for half-year ending 31st December 1905.
| Canal. | To Canal Expenses. | By Canal Traffic. | ||||
| Bridgwater and Taunton | £1,991 | 2 | 8 | £664 | 8 | 9 |
| Grand Western | 197 | 7 | 1 | 119 | 10 | 10 |
| Kennet and Avon | 5,604 | 0 | 9 | 2,034 | 18 | 8 |
| Monmouthshire | 1,557 | 3 | 3 | 886 | 16 | 8 |
| Stourbridge Extension | 450 | 19 | 4 | 765 | 7 | 1 |
| Stratford-upon-Avon | 1,349 | 11 | 3 | 724 | 1 | 4 |
| Swansea | 1,643 | 15 | 7 | 1,386 | 14 | 9 |
| ———————— | ———————— | |||||
| £12,793 | 19 | 11 | £6,581 | 18 | 1 | |
| ———————— | ———————— | |||||
The capital expenditure on these different canals, to the same date, was as follows:—
| Brecon | £61,217 | 19 | 0 |
| Bridgwater and Taunton | 73,989 | 12 | 4 |
| Grand Western | 30,629 | 8 | 7 |
| Kennet and Avon | 209,509 | 19 | 3 |
| Stourbridge Extension | 49,436 | 15 | 0 |
| Stratford-on-Avon | 172,538 | 9 | 7 |
| Swansea | 148,711 | 17 | 6 |
| ——————— | |||
| Total, | £746,034 | 1 | 3 |
These figures give point to the further remark made by Mr Inglis at the meeting of the Institution of Civil Engineers when he said, "It was not to be imagined that the railway companies would willingly have all their canal property lying idle; they would be only too glad if they could see how to use the canals so as to obtain a profit, or even to reduce the loss."
On the same occasion, Mr A. Ross, who also took part in the debate, said he had had charge of a number of railway-owned canals at different times, and he was of opinion there was no foundation for the allegation that railway-owned canals were not properly maintained. His first experience of this kind was with the Sankey Brook and St Helens Canal, one of wide gauge, carrying a first-class traffic, connecting the two great chemical manufacturing towns of St Helens and Widnes, and opening into the Mersey. Early in the seventies the canal became practically a wreck, owing to the mortar on the walls having been destroyed by the chemicals in the water which the manufactories had drained into the canal. In addition, there was an overflow into the Sankey Brook, and in times of flood the water flowed over the meadows, and thousands of acres were rendered barren. Mr Ross continued (I quote from the official report):—
"The London and North-Western Railway Company, who owned the canal, went to great expense in litigation, and obtained an injunction against the manufacturers, and in the result they had to purchase all the meadows outright, as the quickest way of settling the question of compensation. The company rebuilt all the walls and some of the locks. If that canal had not been supported by a powerful corporation like the London and North-Western Railway, it must inevitably have been in ruins now. The next canal he had to do with, the Manchester and Bury Canal, belonging to the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Company, was almost as unfortunate. The coal workings underneath the canal absolutely wrecked it, compelling the railway company to spend many thousands of pounds in law suits and on restoring the works, and he believed that no independent canal could have survived the expense. Other canals he had had to do with were the Peak Forest, the Macclesfield and the Chesterfield canals, and the Sheffield and South Yorkshire Navigation, which belonged to the old Manchester Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway. Those canals were maintained in good order, although the traffic was certainly not large."
On the strength of these personal experiences Mr Ross thought that "if a company came forward which was willing to give reasonable compensation, the railway companies would not be difficult to deal with."
The "Shropshire Union" is a railway-controlled canal with an especially instructive history.
This system has a total mileage of just over 200 miles. It extends from Wolverhampton to Ellesmere Port on the river Mersey, passing through Market Drayton, Nantwich and Chester, with branches to Shrewsbury, Newtown (Montgomeryshire), Llangollen, and Middlewich (Cheshire). Some sections of the canal were made as far back as 1770, and others as recently as 1840. At one time it was owned by a number of different companies, but by a process of gradual amalgamation, most of these were absorbed by the Ellesmere and Chester Canal Company. In 1846 this company obtained Acts of Parliament which authorised them to change their name to that of "The Shropshire Union Railways and Canal Company," and gave them power to construct three lines of railway: (1) from the Chester and Crewe Branch of the Grand Junction Railway at Calveley to Wolverhampton; (2) from Shrewsbury to Stafford, with a branch to Stone; and (3) from Newtown (Montgomeryshire) to Crewe. Not only do we get here a striking instance of the tendency shown by canal companies to start railways on their own account, but in each one of the three Acts authorising the lines mentioned I find it provided that "it shall be lawful for the Chester and Holyhead Railway Company and the Manchester and Birmingham Railway Company, or either of them, to subscribe towards the undertaking, and hold shares in the Shropshire Union Railways and Canal Company."