3. As soon as the chief engineer has, instead of the _best_ line of railway that could have been determined on, decided on that which, for the _reasons_ stated, it is _advisable_ he should recommend--alas! what a pity it is that, in the construction of our great arterial railways, such a discreditable difference should have been allowed to exist!!--he employs his assistant engineers and surveyors to make for him accurate surveys, and to take correct sections, copies of which are to be deposited, according to Act of Parliament, with the various clerks of the peace of the several counties through which the line is to pass, with the Commissioners of Railways, &c. &c. &c.; besides which there is to be prepared for each parish its proportion, as also for every landholder a section, showing the greatest depth of cutting or embankment in any of his fields. In addition to the collection and construction of all these data and drawings, notices are to be served upon every landowner, wherever he may be, in the United Kingdom; for which duty in 1845 almost everybody that could be picked up was engaged, the number of horses employed and _killed_ in the operation having been utterly incalculable. 4. By the time these expenses have been incurred, the attention of the chief engineer is engrossed by a new struggle of vital importance, practically called “_the fight for the Act_,” in both houses of Parliament. As the question before the reader is abstractedly one of science, we gladly refrain from staining it by the slightest political remark; we will therefore, on this branch of the subject, only state that, from returns which have officially been published, it appears that, in the years 1845, 1846, and 1847, more than ten millions were expended in parliamentary inquiries and parliamentary contests. This money would, at the rate of 20,000_l._ per mile, have constructed a national railway 500 miles in length--say from London to Aberdeen! Casting aside the bitter mortification which these expenses must create to the man of science, whose mind is enthusiastically engrossed with the vast importance of railway communication, the permanent tax which they inflict upon the public can very briefly be demonstrated. Supposing 5 per cent. be deemed an adequate return to railway proprietors for the capital they have expended, the comparative charges to be levied by them on every passenger or ton of goods would be as follows:-- Charge per mile on a railway which ought to have cost 15,000_l._ per mile 1_d._ per mile. Ditto on a railway which has unnecessarily been made to cost 20,000_l._ per mile 1⅓_d._ „ Ditto on a railway which has unnecessarily been made to cost 25,000_l._ per mile 1⅔_d._ „ Ditto on a railway which has unnecessarily been made to cost 30,000_l._ per mile 2_d._ „