BLISWORTH TOLL HOUSE and the TURNPIKE
The road through Blisworth was registered as a turnpike in 1794 just at the time the Grand Junction Canal arrived at the village. Turnpikes were toll roads and the money raised, managed by specially set up Turnpike Trusts, was clearly to protect the future of the road. The timing coincides with the expected volume of canal-related traffic through the village and to neighbouring towns, hence expected ravages on the condition of the road. A toll gate and a small hut were located at the edge of the churchyard as depicted by one of George Clarke's drawings and as indicated in the 1838 Grafton Survey map by the label 'T1'. The railway arrived in Blisworth in 1838 and when the railway station was established 1/4 mile along Ford Lane, a substantial toll house was built at the junction between Ford Lane (later called Station Road, a private road belonging to the railway company) and the main turnpike as shown in many drawings of the archway.
When the turnpike trust was dissolved Nov 1st 1873 the toll house next to the railway arch was taken down stone by stone for Mr Pickering Phipps (of brewing and ironstone mining fame) and rebuilt in Collingtree in the High Street at the edge of an estate called Collingtree Grange in which the Phipps family lived. The photograph shows how it appears today - the heading of the bay window and the chimneys appear to have been remodelled and the front door is of modern design. The Grange was demolished in the 1980s, having been unoccupied for decades, and much of the land was taken for a golf course. The road was still referred to as the turnpike even in 1879 in the newspaper - ".. at the turnpike turn by Gayton Road, Milton" for example.
A very distinctive feature of the house is the cast iron lattice work for the windows and this is shown more closely in the second photograph. Some have been derogatory in referring to the design as quaint but most would disagree with that.
On
the Turnpike
The Duke of Grafton must have deliberated over the position of the toll gate on
the arrival of the railway c. 1840 as evidence by the strategic positioning at
the junction with Station Road to maximised interception. At an earlier
date a bypass for the village was being considered and as shown in pencil on the
agent's maps some alternative positions were considered; at label 'T2' in
the survey map and at
the position 3 shown in a bypass
and station layout. This first bypass idea never saw the light of day.
In Northampton Past and Present Vol. I there is a historical account of the turnpikes in the County. Many had been established through Northampton around 1760 to 1790 in an alignment loosely from Rugby/Market Harborough towards London. The turnpike through Blisworth linked across these other roads, described as the 'Towcester to Cotton End' turnpike. Cotton End is in the Parish of Hardingstone and is presumed to be the south side of the Bridge in Bridge Street. The turnpike has also been given the far-reaching name of 'Weston (on-the-Green) to Cotton End' which extends the link nearly to Oxford - but not quite!
Money collected at the tollgates was managed by an array of trusts which concerned themselves with maintaining just a section of the road. It is said that the trust dealing with the Towcester to Cotton End section met periodically at the 'Duke of Grafton Arms Inn' overlooking the bridge over the canal. Roadmaking technology improved dramatically in the toll period due to the inventions of road-builders Telford and MacAdam. The former advocated rolled crushed stone - a mixture of granite and limestone - while MacAdam gave us 'tarmac' in which the rolled surface was washed with molten tar and then liberally covered with fine chippings. That the traffic was expected to roll the chippings into the tar has been a feature of our repaired roads up to recent times.
Parliamentary Acts were brought in a number of times in order to legalise revisions suggested by the trusts for collecting tolls and for radically improving some roads by straightening and widening. There were toll easements for people who needed to pass the toll yet not use the road very much (eg. if there was a field gate adjacent to the tollgate), for those engaged in road repairs and for all military vehicles. The following table gives an idea of the complex tariff which incorporates measurement of wheel width; wider wheels damaged the road surface less, indeed a vehicle equipped with rollers could pass free.
For every horse | plus a cart | 6d |
do. | cart with 6" wheels | 4d |
do. | cart with 4½" wheels | 5d |
do. | heavy cart | 9d |
do. | with rollers (16" wide) | - |
Cart with two wheels | 6d | |
Drug with long wheelbase | 1/6d | |
Any horse not drawing | 1½d | |
A drove of oxen, per 20 animals | 10d | |
A drove of cattle (sheep?), per 30 animals | 5d | |
Any
'Carriage' moved by a Machine* (anything that was bred from railways technology - outrageous!) |
4/- | |
Dog and cart | 2d |
Tolls taken by the turnpikes peaked in 1839, generally in England, as the coming of the railways removed the heavier and non-local traffic from the roads. The Towcester to Cotton End road probably faired well in view of the fact it provided 'feeders' to the railway station. By 1875 most toll trusts were disbanded and the job of road maintenance was handed over to the Parish Vestry meetings and their replacements in 1896, the local Parish and County Councils.
*Any carriage moved by a machine or any vehicle propelled by power other than from horses was a classification aimed at steam technology bred from the railways, their serious competitors, and the maximum toll that could be levied was actually 5/-. This aspect of the tariff was repealed in the 1860s or 1870s as it could be exercised upon bicycle riders. Indeed it was in 1879 when at a toll gate on the Stony Stratford turnpike a bicycler (sic) was asked for a toll of 2d on passing through. The biker refused and on his return was asked for a toll of 4d. He again refused and was chased by the toll keeper who then levied a toll of 5/- and impounded the bicycle. The case came to court and the verdict was to fine the toll keeper 2/6d and 10/6d costs because he had not levied a toll consistent with the newer law since the repeal. His impounding the bicycle would have been legal if the levy were legal. The newspaper editor (Northampton "Mercury") then burst forth with a few sentences calling for the laws to be made clearer and indeed suggesting that bicycles be waived of all tolls since "this new summer pastime could take the enthusiast 50 or even 100 miles across the country, passing many toll gates".