.gif)
Articles
Industrial History of Hammerwich to 1854
This article describes an area of the Parish, covered in Walk 5, which has changed dramatically over the centuries, mostly due to the industrial activity of the Paget family, the exploitation of the coal deposits, the construction of the canal and the railway, the creation of Norton Pool (Chasewater) and the consequent increase in the population of the area.
Walk 5 is now a quiet and pretty stroll through an area abundant in the greens and blues of hedgerows, wildflowers, water and sky, but there is far more history to this part of Hammerwich than would at first be obvious. It may come as a surprise to many walkers that what they see now is the remnant of what was once an industrial landscape as dark as any in the Black Country, and whose story began as far back as the thirteenth century when local landowners began to exploit the coal deposits that came close to the surface across the east of the parish.
At that time, the number of people living in the Hammerwich area would have been measured not in thousands or even hundreds but in tens. Most of the parish was what was described as 'waste' - in other words it had little potential for bringing in an income to its owner, at that time, the Bishop of Lichfield. Small areas around the church had been tamed for agriculture but there was little other source of employment or profit. Several villagers were involved in nail-making which was a common family business during the 18th and 19th centuries. Indeed there was a cottage in Pingle Lane still known as Nailer's Cottage in 1960. There were a few marl pits where farmers dug the bands of clay which could be used to improve the light sandy soil in other areas; sandstone for building was available near to the church and there were a few 'bell-pits' where coal could be dug from the surface for domestic use. This prevalence of agriculture and small scale industry would have been the norm for several hundred years.
After the dissolution of the monasteries by Henry VIII, the Bishop of Lichfield was forced to surrender his holdings in the west of the Parish and the land was acquired by the Paget family. This was to prove the turning point for this area.
The Paget family first came into the aristocracy in 1549 when William Paget, the son of a 'serjeant-at-mace' in the City of London, was made a Baron, taking the title 1st Baron of Beaudesert. He was employed by Henry VIII in various posts including being Clerk of the Privy council. As his reward he acquired lands at Beaudesert, Burton Manor and Harmondsworth. He suffered a few setbacks in his career, falling out of favour with Henry and the protector of Edward VI and although he retrieved his reputation with Edward and later Queen Mary, he opted to retire on the accession of Elizabeth I.
The 7th Baron became the Earl of Uxbridge in 1714, but his only son died before him and some of the titles became extinct as a result. The Baronry of Beaudesert passed to his brother, whose eldest son, Henry William was to have such an effect on the local landscape.
It had been known for centuries that there were coal deposits under the land owned by the Earl and it was only a matter of time before the potential of this was exploited. His local estate extended from Hammerwich in the south-east to Brereton in the north and Cannock in the west. Pits had been opened in many places, including at Beaudesert itself. The coal was suitable for domestic use, being low in sulphur, but unsuitable for smelting and therefore not so valuable when compared with that being mined in the Black Country at that time. The seams were known to be badly faulted and there was at that time no easy or cost-effective way of transporting it out of the area. However, by the middle of the 18th century, demand and therefore presumably the price, was growing to the extent that it was worth extracting the coal for local use. During the early days several ambitious projects were attempted but failed due to inadequate technology, the danger of flooding and the lack of transport.
In 1749, a canal was dug from Wyrley to meet the Birmingham and Fazeley canal at Wolverhampton. This was intended to transport the 'deep' coal from the Wyrley area, but an extension was almost immediately built to serve the coalfields in the Brownhills area (now Brownhills Common). A few years later, another extension was built to link this up with the Coventry canal at Huddlesford near Lichfield. This would become the Lichfield and Hatherton canal, which ran through the east of Hammerwich (see Walk 3). Thus there was, by the early 19th century, a much better potential transport system developing in the area.
The disruption to the landscape of all this construction work must have been on a scale comparable with the building of the modern M6Toll. There were, however, fewer people around to be offended or inconvenienced. Many of those who were living in the area were benefiting either from employment on the project or already employed by the landowners who would eventually profit from the construction!
It was around this time that the population of the area began to increase with the ingress of gangs of 'navigators' or 'navvies', many from Ireland, who would find work on these projects and needed local homes.
As a result of this canal building, the next major impact on the local landscape was about to take place. It came about because of the artificial nature of the watercourses that had been created. Natural rivers arise from springs, brooks and streams following the contours of the land and collecting feeder streams along the way. Canals do not have any natural origin, although they have to be built so that the water flows, however gradually, downhill. The presence of locks to move boats up and down steps in the gradient also means that a large amount of water moves downstream every time the gates are opened.
For a fun demonstration of how a canal lock works see the website 'Up the Cut'.
Without a means of refilling them at the top end, canals will quickly run dry and this is exactly what happened to these new canals. Local landowners, although making money in rent from the operators, mostly refused to allow water to be extracted from streams on their land to top up the canal. The only permanent solution was to create a reservoir large enough to store sufficient water for the purpose. This reservoir is the pool we now know as Chasewater.
It may be a surprise to some that the area between Shire Oak and Muckley Corner was one of those considered for this reservoir, but eventually, the poorer and less agriculturally useful area between Norton Canes and Hammerwich was chosen. This area was already becoming a bog - Norton Bog - as a result of mining subsidence and the landowners must have been highly delighted to be suddenly able to make some money from this area of most unpromising wasteland! The Crane Brook which flowed through the area was temporarily diverted and during 1796, navvies dug out the pool base, using the material removed to create two dams at the Hammerwich end and the Norton Canes end of the already sunken area. The course of the stream was then restored and the reservoir gradually filled up. To get the water from the reservoir to the canal system, a small feeder channel was dug between the Hammerwich dam and the top of the locks at Ogley Hay.
All went well for two years until the Hammerwich dam burst and flooded fields and washed away bridges downstream. The Canal Company then had the expense of compensating landowners and replacing the dam. They accomplished this rebuilding in a record 3 months, this time with a stronger construction. A watchtower and cottage for the watchman was also built to prevent a repeat of the disaster. A branch from the Wyrley and Essington canal at Brownhills to the dam at Chasewater was opened in 1850. These features can be seen on Walk 5.
At this time, the Marquis of Anglesey was Henry William Paget who fought alongside the Duke of Wellington at Waterloo in 1815. He lost a leg to a cannonball during the battle (remember the famous scene in the 1970 film?) and returned home a hero. He was given the title 'Earl of Uxbridge' (after which several local pubs have been named). Unfortunately, his family fortunes began to decline as a result of an expensive divorce settlement and several lengthy legal wrangles with his neighbours over leases and rights to coal . As a result, it became more important than ever to exploit those mineral rights in an attempt to reverse the decline. His mining interests had not as yet extended to Hammerwich, but with the development of the new transport links, there was greater potential for exploiting his coal measures in this area. The family had previously abandoned their own project of building a branch from the Trent and Mersey to their Park Colliery at Cannock Wood, so the Marquis was not slow to see the potential benefit of using these new canals in the Brownhills area, and new pits were sunk at Hammerwich ( No 1) in 1849 and Chasetown (No 2, 'The Uxbridge' or 'The Fly') in 1851-2. Several houses were subsequently built around the pit for key workers, including the 'Manager's House' which still stands today near to the north end of the Hammerwich dam.
The pits were, however, not destined to revive the family fortunes as the income came nowhere near recouping the initial outlay. By 1853 the Marquis, who was now 86, had lost his wife and suffered a serious stroke, which left him severely debilitated and unable to manage his affairs. His son Henry, who had no interest in the industry, started the process that would see the leases of his father's pits eventually sold, at a loss, to the Cannock Chase Colliery Company in 1854. This was the start of a time of acceleration of change for the area with the involvement of another major player in the fortunes of the Hammerwich area, a Mr John Robinson McClean.
Bibliography
A History of Burntwood, Hammerwich and Wall, M. W. Greenslade and N.J. Tringham, University of London, 1990.
Cannock Chase Past, S. Belcher, Phillimore and Co. Ltd., 2001.
A History of the Cannock Chase Colliery Company, J. R. Francis, Staffordshire Industrial Archaeology Society, 1980.
