Category: History

The Company, Cholera, Colouring and the Corporation

by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Points of Interest, Volunteers1 Comment on The Company, Cholera, Colouring and the Corporation

Most of you will know that the ‘great visitation’ inscribed on the large obelisk in the Cemetery refers to the cholera outbreak of the late summer of 1849. This was the second time that true cholera had touched the townspeople of Hull. The 1849 epidemic was the worst outbreak of the disease that Hull ever suffered. As such memories of those grim days lingered in the collective consciousness.

Cholera

This may explain the letter that the Company received in early September 1893. Signed by the Town Clerk, R. Hill-Dawes ,it was friendly enough but requested information in relation to a resolution passed by the Cholera Sub-Committee the previous day. That there was in existence such a sub-committee shows the fear of cholera still reigning in Hull. It didn’t help that a new wave of cholera was sweeping across the world around this time.

Although it was now known how cholera was transmitted, via contaminated water, that didn’t offer immunity to the people of Hull. The reason for this was that many of the people were still dependent upon stand-pipes and that not all of the cesspits had been closed down. As such this letter landed on the the Cemetery Superintendent’s desk, dated the 6th September 1893. He reported it to his board of directors at the 3rd October Board meeting.

letter from town clerk, Oct 1893

 

A Quick Response

As may be seen, the Town Clerk desired the Secretary’s ‘observations’ the very next day. as it was ‘of urgent importance’. The Secretary after having read the resolution on the other side of the letter knew this needed a response from the Board not just from him. The resolution, copied below, alludes to the cholera grounds in the cemetery.

 

resolution October 1893

Upon receipt of this letter the Secretary immediately informed the Chairman. The Chair carefully drafted a reply for Michael Kelly to send. In this reply the Chair refuted any tampering of the area where the cholera victims were laid to rest. This was a patch of ground comprising of parts of four compartments; 96,  97, 122, 123. This appeared to be where the majority of cholera victims were buried. But not all. If a family member died of the disease and that family had a family plot then that family member would have had the right to be buried there. There was also the mystery of plot 121 which I’ve written about before.

Mysteries

Why Panic Now?

So, on many occasions the ground that contained a cholera victim could have been disturbed. Why the panic now?

As mentioned earlier the Corporation was anxious due to the new pandemic, They were taking steps to not allowing cholera to come in via the back door so to speak. They needn’t have worried. Unlike such diseases as tetanus the cholera bacillus cannot persist in the ground unless it lives in the groundwater. After almost 50 years since the 1849 epidemic the likelihood of the cholera bacillus being active was extremely remote. But rational thought doesn’t come into it when dealing with a pandemic. We all saw that recently didn’t we?

The Reply

The chair’s reply is below, signed by Michael Kelly.

Chair's reply

With this reply the matter appears to die a death. It never resurfaces in the minute books. We have no knowledge of whether any of the sub-committee availed themselves of the offer to visit the cholera ground.

Paranoia

Two points are apparent from this reply. One is that the paranoia that affected most of the Company’s board meetings during the period since the Borough Cemetery opened in 1862 were reaching an unhealthy peak at this time. The minute books are strewn with comments alleging that the Company was under attack from all and sundry. The message is that the Company was struggling to function and that cutbacks were necessary. Yet at the same time very healthy dividends were regularly paid to its shareholders. To square this cognitive dissonance it became necessary to claim that unfair methods were being used against the Company.  This attitude continued until the the 1930’s when reality finally made the Company realise it no longer had the assets to contain trading. This was when it began to seriously look to liquidation but that is another story.

Colour Coding

The second point is perhaps more mundane but interesting nonetheless. You may have noticed that Kelly states that,

‘In the plan of the Cemetery all these Cholera Public Grave were inked Salmon Colour as a guide to the Officials’

This was true, at least in the first part of the Cemetery’s life. All grave spaces were assigned a colour. This was dependent upon the status of the grave space being used. The index of this system is shown below although Kelly noted at the top of the page that this system had not been used for some time.

 

Colouring of graves in the HGC burial registers

 

Compartment 102

So, for example if we look at compartment 102 we can see this system in operation. Note the large red square to the lower part of map. This corresponds to the large monument to William Hunt Pearson . Other examples of the second class of graves includes Harbord Harbord at the top of the image.

 

William Pearson's monument taken in the 1990s

William Hunt Pearson’s monument as it was in the 1990s. Below is a more recent photograph.

 

William hunt pearson memorial now

The Victorian Cult of the Funeral

In many areas of Victorian society you were ultimately judged upon your material wealth. Even in death equality did not reign. The rise of the funerary business and the memorialisation of all those who could afford it took off in this period. Poorer families would descend further into debt to give their family member a ‘good send-off’ mainly because it was expected of them. That the neighbours ‘would talk’ was still a feature of communities when I was a young boy in the 1950s. How much worse it must have been when the funeral industry was in its pomp and dictating what sort of crepe and the colour of linen that could be used depending upon your relationship to the corpse doesn’t bear thinking about.

The obelisk that adorns Pearson’s vault tells all and sundry that he was important because he was wealthy. And now you know that not only did he have a large monument but it stood upon a first class grave. vault That may have been some comfort to him and his family. The rites were observed and those attending the funeral would have been suitably assured that Pearson was a ‘great man’. However he was still as dead as those poor people in the workhouse plots and now, like them, he resides in a derelict cemetery where his first class status means nothing any longer.

Oh well, as Dylan sang, ‘That’s life and life only’. Or in this case death.

The Beginnings of Western Cemetery

by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Volunteers4 Comments on The Beginnings of Western Cemetery

The Beginnings of Western Cemetery

Western Cemetery is a large cemetery situated about a mile and half from the city centre of Hull. It comprises of approximately 37 acres and it is unusual for it is divided by a main road, Chanterlands Avenue. People walking around it, sometimes with dogs, in summer with children, treat it as a public space complete with headstones. Although there are still funerals in there, these are quite a rarity these days. There are no services held there now as the Cemetery no longer boasts any chapels. In fact, it is a pleasant ‘country’ walk. Which is a far cry from its beginnings. This article is a short history of this place of rest for many of the town’s residents.

The beginnings of Western Cemetery, or as it was originally called, the Borough Cemetery, are closely tied up with its next-door neighbour, Hull General Cemetery.

Hull General Cemetery opened in 1847. The owners purchasing 18 acres from Henry Broadley M.P. By 1854 it had developed about 10 acres for burial. By the 1850s it would sign separate covenants with both the Society of Friends, also known as the Quakers, and the Hull Workhouse Board that would swallow up another 3 acres. This left 5 acres at the extreme westernmost point of the Hull General Cemetery undeveloped. These were still let out as allotment gardens.

Politics: Local and National

At this point it would be helpful to touch upon both the national and local politics of that period. For both would have an effect upon the creation of Western Cemetery.

In 1848 the Liberal Government of Lord John Russell enacted some legislation. This was probably the first crack in the wall of laissez-faire values. This was the first Public Health Act. It was radical in that it not only took on the role of public guardian of the health of the nation but could be seen to infringe upon private interests such as water companies and private cemeteries. It also empowered local authorities to develop and enact local initiatives to make the health of their charges better, be that via housing, sanitation reform, medical provision etc. Not least of these was the creation of local burial boards. They would oversee the maintenance, provision and delivery of the burials within their jurisdiction.

Cholera and the Local Board of Health

With this legislation in force the Hull Corporation began its work to improve the health of its citizens. Almost before it could get into its stride Hull, and indeed the whole country, suffered from the effects of the second pandemic of cholera. This disease, waterborne by the cholera vibrio bacillus, struck Hull badly. During a four-month period the town lost 3% of its population. This was probably the most destructive visitation of a disease in Hull since the Black Death stalked the land. The Local Board of Health (LBOH) could do nothing to mitigate this disaster. An attempt to clean afflicted housing and whitewash the internal walls was the sum total of the Board’s efforts.

There must be some degree of sympathy for the Board’s efforts. No one knew then of the existence of things like bacillus. How disease could be transmitted by such miniscule creatures was more of a mystery. In fact, the prevalent view amongst the public, and indeed medical practitioners, was that disease was caused by bad smells. This idea of how diseases were transmitted goes back to the time of Aristotle and Galen. This thinking had little changed by the early 19th century. The term ‘mal air’ or bad air can be seen to be the root of the term ‘malaria’ which is an example of that kind of thinking.

Suffice to say that preventative measures to reduce or alleviate the effects of the cholera were ineffective. The LBOH and the inhabitants of the town simply had to wait for the disease to run its course. By October deaths began to fall and by the following month no more deaths from cholera were recorded. The Board now could begin its work in earnest.

The Race for Legislation

One of the first things it looked at was purchasing the Hull General Cemetery. The offer for it was rejected. The LBOH then began to look towards legislation via parliament to gain control of this cemetery. By 1854 it was seeking, via the Kingston Upon Hull Improvement Act (1854) to compulsory purchase the cemetery. Similarly, the Hull General Cemetery Company looked to its own legislation to protect itself from this scheme. It sought to have the Cemetery Company incorporated. This would protect it from any form of compulsory purchase. The race was on. The Hull General Cemetery Company won that race, probably because their bill was much simpler that the Hull Corporation one. This Bill was looking at many other factors than simply burials and the disposal of the dead.

To Buy or Not to Buy

A part of that Hull General Cemetery Company Act was the clause that allowed the Cemetery Company to compulsory purchase the adjacent land to the North. This area, now comprising of Welbeck, Thorseby and part of Newstead Streets, was owned by the Wilkinson family of Cottingham. The Cemetery Company had unfortunately fallen foul of this family when a mix up over what the Company thought was a verbal agreement saw its workmen entering Mr Wilkinson’s grounds and felling his orchard trees. Legal threats ensued and the relationship between the two had remained frosty even after Mr Wilkinson died.

Problems over the valuation of this land and the intransigence of the Wilkinson family suggested that the only recourse the Company had was to pay for, and attend a Sheriff’s Court, who would adjudicate this valuation. The Company, short-sightedly, decided that the expense could not be justified and the matter was left in abeyance.

By 1855 Hull General Cemetery was not only protected from the threat of being compulsorily purchased by Hull Corporation but was now in the ascendance. And here we need to just look back slightly to yet another piece of legislation arising from the 1848 Public Health Act.

No Dignity for the Dead

The state of the burial grounds throughout the country had long been a source of disquiet. Many of them were full yet still being used. In Hull the burial ground of St Mary’s in Lowgate was between 5 and 8 feet above the pavement. It was common knowledge that burials could only take place if the most recent coffins in that grave space were removed to accommodate the next burial. After some shocking stories of the mistreatment of the dead were recorded in the popular press and also by a public- spirited reformer called George Walker in his book, ‘Gathering from the Graveyards’ reform was demanded by the public. This took the form of the Metropolis Act of 1850.

This Act closed many of the disgusting and over-used burial places within the metropolitan area of London. The Act was then systematically rolled out throughout the country. By 1855 it was Hull’s turn. In Hull, both Holy Trinity and St Mary’s churchyards were closed, Also Trippett Street churchyard, which was the overflow burial ground of St Mary’s, was closed. St Peter’s in Drypool also suffered the same as did St Mary’s, Sculcoates. The Quaker burial ground in Hodgson Street was closed and the Jewish burial ground on Hessle Road was also shut. Castle Street survived as a burial ground on a technicality but was ordered to be shut by 1860.

Suddenly, almost overnight, Hull General Cemetery held a near monopoly upon burials in the area. This change in fortunes made the Cemetery Company even more resistant to being taken over by the LBOH. As such the LBOH changed tack.

Lease or Buy?

In the June of 1855 the LBOH again approached the Cemetery Company.  Their new approach was that it could buy or lease the cemetery. If not that then perhaps it could buy or lease the 5 acres towards the west. The Company had not yet developed this area yet. The aim of the LBOH was to start a Borough Burial Ground. Over a period of two years the parties engaged in negotiations. It wasn’t until the AGM of the Cemetery Company in March 1859 that the board of directors stated that,

The negotiations with the LBOH are all but concluded and your board now think this the proper time to lay the arrangement before you. The deeds to carry out the arrangement with the local board are already prepared and require sealing to complete the matter. On the completion of the arrangement with the LBOH your directors propose to call a special meeting of shareholders as the funds for building a new chapel (required under any circumstances.) and for fencing, planting, draining and laying out the portion of ground set apart for the LBOH will then have to be voted on.

By the July of that year agreements had been signed for the drainage and fencing of the five acres. In the September the contact for the erection of the new chapel was signed and later that month the site was chosen and on the 3rd October the foundation stone was laid by the Mayor, Marin Samuelson, of Sammy’s point fame. This chapel was demolished in the 1920s.

 

This is a map of the five acres originally leased by Hull Corporation in 1859. The future Spring Bank West is to the top of the map and the Hull General Cemetery is to the left.

No Division in Heaven

The five acres were leased to the LBOH for the period of 500 years. One final hiccough appeared via the archbishop who demanded that the new chapel could only be used for Anglican burials and that the old chapel in the grounds of Hull General Cemetery should be used for Dissenters. Both the LBOH and the Company agreed to this unreasonable demand and the ground was consecrated accordingly. Later this stipulation would entail the building of another chapel to cater for Dissenters when the LBOH and the Company fell out with each other.

Map of Original Western consecrated ground

Map of the original five acres showing the consecrated area in pink and the unconsecrated and other religion’s burial area. 

At this time, we have the Hull General Cemetery Company operating its own concern. It was also conducting the burials and maintenance of the Hull Corporation’s new burial ground. This arrangement lasted less than two years.

A Moment of Madness?

In June 1861 the chairman of the Cemetery Company informed his fellow board members that he had sent a letter to the LBOH. This letter was sent as a result of him being present in the council chamber at the time of a debate upon burial fees. In this debate, which centred upon the plan by the Holy Trinity Church to develop some three acres they had been given to them by Sophia Broadley as a burial ground for the parish to compensate for the closure of Castle Street, the high cost of burial in Hull General Cemetery was raised and commented upon unfavourably.

The Fateful Letter

The chairman, William Irving, being also a councillor, was angered by the tone of this debate, as he thought, this discourtesy to the Cemetery Company was unjust after all they had done to accommodate the Hull Corporation with the new burial ground. As such he penned the following letter,

To the Burial Committee, LBOH 8/5/1861

Gentlemen, I have read with surprise the report of your board meeting on the 29th Ult and the resolution passed on the occasion. It appears to me that your board in dealing with the burial question have not fairly considered the rights of the Cemetery Company.

At the request of your board the company entered into an arrangement to provide 5 acres of land, then let off as gardens, as and for the place of burial for the inhabitants of the borough; to lay  out the same as an ornamental cemetery and also to erect a suitable chapel thereon; and when the ground should be found insufficient the cemetery engaged to provide another suitable and adjoining piece of land and set it apart in the same way for your board.

These works have been carried out by the company at a cost of £1328 exclusive of land.

The Letter went on…

The company have justified their part in this agreement to the letter, and also to the satisfaction of your board as the following resolution of the 5/5 1860 will prove.

The company, in expending their money to meet the requirements of the board naturally looked to a fair return in the shape of interest on the outlay but your board’s resolution of the 29th ult renders it hopeless. The company think that in arriving at such a decision your board were wholly regardless of the position of the company with your board under the arrangement referred to the effect of your resolution being to deprive this company of the whole or a large part of their anticipation.

Under these circumstances. I have to suggest whether the proper course for the LBOH to adopt would be to purchase the ground included in the arrangement and thus, by taking the whole affair into their hands, release the cemetery company from their present unsatisfactory position, brought about as it has been by the action of your board.

Should the above suggestion to purchase meet with your views and should your board decide on adopting it, you would then be in a position to provide a family burial place in the board’s cemetery for the fees alone, which you can regulate at your pleasure and thus preserve the management of burials under your own control.

The Mistake and in Writing Too.

To carry out the suggestion the cemetery company would be willing to sell your board the land included in the arrangement on the following terms, subject to such regulations for preserving unity of design and uniformity of appearance as might be mutually agreed upon.

Say 5 acres of land at £315 per acre (the cost to the company £1575. Amount expended by the company in laying out, draining, planting and erecting a new chapel to meet the requirements of the burial board £1328. Total £2903.

The company would grant a perpetual right of road through the present cemetery, the board contributing their proportion of maintaining it in good order.

The Justification

The company think that they are fully justified in laying their suggestion before your committee, satisfied that they are entitled to their due consideration at the hands of your board for the large (and as far as they, the company are concerned, unnecessary) outlay they have incurred for the convenience of your board, and they would urge upon the board, through your committee, the necessity under existing circumstances. If your board’s arranging either to purchase the ground as suggested, or to give such compensation as may be mutually agreed upon.

In conclusion I may state that the object of the promoters of the cemetery company was to provide for the inhabitants of Hull what so much needed by them, a place of burial for all sects and denominations; to secure to all classes of the community the means of decent and undisturbed sepulture according to the rights of their own religious faith, and to put an end to intramural interments. This has been the aim of the company from its foundation to the present time and it was with this view, and not with the expectation of pecuniary gain that the arrangement with your board was entered into.

Yours

Wm Irving

Chairman, HGCC.

The Fallout from It

One wonders what his fellow directors thought of this letter, and of him sending it without asking for their approval. In an instant William Irving had curtailed any further development of the Hull General Cemetery. Its demise was certified by the LBOH’s response. In short, they accepted the terms in the Chairman’s letter. From the April of 1862, the Borough Burial Ground was independent of the Cemetery Company. That is except for the administration and the working and maintenance of the ground.  This arrangement was continued for a sum of £180 per annum.

However, although the Cemetery Company did not realise this, the agreement was to continue only until the Borough could gain enough experience and employ its own labour force to take care of its own burial ground. The Cemetery Company received in final settlement the sum of £2903. This appears to be a small sum for committing suicide.

The Borough Burial ground was the genesis of the Western Cemetery. In 1864 it erected a new chapel to accommodate the Dissenters. This chapel was finally demolished in 1994. It had long been disused for services. It was used for the storage of plant and tools towards the end of its life.

The End of the Agreement

The Borough cemetery continued to cater for the Hull citizens whilst being managed by the Hull General Cemetery Company. However, on the 1st June 1880, the Cemetery Company received a rude shock. This was a letter from the Town Clerk and secretary to the LBOH, Charles Spilman Todd, later to become the Sheriff of Hull, stating that they were giving the Cemetery Company one month’s notice of the termination of the agreement that allowed the Cemetery Company to maintain and administer the Borough ground. A further letter that day said that the Hull Corporation were willing to enter into a similar agreement for a lesser sum of money.

Negotiations began in earnest once again between these two adversaries. By the August the Cemetery Company had grudgingly accepted the Corporation’s final offer of £130. This also included £5 for the upkeep of the connecting road. This was a reduction from the £180 and £20 which had originally been agreed back in 1862.

Such changes as this showed that far from being the major player in the burial business the Cemetery Company was now subservient to the Hull Corporation. One of the factors at play here was the recent opening of the Hedon Road Cemetery in 1878. A privately owned cemetery was beginning to look like an anachronism.

Expansion: Go West Young Man

The next change to Western Cemetery, newly named as such with the opening of Hedon Road Cemetery to the east of the city, was a huge expansion. From 5 acres to 37 acres, the new cemetery dwarfed its parent. The irony here was that this land to be purchased was from the Wilkinson family. In selling it to the Hull Corporation, they were exacting revenge for the decimation of an orchard 40 years ago. The only stipulation the Wilkinson family made was an access road should be made by the Corporation so that the Wilkinson land beyond the parcel being sold could be accessed by their tenants. This the Hull Corporation agreed to and the result today is Chanterlands Avenue.

Expansion of Western Cemetery 1889

The expansion of Western Cemetery in 1889 showing the beginning of Chanterlands Avenue.

This expansion took place in 1889. As part of that expansion was the creation of a new lodge for the superintendent, Mr Whitty.  The building of a new Chapel on the western side of the new Chanterlands Avenue also took place. Another aspect of this expansion was that the Borough burials no longer needed to traverse the Cemetery Company’s grounds. They now had access to their own grounds from Chanterlands Avenue.

The Major Cemetery for Hull

Western Cemetery was the major cemetery in Hull at this time. Its heyday was perhaps the period from 1890 to the beginning of the second world war. After this time, it passed the mantle to Northern Cemetery, opened in 1916, and the Eastern Cemetery, opened in 1935.

It still continues to accommodate burials although there is now no longer any room for new graves. Such burials that take place are of family members being buried in family graves. In a few years’ time it will be in exactly the same position that Hull General Cemetery found itself in in the 1970s. The rise and fall of all cemeteries follow the same pattern. A short burst of growth at the beginning followed by a rapid expansion in its adolescence. A much longer period of maturity. This is followed by a period of decline merging into senescence at its end. Much like us all really.

The Larkin Bench

by Pete Lowdenin Events, General, History, News, Points of Interest, Volunteers

INVITATION – FRIDAY 2ND DECEMBER

At 2pm, that day, there is to be the unveiling of the Philip Larkin Bench.
This unveiling will mark the centenary of Philip Larkin’s birth, and will take place on the anniversary of his death. The bench is placed at the point the where Philip Larkin and John Betjeman met in 1964. This meeting was recorded by the BBC.
The bench was purchased by the Friends of Hull General Cemetery, with a generous donation from the Philip Larkin Society, who will be represented on Friday.
It would be great if you could be there to celebrate with us. Meet at the main gates on Spring Bank West.

Anniversary December 1846

by Pete Lowdenin History

This month’s anniversary I’m afraid does not have a Christmas theme. In fact it’s quite morbid in parts but well, we are talking about a cemetery so that comes with the territory.

As some of you may remember the Cemetery Company signed an agreement with the Union workhouses of both Hull and Sculcoates. Part of that agreement was that the Company would arrange to have any inmate of the workhouses who died brought to the Cemetery as soon as possible and placed in the Company’s Dead House, or what we would call a mortuary. That cemeteries had such buildings was quite common. Castle Street had one but it had a bad reputation as bodies left in the building were often found to have been partly eaten by the many rats that lived on the docks and in the cemetery. As such it was closed down and the Spring Street Mortuary replaced it in the early 20th century. The present City mortuary is situated on the HRI site.

Complaint

On the 30th December 1850 John Shields, the superintendent, received a deputation from the stonemasons He passed this complaint on to the Board of Directors. John Shields reported that,

‘complaints had been made by the stonemasons engaged in the Company’s stone shed of the dangers likely to arise from the near proximity of the Dead house to such shed’ 

It’s difficult to see today what the concerns were based upon. The risk of catching something infectious from any of the dead bodies lying in the Dead House would have been minimal. Especially as the mason’s would not have had reason to touch them. However, the idea of how one caught a disease was quite different in those times. Medical practice and beliefs in the Victorian period were still firmly rooted in medieval practices. Blood letting via leeches was seen as a common remedy for a host of illnesses. The idea that the ills of the body were dominated by the four ‘humours’ of the body was still current. The ‘new’ idea of inoculation was still viewed with suspicion and common hygiene, such as washing one’s hands before performing an operation, was regarded as unnecessary and probably eccentric.

Miasmic

The major belief in how one caught an illness or disease was based upon the miasmic theory. This was the idea that ‘bad air’ caused disease. It was an intriguing idea. At least to a population who had no idea of the existence of germs or viruses, it was quite plausible. So, it was probably this idea that had prompted the complaints from the stonemasons.

That this complaint was seen as reasonable is recognised by the response to it by the Board.

‘the matter having been fully considered by the Board it was ordered that the use of the present dead house be discontinued and that a new one be forthwith built on the vacant ground behind the chapel.’

So the Company Dead House was moved and presumably the stonemasons were now happy.

The new Dead House site?

Another intriguing aspect of this incident is the phrase, ‘on the vacant ground behind the chapel’. Of course whereabouts this ‘vacant ground’ was is a little mystery. It all depends upon where you stand when describing something as ‘behind’ something else. The east of the chapel was already occupied by the catacombs the Company sold. As such it cannot have been there. To the south was a path and to the north was Mr Wilkinson’s land. The Company would not have dared to build anything on his land after their legal tussles in 1847. So by process of elimination the new Dead House must have been built on the land to the west of the chapel.

How long it lasted is open to question. The land to the west of the chapel was sold as burial spaces in the 20th century. The Workhouses themselves terminated their arrangements with the Cemetery in the 1920s. As such it is reasonable to suppose that the Dead House continued to be used for the greater part of the 19th century. It probably fell into abeyance as the Cemetery entered the 20th century. All traces of this building have disappeared. It probably was quite shoddily built. It would have been removed to provide room for more grave spaces.

By the way this is the last in the series of anniversaries. I hope you’ve enjoyed the glimpses into the life of the Cemetery.

Anniversary November 1900

 

The Mason Cross

by Pete Lowdenin General, History, News, Volunteers

There are three memorials in Hull General Cemetery made from cast iron. The Eleanor Crosses

Two are shaped in the form of Eleanor Crosses. The third is a much smaller version of the same model. The first cross was erected on Elizabeth Stather’s grave by her husband, Thomas Stather. His firm of engineers, Thompson and Stather, had cast this first model and it was erected in 1863. The second one was erected after this date and it stood on the Mason grave.

Bill Longbone is one of the long standing members of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery Committee. He recently acquired the memorial book of Benjamin Burnett Mason. Memorial books were a Victorian innovation for the wealthy and famous. They listed within them the achievements of the deceased as well as the lavish funeral arrangements made for their departure. Published after the funeral it usually included the names of the people attended the funeral to show how important the dearly departed had been.

Bill asked me if I could put this book up on the site and so here it is in its entirety. I hope you enjoy it. And thank you Bill for this  view of the history of the Mason family and also an insight into Victorian funeral practices.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Anniversary November 1900

by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Volunteers2 Comments on Anniversary November 1900

Sometimes these anniversary items highlight how much has changed since they occurred and strangely how much things still stay the same. This is a case in point and involves the working relationship between manual workers and the Board and the shareholders. I would suggest that although over a century of welfare legislation has occurred between 1900 and today the relationship is still the same. Improvements have taken place but the power distribution is still the same. The time for forelock tugging may have passed but the power dynamics are still the same.

6th November Board meeting

The anniversary takes place on the 6th November 1900. At the Board meeting that day the Board were told some sad news. Jefferson, one of the gravediggers, had died. He had been ill for some time. It had been reported to the Board back in September that he was unlikely to return to work.

At the November meeting therefore the news of his death perhaps was not a surprise. The secretary, Michael Kelly, informed the Board that he had been asked to visit Mr Jefferson. He had complied. Jefferson took the chance to ask a favour of the Board. According to the minutes of the meeting Michael Kelly said he,

went to see him, (Jefferson) who asked that the company might give him a place of burial and allow his wife a little to bide her over the winter months.

Kelly placed the matter before the Chairman, John Pybus as a Board meeting was not scheduled till later in the month. John Pybus agreed that he could have a burial place and that Jefferson’s wife could have 10 shillings a week until the next Board meeting when the issue would be fully discussed.

As such, this situation was the one that presented the Board on the 6th November.

Long serving employee

At this meeting Kelly said that Jefferson had been employed by the Company for 34 years. He was one of the longest serving employees. He also said that only one payment of 10 shillings had been paid. The Board readily agreed that the burial place was agreed. However, upon reflection, it was agreed that Mrs Jefferson would only receive 5 shillings a week. This payment would discontinue at the end of March.

On the 4th December Mrs Jefferson wrote to the Board thanking them for their help.

William’s life

William Jefferson was born in Skidby in 1835. Or Cottingham. Or Newland as he seemed to change his birth place every census. Suffice to say that he was baptised as a non-conformist in June 1837 in Hull. His father was a coal porter and William’s early life was spent in the slums of Collier Street. This site is now subsumed under the Hull Interchange. By 1851 both William and his elder brother John joined their father as railway coal porters. Indeed the family address was cited as the Railway Depot.

By 1861 he had left the family home and was living in a tenement in New George Street. He still earned a living as a railway porter but was supplementing this as a general labourer. In 1867 William married Sarah Ann Howell.

1871 and after

The census of 1871 tells us that William and his new wife were living in Porter’s Terrace, Walton Street and his occupation was now listed as labourer at the Cemetery. William and Sarah were joined by a child called Joseph who was one year old. By 1881 the family had moved again. They now lived in Mason’s Terrace, Wellington Lane. William was listed as a General Cemetery labourer. The family had grown too. Joseph now 11 has two brothers, George and Amos plus a daughter Annie.

The 1891 census is the last that William appeared on. By that date the family had moved yet again. This time the address was in Seaton Street off Fountain Road. This house would have been a relatively new build at the time as the Swann Estate that most of Fountain Road was comprised of was only begun in the 1880s. He was cited as a general labourer and the family had grown once again. Joseph was now a printer and George was a boot and shoe maker. Amos and Annie were still scholars. The family had acquired Frederick and Alice, 5 and 3 year old respectively.

William died on the 28th October and was buried on the 31st. The cause of death was cited as yellow jaundice and exhaustion. The address at the time of death was 168 Waterloo Street.

William’s deathbed worries

It was this family that William worried about on his death bed. It was this family the Board graciously offered 5 shillings a week to compensate for the loss of the main breadwinner.

I know that, like me, you would like to know what happened to this family. Cast adrift in Victorian Britain, with no welfare safety network, no pension. Their only solace, if it can be called that, would have been at the top of Fountain Road and it was the Sculcoates Workhouse. What did they do to counteract this disaster?

Ice cream anyone?

The barebones of their struggle are recorded in the census returns. By 1901, some six months after William had died, their circumstances have changed. Sarah is now the head of the household and she is listed as an ice cream retailer. Her eldest son Joseph is also listed as an ice cream vendor as is young Frederick. George has left home as has Annie. Alice is still at school and Amos, now being 25, has no occupation listed. The family were making the ice cream and presumably selling it from the new address of 168, Waterloo Street. So they had pooled their resources and survived.

By 1911 the family were now living at 28, Aldbrough Street just off Cannon Street. Sarah was now retired and Joseph was running the business alongside Frederick. Alice was running a market stall where presumably ice cream was sold. George was still at school. And Amos? The 1911 census is interesting in that it wanted medical details of people who had ‘infirmities’. This ranged from ‘deafness’ to ‘imbecility’ and many things in between. Amos sadly fell into this bracket. He is listed as ‘feeble-minded’ and as such in a world where Victorian values were gauged upon how much you contributed he would have been classed as a burden. Yet another thing that William must have been troubled by as he lay on his deathbed.

The family breaks up

Amos died in 1920 and year before Sarah passed away. Joseph the eldest son had died in 1916 and the ice cream business died then too. Annie married and went to live in a terrace off Waterloo Street and Frederick went to live with them. George had left the family home long before and worked as a stevedore on Hedon Road. Alice had married on Boxing Day 1913 and so the family had splintered by the time Sarah died. I’m sure she would have been consoled, if that’s the right word, that Amos died before she did.

The grave that the Company had given to the family was only for two. William was the first to lie there and it was expected that Sarah would join him. With the death of Joseph these calculations went awry. Joseph occupied the second spot. However Michael Kelly, probably with some thought of his fellow worker William’s wishes, managed to squeeze another burial in. So a grave for two has three in it. Sadly there was no room for Sarah as Amos took this third spot. Amos died of heart failure.

So when Sarah died in the January of 1921 there was no grave for her to go. Frederick bought another space not far from the previous one and Sarah, his mother was laid to rest there. Sarah died of bronchitis.

Fair shares?

So what did I mean at the beginning about the relationship between a workforce and the owners? What has that got to do with anything in this story? I suppose this is where politics rears its ugly head so if you don’t want to hear that I’d suggest you dip out now.

Some of you may remember one or two articles where I have told of how the finances of the Cemetery were founded. How the initial shares were priced at £10 each and the issue was over-subscribed. You may also remember that the £10 was to be paid in instalments and only an initial £1 was paid to the Company. Over the life of the Cemetery occasionally the shareholders were asked to pay a little more but none of them ever had to pay the entire £10. Surprisingly there was also occasions when what is called ‘return of capital’ gave money back to the shareholders. In essence the shareholders risked very little.

Now we come to the reason why the people bought the shares in the first place. This was the expected return from owning shares that is known as a dividend. This is still current practice today in most capitalist countries.

Money for nothing

Even though the shareholders had not paid the full amount for their shares they still expected and received dividend payments. Over the life of the Cemetery the shareholders were paid dividends that made their initial outlay appear ridiculously small. Some times the dividend would reach 16 or 17 shillings per £1. And this would be paid every year. As you can see simply raking in such dividends over 2 years would defray the cost of the shareholder’s initial purchase of his or her share.

What has this to do with William Jefferson’s sad death? The point I’m labouring here is that at the AGM the year William died the dividend was set at 9 shillings. The same rate followed the next year. So each shareholder received 9 shillings for each share they owned. This would have included the members of the Board who took the step to reduce the payment to Sarah Ann Jefferson from 10 shillings to 5 shillings. What justification could they have had? Why did they think this was the right thing to do?

No I don’t have an answer. I suppose that Mrs Jefferson was grateful and who am I to criticise a decision made over a 100 years ago. But sometimes, just sometimes, something feels so wrong that you can’t allow it to pass by without comment. This is one of those. Sorry

A New Book

by Pete Lowdenin Books, General, History

There’s a new book. It’s called The Life of Hull General Cemetery Lodge and Other Stories.

The book covers the story of how the Cemetery Lodge, the jewel in the crown for the cemetery, was created but also the sad story of its loss to the forces of ‘progress’ in the 20th century. This building, the first commission of the noted Hull architect, Cuthbert Brodrick, was a creation in the Victorian Gothic mode. Its fairy tale castle effect was a highlight of the town. Yet within a a lifetime it was swept away.

Other stories in the book cover the struggle to create the Cemetery; the story of how the destruction of most of the headstones during the development of the cemetery in the 1970s took place and finally, a revisiting of a celebrated walk around the Cemetery by John Symons in the 1880s.

It’s available at Amazon and is priced at £10 post free.

The other books in this series are also still available from Amazon. These are a Short History of Hull General Cemetery, priced at £7. The War Dead of the Cemetery, priced at £10. Public Graves, Workhouse Graves, Catacombs and Crosses, priced at £7 and finally A Short History of Burial in Kingston Upon Hull from the Medieval Period to the Late Victorian Period. This is also priced at £7.

With the nights drawing in, what better way to spend them by reading  about cemeteries and death. Go on, treat yourself for Halloween. At the worst you can always burn them to keep warm.

The other books

 

Anniversary October 1875

by Pete Lowdenin General, History

The anniversary this month shows that the Company could, when it had to, play a mean game of poker. It’s opponents? Hull City Police Force. Here’s what happened.

On the 28th October 1875 the directors of the Company held an emergency board meeting. This meeting was called as a result of a letter they had received. The letter had come from the local Watch Committee of the Corporation. This was a committee of the Hull Corporation that concerned itself with law and order. The letter was signed by the Chief Constable of Hull City Police, Thomas Cook.

The letter stated,

Dear sirs,

At a meeting of the Watch Committee this day it was ‘resolved’, that the Directors of the cemetery company be informed that the attention of the committee has been called to the practice of the borough police being employed beyond the borough in watching the cemetery on Sundays, and the committee desire to call the directors attention to the matter, in the hope that the company will make their own arrangements or through the medium of the county police for watching the cemetery, that the borough police may be withdrawn.’

This letter, much like today, was one attempt to keep costs down for the Corporation. What better than to remove the police constables patrolling the cemetery, which was actually situated in Cottingham parish after all? The cemetery did not become part of Hull until 1885. It must have struck the Watch Committee members as a good way to save money without it harming themselves in any way.

This wasn’t quite how the directors of the Company saw it. Thus the emergency board meeting.

Raise the stakes

However, when in doubt, raise the stakes. The Company did. It’s reply reached the Watch Committee on the 4th November and it must have caused some members of that august gathering to blanch a little.

The chief constable’s letter and the resolution therein contained having been read, and the circumstances under which the police were first put on duty at the cemetery having been considered, from which it appeared that in consequence of complaints made to the directors about plants and flowers being destroyed in the cemetery the grounds were closed against the public on Sundays from the 1/9/1856 and continued so closed until May the following year, when a request was made  by the then mayor of Hull (W.H.Moss esq) that the public might be again permitted to walk in the cemetery on Sundays, and the Board  in compliance with such request again opened the cemetery upon the express understanding that the visitors should be restricted to the gravel walks and that the watch committee should provide sufficient policemen to enforce the observance of such restriction, to preserve order and to protect the graves, tombstones, plants and shrubs from injury.

And further more…

The letter went on to inform the Watch Committee that the Company had,

Resolved that inasmuch as the public who frequent the cemetery on Sundays ate almost exclusively residents  in the borough of Hull, this board  trusts that the borough police may be permitted to continue their attendance, to carry out the before mentioned restrictions, but should the Watch Committee determine to withdraw the police from such duty the directors hope that  timely intimation may be given of such determination in order that the public may have due notice of the Board’s intention to close the cemetery against visitors on Sundays. The directors are most anxious to continue every facility  possible for the admission of the public as the grounds are becoming increasingly attractive and they therefore venture to repeat that they can only do so through the aid of the Watch Committee as in the event of the police being withdrawn the directors feel convinced from past experience that the property of the owners of vaults and graves in the cemetery would no longer be safe from injury.’

Own goal

And with that missive, the ball was safely returned over the net and the Watch Committee suddenly found itself with a problem. What had seemed an easy way to make a cutback in public expenditure now looked like an own goal. The public liked and enjoyed walking in the Cemetery. It was quiet, restful and beautiful. And it especially enjoyed using the Cemetery on a Sunday as that was the one day the vast majority would not be at work.

So for the Cemetery to shut its gates on a Sunday would be very bad. That this would occur through the actions of the Watch Committee was not something that had been envisaged when the idea was thought up. The Watch Committee were caught in a trap of their own making. They could not go back on what they had said. Nor could they be seen to have caused the Company to shut its gates on Sundays.

On the 2nd December the Watch Committee sent a letter to the Company. It stressed that after consideration they would still allow the constables to patrol the grounds of the Cemetery. However the numbers would be reduced from six to three. The Company thought this was sufficient and there the matter ended. For once the Company had played a blinder. A rare occasion for an anniversary.

Anniversary September 1852

Anniversary September 1852

by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Volunteers

The Coming of the Railway

This month’s anniversary is related to the railway that once ran past its gates.

On the 2nd September 1852 the Board received an engineer’s report. This engineer was employed by the York and Midland railway Company. This report detailed a new layout for the proposed branch line to the Victoria Dock. It was the culmination of a campaign waged by the Company to get the railway company to change its mind. And it was a success. Let’s go back a bit and see how this situation came about.

Back in December 1851 the Board received an unexpected and definitely unwanted Christmas present. C.S Todd, the secretary reported that,

‘plans and sections of the proposed Victoria Dock Railway had been lodged with the clerk of the peace for the borough of Kingston upon Hull on Saturday evening and that the proposed railway was projected to pass between the north west corner of the late waterworks and the gates of the Cemetery at a distance of comparatively a few feet and requested instructions as to the course  under such circumstances.’

What to do?

Obviously this development caused consternation with the Board. They knew that a branch rail line was in development but they had no idea it would impinge upon the cemetery. That it would run a ‘few feet’ from the entrance would be disastrous for the cemetery. The effect it would have upon the Lodge was also something that had to be taken into consideration. The Board knew it had to do something quickly.

‘It was resolved that a deputation consisting of the chairman, Mr Irving, and Mr Todd do wait upon the Directors of the York and North Midland Railway Company upon the subject of the injury to the cemetery in consequence of the above railway and that in the meantime the solicitor do see the plans lodged and get all the requisite information upon the subject.’

The meetings

The meeting with the Railway Company was soon forthcoming. The meeting took place on the 14th January 1852. To say it wasn’t a success would be putting it mildly. The Railway Company saw no reason to change their plans. If it caused the Cemetery Company problems , well that was no concern of theirs.

The Company employed their own engineer, Mr Clarke, to draw up alternative plans for the route of the railway line. The Board also thought that an extraordinary meeting of the shareholders should be called to inform the proprietor’s of this situation.

This meeting took place on the 20th February.

‘The chairman opened the proceedings by stating succinctly to the meeting what had already been done by the directors respecting the proposed crossing of the railway Company immediately in front of the cemetery’.

He then called upon the secretary to read out the correspondence between the Railway Company and themselves. Sadly none of this survives but the Secretary, in the minute book, does state,

‘that he had received from the directors of the Railway co., a letter by no means satisfactory inasmuch as it bound the company to no fixed mode of arrangement’.

Oh, the wealth of meaning behind his clipped legal words.

The feeling of the meeting was pretty high at this point and the proprietors made their views quite clearly to the Board and the meeting,

‘fully authorised and empowered (the Board) to take such steps for the protection of the Company’s interests in the matter of the railway crossing as they may be advised and deem right and that if necessary they be authorised to proceed to parliament for the purpose of attaining that object.’

Parliament

This was the nuclear option and the Railway Company probably did not see it coming. The issue was raised with the standing committee of transport and by May a resolution was forthcoming. The Railway Company accepted the plans as put forward by the Cemetery Company,

‘and that the railway Company had agreed to pay this company £2500 on condition that certain suggested alterations should be made at the entrance of the cemetery.’

So, a victory for the Cemetery Company. Well, not quite. Firstly the railway line was still to run quite close to the front of the Cemetery. Secondly, what were these ‘alterations’ mentioned?

Getting the builders in

An insight into these was noted in  July. The minute books state that ‘extra gate piers’ were needed at the front of the Cemetery. Where and how they would fit into the original scheme is difficult for us now to visualise. The Board empowered John Shields, the superintendent, to,

‘be authorised to purchase the necessary stone requisite for the extra gate piers and also obtain an estimate of the difference of expense to the company between  our having gates across the whole of the new entrance or only palisading with a dwarf wall for two openings, both in the present and projected entrance and in the event of the latter plan being adopted then the cost of removing from the present to the new entrance two sets of the gates now at the former and that in the meantime the new walk required for a cab stand to be laid out, planted and completed forthwith.’

So, these were the alterations that needed to be carried out. As I mentioned visualising the changes is difficult as the only image we have before the railway was laid out is from Bevan’s lithograph which is an artist’s impression.

Bevan's Lithograph of the Cemetery

The lithograph shows both the lodge and the chapel built with gates. This is wrong as none of those buildings were built at the time of the lithograph being printed. There would have been some gates at the entrance but what they were like is open to question. In other words we are quite in the dark about these ‘alterations’. Suffice to say that they took place.

One cottage or two?

On the 26th August, a visit took place from Mr Carberry. This was the engineer from the Railway Company. He fully approved of all what the Cemetery Company had done. But there was a sting in his tail for he went on to show the detailed plans he had brought with him.

‘Mr Carbery then laid before the Board the plan and sections for the Gatekeeper’s house, as proposed to be erected by the Railway Company, and the same having been examined by the Board, and it appearing  to be the intention of the Railway Company to erect such house in front of the entrance lodge of the Cemetery.

It was determined to make an offer to the Railway Company to build them a gatekeeper’s house on the ground of the Cemetery and corresponding in style and architecture with the Cemetery lodge, on receiving from the railway Company £100 the amount intended to be expended by them, the additional expense to be borne by this company and that in the event of such an offer being accepted another house should be built on the other side of the lodge in uniformity with the gatekeeper’s house and Mr Carbery stated that he would lay such an offer before the Railway Directors and recommend that the same should be carried out as proposed.’

Horrified

The Cemetery Board must have been horrified by the idea that a workmen’s hut should be placed in front of the Lodge. But they knew that they could not resist this insult. That is, unless they upped the ante. This they did by saying that they would build the gatekeeper a house on their land to the west of the Lodge, in the style of the Lodge. This was agreeable to the Railway Company and the gatekeeper of the level crossing for Botanic Gardens Station lived there until its demolition in 1907. That the Cemetery Company then felt the need to add ‘balance’ to their frontage and erect another cottage to the east of the Lodge was simply just showing off. It was used to house the foreman of the Cemetery staff which at this time was a man called George Ingleby. He remained there until the 1890s.

Not top of the range

These cottages were not built to the standard of the Lodge. Simpson and Malone, quality builders and stonemasons, wee employed to construct them. As the bill tendered for payment indicates, the cost for building both cottages was £170 each. The lodge cost much more than that. Still one had to keep up appearances. The final bill for the cottages came to £320 when other aspects were taken into account. The Company probably thought it had done well getting 320 knocked off the price.

Simpson and Malone's bill for erection of two cottages

 

And so we come to that date in September 1852. The anniversary of the coming of the railway to the Cemetery. At the meeting,

‘A letter was then read from Mr Gray, the secretary of the York and North Midland Railway Company, accepting the offer made to Mr Carbery as to building the gatekeeper’s house on the Cemetery grounds provided his company would give to the Railway Co. a lease of the house for 21 years and after the expiration of that period agree not to terminate the tenancy unless upon giving  6 months’ notice and repaying the said sum of £100 and the matter having been discussed it was resolved that this Board do approve of such an arrangement and that the secretary be requested to communicate with the Railway co.’s secretary in order to carry out the same.’

And there the matter was resolved.

The final cost

However, was it worth it? Was the proximity of the railway line to the front of the Cemetery that important? We are not in a position to judge whether the moving of the track bed by a few feet was so vital to the interests of the Cemetery. Obviously the Company thought it was. But was it worth it? Ah, that’s good question, especially knowing how things turned out for the Cemetery.

Firstly we have no idea what the cost was for the erection of the extra gate piers but it was a cost the Company had no need to indulge in at that time. Secondly, we do know how much the erection of the cottages cost and that was £320. Yes, they were a fixed asset and they received rent from them but it was a cost that was unnecessary. Thirdly, parliamentary time does not come cheap and the cost of that was £850 5s 1d. This is a considerable sum. The cost of buying the entire site for the Cemetery was only just over £5000. And then we have the cost of the new gates, ordered from Thompson and Stather for £53 10s.

So, overall a cost of northwards over £1200. The Bank of England inflation estimator reckons this sum would be worth £116,966 today. Now that’s quite a tidy sum to spend because you don’t want to have a railway track next door. Some people might say that about having a Cemetery next door. There’s no accounting for taste.

Anniversary July 1857

 

An Interesting Find

by Helen Bovillin History, Volunteers1 Comment on An Interesting Find

And Now For Something Completely Different

And on a subject that hasn’t been covered here before as far as I know.

Earlier this year the volunteers were working in an area near the Quaker Burial Ground where several headstones still remain in place, and they found some interestingly shaped pieces of pottery just beneath the surface of the soil.  I could see they came from a pointed shaped vase so I took them home to clean them up.  I was hoping I had enough pieces to make a whole vase. Unfortunately, this was not the case so the photo shows the pieces just laid in place, not glued or attached at all.  The vase is 9” high.

I’ve now placed the pieces inside a padded bag with a label saying where they were found. They are now stored in a safe place inside the volunteers’ cabin in the cemetery so that if anyone should wish to look at them in the future then they can do so.

I was intrigued by the word “Portovase” on one of the pieces and wondered if this was short for “portable vase”. I found out that the “Porto” part is actually short for Portobello in Edinburgh, where there had been a pottery works since well before 1867.

 

Vase Logo

 

The company at the site in 1867 was bought by Alexander Willison Buchan and Thomas Murray that year and they traded as Murray & Buchan until Murray left and then the company became A W Buchan & Co in 1882.

The company’s main products were utilitarian items such as stoneware storage containers, whisky jars and flagons, and in 1926 they patented a graveside vase designed to screw into the ground. The name “Portovase” became one of their trademarks in 1949.

 

Set of different vases

 

As can be seen, it was made in a few different sizes and designs although I am not sure if the vase the volunteers found is one of the smaller or larger ones.

So the vase was made in Edinburgh sometime after 1949. They were mass-produced from two-part plaster of Paris moulds and the general appearance and quality of the glaze in all the photos suggests it was a relatively inexpensive item.  There are blemishes on most of the vases shown in the photos, including on the one the volunteers found.  In the second photo there is a circular mark on the green part of the glaze where a bubble has popped out early in the firing process and the repair has not been done very well.  It is still an interesting piece of social history though, and there is even one in the Museum of Edinburgh.

 

Vase with screw base in Museum

I wonder if this is an earlier model?  It’s certainly more ornate yet still has some flaws in the glaze.  I wonder if the screw design was replaced by the simpler, smooth design of the one the volunteers found?  But despite the flaws, these are still really nice vases in both design and colour.

Early in the 20th century the company also started making some more decorative homewares such as mugs, plates and dishes, many of which can still be found on eBay at quite reasonable prices.  The company moved to Crieff in Perthshire in 1972 but ceased trading in 2000.

Many thanks to Andy Lister for some invaluable insights into the manufacturing processes used in the production of these vases.  And my thanks to @museumofsteve on Instagram for the photo of the vase in the museum.  My thanks also to The Pottery Studio, The Scottish Pottery Society and the-saleroom.com for the information I found on their websites that helped me to piece together the fascinating history of this vase.

And finally, by way of a footnote, I liked the look and colour of the vase so much that I searched online to see if I could find one for sale.  I wasn’t successful but I did manage to find an original Whisky jug in the same colours so I bought it.  My work in the cemetery seems to have a way of leading me down some unexpected paths!

Jug

Bottom of vase showing company logo