Christopher Chalklin, ‘Quarter Sessions building in , 1770–1830’, The Georgian Group Journal, Vol. x, 2000, pp. 92–121

text © the authors 2000 QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE,  –

CHRISTOPHER CHALKLIN

etween about  and  expenditure on THE JUSTICES AT Bbuilding and construction by Lancashire was QUARTER SESSIONS among the largest for any English . In the Until nearly the end of the eighteenth century only previous century there had been a steadily rising the gaol at Lancaster (used as in other to hold outlay, entirely on bridges apart from occasional prison debtors, those awaiting trial, and convicts) and at first repairs. Although Lancashire is the sixth largest three, later five bridges, and a raised roadway, were English county, the great growth of expenditure from the financial responsibility of the county. The number the  s was particularly the result of the increase of of its bridges then rose, reaching  by the early  s.  population. It more than trebled between  and The two bridewells, or houses of correction, holding  , and grew more than four times between  and minor offenders and vagrants who were expected to  . The estimated population of Lancashire between work for up to a few months, were financed separately .  and  was as follows. : ,; : The Preston bridewell was paid for by the five , or , ; : ,; : ,, . hundreds of Lonsdale, Amounderness, Blackburn, While population was growing all over Lancashire , Leyland and West , and the prison the increase was especially great in the part of the by the other hundred, .  The six hundreds county from Preston and Blackburn southwards on were also responsible for about  bridges, the account of the expansion of the cotton industry. number hardly changing between the seventeenth and The consequent inevitable steady growth of crime early nineteenth centuries. In  there were said to and the influence of the prison reform movement be  hundred bridges in Lonsdale North of the Sands led to almost continuous prison building work from and  South of the Sands,  in Amounderness,  the mid-  s, although it was concentrated in Blackburn,  in Leyland,  in and particularly in the decade after  (when the houses  in Salford.  The justices referred to the ‘ancient of correction in Preston and Salford and the county agreement for each hundred to repair and maintain gaol were built), and in the years after  (when their particular bridges, the three county bridges Salford bridewell was extended and a third built at excepted’ in  . The importance of the hundreds Kirkdale near ). In this period the court may be explained by the emergence of all, or most, accommodation was transformed, first in Lancaster of the hundreds before the county did so in the and after  in Preston, and a lunatic eleventh and twelfth centuries;  also perhaps their asylum erected (  – ). Because of the growth of convenient size for administration was a factor, trade and industry, bridge works were continuous, Lancashire being one of the larger counties and long the biggest being constructed at Lancaster in the mid from north to south (Fig. ).  s and the largest outlay being in the south-east, Each quarter sessions met in four towns in in . succession at an interval of two or three days. Those

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

Lonsdale being dealt with at Lancaster, for Amounderness and Blackburn at Preston, for West Derby and Leyland at or , and for Salford hundred at Manchester. The adjournments were convenient on account of the size of the county; Lancaster, the , was distant from the main areas of population and communal activity.  In addition a Sheriff’s Board was held by the justices at the at Lancaster to deal with business concerning the county at large, particularly the nomination of officers. In  it was replaced by an annual general sessions at Preston because of its more central situation. On account of the opposition of Lonsdale justices to its removal from Lancaster, it was established by act of parliament in  to handle all county financial matters (fixing the rate and approving accounts), appointing officers, dealing with the gaol, houses of correction and county bridges.  In the later eighteenth century between three and four and eight or nine justices attended each meeting, with more on special occasions.  The Fig. . The hundreds of Lancashire. majority of the justices were established gentry; a minority were either professional or mercantile men or came from a professional or trading background, particularly Liverpool or Manchester. Cotton manufacturers were not normally justices, because they were not considered to be in a position to adjudicate impartially in disputes between masters at Epiphany and Michaelmas were adjourned from and men in the industry. Lancaster to Preston, thence to Wigan, and from Some of the gentry, such as Alexander Butler of there to Manchester; at Easter and Midsummer the Kirkland near Preston (d.  ), High Sheriff of sequence was Lancaster, Preston, Ormskirk and Lancashire in  and the chairman of annual Manchester. There were occasional further general sessions,  ,  – ,  ,  , and adjournments. Thus in January  quarter sessions Wilson Braddyll of Conishead Priory, , met on the  th at Lancaster, the  th at Preston, the who attended the Lancaster Sessions, belonged to  th at Wigan and the  st at Manchester. A different families who had been established on their estates for group of justices met on each occasion. This system several centuries, either through the male or female of meetings had been decided by the Chancellor of line. Wilson Braddyll was the heir of Thomas the in  after consultation (d.  ), who had modernised the mansion, making between the judges and justices. It enabled the it, in a contemporary’s words, a ‘large and excellent justices to local affairs to themselves, those for gentleman’s seat’, with extensive grounds. Although

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ the Braddylls had been settled earlier near Whalley Lancaster between  and  . Some gentry had on another estate, and a John Braddyll had bought cultural interests: Dorning Rasbotham of Birch House and sold monastic land in the mid-sixteenth century, near (  – ), who grew up in Manchester they were descended from the Dodding family who but retired to the country estate inherited through his had been at Conishead since the sixteenth century. mother in  , indulged in art and wrote a tragedy In the words of the same observer: which was twice performed at the Manchester theatre  . The leading figure among the justices In the house I observed the portrait of a Dodding between  and the  s was Thomas Butterworth aet.  , A.D.  , together with several of the Bayley of Hope, a country estate outside Manchester Braddylls, brought from Portfield. The original seat of this family was the house of Braddyll, with Brook Hall, who also drew an income as Receiver of the Duchy near Whalley, but in the parish of Blackburn. Here Rents for Lancashire. His ancestors had been they may be traced at least three centuries, but a silkweavers and merchants in Manchester. He was purchase of one moiety of the demesnes of Whalley High Sheriff at  and became chairman of Salford Abbey brought them to Portfield, near that place, Sessions. An active magistrate, he paid great where they continued several generations. Enriched, however, by a wealthy marriage with the heiress of the attention to the police and was particularly notable Doddings, they finally migrated to Conishead.  for his zeal over the house of correction erected at Salford in the late  s. He was chairman of the Gentry belonging to families with a Lancashire Board of Health set up in  to improve sanitation. commercial background had often not been in trade His other interests are shown by his being a Fellow themselves, nor had their fathers. The ancestors of of the Royal Society and vice president of the Sir Ashton Lever of Hall (b.  and Agricultural Society of Manchester.  made a justice in  ) had been clothiers in the There was little change in the background of seventeenth century, though his father (who had justices who were most prominent in quarter sessions built the Hall in  and had been High Sheriff) was work in the first three decades of the nineteenth a gentleman.  Among justices who had themselves century.  The clergy were still a minority and there made money in trade was Peter Baker of Liverpool were justices from mercantile families. Several justices (d.  ), a shipbuilder who constructed both naval in the  s and  s had been at meetings long and mercantile vessels, and who owned the privateer before  , such as Sir Richard Clayton of Adlington Mentor which captured the French East Indiaman, in Standish, where his family had been settled for Carnatic , worth £  ,, in October  ; he was more than a century; having become a justice in  , Bailiff of Liverpool in  and Mayor in  , and he was chairman of annual general sessions in  owned landed property in the neighbourhood of and   . Rev Richard of Formby Hall, Liverpool in the  s.  Some families who had made west of Ormskirk, had been a justice since   . In fortunes in trade in the past owned considerable the years  and  both chaired several quarter estates: the Lever estate extended over much of south- sessions at Ormskirk, Clayton taking a deposition east Lancashire, and included property in Manchester from Bolton weavers that they had taken illegal oaths and the neighbourhood. in , when propertied people feared disorder and A few prosperous clergy and other professional risings among the working classes . men were also prominent as justices, such as Rev The majority of justices had less service behind Oliver Marton, vicar of Lancaster until  , whose them. John Silvester of Chorley, a justice since  , father had bought the manor of Bolton-le-Sands about commanded a regiment of militia during the state of  , and James Fenton, a lawyer and recorder of fear in  . Among the leading established gentry

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ was Edward Wilbraham of House EARLY IMPROVEMENT ‒ near Ormskirk, a justice since  and chairman of The county had assumed responsibility for the annual general sessions in  and  ; his great gaol and hall in in the later uncle Sir Thomas Bootle had bought  s.  On his visit to the Castle in  John in  and rebuilt it in stone during the next ten years, Howard noted (with crown and shire halls) the prison after a design by Leoni. His father Richard Wilbraham accommodation. Men and women had separate day of Rode Hall in , M.P. for boroughs outside rooms and the men two cells for night rooms, but no Lancashire, advised the Chancellor of the Duchy, separate courts. The master’s side debtors, who could and was made Lord in   . pay for their lodgings, had many apartments, the Among the justices from a mercantile other debtors a large room.  background was Thomas Earle, of the Liverpool The Manchester bridewell was a small house merchant family (  – ); in his early life he lived including cells, presumably subdivisions of rooms, and worked as a merchant in a house in Hanover in  . When Howard visited Preston bridewell in Street, and was Mayor in  . During the French  , he found a large room with sleeping closets, Wars he was an active commander of the Volunteers. two workrooms and a dungeon, that is a room partly He bought the Spekelands estate, and in  – built or fully below ground.  Both had been repaired Spekelands House, a large square building of white extensively earlier in the century, and there was a wall stone in which he lived until his death.  The most round Preston prison in  which was no doubt prominent clergyman was Rev W.R. Hay (  – ). still there later.  He started life as a barrister, then became a clergyman, In the later seventeenth century and early and mid- becoming rector of Ackworth in on the eighteenth centuries the justices were spending money presentation of Lord Liverpool, the Chancellor of ceaselessly on the repair, enlarging and rebuilding of the Duchy of Lancaster, and a relation, in  . up to  or  county and hundred bridges a year. Between  and  he was Chairman of Quarter One of the original three stone county bridges, Sessions at Manchester, where he lived, and was Bridge, Lancaster, had a typical medieval or sixteenth- active and painstaking; for the strong Tory line he century structure of several arches. Ribble Bridge at took in support of the government during the , near Preston, was rebuilt twice in the in  he was given the valuable  s, first by subscriptions from local gentry, Preston living, worth £ , a year. He was typical Corporation and its two M.P.s, and second by three of the well-connected clergyman who became a county rates costing £ , . It had five segmental justice, but his energy in this activity brought him arches, was about  yards long, and  feet exceptional preferment.  between the parapets.  Crossford county bridge, In the  s cotton manufacturers continued to south of , near Manchester, had been be excluded except in extreme necessity; even the repaired in  , though it is not known whether it clergy were carefully vetted. Landed society still was later rebuilt. Ribchester Bridge at Samlesbury dominated the active bench, as landowners were Ford, on the Ribble above Preston, and Barton regarded by the Chancellor of the Duchy as being Bridge on the Irwell, near Manchester, both hundred most suitable on account of their gentility and bridges in the seventeenth century and county respectability.  bridges by the  s, were rebuilt in the  s. Many of the very numerous bridges maintained by the six hundreds were footbridges or tiny carriage timber or stone bridges of single arches spanning

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ brooks, costing from £  or £  up to £  or £  , known the abuses of prisons and urged reform on the built of stone more often than wood. The biggest county and borough justices and Parliament. Again, bridges of several arches cost five or ten times as the volume of the predominant type of building, that much. Each hundred (or occasionally the individual of houses, tended to fluctuate; large-scale house bridge) had its own salaried supervisor of bridges or construction encouraged other types of building, as in bridgemaster who kept his own account (seen the years  – and  – , with an unprecedented periodically by the justices) and had his own fund for jump in bridge building in the first period and in making payments. He was responsible for viewing the prison construction in the second. state of the bridges in his district, reporting to The specific causes of the various types of English Sessions on repairs and rebuilding to be done (with county building have been mentioned elsewhere. plans and estimates), and superintending and paying Prison improvement and construction from the  s the contractors. By the  s all the bridges were was the result of growing population, the increasing costing over £  a year on average, and in the  s tendency of judges to use imprisonment as a form of about £ , . punishment after  , even for petty offences, in The surge in building from the  s and  s addition to the absence of transportation between which the gentry justices directed, with the help of  and  , and the rising interest in prison reform magistrates from the professions, involved several leading to purpose-built structures. The improvement changing motives and attitudes among the upper of court houses was caused by the wish to handle classes which can be stated briefly. Fundamental was more cases in more suitable premises as well as the the emerging belief that the sick, the poor, the desire of the judges and justices for greater comfort. criminal and the insane needed to be held and cared Bridge building instead of repair followed from the for in institutions such as hospitals, workhouses, growth of trade in farm products and manufactured prisons and asylums. The feelings accompanying goods. Pauper lunatic asylums after  were caused this approach were mixed. Traditional history by a more enlightened approach to the insane, as emphasised the growth of humanitarianism among human beings capable of treatment and cure, instead the upper classes, prison reform accompanying the of as beasts to be whipped or chained in workhouses. growing interest in revision of the harsh criminal law, Finally, building improvements which involved opposition to the slave trade and then slavery itself, higher county rates were encouraged by the growing interest in education for working people, philanthropy prosperity of landowners and farmers in the later and religious enthusiasm. This attitude involved a eighteenth century as increasing population raised genuine benevolence by the prosperous towards the demand for foodstuffs.  people less fortunate in various ways. Recently The only new prison was the Manchester House sociologists and historians influenced by them, such of Correction, rebuilt in  and  . It cost as Rothman, Foucault and Ignatieff have stressed that £, . The growth of population in south-east the ruling classes wished to dominate these people to Lancashire probably made new accommodation stop them being dangerous and to make them useful, urgent, the number of inmates jumping to  or especially to those with property. ‘Social control’ has more at sessions, with far fewer normally, from the become the favourite phrase for this view. There was late  s.  According to Howard, there were a growing sense of duty and of the need for efficiency separate courts and apartments for men and women, among magistrates which was strengthened by the and sickrooms; the men had workrooms, over which presence of clerical justices. A succession of dedicated were chambers, and four cells; the women had three men and women from John Howard in the  s made rooms on the ground floor and three chambers; there

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

ROLLS ( OF RATES ) ISSUED FOR BRIDGE WORKS IN LANCS ., ‒ (total per year ) *

Date County Lonsdale Amounderness B’burn Leyland W. Derby Salford Total ££ £ £ £ £ £ £     s. d.     s. d.    s. d.    s.   s. d.    s. d.     s.      s. d.   s. d.   s. d.   s. d.   s. d.   s. d.    s. d.     s. d.     s. d.   /   s. d.  , s. d.     s. d.    s. d.  ,  s. d.    s. d.   s. d.  s. d.  ,  s. d.    s. d.     s. d.  ,  s. d.         s. d.  ,  s. d.   s. d.   s.    s.  ,      s. d.  ,  s. d.      s. d.  s. d.  , s.  ,   s. d.   s. d.  ,     s.   s. d.   s. d. , ,  s.    s. d.   s. d.     s. d. , ,   s.     s. d.   s. d.  ,  s.  ,  s. d.  s.   s.  d. , ,  s. d.  ,   s.    s. d.  ,    s. d.    s. d.  ,  s.    s. d.    s.  s., ,  s. d.  ,  s. d.    s. d. , , s. d.  ,  s.     s. d. , ,  ,   s.  , , s.

*No data for 

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ was also a dungeon.  Although the premises were footway, and the foundations were sunk seven feet relatively small, the courts and workrooms, apart from below the surface at low water. Next year the one- sleeping rooms and sickrooms, suggest purpose-built arch Turner Bridge was widened from six to  feet. improvements on the typical bridewell accommodation There were three big bridge projects, the rebuilding in houses. of Ribchester Bridge (  – and  ), the Ribble The Preston building was not rebuilt, just repaired, Bridge (  – ), and Lancaster Bridge (  – ). despite a large increase in the rather smaller number All were county bridges. A contract for rebuilding of inmates.  Ribchester Bridge for £ , was awarded to two Lancaster Castle was almost unchanged until the masons (John Bradley and Robert Wilkinson of  s. No major improvements were made in the Aighton, Bailey and Chaidgley) in October  at  s as a result of Howard’s initial reforming Preston Sessions, after public notice that they had influence. Despite the recommendation of the Grand submitted the lowest tender. The total cost of the Jury at Assizes early in  that proper apartments building in  and  was £ , . It was should be erected for sick inmates on a vacant plot destroyed by a flood in October  ‘which filled the by the Castle under the  Act, Sessions, meeting arches and forced them of the pillars before the same at Lancaster, on  April  decided that owing to gave way and left the foundations standing’. During the remarkable health of the prisoners such provision the summer of  ,  labourers were used to get the would be ‘useless and unnecessary’, two rooms being building stones out of the water at s. d. and s. d. ordered to be set aside in the Dungeon Tower for the a day for periods of between  and ½ days, for purpose.  Six cells were also set up, each ten feet two £ s.. Another bridge was erected on a new site  inches by six feet eight inches. These small changes yards above the old bridge in  . In October  were commended by Howard after his visit in  . five masons contracted jointly for the work, one There was no major bridge undertaking in the being John Law, bridgemaster of Salford Hundred,  s apart from the rebuilding of the hundred bridge the others Robert Gudgeon, John Bradley again, at Hornby after a flood in  for about £  , Edward Blackledge and Matthew Tootell. witnessed by the poet Thomas Gray when visiting A superintendent (Richard Threlfall, bridgemaster the Lakes. Expenditure of sums between £  and of Amounderness Hundred) was appointed on a five £ on repairs were numerous, although not always per cent commission as an additional check on the identifiable in the order books, since orders were construction this time. The contract price was sometimes made to levy several hundred pounds on £, and at least £ , was spent.  It was of a hundred for bridge works without specifying what three segmental arches, with fluted pilasters over was to be done.  the cutwaters. The same pattern continued in the  s and The state of Ribble Bridge on the main road early  s, with more works being identified as between Preston and Wigan was considered at a enlarging and rebuilding; again it is not always special adjourned sessions on  August  at possible to identify the works, particularly in Salford Lancaster, following an indictment of the county for Hundred. The bridgemasters worked as before, with not repairing and widening it. Because the wider salaries up to £  according to the amount of work. bridge might involve a rebuilding and choice of a Among smaller works, two masons, Robert Crabtree new site, a committee consisting of three justices and John Grindrod, contracted to repair and widen from each of the six hundreds was appointed to Stayley Bridge for £   s.  d. on  June  . It make a report with the help of ‘able and experienced was widened  feet to  feet  inches, with a workmen’.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

ROLLS FOR BRIDGE WORKS IN LANCASHIRE , ‒ 

 Epiphany Salford Hundred rebuilding bridge £ repair of Carrishaw bridge £ Leyland Hundred ditto £ Easter repair of Cowsey bridge £ ditto repair of Hawkshead Hall and Bowthrey bridges £ County rebuilding Ribchester bridge £ ditto repair of Ribble bridge and Walton Copp £ West Derby Hundred Caddishead bridge £ ditto raising causeway at How bridge £ Salford Hundred repair of public bridges £ County repair of Barton and Crossford bridges £ Midsummer County rebuilding Ribchester bridge £ West Derby Hundred rebuilding and enlarging Parsonage Mill bridge £ Salford Hundred rebuilding Brookhouse bridge, Tottington £ Michaelmas County rebuilding Ribchester bridge £ West Derby Hundred repairing Parsonage Mill bridge and making of Pennington bridge longer £ Leyland Hundred additional work to Sidebrook Lane bridge, etc. £

 Epiphany Lonsdale Hundred enlarging, repairing and altering School Beck bridge and Yewdale Beck bridge £ Salford Hundred rebuilding Brookhouse and Windeybank bridges, Bolton etc £ Easter Lonsdale Hundred rebuilding Condor bridge £ ditto widening High Little bridge £ County rebuilding Ribchester bridge £ Leyland Hundred rebuilding and enlarging two bridges £ Salford Hundred repairing public bridges £ Midsummer County repair of Ribble bridge and Walton Copp £ West Derby Hundred widening, raising and paving Hawkley, Smithy Brook and Morris bridges £ Michaelmas Lonsdale Hundred rest of money for Condor Bridge £ Amounderness Hundred extraordinary work on Broughton bridge £ ditto new wing wall at Wyer bridge £ ditto widening Cowbie and Tyrer bridges £ West Derby Hundred raising, widening and paving two bridges £

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

There was then disagreement about what to do. the Corporation of Lancaster from Cable Street in The Court at Lancaster on  October decided on the the town. Early in  the act was obtained to give basis of the report and the examination of two the county the powers in this respect. At Midsummer workmen, John Law and Robert Charnely, that the Sessions (  July  ) it was decided to seek plans present bridge could be repaired for seven years for and estimates from artificers inclined to contract, £ and that rebuilding was quite unnecessary. with the inducement of the offer of premiums for the Three days later the Court meeting at Preston, first, second and third best plans. The crucial meeting consisting of a different group of justices, most of was held on  September. Five designs were whom probably lived in the district in which the received, and that of Thomas Harrison, a Richmond bridge lay, decided both from personal observation architect, was chosen as a basis for the undertaking. and the report of the committee that it would be But it received some alteration following discussion impossible to do any repairs to secure it effectively or between Harrison and Threlfall, an experienced to put it into a state as to make it probable that it bridge surveyor, and consideration by the justices at would stand for seven years, especially for so small a an adjourned Sessions at Preston on  November. sum as £  . A special sessions was recommended at The final scheme comprised a bridge  feet wide, Preston, so that ‘the sentiments of the gentlemen and with footpaths on each side five feet wide, and five others interested in the county should be taken upon elliptical arches each  feet long; the piers were this important business’. This meeting (on  ornamented with columns and pediments with a November) resolved that the bridge should be cornice and balustrades. The attention of intending rebuilt. It approved the plans obtained by the contractors was drawn to ‘a fine stone quarry of a mos t committee whilst leaving it the right to make excellent quality situated near the said work upon alterations in detail. It was to have three segmental the surface of the earth and the whole of the road arches with an  yard span. Richard Threlfall was leading from the same gradually descends to the said again appointed ‘inspector and supervisor’, and John work – lime is also near at hand’. After advertisement Law’s tender was accepted out of those who Benjamin Muschamp was awarded the contract on  attended the Sessions with estimates. A total of December for £  , , taking other members of his £, was voted towards the building in  and family into partnership in February  . Harrison  , which cost £ ,  . was appointed surveyor on the understanding that The biggest of these new bridges was Lancaster he should receive no more than five per cent (Skerton) Bridge. According to the preamble of the commission. Construction took several years, with act of  for building a new bridge, it was very over  mostly unskilled men employed at the start ancient, needed repairing, was too narrow to allow on pile-driving and pumping. Work was still going two carriages to pass each other safely, and was on in  when the Court twice considered the inconveniently situated. At Lancaster Sessions on  matter of payments additional to the sum agreed by April  the bridge and its southern approach was contract. At Epiphany  the bridge undertakers presented as needing repair and enlarging. The court claimed £ ,  s. in extras, which was considered agreed and asked the Deputy Clerk to have the matter a premature application as the bridge was still considered by the justices meeting at the adjourned unfinished. But it was decided to pay £  s. spent Sessions at Preston, Ormskirk and Manchester. Their on procuring  , feet of stone from ‘distant’ (but opinions are not recorded, but clearly the decision was unnamed) quarries at d. per foot exclusive of their made to build a bridge in a new and more convenient contract, and £   s. spent on opening the quarries, position with an approach road across the waste of making roads to get the stones and other sums due to

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

Fig. . , Lancaster, in  (engraving by I. Landseer after a painting by Joseph Farington). Lancaster City Museums.

the quarry owners. At Michaelmas Sessions they THE REBUILDING OF THE were said to have spent £  more than was due by PRISONS AND THE COURTS the contract and to need at least another £  to IN THE  s AND  s finish the bridge. The work was completed finally by During the early  s all three county prisons were Michaelmas Sessions in  , when another £ , accepted as being in need of change. Under the was voted to cover unexpected expenditure by the immediate stress of fear of the raging gaol fever, by contractors due to flooding and high tides. Thus it is the end of  Sessions were considering alterations likely that the final cost of the works was as much as at the Lancaster Gaol and Manchester House of £ , . It was the largest bridge undertaking by the Correction, and the rebuilding of Preston House of Lancashire justices in the whole period until  . It Correction. is notable architecturally and structurally as the first At a special sessions to consider the state of large English bridge with a level road surface from Lancaster Gaol held at Chorley on  November, bank to bank  (Fig. ). attended by Bayley, Rasbotham and Samuel Clowes,

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

Fig. . Lancaster Castle: plan in , showing the alterations made by Thomas Harrison and Joseph Gandy (west is at the top). Lancaster City Museums.

Fig. . Lancaster Castle: watercolour view by Freebairn,  , looking westwards across the court, before the alterations begun in  . Lancaster City Museums.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

Fig. . Lancaster Castle: watercolour view by Freebairn,  , looking eastwards across the court towards the medieval gatehouse, with the female felons’ gaol (built by  ) south of it, the governor’s house (built in  – ) north of it, and the male felons’ gaol (built  – ) further north again. Lancaster City Museums.

Fig. . Lancaster Castle: watercolour view by Freebairn,  , looking westwards across the court, and showing the arcade with the debtors’ gaol over (built in the later  ’s), with the male felons’ gaol (built  – ) to the north. Lancaster City Museums.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ all Salford justices, it was decided that a house for considerable extent). The approved scheme included the gaoler, apartments for debtors, separate rooms a gaoler’s house, new accommodation for the grand and courts for men and women felons ought to be jury, a colonnade in front of the halls, an arcade, cells provided, and that the justices living at or near (presumably for men), the division of the infirmaries Lancaster should have plans and estimates prepared. for men and women, worksheds, women debtors’ At Easter Sessions , following resolutions at the yard and women felons’ yard and day room (Figs. Sheriff’s Board at the Lent Assizes, three justices for ‒ ). Thus the courts were to be altered as well as each hundred were appointed to form a committee to the prison. A committee was appointed with the inspect the prisons of the county. On  May the power to have £ , raised (the amount of the committee decided that prisoners attached under estimate). Harrison was appointed to oversee the civil processes and those committed for trial were work for a fee of  guineas. appointing a clerk of indiscriminately confined with convicted criminals, works for supervision. He was also responsible for and that separate prisons were needed for employing the workmen and paying their wages.  confinement and punishment. These resolutions Harrison appears to have undertaken the were approved at a special sessions on  August, building of the gaoler’s house first, for at the meeting but there was then a lull in schemes for alterations of the Court on  July  he was voted £  towards and additions at the Castle. James Fenton was its cost. His new plans, revising part of the earlier thanked for his care for the state and repairs of the plans, were adopted. His gratuity was raised to £  Gaol, and the improvements he had made to the and the estimate of works still to be done to £ , . existing buildings. Roger Dewhurst, a justice in The Gaoler’s House, finished by October  , Salford hundred, was thanked for attending to prison cost £ ,  s. d.; the other major works done business, his information about them, and ‘ingenious were the women’s wards, by July  (£ , s. plans for their improvement’. He is an interesting  d.), and the felons’ wards, on which as much as example of a justice acting as architect.  £, was spent between  and  . In July At the Summer Assizes in  the Grand Jury  Harrison’s fee was raised yet again to £  , to saw more plans for alterations prepared by Roger cover further works intended to last until  . Next Dewhurst. Its comments were considered at the year a thorough report by Bayley and another justice October Sessions; T.B. Bayley felt that William (Thomas Bateman) approved the works done to Blackburn (the leading English prison architect) date, recommending furthe r building alterations, and Harrison as professed gaol architects should be including accommodation for debtors, special asked for plans. The Court as a whole thought that if attention to water supply and drainage, and security further plans were needed Harrison should be asked, from locks and chevaux de frise. By April  as it trusted his work as shown by Lancaster bridge £ ,  s. had been spent. The cost was increased and by plans supplied of gaols at . Harrison by the fact that all the prison work was done as much had won the competitions to rebuild as possible with hewn stone, making the Castle one as a gaol and courthouse in the previous year. From of the strongest felons’ gaols in the country.   he and Blackburn worked up plans for it  . The works in the mid- and later-  s were After the presentment of the gaol at Lent Assizes, partly or principally concerned with the erection of  , the details of the proposed works were first the splendid civil court or Shire Hall, designed as resolved at Midsummer Sessions on the basis of seven sides of a polygon arranged in semi-circular plans drawn by Harrison under the inspection of formation (Figs.  and ). The Grand Jury Room was Roger Dewhurst (and using the latter’s plans to a also completed by the late  s, and new debtors’

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

Fig. . Lancaster Castle: watercolour view by Freebairn,  , showing the Shire Hall from the west. Lancaster City Museums.

Fig. . Lancaster Castle: watercolour view by Freebairn,  , showing the interior of the Shire Hall. Lancaster City Museums.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ rooms were erected at this time (Fig. ). In  four The decision was repeated at another sessions meeting houses were bought to enlarge the Castle, and the the following August which dealt with the prisons in accounts suggest that the works were carried on the county. In October  and February  a continuously for many years, though activity was less committee was appointed to handle the business. in most years in the  s than in the  s. The By the latter meeting steps had already been taken to Crown Court, a rectangular room, was completed choose an architect, William Blackburn, consult him more slowly, the interior being done after  (Fig. about a suitable site and have plans prepared. The  ). In the five years July  –June  £, was site on the outskirts chosen by Blackburn was spent on improvements to the Castle.  approved and the plans which he had prepared were The same Special Sessions held at Chorley on  considered adequate to the purposes of the act and November  , which recommended the provision sufficient for the five hundreds it was intended to of more accommodation at Lancaster Castle, decided serve. The Lancashire surveyor and bridgemaster that it was absolutely necessary to build a new House Richard Threlfall was chosen clerk of the works with of Correction at Preston. Presumably it followed an the order to buy the land. £  , was spent on the investigation by justices appointed under the act of undertaking (both site and building) between   , though there is no reference to it in the order and  . Opened in  , it was an extensive three- books. The old building was clearly unsuitable for storey building mainly comprising cells and  adaptation under the  act as a ‘gaol of punishment’, solitary weaving workshops, with several courts and that is, with proper accommodation for labour. dayrooms, a chapel and infirmaries  (Fig.  ).

Fig. . Lancaster Castle, the Grand Jury room. Fig.  Lancaster Castle, the Crown Court. Country Life. Country Life.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

A new house of correction for the Salford insufficiency of the site. At a Manchester Sessions Hundred was built at the same time. Despite the fact under Bayley’s chairmanship which included Sir that the bridewell had been rebuilt in the  s, it Ashton Lever, on  February  , the bridewell was decided in September  that a court house was resolved not to conform to statute and to be far was vital for transacting the sessions business of the too small in view of the huge increase in the number hundred, and that considerable alterations to the of crimes in south-east Lancashire. The building was bridewell were needed based on the report of the condemned as insufficient for the purposes of two justices (Bayley and Samuel Clowes) who had humane confinement, wise correction and exemplary examined it. In May  the Hundred was presented punishment, as the various acts required. It was for not improving the prison on account of the stated that the prisoners confined in it could not be

Fig.  . Elevation and plan of the House of Correction, Preston, designed by William Blackburn in  : from a survey of  by James Wyld.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

Fig.  . Block plan of the New Bayley Prison, Salford, designed by William Blackburn in  , and begun in  : the block on the right is the Court House.

Fig.  . View of the Court House, New Bayley Prison, Salford, designed by William Blackburn in  , and begun in  .

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ classed or divided, be kept to hard labour, or placed and £ ,  s. was recovered from the sale of land in separate apartments as laid down in the acts of in  . The debt was paid off at £ , a year,  and  , and ‘that from the amazing increase of beginning in October  . The money was raised felonies, and other offences in that part of the county by a roll every six months to include principal and of Lancaster, it is become absolutely necessary to interest on the outstanding debt. Thus the sum levied provide an house of correction capable of containing declined slightly each year as the amount of money one hundred prisoners in different classes, with a needed to pay the interest fell. So on  October  separate apartment for each prisoner and proper a roll was issued for £  ; by October  , the last and convenient places for labour, which in this time an exact amount was stated in the order book, manufacturing neighbourhood ought to be especially the figure was £  . attended to not only as a measure of public economy, but as one of the best means of correction’. Textile hand work would raise money and discipline the prisoners. If this was to be done a new building was THE BUILDING OF THE PRISONS , needed on a more extensive site, and this was agreed, THE SECOND PHASE , ‒ together with the use of a plan supplied by Designing from  involved a change of architect. Blackburn (subject to suitable alterations). A site in After Harrison moved to Chester in  to work on Manchester on the Byrom Estate near the River Chester Castle as well, relations with the Lancashire Irwell was first considered, but rejected on account justices deteriorated. In  he had to advance money of its liability to flooding. With Blackburn’s advice a for timber and other materials as the treasurer failed field in Salford belonging to a local charity was to give him half the levy due, and next year he was chosen. A Manchester stonemason, David Board, accused of giving precedence to Chester works. His was appointed full-time ‘surveyor and inspector of job ended either in late  or the beginning of  , the intended works’ (in effect clerk of the works) at after which no architect is mentioned in the order  s. a week. One million bricks were contracted for books for five years. Work continued on the prison supply by a local brickmaker, Roger Sands, for  s. and county courts at Lancaster Castle in the  s d. per thousand. In March  an advertisement and  s. There was expenditure on improvements sought tenders for stone and mason work, timber each year, but in only two years between  and and carpenters’ work, brick work, and different  (in  and  ) did it rise above £ , . kinds of lime and ‘water sand’ to be delivered to the Plans were being considered and work being done for site. Proposals for lead and plumber’s work, slate finishing the Crown Court for some years after  . and slating and cast ironwork were advertised next In March  plans and drawings by J.M. Gandy month. The new building, comprising a central for finishing it were approved by the committee. In three-storey octagonal structure with four wings,  cells and apartments were ordered to hold included  cells and numerous workrooms (Fig. prisoners to be used as evidence for the Crown at an  ). It was named the New Bayley Prison in estimate of £ , . After  there were several orders recognition of the initiative and efforts of Bayley in for enlarging parts of the prison; thus in March  pressing the scheme despite opposition from some the committee decided to add a storey to one of the justices, and in helping to guide the progress of the new towers in the felons’ ward. Gandy was architect work (Fig.  ).  until at least  . The building and land appears to have cost Outlay on the Castle rose between  and  . £ , or £  , , of which £  , was borrowed, The female penitentiary, intended to provide for the

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ classification of prisoners and for labour, was being have been completed at a cost of about £  , . built in the form of a tower. In November  the Sums spent in the following years were for minor gaoler proposed a separate female prison to classify improvements and repairs.  the inmates. Its cost was probably £  , . The No major enlargements to the New Bayley Prison organisation of the work was under the direction of in Salford took place before  , although the the ‘superintendent mason’ or superintendent of increase in the cells from  in  to  by  works (William Coulthurst or Coulthart from August presumably reflects some additions to the building.  ), who, with the treasurer, hired the workmen, In October  , following two presentments about bought the materials and paid for their carriage. For its insufficiency, a committee was set up to enlarge example, the accounts between June   and and improve the prison. The reason was the very June   show that £ , s. was spent on the rapid growth in the population of Manchester and penitentiary and other works, including repairs. The the rest of the hundred of Salford, and the consequent workmen were paid fortnightly, the amounts varying expansion of the number of prisoners. There were between £   .  d. on July   and £  s.  d. then  prisoners housed in  cells intended on November   . They were usually paid s. or originally to be occupied singly. At the Manchester s. d. a day. Major payments for materials such as adjournment of the Epiphany Sessions  the ston e, wood, lime and sand, and their carriage, committee recommended a plan of additional especially timber, included £   s. d. for wood buildings probably supplied by the Salford architect from Langton and Co. of Liverpool on  November Thomas Wright. Land was bought adjoining the  , £   s. to a Thomas Wadsworth for carting existing prison. In April the committee and Wright stone on  October  , and £  s. on  examined the tenders received in answer to September  to a William Bell for stone. There advertisements, first for building a wall to enclose the were also payments to master craftsmen for ironwork, ground, and second, to erect the building. One glazing and painting, especially some big sums to contractor, a local man named Bellhouse, was Moore and Walton for ironwork, including £  on awarded both works, as he made the lowest offer in  October  , and small sums to Thomas Townso n both cases. In this case the justices meeting at the for glazing and painting and to two men called Manchester adjournments of quarter sessions gave Shrigley for painting. The growing expenditure in the work to a single contractor instead of following these years naturally involved an increase in the the more usual Lancashire practice of the county workforce. In March  five masons and two joiners acting as direct purchaser of materials and employer were employed on the Castle works: in August it was of labour. The new building comprised two parallel decided that not more than  masons should be crescents each in nine parts, including dayrooms, employed, and a sufficient number of labourers. each with a range of sleeping cells (which totalled Probably at least  men were being used in periods  ), and workshops (Fig.  ). It was finished by such as the second half of  and from February November  , at a cost of about £  , . But  . Changes to the wards were made in  and almost immediately after completion, at Epiphany  . The extent of refined equipment by this time Sessions in  , the prison was presented as may be seen from ‘apparatus’ to supply warm air needing enlargement. Alterations appear to have under the Courts, water closets in hospital rooms, been almost continuous during the following decade, iron bedsteads and canvas blinds. By about  the with numbers steadily growing. There was an works on the prison and court rooms that had been average expenditure of several thousand pounds a carried on without a break since  appears to year until  . The order books record that in May

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

Mens Wards ‒

Mens Wards

Womens Wards

‒

Court House  yards

Fig.  . Block plan of the New Bayley Prison, Salford, showing the additions made in  – to the designs of Thomas Wright (from Banck’s Plan of Manchester and Salford ,  ).

 the construction of additional workshops was new county prison near Liverpool began at an approved, and three years later it was decided to adjourned meeting of  justices at Lancaster on  build a hospital. On  October  two justices September  . At the representation of the Preston presented the House of Correction as insufficient justice Samuel Horrocks (of the family of cotton under the recent prison legislation and in need of spinners) and following the examination of the prison enlargement. The Visiting Justices were appointed a governor and of the Preston architect Robert Roper committee to consider the best way of enlarging the it was decided that the Preston House of Correction, prison to accommodate at least  more prisoners used by all the Lancashire hundreds apart from according to the terms of the act of  , and Salford, had become too small to accommodate the arrangements for enlarging the female part to allow great number of prisoners assigned to it and that it inspection and classification. About £  , –£  , was essential to enlarge it. On  November an was spent in  – on these works  . There was adjourned meeting at Preston noted that presentments then a pause in the alterations for several years.  had been made by Horrocks and the Grand Jury. It By far the largest single prison undertaking was appointed a committee to do the work, decided what the building of the Kirkdale bridewell between  parts of the building should be enlarged (including and  . The steps which led to the building of a the construction of  cells) on the basis of Roper’s

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ plan, ordered him to buy timber, and ordered a levy building in course of erection collapsed on account of £ , towards the cost. A Sessions at Preston the of the sinking of a bed of sand beneath the clay of the following February received resolutions from foundations, and in January  there was a complaint Liverpool Corporation, from a committee of borough about the quality of the mortar  . The total cost was justices, and from a meeting of county justices in the £ , s.  d., comprising the land, building the neighbourhood of Liverpool, apparently concerning huge prison and court house and fitting up and the need for accommodation for prisoners in West furnishing them, and erecting a house for the chaplain. Derby Hundred, that is, the Liverpool area. A It consisted mainly of two detached semi-circular committee was set up to hire part of the Liverpool wings, for men and women, of three storeys designed town gaol, with the option of procuring plans and by Thomas Wright, holding 800 inmates in  classes. estimates for more permanent prison accommodation About £ , was also spent in alterations and for the hundred. At the Annual Sessions at Preston improvements in  – , which included a chapel, on  June the Court considered the formal chaplain’s house, watch house, laundry and drying presentment of the insufficiency of the Preston House house. Altogether £  , was borrowed by of Correction and the need to provide one or more mortgaging the rates, to be paid off between  new ones, made at Ormskirk on  May. It received and  . the report of the committee set up in February, and The construction of the new house of correction approved the hiring of three wings in Liverpool for West Derby Hundred naturally reduced the borough gaol to provide a house of correction for pressure on prison accommodation in the Preston three years. It also confirmed that a new house of bridewell, but population and hence the number of correction should be provided for the five hundreds, prisoners were growing during the  s. In  it with a suitable court house, either in the borough of was decided to follow the example of other counties Liverpool or within three miles of it. Ground plans by acquiring a treadmill, which meant classifying the and elevations had already been advertised for in prisoners during their labour, and to provide a larger May. A committee was appointed to complete the chapel. The existing court house was added to the arrangements about hiring the section of the Liverpool prison as part of the alterations. Expenditure on gaol, to choose a situation for the new house of improvements cost over £ , between  and correction and treat for a building site. At the same  , and about £ , –£  , in  – . time it was decided that it would be cheaper and be more convenient for the public if an adjourned quarter sessions was held at Liverpool to transact the business of West Derby Hundred, instead of at Wigan and THE LUNATIC ASYLUM Ormskirk; prisoners for offences in West Derby At the first meeting of Sessions which discussed the Hundred would be committed to the house of erection of an asylum, at Wigan early in  , the correction there. In January  it was decided to neighbourhood of Liverpool was proposed as a borrow £  , for the building and in February situation because the  act required an ‘airy and  a high position near the village of Kirkdale was healthy’ environment and because of the ‘beneficial chosen for the site. During  and  the making effects of sea air and sea-bathing in the cure of of bricks (with clay from county land), the supply of insanity’. Land was bought in Walton on  February. stone, the brick and stone work, carpentry, slating, But local doctors pointed out that Liverpool already plumbing, plastering and painting, were all advertised had an asylum and that Liverpool was not in a central for letting separately. In November part of the position in the county. In regard to cost there would

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ be disadvantages not only from the expense of moving to fix the precise site, procure plans and estimates lunatics but also in building and supporting an and contract for and superintend the building. The asylum in the area: ‘great and unnecessary expense choice appears to have been made partly because the would be incurred by the County, not only in the Corporation offered the site free, and partly for the removal of lunatics to this remote corner of it but in convenience of the justices, who could inspect it at the erection and support of this establishment in the their visits to the county town during the spring and vicinity of a large town where the price of land and summer Assizes. At another important meeting on labour is exceedingly high and the price of provisions  September the committee approved the site, much greater than in the interior of the county’. considered several plans which were produced, The site was therefore abandoned, and moors and adopted that of Thomas Standen of Lancaster, near Preston were mentioned as much more central. architect, subject to several alterations which were A meeting of justices at Preston on  July  decided suggested to him. instead to use a site on Lancaster Moor offered free It was decided to build the north front first. A by the Corporation, which would be accessible to meeting of the committee on  March appointed magistrates attending Assizes; it appointed a committee Standen as surveyor: he was to be paid £  for the

Fig.  . Lancaster County Lunatic Asylum, Lancaster Moor, designed by Thomas Standen, and built between  and  . .

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ plans which he had prepared, and was to be allowed (Thomas Shrigley), and plumbing and glazing (James £s. a week during the building for drawing the Willan). Several people were also paid for carting.  working plans and superintending the work, and £  By June  £ , had been spent (exclusive s. a week for his foreman. The committee examined of furnishing) and accommodation had been provided the tenders which it had sought by advertisement for for  (Fig.  ). Nor was this the end: in  £, the stonework of the north front and accepted the s. was spent on more land, and £  ,  s. was laid proposals of Edward Gibson and James Harrison, out on building improvements during the decade. stonemasons of . The contract specified the Expenditure was particularly high (about £ , ) in price for each type of work beginning with s. d. per  – , when a new building was erected to increase yard for ‘common walling’ and s. per yard for accommodation to  , and a chapel was built  . ‘common flagging’, followed by other types of flagging, steps, chimney pieces and various types of ashlar work. The work was to be completed by  September  . Materials were to be bought by the county. A THE NEW COURT HOUSE , PRESTON further meeting on  August adopted plan  instead By the early  s the court house at Preston, in the of plan , which had a pediment and pillars. centre of the House of Correction (Fig.  ), was The year after the completion of the north front being found both inconveniently situated and ‘not Gibson and Harrison did the stonework of the wings sufficiently commodious’. In  it was decided to on the west and east fronts, again after tenders had build a new court house in front or at the side of the been sought by advertisement and they had been existing bridewell. In  – there was a further awarded the contract at slightly higher prices than in incentive provided by the decision to extend the the former agreement. The stone came from a quarry prison accommodation. At an adjourned Sessions on on the premises, but there were substantial recurring  September  the justices decided to spend payments to two Lancaster firms for imported timber £ , on the erection of a new building and record (Welch and Eskrigge, and Thomas Inman and Co.); office outside the walls of the prison. The county lime also came from a regular supplier, lead in sheets employed the architectural firm of Rickman and was bought from two Liverpool firms (Walter Maltby Hutchinson of , who were paid five per and Co., Mather Parkes and Co.) and ½ tons of cent on the expenditure for making designs, working slates were bought between August  and February drawings, specifications and superintending the  from George Jackson of Hawkshead. Under the building between  and  . A clerk of the works direction of the foreman (Thomas Ripley), were a provided constant supervision. The building was of group of labourers who in  numbered about  , two storeys; the subsidiary basement floor included a paid weekly at a daily wage mostly of s. and s. d. records room, room for counsel, Clerk’s office, A number of jobs were done by master craftsmen turnkey’s rooms and lock ups; the main storey had a helped by their own journeymen and labourers. large court room in the centre and two rooms on Thomas Standen, who was both a stonemason and each side, those on one side being for the use of the plasterer, received £  s. d. for digging the Justices and those on the other for the grand jury and foundations early in  before the labourers directed their witnesses. The county used a single contractor, by Ripley were first hired; from April  he was a local partnership of Robert Roper, architect and receiving regular payments for plastering. There were building surveyor, and James Dandy, timber merchant, also master craftsmen doing the joiner’s work (Henry joiner and builder. Despite the careful way in which Hogarth), ironwork (John Moore and Co.), painting the working drawings and specifications were claimed

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ to have been drawn up by the architects, on  March The cost was as follows: , during the course of building they complained of faulty work in part of the carpentry and plumbing. Contract price £, Extras £,  s. d. It included the omission of some floor joists and Clerk of the Works £  s. ceiling joists and all the wall plates of the roofs in Printing and advertisements £ s. d. much of the building, and deficiencies in the lead Architects’ commission £ s. d. work of the lantern and gutters. The deficiencies Total £,  s. d. were remedied, and the work was largely completed by the beginning of  (Fig.  ). There was extra Alterations were made in  – which brought the expenditure in addition to the contract, particularly total cost to between £  , and £  , . on stonework for the foundations, on the lantern, fitting up the court house and several other items.

Fig.  . The Prison and Court House, Preston, designed by Thomas Rickman and Henry Hutchinson and built between  and  . Harris Museum and Art Gallery, Preston.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

Fig.  . House of  in Church Street, Lancaster, bought by the County between  and  and used as Judges’ Lodgings from then until  . Lancaster City Museums.

JUDGES ’ LODGINGS Hundred, where outlay was over £ , in the four Public accommodation was extended further in the years  – . It reflected the great growth of the  s by a new judges’ house at Lancaster. General cotton industry and trade and the population increase sessions on  August  decided that better which accompanied it. From  bridge building lodgings and accommodation were needed for the was also active in Blackburn Hundred (where judges; an act of parliament was obtained giving the industrial activity was also growing markedly) , and it justices the power to spend up to £ , . In continued strongly in West Derby Hundred, September  the commissioners appointed under particularly highly populated because it contained the act reported that they had bought and furnished Liverpool, which needed good road communications a house in Lancaster (Fig.  ).  with other parts of . The number of county bridges grew from five to ten by  , with bridges being thrown on the country in  (one),  (one), and  (three), but they remained a BRIDGE WORKS , ‒ handful compared with the number of hundred bridges During the  s expenditure on bridges averaged ( in  ). This pattern of bridge work continued nearly £ , a year, about four times what it had in the  s; among the biggest undertakings was been before the period of the three large bridge works Blaquoth bridge in Salford Hundred, for which in the  s and early  s. After the completion of £, was voted in October  , and the rebuilding Lancaster bridge there was no major undertaking. of St Michael’s bridge for which £  was paid in Instead the growth of expenditure was the result of July and October   . the great increase in the works done to the hundred General Sessions in  and  disapproved of bridges. They were rebuilt, widened or otherwise the Glasburne decision which put the maintenance of improved, normally for no more than a few hundred poor quality bridges, privately erected, on the county; pounds. This was particularly the case in Salford they wanted all new bridges to be built with county

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒ supervision and consent, clarification of the liability variation was William Coulthart’s £  a year and s. to repair the road within  feet of the bridge, and daily with travel allowances. Despite the sharp rise in special contributions to bridge building by localities. prices in the  s and  s, salaries were no higher Attempts to secure suitable legislation by Bayley, the than in the  s, suggesting that bridges were now in Deputy clerk, and the county members failed, except better condition and needed less work. A security that the act of  provided that no bridge privately payment was normally expected.  or publicly built should be a county bridge unless The two biggest bridge undertakings before  erected under the supervision of the county surveyor. were in the  s. Only half the cost of Lancashire now appointed the hundred bridgemasters Bridge in West Derby Hundred was met by the as county surveyors. The terms of the  act were Hundred. Jointly with Cheshire a wooden bridge extended to hundred bridges in  . with stone abutments was erected in the place of the Bridgemasters undertook or supervised bridge old stone bridge over the , the repairs and rebuilding, sometimes themselves Lancashire Justices raising £ , between  and preparing plans and specifications. They were now  . The plans were by Thomas Harrison, now a described as ‘stonemasons’ or ‘gentlemen’. In January Chester architect, and his partner William Cole,  the Court at Lancaster decided that the Harrison also being the builder, presumably bridgemaster of Lonsdale Hundred (South of the subcontracting much or all of the work.  The Sands), should be a ‘good, practical stonemason’, in Cheshire Quarter Sessions order book notes that in April appointing William Coulthart, the ‘principal January  Harrison or another architect named mason’ at Lancaster Castle, who had just built the Nightingale or a bridgebuilder was preparing a plan Savings Bank in New Street (now the Children’s and report on repairs, and that Thomas Telford the Library, according to Dr Andrew White) and the County Surveyor had proposed an iron Amicable Society Library in Church Street (now bridge.  Royal Bank of Scotland, according to Dr White). The Crossford Bridge at Stretford near Manchester ‘gentlemen’ may generally have been former masons, was rebuilt in  – when Peter Hewitt, gentleman, as in the case of Benjamin Muschamp, a ‘mason’ when was bridgemaster. It had been greatly damaged by he worked on Lancaster Bridge in the  s, and a floods and rebuilding allowed it to be widened. The ‘gentleman’ when he was bridgemaster of Blackburn estimate was at least £  , and in the event the Hundred in  . Presumably a gentleman mason cost was £  , . As a result over £  , was raised contracted the work with other masons. That the in bridge rolls in  , an exceptional amount.  choice of bridgemasters was restricted is suggested by During the  s expenditure averaged just over two successive surveyors of the same name, as in the £, a year, about the same in real terms as in the case of the bridgemasters of Amounderness Hundred,  s. Salford Hundred continued to provide much Richard Threlfall in  and William Threlfall from of the work, but the addition to the county bridges  . Salaries varied according to the number and ( by  and  by  ) was contributing in a importance of the bridges, sometimes suggesting a small way to the total outlay. The rebuilding, part-time and sometimes a full-time occupation. In widening and improving of bridges continued to be  Thomas Fawcett was paid £   s. for Lonsdale important, although no undertaking matched that of Hundred (South of the Sands), and Richard Chaffers Crossford bridge. Between  and  there were of Burnley, stonemason, £  for Blackburn Hundred. at least nine county and hundred bridge works In  the salary of James Housgreave, gentleman for costing more than £ , . The most expensive was West Derby Hundred, was increased to £  . A the rebuilding of Tarleton bridge between  and

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

ROLLS ISSUED FOR BRIDGE WORKS IN LANCASHIRE , ‒ (total per year )

Date County Lonsdale Amounderness Blackburn Leyland West Derby Salford Total  £, £ £ £ £ £,  £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £, £, £,  £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £, £ £, £, £,  £ £ £, £ £ £, £,  £ £ £, £ £ £, £,  £ £, £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £, £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £, £, £,  £, £ £ £, £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £, £, £, £,  £ £ £ £, £, £, £,  £ £ £ £, £ £, £, £,  £ £ £ £, £ £ £, £,  £, £, £ £, £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £, £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £, £, £,  £ £ £ £ £, £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £, £, £,  £, £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £, £, £ £ £, £, £ ,  £, £ £ £ £, £ £,  £, £ £ £ £ £, £, £,  £, £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £, £ £ £, £ £ £, £,

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

EXPENDITURE ON BRIDGE WORKS IN LANCASHIRE , ‒ 

Date County North South Amounderness Blackburn Leyland West Salford Total Lonsdale Lonsdale Derby  £ £ £ £ £ £ £ not known -  £, £ £ £ £ £ £ £, £ ,  £ £ £, £ £ £ £, £, £,  £, £ £, £ £ £ £, £, £,  £, £ £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £, £ £, £ £ £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £, £, £, £,  £ £ £ £ £, £ £ £, £,  £ £ £ £ £ £ £ £, £,  £, £ £ £ £ £ £, £, £,

NOTES  , the bridgemaster being Richard Chaffers, still  P. Deane and W.A. Cole, British Economic Growth ‘stonemason’. The previous structure was ‘so narrow  – , ,  ,  . that one vehicle can only just pass over it, and the  Preston, Lancashire Record Office (hereafter LRO), walls on each side were said to be too low and weak QSG /,  – . to stop a vehicle falling over the edge; yet it lay on a  M. DeLacy, Prison Reform in Lancashire,  – : A Study in Local Administration (Remains Historical main road’. The new bridge cost £ , . and Literary Connected with the Palatine Counties of Lancashire and the West were the two Lancaster and Chester Volume XXXIII – Third largest county bridge spending authorities, though Series), Manchester,  ,  ; this pioneering study technically most of Lancashire’s bridge outlay was concerns Lancashire prison reform in general rather on hundred bridges. The new Lancaster Bridge than prison buildings. erected in the  s was one of the biggest English  E. Barnes, History, Directory and Gazetteer of the County Palatine of Lancaster , , Liverpool,  ,  . county bridges. When its county buildings are also  A. Langshaw, ‘The Hundred Bridges of Blackburn in considered, the county gaol, the new houses of the Seventeenth Century’, Transactions of the Historic correction and the lunatic asylum, Lancashire stands Society of Lancashire and Cheshire (hereafter THSLC ), out as one of the biggest spenders on building and XCVIII,  ,  . construction.  Victoria History of the County of Lancaster , II,  .  B.W. Quintrell (ed.), “Proceedings of the Lancashire Justices of the Peace at the Sheriff’s Table during Assizes Week,  – ”, Record Society of Lancashire and Cheshire , CXXI,  , , . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  R. Sharpe France, ‘The Lancashire Sessions Act, The author is grateful to Dr. Andrew White, Head of  ’, THSLC , XCVI,  , ,  ,  ; A.F. Davie, ‘The Lancaster City Museums, for help in obtaining illustrations, Administration of Lancashire  – ’, in S.P. Bell and to Dr. Andrew White and Mr Richard Hewlings for (ed.), Victorian Lancashire , Newton Abbot,  , – . information about the building tradesmen.  LRO, QSO / – .  A.F. Davie, ‘The Government of Lancashire  –  ’, Manchester University MA thesis,  ,  .

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

 T.D. Whitaker, A History of in the Counties and Public Building  – ,  ,  , North Riding of the County of : Together with  ,  – ,  . Those Parts of the Everwicshire of Domesday which  Chalklin, op.cit. ,  . Form the Wapentakes of Lonsdale, Ewecross and  DeLacy, op.cit. ,  . Amounderness, in the Counties of York, Lancaster and  DeLacy, op.cit. ,  ; Howard, op.cit. ,  . Westmoreland ,  , II,  .  Howard, op.cit. ,   W.J. Smith, ‘Sir Ashton Lever of Alkrington and his  DeLacy, op.cit. ; LRO, QSO / ,  August  (£  Museum,  – ’, Transactions of the Lancashire voted for repair). and Cheshire Antiquarian Society , LXXII,  ,  ,  LRO QSO / ,  April  .  – .  Howard, op.cit. ,  –.  J. Boult, ‘The Historical Topography of Aigburth and  LRO QSO / – . Garston’, THSLC , XIX,  ,  –.  LRO QSO / – , especially QSO / ,  ,  ,  Whitaker, op.cit. ,  ; Sharpe France, op.cit. ,  .  ,  ; QAR /, ; QSP  /.  E. Baines, History of the County Palatine and Duchy of  LRO QSO / ,  . Lancaster, III,  ,  –.  LRO QSO / ,  ; DDX  .  E. Axon, The Family of Bayley of Manchester and  Act  Geo.  c.  ; LRO QSO / –; Howard Hope , Manchester,  , ‒ . Colvin, A Biographical Dictionary of British  LRO, QSO / – . Architects,  – , New Haven and London, ,  J. Aikin, A Description of the Country from Thirty to  ; Benjamin, John and Thomas Muschamp were Forty Miles round Manchester ,  ,  . masons at Harewood House, Yorkshire, between   Baines, op.cit. , II, Liverpool,  , VII . and  [Mary Mauchline, Harewood House ,  ,  F.O. Darvall, Popular Disturbances and Public Order ex inf Richard Hewlings]. in Regency England ,  edition,  .  DeLacy, op. cit. ,  –; LRO QSO / –, QAL /  Darvall, op.cit. ,  . pp. –.  Davie, op.cit. ,  ; J. Harland (ed.), M. Gregson,  J. Mordaunt Crook, ‘A most Classical Architect’, Portfolio of Fragments relative to the History and Country Life , April   ,  . Antiquities, Topography and Genealogies of the County  LRO QSO / –; Palatine and Duchy of Lancaster ,  ,  .  LRO QSO / – ; Manchester Mercury ,  April  J.A. Picton, Memorials of Liverpool , II, nd edition,  ; J. Neild, The General State of the Prisons ,  , Liverpool,  ,  ; T.A. Earle, ‘Earle of Allerton  . Tower’, THSLC ,  ,  ; ibid .,  ,  –.  J. Mordaunt Crook, ‘A Reluctant Goth: The  D. Read, Peterloo: the Massacre and its Background, Architecture of Thomas Harrison – I’, Country Life , Manchester ,  ,  . April   ,  ; LRO CTA/ . No accounts have  D. Foster, ‘The Changing Social Origins and Political been traced for the period April  –June  . Allegiance of Lancashire J.P.s  – ’, Lancaster  LRO QSO / – ; W.L. Clay, The Prison University Ph.D thesis,  ,  – ,  ,  , and Chaplain , Cambridge and London,  ,  –; summary at front. Neild, op.cit. ,  –.  Quintrell, op.cit. ,  –,  .  S. and B. Webb, English Prisons under Local  J. Howard, The State of the Prisons in England and Government ,  ,  ; Neild, op.cit. ,  ; T. Percival, Wales , nd edition, Warrington,  ,  . Biographical Memoirs of the late Thomas Butterworth  Howard, op.cit. ,  . Bayley, Manchester,  , ; LRO QSO / –.  LRO, QSO / ,  ; DeLacy, op.cit. ,  .  LRO QS) / – .   and  Geo. , Acts for rebuilding bridge over the  LRO CTA , QAL /, QSO / – . River Ribble; C. Hardwick, History of the Borough of  Colvin, op.cit. ,  ; LRO CTA  pp.  – , CTA  Preston and its Environs, and the County of Lancaster , pp. – ,  –; Parliamentary Papers (hereafter PP ), Preston,  ,  ; E. Jervoise, The Ancient Bridges of XV  ; Baines, op.cit. , II,  ; LRO QSO / . the North of England ,  ,  .  LRO QSO / – ; Manchester Mercury ,  and  LRO, QSO / – ,  – .  // , // ,  / / , // . Building costs roughly  DeLacy, op.cit. , -- ; C.W. Chalklin, English doubled between  and the  s.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X   QUARTER SESSIONS BUILDING IN LANCASHIRE ‒

 J.J. Gurney, Notes on a visit made to some of the  LRO QSG / ( // , // ), QSV ,  ; Lancaster Prisons in Scotland and the North of England ,  , Gazette,  // ; Baines, op.cit. , II,  ,  ,  ,  –; PP , XV ,  ; J. Rushton, Abstract of the  ,  . Accounts of the County Treasurers and other Public  LRO QSG / ( // ,  // ); Local and Personal Officers of the County Palatine of Lancaster, Acts  Geo.  c.  .  – ,  , f.  .  LRO QSO / – : the main source for expenditure  LRO QSO /, QSG /; QSO / ,  , CTA . is the issue of rolls in these order books, which do not  Manchester Mercury,  // ,  // ; PP ,  , XV mention most of the bridge works by name,  ; Liverpool Mercury ,  // ,  // ,  // , particularly the smaller ones; Davie, op. cit.,  .  // , // , // ,  // .  Davie, op.cit. ,  –,  .  LRO QSG / ( August  ) and CTA ; PP ,   LRO QSO / – .  XV .  Cheshire Record Office, QJB / , pp.  ,  .  LRO Report,  , pp.  – ; QAM /, , ,  ,  ,  Ibid ., QJB / , p.  .  ; R. Hindle, An Account of the Expenditure of the  LRO QSO / – . County Palatine of Lancaster , Lancaster,  ,  .  LRO QSO / – .  Lancaster Gazette ,  // ,  // ,  // ,  // ,  LRO CTA   // ; LRO CTA , ; Baines, op.cit. , II,  ,  ;  LRO QSO /. QSO / – ; CTA ; QSZ –; G.A. Cooke, A Topographical and Statistical Lancaster Gazette ,  // , // ; Liverpool Mercury , Description of the County of Lancaster ,  ,  .  //.

THE GEORGIAN GROUP JOURNAL VOLUME X  