H. L. (E.) 1876 NORTH LONDON RAILWAY CO. v. ATTORNEY- I consider the declaration of the Court of Exchequer to be correct, not for the reasons assigned in the judgment, but upon the grounds I have stated, which have led me to the same conclusion. LORD HATHERLEY :— My Lords, I have come to the same conclusion as my noble and learned friends who have preceded me. It appears to me that there is one leading guide for us, in the first part of the section establishing the cheap trains, which will carry us safely through the construction of the Act; and I certainly so far adopt the construction which has been put upon it by my noble and learned friend on the woolsack. It is this: the section of the Act which establishes the cheap trains expressly recites the anxiety of Parliament "to secure for the poorer class of travellers the means of travelling by railway at moderate fares, and in carriages in which they may be protected from the weather." That is the general paramount intention of the Act, and the Legislature carries out that intention by enacting in the first clause which establishes that cheap train, that, so long as companies carry any passengers at all upon their lines, they shall provide one such cheap train at the least each way on every week day (with certain exceptions in the Act mentioned) "for the conveyance of thirdclass passengers to and from the terminal and other ordinary passenger stations of the railway." It is clear, therefore, that Parliament intended that there should be one train at the least every day which should take third-class passengers, not only from terminus to terminus, but to and from any station at which any other passenger was taken up or set down. I am not now speaking of special stations, some of which are called signal stations and others market stations, but as regards the ordinary stations along the line of railway, it was enacted that every poor man, coming to any one of those stations where passengers are ordinarily taken up and set down, should be able, at a certain specified time, to be arranged as afterwards provided for, to find his train, and to travel by that train at a certain rate of speed, not less than twelve miles an hour, and at a certain rate of fare specified in the Act, namely, not more than one penny a mile. Then the Act proceeds to say, providing as it does for the carry 1876 NORTH LONDON' ! RAILWAY CO. v. ATTORNEY- ing of passengers from the terminal and other ordinary passenger H. L. (E.) stations, that the trains shall be "under the following conditions":"Such train shall start at an hour to be from time to time fixed by the directors, subject to the approval" of the Board of Trade. My Lords, I apprehend that that clause was intended to say: You, the poorer class of passengers, shall be carried by one continuous train, not by a series of trains, some of which will start at one hour and some of which will start at another, but which, taken all together, may perhaps stop at all the several passenger stations along the whole course of the line. Instead of that there is to be one train, which is to pass along the line stopping at all the various stations. In saying " one train," I do not refer to that which has been conceded by the Crown, and I apprehend rightly conceded, namely, that a passenger who started by an earlier train, was dropped at a station and then overtaken by a later train, and changed from one train into another, should not, merely from that fact, be considered to be travelling by the second train. I do not apprehend that that would be so, any more than if he were to be put out of one carriage in a train into another carriage he could be said to have changed his position in this respect. But what is meant is this: There shall be a through train running from end to end of the line, which shall perform the journey at the average speed of twelve miles an hour, and which shall be prepared to take up any passenger presenting himself at any station on the line; and it shall be a train of which the hour for starting shall be fixed with the approval of the Board of Trade, and which hour, when once fixed, can only be changed subject to the same approval. It seems to me to be an essential condition which cannot be dispensed with, that this shall be a train at which every poor man, who is desirous of travelling by it, shall be able to ascertain the hour of departure, whether from the terminal station or from any other station, according to the time that the train shall be occupied in running through the several stations on the route. My Lords, having secured the train for the passenger from the terminus, and having secured the time for starting, and the same for a series of passengers all along the line of route, at this cheap rate, the next condition the Legislature lays down is that the train shall travel at an average rate of twelve miles an hour. Then, 1876 NORTH LONDON V. ATTORNEY- H. L. (E.) thirdly, we have the condition that this same train, which the Legislature is talking of all through, is, "if required, to take up and set down passengers at every passenger station which it shall RAILWAY Co. pass on the line." Now afterwards there comes this dispensing power in the Board of Trade which is in question in the case before us, and the argument has been that the Board of Trade has a discretionary power of dispensing with that condition of the train stopping at every passenger station, because it is said that that which is mentioned in the previous clause comes in as one of the conditions, and as being one of such conditions, it is within the power of the Board of Trade to dispense with it. But, my Lords, observe what the argument of the Appellants must amount to. There is nothing in the Act at all which limits this power of the Board of Trade, as to dispensing with conditions, to any one train in particular or to any class of trains. If it is good at all, it must be good for all; and if it is good for all, then the Board of Trade. would have the power of saying as to any train: Although the Legislature has said, You shall have at least one train a day, and at least one train a day performing all those conditions which are required as to the starting of the train, as to the rate of travelling, and as to the number of stations it is to stop at, we (the Lords of the Committee) will strike out of this number certain stations. What will be the consequence? The consequence will be that there will be a certain number of the poorer class of people, living in the neighbourhood of the stations struck out by the Board of Trade, who will not have the advantage of being conveyed as all their richer neighbours will, who can afford to pay a higher price than one penny a mile. When these poor people living near the stations which have been struck out wish to travel by a cheap train, they will be told by the railway company, The Board of Trade has sanctioned our leaving you out, as to certain stations, all along the course of the line. It was said that, according to the provisions of the dispensing clause, bargains securing other advantages might be made by the Board of Trade which would be for the benefit of the poorer class of passengers, it being in consideration of benefits as regards speed, covering from the weather, seats, or other matters of convenience to the passengers that the dispensing power is to be exercised. 1876 NORTH LONDON RAILWAY CO. v. ATTORNEY GENERAL. But, my Lords, it is obviously impossible that the striking out of H. L. (E.) the condition of stopping at every station where the trains ordinarily stop to take up and set down passengers, can be in any shape or way for the benefit of those persons living near those stations who may be desirous of being conveyed at the rate of one penny a mile. And why? Because they never can, so long as the railway lasts, be carried at the rate of one penny a mile, for their stations have been struck out. How can any arrangement to be made by the Board of Trade, possibly be conceived, which would be a benefit to those persons who are not to be admitted to the benefit of cheap trains at all? Parliament having secured the cheap train, having taken great care that the rate of one penny a mile should not be exceeded, we should, according to what is now contended for, have to hold that it had by a subsequent clause, said, with reference to a certain number of intervening stations on the line: We have given power to the Board of Trade to overrule all that we have done by the previous clause, and to say that there are certain persons residing along the line who shall have no benefit from the cheap trains at all. My Lords, I apprehend that any construction which led your Lordships to such a result as that would be a most improper construction of the Act of Parliament, unless we were driven to it by an impossibility of finding any other construction at all for those words which deal with the discretionary power of the Board of Trade. My noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor has pointed out that those first three "conditions," as they are called, all relate to the train. The train is described as a cheap train, it is enacted that one such train, at least, every day is to be provided; and then the Legislature, fixing its mind on that one single train, with that before its view at the moment, calling it "such train," in the singular throughout, says, "such train" as this shall start at an hour to be from time to time fixed by the directors, subject to the approval of the Board of Trade; it says "such train" shall travel at an average speed of not less than twelve miles an hour, and it says “such train" shall, if required, take up and set down passengers at every passenger station which it shall pass on the line. And then it proceeds to lay down the remaining conditions, 1876 NORTH LONDON RAILWAY CO. v. ATTORNEY- H. L. (E.) in order to make provision for the comfort and accommodation of the passengers who will be conveyed in that train. By means of the first three conditions, if I may so put it, it seats them in the train and it tells them what sort of a train they are seated in; and then the other four conditions provide for their comfort. The first first says that they shall have seats, and that the carriages shall be protected from the weather. The second provides that the charge which may be made for each passenger shall not exceed one penny a mile, and that is specially excepted from the dispensing power; it would have fallen within the dispensing power unless it had been specially excepted from that power. Then there is a provision with respect to carrying a certain quantity of luggage, and a provision with respect to children, and the rates at which they are to be conveyed. Now, my Lords, although I do not conceal from myself that the wording of this Act is not so clear and precise as one would desire, I think still one may arrive at a sound conclusion upon the whole Act, if we do not adopt the conclusion which, not being confined to any one train in particular, would lead us to say that any station might be excluded from the benefit of this arrangement as to cheap trains. If we do not adopt that conclusion, which, I say it with great respect to the Court of Exchequer, leans on so very slight a distinction as that which is drawn between the signal and the market stations on the one hand, and the general stations on the railway on the other; but if we adopt the conclusion of saying that this dispensing power with regard to the conveyance of passengers by such cheap trains, may be well and properly applied in the way in which the Lord Chancellor has pointed out, to the four concluding conditions in the first enacting clause with regard to cheap trains, leaving the other three conditions, by which the train is started and set in motion, not to be affected by those words of dispensing, which are to be applied only to the conveyance of passengers by those cheap trains;-I think, taking that as our guide, we arrive at a much more sound and reasonable construction of the whole Act, according to its true meaning and intent, than by any other. It appears to me, my Lords, although, as I said before, I do |