The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1846-03-24 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS.-THrRSDAY.

Sir J. GRAHAM moved that the report on the Fever
Bill be brought up. After a short conversation, in which
Mr. S. Crawford, Mr. I'. Scrope. Mr. Stafford O'Brien,
Lord Ebrington, and Sir James Graham joined, the re-
port was agreed to, and the bill, at a later hour of the
night, was read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Mr. ELPHINSTONE, leave was given
to bring in a bill to limit the duration of polls in counties
at contested elections of members to serve in parliament
to one day.
Mr. MORRISON moved for a select committee to in-
quire whether, without discouraging legitimate enterprise,
conditions might not be embodied in Railway Acts better
fitted than those hitherto inserted in them to promote and
secure the interests of the public. He stated that it had
been his intention to enter at some length into this sub-
ject ; but as he understood that no opposition was to be
made to his motion, he would not carry out his original
intention. He then briefly mentioned the leading objects
which he had intended to dwell upon. The experience of
the last few years had proved that the railroads had
caused a development of traffic beyond all calculation ;
that cheap fares were the most profitable for the railway
companies, and that low fares produced such ample divi-
dends that the companies were not injured but benefitted
by them. He had, therefore, intended to propose that
the committee should be directed to inquire whether the
rate of fares ought not to undergo revision every twenty
years. He also had intended to propose that his com-
mittee should inquire by what means the committees up
stairs might be relieved from the very heavy labours to
which they were:now exposed. The attempts which those
committees had made last year to establish rates and fares
for the different lines of railroad had been a complete
failure, as all kinds of rates of fares for goods and passen-
gers had been approved by them. He also wished to bring
under the notice of his committee the propriety of grant-
ing terminable leases instead of leases in perpetuity.
This was a matter which concerned the house and the
country rather than the railway companies, provision
always being made for the creation of a sinking fund to
repay them, at the expiration of their lease, the capital
which they had expended. As these leases were daily
becoming more valuable, it was the duty of the house to
prevent them from becoming perpetual monopolies. Ar-
guing from the example of Belgium and France, where
the fares were much lower than in England, he thought
that, if these leases were granted for forty years, the rail-
way companies would not object to such an arrangement.
At the same time lie should never recommend the princi-
ple of competition to be given up—but by itself it was not
sufficient.

Mr. MANGLES considered that this motion had a much
wider scope than that which appeared on the face of it,
for he thought its object was to reconsider the principle
on which our public works had been hitherto conducted.
That principle had hitherto been to give free scope to the
application of private capital to public works • but the
principle advocated by Mr. Morrison was to place that
capital under the restriction of Government. He called
upon the house to look at the results of the two princi-
ples as exemplified in practice in England and France re-
spectively. We had constructed 3,051 miles of railroads,
and France had not constructed more than 376. He had
no intention of oppasing the proposed committee; but he
believed that the principles on which Mr. Morrison pro-
posed it were unsound and pernicious.
Mr. PARKER, after alluding to a motion which he had
on the paper for the appointment of a select committee
to "consider whether precautions could not be devised,
by which the effects of the railway legislation now pend-
ing on the labour and money markets of the country may
be provided against," begged leave to ask the Govern-
ment, which was responsible for the monetary system of
the country, whether it was prepared, with the large
expenditure now proceeding uron railroads, to sanction
this year a still larger expenditure on the same objects,
and so to mortgage all the industrious resources of the
empire. He showed that such a pressure on those re-
sources would greatly raise the value of money, and would
occasion much distress to the agricultural, the manufac-
turing, and the commercial classes. He took a review of
the number of the railway bills presented at the com-
mencement of this session, and concluded therefrom that
it would have been useful had the house selected a certain
number of them for consideration this session, and re-
served the remainder of them for consideration in another.
He had not the slightest wish to impede the appointment
of the proposed committee.
Mr. HUDSON had not intended to have taken any share
in the present debate, as he understood that the motion
was to be granted by Government ; but as Mr. Parker
bad said that the monetary system of the country would
be deranged by the large sums now expending and to be
expended on railways, he must enter his decided protest
against that doctrine. After recapitulating the calcula-
tions which he had made to the house some weeks ago
respecting the amount of money which for some time to
come would be expended annually on these great national
works, he showed that it did not equal the sum which
had been annually expended by the country, without any
return, for many years previously to the close of the last
war. If he could have convinced himself that he should
have any prospect of success, he would have moved a di-
rect negative on the appointment of this committee, be-
cause he believed that the house was in possession of full
information for legislation on this important question
without it. He denied that low fares would ever produce
ample dividends, especially where large capital was sunk
in the construction of public works. He then saye a his-
tory of the profits received by the existing railways, and
inferred from it that they did not afford a very successful
field for private enterprise.
Mr. LABOUCHERE did not believe that on the whole the
profits of those who had engaged in these magnificent un-
dertakings had been enormous, nor did he grudge them
those well-earned gains which they had acquired by their
intelligence and enterprise. But there were circumstances
in the present state of the expenditure on railroads which
did require immediate attention. There was something
besides the employment of capital which ought now to be
considered by the government and the public. We were
fast approaching a state of things in which the whole in-
ternational communication of this great country would be
in the hands of four or five great companies. That con-
sideration took this subject out of the ordinary course of
commercial policy. Some control ought to be devised to
prevent this power from being lodged by a few amalgama-
tion bills in the hands of a few private individuals. He
should support the motion for a committee, and he hoped
that the government would give Mr. Morrison every
assistance in leading its deliberations to a safe and satis-
factory conclusion. He then applied himself to the con-
sideration of Mr. Parker's question, whether it was right
for the house to check the application of further capital to
the construction of railroads from fear of its producing
results dangerous to our monetary system. That was so
grave a step, that, when it was first proposed to take it, he
had said that, if it were taken it should be after due deli-
beration by, and with the full responsibility of, her Ma-
jesty's government. Sir R. Peel, by his speech on that
occasion, had created an impression in the minds of many
members that government would place a plan for carrying
such an object into effect before the committee, which he
had himself proposed. Having briefly stated the course
which had been pursued by the members of the govern-
ment in that committee, and which had been terminated
by their declaring that they were not prepared to bring
before it any such plan as a government measure, he added
that the committee had come to the conclusion that,
though it was at liberty to examine such a plan and the
evidence on which it might be founded if brought before
it by the government, it was not as a committee bound to
originate such a plan itself. His own opinion would lead
him to be very cautious how he limited the application of
capital in the way proposed by Mr. Parker. He was not
afraid of the effect which this railroad expenditure would
produce upon the capital of the country. He was more
afraid of the effect which it would produce upon the market
for labour; but the whole question was of such nicety
that, if taken up at all, it must be taken up by the go-
vernment. _ . _ __ _ _

Sir G. CLERK admitted the correctness of Mr. Labou-
chere's description of what had occurred in the committee
of which he had been a member. If the railway bills of
the present session had been as numei ous as was originally
anticipated, Government would have been prepared to se-
lect some for immediate legislation, and to postpone others
to another session; but when the proposed committee
assembled, it was found that the number of bills was much
less than had been expected, and in consequence there
was no necessity for making any selection. He would not
go so far as to say that the expenditure on railroads might
not affect the capital of the country; but it did not appear
to him that it was likely to affect that capital at present.
If Mr. Parker intended to proceed with his committee,
he should oppose it; but to Mr. Morrison's committee he
would give every ass6tance in his power. In so doing,
he did not wish to throw discredit on the enterprising in-
dividuals who had established railroads : but there were
many suggestions in Mr. Morrison's speech deserving of
inquiry, and every facility would be afforded to him for
prosecuting it by her Majesty's Government.
Sir R. PEEL inferred, that the course which Mr. Mor-
rison would take in the proposed committee, of which
doubtless he would be chairman, would be in conformity
with the very able pamphlet which he had written. He
appeared to labour under the impression that there had
hitherto been great errors in our railroad legislation, and
to propose for inquiry two questions—l. Whether it
would not be desirable to establisia some tariff of prices,
to which all railroads, seeking the intervention of parlia-
ment, should be compelled to conform ; and 2. Whether
it would not be advisable to adopt the French system, and
to give the different companies only a temporary interests
in the railroads. To illustrate these subjects, Mr. Mor.
rison would probably place before the committee a quan-
tity of information respecting foreign railroads. It would
take some time to collect that evidence ; but what in the
meanwhile was to be done with the railroad bills now in pro-
gress? He recommended the committee to attend to that
subject in the first instance. He was of opinion that if
errors of legislation had been committed with respect to
railroads in past years, parliament had a right to correct
them now, and to apply new principles to new companies
which came before it, and, even in case of old companies
which came to demand extensive additional priyilegFs, to
apply principles of correction as preliminary conditions
to granting them. The question then arose whether par-
liament would suspend legislation for the present session,
or would insert in all future railway bills a clause render-
ing the companies liable to any general bill which. parlia-
ment might hereafter pass? He thought that it would be
found difficult, in many cases, to apply this reservation
in
years to come, though there might be no difficulty in pass-
ing it now. At any rate some early report should be made
by this committee on the subject of legislation. He gave
his ready assent to this committee. Its inquiries must be

useful for railway profits and railway monopolies, and
railway interference with all kinds of property baffled all
calculations which were made two years ago.
Lord J. RUSSELL considered that some delay bad oc-
curred in the railway legislation of the present session in
consequence of the statement made by Sir R. Peel at the
commencement of the present session. It would have
been much better had these matters been taken into con-
sideration by the Government at the opening of the ses-
soin than by a committee now. He did not infer, from
anything which had just fallen from Sir R. Peel, that he
had any plan for dealing with the mass of railway legisla-
tion now before the house, nor any opinion whether the
application of such an amount of capital to railroads would
be injurious to the monetary interests of the country.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER complained
that Lord J. Russell had mixed up the question proposed
by Mr. Parker with that proposed by Mr. Morrison, al-
though the two were as distinct as could be. At the com-
mencement of the session it was expected that there
would be upwards of 800 railroad bills, involving an out-
lay of £779,000,000. If that number of bills had come
before the house, it would have been nceessary to pass
extraordinary measures to prevent inconvenience arising
from such a mass of bills, and from the expenditure of
such an immense amount of money; but at the next Par-
liamentary stage the bills were reduced to half their num-
ber, the state of things became essentially different; and
every reason which ought to prevent Government from
interfering with the application of private capital to public
enterprizes, immediately came into action. The incon-
veniences, therefore, which were anticipated at the com-
mencement of the session no longer existed. He should
be most happy to give his attendance in the proposed
committee.

After a few remarks from Mr. BARING, which were in-
distinctly heard, from Mr. HORSMAN, who advocated
cheap fares, and from Mr. WAWN, Mr. MORRISON briefly
replied, reiterating his former statements, and defending
himself from the attacks which had been made upon him
by different members.
The motion was then agreed to.