Letter from Edward Pease, Darlington to Leonard Raisbeck, Stockton-upon-Tees

Made:
1829-11-11
part of archive:
Leonard Raisbeck Archive

Buy this image as a print 

Buy

License this image for commercial use at Science and Society Picture Library

License

Buy this image as a print 

Buy

License this image for commercial use at Science and Society Picture Library

License

Science Museum Group
© The Board of Trustees of the Science Museum

Science Museum Group
© The Board of Trustees of the Science Museum

Discussion on the dispute between the Stockton and Darlington Railway and the Tees Navigation Company and regarding the draft Bill to Parliament - 'each side is so confident there is nothing but victory expected by both sides'. 'does the Tees navigation want an acknowledgement of their rights, if so of what description? remuneration or what? Does that to wish for a differently constructed bridge to which is contemplated?' 'Wish to promote peace'.

Details

Extent:
1 item
Identifier:
RAIS/4/1/15
Transcription:
Darlington 11 Mo.11 1829

Respected Friend
Leo Raisbeck

Thy favor of the 7 Ins was not delivered to me until yesterday afternoon __ permit me to say that endeavouring to place myself in possession of facts which I should have obtained if price had fulfilled the expectation he held out & who I did not know where to find, I cannot admit to any impropriety in my endeavouring to learn them if possible from R Stevenson, presuming he was no longer the engineer of the Tees Co. but had become the servant of the public. I do not feel myself restrained from writing to any who may either aid my private endeavours to bring about an amicable adjustment, or failing in this to use such information as I may receive for the benefit of the RWCo. except anything which comes from thy pen as the result of our unofficial private correspondence.
In regard to the “intimation” stated in thy note as given to the Rly. I can form no opinion as to the extent of the impression it made on the minds of Gentl’m. present __ on my own part I certainly did not consider them as speaking officially or as the organ of the Co. or thereby intending the RWCo. to receive more than thy expression of doubt as to that point

[Page 2]

with me that doubt had the same weight as one of those doubts which are often expressed in the meaning of almost every section – those who received thy communication as offence must write in exculpating the Tees Co. from a hasty & hostile proceed’g – however leaving all informality & etiquette out of the question & labouring after an amicable adjustment appoints as issued _ I would ask the following questions, if thy prudence consider it unsafe to reply to them, we may consider private effort at end, unless thy judgment can suggest any other alternative permit me strongly to advise thee to endeavour to stay the conflict in its present state & prevail on the interested parties to return the (illegible) of the intended bill & not return it to London – each side is so confident there is nothing but victory expected by both sides!!
“does the Tees navigation want an acknowledgement of their rights, if so of what description? remuneration or what?
does that Co. wish for a differently constructed bridge to that which is contemplated!
Is it the wish of that Co. to put an entire and final end to RW for works & anticipation on the Middlesbrough branch, but this I can hardly think as dvd’s can never be paid on their (Tees Co.) capital without it or is it the wish of the Tees Co. merely to give the RWCo. if in its power the expense of going to parliament & create them a year, delay - or

I wish I could change the idea of existing hostility into one more congenial to my feelings, & that we might be able mutually to prove to the respective companies that in the spirit of peace we wish to promote peace – & I am with Regard
Thy friend
Edward Pease

Browse this archive