line to Carlisle, there linking up with whatever English railway might reach that city. The line into Ayrshire received the royal assent on 15 July 1837, and was called the Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock and Ayr Railway (GPK&AR). The company's first shareholders' meeting (while the line was still under construction) was told that "the Glasgow & Ayrshire Railway (GPK&AR) will at no very distant period form part of the great trunk line to England". The GPK&AR opened its line to Ayr in 1840, and to Kilmarnock on 4 April 1843. However the process of construction had been difficult, and getting money from subscribers had proved difficult due to the tight financial conditions prevailing; moreover other priorities arose for the company, in particular the building of branches in Ayrshire for tactical reasons: to discourage rival companies from entering the area that the GPK&AR considered its own. Accordingly, the idea of the GPK&AR extending to Carlisle took a lower priority. It was not only the GPK&AR who considered making a trunk line southwards: a strong body of opinion considered that a route directly over the hills of the Southern Uplands was superior, with a shorter mileage. This became known as the proposed Annandale route to Carlisle, but Kilmarnock was not an ideal starting point to go that way. The GPK&AR's supporters intended a line from Kilmarnock via Dumfries, and this was the proposed Nithsdale route. Although longer, this had much easier gradients—at the time engine power was considered to be inadequate for a hillier route—and would go through more populous districts, bringing in more intermediate business; in addition it would be cheaper to build. Meanwhile, many people supported an east coast route that would reach England from Edinburgh by way of Dunbar and Berwick. Controversy over routes On 15 March 1841 a report on the relative merits of the routes was submitted by two commissioners appointed by Parliament, Professor Peter Barlow (of the Royal Military Academy at Woolwich) and Sir Frederick Smith, the first Inspector-General of Railways for the Board of Trade. There were sixteen variations of proposed route; the Commissioners were frustrated that "the information supplied to us [by the respective promoters] has been very incomplete" and in fact they were unable to get detailed figures of costs and possible income for the Nithsdale route. The commissioners took the view that only one Anglo-Scottish line was viable: "We are led to believe