Lord Wharn-cliffemoved the second reading of the Western Railway Bill. He said, he had hoped to find that the opposition to the Bill, by the Provost and Fellows of Eton, had been withdrawn, and he was sorry to find from a petition presented by the noble Duke (the Duke of Buccleugh), that such was not the case. The noble Lord entered into a brief history of the undertaking, of the difficulties which the projectors had met with last year, and of the opposition to their plan by Eton College. He said, that to satisfy this 581 opposition, the company of proprietors had offered to enter into an agreement not to make a branch rail-way to Eton through Windsor; and the engagement was of such a kind, that he thought it might have been deemed perfectly satisfactory. Indeed a correspondence which had taken place on this subject, justified him in entertaining that expectation. Doctor Hawtry had written a letter, referring to his former opposition, and had said in that letter, that on the subject of that opposition the explanation given by Mr. Saunders was perfectly satisfactory; that he had before been painfully deceived, although, from the source which had supplied the information, he had supposed that he might adopt the statements made, without the slightest fear of misrepresentation. Such was the letter of Dr. Hawtry, and that letter concluded with a statement, that Mr. Saunders might make what use of it he pleased. The House ought to give this Bill a second reading, which would only be admitting its principle, and the details of it might afterwards be considered in Committee. He said that the House ought to give this Bill a second reading, because he thought that a good case was made out to warrant this application to Parliament. This was the second year in which these parties had been before Parliament on the subject of this Bill, and they had proved, as he thought, before the Committee of the House of Commons last year, that the line they proposed to adopt was the best that could be adopted. It was not, however, these parties alone who would have a right to complain of the hardship they suffered if this Bill was now rejected. The merchants of Bristol would have a right to complain. The town of Liverpool, the great commercial rival of Bristol, had a rail-road communicating with the metropolis conceded to it. Why should the same advantage be denied to Bristol? Their Lordships must not imagine that that they could prevent the creation of rail-roads, communicating between any of the great ports of the kingdom and this metropolis, that would be impossible, and entertaining that belief he pressed the Bill upon their Lordships' consideration, and he should not believe, till he saw it, that they would reject it. He moved that it be read a second time.
The Duke of Buccleughsaid, that the sentiments of the Provost and Fellows of 582 Eton-college remained perfectly unchanged on the subject of his objections to this rail-way. There was one argument which had fallen from his noble Friend that he confessed he did not understand, and that was the argument as to the hardship of the case. He did not think that, on account of the supposed hardship to any company, the House ought to concede a Bill of this sort. There were other considerations that ought to weigh with them; one of these peculiarly deserved their attention. There was, at this moment, another line of road which had been surveyed, issuing out of the line of the Southampton and London Rail-way, a line of road much shorter than the other, and capable, if adopted, of saving a considerable part of the labour now proposed to be bestowed upon the Great Western Railway. Of this line, a distance of forty-five miles was now in a course of construction: and taking into consideration the distance from the main line of the proposed Great Western Rail-way, to the manufacturing districts of Trowbridge and Bradford, there would be, by the adoption of the Southampton line, a saving of the cost of construction altogether of fifty-two miles. Then again, the nature of the country through which the proposed line was to pass, offered considerable obstacles to the plan. In one place on the proposed line there must be a tunnel a mile and three quarters long with an inclination of forty-nine feet in a mile, and the progress of the machines there must be assisted by a stationary engine, or by locomotive engines. The former plan would be disadvantageous, the latter almost impossible. The Great Western Rail-way Company might avoid all these difficulties, if they chose to do so. An offer had been made to them by the Bath and Basing Company, of as fair and honourable a kind as any one company could ever make to another. Their offer had not been accepted, yet there could be no doubt that if that offer was adopted, the line of rail-road secured to the public would be infinitely more advantageous than the one now proposed—for it would furnish one continuous line of road connecting itself with Portsmouth by a branch road, and thus connecting Portsmouth and Bristol with the Thames. The considerations, therefore, on which the House should determine were not whether a certain Company had before been disappointed, 583 and whether it would be a hardship to disappoint them again, but which of the two plans offered was the best, and which would confer the greatest benefit on the public at the least cost to individuals. He thought that these questions must be answered unfavourably for the present applicants, the Great Western Rail-way Company, for their proposed line would cut up a great tract of cultivated country, and be highly inconvenient, and unnecessarily inconvenient with respect to the personal residences of a great body of landed proprietors. He was convinced that this proposed line would not be productive of the good supposed, and that all the proposed advantages might be secured by the other plan, and therefore he should decidedly oppose this Bill. He moved that it be read a second time this day six months.
The Earl of Radnorsupported the Bill; in his opinion all the objections urged by the noble Duke ought to be considered in Committee, and not at that stage of the Bill. He recommended their Lordships to let the Bill be read a second time, and to consider the objections in detail, when they went into Committee on the Bill.
The Earl of Carnarvonsaid, that if their Lordships saw reason to decide against the principle of this Bill, they would not allow it to be read a second time. Now he thought he could show them that the principle of the Bill was objectionable. He knew that when public interests absolutely required it, private interests must give way; but when that was not the case private interests ought to be respected. He thought it was clearly established that what was now proposed to be done might be done with less disadvantage to private interests than by the proposed Western Rail-way Road. He agreed with the noble Lord who moved the Bill, that it was impossible to prevent rail-road communication, but he thought that they ought to be sure that the best plan was proposed before they gave their sanction to it; and certainly they ought to take care that they did not sanction the worst. Now, the noble Duke who preceded him had shown that there was another line of road by which goods might be taken down to be loaded on board of ships ready for sea, almost without risk and without the charges that must be incurred if the proposed western line of road 584 were adopted. In his opinion, every great rail-way which communicated with the western part of the kingdom should abut upon the Thames. The Great Western Rail-way Company had thought so last year, and had deemed it of so much importance, that they had pressed it upon the Legislature, and were only diverted from it by the decided resistance of the parties who were interested in the property which must be affected if such a plan were carried into effect. They were ready to lay out the enormous sum of 800,000l., to secure that object, yet now they abandoned it—it formed no part of their present Bill, and in that respect their Bill was in his opinion decidedly defective. That point alone seemed to him a sufficient reason for rejecting the Bill, for the railroad, without such a communication, was unquestionably imperfect. There was another reason why he thought the Bill ought to be rejected. There were already two lines of road—the Southampton line, and the Basing and Bath line, and these running to a considerable distance in the same direction with the proposed line of the Great Western Rail-way, the competition between them, if the last should be sanctioned by the Legislature, would be too great for them all to bear. The individuals connected with these Companies would be ruined, without, as it seemed to him, securing any adequate advantage to the country. On the contrary, he believed that the public advantage would be better secured by adopting the course recommended by his noble Friend (the Duke of Buccleugh); and without some great public advantage being obtained, he should certainly object to a plan that would unnecessarily cut up an extensive line of cultivated country, and seriously interfere with the enjoyment of private rights.
The Earl of Malmesburysaid, that after hearing the statement of the promoters of this measure, he felt great difficulty in supporting the second reading of the Bill: nay, he had made up his mind to oppose it. The inconvenience and evils arising to men who had a line of rail-road traversing their property, it was needless for him to describe to their Lordships. But the question was whether they must submit to a minor evil, in order to obtain a major good. In deciding this question their Lordships should bear in mind who were the parties that opposed the Bill. No less than 170 landowners, over whose property 585 this line of road was proposed to run, and who constituted four-fifths of the whole number whose land would be affected by this measure, were opposed to it. But it was said, these facts could be ascertained in Committee. But were their Lordships aware of the expense of a Committee? It would cost many thousands of pounds; and out of whose pockets was this sum to be paid? Out of the pockets of the poor landholders and that at a time when it was more difficult for them to raise 1.l than it was to raise 51. a few years ago. One argument which had been urged in favour of this measure was, that it would do good to Ireland by facilitating the importation of Irish produce into this country. Now he was one who wished well to Ireland, and was as anxious to maintain our connexion with that country as any man; but at the same time he did not think it was sound policy to attempt to promote the interests of the Irish at the expense of English land-holders. This, however, would be the inevitable effect, if further encouragement were to be given to the importation of Irish agricultural produce into this country. Another reason why it was not expedient to go into Committee was, that the evidence which had already been taken, clearly made out a prima facie case against the promoters of this Bill, and in favour of the line of road.
§ Lord Wharncliffereplied. He put it to their Lordships whether the different arguments and statements addressed to the House on this Question, did not imperatively call for a Committee? All that he could do, were they not to go into Committee, would be to give a flat denial to the statements made by his noble Friends who opposed the Bill. Let them, then, go into Committee, and hear the evidence on both sides; and if his noble Friends made out a case against the Bill, then he would say, let the Bill be rejected. The was the only course that reasonable men could pursue; much more, therefore, did it become Legislators to adopt it. This noble Earl had said, that the Basing Company had established, by evidence, the fact that their proposed line of road was preferable to the one laid down by the Western Rail-road Company. Now it was worthy of remark that an offer was made by the promoters of this Bill to those who opposed it, to submit the two lines of road to three eminent engineers to say which was the better line of the two, and 586 to act upon their decision, but this offer was refused by the Basing Company. It should be remembered, also, that the subscribers to the Basing Company were strangers to that part of the country, and came from a distant part of England, while, on the contrary, the Western Railway Company was supported by the inhabitants of the neighbourhood of the line, and by the authorities and merchants of the city of Bristol. These were facts which he had been assured were, and which he believed to be, true; and it was for the other party to show that they were false. This could only be done by a full inquiry before a Committee.
§ Their Lordships divided. Contents 46; Not Contents 34; Majority 12.