Burges and Cross Cheaping

You folks are so darn clever, it's almost like solving a jigsaw puzzle. I would be lost if it wasn't for the clock.

Interesting to note the overhead cable and tracks for the trams. They had trams in Cov when my mum was a little girl in the 1920s. Now here's another funny thing, albeit this time of a technical nature. If technical stuff is not your bag, please read no further. As there is only one overhead conductor, the earth return was obviously through the rails. In those days, most of the trams ran on d.c., as d.c. motors were much easier to control than a.c. motors. Well, they didn't have the power electronics we have nowadays. I presume the trams in Cov all ran on d.c. A whole chapter is dedicated to this subject in a 1924 copy I have of the Practical Telephone Handbook. The BPO, as it was then called, before being named the GPO, found out the hard way that after a few years of tram operation in inner city areas, underground phone cables were starting to fail at alarming rates. No PVC insulation being available, it was the practice for multicore cable sheaths to be made of lead, and there were large holes in the lead sheath, allowing the ingress of water. The lead was literally being carried away by the d.c. leakage current from tram rails. Because of multiple parallel paths to earth, not all of a tram's return current was going through the rails, some leaking into the general mass of earth. This prompted them to start looking at cathodic protection. Of course, with a.c., as modern trains use, there is no such problem because every second, the 50 positive half-cycles cancel out the 50 negative ones. On the London underground, that is the reason the d.c. circuit uses two separate insulated rails for the motor current; nothing to do with the rails for the wheels of the train. The tunnel cases are made of iron/steel sections, and you wouldn't want them to be corroded away by electrolytic action. I'm sure that if the underground were being started now, they'd do it differently. After all, the first underground trains had steam engines.

I do like a bit of technical stuff, thanks Slim The era for trams varied greatly by location. Trams. Birkenhead saw the first trams in 1860 but they were horse drawn at that time. Coventry's first trams were steam 1884-1893. While WWII ended the tram system in Coventry, it looks like they were phasing them out even before that. Coventry trams.

Thanks Slim, being a "light current" electronic engineer I hadn't thought of that. CB

At this link at Britain From Above July 1949, it looks like the AD 1914 part of the sign was still there hiding behind the Burton's (interior lit) sign. It maybe that it had already begun to decay and/or the fixings for the Burton's sign damaged it beyond the point of repair? Since the brickwork doesn't look damaged/replaced I might guess that the sign was just a render coating and not inset stone blocks? Second thoughts - some of the pediment coping stones are different colours, so maybe the top had been in part or wholly rebuilt?

Here is a better shot of the Comley's building from c 1929, the ground level is not too clear but the right hand side shows Montague Burton's other shop with its distinctive curved fascia, they took the rest of this building over after the Broadgate branch was burnt out: It's extraordinary how many furniture shops there were in this short stretch, James Woodhouse at 20-21 Coss Cheaping, Richmond's at 26 and Smart's at 13 Burges next to the Wine Lodge/Tally Ho! (now The Philip Larkin).

Here's the back of Comley's - Is that the culverted Sherbourne to the right?

The open Sherbourne ran on a bit of a curve at that point. So I believe that the small, old building just to the right of centre at the very bottom was just to the right of the river but the river then curved to the right and came up to that small roadway. It then headed slightly to the left under the road where it still runs, out into the Palmer Lane area. While the culvert could have redirected the line of the river, it would still have had to pass under the road at roughly the same place, so on balance I think that the culvert followed the line of the river - so under the right hand end of Comley's, which might explain the odd shape of the end wall. To the right of the small roadway was the Fountain Inn.

And another slightly different view/era of Burges looking North - circa 1930s as The Wine Lodge is present -

A great one Neil. I love the pics with plenty of activity to study. I see the clock stood the ravages of time. I have just had a metal sun blind installed outside and glad to see they have improved 100% since those shown here. Looking at all those awnings it must have been a lucrative business in their day.

Yes both are excellent shots. I reckon the second one is just pre-war judging by the shops on the left side. Here is a much clearer copy of the Comley's building than the one I posted before (courtesy of Alton Douglas' book Memories of Coventry);

Cooper Collection -

Neil, This is a great photo, c 1932? interesting because it shows Fred Burn the tailor in his old premises which are just about to be demolished and replaced with Richmonds Furnishing Stores. He moved into the premises 2 doors to the right which is shown here under construction. However that building didn't last long and was torn down before the war, presumably because it stuck out from the new set-back building line. Fred would have been well-advised to have built his new shop in line with Comley's. He either retired or just went out of business as his name doesn't appear in the directories at the end of the 1930s. The much older building in the middle appears to have belonged to W Dickins & Co Ltd, tanners, though it looks very much like a domestic dwelling. They relocated to 475 Foleshill Road. A shame we can't read what it says on the posters in their windows, similarly with Fred Burn. Incidentally Neil, is the Cooper Collection available for all to see? Geoff