The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-02-23 00:00:00

F Ez,, it u ILA 1 C

(A DV ERTISEMENTj
EDINBURGII AND GLASGOW RAILWAY.

'TOME EDITOR OP TIM LIVERPOOL SKINDARD.
Stu,—.l have seen two prospectuses fur forming a company to
execute a railway between the east end of the Garnkirk and
Glasgow Railway and the west end of the Edinburgh and Glas-
gow Union Canal. Both are avowedly issued under the auspices
of the proprietors of the Garnkirk hallway and of a tew of the
shareholders of the Union Canal. It is dui concealed that their
object, in part at least, is to endeavour, by occupying a portion
of the country which presents very favourable levels, to prevent
the formation of au Edinburgh and Glasgow company.
Can the promoters of the scheme, however, for one moment
suppose that the friends of a thorough line of railway between
these large cities on the must approved principles, and carried
through the most level tract of country, will tamely submit to
the attempt for ever to strangle this great undertaking; or that
parliament will sanction a small fraction of a liue which is de,-
titute of any legitimate public object, and is leaut only to serve
the private interests of two declining con mils? But it is also
pretended that this new project will not ly amply remunerate
its promoters, but will greatly belief e public and the Union
Canal and Garnkirk proprietors. very slight examination
will show that it cannot do either.
The proposed junction, or rather Union Canal and Garnkirk
Railway, is intended to commence about a mile and a half front
Falkirk, and to terminate about eight miles from Glasgow—a •
distance of about thirteen miles. The first prospectus estimati s
the cost at 1.:100,00i1; the second at E. 125,000. Neither of these
sums will suffice; for, if the experience derived from the form; -
tints of every railway in the kingdom c in be relied on as a test,
the cost will not be less than L'150,000.
By the first prospectus tile ieveuue was calculated at £20,000
per annum, the expenses at £B,OOO, leaving a free income of
£12,000 per annum, which would yield twelve per cent. on the
Capital. By the second prospectus the revenue is calculated at
£23,500, the expenses at £8,500, leaving a free income of
1.15,009, or exactly twelve per cent. on the increased capital.-,
The coincidence is curious, and the way in Which it arises
makes it apparent that the parties interested have been more
anxious to bring out a captivating result than to inquire into
the accuracy of the data ou which they proceed.
Thus in prospectus No. 1 it is assumed, that 200,000 passen-
gers will travel annually on the railway,. which at Is. 6d. each
will yield a revenue of £15,000; but in prospectus No. 2 the
number of passengers is at once increased to 300,000, and the
charge for carrying them is diminished to Is. each.*
This is made to bring out the same result as No. I, and the
revenue from tl;e passengers is declared in both to be £15,000
a-year.
This calculation is absurd enough in itself, but it is rendered
absolutely ludicrous when it is known that it proceeds on the
assumption that there is no competition—that this projected
thorough line of Railway is to be smothered by this Junctioned
Company, and that the latter is not only to carry all the passen-
gess going between the two cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow,
but to augment the traffic 1(1) per cent., although there is no
increase of speed compared with coach travelling.
Again, both prospectuses calculated on a revenue from coals,
&c., of 1:5,000 a-year ; but to make up the wished for return of 12.
per cent, the second prospectus is obliged to add £3,500 a-year
for the carriage of goods, exclusive of minerals, a source of
emolument which the first prospectus never contemplated; and.
both are sources which exist only in the vain imaginations of
the parties interested in promoting this undertaking.
The Junction Railway could never compete iulhis descrip-
tion of traffic with the Forth and Clyde Canal. -
These facts (and I could give many more were it necessary)
show the hollowness of the pretence that the Junction Railway
will remunerate its shareholders.
Indeed, from what has occurred since the prospectuses were.
issued, it is evident that one of the parties promoting this line
looks upon the speculation as being entirely for the benefit of
the Union Canal, and another looks upon it with favour merely
for the sake of the good to be done to the Garnkirk Railway-
In short it appears to be intended by means of it to bolster up
these two consumptive concerns, tile shares of which arts at pre-
sent considerably below par. The same game has been often tried
before; how far it is calculated now to succeed is not for me
to say. But I observe there is a strong difference of opinion on
the subject among the canal proprietors; one set ofwhorn main- •
tains that it will du good, another contends for the reverse, and.
that the Hamannan Branch Railway, for which an act was ob-
tained last year, is the only one which can be of use as a feeder
to the canal, and a third party, with apparently stronger reasons,
insist that neither of these lines can benefit the canal, and ex-
poses very successfully the fallacy of the statement that they
will do so. When the parties interested differ so much, the
public cannot safely rely on any of them.
1 have not seed any attempt publicly made to prove how much
the Garnkirk Railway will benefit by the Junction. But I see
that the prospectus says that the Garnkirk people will consider
any addition to their traffic as a sort of windfall, and will be glad
to carry at very low rates of charge. It may be well to hold out
this wfien the parties are begging, our subscriptions; but at once
let the road be made and joined to the Garnkirk, and then woe
betide the poor Junction Company. They will be at the mercy
of the Garukirk at one end, and of the canal at the other. From
the mercies of such friends they will soon pray to be delivered.
But let us next contrast the benefit likely to result to the pub-
lic from this junction line, as contrasted with those which will
.result from a thorough line.
Ist. Speed —passengers are to be carried from Edinburgh to
Glasgow in 4-Is hours—one half of the way by water, the other
by the two railways. The time is understated; but, assuming
it to he right, the disadvantages are—first, the unpleasant
changes in the mode of travelling, and, as regards goods, the
additional expense and risk of damage thereby created ; and
next, that the time occupied in the journey is more than double
what will be required on the thorough line.
'2d. Economy is promised in the rates of charge. But it is
difficult to believe, where three companies are concerned, and,
of course, three separate establishments to be maintained, the
• charges can be so moderate as under a well regulated thorough
line in the hands of one company. And the calculations of
profit, which, as already stated, are based on the assumption of
• this being the only improVed line Of communication between
the two cities, will all be knockql on the bead by the execution
of any thorouglrlit e.sess
If it could, be for a moment supposed 'that parliament would
sanction this double line of communication, let us inquire what
would be the result of a competition. It is not on a railway as
it is on a canal or a common road. On both these the expense
of haulage is either of 'no 'importance in the calculation, or is
the same to both parties competing. But on a railway of the
best construction the expense of working the line is equal, and
about one-half of the gross receipts. On a bad line it is equal
to much more. In a competition, therefore, between a bad line
and one presenting faYourable inclinations, the former must go
to the g,round. Now, in this point of competition, even at the
same rate of fares, it would be toinous to the parties who might
execute this line. No one cOnversant. with the subject will
gravely maintain that the Garrikirk can form any part of ngeod
passenger. line. It was coest reined for the conveyance of coal
down to Glasgow, and the inclinations are not adapted to a pas-
senger traffic, or to the economical use of locomotive rower of a
great speed. There is an incline of 21 miles long of l'in 150,
which is too steep for unassisted locomotive power, and not
steep enough for the economical use of an assistant or stationary
engine.
The terminus, too, in the neighbourhood of Glasgow is about
140 feet above the city, and cannot be brought into it without
ri"Steep inclined plane, worked by a stationary power. Any at-
tempt to improve the levels or the terminus would involve the
expenditure of immense sums of money in addition to all that
has already been laid out upon it. It is obviously impossible,
therefore, for the Garnkirk Company to support the interests of
the Junction Company and Union Canal by carrying passengers
at the low rate which they admit to be necessary to enable them
to compete with any thorough line.
Looking at these few facts, it is impossible to believe that the'
promoters of the Junction Company are serious in saying that
their line, if executed, would benefit either the public or. the
subscribers. They seem to have calculated on the speculation
mania which at present exists in getting up companies, good
and bad, to enable them to fill their subscriptionlists, ru the
hope that by so doing they might succeed in deterring the pros
moters of a thorough line from proceeding with their undertak-
ing, so that if they could persuade parliament to sanction their
projected line they might, at least for a time, strangle this na-
tional work. But, in both suppositions, they will be found lobe
wrong; and those who are foolish enough, by subscribing for
shares, to make themselves responsible ter the unrestricted ex-
pense of the parliamentary contest, which is impending, will
have themselves to blame for the consequences.
A FRIEND TO USEFUL RAILWAYS.

* This is at the rate of less than Id. per mile. On the Eng-
lish railway the fares are 2d. per mile. About that some one-
half is reckoned as the expense of working the line. When the
fares are thus reduced to Id. per mile, one would imagine that
the whole, or almost the whole, receipts would be absorbed in
the expense of working. But the framers of the second pro-
spectus, having decided that the expense must be about one-
half of the gross receipts, whatever these may be, haying re—
duced the fares to Id., and by one sweep of the pen reduced the
expense to Id. per mile.

[ADVERTISEMENT.]
THE GEORGE IV. STEAM-PACKET.

•
TO THE EDITOR OF THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.
Stn,—ln consequence of a letter appearing in the Albion of
to-day, from Captain Parsons, of the George IV. steainer, re,
lating to the assistance rendered to the Howard, under my com-
mand, I beg to request the kindness of your inserting the f9l:
lowing-stetentent or the facts of the case
On the evening of the 12th instant the Howard, being in
charge of a Liverpool pilot, struck on a bank off the Poiiit of
Ayr, both anchors were let go to prevent her driving further on •
the bank; she, however, soon beat her rudder off .and'betaine
unmanageable, and, further bssisiance beirig
necessary, I con
sidered it my duty to order out the cutter, with font. hands, to
proceed in search of the required aid from any passing steamer
or vessel, having in the meantime leftthe chief officer in chat ge,
with strict orders not to leave thii ship' wiles --itbsolutely neces-
sary for the safety of the lives of the crew, f. which purpose the
launch and second cutter were hoisted • :-the former broke
adrift from the heavy sea that was on,. -four men 'were sent
in the cutter to bring her back,. but.mi Inch they did not suc-
ceed. This reduced the number of the‘crew to seven men, and
the pilot, when the pilot-boat fell in 'with the ship, which boat
went for the George the Fourth stearnir then in sight, at the
time the Howard was in the Fairway Channel, wind then being
moderate from the S.E. A stream anchor and kedge with
hawsers were on board, and the ship could have been anchored
and kept in safety until I returned; but the chief officer and
pilot thought it better to obtain assistance from the George the
Fourth, as it was uncertain how I had prospered in the first
cutter. The captain of the George the Fourth then agreed to
take her in tow, provided the pilot-boat remained astern with
ropes to assist to steer. I now leave the ship to speak of myself •
and the steam-boat I had procured by the prompt assistance of
Messrs. Chapman and Willis, the agents fur Lloyds,. immediately
on my arrival at Liverpool. I got back to the Floating Light
Ship at about two o'clock, and saw a steam-boat at sonic distance
from us, but not knowing the fact of the ship being there, I pro-
ceeded to the place u here I had left her ,• on the way I met a
pilot-boat, that informed me the ship had got off at high water
and proceeded towards the New Channel. I again went in
search of her, and found her in the Rock Channel with the
ahovenamed assistance. I ordered my steam-boat alongside.:--
nothing having been said to me by Captain Parsons, or any
offer of £5 made, as mentioned in his letter In the Albion or at
least I heard nothing of the kind.
Having now stated the facts of the case, I beg it to be under-
stood that I do not wish to prejudice any claims Capt. Parsons
may bring for remuneration, or to dinduish the credit due to
him for his exertions.
I remain, Sir,

ou; obedient Servant,
WM. F. CLARK, U4S. Navy.
Liverpool, Feb:nary 22, 1836.

A "RESPECTABLE" REFoIiM CLun.—A poor fellnw Of`ther`°
name of Norris took the benefit of the Insolvent Act on We&'l
nesday. He described himself as having been steward of the'''
Westminster Reform Club ; and attributed his inSOlVeney to
the dub not paying his account of £92 Gs: for goOds.furnishc4
and he had entered in his schedule the trustees of the said club,'?
Mr. Wilks, Mr. Wason, Mr. S,holefield, and AldertnatiVOOd;
as debtors to that amount. What an excellent,lmrsailliln,,g'iito'uiSareto2 '.1:6,
have any money transactions with theri
sure to be so much betiefitted by it ,1911'