The Sun.
London, England, 1848-11-09 00:00:00

S N7 NOVEMBER 04 .848.

[PRICE 56,

it is not the continuance of "present fares and
accommodation" that the Times claims,—it must
have a power vested in the state to claim a power of
dictating new branches, new trains, new accommoda-
tion, and lower fares," and the 4‘ public are to have
the utmost possible use of railways." The 'Agin
meaning of all this is the reduction of dividends to
the "lowest possible" rate-7, 6,5, 4,3, 2, or 1 per
cent., or whatever the "new branches, &c.," may
leave the "absolute monopolising." shareholders. And
the "guarantee" which the -shareholders are to re-
ceive in return is—the permission to put an end to
law and parliamentary contests, and to economise
their working expenses. The Times charges all the
unnecessary expenditure which has been incurred in
the cost of railways to " chlnce and passion," We are
assured "the railway world had the option of referring
the whole laying out of the country to a railway board,'
and that " the railway world has. to .thank itself ,for
the many tn,kllions absolutely . wasted in the prelimi-
naries of pills passed, rejected, or now laid aside by
the, two successful promoters." The Times will
scarcely- assert that railway companies encouraged
landholders' exorbitant claims, their vexatious opposi-
tion, and all the enormous consequent expense ; or
that the , old companies originated or encouraged
-direct and competing lines, and the wasteful and
.almost ruinous outlay which' such lines occasioned
That some, not all, railway functionaries, as our con-
temporary asserts, " preferred the open fight in Com-
mittee, the private. canvass of the Commons, the trans-
action with the noble landowner, the distribution of
scrip, the profitable amalgamations of lines as yet
without existence, and all the accidents and Opportu-
nities of a hazardous and complicated pine to the d4:11
certainty of a national scheme, done w-ithout battle,
heat, or risk," may be 'very true, but to charge the
difficulties and obstacles which have presented them-
selves to a cheap construction of, railways in this
country to these causes, is not to make a mistake ; it
is to this-state the most notorious of facts. The
Times thinks that the sanction of the Legislature to
the proposed Amalgamation Bill will necessarily lead
to other, and almost as extensive consolida-
tions of railway interests.. No doubt it will,
but it does not as necessarily follow that the
.amalgamated boards would, as Our 'contemporary
suggests, be able •" to work the monopoly to the
utmost advantage " of themselves. With a watch-
ful and just Parliament, these amalgamations may
be rendered both profitable to the shareholder and
advantageous to the public ; but we must protest
against the doctrine of legislative interference pro-
mulgated by our contemporary, the more particularly
as this doctrine is associated with his emphatic asser-
tion, that railways are not private property. Cheap
and expeditious travelling is most -.desirable in this
great commercial country, but the " utmost possible"
cheapness can be realised only by the State taking
railway property into its own keeping. If the State
desire to have " new -branches, new trains, &c.," let
the State provide them, or offer the guarantee of a
fair minimum dividend in return for the " dictation

of these matters, as suggested by the Times. Railway
passengers are not " to travel for nothing, and have a
dinner into the bargain," at the expense of railway
shareholders—not even to please the Times.