雅思阅读thelondon undergeound rail

时间:2023-12-14 21:24:10 阅读: 最新文章 文档下载
说明:文章内容仅供预览,部分内容可能不全。下载后的文档,内容与下面显示的完全一致。下载之前请确认下面内容是否您想要的,是否完整无缺。
雅思阅读thelondon undergeound rail

In the first half of the 1800s, London's population grew at an astonishing rate, and the central area became increasingly

congested. In addition, the expansion of the overground railway network resulted in more and more passengers arriving in the capital. However, in 1846,a Roya Commission decided that the railways should not be allowed to enter the City,the capital's historic and business centre. The result was that the overground railway stations formed a ring around the City.The area within

consisted of poorly built, overcrowded slums and the streets were full of horse-drawn traffic. Crossing the City became a nightmare. It could take an hour and a half to travel 8 km by horse-drawn carriage or bus. Numerous schemes were proposed to resolve these problems, but few succeeded.

Amongst the most vocal advocates for a solution to London's traffic problems was Charles Pearson,who worked as a solicitor for the city of London. He saw both sociaand economic advantages in building an underground railway that would link the overground railway stations together and clear London slums at the same time His idea was to relocate the poor workers who


lived in the inner- city slums to newly constructed suburbs, and to provide cheap rai travel for them to get to work. Pearson's ideas gained support amongst some businessmen and in 1851 he submitted a plan to Parliament. It was rejected, but coincided with a proposal from another group for an underground connecting line,which Parliament passed.

The two groups merged and established the Metropolitan Railway Company in August 1854.The company's plan was to construct an underground railway line from the Great Western Railway's(GWR) station at Paddington to the edge of the City at Farringdon Street- a distance of almost 5 km. The organisation had difficulty in raising the funding for such a radical and expensive scheme, not least because of the critical articles printed by the press.Objectors

argued that the tunnels would collapse under the weight of traffic overhead, buildings would be shaken and passengers would be poisoned by the emissions from the train engines.However Pearson and his partners persisted.


本文来源:https://www.wddqw.com/doc/b6b2319c53e2524de518964bcf84b9d528ea2ca2.html