The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-14 00:00:00

TELF SITN, LONDON, MONDAY MORNING JULY 14 1845:-

I?._t I vt AY CO3IMFITF_:I-.S.

(SAT/ TIDAY.)

Hi JJSE OF LORDS.

11761 E SCOTTISN I'aiDT.A.3XI73

On the re-assembling of the Committee this morning, evidence
o substantiate the traffic tables, which were produced yesterday,
was proceeded with.
Mt. Watson, farmer, of Kellen, was first examined, and spoke
generally as to the cattle and agricultural produce that passed along
the line He was of opinion that the railway, it constructed,
would be of great benefit to the farmers in the district.
Mr. Smith, of Deanstewo, confirmed the statements which had
been made of the traLlic to and from Strathmore. He expressed
an opinion that in inarothAures water power was preferable to
steam power. The wo-k was better done, the morals of the people
were higher toiled, a d the workmen employed in the country manu-
factories, where water power was employed, generally lived longer
than the workmen employed in town factories.
Mr. Sidey, the Provost of Perth, stated the feeling of the inha-
bitants of Perth was generally in favour of the proposed railway.
Mr. Guthr',., the Provost of Brechin, tendered similar evidence
with respect to the opinion of the people of Brechin as to the rail
way, and said that they dissatisfied with the present branch
of the Aberdeen Railway.
Mr. Jack, of Dunkeld, said he knew the course of the proposed
line, and was satisfied, if it were made, it would afford considerable
facilities for transmitting the traffic to tli: <.,uthward.
Mr. F. Nelson, butcher in Glasgow, el,t red into the details of
the cattle, and confirmed the correctrics, I the tables.
Mr. Kerr, writer, at Dundee, and le6al adviser to the Scottish
Midland Railway Company, explained to the Committee the com-
munications which had taken place between the Company and the
opposing landed proprietors, consisting of the Duke of Athol,
Lord Mansfield, Lord Willoughby D'Eresby, and Lady Keith. The
object of the evidence was to show that the Railway Company had
used every means in their power to induce the landed proprietors
who were opposed to the formation of the line to fall in with their
views.
Mr. Errington, civil engineer, said that the Bill now before the
Committee would form a link in the through communication that
was now nearly established between London and Perth. He then
described this course of the line, the particulars of which have
already appeared in theiHouse of Commons' report, and stated that
its passage through the estates of the opposing landowners,
more especially in the valley of Strathmore, was:the best, in an
engineering point of view, that could be adopted. The estates
would not be materially injured by the passing of the line, as it
interfered with very little ornamental property, and every facility
would be afforded for free ways either over or under the railway.
The line as at present laid out was a single one, but if the
traffic hereafter permitted, it could be altered to a double line at
very trifling comparative expense, as sufficient land had already
been taken. The gauge would be assimilated with that of the
London and Birmingham, so as to secure one uniform width of rail
the entire distance from London to the north of Scotland.

Mr. Locke, civil engineer, corroborated the previous testimony,
and said the proposed 'ine would be a main link in the communi-
cation of a through line to Abcrdtei.
Mr. Tasker described how it was intended to carry a line across
a few public turnpike roads in the vicinity of Perth and Strathsay.
Mr. Blackadder deposed to the value of the land to be taken
for the purposesof the railway. He estimated the value of the land,
including damages, at 32,242/. I7s. 6d.
Their Lordships then adjourned till Monday at :eleven o'clock.

Portsmouth. Now, the parties for whom he appeared, had
certain portions of the I.ne to which they were especially
entitled, and he contended that the line between Biggleswade and
London was certainly open to objection, and on that principle he
should assert his right to be heard in favour of the Northern and
Eastern Company, especially when it was recollected that this
Company hcd made the line which immediately led from the
metropolis. The Committee on the Portsmouth had decided that three
accesses should be given to that town. The whole of the evidence
for the London and Yolk line had been received, and he thought
that he was fully entitled to adduce evidence in favour of another
line. He held, therefore, that the Committee were incompetent to
come to anydecision which should invalidate any otherline—perhaps
a better line—between the two termini. This decison could not be
arrived at before they had the whole of the evidence before them.
He had evidence to tender that would materially affect that 'deci-
sion, which would in fact show that another and a better line could
be made to the north than that proposed by the London and York
Company.

Mr. HILDYARD wished to inquire whether the decision was only
on the London and York, or on the access to the northern counties.
He felt assured that where better means of communication were
proffered, he was perfectly entitled to give evidence of the advan.
tages which would be obtained by taking some other route.
Mr. Hope slid that he had been waiting sixty days to be heard,
and he hoped on the sixty-first day he should not be refused the
opportunity of giving evidence on a portion of the line.

The Committee then retired to consider whether this evidence
should be received, and, after some time, declared that they could
not at present give any decision, and they would therefore go on
with the traffic evidence on the Tottenham and Farringdon-street
line.

Levett, a measurer connected with Bow-street Police.office,
testified to the facility which would be afforded by the Farringdon-
street station, and asserted that Belgrave-square would be de-
cidedly nearer by that station than by one by the King's. cross sta-
tion. Portman square would be about the same distance. With
respect to Grosvenor-square there would be but little difference, but
the facilities for communication to all the bridges by the Farring.
don-street station would be the greatest.

Mr. Berke, a miller, having the largest mills in London, stated
that he ground 600 quarters a week, and that his mills being
situated just beyond Blackwall on the Thames, were most con-
veniently situated for the reception of corn by water. They had
a considerable quantity of corn from Lincolnshire, partly for mix-
ing, but a good deal was used alone. In consequence of contrary
winds last winter, they had been kept out of corn for six weeks.
By the use of the Farringdon.street station they wou'd save
the metage. That station was situated in a large con.
miming district, indeed the most populous district
in London. There were more bakers' shops in it than in any
other district. The cartage from the former to the port was 6d. a
quarter, loading 2d. a quarter. Other expenses were pretty much
the same as on other merchandise, Allowing Is. for merchants,
profits, 3d. for insurance, and id. for metage, the whole expenses
amounted to about sd. a quarter. The expenses might be stated
at 1/. Is. 6d. a ton, and there would be a saving of at
least 3s. 6d, a ton by this station. The total charge
including freight, was 1/. I 9s. sp. The usual charge for car-
riage was Bd. a quarter, and having the option of the Farringdon-
street station and the Thames Junction station, he should certainly
use the former. The saving. suppose the price by rail and the
freight were the same, would be 10d. a quarter, and without taking
time into consideration, he should certainly use the rail. The
whole saving by rail would be 17s. 6d. a ton. With respect
to time and certainty the advantages were immense, for now
they were obliged to keep large stocks, and in considera-
tion of delay there was this difference, that corn would
be sold at Mark-lane at oae month's credit, instead of at two
months, as was now the case. The western districts had greatly
interfered with the form of the existence of the railway. There
had been a large crop in the neighbourhood of Reading, and it
was only by going down into the district that they had been able
to nullify that competition. A considerable quantity of wheat went
from Lincolnshire into the western districts, though not through
London.

To the cross-examination of Mr. PAGE; the witness stated
that even if they did the work themselves, the dealers would
have to pay the 4d. a quarter, and the advantages he said were
so great, that though his mills were on the river, he should use it.
He expected to bring back the corn by the back carriage of those
waggons which nelivered the flour at the bakers' shops in the north
district of London. His connexion comprised an area of 14 miles,
and though the Shoreditch station might be useful for the imme-
diate neighbourhood, and a good deal of wheat would he brought
there, yet the Farringdon-street station was by far the best; and
though there were other good stations, the Shoreditch and the Far.
ringdon street must continue to be the best.

Mr, Lane testified to the positions of the distilleries, but he
could not say whether the whole of them were rectifying houses
and distilleries, or how many should be considered as one or the
other,

To the cross-examination of Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM the witness
stated that they only claimed a portion of the traffic on the old
coach line. Five miles and a half was the distance which he
claimed, and certified the table which had been put in. They assumed
that the whole of the omnibus traffic would produce upwards of
21,0601. including Tottenham, Edmonton, andall the places within a
tew miles, and considered that the passengers ought to be taken as
through passengers. Indeed, he considered that all the omnibuses
would cease. The passengers even now went nut of their way,
and, therefore, it was evident that when they could save three
miles they would prefer the railway. Cheshunt would be just the
same distance, and of course the time consumed would be reduced
by the superiority of the speed. The omnibus fare is now Is. but
he could not say exactly what the railroad fare would be.
He supposed at Is. 3d., the distance being ten
miles, or perhaps eleven. For the latter distance the
fare 'will be ls. 4P., but the time now occupied was three-
quarters of an hour, while by rail it would only be fifteen minutes.
Assuming the charge to be the same as by the Eastern Counties,
there would still be a saving of four miles. He had formed his
calculation on the assumption that the saving would be three miles
on the nearest side of Cheshunt. He had taken all the omnibuses
from Enfield, which was half a mile from the railroad, and further
off than Cheshunt. He was not prepared to say that either Bishops-
gate street or the Exchange were nearer to Farringdon-street thau
to the Shoreditch station. In fact, the reverse was the case.
Southgate was a considerable distance from the railway, but he
thought not so much as four miles. The present charge was 6d.
by omnibus, but when the railway was made, the passengers would
have to pay the two fares instead of one. From Enfield they
claimed 7,000/. a year, conceiving that all the passengers who went
along the track of the omnibus would go by the railway. From
Stamford Hill they claimed 4,2001. a year.

To the CHAIRMAN, the witness replied that the distance from
the point of separation was about five miles.
To Mr. Sergeant WRANGHAM, Mr. Law stated that the number
of journeys by omnibus was 1,874, taking the actual journeys made
last year. There would be a station between Kingsland-road and
Newington. There were 4,000 passengers from Newington, and
11,670 from the neighbourhood of Kingsland-road. The schedule
for goods was made on the basis of the Cambridge and Lincoln
calculations, and of course open to the same objection as
had been alleged against that line. The rates were the
same 3d. a ton, the tariff and the calculations being
identical. The charge for grain was to be lid. per ton ; the quan-
tity carried would be 65,000 tons. He had got this information
from Mr. Ruston, the metage clerk of Mark-lane. He assumed
that 35,000 beasts and 287,000 sheep would come to the Farring-
don.street station during the year, considering that half the
cattle would come to the station and half would be left at Isling.
ton. He had put in, however, additional cattle from Nor-
folk and South Lincolnshire, amounting to 27,000 head of
cattle and above 300,000 sheep during the year. Claims credit
for 575,000 sheep altogether. On an average there would be 1,500
beasts a
m eweek,
theli passengers
the
12,000 sheep carried by the railway. He
tookallu
assert that they had the power to compel them to do so. In fact,
h shasee'd ngers from Shoreditch, though he would not
traffic of every kind, and added 50 per cent- to
it. The goods were doubled.
es
In the re-examination of Mr. Webster the witness stated
that he anticipated that the peculiar facilities of the line
would bring all the passengers upon it. The private
traffic was certainly very great, and on a comparison with
the traffic on the Greenwich line, he thought his calculation was
reasonable. The receipts of the Greenwich Company during the
first six months of the present year were 1,0441. per week, the total
being 54,296/. 19s. 4d., while for this railway he only took
21,5781., notwithstanding that this railway had no river compe-
tition, went through a more populous district, and would be the
termination of several hundred miles of railway.
The Committee then adjourned till twelve on Monday.

- - -
PARLIAMENTARY DIVISIONS.
(From the Votes and Proceedings of the House to COnlfneniq
FRIDAY, JUNE 11.
POOR-LAW AMENDMENT (SCOTLAND) MILL.
Order for Committee read; Motion m.:de, and Question proposed,
" That Mr, Speaker do now leave the Chair :"—Amendment pro.
posed, to leave out from the word " That" to the end of the Question,
in order to add the words, " this House will upon this day three
months resolve itself into the said Committee," instead thereof:—
Question put, " That the words proposed to be left out stand part of
the Question." The House divided :

-- ---" •
MAJORITY—AYES, 90.
Aclancl, Sir T. D. Davies, David-A. S. Lincoln, Earl
Arbuthnott, 11. Dickinson, F. h. Lockhart, William
Ashley, Lord Dodd, George Lowther, Sir J. 11.
Baillie, Colonel Douglas, Sir C. Lygon, General
Baillie, 11. J. Duncan, Viscount MacKenzie, T.
Baldwin. Barry Duncombe, A. Mackenzie, W. F.
Balfour, J. M. Fitzroy, Henry M'Neill, Dincan
Baring, W. B. Fremantle, Sir T. Milnes, R. M.
Barrington, Viscount Fuller, A. E. Mundy, E. M.
Bennett, Philip Gaskell, J. M. Nichol', John
Blackhurne, J. I. Gladstone, W. E. Pahner, Robert
Boldero, H. G. Gladstone, Captain Peel, Sir Robert
Borthwick, Peter Gordon, Captain Peel, Jonathan
Bottleld, Beriah Gore, Montague Pringle, Alexander
Bowes, John Goulburn, H. Pusey, Philip
Bramston, T. W. Graham, Sir J. Scrope G. P.
Broadwood, Henry Greene, Thomas Smith, T. It. C.
Brotherton, Joseph Hamilton, George A. Smollett, Alexander
Bruce, Lord E. Hampden, Renn Somerset, Lord G.
Bruges, W. H. L. Harcourt, G. G. Stuart, Lord J.
Buckley, Edmund Hawes, B. Sutton, H. M.
Buller, Sir J. Y. Henley, J. W. Thesiger, Sir F.
Campbell, Sir Hugh Herbert, Sidney Wakley, T.
Cardwell, Edward Hodgson, F. Walsh, Sir J. B.
Clerk, Sir G. Hogg, J. W Wawn, J. T.
Codrington, Sir W. Hope, Sir John Wellesley, lord7C.
Colebroolie, Sir T. Hope, Charles Williams, William
Corry, Henry Houldsworth, T. Wortley, John S.
Courtenay, Lord Hughes, W. B. TELLERS.
Craig, W. G. Hussey, Ambrose Young, John
Darby, George Jermyn, Earl Lennox, Lord A.

MINORITY-NOES, 38.
Dennistoun, J. M`Taggart, Sir J.
Acton, Colonel
Duff, James Morris, David
Archbold,Robert
Duncan, George Morrison, James
Baine, Walter
Dun combe, Thomas O'Connell, M. J.
Pechell, '
Bannerman, A.
Dundas, Admiral
Captain
Barnard, E. G.
pandas, Frederick Rashleigh, William
Bernard, Viscount
Ellice, Edward Somerville, Sir W.
Blake, M. J.
Bouverie, E. P. Esmonde, Sir Thos. Stewart, P. M.
Browne, W. Ewart, William Villiers, Charles
Clements, Viscount
Forster, Matthew Yorke, Henry R.
Colborne, W. R. Grogan, Edward
Hamilton, Lord C.
TELLERS.
Cole, 11. A.
Collett, John Hastie, Archibald Ross, D. R.
Curteis, 11. L. Hume, Joseph Rawdon, Col.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS.
FRIDAY, JULY fl
The following Bills were read a third time and passed :
Guildford, Chichester, and Portsmouth Railway.
Glasgow, Barrhead,and Neilston Direct Railway.
Brighton and Chichester Railway (Portsmouth Extension).
Direct London and Portsmouth Railway.

The South Eastern Raiiway, ( Widening and Extension
of the London and Greenwich Railway) till was referred to
the Select Committee on Standing Orders.

Standing Orders Committee,—Resolution reported ;
" That, in the case of the Glasgow, Barrhead, and Neilston
Direct Railway Bill, amendments on third reading,
i the
amendment to clause 19, may be adopted by the Hotse
they shall think fit; but that the amendment to strike House, if
out
clause 20 ought not to be adopted by the House at that
stage."
Report to lie on the table.

Standing Ordersßevision, Select Committee appointed,
"to consider whether any and what alterations in the Stand-
ing Orders of the House respecting private Bills, the expe-
rience of the present session may
.show to be desirable :"
Lord Granville Somerset, Mr. kstcourt, Sir George Grey,
Sir George Clerk, Mr. Labouchere, Mr. Greene, Sir John
Yarde Buller, Mr. Wilson Patten, Mr. Aglionby Mr. Ewart,
Sir Robert Ferguson, Mr. Pendarves,, Mr. Loch, Mr. Pa-
kington, and Mr. Pringle ower to send for persons,
papers, and records; five to be the quorum.

REPORT FROM TIIE SELECT COMMITTEE ON
GROUP (A) OF RAILWAYS.
LONDON AND CROYDON (CHATHAM TO GRAVES-
END) RAILWAY BILL.
Mr. Lascelles reported from the Select Committee on Group
A of railways, to whom several petitions against the Bills

comprised in the said group, together with the report of the
Board of Trade thereon, were referred, that in the case of
the London and Croydon (Chatham to Gravesend) Railway
Bill, they had heard counsel in support of several of the said
petitions, and had also heard counsel in favour of the Bill,
and that they had examined the allegations contained in the
preamble of the Bill, but the same had not been proved to
their satisfaction.

COMMITTEE ON PRIVATE BILLS
APPOINTED BY THE COMMITTEE OF SELECTION.
RAILWAYS.
Select Committee on Group ZZ.
Sir John Walsh (Radnorshire),
discharged from attendance on the Committee.
Mr.,Thomas S. Duncombe.(yinsburv),
selected, and added to the Committee, vice Sir John Walsh.

NOTICES GIVEN AT THE PRIVATE BILL OFFICE.
Great North of England (Clarence and Hartlepool June •
tion) Railway,—Lords' amendments to be considered, Mon-
day, July 14.
Liverpool and Manchester Railway,—Lords' amendments
to be considered, Monday, July 14.
South Eastern Railway (Tunbridge to Tunbridge Wells),
—Third reading, Monday, July 14.
Monmouth and Hereford Railway,—Third reading, Mon-
day, July 14.
South Wales Railway,—Third reading, Monday, July 14.
Brighton, Lewes, and Hastings Railway (Hastings, Rye,
and Ashford Extension),—Report, Monday. July 14.
Launceston and South Devon Railway.—Consideration of
report, Tuesday, July 15.
South Devon Railway,—Consideration of report, Tuesday,
July 15.

London and Croydon Railway Enlargement,—Committee
on re-committed Bill, Monday:July 14, at twelve.

THE SOUTH-EASTERN RAILWAY

AND THE BOARD 01? ORDNANCE.

The following is the report of the Select Committee ap-
pointed to inquire into the allegations of the petition of the
South-Eastern Railway Company relative to the conduct of
Mr. Hignett, solicitor of the Board of Ordnance, and Captain
Boldero and Mr. Bonham. Several letters and extracts of
evidence, included in the report., we are obliged to postpone,
but indeed they are not very material, as the report itself
embodies the substance of them. The Committee consisted
of Mr. Hawes, Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Roebuck, Lord Worsley,
Mr.Hayter, Mr. Tancred, Mr. T. Duncombe, Lord Ashley,
Mr. Pakington, Mr. W. Patten, Mr. Vernon, Mr. T. Egerton,
Sir R. H. Inglis, Mr. Liddell, and Sir C. Douglas. After
giving the petition at length, and Mr. Hignett's letter to
Mr. Whitehead, which has already appeared in The Sun,
and which led to the investigation, the report thus pro-
ceeds :

From this petition it appears to your Committee that the allega-
tions or charges made by the South-Eastern Railway Company are
these :

The first is a charge made directly against Mr. Hignett, the so-
licitor to the Board of Ordnance, that he had written a letter to
the secretary of that Company on the 3d of February last, suggest..
ing that shares in the South-Eastern Railway Company should be
sent under cover, marked " private," to two members of the Board
of Ordnance, Mr. Bonham and Captain Boldero ; and further, that
he had solicited similar shares for himself from that Company, and
had offered to tell the parties interested " whom to call to give evi-
dence" calculated " greatly" to assist the promoters of the Bill
then before Parliament, on behalf of that Company.
The second charge is made, though indirectly, against the
Board of Ordnance, and is to this effect :
That the petitioners had "reason to apprehend that undue in-
fluence may have been used by the solicitor of the Board of Ord.
nance :n favour of the London, Chatham, and North Kent Rail-
way, to the prejudice of the petitioners," that the "interests of
their proprietary and the public may have been compromised by
the corrupt influence of the said J. Hignett at the said Board of
Ordnance; or that the documents bearing the signature of the said
J. Hignett may not have had the proper and full consideration and
sanction of the said Board of Ordnance."

The petitioners, therefore, prayed the House "t 0 institute an
inquiry into the circumstances of the case, and into the bona fides,
and expediency of the arrangements between the London, Chat-
ham, and North Kest Railway and her Majesty's Board of Ord-
nance on beha:f of the public service."
In reference to the first charge, your Committee examined Mr.
John Whitehead, Who was for several years, and until the 27th
of February last, the Secretary to the Company, and to whom the
letter of the 3d of February last, referred to in the petition, was
addressed; Mr. John Peter Fearon, who is the solicitor to the
Company, and who has held that office from the period of the for.
mation of the Company to the present time ; and Mr. Hignett
himself.

Mr. Hignett admitted that he had written and sent to Mr.
Whitehead the letter in question of the 3d of February. He
considered it a private and confidential communication, but ac-
knowledged that he understood that its contents were to be corn.
municated to one or more leading directors, and that it could only
be acted upon with the full knowledge of the directors.
Though, however, Mr. Hignett admitted that he had written the
letter referred to, he declared to your Committee that when he
wrote it he had no authority to use the name of either Mr. Bonham
or Captain Boldero, that " he had no conversation whatever with
those gentlemen upon the subject," and that he used their names
considering that it would " give weight to" his application for the
shares he was soliciting from the Company. Mr. Hignett further
declared that the statement that he had spoken to Mr. Bonham
was " untrue," and that the presumption intended to be raised by
this use of the names of influential members of the Board, that the
demands of the Company on the Board might be assisted by the
course suggested by the letter, was without foundation, as " they
had not the power to further the objects of the South-Eastern Com-
pany," the questions at issue being deemed of a purely military
nature, and the decision upon such questions resting solely with
the Master-Generalising' not with the Board.
Your Committee also gather from the evidence, that Mr. Hignett
h.td frequently corresponded privately with the secretary of the
South-Eastern Company, who states that "the general character of
the correspondence was suggesting to the South-Eastern Company
the course which they should take in order to bring their project
under the notice of the Board of Ordnance, with the view of secur.
ing their assent to it;" that it "all had reference to the South.
Eastern North Kent of Line Railway and the other North Kent
Line."

(Here are inserted letters, showing the general character of the cor.
respondence of Mr. Hignett with the Company.)
These letters, addressed from time to time to the secretaries of
the Company by Mr. Hignett, were, it appears, handed over to
their solicitor, Mr. Fearon.

But other letters of an earlier date, having reference to shares,
Mr. Whitehead states, were afterwards disposed of, and were
placed in the hands of Mr. M`Gregor of Liverpool, one of the Direc.
tors of the Company.
It appears in evidence that Mr. Hignett had frequently speculated
in the shares of the South. Eastern Railway Company. During
the last two years, or thereabouts, he states that he has had forty or
fifty transactions in the shares of that Company, and that in the
autumn of 1844 he was the proprietor of seventy shares in the Com-
pany, which he had bought as a speculation and not as a permanent
investment; but that he parted with all his shares in this Company
in December of that year.

In his character of a proprietor of the South-Eastern Railway
Company, Mr. Hignett was entitled, it would appear, to a certain
number of shares in a French northern line of railway, and that
eight shares were consequently allotted to him, which he received
as a matter of right, and not as a favour. This transaction is re-
ferred by Mr. Hignett to some time about the end of the year
1894. But there seems to have been a subsequent transaction
between Mr. Hignett, Mr. Whitehead, and one of the Directors
of the South-Eastern Railway Company, and which, as detailed in
the evidence, assumes a questionable character. Subsequently to
the 3d of February, 1845, Mr. Hignett states that he had business
to do with Mr. Whitehead, and that at an interview with that gen-
tleman Mr. Whitehead said, " Mr. Hignett, I have these shares to
hand to you ;" " but," Mr. Hignett adds, " nothing further passed
between us as to the shares." In the course of his explanation of
this transaction, Mr. Hignett adds, "We had been discussing
about some difficulty that occurred to their line, and just as he was
going away he said that he had those shares to hand to me."
Upon being asked whether these shares, being 40 shares in the
French Northern line, included the eight shares to which he was
entitled of right, he replied, " No, they were distinct. I dare say
they were Mr. M`Gregor's shares which you allude to, but I did
not receive them from Mr. M'Gregor." This conversation, your
Committee may add, has reference to a statement previously made,
that the 40 shares in question were part of a number allotted to
Mr. M`Gregor, one of the Directors of the South-Eastern Railway
Company, who afterwards, at the suggestion of the then secretary,
gave them to Mr. Hignett, in the hope of thus obtaining thebenetit
of that gentleman's influence.
Upon pressing the examination further upon this point, it was
admitted by Mr. Hignett, that the 40 shares se handed to him by
Mr. Whitehead were accepted by him from the South-Eastern
Railway Company "as a matter of favour, and not as a matter of
right." It also appeared that these shares were then at a premium
of from I/. to 2/. per share, and that they were given to Mr. Hig_
nett at par, on his paying the deposit of 41.

At a later period Mr. Hignett appears to have purchased shares
on speculation on his own account, as well as on account of a mem.
ber of the Board of Ordnance, Captain Boldero, in the North Kent
line, the line then competing with the South-Eastern North Kent
line before the Select Committee, and in several other companies.
The first of these transactions is dated the 7th of March, 1845,
when Mr. Hignett purchased 100 shares for Captain Boldero, which
he subsequently sold for the account of, and with the knowledge
of, that gentleman. On the 15th of April Mr. Hignett again pur.
chased 145 shares in the same line, 70 of which were for Captain
Boldero, 25 for a friend of his, and the remainder for Mr. Hignett
himself; and on the 19th of June Mr. Hignett bought 50 shares
for himself, at 2/. premium, and which he held at the period of
givini his evidence. The last-mentioned were all scrip transac-
tions, and meant not for investment, but for speculation. It also
appears that Mr. Hignett speculated to a considerable extent in the
shares of other lines, both French and English. He states, how-
ever, that in reference to the lines the proceedings as to which he
was required officially to watch, excepting those of the South-
Eastern and North Kent Companies, neither he nor any friend of
his, nor any member of the Board of Ordnance, nor any acquaint-
ance of his, had held any shares whatever.
Independently of the transactions thus specifically referred to, it
appears by the correspondence to which your Committee have
already directed attention, that Mr. Hignett, a few days after he
had become a purchaser of 145 shares in the North Kent line,
suggested a compromise between the South-Eastern Company and
the party advocating the North Kent, a competing line, and offered
to become the agent of this compromise or amalgamation of inte-
rests. He proposed to the secretary of the South-Eastern Rail-
way Company, if he were authorised, " to communicate with their
opponents upon that subject privately, and let him know what the
answer was, stipulating that whatever passed should be private and
confidential." Mr. Hignett states that he did not think such a
proceeding inconsistent with his public duty; but that he volun.
teered his mediation, to relieve the Board of Ordnance from the
applications of both parties.
He states that he expected neither shares nor other compensa-
tion on becoming the arbitrator between the rival companies, but
to act only as the mutual friend of the parties. . _ _

Mr. Hignett also states that in his letters to the South. Eastern
Railway Company, offering advice, assistance, and support, he was
actuated only by a desire to promote an important public work,
and that he had " never afforded them any assistance except in a
regular way." He admits, however, that if he " had been inimi-
cal to the line he might have hung back, and have hampered them
with delay," but " that he did not do so ;" that "he always
transccted the business with as much alacrity as he could," and
even " went out of his way to do so."

Upon reviewing this portion of the evidence, it clearly appears
that ➢lr. Hignett was a considerable speculator in the shares of one
of the competing lines then before a Committee of this House, and
which immediately affected property placed under the charge of
the Board of Ordnance, and the proceedings as to which it was his
duty, as a public officer, to watch, in order to protect the interests
of the public; and also that he entered into private and confiden-
tial communications with both of the parties promoting these
lines before the Committee, without the knowledge of the Board
of Ordnance, of which he was the paid servant and legal adviser.
With reference to the second charge, your Committee proceeded
to examine Mr. Bonham and Captain Boldero, in consequence of
the use made of their names in Mr. Hignett's letter to the Secre.
tary of the South-Eastern Railway Company. of the 3d of Fe.
bruary last.

It was the wish of your Committee that each of these gentlemen
should, before his examination, have had in his hands a complete
copy of the previous evidence; more especially in the case of Mr.
Bonham, as it had been stated in the evidence, that on the passing
of the Bill in 1836, a sum of 3001. had been paid to Mr. Bonham.
as a remuneration for the " general support he had given the Bill
in Parhament," Mr. Bonham being at that period a Member of the
House of Commons; and, as it appears by the records of the House
(to which your Committee have referred), also a member of the

Commit, c upon that Bill.
Commits, e, and voted.
Mr. B, sham, however, declined to avail himself of the advantage
which yot tr Committee wesa desirous lie should have, and signified
his wish t o be examined, and to snake an explanation to the Com-
mittee Wit bout delay.
On your "Committee proceeding I.rith his examination accordingly,
he denied that Mr. Hignett was in any way authorised to use his
name as it . had bean used in the letter set Orth in his petition.

Mr. Bonham regularly attended the

It appear further, from the testimony of Mr. Bonham himself,
that he lick l and still holds shares in the Non fla _Kent Company.
No evict( nee was called or tendered on behalf of the London and
Chatham N crth Kent Railway Company.
Your Co aimittee having given this summary c,a* evidence which
was brough ft before them, proceed to state to the douse the con-
clusions to which they have come, both with refc7ence to the
charges cot stained in the petition of the South-Easternßailway
Company, a ad to the conduct of the parties implicated in the arans_
actions disci pied in the evidence now presented to the House.
Your Cot aretittee feel it to be their duty, in the first instance, tea
state that an Ali ing which has transpired leads them to suppose that
the decision of the Master-General upon any of the questions
brought bei tar e him by the parties promoting either the South_
Eastern Norrei Kent, or the London, Chatham, and Kent lines of
railway, were influenced by any other than strictly public con-
siderations. Nor has your Committee any reason to suppose that
any act of the Board of Ordnance was affected or influenced by the
conduct of Mr. Hignett ; however well calculated that conduct was
to suggest the t uspicions expressed in the petition of the South-
Eastern Railway Company.
Tour Committee entertain no doubt that the decisions of the
Master-General and the acts of the Boars/ of Ordnance, in reference
to these r ailway Companies, were the result alone of a desire to pro-
tect public interests, and to afford consistently with them a reason-
able and proper accomfiralation to the public its the districts
through which it was proposaki that these ran/ways should pass.
But they are of opinion that thtatlghout these transactions Mr.
Hignett corruptly used the influence of his official station for the
furtherance of his private pecuniary interests, and has thereby ren-
dered himself unworthy of confidence as a public officer.
Your Committee, upon the evidence befora them, cannot enter-
tain a doubt that the paragraphs in Mr. Hignett's letter of the 3d
of February, 1845, which refer to Captaan Boldero and Mr. Bon-
ham are :altogether false. But your Committee find that Captain
Boldero and Mr. Bonham have trafficked in the sharesof a railway
company, the progress of whose Bill depended upon the consent of
a public Board, of which, at the time, they were members;
and they are of opinion that such transactions are inconsistent with
the maintenance of that strict impartiality of conduct upon all
public questions which is to be expected from every servant of the
Crown, and are calculated to impair the confidence of the public in
the integrity of members of Government departments.
Your Committee feel the greatest regret in being obliged to
direct the attention of the House to a circumstance which has
been disclosed in the course of this investigation, viz., that Mr.
Bonham received from the South-Eastern Railway Company in
the year 1836, at which time he was a Member of the House of
Commons, the sum of 3001. This sum appears to have arisen from
the premium upon the sale of 100 reserved shares, which were sub-
sequently to the passing of the Bill appropriated to Mr. Bonham,
and disposed of for his benefit, and was paid by a cheque to Mr.
Bonham through Mr. Wray, as a gratuity for the services which
he had rendered to that Company, both in and out of Parliament,
and as a member of the Committee on the South-Eastern Railway
Company's Bill. But the Committee are bound, in justice to Mr.
Bonham, to add that they received no evidence to show that such
gratuity was the result of any previous arrangement between Mr.
Bonham and the Company.

Your Committee cannot abstain from expressing their opinion,
that the part taken by Mr. Wray, the Receiver-General of Police,
is deserving of serious animadversion.

Your Committee also feel bound strongly to condemn the con-
duct of all those parties in connexion with the South-Eastern Rail.
way Company who participated in the transactions of the years
1836 and 1845, referred to in the evidence, as being in the opinion
of your Committee highly reprehensible.
Your Committee feel it to be their duty also to call the atten-
tion of the House to the practice of canvassing disclosed in the
evidence. It appears to your Committee to be a practice de-
grading to both parties, the party canvassing and the party can-
vassed, and to be calculated ultimately to destroy all respect for
the decisions of the House, especially in the case of private Bills.
Its obvious tendency is to cause these decisions to be regarded
rather as the result of personal solicitation and private influence,
than that of an honest and impartial regard for the Interests of
the public.

The following letters, some of which are embodied in the
petition of the Southern Eastern Counties Company's pe-
tition, and others in the report, with tke examination of other
parties implicated, will enable the reader to judge more cor-
rectly of the whole bearings of the charge :
The humble petition of the south-Eastern Railway Company •
under their common seal,
Humbly showeth,
That your petitioners were incorporated by Act of Parlia-
ment for the formation and maintenance of a line of railway
bet•:;een the metropolis and Dover, and that branches there-
from to various towns within the county of Kent have since
been constructed ; and that the said public undertaking, with
the works in progress, and those to which the proceedings now
before Parliament on behalf of the said company relate, in-
volves a capital of six millions sterling.
That your petitioners introduced various Bills into your
Honourable House in the present session for certain extensions
of the said railway, one of which said proposed extensions
from Hungerford-bridge to Childham, reported for non-com-
pliance of standing orders, is now a project in Group A of your
Honourable House.

That an opposing company, called "the London, Chatham,
and North Kent Railway Company," has now a Bill before the
said Committee, Group A, intituled, "a Bill for making a Rail-
way from London to Canterbury, with Branches therefrom."
That your petitioners have been opposing the said London,
Chatham, and North Kent Railway Bill in the said Committee
22 days to the present day inclusive; and by counsel, agents,
and witnesses, at great cost, have been promoting their own
competing line, in opposition to the said other projected
railway.
That in the course of the evidence of your petitioners be-
fore the said Committee, difficulties were proved to exist:in the
London, Chatham. and North Kent Railway scheme, by rea-
son of certain objections to the levels and stations in the
vicinity of Woolwich.
That those facts were supported, on behalf of your peti-
tioners, by the evidence of the Right lion. Lord Bloomfield,
commandant of the artillery at Woolwich, and other artillery
and engineer officers, who stated that the passing of the said
North Kent line, as proposed, could not be carried out con-
sistently with the public safety and the maintenance of that
branch of the public service.
That the said difficulty raised against the North Kent by
this evidence was met by the production of a letter, signed by
Mr. Hignett, the solicitor to the said Board of Ordnance,
stating the assent to the said railway plan by the said Board of
Ordnance.

That the following documents in relation thereto are ex-
tracts from the minutes of evidence before the said Committee,
Group A:—

" Office of Ordnance, Jan. 20, 1845.
" Sir,—The Master-General and Board of Ordnance having
bad under consideration your notice No. as to the Ord-
nance property at Woolwich, Chatham, and Sheerness,
affected by the proposed London, Chatham, and North Kent
Railway, I am directed to communicate to you thereon as
follows :

" (Woolwich. )—lf the line of railway be adopted, the Mas-
ter-General and Board consider it to be quite indispensable
that it shall be tunnelled throughout the whole extent of its
course through the Ordnance property at this place; and fur-
ther, that no station be placed so near to the Ordnance boun-
dary at either end so as to afford a pretext, or create a tempta-
tion, to persons going to or coming from the station to cross or
trespass in any manner upon the Ordnance property.
" (Chatham. )—ln the proposed Bill a clause should be in-
troduced, requiring the railway to pass through the Ordnance
property on a plan approved by the Master-General and Board,
the details of which should be prepared in this department,
showing the manner in which the work must be executed, so
as to prevent injury to the defences of the place.
" Sheerness. )—The Master-General and Board cannot
sanction the line of railway at this place, an embankment in
the Ordnance property being objectionable. Subject to these
exceptions, the plaster-General and Board assent to the under-
taking, so far as this property at the above stations is concerned.
" I am, Sir, your most obedient humble servant,

"R. BYHAM.
" Wm. Stephens, Esq. (North Kent Railway),
30, Bedford-row."

" June 9, 1545.
" Sir,—l am instructed by the Provisional Committee of the
London, Chatham, and North Kent Railway Company to trans-
mit to you, for the purpose of being laid before the Master-
General and Board of Ordnance, and for their approval and
sanction, a map of their proposed line of railway, extending
from Blackheath to the further side of Plumstead-com-
mon. On the map the line of railway is coloured Wile, the
proposed stations are also coloured blue, and the boundaries of
the Ordnance property at Woolwich and Charlton (so far as
the same are known to the Company's engineer) are marked
by a red shade. The station for the accommodation of Wool-
wich is proposed to be placed on the west side of Woolwich-
common, and the approach thereto from the town of Woolwich
is proposed to be made along the road called Sandy-hill, and
which is coloured yellow on the plan.
" As the house belonging to the Ordnance, and usually
occupied by the Adjutant-General of the Royal Artillery,
and also the field in the occupation of the officer com-
manding the engineers at Woolwich, must unavoidably be
greatly interfered with, it is proposed, at the Company's ex-
pense, to re-build a suitable mansion in such a situation as
the Master-General and Board of Ordnance may select, and
also so to construct the line of railway as to make the least
possible severance in the commanding engineer's field,
and, if required, to purchase proper ground, and at the Com-
pany's expense, in any other other convenient situation. It is
most respectfully submitted to the Master-General and Board
of Ordnance that the station for Woolwich will thus be placed
in a position to allow of no excuse for trespassing on the Ord-
nance property, while the situation is as far removed as possible
from the boundary of the Ordnance grounds so as to leave the
Company any chance of profit for their outlay in constructing
the railway. The plan also shows the nearest station to the
westward of Woolwich-common, which will be situated at
Kidbrook-lane, between Morden College, and the inn called
The Sun in the Sands,' which it is hoped may be considered
by the Master-General and Board of Ordnance as a position
which will not at all tend to occasion any trespass on the Ord-
nance property.
" I beg to add that the several portions of the commanding
engineer's field would have afforded a more desirable station for
the public and the Company ; but, in order to conform to the
views of the Master-General, it has been proposed to place the
eastward station at Sandy-hill.—l have the honour to be, Sir,
your most obedient servant,
" J. Hignett, Esq., &c."

WILLIAM STEPHENS,

" Office of Ordnance, Pall-mall, June 10, 1545.
" beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter, dated
the 9th inst., with its accompanying plan, showing the proposed
line of the North Kent Railway, from Blackheath to the fur-
ther side of Plumstead-common, and the sites of two intended
stations, one to the westward of Woolwich-common, at Kid-
brook-lane, between Morden College and the inn called The
Sun in the Sands,' and the other to the eastward, at the west-
end of Plumstead ; and, having submitted your letter and plan
to the Master-General and Board of Ordnance, I am directed
to inform you that they assent to your proposition. The Mas-
ter-General and the Board consider that those-stations will be
sufficiently remote from the outward limits of the Ordnance
property, not to afford a pretext to persons going to, or coming
therefrom, to cross or trespass upon the Ordnance property.
" It is, of course, to be understood that the tunnelling will
be executed to the satisfaction of this Board, as already agreed
between the department and the Company, and that I am to
prepare clauses for insertion in the Bill, to secure the due exe-
cution of the works assented to by the Master-General of the
Board.
" On this understanding I have, on their behalf, to express
their assent to the Bill.—l have the honour to be, Sir, your
must obedient humble servant,
""J. HIGNETT, solicitor, Ordnance.
"Mr. W. Stephens.

" Office of Ordnate, June 10, 1845."`
Sir,—The Master-General and Board of Ordnance, being
of opinion that the two stations for the London, Chatham, and
North Kent Railway, marked on the plan furnished by you,
viz., that to the westward at Kidbrook-lane, between Morden
College and the inn called' The Sun in the Sands,' and that to
the eastward at the west end of Plurnstead-common, having the
approach to it from Woolwich along the road called Sandy-
hill, will both be auflciently remote from the outward limit of

the Ordnance property not to afford a pretext, or oct. 0
temptation for persons going to, or coming from, those a 'arsons
to cross cross or trespass in any manner upon the Ordnance p
for
perty, lam commanded to communicate the same to you, •
the information of the London, Chatham, and North Kent
Railway Company.-1 am, Sir, your most obedient humble
servant, " R. BYHAM.
" 'Mr. W. Stephens, 30, Bedford-row."

" Office of Ordnance, June 24, 1845.
" Sir,—With reference to the correspondence which has
passed between the Board of Ordnance and the North Kent
Railway Company, as to the formation of a tunnel or
covered way across Woolwich-common in the manner
required by the Master-General and Board, I beg to
state that I have prepared, and transmit herewith, a
clause for insertion in the Bill, in the event of its being
adopted by the Committee, providing that the tunnel
and other railway works at that spot are to be executed to
the satisfaction of the Board of Ordnance. I am directed to
ioid that the company are not to vary the level of the railway
Ly Fairing the same ; but that the Master-General and Board
cooseot to any necessary deviation of the level of the railway
ba lowet3ng the same, or any part of the Ordnance property at
Woolwimh• common, to such an extent below the level of the
railway as ahtotitt in the deposited section thereof, beyond the
extent allowed by the General Railway Act, as may be neces-
sary to give sufficien'' headway throughout for ventilation or
otherwise, as may be rOuired, or as may be pointed out by the
Board of Trade or the Inspector-General of Railways.—l am,
Sir, your most obedient serval;!,
"J. HIGSE TT, solicitor, Ordnance._
" W. Stephens, Esq., solicitor,
" London, Chatham, and North Kent Railway."

That your petitioners hare reason to apprehend that undue
influence may have been used by the solicitor of the Board of
Ordnance in favour of the said London, Chatham, and North
Kent Railway to the prejudice of yeur petitioners.
That your petitioners, under these circumstances, felt it in-
cumbent upon them to lay before the Committee, Group A, z
totter addressed in February last to a late secretary of their
company from John Hignett, the solicitor of the said Board of
Ordnance, and which letter is as follows :

" Office of Ordnance, February 3,184 k.
$' My dear Sir,--I will thank you to let me have some tickets
of admission to the meeting at the City of London Tavern on
Thursday next.
"I think you should not overlook Captain Ikldero (a
member of this Board) in your allocation of the forthcoming
shares ; you can address them to him at this office, and mark it
private.'

" I spoke to Mr. Bonham on the same point, but he feels
some difficulty, as there is to be an opposition in Parliament to
your lines.

" You can send some shares to him or not, as you pleas'',
and mark your letter private,' and state that you do so at my
suggestion.

Whatever you intend for me you will also please to mark
private.:

."
Sir J. Goldsmid is, I hear, still bent on a vigorous opposi.•
tint: ; but, I have little doubt, if you are firm, that you will
succeed.

" There is to be a meeting at Greenwich to oppose you; but
Mr. Forman (son of the late Colonel Forman), who is interested
largely in: respect of some houses, the principal ones in the
place, on his owl,: family's account, and also fur trustees, will
not concur in their views, but quite the reverse. He is my
assistant.—Yours, faithfully, "J. HIGNETT."
" When you get before the Committee of the Commons, I
will tell you whom to attend to give evidence for you. It will
help you greatly.
"J. Whitehead, Esq."
That, under the above circumstances, your petitioners feel
that the interests of their proprietary and the public may
have been compromised by the corrupt influence of the said
John Hignett at the said Board of Ordnance, or that the
documents bearing the signature of the said John Hignett may
not have had the proper or full consideration and sanction of
the said Board of Ordnance.
That such corrupt conduct in a public servant of the Crown
is nut only injurious to the interests of your petitioners, but
derogatory to the honour and integrity of public authorities.
Your petitioners therefore humbly pray that your Honour-
able House will institute an inquiry into the circumstances of
the case, and into the bona fides and expediency of the said
arrangements between the said London, Chatham, and North
Kent Railway and her Majesty's Board of Ordnance on behalf
of the public service.
And your petitioners will ever pray, &c.

The letter set forth in the petition is the most remorkablee
among those laid before the Committee ; but they consider the
following letters worthy of especial notice, as displaying, in a
striking manner, the general character of the correspondence
which Mr. Hignett allowed himself to carry on with successive
secretaries of the South-Eastern Railway Company :

COPY ADDRESSED TO MR. WIIITEHICAD

(" Private.) " March 3, 1845.
My dear Sir—l thank you for your note. I think the Com-
pany have played their cards badly. Mr. Fearon is very
talented and zealous, but he cannot know so well as I do the
feeling which prevails at Greenwich and Woolwich. I think I
could have prevented the petition from Greenwich against you,
and which will be so powerful ; it is now too late I fear. I
gave you a hint, but as it did not appear to meet with accept.
ance, I could not press a matter of that delicacy and importances
further. I could, however, satisfy you that I could have saved
you all trouble at Greenwich, your starting point. If you like
to let Captain O'Brien know this, and it be not too late, you
may do so privately. I saw that gentleman on Friday; he ap-
peared to be aware of my friendly views, but he cannot know
what I can state and do, unless I have an invitation and assur-
ance of confidence. I have great personal interest at Green
wich and Woolwich, and also at Rochester and Gravesend, and
with the well known great personal desire I have always felt,
and shown to serve the South-Eastern line, it is inconceivable
why I was not looked to for assistance. There is no delicacy
as far as my friend, Mr. Fearon, is concerned, because I should
not, and, indeed, cannot act professionally in this or any case.
My help would have been entirely from influence at my own
control. —Yours very faithfully,
" J. HIGNETT,"
COPT ADDRESSED TO (;ATTAIN O'BRIEN.

(" Private.)

" March 3, 1845.

Dear Sir,—l was about to forward the inclosed note to
Mr. Whitehead, but, on reflection, it occurs to me that he
may possibly have left you on unfriendly terms, therefore I
deem it most prudent to eubmit it to )ou, and perhaps ou had
better use it promptly. At all events, I will let you know what
I think I can do, and you can then judge for yourself. This,
however, I am quite convinced of, that if I had been consulted
early and in confidence, I could have rendered assistance of
valuable importance. I could have stopped the Greenwich op-
position, and that would have removed from the Crown an ez-
cuse for refusing compliance with your wish to pass through
or under the Greenwich Park 13ra.y understand that I submit
this to you entirely in confidence.—Yours faithfully,

J. HIdNE TT."
ADDRESSED TO CAPTAIN O'BRIEN.

" Office of Ordnance, March I, 1845.
" Dear Sir,—l have just been informed that Mr. Goldamid
stated yesterday to an influential friend of mine, that if the
Committee on Private Bills should express any opinion in
favour of your line he will withdraw frem the contest, and give
you no further trouble. I can vouch for ae accuracy of this
statement, and I thought you would like to know.—ln haste,
yours faithfully, " J. HIGNETT.
"P. S.—l am concerned to find that }cm a:e thwarted by
this Beard at Chatham."

COPY OF CAPTAIN O'BRIEN'S ANSWER.

" (Private.) "March 7.
"My Dear Sir,— I am sorry that an unusual amount of
business has prevented me from sooner answering your note of
the 3d. I immediately gave to Mr. Whitehead your letter,
and lam glad to be able to assure you that he leaves the Com-
pany on very amicable and friendly terms. I begged him to
explain to you, if he happened to see you, that the Directors
are aware of your friendly disposition towards the South. Eastern
Railway, and that they feel much obliged to you for such sup-
port as you could give to these schemes of great public utility.
Any information which you see no objection to give to me I
shall be most happy to communicate to the Board; and I need
hardly assure you that tie are glad of any help in this great un-
dertaking. Believe me, my dear Sir, very faithfully yours,
" W. O'BRIEN."

And the following, subsequently addressed to Captain
O'Brien:—

" (Private.) " Office of Ordnance, April 18, 1845.
" Dear Sir,—lt has been hinted to me this morning that now
is the time for a compromise between your Company and the
North Kent party. I have heard that the Committee on
Standing Orders will decide for the latter, but the Chairman
waits to give you time for an arrangement. I have no doubt
about the emu aey of my information, and have only forborne
to write to or see you on the subject, that I might not be trou-
bloome. As I have said before, if I can he of any use, I shall
be most happy in affording any assistance in my power.
" Yours faithfully, HIGNETT.
" Addressed to Captain O'Brien," &c.
" Office of Ordnance, April 28, 1845.
" Dear Sir,-1 forgot to tell you in my letter of this morn-
ing, that we have received an overture from Mi. Moneypenny,
on behalf of the Hvstings, Rye, and Tenterden Railway Com-
pany, for the purchase of the Royal Military Canal from Hithe
to Cliff, in Sussex. We shall let them have it.—Yours,
faithfully,
" Addressed to Captain O'Brien," &c.

‘, J. HIGNETT.

" June 26, 1845.

" Dear Sir,—Mr. Fearon has just written to tell me that be
means this morning to produce a letter of mine to Mr. White-
head, dated 3d of February last, before the Committee. I
have no copies of any letters I wrote to Mr. Whitehead ; but
in the strictest confidence I certainly wrote both to him and
yourself. I protest against this most unfair and unwarrantable
breach of confidence, which I am quite sure you will not
sanction, nor would any of the Directors.—" Yours, faithfully,
" J. HIGNETT.

" Addressed Captain O'Brien, &c.—lmmediate."
In reference to the payment of 300/. for Mr. Bonharn's ser-
vices in passing the South-Eastern Railway Company's Bill,
through Parliament, already alluded to, his statement is at
follows --

' In the early part of the session of 1836, Mr. Wray, to
whom I was under particular obligations (it is not necessary
to state them with any explicitness), came to me and said, 4 I
am very much interested in the success of the
South-Eastern Railway, and I wish you would give us a lift;
and I want your advice upon some points.' I said, My dear
Wray, I owe very great obligations to you, and will do any-
thing in my power to serve you.' He said, I should be very
much obliged to you if you would.' And, upon that, I have
not the least hesitation in stating that I did all I could indi-
vidually to assist Mr. Wray in the object he had in view ; that
is, in plain terms, I did what I could to assist him in passing
that Bill, both in and out of Parliament. Mr. Wray never
held out to me one word, nor did any conversation ever take
place, as to any advantage of any kind or sort that I was to de-
rive from it. I considered it a great personal advantage. I
mean personal, with reference to the debt of gratitude that I
owed him. I considered it a great pleasure to myself to do what
I could for him. There were some questions upon the French
lines where I gave them some advice, I w,ll not say assistance,
because they were able to assist themselves. I never had any
communication in any way with any of the members of the
South-Eastern Railway Committee. 1 never had from then p
directly or indirectly, any offer of any personal advantage to
myself to be derived from it. After that bill was passed, Mr.
Wray came to me and stated that the South-Eastern Railway
Company felt that I had been of use to them, great use to
them, I think he said, and that they bad kept a quantity of
reserved shares, which had not been disputed of, and that they
had determined to appropriate one hundred shares for my
benefit. Mr. Wray said, I know it will not be convenient for
you to hold these shares,' meaning, of course, what I do not
deny, that lam not a rich man. ' I will hold them for you,
and I think I can derive some advantage from them ;' and Mr.
Wray, I think, about three weeks afterwards (he will be able to
tell you better,) came to me and said, I have been able to
make 300/. of those shares, which I will give you.' From be-
ginning to end, so far as I know of the transaction, I have no
hesitation in stating that this is the whole of the transaction.
It is nine years ago, and I had very much forgotten it • my
impression was, the other day, that I had not received the 300/.
but that, in point of fact, as I owed Mr. Wray
money, Mr. Wray had received the 300%. for my
benefit, liquidating the debt. That was my impression ;
but the day before yesterday, when I stated this to Mr. Wray,
he said, ' You are wrong, depend upon it; I gave you the
money, either in a cheque or money.' And I said, " If you
did, 1 have not the least recollection; but as I never meant to
suppose for a moment that I had not had the benefit of it in
some way, you are much more likely to know than I am, and,