The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-02-18 00:00:00

NORTH UNION RAILWAY COMPANY.

Yesterday a special general meeting of the shareholders in
the North Union Railway Company was held in the Claren-
don-rooms, South John-street, for the purpose of receiving
the receipts of the directors and passing the accounts.
THEODORE' W. RATHIIONE, Esq., chairman of the directors,
took the chair.

Mr. HIGGIN chairman of the Lancaster and Preston
Junction Railway Company), before the proceedings com-
menced, requested that Mr. S. E. Bolden, the secretary to
that company, might be permitted to remain in the room
during the proceedings, in order to produce certain docu-
ments which he (Mr. Higgin) should have occasion to refer
to. (Cries of " no, no.")
The CHAIRMAN said this was strictly a meeting of the pro-
prietors in the North Union Company, and Mr. Bolden
could not be admitted unless he were one.

thooiN said he could not concur in the justice of
that remark.

The CHAIRMAN said Mr. Higgin must see that if that
course was adopted the room might be crowded.
Mr. HIGGIN again requested that Mr. Bolden might be
admitted as a privilege, as he should have to refer to some
statements in the report.
The CHAIRMAN said the request could not be granted, as
it would establish a precedent that would be very inconve-
nient. _ _ _ . . .

Mr. HIGGIN said he must be satisfied then with this de-

___,., .._
The CHAIRMAN said he had not been in the habit of trou-
bling the proprietors with written speeches, but, as he had
some observations to make now which it was extremely im-
portant should be correctly understood e had thought it
better to follow the practice adopted by chairmen of the
Liverpool and Manchester and Grand unction Railway
Companies, and read his address.
Mr. JOHN CROPPER enquired whether the directors' re-
port, which had been printed, should not be read first ?
The CHAIRMAN said his remarks would be introductory
to the report. He then read the following :
The report of the Board of Directors, which has been
already circulated amongst the proprietors, and which the
secretary will immediately read to the meeting, contains a
full statement of what the directors at their last board con-
sidered it needful to communicate to their proprietors ; a
preferable course, we conceive, to leaving anything which can
be so stated to come in the the form of a speech from the
chairman ; whose statements have a degree of official cha-
racter, though necessarily without the deliberate sanction
and approval of all his colleagues, which can be obtained
through their formal and regular report. What has taken
place subsequently to the preparation of this report, a fort-
night since, will, however, call for one or two additional sup-
plementary observations ; after which—and submitting to the
meeting the proposed report, the audited accounts of the last
half-year, receiving the views of the proprietors as to the pro-
posed dividend, and their formal authority to certain needful
official acts on the part of this meeting—the directors will
have great pleasure in furnishing any further information that
may be desired, and aiding in any discussions that may ap-
pear to their proprietors essential. I must, in the first place,
call the attention of the proprietors to the absolute necessity
—if they wish the reports to be hereafter circulated previ-
ously to the general meeting—of their making a point of
attending these meetings, and not being satisfied with merely
perusing the report, or at all events of their putting their
proxies into the hands of those who will, and upon whom
they can depend for the use to be made of them. I have heard
with regret, from more than one of our proprietors, on the
present occasion, that they were quite satisfied with the
report, and did not intend being with us to-day ; and the
proprietors really must bear in mind that if this practice
should become general, and our real bond fide North Union
proprietors not take the trouble of giving regular attendance
at their meetings, and supporting their directors, those who
only come here in the guise and with the name of North
Union proprietors, having often no beneficial interest what-
ever in this undertaking, or a comparatively overwhelming
interest in others, may obtain an accidental influence most
injurious and detrimental to their interests, and most unfair
and unjust towards directors whose sole fault may have been
a too faithful and scrupulous regard to the interests entrusted
to them. Two general meetings of the company are not re-
quired in the year by the North Union act, and the proprie-
tors might therefore, if they preferred, be satisfied with the
report and the audited accounts for the second half year, and
only hold the second general meeting when circumstances
seemed to call for it, which the act, they will be aware, gives
them full power to do at all times. But if they wish uni-
formly, and as a matter of course, to have a meeting every
six months, those who have North Union interests at heart
will, it is hoped, take the trouble of regularly attending such
meetings. It is now my painful duty to notice to you that
the utterly unfounded statements which have been industri-
ously circulated by some party, apparently with the view of
forcing the directors of this Company into a surrender of
what they conceived due to the interests of its proprietors,
and of which you may have seen the distinct official contra-
diction by our secretary, have been still persisted in, and that
a paragraph has again been inserted in last week's Lancaster
Guardian containing a statement as libellous, false, and ca-
lumnious as could have been devised. If any of you have
seen the paragraph in question, and wish the real facts of the
case stated, they are mostairaPle, and such as are altogether
creditable to the servants of this Company, and the secretary
shall give them to you. and can substantiate them on oath if
needful. We neither know, nor care to know, the author of
these very disgraceful paragraphs; but, whoever he may be,
he is mistaken if he thinks he can thus deter the directors
of this Company from the determined discharge of their duty,
or that any motive or incentive either is or ever has been
wanting, but regard to that duty, to induce us to enter at
all times cordially into any and every arrangement calculated
to promote, and do the fullest justice to, public interests and
convenience. I must next shortly notice a note and pam-
phlet which have just been forwarded to you by one of the
Lancaster and Preston board, Mr. Higgin, with whom I have
latterly had some correspondence, with the view, I hope, to
arrangements of mutual benefit to the two companies, and
in which he subscribes himself " chairman pro tempore" of
that company. Mr. Higgin professes to have been led by
fear of injury and loss to the revenue of the North Union
Company, to address you in this certainly somewhat unusual
way, and with a statement which we can readily shew you is
utterly inaccurate and erroneous, and that to a degree pro-
ving not merely entire ignorance of the affairs of this com-
pany to which it relates, but of the general facts relative to
railway management, to an extent I should scarcely have
anticipated in even the pro tempore chairman of a railway
company. And although Mr. Higgin neither is nor I be-
lieve ever was the actual proprietor of a single share in the
North Union Railway, we are not at all disposed to scruti-
nise his motives in addressing you, but will cheerfully ac-
knowledge the service he has rendered by printing, at all
events, a certain portion of the correspondence which is now
on the table, and which your directors were prepared to sub-
mit to you, together with aicw supplemental and additional
letters, which may be useful, in case of need, in bringing the
whole case and its real merits fairly before you. I can really,
however, at present, add little to the distinct and full account
of all that has taken place on this subject in our report, or
do more than say that, whatever feelings may exist in the
minds of the Lancaster board, there neither are nor ever
have been any in ours hut those of anxious desire to improve
to the utmost the revenue of our undertaking, not only by
affording every facility and encourageipent to the traffic of
our own line, but to that of every one of those connected
with us ' • and, however injurious the proceedings of the Lan-
caster board may appear to us to have proved themselves
of late to the traffic of their railway, we neither have
forgot, nor shall forget, that this traffic constitutes a por-
tion of our own, —one of the streams, though by no means
the only one, which we welcome with cordiality, and at some
1 sacrifice, of what it may be strictly fair and reasonable to re-
quire from us, have done,, and wish, if possible, to continue
to do, all in our power to encourage. Into the facts of the
case and their proof the board is quite prepared to enter at
once, and to whatever extent the proprietors desire ; but we
apprehend that the wish of the North Union shareholders
will rather be to understand the present and future
position
omfitshuendteworstbardins.
boards, than to go further into the history of past
ously assureyo you, us,ecette.lad aaf.tderantliocy
We can most solemnly and conscienti.
engaged in
of us from tile first origin leodnygo
somebeeq
Puerr i°d
confidence, hav e
iigte.--of the undo:taking, upwards of a

dozen years ago, I hope and believe this assurance is all you
desire,) that we have uniformly been prepared to afford to
the Lancaster Co., and to any other company at Preston,
the great advantages and convenience of our station there,
on fair and reasonable terms. to be fixed by any competent
referee, and only desired a fair and moderate compensation
for the trouble, responsibility, and loss of valuable service to
this company, in providing locomotive power for the others.
In our original notice, and in every one of our ninny and
continued communications with the Lancaster directors, re-
muneration for the power was alone ever even mentioned;
and however paltry, and perhaps inadequate, the remunera-
tion we had for our heavy expenditure in Preston, and he
continued expenses we were incurring in providing for the
Lancaster passenger traffic there, we were not disposed at
any time to risk, injuring the thorough traffic of the west
coast, by attempting to urge this point, nor ever did. The
only solitary expression the Lancaster directors can lay hold
of to warrant their aband this station, and subjecting
the public travelling over their line to the inconvenience
they have, is that at a meeting of some of the directors of the
two companies so long ago as August last, when, in reply to
their question of whether the notice terminated the whole
agreement, they were told that it did, the only answer, they
must have been well aware, that could have been given to
such a question ; but the secretary can, I believe, fully sa-
tisfy you, that not only at that time but long previous,
and indeed before any notice whatever had been given them,
they had been in negociation with the Bolton Company on
this subject, and that hence only can their persisting in so
extraordinary a manner admit of explanation. All, how-
ever, that we shall now probably any of us care to
know is, their present position, and we must require that
the fact on this subject is honestly and accurately stated.
Those who are in communication with them are led to believe
that whilst they have made what they consider an advanta-
geous contract for power with another company, they are
prepared to resume the former arrangement as to the Preston
station, from the abandonment of which the travellers on
their line have, in spite of every effort to prevent it, sustained
so much inconvenience, to submit the terms to reference ;
and the parties are further led to suppose that the North
Union Company are the parties to object. We must repeat
most distinctly that the reverse of this is the real fact. We
submitted unhesitatingly to the award of Mr. Booth, the
umpire proposed by themselves ; and at one time a consi-
derable projection in their line, and never hinted at or
thought of disturbing it in any way. We have since offered
to submit to the award of any other referee, if they have
not precluded themselves from going to reference by con-
tracts with other parties, and if they have they certainly
ought to say so, to those who are under such wrong, impres-
sions ; and all we can say is, that whenever we are again at
liberty, they will probably find us still able and willing to
furnish their passengers the accommodation they formerly
enjoyed ; nor shall we at all regret it, if these two compa-
nies should be the first to be brought by Mr. Giadstone's
bill, under a compulsory and. inevitable reference on this
questiOn. We may appear to some of our proprietors to go
almost too far in our desire to settle this question on public
grounds, and certainly not from any anxiety to have the
traffic of another company in our Preston station, for the
paltry miserable consideration we ever received for it. We
we would even be willing to leave it to their own engineer,
Mr. Locke, to settle the terms of remuneration we are to
have ; .convinced that Mr. Locke's character and unques-
tionable integrity, and his knowledge of railway business,
would secure us a fair and just award at his hands; and we
only regret that Mr. Locke's frequent absence, and multi-
plicity of other engagements, deprive the Lancaster Board
of what would he so valuable to them, as his knowledge and
experience in railway management at all times. At all events,
you will bear in mind that no offer of reference has ever yet
been by the Lancaster Board, nor can we yet understand from
a communication lately received, in reply to our renewed
offer, whether or not they are even in a position to agree to
anything of the sort, though it would appear they are dis-
tinctly not so. At the same time, there can be no little doubt
of the utter impracticability of their having any other avail-
able station at Bolton at present.
In addition to the report, which the Secretary will now
read, I have only further to mention that the amount required
in the final settlement of the contracts, or works, between
Wigan and Preston, has proved considerably larger than the
board had any reason to anticipate, the referee agreed upon,
Mr. M`Neiles, having set aside the contracts and awards of

the company's engineer, in a way which they certainly cannot
think equitable to the company at all events. Part of the
original engine stock for the passenger traffic, &c., a conside-
rable amount for cottages, for parties residing on the line,
have also to be provided for, with some other disbursements
on the capital account, and the directors will presently pro-
pose to you a resolution, authorizing, it needful, to extend
the loan to £150,000, being £40,000 beyond its present
amount, but the whole of which is still a sum very far within
that authorised by the company's acts of incorporation. 1
will only detain you further to congratulate you cordially
upon the continued absence of accidents to all our passengers,
the great improvement of the line, and the satisfactory way
in which our dividends are sustained amidst so much gloom
and depression.
The SECRETARY (Mr. James Chapman) then read the
report, of which we subjoin the most important passages
As stated in the report submitted to the proprietors at the
last annual general meeting, notice was given to terminate

the arrangement under which this coaiany undertook to
work the locomotive power of the Lancaster line on the 31st
of December ; and since that period each of these two
companies has provided the power for making its own line of
railway. The directors of this company renewed their offer,
some months since, of continuing to provide the Lancaster
company with power, either on the footing—first, of the re-
cent arrangement, viz., to charge its exact cost according to
mileage, agreeing upon a reasonable annual payment as re-
muneration for the very great extent to which the time and
attention of the superior officers of the North Union Company
are found to be occupied by their having the heavy charge
and responsibility of the power on the Lancaster line, and a
and a sum was named for this service not exceeding what
the Lancaster board have stated that they understood
the North Union Company was actually making by the
contract ; second, of a very moderate addition to the
actual cost per mile, with the same object; and third, of a
fixed charge or price per mile for each mile run, such charge
to be below the price which this company has all along re-
ceived from another company (and which has been paid by
them under the advice of their engineer, Mr. Robert Ste-
phenson,) for a similar service, and reduced in the degree in
which the work of the Lancaster Company is upon a larger
or more extensive scale. The Lancaster board, however,
positively declined to renew the agreement (which terminated
on the 31st December) on any one of these three bases, un-
less the North Union directors would consent to the last,
making the price they were to receive is. 6d. per mile run,
at which rate parties, it appears, had offered to contract.
From several years experience and knowledge of the real ulti-
mate cost of power, both on the North Union and most of
the other leading English Railways, your directors had no
hesitation in unanimously rejecting this proposition ; and
will, on every account, rejoice if it should prove that locomo-
tive power for passenger trains can be permanently supplied
with due efficiency and regularity on such terms as these,
their opinion that it cannot, and that such a contract will not
prove either beneficial or satisfactory to either of the parties
to it, is not the least altered by the short experiment that has
been made ; and they can at all events assure their proprie-
tors that no disadvantage to their interests will arise from
being relieved from the provision of power for the Lancaster
line, on either these or the former terms.

There was, however, another and totally distinct provision
in the above agreement, which, on important public grounds,
the North Union Board were most anxious to have conti-
nued; and this was for an arrangement for the joint use of
one passenger station in Preston by the railway companies
uniting their lines at that place. By this provision it was
agreed between the North Union and Lancaster railway
compan.ies that the commodious and complete static)n of the
former company, at the original terminus of their line,
should be the joint Preston station of the two companies ;
a•id the Lancaster company sending their passenger traffic to
this station—that is, beyond the terminus of their line at
Dock-street, over the portion subsequently formed by the
North Union company, to complete the railway connexion
with the North,—that the Lancaster company should pay to
the North Union company, for the use of their expensive
station accommodation and connexion with Dock-street, as
well as porterage, booking clerks, &c. such compensation as
should from time to time be fixed by a referee proposed by
themselves—Mr. Booth, of Liverpool. Nothing could be
more satisfactory to the public than this arrangement, and the
Lancaster company obtained the very great advantages of
it to themselves, on what cannot but be considered, by any
competent judge, very reasonable and moderate terms, under
Mr. Booth's award. It was of such obvious and important
advantage to the public not to have two stations, and con-
sequently, two delays to the north and south trains,
within two hundred yards of one another, in Preston, and to
the companies not to have two establishments where one
would better answer the purpose, that the North Union
Board confined their notice for the termination of the agree-
ment entirely to that part of it for the provision of locomo-
tive power, although both arrangements being included in
the same agreement, their notice certainly gave the Lancas-
ter Company the right to terminate both, if so disposed ;
and as soon as ever they were aware that the Lancaster Board
had any doubts about their views and intentions in this re-
spect, they at once transmitted minutes of their board, dis-
tinctly offering to continue the arrangement for station accom-
modation on the former footing, and pointing out the incon-
venience inevitably arising from the attempt to form a second
station. Their continued efforts to prevent this attempt so
long as there appeared any prospect of doing so, having, how-
ever, unfortunately proved unsuccessful, and the inconveni-
ences they anticipated having been experienced by the Lan-
caster and North passengers, your directors consider it due
to themselves to state distinctly that they are, and ever
have been, prepared to replace the Lancaster Company on
the same footing as previously, leaving the question of their
remuneration to any competent referee they can mutually
agree upon. They must also distinctly deny the altogether
unfounded statements inserted in the Lancaster papers, of
unwillingness on their part to make arrangements with that
board to prevent inconvenience and increased charge to the
public. So far from their being any foundation for these
assertions, they have from time to time suggested to the
Lancaster board whatever appeared to them calculated to
reduce the delay and inconvenience arising inevitably from
the double station. They can prove that the average deten-
tion of the trains in their Preston station has not been seven
minutes, although a very considerable proportion of all the
the passengers are for the North Union station, and nearly
one-half of the carriages are there detached from the north
trains ; they have constantly sent their porters, &c. up to do
the work of the Lancaster Company, at Dock-street, in
order to prevent delay to the north mails, &c., from the utter
insufficiency of the establishment of the Lancaster Company
in Preston, without ever receiving similar aid from them
in return ; they have pushed their engines to the extreme
speed warranted by due regard to the public safety, to pre-
vent the Lancaster passengers being left, when the trains of
that company were late, and have offered to be prepared with
a special engine to take them on when the North Union
trains could not be longer detained without missing the Li-
verpool, Manchester, and London trains in communication
with theirs at Parkside, but without being able to bring about
any arrangement with the Lancaster board as to how they
were to act with regard to their passengers under such cir-
cumstances. In addition to the original fares of the North
Union Company for the conveyance of passengers between
Parkside and the original terminus at their Preston station
(which have always been, and continue precisely the same
as fixed at the first opening qf the North Union Railway
for this distance) has certainly, and as a matter of course,
been made, since the working and provision of the additional
very expensive portion of railway between this original ter-
minus and Dock-street, Preston, has been recently thrown
upon the North Union Company—just as was the case when
the Liverpool and Manchester Railway was extended fur-
ther into Liverpool, and ought in fairness, always to be
the case when a line of railway is, at considerable expense
to the proprietors, extended to some further point. But it
must be borne in mind by the public, that the arrangement
with the Lancaster Company, when their fares were fixed,
was, that they should convey their passengers to the North
Union Station, and undertake to provide the transit between
this station and Lancaster, and that having now thrown this
part of the expense on the North Union Company, and
ceased to remunerate them for any portion, it is the Lan-
, caster company and not the North' Univn that derive the
benefit, and are the real cause of any increased charge to
passengers beyond Preston.
It has recently been found necessary, in consequence
of the progress of the works of the Bolton and Preston
Railway Company in connexion with their intended station
at Preston, to apply to the Court of Chancery to restrain
that company from violating the terms of the agreement
entered into with this company, and the provisions inserted
in the Bolton and Preston Railway Acts for the protection
of the North union Railway Company. After the motion
for an injunction had undergone a lengthened discussion
, before the Right Honourable the Vice-Chancellor Wigram,

that learned Judge states that this company were Quite right
upon the then state Ofacts,in applying to the court ; but as
the Bolton and Preston company had not actually done, or
threatened to do, the acts sought to be restrained, and as
their counsel would not then avow an intention of doing them
he ordered the motion to stand over, with an intimation that
if the Bolton and Preston Company either did or distinctly
threatened to commit those acts, this company might then
renew their applicatio❑ and ask for an Injunction. It is im-
possible to know, and it may not be strictly proper to infer,
from anything that fell from the court,what may be the opinion
of the Vice-Chancellor on the merits of the case ; but from
the manifest indisposition of the adverse parties to make the
admissions which his Honor deemed necessary to enable him
to come to a decision, or to have his Honor's opinion, which
he kindly offered to give, it is reasonable to conclude that
they are not sanguine as to the result ; and that the impor-
tant right, of uninterrupted communication between the
North Union Railway and the Lancaster Canal, as well as
other railways approaching in that direction, will he fully pro-
tected from interruption by the traffic: of the Lancaster Rail-
way Company being taken into the proposed new station
across the lines which connect the canal and railway at Dock-
street. These lines of communication are already becoming
much occupied with a portion of the valuable coal traffic
whim has been before referred to.

Mr. HENRY HOLMES moved that the report be adopted
and approved.
Mr. WILLIAM BROWNE seconded the motion. He said
that having been in some measure mixed with the formation
of the company, and having been in London when the bill
was obtained, and being, as he believed, the largest proprie-
tor in the undertaking, he begged to express his entire ap-
probation of, and confidence in, the management of the con-
cerns of this company by the directors. He was sure that
there was not an individual among the directors capable of
doing otherwise than the best for the interests of the pro-
prietors, and even the pamphlet—[" Copy of the official cor-
respondence betweeen the North -Union and Lancaster and
Preston Railways, on the subject of locomotive power and
station accommodation." Manchester: Gadsby]—which
had been placed in his hands only yesterday, confirmed him
in the opinion that all their acts were honourable.
Mr. HIGGIN said he intended to move an amendment.
Since he last had the pleasure of meeting the directors and
proprietors of the North Union Railway at Preston, the sub-
ject of locomotive power, as well as station accommodation
at Preston, had undergone the discussion which was so much
wished .for at that meeting. The shareholders then ex-
pressed most decidedly, their opinion that the arrange-
ments between the two companies should be entered into
upon liberal terms—that, as Mr. Thomas Battve Addison
had expressed it, the North Union Company should treat
the Lancaster Company as younger brethren. The share-
holders responded to that sentiment very warmly, and from
what occurred at the time, he bad no other expectation but
that an amicable feeling ',:tvOithtliave arisen. He was sorry
to say, as was now known to the proprietors, that the meet-
ing at Parkside (24th August, 1841), where a deputation
from the North Union board tnet a deputation from the
Lancaster board, proved anything but satisfactory. The
terms offered by the North Union board were 2s. ld. per
mile, which were beyond anything the Lancaster board could
afford.

The CHAIRMAN said those certainly were not the terms
required by the North Union directors.

Mr. HIGGIN said that was the report of the deputation
from the Lancaster board, and he must take it for granted
that it was correct. The North Union board proposed that
the Lancaster board should pay 7d. per mile for every mile
run more than they paid according to the joint agreement
under which they had been working; and as a justification
for asking this sum, Mr. Stephenson, the engineer of the
North Union, mentioned that the Wyre Company paid it.
Mr. RICHARD EARLE really must interrupt Mr. Higgin
in this statement. He said that the offer made by the North
Union Company was to supply locomotive power to the Lan-
caster board for 2s. id. per mile; but the deputation from
his board, what did they say in their report ? Why, they
said that, " the agreement with the Wyre Company, of
2s. id. per mile, was then alluded to, but that was considered
not exactly in point."
The CHAIRMAN said it was clearly stated at that time,
that theirs should be a:reduction in:proportion to the business
done. 'The larger the company, the smaller would be the
rate.

Mr. McGirr continued. Then the North Union deputa-
tion came to this proposition, that the Lancaster Board
should pay them a certain mileage profit-3d. a mile—which
would amount to £lOOO a-year, in addition to the profit
which the North Union derived under the agreement as it
then stood. This was thought extravagant by the Lancaster
Company, their opinion being that they were paying quite
sufficient for the accommodation they received. The remu-
neration under the agreement had been fixed by the referee,
Mr. Booth, of Liverpool, and with his decision the Lancas-
ter Company did not find fault : they never objected to pay
one farthing of it; but when an application was made, prior
to that, to Mr. Booth for an increased allowance to the supe-
rior officers of the company (North Union), Mr. Booth de-
clined to grant it, considering that the sum he had named was
ample and sufficient.

The CHAIRMAN said it was only just to Mr. Chapman to
say that the statement in the " official correspondence," that
Mr. Chapman received £lOO, was not paid to him as salary.
Mr. HIGGIN believed he was correct in stating that such
an award had been made by Mr. Booth, and that an applica-
tion had been made for an increased rate to Mr. Chapman.
The CHAIRMAN.—Never. _

Mr. HIGGIN thought that perhaps be should say for an in-
creased rate for management.
The CHAIRMAM.—Very well. _

Mr. HSGGIN said the Lancaster board had Mr. Booth's
reply, stating that the sum he had awarded for the service
performed was sufficient. Whether it was appropriated to
Mr. Chapman, orlwhether it went into the general fund, he
knew not.

The CHAIRMAN said he should strongly object to any
statement going forth that Mr. Chapman received £lOO.
Mr. HIGGIN repeated that he did not know how the money
was appropriated, but certainly an application had been made
for an increased allowance, which was refused by the referee.
The CHAIRMAN.-1 am not cognizant of it.
Mr. HIGGIN believed he had stated what was perfectly
correct, but he begged to be allowed to proceed without in-
terruption. He had got to that part of the proceedings in
which an application was made to Mr. Booth fir an increased
allowance, but Mr. Booth did not think proper to award it.
The Lancaster Company were perfectly satisfied with that de-
cision, but if Mr. Booth had ordered another 4:100 to be
paid, they should have said nothing about it—the increased
allowance would have been paid. tie now came to the point
at which the two companies came to terms at last, which
was that the Lancaster Company were willing to continue the
arrangement then existing, paying to the North Union the
sum awarded by Mr. Booth, and paying also the actual cost
of locomotive power for the number of rules run. This was
declined by the North Union Company. Allusion had been
made to Mr. Locke, whom he (Mr. Higgin) should have
been glad to have seen present to-day, as he would have con-
firmed him in the statement, that in submitting the pro-
position which they had made at Parkside, they acted
under Mr. Locke's advice and assistance. The Lancaster
Company had been advised that they ought not to pay a lar-
ger sum than they did then, and that plenty of persons could
be found willing to contract for the working of the line for
the same sum as they were then Paying. With that advice,
could the Lancaster Company pay the North Union a profit
of 3d. a mile upon every mile run, which would have
amounted to £lOOO per annum ? This was the ground upon
which the Lancaster Company declined the offer made to
them. The report stated that the sum which the North
Union derived from this source amounted to nearly £lOOO
per annum ; but as far as he knew the account, it was not
exactly stated. He would read the Rails. The sum awarded
by Mr. Booth to be paid by the Lancaster Company to the
North Union. Company, for station accommodntion at Pres-
ton, was £420 per annum, and for covering in lines in addi-
tion £l5, making £435; to be paid to Mr. Chapman, or
some other party, for management, £lOO, and for M r. Hunt's
salary £9B, as their proportion for his superintendence of
locomotive power ; the gain.from interest on the plant £165
7s. 3d. ; saving from coke to North Union Company from
joint working, as per Mr. Chapman's estimate, £152 3s. Bd.;
making a total of £950 10s. lid., anti coming within £5O of
the round sum named at Parkside as the advantage annually
derived by the North Union Company from the existing
agreement. If he was wrong in this statement, he should
be glad to know what the error was.
Mr. HARDMAN EARLE asked Mr. Higgin whether the
sum he named was net or gross receipts?
Mr. HIGGIN in reply, Said he did not know which it was,
—(hear, hear,)—but it was the advantage which the North
Union derived from the agreement with the Lancaster Com-
pany.

Mr. HAnnmAN EARLE.-But you call it "annual gain."
Mr. McGirr would show how it was " annual gain."
If their expenditure continued the same now, upon the va-
rious items as it was then, they were, most unquestion-
ably, in the wrong to the extent of £lOOO a-year.
The CHAIRMAN asked Mr. Iliggin whether he would be
shown the inaccuracy of his statements now or after he had
finished ?

Mr. HIGGIN would go through his statements first. He
had shown that they gained £lOOO per annum by the
agreement as it stood, and that if the Lancaster Company
had agreed to pay the additional three pence they would
have gained another £3OOO. The next point was as to the
station at Preston. The Lancaster Company were quite
aware that one passenger station for both 1 ines would
be a very great advantage; he admitted that, and he
was sorry that the course taken at Parkside was such
as to induce the Lancaster company to make an application
to the directors of the Bolton and Preston company for sta-
tion accommodation—which was never thought of or con-
templated till the question had been raised at a previous
meeting of the board. He himself had raised the question,
and he said, that if the notice from the North Union was
meant to apply to locomotive power alone, or to the station
as well, at the end of six months the directors might not only
find themselves without locomotive power, but also without
a station. In consequence of that the chairman was speci-
ally required to put the question to the North Union depu-
tati'on, whether they intended the notice to apply to both
points or not. The answer -was that it did, therefore the
Lancaster company were in this position, that they must
either yield to the terms of the North Union for loco-
motive power, or be left without a passenger station.
Under these circumstances. and being also advised by Mr.
Locke not to pay a larger sum than ls. 6d., the directors of
the Lancaster Company went to the Bolton Company to see
whether they conld have the use of one station at Preston,
the Bolton Company appointed a meeting, and the terms
were fixed. Mr. Higgin then urged that every disposition
for accommodation had been shown by the Lancaster Com-
pany,:and contended that the directors of the North Union,
by discontinuing the arrangement between the two compa-
nies had damaged the proprietors in the latter to the extent
of £420 per annum. With respect to the Preston station,
he admitted that the public had sustained some inconveni-
ence, but the blame did not rest with the directors of the
Lancaster Company. Very far from it. The detentions at
Preston, as far as they were concerned, had been very slight;
but he knew that great complaints bad been made of the
detentions upon the North Union side. He had no doubt,
notwithstanding the interruptions which had taken place
from bad weather, that the Lancaster line would be as effici-
ently worked as it had been, and he knew that the contract-
ing parties were anxious that no difficulties of that kind
should occur.
Some desultory debate followed, between the Chairman,
Mr. John Cropper, Mr. Richard Earle, Mr. Hardman Earle,
Mr. Higgin, and Mr. Park, respecting the terminus of the
North Union at Preston, and the terms upon which the
Lancaster and Preston Railway Act had been obtained, but

it ended in nothing. After some conversation upon the
terms of the original motion,
The CHAIRMAN put it to the meeting whether it would
be necessary, by way of reply, to go through all the details
which had been mentioned by Mr. Higgin. He thought
that the general statements which had been made in the
directors' report, and in his own address, completely answered
Mr. Higgin. if the Lancaster company could make a more
beneficial arrangement elswhere for locomotive power, there
was no objection to it. As to Mr. Locke's opinion, he
should only say that in general engineers did not think there
was any great advantage arising from companies joining to-
gether for this purpose. He, (the chairman) however, was
afraid that experience would Put the Lancaster company
right upon this point. With regard to the station, all that
had been already so completely answered that it was useless
for him to go over the facts.
Mr. CHAPMAN then proceeded to go through the figures
put forth by Mr. Higgin as " annual gain," in the appendix
to the official correspondence. He showed that what was
said to be annual gain was money which the North Union
Company had actually disbursed in pursuance of the agree-
ment with the Lancaster Company..

The CHAIRMAN added, that as to the charge for officers,
it was quite impossible that their time should be taken up
by the affairs of the North'Union liue without some com-

pensation for it. The £lOO said to be paid to Mr. Chapman
was by no means adequate for the labour he was obliged to
give, and for taking him away from his other duties. Yet
this was put down as profit. Mr. Hunt's " salary" was ex-
actly in the same position.
Mr. CHAPMAN said it was unnecessary for him to state
that he did not get the money set down in the appendix
as paid for him. The statement was untrue. It was Mr.
Booth's award under the twelfth article of the agreement;
and it might as well be said that the Lancaster Com /any
paid the director's salary to that extent as that they paid
him so much.

Mr. HIGGIN claimed the right to reply to Mr. Chap-
man. If he were not heard they would completely put an
extinguisher upon one side of the question. (Cries of—
" You have been heard all day.")

. ,
Mr. DAVID HODGSON warmly defended the proceedings
of the directors of the North Union Company.

A SHAREHOLDER expressed his belief th,it there was
and had been an under current at work between the Lancaster
and other companies, which were in a sinking condition,
to crush the North Union.

The Co AIRMAN assured the worthy proprietor that the
directors would do everything to vindicate the interests of
the North Union proprietors.
Another SHAREHOLDER, in a very conciliatory speech,
said that the directors of both undertakings were honourable
men, and he regretted that any collision should have taken
place between them. The sooner an amicable arrangement
could be come to between them the better would it be for the
proprietors and for the public.
Mr. BROWN, in a few healing observations, suggested
that negotiations should be opened, with a view to making
the North Union station at Preston serve for all the railways
centering there.
Much more debate followed, for which we have not room,
at the end of which the report was adopted.
By another resolution the dividend recommended by the
directors was ordered to be paid.
Several other resolutions were afterwards proposed, and
the meeting separated, after having occupied three hours.