The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-04 00:00:00

ittlling .--'-"' m t

LONDON, THURSDAY, APRIL 4, 1844.

We have only time to express our entire satisfac-
tion with the labours of the Select Committee (of the
House of Commons) on " Railways," whose " Third
Report" we this day present to our readers. It is a
document in every sense creditable to the enlarged
views, combined with a business-like mastery of de-
tails, which the gentlemen composing this Committee
have brought to bear upon a subject of the nearest
and deepest interest to the social comfort, improve-
ment, and development of our great country. May
it be allowed to us to add, that having, for some time
past,—and more especially since the beginning of
the present session,—very frequently called attention
to the all-important bearings of future legislation
on railway management ; we derive a proportion-
ate degree of satisfaction from the coincidence
of the recommendations comprised in this Report
with those which we have thus been endeavouring
to press upon the consideration of Parliament. It
may be remembered by the readers of The Sun, that
we have strenuously urged upon the Legislature the
propriety of availing itself, efficiently, of the oppor-
tunity afforded by applications for its sanction to new
and original lines of railway, or to extensions of old
and working lines. We have called upon it to bring
into operation some well-matured scheme of general
communication, and plans for the administration thereof,
with a view to avoid the errors committed in former
instances, by authorising conflicting lines, and neglect-
ing to make any provision for bringing them, here-
after, into a system of consentaneous and combined
operation, so as to secure to the public the greatest
practicable advantages that can be derived from a well
defined and skilfully organised projection of railway
lines connecting together the most remote points of the
two islands, the intermediate districts, and especially
their great cities and towns, and these again with the
metropolis of the United Kingdom as with a common
centre. More lately we expressed our conviction
that these truly national objects might be attained
without disparagement to the proprietary rights
already invested in railway undertakings. And
finally, we have argued that in very many cases the
interests of the public might be better consulted, both
as to economy and accommodation, if the Government
were to take some large portion of the future railway
investments into their own hands and management.
We especially noticed the hardships affecting the
poorest class of passengers—those who travel by the
third class—and we commented on the enormous
charge appearing on certain Post-office returns, for
the conveyance of mails by railway—about 85,0001.
per annum, in 1841.

The " Report," which we publish to-day, consists of
twenty paragraphs and sixteen resolutions. If our
readers will refer to the commencement of the " Re-
port," they will see that the Committee, adverting to
the greatly increased number of applications for Rail-
way Bills, as compared with those of former years—
the much diminished opposition (not to say the grow-
ing favour) shown to them by the owners of landed
property—the enormous and redundant capital in the
country, which it is of so much moment should be
appropriated to domestic investment—and the dis
tressing experience of late times, which has rendered
ow Rapitalists little disposed to lay out their money in
foie' 'art ;—declare their conviction that the
-, •
spy/;:s. time , --Jin.k! arrived for attaching, beforehand, to
----
- iho legiSiatiV4ALnction which is asked for by the:Orties
r ~ to such new Das, on their own behalf, the oemiltions

which may be deemed necessary for the public good '
The Committee, at the same time, suggest that it
would be to take an unwise and erroneous estimate of
the public interests in this matter, to regard
railroad interests as exclusively opposed to, or even
distinct from,- those of the public convenience. These
propositions are well illustrated in paragraphs 7,8,
and 9. The latter is particularly to be commended
for the solicitude it manifests to give a just and,libe-
ral consideration to the interests of the railway pro-
prietaries, in advocating a better security for those of
the public. Par. 10 sets out the remarkable fact that
in this country, the " high fare system" generally
prevails on our working railway lines ; fares being,
for the most part, much higher than are demanded in
other countries having simiar lines of communica-
tion. The Committee recommend that upon par-
ties applying for new lines of railway, there
should be attached " certain immediate liabilities
with regard to the accommodation, trains, minimum
expedition of travelling, for third-class passengers.
The contingency under which the Government (upon
the Committee's proposition) should interfere, in the
case of extant and working companies,—say at or
after the lapse of fifteen years from this time,—to
regulate the fares, administer the profits, and even
exercise the option of purchasing up the concern ; and
the principles upon which the rights and interests of
the proprietary shall be assessed and guaranteed, are
set forth at length in Resolution No. 111. We con-
ceive that they are equitably devised. They pro-
vide—" That if, at the end of a term of years to be
fixed, the annual divisible profit upon the paid-up
share capital of any such line shall be equal
to a per centage to be fixed—it shall
be in the option of the Government either,
Ist, to purchase the line at the rate of a number of
years' purchase, to be fixed, of such divisible profits ;
or, 2dly, to revise the fares and charges on the line
in such manner as, in the judgment of the Government,
shall be calculated to reduce the said divisible pro-
fits (assuming the ad interim continuance of the same
quantity and kinds of annual traffic) to the said per
centage ; but with a guarantee on the part of Govern-
ment, to subsist while such rate of fares and charges
shall be in force, to make up the divisible profits to
the said per centage."
Resolution No. XI. has especial reference to the fares
chargeable by third class, and for children, &c.
No. XIV. stipulates what shall be the maximum charge
for conveyance of troops, for police constables on
duty, and for their luggage, &c.
We claim for the whole the most careful perusal
of our readers.

Of all political enigmas—and they abound in
these days of shift and expediency the most
difficult to be solved is the enigma of the
politics of the Morning Post. He must be a
clever man who can discover the Longitude, but
cleverer still who can discover the principles of our
eccentric Contemporary. One day he runs upon a
Conservative tack ; the next, he puts the helm about,
and makes sail in an ultra-Tory direction. Now, he
is all for the people ; and now, he is all for
prerogative. On Thursday, he is a staunch
advocate for constitutional principles ; on Friday,
he fights with equal zeal in behalf of JAMES
11., who did his utmost to destroy those prin-
ciples. Will the Post be considerate enough
to tell us what he really is, and what are the political
doctrines which he upholds ? He is not a Tory, for
Toryism repudiates the claims of the people; he is
not a Conservative, for Conservatism is a thing of
petty trick and truckling expediency—and, to do our
Contemporary justice, there is nothing tricky or time-
serving about him, for he has at least the merit of
being honest, so far as he is intelligible ; he is not a
Whig, for Whiggery is of the Doctrinaire school, and
he evidently hates that school with as much hearti-
ness as the Devil hates holy water ; and he is
not a Chartist, for Chartism is subversive of all
the constitutional laws of the realm. Possibly he
may be what is called a Whig-Radical—that is to
say,'an independent, straight- forward Reformer, who,
..,bjuring allegiance to party, regards only principles;
but this can scarcely be the case, for he is furious to
a degree against the notion of unrestricted freedom in
commerce, arid would, we suspect, hail the hour that
should see Messrs. COBDEN and BRIGHT strung up
back to back upon a lamp-post. Then, too, he is op-
posed to all necessary reforms in the Church; is
of opinion that • the hierarchy has not half
power or consideration enough ; and laments,
with the solemn pathos of a JEREMIAH, the
gradual decline of pure, unleavened priestcraft. It
is evident, from this, that our Contemporary cannot
be a Liberal Reformer; and once again, therefore, we
ask, will he vouchsafe to tell us what he is—or rather
what he is not ? His leading article:of this morning
clearly shows that, whatever else he may be, he is no
Ministerialist, for he denounces the PEEL Cabinet in
the most energetic, unqualified terms, and boldly
states that if they were all to be transported to
Botany Bay to-morrow —we wish to GOD they
were I—they would not leave a single soul behind
them to lament their expatriation. Thus speaks the
Post on this delicate point :—" Ministers have better
talents and more prudence than their predecessors,
but we lament to be obliged to say that they do, not
appear to have any better principles. It is morally
impossible that such men should awaken any warmth
of affection on the part of the nation. The national
heart is as much neglected as if there were no
such thing. Ministers seem totally incapable of raising
any such sentiment in the public mind, or of even
appreciating the value of it! Friends they have not,
in their capacity of public men, nor has any principle
' been avowed, nor any sentiment fallen from any one
man among them, that the people at large can dwell
upon as the subject of national pride, or cherish with
home-felt satisfaction. In this respect the present Mi-
nisters are just as bad as the Whigs, and, indeed, they
are the very same ! If they were all sent to Australia
to-morrow, not an atom of the public senti-
ment of sorrow would follow them. Can any
one conceive even the possibility of a single
rational creature in Great Britain being sorry that
the career of Sir JAMES GRAHAM'S public usefulness
was transferred to another hemisphere ? We can
imagine no such thing !" Nor we either. So far
indeed from bewailing the transportation of Messrs.
PEEL and GRAHAM as a heavy blow and
great discouragement," to the popular cause, our
firm and conscientious opinion is, that the people
would receive the tidings of such an event with the
liveliest feelings of satisfaction. The manufacturing
districts would of course illuminate; the agricul-
turists, with the Duke of RICHMOND at their head,
would be anything but broken-hearted ; the Opposi-
tion would regard the circumstance as a signal dis-
pensation of Providence in their behalf; and the
wailing and gnashing of teeth would be confined ex-
clusively to the white-waistcoated Treasury Benches.
It is a delightful picture to contemplate, and the
patriotic imagination lingers on it with fondness—the
spectacle of Messrs. PEEL and GRAHAM tending sheep,
with their hair cropped, on the vast pastures of Australia,
fixing on each other looks of grim despondency, and
mutually confessing that the only chance of freedom
left them, consists in their taking to the woods and
becoming bush-rangers ! We fear, however, that the
present age is not destined to witness the renegade
Whig and the author of the income-tax figuring in
this interesting situation. They have yet much mis-
chief to do ere their public career be closed, and the
only transportation we can venture to anticipate for
them is a transportation from the Treasury Bench to
the Opposition side of the House I

The conversation which took place on Tuesday
evening, in the House of Commons, on the distribu-
tion of our naval force, is calculated to produce a
salutary result on the foreign policy of this country,
by awakening the vigilande, and discussing 'before-
hand the responsibility of Ministers. The parties to
the conversation were, Lord J. Russzta., Sir R.
PEEL, and Viscount PALMERSTON. We quite concur
in the statesmanlike remark of the latter, that " if it
was the privilege of that House to criticise events
after they had happened, he thought it a more useful
privilege still, that Members could offer suggestions
touching the influence of probable events before these
had yet transpired." The point immediately raised
by Lord J. RUSSELL was—the impolicy of the con-
templated withdrawal of our present naval force on
the Mediterranean station. The admission elicited
from the Premier went at least to this extent--that
such an intention did exist on the part of her MA:
JESTY'S Government.

ills Lordship, after adverting to the promptitude
and liberality with which the Coons had slresdy