The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1836-04-08 00:00:00

THE LIVERPOOL STANDARD.

CHELTENHAM, OXFORD, TIRING, AND LONDON
RAILWAY.

On Saturday last, a very numerous meeting of the residents
of Cheltenham took place at the Assembly Rooms, (convened
by public advertisement and byl hand bills,) to consider the
most effectual means of carrying into effect the projected Rail-
way communication betweeu this towu and London by Oxford
and Tring. On the motion of Pearson Thompson, Esq., se-
conded by J. Fisher, Esq., the unanimous voice of the meet-
ing called toithe chair, •
W. Ingledew, Esq., who commenced the proceedings of the
day, by observing that the support of the, proposed line was 'of
vital importance to Cheltenham. The bill for carrying the
railway from this town through Stroud to the Great Western
Railway was before parliament; but that line was very circuit-
ous, and it was highly desirable to form the most direct com-
munication between this town and the metropolis. The line
now proposed, through Oxford,, would effect a saving of more
than twenty miles. If it were not carried, it was certain that
the Stroud line must prove injurious to Cheltenham, by divert-
ing the route of passengers, and the transfer of all articles of
commerce from South Wales, [which, by the new line would
pass through Cheltenham] entirely to the Stroud district. It
was, in fact,, essential to the prosperity of Cheltenham that the
direct connection between this place and' Oxford and London
shduld be maintained. For his own part, he had• no personal
interest to promote in either, line. His only; but his most anx-
ious, desire was that the town of Cheltenhainshouldparticipate
to the fullest extent in. all.the advantages to be derived from
railways; and he trusted that the Cheltenham and Oxford line
would have the cordial support of the meeting.
P. Thompson, Esq., in proposing the first Resolution, re-
gretted the unavoidable absence or Mr. Stephenson, whose
opinion was so decidedly favourable to the projected line; but
his very able colleague, Captain Moorsom, was present, and
would afford the meeting every information. Their only object
was to enable the inhabitants of Cheltenham to understand the
two lines—that through Oxford, and, the circuitous route by
Stroud; and to decide upon which they considered most condu-
cive to the interests of Cheltenham. He attributed wilful mis-.
representation to no party; but certain it was that lie, with
many others, had, till very lately, been misled by the supposi-
tion that no railway communication could he formed between
Cheltenham and London, except through Stroud. That line
had therefore been supported, even though it was felt to be
most prejudicial to Cheltenham, and calculated only to trans-
fer to Stroud all the advantages that this town now pos-
sessed. The London and Birmingham Railway Company had,
however, sent down Mr. Stephenson and Captain Moorsom .to
survey the Oxford Line, and they had pronounced it to be per-
fectly practicable, and without even such considerable difficul-
ties as.were to be surmounted on the Stroud line;- whilst it ef-
fectedta considerable saving in point of distance, and time, and
held out many and very superior advantages to this town.
There existed no wish whatever to interfere with the undertak-
ing of the Stroud Union Company ; or with any. other. All
that was now desired was that Cheltenhana might possess—as
the town was entitled to corntnand—the
,best possible line of
Railway.
R. Roy, Esq., in reply to H. Hyett, Esq., said there was
no intention of offering any, opposition to the Stroud and Swin-
don line, unless the Cheltenham, and Oxford line were opposed,
or that:it...were still represented to parliament that the Stroud
tide .wata-.1--whatit was not—the Cheltenham line to London.

W. Ish,Skillicorne, Esq., seconded the Resolution, which was
carried unanimously.
Captain Moorsorn cordially agreed with. Mr. Thompson that
the Gloucester and Stroud Railway should not be opposed by
them; .but assuredly the people of Cheltenham should not be
tied down, and Old next year that they required no other line
than that branch. lie was unable to attend at Oxford; but
there Mr. Stephenson's authority was relied upon as decisive
against the Oxford line. The fact.was, Mr. Stephenson, when
he first spoke of the line, had not surveyed the country, which,
as. his letter showed, he now considered, as did he, (Capt. M.,)
was perfectly practicable—much more practicable than the
Stroud line. They had to surmount a summit level at Dowdes-
weJl; but they had to surmount one higher still at Chalford.
Both could be accomplished by stationary engines. But there
were no gradients and no tunnelling so bad as the worst on the'
Stroud line ; •besittes there was no mass of earth to remove so
heavy -as on that line. Much as he disliked comparison,`they
were forced into them by the spirit of opposition they had en-
countered.

Mr. Brunel said he should have been silent but for the direct
allusions, to him in connexion with the Stroud line.. Why had
not• Captain :tiiaorsom stated the length of the tunnels and the
inclination of the planes on the Oxford line?' •
Captain Moorsom replied that the length of the tunnels would
not exceed two miles and a half; it might not be two miles and
a quarter. The inclination of the plane would be 1 in 40.
..
,Mr. Brunel then said the Tring lines had twice been unfairly
brought forward, and at periods when neither could have been
advanced in parliament, though they might impede the progress
of the Cheltenham and Stroud Union bill. It was promoted
solely by the London and Birmingham Railway Company to
bring traffic on their own line. The question had been brought
forward in a most unfair way at Oxford. He did not dissent
from the greater part of Mr. Stephenson's letter, nor had he
ever stated that the line between Cheltenham and Oxford was
impracticable; for in point of fact no line of country could be
considered altogether impracticable. But though it was, strictly
speaking, practicable, yet there were almost incalculable difli-
citifies to be surmounted. At Tring was the highest point of
the Birmingham line. Oxford was 200 feetlower than the sum-
mit at Dowdeswell, and'then.You had to ascend another high
summit between Oxford and Tring. Whereas, having -once,
attained the summit at Salperton on the Stroud line, all the rest
of the way was a continued descent to London. The difficul-
ties between Cheltenham and Oxford were so great that, but
for the now prevailing passion.for railways, it would not be the
best line. It was indifferent to him how many lines were
formed; but he begged them not to suffer themselves to be slily
misled.
ndoldCaptain
fe
Would
Moorsom said
parliamentthey
d
should
iallow
walcs
ittakeenh caream tonot
haveto
two be
bli
lines to the metropolis ? The present line had not been brought
forward before, because an impression prevailed that it was not
_practicable. Only three months ago he himself thought so. Six
'Weeks since, and not before, the parties who were anxious to
.have a line from Tring to Oxford asked him if they could not
carry it on to Cheltenham? He surveyed the country, att&thett
found it was practicable. Why should Cheltenham be depen-
dent on the Stroud Union with the Great Western Railway,
which could not be completed for five years, for its connexidn
with London, which might be formed fiy a ine that would be
open in two years? They need not be in any such hurry to
pass the Stroud and Swindon bill.
R. Roy, Esq. denied, distinctly, for himself and all connected
with him, the most distant notion of " slily opposing" the Stroull
and Swindon line, as Mr. Brunel had insinuated: Having long-
' had an interest in' theprosperity of Cheltenham, and lately
in-
vested property here, the Directors of the Stroud, and of the
Tring lines, hail severally applied to him. In the first, he was
struck by the disadvantageof the circuitous route • but on being
distinctly assured that no other line was practicable, he agreed
to support that line; and, when a difficulty arose which could
not have been got over, nor the bill advanced, without his con.
sent, he had given that consent. But when the new line was
pointed out to him, by which so much time; distance, and ex-
pense could be saved; he andlir. Thompson went instantly to
:the Directors, and fairly and openly stated that they could no
longer support a line that not only went so circuitously, but left
Cheltenham in the back ground. Was this acting " slily?"—
We then*saw' the gentlemen by whom the Triiig line was pro-
posed, and were assured by them that it was -perfectly practi-
cable; which' was confirmedby Mr. Stephenson and -Captain
Moorsom. Interested as all here must be in the prosperity of
Cheltenham, this is not a question Of mere rival railroads ; but
bow we may best promote the interests of this town ; and with
that feeling, he had
,hailed with gratitude the offer made by the
London and Birmingham Railway CompanY, Whir in ascertain-
ing the practicability of the line have done so much for us. He
was rejoiced to hear Mr. Brunel admit that the Oxford line was
practicable; though he qualified it by saying that one was more
difficult than another. But was Cheltenham to be consigned
to the condition of a deserted village, and all the advantages
the town now possessed transferred to Stroud, merely because
there might appear to Mr. Brunel to be a little more diffieuly in
one line than another? The opinion of Mr. Stepbensen, on
the other hand is, that the Oxford line is not only practicable,
but the best line. With that .published opinion, and Captain
Moorsom's testimony, there was enough before the meeting to
justify them in saying that the preference should be given to
the Oxford line as the most direct, and as not only equally pra-
ticable, but " the best."
Mr. Brunel disclairfied all intention 'of personal disrespect,
and apologised fcir having used the word " slily."
Mr. Roy said, the Birmingham, Cheltenham, Gloucester, and
Stroud .Union Railway would have passed through some pro-
perty of his, as well as of Mr. Thoinpson's, whereby both must
have benefited; but they cheerfully relinquished any such
advantages feeling how much greaterinterests—the interests of
all Cheltenham were involved in•the question. Mr. Thompson,
feeling that he could no longer support the Stroud line, withdrew
from the Birmingham and Gloucester CMpanv.
W. c.artoll,•Esq., in a strain of fervid and irripassioned elo-
qiiendK Which it would require the hundred hands of Briareus
to repert.fully or fairly, inveighed against the course put sued by
'Mr. Brunel, at Oitford, as well as.at this meeting; without con-
fining himself to facts to support the alleged impracticability of
the Oxford-liue, which had been condemned-on hisranthority.
But when he found that he was to be this day confrpnted by a
professional gentle Man of such acknowledged etriiheuce as
Captain Moorsom, he at once.altered 'his tactics, and instead• of
indulging in such hardy assertions; he first insinuated that we
had only met to support the Lortdpn and Birmingham Railway
Company. At the Oxford meeting, he had reminded Mr. Bru-
.nel's Western Railway company of the claims of Cheltenham;
but we were oppo4edby packed party who said they would
have nothing to do with us; they were there only to uphold the •
interests of Oxford ! Let them carry their interests through 1
Sttritrd and Swindon, and leave Cheltenham to-talse care of her-
self. All the arguments at Oxford were founded on the alleged
impracticability of the direct line from Cheltenham; and when
there, Mr. Brunel asked, " Is, Mr. Stephenson here?—has he
approved of the line? He should be astonished if he had."
Now, all-important as Mr. Stephenon's authority appeared at
Oxford, he hoped 'it would be equally so here when he exceed-
ingly astonished Mr. Brunel, as nndoubt he should do, by strew-
ing him in print; Mr Stepherfson's letter approving if the line
as the best. But we are charged with supporting the London
and Birmingham Railway. What then ? How is the Great
Western Railway better entitled to our support? Mr. Thomp-
son and Mr. Roy had both told them they laboured under a
mistaken notion as to the impracticability of the Oxford line;
and so did he, and so did others. [Mr. 'Carroll then read an
extract from the evidence of Mr. W. S. Evans before the com-
mittee:] There are some proofs that we were "slily misled."
He felt assured the inhabitants of Cheltenhatt would never
' tamely relinquish the advantages they already possessed, or
submit, with all the importance the town now possessed, to be
flung out of the great thoroughfare—that direct and most cen-
tralline of communication with the metropolis, which has es-
sentially contributed to raise this town to its present eminence.
It. C. Sherwood, Esq., proposed the second resolution; as to
which he could not anticipate any diversity of opinion. Hefelt
confident that all who visited Cheltenham, whether for health,
for pleasure, for the enjoyment of its picturesque scenery, or
from any other
,motive, would concur in supporting it—as all
must coincide in the view with which it was framed, that in
coming to Cheltenham they might pursue the straightforward
road, and not go the roundabout way.
E. Armitage, Esq., seconded the resolution, which was
carried unanimously.
R. Roy, Esq. in proposing the third resolution, said, as they
were satisfied the Oxford line was practicable, he hoped they
would pass a resolution which would secure its benefits to their
neighbours. We have no intention of opposing the Swindon
line, unless they oppose us. They are hurrying the bill through
parliament, professedly as the Cheltenham line to London;
and they know they can only succeed by taking away from
Cheltenham all that is valuable to its interests. They could not
have proved their preamble without calculating on the traffic
and travelling which their success must divert from this town. ,
They are bmind to give some pledge that they are-not opposing'
us, when the lung established line of communication through
Cheltenham is about to be' destroyed by our kind neighbours of
Stroud. We had been labouring undei a delusion as to the im-
practicability of the London road; and on discovering it, it
became our bounden duty to' correct our error; to call this
Meeting; and to ask you will you still countenance the line
that, while professing to be a Cheltenham line, must destroy the
interests of Cheltenham? Let Stroud have its line to Swindon

and. to Gloucester.; but don't let them 'get that line under false
colours, and then turn round on us, and say, " You are too
latei; you must not now oppose what you once sanctioned." If
we bring. our case before Parliament, we
.must be'heaid. If
Stroud is to reduce Cheltenham to the condition of a " De-
serted Village," it can only be. done under the pretext of that
being the Cheltenham line ; and then it is a job, and a gross
job. If that Stroud line be adopted, nota single. London coach
' will then come direct to this- town, and we shall be cat out of
our direct line of communication.—[Mr. Roy here exhibited
maps, shoWing the result of the contemplated lines, from which
it was evident that all travelling through Cheltenham must be
at au end.]. If they will meet us in good faith, and satisfactorily
arrange with us—as men of business—that the Oxford line
shall not be opposed, then let their bill pass. If not, we are
bound to press for the protection of our interests. We are not
throwing ourselves into the hands of the London and Birming-
ham Company. On the contrary, so confident were they of the
advantages to be derived from a connection with the traffic and
travelling of Cheltenham, that they determined themselves to
undertake the line, without calling on the inhabitants to take a
single share. They are all men of large capital; and whatever
number of shares may not be. taken in this town, they will take.
For thus liberally promoting the interests of Cheltenham, they
deserve our • grateful thanks. If we attempt to go hence to
LondotT by any but the straight forward route through Oxford,
we must leave our interests behind us.
J. Fisher, Esq. seconded the resolution.
W. H. Hyett, Esq., said, as a director of the Cheltenham,
Stroud, and Swindon line, if their object was, as this resolu-,
tion showed, to oppose that line, which had received the,unani-
mous support of this town, at a public meeting in October last,
he must state his objections to it. He admitted that the traffic
and travelling between Cheltenham and London had been ta-
ken as a portion of the traffic and travelling from Stroud ; but
they should.recollect.that the parties who sanctioned that ar.-
.propriation were as completely bound up with the best interests
of Cheltenham as any men could be, and quite above suspicion
as to their motives. He stood there to demand justice for all.
If the people of Cheltenham found the Oxford line to be the
best, let them have it; but let them not oppose the Swindon
line, which they had so lately and publicly pledged themselves
to support ; and on the faith of that pledge many persons had
invested large capital in the undertaking. He entreated them
not to excite a spirit of opposition, which the resolution must
do, and which must be injurious to both and to all parties. It
has been proved in parliament that the Stroud line is the best;
and if you reject it, you reject a line that would open to this
town a direct communication (hitherto but partially enjoyed)
with the southern, western, and northern districts of Eng-
land, through Bristol, Tewkesbury, &c. And if they succeeded.
in defeating it, were they sure of getting the Oxford line 'in a
future year ? Were they sure of the consent of Parliament,
and of landlords? or,that the money-market would be as fa-
vourable to the project? Were they prepared, in snatching at
the shadow, to lose the substance ?
Mr.' Roy replied—and referring to the map, said it were bet-:
ter to have no bill than to be left, as we must be by the Stroud
line, in the condition of a deserted village.. Next year they
would be met in Parliament by being told they had no traffic;
or travelling for S windon had secured it* all. The line laid
down from travelling.;
to Bristol would secure all the advanta-
ges of a connection with the South and West of England, without
going round about by Stroud and Swindon. They had supported
the Stroud line in October, in utter ignorance of the practicabilit v
of any other: they would make us secure that we should, not
be met in parliament with a plea of having transferred our traf-
fic and travelling to Stroud, we will pledge ourselves not to op-
pose theni.
Dr. Boisragon, in a very able and classically eloquent and
arguMentative speech, to which our limits will'uot allow us to
do justice, supported Mr. Hyett's view of the case. AS a Di-
rector of the Stroud Union Company, he declared that it 'muse
be obvious that, he vast wealth and manufactures of the Vale. of
Stroud could never have a'proper outlet into 'the • Metropolitan
market without .the Great Western and Cheltenham Railway.,
Both linei, he was satisfied, -never would be sanctioned_ by the
legislature—running parallel as the. Oxford and Cheltenham did
with the Great Western. It was much to be' regretted that the
new light bad not broken upon the supporters of the new line,
in October last, when the inhabitants of Cheltenham pledged
themselves to support the Union Railway; For his own part,
had he not felt convinced that the-Tring line was impracticable,
and that the Stroud line must essentially benefit this town, he
would have cut off his right hand rather than have supported
the measure. On the Oxford line there was no town in the
Cotswold districts but Northleach, and Witney. Where, then,
.would be; their traffic or travelling? -The Great Western held
out greater advantages than any other. He concluded by
moving an amendment, to the effect that the Meeting, though
desirous of encouraging the Oxford line, deprecate any step
that could risk the passing of the Stroud Union Railway Bill,
which was now almost secure.

W. Pitt, Esq., seconded the amendment.
Lawrence, Esq., of Cireneester, said it was rather too
late now to make the discovery that it was still open to the peo-
ple of Cheltenham to intercept the Bill before Parliament, after
meetings had been held to sanction it and support it in Chelten-
ham, Gloucester, and other towns. It was outrageous now to
say that parties had been mystified. It behoves Cheltenham to
get the best line to London, and especially to secure the line
they had already got; through Stroud—which was the best.
Parliament had a graving repugnance to encouraging additional
Railway projects; and he warned them to pause before they
endangered the measure, merely in the hope of saving half an
hour to passengers. They did calculate, all the traffic and tra-
velling of this town, as helping to realize, on the Stroud line, a
profit. on 'the outlay of £750,000; but where was the traffic
which was to satisfy Parliament as to the chance of profit on
the outlay of £1,400,000 on the Oxford and Trine line ?
R. Roy, Esq., opposed the amendment, whkh endangered
the interests of Cheltenham. If they act fairly by us, we will
not attempt to interfere with them; but we must and will, for
our own -security, oppose them if they still palm off upon Par-
liament, as a Cheltenham line, that which only places us in the
worst possible situation. Mr. Brunel admitted that be never
did pronounce the Oxford line to be impracticable; and he had
shown that the Stroud line must destroy Cheltenham, by cutting
off its direct communication with London, and reducing this
now prospeions, populous; and affluent town to the state of a
deserted village.
Mr. Carroll likewise opposed the amendment, with much
strong argument, and warmly upheld the interests of Cheltenham.
The chairman then put the amendment,' which was lost by a
large majority; and Mr. Roy's resolution was carried by accla-
mation.
[lt is only right we should state that, of the individuals who held
up their hands in suppport of the amendment, (with the ex-
ception of some one or two directors, or shareholders, of the
Swindon line) all were, from Cirencester, Stroud, and that
district; whose right so to express their opinions in a meeting
of the inhabitants of Cheltenham, is at least questionable.]