The North Wilts. 1810-1820.
Of the three 1810 schemes (for extending the W&B canal) it is obvious that the one which would best serve the W&B and be the least costly to build was the Severn Junction (SJ). They required an alternative supply of coal having experienced difficulty in obtaining a sufficiently large quantity from the SCC and had, as we have seen, made some preparations for procuring this from the Forest of Dean. There were two possible routes from the Forest to the W&B. The Bristol Junction would open the way to the Severn without the expensive aid of the K&A; the Severn Junction, however, would be only half the length, an easier line to build and would make use of the T&S already deeply involved in the Forest coal trade.
The T&S would obviously support the Severn Junction proposal in preference to the Bristol Junction which would threaten their trade with South Wales, and by providing another line for the distribution of South Wales and Forest coal would deprive them of the tolls they would collect from this trade and the coal supplied to the W&B via the Severn Junction.
The estimated cost of the Bristol Junction is not known, but it would have been a difficult and expensive line to build, involving some 70 locks. By tapping the Gloucestershire coalfield it would provide a further alternative supply of coal both for Bristol and the W&B but as far as is known the W&B Proprietors had no such financial interest in this field as they had in the Forest of Dean. There had been talk in 1803 of the W&B obtaining coal from these pits by means of a railway from Pucklechurch to the River Avon. The K&A were prepared to support any such proposal but nothing was done at this time; the railway was built in 1832, the K&A being the majority shareholders.
The W&B lost interest in the Bristol Junction when the GJ claimed heavy compensation for all coal and iron imported into their canal from an extended W&B; the W&Bs grandiose scheme of an all canal line from Bristol to London became much less attractive.
The T&S had another good reason for preferring the Severn Junction; it offered them a chance of bypassing the poor upper Thames navigation which had always been unsatisfactory to their interests. Since their canal had opened in 1789 the Company had been fighting a running battle with the Thames Commissioners trying to induce them to improve the river. An Act of 1795 had empowered the Commissioners to carry out improvements to the navigation; money had been subscribed for the purpose but despite the building of a number of locks above Oxford little real improvement had materialised. In 1797 James Black in a report to the T&S Committee suggested that a road be built between their canal at Inglesham and Acorn Bridge on the line of the W&B,
...so that by a land carriage of 7 miles from canal to canal Abingdon etc. may be supplied with coals and in bad water times goods by the same carriage may be forwarded to Abingdon and avoid the river. Such are the benefits that will accrue from the making of this road and ultimately prove the advantage of a communication by a 7 mile canal by the vale of the Acorn Brook (now the River Cole) to the W&B canal.(Ref.2)
No action was taken.
In the 1810 proposal Whitworth stated that if the Severn Junction was built the T&S would have to alter their locks between their summit and Brimscombe Port. This suggestion would only be valid if the T&S renounced boats wider and longer than the narrow boats capable of navigating the W&B. Presumably he was concerned about the waste of water involved in the passage of smaller boats through locks 92ft long and l3ft wide. The 68ft locks below Brimscombe could by careful manoeuvring accommodate 72 ft boats diagonally across the 16 ft wide chamber.
A Petition to introduce the NW Bill was presented to the House of Commons on 18th December, 1812 and on the same day the T&S asked for a Bill to allow them to complete the canal by making an additional cut to join and communicate with it. This application almost came to grief in February 1813 when the Committee examining it reported that no map, book of reference or list of landowners had been deposited. The basin for which permission was sought was only 192ft by 60ft and the maps etc. should have been deposited by the NW petitioners. One can imagine the frantic preparation of these papers, which the T&S supplied early in March. Both Bills received the Royal Assent on 2nd July, 1814.(Ref.14)
A Petition in support of the NW Bill from "several Gentlemen, Traders and other inhabitants of Cricklade and neighbourhood" has been preserved; it is dated 2nd January, 1813 and has 45 signatures.
The text closely resembles the preamble to the Act 53 Geo. 111 Cap. 182 which stated that,
the canal will greatly facilitate and render more convenient than at present, the conveyance of all kinds of commodities to and from the Towns near the line of such canal and will open a communication between South Wales and the Counties of Hereford and Gloucester and His Majesty's Forest of Dean, and the City of London.(Ref.15)
The "Proprietors of the North Wilts Canal Navigation" could take water locally only during construction; they were not to take any from the T&S nor from any of the sources of the Thames. As all water used was to be supplied by the W&B double stop gates were to be fitted within 200 yards of that canal; these could be closed if the W&B, after inspection, were not satisfied that the NW were using water economically. The W&B were to be paid for all water supplied and could appoint three agents to take care of the NW locks. Another stop gate was to be fitted within 100 yards of the junction with the T&S who were to have powers to prevent passage when the NW water was lower than that of their canal. The Proprietors were empowered to raise £60,000 amongst themselves in £25 shares; if this amount was not sufficient another £30,000 could be raised either by the same means or by Mortgage or Promissory Notes. Work was not to commence until £44,000 had been subscribed. Tolls were to be the same as those taken by the W&B but those on goods between Cricklade and the T&S were to be reduced to one half. The Proprietors were to build an aqueduct at least 8ft wide and 7ft high over the River Churn and four other arches of similar size under the canal in the lands of John Lord Eliot to carry off flood water.
The list of subscribers was deposited in the Office of the Clerk of the Peace in the County of Wilts on 14th September, 1813, together with a plan, elevations of the main aqueducts to be built, a sectional plan showing the location and fall of the 11 locks and also a list of the owners or occupiers of lands to be crossed.
The total sum advanced was £44,750 from 116 subscribers. By far the greatest amount came from Proprietors of the W&B over and above that Company's £15,000. The Earl of Peterborough provided £5,500, the Morlands £1,700, Nathaniel Atherton £1,250, William Hallett £1,000, John Prower £800, James Crowdy £750, Joseph Priestley £700, William Whitworth £500 and Ambrose Goddard £225. Seven T&S Proprietors subscribed £1,900 of which the Disney family contributed £1,000. Thirty subscribers from Oxford produced nearly £6,000, six from Abingdon £1,400 and seventeen from London £3,000. The Bullo Pill Railway Company provided £500 and the T&S subscribed the £5,000 allowed in their Bill.(Ref.16) This sum had been agreed by the T&S when Disney reported in October 1812 at a NW Subscribers meeting where he stated that because of delays many subscribers had withdrawn their support and unless the two Companies subscribed in their Corporate capacity the project would have to be abandoned for lack of funds. The meeting had resolved that as the junction would provide a profit to them of £2,000 a year (nearly equal to their net revenue at that time), £5,000, the amount of their sinking fund, should be advanced together with £250 towards the expenses of the application to Parliament.(Ref.2)
On 24th February 1814 Disney and Lane met Whitworth and Crowdy at Latton; they saw Lord Eliot's stewards and marked out the outline of the basin.(Ref.2)
Friction developed between the Companies during the building of the junction. Whitworth had asked that the position of the basin should be altered to avoid an awkward aqueduct over the Thames. The T&S had agreed to this but the question then arose as to who should pay for the aqueduct now needed to cross the River Churn which flowed between the basin and the T&S. Counsel's opinion was sought in July, this stated that as the T&S first occupied the ground by making the basin they could not compel the NW to make the aqueduct, that canal now ending at the point of junction with the basin and not being continued to the Churn. The Acts were defective, neither Company could be compelled to make the aqueduct and it was doubtful if the T&S had powers to build it unless by arrangement with the NW or people connected with the river.(Ref.17)
The T&S finally built it under the supervision of John Denyer, their Manager. Two estimates were obtained; if an iron cylinder were used the cost would be £230, a more conventional stone structure would cost £311. The latter was chosen.(Ref.18)
The remainder of the NW was built under the supervision of William Whitworth. It included a 100 yard tunnel at Cricklade and three small aqueducts following earlier Brindley designs and consisting of embankments through the bottom of which rivers flowed in three low culverts.
Loveden watched the building in a mood of gloomy foreboding; in a letter of 2nd November he writes "... the North Wilts is a bad prospect and proceeds very slowly."(Ref.7) By 1817 work had virtually ceased owing to lack of funds; application was then made to the Exchequer Loan Commissioners for the money necessary to complete the line. This Commission was set up under the 1817 Poor Employment Act "for the carrying on of Public works and Fisheries, and the employment of the poor in manner therein." The Commissioners agreed to lend £24,000 at 5 per cent interest but only £15,000 was taken, £6,000 in March 1818, £6,000 later that year and £3,000 in 1819.(Ref.17)
John Denyer wrote to J. S. Salt the T&S Treasurer on 21st January, 1817
The traffic from Brimscombe to London is almost nil. I hope to see the North Wilts proceeded with in the spring, the completion of which I have not the slightest doubt will materially improve our Tonnage.
On 25th August, 1818 he reported that work at Latton was under way and on 8th September
The North Wilts is to go ahead, having got a loan from the Exchequer Commissioners.(Ref.19)
Tolls of £26 were collected during May 1818 but the canal was not officially opened, without fuss, until 2nd April, 1819. Priestley marvels that it cost less than the estimated price of £60,000, the actual cost being the £44,750 subscribed plus the £15,000 borrowed.
The NW Proprietors were in financial difficulties almost at once; during the first seven weeks of operation their tolls were only £150.20 At the end of the first year they could not repay the first instalment due to the Exchequer Loan Commissioners and proposed incorporation with the W&B who had little option but to agree that this was very much in their interests. In February 1820 they petitioned for a Bill to unite the two canals. "The Petitioners as a body, being considerable shareholders in the North Wilts and the two navigations being so interwoven and connected with each other as to regulations of trade and supply of water, apprehend that it would be beneficial and expedient to incorporate the two." The preamble to the resulting Act 2 Geo. IV Cap. 97 summarised the W&B and NW Acts and stated that both canals had been made except for the reservoirs and several of the feeders. As most of the Proprietors were common to both Companies it would be highly expedient and beneficial to unite the affairs and concerns of the two undertakings and as an agreement had been made the two Acts should be repealed and the powers, provisions and authorities of the same considered in one Act. All conveyances were to be transferred to the United Company and the powers to make reservoirs and to take water from Wanborough Brook were reserved. The rules governing both Companies were restated and were to be those of the United Navigations. No actions already brought were to be abated by the Act.21
The W&B took over the Exchequer debt which was paid off by February 1836.(Ref.17)
In 1821 Edward Protheroe was sending 18 boat loads of Forest coal from Brimscombe down to the W&B but at the same time William Quarrell of Cricklade and the Stranges of Swindon were carrying Somerset coal up to Cricklade despite the fact that Forest coal was charged one shilling per ton and Somerset coal two shillings per ton. The canal never came up to the expectations of the Forest coal concerns. During the later years for which records are available (1838-1862), with one exception, twice as much coal passed into the T&S from the W&B as came from that line. In 1840 over 15,000 tons of Forest coal poured down the NW for use in the building of the Great Western Railway. In a letter to the T&S written in 1828, Dunsford, the W&B manager, stated that Forest coal was never popular on that line for household use.(Ref.22)
References:
1 K&A minute book 10 July 1803.
2 TS 164a&c Blacks reports.
3 TS 207 20/3.
4 GCLJF145411.
5 WRO 109/900/910.
6 GCLJV141.
7 Thacker, The Thames Highway.
8 TS 166.
9 GCLJV141.
10 TS 207 20/4.
11 BRO D EEL 07.
12 TS 207 20/4.
13 JHC Vol 66 p37-230.
14 JHC Vol 68 p91-592.
15 WRO 54/129.
16 WRO List of NW subscribers.
17 TS 193/22 and SRL D1-3.
18 TS 164C Aug 29 1816.
19 TS 220.
20 TS 207/15.
21 JHC Vol 76 p49-411.
22 SRL letter book.