WATER TRANSPORT
River Navigation
The site of Chester marked the division between the
navigable waters of the upper Dee and those of the
estuary; vessels might come to it from both upstream
and downstream, but at Chester itself from the 11th
century or earlier the river was blocked by a weir or
causeway, passable only at the highest tides and
probably built at a natural interruption in the watercourse. (fn. 1)
Although barges sailed on the river between Bangor
bridge and Chester until the 19th century and pleasure
craft plied upstream from the city thereafter, the
estuary was always the more important waterway. (fn. 2) It
gave access to the Irish Sea and made Chester for much
of its history a main point of arrival and departure for
travellers from and to Ireland. In Roman times there
may have been a quay west of the legionary fortress, (fn. 3)
but by the 12th century the main anchorage seems to
have been to the south, marked presumably by the
Romanesque arch of the Shipgate. (fn. 4) The course of the
river downstream from Chester was always uncertain,
and its shifting sandbanks were remarked upon as early
as the 12th century. (fn. 5) In the endless movement of those
'skittering sands' lay a perennial problem for the city:
the maintenance of suitable anchorages to accommodate sizeable ships. By the 13th century the earliest and
nearest, Portpool, had been created at the western edge
of the city liberties. (fn. 6) Thereafter anchorages were
established further down the Dee, at Shotwick,
Burton, Denhall (in Ness), Neston, Gayton, Heswall,
'Redbank' (later Dawpool) in Thurstaston, and Point
of Ayr (in Llanasa, Flints.). (fn. 7) In the 14th and 15th
centuries 'Redbank' was much the most important, but
Burton and Denhall rose to significance in the early
16th century. Those closest to the city, Portpool and
Shotwick, were affected by silting; they were disused
from the later Middle Ages, and a quay established at
Shotwick in 1449 proved of little value. The fluctuations in the fortunes of the others reflected a succession
of shifts in the river's course rather than progressive
silting downstream. (fn. 8)
The right to establish anchorages far beyond the
limits of the city liberties was an aspect of Chester's
control of the whole of the Dee estuary. The citizens'
rights were first specified in the charter of 1354, which
allowed them to levy tolls and other customs and to
make attachments for offences committed in the water
of Dee between the city and Arnold's Eye, at Hilbre
Point, the extremity of the estuary. (fn. 9) The grant, which is
generally taken to be the origin of the mayor's powers
as 'admiral' of the Dee, claimed to continue ancient
custom. (fn. 10) The citizens' privileges were clarified in 1506:
they were to have the 'searching' of the Dee from
Heronbridge to Arnold's Eye, oversight of nets, weirs,
and fishing, and the collection of fines from all
transgressions. (fn. 11) Heronbridge was on the boundary of
the liberties upstream from the city. By the 17th
century the citizens' rights were usually exercised by a
water bailiff, appointed by the Assembly and often a
serjeant-at-mace. (fn. 12) As a symbol of his authority the city
in 1719 commissioned a silver oar, still in 2000 among
the civic plate. (fn. 13)
The citizens' privileges appear to have overlapped
with those of the serjeant of Dee. Robert of Eaton first
laid claim to that office in the earlier 14th century,
regarding himself as keeper of the river banks from
Eaton weir to Arnold's Eye, with rights over fishing,
wrecks, and ferries, and an entitlement to toll from
every vessel. (fn. 14) The main obligation of the office, to keep
the river clear of obstructions, was evidently a pressing
matter when it was first recorded; in 1358, for example,
the justice and chamberlain of Chester were ordered to
seize nets and other fishing devices which impeded the
progress of boats upstream to the Dee Bridge. (fn. 15)
The office of serjeant was retained by Robert's
descendants, the Grosvenors, until the 18th century,
with the assistance from the mid 17th century of the
Chester fishermen's guild, the Drawers of Dee. (fn. 16) By
then, however, the corporation appears to have been
uncertain about the relationship of the Grosvenors'
office to its own admiralty powers. In 1705, for
example, the mayor claimed that the office of serjeant
of Dee belonged to the city. The alderman of the
Drawers of Dee, who was deputizing for Sir Richard
Grosvenor, 4th Bt., responded by sailing alone from
Eaton to Chester, and thence to Hilbre and back in the
company of the Drawers, in the course of which he
seized illegal fishing stakes. He conducted a similar
progress in 1710. (fn. 17) The dispute was evidently over by
1722, when Sir Richard Grosvenor appointed as his
deputy the mayor who had challenged him in 1705. By
the early 19th century the Grosvenors had apparently
given up their claims. (fn. 18)
In 1541 the corporation adopted a plan to build a
new harbour some 10 miles down the Dee estuary at
Lightfoot's Pool in Little Neston, and the king ordered
200 trees to be delivered to the mayor for that
purpose. (fn. 19) In 1548, in response to a petition from
the city for aid with the work, the orders were repeated
and augmented by a grant of £40 for seven years. (fn. 20)
Despite a further appeal for a royal grant in 1551, (fn. 21) the
city was forced to raise funds locally; between 1555 and
1560 voluntary rates and special assessments were
imposed on the guilds, parishes, and citizens, and
special payments were exacted from members of the
corporation. (fn. 22) Work was evidently well under way by
1565, when a salaried overseer was appointed. (fn. 23) In
1566, however, the 'great pier of stone' which formed
the main feature of the haven was largely overthrown
in a gale. (fn. 24) To repair the damage a further special
assessment was made in 1568 on the citizens and the
guilds, and councilmen were ordered to oversee the
work at their own cost. (fn. 25) By 1570 much of the new
quay had been finished. (fn. 26)
The New Haven, otherwise known as Neston Quay
or New Quay, eventually comprised an anchorage
protected by a stone pier. (fn. 27) The project, which was
probably never completed, remained a constant burden
on the city's finances throughout the later 16th century, despite appeals to the Crown for grants out of
customs revenue in 1576 and 1589. (fn. 28) Its repair was
aided by the Ironmongers' company in 1571, (fn. 29) and was
the subject of further orders by the Assembly in 1576,
1587, and 1598. (fn. 30) The city's last recorded expenditure
upon it was in 1604. (fn. 31) Although it remained in use
until the 1690s or later, the New Haven's position as
head of navigation for larger vessels was gradually
undermined by the anchorage newly developed near
by at Parkgate. (fn. 32) In 1763 the corporation granted the
petition of one of its aldermen to use some of the
stones of the pier, by then known as the Old Quay, to
develop a colliery, and in 1790 it ordered that the
remaining ashlar and other stone be valued and sold. It
was finally disposed of in 1799. (fn. 33)
By the early 17th century, schemes were afoot to
improve the Dee navigation. Commissioners of Sewers,
appointed in 1607 to survey the river and remove
obstructions, decreed that a breach of 10 yd. be made
in the causeway at Chester. (fn. 34) Although favoured by the
J.P.s of Flintshire and Cheshire, the order was vigorously
opposed by the city corporation, two city companies,
and the proprietor of the Dee Mills, on the grounds that
the removal of the causeway would ruin the mills and
damage the new system of water supply. (fn. 35) In 1609 the
privy council quashed the commissioners' order.
In 1646 the citizens of Chester themselves successfully petitioned parliament to be allowed to demolish
the causeway and the mills, (fn. 36) but the only effect of the
several breaches made was to make the river more
shallow and sandy. Despite the appointment of
labourers to carry out the work in 1648, the mills
and causeway survived. (fn. 37)
In 1666 the citizens alleged that the river had
become so shallow that vessels as small as 20 tons
could no longer reach Chester, and in 1670 they were
granted leave to bring a Bill before parliament to
improve the navigation. (fn. 38) The engineer Andrew Yarranton, who surveyed the estuary in 1674, was the first
to suggest the solution ultimately adopted, namely the
construction of a new channel along the Welsh side of
the estuary, reclaiming 3,000 a. of potentially rich
arable. (fn. 39)
In the late 1680s and early 1690s fresh proposals
were put to the corporation for making the Dee
navigable and reclaiming land. (fn. 40) Although the schemes
aroused the opposition of those claiming rights on the
sands and marshes of the estuary, in 1698 the corporation agreed with Francis Gell, a London merchant, that
in return for a grant of tolls and reclaimed land he
should make the Dee navigable for vessels of 100 tons
at all tides. (fn. 41) An Act of 1700 authorized the corporation
to collect special dues on coal, lime, and limestone to
finance a new channel, and to appoint seven commissioners to oversee the work; it also provided for ferries
to replace the old fords. (fn. 42) After a break of six years the
work begun by Gell restarted in 1708 with a new
undertaker, Nicholas Jennings, who promised to complete it in three years. Little was achieved, however, and
work probably largely ceased in 1712, (fn. 43) though maintenance continued in the late 1710s, (fn. 44) when the city's
agents were still collecting the duties intended to pay
for the works. (fn. 45) The work made the city's wharves and
warehouses near the Watergate obsolete by 1707, but
the replacement wharf constructed near the Roodee
was destroyed by flooding in 1720, (fn. 46) and by 1730
almost no ships came up to the city. (fn. 47) Instead most
goods were transferred to lighters or carts at Parkgate. (fn. 48)
About 1730 navigation to Chester ceased altogether
after breaches in the dykes destroyed the channel. (fn. 49)
In 1732 the project was revived by Nathaniel
Kinderley, who sought funding to make the river
navigable for ships of 200 tons. He followed Yarranton
in proposing a new cut across Saltney marshes and
estimated that c. 6,000 a. would be reclaimed to set
against the cost. Despite considerable opposition from
interests in Liverpool and Parkgate, in 1733 an Act
authorized Kinderley to cut a new channel from
Chester towards Flint to a depth of 16 ft. at a moderate
spring tide. Once the new channel was open, the 40
undertakers of the project, of whom fewer than a third
were Chester men, were authorized to collect dues
from ships using it. They were also granted the profits
from any land reclaimed. (fn. 50)
Cutting began in 1734, and the river was diverted
into its new channel in 1737. In 1741, by a further
Act, the undertakers, who needed to raise additional
capital, became the River Dee Company. (fn. 51) The cost
had proved much greater and the income from the
new dues much less than expected. An Act of 1744
reduced the levies in an attempt to encourage trade,
and they remained insufficient to meet outgoings,
enlarged by the requirement to maintain two ferries
and the roads which led to them. (fn. 52) Reclamation
involved the company in expensive work to restore
boundaries and roads disrupted by the new channel,
which as a result was not properly maintained. In
1752 the company claimed to have lost £60,000. It
eventually agreed to pay Sir John Glynne of Hawarden a yearly sum to compensate for his loss of
common rights and to maintain a new south bank.
Since that sum exceeded the receipts from the tolls,
the company remained in difficulties and apparently
paid no dividend until 1775. (fn. 53)

Figure 44:
New Crane Wharf, mid 19th century

Figure 45:
Cheese Wharf, 1867 (looking west)
The new cut nevertheless made the city accessible
during spring tides to ships drawing up to 15 ft. in the
1770s. (fn. 54) By the mid 1740s a wharf had been reestablished west of the Roodee and there were large
timber yards near by. About 1760 the city built a new
warehouse for cheese, with its own quay, just to the
north, and was planning a further dock, warehouses,
and a new road from the Watergate, later called New
Crane Street. (fn. 55) By 1781 New Crane Wharf was lined
with the warehouses of the city's merchants and
capable of taking vessels up to 350 tons. (fn. 56)
The Act of 1744 empowered the corporation to
appoint one of two supervisors who were to take
soundings in the river and report to the city or
county justices if at three successive tides the depth
of the channel fell below 15 ft. (fn. 57) The city, however, took
little interest in the river or the company in the century
after the Act. By the early 19th century, the old watercourse had largely silted up and the company's maintenance of the new channel was under attack. Although
Thomas Telford, who worked for the company
between 1817 and 1828, expressed himself satisfied
with the state of the river, by 1850 it was regarded as
hazardous. (fn. 58)
In 1835 the city's admiralty powers were abolished
and in 1841 its supervisory role over the river was
vested in a council committee. (fn. 59) The corporation
remained concerned about the company's neglect of
the navigation, and there were several schemes for its
improvement in the 1830s and 1840s. (fn. 60) In 1846 the
Tidal Harbours Commission criticized the company
for its interest in land reclamation at the expense of the
new cut, and in 1850 an Admiralty inquiry into the
Dee conservancy condemned the ruinous state of the
navigation, attributing it to the negligence of the
company and to the long-standing apathy of the city
council. (fn. 61) Continuing dissatisfaction with the state of
the navigation led in 1889 to the transfer of the
company's powers to the Dee Conservancy Board,
which also became the pilotage authority for the river
until 1938, when that power was vested in Trinity
House. In 1965 the board was replaced by the Dee and
Clwyd River Authority, after 1974 a division of the
Welsh Water Authority. (fn. 62)
Canals
Improvements to the river Weaver after 1730 served to
channel trade from central Cheshire away from Chester
to the Mersey, (fn. 63) and the Trent and Mersey Canal Act of
1766 threatened to strengthen still further the dominance of Liverpool over the Dee. (fn. 64) Despite that threat,
no apparent opposition to the Trent and Mersey Bill
was voiced in Chester, but within two years of its
passage there was a proposal for a canal to link Chester
to the new canal at Middlewich and surveys were
commissioned from the canal engineer James Brindley. (fn. 65) Jealous of their own traffic, the Trent and Mersey
company and the duke of Bridgewater, Francis Egerton, owner of the Bridgewater Canal which connected
with it, opposed any link with the proposed Chester
Canal. (fn. 66) The latter was nevertheless authorized in
1772, (fn. 67) permitting the building of a canal 14 ft. wide
from Chester to Nantwich and Middlewich. (fn. 68) Most of
the capital was raised in Chester or from the Cheshire
gentry. (fn. 69) The project was undermined, however, by a
requirement that the new canal should keep at least 100
yd. away from the older undertaking at Middlewich. As
a result, the Middlewich branch was not begun. There
were also arguments with the River Dee Company over
access to the river at Chester, and many engineering
problems. Although the canal between Chester and
Nantwich opened in 1779, it was a dead end and
attracted little traffic. The project was a financial
disaster and during its first 10 years was threatened
with closure. (fn. 70) No dividends were paid during the
company's independent existence between 1772 and
1813. (fn. 71)
|
| Table 1: Subscribers to the Chester Canal
Navigation, July 1772 |
| Area | No. | £ | Percentage of Capital |
| Chester | 65 | 18,700 | 48.57 |
| Cheshire gentry | 11 | 8,200 | 21.30 |
| Nantwich | 38 | 4,300 | 11.17 |
| London | 7 | 2,900 | 7.53 |
| North-east Wales | 4 | 2,100 | 5.45 |
| Middlewich | 1 | 1,000 | 2.60 |
| Warrington | 2 | 1,000 | 2.60 |
| Liverpool | 2 | 300 | 0.78 |
| Total | 130 | 38,500 | 100.00 |
| Source: C.C.A.L.S., ZQRP 1/1 (printed List of Subscribers, 1772) |
Within the city the new canal changed the townscape
substantially. From a tidal basin linked to the Dee
north of Crane Wharf the canal climbed a staircase of
five wide locks, the largest in Britain when built, with
chambers cut from the solid sandstone. It then entered
a deep cleft below the northern city walls, a section
expected to need a tunnel but which proved to be along
the rubbish-filled Roman defensive ditch. (fn. 72) The cutting
was spanned by Northgate Street bridge and from 1793
by a narrow stone footbridge, designed by Joseph
Turner, architect of the new Northgate, linking Northgate gaol and Little St. John's chapel in the Blue Coat
school building. (fn. 73) From the main city wharf, later called
Victoria Wharf, east of Cow Lane bridge the canal took
a straight course eastwards across the fields and
gardens north of Foregate Street and Boughton, beginning a steady climb to Nantwich at Hoole Lane lock. (fn. 74)

Figure 46:
Canal and north city wall, 1867
Chester's canal was saved from ignominious closure
by the 'Canal Mania' of the 1790s. The Ellesmere Canal
Act was passed in 1793, (fn. 75) and although the scheme took
12 years to complete (fn. 76) it ultimately connected the city
to a much wider hinterland. The first section, opened
in 1795, linked Chester to the Mersey at Netherpool
(later Ellesmere Port). Connexion to the Chester Canal
and the Dee involved substantial works, finished in
1797, (fn. 77) which resulted in the unusual layout still in use
in 2000. The Northgate staircase was severed below the
third lock, the lower two locks were filled in, and the
Chester Canal swung sharply north to an end-on
junction with the Ellesmere at Tower Wharf. The
bend proved awkward for horse-drawn boats and was
made worse when the railway cut across the cramped
site below the locks, reducing the available space still
further. (fn. 78) The link with the river for both canals
diverged from the Wirral line at Whipcord Lane and
fell parallel to the main route through two locks to
reach the tidal Dee Basin. (fn. 79) The tidal basin itself had
proved difficult of access and prone to silting, and a
new entrance with a tidal lock was opened in 1801
south of the original line, no trace of which survived in
2000. (fn. 80) A dry dock for repairing canal boats was built at
the junction between the two branches in 1798 and a
large boat-building yard developed on the west bank,
while the North Basin and warehouses were built on
the east bank by Tower Wharf in 1802. (fn. 81) That basin
was filled in and the warehouses were demolished
during the 20th century but the dry dock survived in
2000 and plans were in hand to restore the basin as
additional mooring space for pleasure craft.

Figure 47:
Canal, west of waterworks, 1957: Steam Mill (left), leadworks (right)
The Wirral line of the Ellesmere Canal proved a
great success. It was navigable by flats, the standard
craft of the Mersey and Weaver, (fn. 82) and goods could be
brought directly to Chester by water from Liverpool
and other points on the Mersey. Lancashire coal, for
example, became cheap enough to compete with that
from north Wales. (fn. 83) A service of passenger packet
boats was provided from the opening of the canal,
the journey to Liverpool optimistically timed at three
hours, and 15,000 passengers a year were using it by
1801. (fn. 84) The service continued until the opening of the
Chester and Birkenhead Railway in 1840. (fn. 85) The new
link to the Mersey attracted a leadworks and corn
mills to the canal side. (fn. 86) Successful as it was, the new
canal served ultimately to demonstrate that Chester's
waterborne traffic could be carried more effectively
through Liverpool and the Mersey than through its
own port. Although the increase in imported grain
after 1860 initially made the canal more important,
eventually it became more economic to open new
mills on the Mersey and the canal-borne trade to
Chester ceased, probably around the time of the First
World War. (fn. 87) The trade in timber brought from the
Mersey to the yards at Cow Lane bridge also ceased
soon after 1918. (fn. 88)
The opening of the Wirral line of the Ellesmere Canal
revived the debt-ridden Chester Canal, (fn. 89) and its prospects improved further with the expansion of the
Ellesmere company's system. In 1806 Chester was
linked by a circuitous new canal (later called the
Llangollen Canal) to the Denbighshire coalfield near
Ruabon, as well as to Whitchurch (Salop.) and Montgomeryshire. It joined the Chester Canal at Hurleston
near Nantwich. Plans for a direct link between Chester
and Wrexham foundered because of cost and engineering difficulties. (fn. 90) The interdependence of the Chester and
Ellesmere companies led to their merger in 1813. (fn. 91) In
1826 the passing of the Birmingham and Liverpool
Junction Canal Act engendered a scheme linking the
end of the Chester Canal at Nantwich with the main
canal system at Autherley Junction near Wolverhampton. (fn. 92) The name of the new canal (Birmingham and
Liverpool), opened in 1835, was indicative of its primary objective, and Chester was merely an intermediate
point on its route. Faced with a new short route from the
Midlands to the North-West, the Trent and Mersey
Canal agreed to the completion of the Chester Canal's
Middlewich branch and the disputed junction, though
stiff tolls for traffic passing that way were exacted. The
link opened in 1833, but the original aim of diverting
Trent and Mersey traffic to Chester and the Dee had
vanished. The main impact on the city's canal trade was
to bring salt in bulk from the Middlewich area for local
distribution from a wharf west of Cow Lane bridge, a
traffic which ceased soon after 1918. (fn. 93)

Figure 48:
Salt warehouse and timber yard, Cow Lane bridge, 1903
To counter the threat from railways, the Chester and
Ellesmere and the Birmingham and Liverpool Junction
canals united in 1845, becoming the Shropshire Union
Railways and Canal Company in 1846. The new
concern was immediately leased in perpetuity to the
London and North Western Railway, but the Shropshire Union continued to have considerable autonomy
and was operated vigorously because much of its
network lay in the territory of the Great Western
Railway. (fn. 94) A direct benefit to Chester was the location
of the administrative headquarters of the whole Shropshire Union system at Tower Wharf. The company
developed its own carrying business, and by 1870 had
almost a monopoly of traffic on both the wide canal to
Nantwich and the narrow canal beyond and to Middlewich. The boats were controlled from Chester (fn. 95) and
many were built at the company's boatyard in the city. (fn. 96)
From 1878 the city council was responsible for registering and inspecting the company's craft under the
provisions of the Canal Boats Act, 1877. (fn. 97) Two hundred
and fifty-two boats were working in 1878, and the
number had risen to c. 400 by 1895. (fn. 98) Wide boats and
flats traded between the Mersey Docks, Ellesmere Port,
and Chester, the main traffic to Chester being in grain,
fertilizer, (fn. 99) timber, and pig lead. (fn. 100) For narrow boats,
engaged almost entirely in through traffic between
Ellesmere Port and the Midlands or the Welsh Borders,
Chester was merely a port of call and registration.
Chester's significance for the Shropshire Union
system was primarily administrative, a function
which proved vulnerable. The boatyard was sold in
1917, (fn. 101) and in 1921, faced with rapidly rising losses, the
company hastily abandoned its carrying operation. (fn. 102)
Although some of the fleet carried on under other
owners, (fn. 103) trade on the canal to and through Chester
had been dealt a mortal blow. Between 1922 and 1931
only 13 boats were added to the Chester register, while
in 1925 alone 86 were scrapped. (fn. 104) The Shropshire
Union company was taken over by the L.N.W.R. in
1922, and although part of the Shropshire Union
system continued to be managed from Tower Wharf,
Chester ceased to be the canal's head office. (fn. 105) After
nationalization in 1948 most administrative functions
were concentrated in Northwich. (fn. 106) Trade through the
Dee branch ended in 1939 when Courtaulds' steam
flats stopped running between the Mersey and Flint,
and the last regular commercial traffic on the main line
disappeared in 1957, (fn. 107) although carriage by narrow
boat continued spasmodically until the early 1970s. (fn. 108)
The demise of goods traffic was offset by the growth of
pleasure boating, a development pioneered in 1935 by
Inland Hire Cruisers of Christleton. (fn. 109) The canal's
environmental and tourist value was recognized in
the 1960s, and it was still much used and well
maintained in 2000 (Fig. 49). (fn. 110)

Figure 49:
Visitors' canal boats at Tower Wharf