Tag Archives: Lagan

The DUP fightback

I mentioned here that the ridiculous decision by the Sinn Féin Minister for Marching Bands [and Sheughs] to ask the DUP Minister for Finance and Personnel for £46 million for the Lisburn Sheugh might have been intended to annoy the DUP. Most of the Lisburn Sheugh, formerly the Lagan Navigation, ran through unionist territory; the Lagan Valley constituency is solidly unionist, and specifically DUP, in both Westminster and NI Assembly elections. It costs Ms Ní Chuilín nothing to pass on the Lisburn lunacy to the Dept of Finance, leaving it to a DUP Minister to turn down the funding application.

But the DUP has lobbed a neat hand-grenade response back at the Shinner fortress. Brenda Hale, DUP MLA for Lagan Valley, has put two questions to the sheughery enthusiasts:

AQW 48647/11-16 To ask the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what financial support her Department has offered the Lagan Canal Trust, given that their budget has been cut by 11 per cent. [09/09/2015 Awaiting Answer]

AQW 48646/11-16 To ask the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure when the Lagan Navigation Canal Locks where last maintained. [09/09/2015 Awaiting Answer]

Ye’ll no’ fickle Thomas Yownie.

Northern nutters

I suppose this might be a Shinner ploy to annoy the DUP, but it is eloquent testimony to the pointlessness of the Northern Ireland Executive. It is unable to get its own act together, it can’t agree a budget — but one of its ministers thinks it should waste yet more of HMG’s money on yet another useless canal restoration proposal.

The Lagan Canal Trust is, it appears, funded by DCAL to enable it to draw up funding applications to DCAL ….

€200 million for the sheugh?

What does Chris Lyttle [Alliance Party MLA] know that I don’t?

On 16 June 2015 he submitted this written question [AQW 47282/11-15], to which he has yet to receive an answer:

To ask the Minister of Culture, Arts and Leisure what consideration the Executive has given to supporting the Lagan Canal Trust objective of reopening the Lagan Canal from Belfast Harbour to Lough Neagh in light of the Irish Government’s approval of €200 million investment by Waterways Ireland in the Ulster Canal.

To the best of my knowledge, the WI “investment” is €2 million, not €200 million. But perhaps I’m missing something? If, Gentle Reader, you can explain Mr Lyttle’s figure, please leave a Comment below.

Given that the restoration of the Lagan would be quite as insane as that of the Clones Sheugh, it seems that the Alliance Party gets its economic ideas from the Shinners.

 

A puzzle in waterways history

According to the Lagan Canal Trust,

The Lagan Navigation also forms part of a wider all Ireland waterway network. This network of waterways once traversed through the towns and cities of Ireland delivering goods and produce, helping to shape the economic fortunes of the country.

I would be grateful for information about any goods or produce that were ever carried from the Shannon, or from the Royal or Grand Canals or the River Barrow via the Shannon, through the Junction Canal in the Ballinamore & Ballyconnell Drainage District [later called the Ballinamore & Ballyconnell Canal and later still the Shannon–Erne Waterway] and then the Ulster Canal to Lough Neagh or any of the waterways connected therewith. Or, of course, in the opposite direction.

As far as I can tell, outside the sales blurbs written by engineers seeking employment and waterway owners seeking subsidies, there was never a connected all-Ireland waterways network; nor was there ever any need or demand for such a thing.

Any more than there is now.

 

Thon sheughery business

It will be recalled that Her Majesty’s Loyal Home Rule Government in Belfast is considering investing in the Clones Sheugh [aka Ulster Canal] and that I asked DCAL, the department responsible, for a copy of the Business Case. To my surprise, it said:

Your request is being treated as a Access to Information request and will be handled under either Freedom of Information Act 2000 or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.

Either way, DCAL has now told me that I can’t see it. The Business Case, which is apparently an addendum to the 2007 Business Case (which was rotten: see here passim), won’t be complete until November. I have made a note to remind myself to ask for it then.

I quite sympathise with the DCAL folks: it can’t be easy thinking of any good reason to spend taxpayers’ [British or Irish] money on the Clones Sheugh. But perhaps DCAL can spin it out until the Shinners have taken over the Free State, at which point the economics of Grattan’s Parliament will be in vogue and we can all take up growing flax, spinning and weaving, giving grants for canals and making money out of the slave plantations.

Speaking of Shinners, there’s one called Cathal Ó hOisín, a member of HM Loyal Home Rule Government in Belfast representing East Londonderry, who said there recently:

The possibility of the reopening of the Ulster canal would open up limitless opportunities in tourism. The idea that, once again, we could travel from Coleraine to Limerick, Dublin and Galway by boat would be absolutely wonderful.

Well, you can do that: by sea. There was never an inland navigation from Coleraine, Limerick or Dublin to Galway, despite the urgings of Lord Cloncurry and the nitwitted ideas of Sir Edward Watkin.

As for a connection between Limerick or Dublin and Coleraine, I suspect that Mr Ó hOisín is perpetuating the error into which Her late Majesty Victoria, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland Queen, etc, seems to have fallen when she appointed

Commissioners to inquire respecting the System of Navigation which connects Coleraine, Belfast, and Limerick

which Commissioners reported in 1882. There was no such system and, if Mr Ó hOisín can provide evidence that any vessel ever travelled by inland navigation between Coleraine and Limerick, I would be glad to hear of it. I prefer to think of the Commissioners’ conclusion that

As an investment for capital the whole canal system in Ireland has been a complete failure.

I see no reason why politicians of the twenty-first century should repeat the errors of their predecessors in the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

You expect the Parnellite members to have a bit more sense, but one John Dallat said in the same debate:

[…] when the Ulster canal is open, tourists will come in their thousands and that will benefit the Lower Bann, the Foyle as well, and right over to Scotland.

Er, John? There are actually canals in other countries. Even in Scotland. Folk are familiar with canals. They’ve seen them before. And a short sheugh to Clones is not going to attract tourists (apart from the relatively small number of canal twitchers, who will need to tick it off on their lists) unless the town of Clones is particularly attractive. Which … well, let me put it this way: why not look it up on TripAdvisor?

Of course I’m all in favour of Clones myself: I am quite interested in concrete engine-sheds and former canal stores.

 

G boats, Biffs, armoured cars and the Lagan

On the Grand Canal, M boats (boats with the letter M added to their numbers) were motor barges owned by the Grand Canal Company itself; E boats were engineering boats, used for canal maintenance and B boats (whether motor or horse-drawn) were bye-traders’ or hack boats, boats owned by traders other than the Grand Canal Company itself.

G boats were wooden horse-drawn boats, built to carry turf (peat) during The Emergency, which to the rest of the world was the second world war. Some of them [PDF] were built by Thompsons of Carlow, whose archives are now in the National Archives of Ireland; you can read about them in the Summer 2012 newsletter [PDF] of the Archives & Records Assocation.

The same organisation’s Autumn 2013 newsletter had an interesting article about Lagan Navigation archives in the Public Record Office of Northern Ireland. Unfortunately something has gone wrong with the links on its newsletter web page so the relevant PDF is not available at the moment.

h/t CO’M

The Clones Sheugh and other northern waters

Industrial Heritage Ireland has been visiting Ulster waterways including the Blackwater, which linked the Ulster Canal to Lough Neagh.

Brian Cassells was quoted again in the Belfast Telegraph on 27 April 2013. He believes that walking in the country is a Good Thing, although it’s not clear why that requires a canal. I trust that Sammy Wilson will stand firm and refuse to spend public money on a project that has an even stronger political smell than the proposed Narrow Water Bridge.

Clever chaps …

those Danes and Belfast folk at Harland and Wolff (which is on the Lagan, so this is of inland waterways interest).

More Northern Ireland engineering ingenuity here.

Irish galleries please copy

I have often lamented the poor classification methods used by those who look after collections of paintings. They focus on the name of the painter, the date and the school to which he or she belonged, rather than on the really important facts: whether or not a painting shows a steamer, barge, canal or other object of industrial heritage interest. Thus, as I pointed out here, you get titles like “View looking down on a jetty and boats on a lake with a church in the distance” that ignore the most important aspect: that the pic shows a steamer on Lough Erne.

The other problem is that the paintings are in galleries scattered hither and yon, which means that a serious search for steamers, barges and canals would require hours of driving followed by hours of rummaging through archives, even though each pic would require only a few seconds’ attention to determine whether or not it is worthy of notice. The cost-benefit ratio is all wrong, but the use of technology can solve the problem.

I was delighted therefore to learn that, in HM Realm, the BBC and the Public Catalogue Foundation have put online tagged images of [almost] all the 200,000+ oil paintings in public ownership in the UK at the Your Paintings site. The collection is searchable: the search will return artists, painting titles and tags. And you can help by adding tags, if you have more information about a painting.

There is not much of Irish waterways interest, which is scarcely surprising, but there is an interesting illustration of the use of a pole on the Lagan [I’d welcome comment on what’s happening in that pic] and the barge at Edenderry. There is also some material for steam men.

It would be nice if Irish galleries would now do the same. The cost could be met by selling off the originals, which would no longer be necessary, and closing the galleries, at a saving to the public purse.

The Lagan and Lough Neagh in 1830

Philip Dixon Hardy wrote in The Northern Tourist, or Stranger’s Guide to the north and north west of Ireland: including a particular description of Belfast, the Giant’s Causeway, and every object of picturesque interest in the district referred to William Curry, Jun and Co, Dublin 1830:

The river Lagan, although of very considerable breadth in the immediate vicinity of Belfast, and running nearly thirty miles, is yet by far too inconsiderable to be of any great advantage to the town in the way of trade or commerce. By its means, however, a regular communication is kept up between Belfast, Lisburn, and Lough Neagh. Since the year 1755, upwards of £100,000 have been expended in forming a canal, by the assistance of cuts in various places along the line of the river, where it was found too shallow for lighters to pass.

The Lagan Navigation Company have now the direction of the entire line, and have made such judicious improvements, as materially to promote the desired object — a speedy transit of goods and merchandise. This, however, can, after all, be only partially accomplished, as, from the circumstance of the Company not being able to have a horse-track-way along the entire line, nor to introduce steam power, the journey can be performed in a much shorter space of time by waggons and drays going direct. On Lough Neagh there is a small steam-vessel, by which the goods taken up in the lighters are rapidly conveyed to the different towns which lie in various directions round that extensive sheet of water.

W A McCutcheon, in The Canals of the North of Ireland David and Charles, Dawlish 1965, confirms the point about the trackway:

As a result [of various improvements in the early 1800s] traffic greatly increased, though water supply problems remained, and there was a horse-towing path for only part of the length of the navigation.

He gives no details, though, so I don’t know why the trackway was incomplete, how lighters travelled on those stretches that had no trackway or when and how the deficiency was remedied. My guess is that those stretches were along the river rather than the artificial cuts and that the riparian landowners were unhelpful, but I would welcome further information.

McCutcheon does not mention the steamer on Lough Neagh. However, D B McNeill mentions it in Coastal Passenger Steamers and Inland Navigations in the North of Ireland Belfast Museum and Art Gallery Transport Handbook No 3 1960:

The first steamer on the lough was the Lagan Navigation Company’s Marchioness of Donegall. She was built by Ritchie and MacLaine of Belfast, her engines were obtained from David Napier of Glasgow and she was launched at Ellis Gut in November, 1821. She was the first inland navigation steamer in Ireland and was used for towing the Lagan canal boats across the lough. When new, she was reputed to have had a speed of two knots. She was uneconomical and her owners tried to sell her in 1824, but there were no buyers. It is believed the Marquess of Donegall used her occasionally as a yacht. She was broken up sometime about 1840 and her engines were stored in Belfast.

In his Irish Passenger Steamship Services Volume 1: North of IrelandAugustus M Kelley Publishers, New York 1969 he says that the Marchioness was a wooden paddle steamer, built in 1821 and broken up in 1843, 73′ long with a beam of 16′, with a simple single-cylinder engine. He says that the engine cost £1,400, provided 30hp and gave her a speed of 6 knots. A passenger service was considered but never provided, but picnic parties could charter the boat for five guineas a day.