The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-22 00:00:00

SIIIi.',EWSBURY and BIRMINGHAM

RAILWAY.

MANCRI:STER, Lt EVENING. numerously
attended nieetirg of the sharelAdc'N of this Company
was hell by ad;,-nr.ltnni.t, at the Star Hotel this evening,
to reocivc the relort of a depwajon appointed at a
tlif-eting held la,t week to proceed to London and re-
ceive fnoni the Committee of M.in:igsr.nent scale ex piano,-
ti•JA r7specting the recent amalgamation with the Dudley,
Maleley, Brnseley, and Ironbridge ItKilway Company.
The Chair was of.upir..d by J. Todd, Esq., who catled
Upon the deputation to report the result of that visit.
Mr. llAnnisox BLAIR read a written report, the sub-
stance of which was that the deputation was courteously
received, and that the committee thought it due to the
shareholders in Manchester, whom they knew, by the
re-signing of their' deed last year, to be both numerous
and largely interested in the Company, to send their
Secretary down in order to give the fullest ex-
planation of the recent amalgamation with the Dudley
and Madeley Company, or on any other points on which
the snandaolders might desire information. . .

Mr. liNox, the Secretary to the Company, having
arrived, stated that he was ready to furnish the share-
holders with such information as they required, either
in reference to the past proceedings, the present position,
or the future prospects of the Company.
Mr. SIIAKSPEARE PHILLIPS wished the Secretary,
before he proceeded to explain the recent amalgamation
with the Dudley and Madeley Company, to state whether
the Compatty had got rid of the opposition of
the Shrewsbury and Grand Junction Company, which
opposed them last year, and threw them out on standing
orders.
The SECRETARY stated that the Shrewsbury and Grand
Junction Company of last year did not now exist. It
was then merely a branch of the Grand
Junction Company, but in consequence of the
feeling which existed in the district against the
Grand Junction Company before it had amalgamated
with the London and Birmingham Company, what was
called an independent company had been formed, in
which the Grand Junction Company had only one-fourth
interest, the South Staffordshire one-fourth, and he
believed the Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton
one-fourth, _leaving one-fourth for the public. This
company had adopted the plans of the Shrewsbury
and Grand Junction of last year, and was also a
competing line to the part of the Shrewsbury and Bir-
mingham scheme between Shrewsbury and Wolver-
hampton. The Shrewsbury and Birmingham Company
had however offered to amalgamate with it, and to re
ceive half its capital and half its committee on their
board—an offer which if left to the shareholders would
very readily be accepted ; but the committee, from the
constitution of the Company, were so allied with other
parties that they could only amalgamate as between
Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton, and even as to that
.they stipulated for the adoption of their station, in order
to accommodate the South Staffordshire and the Oxford.
Worcester, and Wolverhampton Companies, whereas the
line and station of the Shrewsbury and Birmingham
Company were on a much higher level, and could not be
altered this session to the level of the Shrewsbury
and South Staffordshire station, without destroying the
direct communication between Shrewsbury and Birming-
ham. It had, however, been referred to the engineers
'of the two companies to consider how far it was
predicable in a subseqent session to adopt the lower
level, and to have, for the accommodation of all the
railways into Wolverhampton, one grand central station,
for which the Shrewsbury and Birmingham Company
had some months ago purchased an eligible plot of be-
tween six and seven acres of laud. If the con-
test of last year is renewed, it will be in a more
friendly spirit ; and as both lines run nearly side by
side all the way, it can hardly be decided upon engineer-
ing merits, but must be decided with reference to the
claim and position of the two Companies. Upon this
issue the committee of the Shrewsbury and Birmingham
Company entertained no doubt of the result, taking into
account their priority of claim, the greater extent of
their schemes, and the report of the Board of Trade in
their favour, a circumstance which was likely to have
more weight in the present than in the last session of
Parliament.
A SHAREHOLDER inquired whether it was true, as had
been stated in the papers, that the Grand Junction Com-
pany would support the opposing line in Parliament,
while the London and Birmingham Company determined
to remain neutral in reference to this Company ?
The SECRETARY said that the shareholders could
themselves judge how far such a thing was likely, seeing
that the London and Birmingham Company were united
with the Birmingham Canal Company and with this
Company, to make all the lines in the district between
Birmingham and Wolverhampton, and that such lines
would be useless as a communication with Shropshire if the
line of the Shrewsbury and South Staffordshire Railway
were sanctioned. Besides, he knew that so recently as the
day on which the amalgamation with the Dudley and
Madeley Company was completed, the :chairman and
solicitor of the London and Birmingham Company had
stated to the Vice-Chairman of this Company, that it
might depend upon the cordial support of that Company
in Parliament.
A SHAREHOLDER remarked that the amalgamation
of this Company with the Dudley and Madeley Company,
which could not go to Parliament this year, and was
about to return the deposits to its shareholders, seemed
like joining a living body to a dead corpse.
Another SHAREHOLDER asked whether it was true
that this Company had got a bonus of 30,0001. in the
exchange with the Dudley and Madeley Company ? Ile
did not see how a Company whose shares were at a dis-
count could afford to give such a bonus.
The SECRETARY said that probably the shortest plan
would be to state the history of the Dudley and Madeley
Company, and its amalgamation with this Company.
The Dudley and Madeley Company was projected about
the middle of last year, and received strong local
support, having also a highle respectable pro-
visional committee. Its first project was a line from
Dudley to Madeley, with a branch from Rudge Heath to
Wolverhampton, and its original capital 800,000/., which
was readily subscribed and the deposits paid. At this
time the Shrewsbury and Birmingham committee saw
the danger of a line from Dudley to Madeley, as likely
ultimately to become a competing line to .Shrewsbury,
and, as the best alternative under the circumstances,
offered to contrihute half the capital required, and to be
represented on the Dudley and Madeley committee. This
offer was not only rejected, but the Dudley and Madeley
Company advertised an extension to Shrewsbury, and
an increase of its capital to 1,600,003/. , There was no-
thing left but for the Shrewsbury and Birmingham Com-
pany to oppose the line Irom Dudley to Shrewsbury, and
in like manner, the Dudley and Madeley Company had re-
solved to appear as a competing scheme to this Company.
The plans and sections of the Dudley and Madeley Compa-
nies were not only not lodged in due time, but the latter
were in so defective a state, that it was found hopeless to
proceed for an Act this session. The Committee accord-
ingly published a report, in which they stated their
intention to return 21. per share to the shareholders,
reserving 12s. 61 per share to defray the expenses in-
curred, and to provide for the expense of proceeding in
the next following session of Parliament. It was at this
period that overtures for an amalgamation were again
made by this Company, and as the plan originated with
himself, and had been carried out not without consider-
able difficulty, he hoped the reasons he had to state in
its favour would be as satisfactory to the shareholders
present as they had been to the committee, and had led
them unanimously to conclude the agreement with the
Dudley and Madeley Company. First, an opponent had
been removed from the field and converted into an ally;
second a line, which in other hands might have proved
a powerfully competing line with this Company, and
which in the general opinion of those best acquainted
with the district is not only required and reust be made-
by some one, but will pay for making, has been secured
to this Company; third, this Company were enabled
to effect an arrangement which will )letain for it a bonus
of about 30,0001, being just the expenses which
had been incurred in the formation of the Company
and the fruitless contest of last session. It was one of
those arrangements which proved also beneficial for the
shareholders of the Dudley and Madeley Company, and
the result is seen by the matter being no ldhger one of
negotiation, but of history, for four-fifths of the Dudley
and Madeley shareholders have already signified
their assent to take shares in this Company.
And last, though not least, this Company will obtain
additional deposits amounting to 90,0001., besides having
ite maiden deposit almost untouched, and when the
that,!hare-
t
e na econtributingetve to
hthoeldPerLltiaakmeeriintatroyadeecol:)sn depositbof
gh ech has lodged
Wolverhampton "and Birmingham,
duplicate plans, and is proceeding with a separate and
distinct Bill, that required for the lines, as lodged by this
Company, will amount to • 110,0001, they will have no
difficulty in perceiving that the committee have very
much better consulted their interests by the amalgama-
tion which had been made, than had they made a call of
21. 10s. per share, in order to supply the deficiency.
The capital required for the line from Dudley to
Madeley would about equal that displaced by the alliance
between Birmingham and Wolverhampton, and as the
Parliamentary estimate of the Company is 1,900,0001.,
there is still room to admit half the capital of the
Shrewsbury and South Staffordshire Company, if the two
Companies come to terms.
The SECRETARY then read an extract from the sub-
scribers' agreement, to show that the committee were
fully empowered to conclude the amalgamation with the
Dudley and Madeley committee, and stated that it was
from no want of courtesy towards the shareholders that
they were not consulted, but the short period before
the opening of Parliament, and the very nature of the
negotiation itself, prevented the adoption of such a course.
Several shareholders expressed themselves highly
satisfied with the explanation given, and a resolution
was unanimously passed to that effect, as also a vote of
thanks to the Secretary for the trounle he had taken.
A SHAREHOLDER said he had been informed that the
staff of the two companies was the only thing that pre-
vented an amalgamation with the Shrewsbury and
South Staffordshire.
The SECRETARY stated that such could hardly be the
case, its the engineers of the two Companies were re-
spectively the engineers of the London and Birmingham
and the Grand Junction, which had united, and :Jr.
Syejt had been offered to participate jointly with the
solicitors ;.?f the Company ; as to himself—
A SHAREHaI•DER—Two secretaries would be about
passed to the Chairman,
as bad as two chatrtni;n,
and A thev tme ecotfintghasnelepsaraaetiesd.tlie-4.1

Lord Farnham will second the Address, which
Lord Home will propose, in the House of Lords, in reply to
the Queen's Speech.
GLASGOW AGAINST TIIE CORN-LAWS.-With a zeal
and liberality worthy of the cause, some of our merchants
and manufacture, s, &c., have this week come forward and
subscribed the munificent sum of upwards of 10,0001. to aid
the Great League Fund for the constitutional overthrow cf
the "C orn,laws. This is doing the work in right earnest, and
it attests that the city of Glasgow still holds its right position
cm this most vital of all questions,-4cotph filformcr's qqf