Conciliatory Devices—Loans.

In my anxiety to place our relations with the railway companies on a satisfactory footing, and amidst doubt as to success in any attempt to procure efficient legislation on the subject, I devised, in the beginning of 1857, what I hoped might prove a means of winning from the companies that which, in spite of what I believed and still believe to be to their true interests, they have almost all refused to concede. My plan was that Government should, on ample security and to a limited extent, advance loans, on the terms on which it could itself borrow, to such companies as were willing to adopt a reasonable tariff of charge for postal services. This arrangement, while costing in effect nothing to Government, would enable the companies to borrow at a rate much lower than ordinary. As I still consider this suggestion important, I give my memorandum on the subject at length in the [Appendix (J)]. I may state here that I proposed to make the arrangement terminable at the end of three years, and that I hoped to reduce our annual payments for railway service by about £250,000. An inquiry from the Duke of Argyll, then Postmaster-General, led me to add a representation, setting forth strong additional reasons for seeking to obtain, of course on equitable terms, unlimited use of the railways. The following is the most important passage:—

“I feel assured that if my plan of advances to the railway companies were adopted, there would be no financial difficulty, either in using, more or less, every railway now existing, or which may be hereafter constructed, or in extending the delivery of letters to every house in the United Kingdom.”

My memorandum was sent by the Duke of Argyll to the Treasury, with a somewhat guarded recommendation that it should be favourably considered. By his permission, I also laid it before Mr. Hutchinson, chairman of the Stock Exchange, who, with some valuable recommendations as to the best mode of giving it effect, expressed his entire approbation of the plan. This being reported in a second memorandum, the whole matter was referred by the Treasury to Sir Alexander Spearman, though with what result I do not know. Meanwhile His Grace suggested that I should obtain also the opinion of Mr. Gladstone, who, it must be remembered, was not then in the Government, having seceded on a question relative to the Russian war; and on this advice, with the ready permission of Sir G. Cornewall Lewis, Mr. Gladstone’s successor in office, I was only too happy to act. The result—which, however, I first communicated to the Chancellor of the Exchequer—I subsequently stated in the following letter to the Postmaster-General. The reader will here see something of the practical difficulties which even Government, after giving its approbation to a measure, has to apprehend in carrying it, however cautiously, through Parliament:—

“February 23rd, 1857.

My dear Lord Duke,—Mr. Gladstone is of opinion that the Post Office interests in connection with the railways have been greatly neglected by the Legislature; that the Government should, if possible, obtain possession of the railways, when all difficulty would, of course, cease; that this might have been done seven or eight years ago, but that now it would be very difficult, and that some other course must in all probability be resorted to.

“He likes my plan (though inferior, as being less direct than the other), but considers it too difficult a piece of legislation for Parliament as matters now stand, and advises that, with the consent of the Treasury, we should endeavour to make the arrangement with some one company subject to the confirmation by Parliament, which, for a single bargain, might, he thinks, be counted upon; and that having done this we should, if the results prove satisfactory, apply to Parliament for power to deal with other companies.

“He also thinks well of referring the whole question, including the Bill, to a committee of the House of Commons, provided some able member of the Government can spare time to manage the case; but not otherwise.

“Sir George Cornewall Lewis is inclined to the latter alternative; but the difficulty will be to spare Mr. Wilson or any other able man to attend the committee. He spoke of Mr. Lowe, and promised to consider the whole case.

“Faithfully yours,
“Rowland Hill.