link to Talbot Project home page link to De Montfort University home page link to Glasgow University home page
Project Director: Professor Larry J Schaaf
 

Back to the letter search >

Result number 3 of 5:   < Back     Back to results list   Next >  

Document number: 5635
Date: 30 May 1846
Recipient: BAILEY Charles
Author: TALBOT William Henry Fox
Collection: British Library, London, Manuscripts - Fox Talbot Collection
Last updated: 24th March 2012

[draft]

Bailey/

30 May / 46

In conseqce of yr refusal ^some months time ago to accept a Referee – wch being twice repeated ^& very strongly expressd I considr to be final – I made applicatn to Lds Lansd. & Ilchr to ^ know if they wd undertake to appoint a referee, at when necessy – & recvd from them an assurance that they would do so, at the proper time. And this fm ye last I rathr had bn considg ^as a settled matter thing.

But ^I must add likewise, yt The matter is not yet ripe for a reference, in consequence of the Compy having brought a new Bill into Parlt for making a deviation of the line – in conseqce of which it will pass thro’ other lands of mine than those specified in the Company’s act, which are the same the as are specified in my agreemt wth them. It will be necessary to wait until the new Act passes wch will give ye compy a power of compulsory purchase over these other lands, but at present they have no power.

It appears to me beyond all question that by one agreemt the whole damage & compensatn to me, is to be assessed at one & the same time, & by one referee – There is no provision made The Company on the appointmt of a referee ^ of course the Company must ^ then state to him ye Referee produce a plan of the whole of the lands they claim to purchase, & if [illegible deletion] those lands or any of them are different from those mentioned in the Act & in the Agreement, of course the reference cannot proceed until the difference discrepancy is adjusted removed –

Should you [illegible deletion] to favor me with a reply, as to these points, in which your professional knowledge gives you a much deeper insight than can be

I may also add that I do not see the object of the Company in

It also st appears tome moreover that

If the Company were now put in possession of some of my lands (those namely that are mentd in this act) it wd be of little use to them, until this new Act of parlt passes, & enables them to purchase the remainder. For tho’ I am no Engineer it appears to me that a railway cannot be made piecemeal I may add that my Solr Mr K is of ye same opinn In fact if the company claim to purchase land from me viz. that no referee can proceed at present.

& I have written today to Capt O’B the Secy of ye Cmpy & expect his reply in a few days, wch I will

I believe it is the universal

I beg to enquire whether the Company before making this applicatn to you informed you (as most assuredly they ought to have done) that they were not [illegible deletion] now claiming / purchase fm me only a portn & not ye whole of ye lands necessary for the Railway?

As present . . . I hope ∴ that you will not consider it inconsistent wth the sincere regard wch I feel for you, that I am compelled (as a matter of business) to protest against your proceeding with ye reference under prest circs.

H F T

I am confidt that y. hve not been in

I believe that you were not aware of I hope y will call at ye abbey before taking any further step, whatever [illegible deletion] for I am anxs to have an opportuny of explaining to you the situatn in wch ye C & myself are placed, and the difficulties wch have occurred – as to since our agreemt was signed last year, as I believe that you have not been informed respecting them are not aware of ym at present.

P.S. will you give us ye pleasure of yr Cy at dinner eith on S or My as may be most convt – We dine ¼ before 8, but if you were to cd come ½ hour earlier, we cd shew you ye Abbey wch you will find is now in great beauty.

[expanded version]

Bailey

30 May 1846

In consequence of your refusal some months time ago to accept a Referee – which being twice repeated and very strongly expressed I consider to be final – I made application to Lords Lansdowne and Ilchester <1> to know if they would undertake to appoint a referee, at when necessary – and received from them an assurance that they would do so, at the proper time. And this from the last I rather had been considering a settled matter thing. But I must add likewise that the matter is not yet ripe for a referee, in consequence of the Company <2> having brought a new Bill into Parliament for making a deviation of the line – in consequence of which it will pass through other lands of mine than those specified in the Company’s act, which are the same the as are specified in my agreement with them. It will be necessary to wait until the new Act passes which will give the company a power of compulsory purchase over these other lands, but at present they have no power.

It appears to me beyond all question that by one agreement the whole damage and compensation to me, is to be assessed at one and the same time, and by one referee – There is no provision made The Company on the appointment of a refereeof course the Company must then state to him the Referee produce a plan of the whole of the lands they claim to purchase, and if [illegible deletion] those lands or any of them are different from those mentioned in the Act and in the Agreement, of course the reference cannot proceed until the difference discrepancy is adjusted removed –

Should you [illegible deletion] to favor me with a reply, as to these points, in which your professional knowledge gives you a much deeper insight than can be I may also add that I do not see the object of the Company in It also states appears to me moreover that If the Company were now put in possession of some of my lands (those namely that are mentioned in this act) it would be of little use to them, until this new Act of parliament passes, and enables them to purchase the remainder. For though I am no Engineer it appears to me that a railway cannot be made piecemeal I may add that my Solicitor Mr King <3> is of the same opinion opinion In fact if the company claim to purchase land from me viz. that no referee can proceed at present. and I have written today to Captain O’Brien the Secretary of the Company expect his reply in a few days, which I will I believe it is the universal I beg to enquire whether the Company before making this application to you informed you (as most assuredly they ought to have done) that they were not [illegible deletion] now claiming to purchase from me only a portion and not the whole of the lands necessary for the Railway?

As present … I hope therefore that you will not consider it inconsistent with the sincere regard which I feel for you, that I am compelled (as a matter of business) to protest against your proceeding with the referee under present circumstances.

H F T

I am confident that you have not been in I believe that you were not aware of I hope you will call at the abbey before taking any further step, whatever [illegible deletion] for I am anxious to have an opportunity of explaining to you the situation in which the Company and myself are placed, and the difficulties which have occurred – as to since our agreement was signed last year, as I believe that you have not been informed respecting them are not aware of them at present.

P.S. will you give us the pleasure of your Company at dinner either on Sunday or Monday as may be most convenient – We dine a quarter before 8, but if you were to could come half an hour earlier, we could shew you the Abbey which you will find is now in great beauty.


Notes:

1. Henry Petty Fitzmaurice, 3rd Marquess of Lansdowne (1780–1863), MP, WHFT’s uncle, and Henry Stephen Fox Strangways, 3rd Earl of Ilchester (1787–1858).

2. The Great Western Railway.

3. Of the firm William Read King & Son, solicitors, London.

Result number 3 of 5:   < Back     Back to results list   Next >