Canals have a significant pre- and post-industrial history as a vital technology within cities, with benefits spanning from the creation of new markets, to improving the efficacy of existing markets, and the ability to help cities grow. The Bridgewater Canal in Manchester is no exception and played an iconic role in the industrial revolution that took place in the city. The Bridgewater Canal is a 65km (39 miles) canal in the northwest of England stretching from Runcorn to Leigh and is arguably the first truly man-made canal, as it did not follow the path of an existing river or tributary in its design (“About Us”). Before the Bridgewater Canal, Manchester faced significant transportation issues when moving coal, the main source of heat and energy, from mines to the rapidly expanding town brimming with cotton mills. During this time, as explained by Manchester historian Ben Johnson, the previous modes of transportation for coal, both of which were inefficient and expensive, were river navigation, which was subject to the various inconsistencies of weather and water levels, or by packhorse, which is limited in how much coal they could carry due to the weight (Johnson). Coal mine owner Francis Egerton, 6th Earl and 3rd Duke of Bridgewater, after having taken a grand tour of Europe and being impressed by the canals used across the continent, envisioned a new, technologically advanced version of the canal as a solution to these various transportation issues. The creation of the canal not only facilitated the movement of coal into the city, but also significantly decreased the price, helping to fuel the industrial revolution and subsequent growth of the city. Despite the negative impacts on health, driven from the large use of coal in the city, the canal today now provides positive public health outcomes and is still used as a form of transportation in Manchester.
History of the Bridgewater Canal
The history of the canal is fairly uncontested. The partially underground canal envisioned by the duke, alongside his agent and estate manager John Gilbert who oversaw the preliminary leveling and surveying of the sight, began as a conventional canal with a number of locks and a path covering 16km (10 miles), linking to a surface canal between Worsley and Salford (Johnson). The canal boats would carry 30 tons at a time, pulled by only one horse, which was more than ten times the amount of cargo per horse that was possible with a cart. Their first bill presented to Parliament with the proposal had significant support of those in the town, especially traders who envisioned this canal as a huge improvement to the city (Johnson). The Duke’s Bill was given Royal Assent on 23 March 1759 and an Act of Parliament was granted approving the construction of the Canal.
The canal was executed by James Brindley, a mechanic and engineer hired by Egerton. However, after observing the original proposed route, Egerton persuaded the duke and eventually Parliament to allow him to construct an alternative gravity-flow canal crossing the Irwell valley on a viaduct carried on arches. His main tool of persuasion were models made from cheese and were so convincing that they caused the plan to completely change (History). Two features were especially unique to the Bridgewater: the canal aqueduct over a river navigation and the split-level internal loading canal warehouse. The new model, including these changes, allowed for the canal to physically go more in the direction of Manchester and allowed it to be connected to future canals, thereby making the city a more competitive trading and market location. The process of canal creation, containing unique new technological processes, as detailed in an archaeology article by Michael Nevell, was documented in 1768 by Arthur Young, who worked where the aqueduct was being built. These processes included the use of floating houses and workshops, a series of doors to seal the canal should a break occur on the banks of the canal, and a machine used to sift sand powered by a waterwheel (Nevell 2013, 4), all of which were innovative at the time of construction. The duke also built 100 cottages for his miners and boatmen in the area providing local housing for workers between 1764 and 1785 as well as some other infrastructure including warehouses, bridges, a jetty, and roads, all of which were necessary for the build.
The canal, completed in 1761, extended deep into the coalfield and was eventually extended from Manchester to Liverpool, an additional 48 km (30 miles). Bridgewater captured the public imagination because of its engineering feats; it required the construction of an aqueduct to cross the River Irwell, which divides the cities of Salford and Manchester, and a tunnel at Worsley. As explained by Nevell, “whilst not unique on a canal they were the first of their kind in Britain and the most famous example, the Barton Aqueduct, was probably the first to cross another navigable waterway.” Its success with this new approach to gravity-based transport helped inspire a period of intense canal building in Britain, known as “canal mania” (Johnson), a 70-year period that saw over 100 canals built by 1820 using some of the same technology as Bridgewater (Nevell 2013, 14). This building surge increased the total mileage of navigable rivers and canals from 1610km (100 miles) in 1750 to 6849km (4250 miles) in 1850 and kickstarted a boom of industrial growth across the UK.
How the Bridgewater Canal and Transportation Shaped Manchester
One of the main outcomes from the creation of the canal was the facilitation and movement of cheap coal into the city, with the canal cutting the cost of coal in half by 1762, just one year after the canal’s completion. The canal’s impact on the price of coal sparked a plethora of imitators in a period of frenetic canal building as many heard of the successes in Manchester, came to observe the canal, and then took the idea home for implementation. The idea of the canal was to not only provide a solution to the coal transportation issues that Egerton faced, however, but, as historian Ben Johnson recounts, also to “provide drainage, thus alleviating the regular flooding in the mines (caused by the layer of porous sandstone which sat above the coal seam); provide a permanent source of water for the surface canal and… no longer [make it] necessary to bring the coal to the surface, which had always been a tricky and costly undertaking” (Johnson) due to its partial underground nature. The canal also served as a strategic link between the North and South canal network, allowing for surrounding towns and cities to expand rapidly during the industrial revolution, thereby greatly benefiting the region’s economy (“About Us”).
As time went on, Manchester found itself at the forefront of major developments in Britain’s transport, with five canals and six railways eventually passing through the town by 1850. Water-transport infrastructure, including the Bridgewater Canal, played a key role in determining the intra-urban pattern of factory development. As explained by economic historians Peter Maw, Terry Wyke, and Alan Kidd, who analyzed Manchester’s industrial changing waterfront due to the canal, the shift from water to steam power introduced new patterns of industrial water use, rather than the relocation of factories away from waterways (Maw, Wyke, and Kid 2011). The major improvement was the technology of the steam engine, which used the canals as its available water source, allowed cotton factories to proliferate in the city, and connected the region to the rest of England. The Bridgewater therefore contributed to the use of the steam engine in Manchester factories and helped boost industrial production. Following the development of the cotton industry, other industries moved into the city, including the textile-finishing sector and mechanical engineering sector, to meet cotton’s demands. This pattern continued with major expansions along Manchester’s waterfront with new canals and canal branches, allowing the town to become “the world’s foremost factory centre” (Maw, Wyke, and Kid 2011). The authors even claim that England’s “water system,” specifically the canal, has even been mentioned as the reason why the West developed faster than the rest of the world during this time and why certain English regions were among the first to industrialize.
However, with the invention of the railway also taking place in the 19th century, the Bridgewater Canal faced stiff competition from the Liverpool and Manchester Railway, and gradually its commercial popularity, along with that of other British canal networks, such as the Macclesfield Canal, dwindled. The new implementation of rail technology and later the improvement of this railway infrastructure, however, was challenged in its ability to attract mills in the same capacity that canals did during the 19th century and beyond (May, Wyke, and Kid 2011). While the canal’s impact on trade outside of the region is contested, it’s important to remember these linkages with rail and tram lines that did allow for the growth and securing of capital due to a strong demand of sectors and industries outside of Manchester. What is most vital to note in Bridgewater, however, is the amazing engineering feats achieved. As put succinctly by Nevell, “the significance of the Bridgewater was that it brought together existing technologies to form a single linear transport machine that transformed water carriage, making canals an integral element of an expanding industrial economy” with the legacy of the Bridgewater Canal “transmitted to the next generation of transport technology.” (Nevell 2013 1,17).
Modern Uses and Benefits of the Bridgewater Canal
Commercial traffic continued on the canal until 1974. By this time, canals were becoming more important as a leisure facility, and, from 1952, pleasure craft were allowed to use the canal (About Us). Pleasure craft were not a new sight to Bridgewater at this time, because although the canal was mostly used for freight transport, passenger traffic was an important part of the trading process and took place as early as 1767, as noted by author Stuart Hylton (Hylton 2003, 65). Unlike many other canals in the area which were drained and filled in following various floods and breaches, the Bridgewater Canal continues to flourish as a popular destination and leisure waterway with many cruising boaters, fishers, and other water activities (“About Us”). The canal remains privately owned by the Manchester Ship Canal Company, to whom it has belonged since 1885, and the Bridgewater Canal Trust, which was established in 1975 following a breach of the canal at Dunham Massey, “to allow the local authorities to take an active interest and financial responsibility for the maintenance of this national landmark” (About Us). The canal is a self-contained system that uses the income generated from its various uses to maintain and improve both the canal and the surrounding environment, thereby improving Manchester as a whole. Not only does the canal remain standing, but archaeological hunts alongside the canal have also unearthed existing infrastructure including masons’ marks on bridges and infrastructure where stone was originally transported to help with construction, lime kilns from when lime mortar was an essential element of the build, both of which gave insight to the type of manpower and technological tools needed for the successful completion of the canal (Nevell 2013, 4).
Other than industrial growth and lower coal costs, the canal has had other positive outcomes for the community. Existing on either side of the canal are small strips of greenspace containing footpaths for residents within the city to use. Studies were carried out alongside these footpaths after a set of improvements to “evaluate the impact of the canal improvements on canal usage, physical activity, and two other wellbeing behaviours (social interactions and taking notice of the environment) in adults” (Benton et al. 2021). These improvements included a scheme called “Greater Manchester’s Bee Network” which, as described in a newspaper article detailing the enhancements, aimed to encourage people to walk and cycle on the canal and towpath, thereby improving Manchester’s wider transport strategy, and included better signage on the route, improved access points, and a complete resurfacing (“United Kingdom First Cycle Scheme” 2019). In observing these improvements, Benton et al. found that the urban canal interventions implemented along Bridgewater can effectively influence population health and wellbeing, especially with the inclusion of interventions that “reduce shared space conflict, improve physical activity experiences for existing canal users and attract new canal users,” especially underrepresented or minority populations. The current national UK policy and industry guidelines for planning and designing the physical environment to improve health and wellbeing do not emphasize the potential role of urban canals (United Kingdom 2021). However, these authors are hopeful that the Bridgewater Canal will once again serve as a source of inspiration and will influence other cities to consider using their waterways as a primary source of health and wellbeing for cities in the future, as well as still providing modes of transportation to the city of Manchester.
Bibliography
“About Us.” Bridgewater Canal. http://www.bridgewatercanal.co.uk/aboutus/.
Benton, Jack S., Sarah Cotterill, Jamie Anderson, Vanessa G. Macintyre, Matthew Gittins,
Matthew Dennis, and David P. French. “A Natural Experimental Study of Improvements
along an Urban Canal: Impact on Canal Usage, Physical Activity and Other Wellbeing
Behaviours.” International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity 18, no.
1 (2021). doi:10.1186/s12966-021-01088-w.
Hylton, Stuart. A History of Manchester. Chichester: Phillimore, 2003.
Johnson, Ben. “History of the Bridgewater Canal.” Historic UK.
Maw, Peter, Terry Wyke, and Alan Kidd. “Canals, Rivers, and the Industrial City: Manchester’s
Industrial Waterfront, 1790-1850.” The Economic History Review 65, no. 4 (2011):
1495-523. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0289.2011.00609.x.
Nevell, Michael. “Bridgewater: The Archaeology of The First Arterial Industrial Canal.”
Industrial Archaeology Review 35, no. 1 (2013): 1-21.
doi:10.1179/0309072813z.00000000013.
“The Bridgewater Canal: A Proud Heritage.” Bridgewater Canal.
http://www.bridgewatercanal.co.uk/history/.
“United Kingdom: First Cycle Scheme as Part of Greater Manchester Mayors Bee Network
Project Complete Along the Bridgewater Canal.” MENA Report (Aug 16, 2019).
first-cycle-scheme-as-part-greater/docview/2274160065/se-2?accountid=11091.
United Kingdom. Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government. National Design
Guide: Planning Practice Guidance for Beautiful, Enduring and Successful Places.
London, 2021. 1-66.
One Reply to “Manchester & Technology: The Bridgewater Canal’s Impact on the City”
Comments are closed.