CONSIDERATION. (Hansard, 24 July 1891)

§ MR. T. ELLIS
The Amendments which I have to move are the corollary of the concessions already made with regard to the London & North-Western. I beg to move, in page 11, line 30, after the word "Worcester," to insert— (18.) Railways governed by the 'Vale of Llangollen Act, 1859,' and the 'Llangollen and Corwen Act, 1860.' (19.) Railways governed by the 'Corwen and Bala, and Bala and Dolgelly Acts, 1862.' (20.) Railways governed by the 'Bala and Festiniog Act, 1873.'

§ *SIR M. HICKS BEACH
I accept this Amendment, on the understanding that it is only consequential, and that I am at liberty to satisfy myself by further inquiry before finally agreeing to it.

§ *(6.35.) SIR M. HICKS BEACH
So far as concerns the Amendments of this Bill, I have gone as far as I can to meet the points raised by hon. Members. With regard to the reduced rates in South Wales, the Company lose £2,500 actual receipts in the articles of coal and coke alone, and I am sure the House would not desire to entail a further loss, amounting in the whole to £22,500 a year, on the Welsh line of the Great Western Railway Company, which would result from the immediate reduction of the conveyance rates on this line to the main line scale. I am desirous of meeting 300 my hon. Friend (Sir Hussey Vivian), who has Amendments on the Paper, as far as possible, and I feel that there is some claim on the part of those connected with South Wales for a reduction of rates on the South Wales line, which is now one of the main lines of the Great Western Railway. I therefore propose to insert a proviso, at page 11, line 43, which will ensure that the reduction of the rates will only take place when the company can afford it. That seems to me a fair arrangement, and I hope it will be adopted by both parties.

§ SIR H. VIVIAN (Swansea, District)
We are labouring under what we feel to be a very great grievance in this case, which is not, I am sorry to say, altogether met by the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman. At the same time, the President of the Board of Trade has probably gone as far as he possibly can to meet our wishes. At the same time it must be clearly understood that we do not accept this as final, and that we shall be precluded from endeavouring to obtain redress. I understand that we shall not be hung up for three years, and that if the Great Western Company become prosperous we shall have the advantage of this clause. I am glad the right hon. Gentleman accepts that interpretation, and I think that is a very important Amendment indeed. Then I understand the clause applies to the share capital—to the dividends upon the share capital of the company. Again, I have the assent of the right hon. Gentleman to my interpretation. The paid-up capital might be strained into meaning debentures and various other things. Do I understand it to mean bonâ fide share capital?

§ *SIR M. HICKS BEACH
It means the share capital.

§ SIR H. VIVIAN
I shall not move the Amendment standing in my name.

§ (6.45.) MR. ARTHUR WILLIAMS (Glamorgan, S.)
The hon. Member for Preston has said that the proposed division would have amounted to a serious loss to the Great Western, but I contend that there would not have been a loss, it would only have been a reduction of their advantage. In 1855 the Great Western Company took possession of the South Wales system, and from that time to this the traffic in that part of the country has been yearly growing in 301 prosperity and yielding a large proportion of the dividends payable to the shareholders. It is, therefore, perfectly misleading to suggest that the South Wales system is not contributing a large proportion of the earnings of the Great Western system. But for their intervention that line would be paying 50 per cent. more than any other line for conveying the products of the staple industry of the district.

§ MR. WOOTTON ISAACSON (Tower Hamlets, Stepney)
It was laid down by a learned Judge the other day that the first stock of a company was only the preferred ordinary stock. I hope the right hon. Gentleman wil make it clearly understood that by the stock of the company he means the ordinary stock.

§ *SIR M. HICKS BEACH
I must remind the hon. Member that I have already said so. I will, however, agree to the insertion of the word "ordinary."

§ *MR. W. PRITCHARD MORGAN
Payments out of the stock of a company must include payments out of the debenture stock, and if that be so, the ordinary stock will get to 8 or 9 per cent. before any relief is given. It has always been held by the Railway Companies that the whole stock of a company must necessarily earn 6 per cent. before any dividends can be paid.

§ *SIR M. HICKS BEACH
If, instead of "capital stock," the words "capital ordinary stock" are inserted that will meet the difficulty.

§ *MR. W. PRITCHARD MORGAN
As far as I am concerned I shall be perfectly satisfied with that; but I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider whether he cannot reduce the 6 per cent. to 5 per cent., or at any rate, to 5½ per cent. The great traffic in South Wales, especially in Glamorganshire, both in coal and iron, comes down to the coast, but in the case of the iron ore, which goes into the interior for manufacture, the Great Western Company is enabled to earn a large amount of money on the short distances run, in consequence of the terminal charges at both ends. If the Provisional Order is passed, the maximum rate per ton per mile, including the terminals, will be altered from 2s. 1d. and 2s. 6d. to 5s. 302 This, therefore, is a most important matter when we considor the enormous traffic in iron and steel that will be affected. In the case of coal the charges will be increased from 2s. 6d. to 3s., and considering that 54 millions of tons of coal are sent from Glamorganshire every year, the increased charges will necessarily amount to an enormous sum in favour of the Great Western Railway Company. I should be glad if the right hon. Gentleman could see his way to reduce the 6 per cent. to 5 per cent.

§ *SIR M. HICKS BEACH
The 6 per cent. is the figure fixed by the South Wales Railway Amalgamation Act, and I do not think I can alter it.

§ MR. S. T. EVANS (Glamorgan, Mid.)
I think in the case of dividends fixed at 6 per cent. it would be competent to the Board of Trade to revise the rates. I fail to see any reason why the Great Western Company should be treated in the way proposed by this Bill. The question is whether by increasing the maxima on the South Wales line, the industries of South Wales will be paralysed. When we are revising railway rates, it is hard that South Wales should be charged more than the other lines, the difference being as against South Wales something like 55 per cent. I do not see why in its race with Stafforshire, Lancashire, Yorks, and other mining districts, South Wales should be placed at so great a disadvantage. I can see no reason whatever for continuing the 6 per cent. fixed by the Act of 1864, at the present day. At the time the Act was passed the coalfields of South Wales were not developed, and the railways in that district were practically a speculation.

§ *SIR E. J. REED (Cardiff)
I hope the spirit of conciliation which has been shown by the right hon. Gentlemen will enable him to arrive at such a conclusion with regard to these short distance terminals as will give general satisfaction. The enormous traffic in minerals in the South Wales district is surely deserving of consideration, and the effect of heavy terminal charges on short lines of railways is a matter deserving of serious consideration.

(7.0.) MR. HUNTER
On looking at the South Wales Consolidation Act I find a circumstance which was not brought to the attention of the Committee. Under 303 the Act of 1855 the Terminal Clause is not a terminal clause in the ordinary sense. It is the same terminal clause as that of the London, Chatham, and Dover Company, and the traders in South Wales may fairly contend that in comparing the old maximum rate of 2d. per mile with the new rate the railways are not entitled under the old maximum rate to make a terminal charge. That question was not brought to the attention of the Committee. If it had been, I think it might have affected their decision.

§ MR. HANBURY
There can be no doubt that it was the impression of the Committee that they were reducing the South Wales rates by 25 per cent. I was somewhat astonished to find the opposition raised to our proposal. If it is a fact that that there is no power under the old Act to charge terminals, that 25 per cent. reduction has not taken place. I think my right hon. friend would do well to bear that fact in mind.

§ *SIR M. HICKS BEACH
I will look into the matter, but I cannot go further than that at present. Perhaps I may point out that this provision is distinctly more favourable to the South Wales traders than the Act of 1863.