Wandsworth Common
IN THE NEWS
1837
(Click on image to enlarge)
Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertise — Saturday 03 June 1837
[Route of London-Brighton railway]
[NEEDS EDIT]
Captain AT,AGER said, that the committee to whom the several railway bills between London and Brighton had been referred had, in obedience to the orders of the house, made a special report upon the engineering merits of those lines, and that report was in favour of the direct line ( Sir J. Rennie's). As one of the promoters of that line, he was prepared to make this report to the house, and therefore he should beg leave to move that the report be adopted, that this bill be sent back to the committee, that the committee be directed to have the landholders heard, and the clauses settled, and that the committee do meet on Thursday next. The noble lord, who was the chairman of the committee, taking a rather different view of the subject, intended, he believed, to move an amendment upon this motion, and therefore, as several hon. members were in all probability desirous of addressing the house, he would not take up any or its time at present, but reserve to himself the right of reply.
Lord G. LENNOX observed, that on the 9th of this month an instruction was given by the house to the London' and Brighton Railway Committee to this effect- . --that the committee was to examine the engineering merits of the competing lines, to enable the house to determine which to send back to the committee. Now, he maintained that the committee had not sent to the house the information which was require by the instruction. He knew the objection which the house had to go against the report of a committee, but in order that justice might be done to all . parties lie called on the house to sanction an address to the Crown for the appointment of an Ordnance engineer, who should be called on to decide which was the best line. He objected to the constitution of the committee which had decided in favour of Sir John Rennie's line. The investigation had lasted 27 days, and the average attendance of members each day was 20, but on the 28th day they were honoured with the attendance of 45 members, six of whom voted for Sir John Rennie's line, having been there only one day, and without having heard one word of 'the' engineering evidence: He should now move as an amendment upon the motion of the hon. member for East Surrey, that an humble address be presented to his Majesty, praying that he would' be graciously pleased to furnish some military engineer to survey the several lines of Brighton Railway now under the consideration of the house, together with the several plans and sections thereof, and to report thereon.
Mr. WARBURTON wished to direct the attention of the house to some facts which had come out in evidence relative to the subscription-list for Rennie's line. It certainly appeared that the framing of the subscription-list of last session was conducted in the most unexceptionable manner, but that line having been rejected, the persons into whose hands the shares had come by sale and purchase were the persons whose names appeared on the list for the present bill. (The hon. member was proceeding, when Mr. NVigney rose to order, and after some converon between the latter hon. member, the Speaker and Mr. W urton, the last hon. member, on the understanding that the report itself would be printed, and that he would then be permitted to discusss the facts contained in it, resumed his seat). Mr. Cutazis . considered that the proposition of the noble lord would be most unfair to the majority of the committee, and it would be setting a monstrous and most unjust precedent. Mr. C. BARCLAY was understood to support the amendment.
Mr. W. CRAWFORD asserted that the feeling against Rennie's line was all but universal, from Wandsworth-common to Horsham, and that the consent of every individual land-owner on the line who was in favour of it had been purchased at a most enormous cost.
GORIXa complained that Rennie's line had been carried by means of a coalition, and not owing to its superior merits. He should support the amendment.
Capt. PECHELL said, it was very true that a coalition had taken place, but it was with the parties whom the hon. member himself supported. He contended that no committee could have conducted an inquiry more fairiy.
After a few observations from Mr. TOOKE and Lord EASTNOTt, Mr. P. THOMSON expressed his intention of supporting, after a little amendment which he would suggest, the proposition of the noble lord. He thought that the amendment should be altered so as to direct the committee to apply for a military engineer,. who should give in a report on the three different lines, and that then the committee should be ordered to report en the engineering evidence altogether. (Hear, hear. )
Lord A. LENNOX corroborated the assertion of his noble relative, which had been to a certain extent contradicted by the hon. member for Brighton, that there were six members of the committee who had voted upon the engineering evidence without hearing one word of it. The noble lord then mentioned their names, but the confusion prevailing in the house prevented their reaching the gallery, with the exception of that o_ the noble member for Hythe (Lord Melgund), who before he had been eight-and-forty hours a member of Parliament had voted upon evidence which he could not have heard, and which, in all probability, lie had never read. (" Hear," and a laugh. )
Sir S. WHALLEY hoped that the house would not suffer itself to be misled by the statement of the noble lord who had just sat down — a statement which the records of the committee would prove to be inaccurate. Mr. HumE complained of the conduct of Government in throwing its weight into the scale of one of these parties. The Government had formerly refused to interfere between the parties, and he did not know what influence had been used to cause the right hon. gentleman to interfere now.
Mr. P. THOMSON said, that it was in consequence of his having read the evidence taken by the committee — evidence which he suspected that the hon. member for Middlesex had not yet read — that he had ventured to offer his opinion to the house, and to make the suggestion which he had submitted to its consideration.
Lord G. SOMERSET supported the amendment, for he was of opinion that the committee had not fairly laid the case before the house.
Mr. WANLEY agreed with his hon. friend the member for Middlesex, that the Government ought not to interfere in private contests of this kind. On other private bills the members of Government trotted off to the library when a division was expected as fast as their legs could carry them ; on the present occasion, for reasons best known to themselves, they were stationary in their places, and their recommendation was to supersede every thing else.
After a few words from Sir C. BURRELL, Mr. GOULBURN said, that the proposition of submitting the the different lines to a military engineer would have been proper enough, had not this matter been already for two sessions under examination before two committees of that house. To agree to that proposition *ow would be to prevent any bill from passing during the present session. lie declared himself to be in favour of the direct line.
COl. WOOD admitted that there had been two committees on this subject. The committee of last Session sat 52 days, and reported in favour of Stephenson's line : the committee of this session sat 35 days, and had reported in favour of Rennie's line. The only way to do justice was to call in a military engineer, and let him decide between the two lines.
F'RESHFIELD declared his intention .of voting against the amendment, because he saw great difficulty in appointing an engineer who did not belong to one line or another.
Captain ALSAGER declared his intention of opposing th e amendment, as Mr. Rastrick was an engineer who sco wasvery high in the opinion of the house, and no man's opinion entitled to higher respect. The cries fur a division, which had be:1% 1 10 , 7 ,y d w fo a r s c tl i l e c ar l , ? d st . half hour, here became incessant. Therl; appeared--for the original The house then divided. when there app ; e. majority, 7. motion, 157 ; for the amendment, found , 16 On our return to the gallerye w wished to ask the Government whether, after Mr. HUMa on the his legs. very extraordinary Course they had taken on the question on which the house had just divided, w hen, fur the first time for some years, the whole of the Treasury bench had come down to divide on a private bill(cheers) — he wished, he repeated, to ask, whether Government intendedto come down to-morrow to introduce some general rule as applying to bills of this kind, in order that the public connected with such bills might know what they had to expect ? (Hear, hear.)
Mr. P. TITONISON said that he did not intend to introduce any such measure; but if the hone member should think proper to make any m:Jtion on the subject, he (Mr. Thomsln) would be prepared to show that the. 'iresent was not such a ease as he (Mr. flume) had alludnd
[Source: LINK ]
[NOTE]
[Check this BNA link on railways: Link.]