14.1.1830 9. That Mr Bouverie do pursue the enquiry relative to the mode of expediting boats through the Tunnels by the power of steam. That Mr Bouverie do obtain a calculation of the expense at which boats might be forwarded by means of locomotive engines for any given distance on the canal.
11.2.1830 10. Mr Collier, application of his invention to the haulage of boats and his estimate of the cost thereof.
2.11.1848 58. Mr William Breynton’s new system for passing boats through the Blisworth and Braunston Tunnels
14.2.1850 206. Requesting permission to lay down hauling apparatus in the Braunston Tunnel and thereby supercede the present mode of passing boats through tunnels…. Resolved that this be declined.
9.7.1850 280. Mr Breynton requests the Company to contribute £10 towards the expenses of introducing his plan for hauling boats….Resolved that Mr Fane deSalis to see Mr Breynton.
25.3.1851 67. Referral of a letter from William Gurney and Co on the subject of Mr Breynton’s steam tug to the Canal Committee and Mr deSalis.
1.7.1851 111. Read a letter dated 30th ulto from The Honourable & Reverend A Perceval on the subject of his steamer which he is building and invites the Committee to inspect…Resolved that the Committee are happy to inspect his steam tug on the Grand Junction Canal when it is launched.
29.8.1851 139. That a special committee consisting of Mr Rebow and Mr deSalis be appointed to consider and report how far the Griffiths screw propeller may be applied to the purposes of the navigation of the Canal.
6.10.1851 155. Mr deSalis’ report on the screw steam boats on the Grand Canal, Dublin and the carrying of cattle ….Resolved that the report be referred to the Special Committee to consider.
28.11.1851 174. As recommended by the Traffic Committee that Mr Inshaw’s experimental boat be allowed to pass free from Braunston to West Drayton in order that the Committee may inspect same and that Mr John Lake, the Company’s Surveyor, be directed to attend the experiment made on Wednesday next and to report thereon to the select Committee.
16.12.1851 183. Read a report dated 15th inst from Mr J Lake upon several experiments on the Paddington level made by Mr Inshaw’s screw boat….Resolved that the Canal Company do consider the expediency and legality of this Company permitting two or more boats to be attached and navigated upon the Paddington level and to report to the Committee thereon.
30.12.1851 187. Read a report dated 29th inst from Mr Morris upon several experiments on the Paddington level made by Mr Inshaw’s screw boat….Resolved that each member of the Committee be furnished with a copy of the same.
6.1.1852 189. That the bill for Mr Inshaw for £36.17.5 incurred in his steamboat experiments be paid
9.1.1852 124. Mr Cumberlege having mentioned to the Committee that Mr Saunderson had called upon him and explained the model of his steam tug at West Drayton which seemed to promise great efficiency. The Committee consider it desirable that Mr Lake should report on it by Tuesday next understanding that the subject of steam navigation on the Paddington Level is to be then taken into consideration.
13.1.1852 193. The Committee took into their consideration the question of steam haulage on the canal on Mr Inshaw’s plan and the reports of Mr Lake and Mr Morris. The following motion was made by Mr William Fane deSalis Esq., “That the subject of steam haulage be referred to the Traffic Committee and that they have the authority to order a single tug, it being understood that the cost of such a tug is not to exceed £500. An amendment was proposed by Mr deSalis “to the Traffic Committee, that they ascertain what terms the brickmakers will contract to pay for haulage simply whether by steam or by horse power and to report also the cost of a steam tug and the model of building same.”
23.1.1852 195. Mr Charles Saunderson referring to Mr Lake’s report on the experiments and requesting to be furnished with a copy…. Resolved to send him a copy.
30.4.1852 249. …Mr E L Snee, Secretary to the Regents Canal Co, stating that the Company had made arrangements with Mr Inshaw of Birmingham, to enable him to make experiments with his steam tug with a view to facilitate the passage of craft upon the Regents Canal and requesting permission of this Company to allow the tug to pass free to London and back…..Resolved the Mr Snee be informed that the Committee have much pleasure in granting the permission and to request Mr Snee will be so good as to communicate the results of the experiment.
PRO RAIL 830/13
9.8.1853 43. The Committee having taken into consideration the proposal made by Mr Rufford to conduct an experiment of hauling boats by means of a Bishops Disc Engine and having found that a differing opinion existed between the Engineer of the Company and their Traffic Manager with reference to the problem of that method of haulage being available for the purposes of the Company it was resolved that the documents be passed to Mr Martin.
(Mr Albinus Martin had presented a bill for £181.12.6, which was authorised to be paid))
4.11.1853 78. Read a letter dated 10th inst from Mr Rufford referring to matters connected with the present system of haulage on canals…..Resolved that the matter be referred to Mr Martin
10.3.1854 145. Read a letter dated 9th inst from Mr D Stanwell on behalf of Mr Herbert Ingram, requiring permission to place on the canal boat with a screw propeller…. Resolved that the Engineer will call to obtain such information respecting the screw propeller, as he may deem necessary in order to report thereon to the Committee.
10.3.1854 146. Mr Martin’s report laid upon the table
24.3.1854 157. That the expenses incurred by Messrs Inshaw amounting to £36.17.5 for experiments made by them in the year 1851 for moving boats in fleets by means of a steam tug be charged to the account of the Canal proper.
31.3.1854 162. Read a statement from Mr Morris on the report of Mr Martin.
7.4.1854 166. Resolved that a copy of so much of Mr Martin’s report as relates to Mr Rufford’s experiments be sent to him.
2.5.1854 250. Mr Rufford’s experiment for hauling boats by Bishop’s Disc Engine be made upon the terms set out by him.
14.7.1854 231. Read a report dated 14th inst from Mr John Lake upon the recent experiments of Mr Rufford. Read also a letter dated 13th inst from Mr Rufford upon the same subject.
…. Resolved that further consideration of the subject be deferred.
21.7.1854 235. Read a second report dated 2oth July from Mr Rufford giving a detailed account of the expenses of the experimental trip of his steam engine from Manchester to London between the 4th and 8th inst.
15.12.1854 Read a letter dated 11th inst from Mr Edward.E.Allen, Engineer, stating that he is desirous for establishing steam tug boats between Brentford and the Docks for the purpose of facilitating the traffic in barges between theses two points and requiring to know whether this Company will entertain the project and be party to assist in carrying it out…Resolved that the Company decline being parties to the project (but stating that the Lightermen may be interested)
2.3.1855 340. Read a letter dated 15th ulto from Mr Reinagle stating that he has so far advanced his model propelling
machinery for canal boats as to be enabled to come to a decision as to the principle upon which payment shall be made for its adoption by canal companies and proposing that he be paid the annual sum of £20,000 for 14 years. Further that he will undertake to fit up all the Company’s boats with complete machinery and air power for the sum of £120 per boat…. Resolved that Mr Reinagle be informed that the Committee cannot entertain his proposal.
8.5.1855 377. Read a letter of 10th inst from Mr Joseph Taylor stating that he was the Patentee of a Machine for propelling Canal Boats without horse or steam power but that he was unable to bring the scheme forward unless he received £150 and requesting he be informed whether the Company will advance that amount to enable him to do so…. Resolved that Mr Taylor be informed that this Company will give him every facility to try his scheme upon the canal, provided it does not interfere with the traffic but they decline subscribing towards the same.
|<< Return to Introduction|