Welsh Newspapers

Search 15 million Welsh newspaper articles

Hide Articles List

4 articles on this Page

I LLANELLY HARBOUR.

News
Cite
Share

LLANELLY HARBOUR. An adjourned general meeting was held on Tuesday last, to discuss the motion of which Mr W. H. Nevill had given notice at the last meeting. There were present-Mr J. H. Rees (chairman), Mr D. Lewis, Mr Dunkin, Mr Glascodine, Col. Stepney, Mr Rosser, Mr R. B. Jones, Capt. Luckraft, Mr W. H. Nevill, Mr R. Nevill, Mr 0. W. Nevill, Mr W. Thomas, Mr Margrave, Mr D. Evans, Mr Onslow, Mr J. W. Buckley, Mr Waddel, Mr J. B. Philipps, Mr W. D. Philipps, Mr B. Jones (Caeffir), and Mr H. J. Howell. The Chirman, in opening the meeting said-Before we begin perhaps you will allow me to make a few ob- servations. I am very unwell to-day, and had it not been for the importance of this meeting I should not have been here. We are met to consider the motion of which notice has been given by Mr William Nevill, with reference to the proposed new docks and the railway company and a very serious question it is, considering the importance which docks are to Llanelly, and the very large sum of money we have already expended upon what I may call preliminaries, namely, nearly £ 4,000. Perhaps I may as well shortly detail to you our present position. It is this. The Clerk-The sum spent is 93,000. The Chairman—Well, we are getting on towards £4,000 as fast as we can. Our present parliamentary position is this We went to Parliament for two objects, one was to get the dock vested in us,—the new dock, of which it is now said that all has not been done that is necessary to be done to entitle us to have the dock vested in us,—and secondly to obtain a prolongation of time within which the docks must be made. The Com- mittee on the Bill, has in its wisdom, refused to vest the dock in us, but it has granted an extension of time. Now, it appears to me there are two ways in which the possession of these new docks can be obtained, one is by the heads of agreement in concurrence with the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company, and the other is by making a dock entirely independent of the company. I confess that I am inclined to concur with what Mr William Nevill said at the last meeting, that it would be best for the interests of Llanelly to have a dock in consonance with the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company, and I have always been of that opinion and have ever ex- pressed it. But in order to do so, we must, I beg to ob- serve, let bye-gones be bye-gones and only remember the past in so -f ar as we are absolutely compelled to do so. I hope we shall endeavour to enter into some sort of agree- ment from which there can be no withdrawal. I can very readily admit that there may have been faults on both sides. We certainly have failed to make any terms with the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company, but if Mr Glascodine says that which is correct, and that I have no doubt is the case, I hope that by a little effort, we shall make an arrangement with them which will be satisfactory to the commissioners, satisfactory to the company, and beneficial to the public. Mr W. H. Nevill then said-I feel, sir, in rising to address the Board upon the motion of which I have given notice, that I may very fairly be met at the out- set by objections, all having weight in the eyes of those who entertain them, and I think the best course I could adopt in bringing this matter-which I may say I do very unwillingly—under the notice of the Board, I say I may perhaps deal with it in the best way by advert- ing very shortly to those objections which may occur to me. The first objection I will take notice of is one which may be founded upon the Bill now before Par- liament. It seems a very fair objection to raise, to say that it is very unwise to do anything which will tend to arrest the course of the Bill which we have ourselves introduced, and which is now in the course of procedure through the Houses of Parliament. But if we come to look at the objection we shall find that there is not so much in it as would seem at first sight. The Bill has been shorn of its intended purposes to a very large extent, in the House of Commons. It appears that at present the only advantage to be derived from this Bill, if it become an Act, is that it extends the time for the completion of the docks and other works. It is also threatened with opposition in the Lords. We have spent a certain sum of money already in carrying this Bill so far, and not an inconsiderable sum either, be. cause, on reference to the accounts it will be found that as much as 11200 has already been disbursed, and the expenses we have already incurred in carrying this Bill through the House of Commons may be safely taken as more than double that amount. We have also before us a further expenditure, perhaps a large one, as its pro- gress is disputed, of carrying the Bill through the House of Lords. Now, looking at the ulti- mate benefit which we may derive from the Bill under the most hopeful view of the case, it is, I think, worth an effort to get rid of the threatened opposition in the Lords. If we can do that we shall get our Act, it may be, and save our pockets a large expenditure, therefore, if what I have to bring before the Board will tend to effect that, it ought not to meet with opposition. The next objection which occurs to me is one well founded, and which may be fairly taken. I mean my ignorance of the state of affairs, as between the com- mittee and the officials. I, for one. must confess my complete ignorance of any proposals that have been made, or any ideas that the committee may entertain as to the advisability of any scheme which the engineer may have preferred to them. I mention this because it was incidentally remarked upon at the last meeting, and may bear upon the question. 1 declare my entire ignorance of anything of that kind. It would, perhaps, have been better if I could have informed myself of the matter by something on the minutes, which would have enabled me to arrive at some opinion with regard to it. But there is no such information, and I cannot do so. And then comes the next objection, of those who hold that we have had quite negotiation enough with the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company, and that we had better burn our boats, as I may say, get rid of the negotiations with them,and set about making the docks on our own account, without any regard to them. That, I know, is the opinion entertained by some members of this Board, but I am obliged to say I do not think it is the opinion entertained by a majority of the Board, or the committee either. By their minutes and by the whole tenour of the negotiations found in the records of this Board, the feeling evidently exists that it is better that what we do in the way of improving our dock system should be done in connection with existing accommoda- tion. I believe that feeling still exists, that we should, if possible, conduct our negotiations with the view of carrying out the works in connection with the existing works. (Hear.) Then comes the last objection which I shall refer to, and it is a most important one in my mind. I feel it to be my duty, as a commissioner, to take notice of it, and to see how far it can be taken into consideration in reference to the present aspect of affairs. I hope it will not be supposed for a moment that either in doing or saying anything with regard to this matter, it is my wish to underrate or understate, in any way, the services of the committee. Nobody can do as I have done, that is read through their minutes, without being fully impressed that if there has been any failure, it has not been for the want of zeal, energy, industry, or tenacity of purpose. Since the time the committee came into existence, a very large amount of work has been done by them, and if I am myself obliged to condemn some of their proceedings, it is by no means because I have any satisfaction in using the language of disparagement, but because I think that it is the duty of every mem- ber of this Board to form the best opinion he can on any matter which forces itself on his attention, and having so formed it, to express it openly. If I bring forward any proposal which will interfere with the procedure of the committee, or in any way change the medium of communication between the Board and the Dock Company, it is not because I hope or believe that a greater amount of ability can be brought to bear upon the question. The whole subject, as it appears to me, ever since the appointment of the committee, has been beset with difficulty, from which it seems almost hopeless to escape. That is to say, judging by results. I can only say that as far as the present committe is concerned, I shall only be too happy if it can be shown to me or to the Board, that it is desirable that matters shall remain in statu quo. I shall then have much pleasure in withdrawing my motion, and allowing them to go on as they have been going on hitherto. I have spoken of the commit- tee and of their labours, and I may remind the Board that those labours commenced in 1863, that is five years ago. Since that time a large sum of money has been spent; I do not think we can safely venture to put it at less than X3000. Certainly not, if we include all we ought, such as the expenses of carrying the Act of 1864 through the House. If we do this, I think we may safely say that we have already spent £ 3,000 in this matter, and, of course, we may also say—I will not say of course-but we may safely say that the result of the expenditure, the result of all the trouble and labour gone through by the committee, is one which, I think, not even the most sanguine of us can consider satisfactory. Now, if there are any gentlemen in this room, or out of it, who feel really adverse to your efforts, then, I can quite understand that they must be very well satisfied with the present state of things. I can also quite understand that the professional gentle- men who have assisted us so largely in this matter (laughter) will also rejoice at the present position of affairs. I do not make use of the expression in an in- vidious kind of way, because that kind of feeling is, on their part, simply human nature; but I can only say that they, at least, have got hold of a goose with a golden egg-perhaps I ought to say, with 3,000 golden I eggs-and I do not suppose that they will wish to see the life of so profitable a bird curtailed at all. (Laugh- ter.) I think the question which we-and when I say we, I mean the manufacturers and shipowners, and traders of this port, who, at the very best, take this matter coasiderably on trust, and use little influence on either side; still, I may venture to consider very fairly how far we shall be individually benefitted by it-the question we have to consider is, has this money been spent to the best account? We see an amount of debt accumulating around the neck of the trade of the port from day to day and not only in our own interest, but in the interests of those whom we represent, the ques- tion we ask is, has this money been spent to the best account ? We have not come to the end of the expen- diture evidently. Are we to go on spending the money in the way we have been spending it? Have these negotiations, which have been carried on for so many years, been carried on in the best way for our interests: and are the results derived from those negotiations, the results which we should wish to see? In answering one question I shall be also answering the other two questions which I have asked. Now, are the results satisfactory, and has the money been well laid out. The negotiations, as I have already said, commenced in 1863, and they were founded on negotiations which were then on foot with the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company, for the extension of dock accommodation by that company. They were carried on through 1863, and in 1864 the time and attention of the committee was greatly taken up by the Act which was passed in that year and in that year was brought to light the memorable schedule D. I do not know whether my experience of Parliamentary documents and matters generally entitles me to speak with such strength of language as I undoubtedly feel inclined to use, with regard to schedule D, for I cannot compare it with any similar document. But looking at it in a common sense light, it seems to me of all absurdities the great- est. The Chairman-Are you speaking of the heads of agreement ? Mr Nevill-Yes, heads of agreement, as you very pro- perly observe, but heads having no tail. (Laughter.) It is an agreement which either party may satisfy or not as the opinion of the day, or the high prieat-if you like to have it so-of the day chooses to move it. Well, we had the Act of 1864, and with it we had schedule D, and then began a certain amount of negotiation, based upon the quick-sand, schedule D. Of course there was no footing to be found Schedule D betrayed those who were endeavouring to negotiate upon it. Scheduie D is still in statu quo I am sorry to find it attached to our present Act of 1868, where, I am sure, it will be a fertile source of difficulty in all future arrangments. The Llanelly Railway and Dock Company have doubt- less departed for it they refuse to be held by schedule D in any way and if we are to attempt to make schedule D the basis of any future arrangements, we may very naturally conclude that it will lead to as much trouble in the future as it has in the past. With regard to the negotiations which I say arose out of that Act of 1864 they were carried on, and it is hardly necessary that I should weary you with the leading details, as they are to be found on the committee's minutes. They were carried on through the years 1865, 1866, and 1867. In 1867, you will find further heads of agreement were entered into, and both heads of agreement have fallen through, and in 1868 we find ourselves face to face with the company over an Act which does not in the slightest degree improve our position except as regards extension of time. I think I may venture to ask any man what conclusion he would draw from this. I do not wish to use any language which is not justifiable by the circum- stances of the case,-and I hope I may be put right if I am wrong-but I think I may venture to say that the attempts at negotiation have been a miscarriage from one end to the other. It is true that the miscarriage may to a certain extent be attributed to the false basis ot agreement on which the commissioners started and it may be said-although I do not agree with it in the least,—that we failed owing to a certain amount of bad faith on the part of the railway company. I do not, in the slightest degree, believe in the charge of bad faith imputed to the company. They have departed from heads of agreement which they were perfectly justified in departing from they never ratified them, because schedule D is always made subject to approval, and subject to approval means also subject to disapproval. I do not attribute bad faith to them because they have not thought fit to adopt Schedule D. It may be, and has been argued largely, that they ought to have had a special meeting of the shareholders. A Wharncliffe meeting does appear to have been held. But in regard to schedulo D they have not recognized us and they never will, I believe. It may be said that these negotiations have broken through because the commissioners were not prepared to carry out the money arrangements. I do not think there is much in that. If schedule D had been to the interests of the railway company they would have been only too glad to carry it out as soon as possible, but I suppose it did not. Well of course nothing could be done without money, and as soon as the commissioners found themselves thrown upon their own resources, they set to work to get the money and they found it, displaying the greatest possible energy and zeal. But although they had the money the nego- tiations have come to nothing. Things remain in statu quo, and will so remain, because certain interests are adverse to the scheme. I have taken up your time longer than I need, because these matters are perfectly familiar to you all but as a commissioner I feel it to be my duty, and I think it is the duty of every one here to say what they feel upon the matter. The question now is, what is to be done? There seems to be between the company and the committee an element of diver- gence, I might almost say an element of discord, antagonism whether that element of antagonism arises from the natural hostility which must be engendered amongst men finding themselves face to face for a period of five years, or wh 9ther it arises from any other cause it is not, really, worth our while to enquire, it is evident that there has been no way in this matter there has been no will, therefore no way and the question naturally prompting itself to us is why is there no way ? We both desire the same object, we both have the same interests. At the last meeting I took occasion to say, and I repeat it now, that it appears to me that the interests of the railway company and the commissioners are. completely identical and yet here we are, hammering away for five years and making no progress at all because there is traceable in the negotiations an element of divergence, or some element which nullifies all our efforts. I Use the word divergence because it expresses my meaning and I cannot see, myself, as matters at present stand, any constitutional escape from the difficulty. What the reason of the difficulty is, is a matter for the com- mittee themselves to explain they are better able than anyone else to say why it is that this state of affairs arises. I can only say that it appears they are beset with difficulties which it is hardly possible, apparently, for them to escape from, therefore it becomes our duty, as commissioners, to consider whether we cannot pro- pose something which shall, if possible, remove the difficulty in which we find ourselves, and I can see no way out of it than-not by appointing another com- mittee, for I do not wish to do anything of the kind; but I should propose something like it. I should wish that the chairman, and some three or four members of the Board-I speak of the chairman not only as chair- man of the Board, but as a representative of the com- mittee-be requested to put themselves in communication with the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company to ascertain finally whether it is possible or not possible to come to any satisfactory arrangement in this matter. If they find it is possible, then it comes before this Board, to consider as to what further course they may think necessary if the company are ready to come forward witn any proposal which shall in any way meet the difficulty, then let them state such proposal. I should prefer seeing all proposals referred to this Board, and not to a committee. (Capt Luckraft: Hear, hear.") I think this Board, under the present state of things-mind you, I do not cast any slight upon committees generally-is better able to deal with this than a committee would be. This committee has failed, I am obliged to say, not for want of energy, but, because they appear to be beset with difficulties of the most vexatious character, This Board has no diffi. culties to delay them, and they can better deal with this than anybody else, therefore I should like the Board to deal with them, and the Board ought to meet as frequently as the necessities of the case seem to require; and it is not too much to ask gentlemen to attend more frequently than usual, at a time when our proceedings are of the utmost importance. Having done that, I hope and trust we shall do what appears to us the best to meet the emergency. I do not move any special resolution now; I shall be prepared to do it at the end of the meeting. I wish to make the subject a matter of discussion, and then I shall be prepared to bring it before the Board. If a majority of the Board think my course desirable let it be done; but if upon the discussion such a matter deserves, they think it undesirable, then, I shall be very willing to withdraw my motion, and change my opinion too, if I can be shown any good reason for so doing. If not, I shall feel myself called upon to frame a special resolution for the concurrence, or not, of this Board, as it may see fit. Mr Rosser-I think we ought to have some resolution before us. (Hear, hear.) Col. Stepney-Belonging as I do to the committee, and being its president, after the elaborate speech of my friend Mr William Nevill, it falls I think, to my share, to explain as far as I can, the facts of this matter. I am quite delighted, as far as it goes, at the difference in the resolution proposed now by Mr Nevill and that which he offered us some five years ago. I am glad he hasso far changed his mind as to the necessity of making a dock, which at that time he strenuously opposed. I always rejoice over a repentant sinner as much as 1 possibly can, (laughter,) but when he comes here and casts out any quantity of insinuations of im- becility and incapability and what not, on the committee I must object, for although I must admit that he certainly is very civil in his expressions, or rather in the way in which he says what he has to say, still it goes forth to the public that, as a committee of the commissioners for carrying this Bill through Par- liament, we are more or less considered as not having done our duty. There can be no doubt upon that subject- The Chairman-I do not think Mr Nevill meant that or said it. Mr Nevill—Certainly not. Col. Stepney-I am much obliged to you, Mr Chair- man, for correcting me, but if you will allow me to go on without interrupting me I shall be still more obliged. The Chairmau-1 simply tell you what I thought were the words used or the opinion expressed. Col. Stepney—As to Mr Nevill's words or meanings, I have just as much right to have an opinion as your- self. (Laughter.) The Chairman—But what I said- Col. Stepney-I know what you said, and I know what he said too; and there is the onus which he laid upon the committee, that is the point I am speaking to. I think it will go forth to the public. At least he wishes it to be supposed that we are a condemned body that we have not done all that Mr Nevill thinks ought to have been done, from some cause or other which he does not define. I now come to the point respecting outsiders. He said when he introduced the motion which he has so elaborately discussed, that the outsiders were to meet &have a consultation with the Dock Com pany that we are to appoint outsiders, people who are to know nothing, to remember nothing of former tran- sactions or the real cause of delay. He now visits, in a kind of way, the committee with being the cause of the delay, and for not bringing the transaction to an earlier conclusion. I cannot help thinking that he lost sight of one thing-that when two parties are nego- tiating you must have coincidence of opinion, or else you can under no circumstances agree. (Laughter.) Unless, indeed, you give up the whole interests of the town of Llanelly, and the chance of enlarging the docks and prefer the speculative interests of the rail- ways. That is one great difficulty which we have had to get over. I am very glad Mr Nevill has taken it up, t _;ah Vnm Koflar biipppcs fKan wa wnn "rA nnw condemned persons, have had, supposing it to be pos- sible, and I do not think it is possible for you to super- sede the existing committee for carrying this Bill through Parliament. Now it is proposed, and there could, of course, be no objection to an amateur, empi- rical attempt to do something, and I should most heartily rejoice to know that such a body had been successful at negotiating; but I cannot help doubt- ing their success. You may appoint these persons, but you cannot change the committee for car- rying the Bill through Parliament. I am not inclined to withdraw that Bill, and I don't think you are, because I doubt very much whether you will come to a satisfactory understanding with the company. If amateur negotiators are ap- pointed on one side, why not on the other. Our negotiators ought not to have to meet Mr Gladstone and the other officials, who are bound, more or less, to carry out the views of their company, and to forward its interests reasonable or unreasonable. That is quite clear. I have no objection to other people trying their hands, as Mr Nevill thinks we have failed but I can assure you it is not very easy to make people who disagree, agree. There was a statement made here at the last meeting, proceeding from a conversation that one of our members had with Mr Rendall. I beg leave to clear up one point as far as I am concerned. It is simply this-that it is the first time, at this Board, that I ever heard of such a circumstance as the dock being made for £ 35,000. It would have been a most import- ant circumstance, and not likely to escape my know- ledge. Having been in communication with Mr Rendall the whole time, I am in a position to say that during that time he delivered to the committee or my- self no such recommendation. We never heard of such a proposition from Mr Rendall, which we certainly should have heard if he had ever happened—and he never did happen, as far as our knowledge goes-to mention it. The first time I ever heard of it was at this very Board. I believe there must have been some mistake in the statements made at the last Board, although I do not mean to accuse anybody of —— Mr D. Lewis-No mistake at all. I simply repeated what Mr Rendall said to me. There is no mistake what- ever. Col. Stepney-There is a mistake somewhere, and 1 have been in connection with Mr Rendall quite long enough to know that he is a very clear-headed man, and not likely to make errors, or statements that he is'nt pre- pared to stand by. Mr D. Lewis-l beg leave to say with reference to Mr Rendall, that the estimate of £ 35,000 was drawn up very carefully by the engineer of the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company, sometime ago. The decreased cost arose from the different mode of floating the channel, and the difference betwen zC35,000 and L50,000 is accounted for by that. Col. Stepney—Well, all I have got to say is there must be an error somewhere and- Mr R. B. Jones—Will you please, sir, to rise to order. (Hear, hear.) I agree with Mr Rosser that it is quite necessary, before we can have any regularity in dis- cussion, that Mr Nevill should propound his resolution. Otherwise, as we are sowing the wind, we shall certainly reap the whirlwind. The Chairman-Mr Nevill, will you read your resolution. Got Stepney I am willing to do anything reasonable, but Mr Nevill-At present I would rather not. Col Stepney-I think you ought not to allow me to be interrupted you allow others to do it, and you in- terrupt me yourself. The Chairman-I interrupted you myself, because I thought you were under a misunderstauding as to the words or intentions of a previous speaker. Under such circumstances, it is the duty of the chairman to correct the wrong impression. (Hear, hear.) Col. Stepney—Mr Lewis addressed some remarks to me, which I answered; I was going to add something else when I was interrupted by Mr Richard Jones. Mr R. B. Jones-No, I did not interrupt you. I addressed the Chairman. The Chairman—Will the Board allow Col. Stepney to make his other observation. Col. Stepney-I beg leave to say that the only estimate I ever heard of was £ 40,160. I known of no other and that is an answer to Mr Lewis Mr D. Lewis-I did not address any question to you, and therefore no answer was required. The Chairman asked Mr Nevill to read his motion. He understood that the persons appointed were not to displace the committee for carrying the Bill through Parliament, but simply to negotiate with the Llanelly Parliament, Dock Company. Railway and D?ck ompany.. Mr Nevill said his notice of motion was to attain certain results either by the appointment of a com- mittee, or by such other means, as the Board might determine, after discussion, to adopt. Having sketched his plan, it was for the Board if it pleased, to name certain members to form the deputation be suggested. He did not ask for a committee, but simply for a depu- tation, to meet the Company, hear what they had to say, and let the Board deal with it in future. Col. Stepney said that could not be done without the sanction of the commissioners. Mr Onslow understood that in future information should come direct to the Board, so that a committee should have no means of withholding tue information. The Chairman asked Mr R. B. Jones whether an arrangement with the company, other than the heads of agreement, could be carried out under the present Bill if not, he saw no object in treating. Mr R, B. Jones thought it could be done, to a certain extent. The company and the commissioners were fully authorised to treat with each other. Col. Stepney said Mr Nevill had laid great stress upon the large sums of money already expended, and now proposed to nullify all the money spent by enter- ing into fresh negotiations. The large expenditure was not the fault of the committee, but of their opponents, who would not agree to anything. The amateurs would find the same difficulty. Mr Margrave asked Mr Glascodine whether, if a new arrangement were come to, it would not be absolutely necessary to have a new Act to carry out the works. Mr Glascodine thought not. He wished to avoid any discussion on a preliminary point and if the Board felt disposed for an amicable settlement, Mr Nevill had better move his resolution, and if it were carried let circumstances develope themselves. Mr W Nevill believed they would have to go to Parliament again if they came to fresh terms. The Chairman then read Mr W. Nevill's motion as follows :—" That the Chairman and three other members of the Board be requested to go as a deputation to the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company, for the purpose of ascertaining if they are prepared to enter upon negotiations with regard to the proposed new docks, and it so, on what basis and that the deputa- tion be requested to report to the Board. Mr B. Jones seconded the motion. Mr Margrave wished it to be thoroughly understood that that motion carried with it no arrest of the present Bill in the House of Commons. Mr R. B. Jones said he had seconded it on that understanding. He had not followed Mr Nevill through all his remarks, because he disapproved of some of them. He could not approve of the whole- sale condemnation of the committee. It was not the first time public bodies had failed to carry out public works. He did not think a body of commissioners were the proper persons to carry out such works, and as he understood they were only going in to aid the railway company. That was his opinion, although opposed to that of many gentlemen. The Chairman—Does any gentleman wish to object. No. Then 1 suppose it is carried. Col Stepney-Pardon me, I think you ought to put it to the meeting. The ChairmarL-Why ? There is no amendment. Do you object ? Col Stepney-I do. At least, you put it to the meeting. I think my speech showed that I did not approve of it. I should like to see who votes for and against it, as I have a curiosity to know that. Mr R. B. Jones-I certainly must object to that doctrine of Col Stepney. If it is simply to gratify his curiosity I object very strongly. ("Hear, hear," No, no,") Col Stepney-No, it is not a matter of curiosity, but for satisfaction. I say it ought to be put to the meeting. The resolution was then put, and the names of those who voted for and against were taken. Messrs Dunkin, Rosser, and Onslow, all members of the Dock Committee, said they saw no objection to it, and accordingly voted for it. Mr Margrave and Col Stepney voted against, and we think they were the only dissentients. Col. Stepney said he only wished to test the feeling of the different commissioners and while he wished the new party every success, he assured them that the interests of the other side were so antagonistic to Llan- elly, that he feared they would be beset with difficulties on every side. Mr Onslow, on being asked, refused to serve as a negotiator. Mr Margrave hoped Mr Onslow would not so far sink his personal dignity as to serve. They had failed to gat the docks, by negotiation with the company, and they must now act apart from the company altogether. Mr D. Lewis asked Mr Margrave to explain how they would get the docks perfectly apart from the railway company. Mr W. Nevill then named the Chairman, Mr W. Morris, Mr W. Thomas, and Mr R. B. Jones. To these was added Mr W. Nevill. Mr Rosser called attention to the fact that Mr Morris and Mr Thomas were connected with the Llanelly Railway and Dock Company, and said if the deputation was not to be independent, it was worth nothing. Col. Stepney also made the same objection. Mr W. Nevill said he was quite aware of the conec- tion of those gentlemen with the company, but he put their names down because be deemed them to be men above any kind of influence whatever. Mr Rosser I don't say they are not above influence but it seemed to me, at first sight, a curious selection. Mr Nevill said as the deputation were intended simply to receive proposals, and as they had no power whatever to negotiate, he did not see the objection. Mr Onslow-- They are merely to show some new faces to the shareholders. (Laughter.) Mr W. Nevill-Put it in any way you like. Mr Rosser suggested that Mr Charles Nevill and some two others should meet the company then if the com- pany were animated by a conciliatory spirit, he would have some hopes of success but really, he had not the same faith in a committee, several of whom were con- nected with the company. Mr Charles Nerill did not agree with Mr Rosser, because they only wanted or expected the company's views on the possibility of new arrangements for making the dock in connection with them. The move. ment originated from a few of the commissioners who were anxious to prevent a further expenditure of money at present (Mr R. B. Jones "And an increased expen- diture in the future"), and the constitution and object of the deputation precluded the possibility of any betrayal of the commissioners' interests. Mr Rosser said he had raised the objection, and now, after that expression of opinion, he left it in the hands of the commissioners. Hedidnot pledge himself any further than the mere voting for the resolution and it would be time to take other actions when the company's pro- posals were produced. The Bill would go on. Mr R. B. Jones said the company might possibly be induced to forego opposition in the Lords, on a basis of terms to be laid befor the deputation. Mr Rosser said Mr Nevill's motion was to be brought forward at a special meeting but it appeared this was an adjourned general meeting. He asked Mr Glascodine't; opinion on it. Mr Glascodine thought the motion could be con- sidered at that meeting. It was considered that as the directors met that evening, the deputation could meet them, and an early adjournment could be called.

PEMBROKESHIRE.

[No title]

[No title]