2jo History of Inland Transport 



projected branches in defence of their own interests against 

 threatened competition. It was at this juncture that Mr 

 Gladstone's Committee presented its Report and that, follow- 

 ing thereon, the special department of the Board of Trade 

 was called upon to undertake its responsible duties. 



On November 28, 1844, the department intimated that the 

 points it would particularly inquire into in regard to railway 

 Bills then before it were (i) ability and bona fide intentions of 

 the promoters to prosecute their application to Parliament in 

 the following Session ; (2) national advantages to be gained ; 

 (3) local advantages ; (4) engineering conditions ; and (5) 

 cost of construction, prospective traffic and working expenses. 

 On the last day of the year the department announced which 

 Bills they proposed to recommend, and subsequently they 

 issued reports giving their reasons. Strong protests were 

 raised by the disappointed projectors, and on the opening 

 of the Session of 1845 Sir Robert Peel announced that the 

 Government intended to leave railway Bills, as before, to 

 the judgment of the Private Bill Committees. 



This meant the virtual setting aside of the newly-formed 

 department, though its actual existence was not terminated 

 until the following August. It meant since each Private 

 Bill Committee would deal only with the merits of a particular 

 scheme the definite abandonment of any opportunity for 

 securing, through an authority dealing with railway pro- 

 jects as a whole, the realisation of the ideal of Mr Gladstone's 

 Committee that " each new line should be viewed as a member 

 of a great system of communication, binding together the 

 various districts of the country with a closeness and intimacy 

 of relation " previously unknown. It meant, also, the adop- 

 tion of a policy of free trade in railways, without protection 

 for established interests, and to any and every honest pro- 

 moter or dishonest speculator who had a scheme to propose 

 it gave, in effect, carte blanche to bring it forward. 



Much disappointment was felt at this collapse of Mr Glad- 

 stone's apparently well-devised scheme, and the policy 

 adopted in regard to it was keenly criticised. Francis quotes, 

 for instance, the following passages from " Railway Legisla- 

 tion," the authorship of which, however, I have been unable 

 to trace : 



" Swayed by motives which it is difficult to fathom, the 



