§ Order for Second Reading read.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
§ MR. GOLDNEYobjected to the Motion on the ground that the Bill introduced a new species of legislation. The Bill was one of an extraordinary character, and perfectly new in these days, because it practically called upon the House to assess damages between two Companies who had obtained powers to construct a railway over the same district. He therefore moved that the Bill be read a second time on that day six months.
Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day six months."—(Mr. Goldney.)
§ MR. GREGORYsaid, that after a careful examination of the Bill he had come to the conclusion that it was one 1964 that should be read a second time, and then sent to the ordinary Private Bill Committee.
§ MR. STORERalso supported the second reading, having been advised that the Manchester and Milford Railway Company were suffering a hardship for which their only remedy was to come to that House.
§ MR. RAIKESsaid, it would be very difficult for the House to pronounce an opinion upon the merits of the Bill, because it involved one of the most complicated cases that perhaps had come before the House within his experience in the shape of a Private Bill. The arrangements between two of the Companies interested were such as almost to defy explanation that would satisfy the House. It was only by the assistance of maps and plans that it was possible to convey any idea of the subject-matter in dispute. The two Companies formerly competed for traffic through one of the most mountainous and uninhabited districts of Wales. The Manchester and Milford Company obtained a Bill to make a railway, but finding the difficulties to be overcome enormous, they consented to the construction of an alternative line which was projected by the Mid-Wales Company, and over which they were to have running powers. On the faith of this line being constructed, the Manchester and Milford Company entered into certain engagements, but the Mid-Wales Company subsequently abandoned their project; hence the claim which this Bill was intended to settle. The best course would be to follow the ordinary practice and refer it to a Committee up-stairs. At the same time, he thought it was not desirable that a Committee should be called upon to assess damages between two Railway Companies. It was a course which the House ought to discourage; but the circumstances of the present case were very peculiar, and he did not think they were likely to be drawn into a precedent. He therefore hoped that the hon. Member for Chippenham would not press his Motion.
Question, "That the word now' stand part of the Question," put, and agreed to.
Bill read a second time, and committed.