The Sun.
London, England, 1858-03-12 00:00:00

THE PROPOSED LONDON TRAMWAY.

DEPUTATION TO LORD JOHN MANNERS.
Yesterday afternoon a deputation, consisting of
Gen. Wyndham, M.P., Mr. Scholefield, M.P., Mr.
Conway, the chairman of the London Tramway Com-
pany ; Mr. Keating and Mr. Armani, directors ;
Mr. Samuel, the engineer ; Messrs. Wilkinson
and Stevens, the solicitors ; Mr. Church; the
secretary ; Mr. Coates, the Parliamentary agent,
and other gentlemen interested in the question,
waited upon the Right Hon. Lord John Manners,
M.P., the Chief Commissioner of Works, at his
office in Whitehall-place, to explain to him the
nature of the proposed tramway through a portion
of the streets of London, a bill for securing which
is at present before the Housseof Commons.
General Windham having introduced the deputa-
tion,
Mr. COATES said the proposition of the promoters
of the street tramway was to lay a line from Not-
ting-hill-gate to the Bank via Bayswater and the
New-road, and thus to relieve Cheapside, Holborn,
Feet-street, &c., of the 1,592 omnibus loads of
passengers to that district by which those thorough-
fares were daily impeded. The idea was to lay
down a groove in which omnibuses might run three
times as large as those now plying on the public
roads, and carry three times the number of passen-
gers. It had been urged against them that as a
private company they were seeking to take the
public streets. Of course the company expected to
be paid for the capital they invested—not, however
by every one who went into the streets in a car-
riage, but simply by those who for their own con-
venience used the tramway. It had been urged
that the company ought not to make a profit out
of the streets ; they did not wish to make a profit
out of the streets, hut out of the 50,0001. or 60,0001.
they invested. From the streets themselves they
would receive no payment, for the streets would
be just as open to the public as they were now.
In the second place, it had been alleged against
the company that the groove they would put down
in the public streets would be a constant impedi-
ment to all other traffic, inasmuch as the groove
would rise and not he flush with the street.
Lord J. MANNERS—WouId it not be more cor-
rect to say that the street would fall by the side of
the groove?
Mr. CRATES said that all experience proved the
reverse, and Mr. Scholefield, the hon. member for
Birmingham, who had been iu New York where
ramways were 1F id down, had borne testimony to
the tact that neither by subsidence,.nor crossing
diagonally or otherwise, was there any impediment
s.O the traffic wha' ever. All the promoters desired
wag to have an opportunity of proving their case
before a committee of the House of Commons, and
that was the sole object of the present intervibw
with his lordship. They denied most distinctly
that they wished to secure for themselves any mo-
nopoly, or that they would in any impede the free
course of traffic ; and they contended that this case
did not in any respect differ from those in which
property was taken to secure public improvements,
,nd ample capital raised for that purpose. If the
Proposed plan were carried out the public would
secure cheapness of fares, for the number of horses
required would be diminished two-thirds, and thus
passengers could be carried at a cheaper cost.
Lord J. MANNERS inquired whether the proposed
grooves would be fit for other ordinary carriages I
Mr. SAiIVEL, the engineer, said that the wheels
of ordinary carriages would not be able to enter the
groove' and it would not therefore be any impedi-
ment to their progress along the road. The groove
would be of an inch wide, while the wheel of an
ordinary carriage was from 1i to lil of an inch in
width.
Lord J. MANNERS inquired how, in the event of
a carriage crossing the groove, it was proposed to
stop an omnibus that might be coming along the
line in that direction.
Mr. SAMUEL said it would be done by applying
the breaks, which were all-powerful in themselves,
and the horses would be saved much more than
they were at present.
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD, M.P., said be did not know
snything about the company, but one of the solici-
tors knowing 'hat he had been in New York, asked
him to accompany the deputation. His experience
of tramwa, s in New York was favourable to such a
scheme in London. The tramways in New York
were wider than those proposed here, and he had
seen carriages much wider than our omnibuses run-
ning upon them. He had seen carriages running
on and across tramways at all possible angles, but
he had never seen any accident, any jolting, orany
inconver ience. The omnibuses in New York held
40 or 50 people ; and although the place he bad
to go was four miles by the omnibus route, and
only three by another he might have taken,
he always preferred the omnibus on the tram-
way, because it was so much more agreeable
than any other motle of conveyance. Nothing
could be more successful than the system of tram-
ways in New T.,rk,
Lord J. MANNERS—Are there such enormous
holes in the streets of New York as we frequently
find in the case of London ?
Mr. SCHOLEFIELD—Oh, yes ; there are parts of
New York infinitely worse than anything we expi'
rience in London. (Laughter.)
Lord J. MANNERS—Are the streets of New York
paved? How long have the tramways been ill
existence there ?
Mr. SenoeepieLia—They have been in existence
14 or 15 years at least. The Broadway is paVecip
but I really don't accurately recollect about the
other stree,s. I think they are macadamised.
Lord J. MANNERS said the case bad been stated
very clearly to him, and it should have his best
considerat
Gen. WYNDHAM said that Al the promoters asked
for was, that if they made out a prima facie case,
they should not be prevented from going into com-
mittee. All they wanted was fair play, and by that
they were content to stand or fail.
The deputation thanked the noble lord for the
courtesy with which he had received them, and re-
tired.