Лондон, Чатэм и Дуврская железная дорога: История и объединение.

British pre grouping railway company (1859–1899/1922)

The London, Chatham and Dover Railway (LCDR or LC&DR) was a railway company in south eastern England created on 1 August 1859, when the East Kent Railway was given parliamentary approval to change its name. Its lines ran through London and northern and eastern Kent to form a significant part of the Greater London commuter network. The company existed until 31 December 1922 when its assets were merged with those of other companies to form the Southern Railway as a result of the grouping determined by the Railways Act 1921. The railway was always in a difficult financial situation and went bankrupt in 1867, but was able to continue to operate. Many of the difficulties were caused by the severe competition and duplication of services with the South Eastern Railway (SER). However, in 1898 the LCDR agreed with the SER to share the operation of the two railways, work them as a single system (as the South Eastern and Chatham Railway) and pool receipts: but it was not a full amalgamation. The SER and LCDR remained separate companies with separate shareholders until both becoming constituents of the Southern Railway on 1 January 1923. 'The Chatham', as it was sometimes known, was often criticised for its lamentable carriage stock and poor punctuality, something which Somerset Maugham uses in the novel Mrs Craddock ("Suddenly she thought of going away there and then But there were no trains: the London, Chatham, and Dover Railway has perhaps saved many an elopement"). However, in two respects it was very good: it used the highly effective Westinghouse air brake on its passenger stock, and the Sykes 'Lock and Block' system of signalling. As a result, it had an excellent safety record.

The LCDR originated through the dissatisfaction felt by the inhabitants and businesses of towns in north and east Kent with the services provided by the SER, resulting in the formation of the East Kent Railway (EKR). Permission to build a new line from Strood near Rochester to Faversham was granted by Parliament in 1853, but the SER successfully fought off an attempt by the new company to secure running powers over its metals. In return the SER agreed not to oppose any future application for an extension of the line to Dover, which was granted in 1855. It took the EKR several years to raise the necessary finance and it was not until 25 January 1858 when the first section of the line from Chatham to Faversham was opened, with stations at Rainham, Sittingbourne, Teynham, and Faversham. On 29 March 1858 a second section from Strood to Chatham. Around July 1858 a station opened at New Brompton (renamed New Brompton (Gillingham) in May 1886 and Gillingham from 1 October 1912). Rochester station opened after the rival SER opened Chatham Central station. On 3 March 1858 the West End of London and Crystal Palace Railway (WELCPR) opened the extension of their line from Norwood (Crystal Palace) to Beckenham Junction (opened as Beckenham) and Shortlands (opened as Bromley). On 22 November 1858 the Mid Kent Railway constructed a line from New Beckenham to Beckenham Junction station and obtained running rights over the WELCPR to Bromley (Shortlands). From there the Crays Company was building a line on to Bromley South (opened as Bromley Common) and Bickley (opened as Southborough Road). The Mid Kent line connected with the WELCPR that later provided the necessary access to London. After absorbing the Crays Company and gaining running rights over the Mid Kent metals to Beckenham Junction, the LCDR was to later buy the track between Beckenham Junction, Birkbeck and Bromley Junction, while the LBSCR absorbed the rest of the WELCPR. In 1859 the EKR changed its name to the LCDR though Dover had not then been reached, coinciding with the Western Extension via Longfield to join the Crays Company metals at Southborough Road (now Bickley).

Parliament had established standard clauses that were included in the authorising Acts of Parliament for all railway companies that specifically limited the borrowing powers of the company to one third of its authorised share capital to ensure there was a proper balance between share capital and loans. These standard clauses also required that before any loans could be taken, all of the share capital must have been subscribed for, at least 50% paid for and the payment proved to the satisfaction of a justice of the peace. The railway construction partnership Peto and Betts had done a lot of work already for the LCDR, some of it via a close but separate partnership between Sir Morton Peto, Edward Betts, and Thomas Russell Crampton, the engineer for the LCDR. This new partnership, Peto, Betts and Crampton, in conjunction with the original partnership, Peto and Betts, agreed to build a line between London Bridge and Victoria for the LCDR and to be paid entirely in the company's shares and debentures.

From its inception, the LCDR was known to be under capitalized. With the collapse of the bank Overend, Gurney and Company in May 1866, it became apparent that the LCDR had been funding its construction by operating a series of schemes to evade the loan restriction requirements and borrow money that was not secured in the way the law required. Shares had been issued in the names of Peto, Betts, Crampton and their acquaintances, and the LCDR accounts written up to make it look as though either the associated cash payment had been made directly to Peto and Betts to fund the construction of the line, or the money, having been paid to the railway company, had temporarily been lent back to the new shareholders. In fact, no cash had changed hands at all, but on the strength of these fictitious entries, the statutory declaration was made before a justice of the peace and authority given to raise loans. Once these major irregularities were exposed, the financial markets refused to continue lending to the LCDR and it became insolvent.

In December 1863 Samuel Morton Peto, a partner in Peto and Betts, had joined the board of the LCDR as financial advisor. With the collapse of the company the accusation was made that Peto was party to the scheme to circumvent the loan restrictions. At the time of the LCDR insolvency Peto was the Liberal Member of Parliament for Bristol, and on 22 October 1866 addressed a meeting in Bristol to explain his involvement with the LCDR. Although reports of the meeting are very complimentary and sympathetic to Peto, further contemporary analysis was less so.</blockquote>

Both the South Eastern and London, Chatham and Dover Railway companies' locomotives were painted black each with their own style of lining but, when taken over by the South Eastern and Chatham Railways Managing Committee (SE&CR), dark green was adopted with an elaborate lining scheme. After some trials with a hybrid colour scheme (SER maroon on the upper parts and LC&DR teak on the lower), the SE&CR adopted the dark maroon/lake livery for passenger stock. Ex LC&DR locomotives were renumbered by adding 459 to the running numbers (i. e. locomotive No 1 became No 460, etc. ); SER locomotives retained their existing numbers. For a small and indigent company the Chatham was lucky in its locomotive engineers. After a very patchy start, with a miscellany of Cramptons and other oddities, it had two very competent engineers. William Martley was appointed in 1860, and commissioned some very effective performers, notably the 0 4 2 well tanks of the 'Scotchmen' (1866) and 'Large Scotchmen' (1873) classes for the suburban services; and the 'Europa' class (1873) of 2 4 0s, which ran the mail trains to and from Dover, the Chatham's crack service. William Kirtley came from the Midland Railway in 1874, following the death of Martley. He was the nephew of Matthew Kirtley, the Midland's famous locomotive superintendent. Kirtley produced a series of excellent designs, robust and good performers — the A series of 0 4 4 tanks for suburban services, the B series of 0 6 0 goods engines; the T class of shunting engines; the M series of 4 4 0 express passenger engines; and a final R series of enlarged 0 4 4 tanks. These rather than Stirling's Ashford products formed the basis for SE&CR development under Wainwright, not least because it was Robert Surtees from Longhedge who led design work for the successor organisation. The R series led to the SE&CR's R1 and subsequent H class; the Bs to the famous C class; and the Ms to the D and E classes, which in their rebuilt Maunsell form may have been the best British inside cylinder 4 4 0s.