STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

I settled down to some honest fitting from this point. First we installed a chain block directly over the centre of the wheel and then we started fitting the spokes to the boss. The spokes were all numbered and were fitted into borings in the boss where they were retained by double cotters acting as opposed wedges. They were a beautiful fit and the only fitting that needed doing was on a couple of the wedges which I reckoned had been re-made at the time the engine was erected at Holcroft’s in 1957 because they were planed. The great fascination about building something like this for me is that you are following in the footsteps of the old fitters who first erected the engine in Petrie’s shop in 1841. You come across all their difficulties and deficiencies. One thing about the Whitelees which was obvious was that for its time, it was very accurately built. The other thing that was noticeable, as in the keys that needed re-fitting, was that they hadn’t got a planing machine. These had only just been invented then, all the plane surfaces on the engine were either chipped and filed by hand or generated on the lathe which would be the only machine tool they had at that time. It must have been a big lathe as well, the flywheel boss was no lightweight.

Once all the spokes were in the procedure was to fit the rim segments and then finish off by fitting the gear segments to the outside of the rim. This was routine, repetitive work but had to be done very carefully as the wheel was out of balance. This had started as soon as we got one spoke in of course. The cure was to restrain the wheel with a chain block at each side. These had to be re-attached each time the wheel was tuned and it was at this point when only one block was holding the weight that you had to be very careful. Once the wheel was complete we spun it round and I was delighted to find it was actually running nearer to truth than it had been at Holcroft’s. I don’t claim any credit for this apart from the fact we must have been more consistent with our fitting than the 1957 gang because the truth of the wheel depended primarily on the accuracy of the machining and that was superb.

We then mounted the governor on its pedestal above the flyshaft bearing and concentrated on the other end of the beam. I had decided that it would be easier to fit the parallel motion and the piston and rod while the con rod end of the beam was free. The first thing we did was fit the cover temporarily as this gave us a true centre on the cylinder. I hung a plumb bob from the centre of the bearing position for the end of the piston rod and first tried the line for centre on the cover and then on the base of the cylinder. I did this by making a piece of wood that fitted exactly in the bore and marking the centre through the cover. We then took the cover off and transferred the piece of wood to the base of the cylinder and checked the line against it. We made a few minor adjustments with wedges under the base until we had the centre perfect. Finally I did one check with the plumb bob on the mark in the cylinder bottom and the cover installed. As near as I could see we had it perfect. Then we took the cover off, removed the wooden target and did a final check measurement on the equality of the distance from the cylinder ends on both ends of the stroke. I was within an eighth of an inch and that was OK by me. We put permanent packings in in place of the wedges, tightened the holding down bolts, did one final check with the plumb line and then installed the piston, piston rod and cover.

Image

More chain blocks than you could poke a stick at! But essential for safety and we never lost control through the entire build.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

I had fabricated a girder frame and welded it in place above the cylinder. This was put in to act as a stay for the entablature beam and also to give us a sky hook to install the anchor points of the parallel motion. I wasn’t looking forward to setting the parallel motion up as I had never done one before from scratch. I could hear Johnny Pickles telling Newton that on no account was he to alter the parallel motion on the big beam engine at Victoria Mill at Earby because if he did he'd never get it right again! I’d talked to Newton about it and he didn’t really have any specific advice beyond listening to what I thought would be the right way to go about it and telling me to use my head.

I’d given this a lot of thought and had come to the conclusion that the best way to do it was to set the engine beam dead parallel, that is, at mid-stroke and then set the parallelogram of the linkage dead square and level and measure the anchor points of the linkage from that position. There was a certain amount of adjustment on the connections so I thought we would be near enough. In theory it should have been perfect but there was always the chance that I’d get the anchorages slightly wrong. We did it this way, attached the piston rod and barred the engine over to see how we were. We were dead true across the line of the beam and only an eighth of an inch out on the centre line so I left it at that. The packing would tolerate that amount of play. I’m sure we could have fiddled with it and got it better, the basic positioning was good and the adjustments would have fine-tuned it, but I had my eye on my May deadline and good enough was all right by me.

Next, we fitted the connecting rod between the opposite beam end and the crank. This fitted perfectly and when we barred the engine over it cleared the central pillar easily and evenly so that was all right! We then shifted operations back to the cylinder end, we had to fit the valve chest to the cylinder.

The valve chest was a beautiful cast iron construction and was a bit of a puzzle to me. I knew it was made up of separate castings but they were so well fitted that we couldn’t find the joins or even any trace of how it was fastened together! I had no intention of dismantling it but needed to know as much as possible about it before attempting to fit it as I was working at a big disadvantage. I knew nothing about the internal arrangement of the ports in the circular slide valve and they were almost totally inaccessible. I could measure the valve itself with ease as it was out of the bore but the positioning and shape of the seats was a different matter. I knew that they had used the common practice of cut-outs in the seats to give a rudimentary form of lead by allowing a small quantity of steam in before Top Dead Centre and BDC but I had to get measurements in order to set the valves correctly. I reasoned that it was no good relying on the evidence of the old fitting marks on the flyshaft and eccentric as we had rebuilt the engine and these would almost certainly have changed. As it turned out, I was right but not for the reasons I had deduced!

In the end I got the measurements by using a wooden batten with a nail driven through it at the end. I passed to batten up the bore and found the top edge of the port, the bottom edge and the depth and shape of the cut-out. All this was done by feel but I had some clues from the bottom port which I could see and so had a rough check on my measurements at the top. I decided eventually that I had a pretty reasonable set of measurements and could fit the anchor plate for the motion, the circular slide valve and the rod and cover. We were ready to fit the valve chest to the cylinder.

Image

Graham Riley and Newton trying to fathom out how the valve chest was put together. I got Newton to come over because I'm not proud and I needed all the help I could get! We didn't do too badly because when we eventually put steam on it I must have got the valve setting somewhere near because it ran smoothly with equal events. By the way, we finally decided that the individual castings were held together by countersunk screws which were filed flush with the surface and then polished.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

The first thing to say is that the valve chest was a big lump. There was very little difference between its weight and that of the cylinder It fitted on a two small faces about nine inches square cast on to the cylinder and these were the admission and exhaust ports to the cylinder so they had to be steam tight. When fitted, the valve chest was hung on the front face of the cylinder and all the weight was supported by these two faces. This was the reason I had taken so much trouble with the cylinder foundation as, when it was all erected, the cylinder was way out of balance on account of the weight of the valve chest hung on the front of it.

Once I was ready to lift the valve chest I had another set of problems to address before I could attempt to fit it. The first was the condition of the studs and nuts which held the chest on to the faces. They were pretty rough. They hadn’t been perfect when the engine was built and after over 150 years of undisturbed corrosion, both they and the tappings they fitted into on the cylinder had deteriorated. I decided to make new studs and make the threads that went into the cylinder slightly oversize. I was making all new nuts so the outboard end could be standard Whitworth thread. These were fitted and bedded in Manganesite. This is a very old jointing compound made out of double boiled linseed oil and manganese dioxide powder. It is black and sticky and when raised to steam temperature it bakes hard and sets like cement.

You’re working hard here to follow this lot so let’s have a Manganesite interlude! Being an old-fashioned bugger and knowing what’s good for me I am a big fan of double boiled linseed oil. In my experience it is wonderful stuff for preserving, sealing and combating corrosion. I have never known a joint made with Manganesite to fail on account of the jointing, only by reason of bad fitting. I remember working with Newton one day when we were fitting a new cylinder packing on the Bancroft Engine. He cut his hand and I noticed that he dipped his finger in the Manganesite tin and rubbed some into the cut. The joke with this stuff is that if it gets rubbed into your skin it’s no use trying to wash it off. The only way you get rid of it is to let it wear off! I laughed at Newton and asked him what the bloody hell he thought he was doing. He told me that it was the best stuff in the world for protecting a cut and promoting healing! I told him he was a daft old bugger and left it at that. Many years later I heard an item on Woman’s Hour on Radio 4 in which they were talking about the latest treatment for healing varicose ulcers in old people. As you probably know, these can be terribly slow to mend. The new, state of the art dressing was impregnated with manganese dioxide! I went straight round to Newton’s and told him he might not have been as daft as I thought. It just goes to show, don’t dismiss old style cures out of hand. Remember Mother Hanson and my carbuncle?

Back to the valve chest. Once the stud problem was out of the way I had another thorny issue to address. When Duncan and I split the valve chest from the cylinder before removing it from the Holcroft site, we had puzzled over the seal between the valve chest and the cylinder. As far as we could see at the time it was simply metal to metal, two fitted faces. We didn’t bother too much about it then, we had other fish to fry. Once I got the valve chest laid out on the boiler room floor and cleaned it up I realised that it wasn’t two fitted faces at all. The seal had been made with jointing cement which had set as hard as the parent metal and when I tested it, was magnetic. I took a piece home and found it drilled and tapped like cast iron. I decided in the finish that it was a mixture of cast iron filings and, you’ve guessed it, double boiled linseed oil! I took a piece of it down to Edward Keirby’s in Rochdale who made all my packing for me and showed it to Roger and his dad but neither of them had seen anything like it before. My problem was that I could soon make some fine cast iron powder on the lathe and could get the linseed oil but I didn’t know how long it would take to set, neither was I sure that my diagnosis was right. All I was sure of was that we only had one chance to get it right and if we got it wrong there wouldn’t be enough time to strip the whole thing down to rectify it so, once more, Stanley had a decision to make!

I thought long and hard and in the end decided to get Keirby’s to make me two proofed asbestos packings 3/8 of an inch thick. These would be bedded in Manganesite to give the seal. The problem was that these wouldn’t be rigid enough to give me the mechanical strength I needed in the joint so we made the packings an inch wide and filled the remainder of the space with a mixture of ceramic fibre and Manganesite. I reckoned that if we put the valve chest back bedded on to this but only nipped the joints we would have enough strength to make it integral and that we could leave the final tightening down until we warmed the cylinder when we got steam on it. By that time the compound should have hardened a bit and would bake with the rise in temperature. In the end this was what we did and as far as I know there has never been the slightest sign of any leakage on the joints. One thing is sure and certain, if ever there is they’ll need to read this chapter before they strip it down to re-make the packing!

Image

Here's an informative pic for you. This lift was stressful for lots of reasons. Notice the frame I built for the cylinder, we lifted the cylinder in before the concrete was poured, I'd forgotten that. You can see the faces on the cylinder and the valve chest which had to be sealed. All the studs are new, made by me slightly oversize so that they were a tight fit in the old castings. That meant making all the nuts as well. We haven't installed the packing and cement yet, that was done just before offering the chest up to the faces and then nipping the nuts down but leaving the final tightening until we had got steam on and baked the cement. This gives an idea of how complicated the rebuild was, a steep learning curve!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

Having made the joints, fitting the valve chest was straightforward but an awkward lift and very stressful. I had this mental image of the tackle failing and us dropping the casting and breaking it. I could have fabricated a replacement but our deadline, budget and the quality of the job would all have gone to the wall, in other words, disaster! As it was it went straight on with no bother and we nipped the fastenings up and stripped the tackle. It was looking more and more like an engine.

We then fitted the valve gear, the twist motion that helped even the wear out on the bore of the valve and the eccentric rod and associated parts. Once we had done this I barred the engine over and at the time thought it was very stiff. This got worse and when I had a look to see what was causing it found to my dismay that part of the twist motion had come loose, displaced to one side and bent the valve rod going up into the valve chest! One of the lads had forgotten to tighten some nuts and I was at fault because I hadn’t checked them. We dismantled the gear, drew the rod out and I took it down to a friendly engineering firm at Castleton, told them what I had done and they straightened it out for me and skimmed the bottom end where it ran in the packing. This was a ticklish job but they did it well and for free! Problem solved, rod back in, nuts tightened properly this time and all was well. In fact, it was better than before and sealed better in the bottom gland because 150 years of wear had been taken out of it.

The next part we had to address was the condenser and air pump which sat in the pit below the cylinder and were connected to the cylinder by a cast iron eduction pipe. This pipe had been sealed into the top of the condenser with rust setting compound. This used to be the standard method of making a pressure tight joint between two cast iron pipes. Mechanically, the joint consisted of a tapering plain end that fitted into a flanged female seating. The joint was caulked with lead wool driven in with a hammer and caulking iron and then the space left was filled with a paste of cast iron borings and sal ammoniac. (The old name for Ammonium Chloride) There was a chemical action between the sal ammoniac and the cast iron which in effect was accelerated corrosion. The paste swelled and set hard and it was a permanent joint. The joint on the condenser had been done like this and the paste had swelled that much that the pressure had split the flange so there was no way I was going to disturb it. The condenser and the air pump sat on a flat cast iron chamber called the ‘coffin bottom’ which had a one way rubber flap valve in between the two sections, access to this was via an inspection plate on the top of the coffin bottom.

We had broken the whole construction down into its separate parts, cleaned them up, refurbished the valves and faces and made packings for all the joints. I got some thick rubber sheet and was prepared to make a new valve but the old one was in such good condition that I left it in place. We had to position the coffin bottom precisely because it was fixed at one end by the eduction pipe and at the other end had to be directly below the air pump rod which drove the pump and was hinged to the engine beam above. This wasn’t as complicated as it sounds because it had all been fitted up before. All we had to do was drop the coffin bottom into the pit. Install the condenser on it making the joint between the condenser vessel and the coffin bottom at the same time. Wedge the coffin bottom up until it was level and at the correct height to make the joint with the cylinder fit, check that the centre line of the opening which took the air pump coincided with the attachment point for the pump rod on the beam and then fit the holding down bolts to the coffin bottom before pouring concrete into the pit to a level slightly higher than the bottom of the coffin. The reason for this was that the coffin was corroded badly and setting it in concrete meant there would be no leakage from that source even if it perforated..
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

I noticed that the eduction pipe was an awkward fit on to the cylinder but we managed to get it in place and jointed up whilst preserving our relationship with the pump rod. We poured the concrete and went on to do other jobs while this was setting. While we had been building the engine the pipefitters had been hard at work installing the steam main to the engine and I had been busy in my workshop at home refurbishing the stop valve, equilibrium valve and other small parts of the engine.

It was time to fit the air pump. This was a simple job, we dropped the casting into the pit, made the joint, fitted the piston, rod and top cover and connected it up to the beam. No problem. Then we barred the engine over and found we had a big problem, the bucket of the air pump fouled the delivery plate at the top of the stroke and the engine couldn’t turn over. If it had been under steam it would have smashed the engine or the pump or both. I was baffled at first because this couldn’t happen! I took a leaf out of Sherlock Holmes’s book again and decided this was another ‘three pipe problem’! I retired to the site hut, brewed up and to all intents and purposes went to sleep in the corner again.

Diagnosis of problems like these is by far the most satisfying part of fitting. It’s like a detective story, you have to collate all the information and think it through carefully. As Holmes said, ‘If you eliminate all the possible causes or explanations, the answer has got to be the impossible’. This is very often the case, of course the answer is that what you thought was impossible was actually definitely possible. Never eliminate anything until you are certain it’s wrong.

I’m going to do my Stanley as engineering superman bit again. Sorry, but I’ve got to tell the truth. Years before, I had had a part-time job at Hey Farm reconditioning Land Rover engines for a bloke at Crawshawbooth called Walter Johnson. I was sat at home one night and he rang up, he had a problem. They had a Land Rover which had come in because the clutch had failed, the centre of the clutch plate had ripped out of the plate. They repaired it and sent it out but it had come back with the same fault twice in a fortnight and Walt knew they were missing something. I told him I was going for a bath and I’d think about it while I was soaking and ring him back. I went and soaked, identified the problem and rang him back. I told him that the only thing that could break the centre out of a clutch plate like that was metal fatigue, the plate must be flexing while it rotated. The only thing that could cause this was if the gear box was out of alignment with the engine and this could only happen if the fastening between the bell housing and the engine casting was loose. Due to the design of the engine this wasn’t disturbed when you replaced the clutch. Walt went away and had a look and rang back about ten minutes later, he said he’d crawled underneath and found a gap at the bottom of the bell housing where it butted up against the gearbox. I was right, problem solved and Walt went away swearing I was a genius.

When I had my new Bedford TK wagon at Harrisons it started giving problems after I had a day off because I couldn’t keep the securing nuts tight on the right hand half shaft. I told Billy that the axle casing had been bent and nobody believed me. In the end it started breaking half shafts and it went in to Ferrands. They measured it up and the axle was bent back over an inch. It transpired that the spare driver had hit a large stone at Broughton Hall and never told anyone. Even Billy was impressed. The point about this is that it demonstrates Holmes’s point, it was impossible to bend an axle like that. I’ve never seen one before or since, but that driver had managed to do it.

So I sat there in the hut and pondered. I remembered the cuts in the bottom of the cylinder and the fact that we had difficulty making the joint between the eduction pipe and the cylinder and came to the conclusion that they had made a mistake in the foundry 150 years ago when they cast the eduction pipe, it was about two inches too long! When the fitters had erected the engine temporarily in the shop in 1841 they had found this fault but had compensated by raising the cylinder two inches. This meant that the steam piston was almost hitting the bottom of the bore at the end of the stroke and so they’d chiselled the grooves to help it deliver any water in the bore to the drain. This was probably what had cracked the entablature beam all those years ago, there had been too much water for the cylinder to get rid of, the piston had stopped before top centre on the crank end and the momentum of the flywheel had carried the engine on, lifted the entablature beam and cracked it. I had installed the cylinder correctly giving equidistant clearance at both ends of the stroke and so had installed the coffin bottom two inches too low. Therefore, the air pump bucket was short of two inches at the top of its stroke.

There were two cures, I either dropped the bucket two inches by lengthening the air pump rod or I raised the pump itself two inches by inserting a packing ring two inches thick between the pump and the coffin bottom. I remembered seeing some thick Tufnol sheet down at Rochdale Training so I popped down to see my mate Rod. Tufnol is a plastic material made by impregnating layers of linen with resin and then curing the sandwich under pressure. It has virtually the same mechanical strength as cast iron and is not affected by corrosion. Rod had a sheet of Tufnol which had come out of Tommy Robinson’s when they finished. It was two inches thick and big enough to make the packing. He gave this to me. I went back to Ellenroad, made a template of the joint with cardboard and took this and the sheet of Tufnol to Tatham’s the textile manufacturers in Milnrow. They cut the packing out of the sheet for me, again for nothing and I went back to Ellenroad with the solution. We fitted the packing piece, jointed with a thin packing each side and a lot of Manganesite and re-assembled the pump. Problem solved and unless you knew about it you would never see what we had done because when it was covered with oil and grime it looked just like the original casting.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

We barred the engine over again, the stroke was all right but the pump rod was catching where it passed through a yoke in the parallel motion. I had no cure for this apart from getting up there with the oxy acetylene cutter and washing enough metal out of the yoke to allow the rod to function with a minimum of distortion. It felt like, and was, vandalism but Time’s Winged Chariot was hurrying near.

All the major elements of the engine itself were in place and it was just a matter of checking all the fastenings, making sure all the cotters were tight, setting the valves and making the connections between the engine and the boiler. There were drains to fit and pipe up and small items like lubricators and other accessories to refurbish and fit. The lads and Cecil helped me when I needed it but they had another task as well.

We had an engine but no connection with the river for water for the condenser. It was a long pull from the river but because the air pump was actually below river level I reckoned that once we had a connection it would draw water all right. There was a nine inch connection via a non-return foot valve into the middle well outside. This had been installed in 1975 as a supply main for the Mather and Platt electric sprinkler pump in the main engine house cellar. I set the lads on to dismantling this pump, shifting it out of the way and knocking a hole through the engine house wall into the cellar from the boiler house. Once they had done this the pipefitters moved in and installed a six inch suction main in between the nine inch connection in the cellar and the inlet port on the condenser. Just as a precaution we put a valve in this line to hold the water in the condenser when the engine was stopped. As a matter of fact I was more bothered about a siphon effect flooding the pit but as it transpired it wasn’t necessary. This wasn’t a problem as it was a useful thing to have in the line for maintenance purposes.

To get water away from the air pump while the engine was running I made a steel trough that ran away to the end of the pit where it dropped the water into a four inch centrifugal pump. This was piped to a hole cut in the top of the main drain in the engine house cellar which dropped the water from the main engines back into the river below the weir. My idea was that this pump would be running all the time and would keep the trough clear of water. We finished this and all the other small jobs by about Wednesday on the week before we were due to steam for the Total Open Day. It was time to fire the boiler and find out if I’d got everything right. I knew in my bones that there would be something wrong but didn’t have a clue what it would be. There was only one thing to do, run the engine in steam for the first time in 50 years. How the hell did I manage to get myself into these situations?

On the Tuesday we steamed the boiler and got about ten pounds of steam, we could set the automatic controls to hold this pressure. We cracked steam through the main and barred the engine round until the steam was passing through into the base of the cylinder. I reckoned there was enough play in the piston to allow circulation to the top so we opened the drains and left the engine warming through for 48 hours. While it was all hot and under very low pressure we nipped all the joints on the pipework and engine except for the connection between the valve chest and the cylinder. The reason for nipping all the joints is that no matter how tight you get them while they are cold you can always get another couple of turns when the metal has warmed up. I always call this following the joints up and it should be done on any piece of equipment when it has been re-built.

On this point, it never failed to amaze me how some engineers running steam plant got away with neglecting things like this. I remember once helping a firm to get a gas burner on a boiler working after it had been repaired. I found the fault and we started the boiler from cold on ‘kindle’ which is a low setting on the burner designed for slow steam raising so as not to damage the boiler by thermal shock caused by too rapid firing. The engineer said they never bothered about this and put it straight on to ‘High Flame’, the top setting. I kept quiet and stood back, awe-struck by his ignorance. At this setting the boiler started making steam after about twenty minutes and I noticed a few wisps of vapour on the top of the boiler. By the time I got up there to have a look it was a full blooded rush and you couldn’t get near it. It was steam escaping out of the top manhole on the boiler which was a mile off being tight. I told the engineer about it and he said it had always been like that since Rochdale Electric Welding had repaired the boiler. He said it would shut itself off as pressure blew the lid up against the seat! It did too, but I suggested it would be as well to tighten the holding up nuts as soon as he had a chance! There is a lesson to be learned from this; never underestimate the capacity of the human race to be stupid!

Back to the Whitelees. I couldn’t put it off any longer, I did a last minute check and then opened the steam valve. It’s very hard to communicate the tension that you feel when you unleash an unknown quantity like that. Starting the main engines had been just the same. I don’t think you ever reach a higher point of awareness and readiness for instant action than when you’re doing something like this. The best way I can describe it is rigidly controlled panic! It’s the best example I can think of to illustrate the phrase ‘Putting your money where your mouth is’. If you’ve made a serious mistake your life expectancy could be extremely low! The Whitelees was worse than some because due to the design of the engine you were literally inside the orbit of the engine when you started it, there was no comfortable separation like there was on the main engine. Not that this would do any good if something went wrong but psychologically, a bit of separation can be a comfort!

There was a whoosh as the cylinder filled and the engine started straight away and ran beautifully. Only one thing was wrong, we were running on the water we had put in the rising main to the condenser to prime the pump and as soon as this was removed by the air pump two things became blindingly obvious. First, we weren’t getting any water from the well and second, the centrifugal pump didn’t seem to be handling the tail water from the pump. The first fault was the worst and we stopped, the scavenging pump shifted the tail water and we filled the rising main and the condenser manually again and then tried once more.

We had exactly the same result and I decided that the problem was most likely outside, in the well. We went out and lifted the manhole cover but this didn’t do us much good because all we could see was the nine inch pipe vanishing into fifteen feet of muddy water. This is the time you need friends so I rang John Ingoe and asked him to send his low loader up as it had a very large hydraulic crane mounted on the back. We broke the joint in the pipe and thanked our lucky stars that Mather and Platt had had the sense to fit a lifting eye on the bend where the pipe turned before diving under the water. Same as a sky hook but the other way round! John brought the sky hook himself and we drew the pipe out of the well.

I opened the chamber which held the foot valve and found the problem straight away. Because the installation hadn’t been used or tested for several years, the rubber face of the bronze foot valve had stuck down on to the seat. I had to give it a clout to get it loose and remove it so we could clean it all up. The valve was wonderfully well made and in perfect condition, all it needed was freeing and re-assembling. I was having a cup of tea while the lads started to put it back together. I was watching them through the open door of the site hut and noticed they seemed to be having a bit of bother. I went out and asked them what was the matter and they said they couldn’t get the valve back in the housing, it was too big! I tried myself and they were right! In the end, everybody had a try and nobody could see how we were going to get it back in. I went and had another look and all of a sudden it dawned on me that when I took it out I must have turned it over in the housing and not noticed because I was more interested in the seat. I turned it upside down, pushed it in the housing, turned it over and it fell into place perfectly. I went back and finished my tea while they re-fitted the cover. You’ll often meet up with this sort of thing especially when you’re tired. A simple matter that should be blindingly obvious becomes a problem. This is always the time for a pint of tea and a smoke! We dropped the pipe back in the well, made the joint, dropped the lid on the well and went home for tea. Tomorrow was another day, we would see how much good we had done then.

Image

The redundant Mather and Platt sprinkler pump in the main engine cellar. We had a nine inch suction connection in place. Very handy!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

The following day we raised steam again, warmed the engine through, oiled round and had another go. This time we did far better, we had water at the condenser and about fifteen inches of vacuum. Wonderful, the connection to the river was working well! The only problem we had now was that the scavenge pump which was supposed to pick the water up from the end of the trough carrying the tail water away from the engine was air-locking and not coping with the water. We very soon had six inches of water in the pit and had to stop. We had a sump pump running in the pit to deal with any spillage and we left this running while I retired to the site hut for another pint of tea, a pipe and a good think.

It was obvious from the speed the scavenge pump shifted the water when it was working that it was man enough for the job. The problem was that it wouldn’t self-prime once it had gulped the first lot of water out. We either needed a new pump with different characteristics or a reservoir to drop the tail water in and have the pump controlled by a float switch. As we had no money and no alternative pump the reservoir option looked the best bet. In addition, with only a couple of days to go, this was all happening on a Saturday, I needed a solution that I could be confident with. I rang John Ingoe again and within a couple of hours he had sent up an 800 gallon hot well tank and Paul Greenwood with a plant wagon. I rang Alex Mill our tame electrician, told him he was working for free as well and arranged for him to come up and re-wire the pump through a float switch.

We set to and by nine o’clock that evening we had the tank installed, piped up and the electrical wiring almost completed. On the Sunday, Alex finished the wiring and we ran the engine again. This time we had a complete cure, the engine ran reasonably, the air pump delivered water from the river and the new arrangements coped with the tail water with no problems at all. We had a working engine and a couple of days to make minor adjustments and tidy up. We ran for the Total Open day and apart from one hitch on the last run when the air pump boiled, had no problems. Everyone was very pleased, as well they should be!

Image

High stress but we had made our deadline and everyone was satisfied. We had time for some leisurely adjustments and soon had the engine running well. We ran it at 40rpm as originally intended but never got the governor to work effectively.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

At one point I was stood there with Peter Dawson while one of the lads ran the engine and Peter turned to me and said “It’s a good job we gave it that extra foot in the bottom!” I told him I still couldn’t account for why I had done it, I thought we’d better just put it down to luck. Eight years on, the Whitelees is still steamed regularly with the main engine and seems to get better and better as time goes on. At one point the Trust got the idea in their head that they could make the piston a better fit in the bore. They took it out and made all sorts of plans about it. I told them at the time that the best thing was to leave it alone but they wanted to do it their way. In the end, they put it back and it runs as it did when I first started it. Funnily enough it is far safer like this. Volunteers are splendid people but they haven’t the depth of knowledge and instinct that years of practical working gives you. If someone does make a mistake and gets water in the cylinder, the fact that the piston is a sloppy fit in the bore is a good thing, the water can escape up past the piston. If it was to be made a perfect fit, they would run into all sorts of problems. I always used to tell them that we had no worries, we weren’t running 300 looms and everyone depending on us. We could afford to run uneconomically but safe, the engine only had to run, it wasn’t driving anything.

Building the Whitelees was a wonderfully satisfying job and taxed me to the limit. I made a couple of mistakes and if I could go back and do it again there are a couple of things I would do slightly differently. Having said that, I take credit for a significant achievement, building a full size engine with no drawings or experience and having it running on time was pretty bloody good and the nice thing was that there were a number of people who realised this and told me so. My main joy was to be able to follow the blokes who made the engine and erected it in the first place. I found all their mistakes and appreciated all their good work, I really did feel as though I had reached back 150 years and shaken hands with them.

One last matter. Some time later we had a visitor from another museum and he saw with horror that punched on the castings of the flywheel was the legend ‘Rebuilt 1991, S Graham’. He took me to task about this so I rolled the wheel round a bit further and showed him the names of the fitters who had rebuilt it at Holcrofts in 1957. I asked him if he’d ever looked inside the back of an old watch and seen the initials and date of the watchmaker who had done repairs on it. What we had done was exactly the same thing and part of a long tradition. So, if ever you go down to look at the engine, look on the flywheel for my memorial!

Image

The Mayoress christening the engine. I don't think anyone realised what we had done or the deadline we had worked under. Funny thing is that much later I became "he who shall not be named" at Ellenroad with some of the volunteers who found some of the mistakes. I always told them the same thing, of course there were mistakes but before they started throwing stones they should try doing the same job themselves. After all it has run trouble free for visitors for 25 years now.....
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

The dust soon settled after we ran the Whitelees Engine for Total Oil and I had to get back to the can of worms which is what the Trust and the project had turned out to be. Truth to tell I was exhausted after three months of unremitting mental and physical work. I had lost over a stone in weight and what I really needed was a fortnight’s holiday. I didn’t really analyse what was going on at the time but hindsight is 20/20 vision so they say and I have a fair assessment to hand now of what the problems were. The internecine conflicts within the Trust had subsided after Horace intervened on my behalf but they had never gone away. Horace was dead so that line of defence was closed. My version of what was going wrong is as follows.

By the way, if you detect a sort of moveable feast in that I sometimes call them the Trustees and sometimes the Directors there’s a good reason for it. They were Trustees when we started but for some reason which I never fully understood, changed their title to Directors so regard the terms as interchangeable!

In the early years of the project I was seen as some sort of miracle worker. I remember John Pierce once referring to me in a speech as “Mr Ellenroad” and I took him to task afterwards. I told him that it was a big mistake to identify the success of the project with one person unless it was posthumously. Even so, I was delivering the goods so fast that I think some of the directors thought I walked on water. Bear in mind that in hard cash donations alone, I brought in over £3,500,000. Add gifts in kind, services and subsidy through MSC and you are getting very close to £5,000,000. This is big money in anybody’s terms and we were showing concrete progress for it. My wage and the expenses of running the Trust were about £20,000 a year. This was peanuts for a project of this size and compares more than favourably with other schemes. However, many of the directors hadn’t a clue as to what was going on or what was needed to run something like Ellenroad and every time the figure of £20,000 was mentioned they assumed it was going into my back pocket.

Another aspect of my thinking which the directors as a body never took on board was what I’m sure they saw as my empire building. Every time I came up with a scheme like the residential block, the exhibition centre, the exhibition building enterprise or the park and ride facility and the link road to Kingsway they dismissed it out of hand. I’m not saying that all the directors were blind to what I was aiming for, but they were ruled by the majority and there were some small-minded people of no great imagination or intelligence sitting as directors and you don’t need many of them to knock the enterprise out of the rest. I’ll give you a couple of examples. There was a big article in the Rochdale Observer one week which tore into the Trust because of the fact it was spending too much and was nearly bankrupt. The situation at the time wasn’t unusual for us. We were taking a lot of money in but spending it on major works. The problem was that the source of the story, and he was quoted by name, was one of our directors! I had to stand up in the board meeting and point out that there was no problem, that even if there was, the directors were party to it because they had full information and accounts and had ratified every action the Trust had taken. Further, did they realise what the consequences of any proof of wrong-doing was? They were under the impression that because we were a Company Limited by Guarantee the directors could only be held liable in the sum of £1 each under company law. I pointed out that if the Trust was found to have traded unlawfully the directors were liable for the whole amount of any shortfall. This caused great consternation as some of them had never read any of the papers given to them and didn’t understand their liabilities. If I remember rightly I had to ask John Youngman to come up and give them a lecture on collective responsibility. Another example which I was able to nip in the bud straight away because I heard about it as soon as it happened was when another director had a couple of beers in a local pub and said the Trust was going to liquidate! Enough of this, just take it as read that the directors weren’t always the most helpful element at work in the project.

As the project found its feet and started to produce concrete results people started to forget how steep the hill had been when we first started to climb. They began to see Ellenroad as a wonderful example of local enterprise which had been very successful up to now and so would continue to be so. What nobody ever realised was the amount of work that I put into fund-raising. I never told them because it would have been seen as simply another ploy from Stanley to get more money out of the Trust. I was looking at some of the old computer files of correspondence and memoranda the other night and was struck by the number of them which were timed before eight in the morning and after eight at night! There are plenty which are after midnight! I told the directors time and time again that the lead-in time to funding could be anything up to five years and that what we should be addressing when we had plenty of money coming in was where the next five years worth of funding was coming from. This never sunk in.

By 1990, we had only one major source of income and that was Total Oil. There was a chance of other funding but it was just at this time that Ray Colley proposed that my hours should be cut down to two days a week. Behind this was the assumption that I would continue fund-raising on the same scale, presumably in my own time! I forget how this finished up but I think it got buried in the hard fact that I had to work full time to get the Whitelees Engine built and running and the Trust hadn’t got any money to pay me anyway. I was keeping it going by working simply on the premise that when they had the money they would pay me what they owed me. To make matters worse, negotiations with the Co-op which I was convinced was our next major funder were handed over to Malcolm Dunphy, one of the directors, and I am certain he never put enough time into it. He certainly never came to me for the materials which I would have considered necessary for bringing in a funder as big as that. My impression at the time that this was something which was best handled by the top men having a quiet word after they had finished their main business. This was the root of the problem, the Trust’s funding was the main business as far as I was concerned and in my book, the best way to get funding was to state a clear, logical case and support it with written evidence. It’s all water under the bridge now but very few of the directors really understood the principles behind funding. They were businessmen and thought like businessmen. In their book the project was tailored to the budget. In mine, you decided what you wanted to do, costed it, added at least 50% and that was the budget you had to fund. I never trimmed a segment of the project to fit a budget, always the other way round.

Early in 1991 I did a paper for the directors which was entitled ‘Why the Trust should sack Stanley’ or words to that effect. My argument was that if they weren’t going to go for the external services and the residential accommodation they didn’t need me and should start to make plans to replace me. I laid out all the things a replacement would have to do and gave them every assistance to do some head-hunting. I knew I was on a losing wicket because the first thing they would try to do was reduce the figure of £20,000 I had always put on the cost of a year’s management and if you pay peanuts you get monkeys!

By May 1992 everything was winding down. We lost the MSC workers and due to my full time commitment to Whitelees no fund-raising had been done for six months and all I wanted to do was to get out. I spent a month tidying up the Trust’s affairs and moving paper from home to Ellenroad and it was not a happy time.

What made things worse was the fact that the directors made up their minds that they wanted to clear up their debt to me. They hadn’t enough money to do this and I suggested that they pay people like Alex Mill our electrical contractor the money he was owed first. Eventually Total and Coates, who recognised my position and sympathised with me, put in I think about £2500 each on condition that it all went to me. I thought this was wonderful and a concrete indication of what they thought about my work. This left about £3,500 owing to me and I was asked to attend a meeting at Malcolm Dunphy’s factory one evening. There were only a few directors there and I knew I was going to get shafted as soon as I walked in. Briefly they told me how much they could pay me and if I didn’t accept it they would declare the Trust insolvent, restart and I wouldn’t get anything. I never argued, I just asked for a piece of paper, wrote a draft of the letter I would send them, got them to approve it and walked out. Peter Metcalfe came out with me and we went for a drink. He didn’t say a lot beyond the fact that I’d surprised him by not losing my temper. “What’s the point?” I said, “They hold all the cards and they are doing exactly what they see fit.” It was as simple as that. I wrote off the £3,500 or whatever it was that they owed me and walked away from them a sadder and wiser man. The directors never even thanked me for what I had done for the Trust.

A few days later I was at Ellenroad for a steaming and the Friends surprised me, they gave me an engraved tankard, a picture of me asleep while tenting the engine and a single red rose. Guess who I remember with most affection.

Image
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

There was a funny incident while all this was going on. John Pierce and Veronica with their family were going to the States for a holiday and I said I’d look after their West Highland Terrier, Maisy, while they were away. They left on the Friday and I lost Maisy either that day or the day after. She was playing about with Eigg, Muck and Jess outside the engine house one minute and next time I looked she had vanished! For two days I had gangs of blokes wandering the streets of Milnrow and Newhey shouting “Maisy!” at the tops of their voices. I’m sure the locals thought it was a movement. I arranged for an advertisement to be put in the local paper on the following Thursday and rang all John’s neighbours to ask them to keep an eye open for her. For two nights I couldn’t sleep, it was terrible. I remember Cecil Hufton saying to me on the second day “Is this the end of Ellenroad as we know it?” I mean, losing the Chief Executive’s dog!

On the Sunday I went to Ringway to pick Mary up off the plane and I asked her if she would indulge me and let me go round by Ellenroad. I told her what had happened. When we got there the security guard at Coates came out and said he’d just seen a dog answering Maisy’s description and he pointed to where she had gone. I told Mary to stay with the car in case she turned up and I set off across the fields. It took me about half an hour to find and catch her. I carried her back to the car and was I one Happy Bunny
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

Ellenroad went down well so I'm going to do Bancroft. If you don't like it let me know!

PREFACE
I live in a small town called Barnoldswick, mid-way between Burnley and Skipton and 600ft up in the Northern Pennines of England. It’s a walking distance town, you’re never more than ten minutes away from open countryside and the population is around 12,000 souls in 2008. For a hundred years it was a mill town depending solely on agriculture, cotton manufacture and associated services. We are reputed to be the biggest town in England that isn’t served by an ‘A’ road and so if you find yourself in Barlick (we use that name because it’s easier) you’re either lost or you meant to come here in the first place. The boundary changes of 1974 dragged us kicking and screaming into Lancashire but many people still regard us as a Yorkshire town. Actually I think they might be wrong, Barlick was always unique and has been quite happy to straddle the border, take note of what the Red and White Rose counties were doing and pick and mix the options. You’ll be nearest to the truth if you think of us as independent, slightly bloody-minded and convinced that we have the best of both worlds.
This relative isolation ensured that the town grew up to become self-contained. We still have good services and one of the attractions for visitors is that we have managed to retain the air of solid stone-built mill town even though the cotton industry is long gone. I wasn’t born here but I love the place and have been looking at its history for more than thirty years now. It’s a bit late in the day, I was born before WW2, but I’ve finally got round to sharing some of the things I have learned in fifty years of residence. Pity if I took it to the grave…
I want to tell you a story about a cotton mill. My qualifications for doing this are that I ran the engine at Bancroft Shed, the last steam driven mill to be built in Barlick and the last one to close. A lot has been written about the mills and parts of their operation and equipment but as far as I am aware nobody has ever told the full story of one of these marvellous places, it’s genesis, how it was built, how it functioned, what effect it had on the workers lives and eventually how it died. That’s my intention, I’ll leave it to you to decide how well I have done the job.
[If you have a computer, log on to this link and watch the film and the one that follows it. It will give you some background and help you to get a feel for the story. http://www.photobus.co.uk/index.php?id= ... tanley.flv]
You’ll find that every now and then I give you a break from absorbing quite dense information because I know how hard it is to keep concentration levels up. Everyone needs a tea break occasionally so I’ve given you the literary equivalent. They are culled from interviews I did with Fred Inman who was a tackler at Bancroft. It’s a parallel narrative to my main story but from a different perspective, if there is repetition at times I think it’s helpful because it reinforces the main narrative. I hope you enjoy Fred’s version and that he helps you get a better insight into Bancroft and the world that shaped its story. If you like Fred’s story look at the Lancashire Textile Project on Oneguyfrombarlick.co.uk for more of the same.

Image

Bancroft Shed in 1979.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

CHAPTER 1: THE BACK STORY
Barlick is a very ancient settlement, the name is thought to be Saxon, a man called Bernulf had a wick (farmstead) here before the Domesday Book and so when the King’s clerks came here in 1085 they marked us down as Bernolfwic, now modified to Barnoldswick which we shorten in everyday speech to Barlick and this is the name I shall use. We have evidence of Bronze-age settlement, the inhabitants were peasant farmers living off small enclosures and hunter-gathering on the surrounding land. About 4,000 years ago they had domesticated sheep and unless they were severely retarded found that the wool could be twisted into a yarn and woven into cloth. This domestic production of textiles lasted until the steam-driven factory system finally made it uneconomic in the 19th century. At first the fibres used were home-grown wool and linen produced from the flax plant, later there was some silk weaving. Cotton had been known as an exotic fibre for hundreds of years prior to coming into Britain in significant quantities through London in the early 17th century after Queen Elizabeth licensed the East India Company in 1600. The Company imported cotton fibre, fine yarn and some light cloth from the Indies. By the mid 18th century there was a high demand for the new lighter cloths. Some cotton was being traded in Liverpool by 1780 and after 1800 the ‘Pool was the entry port for virtually all cotton imports, particularly those from the United States of America as part of the third and final leg of the infamous triangular slave trade. Wool was still being woven by hand loom weavers as late as 1861 in Barlick but the domestic trade was small and shrinking. The main trading centres for cloth in the early days of the domestic industry were Colne and Halifax but with the rise of the cotton industry Manchester became the regional centre.
The genesis of the domestic textile industry was the necessity of weaving for the family. It developed into making cloth to use as a barter good and in the 17th century was organised by ‘clothiers’ who supplied the raw wool and marketed the cloth paying the weavers by the ‘piece’, a standard length of cloth. This is the origin of the modern term ‘piece work’ and this old wool trade still survives in some areas of the Outer Isles in Scotland weaving specialised high quality tartan cloth. In the mid 18th century cotton became the most important fibre. With the advent of crude water powered spinning machinery before 1780 sliver preparation in the cottages died out and they became full time spinners and weavers. Arkwright’s improvements were a great advance but the patents weren’t broken until the mid 1780s after which use of his waterframe expanded rapidly. Barlick had plenty of water power and got in on the act well before 1800 but there is no evidence of them using the Arkwright water frame, it seems they may have been using the cruder machines to produce good quality roving for the cottage spinners to improve the quality of the yarn. As soon as Richard Roberts perfected the power loom and started manufacturing them in 1827 the industry took them up, weaving moved into the factories and the slow decline of the handloom weavers started. By about 1850 they were almost extinct and the modern steam-driven textile factory system was fully established.
In most North West textile towns this would be where the boom began but true to form, Barlick was a bit different. From the early 19th century there were two dominant manufacturing families in the town, the Slaters and the Bracewells. The Slaters come into the story later, the man we are interested in at the moment is William Bracewell of Newfield Edge, commonly known as ‘Billycock’ because of his customary headgear a hard bowler hat. Born in 1813 in Earby he set up a putting-out business in the town around 1840 and by 1860 had driven everyone but the Slaters and their tenants out of business. The biggest casualty was his cousin’s enterprise, Bracewell Brothers at Old Coates Mill. Billycock was a hard man with only one ambition, to dominate the town. Using family capital for his initial establishment but later working on credit from the Craven Bank he rapidly expanded his empire, built two steam mills in Barlick, bought land and assets in the town and even an engineering works in Burnley and a coal field at Ingleton. In between he found time to promote and build a branch railway line and run the biggest milk round.
In 1885, during a series of family problems, Billycock died and because of bad business decisions he had made the firm he had built up collapsed. The will was thrown into Chancery and everything sold off to pay his creditors. The consequences for the town were disastrous and a contemporary report said that grass was growing in the streets. Other local capital holders whose income depended on the prosperity of the town got together, founded two ‘room and power’ companies and saved the town. A ‘room and power’ company is an association of capital holders who build a weaving shed and run it providing room and power for manufacturers as tenants. This was a brilliant success, the major company, the Calf Hall Shed Company, building one new shed at Calf Hall, buying Bracewell’s Butts and Wellhouse Mills from the receivers and later Viaduct Shed at Colne. The Long Ing Shed Company built one mill a year earlier but never grew beyond that. The ‘room and power’ principle gave entrepreneurs access to manufacturing at a low threshold of capital expenditure. These new entrants to the trade could concentrate entirely on their speciality, weaving cloth and this resulted in efficient management, good returns and the accumulation of profits which fuelled another burst of expansion between 1895 and 1914 when these successful tenants built their own mills. The town doubled in size. By 1914 Barlick had 13 mills and Bancroft in the course of erection, the proportion of looms to inhabitants was the highest in England, almost 25,000 looms and about 10,000 inhabitants.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

One notable family of manufacturers who emerged from the wreckage of the Bracewell empire was the Nutters. In March 1920 when they finally started Bancroft it was the last and most modern weaving shed in Barlick. In July 1920 the cotton trade cracked and went into a slow decline, by 1980 it was dead. My story is about this last mill, Bancroft. By the way, you may have noticed that when I refer to the mills some are named ‘Shed’ and some ‘Mill’. The difference is that if a factory started by doing preparation, spinning and weaving it was named ‘Mill’. If it concentrated solely on weaving it was named ‘Shed’. I regard the collective term mills as being correct for all of them but will quite often refer to the specialised weaving mills as ‘sheds’.
So, we have our background, let’s get on with the tale… We need to know something about the Nutters.

CHAPTER 2: THE NUTTER FAMILY
One suggestion for the origin of the surname ‘Nutter’ is that it is a corruption of ‘neat herd’. ‘Neat’ is the old name for a deer and neat herds were men employed to turn deer back into the royal forests if they attempted to stray. The name is very common on the boundaries of the Royal Forest of Blackburnshire so this origin fits.
The branch of the Nutter family we are interested in originated in Rimington near Clitheroe. James junior (b.1845) [son of James (b.1811)] started work in a water powered textile mill at Howgill processing ‘shoddy’ which is substandard wool fibre regarded as waste by the high end of the wool industry. This is the origin of the pejorative term shoddy to describe anything that is of lower quality. The family moved to Barlick in search of employment early in the mid 19th century and young James got employment in one of Bracewell’s mills. He didn’t stay long there but joined in with some neighbouring young men selling Blackie’s Family Bibles door to door in Barlick and the countryside around.

William Atkinson in Old Barlick says that in 1864 Edward [Ned] Slater lost an arm in an accident at Wellhouse Mill and started selling Blackie’s Bibles to make a living. Edward died in 1885 aged 45 years but other young men had followed his example, Billy Brooks told me that James Edmondson did the same thing.

By 1867 James is back in textiles working in Porrit and Austin’s mill at Edenfield learning the trade of wool spinning and living at Tottington near Bury where he met and married Mary Jane Chadwick in 1867. Her father worked in the same mill as he did. In 1868 they were living at Straighby in Lancashire (Not sure where this is. Could it be a district of Tottington?) where their first child Eliza Jane was born. By 1872 he and Mary Jane are living in Gargrave, and have three children, he is working at Aire Bank Mill which was owned by the Earby branch of the Bracewell family. At the 1881 census he is back in Barlick and living at Townhead but is evidently doing quite well because they soon moved into a larger home, Stopes House on Gillian’s Lane opposite what is now Moorgate Road.

Sometime around 1880 James Nutter started up as a manufacturer in Nuttall’s New Coates Mill as a tenant with 56 Looms. Shortly afterwards he was in partnership with one of his former bible-selling friends, Slater Edmondson, in the Slater Brothers’ Clough Mill. In 1888 the partnership moved to the new Long Ing Shed with 400 looms. In 1890 the partnership broke up, Slater Edmondson stayed in Long Ing Shed with 400 looms but James started again in Calf Hall Shed with 414 looms. In 1905 he moved into the newly built Bankfield Shed with 900 looms working alongside Bradley Brothers who also had 900 looms in what was then reputed to be the biggest single weaving shed in the industry. James Nutter and Sons wove there until 1934.

Image

James Nutter.

Image

Mary Jane Nutter
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

Meanwhile, other branches of the Nutter family had been busy. Things get confused here because the different Nutter family firms were closely associated in both finance and management. What is certain is that James Nutter conceived the idea of building Bancroft Shed (then known as New Shed) at Gillians and was instrumental in starting the construction in 1914 even though he was still trading as James Nutter and Sons in Bankfield. The Bankfield unit was run by his son Wilfred Ewart Nutter (b.1883). James died at Southport on 20 February 1914 aged 69, he had a mastoid operation and then succumbed to gall stones. The war intervened and construction stopped at Bancroft. In March 1920 it was finished and his eldest daughter Eliza Jane deputed for her mother who was unwell and started the engine which had cylinders named James and Mary Jane. The first occupier of the mill was another Nutter firm, Nutter Brothers with 1200 looms. They ran it until 1934 when they moved into Grove Shed at Earby to take up space vacated by another Nutter firm, R Nutter Ltd which had failed in 1932, this firm had been run by Wilfred’s brothers Randall and Rupert. Nutter Brothers left their looms in Bancroft which was taken over by James Nutter and Sons Limited under the command of Wilfred Nutter. Nutter Brothers took the 900 looms from Bankfield and moved them to Grove Shed but remained members of the Barnoldswick Manufacturer’s Association. Incidentally, this was the end of Bankfield as a weaving shed because Bradley Brothers had gone bankrupt in 1920 and had been replaced by a rag bag of small firms which the other manufacturers referred to as ‘Woolworth’s’. Bankfield Shed closed and didn’t run again until WW2 when it became a shadow factory, first for the Rover Company and then for Rolls Royce who are still there in 2008. There was another firm, W E & D Nutter Ltd who were in Wellhouse Mill as tenants of the Calf Hall Shed Company with 1,125 looms. This appears to have been a partnership between Wilfred Nutter and I think David Nutter.

So, in 1934, in the middle of all the inter-war disputes and bad trade, James Nutter and Sons are weaving in Bancroft Shed and the firm continued under that name until final closure in December 1978. My involvement was that I went there as firebeater in 1972 and after about four months took over as engineer and ran the mill for six years until it closed down. Flawed though my account may be, it has the merit that I was personally involved and speak from experience.

Image

Aunt Liza Nutter starting Bancroft engine in 1920. She was standing in for Mary Jane who was ill.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

TEA BREAK: A TACKLER’S TALE.

One of the benefits gained from listening to people describing their lives is that apart from learning about their experiences and how they shaped their world you occasionally come across seemingly unconnected facts that had an impact at the time but have since sunk without trace. Try this one for size….

In 1906 there was a young married couple living on Albion Street in Earby. Parkinson Inman, the husband, was born in 1876 at Pately Bridge but spent most of his young life in Keighley where his father who was a navvy had moved for work. Parkinson started work as an engineering apprentice but seems to have left this quite soon because by the age of 16 he was a weaver. He followed an older sister to Earby in search of work in about 1892 and went into the Big Mill working for Hugh Currer’s and then Shuttleworths where he eventually became a tackler. In about 1903 he married a lass called Elizabeth Turner, born 1878 in Earby, whose family had a butcher’s shop on Water Street. Elizabeth wove in the mill and helped in the shop as well, she used to have to carry heavy baskets of meat around the town delivering to customers.

This is where the unconnected fact creeps in… ‘July 15th 1878. Birth of Melbourne Inman. Four times Professional Champion of English Billiards, 1912 - 1919 and winner of the first ever match to be played in the World Snooker Championships. He beat Tom Newman 8 games to 5 in a match which began on 29th November 1926 and finished on 6th December.’ Parkinson and Elizabeth had a son in 1906 and called him Melbourne Inman after this professional billiards player. This fascinates me because it was before Melbourne won the championship and it makes you realise how significant billiards was in the sporting scene at the time.

Two years later, on December the nineteenth 1908, Elizabeth had another son who they named Frederick, this time after a lodger who was living with the family. Frederick Inman is the source of the Tea Breaks, he was an informant in the Lancashire Textile Project in 1978/1979 and survived almost 30 years before dying in 2007 aged 98 years. A good man, a life well lived and a great loss. I shall never forget him.

I first met Fred in 1977 when he came to Bancroft to help us out. Jim Pollard the weaving manager had a bit of a problem because we were short of a tackler. At that time good tacklers were thin on the ground and who would want to come to Bancroft anyway, it had been on its last legs for twenty years. Jim was an old Earbier and he knew Fred was retired but still active so he persuaded him to come and fill in for us. It was a good day for Bancroft when he arrived, tacklers can be funny blokes, some can be a lot better to get on with than others. We were lucky because we had Roy Wellock and Ernie Roberts, two lovely blokes who knew their job. Fred moved into the big tackler’s cabin in the warehouse with them and I’ve seldom seen three people get on better. Eventually this partnership made the hard job of weaving out a lot easier because the weavers liked them as well.

Twenty years ago I could have started straight into Fred’s story but it’s an indication of how much times have changed that I’m fairly certain that not everyone will know what a tackler was. The loom overlooker or tackler was a man who worked in the weaving shed. His job was to keep his set of looms running and do everything he could to make sure his weavers could get maximum production. In the old days he had the power to hire and fire and his wage included an element related to how much his weavers made. It was therefore in his interest to get rid of poor weavers and press the others hard to get cloth off. He was the timekeeper as well and in the days of tramp weavers waiting in the warehouse at starting time he could go out and get a weaver to run any looms that were idle because the regular weaver was late or absent. Under this regime the tacklers were men to be feared and often had a bad reputation.

As conditions changed in the industry the link to wages was abolished, the tramp weavers faded into history and the tackler lost much of his power over the weavers but not his status in the hierarchy of the shed. I keep referring to tacklers as men because to my knowledge there was never a woman tackler. My experience of the breed forty years ago was good, they had a close relationship with their weavers and sometimes their pastoral care extended beyond loom-tuning. I once saw Ernie Roberts in the shed having a very serious conversation with a young lass called Susan about her career in weaving, Ernie was advising her to get a better job because he thought an intelligent young lass could do better for herself. I once asked Ernie to turn out his pockets so I could see what he carried round with him and noted that one of the items was a Fox’s Glacier Mint. I asked him what that was for and he said it was an essential part of his toolkit. If a weaver was having a bad day, say she had lost production with a bad warp or a smash or even had troubles at home Ernie reckoned that a good way to cheer her up was to give her a mint.

For some reason tacklers gained a universal reputation for being comical figures. ‘Tackler’s Tales’ abound in the industry and beyond. Ernie used to say that a tackler was a weaver with their brains taken out. I think the stories stemmed from the close bond between the tackler and his weavers, he was the man who turned up when things were going badly to set them right and there was always banter involved. One thing was certain, the tales are mostly funny and none of them nasty. We might even trip over a couple as we listen to Fred telling his story.

Image

Fred Inman, tackler and gent, taking his lunch in the cabin in the warehouse in 1977. A lovely bloke!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

CHAPTER 3: WHAT IS A WEAVING SHED?

Sixty years ago this chapter would have been superfluous. Every family in Barlick had someone working in the mill and all the children would have been inside the mill at an early age taking hot meals in, delivering messages or just to have a visit. In these days of Elfin Safety this would be regarded with horror but we did things differently then. I was raised in Stockport and can remember before WW2 when I was still in my pram my mother used to stop at the top of the short slope down into the moulding floor of Hollindrake’s foundry in Princess Street to let me watch the sparks flying as the workers poured molten iron into the moulds. So what? My point is that Princess Street was the main shopping street of the town. Can you imagine a modern shopping centre with heavy industry in the middle of it? Later when I became independent and started to roam I often went after school to the LMS motive power depot at Heaton Mersey to wander round amongst the steam locomotives being prepared for their duty. (LMS shed number 9F. You see, we knew about such things in those days!) I rode on the footplate down to the coaling tower and I was once allowed to blow the whistle. This could never happen now even if the opportunity was there but in those days much of industry was wide open to us and it was no wonder we grew up wanting to be engineers and get our hands dirty. A couple of years ago I met with five old school mates I hadn’t seen since we were at Stockport Grammar School fifty years ago. Four of us had spent at least part of our careers on steam engines and the other two in engineering. We grew up understanding what went on in industry and it shaped our lives.
Things have changed, the steam driven mills have gone and even if they still existed they would be closed to visitors. Far too dangerous to let anyone in to see what they were doing. So my first job is to make sure that you all know what a weaving shed looked like and what went on inside it.
Built on sloping ground with the hill behind rising to Weets Moor Bancroft was in an ideal position. Gillian’s Beck flowed down from the hill and supplied the mill dam or lodge where the cold water for the steam engine condenser was stored. This supply of cooling water was the key to economic running, it ensured efficient running of the engine without which the mill wasn’t viable. Building back into the slope meant that the weaving shed was partially below ground level, this ensured a humid atmosphere which helped weaving. There was a road outside the front gate and plenty of room round the engine and boiler house to store stocks of coal. The large building nearest the town with the arched window is the engine house. The cast iron framed window was sectional and could be removed to allow access if large new castings had to be got in and out during erection or heavy repair. To the right, behind the engine house is the boiler house and the chimney. The two storey range down the front of the mill housed the warehouse on the ground floor with two loading docks for goods in and out. In the upper story were the winding, warp preparation and tape sizing departments. The building at the end of the cobbled yard is the office and the weaving shed lies behind this frontage built back into the hillside, the shed was the largest space in the mill and the most important.
It’s important to realize that Bancroft shed was built for only one purpose, it specialised in taking yarn in and weaving it into cloth. The cloth was described as ‘grey’ but this referred only to it’s unfinished state. Depending on the yarn used it could be any colour from white to a warm cream colour. Bancroft didn’t make yarn or bleach and finish cloth, it was simply a weaving machine.

This specialisation was the secret of the north east Lancashire industry’s success after about 1870. The days of the old combined mill were over, south east Lancashire specialised in spinning and they could deliver loom-ready yarn to the door of the shed in Barlick cheaper than we could make it. The Bracewell firms in both Barlick and Earby didn’t take advantage of the opportunity to specialise and became uneconomic and this brought about their failure in the mid 1880s. The low threshold of entry under the ‘Room and Power System’ of the shed companies further increased efficiency because the manufacturers could ignore the responsibilities of running the shed and concentrate on what they knew best, producing cloth.

There was a further efficiency which paradoxically was to eventually contribute to the decline of the industry. As the scale of the industry increased so did the sophistication of the trading system that supported it. The first Manchester Cotton Exchange was built in 1729 and subsequently enlarged four times, the last being 1921. At one time the main room was reputed to be the largest trading floor in the world. From its inception the Manchester Exchange was the business centre for the whole of the north western cotton industry and every firm had a Manchester Man, their representative on the ‘change. Thanks to the railway, these men could leave home in the morning and be on the floor of the exchange in less than two hours from Barlick. Once there they could sell cloth, take orders and buy yarn. It wasn’t unknown for an order to be taken, the yarn bought and dispatched to Barlick before the close of trading to be delivered the next day. The exchange was all powerful and rapidly established standard contracts and mechanisms to regulate the trade, these contracts contained clauses which allowed variations in price if labour or coal costs increased during the term of the agreement. This certainty of profit allowed the mills to work on high volumes and very low profit margins which was efficient and fine when demand was high and the mills were working to full capacity. In later years when volumes fell and competition between individual firms increased it was a disadvantage because the historically low profit margins couldn’t cover fixed expenses. Manchester soon had another name, ‘Cottonopolis’ and was famous for independent thought and progress. ‘What Manchester does today the rest of the country will do tomorrow’.

So, we all know now what a weaving shed is and a little bit about a particular shed, Bancroft. As far as I know Bancroft was the last steam driven traditional weaving shed to be built in the North of England and so it was the most modern. It had the potential to be the most efficient unit in the town and this undoubtedly helped it to attain the dubious honour of being the last one to close. There was one small problem, the real world had caught up during the extended building period. In July 1920 the cotton trade cracked and started the long decline to extinction. Bancroft was to work under this handicap all its life.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

I’ve got a bit of a goodie for you now. In the late 1970s I bought myself a very expensive tape recorder and started to interview people connected with the mills about their lives and what they did for a living. This developed eventually into the Lancashire Textile Project, 1,500,000 words and over 500 pictures. If you want to find out more about this go to Google, type Lancashire Textile Project into the search bar and go forward from there. You’ll find the whole thing is on a funny little website called Oneguyfrombarlick which is run by a friend of mine and contains lots of information about Barlick. My informants were patient and very good to me. They suffered many hours of close questioning about every aspect of their lives and I’ll freely admit that a lot of the transcripts, though invaluable information for the social historian, are not the most riveting thing you will ever read. However every now and again a real gem of information surfaced and what follows is one of these.

Later on I’ll tell you how we went about closing Bancroft down because it is a story that needs telling to get it on the record. The story I want to look at now is how it started up in 1920. I was interviewing an old mate of mine, Jack Platt, not because I knew he had information about the mills but because he had worked in the Barlick quarries and later on had been a wagon driver, another subject close to my heart because I spent 25 years doing the same thing. When he talked about his early work experience I was surprised to find that he was one of the first weavers in Nutter Brothers’ Bancroft Shed. He was in there right at the beginning on the first day they ran the mill. I don’t know whether anyone has ever described this process before but in Jack we have what historians call ‘a prime source’, he was there, his description is straight from the horse’s mouth.
Once the mill was finished and the opening ceremony had been performed in March 1920 Nutter Brothers wanted to commission the mill as soon as possible and get some production out of it. They knew that until they had bedded everything in and sorted out the inevitable teething problems they were losing money every day. The way they tackled this was get about 50 looms in, connect them up to the shafting, get some weavers in and start weaving cloth on a small scale. In 1920 all weavers worked on piece work, they were paid according to the amount of cloth they produced. This was reckoned up only after they had delivered a good piece into the warehouse and it had passed inspection. In 1920 the standard piece length was 100 yards and a good 4 loom weaver, working on an average cloth weight with everything going well could make about 6 pieces a week and get six shillings a piece wage. All this varied with the complexity of the weave and prices were set out in the Uniform List of Weaving Prices agreed between the unions and the industry which was standard throughout the cotton areas. One valuable piece of information Jack gave me was that when he and his mother and sister moved from Calf Hall Shed to Bancroft in March 1920 they were paid a standard wage. This must have been the practice when weaving a shed in because everything couldn’t be expected to run smoothly and the weavers would otherwise not get enough income to make working the initial bedding-in period attractive.

Jack was 16 years old in 1920 and he had been weaving with his mother since he was 12 when he was a ‘half-timer’. The school leaving age was 13 but if a pupil had a satisfactory record they were allowed to work in the mill for half the day and go to school for the other half. They did a week working in the morning and school in the afternoon and the following week this was reversed. My mother did the same thing in Dukinfield and she told me that school in the morning was best because you didn’t have to get up as early. At first Jack worked as a ‘tenter’ for his mother. (‘Tenter’ is a dialect word for someone who watches and helps a process, as engineer at the mill I was the ‘engine tenter’.) For this service his mother got half a crown a week for his services. (twelve and a half new pence.) When he went full-time a year later he was given two looms of his own next to his mother and sister and they worked as a team running ten looms between them. On moving to Bancroft Jack got four looms of his own and the same standing wage as his mother and sister, so they had 12 looms between them.

Image

It’s 1921 at the back of the weaving shed. From left to right: Annie Platt (Jack’s big sister). Iris or Edith Barrett, Mary Joyce and Vera Scott. All young weavers in the shed.

When the mill first started there was only part of the first double row of looms nearest the warehouse, the loom shifters were at work alongside them filling the shed with what would eventually be over 1200 looms. There were 16 cross shafts in the shed driven by bevel gears on the lineshaft, eight were supported by brackets on the pillars holding the roof up, eight were on hanging brackets mounted in between on the girder gutters. Each shaft drove two rows of looms and so there were 80 looms to each shaft. It must have been exciting work because before they started up the weaving manager told them that if someone shouted to them ‘Get out!’ they had to immediately run to the door, through the warehouse and outside into the yard. They hadn’t even to stop their looms, just get out as fast as possible.

You might wonder what could go wrong… plenty actually. The greatest danger was from some fault on the engine. Remember this was a brand new engine with tremendous power running on light load and all sorts of things could go wrong. The worst thing that could happen was if it decided to ‘run boggart’, the common term for over-speeding. If the engine exceeded its design speed of 70rpm there was a real danger of it picking speed up quickly to a point where the cast iron flywheel flew to pieces because of the excessive centrifugal force. This wasn’t common but was by no means unknown. I have run a much larger engine at twice its rated speed and the 85 ton flywheel survived the experience so it was possible for the Bancroft engine to run fast enough to make the situation in the weaving shed dangerous but not disastrous for the engine. There could be a fault in the system of shafts inside the mill which transmitted the power from the engine, a bearing could heat up to the point where it seized solid and the power of the engine could easily break a shaft eight inches thick like a rotten stick. There were many things that could go wrong and it was almost inevitable that some of them would. The engine manufacturer, in this case William Roberts and Sons of Phoenix Foundry in Nelson, had several of their best men there to help the mill engineer keep everything safe. Roberts’ foreman on the Bancroft contract was a very experienced man called Jack Waddington and he would be a good bloke to have with you for the first week or so.
A little story about Jack Waddington, he was in charge of the engine on the day they had the opening ceremony. The great and good had assembled in the engine house, the boiler had a head of steam, the speeches were made and Aunty Liza, James Nutter’s eldest daughter who had married Joe Slater of Clough Mill, opened the stop valve to start the engine. Nothing happened. Arthur Roberts, one of the brothers who owned the Phoenix Foundry was present and shouted for Jack Waddington only to be told he was over at the Greyhound pub having a beer. A runner was sent and a short while afterwards Jacky appeared and was immediately pounced on by his boss who informed him that the engine wouldn’t start. Jack said of course it won’t, not until I have put the valves in, you didn’t think I’d let you start it without me being here did you? With that he took the valve covers off the high pressure cylinder, slid the cylindrical steam valves in, bolted the covers back on and said there you are, it’ll go now! Eliza opened the valve, the engine sprang into life and everyone cheered. Johnny Pickles of Henry Brown Sons and Pickles was there and told this story to his son Newton the man who taught me all I know about engines so we can be pretty sure it’s true. It says something about the regard that Mr Roberts had for his foreman that he didn’t sack him on the spot, not surprising really because he was such a valuable employee. Roberts’ lost Jack later when he was put in charge of erecting an engine at Bradley Mills in Nelson. He liked the plant so much that after it was commissioned he handed his notice in and stayed at the mill as engine tenter until he retired.

Back to Jack Platt and his four looms. As it turned out the warning about getting out quickly if told to was no idle threat. They had to evacuate several times over the first few weeks because of over-speeding, evidently the engineers were having a problem with the governor on the engine. Once when this happened Jack came back in to find that one his looms, about 1200lbs of metal, had been picked up bodily and dropped on top of another loom. As the engine over speeded the leather belt driving it from the drum on the overhead shafting had flown off the drum, caught on a bolt head and became a winch cable dragging the loom up until it hit the shafting which broke the belt and allowed it to drop. Jack was quite impressed! He confessed to me that he had run out once or twice without being warned, he just felt like a break from work and a bit of fresh air.

The shed and the machinery gradually settled in and within six weeks Bancroft was fully operational and running smoothly. By that time the standard wage had been cancelled and the normal piece rate working brought in. This wasn’t the end of the teething problems, there was a tragedy. A major danger in any cotton mill is fire. Water sprinkler systems were fitted in the most vulnerable areas such as the offices, warehouse and the preparation departments upstairs. Part of the fire precautions was to have heavy secondary fireproof doors fitted throughout the mill where they would do the most good. There were two entrances into the weaving shed from the warehouse and these had double wooden doors for use during the day but with a big teak fire door protected with tin plate on both sides hung on rollers running on a heavy metal track above the doorway which was closed at night. One day in I think 1921 a young woman weaver was going out of the shed into the warehouse to brew up and the fire door fell on her killing her instantly. Jack could remember helping to lift the door off her and lay her on the table in the warehouse with a lump of cotton waste under her head. Bancroft got a nickname that day which stuck for many years, they called it ‘The Graveyard’. By the end of 1920 the shed was commissioned and fully operational.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

TEA BREAK: YOUNG TOOLEY AND JACKIE WATERWORTH

I brought up the subject of Tooley’s barber shop in Water Street Earby during a conversation with Fred Inman and asked him about Young Tooley. I remembered that when I first went to live at Sough someone told me that if you went into Earby and asked who was the biggest liar in the town you would be told it was either Jacky Waterworth or Young Tooley. Fred laughed at this and said it was true, they both had reputations for ‘romancing’. He added that Young Tooley may have told lies but they were entertaining lies.

I was told once that somebody took an exceptionally big mushroom into the barber’s shop. It was like a dinner plate and he showed it to him. “There you are Tooley! I bet tha’s never seen one like that before.” Tooley said “I had one bigger than that t’other week. I was walking down Thornton Bottoms when I found it. My biggest job were getting the sheep from underneath it before I picked it!”

“Young Tooley reckoned he was with the Ghurkhas during the war and he says they had these knives, these Kukris and he says they throw ‘em you know and they can hit anything. One day he was going through the jungle with a Ghurkha and he says there were this here Japanese bloke stood there. The Ghurkha pulls this Kukri back, he fetches it back to throw it. Tooley says, no, let me throw it, so he did. The Japanese bloke never moved and the Gurkha says you've missed him. Tooley said, I nodded to him and his head dropped off.”

Fred and I agreed that it didn’t matter whether the stories were true or not, they were funny and entertaining. I can remember once visiting some friends who had three young lads and they always wanted me to tell them stories about things I had done and one day their mother pointed out to them that the reason I was a good story-teller was because I had been born before the days of television. I think there might be some truth in this, when I was a lad we spent time telling each other stories, many of them were downright lies but it was entertaining and passed many a happy hour.

I asked Fred about a story I had heard about Jacky Waterworth and a boxing match at the White Lion in Earby and here’s what he said: “Well It were Sammy Cragg and Jacky what were fighting. Sammy were a bit of a character, he’d been taken prisoner twice in t’war you know and escaped and that sort of thing and he were a bit of a boxer. Well, I'm saying a bit of a boxer, he’d be as good as owt there were in Earby. They arranged this fight 'cause Jacky fancied his self as a boxer, so they had it set out up in the top room at the pub, nobody ever went in the top room in them days. Eventually it gets out there’s going to be this boxing match. They had all the floor chalked, it were only oilcloth on the floor and they had it chalked like a ring and they were all the way round. And what did they call the fella? [Fred was trying to remember Stuart McPherson who did all the boxing commentaries on the wireless] There were a fella there wi’ a microphone and nowt attached to it, just the microphone. Anyway he were a real good commentator and he's sending this to the BBC - Jacky thought it were on BBC. And when they went into the corner you know for break, they daubed lipstick on Jacky’s gloves and then when they went in Sammy let him hit him, you know, all red on his face you know. And they were shouting “Give ower Jacky! Tha’s going to kill him!

Jacky's preening his self and he give him another and Cragg ‘ud go on the floor for about seven you know and this fella’s commentating just to perfection. And Jackie went into his corner again “Tha’rt doing well Jacky, keep it up, there’s nobody ever knocked him out afore.” “I’ll knock him out, I’ll knock him out!” All lipstick again tha knows and he's covered in blood is Sammy and Jacky’s knocking him down two or three times, just managing to get up in time you know. And then when he’s in his corner, Jacky's sat there, doesn’t ail a thing you know and they’re wafting Sammy and massaging him and rubbing him and giving him smelling salts. Then when they thought he’d had enough like Sammy just give Jacky a belt, about first time he’d hit him you know, he didn't hit him too hard but he'd had enough had Jacky when he did. [Fred nearly chokes laughing] So he stopped the fight then did the referee. And he got his photo taken did Jacky. [The picture was in the pub for a long time afterwards, Jackie in shorts far too big for him.] And then they arranged a return match and I think the police must have got to know sommat about it and he daren’t let ‘em have another do daren’t Sam Taylor, he were the landlord. You know it were, what would you call it? An exhibition or sommat and he weren’t licensed, so it didn’t come off again. But Jackie thought he were doing well and it were a real good show you know, if you'd have given a bob entrance money which were a fair good do then you'd have said I’ve getten a good bob's worth.”

Later I remembered the sequel to the great Waterworth v. Cragg fight at the White Lion. It appears that Jacky was convinced he was a champion and for weeks afterwards anyone in the know would reckon to be frightened of him if they met on the street, they would cross the road or hide in shop doorways. This was alright until Jacky met a bloke one day who didn’t know about his fearsome and entirely undeserved reputation. Jacky tried to face him down and ended up getting a severe beating. He modified his behaviour after this salutary incident.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

CHAPTER 4: HOW THE MILL WORKED

The heart of Bancroft was the weaving shed which held over 1200 looms. In later years I interviewed a man called Victor Hedges who used to be a senior partner in the accountants Proctor and Proctor of Grimshaw Street Burnley. They specialised in managing shed companies for the shareholders and Victor knew as much about the practical economics of the weaving trade as any man alive. He said that a ‘thousand loom shop’ which was the description for a shed like Bancroft was the most profitable unit. The late George Forrester Singleton, founder of G F Singleton of Blackburn, industrial estate agents, valuers and auctioneers who are still in business today told me the same thing. If you look at the records of the individual manufacturers who were tenants in the shed companies you’ll find that many of them have multiples of 400 looms. This was related to the shed size, a standard 1200 loom shed could be easily divided into three units of 400 looms each. Each unit needed one tape-sizing machine to process the warps, one loomer to prepare the warps for the looms and one cloth-plaiting and inspection machine in the warehouse to deal with production. Bancroft never ran as ‘room and power’ but the same rules applied, 1200 looms, three tape-sizing machines, three loomers and three cloth plaiting machines. The rule of thumb for sizing the engine was that half a horse power was needed for every loom so a 600hp engine was sufficient. In practice, with 1200 looms it would be slightly overloaded because of other demands besides the weaving shed but one of the virtues of these engines was that they were built with plenty of capacity for overload. It was quite normal for a 600hp engine to run happily at 750hp as long as was necessary.

The weavers were the most important resource needed to run the shed. When Bancroft first started in 1920 the standard number of looms for each weaver was four, so 1200 looms required 300 weavers. To supply them with warps you needed three tapers, three loomers doing nothing but preparing warps for the looms by fitting the healds and reeds (we’ll explain these later). Once you had warps you needed weft for the shuttles. In 1920 this was purchased shuttle ready from the spinners and was delivered in big basketwork skips or sometimes wooden weft boxes. The yarn packages were then distributed directly to the weavers. This changed later on and we will come to that but in 1920 weft direct from spinner to shuttle was standard practice. 1200 looms needed attention to keep them going and this was the job of the overlookers, more commonly called tacklers. It varied from mill to mill but each tackler was responsible for between 100 and 150 looms depending on the type of loom and the cloth being woven. In 1920 I think Bancroft had ten tacklers. In the warehouse there were three men dealing with the cloth as it came out of the shed and managing goods in and out. Down in the engine house there was the engineer who was responsible for running the boiler, engine and all the transmission shafts in the mill. He had a firebeater (the name we gave the stoker) who managed the boiler. In the office there were two men, an office manager and his assistant. There was also a weaving manager who had a roving brief, it was his job to liaise between the shed and the office and generally supervise the running of the mill. At Bancroft in the latter days we had a director visit us once or twice a week, in 1920 there would be a director there every day perhaps doubling as weaving manager. There would also be a Manchester Man who spent most of his time in Manchester on the ‘change. That was the sum total of the workforce, over 330 people working together and turning out cloth as efficiently and quickly as conditions allowed.
One little story about mill management. A friend of mine from Nottingham, Robert Aram, once told me about a mill he knew that made lace. It was run by two brothers and they had an interesting filing system. The mail was opened each morning and sorted, anything that wasn’t an order, a cheque or an invoice was thrown in the bin. This worked well until they were taken over by Courtaulds, a large textile conglomerate. The new owners immediately installed a modern office system with a manager, secretaries, clerks and all the latest equipment. They went bankrupt within three years. I’m not saying that the office re-organisation was the reason for the failure but what it does flag up is that there is nothing more effective in the management of an enterprise than in-depth knowledge and experience. The two brothers may have looked dreadfully old-fashioned to the new owners but the fact was that they had managed the business well enough for it to be attractive to Courtaulds. I leave you to draw your own conclusions.
We’ve got an idea now about what went on inside Bancroft Shed. We need to look at each part of the mill in more detail now and put some flesh on the bones. Remember that what I am telling you is direct from my experience in the last six years of the life of the shed plus what my informants and other research threw up. Different mills varied in detail and procedures, what I will tell you is how we did things at Bancroft which was broadly typical of the industry.

Image

Bancroft tacklers in the warp preparation department, Coronation 1937. Back row, left to right: Harry Hartley, George Beaumont, Herbert Crow, Dick Smith and Bill Tomlinson. Front row, left to right: Levi Steele, Johnson Carr, Dick Lord, George Monks and Ted Burke.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

TEA BREAK: RECYCLING

Image

An old-fashioned rag and bone man in Salford in 1977. The only difference between him and the early men is that he has the luxury of rubber tyres on the wheels.

There was another common feature of life in the first half of the twentieth century, the rag and bone man. He almost always rode round sat on the front corner of a two wheeled cart drawn by a single horse shouting ‘any rag bone’ as he did his rounds. Fred said that the usual rag and bone chap when he was a lad in Earby was Paul Brydon from Barlick. He was well known in the district and was notable because he only had one leg. His yard was on Forty Steps at Barlick in the early days and later he had a ‘marine store’ on Commercial Street. The name rag and bone man is a good clue to their stock in trade. When Fred was talking about clothes he described how his mother repaired them until they had reached the end of their useful life. If they were still good but too small for her lads they were passed on to someone who could use them. If they were beyond this she cut off the buttons and saved them and when she had a bagful of rags she gave them to Paul Brydon when he came round. The usual trade item for the rags was a donkey stone. He would take bones as well because there was a market for these down in Staffordshire in the fine china trade where the bones were ‘calcined’, that is burned until they were brittle and then ground down and used as an additive to the clay for the very best bone china.

The rags were sorted into cotton and wool. The cotton rags went back to the condenser spinning industry where they were broken down in machines with spiked drums until they were reduced to the original fibres. This was mixed with waste thread from the mills and some new cotton and spun and woven into a cloth that was easily raised, that is, put through a machine that raised the nap. The classic end products from this branch of the industry were the dreaded yellow duster and winceyette. If you’ve ever had either, you were almost certainly using recycled rags. The wool went to Bradford and was broken down into fibres and used for cheap cloth and blankets in the ‘shoddy’ trade. Any waste that was left was sold as fertiliser to the agricultural industry and spread on the fields to improve soil quality.

The rag and bone chap would also take old household items but the main trade was rags, bones and scrap metal. I can remember these men coming round in Stockport when I was a lad. There was a family called Mather’s on Brinksway who hired out carts and horses and bought the collected material from their casuals. Donkey stones had largely gone out of fashion by then and the standard trade item was a paper windmill on a stick for the children. The bottom line is that the Paul Brydons and Mathers of this world were the precursor of the modern recycling industry. Nothing was wasted, there was an outlet for everything except the contents of the ash pit. This philosophy of recycling even extended to the clinker and ashes from the boilers in the mills. Clinker and ash was ground down in mortar pans with quicklime and water and produced a very durable slow-setting mortar. It had the great advantage that once mixed it would be usable for up to a week afterwards as long as it was ‘knocked up’ with additional water before use. In fact the re-worked mortar set better than the new. If you have a house built after about 1840 the grey mortar you can see between the stones or bricks is ash-lime mortar from this source. The flue dust that came out of the flues and chimney bottom had a different use, it was the ideal material for bedding stone flags on and right up to the end of weaving at Bancroft all the flue dust went for this purpose.

All of this is contrary to the usually accepted view that the early coal driven industries were dirty and produced enormous pollution. This is undoubtedly true in terms of air quality but underlying this fact is a huge culture of re-use of materials. The only thing that ever came out of the mills that was totally useless and went into landfill was ‘sweeps’. This was the dirty down and waste heavily contaminated with oil that was swept up in the mill. Everything else had a use, sometimes not entirely legal, look at any old hen pen or allotment and you can still find traces of weft boxes and heald staves. Fences were made and huts repaired with the larger pieces of wood, heald staves were ideal for plant supports and light repair jobs. The mill owners usually turned a blind eye to this export trade, the only exception was in the run up to November the Fifth when no wood was safe, bonfires had to be fed!

Even the droppings from the tradesmen’s horses were recycled. My mother used to send me out into the street with a fire shovel and a bucket to collect horse manure for the garden, it was a fine thing for the roses. There was one other advantage that didn’t become clear until the first Clean Air Acts were passed in 1956. Gardeners noted a big increase in blight and fungal diseases on roses and other plants and it took a while for them to realise that for over 100 years the atmospheric pollution from coal-fired boilers was acting as a very effective defence against these problems, every cloud has a silver lining. So, the stonework may have been black and respiratory diseases more common but the roses were doing very nicely thank you!

It’s not my intention to suggest that everything was spotless in Barlick and Earby but if we are going to look at the history of the time we should take note of the advantages of the system as well as the problems. One final thought about this, there was much more low level infection around, everybody ate a peck of dirt before they died. Modern researchers are beginning to suspect that this exposure to pathogens, debilitating and dangerous as it might have been, ensured that the survivors had wonderfully efficient immune systems. Excessive cleanliness could be bad for us…
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

CHAPTER 5: THE WEAVING SHED

By the time Bancroft shed was being designed in March 1914 by W M Atkinson of Colne the industry had 100 years of experience and a standard shed design had evolved. There were four masonry walls and the roof was built on a framework of cast iron girders weighing 150lbs to the foot length supported by cast iron pillars at regular intervals. These pillars had brackets on them for the shafting bearing boxes. There were also shafting brackets hung off the girders midway between each pair of pillars. The girders doubled as rain water troughs between each long narrow apexed roof, each length of which was blue slate on one side and glass supported by patent glazing on the other. To avoid direct sunlight and give even illumination for weaving the glass sections of the roof should face due north. In many sheds this wasn’t possible but at Bancroft the orientation of the site was such that it was a genuine north light roof. The shed was 200ft deep from front to back and 250ft wide. The floor was Rossendale stone flags. These were about four inches thick, heavier than a normal paving flag and they had another identifying feature, Rossendale stone doesn’t have a natural bed and so they had to be planed to a flat surface by machine, this gave them a ribbed face.

All the walls of the shed were whitewashed and the pillars painted brown on the bottom half and cream to the top with a green transferred floral frieze applied round the junction of the two colours. I know this was the colour scheme because they were never repainted during the life of the mill and were still the same when it was demolished 58 years later in 1979. The cast iron pillars were hollow to save metal but were perfectly adequate for their task.

Many early mills had gas lighting but as befits its modern status Bancroft started life with 110v direct current electric lighting from a large dynamo driven by the engine. There were some redundant glass batteries in the cellar when I was there and these used to be charged up during the day from the DC supply to give a source of electricity when the mill was stopped. The Nutter houses near the mill were wired to this supply for electric light and Ughtred once told me that it was his job to go round and collect the fee each Friday. The supply was changed to 440v three phase and 250v single phase in 1948 when the existing dynamo driven off the lineshaft was replaced by an alternator. The new shed lights were 150 watt Edison screw bulbs. There was a mains supply to the mill in its latter days but this only supplied electricity in the offices, engine house and some pilot lights scattered around the building.

The Lancashire looms were laid out parallel to the front mill wall in such a way that they were in pairs facing in towards each other forming the ‘weaver’s alley’ where the weaver operated the looms. Lines of shafting ran overhead along each double row of looms and drove them by means of leather belts from drums on the shafting to pulleys on the looms. There were sixteen of these cross shafts with two rows of forty looms on each. The looms were stopped and started individually by shifting the driving belt from a ‘fast’ pulley driving the loom to a ‘loose’ pulley which revolved freely without transmitting power. The belt guide that accomplished this change over was operated from a lever on the front of each loom. The long cross shafts over the looms were driven from bevel gears on the heavy lineshaft which ran from the engine house, through the warehouse and 200 feet up the side wall of the shed next to the boiler house on the other side. This wall was built three feet thick to support the weight of the shaft and gearing. The shaft was eight inches thick at the beginning of the run but reduced to four inches at its end. The end of the line shaft was extended through a hole in the back wall of the shed, this was standard practice in many mills as it allowed a useful sideline, a local builder could be allowed to site a mortar mill outside driven by the shaft. This gave an outlet for the ashes and clinker from the boiler furnaces because with the addition of lime and water they could be ground to make ash-lime mortar for bricklaying. This grey mortar was the standard for all building purposes from the days when ashes first became available until the mid 20th century when sand/lime/cement mortar became the accepted standard.

The shed was heated by ranges of two inch internal diameter steam pipe hung at about the ten foot level in a grid throughout the shed. You might wonder why these pipes were fixed like that as they would have been far more effective if placed near floor level. The idea was two-fold, to keep them out of the way of activities in the shed and most importantly, to avoid any direct heat on the warps because it was an advantage if they were slightly damp as this made them weave better. Many sheds had humidifiers fitted to raise the humidity but Bancroft, being sunk into the hillside, never needed these. I have evidence that Moss Shed in Barlick was so dry that they used to flood the floor with water at weekends in high summer. If a weaver had a susceptible warp they would drape a piece of damp cloth over the warp every night and over the weekends.

So, we have our weaving shed. An enormous well-lit open space crammed with a forest of shafting and belts and 250 feet long rows of black framed cast iron looms weighing half a ton each. There were two things about the space which were striking, the first is the fact that it appeared to be almost monochrome. The most striking colours were the brown wood of the loom slays and picking sticks and an occasional cardigan hung on the back of a weaver’s chair at the end of her set of looms. Under the Factory Acts every weaver had to have a chair and they used this and a small box as their personal space, they all had a mug for brewing up, tea and sugar, perhaps a magazine and very often a cardigan for use when the shed was a bit chilly. The only other personal touch was the occasional pinup stuck on a pillar, some of these from WW2 survived until the mill was demolished. The other distinguishing feature of the shed was the noise it made when all the looms were running. A weaving shed in full song is a noisy animal, the roar would be disconcerting to anyone not used to it. None of the weavers wore ear defenders and many had a low level of hearing loss after years of exposure. Many thousands of pounds were spent on experiments to lessen the noise but all of them failed and right to the end of the industry the Lancashire loom made as much noise as it did when it was first invented. There was one small consolation, the noise was low frequency and nowhere near as damaging as modern high speed looms so it wasn’t as bad as some would like to portray it. However, it made communication in the shed by normal speech almost impossible. The weavers found a way round this, they used to ‘mee maw’ to each other. This was using exaggerated lip movements with no sound so they can lip-read each other. If a weaver wanted to say something privately to another weaver she would place her mouth very close to her friend’s ear so nobody could see her lip movements. If I wanted to spread a message round the shed, say if I was stopping early for some reason, all I had to do was go to the door of the shed, mee maw my message to the first weaver inside the door and before I had walked back to the engine house everyone in the shed had the message. There was also the smell, a pleasant mixture of oiled leather, linseed oil and the almost indefinable smell of the sized warps.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

The weavers in 1920 were mostly women but there was always a scattering of men. This applied equally in the 1970s when I was there. The weaving shed is often cited as one of the first workplaces where there was equality between the sexes. This is true in that the wage scale was identical for men and women, however there were always the hidden undercurrents. The Weaver’s Union never had the same power as those catering for other workers in the mill like the tacklers, clothlookers, loomers and twisters because these higher grades were always men. This meant that the wage, though equal was low. Don’t worry about the names of the different skills, by the time we have finished you will have a pretty good idea of who they were and what they did. The weavers were also subject to more discipline, some of it overt but much of it buried in the system. Weavers were responsible for any faults in the cloth they wove and the amount of waste they made in the course of weaving. Let’s take these one at a time.

The ultimate quality of the cloth a weaver made was a product of yarn quality, cloth construction and well-maintained looms driven at a steady speed. Each cloth had instructions specific to its manufacture and these were stated on the card that accompanied the weaver’s warp into the shed when the loom was ‘gaited’. (This was when the tackler installed a new warp and set it up ready for weaving) Terms used and well understood by the weaver were ‘pickfound’ which meant that when a shuttle ran out half way across the piece the weaver had to find the pick end and insert the new shuttle in the same place so as to give the appearance of a continuous length of weft with no double threads. It was a given that the weaver would cut any loose tags of yarn off close to the cloth. Other instructions on the card would tell the weaver to pay particular attention to setting on the loom so as to avoid ‘stopping and starting’ marks. They did this by controlling the speed of the slay movement by holding the wooden ‘hand shelf’ as the loom was starting and stopping. Some cloths had to have a coloured thread inserted at regular intervals and in some mills weaving specialised cloths gold wire had to be woven in. I’ve never seen this done and have often wondered how the gold was accounted for. I have been told that the weaver had to buy the wire herself but I don’t see how they could afford this. The bobbin of wire was held in a very small shuttle and this had to be substituted for the regular shuttle for one pick of the loom which of course took time. Each finished piece of cloth had to be marked with the weaver’s loom number and this was usually done with black wax crayon. Some customers demanded that the number be sewn in so that finishing processes like bleaching and dyeing didn’t destroy the mark. This was usually paid for as an extra by the weaving firm but in hard times it had to be done as part of the job. This ‘sewing in’ caused a strike at Brook’s Brothers Westfield Shed in the 1930s. (The weavers lost.)

There were other ways in which the weaver could be made to work harder for his or her wage. Weaving cloth demands a constant supply of fresh weft packages for the shuttle. In some mills weft carriers were employed to do this but at Bancroft the weavers always carried their own weft from the warehouse. In the early days of the industry weavers had to carry their own pieces out as well but later on cloth carriers were employed. A Lancashire loom produces ‘dawn’ when it is running. This is cotton fibres rubbed off the yarn by the action of the loom which build up like cotton wool which is a fire risk and also makes the looms inefficient. The weavers were responsible for sweeping their own looms and alleys as long as there was a warp in the loom. There was a dedicated loom sweeper, always a man, and he would thoroughly sweep a loom and oil it when it was waiting for the tackler to come and install a new warp.

There were often faults that occurred due to a warp thread breaking or a malfunction in the running of the loom causing multiple warp thread breakages. An ‘end down’ was the weaver’s responsibility. They all had their own tools, a small drawing in hook (like a very fine button hook), a pair of tweezers with flat jaws and a sharp spike on the other end and a pair of small sharp scissors. They could quickly repair a broken end and get weaving again. A small multiple breakage caused by a shuttle running badly was called a ‘trap’. In many sheds there were ‘trap-hands’ who did nothing but repair traps for the weavers so that they could keep the rest of their looms running. Bancroft never had trap hands, the weaver had to repair all the broken ends herself. If it was a large trap and she had a sympathetic tackler with time on his hands he would repair it for her. A larger number of ends down (typically over thirty) was called a ‘smash’ and was usually caused by a failure in the timing of the loom. This was always a tackler’s job and in a very bad case the warp would be cut out and taken upstairs to be loomed again in the warp preparation department as this was the fastest way of repairing it. Everybody hated smashes. (The spinning industry had the same problem and a catastrophic breakage of all the ends in a mule was called a ‘sawney.)

This wasn’t the end of the weaver’s burdens. There was ‘time cribbing’ which was the practice of starting the engine slightly early and stopping late. Only a fraction of a minute but it all added up. Every shed had at least one clock on the wall, clearly visible to all the weavers. Bancroft had two, one over each exit to the warehouse. In some sheds the clocks were adjusted to run slow and corrected each day when the weavers weren’t there. This could gain an extra five minutes a day. The unions were very hot on time stealing and if it was proved the management always retracted because there was no defence.

A weaver was judged on the quality and quantity of cloth they produced. In 1920 the system of paying the weavers their wage was for the tackler to come round with the wages in small tins in a tray divided by wood strips and numbered. These trays were made up in the office according to the weaver’s production on ‘making up day’, usually a Thursday. This meant that a tackler knew exactly how much each weaver was making and here’s the clever bit, a proportion of the tackler’s wage was dependent on the production from his set of looms. This was an incentive to him to do his job well and keep his looms in good order but it was also an opportunity for him to identify the worst earners, chide them for being slack or in the worst cases get them sacked and replaced by a better weaver. In some sheds there was a board on the wall showing who the best and worst weavers were. If your name was up on that board as a low performer the message was clear, improve or you were out. It was very easy for a tackler to ensure that a weaver had bad production figures and many weavers suffered dismissal simply because they got on the wrong side of their tackler. I have heard of cases where this included refusing sexual favours.

Then there was the oppression of the clothlooker in the warehouse. In 1920 they had a very strong hold over the weavers because until they approved a piece it didn’t count towards the weekly wage. All waste had to be brought into the warehouse and weighed before being booked against the weaver’s name. If your proportion of waste was higher than average you could be called up into the office and reprimanded. This could have an interesting effect on the foul drains of the mill. If a weaver had too much waste they would secrete it about their person and flush it down the toilets. Many a drain was blocked in this way and Harold Duxbury once told me it was a common cause of call-out to the mills. In my day I had a brief period when I had the same trouble but that was due to the popularity of paper disposable knickers. Cloth faults, oil marks, loose tags or any other blemish could also result in a reprimand and of course, frequent reprimands meant that your days were numbered.

There was the ultimate time discipline of engine stop and start times. The whole system of management in the mill was dedicated to getting as much production out of the looms as possible. Jim Pollard told me that in the early days the management were looking for 95% efficiency and this could easily be checked by estimating the number of picks each week. A ‘pick’ was the passage of the shuttle through the loom and back. One of the ploys they used to ensure the least downtime was to make use of ‘tramp weavers’. Tramp weavers were itinerant weavers who for a variety of reasons didn’t want or couldn’t stick to a regular job. They were usually very good workers, if they weren’t they would never be picked out. At starting time in the morning there would be a line of tramp weavers in every warehouse in Barlick waiting for work. The tacklers would go in the shed and stand by their sets waiting for the engine to start. If a set of looms wasn’t manned when the shafting started to turn they went into the warehouse, picked a tramp weaver they knew to be proficient and set them on that set of looms for the day. If the unfortunate weaver turned up, perhaps after over-sleeping, he or she was sent home and lost a day’s wage. Tacklers also timed their weaver’s toilet breaks, Jim Pollard told me about an old male weaver he once had who kept a tin next to his looms to relieve himself in and he emptied it at break time. I’ve seen weavers as late as the 1970s who were stricken with cystitis and the doctor who attended one lass who passed out from this cause told me that one of the chief causes was not going to the lavatory when she wanted to. It was no coincidence that she was the most productive weaver in the shed. She wasn’t missing toilet breaks in the 1970s because of coercion but because her nature was to keep going and not waste time. If I’m building up a picture of a hard and very closely regulated life I’m doing a good job. No other section of the workers was regulated and driven so much as the weavers. Much of this was ultimately due to the fact they were mostly women.

Now here’s the strange thing about all this. I have never met a weaver who didn’t enjoy working in the shed. If you asked them why they should put up with such lousy conditions, long hours, hard work and low wages they always cited the friendly atmosphere. I have heard weavers in the latter days refer to Bancroft as a holiday camp. Of course, even the most enthusiastic had bad days but on the whole they all enjoyed it. I’ve thought a lot about this and I think the main factor was that they could see and measure the fruits of their labours by watching the cloth rolling out from under the shuttle. There was also the very short chain of command, they were in constant contact with their immediate supervisors. It was all a human scale endeavour producing a finished product that they understood perfectly.

We need to say something about safety and the dangers of working in the shed. When people with modern expectations look at the weaving shed through their frame of reference they are horrified by the forest of unprotected belts, the violent movement of the picking sticks and slays, the unprotected gearing on the looms and the number of trip hazards and heavy weights that had to be lifted. In 1974 when the administrative boundaries were changed we ceased to be the responsibility of the Yorkshire Factory Inspectorate based in Leeds and came under Quay Street in Manchester. A young inspector arrived unannounced one day from Manchester and was horrified by everything he saw from the flailing con-rods of the engine to the belts in the shed. He went away muttering that he would have to consult with his superiors. He had never seen a shaft and belt driven factory in his life. Luckily, his superior Mr W E G Greville was a very experienced man and was delighted when he heard that he once more had a proper steam-driven shed under his care. He brought a gaggle of his young inspectors up to Barlick for a visit and educated them in what a ‘proper’ factory used to look like. He asked two questions, first how many accidents were in the official Accident Book and second, how long did I think the mill would run before closing. I showed him the accident book, nothing in there but minor cuts and grazes and I estimated that we might last for another year or so. He told me and his young workers that the mill was perfectly safe because the workers all knew the hazards and could protect themselves. In theory we were illegal but in practice we were safe and he was going to do nothing to make an already precarious situation worse for the management. What a sensible man, and what a pity there is so little of this pragmatic decision-making about nowadays. He was definitely not a Jobsworth.

We’ll leave our weavers now even though there is much more to tell. Some of this will become apparent as we look at the other departments in the mill. The key thing to grasp is that the weavers were extraordinarily skilled workers. This was concealed partially by the fact that they were so numerous but even more so by their gender. After all, how could a woman be so skilled when everyone knew they were the weaker vessel…
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Tizer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 18909
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 19:46
Location: Somerset, UK

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Tizer »

I've just posted elsewhere on the OG forums to tell members about a very good online bookshop I've discovered which sells second-hand books on all things mechanical: LINK
Nullius in verba: On the word of no one (Motto of the Royal Society)
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

TEA BREAK: BATH NIGHT
Fred and I got talking about what life was like at home in Lincoln Road Earby. I asked him about children standing at the table for meals and here’s what he had to say: “Well when we were little I can remember there were a little high chair and me mother used to lift me into that and I sat up to table in that and me brother used to be stood at side of me because he were a bit bigger. But he were stood on a little buffet and as I got older I can remember he could just make a do without. I'd to stand on the buffet then, they did away wi’ the high chair.” He said he stood for his meals until he was about ten or eleven years old. Other people have told me that they stood until they started work but Fred got a seat at table before he went half-timing at twelve years old.

Fred remembered a household where there was a slight variation on this theme: “I used to go to one of me father’s cousins, and he had six youngsters, there wouldn't be ten years in all the lot and they had a table on their own. Father and mother sat at one table and all these, they were round this table and the mother served ‘em all and then she came and served father and her and they daren’t say anything or move. When the father and mother had finished, she sided their plates and then went and give youngsters their second round of pudding or sommat like that. When the father and mother had had their pudding they'd say right and the kids would say thank you very much, please may we leave the table. And that were it then.”

I’ve come across lots of instances of these practices and they seem to have been fairly general at the time. I suppose it was a way of reinforcing the hierarchy in the house and maintaining discipline. Arthur Entwistle suggested that some children were marched to the table at meal times and he suspected it was something to do with Teutonic influence from the Royal Family. I’m always reminded of the old stand-up desks at Bancroft, in the early twentieth century clerks in offices stood up to their work at high desks. This is why our common perception of people in offices of a slightly later period has them all sat on high stools, which were needed because the old desks were still in place and were too high for a normal chair. Many a film-maker has made the mistake of putting Bob Cratchitt on a high stool when he should really have been standing. Winston Churchill used to do a lot of his writing at a stand-up desk.

I told Fred about delivering straw to Dales farms as late as the 1960s where the farm men were seated at a separate scrubbed table while the family had a table cloth. Ted Waite once told me that when he worked for William Taylor at Friar’s Head at Winterburn they used to bake two sorts of pies, one with sugar in for the family and one without for the men. The ones with sugar in had pastry crosses on the lids. I’ve often wondered whether this was the origin of pie decoration.

This conversation got us to talking about the Clark family at Seat House near Eshton, I used to pick their milk up at one time and had always remarked on what an old-fashioned set-up it was. The house was stone at the bottom and wood at the top and faced directly onto the yard. Fred surprised me by saying that the old lady who lived next door to him on Spring Terrace at the time had married one of the Clark brothers but he was killed when he was thrown off a horse at Leyburn. This connection led to Fred’s mother, Elizabeth, going with Mrs Clark to visit at Seat House and she got to know Eric Clark, one of the sons. This led to an arrangement between Eric and the farm man from Seat House and the Inman family. I’ll let him describe it:

“There were him and a farmer’s man, similar to Eric, two big young fellas. Well they'd no bath then at Seat House and every Friday they used to come to Earby, they had a motor-bike, and Eric went next door to Mrs. Clark’s for a bath and the farmer’s man came here for a bath. ‘Cause it were one of them do's, they were going dancing, and if same as Eric had his bath and he’d to have his bath and all, well there were a lot of time wasted. So me mother says “Oh you mun come and have one at our house.” And so Eric says to me dad, “You're interested in rabbiting aren't you Mr Inman?” He says “Yes” Eric says “Come over to our place. We’ve got plenty but if I aren’t about, get me dad to write you a paper out, you know, that you've got permission.” “Aye, alright.” So we went, it were one September me father and me went, I think we got thirty and we weren’t a reight long while of getting these thirty. So when we were coming away me dad says “We'll have ten apiece and leave them ten.” So he says to Eric, “We’ve getten thirty Eric. We'll leave you ten and take ten apiece.” Eric thought that were a good do because I think they got a shilling each for ‘em, somebody picked them up. Eric says “It's a good do is that Mr. Inman.” So next time he came for a bath he says, “Well, I don't like telling you but me father says “Is that all they've left, ten? They’re not coming no more, they should have taken ten and left twenty.” So Eric says “I'm sorry about it.” Fred and I laughed about this because it was a good example of how hard and tight those old Dales farmers were no matter how well they were doing or how much money they had.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 90859
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: STEAM ENGINES AND WATERWHEELS

Post by Stanley »

CHAPTER 6: THE WAREHOUSE. TACKLERS, CUTLOOKERS AND THE OFFICE.

You could be forgiven for wondering why I started my description of Bancroft in the weaving shed. Partly it’s because I have such respect for the weavers in general and the ladies in particular, they were the best work mates anyone could have, and partly because the weavers were the heart of the enterprise. Every other department in the mill was dedicated to one thing, keeping the looms running and producing saleable cloth. So, it’s logical to start in there and move into the warehouse which was another of the weaver’s haunts, they all had to come in here for weft and their cloth all passed through here.

The warehouse was as long as the weaving shed, 250 feet from the engine house at the north end to the office at the other end. It was 65 feet wide and 15 feet from the concrete floor to the ceiling. This ceiling was supported on cast iron pillars with steel cross beams and was formed by the underside of the double-boarded floor of the second storey. There were sixteen large windows in the east wall fronting on the yard and two loading bays with roller shutter doors. Despite the number of windows the warehouse was always a gloomy place because some of the windows were blocked by the two tackler’s cabins, the workshops and store rooms used by the loom overlookers. It was a bit brighter at the south end where the clothlookers lived because there were six more large windows in that wall. Because of Bancroft’s situation on the outskirts of the town, all the windows looked out onto green fields and hills with trees, hedges and grazing animals. Definitely not your archetypal ‘dark satanic mill’.

Image

See what I mean? If you looked out through the loading bay door you saw green fields, trees and animals grazing. Lovely.


Leaving aside the tackler’s cabins, we’ll come to them later, apart from the south end where the cloth plaiting machines stood because of the good light, the whole of the warehouse was given over to storing weft boxes, skips and anything bulky that didn’t belong anywhere else. Near the office end were the stacks of neatly plaited, tied and labelled bundles of finished cloth waiting for onward dispatch.

In the latter days of the mill I was intrigued by the piles of boxes and weft skips which hadn’t been used for years, they just sat there gathering dust. Every one was marked in large letters with the name of the spinning mill from whence it came. You may have noticed in your travels around south east Lancashire that all the spinning mills have their names prominently displayed on the towers and chimneys. This was an aid to finding them but also because a short and easily recognizable name was handy for painting on the weft containers. Bee, Elk, Manor, and many more. I knew that many of the names I could see on the boxes and skips in Bancroft warehouse were those of mills which had long since closed down. I asked Sidney Nutter in the office about this one day and he said that because Bancroft had paid a deposit on these containers many years ago they were still on the company’s books as an asset and if they were destroyed they would reduce the value of the company. I kid you not, this clutter of boxes and skips was a phantom asset and as such was sacrosanct.

Image

The two cloth plaiting machines at the office end of the warehouse. They were originally rope-driven but I converted them to electric motors after the drive rope from the shed broke.

Up at the south end there was an entrance to the office next to two large cloth-plaiting machines. These were combined inspection and measuring tables with a cloth folding mechanism underneath. The wooden roller on which the cloth was wound as it came off the loom was mounted at the front of the machine, threaded through the mechanism and when the clothlooker pressed a pedal at the front the cloth was pulled off the roller, traveled flat across the inspection table passing through the Trumeter which measured it and into the folding or plaiting section below where it was folded back and forth a yard at a time. When the piece had gone through the machine, the clothlooker took the yard square folded pile of cloth to the packing table, folded it over once onto itself and tied it up tightly into a bundle with strong string. A corner was pulled out of the centre of the bundle and the cloth details written on it for identification. All the cloth made for one order was in one pile and it sat there until road transport arrived to lift it and take it to the customer. Cloth was loaded by hand a bundle at a time and stacked on the wagon flat by the driver. I never saw a covered van used for this job because the same wagons that delivered the taper’s beams and weft took the cloth away and a box van would have hampered the loading of these.



By the time I was at Bancroft the clothlookers had lost much of their power. The only things they could pull a weaver up on were faults. In 1920 it was completely different. The clothlooker, like the tackler, had the power to make a weaver’s life a misery. Many a time they worked in collusion with the stricter tacklers and between them they could get anyone sacked if they wanted to. The clothlookers kept an account for each weaver in 1920, booking in each piece as it came off the looms. Making up day was Thursday and any piece that wasn’t in the warehouse by going-home time on that day didn’t get included in the wage. This could have serious consequences on the piece rate system. Suppose a weaver had four bad warps in her looms that were causing her a lot of trouble with ends going down and other weaving faults. It was quite possible to end the week without a single piece of cloth delivered into the warehouse and this meant that there was no wage, nothing at all. I think you can realise how dispiriting that could be. Of course it might mean that the following week he or she could have up to ten pieces off and a bumper pay cheque but that didn’t help with the groceries or the rent that week.

Weavers are a resourceful bunch… When a weaver’s warp is made on the taping machine a hammer drops at the end of each piece length onto the web of yarn as it passes over a pad soaked in black ink. This puts a ‘cut mark’ on the warp which can be seen in the woven cloth and this is the signal for the weaver to cut that length of cloth out and start with a new empty wooden roller on the front of the loom. Suppose it was Thursday and you were nearing the end of a cut. You could see the cut mark coming up in the warp at the back of the loom but by experience you knew it was five or six layers down and you weren’t going to reach it before the engine stopped that day. What you did was wet the warp where the ink stain was and dab at it until you had brought the mark up to the top layer. Weave that through to the front, cut it out and send it into the warehouse. Problem solved, another six shillings on that weeks’ wage. Of course the clothlooker would pick up on this under measurement but it was one of the few circumstances where a lenient view was taken because the mill lost nothing, the extra turns would be on the next piece that came off the loom.

In later years, after WW2 the system changed. ‘Pick clocks’ were mounted on each loom and the price paid was so much for every 100 picks and the weaver was paid off the readings on the clocks taken every Wednesday to be the basis of making up day in the office on Thursday. In addition the weaver was paid a fall-back amount each week in addition to the pick rate. It always amused me that because of the way the system had been brought in the weavers called the pick rate the ‘basic’ and the fall back the ‘bonus’ when I would have thought it was the other way round. The weaving manager read the pick clocks and the weaver’s wage was paid in individual envelopes at the office on Thursday so the tacklers had no direct information as to how individuals were performing. Of course they still got to know but by then the production element of the tackler’s wage had been abolished and so the pressure came off the weavers.

Image

The Orme pick clock. The weaver's friend!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!
Post Reply

Return to “Local History Topics”