Hampshire Waterways

Background

John Rennie (1761-1821)

George O'Brien Wyndham, 3rd Earl of Egremont FRS (1751 - 1837)

Portsmouth has been a naval port since before the reign of Henry VIII but until the second half of the 18th century its facilities were rather poor. An unsuccessful attempt was made in 1641 to obtain an Act of Parliament to build ‘a river’ for boats and barges to join the headwaters of the Rivers Wey and Arun. However, there was still a need for movement of naval stores and ammunition between London and Portsmouth. It wasn’t until after major improvements commenced in 1761 that Portsmouth became regarded as Great Britain’s principal naval port.

Britain and France had been at war since 1793 and, despite a break in hostilities in 1802-3, the wars continued until the defeat of Napoleon in 1815. This had an effect on shipping in the English Channel as French privateers were liable to capture or even sink English vessels. In addition, the passage through the Strait of Dover, past the Goodwin Sands and around North Foreland could be hazardous in the boats of the time. These factors gave impetus to consideration of the development of an inland waterway route between the south coast and the Thames that could help avoid these perils.

In 1802 the London and Portsmouth Canal Company was set up and John Rennie, a leading civil engineer, was asked to survey a route. He came up with two versions of a scheme for a circuitous 100 mile route from the Croydon Canal but neither connected the city to Chichester Harbour and no further action was taken. In 1805 Chichester Corporation asked Rennie for a more local solution and he made two proposals but, although the Corporation resolved to take things forward, nothing went any further.

In 1810, Rennie was promoting an adaptation of earlier schemes as the Grand Southern Canal to take Thames barges from the River Medway at Tonbridge to Portsmouth but the bill for it failed to pass through Parliament as a result of opposition from powerful landowners. In 1811 there were further proposals for a canal from Chichester to the Harbour but nothing concrete resulted.

Establishing the project

The end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815 led to an economic downturn. However, the idea of the London and Portsmouth Canal was not totally dead. By 1816 Rennie was referring to the Portsmouth and Arun Canal: a cut down version of the London and Portsmouth. The Wey & Arun Canal opened in 1816 and was the final link in a waterway route from London to Arundel and Littlehampton on the South Coast. All that was needed was a canal connection to Portsmouth with a navigable link to Chichester. In Rennie’s report of January 1816 to the subscribers of the Portsmouth and Arun which would, he believed, give them “an ample return” on their speculation.

The construction of the waterway was strongly supported by William Huskisson, at that time MP for Chichester, and the 3rd Earl of Egremont. The canal was authorised by an Act of Parliament in July 1817. This authorised a canal from the River Arun near Ford to Chichester Harbour at Salterns near Birdham with a branch from Hunston Common to Chichester. Powers were also granted to make and dredge channels (or ‘bargeways’) through the tidal areas of Chichester, Langstone and Portsmouth Harbours. From Langstone Harbour at Milton on Portsea Island a further canal was to be dug towards Portsmouth.

The Act also authorised the Cosham Canal to overcome concerns of the Admirality over the effects on tidal levels in Portsmouth Harbour if the Portsbridge Creek was to be made navigable. The Act gave the name of the waterway as the “Portsmouth & Arundel Navigation”. Usually, it was and is referred to as the “Portsmouth & Arundel Canal” but sometimes the company used the name “Portsmouth & Arundel Canal Navigation”.

At the company’s first general meeting in August 1817, the management committee was formed consisting of a group of noblemen, landowners, attorneys and farmers rather than men of business. The members had little or no experience of building a canal on this scale nor of canal trade. The one salaried executive was the clerk who acted as secretary to a body of, in today’s terminology, unpaid non-executive directors. The most influential member was George O’Brien Wyndham, 3rd Earl of Egremont who was the company’s largest shareholder.

To attract more investors, a document was circulated setting out the company’s trading expectations. It described the trade between Portsmouth, Chichester and London carried by land and sea during 1816. From this it was expected that half of the 80,000 tons would transfer to the canal and the income would exceed £10,000 providing shareholders nearly ten per cent per annum.

Before construction could begin, the rest of the estimated cost of construction £125,450 had to be raised; a sum of £24,200. This was achieved in January 1818. On 14 August 1818, Dyson & Thornton were contracted to actually build the navigation. Rennie was the Consultant Engineer to the project and he recommended that James Hollinsworth should be appointed as Resident Engineer.

Hollinsworth (1760s - 1828) was a stone mason who, despite some setbacks early in his career, became the trusted assistant of Rennie. He was appointed as Resident Engineer on a rather generous salary of £500 per annum plus a £50 annual accommodation allowance. The Resident Engineer’s tasks included directing and supervising the contractors’ work. He should also advise the management committee on progress of the work by attending all their meetings, pointing out the difficulties being met and how well the contractors were coping.

Construction

Construction started in 1818. Soon there were representations to enlarge the canal from Salterns to Chichester to take ships up to 100 tons. As this would require the depth of the canal to be greater than the 6 feet (1.8m) already authorised, a further Act of Parliament was necessary and this was obtained in 1819 also covering a number of other matters. Powers to build the Cosham Canal were repealed to be replaced by making Portsbridge Creek navigable. In addition, to take sea-going ships of up to 150 tons, the draught of the Portsea Canal was to be increased from 5 feet (1.5m) to 10 feet, the width increased from 40 to 60 feet (18.3m), and all bridges to be swivel (swing) bridges.

However, just seven months later, the company committee decided to make the Portsea Canal 12 feet (3.6m) deep, apparently in the belief that this would minimise the pumping needed to keep the canal topped up. Furthermore, they did not consult Rennie about the matter. When he found out, he was highly sceptical of the motive for spending such a large sum of money whilst falsely thinking water supply would be improved and money saved pumping less water.

In July 1818, Rennie placed an order with Boulton and Watt to design and supply the two steam engines and pumps for Ford and Milton. The steam engine at Ford began pumping water from the River Arun in August 1819 and the pump at Milton started trials in October 1820. There were restrictions on the times that the Ford pump could operate since it was pumping from the tidal River Arun. To minimise pumping salt water into the canal, it could only pump between two hours after high water and one hour after flood. Surprisingly, it seems that the Milton pump was allowed to pump sea water into the Portsea Canal.

On this waterway the term “Swivel Bridge” was used to mean “Swing Bridge” which was the more common name elsewhere. 21 cast iron swivel bridges were built by C H Tickell of Southampton. All were named after local landowners or leading supporters of the project. There were seven on the Chichester Ship Canal namely: Egremont, Casher, Cutfield, Dudley, Crosbie, Poyntz and Padwick. There were seven on the Portsea Canal with the remaining seven on the canal between Ford and Hunston Junction.

Hollinsworth seems to have had difficulty in deciding upon a method of deepening the channels through Chichester and Langstone Harbours. Traditionally, dredging was often accomplished by using large numbers of men during low neap tides standing in the water digging with shovels. But steam-powered bucket dredgers were being developed during the early 19th century - could the new technology be relied on? Certainly it was being used in Portsmouth Harbour by 1829.

However, as usual during such large projects, there were also various other unexpected difficulties encountered that needed solving by Hollinsworth. There is no record that his contract was renewed in December 1820 but he seems to have continued in post. However, he may have been paying less attention to his duties than he should. During the summer of 1820 he carried out a survey of the Arun Navigation and produced a design for the timber bridge to link Hayling Island to the mainland.

The canal company was authorised by Parliament to dredge channels to the north of both Thorney and Hayling Islands. Both of these islands were connected to the mainland by “wadeways” which were centuries-old hard-surfaced tracks which could be negotiated on foot or by horse drawn vehicles at low tide. However, the company wanted to dredge channels about three feet (0.9m) deep at low water but they had to provide bridges over these channels to maintain access to the islands. They proposed to bridge the channels only so that users would still have to use the wadeways for the remainder of the crossing.

The channel north of Thorney Island was never made navigable, probably as the cost of a bridge was considered to be too great. Instead boats passed to the south and west of the island. Barges made the passage from Birdham to Milton under tow from a primitive steam tug, the Egremont, and a favourable tide. The tug was scrapped in 1840.

The wooden Hayling Bridge that opened in 1824, seen looking north.

The canal from Salterns Lock at Birdham to Chichester Basin was officially opened on 9 April 1821. A trip was organised the following day for ladies and gentlemen to depart from the entrance to the Portsea Canal to Chichester and return. Three gaily adored barges were to be towed by a steam tug. But things did not go to plan. The procession left Eastney late, there were several delays en route and it was late afternoon when the tug ran aground about quarter of a mile from and in sight of Salterns Lock. The guests were unable to get to Chichester: the object of the trip. Meanwhile, a procession of pleasure craft and 12 laden barges did traverse the canal from Salterns to Chichester Basin.

The Portsea Canal was opened on 19 September 1822 and the barge canal from Hunston Junction to Ford on the River Arun was opened on 26 May 1823.

In 1824, built by a separate company, the 960 foot long timber bridge provided Hayling Island with its first permanent dry connection to Langstone, replacing the wadeway as the main link to the mainland. The wooden bridge was built on piles of African Oak and other timbers and had a 40ft swing section in the centre to allow for vessels to pass beneath. The 1824 bridge was described, in it’s time, as “One of the finest structure of the kind in the Kingdom”.

In more modern times, motor vehicles had to stop to pay a toll at the bridge, which could not take heavy loads. Such was the fragility of the construction that bus passengers were required to disembark and walk whilst the bus crossed the bridge unladen. Today Hayling is served by a single dry crossing to the mainland in the form of the modern road bridge. This two lane, concrete construction was opened in 1956, 5 months ahead of schedule and forms part of the A3023 to Havant.

The navigation company suffered from poor management and lack of financial control. The contractors’ accounts were queried and left unpaid, finally resulting in the contractors’s refusal to carry out remedial work.

Within a year or two, there were complaints on Portsea Island that water supplies were being contaminated by salt water pumped into the canal and the company had no money to put it right. The Portsea Canal was drained in 1827 and abandoned by 1830.

The tidal waterway known in the early 19th century as Portsbridge Creek is what makes Portsmouth lie on an island. This has been known by various names over the years: Portcreek, Ports Creek, Portsea Creek and Canal Creek. Portsea Creek appears to be the official name, but Ports Creek is usually used today.

To enable barges to access Portsmouth Harbour, the creek was widened, straightened and made navigable by the Portsmouth & Arundel Navigation company in 1830 after the failure of the Portsea Canal. It was estimated that this work would cost over £6,100.

It proved difficult to keep the creek clear for navigation and a canal called the Cosham Canal to provide an alternative route had been proposed in 1816 although the powers to build it were repealed in an Act of Parliament in 1818. The insolvent canal company abandoned the creek in 1838 when regular through traffic to London ceased. It should be noted that the creek has been modified a number of times since abandonment by the canal company. Further details can be found on this page of the Portrait.

The aftermath

As the canal historian P A L Vine wrote, “The Portsmouth & Arundel Canal was an extraordinary speculation and an ignominious failure.”

The sailing barge ‘Fanny’ under sail on the Chichester Canal at Hunston, c1905.

Intended as a key link in a through route to London via the River Arun Navigation, Wey & Arun Junction Canal, Godalming Navigation, River Wey Navigation and the River Thames, it was not a success. Built to safeguard coastal shipping from French privateers and the hazards of the Foreland passage, the outcome of Waterloo and the development of steam vessels transformed its prospects.

The inland journey from the Thames to Portsmouth was 115 miles and involved the passage of 52 locks. Only when there was sufficient water available and there were neither floods nor ice could the voyage be made in less than five days. But the London merchants, frustrated by the need to pay tolls to six different Navigations, continued to prefer the coastal route. One of the few regular through cargoes carried was gold bullion from Portsmouth to the Bank of England, with armed redcoat guards on the barges.

The Sussex section from Hunston to Ford saw little traffic and was effectively abandoned by 1847 when the canal had ceased to be used commercially and the railway from Shoreham to Portsmouth was fully opened. It is thought that the last boat passed through in 1856. Only the canal from Birdham to Chichester Basin remained in use.

In 1892, as part of the winding up of the Portsmouth & Arundel Canal company, the section between Birdham and Chichester was transferred to the Chichester Corporation. The last recorded traffic on the canal was in 1906. Chichester Corporation resolved to close and abandon their canal undertaking in 1928. In 1957, West Sussex County Council purchased the canal primarily to use some of it for road improvements which never came to fruition.

In the 1930s, the canal west of Cutfield Bridge was leased to the Chichester Yacht Company and after the County Council’s purchase the upper reach was leased to the Chichester Canal Angling Association.

in 1973, the Sussex Canal Trust was formed with the aim of restoring the whole canal. Half a mile of canal at North Mundham was restored but by 1977 the Trust became dormant. In 1979, the Portsmouth & Arundel Canal Society was formed to carry on the aims of the Trust. The Society took over the lease on the canal and together with the Angling Association began restoring the canal towards Hunston and then Crosbie Bridge. Eventually the canal society renamed themselves as the Chichester Ship Canal Trust.

The Sussex Industrial Archaeology Society (SIAS) has been interested in the canal, particularly east of Hunston. In 1982, Poyntz Swing Bridge broke which SIAS repaired and it was re-sited just outside the basin at Chichester on the foundations of the former Padwick Bridge which was officially opened in 1997. SIAS have investigated many sites especially east of Hunston and worked on the remains of swing bridges, in particular Hollinsworth and Stewart Bridges at Barnham.

The Chichester Ship Canal Trust and their partners have achieved much over the years. However, the two culverted bridges, Crosbie and Cutfield, are major obstacles to the further restoration of the Ship Canal to the sea.