Any Muddy Bottom

by Geoff Body

  These illustrations of a sloop-rigged trow (above) and one with a ketch rig (below) exemplify the progressive changes made to the traditional trow design. (Roy Gallop)

  The trow dates back at least to the fifteenth century and its original homelands were the waters above Gloucester and those of the River Wye. There the square rig persisted for a good 400 years, but changes in the trow’s environment from around 1830 forced change upon traders, traffic patterns and upon the vessels and their owners and crews. Steam was the agent of a massive alteration, first in the form of the availability of steam towage and then in the growth in railway companies and their networks – the Taff Vale 1840, South Wales Railway 1850, Severn Bridge 1879 and Severn Tunnel 1886. The whole pattern of transport altered and this simple vessel had to alter to reflect this. It had to work further afield, increase its load and speed up its turnaround if it was to stay in business. From the middle of the century the traditional trow profile was giving way to a much bigger craft suitable for more open waters.

  Not only did vessels need to become bigger and capable of carrying a better payload but seaworthiness now became a major consideration. The Severn was always tricky because of its varying depths, but once in the Bristol Channel there was always a prospect of severe storms and other hazards. The combination of an open hold and low freeboard was now an invitation to trouble, especially damage to cargo or even swamping. The traditional side cloths were no protection against bad channel weather and many of the trows facing change had the sides and ends of the hold built up while others, the box trows, had side decks and coamings added. Tarpaulins as the standard form of cargo protection gave way to conventional hatch boards.

  Many trows were given a mizzen mast and a bowsprit, and some were lengthened by the insertion of a section amidships. With the ability to add various foresail and topsail extras they became ketch-rigged and capable of regular journeys as far as Porlock and Barry or even further, while remaining within the manning capacity of two crewmen or two men and a boy. The new breed of larger vessels could take on a heavy load from the coal chutes at Lydney, Newport, Cardiff, Barry, Neath and Swansea and worked well beyond the former Somerset destinations.

  The traditional trow had an oak frame and deep, strong beech keelson, the inside keel which added longitudinal strength. The bottom strakes were of 3in elm and the planking of 3in pitch pine. At one time 20 tons would be a good load, but later overall dimensions ranged up to 70ft in length and loading capability of up to 100 tons or more. Hull profiles changed less than other aspects although some slight rounding took place, albeit without sacrificing the essential flat bottom. Most of the new breed of vessels retained the age-old, near-flat bottom hull, but might have a deeper keel or manage with a detachable keel which had to be floated into position and secured with chains. A high keelson provided added strength and an aid to dividing and so balancing the coal loads.

  The sad end of the life of a trow, the Severn Trader, pictured at Purton in 2003 and still revealing much of the construction of her upper works, including the rather plain traditional transom. Some of the vessel’s alterations are clear, including the housing for an auxiliary engine. (Roy Gallop)

  These later vessels would typically be of some 6ft draught, 17ft wide and be decked forward (for stores) and aft (for living accommodation). Protection against swell might now come not only from the traditional side cloths or sideboards but, in many cases, from higher bulwarks and hatch covers. The combination of extra sail and larger holds enabled this new generation of ketch-rigged trows to operate effectively in their new and larger environment of the Bristol Channel proper.

  The Ketch

  The most popular rig of all from around 1870 onwards, that of a two-part foremast and shorter mizzen, was carried by that most ubiquitous of the channel trading vessels, the ketch. Early vessels with this rig were often converted smacks or sloops with the ketch ranks later being joined by many former trows and even by schooners, all pressurised into the simplest effective rig by low freight rates and the constraints of weather and by the need for high utilisation, all of which contributed to making cutting crew costs imperative. As trows were converted to the two-masted fore-and-aft ketch rig, this format came to dominate, especially as a ketch could point higher into the wind and cope better with the wind variations of coastal waters.

  The most favoured rig, versatile and easy for a small crew to handle, the ketch was the mainstay of the Bristol Channel trade for many years. (Roy Gallop)

  New-built ketches had more pretensions to looks than the traditional trows, with a better shape based on a carvel-built hull with a somewhat less flat bottom, a counter stern in place of the former vertical transom and with much sweeter lines at the bow. To the basic rear mizzen mast and the mainmast forward, a topsail was sometimes added above the mainsail gaff, while a bowsprit permitted jib sails in front of the foresail, something which proved handy when going to windward. This extra provision gave the ketch better balance, speed and handling qualities and, unlike many trows, they were normally provided with an overall hatch cover. Yawls, although similar apart from the siting of the mizzen mast aft of the rudder post, were less common in local waters. The ketch rig could be tricky in windward sailing, but was still near ideal for the waters in which it worked.

  A classic scene with a ketch, the most ubiquitous of local sailing vessels, at anchor in Minehead Harbour, probably awaiting its next cargo.

  The Schooner

  Schooners also appeared in local harbours. Built for speed and manoeuvrability by having fore and aft sails with various additions – square sails, foresails, topsails, gaff sails – they naturally needed more handling and incurred manning costs extra to the standard skipper, mate and, possibly, boy crew of the simpler trows and ketches. This had to be weighed against how much more could be carried with the faster transit times achievable. Performance to windward could be poor, but quite the opposite with the wind on or abaft the beam. Schooners were versatile in sailing terms and could cope well with bad weather as the largest sail was amidships and the mainsail could be stowed in favour of a trysail on the mainmast.

  Of course, not every vessel fitted neatly into the basic categories of sailing rig. Compared with a steamer, a sailing vessel was not so costly as to be completely beyond the aspirations of ordinary seafarers, and a large proportion had a single owner, albeit in the form of several investors. This led to a great deal of individuality for one thing and, for another, the choice of vessel for a new owner or owners was frequently dictated by the limitation on funds. If a new build could not be afforded, frequently the case, the vessel acquired depended on what happened to be on the market at the time, and second-hand purchases were more likely to vary a lot in condition. They would also reflect the previous owner’s preference for rigging and the extent to which he had been able to maintain his charge. Little was standard or permanent in the sphere of sailing vessel rigs, condition, appearance or performance.

  This schooner rig had many similarities to that of a ketch except that the mainmast was towards the stern of the vessel. It was mostly used on bigger vessels but, because of the larger sail area, more hands were needed. Ketches tended to be more manageable, but the schooner had the edge in speed. (Roy Gallop)

  Even when a new master, and any backers he had, started up in business, few would make such generous profits as to be able to keep their vessel immaculate at all times. Seaworthiness was always the prime consideration, but ‘make do and mend’ was a very real concept. A torn sail had to be mended or patched, a broken mast might have to be shortened or abandoned, a new spar crudely shaped from timber that could be found, scrounged or purloined. Important though they were, few ropes would have been in pristine condition. Splicing was an essential skill for seamen.

  Two schooner variations, one (above) with square topsails to increase canvas area and produce extra speed and the other (below) where having three smaller, common sails eased the work of handling them. Rare visitors to Somerset harbours,
such vessels would frequently be encountered in the Bristol Channel along with barques, brigs and, later, steamers. (Roy Gallop)

  At its peak the sailing vessel activity in the Bristol Channel and Severn Estuary would have been a glorious mixture of every type of vessel imaginable and each likely to display the character of its owners, its trade and its circumstances.

  Building

  In the heyday of sail in the waters of the Severn and the Bristol Channel, at any one time about half of the working vessels would have been built in the area they served. The rest were of motley origins, emanating from southern English ports, Scotland, Europe, and even further afield.

  The principal boat building activity of the area was centred on Ilfracombe, on the Barnstaple/Bideford estuarial waters, at Bridgwater and Bristol and on the river and canals in and around Gloucester. Bridgwater had several boatyards as well as dry dock facilities and produced around 140 vessels in the nineteenth century while quite a few small vessels were built at Minehead. Fairly large vessels could be and were built at Chepstow and smaller ones were completed from time to time at Lydney and Redbrook.

  Building took place at Gloucester itself, but was significantly exceeded by the group of yards at Saul, which built ships up to 75 tons, and at Brimscombe, Framilode and Stroud. In the earlier years the majority of vessels from this area at least started their lives as a trow and might draw as little as 3ft to recognise the shallow waters of their canal and Severn homeland. Because of its location there was also a great deal of building for the canal network and of barges for horse or tug towage.

  In addition to the main Somerset building yards capable of constructing sizeable vessels, irregular building of smacks and other smaller vessels took place at Porlock Weir and other small harbours, even on the beach with a launch on rollers on completion. Building was also carried on at several inland locations, including Langport where a 66-ton ketch was built around 1847 for fitting out at Bridgwater, and the odd small, one-off craft could originate from quite small places such as Bleadon. An ongoing business in repairs and conversions beyond the capacity or ingenuity of the crew was another feature of almost all these places and some would have a vessel on the stocks as work in hand, to be pushed forward when time and money permitted. Generally speaking, the smaller the port the smaller the vessels that were built there.

  The Bristol shipyards were quite well equipped, but most Somerset enterprises were only modest in size. Certainly in the early years they had no elaborate facilities and no complicated tools. What they did have was an understanding of timber and where to obtain wood of the right type and shape, and the know-how then to use it successfully. The location might be no more than a flat surface with water access, possibly in the form of a shallow hollow into which water could be admitted to aid the launching process (although small hulls were even launched over the quay wall occasionally at some places). From that point onward the essentials were a firm foundation for the keel and the timbers to prop the vessel upright as work on the hull progressed. Lifting would be done by sheer legs, shaping by traditional tools and fixing by joints, nails and plugs.

  Although the location of his inspiration is not known, the artist has conveyed an excellent idea of the near-universal method of building wooden vessels other than in a dry dock. (Dover Publications)

  The same essentials applied at Bridgwater, at least until cranes and powered saws came along. There, the development of the port in the nineteenth century resulted in increasing shipbuilding activity. Axford & Son are recorded as building the 800-ton barque Pathfinder which was launched to great acclaim in 1852 and made a maiden voyage from the port to New York. On the West Quay, the Crowpill Shipbuilding Yard launched a vessel named after local naval hero Admiral Blake five years later. She was a smaller vessel of 190 tons and just 100ft long. In 1864 John Gough’s business as shipbuilders and repairers added the 400-ton Cesarea to the Bridgwater tally. The final addition to a long and honourable list was that of the 99-ton ketch Irene which came from the yard of F.J. Carver & Sons in 1907 to take up a life of carrying local bricks for her owners Colthurst Symons & Co. Ltd. Carvers owned Bridgwater’s dry dock at the downstream end of East Quay, just beyond the port’s well-used gridiron. This latter structure was an essential dock feature, allowing vessels to be settled on its raised, cross-timbered base at high tide so that attention could be given to the area of the hull exposed when the water level was lower. Many a bruised timber or leaking seam was put right on the gridiron.

  Most shipbuilders, and especially the smaller concerns, depended for their livelihood more on repairs than on new building. This source of work continued for a time after the building of wooden ships ended with the dawn of the twentieth century, but as vessels became too old for economic service this work dried up as well, and with it the shore facilities to keep the surviving vessels earning. If a repair was beyond the competence of its crew or a local carpenter, one more hull had to be sold for scrap, burned or left to rot. Very few shipbuilders made the change from wood to steel construction, certainly not the small ones.

  The equipment of the wooden shipbuilders, both large and small, was very unsophisticated by today’s standards of power tools and computer-controlled machinery. On a simple site, often without the basic protection of even a home-made wooden shed, the shipbuilder practised his art in the design of the vessel, the selection of timbers for its construction and the process of measuring, shaping and fitting them into the required pattern. A ‘feel’ for the wood and ‘an eye’ for shape and measurement were essentials.

  Local timber was used if suitable in type and shape, often purchased on site after inspection. Oak and elm could be had from the Forest of Dean if none was available locally. A sawpit was the first step after selection with final shaping as keel, frames, knees, bracket and planks achieved with the adze, heating taking place as necessary for bending. Discarded timber would be stored in a pile for possible later use and a store of props had always to be on hand. A grindstone, vices, windlass and simple jacks would all be needed and yards always had a motley array of paints and the smaller tools like augers, hammers and so on.

  The majority of vessels owned and operated out of Somerset’s harbours had a chequered pedigree, passing from one owner to another as circumstances dictated and frequently subject to changes to hull, sails or other features in the process. A three-part division of net earnings was common, albeit only one of several similar business norms, with one part to the owner or owners, one for the vessel’s upkeep and one for the master and crew. The latter thus had a vested interest in their vessel’s equipment, handling and ability to earn a decent living, in addition to the basic instinct for self-preservation. The builder might be a part-owner or have agreed to accept some deferred payments from the vessel’s earnings in which case his interest did not end with its move from yard to sea.

  Not unusual in the varied life of many sailing vessels was the Jane. Her 140-year life had begun at Runcorn in 1800 and over her lifetime she had changed rigs in stages from sloop to ketch. In this form, 62ft long, with a flush deck and capable of carrying 80 tons she was owned at Uphill by Captain Smart and a local coal merchant. Like many others of her kind Jane finished her working life as a Bristol lighter and was broken up around 1940.

  While there was no fixed pattern, of course, those vessels not dedicated to a particular owner or trade were subject to a sort of downgrading, a phenomenon which today would be labelled ‘cascading’. A good example was the Flying Foam of Bridgwater, a twin-mast, 100-ton topsail schooner which had been built in Jersey in 1879. After a period of ocean-going in the Newfoundland trade, she cut back her activities to the Welsh slate business. Then, like many others of her kind, she entered a sort of twilight as a regular carrier of china clay from the Fowey Estuary. Both the slate traffic and the china clay were available in quantity and attracted many vessels seeking a cargo. Flying Foam survived the setback of sitting on her anchor in 1931, but sank five years later en route from Liverpool t
o Plymouth with coal. In other ships’ careers, coal from the Bristol Channel to Ireland and salt from Runcorn would have featured regularly.

  Whatever the vessel, the aim was always regular business over the shortest possible route with maximum use of the tide, sometimes even an out and home journey in one cycle. This driving factor limited the attention paid by boatbuilders and owners to the comfort and well-being of the crew. Living and working conditions were spartan, calling for a skilled and hardy breed of men who might make a reasonable living in the good weather months, but had to be ready to find other loads or other jobs in the bad times. They were not expected to have much non-working time while at sea or handling cargoes. Thus on board accommodation provided for the crew would be limited to the aft cabin and this would consist of little more than rough bunks, table, shelves and the essential stove. Space for crew and equipment became even scarcer when marine engines usurped the rear cabin space, another conversion job for the builders.

  Inland

  Less notable, but equally diverse, was the range of smaller vessels used in coastal and inland waters. Small sailing and rowing boats of several designs served countless fishermen in the inshore waters and estuaries and rowing dinghies operated around all the harbours, the larger ones accommodating several oarsmen to undertake towage of sea-going vessels. The trading vessels themselves all had their own small boat while others were in constant use by pilots, chandlers, merchants, port and drainage officials, customs men and others going about their day-to-day business of supply, trade and inspection.