John Curr (c.1756 - 1823)

[Ponytail]

Eyre Street, Lots of Thomas Fisher and Edwin Unwin, in George Curr’s land late Dr Frith's, [1827]

https://www.picturesheffield.com/frontend.php?keywords=Ref_No_increment;EQUALS;arc04101&pos=5&action=zoom&id=103589

Shows Jessop Street, Jessop Lane, Eyre Street Earl Street and Eyre Lane. Owners / Tenants marked: Thomas Fisher, Edwin Unwin, William and John Alsop / Joseph Foote.

 

According to the article in the Star, dated 19th January 2023.

"John’s brother, George (1749-1826)" 

 

Is this "George" or another relative?

 

[Ponytail]

Edward Curr born Sheffield 1st July 1798- died 16th November 1850 Australia. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Curr

 

https://www.utas.edu.au/library/companion_to_tasmanian_history/C/Edward Curr.htm

 

https://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/curr-edward-1944

 

https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Curr-12

 

[MartinR]

Interesting that Curr's The Coal Viewer, and Engine Builder's Practical Companion is of 1797.  It describes in detail a Newcomen engine, but no mention of the Watt engine which had come onto the market in 1776 - quite a revolutionary year.

[Edmund]

13 hours ago, MartinR said:

Interesting that Curr's The Coal Viewer, and Engine Builder's Practical Companion is of 1797.  It describes in detail a Newcomen engine, but no mention of the Watt engine which had come onto the market in 1776 - quite a revolutionary year.

Hi Martin,

Watts patent monopoly was extended by Act of Parliament up to 1800, so no doubt there would be a cost implication. Newcomen's engine continued to be installed at collieries in large numbers during the period of Watt's patent.  The Newcomen engine was much simpler and cheaper than Watts' engine, and Watt's advantage of economy of fuel was irrelevant when operating at a coal mine, as opposed to say tin mines (Watts machinery did well in Cornwall).

I think that long ropes tended to be produced for nautical applications (as your Chatham example).  Even where deep pits operated (such as in the North East), their lifts were in sections, and most other colliery depths were much less than the average UK sea depths.  An anchor rope for a ship would have unknown and variable depths to contend with, whereas the requirement in a colliery was known and fixed.

[MartinR]

Valid points, but even if the choice for a colliery was a cheap but inefficient engine then you would still think he would mention in passing the alternative twenty years after its appearance.  Some collieries did have deep shafts at quite an early time.  At around the time the ropewalk was in use Hartley Colliery for instance had a main shaft over 95 fathoms deep (say 190 yards or 1,140 feet) and workings extending out under the sea.  I don't have data on the contemporary Sheffield pits however, they may well have been shallower.

[Ponytail]

Edmund posted this lease which has Colliers Row marked:

A plan of the late John Curr’s leasehold property in Sheffield Park [Duke Street] 1823.

https://www.picturesheffield.com/frontend.php?keywords=Ref_No_increment;EQUALS;arc04185&pos=3&action=zoom&id=104944

Marked: Furnace, foundry, gardens, proposed roads, Colliers Row, Clay Wood Road, ropery, Duke Street, [road] to Granville Lane, Robert Calver,

 

Is this the same Colliers Row or was there another at a later period? 

Colliers Row, Long Henry Street, Park, from junction with The Green, left. January 1940.

u00198

 

[Edmund]

1 hour ago, MartinR said:

Valid points, but even if the choice for a colliery was a cheap but inefficient engine then you would still think he would mention in passing the alternative twenty years after its appearance.  Some collieries did have deep shafts at quite an early time.  At around the time the ropewalk was in use Hartley Colliery for instance had a main shaft over 95 fathoms deep (say 190 yards or 1,140 feet) and workings extending out under the sea.  I don't have data on the contemporary Sheffield pits however, they may well have been shallower.

Curr in his "Coal Viewer and Engine Builder" does mention Watt, briefly on page 20, but the point of his book is to promote his own design of engine which he does in great detail.

In 1835 the maximum depth achieved in the North East was 1,590 feet at Monkwearmouth Colliery which was on the deepest part of the coalfield. Other collieries there were also deep - Jarrow, Gosforth and South Hetton around 1.100 feet, though Jarrow brought the coal up in three stages, the maximum lift being 780 feet

In 1819 the average depth of Sheffield collieries was 360 feet.

There were several shafts at the Hartley colliery and it can be confusing which one is being referred to - for example the "Old Pit" sunk in 1754 was 191 feet ( = 64 yards = 32 fathoms) and the "Mill Pit" sunk in 1830 was 437 feet ( = 144 yards = 72 fathoms)

[MartinR]

Hartley Old Pit was started in the 13C, the first records mention it in 1291.  It was abandoned in 1844.  The Hester pit, aka New Hartley Colliery,  (for which I quoted the depth) was then started and reached the low main coal on 29 May 1846.  It was a single pit colliery.  It was sealed after the disaster of 16 January 1862 and never reopened.  In 1874 a new colliery consisting of the Hastings and Melton pits was started nearby which eventually broke into the old workings in 1901.  The whole colliery was abandoned in 1959 leaving 70 years of coal below ground.  Both Hartley and New Hartley collieries had workings reaching out beneath the North Sea.

Thanks for the info on the Sheffield collieries.

I've re-read page 20 and can't see a mention of the Watt engine.  Page 20 is "Instructions to the Founder" concerning the making of the corf.  The description of "The Fire Engine" starts on page 37.  Just in case we're looking at different publications, the URL is https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_the-coal-viewer-and-eng_1797/page/n19/mode/2up  WE both agree that the point of the book is to promote his own designs and inventions, it was the lack of even a passing reference that surprised me, that's all.

[Edmund]

Apologies for my error (hope not too much time has been wasted as a result!).  The reference is on page 35:

[MartinR]

Found it!  Thanks for your assistance, and don't worry about time being wasted, I can spend hours browsing such works.  It's a fascinating period of history, the groundwork for the subsequent explosion of activity in the 19C was being laid by practical men who actually built their machines and devices.