1849.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



171 



June, the first clause of the bill, empowering the company to make 

 a railway, was lost on a division by 19 to 13; the clause to take land 

 was next put and likewise lost; whereupon Mr. Adam, on behalf 

 of the railway company, withdrew the bill.^^ In the committee, 

 Stephenson was ex.imined; and in his speech at Newcastle, he 

 said, "I tried to keep the engine down to 10 miles an hour. I 

 had to place myself in that most unpleasant of all positions — the 

 witness-box of a parliamentary committee. I was not long in it, 

 I assure you, before I began to wisli for a hole to creep out at. I 

 could not find words to satisfy either the committee or myself. 

 Some one inquired if I were a foreigner, and another hinted I was 

 mad. But I put up with every rebuff." 



Such was the end of the first trial to get a bill for a railway be- 

 tween Liverpool and Manchester; but the board forthwith set to 

 work to try again for the next year. 



The backers of the railway felt sure, says Mr. Booth, that their 

 failure was not to be set down to any lack of public opinion in 

 favour of the great work which they had undertaken; and under- 

 standing many members of parliament strongly felt tlie great 

 wortli of tlie proposed railway, it was thought right a meeting 

 should be held between the railway committee and such of the 

 members as were able to come, so as to give some expression of 

 opinion on the then state of matters. 



This meeting was held on the 4th June 1825, when seventy-one 

 members were present; and among them. General Gascoyne, Sir 

 Robert ^V^ilson, Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Spring Rice, Mr. AV'illiam 

 Yates Peel, and Mr. Richard Hart Davies. Mr. Spring Rice, now 

 Lord Monteagle, has almost throughout been a great mischief to 

 railways. As Chancellor of the Exchequer, he raised the deposit 

 on railways to ten per cent.; in the Lords he has been intriguing 

 for a government audit on railways. The meeting passed resolu- 

 tions in favour of a railway, and a renewed application to parlia- 

 ment. 



XV. LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER SECOND BILL. 



On getting back to Liverpool, the railway committee advertised 

 their intention to go again before parliament. As George Ste- 

 phenson was not known in London, and it was thought his know- 

 ledge of the locomotive was not enough to give him weight before 

 the House of Commons, it was determined to set him aside, and 

 have engineers better known to the public. On the 1st of July, 

 therefore, it was resolved that Mr., now Sir John Rennie, should 

 be asked to become the engineer of the company. After some 

 writing, it was settled that Messrs. George and John Rennie 

 should be asked to become the engineers. George Rennie un- 

 dertook a new survey of the country between Liverpool and Man- 

 chester. ^^ 



On tlie 12th of August, the committee, moved thereto by the 

 engineers, determined to take a new line of way, going much to 

 the south of the former; and Mr. Charles Vignoles, on behalf of 

 Messrs. Rennie, was named to make the sections and plans for this 

 undertaking. As these went on, it was seen the new Rne would 

 cost more than the old, which had been set down at 400,000/. The 

 committee had, therefore, to think how they should raise the fur- 

 ther money which would be needful. 



IMr. R. H. Bradshaw, M.P., was trustee for the Duke of Bridge- 

 water's canal, and the manager of it. In the beginning of the un- 

 dertaking he had been asked to have shares, but refused. It was 

 now thought a more fitting time to settle with the Duke of Bridge- 

 water's interests, and it was at length agreed the Duke of Sutlier- 

 land should become a shareholder for one thousand shares.'* 



On the 26th December 1825, a new prospectus was sent forth, 

 and in which the committee give their support to the locomotive 

 system. 



In February 1826, the committee again went to London. On 

 the 7th, the petition for the bill was sent in; on the 9th, the 

 standing orders were passed; on the 10th, the bill was read a first 

 time, and on the 20th a second time, without a debate. The com- 

 mittee-room was then the fighting ground, for it was always much 

 easier to knock down a bill there than in the House. On the 16th 

 of March, the preamble was voted by 43 to 18; and on the 6th of 

 April the bill read a third time. In debate, General Gascoyne, Mr. 

 William Yates Peel, Mr. Huskisson, and Sir John Newport, spoke 

 for the bill; and the Hon. Edward Stanley, now Lord Stanley, Sir 

 Isaac Coffin, Mr. Philips, and Captain John Bradshaw, against it. 

 The numbers were 88 for the bill and 41 against it. 



On the 7th of April, the bill was read a first time in the Lords, 

 and on the 10th, a second time. On the 13th, the bill went into 

 committee, there being thirty- three peers present; Lord Kenyon 

 in the chair, and the Earl of Derby to support his own interests. 



12 Booth's Account, p. 19. i3 Booth's Accouat,,p. 23. i4 Booth's Account, p. 24. 



Evidence was given against the use of the locomotive; but so 

 poor a case was made, the Lords did not think it needful to hear 

 any witnesses for it.' ^ Mr. Jessop gave evidence in favour of the 

 estimates. 



On the 27th of April the committee divided, 30 for the bill and 

 2 against it; these two being the Earl of Derby and the Earl of 

 Wilton. The bill was on the 3rd of May read a third time and 

 passed; and on the 7th May 1826, received the Royal assent. 



On the 22nd of May, the committee sent forth a circular, call- 

 ing the first meeting of shareholders, and in which they say: "They 

 have already received a proposal from an engineer of eminence, to 

 furnish an engine that sliall comply with the clause in the act, 

 compelling the consumption of smoke, — the engine proposed not 

 to be paid for, if it do not answer the objects of the company."'" 



The first meeting was on the 29th May 1826, when twelve direc- 

 tors were chosen by the shareholders, and three by the Duke of 

 Sutherland; and on the 30th of May, Mr. Lawrence was named 

 chairman, and Mr. Moss deputy-chairman. At this meeting, the 

 question of a principal engineer came under discussion. It was 

 the wish of Mr. Sandars and his friends to have an engineer resi- 

 dent in the north, but others wished to keep the Messrs. Rennie; 

 and the Board wrote to ask them to undertake the professional 

 superintendence of the works. Mr. Booth says, that on the 17th 

 of June, George Rennie saw the board, and proposed to superin- 

 tend the execution of the works, making six visits yearly, and re- 

 maining on the gi-ound seven or ten days at each visit, but asking 

 that the resident engineer should be named by him." 



Nothing will show more strongly the slow communication be- 

 tween the great towns of London and Liverpool, five-and-twenty 

 years ago, than this proposal of George Rennie. To make these 

 six visits, which were two months apart, he would have to travel 

 each year fourteen or fifteen days, night and day, boxed up in 

 what Lord Brougham calls a comfortable stage-coach, travelling 

 on the turnpike road at some ten miles an hour; — but which we 

 know was most uncomfortable, and which made a man so tired at 

 the end of the journey between Loudon and Liverpool, that he 

 wanted a long time to refresh himself. An absence of ten days or 

 a fortnight at Liverpool, away from home, was aggravated by the 

 slowness of the post; neither was the control of the engineer over 

 the lower officers during his absence made any whit more efficient 

 in Lord Brougham's Saturnian time. 



For no class have railways done more than for professional men, 

 and among these perhaps most of all for engineers. They can now 

 undertake works at a great distance, and exercise an efficient con- 

 trol over them; the more efficient because it can be brought into 

 play at any moment, instead of the resident engineer having it in 

 his power to do as he liked at all times than the visits few and far 

 between of his principal. The readiness of commmunication and 

 cheapness of postage enables daily reports to be made; and pro- 

 fessional men are able to travel, without being kept away for pro- 

 tracted periods from the comforts of home. 



On the 19th of June the board met, and at length declined 

 George Rennie's proposition, and named George Stephenson en- 

 gineer-in-chief. '« We believe it had been left to Mr. Sandars to 

 choose between Stephenson and Mr. Rastrick, and that he named 

 the former. 



XVI. LIVERPOOL AND MANCHESTER WORKS. 



The works began on Chat Moss in June, and the first shaft of 

 the Liverpool Tunnel was opened in September of the same year; 

 but very little way was made with either. In January 1827, the 

 earthworks were begun.'" 



At tliis time, public works were on a scale so much smaller that 

 it was hard to find contractors with wagons, tools, and plants 

 enough for sucli an undertaking as the Liverpool and Manchester 

 Railway; and great works instead of being done cheaper, were 

 sometimes more costly, — being the monopoly of the great contrac- 

 tors, or done by the companies themselves. For a long time, in 

 the beginning of railways, works were carried on by the companies 

 under the superintendence of the engineers. In the end, a class 

 of capitalists has been made in England, who are ready to under- 

 take the greatest works, many of whom can hold a contract for a 

 million, and who have been able to carry on works abroad to the 

 great profit of this country. This class of capitalists has much 

 helped tlie growth of railways, not only by making great works 

 cheap and easy, but by making the cost certain. All great works, 

 however well carried on, are open to risk; but formerly this risk 

 fell on the companies, whereby the estimates were exceeded. Now 

 1 ■ — 



15 Buoth's Account, p. S3. ^o BIr. Booth's volum's of Prospectuses. 



1 ' Booth's Account, p. 37. i 8 Booth's Account, p. 37. Ritchie on Uailwaj'S, 



p. 23'J. Volume of I'lospectuses. i s> Booth's Account, p. 3?. 



231= 



