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

/
| oo......,.,. Oh ~ 9,3j3 go
| $685.. 49,. 10o $40 15,51760
| 1s5s......,.. y 9e2 9,Nl, 90.
| 1s55.......... 70 SOB 9,l92 03,
OF the 70 acts passed in 1866 SO had reference Il
the construction Of works the length of new line
authorized by these So acts was as follows, wiz
1876 miles in England and Wales, rs miles in Scot
land, and 81 miles in Ireland.
The lines authorized in England and Wales were
chiefly extensions or branches connected with rail
ways already authorized. The most important were
] the following -
| The extension Of the East Kent Railway. from
! Canterbury TO Dover. BY this line direct railway
| communication will be afforded between Dover and
the naval and military arsenals in North Kent, q
also shorter line between Dover and the metropolis
than is afforded by the Southeastern Railway.
| The NewtOwn and Oswestry Railway deserves
| notice, as forming link in line of railway com
muncation which will probably eventually connect
| the manufacturing districts with Milford Haven.
| The Carlisle and sloth Bay Railway is an exten-
sion Of the Port Carlisle Railway to a new harbor on
| the Solway Firth.
Among the lines authorized in Scotland may be
| noticed the Glasgow, Dumbarton, and Helensbur g
Railway proposed 10 be constructed along the north
bank Of the Clyde from Glasgow to Heensburg,
| and the Banf, Macdufi, and Turrif Railway. The
remaining lines wee merely short branch lines in
| connection with existing railways.
In Ireland were authorized an extension Of the
Dundak and Enniskillen Railway to Cavan, and OF
the Ulster Railway to Monaghan.
The Belfast and County Down Raj lway Company
was authorized to make . line to connect Downpat
rick with Belfast A few other short branch lines
were also authorized.
AS your lordships are aware, the select committee
on railway and canal bills in 1853 recommended
and the House of Commons has acted on the recon-
meDdation that with view to securing uniformity
in legislation, q general committee on railway
and canal b lis should be appointed in each SEES
SION Of character more permanent than had until
that time been the practice in order 10 secure COM
prehensiye review Of all schemes bmitted to Parla
ment; and that for the investigation Of contested
districts settle questions of principle, and make ar
rangements for uniformity in the decision Of ques
tons in which more than one district might be in
terested; and direct the investigation of schemes
within the several districts as to secure for the
public the utmost advantage that might be derived
from judicious combination Of new lines with those
already existing.
Your lordships caused general report upon the
railway bills OF the session OF 1855 to be laid before
this general committee, in which its attention was
called to the following recommendations OF the Sc
lect committee Of ls53-viz. first, that running
powers should only be conceded in cases where the
free transit from one system OF railways TO another
cannot be practically insured by other means; &C.
cond, that smalgamation between large companies
should not be permitted, except under very special
circumstances; third, that working arrangements
for the conduct Of the traffic and the division Of the
profits should be sanctioned under proper conditions,
and for limited periods.
In ten bills application was made for one company
TO be empowered to run over the line Of another
company; bat in only five cases were these powers
granted, and these were cases where IT was neces-
sary for one company to pass over short piece OF
line belonging 10 another company In order TO reach
station 10 lie used jointly.
In twelve cases application was made for one
company 20 be allowed TO be anal gamated with, or
for It's line 10 be transferred TO, another company;
but il was only in seven cases OF small lines
closely connected WITH or subordinate TO, existing
railways that the applications were acceded 20.
The most important class Of bills were those In
which the company proposed TO enter into traffic and
working arrangements with another company. Pow
ers Of this nature included in 40 bills, OF whih
81 bills were passed.
These bills generally provide for the working by a
large company Of a line Of railway 10 connection
with il belonging 10 q smaller company, the OBJECT
being TO enable one company 10 make arrangements
with another company for the maintenance OF tby
line, the management or the interchange VI traffic,
and the apportionment Of the receipts.
The duration OF these arrangements was IN every
case except two which involved special circum-
stances limited 10 period Of about ten years; in
most cases the act conferred power % renew no
agreement at the expiration OF ten years withJl.
application TO Parliament, upon the approval OF
your lordships.
The object Of limiting the duration Of the agree
ments an stated by the select committee Of the House
OF Commons in 1853 was that II the agreement were
found preudicia 70 the public interests an opportu.
nifty would be afforded OF its periodical revision.
or the bills Of this class the one which proposed
10 take the largest powers was one Tor the improve
nent OF the communication between England ana
ireland. IL was, however. considerably modified,
and the act was limited 70 enabling the London and
Northwestern and Chester and Holyhead Railway
Companies TO raise money for improving the means
Of conveying the passenger and parcels traffic be
tween Holybead and Dublin.
There were three bills which bore upon The ques-
tion of gauge which deserve notice. The diversity
Of gauge which exists In this country has undoubt-
edly stimulated mechanical science; but u has been
the occasion OF large expenditure and Of frequent
contests between railway companies W Parliament,
and II causes great inconvenience 70 that traffic
which requires to pass from one system to the other
nor does the mixed gauge, which involves great ex
| peDse, rem owe all the evils Of break Of gauge
The first Of the three bills proposed 70 form
| company with powers 70 construct short narrow
gauge line at Reading TO connect the Reading, Gull
| ford and Reigate Railway with the narrow gauge
| line which The Great Western Railway Company
are constructing between Oxford, Reading and Ba-
singstoke. The line was not judiciously selected,
and the ball was, therefore not passed but 81 the
| desirablty OF such a communication there can be
no question, a. il would form most important link
70 connect the system Of narrow gauge lines south
| OF London with those north Of London.
The other tao bills were introduced by the Ok
| ford, Worcester and woverhampton Railway Com
pany with the object OF being relieved from the oh
legation incurred under former acts Of laying down
the broad gauge. OF these bills one was Withdrawal
The case Of the other bill exhibits the uncertain
/ " which still prevails in the legislation for private
/ bills.
This bin, which involved an important question Of
principle in railway legislation was passed by the
House OF Commons, but thrown ont in the House
4 Of Lords.
The proceedings Of the House % Commons with
/ respect 10 the London and Southwestern Railway
i bill also deserve notice.
II win he In The recollection Of your loriships.
| that in 1853 the London and Southwestern Railway
| Company opposed bill promoted by the Great Wes-
tern and Bristol and Exeter Railway Companies or
| railway termed the Devon and Dorset Railway;
/ ard that this bill thrown out BY the House Of
/ Commons, upon pledge being given by the London
| and Southwestern Railway Company that they would
introduce bill in the following session Of contin-
| uation Of their line TO Exeter.
But, having obtained their object, the London and
Southwestern Railway Company repudiated their
| pledge. Consequently, when the company brought
forward bill for other ohiects In 1855 the House
Of Commons referred the consideration OF The bi II ~
| a committee Of nearly the same members TO whom
the Devon and Dorset Railway bill had been referred
In IeSa Ihia committee inherited clausns intn their