Engineering Wonders of the World
Volume I
Forfatter: Archibald Williams
År: 1945
Serie: Engineering Wonders of the World
Forlag: Thomas Nelson and Sons
Sted: London, Edinburgh, Dublin and New York
Sider: 456
UDK: 600 eng - gl.
Volume I with 520 Illustrations, Maps and Diagrams
Søgning i bogen
Den bedste måde at søge i bogen er ved at downloade PDF'en og søge i den.
Derved får du fremhævet ordene visuelt direkte på billedet af siden.
Digitaliseret bog
Bogens tekst er maskinlæst, så der kan være en del fejl og mangler.
154
ENGINEERING WONDERS OF THE WORLD.
PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF THE CANAL, SHOWING THE POSITION
OF THE EMBANKMENTS, WORKS, RAILWAYS (BLACK LINES),
AND CANALS (WHITE LINES) IN CONNECTION.
Mr. James Abernethy, a shrewd Scot, whose
services as a consulting engineer had been re-
tained, did not hesitate to report in favour of
the scheme outlined by Sir E. Leader Williams,
and the latter was unanimously approved by
the committee. An enthusiastic
town’s meeting endorsed their
action, and within a short time
£63,000 was subscribed to defray
the cost of an application for Par-
liamentary powers.
When launched, in the presence
of the writer, before a Select Com-
mittee of the House of Commons,
in the session of
1883, the project Great
. , Opposition
aroused extraordi-
met
nary interest, and with,
the promoters were
at once made aware of the fierce
antagonism which they might ex-
pect on the part not merely of the
port of Liverpool, but of every
railway company in Lancashire, as
also of a host of other bodies, who
thought that their interests would
suffer permanently if Manchester
ever secured its much - coveted
through the
First
Defeat.
water outlet.
Power was sought to make a
semi-tidal waterway between Run-
corn and Manchester, and to
dredge a channel
shallower portion
of the Mersey es-
tuary. Witnesses
came forward to declare that this
latter work was calculated to cause
a silting up which would ulti-
mately render impossible uninter-
rupted navigation to the port of
Liverpool. But the Committee
reported in favour of the meas-
ure. In the House of Lords, on
the same evidence, the decision
was reversed.
Steps were forthwith taken for a further
application to Parliament in the following ses-
sion. This time success attended the ap-
pearance of the promoters before a Select