The Sun.
London, England, 1846-10-31 00:00:00

No. 16,885. LON DON, SAT URDAY E ' •
OCTOBER 31 1846.

who oppose that amalgamation to consider how much it
was to their advantage to enter into it. It was proposed
on equal terms, and if their was any advantage in the
negotiation it was on the side of the Birmingham and
Oxford Company. He therefore proposed,
" That as this meeting deem it expedient that an
amalgamation of this company with the Birmingham,
Wolverhampton, and Dudley Railway Company should
be formed, the directors be authorised and requested, in
conjunction with the Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and
Dudley Railway Company, to apply to Parliament in the
next ensuing session for an Act or Acts to carry such
amalgamation into effect ; providing in the said Act for
powel' to lease or sell the two lines when amalgamated,
or any part thereof, to the Great Western Railway Com-
pany ; the directors being requested and authorised at
once to negotiate with that company for some arrange-
ment for that purpose:'
Mr. BULLER seconded the motion.
Mr. MOSELEY rose to oppose the motion. For his
part, at the outset of his remarks, he must acknowledge
that he was ignorant of the advantages which the chair-
man stated the amalgamation would confer on that com-
pany, because it had not pleased the directors to en-
lighten the shareholders as to the precise nature of
them. He did not wish to cast censure on the Chair-
man, because lie was bound, by the instructions which
he received from the directors ; but he must confess he
never listened to more meagre reasons for the adoption
of so important a step as the amalgamation of the com-
pany with another. The only reason of the slightest
importance, and that was not a great one, was the laying
down of the narrow gauge,
li
infor-
mation, because it might possibly e
convert.
The figures were most unsatisfactory. He wished to
know the length of the Birmingham and Oxford line ?
The CHAIItMAN said the line was 42 miles in length.
Mr. MOSELEY also wished to know the length of the
Birmingham and Dudley ?
The CHAIRMAN—About 14 miles.
Mr. MOSELEY wished to know the comparative cost of
the two lines ?
The CHAIRMAN said the cost of the Oxford and Bir-
mingham was 1,000,0001, and the Birmingham, Wolver-
hampton and Dudley, 700,0001.
Mr. MOSELEY said, then the matter stood thus :—that
one line cost 1,000,0001., and the other 700,0001., and
that an amalgamation was proposed on equal terms.
They should be satisfied that the advantages which they
proposed to give were equal to that they should receive.
He did not think they were, and therefore he
was strongly opposed to, any alliance of the
kind. The Chairman told them, and he re-
gretted to hear it, that there had been no negotiations
with other companies. He wished to know why no ne-
gotiation had taken place. He was surprised at such a
statement, because it was understood that the line was
to be taken up by the Great Western. That was held
out to the proprietors, and clauses were inserted in the
Bill for the purpose of giving legal effect to an amalga-
mation with the Great Western Company; but at the
eleventh hour these clauses were struck out, rendering
amalgamation optional on the part of either company,
and the Oxford and Birmingham Company were thus
thrown prostrate at the feet of the Great Western. He
admitted he was deeply interested in the North-Western
and Oxford and Birmingham Companies. He had
heard, and he believed the information was true, that
there were sufficient proxies in the room to carry the
amalgamation, but the knowledge of this would not
prevent him from expressing his sentiments. Still ho
should not object to any offer which seemed likely to be
advantageous to the company, but Fe would not be a
party to casting away advantages without a commensu-
rate return ; besides, as an independent scheme it would
pay, and could therefore afford to stand by itself. He
contended also that amalgamation at that period was most
uncalled for, because its resources had not been de-
veloped, whereas the other company was opposed by
three companies, and could only yield them an " omni-
bus " traffic, which would have to be worked at tbeir
expense. He must enter his decided negative to the
motion, and should do the utmost of his power to op-
pose a marriage where the entire dowry was on one
side, and no commensurate advantage on the other.
Lord HATRERTON was very happy at length to make
Mr. Moseley's acquaintance. During the last session,
and when he was Chairman of the Birmingham, Wol-
verhampton, and Dudley, he received several letters
from Mr. Moseley, with respect to the affairs of the
company, but they were so tinged with an inclination
to adverse interests, that he did not take that interest
in them which Mr. Moseley wished. Mr. Moseley was a
proprietor in the North-Western, but he (Lord Hather-
ton) was only interested in the two lines propesed to be
amalgamated. He instituted a comparison between the
cost of the two lines. Supposing the Wolverhampton
line had not passed, and the Birmingham and Oxford
had, did they not think that a line running through
such a dense population would have been cheaply pur-
chased at 700,00u/.?—(Hcar, hear, and cheers.) Mr.
Moseley was a respectable gentleman, residing at Birm-
ingham ; whereas he (Lord Hatherton) had passed
his line in that district, but not in the traffic
of shares. He had tendered his services to this company
because he was sensible of its importance to the public
at large, who ought not to be subject to one gigantic
monopoly, and be shut out from those advantages which
were derived from competition--those advantages not
only consisting in the reduction of fares, but in civility
and attention to the passengers, He had been chair-
man of both companies, and was satisfied that at that
moment great necessity existed for an union of them.
In fact the line ought to be carried on to Wolverhampton,
instead of terminating at Birmingham. The Grand
Junction was laid out in an inconvenient manner, and
did not come near those towns which the Birmingham,
Wolverhampton, and Dudley traversed. The lines of
the two companies ought to have been made general.
The reason was a natural one, and must inevitably take
place. He did not set his opinions up against those
who had directed much time to the• consideration of
railway matters, but he repeated that their interests would
be best promoted by the proposed amalgamation.
Mr.STEVENS proposed the following amendment, "That
the directors of this company be authorised to proceed to
obtain an Act of Parliament for the amalgamation of
the Birmingham and Oxford Junction Railway with the
Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dudley Railway,
on such terms as shall be approved of by the proprietors
of this company; that an agreement be previously entered
into by the directors of this company, to be confirmed
by the shareholders of the Great Western Company, for
leasing or selling to them this undertaking." Ile stated
in support of his proposition that as the line was origin-
ally ;intended to be leased or amalgamated with bthe
Great Western, he was anxious to drive the Great
Western to adopt their own child, and not to send it
abroad to seek paternal attention elsewhere.
Mr. TELFORD seconded the amendment. He consi-
dered, as men of honour, that they could not go to Par-
liament to seek powers to amalgamate with another
company whilst the clause with respect to the Great
Western remained in their Bill. With respect to amal-
gamating with the North Western Company, which
seemed a part of the Hon. Gentleman's proposition.
Mr. r. notMTEoLsErLOEßvp—aplodliodgised f
make
the
eane akymsuisethpe ;roposition.
Mr.
tinge—the colouring—of his speech went to induce
shareholders to believe that he, a proprietor of the North
Western, was opposed to an amalgamation with the
Great Western Company. ut the
the
Mr. MOSELEY—Certainly not. You are mistaken.
iots the
House of
Mr. TELFORD—Then you do not object to an amal-
gamation with the Great Western?
Mr. MOSELEY—Certainly not.
Mr. TELFORD—That gives me greater confidence in
seconding the amendment.
Mr. BULLER opposed the motion, and considered that
the directors ought not to be bound to make the amal•
gamation of this company with the Birmingham and
Dudley subservient to the consent of the Great Western.
It was true there was a clause in the Act giving the
powers to amalgamate with them if they thought proper,
but if they did not offer fair terms why this company
was at liberty to seek elsewhere for better. The pro-
position was absurd, and he said so with all respect
for the gentlemen from whom it had emanated,
It was said the directors had not furnished the share-
holders with sufficient information. Now he would
to recommendafford tthem
e nh e
too
muchshareholders
information,
not to press e directorsctahhueeseci iofutbhtyd
did so they might depend upon it they would thereby
lay themselves open to their opponents, and a
dnodthem-
selves serious damage. The amalgamation would be
con-
sideredm noto sbt
Mr. toadrtvi
PARSONS
Re poonwsta
rogNolesdpo
ouos advantageous,
yieldpl
opposed
a absurd.a sneddf
ati
withhr e profitTc hh cheap attpow atthsr
ena
shareholders.n
amalgamation,
,ateiothriceer
way, who
terests. If the Great Western
Lords, buthaadmmeeettintogcoonfsipdeerrsehnoswcothnenyeemted ighwtibthesat rpariol:
mote their private in
ae tdh emma,
kl
ee ta t hp
re
omp
ods
iot soon
lease the line ; for he would rather take a
to buy or
—letwishe them
come amalgamate
forward with
lease, or rent from them, if they met them fairly, though
the other company might offer higher terms.--(Cheers.)
Mr. SPOONER, M.P., considered_ that there was some
misapprehension on the part of
of the
to
gentielmen
who
op-
posed the amalgamation, and seemed think that they
must look to their own interest, to the exclusion of any
consideration of the interests of the public. The Noble
Lord used but h
no such argument,he
advised them, in
considering their own
interests, not to overlook those of
conclusion:—
Lord took. After all, they came to this
was spread over the The whole trade of the districtfour-
teen miles of the Birmingham and
Dudley line, and if
the public.—(Hear.) That was the view the Noble
as upon the population and the
the district would go P
usmuchNorth
Western. They should not so_ reckon upon
they did not unite with that line,
anotherthe exliteeenftieletraNde
tohf
the alliance would bring to their
tons of goods which
the objectionsof
the Hon.
line. He did not wonder at
the length of their line,
Moseley), Proprietor (Mr. because he was a o
North-
western proprietor, and
the Oxford line, and they would
have no hindrance, because
was to get the traffic on
it was manifest they must
tam and Dudley line,
he had no hesitation in sayi
prevent the traffic going was
asnly doing all he could to
Oxford. Now, their object
amalgamate. Without the Birmingham
that
their
line eveuld not
be of that serviee to the public, or to them, as it would if
t with other companies
when their scheme was complete. e
He suggested the
withdrawal of the amendment.
an amalgamation took place.icsßesidesi they would have
a greater power to amalgamate
Mr. MATTHEWS (the Chairman of the Birmingham,
Wolverhampton and Dudley), also, rose to explain away

misconception on the part of Mr. Moseley, and other
gentlemen opposed to the amalgamation. That gentle-
man did not appear to see the relative merits of the two
lines. He said, as the cost of one was 1,000,0001., and
the other only 700,0004—0ne-fourth less, that the
contrast was greatly against the smaller pro-
ject. The original estimate was 450,0001., but the
station at Birmingham increased the amount to 709,000/.
That station of course belonged to the Birmingham and
Dudley Company, but in the event of the amalgama-
tion they would have joint use of it. Then the one line
went through almost an entirely agricultural district,
almost bare :of population, whilst the other ran through
one of the most densely populated districts,
in any part of England so that no disadvan-
tageous comparison could be drawn between the two
companies. After explaining the position of the lines,
and that the hiatus between Fennycompton and Wol-
verhampton would be filled up by the amalgamation, and
that sooner than rest his connexion with the lines on
the mere possession of shares, without an interest in the
district, he went on to say, the grand object of himself
and Lord Hatherton was the amalgamation of the line
Mr. PARSONS said his interest in the line was fourfold
the interest he held in the London and Birmingham.
Mr. RUSSELL, M.P. (the Chairman of the Great
Western), then rose, and said, Mr. Chairman—l have
waited to this period of the proceedings, because I was
extremely desirous to hear the opinions and views enter-
tained by the proprietors of the Birmingham and Ox-
ford. I feel that I can no longer remain silent, and that I
am bound to express my opinion, as director of that
company ; and, after the taunts which have been
thrown out respecting the silence of the Great
Western, I feel also bound to say a few words
on behalf of that company.—(Hear.) On the ques-
tion of amalgamation, independent 'of any arrangement
with the Great Western Railway Company, I should be
reluctant to give a strong or decided opinion, although
the opinions I have entertained are in favour of that
amalgamation. This is a question very much influenced
by private considerations, and it is rather surprising
that in the course of the discussion which has just taken
place, all the arguments which have been adduced against
the amalgamation have proceeded from an Hon. Proprie-
tor residing at Liverpool, and from a second Hon. Pro-
prietor residing in London. I think, therefore, we are
justified in assuming that the local opinions are decid-
edly in favour of the amalgamation.—(Cheers.) Sir, all
prima
,facie arguments are in favour of it. It needs no
great power of argument to show that two lines connected
with each other, and forming one continuous line, are
almost naturally associated. They come together to the
same station at Birmingham, and are possessed in some
measure by the same proprietors, and they can be worked
as joint lines much more economically than they possi-
bly can do as two separate lines. Anti I think it must
be obvious to every one that each is calculated to
enrich the other.—(Hear, hear.) On the question
of amalgamation I can entertain no doubt whatever. I
confess, however, that I am rather disposed to concur in
the opinion of the Hon. Proprietor who made the last
proposition, at the other end of the table (Mr. Stevens),
that it was desirable that the two questions—the amal-
gamation of the two companies with the Great Western
should proceed together.—(Cheers.) Gentlemen, there
are many considerations affecting one line which bear
strongly upon the other. It is true that by the Bill of
the Oxford as it now stands we have a right to lease it.
We must be careful, as guardians of the interest of the
Great Western Railway, that we do not permit the
right which we possess by that Bill, but which we do
not possess by the Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and
Dudley lino, to fall into abeyance.—(Cheers.) It is pos •
sible the Great Western have made no overtures to the
proprietors of the Birmingham and Oxford. By law
they possess a right of working over that line. The
Hon. Proprietor had said that by that law they have
been laid prostrate at the feet of the Great Western
Railway Company. Sir, I contend that that law was
granted expressly for the purpose, not of laying the
Birmingham and Oxford Company prostrate at the feet
of the Great Western Railway_ Company, but to enable
themselves to stand against the London and Birmingham
Company. Sir, it is not my intention upon the present
occasion to make any overture on the part of the Great
Western to 3,0 u. The shareholders and the interests of
the Birmingham and Oxford Railway are well guarded
by the directors whom you have entrusted with the ma-
nagement of your affairs. They aro the best judges of the
interests of your company ; but this I will say, that i
they think it right, after taking a view of their interests
to make any proposition to the Great Western, tho
Great Western is quite prepared to make and consider
with them such proposition.—(Cheers.) The principle,
however, upon which any negotiations must proceed with
the Great Western Company, must be that of a complete
adherence to the principles upon which this Bill was
granted. The first object that was contemplated
by the Bill was to open a line of communica-
tion between Birmingham, Southampton, and the
southern coast of England. Now it must be
clear, I think, that the Great Western Company
hold a very considerable portion of that line, and that
object will be rather advanced by a connexion with the
Great Western Company than retarded. But perhaps
the most important object contemplated by that Bill
was to open a second, and not only a second, but an in-
dependent line of communication with the metropolis.—
(Cheers.) That a second line was wanted was admitted
even by the opponents of the Bill—that it was to be an
independent line was the very essence of the
purpose of those who first devised it—of
the inhabitants of Birmingham who aided in
carrying it out, and lastly of the Legislature that
passed the Bill. I must, therefore, contend that no
arrangement can be contemplated by the proprietors of
this company—l frankly and confidently believe
that no arragement will be sanctioned by the Legisla-
ture which does not hold in view that object for which
it was granted—of its being an independent line.—
(Cheers.) Some allusion has been made to the purchase
of this line by the North-Western Railway Company,
and an intimation intelligible enough has been made that
these two companies should be brought into competition
with each other, to which the Great Western will never
consent to be a party.—(Cheers.) If the Oxford and
Birmingham Company can make a more advantageous
bargain with the North-Western Company—it they
think it is consistent with the principles upon
which the line was granted--if they think
they should make such a bargain—if they
think that the Legislature will sanction such a bargain
—(Hear, hear)—let them at once open their negotia-
tions with the London and Birmingham Company; the
Great Western will stand aloof and leave these negotia-
tionstimore to proceed.
with.lf, ot nil the
principlesothe r hoann dw,
which
they nl
ob-
tained
( it
e
el h
their Bill that such negotiations should proceed
with the Great Western Company—though I must
be distinctly understood as not being empowered to
make any proposition of that kind on the part of the
Great Western Company—thus much I will take upon
myself to say, that we shall be quite prepared to treat for
such a purpose.—(Loud cheers.)
Mr. MOSELEY was ready to support the line as an in-
dependent line.
g
to
oeaoeAvr
nnbri
n. rr.
.aGnnSg Gentleman
Ani
listeneduottlhut
esnm Ea
to
amn
throw
(the
to
ht
wtreboh woo tthaomsi
yaoic
sides,
deee
istdiffia, s secretary
settulrhl
eul oet.
sy ftetdhehGermeaigthWt
besetearbnle)
Mr. CROSSTHWAITE advised an adjournment.
He considered the
amalgamation of the two companies desirable ; and the
aimnetnhdemweanytofdidno
effect-
ing this.
Mr. CROSSTIIWAITE—" No, no."
Mr. SAUNDERS—He was sure the Great Western had
no wish to do so. It, therefore, came to this issue

that amalgamation was desirable and ought to
be carried out.—(hear.) But it was stated that the
Great Western had no power •to lease the other line,
and that unless there was some stipulation to confer the
same power of lease or purchase on the Great Western
with respect to the Birmingham and Dudley, that the
Birmingham and Oxford would be placed in a disadvan-
tageous position; as, for instance, if it passed into the
hands of another company. Now the introduction of a
few words into the amendment by the solicitor would no
doubt have the effect of destroying any ambiguity—
that when the amalgamation of the two companies should
take. place that their position with regard to amalgama-
tion should be assimilated.
Lord HATHERTON objected to fixing down the direc-
tors to the Great Western, and warned that company
that they were not without a powerful rival, and that
as shares changed hands, those who were willing to deal
with them then, might be succeeded by others, who, two
years hence, would exact high terms when the Great
Western were less able to accept them.
Mr. CROSSTHWAITE then proposed, "That as this meet-
ing deem it expedient that an amalgamation of this com-
pany with the Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and Dud-
ley Junction Railway should be formed, and that the
directors be authorised and requested, in conjunction
with the directors of the Birmingham and Dudley line, to
apply to Parliament in the ensuing session for an
Act or Acts to carry such amalgamation into
effect, providing in the said Act power to lease or
sell the two lines when amalgamated, or any part
thereof to the Great Western Company, the directors
being requested and authorised at once to negotiate
with that company for some arrangement for that pur-
pose."
This motion having been seconded, was, with the ori-
ginal motion of the Chairman, submitted to the meeting,
and both were carried, but two hands, those of Mr.
Moreley and Mr. Parsons, being held up against either.
The motion of Mr. Stevens was superseded by the
amendment of Mr. Crossthwaite.
Lord Hatherton, having taken the chair, a vote of
thanks was awarded to Mr. Muntz, who briefly returned
thanks, and the meeting gave way to that of the

BIRMINGHAM, WOLVERHAMPTON AND
DUDLEY COMPANY,
which was held in the same room.
Mr. MATTHEWS, the Chairman of tho Company, pre-
sided, who briefly addressed the meeting, and concluded
by reading the report, which stated—
"The Act of Incorporation received the royal assent
on the 3d of August last.
" There was a balance of 59,421/. 17s. 10d., of which
50,0001. is placed to a deposit account, bearing interest.
" The directors, in pursuance of the powers of the
Act, had determined to allow 4 per cent. interest on calls
after 51. per share has been paid ; and shareholders wish.
ing to anticipate their calls, will be allowed the same
rate of interest upon all sums paid in advance.
" Since the Act was passed, a careful re-survey of the

's,-' -2-------78/----7--- ----- ~-------x--0,---e--------) —z;'*------,:--C-'‘''''------,—‹)
.. .
w, ,- fi,„ 7_,7
.4 i l' ,
ix
riii
, r 4 N• ,
~zaz_4\-----___ 1
1 .
it . -7
, 4
'‘
. • ~... 0-rt • 7,7- AD _. ~,
ki'" ' •
. .:11,„t L.,,,, ~.,„
(s'l4' vq,
_ .*, , ..4.,
, .
~.. J. '; 41 'l/4 l'' a3l i.':' . - V; '''
' ii ^
9
12-ilitti." r - 7.. ' '"' °J,, 4, ',„
.
\:"-- ',-**l' 4A / 4,-- L'Ll.' zx 11".',.e LA.' -41,,,,0--.1: ~6,„'11e-i—ji, ______ ~f.;:;:7 _,,......_ 74_
....--
,v.,,,,,, ••_________ ...,:,..) 1 ,
r.- .
•
~,,,44::v5,, •-•2' . ' vi ~,.., E: ,„t• '
1.. ',✓W93 -1-1. b -MI; 4 '..
....d-3. t -- - .--4.4'-'ti'';' / 1
;:,r, • ,1 m' o

PRICE SD.

line has been made, and the engineer, Mr. McClean,
had reported that no deviation is required beyond the
limits authorised by Parliament.
" The property plans of a great portion of the line
are in the hands of the valuers ; some portions of the
property had been purchased ; the first contract is ad-
vertised, and preparations are being made for proceed-
ing with the execution of the works with the necessary
vigour.

The importance of obtaining over this railway all
the traffic which can be influenced by making it a con-
tinuous line, in connexion with the Birmingham and
Oxford, and the Great Western Railways, on the one
hand; and the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton
on the other, without the interruption of any break Of
gauge between Wolverhampton and London, pointed
out the urgency of applying to Parliament, in the next
cession, for power to lay down broad gauge rails, in
addition to those of the narrow gauge; and the directors
proposed to take proper measures for that purpose,
" They proposed to apply to Parliament for a line of
railway in connexion with the Oxford, Worcester, and
Wolverhampton Company, from Westbromwich to
Stourbridge, through the Halesowen and Netherton dis •
trier."

The report concluded by recommending the amalga-
mation of the company with the Oxford and Birmingham.
The report was received and adopted ; Mr. Aston and
Mr. Scott were elected auditors ; and the amalgamation
was carried without the slightest opposition.
A vote of thanks was passed to the Chairman, and the
meeting separated shortly after five o'clock.

DERBYSHIRE, STAFFORDSHIRE,
AND WORCESTERSHITZ JUNCTION, AND
DIRECT EAST AND WEST JUNCTION RAIL-
' WAYS.

A public meeting of the scripholders of these two
companies was held yes'azday, at the Railway Protector-
office, 11, Bncklersbury. The meeting was presided
over by Mr. Davis.
An irregular discussion took place at the commence-
ment, as to whether certain resolutions, agreed to at a
' private meeting of the scripholders, should be read. It
resulted in their being read by Mr. Clark, and their
substance was, that the affisirs of the two companies
were in such a state as to imperatively require the most
thorough investigation, and that a public meeting should
he called, at which to determine on ulterior proceedings.
The present meeting had, in consequence, been calle.
Mr. CLARK then proceeded to explain the circum-
stances of the two companies. The first company to
which he would refer was the Derbyshire, Stafford-
shire, and Worcestershire Junction. It was origi-
nally brought out with a capital of 800,0001., the shares
being fixed at 32,000, of 25/. each. It was subsequently
altered to 40,000 shares, of 20/. each. The promoter
was Mr. M`Gregor, of Suffolk-street. In respect to the
second arrangement, no regular registration took place,
the prospectus and provisional directors only being regis-
tered. About 17,000 were issued, and 8,212 were paid
upon, the deposit being 2/. 2s. Of the Direct East and
West Junction, the originator was a Mr. Arnold, of
Uttoxeter, a solicitor there, who subsequently appeared
to have assumed the name of Bainbridge.
Dr. Macias:Nam—lle took that name, in consequence
of acquiring some property.
Mr. CLARK—It might be so. Tho capital of this
company was 600,0004, being made up of 30,000 shares
,of 2/. 2s. each. The number of shares was 12,195,
while, from information obtained from the registrar,
there was a blank against the number paid upon.
Dr. MACKENZIE—That is not accurate.
Some altercation arose on this point, which ended in
Dr. MACKENZIE explaining that the certificate of the
registrar was incorrectly filled up, and that upwards of
17,000 shares were issued, while above 12,000 were paid
upon. They had then the fact before them that in the
first company, of 40,000 shares, but 17,000 were allotted,
while in the latter, of 30,000 shares, according to Dr.
Mackenzie, but 17,000 or 18.000 were issued. This was
a great source of complaint among the shareholders, as
they had been led to believe the shares had all been issued.
It therefore appeared there was not sufficient to go to Par-
liament with. It was a remarkable fact, the directors of the
one company were exactly the same as those of the other.
Finding that the capital was not sufficient for Parlia-
mentary purposes, the directors, without consulting the
scripholders, or calling a meeting, agreed to amalgamate
the two, transferring the capital of the larger to the lesser
scheme, the Derbyshire, Staffordshire, and Worcester-
shire. Though the directors advertised that exchange
scrip would be supplied to all who applied for it, he be-
lieved none was supplied.
Dr. MACKENZIE—That is not so; every one who ap-
plied for it received it.
Mr. CLARK said he was prepared to prove what he
said. The result of all these proceedings was, that see-
ing the directors in both schemes had but issued 17,000
shares each out of 40,000 and 30,000 shares respectively,
the law gave the scripholders a right to recover their full
deposits. Ile now left the matter in their hands, and
would conclude by advising them to follow up the pre-
sent meeting with such measures as would recover the
money of the shareholders with whom faith had thus
been broken.
A SHAREHOLDER hoped that some of the gentlemen
present who knew the affairs of the company would
answer what bad been stated by Mr. Clark. Perhaps
Dr. Mackenzie or Mr. Matthew, who were both present,
would do so.
Mr. MATTHEW said be was at present Chairman of
the Derbyshire, Staffordshire, and Worcestershire Junc-
tion, and be had only been called on to lk so since the
amalgamation. The line proposed now to go on with
was much required by the district through which it would
pass. The inhabitants were generally in its favour, and
Lords Hatherton and Anglesey were its warm
supporters. What had been done was for the bene-
fit of the shareholders. The directors had no
object in view but the good of all, in fact,
the carrying out of the scheme was the only way
of getting out of the wood. He had no doubt, were the
Bill obtained, but that good terms would be obtained
from some of the existing companies, as it formed a
junction with both the North and South Staffordshire
lines. The Hon. Gentleman, after explaining the pro-
ceedings of last session in regard to the line, said that
sufficient arrangements had been made in regard to de-
posits to go to Parliament, without calling on the share-
holders, and they had every prospect of obtaining the Bill.
Mr. CLARK was glad to hear that the affairs of the
company were so promising. In that case, perhaps, the
directors would be in a position to pay back the deposits
to those that did agree to the amalgamation.
Mr. MATTHEW said what had been done was under
the deeds of settlement of the two companies, and such
a return could not be made.
Mr. BROWN intimated that he held 1,000 shares, and
he thought the proposed line an excellent scheme. If
the Bill was obtained he would be glad to buy 1,000
shares more at par, as the line would have to fall into
the hands of some of the great companies.
Dr. MACKENZIE explained at some length the cha-
racter and route of the line now laid out by Mr. Ras-
trick. It had been much improved in its engineering
peculiarities since last year. It started from the North
Staffordshire line at the Uttoxeter station, and terminated
at the Walsall station of the South Staffordshire.
Mr. CLARK thought if the directors meant well they
ought to publish a statement of their accounts.
In answer to a question put by Mr. Brown,
Dr. MACKENZIE complained that there was no oppo-
sition last year in the Lords, but they had strong oppo-
sition in the Commons from the Birmingham Canal
Company and Lord Anglesey. This opposition would
be withdrawn this year. The line was locally very pow-
erfully supported.
After some further discussion, a resolution was una-
nimously agreed to, appointing a committee of five
shareholders to communicate with the directors, so as
to obtain all necessary information respecting the affairs
of the companies, such to be submitted afterwards to
the shareholders, in order that they might determine
what course to pursue. The meeting then broke up.

MORE MISCONDUCT OF GENTLEMEN CADETS AT
THE ROYAL MILLITARY ACADEMY, WOOLWICH.—An
extraordinary sensation has been caused at the Royal
Military Academy, Woolwich, at the disgraceful conduct
of three more gentlemen cadets, named Peel (nephew of
Sir Robert Peel), Braybrook, and Birchall, and the
severe punishment the two last have received. The
charge was intoxication, &c., which was fullyinvesti-
gated by the Lieutenant-Governor, Colonel Sir B.
Parker, C. 8., who, after the case had been fully proved
against them, sentenced Braybrook and Burchall to be
confined in the blackhole forty-eight hours, eight days'
confinement to their room, one month's extra drill, and
to be restrained from leave and passing the gates for
the ensuing half-year. The sentence on Mr. Peel
(son of Colonel Jonathan Peel) has not yet been
promulgated.

DEFALCATION OF A CLERK UPON THE PROPERTY
OF LORD HOWDEN.- On Thursday morning information
was forwarded to the police that a clerk employed at
Wingate Grange Colliery, near Hartlepool, had ab-
sconded, taking with him upwards of 6801., the pro-
perty of Lord Howden. He is described as being about
twenty years of age, rather short and stout, light sandy
hair, walks upright, and generally with a quick step.
He is a native of Northumberland, and has a northern
accent.

BOOKBINDERS' PROVIDENT ASYLUM SOCIETY.---
The annual general meeting of this society was held in
the Mechanics' Institution, Southampton-buildings,
Chancery-lane, on Tuesday evening, for the election of
officers for the ensuing year, and the transaction of other
business, Luke James Hansard, Esq., in the chair. The
report having been read, the Secretary proceeded to read
the balance-sheet, showing that after all that had been
done there was still a balance of upwards of 1201., and
further stating he had received that day the sum of 151.,
out of which was the munificent donation of 101. 10s.
from the chairman, who bad also consented to become
an annual subscriber of 11. Is., until such time as the
asylum is fully completed. A vote of thanks to the
chairman terminated the proceedings.
Joseph Hume is now 70 years old, Sir William
Molesworth 36, Lord Morpeth 44, Daniel O'Connell 72,
Sir Robert Peel 58, Lord Stanley 46, Colonel T. P.
Thompson 63, Dr. Bowring 54, Sir James Graham 54,
Earl Grey 44, Lord Brougham 67, the Duke of Devon-
shire 56, Earl Fitzwilliam 60, Lord Lyndhurst
74, Lord George Bentinck 44, the Duke of Rich-
mond 53, the Duke of Rutland 68, the Duke of Wel-
lington 77.