Tales from the Waterwitch - 50th anniversary

TALES FROM THE

WATERWITCH Volume 1

Special Edition

WATERWITCH MAGAZINE OF THE LANCASTER CANAL TRUST

The Lancaster Canal Trust (Registered Charity No.24O957 Affiliated to the Inland Waterways Association Ltd.)

http://www.lancastercanaltrust.org.uk/

Revisit some of the more interesting tales and articles from old copies of our own very long running Trust Magazine

PREFACE There was a mound of old Trust papers and records ‗filed‘ away over the years; moved from storage place to storage place and finally finishing up in our new depot at Millness.

As secretary I volunteered to sort through this paperwork and try to get it some sort of order.

In one bag I discovered several dozen old Waterwitch Magazines.

They started at issue 13 ( Autumn 1970 ) and ,with several missing editions along the way, finished at Edition 68 (Spring 1984 ) .

As present editor of the current version of Waterwitch I was naturally very keen to see what went on some 25 to 40 years ago.

In those times, the magazine was produced the good old fashioned way. It was all typed onto the wax master sheets and then run off on a duplicator. Any mistakes had to use that horrible red correcting fluid and then retyped. The paper was very rough and absorbent by modern day standards and of course no pictures. The front covers were crudely drawn with probably a stylus pen such as you used to sign your name.

How far have we come today when the whole crisp full coloured editions are now loaded onto a pen drive on your key ring and taken to the printer?

The Waterwitch of the 70‘s seemed much more confrontational about almost everything and had regular contributors such as Lancastrian'; Along the Towpath by ‗Canalsider‘; Book reviews and Greenways Grommets; Waterwitch Waterwatch to name just a few.

All organisations were fair game and BW; the government, the local council, anglers, linear mooring are just some of the issues often arousing constant and quite passionate letters and replied over a period of time. Thank goodness we are more mellow now.

(Continued on page 3)

2

CONTENTS

Page

OFFICIAL OPENING OF THE LANCASTER CANAL

4

BUILDING THE LANCASTER CANAL

6

A LIFETIME SPENT WORKING FOR THE LANCASTER CANAL COMPANY

18

SAILING THROUGH THE MOUNTAINS OF GARSTANG

20

AVENHAM INCLINE ACCIDENT

21

SHELAGH'S LAST TRIP

22

GLASSON DOCK & THURNHAM MILL

23

FAIRY TALE CASTLES . . . ?

24

BIG JOHN - A KING OF THE WATERWAY

28

THE LAST BOAT TO LANCASTER

30

SIR GEORGE HEAD'S TRIP FROM PRESTON TO KENDAL 32 THE BRIDGES OF THE LANCASTER CANAL BETWEEN THE RIBBLE AND THE LUNE

37

THE FLORA & FAUNA ALONG THE NORTHERN REACHES

56

CANAL SIDE EFFECTS

61

PROBLEM CORNER

62

THE LANCASTER CANAL TRAMROAD

63

LANCASTER CANAL TRUST EXCURSIONS 1967

74

HINCASTER BRICK MYSTERY SOLVED

77

(Continued from page 2)

But amongst all these items there appeared every so often an article or series of articles which dealt with more historical matters associated with the Lancaster Canal and so are just as valid today as when written.

These have been scanned and reproduced verbatim, plus the addition of a few illustrations to give some visual dimensions where possible. We hope you find them an interesting read. Where are the editions since 68 I wonder? DC 3

39

OFFICIAL OPENING OF THE LANCASTER CANAL 22 NOV. 1797.

Extract Waterwitch No. 39 Autumn 1977

The

first part of the Lancaster Canal to be opened to traffic was the section from Preston to Tewitfield - ironically this, with the addition of the Glasson arm, is all we have left at the present time.

The company decided the opening of the canal should be done in style and their original notes on the proposed arrangements are re-produced below.

In these notes reference is made to the "most respectable" persons in Lancaster. One wonders what the reaction of the "less respectable" persons would have been had they had sight of the notes at the time !

OPENING THE CANAL The Committee meet at the Office at 9.30 and to proceed from thence accompanied with colours and music to the canal bridge in the Fryerage where the boats will be placed ready to receive them in the following order.

Committee Barge. Leeds & Liverpool Committee and the most respectable of the Land Owners The "Bee" to be fitted up for the particular friends of the committee and the most respectable persons in Lancaster.

The "Ceres" - do Two of the trading boats belonging to the Canal Company and the "Elephant" to be fitted up for the Proprietors in General and to follow in order. The other trading boat (the best of the three) to be sent for Limestone and to be at Halton Basin the preceding evening. The "Ant" loaden with Coal and Cannel will be at Galgate the preceding evening) A few guns to be planted upon the rubbish heap on the Moor. A signal gun to be fired at half past nine.

The music to be placed in the second boat (the "Bee") and a Salute of guns to be fired when the Committee take the Barge, the whole to move in order to the northward and as soon as the Committee Barge enters the Aqueduct a Salute of guns.

If the day is favourable the Company may step out to take a view of the Aqueduct while the Boats are turning the order of returning to continue the same, except that the Limestone Boat must proceed next to the Committee Barge and the music get into that Boat from the Aqueduct, the procession returns southwards as far as convenient, say to Galgate where the Boat loaded with Coal meets them and leaving the boat loaded with limestone the Coal boat returns in its place and the same order is continued by the other boats. As soon as the Committee land at the Basins the Salute is repeated. The procession then (Continued on page 5)

4

(Continued from page 4)

moves preceded by colours and music the Company's flag being carried the last, after which the Lancaster Canal & Leeds and Liverpool Canal Committee walk 4 in line after them the Engineers etc, proceeding down Penny Street, up Church Street over the Castle Hill to Market Street and adjourn to dine.

Volunteers parade on Wednesday morning at 8.45a.m on 22nd November, 1797 Proceed to the Fryerage to meet the Canal Committee. When the Committee take their boat a Volley. The Light Infantry to take the Bow of the Boat. Second company in the midships, and the Grenadiers the stern with the Colours. 3 volleys at the New Bridge (Aqueduct), 3 volleys on meeting the coal boat, 1 volley on landing. Then to parade down Queen Street, Back Lane, Common Garden Street, Penny Street, Padding Lane, Church Street, Castle Hill and Market Street. To go round the Market Place and form at the front of the Town Hall, where the volunteers fire a feu de joie.

Altogether the arrangements must have provided the citizens of Lancaster with a colourful spectacle, and no doubt the guests enjoyed the "cold collation" aboard the boats, thoughtfully provided by the committee.

And in Kendal in 1820...........

The following report in the local paper said: “The Kendal and Lancaster Canal opened for navigation yesterday. All business was suspended, the shops were closed, flags were hoisted, and the bells rung. A procession of packets from Kendal met a procession from Lancaster at Crooklands, and the combined procession of sixteen boats and packets proceeded to Kendal.

The proceedings included a dinner at the Town Hall, to which 120 sat down. There was a very numerous list of toasts, some of which read rather strangely now. [c.

1865.] For instance, Mr Mayor [John Pearson] gave 'A bottle at night and business in the morning', T. Wilson, Esq., gave „The Bonny Lasses of Westmorland‟ „Old wine and young women‟, and the concluding toast was 'Champagne to our real friends, and real pain to our sham friends‟. A ball in the evening terminated the festivities of the day.” Local Chronology (a collection of excerpts from the local press). Kendal, 1865, p.

35.

5

BUILDING THE LANCASTER CANAL Extract from Waterwitch Editions 28,29,30, 1975

On

27th April, 1916, John F. Curwen, F.S.A. ,- F.R.I.B.A., gave a paper to the Cumberland & Westmorland Antiquarian & Archaeological Society, at Carlisle, entitled "The Lancaster Canal." It was based on documents and records kept by the then owner of the canal, the London & North Western Railway company, at Castle Station, Lancaster, where the canal superintendent held his office. The records are now housed in the Public Record Office in London. Mr Curwen' s paper was subsequently published in the Society's Transactions, Vol XVI 1 (new series), 1917-17 from which the following and subsequent extracts are taken.

The Lancaster Canal When London, the largest city in Europe, possessed no public docks upon her river, when heavily laden coaches lumbered along the thinly inhabited suburbs of the West End to the outlying villages of Chelsea, Kensington, Marylebone and Bermondsey, when the roads of the country were reckoned the worst in Europe, over which it was impossible for wheeled traffic to travel at a greater speed than four miles per hour and when everything had to be carried by pack-horses - then the businessmen of Lancaster and Kendal were seeking for some easier method of conveying their merchandise and of obtaining their needs.

With the exception of the main road from Lancaster and perhaps the cross road via Ambleside to Cockermouth, the lines of transit in this part of the country were little better than pack-horse tracks, which were abandoned for fresh ones when through depth of mud they became impassable. Even when in later years it was attempted to adapt them for wagon traffic, they were little improved; for stones were just thrown loosely into the larger holes, over which the wheels were supposed to jolt, only to find themselves buried the deeper in the mud beyond.

We have a glimpse of the conditions of our main road south at this period (1768), given by Arthur Young in his "Tour", who "most seriously cautioned travellers who may accidentally purpose to travel this terrible country to avoid it as they would the devil, for a thousand to one but they break their necks or limbs by overthrows or breaking down . . . between ―Proud Preston‖ and Wigan I actually measured ruts of four feet deep, floating with mud and passed three carts broken down in those eighteen miles of execrable memory. In winter he says "it would have cost no more money to make roads navigable, then to make them hard!"

There can be no doubt that it was owing to the wretched condition of the roads, as also to the limited amount of burden that could be placed on a pack horse, that the conception of inland water carriage was due. The lesson had been learnt from the sea. It was much easier and actually cheaper to bring foreign goods to Lancaster, Milnthorpe or Whitehaven than to bring English goods by land from Wigan, Manchester, or Birmingham, Only some ten years before our promoters were at work the Duke of Bridgewater was engaged upon England's first modern canal. So behind were we in engineering skill that his Grace had to employ a workman of the poorest origin to survey and scheme cut the course. James Brindley, the wheelwright of (Continued on page 7)

6

(Continued from page 6)

Sutton, near Macclesfield, could scarcely sign his name; he certainly could not write, and yet he was a man so endowed with common sense and ingenuity that he was already looked upon as a clever constructor of water mills.

And so to James Brindley the seekers went, only to find, unfortunately, that his life's work was nearly done. It is recorded that he commenced the survey himself but owing to ill health, the task had to be relinquished to his pupil. I have recently been presented with a plan of this survey, inscribed "A plan of the intended Navigable Canal near Eccleston in the County Palatine of Lancaster to Kendal in Westmorland surveyed by Robert Whitworth, engraved by Thomas Jefferys, Geographer to His Majesty, 1772." From it we find that at first it was suggested to cut the line from Eccleston via Longton to Penwortham in order to cross the Ribble, and from thence trailing westward nearly as far as Kirkham, back again to Plumpton, and so along northward passing to the west of Garstang, Lancaster and Borwick, to a place called 'Tewitfield', a total distance of 551/2 miles.

As this line-was attended with some difficulties, Whitworth was asked to try a higher line, which he did by taking a shorter bend westward and by locking up 24 feet at Sidgreave. From thence he took a course to Salwick Hall, eastward again to Hough and so along northward, passing to the east this time of Garstang and Lancaster and with a long hairpin bend nearly to Halton, onward to Tewitfield, a total distance of 55 1/2 miles which, as he observed "notwithstanding the 24 feet rise, is the easier and better line," Entering the hill country, Whitworth found it necessary to rise very suddenly, from the first rise line 86feet, or from the second line 62 feet. From the head a level course of 161/4 was taken via Holme, Farleton, Crooklands and the Hincaster Tunnel to Nether Bridge at Kendal on very much the same line as the Canal exists today. One cannot but pause with admiration at the cleaver way in which this survey was made, and that without the aid our modern scientific instruments.

For one reason or another however, the Committee were not satisfied, and so sought further advice from different people hoping for an improvement on Whitworth's higher line.

Several years later, when Samuel Gregson published a printed letter to the committee (30 1.1792), he reviewed the history of these long negotiations, stating how they had tried various plans for crossing the Lune, one of which was by taking a line as far up as Halton Scars, but that each surveyor had come to the conclusion that it was necessary to drop to the same level as Whitworth proposed; in like manner how various lines had been tried on either side of Preston to cross over the Ribble.

The chief objection taken to the scheme, however, appears to have been that the course did not extend south enough to tap the coalfields around Wigan.

During, this delay (1785) one enthusiast, whilst denouncing in a pamphlet the wretched condition of the roads in such words as "May we all scorn to plod through the dirt as long as we have done", writes "A lime stone and a coal country ought to have a communication with each other, as both those articles are necessary for the convenience of life, the demand for them will always subsist and pay more tonnage than every other article that may be navigated upon a canal.

No definite advancement was made, however, until the 4th June, 1791, when some thirty merchants and traders of Lancaster addressed a letter to the Mayor, setting forth the advantages which their rival, the port of Liverpool, derived from inland navigation and how that it placed them in "so decided a superiority in the vend of their imports as greatly to (Continued on page 8)

7

(Continued from page 7)

diminish the commerce of this town of Lancaster ... unless some means can be found to meet them in the market upon more equal term." The letter concludes with a request that the Mayor will convene a public meeting to consider the several surveys. There can be little doubt that young Rennie was selected engineer at this meeting. It is no small thing to realise that upon our Canal the promoters not only consulted and secured the services of Brindley but also of Rennie, a man who, in later days made his name famous when he carried the Rochdale and Todmorden Canal right over the backbone of England, and even more so when he erected the wondrous breakwater at Plymouth, Rennie's survey bears the following inscription ―Plan of the proposed Lancaster Canal from Kirkby Kendal in the County of Westmorland and to Westhoughton in the County Palatine of Lancaster; Surveyed in the years 1791 and 1792 by John Rennie, Engineer. Engraved by W Faden, Geographer to the King 1792‖.

In this scheme the suggestion was accepted to tap the coalfields of Wigan, and thus make the canal of twice the value to the districts along its banks, The cutting was to form a level distance of 15 1/2- miles to a place called Clayton Green, thence to lock down 222 feet on to an embankment and aqueduct across the Ribble. From Preston it was suggested to follow the second line of Whitworth's plan as far as the Calder river where Rennie desired a branch round the north side of Greenhalgh Castle to the village of Garstang, and so, by an aqueduct over the river Wyre, northward to join the line again at Cabus Hook, and thence through a remarkable deep cutting at Ashton, near Lancaster, with slight variation to Tewitfield - a level distance of some 421/2 miles. Here there was to be a branch cut (21/2 miles) to the foot of Warton Crag for the sake of tapping the limestone of the district.

In order to shorten the course through Westmorland, Rennie struck a line across the mosses rising by five locks at Dale House and Holmer Hall and from thence via Hilderstone, MossSide, to Hang Bridge.

With four more locks he made direct to Hincaster, a distance of 9 miles and rising in all 65 feet. To approach the gunpowder works at Sedgwick it seemed still necessary to tunnel beneath Hincaster Hill, after which a level course of 5 miles completed the line as a canal. An additional mile was struck to the River Mint, opposite Mint House, as a feeder, a total length of 751/2 miles with a fall of 222 feet from the south and 65 feet from the north. It was intended to place a canal head at Kendal just south of Nether Bridge, but the enlightened Corporation of the time came forward and offered to build at their own expense the necessary warehouses and wharves, together with a stone bridge across the Kent, in place of the ancient Miller Bridge, if the company would continue the length more into the centre of the town.

The scheme soon developed. A general meeting was held at the Town Hall, Lancaster, on the 7th February, 1792, at which it was resolved unanimously to form a subscription list for obtaining an Act of Parliament to carry it into execution, and for defraying all expenses necessary for completing the same. It is said that before the meeting terminated £247,000 had been promised, a sum which was increased to £370,500 before the end of the month, the town of Lancaster providing an overwhelming proportion.

The first Act was obtained on the 25th June, 1772, as follows; "WHEREAS the making and maintaining of a Navigable Canal from the town of Kirkby Kendal, in the county of Westmorland to the township of Westhoughton, at a place called Westhoughton Chapel, in the County of Lancaster and also the making of two navigable cuts or branches, one from a place at or near Borwick Hall, to or near Croston by Chorley, to or near Duxbury, in the parish of Standish both in the said county of Lancaster j will not only be of considerable advantage to the lands and estates in the neighbourhood thereof, by making a communication from the inexhaustible quantities of limestone at the northern end thereof, of both which articles all the intermediate country is greatly in want, but also by uniting the Port of Lancaster with so large a tract of inland country. . . . wherefore for obtaining and perfecting the good effects and purposes aforesaid it may please your Majesty. . . etc."

From Section 3 the Act makes it clear that it was not then the intention of ―the Company of Proprietors of the Lancaster Canal Navigation‖ to join up with the Leeds and Liverpool Canal, which had not been built at this time, but rather to cross over it at Westhoughton.

Section 7 grants permission to the Company to take a feeder from the river Mint at a certain place called Mints Feet, taking in at the most convenient place the Stockbridge Brook and to make the same to join the said intended canal, at a certain place at Kirkby Kendal aforesaid, called Yeanum. [Aynam]" ―Provided always that not more than one half of the water of the said rivers be taken; and that the mill owners upon (Continued on page 9)

8

(Continued from page 8)

their banks may draw, if necessary, water from the canal for the use and working of their mills so that the head of water in the said canal be not thereby reduced more than 2 feet, nor to a less depth than 5 feet.‖ Sections 62 and 64 grant the proprietors power to raise and contribute among themselves a competent sum of money to carry on so useful an undertaking provided that the said sum does not exceed £414, 000 to be divided into shares of £100 each, and that £60,000 thereof be applied solely to the Westmorland section. Permission was also given to borrow an additional sum not exceeding £200,000, With such powers no time was lost in getting to work and the first meeting of the proprietors was held on 3rd January 1792, when John Dilworth was elected Chairman of the company. In the following year a second act was obtained, granting permission to make another branch from Galgate to Glasson Dock, within the port of Lancaster, a distance of 21/2 miles.

In 1794 trouble arose with the Leeds and Liverpool Canal Company who desired to make a deviation from their plan and by going southward to take in the Douglas Valley, circle round the south of Wigan, turning northward to run in a parallel line beside and above the Lancaster Canal to its prejudice and detriment. In their answer as opponents to the Leeds and Liverpool Bill the Lancaster Canal Company prepared a plan not only showing the deviation complained of, but - what is more interesting to us - an intended extension of their own line from Westhoughton to Worsley in order to form a junction with the Bridgewater Bridge building Canal.

Three years after the first Act was obtained, on 30th August, 1795, the Company published their first detailed report in which we find the committee intended to confine their energies at first to two separate portions viz: one from the-limestone country at Tewitfield to Preston, and the other from the coal and cannel country in the neighbourhood of Bark Hill, near Wigan, to Clayton Green, 5 miles south of Preston; thus deferring the difficult sections caused by lockage from Tewitfield to Kendal, and from Clayton Green to the Ribble, with the necessary embankments and aqueduct across the river to Preston. Of the work in progress the committee report as follows: Section 1 From Tewitfield to Ellel Grange (17 miles) it is hoped to complete within two years. The aqueduct over the Keer is up to the spring of the arch; that over the Lune "the greatest piece of work of its kind in this Kingdom" is likewise up to the spring of the arches; the road aqueduct at Bulk is completed; the arch of the aqueduct of the Conder is turned; and a number of road and occupation bridges, culverts and other pieces of masonry are in great forwardness".

Section 2 From Ellel Grange to the river Calder (10 miles) may be completed within 16 months. The Cocker aqueduct is of, small dimensions, and for the one over the Wyre - consisting of one arch of 54 feet span - the materials are preparing.

Section 3 From the Calder to Myerscough Wood (3 miles) may be completed within 18 months. The materials for the aqueducts over the Calder and Brock are in great forwardness and the arches of three of the other bridges have been turned.

From here nothing seems to have been done until we get to Limbrick Beck near Chorley, "from whence section 4 carries the line to Bark Hill (7 miles) which it is hoped will be completed shortly. The aqueduct of the Limbrick, Baganley and Lostock - as over the river Douglas consisting of one arch of 40 feet span are nearly finished." Truly a fair record for three years work at a cost of £149,920.

How far Rennie himself was responsible for the carrying out of the work, it is not easy to determine, but (Continued on page 14)

9

(Continued from page 33)

the Water Witch had completed the whole ascent. On this occasion a couple of ladies, with their gawky footboy, very narrowly escaped a serious ducking; being exclusives, they preferred remaining on board to accompanying the herd of passengers ashore, while the boat was mounting; during one of which feats the Water Witch herself had well nigh been smashed. Notwithstanding the skill of the postilion, who in ordinary cases no sooner managed to get his vessel clear of one lock, than he towed her forwards in a smart canter about a hundred yards along the intervening space to the next, the catastrophe aforesaid was with difficulty prevented.

The Water Witch had entered the lock with considerable impetus; the horses, as usual, were speedily detached, and a rope was thrown ashore. The man on shore giving the rope a turn round a short post on the bank of the canal, then applied his strength to check the way of the boat, but by misadventure it slipped over the head of the post, the Water Witch meanwhile making headway, and dragging the man along the bank towards the head of the lock. He on shore, a sturdy little man, held on like a. bull dog, nevertheless, the boat overpowered him, and collision within a few seconds appeared inevitable; at this crisis another individual very sensibly threw his weight into the balance; yet both together handing upon the rope, and straining with all their might, notwithstanding their utmost exertions, were hardly able to restrain the vessel from striking with tremendous force against the inner gates of the lock.

The above circumstances refer to the only point of management regarding these boats, as to which a little additional precaution seems necessary. While underway, and with an impetus upon them, they have no other means of stopping suddenly than the aforesaid mode of throwing a rope ashore; notwithstanding it happens not infrequently that barges are encountered unawares, either at the bendings of the canal, or on passing through bridges. On more occasions than one during the passage, the Water Witch ran bump on shore, with a momentum neither agreeable to the passengers nor profitable to her owners.

(Taken from "A Home Tour Through the Manufacturing Districts of England in the Summer of 1835" by Sir George Head. First published 1836. Re-published 1968 by Frank Cass and Company. Available through Lancashire County Library Inter Lending Scheme. Ed.)

Notes from a meeting in 1834 on he operation of the Fast Boats.....

AT a General Meeting of the Company of Proprietors of the Lancaster CANAL NAVIGATION held at the Canal Office, in Lancaster, on Tuesday fourth of February, 1834 WILLIAM DILLWORTH CREWDSON, Esquire, in the Chair.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE. The Accounts for the year have been examined with the vouchers and found correct and abstracts are laid before you.

The Tonnage duties have improved during each Quarter upon the amount of the former year— and the disbursements have been very considerably diminished.

Mortgages to the amount of £5000 have been paid off, as directed by the last Annual Meeting and your Committee propose the further sum of £5000 to be paid off during the current year; and so that the sum of £1900, part of the surplus Fund advanced towards the completion of the Glasson Branch, now forming part of the debt, and for which Interest continues to lie charged, be extinguished. The Balance at the credit of the Tonnage Account on the 31st December last, was £17,424 16s. 11di from which your Committee recommend a Dividend of One Pound per Share, to be paid on the fifth day of April next, Your Committee have much satisfaction in reporting the complete success of the experiment with the quick sailing Passage Boat. Near the end of March last this Boat commenced sailing between Lancaster and (Continued on page 34)

10

11

12

Curwen circa 1900

13

Surveyed by Robert Whitworth Engraved by Thomas Jefferys Geographer to his MAJESTY 1772

(Continued from page 9)

by the year 1796^ it would seem that a Thomas Fletcher was engineer to the Company, and engaged upon planning out the Westmorland section. The scheme for extending the line to Kendal was shelved at this time for the company seem to have been at their lowest ebb of depression. Although it was reported that the two southern portions would be completed before the end of the year, the company had to face the fact that by the time their full resources of £85 per share as £15 per share was reserved by Act for the construction of the Canal in Westmorland.

According to expectation the portion from Preston to Tewitfield was completed by 1st November, and three weeks afterwards the traders of Lancaster, notwithstanding the financial difficulties, indulged in quite an aquatic ceremony and toasted the magnificent aqueduct over the Lune which alone seems to have swallowed up all of £48,000.

On the north east side of the aqueduct is inscribed ―To Public Prosperity‖ on the South West sides ―Quae deerant adeunt; sociantur dissita; merces Flumina conveniunt arte datura novas. A.D.MDCCXCVLL. ING.J.RENNIE. EXTRDX. A STEVENS P. ET. F.‖ Translation: ―Old needs are served; far distant sites combined; Rivers by Art to bring new wealth are joined. A.D.1797 J. Rennie, Engineer, A. Stevens & Sons, Contractors.‖ Rennie was great on bridges - Waterloo Bridge, London Bridge, and. Southwark Bridge were all of his design. This bridge was 600 feet in length, formed of five semi-circular arches, each of 70 foot span;° it carried the surface of the canal 62 feet above the average level of the river, or 70 feet above the sea level.

An abstract of the balance sheet for the first 6 years is instructive: ON THE LANCASTER LEVEL Land etc.

42,604 17s l1/2d General Expenditure 178,158 11 2 Lune aqueduct 320 18 10 Hydraulic Pozzolano earth from Italy 321 8 9 269,405 15 11/2 ON THE WIGAN LEVEL Land etc.

5,760 1 6 General expenditure 55,416 16 31/2 61,176 17 91/2 Application to parliament 6,327 1 2 Salaries, fees etc.

16,341 11 9 Quarrying, boat building & interest to proprietors 29,314 3 5 £51,892 16 4 GRAND TOTAL: 382,565 10 0 By the year 1799 William Cartwright was engineer to the Company and on 1st November, 1799 the committee issued a report of his survey for the best method of connecting the northern with the southern portion of the canal. He says ―Your south level is intended to terminate at Clayton Green being the most northern point which will admit of that level being carried on before the general fall to a vale of the Ribble commences. This part of your canal is complete from Bark Hill to Johnsons Hillock (12 miles) the remaining part to Clayton Green (3 miles) has the chief part of the masonry and part of the cutting already done upon which £8,000 has been expended. Prom want of some connection between the two levels both sections suffer so that even the town of Preston cannot be supplied direct with coal 2 Cartwright estimated the cost of the original plan of locking down 222 feet and crossing the Ribble by an aqueduct at £180,945 Conceiving that a simpler method might be found he continues ―I have turned my (Continued on page 15)

14

(Continued from page 14)

thoughts therefore .to the forming of a junction, by means of a double wagon-way, that is, the ascending wagons to have one road and the descending wagons to have another road . . . erecting steam engines by the aid of which the wagons will be lowered and raised . . . and to cross the Ribble with a substantial wooden bridge. . . . making a similar inclined plane on the northern side of the river to a proposed basin at Preston with a short length of waterway to the present waterway at Spital Moss.‖ Estimated cost: £60,000.

To carry some such scheme into effect and to pay off the debts of the company the committee once more applied to Parliament and on 20th June, 1800 obtained the fourth Act, granting them power to raise £200,000 by additional shares.

A Mr Monk now came forward with an alternative scheme, suggesting that the Douglas Navigation should be continued from Rufford via Tarleton Bridge, Bank Hall and, skirting the marshes to Penwortham, lock down to Work on the Lune the Ribble. With these Aqueduct conflicting views it would appear the proprietors then went back to their first engineer, asking John Rennie and William Jessop Esq., to survey and adjudicate upon the schemes. Their report was presented to the General meeting on 7th July, 1801, in which they say: "We are still of the opinion that an embankment to the full height of the Lancaster level, and a stone aqueduct will be most advisable, and on estimating the expense of a design which Mr Rennie has made for an aqueduct of 3 arches of 116 feet span each, we have no doubt of its being done for less than £94,979 (i.e. about half Cartwright's estimate). As this sum is not within the extent of the Company's funds at present it will be to the interest of the company that a temporary mode of conveyance should be immediately adopted and we know of none more advisable than by an Iron Railway etc." Cartwright's scheme was evidently adopted for on 4th January, 1803, the committee report that the "Iron Railway is making considerable progress and that 234 yards out of 259 yards in length of the tunnel through Whittle Hills, connecting up with the canal at Johnson's Hillock, are completed.

The engine house on the north bank of the river was situated on the site of the present Belvedere, near the flagstaff, and after the wagons were hauled up, eight or nine of them were formed into a train drawn by horses. The route skirted the edge of Avenham Brow, behind what is now Ribblesdale Place, and thence turning due north crossed under Fisher gate to the wharf.

The first recorded effort for passenger traffic appears to have been made in 1802, when a ―pleasant voyage‖ for the Guild is advertised from Preston to Lancaster with the assurance that ―for safety, economy and comfort no other mode of conveyance could be so eligible as the packet boats; for there the timid might be at ease, and the most delicate mind be without fear.‖ By the year 1805 it is evident that the company were at last considering it about time to do something in Westmorland. On 2nd July a report and survey of the practicability and expense of making a railroad from Tewitfield to Kendal, with an estimate of £38,574 was laid before the meeting.

How far Cartwright was responsible for this suggestion I do not know, but the original plan shows that it was thoroughly worked out with inclined planes for ascending and descending wagons, similar to that over the Ribble. The line was to ascend 70 feet at Tewitfield to rise gradually 10 feet in a fairly straight line to Crooklands and thence east of Lane Hill to Stainton. Following the easiest course it was (Continued on page 16)

15

(Continued from page 15)

again suggested to avoid the gunpowder works by continuing the line on Fletcher's plan to the east of Stainton Hill, where ascending 40 feet by another inclined plane it reached its highest level to descend gradually 13 feet to Natland and by a third inclined plane to-descend rapidly 32 feet to Natland Mill and so onward to Kendal 75 feet above the canal at Tewitfield.

The gunpowder influence, however, appears to have been too strong against the scheme, so that we find on 7th January, 1806 a report and survey for making a navigable canal, 27 feet wide at the top and of 41/2 feet depth of water, with an estimate of £71r134 was laid before the meeting and approved in preference to the railroad.

This scheme, which virtually adopts the original Whitworth survey and the one ultimately carried out was designed by William Miller and inscribed, ―A Plan of the intended variation (from Rennie's line) of the Lancaster Canal from the Township of Hutton in the Co. of Lancaster to the Township of Hincaster in the Co, of Westmorland and of the intended railway from the said canal in the Township of Carnforth to Kellet Seeds in the township of Over Kellett both in the said Co. of Lancaster.‖ At the July meeting it was resolved to apply to Parliament for the Act to sanction the Variation, The Bill which received the Royal assent on 13th August 1807 prays for power to vary the line of the canal, at or near a place called Tewitfield to a certain place called ―World‘s End‖ in the Township of Hincaster, and also to make and complete a railway, or road leading from Farleton Knott to communicate with the said variation in a certain close called Kilnhall in the township of Farleton and another railway or road from certain limestone rock at or near a place called Kellett Seeds in the Township of Over Kellett, according to a plan depositedLoading Coal with the Clerks of the Peace for the counties of Westmorland and Cumberland. It repealed the power of the committee to take a feeder from the river Mint and withdrew the stipulation that canal must be 7 feet in depth from ―Yeanam‖ to Hincaster Green.

Eight locks were to raise the level from 70 feet up to 146 feet above the sea level, and the canal was to pass to the East of Holme through Farleton and Crooklands to Stainton Bridge End where it was to turn due west to flow through the Hincaster tunnel of 378 yards in length with the water level 76 feet below the summit of the hill. Finally the canal was to end at Kendal with a basin near the Aynan, and one cannot help being struck with, the very curious coincidence that the northern section commences from Preston at a place called Avenham Walk (pronounced Aynam) beside the confluence of the Swillbrook with the Ribble. At Overborough there is a field now called ―Yannum‖ but formerly ―Eynam‖ which is situated in the angle formed by the confluence of Leek Beck with the Lune, just as the French town of Avignon is situated in a fork between the Rhone and the Durance rivers.

On 7th February 1809, it was resolved "that the committee be directed and authorised to proceed with the execution of that part of the canal between Tewitfield and Kendal. And yet, owing to no doubt to the dark Napoleonic war cloud, four more years elapsed before the committee issued on 18th December 1812, their reasons for continuing the canal to Kendal, as follows; COAL: The quantity of coal at present carted from Tewitfield to Kendal amounts to 7,000 tons per annum, which if conveyed by canal would raise an additional income of £620. To which should be added a possible increase in the consumption of coal by the facility and saving in conveyance; as also an increase in the demand for coal owing to the inclosing of Waste Lands and drain draining of Turbary Grounds, thereby reducing the quantity of turf for fuel; estimate of increased consumption paying Canal Duty the whole length of the line £1,924 COAL SLACK The quantity of slack at present carted from Tewitfield to Kendal amounts to 6,000 tons, which if conveyed by canal would raise an additional income of £175. Estimate of increased (Continued on page 17)

16

(Continued from page 16)

consumption say 3,000 tons paying duty the whole length of the line £400.

SLATE 3,000 tons are stated to be carried annually from Kendal to Yorkshire, and to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal at Gargreave, at an expense of 27/- per ton, a cost of equal to £450. An increase in the trade owing to the saving of at least 14s per ton estimated at £450 4.

MERCHANDISE 6,600 tons, the present quantity, if conveyed by the canal from Tewitfield to Kendal, would raise £1,070, to which should be added an increase of the carrying trade owing to the probable diversion of the coasting trade from Milnthorpe to Lancaster and so along the canal £1,100.

5.

TIMBERS Freestone, Flags, Bricks and Marble estimate £500.

6.

PACKET BOATS Estimate £400 7.

WATER It is further estimated that the water which the locks will bring down may supersede the expense of pumping water at Preston, a saving of say £500. Making a total extra income of £7,589 the committee estimate the expense of construction of the line, which has recently been resurveyed, at £98,095.

Toward the end of 1813 the contract for making Hincaster tunnel was let, and by 6th February, 1816, the committee report that the aqueduct over Stainton Beck and the Moss Lane aqueduct are finished; a considerable quantity of materials are laid down for those over the Crooklands and Farleton Becks; the masonry of one of the locks is completed whilst the others are in a state of forwardness. Difficulty had been found in getting suitable stone for the roofing of the Hincaster Tunnel but that the committee were trying experiments for the manufacture of bricks on the site. On 4th February 1817, it is reported that 2,000,000 bricks had been made and that half the length of the tunnel was completed.

The construction of the line from Hincaster to Kendal was publicly let, on 30th June 1817. Several navvies attended the meeting and afterwards caused considerable riot in the town. The newspapers record the occurrence, and say ―Sound Policy demands that the ruffians should be held up as an example to the unruly multitude which the cutting of the canal will bring to the populous neighbourhood‖ (Westmorland Advertiser - 5th July 1817). And so we pass forward to the 21st November, 1818, when we find that the eight locks were all completed and that "much praise is due to Mr. Fletcher (who succeeded as engineer after the death of Cartwright in 1812) for the plan of these locks and for the manner in which the workmanship has been executed under his immediate control and inspection.

In the last and 6th Act of Parliament we find the company seeking power to raise £270,000 on mortgage of the rates and dues, as having spent all their capital they now found it "expedient and necessary" to make one or more reservoirs in the township of Killington and to utilize the river Beela for conveying water from thence to the cut or feeder already joined up with the canal. The Bill met considerable opposition.

Seal of the Lancaster Canal Corporation 1792 17

LOOKING BACK

38

MR .B. P. GREGSON'S LIFETIME SPENT WORKING FOR THE LANCASTER CANAL COMPANY Extract Waterwitch 38 Summer 1977

On

7th February, l865, the Annual General Meeting of the Lancaster Canal Company was held at the Canal Office in Lancaster. The company was about to be taken over by the London and North Western Railway Company and the Canal Committee had it in mind to reward their long serving secretary, Mr B.P. Gregson, with a cash grant of £4500 - "The committee being deeply impressed with the value of Mr Gregson's Iong and faithful services, extending over a period of more than half a century, unanimously recommend that a sum of £4,500 to be given to him, as some consideration for the zealous attention he has invariably paid to the interests of the Canal Company, and they trust this recommendation will meet with the full approval of the proprietors.... Mr Gregson having presented a statement in detail of the principal duties which have devolved upon him, the committee think it due to him to annex his statement to this report....."

Mr Gregson's statement is reproduced in full below. We hope members will find it of interest.

TO THE LANCASTER CANAL COMMITTEE Gentlemen:As the transfer of the Canal to the London and North Western Railway Company and the Leeds and Liverpool Canal Company involves matters of grave importance to me, I trust I shall not be considered trespassing upon your attention in bringing before you the circumstances of my services during the very extended period of nearly 54 years.

I entered the Company's services in April, 1811, when the canal was incomplete, my father being then the Clerk of the Company, and the following works were subsequently constructed: 1st. The junction with the Leeds/Liverpool Canal with seven locks – open October, l8l6.

2nd The extension to Kendal, 15 miles with 8 locks and a tunnel – opened June, 1819. Also, the construction of a very large reservoir of 150 acres.

3rd The branch to Glasson Dock, the Port of Lancaster, 3 miles with 6 ordinary locks, and a large lock into Glasson Dock to pass vessels of 250 tons register - opened in 1826.

My attention and assistance were given to the construction of all these important and extensive works, and to the settlements with the contractors. No engineer has been employed since the year 1826. I have had the charge and management of the whole of the Canal works, and of the tramroad of 5 miles across the Ribble valley up to the sale thereof to the Bolton and Preston Railway Company - the whole extending over 79 miles ~ together with the management of the traffic and of the general business of the Canal.

In 1836, after several conferences between the Canal committee arid the Directors of the Bolton and (Continued on page 19)

18

(Continued from page 18)

Preston Railway had failed, I succeeded in reopening the negotiation and in arranging of the transfer of the tramroad and of a limited portion of the traffic on the South end of the Canal for an annual rent of £8,000, which was approved by the Committee and carried into effect by Act of Parliament. The result, otherwise, would have been the loss of nearly the whole of that traffic and a considerable outlay in repairs.

This arrangement also secured and improved-the Coal traffic of the North :End by connection with the North Union and Bolton and Preston Railways at Preston.

In l839 the Swift Passenger Boats were established and worked to profit, until the Lancaster and Preston Railway was opened in 1840, and thence maintained a successful opposition to this Railway till September, 1842, when I succeeded in arranging the terms for a lease of the Railway for 21 years. This was confirmed by the Committee and the Canal Company immediately entered into possession of the Railway.

Difficulties arose in consequence of not being able to obtain full powers in an Act, passed in 1843, and the Canal Company's possession of the Railway ceased by arrangement in August, 1849.

The Lancaster and Carlisle Railway was opened in 1846, thus completing continuous line of Railway parallel to the Canal for its entire length, creating increased difficulties and the necessity for the relinquishment of the Lancaster and Preston Railway.

From 1850 to the present Transfer of the Canal, the traffic of the North End has been carried on under mutual arrangements with the Railway Companies from time to time to avoid ruinous competition and the merchandize traffic of the south end under lease at an annual rent.

In 1844, where Terms for the transfer of the north end of the Canal, and of the unexpired lease of the Lancaster and Preston Railway were arranged with the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway Company, the Canal committee presented to me the following resolution, dated 29th November, 1844:―The Committee having taken into consideration the present position of the Canal with reference to the services of Mr B P Gregson, think it due to him to place upon record their deliberate opinion that it has been in a great measure through his unremitting attention to the ordinary management of the Canal, and to his unwearied, care and skill in conducting many difficult negotiations - especially those with the Bolton and Preston, the Lancaster and Preston, and the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway Companies, that the satisfactory arrangements entered into with these Companies have been accomplished - and further, that in consideration of these results and to secure to the Canal Company his future services in a business in which a personal and intimate knowledge is of paramount importance, it is the opinion of the Committee that his present salary should not be diminished so long as he shall continue the management of this concern‖ And in .March, 1846, the Canal Committee passed the following resolution: ―On reviewing the men placed on their books, 29th November, 1844, the committee express their opinion that for the reasons therein stated the salary of £l,000 per annum should be secured to Mr B.P. Gregson for life, as a proof of the high estimation in which his long, faithful, and efficient services are regarded, he engaging to retain the responsibility and management of the Canal Company's affairs."

"Resolved that the requisite steps be taken for carrying the above into effect.‖ I have been spared during nearly nineteen eventful years since that date, and continued my attention to the various complicated interest and concerns of the Canal, and. to the maintenance of its important works.

In 1830, the mortgage debt of the Canal Company was £127,000. Besides the regular payments of dividends to the Proprietors, this debt was gradually reduced by sums from the Tonnage account, to £43,000, and this sum was paid off in 1850 out of the profits derived from the possession of the Lancaster and Preston Railway, In addition, a bonus of £1.17s.6d per share was paid to the proprietors in 1851. The gratifying result of my anxious duties throughout the very long period of upwards of half a century is the security of a permanent dividend of £1.15s per share to the proprietors.

I have endeavoured to explain the principal facts only, for your consideration, and may I be allowed to add that I received no remuneration for the very onerous additional duties of the successful establishment and working of the Swift Packet Boats for 9 years to the extent of 288 miles daily, or for the entire management of the Lancaster and Preston Railway during 7 years, from which a clear profit of (Continued on page 20)

19

(Continued from page 19)

£67,391.7s.6d was derived by the Company, but have persevered in my duties on the faith of the engagement of March, 1846.

Allow me to express my grateful acknowledgments for the uniform confidence ,and support I have at all times received from each member of the committee throughout the very long period of my-service.

Believe me, Gentlemen, Yours very faithfully, B.P. Gregson Lancaster. 23rd January, 1865.

SAILING THROUGH THE MOUNTAINS OF GARSTANG (WITH A PACKET OF CRISPS) Extract from Waterwitch Edition Spring 1978

M

embers may have noticed that the Great Harwood firm of crisp manufacturers XL Crisps, have a canal information series on the back of their packets. The information is apparently supplied by the British Waterways Board. Under the heading ―What do you know about your canals?‖ the following is printed about ours. ―With ingenious routing and impressive aqueducts the Lancaster Canal managed to cover the mountainous sixty miles between Preston and Kendal with only eight locks at Tewitfield. But finance ran out before the River Ribble could be bridged at Preston, and the canal remains isolated from Britain's main network to this day.‖ Mountain spotters on the West Lancashire plain - please note!!

20

AVENHAM INCLINE ACCIDENT

35

Extract Waterwitch Edition 35 September 1976

In

our Spring 1973 issue, we reported the finding of the remains of an old tramroad wagon in the bed of the Ribble close to the Old Tram Bridge in Avenham Park, Preston, and thought to have lain there since an accident on the nearby incline in 1826 which was widely reported in the local newspapers of the day. Here is the text of the official report received by the Canal Company's committee from its engineer, James Fergus, and others.

Oct. 1826 The chain at Avenham Inclined plane Engine broke on Tuesday morning Oct 3rd 1026 and the Waggons on the Chain killed two horses belonging to John Roberts of Walton Summit under the following circumstances.

Lord Balcarres' people had a team the last Waggon of which had just landed at the Engine and John Roberts had three teams of two horses and two Waggons each, one of which teams was going up the hill and the other two teams were at the Wheel and framing on the Bridge. The foremost of these last teams the horses were unhooked from the Waggons and taken to the side of the road (i.e. tramroad) just off the end of the bridge. The last team of horses were standing at the framing of the Bridge. When things were in this state the Chain broke in the Wheel opposite the Engine and fell into the catches of Lord Balcarres' Waggon that had just been unhooked and dragged it down the hill after the other Waggons. Roberts driver was set (i.e. sat) upon his foremost Waggon in the middle of the hill and his two horses going up the road side nearly opposite to him. He leapt from the Waggon on perceiving it going backwards and Lord Balcarres' Waggon went past both him and his horses without hurting them.

Roberts second Waggon which was gone a little way up the hill also went past the two horses that were just taken off the bridge without injuring them but the next Waggon from the middle of the hill laid hold of their Gears and dragged them backwards down upon the road upon the bridge and Lord Balcarres loaded Waggon from the top of the hill immediately went over them broke the hand railing of the bridge and fell into the river. One of the horses was killed upon the spot and the other in struggling to rise fell over the bridge upon the rocks in the bottom of the River and was also killed.

We the undersigned Edward Marshall and William Farrington were upon the inclined plane and Ribble Bridge when the chain broke, and saw the circumstances and can attest the truth of the foregoing report. . .

Witnesses James Fergus Edwd. Marshall his mark Thomas Dewhurst l Wm. Farrington his mark Lord Balcarres was the owner of collieries and Haigh Ironworks at Wigan, and had extensive traffic on the canal. Roberts was employed by Rail & Co, who also were canal traders. It appears from a subsequent minute of the committee that Roberts was infringing a Company byelaw by attaching his wagons to the endless chain which worked the incline before the preceding wagons had been detached at the top, it being a rule that only one wagon should be raised or lowered at a time. On these grounds Hall & Co.'s claim for compensation for their two horses was rejected by the canal company.

21

SHELAGH'S LAST TRIP Extract from Waterwitch 18 Spring 1972

It

was dull warm day in late August, 1971, when passengers began to board "Shelagh" for the Trust's last scheduled summer cruise to Tewitfield. The boat was fully loaded, and despite bumping over obstructions in bridge holes, and wrestling for half an hour with a tyre round the prop at Bolton-le-Sands, the cruise was pleasant and uneventful. It was not known that this was to be "Shelagh's last passenger trip on the canal, and indeed, as things have turned out, apparently her last passenger trip anywhere!

After the cruise Dan Ashcroft sailed "Shelagh" to Glasson Dock where the new owners took her back from whence she came - the Leeds & Liverpool canal - via open sea, River Ribble, and the Rufford Branch.

My last information is that she now lies in the Rufford Branch and I understand it is intended she becomes a floating cafe. This seems a pity but the fact is that she is getting on in years (estimated 1914 vintage) and much of her woodwork needs renewing.

Meanwhile Dan was busy negotiating with British Waterways for another boat and purchased "Leo" (as members will have road in the last issue.) We are pleased to report "Leo" has successfully negotiated the sea passage to Glasson Dock, and entered the Lancaster Canal on 1st December, 1971. The boat is now undergoing intensive conversion work and has already had a "sex change" having been re-christened "Shelagh". The new "Shelagh" is a relatively new boat (1942) with an almost brand new engine, We look forward, to her remaining on the canal for many years to come. If you want a cruise on the new water bus, at a reduced price, see the cruise programme printed elsewhere in this issue, John Gavan

22

GLASSON DOCK & THURNHAM MILL Extract Waterwitch Edition

We

recently requested B.W.B. to provide us with a list of Ancient Monuments owned by them and we are grateful for the quick response. More about the contents of the list can be read elsewhere in this issue but we were very surprised to learn that part of Glasson Dock, described as Thurnham, was an Ancient Monument. This led us to conclude that the Corn Mill, adjacent to the bottom lock on the Glasson Arm, had been scheduled. Our enquiries revealed our conclusion to be wrong. What has been scheduled as an Ancient Monument is part of Glasson Dock. This includes the sea basin, lighthouse, warehouse, graving dock, entrance lock from the canal basin, and a very small part extending from this lock. This area was scheduled on 25th August, 1976. It does seem that when "scheduling" decisions are taken they are kept decidedly quiet - by all concerned. Be that as it may, a close look at Thurnham Corn mill is quite rewarding. It receives mention in Ashmore's "Industrial Archaeology of Lancashire" but we have been able to expand on this by reference to the present day owners W. & J Pye Ltd, Agricultural Merchants & Food Compounders, of Fleet Square, Lancaster. We are extremely grateful to one of the Directors, R. Edgar Pye, for taking the trouble to give the Trust all he knows from his records. We quote: "According to our records, the Lancaster Canal Company purchased a mill on this site in 1824, for about £1100, mainly to obtain the right to take water from the River Condor and divert it into the canal. We understand that it was in bad condition at that time and was re-built 1829/30 for a cost of approx. £750.

About 1885 the mill and canal was sold to the London and North Western Railway Company and we took tenancy of it somewhere between 1887 and 1890, but probably 1887. We purchased the property from the British Transport Commission in 1952.

I believe that there were three pairs of stones in the mill at one time and we certainly ran an oatmeal plant there for many years. There was a drying kiln installed and this part of the mill is now occupied by a special mixing plant devoted to milk powder based feeds for calves etc. The turbine was removed to give more warehousing space about 1970/71. My brother found some reference to a mill at Thurnham in 1740 and we can only presume that this was the mill purchased by the Lancaster Canal Company in 1824‖.

Glasson Dock Thurnham Mill & lock

23

FAIRYTALE CASTLES . . . ?

By Philip Pacey Extract Waterwitch Edition 33 Spring 1976 canal enthusiast is familiar _with the roses and diamonds, and with the panels painted with Every castle and bridge in a landscape of lake and mountains, which are characteristic features of the traditional painted decoration of narrow boats. In his book "The Inland Waterways of England" (Allen & Unwin, 1950), L.T.C.Rolt, groping in the dark for an explanation for this remarkable decorative scheme, asked "May it not be that at the time James Brindley cut the Duke's Canal there was encamped on Trafford Moss a tribe of gypsies fresh from the Balkans who had brought with them the first vans, the tradition of the painted flowers, and the recollection of the fairy-tale castles of Eastern Europe which they perpetuated in paint?"

Now, quite apart from the objection that in the decoration of gipsy caravans the castle motif is singularly lacking, I have for long suspected that the immediate source of the narrow-boat castle scene lay much

(Continued on page 25)

24

(Continued from page 24)

nearer home than the Balkans, and in his "Narrow Boat Painting" (David & Charles, 1974) A.J.Lewery makes the same point. My own view is that the boatman's castle scene is a "popular" interpretation of the landscapes created by the 18th century cult of the "picturesque", and the purpose of this article is to outline how this could have been.

The taste for the picturesque was a reaction away from the laying-out of gardens on strict geometrical lines, and it was a tentative aesthetic approach to the wilder parts of the British scene. "Picturesque" meant, simply, "fit for a picture" - the picturesque was partly inspired by Italian, French, and Dutch landscape paintings, especially the works of Claude Lorraine and of Poussin, brought into this country by aristocratic English collectors it was also inspired by a dawning awareness of the "naturalness" of Chinese art and of Chinese gardens - Addison wrote in 1712 of how "the inhabitants of that country laugh at the plantations of our Europeans which are laid out by the rule and line ... ".

The picturesque landscape, then, was a "natural" landscape which supposedly ordered itself in such a way that it was "fit for a picture". In the 18th century England an idea of a- landscape like this became an ideal against which actual

Drawing extracted from the Waterwitch (Continued on page 26)

25

(Continued from page 25)

landscapes were measured, and according to which they were "improved" both by the artist who painted them and also by the landscape gardener who, working for the great landowners, re-created portions of England to make the picturesque dream come true.

Let's' have a look at a typical "picturesque" landscape. To begin with, the scene is "framed", as a picture ought to be, by clumps of trees on either side, or by trees on one side and perhaps a rocky hillside on the other. Beside the trees stands a building - it may be a Classical temple, or a medieval castle, quite probably it is in a ruinous state, suggestive of times long past and crumbling: back into the landscape, grown over with ivy, achieving complete aesthetic harmony with the natural scene. A stream meanders by, as likely as not crossed by a bridge, and winds off into a luminous distant view, there to meet a lake or the sea, beyond which the prospect is closed by faraway mountains „ Such was the scene, with variations, which was depicted by artist upon artist, and which was created from the landscape itself - even to the extent of building the required ruined castle, although when a genuine ruin was available full use was made of it. The architectural styles associated with the picturesque were the Classical, occasionally a version of the Chinese, and what became known as the "Gothick" (the "k" on the end distinguishing it from both authentic medieval Gothic, and from the later, more academic Gothic Revival, of which it was the forerunner). It is the English "picturesque" landscape, complete with either a genuine Gothic ruin or a newly-built Gothick castle, to which I believe we must look for the source of the narrow-boat castle scene.

This cult of the "picturesque" flourished in the second half of the 18th century; the Bridgewater Canal was completed in1776 and the canal era had begun. At the same time the "Gothick" style of building spread on and beyond the great estates; on the estates it was applied to humbler buildings such as the dwellings of the estate workers and the buildings of the farm; beyond the estates it could turn a lockkeeper's cottage into a miniature, battlemented castle-keep. Why look to the Balkan's for the inspiration behind the narrow boat castle scenes, when there were castles, alongside bridges, on the very banks of the canals?

Here was something that anybody could see, that nobody could miss. But this was not all. The cult of the picturesque involved its disciples in journeys away from their great houses and into the wilder parts of Britain, among them the Lake District, where they were often grateful for the hospitality of humbler folk.

With the growth of tourism came the beginnings of a tourist industry, bent on revealing the picturesque to those who sought it. Guide books were written and published; picturesque scenes were recorded not only in unique paintings but also in topographical engravings, many copies of which could be printed. In an engraving illustrating a long poem poking fun at the tourists,-"The Tour of Dr Syntax in search of the Picturesque", Rowlandson shows the hero sitting down and in doing so falling over backwards - to draw a landscape ... with castle, lake, and mountains on the lake , catching the light, are the white, sails of boats, a motif which frequently occurs in the narrow-boat castle scenes, As the fashion spread, being no secret, picturesque scenes were employed for the decoration of all manner of objects, notably ceramics and enamelware. Both of these were produced in areas served by the canals - ceramics in the Potteries, enamelware at Wolverhampton and Bilston. And both benefitted from a new process which made sure of engravings: transfer-printing. Previously wares were decorated entirely by hand now it became possible to transfer an image from an engraving on paper on to the object to the decorated. As many copies as were needed could be easily printed from the original plate. Engravers were employed by potters and enamellers they frequently based their engravings on those of others, some of them reproductions of paintings, others published in book-form specifically for the use of decorators.

The role of engraving in multiplying images can hardly be overestimated. Transfer-printing of pottery and enamelled copperware facilitated production and lowered prices, thereby making these things available to poorer people; it did not, however, altogether do away with hand-painting which "ordinary" folk also undertook for themselves. What is of interest is that, although picturesque scenes were often depicted on these wares in a correct and sophisticated manner, we can also find bolder, spontaneous interpretations of the picturesque formula, and a tendency to reduce it to simplified, more-easily applied essentials, which brings it stylistically much closer to narrow boat decoration. (In "Narrow Boat Painting" A.J.Lewery analyses the different methods of stylisation adopted by the dockyard painters). One plate in particular, apparently shrouded in mystery, deserves mention. Probably dating from about 1820, it (Continued on page 27)

26

(Continued from page 26)

reduces the picturesque scene to castle and bridge (joined into a single building) with a sailing-boat on the lake beyond, and distant mountains; the banks of the river - if it was ever intended to be a river - are straightened so that the whole scene is more reminiscent of a canal with bridge and Gothick cottage, than of either a Claude Lorraine painting or of the Balkans. As in the case of the narrow boat castle scene, the "castle" has been pulled from the wings into the centre of the stage - a move for which Claude set a precedent with his canvas, "The Enchanted Castle", one of those which found a home in 18th century England, Willow-pattern, which is still with us but dates from the epoch we are discussing, is a reminder that an interest in things Chinese, and their imitation (in Chinoiserie), was part and parcel of 18th century tastes; the willow-pattern scene embodies the Chinese contribution to the picturesque, and includes all the required ingredients - a building, a bridge, water, boats, and mountains. Also worthy of note are the pottery pastille-burners which were popular from about 1820 to the 1850s, for many of these were made in the shape of castles.

The boatmen must have seen some of these things; undoubtedly some would have been carried from the Potteries in the narrow boats. Despite the popularity of cheap enamelware in the Midlands, I tend to favour ceramics as the most likely direct inspiration for the narrow-boat castle scene (and that is not to say that the enamels, and Gothick lock-keepers' cottages, did not play their part) if only because pottery became absorbed into the total decorative scheme of the narrow boats. In the latter days of the working narrow boat, the insides of the cabins were hung with "laceedged" souvenir plates, perhaps the last in a whole series of plates which boatmen‘s' wives had taken a fancy to over the generations. Many of these laceedged plates would have at their centre a transfer of Blackpool or some other tourist centre of our century; in all probability they were won at the fair. But I have one which is apparently hand-painted with a traditional picturesque scene of lake, boat and mountain, but with a house instead of a castle. Could it once have hung above the stove in a narrow-boat?

In this whole field of rather unfashionable or "minor‖ applied arts too little is known, and probably much that one would wish to know is lost forever. There is one more mystery that must belong somewhere in the tradition of "popular picturesque" which I have traced. Paintings on glass of typically picturesque scenes, with castle or Gothic ruin, bridge, lake, boats, mountains, and sometimes a windmill or two, all "framed" between trees, often appear in 'antique shops. They are invariably freely, and sometimes almost crudely, painted, although there is another tradition of glass paintings which made use of engravings, somehow transferring the outline of the engraving on to the glass and then colouring in between the lines, a process curiously similar to transfer-printing of pottery and enamels. There are records of glasspaintings based in this way on engravings based, in turn, on landscape paintings, though I have yet to see one (those I have seen are of a religious nature). Could, the "picturesque" glass-paintings, of which there seem to be so many be free-hand interpretations of engraved landscapes or a better class of glass-painting making use of these, produced by people who could not even afford to buy an engraving? I have little doubt that, just as the narrow boat castle scenes were the boatman‘s version of the picturesque, so too, inland (so to speak), these glass-paintings were the poor man's Claude Lorraines.

Nobody knows anything about the glass-paintings; they are sometimes said to be foreign (perhaps because of the occasional windmills, although remember the influx of Dutch paintings into England, while windmills themselves were -not uncommon), and I have heard them called Edwardian ( though they look 19th century, and they are often framed in maple, a common practice. in Victorian times). One I acquired in (Continued on page 29)

27

BIG JOHN - A KING OF THE WATERWAY Extract from Waterwitch Edition 43 Spring 1978

Towards

the end of last century, Myles Pennington, an old Canadian railwayman, decided to set down his life story„ Perhaps to his surprise the account was published - in Toronto in 1896. Recently a copy turned up....

Pennington was born in Lancaster in 1814 and he described his early years there a century and a half ago.

His father was agent at the fly-boat warehouse of John Hargreaves then the second-largest carrier in England. His canal boats came up from Manchester and Liverpool to Walton Summit, where goods were transferred by tramway to the Lancaster Canal at Preston, from thence to Kendal, to be sent on by stage waggons drawn by six powerful horses to Penrith, Carlisle, Glasgow and intermediate towns.

Hargreaves used to pass through Lancaster every three months. He was an impressive man. "I, my brothers and sisters, when children had great reverence for the imposing looking gentleman and gazed upon him as we would on a king, Pennington recalled.

Hargreaves had a large head, bulky body, broad red face, prominent nose, mutton chop sandy whiskers, dark red curly hair, "broad gauge" legs, a ponderous and-swinging walk, knee breeches, top- shiny boots, massive. gold snuffbox, heavy gold chain, with giant seals hanging from his fob, f:.ne silk broad-brimmed hat, immense broadcloth black top coat, with pockets of capacious dimensions filled with papers. He was massive, dynamic and forceful, but friendly and fair with his work force, in a gruff sort of way, addressing them always with a "Well, John" or a "Well, Thomas". He needed to keep a firm hand on his men, who were a rare lot according to Pennington, being prone to pilferage, poaching and drunkenness.

One day the fly boat was later arriving and Pennington's father set out in search of it. He came upon the boat lying across the canal, the horses quietly grazing on the bank. The boatmen lay in the bottom helplessly drunk, ‗soaked with rum inside and out'. They had bored a hole in a hog's head and left the liquor running out, causing great damage to the rest of the cargo.

Boatmen were not usually found out so easily, but more often would surreptitiously 'smuggle' out spirits and replace them with water. It was just as difficult to catch them poaching though the gentry complained mightily enough. A man would slip off the boat into a wood, gun in hand, bring down a pheasant or a partridge and be back on board within a minute or two, smoking his pipe or whistling innocently, gun and game well hidden. Hargreave's fly boats were not allowed to carry passengers on the Lancaster Canal (although it was common for poorer people to travel by this means elsewhere), probably so as not to compete with the Lancaster Canal Company's packet boat. Each boatman could be fined £10 if passengers were found on board, but they generally managed to stow two or three on board. Every now and again Mr Hargreaves got fined.

It was difficult to keep up an honest crew for long; outside 'harpies' were always; on the look out to encourage them to pilfer valuable goods in the lonely night hours. 'Still with all this' wrote Pennington 'there were some good men who ran Hargreaves' fly boats for ten, twenty and thirty years and who might have been trusted with untold gold." Not only were the boatmen dishonest. Johnny Morrison, the Scottish (Continued on page 29)

28

(Continued from page 28)

wharfinger at Tewitfield, had an original method of balancing his cash books. He only added up the credit side, and made the debit side agree with it, regardless of the arithmetic. "Why, how's this?" said Pennington's father "the addition is incorrect" "It's a‘reet mon" Johnny assured him "Dinna ye ken th' coont balances on baith sides". There was a considerable shortage of cash and Johnny's wharfage business came to a sudden close.

Another incident stuck in Pennington's mind. One Sunday, in 1826, when all the family, save Mrs Pennington were at Church, a trunk arrived addressed to Edinburgh. She ordered it to be left in the warehouse and promptly forgot about it. Next morning the yardmen were driven from the premises by a putrid smell. A man chanced to come into the office and explained he had seen the Liverpool stage coach arrive the day before and had heard the passengers protesting that they would not go one foot further if the trunk remained. Mr Pennington ordered the trunk back to the coach office, but the coach people refused it. It was left in the street and a large crowd gathered. Finally the police took possession and on opening it found a woman and a child doubled up inside. Apparently they had been murdered by the woman's husband and he had sold the bodies for medical research. ―This was probably one of the earliest cases of what was afterwards called burking" Pennington explained. In 1830, well grounded in canal business by his father, Myles Pennington went to work as a clerk in Hargreave's office for fly-boats at Preston. He graduated on to railways and finally became general freight agent of the Grand Trunk Railway in Canada, where at the age of 82 he was still at work.

(The following article appeared in the Lancaster Guardian on 30 Dec 77 - It was taken from the book "Canal People‟ by Harry Hanson, published by David and Charles on 30th April, 1978. We are grateful to Mr Hanson and the editor of the Lancaster Guardian for permission to re-publish, and offer apologies to members in the Lancaster area who may already have seen it. Ed)

(Continued from page 27)

Preston had, sandwiched between the glass itself and the sheet of wood holding the glass in its frame, two sheets of paper printed with the heading BOLTON, BLACKBURN, CLITHEROE & WEST YORKSHIRE RAILWAY, The sheets ware thick with grime, and but for a few figures against the names of stations on the line, whatever had once been written on them had long-since faded., I probably don't need to tell you that this particular railway company was founded in 1845 but operated as a separate concern only from 1843 to 1851.

"Gothick" castles were being built one after the other from the 1750‘s; pottery was decorated with picturesque scenes, which included castles, from about the same time until the middle of the next century and even afterwards. Enamel-ware, similarly decorated, was a flourishing industry in the Midlands in the last decade or two of the 18th century. Pottery castle pastille-burners were popular from 1820. My glasspainting, and perhaps hundreds of others, with castles or other ruins, would appear to date from about 1850. And the first known record of a castle scene on a narrow-boat (traced by A.J Lewery) dates from 1858; the scene, of "a lake, a castle, a sailing boat, and a range of mountains", was even then "rather faded".

My case is far from complete. But is at least convinces me that the source the narrow boat castle scene need not be sought in the Balkans.

29

THE LAST BOAT TO LANCASTER

By John S. Gavan Extract Waterwitch Edition 19 Summer 1972

19

It

is now 25 years since the last commercial traffic was carried on the Lancaster Canal. It seems fitting that some form of definitive account should appear in this journal regarding the final phase of commercial carrying, for as far as is known, the story has not yet been written. The historian can easily find reference to the opening of new canals - the newspapers gave full coverage to the processions of bands and boats which invariably marked the openings. Yet let him find any reference to the last commercial traffic carried and his job becomes immensely more difficult. Railway enthusiasts have generally seen to it that the last train does not leave without fog detonators on the line and full carriages of people wanting to make the last trip, making good copy for local newspapers. It seems that canal traffic, like old soldiers, just fades away.

But let us start at the beginning - 18th June, 1819, in fact, for this date marks the official opening of the last stretch of the Lancaster to be completed - from Tewitfield to Kendal. This marked the completion of the canal, apart from the Glasson Dock branch, which was not finished until 1826. The canal company had estimated the following-traffic and income on the canal from Tewitfield to Kendal.

Annual amounts: Coal 7,000 tons. £620, Coal Slack 6,000 tons £175. Slate 3,000 tons £450.

Merchandise 6,600 tons £1.100.

Timber, Freestone, Flags, Bricks & Marble £500. Packet Boat income £400.

Railway competition in later years gradually eroded the traffic but the canal was kept relatively busy until it had also to compete with road transport. Thus there was a regular trade in timber from Scotland to Glasson Lock, where it was loaded into the barges for the gunpowder works in Westmorland. This traffic ceased just before the 1914-18 war. However coal slack from the Ayrshire coalfields was still imported at Glasson and taken to Storeys at Lancaster by barge until 1932. This year would seem to mark the end of commercial traffic on the Glasson arm. Other traffic lost to road transport during the inter-war years was coal, from Preston to Galgate wharf (1920s) and gravel from Carnforth quarries to Bay Horse and Potter Brook (1920s) By the outbreak of the Second World War there were only 10 boatmen and about six barges left working the canal. Baynes Brothers owned the boats and employed the men and the only commodity transported was coal from Preston to the gasworks at Garstang, Lancaster, Carnforth and Kendal, plus Storeys' and (Continued on page 31)

30

(Continued from page 30)

Albion Mills at Lancaster. All the boats were horse drawn and men lived on them whilst working.

By 1942 the war had increased the cost of living and the remaining boatmen wanted a pay rise. Baynes Bros, were reluctant to grant this but an increase was eventually negotiated through the Transport and General Workers Union and a wartime arbitration panel. However Baynes Brothers never paid it. They called all the boatmen to a meeting. The boatmen found that the "meeting" was in fact to receive their cards for Baynes Brothers said they were retiring. This announcement could have seen the last boat sail, but this was not to be.

Dan Ashcroft Senior who had worked 42 years for Baynes Bros., together with his sons Joe and Jack, bought the boats for £400 plus another £400 for goodwill, and the price included the workshop at the Preston terminus. The traffic continued as before.

October 1944 saw the last traffic to Kendal. The reason for this was a coal zoning order which put Kendal gasworks in a different area from Preston. A loaded boat from Preston took about 2 days for the journey to Kendal and was unloaded by casual labour. Six men took about six hours to unload a fully loaded boat (40 - 50 tons) for which they received five shillings each. 1944 saw other gasworks traffic cease leaving Storeys of Lancaster the last customer for coal, but the writing was now on the wall for even this firm v/as using oil for half its fuel needs. By Christmas 1946, due to the coal shortage, Storeys decided to go over completely to oil firing and the last orders were placed with Ashcroft‘s, Four boats were loaded at Preston on Christmas Eve, 1946, but ironically the coal in them never reached Storeys. The freeze which commenced just after Christmas left the boats frozen in at Preston until Easter 1947, when it fell to Joe Ashcroft to take them up the canal in stages to Lancaster, He used two horses and took the boats in pairs to Galgate, and then again to Lancaster, The coal was unloaded in the traditional way with barrow and shovel, but during the winter months Storeys had completed their oil firing conversion and the coal was re-sold to the Royal Albert Hospital. And that was the end of commercial traffic as far as the Lancaster Canal was concerned. Dan Ashcroft Snr.,,. died later that year.

For the rest we record the fate of the boats. "Benjamin" was sold at Best Bank, for use as a floating office, but did not come to fruition and the boat was put into the basin by the Lime Aqueduct. When this basin was later drained for maintenance work on the Aqueduct the boat was cut up and removed.

"Herbert" was towed across to the Isle of Man and finished its days as a landing stage at Peel. Harold" was cut up and removed from the canal at Lancaster, and a similar fate occurred to ―Wasp‖. "Kenneth" and "Anne" finished their days at the Preston terminal and were never removed from the canal. They now lie buried under the car park by the new British Rail buildings on the site of the old terminal. Hard by the old Preston terminus in Marsh Lane, is the Boatman‘s Arms Hotel. One can still see the sign "Good Stabling" over the arch to the yard. Joe Ashcroft used these stables for his canal horses until the traffic ceased, I am indebted to Joe and Dan Ashcroft for most of the information contained in this article, and also to Mr Heaton, who was Station Engineer at Kendal Gasworks in 1964.

31

LOOKING BACK SIR GEORGE HEAD'S TRIP FROM PRESTON TO KENDAL Waterwitch Edition 45 Autumn 1978 Members will re-call a short first hand description of a journey from Garstang to Preston on one of the Lancaster Canal Company's packet boats. A much more detailed description is provided by Sir George Head who undertook the journey from Preston to Kendal in 1835- The full account' is printed below:

N

otwithstanding the distance from Preston to Kendal by land is less than by Canal, this natural disadvantage is compensated by the ease and rapidity with which passengers are conveyed by the quick passage boats, in a sufficient degree to raise an effective opposition against the coaches; and reasonably, for no sort of locomotion can possibly be more agreeable,, This distance by the road is forty four miles, by the canal fifty-seven, seven or eight locks moreover are encountered by the way; all contiguous to each other, and about twelve miles north of Lancaster; nevertheless the voyage is performed by the boats within seven hours. The time of leaving Preston is half past eleven in the morning, that of departure from Kendal half past seven, the latter boats arriving at Preston at half past one; when, according to arrangements made with the coach-proprietors, passengers are conveyed to Manchester by vehicles which wait upon the boats.

The "Water-Witch" is a sheet iron boat; a little more than seventy feet long, by five feet four inches broad, and draws, when light, only six inches of water. The "Swiftsure" is two feet shorter, four inches narrower, and heavier by about a ton and a half. Notwithstanding the difference in figure, both boats have a light canoe-like appearance, and are fitted up in a similar manner; a light awning of stout calico, dressed with linseed oil, effectually protects the passengers from the weather, though it sheds a yellow, watery light on the people's countenances.

This simple mode of preparing calico or linen-cloth is now much in fashion among the navigators of the Humber the material, merely payed over two or three times with a brush dipped in linseed oil, is rendered totally impervious to water; jackets thus anointed afford the wearers the advantage of light waterproof apparel, instead of the heavy Flushing garments formerly in use.

The embarkation at Preston is most commodious. A covered shed, thrown over the canal, encloses on both sides ample marginal space, so that passengers and their luggage are equally protected from the rabble and the weather.

My luggage was no sooner on board the Water Witch at Preston, than all being ready, at the shrill sound of a whistle, the horses started instantly on their way in a canter; of two horses, a boy rode the hindermost, driving the other in front by rope-reins. The steersman regulated the pace by the said whistle, and a horn, the former being a signal to the postilion to increase the speed, the latter to halt; the intelligent horses evinced their sagacity, by eagerly anticipating not only each of the two sounds, but also every motion of the driver.

(Continued on page 33)

32

(Continued from page 32)

The proprietors of these canal boats have endeavoured to establish a theory which, setting philosophy

aside, is surely a bad one for the horses; they maintain, that the animal works more at his ease at the rate of ten miles an hour, than at eight, or even less; because the swell at the head of the boat is, they say, by the greater velocity, surmounted before it accumulates, whereas at less speed the increase of the obstacle more than counterbalances the diminution in labour. Much depends, at all events, upon the width of the canal, the depth of water, and so forth; but in practice, I think the experiment fails 1 never saw horses more defeated than these, although the stages were usually only four miles. At the end of each they sweated and panted, as if they had undergone a severe burst with foxhounds; there they stood planted as it were, reeling and shaking their tails till led away. We were generally on these occasions very soon out of sight, for on changing the cattle no other ceremony was requisite than merely to unship the eye of each trace from the hook, and fix the other instead; nay, so quick were our movements, that frequently, on whisking round-a corner, a traveller was seen waiting for a passage, and within the space of twenty seconds, from the moment the boat stopped til she proceeded on her way, from the blast of the horn to the sound of the whistle, the packages and our new companion, the owner, were altogether gliding away on our voyage. Even with the advantage of short stages, the horses, unless highly bred and in top-top condition, are unequal to the work assigned to, them; twice during the passage, one horse, on both occasions, overpowered by the draft, as narrowly as possible escaped being soused in the canal. Such casualties have frequently happened, leading to an alteration in the towing path, now gradually carried into general effect. Instead of making the slant inwards, it is now inclined the contrary way; thus not only are accidents in a great measure prevented, but a better foot-hold and purchase against the draft is afforded to the animal„ It is extraordinary, for how long a period, in many cases, principles, diametrically opposite, to common sense, are acted upon.

After five minute's delay at Lancaster, for the purpose of exchanging passengers, we glided rapidly onwards, over the aqueduct thrown on five circular arches across the river Lune; hence is a fine view of Lancaster Bridge, about a mile below - an elegant structure, level on its surface, like that of Waterloo, and on five elliptical arches.

The locks, as has before been observed, are-all contiguous to each other, and here the dexterity and dispatch with which they are surmounted, one after another, is very remarkable; the rise is nine feet each lock. The passengers disembarked during the process, and re-embarked on the summit of the level, after (Continued on page 10)

33

(Continued from page 10)

Preston in one direction daily, thirty miles - from the middle of May to the sixth of July it sailed in both direction-, or sixty miles daily - The establishment was so far completed by the eighth of July as to work the Boat daily from Kendal to Preston and back, one hundred and fourteen miles, and which has since been and is now continued. The distance from Kendal to Preston, fifty seven miles, in which are a Tunnel and eight Locks, is performed in seven hours including all stoppages.

No difficulty is found in working the Boat at nights; and during the winter, which has been extremely stormy, the time has been kept with great punctuality. The strongest proof that can be offered of the success of the boat is that from the eighth of July to the thirty first of December, the number of Passengers was nearly 16,000. Some inconvenience has arisen from having but one Boat to perform so much work the building of which has been unexpectedly delayed), will shortly be completed and during next summer your Committee have it in contemplation to extend and improve the conveyance by working both Boats. The outlay has been very considerable, but the receipts have been such as to warrant the expectation of an adequate return, and to increase your revenue as soon as the whole cost of the establishment has been paid off by earning.

Operating the Packet Boats The packet-boats ran to a strict timetable, as the mail-coaches did. Their turn-out had to be of the best, with gleaming paintwork and scrubbed decks. Only the best horses had the stamina to pull the boats at speed for a four or five mile stage. The postillion rode the trace horse, driving the leader; both horses had to be 15.2 to 16 hands high to keep the traces and towrope at the correct height, as experience proved.

Each postillion was brightly and elaborately dressed; usually boys were employed for their light weight and ability to duck under low bridges. One man however, who weighed 16 stone, was caught by a bridge and tumbled into the canal! It has been suggested that bridge voussoirs on the Lancaster Canal were painted white to draw the postillion's attention to them, though this also aided navigation at dusk or in the early morning.

The steersman, known as the 'master1 or 'conductor', steered the packet from an open cockpit in the stern.

A short mast with a ball cap to it was fixed in the bow to allow the steersman to direct the boat when (Continued on page 35)

34

(Continued from page 34)

his view forward was obstructed by the passenger cabin. The steersman and postillion communicated by means of whistle and horn and could adjust the speed accordingly.

Accommodation for luggage and some open seating was provided in the bow, then came the first class cabin. Between this and the second class cabin was a steward's room, from which drinks and even meals could be obtained. Behind the second class cabin came more open seating and the steersman's cockpit and tiller. The two cabins appear on the 1915 model to be very bare, with two rows of seats facing into the centre, but there were probably tables down the central gangway before the vessel was cut down.

In passing the eight locks at Tewitfield two further Canal Co. employees assisted the packet, probably by holding back other vessels and setting the locks in advance so that the packet might pass through swiftly. Here the passengers had the choice of staying aboard or walking on to the final lock, a walk of some twenty minutes. Another obstacle was created by the Hincaster Tunnel. Here the horses were detached and led over the hilltop to rejoin the packet, which appears to have been win-ched through by some sort of horse gin or stationary steam engine. Iron runners for the ropes or wires can be seen on the south wall of the tunnel.

The towpath is on the western side of the canal all the way except for a short distance through Lancaster itself. Bridge no. 98 is a cross-over bridge enabling the horses to cross the canal with-out dropping the towrope. At Preston and Kendal were covered termini, while at Lancaster the packet wharf lay across the canal from Aldcliffe Road: the boathouse, which still survives, albeit in poor shape at the time of writ-ing, has a canted end to allow packets to be floated in at an angle. They could lie here two abreast, while the top floor was a working room with a hoist spanning the canal to enable the vessels to be lifted out of the water for maintenance.

The towing horses were changed every four or five miles. There were eleven intermediate changing points between Preston and Kendal: some surviving stables can be seen near bridge no. 98 in Lancaster and at Farleton near Burton-in-Kendal though the latter now have all doors and windows blocked up. By the end of each stage the horses were completely exhausted, and needed to be led away to shelter, warmth, and water before they suffered ill effects. The postillions changed at Lancaster, so that two were required for one trip between Preston and Kendal, though they frequently carried out the return half trip almost at once. Passen-gers could join the packets at the Preston, Lancaster, or Kendal packet stations, but could also be picked up at request stops anywhere along the canal bank. This contrasted favourably with the heavily pre-booked road coaches and the trains, with their limited stops and probably contributed a great deal to the success of the packets. There were many ex-passengers who regretted the passing of this smooth, warm, peaceful, and cheap form of transport.

Waterwitch Packet Boat

35

London& North Western Railway Permanent Way Department Divisional Engineers Office Lancaster Dec. 17th, 1912.

Isaac-Briggs Esq., Beachfield Sandal Magna near Wakefield.

Dear Sir, Old Canal Express Packet Boats.

Your letter of the 6th instant has been passed on to me. According to our records the first express packet boat used on The Lancaster Canal was obtained from Mr. V. Houston of Paisley in Jany,1833.

It was named "the Water Witch”, and was improved in 1835. The second express boat was named "The Swiftsure", the ironwork being built by Messrs Vernon & Coy of Liverpool, the woodwork being put together at the Canal Workshops at Lancaster. It was built in July, 1833.

Subsequently two other express boats, "The Swallow" and the “Crewdson" were constructed, the latter being built about 1889 making 4 swift boats for express service.

The “Water Witch” commenced sailing between Lancaster and Preston on 20th May, 1823, and between Kendal and Preston on 9th July, 1833, It left Kendal at 6.30 am. and returned to that town at 8.30pm The iron hull of the last of the four packet boats, the "Crewdson" was built by Mr McDowell, of Glasgow, in 1839, and this is probably the boat now at our Lancaster Canal Shops, which has been used up to quite recently as an inspection boat. The name however was altered to "Water Witch, No 2" many years ago.

The original "Water Witch" and the "Swiftsure" we believe were transferred to the Crinan Canal, previous to 1856.

You are quite at liberty to make drawings or take photographs of the old boat lying at our shops here, and perhaps in return you may be able to give me some information with respect to the express traffic.

If I should glean anything further from ay records here* 1 will send you particulars of same.

Yours truly, I H Thurstan

36

THE BRIDGES OF THE LANCASTER CANAL BETWEEN THE RIBBLE AND THE LUNE .....by John Champness.....

Extract from Waterwitch Editions 46 & 47 Winter 79/Spring 80

A

well designed bridge attraction to the eyes and well as its obvious better communications, it qualities of ‗commodity, in the oft-quoted and of Sir Henry Wotton from mere building. More reveals without reticence way in which its designer within the technological p r o du c e d s o me th in g

exerts an almost irresistible minds of many people. As symbolic appeal as an aid to embodies so clearly those firmness and delight' which generally accepted opinion distinguish good architecture often than not a bridge not only its purpose but the solved a given problem limitations of his age - and beautiful into the bargain.

On the 30 mile stretch of t h e La nc a s t er C a na l between the Ribble and the Lune there are still about a hundred bridges which were built over or John Rennie (1761-1821): Scottish civil under the canal as part of the original scheme. They engineer, the designer of many bridges, canals and docks. range in status from humble culverts, through the Portrait by Sir Henry Raeburn (1810). deceptively simple structures built to carry public highways or to link the separated parts of a single land-holding, to the imposing five arch aqueduct which strides across the Lune itself a mile to the north east of Lancaster.

(Continued on page 40)

37

Some architectural definitions associated with bridges and arches might help the layman, such as myself, to understand the finer points of this extensive article Abutment

The ground end-support of a bridge, especially to resist the horizontal thrust of an arch.

Batter

A slope, as of the outer face of a wall, that recedes from bottom to top.

Baluster

In architecture a baluster is a small column or pilaster, used as a support to the rail of an open parapet.

Pilaster

A pilaster, is a slightly-projecting column built into or onto a wall. Constructed like a pier but architecturally corresponding to a column, having capital, shaft, and base to agree with those of the columns of the same order. In most cases the projection from the wall is one third of its width, or less.

Blocking course

The masonry above a cornice, whose mass gives stability to the latter.

Coffer dam

A watertight structure allowing underwater foundations to be built in the dry.

Cutwater

The end of a pier-base, pointed to cleave the water

Cornice

Any horizontal, moulded or otherwise decorated projection which crowns or finishes the part to which it is affixed.

Dentil

One of a series of small square projecting blocks in the moulding of a cornice.

Elliptical arch

An arch with a curve that becomes tighter towards the crown.

Extrados

Is the exterior curve of an arch; especially, the upper curved face of the whole body of voussoirs.

Gritstone

A form of sedimentary rock, similar to but courser than sandstone

Intrados

The interior curve of an arch. The term is especially applied to the inner or lower curved face of the whole body of voussoirs taken together.

Horizontal thrust

The tendency of an arch to push outwards,

Impost Jamb

The band or block from which the springing of an arch occurs.

Keystone

The voussoir at the crown of an arch.

Frieze

That part of the entablature of an order which is between the architrave and cornice.

Parapet

A low, or breast height wall or fence, especially one serving to protect the edge of a platform, roof, bridge, or the like.

Pier

The support between two bridge spans, usually arches .

Spandrel (also spandrel)

The roughly triangular space between the left or right exterior curve of an arch and the rectangular framework surrounding it and/or the space between two arches and a horizontal moulding or cornice above them.

A facing of stone, concrete, etc., to protect an embankment, or shore structure, against erosion by wave action or currents.

Revetment

The vertical side of any opening, such as a door or fireplace; hence, less properly, the term applies to any narrow vertical surface of a wall, such as the wall of a chimneybreast or of a pier, as distinguished from its face.

Crown

The highest part of an arch

Rustication & Hammered stone

Rustication is stonework with roughened surfaces and recessed joints. Hammered is having the surface roughly shaped or faced with the stonecutter's hammer.

Voussoir

One of the wedge-shaped stones forming the curved parts of an arch or vaulted ceiling.

Entablature

The upper section of a classical building, resting on the columns and constituting the architrave, frieze, and cornice.

38

Some useful diagrams and illustrations

Elliptical arch

Elements of the Arch (1) Stilted arch Entablature A Cornice B. frieze C. architrave D. entablature

Elements of the Arch (2) Blocking course Baluster

Dentil

Elements of the Arch (3) 39

(Continued from page 37)

Probably without exception, they were built to the designs of John Rennie (1761-1821) who was one of the first and must now figure among the greatest of civil engineers. Excluding perhaps the Kennet and Avon Canal, which preserves the only remaining example of Rennie's work as a mechanical engineer, the best places to appreciate his engineering skill and the sobriety of his taste as a designer are along the Lancaster Canal. Ironically one cannot appreciate these "from the towpath let alone from the waterway itself, because the most impressive works of engineering are, in the literal sense of the term, part of the canal's infrastructure.,

Why the Canal was built The Lancaster Canal is now used as a leisure cruiseway and as part of the land-drainage system for a large part of North Lancashire. It was however built in response to economic necessity, as one can read in an anonymous pamphlet published in 1791. 'With respect to Kendal, Lancaster, and perhaps Preston, it is now no longer a Question of Choice, but Necessity:- either they must put themselves on a Footing with their Southern neighbours, or submit to a decline in their trade and population, and a decrease in the value of their land, as a natural James Brindley and inevitable consequence; in short, a canal is now become as necessary an appendage to a Manufacturing or Commercial Town as a Turnpike Road,' In 1791 Lancaster was enjoying what we can see, and what the pamphleteer perhaps foresaw, were the last few years of that Golden Age which left the town so many fine Georgian buildings. An Act of Parliament in 1749 had created a Port Commission which built St. George's Quay, improved the channel up the Lune and created a foreport at Glasson Dock. Lancaster was however suffering from the competition created by Liverpool's much better dock system, commercial facilities and transport links to a wide hinterland. A canal, it was hoped, would improve Lancaster's outlets and thus make the use of the port more attractive; it would also allow the easier import of coal from the Wigan area, and the export of limestone to farmers in South Lancashire - a commodity they lacked but badly needed to increase the fertility of their fields.

Such thoughts had already exercised the minds of Lancaster merchants in 1772, during a canal mania provoked by the success of such canals as the Bridgewater and the Staffordshire and Worcestershire. They had employed Robert Whitworth - one of James Brindley's assistants - to survey the line of canal from Kendal via Lancaster and Preston to near Eccleston, where it should join the proposed route of a canal from Leeds to Liverpool.

Nothing however, came of this scheme.

Nevertheless the idea of a canal caught on in 1791 - at the height of the second canal mania. The Mayor of Lancaster chaired a public meeting on 8 June, and in October John Rennie, whose reputation as a civil engineer was beginning to eclipse his considerable fame as a mechanical engineer, was asked by the recently formed Lancaster Canal Company to check Whitworth's line and, if possible, improve it. He did both, published his (Continued on page 41)

40

(Continued from page 40)

survey early in 1792, and an Act of Parliament was obtained in June of that year.

The Act authorized the construction of a canal from Westhoughton to Kendal. A second Act, passed in May, 1793 allowed the Company to build a branch which would lock down from a junction just south of Galgate to Glasson Dock and thus link the canal directly to the sea. Such a scheme was important to Lancaster's prosperity because, as ships grew in size, the Lune's treacherous channel was increasingly difficult and finally impossible to navigate. Nevertheless the Glasson branch was not opened until 1826, seven years after the originally planned .line to Kendal.

How the Canal was built The first Act also empowered the Company to raise £414,000 in £100 shares - of which £65,000 was reserved for building the Westmorland stretch of the canal which ran between Tewitfield (near Berwick) and Kendal - and to borrow up to £200,000 more by mortgage or additional shares, if Glasson Dock & Basin the initial sum should prove inadequate. The bulk of this money - and all, and more, was needed because the Lancaster level alone cost nearly £300,000 - was subscribed by the merchants of Lancaster and local landowners, who had hopes of indirect benefits even if of no speedy return on the capital they invested.

Construction began late in 1792 when John Pinkerton, a well known contractor who had already built parts of the Basingstoke Canal, and John Murray, of Colne, were awarded the first contract, for work between Tewitfield and Ellel (near Galgate). By then Rennie had carried out a much more detailed survey, which led to a number of small changes in the proposed route. He had also produced calculations for the earthworks involved and detailed designs -with elevations, plans and sections - for the bridges which were to be built. All of the bridges, including the Lune aqueduct for which Rennie advocated, a structural use of brick, were built of the Millstone Grit which occurs between Forton and Lancaster; I suspect, but cannot prove, that one or more of the leading shareholders was a quarry owner.

No detailed reports of the construction of the Lancaster Canal have been published, but it seems that, while abnormal masonry work, such as the foundations of the Lune aqueduct, was carried out by direct labour under the supervision of the Canal Company's engineers, most other contracts were initially signed with individuals who supplied labour or materials only. Tenders were requested, and contracts signed on the basis of Rennie's detailed designs, and working drawings were later produced by his professionally qualified assistants. The day of the big general contractor able to undertake everything had hardly dawned.

Pinkerton and Marray, for example, found themselves unable to supervise their employees' work adequately and lost their contract in l794 after which the Company took over and relet the work in several smaller contracts.

At this time Rennie was the engineer not merely of the Lancaster Canal but also of the Rochdale and of (Continued on page 42)

41

(Continued from page 41)

the Kennet and Avon. Although only in his early thirties, he was able to complete all three contracts successfully because he believed in delegation but tight control. Dr. Cyril Boucher, in his biography of Rennie, quotes a letter written by him in 1795 to the committee of the Kennet & Avon Canal company; in this he outlines the respective duties of the principal engineer, the resident engineers and their assistants.

Boucher also quotes a list of salaries paid to agents of the Lancaster Canal Company, from which it is possible to derive the administrative hierarchy of those working under Rennie on 1 January 1797.

The asymmetry of this hierarchy is interesting, as it reflects the different rates of progress on the various sections of the canal. It is clear that while work between the Calder and Preston was complete, the section north of the Calder -of which much had been undertaken by Pinkerton and Murray - was still unfinished, and that progress was even less advanced south of the Ribble. This southern section was not opened until 1803, whereas Preston was linked to Tewitfield in November 1797 after the completion of the Lune aqueduct. In addition, I infer from the hierarchy that the other masonry structures had been built but that the earthworks between them was still incomplete, and I assume that Mr Atkinson and Mr Gill were responsible for ensuring that masonry and earthworks married up properly. ************************.

Overbridges (a) The Standard Pattern The most common type of bridge on the Lancaster Canal - indeed, on any canal, is the hump-backed overbridge which carries a farm track; or public highway across the water. Because they needed to be so numerous, they were built to a standard basic design which was arrived at not by chance but in response to certain constraints. The Lancaster Canal was designed to take barges with a beam of 14 feet, towed by horses which contemporary illustrations suggest were about 6 feet high. The standard over-bridge has therefore an elliptical arch with a 22' 6" span, which gives about 7 feet headroom in the middle of the 6 feet wide towpath and about 10 feet clearance above water level.

A standard bridge between Preston & Lancaster

Rennie was an engineer rather than an architect, as described below though the division between the professions was not as great then as it has unfortunately become. His bridges were designed both to be attractive and to contain within themselves the structural forces which they would generate. Not only does each arch have heavy abutments to absorb its thrust, but each face of the bridge is concave in plan and has a pronounced batter in section. The concavity is obvious - the buttresses which mark each end of a bridge's structure stand about four feet in front of the keystone of the arch - but one must look more closely to notice the batter; the width of the bridge at the crown of the arch is about four feet less than at each base.

A further protection for the structure of a bridge is provided by the stone revetment of the banks where (Continued on page 43)

42

(Continued from page 42)

these narrow toward the bridging points. On the near side this ensures lateral support for the towpath at the place where the wear is heaviest and allows a cobbled pavement to be laid under the bridge itself.

Further evidence that Rennie took care to minimise inconvenience to horses and men on the towpath is to be found in the chamfered profile of the arch at the side of and above the towpath.

Three-quarters of the original bridges which cross the canal on the stretch between Preston and Lancaster follow a single decorative pattern in which their gritstone blocks One of the iron-railing bridges No 69 Snapewood are simple scrabbled. The voussoirs at the bases and crown of the arch measure 18" deep - slightly more than at the haunches - while the keystone, which normally has a double projection, is 2' 4" high. The roadway, whose line is marked by the top of the string course just above the keystone, runs in a shallow curve over the bridge, and the top of 2' 6" high parapet, which has a half round capping, is parallel to it.

There is a series of 12 bridges (number 66-77) north of Sateby Hall, which has no parapets but iron railings instead; this is not an original feature but a refinement made by the Home Guard during the last War to reduce the cover afforded to potential enemy soldiers. A unique and original variant of the standard pattern is bridge 95, which has no special keystone in its arch. (b) More Striking Variations Eight bridges south of the Calder are slightly more sophisticated in their decoration; their hammerdressed stones have chisel-draughted margins, and their parapets run straight to a blunt point over the keystone. I can see no logic behind their distribution, unless perhaps they were built slightly later than the standard overbridges. A more attractive single variant of the standard pattern occurs where the drive to Ellel Grange crosses the canal; here each parapet of bridge 84 has been straightened and pierced by four groups of five moulded balusters. This adds a touch of elegance to the design, but I suspect that this is a modification which dates not from Rennie's time but from the mid-nineteenth century when Ellel Grange was rebuilt.

For by far the greater part of its length the Lancaster Canal was built as a contour canal, winding - often markedly - across country to maintain its approved level of 70 feet above the sea. In consequence the surface of the water is within a foot or so of the level of the land on either side. In most cases therefore, and a fortiori when the canal runs on a slight embankment, the bridges are approached by a fairly steep ramp on either side. Where the canal lies somewhat below the surrounding countryside, the standard bridge is inset into the landscape and the approach ramp is more gentle, and in some cases virtually non(Continued on page 44)

43

(Continued from page 43)

Close up of balustrades existent. In these cases the parapet is normally straight.

In a few places, and especially for a couple of miles between Galgate and Lancaster, the canal r uns thr oug h a c utting .

Wherever possible, the standard elliptical arch is slightly stilted to give the extra height, but occasionally another expedient had to be found.

The aptly named Deep Cutting Bridge (No 94), a mile south west of Lancaster, has a semi-circular arch springing from stilted jambs 10 feet high; its road-deck and parapet are horizontal. A more striking bridge, though it is lower, is bridge No 10, which carries Roebuck Street, off Tulketh Brow in Preston. Its original arch, which remains although the bridge has been considerably widened, is hyperbolic in shape. With a span of 23 feet, it rises to 14 feet above the canal; it is also steeply battered, tapering to 12 feet from a base width of 21 feet.

Most bridges are of a more or less standard width, their battered arches measuring about 16 feet at the base and about 12 feet at their crown, which gives a roadway about 10 feet broad. I have not measured every bridge, but I have found roadways with

Ellel Grange bridge

Brantbeck Bridge a stilted arch

The two roadways over Double Bridge with the wall in the middle (Continued on page 45)

44

(Continued from page 44)

a width of 12 feet and even one 14 feet wide.

This 14 foot roadway runs over Brantbeck Bridge (No, 91) which crosses the cutting south of Lancaster; its width is due, I think, not to the importance of this minor road, but to the height of the bridge which was considered to require a more bulky structure.

As regards the other widths, I am inclined to believe that 12 foot roadways were generally reserved for the more important bye roads, with 10 feet for occupation roads but I know that this is not always the case because the The much wider barrel is shown on Double Bridge widest bridge structure over the canal - the 34‘ 6" wide Double Bridge (No 85) a little south of Galgate - carries two 13 foot occupation roads separated by a wall.

Several road bridges over the canal have been widened since 1797. The widest original roadway - 24 feet is at the Garstang Turnpike Bridge (No 59) which was built to carry the great highway running northwards through Lancashire. The bridge has only escaped re-building because Garstang was by-passed between the Wars and the original turnpike was demoted to Class B status. (c) Turnover Bridges Every so often along the canal there

Brokenback Bridge with & without railings

45

(Continued on page 46)

(Continued from page 45)

occurs, close to a bridge and on the side away from the towpath, a slight widening where barges could load or unload. Occasionally, as at Garstang or Galgate, these embayments have stone revetments and are graced with the name of Basin. Unloading points were always placed on the offside, so that through traffic should not be interrupted. A barge could glide under its own momentum to a stop; its horse would already have been unhitched and, when it was necessary to set off again, the towline could be brought back across the bridge and attached to the waiting horse.

At Garstang and Galgate the canal passes to the west of the villages; the basins therefore are situated on the east bank of the canal, and the towpath could continue on the west. At Lancaster, however, the canal passes to the east of the town, so the basins had to be on the west bank and the towpath had to change sides - but in such a way that towing horses did not need to be unhitched and/or ferried across. The staggeringly simple answer to this problem was invented - not by Rennie - in the form of a turnover bridge. A horse on the nearer bank, towing Change Bridge at entrance to Glasson arm a barge from right to left, i.e. southwards, would walk up the ramp, over the bridge, down the other side and under the bridge's arch to continue once more towards the south.

Bridge No 98 is the turnover bridge and the towpath returns to the west bank at bridge 100 and stays there all the way to Kendal. The only other turnover bridge is at the junction of the Glasson Branch, which comes in under the bridge from the right; a horse from Glasson coming north would walk Chamfered stone work under the bridge, while, one going south would back over the bridge. The bridge which was built in 1826 is of the standard pattern, except that its road surface is only 6 feet wide and that its stones are hammer-dressed with chamfered edges.

Underbridges (a) Introduction However pleasing these overbridges may be, whether to the eye or to the mind, their interest is eclipsed by that of those bridges which carry the canal over roads and rivers. Aqueducts are as old as the Romans, and there is nothing on the Lancaster Canal which is as striking in its grandeur as the Pont du Gard or-the Roman Aqueduct in Segovia, nor is there anything to rival the vertiginous elan of Telford's Pont Cysyllte (Continued on page 47)

46

(Continued from page 46)

with its cast-iron channel resting on slender stone piers. The Lancaster Canal runs for 43 miles at a constant level of 70 feet above the sea; it attempts no feats like crossing the Pennines but it does run across the grain of the country between the Ribble and Lune and must cross numerous streams and rivers flowing down from the Forest of Bowland. What is impressive about these bridges is not the scale of the work but the fertility of imagination which Rennie displayed in tackling the obstacles, while content to work within the limits of masonry construction, Even more than in the case of overbridges the dimensions if not design-details of these under bridges were tightly constrained. The limiting factors were three: the depth of the canal itself, the relative height of the surface-levels of the canal and of the river it was crossing, and the width or rate of flow of the river.

Of these three only the depth of the canal was constant - 6 feet of water with a 2 feet impervious layer of puddled, clay underneath. No top of any arch under the canal could therefore stand higher than 62 feet above sea level.

When this section of the canal was designed it crossed two roads in its course - one in Preston which is called Aqueduct Street (now demolished), and also Caton Road in Lancaster. Both these aqueducts over roads have disappeared, the Lancaster one by rebuilding with steel girders with a much longer span, and the Preston one by demolition. Though there are three road aqueducts on the Westmorland section of the-canal and also one tunnel, with another two tunnels south of Preston at Whittle-le-Woods, there are now no road aqueducts on the section I have studied in some detail, and the rest of this report will be devoted to aqueducts which carry the canal over water (b) Culverts and Syphons The simplest form of underbridge, which was used whenever possible, was the culvert whose bore varied with the rate of flow expected from the brook concerned. The smallest culvert, with a bore of 4 feet, accommodates Newton Beck north of Lancaster. This is a small stream which drops about 80 feet in the two miles of its length. Sharoe Brook, just north of Preston, is about five miles long with a fall of about 110 feet; its culvert has a bore of 8' 6". Both these culverts are markedly concave in plan and slightly battered in section, as they are inset into low embankments. Perhaps because its bore is smaller in relation to its whole ‗facade‘, the Newton Back culvert is decorated with two little pilasters.

One of the most interesting of all the designs along the canal is the culvert which carries it over the Hollowforth Brook in its broad and shallow valley north of Woodplumpton. The brook's various tributaries have a total length of some ten miles and fall at least 200 feet from their sources. Rennie's problem here was to carry the canal over a 40 foot wide stream-bed which was only 10 feet below the bottom of the canal; he solved it brilliantly with the three similar elliptical tubes which measure 9 feet high by 12 feet across.

Hollowfields Culvert

In the three cases described so far there is a (Continued on page 48)

47

(Continued from page 47)

sufficient difference in the relative height of canal and river for a more or less orthodox bridge to be built.

In three other cases, and notably where the canal crosses the River Calder in Catterall, the level of the river is no more than a yard or so below the top of the canal. To allow the river to act as a tributary was impossible, since a couple of mills downstream had a prior right to the water. The answer was found by building a sort of syphon.

Just upstream of the canal a weir was built which lowers the river by a little ever six feet so that it can just pass under the canal in a specially deepened channel before flowing out downstream. As always the visible structure of the ‗bridge‘ is markedly concave in plan with a slight batter in section.

Elsewhere more conventional aqueducts were built. The simplest are those which allow the canal to cross Woodplumpton Brook and Savick Brook, west of Woodplumpton and west of Fulwood respectively. In each case the arch is segmental in shape with a span of about 18feet. The only significant difference is in the height of the crown above the water in the brook; at Woodplumpton the height is just under 6 feet, at Savick just under 11 feet - a difference which is explained by the different depths of the respective valleys. The same reason explains the deeper concavity of the plan of the Savick Brook aqueduct.

A similar but more sophisticated structure takes the can.al over the River Condor south west of Galgate.

The 23 foot span segmental arch which carries the canal trough is flat in plan, but its abutments are continued upwards and act as buttresses to the concave retaining wall of the trough. This is thus a sort of horizontal arch resisting the lateral pressure of the water.

No less sophisticated but considerably more impressive is the aqueduct which spans the River Brock just north of Bilsborrow. Here Rennie faced a problem which was similar to that posed by the Calder three miles further north - a river whose surface was about four feet below the top of the canal - and solved it with as much intelligence and more panache.

Brock aqueduct

Upstream of the canal a 12 feet deep weir was constructed which dropped the water down a narrow chute to its new bed which had been excavated for about a quarter of a mile downstream. The canal itself is carried on a shallow elliptical arch with a span of 30 feet. Once more the structure has a clearly visible batter and is also markedly concave in plan - a feature which is emphasised by the play of light along the heavily moulded string course and across the bulky parapet. The strength and stability of the structure is suggested by the horizontality imparted to the design by the chamfered bed-joints of the rusticated masonry - a characteristic shared by all true underbridges, except Condor aqueduct, which I have so far described. A further apparent expressiveness in the design resides in the way the jambs of the arch slope (Continued on page 49)

48

(Continued from page 48)

towards each other. I assume that they are in fact acting as buttresses to the Aqueduct at Lancaster, Caton Road embankment, but they may also continue under the river bed to form an elliptical tube as at Hollowforth. (This is in fact stated to be the case by Christopher Clark in his 'Historical and Descriptive Account of The Town of Lancaster‘, published in 1807). The impact of the whole design is heightened by the roar of the foaming waters over the weir and the swirling eddies under the bridge itself.

WYRE AQUEDUCT In stark contrast to all this drama stands the simple grandeur of the Wyre aqueduct. It is the largest single arch aqueduct on this, or any other section of the Lancaster Canal. Its 54 foot stilted elliptical span arch rises about 25 feet above the quiet, deep waters of the Wyre, and this impression of repose and solidity is enhanced by the strongly projecting dentil cornice and by the rustication of the massive blocks of stone from which the bridge is built. This rustication is different from the other cases I have described in that, basically, two courses of rusticated masonry alternate with a single course of hammerdressed stones. The The Canal running across the Wyre Aqueduct clearly indicates the degree of concavity of the whole structure although the arch itself, in plan, is straight. stability of the structure is once more assured, and suggested, by its concave and battered abutments, but the arch itself with its 3 foot deep voussoirs is (Continued on page 51)

49

Top left: A close up of the

dentil

Top right: The alternating

bands of hammer dressed and rusticated stonework are clearly seen Left: in this view it can been that there appears to be no special keystone as on most bridges on the canal. The dentil under the cornice with the blocking course and parapet on top can be seen.

Right: The enormous concaved &

battered buttresses are linked by a stilted arch, which can be seen to be straight in plan

Left: A view from the towpath

THE WYRE AQUEDUCT 50

(Continued from page 49)

straight on plan.

THE LUNE AQUEDUCT It says much for Rennie‘s inventiveness as an engineer that, after all these designs - and he made still more for other sections of the canal - he was able to produce a design for the Lune aqueduct which surpasses them all. Within weeks of its completion in 1797 it became a tourist attra ction a nd has remained one ever since.

In its sober magnificence it has, to my mind, no rival in the North West and is only surpassed by Telford's totally different aqueduct over the River Dee - the breath taking Pont Cysyllte, When it was completed, A view many years ago when it all looked much more tidy the Lune aqueduct was, to the best of my knowledge, the longest and highest yet built in Britain. With its abutments and five arches of 70 feet span, its total length exceeds 600 feet, and, according to Rennie's drawings the level of the water in the trough is 53 feet above the normal water level in the river. Such boldness created practical problems, but the existence in Lancaster Library of a photocopy of some of Rennie's designs has enabled me to state - rather than to guess, as I have been previously forced to do - how Rennie approached a solution.

Rennie's main concerns seem to have been to ensure the lateral stability of his bridge, and to prevent the almost semi-circular arches from An old view across the aqueduct, complete with telephone poles. bursting. Comparison of the two transverse sections with the horizontal section taken between the top of the arch and the puddle indicates a system of tie bars at two levels - an upper network under the puddle stretching the whole length of the bridge and anchored firmly into each pier, and a single transverse bar a third of the way down each pier. The pencilled lettering which annotates the drawings has not reproduced well but seems (Continued on page 52)

51

(Continued from page 51)

to indicate that the network of tie bars was made up of 12 foot brass bars with a cross section of 4 1/2 inches x 1 inch, and that the anchors were cast iron bars 6 feet long by 71/2 x 11/4 inches.

Rennie's concern that the aqueduct's arches might burst and the measures he designed to prevent this are interesting in their own right and also as an illustration of how his University-trained mind worked. The horizontal section through the spandrels shows two longitudinal walls within the main structure. I cannot tell from the copy drawing whether or not the spaces between the walls were backfilled with rubble, or puddled clay, but I understand that a modern engineer would regard their dead weight as sufficient by itself to confine the arch in its proper shape. Rennie was apparently not so sure, and there is an interesting story behind the device of inverted arches which he designed into the structure.

Rennie was exceptional among eighteenth century engineers in that he had studied at a university - in Edinburgh between 1780 and 1783. He seems to have studied what was of interest and use to him in his already established practice as a millwright - primarily chemistry and physics - rather than following an academic course. He came down without a degree, although he had a reputation as a good student and maintained a lifelong friendship with his professor, John Robinson (1739-1805). The latter's respect for his former pupil's intellect and practical skill led him to seek his advice when preparing a book which was published in 1797 as 'Outlines of a Course of Lectures in Mechanical Philosophy'. It is quite clear that Rennie was au fait with the most advanced aspects of contemporary structural science.

We know that eighteenth century experimenters investigating arches and their failures loaded model arches with independently hung vertical weights. Their research showed that, if a semi-circular arch is overloaded at the crown, this weight will cause the crown to sink and thus burst the arch at two points, one on each side of the crown. These points of failure could be found by extending a tangential line from the intrados of the crown of the arch and noting where it crossed the extrados. Rennie must have had this in mind when designing the Lune aqueduct, as the longitudinal section shows that he introduced a 24 foot radius inverted arch whose thrust would bear upon the extrados of the main arch just below its theoretical bursting point. This arch must have some effect but, as I wrote earlier, is now regarded as superfluous because of the dead weight of the internal spandrel walls which carry the trough of the canal.

The canal itself, as the transverse section shows, is 20 feet wide - rather than the normal 42 feet - when it passes over the bridge; in the Wyre and Brock aqueducts it is only 16 feet wide. In all these cases the trough appears now to have been remade in concrete, but a drawing for the Lune aqueduct indicates that it was originally made in stone. Its curving side walls were 18 inches thick and the bottom was 1 foot deep, and they all rested on a base of puddled clay, at least 3 feet thick, which was supported by the arch and the spandrel walls. In this way the trough was made effectively watertight and the problem of seepage reduced to a minimum.

None of this superstructure could - obviously - be built before the foundations. These were laid on wooden piles driven into the river bed within 20 feet coffer dams kept dry by steam pumps. The work by direct labour under the personal supervision of William Cartwright, the resident engineer's assistant was started in January, 1794, and, despite flash floods, bad weather and recalcitrant workmen, was completed in 18 months, to everyone's satisfaction. The superstructure was then begun by Alexander Stevens, a fellow Scot, whom Rennie had recommended previously as an inspector of masonry, and finished by his son, of the same name, in the autumn of 1797. The role of the Stevens‘, father and son, is commemorated, in Latin, in part of the inscription on the downstream face of the aqueduct.

(Continued on page 54)

52

A view of the heavy blocking course counter balancing the projecting cornice with the frieze in between.

Recent repairs to the southern embankment of the Lune necessitating a section on new concrete bed..

53

(Continued from page 52)

The design of the Lune aqueduct is altogether more monumental than that of any other on the canal. Even the Wyre aqueduct would almost fit into one of its five arches. Its scale, because there are few points of reference, is difficult to appreciate until one gets quite close and sees that the voussoirs are 4 feet high; this is perhaps why Collyer added men, horses and barges to his engraving - even though his men are about eight feet tall. With the exception of the heavy abutments which, as usual are concave and battered, the form of the structure reveals little of the structural problems it resolves - because the resolution is largely internal. All one sees is a combination of elegance and strength. The leap of each arch across the river is checked by the pilaster which projects above each cutwater. Only the fact that the pilasters are battered whereas the arches are straight on plan hints at internal forces to be counterbalanced. The appearance of the pilasters is lightened by the sunken ashlar panels, but the visual stability of the whole is enhanced by the rusticated masonry with its chamfered bedjoints and finally sealed by the heavily projecting cornice with its deep freeze and balustraded blocking course.

Above: A view clearly showing the pilasters,

with the sunken ashlar panels, standing on the cutwaters. These can be seen to be battered whereas the arches themselves are straight on plan.

At the top can be seen the heavily projecting cornice with its deep frieze and balustraded blocking course

If one compares a modern map showing the line of the canal with the map of 1795 which shows the line originally proposed by Rennie, one will notice very soon that only the Lune aqueduct (and perhaps the Calder syphon) now stands on the sites first suggested. Every other aqueduct was in fact built lower down the course of the river it crossed, and the canal consequently follows a different and shorter route. The changes betoken a greater boldness on the part of Rennie after the acceptance of his original line, which differed relatively little from Whitworth's preferred line of 1772. An important change is however at the crossing of the Lune, which Whitworth suggested should be made at Halton Scars. This place name no longer stands on modern maps, but a comparison of maps suggests that it was nearly as far upstream as the Crook o' Lune The Economic Impact of the Canal One aqueduct proposed by Rennie was however never built. The Ribble crossing was left to the last because of the difficulties involved and of the expense these would entail. Rennie 's original intention had been to lock down 222 feet from what is now called Walton Summit, to bring the canal on an (Continued on page 55)

54

(Continued from page 54)

embankment to a high aqueduct and then to link up with the Lancaster level. In view of the fact that the Lune aqueduct had cost £48,321, whereas the original estimate had been £18,619 the committee was reluctant to embark on such a project. Instead it favoured a plan by William Cartwright which involved a cast-iron tramway down from Walton Summit to a low trestle bridge over the Ribble and then up to Preston wharf. The opening of this tramway in 1803 - its route can still be traced - was very important to Preston, as it made coal more easily obtainable and therefore cheaper. By 1825 many cotton mills had been established and the population had trebled to 30,000. Preston soon became economically more important than Lancaster.

The judgement is not mine, but belongs to Edward Bains. In his 'History, Directory and Gazetteer of the County Palatine of Lancaster', published in 1825, he wrote; "The Lancaster Canal is one of the great public works of this County". Such indeed it was meant to be, for the plaque on the upstream face of the Lune aqueduct bears the proudly laconic inscriptions "TO PUBLIC PROSPERITY". On the downstream side a Latin inscription elaborates the same theme in two lines of hexameters which were thus translated at the times 'Old needs are served, far distant sites combined. Rivers by art to bring new wealth are joined".

However, Baines felt obliged to continue; "and if it does not materially add to the commerce of the town of Lancaster, it does very essentially advance the interests of the extensive line of country through which it is conducted." The following year the opening of the Glasson branch gave a welcome boost to the tonnage passing through Lancaster's foreport, and until the opening of Preston Dock in 1892 the best way of getting heavy or bulky goods to Preston was via the canal. Nevertheless, Baines‘ verdict was essentially valid. To this day one can see between Lancaster and Preston the remains of one quarry and two banks of limekilns which were opened to take advantage of the canal. There are others on other stretches, and there must have been more than now survive. The prosperity was public indeed.

Conclusion The overbridges of the Lancaster Canal are there for everyone to enjoy, but, to be fully appreciated, the various under-bridges must be approached across country by circuitous paths or down steep embankments at some risk to limb if not to life, My aim has been to prove that such a pilgrimage to a dozen sites more than repays the effort involved. Short of a truly catastrophic collapse of an embankment or of a major aqueduct - which is in fact even less likely - there is little chance that the canal will be closed for the foreseeable future. Yet the future will probably stretch farther than we can foresee, and what is now unthinkable may well come to pass. John Ramie's well-deserved fame as the last, and possibly the greatest, of the bridge builders who used traditional masonry techniques is unlikely to be tarnished by then. So, what should happen to his works? I cannot in conscience advocate the preservation of anything which is not aesthetically or technically significant and/or unique, but I believe that every bridge should be photographed and its significant dimensions measured and that these records should be collated with Rennie's extant drawings in London. I further believe that I have made a good case for the Calder syphon and the aqueducts over the Brock, the Wyre and the Lune to be preserved in perpetuity as monuments to John Ramie's engineering skill and taste as a designer.

(We are extremely- grateful to Jeffrey Rowbotham, Planning Officer for Lancashire County Council, for providing the Trust with a paper prepared by one of his assistants. Permission has been given to re-print the document in these pages and we are sure members will find it most interesting.)

55

THE FLORA & FAUNA ALONG THE NORTHERN REACHES Extract from Waterwitch Edition 52 Autumn 1980

The

Cumbria Naturalist's Trust have circulated a guide for those walking the northern reaches of the Lancaster Canal. It was submitted to I.W.A.A.C. in 1977 and we repeat here some parts of the guide which will be of interest to members who decide to ―navigate‖ the closed section of the canal on foot.

The Nature Trail from Field End Bridge to Stainton The stretch of canal from Crooklands to Stainton meanders through a drumlin landscape and under several bridges before arriving at Field End Bridge. Drumlins, snail often oval shaped hills, were formed when material collected under ice and the ice flowed over the top. There is an embayment just south of Field End Bridge, and looking southwards from the towing path on the opposite bank, an intricate pattern of hedges can be seen stretching towards the main road. These replace the drystone walls of the Lake District, are mostly of hawthorn, are well maintained and laid and provide good cover for mammals and birds. Contrast these with the open hillside on the east bank with its straggling busses of holly and ivycovered hawthorn which provide berries for flocks of redwings and fieldfares visiting the area in winter. A sparrow-hawk uses this section of the Canal as a Burr reed regular hunting ground.

Standing opposite the embayment - a wide section of the Canal used at one time as. a passing place or turning point for barges - one can see that the eastern side has become silted up. In summer time horse tails and burr reed are prominent in the shallower water. They provide cover and nesting sites for coots, moorhens and mute swans, and in winter the mud is rich in food.

Stand of Larch

Redshanks, with their characteristic warning cry and white rumps, are present for most of the year and in spring the common sandpiper will flit low over the water on bow like wings. Carrion crows and magpies nest in the holly and hawthorn behind the embayment. The crows like to perch on the larch trees that border the Canal. The route of the Canal can be identified by these rows of larches, almost certainly planted when (Continued on page 57)

56

(Continued from page 56)

the Canal was first built to provide posts and rails for maintenance.

In Springtime, curlews and lapwings frequent the surrounding fields, while in winter this spot lies right in the flight line of blackheaded gulls, common gulls, jackdaws and rooks which forage on the fields and return to the Lake District to roost at sunset. Notice in spring how the heavier soil of the towing path suits cowslips and lesser celandines.

Curlew

Field End Bridge south side

Now turn to face Field End Bridge. In spring time the damson blossom round Field End Farm to the west is quite spectacular, as is the blackthorn on the hedges. The bridge, as Lesser celandines with all others on the canal is a delightful example of nineteenth-century architecture worthy of preservation. Similar bridges over the railway have lost their identity following electrification. Some green Lakeland slate has been incorporated into the stonework Herb robert of the bridge which makes it appear incongruous among the limestone.

Using the bridge as a framework, you can now enter the picture. Contrast the scarcity of mosses and ferns on the southern side of the bridge with Dogâ€&#x;s Mercury those to be found as soon as you see the northern side where they are shaded from the direct sunlight. In addition to maidenhair spleenwort fern, try to find bramble, herb robert, ivy dandelion, a tiny oak and a small elder, all of which have gained a foothold.

Notice, too, now that you have passed below the bridge, how quickly everything has sprouted on the opposite bank since being cut back in 1977. Embankment trees have to be coppiced or felled intermittently as otherwise they weaken the embankment. Note the typical woodland flora of dog's mercury, bluebells, holly and gean.

Hereafter the Canal provides what for Cumbria is a unique Blue tailed damselfly habitat of near-stagnant water, wooded banks, scrub, reeds and open fields beyond. In summer swallows and house martins dip low over the water after knats and gagglings and possibly the weaker-flying alder flies whose laval life is spent in the Canal itself. Damsel flies, (Continued on page 58)

57

too, are attractive with their red or blue bodies and lacelike wings. As you walk along the towing path, look carefully at the edge of the water for pond skaters which skim on the surface of the water. Under the shelter of vegetation, a more slender relative called Hydrometra is more secretive as it moves slowly along the surface film.

Pond skater For those interested in aquatic plants, the unpolluted water between here and Stainton supports bottom-rooted waterweeds, such as curly pondweed and the Canadian pondweed, spiked water-milfoil, later in the season, spineless hornwort in what is now its only known Cumbrian locality.

All these plants grow submerged. Those which bear their leaves above the surface include reed-grass which forms a striking golden fringe to the Canal in winter, branched burreed, common water plantain, bottle sedge, pond sedge and an aquatic representative of the ancient group of horsetails of which a terrestrial species is to be seen on the Canal bank. Floating duckweed is common arid often covers the Canal at the Stainton end, blown in by the wind.

On the canal banks are species common to many English canals - willow herb, meadow sweet, woody nightshade, wild angelica, the extremely poisonous hemlock, water dropwort, marsh woundwort, water mint and forget-me-nots. This succession of plants is best seen from between the next bridge and the end of the canal, and also along the filled-in section after the bridge at Stainton.

The section between these bridges and the filled-in section are the most interesting stretches.

In the hedge running along the edge of the bank near the first of these bridges, one can usually find old nests of blackbirds and thrushes. In winter these nests are filled by fieldmice with pips from hawthorn berries. Now that there is more cover, wrens can be heard, summer and winter alike, with their piercing calls,

Poison Hemlock

Meadowsweet

Swan Mussel

The wood on the opposite bank is more substantial than the lines of larches and nearly always has long tailed tits in winter along with great tits and blue tits.

There is a good variety of hardwoods, including silver birch, oak, ash, cherry, willow and elm - which is still free from disease. Note in particular the fine elm at the Stainton end of the canal.

Along the final stretch, after the last bend, everything is in abundance. If you are walking quietly, a sudden disturbance near the surface of the water means that a pike has been basking in the sunshine. Eels also frequent the canal, as do perch and roach, the young of which are to be seen in shoals. The large shells on the bottom of the canal are those of the swan mussel.

Smaller species of mussels are also present, as are several kinds of aquatic snail, including the lime loving Bithynia which has not yet been found anywhere in the Lake District.

The willow scrub along the opposite bank provides a haven for warblers in the summer. From May until early July the willow warblers, chiffchaffs, white-throats, garden warblers and blackcaps can be heard singing.

58

Door snail

Rosebay willow herb

Water forget-me-not

Marsh Woundwort

Orange tip butterfly

Sedge warbler

59

(Continued from page 58)

Reed buntings, the cockbirds having black heads and white collars, sing from a high perch on the willows or reeds. Mute swans nest along this stretch and in 1977 a Canada goose arrived with the swans. In 1978 it brought a mate and nested. Sometimes moles kick up mounds of soil where their runs come near the surface and another mammal which leaves its traces in the mud is a relative newcomer - the mink.

Shortly before the Stainton end of the Canal a beck flows underneath and it is worth a detour to see the wonderful architecture of this aqueduct. Contrast the swift flowing stream with its occasional dipper and grey wagtails with bright yellow breast which rarely venture on to the canal. On the other hand, the kingfisher which comes to the canal in winter, is not often seen along the beck. Pass under the bridge carrying the canal and note the luxuriant growth of ferns and other plants on the north facing wall.

Chiff Chaff

On arriving at Stainton end, take a close look at the stonework of the final bridge. In the crevices you should be able to find at least five different types of snails - if you look very carefully. Some are no larger than mouse droppings, but are incredibly beautiful when seen under a magnifying glass. Others, the so called door snails, have long pointed tails.

It is interesting to see how quickly nature claims her territory back as you pass across to the other side of this, bridge. At one time it was planned to fill in this section of the Canal but it now provides a different habitat altogether. Nettles have taken over in the centre and it is a haven for butterflies - small tortoiseshells, peacocks, red admirals and the orange tip is also common from May until almost the end of June, with meadow browns coming later.

Along the hedge bottom are good stands of lords and ladies, and cuckoo pint, and in spring there are violets and occasional primroses. The dense cover provides a habitat for most of the warblers mentioned earlier and also for sedge warblers.

It is an excellent spot to sit - to wait and watch. This after all is the way to absorb the change in mood of the natural environment. It is an experience to be shared by naturalists, anglers and artists, and those who engage in more active pursuits - such as boating and rambling - who also find pauses for reflection most rewarding. And if you wish to observe wild creatures at their best, remember it is better to let them come to you, rather than to. warn them of your approach and disturb them.

Reed Bunting

Cuckoo pint or Lords & Ladies 60

CANAL SIDE-EFFECTS Extract from Waterwitch Edition67 Autumn 1984 Colin S. Barnes tells how one canal's influence spread far beyond its banks.

(Re-printed from Lancashire Life - March 1975)

The

commercially useful life of the Lancaster Canal drew to a close 128 years ago, when the railway began to take away the trade. But the legacy of the 18th century canal builders is not confined to their surviving waterway, Today, their influence can still be seen in the buildings of the surrounding countryside. For lock attendants, bank rangers and other employees, the canal needed accommodation. The style of cottages provided, was new to the area, and it set a pattern soon to be echoed, by other dwellings. Take for instance, the design for a group of cottages at Glasson, dated 1819 and found among drawings in the possession of the British Waterways Board at Lancaster. This illustrates a new phase in domestic building, providing a fresh influence apparent in a variety of features. There wan the vertical proportion of the windows, the carefully cut projecting stone sills and the splayed stone lintels over windows and doorways. This new look must have made quite an impression for many.

Examples of detached farm dwellings have been recorded in which the Glasson innovations were incorporated. Georgian balanced vertical sash windows replaced the traditional side-hung wood, casements or the Yorkshire horizontal sliding sashes, and a more liberal use of fireplaces in these Georgian-houses was, in part at least, encouraged by the improved supply of coal .resulting from the opening of the. canal.

Thus, in plan arrangement, the dwelling built for a lock-keeper at Glasson is not dissimilar to the arrangement commonly found in the later Georgian farmhouses of the district. The centrally placed entrance door opened on to the living room from which access was made to a front parlour and another smaller compartment behind it. Staircase access to the upper floor was made from the living room on to a landing which gave access to two bedrooms' and a very small boxroom. The house contained four hearths evidence of the abundant supply of fuel that the canal provided. The remarkable fertility of the Fylde through which the canal passes was at least partly due to the improved transport for lime and other fertilisers which the waterway made possible, and the extent of the canal's influence on the region now stands revealed by the surviving examples of smaller dwellings built after the of the canal in 1794 and up to the termination of its useful life in about 1846.

Perhaps the most noticeable feature attributable to the canal is the introduction of green Westmorland slate (superseding thatch) for roofing purposes; limestone also/appears as a walling material in the traditional Fylde brick area during this period, and on both stone and brick districts the use of freestone (Continued on page 62)

61

PROBLEM CORNER Waterwitch’s Agony Aunt Page A new "Waterwitch" service to the membership "Waterwitch" is pleased to be able to announce that we have secured the services of the Princess Risborough to answer: and give advice to members who may have problems. The first batch of problems and advice follows Dear Princess Risborough, "I am eighteen years of age and the other night I was walking along the towpath in Selly Oak when a Harrow Boat captain invited me aboard. He made me sniff glue and plied me with seventeen rum and blacks and then walked me home. Did I do wrong?"

Worried Dolores Answer; My Dear, try to remember.

Dear Princess Risborough "My father tells me there is more to life than sex and narrow boating on the canals.

Is this true ?

Myrtle Trummock, Answer; Why not try writing about the waterways !

Dear princess Risborough, "Is the 'I.W.A. as an organisation, as democratic as the Lancaster Canal Trust ?

As you are a member of both perhaps you could comment."

Simon Gruntfuttock.

Answers Well, of course I am delighted to answer this question. Let me illustrate. If an LCT member goes to the LCT Chairman and calls him a buffoon the LCT Chairman will not mind a bit and neither will any LCT member. Similarly if an IW& member goes to the IW& Chairman and tells him the LCT Chairman is a buffoon the IWA. Chairman will not mind a bit and neither will any IWA member. I hope this serves to prove how democratic both these organisations are.; I am proud to be associated with both,,

(Continued from page 61)

for quoins (dressed stones at the angles of buildings) in the smaller dwellings marks a new phase. There are many surviving examples of cottages where thatch has been stripped, advantage being taken of the low pitch made possible by the use of slate to convert loft space into a habitable room.

The magnificent scale and bold detailing of the Wyre Aqueduct, designed by Rennie, must have greatly impressed local inhabitants, and it is not un-reasonable to suppose that this structure alone must have been, responsible for the introduction of many of the new details which began to appear as embellishments to the district's dwellings. True, by the time the canal arrived the architecture. of the larger homes of the gentry was .already reflecting changes in national fashion. But there was in Lancashire a considerable time lag before the new style was taken, up for smaller houses and cottages. Shortcircuiting this traditional delay in the local application of national trends, canal architecture demonstrated to Lancastrian cottagers that stone building refinements' were not necessarily just for the well-to-do. If lock-keeper could have them, so could farmers . And they did. CB

62

THE LANCASTER CANAL TRAMROAD

By Gordon Biddle Extract from Waterwitch Editions 66 & 67, 1984

The

following article, which will appear in the next few issues of "Waterwitch", was prepared by our member, Gordon Biddle, for the journal of the Railway and Canal Historical Society. It originally appeared in Volume 9 (Nos 5 & 6) in September and November, 1965. It can be regarded as the definitive history of the tram-road. Members are warned that references to current traces of the tram-road are now out of date. Nevertheless much still remains, including Whittle tunnels, and the Penwortham tram-road embankment arid bridge across the River Ribble. There are other traces, too numerous to mention here, for the interested observer to find.

The Lancaster Canal Company was incorporated, by an Act of 1792 to construct a broad canal on a line surveyed by John Rennie, 75 miles long, from Westhoughton on the south Lancashire coalfield between Wigan and Bolton, through Chorley, Preston and Lancaster to Kendal in Westmorland. The Rivers Ribble and Lune were to be crossed by massive stone aqueducts, the former accompanied, by 222 feet of lockage down into the valley, and further north on the Westmorland border a rise of 65 feet, the remainder being level. The object of the canal was to carry coal northward cheaply and bring limestone south, for which there was a respective demand in each district. The company spent most of its capital in cutting sections from Preston to Tewitfield, north of the Lune Aqueduct opened in 1797and Bark Hall, Nr Wigan, to Johnson's Hillock, south of the Ribble, opened in 1799.

Goods had to be laboriously carted by Johnson's Hillock road over the intervening eight miles and some coal from Chorley pits went by boat down the Douglas Navigation, up the Ribble estuary to Preston Marsh, and thence by road to the canal wharf at Spittals Moss, just outside the town. Loss of tolls on the South End induced the canal committee to extend it another two miles to Clayton Green, to cut out the very worst of the road to (Continued on page 64)

63

(Continued from page 63)

Preston, and at the same time they instructed their Resident Engineer, William Cartwright. to prepare a fresh estimate for crossing the barrier of the Ribble.

At the half-yearly meeting on 2 July, 1799, Cartwright gave his estimate for constructing locks, embankment and aqueduct at £172,945, and as a temporary measure advocated a tramroad The Avenham incline to the old Bridge can just be discerned to connect the two ends of the canal for £60,000, including extensions of the waterway from Spittals Moss to the northern edge of he Ribble valley at Avenham and Clayton Green to Walton Summit on the edge of the The replica Bridge southern escarpments. From Avenham a double line tramroad would descend the steep bank of the river by an inclined plane to a timber bridge over the Ribble, followed by a 71 embankment across the water meadows to Carr‘s Wood, Penwortham, where a

second Incline would ascend 60 feet. Here the two lines would diverge, the southbound track continuing by three levels connected by two more planes, one near Bamber Bridge and the other at Walton Summit,, a total rise of: 215 feet* Some . earthworks and short tunnel would be needed to preserve the levels. The northbound. line would des c end fr o m W a lto n to Penwortham on. a separate course following the natural.

The Incline today

(Continued on page 65)

64

(Continued from page 64)

slope of the ground to enable it to be worked by gravity. The tramroad was to keep to the Parliamentary line of the canal except for slight deviations to ease curves and give an even descent, Cartwright proposed a gauge of 41/2 and waggons 6‘ by‘ 2‘ weighing 10 cwt tare and costing £l4 apiece„' The Act of Incorporation provided for additional capital of £200,l00 by mortgage or subscription, but thee financial outlook was on the raw side. It was decided the only way to raise the money was in new £30 shares. Counsel advised that this was not legal under the 1792 Act so a further Act was obtained to this end on 20th June1800. In their eagerness to finance a tramroad the committee seemed to overlook that the canal Act did not provide for an alternative mode of conveyance and it was not until an act of 13 Aug 1807 was obtained for deviations in the Kendal line that a clause was inserted authorizing A replica track ―railways or waggonways within the line of the canal.‖ Cutting of the extension to Clayton Green began in October, l800, but a firm decision on the Ribble crossing had still not been made. There were three distinct factions within the company of proprietors; the original promoters from Lancaster, mostly merchants interested in increasing their town‘s trade; a Westmorland party which wanted cheap coal for Kendal and the Lake District; and the inevitable ―Liverpool Party‖ common-to so many canals and early railways, which included proprietors from Preston. The latter it was which constantly battled for a canal across the Ribble, losing no opportunity to point out that the costly Lune Aqueduct was comparatively little used, the bulk of the traffic stopping short at Lancaster. The prospect of a tramroad across the Ribble in their view appeared likely do delay even more the possibility of a through canal and in September Rennie wrote to Samuel Gregson, Clerk to the Company, stressing

(Continued on page 66)

65

The Tram Railway Connection (Not to scale) Avenham

Penwortham

Walton Summit

= Steam Engine Bridge over Ribble

The waggons were drawn up the inclines by steam engines.

The one at Avenham was typical. It was of 6hp and made by a firm named Wilkinson which was based in Wrexham, All the engines were housed in sheds. At Avenham and Penwortham these sheds were at the top of the inclines, at Walton Summit at the bottom.

that a tramroad must only be a temporary expedient.

If allowed to become permanent it would eventually be an encumbrance, which it did, although by luck the company was able to get rid of it at the right moment. On 5 December Gregson wrote to a shareholder assuring him of the temporary nature of a tramroad in order to speed traffic and induce the opening of new pits on the South end. It would also be invaluable for carrying materials for the Ribble Aqueduct, he said.

The committee was still in two minds about it in March, 1801, when they asked Rennie .and William Jessop to report on the problem. The two engineers submitted their conclusions on 12th May and after giving again detailed recommendations for a stone aqueduct and embankment as the only permanent solution, went on to advocate the immediate but temporary expedient of a tramroad. They discarded Cartwright's system of separate roads and instead proposed a straightforward double track following the Parliamentary line, 43/4 miles long, with inclines at Avenham, Penwortham and Walton Summit, the former worked by a steam engine and endless chain but the other two perhaps by counterbalancing rising and descending wagons on the self acting principle.

Nevertheless they provided for three engines in their estimate of £21,600. A general meeting on 7 July authorized construction and Jessop was paid a fee of £70. Rennie, as Engineer to the company, received rather more. is account was credited with £112 5s 4d.

Land was quickly purchased and Cartwright went over to Derbyshire to study the Peak Forest tramroad.

(Continued on page 67)

66

(Continued from page 66)

On his return he suggested that the tramroad should be taken on from Avenham into Preston to meet the canal rather than the reverse, as there was more room for warehouses and accommodation on the company's land near Fishergate. This was adopted, a single line tunnel being necessary under Fishergate. A sectional drawing of the tramroad by Cartwright, dated 1802, shows L section tramplates with the gauge between the facing edges of the flanges as 4‘ 3‖ but this has been altered in pencil to 4‘ 1‖, which is the distance stated in the company's book of specifications. The width between the two lines of plates was 3‘ 8‖ and the entire roadbed was 24‘ between the drains.

Each tramplate was specified to be cast of best No 1 pig irons not exceeding 40lb per yard, and the dimensions were; 3‘long, 3 1/2 broad on the bearing surface, 1/2" thick, flange 2‖ high at each end bowed upwards to 32 at the centre, and a 11/2 ‖ deep rib on the underside. Two 3/8‖by 1/2 ‖ countersunk recesses were to be cast in each end so that two plates, butted together , would form holes for the iron ―gad nails‖ or spikes which secured them to the sleeper blocks. The suppliers were to keep the plates in repair for the first twelve months. Stone blocks were quarried near Lancaster, 16‖ to 20‖ long, 12‖ broad and 82‖ to 10‖ thick with two holes bored for the spikes. By May 1803 10,500 had been prepared at 5d each.

Work on extending the canal to Walton Summit was hampered by trouble in cutting Whittle Hills Tunnel, but by-January, 1802, the extension of the North End from Spittals Moss, was ready. Next month contracts for tramplates were advertised and in April, the committee ordered 300 tons from the Aberdare Iron Co. at £1010s 0d per ton with a reserve on another 100 tons if satisfactory. The next lowest tender was from Aydon and Elwell of Shelf Ironworks, near Bradford, who were told they could supply 100 tons if they would deliver at £1015s 0d per ton, to which they agreed. Walton Summit Basin and the incline roadbed were ready and Cartwright was ordered to obtain an engine and endless chain.

Whether one was erected is doubtful, is nowhere else in the company‘s minutes is an engine referred to at Walton and I suspect that this incline was worked by horses, or perhaps counterbalancing. I hopefurther research will give the answer.

Late delivery of the plates from Shelf caused more delay, while those supplied by the Aberdare were 8 lb. overweight yet so badly cast that they broke under a 31/2 tons test load. ―I never saw any castings so badly executed‖, wrote Cartwright to Gregson in October, ―I confess if they had been moulded in gravel instead of sand they could not have been rougher handled and the metal of itself is the worst I ever saw, a specimen of which I send you to lay before the Committee‖. They were not accepted and fresh tenders were sought from Sturges & Coy of Bowling Ironworks, Bradford; the Halton Iron Coy., A replica wagon showing the hooks for the endless chain Lancaster,, and Rigby's of Howarden. Sturges & Coy agreed to supply 100 tons at £10 15s 0d per ton.

(Continued on page 68)

67

The roadbed was now ready, with sidings laid out at various wharves, (―splice roads,‖ Cartwright called them). 1,400 yards long in all, for which inferior rail sorted out from deliveries was used. Extra strong rails were used at road crossings. The company's records do not give details of the inclines but some impression can be pieced together from scraps of information among the minutes. The length of Avenham incline was 115 yards on a gradient of about 1 in 6 the lower wheel being on the end of the wooden bridge over the Ribble. A.6 hp. engine (Rennie and Jessop had advocated only 3 h.p.) with 13" cylinders cast by Wilkinson of Wrexham drove the endless chain, performing 40 strokes per minute.

As it is stated that each engine cost £350 and the engine house, rollers and gear £450, presumably identical plant was erected at Penwortham incline, which was 165 yards long. A horse path ran alongside each incline. Ai the insistence of Sir Harry Hoghton of Walton Hall the Avenham engine was designed to consume its own smoke. The canal had an odd pair of names for the two tracks, the northbound one being called ―the coal or descending road‖, and the southbound one ―the limestone or ascending road‖, after the principal traffics carried in each direction.

In June, 1803, when Whittle Hills Tunnel was finally complete, the ‖Blackburn Mail‖ recorded the passage of the first train, or "team" as they were called, as far as Bamber Bridge. ―On the first instant, a boat laden with coal was navigated on the Lancaster Canal thro' the Tunnel at Whittle Hills, and her cargo was discharged into waggons at the termination of the canal at Walton. Twenty seven waggons were laden, each containing about one ton, and were drawn by one horse, a mile and a half, along the rail road, to the works of Messrs Claytons at Bamber Bridge. The waggons extended one hundred yards in length along the rail road, Geo. Clayton of Lostock Hall Esq., rode upon the first wagon and the tops of the others were fully occupied. The intention of navigating a boat through the tunnel, upon this day, was not generally known; it was quickly circulated; old and young left their habitations and employments to witness a sight so novel and before the boat reached her discharging place, she was completely crowded with passengers, who anxiously rushed into her at every bridge. The workmen were regaled with ale at Bamber Bridge| and among the toasts of the party were given, ‗The glorious First of June‘, ‗The Memory of Lord Howe‘, and ‗The healths of the surviving heroes of the memorable day‘. The reward of the horse for pulling such a load is not mentioned, although even if the gradually falling gradient did not demand much exercise, the number of wagons still seems somewhat suspect.

The ―coal road‖ was completed through to Preston in November and the south bound road early the next year, but on 19 January Cartwright died, probably of overwork, as in addition to supervising construction of the tramroad and the general working of the canal he was currently engaged on the installation of a 70 h.p. pumping

Recovering some old wagons from the Ribble

(Continued on page 69)

68

(Continued from page 68)

engine and tunnelling a shaft for drawing water from the Ribble for the canal at Preston. He was an able engineer, having superintended the building of the footings and underwater piers of the Lune Aqueduct and had designed several ingenious devices for the canal company.

At first a duty of 1s per ton was levied on-coal carried on the tramroad, plus 4d per ton for the use of a company wagon if the trader had none of his own. Later these charges were consolidated into 4s Per wagon (which at that time carried 2 tons) for a round trip, the company keeping the wheels oiled and repaired, the trader to maintain the rest. Traders‘ own wagons had to-be marked by a letter and number on an iron plate provided by the company, who kept a register of wagons in the same way as with canal boats.

Later the tonnage rates were revised on the lines of the canal rates and. incorporated in the company's full scale, but continued to be charged separately for the tramroad. The rates in 1819 for a cargo of coal carried throughout, for instance, were 11/2d per ton per mile on the South end; 1s per ton flat charge on the ―rail-way‖ (as it was then called), and 1d per ton per mile on the North end The tramroad rates were graduated from Walton - 4d per ton to Bamber Bridge, 6d per ton to Todd Lane, 8d per ton to Penwortham and 1s to Preston.

Wharves and warehouses gradually were extended as traffic grew and a map of Preston in 1824 shows the single line emerging from Fishergate Tunnel to meet the canal end-on, with a left hand branch to a side basin and a right hand branch to seven coal yards or ‗hurries‘ lining Fleet Street at right angles to the canal.

The 6‖ Ordnance Survey Map of 1845 shows that this had grown to a fan of sidings criss crossed by standard gauge railway lines, and at Walton Summit there was an elaborate layout of sidings alongside the two outer basins of the canal, connected by up and down inclines.

Continuing experience produced bye-laws for regulating the tramroad working in a piecemeal fashion at first but later properly drawn up and published in notices. The first to be enacted directed that only ‗shunts‘, i.e. crossover points, were to be used for transferring wagons from one line to the other, at least four being provided along the route. Originally wagons were permitted to load to 2 tons but frequent tramplate breakages dictated a 1 ton limit. Six small wagons or four large' wagons were allowed in a train and the incline enginemen were under penalty to enforce observance. Upon complaints from traders that their "halers" (wagondrivers) were demanding 25% wage increase through having to make more journeys to carry the same loads, the committee relented, to the extent of permitting 25 cwt per wagon. It was not uncommon for a driver to continue to haulderailed wagons along the roadbed if he could not be troubled to re-rail them, and if he did make the effort as like as not he would use his horse to drag them back forcibly on to the line one by one to the detriment of the plate flanges. Both practices were subject o a 5s fine, it being stipulated that re-railing must only be done with levers. In 1828 a bye-law was introduced prohibiting drivers from ‗sleeping in a waggon or otherwise not attending to his horses,‘ (Addendum.

Since writing this article I have, through the courtesy of Mr C.M.-Marsh, North Western Divisional Manager, British Waterways, been allowed to inspect the records held at the Divisional Offices at Liverpool, relating to the Lancaster Canal. A number of hitherto unsolved problems will obviously be answered by these records, and in connexion with the tramroad the doubt I expressed appears to be resolved. A set of plans to the scale of 2 chains to the inch prepared for the canal company by William Millar, their Engineer, in 1807s clearly shows a building marked ‗Engine House‘ on the site of what is now Summit Farm, at the foot of Walton Summit incline. As the incline was worked by an endless chain it would be quite feasible to have the engine at the bottom instead of the more usual place at the top).

(Continued on page 70)

69

(Continued from page 69)

Accidents on the inclines were fairly frequent, often due to the chain breaking, and another bye -law prohibited a northbound train from entering the Ribble bridge before the last wagon of the preceding train had been hooked on the Avenham chain. This chain made a complete revolution in nine minutes and wagons were hitched on one at a time at roughly equidistant intervals, the whole length being required to take up a six wagon train. The descent for the same number took six minutes. Chains were a constant source of trouble, in 1818 it being recorded that a patent twist-link chain at Penwortham had stretched by a tenth in 21 months and broke after a year. The more orthodox straight-link chain at Avenham lasted three years without breaking and over 31/2 years it stretched by one sixth. There is a graphic description in the minutes of an accident in 1826 when the Avenham chain broke in the upper wheel and sent three wagons, full tilt back down the 1 in 6 gradient. A haler riding on the middle one jumped clear and fortunately only his two horses were killed, but on other occasions loss of life was not limited to animals.

The permanent way and the Ribble bridge also were costly to keep in repair, large sums regularly being spent on maintenance. So, by and large, the tramroad was an expensive item and in 1822, on being asked to join the Duke of Bridgewater, the Mersey and Irwell Navigation and the Leeds and Liverpool Canal Coy in opposing William James's Liverpool and Manchester Railway scheme, the committee declined. ―Having found the maintenance of a Rail Road so much more expensive than a canal, they think the plan will not be generally accepted.‖ Despite immediate lack of wharfage the opening of the tramroad gave a rapid improvement in revenue.

Gross income in 1803 was £4,853; in' 1804 £8,489 and in the first six months alone of 1805 it amounted to £5,241, so that, at the general meeting on 1 July, it was felt that the company's first half-yearly dividend could safely be declared at £1 per share. Dissention now rose again between the parties. The Liverpool party wanted the Ribble to be crossed by canal as the next step, but the Westmorland Party, backed by the Lancaster faction, succeeded in insisting on carrying the canal on to Kendal, and in 1813 it was decided to make a start, at an estimated cost of £98,095 against £160,537 for replacing the tramroad. Walton wharves had been extended and 19 teams were working back and forth twice daily. The greater part of the road had been paved, and it was argued that having incurred so much expense, and as it was now apparently functioning quite well, the tramroad could continue in use a little longer.

In 1817, the Liverpool Party tried again but this time the northern proprietors had their eye or a branch canal to Glasson Dock as soon as the Kendal canal should be finished, (it was completed in 1815). There had been complaints from traders about long delays at the inclines so instead it was decided to divert the line at Penwortham to avoid that incline entirely, and replace the Avenham engine, with one more powerful, for which a second-hand one was bought for £240 but not erected until 1822. Two years later the Ribble protagonists tried a last time but the Lancaster Party was now firmly convinced that a Glasson branch would revive the declining Port of Lancaster and the plan to bring the South End to Preston was finally dropped.

Improvements to the tramroad continued and in 1827 it was suggested that a diversion should be made at Avenham, the incline abandoned and Fishergate Tunnel enlarged to take two tracks, but these proposals were not pursued. Next year 9 ft. plates were experimentally laid in the tunnel and on proving the system a success the west side of Walton incline was also re-laid, after which it was found that five laden wagons could be taken up instead of two. The new plates were cast by Lindsay and Coy of Preston, and Hills and (Continued on page 71)

70

(Continued from page 70)

Wheeley of Blaenavon. B.P. Gregson, Samuel's son and assistant, visited the, Stockton and Darlington and Bolton and Leigh Railways in September, returning to Lancaster to recommend broader wagon wheels fixed to the axles instead of loose springs, and brakes instead of ‗Lock-chains‘, to improve the efficiency.

In 1831 ‗new through blocks with hollow plates grooved in, and paving across the Turnpike Road at Bamber Bridge were laid evidently a form of level crossing.

The committee-obviously took to heart the success of the Stockton and Darlington and Liverpool and Manchester-Railways for in 1830, the year the latter was opened, they directed that the canal staff was to be reduced to the minimum as an economy measure and asked B.P. Gregson to prepare an estimate for converting the tramroad for locomotive haulage, which he thought would cost £11,650, excluding diversions and banking. This followed the threats of competition from the projected Preston and Wigan Railway (one of the constituents of the North Union Railway) and the Manchester and Preston Railway.

Gregson suggested they could be countered by either converting the tramroad to a railway for steam traction or joining forces with one of the newcomers and abolishing the tramroad and canal from Johnson's Hillock altogether, leaving the South End to the Leeds and Liverpool, which it already used as part of its line.

He seemed to be alive to the danger in a railway parallel to the canal, and pointed out that even should the present projects be defeated the benefits of railways were now so apparent that others would soon take their places. He. went on to state his opinion that if the committee decided seriously to oppose the Wigan line the best method of all would be to promote their own direct line from Preston to Liverpool.

So the committee resolved to seek George Stephenson‘s advice on the practicality of converting the tramroad, and after making a survey he reported that he would propose four self acting inclines between Walton and Penwortham bottom and an engine worked incline o9n a new line at Avenham, at an estimated cost of £11,894. Gregson commented that the plan would be difficult to execute and inconvenient to operate. He manifestly thought very little of Stephenson‘s addiction to inclines.

Simultaneously the committee was meeting the Preston and Wigan promoters who offered to build a quarter mile branch tramroad at Brownedge, whence canal traffic would use the new railway into a terminus at Preston alongside the wharf. The canal committee rejected the proposal on the ground that it was too vague.

The Wigan and Preston Bill received the Royal Assent on 22 April, 1831. Negotiations were also opened with the Manchester and Preston on similar lines, but their Bill failed.

A few years later the performance was enacted a third time, with the Bolton and Preston Railway, who wanted to use the tramroad course for their projected line into Preston, and on 27 January, 1837? it was agreed by the canal company to lease the tramroad to the railway in perpetuity, together with land near the canal wharf for a station, and all tolls received from traffic on the South End with the exception of income from Leeds and Liverpool traffic. In return the railway company agreed to pay the canal £6,000 a year, construct a short branch from their Preston station to the canal wharf, maintain (by means of their railway) an efficient link between the North and South Ends of the canal and keep an engine solely for the use of canal traffic. However, on 4 July 1838, the Bolton and Preston obtained an Act empowering them to enter Preston over North Union Railway metals from Euxton Junction as part of the price of buying off North Union opposition, so they never used the tramroad, but eventually agreed to maintain it for the canal in return for six hundred pounds a year towards the cost. The canal company later increased it to (Continued on page 72)

71

(Continued from page 71)

one thousand pounds rather than allow the B & P.R. preferential coal rates on the North End for traffic transferred at Preston. The new agreement was sealed on 6 September, 1838.

The clue to the canal company's willingness to shed what appeared to be its lifeline lay in the siding from the B & P.R. to Preston wharf, which was eventually built by the .N.U.R. To take this in exchange for the, tramroad and tolls on the South End might seem a bad bargain, despite the £7,000 a year net payment from the B & P.R. but it was far from it. Gregson foresaw that improved transit by rail and extensions northward would slowly sap the mineral traffic, hampered as it was by double transhipment, and in any case the tramroad was expensive to maintain, so why not concentrate on retaining the canal company's old established trade on the North End, using Preston as a rail-head ? This they did with some success, to the extent later of making an agreement with the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway for sharing traffic, the canal taking minerals and heavy goods - the railway the rest. Traffic from the South End collieries would have to continue using the tramroad although on a declining scale as the railway network spread, so that before long it would probably cease to be a paying concern. The wisdom of this argument was shown in the North Union accounts, that company certainly having the worst of the bargain. The project to use the tramroad site for a railway was revived briefly in 1843 during the B & P.E's rate-cutting war with the N.U.R., but finally lapsed when the two companies amalgamated on 10,May,1844. The tramroad thus passed to the N.U.R and later to the London & North Western and Lancashire and Yorkshire Railways jointly in the course of further amalgamations.

The first act of the new owners was to raise the tolls ―to the highest level‖, after which the B& P.R. had to set about renewing the Ribble bridge supports which were in a bad state. Wrought iron plates were also used in future track replacements. Gross profit from the South End tolls and tramroad in 1839 was about £1,000 but by 1850 the N.U.R. was losing nearly £5,600 on its canal venture. In 1847 the Ribble bridge was in need of urgent repairs, of which the bare minimum was executed, and there was talk of discontinuing tramroad maintenance, but the canal company stuck to the agreement, as it had no desire to redeem the millstone. It was doing quite nicely in its truncated form, and was receiving its £7,000 annuity into the bargain. By 1856 it was apparent that the Ribble bridge would have to be renewed and the N.U.R asked its controlling boards to sanction the expenditure of £1,500 for this and £1,000 for altering the tramroad gradients. The L & N.W.R did not demur, but the L & Y.R. jibbed at first before reluctantly agreeing to its share. The N.U.R asked the canal company to agree to closing part of the tramroad in order to avoid having to rebuild the bridge, but again the Lancaster company insisted on adhering to the 1837 agreement. The Avenham engine boiler was renewed for £120 in 1858.

In 1851 the Lancaster Canal leased to the Leeds and Liverpool Canal the tolls it had continued to receive from the latter's traffic on the South End. The Leeds and Liverpool's own tolls were already leased to railways which were attracting traffic away from the canal, so the decline of the tramroad was accelerated.

In the late 1850's trade depression decided the canal committee, ever realists, to open negotiations with the L & N.W.R. and the Leeds and Liverpool with a view to disposing of their canal, although the halfyearly dividend had not fallen below 16s. The result was the Lancaster Canal Transfer Act of 29.July.1864 whereby the North End was leased to the London and North Western and. the South End to the Leeds and Liverpool in perpetuity.

The L & N.W.R. and the L & Y.R. were allowed to close the tramroad from Bamber Bridge to Preston and come to an arrangement with Preston Corporation regarding the portion in what was now Avenham (Continued on page 73)

72

Park. The last through traffic recorded was in January 1862, although local traffic continued to use the section from Walton to Bamber Bridge, which was to be kept open. An Additional Powers Act of 21.July 1879, permitted the two railway companies to close the remainder, which they subsequently did. Most of the plates were taken up for scrap, but those in Fishergate tunnel and down to the wharf appear to have been left, as in September 1884 they were mentioned in connexion with street improvement works, part of the tunnel being filled in, and in November of that year we learn that the tramplates were finally removed from the north side of Fishergate. The rest of the tunnel was later enlarged by the L & Y.R. to form a road entrance from Corporation Street to its Bulter Street goods yard. On 1 July, 1885s the canal was formerly vested in the L & N.W.R., and the company was wound up on 1 January, 1886.

Considerable traces of the tramroad remain today, throughout most of its length, and. it is a pleasant walk from Leigh Brow down past Carr's Wood at Penwortham and over the embankment to the Ribble bridge, which has been re-constructed in reinforced concrete to the same design as its wooden forerunner.

Avenham Incline is now a park footpath. Only a short length at Brownedge and the portion in Preston have completely disappeared (see below. Ed.) except for a small piece of bridge abutment at the foot of Garden Street. Large numbers of sleeper blocks have been used to make a cart road up Walton incline, and blocks are also to be found near Penwortham and other odd places en route. My thanks are due to the British Railways Board Historical Records Office for kind permission to consult the Lancaster Canal Company's records, from which much of this article has been compiled, the Librarians of Lancaster, Preston and Blackburn, and the Lancashire County Archivist, Gordon Biddle (Readers will appreciate that since this article was written, circa l962, there have been many changes affecting the route of the tramroad - the most important being the obliteration of Walton Summit and incline 5 this is now part of the Walton Summit Housing and Trading estate. Ed.)

73

74

LOOKING BACK MRS MARLAND'S SCRAPBOOK Extract from Waterwitch Edition 41 Spring 1978 In early Autumn, 1977, your secretary and editor gave a canal talk to the Leyland Townswomen's' Guild and were pleased to meet, once again, our long serving member - Mrs Marland. Mrs Marland gave us her Lancaster Canal scrapbook for perusal. From the pages of press cuttings she has collected over the years we take this opportunity of looking back just a few years ago...

The inaugural meeting of the Lancaster Canal Boat Club took place on 23rd June, 1955, and press reports appear of their 2nd Annual Rally of Boats which took place at Lane Ends, Preston, on Sunday, 9th June, 1957. Apparently the main topic of conversation was the appearance at the Rally of a hire cruiser belonging to British Waterways (NW Division). The two private hirers on the canal (Arthur- Ingham of Blackburn and Sam Sherry of Galgate) expressed concern of what might become "unfair competition", but a spokesman for British Waterways said "There is plenty of room for all of us on this 45 mile stretch." As if to emphasise this statement only 24 boats took part in the grand cruise, just twice as many that had taken part at the first rally! This gives some indication of how quiet the canal was in those days and what a transformation has taken place since. Indeed the total membership of the Boat Club in that year was 100 persons, including only 28 boat owners.

In 1961, the Boat Club held their sixth annual rally which by all accounts was quite a large affair. One of the prize-winners quoted in the Lancs. Evening Post said "It is not particularly expensive sailing on the canal.

Biggest single item is insurance which costs about £9 for a £500 boat. The licence is just over £3 for eight months from April to December. There are about 154 boats on the 43 mile length of canal and the number is increasing every year. Ah well, those idyllic times are gone forever.

On to 1965 when a very full report appeared concerning the de-watering of the canal from Maudland Bridge to the terminus in Preston for the purpose of building the new Harris College. The main concern was what would happen to the fish as the water was slowly pumped out? The Northern Anglers Association came to the rescue with a working party which netted 50,000 fish including 17 pike. They were all removed and returned to the canal further north. As the stretch of water finally disappeared onlookers could see the remains of the barge "Kennedy" which was one of the last barges to run coal to Lancaster. In October that year there are reports of the joint working party on the canal to remove the weed "water soldier" which annually fouled the stretch between Preston and Catforth. The Boat Club, Trust, N.A.A. and BW workmen all combined in a joint effort to clear this green menace. Sid Wordsworth, then Trust secretary said "They've done a good job - it is going to take quite a long time to get good conditions, probably not this year, but it is a worthwhile job and it was high time we made an organised start." Mr Eric Fry, Boat Club chairman is quoted "We are setting off with a limited number but (Continued on page 76)

75

as it gains momentum we will have anything up to 100 volunteers each week-end."

On to 1968 and reports of what was perhaps the biggest demonstration ever to be mounted on the Lancaster Canal. Organised by the Trust and the Boat Club it took the form of a "protest cruise" from Lancaster to Tewitfield, with a public meeting at Tewitfield terminus. "Shelagh" was fully loaded and the "Lady Fiona" also participated with a full load of passengers. Dozens of pleasure cruisers also joined in and a large crowd assembled for the meeting and to listen to the speakers - Mr Colin Hearnshaw, Trust Chairman; Vice President M.J. Fitz-Herbert Brockholes, and Stanley Jeeves of C.P.R.E. The event received widespread publicity including the unlikely headline -"Pro-test March in a Barge‖. The protest was one of the last efforts made to change the Ministry of Transport's plans to culvert the M.6 extension crossings north of Tewitfield.

"This culverting plan", said Mr Brockholes, "is an example of the faceless authority of Whitehall completely disregarding the wishes of local people from the very inception of the motorway extension plans. The most office bound official in Whitehall would have his imagination stimulated if he saw what could be done. It would be cheaper to build bridges than culverts and the canal could be saved. All the evidence is overwhelmingly in the Trust's favour and we cannot accept the Ministry's refusal to build bridges. They have shown themselves quite unconcerned with the views of local people."

All this took place on 7th July, 1968. In the Autumn of that year the Trust took part in an illegal act and invited the B.W.B. to prosecute them ! Part of the Ministry's case was that the northern reaches were, in any case, completely un-navigable. To prove them wrong a cabin cruiser was launched and sailed from Holme to Tewitfield (top lock) without a hitch. "Our sail on the canal was an open invitation for a summons", said Colin Hearnshaw, Trust Chairman. "If they do summon us we could certainly prove our point." Commenting on this very mild case of civil trespass a BWB spokesman said "We will have to look into this question and possibility of prosecution rests with our legal people. We are open to take whatever action is necessary but I cannot say what this will be." In the event no summonses were issued and. the cruise seemed to substantiate Mr Hearnshaw 's claim that authority had been "deluding the public."

The end of the fight really came with a letter from the Ministry of Transport to Mr Stephen Jopling, M.P. for Westmorland, who had spearheaded the campaign in Westminster. The letter was published in the press in late 1968 "On all the mass of evidence before us, neither the Minister nor I, in a third detailed review of the case, can accept that the Trust's proposals are neither realistic nor reject the unanimous conclusion of all our experts.

Nothing I have seen or heard from the Trust persuades me that we can further delay this national project while we pursue the question any more... I really must ask you to regard this as a firm and final decision and to convey to the Trust an assurance that everything possible will be done to preserve, and if possible enhance the amenity value of the northern reaches of the canal..."

Part of the Ministry's case at that time was the expense which would be incurred to replace the piped sections of canal at Holme with concrete flumes and making the "un-navigable" northern reaches navigable again. Not many years later B.W.B. removed the pipes and put in a navigable concrete flume! Even later, as we all know, they agreed that light craft could once again use the canal north of Tewitfield!

So it goes. The canal became derelict from Tewitfield bottom lock largely because a young and inexperienced Boat Club failed to press hard enough for their statutory right to navigate the locks and beyond. Thus when the culverting proposals were made the Ministry could say the canal above Tewitfield was not used by boats.

This lesson was well learnt and other canal societies up and down the country had more success than the Trust in later years as a result.

All canals must be used if any effective opposition is to be made to proposed closures - the re-instatement of Ashton Basin at Preston is a good example of this principle being put into effect.

76

HINCASTER BRICK MYSTERY SOLVED Extract from Waterwitch, Edition 67 Autumn 1984 Hincaster Brick Mystery Solved.

This journal has mentioned from time to time the mystery as to exactly where the bricks for the Hincaster Tunnel were manufactured. John Curwen, in his definitive lecture on the canal in 1916, says the bricks were manufactured on site. This information has never been confirmed. Our member John Diggle has made- his own enquiries and his information, not confirmed, was that the site of the brick manufacture was at Moss Side Farm, Heversham, nr Milnthorpe, not a million miles from the tunnel. �Water-witch� is grateful -to local historian Eric H, Whitehead, of Kendal, for finally confirming the true position. The answer is provided in a book written 'by John Curwen entitled "Milnthorpe and. Heversham".- We re-print the relevant extract: Moss Side Farm. The first note that we have is that Richard Hodgson was the farmer here in 1770...... .The manufacture of bricks was started here when the Lancaster to Kendal Canal was in course of construction in order to provide bricks for the Hincaster tunnel. On 4 February, 1817, it was reported that two million bricks had been made and that half the length of the tunnel was completed. John Harker and Thomas Collins appear to have been the manufacturers, for in 1816 they advertised the supply of bricks to the public. In 1817 there were 50,000 put up for sale, and in 1818 Thomas Fletcher, the Canal Engineer, advertised 100,000 bricks that were left over from the works. In 1826 the yard was occupied by William Bindloss of the Church Farm. The manufacture was resuscitated again by John and Thomas Sharpies in 1845, when the Lancaster and Carlisle Railway was in construction. The clay was found to be well adapted for the purpose and over 100 men and 30 horses were employed in the works. Our quiet Moss Side must have been a busy place in those days.....If one travels north along the A6 and turns left in the middle of Heversham, Moss Side Farm is down the road about a quarter of a mile - on the left.

Present day maps still show the clay pits in the middle of one of the Farm's fields.

Moss Side Farm

Acknowledgement to Ordinance Survey

77

Overleaf: The photograph of the ‘Waterwitch’ on the back cover dates from spring 1997 when it first entered service.

Printed by Kent Valley Colour Printers (01539) 741344

78

Waterwitch Covers 1970 - 1982 Between Edition 13 & Edition 68 79

80