“As regards the purchase of Irish railways,” the Commissioners add, at clause 80, “having come to the determination that it is inexpedient that the railways should be purchased by the State, we consider there is not sufficient reason for excepting Ireland from this general conclusion; but, as it has been the established policy to assist Irish railways and other public works in Ireland, we recommend that when Parliament thinks fit to make advances to Irish railway companies, the money should be lent for a fixed period of considerable length, so as to enable the company to develop its resources before it is called on for repayment.” The Commissioners add, that these advances or loans should never be made to Irish railway companies on condition that their rates and fares should be reduced, that being a matter, the decision upon which should rest exclusively with the executive of the company. The two dissentients from the report were Mr. Monsell, M.P., and Sir Rowland Hill. Mr. Monsell being of opinion that the Irish railways should be purchased by the State, and to this extent agreeing with Sir Rowland Hill, whose opinion is that the railways of the whole kingdom should become, by purchase, the property of the nation. Sir Rowland Hill gives various reasons in recommendation of this suggestion, and summarises in his report, written, as we learn by its first paragraph, “in a growing expectation of dissent,” his reasons with the following language:— “In short, experience has now shown that railways are essentially monopolies; consequently they are, in my opinion, not suitable objects for ordinary commercial enterprise, in which each party, while striving for its own interests, generally contributes, perhaps in the best possible way, to the interest of all. It seems to follow that they cannot be advantageously left to independent companies, who, of course, manage them with exclusive reference to their own interests, but that they should be in the hands of those who will control the management of them with a view to the interest of the country at large, that is to say, in the hands of the Government. “Proposing this, however, I do not mean to recommend that any Government Board should take upon itself, in the gross, the duty now performed by railway directors. For the direct management of the lines, I propose to provide by leasing them out, in convenient groups, to companies, partnerships, or individuals, as the case may be. An opinion in favour of leasing the lines will be found in the evidence given by Mr. Bidder before this Commission. “What I recommend is, that either a department of Government should be created, or the superintendence of railways committed to one of the existing departments, and that the controlling power, thus established, should act as a lessor, not only in granting leases, but in fixing suitable terms and enforcing due observance of contract.”