The civil engineer whose crowning glory was the construction of the Manchester Ship Canal, Sir Edward Leader Williams, was born 28th April 1828 and died 1st January 1910.
Williams was born in Worcestershire, the son of a civil engineer who worked for the Severn Navigation Commissioners. The young Edward became an apprentice engineer and was admitted to the Institute of Civil Engineers in 1860.
For much of his career, like his father, he was involved in canals and rivers. He gravitated from the Midlands to the North West where some of his most celebrated engineering triumphs occurred.
In 1856 he was appointed engineer for the River Weaver Trust, a river running through Cheshire then used to transport, amongst other goods, the salt from the Cheshire salt mines. To move goods from the river to the Trent and Mersey Canal for onward transport to other cities, it was necessary to address the difference in elevation between the two waterways. Time and money were being lost transhipping the goods from the river to the canal network. Williams was charged with developing a solution which was the Anderton Boat Lift. It was not designed by Williams but another designer, Edwin Clark. However, Williams was in control of the construction of the lift which still operates today. The principle was to lift laden boats between the two navigations using water filled caissons. It was very successful with the lift allowing 100,000 tonnes of salt and coal to pass over the river Weaver, and although it is now electrically operated, it stands as one of Williams’ most notable achievements.
In 1872 he was appointed as the engineer for the Bridgewater Navigation where he became involved in enlarging the lock at Runcorn. This gave him a significant insight into the commercial waterways in the North West, knowledge which would have informed his proposals for his life’s major work, the Manchester Ship Canal.
The Ship Canal came into being because the manufacturers of Manchester felt that the charges levied on them for the import and export of goods by the port of Liverpool and the Liverpool to Manchester Railway, were too high. The existing canal network was not sufficient to transport goods into and out of the expanding 19th century Manchester. So, the proposal was to build a canal large enough to take seagoing vessels directly into Manchester from the River Mersey near Eastham
In 1882 Williams’ plans for the Ship Canal were accepted. There were competitor plans which involved a tidal canal but those would have left the terminus for the Ship Canal in Manchester at 60 feet below street level. Williams’ proposal to deal with the changing levels between Liverpool and Manchester was a system of locks and, wherever possible, using the existing Mersey channel.
It took a considerable amount of time to get parliamentary approval for the Canal, in the face of stiff opposition from the Port of Liverpool and others. However, construction, under Williams’ supervision, commenced in 1888 and the Canal was opened in 1894.
The Manchester Ship Canal is one of the major achievements of the Victorian age. It is approximately 36 miles long. 16,000 workers were involved in digging it using 124 steam powered cranes, 80 locomotives and it required the shifting of many tonnes of earth by hand. Unfortunately, 130 workers were killed during the construction of the Canal.
Williams had to overcome significant engineering challenges. Numerous bridges and crossings had to be dealt with and the water in the rivers Irwell and Mersey still had to be allowed to flow while new channels were being cut because they provided vital drainage for a large area. Williams’ solution involved temporary diversions and the building of locks. Eventually the old watercourses were incorporated into the Ship Canal which also helped manage waterflow more efficiently, reducing local flood risk.
In addition to the engineering challenges, the main contractor died, so the work had to be contracted out to other firms. In common with many engineering projects, the works went very substantially over budget due to the challenges encountered. During construction Manchester City Council had to step in and give money to save the project. The Council accordingly became a major shareholder but rates in the city between 1892 and 1895 had to rise by 26% to fund it.
In addition to the building of the Manchester Ship Canal and locks, Williams came up with other engineering solutions during the course of the construction. The Bridgewater Canal passes over the Ship Canal and to facilitate this Williams built a swing aqueduct. This was unique in allowing large ships to pass through while keeping water within the Bridgewater Canal.
As a result of the successful completion of the Manchester Ship Canal, Manchester became the third busiest port in England, quite an achievement for a city which is 40 miles from the sea! The Ship Canal remains in operation today although at a lesser level than in its heyday because it is now too small for modern large freight ships. It reached its zenith in 1955 at which point 18.9 million tonnes of cargo were being carried by the Canal.
Despite some of the modern challenges from increasing ship size, Williams’ achievement is still serving the region well, with cargo continuing to come into Salford. There are proposals for further development as part of the Atlantic Gateway plan which would reduce the need to transport some heavy goods in the region by road.
Interestingly, Williams had a brother, Benjamin, who was a well-known artist in the Victorian period. Benjamin changed his name from Benjamin Leader Williams to Benjamin Williams Leader, mainly because there were a number of other artists with the surname Williams. It is clear that he had some pride in his engineering brother because he painted several pictures of the Manchester Ship Canal during its construction.
Edward Leader Williams was knighted in 1894 for his services, not coincidentally at the time that the Manchester Ship Canal was being opened.
Although Sir Edward Leader Williams was one of the most celebrated engineers of his day and was living in some comfort in a villa in Altrincham with his family when he died, his estate was valued at £10,612 – whereas his artist brother, Benjamin, had an estate valued at £86,185 when he died. Perhaps a commentary on the commercial value placed on engineering and art at that time?
Andrew Welch, member of Manchester Lit & Phil