The Sun.
London, England, 1842-06-01 00:00:00

of which the Chairman observed that the Grange-road
terminus would for the present answer all the purposes -of
a West-end terminus, and that there was no intention of
abandoning the London-Bridge terminus, as it was a
station as necessary for the City as the other one was for
the West-end.

Mr. Wisßaw expressed himself perfectly satisfied
with what had fallen from the Chairman, and
stated, while he considered it no more than his duty to
put those questions, his conviction that no Company in
the Metropolis contained to a greater extent than the
South Eastern the seeds of future prosperity and success.
Mr. PARSONS thought that the Chairman was in error
in supposing that the line from Croydon to the proposed
terminus at the Bricklayers' Arms would be twelve or
thirteen miles. For his own part, he did not think it
would exceed nine miles. The railway to that terminus
would have to be carried either by means of an embank-
ment, or arches. He thought they ought to have some
details of the cost of such a line, and some statement
with respect to the probable profits. They ought to
have some statement of that sort before they incurred an
outlay which would necessarily be costly, considering
the property through which the line would have to run.
The CHAIRMAN said that, at the last meeting, he had
stated he should be greatly neglecting his duty if he did
not hold out the opinion that they must have another
station. His opinion remained unchanged, and he
thought it would answer the purposes of the Company to
make that station, even if afterwards they had to
abandon it, when a new line was established, because he
believed that no new line would be established in time
for them. He believed, if they depended on the station
at London-bridge alone, they would get into the greatest
confusion. The Board were unanimous in their opinion
of the soundness of the station proposed.
Mr. Cunrrr had not made any estimate of the cost of
carrying the terminus to the Bricklayers' Arms. He
had formerly made an estimate of two termini—one at
the Elephant and Castle, for Croydon, which he es-
timated at 650,000/., and another, from the Dartmouth
Arms to the Obelisk in St. George's-fields, at 400,000/. ;
but those estimates he was now convinced were in-
adequate. He believed that the cost from Croydon to
the Bricklayers' Arms would be about 1,200,000/. He
was of opinion that it was impossible to carry on three
lines at the London-bridge Station. He thought that
the proposed terminus would be a great benefit. With
respect to his not having made a detailed report, he
begged to say that that would be done when every item
of expense was ready for posting.
Mr. PARSONS admitted that the excess of the esti-
mates of Mr. Cubitt was not so great as in many other
cases. The details that had already been given were
highly creditable to the engineer.
Mr. CUBITT could assure the Proprietors that, as soon
as the engineers could be taken from their different
labours, every account that could be desired would be

' given.
Mr. HILLYARD expressed his full confidence in the
measure of the Directors, as it had the full approbation
of the whole body. He most willingly surrendered his
judgment to their's, believing that, in so doing, he was
best consulting his own interest. He thought they had
sho tvn a due regard to economy in all their proceedings.
After a short discussion on the maximum toll, in
which Mr. Wilkinson and Mr. Parsons joined, and in
which the Grange-road Station was referred to,
The CHAIRMAN said, that if they had waited to see
how the traffic would develope itself, they would never
have had the station at all. He was so satisfied of the
good policy of the measure, that he had offered his
brother Directors to take it on his own responsibility.
With regard to the Croydon Railway, he thought every
transaction with that Company had been in perfect good
faith, and very satisfactory.
In answer to a question from Mr. TYRRELL,
The CHAIRMAN explained that each Company paid for
six miles out of the twelve. In reply to another question,
he stated his full and perfect confidence in the remune-
rative prospects of the Company.
On the motion for receiving the Report being put,
Mr. PARSONS asked, whether the adoption of the
Report would pledge the Proprietary to the Grange-
road plan ?
The CHAIRMAN assured the meeting that no attempt
should be made to carry the plan by a side-wind, but
that a distinct resolution on the question should be laid
before them. This appeared to be perfectly satisfac-
tory to the meeting.
The Report was then put and adopted.
The CHAIRMAN proposed the following resolution :
" That the Directors be and are hereby authorised to
adopt such measures as they, in their judgment, shall
think proper with reference to the Grange-road ap-
proach, mentioned in the Report this day submitted to
the Proprietors."
The DEPUTY CHAIRMAN seconded the resolution.
Mr. PARSONS inquired to what that resolution pledged
the Proprietors ?
The CHAIRMAN said, that it would leave to the Pro-
prietors the power of making either a common road or
a railroad, as they might deem best.
Mr. PARSONS observed, that in that case 'he objected
to the resolution.
After a few words from Mr. Barnard, Mr. Salomans,
and Mr. Tyrrell, the Chairman again read the resolu-
tion, when
A PROPRIETOR inquired if it would require any addi-
tion to the capital to make the approach referred to.
The CHAIRMAN replied in the negative. 'Whatever
expense might be required for the Grange-road ap-
proach they had sufficient funds to meet it.
Mr. PARSONS suggested, that if they did anything in
this matter, it should be merely to authorise the Directors
to obtain possession of the land requisite for the ap-
proach, without empowering them to construct any-
thing on it, 'but a common road.
Mr. SALOMANS thought, if the Directors would under-
take to do nothing but purchase the land for the ap•
proach, the resolution might be agreed to..
The CHAIRMAN said, on behalf of his brother Directors
and himself, he would give that undertaking-.
The resolution was then agreed to.
The three Directors that went out by rotation were
re-elected.

Mr. PARSONS suggested that some alteration should be
made in the mode of electing Directors, by which the
Proprietors would have a greater voice in the election.
He knew that, in Liverpool especially, the present mode
of election had given great dissatisfaction.
The CHAIRMAN said that, to effect such an object, they
must repeal their Act of Parliament.

On the question that the Bye-laws should be agreed to,
A PROPRIETOR inquired, whether they intended to
lock up the passengers ?—(Hear.)
The CHAlRMAN—Certainly not.—(Cheers.)
A PrtoPmETott wished to know why the Sunday trains
had been discoutinued ?

The CHAIRMAN said that, at his suggestion, they had been
discontinued, because he did not think them necessary or
beneficial to the Company. If, however, it was found
necessary, the Sunday trains would be re-established, the
same as on other railways.
Mr. lIILLYARD believed that the discontinuing the
Sunday trains was not only calculated to give great dis-
satisfaction to the public, but great loss to the Company.
He contended that running trains on Sunday was neces-
sary to give the public a just idea of their traffic. He
hoped the Board would reconsider this question, and that
they would establish a Sunday train to Tunbridge.
The CHAIRMAN was satisfied with the general feeling of
the meeting, and at the next Board he would view the
question in the manner they wished.
In answer to a question from Mr. PARSONS,
The CHAIRMAN stated that such limits were put to
the free passes that no abuse could possibly occur. The
Directors went free, but no friends of the Directors, not
even the contractors' men, were allowed to pass free.
Some conversation took place as to the manner in
which the shares had been disposed of, during which the
Chairman stated, that the Directors could not have
arranged the matter in any other manner.
Mr. SALOMANS thought that the Proprietors ought
not to let the present opportunity pass without voting
them their thanks for the perseverance and ability they
displayed in bringing the affairs of the Company to a
state that enabled them to open the line on to Tunbridge.
He would propose, then, that the thanks of the Proprietors
be given to the Chairman and Directors, on the grounds
which he had mentioned.

Mr. PARSONS seconded the motion, which was pu
and carried unanimously.
The CHAIRMAN, on the part of himself and colleagues
acknowledged the compliment, and the meeting separated

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF LORDS, May 31.
MONUMENTS IN CHURCHES.
Lord HOWDEN said that seeing the Right Rev. Pre-
ate who had the spiritual welfare of the Colo-
nies under his superintendence, he would take
the liberty of putting a question to him. He did not
moan to detain their Lordships long, but he thought that
many of them would be surprised at the statement he
was going to make, of a transaction which would appear
more properly to •have taken place in the middle ages
than an occurrence which hardly had taken place a
year ago. An officer of rank, with whom he
(Lord Howden) was well acquainted, died in
Quebec, and after his decease the officers of his regiment
unanimously resolved that a testimonial should be raised
to him ; and they caused a tablet to be engraved, merely
stating the circumstances of his death, and the respect
and affection of his brother officers, which he carried to
the grave. This testimonial, one would have thought,
was very innocent. They wished to erect it in one of
the churches of the city, and applied to the Colonial
Bishop for permission to do so. That permission was
refused. But he thought it would be difficult to find any justi-
fiable reason for offering, under any circumstances, an insult to
tt e dead. He wished to draw the attention of their Lordships
to the fact, that this officer was born of parents, members of the
Church of England, that he was baptised and brought up in
that Church, and that he was accustomed to its service with the
officers and men of his regiment. Now he was not aware that
there was any occurrence upon record which could justify any
inquisitorial surmise as to his not having belonged to the.com-
Er union of the Established Church. For his part, he respected
the rights of the ecclesiastical authorities; but he should say,
thrr, in this country, such an occurrence as that to which he
had referred could not have taken place, and that public opinion
would have checked any attempt of the kind, however willing
some parties might be to make it. He should conclude by
asking the Right Rev. Prelate first of an, whether the state-
ment he had made was a correct one? And, if it were correct,
whether the conduct of the Colonial Bishop had met with the
confirmation and approval of his spiritual superiors at home ?
The Bishop of LONDON said, that as the Noble Lord who
had just sat down had had the kindness to communicate to him
his intention of putting those questions, he was prepared to
answer them. lie should say, however, that he did not admit
that a' Bishop was responsible to that House—much less to any
individual Member of the House—for any regulations he might
think fit to make in the administration of the affairs of his dio-
cese. The Noble Lord was mistaken in supposing that he, the
Bishop of London, was entrusted with the superintendence of the
spiritual affairs of all our colonies. They had no jurisdiction
whatever, except in those colonies which had not a Bishop of
their own. Canada had had, for many years, the advantage
of a Bishop to superintend its spiritual affairs, in which he (the
Bishop of London) could not therefore interfere. If he were
at any time consulted by any of our colonial Bishops, they
addressed themselves to him merely from any defer.