RAILWAY EXPROPRIATIONS.
ITO THE EDITOR OF THE " SrEOTATOH."l SIR,—YOur correspondent, "A Liberal Surveyor," in replying to my letter on this subject, says that I have made two " inex- cusable mistakes." First, he states that, besides the usual
addition for compulsory sale, the assumed value of property taken for railways is always " something more than the real value." Admitting this to a certain extent, I do not consider that it ought to be taken into account in estimating the amount of " bonus" paid for expropriation. The value of the property taken is a matter of opinion and evidence, and any claim for something more than the market value, besides the addition for compulsory sale, would be treated as inadmissible before a jury or arbitrator. On the other hand, the amount of that addition has been fixed by a generally recognised practice, almost amount- ing to a law.
Second, your correspondent asks,—Why exclude large towns from the calculation ? I answer,—Because the land in towns does not come within the scope of the discussion. Mr. Chamberlain's charge of exaction referred to landowners as a class ; and he certainly would not include among them the owners of houses and gardens, plots of building-ground, or land used for commercial purposes, in towns. The average price I assumed, £100 per acre, is, I believe, sufficient to cover everything else, since there are thousands of miles of railway through agricultural districts where the value of the land would not much exceed
Previous page
