Accrington on Rails - The Tramways: A Complete History - Robert Kenyon

ACCRINGTON ON RAILS

THE TRAMWAYS

A COMPLETE HISTORY

PREFACE

1

When I was the editor of an enthusiast’s monthly bulletin, one of my editorials was entitled ‘bwy haant wA ci lcl rbi ne gyt oo un ri alne gparci ym’ ?a rTi hl yi sf oi sr wA hc ca rt i In gh toopnei awn isl l abned t hr ees fi idr es nt tpsa or tf oCfhmu ryc hl e, gCal cayy. t Iot ni -s l ea - bMooookr sw, rGi rt teeant Hh aasr wa opoads, sOi osnw af ol dr t wt hies t al er,eRa ,i sbhut ot na lasnodat hger esautr ri no tuenrde isnt gi na rteraa.n sI tp iosr twbr iot tt he nobny raa ipl se rasnodn ownh ownhoe te losn. lIyt si nhfoour lmd aat ipopne ao ln tnootthoonsley wwhhoa t sheaepk pteon eudn,dbeur st ttahnedc hh aorwa citte rbse gwahni,c hp rpolgaryeesds et hd eai rn pd aer nt di ne dt h. eI t ecvoonl ut at iionns of public transport. It also seeks to explain the reasons why some grand plans were not progressed. Not a picture book but a reading book, it contains material of value to anyone who is ienntteerret sati ende di nb yt hf aec ths e. Ar i st aI ghea voef rtehsee at rocwh ne ,d tthhei s tbr oa no ks poonr tv eernyt hmuasni ays ot cacna ds i oannsy Io hn ae dwt hhoou wg hi st ht oe smtyos ebl fe, ‘ewner il cl hI endebvue rt wk ni lel wh avt hea, ot ’,nasnedveIr asli noccecraesliyo nhso, pbee etnh aatb hl eatvoi nsgayr et ha ed stahme me . , t h e r e a d e r w i l l n o t o n ly b e When compiling books of this nature covering a long period of time, I have been faced with hq uo wo t eb ae ns ty tsou mp rse os ef nmt otnheey i na sf oPr omuant di osn, Schoi nl l ti na ignseadn wd iPt he ni nc.e I ( ih. ea.v2e 0dsehc ii ldl iendg st h=a t1 Ip os huonudl, d1 2c opnet ni ncue e= t 1o sdheicl il di negd) , muops tul ny t ti lo t shtea nc dh aa rndgies et oo nd etchi em tawl i seanttiyo-nf o. uHro wh oeuvre rc, l wo chke, ne vi te nc atmh oe utgoh t ii mt we sa so fn toht eudnai vye, rI sha al ldy used during the earlier periods the text covers. A great deal of the information contained in this book comes from the Minutes of the Council aCnodm mt hiet t el oecsa lwneerwe srpeasppeorn, st ihbel ree ffoorre wI hhaatv eo hc caudr rteod i. n Ic l uhdaev et hoen dl ye t na ial sm eodf wt hhei c ha cotfu at hl eC Bo uo nr oc ui l gl ohr’ ss cmoonscteqr nu eodt ews ahne dn ftahcetys wa reer pe rreesleenv at endt ti no tthhies pt yr opceefeadc ien, gasl l. mE qyuoawl l yn awnodr md soarpe pi me apr oi rnt a n t l y, e v e n t h o u g h (parentheses) , and can only therefore be attributed to yours truly. Of course the trams left the scene well before I came into this world, but in my researches of owtrhi et irnmg . eSaonbs yo tf ht reatni ms peo Ir th ha ad sf iunni seha er tdh tehde sr oe wmausc he ndoeut ag ihl tmh aa tt ei rt i sael ef omr ead baosohkaimn ei t ns ootwt on pr iugthitt, da no wd nt hiins is it. I personally don’t remember the trams, but I do remember conversations with those who did, including historian Robert Rush and William (Billy) Dean who was a conductor on the trams. It is from my researches and these reminiscences that I have been able to put together a history of what went out of fashion early in Accrington, but all over the country is making a comeback. In my investigations I am most grateful to several individuals, too many to name individually, bDuotwInmh aums t amnadk eB amr reinet iEodnwoaf rtdhse aOnmd nt hi beu Ls oScoacl i eSttyu, dt ihees RDi ebpbal er tEmnet nh tu soifa st ht ’ es CC laurbn, etghi ee PL Si bVr aCri yr c al en, dB oi tbs smt aa ftfe irni aSl .aAi nl st oJ atmo eCso Sl i tnr eMe at ni ns fAi eclcdr, i an gSteonni ,oers Mp eacni aa lgl ey rJ oa ht nH, ywn hd ob uprrno vTi rdaends pmoer tw, wi t hh oa ewnet ar lut sht eodf amr cehwi viet dh much of the content of the Ellison Street archive when the depot was vacated.

ACCRINGTON ON RAILS

2

THE TRAMWAYS

CHAPTER 1 - THE START OF SOMETHING BIG (Page 4) CHAPTER 2 – THE STEAM TRAMWAY – 1891 to 1899 (Page 37) CHAPTER 3 – INTO THE 20 th CENTURY (Page 78) CHAPTER 4 – 1900 TO 1907 THE YEARS TO TRANSITION (Page 84) CHAPTER 5 - THE YEAR OF TRANSITION (Page 114) CHAPTER 6 - ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS 1908 – 1911 (Page 137) CHAPTER 7 – ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS 1912 – 1915 (Page 169) CHAPTER 8 – ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS 1916 – 1919 (Page 205) CHAPTER 9 – ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS 1920 TO 1923 (Page 230) CHAPTER 10 – ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS 1924 TO 1927 (Page 253) CHAPTER 11 – ELECTRIC TRAMWAYS 1928 – 1932 (Page 275) CHAPTER 12 – ACCRINGTON DE-RAILED (Page 304) ADDENDA 13 – THE GORDON SHELTER, TICKETS (page 317)

CHAPTER 1

THE START OF SOMETHING BIG During 1882 steam engines and cars from the Blackburn Corporation Tramways began running from Salford in the town centre to Church Commercial, a few yards short of Accrington’s terminus when opened, which was opposite the top of Henry Street in Church. (As far as can be ascertained the decision to construct a Tramway to serve Accrington and District would have been taken as early as 1881 and must have been influenced to some great extent by events in neighbouring Blackburn, who introduced steam hauled tramcars in that year. Blackburn had also

3

operated a horse drawn tramway, which Accrington did not, as the terrain over which the horse-drawn cars would be required to operate was considered to be too hilly for the proper welfare of the animals.) The Act to Empower the Mayor, Aldermen & Burgesses of the Borough of Accrington to make Tramways in and near the Borough and for other purposes, was given assent on July 12 th 1882 . ( I have included selected Clauses from 68 contained within this Act for reference purposes .) 1. Gave the Corporation powers to purchase or dispose of tracts of land, providing they did not at any time amount to more than 2 acres. 2. Set down the laying of single lines, with those sections of double line clearly shown on the plans including, points, crossings, turnouts, carriage sheds, stables, building works and conveniences therewith, using all proper rails, plates, sleepers and turntables. 3. That the Tramway had to be completed within two years of the passing of this Act. 4. That it could not be opened to the public until it had been passed by the Board of Trade Inspector. 5. That the carriages could be drawn by ‘animal’ power during an initial period of 7 years and thereafter for a further period of 7 years by steam traction. 6. Anyone using other than these specified powers for the moving of carriages contrary to this Act would be liable to a fine not exceeding £10, and £5 for every day thereafter. 7. That the Board of Trade could, if thought necessary amend the Bye-Laws passed by the Corporation for the operation of the Tramways. 8. That the speed limits as set by the Board of Trade, would not be countermanded by any new Bye-Laws made by the Corporation. That the Board of Trade could, if thought necessary amend the Bye-Laws passed by the Corporation for the operation of the Tramways. All Orders and Bye-Laws made by the Corporation would have to be signed off by the Board of Trade’s Secretary or Assistant Secretary. That the Board of Trade could, if thought necessary amend the Bye-Laws passed by the Corporation for the operation of the Tramways. 9. The specifications regarding the rails, which the Board of Trade would determine. That the Board of Trade would have the say in whether the quality of the rails may have to be upgraded. 10.The Act contained statutes relating to the maintenance of the Tramway along with the highways and the penalties for failing to do so. Concerned further provisions for the excavation of the highways on which the lines were to be laid. That the lines must be kept to the level of the roadway. That the tramway must not impede the Sewer Authority from accessing the sewer system. Gave sanction to the addition of more crossing places if it was agreed they were necessary. Gave sanction to abandon and lift sections of the Tramway, whilst restoring the roadway back to its proper state. That materials excavated during the construction would remain the property of the Corporation. 11.Gave the authority to carry passengers, animals, goods and parcels. 12.This limited the fares to no more than 1 penny per mile or part thereof for the carriage of people. 13.For every horse, mule or other beast of draught or burden, not to exceed 3 pence per mile. For every ox, cow, or bull not to exceed 3 pence per mile. For every calf, pig, sheep and small animal, not to exceed 2 pence per mile. Animals, goods, minerals and parcels shall be carried set apart from the passengers. 14.For all coals, culm, cannel, limestone, chalk-limes, slates, clay, ironstone or scabbled stone for building, pitching and paving, slag, stone, salt, cinders and all undressed materials for the repair of public roads, not to exceed 2 pence per mile. For all pig-iron, bar-iron, sheet-iron, iron slabs, plate iron, rolled iron, wrought iron specifically cast herein, and for heavy castings [including railway chairs], tiles, bricks, coke, charcoals, dung, manure and compost not more than 4 pence per ton mile, and for all timber and wood not exceeding 3 pence per mile. 15.For all sugar, grain, cornflower, hides, dyewood, earthenware, staves, deals and metals

4

[excepting iron], nails, anvils, vices and chains, and for ‘light metal’ castings, not to exceed 5 pence per ton. For all cotton and wools, drugs, manufactured goods and all other wares or merchandise, fish, not to exceed 6 pence per ton mile, and for carriage of all other descriptions of goods not to exceed 1 shilling per ton mile. 16.For any parcel not exceeding 7 lbs. in weight - 3 pence per mile. For any parcel exceeding 7 lbs. in weight but not exceeding 14 lbs. - 5 pence. For any parcel exceeding 14 lbs. in weight but not exceeding 28 lbs. - 7 pence. For any parcel exceeding 28 lbs. in weight but not exceeding 56 lbs. - 9 pence. For any parcel exceeding 56 lbs. in weight but not exceeding 500 lbs. - any negotiable sum. 17.Stated that the servants and employees of the Corporation should be allowed to travel without charge at the discretion of the Corporation. 18.Any tolls and charges shall be paid to the Company at such places, and to such persons authorised by the Company. 19.The Company shall provide cheap and discounted fares for the ‘labouring classes’, and shall run cars not later than 7 am, or earlier than 6 pm in the evening every day of the week [excluding Sundays, Christmas Day and Good Fridays excepted], as the Company thinks most convenient for the artisans, mechanics and labourers. These fares not to exceed one halfpenny (½d) per mile or any part thereof. The Lessees shall be subject to fines proscribed by the Corporation for failing to provide these cars. 20.Required the Lessees and, or the Corporation, to give 2 months’ notice to any Authority of their intentions to extend the operation of the Tramway into their territories. 21.Gave the Corporation powers to have removed any horse, carriage or engine, when it is certified by the appropriate officer to be unfit for use. 22.The Corporation shall have further powers to raise extra capital by borrowing at interest on security of the Borough Fund, and of the other rates and revenues of the Corporation, for the purposes of the Tramway and Works authorised by this Act, not exceeding £45,000. All monies borrowed by the Corporation under this Act, shall be repaid within a period of not exceeding sixty years, by whatever funds and/or in yearly instalments. 23.The Corporation shall keep accounts of all the revenues, rents and receipts separately from all their other accounts, and apply such monies properly applicable on capital accounts as follows - in repayment of interest on borrowed money. In payment of expenses (if any), properly charged against revenue. That every year the Corporation shall set aside by means of a Sinking Fund sufficient monies to pay off the monies owed by them in instalments over the sixty-year period. 24.This Clause was specifically designed for the protection of the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway Company, its bridges, lines and other infrastructure. Specifically the bridge over Whalley Road between Castle Street and Milnshaw Lane, and the one over Blackburn Road adjacent to the Crown public house. 25.There was a Clause for the protection of the interests of the Local Board of Clayton-le Moors, and the purchase of land and also a Clause for the protection of the interests of the Local Board of Church and the purchase of lands. 26.States that the Corporation and any Road Authority shall from time to time enter into agreements and contracts, with relation to the laying down, renewing, repairing and using the Tramways within their districts and of all works connected therein. 27.Gave the Corporation authority to sell off any portions of the Tramway which did not lie within the Borough of Accrington, at a sum to be mutually agreed, or settled by an arbitrator in the case of a dispute, this referee to be appointed by the Local Government Board. 28. Set the gauge at 4 feet, and provided for an end-on junction with the Tramway authorised by the Blackburn Improvement Act of 1882 at the terminus of the aforementioned

Tramway, so as to permit the interchanging of traffic without a change of car. The Rolling Stock specifications as laid down by the Board of Trade were as follows –

5

Steam Engines a. Every engine shall be equipped with such mechanical devices capable of bringing the engine and any such carriage drawn to a stand, as is passed as sufficient by the Board of Trade. b. Every engine shall have its number shown in a conspicuous position on its body. c. Every engine shall be fitted with an accurate indicator of speed. d. Every engine shall be fitted with a suitable fender to push aside any obstructions. e. Every engine shall be fitted with a bell or other apparatus capable of sounding a warning. f. Every engine shall be fitted with a seat for the driver in a position which affords the best possible view of the road before him. g. Every engine shall be free of noise produced by blast or clatter, and all machinery above 4 inches from the rail shall be concealed from view, with all fires completed covered out of view. Carriages h. Every carriage shall be so constructed as to provide for the safety of the passengers. For their safe entry and exit, and for their protection from all moving machinery or any engine used to propel the carriage. General i. The Board of Trade shall, on application to the Corporation, or on any complaint from a person, from time to time inspect any engine of carriage used on the Tramway. j. The Board of Trade may prohibit the use on the Tramway of any engine or carriage, which in its opinion would not be safe for use. k. The speed at which the engines and carriages may be driven on the Tramways shall not exceed 10 miles per hour. l. The speed at which the engines and carriages may be driven through moveable points shall not exceed 4 miles per hour. ( During the years 1883 and 1884 and the build-up to the building of the Tramway in Accrington the main roads over which the Tramway would operate were “purposely allowed to fall into disrepair”, so that during the construction of the same, some of the gradients could be eased and a thoroughly good job made of the main roads repairs. As a result the Council’s expenditure on road maintenance was comparatively much less than in 1882 and 1885. Much of the business of the latter half of 1885 was taken up with the tenders for the lease of the new tramway, negotiations with the various contractors and the Board of Trade. On the 25 th of January 1885 a proposal was put forward for an extension of the steam tramways to Blackburn. Much of the business of the latter half of 1885 was taken up with the tenders for the lease of the new tramway, negotiations with the various contractors and the Board of Trade. The majority of the entries for this particular year and subsequent years used the minutes of the meetings of the General Works Committee of Accrington Corporation as their source. ) The era of construction was not straightforward by any manner of means. In May and again in July 1884, one of the main suppliers, J. J. Lee of Cheetham in Manchester, had the misfortune of supplying the main contractors, Messrs Green & Burleigh of Battersea and Southampton, granite sets to the amount of £521 which remained unpaid. He was therefore forced to pursue them through the High Court when they went into receivership. High Court of Justice Court proceedings of 1884. (N o 998). J. J. Lee’s Accounts Versus Burleigh & Plowden in Bankruptcy. Re; Samuel Charles Burleigh and Charles John Clucheley Blake Plowden carrying on business. Ex-Parte Under the name or firm of Green & Burleigh, at 8 Suffolk Lane, Thames Street, in the City of London, also 79a High Street, Southampton and York Place, York Road, Battersea in the County of Middlesex, Contractors. John Joseph Lee of Halliwell Lane, Cheetham, Manchester, Make (Oath and Say), that the said Samuel Charles Burleigh and Charles John Clucheley Blake Plowden, were at the date of the

6

Receiving Order, 9 (and is still justly and indebted to me in the sum of) £518 - 2s - 7d, for goods sold and delivered as per particulars stated, for which said sum or part thereof, (I) say that I have not, nor hath any person by my own order or to my knowledge or belief for (my) use, had or received any matter of satisfaction. --------------------------------------- Mr Lee had also to invoice Accrington Corporation on three separate occasions during August and September 1885 for payment of £346 – 13s – 1d for a shipment of Granite and Whetstone Setts, Kerbs, Channels and Macadam. 1885 The advent of the steam hauled cars in Accrington required premises in which to house and maintain them. This needed to be sufficiently near to the tramway lines themselves, not too far from the town centre and not too near either, as in the industrialised atmosphere of a mill town there was enough smoke and fumes already pervading the town from mills and the railway. A site was chosen to the west of the railway viaduct in a place which was adjacent to a large plot of open land known as Ellison’s Tenement. One must remember that in 1887 when work was started there was no road traffic other than that horse drawn to compete with the trams. The building was at the foot of Ellison Street with the entrance facing up towards Blackburn Road, and had two levels. The uppermost was the running shed, whilst the lower one was accessed from Hyndburn Road but had no lines, and was used for the storage of spares etc. The garage itself was divided into two parts, for the cars and the other for the steam engines. The reason for this segregation is obvious, as one could not house the engines which had fires in the same section as the trailer cars. The first workshops were constructed and ready for use by 1887 and were situated at the foot of Ellison Street, in an area backing on to Hyndburn Road and facing upwards almost towards the centre of the street. There were five covered roads in this first shed all with points situated under the roof. The construction of the roof could not have been as robust as one might have expected, as on two separate occasions it was damaged by high winds and had to be repaired. At the rear of the shed were the workshops, whilst offices were in a building just inside the entrance to the right. Steam engines themselves were serviced in the road to the far left, adjacent to a lean-to where the coal was kept. This was supplied through a hatch on the Taylor Street East side wall. Trailer cars were serviced on the remaining four roads. June 9 th . In June the Tramway Committee consisted of Alderman Hindle (Chairman), His Worship the Mayor Alderman Smith, and Councillors Green, Lupton, W. Maden, J. Maden, Moorby, Ormerod, Waddington & Woolley. Later Cllr Herald would replace William Maden and by January 1886 Cllr Haythornthwaite had joined this group, hereafter referred to as the Committee. The following are extracts from the earliest minute book of the Corporation. The Town Clerk would write to Clayton-le-Moors Local Board, if the intention to extend the Tramway through Church and into Oswaldtwistle was proceeded with. The Borough Surveyor reported on a meeting with both Church and Oswaldtwistle Local Boards to inform them he was preparing a plan for a proposed extension to the Tramway. Also no steps would be taken towards the purchase of a travelling crane for the Ellison Street Tram Sheds. June 15 th . The Borough Surveyor was instructed to prepare balance sheets for all the new Tramways accounts, and report on the financial situation of the Council with regard to same. Also entries are published in two local papers advertising that the Corporation would be prepared to lease the Tramway to a company formed in Accrington or a neighbouring area on “most favourable terms”. June 23 rd . A letter was presented to the Committee from Mr J. H. Heap suggesting he was intending to tender for the lease of the Tramway Company. The Borough Surveyor was instructed to investigate and report back on the specifications of the ‘Model’ crossings, supplied to the Tramway by Smith – Paterson, who had submitted their account for £50. June 29 th . A ‘Special’ meeting of the General Works Committee was convened to receive two tenders for the lease of the Tramway, from Messrs Green & Burleigh and a Mr John Sharples. Also a report by Messrs Broome, Murray & Company dated April 29 th , on the subject of these tenders. This report was approved and unanimously adopted.

7

July 7 th . Another letter was received from Mr Heap with regard to the operating lease of the Tramway. The Committee also discussed the repairing of the pavements accompanying the tram lines, but following considerable debate the matter was dropped. The Committee resolved to settle the account of Thomas Cronshaw for plastering work completed at the Ellison Street tram depot and authorised Cllrs Maden and Waddington to accompany the Borough Surveyor to examine the slating on the tramway depot roof. July 13 th . A ‘special Sub-Committee’ was set up to be responsible for any contract regarding the Tramway. This consisted of Alderman Haywood (Chair), His Worship the Mayor (Alderman Smith) and Cllr Sprake. The Committee ‘again’ considered the report by Messrs Broome, Murray & Co. on the tenders submitted by Mr John Sharples and Messrs Green and Burleigh. This report was approved and adopted. July 21 st . The Committee considered the account of Messrs Smith, Patterson & Company, for ‘special tram crossing patterns’. The Committee resolved to settle this account following a deduction of £12 – 10 shillings, for five sets of points which had already been delivered to Messrs Green & Burleigh, and for which they were liable. The Town Clerk reported the Council had received a writ from J. H. Lynde of Manchester, with regard to an infringement of his patent Tramway lines. It was resolved that the Mayor and Town Clerk meet with Mr Lynde and compensate him for the full amount of his claim. July 28 th . The Mayor and Town Clerk reported back on their successful meeting with Mr J. H. Lynde as to settling his claim for a royalty. The Committee considered a further tender for operation of the Tramway from Mr J. H. Heap and a Mr John Duckworth. These matters were adjourned for twenty-four hours, whilst the Town Clerk was authorised to invite Mr Heap to be in attendance at 7pm (19:00) the next day. July 29 th . Present at this extraordinary meeting of the General Works Committee were the Mayor Alderman Smith and Councillors Lupton, Moorby, Sprake and Waddington. The details of Mr Heap’s tender offering to execute a provisional agreement for the lease to operate the fully equipped Tramway, for a term of seven (7) years at the following rent payable - In addition to the above, a payment of £4 per every £100 on the cost of the proposed extensions in Clayton-le-Moors and Oswaldtwistle. It was resolved unanimously by the Committee to recommend to the full Council they should enter into a provisional agreement with Mr Heap for the lease of the Tramway at the rents stated in his tender, such an agreement to contain certain clauses for the due protection of the Corporation. Plus other terms and conditions approved by the Town Clerk on behalf of the Corporation, subject to the approval of the Board of Trade, also in respect of the provisions contained in the Tramways Act of 1870, and the Accrington Steam Tramways Act of 1882. Also in July 1885, Mr J. S. Button was appointed to the post of Borough Surveyor to Accrington Corporation at a salary of £180 per annum, whilst Mr N. Green Jnr was appointed Assistant Surveyor to the Borough at a salary of £80 per annum. August 4 th . Following an inspection of the roof and slating of the new Tramway depot on Ellison Street, the Committee were of the opinion that the work was not done in a proper manner, and the slate was sub standard to that which had been specified in the original tender. The Town Clerk was authorised to summon Messrs Eli Knowles, Evans & Co. and H. Ramsbottom to attend the next meeting of the General Works Committee to explain these criticisms. The Committee however, did resolve to settle the account of Mr Richard Nuttall (joiner), and Messrs Carter & Sons (plumbers) for their work at the new tram depot. A letter from a Mr M. H. Smith was read out to the meeting on the subject of the supply of electricity to the Tramway, but its contents were disregarded. August 18 th . A letter was read out from roofer Eli Knowles who declined to attend any meetings until after his account had been paid. Following consideration of this account a decision was deferred for two • Year 1 = £1,000. • Year 2 = £1,100. • Year 3 = £1,200. • Year 4 = £1,300. • Year 5 = £1,400. • Year 6 = £1,500. • Year 7 = £1,600.

8

weeks, pending a meeting between the firm’s Mr Thomas Shutt and the Corporation’s Clerk of Works Mr H. Ramsbottom. The General Works Committee considered the estimate submitted by Messrs Evans & Company for slating the roof of the tramsheds. The Clerk of Works, H. Ramsbottom, and Mr Thomas Shutt from the firm met to discuss the tender, but this decision was also deferred for a fortnight. Correspondence between Major-General Hutchinson and the Board of Trade was read out to the Committee, this referred to an inspection of the Tramways equipment. The Board of Trade would not put a clearly defined construction on the words contained in the Act of Parliament, so would be unable to approve the lease to include engines and trailer cars. A Sub-Committee along with Cllr Lupton was authorised to meet with Mr Heap, to discuss the proposed lease of the Tramway. A statement was read from the Borough Surveyor concerning the ‘ironwork’ done by Messrs A. Anderton & Sons at the tram depot. August 20 th . The Borough Accountant reported that following settlement of all the accounts relating to the construction of the Tramway, there was a surplus of approximately £10,000 left out of the sum borrowed. This could not be used in order to equip the Tramway with engines and rolling stock. It was resolved that a decision on this Tramway balance be deferred until a definite plan for the equipping of the Tramway had been agreed. September 1 st . Notice was received that legal proceedings would ensue if the account of Messrs Evans & Company was not settled within seven days. It was recommended that the Council settle this bill, with the recommendation that in all future contracts the final certification would not be issued by the Borough Surveyor without the Council’s consent. September 7 th . The Committee considered again the tender of Mr J. H. Heap for the lease of the Tramway. The Town Clerk and Borough Surveyor reported on the result of their investigations into Tramway assessments in other districts. Mr Heap was in attendance at this meeting and further stated he was prepared to accept a lease for 14 years, and amend the limit of the rent for the second term of 7 years to 4½% interest on the total cost of the Tramway and depot. It was resolved this amended tender be referred to the General Purposes Committee for them to consider. A letter was read out from Messrs Anderton with regard to their account for ironwork at the Ellison Street depot. It was resolved to reply to them to the effect that the Council authorised the Town Clerk to request the Low Moor Iron Works Company (Clitheroe), to send a competent man to inspect the ironwork at the depot, to certify the quality of the materials used. ( As can be seen from the correspondence which follows, the matter of the Lees unpaid invoice became a matter for the legal people .) 35, Lincolns Inn Fields, LONDON W.C. September 11 th , 1885 To A. H. Aitken Esq., Town Clerk, Accrington. Re - Green & Burleigh. Dear Sir, The Official Receivers Department would not supply us with a copy of Mr Lee’s proof, and we have therefore obtained an office copy from the Court, which we will send to you on Monday. Yours, J. Armstrong. September 22 nd . Two letters were read out from the Low Moor Iron Works Company outlining the results of their inspection of the ironwork used in the tram depot on Ellison Street. Following which the matter was postponed pending further investigations. September 28 th . Cllr Smith was assigned to see Messrs Broome Murray to challenge their excessive accounts and receive an explanation. A Sub-Committee was set up to look into this matter. This Sub Committee consisted of His Worship the Mayor (Alderman Smith) and Cllr Sprake. The Finance Committee was asked to consider at their meeting on this date, the account of Messrs Broome, Murray & Co (accountants), for work undertaken during the tendering process for the lease of the Tramway. It was

9

resolved that Cllr Smith meet with the company, to explain that this Committee found the amount excessive, and to request a full explanation as to the reasons why their bill had come to such a large amount. September 29 th . Letters dated September 21 st and 25 th respectively from Messrs Cosh & Company of London, were read out to the Committee. They offered their terms for the lease of the Tramway. It was resolved that the Town Clerk should take all steps to bring the offer of Cosh & Co. to a favourable conclusion as soon as possible. Also that he should obtain rates of insurance for the Tramway depot from several sources. October 19 th . The Committee were presented with Messrs Broome, Murray & Company’s monthly account, plus a report on the audit of their annual statement of accounts. Also correspondence explaining their charges for preparing statements with regard to the tenders for the Tramway lease. It was resolved that Alderman Hindle and Cllr William Smith, meet with the accountants with a view to obtaining a reduction in their bill. November 17 th . It was recorded that the Tramway depot on Ellison Street would be insured by the Equitable Insurance Company for the sum of £2,000. November 24 th . A letter was read out to the Committee from the Assistant Secretary to the Board of Trade, enclosing correspondence from Major-General Hutchinson. December 11 th . The Committee considered the report made by their accountants, Messrs Broome, Murray & Co, on the two tenders submitted by Mr John Sharples and by Messrs Green & Burleigh. This report was approved and adopted. December 28 th . A report was presented to the Committee from Messrs Broome, Murray & Co. on their monthly audit of accounts. Cllr Smith reported on the meeting he had arranged with Broome, Murray along with Alderman Hindle, with regard to their work on the tenders for the lease of the Tramway. December 29 th . The Town Clerk submitted the Parliamentary Plans for a railway line to link Accrington with Clitheroe through Clayton-le-Moors, ( heavy rail not a tramway .) THE LINE THAT NEVER WAS On December 29 th 1885 the Town Clerk submitted the Parliamentary Plans for a tramway line to link Accrington with Clitheroe through Clayton-le-Moors. This ambitious scheme destined never to be realised was the Blackburn, Burnley & Whalley Light Railway , devised in the era when the expansion of the railways was in full swing and private investors were looking towards profitable expansions. The line was to connect with the Blackburn system end-on at Whitebirk, and run along Blackburn Road into Rishton, where in the centre of the town it turned sharply north. Following the course of the main highway it then would have crossed over the Leeds & Liverpool Canal, and the North Lancs Avoiding Line (The Harwood Loop) in the Norden District, and following first Lee Lane and then Blackburn Road entered Great Harwood town centre. From Town Gate it would have turned to go down Queen Street to Park Road. Departing Great Harwood along Harwood Lane it then would have arrived at Harwood Bar, where it was intended to make a junction with another line coming out from Clayton-le-Moors over Hyndburn Bridge to Harwood Bar. This ‘other’ line would have had connections with the Accrington system at its terminus just short of the Leeds & Liverpool Canal a short distance beyond the Hare & Hounds crossroads. The main connection would however have been with an extension of the Burnley system coming through from Padiham, which is where the Burnley interest originated for this line. Having made this connection the line again would have turned north to cross over the River Calder in the dip at Cock Bridge before passing through Portfield Bar. Proceeding further north the line would have entered Whalley down the hill to terminate outside the Assembly Rooms, just a few yards short of the ‘T’ Junction with King Street. There are many reasons why this scheme was not progressed. It might have been that not enough backers were prepared to invest capital in a share issue. Even if there were sufficient funds assured, having a Bill passed through Parliament in order to commence construction was not guaranteed. The other factor was a connection with the lines from Padiham through to Clayton-le-Moors and then to Harwood Bar. This line would have had to have negotiated some formidable gradients, none the least of

10

which was the northern approach to the Leeds & Liverpool Canal in Clayton, which was why when the Accrington system was electrified, it stopped just yards short on the southern approach. The dip into and out of the road at Cock Bridge, would have been another obstacle to be overcome by the engineers. Perhaps all these factors would have made the cost of construction too great a risk, and it became another ‘might have been’. 1886 ( The year 1886 would be taken up with detailed alterations to the lines and other matters, which came to light whilst operations on the new tramway settled in. It was during this year however, the first signs of an uneasy and at times acrimonious relationship began to emerge between Accrington Corporation and the Tramway Company. Differences which would persist throughout the full term of the twenty-one year lease at various times. The lease was signed between Accrington Corporation and the Accrington Steam Tramways Company, to operate the engines and trailer cars also for the lines and the depot.) According to the covenant granting operating powers to the Tramway Company, the main roads on which the tracks were laid would be their responsibility to maintain. This accounted for approximately one third of the main roads in the Borough. The supervision of the period leading up to and covering the early years of operation, would be the responsibility of the General Works Committee of Accrington Corporation and the following are mainly extracts from the minutes of this committee’s meetings. January 12 th . A letter ( dated January 6 th ), was received by the General Works Committee from the Solicitor of the Tramway Company, Mr Edward Chubb, informing his clients had ordered the necessary engines and trailer cars, and that their side of the agreement would be progressed. January 19 th . The Borough Surveyor was authorised by the General Works Committee to ascertain the terms and conditions for borrowing an engine and trailer car, for the purposes of an inspection of the tramlines. The Town Clerk presented two letters to the Committee (both dated January 14 th ), one each from the solicitor acting for the Accrington Steam Tramway Company and one from a Mr R. L. Cosh, asking the Council to grant the lease to operate the tramway to the Company. The Town Clerk was authorised to reply as “he may deem desirable”. January 26 th . The Town Clerk submitted the Certificate of Registration of the Tramway Company to the Committee, along with copies of the Memorandum of Association and the agreement with Mr R. L. Cosh and the Company. It was further unanimously resolved by the General Works Committee, that the Borough Surveyor and Councillor Whittaker would visit the works of Thomas Green & Son of Leeds, to check on the progress being made on the supply of tramway engines, whilst Alderman Hindle should go to the works of George F. Milnes, on Cleveland Street in Birkenhead, to see what was being done to provide the trailer cars. ( Thomas Green’s premises were the Smithfield Iron Works in Leeds, although they had a factory on Blackfriars Road in the south east of London called the Surrey Works. It should be noted that all steam tramway engines had by law to condense their own steam, usually through a series of roof-mounted tubes. Also their moving parts had to be covered practically down to the surface of the roadways . This was so as not to startle horses, which were still responsible for hauling the majority of goods on the roads. Milnes were the successors to the Starbuck Waggon & Car Company. ) The Town Clerk received a letter from Mr Blunt the Secretary of the Accrington Corporation Steam Tramway Company, informing the Council that one engine from Greens would be delivered in about three weeks, with the remainder to follow within a short period of time. He had also asked permission for the workmen to have access to the Ellison Street premises to begin the process of furnishing the offices and installing the necessary equipment. The Town Clerk also reported a draft of the lease had been returned from the solicitors acting for the Company approved by them with just a few minor amendments. They had inserted the title of the Company in place of that of Mr Cosh, who had given an undertaking that he would now sell his interest to the Company. The Town Clerk confirmed that the company had been properly incorporated and registered at Company’s House. It was agreed the Company’s workmen could have access to the depot, that a copy of the lease should be deposited in the Council’s offices and that an application should be made to the Local Government Board for their approval of this lease.

11

February 3 rd . Following a letter from the Secretary of the Tramway Company, the Town Clerk met with Mr Baker a solicitor acting for the operators, to discuss the protection of the Corporation with regard to the Tramway’s roads. Following this he agreed to insert a covering clause. February 9 th . The Town Clerk was asked to write to the Manager of the Tramway Company to ask why they were taking so much time in equipping the tramway. He was also to correspond with Major-General Hutchinson to enquire what rolling stock would be required in order that his inspection take place. The Borough Surveyor accompanied by Cllr Herald were authorised by the General Works Committee to visit the directors of the Over Darwen Tramway Company, to attempt to arrange for the loan of an engine and car from their system to enable a Board of Trade inspection of the Accrington tramway. ( The Over Darwen Tramways were in 1880 owned by Messrs Busby Carson & Company, whose Head office was in Liverpool. They ran tramways across the North of England including Manchester, in a livery of red and white with gold lining out. Promoters of the Accrington system Cosh and Cramp, were also directors of the Over Darwen system.) February 16 th . On Monday, the 16 th and Tuesday, the 17 th , the wheelsets and frame of an engine were placed on the newly laid tramway rails and pulled by a horse in order to test the trueness of the gauge of the lines, prior to the running of a fully constructed engine over them. They were found to be true and sound without any faults. The Borough Surveyor reported back to the General Works Committee that after a meeting with the officials of the Darwen Tramway Company, it was established they were willing to lend an engine and trailer car to the Accrington system, for the purposes of a line inspection by the Board of Trade’s Inspector. On this day the Clayton-le-Moors Local Board consented to the leasing of the Accrington Tramways for twenty-one years. February 19 th . At a meeting of the General Works Committee the Town Clerk was authorised to write to the Tramway Company about the ‘dilatory’ way in which they were proceeding with equipping the tramway. February 23 rd . The Town Clerk reported his interview with Mr Baker, the solicitor acting on behalf of the Railway Company, ‘proposing’ the new Accrington to Clitheroe extension, to the effect that he was prepared to insert a clause in the Bill, “for the protection of the Corporation with regard to their tramways and footpaths”. He would forward an amended draft to Accrington Council before the next meeting on the following Monday. The Borough Surveyor reported that testing of the gauge of the tramway lines had showed them to be out between ¾ of an inch and 1½ inches out at several places. The Committee requested he should seek rectification forthwith. March 9 th . A General Works Sub-Committee from the Corporation had visited those lines which were out of gauge on the tramway. The town’s Surveyor was called to explain why the blame for these problems should not be placed upon him, as they had occurred whilst the track was being laid. He was then requested to attend before the next meeting of the General Purposes Committee to explain his position. The Secretary of the Tramway Company sent a letter ( dated March 5 th ), with regard to the alterations required at the Ellison Street depot, and the Committee resolved these alterations should be carried out, with the exception of those concerning the offices. Also on this date the Town Hall & Markets Committee received a letter ( also dated March 5 th ) from Mr A. W. Blunt, Secretary of the Tramway Company, requesting permission to erect a waiting room on part of the Market’s grounds. It was resolved a Sub Committee would visit the proposed site of this waiting room and that subject to their approval the Tramway’s Engineer be asked to supply a plan of the structure, its design and details of how much land it would take up. April 5 th . The lease was signed which gave the Accrington Steam Tramways the option to operate the tramway for 21 years. This was divided into three equal parts, each of seven years at the following rental payable to the Corporation of – (1)£1,120 per annum for the period 1886 to 1893. (2)£1,280 per annum for the period 1894 to 1901. (3) £1,600 per annum for the period 1901 to 1908. The Lease contained in addition the usual covenants and powers of distress and re-entry as laid down in the following -

12

The Tramway Company had the option to terminate this agreement after 7 or 14 years, with the Corporation having sole right to purchase same at a valuation made by the Borough Treasurer, the Board of Trade being the arbitrator in the case of any disputes. The engines and trailer cars would have to be of such construction, capacity and number which the Corporation would have to approve as well as being kept in good order and condition. The Steam Tramways Company would also be required to indemnify the Corporation against any damage done by either engines or cars, and would also be responsible for highway repairs between 18 inches outside of each of the rails. They would also have to keep rolling stock and engines in good order. The Corporation however could do repairs and claim the costs from the Tramway Company within 14 days of the repairs being completed. The Tramway Company would have to maintain, repair and paint the Ellison Street depot and insure it for the sum of £4,000. Whilst the lease was current it gave powers to use the engines, carriages and ‘horses’ to run over all, or any of the original tracks authorised by the Act of 1882, and any junctions or extensions which may be mutually agreed upon by the two parties. Any disputes arising to be resolved using the powers provided for by ‘The Railways Clauses Consolidation Act of 1845’. 1. The Tramway Company would have to run in service engines and cars of such capacity and construction as the Corporation would approve, and maintain these in good order and condition. 2. The Tramway Company shall not interfere with the rails or crossings without the prior permission of the Corporation. 3. The Tramway Company shall indemnify the Corporation against any damage or injury caused by any of the engines or trailer cars or any of their employees. 4. During the terms of the Lease the Tramway Company shall keep in good order and repair the whole of the tramway, including the paving which extends to 18 inches on either margin of the tracks. 5. If the conditions contained in 4 are not met, then after 14 days the Corporation shall carry out the necessary repairs, and then recover the full cost from the Tramway Company. 6. The Tramway Company will maintain and repair the Ellison Street depot, whilst insuring it for the sum of £4,000. 7. The Tramway depot shall not be used by any other Corporation or Company, or for storage or work on any other cars other than those owned by the Tramway Company. 8. Any disputes arising to be resolved using the powers provided for by ‘The Railways Clauses Consolidation Act of 1845’. 9. At the termination of the Lease the Corporation has the rights to purchase the Tramway, with all its equipment and stock used to operate the system at a valuation given by the Borough Surveyor. In the case of a dispute the Board of Trade would be the arbiter. The Accrington Steam Tramways Company had Mr Cramp as its Managing Director and a Board consisting of W. M. Perring Piage Esquire, S. Yates Esquire, James Kenyon Esquire, and Robert Waite Esquire. The Company Secretary was Mr William Jeffs, and the Registered Office was the Tramway Depot, Ellison Street, Accrington. The Bankers were the Manchester & Liverpool Banking Company of Eagle Street, Accrington. The Auditors nominated were James H. Heap Esq., of St. James’ Street, Accrington, and J. W. Cooper, the Secretary of the Co-operative Society, Clayton-le-Moors. The Council was ordered to affix its seal to the amended lease approving it for a period of 21 years. An advertisement was placed in the local press of the issue of £3,000 in 6% preferential shares in the tramway. In 1886 as operations commenced, a Bill was passed in the Houses of Parliament authorising extensions to be built to Oswaldtwistle and Rawtenstall. This Bill did not contain a provision confirming the Corporation’s lease, but a clause was added seeking to obtain ‘perpetual running powers’ over the Corporation’s lines. It was evident from this that the Accrington Steam Tramways Company intended to

13

use the Ellison Street depot in connection with these add-ons. It was this that brought the two sides into a conflict, which would not be resolved until 1888. April 6 th . It was determined following Major-General Hutchinson’s inspection made on Monday, April 5 th that the lines at the top of Peel Street and the top of Blackburn Road would have to be ‘slightly’ altered. The Borough Surveyor authorised these changes so that the points be taken out to facilitate single line working on the outer track only. The Borough Surveyor should then inspect these alterations to ensure that they were to the standards required by the Board of Trade. Also on April 6 th the Town Hall & Markets Committee arranged with Mr William Kitchen of the Commercial Hotel for the loan of 50 chairs, to be used at the banquet to celebrate the opening of the tramway. ( The Accrington Steam Tramway Company organised a parade to celebrate, and this was recorded by ‘OLD HAND’ who described the events of the day as follows) - “ Only two of the cars had been delivered but a third was due on the following day. I well remember taking part in a trial trip on Thursday, April 8 th 1886. The Tramway had been inspected by Major-General Hutchinson of the Royal Engineers from the Board of Trade on the previous Monday. Two engines and one car were run over the lines with the Inspector riding on the first engine to Church and then on to Baxenden, later to Clayton-le-Moors. He expressed himself satisfied with the levelness of the lines, but made some adverse observations on the lines at the top of ‘little’ Blackburn Road and on Peel Street. The party included Alderman Hindle, Chairman of the Corporation’s Committee, Mr Cramp, (Managing Director of the newly formed Tramway Company), Mr Rowley who represented Thomas Green & Sons of Leeds, (the makers of the engines), Mr Holt, Consulting Engineer and Mr Button, the Borough Surveyor. On Thursday the Tramway was formally opened. This ceremony created quite a stir amongst the public, the streets being lined by spectators. The first car, which departed the Town Hall, had on board Mr Cramp and Mr Cosh, who was one of the promoters of the Company, along with Mr Cubitt also representing the Company, Alderman Hindle and Councillors Haythornthwaite, Broughton, Maden and Woolley along with several tradesmen. At the Church boundary the car was met by the Mayor, Alderman Smith. On returning to Clayton-le-Moors it was met by Mr J. Hacking and Mr D. Towers, Council Members and Mr J. Smith, Clerk to the Local Board. The lines were all in good order, and the engine manipulated to a nicety. The greatest satisfaction was manifested on all hands. From all this it was clear that at their inception at any rate, the Baltic fleet was highly appreciated. They were then considered up-to-date, and the old horse drawn cars were ridiculed. But let the Mayor of the day speak. On the arrival of this procession in front of the Town Hall he declared, “That no duty during my Mayoralty has afforded me greater pleasure than formally opening this tramway. I have had the pleasure of riding from Church to Clayton and back, and I am sure that no lady or gentleman can ride in their carriage with greater comfort than that in

14