SELBORNIANA 
63 
will enter a tunnel 280 yards long, from which it will emerge 
near the northern end of the pass and on to an embankment on 
the eastern side of the river. It then crosses the Glaslyn and 
runs a short distance to the west of the road until it passes 
Beddgelert, after which it again approaches the river. A 
portion of the bed of the river Glaslyn ( i.e ., to the centre of the 
stream) for a considerable distance to the north of the pass is 
within the limits of deviation, and it may be thought desirable 
to ensure that no embankment or other works shall encroach 
upon the bed of the river.’ To any one who knows the neigh- 
bourhood it is plain that this is hardly less fatal to the whole 
Glaslyn valley than if the pass itself were traversed. Is it 
possible that any one is insensible to the hatefulness of a railway 
bridge or a railway embankment beside a lovely road across a 
mountain stream ? Beddgelert — long unrivalled in situation and 
secluded charm — will of course be entirely ruined. And for 
what end is the whole nation to be robbed of this bit of beautiful 
scenery? To ‘open up’ Beddgelert, we are told. That is to 
say, instead of a delightful walk, or drive, or cycle ride of eight 
miles along a perfectly easy and perfectly lovely road, the tourist 
may get himself whizzed from Portmadoc to Beddgelert in a 
shorter time and be taken through a tunnel instead of strolling 
through the Pass of Aberglaslyn. And on reaching the end of 
his interesting journey he will find himself in a spot the once 
famous beauty of which is gone. Any one who shares my desire 
to protest against this folly and to make an effort to save this 
rare bit of natural beauty will be interested to read the following 
clause from the Light Railways Bill : — ‘ If any objection to any 
application for authorising a light railway is made to the Light 
Railway Commissioners, or if any objection to any draft order is 
made to the Board of Trade on the ground that the proposed 
undertaking will destroy or injure any building or other object of 
historical interest, or will injuriously affect any natural scenery, 
the Commissioners and the Board of Trade respectively shall 
consider any such objection and give to those by whom it is 
made a proper opportunity of being heard in support of it.’ ” 
The Royal Buckhounds. — “ Denials,” says the Daily Chronicle, 
“ have been made of the tortures suffered by the tame deer hunted 
by the Royal Buckhounds on December 10, 1897. We have 
before us the sworn depositions of two men, one of whom helped 
to drag the deer out of the water, while the other poured brandy 
down its throat. The first is that of William Pursey, of Reading, 
who deposes : — ‘ I hereby declare that when the said animal 
entered the river for the last time I saw about half a dozen 
hounds follow it and surround it in the water. I saw some of 
them get upon it. When the deer was secured and brought to 
the towing-path it lay helpless and gasping. Liquor from a 
flask was poured down its throat by one of the mounted fol- 
lowers, wearing scarlet, which liquor did not, however, revive it. 
