The Exception To The Rule

The Exception To The Rule It is quite reasonable to associate narrow boats with England's canal system. Firstly because this is the type of craft that predominate the canals today. Secondly, if you've read even the briefest of histories about how the canals came into existence in the 1760's through the enterprise of the Duke of Bridgewater, you will know that the beam of the boats - and to a large extent the width of the locks that we have today, are a direct result of his pioneering work. So, with a canal system designed for vessels with beams of 5 ft. 10 in. in other words "narrow boats" surely it is a far cry to link Thames sailing barges whose beams can be up to five times that, with the world of canals?
It is often said that there is invariably one exception to any rule, and in the case of the canals it was Thames sailing barges. The canal in question was the "Thames & Medway" that was built between Gravesend on the River Thames and Frindsbury on the River Medway, and in doing so crossed the Hoo Peninsula in Kent. The canal was originally built to avoid the predatory raids of French warships during the Napoleonic Wars (1796-1815), but finally opened in 1824. Unusually it included a tunnel.	A stump rigged barge berthed at the Higham entrance with a steam train leaving the tunnel [After a painting by Pyne 1845]
A stump rigged barge with her main mast lowered - the condition needed for barges to use the Higham tunnel [After Taunt ca. 1890]	At one point in an attempt to improve its profitability a railway line was built parallel to the canal and this also went through the tunnel. So, for a time the novel situation existed of sailing barges, their towpath horses, and steam passenger trains all sharing the tunnel!
The tunnel was to take the canal between Higham and Frindsbury. The barges were drawn by horses along the canal towpath in the conventional manner and through the tunnel. For the barges to achieve the tunnel passage they had to lower their mainmasts. Given the design of the Thames sailing barge, this was no problem as it was a design feature - normally used when they had to pass under low bridges of the Medway in the Rochester area, and on the Upper Thames.
After different sections of it experienced different economic fortunes, and the successful attentions of a German bomber during World War II, sections of it remain to this day, including the tunnel - but in a different guise! It is subject to the active renovation efforts of Thames & Medway Canal Association (TMCA) in Kent, who's aim is to marshal volunteers to work on the progressive reclamation of certain stretches and so return them to multi-leisure use. The TMCA has its own website here which explains the canal's history and their present day work. Their activities have not been without some drama, as towards the end of 2003 their long held aspirations clashed with those of a property developer who had applied for planning permission to regenerate the Gravesend basin section of the canal which is currently a brownfield site. Two significant issues surfaced. The first was that the developer's plans were not sympathetic to the practical restoration of the particular section of the canal which leads directly into the Thames basin. Their proposals had it being "reclaimed" into a static water feature rather than a section of canal that could be used for public leisure use. One commentator described the likely end result as being nothing more than a "duck pond"! The campaign to have this shortcoming remedied was headed by the Inland Waterways Association, assisting the TMCA. The second issue was that the developer's plan did not include the refurbishment of the River Thames lock to a state where it would be fully operational. This lock has had only a single pair of gates, rather than the standard two, since the attentions of that German bomber mentioned earlier. As a result its operating window is so short as to be practically useless for any sensible use of the basin - which incidentally under the developer's plans is to become a marina and the necessary focal point of a modern mini-village. The efforts were made at trying to marshal the Thames sailing barge community and the wider River Thames users' community, 2003-2004, to get the missing pair of lock gates re-instated. The public response therefore ended up as a two pronged approach with the canal users' and restorers' community concentrating on the canal and the basin whilst the wider River Thames leisure users' community concentrated on the Thames lock gates issue. Please check the TMCA website for an update on the outcome. If you're already a sailing barge enthusiast you'll doubtless find the Thames & Medway Canal a fascinating story - which continues to rumble on. Likewise if you're a member of the TMCA, then discovering the involvement that the wider River Thames users' community took in trying to get one aspect of "your" canal back into full working order should be equally interesting. Finally, for anyone feeling so inclined there is no reason why some "cross pollination" could not take place. Members of the various sailing barge trusts could consider joining the TMCA, whilst members of the latter could do likewise with the barge trusts - shared interests but with rather different perspectives. Something to think about? M. W. 2004