DOCSLIB.ORG

Engines for Erebus and Terror Was Almost Certainly Taken Sometime in the Middle of February, Even Though Admiralty Approval Was Not Given Officially Until 1 March

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Engines for Erebus and Terror Was Almost Certainly Taken Sometime in the Middle of February, Even Though Admiralty Approval Was Not Given Officially Until 1 March Page !77 of !111 Finding the Engines As we’ve now established, Joshua Field knew from experience that the size of engine required for Erebus and Terror was 30 NHP, which was sufficient to move the ships along at up to 5 miles per hour. However, it quickly became apparent that there was not enough time to design and build new auxiliary machinery to suit. Consequently, the firm suggested that second-hand railway engines be adapted instead, a proposal accepted by the Admiralty on 1 March 1845 “on condition that the machinery is made perfectly efficient.”136 How this was achieved has not been recorded, although as Pambour relates, such work could potentially be extensive: “… what is meant by repairs to the engines, is nothing less than their complete re-construction; that is to say, that when an engine requires any repair, unless it be for some trifling accident, it is taken to pieces and a new one is constructed, which receives that same name as the first, and in the construction of which are made to serve all such parts of the old engine as are still capable of being used with advantage. The consequence of this is, that a re-constructed or repaired engine is literally a new one. The repairs amount thus to considerable sums, but they include also the renewal of the engines.”137 The key questions would be how worn the second-hand locomotives were when they arrived at the Maudslay workshop; and what specific modifications were required before they could be installed on board Erebus and Terror? The type of locomotive selected was, of course, critical. Small, inside connected engines were a must, for they had to be as light as possible, fit within the eight-foot wide engine room space and be capable of directly connecting to the propeller shaft. In fact, there was only one type of engine with these attributes able to generate the required 30 NHP, and that was the Planet- and Samson-types, as previously noted. Finding a matching pair would pose a challenge, and not just because they were already obsolete by the time Erebus and Terror were being prepared. Most of the examples built had already been scrapped, or were so decrepit that they would be all but useless. Moreover, the specifications could vary considerably, even for those from the same manufacturer with the same cylinder size. Consequently, Field would have to settle for engines of similar dimensions and output, just so long as they achieved something close to the required 30 NHP. Unfortunately, only two surviving accounts actually name the source of the engines, and these don’t tell us much. The Illustrated London News reported in late May 1845 that Erebus’ “screw-propeller is worked by an engine of 25 horse power, which formerly ran upon the 136 NA(UK), Adm.95/88, Particulars of Steamships, pages 109-10, Terror, as reported by Woolwich, 15 May 1845. 137 Chevelier F.M.G. de Pambour, A Practical Treatise on Locomotive Engines upon Railways, John Weale, London, 1836, page 330. Whilst Pambour’s comments relate to the Liverpool & Manchester Railway’s practice during the 1830s, similar methods would have been widely employed. Page !78 of !111 Greenwich Railway.”138 Whilst Lieutenant John Irving of the Terror, wrote in a letter: “We tried our screws, and went four miles an hour. Our engine once ran somewhat faster on the Birmingham line.”139 The obvious conclusion is that Erebus’ engine came from the London & Greenwich Railway, and Terror’s from the London & Birmingham Railway, because the two companies were colloquially known as the Greenwich and Birmingham, respectively. Until recent years this has been the interpretation accepted by most researchers; but, are these two reports accurate? i) The London & Greenwich Railway The London & Greenwich Railway initially opened in February 1836 between Spa Road and Deptford as London’s first public railway; and was fully completed in December 1838, for a distance of 3.75 miles between London Bridge Station and Greenwich. When the company’s first locomotives were ordered, they were chiefly guided by the Liverpool & Manchester Railway’s practice and so four Planet-types were initially procured from William Marshall & Sons of Lea Brook, Tipton, Staffordshire. William Marshall, a partner in the banking firm of Barber & Marshall of nearby Walsall, provided the capital for the ironworks, leaving his sons John and William to manage the shop as well as a colliery at Darlaston. Locomotive construction was superintended by Joseph Mills, formerly of the Horsley Iron Works, Tipton. Marshall & Sons do not appear to have built railway engines before or after, but they did have a connection with two of the London & Greenwich’s directors, and this in part seems to have gained them their original contract for one locomotive on 10 May 1834. A second engine was ordered from Marshall & Sons in late July, along with two each from the established firms of Edward Bury & Company of Liverpool, and Robert Stephenson & Company of Newcastle. However, owing to pressure of work, neither Bury nor Stephenson ever fulfilled their contracts.140 The original Marshall engine arrived in London by canal in February 1835, and was put together at a temporary workshop at Corbetts Lane, Bermondsey (about 1.75 miles east of London Bridge), near the temporary Spa Road terminus. Dubbed Royal William, her trials proved so successful that another two Marshall engines were ordered on 10 June 1835.141 The remaining three Marshall engines were delivered in 1836 and christened Royal Adelaide, 138 The Illustrated London News, London, Volume VI, Number 160, Saturday 24 May 1845, page 328. 139 Benjamin Bell, F.R.C.S.E., editor, Lieut. John Irving, R.N. of H.M.S. “Terror”, in Sir John Franklin’s Last Expedition to the Arctic Regions: A Memorial Sketch with Letters, David Douglas, Edinburgh, 1881, pages 117-120: John Irving to his sister-in-law, Katie Irving, H.M.S. Terror, Greenhithe, Friday 16 May 1845. 140 R.H.G. Thomas, London’s First Railway —The London & Greenwich Railway, B.T. Batsford Limited, London, 1986, pages 170-3. 141 Note that a works list of railway engines built by Charles Tayleur & Company, Vulcan Works, Warrington, identifies the firms 25th engine as the London & Greenwich Railway’s Royal William (see <http://www.enuii.org/ vulcan_foundry/vulcan_loco_list_p1.gif>). This list was prepared at a much later date and is unreliable so far as the early locomotives are concerned. The attribution of the 25th engine was probably made because Francis Whishaw mistakenly listed Royal William as a Tayleur engine. A Tayleur drawing of Works No.25 is simply titled “Combined View of a Locomotive Engine.” (See <http://www.enuii.org/vulcan_foundry/photographs/Drawings/no %2025%20london%20&%20greenwich%20'royal%20william'.jpg>) Page !79 of !111 Dottin and Twells, the latter two honouring directors of the company. The total cost for the four was at least £2,950, paid in bills of exchange, or about £738 each.142 In 1837 the Marshall engines were assigned numbers 1 to 4, respectively; and by 1840 their names were removed.143 Further locomotives were also acquired by the railway from other manufacturers, but for the purpose of this study, we shall concentrate on the Marshall engines as these were their only true Planet-types. Normal wear and tear occasioned periodic overhauls, and in 1838 the company had its oldest six engines completely refurbished. The lighter work was done in the railway’s workshop at Deptford; engines requiring heavier repairs were sent out. No.2 Royal Adelaide needed considerable attention, and was sent to the Deptford shop of John Penn & Sons, a noted stationary and marine engine builder with workshops at Deptford and Greenwich. She needed new frames, cylinders and pistons, a new crank axle, wheels re-turned, and other replacement parts, for a total charge of £200.144 No.4 went to Messrs. Braithwaite, Milner & Company (formerly Braithwaite & Ericsson), 1 Bath Place, New (Euston) Road, London.145 In keeping with locomotive trends, No.3 was altered to a 2-2-2 wheel arrangement in 1840 by adding a pair of trailing wheels. Nos.1 and 2 were subsequently converted in 1842 or sometime after, but No.4 was never done.146 The mechanical specifications of the Marshall engines in 1840 were outlined in Francis Whishaw's The Railways of Great Britain and Ireland, and in a report to a Parliamentary committee on accidents, as shown in the table below:147 142 R.H.G. Thomas, London’s First Railway —The London & Greenwich Railway, B.T. Batsford Limited, London, 1986, pages 170-3. 143 R.H.G. Thomas, London’s First Railway —The London & Greenwich Railway, B.T. Batsford Limited, London, 1986, page 180. 144 R.H.G. Thomas, London’s First Railway —The London & Greenwich Railway, B.T. Batsford Limited, London, 1986, page 184. 145 This is somewhat surprising considering that Braithwaite, Milner & Company had been in the hands of a receiver since 1837. John Ericsson left the firm in 1839 for the United States, and the business was wound up in 1841. 146 R.H.G. Thomas, London’s First Railway —The London & Greenwich Railway, B.T. Batsford Limited, London, 1986, page 187. 147 Francis Whishaw, The Railways of Great Britain and Ireland, London, 1842 (2nd Edition), Appendix, page xxi, No.XIV; House of Commons (U.K.), Sessional Papers, Accounts & Papers: 1842, Volume 16: Report of the Officers of the Railway Department, 1842, page 224. Page !80 of !111 Table X: London & Greenwich Railway Locomotives by William Marshall & Company No.1 No.2 No.3 No.4 Original Name Royal Royal Dottin Twells William Adelaide Delivered 1835 1836 1836 1836 Wheel Arrangement, 1840-1 2-2-0 2-2-0 2-2-2 2-2-0 Driving Wheel Diameter (feet-inches), 1840 5-0 5-0 5-0 5-0 Driving Wheel Diameter (feet-inches), 1841 5-0 4-0 5-0 5-0 Carrying Wheel Diameter (feet-inches), 1840 3-9 3-9 3-9 4-0 Carrying Wheel Diameter (feet-inches), 1841 3-9 3-9 3-6 3-9 Cylinder Diameter (inches) 10 10 11 10 Length of Stroke (inches) 16 16 18 16 Nominal Horsepower @ 50 p.s.i.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Carrying Trade and the First Railways in England, C1750-C1850
    The Carrying Trade and the First Railways in England, c1750-c1850 Carolyn Dougherty PhD University of York Railway Studies November 2018 Abstract Transport and economic historians generally consider the change from moving goods principally on roads, inland waterways and coastal ships to moving them principally on railways as inevitable, unproblematic, and the result of technological improvements. While the benefits of rail travel were so clear that most other modes of passenger transport disappeared once rail service was introduced, railway goods transport did not offer as obvious an improvement over the existing goods transport network, known as the carrying trade. Initially most railways were open to the carrying trade, but by the 1840s railway companies began to provide goods carriage and exclude carriers from their lines. The resulting conflict over how, and by whom, goods would be transported on railways, known as the carrying question, lasted more than a decade, and railway companies did not come to dominate domestic goods carriage until the 1850s. In this study I develop a fuller picture of the carrying trade than currently exists, highlighting its multimodal collaborative structure and setting it within the ‘sociable economy’ of late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century England. I contrast this economy with the business model of joint-stock companies, including railway companies, and investigate responses to the business practices of these companies. I analyse the debate over railway company goods carriage, and identify changes in goods transport resulting from its introduction. Finally, I describe the development and outcome of the carrying question, showing that railway companies faced resistance to their attempts to control goods carriage on rail lines not only from the carrying trade but also from customers of goods transport, the government and the general public.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of the Steam Locomotive, 1803 to 1898 (1899)
    > g s J> ° "^ Q as : F7 lA-dh-**^) THE EVOLUTION OF THE STEAM LOCOMOTIVE (1803 to 1898.) BY Q. A. SEKON, Editor of the "Railway Magazine" and "Hallway Year Book, Author of "A History of the Great Western Railway," *•., 4*. SECOND EDITION (Enlarged). £on&on THE RAILWAY PUBLISHING CO., Ltd., 79 and 80, Temple Chambers, Temple Avenue, E.C. 1899. T3 in PKEFACE TO SECOND EDITION. When, ten days ago, the first copy of the " Evolution of the Steam Locomotive" was ready for sale, I did not expect to be called upon to write a preface for a new edition before 240 hours had expired. The author cannot but be gratified to know that the whole of the extremely large first edition was exhausted practically upon publication, and since many would-be readers are still unsupplied, the demand for another edition is pressing. Under these circumstances but slight modifications have been made in the original text, although additional particulars and illustrations have been inserted in the new edition. The new matter relates to the locomotives of the North Staffordshire, London., Tilbury, and Southend, Great Western, and London and North Western Railways. I sincerely thank the many correspondents who, in the few days that have elapsed since the publication: of the "Evolution of the , Steam Locomotive," have so readily assured me of - their hearty appreciation of the book. rj .;! G. A. SEKON. -! January, 1899. PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION. In connection with the marvellous growth of our railway system there is nothing of so paramount importance and interest as the evolution of the locomotive steam engine.
    [Show full text]
  • Hillsborough Hall & Hillsborough Park
    HILLSBOROUGH HALL & HILLSBOROUGH PARK The Steades Thomas Steade was the builder of Hillsborough Hall. He was the son of Nicholas Steade and Anne Micklethwaite and was born on 16 March 1728 at Ecclesfield. He married Millicent (Meliscent) Pegge, who was the daughter of Strelley Pegge of Beauchief and Mary Broughton from Lowdham, on 30 April 1768. He was a magistrate and he died in 1793. Hillsborough House was built in 1779 as a dwelling for Thomas and his wife Meliscent who had been living in nearby Burrowlee House, which is situated just 250 metres to the east. The Steades were a family of local of landowners whose history went back to the 14th century. At the time of construction the house stood in rural countryside well outside the Sheffield boundary. Steade named his new residence in honour of Wills Hill who at the time was known as the Earl of Hillsborough (later Lord Downside of Hillsborough, County Down), an eminent politician of the period and a patron of the Steades. Steade acquired more land and the grounds eventually had an area of 103 acres (0.42 km2). They were much more extensive than the present Hillsborough Park, stretching north to the current junction of Leppings Lane and Penistone Road and included the site on which Hillsborough Stadium now stands. It extended further south encompassing the site now occupied by the Hillsborough arena. The grounds had areas given over to agriculture but there was also extensive parkland featuring a lake, two lodges and a tree lined avenue. There was also a walled garden, which still exists today, which provided fresh produce for the house’s kitchens.
    [Show full text]
  • Pearce Higgins, Selwyn Archive List
    NATIONAL RAILWAY MUSEUM INVENTORY NUMBER 1997-7923 SELWYN PEARCE HIGGINS ARCHIVE CONTENTS PERSONAL PAPERS 3 RAILWAY NOTES AND DIARIES 4 Main Series 4 Rough Notes 7 RESEARCH AND WORKING PAPERS 11 Research Papers 11 Working Papers 13 SOCIETIES AND PRESERVATION 16 Clubs and Societies 16 RAILWAY AND TRAMWAY PAPERS 23 Light Railways and Tramways 23 Railway Companies 24 British Railways PSH/5/2/ 24 Cheshire Lines Railway PSH/5/3/ 24 Furness Railway PSH/5/4/ 25 Great Northern Railway PSH/5/7/ 25 Great Western Railway PSH/5/8/ 25 Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway PSH/5/9/ 26 London Midland and Scottish Railway PSH/5/10/ 26 London & North Eastern Railway PSH/5/11/ 27 London & North Western Railway PSH/5/12/ 27 London and South Western Railway PSH/5/13/ 28 Midland Railway PSH/5/14/ 28 Midland & Great Northern Joint Railway PSH/5/15/ 28 Midland and South Western Junction Railway PSH/5/16 28 North Eastern Railway PSH/5/17 29 North London Railway PSH/5/18 29 North Staffordshire Railway PSH/5/19 29 Somerset and Dorset Joint Railway PSH/5/20 29 Stratford-upon-Avon and Midland Junction Railway PSH/5/21 30 Railway and General Papers 30 EARLY LOCOMOTIVES AND LOCOMOTIVES BUILDING 51 Locomotives 51 Locomotive Builders 52 Individual firms 54 Rolling Stock Builders 67 SIGNALLING AND PERMANENT WAY 68 MISCELLANEOUS NOTEBOOKS AND PAPERS 69 Notebooks 69 Papers, Files and Volumes 85 CORRESPONDENCE 87 PAPERS OF J F BRUTON, J H WALKER AND W H WRIGHT 93 EPHEMERA 96 MAPS AND PLANS 114 POSTCARDS 118 POSTERS AND NOTICES 120 TIMETABLES 123 MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS 134 INDEX 137 Original catalogue prepared by Richard Durack, Curator Archive Collections, National Railway Museum 1996.
    [Show full text]
  • The Descendants of John Pease 1
    The Descendants of John Pease 1 John Pease John married someone. He had three children: Edward, Richard and John. Edward Pease, son of John Pease, was born in 1515. Basic notes: He lived at Great Stambridge, Essex. From the records of Great Stambridge. 1494/5 Essex Record office, Biography Pease. The Pease Family, Essex, York, Durham, 10 Henry VII - 35 Victoria. 1872. Joseph Forbe and Charles Pease. John Pease. Defendant in a plea touching lands in the County of Essex 10 Henry VII, 1494/5. Issue:- Edward Pease of Fishlake, Yorkshire. Richard Pease of Mash, Stanbridge Essex. John Pease married Juliana, seized of divers lands etc. Essex. Temp Henry VIII & Elizabeth. He lived at Fishlake, Yorkshire. Edward married someone. He had six children: William, Thomas, Richard, Robert, George and Arthur. William Pease was born in 1530 in Fishlake, Yorkshire and died on 10 Mar 1597 in Fishlake, Yorkshire. William married Margaret in 1561. Margaret was buried on 25 Oct 1565 in Fishlake, Yorkshire. They had two children: Sibilla and William. Sibilla Pease was born on 4 Sep 1562 in Fishlake, Yorkshire. Basic notes: She was baptised on 12 Oct 1562. Sibilla married Edward Eccles. William Pease was buried on 25 Apr 1586. Basic notes: He was baptised on 29 May 1565. William next married Alicia Clyff on 25 Nov 1565 in Fishlake, Yorkshire. Alicia was buried on 19 May 1601. They had one daughter: Maria. Maria Pease Thomas Pease Richard Pease Richard married Elizabeth Pearson. Robert Pease George Pease George married Susanna ?. They had six children: Robert, Nicholas, Elizabeth, Alicia, Francis and Thomas.
    [Show full text]
  • 50UTHAM Director of the Midland Counties Railway
    8- Edward Bury & Co. Lark for the London & Southampton Railway. This drawing first appeared in 7lhe Locomof/.ve Magazine and Railway Carriage and Wagon Review, Vol.8, locomotive building market. It planned to build pl 20,14th February 1903, and has been reproduced many times since. The accompanying text states "The first engine three locomotives of a 2-2-2 `Stephenson' type, shown on the Company's books was a small one built by E. speculatingitcouldsellthemontheopenmarket. Bury & Co. in 1835, numbered 24 on the makers' list, and The letter books indicate they took a long while named the 'Lark'." It was a four-wheeled passenger engine to be disposed of and in the meantime the firm with single driving wheels 5ft 6in diameter and a small had the opportunity to build locomotives for leading pair 3ft 6in diameter." It is not Lack as that had 4ft specific companies. The first order was for three diameter leading wheels. (Author's Collection) enginesfortheLondon&SouthamptonRailway a,&SR, soon to become the London & South Western Railway, I.SWR). Many of the shares of the L&SR had been taken up by people living in the Manchester and Liverpool areas and in Angust 1834 at the Royal Hotel in Manchester they formed a committee to represent their interests, with Thomas Cooke as chairman.7 Initially they were agreeable to the financesofthecompanyandtheworkofFrancis Giles (the L&SR engineers). By December 1836, however, the Iidncashire proprietors were very concerned with the slow progress and Giles's methods of wondng and Thomas Cooke, Robert Garnett[° and William Hill came down to meet the directors from London & Southampton and survey the line.
    [Show full text]
  • EALE BURY -- Richard Holt, Tailor, to Keep the Peace to Thomas Eale, Tailor - Ref
    EALE BURY -- Richard Holt, tailor, to keep the peace to Thomas Eale, tailor - ref. QSB/1/223/23 - date: 1639 EARL Copy inquisition: Manor of Tottington: finding Charlotte Ann, wife of John Hargreaves of Ormerod House, Esq., heiress at law of Lawrence Ormerod - Coupe Tenement and Little Coupe Tenement, township of Tottington Higher End - with draft copy surrender: John Hargreaves and wife to the Rt. Hon. Thomas Earl of Wilton and Thomas Clayton of Carr Hall, Esq., of the Coupe tenements for the purpose of a marriage settlement - ref. NCHa/46/1 - date: Oct. 1803 EARNASHAWE Tottington -- apprenticeship of Robert son of Anne Earnashawe, widow, to John Yate, woollenwebster. - ref. QSP/256/26 - date: c1664 EARNESHAW Tottington -- apprenticeship of Robert son of Anne Earneshaw, widow. - ref. QSP/252/1 - date: c1663/4 EARNESHAW Tottington -- bad character of Anne Earneshaw. - ref. QSP/388/17 - date: c1672 EARNESHAW Tottington -- bad character of Anne Earneshaw. - ref. QSP/388/18 - date: c1672 EARNESHAW Tottington -- refund from relief to Anne Earneshaw, decd. - ref. QSP/779/13 - date: c1696 EARNESHAW Tottington and Turton -- settlement of Priscilla Earneshaw. - ref. QSP/404/25 - date: c1673 EARNESHAWE Tottington -- habitation for Anne Earneshawe, widow, daughter of James Lomax of Walmersley, yeoman. - ref. QSP/264/7 - date: c1664 EARNESHAWE Tottington -- habitation for Anne Earneshawe. - ref. QSP/244/25 - date: c1663 EARNESHAWE Tottington -- habitation for Anne Earneshawe. - ref. QSP/244/26 - date: c1663 EARNSHAW Ainsworth to Elton. Order of removal of Betty, Robert, Mally, Thomas, James and John, children of James and Ann Earnshaw, deceased - ref. QSP/2941/27 - date: 1830 8 Nov EARNSHAW Elton and Radcliffe.
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation During the Cherokee Removal, 1837-1839
    Table of Contents Introduction . 1 Steamboats . 2 Keelboats . 5 Flatboats . 7 Ferries . 9 The Tuscumbia, Courtland & Decatur Railroad . 11 Early 19th Century Roads and Turnpikes . 17 Wagons, Carriages, and Carryalls . .23 The Zuraw Wagon . 27 This publication was made possible by the Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Unit (CESU) Task Agreement P18AC01316 with National Trails– National Park Service and the Center for Historic Preservation at Middle Tennessee State University . For more information about the Trail of Tears National Historic Trail, please access: nps .gov/trte/index .htm . Booklet layout by MTSU Creative Marketing Solutions Cover: Bolivar-Somerville Stage Road, Fayette/Hardeman counties, Tennessee November 2020 1120-9331 MTSU is an AA/EEO employer . Introduction Steamboats In 1835, a minority of Cherokee leaders, acting outside of the authority From 1837 to 1839, nine different steamboats were employed to assist in the of the Cherokee government, signed the Treaty of New Echota . This treaty transportation of Cherokee detachments in reaching Indian Territory . These set the conditions for the Cherokee removal: In exchange for $5 million, steamboats included the Knoxville, Newark, Revenue, Smelter, Little Rock, George the tribe would abandon their homes and lands in western North Carolina, Guess, Tecumseh, Itasca, and Victoria . Several of these steamboats were also used northern Georgia and Alabama, and southeastern Tennessee and relocate in the removal of the Muscogee (Creek), Chickasaw, and Seminole . to Indian Territory (present-day Oklahoma) . The Cherokee were given until Steamboats were plying America’s waterways for decades prior to the removal of the May 1838 to remove voluntarily . Most refused to recognize the Treaty of Cherokee .
    [Show full text]
  • ACKROYD BURY -- Jane Boulton, Spinster, to Appear at Sessions
    ACKROYD BURY -- Jane Boulton, spinster, to appear at sessions. for theft from Simeon Ackroyd, woollenwebster - ref. QSB/1/135/23 - date: 1634 AINSWORTH Bury. Brief for consent to respite of appeal of [Joseph] Handley and [Richard] Ainsworth against [order for payment for sewering and paving work] - ref. QSP/4065/7 - date: c1879 AINSWORTH Bury. Instructions for motion that appeal of [Joseph] Handley and [Richard] Ainsworth against [order for payment for sewering and paving work] be respited - ref. QSP/4065/13 - date: c1879 AINSWORTH Bury. Notice and grounds of appeal of Joseph Handley and Richard Ainsworth - ref. QSP/4065/22 - date: 1879 4 Oct AINSWORTH Elton. Certificate of James Broughton Edge, coroner, of non-appearance of Henry Ainsworth as juror, with imposition of fine - ref. QSP/4030/50 - date: 1878 19 Mar AINSWORTH Letter of Thomas Dodds at Bury, solicitor, to F.C. Hulton, Clerk of the Peace at Preston re appeal of Joseph Handley and Richard Ainsworth - ref. QSP/4065/21 - date: 1879 14 Oct AINSWORTH Order of Justices that Joseph Handley and Richard Ainsworth, surviving executors of James Ainsworth, make payment to the Borough of Bury for sewering and paving work - ref. QSP/4065/20 - date: 1879 29 Sep AINSWORTH Radcliffe to Bury. Order for removal of James Ainsworth, Ann his wife and John, James, William, Elizabeth, Sarah, Jane, Ann and 'Pleanny' their children - ref. QSP/1710/8 - date: 1754 25 Nov AINSWORTH Sacrament Certificates - ref. QSJ/8/1/107 - date: 29 Jun 1673 Bury. Ralph Howorth of Brandlesome. Witnesses. Charles Walmsley of Bury, gent., and Jeremiah Ainsworth of Blakelow, yeoman.
    [Show full text]
  • Robert Benson Dockray (1811-1871), Railway Engineer. 1835 Assistant Engineer, London & Birmingham Railway
    Robert Benson Dockray (1811-1871), railway engineer. 1835 Assistant Engineer, London & Birmingham Railway. 1840 Resident Engineer for the whole line of the railway. Retained this post on the amalgamation of the London & Birmingham into the London & Northwest system. Resigned 1852 on health grounds. The collection consists of folders of correspondence to Dockray by various authors. Contents of folders are transcribed from Dockrays own descriptions, but with additional information supplied (indicated in square brackets). All folders are labelled N.N. Meinertzhagen Collection 1957. Not all the original folders came to the Library & some folders no longer contain all the material that was originally present. Folder 1 Francis Newburn, Solicitor, Stockton & Darlington railway 23rd April 1831 to prove levels Enquiries ( Undated) Wants further information (Undated)) 16th March 1864 after his retirement. Folder 2 Autograph letters 3rd Feb 1835 Le Cher de Pambour (Pambour, G. de, Cher) Cesar Daly (Editor of Journal des Architectes) (undated) 9 September 1837 Lucienne de Moinne Folder 3 Thomas Storey 7th Nov 1835. Directions for survey of the Great North of England Railway Folder 4 Lieut Peter Le Count, R.et. Assistant Secretary, London Birmingham railway (Peter Le Count, Lt. R.N.) 27th Jan 1836 Cost of the railway. Folder 5 Theodore W. Rathbone, Director of the London & North Western Railway 13th Feb 1837. Lines of railway in which he has interest Folder 8 Joseph Locke, Esq, M.P. (1805 - 1860) 25th July 1837 Letter to Theodore W. Rathbone in reply to his application on behalf of R.B.D. employment. T.W.R. letter to R.B.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Backhouse of Yealand
    Descendants of Backhouse Charles E. G. Pease Pennyghael Isle of Mull Descendants of Un-named Backhouse 1-Backhouse Backhouse married someone. He had two children: John and Richard. 2-John Backhouse,1,2 son of Backhouse1, died in 1690 in Yealand Conyers, Carnforth, Lancashire and was buried on 9 Mar 1690 in Hilderstone, Yealand, Carnforth, Lancashire. Noted events in his life were: • He worked as a Yeoman of Yealand. In Moss Side, Yealand, Burton in Kendal. • He was Quaker. John married Sarah Jackson,1,2 daughter of William Jackson and Mabel Carr, in 1650. Sarah was born in 1626 and died on 30 May 1706 at age 80. They had six children: John, Hannah, Thomas, Sarah, James, and James. General Notes: Became a Quaker aged 27 in 1653 Noted events in her life were: • She worked as a Quaker Minister. 3-John Backhouse was born on 16 Jun 1656 in Yealand Redmayne, Carnforth, Lancashire, died on 30 Mar 1657 in Yealand Redmayne, Carnforth, Lancashire, and was buried on 31 Mar 1657 in Yealand Redmayne, Carnforth, Lancashire. 3-Hannah Backhouse1 was born on 28 Aug 1658 in Yealand Redmayne, Carnforth, Lancashire and died on 8 Apr 1729 in Hilderstone, Yealand, Carnforth, Lancashire at age 70. Hannah married John Cumming,1 son of Edward Cumming, on 24 Mar 1682 in Richard Lancaster's House, Yealand. John died on 28 Nov 1697 in Hilderstone, Yealand, Carnforth, Lancashire. They had five children: Edward, Ann, Edward, Sarah, and Mary. 4-Edward Cumming1 was born on 30 Sep 1684 in Hilderstone, Yealand, Carnforth, Lancashire, died on 6 Oct 1684 in Hilderstone, Yealand, Carnforth, Lancashire, and was buried in Hilderstone, Yealand, Carnforth, Lancashire.
    [Show full text]
  • Locomotive Fuel on the Boston and Providence Rail Road
    Locomotive fuel on the Boston and Providence Rail Road Harry Chase 2012 1. Introduction The Boston and Providence Rail Road opened its 42-mile main line between the capital cities of Massachusetts and Rhode Island in 1835. The railroad operated as an independent corporation until 1888, when it was leased by the Old Colony Railroad. During its 53-year history the Boston and Providence burned first wood and then bituminous (“soft”) coal in its approximately 124 steam locomotives and experimented with coke, anthracite (“hard”) coal and oil. This monograph contains a brief account of each of the fuels used in the railroad’s locomotives during its corporate history and the rationale for converting from one fuel to another. 2. Wood In Europe, wood had been tried for its cheapness as locomotive fuel but was given up in favor of coal and coke largely because of the greater availability of fossil fuel, and also because of the annoying and even dangerous sparks that issued from the smokestacks of wood-burning engines. In the United States, wood was much more easily available and generally cheaper than other fuels, and for many years was commonly burned in locomotives; while sparks were less of a problem in the thinly settled countryside through which American railroads ran. Ingenious spark-catching devices were invented, including the popular “diamond stack” devised by Boston and Providence master mechanic George S. Griggs. [1] Spark arresters were not always effective. British travelers, who at home were accustomed to engines that burned fossil fuel, were entranced by the sparks thrown by American wood-burners.
    [Show full text]