Trams versus The Railways

[Springs Branch]

In line with this thread's title "Trams versus The Railway", one example of when The Railway (temporarily) fought back in the Wigan area is as follows...

In the early 1880s, the Wigan Tramways Company Ltd, a private concern, was expanding its operations with a new street tramway between Wigan and Hindley, along what has become today's A577 road. This was 3ft 6" gauge, mostly single-track and planned for operation by steam trams.

(BTW - the indefatigable Maj.Gen. Hutchinson was involved in inspection & approval of the new tram lines in the Wigan district too)

Along its route the new tramway needed to make a 90° flat crossing across an existing freight railway - the Springs Branch, originally opened in 1838 by the North Union Railway, but by this time owned by the London & North Western Railway.

E.K. Stretch's book The Tramways of Wigan gives the story succinctly:-

"The Hindley line finally opened to traffic on Saturday 13th January 1883, but was horse-worked. Only one of the four steam locomotives had been delivered, and the order was not completed until later in the year.

However the main reason for the use of horse traction was that no tram track had yet been laid across the Springs Branch of the L&NWR at the level crossing in Manchester Road, Ince. The railway company had raised all kinds of objections.

The tram service therefore had to be operated as two separate shuttle services, with passengers walking across the level crossing. Luckily this lay almost at the mid-point of the line, which simplified the timetabling of this method of operation.

In the morning and evening the cars for the Wigan end of the line were dragged across the gap (the only depot was located in Hindley). Horse cars could easily be deliberately derailed and run noisily and bumpily over the roadway, and this was done to get around obstructions, although steering them in such circumstances was difficult and depended on a strong pull from the horses!

It has proved impossible to discover the date on which track was laid across the railway crossing and tramcars began to run through, but it must have been some time around July 1883.

Horse traction remained, for the L&NWR, having agreed to the level crossing, were now objecting to steam".

When the Springs Branch railway had been built in the 1830s, it crossed a number of pre-existing late 18th and early 19th century colliery tramroads in the area, which ran from local pits towards the Leeds & Liverpool Canal. It seemed to cope with those crossings alright.

A separate publication on the history of the Springs Branch line* gives an opening date of August 1883 for a new standard-pattern L&NWR signal box at the Manchester Road level crossing; previously (and pre-tramway) the road crossing there had been controlled by flagmen. However, that account gives no mention of the tribulations with the Wigan Tramways Company.

So, being charitable, maybe rather than the L&NWR deliberately hindering opening of the tramway, it was a 19th Century case of 'Elf & Safety Gone Mad' - they didn't want the risk of passenger-carrying steam trams crossing their lines until after they'd completed installation of proper signal protection. After all, the L&NWR were not going to lose any of their passengers to those particular trams - it was the L&YR which had stations at Ince and Hindley.

I wonder if there were examples elsewhere in the country of railway companies hindering construction or operation of local tramways?

Or, once they became popular and acquired some local political clout, the tramways sometimes could call the shots on the railways?


* The Wigan Branch Railway by Dennis Sweeney.

 

[Andy873]

So far we have discussed the impact of competition of trams on railways. A different angle is the role that trams and tramways played as low cost feeders to the main line. As examples, Wantage, Wisbech and Upwell, Wolverton and Stony Stratford - all steam worked. Cruden Bay was electric. No doubt others can add to this list.

A great point and one I hadn't thought about.

I decided to go back to the OS maps and have a closer look at the tram system of Burnley. In the town there are three railway stations, Rose Grove, Burnley Barracks and Burnley Bank Top (now Burnley Central).

At the southern end of the tram network, it actually terminates right outside Rose Grove station, the tram line come very close to Burnley Barracks. The only exception was Burnley Bank Top which was a good distance away, however on the 1909 map there is a footpath from Colne Road (which had the tram line on it) to a long footbridge which led directly to Bank Top station - now the thing is, it wasn't there (both the footpath and bridge) in 1890. Clearly when the tram system was taken over by the corporation, re-gauged to 4 feet and electrified, this must have been roughly when this link between the trams and station was made.

(BTW - the indefatigable Maj.Gen. Hutchinson was involved in inspection & approval of the new tram lines in the Wigan district too)

Doesn't surprise me, he went everywhere, one minute he could be inspecting the Fourth bridge construction, the next, might turn up in Cardiff or Brighton.

Or, once they became popular and acquired some local political clout, the tramways sometimes could call the shots on the railways?

Once a tram system is taken over by the local corporation it would certainly put them in a stronger position, how strong is anyone's guess. The footbridge I mentioned just before might be an example... It was around 470 feet long and had to cross Bank Hall colliery sidings and the railway's coal yard sidings. To get this bridge built you need both co-operation from the railway company and some political clout.

Here is the footbridge and path - look for the large L in the word Burnley.

Georeferenced Maps - Map images - National Library of Scotland

You have to wonder just why the towns of Burnley, Nelson and Colne (and others around the country) wanted to join up? For sure some people might need to travel between them for work, but back in the day most people worked in the town they lived in. In joining up, it would have been perceived as direct passenger competition from the trams.

I wonder if there were examples elsewhere in the country of railway companies hindering construction or operation of local tramways?

Another great question, wonder if anyone knows of that, or perhaps some examples?

 

[Ken H]

@Andy873 raises an interesting question at the end of post #32. This was discussed here. https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/bus-services-ran-by-railway-companies.182195/ but its a bit inconclusive.

 

[Andy873]

@Andy873 raises an interesting question at the end of post #32. This was discussed here. https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/bus-services-ran-by-railway-companies.182195/ but its a bit inconclusive.

Thanks Ken, a fascinating read, as you say though, it's a bit inconclusive. Didn't know the railway companies had a hand in some of those bus companies.

A quick look and with the timescales involved, the railway companies looked like they didn't have an opportunity to influence the tram companies by way of shares. A lot of the private tram companies that started say in the 1880's were simply bought out by the local authorities in only 20 years or so. Once they became part of the local corporation the share option would have closed to the railways.

As for the trams being feeders to the railways, well I can only say all the ones I have had a look at, the trams come reasonably close to the railway stations. More than that, the tram terminus at the southern end of Burnley was actually Rose Grove railway station. This new tram line was added in 1903 by the corporation and looks to be a deliberate decision.

1903 (at least in East Lancashire) is an interesting year, this is the year the trams of Nelson and Colne were electrified and fully connected with Burnley. This contributed to a large downturn in passengers for the L&Y. With these tram systems under the ownership of the respective corporations, there wasn't much they could do about it.

What they did do, (and I'm sure this happened around the country to some degree) was to open small halts, and run some smaller local trains in 1906 but these were largely unsuccessful. I can see what they (the L&Y) were trying to do, one of the halts, New Hall Bridge halt was situated very close to several cotton mills whilst the tram was further away from them.

 

[miklcct]

Trams, and later buses, were a major source of competition to the railways for shorter-distance urban journeys in the early 20th century. The train was probably faster station to station, but the tram was often faster door-to-door through having stops in more convenient places, and it was usually more frequent and often cheaper. Tram competition was one reason some companies with major commuter flows adopted frequent electric services, notably around Newcastle, Manchester and Liverpool. In London, short-distance services on the main line network were usually out-competed by trams or more often the Underground, and the rail companies tended to focus on the longer-distance market.

By time time traffic congestion started to significantly affect bus journeys (by which time the trams had gone), most of the railways that could have provided an alternative had been closed. Ironically some have now been re-born as modern light rail systems.

In Hong Kong, there was a plan to close the tramway when the Underground Island line was built with the western extension, as they would run on the same alignment, making the tramway economically unviable. The western extension wasn't built and the trams survived. The western extension has now been built using another alignment which doesn't directly compete with the tramway, and the buses suffered as a result due to slower than the Underground, and more expensive than the tram.

There is no competition between the main line network and the Underground in Hong Kong, as they serve different areas.

This is still a rule in Melbourne, where the tram network is kind of comparable to the ones the UK used to have. You aren't allowed to overtake a stopped tram until its doors are closed and the road is clear of pedestrians.

This is still the rule on Hong Kong Island as well.

Then we built huge estates of low density housing- 'Homes fit for heroes'. The type of area its impossible to make a tram pay - indeed its hard for buses today

How can these housing attract low-income residents which can't afford cars?

Most UK tram networks closed between the 1930s and the early 1960s, so before power electronics were a thing. The main reasons were the spending needed to replace worn out infrastructure and vehicles, trams obstructing or being obstructed by the increasing number of cars, and buses (occasionally trolleybuses) being more modern and therefore more attractive. Even places such as Leeds, which built reserved tracks in the outer suburbs, were still reliant on street running on older sections further in, and it's probably not a coincidence that the only survivor (Blackpool-Fleetwood) was almost 100% on its own right of way.

How are diesel buses more modern than electric trams? Isn't diesel an inferior form of power than electricity?

 

[Ken H]

Thanks Ken, a fascinating read, as you say though, it's a bit inconclusive. Didn't know the railway companies had a hand in some of those bus companies.

A quick look and with the timescales involved, the railway companies looked like they didn't have an opportunity to influence the tram companies by way of shares. A lot of the private tram companies that started say in the 1880's were simply bought out by the local authorities in only 20 years or so. Once they became part of the local corporation the share option would have closed to the railways.

As for the trams being feeders to the railways, well I can only say all the ones I have had a look at, the trams come reasonably close to the railway stations. More than that, the tram terminus at the southern end of Burnley was actually Rose Grove railway station. This new tram line was added in 1903 by the corporation and looks to be a deliberate decision.

1903 (at least in East Lancashire) is an interesting year, this is the year the trams of Nelson and Colne were electrified and fully connected with Burnley. This contributed to a large downturn in passengers for the L&Y. With these tram systems under the ownership of the respective corporations, there wasn't much they could do about it.

What they did do, (and I'm sure this happened around the country to some degree) was to open small halts, and run some smaller local trains in 1906 but these were largely unsuccessful. I can see what they (the L&Y) were trying to do, one of the halts, New Hall Bridge halt was situated very close to several cotton mills whilst the tram was further away from them.

Go on the bus section of timetable world and see how many non-municipals have something like 'by association with {some rail company or BR} on the cover and have a train departures section. also there are many pages of interavailability of train and bus return ticket regulations, whereby one could travel out by train and back by bus. No idea how the money moved between rail and bus company. Railway Clearing House?
Here is a page about interavailability on West Yorkshire Road Car Co 1956 timetable https://timetableworld.com/ttw-viewer.php?token=aa007892-fc31-4ea4-b514-6d12f8370adc

The Amalgamated Transport Company (ATC) is interesting. The railway interests in bus companies were nationalised in 1948 and the bus shares were vested in the British Transport Commission. Later, the National Bus Company was established and some ex railway interests* were vested in ATC, which was based in Saville Town in Dewsbury in the Yorkshire Woollen offices. Yorkshire Woollen were owned mostly by British Electric Traction and were a tramway company till 1934.

*As far as I know it was just the railway interests in the Yorkshire Joint Operating Committees in Todmorden, Halifax, Huddersfield and Sheffield.

I think the railway holdings in bus companies is listed in a schedule to the act of parliament that established BR.

Interesting thread about the crossover between Rail and road travel industries

 

[Rescars]

The precise purpose of the trams acting as feeders to the railways varied. Using my earlier examples, both Wantage and Wisbech and Upwell carried passengers, but their main function was to transfer freight - a lot of farm produce in the case of the W&U. Being standard gauge helped! Wolverton and Stony Stratford was a narrow gauge passenger route. Although initially independent, it was bought by the LNWR when it got into financial difficulties because it was a prime commuting route for most of the staff at Wolverton works. Cruden Bay was built by the GNoSR to convey guests between its rather smart hotel and its nearest main line station.

 

[edwin_m]

The Burton and Ashby Light Railway was a tram route operated by the Midland and connected to their stations at both ends plus a branch to Swadlincote.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

Grimsby and Immingham Electric Railway - strictly a light railway but it did have street running in Grimbsy - was built and owned by the GCR to convey workers to its new dock complex. It was intended to link up with the municipal tramway, but this never happened. It lasted until 1961.

 

[Dr Hoo]

The Burton and Ashby Light Railway was a tram route operated by the Midland and connected to their stations at both ends plus a branch to Swadlincote.

You beat me to it.

The gauge was 3ft 6in by the way, in order to allow through working with the pre-existing Burton-on-Trent network, so it wasn't much use for freight. The B&A also had a branch to Gresley (Castle Gresley) Station, I understand.

 

[edwin_m]

You beat me to it.

The gauge was 3ft 6in by the way, in order to allow through working with the pre-existing Burton-on-Trent network, so it wasn't much use for freight. The B&A also had a branch to Gresley (Castle Gresley) Station, I understand.

On checking, the branch was from Swadlincote to Castle Gresley.

There were extensive railways in the area so I think anywhere with potential for freight would already have been connected. I can't really think of much reason for the tramway - perhaps all that freight left no room for much passenger service, but that must have applied in lots of other places where the railway never attempted to run trams. Maybe its closure as early as 1927 just confirmed it was a bad idea.

 

[Ken H]

How can these housing attract low-income residents which can't afford cars?

Well the 1930's build in Leeds where I grew up is a mix of private and social housing. All the streets are full of cars. The poorer have older cars, and many will do servicing themselves. Cars can last a long time with proper care. Wifes car is 2006, mine is 2010. Both are reliable.

 

[edwin_m]

How are diesel buses more modern than electric trams? Isn't diesel an inferior form of power than electricity?

We're talking about the 1930s to 1960s when almost all trams in the UK disappeared. At that time many tramways were still using the original equipment from electrification, the costs to replace it being one of the main reasons for closure. Buses didn't exist at the time so were by definition newer, and had luxuries such as heating and padded seats that trams usually didn't. We may see diesel as inferior now, but at the time it was the latest thing, and arguably less damaging than electricity, when trams were fed from power stations that burned dirty coal and were often near the centres of towns.

A few tramways did of course fight back in the 1930s with modern vehicles that matched the comfort of buses, but by the 1950s these too were falling behind, considering that buses had shorter lives so most of the ones of similar age had by then been replaced with new ones.

 

[Roger1973]

We're talking about the 1930s to 1960s when almost all trams in the UK disappeared. At that time many tramways were still using the original equipment from electrification, the costs to replace it being one of the main reasons for closure. Buses didn't exist at the time so were by definition newer, and had luxuries such as heating and padded seats that trams usually didn't. We may see diesel as inferior now, but at the time it was the latest thing, and arguably less damaging than electricity, when trams were fed from power stations that burned dirty coal and were often near the centres of towns.

A few tramways did of course fight back in the 1930s with modern vehicles that matched the comfort of buses, but by the 1950s these too were falling behind, considering that buses had shorter lives so most of the ones of similar age had by then been replaced with new ones.

yes.

At any point in time, a new tram is broadly better / bigger than a new bus, it will last longer, but will cost more.

But this meant that in some British towns and cities, the first generation of electric trams from the 1900-1914 era stayed in service a lot longer than it should have, and compared badly with new motor buses. There were still places running open top, 4 wheel trams in to the 30s (both Bristol and Coventry were in to the 1939 war which initially delayed then later forced the abandonment of trams in those cities.)

Motor bus (and trolleybus) technology moved a long way forward between the mid 20s and the mid 30s, along with a move to pneumatic not solid tyres, and more tarmac rather than cobbled roads.

There was also the cost of constructing new track and electric infrastructure as towns / cities grew between the wars and again after 1945, the complications of tracks and wires when post-1945 road widening / realignment plans started to happen, and also the nationalisation of the (often municipal) electricity generation industry in 1948 - most places didn't have a separate power station for the trams, so had to buy rather than generate electricity.