The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1844-10-22 00:00:00

and Shrewsbury Line, (thus performing, in every respect,
their part of the agreement,) they feel that they mr,y
properly and justly appeal to the London and Birmingham
Board also to abide by it; moreover, to urgejor the con-
tinued adherence of the Shropshire party; since, as it
appears to this Board, those Gentlemen have, by their
concurrence in the agreement as made, fully recognised
the whole arrangement.
" That if any difference shall ultimately arise upon the
agreement, this Board will be prepared to refer that dif.
ference to the Board of Trade, to Sir Robert Peel, tb
Lord Granville Somerset, or to any other equally high
and independent authority.
" That a copy of these I:eFolutions be forthwith trans-
mitted to the London and Birmingham Board, arid ano-
ther copy (with a copy of Mr. Gore's letter, of Mr. Jen-
kins', and Mr. Creeds') to the Hon. Mr. Clive."
The Grand Junction Directors conceive they have only
to publish the following letter, addressed to them by the
Secretary of the London and Birmingham Railway Com-
pany, at the request of his chlirman, in order to shew that
down to the present moment there has been no change of
purpose or plan, and (what is much more material) no
failure of engagement whatever on the part of the Grand
Junction Directors :

• " Office, Euston-station, 25th September, 1844.
" MY DEAR SIR,—On the return of Mr. Glyn from
the conference of the 3rd July,-at Birmingham, a commu-
nication was made to Mr. Gore and Mr. Clive, of the ar-
rangement which had been entered into with the Grand
Junction Company. A deputation from their Provisional
Committee thereupon attended cur board, and the article
of our agreement which affected them was read.
"On the 12th July following, a letter was addressed to
Mr. Glyn, to which Mr. Gore's name was affixed as ch&r-
man, and handed to me by Mr. Roy's nephew. On a pe-
rusal of the contents, I found the following words :
`Anxious, however, to form no abAacle in the carrying
out of the acnicahle arrangements between such large in-
terests, and relying upon the honour and integrity of the
two companies [Grand Junction and London and Bir-
mingham] as pledged to carry out the contract already
agreed upon, by our respective solicitors and subscribers
—between the Shrewsbury Committee and your company,
I am directed to express their perfect acquiesceuce in the
ble,geurrleyeeamtzei‘n‘ttr,,o3wityhle)cerri,G;.!bmryapnttdloineji_ur aricsoofamlttopearßenidy7fuirEht,
shallews
iden-
ticalnction
the
terms already arranged in our negoci,:tions with
you;' and directly stated to Mr. Roy's nephew, who
brought the letter, that it must be altered ; as not being
consistent with the pledge of the Grand Junction Cam-
pony, contained in the agreement read to the Shrewsbury
deputation. I returned the letter for this purpose, but it
was sent to me the following day unaltered, with a request
that it might be sent as it was to Mr. Gl n. The latter
did not attach the same value that I did to the objection-
able words, because, in point of fact, nothing had been
definitively agreed upon with the Shrewsbury Company
and ourselves, except that we were to lease the line at a
given rent.

" When, however, the Shrewsbury party had given in
their ultimatum, and that Mr. Roy. with his nephew, at-
tended our last board, 1 felt that it was equally due to the
Grand Junction Beard and our own, that I should recall
to Mr. Roy's nephew, in the presence of the directors,
what, had passed between us on the subject of the letter of
the 12th July. lie frankly admitted that I bad protested
against Mr. Gore's assumption of a concession on the part
of the Grand Juucti,m Company ; for which, in my view
of the terms of agreement, between the Grand Junction
and London and Birmingham deputations, there was no
warrant. You may have taken a sound view, or you may
not, of the wisest course to be adopted with the Shrews-
bury party ; but they cannot say that you have failed in
your engagements, either to them or to us; nor were we
called upon to do more than offer our mediation on points
in which you differed. 1 think it right that you should
know what has passed on this occasion, and at the request
of our chairman, I put you in possession of the facts as
they occurred. "--7" Yours, faithfully,
"R. CREED.

(Signed)—
" To Captain Huish."

After this letter the Grand Junction Directors feel that
it is unnecessary to add another word in explanation of
their conduct ; but as the following letter from Mr. Glyn
to Mr. Gore has been published, as shewing that the for-
mer had written something to Mr. Moss inconsistent with
an admission on the part of the London and Birmingham
that the Grand Junction were to "make" the Shiewshuty
line, it is thought right to publish also the subsequent
correspondence ou the subject of that letter.
[COPY OF THE LETTER PUBLISHED IN MR. GORE'S
STATEMENT.]
"Lombard-street, 26th August, 1814.
" MY DEAR SIR,—Mr. Roy has handed me your note
of the 16th instant. I am surprised to find there can be
any difficulty upon the particular point to which you al-
lude. We never raised any doubt upon that condition—
indeed the very fact and stipulation of granting a lease to
the incoming company, presupposes and settles the ques-
tion. I have written to Mr. Moss upon the subject, and
stated wry opinion to him.
"Believe me, my dear Sir,
" Yours truly,
(Signed) " GEO. CARR GLYN.
" To W. Ormsby Gore, Esq , M.P."

[SUBSEQUENT CORRESPONDENCE AS TO IT
" Newton House, near Whitby, October 5/h, 1814.
" My DEAR observe in the Morning Chronicle
of the 3rd instant a copy of a letter from yea to Mr. 0.
Gore, dated 26th Augost,-wherein yon say you had writ-
ten to Mr. Moss' upon the subject of • some particular
point' in Mr. Gore's letter of ]6th August, 'Ste., &e. May
I hcg the favour of the date of that letter. and a copy of
it if you have one. Address to me in Liverpool, where I
return on Monday.
" I am, my dear S,r,
" Very faithfully yours,
"JOHN MOSS.

(Signed)
" To Geo. Carr Glyn, Esq."

" London, 7th October, 1814. "
"My DEAR Stn,—ln reply to your note from Newton
House, 1 am inclined to think there is some innccuracy as
.to dates in the letter quoted to which you allude, but can
state that the particular and only point to which I refer-
red, was the independence of the Shrewsbury and Wol-
verhampton Company, and its existence as a separate un-
dertiking; that being settled by the stipulation of the lease
required by the incoming company ; for we have uniformly
maintained on the one side and the other, than making the
line, strictly speaking, was with the Grand Junction,
though as a question of policy, I have ventured to press
upon you the expediency of settling with the Shrewsbury
parties under any circumstrnces, fearing the consequences
which would ensue.
" I find that I wrote to you on matters connected with
the Shrewsbury affairs several letters in July and Septem-
ber, and on the 19th. 20th, 22d, 23d, and 2lth August,
(if my memoranda are correct,) besides the interview
which I had with you and Mr. Lawrence.
" Believe me, my dear Sir,
" Yours faithfully,
" GEO. CARR GLYN.

(Signed)
" To John Moss, Es•q."

" Otter pool, 11th October, 1814.
" MY DEAR thank you for your letter of the
7th ; but after Mr. Gore's manifesto, it is due to all con-
cerned, that the part each has taken in the Shrewsbury
matter should be publicly and clearly understood. Now,
as I never, to the best of my recollection, received from
you any letter whatever which is at all in accordance with
the construction put by Mr. Gore, and which others ap-
pear.. to put on your letter-published to hint of the 2ith
August, I am very anxious to know which particular letter
of yours to me you allude to in in th:t letter to Mr. Gore.
Will you be so good as to let me know. I may mention
too that I have not any letter from you dated either the
19th. 20th, or 21th August, though I have two which you
do not refer to, dated the 21st and 25th August.
" I am, my dear Sir,
" Very faithfully yours, --
"JOHN MOSS.

(Signed)
" To Geo. Carr Glyn, Esq."

" rro/verlon, 13th October, 1844.
"My DEAR SlR,—Though I have started for a short
time, in the hope of securing a little respite from these
railway turmoils, yet I must acknowledge at once ye ur
note of the llth, and accompany it by the request, that
you will not hold me responsible for the-acts and putlica-
tions of the Shrewsbury Committee. The first intimation
of the manifesto in question which I received was from
the newspapers. It must be erident to every reader, that
my note inserted in it replied to one point only—the ex-
istence of the Shrewsbury Cempany, as a separate and in-
dependent.undertaking, as I hare already noticed to you.
" I think, as far as my recollection enables me to reply
from hence, several of the numerous letters on the Shrop-
shire affair pressed upon you the expediency of settling
with the Shrewsbury Company; and am'cobfldent that I
wrote to you a letter, under date of the 19th August,
stating my views more- particularly ; and which I had in
my mind when writing to Mr. Gore. The question of
making the line was matter for negociation, and I certainly
hoped from the tenor of the conversation between you,
Mr. Lawrence, and tee, that this would have been arran-
ged, feeling that a measure of such great impottance to all
interested should not be allowed to fall through upon such
a point, more especially as in other ways efficient controul
over the outlay could be insured to you.
"My movements are uncertain, but letters addressed to
Lombard. street will always eventually find me.
" Believe me, my dear Su-, yours truly,
(Signed,) . " GEO. CARR GLYN.
" To John Moss, Esq."
It can hardly be necessary after these letters to add,
that Mr. Moss never received any letter fr,,m Mr. Glyn
on which he could have put the construction suggested in
Mr. Gore's published statement; nor can the Grand Jun-
ction directors admit for a moment that the London and
Birmingham would have had, at any time alter their July
agreement, a right to allude to the making of the line as
" matter for negociation," in their correspondence with
any party, without the previous consent of the Grand
Junction Company, that point having been discussed be-
fore the agreement, and concluded by it.
Upon the merits of the Shrewsbury and Wolverhamp-
ton line, and its prospects, either per se or as compared
with the Shrewsbury, and Birmingham, or on the character
provisional corn mitt ee
crrinlYinsegtt,hame line, fur entire exone-
ration probable cost or revenue of the latter, the Grand Junc-
tion Directors do not proposl to enter again, having. in
a desire (wl.ich they most nn-
their former statement submitted their views on those
subjects ; but they feel that, under the circumstances here
detailed, they have a right to appeal, and with confidence,
r(fte'of: itgtit(ht;ineeedStglrhy:rd'etiliwiset:l!mibl disclaim) of
dictate" to any tarty ; and they
now trust that tin; Shropshire party, as well as the public,
will be ready to concur in the admission of the Loodon
and Birmingham Company, that the Grand Junction
Company bare not failed in their engagements to any
party. JOHN MOSS, Chairman.
Liverpool, 121 h Oclokr, 1844.