The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-07-26

The gauge question was brought under your lord
ships notice during the year in the case Of the Ok
ford, Worcester and Northampton Railway. This
company were required by the 10th clause Of the
act 18th and 18th VIC, cap. POT, to complete the
northern portion Of their line by the 3lst May 1855,
as double line upon the broad gauge, and the ie-
mainder by the end Of the year. II has been already
mentioned that this company introduced two bills
into Parliament with the view Of relieving them.
selves from this obligation, but these bills did not
ass and, az the company had taken no steps to
complete the railway 1t had rendered itself liable to
heavy penalties. In the month Of September, 1855,
the Great Western Railway Company called upon
your lordships TO enforce the completion Of the
broad gauge and at an interview which took place
between the two companies and your lordships 1t
was agreed that the oxford, Worcester and Wolver-
hampton Railway Company should apply to Parlia-
ment in the session Of 1856 for further time to cs
pete the line, power to raise further sum Of
money, and relief from the penalties already in
cured
Your lordships granted to the Great Western Rail.
way Company an extension OF time for six months
for the completion Of the Bathampton branch Of the
Willis, Somerset, and Weymouth Railway.
In four instances your lordships have been called
upon to make regulations at level crossings and Of
these three have been level crossings Of important
thoroughfares traversed by large traffic.
In two other cases q level crossings-Aviz., the
Chipping Norton branch Of the Oxford, Worcester,
and Northampton Railway, and the Mullingar and
Longford branch Of the Midland Great Western
Railway, level crossings had been constructed in
lieu Of bridges as required by the acts Of the com
In the first case the company gave an undertaking
that the bridge should be completed within spcei
fed time.
In the latter case the company did not consent to
erect bridges until your lordships had been under
the necessity OF giving the company notice OF your
intention to take legal proceedings.
The particulars Of these cases, as well as those In
which your lordships interfered with regard 10
screens, &C., win be found In Appendix No..
your lordships were called upon to direct an In.
spection OF the Eastern Counties Railway under the
provisions Of the act Sd and 4th Wet, cap. ~.
From the inspecting officers report appeared
that the permanent way was la q dangerous condi
ton and that several Of the bridges were In adj
yanced state OF decay. The act under which your
lofdships are empowered 10 order a railway 10 he
management Of the line IL vested the responsibility
Of removing any source Of danger which may be
pointed out.
In the case in question the company informed
your lordshps that they were taking steps TO repair
the line.
In pursuance Of powers conferred upon your lord
ships by the special acts Of the companies, your lord
ships approval was requested TO working agreements
pany and the Leven Railway Company, ana be
tween the Scottish Central Railway Company and
the Perth and Dunkeld Railway Company.
As regards the first OF these agreements, iouo
correspondence ensued between your lordshps and
the parties upon the proposed duration Of the agree
ment. whc hwas longer than that recommended b
the Select Committee OF the House OF Commons od
railway and canal bills Of 1853. Meanwhile, the In
terests Of the Leven Railway Company in the main.
tensnce OF the agreement appear TO have been modi
fed, and the application for approval was Withdrawn
the agreement also contained clause by which the
development of the traffic Of the port Of Leven might
have been niuriousy affected.
IL has been already observed that agreements
authorized by Parliament, by which one company
undertakes TO work the line OF another company. u
by which the interchange OF taic l. facilitated, arc
becoming very numerous.
In the case Of six distinct lines " railway ened
during the year 1856, the lines were TO he w0, aed
under parliamentary authority, by company 0~n
ing line in correction with them; and seven othel
companies appear to have entered into working
arrangements without the sanction Of Parliament
viz -
The East Grinstead Railway Il worked by the Lon
don, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company
without there being any special power In the com
pany's act.
Tie Wimbledon and Croydon Railway is worked
Nv tie London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway
Company, the act having authorized the company
10 enter into arrangements with the London and
southwestern Railway Company.
The Bideford Extension Railway H worked by n
Brsssey. the act having authorized the company Il
inter INTO arrangements with the North Devon Rail
fhe CeIeford, Monmouth, Usk and Pontypoo
Railuay Ia worked by the Newport. Aberga
yenny and Hereford Railway Company. the &C
having authorized the company to use portion O
The object Of these working arrangements l. q
rt,ate that identity OF interest between the seyera
companies which Il caused by an amalgamation; bu
whilst they place the working Of the small line IN
der the control Of the larger company, they appeal
10 p,oyide better security that the local traffic
lie smaller line win he cared for aud developed
Than IL we're entirely merged into the larger con
cern.