RAILWAY LINES OF POLITICS.
“Mr. Punch, Honoured Sir,
“As a British Elector, I should just like to know your opinion about the follerin observations as was made by Mr. Tite tother day at the meetin of the South-Western Railway shareholders:-
“They were placed in a false position, not by the acte of the Directors, but by the rivalry of other companies, and the support which Parliament gave to that rivalry . . . Take another instance which they would have to fight that session, and which involved the running of a broad gauge line into Southampton. Whether that line was withdrawn or not, the going to Southampton on the broad gauge was on the cards, and they must oppose somehow or other such a project as that. There was a disposition to encourage rivalry in railways, and Directors were driven to measures which were beyond their control.”
“What do you say now to these here remarks of Mr. Tite’s as exibitin his notion of the duties of a Member of Parliament? What I said when fust I read em was, Blow me, Tite! Here’s Mr. Tite, a wery respectabel gentleman no doubt calls his self M. P. for Bath; but is bath the constitchency represented by that hon. legislator? Is he Member for Bath, or Member for the South-Western Railway? I don’t know what may be the Bath voters’ notion of the bisnis of their repersentative, but what I should like mine to do would be to flight the battles of the people in the House of Commons, instead of fightin rival railway companies. That’s how the work of the nation’s neglected, for the sake of forcin’ up dividends, by means too of inderin competition, so as to enable directors to charge the public whatever fares they choose. It strikes me there’s a good deal too much of this here sort of thing, and these here M.P.s for Railways in that there Assembly, which may be all rite and Tite for such as it may consern, but is wery like to be the cause of a good deal of loose legislation by which the people suffers in warious ways, besides bein’ overcharged for travelin, thanks to the Railway Members as goes there to fight for privilidge and monopoly agin Free Trade. I has the honner to scribe myself,
“Your abitchial Reeder,
“Simon Pure.”
“Tenpun Alley, February, 1860.”
“P.S. If there must be Railway Members, why not let’em be returned to Parliament or the different lines at wunce? Well – there’d be rayther too many on’em, I spose, in that case for the size of the bildin; so probbaly that scheme won’t form no part of the nu Reform Bill.”
Back to The Latest Arrival from Paris. <<< — >>> Next to A DREAM OF THE GREAT UNPAID.
