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

COURT CIRCULAR,

His Serene Highness the Prince of Leiningen and Lord
John Russelfjoined the royal dinner circle at 9korne House
on Tuesday evening.
Yesterday morning, at half-past eight o'clock, Lord John
Russell left Osborne House, crossed from the Isle of Wight in
the Fairy steam-packet, and proceeded to town, returning by
route of Wimbledon, where Lady John Russell has been
staying.
The Queen and Prince Albert walked yesterday morning
in the pleasure-grounds of Osborne House.
The Royal children rode out on ponies yesterday.
The Court will, it is expected, leave Osborne House at two
()Mock this (Thursday) afternoon, for Euckingham Palace.
His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge visited the
botanical garden in the Regent's Park yesterday.
Lord John Russell returned to his residence is Chesham-
place at half past two o'clock yesterday afternoon, from
Osborne House, Isle of Wight. The Dake of Bedford visited
his Lordship immediately after his arrival
Sir Robert and Lady Peel left their residence in Whitehall
Gardens yesterday morning, for Drayton Manor, Stafford-
shire.

Mr. William Smith had an interview with Mr. Secretary
Gladstone yesterday, at the Colonial-office.
The Ecclesiastical Commissioners fur England had a
general meeting yesterday. There were present, the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury, the Bishops of London, Durham,
Bangor, Chichester, Gloucester and Bristol, Oxford, Roches-
ter, Salisbury and Worcester, and the Right Hon.
llobhouse.

Dispatches were sent off yesterday evening from the
Colonial-office for the Governors of the West India Colonies.

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. sat yester-
day, and resumed the hearing of the Vasareelely case, from
Madras. Mr. Kindersley, Queen's Counsel, was heard_ The
Lords present were the Lord President, the Master of the
Rolls, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Cornwall, and.the
Judge of the Admiralty Court.

REPORT OF THE COMMISSION-
ERS ON METROPOLITAN TERMINI.

May it please your Majesty—We, the Commissioners
appointed by letters patent, under your Majesty's privy
seal, bearing date the 2d day of April, in the 9th year
of your Majesty's reign, to investigate and report upon
the various railway projects of which the termini are
proposed to be established within or in the immediate
vicinity of the metropolis, beg leave dutifully to submit
to your Majesty, that we have called before us such
persons as wo have judged to be, by reason of their situa-
tion, knowledge, and experience, most competent to
afford us correct information on the above-mentioned
subject, and that we hare required the production of such
books, documents, papers, and returns, as have appeared
to us calculated to assist our researches.

We have further to submit, that in obedience to your
Majesty's commands, signified to us through one of your
Majesty's principal Secretaries of State, we have directed
our attention to such portions of the several railways,
either now before Parliament, or projected, as come
within the following limits: that is to say, the Edge-
ware-road, from Oxford-street to the intersection of the
New-road; the New-road and the City-road, to Fins-
bury-square; Bishopsgate-street, London-bridge, High-
street, Borough, Blackman-street, the Borough-road,
Lambeth-road, Vauxhall-road, Vauxhall- bridge, Vaux-
hall-bridge-road, Grosvenor-place, and Park-lane.
And that we have especially considered whether the
extension of railways into the centre of the metropolis
is calculated to afford such additional convenience or
benefit to the public as will compensate for the sacrifice
of property, the interruption of important thoroughfares,
and the interference with plans of improvement already
suggested. .

•Vcre now humbly beg leave to lay before your Majesty
this our report.
We commenced our inquiry by collecting such docu-
mentary information, in the form of bills, prospectuses,
and plans, as would place us in possession of the general
features of the various schemes, whether before Parlia-
ment or not, by which it is proposed to bring the line or
terminus of any railway within or near to the limits
prescribed in our instructions.

The following list shows the number and designation
of all such projects as have come to our knowledge :-
1. An Extension of the Eastern Counties Railway to
Finsbury-square.
2. An Extension of the Eastern Counties Railway to
Fore-street.
3. The Tottenham and Farringdon-street Terminus.
4. The London and Birmingham Terminus at Earring-
don street.
5. The Direct London and Manchester Line, and the
London and Manchester Extension to the City.
6. The North London Junction Railway.
7. The Regent's Canal Railway.
8. The Direct Northern Railway Terminus in Hol-
born.
9. The Extension of-the London and Birmingham to
the East and West India Docks.
10. The Central Terminus in Farringdon-street.
11. The Great Western, Brentford, and Central Junc-
tion Terminus Railway.
12. The Thames Embankment Central Terminus.

13. The London Railway.
14. The London Connecting Railway and Railway
Transit Line.
15. The National Junction Railway and City of London
Terminus Company.
16. The North Kent Railway.
17. South Eastern Extension to Waterloo-bridge.
18. The South-Western Extension from the York-road
to London-bridge.
19. The 'West-End and Southern Counties Railway.
The list divides itself into two heads, viz., the lines
which approach London from the south side of the
Thames, and those which approach it from the north.
The first point, therefore, which presented itself for
our decision was whether the same considerations apply
equally to the admission of these two classes within the
limits named to us; that is, whether the convenience or
benefit which the public would derive from such admis-
sion bears in each case the same, or nearly the same pro-
portion to the injury which would be sustained from the
sacrifice of property, the interruption of thoroughfares,
and the interference with future improvements?
It is our opinion that this is not the case—and for the
following reasons:-
1. Setting aside, for the present, the question whether
any railway should bo permitted to cross the Thames
within the metropolis, the termini which would offer the
greatest convenience, both to passengers and goods con-
veyed by the southern railways, may be described to be
Waterloo, or Hungerford-bridge, for the West of Lon-
don: and London-bridge for the City. The immediate
vicinities of these points are attainable by railways from
the south, with much less disturbance of house property
than would be caused by bringing the northern railways
to points of comparatively equal convenience on the
north side of the Thames.
2. The property to be disturbed is less valuable, and
consequently the cost of furnishing the accommodation
to the public would, on this account also, be proportion,
ably smaller.
3. The thoroughfares to be crossed on the south side
of the river arc less important, and much fewer than
those on the north.

4. We have no evidence of any plans of strQet improve-
ments having been suggested on the south side which
would be interfered with by the pvojeeted lines of railway.
The only contemplated improvement which could in
any way be affected thereby, is the opening of a new
and commodious thoroughfare from the Waterloo-road
to the Borough ; and we have reason for believing that
this might be facilitated by the formation of a railway.
This case is not so on the north,

5. The ordinary traffic of the streets on the south
side is not so great as on the north ; it is less concen-
trated, and it runs through wider and more convenient
channels ; so that the additional traffic created by rail-
way termini could be 114,,re easily accommodated.
6. Those of Ow public who would be benefited by the
close approach of the southern railways to the city and
to the west-end of London are more in number than
those who would derive advantage from bringing the
Northern railways into the centre of the metropolis ; in-
asmuch as those parts of Surrey and Kent which are
within a short distance of London, are generally more
thickly inhabited by persons having occupations in Lon-
don, and are more frequented for occasional relaxation
than the corresponding parts of Essex, Middlesex, and
Hertfordshire.

7. The Legislature has already sanctioned the form-
ation of a line from the Nino Elms to the York-road,
near Waterloo-bridge, and the construction of a tenni.
nus at the latter point.
Theso are the grounds upon which we draw a distinc-
tion between the smaller portion of the district described
in our instructions, which lies on the Surrey side of the
Thames, and in the larger and more important division
of it which is situated on the Middlesex side of the river;
and a careful consideration of them induces us to look
upon the close approach of the southern railways to the
eastern and western bridges of the metropolis in a more
favourable light than that in which we view the pro-
posed extension of northern lines into the City, or other
thickly inhabited districts of London.
We will now, in obedience to your Majesty's
,com-
mands, submit our opinion upon that question which we
are enjoined by our instructions as our especial
duty to
considev, whether the extension of railways into the
czinire of the metropolis is calculated to afford such ad-
ditional convenience or benefit to the public as will com-
pensate for the sacrifice of property, the interruption of
important thoroughfares, and the interference with plans
of improvements already suggested ?
1. AS TO THE CONVENIENCE AND BENEFIT OF THE
PUBLIC.
We are of opinion that, as regards passengers, the
demand for that further accommodation which would
be given to them by extending the present lines
towards the centre of the metropolis, and the advantage
which would be derived from such accommodation, have
been much exaggerated.
It is no doubt true, that for persons proceeding to or
from the city, the terminus of the Great Western, at
Paddington, is inconvenient ; and the same must be ad-
mitted of the Eastern Counties terminus at Shoreditch,
in regard to passengers to or from the west end of Lon-
don. And if these lines were to be laid dawn afresh, it
would perhaps be a benefit to the public large, that
they should enter Loudon at points respectively east and
west of their present stations. We are led to this con-
clusion by the opinion which we find to prevail gene-
rally, and to be entertained by all those who are most
competent to form a judgment on the subject, that the
station of the Birmingham Railway in Euston-square,
is, on the whole, situated conveniently for the great mass
of passengers. This opinion being supported by the fact that
the distribution of passengers from the various stations
in London may be estimated to take place in the propor-
tion of nine to the west, and four to the east of a line
drawn north and south through Temple Bar,*
And although it dues not follow from this that the ex-
tension of the Great Western, or even of the Eastern
Conzt:es tine, in the direction of Euston-square (even
were such projects before us), would deserve encourage-
ment, we feel that it fully justifies us in recommending
that if those lines should seek to come further east and

* See Table No. 1 in Appendix to Evidence.