The Sun.
London, England, 1846-08-31 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, MONDAY EVENING, AUGUST 31, 1846.

---e.„--
ixaes in operation extend to 1,000 kilometres (about 620
Saes), and the whole number of kilometres to which the
Zedlwalys will extend in six years is estimated at nearly
(6,000 (about 3,760 miles).
All the-'lines of France, with one or two exceptions,
before the introduction of this system, are conceded for
terms cat: years varying from 99 to 25.
In Geirmany, divided as it is into a number of inde-
pender tt states, the adoption of a systematic plan of rail-
ways was attended with greater difficulty. The nature
of t 1 Al country, however, especially of Prussia, for the
mos t part level, suggested the construction of them at an
ea' Ay period. The choice of lines was at first the work
'Of. chance, but the different Governments soon became
Neonvinced of the necessity of regulating by treaties the
direction of their lines, and proceeding according to It
systematic plan.
In Austria, Prussia, and the other German Ste.tes, the
construction of lines has generally b'sen conceded to pri-
vate companies. In Austria the concession is for fifty
years, and in Prussia until the, capitals of the companies
have been extinguished by ',inking funds, with a right of
purchase, and revision e tolls and fares. The minor
German States genera•V‘y concede the lines on lease.
1n this country 'alone were companies allowed the
possession of lines in perpetuity, subject to no available
sex idi time.
That:r.erance should have concluded arrangements for
corestruction of her railways on so much better terms
t han lave been obtained in England, cannot fail to strike
Iffitl-• astonishment those who reflect on the superiority
of fthis country in wealth, industry, density of populs-
taooL, and number of great towns, and on the readiness
a vb ich has always been evinced to embark capital in un-
takings promising a fair return, while France has no
sseperiority over England in the means of construction.
.But not only were our advantages not turned to duo
account by the Government in the outset, for which
some excuse was perhaps to be found in our inexpe-
rience ; the opportunity for imposing suitable conditions
On railway companies was not seized when that excuse
erao longer existed.
Year after year companies obtained Acts for the con-
struction of lines through the most important districts
'of the country, characterised by the same disregard for
the interest of the public. Companies still obtained lines
in perpituity ; the maximums for fares were still fixed
at far too high a rate ; and the conditions imposed were
of so vague a character, and so utterly inapplicable to
the subjects which they professed to regulate, that they
could hardly ever be enforced or made available to the
protection of the public.
The first material attempt on the part of the Legisla-
ture to place the public in a more advantageous position
with regard to railways was not a very successful one.
The 7 and 8 Vic., c. 85, provides that after a lapse of
twenty-one years, when the dividends shall equal or ex-
ceed 10 per cent., the Lords of the Treasury, on giving
threes months notice, may revise the scale of tolls, fares,
sane, charges. The hope of revision held out by this
aeuse, was, however, quite illusory, for no precautions
Lad been taken to settle the principle on which dividends
should be calculated. The capitals on which dividends
were declared exceeded in many cases by large sums the
actual outlay ; and there existed no effi.dent system of
accountability by which Parliament could obtain any-
thing like an accurate knowledge of the net profits of
railway companies. By the Companies Clauses Conso.
Relation Act of 8 Victoria, certain rules were laid down
with respect to the augmentation of capital by the crea-
tion of new shares, but your Committee are given to
understand that this Act does not prevent companies
from allocating shares among the proprietors at par when
actually at a premium, in order that they may pocket
the premiums.
It is established by the most satisfactory evidence,
that in the case of many companies large additions have
been made to the nominal capitals, beyond what has
been required by the actual outlay, through the creation
of shares, not at the current market price, but at par.
To take one of the most common operations of the sue-
'cessful companies, if for instance, shares being at cent.
per cent. premium, a million were required for an un-
dertaking, and to raise that million shares for a million
were created in order to enable the proprietors to divide
among themselves another million in the shape of pre-
miums, it is clear that the nominal capital exceeds by
500,0001. that of which the actual outlay required the
creation, and. consequently, that a dividend is made on
a sum exceeding by so much that outlay. In this way
the object of Parliament, in subjecting companies to a
revision of fares when the dividends should equal or ex-
ceed tan per cent., could always be defeated. Mr.
Hud'aon, a Member f your Committee, specified several
in.e.ances, in companies with which he was connected,
wnere large additions were made to the nominal capitals
by these and other means. For instance, he states, that
by an arrangement between the Great Northern and
the Great North of England Railway, it was stipulated
that the latter should receive 10 per cent. on every 50/.
shiere till 1851, when they had a claim to be paid off in
fieur per cent. stock at 2501. a share ; thus creating a
mew nominal capital of 250/. for every 501. He states
also that, to meet a purchase by the Newcastle and
Darlington Company, new 25/. shares were issued to the
proprietors at par, when they were at a premium of 201.
It is obvious that the money required could have been
obtained by a much smaller issue of shares, bad the 20/.
premiums, as well as the 251. shares, been applied to the
purposes of the company, and not divided as a bonus
among the proprietors.
This practice of swelling the nominal amount of
stocks beyond the actual outlay on the lines, which has
extensively prevailed, was recently noticed in reports
presented by Mr. Ellice from the Select Committee on
Group (58) of Railway Bills, in which it is stated that
tin the Hull and Selby Purchase Bill the actual outlay and
estimates for further works is 955,3631., while the money
to be raised by the Bill is two millions, extending the
outlay and engagements of the Hull and Selby proprie-
tors by the large sum of nearly a million, and that in
the Great North of England Purchase Bill, the actual
outlay and estimate for additional works is 1,496,7961.
18a. 4d., the proposed capital 4,000,000/., exceeding the
actual outlay and engagements of the Great North of
England proprietors by the sum of 2,503,0031. ls. Bd.
The Committee in question add the observation that, in
their opinion, " It would be greatly for the public inte-
rest that some fixed and uniform rule should be clearly
I.id down by the House for the guidance of their Com-
mittees with respect to the whole system of raising ca-
pital, loans, the conversion of loans into capital, the pay-
ment of rents and profits on separate lines and branches,
not from the actual traffic on such separate branches
and lines, but from the surplus receipts of old com-
panies, in all cases where new powers for raising money
are applied for, of extension, purchase, or amalgamation
Bills." These illustrations of a system extensively pre-
valent, which are taken from numerous instances brought
before the notice of your Committee, are sufficient to
prove that so long as it is suffered to continue, the in-
tentions of Parliament in passing the 7th and Bth Vict.
must be defeated.

This practice of issuing new shares to the present
shareholders at par has not been allowed in any other
country. Mr. William Reed, a director of the Paris and
Rouen Railway, states, that when the exigencies of the
company rendered it necessary for them to raise money,
they applied to the Government to be allowed to issue to
the then shareholders new shares at par, in the propor-
tion of one new share for every five shares they held.
This application was rejected by the Ministry, and they
borrowed the money required, for which no authorisa-
tion was necessary. The French Government contended
that the rights of the future proprietor would be com-
promised by the issue of shares at par when at a pre-
mium, but it has been maintained by some of the railroad
-proprietors in this country, that it is immaterial whether
the money required by companies be raised by the crea-
tion of new stock or by loans ; and whether the share-
holders received increased dividends on smaller capitals,
or smaller dividends on larger capitals. But if the rate
of dividend is to determine whether the scale of fares
shall be subjected to revision by the Government on
behalf of the public, it is of the very first consequence
that the capitals should correspond with the original
outlay. It may be the same thit,g to proprietors whether
they pocket large bonuses, and increase their capitals by
sums exceeding the money laid out on the roads by the
amount of such bonuses, and receive proportionately
smaller dividends ; but it is a very different thing to the
public, if the scales of fares are to be governed by the
rate of dividend, whether they pay high fares or low
fares.

But by another section of this Act, the second, the
Lords of the Treasury are empowered, after the expira-
tion of twenty- five years, to purchase the railways,
whatever the rate of divisible profits may be, upon giving
three calendar months' notice in writing of their inten-
tion, on payment of a sum equal to twenty•five years'
purchase of their profits, estimated on the average of the
three preceding years.

This power to purchase on such extravagant terms,
and under such limitations, held out small hopes of
relief ; so that, upon the whole, the position of the pub-
lic with regard to railways was not thereby materially
improved.
Whilst your Committee thus express their regret that
the public interests were so little consulted in the ar-
rangementsirith railways for so long a period, they have
seen with satisfaction the commencement of a better
system. In consequence of sessional orders of the House,
both in this and the previous session, clauses have been
introduced into all Acts relative to railways, either for
the construction of new lines or the extension of old lines
by branches, reserving the power, whenever it should be
deemed necessary, to revise and regulate the scales of
fares and charges ; and as nearly all the great com-
panies have either obtained or applied for Acts for the
construction of branch lines, and the extension of old
lines, they have thereby enabled Parliament to place
them under such control or supervision as it may be
deemed expedieut to adopt ; and thus the hope may at
length be entertained, that means for securing the public
against oppressive and extravagant charges will yet be
adopted.

Your Committee wish here to dwell a little on the im-
mense importance to the community of a judicious sys-
tem of railways, both with reference to the selection of
lines, and the rates at which the fares and charges are
fixed. It is hardly possible, indeed, to exaggerate the
importance of a railway, not only to the great cities
whilh are connected by it, bat to the districts through
which it runs. It has been generally assumed that rail-
ways are better suited for the seats of commerce and
manufacturing industry than for agricultural districts;
but a highly respectable and intelligent witness, Mr.
Samuel Morton Peto, who has had considerable experi-
ence in the construction of railways in manufacturing
districts, and is deeply interested in the Norfolk lines as
a proprietor, states, as the result of his experience, that,
"the people in manufacturing districts do not travel any-
thing like so much as an agricultural population;" and
that " he would rather, if he could get a moderately-
priced line, have it in an agricultural district than in a
manufacturing district, as far as the population of the
district is concerned." Mr. Peto adds, that the experi-
ence of Belgium furnishes a striking corroboration of the
soundness of these views, as it ha; been proved by the
report of M. Desart, in whose hands the Belgian
Goverment placed the whole of its railway statiaucs,

that in a given population the traffic of the small
I towns and villages along a line is proportion-
ately greater than the Israffle. between two large
cities at the termini. New branches of industry
are everywhere called into ekisterice by the facility and
cheapness of communication e.fforried by railways ; and
land previously of little or no value is at once made
productive by cheap acceas to materials by which the
soil may he improved, aed to markets for disposing of
its produce. On the subject of this revolution in the
value of head, some important evidence is given by Mr.
Miller, end by Mr. Smith, of Deanston. Mr. Miller
states that Mesnufactories of sulphuric acid, extensively
wet!, for agricultural purposes, have been established in
euitabte situations by the sides of railways in several
districts of Scotland, and that manures are conveyed on
them at charges lower than the mere tolls on turnpike
roads. Mr. Smith states that upon those lines which
have been in existence for some years, over which he
has had occasion to travel, a very great agricultural im-
provement has taken place, chiefly in consequence of the
' cheapness and facility of transport ; and by way of illus-
trating the amount of the benefit, he takes a farm of 200
acres, on a six-course shift, with 15 miles of transport,
and shows that by the old mode the charges of carriage
would amount to 1421. 6s. 3d , while by railway it would
be only 401. Bs. 9d. Mr. Smith states also that land
along the Glasgow and Edinburgh Railway, previouale
not worth ss. an acre, is now worth between 30s. and
40s. By way of illustrating the benefit of railroads,
when the charges are sufficiently IoW, this intelligent
witness further states, that " a low rate would very
greatly tend to the increased consumption of manures,
and to the transport of earth for agricultural purposes ;
that this would give increased produce to the land, which
would enable the agriculturist to furnish his commodity
at a lower rate ; that this cheapness again would increase
the consumption in large towns ; and in manufacturing
populations it would also create a greater traffic upon
the railways, and enable them still further to reduce
their rates ; and as the heavier articles are more con-
sumed by the working classes, it would add very much
to their comfort ; and there are great tracts of country
which would be cultivated to much advantage, it
favoured by railway communication, which are now al-
lowed to lie comparatively barren."
With regard to these views of Mr. Smith, as to the
important change which railways might effect in agricul-
ture, by the transportation of manure and earths, your
Committee conceive that as the fertility of soils depends
on the proportion which certain earths bear to each other
in their composition, it is merely a question whether, by
any mode of transport, the proportions of earths can be
so varied as to create fertility at an expense which would
be remunerative. It has been demonstrated by an in-
telligent gentleman, who has devoted much attention to
this subject, that the cost of conveyance diminishes with
every increase of quantity. Taking fixed sums for the
interest on the capital and working the railway, the
charge (which with a traffic of 20,000 tons would only be
remunerative at 100. a mile), with a traffic of 1,000,000
tons, would be remunerative at about a halfpenny a mile.
It is impossible, therefore, to over-estimate the import-
ance of this new instrument placed at the command of the
agriculturist.
Cheapness of fares may thus create a traffic which
otherwise could not possibly exist. It is, therefore, of
the utmost importance to determine whether fares should
be fixed according to a scale, which while it remunerates
the railway, would allow of the existence of a valuable
traffic, or according to a scale which would prevent it.
These considerations ought not to be lost sight of in
determining how railways may be made most conducive
to the public benefit. The object to be effected by rail-
ways ought to be, the affording, at the least expense, the
utmost facility of communication between different locali-
ties, and the utmost development of the national re-
sources. This object, which hitherto has been little
attended to in this country, where the interests of the
public have too often been sacrificed to the supposed inte-
rests of railway companies, was much better understood by
the Belgian Government. Having, determined to carry lines
through the kingdom, on a principle which should im-
part to every locality the benefit or this improved means
of communication, they saw that the railways them-
selves would aid them in giving effect to their intentions.
The excess of receipts beyond the expenditure on some
lines, instead of being transferred, as in this country, to
the pockets of individuals, was applied towards the con-
struction of other lines through districts less advan-
, tageously circumstanced. The Belgian Government
traced a general plan of railways, embracing as a net-
work the whole country. The State lines were com-
menced on the sth of May, 1835, and completed in Oc-
tober, 1843. The fares for passengers, extremely low
from the first, have been occasionally reduced when in-
crease of traffic enabled the Government to make the
reduction.
In Prussia, a comprehensive system of lines, em-
bracing the whole kingdom as with a network, and ex-
tending to upwards of 3,200 English miles, was traced
several years ago. Of these lines nearly 700 miles are
completed; about the same number of miles are in the
course of construction; upwards of 800 miles finally
adopted, and upwards of 900 remain merely as pro-
jects. Though the undertakings were committed to
private companies, the necessity of Government inter-
ference was soon felt. The fundamental law of the
Prussian Government respecting railways is dated the
3d of November, 1838. Three years are allowed to
companies to fix definitely, from experience, what rates
ought to be charged; but the tariff, at the commence-
ment, and in case of an increase of fares, six weeks be-
fore the alteration, must be communicated to the Go-
vernment. At the end of three years the companies are
to receive a concession of the fares and charges in the
tariff agreed on between them and the Ministry. In
fixing the tariffs, the rates are in no case to exceed

what corresponds with the receipts, after deducting
the expense of maintaining and working the lines, &c.,
and a dividend in no case higher than ten per cent. or
lower than six per cent. The fares to be subject to re-
vision after periods of not less than three years, and not
exceeding ten years ; but the companies, though they
cannot increase, may dimish the prescribed rates ; and
exact accounts of everything relating to the concerns
must be submitted yearly to the Ministry. A sinking
fund, corresponding with the capitals to be fixed after
the second Prussian railway has been opened three years,
and the necessary experience has been obtained, to be
applied in extinction of the capitals ; and the tolls, on
the completion of the extinction, not to exceed the ex-
pense of maintaining and working the lines. The post
and its servants to be conveyed free. Lines may be
purchased after thirty years, at twenty-five years of the
net profits, on an average of the five preceding years.
In this country no comprehensive system has ever
been traced. The lines promising the most ample re-
turns were, as a matter of course, first selected by com-
panies ; but the best mode of communicating the benefit
of railways to the kingdom, considered as a whole, was
only incidentally considered by Committees in deciding
between rival projects. The Committee of the Board of
Trade, in some of its reports, first attempted to lay down
principles more worthy of the Legislature of a great
country, by which it should be governed in regard to its
railways.
Your Committee conceive that the advantages of sys-
tem in determing on railways are sufficiently obvious.
The best system is that which, at the least expense, and
with the least sacrifice of soil, affords the greatest facili-
ties to intercourse, and the greatest encouragement to
industry. By selecting an injudicious line, the capital
of the country may be unnecessarily wasted, and the
population of a district may not derive all the benefits
from it to which they arc entitled. By constructing two
lines where one would suffice, there is not only an unne-
cessary outlay of capital, but a waste of a portion of our
territory. Besides, as the cost of conveyance diminishes
with every increase of traffic, competing lines, by
dividing the traffic, add to the cost of conveyance on the
separate lines. In private concerns, no sensible man
employs more mechanical power than he conceives
necessary for his purpose ; but it is now almost univer-
sally admitted that not a few of our lines have been inju-
diciously traced, both with reference to expenditure of
capital and local accommodation ; and that, in the fruit-
less hope of competition, rival lines have been sanctioned
where they were not wanted. But the sanction by Parlia-
ment of injudicious and unnecessary lines is not the only
evil. The mere entertainment of wild schemes, which
may never go further than Committees of the House of
Commons, keeps owners of property in a constant state
of alarm, and often subjects them to much trouble and
expense in watching and resisting them. It is stated by
several of the witnesses as matter of notoriety that more
than half the schemes lately brought forward, and which
occupied the time of Parliament, were utterly uncalled
for. Mr. Robert Stephenson, by way of illustrating
the inconvenience of the present system, stated in his
evidence that he could " quote a case at Wisbeach, where
within half a mile of that town, there were actually
fourteen different schemes, intersecting the land in every
possible direction, hedges cut down, and crops interfered
with. Now, all the legal expenses, and the expenses of
engineers and surveyors, have been thrown away, be-
cause only one Act had been obtained. When they
come before Parliament it is impossible to convey to the
members of this Committee a correct notion of the diffi-
culties which the Committee must have to wade through
in coming to anything like a true decision."
It is stated by Mr. Peto that many lines have been
very injudiciously laid out; and he gives, among other
instances, the Trent Valley line, promoted and purchased
by the London and Birmingham, in order to get the
lines
most direct course to Manchester; and theof the
South -Eastern Company, who are obliged to incur great
expense in constructing the Mid-Kent line, to remedy
the defects of that first adopted.
Economy in the outlay of capital, and in the applica-
tion of the surface of the country to its railways, ought
always to be aimed at. In the opinion of nearly all the
witnesses practically acquainted with railway affairs
examined by your Committee the public can never bene-
fit by the competition of companies. Mr. Robert Ste-
phenson, when asked whether the lowering the fares
might not be influenced by competing lines and compet-
ing canals, gave this decided answer:—" I hare had so
many cases of that kind brought before me, that I have
come to the conclusion, that wherever combination is
practicable competition is impracticable. Therefore I
say, let the Government be as stringent as they like with
existing companies, but never C4i cite competition; be-
cause by exciting competition you increase the capital
invested for giving the same convenience which would
be otherwise obtained with less capital."
Your Committee find in the second report of the Select
Committee appointed this session to consider the princi-
ple of amalgamation, as applied to the Railway and
Canal Bills under the consideration of Parliament, and
in the report of a Select Committee of the House of
Lords, also appointed this session, to take into consider-
ation the best means of enforcing one uniform system of
management on railroads in operation or to be con-
structed, abundant confirmation of their views as to the
hopelessness of looking to competition for the means of
securing the public interests. The more powerful com-
panies have, it appears, not only succeeded to a great
extent in obtaining the control of railway lines, from
which competition might be apprehended, but also
succeeded, by various mewls in obtaining a control

over the canals, which, for a time, maintained a corn-
, petition with them in the carriage of heavy goods,
and have thus deprived the public of all the protection
at one time anticipated from this source. It would
appear from evidence received by your Committee that
railways may also be expected to encroach materially on
the coasting trade of the country. Mr. Peto states, that
a great deal of the produce of Suffolk and Norfolk, which
' hitherto has been carried by coasting vessels is now con-
veyed to town by railways; and that much more will, no
doubt, be carried hereafter. Norfolk and Suffolk are
great counties for malt, much of which, formerly carried
by coasters, now reaches town by railway, cheaper and
more rapidly than by water ; and Mr. Peto states, also,
that as rates will be still further reduced with increase of
traffic, they must take away more and more of the
coasting trade, and that the only reason why more pro-
duce is not now carried, is the inability to procure at
once the requisite number of engines.
Your Committee, therefore, conceive that experience
warrants them in viewing railways in the light of mono-
polies. As expectations of relief from competition can-
not possibly- be realised, they ought not to be longer
entertained. But the very circumstance of railways
being monopolies only renders it the more necessary to
subj,ct them to proper regulation. The past cannot, of
course, be remedied, but the future is more in our power,
and an endeavour should be made to discover the best
means of securing to the community all the advantages
which, under a proper system, may be derived from
railways.
A monopoly, from its very nature, can only be exer-
cieca with safety to the community under effective con-
trol. One of the abuses of railway management from
which the public have most suffered in this country is
the fixing the fares and charges at too high rates.
By extravagant charges, in some cases imposed with
the highly objectionable view of limiting the benefit
of railways to particular classes, in others with
the view of driving certain descriptions of animals
and produce from the lines, the railway companies
were long open to severe animadversion. A feature in
the English practice which very early attracted the no-
tice of foreigners, and is severely censured in continental
publications on railways, was the absence for a long time
of third and fourth-classes on nearly all our lines. And
even after third-class carriages were supplied, they were
for the most part so constructed as to affect health, and
did not proceed with the usual trains, but were dragged
at a paee which seemed chosen to disgust those who took
places in them. In short, it appeared as if it had been
determined to exclude the great body of the nation, un-
able of course to pay first and second-class fares, from
the benefit communicated to the more wealthy orders.
When the Belgian Minister proposed his last tariff, he
introduced a modification of the third-class fares with
the express intention of encouraging third-class pas-
sengers and inducing them to travel, by which he ex-
pected to swell the treasury receipts. The offensive
conduct of English directors, betrayed, no doubt, an ig-
norance of their true interests, but that forms no valid
excuse for them.
Many intelligent persons who saw how much better
the convenience of the public and the encouragement of
industry was secured abroad than in this country,
where at one time fares, according to Mr. Laing,
ranged at 80 per cent. higher than on the conti-
nent, were in serious apprehension for our trade and com-
merce, from the disa•lvantages to which they were thus
exposed. Your Committee perceive with satisfaction
that this evil has of late considerably abated. Several
of the railway companies, of their own accord,
under the influence of public opinion and more correct
views of their interests, have lowered their scales of
fares and charges. It is admitted by most of the wit-
nesses c mnected with railways, examined by your Com-
mittee, that in keeping the scale extravagantly high, and
in excluding the mass of the people from the benefit of
railway conveyance, the companies took a mast errone-
ous view of their own interest ; and with hardly an ex-
ception it has been found that every reduction of fares
has been attended with an increase of revenue. Mr.
Creed states that the difference between the prices
charged originally on the Birmingham Railway and the
present price is exactly one-third. The reductions on
the first class in the half-year ending 30th of June, 1844,
were 17i- per cent., and they caused an increase of pas-
sengers of 191 per cent. ; on the second class the reduc-
tion in the fares was 264 per cent., and the increase in
the number of passengers 61 1-5 per cent. ; on the third
class the reductions in the fares was 33 1-3 per cent., and
the increase of passengers 259 per cent. ; and the reduc-
tions have in most cases increased the revenue of the
company. But were there to have been no immediate
increase of the revenue, still a regard to the welfare
and convenience of the community, which ought to be
the object of all legislation, would have demanded the
reduction.
Your Committee wish to observe, in passing, that they
regret to perceive in the evidence of this witness an at-
tempt to justify the limitation of carriages for third-class
passengers to four out of sixteen trains, not on sound
commercial principles, but by the statement, that if there
were third-class passengers with each train, it would be
considered objectionable to the other passengers, and he
refers in confirmation to what had taken place on the
North Midland line.
Your Committee cannot understand how third-class
passengers in separate carriages can interfere with the
convenience of first-class passengers, where due provi-
sion is made for the preservation of order at stations.
In Belgium, France, and Germany, carriages for all
classes proceed with every train ; and it appears, from
the evidence of Mr. M‘Gregor, the Chairman of the
South-Eastern Company, that on their lines the conduct
of the third-class passengers has been uniformily inoffen-
sive, and that first-class passengers have never objected
to travel in the same train with them. The fares of the
South-Eastern Company have experienced a greater re-
duction than those on the Birmingham line. The fares
by the express train are 2 45-100 d. per mile ; and, day
tickets, 1-84-100 d. per mile ; by the ordinary trains for
the first-class, 2.05 d., and day ticket, 1 53-100 d. per mile;
for the accond-claw, 1-36 d., and day ticket, I-02d. ; for
the third-class, 82-100ths of a penny, and day ticket,
61 -100ths of a penny. On the Scotch lines the fares
from the first have been generally lower than on any of
the English lines. On the Edinburgh and Glasgow
Railway, Mr. Miller states, that several trains a day are
run, on which fourth-class passengers pay about id. a
mile, and third-class passengers Id. ; and he thinks that
still lower fares would be more profitable in many dis-
tricts. The fares for third.class passengers on the Glas-
gow and Greenock line are so low as id. a mile.
According to Mr. Peto, the charges on the Norfolk lines
are very low. "We have," he says, " paid great atten-
tion to the fares there. It was a subject of deliberation
before we fixed them, and we decided that the lowest
scale of fares, lower in fact than upon any other
line, would be that which would bring us the largest
amount of profit ; that it would bring the greatest
number of people, and therefore would be most bene-
ficial to ourselves." The third-class passengers pay
much less on the Norwich and Brandon line than
Id. per mile ; from Norwich to Yarmouth, 22 miles,
only ls. 6d.

Notwithstanding the reductions on several of our lines
the fares are almost always higher, and in some cases
considerably so, than on the Belgian lines. On the State
lines, the first-class fares, which from 1835 to 1838 were
1.13 d. per mile, were, on the 3d of February, 1839, raised
to 1 37d. per mile ; on the 10th of April, 1841, lowered
to 1.2.9 d. per mile ; on the 17th of August, 1841, still
. .

further lowered to 1.22 d. per mile, at which they remain
by the existing tariff. The second class fares were suc-
cessively at the above periods, 0-80 d. 0.90 d., 0-80 d. 0-90 d.,
and 0 93d. ; the third class fares, 0.40 d., 0-64 d., 0-48 d.,
0.554., and 0.581 It will be seen that by the existing
tariff first-class passengers are carried for something
more than id. a asile ; second-class passengers for con-
siderably less than ld. ; and third-class passengers for
little more than a halfpenny a mile. The last tariff laid
before the Chambers by the Belgian Minister made a
reduction of 10 per cent. for third-class passengers, for
all distances short of 25 kilometres (151 miles), in order,
he said, to attract travellers for short distances, to favour
the working population, and at the same time increase
the Treasury receipts.
It is more difficult to institute any satisfactory com-
parison between the charges for goods in Belgium and
England, from the difference in the mode of rating. In
Belgium a distinction is made with respect to coal and
pig iron when destined for exportation, and when des-
tined for home consumption. In the former case the
charge is l-127d. per ton per mile ; in the latter it is
charged like other heavy goods, 1.61 d. per ton. The
charges on twelve English railways for iron and coal
have been averaged at somewhat less than 2id. a mile,
ranging from Id. to sd. On the Hull and Selby line
the maximum for coals and coke carried 30 miles and
upwards is ld. per ton per mile ; for 20 miles, and less
than 30 miles, lid. per ton per mile ; for less than 20
miles 14d. In the Great North of England Purchase
Bill the maximum for iron for 40 miles and upwards
is lid. per ton per mile; for less than 40 miles 2d. per
ton per mile; for coals, upwards of 40 miles, ld. per
ton per mile; less than 40, but upwards of 30, lid. per
ton per mile; for 20 miles, but less than 30, lid. per ton
per mile; for 10 miles, and less than 20, 141 per
ton per mile; for less than 10 miles, 2d. These maxi-
mum charges are, according to the distance, higher or
lower than the Belgian charges. In Belgium the charge
for a horse on all the lines is 6-44 d.; on the Hull and
Selby line the maximum is 51 per mile; in the Great
North of England Purchase Bill, sd. per mile. In Bel-
gium on all the lines the charge for five or six oxen, or
one waggon of small cattle, is 7.25 d.; for three or four
oxen, five or ten pigs or calves, or eleven to twenty
sheep, it is 6.44 d.; for one or two oxen, or one to five
pigs or calves, or one to ten sheep, it is 4-83 d. per mile.
On the last-mentioned English line the maximum for
horses and other beasts of draught or burden, if con-
veyed more than fifteen miles, sd. per mile; for less
than fifteen miles, ss. the whole distance; for neat
cattle, if more than fifteen miles, 3d. per head per mile;
if one, at 2d. per mile; if more than one, if conveyed
fifteen miles only or less, 2s. for the whole distance.

These last instances are taken from one of the latest
Bills, and are much lower than the average rates in this
country; but, as has been stated, not only is there the
utmost diversity in the charges on different lines, but
also in the classification and mode of charging, so that
it is almost impossible, in goods traffic, to institute a
comparison either between the charges of different com-
panies, or between the charges of any one company and
those in foreign countries.
In Belgium the charges for the carriage of goods are
it is understood, in many cases below the water carriage
rates; and it is stated, in the Compte Rendu by the
Minister of Public Works of the service of the year 1844,
that the goods traffic of 1844 was about 52,000 tons,
while it was only 33,000 tons in 1843, and that it was
to the goods and cattle traffic that the very remarkable
increase of tho revenue for that year, which exceeded the
estimates by 630,000 francs, had been chiefly owing.
The increase of the passenger traffic of 1844 above that
of 1843 was nine per cent., while the increase on horses
was 26 per cent., and on heavy goods 56 per cent. It
is principally, therefore, to the carriage of heavy goods,
which was scarcely thought of a few years ago, that the
very considerable increase in the revenue is due.

The Belgian Government would seem anxious to ob-
tain the goods traffic; for it is stated in this Compte
liendu, that it is to the extension of it that the State
must look for any fresh increase in the net profits of its
railways. It has been observed, however, that the rail-
ways do not maintain a very successful competition with
the canals; for while in 1844 the goods carried by rail-
way amounted only to 52,000 tons, those carried by
canals amounted for that year to 400,000 tons. The
canal traffic of 1845 still showed an increase, and the
freights exceeded those of 1844 by 18,9451. It has been
inferred that the Belgian Government have not yet
suffic'ently lowered their charges for heavy goods.
In France, by the law of 1845, the fares and charges
are in pence and decimals :

Passengers, per head per mile.—First class
„ Send 1.25
~ Third.ditto
—Bullocks, Sze.
Calves, &c. .. 066
It„
It If Sheep, &c.
Fish, per ton per mile 8 37
Goods, per ton per mile.—First class
ff „ Second ditto
if „ Third ditto 235
f .1
11 And
ft f t
Carriages, per mile.—Single bodied 4.18
„ „ Double ditto
The French charges are about 20 per cent. higher
than the Belgian for passengers, and considerably more
so for cattle and goods. _ .

91
Cattle per head per mile.

The fares on the lines of Austria and Prussia, and the
States of the German Confederation, are in some cases
even lower than those of Belgium. Oa the lines of
Austria and Baden, which were executed by the
State, they arc the lowest. On the Austrian
lines of Budweis and Linz the fares are only
three silver gro,-chen per German mile, or 0.73 d.
per English mile, for second class passengers, and two
silver groschen per German mile, or 0.401 per English
mile, for third-class passengers. In Prussia the fares
differ very little from those of Belgium. On the Berlin
and Potsdam line, for instance, the fares for first-class
passengers are 1.4 d. per English mile ; for second-class
passengers, 1.06 d. per English mile ; for third-class pas-
sengers, 0 6i. per mile. On the Berlin and Anhalt road
the fares for first-class passengers are 1.47 d. per English
mile; for second-class passengers, 0.93 d. per mil^ ; for
third-class passengers, 0.61 d. per mile.
The following comparison is instituted in the Rapport
on the Projet do Loi:on the Northern line, to the Cham-
ber of Deputies in France, in 1845, between the passen-
ger fares in England, France, Germany, and Belgium,
in centimes per kilometre, in 1844:--

First Class. Second Class. Third Class

England
France
Germany
Belgium

742-
6f
5 4.5

5 7. 10

3 7-10

These rates may still be near the truth with respect
to France, Germany, and Belgium ; but they are no
longer applicable to England, where considera!sle reduc-
tions have taken place on most of the lines. But though
the difference between English and Foreign fares and
charges is not so great as it formerly was, it is still suf-
ficient to constitute a strong reason for control and in-
terference ; the fares on nearly all the lines are still too
high, and evidence has been given that railway com-
panies, when they have driven rivals out of the field,
have not hesitated to raise their charges, especially for
the conveyance of goods, on principles not perhaps
strictly in accordance with their own true interests, but
still less in accordance with those of the public. Yonr
Committee conceive this is far too important a matter to
be left to the arbitrary will of companies.
The greater cheapness of coal and coke in this coun-
try enables companies to convey heavy goods by railway
at a much lower rate than Continental railways can pos-
sibly do ; and the ability to lower fares increases in the
ratio of the amount of goods carried. A line with a
tragic of 750,000 tons per annum, could carry goods
with as much profit at Id. per ton per mile as the Paris
and Orleans line with a traffic of 150,000 tons at 3d. per
ton per mile. _ _ _

The maximum rates fixed by Parliament in the dif-
ferent Acts are in all cases above, and in some greatly
above, what ought to be taken from the public ; and
thug, were no other check interposed, the community
would be entirely at the mercy of the companies. Be-
sides, as has been already observed, there is at present
the greatest diversity both in the scale and the mode of
charging on different lines. For these high fares no
justification can be found, either in the original outlay
on the lines or the expense of maintaining and working
them. Mr. Reed, intimately acquainted with the work-
ing of English and French lines, who is confirmed by
Mr. Brassey, extensively employed as a contractor in
the two countries, states that the cost of earthwork is
much the same in England and in France ; that the rails
and chairs, which on the Soutnampton line cost 2,7901.
per mile, cost 4,635/. per mile on the Paris and Rouen
line ; that the working of the former line costs about
Is. a mile, while it is about Is. 4d. on the Paris and
Rouen line ; that the locomotive power and the carriages
cost about 147 per cent. on the former, and 16 1.3 on
thc. latter ; that the general expenses, including officers,
police, &c., are about 12 percent. on the South-Western,
and about 16 per cent. on the Paris and Rouen ; so that,
in all these respects, England, it would appear, has a
considerable advantage over France. On some of the
English lines the balance of advantage is still more in
favour of England.

The cost of construction of the Belgian State lines
appears to have been very unequal. According to the
report of the Minister of Public Works, the three
cheapest State lines were those from Ghent to Courtray,
from Ghent to Bruges, and from Landen to St. Trond.
The line from Ghent to Courtray cost per mile 6,6201.;
from Ghent to Bruges, 7,675/. ; from Lander'. to St.
Trond, 8,990/. The three dearest State lines were those
from Louvain to Tirlemont, from Liege to the Prussian
frontiers. and from Ans to Liege. The line from Lou-
vain to Tirlemont cost per mile 19,957/. ; from Liege to
the Prussian frontiers, 40,7971. ; from Ans to Liege,
62,3251. The average cost of the State line was 17,1321.
per mile. The items of this average c )st are, per mile,
land and compensation, 2,919/. ; earthwork, bridges,
tunnels, &c., 7,1631. ; rails, &c., 3,1461.; stations and
buildings, 1,1531. ; working stock, 2,201/. ; miscella-
neous, 5501. _

The following is the coat of some of the French lines
executed and in the course of construction :

Per mile.
The Paris and Orleans
.... £24,390
The Paris and Rouen
The Strasbourg and Basle 18,485
The Amiens and Boulogne 20,000
The Rouen and Havre 28,300
The Avignon and Marseilles 28,600
The Orleans and Bordeaux ......
The Centre
The North, with Calais Branch 19,900
The Paris and Lyons 24,840
The Lyons and Avignon,with branch to Grenoble 25,800
The Austrian line from Olmiitz to Prague, 152
English miles, cost 11,6571. per mile ; that from Briinn
to Billimisch-Trilbau, 55 English miles, cost 16,3601. per
mile.

The cost of construction of the Prussian lines appears
to have been generally lower than that of the Belgian
lines. According to the elaborate work of Baron Von
Reden, the cost of the Berlin and Potsdam line was
12,323/. ; of the Madgeburg and Leipsic was 10,1791. ;
but the Rhenish line from Cologne to the Belgian fron-
tiers was to cost 28,3311. per English mile. This last
line, though lower than most of the English lines, is
higher than that between Edinburgh and Glasgow by a
trifle, and considerably higher than most of the Scotch
lines. Mr. Legoyt, a respectable authority, estimates
the average cost of the German lines at 170,0001. per
kilometre, or 10,9401. per English mile. The Prussian
and other German lines pay less for land and law
charges thon the English lines.
The following is the cost per mile of some of the
principal lines in this country:—

Average cost per mile.
Arbroath and Forfar £ 9,214
Chester and Birkenhead 34,198
Dublin and Drogheda 15,652
Dublin and Kingstown
Dundee and Arbroath
Durham and Sunderland 14,281
Edinburgh and Glasgow 35,024
Eastern Counties and North Eastern 46.355
Glasgow, Kilmarnock, and Ayr 20,607
Glasgow and Greenock
Gravesend and Rochester
Great Western 43,885
Hartlepool
London and Birmingham
London and Blaekwall
London and Brighton 56,981
London and Croydon 80,400
London and South-Western
Manchester, Bolton, and Bury
Manchester and Birmingham
Manchester and Leeds
Midland 30,949
Newcastle, Darlington, and Brandling
Newcastle and Carlisle
Newcastle and North Shields
Norfolk 13,150
North Union and Bolton and Preston
Preston and Wyre
Sheffield and Manchester
South-Eastern 44,412
Taff Vale 21,610
Ulster
York and North Midland, &c.
The extravagant expenditure in England in buying
off powerful landowners, from whom opposition was an-
ticipated, and in the proceedings before obtairrng Acts:,
no doubt swelled very much the outlay on many of the
English lines. In the mere purchase of land the outlay
was often as great in France, if not greater than in
England. Mr. Legoyt averages the purchases and com-
pensation on the three lines of Orleans, Rouen, and
N!smes, at 40,000 francs per kilometre, or 2,572/. per
mile. Mr. Reed states that on the Paris and Rouen
line, the land damage and law charges cost 3,1321. per
mile (the law charges being very trifling), while on the
South-Western they cost 3,6231. per mile. But if the
outlay has been unnecessarily great on some of the
English lines, and they run through districts of which
the traffic does not, as is alleged, yield the usual returns
on capital, that can surely form no reason why an ex-
travagant scale of fares should be adhered to. The pro-
prietors of a bridge would not be allowed to charge high
tolls because moderate tolls would not yield such a re-
turn as they might wish to obtain for the capital ex-
pended by them.
Mr. Peto says, he has several times stated to the
directors of lines in agricultural districts, that if the fares
be low they will have a larger traffic, but not otherwise,
because the people in such districts cannot aftbrd to pay
largely tGr their travelling; that unless you bring it
within their means they will not come to you; and that
If low faros Ivill not pay, high fares never can.

Mr. Robert Stephenson states it as his belief, that re-
ductions of fares are not carried to the extent that rail-
way companies, as they go on and gain experience, will
carry them. It is possible that ultimately the conviction
may gain ground that further reductions to a great ex-
tent are indispensable; but your Committee cannot shut
their eyes to the danger of placing the community at
the mercy of companies, who may or may not take views
of their interests in accordance with the interests of the
public. The railway companies have either driven, or
must ultimately drive all competition from other quar•
ters out of the field. Even the canals, which it was
thought with proper management might maintain a suc-
cessful competition with railways in the case of heavy
goods, in many instances, as has already been observed,
h ive been beaten by them, and the report of the Com-
mittee on Railway and Canal Amalgamation Bills shows
but too clearly that we must prepare ourselves for seeing
the canal interest come still more extensively under the
influence and control of railway companies. This has
resulted not merely from the power which the passenger
traffic gives the railways of conveying goods at rates
at which the canals cannot afford to carry them, but
from their obtaining the command of portions of the
lines of canals, and raising the tolls of that portion
to the utmost limit allowed by law, so that the com-
panies in possession of the remainder of the lines are
thereby disabled from maintaining a successful competi-
tion. On no subject is there a more general agreement
among all the intelligent witnesses recently examined
by Committees of both Houses of the Legislature
than that railways either now are, or from the nature
of things must soon be, in possession of a complete mo-
nopoly of all the internal traffic of the country. The
system, which has been carried to so great an extent by
some companies, of creating nominal capitals, amounting
to twice and even three times the actual outlay, had no
doubt mainly for its object to enable them to exclude the
interference of Parliament, and maintain extravagant
fremaoase.t
iUmpndoretranseuh circumstances,ecthatarigilants i
o pet becomes
rinton dermoefshpraoaold-
be exercised over the different railway companies, in
order to defeat any attempts on the part of those com-
panies, from whatever motives, whether mistaken views
of their interest, or the supposed necessity of their posi-
sition, from exacting higher fares, either for goods or
passengers, than the interests of the community will al-
low. Without interfering with the details of the ma-
nagement on railways farther than the necessity of the
case may occasionally demand, they ought, as in every
other country, to be eimpelled to furnish all the informa-
tion necessary to the thorough understanding of what-
ever relates to the working of the lines, and in particu-
lar to furnish:complete and int. lligibie accounts of re-
ceipts and expenditure from time to time.
By the exercise of such a control alone can a hope be
entertained that the interests of the public be safe
under the existing railway system. The general rule
may be exceedingly good, that the utmost scope should
be given to private enterprise, but in the case of railways
the most important interests of the country are at stake,
and a monopoly, embracing all its communications, and
consequently possessing power in the absence of control,
of inflicting irreparable injury on its trade and industry,
from the very nature of things, ought to be exercised
under proper regulation and supervision. Most of the
witnesses representing railway interests, examined by
your Committee, deprecate all attempts to regulate with
exactness the scale of fares, and contend that the Legis-
lature should content itself with fixing a minimum. It
is proper, no doubt, that maximum fares should be fixed
in Railway Acts ; but though they may be fixed with
care, and may sometimes approximate to fair rates at a
given time, they can never meet all future exigencies.
Continual improvements are made, both in the modes of
constructing and maintaining lines, and in the mechanical
means by which they are worked, and the public ought
not to be excluded from participation in these ad-
vantages. The maximum rates are, however, almost
always extravagantly high. In the Acts passed so
latess e an
etrhs the a
re session
almostofalways 5
84
thrice the m
aa
sx
muchmu m
a s rates
on
tli
foro
p
Belgian lines, and the charges for goods usually exceed
1
those in Belgium in nearly the same proportion, though
sometimes in a much greater. Thus, while in Belgium
twenty sheep may be carried a mile for less than 41,
and in France one sheep for 0.34 d., the maximum rate
for sheep in not a few of the English Acts of 1845 is 2d.
per head per mile, more than six times the Belgian and
French rates. Such is the extent of the arbitrary power
possessed by companies. But because the Legislature was
at first taken by surprise, and from inability to foresee the
results'to which railways have led, omitted to take suit-
able precautions against the abuse of the powers
entrusted to companies, that can be no reason why we
should not avail ourselves of subsequent experience to
turn to due account such opportunities for protecting the
public as are afforded under the Acts passed during the
last two years, and as will be afforded under future Acts.
Your Committee conceive that though the occasion, which
was carefully seized by the Belgian and some other
Governments, of placing the management of railways in
accordance with the interests of the community, has
been neglected, yet that we should never lose sight
of the fact that railways are a public concern, and that
the most perfect system in the abstract is that
which regulates the fares by such scales as will produce
the utmost amount of convenience to individuals and
give the utmost possible development to the trade and
interest of the country. We cannot, as in Belgium, ob-
tain all the benefit which an increased traffic on railway
lines might give, because the first adventurers in the
great lines, which were undertaken before the practica-
bility and profitableness of railways were established,
are entitled to large profits as the legitimate rewards of
their enterprise and sagacity, but there is a point beyond
which the sacrifice of the public interests ought not to be
carried, and, therefore, every available occasion should
be seized for reducing fares. Your Committee, enter•
. .

taining such views of the legitimate demands of the pub-
lic on railway companies, cannot admit that we should
be content with the maximum fares imposed in the Acts,
and leave the reduction of them exclusively to the dis-
cretion of companies,
_ _

Much of the evidence received by your Committee
bears upon the defects of the existing system of legis-
lation in the so-called private Bills, which are often
private only in name, and in which class Railway Bills
are comprehended. The objections to the mode of pro-
ceeding in these Bills are of extensive application ;
and your Committee have seen with satisfaction the
report of a Select Committee on the subject of Private
Bills, recommending a decided alteration with regard
to them. Of one of the suggestions in that report,
your Committee cordially approve—the appointment of
a public board or department to which all applications
for Private Bills affecting public interests should be re-
ferred. Such a board, if properly constituted might re-
lieve Committees of the House from much waste of time
and companies applying for lines, as well as the public
at large, from much needless trouble and expense. The
example of foreign countries has shown that many in-
quiries with regard to railways can best be conducted on
the spot. But, besides the advantage from substituting
a cheap and natural mode of conducting inquiries for
the present cumbrous and most expensive mode before
Committees, under which, too, they are entirely de-
pendent for information on interested parties, the public
might hope that a properly qualified board, entrusted
with railway affairs, would obtain more knowledge of
the wants of the country, and of the best means of sup-
plying them, than committees under the present system,
can possibly possess. Your Committee, are, therefore,
of opinion, that the functions of the board may, with
safety, bo extended to the supervision of ex-
isting railways, and the determining, in the
first instance, subject, of course, to the con-
trol of the Legislature, where lines should be con-
structed, and what projects should be entertained. It so
happens that existing companies have an interest, in
common with the public, in preventing wild and unne-
cessary projects for the construction of new lines from
being put forward; and your Committee therefore anti-
cipate from them no opposition to the confiding such
powers to the board as may be necessary to enable it to
interpose with effect in defeating foolish or fraudulent
schemes in the outset. The receipts of those companies
are always diminished by the construction of rival lines;
and they are often put to heavy expense in purchasing
them, and in buying off threatened opposition.
Mr. Robert Stephenson thinks the fact of the pre-
liminary steps in railway schemes being subject to no
control, is the root of all the mischief now existing in
the railway world, and is of opinion that no project
for the construction of a new railway should be allowed
to be brought forward till it has been taken into con-
sideration by a Government board. Mr. William Reed,
who acted for about five years in the capacity of secre-
tary to the South-Western Railway, and who is now a
director of two French railways, the Paris and Rouen
and the Ration and Havre, is of opinion, from his ex-
perience in both countries, that the greatest benefit
would result from the appointment of a Government
board, to which should be committed the examination of
all projects for the construction of railways, with power
to veto them if disapproved.
In France all schemes must first be submitted to and
approved of by a Government board; but, notwithstand-
ing their having obtained the sanction of such a board,
they are still, as in England, referred to a Parliamentary
Committee; but that Committee does not, as in England,
hear counsel and receive evidence on all manner of de-
tails, but merely decides on' the materials submitted to
it; and it is only when any difficulty occurs, or explana•
tion is required, that a member of the Government
Board is called before it, or some superior person in the
confidence of the promoters of the project, who supplies
the additional information required, in order to enable it
to arrive at a correct decision. This part of Mr. Reed's
evidence is not materially contradicted by another. wit-
ness, Mr. D. Salomons, who states that the Canstnission
of the Chambers may alter and modify a project, and
that " it does hear evidence in one way or other." What
Mr. Reed wished more particularly to convey was merely
that the inquiries, which are conducted at so much ex-
pense, and occupy so much time before Committees of the
Houses of Parliament in this country, are unknown in
France; and that the Commission of the Government
Board of that country, though it does not decide finally
whether a particular project shall be adopted or re-
jected, is invested with the power of determining, after
due inquiry, whether or not it shall be submitted at all
to the Chambers. In the one case the State wishes
only to understand the merits of a project before allow-
ing it to be brought forward, and adopts the means
believed to be most conducive to the attainment of thats
end ; iu the other a project is at once suffered to be
brought forward, without having been subjected to the
ordeal of an examination before a department of the
Executive entrusted with the care of the public interests.
which,
she uld no opposition be offered on thepart of
existing companies, the owners of property, or the pro-
moters of rival projects, are here but little regarded •
while, on the other hand, parties can only hope to suc-
ceed in their opposition by the employment of counsel
of eminence, and by bringing forward witnesses, often
from a distance, and maintained in London for weeks at
a heavy expense.
Some idea may be formed of the magnitude of the
sums absolutely wasted in this country, before Bills
can pass through Committees, from a return just made