Railways Act 1921
||This article needs additional citations for verification. (September 2008)|
Parliament of the United Kingdom
|Long title||An Act to provide for the reorganisation and further regulation of Railways and the discharge of liabilities arising in connection with the possession of Railways, and otherwise to amend the Law relating to Railways, and to extend the duration of the Rates Advisory Committee.|
|Introduced by||Eric Geddes|
|Territorial extent||Great Britain|
|Royal Assent||19 August 1921|
|Commencement||1 January 1923|
|Text of statute as originally enacted|
|Revised text of statute as amended|
The Railways Act 1921, also known as the Grouping Act, was an Act of Parliament enacted by the British government of David Lloyd George intended to stem the losses being made by many of the country's 120 railway companies, move the railways away from internal competition, and to retain some of the benefits which the country had derived from a Government-controlled railway during and after the Great War of 1914-1918.
Background history 
The British railway system had been built up by more than 100 railway companies, large and small, and often, particularly locally, in competition with each other. The parallel railways of the East Midlands and the rivalry between the South Eastern Railway and the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway at Hastings were two examples of such local competition.
During World War I the railways were under State control, which continued until 1921. Complete nationalisation had been considered, and the 1921 Act is sometimes considered as a precursor to that, but the concept was rejected; nationalisation was subsequently carried out after World War II, under the Transport Act 1947.
The final Act largely followed proposals set out in a June 1920 White Paper, Outline of Proposals as to the Future Organisation of Transport Undertakings in Great Britain and their Relation to the State.
Aims of the Act 
After consideration of the Railways Bill it was decided that the Scottish companies, originally destined to be a separate group, would be included with the Midland/North Western and Eastern groups respectively, in order that the three main Anglo-Scottish trunk routes should each be owned by one company for its full length: the West Coast Main Line and the Midland Main Line by the former group, and the East Coast Main Line by the latter.
The opening paragraph of the Railways Act of 1921 states:
With a view to the reorganisation and more efficient and economical working of the railway system of Great Britain railways shall be formed into groups in accordance with the provisions of this Act, and the principal railway companies in each group shall be amalgamated, and other companies absorbed in manner provided by this Act.
The Act took effect on 1 January 1923. By that date most of the mergers had taken place, some from the previous year. The Railway Magazine in its issue of February 1923 dubbed the new companies as "The Big Four of the New Railway Era".
These "Big Four" were:
- London, Midland and Scottish Railway (LMS)
- Great Western Railway (GWR)
- London and North Eastern Railway (LNER)
- Southern Railway (SR)
See also a list of railway companies involved in the 1923 grouping.
Lines outside of the Act 
A number of lines remained outside the Big Four. Some of these had been, and continued to be, operated as joint railways. Examples include the Midland and Great Northern Joint Railway (M&GN) between the LMS and the LNER in eastern England, the largest of the joint railways in terms of route mileage. The largest in terms of both passenger and freight traffic was the Cheshire Lines Committee, also LMS/LNER with operations in Lancashire and Cheshire. The third major joint line was the Somerset and Dorset Joint Railway (S&DJR) between the LMS and the SR in south-western England, perhaps the most famous of the joint railways.
The London suburban railway companies, such as the Metropolitan Railway, were also excluded.
Other exempted railways were light railways authorised under the Light Railways Act 1896, and similar lines; although some such lines still chose to join the Groups. Those lines staying independent were principally those under the influence of Colonel Stephens, who had been instrumental in securing the necessary exemption.
||This article includes a list of references, but its sources remain unclear because it has insufficient inline citations. (September 2008)|
- "1920-08-03". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) (Hansard). col. 711–713. 1920-08-03. Retrieved 2009-07-18
- Dyckhoff 1999, p. 7