The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-03-18 00:00:00

LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER RAILWAY
SPECIAL ORNERAL MEETING,
TUESDAY. 'MARCH 15, 1842.
REPORT.
_ _

(SHE Directors in their Address to the Proprietors, on the
JJII 28th ultimo, entered at some length into the merits of
the two proposed Junction Lines. Of the comparative cost,
the Estimates, at that time, were not completed, but the Di-
rectors promised to submit them to the Proprietors at the
present Meeting. The valuations have been carefults made,
and the assistance of experienced Surveyors connected with
the Town of ManchestOr has been obtained, in order to afford
to the Proprietors the fullest satisfaction on this head. The
following is a copy of the Engineer's' and S)kveyor's valua-
tions ; which it will be perceived confirm theavourable result
anticipated from the approximate Estaires, as reported to
the Shareholders on the 28th ultimo, which comprise an
allowauce of Ten per Cent. on the Works for Contingencies,
in addition to the calculated Cost.

First.—Estimated Cost ofESTIMATES.
South Line of Communication,

via STORE-STREET :
From the Liverpool and Manebaster
Railway at Ordsall-lane, to the Man-
chester and Birmingham Railway near
Store-street— £170,000
2400 yards Arching, including Bridges]
over Streets
500 yards Embanking

- Laud, Buildings, and Compensation 101,160
£271,160

From the Manchester and Birmingham
Railway, Store-street, to the Manches-
ter and Leeds Railway near Oldham-
road-1246 yards Arching, including
Bridges
Land, Buildings, and Compensation
£148,778

New Station or increased acommodation at Store-
street, including additional Land and Buildings 100,000
Junction between the Manchester and Bolton and
the Liverpool and Manchester Railways 30,062

Total estimated Cost of Line by Store-street £550,000

Second.—Estimated Cost of the Salford Line of Communi-
cation by HUNT'S BANK :
From the Liverpool and Manchester Railway by the
Manchester, Bolton, and Bury Line to Hunt's
Bank, including new Station in Salford £250,000
Toll to the Manchester and Bolton Company, equal-
ling Capital
From St. George's-road to Hunt's Bank 200,000
New Station at Hunt's Bank, say 50,000
Proposed Tunnel from Hunt's Bank to Store-street,
including Compensation for Damage to Property,
and Machinery for perpendicular Lift

Total estimated Cost of Line by Hunt's Bank £650,000

After the Address of the Directors announcing the present
Meeting bad been agreed upon by the Board, a publication
was placed in their hands, entitled " Reply of the Directors
of the Manchester and Leeds Railway Company, to the Re-
port of the Directors of the Liverpool and Manchester
Company."
At the period referred to, your Directors had only time to
notice those statements in the " Reply" which referred to
the comparative merits of the two J unction Lines. They
proceed now to remark briefly on such other portions of this
document as appear to call for particular notice ; and they
will refer to the points claiming observation in the order in
which they appear in it. First, the complaint against this
Company, put forth it would seem on behalf of the Mfinches-
ter and Balton Company; that " had the Liverpool Directors
ever seriously entertained the question of carrying out the
Hunt's-bank Line, after obtaining their Act, they would
undoubtedly have communicated with the Bolton Company
respecting the terms of the Parliamentary Agreement."
It is true, that from the passing of the Act till the present
time, nearly three years, the Directors first impression of
doubt and hesitation, as to the expediency of carrying out the
Hunt's Bank Line, hasbeen gradually strengthened and con-
firmed. Neither the prospect of direct traffic, nor the gene-
ral condition of trade and manufactures, has been such as to
justify the Directors in recommending to the Proprietors a
very large outlay for the attainment of a limited and incom-
plete, though in many respects an important, object.
The option of making or not making the Hunt's Bank
Line being secured to them by their Act of Parliament, and
distinctly recognised in their Agreement with the Bolton
Directors, passed under the Common Seal of each Company
respectively, your Directors, as in duty bound, hare pursued
that course which they have considered most conducive to
those large interests which they have been especially ap-
pointed to superintend.
The next subject calling for remark is the discrepancy in
the original Traffic estimates between the two Companies.
Your Directors, in their last Half-yearly Report, observing
upon the extraordinary amount of Traffic considered by the
Leeds Company to belong to the Rochdale Canal in the up
direction, towards the interior of Yorkshire, made the fol-
lowing remark.
" And yet the Manchester and Leeds Report assumes that
210,000 tons per aunum, more than half the immense ton-
nage from Liverpool by all modes of conveyance, passes to
the interior, exclusively in one direction up the comparatively
limited channel of communication, the Rochdale Canal."
Now, in reference to this passage, we are informed in the
" Reply," that the Chairman of the Leeds Company was in
error in assuming that the 210,000 tons passed all in one
direction up the Rochdale Canal ; he should have stated that
such, according to Mr. Stanway's returns, was the Quantity,
in both direction ; and then it goes on to express surprise
that the Liverpool Directors could have been so far misled
as to put forth the passage just quoted, inasmuch as the dis-
covery of this error "destroys their whole argument on the
subject."

Your Directors would certainly have given occasion for
surprise if they bad founded their argument so loosely that it
should be wholly destroyed by so unimportant an error as the
one alluded to. Your Directors were fully aware of the ge-
neral scope and tenor of Mr. Stanway's Estimates, and on
the occasion referred to, as on all occasions, they were careful
to keep altogether within the mark, in any strictures or com-
parative observations, on questions of figures, which it might
be incumbent upon them to make. What, then, specifically,
is the argument on the part of your Directors, which is now
stated to be wholly destroyed by the discovery of this mis-
conception. Your Directors expressed their surprise that
the Manchester and Leeds Report should assume that " more
than half the immense tonnage from Liverpool (to Manches-
ter), by all modes of conveyance, passes to the interior, ex-
clusively in one direction up the comparatively limited
channel of communication, the Rochdale Canal." And in
what measure is the strength of this observation affected by
the discovered error on the part of the Leeds Company ?
Not in the least. The observation was strictly and literally
true, taking no account of the error referred to ; and it is
strictly and literally true, supposing the error to be corrected.
It is to be regretted that the " Reply," after summoning the
error in question to perform so important a part in the argu•
ment, should not have informed us wherein the precise error
consists. It is said, indeed, that the 210,000 tons on the
Rochdale Canal were intended " to include the Traffic in
both directions ;" but the Reply is silent as to the essential
point in the argument, how much in each direction. On
referring to copies of Mr. Stanway's original Documents, his
Estimates appear to be, that out of the aggregate amount of
210,314 tons, only 15,392 tons passed down the Rochdale
Canal, while 194,922 tons passed up. the Canal ; thus verify-
ing literally and to the full extent, after allowing for the error
of 15..000 tons, the observation of your Directors, in which
they expressed a doubt "that more than half the immense
tonnage from Liverpool, by all modes of conveyance, should
pass to the interior in one direction up the comparatively
limited channel of the Rochdale Canal."

The " Reply," after noticing the Up Traffic from Liverpool
to Manchester, proceeds to remark, that 375,000 tons per
Annum being admitted to pass in One direction, " probably
not less than 620,000 tons pass in both directions." This
would suppose 245,000 tons per Annum for the Down Traffic
from Manchester to Liverpool, or very nearly 800 tons for
each working day in the year; an amount which will at once
be acknowledged by men conversant with the trade to be
greatly beyond the real fact of the case. For of what could
so large an amount of Down Traffic consist ? The Grain
and the Flour, the Sugar and Coffee, the Wines and Spirits,
the Tallow, Butter, Eggs, Dyewoods, Drysalteries, Timber,
Cattle, Pigs, &c. &c. ; these great articles of import once
despatched into the Country do not come back; and of the
various descriptions of Manufactures, only a portion is sent
to Liverpool either for export or local consumption, while the
remainder finds its way either to the interior of the Country
for consumption, or to the East Coast for export.
In the Postscript to the communication which the Directors
addressed to the Shareholders announcing the present Meet-
ing, they were able very briefly to advert to the project of a
Tunnel from Store-street to Hunt's Bank, to connect the
Manchester and Birmingham Railway with the Leeds
Railway at Hunt's Bank. This Project requires more
particular notice. It will be recollected that the Man-
chester and Birmingham and the Sheffield and Manchester
Lines, which unite at Store-street. constitute the High-
ways to extensive and very populous Districts, com-
prising, within a short distance from Manchester, Stockport,
Macclesfield, Staley Bridge, Ashton, Hyde, Glossop, &c.
&c., and ultimately Sheffield and other distant places ; con-
sequently that in any plan for a Junction of Railways in
Manchester, calculated to benefit this concern, a good con-
nection with these two Lines is an essential and indispensable
requisite. Your Directors have had the opportunity of in-
specting copies of the Plans and Sections of this Tunnel, as
lodged with the Clerk of the Peace at Preston, and they find
it yet more objectionable than they at first imagined. At the
lower end, at Hunt's Bank, the Tunnel comes out on the sur-
face of the ground, or about sixteen feet below the level of
the Rails at the proposed Junction of the Liverpool and
Manchester and the Manchester and Leeds Lines. The
Tunnel is about 1,500 yards in length. At the lower end it
has an S curve, or double bend, and at the upper end, an
elbow extending nearly to a right angle, as it approaches
Store-street, at which place the Rails in the Tunnel are 73
feet below the level of the Manchester and Birmingham Rail-
way. Most justly applicable indeed to this mode of inter-
communication is the strong denunciation of the Manchester
and Leeds Board applied to the supposed Tunnel between
Store-street and Oldham Road. But your Directors can
scarcely believe that the Members of the Leeds Board have
deliberately considered the objectionable character of this
project, or that with the facts of the case clearly before them,
they could seriously propose the Tunnel, of which the Plans
are just lodged with the Clerk of the Peace at Preston, as
the great highway between Liverpool and those populous