The Sun.
London, England, 1840-03-18 00:00:00

of being at least one-half longer, making the con
nection, of course, more expensive ; but which has
the advantage, in their eyes, of also connecting theirs
with the Manchester and Birmingham line ; so that,
in addition to the traffic: by our line, they would
obtain the additional traffic from the Stockport district
on the Manchester and Birmingham Line ; and a'so
from the Ashton and Glossop district on the Man-
chester and Sheffield Railway. Latterly, they have
proposed an improvement on the route, suggesting that
it should be carried across Ducie-street and across Lon-
don Road ; but this second proposition differs very little
in its main features from the first : it may be a slight
improvement ; but it leaves the main objection which
this company have to a junction in that way still un•
altered ; and it is for us to consider what are the prin-
cipal inducements for going round in this way. As for
ourselves, we can have none. The line to Hunt's
Bank was projected by us, not solely on account of the
through traffic, but partly on account of certain local
advantages, which we expect to derive from bringing
our station down here ; for we arc here within 500
yards of the Exchanee ; and, at one corner of the
ground we have purchased, we are within a hundred
yards of the resort of all the stage coaches to Oldham
and that neighbourhood. Looking to the character of
our line—and we must consider that a very large pro-
portion of our traffic will consist of what may be called
omnibus traffic—it is evident, that, unless our station
is somewhat near that part of the town where those
who resort from Oldham, &c., are in the habit of corning,
we are not likely to obtain that short traffic. It is,
therefore, of great advantage to us, that our line comes
within one hundred yards of Shudehill, where all the
short coaches and stages stand. We have also the
adv,entage of coining down to the river ; and the Old
Quay Company have latsly passed a resolution to sur•
vey the river, with a view to bring the navigation to
this point. We think that the inducements to the
Liverpool Company are equally strong ; because, while
it unites their line to ourselves, there is nothing want-
ing to complete the chain of railway communication
from Liverpool to Hull but these two miles which this
junction would furnish, and which offers %cry consi-
derable advantages to the Liverpool Company. They
still, however. have a very strong leaning towards going
to the other side of the town ; and it remains for us to
consider how far it is probable that that line will
ever be completed. Individually, I say I cannot
see how the Birmingham Company. if they act in this
matter, as it is reasonable to suppose they will act,
regarding it simply as a matter of business, a question
of profit and loss,-1 cannot see how they can ever be
I expected to contribute their quota to making that cir-
cuitous line. These are my reasons for thinking so.
The Liverpool Company say to us, " Your traffic on the
Leeds line, we know, is considerable ; but we have re-
turns from Canal Companies (the Liverpool and Leeds,
and the Rochdale Canal Company), and we find the
traffic by no means such as you expect; and we think
that it is not sufficient to justify us in laying out
240,000/. to come to Hunt's Bank. But (they say)
if we can get, in addition to your traffic, the traffic of
Birmingham, which will have a certain traffic to and
from Stockport, and also the traffic from Ashton and
that neighbourhood, we think then, by the union of
these two traffics, that we may be justified in making
the junction line in that way, and in contributing our
just proportion." Upon asking a Deputation that
waited upon us within this week, in what proportions
this improved line would be made, they said, " Of
course each Company will make their own third." Now
if we look at the district to which the Birmingham
line extends, we must all see that any traffic between
Liverpool and that district cannot extend much be-
yond Stockport, or beyond Ashton and Glossop on the
Sheffield line ; that in fact the traffic between Liverpool
and Birmingham cannot form a branch of that traffic
which this Company must bring towards Liverpool.
Look at Wakefield and Halifax, and their neighbour-
hood, and again at Burnley and other places, and we
must see that our traffic must preponderate infinitely as
compared with that which the Birmingham line could
contribute to the Liverpool Company. And, without
wishing at all to disparage the Birmingham Company,
I may be allowed to assume that two-thirds of the
traffic between Liverpool and all parts eastward of
Manchester will come along our line, and not above
one-third of it by the Manchester and Birmingham
Company. What then is the position of the Birmingham
Company ? The Liverpool Company say to us, " Your
two-thirds of the traffic is not sufficient for us ; but if
we had the other third also, we should then be justified
in making a junction line." What do the Birmingham
Company say to this? Will they not ask themselves,
"If it requires three-thirds of the traffic to pay the
Liverpool Company for making one-third of this junc-
tion line, how can it ever pay the Birmingham Com-
pany, which will never benefit by it by more than one-
third of the traffic ?"—(Applause.) And it appears to
me that if the Birmingham Directors are to be guided
by business principles,—and we know and respect
many of them, and know that they are as active busi-
ness men as any of us,—it is obvious that they can
never lay their part of the line at the cost of their
share of the 240,0001. ; for only one-third of that
amount of traffic which the Liverpool Company say
is essential before they can be justified in commencing
the junction line. I think, consequently, that or.
that ground it cannot be expected that the line will
ever be made, unless the Liverpool Company do con-
tribute a great part of it themselves. I know it may
be said that the Birmingham Company have an in-
terest in making this junction, because it connects
their Line, not only with the Liverpool Railway, but
with ours. To a certain extent this is true ; but we
have a more economical mode of forming that junction
by a tunnel under the town to Store-street, three
quarters of a mile in length ; and, we believe, from the
estimates we have received, that such tunnel is not
only practicable, but would cost not the half of what a
surface Line would cost. tied we say that, so long as
there is no advantage to be gained by a circuitous line,
and every advantage to be gained by seeking to obtain
a direct one, we are right in persevering to this end.—
(Applause.) Now, as to the traffic which the Liver-
pool Directors have called in question. For my own
part 1 must say that I never did attach much import-
ance to these statements of traffic. The elements of
these estimates arc not sufficiently in a state of settle-
ment to enable parties to judge ; but in this particular
case the difficulty is multiplied tenfold, because the pro-
fit is not to be derived from the quantity of tonnage
that passes over the junction, but from the quantity
of tonnage that passes over the whole line, in addition
to what dow comes on it. Now the estimates of
traffic which we presented to them were founded upon
observation. We employed a competent person to ob•
serve the through traffic at Skipton, and we also had
it observed at Castle Field, in Manchester. He made
observations for a sufficient number of days, and
he made a regular average, and worked it out, to the
result that 85,000 tons pass annually at Skipton, be-
tween Liverpool and Leeds. The Liverpool Directors
now tell us, that they have received returns from the
Canal Companies. which show that the traffic does
not exceed 17,000 tons. Now, really, when we look
at the extent of the traffic on that line—that from 6 to
8,000,000 tons pass annually along that line—it ap-
pears en exceedingly small proportion to say that only
17,000 tons pass between Liverpool and Leeds. But
I admit that we have no other way of refuting it, than
by looking at the general features of the case, and by
appealing to those estimates which we have made from,
personal observation. It is true that the party who
observed for us might have been deceived in sonic
cases ; but I cannot conceive that he could have been
to anything like that extent, Now, look at the Rea-
dale Canal returns. Ile placed an individual in Castle
Field, who observed the traffic that way ; and the
result of his observation and estimates was, that
210,000 tons pass annually between the lower•
part of the town (Manchester), and the upper,
by those water communications that you know exist
through the town. We are now told, that only
55,000 tons of that—(only 45,000, I believe, arc as-
sumed by the Liverpool Directors ; but the Rochdale
Canal Company, by another return, make it 65,000,
and I take the large amount)—is all that passes for-
ward beyond Manchester. Now, our observation
is
210,000 tons ; and I submit that there is a discrepancy
there which cannot be accounted for on any reasonable
principle ; and while the Liverpool Directors choose to
assume that their private returns are correct. I think
we have as strong grounds for assuming teat sur re:
turns are not perhaps correct, but more correct than
theirs. At all events we ay do so in argument ; but
we have never attached that importance to those
statements and returns of traffic that the Liverpool
Company. •appears to have done ; we look
more
the
general feature of' the case. And I think it is im-
possible, looking at the advantages of railway commue.
nication, to suppose that one small link of two miles in
the great chain of railway communication between
Liverpool and Hull can long be suffered to remain
n
disunited. I think that on public grounds the Companies
may
o almost
than'
tnbe compelled to make that connection.
Looking, then, at
the
ee
mgeneral
points, features,
which
s :•ee know
leave
are to some extent involved in uncertainty, we think
we are nearest to the truth. The difference of opinion
does not imply a mere difference of 3d. or 6d. per ton
upon the lire of two miles ; because thebenefitis not
done, rather
to be derived from the amount of toll that will be paid
over the two miles, but from the toll paid upon the
whole line—(Hear, hear)—and every ton, in their esti-
mate and ours, involves a difference of five shillings
per ton in the estimates. Consequently the amounts
of their estimates arc not to be depended upon ; while
I think we have quite sufficient, in the means we have
taken to establish our traffic, to rely upon to a consi-
derable extent. But let us look at the general features
of the case. I have already mentioned the necessity
of completing the communication, by adding this, the
only link wanting, in the chain between Liverpool and
Hull. We see also that the Water Companies have,
long ago, connected their lines, not by one connexion
only, but by two ; and I would submit that the se-
cond water connexion is a proof that the first must
be remunerative ; and, if the connexion between the
two places by water is remunerative, I do not see on
what principle one formed by railways would not la