Just to add a further item of fact that contributes to the debate: the financial returns around the relevant period: –From 1799, when the GJCC traffic had really hit its stride, the annual sums taken by the GJCC rose by 6 or 7 thousand pounds each year until 1803, when it DROPPED by nearly £4,000.Thereafter, between 1803 and 1804 the takings nearly doubled, from £22,782 to £39,409. The next year it jumped by over £29,000, and over the next 5 years until 1810, annual increases between were in the region of anything between 5 to 20 thousand pounds.1818 recorded the highest income since the canal started up, and this was not matched again until 1824.So it seems likely that 1803, when the miller was bought out, was the year they built the lock – which would explain the relatively huge drop in income as traffic was disrupted [they could still take the long way around via Town Wharf, at suitably high tides]. It would also help to explain the annual increases thereafter.On the same argument, 1818 seems the LEAST likely date, as that was when an unprecedented spike in income was generated, which could hardly have been accomplished during significant lock works.The reconstructed High Street bridge in 1824 seems to have had insignificant impact on traffic volumes; from 1820 the profits had been rising by 5 to 9 thousand per annum in a fairly even gradient until 1825. It dropped £9,000 the following year before reaching an improvement on the 1825 figure of just £1,600.
Nigel Moore ● 3267d