University of Warwick institutional repository: http://go.warwick.ac.uk ...

262«
members of the Mackinnon family
himself contributing £5,, 000,
(9)
. and. their friends
i 'k c1 innon
The lack of widespread support# ecpocially. for Biohop
Tucker1a fund may have been partly du*' to come disapproval
by C, H. S cupportorc,, of the Socioty'c connections with'
the Cocapony, A Norfolk clergyman wrote "I an deeply rriovod
to coo the dear old ship drifting from har ancient ooorifEa
into troubled coac in which rcckc and ahoalo abound on
every cide.. A. I shall think it a gracious intcrpooition
of Providence if the extraordinary appeal for funds =Soto
with little response. " (2)
There were still some
niuuionary nupportern who thought that tho Di3Cionar1 iat
cuccoed due to hin own ottortc, without zid$ anpcciall. y
military aids from Cpmpaniea or Govorn ont.
By February 1892, attontion had attune to the
propoood ßovornmant grant of 920,000 for a purvey or tlio
line of the fla bann Victoria railway, which wan debated in
the Rouse of ßo=onn in 2larch; the railway Survey vote
pauovd by 211 to 23 in a thin fouue, but it was doubtful it
any more money would be obtained. The Company doairod a
(1) Iii, Mackinnon to flutchinson# 18th Docorbor 1891.
(2) 2hß, W. G. Price to Hutchinson, 2nd January 1892,