RAILWAY GAUGE—ADJOURNED DEBATE. (Hansard, 18 June 1846)

§ MR. J. E. DENISON
resumed the debate by saying that he had no pecuniary interests in any railway, neither could he have any peculiar interests in favour of the one gauge beyond the other. He objected to that resolution which recommended that the narrow gauge should run inside the broad gauge from Rugby to Oxford. The more he looked at these resolutions, the more he thought that the Board of Trade 632 had not sat as a fair arbiter between the two great parties, but had rather endeavoured to effect a compromise by partially accommodating both. He thought that these resolutions would prove useless and inoperative, and by pledging the House of Commons to a particular course would prove also most inconvenient. The House of Commons should not be called upon to pledge itself to a course that was inconsistent with the evidence that was taken upon the subject. He should at the proper time move, that the word "not" be left out, and should recommend the House not to give an opinion in favour of the recommendation contained in the 5th Resolution.

§ SIR G. CLERK
proceeded to observe, that an Act of Parliament was obtained last year, authorizing the formation of a railway to South Wales, running for a considerable distance along the coast. It was, no doubt, the object of the promoters that this should be a broad gauge line; but there were no terms in the Act expressly requiring such to be the case. After the best consideration which could be given to the subject, looking at this line as the great line of communication with the south of Ireland, and a continuous line from London to the establishments at Pembroke Dockyard, it was considered expedient that it should be considered on the broad gauge.

§ SIR G. GREY
had no objection as the gauge on which the South Wales line ought to be formed; but he renewed the objection which he had made to the former of these resolutions—viz., that it was to amend an Act of Parliament by a resolution of the House, and that the House of Lords might pass a resolution directly contrary to that of the Commons. If they meant to found an Act upon the resolution, then his opposition was withdrawn; but if not, the proceeding must be considered 633 objectionable. It would be in the power of the other House, to-morrow, to pass a resolution that it was expedient to construct the railway on the narrow gauge. He would propose as an Amendment that, after the word "is," there be inserted the word "not."

MR. O. GORE
said, that the effect of this railway being constructed on the broad gauge would be to cause a break of gauge with the narrow gauge lines at Hereford; and as this should be avoided, the narrow gauge should be preferred.

§ MR. HAWES
thought, that if the objection of the right hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey) was merely technical, it could easily be got rid of by adopting the minute of the Board of Trade in the resolution; but it was not solely a technical objection. The previous resolutions were restrictive; the object of this resolution was to encourage the broad gauge in this particular locality; from this it might be supposed the House was not prepared to extinguish the broad gauge system, and hence the objection made by the right hon. Gentleman. A compromise had, in fact, been made between the contending parties. [Sir G. CLERK: There was no compromise.] It was through an arrangement, after hearing both sides; and in this arrangement, and in the resolution, the public interests had been wisely consulted.

§ MR. HUME
thought it was a prudent course to leave the parties in Wales to construct this line on that principle to which they were most favourable.

§ VISCOUNT SANDON
It was important to know whether, in passing this resolution, the House expressed an opinion that the broad gauge was best, or that merely it was not wished to impose upon the company the narrow, after an Act had been obtained for the broad gauge.

§ SIR T. WILDE
said, that it was very generally understood that it had been the original intention of the parties who projected the South Wales line and its branches to Monmouth and Hereford to adopt the broad gauge principle; and, inasmuch as it was well known that the Gauge Commissioners had reported against that principle and in favour of the narrow gauge, the object of the present resolution, as he understood it, was to do away with that uncertainty, alarm, and wild speculation to which the project was liable as long as it was not distinctly understood how far the Legislature might think fit to interfere with the intentions of the directors, or whether 634 they would think proper to interfere at all. The present resolution would prevent alarm, and give the company to understand that they were still at liberty to carry out their project as they might judge proper, notwithstanding that their adoption of the broad gauge principle would not be in accordance with the recommendations of the Board of Trade. It was to be observed that the Government did not seek to control the movements of the company, or to make it compulsory on them to adopt a certain course. All they did was to give the company to understand that they were at liberty to adopt the broad gauge if they chose.

§ SIR G. GREY
said, that he should withdraw his Amendment and divide against the resolution altogether. He should oppose the resolution on the ground that it proposed to amend an Act of Parliament by a resolution of the House.

SIR T. D. ACLAND
said, that he should support the resolution, on the ground that it was part of a series of resolutions which were proposed by the Board of Trade.

§ MR. LABOUCHERE
rose to call their attention to the advantage of a twofold gauge on the same line of railway. He observed, that they had had no experience of that system. But if they looked at the resolutions which had been submitted to the House by Her Majesty's Government, they would see that, in certain cases, it was proposed to introduce a twofold gauge, at the same time that, if hon. Members looked to some documentary evidence that had been laid before them, they would find that there existed some doubts as to the expediency or the safety of introducing such a change. For his part, he entertained strong doubts on the matter; but, upon the whole, he thought it best to assent to the proposition of the Government. He thought it better to take the resolution which had been proposed upon the responsibility of the Government. The opin- 635 ion of Ministers evidently was, that there would be no want of safety in the proposed change; and, under present circumstances, the House, in adopting the resolution, left all the responsibility upon the Government. The House were enabled to look into the matter for themselves; and it must therefore place a certain degree of confidence in the responsible advisers of the Crown; and he trusted that the House would view this question without reference to the interests of any party whatever, but merely consult the general advantage of the country at large. If the broad gauge were kept at all, he thought it might be made useful by extending traffic from the Great Western Railway into the manufacturing districts. There were those who thought, and upon very plausible grounds, that the plans of the broad and narrow gauges might be united; and certainly the advantages of a broad gauge in manufacturing districts had never yet been fairly tried; for on the Great Western the traffic was principally that of passengers, not of goods. If the House were of opinion that the adoption of the resolutions now before them did not preclude them from expressing a further opinion on the subject of uniting the gauges, then he should not trouble them by pressing upon their consideration any Motion whatever upon the present occasion; otherwise he should be inclined to propose a resolution to follow those now before them, to this effect, that notwithstanding what might be contained in the foregoing resolutions, it should be competent to the Board of Trade to require that in future clauses should be introduced into all Railway Bills, sanctioning the twofold gauge upon the same line, but the Board of Trade making a special report to the Committee on the Bill in every case.

§ MR. HUDSON
was sure that railway companies, generally speaking, would not stand in the way of carrying out any improvements that might be suggested in the construction and working of lines. But for his own part, he must say he had raised strong objections to the introduction of two gauges on one line. It was true that some eminent engineers had given opinions that there would be no difficulty in adopting the system; but from his own experience of railway matters he thought there would be imminent danger incurred by it, and that it would be the cause of great confusion, without at all serving the interests of the public. In fact he believed it would be impossible to carry it out on any long line. 636 He felt bound to enter his protest against any attempt being made to try the broad and the narrow gauge upon one line of railway, because he considered that it would be attended with much danger.

§ SIR G. CLERK
thought that it would be premature for the House to come to a final decision as to the two gauges. All that was proposed in the present case was merely to ensure the fulfilment of the promise of the clauses in the two Bills of last year, enabling the Board of Trade to lay down rails in the two gauges, so that they might try the experiment of double lines. If this should succeed, there was nothing to prevent its being more generally adopted.

§ SIR G. GREY
inquired if it were the intention of the right hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Clerk) to bring in any Bill founded upon those resolutions?

§ SIR G. CLERK
said, that of course it would be necessary to bring in a Bill to carry into effect the second resolution; but at present he could not say whether he would introduce a Bill specially for that purpose, or whether it might not be included in some other Bill for the regulation of railways.