Talk:Durham boat

Comment

Hi, I was one of the captains of the "Endurance" from 1992 to about 2000. The Endurance is a 50 foot Durham boat replica built for the 150th anniversary of the Rideau Canal which connects Ottawa to Kingston (Canada). The Durham boat could also use a square sail on a mast that could easily be taken down (20 min) to go under the bridges. Since the Durham boat has a flat bottom and no keel, it is very fast but quite difficult to control in high winds. It will outrun most modern sail boats. Our experience showed us that a 5 man crew (4 + captain) is the minimum crew size with this ship. Polling is quite fast and effective when there is little water and rowing (facing forward and standing on the walking boards) is quite slow and painful especially if you are tall. It is true that these boats are famous for their use in Washington's crossing of the Delaware during the American Revolution. Also, they were use by both the Canadian and American sides during the War of 1812.

If you want pictures, video or more info on the Durham boat, call me in Montréal, Canada at 514-987-6253. Nicolas Cadieux

Does anyone know if this boat, the Endurance apparently built in 1984, still survives? I can find nothing online regarding it. Thanks. GullyWalker (talk) 13:50, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Found it, scrapped due to rot in 2006, except for the bow which is on display in the Rideau Canal Museum. 72.75.222.195 (talk) 18:25, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Interesting

Interesting... You mention that this type of boat had no keel, but Christopher Ward notes that it did at the time used by the Continental Army. Perhaps the keel was done away with later as, according to your comments, the boat served a useful purpose for quite some time, including the War of 1812.

Also, carrying all that weight (17 tons or so) I would think a keel would be necessary to help distribute weight.

Also note: the original editor of this piece stated a three man crew, but Ward indicates five, four to pole and one to steer. With just three crew, this system of poling would be quite difficult. With four crew and a steersman, then two could walk each side and the steersman be at the steering post.Wikited (talk) 19:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

No keel

Hi,

I just looked at "Wooden Ship Building and the Interpretation of Shipwrecks" (J.Richard Steffy, 1998) and you are right to say the boat Durham boat had a keel but no centreboard. The Endurance had a keel (about 18 inches wide x 2 inches thick) running from stern to bow BUT it was useless for sailing! It did not stop the boat from drifting sideways in a side wind. It did provide structural strength and protected the garboard and frame from rocks. (We must keep in mind the Endurance was designed from descriptions and painting and not plans so who knows what the boats looked like.) The Durham boat was primarily a canal and river boat. Canals are slim and shallow and rivers have rapids incompatible with any large keel and the Durham boats were designed with this in mind. A boat made for the Rideau Canal would have been smaller and narrower then a boat made for the St-Lawrence River. As for the comment about the crew size, 4 + captain was a minimal for a 50 foot boat but 2 people can pole this boat fairly easily if you have no cargo, no wind or current. The problem is getting it up to speed!

I have to interesting quotes I found about the Durham’s:

"...there was great risk may be seen from the fact that the nine-mile Long Sault was sometimes run in fifteen minutes… We descended the Long Sault in an hour without sailing and seldom rowing, though near particular currents they rowed with great exertion. The most agitated part is towards the end of the rapids, where the river becomes wider; here I had an opportunity of seeing the boats which followed us; they appeared to fly. I compared them to race horses trying to outrun each other. The velocity was extreme; sometimes the whirlpool turned them round; at other the head of one and stern of another boat appeared buried under the waves... ...now I had nothing to think of but the present danger, and was terrified." (Madame Simcoe July 28 1795 in Roberton, The Diary of Mrs. John Graves Simcoe, Toronto, William Briggs, 1911, pp. 439)

“The one in which I sailed in May was, according to the information of the captain, 62 feet in keel, and 11 feet 4 inches in beam; she carried about 26 tons, and drew only 38 inches water. She carried about 270 barrels of flour..." (John M. Duncan in 1818 in Craig, Early Travellers in the Canadas, 1791-1867, Toronto, The Macmillan Company of Canada Limited, 1955, pp. 300)

And finally this is why they called it the Endurance...

“...the accommodations which this boat afforded were so poor that our situation during the thirteen days of our voyage from Lachine to Prescott was in reality `below the reach of envy'. To make room for my mother and the children in the wretched little hole of a cabin, my brother and I were frequently obliged to sleep on the shore in the open air... ... I think I may say, without any danger of hyperbole, that during this short period, each of us encountered greater difficulties, endured more privations, and submitted to stronger proofs of our fortitude than had been our lot in all the preceding years of our lives. We were obliged by day, in consequence of the great weight of our luggage, to assist the sailors in towing the boat up the rapids, often up to our armpits in water; and by night to rest our enervated and shivering limbs on the inhospitable shore of this river of cataracts.” ( E.A. Talbot 1818 in Guillet, Pioneer Travel in Upper Canada, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1966, pp. 241)

Look at list for more info: Bonnycastle, Canada and the Canadians, vol 1, London, Henry Colburn Publisher, 1849. pp. 313

Canniff, The Settlement of Upper Canada, Belleville, Ontario, Mika Silk Screening Limited, 1971, pp. 670

Craig, Early Travellers in the Canadas, 1791-1867, Toronto, The Macmillan Company of Canada Limited, 1955, pp. 300

L'éclusier, journal d'interprétation du canal de Lachine, vol 2, numéro 3. Guillet, Pioneer Travel in Upper Canada, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1966, pp. 241 Hall, Dodds, A Picture History of Ontario, Ontario, Hurting Publishers, 1978, pp. 224 Hall, Travels in Canada and the United States, in 1816 and 1817, Boston, Wells and Lilly, 1818, pp. 332

Lafrenière, Le réseau de canalisation de la rivière des Outaouais, Hull, Canadian Government Publishing Centre, 1984, pp. 100 Le Bateau Durham, Ottawa, Commission de la Capital National, 1984, pp. 11

Legget, Rideau Waterway, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1972, pp. 249

Pavie, Souvenirs Atlantiques, voyage aux États-Unis et au Canada, Paris, Imprimerie et Fonderie de Rignoux et Ce, 1833, pp. 350

Roberton, The Diary of Mrs. John Graves Simcoe, Toronto, William Briggs, 1911, pp. 439

Ciao Nicolas Cadieux 2009/04/29

Another Comment

I don't have a citation handy, but Durham boats were also in regular use on the Niagara River. The Porter, Barton Company which owned a monopoly on the Niagara Falls portage from about 1796 until the opening of the Erie Canal in 1825 used them to haul salt from Little Niagara (Fort Schlosser) to Black Rock on the route from Syracuse to Pittsburgh. I have seen a reference to a Durham boat built at the Black Rock shipyard circa 1810.

Also, this article does not mention their use on the St. Lawrence River. My understanding is that at some point, possibly at the start of construction of the Erie Canal, all the American Durhams on the Mohawk River moved to the St. Lawrence where they continued in use for some time. Interestly also, there was regular passenger service between Schenectady and Montreal by Durham boat for a time. GullyWalker (talk) 19:31, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

“The Dobbins Papers,” Publications of the Buffalo Historical Society, vol. 8, 1905, p. 285. “In 1796-7, settlements sprang up rapidly on the American side, and business followed. Porter, Barton & Co. – an enterprising firm just commencing business – established a transportation line via the American route to Black Rock, using what were called Durham boats from Schlosser, up the river, the freight being mostly salt and merchandise up, peltries, highwines, flour and pork, down.”

“Ship-Building on the Lakes, No. 1, Buffalo and the District of Buffalo Creek, N. Y.”, The Monthly Nautical Magazine and Quarterly Commercial Review, vol. 1, no. 1, October, 1854, p. 291. “Prior to the year 1809, we can find no mention of any vessels having been built in this district. During that year, however, a small Durham boat, of about ten tons burthen, was constructed at Black Rock.” GullyWalker (talk) 12:33, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Duncan, John, Travels through part of the United States and Canada in 1818 and 1819, p. 118 The Durham boats of the St. Lawrence are similar to those on the Mohawk. In smooth water they use a sail or oars, but are forced up the rapids by incessant and laborious exertions with the pole. They are generally navigated by natives of the United States. The one I sailed in May was, according to the information of the captain, 62 feet in keel, and 11 feet 4 inches in beam; she carried about 26 tons, and drew only 28 inches water. She had on board about 270 barrels of flour, which sunk her gunwale within a few inches of the water; and to defend us in passing through the rapids, a couple of stout planks, about a foot in breadth, were nailed along the sides; a precaution which, as we afterwards experienced, was no more than needful.GullyWalker (talk) 12:38, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Niles Weekly Register, vol. 10, Saturday, July 20, 1816, p. 348. From the Montreal Herald of June 22. Among the objects which attract public notice, we were the other day struck with the appearance of a handsome Durham boat of the ordinary size, or of about 250 bbls. Burthen. She was not intended for freight, but for passengers; she had a substantial roundhouse, 20 feet in length by 8 in width, well fitted up with sides of painted canvas, such as stagecoaches have; sixteen or twenty passengers can be tolerably accommodated in this boat. The question to the master naturally was, from whence came you? From Schenectady. No interruption in the navigation? None, for an instant - at this season we had more than enough of water for a larger vessel. Upon a reference to Mr. Lay’s large map of the state of New York, published in 1813, we find the old portage between Mohawk River at Rome and Wood Creek, of about four miles in length, is now made navigable, by a canal for large barges; so that the tourist or traveler can leave Schenectady, arrive at Montreal without disembarking, and return in the same manner…so that by the Hudson, the Mohawk, Wood creek, Oneida Lake, Oswego River, lake Ontario, and the St. Lawrence, a water carriage is opened between New-York and Quebec.GullyWalker (talk) 12:41, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

This page is incomplete and contains some inaccuracies. I am going to try to improve it. Beginning rewrite now. GullyWalker (talk) 18:49, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Rewrite complete

I have done extensive research on Durham Boats, particularly their use in New York State, and in my opinion, this article as it stands now is relatively accurate and complete and provides a fairly good summary of what is known about Durham Boats. The two contemporary images included are, to my knowledge, the only contemporary images of Durham Boats that exist. No detailed description, plans or archaeological remains have been found. I am always interested in hearing if anyone comes across any additional information regarding Durham boats, particularly construction details. GullyWalker (talk) 15:06, 25 November 2013 (UTC)