The Highways of Sheffield in the Early 19th Century

[Bayleaf]

This article first appeared in the Transactions of the Hunter Archaeological Society, Volume 6 pp64-77, and is reproduced by the kind permission of the Society, and with thanks to Gramps for reproducing it.

THE HIGHWAYS OF SHEFFIELD IN THE EARLY

NINETEENTH CENTURY.

By Mrs. A. E. HALL

THE surveyors accounts for the highways of Sheffield, with which these introductory pages deal—in some selected extracts—commence with the first year of the nineteenth century and end in 1835 with the passing of the highway act of that year and the inception of a new procedure.

In these first thirty-five years of the century, the business of highway administration was controlled and regulated by the same highway code as that of simpler times; that is to say, by the enforcement of the annual statute duty, or its composition, by a rate assessment of sixpence in the pound, twice yearly, to which the justices might add a supplementary rate, if they deemed it necessary, and by occasional indictment of bad roads.

Within these statutory limits, the various parishes of the country proceeded, adapting to them their own customs, using their own local material. In the case of Sheffield, besides the native quarry stone, sand from the river, furnace cinders, and one specially local product, smithy sleck.

In the year 1812, someone in authority had inserted in these accounts a few guiding remarks in the form of a letter. He says "Dr. Haslehurst thinks smithy sleck a very bad material in the streets for there is very little solidity in it, as it grinds to powder in the summer season when the streets are generally pitched and fills the eyes of passengers and the shops with dirt . . .

"The surveyor", he goes on, "on entering office, should be cautious of making promises to anyone respecting paving of any new or intended street, as it is the general opinion that such streets ought in the first place to be paved and pitched by owners of property adjoining."

"Nevertheless, many new streets in Sheffield have been made when the owners contiguous have agreed to be at two-thirds of the expense and it would perhaps be as well not to extend this courtesy, except in some particular cases where it would be advantageous to the public."

A statement of the annual accounts for highways in the year 1793 divides Sheffield parish into three divisions, Upper, Nether and Park, with two surveyors acting for each. At the commencement of the nineteenth century the Park has apparently been merged, for the accounts are entered under upper and lower divisions with two surveyors to each, and entries occur such as ' Received for sand sold to lower division. Paid J. Green, Upper division surveyor part of the donation of the town trustees.' .

But in 1816 the accounts are combined under four surveyors. Occasionally, in the course of highway negotiation and contract, it was necessary to combine with the other townships of Sheffield as shown in the following entries.

1828 To cash of the several townships in the part of Sheffield, being their proportioned share of Mr. Sorbys bill for making the deed for the Whitham Rd., Ecclesall £2/9/6d., Upper Hallam 13/9d., Nether Hallam 15/9d. Brightside £1/10/6d., Attercliffe 17/6d.

1830 Cash from Smith, Ecclesall surveyor, for half expense of making the road from Porter Bridge to St. Mary's church, half the road belonging to Ecclesall Bierlow.

The most noticeable feature of the accounts in the first years of the century is the annual expenditure of substantial sums upon the park road, entered under various heads such as—

Paid J. Rimington for Park Road £187/ -/ - in 1802.

Paid Commissioners do. £132/11/1 —1805.

Paid Ganister leading to Park Rd., April to Sept., £134/6/-, in 1809.

An entry of 1830 is a reminder that it would be a road subject to heavy traffic. The entry runs :

Paid Sheffield Coal Company for five years rent of depot for ganister in the Park road at 12/6 the year

For repairing, paving and pitching of streets, the surveyors receive subscriptions from the persons interested.

In 1806, cash from proprietors of Eyre Street for pitching.

In 1810, Received of sundry persons for their proportion of pitching in Solly Street.

In 1815 subscriptions in part of Charles Street.

Sometimes improvements meant the purchase of land. In 1813, Messrs. Young were paid £166 13s. 4d. for land in High Street. In 1815, J. Rimington received £66 13s. 4d., being one-third purchase of land in front of the Angel Inn. But in neither case is the quantity of land stated.

In the year 1818 there appeared in the Sheffield Mercury a letter complaining of the bad state of the roads on the North and South sides of the new burial ground (St. George's) and the difficulty of approach from the west side of the town. Subsequently, a meeting of responsible inhabitants was convened, which asked either—that the magistrates who may attend petty sessions tomorrow be asked to present the roads at next Pontefract Sessions, or—in case they advise an indictment instead, then it be preferred under the direction of the chairman. The expense of convening this meeting and effecting the objects of it to be paid by the parties present in equal proportions.

Among the Fairbank papers is a letter, dated 1818, and signed by B. Wake, saying :

I have instructions to indict the roads on the sides of the new burial ground and I want to point out to you which should be measured. Meet me at John Eadons, Crookesmoor.

Finally, the surveyors accounts for that year include this item:

By Mr. Tattersalls bill for indictment £19 10 0.

In that same year Sheffield obtained the power to appoint a body of police commissioners to improve the lighting, watching and cleansing of the streets, for which a rate might be levied not exceeding, at that period 1s. 3d. in the pound, yearly.

The Town Trustees and the master and wardens of the Cutlers Co., were automatically members of the commission, who also employed a surveyor, a salaried official, unlike the parish surveyor, annually elected and serving under the compulsion of common law. It was the duty of the former, among other things, to prevent encroachments and suppress nuisances ; but their powers were limited by the act within an area of three quarters of a mile in each direction from the parish church.

Two examples of this have survived among the Fairbank papers. In the year 1820, owing to a complaint that Mr. Adams, the tailor was building in the footway leading from Pinfold Street to West Street, he has official notice not to proceed further with his building till a proper line of demarcation has been drawn by Fairbank, by order of Fras. Fenton surveyor of police.

And in 1832 Rowland Hodgson is required, at his own cost and within fourteen days to remove or fill up the pond of stagnant water in or near Fitzwilliam Street in Sheffield and within the limits of the act, and which has been considered an annoyance to persons residing near. The liability is ten shillings fine for every day of default from the fourteen days.

The parish surveyor of highways submitted his accounts for public scrutiny and approval at the end of his year of service and it appears from the signatures that a committee practice was adopted. In 1820 the accounts were signed by three of the committee of five chosen at a general public meeting of inhabitants, held in the parish church, who examined the accounts for 1820. There were also appended a further list of names and that of the justices, as required by statute. I might also add that, a newspaper of that year shows that in spite of the signatures there appeared to be some reserve in accepting the items on the part of the town regent, for he requested a further inspection at leisure, without the presence of the surveyors, which evoked from the latter a letter of protest in the current newspaper.

The following are taken from that year's accounts :

Paid paupers in the town thirty and a half days at 9d. ... £1 2 10 ½

paupers at Delf fifty six days at 9d. ... ... £2 2 -

paupers at ithe quarry forty three days at 9d. ... £1 12 3

workmen in the Park Road for drink ... ... £1 1 -

Paid men for drink finishing Charles Street ... £- 4 -

Paid six paupers at 3/- per week each ... ... £- 18 -

Petty disbursements, chiefly statute allowances .. £27 4 11

Wages to men on Park rd and sundry other articles .. £170 11 10 ½

Paid the grinders at the Walk Mill grinding wheel an allowance

for gravel got out of the river there ... ... £- 12 0

It was not until the early nineteenth century that the expedient of using pauper labour on the roads was adopted by some parishes, an experiment by which they hoped to reduce road costs and to ease the burden of rates. It is stated by the Webbs that the wages paid by these vestries that were dominated by the new school of poor law reform were reckoned by piecework at rates deliberately fixed below the market price of labour; more usually, however, a time rate was allowed, fixed according to the justices scale, this varying with the size of his family and the price of corn.

In 1821 appears an item.

Paid Mr. Tattershall relative to the indictment of Sheaf bridge £32 1 9d.

The subsequent items are interesting:

To the Duke of Norfolks contribution towards Sheafbridge and

improvements there £200

To Town Trustees £200

To the sale of materials of buildings taken down there £56 - 4 -1 0

Paid Mr. Hodgson, premises bought of him there £250 - -

Expenses of pulling down £8 - 17 - 6

The year 1822 continues :

Received of Sheffield Gas Light Co., for land sold to them at Sheaf

Bridge and work done for them £87 10 6

Received from Gas Co. on account £60

Received from Geo. Hawksworth for land near Sheaf Bridge £250 - -

To cash of the bank sundry times from Mr. Hodgson and J. Birkett

on account of Sheaf Bridge and buildings adjoining £465 - -

As the century advances the entries of subscriptions for repair and improvements on the roads become more general, also sewers are included. In 1826 the common sewer in Eyre Street, Jessop Street, etc., also one from Green Lane to Lady's Bridge to which the Town Trustees paid £50.

There is another subscription entered this year, from the Church Burgesses, five years donation due Christmas 1826, £7 10s. 0d.

It is entered also later as the annual donation of thirty shillings.

One entry shows that the police paid for repairs at the well in Barker Pool.

Another transaction in 1826 gives the price paid for land. Paid T. Holy for 948 yards of land at 1s. 10d. per yard situate at the back of Lancaster School.

Some prices for soughing are given in 1831. Ninety yards in North Street at two shillings per yard . . . Thirty yards in Blind Lane at three and threepence . . . Twenty yards in Townhead Street at two shillings.

Before passing from these disconnected items to a more concise survey of particular road making I will add one or two that seem to me worth quoting.

In 1832 Received of Lancasterian School for land £150 - -

1833 Paid J. Dixon on account of law expenses £600 10 -

1834 & 5 Received of Duke of Norfolk in aid of making Suffolk Rd. Shrewsbury Rd. and Talbot Street £100 - -

Received from the Canal Co., in aid of making the Canal Road £100 - -

Received from the Sheffield Water Co., in aid of making a culvert £200 - -

And in 1836 the ratepayers certify satisfaction with the accounts for the half-year ending March. The statement shows a balance in hand of £366 17s. 3d. Cash paid over to the board £103 13s. 2d. Signed by the magistrate H. Parker.

The board of highways here referred to was formed in accordance with the highway act of 1835, which gave that power to parishes of over five thousand people. It was to be composed of not more than twenty members, nor less than five and three could act.

Because of the material available the district of Sheffield Moor, or South Street as it was first called, offered itself as a tempting example of highway development. At the end of the eighteenth century, the streets, or the first portions of them, on either side of South Street were set out by the Commissioners of the Ecclesall enclosure award. Following the lay-out, there are glimpses of activity, when the various interests involved were at work. Leases of land granted, being part of the common land lately allotted, to J. Trevers Young.

The Trustees of Norton School think the boundaries of their allotment on Sheffield Moor which they wish to sell, have been wrongly assessed, but the first evidence I find of the improvement of South Street itself is in an estimate of 1825.

In 1823 discussions were taking place between the surveyors of Ecclesall and of Sheffield regarding a suggestion of the Town Trustees that they should remove the top of Coalpit Lane so as to render the ascent from Fargate easier, as well as make Division Street and Blind Lane correspond. And two years later there is an estimate for this work, coupled with another for lowering Coalpit Lane and raising South Street.

Leader's old parishioner describes Sheffield Moor at the dawn of the century as a "shocking road for coaches, rising steeply to the Moorhead. The footpaths a good deal higher than the road, which did not run straight, as now, but turned rather towards the right". In other words, the track of this main highway to the town was deeply hollowed by the years of passage to and fro; the annual road repair by the inhabitants, even if faithfully performed, being little else than a filling up of ruts and a raking over.

The progress of the work in Coalpit Lane and South Street is followed through the letters of Hugh Parker, who, exercising his duty as a magistrate to supervise highways, gives injunction and comment to the overseers.

"I think", he says, "it may be better to form Coalpit Lane rather higher than my last instructions, not only as regards the footpath but the convenience of cross streets and the roads into private yards. It will, I apprehend, be less expense to finish if this suggestion be adopted and not affect in any way the general plans. If nothing be got done in laying the curbstones, please delay till Tuesday when I will look at it with you, or if begun, it may be better to employ the men in the lower part of the street, where no variation can be made in the plans."

Again, he writes, "I yesterday saw the South Street work proceeding very slowly. It appeared to me there was a scarcity of workmen in every department, but especially among the excavators. If the excavations be not expedited we shall be driven far into the Autumn before finishing the carriage part, which will be a serious interference. Please to meet me at the Town Hall to-morrow."

A further injunction runs : "In addition to what I have stated to-day not to allow the workmen to use smithy sleck in setting the channel stones. A few loads of clean sand will be sufficient for the whole work. The magistrates have long ago forbid the surveyors of Sheffield to use smithy sleck and I should be sorry to have it used in Ecclesall, particularly in so good a road as South Street will be made."

An estimate of the expenses of Coalpit Lane shows, among other items, 3,269 cubic yards of excavation and carriage into South Street. New flags for paving to augment the old. Six flights of stone steps, six feet long, ten inches broad and eight inches rise—in all 54 steps and ... a hundred and twenty loads of smithy sleck.

For South Street some details run—

Taking up the present ganister and adding new, lowering the foundation with stone from Hunters bar quarry, ten inches thick and eleven yards wide, 3447 cubic yards of extra excavation beyond that supplied from Coalpit Lane. 2259 square yards of causeway to make the whole as low down as Sharmans shop nine feet wide. 1130 square yards of new flags to complete the above, including carriageway. 110 loads of smithy sleck for the cause way at l/3d.

The total expenses for Coalpit Lane is £651 6s. 4d., and for South Street £1553 11s. 2d., though it appears they are rough estimates as there are other statements which vary a little.

The foregoing piece of road construction comes under the category of public enterprise. The next, road making, of private enterprise by the Rev. J. Bowden and his sister Mary, whose estate seems to have been contained in a section from Button Lane to Broomhall Lane.

There are statements of work done for them in street lay-out in Button Lane, Milton Street, Bowden Street and Fitzwilliam Street.

In 1832 John Cornish contracts to cut and form Fitzwilliam Street from Bright Street to a point between Scots Gardens and to lay the earth, etc., in the said street between Wellington Street and Black Lands Lane, or as Leader has it, Broomhall Street.

There is a seam of coal under a part of the street that may be worked for a short distance without injury to adjoining building lots, and Cornish is to get the coal to the width of five yards from the street middle, except when permitted to extend, and in compensation is to make for every five yards of coal seam as may be saleable, one yard in length of a drain or a sewer. After he has made the compensation length, the remainder is to be done for 13/- per lineal yard. Also he may have the superfluous clay for brick making.

One writer says "Coal is said to be found in various parts of Ecclesall, but of an inferior quality."

This rather vague account of street making is filled in a little by a leaflet of 1834 headed Fitzwilliam Street—320 yards.

Calculations of the expense of completing the road (exclusive of causeways) so that the surveyor would be justified in taking to the same. Cost of common sewer, grates, road stoning, etc., £354 17s. 0d. The Rev. Bowden has already done £247 17s. 0d.

There is also a statement in 1834 from Marcus Smith to J. Bowdon and Sister which says :

To services from 1830 to 34 in laying out the estate near Sheffield Moor and rendering the land eligible for building purposes. Making statements of the value as it proceeds to regulate the advances to the contractor. Attendances on Mr. Kirk and others. Measuring off the coal got out of the estate by J. Cornish. Making settlements thereof to Mr. Kirk £30/5/-. Expenditure about £500.

The records of that part of Fitzwilliam Street from the Moor to Button Lane, laid out by the enclosure commissioners and then named Bright Street, show the total cost of construction in 1834 to be £226 15s. 6d. and the length of road 147 yards.

There are conflicting statements of the division of expenses between Lord Fitzwilliam, other proprietors and the township, the cost to the township being entered up as the regular and usual contribution of the township in making footways.

There is yet a third category of road development, that undertaken by the Church Burgesses, a part of it centred in the district we are now considering. From the year 1830, when lower Trafalgar Street was formed, the succeeding years saw a steady development of the streets and lanes of its neighbourhood. Details of the work done, street lengths and cost are given in a sheet headed "Memorandums."

Eldon Street, 336 yards, cost £334 16s. 4d. Wellington Street, 229 ½ yards, cost £127 11s. l1d. Milton Street, 48 yards, £50 7s. 7d. Lower Trafalgar Street, 245 yards, and sough making in Button Lane, £112 15s. 4d.

An interesting work note by one of Fairbank's assistants mentions the colliery in Trafalgar Street and says he had measured and fixed the situation of the pumps and coal pits in the burgesses land.

But to revert to road costs. The lists quoted seem to be a rough draft to assist the final statement. The process of arrival at these costs from the tender to the finished work is shown in the data for Eldon Street, which was formed from Devonshire Street to Button Lane.

The first part, as it is called, from Devonshire Street to Wellington Street, 40 feet wide.

The second part, to Button Lane, 36 feet wide.

There are three tenders for the first part only, which average about £380 each, and one tender for both parts of £694 19s. l0d.

An estimate in detail by J. Fairbanks reduces this to £465 14s. 5d. But in a formal contract between the Burgesses and J. Cornish, signed by the latter, he agrees to build both parts for £299 6s. 8d., with the proviso that in case of deviation in cutting or other work, a proportionate allowance shall be made, to be settled by the surveyors of the burgesses and commonalty.

The contract stipulates for a sough and two manholes in each part of the street. Bank walling each side. Two footpaths each seven feet wide to have a foundation of cinders four inches thick. A foundation of the same for the roadway five inches thick, and the middle of the road then covered with broken stones ten inches thick. Also a channel of square stones set in each side along with edgestones.

The lower part of the road needed raising. If the excavation work did not provide sufficient material, the contractor to state the sum he will expect to raise the remainder to the right level, but if the excavation should be more than required it should be used in the low part, north of Wellington Street.

The final statement, as drawn up, includes the usual reference to the township's contribution in the item :

To edgestones not furnished by the surveyor of Sheffield Highways—and totals to the sum of £346 5s. 0d., which is a slight variant on the memorandum one. Of this cost the Burgesses pay for the whole of the upper part of the street, and 224 yards,of frontage in the lower £250 13s. 3d. S. Young, Esq., Pays for 230 yards in the lower part £95 lls. 9d. And the Burgesses will have to receive back from their lessees £41 15s. 0d.

There seems to have been a general tendency to deal with the contractor who sent in the lowest estimate for these works. For instance, in 1826 a contract to build a road for Thos. Holy and Richard Bailey was entered into. The system of payment adopted, however, of keeping a sum in hand, evidently created difficulties for the contractor, probably working on a low margin of profit with insufficient capital.

The work came to a standstill, and after some friction and negotiation, a settlement was made and a fresh contractor engaged to finish the work. To quote another example. Five tenders were offered in 1832 for sewer laying in three streets for Rowland Hodgson. Of these tenders the highest figure was £212 16s. 0d. and the scale descended to the lowest and very dissimilar figure of £83 13s. 6d.

This was the one accepted and a later report on the work says, "Chadwick has done the job as well as any of the others would have done, though there will be little left for himself after paying his assistants and cost of carriage. I therefore recommend a further allowance of £15, and even then he will be but poorly paid."

In the question of repayment for these road works by the lessees, is an illustration of the steps by which commercial intercourse was rendered more accommodating.

Speaking of the early years of the century, a writer in 1885 makes this comment: "No provision was made for distributing over a series of years the cost of sewers, draining and paving. Levied in one collection, as the general practice then was, these expenses often entirely absorbed the immediate rents or profits of absolute owners, whilst owners of short terms, who might derive little benefit from the works, had still greater cause of complaint. This immediate charge was the great obstacle to an extensive voluntary improvement, in a few instances time might be allowed for repayment, but with one exception this never exceeded three years. Manchester Town Council generally allowed twelve months. They had no authority to do more. But these expenses frequently exceeded the whole yearly rent of premises and pressed upon persons solely dependent upon such property, as artisans who borrowed money from building clubs to erect houses, the interest on which absorbed the whole rent."

In 1833 a proposal is put forward for the consideration of the burgesses that it would be more advantageous to them if in future the lessees were charged with a rent upon half the adjoining streets, which are not now paid for, rather than charge them with a proportion of the expense of forming, as at present, and for the trust to be at the cost of making.

For example, the amount expended on Leicester Street has been £80 17s. 3d., and the lessees either have paid or will have to repay this sum as the land may be let off. But if the proposed plan be adopted instead of the present system, the trust would get rather more than 15 ½ per cent for the money laid out, in the way of an additional rent. In Eldon Street, rather more than 14 ¾ per cent. In Trafalgar Street, about 11 ¼ per cent.

Three years later, in 1836, the need for long term repayment was expressed in a letter by one Roger Brown, who carried on the business of his late father as a slater in Division Street.

The letter mentions a proposal relative to parcels of land and the writer says : "I am disposed to agree to your terms provided you will transfer the outlay of street formation into an annual rent, for I have ever found it an objective of very great moment in the letting of land where sums of money must be advanced for the forming of streets. If the expenses already incurred in the formation of the streets were adjusted by the payment of some three or four pounds per annum along with the rent, it would make the letting prospects greater, because experience has shown that the advancing of money for such purposes is often a great stumbling block. If this is agreeable to you I have no objection to becoming your tenant."

Some jottings indicate the streets in question to be Thomas Street and Headford Street.

But it comes almost as a rebuke to arbitrary statement to find, after this, a letter by Fairbanks writen in 1828 to a client in Durham in which he says, "It is usual here in laying out streets to charge the lessee of the building plot with half the width of the street on each side in his rent. The road formed at the expense of the owner, but not kept in repair by him."

The need of better communications, rendered urgent by the rapid growth of commerce, had focussed attention upon road surfaces. The sleepy village concept of a road was being slowly scrapped, and various new systems tried out. In this district of Headford Street we get a ripple of the wave of experiment that was ushering in our modern road. It is contained in a leaflet dated 1833 entitled Thomas Street, Headford Street and the east end of Bath Street.

The expense of forming the above streets in two different ways. First by patching the carriage way with boulders and having channel stones and edgestones with two footpaths, each 7 feet wide, and a sewer 2 foot six by 1 foot six inside measure, the edgestones supposed to be found by the surveyor of highways and all other materials by the assessment on the persons liable. The cost of Thomas Street done as above would be £138 16s. 3d.

The second method, by macadamising the carriage way, with furnace cinders underneath, would cost £123 15s. 9d. Though the expense is less in macadamising, yet there are several advantages in the other mode. It is completed in less time, and is more durable. No repairs would be needed for a number of years. The other way will want constant attention for a considerable period that no ruts may be suffered to exist, which will be the case unless persons are employed to rake them over frequently."

There is another feature of highway development, not so far considered, that of dedication. The records available on this subject deal with the streets in the burgesses land, in our particular district.

In 1843 a proposal was made for the dedication, under the late highway act of those streets wholly or in part formed since the act came into force March, 1836, and also of those formed before that date which required improvement before acceptance.

The footpaths of Eldon Street, a report says, as far as they are in Sheffield township, have been taken to, but not the carriage way, which requires pitching. The upper part of the footway on the west side of Trafalgar Street, belonging to Sheffield, has been taken to, but not the carriage way, nor the footpaths on the east side. Leicester Street has not been taken to. It has no sewer, never was pitched, and has been much injured by excavations brought out of the yards and cellars adjoining, and the water has not been taken off.

The thoroughfares of this dedication group include also Wilkinson Street, Brunswick Place, Brunswick Street and Hanover Road or Street. Both names are used.

In Wilkinson Street several of the lessees have laid excavations out of their premises both on the footpath and carriage way so as to be a nuisance and obstruction, and the land not having been taken to by the board of highways, their surveyor will not interfere in it, and the surveyor of police declines to take any notice as their powers do not extend to what is yet private property. Mr. Wheat is to request owners to remove the rubbish.

In the other three streets Thos. Holy, as landowner, shares the onus of road making with the Burgesses, though it is two years later, in 1845, that Holy addresses an enquiry to Fairbanks regarding the probable cost of dedication to the use of the public, Porter Street and Hanover Road, as he lacks any previous experience of such matters and fears the cost will be heavy.

There is evidence of discussion between landowner and surveyor concerning the state of the group of streets and the amount of repair necessary. There is also a request from the Burgesses to Mr. Fairbanks in 1846 for his opinion.

In the spring of this same year Mr. Holy writes : "Please communicate to the Church Burgesses that I have completed the footpath adjoining my land of Brunswick Street—formally called Porter Street —also the two footpaths of Hanover Road between Broomspring Lane and Wilkinson Street, and I hope the Burgesses will proceed with the same into Glossop Road. The footpath is asphalt which I consider far more durable than flags, pleasanter to walk upon and half the cost, proved by what was done at Norton some time since, and the magistrates, Bagshaw and Overend, also approve the same."

A further note says:

“Hanover Road footpath completed and the magistrates ready to view, but I wait for you to complete Brunswick Street. You may have the other side completed in four days by Mr. Wright, superior to flag stones at half the cost." A bill for the finished work was presented by Mr. Wright in July.

The case for dedication now appears to have reached a decision. In November, 1846, a list of streets to be made public highways was again drawn up. They were Chester Street, Eldon Street, Dee Street, Devonshire Lane, Wilkinson Lane, Hanover Street, Eldon Lane, Brunswick Place, Milton and Trafalgar Streets, which shows the omission as compared with the original list of Leicester Street, Wilkinson Street, and Brunswick Street.

I have no evidence of what happened in the case of the two former. The streets were to be viewed again, and if approved were to be put in three certificates, one each for Ecclesall, for Sheffield and for Nether Hallam. The magistrates refused to certify lanes, they not being of the required width.

A meeting of the board of highways resolved that some small improvement still remained to be done in three of the streets, and that Eldon Street required pitching at a cost of £80 8s. 6d. and a main sewer laying from Wellington Street to Button Lane—cost £135.

The resolution states, as soon as the work is completed the Board shall do the best they can to aid the Burgesses in getting the streets certified and affirmed and enrolled at the sessions. As soon as the certificate is obtained, the Board to be at liberty to take up Eldon Street, if they think proper, and lay a sewer and this shall not be considered as relieving the Burgesses from their liability to keep this and the other streets in repair for twelve months as by law required. But they shall not be called upon to make any repairs which may be required in consequence of the street being so taken up.

Under the date of February, 1847, are two certificates of acceptance, one signed by Wm. Lee and named as assistant surveyor of Sheffield and of Ecclesall Bierlow, and one by Samuel Horrabin for Nether Hallam.

The attitude to sewer construction shown by these records seems haphazard and casual. One probable cause has been pointed to in the early method of repayment. Improvement Commissioners, too, had little scope.

"They rarely had powers," says one authority, "to drain unfinished streets, only partly built upon . . . ." And much was left to individual caprice.

"You will observe," says Roland Hodgson, in 1832, "that Mr. Sheldon has no way of carrying off the water from his cellars, except by the old land drains, which being of small dimensions must, of course, be soon stopped up. In order to prevent this cellar overflow, he has, I am told, made a sough into the common sewer in George Street, which is certainly a trespass on my rights, and which, if we do not come to some agreement I shall be obliged to have stopped up." But this same year the scourge of cholera drew attention to the bad state of the Young Street area and Mr. Hodgson is engaged in correspondence on the subject. It is significant that the contract for sewer laying for Hodgson in Thomas Street, Tudor Street, Headford Street to its junction with Young Street—previously referred to in a comparison of tenders—should be under date of 1832. It was in this area also that Roger Brown asked for easy terms as a condition of tenancy.

By 1841 the question of drain capacity is raised in an enquiry in a nuisance near Leavy Greave, which includes also a question of sough ownership. The nuisance was caused, the statement runs, by water out of Broad Lane overflowing into the street, passing between Mr. Sutton's land, which I will call Winter Street, and conveying mud and sand into the bath of Mr. Sutton in times of heavy rain so as to render it unfit for use.

It appears that some time ago the water was conveyed across this street through Sutton's land into a deep channel there which would take it away, but for the circumstances of the sough first mentioned being filled up, which is insufficient for, and was not made to conduct all the water running down Broad Lane, but merely the water from Winter Street, which was but a small portion of what now accumulates there. As there is reason to fear the sough has been used for so long as that the surveyor may have gained a right to it, it appeared reasonable they should repair it and keep it from injuring the private property of anyone. Mr. Lee, the Sheffield Surveyor, said that as Nether Hallam was also involved, he would halve the cost with their surveyor.

To conclude this paper, I should like to add a footnote taken from the work previously quoted, A History of Private Bill Legislation by Frederick Clifford, barrister-at-law.

The quotation runs—

The inspector of highways stated in 1843 (report of commissioners) "there are really no legal powers in force to regulate the drainage of towns like Sheffield. The highway funds are wasted and mismanaged.

My predecessor, who was employed many years, could neither read nor write. He recommended and overlooked the making of common sewers, and at the same time contracted to do the work himself, without level, plan or agreement, and of course without any regard to the dimensions required in the localities.

Within the last eight years several miles of such sewers had to be reconstructed. No books of the expense of roads and works were kept, and the annual cost of maintaining a certain length of any kind of road was so little known that the last surveyors, before the passing of the present highway act, rendered the public liable to repair for a consideration of £100, a line of three roads which have cost annually since that time, an average sum of £241.

At this period sewers and roads were under the management of different surveyors. My jurisdiction is confined to the township of Sheffield. There is a separate board in Ecclesall bierlow. I believe there are some few sewers there, but the officers confess they know nothing about them. If there are any sewers in the other townships—namely—Brightside, Attercliffe, Nether and Upper Hallam, the respective authorities do not know it."

[Edmund]

"You will observe," says Roland Hodgson, in 1832, "that Mr. Sheldon has no way of carrying off the water from his cellars, except by the old land drains, which being of small dimensions must, of course, be soon stopped up. In order to prevent this cellar overflow, he has, I am told, made a sough into the common sewer in George Street, which is certainly a trespass on my rights, and which, if we do not come to some agreement I shall be obliged to have stopped up." But this same year the scourge of cholera drew attention to the bad state of the Young Street area and Mr. Hodgson is engaged in correspondence on the subject.

The links are to an archaeological dig in Hodgson Street Headford Street / Milton Street (behind Stokes Tiles):

http://archaeologyda...us2-37904_3.pdf

http://archaeologyda...us2-37904_2.pdf

http://archaeologyda...us2-37904_1.pdf

Brief extract:

The first map to show the area in detail was the 1853 OS map. This depicted the development site as a vacant building plot, with some housing having been built immediately to the northeast. Milton Lane, Hodgson Street and Headford Street had all been laid out and named by that date.Hodgson Street is named after George Hodgson, steel maker and roller, who owned the Vulcan Works just off the Moor. The property at No.97 was shown as a public house, still referred to in tradedirectory entries as a beerhouse. A photograph of the site taken in 1914 showed it as the Foresters Arms. (see https://www.hpacde.o...ield/s17413.jpg ) The two shops on Hodgson Street were still in existence in the 1950s, although the beerhouse at No.97 Headford Street had been converted to a shop by 1922. A photograph of the corner of Headford Street and Hodgson Street from 1965 showed the Foresters Arms, by then part of the works, with a garage entrance to the northwest and the lower garage building behind with a pitched roof. ( see https://www.hpacde.o...ield/s17422.jpg )

[Calvin72]

On Spring Hill, Crookes. Never seen another one.

Wonder if it has anything to do with any of the above text - it is certainly pre-1890 and i think c.1850