The Sun.
London, England, 1846-07-02 00:00:00

weet, they should be reside-fed to a e ourso which weulei
keep them outside the circle, or belt; deezcribed in our in.
structions. . . . .
. For the came reasonV.as well-as for.othcre which will
appear hereafter, we haVie-no hesitation in recommending
that the same rule should be strictly applied to ail new
railways of which the schemes have come under oar con-
sideration.
We have stated that the advantages -to the public of
such accommodation as would be afforded to them by
bringing the railway stations further into the City
appear to us exaggerated. It must be observed, how-
ever, that traffic-tables, the usual data by which the de-
mand for railway accommodation, and the convenience
which it will bestow upon the public, are estimated, have
throughout cur investigation been very imperfectly fur-
nished to us. We do net mention this as a matter of
reproach to the promoters of the schemes which have
been brought under our consideration, for it is manifestly
impossible to calculate the cll6ection and extent of the
traffic which takes place to and from the different parts
of London and its suburbs, with the accuracy which is
expected in dealing with ordinary lines of railway ;
but Lecause the want of such evidence has compelled
us to found our conclusions rather upon the judgment
of persons of experience, and upon oar own observation,
than upon numerical returns.
It is by those passengers who constitute the short
traffic on lines entering London, and who are in the
daily habit of using a metropolitan railway, that tke ad-
vantage of carrying the line as far as pessible i n.to the town,
would he most sensibly felt. Eut we have it in evidence
that the average distance travelled by passengers who ar-
rive at the Euston-square station is not less than 64 miles.
To passengers moving over this length of ground, aed,
it may be assumed, using the railway less frequently,
the saving of a mile or two, whether estimated in time
or money,• is of comparatively little importance. And
although it is likely that in. the ease of other lines which
may hereafter enter London from the north, this average
will be lower ; inasmuch as they may pass through dis-
tricts more frequented by persons having occupations in
the metropolis than any which are traversed by the
Birmingham Railway ; we are nevertheless of opinion,
that the probable demand for the better accommodation
of short traffic on those lines, would not lustify such an
expenditure on the part of the companies, or such a sa-
crifice of property, as must result from carrying the
lines through the thickly inhabited parts of the metro-
polis.
Bus if these railway companies should deem it neces-
sary to offer to their passengers the means of sonvey-
ance to more parts of the metropolis than one, we are of
opinion that this might be effected with greater advan-
tage to all parties by branches skirting the town, and
terminating at points without the line described in oar
instructions, than by penetrating within it.
If the convenience of passengers does not call for the
prolongation of railways into the heart of the metropo-
lis,et
still less does it require the establishment of y
one central terminus, at which therail ways from differ t
parts of the country should unite. We believe that t the
number of passengers who desire to pass through Lon 'i
don, without quitting the railway, and to whom princi. i8'..4
pally such an arrangement would be an advantage, is so-- •
small as to be scarcely appreciable. We are oorXident
that it is not such as to justify the Legislature is sanc-
tioning the establishment of a terminus which would re-
ceive the traffic of many lines, and be conducted under
divided management. Of the inconvenience, confusion,
and danger of such an arrangement, we have the strongest
1 and most authoritative evidence.

As regards merchandise, the railways which are of
most importance as channels for its conveyance into the
commercial parts of London and of its suburbs, are
undoubtedly those which connect the metropolis with
the north and north-west of England. And 'here wib
are not called upon to consider the speed, so much as
the uniform and uninterrupted nature of the conveyance
and the diminution of expense.
It is our opinion supported by the evidence of expe-
rienced and very intelligent witnesses, that so far as an
easy, unbroken, and economical communication between
the norther railways and the docks, or the east of Lon-
don generally, is concerned, the object canhe more con-
veniently and surely attained by a line which should
pass outside the metropolis on the north, at such a dis-
tance as to avoid interference with populous districts
and thronged thoroughfares, and so connect the goods
stations of the various railways from west to east with
each other, terminating at some convenient point on the
Thames or within the docks. Such a railway, it is true,
would not bring the merchandise of the north and west
so near to the warehouses in the City, as the prolonga-
tion of some of the northern lines to Faringdon-stroet,
Aldersgate-street, Fore-street, &c. ; but without antici-
pating the objections which we shall shortly have to
make to these projects, it is sufficient to observe that the
execution of any. or even all of them, must still leave the
communication Ivith many of the warehousing districts
of London very incomplete ; and that, therefore, re-
course must still be had to conveyance by oart through
some of the most crowded thoroughfares.
To facilitate the transfer of goods, not on* between
the northern railways and the commercial parts of ten-
don, but between the northern and southern railways
respectively, and thereby to make the communication
between all parts of the country complete, it would be
necessary that the line which we have suggested should
cross the river to the west of the metropolis, to connect
itself with the South-Western, South-Eastern, and any
other lines that may approach 'the town on that side.
The course which it should take has not come specifi-
cally under our consideration, inasmuch as it would cer-
tainly lie beyond the limits laid down in our instructions;
but we have no hesitation in saying that such a line
might be constructed, answering all the commercial and
more important purposes of a central terminus, without
being liable to the objections which arise to this latter
scheme.

We have upon this head the valuable testimony of
your Majesty's Quartermaster-General, and of the In-
spector-General of Fortifications, that whilst it is of the
utmost importance, with a view to the national dlenee,
to establish an unbroken connexion between the ra .ways
of the north, south, and west, a circuitous communica-
tion for this purpose round London would, for military
purposes, be preferable to one which should necessitate
the conveyance of your Majesty's troops or stores
through a populous part of the metropolis.
2.. AS TO THE SACRIFICE or PROPERTY.
The actual demolition of houses, and other premises,
and the occupation by railways of ground now; used for
other purposes, may, for the most part, h-0 estimated,
and compensated to the owners by mono, ; and although
cases will undoubtedly arise, in wbch the injury sus-
tained, being less direct, cannot be so estimated, sr re-
dressed, these would be for the special consideration of
the Legislature, when ver the project may be brought
befou.c it.

But respect to the general effect produced upon
pror2,-,rty in and near London by the passage of a rail-
way through it, we are of opinion, that although in most
cases an injurious one, it is not necessarily and in-
variably so.
If the property is situated on the outskirts of the town,
and is not already crowded with buildingjo if the ap-
proaches to it are well preserved ; and, escially, if the
railway is carried through it in a cutting or tunnel, and
not on a viaduct, we are of opinion, from
the evidence and examples which have been
brought before us, that its value, even for dwel-
ling-houses, is not universally deteriorated. On the
other hand, we are not disposed to attach any weight
to the assumption which we have found to be a com-
mon one, that districts thickly inhabited by a popula-
tion of the lowest class, and where T ce and destitution
prevail, are sensibly improved by the passaga of a rail-
way through them. Where a large extent of such ground
is occupied by a station, approaches, or works of a rail-
way, we believe that ultimate benefit is the result, both
to those who are removed and to the neighbourhood,
though at the cost to the former of much immediate
hardship. But we see no reason to think that the mere
passing of a railway through such a district has any good
effect. It does not open the streets to any new traffic,
ttheof dwellings on
eniotrh
odro essi
diet
olead
et ol
ntehe;
aimndprso,
improvements
vheemr where n
which such districts most require, viz., the formation of
new streets, with better built houses, better ventilation,
and better drainage are in contemplation, or are likely
to be effected, it tends, in most cases, to obstruct rather
than to facilitate them.
We have not considered it necessary to determine
whether the expense which will be incurred by the com-
panies in carrying their lines far into the town is likely
to be compensated to them by increased profits, although
we see great reason for doubting it.
The only case in which it would appear that any con-
clusion upon this head might be drawn iron] experience
is that of the Blackwell Railway, the extension of which
from the terminus in the Minories to Fenchurch-street,
a distance of only 415 yards, was effected at a cost of
250,0001. It has been stated to us by Mr. Wightman,
the superintendent of the company, that this extension
has increased the traffic on the line by one-half ; but we
are of opinion that other circumstances have operated
considerably towards producing- this result, and there-
fore that this example cannot be applied to the greater
part, if to any, of the lines brought before us. The
Blackway Railway is a line of short traffic only,
and has to encounter formidable opposition from the
steam-boats, which bring their passengers to landing•
places at many convenient points within the metropolis ;
and, under these circumstances, it is quite possible that
a very slight promulgation of their line towards the
centre of the city, may, though purchased at the cost
above named, have enabled the company to make head
against competition, and so justify them in considering
the expenditure a profitable one. Such an example
furnishes no grounds for assuming that the promoters of
long lines n.)t exposed to a similar competition, would
derive any benefit from advancing their stations, even to
a far smaller cost, within the outskirts of the metropolie.
3. AS TO THE INTIXIRUPTION OF IMPORTANT TKO.
ROUGHFARES.

The difficulties and objections which arise on this
head to the establishment of termini within the metro-
polis are so fully admitted by the companies who pro.
pose to execute such plans, that there is scarcely one
amongst the schemes which we have had before us of
which the promoters have not expressed cneir intention
to combine, more or less with their own works, and at
their own expense, the improvement of existing, or the
formation of new thoroughfares for the benefit of the
public.
It is well known that the thoroughfares of London. is
which the pressure and inconvenience of a too great ac-
cumulation of traffic is moat felt, are those that run
east and west; and that the wants of the community are
already very ill-supplied by the few continuous lines of
streets which lie in that direction. It is impossible to
pass along the Hue of Thames-street, of the Strand.
Fleet-street, Watling-street, and Eastcheap, or through
parts of Holborn, Skinner-street, Cheapside, and the
Poultry, without being aware, that if then ber of
vehicles which throng these thoroughfares w cere at an 7
hour of the day to be suddenly inereased„ eveP inug2ll
l
very slightly, the current of traffic through thole qin. _"t
nelswcai would
would
makebethseumbj eaclitotgoecthheerclucssealnesds int
oterrxeurspotinosn
0,
whose
speed and certainty of transit are an object.