I fail to lend any adequate reason for dissatisfaction on the part of holders of Income Bonds of the Underground Electric Railway?, gf London concerning the latest offer made by the directors of that company. I have already set out the main facts in these columns, chief among them being the point that the company had the right at any time to repay on short notice. The strain on the company's resources, of course, consisted in the fact that the 6 per cent. interest was paid free of Income Tax, and it is this provision which it is proposed to withdraw. By way of compensation, however, the company is to have no right of redemption for the next two years, and for the following eight years can only redeem at a premium of S per cent. instead of at par. What, however, seems to be of even greater importance is that holders of the bonds are to have every opportunity for benefiting as shareholders by the economy effected by the alteration in the Income Tax arrange- ments for the Income Bonds. Thus, it is proposed that for a period of three years holders of the Income Bonds consenting to the proposals shall have the option of converting into Ordinary shares at the price of 21s. Not only do these propo- gals seem to be thoroughly equitable, but, unless present , indications are misleading, those holders may benefit the most iu thi long itin–Niho eXeteise optfoRibflonVeisioh.