Now! Then! Serenaded by the military, decorated barges leave Leeds for Liverpool to celebrate the completion, after almost 50 years, of the canal uniting east and west

19 October 1816: Serenaded by the military, decorated barges leave Leeds for Liverpool to celebrate the completion, after almost 50 years, of the canal uniting east and west

Glorious present, glorious past: Turner’s image eight years later of the Leeds and Liverpool Canal sets off Ephraim Elsworth’s maltings(?), the Ellers/Ellars, Ellers Bridge, and Kirkstall Lock against the ruins of Kirkstall Abbey (Turner 1824/5).

Leeds Mercury. 1816/10/26. Completion of the Leeds and Liverpool canal. Leeds. Get it:

Excerpt

It was not an uninteresting theme to endeavour to review the different feelings with which this scene was contemplated by the persons assembled. Many, no doubt, viewed it merely as a splendid and novel spectacle, whilst others contemplated it as the finishing of a great national work, of which they remembered not the beginning. Others again associated with the memory of its commencement the earliest recollections of their boyish days; whilst a few, alas, how few, rejoiced in the completion of an undertaking, in the very first stages of which they had taken a lively interest, when in the full bloom and vigour of life, to which period this scene would irresistibly carry back their thoughts (a period of nearly fifty years) which, though brief in the review has been full of important incidents… As the aquatic procession passed through the different villages on the banks of the canal, it continued to be greeted with new spectators; nor was it unamusing, as the scene changed, to trace the different costume and manners of these various assemblages. The whole of the voyage was one indeed of peculiar interest, and frequently of great hilarity, and the populace, however noisy and uncouth their expressions of joy might occasionally be, manifested undeviating good humour, to which indeed the politeness, hospitality, and good humour of those who had the management of this procession, did not a little contribute.

Order the book

Subscribe to the free daily email

To facilitate reading, the spelling and punctuation of elderly excerpts have generally been modernised, and distracting excision scars concealed. My selections, translations, and editions are copyright.

Abbreviations

Comment

H/t to the Leeds & Liverpool Canal Society. Their article also contains an excerpt from the Mercury of 1777/06/10 describing the opening ceremony of the Leeds-Gargrave segment on 1777/06/04, not reproduced here. Joseph Priestley (<1741-1817) was superintendent of Leeds & Liverpool Canal Co. for nearly 50 years, and is not to be confused with the Birstall-born scientist and theologian. The lock is apparently 1770-77, the bridge 1800.

JMW Turner

The big house – The Ellars/The Ellers/Ellers Cottage – is something of an enigma. Kathleen Gurney has established that the original house, stables, and maltings with direct access to the canal were built by around 1820 on ground already known as the Ellers by an Armley maltster, Peter Tattersall, who was married to her great-great aunt, Mary Cooper (Gurney 1998). I think this is the house shown on the 1842 OS, and the ground plan appears consistent with Turner’s house:

However, it seems to me that the three-storey house in the early-century well-off vernacular shown by Turner is not the two-storey late-19th-century house with an H layout(?) visible in the distance in 1952, following a road accident:

The chimneys (which appear to be in a different location from Turner’s), and the rear vertical of the H (industrial function?) have gone by the time Ian Thornton produces the sketch reproduced in Gurney’s piece:

Finally, two shots, the first from the 2004 architect’s website, the second from Google Maps, showing the different stone used in the south-facing cottage (left) and the crossbar of the H:

Three competing hypotheses:

✓ Georgian ✓ Turner Despite the obvious fundamental differences, the two houses depicted are (structurally?) the same. Shayne Niemen, the architect for the 2004 redevelopment: “When the planners told us the building was in a Turner painting, restoring it immediately became the number one priority.” However, and I think this is Niemen again, “at some point in the 19th century, the building was … given a new [sandstone] façade, obscuring the gable end visible in … Turner’s watercolour” (Greenwood 2004/02/11). Why would either the planners or he believe this?
✓ Georgian ✗ Turner The 1810s house is the modern house but not Turner’s house, which is an invention. This, in the piece above, seems to be the view of Martin Erkulis, the developer: “Although the house that Turner depicted has three storeys, Erkulis says there is no evidence that it ever had three floors above ground. ‘At one end of the property is a basement with a vaulted ceiling which will have a window looking out to the front,’ he says. ‘But whether Turner painted from sketches or used artistic licence, we don’t know.’” And on his own site, Erkulis says it is Georgian – presumably in a general historical sense rather than in terms of any stylistic traits. I think Turner for artistic effect foreshortens the scene and exaggerates height differentials in the landscape (Dover (1825) is the most notorious example of this latter practice of his), but why would Turner paint a different house into an otherwise reasonably verosimil scene?
✗ Georgian ✗ Turner In the late 19th century, after the original family had moved out (the 1840s, pace Gurney), the 1810s house was demolished and replaced, starting from scratch (Regency houses tend to be short on foundations), by a south-facing cottage, which was faced with more fashionable and more readily available (canals, railways) fine-grained sandstone from the Pennine Coal Measures (I hope I’m not misinterpreting Graham Lott (Lott 2012)), and which took advantage of the many technological improvements in house construction since the Napoleonic Wars (e.g. flush toilets became common mid-century) Some of the coarser-grained Millstone Grit sandstone may have been reused in the crossbar and rear vertical of the H layout visible in the 1952 photo. Perhaps the rebuild was by the prosperous Leeds draper, George Francis Crowe (1833/4-1909), who was living at The Ellars on Bradford Road, Kirkstall (continuation of Bridge Road) by 1888. The lack of listing suggests to me that there is no historical association. (Erkulis incorrectly says that it is Grade-II listed, though the bridge and lock are.)

I can see nothing in Lidar to refute or support any of the above.

Other curiosities of the scene: the window alignment, the apparent lack of chimneys on the cold north side, the livestock on the road – like the main roads into Belfast on a Monday morning in the 1960s.

Greenwood has a puzzling quote from David Hill, then Professor of Fine Art at Leeds University and a prolific writer on Turner. No, an ellars isn’t “a place where elm trees grow”: an eller is an alder – see the OED entry (“common on riverbanks and damp woodland”) and Thoresby’s confirmation (Thoresby 1715). It is true that when Crowe sent his son to Rugby, the address was listed as The Elms, and there were elms along the Aire at Kirkstall, but that doesn’t affect the meaning of ellers/ellars.

I’m also curious about Hill’s dates: “Most of what he shows was newly completed – the Leeds-Liverpool canal in 1816 and the Leeds to Bradford turnpike road, which was only opened in 1824. The bridge was absolutely new and it was not like him to be interested in the contemporary world.”

Something to say? Get in touch

Original

On Saturday morning at seven o’clock, several of the proprietors of the Canal, accompanied by a number of friends, proceeded in an elegant barge, from the basin of the Canal to the Bridge over the Aire, to commence at that point their voyage to Blackburn, to open that part of the Canal which was still wanting to complete the communication with Liverpool. This vessel was accompanied by a barge belonging to the Union Company, splendidly decorated with flags and streamers. The sailing of the vessels was announced by a discharge of cannon, and the barges entered the canal amidst the discharge of artillery, the animating strains of a full military band, and the acclamations of an immense number of spectators, which lined the banks of the canal for a great distance. On entering the first lock, the band struck up the national air of “God save the King.” The barge of the proprietors bore a flag, in which was inscribed the name of ‘John Hustler,’ the engineer, under whose superintendence a considerable part of the work had been completed. It was intended that another barge belonging to the proprietors, called the Joseph Priestley should have taken part in the procession, but some mischance which happened to it on its voyage to Leeds defeated this part of the plan; all the sloops in the basin were decorated with streamers, and the whole formed a truly animated and delightful scene. It was under these favourable auspices that the two barges proceeded on their route to Liverpool, attended by the military band, who gratified the immense number of persons who followed their route, with playing the most popular airs, marches, &c. It was not an uninteresting theme to endeavour to review the different feelings with which this scene was contemplated by the persons assembled. Many, no doubt, viewed it merely as a splendid and novel spectacle, whilst others contemplated it as the finishing of a great national work, of which they remembered not the beginning: others again associated with the memory of its commencement the earliest recollections of their boyish days; whilst a few, alas, how few, rejoiced in the completion of an undertaking, in the very first stages of which they had taken a lively interest when in the full bloom and vigour of life, to which period this scene would irresistibly carry back their thoughts (a period of nearly fifty years,) which, though brief in the review has been full of important incidents. But it was to all a scene of great interest, and afforded evident satisfaction to the immense multitude that witnessed it.

Our notice of the rest of the voyage must for the present be very brief-The barges reached Skipton on Saturday evening, and on the following day arrived at Burnley. On Monday, about three o’clock in the afternoon, they entered Blackburn, having in their train a number of other vessels. The proprietors and their friends, &c. proceeded with flags and music to the New Inn, where they sat down to an excellent dinner. The bells rung a merry peal, and the afternoon was spent with the utmost harmony and satisfaction. On Tuesday morning, at eight o’clock, all the arrangements being completed, the proprietors’ barge, attended by the sloop of the Union Company, and a number of other vessels decorated with flags, streamers, &c. and crowded with persons of the greatest respectability, entered the new part of the canal amidst the discharge of cannon, and the heartfelt cheering of an immense number of spectators. In the evening the procession reached Wigan, and on Wednesday this interesting ceremony was completed by the arrival of the voyagers at the Basin of the Canal at Liverpool about five o’clock in the evening.

As the aquatic procession passed through the different villages on the banks of the canal, it continued to be greeted with new spectators; nor was it unamusing, as the scene changed, to trace the different costume and manners of these various assemblages. The whole of the voyage was one indeed of peculiar interest, and frequently of great hilarity, and the populace, however noisy and uncouth their expressions of joy might occasionally be, manifested undeviating good humour, to which indeed the politeness, hospitality, and good humour of those who had the management of this procession, did not a little contribute.

731 words.