Talk:Morden Depot

Trade Facilities Acts

(Discussion moved here from User talk:DavidCane)

Thanks for your edits to Morden Depot. I was wondering on what basis you have changed the date of the Trade Facilities Act from 1922 to 1921, when 1922 was supported by a reference, and 1921 isn't. Since the emphasis is on government guarantees, it is much more likely to be the 1922 act than the 1921 act. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:12, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

That's the date of the Act - it received royal assent on 10 November 1921 (see here). If you want a book reference see page 90 of The Story of London's Underground (11th ed.) by Day and Reed, which mentions it by date. I happened to know, as I wrote the articles on the C&SLR and the CCE&HR which referenced it.

Prior to the act being assented, the government had asked organisations to submit applications for government backing of their schemes. Lord Ashfield made the application in October 1921. The application was approved in March 1922 (The Times page 12, 9 March 1922 and page 12, 10 March 1922). The 1922 Act (actually the "Trade Facilities and Loan Guarantee Act") received assent on 15 December 1922.--DavidCane (talk) 16:17, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree that 1921 is the date of an Act, but not necessarily the date of the Act that enabled the City and South London Railway to raise the finance for their scheme. Lee (1968) expressly states on two occasions that it was the provisions of the 1922 Act that enabled them to raise the finance. I have had a look at the two articles you mention, and was surprised to find that the paragraphs dealing with the 1921 Act are completely unreferenced on both occasions. I do not have access to Day and Reed, and sadly, "I happened to know" does not count as a reliable source. There are now two {fact} templates covering the unreferenced information in the article. I think I can resolve the one about the extensions to time by using the references in the City and South London article, but unless you can supply a proper reference for the 1921 Act, I shall be reverting it to the 1922 Act, since that is supported by a reliable source. If Day and Reed specifically mention the 1921 Act in this context, we then have the usual conundrum of what to do when reliable sources disagree. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 11:25, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

I have the 10th edition, but it's also p. 90

In 1921 the Government passed the Trade Facilities Act which promised generous financial guarantees for projects which provided employment for large numbers of people. Railway building, being highly labour intensive, provided such employment and in October 1921 Lord Ashfield presented MPs with detailed proposals to extend certain parts of the Underground, including the Hampstead Line to Edgware, using capital guaranteed by the new Act. Eventually the powers were extended by the LER Act (1923) to build an extension of the Hampstead Line from Charing Cross to Kennington,

it goes on. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 15:22, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

I agree that the northern extensions were enabled by the provisions of the 1921 Act, and Wolmar (2004) p.221 also makes that point. However, what has been quoted so far makes no clear reference that it was the powers of the 1921 Act that funded the southern extensions, and Lee specifically says that it was the 1922 Act. This probably ought to be on the article talk page now that the discussion has escalated. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 15:42, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Bob, Hansard was unavailable yesterday, but this answer from Hilton Young on 22 March 1922 indicates that the government was guaranteeing principal and interest on up to £5 million of borrowing for the London Electric Railway Company and the City and South London Railway works.--DavidCane (talk) 21:49, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

A further question to Mr Young on 1 May 1922 makes it explicit that it was under the 1921 Act that the loan was guaranteed.--DavidCane (talk) 22:30, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

The dates of both of these reports clearly indicate that they are dealing with the £5 million that Lord Ashfield requested for the northern extensions in 1921, which were not originally mentioned in the article, because they have much less to do with Morden Depot than the southern extensions, which included the depot. The question remains as to whether, having requested £5M in 1921, under a scheme that guaranteed amounts up to £5M, he could go back in 1923 to request another £5M (or whatever the cost was) under the same scheme to fund the southern extensions, and whether this would be described as "issuing 4.5% debenture stock in November 1923". Lee says it was not the same scheme, and the fact that the government introduced Trade Facilities Acts in 1921, 1922, 1924 and 1926 would also point in this direction. Regards. Bob1960evens (talk) 09:02, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I have just found this which clearly states that the 1922 Act extended the total amount of money that could be guaranteed, and extended the time limits for another year, during which an application for guarantees could be made. In view of the dates, the southern extensions must have been funded using the provisions of the 1922 Act, and so I believe Lee is correct when he states that they were. Bob1960evens (talk) 07:40, 5 April 2018 (UTC)