The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-01-11 00:00:00

It would be observed, that the greatest_ deficiency was in the

donation

but at the same time it should be stated, that

those for 1840 included the portion of " The Queen's Mar-
riage Fund" allotted to the Infirmary.

After a very brief discussion_,_ a motion was proposed by
Mr. REAM:, seconded by Mr. HOUGHTON, that the accounts
do pass, and it was carried unanimously.
The other resolutions were afterwards carried unanimously,
but being altogether of a formal and routine character, it is
unnecessary to specify them. William Brown, Esq., of
Richmond-hill, was elected president for the ensuing year.
Some conversation took place on the necessity of obtaining
increased subscriptions in order to maintain the efficiency of
the charity, and it was understood that the committee would
press this subject on public attention.
The meeting then separated, the proceedings not having
oceupied more than half an hour.

LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER AND MANCHES-
TER AND LEEDS RAILWAYS.

Our contemporary, the Railway Times, in replying to a
few remarks which we offered, on Tuesday last, upon the
subject of the proposed junction line between the above rail-
ways, infers what we really cannot allow him to do, that the
article in our columns must have emanated from " a partizan"
deep in the secrets of the Liverpool and Manchester board.
We can assure the Railway Times, that in any opinion which
we have at any time offered upon the comparative merits of
of railway undertakings, our motives have been equally pure
as Lis own, and our mind perfectly unbiassed • and If, on this
question, we could see, in the conduct of the Liverpool board,
any leaning to individual interests, as opposed to the interests
of the shareholders at large, or the convenience of the public,
we should be as ready to denounce such a leaning as our con-
temporary himself.
We cannot, however, we must confess, discover any such
unworthy spirit in the conduct of the directors of the Liver-
pool line, in resisting the attempt of the Leeds and Manches-
ter directors to hurry them into the formation of the proposed
junction between the two railways. On the contrary, we are,
on a more mature consideration of all the circumstances of
the case, even strengthened in our conviction that the Liver-
pool and Manchester board have a perfect right to pause be-
fore adopting the views of the Leeds Company, and with
three railways, each seeking, a communication with them
through the town of Manchester—and that communication
necessarily a somewhat expensive one—to give their sanction
to such a scheme as would satisfy at once all interests, rather
than to enter upon the formation of a separate junction with
the Leeds line, leaving two other important lines entirely un-
provided for. We can see nothing either very reprehensible,
on the part of the Liverpool board, in wishing to postpone
any present steps -in the matter, even supposing—(and
it is a mere supposition)—that they are convinced of
the superiority of any particular scheme. It is quite
possible, as we remarked in a previous article upon this
subject, that circumstances may develope themselves,
during the present session of parliament, which will
force upon the mind of every prudent man the conviction
that the formation of a junction line through Manchester, so
expensive as either of the competing schemes, is very inex-
pedient ; and independent of this consideration, the present
position of commercial and monetary interests, and of rail-
way interests as well, is quite sufficient ground for unwilling-
ness to embark in new undertakings not urgently required.
We did not, whilst alluding to the "unfair spirit" mani-
fested by the Leeds company at their recent meeting, or
when expressing our confident expectation that the Liverpool
board could not be turned from their course by the paper
pellets directed against them by their " detractors," include
our contemporary amongst the number. And yet on the
principle that a journalist is in some measure responsible for
the statements of his correspondents, any one, not so well
acquainted as we are with our contemporary's general fair-
ness in " hearing both sides," might almost have done so.
For weeks past his columns have teemed with the contribu-
tions of the Manchester and Leeds gentlemen, impugning
the motives of the Liverpool board in no very measured
terms, and decrying the merits of other undertakings, in par-
ticular of that much vilified one, which is the especial object
of their jealousy (the line between Manchester and Sheffield),
and which for the last five years their scribblers have been
sedulously endeavouring to write down ; and coupling with
these attacks the total omission, (for which our contempo-
rary offers a very lame excuse,) of the claim of that under.
taking to be considered in the settlement of this question of
a junction line, we are convinced that we were fully justified
in charging them with both " selfishness" and "unfairness."
But pass we to the main point in dispute ; the question as
to the relative advantages of the two competing schemes, for
after all, that question is the most important one to be
settled. The Standard, our contemporary, says, " Asserts,
but does not prove that the other junction line" (the line to
connect the Liverpool with the Birmingham and the Sheffield
line) " would be more advantageous and less expensive than
that to Hunt's Bank. We should be glad if this could be
satisfactorily made out, for in that case we should urge the
Liverpool directors and all concerned to give it the prier-
ence. Our reply to this passage shall be very brief. In the
first instance, we did not say that the line to join the Liver-
pool with the Manchester and Birmingham and Manchester
anal Sheffield could be made for less than that to Hunt's
Bank. We said that it had been estimated at and could be
made for one-third the cost (£650,000) put down for it by
the speakers at the Manchester and Leeds meeting ; and is
it be the case that the estimated cost of the line to Hunt's
Bank is £450,000, then, of course, we may in substance have
made the assertion which is here attributed to us. We have
no great confidence, however, in exparte estimates, or indeed
in estimates of any kind. It is not, however, a dozen years
ago since we saw a plan and estimate of a line of railway over
this very part of Manchester, commencing from the Liver-
pool line at Oldfield-lane and terminating at Sheffield—a
route of 44 or 46 miles, and comprising eight miles of tun-
nelling—the cost of which was stated at, if we remember
right, the very same sum of £650,000, by no less celebrated
an engineer than Mr. George Stevenson, the projector of the
Leeds line ; and we cannot think that such great improve-
ment has been made in the art of spending money upon
railway works that two miles of railway now will cost as much
as 46 miles, including the same two miles, would have cost
ten or twelve years ago ! This estimate, it is true, may be
too absurd to be noticed ; and so may be, and so is, the
estimate which the Leeds gentlemen would palm upon us.
The same line has, however, been surveyed at a more recent
date by more than one eminent engineer; and we are much
mistaken (and we can be corrected if we are) if the estimate
of any of them exceeded £250,000! Our contemporary can
readily satisfy himself, if he possesses the inclination, by an
application to the parties in Manchester, one of them a com-
pany proposing to make the line in question, for whom these
surveys were made. If we mistake not, some information
upon the subject will be found by a reference to the early
numbers of his own publication.
With respect to the comparative advantages to the Liver-
pool company of the two connecting lines, we presume that
company is very competent to judge for itself. We have no
wish to undervalue the importance of a connection with the
Leeds line, and do not think that that line ought to be with-
out a junction with Liverpool ; at the same time we are as
little disposed to overlook the advantage of a connection with
the important towns upon the other two lines, some of which
—and we allude to Sheffield in particular—do not possess
already the advantage of water communication with Liver-
pool. On these grounds we do not wish to see a decision
upon the line to be adopted hurriedly arrived at; and would
suggest, that it would be infinitely better that all the compa-
nies should consent to abate a portion of their preset de-
mands, and seek a line of which all might partake the ad-
vantage. _

In Conclusion, we should be very happy if we could on all
occasions copy entire any remarks of our contemporary
addressed to us. We believe, however, that he will not suffer
greatly by the omission, his journal being generally read by
those of our townsmen who are interested in any subject
likely to be discussed between us.

A recent grant of the House of Commons placed at the
disposal of the government a sum of money to be appropri-
ated in aid of the formation of public works in the vicinity
of large towns. It is a condition that the town or corpora-
tion thereof should contribute land of the value of an equal
sum of money to that granted.
DEATH OF WALTER HENRY WATTS, ESQ.—This gentle-
man died on Tuesday last, aged 64, after many mouths of
severe illness and painful suffering, which he endured with
heroic patience. Mr. Watts was the son of Capt. Watts, of
the royal navy; and from his earliest youth devoted himself
to the congenial exercise of the pencil and the pen. Mr.
Watts was very many years a reporter of the debates in
parliament for the press, and in the discharge of the duties
thus imposed upon him he has not been surpassed, and seldom
equalled. He was one of the most zealous founders of the
institution for the benefit of newspaper writers, and always
took an earnest interest in its prosperous establishment. Mr.
Watts was no less appreciated as an artist and a writer on
art ; and was also the author and editor, for a considerable
time, of the Annual Obituary, published by Messrs. Long-
man and Co.- and of the Political Memento, a curious se-
lection of striking passages from parliamentary speeches.
or more than twenty years Mr. Watts wrote the moat con-
siderable portion of the criticisms on the fine arts in the
Literary Gazette.—Literary
Gazette.