Letter from Mr Peacock to Leonard Raisbeck

Made:
1830-03-03
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

Peacock implores Raisbeck to not let his personal feelings get the better of him regarding his opposition to the Bill to build a bridge extending the railway over the River Tees. Discussion the differing interests of the Stockton & Darlington and those of the Tees Navigation, as well as disagreement over the height of the bridge.

Details

Extent:
1 Item
Identifier:
RAIS/4/7/1
Transcription:
Great Stainton March 3rd 1830
Dear Sir
Being desirous of saying a word or two on what was passing yesterday at the Railway Meeting, when I left it, I will take upon me to answer Mrs. Raisbecks invitation for Thursday the 11th instant, which we have great pleasure in accepting and Mrs. Peacock and myself with two of my daughters hope to wait upon you.
I was struck with your declaration yesterday that you would yourself oppose the pending Bill, if it were but on account of the variation made in your clause as to the height of the bridge and I would now express my hope that on cooler reflection you will not allow any personal feeling towards the Sub Committee to prompt you to throw any new bone of contention between the Railway Co. and the Tees Co:, or to say anything to the latter to hinder the amicable adjustment of the present subject of difference, and I would beg you to consider, that the interest of many of your friends is at stake, as well as that of the Sub. Committee. Whatever part you may think it might it right to pursue should the bill be persevered in, I trust you will do nothing to render the Tees Nav. Co. intractable, and thereby so far render it necessary to proceed with the Bill. But in truth I can hardly persuade myself that the reduced height of the

[Page 2]

bridge can materially prejudice the navigation to Yarm: should it however be so to a certain degree, I do not see, that blame can justly attach to the Sub. Committee for proceeding according to the words of the Act, if they were not instrumental in defeating the intention of your clause; on the contrary I should say that had they raised the line of the Railway four feet higher than the words of the act require, merely to fulfil the design of the original clause, they would have acted unwarrantably in unnecessarily so expending the funds of the Company. But be this as it may, the matter cannot now be rectified without a great additional charge to the Company, and I would therefore earnestly repeat my request to you to make no [llegible] about it so as to defeat the negotiation now on foot, but to let it pass sub silentio, at least unless the new Bill should be persevered in. In doing so I think you will do yourself most credit.

I remain
my dear Sir
very truly yours
D M Peacock

Browse this archive