The Liverpool Standard and General Commercial Advertiser.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1842-09-06 00:00:00

),t•

• -

. ~~

,

\

•

SHEFFIELD ANDCO MANCHESTER RAILWAY
MPANY.

The half-yearly meeting of the Proprietors of this Railway
was held at the Cutler's Hall, Sheffield, nit Wednesday
noon, when, in the absence of the chairman and
hair. deputy
chairman, Michael Ellison, Esq., was called to the c
Mr. Stevenson read the notice convening the meeting, and
the seal was affixed to the register of the proprietory.
Mr. Stevenson then read the report of the directors and
the engineer.
Mr. T. A. Ward moved that the reports be approved and
printed. He took it for granted that this was a technical
motion, and would not be considered as pledging the meeting
to every particular proposal contained in the reports. Upon
some of these, there might be a difference of opinion, and he
thought they should be left open to future discussion.
The Chairman thought that if the motion was carried, it
would be such a sanction of the general views of the directors,
on the subjects mentioned in the report, that they would
feel justified in carrying them into effect.
Mr. Ward thought that the proposed Junction Line was
a subject worthy of discussion, before it was adopted.
Mr. Johnson seconded the motion.
Mr. Spencer said, it appeared a great number of shares
were to be forfeited, as many had been before, and he wished
to know before this was done, whose those shares had been
originally. He had reason to suppose that some of them
might belong to directors themselves. And if they were
thus making their escape, it was not fair of the shareholders
who had been compelled to pay up to the whole number of
their shares as best they could. He thought that if any
of the directors had transferred their shares to A, B, C, or
D, men of straw, who never could or meant to pay, and were
then getting those shares forfeited, they stood in a different
position from what, as gentlemen, they should. With re-
gard, also, to going again to parliament. they might repeat
that operation till they found their expenditure consisting
chiefly of parliamentary expenses. Objecting, therefore, to
this, and to the forfeiture of the shares, he moved as an
amendment, that the accounts and reports be received (not
adopted.)
Mr. E. Unwin seconded the amendment.
The Chairman thought that Mr. Spencer's purpose would
not be answered by his amendment, for the reception of the
report would settle the question, so far as the forfeited shares
went. As to the parties to whom the shares originally be-
longed, the directors could not give that information, unless
called for by a majority of the meeting. With regard to what
the directors might have done with their shares, he could
only answer for himself. He knew that none of his were for-
feited, and be was sorry to tell them so. At the first meet-
ing at which shares were forfeited, the names were published,
which exposed the directors to considerable animadversion.
They were told that it was not usual with other companies,
and ought not to have been done by them. Of course, there-
fore, the directors could not give the information which Mr.
Spencer required, unless it were drawn from them.
Mr. Kenyon Parker suggested an alteration of the form of
the resolution, as follows :—" That the reports now read be
received and approved."
Mr. E. Unwin had seconded the amendment, because he
did not approve of going to parliament again. They had been
once too often.
Mr. Ironside supported the resolution, but wished for an
explanation of a statement he had seen as to the coaches
running between Ashton and Manchester, in competition
with this company. He saw in the accounts that £3OO had
been received from Mr. Thomson's sureties ; but as the de-
falcations arising from Thomson's misdeeds was £lOBO, he
thought the directors could not have seen this item, or they
would have paid the money out of the allowance made to
them. He merely threw this out as a hint. (Laughter.)
He asked whether Mr. Peet, the accountant, was a share•
holder ? (No.) He should have felt more confidence had
Mr. Unwin been employed, and he thought it would have
given more confidence to the Sheffield shareholders gene-
rally.
The Chairman thought he had information enough to
answer the question put by Mr. Ironside. There had no
doubt been a considerable falling off in the traffic, of which
one cause was the disturbed state of the district. At one
time, the mob had completely stopped the traffic for some
hours, and that becoming known to the public, had no doubt
had a bad effect. Some of the falling-off arose from the
coach opposition between Manchester and Ashton. He
could not understand it, for he had been of opinion that
coaching had no chance of contending with traffic by rail-
way. He thought it was an unfortunate circumstance that
the fares on the railway had been raised a trifling sum, which
had served as a pretext for putting stage-coaches upon the
road, and since that time the traffic had been rather fallings
off. Whether it would be more wise to return to the first
table of fares, required serious consideration. It might not
always be advisable, in the first instance, to increase fares,
but when or.ce done, it was awkward to go back again, for
such a course was liable to bring directors into disrepute.
He hoped, however, that the asking of the question would
be of use. Then as to the accountant. Gentlemen were
aware that the principal office for the business of the com-
pany was at Manchester, and it had been thought advisable
that instead of a shareholder, some person unconnected with
the directors or shareholders should audit the accounts.
Messrs. Peet and Hobson had been recommended to the
directors as at the head of their profession, in Manchester,
as men of high character and reputation; and the directors,
therefore, had thought it right to employ them, having no
feeling in the matter but a wish that the accounts should be
thoroughly investigated. In regard to the defalcation of
Thomson, he made no question that the directors were in a
great degree culpable. It certainly implied a want of vigi-
lance to allow a man to be guilty of a fraud, and not have
sufficient security to cover what he had done. He did not
know what might be the feeling of the directors about sup-
plying the deficiency from their own resources, but for his
part, he had no sort of objection to it.
Several directors explained, that the loss arose from no
negligence on the part of the board, but from forgeries com-
mitted by Thomson.
Mr. Kenyon Parker was sure the directors would be in-
clined to make good the loss, if it arose from any remissness
of their own. But as Mr. Sykes truly remarked, the direc-
tors could not guard against forgery, if a man were so far
abandoned as to forge documents, and so involve the company.
He was sure, therefore,Mr.lronside must have been dealing
in irony when he made that allusion, or he did not know that
the defalcation arose from forgeries. lie, as an •individual,
was satisfied that the directors had given their best attention
to the affairs of the company. They had been placed in a
difficult position, and exposed to opposition of a violent, he
might almost say, virulent kind.
Mr. Appleby said, it was impossible that any body of
directors could take precautions so as to prevent suck disho-
nest practices as Thomson had been guilty of. As a director,
he had had on several occasions to examine and pass accounts,
and he had. also to appear as a witness at Liverpool in relation
Intone of the forged documents which had passed under his
notice. Theimitation wasso perfect that he did not discover
the forgery, for of course he had no suspicion of such a thing
being done. He thought it could hardly be expected that
the directors should be answerable for a fraud committed by
such means.
Mr. W. Jackson supported the resolution. He thought
the publication of the names desired by Mr. Spencer would
do harm, but no good. He thought one of the greatest ad-
vantages of this company was its poverty—(hear, hear)—as
the greatest misfortune of a neighbouring undertaking has
been its wealth. He wished to know what the branch to
Ashton would cost ? And did they anticipate opposition ?
The CHAIRMAN replied that the estimate of cost was
£50,000. They expected the assistance of Lord Stamford,
who was the person most interested, but if he opposed, they
must abandon it.
Mr. Jackson said it appeared to be a sine qua non to the
success of railways, that they should go to the large towns,
and as the main line could not go to Ashton, it was most
important to have a connexion with it. He asked if it might
not be accomplished without going to Parliament?
Mr. Turner replied, that would not be possible, because
the line would go through the outskirts of Ashton, and so
pass through many small properties.
Mr. Jackson thought, if they had to go again to parlia-
ment, they should consider the expediency of reducing the
number of directors.
The Chairman said they should be obliged to go again to
parliament, whether they wanted to borrow money or not,
for an extension of time; for within the period prescribed
by the act, they could not complete the undertaking. He
agreed as to the number of directors, that large bodies were
unmanageable, and that eight directors would be better than
sixteen. He had always thought sixteen too many. The
shareholders would be aware that aline to Ashton and Staly-
bridge was originally contemplated as part of the undertaking;
but in consequence of the capital not being sufficient, that
part of the line was abandoned. But the line as then pro-
posed would have been very expensive. By taking the di-
rection now proposed, it would be much less expensive, and
it would form a most valuable adjunct to the line. if it
could be carried, and the directors would use their best ex-
ertions to accomplish it, it would be a source-of considerable
traffic. They would then hear of no coaches from Ashton
competing with the line. The line was now nearly a mile
from the centre of Ashton ; and when persons were on the
coach, they would often think they might as well go forward
by it for so short a distance as to Manchester as change to
the railway.
A Shareholder inquired if the proposed branch would go to
Staleybridge ?
Mr. Tamer replied, it would go to the centre of Staley-
bridge and skirt Ashton.
A Shareholder hearing that the third class carriages of the
company had no seats, was of opinion, that to supply them
with seats would be an inducement to passengers to go by the
railway rather than by coaches.
Mr. Turner said, the distance was so short, he did not
think it would make any difference.
The Chairman said it was quite right that the third-class
Passengers should have sufficient accommodation, but if they
were made too comfortable, none would travel in the second-
class, It was to be remembered, that there was no night
travelling on this line. T.
A. Ward said that the line to Ashton, as origi-
nal
now•irericoecised, was to cost .f. 300,000, but the estimate was
The Csatte
count for an• inspection of the plans would ac-
through mhtZfference. The former proposal was to go
mr. Wara saw' line now proposed would only skirt it.
borrowing, or 4°4. was it proposed to raise the money by
be £lOO shares, ollriokiansfti esnilarote:b?aranead?if the latter, were they to
Mr. Stevenson
would prevent their borrowing, .the standing orders of parliament
by subscription of :wing, unless they first raised money
their market value at the rtsieo they could issue shares only at
The Chairman said, us:seri:os _
not yet been determined upon 127 of raising the money had
wotarlie directors. the shares
rose in value, the money
would be difficult to raise it. easily be raised. If not, it
Mr. Ingleson asked how was it them
when they understoohad been made before) o many shares
d all forfeitures
for forfeiture,
How was it that
e-rearreeasd?y for forfeiture
that were intended
only £l6 each had been paid on these
,but the directorso
said that all that sev
The Chairman
were forfeited
at the former meet•ng,
could not say that those were all that would be
These shares had paid on the average only eacht, forfeited.
the directors. with all their efforts, had been unable because
to get
any more.
Mr. Unwin was sorry that Mr. Ironside had named
- s,_
in connection with the auditing of the accounts. He him
quite satisfied with the accounts.
Mr. Ironside said, the directors of some of the companies
were playing such pranks as would furnish the government
with a pretext for taking the railways into their own hands.
At present, it appeared the borough of Sheffield was robbed
of a quarter of an hour in the departure of the mails, just
because there was a dispute between the Post-office and the
directors, about the conveyance of the mail to Masbro'. He
hoped the third-class carriages would be pnt on a bettar
footing, for he did not like to see human beings conveyed
like pigs in a pen. On the French railways, there were no
carriages so bad even as our second class. The worst of them
had cushioned seats, and could be closed air. II e again
asked for an explanation about the No. 1 shaft.
Mr. •htz, the engineer, said the sinking of that shaft
would
enable them to finish the driftway in four months,
instead of ten. There ws, a valuable stone quarry near
its mouth, and the shafts would he very useful in lowering
stone and other material for the progress of the works.
Mr. Turner sa
it would give three
would have the further advantage, that
larged instead of one
e.
faces at which the tunnel might be en-
Mr
. Spencer said, Mr Jackson •
the company was one of,ii had said, the poverty of
of the same opinion. 11:advantages, and he had once been
forfeited, and buying themtWhen persons, by getting shares
interest on £B2 10s., it walitegain at £32s. 10d. could get
the names of original owner'sitorpttittemptation. If they had
should probably find that this had been
shares, they
done. If this was
not true, he challenged proof to the contrary. If tree, he

\

i ~.

did not know how those who had done so stood in their own
minds. He thought, considering the great burden of the
station-toll on third-class passengers for short distances,
they- should see if the Manchester and Birmingham Company
would not be contented with something less. He recom-
me aded that in their carriages the directors should take pat-
tern by the Manchester and Liverpool.
Mr. Appleby thought Mr. Spencer's first remark required
some reply. He could scarcely comprehend it; but Mr.
Spencer seemed to insinuate that some of the directors had
got rid of shares by forfeiture, and then bought shares at
1.32 10s. to receive interest on £B2 les. if that were the
insinuation, Mr. Spencer might be assured it was not the
case. No interest was paid on any shares, but such as had
paid up £B2 10s.
The Chairman said, the charge did not appear to apply to
the directors collectively, and therefore he could only say for
himself, individually, that it did not apply to hiin.
Mr. Turner said, as the sweeping charge of Mr. Spencer
must go forth to the public, conveying the imputation that
some of the directors had made an improper use of the power
they possessed, he deemed it due to himself to state, that he
had not sold any shares, and the shares he had, he had taken
at par. He made a contract with the company to take shares
for his land; but between that time arid the time when his
land was required, the shares fell to 50 per cent. discount,
yet still he took them at par.
The amendment was then put and negatived, and the ori-
ginal resolution, that the report be received and adopted,
was put and carried.
Mr. Kenyon Parker then moved that the accounts be ap-
proved and distributed among the shareholders.
Mr. Ironside seconded the motion.
Mr. Collier wished to know to what extent the portion of
the line now open was productive, for he understood there
were some outstanding accounts connected with the traffic
expenses that would reduce the balance.
The Chairman said, the directors did not wish to be un-
derstood that the seven miles of the line now open could be
very profitable. It was not likely that it should be so.
Many of the expenses were the same for a seven miles
traffic as they would be for fourteen. The present balance
would be reduced to the extent of several hundred pounds
by outstanding claims.
Mr. Turner said, some of the traffic expenses had been
considerably reduced. At first, owing to the newness and
stiffness of their machinery, they consumed thirty pounds of
coke per mile. It was now reduced to 221 pounds, and they
expected a further reduction.
The Chairman said that the station tolls payable to the
Manchester and Birmingham Company took the greater
portion of the receipts for the third class passengers, for
short distances. But the tolls would form a smaller propor-
tion of the longer traffic. They had paid in station tolls
£1774.
Mr. Spencer thought the Manchester and Birmingham
Company might make some abatement in the tolls on third
class passengers, considering the competition to which this
company was exposed.
The said that every effort had been made to pro-
cure a mitigation of the tolls; but the Manchester and Bir-
mingham company would not take less than the law gave
them.
Mr. W. Jackson observed, that the passenger duty had
amounted to ten per cent. on the receipts; but the new mode
of levying the duty would reduce that one half. He hoped
that, in future reports, the directors would state the number
of passengers ofeach class, and the revenue from each.
The Chairman intimated that this should be done.
Mr. Chapman, a director, in allusion to the remarks of
Mr. Spencer, delared that he had now the shares as he had
from the first.
The adoption of the accounts was then put and carried.

Mr. S. Butcher moved, and Mr. Hovland seconded the
confirmation of the forfeiture declared by the directors of
1419 shares.
Mr. Ironsides was ignorant whether there was anything in
Mr. Spencer's charge, but thought the directors should wash
their hands of it, and stand right at the bar of public
opinion.
Mr. Thorneley said he had ten shares at first, and held
them still.
The motion was carried.
The bye-laws of the company having been sanctioned by
the Board of Trade, were then confirmed, and ordered to be
sealed. The laws relating to passengers, it was stated, were
posted at the stations, and each servant of the company had
a book containing the laws relating to them.
Mr. Spencer then moved the company views with regret,
the issue of shares at a discount of £5O each, and to prevent
such issue in future, that no shares be issued at a discount,
unless by the sanction of a special or general meeting.
The Chairman thought the proper time for this motion was
gone by. The proprietors might be sure the directors would
issue the shares on the best terms they could ; but they were
bound to provide the means to carry on the works. They
were engaged in heavy liabilities, which must be met, and it
would be a great misfortune if that could not be done. The
shares might first be offered to the shareholders, and if they
were disposed to take them up at a high rate, of course the
directors could have no objection.
The motion, for want of a seconder, fell to the ground.
Mr. Kenyon Parker then moved, and Mr. S. Butcher
seconded, a vote of thanks to the Chairman.—Carried unani-
mously.
The Chairman said he was obliged to the meeting for
deeming his services worthy of thanks. He assured them
he was greatly interested in the undertaking—more largely
than he could wish, as a shareholder, and if he had a fair
opportunity to get quit of some of his shares, he should have
been glad. But he had kept them at great inconvenience to
himself, because he was determined to be ❑o party to any-
thing that might prejudice the undertaking. He was also
interested in it as belonging to this town, and as connected
with a nobleman who had immense property here. He was
convinced this railway would he one of the best things for
this town, and he should devote himself as much as he could
to bringing it to a successful issue. He hoped that, notwith-
standing all the discouraging circumstances, they might
shortly meet to celebrate the opening of the line.
The meeting concluded about two o'clock.

\, " \'
\

.~
,: Y