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

S t

But although, as we have stat ti, the
panics who propose to bring their lines
its neighbourhood have shown themsel%
this, we have not found that the enlargernen
fares and general accommodation which
the public is in any case commensurate with
venience which might be expected to resa
execution of their scheme.
We must ,therefure, express our decided opinion, that
unle? Om Existing main line of streets are enlarged and
impr3ved to a degree far beyond the intention, and
perhaps beyord the means, of any of the railway,com-
oanies or projectors with whom we have had communi-
cation, the legislature would not be justified in sane-
ti,,ning the extension of any railway into the neighbour-
hood of those streets.

And here we would observe, that the enlargements
and improvements which would be required, are not
merely the providing open spaces and areas immediately
around the station for the reception of the carriages and
other vehicles which may arrive at or depart from it,
hut a widening, more or less extended, according to
circumstances, of those channels through which traffic
must approach the railway, and which, if overcrowded
now, mast become more so in proportion as the site of a.
the steticn is found to suit the convenience of the
travelling public.
What we have said of the main thoroughfares running
eest and west applies, though generally in a less degree,
to many many other important lines of street traffic upon or in \
the immediate neighbourhood of which it has been pro-
posed-to place the terminus of a railway—Gray's Inn-
lane, for instance, and Queen-street, Cheapside..
That the enlargennent,ooke grelt theitoughfaires-tO
the extent which we haVe suggested, and which we are
convinced would he found indispensable if railway
should be permitted to approach them, can be purchased
only at a vast expense, is obvious. How much of that
expense it might be just that the constructors of the
railway should bear, and how much should be borne by
the district to be benefited, or by the public, can only be
determined upon a careful consideration of each par-
ticular scheme. But if hereafter anything should lead
to the admission of railways, or railway termini, within
that portion of the district submitted to our investigation
which lies north of the Thames, and if any company, or
number of companies, should be willing to undertake
wholly, or partially, the execution of such street im-
provemen:s as we have adverted to, we are of opinion
that it will be to the advantage of all parties, that these
should be planned and prescribed to the companies, and
finally carried out under the authority of some depart-
ment of your Majesty's Government, in conjunction
with the Corporation of the City of London, or with the
local authorities of the district in which the works are
to take place.

We give this as our opinion, because we consider that
the merit of the street improvements of London, in
regard as well to their utility and beauty as to the econo-
my and convenience with which they can be carried out,
must greatly depend upon their being executed with one
intention, and as part of one well-considered scheme,
and because we see no security for thiF, if they are left
to originate with different railway companies, according
as these may spring up, and without any other supervi-
sion than that supplied by Parliamentary committees.
The foregoing observations and suggestions are di-
rected to the consequences which would result from
bringing the termini of railways, and the consequent
increase of traffic, into the vicinity of any of the princi-
pal lines of streets.

The interference caused by a railway crossing a
thoroughfare in its passage to a distant point, is, as
regards the traffic of the thoroughfare comparatively
unimportant—assuming of course that there can be no
question of crossing any street or road in the metropolis
on a level; and, whether effected by a viaduct or a deep
cutting, it need not, we conceive, if properly constructed,
prove any serious inconvenience to ordinary traffic ;
though, of these two methods, the latter would be the
less objectionable, inasmuch as it would not require that
any part of the rai:wa.y should be occupied by piers or
supports.

We must not dismiss this part of the subject without
noticing that which forms a part of the several projects
betore us, viz.—the carrying a railway across the river
within the metropolis. We are of opinion that there are
strong reasons for discouraging such a scheme. An in-
crease in the number of bridges already existing cannot
take place without creating a new obstruction to the na-
vigation of the river, and therefore should not be per-
mitted except upon grounds of paramount necessity. To
withdraw from ordinary traffic, and to appropriate to the
purposes of a railway any of the existing bridges, would
be an inconvenience and injury to the public ; and no
plan which has been brought betore us for adopting any
of the bridges to both purposes is free from serious prac-
tical objections
4. AS TO INTERFERENCE WITH PLANS OF IMPROVE-

MENT ALREADY SUGGESTED.
Judging by what has already occurred, we are bound
to state that if railways are admitted within the limits
prescribed to us on the north bank of the river, such in-
terference must be expected to take place to a consider-
able extent,
From the evidence of Mr. Pennethorne, it will be
seen that the only two railways which as yet have been
permitted to eater or approach those limits have proved
a serious impediment to the execution of improvements,
the advantage of which to the eastern portion of the
metropolis is unquestionable. The Blackwall Railway
havin4,r, by its passage across White Lion-street, greatly
interfered with the formation of the new street from
the London Docks to the Commercial-road ; and
the Eastern Counties Railway having by the low level
of its viaduct put a stop to the extension of the same
new street northwards, at the hack of Spitalfields Church,
as well as to the improvement of Brick-lane.
That similar eases will occur again, if railways are
-allowed further to penetrate the town, and to approach
the northern bank of the river, cannot be doubted.. A.
glance at the map which accompanies the evide-nee an-
nexed to our report, is sufficient to show that, lines en-
tering London from the north cannot be br's-night down
to Holborn, Farringdon-street, or Alaersgate-street,
without intersecting any future thoroughfare, east and
west, which may be opeucd to the north of Holborn, and
the want of which, as an accommodation to the traffic
of the metropolis, is sensibly felt.
lallways might take in
Whether the course 'which
passing through the town, ':eould be fatal to the future
carrying out of that or of any other improvement, would
at present depend mai.dy upon the pleasure and conve-
nience of the resprAtive companies. But this is a state
of things which, if the Legislature should deem it right
to sanction the extension of railways into the heart of
the metropolis, cannot, we humbly submit, in safety
continue ; and the course which we would suggest as
best calculated to check the inconvenience, the confu-
sion, and the collision of interests, public and private,
which will otherwise ensue, would be the same with that
which we have already described in treating of the in-
terruption of thoroughtares—namely, that the lines to
be adopted by railways in entering the metropolis, thee
elevation at which and the point to which they should be
carried, and the degree and manner in which they should
be required to adapt themselves to works of public im-
provement, should be laid down and prescribed to them
by your Majesty's Government, aided, whenever it may
seem right, by local authorities, and sanctioned by the
wisdom of Parliament.
Having thus given our general opinion upon those
points to which, by your Majesty's commands, our con-
sideration was directed, we will now proceed to examine,
seriatim, the several projects which have been brought
before us,
The schemes submitted to us for establishing railway
termini north of the Thames, and either within or near
the limits to which our attention has been especially
called, are as follow, viz.—
]. AN EXTENSION OF THE EASTERN COUNTIES RAXLWAY

TOWARDS FINSBURY-SQUARE.
It is proposed to effect this by carrying the line across
the City-road .to a terminus which would occupy the
entire space of the .Artillery-ground, or to an area
bounded by Castle-street on the north, by Paul's-street
on the east, by Providence-row on the south, and by the
City-road on the west ; or, thirdly, Finsbury-square
itself:

There can be no question that the present terminus at
ShoreditchWest-
end
passenger, is
but
not only
tveirty
iinconvenient
remoteto thfreom the
general points at which the great commercial business is
transacted in the City. We are of opinion, however,
that the traveller would gain very little by a prolongation
of the Eastern Counties Railway either to the Artillery
Ground or to any other spot in that immediate neigh-
bourhood ; and since, as a general principle, we have
arrived at the conclusion that some great and
positive advantage would alone warrant such an
interference with private property, and with the public
thoroughfares, as the project now under consideration
would require ; and as the extension in question would
present an obstacle to an important improvement which
is in contemplation by the formation of a street between
Spitalfields and Shoreditch, and for which a Bill is DOW
before Parliament, we are decidedly of opinion that we
cannot recommend this project for adoption.
2. AN EXTENSION OF THE EASTERN COUNTIES P.kILWAT
TO FORE-STREET.
According to this scheme, a line would branck,off
from the main trunk line at Bearbinder's-lane ; Alter
which, taking a course to the noAh-west, through
Globe town, it would cross tte Bethnal-green-1.4d,
touching the southern end of 'ale Union Poor-house, and
being carried over the Regent's-canal, at Cambridge-
heath,' would take a westerly course beyond Hugger-.
stone and lioxton, and crossing Shepperton-street,
would proceed in a south-westerly direction, till. it re-
crossed the cand at a point a little to the eastward of
Vineent-pltu;e ; thence it would be carried in nearly a
straight line to the terminus proposed to be formed in
space bounded by Fore-street, Milton-otreet, Rope-
maker's-street, and Moorfields.

The branch above described is identical with the
oaaern portion of the North London Junction Railway,
and its length from the Regent's Canal at Islington to
Bearbinder's-lane is 3* miles.
The City terminus, which it is proposed to establish
in Fore-street, would be common to the eastern counties
traffic, as well as to that of the western lines wbich are
proposed to be brought into connexion with the North
London Junction Railway. From Islington to Fure-
street, a distance of le mile, the line would be on a
viaduct.

Ira the preposition to establish a railway terminus in
Fore-street we do not discover any circumstance to
make it an exception to our geneal objections against
railway termini within the heart of the City. The pro-
posed branch to the Eastern Counties Line will be con-
sidered under the head of the North London Junction.

3. THE TOTTENHAM AND FARRINGDON..STREET
TERMINUS.
Proceeding from Tottenham, the lino would pass to
the east of the Islington cattle-market. Carving a little
to the westward in crossing Shepperton-street, it would
thence run in a straight direction to Vincent-pace, and
passing under the City-road, at right anglers, it would
take a line to the angle formed by the intersection of
Skinner-street and St. John-street, whence it wound be
carried in a curve to the north-wes: angle.of West
Swithficid to a space proposed for tho Sorlainwir and

therc'o
,genb e
04,0„iigh,

--_---, "
ra-