The Sun.
London, England, 1841-02-11 00:00:00

M ORNING EDITION:

must hie considered as little more *than a check upon
the possible but improbable , case pf any, railway
~comp-
any abusing the power of inflicting penalties entrusted
to it by the Legislature, so far as to mak-e:regulations
which are obviously improper and oppressive.
In several cases it seems desirable_ that this eupervi-
is 'should be extended to arrangements , and regula-
tions of much more practical unpoyeance to the public
than those which nominally inflietipenelties, as, for in-
stance, to the arrangements made respecting the nubile
traffic by different railway companies using a portion of
the same line in common, or_different railways forming
'together one continuous line of communication. But
these are questions for the consideration of the Legis-
lature, and respecting which, having, in the absence of
any power calling for statistical or general information,
no additional evidence to offer, we should not think
ourselves justified in adding anything to the recommen-
dations contained in the reports of the select committee
on railways.
There is, however, one defect in the clauses relating
to by-laws so obvious that it only requires to be stated
in order to procure its correction. The power of die-
' allowance given to the Board of Trade is intended to
:supersede the by-law jurisdictions of justices of the
peace, Courts of Quarter Sessions, and all other
triounals, which are expressly repealed by the 10th
section of Lord Seymour's Act. The wording of the
sections, however, which confer this power of disallow-
ance does not correspond with the language generally
emp'oyed in the sections of the different Railway Acts
which provide for the confirmation of by-laws by justices,
&c. The London and Birmingham Act, for instance,
provides for the publication of " all by-laws, orders,
and rules, which are of a public nature, and relate to .
or affect other persons than the servants of the
,com-
pany," and requires all such by-laws to be submitted
to one of the Judges of her Majesty's Courts at West-
minster for confirmation. The 7th, Bth, and 9th sec-
tions of the Act for Regulating Railways confine the
jurisdiction of she Mani of Trade "to by-laws, orders,
rules, or regulations, which impose penalties fot their
enforcement upon persons other than the servants of
the companies ;" so that, as regards by.laws which
affect the public, but do not expressly impose penalties,
there mny be a doubt whether the effect of the Act has
not been to give to railway c mpanies a greater degree
of irresponsible power than they before possessed. This
should be Frovided for by substituting in the sections
of the Act which create the by-law jurisdiction of the
Board of Trade words commensurate with those em-
ployed in the provisions of the London and Birmingham
Railway Act above quoted, and of other Railway Acts.
The reasons already stated induce us to abstain from
offering any suggestions respecting the many ways in
which the Legislature might avail itself of the existence
of the railway department with respect to Bills in their
progress through Parliament, and as a means of intro-
.ducing modifications, alike advantageous to the puhlic
and !o th s companies, in the rules and standing orders
which, in the absence of any disinterested tribunal to
which discretionary powers could be entrusted, it has
been found necessary to enforce.
Such ulterior objects, however important in them-
selves, may, we conceive, be properly left for the consi-
deration of the Legislature, and we are unwilling to
mingle them eith the more inimcdiate and pressing ob-
ject which the have in view at present. viz., the intro-
duction of such a legislative measure as will give the
Board of Trade the requisite means of exercising an
effective supervision over railways, with a view to pro-
viding for the public safety.

G. R. PORTER.
FREDERIC SMITH.
S. LAING.
R :ilway Department, Baerd of Trade, Jan. 25.