Talk:Whitechapel and Bow Railway

Trains: in UK Low‑importance

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Transport Mid‑importance

	London transport portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London Transport, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Transport in London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.London TransportWikipedia:WikiProject London TransportTemplate:WikiProject London TransportLondon Transport articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ownership[edit]

copied from User talk:MRSC

Hi, regarding recent edits to Stepney Green tube station and Mile End tube station - it's not really correct to put

| original      = [[Whitechapel and Bow Railway]]
| pregroup      = [[Midland Railway]]
| postgroup     = [[London, Midland and Scottish Railway]]

because the Whitechapel & Bow was not absorbed by the Midland. The W&B is explicitly named in the Transport Act 1947 (third schedule "Bodies whose Undertakings are Transferred to [the British Transport] Commission", page 149, 17th entry), so it continued to exist right up until nationalisation, even though both joint owners did get swallowed up into larger concerns. Personally I would put

| original      = [[Whitechapel and Bow Railway]]
| pregroup      = Whitechapel and Bow Railway
| postgroup     = Whitechapel and Bow Railway

It was at some point during 1948/49, when the relationship between British Railways and the London Transport Executive was being tidied up, that the various joint lines were split up between BR and the LTE (the LTE got most of the W&B line, but BR got a very short stretch just before Campbell Road Junction). It's since been altered again; when the northern pair of former LTSR tracks between Campbell Road Junction and Upminster were transferred to LT about thirty years ago, the short bit of the W&B near Campbell Road Junction was transferred at the same time. --Redrose64 (talk) 09:13, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It is a bit of an oddity. W&B doesn't seem to have any public facing existence. The stations had exterior signage indicating they were "joint" stations of the respective owners:

I'd be inclined to leave the original company and remove the other two, then explain the rest in the text. MRSC (talk) 13:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've found the actual date: see

Lee, Charles Edward (1988) [1956]. The Metropolitan District Railway. The Oakwood Library of Railway History (2nd ed.). Headington: Oakwood Press. p. 53. ISBN 0-85361-361-3. OL12.

where it says "On 23 January 1950, various lines which had for some time been controlled by London Transport were formally transferred by the B.T.C. from the jurisdiction of the Railway Executive to that of the London Transport Executive. These included the Whitechapel & Bow, the East London line ...".

It seems that the W&B was promoted independently, but was always controlled jointly (by the District and the LTSR, or their successors). --Redrose64 (talk) 13:37, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Here is the relevant public announcement:

Edinburgh Gazette [1].
London Gazette [2] [3]

Although carrying the date 27 January 1950. MRSC (talk) 15:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting that they needed two instruments - one to revoke the powers delegated to the Railway Executive, and one to delegate the same powers to the LTE. Regarding the date - the London Gazette wasn't published daily in those days (I think it was Tuesdays and Fridays), and (then as now) only published information after the event, as a formal record of what had been done (this still happens: the National Assembly for Wales (Official Languages) Act 2012 received Royal Assent on 12 November 2012 (it came into force "on the day after it receives Royal Assent" according to section 3b of the Act); but wasn't published in the LG until 16 November). --Redrose64 (talk) 16:02, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

end of section copied from User talk:MRSC