Broad to narrow on the T&M

[Kendal]

Sorry if this has already been discussed here but I've done a search and can't find anything. No doubt there will be plenty of historians on here that can enlighten me.

 

What influenced the decision to switch from a broad to a narrow canal at the particular locations they do, and specifically at Dallow Lane lock in Burton Upon Trent? I can appreciate why a junction might be selected, the start and finish of a canal, or for particular cost reasons (e.g. the change on the Leicester section at Foxton for the staircase and for the two tunnels?) but there doesn't appear to be any logic for selecting BoT, other than it possibly being a major town where the money ran out.

 

I understand it was built in one hit by James Brindley from 1766 to 1777, so it's not as if building was stopped at Burton and later started again.

[b0atman]

They saw the light and decided narrow is more beautiful.

[magpie patrick]

The Trent was already navigable to Burton, and it was envisaged Trent Marges might use the canal that far. Derwent Mouth Lock is even bigger than the others, to get the largest barges to Shardlow

 

At the other end the idea was that wide boats from the Bridgewater could get to Middlewich, but a mix up over tunnel sizes meant that Bridgewater barges couldn't fit though Preston Brook. I understand there were recriminations with both sides blaming the other, the T&M company saying they'd been given the wrong size and the Bridgwater saying the T&M couldn't read the instructions.

 

Note to pedants, this is a very loose summary!

[Timleech]

The Trent was already navigable to Burton, and it was envisaged Trent Marges might use the canal that far. Derwent Mouth Lock is even bigger than the others, to get the largest barges to Shardlow

 

At the other end the idea was that wide boats from the Bridgewater could get to Middlewich, but a mix up over tunnel sizes meant that Bridgewater barges couldn't fit though Preston Brook. I understand there were recriminations with both sides blaming the other, the T&M company saying they'd been given the wrong size and the Bridgwater saying the T&M couldn't read the instructions.

 

Note to pedants, this is a very loose summary!

 

Not Butters, though?

 

Incidentally, Dutton Stop Lock (as built) would take about the same width of boat (around 12') which would fit through the tunnels, but there is extant an early map which shows just a bar at this point. Is there any record of when this lock was actually built?

 

Tim

[AndrewIC]

There might be something in Lindsay's T&M book. I'll try to remember to have a look later.

[Kendal]

The Trent was already navigable to Burton, and it was envisaged Trent Marges might use the canal that far. Derwent Mouth Lock is even bigger than the others, to get the largest barges to Shardlow

 

At the other end the idea was that wide boats from the Bridgewater could get to Middlewich, but a mix up over tunnel sizes meant that Bridgewater barges couldn't fit though Preston Brook. I understand there were recriminations with both sides blaming the other, the T&M company saying they'd been given the wrong size and the Bridgwater saying the T&M couldn't read the instructions.

 

Note to pedants, this is a very loose summary!

Thanks for this. So if the Trent was navigable up as far as Burton (presumably for broad craft), then when the canal was built from Derwent Mouth I guess they kept it broad as far as Dallow Lane so those same wide beam barges could still make the journey, the river itself being left to silt up?

 

Edit to add: As the canal is nowhere near the river in Burton all the docks, warehouses etc on the river must have been abandoned with new ones having to be constructed on the newly built cut. Expensive business this canal building!

Edited September 23, 2014 by Kendal

[magpie patrick]

Thanks for this. So if the Trent was navigable up as far as Burton (presumably for broad craft), then when the canal was built from Derwent Mouth I guess they kept it broad as far as Dallow Lane so those same wide beam barges could still make the journey, the river itself being left to silt up?

 

Edit to add: As the canal is nowhere near the river in Burton all the docks, warehouses etc on the river must have been abandoned with new ones having to be constructed on the newly built cut. Expensive business this canal building!

 

They were both navigable for a while, managed by different entities, and there was even a canal between the two, the Bond End Canal, although this joined the T&M at Shobnall Basin which is above Dallow Lane Lock!

 

There was also briefly a connection at Swarkestone, the Derby Canal joining above Swarkestone Lock and owning a short cut with four locks down to the Trent.

 

The River navigation didn't last long once the canal was open, so the co-existence, and the connecting canals, were short-lived.

 

I can't comment on this particular case but normally when trade transfers as it did from, say the canals to the railways, there is an element of evolution, with new start-ups choosing the new for of transport and the older companies either going out of business or eventually transferring. It seldom happens overnight but yes, there is a lot of capital expended to get through the transition! This is one reason why vested interests fought so hard against change, it was expensive!

[Kendal]

Thank you Patrick, you have an excellent knowledge of the history. Clearly the evolution of the system was a lot more complex than one might believe when looking at what remains of the network today.

 

I have had a wander through some of these pages http://www.canalroutes.net/. Some fascinating and very detailed reading. I seem to recall Peter Hardcastle from my old forum days of CutWeb in the 90's, I think he called himself The Dral then. He did a wonderful job of creating Roots and Routes, which I think that website is based upon. I hope he is still well and enjoying the system

 

Edit: sp

Edited September 23, 2014 by Kendal

[Paul C]

 

Not Butters, though?

 

Incidentally, Dutton Stop Lock (as built) would take about the same width of boat (around 12') which would fit through the tunnels, but there is extant an early map which shows just a bar at this point. Is there any record of when this lock was actually built?

 

Tim

 

Apparently (a friend told me, not me myself obviously) its quite embarrasing if you use the Dutton stop lock, drop the 1 1/2 inches or so, then are unable to get back onto the boat because you assumed it was a narrow lock but its drifted exactly into the middle of the lock (in a 45' boat).

[Timleech]

 

Apparently (a friend told me, not me myself obviously) its quite embarrasing if you use the Dutton stop lock, drop the 1 1/2 inches or so, then are unable to get back onto the boat because you assumed it was a narrow lock but its drifted exactly into the middle of the lock (in a 45' boat).

 

More embarrassing to the people who think it's a wide lock and try to get two boats in

 

Tim

[Heartland]

The end of the broad canal section near Horninglow may have been influenced by the rival Burton Boat Company operation along the River Trent to Bond End. At the time of the building/ making the Grand Trunk, Burtons only link to the sea was via the Upper Trent Navigation which served the river wharves at Burton. It is a subject that I have mentioned in Silent Highways. Whilst the building of the Bond End Canal was contemporary with the making of the Grand Trunk from Wichnor to Horninglow and further eastward (source Staffordshire RO various papers in collection deposited re Paget Family) and the making of the Bond End Canal to Barge dimensions, there was initially no link at Shobnall and the Grand Trunk seemed determined that Trent Boats could only pass as far as Horninglow. This decision appears to have favoured trade on their waterway and led to the decline of the Burton Boat Co who sold out their carrying business.

 

Ray Shill

[Kendal]

Thank you Ray, that adds another dimension to the explanation. There are clearly other economic influences than just the extra cost of building a broad canal, with rival companies vying against each other and no doubt some skulduggery into the bargain. Sounds like the makings of a good book

[oboat]

 

Apparently (a friend told me, not me myself obviously) its quite embarrasing if you use the Dutton stop lock, drop the 1 1/2 inches or so, then are unable to get back onto the boat because you assumed it was a narrow lock but its drifted exactly into the middle of the lock (in a 45' boat).

 

Is this lock necessary now it was just a pain to operate with little value I suspect? Can anybody tell me why the iron Aqueduct is so narrow am I correct in assuming it was a rebuild at some time?

[Timleech]

Is this lock necessary now it was just a pain to operate with little value I suspect? Can anybody tell me why the iron Aqueduct is so narrow am I correct in assuming it was a rebuild at some time?

Before my time, but I was told that BW did remove all the gates for a little while in the early 1960s, but quickly reinstated the top gate because they found the levels at the Middlewich end became too variable.

Also, it still separates two different canals with different owners. There is a small but significant difference in levels, at the time they tried removing the gates the Bridgewater was kept at much the same level as the T&M to facilitate the grain traffic to the Kelloggs factory, that is no longer the case. There was a major problem on the Bridgewater a few years ago which cause the level to drop by about 3 feet. If that had been extended to Middlewich, including the marinas etc along that length, there would have been a lot more very unhappy people!

 

Yes, Croxton aqueduct (tank) is a replacement for an earlier masonry aqueduct.

 

Tim

Edited September 30, 2014 by Timleech

[tarboat]

Yes, Croxton aqueduct (tank) is a replacement for an earlier masonry aqueduct.

 

I was looking for a date for the replacement aqueduct at Croxton, but so far have only managed to get it to the 1930s after flooding damaged the original. I do, however, have a photo of the work in progress.

 

[Paul C]

Before my time, but I was told that BW did remove all the gates for a little while in the early 1960s, but quickly reinstated the top gate because they found the levels at the Middlewich end became too variable.

Also, it still separates two different canals with different owners. There is a small but significant difference in levels, at the time they tried removing the gates the Bridgewater was kept at much the same level as the T&M to facilitate the grain traffic to the Kelloggs factory, that is no longer the case. There was a major problem on the Bridgewater a few years ago which cause the level to drop by about 3 feet. If that had been extended to Middlewich, including the marinas etc along that length, there would have been a lot more very unhappy people!

 

Yes, Croxton aqueduct (tank) is a replacement for an earlier masonry aqueduct.

 

Tim

 

Could it be replaced with a stop gate then?

[magpie patrick]

 

Could it be replaced with a stop gate then?

 

Assuming you are referring to Dutton Stop Lock then for several years it had just one gate, however some crews struggled to open it against the small head of water. There were also suggestions that BW left it open when they had excess and closed it when they didn't, leaving the owners of the Bridgwater Canal to deal with the surplus over their spillweirs, this left the Bridgwater fold unimpressed. The two canals are still in different ownerships, the implication being they wish to separate their liabilities

[X Alan W]

Before my time, but I was told that BW did remove all the gates for a little while in the early 1960s, but quickly reinstated the top gate because they found the levels at the Middlewich end became too variable.

Also, it still separates two different canals with different owners. There is a small but significant difference in levels, at the time they tried removing the gates the Bridgewater was kept at much the same level as the T&M to facilitate the grain traffic to the Kelloggs factory, that is no longer the case. There was a major problem on the Bridgewater a few years ago which cause the level to drop by about 3 feet. If that had been extended to Middlewich, including the marinas etc along that length, there would have been a lot more very unhappy people!

 

Yes, Croxton aqueduct (tank) is a replacement for an earlier masonry aqueduct.

 

Tim

I think it was in 1961 or 2 that I boated straight through Dutton , i didn"t return for a couple of years & the gates were back, at the time I just thought they had removed the gates for repair & as the rise/fall was minimal they didn"t put a stoppage in place.

[Alan de Enfield]

Maybe some interesting info (Shobnall marina) here :

 

http://www.jannel.co.uk/History.htm

[tarboat]

Another image showing that broad beam boats did reach Middlewich. This is a view of the milk factory below the Big Lock at Middlewich - note the boat on the left. The card was postally used in 1904.

 

[Timleech]

I think it was in 1961 or 2 that I boated straight through Dutton , i didn"t return for a couple of years & the gates were back, at the time I just thought they had removed the gates for repair & as the rise/fall was minimal they didn"t put a stoppage in place.

When the 'gates' were put back, it was only the top gate, which was given a huge paddle and an extra long (steel) balance beam so that it could be opened against a difference of an inch or two.

When the Bridgewater level was dropped, as per my earlier post, the difference became too much to manage in this way. As a temporary measure, a big hand winch was fitted to pull the gate open, a potentially quite dangerous arrangement about which today's elfin safety wallahs would have had several blue fits. The initial replacement set of bottom gates was made by the Ship Canal company.

 

Tim

[Jay4424]

Kendal ... (sorry if its already been pointed out/you know about it) but the remains of one of the locks on the river Trent in BoT is still there ... just to the West of the old bridge, the river splits, the northern bit (where the wier is) has a little funny thing with cobble places on/in it... thats part of a lock, the cups for the gates can be seen, I think theres a sign there too, and a life ringbouy thingy!

 

...if your board on a sunday, a nice place to go, with the Bridge inn only round hte corner ;-)

 

 

Jay.

[Heartland]

The Trent & Mersey was widened from Anderton to Middlewich with the completion of Anderton Boat lift. The 1904 postcard is a useful image as it shows a weaver flat at Middlewich

 

Ray Shill