• /
THAMES AND SEVERN CANAL.
RETURN to an Order of the Honourable The House of Commons,
dated 18 February 1887 j—for,
s&KKgU
asm
< '■ Pi '. \
■ !V ; :-r; ■
I
COPY " of Memorial presented to the Board of Trade on the 29th day of
November ultimo, by the Public and Canal Navigations interested, with
respect to the Acquisition by the Great Western Railway Company
of the Thames and Severn Canal, and the subsequent Corre¬
spondence which has arisen thereon."
Board of Trade, 1
28 February 1887./
HENRY G. CALCRAFT.
. ■ 1
(Mr. Holloway.)
'
V;--~
V-axy. " ~-r - < '
Ordered, by The House of Commons, to be Printed,
2 March 1887.
t
L y _ y:.; .A • • '
• ' \ 1
- V
LONDON:
PRINTED BY HENRY HANSARD AND SON;
and
69.
Published by Eyre and Spottiswoode, East Harding-street, London, E.C.,
and 32, Abingdon-street, Westminster, S.W.;
Adam and Charles BlaCk, North Bridge, Edinburgh ;
and Hodges, Figgis, and Co., 104, Grafton-street, Dublin.
' •. c".- •• ;
10
PAPERS RELATING TO THE
Mr- Holland's explanation is that, " so far as he has been able to ascertain,
the pump was only worked when the natural feeders were insufficient for the
supply of the canal summit, and that it had been the practice under the old
system of management to keep the pumping staff at full wages when the engine
was not working, although they were practically doing nothing for their pay all
this time."
Such a statement, which is considered satisfactory by the secretary of the
Great Western Railway Company, is throughout misleading and inaccurate.
There are no natural feeders of constancy or of significance, and the summit
depends absolutely on the artificial supplies from Thames Head and the River
Churn, both of which sources of supply were discontinued by the direction of
the sub-committee for nearly a year.
Under " the old system of management " the suspension of pumping was usually
of short duration ; sometimes the pumping was continuous throughout the year
or nearly so; always when the engine was stopped it was a busy time for over¬
hauling and repairing it, as well as the boilers, pump and machinery, to which,
besides general blacksmith's work for the lock-gates, &c. /when time allowed), the
engine-men would attend, instead of practically doing nothing for their pay as
stated. The intention to stop the engine and pumping into the canal alto¬
gether, had it not been challenged, is indicated by the terms of Mr. Mahon's
notice, viz.:
" To stop forthwith," " as the company will no longer have occasion for their
services ; " whilst the fallacy of Mr. Holland's explanation is shown by the slight
saving (if any) which the leaving of the engine-men for a few weeks now and then
(their weekly wages together amounting to 2 /. 2 s. only) would effect.
Mr. Holland is next referred to as to why the renewal of the pumping was so
long delayed, and as to his explanation of this, it is stated by Mr. Higgins that
the " Committee " having reason " to believe that extensive leaks existed in
the ' Summit Level,' wished to make a thorough examination of that part of
the canal, and to carry out the necessary repairs, so far as their means would
admit, while the water was at its lowest." Mr. Holland adds in his separate
report that the committee desired also, to have the condition of the tunnel
investigated, and that the investigation and the repairs extended over several
miles. The gross fallacy of any effective action having resulted in consequence
of these desires, as would seem intended to be indicated, is at once disposed of
by an examination of the accounts of the Canal Company for each summer half-
year (ending the 30th September), which show that the expenditure for labour
and repairs was less in 1886 than it had previously been, and so trifling as to
prove that nothing material can have been done.
The account is as follows:—
£. s. d.
591 11 11
759 3 1
644 19 7
437 17 8
424 7 8
In point of fact, it is well known in the district that no systematic stoppage of
leakage was effected, or even attempted, through the summit level, as stated or
implied by the secretary and Mr. Holland. Some isolated leaks were choked or
stopped, but for every one so stopped it may safely be asserted that a multitude
of others were created by the scorching action of the summer sun on the puddle
linings, slopes, and banks throughout the II miles of the canal, in which the
water was let out. To show the manner in which the repairs were conducted,
Expenditure for Summer half-year,)
1882 (ending the 30th September; J
Ditto - - ditto - - 18831
Ditto - - ditto - - 1884|
Ditto - - ditto - - 1885 f
Ditto - - ditto - - 1886[
Labour
Repairs
£. s. d.
388 18 4
202 13 7
Labour
389 8 3
Repairs
369 14 10
Labour
419 12 5
Repairs
225 7 2
Labour
282 13 7
Repairs
155 4 1
Labour - t -
283 7 4
Repairs
141 - 4
THAMES AND SEVERN CANAL.
ti
it may be stated that when the canal was inspected in the month of September
last it was found that on these 11 miles, supposed to be under examination and
repair, there were two inexperienced hands apparently employed in stopping
leaks; they had a wheelbarrow and a little boat between them, and were fetch¬
ing clay from a distance of about a mile and a-half to the spot where it was
required to be used. No wonder that the investigation and repairs were, as
Mr. Holland states, " protracted !"
There could be no necessity or propriety in letting out the water over the
whole length of the summit level at one time, as it scarcely need be stated
that the work of reparation should be carried on continuously and in lengths,
not only with the view of detecting and localising leakage, and of remedying
it afterwards by letting the water in promptly over each length as treated,
first to test, and, if proved to be water-tight, to secure therein the curative
treatment adopted, but also with reference to the important consideration of
maintaining the navigation, and carrying on the traffic, whilst the work is
in progress. As for letting the water out of the tunnel for months together
in order "to have its condition investigated," there can be no justification for
such a procedure; no repairs to the tunnel were even attempted, and letting
out the water for so long a period without proper precaution was hazardous,
and has probably done considerable injury to portions of that work.
It is thus obvious that the suspension of pumping, and also of the supply
from the River Churn, for nearly a year, the letting out of the water for a dis¬
tance of about 11 miles at one time, and that, too, for a period of nearly three
months, and the trifling repairs executed, these " repairs " being apparently
intended to serve as a pretext for the object the sub-committee had in view, fully
justify the statement of your memorialists that the evident design and intention
of the sub-committee was to close the canal as a through route.
Mr. Higgins next proceeds to state that the object of the committee in reduc¬
ing the staff appears to have been to obtain a larger fund to spend on the repairs
of the canal and works, a proposition quite contrary to the received idea that it
is wiser to prevent dilapidations occurring by reasonable early attention and pre¬
caution, than to repair them when they have arisen from insufficient or neglected
maintenance ; and he states that the whole of the available income, and 320 I.
besides, has been spent since the Great W estern Railway Company became
interested in the canal in 1882.
The contention, however, of your memorialists is that the sub-committee have
not only neglected repairs and proper maintenance, but also, and simultaneously,
the development of the trade on the canal, and its money-earning capability.
This is illustrated by the detailed cash account referred to by Mr. Higgins as
follows:—
Table of Receipts and Payments of the Thames and Severn Canal Navigation
from 4th April 1882 to 30th September 1886.
Period.
Half-year ending—
October - - 1882
April
- 1883
October - - 1883
April - - 1884
October - - 1884
April - - 1885
September 30,1885
April - - 1886
September - 1886
Receipts.
For
Half-year.
£. s. d.
1,521 3 5
1,955 16 2
1,977 11 2
1,501 - 5
1,154 4 -
991 7 10
1,035 10 3
967 6 10
885 5 11
For Year.
£• ».
3,476 19 7
3,478 11 7
2,145 11 10
2,002 17 1
Payments.
For
Half-year.
£. s. d.
1,453 17 8
1,784 17 11
1,903 14 8
2,080 18 2
1,554 16 3
1,210 16 5
1,046 1 1
664 3 2
619 9 9
For Year.
£. s. d.
3,238 15 7
3,984 12 10
2,765 12 8
1,710 4 3
Remarks.
Dredging Cost £. 335 - 10
- - Ditto
£.313 7 9
f>9-
B 2
12
PAPERS RELATING TO THE
It will be noted from the above account that whilst between 1882 and 1884
the annual income was nearly 3,500 /. per annum, it is now reduced to less than
half that amount.
The 3201, spoken of as loss by the secretary during the five half-years
between April 1882 and October 1886 is accounted for by the dredging effected
in the Stroud Valley in 1884, which cost 648 I. 8s. 7 d., and was of the nature
of exceptional expenditure, and intended to be repaid from the fund obtained
from the Midland Company, 1,500 I. of which was placed to a separate account
in the names of Messrs. Holland and Barlow, two of the Great Western Railway
nominees, and the larger part of which has been applied to the rebuilding of a
public-house in Stroud. As to the whole of the available income, as stated by
Mr. Higgins, having been applied to repairs and works, this does not appear to
be. accurate, seeing that the accounts of the committee show that two sums of
303 I. 3 s. 8 d. and 265 I. 16 s. 2d., received in 1886, have not been so expended,
as stated in paragraph 11 of the Memorial.
IIow far under the trifling and reduced expenditure for labour and repairs
made by the sub-committee, for the year ending the 30th September 1886, tner
a length of upwards of 30 miles of barge canal, with a defective Summit Level,
with 44 locks, comprising 174 gates (according to the secretary's method of
computation), a tunnel 2$ miles long, sundry feeders two or three miles in length,
with a steam pumping establishment, bridges, aqueducts, culverts, docks, ware¬
houses, weirs, and works, to say nothing of sundry cottage and house properties,
the condition has been improved, may be judged from the following considera¬
tions :—
The amount appearing in the accounts for labour and repairs during the year
ending 30th September 1886, is 831 I. 12 s. Ad., being but little over 10 s. per
mile per week, which, under ordinary circumstances, would about pay the 'ock-
keepers and wharfmen, leaving nothing for repairs and maintenance of works.
On the neighbouring navigation (the Stroud Water) with which Mr. Holland
suggests a comparison, although it is free from much expenditure, due to phy¬
sical and other difficulties that apply to the Thames and Severn Canal, the cost
for labour and repairs is upwards of 1 /. 10 s. per mile per week.
No comparison can be properly instituted with the Wilts and Berks, as that is
a narrow, or boat canal.
Mi*. Higgins gives a statement of tolls received during the 4j years prior and
subsequent to 1882, which, however, excludes the carrying trade of the Com¬
pany established in 1875, and which proved profitable, but was discontinued by
the sub-committee in April 1886. It is therefore incomplete.
The new railways in the district not worked by the Great Western Railway
Company which are spoken of as a new element of competition do not appear to
have injured the canal, and there can be no doubt that if the canal were placed
entirely free from all railway control, according to the intention of Parliament,
both the public and the independent shareholders of the canal should obtain
benefit by being enabled to make arrangements and establish traffic jointly in
connection with navigations and all or any of the railways existing, or that may
be formed, in the district.
With reference to Mr. Holland's opinion, that the " condition of the canal is
as good as it has been for some years," your memorialists deny the fact, and
adhere to the allegations made in the 12th paragraph of the Memorial. They
further represent that there has been a serious accumulation of defects in the
various works of the navigation arising from insufficient expenditure in main¬
tenance by the sub-committee, and particularly from letting out the water in
the Summit and higher pounds for nearly three months in the summer of last
year, a proceeding in violation of the interests of the public, and one that
has never before happened in the history of the navigation.
Your memorialists, in conclusion, would refer to the recent Report of the
Royal Commission on Trade Depression, in which it is recommended " that
greater attention should be paid to the development of the water communica¬
tion of the country, and that no railway company should be allowed, either
directly or indirectly, to control or own a canal," and they would again venture
to urge upon the Board of Trade the importance of effective legislation on this
subject being introduced in the ensuing Session of Parliament.
[Here follow 72 signatures.]
THAMES AND SEVERN CANAL.
13
— No. 6. —
The Secretary of the Sharpness New Docks and Gloucester and Birmingham
Navigation Company to the Board of Trade.
The Thames and Severn Canal.
Sharpness New Docks and
Gloucester and Birmingham Navigation Company,
Sir, Gloucester, 29 January 1887.
I am instructed by my directors to acknowledge the receipt through Earl
Batliurst of a copy of the explanation and reply of secretary of the Great
Western Railway Company given to the Board of Trade in reference to the
memorial of the traders and others, presented by the deputation received by
the Right Honourable the President of the Board of Trade on the 29th of
November last.
This explanation and reply has so little bearing on the subject-matter of the
complaint of my Company, laid before the Board of Trade in March last, that I
refrain from following Mr. Higgins into the details with which the Great
Western Company are obscuring the issue involved.
Our memorial of 4th March 1886 made complaint of an infraction of the law
and of proceedings ultra vires by the Great Western Company. We find that
in no reply or statement since put forward have that Company ventured to
deny the facts upon which such a serious charge was founded, or urged that
their action so disclosed and complained of was in exercise of any power which
the law had given them.
We further pointed out that had the Great Western action in this matter
been based upon any legal power or authority for the acquisition of the Thames
and Severn Canal by them, that then the law provides for the due maintenance
of the Canal works, water supply, and its navigable condition, but that under
the illegal ownership acquired by the Great Western Company they were enabled
to escape such responsibilities, and defeat the salutary provision to which, in
the public interest, Parliament has subjected all Railway Companies who own or
manage canals. The memorial also urged that no available remedy existed for
this state of things, and we gathered from your statements, made to the above
deputation on the 29t,h of November last, that the law officers of the Crown,
having been consulted, advised to the same effect.
In this way we endeavoured, and, we submit, have succeeded, in bringing to
light a public wrong, an evasion of the statutes for the protection of canals and
the control of railways, a method simple in operation and so effective in its
action that, if unchecked, will in all probability, sooner or later, utterly destroy
the canals of the country and the large interests the public have in their main¬
tenance.
For the present purpose, it is not a question whether the Great Western
Company pump more or less water, maintain a proper staff on the Canal, or do
a little more or less to stop leaks or maintain locks, as to all which we have
evidence to the opposite of that which Mr. Higgins asserts.
Assume that every reasonable obligation in these directions have been for
the time being fulfilled, what security, we may ask, have the public against a
total change of policy on the part of the Railway Company at any moment, and
what remedy would the public in such a case possess.
The continuance of such fulfilment by the Railway Company would be dis¬
cretionary on their part, but rendered most improbable (1st) by the fact that
the Railway Company possess both the inducement and the power to drive
traffic from the Canal; and (2nd) that there exists no authority to inquire
into and compel repair by them.
Whilst we put the case on the general grounds above referred to, we deny
the details of Mr. Holland's statement, and Mr. Higgins' letter founded upon it.
69. b 3 But,
J4 PAPERS RELATING TO THE
But, for the purpose of maintaining our complaint, it is utterly immaterial
whether the facts bear out Mr. Holland's assertions or not.
It is not, after all, what the Great Western have done in the way of repairs,
&c. ; it is what they may do, and can do, unfettered by that control which
Parliament has enacted where the Railway Company have obtained the neces¬
sary legal authority to possess or control a canal.
The Great Western Railway Company suggest an inquiry; in other words, to
impose delay and expenses on the Water Companies. But, as the facts of the
case, so far as necessary to support our memorial, are not denied, there is
nothing to inquire about.
There is one point outside the main issue that 1 must reply to, seeing that
the Board of Trade have desired our notice to be drawn to it.
It refers to Mr. Saunders' suggestion at the close of his letter of 21st May
1886, and printed on page 13 of the Parliamentary Paper, where he says:—
" My directors will be glad to facilitate any reasonable arrangement for
" the Thames and Severn Canal being taken over by the neighbouring
" canals on reasonable terms, having reference to the cost at which the Canal
" has been preserved from being closed
I have to observe as to this that the Navigations made two proposals, one in
February 1882, and the other in October 1883; both appear in the Parliamen¬
tary Paper, and either would secure the maintenance of the Canal as a
waterway.
It was at the suggestion of the Great Western Company that the Navigations
appointed a Committee in the autumn of 1883 to confer with the representa¬
tives of the Thames and Severn Canal with the view of ascertaining whether an
arrangement could be made on the basis of' the proposals of February 1882.
The Committee after several meetings proposed the " Heads of Arrangement"
(set out at page 9 of the Parliamentary Paper); these were communicated in
October 1883 to the Great Western Company, and Mr. Holland was sent down
avowedly to discuss them, but with the result recorded in the minutes of the
meeting of 3rd November 1883 (see page 16 of the Parliamentary Paper). Mr.
Holland challenges the accuracy of these minutes, and in so doing opposes his
recollection to that of the Committee of the Associated Navigations to whom at
their next meeting, 8th February 1884, those minutes were read, and by whom
they were accepted as correct.
Mr. Holland describes himself and his responsibility in an exaggerated
Way throughout his report to the Great Western directors, and forwarded
by Mr. Higgins; he repeatedly speaks of his shareholders and his debenture
holders.
It is well -to remember that Mr. Holland was and is the nominee of the Great
Western Hailway as chairman of the Thames and Severn Canal Company;
that he holds three shares; that with two other persons, one holding three
shares and the other holding 10 shares, the shares in each case, provided, as I
am informed, by the Great Western Railway Company, he constitutes a sub¬
committee, to whom the management of the Canal and the exercise of all the
powers of the Company's Acts of Parliament are entrusted.
It becomes a trifle ridiculous, therefore, to find Mr. Holland, in reporting to
the Great Western Company, speaking of his shareholders and his debenture
holders as if he had some body of unknown views to report to, and to satisfy.
Mr. Saunders disqualifies his offer for consideration by the condition,—
" Having reference to the cost at which the Canal has been preserved
" from being closed,"
The only cost incurred by the Great Western Company was in order to
prevent a railway being substituted for the Canal. That Company neither had
nor have any anxiety or desire that the Canal should be kept open, except as a
means of securing the exclusion of a second railway in the Stroud Valley.
When the Great Western bought these shares it was to avoid a railway, and
not to preserve a canal. Why, therefore, is their outlay with this object, of
which they would continue to receive the benefit, be a matter to be regarded by
the Associated Navigations in making any arrangement as to purchase or
lease with the Thames and Severn Company f
The
THAMES AND SEVERN CANAL.
15
The opposition of the Navigations had, practically, preserved the Canal. But
the. Great Western Company, wishing to avoid the possibility of some powerful
railway rival substituting a railway for the Canal, and prevent the renewal of
schemes with that object, yielded to Mr. Potter's representations, and gave 7 I.
or thereabouts per share for over 2,000 shares, some of which shares had been
sold in several cases for as little as 5s. a share. The purchase was an insurance
investment by the Great Western against two forms of competition; the one by
a rival railway, and the other, of course, in a much lesser degree by the Canal
itself.
On what ground, therefore, can it be reasonably proposed that the Associated
Navigations are to accept terms having reference to this insurance outlay by the
Great Western, and to the extravagant price at which the Great Western bought
their shares in the Canal.
This proposal of Mr. Saunders, apparently so specious, is simply attempting
a further wrong in addition to those they have already caused the Naviga¬
tions.
I have now placed before the Board of Trade some reasons why my Company
decline to re-open their negotiation with the Great Western Company, and to
these I would add those which are to be gathered from the last paragraph of
my letter to the Board of Trade of 2nd June 1886.
In conclusion, my directors again appeal to the Board of Trade to regard this
case on its broad lines and its great public importance. Its essential facts are
admitted, and they disclose a state of things in itself illegal and highly dangerous
to the independence of canals, to their success and development, and even to
their very existence; but, beyond ail, to the greater interests which the public
have in the continuance of waterways independently owned and efficiently
maintained.
I am, See.
(signed) Henry Waddy,
Secretary of the Sharpness New Docks and
Gloucester and Birmingham Navigation
The Assistant Secretary, Company.
Railway Department, Board of Trade.
69.
THAMES AND SEVERN CANAL.
COPY of Memorial presented to the Board of Trade
on the 29th November ultimo, by the Public and
Canal Navigations interested, with respect to the
Acquisition by the Great Western ' Railway
Company of the Thames and Severn Canal, and
the subsequent Correspondence which has arisen
thereon.
{Mr. Holloivay.)
Ordered, by The House of Commons, to be Printed,
a March 1887.
[Price 2 d.~\
69.
Under 2 oz.
H.-21. 8. 87.
[ a 1
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE.
1. Memorial to the Board of Trade - - - - - • - - - 3
3. Reply from the Great Western Railway Company 5
5&6. Rejoinders from—
(I.) The Memorialists, an*d - - - - - - - 9
(2.) The Sharpness New Docks and Gloucester and Birmingham
Navigation Company - - - - - - - - 13
Board of Trade,
February 1887.
♦
L 3 ]
COPY of Memorial presented to the Board of Trade on the 29th day of
November ultimo, by the Public and Canal Navigations interested, with
respect to the Acquisition by the Great Western Railway Company
of the Thames and Severn Canal, and the subsequent Correspondence
which has arisen thereon.
— No. 1. —
Memorial to the Board of Trade.
To the Right Honourable the President of the Board of Trade.
The Memorial of the undersigned Owners, Lessees, and Occupiers of Lands,
Mills, and Houses on and near to the borders of the Thames and Severn
Canal, and Barge and Boat-owners, Traders, and others navigating and trading
on the said Canal,
Sheweth:—
1. That your memorialists are owners, lessees, or occupiers of lands, mills, or
houses adjoining the Thames and Severn Canal, or owners, or masters of barges
and boats navigating upon, or traders interested in, the maintenance of the said
canal.
2. That your memorialists desire to draw the attention of the Board of Trade
to the present unsatisfactory condition and management of this canal, and the
loss and injury resulting both to them and the public generally by reason of the
Great Western Railway Company having disabled the canal for traffic through¬
out, except between Stroud and Chalford, a distance of only four miles.
3. Your memorialists believe that the Board are already cognisant of the
means by which the Great Western Railway Company have practically acquired
the canal, and of the fact of the dismissal of the principal officer and many of
the workpeople and lock-keepers essential for its proper maintenance, but your
memorialists desire to represent the following additional facts.
4. That the provisions of the Thames and Severn Canal Act (23 Geo. III.,
cap. 38) for holding general assemblies of the proprietors, and appointing a
committee of management from time to time of 13 persons, have been set
aside and disregarded, the committee of management now consisting of eight
persons only, all of whom are nominees of the Great Western Railway Company.
Three of such nominees have been appointed a sub-committee, by which the
canal is now virtually managed, as appears by the following minute adopted by
the so-called general committee on 27th April 1886 :—
(Copy Minute.)
" Resolved, that the following proprietors, viz., Messrs. Thomas Holland, A. P.
Barlow, and C. Mortimer be chosen and appointed a sub-committee to
manage the affairs of the company of proprietors, and generally to exercise
and carry out all the powers of the Acts of Parliament affecting the com¬
pany, and that such sub-committee continue to act until another is appointed
in its stead."
5. That Mr. Thomas Holland and Mr. A. P. Barlow have each been assigned
three shares in the canal company to qualify them to act as directors, and Mr.
C. Mortimer has been similarly assigned 10 shares. The five other gentlemen
referred to as being members of the general committee have no real qualifica¬
tion, and never attend the meetings.
69.
a 2
6. That
4
PAPERS RELATING TO THE
6. That by direction of the sub-committee the pumping from the spring at
Thames Head, from which the canal obtains its main supply of water, was dis¬
continued on or about the 6th November 1885 (the staff consisting of two
enginemen, one of 31 years' and the other of 25 years' service, being dismissed
at a week's notice), and the water in the canal was at first gradually and after¬
wards in the month of July last entirely let out for a distance of about 11 miles.
The supply of water was partially resumed on the 1st October last, but during
the three previous months the upper levels of the Navigation for the distance
stated became a dry ditch, all traffic on that part being entirely stopped, and
boats belonging to some of your memorialists being left aground with their
cargoes on board, and their crews in some instances begging in the neighbour¬
hood.
7. That the pumping at Thames Head was resumed on the 1st October
last, but merely occasionally and during the day only, and not during the
night also, so as to be continuous as formerly, and that the depth of the water
in the summit level of the canal is not maintained so as to permit of any remu¬
nerative traffic.
8. That during the present year (except for a period of 12J hours) no water
has been obtained as formerly from the River Churn at Cirencester, the source
of supply to the canal authorised by Act of Parliament.
9. That no boats have been able to pass or have passed over the canal to
Cirencester between the middle of July and the end of October 1886.
10. That several of your memorialists have recently been compelled to refuse
orders for the carriage of coal, stone, timber, and other goods and materials;
many instances of this loss of trade might be given, but to mention only one
important branch of traffic which has been diverted from the canal to the railway,
it may be stated that the Cirencester Local Board of Health have been accus¬
tomed to contract for many thousands of tons of roadstone to be brought by
water from Bristol to Cirencester every year, but owing to the condition of the
canal the stone is now being brought to Cirencester by the Great Western
Railway Company, the Local Board having in consequence to pay an increased
rate to the contractors.
11. That notwithstanding the unsatisfactory condition in which the canal has
been maintained, and in spite of the fact tliat it was closed for through traffic
for a period of three months, as before mentioned, the accounts produced by
the sub-committee show that there was a profit of 303 I. 3 s. 8 d. on the
working of the canal for the half-year ending the 31st March last, and of
265 /. 16s. 2d. for the half-year ending the 30th September last, these
accounts showing that the whole of the revenue is not being expended on
the maintenance of the canal as represented by the Great Western Railway
Company.
12. That the sub-committee have neglected the necessary repairs of the
lock-gates and other works of the canal; the weeds have not been removed
from the pounds; the lock-keepers have been dismissed ; at the east end of the
canal there is an interval of 12 miles without a lock-keeper or other person
employed upon it; the slopes are untrimmed ; the fences and towing-paths
neglected; the feeders not properly maintained; and throughout, a system of
gradual destruction has been introduced by the sub-committee with the evident
design and intention of closing the canal as a through line of water communi¬
cation between the Rivers Thames and Severn.
13. That the policy of the Great Western Railway Company in stopping all
through communication by the canal is apparently to divert the traffic from
the canal to their railway and to deprive the public of the advantage of com¬
petition which they would otherwise possess.
14. That the manner in which the canal is now being managed and worked,
and the trade diverted and driven from it, constitutes a great public injury,
and your memorialists pray that the Board of Trade will introduce such
legislation in the ensuing Session of Parliament as will effectually remove all
control
THAMES AND SEVERN CANAL.
5
control in respect to the management, working, and maintenance of the canal
from the Great Western Railway Company or any nominees acting on their
behalf.
November 1886.
[Here follow 253 Signatures, and the seal of the Cirencester Local
Board.]
— No. 2. —
Board of Trade to Secretary of the Great Western Railway Company.
Board of Trade (Railway Department),
Sir, London, S.W., 1 December 1886.
I am directed by the Board of Trade to transmit, for the information of the
Directors of the Great Western Railway Company, the copies of a memorial
presented to the President of this Board with regard to the matter of the Thames
and Severn Canal Navigation, from owners, lessees, and occupiers of lands, mills
and houses on and near to the Navigation, and from barge and boat owners,
traders, and others navigating and trading thereon.
I am, &c. ,
The Secretary of the (signed) George J. Swanston.
Great Western Railway Company.
— No. 3.
Secretary of the Great Western Railway Company to the Board of Trade.
Great Western Railway,
London Terminus, Paddington, W.,
Sir, 17 December 1886.
Mr. Swanston's letter r>f the 1st instant, and the copy of the memorial pre¬
sented to the Board of Trade on the 29th ultimo which accompanied it, were
submitted to the directors of this company at their last meeting, and at the
same time there were laid before them the communications from the secretary
and solicitors of the Sharpness Docks of the 2nd of June and 31st of July last,
which had not been previously furnished to this company, and with which my
directors only became acquainted from the correspondence recently published
by the Board of Trade.
As to the imputations conveyed by those letters, and the memorial, that "the
policy of the Great Western Railway Company is apparently to divert the traffic
from the canal to the railway and to deprive the public of the advantages of
competition," I need only, without repeating it, refer you to the explanation
given in Mr. Saunders' letter of the 21st of May last of the objects which the
directors of this company had in view in becoming connected with the canal.
The explanation there given disposes of a great deal of what is again urged by
the memorialists on the present occasion.
As to the charge made with regard to the management and state of the canal,
as the Board of Trade are aware, the management of the canal has been in the
hands of a committee, of whom Mr. Thomas Holland, one of the representatives
of the company upon the Severn Commission, is chairman, and I was desired,
therefore, to call his attention to the statements contained in the recently pub¬
lished letters and the memorial. For the information of the Board of Trade
I beg to enclose a copy of the reply received from him.
Mr. Holland's letter will be found satisfactorily to explain the circumstances
under which,— 1st, the pumping was discontinued in November 1885, as being
unnecessary during that period of the year when the other sources of supply are
sufficient for the maintenance of the Navigation; and 2nd, why the committee
having reason to believe that extensive leaks existed in the summit level which
practically neutralised the pumping, it was not renewed in the month of August
69. A3' last,
6
PAPERS RELATING TO THE
last, the object of the committee being, it appears, to make a thorough examina¬
tion of that part of the canal, and to carry out the necessary repairs, so far as
their means would admit, while the water was at its lowest.
The object of the committee in reducing the staff appears to have been to
reduce the expenses as far as was reasonably practicable, so as to have a
larger fund to spend on the repairs of the canal and works; and it appears from
the accounts that during the four and a-half years since the Great Western
Railway Company became interested in the canal the whole of the available
income, and 320 /. in excess, has been iu fact so expended ; and that so far from
" the canal having been disabled" during the past year, as stated, extensive
leaks in the bed and tanks have been stopped, general repairs executed, and
four new lock-gates put in, whilst four others are under construction.
1 may point out that while the tolls on the canal for the four and a-half
years prior to April 1882 amounted to 6,519/., the tolls for the four and
a-half years since 1882 have amounted to not less than 6,227 /., notwithstanding
the great depression of trade which has existed during this period, and which
has been severely felt in the district, and the necessary closing of the upper
portion of the canal in the months of August and September last.
Moreover, a new element of competition has been introduced by the opening
within the latter period of new railways in the district not worked by the Great
Western Railway Company.
From the allusion made to the determination of the services of Mr. Taunton,
the late engineer and manager of the canal, both in the correspondence and jn
the memorial itself, and from the fact stated by Mr. Holland that it was on
the personal canvass of Mr. Taunton that many of the signatures to the
memorial were obtained, it would appear that the outcry endeavoured to be
raised against this company has been dictated rather by personal motives titan
by anv bond fide ground of complaint on the part cither of the memorialists or
of the public.
As affording to the Board of Trade some idea of the value of the statements
made as to the great injury which the water communications and the public
suffer from the alleged influence in the recent management of the canal, it
would be well that the Board should call upon the Severn Commissioners, the
Stroud Water Navigation Company, the Sharpness Docks, and Gloucester and
Birmingham Navigation, the Warwick and Napton Canal Company, and the
Wilts and Berks Canal Company, all of.whom have been represented at the
deputations to the Board of Trade on this subject, to state what extent of
traffic passed between the Thames and Severn Canal east of Brimscombe, and
those canals and navigations respectively, for the four and a-half years prior
and subsequent to April 1882.
My directors are informed that the present state of the canal will not only,
as Mr. Holland says, compare favourably with, for instance, ihe neighbouring
navigation of the Wilts and Berks Canal, but also with the state of the canal as
described by Mr. Taunton in his evidence before the Lords Committee in 1866 ;
evidence which he was prepared to re-affirm in ] 879.
My directors are informed that since the middle of November there has been,
and is, a depth of 3 feet of water and upwards in the summit level of the canal,
which there can be no doubt is more than sufficient to accommodate the traffic
usually passing over it.
In conclusion, I am desired again to refer to the offer contained in the con¬
cluding paragraph of Mr. Saunders' letter of the 21st of May last, of which no
notice has been taken, except that Mr. Wraddy in his letter to the Board of
Trade of the 2nd of June contends, for the reasons dealt with in Mr. Holland's
letter before referred to, that it was not seriously made.
That offer I am again instructed, so far as the directors of this company are
concerned, to repeat, and further, to suggest that as the best mode of enabling the
Board of Trade to satisfy themselves upon the real merits of this case, they
should institute a formal inquiry into the circumstances under which the
directors of the Great Western Railway Company became connected with the
canal, and as to its present condition.
I am, &c.
(signed) J. D. Higgins,
The Assistant Secretary, Secretary.
Railway Department, Board of Trade, S.W.
THAMES AND SEVERN CANAL.
7
Enclosure in No. 3.
Thames and Severn Canal.
Dear Sir, Malvern, 10 December 1886.
In reply to your letter drawing my attention to the statements contained in copy of
the correspondence recently published by the Board of Trade and in the memorial pre¬
sented to the Board on the 29th ultimo, I have to state, for the information of your
directors, that the minutes of the meeting of the 3rd November 1883, referred to in
Mr. Waddv's letter to the Board of Trade of the 2nd June last, do not correctly repre¬
sent the share taken by me in the discussion.
Of the parties proposing to acquire the control of the undertaking, and who attended
the interview on the 3rd November 1883, you will see that the Warwick and Birmingham
Canal and the Staffordshire and Worcestershire Canal were unrepresented, while, from
my position as a Severn Commissioner, I felt assured that if that body had the inclination,
it was not probable they would obtain statutory powers to embarrass that Commission
with fresh obligations so long as they are unable to meet their present engagements with¬
out the material assistance of. your company.
The Sharpness New Docks and Gloucester and Birmingham Canal Navigations, now
practically one company, the Stroud Water Company, one of the lessees of the Wilts and
Berks Canal, and the solicitor and engineer of the Severn Commission, were the only other
parties who attended the interview.
Having been informed that a large section of the shareholders in the former company
were not then disposed to commit themselves to any further liabilities, and in view of the
many difficulties which presented themselves, it occurred to me to be desirable to ascer¬
tain definitely, in the first place, whether the promoters' scheme, which appeared to be of a
very unusual character, was a practicable one, having regard to the financial position and
legal powers of the parties promoting it.
'The interview was treated by me simply as of a conversational description. I had no
knowledge of any previous negotiations; no director from either of the companies was
present; no minutes were submitted to me, and those to which my attention has recently
been called do not correctly set forth the purport of my remarks.
The impression I intended to convey was that before calling the Thames and Severn
debenture and shareholders together to consider so serious a change in the constitution of
this company, or any other offer the promoters may wish to make, for the acquisition of
this property, I ought to know definitely :
1st. Who were the intended purchasers or companies seeking to acquire posses¬
sion of this canal ?
2nd. What security was proposed for the due fulfilment by them of any engage¬
ment that might be entered into ?
3rd. What were the means and probabilities of raising the contemplated capital of
12,0001. ?
I further suggested that I considered the scheme, as proposed, was of too speculative
and indefinite a character, and pointed out the extreme improbability of the debenture
and shareholders of this company practically giving up all control over their undertaking,
and consenting to the sale or confiscation of any portion'of their property on such
hazardous terms, unless some definite payment in the nature of a rent were secured to them
as in the case of the Wilts and Berks Canal.
As there did not appear to be any person present authorised to bind any of the com¬
panies, and failing to get any satisfactory information upon the foregoing points, I felt
myself quite unprepared to commit this company to the chance of a Parliamentary con¬
test, or to deal with such unusual proposals ; but I need not say that, had a practical and
well-supported scheme been brought forward, I should at any rate have submitted it for
the consideration of the proprietors and debenture holders of this company.
With regard to the alleged dismissal of the joint engineer and manager, of some of the
lock-keepers and of the pumping staff, I have to say that there is nothing substantial in
these complaints. The committee felt that they had a duty to discharge to their pro¬
prietary, and it will be manifest on inquiry that they were fully justified in the course
they pursued.
The object of the committee has been throughout to deal with the canal in the best
way they could, having regard to the means at their disposal, and to improve its physical
and financial condition, and I have no hesitation in saying that they have not dispensed
with the services of a single person who could not be spared.
The frequent reference to the engineer and manager in the correspondence, and the
fact of his canvassing the district for signatures to the memorial, as well as his attending
with the recent deputation to the Board of Trade, would lead to the inference that it was
the severance of his connection with this company which has caused all this agitation.
In terminating the old arrangement with him as joint engineer and manager, we had
every reason to hope that we should be able to make a fresh one with him in the capacity
69. A 4 of
8
PAPERS RELATING TO THE
of engineer only, and regret that lie was unable to make any new proposal more in
accordance with the existing state of affairs, and the altered position we wished him to
assume, although invited to do so.
The statement as to the alleged dismissal of the pumping staff involves a miscon¬
ception.
So far as I have been enabled to ascertain, it has never been the practice to pump
water into the summit level of the canal, except during such periods as the natural feeders
were insufficient for that purpose; in fact, it is self-evident that it would be useless to do
so, but we found that, notwithstanding this, it had been the practice under the old system
of management to keep on the pumping staff at full wages during the whole of the
remaining period of the year, although they were practically doing nothing for their pay
all this time.
The committee felt that they were not warranted in incurring so unnecessary an
expense, and have made more economical arrangements without detracting from the
efficiency of the service.
As a good deal appears to have been said as to the condition of the canal during the
months of August and September last., I have to explain that the committee did not give
instructions for the pumping to re-commence at the beginning of August, because .the loss
of water over the summit level of the canal, chiefly in the tunnel from leakages, was so
great as to make it a waste of money to pump water until the leaks were to some extent
stopped, added to which the committee desired to have the condition of the tunnel inves¬
tigated, and as much of the puddling repaired as their means would admit of whilst the
water was at its lowest.
The investigation and the repairs consequent thereon, which extended over several
miles, were necessarily protracted, but were carried out, as far as circumstances would
admit of, by the end of September, when the pumping was immediately re-commenced,
and there is now, and has been for nearly a month, a depth of three feet and upwards of
water in the summit level, which is sufficient to accommodate the traffic usually passing
over this portion of the canal.
In answer to the allegation that the sub-committee have neglected the necessary
repairs to the lock-gates and other works, I beg to remark that extra hands have been
employed beyond the usual staff, and four new lock-gates have been put in during the
past dry season, and four others are in course of construction.
Generally speaking, the condition of the canal, in my opinion, is as good as it has been
for some years, and quite adequate to the requirements of the trade, and equal to that of
the neighbouring navigations.
Yours, &c.
(signed) Thomas Holland,
J. D. Higgins, Esq., Secretary to the Chairman.
Great Western Railway.
— No. 4. —
Board of Trade to the Right Honourable the Earl Bathurst.
Board of Trade
(Railway Department), London, S.W.,
My Lord, 23 December 1886.
With reference to the deputation of traders and others interested in the
maintenance of the navigation of the Thames and Severn Canal, introduced by
your Lordship to the President of the Board of Trade, and the memorial left by
them on the subject, I am directed to transmit the enclosed copy of a commu¬
nication which has been received from the Secretary of the Great Western
Railway Company in reply to the statements contained in the memorial.
In forwarding a copy of Mr. Higgins' letter, I am to refer your Lordship to
the concluding paragraph of Mr. Saunders' letter of the 21st May last to this
department, published at pages 11, 12, and 13 of the correspondence recently
laid before Parliament, and of which a copy is enclosed, and to inform you
that, inasmuch as the offer on the part of the Great Western Railway Com¬
pany to dispose of the canal has now been repeated formally, the Board of
Trade desire to bring it under the notice of those who are interested in the
maintenance of the Navigation.
The Board cf Trade will be glad to give every assistance in their power to
any negotiations which may be undertaken with the object referred to, and
would be glad if the offer made in Mr. Saunders' letter, and now repeated,
should be carefully considered with the view of keeping up the waterway.
I have, &c.
The Right Hon. Earl Bathurst, (signed) Courtenay Boyle.
&c. &c. &c.
Cirencester House, Cirencester.
»
THAMES AND SEVERN CANAL. q
• — No. 5.—
Reply forwarded to the Board of Trade by the Memorialists with reference to
No. 3.
To the Right Honourable the President of the Board of Trade.
A copy of the communication received hy the Board of Trade from Mr.
Higgins, the Secretary of the Great Western Railway Company, in reply to the
Memorial presented on the 29th November last as to the unsatisfactory condi¬
tion and management of the Thames and Severn Canal, having been brought to
the notice of your memorialists, they desire to make some observations upon it,
as many of the statements made by Mr. Higgins, and also in Mr. Holland's
report to the Great Western Railway Company, are inaccurate and calculated
to mislead.
It is suggested by Mr. Higgins that your memorialists and the public have
no " bona fide ground of complaint," and that the " outcry" against the Great
Western Railway Company is dictated by personal motives, and is owing to the
dismissal of Mr. Taunton, the late engineer and manager of the canal. It is
scarcely, perhaps, necessary to state that this suggestion is entirely unfounded,
and would not probably have been made if Mr. Higgins had x-ead the Memorial
more carefully, as he would have seen that it bore upwards of 250 signatures,
comprising those of a large number of the principal landowners and occupiers
on the banks of the canal, of the merchants and traders of the district, and of
the chairmen of the local boards of health of Stroud and Cirencester. Apart
from the number of signatures to the Memorial, the fact alone that it received
the unanimous support of the Members for the four Divisions of Gloucestershire
affected by the action of the Great Western Railway Company, sufficiently
indicates the feeling of the public on this question, and the absurdity of the
suggestion that they and your memorialists have no interest in the matter.
As regards the discontinuance of the supply from Thames Head, and the
summary dismissal of the two engine-men who worked the pumping engine there,
Mr. Higgins states that the explanation of the circumstances uuder which these
things happened, given by Mr. Holland, will be found " satisfactory." That
both the discontinuance of the pumping and dismissal of the men were deliberate
acts of the Great Western Railway Company through their nominees (the sub¬
committee) is shown by the following letter from Mr. John Mahon, the gentle¬
man appointed by them to act as clerk of the Canal Company :—
"Thames and Severn Canal Navigation,
Paddington Station, London, W.,
6 November 1885.
" Thames and Severn Canal Company, Siddington and Cirencester.
" 1 am instructed to request that on receipt of this you will be good enough
to direct Henry Hewlett and Albert Sparrow (the two engine-men at Thames
Head) to stop pumping forthwith, and give them notice that at the expiration
of a week from date of such notice the Company will no longer have occasion
for their services."
The question of resuming pumping at Thames Head was left for consideration
in April 1866, as appears by the following minutes of the sub-committee of the
6th of that month :—
"The committee deferred until their meeting on the 27th instant the
question of the desirability or otherwise of resuming pumping at Thames
Head."
No reference, however, to the pumping is made in the minutes of the
meeting of the 27th April, and the question of resuming it appears to have
remained " open for consideration " through the whole summer and part of
the autumn of 1866, although the navigation was then stopped, and it so
remained until the attention of Parliament was called to the proceedings of the
Great Western Railway Company in respect to this canal by Mr. Holloway,
when one of the dismissed men was sought out and hastily brought back at the
end of September.
.«■ 69. B Mr.