The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-17 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TITURSDAI MORNING, JULY l7, 184 5.

THE SOUTH-EASTERN COIVIPA.NY
AND THE BOARD OF ORDNANCE.
EVIDENCE TAX EN BEFORE THE COMMITTEE.

Members present—Lord Ashley, Sir Charles Douglas, Mr.
Duncombe, Mr. Tattoo Egerton, Mr. Hawes, Mr. Hayter,
Mr. Liddell, Mr. Faking,ton, Mr. Wilson Patten, Mr. Roebuck,
Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Tapered, Mr. Vernon, Lord Wortley.
Benjamin Hawes. Esq., in the chair.
Francis R. ainham, Fsq., called in and examined.
ai:pli,,:a.tion I .Ira al,,out to do to the
Committee. I trust you will allow me to preface it with a very
few observations.

CHAIRMAN—WiII you allow me to precede what you are
going to say, by stating what the Committee have entrusted
me to enmmunicate to you? It is their wish that the whole of
the e qui ace that is supposed to militate against you, in your
pub! sapacity, should be in your hands, and that you should
have the full cognisance of all that has been alleged against
your pubic cenduct ; if that has rant been done, you are at
perfect liberty to wait. till you have full cognisance of all that
has been said before the Committee, before you make any
statement,
Witness—l am exceedingly obliged to you; I have had no
papers. My object in appearing here may be considered
an improper object. I am told that I have forgone an ad-
vantage, and I am quite willing to forego that in the
anxiety that I have of setting myself right, or at least of
making such explanation, whether it be satisfactory or not,
as in my cross-examination or the evid.nce of ethers will
bear the test of truth. The object of my coming here
is to pray that. I may be immediately examined ; and one
word I have to say upon that. It was late on Wednesday
when I heard that a statement was made as to the cheque.
I heard it indi ectly ; this Committee was sitting, and the
immediate inn ulse upon my mind was to send in to beg to
be examined at the moment ; but I felt that as you pro-
bably were upon the other question, that is, immediately
upon the petition, it nouid be impertinent and improper
for me to occupy your time at that moment. It was
only last night. that I heard in a way that may readily
()emir hi a gentleman that was examined, that the
question of the cheque Was gone into. I immediately deter-
mined iu my ewn m nd to appear before the Committtee; the
advice of the only friend I consulted upon it was against it ;
he said, " You forego an advantage; you should hear the
whole first." lam ready, however, to forego that advan-
tage, and I am perfectly willing to state the case, sub-
jecting my statement to the test of cross-examination
afi.eitwarde, aril the statement of oilier witnesses who
may be examined. I am prepared to make a state-
ment of the precise facts. The Committee will re-
member that the transaction was nine years go. I have no
paler of any kind or sort. I think, however, my statement
will be so ccrrect as to defy eiedradiction ; at the same
time, up to yesterday, when I saw Mr. Wray after hia examina-
tion, I was mistaken as to one point which I am extremely
anxious to exslain ;he set me right yesterday as to that, My
statement mu t be very short; In the early part of the seesion
of Mr. Wrey, to whom I was under considerable
obligations (it is not necessary to state them with any
ex licitness), came to me and said, "I am very much
interssted in the success of the South-Eastern Railway,
and I wish you would eive us a lift ; and I want your
advice upon some yesnts." I said, " %-y dear Wray, I owe
very great obliea es to Sou, and I will do anything I can to
serge you." He • , " I should be very much otillged to you
if you would." A: d, upon that, I have not the least hesita-
tion in swine the,: 1 did all I cull individually 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 pa sing that
Bel. both in and out. of Parliament Mr. Wray never
held out to me oi.•• word. nor any c:inversation e,er take
place, as to any advantage of any kind or sort that I was to
derive from it. I considered it a great personal advantage;
I mean personal, with e cute to the debt of gratitude that I
owed him ; I consider, it it a great pieasure to myself to do what
I could far him. Trier, were some vestions upon the French
lines where I gave th• m sore advice, I will not sae assistance:
because thee w •re tacit eb eto assist them elves. I never had
any communication in anyway with any members of the South •
Eastern Railway Committee. I never had from them directly
or indirectly, or from Ms. Wray di' ectly or indirectly, any offer
of any personal advantage to my self to be derived from it
After that Bill was passed, Mr liVrey came to me and
stared 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 had kept a quality of reserved shares, which had not
been disposed of, aest that they had determmn d to appropriate
100 snares fanny benefit. Mr. Wray said, "I know it will not he
cony n'ent for you to hold these snares." meaning, of course,
what Ido not deny, that I :Ina not a rich man " I will hold
them for you and I te ink I , an derive some advantage from
them ;" and Mr. \Vr ty, I think, ab cut three weeks after-
wards (he will be able to tell you be'ter), cam• to me and
said. .' I have been able to make 30 'I. of 'hose share: which
I will wive, ton" brim beginning to end, so far as I know
of the transaction, I have no hesitation in stating that
that is the w transaction. It is nine years ago. and I
had very much forgotten it ; m e impression was the other
day, that I had not received the 30/.. but that, in point of
fact. as I ow. d Mr. Wray money, Mr. Wray had received the
3001. for my benefi, liquidating the debt I hat was my im-
pression ; bur the day befere 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." Arid I said,
4' If you did I 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 therefore I take it for granted, under
the circumstances. that I received the money." I have
not the least recoll:ction of receiving it, but I take it for
granted that so it is. I cannot have the slightest doubt of
it, and I must take it for granted that he did give me the
cheque. I can only stale again that, a to the transaction
itselt, there was never, at the time I assisted him, the smallest
expectation on my mind of deriving any advantage frem it ;
and of course, when I state this, the Committee will most
naturally and properly take care to ascertain that fact from other
quarters. I think I can undertake to say, net knowing who the
Directors of toe South-Eastern Railway were at that time, so
much as this, that all those gentlemen will tell you the same. I
should h.toe so. for, upon my honour, I do not know their names,
nor all of them ; but I challenge them all, from beginning to
end, to say that I had ever the slightest expectation of any
kind or sort, and Mr. Wray also ; and the proposal as to these
shares was never made to me till after the Bill had passed, and
the shares I never received. inasmuch as it would not have
been convenient ; but the shares' worth, afterwards, I did re-
ceive frosty Mr. array ; that is the transaction.
Was that the only sum which you so received from the
South-Eastern Company ?—Certainly, unequivocally the only
sum.

Have you read the petition which has been presented to the
House from the South •Eastern Railway Company?—l have.
And. of coo se, therefore, you have read the letter, signed
4; J. Hignett," dated " February 3, 1845 ?"—Yes.
I wiLt read tw,, pass3ges in that letter :—" I spoke to Mr.
Bonham on the same point," that is, the allocation of forth-
coming +hares. " i.ut he feels scone difficulty, as there is to be
an oppo pion in Parli.onent to y••ur Ines. You can send some
shares to him or not, as you please, and mark your letter, Pri-
vate,' and s, ate that no do so at my suggestion." Have you any
explanation or observation to make ui.on that ? —Mr. Hignett
never spoke to me on the subject in any way. I had never
communicated wish hioi upon it. I never heard of the ex-
istence of any letzer written, as it appears, on the 3d February,
up to the receipt of this 1.-tter from Mr Fearon. Upon my
honour, as a gentleman, I was perfectly ignorant of the exist-
ence of such a letter till I received this letter from Mr. Fearon.
The —to RS read the same as foll,ws
g Sottel-E...stern Railway-office, 35 a, Great George-
We-tmioster June 26, 15.1,5,

st F ;ma fo i it Inv duty to inform you, that under the advice
()f co, 6 • ter addr s-t 1 by Ilr, Hignett, the solicitor of
the B • r to which you -ire attached, to the late Secretary of
the Soot i-Eas frt. if ;du, y Company, will he produced this
d.,y at he sittinz of the Cti;:omitte• on Group A ; y• ur name
is mentioned in this letter, ,nti it w ll no doubt appear desirable
to you that you o-oul Ibe present.--1 have, Sze.
( Sign. d) " JOhN •'. FEARON.
" Solieito to the Soutt-Eastern Railway Company.
" Francis R. 13, nhain Fri . Ordnance-office, Pall-mall."
The ``6th of Joe w-s 'f• hors •ay ; lbursday is not a board day
at the Ordnance. lam there every morning, but Iha i
quitted the office, at d by a mere accident connected with other
maters, I went there o ee someht d, at a quarter to three;
and if it 'ha • not been for that. I sh uld not have f •und the
le ter sill the t.. owl g day. It was of course too
lave so go to toe Committee that day. I im-
mrdiately sent for Mr. fliztiett, not having the
least idea to what the letter could refer, to in-
quire whether he Was in the House; they said he was not ;
soon afterwards Jr,A ilignett saw me. I was a god
deal embarras ed and a-tooished, and felt in a difficulty
to know w,.at to do. Neither of my colleagues, neither
Colonel Ps•el nor C•pt •in Bolder°, wa to the Hcuse. Vt ry
soon afterwards cairtain Bo deco Caine in. and brought a copy
of the letter addressed to him, and two or three minutes
afte:wards Hignett came in, in a sate of great
agitatiO'n. • I -aid to him, • I am very anxious to know
what this is but. I think ail explanation had better he in
'writing." He went out of the room, of course, imm idiately,
and I went very soon to a club in the neighbourhood. I
sail, •• I shall he at the Carlton for some •ime." In about
an hour or two of erwaria I gut a letter from Mr. Hignett ;
it was a coniu ed letter, certainly, tot the main point of the
letter was-. I do not like to put in the letter, because
you will have evidence eoough to show you that I could not
have had anything to do with it. I will not put in that letter,
but I may say that Mr. Hignett wrote me a letter, expressing
his vexation, and so on, but saying that he was quite pre-
pared a d ready to admit that he had nerer had any communi-
cation with me on the subj. ct. The letter Came about an hour
after I quitted the Ordnanc--office. It came to the club. I
was in a private room in the club I dui nut choose to remain
at the Ordnance, because I was afraid Mr. Hignett would come
up. and I wished to he aw y.
The Committee aai-h you to produce the letter which you
received from :Mr H gnett.

The letter was reacr:4s follow g :--
" Office of Ordnance, June 26, 1845.
_

,t sir—l have
.p 'tilted a letter addressed to you by Mr. J.
p.'Fearon, solicoor to the S',outh-Eastern Company, dated
this day, adverting to a letter stated to have been written by
me to the late Secretary of that Company, in which your
name is mentioned ; and in compliance wish your desire to
be furni-hed with some explanation. I beg to state that I
remeo.b,r Applying. tOr :orae new shares lour or five moths
.ago, I navitits, previous! hrld some of the old shares in my own
name for individuals of my family ; but I have no recollection
of having ti,ed your name in my letter to the secretary. Most
assuredly I had no authoriy ,om you to apply for shares in
your name, or on your behalf, neither had lever c mmunicated
,w;th you on the subject. If I did so. it must have been inad-
vertently, and improperis no doubt, and I deeply regret
that the circutti, %ill occasion you much ann• yPor.e.
have Sze., " J. HIG.NETT.

" F. R. Bonham, Esq."
Soot a•ter, Co,onel Peel came in from the House of Corn-
!fops, and sain its me ." NiTme u.,en i arth is this •tory ?
There is a e'or, down at the House about you?" and I lin-
12iediately put the le•ter into his hawk and said " 31v dear
Peel, alt I can ,ell •. on is, upon my hands,
I said, c`
heard
one word upon th • c et oat is t,e matter ? first let
me know what ih.• .t ' j is." He
to Mr. Lascehes t'o.i:•cl.'ti:.raisc.Lopy He said, " You had b•-ter write
of the letter ;" anti I had half
written a lever
that to write to Mr. 1-as.c Dawdles' when it occurred to me
perfeetiy ah,urtl, inasmuch
a, the Committee had refusedtr'ah7toa''receive the letter, and there-
fore I could not get
Fearon had written to memo. letter awch.;(l;h). in
of it ; but as Ali-.
ihe hurry of the
-moment, I had forzultrirveret
~,,,ea an.wer,ve the answeri I g of Mr.
Fcaron's letter wou d
i GI-tool+ y for in-
quiring, for the letter ; I kept a burrirebogc;:i.idy no
'f' the letter which
wrotre"tnoN wouldi r p
Eatonin I wrote to Mr Fearon • probahly Mr.
orlginal; this was the letter whir.. I
titthe
same evening. The % itneis read the same as follows
" 35, Clar,:es—tr..et, June 27's :
a!845.
" Sir,— On my return to the Ordnance office thi,.
I found your letter, in which you state your invention noefrnoon
pro-
clueing a letter from Illr. Hignett to :he secretary of the South-
:.Eastern Railway, in winch letter my name is mentioned,
and I thank you for tine courtesy of your communication ;
and I have >ince heard the substance of its contents, but I
should be g'ad to have a coo of the letter, in which I am,
of course, deepli, int,,sted lo the mean time, I can only
give the most •-oli mn fk surance that neither directly nor in-
directly was Mr. Hienptt withori,ed to tive my name, or
Trakf, an-.• apr!ic.,tion fin Try Ir6tif, for any Owes in any corn-
s,any, and that 1 had not the slightest notion that he had ever
done so.—l have, &e.
(S010.,1) 14 F. R. BONHAM.
" J. P. Faxon, E49...'

Perhaps the Committee would allow me to suggest that I
should be very glad that the original letter, of which this is
a copy, should be given in, and I will state precisely why.
I have written thus far, but in the original letter to Mr.
Fearon you will find this sentence—" I could not state the pre-
cise words; I did not think of copying it : but you will find a
sentence to this effect—' I shall be glad if you will show this
letter to any person to wham you may have shown Mr. Hig-
nett's letter ;' that was in order to make my denial as public
and unequivocal as the charge. The following morning, I
found, of course, the answer from Mr. Fearon, and he en-
closed me this letter, which then, for the first time, I saw.
The witness read the same, as follows :

".South-Eastern Railway Office, 3.5 A, Great George-
street, Westminster, July 27, 1845.
" Sir—l have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your
letter of yesterday's date, and beg to forward you herewith a
copy of Mr. Hignett's letter of the 2d of February last to the
secretary of the South-Eastern Railway Company.
" I have, &e.,
(Signed) "JOHN P. FEARON.
" Francis R. Bonham, Esq."
Have you ever held scrips or shares in the South-Eastern
Railway "? No—never in my life. I use the expression sub-
ject to the explanation a',out the shares of Mr. Wray's—l
never held a single share, or applied for a single share, nor
ever thought of applying for a single share.
Permit me to repeat the same question with regard to the
North Kent shares never applied for a single share. I
have held shares and hold shares. I bought the shares in the
market, and I hold them at this moment.

In what company ? —ln the North Kent Company.
Will you inform the Committee the date of the purchase of
those shares in the North Kent Company ?—I could easily get
it, but I cannot speak from memory, but it was very long since.
I should be perfectly prepared by to morrow to state the time.
I bought the shares in the market at a premium, and paid a
deposit.
Was the purchase of those shares suggested to you by any
one ?—No, it was suggested by my own opinion that it was a
very good line, judging from what I had heard. Ido not pro-
fess to have much knowledge of engineering, but the company
was a strong company, and fro' what I remembered and always
thought of the advantage of having a direct coast line to Dover
I thought that would be a good line. I considered myself as
much entitled to buy shares in that as any other line in
the market.

Have you purchased shares in the market in many corn-
panies, not with a view to investment, but as a speculation ?—I
have nut the !east objection to answer the question. I have.
Have you ever had any joint transactions in the purchase of
shares with Mr. Hignett, the solicit or to the Board of Ordnance?
—Never in my life.

Whatever shares you have purchased in railway companies
have all been purchased in the railway market, entirely at the
dictation of your own opinion of the merits of the company
of which you have purchased shares ?—Every share I ever
bought has been purchased upon my own opinion, in the open
market; and certainly I have had no shares in any company.
nor even any conversation which would lead to i•hares with
Mr. Hignett, and I have had no shares with any member of the
Board of Ordnance at all, or any person connected with the
Board of Ordnance.

Mr TANCRED—You have had no conversation with Mr.
Hignett as to shares ?—No "conversation" is rather indefi-
nite. But I should say that I could have had no conversation
with Mr. Hi 'nett.upon the subject; one is not in the way of
seein him very much. I think I might safely say that I had
never any conversation with him upon the subject.
Mr. Ronsucx—You do not hold any shares in the North
Kent Railway That you have not bought ?—I do not hold a
single share in the N ,rth Kent Railway that I have net bought
and paid for.

Ali-. T. EGERTON—That purchase being a matter of invest-
ment, and not of speculation will endeavour to answer
that question as nearly as possible. I wish to answer it cor-
rectly; it is a mixed question. I would rather answer that
question. I have no hesitation in saying that I had more
shares than I could pay ui, is full; and the advantage that I
contemplated was, to hold a certain number of shares, as I
think the speculation a good one, atid likely to be for my ad-
vantage, ano by selling some to pay for the otters.
CHAIRMA N—Can you state to the Committee the lines of
railway which pass in or near the Ordnance property, upon
which the Board of Ordnance- have reported their assent or
dissent ?—I really cannot ; and, extraordinary as it may
appear to the Committee, I have never read one word of any
of the papers connected with any one of the railways. I
wish that answer to be put down. I have not read any of
the papers connected with any one of the railways, not con-
sidering it any part of my duty.
Then, whether you have bought or sold shares in any of the
lines so affecting Ordnance property, you cannot inform the
Committee?—Yes ; I meant to state distinctly to the Coin-
mittee that I had not bought shares in any other but the
North Kent Railway.
Mr. ROEBUCK—Nor held shares? Nor held shares.
Mr. LIDDELL—May I ask you whether you ever attended
any meetings of the Board of Ordnance, where you pro-
nounced an opinion as to the merits of any particular lines ?
—Never, upon my honour ; nor have I been called
upon to do so ; nor still, further, have I had an opportunity
of doing so. Perhaps the Committee will allow me to say
this; it will appear more distinctly if the Committee will do
that which I think is due both to the public and to the mem-
bers of the Board of Ordnance, viz., examine the highest
authorities in the department upon the subject ; I should be
most happy that Sir George Murray, Colonel Peel, and Mr.
Byham, who has been Secretary of the Ordnance for forty
years, should all be examined ; and I am sure they will all state
that I could have had no opportunity of giving an opinion, or
furthering or promoting the interests of any one of the railways.
I believe you have documents from the office, and you will see
my name signed to them. Many of the documents contain
this indorsement, " Refer it to the Inspector-General of For-
tifications for a report." When we have a report of the
Inspector-General of Fortifications, it is submitted to the
Master-General for approval. The papers will be before you ;
and I state it, subject to the possibility of stating anything in-
accurately, with all the consequences before me. I have never
had any opinion to give, and never been called upon to give one.
In what capacity do you sign your name to these papers ?
—As a Member of the Board ministerially. I may make
myself understood in this way : when a railway company
applies to the Board of Ordnance for permission to pass
through their property, Mr. Byham, the secretary of the
Ordnance, not waiting for any communication from the
Board, makes the minute : " Refer it to the Inspector-
General of Fortifications for a report," the Inspector-Goneral
of Fortifications reports accordingly to the Board. In every
case, and on all occasion., the next minute will be, " Submit it
to the Master-General for his approbation." The Master-
General, you will find, always enters somewhat at large into the
question, and then he gives instructions to the Board to convey
his approbation or disapprobation of the line. That is the re-
gular official mode of doing business. We never have an aye
or nay upon the subject ; we have no opinion to offer; we can
offer none. It is a military question ; and the 1 faster-General
Mates that, upon all military questions, he reserves to himself the
entire power of deciding.
Then your signature, upon the occasions upon which it ap-
pears upon the papers, is purely in an official capacity?—
Purely official.
No discretion whatever is exercised nn your part with re-
gard to the merits of any question which may come under the
consideration of the Board in those papers?—No question
whatever on my part—no power of altering it in the minutest
degree ; of advancing the interests of one, and retarding the in-
terests of another.

Mr. HA YTER—It ig merely ministerial?—Merely minis-
terial.

SHICRIDA M—Are the papers read by the members of
the Board?—With regard to the other members, you will have
an opportunity of having both Colonel Peel and Captain Bol•
dero before you ; but, fur myself, I have never read a single
paper connected with one railway, for I have enough to do
without. Ido nut understand engineering.
Mr. ROEBUCK—Can you explain how it was that on one oc-
casion Mr. Hignett had to report ?—With regard to these three
railways, there were three competing lines, the North Kent, the
South-Eastern. and the Croydon, and the Master-General, you
will find, has reported (tor there is great misconception on the
subject ), his assent to each and all of them, subject to certain
conditions ; that is. that a certain clause should he put. in,
which he dictates. This clause, of course, must be put in by the
solicitor, and the solicitor is ordered to put in a clause fur pro-
jeet so and so ; for example, with reference to the North
Kent Railway, the Master• General reported his appro-
bation of ihe line. (I am speaking with regard to
NS'ollwich ; I do not remember what it was as to k.;tiatham,
but I remernier that with regard to Woo:•.vich from a
discussion occurred since.) The Master-General reported
his assent to the .forth Kent Railway passing through Wool-
wich .common by a tunnel; he required that the whole extent
of our ground at Woolwich should be tunnelled; that was the
first cond,tion; and I b lieve also that the stations on each
side should he so fur from the Arsenal as not t r produce incon-
venience, by quantities of persons corning ; subject to those two
conditions he assent .4. 'f hat assent is reported to the so'icitor,
and he is instru ted to prepare clauses ; accordingly, Mr. Hig-
nett had to prepare those clauses.
What followed on the report being made by Mr. Hignett?—
He is required to report to the Board, for the benefit of the
Master-General, how he has executed that duty. That report,
and you will find, it among the papers, is sent to the Board ; and
you will find a minute referri: g it to the Mater-General for
his approval ; but one word of it we are not called upon to read,
because we have not the power to decide upon it.

Mr. LIDDELL-With regard to the North Kent Railway, you
have stated that you bought shares in the market, and paid for
them a deposit, upon the impression that that was likely to be
a successful line of railway?—Certainly.
Has the North Kent Railway come under the consideration
of the Board of Trade ?—The North Kent Railway came under
the consideration of the Board of Trade, and the South-
Eastern was preferred.
In the report of the Board of Trade the South-Eastern was
preferred ?—Yes.
May I ask whether, from the transactions that had occurred
at the Board of Ordnance, you had acquired any information
respecting the line of the Noith Kent Railway which induced
you to give it the preference?—Certainly not.
Was it then the character that it bore in the market gene-
rally, and with the public at large, which induced you to prefer
it when you bought those shares ?—I acted upon the advice of a
friend of considerable engineering knowledge.
You took that sort of advice which any person may legi-
timately take who goes into the market and buys shares?—
Precisely.
And that advice you consider to have been fairly given ?
Yes. I pledge myself, knowing what the Committee cannot
know, but what I am sure they will be sati.fied of before the
inquiry is concluded—l am content to let the issue rest upon
this, with reference to any improper advantage that I may
have derived, that I was as fully justified in buying North
Kent shares as I should have been in buying Yorkshire shares,
where the Ordnance have no property at all. lam content to
r •,t my whole case upon the Committee coming to that
opinion whin they know how the bu•iuess of the Ordnance is
transacted.

DUNCOMBE—How many member. is the Board of
Oronance comp sed of?—Three ; the Master-General is not
a member of trle Board ; we never see the ;Ilaster-General.
The surveyor-general, Colonel Peel ; the clerk, Cap,ain Bol-
der) ; and the storekeeper, myself, are the three members of
the Board of Orch:ance.

Have you any voice in anything which is proposed to the
Board?—:Many things; everything but military questions.
The 31aster-Genera; distinctly ryes, and states .0 the mili-
ta.'y authority that he does, in those cases, act for himself; I
believe you will find a minute to that effect. All cases of
c ntract, all commissariat cases, all store cases, many of
which must occur, and various tither thing., of course come
before the Board, and each member of the Board has a voice.'
If there is a difference of opinion in the Board, does the ma-
jority decde ? Yes ; I have been ;our years at the Board. and
there never has bee. a difference of opinion coming to a
point, coming to cella' m.y be called a division, or anything
of that kind, since I have been there ; I have been in four
years ; I never miss, and I have nut been out of town during
those four years for four weeks, and I have never known a
difference.
Supposing it is proposed to carry a railway across the Ord-
nancetliei property, and a diff rence arises among the members of
b (~rotairi,d:tihvientahepraartnieys,c;onsent on the part of the Board shall
given to that railway, whether they shall appear as consent-
ing_l answer t istinctly that ltthoewcawseille.thnantor
aecitetuionn be decided ?
That is not a military question ?—lt is considered so; in a
certain sense it is not, but
riitiesr
t
sot,occur,
practically considered ; and
itu
,nsetvi
oenr
areoul could
fcecrurr,
ci oit never
he iMaster-General
, o
whicochuwr,e. b
neictahursoeugahll those
bj; C, DovgLA3—Any railway

nance property would be under the military surveillance of the
Master- General ?—Yes.
And would not come before the Board ?—No.
Mr. TANCRED-Mr. Hignett save, " On the 30th of May
the Board ordered me to have a meeting of the military officers
with the solicitor, myself, and then on the Monday following
we met near the Committee-room, in an ante-room, and dis-
cussed the matter, and on the 3d of June I made my report re-
commending the stations ;" did you not take that report into
your consideration?—Certainly not; we referred it to the
Master- General.

Then it passtd merely ministerially through your office ?
Clearly. I hove endeavoured to exrlain that no one case of that
sort ever came before the Beard for their consideration. We
referred it to the Master-General.

He says, " The minute submitting this to the Master-Gene-
ral is signed by Mr. Bonham and Captain Boldero ?"—That is
exactly bearing out my point; that minute is submitted to the
Master-General.

Does not that minute contain a general approbation or disap.
probation ?—Certainly not.
Mr. SHERIDAN—What is the nature of the report submitted to
the Master-General where do you make alterations or amend-
ments or suggestions ?—There are various questions of course
upon which we make communications to the Master-General ;
i t is rather difficult to answer that question. In fact, upon many
points of the general details of the Board the Master-General
would rather require us to give an opinion : for example, as to
the conduct of officers in various things. Very recently there was
the case of a gentleman in one of the Arsenals whose conduct
was complained of : we referred it to the Master-General ; we
thought it wiser to refer it to him ; and the Master-General sent
it back to us, and stated he would be glad to have our opinion
upon it; but upon military questions we never (1 state that
generally aid broadly) presume to give an opinion to the
Master-General—and all rail way 'questions are considered under
that category of military questions—and we never presume
therefore to form an opinion; and I will venture to say that,
having the documents before you, you will not find an opinion
in any case offered by the Board to the Master-General upon
military subjects; but at the same time this will be much
more satisfactorily explained by others; and I do hope that
you will have Mr. Byham, who has been in the office for half a
century, or the Master-General; those gentlemen will tell you
the routine of the office.

Mr. PAKINGTON—Upon a railway question, after the Mas-
ter-General has given his opinion, is that opinion submitted to
the Board, or is his opinion final ?—Final ; it is never submitted
to the Board.

Mr. T. EGERTON—Your duty is merely to transmit it to
the parties ?—Exactly ; and the answers to those three com-
peting lines were sent to the solicitors of the different com-
panies; to Mr. Fearon, the solicitor of one ; to Mr. Stephens,
the solicitor of the other ; and to the solicitor of the Croydon ;
we never offered our opinion upon it.
`Jr. ROEBUCK—So that if, in your opinion, one of the rail-
ways was a very mischievous one, and the other a very good
one, that could make no difference ; you could express no poi-
nion 7—l, would be totally out of any power to express any of-
ficial opinion. I aright out of doors, if I was fool enough to
critici,e what had been done, express an opinion.
Mr. VERNON—Is the decision of the Master-General upon
the point submitted to him known to other persons as soon as
the members of the Board ?—Yes, because to other parties in-
terested it must be communicated.

Mr. LIDDELL—In your official capacity, as a functionary of
the Board of Ordnance, would it be possible fur you to pro-
mote the iuterests of this railway or that railway at the Board
of Ordnance?—Clearly impossible. That anQwer I give win,it
distinctly, and I abide by it, always supposing that you will
take care care to have the parties connected with the Ordnance
before you to examine them.

Mr. TANCRED—The Master-Gener:.l does not act, except
through reports ?—Not except through reports. with the single
exception of the case I alluded to. of the officer, whose con-
duct was brought before us. I have not occasion to see the
Master-General for seven or eight months ; the clerk of the
Ordnance has occasion to see him on many points. I believe
he has occasion to consult him upon the question of the har-
bours of refuge. That is a case on which I know nothing ; and
h,s see'ng him is, I believe, rather with a view to questions
coming before the House of Commons, that the clerk of the
Ordnance •hould be prepared to answer any question that may
at ise. But they are Master-General's questions entirely ; and
unless it could be supposed that the Master •General was likely
to take my opinion upon a military point, it is totally impossible
that I could have the slightest influence, or indeed any member
of the Board, in the case of any single railway.
CHAreatAN—Will you turn your attention to a letter dated
" Office of Ordnance, the 24th of June" (the letter being shown
to the witness.) That letter, signed by Mr. Hignett, the
solicitor of the Ordnance, states :—" I am directed to add, that
the Company are not to vary the level of the railway by raising
the same ; but that the Master-General and Board consent to
any necessary deviation of the level of the railway by lowering
the same." Had the consent of the Master-General been
formally obtained at that time ?—I believe I can give infor-
mation upon that. The question was raised before the Par-
liamentary Committee whether the Master-General's consent
had been really given. 1 think a letter was sent up to Mr.
Byham, Secretary of the Board, to know whether the
Master-General's consent had been given or not. Mr.
Byham went down accordingly, and was examined before
the Committee : and he stated that the papers had been
sent to the Master-General, but his consent had not been
formally received. It was the board day, otherwise I
should not have known anything about it. Colonel Peel
and myself were at the Board when Mr. Byham re-
turned from the Committee. The moment he came into
the room, a paper was sent up by Mr. Elliott, the chief
clerk in the Master-General's department, a different depart-
ment from the Board of Ordnance, containing the Master-
General's report, and Mr. Byham said, " I am very sorry that
this did not arrive before I went ; for being called upon, I
stated, that the consent had not arrived, for we had sent to
the clerk for it, and it had not arrived ; and it now appears
that Mr. Elliott received it last night, and had not sent it up
before I went." We told him that all he had to do was to
forward it to the Committee that day. Indeed that was his
own suggestion. He said, " The best thing I can do is to send
this to the Committee." We said, " Certainly ;" and it was
sent to the Chairman of the Committee, Mr. Lascelles, upon
that day. The Committee was up ; it had adjourned at two
o'clock ; and the following morning, the first step that the
Chairman of the Committee took was to read the report of the
Master-General of the Ordnance.

Could the solicitor of the Ordnance, without your know-
ledge, write a letter, stating that the Master-General had
consented to a variation of the levels, without the formal
consent of the Master-General ?—Certainly, without my
knewledge ; he was instructed to prepare this; he would not
come to the Board upon it, or have any communication with
the Board.

Mr. ROEBUCK—What is the meaning of the words, " The
Master-General and Board consent ?"—Those words you will
find always used ; in the same way as you have an official
seal, so you have the terms, " the Master-General and Board
consent," to everything.
Then the Board really have nothing to do with it?—The
Board really and truly have nothing to do with all these ques-
tions ; but I apprehend generally, in any formal consent to the
conveyance of property, or anything else, they put " the
Board" as part of the formal words ; but it is, in fact, the
Master-General in military cases
Do not you think that out of doors that is understood to
mean the Board of Ordnance ?—No, I should think not; but
if you consider that it is so. it is certainly desirable that you
should have information upon that from a higher authority
than I can pretend to be, or a more disinterested one ; that you
should in that way obtain accurate information ; but the party
to df•cide in que-tions of this kind is the Master-General; but
the words must be used on all occasions in every lease, and so
on, • The Master-General and the Board of Ordnance."
Mr. TA NCRED—In the letter of 'he 10th of June there is
the same expression. " The Master-General and Board of
Ordnance being of opinion that the two stations for the Lon-
don, Chatham, and North Kent Railway," and so on; von
have nothing to do with that ?—No.

Mr. Dor:comas-1 he Board of Ordnance are only instru-
ments ?-I'ney are only instruments, but they are necessary in-
strument,

Mr. RoEsucx—lf they were efficient, as they are supposed
to be efficient out of doors, what would be the result of any
one member of the Board being known to be a large share-
holder in any railway pas4ing through Ordnance property ?
I hardly know how I can answer that question ; I understand
what it is intended to convey, but I hardly know how to
answer it.

CHAIRMAN—Do you not think that any member of the
Board of Ordnance holding shares in a railway where the con-
sent of the Master-General and Board of Ordnance would be
necessary. would convey the impression that the consent of the
Board would be obtained, and increase the chances of that line
passing ? I must leave every gentleman to answer that ques-
tion ; all I ran say i-, that I, as a member of the Board, con-
sidered my-elf as much entitled to buy shares in the North
Kent Railway as I should in any Oatord Railway. I may be
wrong, but that is my impression.

Mr". ROEBUCK—You came to that conclusion from the Board
beinp, not real]) efficient, but merely nominal?—Yes,
illy. LIDDELL—NominaI so far as these points are con-
cerned ?—Exaetly.
Upon military questions you are a nominal Board, but upon
all other questions an effective Board ?—Yes.
Mr. RA YT R—Would not the knowledge on the part of the
public that any members of the Board of Ordnance were
holders of shares in one of the lines passing through Ordnance
property, create an undue prejudice against a rival line which
had no such advantage ?—ln the first place, I do not know that
when a person buys shares in any line it will be publicly known
what shares he has.

Do von think that it oozes out through the brokers 7
Pos,il;ly.
Mr. DUNCOMBE—ShouId you think it right on the part of
the Master-General to have shares in the North Kent Rail-
way ?—Certainly not.
Mr. LlDDELL—Because the Master-General is the person
to pronuunee upon the adoption or rejection of the line —He
has the absolute power in his own hands, and therefore, of
course, he should not 1-old shares.

Mr. DUNCOMBE—What is the great use of this Board under
these circumstances ?—ln the first place, the Board transact all
contracts and commissariat business of every sort, and business
connected with landed property. We are, in a word, if I may
use the expression which was used by our old secretary, gene-
ral dealers. The India Company receive through the Ord-
nance their supplies of arms, clothing, and various things. The
contracts are all made by tender, and they are made through
the Ordnance.

Why should not your decisions equally extend to matters con-
nected with railways ?—Simply because they are military ques-
tions; and the Master-General, who is always a high military
authority, decides them ; and the members of the Board of
Ordnance are not supposed to be military men.
With the exception of two, the other two are military men ?
—Generally, they are.
Mr. W. PATTEN—Two of the members at present are mili-
tary men ; but, on a late occasion, two out of the three were
not military men ?—I should say that there is never more than
one civilian at. the Board ; at least, so far as I am able to speak
to that; there is a great deal of business for a civilian.
Mr. LIDPELL—Durinz the time that Lord Mulgrave was
Master-General of the Ordnance, Mr. Ward was Clerk to the
Ordnance for many years ?—de was.
Mr. SHERIDAN—Were Mr. Hignett's letters submitted to
you before they were forwarded; for invance, this letter of
the 10th of June ?—No, that would not be submitted to us ;
Mr. Hignett receives instructions from the :Master-General;
the Master-General approves of the proposition, and sends it
to the Board " approved" so and so. I believe you have the
original paper, which would show it better than I can.
Then it is rather incorrect for Mr. Hignett to say, "the
tunnell and other railway works at that spot are to be executed
to the satisfaction of the Board ;" he does not there mention
the Master-General?—But " the Board" means the Master-
General.

Mr. VERNON—I suppose that your attention was more
directed to the merits of the North Kent Railway in consequence
of the communications which have been made on the subject,
and which had been brought under your knowledge in the pro-
gress of the applications to the Board ?—No, certainly not ; I
should rather say that my opinions as to the North Kent Rail-
way were derived from one who is not a member of the Board,
but who it a personal friend of mine. I again repeat what
must sound very extraordinary, that I am persuaded, with re-
ference to this railway, I never read a single paper, for I was
nor called upon to give an opinion ; and therefore it was no use
for me to read any of the papers. I have plenty of occupation.
Mr. LIDDELL-I'2S the Board of Ordnance always been
per
rs
?;—Yes sertehewyod
raulynot be more than
composed of the same officers who now yompose it, a surveyor,
be military men,
I should think.
ooanreenleacivkailliananinednat tsohtroereSilaeikveileei time;

CHAIRMAI,T—WiII you state the number of shares you had
in the North Kent Railway ?—I had 100.
You purchased 100 ?—Yes.
You still hold them?—Yes ; that is to say, I had 125 ; those
125, it seems, were sold upon a profit of somewhere about half-
a-crown, or it may be ss. a share.
Lord WORSLEY—You mean the whole 121 ?—Yes.
CHAIRMAN—Then you purchased again 7—Yes, I purchased
again very recently 100, and those I have.
Did you buy them in the market? I bought them, at least
ray friend who managed the transaction for me, bought them in
the market at a high premium.
They were not then bought in your name ?—They were not
bought in my name.
Your name does not appear ?—No, it does not.
Then they are, in fact, held by him at this moment ?—They
are, in fact, at this moment held by him.
Are they held by him in trust for you ?—Yes.
You having paid the deposit and the premium?—He must
have paid the deposit and the premium ; they are held by him
in his hands for me.

In point of fact, up to this time, you have paid nothing?—l
have paid nothing upon those—they were bought only a few
days ago.
Was that friend any person connected with the Board of Ord-
nance ?—Not in the remotest degree.
Was it any person connected with the promoters of the North
Kent Railway ?—Not in the remotest degree.
Mr. VERNON—What was die date of the first purchase ?—I
cannot state the date,' but it must have been long ago, because
they were purchased at par ; it must have been vary early in-
deed, several months ago, and they were sold again at quarter
premium.
CHAIRMAN—Did you pay the deposit and premium upon
those shares?—Certainly.
Of those shares did you hold the scrip in your hands ?—I
should say not—my friend held them in the same way.
Mr. LIDDELL—Do you happen to know when Captain
Boldero sold his North Kent Shares ?—I remember he came
into my room (you remind me of that which perhaps, 1
ought to have stated), and said, " I think this question is
likely to come unpleasantly before Parliament" (he did not
mean before the Board of Ordnance) ; " a question has arisen
about Woolwich-common, which is very likely to come before
Parliament, in which I must take a part, and I shall therefore
sell my shares." He said, " before Parliament," not " before
the Board of Ordnance." I beg you to draw the distinction.
That was early in June ; it was when the difficulty arose about
the tunnel question.
Was it the 9th of June?—Very early. It appears further,
of which I was not aware at the time, that I told this to my
friend, and he sold my shares also.

The CHAiumax—The first one hundred and twenty-five
shares were bought in the open market? All were equally
bought, I apprehend, in the open market ; I can have no doubt
about that, as they were bought at par. I shall be able to
inform myself correctly upon that. The last I know were
bought in the open market, and they were bought at a con-
siderable premium ; that I can speak with certainty to.
Your name appeared in none of these transactions?—No, I
should take for granted, in none.
Each time they were bought on your account ?—Yes ; not
on a joint account. My name, therefore, would not appear.
If on the papers to morrow there should be any difference be-
tween them and what I have now stated, I trust I shall not
have any disservice from it. To the accuracy of the papers I
will pledge myself; the precise details I cannot vouch for, but
I will pledge myself that those details shall be forthcoming.
Was the person who was joined with you in the purchase of
those shares in any way engaged in promoting the North Kent
Railway ?—No, in no degree whatever.
Do you feel any objection to mention the name of the party
with whom you were joined in buying those shares ?--I do not
know that I shall have the least objection to-morrow morning
to mention his name.

Captain Henry George Boldero, • Member of the House.

examined.

CITAIRMA N—You are the Clerk of the Ordnance ?—I am.
Have you read the petition presented to Parliament by the
South-Eastern Railway Company ?--I have.
Has you attention been particularly drawn to the letter of
Mr. Hignett of the 3d of February, 1845 ?—Deeidedly.
Are there any observations or explanations which you wish
to make in reference to that letter ?—The first intimation I
had about that letter was a letter I received from %Ir. Fearon.
I received this letter from Mr. Fearon, dated the 26th of June,
1845 I docketed the time at which I received it ; it was half-
past three, but it might have arrived at the office sooner.
The witness read the same, as follows :
" South-Eastern Railway-office, 35 A, Great- George-
street, Westminster, June 26, 1845.
" Sir—l feel it my duty to inform you that under the ad-
vice of counsel a letter addressed by Mr. Hignett, the Solicitor
of the Board to which you are attached, to the late Secretary
of the South• Eastern Railway Company will be produced this
day at the sitting of the Committee on Group A. Your name
is mentioned in this letter, and it will no doubt appear desirable
to you that you should be present.
(Signed) " JOHN P. I'EARON,
" Solicitor to the South-Eastern-Railway
" Company.

" Captain Boldero."
Having received that letter, as I have stated, at half-pat.
three, I immediately sent down stairs for Mr. Hignett to come
up. He was not in the office, and I left word that he was to
come up immediately he came in. About half-past four I
went into Mr. Bonham's room, and there I found Mr. Hignett.
I had the letter in my hand, and I said to Mr. Bonham,
" Here is a curious letter ;" or something of that kind. I
alluded to the letter from Mr. Fearon. Mr. Bonham told me
he had received a similar one. I then said to Mr. Hignett,
What does this letter mean ?" because it was an ambiguous
letter. I could not make anything of it. He said, " Sir, I
do not know ; I have no copy of that letter." I said, " Very
well, sir, you will take this,' I gave hint the original letter),
" and give me an explanation immediately." I mentioned
also, (this was at half-past four), that I hoped to dine at the
Carlton Club, where he was to send his letter. At seven o'clock
the following letter was delivered to me.
The witness read the same as follows :
" Office of Ordnance, June 26, 1845.
" Sir—l have perused a letter addressed to you by Mr. J.
P. Fearon, solicitor to the South-Eastern Railway Com-
pany, dated this day, adverting to a letter stated to have been
written by me to the late secretary of that Company in which
your name is mentioned; and in compliance with your de-
sire to be furnished with some explanation, I beg to state that
I recollect having had some communication with the gentleman
alluded to, but it was a confidential one, and he has just in-
formed me that he so considered it, and so indeed did Mr. Fearon
so understand it from him. I remember applying to the Se-
cretary far some of the new shares four or five months ago, I
having previously held some of the old shares in my own name,
for individuals of my family ; but I have no recollection of hav-
ing used your name in my letter to the secretary. Most assur-
edly I had no authority from you to apply for shares in your
name, or in your behalf, neither had I communicated with
you on the subject. If I did so it must have been inad-
vertently, and very improperly no doubt, in a letter which was
strictly private and confidential. I have, on the present oc•
casion, strictly conformed to the orders of the Master General
and Board, and am exceedingly sorry for the annoyance which
this most unwarrantable breach of confidence on the part-of
Mr. Fearon will occasion you.—l have, &c.,
(Signed) " J. HIGNETT.
" Captain Boldero, M.P., &c., &e."
I had previously made an arrangement with Mr. Bonham
to meet him after dinner. I met him after dinner : I should
think at half-past nine, and I said, " Steps must be imme-
diately taken to get a copy of this letter." We discussed
the question, and we mutually agreed that a letter should
be written to the Honourable William Lascelles, the Chair-
man of the Committee, requesting a copy ; but when writing
the letter (each was engaged writing his own letter), we
received an intimation that the Chairman of that Committee
( Group A) had refused to receive the letter ; therefore, I
naturally said, " It is useless to write, still something must be
done." We discussed the question, and we thought that
the only mode open to us was to write to Mr. Fearon. I
drew a draft of the letter I intended to send : Mr. Bonham, of
course, wrote his own. I came down to the House of Commons,
and it was intimated to me that a petition was going to be pre-
sented that night from the South-Eastern Company. I went
into the library and I altered the terms in which I originally
addressed the letter to him. I meant to have asked for a copy
of the letter of the 3d of February, but when I found that a
petition was going to be presented to the House, I had no doubt
that a copy would be produced, and, therefore, I did not ask for
a copy. This is the letter which I wrote. The witness read the
same, as follows :

" Ordnance, June 26, 1845.
" Sir—l hare received your letter dated this day, wherein
you state your intention to produce before the Committee now
sitting on Group A ( Railways) a letter addressed by Mr. Hig-
nett to the late Secretary of the South:Eastern Railwa), in
which my name is mentioned. I thank von for the information ;
I am ignorant of the contents of Mr. Hignett's letter, except as
far as he has since communicated them to me, and 1 have to as-
sure you that he had no authority from me, direct or indirect,
to make such an application. But, whatever correspondence
has taken place between the contending parties, and sanctioned
by the Master-General and Board, I, as a Member of this
Board, am content to share the responsibility.—l remain, &e.
( Signed) " H. ts. BOLDERO."
I think you caine to me and stated that you wished to speak
to me, and you then said, " Here is the petition." That pe-
tition you offered to me, and you said that the petition you
would not have presented, unless you had the original letter.
You offered me the petition; I declinpd it, arid asked for the
original letter. That was my first knowledge of that letter.
Will you now allow me to call your attention to a paragraph
in a letter of the 3d of February, whirl is to this effect ;—" I
think you should not overlook Captain Boldero (a member of
this Board) in your allocation of the forthcominc, shares ; you
can address them to him at this office, and mark it private."
The Committee understand, therefore, from the letter that you
have put in, that Mr. Hignett had no authority whatever to
use your name ?—Not a shadow of authority.
Are you a holder of shares in the North Kent Railway ?—I
am not now ; I was.

Did you buy them yourself in the market?—l did not buy
them myself in the market.

Will You state the particulars of that transaction to the Com-
mittee ?—Decidedly.
The date when you became a shareholder in the North Kent
Railway, and the date when you got rid of those shares?— Until
the beginning of this year 1 never held a railway share of any
description ;
my first transaction in speculating a little in rail-
ways commenced thus : A friend of mine asked me if I would
buy some shares in the Chester and Holyhead. I said " Yes,
provided they are moderate in priee. It was finally agreed
between him and me that I should buy twenty shares of
him, and he would deliver them in the course of four
or five days, if I would give him a cheque for 1401. I sent
for the newspaper,
and I found the shares quoted in the market
at He said, 4. Well, if you will give me a cheque for
140/., that will include brokerage and everything ; and I
bought the shares. On the 10th of March I asked Mr.
Hignett to buy me ninety shares more in the Chester and
Holyhead. I knew no broker; I was never on the Stock
Exchange, and I therefore asked him to buy them for me.
Mr. PAKINGTON—And you got those shares ?—Yes ; he
bought them for me at my desire. On the 7th of March
Mr. Hignett was at my room, and we spoke about the North
Kent Railway ; he said he thought it was a vod speculation;.
the premium was very low, and I requested him to buy me one
hundred shares. He bought one hundred shares, a-d of course
paid the premium and paid the brokerage, and I paid him for
them; I kept them for a short time, and sold them.
When did you sell them ?—ln a fortnight, I think.
Mr. W. PATTEN—Do you recollect what the premium was ? '
—No ; it was not a very profitable one.
CHAIRMAN—You gained by the sale of them ?—I think I
did ; yes. I may say that I did.
Mr. ROEBUCK—Were the whole 100 sold ?—The whole 100
were sold ; it was a heavier stake than 1 liked. _

CHA IRNIA N Can you state what the premium was ?—I will
endeavour to ascert,in by to-morrow at what the market price
was; I forget what it was at thi- moment.
What was the date of the sale ?—Ttiat I will make good to-
morrow.

Had you a broker to sell those shares?—Yes.
Do you remember the broker's name ?—No, I do not.
Mr. HoEsuck—Have you got the note ?—1 do not know
whether I have, for I had closed my transactions upon that
point; but I will look ir.to all my papers for the Committee.
CHAIRMAN—Were they sold in your name?—No, I believe
not.

Mr. PAKINGTON—The whole bu,iness was transacted by
Mr. Hignett ? —lt was ; he bought and !old them for me. The
next transaction was, I think, in April. I took up a paper,
and I said, " Mr. Hignett, I have selecb.d three lines, and I
should like for you to buy me twenty shares in each:" (I am

stating things as they occurred:) " twenty in the Man-
chester and Leeds, twenty in the North British,
and twenty in the Glasgow and Edinburgh," all six-
teenths. I think the Manchester and Leeds I hold now, and
these are the papers. ( The witness produced the same.)
There was a premium paid in the market. And these are the
North British. (The witness produced the same.) The
Glasgow and Edinburgh I have not got ; I sold them in
the market.

CHAIRMAN—Did you at any time subsequently purchase
any shares in the North Kent ?—I did.
What was the date of that purchase, and the number of
shares ?—That was in April; the next and only other trans-
action that I had in the North Kent, something occurred in
getting the Bill through the Committee; some objections
were got over, and a friend advised me to re-invest in the
North Kent. On the 25th of April I asked Mr. Hignett to
buy me fifty or sixty shares. In the afternoon he came and said
that he had bought one hundred and twenty North Kent shares.
1 said, " That is more than I want," and I took seventy.
There was 21. premium paid. I asked him also to buy twenty-
five shares in the North Kent for a connexion of mine, which
he did, at 21. premium.
Sir C. DOUGLAS—Were those twenty-five over and above
the seventy ?—Certainly.
Mr. T. EGERTON—Did you pay a deposit with the pre-
mium ?—They were sold in the market at 21. premium on
the deposit ; the shares were, I think, at l/. los. each, and 21.
was the premium added to the deposit. I sold thirty of those
shares in April, and I kept the remainder until the 9th of
June. On the 9th of June I sent for Mr. Hignett, and de-
sired him to sell the whole sixty-fire.
Mr. PAK' wcrow—Your remaining forty, and your friend's
twenty-five ?—Exactly. There were thirty sold first, and on
the 9►h of June I sold sixty-five. Here is the paper—
" Sixty.five North Kent shares, 9th of June." I sold them at
23 premium.
CstantatAx—You have ceased to be a shareholder in the
North Kent Company ?—I have.
You have not had any shares since ?—No.
Your purchases and sales were made in the name of Mr.
Hignett ?—They were.
Under your direction ?—Certainly.
Your name not appearing in the transaction at all T— I sup-
pose not. I told him to buy and sell, just as I felt a disposi-
tion to speculate. The reason why I sold on the 9th of June
I will explain. Finding that evidence was being received by
the Committee contrary to the spirit and wishes of the Master-
General, it struck me that possibly some question might arise
in which I should be called upon to offer some explanation, and
that induced me to sell.

Mr. Dulscomse—Where did you expect that explanation
would be called for ? In the House ; there might be some
petition or discussion about it. I saw that as the matter was
going on I had better be out of it. But previously to
this, the Master-General having given his consent to the
three competing lines, unqualified to one, and conditional
to the other, which conditions had been accepted, I did not
think it possible that any question could arise in the depart-
ment affecting the merits of either line. The Master-General
having left it to Parliament which of the lines was the best,
his assent being given to all three.
CHAIRMAN—You have stated that a friend advised you to
re-invest in the North Kent shares in April, you having sold
those shares that you previously had in March ; was that friend
any Member of the Board of Ordnance, or anybody connected
with the Board ?—Certainly not.
Was he in any way connected with the promoters of the
Bill ?—Not in the slightest degree. He was a man specu-
lating in them a little like myselt ; a connexion of mine.
Neither connected with the office nor the Railway Company ?
—No.

Have you ever had joint-share transactions with any per-
sons, with the exception of Mr. Hignett, connected with the
Board of Ordnance ?—I do not call those joint-share transac-
tions with him. He bought when I asked him, and sold when
I asked him.

Have you had any similar transactions to those with any
other person connected with the Ordnance ?—No; and ex-
cept that he bought and sold for me in those two cases, with
those two exceptions, I have never touched any shares in the
North Kent Company.
Mr. T. EGERTON—The reason that you employed Mr.
Hignett was, that you had never had any dealing in shares?--
Exactly.
You said that you bought those shares after the assent of the
Master-General had been given to one line, and the conditional
assent of the Master-General had been given to the other; will
you be kind enough to state when that assent had been given ?
—The answer to that ought to have been, that I bought the
shares after the assent of the Master-General had been given to
all those three lines ; the assent to them was Riven, and they
were all before the House of Commons with the assent of the
Master- General.

Mr. W. PATTEN—Before you bought any shares ?—Yes.
Mr. T. EGRATON-Will you be good enough to give the date
of the assent of the Master-General 7—The assent of the Master-
General to the London and Croydon was given on February
the 7th, to the South-Eastern on the 29th of January, and to
the North Kent on the 20th of January ; a conditional
assent was given, and then went to Parliament.

Mr. Liddell—The sixty-five remaining shares that were in
your possession after the purchase, you directed to be sold on
the 9th of June ?—I did.

I understand you to say, that the reasons why you directed
that the sale should take place were, that certain proceedings
were going on before the Committee, in consequence of which
you thought that the propriety of your holding those shares
might be questioned ?—vecidedly. I had previously enter•
tained the opinion that no possible question could come before
us. I thought that the present conditions of the Master-Ge-
neral, would, in this case, as in every case which we had had
before, be insisted upon by the Committee to which the Bill
went: I had never known any instance to the contrary.
Mr. TANC KED—Have you had frequent instances of Bills
in which the consent of the Master-General was necessary ?
—Yes, we have frequent instances of Bills that affect Ordnance
property, and the Master-General makes one rule in such
cases ; he will never throw any unnecessary impediment in the
way of a public improvement, whether it is by a railway Bill,
or a dock Bill, or any other; he decides all those questions;
they are military questions.
Mr. DuricomßE—The Board have not the slightest influence
in those cases ?—Not the slightest.

TUESDAY Nlcill'rS GAZETTE.

DIVIDENDS DECLARED.

C. Murcott—first div. of I Id. in the pound, any Thursday,
at the office of Mr. Christie, Birmingham.
G. Harvey, spirit merchant, Handsacre, Staffordshire—
final div. of 3s. 33%d. in the pound, any Thursday, at the
office of Mr. Valpy, Birmingham.
J. Kirkpatrick, banker, Newport, Isle of Wight—third div.
of 2;. 6d. in the pound, any Wednesday, at the office of Mr.
Whitmore, Basinghall-street, or the Town-hall, Newport.
W. Chandler, chemist, Minories—first div. of Is. 4d. in
the pound. July 16, and two following Wednesdays, at the
office of Mr. Turquand, Old Jewry.
T. K. Gorbell, bookseller, Bedford-place, Commercial-road,
Stepney—first div. of 6s. 6d. in the pound, July 16, and two
following Wednesdays, at the office of Mr. Turquand, Old
Jewry.
F. E. Blyth, porter merchant, Colchester—first div. of Is.
2d. in the pound, July 16, and two following Wednesdays, at
the office of Mr. Turquand, Old Jewry.
J. F. Figge, merchant, Dunster-court, Mincing-lane—first
div. of 84. in the pound, July 16, and two following Wednes-
days, at the office of Mr. 1 urquand, Old Jewry.
R. M. Herbert, tea dealer, Reading—first die. or 3s. 4d.
in the pound, July 16, and two following Wednesdays, at the
office of Mr. Turquand, Old Jewry.
J. Burge, jun., tailor, Weston super Mare, Somersetshire
—final div. of Wtd. in the pound, July 16, or any subsequent
Wednesday, at the office of Mr. Kynaston, Bristol.
W. Carpenter, innkeeper, Chippenham, Wiltshire—final
div. of 31/0. in the pound, July 16, or any subsequent Wed-
nesday, at the office of Mr. Kynaston, Bristol.
T. Robinson, lime burner, Eccleston, Lancash re—first div.
of 7s. in the pound, July 17, or any subsequeuThursday, at
the office of Mr. Cazenove, Liverpool.
H. Lewis, cabinet maker, Haverfordwest—finsTdiv. of 11,4 d.
in the pound, July 16, or any subsequent Wednesday, at the
office of Mr. Kynaston Bristol.
J. Kewley, tailor, Liverpool—first diva of 2s. 6d. in the
pound, July 17, or any subsequent Thursday, at the office of
Mr. Cazenove, Liverpool.
DIVIDENDS.
At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basinghall-street.
W. S. Goodeve, banker's clerk, Chichester, Aug. 5, at
one—J. Phillips and T. Peason, silk dressers, South-place,
Finsbury, Aug. 11, at eleven—R. Kipling and W. Atkin.on,
warehousemen, Wood-street, Cheapside, Aug 5, at eleven—
It Kipling, warehouseman, Wood-street, Cheapside, Aug. 5,
at eleven.

In the Country.
T. Lakin, builder, Nottingham, Aug. 7, at eleven, at the
Birmingham District Court—T. B. Golborne and A. A.
Dobbs, wine merchants, Liverpool, Aug 7, at eleven, at the
Liverpool District Court—A. A. Dobbs, wine merchant,
Liverpool, Aug. 6, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court
—T. Parr, plumber, Liverpool, Aug. 8, at twelve, at the
Liverpool District Court—C. Mottram, wool broker, Liver-
pool, Aug. 7, at twelve, at the Liverpool District Court—B.
Berrill, merchant. Liverpool, Aug. 8, at eleven, at the Liver-
pool District Court—D. Rowlands, wine dealer, Pwllheli, Car-
narvonshire, Aug. 8, at twelve, at the Liverpool District
Court—R. Shepherd, boot maker, Liverpool. Aug. 7, at
twelve, at the Liverpool District Ceurt—J. Taylor, miller,
Willowholme, Cumberland, Aug. 6, at half-past one, at the
Newcastle-upon-Tyne District Court—E. Heron, shipowner,
South Blyth, Northumberland, Aug. 6, at twelve, at the
Newcastle-upon-Tyne District Court—J. B. Pigott, linen ma-
nufacturer, Darlington, Aug. 6, at two, at the Newcastle-
upon-Tyne District Court—S. Rogers, earthenware manufac-
turer, Dale-hall, Staffordshire, Aug. 5. at twelve. at the Bir-
mingham District Court—B. Robinson, draper, Burton-upon-
Trent, Aug. 7, at half-past eleven, at the Birmingham Dis-
trict Court—H. J. Dixon, carpet manufacturer, Kiddermin-
ster, Aug. 7, at eleven, at the Birmingham District Court—
T. Izon, merchant, Handsworth, Staffordshire, Aug. 8, at
eleven, at the Birmingham District Court.

CERTIFICATES to be granted, unless cause be shown to the
contrary, on the day herein-mentioned.
R. Kimble, boot maker, Great Marylebone-street, Aug. 7
G. Sheraton, corn merchant, Hartlepool, Durham, Aug. 5
C. Martyn, linen draper, Durham, Aug. 5—H. Nichols,
auctioneer, Coleford, Gloucestershire, Aug. 14—H. J. E.
Saffran, cloth merchant, Huddersfield, Aug. 7—W. H. Robin-
son, wine merchant, Leicester, Aug. 7—T. Jones and H. M.
Crosskiil, booksellers, Rochdale, Aug. 6—Joseph Hill, hatter,
Stroud, Gloucestershire, Aug. 5.—J. Winscombe, boot maker,
Bristol, Aug. 5—J. Wood. linen manufacturer, Barnsley,
Aug. 5—S. P. Bidder, slate dealer, Fleetwood-on- Wyr*,
Lancashire, Aug. 5—G. J. Carter, carpenter, Hornsey-road,
Aug. 5—W. Granger, paper manufacturer, Relly-mill, Dur-
ham, Aug. N: Fraley, linen draper, Bristol, Aug. 5.