Private owner merchandise wagons?

[t.s.meese]

Many 5 plank POWs were for coal - typically coal merchants, as I understand it. But were any of those 5 plank POWs that we see from the likes of Bachmann (the ones that make no mention on their sides of anything coal related) used for general merchandise? (One can easily imagine such traders.) Or was general merchandise always carried by company wagons, there being no motivation for general merchandise traders to own their own wagons? (This is a big 4 period question.)

[Bernard Lamb]

Many 5 plank POWs were for coal - typically coal merchants, as I understand it. But were any of those 5 plank POWs that we see from the likes of Bachmann (the ones that make no mention on their sides of anything coal related) used for general merchandise? (One can easily imagine such traders.) Or was general merchandise always carried by company wagons, there being no motivation for general merchandise traders to own their own wagons? (This is a big 4 period question.)

Most coal was carried in 7 plank wagons while the 5 plank type were used for a variety of materials. Our local builders merchant for example, Anderson and Woodman had 5 plank wagons. I don't think they were ever used for coal.

Bernard

[eastglosmog]

Many quarry companies had 5 plank PO wagons  - see these Mountsorrel Granite Co examples as preserved by the GCR on the quarry branch.  Being denser than coal, 5 planks gave adequate capacity.

Edited November 11, 2017 by eastglosmog

[bbishop]

Some collieries could only load 5 plank wagons.  I think some collieries in the Somerset coalfield were the preserve of 5 plank wagons.  Any wagon which unloaded by bottom and/or end doors was clearly built for mineral traffic.

Bill

[asmay2002]

Many 5 plank POWs were for coal - typically coal merchants, as I understand it. But were any of those 5 plank POWs that we see from the likes of Bachmann (the ones that make no mention on their sides of anything coal related) used for general merchandise? (One can easily imagine such traders.) Or was general merchandise always carried by company wagons, there being no motivation for general merchandise traders to own their own wagons? (This is a big 4 period question.)

Private owner wagons by their nature would be carrying the goods specific to their owner rather than general merchandise.  So quarry owned wagons had Stone, salt wagons, salt and grain wagons, grain.  Colliery owned wagons (rather than those owned by coal merchants or factors) could sometimes be seen carrying other mining related things like pit props.

[Nick Holliday]

Depends what you mean by general merchandise. As Andy May has suggested, the bulk of non-coal traffic in open Private Traders' wagons would be other types of mineral commodities, whereas manufactured or processed items would probably require some form of protection, hence the use of special PO vans for salt, lime, cement, beer and gunpowder, or tanks for petroleum products, acids, molasses or milk. There were also PO vans for oddities like eggs, sausages and tents, but few and far between. Some of the hardier items above might have been bagged up and carried in opens which could be fully sheeted for protection, and beer or whisky barrels might be possible loads, but probably only as empties, since security of these when full would be an issue. I cannot recall seeing any PO wagons with sheeting rails, apart from, perhaps, some China clay carriers, so I suspect suitable railway company wagons would be preferred.

[kevinlms]

Depends what you mean by general merchandise. As Andy May has suggested, the bulk of non-coal traffic in open Private Traders' wagons would be other types of mineral commodities, whereas manufactured or processed items would probably require some form of protection, hence the use of special PO vans for salt, lime, cement, beer and gunpowder, or tanks for petroleum products, acids, molasses or milk. There were also PO vans for oddities like eggs, sausages and tents, but few and far between. Some of the hardier items above might have been bagged up and carried in opens which could be fully sheeted for protection, and beer or whisky barrels might be possible loads, but probably only as empties, since security of these when full would be an issue. I cannot recall seeing any PO wagons with sheeting rails, apart from, perhaps, some China clay carriers, so I suspect suitable railway company wagons would be preferred.

Probably the main reason for lack of PO true general merchandise wagons, is that while things like coal & other mineral wagons and even relatively toxic contents (oil etc), could and did have the contents sitting around in private sidings for several days, weeks even. In the case of small valuable items, the owner would want to get the stock out of the wagon and into permanent storage facilities ASAP. So lessening the value of owning wagons.

 

The exceptions as you stated would include very prominent items, such as the sausage vans, which were effectively a mobile advertising billboard, that frequented large stations.

[Guy Rixon]

Open PO-wagons for merchandise are vanishingly rare. PO vans are slightly less rare; there were some in the south east. Some of the Kentish breweries (or breweries of Kent?) had vans, and there were some for cement works. Searching this form for "Huntley and Palmers" may turn up some more vans, mixed in with a lot of mineral wagons.

[Fat Controller]

Open PO-wagons for merchandise are vanishingly rare. PO vans are slightly less rare; there were some in the south east. Some of the Kentish breweries (or breweries of Kent?) had vans, and there were some for cement works. Searching this form for "Huntley and Palmers" may turn up some more vans, mixed in with a lot of mineral wagons.

At least some of what appeared at first sight to be 'merchandise' private owners were actually 'moving billboards' for third parties; an example that comes to mind is the wagon lettered up for a billiard-ball manufacturer. Users of 'non-coal' private-owner opens included quarries (both aggregates and slate), glass-works and iron-works.

Private-owner vans seemed to be for users who wanted to be certain the contents stayed dry; examples of products carried included cement, flour and hops.

[t.s.meese]

Thanks to all those who have replied so far - these have been very helpful, largely confirming my hunches, but that's a good thing. More than happy to hear more...

cheers

t.

[Bernard Lamb]

Seeing that this topic has strayed into other vehicles and goods I should add our local vans.

John Dickinson, paper makers and stationary suppliers, had a large fleet of vans. Each was inscribed with a destination and most large towns were covered.

I don't know how long they were in service in Big 4 days bit in LNWR times they were relatively common in bulk near the London end of the WCML.

This trade continued into the 1960s and by then standard BR 12 t vans were almost universal for this traffic.

Bernard

[wagonman]

I will stick my neck out slightly and state that there were no PO wagons used for general merchandise, that being the preserve of the railway companies as Common Carriers. The attempt by Spillers to operate their own fleet of vans for conveying flour ended in a court case and them having to sell their newly acquired 'iron mink' style vans. Most PO wagons carried bulk minerals of one sort or another – possibly builders merchants had the most varied cargoes but it was always for the owners' own purposes. 

 

 

 

Richard

[eastglosmog]

I suppose you ought to caveat that observation with a note that PO wagons did carry general merchandise after September 1939 when they were in the common pool although still owned privately (hence why I can load them with anybody's goods on my 1946/7 layout)!

[Poggy1165]

One of the reasons for PO wagons was that the traffic they were to carry (e.g. lime, tarmac) would spoil the nice clean railway company wagons. The railways preferred to carry most traffic in their own wagons as it was more efficient. This is the logic behind the Spillers case, although Spillers complained that the GWR often provided sheeted opens which were (they felt) less suitable for carrying flour than vans. I can see their point, but the powers-that-be evidently couldn't.

 

Coal is a bit of a special case. Originally (we are talking early-mid nineteenth century) some railway companies, certainly including the LNWR, were decidedly sniffy about conveying coal at all as it was seen as a bit infra dig. A compromise was to make the traders and collieries supply their own wagons. Later, some railway  companies, but by no means all, deigned to provide coal wagons for those wishing to hire them, but by then the use of PO wagons had become established by custom and practice. Moreover, replacing the vast array of private wagons with company ones would probably have been unaffordable.

[wagonman]

I suppose you ought to caveat that observation with a note that PO wagons did carry general merchandise after September 1939 when they were in the common pool although still owned privately (hence why I can load them with anybody's goods on my 1946/7 layout)!

 

 

When the PO wagons were placed under government control from Sept 1939 they effectively, if not legally, ceased to be PO wagons in the accepted sense. Some wagons such as tarred roadstone carriers were exempted from the pooling arrangement but those in the pool tended to continue to be used for the same traffic as before the war – there were very few back-loads from the docks to the collieries except pit props, and even fewer from the big cities/steel works/power stations/etc. Plus nobody fancied sticking their general cargo into a dirty old coal wagon. And that still applied in 1946/7...

 

 

Richard

[Andy Hayter]

One of the reasons for PO wagons was that the traffic they were to carry (e.g. lime, tarmac) would spoil the nice clean railway company wagons. The railways preferred to carry most traffic in their own wagons as it was more efficient. This is the logic behind the Spillers case, although Spillers complained that the GWR often provided sheeted opens which were (they felt) less suitable for carrying flour than vans. I can see their point, but the powers-that-be evidently couldn't.

 

Coal is a bit of a special case. Originally (we are talking early-mid nineteenth century) some railway companies, certainly including the LNWR, were decidedly sniffy about conveying coal at all as it was seen as a bit infra dig. A compromise was to make the traders and collieries supply their own wagons. Later, some railway  companies, but by no means all, deigned to provide coal wagons for those wishing to hire them, but by then the use of PO wagons had become established by custom and practice. Moreover, replacing the vast array of private wagons with company ones would probably have been unaffordable.

 

That difference between companies is perhaps most pronounced with the NER where there were very few PO wagons for minerals.  The NER preferred to transport and control this merchandise themselves.  

[petethemole]

When the PO wagons were placed under government control from Sept 1939 they effectively, if not legally, ceased to be PO wagons in the accepted sense. Some wagons such as tarred roadstone carriers were exempted from the pooling arrangement but those in the pool tended to continue to be used for the same traffic as before the war – there were very few back-loads from the docks to the collieries except pit props, and even fewer from the big cities/steel works/power stations/etc. Plus nobody fancied sticking their general cargo into a dirty old coal wagon. And that still applied in 1946/7...

 

 

Richard

 

 

Numbers of PO mineral wagons were used for transporting military supplies to the invasion ports before D-day and during the subsequent campaigns. Southampton City Archives have a number of photos of such wagons at Southampton Docks. They vary from four (wide) planks to eight. I downloaded them from the work intranet but they are copyright so I can't put them on here. Owners include 'Milner', 'Lazenby & Co', 'M. C.', 'B.A.C.', 'Goldthorpe', 'Ebbw Vale'. They are in mixed rakes with company merchandise wagons. Visible loads are mostly ration boxes, plus oil drums.

[eastglosmog]

Further to what Petethemole says,  I have seen film of ships being unloaded at Southampton in 1942, well before D-Day (filmed by the SR film unit) with general supplies including food (in boxes) into various PO wagons, including Ebbw Vale coal wagons.  Wagons were cleaned out after use - the consequences of not doing so thouroughly were shown by the fire and explosion of an ammunition wagon at Soham in 1944.  Regarding ownership, PO wagons were still being built in 1943 (Alfred Smith of Bristol had some built by the Gloucester Wagon Co then).  I don't know what use they got from them or quite why they were built.  Maybe as replacements for wagons destroyed by bombing - I presume the Government paid some sort of hire charge to use all the PO wagons they had commandeered.  There is also some film of the SR using Forsters (IIRC) PO wagons to transport demolition rubble from a bridge they were replacing.

Edited November 14, 2017 by eastglosmog

[wagonman]

The exigencies of war – especially just prior to an invasion fleet sailing – would have meant anything with wheels could be pressed into service, but I would not regard those cargoes as 'general merchandise'. As far as I can remember we didn't invade anybody in 1946.

 

There were a few PO wagons built during the war, presumably to replace losses, and Alfred J Smith was one such 'owner' though I doubt he caught more than a fleeting glimpse of his new wagons as they went straight into the pool. The owners were eventually paid compensation by the BTC in 1948 for the wagons that had survived to be taken over by British Railways.

 

To return to the OP's question, which was in regard to general traders in pre-war days having their own wagons for normal goods traffic, the answer is still a resounding 'NO'!

 

 

Richard

[Caledonian]

That difference between companies is perhaps most pronounced with the NER where there were very few PO wagons for minerals.  The NER preferred to transport and control this merchandise themselves.  

 

Slightly more complicated than that I'm afraid. On the one hand a very high proportion of the coal from the Northumberland and Durham coalfields was shipped by sea, loaded from staithes on the Tyne and other ports which were directly accessed from the pits by private railways. On the other hand the figures bandied about for numbers of wagons registered with the railway companies are mince. The problem is that they normally relate to first registration and that in turn depends on where the wagon manufacturer was situated.

 

A splendid example of this is the 20T tank wagon belonging to the Newcastle & Gateshead Gas Company which was released by Hornby [or was it Dapol?] a few years back. The original No.18 was actually registered not with the LNER as you might expect, but with the LMS, because the builder - I think Charles Roberts - was located in LMS territory and so it was shipped out of the factory on LMS metals.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Caledonian

[Caledonian]

One of the reasons for PO wagons was that the traffic they were to carry (e.g. lime, tarmac) would spoil the nice clean railway company wagons. The railways preferred to carry most traffic in their own wagons as it was more efficient. This is the logic behind the Spillers case, although Spillers complained that the GWR often provided sheeted opens which were (they felt) less suitable for carrying flour than vans. I can see their point, but the powers-that-be evidently couldn't.

 

 

The Spillers business is odd, because the Leith General Warehousing people had their own covered wagons for many years, mainly used for grain and malt, but I have heard they also had a few for general merchandise at one point.

[Mark Saunders]

The Spillers business is odd, because the Leith General Warehousing people had their own covered wagons for many years, mainly used for grain and malt, but I have heard they also had a few for general merchandise at one point.

 

The Leith General Warehousing ones were grain hoppers not covered wagons and were not pooled in 1939 as they fell out of the scope or pooling!

[Caledonian]

The Leith General Warehousing ones were grain hoppers not covered wagons and were not pooled in 1939 as they fell out of the scope or pooling!

 

That was my understanding, but then I came across a secondary source which claimed that they also had some used for general merchandising, supplying small tows ad villages in the borders, although I'll admit I'm not entirely convinced.

[t.s.meese]

That difference between companies is perhaps most pronounced with the NER where there were very few PO wagons for minerals.  The NER preferred to transport and control this merchandise themselves.  

Thanks; I did not know this. But how did that pan out in LNER days? From photos (I have plenty in books), I get the impression that PO wagons were far more common than LNER mineral wagons on the ECML. But could there be a bias in the images available? I would imagine photographers to be far more likely to spend film on an interesting rake of POWs than a dull set of company wagons...

Edited November 24, 2017 by t.s.meese

[Mark Saunders]

Thanks; I did not know this. But how did that pan out in LNER days? From photos (I have plenty in books), I get the impression that PO wagons were far more common than LNER mineral wagons on the ECML. But could there be a bias in the images available? I would imagine photographers to be far more likely to spend film on an interesting rake of POWs than a dull set of company wagons...

 

From what I gather it would depend on which part of the LNER you were in as Northumberland and Durham seem to have few and Yorkshire had plenty.

 

Mark Saunders