JohnWard and the Kennet and Avon Canal MichaelCorfield ln the progress of any great enterprise the record of events John Ward was a native of Staffordshire, born in Cheadle on that led to its fruition are often to be found in the off icial 30 June 1756, who came to Marlborough in Wiltshire to minutes of the concern. Behind those bland words lies a succeed his uncle, Charles Bill as agent to the Earl of weaith of controversy. lf the real reason for a particular Ailesbury. He became a leading citÌzen of Marlborough, course of action ís to be understood, then it is necessary to founded the Marlborough Bank and, as an attorney, started get beyond the official record and to have a víew ínto the a firm of solicitors which still practices in the town as committee room er the parlours of the members. To Ward Merriman's and Co; he was elected a memher of the examine the course of an event we need to find a personal Corporation and was Mayor several times. correspondence to or from someone tntimately connected with the event. The Ward family had a historic connection with the development of inland water transport. Whether or not ln the planning of the Kennet and Avon Canal we are John Ward was connected with the Earls of Dudley has yet fortunate that the læding landowner in the Marlborough to be demonstrated. However, one of the first proposals to area walthe Earl of Ailesbury, a leadíng figure ín court unite the Rivers Severn and Trent was proposed by Congreve circles whose duties kept him from his Savernake es'tates for in the 17th century in a pamphlet addressed to Sir Edward long periods. During his absence he maintained an almost Ward of Staffordshire.. Charles Bill, Ward's uncle had a daily correspondence wíth his agent, John Ward, who was great interest in canals, being a committeeman on the Trent also to be closely concerned with the planning of the Canal. and Mersey Canal and also intimately concerned with the The lettersfrom Ward to the Earl have been preserved asl as Rochdale Canal. lt was natural, therefore, that when in part of the Savernake Collection in the Wiltshire Record 1788 a meeting was called by the citizens of Hungerford Office, and I am most grateful as I am sure will other to discuss an extension of the Kennet Navigation from æholars of the history of the waterways that Kenneth Newbury on to Marlborough, Ward attended, not only to Rogers, the County Archivist brought them to my attention. represent Marlborough ¡nterests but also as one with a The lettersare especíally detailed for the period up to the particular knowledge of canals in the Midlands. passing of the Aa, the period on wltich this account will .^oncentrate. Following the meeting Ward wrote on 6 April 1798 I shall lay a copy of the resolutions before my brothers . ,s E Fur rrry uvvrrpar t I tJt-.r rruL sce wltat c,ar tiagu is Lcl Llc l¡¿d in o suff icient quantity to pay interest on the money it would cost I to make such a navigation, but if there was, it would be a good o thing for Marlborough, in all probability by causing a great (¡)o t quantity of corn to be brought into the town as wel I as other aà goods, and might in time raise the value of the houses here if the s navigation f lourished. Ward was aware of the difficulties that faced such an undertaking; he goes on: However, I do not think Sir William Jones would like a navigation so near his house, ¡t may also deprive the mills and water- rneadows on the river of a proper supply of water, and it must certainly injure the tolls on the London Road. Ward did not have long to wait for the expected outcry from the Earl's neighbours. Sir William Jones lived at Ramsbury Manor and, like his neighbour Mrs Popham of Littlecote House, had improved his property taking advantage of the river which flowed through their estates. Neither of the landowners would wish the river canalised, nor would they wish boatmen passing within a few hundred feet of their homes. The experience of people in the south was much more with the River Tha¡nes orr which boats were manned by up to six crew. and often hauled by gangs of men. lt is I likely that their opposition would have been less had they S been aware that in the Midlands canal boats were run by a crew of two and a horse. On the 16 April the expectedl s letter arrived, Ward wrote: 28 WARD&KAA/CORFIELD BIASJOURNAL 141981 Silbury a Colne Ramsbury ye /Bath a- Kennet Froxfield Beckhampton House Bedwin Melkshom GtBedwin Whadden MilkhouseWater Brodford Semington a Urchfont a Area encompass¡ng the two routes proposed for the Kennet and Avon Ganal 0xford London Windsor Reading Rivers between Bristol and London Sketch maps sþowing the areas involved From plans in Wiltshire Record Off ice I had a letter from Sir William Jones this morning mentioning As a result of the meetings in 1788 a pamphlet entitled his disapprobation of the navigation being extended to Marlborough Observations on a Scheme for Extend¡ng the Navigation of as impracticable f or want of money, injurious as tending to hurt the Rivers Kennett and Avon was prepared setting out the the corn farms and other interests and disagreeable and unsìghtly advantages that were likely to accrue from the proposed with respect to his improvements at Ramsbury, which he desired Western Canal as the undertaking was named. From the me to signify today at the meeting. style of the pamphlet it would seem probable that it was At the meeting a more momentous decision was made: written by Ward. Although only the route via Marlborough had previously been discussed, tu/o are described in the pamphlet, the It seemed to be the general opinion that nothing short of an the Northern as described above, and for extension of the navigation to Bristol by Marlborough Avebury first time, a suggestion that the line might run to the south Cherril Calne Chippenham the Clothing Country and Bath through the Pewsey Vale. The anticipated traff ic is would be likely to answer. described as coal, freestone IBath Stone], building materials, lime, peat ashes, manure, corn. malt. cheese, It was also decided chalk and flint; in other words, the wr¡ter was emphasising the canal as a means of transporting those products To employ Mr Whitworth to view the proposed line of the produced along it rather than as a link between the cities of Navigation and to report his opinion upon the practicability London and Bristol. A surprising omission is cloth and wool, of carrying it to Bristol . Reassuringly Charles Dundas and the Lord Craven, the Provision for compensation for damage to property was two principle Berkshire landowners were 'ready to support allowed for, particularly 'every attention ought to be paid to any plan which appeared to be of public benefit'. Ward gentlemen who have their seats and grounds contiguous . .'. pledged his master's support, but with the proviso that Finally, the anticipated costs of constructi¿n were the Earlwould be sorry if there were a difference of examined, with a conservative estimate of f 180,000 based opinion or ¡nterest between himself or his neighbours. on the cost of construction of the Basingstoke Canal. The Charles Dundas, who acted as chairman asked Ward to estimated dividend payable on completion was 10%. 'reassure Sir William that nothing would be attempted unless it meet with a very general approbation'. Through 1 789 to 1 792 there are scant references to the 29 WARD&K&A/CORFIELD BIASJOURNAL 141981 canal. On 2l August 1789 Ward writes, 'The business of the Canal (to which the White Lyon Jùnro, as Mr Daubeny's canalwearsa very cordial face , . .'and 12 months later meeting was called, had smuggled a subscription) to a new '. I have heard nothing lately about Mr Wl:itworth's project of a canal from Bath by Devizes to Salisbury (for nolhing intended visit . .'. lt is clear that the hopes of the has been said by anybody about the Pewsey and Crofton line) committee, as set out in the pamphlet of 1788, were not and the advertisement was so artfully worded that it could not realised and that there was no enthusiasm on the part of the be known whether a Newbury or a Salisbury Canal was meant public for the scheme. Both my friends here - the Bristol gentlemen, and Mr Dundas agreed in wishing me not to engage in anything, which I The situation changed suddenly and dramatically at the took care not to do, and I went very little amongst them except into end of 1792. A wave of enthusiasm for canals was sweeping two roomsful of the leading gentlemen to vouch for one of the through paid the country; the dividends being by earlier White Lion party's assertion of thc partlcularr of Mr Daubcny's carral companies such as the Trent and Mersey, the Oxford letter to Your Lordship that that party meant to hold only and the Birmingham were now considerable. The slump f500 shares each man for himself, and to hold th€ rest ¡n trust which followed the end of the American War of lndependence f or his fellow citizens was over and irrvestots were seekirrg new projects. Arr ever increasing spate of proposals for new canals culminated in It was agreeable enough to see the parties both from Bristol and what was to become known as the Canal Mania, Bath look towards Your Lordship with the highest deference and respect, professing that the subscription should be decided by Your Lordship, but I suppose you would much rather be Naturally tlre Westerr Carral proposals which had lain excused settlin0 that trif ling point amongsl all the men of dorrnant for four years were the sub¡ect of much interest, property and speculation in Bath and Bristol, and leave them not this time by landowners the and merchants who wished to to settle it amongst themselves how they can tak ing care that see it built for the improvement of trade and the good of the country interesls shall have what shares they please, which the country, but by the men of 'money of Bristol who sought it is supposed will sellfor a premium.