Letter from Meynell, Hartlepool to Leonard Raisbeck, Stockton-upon-Tees

Made:
1828-07-16
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

Meynell informs Raisbeck that he is unhappy with the resolution passed by the committee on 8 July 1828 and outlines his plans to oppose the resolution because he considers it ‘a most extraordinary attempt of self-remuneration out of a public fund’.

Details

Extent:
1 item
Identifier:
RAIS/4/3/14
Transcription:
My Dear Sir

The resolution you mention to me as having been passed by the proprietors of the railway who attended the Gen’l Meeting on the 8th Inst appears to me a most extraordinary attempt at self remuneration out of a public fund and at variance with the practice on all former occasions and most willingly will I protest against it, but before I add my signature allow me to suggest the [illegible] of starting in the protest as on the principal ground of objection “that it is a departure from the practice observed on all former occasions when applications have been made to Parliament, has the appearance of partiality; is a lavish expenditure of the funds of the Company, and would become a precedent highly exceptionable” With all submission to your better judgement, I [illegible] this a means

[Page 2]

of preventing it from being said that we protest against it only because we were the defeated opponents of the measure.
There is another circumstance I wish to recall to your recollection, if I [illegible] not, at the first General meeting of the Company, a resolution was passed that such proportion of the expenses of the unsuccessful application to Parliament as were not at that time allowed to form a part of the first instalments on the shares after the passing of the Act should be repaid when the concern commenced paying 5 per cent a period which I consider to have now arrived – a reference to the books will I presume show whether my memory be correct.
I recollect there was much discussion regarding the claims of those who had paid their proportion of the expenses and I think the resolution was proposed by Mr. E Pease as a middle course – to satisfy all parties.
I remain my dear Sir
Yours faithfully

I some time since received a letter from Mr. Wilson concerning a subscription for the rebuilding a part of the Wall at this place, will you apologise to him for my neglect in not having replyed to him but I [illegible] his letter a’it escaped my memory [illegible] have my answer would [illegible] that on a former occasion I [illegible] to a similar purpose [illegible] having p’d my subscription I [illegible] I was the only subscriber.
I had previously subscribed to the repairs of the Pier and never to this day ever had an opportunity of seeing an account or learning how the money was expended.

Browse this archive