Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway locomotives
Steamindex homepage
Aspinall locomotives
Hughes locomotives (LYR/LMS)

The railway had originated as the Manchester & Leeds Railway and took the easiest route through the Pennines involving a long glacial overflow channel between Rochdale and Hebden Bridge. Nevertheless, even this involved the long Summit Tunnel. Having connected the two centres it adopted the broader name of the Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway: it connected Liverpool, Manchester, the Lancashire cotton towns and Blackpool in the west with Leeds, Bradford, the Yorkshire woolen towns and Goole in the east. The company also absorbed several other lines, but its relationship with the East Lancashire Railway was distinctive in that it retained a distinctive stock with separate numbers (and names) and maintained (an constructed) locomotives at its works in Bury. Many lines penetrated into the Pennines and were steeply graded. John Marshall is the major historian with a three volume work. E. Mason, a locomotive engineer trained by the company, is the principal locomotive historian of twentieth century development. He has also produced a long list of corrections to Rush's book.

Most of the early railways went through a period where locomotives were acquired rather than planned, and the L&YR appears to have been especially prone to this process which lasted longer than on other major railways. Hawkshaw, like Brunel was a major engineer and dabbled in locomotive affairs, but the L&YR lacked a Gooch: Jenkins appears to have been mediocre at best (the railway suffered far too many boiler explosions) and his successor (Yates as stated by Marshall or Hirst as stated by Ahrons or the disgraced Hurst) are unknowns. Barton Wright was the eventual Gooch and was related to that family through his mother. Thus until the appointment of Barton Wright in 1875 there is a lack of coherence in locomotive policy: Barton Wright (partly under the guidance of Ramsbottom) changed that.  The period following Barton Wright's cleansing is covered under Aspinall and Hughes (the latter extending into the LMS period). The locomotives absorbed from the West Lancashire Railway are treated alongside other interesting ruins.

Bibliographical sources

Ahrons, E.L.The British Steam Railway Locomotive 1825-1925. London: Locomotive Publishing Co., 1927. 391 pp. 473 illus. 19 tables.
Very thin on early locomotives, but does include (Fig. 81, page 79) an outside cyclinder 2-2-2 designed by Hurst/Hawkshaw.
Ahrons, E.L. Locomotive and train working in the latter part of the nineteenth century; edited by L.L. Asher. Cambridge: Heffer, 1951-4. Volume 2 includes LYR
Originally published in Railway Magazine 1917
Ashworth, J.E.N. The locomotives of the L. & Y.R. Rly News, 1928/29, 2, 3; 19; 39-40; 55-6. Rly Obsr, 1929, 1,3-4; 20; 34-5; 54-5; 70: 1934, 6,62-3; 79-81.
Bulleid, H.A.V. The Aspinall era. London: Ian Allan, 1967. viii, 270 p. + 40 plates. 125 illus. (il. 8 ports.), 37 diagrs., 10 tables, 5 plans, 4 maps.
J.A.F. Aspinall was C.M.E. of the L. & Y.R. between 1886 and 1899 and subsequently became the railway's General Manager. Bulleid's study is clearly based on extensive research which includes the biographee's many patents.
Cox, E.S. Chronicles of steam. London, Ian Allan, 1967. x, 182 p. + 36 plates. 66 illus., (mcI. 2 ports.), 21 diagrs. (md. 16s. els.), 19 tables.
The opening chapters include memories of apprentice days at Horwich Works.
Hewison, Christian H. Locomotive boiler explosions. Newton Abbot: David & Charles, 1983.
The L&YR seemed to be especially prone to boiler explosions, and not all of these could be excused by heavy gradients. One of the worst involved an 0-8-0 near Knottingley: this is difficult to find via book's index, but extensively covered at beginning of Chapter 7 (p. 110) where a combination of poor design and unsatisfactory maintenance led to the death of two footplatemen whom the CME Hoy, and his friend Hurry Riches tried to implicate for the severe boiler explosion..
Lane, Barry C. Pouteau update – RA 10. Rly Arch, 2005, (11), 42.
Interesting letter in that it comments upon L&YR locomotive classification and approves of the avoidance of Rush's system (which was not an official classication: that used numbers as employed by the GWR). Also observations on caption writers notes on painting over of brasswork on splashers, and specific note on illus. on page 74 lower: tender weatherboards were provided to protect footplates crews from water spilling from fillers at front of tenders.
Lowe, James W. British steam locomotive builders. Cambridge: Goose, 1975. 705pp.
Covers the works at Bury (East Lancashire Railway), Miles Platting and Horwich.
Marshall, J. Horwich works. Rly Wld, 1965, 26, 22-6; 62-5. 11 illus., table, plan.
Includes a table of locomotives constructed there.
Marshall, John. Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway. Newton Abbot: David & Charles. 1969-72. 3v.
A good historical survey which is strong on biographical material: Volume 3 is the primary part for the Company's locomotive history.
Mason, E. The Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway. London, Ian Allan, [195 ]. 32 p. 62 illus., (Railways before the grouping—3).
A collection of photographs, most of which are not repeated in the work following. Many were taken by the author.
Mason, E. The Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway in the twentieth century. London, Ian Allan, 1954. [viii] ,236 p. incI. 32 plates + col. front. 103 illus., l4diagrs.,2 plans, 10 maps (incl. 1 folding).
A record of all locomotives extant in the twentieth century.
[Mason, E.] "Rivington", pseud My life with locomotives: a retired locomotive engineer looks back. London, Ian Allan, 1962.168 p. + 22 plates (incl. 2 folding). 53 illus., 4 diagrs., 2 plans.
Reminiscences of a working life which started in Horwich Works and was subsequently spent in the Motive Power Department on the L. & Y.R. and later on the L.M.S. Central Division.
Nock, O.S. The Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway: a concise history. London, 1969. 159pp.
This is not a typical Nock book as less attention is given to locomotive design than might be expected and performance is scarcely mentioned.
Normington, T. The Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway. London, 1898. 375pp.
Ottley 6184.
The old locomotives of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Ry. Locomotive Mag., 1916, 22, 48-52. 7 illus.
Rush, R.W. The Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway and its locomotives. 1846-1923. London, Railway World, 1949. 154 p. + folding plate. 100 illus. (line drawings: s. el.), tables.
Some of this material was originally published as "Locomotives of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway" in Railways, 1946, 7. E. Mason gave a page by page corrigenda in J. Stephenson Loco. Soc., 1951, 27, 101-3; 155-7; 180-2. Marshall gives an excellent assessment of the Rush work noting both its strengths and its pitfalls, notably his own classification..

Manchester & Leeds Railway

0-4-2 (Robert Stephenson type)

Robert Stephenson provided three plus a technical specification so that other builders could supply. Marshall (3 p. 15) shows drawing of type. A total of twelve were supplied:
1 Stanley RS 211
2 Kenyon RS 210
3 Stephenson RS 212

Three were also supplied from each of Sharp, Nasmyth and Shepherd & Todd.

Kenyon was sold to George Wythes, a contractor for Thomas Savin and it eventually entered Brighton Works in 1860/1 and emerged as an 0-6-0 Numbered 1
Stephenson became Stockton & Hartlepool Railway No. 30 and NER No. 605
Sharp No. 4 Lancaster (as LYR No. 129) suffered a boiler explosion at Darwen on 19 January 1857: William Fairbairn reported that this was due to boiler corrosion.

0-4-0 (Bury type)

No. 13 Liverpool and 14 Clarence were acquired in 1839: these were both rebuilt as 0-4-2s in 1843. Clarence was sold to George Thomson and Liverpool was withdrawn in 1868.

2-2-2 (Robert Stephenson type): 1840-

These were similar to the 6ft singles constructed for the North Midland Railway. Drawing Marshall (3) p. 20. Nineteen were supplied in 1840-2 (although none were built by Robert Stephenson). The builders were Tayleur (Vulcan Foundry), Rothwell, Laird & Kitson, Sharp, Nasmyth and Fairbairn.

No. 27 Irk suffered a boiler explosion at Miles Platting on 28 January 1845 and this led to three deaths. The boiler was examined by William Fairbairn who had been the builder in this case.

The class was taken out of service from 1849 and most were out of use by 1859 although Nos 20 and 29 continued to work to Goole until 1863.

0-4-2 goods engines

On page 21 Marshall states that "sixteen more engines had been ordered" although only 13 are listed as being supplied: four from Haigh Foundry, three from Robert Stephenson and six from Fairbairn. The Haigh Foundry locomotives had 14 x 20in cylinders and 5ft coupled wheels, but may have been rebuilt with 4ft 6in coupled wheels. The Stephenson Loco. Soc. J. (1957 p. 87) states that No. 34 London (as an 0-6-0) was fitted with Fenton's expansive valve gear (drawn (illicitly copied) by David Joy at Miles Platting on 5 November 1844).

The Robert Stephenson locomotives were intended for the Oldham branch, but it seems that Fenton rebuilt No. 33 Competitor (a Haigh locomotive) with 4ft 6in coupled wheels and the other Haigh locomotives with 3ft 3in coupled wheels. They remained in this form for about two years and then received 5ft wheels. On 10 March 1845 John Chester Craven was asked to rebuild Competitor as an 0-6-0 for working the extension incline between Miles Platting and Victoria station.

0-4-2: Thomas Gooch specification: 1842-

These were supplied by Fairbairn, although the tenders were supplied by Jones & Potts. All except No. 41 received new fireboxes in 1849/50. In 1843 No. 44 had received a larger boiler which consumed less coke.

0-4-0 (Bury type): 1845-

These were the standard Bury product, and judging by the names of 47 and 48 (West Riding Union and Cleckheaton) were intended for use east of the Pennines. According to Marshall they were sold to the Stockton & Darlington Railway in 1854.

Other constituent companies

Manchester & Bolton Railway

0-4-0 (Bury type): 1837-

At the opening on 29 May 1838 four Bury locomotives (Victoria, Fairfield, Manchester and Bolton) were available plus two outside-framed 2-2-0s from Forrester named Forrester and Buck. A further four locomotives of this type (0-4-0) were supplied by Fairbairn. From 4 February 1841 these locomotives were operating the Bolton & Preston Railway. Two further Bury 2-2-0s were acquired by the M&BR in 1844/5: sectionalized drawing (from The Engineer) Marshall 3 p. 30. See also Locomotive Mag., 1938, 44, 179..

North Union Railway

This line was amalgametd jointly with the Manchester & Leeds Railway and LNWR on 27 July 1846 and its locomotive stock was divided between the two companies. At the amalgamation the company had owned eighteen locomotives which had been supplied by Haigh; Jones, Turner & Evans; Benjamin Hick; Bourne, Bartley; and by Bury. Marshall (3 32) tabulates the locomotives obtained by the Manchester & Leeds Railway, but sadly not the remainder. Thomas Hunt, who had been locomotive superintendent of the North Union Railway had fitted balance weights to at least one of the Bury engines in 1840 (Ahrons British steam railway locomotive p. 61). The locomotives acquired were mainly 2-2-0s: two from Hick, one from Haigh and one from Bury; one 2-2-2 from Jones, Turner & Evans and one Bury 0-4-2. No. 6 (Hick 2-2-0 was given a new firebox in 1851 and lasted until 28 October 1874, by which time it was the oldest LYR locomotive.

Preston & Wyre Railway

Marshall is mainly interested in what came into the possession of the Manchester & Leeds Railway and on page 214 he lists the researches made by E. Craven. These were eight Bury 2-2-0s or 0-4-0s; one Tayleur 0-4-2 and one Haigh 2-2-0. The remaining five locomotives went to the LNWR. (Wesley, B. By rail and sea to Fleetwood., Backtrack, 2004, 18, 498). In the earlier part (Wesley, B. By rail and sea to Fleetwood., Backtrack, 2004, 18, 437) dismisses the suggestion that the Preston & Wyre was opened by Fleetwood (a Tayleur 0-4-2) and follows Marshall's option of two Bury 2-2-2s (North Star and Duchess) owned by the Preston & Lancaster Junction Railway.

Blackburn, Darwen & Bolton Railway

Marshall on p. 214 lists  the seven locomotives which passed to the Manchester & Leeds Railway in 18 No. 7 was a Bury 0-4-0, the remainder were supplied by R&W Hawthorn and included three 0-6-0s and three 0-4-2s. One of the 0-6-0s was used by the contractor John Evans. The line was worked by the LYR from 1 April 1850.  No. 3 (0-4-2) was given a new firebox in April 1852. No. 7 received a new boiler in 1853, a new firebox in May 1854, and on 9 July 1860 the boiler exploded. No. 4 (0-6-0) was sold to the Stockton & Darlington Railway in 1865 becoming No. 86 Zetland and NER No. 1086: it was rebuilt in 1869 and scrapped in 1881. No. 6 (0-4-2) was rebuilt in November 1866 with 15 x 24in cylinders and 5ft coupled wheels.  Nos. 1 and 2 were sold to the Whitehaven & Furness Joint Committee in May 1854.

Liverpool, Crosby & Southport Railway

Marshall cites and uses:

Craven, E. J. Stephenson Loco. Soc., 1957, March-May.

It was originally entirely isolated until the link with the LYR was established at Sandhills Junction on 1 October 1850. It was worked by the LYR from 1850 but did not amalgamate until 1855. Three outside-cylinder 0-4-2s were obtained from Tayleur. These were similar to locomotives supplied to the Scottish Central Railway and were named Sefton, Forby and Brundell. These were too heavy for the poorly constructed line. Two locomotives were also acquired from the Norfolk Railway: these were outside-cylinder long boiler Stephenson 2-2-2s (possibly of tthe type illustrated on p. 22 of George Dow's The first railway in Norfolk (1947)). They were named Waterloo and Southport: by 1850 they had become Antelope and Gazelle.

On 31 July 1849 the railway obtained a Sharp 2-2-2 off the shelf: it became No. 6 Firefly. It may have been originally intended for the East Lancashire Railway. One of the Tayleur 0-4-2s, No. 3, was sold to Jonathan Blundell in January 1850. A Bridge Adams type of light tank engine was obtained from George England and named England in the summer of 1850: it had 9 x12in cylinders. Finally Spitfire was obtained in October 1850. This may have been an intermediate crankshaft locomotive as Jenkins was authorised to put in two centre wheels without flanges. When sold in 1866 it was described as a 2-2-2.

A new agreement was made between the LYR and the LCS: the LYR retained two Tayleur 0-4-2s and the Sharp 2-2-2: Waterloo, Southport, England and Spitfire were returned. In October 1854 the LCS ordered three light tank engines (2-2-2T) from William Fairbairn (a further one, together with a 2-4-0T  was ordered on 9 January 1855) . The 2-2-2Ts became LYR Nos. 2, 5, 6 and 7, but the 2-4-0T was sold to George Thomson and the LYR compensated Fairbairn. On 26 May 1865 No. 2 suffered a boiler explosion near Miles Platting station. The footplate crew escaped but a child in a nearby field was killed. In the final fling of independence the LCS acquired two former Northern Division locomotives: No. 8 Wildfire and No. 3 Sirius (both constructed 1844). It would seem that Spitfire was handled at Boulton's Siding.

Preston & Longridge and Fleetwood, Preston & West Riding Junction Railway

Marshall (page 43 et seq) notes that Addison, named after the Chairman T.B. Addison was first used on 12 June 1848. In September 1849 two Bury 2-2-0s were acquired from the Lancaster & Preston Junction Railway. In December 1856 Beyer Peacock (WN 42) 0-4-0ST was acquired and named Gardner (early photograph p. 18). Two similar Beyer Peacock 0-4-0STs were supplied to Chester Station and to Cannock Chase Colliery. Both of the Bury 0-4-0s had been sold by the end of 1860. Addison must also have been disposed as a Sharp Stewart 0-4-2 (WN 1233) was obtained and named Addison. Following the LYR/LNWR joint amalgamation it appears that both Gardner and Addison continued to work to Longridge until both were sold to the Wigtownshire Railway in May 1876: the 0-4-0ST having been  rebuilt as a tender locomotive at Miles Platting.

East Lancashire Railway

Blackburn & Preston Railway

The section from Blackburn to Preston opened on 1 June 1846. Marshall notes that a locomotive and tender were to be bought from Bourne & Robinson (Peasley Collieries, St Helens). This was used by the contractor Nowell & Hattersley and was an 0-4-2 named Broad Oak. Four 5ft 2-2-2 were obtained from Sharp and these may have been rebuilt as 2-4-0s: Marshall (p. 215) lists them as 7 Bacchus (WN 337/1846); 8 Jupiter (350/1846); 9 Vesta (353/1846) and 11 Mercury (354/1846). Moffat notes that three similar locomotives were diverted to the Eastern Union Railway. The line amalgamated with the East Lancashire Railway. Vesta as No. 609 is illustrated in Backtrack, 1998, 12, 162-3. .

East Lancashire Railway

The company ordered  a total of twelve Stephenson long boiler 2-2-2s from Fenton, Craven & Co/Shepherd & Todd/E.B. Wilson: these locomotives were found to be "very poor machines" (Marshall 3 p. 46) and the ELR would only accept four: of the remainder four were diverted to the Leeds Dewsbury & Manchester Railway and two to the Eastern Counties Railway. In 1848 the four ELR 2-2-2s were rebuilt as 2-4-0s by R&W Hawthorn. In about 1858 they were further rebuilt as 0-6-0s at Bury under Sylvester Lees. Richard Walker was both a Director of the ELR and supplier of locomotives to the ELR.

2-2-2: Walker  Bros., Bury: 1846-

These four locomotives were:
1 Medusa
3 Hecate
10 Diomed
18 Lynx.
All were rebuilt as 2-4-0T, the first before 1853, and the remainder by Walker Bros. Marshall states that No. 10 became GNR No. 261 via acquisition from the West Yorkshire Railway

0-4-2: Hawthorn: 1847

In April 1847 0-4-2s Nos. 16 Pegasus and 17 Ajax were obtained from R&W Hawthorn. In 1868 these were rebuilt at Bury as 2-4-0s with outside frames: they were withdrawn in 1869 and 1871.

0-6-0: Haigh: 1845

On 11 March 1845 the Manchester, Bury & Rawtenstall Railway ordered four long-boiler 0-6-0s from Haigh Foundry and a fifth was constructed by Fenton, Craven: this was No. 13. The remainder received Nos. 12, 19, 20, 22. Another engine No. 23 Elk was built by Haigh in 1848.

2-4-0

The largest ELR class was a series of outside-frame 2-4-0s with 15 x 20in cylinders and 5ft 6in driving wheels. But No.s 44/5 and 51/2 had 16 x 20 in cylinders and 5ft 2in driving wheels. Nos. 25-9 and 33 may have originated as 2-2-2s, but were 2-4-0s later. Nos. 44 and 45 were rebuilt as 2-4-0Ts in 1864 and 1862, and in February 977 No. 680 was rebuilt as a 2-4-0ST. The last nine were built at the Bury Works after amalgamation into the LYR. No. 622 was the last locomotive to be built at Bury.

2-2-2: Walker: 1850

Four supplied, similar to the 2-4-0s. These were numbered 49, 50, 53 and 54: all except No. 50 were rebuilt as 2-4-0s.

0-6-0: mainly Walker: 1852-

Marshall's structure of separating locomotive lists from the text mazkes this section tortuous and this is not helped by the assorted nature of the locomotives, but all were of the long-boiler like those supplied by Haigh Foundry:

0-4-2: Sharp: 1850

47 Pluto and 48 Cerberus: according to Marshall were similar to Addison supplied to the Preston & Longridge Railway (but presumably also similar to Sharp 0-6-0 supplied at same time)

0-6-0: Stothert & Slaughter: 1856

Five obsolescent 0-6-0s (with haystack fireboxes)> No. 660 (LYR) Sphinx is illustrated on p. 18:

.2-4-0: Beyer Peacock: 1857

WN 70/1 became 65 Giraffe and 66 Antelope. They incorporated Beattie patent fireboxes and feed water heating apparatus and outside cylinders. Two similar locomotives were supplied to the Egyptian Government (BP 73/4) and one to the. GSWR (BP 72).  For a time they worked express trains between Southport and Manchester.

Other locomotives passed to LYR

Marshall (3 p. 213) in a table includes some Fairbairn Bury-type 0-4-0s and some Sharp 2-2-2s which probably passed from the ELR to the L&YR

The Fairbairn locomotives were of the Bury type

Livery

Marshall (3 p. 52): passenger locomotives: dark green with red brown frames and polished domes and safety valves.

Amalgamation with L&YR

Took place in 1859:

Miles Platting/William Jenkins

William Jenkins was appointed the Locomotive Superintendent of the Manchester & Leeds Railway in 1845 and was responsible for constructing the works at Miles Platting which were opened in 1846. He died in November 1867 following a period of ill-health.

Marshall notes that the LYR during the thirty years covered in this chapter and the next [i.e. approximately 1845 to 1875] was singularly unfortunate in that the deplorable state of its fixed equipment, stations, and rolling stock was matched by that of its locomotives. This was not the fault of its locomotive superintendents who, though not brilliant, were at least competent. The trouble lay with the management and the directorate who were prepared to allow the railway to degenerate into one of the worst in the country in order to achieve a high dividend, though it must have been obvious to many that this could not continue indefinitely.

Against such apathy even the best of locomotive superintendents could do little and Jenkins, given no encouragement to introduce better engines or a higher standard of maintenance, retained old stock far too long.

Hawkshaw was the dominant influence at first and, since like BruneI he was no locomotive engineer, engines built or supplied to his specifications were not in every way the best even for their period and long before they were withdrawn they were hopelessly outdated.

The period under review falls into two parts, divided by the death of Jenkins on 20 November 1867 and ending soon after the appointment of Barton Wright on 1 November 1875.

Following the death of Jenkins, Hurst, who had gone to the East Lancashire section works at Bury after his dismissal from the NBR , was transferred to Miles Platting where he became outdoor superintendent. William Yates, previously works manager, became indoor superintendent. According to Marshall official LYR photographs at Horwich and all references in the Minutes ascribe the engines of this period to Yates. Both Ahrons and Nock refer to Hirst (note the "i") and make no mention of Yates. Hurst is not mentioned, and it seems likely that Yates was the dominant influence in matters of locomotive design. Hence the reference to Yates cabs and boilers by Marshall.

During the Yates/Hurst period progress was hampered by the inadequacy of the workshops at Miles Platting, a situation made even more desperate by the disastrous fire in 1873 in which the workshops were largely destroyed. Increasing numbers of engines had to be obtained from outside makers at necessarily higher cost than if built by the company and, with mounting arrears of maintenance, standards became even lower.

The same period saw the opening of the HeckmondwikeThornhill-Dewsbury lines, the Meltham, Stainland and Horwich branches, the Blackburn-Chorley-Hindley and the Rochdale-Facit lines, the Padiham loop, and also the new service to Hull via Goole. With all these extensions requiring extra locomotives and rolling stock Yates, Hurst, and the C & W superintendent Charles Fay deserve credit for avoiding total collapse.

Locomotive development under Hawkshaw & Jenkins 1845-67

Bury type 0-4-0s
Three Bury 0-4-0s Nos 47-9 delivered to the Manchester & Leeds Railway in 1845-6 pioneered the standard goods engines which dominated the LYR scene for the next decade. (Marshall 3 38-60) Hawkshaw preferred the 0-4-0 type for goods work as opposed to the 0-4-2 because the total weight was available for adhesion, but for passenger work he chose the 2-2-2. In this respect LYR policy was similar to that on the London & Birmingham (see Jack and precise thereof) and Great Northern Railways (see Groves and precise thereof) at about this time. Three more goods engines were ordered from Fairbairns on 17 March 1845. Fairbairn had proposed an enlarged version of its 0-4-2 of 1842-3 (M&L Nos 41-6), but it was suggested that they would be better as long-boiler type 0-6-0s, but the increased cost led to a decision to build them as 0-4-0s, Nos 50-2. Photograph of of this type page 17 (top). Principal dimensions were: 5ft coupled wheels, 15in x 24in cylinders and a total heating surface of 744.3ft². In spite of two safety valves No 51 exploded on 11 June 1858.

On 12 November 1845 Hawkshaw ordered fifteen 0-4-0 goods engines from Bury Curtis & Kennedy for the Liverpool & Bury Railway. James Thomson (engineer of the L&B) recommended ten six-wheeled passenger engines, some single and some coupled, and ten goods engines all coupled. However, the order for the fifteen 0-4-0s was transferred from the M&L to the L&B, but with the two companies amalgamated from 27 July 1846 these engines passed into M&L stock. The first two were put into the Bolton division stock becoming Nos 19 and 20 in that series, but the rest went directly into M&L stock. These engines were generally similar to the Fairbairns, but with 4ft 9in wheels.

According to Ahrons No 196, built December 1848, was the last four-wheeled engine built by Bury, Curtis & Kennedy before changing over to six-wheeled types. Several of these standard 0-4-0s, such as 194, 196, and others in the next batch, were rebuilt as 0-4-2s by adding a pair of carrying wheels behind the firebox. The photograph of one of these on page 17 with the name Victoria roughly painted on the boiler shows one of the two engines bought by Evans in 1878 for £550 each for use on the construction of the Thorpes Bridge-Oldham line. They were bought back by the LYR for £200 each in 1880.

On 17 March 1875 there was a wholesale condemnation of many of the old engines, fourteen of which had by then been replaced and were included in a duplicate list.

In October and November 1845 a further 21 Bury-type 0-4-0s were ordered from Fairbairn. In September 1846, after nine sets of 5ft 0in wheels had been made, it was decided to alter them to 4ft 9in, at extra cost. After complaints by Jenkins about structural weaknesses an order was given in March 1847 to strengthen the Fairbairn and Bury engines. At this period Fairbairn was enlarging his works and delivery was delayed, but general financial difficulties on the LYR delayed acceptance of some later engines.

Four of this order were allocated to the Bolton division, Nos 197/8 in April 1848 and 199 and 200 in July 1849. A further engine, No 201, was not part of the original order but was bought separately on 25 April 1849 for £1,700 after being offered as 'a goods engine and tender lying at Birmingham'. Some received new fireboxes: No 215 in June 1854 and No. 214 in January 1855.

"Hawkshaw" Standard 2-2-2s

Marshall (3 60 et seq) stated that on 16 February 1846 Hawkshaw announced that the new works at Miles Platting were ready to begin locomotive construction and he provided a specification to which six were ordered. He was not a locomotive designer and there can be little doubt that the actual design work was carried out under the supervision of Jenkins. Ahrons [Engineer, 1925, 30 January, p.124] attributed the design to Hurst whose name, for the only time known to the writer (that is Marshall), he spelled correctly in a footnote. But Hurst was then in charge of the Bolton division engines at Salford where he was appointed when Jenkins moved to Miles Platting, and he is unlikely to have influenced the design in any way. The engine carried Jenkins' 'cottage loaf' shaped dome over the firebox, which became his standard type. The locomotive type was the subject of an article by J.S. Gibson in Backtrack which led to a long correspondence.

Gibson, J.S. 'Hawkshaw Singles' of the LYR. Backtrack, 1997, 11, 368-9..
Hawkshaw was the engineer of the Manchester & Leeds Railway and was responsible for some 2-2-2 locomotives, the man responsible for the detailed design is not known, but William Hurst (shown to be improbable), William Jenkins and John Hunt are contenders. Some were built at Miles Platting but others were built by contractors. In 1867 the decision was taken to rebuild them as 2-4-0s. Brian Orrell questions some of the techniques employed (page 688), although Allsopp describes (page 517) how this might have been done and returns to this again later on page 173 (Volume 12). Response from author page 60 (Volume 12). illus.: 2-2-2 Diomed;

Thus the design for what was known as the 'Hawkshaw single' emerged as a 2-2-2 with inside plate frames, outside cylinders 15 x 20in, deeply forked connecting rods to driving wheels 5ft l0in diameter; leading and trailing wheels 3ft 6in. The boiler, 4ft 2in x 10ft 1½in, had a firebox casing raised 1ft above the top of the barrel, surmounted by a dome containing a double-beat regulator. It carried a pair of safety valves and was encased in a copper cover. This boiler was standard with the 0-4-2s. The overall length of the engine was 21ft 6in and total weight 22 tons of which exactly half was taken by the driving wheels.

A total of 82 of these singles was built, thus becoming the largest class on the LYR for some years, at a period when locomotive design was developing rapidly. Marshall considered that they tended to arrest progress and it was not until 1860-1 that Jenkins was able to design his 2-4-0 passenger engine to replace them. By this time they were becoming outdated and something of a burden on the locomotive department. Their appearance is shown in a drawing (Marshall 3 p. 61) taken from The Engineer 2 February 1923, p. 114.

Miles Platting was responsble for constructing 32, but demand was sufficient for thirty more to be ordered from Fairbairn, but before they were completed the order was altered to 20 singles and ten 0-4-2 goods engines. In 1848 a further thirty singles were ordered from Bury, Curtis & Kennedy: this firm specialised in bar-framed engines which were a complete success provided there were no trailing wheels. On the Bury engines the main frames were 4¼in wide. If continued straight beyond the firebox for trailing wheels, on the 4ft 8½in gauge, the firebox was necessarily narrow, a practice adopted in the famous American 4-4-0 type, but in the Bury 0-4-2 type these frames were reduced and 'joggled' round the firebox resulting in distortion through stresses in traffic and a much shorter life for such engines. Thus the thinner plate frame came to be adopted and at the time of this order BC & K had had little experience with this type of work. Ahrons [Engineer, 1925, 30 January, p.124] suggested that they lost money on the contract and that it was partly this which led to the closure of the firm in 1850. Except for one more bar-framed engine, these LYR singles were the last of about 415 engines constructed by BC & K in twenty years of operation.

Driving wheel diameters varied: Miles Platting and Fairbairn engines were 5ft 9in except Nos 58-63, 70 and 76-8 in the 1850 list. Hawkshaw's list states 5ft 0in for Nos 58-62 but this appears to be a misprint. The BC & K engines had 5ft 10in wheels. According to Normington, a Bury engine, No 131 was the first to take a train up the 1 in 27 to Oldham Werneth unassisted. Another, No 151 driven by William Hurst, took the first regular train of six carriages up to Oldham without the rope in 1851. If Normington is correct, this was no mean feat for a small single.

Five were transferred to the East Lancashire section, receiving numbers in the ELR series and names. In July 1862 No 37 became ELR No 73 Theseus and No 38 became 77 Ariadne. Within the same year No 90 became ELR No 10 Diomed. In 1866 No 85 became 65 Giraffe and 86 became 66 Antelope, having exchanged numbers and names with the two Beyer Peacock 2-4-0s of the ELR (Ch 3 P 51). In 1877 these ELR section numbers were increased by 600.

From 1867 to 1871 all but eleven were rebuilt into 2-4-0s.

Twenty-two of these received Yates domeless boilers and cabs as shown in the photograph on page 35. On the original print the date 1872 can be clearly read on the works plate, suggesting this is No 93, the only one rebuilt in that year. Others retained the Jenkins boiler and no cab. A curious feature of the rebuilds was the connecting rod which was forked and drove on to forward extensions of the coupling rods. This class was painted the standard LYR dark green with black bands picked out in white. Brass beading was fairly general and large brass numerals were carried on the front buffer plank, the number being also painted on the back of the four-wheeled tender.

Number plates on cab sides were introduced in 1875, on the former ELR engines as mentioned in <Chapter 3>, but it was not until 1881 that all LYR engines were so provided. Photographs at Horwich show that number plates on rebuilt engines carried the year of rebuilding instead of the year of origin.

Ahrons relates how these 2-4-0s 'progressed to the accompaniment of much rattling and clanking, like a barrel of chain links being rolled along the line. . . . Although ubiquitous over all the LYR system, their principal haunts were in Yorkshire between Leeds, Wakefield and Goole, and between Bradford-Huddersfield and Penistone.' Two of these 2-4-0 rebuilds were acquired by I. W. Boulton of Ashton under Lyne in 1867. He converted them to saddle tanks, with 3ft 6in coupled wheels, of somewhat comical appearance. To judge from the illustrations the connecting rods drove on to the wheels and the coupling rods were outside.

"Hawkshaw" standard 0-4-2 goods engines

This design was prepared. most probably by Jenkins, to another specification by Hawkshaw. The boiler was similar to that of the singles, but these 0-4-2s had inside cylinders 15 x 24in, coupled wheels 4ft 9in and trailing wheels 3ft 6in. The total weight was 24 tons 6 cwt in working order. Their appearance is shown in the photograph in Marshall (V. 3) on page 36 (top). Ten were built by Fairbairn as part of the original order for thirty 2-2-2s, and the remaining twenty-three were built at Miles Platting. They were painted dead black with no lining. Between 1869 and 1873 Yates rebuilt many of them with domeless boilers, and No 171 was rebuilt under Barton Wright in 1877 with domed boiler and Ramsbottom safety valves.Three of the Miles Platting engines, Nos 229, 175, and 123, were rebuilt as 0-6-0s in February, March, and November 1869. A photograph, probably of one of these, appeared in The Locomotive in January 1907, page 16, and is captioned as a Fairbairn engine with the date 1853, but both these appear to be mistakes. The number is not visible as at this period LYR engines carried numbers only on the buffer beams. According to The Locomotive this engine was used on the fast Belfast goods to and from Leeds and Fleetwood. As rebuilt they were similar to the Jenkins 0-6-0s.

No LYR engines were built during 1851 and only three in 1852; and none came from private builders during this period.

5ft 0in 0-6-0s

Marshall (3 page 64) considred two older engines from E.B. Wilson & Co of Leeds before dealing with the standard Jenkins 0-6-0. In 1849 Wilson had unsuccessfully attempted to take over the running and maintenance of the LYR locomotive department for fourteen years for 12% of the value of the working stock plus 5½d per train mile. Two 0-6-0s which Wilsons had in stock were bought by the LYR in April 1849. Little is known about them, but as they were rebuilt in 1863 this suggests that they were of the pre-1850 standard Wilson design with outside frames and inside cylinders inclined upwards, with slide bars and piston rods below the front coupled axle: a design which, apart from the cylinders working loose, involved considerable dismantling before the engine could be lifted from the wheels. The boilers were generally similar to those of the Hawthorn 0-6-0s on the >>>Blackburn, Darwen & Bolton Railway (Ch 2, P 38). Cylinders were 17 x 24in and the wheels 4ft 9in. They were numbered 202/3 in the first series, 220/31 in the 1850 list and were replaced in April 1870 and April 1869 respectively.

These two engines were concerned in several trials against the LYR 0-4-2s in 1850-1 and again in August and November 1853. Three of the 0-4-2s, Nos 128, 132/7, were ordered on 2 November 1853 to be tried at a pressure of 120 psi against the Wilson 0-6-0s at the same pressure, and during the four weeks ending 20 May 1854 the 'new 15in luggage engine No 123' was tested at a pressure of 140 psi.

Arising from these tests it was decided to build four 0-6-0s with 17 x 24in cylinders and 5ft 0in wheels and to order four 0-4-2s of Ramsbottom design, with similar dimensions, which Fairbairn was at that time building for the LNWR Northern Division. It appears that Hurst, then outdoor locomotive superintendent, was influential in this decision because when he resigned from the LYR, on 20 December 1854, to take up the position of locomotive superintendent on the North British Railway at St Margaret's, Edinburgh, these four 0-4-2s were diverted to the NBR where they became Nos 72-5.

Jenkins

0-6-0: Jenkins 5ft:1854-

Jenkins was now in sole command at Miles Platting and to replace the 0-4-2s he continued the order for 0-6-0s until twelve of this type were completed, all at Miles Platting. The raised firebox was crowned by Jenkins' 'cottage loaf' dome cover, surmounted by two safety valves. One of these engines, No 224 in its original form, at Clitheroe old station about 1860, is illustrated in Marshall Volume 1 p. 144. Ahrons (Locomotive, 1916, October, p. 201) described them as having 18in cylinders and claimed that No 225 retained these to the end and that others were rebuilt with 17in cylinders, but the LYR local Committee Minutes confirm that they were built with 17in cylinders. According to the LYR locomotive stock list of 1878 No 225 was rebuilt with 18in cylinders in December 1877. A photograph of this engine after rebuilding is shown In Marshall 3 p. 53. The total heating surface was 782.6 ft², the boiler pressure 130 psi and the grate area 14.4 ft².

On 14 July 1868 at 6.40am Sowerby Bridge was shaken by an explosion: one of these 0-6-0s on a Huddersfield to Liverpool freight had gone about 100 yards into the tunnel when its boiler exploded. Both driver and fireman escaped with nothing worse than severe scalds. According to local reports the engine was a six-coupled goods built by the LYR in 1854. It was probably No 223 as this is the only one of the 1854 batch which was rebuilt as early as January 1869.

Some were rebuilt under Yates' supervision with domeless boilers and standard cabs. Nos 217/9, 225/8, and 231 were rebuilt under Barton Wright with domed boilers and Yates-type cabs as shown in the photograph of No 225 on Marshall 3 p. 53 (top). The original four-wheeled tenders were replaced by Jenkins' six-wheeled ones.

1871: 0-6-0: No. 369 modified with Richard Eaton's Warsop's Aero-Steam System.

Sekon, G.A. Evolution of the steam locomotive. 1899.
An air pump forced heated air into the bottom of the boiler which agitated the water and assisted the generation of steam and fuel economy, but the air pump increased maintenance costs. Six locomotives were fitted

4ft 0in 0-6-0 saddle tanks (Liverpool Dock Tanks)

On 19 September 1854 Hurst (then outdoor superintendent under Jenkins) suggested converting two old four-wheeled engines to six-wheeled tanks at not more than £500 each. Three such were ordered to be done, but on 4 October it was decided instead to order three six-wheeled tanks to be built by the company at an estimated cost of £1,650 each for shunting around Liverpool docks and for short distance goods work. The design emerged as a 4ft 0in 0-6-0ST with 15 x 24in cylinders. The boiler was closely similar if not the same as that on the 5ft 0in 0-6-0. The saddle tanks extended from the front of the smokebox to the front of the raised firebox. As built they had no cabs, only bent weatherboards.

The first three, 119-21, were reported on 12 June 1855 to have cost £1,264 3s 9d each. In 1870-1 they were rebuilt with Yates boilers and cabs and the tanks were moved back to the rear of the smokebox and up to the cab front. Altogether eleven were built to the original design. The fourth, No 131, remained in its original form until withdrawn, but the other seven were rebuilt under Barton Wright in 1879-81 with domed boilers and Yates type cabs, and the saddle tank extending from behind the smokebox to the cab front.

Livery

From about 1860 Jenkins adopted an ornate livery for engines. The dark green was continued with much brass-work, and copper-capped chimneys. Numbers were carried on the buffer beams, in brass on the engine and painted in yellow on the tender. Some had the number also on the sides of the tender tool boxes as in the picture of Jenkins 2-4-0 No 290 in Marshall 1 p. 126. Frames were black, lined in scarlet.

4ft 10in 0-6-0 goods engines: 1859-70

This was the largest Jenkins' class, built from 1859 until 1870, when the total grew to 149. Marshall states that they were good engines for their time, working both freight and passenger trains over the entire system. Those with numbers in the 600s were given names and were allocated to the East Lancashire section. No 323 was added to stock on 9 July 1864 and was renumbered 688 Amphitrite in December 1866. There is some evidence, that the engine intended to be No. 267 became EL section No 668 Bucephalus, and that 670 or 697 was originally intended to be 274. A photograph of 687 Neptune is shown in Marshall 3 p. 36 (bottom).

The original batch, as far as No 285 built in July 1861, had 'polished' copper dome covers over the firebox as in Jenkins' previous designs, but subsequent engines were built with the dome over the centre of the boiler, and the safety valves enclosed in a tall brass column over the firebox. The boiler dimensions were: 3ft 9in diameter; total heating surface 895 ft2; grate area 14.4ft2 working at 130 psi.

By 1868 the original design with 15 x 24in cylinders was proving inadequate and on 21 October it was announced that Nos 329, 330, and 352 had been fitted with 16in cylinders, making them capable of hauling an additional six to seven wagons with no appreciable increase in cost of fuel, or other working expenses. Yates was making new 16in cylinders 'for all the old class of engines as they wear out'. He was asked to supply them to the Bury shops as required. Except for about twelve locomotives, all eventually had 16in cylinders, and from No 303 in January 1862 most were built with 16in cylinders. No. 37 is illustrated in Backtrack, 1998, 12, 162-3. but is in stated credited as William Hurst rebuild with domed boiler, Naylor safety valves and late GNR-type cab by J.S. Gibson who contributed the captions ..

Many of these 0-6-0s were rebuilt into tank engines by Barton Wright and fitted with cabs. The first were Nos 25, 327, and 345 which were rebuilt into 0-4-4 tanks in 1878, with 16 x 24in cylinders and a domed boiler carrying Naylor safety valves over the firebox. They had short side tanks and retained their 4ft 10in coupled wheels. From 1879 to 1883 eighteen were rebuilt into 0-6-2 tanks with lengthened frames, large side tanks and bunkers, and Webb pattern radial axle boxes, becoming the first of their type in Great Britain. Presumably the cost of the extensive alterations precluded further conversions to 0-4-4 and 0-6-2 tanks. In 1883-4 eight more were rebuilt into 0-6-0 saddle tanks for passenger trains, retaining the 4ft 10in wheels. Finally, in 1884-7 twenty-six were rebuilt into 0-6-0 shunting saddle tanks with 4ft 0in wheels, as shown in the photograph of No 690 (Marshall 3 p. 54 (bottom). The last ones, completed during Aspinall's period, had cast-iron wheel centres with spokes of H section.ls The EL section engines were not named after rebuilding.

No. 682 Vesuvius of 1864 is illustrated in Backtrack, 1998, 12, 162-3. and is dated between 1875 and 1882 by J.S. Gibson who contributed the captions .

5ft 0in 0-6-0 passenger saddle tanks (Oldham Incline engines): 1856-

In 1856, while the above 0-6-0s were being built, Jenkins brought out a 5ft 0in 0-6-0 passenger saddle tank which, according to Ahrons, was probably the first six-coupled passenger tank engine in Britain. He described the class as 'really good machines and much the handiest local passenger engines the LYR then possessed'. With the exception of wheel size they were identical with the 4ft 0in 0-6-0STs (for Liverpool Docks) of 1855-67, and had tanks extending from the smokebox front to the front of the raised firebox.

The first four, Nos 130/4/9 and 156 in 1856-7, had round top copper dome covers over the firebox and circular section coupling rods. They were followed by eighteen more in 18607 with large 'polished' brass dome covers over the firebox, and rectangular section coupling rods.

Another, No 162, was built to the same design at the end of 1868, after Jenkins' death, and was fitted with the standard Yates type cab. This is most probably the engine illustrated on page 54. In The Locomotive June 1916 p. 135 (and British steam railway locomotive on p. 122): this photograph is ascribed by Ahrons as being No 269, but careful examination of a print under strong magnification has confirmed that the date on the plate is 1869. No 162, built possibly in the last week of 1868, is the only one which fits. The plate may have been cast the same week but with the date 1869. Ahrons' error clearly led to the wrong assumption (Rush page 54) that the whole class had cabs from the beginning, but those built under Jenkins had only the standard bent weatherboard. The ornate livery adopted by Jenkins is clearly shown in the photograph.

The last three, Nos 188, 203, and 10, were built under Yates with his cab and domeless boiler, with the tank between the back of the smokebox and the cab front. According to Ahrons (Locomotive 1916, July, p. 135) Nos 162, 188, and 203 were partial rebuilds of old Bury and Fairbairn goods engines of which the old motion, wheels, and cylinders were used. He states that the wheels had larger bosses of an old type, but these do not appear in the photograph of No 162. In 1874 nos 270 and 299 were rebuilt into this form. Others were rebuilt under Barton Wright from 1877 to 1883 in the same way but with domed boilers and Ramsbottom safely valves over the firebox. (There was an official photograph at Horwich of 361 thus rebuilt and bearing the date 1882 on its number plate.) Nos 269, 270/2, 299 and 5 were rebuilt also with 16in cylinders. Nos 271 and 298 were scrapped in 1887 with their original boilers.

Jenkins 2-4-0 passenger engines: 1861-

Passenger traffic was handled by the early Miles Platting 2-2-2s, later rebuilt into 2-4-0s, supplementer by the ELR 2-4-0s and 0-6-0 tender and saddle tank engines. It was not until 1861 that the first Jenkins 2-4-0 'express' engine emerged, and during the next six years 22 were built. The first 11 carried names of LYR directors like No 290 Atkinson which figures in the painting by Hamilton Ellis shown in Marshall 1 p. 126; but those in the subsequent eleven were not so distinguished. Marshall owned a photograph of one of these engines bearing the name Holme, but there is no record of this name. Jenkins' standard brass-covered dome was mid-way along the boiler and the safety valves were enclosed in a tall brass casing over the firebox. The engines had no cabs as built, only weatherboards bent over at the top. The major dimensions were: 3ft 9in dimater boiler, total heating surface 895 ft2, grate area 14.4 ft2, boiler pressure 130 psi and 15 x 22in cylinders. The coupled wheels were 5ft 9in

The first, No 286, was turned out on 17 April 1861 and was inspected by the directors at Victoria station. Nearly all were rebuilt under Barton Wright or Aspinall between 1875 and 1886, receiving new boilers and cabs. An official photograph at Horwich shows No 288 rebuilt with domed boiler and Ramsbottom safety valves and Yates type cab. Another shows No 15 with the original Jenkins boiler and the Yates cab. Both these carry the original building dates on the number plates. The photograph on Marshall p. 36 (middle) shows No 336 with domed boiler and Yates type cab.

Ahrons described the working of these engines in Locomotive and Train working: Most of the 286 classes [sic] were stationed at Lancashire sheds, and some worked from Manchester on the Blackburn and Preston services. A number of them at Newton Heath, such as 340, 300, ran regularly to Leeds, and one or two, eg, 16 and 289, which were at Sandhills (Liverpool) for a considerable period, frequently worked through to Normanton. Most of those which Barton Wright rebuilt eventually settled at the Yorkshire sheds, Low Moor and Wakefield. In 1879 and for a number of subsequent years the rebuilds 13 and 21 were at the latter station to work the more important main line trains to Manchester.

Yates or Hirst and possibly Hurst

Following the death of Jenkins locomotive affairs at Miles Platting appear to have been controlled by William Yates (about whom nothing appears to be known or it might be Ahrons' Hirst), altough it seems probable that the disgraced Hurst may have had some influence. Lowe makes no reference to Yates and states that Hurst was in charge.. Hamilton Ellis (North British Railway) p. 17 noted that Hurst was a locomotive engineer of repute in his day. One of the characteristics of this period is the use of straight back domeless boiler of the type favoured by the Stirling family. The Yates cab also reflected the Stirling style and the illustration of 2-4-0 No. 51 on page 72 of Marshall (3) would pass as a rather poorly constructed product from Doncaster. To an extent this trend towards the Stirling type of boiler culminated in the purchase of Stirling 0-4-2s after the appointment of Barton Wright in late 1875. During this period between Jenkins and Barton Wright there had been an attempt to amalgamate with the LNWR in 1871 (and from that time there was attempt to source locomotives from Crewe Works which was ultimately halted by a respomse from private locomotive manufacturers); and a serious fire at Miles Platting Works on 27 April 1873 disrupted output.

2-4-0T: Yates: 1868

Marshall (3 p. 74) somewhat improbably suggests that No. 23 was assembled from a Robert Stephenson-type outside frame 2-2-2 built by Nasmyth Gaskell for the Manchester & Leeds Railway in 1840 and suggests this may have been Sheffield. This suggests that the 2-2-2 was out-of use from August 1849 until its metamorphosis. The "new" locomotive had outside frames, 15 x 20in cylinders and 5ft coupled wheels. It in turn was replaced in 1888. Marshall notes that this locomotive is sometimes mis-placed with the 2-4-0WTs.

4ft 0-6-0ST: 1868-

This was essentially the Jenkins Liverpool Dock type promulgated for wider duties: shunting and pick-up goods. The last two were not delivered until 1875. Most were withdrawn before the end of the nineteenth century. Six allocated to the East Lancashire section received names. Nos. 160, 189 and 216 were fitted with larger (16in diameter) cyclinders. Some were painted in brick red and lined in maroon. No. 620 Vulcan is illustrated on p. 89 (middle) of Marshall.

2-4-0WT: 1868-

These were small locomotives with 5ft coupled wheels, a grate area of only 12.7 ft2 and a total heating surface of 474.7ft2. The boiler pressure was 140 psi and 15 x 20 in cylinders were fitted. 25 locomotives were constructed. They were fitted with saddle tanks and cabs from 1876 and No. 481 may have been constructed as a saddle tank engine. There is a not very clear view of No. 28 at Crosby in its original state c1880 (Marshall 3 p. 71 top) and another of No. 623 Elk (71 middle). The bottom picture on page 71 shows the often reproduced view of No. 31 reconstructed as a 2-4-0 and coupled to a directors' saloon resting on three axles. This transformation took place in 1889: the domeless boiler is pathetically visible. Marshall stated that No. 135 beacme a departmental locomotive in 1885. . Ahrons called them "miserable little undersized machines".

0-6-0 goods engines: 1869-

These were very similar to the Stirling 0-6-0s constructed from about two years previously and must have been known to Yates and or Hirst/Hurst. They shared the straightback boiler, but initially lacked cabs: these followed from 1872. These were supposed to be an improvement upon the Jenkins 4ft 10in 0-6-0s. A total of 84 were built and this included 10 from Kitson and 12 from the Yorkshire Engine Co. (a firm which was very much in the Doncaster backyard). Some were allocated specifically to the East Lancashire section. The locomotives were withdrawn between 1898 and 1904. No. 709 Ganymede (Miles Platting WN 330/1870) and No. 703 Emperor (Miles Platting WN 297/1870) are illustrated in Backtrack, 1998, 12, 162-3. and is credited to William Hurst by J.S. Gibson who contributed the captions .

2-4-0 passenger engines: 1870-6

With one exception these had 6ft coupled wheels. The exception was No. 103 with 5ft 6in coupled wheels (it also had 17in diameter cylinders). The last ten had 17 x 24in cylinders, but the earlier locomotives had 16 x 24in cylinders. 38 were constructed and this included four built at Bury: 650 Banshee, 654 Reindeer (presumably for Santa specials), 607 Bacchus (wine & dine?) and 609 Vesta (November 5th?). Illustration (Marshall 3 p. 72) shows No. 51 in a very Stirling-like state. Nos 44, 52, 102 and 103 may have been built with domed boilers: Nos 73 and 84 certainly were. The last ten worked from Newton Heath on Leeds and Normanton services.

LYR loco miscellany. Michael Blakemore and Barry Lane (captions). Backtrack, 1996, 10, 557-9.
Very lengthy captions to illustration of 2-4-0 No 53 firmly credited to Yates with straight-back boiler and "Stirling" cab. No. 609 Vesta is illustrated in Backtrack, 1998, 12, 162-3. and is firmly credited to William Hurst by J.S. Gibson who contributed the captions: in the state illustrated it had a domed boiler. ..

0-6-0ST: 1872-8

According to Ahrons this was a "Hirst design". These had 17 x 24in cylinders and 4ft 6in, 5ft and 4ft driving wheel sizes. They continued to be built under Barton Wright, but most were withdrawn by the end of the century, but one lasted until October 1905. Only the first nine had domeless boilers, but the reaminder had domed boilers and may be considered as a further Barton Wright "design". Within this earlier period were the six passenger tank engines (with 5ft coupled wheels) for working to Oldham.

No. 622 Atlas (Miles Platting, 1875) is illustrated in Backtrack, 1998, 12, 162-3. and is credited to William Hurst by J.S. Gibson who contributed the captions .

Standard Crewe products

0-6-0: DX class

86 of this standard Crewe class were built at Crewe Works for the LYR between 1871-4: the later ones incorporated Webb improvements including cabs. According to Marshall (3 p. 79) they became one of the principal passenger types on the LYR and even worked the Manchester to Bradford market train. The majority were withdrawn in the 1890s although one lasted until 1904.

0-4-0ST

This inside-cylinder 0-4-0ST was a typical Crewe product: five were acquired but all were withdrawn by the end of March 1902. Nos. 410 and 411 were rebuilt as 0-6-0STs

2-4-0: Newton type

In 1873 ten LNWR Newton class were constructed at Crewe for the LYR. These were the best express locomotives on the LYR and were rebuilt in 1888-9. They worked the fast expresses bewteen Manchester and Liverpool from 1889. No. 731 became the power for the CME's  personal saloon in 1886 and in this form it lasted until 1926, latterly numbered "10000" and painted in Midland red (Marshall 3 89 bottom). Talbot (An illustrated history of LNWR engines)  Figure 55 (page 111) general arrangement drawing.

Beyer Peacock products: 1875

In 1875 Beyer Peacock had three 0-6-0s (WN 1235-7) and three 2-4-0Ts (BP 1238-40) on their hands which had been ordered by the insolvent East & West Junction Railway. They had been constructed to designs developed for Sweden (the 0-6-0s for the Swedish Government Railway and the 2-4-0T for Boldermann & Co. One of the 0-6-0s (No. 522) was rebuilt as a saddle tank in 1896-7 and this extended its life to 1903 — the others went in 1887 and 1890. The 2-4-0Ts lasted until 1902 and 1909, but one, No. 518 was rebuilt as a crane tank and lasted until 1922 working at Horwich Works (photo. page 90 top).

0-4-2 tender Stirling design

Eight supplied by Sharp as supplement to GNR order for Stirling 0-4-2s. According to Groves (2) 119-21. the locomotives were used to haul expresses, but were withdrawn by 1900. These locomotives were supplied following the injunction taken by the locomotive manafacturers against the LNWR for constructing and supplying 101 locomotives to the LYR from 1872. Marshall (3 p. 88) does not mention the injunction, nor does he note the puzzling aptness of the design at the "culmination" of the "Yates period" of domeless boilers. He does note that Barton Wright rebuilt them with domes on the original boilers, and some received other standard LYR fittings. All were withdrawn before the end of 1901

Barton Wright designs

Nock (Lancashire & Yorkshire Railway p.57) implies that Barton Wright must have been astonished by the heterogeneous collection of locomotives which he found when he took charge of locomotive affairs in 1876. makes it abundantly clear that Barton Wright's primary contributions were the establishment of Horwich Works with the assistance of John Ramsbottom acting as Consultant and the introduction of four standard designs as noted in the Table (all had 140 psi boilers initially). Kevin remembers seeing the last of the 0-6-0s in their original state (that is before being converted into saddle tanks) when he and his LYR-loving companion used to go down Weaste Lane after school to see the Barrow go through (usually headed by a rebuilt Scot). The Barton Wright 0-6-0s always seemed so slight compared with the later Aspinall 0-6-0s: this slightness was masked in the saddle tank conversions.

As Barton Wright is credited with the introduction of the 0-6-2T type, which had a major influence in South Wales, it should be noted that Barton Wright's initial essay consisted of rebuildiing a Jenkins' 0-6-0 into an 0-6-2T at Miles Platting in 1879 and this was followed by seventeen further rebuilds in 1880-3. These had 16in x 24in cylinders, 4ft 10in coupled wheels and Webb radial axleboxes.

0-6-0: 1876-

Marshall (3 p. 85) adds still more to the connection with South Wales by noting that this design originated via Kitson and was virtually identical to 0-6-0s being supplied by that firm to the Taff Vale Railway. Two of the TVR batch were actually delivered to the LYR by mistake and had to be returned. Forty were built at Miles Platting (the last locomotives to be constructed there), but the majority were supplied by Kitson, Vulcan, Beyer Peacock and Sharp Stewart. All except for the last fifty (ordered under Aspinall were converted to saddle tanks. In this form many lasted into the BR period and were the subject of colour photographs and preservation.

More importantly, the class demonstrated (1) standardization could be achieved via a multiple builders; (2) at last the railway had a robust freight locomotive (which lasted almost to the end of steam); and (3) was more powerful than the Ramsbottom DX type. On page 86 Marshall notes that Low Moor iron was specified for boiler construction.

0-4-4T: 1878-86

Ahrons (Chapter 14 p. 218) noted that Barton Wright introduced this type, but that tthe supplier, Kitson (initial batch) was responsible for the detailed design work. ; Dübs, Neilson and Sharp Stewart supplied later batches. The side tanks varied in size between batches. Ahrons noted that they were intended for express passenger work due to a shortage of turntables. The Adams bogie was modified by the replacement of the rubber springs in spite of Manchester being one of the centres of rubber manufacture. The side springs were replaced by Timmis coil springs, but according to Marshall (Rly Engr., 1880 (August), p. 221) an excellent ride was provided by the modified bogie. No. 614 was named Victoria when exhibited at the exhibition in Liverpool in 1886. The class total was 72. Most were withdrawn before WW1, but one lasted until 1921, although many remained as carriage heating boilers until that function ceased.

4-4-0: 1880-7

These light, but moderately powerful 4-4-0s with 6ft driving wheels may reflect Barton Wright's association with India. The initial batch was supplied by Sharp Stewart. By implication from the other "Barton Wright designs" these may have been developed by Sharp Stewart. Construction continued under Aspinall. Timmis coil springs were used on all the axles including the bogie, was of the swivel link type (unusual at that time). Some of a batch manufactured by Neilson  in 1884 were fitted with Joy valve gear. (see Ahrons Loco. Mag., 1909, 15, 215). 110 locomotives were constructed by a variety of outside builders: Vulcan Foundry built the last batch. Most were withdrawn before WW1, but two became LMS 10100 and 10101 and survived until November 1930. Further of a slightly modified version were built after Aspinall took control. No. 1007 illustrated in Rly Wld, 1958. 19, 168-9.

0-6-2T: 1881-3

Marshall (3 p.94) calls this tellingly another Kitson design. It had 5ft 1in coupled wheels and a radial axle box. They were highly successful on the Werneth Incline (1 in 27) and according to Rly Engr 1884, (June) p. 159 could manage to haul 144 ton passenger trains up it. 54 were built, the majority by Dübs. Some lasted until the 1930s. It is strange that there were no subsequent additions, although it is considered that the type acted as the origin for the "South Wales Valleys 0-6-2T". No. 655 illustrated in Rly Wld, 1958. 19, 168-9.

2016-11-01