The Sun.
London, England, 1868-08-07 00:00:00

KENT COAST.

The report of the directors of this company states
that on the 9th of June last, the Lords Justices
gave judgment on the appeal of the company, con-
firming the decision of Vice-Chancellor Stuart, by
which the agreement with this company was held
to be invalid. When the Working Union Bill pro-
moted by the South-Elstern, London, Brighton,
and South Coast, and London, Chatham, and
Dover Companies was before Parliament a clause
was agreed to and inserted in the bill which provided
for a settlement by arbitration of the question of the
future working of the line by the London, Chatham,
and Dover Company, either in the event of the
agreement of April, 1862, being upheld or being set
aside. The withdrawal of that Bill, however, put an
end to this agreement. When the question of the
provisional working of the line by the London, Chat-
ham, and Dover Company was referred to Captain
O'Brien by the Court he was directed to make his
award without reference to the agreement of April,
1862. That agreement provided that the Kent Coast
Company should take 50 per cent. of the gross re-
ceipts arising from traffic to, from, and on the line
up to £45,300 per annum, and 25 per cent. of any
further receipts. The award made by Captain
O'Brien on the limited reference yielded only about
£20,000 per annum to the company. This sum,
although more than sufficient to pay the debenture
interest, was obviously a very inadequate return for
the great advantages resulting to the London,
Chatham, and Dover Company from the construc-
tion of the Kent Coast line, and the directors were
satisfied that more equitable terms would be ob-
tained by arbitration or otherwise. The best inte-
rests of the company required the speedy release of
their affairs from the control of the court. This
could only be effected by the creation of debenture
stock, and by either applying it in exchange for
debentures of the company or offering it to the pub-
lic. The capital account showed that £968,322 had
been expended.

CRYSTAL PALACE AND SOUTII LONDON JUNCTION.
The directors' report states that they were com-
pelled to withdraw their bill for improving the com-
munication between this company's line and the
city. The capital of the company was raised under
a prospectus, wherein it was stated that an arrange-
ment had been made with the London, Chatham,
and Dover Company for working the line on certain
advantageous terms. Though that arrargement
was publicly represented as an accomplished f act,
the formalities required to render it legally binding
were never completed; the London, Chatham, and
Dover Company, however, entered upon and still
retain possession of the line, alleging that they are
working it "by request of and at the cost of" this
company. This statement, which has appeared in
the last two reports issued by that company, is not
in accordance with the facts of the cas:,, and a
suit has been instituted by a debenture holder,
with the full concurrence of the board, which will
determine the occupation, and decide what payment
this company shall receive for the use of their line.
On the occasion of the Amalgamation Bill being
before Parliament the promoters agrccd to a clause
providing for a reference to arbitration of the whole
question between this company and the Dover Com-
pany. The bill passed the House of Commons, and
was approved at a special general meeting of the
debenture and shareholders of the London, Chat-
ham, and Dover Company, but was withdrawn in
the House of Lords. The shareholders of both
companies having thus formally recorded their
opinion that this is a fit case for arbitration, no
difficulty ought now to exist in arriving at a speedy
settlement. Although the circumstances under
which the traffic of the line is worked remain un-
altered, the directors have much satisfaction in
stating that the weekly returns prepared by the
London, Chatham, and Dover Company indicate a
very considerable growth in the receipts. The
mileage proportion of receipts attributed to this
company for the 26 weeks ending the 28th of June
last is £6,505, against £4,88) fur the corresponding
period of last year, being au increase of 33 per
cent. The directors do not admit the correctness
of these returns, or of the principle on which they
are calculated. That the increase will continue to
he progressive may reasonably be expected from
the vast amount of building now going on at Up-
per Norwood and other places contiguous to the
line, and from the conveyance of goods and coals—
a source of income which for the present remains
undeveloped. The directors express their regret
at the great incoaveniene3 which the debenture
holders are suffering from the non-receipt of inte-
rest for so long a period. The capital account to
the 3)th of June last shows that £861,368 had been
I expended.