The Sun.
London, England, 1866-01-12 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, JANUARY 12, 1866.

RAILWAY INTELLIGENCE.

SOUTH-EASTERN•

A special general meeting of this company was
held yesterday at the Bridge House-hotel, London-
bridge ; the Hon. J. Byng, the chairman, presided.
Mr. S. Smiles, the secretary, having read the no-
tice convening the meeting,
The CHAIRMAN said they had been called toge-
ther to consider the course to be pursued by the
company in the approaching Session of Parliament,
having already briefly explained the policy which
they thought the most expedient in the circular
lately issued by the Board. They had been in-
formed at different times of the territorial arrange-
ments and agreements which had been made with
neighbouring companies with a view to peace and
the avoidance of unnecessary capital expenditure.
He could conscientiously say that they had endea-
voured to the best of their power to pursue that
policy, and at the same time to defend the interests
of the property intrusted to their care. (Hear,
hear.) At a time when shareholders were very
much opposed to extensions, they endeavoured to
carry out a policy of non-extension in compliance
with their views. (Hear, hear.) Hence some 12
years since, when the Bromley Bill for a line from
Lewisham to Bromley and Croydon was before
Parliament, they withdrew the Bill to avoid fur-
ther capital expenditure, but the consequence of
that step was the immediate granting of an exten-
sion of the West-end and Crystal Palace line to
Bromley and Farnborough. Shortly after, in a
subsequent Session of Parliament, an independent
company projected the Mid-Kent line, which they
had since been under the necessity of purchasing ;
and another independent company subsequently
projected the Crays line, which the Chatham Com-
pany had in like manner made part of their system.
During the same time the London, Chatham, and
Dover Company, which had become established be-
tween Chatham and Canterbury, was seeking to push
itself eastward to Dover on the one hand, and west-
ward to London on the other. They endeavoured
to oppose them to the best of their power, and did
so at much cost, but they knew with what result.
(Hear.) Parliament granted the rival company, in
successive sessions, nearly all that they sought to
obtain, until, in short, a second line of railway be-
came established between London, Canterbury, and
Dover, and between, London, Margate, and Rams-
gate. They were thus compelled to recognise the
existence of the competing company's line. They
felt that the competition between London, Canter-
bury, and Dover was affecting the whole traffic of
their railway, and if persisted in would become most
injurious to their interests ; and they did what all
companies similarly situated were under the neces-
sity of doing—made peace on fair and honourable
terms. (Cheers.) While all this was going on,
they had to defend themselves against other attacks
—not so much by new companies as by their old ally,
the Brighton Company. In 1848 an agreement was
made by which the two companies recognised cer-
tain districts as those of the Brighton and South-
Eastern systems respectively. That was originally a
toll agreement, but in 1854 the Brighton Company
proposed that its meaning should be enlarged, and
that the two companies should " not enter into any
arrangement with, or give any assistance, direct or
indirect, to any new company" in the districts de-
fined by the agreement of 1848 without the consent
in writing of the other company. This proposal was
agreed to ; and the company accordingly declined
to entertain applications which were made to them
to work the Portsmouth direct railway, then an in-
dependent line, and to support a scheme -for a new
line to Eastbourne. Such was the state of affairs
when a line was projected, in 1858, from Uckfield
to Tunbridge-wells. As Tunbridge-wells was un-
questionably situate within the district defined by
the agreement as South-Eastern, they called upon
the Brighton Company to declare themselves on
the subject, as the projectors gave out that the
Brighton Company had agreed to work the line,
and to guarantee 4 per cent. on the capital.
The chairman of the Brighton Company, over
and over again, expressly declared that that com-
pany had nothing whatever to do with the scheme,
and they had no intention of entering" into any ;
arrangement with the promoters. 'This was also
repeated by the board of directors of the Brighton
Company, speaking through their secretary, and
they also assured the board that they had no inten-
tion of entering into any arrangement with the pro-
moters of the Uckfield line. The bill was, however,
ol)tained, as well as a subsequent bill, authorising
the construction of a line from East Grinstead to
the lick tiehl and Tunbridge-wells line, thereby com-
pleting the connexion between the main line of the
Brighton Company and the line toTunbridge-wells,
and both lines were now the property of the Brigh-
ton Company. (Hear, hear.) Notwithstanding the \
strong and express denials of the Brighton chairman
and board of directors, that they had any connexion
with the Uckfield scheme in its early stages, it was
quite clear that they encouraged it from the begin-
ning,if they were not its actual projectors. In sup-
port of this view it was only necessary for him to
quote the evidence given by Mr. Cary, chairman of
the L'ckfield Railway, before Mr. Meadows White,
Master in Chancery, on the 20th of April, 1863, in
the case of " Pete v. the Brighton, Uckfield, and
Tunbridge-wells Railway, and others." Mr. Cary's
statement on oath was as follows :—" Before we
went to Parliament at all we consulted the Brighton-
Company about introducing the bill, and therefore
we kept with them. They gave us their assistance
so far as they could in the face of their territorial
agreement. . . . We were with them from the
very beginning. We have been in treaty with the
Brighton board up to this very time." (Hear,
hear.) The action of the Brighton Company having
been thus in express violation of the spirit as well
as the letter of the existing arrangement, the South
Eastern considered themselves set free from all
obligations under it, and that they were no longer
debarred from admitting over their lines the traffic
of districts from which they had before considered
themselves excluded. (Rear, hear.) They, there-
fore, encouraged a projected line to Eastbourne, and
they brought out an extension of the Mid-Kent line
into Croydon. But in the same Session in which
these schemes were before Parliament the Surrey and
Sussex line was projected, passing through this com-
pany's district from Croydon to Tunbridge-wells,
and giving the Brighton Company, if carried out, a
direct competing line to that place. As they con-
sidered the line calculated to be most injurious to
the interests of the company, they opposed it in Par-
liament. They had various interviews with the
chairman of the Brighton Company on the subject
of the rival projects, and the result of them was that
in 1864 a new agreement was entered into for the
purpose of establishing amicable relations between
the companies, each binding themselves not to sup-
port any future application to Parliament by which
an inroad was to be made into the system of the
other company without the consent of that other
company in writing. Under the agreement thus
entered into, the South-Eastern Company withdrew
their Eastbourne and Croydon schemes, and the
chairman of the Brighton Company undertook to
obtain the withdrawal of the Surrey and Sussex
scheme, which was done. But in the very next en-
Ening Session the Surrey and Sussex scheme was
again introduced, was carried, and it was now the
property of the Brighton Company who were ac-
tively engaged in constructing the line. (Hear.)
The projection and construction of the Surrey and
Sussex line could not possibly be regarded by them
as a friendly project, or calculated to further those
" amicable relations between the companies', which
it was the express object of the agreement of 1864
to establish. It ran nearly parallel in the first part
of its course with the Caterham line of this comnany,
ecossed the main line near Godstone and Edenbridge,
and ran in nearly a parrallel line with their own to
Tunbridge-v:ells. In short, it was a line of a di-
rectly hostile and competing character throughout.
(Hear.) '1 lie line in course of construction by the
Brighton Company was from Leatherlicad to Dork-
ing, which district had until now been entirely
served by this company, but in a short time they
would have the Brighton competition to encounter in
hat quarter also. He asked whether they were to
Cut •till and see their traffic abstracted at those diffe-
rent points and take no steps to prevent it. (Loud
cries of " No, no
) Some of their proprietors

called out " Peace," and others asked them to re-
main quiescent and do nothing. (A voice—" Not
peace at any price.") It was possible th( y might
be more largely increased in Brighton than they
were in South-Eastern stock, and were influenced
by considerations of that nature. (Hear, hear.)
But they were there solely as defenders and pro-
moters of South-Eastern interests, and as they saw
the traffic assailed and likely to be abstracted, they
were compelled to look out for new traffic to supply
its place. The Brighton Company, by their re-
peated violations of agreements, had set them en-
tirely free from all obligations to them—(hear, hear)
—and they must see if they could not extend their
accommodation in the interest of the public as well
as of themselves, and thereby obtain a large acces-
sion of new customers from entirely new quarters.
(Hear, hear.) Referenee had been made in the cir-
culars addressed to the proprietors by Mr. Bell to
the large expenditure incurred by the company in
providing the new termini at Charing-cross and in
Cannon-street. It was quite true that the expendi-
ture had greatly exceeded the original estimate—
(hear, hear)—but a far larger amount of accommo-
dation was afforded than was originally contem-
plated. He then read a letter from Mr. Hawkshaw,
the engineer, which stated that the Charing-cross
main line of railway, extending from London-bridge
to Charing-cross, as well as the city extension into
Cannon-street, were both designed and originally
estimated for two lines of way only, with stations
of moderate size at Cannon-street and Charing-
cross. These works had been increased from time
to time to three lines of way south of the Thames,
to four lines of way across the Thames at Hunger-
ford, and to five lines of way across the Thames at
Cannon-street, and the stations both at Cannon-
street and at Charing-cross were about double the
size originally proposed and for which the Parlia-
mentary estimates were made. In addition to this it
had been necessary to provide locomotive depots on
the south bank of the Thames. The works, there-
fore, had been nearly doubled in magnitude, and
this fully accounted for the increased expenditure
on that head. The increased quantity of land re-
quisite for the additional lines of way and enlarged
stations necessarily swelled the amount to be paid
for land ; but on this item it was necessary to ob-
serve that in the neighbourhood of the works the
cost of property ever since the first Act for the
Charing-cross Railway was obtained had been
rapidly increasing. Mr. Ilawkshaw believed the
directors adopted a wise course in increasing the
amount of accommodation on these lines to the ex-
tent they had done. He regretted that these ter-
mini had been so costly, but the provision of them
had become absolutely indispensable for a first-
class line. (Cheers.) Had they remained cooped up
at London-bridge while all the other large compa-
n es were forcing their way into the central parts of
London, they must have seen the best part of that
traffic leaving them for other routes. They had
secured, without exception, the two best and most
centrally situated railway termini in the metropolis,
and they must now exert themselves to make the
most of them. (Hear, hear.) With that object
they had again projected the extension of the Mid-
Kent line into Croydon, and, should they succeed,
but few Croydon passengers whose destination was
the city would travel by the other line and stop
short at London-bridge, when they could carry them
directly into Cannon-street. The proposed new
lines to Brighton, as well as to Clapham, Kenning-
ton, and Brixton, which they proposed to promote,
would also furnish a very large accession of traffic
for the new termini, which could not be otherwise
than most profitable. By the connexions of the
proposed Brighton line, Brighton passengers would
have direct access to the five first-class stations
at London-bridge, Cannon-street, Farringdon-
street, Charing-cross, and Victoria, as well as to
fifty other stations in London and the suburbs.
It had been assumed that the expenditure in-
curred on the city terminus and works would be un-
productive, and that there would be next to no traf-
fic carried upon the line between Cannon-street
and Charing-cross ; at least no mention was made
of it in the adverse circulars ; but it was only neces-
sary to point to the tens of thousands of persons
daily travelling between these two points—to the
numbers who crowded the omnibuses and the boats,

to show that there already existed an immense
traffic between the city and Charing-cross, and that
if they did not get a very large share of that traffic it
would be the fault of their own arrangement. With
trains running every ten minutes, and doing the
journey in about five minutes, so much faster than
either boats, or omnibuses, or cabs would do the

distance, it was his belief that they would have a
very large accession of remunerative traffic as soon
as the Charing-cross line connecting it with the
city was opened to the public. The opening of the
Cannon-street station, in connexion with the new
line through Mid-Kent, whereby the distance to
Ramsgate and Margate by the South Eastern Rail-
way would be shortened by about 13 miles, must
also have the effect of enabling them to recover
much of the traffic to those places which they had
lost since the opening of the Kent Coast Railway.
There was also the increase to be anticipated on the
opening of the Cannon-street station such as they
had experienced since the opening of the Charing-
cross station, in consequence of its greater conve-
nience to the public, and which would place the
South Eastern line at a great advantage compared
with other routes to Gravesend, Woolwich, and
Greenwich, as well as other places where they com-
peted for traffic with adjoining companies. Their
general manager had handed him an estimate of the
probable increase from these sources, to this effect :
That the opening of the Cannon-street terminus
would give an increase in net receipts of about
£54,000 a year ; Lewisham and Tunbridge direct,
£45,600; Lewisham and Dartford, £22,800; and
the Cranbrook, Woolwich, and Westerham
branches, £15,750, or an estimated total increase
of about £138,000 per annum, but he (the chair-
man) trusted that this estimate would be very con-
siderably exceeded. These were their general views
as to the present position and policy of the company
which they recommended for approval and adoption.
(Cheers.) His friend the deputy chairman had sug-
gested that in order to place the board as much as
possible in accord with the proprietors, four of the
present directors should retire and make room for
four new directors, two representing the Northern
interest, and two the London and Southern interest.
The subject had also received the consideration of
the board, who had passed a resolution to the effect
that four of the present directors retire and give
place to four to be chosen out of the number of
shareholders holding thelargest amounts of the con-
solidated stock of the company. He concluded by
proposing the following resolution :—« That this
meeting commits the policy of the company to the
board, and pledges to it a cordial support in protect-
ing the rights and interests of the proprietors at
large ; and that this meeting approves the resolution
of the directors in reference to the reorganisation of
the board." (Cheers.)
Mr. W ATKIN, M.P., deputy-chairman, seconded
the motion.

Mr. BELL thought as the holding of shareholders
had been alluded to, the directors ought to state
their holding in the stock of the company.
The CHAIRMAN said he held £5,000 ordinary stock,
and about £5,000 of preference, and other stocks,
making altogether £lO,OOO stock in the company.
Mr. WATKIN said he held £4,700 ordinary stoec
in the company, and also he held in trust for four
members of his family £6,5500f theirstock, making
together £11,250. (Hear.)
Mr. A. BEATTIE, a director, said he held £3,500
of the ordinary stock, and no stock in either the
Brighton, or the London, Chatham, and Dover
Companies. He said a duty had devolved upon him
to give some information with regard to the bills
they were promoting in Parliament on their own
account and in conjunction with other companies.
There were only two bills promoted by the South-
Eastern Company. One was a bill for powers to
connect the two ends of the Greenwich branch line
granted last session ; and the other bill was for
powers to extend the Mid-Kent Railway through
Croydon to the Caterham Branch, and to a junction
with the company's main line south of that place.
Those two bills would require a share capital of
:U71,000, snd the usual borrowing powers of one-
third the capital. The other bills were stated bathe

circular. One was for making a line from Becken-
ham to Lewes and Brighton, in conjunction with
the London, Chatham, and Dover Company. That
line would require a share capital of £2,250,000,
and the usual borrowing powers of one-third that
amount. A line promoted by an independent com-
pany would require a capital of £300,000 and one-
third borrowing powers. The line between the city,
Kennington, Clapham, and Brixton would require
a capital of £2,000,000, together with the usual one-
third for borrowing powers. Those were the bills
they were promoting—first by themselves, and se-
condly in conjunction with the London, Chatham,
and Dover Company. There was another bill for
working arrangements with the North-western and
Charing-cross Company which was not in a shape
to deal with at present. Now, those were very large
and important measures. He contended that the
Brighton Company were not justified in supporting
the Surrey and Sussex scheme, and afterwards in
obtaining possession of their line. The South-
Eastern Company were thus forced to take steps to
retrieve the traffic which would be taken from them
by that line. When their traffic was assailed they
could not be expected to sit still and do nothing. They
had therefore projected a new line to Brighton, which
had the largest pleasure traffic of any town in Eng-
land, and they could afford Brighton passengers ac-
cess to Cannon-street, Ludgate-hill, Charing-cross,
and other stations in London. The South-Eastern
Company had heretofore abstained from obtaining
traffic in the South London in order to keep peace
with the Brighton Company. By making a line beyond
Balham to the lower side of the hill near the Star
and Garter, Richmond, they would be enabled to
accommodate a very large traffic, and thus very
much relieve the crowded station at Waterloo.
They had offered the South-Western Company to
come into the station at Cannon-street, but they
had not accepted it ; that company had, however,
made an agreement with the London, Chatham, and
Dover to use the Ludgate Station. To protect the
interests of the shareholders the directors had pro-
moted a line to Croydon, and another line into
Brighton. (Hear.) It was for the proprietors to
determine whether they would sanction those mea-
sures. He was very sorry that they had been com-
pelled to promote them, as they would much rather
have been at peace with their neighbours. He then
alluded to the circular issued by Mr. Bell, in which
he said there were certain errors as to the financial
position of the South-Eastern Company, particularly
with respect to estimating their future dividends at
£1 ls. 10d. per cent. subject to certain traffic. The
Brighton Company were now making the Surrey
and Sussex line from near Croydon straight to Tun-
bridge, which Mr. Bell seemed to consider was per-
fectly valid. The making of: that line had led to
other agreements with the Chatham Company.

Dr. BEATTIE wished to know whether there had
been any communication with the South-Western
Company as to the extension line to Richmond.

The CHAIRMAN said there had.

Dr. BEATTIE believed that the Brighton and
South-Western Company had been asked a very
large sum for access to the Cannon-street Station.
He held nothing in the Brighton line ; but he had
stock in the South-Western, and, therefore, felt in-
terested in both companies.

Mr. FIELDER believed that one of their own
directors had given evidence in favour of the Surrey
and Sussex line. He represented several Brighton
shareholders, who regretted the present hostile pro-
ceedings between the two companies.
Mr. C. BELL moved an amendment, to the effect
that the meeting having heard the explanations of
the chairman it was expedient that the bill referred
to in the circular be not proceeded with, save and
except the " Further Powers Bill" for forming the
middle portion of the Greenwich branch line, in
order to join the two ends of it, which were sanc-
tioned by Parliament last session. He then went
into a history of the company since 1853, when
there was a line submitted to the board for accom-
modating East Kent, which they might have had in
their own hands for £350,000, or purchased it by
giving a guarantee of 4 per cent. on its cost. It was
promoted by Lord Sondes and other landowners,
and the contractors were Messrs. Wythes, 'Fredwell,
and Jackson, who were then willing to make the line
for that sum, as part of a direct inland line to Do-
ver. lie happened to be the negotiator with the
South Eastern Board in respect of the line, and he
told them at the time that they were wrong in re-
fusing to accept the offer of the promoters. If the
Board had not fallen into that fatal error and
adopted a mistaken policy, they would never have
heard anything about the Chatham agreement. He
had pointed out in his circular that the proposed
new scheme of the company would involve an addi-
tional outlay of £7,080,000, but Mr. Smiles had
stated that it was not so ; but he contended from
the preambles of the bills that the figures in his cir-
cular were so far correct. It was not likely the
proposed railways could be made for double the sum
specified to make incursions ou their neighbours.
He thought it was rather late to ask the share-
holders their opinion of those measures after the
Board had incurred an expenditure for surveys,
plans, &c., of between £20,000 and £30,000 in pro-
moting those measures. There might have been some
errors in his figures with regard to the revenue ex-
penses of the company, but the result of the opera-
tions showed him that there would not remain much
over 1 per cent. for the ordinary stock. He did not
know what might be done by suspense accounts, but
that was the result of his investigation. Mr. Watkin
had told them at Liverpool or Manchester the divi-
dend would be nearer £4 9s. 6d. per cent. than what
he (Mr. Bell) had stated. In alluding to this sub-
ject, a writer in the Times, who had written a series
of articles on the principal lines in England and
France, and who had, no doubt, the Board of Trade
returns and official documents to refer to, had ar-
rived at the conclusion that the South-Eastern divi-
dend would be reduced to 2 per cent. He (Mr. Bell)
had stated in his circular that he had not put down
anything in his estimate for prospective traffic. He
considered the estimate of the directors as not re-
liable, because if he referred back to the Charing-
cross estimates there would be found ample proof of
that. The estimate of £138,000 for expected traffic
if it should hereafter prove to be erroneous, the share-
holders would be told was merely approximate, and
therefore nothing wrong, but he thought it was a
very doubtful estimate. It was stated at the meeting
in Liverpool that the effect of the agitation he was
connected with had reduced the price of the stock in
the market from 78 to 73 ; but he (Mr. Bell) con-
tended that it was only part of a general fall
in the price of the South-Eastern stock ever since
1863, when the price stood at 95, and, therefore,
the agitation had nothing to do with the continued
fall in price. He maintained that the Brighton
Company in supporting and making the Surrey and
Sussex line had not committed a breach of faith.
That matter had been tried before the House of
Lords, who were very strict in such matters, and
had been given in favour of the Brighton Company.
The latter company were at Hastings before the
South-Eastern, and therefore were entitled to
shorten the distance to that place when the oppor-
tunity occurred. The directors had commenced the
Charing-cross scheme by asking the shareholders to
subscribe £300,000, and they ended by adding the
Cannon-street Railway to the undertaking, and in-
volving them altogether in an outlay of £4,000,000
on that account. He wished to know what the pro-
position of placing four new directors on the Board
had to do with the question before them. He and
his friends asked them to abandon five bills, and the
Board proposed to abandon four of the present di-
rectors and elect four new ones. He had nothing
to say against Mr. Smiles nor against the Board,
but he felt that there was some unseen influence
that misled them. He believed if his amendment
were adopted some arrangement would be come to
with a view to peace. (Cheers.)
Mr. Alderman WILSON, of Brighton, seconded the
amendment. He was a large shareholder in the
South-Eastern, he held stock in the Brighton, and
much more in the London, Chatham, and Dover,
and was of opinion that the proposed railway to
Brighton would be perfectly valueless.
Mr. WATKIN, M.P., complimented Mr. Bell on
the gentlemanly manner in which he had conducted
his opposition to the measures of the Board. He
was glad that the business of the meeting had been
carried on in a calm and temperate manner. It was

right shareholders should know the position they had
been placed in by other parties in referent to the
traffic. It appeared that Mr. Bell wax tted them
to withdraw the bills for which notices had been
given, and his amendment ended by requesting
that negotiations be entered into with other com-
panies. He (Mr. Bell) did not tell t' hem that he
was the bearer of the olive branch. No ; but he
had told them the Brighton Company would not
negotiate with them, and concluded by at;king the
South-Eastern Company to withdraw their bills. He
quite agreed with Mr. Bell that the policy formerly
adopted by the South-Eastern Board was a wrong
one, and had endeavoured to induce a different
policy, so as to have preservedtheir district intact by
making lines which were absolutely required to ac-
commodate it. As to the question of proposed new
capital he (Mr. Watkin) saw how it could be re-
duced. He thought that no one could blame them
for making a line to Richmond, because it would pay.
The proposed Brighton line would be as good as the
existing line, and would have the great advantage
of having more stations in London than the existing
line. He believed they would get half the traffic,
and as the traffic from London to Brighton was not
less than £300,000 a year they would get £150,000.
From his 20 years' experience of railways hebelieved
that the proposed line would be made for less money
than the estimates. If the Brighton shareholders
present were there to form a bridge of peace or were
prepared to submit to arbitrationwhich was required
for the accommodation of the public, he would en-
tertain that question. Whether the directors were to
blame or not, there was the green lane on the map
in the room, and he maintained that it was an injury
to the South-Eastern Company. He complained that
Mr. Bell's circulars had been sent only to certain
shareholders as private and confidential communi-
cations, but when he and other directors heard of
those proceedings they thought it best to call the
shareholders together and meet them face to face.
It was a question whether the South-Eastern share-
holders were to be allowed to settle their own
affairs, or whether they were to follow the advice of
shareholders interested in other companies. He
then showed that several professional gentlemen,
who had business connexions, had been acting in
the late movement with a view to bring about the
rejection of those bills, and a favourable state of
things for the advantage of another company. Hold-
ings of £9O and £lOO in the stock of the company
had been recently transferred into the names of
some active and influential gentlemen to bring
about that result. A circular by the Brighton
Company had been issued in the nick of time,
stating that no negotiations whatever with the
Brighton were pending. Although the directors'
circular did not say that there were any with that
company, if they came before Parliament the whole
matter would be sifted, and they would probably
find out that things had been done which no com-
pany ought to have done. They had been told that
there was some unseen influence at the board.
That was a most unfair insinuation, and he believed
it was unfounded. If any one would bring them
terms of peace he would be glad to meet him. It
was important they should maintain those projects.
The liabilities under the bills were not exactly as
stated by Mr. Bell. The public would be asked to
take shares in them; there was no other responsi-
bility than the working of the traffic, and, of course,
the interest on capital would go to suspense ac-
count during construction. He was totally opposed
to giving estimates of traffic, but from a statement
by Mr. Eborall, their manager, including an item
of £42,000 for accidents in their expenses, the divi-
dend, instead of being 1 or 2 per cent., as stated,
Would be close upon 41 per cent. In 10 years their
traffic had increased 35 per cent., while the mileage
had only increased 8 per cent. No one could say
what the traffic between London and the Continent
would amount to in a few years hence. About 50
years ago the population of London was 1,000,000,
and it was now above 3,000,000, and if it went on
increasing at the same rate in 20 years hence
it would be 4,500,000. Owing to the pres-
sure a few years ago on the directors for closing
the capital account of the company, many good op-
portunities had been lost by which the company
might have profited considerably. The policy of nou-
extension was a great mistake, and it was now evi-
dent that they should take a large and comprehen-
sive view of their position. (Cheers.)

Mr. G. SMITH, as an old shareholder, asked Mr.
Bell to withdraw his amendment.
After some observations from Mr..Nor:roN and
Mr. BEAVIS,
Mr. EBORALL explained that they found, with re-
ference to the operations of the Charing-cross line
on the traffic of the South-Eastern Company, that
it had increased £82,000 in one year.

Mr. BELL said he could not withdraw his amend-
ment, as proxies had been given in favour of it ; but
he and those with him would enter into a friendly
communication, with a view to bring the two boards
together. (Hear, hear.)
The CIIAIR3IAN thanked Mr. Bell for his offer.
Mr. WITHERS strongly recommended the meeting
to support the directors' resolution.
The amendment was then, on a show of hands,
negatived, and the motion was carried.
A poll was demanded by Mr. Bell, and the meet-
ing was adjourned till Saturday (to-morrow) to re-
ceive the result of the poll.
A vote of thanks to the chairman so far concluded
the business.

A Railway Guard Convicted of Stealing
from a Train.

-~--

At the Worship-street Police-court, yesterday,
Thomas Davey, a guard working on the Woolwich
line of railway, was charged with stealing from a
luggage-van while on transit between Mile-end and
Ipswich.

- Twist, formerly attached to the metropolitan
division of police, and now employed by Mr. Super-
intendent Kent, of the Great Eastern line of rail-
way, as a detective, said—On Wednesday morning
I entered the back compartment of a second-class
carriage in the 7.15 train, Parliamentary, from
London to Colchester, and immediately next to it
was the luggage brkae-van, and my instructions
were to watch it. I got in at the Bishopsgate ter-
minus, and on reaching the Mile-end station, the
first at which the train stops, I distinctly felt a
vibration of the buffers, as though some person was
treading on them to pass over into the six-foot way
or middle of the line. I looked through the window,
and although nearly dark perceived a man close to
the luggage-van, standing as if privately engaged.
As the train began to move off, however, he sud-
denly unlocked the door of the van, entered, and
closed it. Just as the train entered Stratford the door
was again opened, and he alighted with a basket and
bundle, which he did not have when he entered,
and made his way across to the opposite platform.
I followed and called to him, and said I wished to
see the contents of his luggage, took him into a se-
cond-class carriage, and found the bundle contained
a sailor's jacket, and the basket a pair of boots. He
said all were his own property, and that he was
going to take them to Woolwich. I conveyed him
back to London, and gave him up to my superin-
tendent. He wore his guard's uniform.
Mr. Ellison--Do you, prisoner, wish to ask any
questions ?
Prisoner—l wish to say that I did not cross the
buffers.

Mr. H. Kent—l am superintendent of police on
the Great Eastern line. When the last witness
brought the prisoner to me I questioned the latter as
to his possession of the articles. He said that they
belonged to his brother-in-law, who was a foreman
at Woolwich, and that he was, when taken into cus-
tody, going there with them. He could not
give me any address of his relative, but named his
own as being at 40, Oxford-street, Whitechapel. I
instantly telegraphed to Ipswich for inquiry to be
made as to any sailors having proceeded by the train
in question, and if so, to ascertain whether they had
lost anything. I then proceeded to Woolwich, made
search for prisoner's brother-in-law, could not learn
about such a person, and on returning found an
answer to my telegram. The owners of the pro-
perty had been found, but not without some diffi-
culty, as their luggage was fastened up so neatly it
did not appear to have been touched. The men are

I now present by my direction to claim the things,
and their evidence will complete the case.
John Lewis and James Milne, both sailors, iden-
tified, one of them the jacket, and the other the
boots, his best. They had seen their luggage placed
safely in the brake-van mentioned.

Mr. Ellison—Am I to assume that you, Mr. Kent,
placed the detective in the position he named in
consequence of previous robberies by this means ?
Mr. Kent—There certainly had been robberies,
and I felt convinced that some person was prowling
about who was not likely to be suspected. The
prisoner entered the Great Eastern Company's
service as a porter about six years since, and has
been a guard on the Woolwich line eight months.
He is one of the last men who, from his apparent
good conduct, could be supposed guilty of stealing.
When I told him that two sailors had claimed the
property and were coming to London, he admitted
having taken it from the van, declaring at the same
time it was his first offence.

Prisoner—lt is, I assure you, sir; and lam very
sorry for what I have done.
Mr. Kent—Before the train started I took the
precaution to have the door of the luggage-van
secured on the down side, so that it was compulsory
to open that on the other.
Mr. Ellison—Robberies by servants are, at all
times, great offences. A certain amount of confi-
dence must necessarily be placed in such persons,
and where they succeed in avoiding detection, sus-
picion, and at times the worst results follow to those
who are perfectly innocent. Yours is an especially
bad case, and but for these sailors having to pro-
ceed immediately to sea, thereby rendering it im-
possible for them to attend before a jury, I would
most certainly send you for trial, if only as a warn-
ing to others. As it is, you must go for six months'
hard labour.

Another Death from Destitution and Neglect

Yesterday afternoon an inquiry was held by Mr.
Humphreys, coroner, at the Duke of Cambridge
Tavern, Felix-street, Cambridge-heath, relative to
the death from destitution of Margaret Fairservis,
aged 48.

The deceased was a member of a very well-to-do
family, but being of somewhat weakened intellect
(her family alleged that she was simply given to
drink) she had sunk into a state of the most miser-
able poverty, and received no effectual aid from her
relatives.

Mrs. Annie Miller, 2, Victoria-street, Hackney,
said she was the wife of an oilman. The deceased
was her sister, and worked as a sempstress until six
months ago, when she became unable to'follow that
avocation. "I used," said the witness, "to give
her relief every Monday. She always came for it.
I used to send it out to the door to her generally;
she used not to come inside my door ; she was
not fit, not clean. I gave her a shilling and some
bread and tea, and some meat when I had any left.
When I met her in the street I would give her 3d.
or more, but she used to go into the publichouse and
spend it.
Coroner—Did you see her do that ?

Witness—No, I did not. But I know she did it,
and I often saw her drunk. She had two brothers,

both well off. James Fairbervis gave her is. a week,
but William never gave her anything, although he
had £lO, and often £2O a week. She would not let
me go to her room, /or know where she lived, and
her temper was very bad. She once tried to take a
knife to my husband. A few days ago the deceased
called upon her very ill, and said that the hospital
told her she would die of disease of the heart if she
went out in the street. Witness offered her a bed to
take home, but she declined it, saying she was going
into the hospital. On Saturday her niece came to
tell her that " Old doggy" was very ill. Witness
took her 35., and next day took her a bed, &c., and
some underclothing. Witness was going to take her
to the workhouse on Tuesday in a cab ; but she
died cn Monday.

In answer to a juror, witness said that on Sunday
she took deceased a chemise and a bedgown. Wit.
ness did not know whether the deceased had either
of those articles on. She had something which wit-
ness was afraid to look at or touch.

Louisa Emmerton, 27, Matilda-street, Bethnal-
green, said that since August last deceased lodged
with her and paid is. 3d. a week. Witness wasnever
in her room until Saturday, when a friend, a person
of French descent, called to see her. The only fur-
nifure in the room was a bedstead, not a bed, and
a table. The deceased was sitting on the bedstead
clad in one garment. She was deplorably dirty,
and the room was in the same state. On the previ-
ous Thursday night witness had seen her take her
cape to a leaving/shop. There was an old meat pie
in the room, but deceased could not eat it. Wit-
ness gave her food, but she could not eat much.
The Frenchwoman, Mrs. O'Blein, went and got a
parish order for the deceased, and witness sent in
every direction for the relatives of the deceased, and
at last found out her brother at 9, Prospect-place,
a confectioner. The same night her sister came and
brought things to her.
This witness also said that the deceased was given
to habits of intoxication, but nearly all the jury said
that they had seen her daily for years, and they
never saw her drunk. Latterly, however, she was
not very " sharp," and people would mistake that
for the effect of drink.

Mr. C. Walsh, parish surgeon, said that he visited
deceased on Saturday at noon under an order. She
was in a most destitute condition, having no bed, and
scarcely any clothing. Witness certified that she
ought to be at once taken into the workhouse in-
firmary, and told the persons about her to send to
the workhouse at once. He heard no more until
Monday night, when he was sent for and found her
dying. There was then a bed and a fire in the room,
but deceased died. The post-mortem examination
showed that she was much emaciated. She died
from suffocation from asthma. There was no disease
of the heart. In a case of asthma, clothing, bedding,
and warmth from fuel were essentially necessary.
The want of them accelerated the deceased's death.
The internal organs showed no trace of drinking
habits.

A juror said that the deceased was well known in
the neighbourhood for years. She had been used as
a kind of serf or drudge to do dirty work until she
got ilt, and then she was sent adrift by those who
could well have afforded to support her.

The Coroner said that the case was a most shock-
ing one in every respect. The deceased had about
2s. a week to live upon, and after paying ls. 3d. for
rent she could hardly have spent much upon drink,
as was alleged.

The jury returned a verdict, "That the deceased
was found dead from the mortal effects of asthma,
accelerated by destitution, by want of clothing to
wear, and by the want of bedding, warmth at night,
and necessaries generally, through the neglect of her
relatives." The jury added that the parish was in
no way to blame in the case, and that they desired
to censure the relatives alone.
During the proceedings it was mentioned that
the relatives of the deceased, who stated that they
did not know of the extreme poverty of deceased,
" would bury her well."
After the close of the case, however, Mrs. Miller,
the sister, demanded her fee as a witness for giving
evidence, and on being refused, she said, " I in-
tended to have buried my sister, but now that I am
refused the fee I shall leave her to be buried by the
parish just as they like."

THE MURDER NEAR ABERDARE.—There is strong
probability of the mystery which for the time being
surrounds this horrible tragedy being cleared away, as far
as circumstantial evidence can clear it up. Since the ex-
amination of Coe, it has transpired that on the day of the
missing of the youth Davies he borrowed a small hatchet
of a gardener, for the alleged purpose of cutting some wood
to make a hen coop. The woman of the house where he
then lodged, and also his companions, say they never heard
him express any desire or invention of making a hen coop;
and if he did make one, they never heard anything about
it. The hatchet was not returned that day, nor for many
days afterwards. Indeed, the gardener says he should not
have had it back at all had he not pestered the prisoner
for it. At last it was returned, but very dirty and very
rusty, as though it had been buried in the earth. The
hatchet was unsuspectingly put by. It is now, it is said,
in the hands of the police, who have caused a minute ex-
amination of it to be made, with very important results.
On Monday a further piece of information cropped out. In
the first week in September—the same week as the murder
—a common pocket handkerchief, saturated with blood,
was found in this smite wood.

SPIRIT OF THE PUBLIC JOURNALS.

--...-.. -.......--..-_-

TIMES.—It takes some fully to realise the
true nature and extent of so great a calamity as the
rinderpest seems likely to prove itself. The infliction
under which we are suffering is on a scale, and ac-
companied with a virulence and intensity such as no
living inhabitant of this country has witnessed.
Whether the rinderpest be the same as the smallpox
or not, it reminds us most forcibly of those times
when that dreadful pestilence stalked through the
land without the suggestion of any possible cure,
and before the discovery of a preventive in vaccina-
tion. There was then the most imminent risk that
the loveliest face might be turned into a hideous
mask, and the strongest health shattered or de-
stroyed, by a cause which no one could calculate on
or control, against which there seemed to be no
means of guarding beforehand, and against the viru-
lence of which medicine was powerless. No doubt,
then, the smallpox was the causeof very great misery,
but it, after all, only anticipated a fate for which all
living are sooner or later destined. In an artificial
state of society there is somebody to gain by every-
body's death, somebody ambitious to fill the place
and to inherit the clients, the patients, or the property
of the departed. But in the case of a visitation like
the cattle plague all is pure loss. The owner loses,
but nobody else gains. The cattle that are swept
away were never intended to die a natural death,
and the food and capital of the country are dimi-
nished without any compensation whatever. The
loss, though it will doubtless ultimately be divided
among the whole community, falls with crushing
and almost irresistible weight on a single class in
the first instance. Our present system of agricul-
ture is so entirely dependent on the feeding of stock
that we cannot wonder at the dismay with which
such a visitation has filled the tenant-farmers
throughout the country, and that large and most
influential class a main part of whose income con-
sists of rent. If the tenant loses his stock, he is
threatened with something little short of luin from
the mere pecuniary value of the capital destroyed,
to say nothing of the prospective injury to his cul-
tivation from the want of manure. No wonder, then,
that the panic on all sides becomes greater and
greater, and that the desire of efficient prevention,
or of indemnity if that prevention cannot be ob-
tained, becomes every day more urgent. In one re-
spect it certainly appears to us that the agricultural
interest have good right to complain. With the
disease increasing terribly week by week—we might
say day by day—the measures which are taken for
its suppression are notoriously and avowedly not the
best that the case admits of. The Government can-
not be charged justly with neglecting the subject ;
perhaps it is even more rightly accused of over-legis-
lation. If the mere issuing of an infinity of orders
be a proof of diligence and industry, the Govern-
ment has not been wanting in that respect. Shortly
after the outbreak of the disease the Privy Council
came into the field as a legislator, and has produced
on this subject a code voluminous enough to suffice
for the legislation of a whole city in the earlier days
of Greece or of Rome. , Nor, while we accord to
the Government the praise of diligence, are we dis-
posed to speak harshly of the form which its ideas
in the first instance took. It believed, not at all un-
naturally, that for a disease scattered so widely over
the country the best remedy that could be found
would be the agency of localauthorities ; and so it be-
gan with the smallest units of local authority it could
find, and intrusted to them such powers as seemed
to be necessary for the purpose it had in view.
It also appointed a commission, composed of per-
sons who, until they made their report, were con.
sidered competent for the duty assigned to them.
The Commission made a distinct recommendation,
on which the Government did not choose to act,
but it is only fair to say that three very important
members of the Commission—Lord Spencer, Lord
Cranbourne, and Mr. Reed—dissented from the
recommendation, so that the Government may be
excused if it took the opinion of the minority in-
stead of the majority. It is also certain that, if it
had been left for public opinion to decide, the Re-
port of the majority of the Commission would not
have been accepted as a safe basis for action at the
time it was made. So far, then, we think it would
be unfair and uncandid to find any serious fault
with the Government ; but here, we fear, is the
limit up to which its exculpation is possible. The
Government might be excused for not being con-
vinced by the reasonings of the Commissioners, but
it ought, we think, to have yielded long before this
' to the logic of facts. At any rate, for the last six
weeks there is no excuse for saying that we do not
know the real character and true danger of the
Rinderpest from our own sad experience, and without
reference to the annals of any other country. We
have learnt, without entering into any questions of
curiosity as to its origin or as to the possibility of
its being spontaneously generated, that for all prac-
tical purposes it may be considered a contagious
1 disease, the most contagious, probably, of which
we have any knowledge, and that against it there
are at present two practical remedies—circumscrip-
. tion and slaughter in its earliest stages, and the
prohibition of the movement of cattle afterwards.
Government has given us both these remedies, hut,
unfortunately, neither of them in a way to be effi-
cient. It began by slaughtering cattle, but at the
same time took no efficient precaution against the
spread of the disease. It then adopted the prin-
ciple of preventing movement, but it delegated that
power to such an infinity of authorities, leaving
each liberty to make such a number of exceptions,
that the whole plan has became a mass of confusion,
and the disease runs its course with daily increasing
virulence. It has been shown by the most un-
answerable arguments that a power fraught with
such great inconvenience to the public as the pre-
vention of the movement of cattle ought to be ex-
ercised
in such a manner as to make that incon-
venience as short as possible, and to give those who
suffer it the greatest possible advantage in ex-
change. It is shown that the matter is much more
of Imperial than of local concern, and that there
would be enormous advantage in the application of
simple and uniform rules, even on the supposition,
which is not the fact, that every local authority was,
or would be likely to remain, eager and zealous in
the dischrge of its duty.
U
has taken the thing into its o:tnilhathnedsGoavnedrnismsueendt
one General Order for the whole country' , it is im-
possible to say that it has done everything in its
power to relieve the grazing interest from the
terrible scourge under which it is suffering. We hold
that it is the duty of Government to do everything
possible in this direction under a calamity so new
and so terrible ; and its timidity is the more repre-
hensible, because it cannot and does not for a
moment pretend that the duty which it devolves on
local authorities should not be discharged by itself.
It is simply from fear of unpopularity, from the
dread of an outcry against centralization, from that
abject terror of responsibility which seems to be be-
coming every day more and more the characteristic
of our statesmen, that the Government deserts the
country in this great strait, and leaves it to fight with
confessedly inferior weapons against an enemy who
puts forth his whole strength and knows neither
fear nor mercy. We want all, mid more than
all, the power we can bring into the field against
our antagonists, and of a very considerable por-
tion of that power we are deprived by the un-
willingness of the Government to take upon itself
a responsibility which flows necessarily from its
duty. This conduct is the more to be lamented,
because, by refusing to do its duty to the public in
this particular, the Government not only protracts
the existence of a most formidable calamity, but
also furnishes arguments against itself very difficult
to meet. The cry for a general system of insur-
ance, under the management of the Government,
against the ravages of the rinderpest--in other
words, for an indemnification out of the national
purse—is again raised, and, unless the British far-
mer is very much altered from what he was fourteen
or fifteen years ago, will be pressed with increasing
vigour. Mr. Gladstone has very properly antici-
pated the pressure that is to be put upon him by a
refusal to accede to the demand, and, as far as the
general argument goes, we admit the force of his
reasoning. But will he not be placed in consider-
able difficulty when he comes to be pressed, as he
certainly will be, with the argument that Govern-
ment had in its own hands the means of stopping
the pestilence ' • that it did not dare to use those
means ; and that it is, therefore, bound to in-
demnify the grazier against mischiefs•caused, not by
the visitation of Providence, but by its own timidity
and want of zeal for the public service? We hope
the Government will at length bestir itself in this
matter—first, because we Wish that every one should
do his duty; and next we do not wish by the default
of the Government to see the evil precedent esta-
blished of saddling the general revenue with the
losses incurred by any particular occupation.
HERALD.—The Ministry regards the Anglo-Aus-
trian Treaty of Commerce as a doting mother does
her only child. Just as the poor woman finds in
her offspring all the virtues and talents given to
humanity, is never tired of lauding its wit
or even of expatiating upon its good looks,
the Ministry, by its mouthpieces, goes into
raptures over its one sorry diplomatic achievement,
and tries to make the public discover in a
ridiculous fiasco the merits of a great act of states-
manship. The treaty is merely a contract, by
which England buys from Austria, at a large
sacrifice of revenue, concessions which she might
have obtained, if she would have waited a short
time, for nothing, and the full benefit of which, if
benefit there be in them, will be at once given gratis
to our competitors in Austrian markets. The Eng-
lish Government engages to recommend Parliament
to abolish the duty on wood, and to reduce the duty
on wine in bottles to that payable on wine in casks.
It would be consistent, of course, with the letter of ,

this engagement, to charge wine in bottle according
to its alcoholic strength, just as wine in wood is Deli
charged, and to continue to levy the highest rate on
wines with a large percentage of alcohol ; but such
a plan would be so cumbrous and costly—wound
leave so much room for fraud—that it may be safet9
assumed that the Minister will propose to equalise
the duty at Is. per gallon. If wine were still to he
charged according to its alcoholic strength, the con-
cession would not be much worth to the Austrian
wine producer. This concession now made to AO'
tria has been refused to France and the Zollverein
it is the price of the Austrian tariff modifications.
Let us see what they are worth, and what value is
to be attached to the promise given English mane'
facturers of a large market for English goods in the
Austrian empire. Austria engages to admit articles:
the produce or manufacture of the dominions of her
Britannic Majesty, from Jan. 1, 1867, that is to sal,
12 months hence, at a duty which shall not erg'
25 per cent. of the value, with the addition of the
cost of transport, insurance, and commission neee,S;
sary for the transport into Austria as far as tmf
Austrian Customs frontier ;" and this maximum e'
25 per cent. is to be reduced to 20 per cent''
calculated after the same fashion _
from the Ist ()
January, 1870. The ad valorem duties are to be
converted into specific duties by commissioners
from both countries, who are to meet not later
than March, 1866. There are provisions for
revision of the values at the option of either of t 11;
contracting parties, and the treaty is to be in force
for a period of 10 years. What does the concessleo
u
amount to? A duty of twenty-five per cent. °A
the value of the goods, augmented by transport an
other charges, will be a duty which, upon mall
classes of goods, will amount to much more than
protection of twenty-five per cent. to the Austriarl
producer, and against these advantages the EngliSo
manufacturer will, generally speaking, struggle,b
vain. There are, of course, certain goods whce
Austria does not produce in any quantity which sm
always has had from England and must continue .°
have from England ; but an advantage of 25 and .„
per cent.—really by the mode in which the
are to be calculated considerably more—will inc)L
than compensate the Austrian manufacturer for the
greater cost of production, a difference which is film
ininishing every year. The manufacturers of "
Zollverein, many of whom are placed in as favour
able a condition for production as those of Engla!,;
complain that duties much below those which v'ut
to be imposed on English goods exclude them froo
competition in the Austrian market, and these duties
of 25 and 20 per cent. will be found with regartl4
many articles practically prohibitory. No clo"e,
the general effect of the stipulation will be to
duce the duties now levied by Austria upon EngTo
goods, but so long as the reduction does not go the
enough to enable the English goods which pal fn.
duty to be sold at the same price as Austrian Pie
duce of the same quality it is of no benefit to
British manufacturer. A duty of 25 per cent.
be in effect ar prohibitory as one of 200 per eend,
The organs of the Government are compelled to 5,
mit that the concession does not look a large e,11,/
but they insist that Austria is not bound to leeic
these maximum duties, that she may, if she pleas
agree to much lower ones when the duties are,,,or
ranged. Of course, but is she likely to do so ? the
argue that she will, because the ice is broken,
first step taken, the past broken with, and so on
00
very unsafe data upon which to found reasothhcira
questions of commercial or political economy. ,eot
do not think she will, because she will have no rth,
reason to do so. It is very probable that, ii,ese
English Government had not entered
negociations, Austria would very shortly base
tered upon a thorough career of economical ref(); to
But the eagerness of the English GoverniDen, a
get a treaty of some kind, its readiness to pages
high price for such concessions as maximum date
of 25 and 20 per cent., will furnish Austrian sea the
men with excellent reasons for believing that to
into tiies.
adoption of free trade is rather a concessiouatis,
foreign manufacturers than a boon to native iuwie
try, or induce them at least to believe that they Pilocl
gone far enough when their concessions are ba,,eot
with so much delight by the English Governi'_„w.
and its supporters. Duties fixed by a treaty ervov
eluded for a term of only ten years are very rs'left
altered during the treaty.' Their modification oo
to be arranged between the contracting parties we to
the approaching termination of the treaty sugbriog
the expediency and affords the occasion for ent_e4bie
into a new arrangement. It is, of course, PO'-stry
Mini' that the present or some future Austrian '
may frankly adopt a free-trade policy, and re-auto:ice,
the tariff upon the principle of making its sole Yoto
pose the legitimate one of yielding a revenue. 10
if there is to' be such a Ministry, if the Ellg
use
manufacturer is to have that advantage, of what
is the treaty ? The old Austrian tariff was s°,r-be
surd that a sweeping revision was inevitable. tio°
extravagance of the duties compelled the atten` no
of the Government to the question. The new d,
whilst being practically
virtually established by the treaty with Eng'-re•
spects as the old one, will
--- appear sufficiently iii tee.
rate, and can be defended by the Austrian Pr° ice
tionists with far more effect. But at prese.telf;
as prohibitive in mani de.
have only to deal with the terms of the treaty 11-'lO4
the nods and winks which Baron Wullerstorff do
have given Lord Bloomfield have nothing t7ro
with that question, and we are very muebAiliodt
that our manufacturers will find the promise" Give
for admission to which they are to wait a t'sv„tho
month, barred as effectually against them, °l.il'ary,
Ist January, 1867, as it was on the tat Jan,, the
1866. A special article of the treaty reduce:too
duty on salted herrings to 50 kreutzer the Ctyo not
100 cwt. from the Ist February next. We ssioo
pretend to know the exact value of this coueetech
to the British fishery trade, but we are very ibl°
inclined to believe that it is about the most vaupc-
concession made to British produce and luaust So
tures by the treaty which has been bought
serious a sacrifice.