The Sun.
London, England, 1845-03-22 00:00:00

elvning

LONDON, SATURDAY, iIARCII 22, 1845.

The motion of Mr. MORISON, on Thursday night,
had for its object to make Parliamentary provision for
that which ought long since to have been guaranteed
to the public by the Legislature. The Hon. Gentle-
man called upon the House to affirm three resolutions
of a declaratory and economic character, to the effect
that the public should be secured the utmost amount
of accommodation in railroad travelling, at the lowest
rates of charge, which may Le compatible with a fair
interest or return, to the several railway companies,
on the capitals invested by them in such under-
takings ; that the arrangements introduced in respect
of some former railway Acts for guarding the public
against the exaction of unreasonable or even exorbitant
fares had been found to fail, utterly, in practical
working; and that, in all future railway Bills or
agreements to be made between the Board of Trade
and the directors of companies, the latter should be
required to assign, beforehand, the highest rates
of fares which they would be content to take as the
extreme limits within which the charges that
would adequately remunerate them should be fixed.
Whatever force may attach to the objection taken by
Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET to the terms of these
resolutions, especially of the latter, which we agree
with his Lordship would not necessarily secure to the
public the maximum charge by ascertaining the mini-
mum demand to be made by future railway corw.
panies for fares—it must be allowed that the pro-
positions which they involve are reasonable enough.
Mr. MORISON showed very clearly that from the
favour with which the present system of railroad tra-
velling has been adopted by the public, it is rapidly
superseding all other modes whatever of moving from
one part of the kingdom to another. We quite con-
cur with him also in considering the marvellous faci-
lities of locomotive communication and intercourse
which we have already attained, as being at once the
result and the evidence of an extremely advanced de-
gree of civilisation. But in this—as in so many
other branches of economic labour and art—the neces-
sity of progress is an indispensable condition attached
to permanency of success. When the improvement
of material forces, and of machinery for their
exhibition, shall have reached a point of ap-
parent perfection, there will still, doubtless,
be discovered many new and important im-
provements in the system and details of
Administration connected with these vast undertakings.
Now it is not less essential to this principle of pro
gress, and its concomitant prosperity in railway con-
cerns, than it is to the convenience, service, and benefit
of the public, that the former should not take too large
fares for travelling from the latter. The palpable in-
fusion of the monopoly principle in the constitution of
every existing railway company, sanctioned by the
dangerous laxity of the Legislature in passing the
Bills for their establishment in a form and with
powers enabling them to enforce such principle to its
fullest extent, is already felt as a serious grievance
under a variety of circumstances. Excessive fares
are an imposition of which the public soon be-
comes cognizant. In point of fact, no worse
policy could be well pursued .by any new
company than the attempt to exact unreason-
able fares from those who are to support them ; and
in that point of view, perhaps, there is not much
reason to apprehend that new companies would, in
such a manner, compromise their own welfare.
But, as it was remarked in the course of the
debate, the remedy for any abuse, however
oppressive in railway management, is of so
cumbrous and protracted a character that it will
be but seldom, and only in the last necessity, resorted
to. Under the high-road system of travelling, for
extortion, misconduct, or incivility of any kind, there
was always a means of punishment and redress at
hand to those who were habitual sufferers by such
proceedings. It was a work of little difficulty and of
no overwhelming expense, distributed as that expense
was, among a few subscribing residents and pro-
prietors along the line of road,—to establish an oppo-
sition coach with all its appointments, relays of horses,
stabling, staff of coachmen, &c. &c. An opposition
railroad is quite another affair. The most credulous
speculators in railroad projects would be disinclined
to subscribe a second capital of one or two millions, in
order to construct between two termini already so
connected, a second railroad, even were Parliament,
for such a purpose, disposed to negociate with a se-
cond set of parties for the purchasing up of a second
strip of freehold through fifty or sixty miles of
the kingdom. The Duke of WELLINGTON alone,
among the Peers, had the sagacity, we well remember,
to foresee, when the Bills for some of the earliest esta-
blished railroads (such as the London and Birmingham,
Great Western, and London and Southampton Line
Bills), were before the House of Lords, the extent and
inconvenience of the monopoly which the Legislature
were sanctioning. His Grace strongly urged upon
the Lords the necessity for taking guarantees from
these companies that the public should not be placed
in a worse position, as to the fares to be demanded for

travelling by rail, than they were in then, in respect
of fares for high-road travelling and posting under a
_ _ _ _ _

long matured system, which had at that time attained
its culminating point of perfection, and has ever since
teen rapidly declining to decay. For once, the Duke's
remonstrances were disregarded by Parlianitnt. With
all our respect, and even admiration for the excellent

management and general liberality displayed by our
great railway companies, we must say that subsequent
events have largely justified the Duke's solicitude.
Mr. MORISON'S resolutions seem excellently adapted
(at any rate, with regard to new or future companies)
to supply the ladies of Parliament in not having
sooner devised and organised those guarantees
which the Honourable Gentleman so justly demands
on behalf of the public. We are pleased to observe
the consideration and marked favour with which they
were entertained by the House, and have no doubt

that Lord G. SOMERSET, when they shall have bee]

shaped to meet the objection suggested by his Lord
_ _

ship on principle, and so as to avoid some technical
informality which is supposed to attach to their
original ' wording, will give them the, benefit of
his sincere and efficient support. The service which
Mr. Mostisort proposes to render to the public was
clearly demonstrated in a speech distinguished, as the
speeches of that Honourable Gentleman always are, by
its neatness and ability.

We direct the attention of our readers, and espe-
cially those who are bent on closing public-houses on
Sunday, to a letter of Mr. BUCKINGHAM, in another
part of the paper. Mr. BUCKINGHAM has studied the
question—possibly he is a living example for tee-
totallers, drinks no spirituous liquors, and never
enters a house of refreshment on Sunday. He
is a sincere friend of the lower classes,
anxious for their improvement, and his opinion on
the subject, therefore, is entitled to consideration.
But really he advances no argument against drinking
beer, and gin, and wine, which might not be urged
against the blessings which have been bountifully
provided for rational beings. Before he can gainsay
our argument, he must have recourse to a postulate
which the wisdom of ages has rejected. No man in
his senses will grant that wine and beer are poisons,
or even admit that they are injurious to health, if
taken in moderation. We have the highest autho-
rity for the use of wine. ST. PAUL recommended it to
young TIMOTHY; and one of the most remarkable
miracles on record was the turning of water into
ine. Grave moralists, therefore, can only blame
the abuse, and to that we are as much op-
posed as Mr. BUCKINGHAM or Father MATHEW.
But to punish one man for the crime of another—to