Railway Mania in 1845 in the Severn Valley: Appendix
Railway Mania in 1845 in the Severn Valley
Appendix – The Board of Trade Report, 28th February 1845
The Report was into 2 proposed railways to run between London, Worcester and Wolverhampton where Bills had been deposited on 30th November 1844 for consideration in Parliament’s 1845 session. As they were targeting traffic in the same areas of the country the Board of Trade were to consider the merits of each scheme and which could be supported. They asked for evidence and received memorials.
The 2 schemes were the Oxford, Worcester and Wolverhampton Railway supported by the Great Western Railway, Engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel and the London, Worcester and South Staffordshire Railway supported by the London and Birmingham Railway, Engineer Robert Stephenson. The routes were similar north of Worcester although the Tring scheme ran via Stourport and west of Dudley. They differed east of Evesham on their way to London; the ‘Oxford’ line joining the GWR at that City and the ‘Tring’ line joining the London and Birmingham Railway at that location. The distances from Worcester to London were said to be 119 miles via Oxford and 122 miles via Tring. The Tring route was described as taking an easier route from an engineering consideration between Kidderminster, Stourport, Stourbridge and Wolverhampton.
They were convinced of the case between Wolverhampton and Worcester where the population was said to be 300,000. There were the important towns of Kidderminster (carpets), Droitwich (salt), Stourport, Stourbridge (glassware and hollowware) and Worcester (porcelain). This route would help with an extension across the River Severn to Leominster and Ludlow. Between Wolverhampton and Stourbridge there were said to be 100 blast furnaces producing 480,000 tons of pig iron annually and receiving 4 million tons of ironstone, lime, coal etc. The export of iron was 240,000 tons per year plus heavy hardware, tinplate, glass etc.
A ‘Memorial’ in favour of the Tring scheme was received signed by representatives of 46 ironworks, 57 furnaces and 98 collieries in the Staffordshire mineral district including the trustees of Lord Ward whose estate produces I million tons of coal and iron annually. A second ‘Memorial’ in favour of the Oxford scheme was signed by representatives of 37 ironworks and 9 collieries. They said that without better communication they were at a great disadvantage compared with South Wales and Scotland who had better sea access. The canals were said to be tedious, expensive and subject to serious interruptions through ice in winter and drought in the summer. Trade with the ports was quoted as 8% via Bristol, 37% via Liverpool and 13% via Hull.
The Report had raised the safety considerations of construction through the mining areas. Evidence from Brunel, Stephenson and Rennie said there was no undue danger. The issue of the different gauges taxed them being aware of the difficulties emerging at Gloucester where transhipment was involved between passenger and goods services. The ironmasters had asked for no break of gauge in Birmingham. The Report said if it occurred it should be at major interchanges at Bristol and Oxford. It did envisage a growth in traffic quoting the salt trade from Droitwich with 250,000 tons produced – 80,000 tons using the Birmingham and Gloucester Railway. Similarly the wool trade between Bristol and Leicester/West Riding was considerable.
In considering the merits of the routes south of Worcester, the population on the Tring route was said to be 125,000 which exceeded that served by the Oxford route. They also considered the proposed Shrewsbury to Birmingham line would provide a better connection in the Wolverhampton area. They were concerned with either the London and Birmingham Railway or the Great Western Railway having a monopoly over the area traversed allowing them to raise prices. Overall, the Report came down in favour of the London, Worcester and South Staffordshire Railway proposal.