(mainly prior to London & Birmingham Railway)
Cover from Early Railways 3 (Hatton Gallery, Newcastle-upon-Tyne)
| Early locomotive
history (mainly prior to London & Birmingham Railway) Cover from Early Railways 3 (Hatton Gallery, Newcastle-upon-Tyne) |
|
There is no problem in deciding when early locomotives begin, that is with Trevithick, although it is essential to note that locomotion was achieved on roads, both by Trevithick, and by others earlier. There is a further problem in that steam propulsion on water developed rather more rapidly than on land. The real problem is when to stop: the opening of the Stockton & Darlington Railway and the Rainhill trials were two key events. Dendy Marshall selected 1831 for his seminal work and this marks the main cut-off point. The real problem is that development on both the Stockton & Darlington Railway and the Liverpool & Manchester Railway continued for some time and it is more convenient to consider them herein. Niall Ferguson (Early Railways 3) extends the "early period" still further.
http://www.makingthemodernworld.org.uk/stories/the_age_of_the_engineer/01.ST.04/?scene=2
General works
Dendy Marshall,
C.F. History of the railway locomotive down to the end of the Year
1831. London: Locomotive Publishing Co., 1953. 271pp.
The chapters are as follows: Steam Power and its application to
locomotion; Richard Trevithick; Blenkinsop and Murray; Taylor Swainson; William
Chapman; William Hedley; William Brunton; William Stewart; George Stephenson;
Robert Stephenson and Co.; John M'Curdy; Robert Wilson; Timothy Hackworth;
Braithwaite and Ericsson; Timothy Burstall; John Urpeth Rastrick; Bury and
Kennedy; Neath Abbey; Rothwell and Hick; Goldsworthy Gurney; George Dodds;
Miscellaneous British Builders; Early attempts on the Continent; Marc Seguin;
The United States of America. The initial period is still (2007) one of
controversy as to who did what and when (Trevithick and Blenkinsop/Murray
fall outwith the controversy): it is "what happened next near the banks of
the Tyne". Dendy Marshall (page 83):
What seems to have happened, so far as we can tell, is as follows:
October, 1812. Hedley's attention first called to the subject.
Adhesion trials with the test carriage.
13 March, 1813: Patent. Hedley at loggerheads with Chapman.
'early' 1813. (ODH). The first engine, built by Waters.
Sept., 1813. George Stephenson started to build an engine. 2 ,
March, 1814? Puffing Billy' on four wheels; produced by the combined efforts
of Hedley, Foster and Hackworth, possibly assisted by Chapman.
25 July, 1814. (Wood). Stephenson's first engine was finished.
21 Dec., 1814 Chapman's second engine; on eight wheels.
early in 1815? Wylam engines put on eight wheels.
If the above chronology is approximately correct, two facts appear
to emerge:-
1. Chapman copied the Hedley design in his Lambton engine,
except the wheel arrangement; the quarrel having been made up.
2. The Wylam people used Chapman's design of the bogies.
Where ODH=Hedley, Oswald D. Who invented the locomotive
engine (Ottley 2812) and
Wood=Wood, Nicholas Practical treatise on rail-roads.
(Ottley 294)
Dendy Marshall,
C.F. Two essays in early locomotive history. London: Locomotive
Publishing Co., 1928.
Part I the first hundred railway engines; Part II. British locomotives
in North America. Cites Warren's Century of locomotive
building and Young's Timothy
Hackworth which receive the accolade of being "excellent books".
This work clearly formed the foundation for the later, much larger study
of locomotive history (ibid). The Introduction notes "even official publications
cannot be trusted implicitly".
Early Railways 3: papers from the Third International Railway
Conference; ed. Michael R. Bailey. Sudbury: Six Martlets, 2006.
Several of the papers relate to very early railways, that is long
before Trevithick, and even long before iron rails.
Scott, Andrew. 'First' impressions — some reflections on 2004, early railways' year of anniversaries: Keynote address. 3-7.
History
Lewis, M.J.T. Reflections on 1604. 8-22.
Early wooden waggonways, notably that organized by Huntingdon Beaumont to connect his coal pit at Wollaton, near Nottingham, to the River Trent, and those at Broseley in the Severn Gorge in Shropshire, and the subsequent spread of these technologies, especially to the North East. Also includes waggons (hund) on earlier systems in use in parts of Austria and Germany and imported into the Lake District, and later more advanced systems in Transylvania and Lower Hungary.
van Laun, John. New light on the wooden waggonways at Whitehaven harbour. 23-39.
Influence of Sir James Lowther (1674-1755) who encouraged Hennry Winship or Winshopp of Newcastle to develop a waggonway to replace packhorse transport from coal mines at HowGill, Saltom and Whingill to the improved harbour.
Goodchild, John. The Lake Lock Rail Road. 40-50.
In spite of the name it connected collieries near Flockton with the Aire near Stanley in what was the West Riding of Yorkshire, north of Wakefield.
Liffen, John. The iconography of the Wylam waggonway. 51-75.
Very important for images of the Puffing Billy and Wylam Dilly.
Mountford, Colin E. The Hetton Railway — Stephenson's original design and its evolution. 76-95.
Worked by a mixture of inclines, with stationary engines (notably at Warden Law) and locomotives.
MacDonald, Herb. The Cape Breton waggonways of the General Mining Association, 1830-1855. 96-117.
Coulls, Anthony. The Corris, Machynlleth & River Dovey tramroad. 118-25.
Development
Levitt, Alan M. How America discovered the railway. 126-52.
A paper in which it is difficult to follow the text for the weight of the footnotes: several methods are proposed, but William Strickland emeges as the major figure.
Withuhn, William L. Abandoning the Stourbridge Lion – business decision-making, 1829: a new interpretation. 153-64.
Stokes, Winifred. The importance of the northeast viewers in the development of early railways and locomotives. 165-75.
Nicholas Wood, William Hedley and John Buddle are the key figures in locomotive development.
Ferguson, Niall. Anglo-Scottish transfer of railway technology in the 1830s. 176-90.
Mechanical
Rees, Jim and Guy, Andy. Richard Trevithick and pioneer locomotives. 191-220.
Darsley, Roger. Some considerations on the origins of the chaldron waggon in the northeast of England. 221-41.
Hills, Richard L. The development of machine tools in the early railway era. 242-59..
Stresses that stationary engines and the development of iron rails, as well as the development of steam
Gomersall, Helen. The Round Foundry of Leeds. 260-9.
Mainly interested in the buildings, including those which have survived.
Bailey, Michael R.. Restaging the Rainhill Trials, learning from replicas. 270-1.
Lamb, Richard. Something of a Novelty. 272-83.
Davidson, Peter and Glithero, John. Analysis of locomotive performance. 284-99.
2002 trials staged at Llangollen: The replica Rocket out-performed its rivals: the replicas of Sans Pareil and Novvelty.
Lowe, James W. British steam locomotive
builders. 1975.
Lowe cites Dendy Marshall and includes most of the people/concerns
mentioned by him, but some, notably Gurney were excluded.
Mountford, Colin E. The Private Railways of County Durham.
Industrial Railway Society, 2004).
The first chapter (pp. 1-15) is devoted to early development of
locomotives, from Trevithick to Stephenson's for Killingworth. Further discussion
on the latter is given in pp. 137-139. It includes the latest therories about
the matter and, suggests a higher number of locomotive extant prior 1825
than previously published. Mountford discusses the tradition of locomotive
building at Killingworth and states that the preserved engine doesn't date
back to 1822 but to the 1850's under the original Stephenson design (information
suupplied by Guillermo Bas).
Rutherford, Micheal. Heroes, villains and ordinary men.
(Provocations/Railway reflections No. 10).
Backtrack, 1995, 9,
528-34.
Approaches to history, one of which that is very popular (biography)
concentrates upon individuals. Inevitably some important contributors fail
to receive adequate atention — others ensure that they get too much.
Considers sources: Dendy Marshall (which
is neither congratulated nor condemned by Rutherford: only its age is noted
— which in such a topic may be an asset), E.A. Forward (Trans. Newcomen
Soc), Samuel Smiles, Patents (those of Chapman, Trevithick and Hedley);
the contenders (William Hedley, Trevithick, Blenkinsop, Chapman, Brunton,
Timothy Hackworth and Jonathan Foster, most of whom pre-date George Stephenson.
Notes call by George Stephenson on son to assist in locomotive-building
enterprise. Considers locomotive remains: Puffing Billy and
Wylam Billy. Emphasizes that Hetton Colliery locomotive is an early
replica built by Sir Lindsay Wood, son of Nicholas Wood (collaborator with
Stephenson) in 1851/2. There is no adequate biography of Charles Beyer, nor
of Stanier, but Gresley and Bulleid are better served. There is a tendency
to over-play the significance of the CME (much development took place on
the LMS whilst Stanier was in India) Illus. (b&w): A pastiche of early
locomotives; Puffing Billy from nearside and offside; early view of
Hetton Colliery with Stephenson locomotives at work; Hetton Colliery shunter;
Beyer 0-6-0 made for the Shrewsbury and Hereford railway but sold to the
GWR before delivery; The Hetton Colliery shunter
Snell, J.B. Early
railways. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson, 1964. 128pp.
Quite a nice book, but it does not really belong here.
Snell, J.B. Mechanical
engineering: railways. London: Longman. 1971. 177pp.
Like the following book by Stead, Snell appears to fail to mention
Dendy Marshall yet lists his main work in his rather limited
bibliography.
Stead, Christopher. The birth of the
steam locomotive – a new history. Haddenham: Fern House, 2002.
115pp.
Main problem is that although the author is an expert in his own field
of ancient philosophy and early Christian doctrine, and should therefore
be able to know the prior literature he fails to note the existence of Dendy
Marshall (above) whilst he cheerfully cites
Clement Stretton without noting his
reputation. He also cites Snell's Early
railways without any real justification. Nevertheless, he does place
locomotion within the overall development of steam technology: furthermore,
it might stimulate someone to write a new overall history of steam locomotion
prior to 1840.
McGowan, Christopher The Rainhill
Trials: the greatest contest of industrial Britain and the birth of commercial
rail. London: Little, Brown, 2004. 380pp.
Reed, Brian. 150 years of British steam
locomotives. p. 21.
By good fortune the competition was won by the only locomotive whose
principles were straight away capable of the necessary further development.
If by some chance Sans Pareil had put up a better performance than
Rocket the judges would have been in a dilemma, for not only did Hackworth
fail to comply with the testing rules but his engine was heavier than the
prescribed maximum for four wheels. Moreover it did not have springs, and
to the springless condition were added vertical cylinders. Any development
of these principles was unthinkable, and Sans Pareil ideas already
were seen to be approaching obsolescence.
Novelty was a different proposition altogether. In it the new spirit
of speed was given full play, and in its first pre-official run it maintained
28mph for a full mile; but lightness also was a keynote, and that lack of
adhesion, plus the boiler type necessary to get it, were not suited for
development to the haulage of heavy trains. So easily was this recognised
that one admirer in 1830 asked if rack-and-adhesion mechanism could not be
put in, a remarkable suggestion for that time. The logical development of
Novelty would have been 'every vehicle with its own motive power'
– admirable if technology in carriage construction had been more advanced,
and one that would have brought a railway system different in almost every
respect from what did arise. For Rocket see below.
Restaged trials on Llangollen Railway in October 2002
The trials were restaged with replica locomotives on the Llangollen
Railway as part of a BBC Timewatch programme for televsion. See papers
by Bailey, Lamb and Davidson and Glitheroe in Early
Railways 3.
Barnes, Robin. Coalbrookdale & Penydarren revisited: a Bi-Centennial
note. Part 1. Bactrack,
2003, 17, 492-6.
Richard Reynolds (1735-1816) acquired through marriage (to Abraham
Darby's daughter Hannah) a share of the Ketley iron and coal works. In 1767
the waggonways were relaid with broader wooden rails to accommodate iron
plates, but the edge rail was replaced by the cheaper L section in the 1790s.
In 1778 Boulton & Watt supplied the Ketley works with a rotative engine.
Richard's son, William Reynolds (1756-1803) had wide scientific interests,
especially in chemistry and electricity, and was assisted in these efforts
by Prof. Joseph Black of Edinburgh.
Barnes, Robin. Coalbrookdale & Penydarren revisited: a bicentennial
note — Part 2. Bactrack, 2003,
17, 554-7.
Part 1 see page 492. Considers the John Llewellyn
drawing and E.A. Forward's assessment of it, and the Author's own inspection
of the drawing in the Science Museum. Also considers how Trevithick may have
been involved in devising traction for the Tar Tunnel. Letter by Author in
Volume 18 (page 188) brings greater clarity to the Llewellyn drawing and
incorporates information from John Liffen of the Science Museum.
Barnes, Robin. Coalbrookdale and Penydarren revisited. Part three.
Robin Barnes. Bactrack, 2003,
17, 622-6.
The first part began on page 492 and Part 2 on page 554. In this
concluding part the author summarizes, " if somewhat hesitantly" that (1)
in the period 1790 to 1797, in model form, the American John Fitch made the
first operable steam locomotive designed to run on rails; (2) William Reynolds
in Shropshire planned a full-scale steam railway locomotive at a slightly
earlier date, but there is no evidence it was made; (3) Reynolds, with Trevithick
as consultant, at Coalbrookdale in 1802 made the first known full-scale steam
railway locomotive, but probably it was not tried and may never have been
completed; (4) it cannot be certain what is depicted in the 'Llewellyn' drawing,
other than it is a sketch of a locomotive incorporating Trevithick features;
and (5) the general arrangement of the Penydarren locomotive is not
known and it may have differed substantially from that of the later Gateshead
example. The feature is concluded with a very extensive list of references
and acknowledgements and the address of a website dedicated to John Fitch:
http://www.history.rochester.edu/steam/Westcott
Illus.: working model steam locomotive made in USA by John Fitch; impression
created by Robin Barnes of portable engine designed by Boulton & Watt
for William Reynolds (see also Volume 11 page 543
for another diagram of this machine; diagram illustrating difficulty
of fitting 1804 Penydarren locomotive into Plymouth Ironworks Tunnel (flywheel
especially problematic); portrait of Major General Arthur St Clair whom (the
extended caption states) may have been the intended beneficiary of Fitch's
locomotive – to relieve him in his fight against Indian forces on the
Wabash using a wooden railway: the Scottish General was also briefly President
of the USA..
Pendred, Loughnan. St. L. The mystery of Trevithick's London locomotives.
Trans Newcomen Soc., 1920/1,
1, 34-49.
The two locomotives concerned were the road locomotive of 1803 and
Catch-me-who-Can of 1808. Harvey Trevithick, great grandson of Richard,
believed that there were more of Richard's letters at Hayle. E.A. Forward
considered that both models are genuine. The drawing of the Pen-y-darren
engine was "manifestly wrong" as the "fireman would have to lie on his stomach
to get at the fire". Note the significance of
Francis Trevithick's Life.
(1872). Pendred stated that this book is "made tedious by repetition",
but only Chapters 7 to 9 needed to be considered. Forward (pp 46-9) stated
that there can be no doubt that the enclosure was built and Trevithick did
run an engine on rails within it. The Forward contribution is very important:
he notes the significance of the record made by Isaac Hawkins in 1847 which
is included in the Life on page 193. Acording to Forward Hawkins was
an engineer of some eminence and is a "fairly reliable
witness."..Note: it would not have been possible to have written this
abstract on the basis of inspecting the first page.
Rees, Jim and Guy, Andy. Richard Trevithick and pioneer locomotives.
Early railways 3. 191-220.
The identification of "Trevithick" locomotives is extremely difficult.
The authors give two separate lists. The first is where Trevithick appeared
to have some direct input: Penydarren (1804); Gateshead (1805); Catch
Me Who Can (1808); West India Docks (1804); and Plymouth breakwater
(1812-14). The second is where there is less evidence for Trevithick's direct
involvement, but there is an indication that they were derived from his ideas:
Coalbrookdale (1802-3); Chapman's Newcastle (1805-6 or 1811-12); Black
Billy (1812-13); Whitehaven (1812); Fatfield (1815).
Chapman's locomotives
Forward, E.A. Chapman's locomotives, 1812-1815, some facts and some
speculations. Trans. Newcomen
Soc., 1951/2, 28, 1-18. Disc. 18-19.
Patents noted but not cited in full. Most information added to
Chapman entry. Also makes reference to
Whinfield's Trevithick locomotive.
Rees, Jim and Guy, Andy. Richard Trevithick and pioneer
locomotives. Early railways 3. 191-220.
Chapman's Newcastle (1805-6 or 1811-12) "locomotive": also queries
whether the Chapman "locomotives" might have been part of the Chapmans'
rope-making machinery.
Bailey, Michael R. and John P. Glithero
The engineering and history of Rocket: a survey report. York: National
Railway Museum, 2000. 186pp.
Although Rocket is one of the world's best-known locomotives, rightly
perceived as being the progenitor of main-line railway motive power, its
interpretation has been limited to its success at the 1829 Rainhill Trials
and to its being the first locomotive fitted with a multi-tubularboiler.
Rocket's importance as an artefact is much wider, however, as it was:
Reed, Brian. 150 years of British steam
locomotives. p. 21.
Rocket and the ideas it embodied had greater
immediate potentialities than had the other two competitors, and the basic
design was capable of substantial development with the resources available
at that time. These factors permitted the inauguration of railway projects
to the full extent of civil engineering technique as it then stood. This
matching of civil and mechanical engineering led to the big railway schemes
of the mid-1830s, in particular the Grand Junction, London & Birmingham,
and Great Western railways. Without Rainhill and Rocket all such schemes
would inevitably have been deferred. Rocket's success was due almost
entirely to the combination of the multitubular boiler with separate firebox
and the blast-pipe exhaust, that is to the steam-generating equipment. The
boiler was suggested by Henry Booth, first treasurer and, in effect, first
manager, of the LMR, and Rocket itself was entered by him and George
Stephenson and its cost charged to the pair in the Forth Street books; but
the whole of the design was the direct task of Robert Stephenson. This boiler
was particularly suited to the stringent weight conditions imposed; nevertheless,
without the blast pipe its evaporative powers would have been only fractionally
greater than established return-flue types.
Blast pipe and multitubular boiler with separate firebox were an individisible
quantity which gave automatic regulation of the whole plant. Blast-pipe exhaust
in single-flue and return-flue boilers could more easily tear the fire to
bits, as it did at the Rainhill trials in Sans Pareil. Among the three actual
competing engines Rocket and Sans Pareil had induced draught promoted by
blast exhaust and Novelty had forced draught from mechanicallydriven
bellows.
In its mechanical arrangement Rocket was disappointing, particularly
after the experience with Lancashire Witch and Robert's 1828 thoughts as
to cylinder position; the angle of the cylinders was surprising, and the
result was a bouncing movement on the springs. This was rectified in the
Rocket-type locomotives ordered for the opening of the LMR, in which cylinder
inclination was reduced to 8° from Rocket's 35°. But Rocket
at 35° and on springs was superior in riding to the vertical-cylinder
springless Sans Pareil, though perhaps inferior to Novelty
which, though it had small vertical cylinders, had very good springs, and
a bell-crank drive to long connecting rods which drove a double-throw crank
axle - the first ever, though it was not in combination with inside cylinders.
Novelty was also the first full tank engine, for it contained the small amount
of fuel needed, and the water was in a tank below the platform.
In the contest each engine had to make 10 return trips over a
1¾-mile length of which an eighth of a mile at each end was allowed
for acceleration and retardation, thus giving the equivalent of a 30-mile
journey at speed and 35 miles total, with a trailing load three times the
locomotive weight. After a stop for refuelling and rewatering the engine
had straightway to make another 35 miles. This was the equivalent of a return
journey between Liverpool and Manchester. The 4¼-ton Rocket hauled
13 tons and averaged 12.4mph for the 70 miles including the 38 end stops
but not the 16min refuelling stop. The day after, when the 2¾-ton
Novelty had broken down after one trip, Rocket gave the spectators
a 'consolation display' when without any load at all it made two double trips
at 30mph. On being tried again Novelty once more broke down, this
time after about seven miles, and retired from the contest.
Wheeler, Geoffrey. Fired
by steam. London: John Murray, 1987.
Second plate is an attractive side elevation coloured painting of
Rocket
Lamb, Richard. Something of a Novelty.
Early Railways 3, pp. 272-83.
Difficulties encountered with operating a replica, notably the generation
of carbon monoxide through the inefficient combustion of coke.
Sanspareil
An industry has grown up which has attempted to show that Timothy
Hackworth was cheated in some way during the Rainhill trials. Reed's comments
are reproduced below. Some of the other material is considered with
Hackworth.
Reed, Brian. 150 years of British steam
locomotives. p. 21.
Sans Pareil completed 27½ miles of the
70 at an average approaching 15mph; then a defect in a feed pump lowered
the water level and the fusible plug in the flue melted, so ending the test.
Subsequently Hackworth and his family worked hard to create a belief that
a cylinder cast by Stephenson had cracked and led to the bad results, but
neither the judges nor other contemporary records made mention of that. Over
the 27½ miles the coke consumption of Sans Pareil was 12691b
or 461b/mile contrasted with Rocket's 15½lb/mile; most of this
went out the chimney as unburned fuel for Hackworth had contracted his blast
pipe far too much by tapering, and the firing rate was the almost inconceivable
figure, for a return-flue boiler, of 691b/sfg/hr (pounds of coal per square
foot of grate per hour), whereas that of Rocket, with a firebox that
could more easily have taken a high firing rate, was only 30lb/sfg/hr.
Possibly Sans Pareil was the first engine to have a tapered blast
pipe, for the evidence that Royal George had one previously is anything
but sure; but it was not the first to have a contracted blast pipe. As that
term was then understood it meant an area less than that of the exhaust port
in the cylinder, and this was found in the double blast pipes of the SDR
four-wheelers and in the twin up-turned final exhausts of Rocket,
in which the end pipes were parallel. This was sufficient to make enough
steam for Rocket to run its 70 miles, and had also been enough for
the earlier Killingworth engines.
That the new era in public transport made possible by Rocket was
appreciated at once by a few forward-thinking minds is shown by the words
of Henry Booth early in 1830 before the formal opening of the LMR 'the sudden
and marvellous change which has been effected in our ideas of time and space.
. . it will pervade society at large. . . will influence more or less the
whole tenor and business of life.' First practical result of Rainhill was
the immediate purchase of Rocket by the LMR and an order for four
similar engines placed in October with Robert Stephenson & Co to be delivered
in 1830 in time for opening day. Two more were ordered in February 1830,
and another two later,
Usually known as the Penydaren Tramroad
Barnes, Robin. A Royal Progress. Part 2.
Backtack, 2002, 16,
406-13.
Part 1 began on page 346. Tour of England and Scotland
by King of Saxony with his physician Dr Carl Gustav Carus in 1844. This part
covers Wales (Merthyr and Dowlais (Dante's blazing city of Dis), Liverpool,
to York via Liverpool and Manchester and Manchester & Leeds Railway,
to Leeds, the Lake District, by road to Hamilton to stay with the Duke, but
no railway journeys were made in Scotland, and departure for Germany was
made from Granton. Letter by Martin Oliver on page 594.
Illus.:Possibly the first photograph of a railway scene Linlithgow station
c1845, Sketch; 0-4-2 Black Diamond of 1857, Coatbridge works no 11 now Alfred
Paget on the Chasewater Light Railway, Paintings by Robin Barnes: Dowlais
Iron company's Perserverance as it would be between 1832 and 1840
(it had twin chimneys), Painting; GWR Spit Fire (Spitfire in
some accounts - Back Track?)of the Fire Fly class with Aeolus
at Paddington. Extensive list of sources.
Hilton, H.F. Gurney's locomotive on the Hirwaun Railway. Loco. Rly Carr. Wagon Rev., 1944, 50, 192-4.
Pearce, Thomas R. The
Locomotives of the Stockton and Darlington Railway. Historical Model
Railway Society. 250pp.
This book is exactly what it says that it is and is of inestimable
importance as it enables the reader to know as far as it can now be known
which locomotives operated on the railway. It needs to be noted that originally
the locomotives lacked either numbers or names: this makes research extremely
difficult.. Furthermore, as in later years names were exchanged and bits
of locomotives were exchanged. The book was the subject of a remarkably generous
review from David Jenkinson in
Backtrack Volume 12 page
61, and by Alan Cliff in Archive
No. 14 p. 32. but ridiculously few copies of this work are held in
public libraries. A copy was obtained from North Yorkshire County Library
where it had been seen at such tiny libraries as Kirbymoorside, but is not
available in potential "City of Culture" Norwich.
. In his Foreword the Author notes that he "wrote this book because it didn't
exist". One wishes that more books were written on this admirable basis.
The book is still in-print and is obtainable from the
Historical Model Railway Society
(HMRS), and is remarkably cheap for Members. It suffers from one
major, and one minor defect. The major one is a lack of an index (this is
extremely serious) and the bibliographical citations are not as good as they
should be..
The general division of the work is:
Background:(The People; General Note; History & Development; Locomotives
at the 1875 Jubilee; Track Development; Liveries);
Principles and Valve Gear:(Basic Mechanics; Gab Gear);
The Early Engines: 1825-6.(Design; The Locomotives; "Chittapratt"; Nos.
3, 4 & 5);
"Royal George" and Successors: 1827-31. ("Royal George": "Experiment";
Comparisons.);
The Double Tender Classes: 1831-46. (The
"Majestic" and "Director" Classes;
"Magnet" and The "Enterprise" Class; The "Tory"
and "Miner" Classes.);
Pages 60-1 describe and illustrate (Theodore West and drawing in Science
Museum) the "first" R. & W. Hawthorn locomotive, No.
13 CoronationNo. 15 Tory suffered a boiler exxplosion in
1839, No. 7 Prince had a boiler explosion at Crook in 1859 aned No.
12 Trader blew up in 1868 (all page 75)
Passenger Traffic: 1837-60. (General; The Bury Engines; Mainly 0-4-2's
& 2-4-0's);
2-2-2 Arrow page 87 (including John Graham's views about.
Hawthorn WN 199/1836 an 0-4-0 with vertical cylinders driving an intermediate
crankshaft named Swift pp. 88-90. Fig. 71 shows locomotive with revolving
cowl at top of chimney to inhibit fire throwing. May have been owned by William
Lister. Sold to GNER with Nos. 18 Shildon and 10 Planet.
Mineral Locomotives: 1845-75. (The 0-6-0 Long Boiler Engines;
E. Craven's Notes on "Gazelle" Trials);
The 4-4-0's: 1860-74, and The "Gamecocks": 1873-6. (The 4-4-0's; The
"Gamecocks".);
The Tank Engines and The Final Mineral Engines.(The Tank Engines; The
Final 0-6-0s).
Appendixes list Locomotive Names; Drivers' Names. Renumbering out of Class;
Theodore West Sketch Sheets and Clement E. Stretton's Drawings: Numerical
and Alphabetical Lists of Locomotives: List of engines in numerical order,
with page and figure index; Alphabetical list of named engines.List of Lines
and Opening Dates: Map of System.
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1925, 31,
42-5.
Introduction includes map of railway and general history. Locomotion
No. 1 including drawing (side elevation). Notes boiler explosion at Aycliffe
Lane on 1 July 1828 (NB this is recorded
by Hewison).
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the
Stockton & Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev.,
1925, 31, 85-7.
Six-coupled locomotives: No. 5 Royal George, No. 7
Rocket and No. 8 Victory.
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the
Stockton & Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev.,
1925, 31, 121-3.
No. 9 Globe and 2-2-0 No. 10 Planet. Photographs of
Wilberforce, and No. 20 Adelaide driving a mortar mill at Saltburn
in 1860.
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the
Stockton & Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev.,
1925, 31, 154-7.
0-6-0 Magnet, valve gear for Magnet, 0-4-0 No. 29 Queen,
2-2-2 No. 30 Raby Castle and photograph of No. 43 Sunbeam
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the
Stockton & Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev.,
1925, 31, 182-5.
Table of the Tory or Collier class.Photographs of 0-6-0s Nos. 9
Middlesbrough, 10? Auckland, 25 Derwent and 8
Leader, and passenger 0-4-0 No. 27 Swift.
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the
Stockton & Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev.,
1925, 31, 300-1.
0-4-0 NER No. 1041 (ex- No. 41 Dart and drawings of 2-2-2
No. 54 Tyneside and No. 50 Meteor (and latter as rebuilt).
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the
Stockton & Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev.,
1925, 31, 322-3.
Bury 0-4-0s No. 44 Sura, 45 Ganymede, 46 Antelope
and 47 Unicorn. Also Bouch 0-6-02 Nos. 29-33 built at
Swindon
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1925,
31, 346-7.
Hartlepool Iron Co. 0-6-0 No. 28 Conside (s. & f. els);
photograph of NER No. 1035 ex-35 Commerce and notes of No. 55
Wolsingham.
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1926,
32, 93-4.
Link motion.
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1926,
32, 256-7.
Rokeby and Bouch feedwater heater
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1926,
32, 362-3.
2-4-0 No. 66 ex Priam and NER No. 1068
Woodlands
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1926,
32, 403-4.
No. 63 Birkbeck: drawing (s. el.), Bouch 0-6-0; diagram of
Hackworth plug wheel
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1927, 33,
252-3.
Secondhand locomotives acquired: inside cylinder 0-6-0s:
Nos. 81 Miller and 82 Hawthorn (Hawthorn WN 532-3
of 1846) acquired from Edinburgh & Glasgow
Railway where they had been Cowlairs Incline locomotives. No. 82 illustrated
at Shildon. Three Bury 0-4-0s were also acquired: 87 Fryerage; 88
Deanery and 89 Huddersfield: last illustrated as NER No. 1089
(this last was supplied to Manchester & Leeds Railway in 1846
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1927, 33,
292-3.
Secondhand locomotives: NER 0-6-0 No. 2259; 2-2-2 No. 93
Uranus. Also tabluates new G. Wilson 0-6-0s.
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1927, 33,
330-1.
2-4-0 No. 98 Pierrmont of 1855; NER No. 1101 and NER No. 1099
at Hopetown Foundary
Inness, R.H. (unattributed): Locomotive history of the Stockton
& Darlington Railway, 1825-1876. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1929, 35,
27-8.
0-6-0s Nos. 19 and 20 (latter fitted outside cylinders): Designed
James Irving Carson for West Hartlepool
Railway: became NER Nos. 1194 and 1192.
Lowe, James W. British steam locomotive
builders. 1975.
Lowe is cited by Pearce: as usual Lowe is very concise and his text
has an excellent degree of connectivity.
Tomlinson, Joseph. Address by the President.
Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs., 1890,
41, 181-202.
Some recollections of early locomotives.
Wheeler, Geoffrey. Fired by steam.
London: John Murray, 1987.
First plate is an attractive side elevation coloured painting of
Locomotion
4-4-0 No. 161 Lowther
Stockton & Darlington Railway
photographs. Br. Rly J., 1988, (24), 188-9.
Photographs of 4-4-0 No. 161 Lowther with 5 ton capacity crane
built by Cowans Sheldon probably in Darlington North Road works yard. Notes
by Ken Hoole.
Drivers
The reminiscences of George Graham, an early driver of No.1 engine and son of John Graham, the first Traffic Manager of the line, recorded by a Mr. Harold Oxtoby in about 1896, gives much useful information and detail about the day to day operation of the line in the early years. These memories are based in the main on his father's notebooks, referred to above, a set of four held at the Science Museum (together with a later resum~) which, having been written at the time are rather more reliable. Nevertheless, George Graham adds much from his own experiences in the way of later adventures and behavior.
John Graham: Notebooks (4 vols.) 1831-1845; M.S., Science Museum.
George Graham: Reminiscences (recorded by H. Oxtoby c.1896-7); M.S., P.R.O.
Kew & typed version, Stockton-on-Tees Reference Library.
Earl of Dudley's Railway
Perkins, T.R. and Perkins, G.M. The Earl of Dudley's Ry. Loco. Rly Carr.
Wagon Rev., 1910, 16, 100-3.
Includes description of Agenoria.
The "Agenoria" locomotive. Loco. Rly Carr. Rev., 1925, 31,
320-1.
Liverpool & Manchester Railway
The Liverpool & Manchester Railway forms the vital link between locomotive development over its first, sometimes shaky twenty-five years to the Rainhill Trials onto its rapid development in parallel with the spread of railways in the late 1830s/1840s. Nevertheless, it needs to be remembered that the Liverpool & Manchester Railway formed a remarkable nursery for the development of the locomotive, initially from the works from Robert Stephenson, but once the L&MR had become dissatisfied with the Stephensons from elsewhere. The demand for fast and frequent travel between the two cities was a key influence, and it is absurd that no attempt has ever been made in modern times to provide a state-of-art railway system between the two cities: most of the current train service is only worthy of a very minor banana republic.
Dendy Marshall, C.F. A centenary history of the Liverpool & Manchester
Railway. London: 1930. 192pp.
Ottley 6361: suggested addition by Guillermo Bas. Simmons was very
rude about this book in his carping biography of Dendy Marshall..
Garfield, Simon
The last journey of William Huskisson. London: Faber 244pp.
An elegantly written and produced book which does rather more than
describe the brief fatal moments, but places Huskisson's involvement in the
Liverpool & Manchester Railway as central to its successs.
Thomas, R.H.G. The Liverpool & Manchester
Railway. London: Batsford, 1960. 264pp.
Ottley 12199. Foreword by Jack Simmons. Chapter
9: Locomotives & rolling stock. Other chapters describe the working
conditions of the early railway workers, including the very high rate of
fatalities and serious injuries, and the experience of the new form of travel.
Sources are quoted moderately fully.
At the end of the Rainhill Trials the following locomotives were
available: Twin Sisters, Rocket and Sans Pareil. The
Lancashire Witch was still working, but the B&LR was requesting
its return.
The Board ordered four Rocket-type locomotives from Robert Stephenson &
Co.: Wildfire (renamed Meteor), Comet, Dart and
Arrow. These were followed by Phoenix and North Star with smokeboxes
and larger cylinders.
In 1833 Novelty was rebuilt by Robert Daglish and supplied to St Helens
& Runcorn Gap Railway on 3 August 1833.
Northumbrian was supplied with a firebox integral with the boiler.
It had stronger frames, 132 tubes and achieved 40 mile/h on trial.
In June 1830 the locomotive stock was numbered.
No. 9 Planet had cylinders inside the frames and on 23 November 1830
ran from Liverpool to Manchester in one hour. Six furher of the type were
ordered from Robert Stephenson & Co.
These were followed by two powerful locomotives to help freight up the inclines.
These were 0-4-0 with 14in x 20in cylinders: Nos 13 Samson and 15
Goliah [sic].
Braithwaite & Ericcson supplied William IV and Queen Adelaide
but these were unsuccessful. Gurney also offered one of his coach
engines.
Murray & Wood which became Fenton & Murray of Leeds supplied Nos.
19 Vulcan, 21 Fury and 30 Leeds: these were of the
Planet-type and Robert Stephenson & Co. had sent the drawings to Leeds
for their manufacture.
In May 1831 the L&MR invited tenders for locomotives.
Bury supplied Bee to the Bolton & Leigh Railway and Bury No. 26 Liver
ran trials against Planet in June 1832 when it was found that
Liver was more economical yet there were no further orders.
Sharp, Roberts supplied No. 32 Experiment.
Galloway, Bowman & Glasgow of the Caledonian Foundry was established
in 1831 in Manchester. The L&MR purchased an 0-4-0 with vertical cylinders.
No. 28 Caledonian: this was involved in a fatal collision with
Star on 28 February 1835. (Jack
page 74 notes the use of Caledonian as a ballast engine on the
London & Birmingham Railway).
Star was one of three locomotives supplied by the Horsley Iron Co. of Tipton,
Staffs to the St Helens Railway in 1833. The collision happened whilst Star
was still the property of Horsley and the lcomotive was sold to the Dublin
& Kingstown Railway for £700.
In August 1832 Robert Stephenson & Co. supplied No. 27 Pluto and this
was folowed by 29 Ajax and 31 Firefly. 2-2-2 No. 33 Patentee was
constructed for Robert Stephenson & Co. and this was the final Robert
Stephenson locomotive to be supplied to the L&MR.
From 1835 there was a growing reaction against both the
Stephensons: the early locomotives were
not very durable and this was not helphed by the reckless behaviour of their
drivers. Repairs were performed by outside firms.
In November 1835 Tayleur supplied 0-4-2 with 12in x 18in cylinders: 40
Eclipse and 42 York.
Haigh Foundry supplied 2-2-2 Nos. 43 Vesuvius, 45 Lightning and
46 Cyclops.
Star type
Four were supplied by Tayleur including 47 Milo and 49 Phoenix;
four from Mathew Dixon including 48 Dart and two from R.&W. Hawthorn:
53 Sun and 56 Vesta. (Jack page
74 notes the use of Sun as a ballast engine on the London &
Birmingham Railway).
Todd Kitson & Laird supplied No. 57 Lion and 58 Tiger.
The former is still extant and was descibed in
Reed, C.W. The iron 'Lion' locomotives,
pump engine, film star. JSLS, 33, 312
In 1839 coke consumption of the L&MR (57lb/mile) was compared with that
of the London & Birmingham Railway (39lb/mile).
Edge Hill works became fully operational in 1841.
John Dewrance was responsibe for new locomotives of
the Bird class: 2-2-2 with 12in x 18in cylinders with a freight version
(2-4-0) with 13in x 20in cylinders: No. 69 Swallow (2-2-2) entered
service on 8 September 1841.
In July 1842 trials took place between Stork and GJR Hornet
between Liverpool and Birmingham.
An apprentice sheme was introduced at Edge Hill works.
The above account based on Thomas is the main chronology: he also
cited the following developments in rather skeletal form:
Lord Dundonald's rotary engine was evaluated on the
Rocket.
There was vague interest in the Gurney steam carriage type of
engine.
Perkins tubular boiler
Hall's patent system for burning coal
Melling patent (1837?) link valve gear
Gray valve gear (horse-leg motion of 1838): Cyclops fitted
in 1839 and this led to a 12% fuel saving. (David Joy: The introduction of
expansive working by John Gray's expansive motion. Engineer, 1890,
69, 14 Feb.)
John Melling improved feed pump evaluated in 1834.
steam jets used to clean rails
Firefly was fitted with friction wheels to increase adheion
(patented July 1837)
John Gray: double grated firebox of 1835 designed to burn coal with
coke.
John Dewrance experimented with coal buring on
Condor.(Sekon)
Hot water was used to replenish locomotives: boilers were provided
at Liverpool, Manchester and Parkside.
Lowe mentions that locomotive constructed by Peel, Williams & Peel called Soho, which replaced eccentrics by gear wheels was evaluated in 1839.
Sekon (pp 38-9) mentions Winan's Cycloped horse-powered locomotive and his manumotive, both of which were exhibited at Rainhill.
Bolton & Leigh Railway: Sanspareil
Sekon's Evolution of the steam
locomotive.(pp. 34-5) notes that the locomotive was
preserved at the Science Museum in 1864 with the involvement of the MP for
Bolton, John Hick, and with John Hargreaves.
Canterbury & Whitstable Railway
Invicta Canterbury & Whitstable Railway
Sekon's Evolution of the
steam locomotive.(pp. 44-5) notes that the contractors
operating the railway offered the locomotive for sale in October 1839 but
could not find a buyer, that it haad been preserved at Ashford by the South
Eastern Railway and was exhibited at the Jubilee of the Stockton and Darlington
Railway in 1875 and at the Newcastle Stephenson Centenary in 1881.
Scotland
It could be argued that Scotland should not be treated separately
as many parts of England (notably Norfolk) remained separate from railway
development in the rest of Britain for a significant period. Indeed
Niall Ferguson argues in Early Railways 3 that
information and technology flowed in both directions between England (notably
the North East) and Scotland. Ferguson includes a table of 25 "early locomotives"
which were mainly manufactured in Scotland between 1831 and 1844 for Scottish
railways:Monkland & Kirkintilloch, Dundee & Newtyle, Arbroath &
Forfar, Dundee & Arbroath and Garnkirk & Glasgow Railways..
Robertson, C.J.A. The origins of the Scottish
railway system.
Does not dispute the very early (1816 or 1817), but brief, use of
a locomotive on the Kilmarnock & Troon Railway
Table 14. Dates of lntroduction of Locomotives on Scottish Railways
| Company | Date |
| Monkland & Kirkintilloch | 1831 |
| Garnkirk & Glasgow | 1831 |
| Dundee & Newtyle | 1833 |
| Paisley & Renfrew | 1837 |
| Newtyle & Coupar Angus | 1837, abandoned by 1842: reintroduced 1846 |
| Ardrossan | 1840 |
| Ba1lochney | 1840 |
| Edinburgh & Dalkeith | 1846 |
Scotland (Dundee)
Steel's Dundee's iron horses gives an imperfect account of (1) the Dundee & Newtyle Railway; (2) J & C Carmichael builders of (3) the Earl of Airlie (probably the first locomotive to be built in Scotland, certainly one of the few to be built in Dundee).
Garnkirk & Glasgow Railway
Lowe lists the four locomotives built by the St Rollox Foundry for the Garnkirk & Glasgow Railway: Frew (an 0-4-0 of 1835) and three vertical-cylinder 0-6-0 in 1840: Victoria (fig. 476), St. Rollox and Carfin.
Monkland & Kirkintilloch Railway
The railway was incorporated in 1824 and opened in 1828. The gauge was 4ft 6in. As stated in the Ballochney Railway section. their first Greenside shops were used until new shops were completed at Moss-side, Kipps; and all M&KR work was concentrated here. These shops survived until the mid 1960s and were known latterly as 'Kipps Wagon-shop'.
George Lish took charge of the new works leaving William Dodds to concentrate on Ballochney Railway work at Greenside. The first locomotive built at Moss-side was probably a 0-4-0 named Atlas with 13in x 20in inside cylinders and 4ft. diameter wheels, completed in 1840. Two similar 0-4-0s named Zephyr and. Sirocco were completed in 1841 or 1842, the latter having 14in x 20in cylinders and 4' 6" diameter wheels.
The names Thetis and Bedlay have been mentioned as new locomotives but these were probably old locomotives which may have been rebuilt or even renamed by 1852. Bedlay may not even have been a name but merely 'the engine at Bedlay'.
It is likely that locomotives may have been built for local industry or coal owners adjacent to the railway and this equally applies to the Greenside works of the Ballochney Railway. Alter 1842, new locomotives required were built by private builders especially Neilson & Mitchell.
On amalgamation with the Ballochney and Slamannan Railways in 1848 the title became the Monkland Railways Co. and the gauge converted to 4ft 8½in.
Unfortutately the early Minute books, before 1848, no longer exist and the above notes, and those for the Ballochney Railway have been made possible due to information received from Messrs A.G. Dunbar. Jas. F. McEwan. E. Craven and D. Martin. Lowe.
J.P.G. Ransom's Iron road is highly critical of some earlier work about the locomotives used on this railway, especially that by S. Snell. and a Newcomen Society paper about Ralph Dodd. Ransom asserts that George Dodds introduced metallic piston rings to Monkland & Kirkintilloch locomotives.
Specific locomotive building companies
Warren, J.G.H.
A Century of Locomotive Building by Robert Stephenson & Co., 1823-1923.
Newcastle: Andrew Reid, 1923. (reprinted David & Charles with
introduction by W.A. Tuplin in 1970). 461pp. extensive index.
Fuller information
Young, Robert
Timothy Hackworth and the locomotive. London 1923. 406pp.
Ottley 378: "very detailed work containing much information
on early railways and locomotives". Rutherford notes several errors in
Backtrack: (vol. 9 p. 534) see 9-528.
Notes especially an error on page 51 where locomotive illustrated is
not Wylam "Grasshopper" locomotive, but is Puffing Billy. Reissued
as part of the150th Anniversary celebrations by Shildon Town Council in
1975.
Bogie steam locomotives - Part 1. [Railway Reflections
No. 42]. Michael Rutherford.12, 333-40.
This article covered a lot of ground: Chapman obtained a patent for
a bogie locomotive on 30 December 1912, and in 1814 a double bogie locomotive
was built by Phineas Crowther at the Ouseburn Foundry on Tyneside to work
on the Lambton Colliery Waggonway.
Updated 2008-10-17