,,railways4 ,,report of the ,,railway   
,,department of the ,,board of ,,trade  
on the ,london1 ,worcester1 and         
,wolverhampton1 and on the ,birmingham  
and ,shrewsbury ,districts4             
7,presented to ,parliament by ,her      
,majesty's ,command47  ,ordered1 by ,the
 ,house of ,commons1 to be ,printed1 #bh
 ,february #ahde4  #hc--b4  ,under #b   
oz4  ,railway ,department1 ,board of    
,trade1 ,whitehall1 #bh ,february #ahde4
  ,the ,board constituted by ,minute of 
the ,lords of the ,committee of ,privy  
,council for ,trade1 for the transaction
 of ,railway business1 having had under 
consideration the different schemes     
deposited with the ,railway ,department 
for extending ,railway communication    
between ,london1 ,worcester1 and        
,wolverhampton1 and in the district     
intermediate between the ,london and    
,birmingham and ,great ,western         
,railways1 and also1 in connexion with  
the above1 the schemes for extending    
,railway communication between          

,birmingham and ,shrewsbury1 have       
determined on submitting the following  
,report thereon for the consideration of
 ,parliament4  ,the object of the first 
class of schemes in question is to      
supply ,railway communication to the    
great mining district of ,staffordshire1
 lying south of ,wolverhampton1 to the  
towns of ,kidderminster1 ,stourbridge1  
,stourport1 ,worcester1 c41 and to the  
district north of ,oxford1 intermediate 
between the ,great ,western and ,london 
and ,birmingham ,railways4  ,for this   
purpose two competing schemes are       
proposed2 one1 which is promoted by the 
,london and ,birmingham ,company1       
comprises a line from ,rugby to ,oxford1
 and another from ,wolverhampton1       
through ,worcester and ,banbury1 to join
 the ,london and ,birmingham line at    
,tring2 the other scheme consists of a  
line from ,oxford to ,rugby1 which is   
proposed to be made by the ,great       
,western ,company2 and of another line  
from ,oxford to ,worcester and          

,wolverhampton1 which is undertaken by  
an independent ,company1 but in         
connexion with the ,great ,western      
,company1 and which must be considered  
as forming1 with the ,oxford and ,rugby 
line1 one scheme1 competing with the    
former4  ,for the sake of brevity we    
shall distinguish these as the ,london  
and ,birmingham or ,tring ,scheme1 and  
the ,great ,western or ,oxford ,scheme4 
,their general direction will be easily 
understood by reference to the          
accompanying map4  ,in their general    
features and objects the two schemes are
 so nearly identical that the two       
manifestly cannot stand together4  ,a   
further scheme for the accommodation of 
the country between ,worcester and      
,wolverhampton1 was proposed by the     
,birmingham and ,gloucester ,company1   
but it is understood that arrangements  
have been made by which this scheme is  
withdrawn in favour of the ,london and  
,birmingham scheme1 to which it was     
moreover inferior in several important  

respects1 so that we may consider the   
question as reduced to one of           
competition between the schemes of the  
two great ,companies4  ,the first point 
is1 whether a sufficient public case can
 be established to justify the          
construction of any ,railway at all     
throughout the districts in question4   
,as regards the ,south ,staffordshire   
district1 this point has been disputed  
by various ,canal interests1 who urge   
that the district is already            
sufficiently well supplied by water     
communication1 and that the introduction
 of ,railways1 by destroying the        
resources and crippling the efficiency  
of such water communications1 will be   
productive of injury rather than of     
benefit to the ,public4  ,various       
special reasons have been urged in      
support of this view1 more especially   
with reference to the mineral district  
of which ,dudley may be considered as   
the centre4 ,it is said that the        
,birmingham ,canal ,company have1 at a  

great expense1 created a very complete  
and efficient system of water           
communication throughout this district2 
that a right is reserved of making      
branch ,canals to all mines and works   
within certain limits1 which right would
 be to a certain extent defeated by     
running a ,railway parallel to the      
existing ,canal1 to the injury both of  
the ,canal ,company1 and of the owners  
of the mines and works so cut off2 that 
the management and charges of the ,canal
 ,company have always been of the most  
liberal description2 and finally1 that  
owing to the peculiar nature of the     
district1 in which great excavations    
have been made for mining purposes1     
,railways cannot be carried through it  
without danger4  ,it will be readily    
conceded that the importance of the     
district in question is such as to      
entitle it to require the best means of 
communication1 whether by ,canal or     
,railway4  ,between ,wolverhampton and  
,stourbridge there are at present about 

#ajj blast furnaces in work1 producing  
about #dfh1jjj tons of pig iron         
annually4  ,in order to produce this    
quantity1 nearly #d1jjj1jjj tons of     
coals1 lime1 ironstone1 and other raw   
materials are consumed1 which are raised
 from the mines of the district1 and    
transported to the various furnaces1    
forges and founderies4  ,the export of  
iron from the district is about #bdj1jjj
 tons annually1 in addition to large    
quantities of heavy hardwares1 tin      
plates1 glass1 and other goods4  ,the   
export of coal is also very large1 and  
might be greatly augmented by increased 
facilities of communication4  ,the      
population1 depending for support on the
 iron-works1 mines1 and manufactories of
 the district1 is estimated at not less 
than #bcj1jjj2 and the total population 
of the respective towns and places      
between ,wolverhampton and ,worcester1  
which would be benefited by the proposed
 ,railway communication1 is believed to 
exceed #cjj1jjj4  ,among these towns may

 be mentioned ,kidderminster1 a place of
 considerable manufacturing importance1 
and great intercourse with different    
parts of the kingdom2 ,droitwich1 with  
its extensive salt works2 ,stourbridge1 
,stourport and ,worcester4  ,the        
construction of a ,railway in this      
direction will also lead1 in all        
probability1 to extensions into the     
fertile agricultural district on the    
west of the ,severn1 towards ,leominster
 and ,ludlow4  ,the claim of the        
district1 therefore1 to the most        
improved mode of communication can      
hardly be disputed2 and whatever claims 
,canal ,companies may have from benefits
 previously conferred1 or from past     
liberality of management1 such claims   
cannot be considered by us in any other 
light than those of other private       
interests1 unless in so far as they may 
be based upon public considerations4    
,our ,report will not1 in any way1      
prejudice or affect the right of those  
,canal ,companies to have their vested  

interests1 if any1 carefully considered 
by the ,legislature4  ,upon public      
grounds1 therefore1 we have merely had  
to consider the allegation that the     
interests of the district will not be   
promoted by the introduction of         
,railways1 and that ,railways cannot be 
constructed through it without danger4  
,upon the first point it seems          
sufficient to refer to the unanimous    
opinion of the parties principally      
interested1 and who have the best       
opportunities of judging of the effects 
likely to follow from the introduction  
of ,railways4  ,the only difference of  
opinion has arisen from the anxiety of  
the parties to obtain a ,railway of some
 description or other1 which has led    
them to support different competing     
schemes2 but all parties have united in 
the strongest representations of the    
vital importance to the district of     
obtaining a good ,railway communication1
 in addition to those afforded by the   
,canals4  ,a memorial signed by the     

representatives of #df iron-works1 #eg  
furnaces1 and #ih collieries1 in the    
,staffordshire mineral district1        
including the trustees of ,lord ,ward1  
from whose estate alone upwards of      
#a1jjj1jjj tons of coal and iron are    
raised annually1 in favour of the       
,london and ,birmingham scheme2 and     
another memorial1 representing #cg      
iron-works1 and #i collieries1 in favour
 of the ,great ,western scheme1 were    
presented to us2 the memorialists in    
each case urging in the strongest manner
 the advantages of ,railway             
communication to the district4  ,it is  
stated1 that without such communication1
 they have to compete at a great        
disadvantage with the iron districts of 
,south ,wales and ,scotland1 which1 from
 their readier access to the sea1 can   
convey their products to market at a    
cheaper rate4  ,the ,canals are stated  
to be not only more tedious and         
expensive1 but subject to serious       
interruptions1 often for weeks together1

 from frost in winter and drought in    
summer4  ,in short1 it is urged that the
 apprehensions of the ,canal ,companies 
are the best test of the further        
advantage of a ,railway2 since unless   
the latter obtained a large proportion  
of the heavy traffic1 which it could    
only do by affording the public a better
 and cheaper means of transport1 the    
interests of the ,canals could not be   
prejudiced4  ,with so strongly expressed
 a wish on the part of such an important
 district for ,railway communication1   
and with two great ,companies competing 
with one another to afford it1 we do not
 think that1 upon public grounds1 we    
should be justified in reporting that it
 ought to be withheld on account of any 
apprehended interference with existing  
water communications4  ,in the case of  
one ,canal ,company1 special reasons    
existed which might have weighed more   
strongly than those derived solely from 
private considerations2 viz4 that a     
guarantee had been given to assist the  

,severn ,navigation ,commissioners to   
raise money for the purpose of carrying 
out a great public improvement          
authorized by ,parliament4  ,from this  
difficulty1 however1 as well as from the
 apprehension of that great improvement 
being impeded by the introduction of    
,railways into the district1 we are     
relieved by the offer made by the       
,railway ,company to whose scheme we    
recommend that a preference should be   
given1 to take upon themselves the      
burden of the guarantee to the extent of
 any loss sustained in consequence of   
the construction of the ,railway1       
subject to any reasonable conditions and
 arrangements4  ,with regard to the     
remaining point1 that of safety1 it is  
admitted that portions of the soil being
 undermined1 subsidences occasionally   
take place2 but there appears no reason 
to apprehend any peculiar degree of     
danger to a ,railway from this source1  
beyond what equally affects the ,canals1
 ,roads1 ,tramroads1 ,founderies1       

,mills1 and other buildings of the      
district1 and which has never been      
considered an impediment to the         
introduction of ,railways in other      
mining districts4  ,some of the most    
eminent engineers of the day1 among whom
 may be mentioned ,sir ,j4 ,rennie1 ,mr4
 ,brunel1 and ,mr4 ,r4 ,stephenson1 have
 proposed the lines which pass through  
the district in question1 and are       
clearly of opinion that they may be     
worked without any unusual degree of    
danger4  ,we are of opinion1 therefore1 
that some one line of ,railway is       
required1 and may be properly           
sanctioned1 for the accommodation of the
 district in question1 between          
,wolverhampton and ,worcester4  ,this   
being conceded1 the sanction of a line  
in connexion with it1 to connect        
,worcester more directly with ,london1  
and to give communication to the large  
intermediate district1 appears to follow
 almost as a matter of course4  ,the    
supply of coals to this district1 where 

a great reduction of price will be      
effected1 is alone an important object2 
and1 on the other hand1 an outlet will  
be afforded for agricultural produce4   
,a population of about #abh1jjj between 
,worcester and ,tring would be          
accommodated by the line in that        
direction2 and on the whole1 taken in   
connexion with the ,worcester and       
,wolverhampton ,junction1 the traffic   
seems sufficient to justify a fair      
expectation of return on the capital to 
be invested1 as also on the ,rugby and  
,oxford portion of the line1 which will 
complete a chain of direct ,railway     
communication from the ,northern and    
,midland to the ,southern and ,south    
,western counties1 and will afford to   
those counties a valuable supply of coal
 from the ,derbyshire collieries4  ,we  
proceed1 therefore1 to investigate the  
subject1 on the assumption that one or  
other of the competing schemes promoted 
by the ,london and ,birmingham1 and     
,great ,western ,companies1 will be     

sanctioned1 and that the question is    
reduced to one of preference between    
them4  ,in regard to distance1 the two  
schemes are as nearly as possible equal1
 the distance from ,worcester to ,london
 being #abb miles by the ,tring line1   
and #aai by the ,oxford line2 the       
former1 however1 terminating at the     
,euston ,square ,station1 and the latter
 at ,paddington4  ,the number of miles  
of new ,railway to be constructed in    
either case is also nearly the same2 nor
 does there appear to be anything in    
respect of gradients or engineering     
character calculated to give one scheme 
a decided preference over the other4    
,the course of the ,tring line          
accommodates a larger population between
 ,worcester and ,london than the ,oxford
 line2 but the importance of the        
districts traversed by either line1 and 
left out by its competitor1 is hardly   
sufficient to give a decided superiority
 on a question of such magnitude4  ,a   
far more important feature of comparison

 is derived from a consideration of the 
question of gauge4  ,the ,great ,western
 scheme is proposed to be constructed on
 the wide gauge of seven feet1 used upon
 the different ,railways of the ,great  
,western system2 while the scheme of the
 ,london and ,birmingham ,company is    
proposed to be constructed on the narrow
 gauge of #d feet #h4e inches1 common to
 all the other ,railways of the kingdom4
  ,in order to estimate fully the       
importance of this question1 it must be 
borne in mind that the ,bristol and     
,gloucester ,railway is on the wide1    
while the ,birmingham and ,gloucester is
 on the narrow gauge1 and that the      
inconvenience resulting from the break  
of the two gauges at ,gloucester has    
been so great as to lead to an          
amalgamation of the two ,companies1 with
 a view to obviate it1 by introducing   
uniformity of gauge throughout between  
,bristol and ,birmingham4  ,from the    
arrangements which have been made with  
this view1 it is perfectly evident that 

upon the question of the ,worcester     
lines depends whether this uniformity   
will be proposed to be attained1 by the 
,birmingham and ,gloucester ,railway    
adopting the wide gauge1 or the ,bristol
 and ,gloucester adopting the narrow4   
,the question1 therefore1 upon which we 
have had to form an opinion is1 whether 
it is better for public interests that  
the wide gauge should come up to        
,birmingham and ,rugby1 or that the     
narrow gauge should go down to ,bristol 
and ,oxford8  ,it would be difficult to 
overrate the importance of this question
 in a national and commercial point of  
view4  ,if there is one point more fully
 established than another in the        
practice of ,railways1 it is that the   
inconvenience occasioned by a break upon
 a line of through-traffic1 occasioned  
by want of uniformity of gauge1 is of   
such a serious description as to detract
 most materially from the advantages of 
,railway communication4  ,the following 
description of what has actually        

occurred at ,gloucester during the last 
few months1 furnished to us by a        
gentleman who has been practically      
engaged in the management of the        
traffic1 will give some idea of the     
working of the system3--     ,we        
experience the greatest possible        
inconvenience from the change1    both  
as regards passengers and goods2 coals  
we have not attempted to    tranship4   
,in the first place as regards          
passengers and passenger trains3        
,the passengers and their luggage have  
to be hurried across from one    train  
to the other1 when there is a chance of 
the luggage being    misplaced4         
,gentlemen's carriages and horses have  
to be changed1 a    process uniting time
 and risk4  ,valuable parcels have to be
 handed out    in the confusion1 and    
handed in4     ,the result is a delay1  
with the ,mail-trains1 for instance1 of 
half an    hour sometimes1 just         
sufficient if the coming-in train is    
after time1    to miss the ,manchester  

or other train from ,birmingham1 or the 
,exeter    or ,bath train from ,bristol2
 annoyance to the passengers1 who are   
anxious about their parcels and luggage2
 risk1 and expense1 as a large    body  
of porters have to be maintained1 who   
are not fully employed1 in    order that
 no more time than is necessary should  
be lost in the change    of trains4     
,with regard to goods1 the inconvenience
 attending the change is far    more    
serious4     ,up to this day a great    
number of waggons laden with goods of   
all    descriptions have been lying at  
,gloucester1 which we have been unable  
to remove in spite of every exertion4   
,we keep an establishment of    clerks  
and porters to superintend and effect   
the transhipment1 but1 in    the hurry  
of business1 mistakes occur2 goods      
destined for ,hull are    perhaps put   
into the ,manchester truck2 boxes are   
bruised1 packing    torn1 furniture and 
brittle articles damaged4  ,there is the
 chance of    mistake in the            

re-invoicing of goods2 the other day1   
for instance1 a    bale for ,bristol was
 laid hold of by a carrier at           
,gloucester and taken    to ,brecon1 a  
claim for some #cjl4 being instantly    
made upon us4     ,in short1 all the    
inconvenience1 delay1 and expense       
attending an    unloading and reloading 
of goods have to be encountered1 and    
there is    nothing the senders of goods
 so much dread as this4  ,the expense   
involved is very considerable3 there is 
the expense of porterage1    which      
varies from #c;d4 to #f;d4 per ton3 the 
expense of clerks    employed in        
inspecting and invoicing the goods1 the 
expense of    shunting the waggons1 the 
waste of premises1 the additional       
carrying    stock it obliges the        
,companies on each gauge to maintain1   
and1 above    all1 the loss of trade    
which is sure to result from the delay  
and risk    attending the change1 and   
the advantage which uninterrupted       
communications1 whether by ,water or    

,railway1 are sure to have over you     
in competition4     ,much of this       
expense and delay1 it may be said1 can  
be obviated by    better arrangements   
and more care2 by ample station         
accommodation1 by    abundant carrying  
stock4  ,no doubt some of it may be     
prevented1 but    this is only another  
name for expense4  ,the care1 too1 which
 is    required must not be confined to 
the ,railways immediately affected1     
but must commence on a ,railway a long  
way off4  ,the goods from ,leeds    for 
,bristol1 for instance1 must be duly    
placed together at ,leeds1    packed in 
such a manner as will enable you at     
,gloucester to get at    them in the    
best manner4  ,they must be forwarded   
from ,leeds1 and again    from          
,birmingham1 in such quantities as will 
be convenient at    ,gloucester4  ,the  
arrangements1 in short1 by which our    
interests at    ,gloucester will be best
 consulted1 will have to be made by     
another    ,company1 often not          

interested in the matter1 and whose     
convenience may    suggest another      
course4  ,you cannot1 therefore1 look   
forward to    remedying many of the     
difficulties attending on change of     
gauge1 which    are of this nature4  ,to
 the above summary of the practical     
inconveniences mentioned1 we have only  
to add1 that the numerous               
representations addressed to us by the  
principal carrying and commercial       
interests which have been concerned in  
the traffic affected by the change of   
gauge at ,gloucester1 have fully borne  
out the statement of the evils          
experienced1 more especially with       
reference to the loss1 delay1 and       
misdirection of goods4  ,the principal  
,railway ,companies north of ,birmingham
 have also made strong representations  
as to the obstacle thrown in the way of 
a proper development of the traffic by  
the break of gauge2 an obstacle which1  
as regards coal1 iron1 salt1 corn1 and  
every description of heavy goods1 they  

consider as amounting to a virtual      
prohibition4  ,the question may be      
raised how far it is possible to obviate
 the inconvenience of two different     
gauges by mechanical arrangements8      
,these arrangements may consist either--
  #a4  ,of contrivances for transferring
 the bodies of waggons from the wheels  
and axles adapted for one gauge to those
 adapted for the other2 or--  #b4  ,the 
laying down of additional rails1 so as  
to permit trains of either gauge to run 
on without interruption4  ,with regard  
to the first1 it is stated that the     
experiment has been repeatedly tried on 
the ,liverpool and ,manchester1 the     
,newcastle and ,darlington1 the         
,leicester and ,swannington1 and other  
,railways1 where crossed by local coal  
,railways of a narrower gauge1 and has  
never succeeded4  ,the practical        
difficulties also are obvious1 of       
securing with waggons constructed with  
moveable bodies1 the rigidity and       
solidity requisite for safety1 and to   

prevent excessive wear and tear1 and    
damage to the articles conveyed4  ,even 
if we were to suppose1 however1 all     
mechanical difficulties overcome1 the   
serious objection would still remain1   
that in addition to the expense of      
transfer1 a large additional stock would
 require to be kept by all ,railway     
,companies1 owners of mines1 and other  
parties who had occasion to send traffic
 sometimes in the direction where the   
gauge was uninterrupted1 and sometimes  
in the direction where waggons of a     
special construction were required4     
,this consideration is the more         
important as1 under the system of the   
clearing- house1 the whole stock of the 
narrow-gauge ,railways of the country   
may be considered as becoming more and  
more common property1 available wherever
 there may be a press of business1 and  
for as great distances as may be        
required1 in order to avoid the         
inconvenience of unloading4  ,the second
 arrangement1 of laying down additional 

rails1 may be practicable under peculiar
 circumstances1 and to a limited extent1
 but it is open to great objections4    
,it is very doubtful how far the        
addition of a single rail only would be 
consistent with safety1 as in this case 
the centre of gravity of the carriages  
of different gauge in the same train    
would not be in the same straight line4 
,if a complete double set of rails were 
laid down the expense would be very     
considerable4  ,the complication of     
switches and crossings that would be    
necessary would involve considerable    
additional risk and great expense4  ,the
 difficulty and expense of maintaining  
the permanent way1 and of keeping the   
double set of rails in proper           
adjustment1 would be greatly increased2 
and on the whole1 the expense1          
inconvenience1 and risk1 would probably 
be so great as to prevent the experiment
 from being tried to any extent4  ,we   
cannot therefore consider the plan of   
laying down additional rails as         

applicable1 unless perhaps to a limited 
extent and under special circumstances1 
such as enabling1 for instance1 mineral 
waggons constructed for the narrow gauge
 to pass for a short distance and at a  
slow speed over a wide-gauge ,railway2  
with which view alone it is proposed to 
lay down extra rails upon the ,oxford1  
,worcester1 and ,wolverhampton line1 for
 a few miles south of ,wolverhampton4   
,on the whole1 therefore1 we cannot     
consider any of the mechanical          
arrangements which have been proposed   
for obviating the inconvenience of a    
meeting of different gauges 7even if we 
could assume their practicability1 which
 in the present state of experience we  
should not be warranted in doing17 as   
anything better than partial and        
imperfect palliatives of a great evil4  
,assuming this to be the case1 and      
assuming also1 as we are compelled to   
do1 that an interruption of gauge must  
exist somewhere1 the question is reduced
 to this3 to ascertain at what points   

such interruption should be fixed in    
order to occasion the least             
inconvenience to the traffic and        
commerce of the country4  ,from the fact
 that nearly #b1jjj miles of ,railway   
are already made or sanctioned on the   
narrow gauge1 while not more than #cjj  
are sanctioned on the wide gauge1 a     
disproportion which will be still more  
largely increased by the new ,railways  
now in contemplation1 an inference might
 be drawn in favour of confining the    
gauge which is in such a decided        
minority within the narrowest possible  
limits2 and this inference might be     
strengthened by referring to the obvious
 fact that the wide gauge has not       
realized those decided advantages over  
the narrow gauge which were at one time 
anticipated4  ,the actual speed of      
trains upon the ,great ,western         
,railway1 as shown by the published     
time-tables1 and by official returns1 is
 not so high as upon some narrow-gauge  
,railways1 and notwithstanding the      

excellence of its gradients1 very       
slightly higher than the average speed  
of other great ,railways on the narrow  
gauge4  ,in respect of safety1 it is    
manifest that both gauges are alike     
unobjectionable1 with due precaution and
 proper management2 and in respect of   
convenience and of economy1 including   
the cost both of construction and       
working1 the opinion of a great majority
 of the most eminent authorities is     
unfavourable to the wide gauge4         
,without wishing to express any positive
 opinion ourselves upon the point1 it is
 enough for us to say that we think     
there is nothing in the relative merits 
of the two gauges in themselves         
materially to affect the question       
between them1 which turns upon          
commercial considerations4  ,in this    
point of view the question is1 as we    
have already observed1 whether the      
points of junction between the wide and 
narrow gauge should be at ,rugby1       
,birmingham and ,wolverhampton1 or at   

,oxford and ,bristol4  ,in support of   
the first view1 it is contended that the
 principle which should regulate the    
choice of the points of junction ought  
to be to fix them at great foci of      
traffic1 and centres of converging      
,railways1 where delay must take place  
and large establishments be maintained  
at any rate2 while on the other hand it 
is contended that such points are the   
worst possible to select1 and that the  
opposite principle should be adopted1 of
 confining an inevitable inconvenience  
within the narrowest possible limits1 by
 fixing the points of junction where    
there is least through-traffic4  ,the   
correctness of the latter proposition   
seems perfectly obvious upon general    
considerations2 but the question is one 
of such great commercial importance1    
that we have thought it right to inquire
 fully and in detail into the practical 
effects that would result to the        
principal interests concerned from an   
interruption of the gauge1 on the one   

hand1 at ,birmingham and ,rugby1 and on 
the other at ,bristol and ,oxford4  ,by 
either combination the traffic of places
 intermediate between ,birmingham and   
,bristol with each other1 and with      
,london1 would not be affected2         
uniformity of gauge being secured       
equally in the one case by the wide1 in 
the other by the narrow gauge4  ,by     
either combination the traffic between  
places north and east of the line of the
 ,london and ,birmingham ,railway and   
places south of the line of the ,great  
,western ,railway would not be affected1
 interruption of gauge having equally to
 be encountered in the one case at      
,bristol and ,oxford1 in the other at   
,birmingham and ,rugby4  ,by the former 
or wide-gauge combination1 the traffic  
between ,devonshire1 ,cornwall and all  
places south of the line of the ,great  
,western ,railway1 and ,birmingham1 and 
all places between ,birmingham and      
,bristol1 would gain1 i4e4 would escape 
an interruption of gauge2 also such of  

the traffic of ,south ,wales1 to        
,birmingham1 and places short of        
,birmingham1 as in the event of the     
,south ,wales ,railway being sanctioned1
 would take the circuitous route by that
 ,railway to the north of ,gloucester4  
,on the other hand by the narrow-gauge  
combination1 a break is avoided in the  
whole of the traffic between            
,manchester1 ,liverpool1 ,hull1 and the 
,northern1 ,eastern1 and ,midland       
portions of the kingdom1 and ,bristol1  
,gloucester1 ,worcester1 and the whole  
district intermediate between the       
,london and ,birmingham and ,great      
,western ,railways4  ,the paramount     
importance of this consideration has    
been strongly urged upon us by parties  
practically acquainted with the traffic1
 and by the principal interests affected
 by the question4  ,in the memorial     
already referred to1 signed by the      
representatives of #df iron-works1 #eg  
furnaces1 and #ih collieries1 in the    
,staffordshire mineral district1 in     

favour of the ,london and ,birmingham   
line1 and narrow-gauge system1 it is    
stated that1 of the total export of the 
district1 only eight per cent4 is sent  
in the direction of ,bristol1 of which  
by far the greater quantity is shipped  
from that port1 and would therefore be  
unaffected by a break of gauge there2   
while #cg per cent4 is sent to          
,liverpool and the north and north-west 
of the kingdom1 and #ac per cent4 to    
,hull and the east1 all of which would  
consequently suffer by a break at       
,birmingham4  ,the wool trade between   
,bristol1 where wool fairs are held     
annually1 and ,leicester and the ,west  
,riding of ,yorkshire1 is very          
considerable1 all of which would escape 
a break of gauge by the narrow-gauge    
combination4  ,the export of salt from  
,droitwich1 both to ,gloucester and     
,bristol1 and to ,hull and other parts  
of the kingdom1 is already large1 and   
likely to receive very great increase1  
if an unbroken ,railway communication is

 afforded1 which can only be done by the
 narrow-gauge combination4  ,the same   
combination affords the important       
advantage of an unbroken communication  
to the traffic of ,manchester and       
,liverpool with ,bristol1 and indeed    
with the whole of the ,west of ,england1
 as a very inconsiderable proportion of 
the goods actually dispatched require to
 be carried in transit through ,bristol4
  ,the same remark applies to the trade 
of the ,potteries with the ,west of     
,england2 of ,bristol and ,gloucester   
with the ,midland ,counties1 where the  
imports of these ports now meet those of
 ,hull and ,liverpool2 of ,worcester1   
,kidderminster1 c4 with ,liverpool1     
,lancashire1 and ,yorkshire1 and of     
various other branches of traffic that  
might be specified4  ,as a proof of the 
importance of some of the branches of   
traffic that would be thus              
inconvenienced by a change of gauge at  
,birmingham1 it may be mentioned that   
single carriers already send as much as 

#bj1jjj tons a year in transit through  
,birmingham1 by the ,birmingham and     
,gloucester ,railway1 and that the total
 quantity thus sent is estimated at from
 #ej1jjj to #ajj1jjj tons per annum1 and
 is considered to be capable of great   
increase1 the line of communication     
having been only very recently completed
 by the opening of the ,bristol and     
,gloucester ,railway1 and the           
development of the traffic having since 
been greatly impeded by the interruption
 of the gauge at ,gloucester1 and other 
circumstances4  ,with the low rates     
which it is now proposed to establish on
 coals1 salt1 agricultural produce1 and 
other heavy goods1 the amount of traffic
 that may be expected to pass from the  
west in transit through ,birmingham1 and
 vice versa1 if the advantage of an     
unbroken communication can be secured1  
will be exceedingly great4  ,it has been
 represented to us that ,droitwich alone
 would send upwards of #bej1jjj tons of 
salt annually4  ,the same observation   

applies as to the coal traffic from the 
,midland ,counties through ,rugby to    
,oxford4  ,the whole of the extensive   
district between ,rugby and ,oxford1    
where coal is now usually at a very high
 price1 may be cheaply supplied by      
,railway2 an object of great importance1
 which could be only partially attained 
if the impediment of an interruption of 
gauge were allowed to exist at ,rugby4  
,another important consideration which  
seems to point to ,bristol rather than  
,birmingham1 as a proper point for the  
interruption of the gauge1 and which has
 been strongly urged upon us by         
carriers1 merchants1 and practical men  
acquainted with the course of traffic1  
is1 that ,bristol1 like ,london1 is a   
great emporium and shipping port1       
through which a comparatively small     
portion of the goods which enter by     
,railway require to be forwarded in     
transit without repacking and           
assortment4  ,the facilities for water  
communication with ,bristol also give   

the public a better alternative than    
they would enjoy elsewhere of avoiding  
the inconvenience of the change of      
gauge1 and thus afford the best possible
 security1 that if the interruption be  
fixed there1 the ,railway ,companies    
interested will use every possible      
effort to reduce the inconvenience to a 
minimum4  ,for all these considerations1
 we can have no hesitation in expressing
 our preference1 on public grounds1 to  
the alternative that proposes to fix the
 break of gauges at ,bristol and        
,oxford1 rather than at ,birmingham and 
,rugby4  ,another important advantage   
offered by the ,london and ,birmingham  
scheme1 and intimately connected with   
the question of the gauge1 is the       
arrangement by which it is proposed to  
lay down an additional double line of   
rails throughout the mineral district1  
to be devoted entirely to the           
accommodation of the mineral traffic4   
,we have already seen that the          
production of iron of the district      

requires a continued interchange of     
coals1 lime1 ironstone1 and other raw   
materials among the different mines and 
works1 to the extent of about #d1jjj1jjj
 tons annually4  ,it is only by         
obtaining ready access to the ,railway  
by means of short branches or tramroads 
from those mines and works1 that the    
benefits contemplated from the          
introduction of ,railway communication  
can be fully realized4  ,but if this is 
to be the case1 and if any considerable 
portion of this immense local traffic is
 to pass by ,railway1 it is manifest    
that the rails so used could not be     
rendered available without extreme      
danger and inconvenience for the general
 traffic4  ,even the export trade alone 
in coals and iron could not be conducted
 with convenience upon the same line of 
rails as the passenger traffic1 and     
would require a separate line of rails  
in order to allow the waggons passing   
and repassing from the different works  
within the district to reach without    

interruption some principal station at  
its extremity1 where trains of the      
proper size could be formed and         
dispatched to distant points4  ,this    
object would be very imperfectly        
fulfilled by the plan proposed by the   
wide-gauge ,railway1 of laying down an  
extra rail1 or pair of rails1 on the    
narrow gauge1 inside the principal      
rails1 which would1 in fact1 obviate    
none of the objections to the           
accumulation of slow mineral trains upon
 the main passenger line1 and would     
allow of no access by lateral tramroads1
 without cutting up the main line by    
crossings4  ,it is represented also that
 the waggons of the wide gauge are1 from
 their greater weight and size1 ill     
adapted for the purposes of the mineral 
traffic4  ,the arrangement in question1 
of an additional double line of rails1  
is equally proposed by the line from    
,birmingham to ,shrewsbury1 via ,dudley 
and ,wolverhampton1 which traverses the 
same mineral district1 and must be      

considered as1 to a great extent1       
identified with the ,tring or ,london   
and ,birmingham scheme4  ,the case of   
the ,shrewsbury line1 as compared with  
the competing scheme of the ,grand      
,junction ,company1 which stops at      
,wolverhampton1 depends very much on the
 same arguments1 of the importance of   
opening up the ,staffordshire mineral   
field by ,railway communication1 which  
have been already adduced in favour of  
the ,tring line2 and the objections to  
it on the part of the ,canal and other  
interests are of the same description4  
,the arrangements proposed for supplying
 the local wants of the district are    
also of the same nature1 and the plans  
and sections of the two lines           
correspond1 so that the portion between 
,dudley and ,wolverhampton is common to 
the two2 the understanding being that1  
if both are sanctioned by ,parliament1  
this portion is to be made by the       
,shrewsbury ,company1 and used on       
equitable conditions by the other       

,company4  ,the ,great ,western scheme1 
on the other hand1 introduces a         
different gauge and different           
arrangements1 and adopts a different    
line between ,dudley and ,wolverhampton1
 so that its existence is hardly        
compatible with that of the ,shrewsbury 
scheme4  ,for the reasons stated we are 
therefore of opinion that1 for the      
purpose of accommodating the great      
mineral district of ,staffordshire1 the 
combined scheme of the ,tring and       
,shrewsbury lines is preferable to any  
other that has been proposed4  ,the     
,tring scheme is equally superior for   
the local accommodation of              
,kidderminster1 ,stourbridge1 and       
,stourport1 to which it gives better    
stations1 by pursuing a lower level     
along the bottom of the valleys1 and it 
admits of more easy extension towards   
,leominster1 ,ludlow1 and the ,west4    
,between ,worcester and ,london it      
accommodates1 as we have already seen1 a
 larger population2 and therefore1 on   

the whole1 both in these respects and in
 the important particular of the gauge1 
it seems to us to be in itself decidedly
 preferable to the competing ,great     
,western scheme4  ,it remains to be seen
 whether there are any other            
considerations which might modify this  
conclusion4  ,it is urged1 that the     
concession of this line to a ,company   
promoted by the ,london and ,birmingham 
,company1 will constitute a great       
monopoly1 extending over a vast extent  
of country1 while1 by giving it to the  
,great ,western ,company1 a competition 
would be introduced1 from which the     
,public might derive benefit4  ,on the  
other hand1 it may be said that1 to     
allow the ,great ,western ,company to   
embrace1 by their influence1 not only   
the whole western communications of the 
island1 but also the whole of ,south    
,wales1 and the whole district up to    
,worcester and ,birmingham1 would be to 
establish a monopoly much more gigantic 
than that of the ,london and            

,birmingham4  ,this latter monopoly     
would also be more obviously            
objectionable1 inasmuch as an interest  
adverse to the ,public would at once be 
established if the line from ,london to 
,worcester and ,wolverhampton1 and that 
from ,bristol to ,birmingham1 were to be
 in the same hands1 and upon the same   
wide gauge1 as the line now proposed    
through ,south ,wales4  ,the            
accommodation of ,herefordshire1        
,worcestershire1 ,south ,wales1 and the 
important districts lying to the west of
 the present lines of ,railway1 will    
evidently1 at no distant period1 require
 not only a wide-gauge ,railway along   
the ,southern coast1 to place them in   
communication with ,london1 but also a  
narrow-gauge ,railway to place them in  
direct and unbroken communication1      
through ,birmingham1 with the           
manufacturing districts and the great   
,railway system of the rest of the      
kingdom4  ,the extension of such a      
,railway would be greatly facilitated by

 the establishment of the narrow gauge1 
and of an interest independent of the   
,great ,western1 in the ,worcester      
district1 and1 on the other hand1 would 
be greatly impeded if that district were
 assigned to the ,great ,western        
interest and to the wide gauge4  ,in    
respect therefore of the general        
question of monopoly1 it appears to us  
that nothing would be gained by         
substituting that of the ,great ,western
 for that of the ,london and            
,birmingham1 which is the only          
alternative2 at the same time1 if the   
latter ,company had shown no disposition
 to meet the fair demands of the ,public
 by a reduction of rates1 and to obviate
 the objections of monopoly by the offer
 of reasonable guarantees1 it might     
perhaps have become necessary1          
notwithstanding the disadvantages of the
 ,great ,western scheme1 in respect of  
the gauge and other points1 to adopt    
this alternative4  ,this is1 however1 by
 no means the case2 but1 on the         

contrary1 the ,london and ,birmingham   
,company have come forward voluntarily  
to offer guarantees and conditions of a 
very advantageous character4  ,they     
offer1 on condition of their ,worcester 
scheme being sanctioned1 at once to meet
 the objections of monopoly1 by         
inserting in their ,act the following   
provisions3  #a4  ,the whole of the     
,railways under their control1 including
 the existing ,london and ,birmingham   
,railway1 to become subject to the      
options of revision and purchase        
contained in the ,act of last year3 the 
option of revision1 however1 at #aj per 
cent4 to accrue at an earlier period    
than that of #bj years1 specified in the
 ,act4  #b4  ,a revised tariff to be    
framed for the whole of the said        
,railways1 including the ,london and    
,birmingham ,railway1 upon the principle
 of fixing maximum rates for passengers 
and goods lower than those at present   
charged1 and at as low a level as those 
charged upon any of the principal       

,northern ,railways4  #c4  ,one article 
of such tariff to be1 that coals and    
iron are to be carried at rates not     
exceeding #a;d4 per ton per mile1       
including toll and locomotive power4    
#d4  ,all differences with other        
,railway ,companies1 by which the public
 safety or convenience are affected1 to 
be referred to the ,board of ,trade1 or 
other competent authority for that      
purpose established by ,parliament4  #f4
  ,the ,london and ,birmingham ,company 
to pledge the whole revenue of their    
existing line for the completion of the 
proposed undertaking within a reasonable
 time4  ,it appears to us that these    
guarantees hold out for the ,public a   
prospect of permanent and certain       
advantage greatly beyond anything that  
could be expected from the competition  
of two great ,companies1 who would be   
urged by every motive of interest to    
combine4  ,we attach the greatest       
importance to the security obtained for 
the cheap transit of coals and minerals4

  ,not only will a great benefit be     
thereby1 as we believe1 secured for the 
important mineral districts of          
,staffordshire and the ,midland         
,counties1 but also a still more        
important benefit for the poorer and    
industrious classes1 and for the        
consumers of coals generally throughout 
the ,southern and ,western ,counties1   
and in the ,metropolis4  ,the charge of 
conveyance of coals by ,railway from    
,south ,staffordshire or ,derbyshire to 
,london will not exceed #aas4 or #abs4  
per ton1 and it has been stated to us1  
that1 after payment of all charges1 good
 house coals could be sold here1 with a 
profit1 at prices not exceeding #bjs4   
per ton4  ,during the recent frost and  
easterly winds the price of coals in    
,london has been as high as #djs4 per   
ton2 and during the winter the price    
frequently exceeds #cjs4 for coals of   
ordinary quality4  ,when we consider how
 materially the comfort of all classes1 
more especially of those in humble      

circumstances1 depends on a regular     
supply of cheap coal1 and also how much 
the employment of industry is affected  
by the same circumstances1 and when we  
bear in mind that a saving of every     
shilling per ton on the average         
consumption of the ,metropolis is       
equivalent to an annual saving to its   
inhabitants of #aej1jjjl41 it is        
impossible not to appreciate the        
importance of insuring low rates of     
charge upon the principal ,railways     
which are in connexion with the great   
inland coal fields4  ,in other respects 
also we think that the introduction of a
 system of moderate charges upon the    
,london and ,birmingham and its         
tributary ,railways1 will be calculated 
to afford great advantage to important  
commercial interests1 and to the        
community at large1 while we see every  
reason to hope that it will not be      
unproductive of benefit to the ,company 
itself4  ,we must remember1 however1    
that this latter point is1 to a certain 

extent1 experimental1 and that it is    
highly important to obtain voluntarily  
from the ,company guarantees of a       
permanent character4  ,it must not be   
forgotten that1 without some arrangement
 of this sort1 the ,company1 if so      
disposed1 has a perfect legal right to  
resort to charges so high as greatly to 
inconvenience the ,public1 and that1    
under an altered state of things1 with a
 depressed money-market1 and all fear of
 immediate competition removed1 it is by
 no means certain that it might not find
 it for its interest to do so4  ,we have
 also the authority of the ,select      
,committee of last ,session for         
attaching great importance to the       
prospective guarantee1 for the future1  
in the shape of options of revision or  
purchase1 which are now voluntarily     
offered by one of the first ,railway    
,companies in the kingdom1 whose line   
could not be1 otherwise than by their   
own consent1 subjected to the operation 
of any conditions not contained in their

 original ,act4  ,on the whole1         
therefore1 when we consider on the one  
hand the superior advantages afforded by
 the ,london and ,birmingham scheme in  
itself1 and by the adoption of the      
narrow gauge1 and on the other the great
 advantages offered by the ,london and  
,birmingham ,company1 in connexion with 
it1 over their whole system1 and the    
ample guarantees given against any      
possible abuses of monopoly1 we can     
arrive at no other conclusion than that 
the scheme promoted by that ,company is 
preferable on public grounds to the     
competing scheme1 which is inferior in  
itself1 and which holds out no such     
collateral advantages4  ,having already 
referred to the ,shrewsbury1            
,wolverhampton1 ,dudley1 and ,birmingham
 scheme1 as connected1 in a great       
measure1 with those between ,worcester  
and ,wolverhampton1 it will be          
convenient to include this scheme in the
 present ,report4  ,we have stated that 
the general question involved in the    

comparison of this scheme with the      
competing line proposed by the ,grand   
,junction ,company is1 that the latter  
joins the ,grand ,junction line at      
,wolverhampton1 and thus affords no     
accommodation to the mineral district   
between ,wolverhampton and ,birmingham4 
,if the views which we have stated in   
regard to the importance of opening up  
this district by ,railway communication 
are correct1 this consideration alone is
 sufficient to give a decided preference
 to the more extended scheme4  ,it also 
appears to us1 that to entrust the      
branch to ,shrewsbury to the ,grand     
,junction ,company would be open to the 
objection which we have stated in our   
previous ,report upon the ,south        
,eastern schemes1 when discussing the   
general policy of giving a preference to
 lines proposed by existing ,companies  
for the accommodation of adjoining      
districts1 viz4 that there may be danger
 in giving such preference where the    
scheme proposed by the existing         

,company1 although insufficient for the 
complete accommodation of the district  
to be provided for1 may yet be          
sufficient to throw impediments in the  
way of other parties coming forward with
 more extensive schemes4  ,a line to    
,shrewsbury1 in the hands of the ,grand 
,junction ,company1 would manifestly be 
not unlikely to be used for the purposes
 of protection against competition1     
rather than of encouragement to         
,extensions beyond ,shrewsbury1 and to  
the legitimate development of the       
traffic4  ,it appears to us1 therefore1 
that1 under the peculiar circumstances  
of the case1 the fact of the ,shrewsbury
 and ,birmingham line being promoted by 
a substantial and independent local     
party1 is a legitimate ground of        
preference1 in addition to that already 
pointed out1 of the superior advantages 
afforded by the independent line to the 
populous mining district between        
,wolverhampton and ,birmingham4  ,as    
regards the line between ,shrewsbury and

 ,stafford1 of which plans and sections 
have likewise been deposited by the     
,grand ,junction ,company1 it appears   
sufficient to say1 that although as a   
mere line for the town of ,shrewsbury1  
it might afford considerable advantages1
 it accomplishes none of the more       
important advantages for the district at
 large which are held out by the line to
 ,birmingham4  ,we are of opinion1      
therefore1 that the latter line is      
preferable to all the competing schemes 
proposed1 upon general grounds of public
 policy2 and we are aware of no public  
reasons why it should not receive the   
sanction of ,parliament4  ,at the same  
time1 there are points of detail        
connected with it1 more especially as   
regards the mode of passing through the 
town of ,birmingham1 and of effecting a 
junction with the ,london and           
,birmingham ,railway1 to which we think 
that the attention of ,parliament should
 be especially directed4  ,with regard  
to the first point1 it depends to a     

great extent upon considerations of     
private property1 which we are precluded
 from entertaining2 but with regard to  
the second point1 it appears to us of   
the greatest importance that provision  
should be made for an uninterrupted and 
convenient junction in ,birmingham      
between the projected line and that of  
the ,london and ,birmingham ,railway4   
99 99 99 99 99  ,in conclusion1 we beg  
to draw attention to the passage of the 
,fifth ,report of the ,select ,committee
 of last year1 in which it is stated1 in
 recommending that ,reports should be   
made to ,parliament by this department  
upon ,railway ,schemes1 ,that no such   
,report should be held to prejudice the 
claims of private persons1 the          
examination of which should be          
altogether reserved to the ,houses of   
the ,legislature4  ,in submitting to    
,parliament1 in conformity with the     
recommendations of that ,committee1 the 
results at which we have arrived1 with a
 view to the information and assistance 

of ,parliament in forming a judgment    
upon the schemes in question1 in so far 
as our ,report may be available for that
 purpose1 we are anxious that it should 
be distinctly understood that we have   
arrived at these results solely upon    
public grounds1 and to the exclusion of 
all considerations how far such results 
might require to be modified by a due   
regard for private rights and interests4
  ,,dalhousie4  ,c4 ,w4 ,,pasley4  ,g4  
,r4 ,,porter4  ,d4 ,o',,brien4  ,s4     
,,laing4  99 99 99 99 99  ,,railways4   
,,map ,,of ,,the ,,several ,,projected  
,,railways1 ,,in ,,the ,,worcester1     
,,wolverhampton1 c1 ,,division4  7,broad
 and ,narrow ,gauges47  ,,referred ,,to 
,,in ,,the  ,,report of the ,,railway   
,,department of the ,,board of ,,trade  
on the ,,london1 ,,worcester1 ,,and     
,,wolverhampton1 and on the ,,birmingham
 ,,and ,,shrewsbury ,,districts4        
,ordered1 by ,the ,house of ,commons1 to
 be ,printed1 #bh ,february #ahde4