Wikipedia

Central London Railway

TheCentral London Railway(CLR), also known as theTwopenny Tube,was a deep-level, underground "tube" railway[note 1]that opened inLondonin 1900. The CLR's tunnels and stations form the central section of what becameLondon Underground'sCentral line.

Route diagram showing the railway as a red line running from Ealing Broadway at left to Liverpool Street at right
Geographic route map of the Central London Railway

The railway company was established in 1889, funding for construction was obtained in 1895 through a syndicate of financiers and work took place from 1896 to 1900. When opened, the CLR served 13 stations and ran completely underground in a pair of tunnels for 9.14 kilometres (5.68 mi) between its western terminus atShepherd's Bushand its eastern terminus at theBank of England,with a depot and power station to the north of the western terminus.[1]After a rejected proposal to turn the line into a loop, it was extended at the western end toWood Lanein 1908 and at the eastern end toLiverpool Street stationin 1912. In 1920, it was extended along aGreat Western Railwayline toEalingto serve a total distance of 17.57 kilometres (10.92 mi).[1]

After initially making good returns for investors, the CLR suffered a decline in passenger numbers due to increased competition from other underground railway lines and new motorised buses. In 1913, it was taken over by theUnderground Electric Railways Company of London(UERL), operator of the majority of London's underground railways. In 1933 the CLR was taken intopublic ownershipalong with the UERL.

Establishment

edit

Origin, 1889–1892

edit
Rejected route proposed in 1889

In November 1889, the CLR published a notice of aprivate billthat would be presented toParliamentfor the 1890parliamentary session.[2]The bill proposed an underground electric railway running from the junction of Queen's Road (nowQueensway) andBayswater RoadinBayswatertoKing William Streetin theCity of Londonwith a connection to the then-under construction,City and South London Railway(C&SLR) at Arthur Street West. The CLR was to run in a pair of tunnels under Bayswater Road,Oxford Street,New Oxford Street,High Holborn,Holborn,Holborn Viaduct,Newgate Street,Cheapside,and Poultry. Stations were planned at Queen's Road, Stanhope Terrace,Marble Arch,Oxford Circus,Tottenham Court Road,Southampton Row,Holborn Circus,St. Martin's Le Grandand King William Street.[3]

The tunnels were to be 11 feet (3.35 m) in diameter, constructed with atunnelling shield,and would be lined with cast iron segments. At stations, the tunnel diameter would be 22 feet (6.71 m) or 29 feet (8.84 m) depending on layout. A depot and power station were to be constructed on a 1.5-acre (0.61 ha) site on the west side of Queen's Road. Hydraulic lifts from the street to the platforms were to be provided at each station.[4]

The proposals faced strong objections from theMetropolitanandDistrictrailways (MR and DR) whose routes on the Inner Circle,[note 2]to the north and the south respectively, the CLR route paralleled; and from which the new line was expected to take passengers. TheCity Corporationalso objected, concerned about potential damage to buildings close to the route caused bysubsidenceas was experienced during the construction of the C&SLR. TheDean and Chapter of St Paul's Cathedralobjected, concerned about the risks of undermining the cathedral's foundations.Sir Joseph Bazalgetteobjected that the tunnels would damage the city's sewer system. The bill was approved by theHouse of Commons,but was rejected by theHouse of Lords,which recommended that any decision be postponed until after the C&SLR had opened and its operation could be assessed.[5]

Route approved in 1891

Central London Railway Act 1891
Act of Parliament
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long titleAn Act for incorporating the Central London Railway Company and for empowering them to construct underground railways from Shepherd's Bush to the City of London and for other purposes.
Citation54 & 55 Vict.c. cxcvi
Dates
Royal assent5 August 1891
Text of statute as originally enacted
Central London Railway Act 1892
Act of Parliament
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Citation55 & 56 Vict.c. ccxli
Dates
Royal assent28 June 1892

In November 1890, with the C&SLR about to start operating, the CLR announced a new bill for the 1891 parliamentary session.[6]The route was extended at the western end to run under Notting Hill High Street (nowNotting Hill Gate) andHolland Park Avenueto end at the eastern corner ofShepherd's Bush Green,with the depot and power station site relocated to be north of the terminus on the east side ofWood Lane.The westward extension of the route was inspired by the route of abandoned plans for the London Central Subway, a sub-surface railway that was briefly proposed in early 1890 to run directly below the roadway on a similar route to the CLR.[7]The eastern terminus was changed toCornhilland the proposed Southampton Row station was replaced by one inBloomsbury.Intermediate stations were added at Lansdowne Road,Notting Hill Gate,Davies Street (which the CLR planned to extend northwards to meet Oxford Street) and atChancery Lane.[8]The earlier plan to connect to the C&SLR was dropped and the diameter of the CLR's tunnels was increased to 11 feet 6 inches (3.51 m).[7]This time the bill was approved by both Houses of Parliament and receivedroyal assenton5 August1891 as the Central London Railway Act 1891 (54 & 55 Vict.c. cxcvi).[9]In November 1891, the CLR publicised another bill. The eastern end of the line was re-routed north-east and extended to end under theGreat Eastern Railway's(GER's) terminus atLiverpool Street stationwith the Cornhill terminus dropped and a new station proposed at theRoyal Exchange.[10]The proposals received assent as the Central London Railway Act 1892 (55 & 56 Vict.c. ccxli) on28 June1892.[11]

Route approved in 1892

The money to build the CLR was obtained through asyndicateof financiers includingErnest Cassel,Henry Oppenheim,Darius Ogden Mills,and members of theRothschild family.[12]On22 March1894, the syndicate incorporated a contractor to construct the railway, the Electric Traction Company Limited (ETCL), which agreed a construction cost of £2,544,000 (approximately £366 million today)[13]plus £700,000 in 4 per centdebenture stock.[14]When the syndicate offered 285,000 CLR companysharesfor sale at £10 each in June 1895,[14]only 14 per cent was bought by the British public, which was cautious of such investments following failures of similar railway schemes.[15]Some shares were sold in Europe and the United States, but the unsold remainder was bought by members of the syndicate or by the ETCL.[14]

Construction, 1896–1900

edit

To design the railway, the CLR employed the engineersJames Henry Greathead,Sir John Fowler,andSir Benjamin Baker.[8]Greathead had been the engineer for theTower Subwayand the C&SLR, and had developed thetunnelling shieldused to excavate those companies' tunnels under theRiver Thames.Fowler had been the engineer on the Metropolitan Railway, the world's first underground railway opened in 1863, and Baker had worked on New York's elevated railways and on theForth Railway Bridgewith Fowler. Greathead died shortly after work began and was replaced byBasil Mott,his assistant during the construction of the C&SLR.[8]Horace Field Parshallwas the consulting engineer and designer for the electrification system, including the generating plant and locomotives.[16]

Oxford Circusstation, an example of theHarry Bell Measuresdesign used for the CLR's stations

Central London Railway Act 1894
Act of Parliament
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long titleAn Act to extend the time for the purchase of lands for and for the completion of the Central London Railway and for other purposes.
Citation57 & 58 Vict.c. lvii
Dates
Royal assent3 July 1894
Text of statute as originally enacted

Like most legislation of its kind, the Central London Railway Act 1891 imposed a time limit for thecompulsory purchaseof land and the raising of capital.[note 3]The original date specified for completion of construction was the end of 1896, but the time required to raise the finance and purchase station sites meant that construction had not begun by the start of that year. To give itself extra time, the CLR had obtained an extension of time to 1899 by the Central London Railway Act 1894 (57 & 58 Vict.c. lvii).[17][18]Construction works were let by the ETCL as threesub-contracts:Shepherd's Bush to Marble Arch, Marble Arch to St Martin's Le Grand and St Martin's Le Grand to Bank. Work began with demolition of buildings at the Chancery Lane site in April 1896 and construction shafts were started at Chancery Lane, Shepherd's Bush, Stanhope Terrace and Bloomsbury in August and September 1896.[19]

Negotiations with the GER for the works under Liverpool Street station were unsuccessful, and the final section beyond Bank was only constructed for a short distance as sidings. To minimise the risk of subsidence, the routing of the tunnels followed the roads on the surface and avoided passing under buildings. Usually the tunnels were bored side by side 60–110 feet (18–34 m) below the surface, but where a road was too narrow to allow this, the tunnels were aligned one above the other, so that a number of stations have platforms at different levels.[20]To assist with the deceleration of trains arriving at stations and the acceleration of trains leaving, station tunnels were located at the tops of slight inclines.[21]

Central London Railway Act 1899
Act of Parliament
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Citation62 & 63 Vict.c. clxxxv

Tunnelling was completed by the end of 1898,[22]and, because a planned concrete lining to the cast iron tunnel rings was not installed, the internal diameter of the tunnels was generally 11 feet 8.25 inches (3.56 m).[20]For Bank station, the CLR negotiated permission with the City Corporation to construct its ticket hall beneath a steel framework under the roadway and pavements at the junction ofThreadneedle Streetand Cornhill. This involved diverting pipework and cables into ducts beneath the subways linking the ticket hall to the street.[20]Delays on this work were so costly that they nearly bankrupted the company.[19]A further extension of time to 1900 was obtained through the Central London Railway Act 1899 (62 & 63 Vict.c. clxxxv).[17][23]

Apart from Bank, which was completely below ground, all stations had buildings designed byHarry Bell Measures.They were single-storey structures to allow for future commercial development above and had elevations faced in beigeterracotta.Each station hadliftsmanufactured by theSprague Electric Companyin New York. The lifts were provided in a variety of sizes and configurations to suit the passenger flow at each station. Generally they operated in sets of two or three in a shared shaft.[24]Station tunnel walls were finished in plain white ceramic tiles and lit by electricarc lamps.[25]The electricity to run the trains and the stations was supplied from the power station at Wood Lane at 5,000VACwhich was converted atsub-stationsalong the route to 550VDCto power the trains via athird railsystem.[26]

Opening

edit
Central London Railway poster extolling the railway's ease of use, 1905

The official opening of the CLR by thePrince of Walestook place on27 June1900, one day before the time limit of the 1899 Act,[17]although the line did not open to the public until30 July1900.[26][note 4]The railway had stations at:[28]

The CLR charged a flat fare of twopencefor a journey between any two stations, leading theDaily Mailto give the railway the nickname of theTwopenny Tubein August 1900.[29]The service was very popular, and, by the end of 1900, the railway had carried 14,916,922 passengers.[30]By attracting passengers from the bus services along its route and from the slower, steam-hauled, MR and DR services, the CLR achieved passenger numbers around45 millionper year in the first few years of operation,[29]generating a highturnoverthat was more than twice theexpenses.From 1900 to 1905, the company paid adividendof 4 per cent to investors.[31]

Rolling stock

edit
Original CLR locomotive with gate stock carriages behind
1903 driving motor car heading a train at Bank station

Greathead had originally planned for the trains to be hauled by a pair of small electric locomotives, one at each end of a train, but theBoard of Traderejected this proposal and a larger locomotive was designed which was able to pull up to seven carriages on its own. Twenty-eight locomotives were manufactured in America by theGeneral Electric Company(of which syndicate member Darius Ogden Mills was a director) and assembled in the Wood Lane depot.[32][note 5]Afleet of 168 carriageswas manufactured by theAshbury Railway Carriage and Iron Companyand theBrush Electrical Engineering Company.Passengers boarded and left the trains through folding lattice gates at each end of the carriages; these gates were operated by guards who rode on an outside platform.[33][note 6]The CLR had originally intended to have twoclasses of travel,but dropped the plan before opening, although its carriages were built with different qualities of interior fittings for this purpose.[32]

CLR Gearless Locomotive

Soon after the railway opened, complaints about vibrations from passing trains began to be made by occupiers of buildings along the route. The vibrations were caused by the heavy, largely unsprung locomotives which weighed 44tons(44.7tonnes). The Board of Trade set up a committee to investigate the problem, and the CLR experimented with two solutions. For the first solution, three locomotives were modified to use lighter motors and were provided with improved suspension, so the weight was reduced to 31 tons (31.5 tonnes), more of which was sprung to reduce vibrations; for the second solution, two six-carriage trains were formed that had the two end carriages converted and provided with driver's cabs and their own motors so they could run asmultiple unitswithout a separate locomotive. The lighter locomotives did reduce the vibrations felt at the surface, but the multiple units removed it almost completely and the CLR chose to adopt that solution. The committee's report, published in 1902,[35]also found that the CLR's choice of 100lb/yard (49.60 kg/m)bridge railfor its tracks rather than a stifferbullhead railon crosssleeperscontributed to the vibration.[36]

Following the report, the CLR purchased 64 driving motor carriages for use with the existing stock; together, these were formed into six- or seven-carriage trains. The change to multiple unit operation was completed by June 1903 and all but two of the locomotives were scrapped. Those two were retained for shunting use in the depot.[37]

Extensions

edit

Reversing loops, 1901

edit
Rejected route proposed in 1901

The CLR's ability to manage its high passenger numbers was constrained by the service interval that it could achieve between trains. This was directly related to the time taken to turn around trains at the termini. At the end of a journey, a locomotive had to be disconnected from the leading end of the train and run around to the rear, where it was reconnected before proceeding in the opposite direction; an exercise that took a minimum of 2½ minutes.[38]Seeking to shorten this interval, the CLR published a bill in November 1900 for the 1901 parliamentary session.[39]The bill requested permission to construct loops at each end of the line so that trains could be turned around without disconnecting the locomotive. The loop at the western end was planned to run anti-clockwise under the three sides of Shepherd's Bush Green. For the eastern loop the alternatives were a loop under Liverpool Street station or a larger loop running under Threadneedle Street, Old Broad Street, Liverpool Street,Bishopsgateand returning to Threadneedle Street. The estimated cost of the loops was £800,000 (approximately £109 million today),[13]most of which was for the eastern loop with its costlywayleaves.[38]

The CLR bill was one of more than a dozen tube railway bills submitted to Parliament for the 1901 session,[note 7]To review the bills on an equal basis, Parliament established a joint committee underLord Windsor,[41]but by the time the committee had produced its report, the parliamentary session was almost over and the promoters of the bills were asked to resubmit them for the following 1902 session. Among the committee's recommendations were the withdrawal of the CLR's City loop,[42]and that a quick, tube route fromHammersmithto the City of London would benefit London's commuters.[43][note 8]

Loop line, 1902–1905

edit
Rejected route proposed in 1902

Rather than resubmit its 1901 bill, the CLR presented a much more ambitious alternative for the 1902 parliamentary session. The reversing loops were dropped, and the CLR instead proposed to turn the whole railway into a single large loop by constructing a new southern route between the two existing end points, adopting the committee's recommendation for a Hammersmith to City route.[44][45]At the western end, new tunnels were to be extended from the dead-endreversing sidingwest of Shepherd's Bush station and from the depot access tunnel. The route was to pass under Shepherd's Bush Green and run under Goldhawk Road as far as Hammersmith Grove where it was to turn south. At the southern end of Hammersmith Grove a station was to be provided on the corner of Brook Green Road (now Shepherd's Bush Road) to provide an interchange with the three stations already located there.[44][note 9]

From Hammersmith, the CLR's route was to turn eastwards and run under Hammersmith Road andKensington High Streetwith interchange stations at the DR'sAddison Road(now Kensington Olympia) andHigh Street Kensingtonstations. From Kensington High Street, the route was to run along the south side ofKensington GardensbeneathKensington Road,Kensington GoreandKnightsbridge.Stations were to be constructed at theRoyal Albert Halland the junction of Knightsbridge andSloane Street,where theBrompton & Piccadilly Circus Railway(B&PCR) already had permission to builda station.[note 10]From Sloane Street, the CLR's proposed route ran below that approved for the B&PCR under the eastern portion of Knightsbridge, underHyde Park Cornerand alongPiccadillytoPiccadilly Circus.At Hyde Park Corner, a CLR station was to be sited close to theB&PCR's stationand the CLR's next station atSt James's Streetwas a short distance to the east of the B&PCR's plannedDover Street station.At Piccadilly Circus, the CLR planned an interchange with thepartially completed stationof the stalledBaker Street and Waterloo Railway.The CLR route was then to turn south-east beneathLeicester Squareto a station atCharing Crossand then north-east underStrandtoNorfolk Streetto interchange with theplanned terminusof theGreat Northern & Strand Railway.[44][note 10]

The route was then to continue east underFleet StreettoLudgate Circusfor an interchange with theSouth Eastern and Chatham Railway's (SECR's)Ludgate Hill station,then south under New Bridge Street, and east intoQueen Victoria Streetwhere a station was planned to connect to the District Railway'sMansion House station.The route was then to continue under Queen Victoria Street to reach the CLR's station at Bank, where separate platforms below the existing ones were to be provided. The final section of the route developed on the proposed loop from the year before with tunnels winding under the city's narrow, twisting streets. The tunnels were to run east, one below the other, beneath Cornhill andLeadenhall Street,north underSt Mary Axeand west to Liverpool Street station, then south under Blomfield Street, east under Great Winchester Street, south under Austin Friars and Old Broad Street and west under Threadneedle Street where the tunnels were to connect with the existing sidings back into Bank. Two stations were to be provided on the loop; at the south end of St Mary Axe and at Liverpool Street station.[44]To accommodate the additional rolling stock needed to operate the longer line, the depot was to be extended northwards. The power station was also to be enlarged to increase the electricity supply.[46]The CLR estimated that its plan would cost £3,781,000 (approximately £518 million today):[13]£2,110,000 for construction, £873,000 for land and £798,000 for electrical equipment and trains.[46]

Central London Railway Act 1902
Act of Parliament
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Citation2 Edw. 7.c. cxlv
Dates
Royal assent31 July 1902

The CLR bill was one of many presented for the 1902 parliamentary session (including several for the Hammersmith to City route) and it was examined by another joint committee under Lord Windsor.[note 11]The proposal received support from the mainline railway companies the route interchanged with and from the C&SLR, which had a station at Bank. TheLondon County Counciland the City Corporation also supported the plan. The Metropolitan Railway opposed, seeing further competition to its services on the Inner Circle. Questions were raised in Parliament about the safety of tunnelling so close to the vaults of many City banks and the risk that subsidence might cause vault doors to jam shut. Another concern was the danger of undermining the foundations of theDutch Churchin Austin Friars. The Windsor committee rejected the section between Shepherd's Bush and Bank, preferring a competing route from theJ. P. Morgan-backedPiccadilly, City and North East London Railway(PC&NELR).[48]Without the main part of its new route, the CLR withdrew the City loop, leaving a few improvements to the existing line to be approved in the Central London Railway Act 1902 (2 Edw. 7.c. cxlv) on31 July1902.[46][49]

In late 1902, the PC&NELR plans collapsed after a falling out between the scheme's promoters led to a crucial part of the planned route coming under the control of a rival, theUnderground Electric Railways Company of London(UERL), which withdrew it from parliamentary consideration.[50]With the PC&NELR scheme out of the way, the CLR resubmitted its bill in 1903,[51][52]although consideration was again held up by Parliament's establishment of theRoyal Commission on London Traffictasked to assess the manner in which transport in London should be developed.[53]While the Commission deliberated, any review of bills for new lines and extensions was postponed, so the CLR withdrew the bill.[51]The CLR briefly re-presented the bill for the 1905 parliamentary session but withdrew it again, before making an agreement with the UERL in October 1905 that neither company would submit a bill for an east–west route in 1906.[54]The plan was then dropped as the new trains with driving positions at both ends made it possible for the CLR to reduce the minimum interval between trains to two minutes without building the loop.[37]

Wood Lane, 1906–1908

edit
Route approved in 1907

Central London Railway Act 1907
Act of Parliament
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long titleAn Act to confer further powers on the Central London Railway Company and for other purposes.
Dates
Royal assent26 July 1907
Text of statute as originally enacted

In 1905, the government announced plans to hold an international exhibition to celebrate theEntente cordialesigned by France and Britain in 1904. The location of theFranco-British Exhibition'sWhite Citysite was across Wood Lane from the CLR's depot.[55]To exploit the opportunity to carry visitors to the exhibition, the CLR announced a bill in November 1906 seeking to create a loop from Shepherd's Bush station and back, on which a newWood Lane stationclose to the exhibition's entrance would be built.[56]The new work was approved on26 July1907 in the Central London Railway Act 1907.[57]

The new loop was formed by constructing a section of tunnel joining the end of the dead-end reversing tunnel to the west of Shepherd's Bush station and the north side of the depot. From Shepherd's Bush, trains ran anti-clockwise around the single track loop, first through the original depot access tunnel, then passed the north side of the depot and through the new station before entering the new section of tunnel and returning to Shepherd's Bush. Changes were also made to the depot layout to accommodate the new station and the new looped operations. Construction work on the exhibition site had started in January 1907, and the exhibition and new station opened on14 May1908. The station was on the surface between the two tunnel openings and was a basic design by Harry Bell Measures. It had platforms both sides of the curving track – passengers alighted on to one and boarded from the other (an arrangement now known as theSpanish solution).[55]

Liverpool Street, 1908–1912

edit
Route approved in 1909

Central London Railway Act 1909
Act of Parliament
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Citation9 Edw. 7.c. lxxi
Dates
Royal assent16 August 1909

With the extension to Wood Lane operational, the CLR revisited its earlier plan for an eastward extension from Bank to Liverpool Street station. This time, the Great Eastern Railway (GER) agreed to allow the CLR to build a station under its own main line terminus, provided that no further extension would be made north or north-east from there – territory served by the GER's routes from Liverpool Street.[58]A bill was announced in November 1908,[59]for the 1909 parliamentary session and received royal assent as the Central London Railway Act 1909 (9 Edw. 7.c. lxxi) on16 August1909.[58][60]Construction started in July 1910 and the newLiverpool Street stationwas opened on28 July1912.[58]Following their successful introduction at the DR'sEarl's Court stationin 1911, the station was the first underground station in London to be built with escalators. Four were provided, two to Liverpool Street station and two to theNorth London Railway'sadjacentBroad Street station.[61]

Ealing Broadway, 1911–1920

edit

The CLR's next planned extension was westward to Ealing. In 1905, theGreat Western Railway(GWR) had obtained parliamentary approval to construct the Ealing and Shepherd's Bush Railway (E&SBR), connecting its main line route atEaling Broadwayto theWest London Railway(WLR) north of Shepherd's Bush.[62]From Ealing, the new line was to curve north-east through still mostly ruralNorth Acton,then run east for a short distance parallel with the GWR'sHigh Wycombeline, before curving south-east. The line was then to run on an embankment south ofOld Oak CommonandWormwood Scrubsbefore connecting to the WLR a short distance to the north of the CLR's depot.[63]

Route approved in 1911

Central London Railway Act 1911
Act of Parliament
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long titleAn Act to impower the Central London Railway Company to construct new railways to authorise arrangements between the Company and the Great Western Railway Company and for other purposes.
Citation1 & 2 Geo. 5.c. lxxxiii
Dates
Royal assent18 August 1911
Text of statute as originally enacted

Construction work did not begin immediately, and, in 1911, the CLR and GWR agreedrunning powersfor CLR services over the line to Ealing Broadway. To make a connection to the E&SBR, the CLR obtained parliamentary permission for a short extension northward from Wood Lane station on18 August1911 in the Central London Railway Act 1911 (1 & 2 Geo. 5.c. lxxxiii).[62][64]The new E&SBR line was constructed by the GWR and opened as a steam-hauled freight only line on16 April1917. Electrification of the track and the start of CLR services were postponed until after the end of World War I, not starting until3 August1920 when a single intermediate station atEast Actonwas also opened.[65][28]

Wood Lane station was modified and extended to accommodate the northward extension tracks linking to the E&SBR. The existing platforms on the loop were retained, continuing to be used by trains that were turning back to central London, and two new platforms for trains running to or from Ealing were constructed at a lower level on the new tracks, which connected to each side of the loop. Ealing Broadway station was modified to provide additional platforms for CLR use between the existing but separate sets of platforms used by the GWR and the DR.[63]

To provide services over the 6.97-kilometre (4.33 mi) extension, the CLR ordered 24 additional driving motor carriages from the Brush Company, which, when delivered in 1917, were first borrowed by the Baker Street and Waterloo Railway for use in place of carriages ordered for itsextension to Watford Junction.The new carriages were the first for tube-sized trains that were fully enclosed, without gated platforms at the rear, and were provided with hinged doors in the sides to speed-up passenger loading times. To operate with the new stock the CLR converted 48 existing carriages, providing a total of 72 carriages for twelve six-car trains. Modifications made while in use on the Watford extension meant that the new carriages were not compatible with the rest of the CLR's fleet and they became known as theEaling stock.[66]

The E&SBR remained part of the GWR until nationalisation at the beginning of 1948, when (with the exception of Ealing Broadway station) it was transferred to theLondon Transport Executive.Ealing Broadway remained part ofBritish Railways,as successors to the GWR.[67]

Richmond, 1913 and 1920

edit
Central London Railway Act 1913
Act of Parliament
Parliament of the United Kingdom
Long titleAn Act to empower the Central London Railway Company to construct new railways to authorise agreements between that Company and the London and South Western Railway Company and for other purposes.
Citation3 & 4 Geo. 5.c. lxxiii
Dates
Royal assent15 August 1913
Text of statute as originally enacted

In November 1912,[68]the CLR announced plans for an extension from Shepherd's Bush on a new south-westwards route. Tunnels were planned under Goldhawk Road, Stamford Brook Road and Bath Road to Chiswick Common where a turn to the south would take the tunnels under Turnham Green Terrace for a short distance. The route then was to head west again to continue underChiswick High Roadbefore coming to the surface east of theLondon and South Western Railway's(L&SWR's)Gunnersbury station.Here a connection would be made to allow the CLR's tube trains to run south-west toRichmond stationover L&SWR tracks that the DR shared and had electrified in 1905. Stations were planned on Goldhawk Road at its junctions withThe Grove,Paddenswick RoadandRylett Road,atEmlyn Roadon Stamford Brook Road, at Turnham Green Terrace (for a connection with the L&SWR's/DR'sTurnham Green station) and at the junction of Chiswick High Road andHeathfield Terrace.Beyond Richmond, the CLR saw further opportunities to continue over L&SWR tracks to the commuter towns ofTwickenham,SunburyandShepperton,although this required the tracks to be electrified.[69]The CLR received permission for the new line to Gunnersbury on15 August1913 in the Central London Railway Act 1913 (3 & 4 Geo. 5.c. lxxiii),[70]but World War I prevented the works from commencing and the permission expired.[69]

Routes approved in 1913 and 1920

In November 1919,[71]the CLR published a new bill to revive the Richmond extension, but using a different route that required only a short section of new tunnel construction. The new proposal was to construct tunnels southwards from Shepherd's Bush station, which would come to the surface to connect to disused L&SWR tracks north ofHammersmith Grove Road stationthat had closed in 1916. From Hammersmith, the disused LS&WR tracks continued westwards, on the same viaduct as the DR's tracks through Turnham Green to Gunnersbury and Richmond.[note 12]The plan required electrification of the disused tracks, but avoided the need for costly tunnelling and would have shared the existing stations on the route with the DR. The plan received assent on4 August1920 as part of theCentral London and Metropolitan District Railways Companies (Works) Act 1920(10 & 11 Geo. 5. c. lxxxii),[73]although the CLR made no attempt to carry out any of the work. The disused L&SWR tracks betweenRavenscourt Parkand Turnham Green were eventually used for the westward extension of thePiccadilly linefrom Hammersmith in 1932.[74]

Competition, co-operation and sale, 1906–1913

edit

From 1906 the CLR began to experience a large fall in passenger numbers[note 13]caused by increased competition from the DR and the MR, which electrified the Inner Circle in 1905, and from theGreat Northern, Piccadilly and Brompton Railway(GNP&BR) which opened its rival route to Hammersmith in 1906. Road traffic also offered a greater challenge as motor buses began replacing the horse drawn variety in greater numbers. In an attempt to maintain income, the company increased the flat fare for longer journeys to three pence in July 1907 and reduced the fare for shorter journeys to one penny in March 1909. Multiple booklets of tickets, which had previously been sold atface value,were offered at discounts,[note 14]and season tickets were introduced from July 1911.[58]

The CLR looked to economise through the use of technological developments. The introduction in 1909 ofdead-man's handlesto the driver controls and "trip cocks"devices on signals and trains meant that the assistant driver was no longer required as a safety measure.[76]Signalling automation allowed the closure of many of the line's 16 signal boxes and a reduction in signalling staff.[77]From 1911, the CLR operated a parcel service, making modifications to the driving cars of four trains to provide a compartment in which parcels could be sorted. These were collected at each station and distributed to their destinations by a team of tricycle riding delivery boys. The service made a small profit, but ended in 1917 because of wartime labour shortages.[78]

The problem of declining revenues was not limited to the CLR; all of London's tube lines and the sub-surface DR and MR were affected by competition to some degree. The reduced income from the lower passenger numbers made it difficult for the companies to pay back borrowed capital, or to pay dividends to shareholders.[79]The CLR's dividend payments fell to 3 per cent from 1905, but those of the UERL's lines were as low as 0.75 per cent.[80]From 1907, the CLR, the UERL, the C&SLR, and theGreat Northern & City Railwaycompanies began to introduce fare agreements. From 1908, they began to present themselves through common branding as theUnderground.[79]In November 1912, after secret take-over talks, the UERL announced that it was purchasing the CLR, swapping one of its own shares for each of the CLR's.[81][note 15]The take-over took effect on1 January1913, although the CLR company remained legally separate from the UERL's other tube lines.[62]

Improvements and integration, 1920–1933

edit
Central London Railway
Legend
Extent of railway at
transfer toLPTB,1933
connections
 Ealing Broadway
GWR
 West Acton
GWR
 North Acton
GWR
 East Acton
Wood Lane
Depot
Shepherd's Bush
WLR
 Holland Park
Notting Hill Gate
MR/MDR
 Queen's Road
Lancaster Gate
Marble Arch
Bond Street
Oxford Circus
BS&WR
 Tottenham Court Road
CCE&HR
 British Museum
Holborn
(under construction)
 Chancery Lane
Post Office
Bank
C&SLR/MDR/W&C
 Liverpool Street
MR

Following the takeover, the UERL took steps to integrate the CLR's operations with its own. The CLR's power station was closed in March 1928 with power instead being supplied from the UERL'sLots Road Power Stationin Chelsea. Busier stations were modernised; Bank and Shepherd's Bush stations received escalators in 1924, Tottenham Court Road and Oxford Circus in 1925 and Bond Street in 1926, which also received a new entrance designed byCharles Holden.[82][83]Chancery Lane and Marble Arch stations were also rebuilt to receive escalators in the early 1930s.[83]

On 5 November 1923 new stations were opened on the Ealing extension atNorth ActonandWest Acton.[28]They were built to serve residential and industrial developments aroundPark Royaland, like East Acton, the station buildings were basic structures with simple timber shelters on the platforms.[63]The poor location of British Museum station and the lack of an interchange with the GNP&BR's station at Holborn had been a considered a problem by the CLR almost since the opening of the GNP&BR in 1906. A pedestrian subway to link the stations was considered in 1907, but not carried out.[84]A proposal to enlarge the tunnels under High Holborn to create new platforms at Holborn station for the CLR and to abandon British Museum station was included in a CLR bill submitted to parliament in November 1913.[85]This was given assent in 1914, but World War I prevented any works taking place, and it was not until 1930 that the UERL revived the powers and began construction work. The new platforms, along with a new ticket hall and escalators to both lines, opened on25 September1933, British Museum station having closed at the end of traffic the day before.[28][84]

Between March 1926 and September 1928, the CLR converted the remaining gate stock carriages in phases. The end car platforms were enclosed to provide additional passenger accommodation and two sliding doors were inserted on each side. The conversions increased capacity and allowed the CLR to remove gatemen from the train crews, with responsibility for controlling doors moving to the two guards who each managed half the train. Finally, the introduction of driver/guard communications in 1928 allowed the CLR to dispense with the second guard, reducing a train crew to just a driver and a guard.[86]The addition of doors in the sides of cars caused problems at Wood Lane where the length of the platform on the inside of the returning curve was limited by an adjacent access track into the depot. The problem was solved by the introduction of a pivoted section of platform which usually sat above the access track and allowed passengers to board trains as normal, but which could be moved to allow access to the depot.[87]

Move to public ownership, 1923–1933

edit

Despite closer co-operation and improvements made to the CLR stations and to other parts of the network,[note 16]the Underground railways continued to struggle financially. The UERL's ownership of the highly profitableLondon General Omnibus Company(LGOC) since 1912 had enabled the UERL group, through the pooling of revenues, to use profits from the bus company to subsidise the less profitable railways.[note 17]However, competition from numerous small bus companies during the early 1920s eroded the profitability of the LGOC and had a negative impact on the profitability of the whole UERL group.[88]

To protect the UERL group's income, its chairmanLord Ashfieldlobbied the government for regulation of transport services in the London area. Starting in 1923, a series of legislative initiatives were made in this direction, with Ashfield andLabourLondon County Councillor (later MP and Minister of Transport)Herbert Morrison,at the forefront of debates as to the level of regulation and public control under which transport services should be brought. Ashfield aimed for regulation that would give the UERL group protection from competition and allow it to take substantive control of theLCC'stram system; Morrison preferred full public ownership.[89]After seven years of false starts, a bill was announced at the end of 1930 for the formation of theLondon Passenger Transport Board(LPTB), a public corporation that would take control of the UERL, the MR and all bus and tram operators within an area designated as theLondon Passenger Transport Area.[90]The board was a compromise – public ownership but not fullnationalisation– and came into existence on1 July1933. On this date, ownership of the assets of the CLR and the other Underground companies transferred to the LPTB.[91][note 18]

Legacy

edit
For a history of the line after 1933, seeCentral line (London Underground).

In 1935 the LPTB announced plans as part of itsNew Works Programmeto extend the CLR at both ends by taking over and electrifying local routes owned by the GWR inMiddlesexandBuckinghamshireand by the LNER in east London andEssex.Work in the tunnels to lengthen platforms for longer trains and to correct misaligned tunnel sections that slowed running speeds was also carried out. A new station was planned to replace the cramped Wood Lane.[92]The service from North Acton throughGreenfordandRuisliptoDenhamwas due to open between January 1940 and March 1941. The eastern extension from Liverpool Street toStratford,LeytonandNewbury Parkand the connection to the LNER lines toHainault,EppingandOngarwere intended to open in 1940 and 1941.[93]World War II caused works on both extensions to be halted and London Underground services were extended in stages from 1946 to 1949,[28]although the final section from West Ruislip to Denham was cancelled.[94]Following the LPTB takeover, theHarry Beck-designed tube map began to show the route's name as the "Central London Line" instead of "Central London Railway".[95]In anticipation of the extensions taking its services far beyond the boundaries of theCounty of London,"London" was omitted from the name on23 August1937; thereafter it was simply the "Central line".[96][95]The CLR's original tunnels form the core of the Central line's 72.17-kilometre (44.84 mi) route.[1]

During World War II, 4 kilometres (2.5 mi) of completed tube tunnels built for the eastern extension betweenGants HillandRedbridgewere used as a factory byPlesseyto manufacture electronic parts for aircraft.[97]Other completed tunnels were used asair-raid sheltersat Liverpool Street,Bethnal Greenand between Stratford and Leyton,[98]as were the closed parts of British Museum station[99]At Chancery Lane, new tunnels 16 feet 6 inches (5.03 m) in diameter and 1,200 feet (370 m) long were constructed below the running tunnels during 1941 and early 1942. These were fitted out as adeep level shelterfor government use as a protected communications centre.[100]Work on a similar shelter was planned at Post Office station (renamed St Paul's in 1937) but was cancelled; the lift shafts that were made redundant when the station was given escalators in January 1939 were converted for use as a protected control centre for theCentral Electricity Board.[101]

See also

edit

Notes and references

edit

Notes

edit
  1. ^A "tube" railway is an underground railway constructed in a cylindrical tunnel by the use of atunnelling shield,usually deep below ground level. Contrast "cut and cover"tunnelling.
  2. ^The Inner Circle (now theCircle line) was a sub-surface loop line operated jointly by the MR and the DR.
  3. ^Time limits were included in such legislation to encourage the railway company to complete the construction of its line as quickly as possible. They also prevented unused permissions acting as an indefinite block to other proposals.
  4. ^A commemorative plaque of the opening was installed at Bank station and listed the directors asSir Henry Oakley(chairman),Lord Colville of Culross,Sir Francis Knollys,Algernon H Mills,Lord RathmoreandHenry Tennant.[27]
  5. ^After arriving at the London Docks, the locomotives were taken along the river by barge to Chelsea and from there to the depot. One of the barges sank on the way, but the disassembled locomotive was salvaged and was put into use with the others.[32]
  6. ^A train originally required a crew of eight to operate: driver and assistant, front and rear guards and four gatemen.[34]
  7. ^In addition to bills for extensions to existing tube railways, bills for seven new tube railways were submitted to Parliament in 1901.[40]While a number received Royal Assent, none were built.
  8. ^The MR and the DR both offered services from Hammersmith to the City of London. The MR route ran via Paddington and the northern section of the Inner Circle and the DR route ran via Earl's Court and the southern section of the Inner Circle. The steam-hauled trains were slow and suffered from having to compete for track space in timetables crowded with services from the companies' other routes. The prospect of quick electric tube trains offered an attractive alternative.
  9. ^In 1901, the DR, MR and theLondon and South Western Railway(L&SWR) all had stations at Hammersmith, although the L&SWR's closed in 1916.
  10. ^abThe Brompton & Piccadilly Circus Railway and the Great Northern & Strand Railway merged in 1902 to form theGreat Northern, Piccadilly and Brompton Railway,forerunner of today'sPiccadilly line.
  11. ^The Windsor committee examined bills for tube railways on an east–west alignment, and a separate committee underLord Ribblesdaleexamined bills for tube railways on a north–south alignment.[47]
  12. ^The viaduct had been widened in 1911 to separate the DR's electric services to Richmond, Hounslow, Ealing and Uxbridge from the L&SWR's steam-hauled services, although the DR's trains had so out-competed the L&SWR's that it withdrew its own services in 1916. The viaduct and both sets of tracks were owned by the L&SWR.[72]
  13. ^In 1906 the CLR carried 43,057,997 passengers. In 1907 the number carried was 14 per cent lower at 36,907,491. The Franco-British Exhibition boosted numbers in 1908, but they fell back again afterwards and were still at around36 millionin 1912.[58][75]
  14. ^From July 1907, a twelve ticket strip of 3dtickets was sold at 2s9d, a 3d discount, and twelve ticket strips of 2d tickets were sold at 1s 10d, a 2d discount, from November 1908.[58]
  15. ^At the same time, the UERL also bought the C&SLR, swapping two of its shares for three of the C&SLR's, reflecting the latter company's weaker financial condition.[81]
  16. ^The Bakerloo line extension to Watford Junction opened in 1917, the CCE&HR extension toEdgwareopened in 1923/24 and the CS&LR extension toMordenopened in 1926.[28]
  17. ^By having a virtual monopoly of bus services, the LGOC was able to make large profits and pay dividends far higher than the underground railways ever had. In 1911, the year before its take over by the UERL, the dividend had been 18 per cent.[75]
  18. ^The CLR company continued in existence as a repository for all of the fractions of shares in the new LPTB that could not be distributed to the old companies' shareholders and to enable payment of interest on a CLR deed from 1912 owing to the bankGlyn, Mills & Co.The company was liquidated on10 March1939.[84]

References

edit
  1. ^abcLength of line calculated from distances given at"Clive's Underground Line Guides, Central line, Layout".Clive D. W. Feathers.Retrieved30 March2010.
  2. ^"No. 25996".The London Gazette.26 November 1889. pp. 6640–6642.
  3. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,p. 43.
  4. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,p. 44.
  5. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,pp. 44–45.
  6. ^"No. 26109".The London Gazette.25 November 1890. pp. 6570–6572.
  7. ^abBadsey-Ellis 2005,p. 47.
  8. ^abcDay & Reed 2008,p. 52.
  9. ^"No. 26190".The London Gazette.7 August 1891. p. 4245.
  10. ^"No. 26227".The London Gazette.27 November 1891. pp. 6506–6507.
  11. ^"No. 26303".The London Gazette.1 July 1892. pp. 3810–3811.
  12. ^Wolmar 2005,pp. 147–148.
  13. ^abcUKRetail Price Indexinflation figures are based on data fromClark, Gregory (2017)."The Annual RPI and Average Earnings for Britain, 1209 to Present (New Series)".MeasuringWorth.Retrieved7 May2024.
  14. ^abcBruce & Croome 2006,p. 5.
  15. ^Wolmar 2005,p. 147.
  16. ^Lee 1970,p. 15.
  17. ^abcBruce & Croome 2006,p. 7.
  18. ^"No. 26529".The London Gazette.6 July 1894. p. 3872.
  19. ^abBruce & Croome 2006,p. 6.
  20. ^abcDay & Reed 2008,pp. 52–54.
  21. ^Wolmar 2005,p. 148.
  22. ^Wolmar 2005,p. 149.
  23. ^"No. 27105".The London Gazette.4 August 1899. pp. 4833–4834.
  24. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 14.
  25. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 13.
  26. ^abDay & Reed 2008,p. 56.
  27. ^"Photograph 1998/41282".London Transport Museum.Transport for London.Retrieved2 April2010.
  28. ^abcdefghijRose 1999.
  29. ^abWolmar 2005,p. 154.
  30. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 9.
  31. ^Wolmar 2005,p. 156.
  32. ^abcBruce & Croome 2006,p. 10.
  33. ^Day & Reed 2008,p. 54.
  34. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 18.
  35. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,p. 91.
  36. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 15.
  37. ^abDay & Reed 2008,pp. 57–58.
  38. ^abBadsey-Ellis 2005,p. 94.
  39. ^ "No. 27249".The London Gazette(Supplement). 23 November 1900. pp. 7666–7668.
  40. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,p. 92.
  41. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,p. 93.
  42. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,pp. 110–111.
  43. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,p. 129.
  44. ^abcdBadsey-Ellis 2005,pp. 148–49.
  45. ^"No. 27379".The London Gazette.22 November 1901. pp. 7776–7779.
  46. ^abcBadsey-Ellis 2005,p. 150.
  47. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,p. 131.
  48. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,p. 185.
  49. ^"No. 27460".The London Gazette.1 August 1902. p. 4961.
  50. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,pp. 190–95.
  51. ^abBadsey-Ellis 2005,p. 212.
  52. ^"No. 27498".The London Gazette.25 November 1902. pp. 8001–8004.
  53. ^Badsey-Ellis 2005,p. 222.
  54. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 19.
  55. ^abBruce & Croome 2006,p. 20.
  56. ^"No. 27971".The London Gazette.27 November 1906. pp. 8361–8363.
  57. ^"No. 28044".The London Gazette.26 July 1907. p. 5117.
  58. ^abcdefBruce & Croome 2006,p. 22.
  59. ^"No. 28200".The London Gazette.27 November 1908. pp. 9088–9090.
  60. ^"No. 28280".The London Gazette.17 August 1909. pp. 6261–6262.
  61. ^Day & Reed 2008,pp. 59 and 81.
  62. ^abcBruce & Croome 2006,p. 25.
  63. ^abcBruce & Croome 2006,p. 28.
  64. ^ "No. 28524".The London Gazette.22 August 1911. pp. 6216–6217.
  65. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 26.
  66. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,pp. 28–29.
  67. ^Day & Reed 2008,p. 150.
  68. ^"No. 28666".The London Gazette.26 November 1912. pp. 9018–9020.
  69. ^abBadsey-Ellis 2005,pp. 273–274.
  70. ^"No. 28747".The London Gazette.19 August 1913. pp. 5929–5931.
  71. ^"No. 31656".The London Gazette.25 November 1919. pp. 14425–14429.
  72. ^Horne 2006,pp. 48 and 55.
  73. ^"No. 32009".The London Gazette.6 August 1920. pp. 8171–8172.
  74. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 30.
  75. ^abWolmar 2005,p. 204.
  76. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 23.
  77. ^Day & Reed 2008,p. 59.
  78. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 24.
  79. ^abBadsey-Ellis 2005,pp. 282–283.
  80. ^Wolmar 2005,p. 203.
  81. ^abWolmar 2005,p. 205.
  82. ^Day & Reed 2008,p. 93.
  83. ^abBruce & Croome 2006,p. 33.
  84. ^abcBruce & Croome 2006,p. 35.
  85. ^"No. 28776".The London Gazette.25 November 1913. pp. 8539–8541.
  86. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,pp. 30 and 33.
  87. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 34.
  88. ^Wolmar 2005,p. 259.
  89. ^Wolmar 2005,pp. 259–262.
  90. ^"No. 33668".The London Gazette.9 December 1930. pp. 7905–7907.
  91. ^Wolmar 2005,p. 266.
  92. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,pp. 37–38.
  93. ^Bruce & Croome 2006,p. 44.
  94. ^Wolmar 2005,p. 294.
  95. ^abLee 1970,p. 27.
  96. ^"London Tubes' New Names – Northern And Central lines".The Times.No. 47772. 25 August 1937. p. 12.Retrieved30 March2010.
  97. ^Emmerson & Beard 2004,pp. 108–121.
  98. ^Emmerson & Beard 2004,pp. 60–66.
  99. ^Connor 2006,p. 42.
  100. ^Emmerson & Beard 2004,pp. 30–37.
  101. ^Emmerson & Beard 2004,pp. 104–107.

Bibliography

edit
  • Badsey-Ellis, Antony (2005).London's Lost Tube Schemes.Capital Transport.ISBN1-85414-293-3.
  • Bruce, J Graeme; Croome, Desmond F (2006) [1996].The Central Line.Capital Transport.ISBN1-85414-297-6.
  • Connor, J E (2006) [1999].London's Disused Underground Stations.Capital Transport.ISBN1-85414-250-X.
  • Day, John R; Reed, John (2008) [1963].The Story of London's Underground.Capital Transport.ISBN978-1-85414-316-7.
  • Emmerson, Andrew; Beard, Tony (2004).London's Secret Tubes.Capital Transport.ISBN1-85414-283-6.
  • Horne, Mike (2006).The District Line.Capital Transport.ISBN1-85414-292-5.
  • Lee, Charles Edward (May 1970).Seventy Years of the Central.Westminster:London Transport.ISBN0-85329-013-X.570/1111/RP/5M.
  • Rose, Douglas (1999) [1980].The London Underground, A Diagrammatic History.Douglas Rose/Capital Transport.ISBN1-85414-219-4.
  • Wolmar, Christian(2005) [2004].The Subterranean Railway: How the London Underground Was Built and How It Changed the City Forever.Atlantic Books.ISBN1-84354-023-1.
edit
Wikimedia Commons has media related toCentral London Railway.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Central_London_Railway&oldid=1245762448"