this cross-examination. He held his ground bravely, and defended the plans and estimates with remarkable ability and skill; but it was clear they were imperfect, and the result was on the whole damaging to the measure.
The case of the opponents was next gone into, in the course of which the counsel indulged in strong vituperation against the witnesses for the bill. One of them spoke of the utter impossiblity of making a railway upon so treacherous a material as Chat Moss, which was declared to be an immense mass of pulp, and nothing else. “It actually,” said Mr. Harrison, “rises in height, from the rain swelling it like a sponge, and sinks again in dry weather; and if a boring instrument is put into it, it sinks immediately by its own weight. The making of an embankment out of this pulpy, wet moss, is no very easy task. Who but Mr. Stephenson would have thought of entering into Chat Moss, carrying it out almost like wet dung? It is ignorance almost inconceivable. It is perfect madness, in a person called upon to speak on a scientific subject, to propose such a plan. Every part of this scheme shows that this man has applied himself to a subject of which he has no knowledge, and to which he has no science to apply.” Then adverting to the proposal to work the intended line by means of locomotives, the learned gentleman proceeded: “When we set out with the original prospectus, we were to gallop, I know not at what rate; I believe it was at the rate of 12 miles an hour. My learned friend, Mr. Adam, contemplated—possibly alluding to Ireland—that some of the Irish members would arrive in the waggons to a division. My learned friend says that they would go at the rate of 12 miles an hour with the aid of the devil in the form of a locomotive, sitting as postilion on the fore horse, and an honourable member sitting behind him to stir up the fire, and keep it at full speed. But the speed at which these locomotive engines are to go has slackened: Mr. Adam does not go faster now than 5 miles an hour. The learned serjeant (Spankie) says he should like to have 7, but he
would be content to go 6. I will show he cannot go 6; and probably, for any practical purposes, I may be able to show that I can keep up with him by the canal. . . . Locomotive engines are liable to be operated upon by the weather. You are told they are affected by rain, and an attempt has been made to cover them; but the wind will affect them; and any gale of wind which would affect the traffic on the Mersey would render it impossible to set off a locomotive engine, either by poking of the fire, or keeping up the pressure of the steam till the boiler was ready to burst.” How amusing it now is to read these extraordinary views as to the formation of a railway over Chat Moss, and the impossibility of starting a locomotive engine in the face of a gale of wind!
Evidence was called to show that the house property passed by the proposed railway would be greatly deteriorated—in some places almost destroyed; that the locomotive engines would be terrible nuisances, in consequence of the fire and smoke vomited forth by them; and that the value of land in the neighbourhood of Manchester alone would be deteriorated by no less than £20,000! Evidence was also given at great length showing the utter impossibility of forming a road of any kind upon Chat Moss. A Manchester builder, who was examined, could not imagine the feat possible, unless by arching it across in the manner of a viaduct from one side to the other. It was the old story of “nothing like leather.” But the opposition mainly relied upon the evidence of the leading engineers—not like Stephenson, self-taught men, but regular professionals. One of these, Mr. Francis Giles, C.E., had been twenty-two years an engineer, and could speak with some authority. His testimony was mainly directed to the utter impossibility of forming a railway over Chat Moss. “No engineer in his senses,” said he, “would go through Chat Moss if he wanted to make a railroad from Liverpool to Manchester. . . . In my judgment a railroad certainly cannot be safely made over Chat Moss without going to the bottom
of the Moss. The soil ought all to be taken out, undoubtedly; in doing which, it will not be practicable to approach each end of the cutting, as you make it, with the carriages. No carriages would stand upon the Moss short of the bottom. My estimate for the whole cutting and embankment over Chat Moss is £270,000 nearly, at those quantities and those prices which are decidedly correct . . . It will be necessary to take this Moss completely out at the bottom, in order to make a solid road.”
When the engineers had given their evidence, Mr. Alderson summed up in a speech which extended over two days. He declared Mr. Stephenson’s plan to be “the most absurd scheme that ever entered into the head of man to conceive. My learned friends,” said he, “almost endeavoured to stop my examination; they wished me to put in the plan, but I had rather have the exhibition of Mr. Stephenson in that box. I say he never had a plan—I believe he never had one—I do not believe he is capable of making one. His is a mind perpetually fluctuating between opposite difficulties: he neither knows whether he is to make bridges over roads or rivers, of one size or of another; or to make embankments, or cuttings, or inclined planes, or in what way the thing is to be carried into effect. Whenever a difficulty is pressed, as in the case of a tunnel, he gets out of it at one end, and when you try to catch him at that, he gets out at the other.” Mr. Alderson proceeded to declaim against the gross ignorance of this so-called engineer, who proposed to make “impossible ditches by the side of an impossible railway” upon Chat Moss; “I care not,” he said, “whether Mr. Giles is right or wrong in his estimate, for whether it be effected by means of piers raised up all the way for four miles through Chat Moss, whether they are to support it on beams of wood or by erecting masonry, or whether Mr. Giles shall put a solid bank of earth through it,—in all these schemes there is not one found like that of Mr. Stephenson’s, namely, to cut impossible drains on the side of this road; and it is sufficient for me
to suggest and to show, that this scheme of Mr. Stephenson’s is impossible or impracticable, and that no other scheme, if they proceed upon this line, can be suggested which will not produce enormous expense. I think that has been irrefragably made out. Every one knows Chat Moss—every one knows that the iron sinks immediately on its being put upon the surface. I have heard of culverts, which have been put upon the Moss, which, after having been surveyed the day before, have the next morning disappeared; and that a house (a poet’s house, who may be supposed in the habit of building castles even in the air), story after story, as fast as one is added, the lower one sinks! There is nothing, it appears, except long sedgy grass, and a little soil to prevent its sinking into the shades of eternal night. I have now done, sir, with Chat Moss, and there I leave this railroad.”
The case of the principal petitioners against the bill occupied many more days, and on its conclusion the committee proceeded to divide on the preamble, which was carried by a majority of only one—37 voting for it, and 36 against it. The clauses were next considered, and on a division the first clause, empowering the Company to make the railway, was lost by a majority of 19 to 13. In like manner, the next clause, empowering the Company to take land, was lost; on which the bill was withdrawn.
Thus ended this memorable contest, which had extended over two months—carried on throughout with great pertinacity and skill, especially on the part of the opposition, who left no stone unturned to defeat the measure. The want of a third line of communication between Liverpool and Manchester had been clearly proved; but the engineering evidence in support of the proposed railway having been thrown almost entirely upon Stephenson, who fought this, the most important part of the battle, single-handed, was not brought out so clearly as it would have been, had he secured more efficient engineering assistance—which he was not able to do, as the principal engineers of that day
were against the locomotive railway. The obstacles thrown in the way of the survey by the landowners and canal companies, by which the plans were rendered exceedingly imperfect, also tended in a great measure to defeat the bill.