Thu 20 Nov 1879
To Thames & Severn Canal Co (Richard Potter)
At our meeting in September our Committee did not expect your proposal, previously declined by us, as it must benefit your company while, unless there was a very large increase in traffic, causing us a loss in revenue. While we cannot accede to this, we wish to work in harmony with our committee which will require some concession on your part. The division of tonnages between Stroud and Brimscombe and Stroud and Chalford has long been a point of conflict. The suggestion of your former chairman that the equal division of tonnages could possibly be extended to Chalford could be the basis of negotiation between us.
Signed by G H A Beard Chairman
November 20^th 1879
My Dear Sir,
You will have been expecting to hear the views of my Committee upon the subject of our interview with you on the 20^th Sept.
I cannot conceal the fact that we are disappointed at the nature of your proposal for looking forward as we were to receive suggestions which should promote and thoroughly establish a good feeling between the Committees of the Upper and Lower Canals. We were not quite prepared simply to receive a renewal of a proposition discussed and negatived on a former occasion and on which must certainly benefit your Canal to the whole extent of any increase in traffic which might arise from its adoption whilst it could only increase the revenue of our Canal in case of a very large extension in traffic, and short of this must entail a loss. To put the matter shortly your Canal must certainly benefit to some extent whilst the whole risk and that a serious one would rest with us.
Under the circumstances my Committee do not see their way clear to accede to your proposition, but at the same time desire to express their wish to act in harmony with your Committee, and to establish and maintain good feeling between the officers of the two Companies, but we are satisfied that this can only be done by some concession on the part of your Company.
The present division of tonnages between Stroud & Brimscombe, and Stroud & Chalford, has almost as long as I can remember, been a very sore point with my Committee, and so long as there is not any modification I do not see how there can be entire harmony with yours. On a former occasion, where the subject of a reduction of tonnages on merchandise was discussed Mr Barrington, who was at that time the spokesman of your Committee, rather intimated that they would be disposed to extend the equal division of tonnages from Brimscombe to Chalford and if you are still prepared to do this it might tend at all events to establish a basis of negotiation between us. Your (?) to do this and to share the risk which we should run in making the reduction of tonnage you wish for, would be elements of consideration that would (?) much with my Committee considering the matter further,
I Remain, your truly
G H A Beard.
R Potter Esq
T&S Canal Co
