(NO. 101.) THIRD READING. (Hansard, 22 May 1868)

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
said, that the object of the noble Lord seemed to be simply to place the government of Railway Companies in the hands of those who attended the meetings, and to disfranchise those who were unable to attend. But it was obvious that the largest shareholders, who had most right and most reason to exercise control over the management of a railway, were those who, in consequence of the multitude of their engagements, had no time to be present at the meetings—especially if they lived in the country. It should rather be the 708 policy of their Lordships to place the management of railways in the hands of the richer shareholders, and take it away from the less responsible, who attended the meetings as often from motives of amusement as business. The legislation of Parliament in regard to railways seemed to be minute in the extreme. If the Bill became law, a Railway Company desiring additional powers from Parliament would have to apply for them supported by the decision of a Wharncliffe meeting, and here again the Motion of the noble Lord t would tend to throw the control of these applications into the hands of the less responsible shareholders. He would prefer to leave out the clause altogether; it embodied a most vicious principle. He believed his noble Friend very much in error in pursuing a system of tying up companies by minute and vexatious restrictions. The results of such a course had been most distressing, and he was tempted to say of the noble Lord, "Si monumentum quæris, circumspice." If anyone wanted to estimate the merits of a paternal system of government, which the noble Lord seemed so highly to approve, let him look at the condition of Railway Companies.

THE EARL OF CLANCARTY
hoped that his noble Friend the Chairman of Committees would not insist upon the Amendment; because it was important, as the noble Marquess had remarked, that every inducement should be held-out to large shareholders and capitalists to select a good Board of Directors and to give such a Board a full and generous support.

VISCOUNT LIFFORD
made a few remarks, which were inaudible.

§ LORD REDESDALE
said, it was not advisable to put extraordinary powers into the hands of Railway Directors. The richer shareholders generally knew where to forward their proxies, and it was only the poorer shareholders who required that this should be indicated to them. The consequence was that the extraordinary powers possessed by some of these Boards were the result, to a great extent, of the proxies sent by the smaller shareholders who forwarded them on the indication furnished in the proxies and without due inquiry. No doubt, when a Railway Company had a good Board of Directors, the shareholders were quite right in giving them their support; but there could be little doubt that all the injury done to the affairs of Railway Companies had resulted from the action of the respective Boards 709 of Direction. What was wanted was that the Directors should act under a stronger feeling of personal responsibility. He thought that for this end they required to be reduced in number. The effect of the Amendment would simply be to prevent persons from intrusting their proxies to Directors without knowing who these Directors were.

§ THE DUKE OF RICHMOND
said, he consented to the omission of these words the other evening at the suggestion of the noble Marquess, who proposed the omission without giving Notice. It was only subsequently that the full effect of their omission was pointed out to him, and, be lieving the alteration to be unwise, he should now be prepared to support the Amendment.