The Sun.
London, England, 1857-06-06 00:00:00

jetted. 1
,
Mr. VANCE, after apologising to Lord Stanley!for
the memorial being addressed to Mr. Lowe, as V ee-
-1
-President of the Board of Trade, instead of to his
lordship, proceeded to observe that the merno-
rialists were traders representing 300,000,000/.
sterling, which had been expended for the benefit
of the country, and the proprietors of which had
not received anybenefit whatever from the capital.
This, they affirmed, had not arisen from mismanage-
ment on their part, buthad been caused by the mpde
in which the Legislature had dealt with rail-
way property. Competition was good in all other
trades, but not in reference to railways. In other
trades competition regulated prices, but in regard
to railways the Legislature had fixed the limit!! of
charges for which they should carry passengers.
Various committees had sat and discussed the ques-
tion. The committee of 1844, I:iresided over by Mr.
GI tdstone, was of opinion that the question should
be referred in the first instance to the Board of
Trade, and on that occasion Lord Dalhousieex-
pressed an opinion that competition, which was
then very rife, should be restricted. But, instead
of paying any attention to this suggestion, Parlia-
mentary connnttees, acting under the influence' of
Sir it Pe-el'a.dicitcrii., that competition should be
the order of the clay, granted agreat number of cm-
peting lines, the result of which was that man- of
them never paid even theirworking expenses. Cpm-
petition, therefore, had proved equally detrimental-
to the shareholders and to the public. On the Sub-
ject of rating he submitted that the railway coMpa-
nies had very strong grounds of complaint. The
law in regard to rating other property was filto-
gether inapplicable to railways. This had been; ad-
mitted by Lord Campbell in the Court of Queen's
Bench. The only mode in which it was possiblh to
arrive at the value of a portion of a railway was to
make a conjectural estimate of its profits, but !this
was regarded as grossly unjust. The question was
raised in the House of Lords some time ago, ashen
the Marquis of Lansdowne pledged the Government
that be would introduce a measure to remedy the
evil complained of. i
Lord STANLEY—YOU are speaking of some years
AV. .
Mr. VANCE—It was in 1819. In addition to that
a committee of the House of Commons recom-
mended that whenever a general bill relating to
railways came before Parliament the subject of
rating should be specially attended to. He might,
however, state that so long back as 1844, when
some of the leading men connected with railways
met Mr. Gladstone on the subject of carrying pas-
sengers at the rate of a penny a mile, and also of
carrying soldiers and policemen at a cheap rate,
an arrangement was made that if the com-
panies conformed to that regulation Sir J. Graham
should bring in a bill that would give the share-
holders relief from the oppression which they la-
boured under in reference to the poor rates. This
had nevrr been done.
Lord STANLEY—I wish you would point out to
us what is the distinction you complain of in the
mode pursued in the rating of railways and in that
pursued in rating gas companies, water companies,
canal companies, and other such like public com-
panies.
Mr. VANCE—Water companies go . under the
ground, and therefore pay no rates at all. But if
you take a largo manufactory you can estimate its
letable value, which would be its rateable, only
that you pass a special act of Parliament by which
. .

it is exempted from duty.
Lord STANLEY—Is not gas rated at so much a
mile that it passes through the pipes ?
Mr. WATKIN—No; the gas companies are rated
for the land they occupy, and not for the property
that passes through their pipes.
Lord STANLEY.—How would youpropose to rate
railways ?
Mr. VANCE. —I would propose to rate them in
the same mode as turnpike roads are rated.
Lord STANLEY. —You mean you would rate them
for so much land that they possess?
Mr. ADAMS did not think that that was the
prayer of the memorialists. It was a question to
bo inquired into.
Mr. VANCE —lf I am asked top reseribe a remedy
I would respectfully say that I am not the Legisla-

ture.
Lord STANLEY—If 'understand you rightly, you
do not say that there is any new law affecting your
rating, but that there is a distinction iv the appli-
cation of the present law to your case ?
Mr. VANCE—Precisely so.
Lord STANLEY—What I wish to arrive at is the
distinction between yours and other cases. Ido
not think there is such a distinction as would make

it necessary to alter the law.
Mr. VANCE—Lord Campbell had frequently
pointed out the necessity of some remedy being
provided by the Legislature for the evil of which
we now complain.
Lord STANLEY-.—l think Mr. Hadfield said there
was no appeal.
Mr. \V ATKIN said, he did not expect that in wait-
ing on his lordship the deputation would be
evil called
upon to suggest specific remedies for the sof
which they complained. They came to. the board to
state their grievances. If his lordship should tell
them they had no grievances
.to complain of, why
then they must submit. But if, on the other hand,
his lordship and the right hon. gentleman, A Ir.
Lowe, should tie of opinion that there
were griev-
ances of which the railway shareholders might rea-
sonably complain„then he would say that the me
morialists had a rig p
upon them to apply a
remed•
In regard to rating, Lord Campbell said
that he y. was called upon to apply a law to railway
property which, when the law was passed, had no
application whatever to such property, there being
no railway property then in existence. Besides, it
was impossible to ascertain the letable value of a
portion of railway which could never be let at all.
Ile knew a case where 4-sths of the rates of the
parish were paid by the railway company, although
there was no station in the parish, nor .was a shil-
ling received in the parish by way of passenger ;
nor, on the other hand, was there any person im-
posed on the parish from the company. Railway
property was altogether an exceptional case, as
shown by Lord Campbell. It was a newly created
property that required obe dealt with in a manner
different from the old-established possessions ; and
that properly having been devoted to the creation of
magnificent public works, the holders of it were en-
titled to come to the Government and ask them to
afford redress for any grievances to which by the
existing law they were subjected.
Mr. VANCE said there w o
asone grievance of which
thought the railway corapathee had great reason