Report and Evidence on Compensation. 5. Report and the Evidence given before the Lords' Select Committee, on the Principle of assessing Compensation for Lands. During the Session of 1845, the House of Lords appointed a Select Committee to take into consideration the practicability and the expediency of establishing some principle of compensation to be made to the owners of real property, whose lands, &c. may be compulsorily taken for the construction of public railways; and also further to take into consideration the question of severance, and that of injury to residences; and to report to the House. The following Report was made to the House: : That the Committee have met, and taken into consideration the various matters referred to them. They have summoned witnesses, not numerous, but of great practical experience in the dealings between the railway companies and the landed proprietors. In the evidence of all these witnesses, but more especially in those of Mr. Duncan, an agent of the Eastern Counties Railway Company, and of Mr. Cramp, a land valuer in Kent, will be found ample illustrations of the nature of the transactions between the parties. Upon the questions of severance and damage, however, the Committee are of opinion that it is impossible to establish any fixed rate upon which the damage arising from severance, and other injuries to property, can be assessed and compensated. With respect to the land, &c. actually taken, the witnesses who were examined state, that, to the marketable value of the property taken, they add, in their valuations, a percentage, on the ground of the sale being compulsory. The amount of this percentage varies with the views of the different witnesses, whose evidence will be found in the Appendix; but the Committee are of opinion that a very high percentage, amounting to not less than 50l. per cent. upon the original value, ought to be given in compensation for the compulsion only to which the seller is bound to submit, the severance and the damage being distinct considerations. In some of the evidence, especially of Mr. Duncan, (post, 263), it appears to the Committee that a very unfair view is taken of the injury done to proprietors, and of the compensation due to thein. The Committee are of opinion that many cases occur in which it is necessary to consider the land, &c., not merely as a source of income, but as the subject of expensive embellishment, and subservient to the enjoyment and recreation of the proprietor. Public advantage may require all these private considerations to be sacrificed; but as it is the only ground upon which a man can justly be deprived of his property and enjoyments, so, in the case of railways, though the public may be considered ultimately the gainers, the immediate motive to their construction is the interest of the speculators, who have no right to complain of being obliged to purchase, at a somewhat high rate, the means of carrying on their speculation. It is also to be observed, that the price of the land purchased, and the compensation for that which is injured, form together but a small proportion of the sum required for the construction of a railway, so that no apprehension need be entertained of discouraging their formation, by calling upon the speculators to pay largely for the rights which they acquire over the property of others. In the course of the Committee's deliberations, the question of injury to mineral property by the construction of railways over it, was very forcibly brought before them; and they are of opinion, that (notwithstanding the improvement in the law relating thereto made in the present session) it is one which requires still further consideration; but, as they did not deem it to have been within the original scope of their appointment, they do not think it advisable to make any allusion to it in their report, beyond recommending it most strongly to the attention of the House. The Committee are also of opinion 1. That, before any road, or canal, or railway, or dock bill shall be read a first time, there be laid on the table of this House a statement of the length and breadth of the space which is intended or sought to be taken for the proposed works, and to give up which the consent of the owners of the land has not been obtained; together with the names of such owners, and the heights above the surface of all proposed works on the ground of each owner. 2. That a return shall also be presented at the same time of the Report and Evidence on Compensation. names of the owners or occupiers of any houses situated within three hundred yards of the proposed works, who shall have, before the 31st December preceding the introduction of the bill into Parliament, deposited written objections to the said railway with the public officer appointed to receive the plans of the said railway within the parish or township in which their property is situate; or, if the railway should not be proposed to be carried through that township, in the one through which the railway is to pass in the manner objected to by the above-mentioned parties. 3. That, where any party or parties have appeared and contested any such bills at the bar or in the committees of the House, it shall be lawful for the House or committees, if, in their discretion, they shall think fit, to direct the costs in whole or in part of such party or parties to be paid by the opposite party promoting the bill (i). And the Committee have directed the minutes of evidence taken before them to be laid before your Lordships. The following are extracts from these Minutes: 29th May, 1845.-The EARL FITZWILLIAM in the Chair. Mr. Charles Parker examined: You are the law agent of the London and Birmingham Railway Company?-I am. Have you any information to give to the Committee respecting the rate at which land has been purchased by that company for the purpose of constructing the railway?—I can give the Committee general information; but I only heard late last night of the appointment here. There are tables being made out of the average price that has been paid for land upon the line; but I can answer any questions and give any general information upon the subject. Can you give generally any information to the Committee as to the number of years' purchase at which the land was purchased, keeping that question entirely distinct from the question of severance and damage?—I think it is hardly possible to give that information through the line. Generally speaking, those agreements are made in (i) Parliament has not as yet adopted either of the above recommendations of the Committee. one gross sum; they are sometimes divided afterwards, but not by any means generally. Generally speaking, the compensation and the price of the land are mixed up together. Have you any idea of what is the proportion between the severance damage and the value of the land?—That varies in almost every case. If you take the line at the side of a field the damage is very inconsiderable, compared with going right through the middle of it; and the same with buildings. That makes a great variation in the compensation. Have you ever built any farm buildings, in consequence of your going so near the old ones as to make them inconvenient?-We have frequently allowed money for it. You have never done it yourselves? No. I think that it is always better done, and cheaper done, and more satisfactorily done, by the parties themselves; but I have had the buildings accurately valued, and then gone to the parties, and said, "That is the sum we are told it will cost; if you like to take that sum, and lay it out yourself, we will pay you;" and I have found that generally preferred, I may say universally. Although you cannot state how much is paid for severance, can you state about what proportion of the total price severance forms?— I think about half. It varies very much; but if you took the average of all compensations, I think it would come out at about half. I think that where 20007. is paid to a landed proprietor, in the generality of cases about 10007. is for the land, and 10007. for the compensation. Of course, in many cases, where there is no severance, we do not expect to pay at the same rate, but we always pay a great deal more than the market value; that is conceded on all hands. The severance made in the case of a house, or of a gentleman's park, would be infinitely greater than the severance in going over a field where a flock of sheep are kept ?—Yes. But you would pay a severance for the field?—Yes; we always pay an additional sum, either in the price of the land, or professedly for severance, in all cases. Mr. John Duncan examined : You are solicitor to the Eastern Counties Railway?—I am. Can you state the number of years' purchase which has been given by the company for the land required for the construction of the railway?—It has depended on circumstances. It has generally been thirty to thirty-five years' purchase, after getting at the net Report and Evidence on Compensation. rent; but the question of compensation or severance, of course, varies in every case, according to the extent of damage done. Do you think that you could inform the Committee, by referring to documents in your possession, about the number of years' purchase which has been paid for land absolutely taken, as distinct from the questions of severance and damage?—I have no doubt of that. Can you state the maximum and minimum which has been given with reference to compensation and severance?-No; there is certainly neither maximum nor minimum as guiding rules. With reference to the value of the land, what has practically been the rule you have acted upon?-With reference to the value of the land, I know that the general rule we take in the country is to get as nearly as possible at the net rent paid, or the net letting value, and, having got that, to give a certain number of years' purchase for the compulsory sale. How many years' purchase ?—I have said thirty to thirty-five. Then afterwards you add to that what will be required for compensation?—Yes. In towns it is different. Where we go through property in towns, we do not give the same number of years' purchase for buildings as for land. How many years' purchase do you give for buildings; for houses, barns, and so forth ?-That differs very much, according to the class of houses: it runs between twenty years and twenty-six years. Do you pay for annoyance besides?-We pay for annoyance besides, where the party has property left beyond what we take. But where we take a particular owner's house, and he has no other house in the neighbourhood, we simply pay him the value of that house so purchased compulsorily: we give him more than the market value of it, because we have compelled him to sell it to us for our objects. Was the dissentient party generally satisfied at last ?—I should say certainly. They had only to employ an intelligent surveyor, and obtain satisfactory settlement through his means. There is no doubt that surveyors, from the practice of the last ten years in railway matters, have become so conversant with every species of damage done by railways, and injuries done to landowners, that, if a landowner chooses an intelligent surveyor, he is sure to get his case protected. The surveyor goes upon the land, and he does not look merely at the land taken, but he looks deeply into present and future injury, and far off at every species of practical damage that may occur, and makes out the claim of the landowner; and then the surveyor of the company either consents to each item of claim, or |