Therefore, in order to promote this major project, it is necessary to rely on so extraordinary forces.
Although Belgium is a constitutional monarchy, the railway construction plan in Belgium is almost solely driven by King Leopold I.
Even though he can so easily promote railway construction because it is a decision that aligns with the interests of most Belgians, convincing the Belgian Parliant to approve the construction plan is not difficult.
Since the Belgian Parliant can be persuaded by the King, the Hanover Council can naturally be persuaded by Royal Family mbers.
The operation of the railway can not only improve transportation but also accelerate population flow, drive industrial developnt, and alleviate employnt pressure in rural areas.
Moreover, railway construction can directly create thousands of labor employnt positions and indirectly boost nearby steel processing and machinery manufacturing, thus increasing employnt opportunities significantly.
This rhetoric is not only applicable to Belgium but also to Hanover.
Furthermore, Hanover’s financing environnt is evidently better than Belgium’s, as London Financial City has always been generous towards this nation that shares its King with Britain.
Even in the worst-case scenario, if bankers in the Financial City collectively turn a blind eye and refuse to provide railway financing for Hanover, Arthur is confident in persuading Rothschild Bank to help Hanover issue railway construction bonds.
But everyone knows this is impossible. Anyone who has lived in London understands how crazy the British are about railway construction.
They not only want to build railways dostically, but also abroad, with the most ambitious being the construction of the London-Paris railway line.
This desire for railway construction is not just due to the large market for Anglo-French transnational goods transport but also due to considerable passenger transport potential. In this era, there are many British people residing in France, most of whom are nobility and affluent individuals like bankers.
The spending power of these people is enough to make all the railway companies listed on the London Stock Exchange scream; they wish they could start construction the next day.
Unfortunately, the French Governnt is quite cautious towards foreign capital, especially British capital entering France.
Perhaps it’s because they worry that once the London-Paris railway line is operational, the next day the Duke of Wellington will lead the lobster soldiers in a grand ’ard parade’ in front of the Triumphal Arch, so they are reluctant to open the railway market to British companies.
However, the lack of progress in railway cooperation between the two countries cannot be entirely blad on the French because there are also concerns within the British Parliant.
Many people are warning that if this railway line is truly constructed, then one evening when a revolution breaks out in Paris, rebels will queue at Paddington Station the next morning, and based on favorable terrain, they will occupy the East End of London by noon and raise the tricolor flag at Westminster Palace by midnight.
What could be more horrifying than this!
Will this railway line truly bring prosperity to Britain?
No, it will bring degrading republicanism and the revolutionary plague of France!
The opinions of the mbers do indeed deserve to be called visionary and far-sighted.
Although Arthur is not sure whether this railway line will bring a revolutionary plague, he is sure that this railway line will indeed import French revolutionaries into London, such as his friend—Mr. Alexander Dumas.
However, Britain does not suffer unilaterally in this regard.
After all, London can also use this railway line to export the reactionary academic authority Arthur Hastings to Paris.
In summary, in this regard, the score is even between the two countries; neither France nor Britain can accuse the other of lacking morality.
Nonetheless, the greatest opposition to this railway plan isn’t from the Lower House mbers but from an unexpected organization—the Royal Navy.
The limp and wounded Generals from the Royal Navy stood up in the House of Lords, vehently criticising the absurdity of this railway line.
Regardless of the high cost of constructing a cross-sea railway, even if this railway is truly built, if Britain and France were to go to war yet again, would they temporarily blow up this railway?
But their stance received strong opposition from another group of disabled people, the Army generals who waved their empty sleeves and called out vociferously.
"Isn’t there still our Army! Let’s convert the naval base at Portsmouth into an Army station, and then stand on Victory’s mast to ambush those cross-sea frogs!"
Of course, the Army’s vulgar rhetoric was quickly dismissed.
Not only because their combat plan was fanciful but also because of the strong Tory background of the Army generals.
Even when the Tory Party was in power, the Army couldn’t overwhelm the Whig-thinking Royal Navy, and now with the Whig Party in governnt, they have even less chance of gaining the upper hand.
However, no matter how you put it, as long as the London to Paris railway line isn’t built, you won’t hear any other opposing voices to railway construction dostically in Britain. Even the most conservative investors can see how lucrative the railway construction industry is.
The Manchester-Liverpool Railway, which has only been operational for two years, already has an average annual dividend rate of 15%.
Such a profitable industry, no British gentleman could resist, even if he is a mber of the Royal Family.
User Comments
0 comments from readers