Oh dear - another slip of the pen. Apologies. I'll start again: It should read, "I was already aware that navvies working with teams of horses ." and not "I was already aware that teams of navvies working with horses ." OK? Teams of horses were USED - not owned - by navvies building railways. I suspect that the vast majority of owners of these teams were the Railway Companies themselves. However, a need on a small scale might be met by local horse teams temporarily employed. Hard evidence of this, as opposed to anecdotal, is hard to come by. My research shows that many navvies were originally 'ag labs' and would be familiar with agricultural work with horses. After making a little money whilst navvying, they often returned to work on the land. Some found local women to settle down with leaving the building of the line to go on its merry way without them. But I digress . Ruth ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Railton" <railton.david@btinternet.com> To: "'Ruth J'" <ruthgenda@btinternet.com>; "'Cheshire'" <cheshire@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 8:56 AM Subject: RE: [CHS] Team Owner (Henry Jones) > Ruth, > > Team owners were not navvies. Navvies were labourers employed by others. > The > term comes from navigators, the original name given to the labourers who > dug > out the canals. Team owners were self- employed and owned their horses and > wagons. They may have been in a small way of business owning and operating > one wagon with a team of horses or they may have owned and managed a > number > of teams. > > David > > -----Original Message----- > From: cheshire-bounces@rootsweb.com [mailto:cheshire-bounces@rootsweb.com] > On Behalf Of Ruth J > Sent: 22 November 2013 22:55 > To: Cheshire > Subject: [CHS] Team Owner (Henry Jones) > > Further to the recent mailings re Henry Jones, team owner, in Birkenhead > I've become curious about the occupational term. Googling hasn't been a > great deal of help but I did find postings that had been exchanged on > Rootsweb Lists a couple of years back but which had no final conclusion. > > I was already aware that teams of navvies working with horses became a > common sight in the newly developing industrial landscape of Georgian and > Victorian England. [Navvies are a current research interest of mine - > don't > ask.] But I hadn't heard the term 'Team Owner' used in this context. > > I searched Birkenhead Trade Directories and found the terms 'Team & Cart > Owners', 'Team Proprietors' and 'Team Contractors' used. They are listed > under headings such as 'Carmen' and 'Carters', Van Proprietors (including > furniture removers), Warehouse Owners and Forwarding Agents. > > But it was the addresses that were interesting. It showed that many were > set amongst coal-yards, railway offices, goods yards, manufacturing bases, > etc. So the teams would be composed of men and horses used in urban > industry of one kind or another and not in agriculture. > > Oh, and BTW, the entry for Henry Jones in Gore's 1894 Directory of > Liverpool > and Birkenhead reads: > > Jones Henry & Son, wheelwrights, team owners & contractors, 10 Waterloo > Place & 61 Tunnel road. > > > > His premises are in the same street/area as the railway station, coal > merchants, a shoeing smith and (what else) a beer retailer. > > > > Ruth > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > CHESHIRE-request@rootsweb.com with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes > in the subject and the body of the message >

<<snipped>> Teams of horses were USED - not owned - by navvies building railways. I suspect that the vast majority of owners of these teams were the Railway Companies themselves. <<snipped>> For what it's worth, the teams of horses used in railway construction would have been owned (or sometimes hired? Maybe?) by the contractors undertaking the work, not the railway company owning the line under construction. Certainly in later years, the railway company would have been its own contractor for small projects. Adrian B

Adrian, I don't have a definitive clarification to give you. My in-depth research is on an 18 mile stretch of a Midland Railway link between Bourne Lincs. and Saxby, Leics. Three contractors were employed here under the overall direction of Midland's chief engineer and were drawn from three areas, London, Manchester and Eccleshall, each with their own engineer. Each section required both tunnels and cuttings. I have photographs showing horses being used on the construction which was completed in 1893. But I have found no references as yet to owners or hiring of horses. >From a book written about an earlier Rutland/Northamptonshire railway line (1875) I learned (under the heading of 'Machinery and personnel arrive') that contractors brought in: '. 120 railway horses, highly trained to the specialised work, while a large number were also hired locally, as required, for general haulage.' 'Scores of trucks, trolleys and wagons were brought to the works.' '. huge machinery was hauled along narrow country roads .' Reports of 'lanes being blocked, as up to 18 pairs of contractors' horses, each pair with its own handler, struggled to take a single locomotive on a wagon several miles from the nearest station to the works . three days to convey such an engine 5 miles.' J. Ann Paul, '3000 Strangers', pp38-39, Nostalgia Collection, 2003 The implication here is that horses were owned and handlers employed by the contractor. But whether the contractors owned the horses or hired them is still unclear in my mind. It is the long distance from the contractors' bases to the site of the works that puzzles me. Plus the 'highly trained to the specialised work' clause which adds another dimension. I just need to know more. An opportunity to delve into Midland Railway accounts in Derby might help. I'm beginning to think we are now veering off-topic a bit - Henry Jones in Birkenhead is a bit far away. Henry was certainly based near a Railway Station but he may never have been involved with line construction. So if anyone wants to contact me further perhaps it should be done off-list. Ruth ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Bruce" <abruce@madasafish.com> To: "'Ruth J'" <ruthgenda@btinternet.com> Cc: "'Cheshire'" <cheshire@rootsweb.com> Sent: Saturday, November 23, 2013 4:42 PM Subject: RE: [CHS] Team Owner (Henry Jones) > <<snipped>> > Teams of horses were USED - not owned - by navvies building railways. I > suspect that the vast majority of owners of these teams were the Railway > Companies themselves. > <<snipped>> > > For what it's worth, the teams of horses used in railway construction > would > have been owned (or sometimes hired? Maybe?) by the contractors > undertaking > the work, not the railway company owning the line under construction. > Certainly in later years, the railway company would have been its own > contractor for small projects. > > Adrian B > >

I hope you keep this on list. If you do take this off list I would like to be Cc'd please. >From what you have written Ruth it seems to me the railway had their own teams of horses but would hire extra teams with handlers if they were needed. I think Henry Jones & Sons benefited from this type of construction. Just for interest.......when the Canadian Pacific Railway track was being built between Ontario and British Columbia in 1885 it is said 5,000 horses were used and 300 dog-sleds!! Marg >From the Beautiful British Columbia Cariboo Region, Canada ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ruth J" <ruthgenda@btinternet.com> To: <abruce@madasafish.com> '. 120 railway horses, highly trained to the specialised work, while a large number were also hired locally, as required, for general haulage.' 'Scores of trucks, trolleys and wagons were brought to the works.' '. huge machinery was hauled along narrow country roads .' Reports of 'lanes being blocked, as up to 18 pairs of contractors' horses, each pair with its own handler, struggled to take a single locomotive on a wagon several miles from the nearest station to the works . three days to convey such an engine 5 miles.' J. Ann Paul, '3000 Strangers', pp38-39, Nostalgia Collection, 2003 The implication here is that horses were owned and handlers employed by the contractor. But whether the contractors owned the horses or hired them is still unclear in my mind. It is the long distance from the contractors' bases to the site of the works that puzzles me. Plus the 'highly trained to the specialised work' clause which adds another dimension. I just need to know more. An opportunity to delve into Midland Railway accounts in Derby might help. I'm beginning to think we are now veering off-topic a bit - Henry Jones in Birkenhead is a bit far away. Henry was certainly based near a Railway Station but he may never have been involved with line construction. So if anyone wants to contact me further perhaps it should be done off-list. Ruth