The Sun.
London, England, 1858-10-28 00:00:00

_Yesterday a special- Waterloo-bride
meeting of this com-
pany was held at the Waterloo-bridge Station, for
the purpose of considering and determining as to
the expediency of the-company taking leases of the
respective undertakings of the Staines and Woking-
ham Railway Company, and of the Portsmouth
Railway Company, and as to the terms and condi-
tions of such leases. W. J. Chaplin, Esq., was in
the chair.
The special report, which has already appeared
in The Sun, was then taken as read.
The CHAIRMAN, after asking the indulgence of
the meeting on the ground of his suffering from ill-
ness, proceeded_ to say :—Our report has informed
you of the object of our meeting—an object novel
to this company—for we have hitherto become
owners of our branches, either by constructing
them ourselves or purchasing them outright. But;
railways must look in the face varying influences
which are brought to bear on them. They have to
meet the requirements and convenience of localities,
the tender and untiring care of professional gentle-
men, and all those other agencieS which have con-
tributed to produce the two undertakings now offered
to you on lease. We could have perhaps dispensed
with both of them ; and from this reason, and also
from a due deference to your repeatedly expressed
wishes that we should avoid extensions, we have
throughout rigidly abstained from all pecuniary as-
sistance, :directly or indirectly, to either scheme.
Now, however, as the report states, they are corn-'
pieta, and have become facts whieh must be dealt
with. With regard to the former, the Staines and,
Wokingham-Railway, it opens a new district, and
affords a prospect as a tributary to our present line
at Staines. The experience of the London and
South-Western in working the line since 1857
has shown that it can be worked not only without
liability and loss, but with a prospect of profit; and
with such facts and prospects for the future before
you, I feel confident of your approval of the pro-
posed lease, already sanctioned by their proprie-
tary at a public meeting, and also by Parliament.
I propose to take the opinion of the meeting on this
part of the question in the first instance, and I beg
to propose the following resolution :—" That the
lease of the Staines and Wokingham Railway un-
dertaking agreed upon between the Staines and
Wokingham Railway Company and the directors
on behalf of this company be approved and ac-
cepted, and that the directors be authorised and re-
quested to do all such further acts as they may con-
sider necessary and proper for ratifying and eon-
firming the same;. or for completing it with such
modifications (if any). as they may think, conducive
to the interests of this company.'
After a short discussion, in the course of which it
was explained that there would be no increase to
the capital of the company, and that the sum gua-
ranteed was placed at the amount iiroposed in order
that this company might work the line at a cheaper
rate, the resolution was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN then proceeded _to say—The
second portion of the report deals with a project of
a. more weighty and serious character, viz., the lease
of a section of a direct line to Portsmouth, extend-
ing from Godalming to Havant, a distance of 32
miles. Although the terms proposed are as mode-
rate and fair as we could, after much trouble and
care, obtain, or indeed expect to obtain, yet I must
urge you to consider, not so much the monetary
value of the lease, as its bearing 'on our general
policy and security. We have, in conjunction with
the Brighton Company, a considerable amount of
yearly traffic- between London and Portsmouth,
Gosport, and the Isle of Wight, producing annually
nearly £lOO,OOO. This traffic is threatened by a
new route, shorter by 20 miles or more than by
the existing lines. To work it for its proprietors
would prove- difficult, and would: be productive
of much .jealousy, since they would be aware that
we occupied the original route, which would still
remain open to the public. To leave it to itself
would be • an., equally hazardous course, followed
probably, by competition and reduction of
rates and injury to our other traffic to a very con-
siderable extent. Further, although the proprie•
tors of the Portsmouth line might not receive a
large dividend, -this would be no security against
the existence of a_restles_ Spirit among them, re-
sulting in attempts to procure another route from
Guildlord to London, and relations with other com-
panies, thus disturbing the entire district, (in which
we, being the largest shareholders, would naturally
be the largest sufferers .: whereag, according to the
plan now proposed, we at any rate secure the traffic
which may be attracted by the shorter route for 34
miles on our own line between Godalming and
London. And I would here take a wider view of
the question, which I consider to be equally tenable,
and I hope tkat I may be pardoned for alluding to
other railway companies, a practice which. I have
always avoided, although one cannot be blind to
the contingencies which befal them. Most of you
are aware of the disturbed state of the railways
north of London, and have seen that in spite of the
lofty position deservedly occupied by the North
Western, the original route northwards, that the
company, in the absence of some close and binding
arrangement either by the aid of co-operation or
participation of capital, or other available means,
has from some causes or other suffered a disruption
from its tributary railways, some 700 miles long,
which for the present at all events have transferred
their traffic to another company. I allude to the
North Staffordshire, the Midland, and the Man-
chester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire. Now, I ask
you coolly to consider that map, Who will be bold
enough to say that we may not suffer the like by
i
theintervention of lines from Godalming to. Lether-
head, and Petersfield to Southampton, by which
the whole produce of this district may be lost ? I
repeat, then, that the precise amount of rental is
unimportant in comparison with the secure posses-
sion of this traffic. These are the heads on which I
have thought it important to address you, and
which I and my colleagues have thought will
show the necessity of taking this Ip,ase.
Mr. HERAPATII—I beg to ask one question. Is
the board united on this subject ?
The CHAIRMAN--I have heard that your paper
says_ we are not. (Laughter.)
Mr. HERAPATII—I am here, and am not the
paper. I should like an answer.
The CHAIRMAN—There may be two or three who
differ from opinions I never expressed.
Mr. HERAPATII urged that this had been offered
to the Brighton and South-Eastern as well as to
this company ; that the works were not satisfac;
tory, and the gradients excessive. The chief thing,
however, was the position in which the company
would be placed in reference to the Brighton Com-
pany. If they got into collision with the Brighton
Company by taking this' line, the result would be
as bad as it was represented to become if it were
not leased. There would arise a fearful competi-
tion between, the two companies. Had any terms
been made with the Brighton Company P-
The CHAIRMAN—I beg to ask you, do you con-
sider the Brighton Company has any claim on this
line—is it in OUT district or not ?

- -
Mr. HERAPA'TH understood the argument to be
that the line would not be taken without the consent
of the Brighton Company. Now, the Brighton
Company had a line to Portsmouth, which was
worked by agreement with the South Western on
a division of profits—could they consent to lose that
traffic ?
A SHAREHOLDER—Are you advocating the in-
terests of the Brighton Company, or this ?
Mr. HERAYATH, after some further remarks,
handed in a protest against the leasing of the Ports-
mouth line, on the ground that it had only one line
of rails, was badly laid down, and the gradients
excessive, and also on the ground that it would be
a violation of •an existing agreement with the
Brighton Company.
Some objection was made to handing in a protest
before any resolution was agreed to, but
Mr. CASTLEMAN, a director, said that there were
statements in the protest which required an answer,
and requested that it might be handed in.
Mr. TITE, M.P., said that this was as grave and
important a question as had ever been discussed by
the company. He wished, in the first place, to state
that he was no longer a shareholder in the
Brighton Company. His feeling was against all
guarantees. No doubt the guarantee of this com-
pany of £lB,OOO a-year was as good as Consols, and
would be advantageous to the Portsmouth proprie-
tors. He• commented on the circumstance of the
opposition to the construction of the Portsmouth
line having stopped at a time when it might have
been successful.

The Solicitor to the company explained that the
opposition had been always-kept up until it was
found to be quite hoyieless.
Mr. TITE proceeded to consider the main ques-
tion. The point of difficulty Was this—the South
Western had kept up friendly relations with the
Brighton Company, and had come to terms with
-regard to the working of the Portsmouth traffic. Now
the South-Western was about to guarantee a line
that must obtain its earnings as much from the
Brighton as the South-Western Company. (No,
only its fair proportion.) The Brighton could not