The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1845-09-02 00:00:00

London

opLICA'
FOR PROSPECTUSES and FORMS of A.,-
TION apply to A
LLOYD and PRICE, 25, Castle"6tre
Liverpool.

MANCHESTER, MIDLAND, AND/r 0
GREAT GRIMSBY JUNCTION RAILVOI

ROTHERHAM

P.O
TO THE EDITOR OP THE LIVERPOOL STAI`") ea; ,14;:
IR,—My attention having been directed to 0,1 ~,N3
fiJJ •• Sheffidellnal; :41w4:
tisernent on Saturday last, headed
Lincolnshire Railway," signed " By order, J. 41',,„001P
frey," in which the project with whichl have the bon 41•1 i,
to be connected is alluded to, j-feel it incuroben,e cor 1414
me to offer a few remarks, i order to prevent tho,bv the ktil
nected with our undertaking from being Misled oPl'.: 1111 k;
supposition that we sh rhave no locus standi for P,ltlk
sing the Sheffield an ineolnshirc scheme in °I:0101i bk
of Lords next se on. Had the advertisernentkelPsns
stated the favour le position in which the She-- ci 01)"
Lincolnshire scheme stands, or even anirnadverte defend 1,1
the weakness of the evidence, or exulted over OF, wool ktkili
of the party who appeared in opposition to it, it or fiat
have passed without one remark from me, but Vie pilre
fairly and incorrectly assumes that inasmuch all,l,festei ""k,
moters of the Sheffield and Lincolnshire schenieceoelL"
that of the London and York, from Bawtry to.fr„Dcbegh'
ttehreTmmiudslatbnde,cessbsdarGilryedato
Gsoriwmistbh r
Junction.
to thriv",ii,
Grimsby unction. temeot 41
your leave, endeavour to show that such a sta
wholly ithout foundation. Shi6ell
As areas the defeat of the Bawtry Branch toqicilso
is concerned, the promoters of the Manchester, ", i 013141"
and Great Grimsby Juncion via Rotherham fee' „ccoOt
no regret, as they have always considered that the !to $O,
modation proposed to be given by that project "e; set
such as to deserve the sanction of the legislatillicieri°
they are also free to confess, that from the tw° the Pne
schemes submitted to Parliament for connecting
pulou
gs
fdGi
stsri districtsbcsttbhsoeoorfbbfbeLNgs atbotnhrwcataaahntssdh
Nottinghamshirei
sGtrheerleeeracse eddGw Y;ar
isbomur
skatyhosi
ar:aer
rof
oopfire
dPbocritbs d d
th,,Teill
brought forward late last year, purporting Ma elor t•
thee Pto:111/
doubtlessLinnsh rremembere
to carry out the same general objects, and als°,.l;atib.,°o,i:
far greater accommodation to the surrounding r'''be ae' e
hood, and which the Board of Trade reported to
ranch of ,ire
dedly preferable to either the Bawtry Brr‘ T,-coills"fec
London and York or the Sheffield and P`';:e3 °to
Junction, but with which, from circurnstnnabd
which the promoters had no control, they vcier`„,ilitter-ote
meet the two contending parties before the Ibe,'" to
the House of Commons, and therefore, as I e°
a
intimated, that of a bad choice the comMitteeotnetio
make the best. I beg, with confidence, to re end 6hreeee
tGhreimshsabryehjoblbdcetrisbnoftothpeerMusaenctbbeesetevrid,
eMbeidelwanhclic,khoiaos
ed
published as given before the above .mentioned L'iwpces,-0”
for I then feel assured they cannot fail: to e P"„tv
with a confident belief that if the promoters 01 tl poky
try Branch to Sheffield could have laid claim to di" re
try foo
lation of Rotherham. there would have been a aril
ent decision given, but this they could not do 900trd
than the Sheffield and Lincolnshire, but oil ctteecOeill
by the attempt to run a parallel line to the '-ayolu,heir
Rotherham, they rather appeared purposelY t° io the
therham, and, consequently, not a single wittre,:osche,s, to
favour was produced from that town. The not on'er;
Midland, and Great Grimsby project proposes,' the er,
accommodate Rotherham, but to make use °` •'"
field and Rotherham Railway as a connection w the
field, thereby avoiding the construction 01:fi_vreeasirdoioo
unnecessary Railway, and that without za' ote toce
distance to that town ; but also by tbei,A
dis
from Rotherham to Wortley to reduce t"1, Gres
t
several miles between Manchester, LiverPo'9ocl
dersfield, and the West, and Gainsborough Linooln
Grimsby on the East, and now even ~t,?,,ffielcitaileti
Boston, &c., since that portion of the 9";.010
Lincolnshire scheme from Retford to I.°ll-00c1 Id 01
to be proven,—and it will also, by the Londoo niatiorTeet
from Bawtry to Retford, affording to the P°„1),;$119, iti.
that town and surrounding neighbourhood at4,_e:4lffe„,,lf
and convenient rout; to Manchester and to'y thehuots
ding, and a much superior one, indeed I may at
one to the important market at Rotherhan:„; ceer.Ajoi
principal part of their Stcck has been solo '0;1 at '
and it will open out to them one of the best C ivhtbat
England. It will, therefore, be perceived .o°oo, to
have stated, and which can be fully stiliSton: be beo
WORKSOP IS THE ONLY TOWN that wou'iis th 3 oii'
served by the Sheffield and Lincolnshire 5001 it is Oterf
our projected Line via Rotherham • and when i- 0,00:
dered that the district in and around W:orks,,9:olse"bieo
thinly populated, and that they have already 0:60
modation, whilst the whole of the district thi:_° J sl'
the Manchester, Midland, and Great Grinisuoidatiooth to
is proposed to pass, is void of such acconl°3oo 0501
though much more thickly populated, it is the °ld f'il
assume, I humbly venture to submit, that suitesls
which can be produced to prove what I ha!„so. jut°,oo`
not be listened to by Parliament before Possiblessew,eol.:
a line of railway which not only gives a 'nue,' onoe'ess'
of local accommodation, but also greatly afl'eb jaerel
rily interferes with vested interests, arid ViDrol#
the distance between the two termini it 's '
connect. rel
tsßi
aaeAl
pn
groundso rtthe
aadvertisement
publishedo fb objection,"
j e
ctoinb,t,
h, le statesßbeag`i‘itwTo
ahayadtdrt
ihantne re:: tracto.eltbo Efsltahra;oori
" The Chairman said that the Cotaraitte_inote.rfo
the promoters of the Sheffield and
ear P
would come to the best arrangements i tuouses
removing the inconveniences which the P.Ai, fru
Foljambe and Mr. Hutchinson would 60' bbettr,
fitie'
construction. Id con ho
" Mr. Hope said that the Coropaill.w°° tbebsf
selves to the extreme limits of deviation fro ,
NOU
of those gentlemen. iides eit
" Mr. Talbot said he wished it to be of those
be would come to no terms on the part °
men."

Rotherham, August 25, 1845.
I am, SFiar,AyNoucriosbeipdAiengticservita:itgeretorP