The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-04-02 00:00:00

TO JAMES A/MALL, ESQUIRE, CHAIRMAN OF
THE GLASGOW, PAISLEY, KILMARNOCK,
AND AYR RAILWAY COMPANY.
Caledonian Railway Office,
22, Parliament-street, Westminster,
23d March, 1844.
SIR,—It is with great regret that the Provisional Com-
mittee of the Caledonian Railway feel themselves
compelled, in consequence of the observations of certain
Shareholders (one of them being also a share-broker) at
the meeting of the Glasgow and Ayr Railway Company,
on the 20th instant, at which you presided, to come for-
ward and give the most unqualified contradiction to those
statements.
It never was the intention of this Committee to enter
into controversy with the projectors of other lines. The
question, as far as they are concerned, has been already
decided by those most competent to judge between private
interests and the benefit of the community, and that de-
cision having been ratified by the approbation of the pub-
lic, they would have been content to leave each project to
rest on its own merits.
When, however, unprecedented and unwarrantable at-
tacks are made on the promoters of an undertaking, and
when it is sought to sustain these attacks by statements
equally at variance with good feeling as with the ordinary
usages of society, it becomes the duty of those against
whom such assaults are directed to justify their conduct,
and defend the interests of the parties for whom they are
acting.
In the present instance, the attention of the Committee
has been directed to the observations made by two per-
sons at the meeting in question, as being not only un-
founded, but contrary to the fact. One of these parties is
reported to have said, " he had been staggered when he
saw the formidable arrey of names of Glasgow gentlemen
in the Prospectus of the Caledonian Railway, but he was
not a little surprised when he found that not one of these
gentlemen were Shareholders, and he was convinced it
would be found they had not given their sanction to their
names being now published. The real state of the matter
was, that about two years ago, when there was no pros-
pect of either a west or east-coast line being attempted,
these gentlemen had agreed to allow their names to be
used for the preliminary business of getting suiveys ; but
now, when matters were entirely changed, he could not
believe these respectable parties would longer allow the
public to be deceived by their names being put forward."
Another Shareholder " quite concurred" in these re-
marks, and observed, " that with respect to the apparently
formidable array of names in the Provisional Committee
of the Caledonian Railway, the Directors had seen several
of them. niany of whom declared that their names had
been given two or three years ago when the line was first
spoken of. Some were astonished when they saw their
names so announced, as they could not recollect their
having been so given."
With respect to these observations, as regard it in-
terest as Subscribers in the undertaking, the mittee
will simply remark, First, that the members of that Com-
mittee locally connected with Lanarkshire and Dumfries-
shire alone, have taken upwards of 1000 shares ; Secondly,
that on first forming the Committee, a fund having already
been subscribed at a public meeting of the County of La-
nark for preliminary expenses, it was left at the option of
every one who approved of the underfaiking to become a
Subscriber afterwards, if he wished to remain a member
of the permanent directio, -Thirdly, that the Committee
never did deceive the p 4.ti c by a show of names of per-
sons not being Shar:..l. ders, and that so far from such
being the fact, the e- mbers generally of the Provisional
Committee, who 'e not official parties, have now either
actually taken aces, or expressed their intention to do
so; and that, ,ithout a single exception, the Committee
have express authority from every nobleman and gentle-
man whose name appears on the list, such authority bay•
ing been given in consequence of applications made since
the 20th February last, and not, as stated at your meet-
ing, " two or thgoe years ago when the line was first pro-
posed."
It was not the wish of the Committee of the Caledonian
Railway to express any opinion on the merits of rival un-
dertakings, though the " Glasgow, Dumfries, and Car-
lisle" line can only be regarded in the light of a scheme
got up in opposition to the recommendation of the Go.
rernment Commissioners, by comparatively a few inter-
ested parties, to serve their own ends. On this subject,
however, as the speakers at your meeting have called in
question the merits of the Caledonian Railway, the Com-
mittee feel called upon to make the following observa-