The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-17 00:00:00

Newry and Enniskillen,
Enniskillen and Dundalk,
.2elftst and Ballymena,

Londonderry and Enniskillen,
L ndrmderry and Coleraine,
which have chiefly fur their object communication be-
tween inland towns and their nearest seaports.

In examining into these schemes, we have derlvcd
much assistance from the second report of the Com-
missioners appointed to ccarsider and recommend a
general system of railways for Ireland, printed in 1838.
To them we are indebtd for a mass of most valuable and
well arranged information. ,Since 1837, however, when
the Commissioners' inquiries were going forward, com-
mercial changes have taken place; still the report must, cn
the whole, be regarded as high authority; and without it
we should have found great difficulty in arriving, in
several instances, at what we consider to be sound con-
clusions. It is also satisfactory to observe that the pro-
jectors of the various schemes in Ireland look upon the
Commissioners' report as the most useful guide they
could have followed.

Judging from the Commissioners' report, railways in
Ireland hold out no prospect of very great remuneration
to the projectors: judging from the statements made by
the projectors, considerable profits must be derived from
the receipts on all the projected railways. On the one
hand is the weighty argutuent, that if capital be laid out
in railways in Ireland, which cannot u,,mmand a reason-
able re: urn, a check will be given to railway
enterprise there, which must retard their useful ex-
tension. On the other hand, manifold advantages
are pressed on us as the certain results of railway com-
munication throughout the country. On this portion of
the subject we must observe, that while we are quite
alive to the benefits which will be generally diffused
thereby, we are not prepred to believe that in many
cases the railway receipts will greatly exceed the Com-
missioners' estimates, notwithstanding the changes which
have taken place in the last eight years.
The traffic cases connected with the various railway
schemes in Englani which we have examined, have ge-
nerally been attended by circumstances which have ena-
bled us to judge of the probable success of each under-
taking. For instance, the actual traffic on an existing
railway has frequently guided us in forming our opinion of
the value of an estimate of traffic on a projected line
likely to he placed in nearly similar circumstances. But,
in Ireland, we have had no such help : neither have we
had the power of making inquiries to an extent that
might have tested, in a satisfactorymanner,the accuracy
of many of the statements which we have received. We
are, consequently, induced to direct the particular atten-
tion of the Committee on the Bill to the estimates of'
traffic in each case.

With regard to the general direction of the leading
lines of railway best adapted for Ireland, we are fully
disposed to consider the recommendations contained in
the report of the Commissioners as of great weight,
where the circumstances under which those recommen-
dations were made, continue unaltered.
In the present instance, however, of the railways pro-
jected for the accommodation of the north and north
west of Ireland, this is manifestly not the case.
At the date of the Commissioners' Report, no line
northwards from Dublin had been sanctioned by the Le-
gislature, nor was there then any prospect of the line
from Dublin to Drogheda being brought forward by a
private company, as a commercial undertaking.
Under these circumstances the Commissioners, pro-
ceeding on the same sound and cautious principle which
had induced them to recommend the concentration of the
traffic of the south and south west of Ireland, upon a
single trunk line, similar to that which was sanctioned
last year by Parliament, from Dublin to Cashel, adopted
a similar principle with regard to the communications of
the north and north west, and recommended the adoption
of a single trunk line from Dublin to Navan, with
branches by way of Cavan to Enniskillen, and by way of
Armagh to Belfast, with a view to the concentration of
the principal streams of traffic upon the smallest possible
number of miles of new railway.
In this view, also, the Commissioners were very much
guided by the belief stated in their report, and founded
upon the plans and sections then before them, that a
practicable engineering line could not be found through
the difficult country between Dundalk and Newry, and
therefore that the coast line could not be looked to as
; affording an unbroken trunk communication between
Dublin and Belfast.

We have been informed by parties whose authority is
unquestionable, that if the Commissioners had had before
them in 1837, the plans and sections of a practicable
coast line throughout, such as is now brought forward,
their views would have been materially modified, and
the result of their recommendations might have been
very different.
In addition, however, to this consideration, there is
enough in the circumstance of the Dublin and Drogheda
lice being constructed and in successful operation, to
alter completely the state of things under which the
Commissioners made their report.
It is manifest that the same consideraticns of economy
which induced the Commissioners to regard favourably
the combination of an inland line, which then appeared
to require the construction of thefewest miles of railway,
now weigh in favour of effecting the most important
object:, that of connecting Dublin with Belfast, 1 y
continuation of the coast line, of which the first and
most expensive portion of 33 miles from Dublin to Drog-
heda is already constructed. The doubts respecting the
existence of a sufficient amount of traffic to support the
inland lines which pass by few considerable towns, and
through a district of less population, also derive addi-
tional strength from the fact which must now be assumed,
of the existence of a coast line competing with them for
much of the through-traffic. The views also so properly
expressed by the Commissioners of the importance of the
results depending upon the first investments of capital in
railway enterprise in Ireland proving remunerative, tell
forcibly against the unnecessary adoption of any line
which would have the effect of ruining or materially in-
juring the principal line now in operation in Ireland, viz.
the Dublin and Drogheda.
Under these circumstances, it is evident that it would
be a complete misapprehension of the arguments con-
tained in the report, and of the comprehensive views of
the Commissioners, to quote them as conclusive under an
altered state of things, which to such a great extent mo-
difies their application.
We therefore proceed to consider the different schemes
now proposed for the extension of railway communica-
tion in the north and north-west of Ireland, with refer-
ence to the existing state of things, and to the circum-
stances under which they are now brought forward.
The Commissioners' Report has established an im-
portant fact, which, in considering the several railway
projects in Ireland, it is necessary to keep in view; and
that is, passenger-traffic has hitherto converged towards
Dublin, and goods traffic has drawn towards the nearest
or most convenient seaport.
With reference to the district through which the rail-
ways under consideration are intended to pass, the Com-
missioners state that,

" The population is most crowded and numerous in
the counties of Armagh, Monaghan, and in part of the
counties of Antrim and Down.

" The northern portion (of the population of Ireland)
are bAter lodged, clothed, and fed than the others; the
wages of labour are higher, being on an average about
one shilling per day : they are a frugal, industrious, and
intelligent race, inhabiting a district for the most part
inferior in natural fertility to the southern portion of
Ireland, but cultivating it better, and paying higher rents
in proportion to the quality of the land, notwithstanding
the higher rate of wagei."—(Second Repo, t of Railway
Comm-issioners, Ireland, Part I.)
The proposed Dublin and Belfast Junction is an ex-
tension of the existing Dublin:and Drogheda line from
Drogheda through Dundalk and Newry, to join the
Ulster Railway at Portadown. Its length is fifty-six
miles fourteen cha'ns. On part of the line the works
will be inconsiderable ; on part of the line they will be
heavy and costly : on the whole, however, we do not
know that the country could have afforded a better or a
less expensive line.
To compete with this scheme a project has been
started, termed the Northern Inland Railway, which
takes up the line formerly recommended by the Irish •
Railway Commissioners from Dublin to Navan; and from
thence it proceeds by Armagh to join the Ulster rail-
way at Portadown. From Dublin to Navan, by
.this
line, the distance is 28 miles ; from Navan to Armagh,
57.1 miles. The works would be heavy, and the :cost
would be considerable.

The Belfast Junction scheme has this great advantage
over the other scheme, that it is supported by a power-
ful existing railway interest.
Assuming, however, both to be substantial and bona
fidc schemes, we find that the Dublin and Belfast Junc-
tion is in all respects to be preferred to theinland hve.
As regards the town of Belfast, by the Dublin and
B2lfast Junction, the distance to Dublin is above eight
miles shorter than by the Northern Inland line.
The Dublin and Belfast Junction has already 33
miles made, viz., from Dublin to Drogheda, leaving 56
miles to be made ; the Northern Inland ..would have
85i miles to construct.
__ _

The c::st of the Dublin and Belfast Junction wilt be
probably 700,0001.; the Northern Inland would probably
cost 1,200,0001.
The population of the country through Which the
Dublin and Belfast Junction would,pass from Dublin to
Portadown is stated to .Le 79,468 ; tho, population
through which the Northern Inland would pass, having
the same termini, is Mated to be 39,265.

The Dublin and Belfast Junction proposes to pass
through the important towns of -Drogheda, Dundalk,
and Newry. The Northern Inland would not pass
through any town of importance between Dublin and
Armagh, except Navan.
Between Belfast and Dublin, the through . traffic by
the Dublin and Belfast Junction, combined with the
local traffic, does not promise a greater return than 51
per cent. on the outlay. 'Do Northern Inland, with
scarcely any local traffic, would not be likely to pay even
its- working expenses; . _ _

On these public grounds we are of opinion that the
Dublin and Belfast Junction is preferable to the compt •
ing scheme.
The Great North Western Railway, commencing on
the north side of the city of Dublin, is proposed to pass
through the towns of Never), Kells, and Virginia to
Cavan.

It is 70 miles 11 chains in length, and has a branch to
Trim 5 miles 61 chains in .length. On the whole the
works may be considered light, and, comparatively-, in
expensive. The line is the same with that marked out
by the Commissioners in their report on Irish railways.
The promoters of the projt et have intimated their inten-
tion of proceeding at a future period to Enniskillen, if
their line be made.

To occupy part of this district also, a branch from the
Dublin and Drogheda Railway is projected; 2f, mites. in
lorgth, which, commencing at Drogheda, passes through
Navan,,aad terminates at
The Great North Western Railway and the Branch to
must be considered as competing lines.
'We have already ventured to draw attention to the
-i'act that passenger traffic in Ireland has converged to-
wards Dublin; goods traffic has always found its way to
the nearest or to the moat - convenient seaport. We be•