§ MR. CONINGHAMsaid, he would beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, Why the Portpatrick Railway Company have been allowed to repudiate that portion of their reciprocal agreement with the Treasury by which they were pledged to extend their Railway to Glasgow, so as to connect the North of Ireland with that city; and if, in that case, it is advisable to ask for an additional grant of five thousand pounds beyond the sum originally agreed upon and reported as necessary to fulfil the engagement entered into by former Governments?
§ MR. MILNER GIBSONreplied, that he was not aware that the Railway Company referred to had been allowed to repudiate any agreement that it had entered into with the Government. He believed the facts were these:—At the commencement of 1856 the Treasury proposed that there should be two lines of railway to Portpatrick, one going north to Glasgow, the other going east to Dumfries, and that Portpatrick Harbour should be improved and adapted to vessels carrying on the mail service to Ireland. As the Government undertook to improve the harbour, they insisted on a Clause being inserted in the Act of the Portpatrick Railway Company's Bill which prohibited the declaration of any dividends until the Company brought within a certain time as far as the harbour its line, which runs east to Dumfries. The Company had completed its arrangements, and therefore the Government had proceeded to improve the harbour.
§ MR. CONINGHAMBy what influence is the traffic from this country to Ireland forced to go to Portpatrick?
§ MR. MILNER GIBSONI am not aware of any influence of that nature. I found that successive Governments had bound themselves by engagements from which it was impossible to escape; and as I am in a position to carry out the project, I think it is my duty to proceed with the improvement of the harbour.