| dc.description.abstract | In pre-industrial England river navigations were subject
to improvement by canalisation, the introduction of
artificial navigation cuts and pound locks. Along the Lea
this did not happen until 1767. Before that the navigation,
except for one short period, relied upon a less efficient
technology, the provision of flashes from fishing weirs,
turnpikes and mills. Yet the river was still an important
transport route, particularly for the supply of grain, meal
and malt to London. It had been this during the mediaeval
period, but not by the middle of the sixteenth century. Then
in 1571 the City of London sponsored legislation to construct
a canal from the Lea to London. Parliamentary opposition
thwarted the original ambitious scheme, so two cheaper,
shorter canals were considered, but never built. Instead
an ambitious and unique river improvement scheme was
successfully implemented. This experimental navigation
(reducing reliance on flashes to a minimum) survived 20
years, before persistent and violent opposition from land
carriers closed it. A Star Chamber case upheld the rights
of the bargemen, but the experimental navigation was not
restored. Instead the traditional flash-lock navigation
re-appeared, and was to last, with only minor improvementg
until 1767. In the intervening years the navigation
continued to expand and prosper., This despite the admitted
problems of relying on flashes and tides, and despite a
series of major disputes with the New River Companyq the
millers, fishermen and riparian land-owners. Conflict there
certainly was, but also compromise. Ultimately all parties
were prepared to accept the conflicting rights of other
users, provided they could defend their own. commissions
of Sewers provided an effective administrative forum to
effect and authorise such compromise, even after the
appointment of a body of Trustees in 1739. That the Lea
was an adequate navigation before canalisation, despite
a 'second-best' technology and an unpaid part-time administrative
structure means' that a valid comparison with the
concept of Appropiate Technology, discussed in modern-day
development theory, is possible. | en_US |
