The Sun.
London, England, 1851-07-16 00:00:00

Act, and it was this consideration which had induced the
directors to tern to the Great Western Company.
Mr. TowNLEY objected to the present agreements, end
contrasted them with former agreements proposed by
the Great Western Railway, by which a 4 per cent.
dividend was guaranteed to the shareholders of this
company. He was astonished that the directors had
been so short-sighted. H 3 should certainly support the
amendment.
Major COURT suggested that the original agreement
alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down
should be reverted to at once. Ever since that agree-
ment had been abandoned the company had been going
wrong.
Mr. COHEN contrasted the advantages which this
' company would derive from the two companies who
were candidates for their alliance. If they agreed with
the London and North-Western Company, from the re-
ceipts of 150 0001. this company would receive 29,3841,
and the Landon and North-Western 14,3601., or a din-
, deed of 2 per cent., and all excess to be divided equally
b-tween the two. From an agreement with the Great
Western Railway, from a receipt of 100 0001. this com-
pany would only get about 21 1 Is. 61. per cent. Again,
the agreement with the London nod North-Western Rail-
way would save the expenditure of 300 0001. and
b- able to borrow money on the credit of that, railway
at 4 per cent., and aivo to borrow money on the Great
Weetern Railway. If the worst came to the worst they
could work their own line—(ll-ar, hear)—and he was
sure that with the increased advantages of the present
de) they could do it with a much higher dividend than
many other railway companies.
Mr. PARSONS defended the agreement on the ground
that It was more advantageous than the former agree-
ment with the London and North-Western Railway, and
that in fact there was no other path left open for this
company. 'l'be one distinguishing element in the last
agreement was certainty, whereas in the other there was
an uncertainty both of expenditure and receipts. This
last agreement, also, could be carried out immediately
without any further experience. The London and
North Western were not iu a position to deal with them.
l'he traffic of this company was a London traffic, and in
his opinion the Great Western Railway was the most
advantageous line to carry on their traffic to London.
Mr. Sergeant GASELEE commented on the anomaly
of the solicitor of the compile), making harangues in fa-
vour of a scheme which he would receive the pay of the
company to carry out in another place. Unfortu.
nately, on the last occasion, he had just. the same advo-
cacy in favour of the London and NA‘ch-West-rn Ra.l-
- Company. It, however, he had such confidence in
nia case, what objection could there be to wait and al-
low even body else to satisfy themselves that the ad-
vantages were as greet as had been represented? He,
ror one, could not forget the breach of faith which the
Great Western Railway had once been guilty of. He
would rather subscribe for a Bill against the Great
Western, than favour them in the least. He would,
however, not enter into the rela ive advantages of the
two schemes, but entreat them to consent to the amend-
ment fir a delay, to give time for consideration.
After a considerable altercation the original resolution
was withdrawn, and the amendment agreed to.
Mr. Uzelli, Mr. Lawrence, Mr. Walker, Mr. Brett,
Mr. Caple, and Mr. H. Grisewuod were appointed to
form the committee of inquiry.
The meeting then separated, after a vote of thanks to
the Chairman.