Next Month

Hi,

Next month on the site there will be the conclusion of the story of the creation of Hull General Cemetery. This story leads from witnessing the terrible scenes that burials in the churchyards of Hull in the early 1840s often displayed. It ends after the first burial in the first cemetery that the town ever possessed and the official opening of the site. I hope you enjoy it. The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part One 

There will be further articles from Bill Longbone’s posts on our sister sire; Friends of Hull General Cemetery As you know these initially featured on the Facebook. By placing them on this site the Facebook Archive will become a repository of research and knowledge for future students of the subject and site.

Helen Bovill will be providing more detailed and beautiful images and information on the wildlife that lives in Hull General Cemetery during the summer months. Wonderful Wildlife

Stone masons

There will also be the long trailed story of the master masons of the Cemetery’s monumental business. This business was often the sole profitable part of the Company’s business. I was hopeful that I could have used it this month. However I believe that as I am now able to use Bill’s extensively researched Facebook’s articles I should do that. I also believed that these items of Bill’s needed preserving by placing them on this site.

So the story of the master masons has been held over for June’s newsletter.

And of course there will be the usual Anniversary and News items. The anniversary item will move this time from Victorian times into the recent past. It will examine the final board meeting of the the Cemetery Company.

The news item is really dependent upon what happens over the period. One of the things that I hope to touch upon is the issue around the Council’s  request to stop working. It’s hoped that we may be able to report back on a positive decision of the Hull City Council for the FOHGC.

However we are committed to work with any decision that the Council arrives at. Hull City Council request to the FOHGC

The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part Two

The initial meeting

In the February of 1845 another advert appeared in the local press. This advert offered the speculator the chance to purchase shares in the new company. A prospectus was issued about a month later.

 

Advert in Hull Packet Feb 1845

 

Of course, many of Hull’s townspeople had seen this stuff before some 5 years ago and were watchful of developments. The Hull Packet of the 7th March simply said that, ‘We hear that a great number of shares have been taken to forward the project of a new cemetery at Hull, and that the provisional committee consists of some of the more influential inhabitants of the town.’

The press were quite right. Some of the most influential people of Hull were involved. What the press did not know was that a meeting had taken place on the 5th March. This meeting took place at the offices of Charles Spilman Todd at 15, Bowlalley Lane. Below is a picture of that address today. It is now a private house.

15, Bowlalley Lane today

Charles S.Todd was to become both Sherriff of Hull and also the Town Clerk. At this time he was merely a practising solicitor and the solicitor for the proposed cemetery. It is from this date that the creation of the Hull General Cemetery really begins.

HGC minute book, page 1.

The Committee

Throughout March and April, the local press continued to run constant adverts for people to buy shares in the new company. The names behind the Committee were now published and the bankers too as part of these adverts.

Advert Hull Packet March 1845

 

By the 12th March the draft of the Prospectus was examined by the Committee and on the 19th it was released to the press. By the 5th April C.S.Todd could tell the Committee that he had received 400 share applications. It looked like the time was right for the creation of the Cemetery and its success.

Original Prospectus of HGC

 

You may notice that the membership of the Provisional Committee had increased. Whilst some early adherents had left, such as Edward Brady, this was more than compensated by the new arrivals. Sir William Lowthorp had joined the committee. He had been the mayor of Hull in 1837. It fell to him to present the town’s best wishes to the newly installed monarch. As a result he was knighted. He was also the father-in-law of Dr. Gordon. William Watson was another landowner to the west of Hull who had joined the committee.

John Solomon Thompson

The most important new arrival, however, was John Solomon Thompson. This man was to become the first chairman of the Cemetery Company, and in some ways, the best. He guided the Company through its initial days of purchasing the land and laying it out. His negotiations with the London and Midland Railway Company when their proposed rail line would have demolished the front of the Cemetery were admirable. He was also instrumental in pursuing the Act of Parliament that incorporated the cemetery. This in the face of the Hull Corporation pursuing its own Act of Parliament which would have enabled it to take over the cemetery. He will be the subject of an article later this year.

Evidence of something more substantial than simply selling shares was indicated by an advert in April that appeared in the press showing that the new company directors were not being idle and were actively seeking a suitable site for the Cemetery as may be seen below.

 

15 Spring Bank

Above is no.15, Spring Bank today, which was the site of the temporary offices of the secretary of the Cemetery Committee, Shadrach Wride before the building of the Cemetery Lodge

Finding the perfect site

Some two days later C.S.Todd reported to the Committee that he had written to Mr Webster of Yafforth Grange. This gentleman owned property that was suitable for the cemetery. We’ll return to this person later.

By the end of April two more offers of land had been received. One plot was on Dansom Lane from the Revd. Nicholas Walton. This was dismissed out of hand. The Committee felt the price asked was ‘an exorbitant one and the offer could not be entertained.’

The second offer  was for a site in the village of Marfleet, ‘A close of about 12 acres adjoining Marfleet Lane on the Holderness Road and belonging to Mr Pease’. This man was one of the bankers for the provisional Company. However, when C.S.Todd wrote to Mr Pease’s solicitor, Mr Saxelbye, who later was one of the first inhabitants of a large house overlooking Pearson Park, the offer of land was withdrawn.

Webster and Pearson

But by the time this offer was received and withdrawn, Mr Webster had replied and asked the Committee how much land they desired. As a result John S. Thompson and C.S.Todd set off on the long journey by coach to Northallerton. Instructed to ‘make the best bargain possible’ and not to offer more than £220 per acre their instructions were clear. Sadly, Mr Webster wanted £350 per acre and the deal fell through. Later,  Zachariah Pearson bought the land it and became Pearson Park.

The map below is from1847. It shows what was to become Queen’s Road running along the top of the map from the top right hand corner till it joins Newland Tofts Lane, later Princes Avenue. The Sculcoates Union Workhouse, later Kingston General Hospital, can be seen at the right hand side of the map. The upper central portion is Webster’s land which became Pearson Park in 1860.

Dr Webster's land, later Pearson Park

Enter Mr Broadley, M.P.

The Committee had another offer of land throughout this period. On the 5th May Charles Stewart had alerted the rest of the Committee to it. Henry Broadley had a site ‘on the Spring Bank of about 19 acres’.

Henry Broadley, and indeed the Broadley family, are well known. He was an M.P. for the County and it was said that one could travel across the East Riding without stepping off his land. Conservative in nature, and conscious of his position, he was a strange mix.

He owned tenements in Leadenhall Square that were so dire that the Corporation and the Church railed against them. Many of them were brothels or worse.

Foster, in Living and Dying, cites one instance where a policeman, entering one of these premises, disturbed a lady plying her trade with customers. In the ensuing struggle, the policeman’s presence caused a rotten window frame to be dislodged and broken. When this episode was reported in the press and debated in the Council Chamber the landlord was excoriated. Sir Henry, rather than be embarrassed, sued the Corporation for damage to his property.

Yet, he donated time and some money to helping young people away from crime. And he was very interested in treating the dead with dignity.

By the 28th May C.S.Todd was instructed to proceed with the necessary arrangements to buy Mr Broadley’s land. Of course nothing was that simple. Broadley instructed C.S.Todd to deal with his land agent. His land agent said he did not have the leeway to deal with the Committee. Broadley then said that he could not contemplate any discussion about the land until Parliament went into recess. As such the Committee were left in limbo.

The drainage report and public disquiet

A report as to the drainage of this site, and of Dr Webster’s, was drawn up Mr Francis Tadman. He informed the Committee that the drainage of the Spring Bank site was about 4 feet 6 inches whilst the drainage from Dr Webster’s site was only 3 feet. This report finalised the Committee’s determination to acquire the site.

However, to the general public, things had gone suspiciously quiet once again, as this letter to the Hull Packet showed.

The first AGM

The following month the Committee, probably reacting to this pressure, felt they should inform their subscribers of the situation. They called a General Meeting of the subscribers for the 29th October. The Chair, J.S.Thompson, outlined what the Committee had attempted to achieve. He then set out the difficulties they had met in acquiring a site. Finally, he outlined both of the sites points. Below is the record from the meeting related to the Spring Bank site.

Report to the first AGM, Oct 1845

As you can probably guess, the Committee recommended to the subscribers the purchase of the site on Spring Bank. Henry Broadley offered the site on Spring Bank for £300 an acre. This land was to be the site of the creation of the Hull General Cemetery.

The formation of the Company

At this same AGM the Committee felt that a resolution should be put forward to form the Hull General Cemetery Company. Needless to say, the resolution to buy the Spring Bank site, ‘at such price and upon such terms as they deem advisable’ was passed. As was the resolution to form the Company.

On the 31st October this news from the AGM was reported in the press. The news was what many people had been hoping to hear. It was reported that the Committee had held an introductory shareholder’s meeting to lay before them the progress they had made and that they desired the power from the shareholders, ‘for the purchase of Mr Broadley’s ground near the old Waterworks on the Spring Bank.’

This power was given to them under the resolution, ‘That the Company be formed and that immediate steps be taken for securing the purchase of a very suitable site near the Old Waterworks, offered to the Provisional Committee by Henry Broadley, Esq, M.P.’

General means general

The newspaper item went on to state that all denominations were to be allowed burial on the site. No doubt a view to both enhancing good will and maximising profit. Stating this was ensuring no shortage of future customers due to any short sightedness in terms of religious observances. In essence, the directors were adhering to the principles of a General Cemetery.

1854 map of HGC

The map above was drawn in 1854 for the Hull General Cemetery Act. As you can see the proposed enlargement of the cemetery would have taken it to what would become Chanterlands Avenue. It would have engulfed the future sites of both Newstead and Welbeck Streets. An article on how this proposed plan to enlarge the Cemetery will be published later this year.

The map shows both the reservoir at what was the end of Bank Street, now entirely subsumed under William Jackson’s’ factories, and also the beginnings of Princes Avenue but known then as Newland Tofts Lane. The cemetery was in the parish of Cottingham and was well out in the country and therefore met the criteria as laid down by the 1843 statute mentioned in the previous part of this article.

A grand boulevard

Tying neatly with other civic aspirations as to a grand boulevard or promenade being developed, the Committee also stated that if they took up the option to buy Mr Broadley’s land they would also seek help and apply for a grant from the government, “for making a Promenade on the Spring Bank, as had already been proposed.”

This proposal stemmed more from the proprietors of the Zoological Gardens than it did the Hull General Cemetery Company as the zoo attempted to encourage more business for their venture. Indeed, although this isn’t clear from the documents, I believe it was the Zoological Gardens that made the appeal for the grant. The idea for a “promenade” along the Spring Ditch had been mooted in 1830 by Charles Frost and associates but had never been acted upon due to financial issues.

Cheap is best!

Civic pride being what it is, and the Victorians being the way they were, an article in the Hull Packet of the 21st of November positively crowed that Hull had not only spent less on procuring a cemetery than other significant towns in the country but that it was bigger than those others too. This before the site was actually bought and well before a body was buried there!

Article claiming how cheap the cost of HGC was in comparison to others

 

The structure of the Company

On the 17th November, the bare bones of the Company and how it would work was laid out to the subscribers and passed unanimously. The voting at AGMs would be determined on how many shares a subscriber held. No one could have more than five votes no matter how many shares they held. There would be seven directors and no one with less than five shares could become one. The first directors were as follows: William Irving junior, John S Thompson, George Milner, Benjamin A.Tapp, John Malam, Charles Stewart and John Robinson.

Auditors would have to hold three shares at least. These first auditors were Thomas Abbey and Thomas Dalton Hammond. The bankers, Pease and Liddell, were chosen and the directors and auditor’s remuneration for their work was accepted.

Two further resolutions

Two further resolutions were passed at this meeting. Both would be problematic for the Company in later years. The first effectively restricted it’s capital to £10,000. A goodly sum in the ‘hungry 1840s’ but this would prove not be enough to finance their enlargement plans a decade later. To do that they would need to issue a further tranche of ‘half-shares’. Just another further complication.

Capping the capital

The second resolution would prove more disastrous.

Reserve fund resolution 1

Reserve fund resolution 2

On the face of it an eminently sensible action. To create a Reserve Fund from the annual profits was sound business principles. If it had been used like this, for example, ‘extending operations of the company’ the Cemetery could even now be a going concern. Where it failed was in the first point of the Reserve Fund. ‘For equalising Dividends’.

This was fine during the good times but this Reserve Fund was used throughout most of  the Cemetery’s life in the 20th century to prop up the dividends to the shareholders. But by then it was surrounded and could not expand anyway. It had frittered away its life blood keeping its dividends at inflated levels and failed to plan long term. And it was this resolution, made in November 1845, that allowed that to happen.

This is the second part of the story of the creation of Hull General Cemetery. The third part will appear next month.

 

 

Dr. William Gordon

Dr. William Gordon was known as the ‘The People’s Friend’.

Dr. Wm Gordon

William Gordon was born at Fountains Hall near Ripon on 2nd August 1801. He was educated at the Ripon Grammar School.  He studied medicine at London and Edinburgh. After qualifying he set up a medical practice at Welton, near Brough around 1825. He married Mary Ann Lowthrop of Welton Hall in 1826, pictured below. They had one daughter, Charlotte, who was born 1828.

Welton hall

His father-in-law was Sir William Lowthrop. He had been the Mayor of Hull when Victoria came to the throne. Sir William was one of the original Committee that instigated the creation of Hull General Cemetery. He and his son-in-law, Dr. Gordon, were early shareholders in this venture.The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part One

The family moved to 29 Albion Street in Hull where he set up his medical practice. Albion Street at that time was the ‘Harley Street’ of Hull. Many medical men lived there including Dr. Alderson.

Dr. Gordon was very involved with Christian movements and an active supporter of the working classes. He was also President of The Christian Temperance Society and became known as ‘The People’s Friend’. Chris Ketchell once said that he could not understand why Dr Gordon earned this title as, at that time, alcoholic drink was a better friend to the working man but Chris always had a personal view upon alcohol and its benefits.

All through Dr. Gordon’s short life he had an affinity with the working class and poor people of Hull, and would help them in whatever way he could.

Dr. Gordon’s daughter Charlotte, married the Albion Street Chapel pastor, the Rev Christopher Newman Hall.

His death

Dr. Gordon contracted a wasting disease during 1848 and eventually died at his home in Albion Street in February 1849 aged 47.

His son-in-law wrote a rather morbid detailed account of his death in a booklet which he published the same year.

Dr. Wm Gordon narrative

His funeral was a well attended event. It commenced at the Albion Street Chapel with a procession of five Mourning coaches. Hundreds of people followed on foot. Police officers, six abreast, accompanied the cortege to Hull General Cemetery.

It was well reported in the local press at the time.

doctor gordon eulogy

He was buried in the centre of the newly opened cemetery. His grave was just east of the central willow tree as he had requested. At that time the plot’s shrubbery had been planted in the shape of a Maltese Cross.

Dr. Wm Gordon funeral

The monument

The newspapers of the day prompted the idea of a public subscription for a monument to him. The working class of Hull contributed greatly to this public subscription to erect a large monument to Dr Gordon. They collected the full £80 for the monument. Only Dr. Gordon’s monument, Captain Gravill’s and the Cholera Monument were erected after calls for a public subscription.

Many local sculptors put forward designs for the monument, including William Keyworth. The commission, however, was given to Aaron Shaw. The total cost was £80.

The monument was erected in November 1849 and took the form of an obelisk of white marble modelled on the one that Napoleon had brought from Luxor.

It stood twenty-five feet high and was inscribed: ‘Erected by public subscription, to William Gordon, M.D., F.L.S. – the People’s Friend. Ob. Feb. 7 1849 aet 47’.

The monument still exists in Hull General cemetery. It is still in good condition if a little moss covered.

However, it needed reducing in size at the turn of the 20th century. The monument was becoming unstable. The Cemetery Company contacted Dr. Gordon’s daughter, Charlotte Hall, regarding this.

Dr. Wm Gordon memorial

She and the Cemetery Company came to an arrangement and the Monument was lowered by about a third. Early maps of the cemetery show it and the Cholera Monument marked. 

Shortly after Dr Gordon’s death his wife, Mary Ann, moved from Albion St to Carlton Terrace. This was near Park Street on Spring Bank. She died in 1886. She is  buried in the same grave with her husband.

Their daughter remarried Mr Frank Richardson after the death of the Rev Newman Hall. She died in 1903 and is also commemorated on the monument.

Henry Hodge

Henry Hodge was born at Kilnsea, East Yorkshire in 1812. He was the son of a small farmer and one of 12 children. Henry Hodge can truly be described as a self-made man.
Henry Hodge
In 1826 the Hodge family moved to Hull and took on a dairy farm at Newland Tofts. As a young man Henry worked at Bell’s flour Mill on Holderness Rd. This was  situated near what is now Morrill Street. The access to the mill was along a track which eventually became the entrance to the Morrill Street clinic.

Seed crushing industry

At this time seed crushing was becoming an important industry in Hull. As a result, the mill changed from a flour mill to a seed crushing mill. Around 1831 the hydraulic press was invented for crushing seed. This soon replaced the old stamper mill. The firm of Rose, Down & Thompson were one of the early fore-runners in this development.
Henry accumulated a little capital whilst working at a mill in Louth. Along with his brother, William who was now a foreman at Bell’s Mill, they purchased a former mustard and flour mill. This stood on what was then William St in Drypool. It later was renamed Hodge Street. They then installed 2 hydraulic presses to crush seed.
In 1852 the nearby Tower Mill at the junction of Holderness Rd and Clarence St was purchased. However, although the business was successful, the two brothers dissolved the partnership. William took the Tower Mill whilst Henry kept the mill in William St.

Family life


He married Jane Simpson in 1842 and they had 6 children. One of them was Emma Hodge, who married Joseph Robson. Emma became a very active member of the Primitive Methodist church. Henry’s family originally lived in East Parade on Holderness Rd between Williamson St and Field St. They also lived and worked at Blaydes House at 6 High St for a time.
Henry Hodge mill advert
In 1869 his daughter Emma died at the young age of 32. This devastated Henry. His wife, Jane had already died in 1867 aged 54 years. In 1871 Henry married his housekeeper, Emma Graves.

Henry’s business continued to expand. He erected the huge Alexandria Mill in High St, in 1884. He also purchased the adjoining Phoenix Mill. This was followed three years later by the Globe Mill on Church St, which was part of what is now Wincolmlee.

Pioneer


Henry was a pioneer in the seed crushing industry. Prior to 1861, the only seeds imported into Hull for oil and cake were linseed, rapeseed and nigerseed.  Henry began to experiment with Egyptian cottonseed. He found that it made an ideal oil for use in the manufacture of soap, paint, culinary purposes and also for cattle feed. It soon became one of the major seed imports into the city.
henry hodge advert for cattle feed

He subsequently purchased Bell’s Mill near Morrill St, where he had previously worked.
The family lived at Ivy House adjacent to the mill until his death in 1889.
Henry Hodge
In addition to being a mill owner he was also a very active member of the Primitive Methodist Church in Hull. He was also a benefactor of many good causes, and subscribed to the erection of several churches. This included the Holderness Rd chapel near Bright Street, and the Henry Hodge Memorial Chapel in Williamson Street.
He was also a member of the East Hull Conservative Club and an alderman. His brother William was twice mayor of Hull.

Henry, his wives Jane & Emma, daughter Emma, son Edwin and son in law Joseph Robson are all buried in the ‘Prim Corner’ of The Hull General Cemetery. His brother William Hodge, and his family, also have a large monument in the cemetery.
Henry Hodge tomb

The Eleanor Crosses

The catacombs of Hull General Cemetery are now long gone. Nothing remains of them. (see the link below)

Unlike the Eleanor Crosses. Let us examine their history here.

Thompson and Stather

We’re fortunate in having a reasonable idea of who built the crosses. The firm of Thompson and Stather were an engineering firm in Victorian Hull. This firm had a long relationship with the Cemetery in its early days. The Stather in this firm was Thomas Stather. His brother John was equally as successful in his business enterprise. Their stories will be published on the website at a later date. Suffice to say here that, in terms of Hull General Cemetery, both brothers and their families are buried there.

As an example of Thompson and Stather’s relationship with the Cemetery Company, in August 1852 the firm were approached by the Company. They were asked to make some new gates for the Cemetery. These listed gates still survive and may be seen on Spring Bank West. They also completed a number of other contracts for the Company. Thompson and Stather were one of the foremost engineering firms of the Victorian Hull. So it stands to reason that the Cemetery Company would have dealings with them.

Family tragedy

In 1863, Thomas Stather’s wife, Elizabeth, died. She is buried in the Cemetery. The grave is a brick lined vault. Luckily it still has the headstone. Or should I say it has a large Eleanor cross on a plinth erected upon a sandstone kerb set. The cross is made of cast iron. It was the first one erected in the Cemetery and was made by her husband’s firm of Thompson and Stather.[1]

How do we know this? Local resources are scarce on these matters. We do have a newspaper report that quite clearly speaks of the erection of the cross in the cemetery. This newspaper report is shown below.[2] Thomas Stather’s wife of over 25 years, Elizabeth, died on the 1st April 1863. On the 11th September that year the cross had been erected on the grave where Elizabeth lay. I would suggest this is as concrete a proof as one may wish for.

Newspaper item re the erection of the Eleanor Cross on Elizabeth Stather's grave

Fig 1: 11th September 1863, Hull Packet.

 

Eleanor Cross on Thomas Stather's grave

Fig 2: Thomas Stather’s grave. The site of the first Eleanor Cross erected in Hull General Cemetery

The second Eleanor Cross

The second Eleanor Cross is situated about 50 yards west of the main gates of the Cemetery. It celebrates the grave of the Mason family. The plot was initially bought by Benjamin Burnett Mason. He was born on 16 Feb 1822 in Hull. The son of master mariner Samuel and Martha Mason (nee Green), he was baptised at Holy Trinity on the 9th April 1822.

Benjamin married Anne Green on 19th June 1844 and they had 2 sons, Benjamin William, born in 1846, and Samuel Burnett born in 1850. In the 1851 census Benjamin and his family were living at Northgate in Cottingham and he is listed as a wine merchant and ship owner. He was successful in his business enterprises and established a large wine and spirit business in Lowgate. Its premises eventually extended close to the quays of the Queen’s Dock, now the site of Queen’s Gardens. He also was successful in the community. He became a JP and a Guardian of the Poor. Not content with that he turned his hand to history and was the author of a book entitled The Brief History of The Dock Company. Throughout his life was also an active member at the Minerva Lodge of Freemasons.

The move to Hull

The family moved from Cottingham to a new home at 3, Grosvenor Terrace on the Beverley Road, which is now numbered 113 Beverley Rd.  A grand address in its day. It was then on the outskirts of Hull and was situated just outside the village of Stepney.

However, like all Victorian families whatever their circumstances, tragedy was never far away. On the 2nd December 1863, the eldest son, Benjamin William died at the family home from scarlet fever. He was only 18 years old. It is believed that this is when the second elaborate cast iron ‘Eleanor Cross’ was erected in Hull General Cemetery. This would have been some three months after the first cross was mentioned in the press.

There is no record in the newspapers of this new cross being erected. Nor any record in the Company’s minute books or any other documentation to confirm this. However, it appears to fit the bare facts as outlined above.

When was it erected?

We know the original cross was erected in or before the September of that year. The death of Benjamin William Mason took place in December. During the consequent sorrow that almost certainly gripped the family, it is conceivable that the family seized upon making a significant gesture to mark the passing of their son. I would suggest that they commissioned the cross on their family tomb at this time. The erection of this cross was probably appropriate and timely. Grief was something that the Victorians often felt needed to be reflected in ostentatious display and the erection of this cross certainly does do that.

Mason's home

Fig 3: The site of the family home on Beverley Road, 2018. Just out of the picture to the left is ‘Welly Club’.

Benjamin’s wife, Anne, was buried in the family grave, dying from bronchitis on the 7th February in 1874 aged 57. Benjamin’s younger son, Samuel, eventually joined the family company, and continued to work in the business.

Benjamin died of bronchitis on the 12th January 1888 aged 65. Samuel died in Cairo, Egypt on 19th Jan 1894 and was buried there. Samuel’s widow, Mary Ellen, was buried as cremated remains in the family tomb, the final interment under this Eleanor Cross.

Mason's Eleanor Cross

Fig 4: Mason’s Eleanor Cross.

The saddest story of all?

The final Eleanor Cross is perhaps the most poignant story of all. It is the smallest of the three crosses and it stands on top of a grave dug for just one person. Yet it is a public grave. A strange occurrence and the only instance known in Hull General Cemetery. As the reader knows, public graves rarely have any kind of memorial upon them. To have a cast iron monument on it is unheard of. Let’s examine the facts of the story.

We need to go back in time a little to fully explain the Crosses’ story. In the East Riding a farmer by the name of George Peacock Harrison, 1808-1885, and his wife Ann, 1807-1872, lived in the village of Gembling, near Driffield. He farmed approximately 400 acres and employed over a dozen farm workers, so he was an influential man in that neighbourhood. Throughout their married lives, he and his wife had eight children. The two we need to focus on are his third child and second son, George Peacock, 1839-1916, and his seventh child and sixth son, Jonathan, 1846-1887.

The 1851 census

As can be seen in Fig 21, G.P. Harrison’s family is gathered around him. Jonathan being four years old, but there is no sign of George Peacock junior. This was because he was absent at school in Hampshire. There is no record of any other of the children being so favoured.

By the 1861 census, George Peacock senior and his wife have moved to another farm at Wharram of 1000 acres. Their two daughters and William Christopher, the third son, went with them. His previous holding was now being run by his son George Peacock junior. No other family member resides at this time at the Gembling farm.

A George Peacock Harrison had appeared at the Assizes on a charge of rape but, according to the Barnsley Chronicle of 15th December 1858, the Grand Jury, ‘ignored the Bill’ and he was allowed to go free. We have no way of knowing which George Peacock this was but the offence was against a woman in Wharram, so it may well have been George Peacock senior who was in the dock.

Census return for the Harrison family

Fig 5: 1851 Census record for George Peacock Harrison and family.

The death of George Peacock senior

The younger George Peacock was unmarried. This personal situation continues through the 1871 and 1881 censuses and his father continues to work the Wharram farm. In October 1885 George Peacock senior died.

Probate record for George senior

Fig 6: Probate of G.P Harrison senior.

As the sole executor George Peacock Harrison junior could administer his father’s estate as he chose and this is what he proceeded to do.

Let’s just take a look back at Jonathan. He was born in 1846 and baptized that same year in the local church.

Birth Record of Jonathon Harrison

Fig 7: Jonathan Harrison’s baptismal record, May 1846.

Other than the entry on the 1851 census we lose track of Jonathan. He doesn’t surface in any of the censuses of 1861,71 or 81. Yes, there are characters who could conceivable be him but they are far removed from the family settings.

In the dock

The next we hear of Jonathan is in a court case. Reported in the Driffield Times in the July 1887. As can be seen in below, Jonathan appears to have had an altercation with his brother George Peacock Harrison junior. During this altercation he committed criminal damage to his brother’s house. The problem appeared to revolve around the will of their father, and money that Jonathan thought was his due. Being legally summoned by his brother must have been difficult for both sides. It was further exacerbated by Jonathan refusing, or being unable, to pay the fine. This resulted in a custodial sentence of one month for him.

The final straw

This appears to have been the final straw for Jonathan.  He obviously removed himself to Hull for the next and final part of this sad story. We find Jonathan next having died aged just 40. Only four months after his release from prison.

Driffield Times

Fig 8: 2nd July 1887, Driffield Times report of Jonathan’s offending.

Jonathan’s death

 

Death certificate of Jonathon Harrison

Fig 9: Jonathan Harrison’s Death Certificate.

Jonathan died four days before Christmas Day 1887 and of Cystitis which was a disease that he could easily have contracted whilst in prison.  As can be seen, he was earning his living as a cotton spinner at the time of his death and his place of work was the Royal Infirmary in Prospect Street. This was work that he would have been detailed to do as his place of residence was the Hull Workhouse. He would have been an out-worker for that institution, paying for his placement and meals by this form of work. He would, therefore, have been accorded a pauper grave.

The final gesture

Jonathan, surprisingly, lies in a grave that was purchased for one burial. Exceptional and unique for a public grave. The purchaser was a certain George Peacock Harrison. Jonathan was buried on the 23rd December 1887. The rest is conjecture. Was this purchase by George a belated gesture to his dead brother? Had he done his brother wrong? We don’t know. What we do know is that after the burial and the purchase of the private grave for one person only, the grave was surmounted by an iron Eleanor cross.

 

Grave space in Hull General Cemetery burial records

Fig 10: Grave space of Jonathan Harrison, purchased by G.P. Harrison. It is the third row from the left, fourth space down. No. 6610, Compartment 48.

Not by Thompson and Stather

A smaller version and less detailed than the Thompson and Stather ones true, but a good monument. Thompson and Stather were both dead by this time and the firm dissolved. George would have probably ordered a similar cross for his brother from someone who said they could do the job.

Entry in HGC burial book

Fig 11: Grave number and the purchaser’s name, how many burials and for how many. In this case there is one burial and the grave is stated to be full.

The purchase of the iron monument appears to go beyond grief, and perhaps touches upon a deeper remorse, maybe even fuelled by guilt. We shall never know. George Peacock Harrison continued working the farm at Gembling but in the early part of the 20th century he emigrated and spent his remaining years in New Zealand. He died at Cartertown on the 9th March 1916. We don’t know what was going on in George’s mind. We can only guess. My guess is that this purchase of Eleanor Cross is due to remorse. The only indication of this may be found in the burial register of the Cemetery where he was listed as the informant,

Entry in the burial register

Fig 12: Hull General Cemetery burial register, December 1887.

Melancholia or remorse?

As you can see, George Peacock Harrison cites his brother as being a ‘gentleman’ and his cause of death as ‘melancholia’. Hardly a cause of death then as now.  Much more probably a symptom of how George was feeling at registering his brother’s death with the Cemetery, and at the same time purchasing the burial plot for his younger brother. The brother whom he had taken to court. who had gone to prison as a result of these court proceedings. The brother who eventually ended up in the workhouse where he died.

Yes, I would think there was a lot of melancholia, but I think it was George who was suffering from that, rather than Jonathan.

And that is the end of this short journey examining the Eleanor crosses of Hull General Cemetery.

The final Eleanor Cross

Fig 13: Jonathan Harrison’s grave with its monument.

Acknowledgements:

Fig  1: Hull Packet.

Figs 2, 3, 4, 13: Authors’ collection.

Figs 5, 6, 7: The National Archives.

Fig 8: Driffield Times.

Fig 9: General Record Office.

Figs 10, 11, 12: Hull History Centre.

The Catacombs of Hull General Cemetery

[1] Not Young and Pool as Historic England maintain on their website for Hull General Cemetery.

[2] See Fig 1.

 

Next month

Next month in the June newsletter, the second part of the Creation of Hull General Cemetery will be posted. I’m also hopeful of posting the first part of a work on one of the master stonemasons of the Company. I’d love to title it Stoned but Search Engine Optimisation would throw a fit. I’ll come up with something.

Helen will grace this newsletter with more of her stunningly beautiful photographs of the natural world that lives and thrives in the cemetery.

Also, we’re hoping to add more stuff to the website. One will be called Facebook Archive and it will feature the research of Bill Longbone and Karen Towner. Both post on Facebook such interesting stories around the people buried in the cemetery. Unfortunately, Facebook ‘loses’ them by, in effect, moving on. Well now, the stories will be found here too so no more searching.

Also next month in the June newsletter there will be another anniversary, and, of course, whatever news there is.

See you then.

An Anniversary

 11th May 1854

A special piece of land in the cemetery celebrates its anniversary on this date. The plot known as the Quaker burial ground began with this entry in the Company’s minute book. After some lengthy negotiations the Society of Friends, often known as Quakers, signed the lease. The lease was for 999 years.

The Society of Friends, also known as the Quakers, take on their plot in HGC

The negotiations for this piece of land began in July 1848. This was only just over a year after the cemetery opened. The Quakers wanted to lease a strip of land on what was the frontage of the cemetery. It would have faced on to Princes Avenue and is now the site of the shops. The Company rejected this. They  did not want the drainage at the front of the cemetery site tampered with. One has to remember that running along the south side of the cemetery was Derringham Dyke. This ran all the way to Cottingham Drain alongside Queen’s Road. The cemetery culverted the Dyke but only at the cemetery’s entrance.

The following month another offer arrived from the Quakers. This offer was to take a lease on ‘part of the far field’ as their burial ground. The offer was accepted. At this time the cemetery ended roughly in line with the Cholera Monument. It owned the further 7 or 8 acres westwards, but that land had not been developed. John Shields was tasked with marking the new burial site out.

Why the delay?

And yet, 7 years elapsed between the agreement in 1848 taking place, and the lease being signed. Why?

Two reasons suggest themselves for this. Finance obviously was an important factor. The composition of the Society of Friends was broad. It took members from all classes. However, a reasonable proportion of them would surely have been from the middle class. The Society of Friends was therefore financially viable. It would also have looked after its funds. And in 1848 it didn’t need to sign the lease then. Which leads to the second reason.

The second reason was more important. The original burial ground for the Quakers, Hodgson Street, was still open. It finally closed in the year that they clinched the deal above. The closure was imposed by a Parliamentary Order in Council in 1855. This Act was known to be coming. With the passing of the Public Health Act of 1848 and the Metropolis Act of 1850, burials were regulated much more closely. The Metropolis Act was rolled out across the country. By 1855 it was Hull’s turn. At that time the Quakers had to act. And the entry above shows that they did.

An Anniversary

13th January 1942

An Anniversary

A Second Anniversary

An Anniversary

 

 

The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part One

The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part One

I wrote this article in 2015 back in a time when Nick Clegg was the Deputy Prime Minister. It was published in six parts in the Hull Civic News in 2016 back when the country was still European. As Dylan sang, ‘The times they are changing’ but I think even he might not have foreseen such changes occurring since I sat down at the keyboard and started typing this story.

I’ve revised the article here and there for this website. You may find some comments slightly out of kilter, such as the state of the cemetery at that time I was writing, but I thought they should be left in. It shows the progress that has been made. Finally, I’ve divided the story up into three parts for ease of reading. The other parts will follow in the next couple of months.

This is a brief overview of the creation of Hull General Cemetery, with some personal views.

As a young child I used to love walking to Hull Fair every October. One of the delights was to kick my way through the large drifts of fallen leaves along Spring Bank West. These had fallen from the many over-hanging trees on the Hull General Cemetery side. Of course, I never strayed too far from my mum. Even though the Cemetery had a large wooden fence enclosing it, it was still a dark, scary place to be next to. Especially without the reassurance of a grown up. But the cemetery itself exercised a fascination. It was as much a part of the ‘fun of the fair’ as candy floss and the big wheel.

I suppose the attraction of it, for me at that age, was that I loved history. By far my favourite subject at school, I was in awe of historical ‘things’ and I could see that Hull General Cemetery was old. Therefore, to me, it was valuable, just as much as dinosaur bones or the Crown Jewels were. But even better, this history was here in Hull.

1977 and all that

Moving forward, some 20 years from that time, I worked for Hull City Council. I was employed as a gravedigger. Firstly in Northern and then Western Cemetery. The Council began its despoliation of the Hull General Cemetery whilst I was working for the Council. This destruction was done in the name of progress, transforming something precious into something mundane.

You may want to read ‘A Monumental Loss’ elsewhere on this site for a fuller picture of that travesty. A Monumental Loss

History is bunk

Working in Northern Cemetery at the time I’d sometimes get off the bus at Western Cemetery and walk home. The route home was through Western and HGC. I was a union rep at the time so this journey was not simply a whim. The health and safety of my members was important and I wanted to check up on this. So, a walk home was sometimes the only way I could do this. I noted the destruction that was taking place there with every step home. And every night I knew that something precious was being lost.

I can still remember one senior member of the Leisure Services Department telling me at the time that if he had had his way the entire site would have been cleared; no ifs or buts. Henry Ford once said, ‘History is bunk’. It would be fair to say the Council at this time agreed.  This was long before the ‘heritage’ industry was seen as a money spinner for local authorities. However, even at the time, just a quick look up the A1079 to York might have enlightened the elected members somewhat.

Today ( but actually 2015)

Now the site seems to be a multi-functional ‘community resource’; as a dog walk, a cut through to the Dukeries, a place for both ‘serious drinkers’ to frequent and drug users to hide their habits away from prying eyes. Principally it has now become an unofficial rubbish dump. Was that what that tide of destruction was for?

I am not anti-dog. Far from it, I have owned dogs most of my life. Nor do I refuse to take an alcoholic drink without a good reason. I am also aware that the Council runs quite an efficient waste disposal sites. They’ll even come to pick up items from your house. So how did we come to exchange a rare resource for the above?

I am pretty sure that the Council did not envision these limited outcomes for the Cemetery when they cleared it back in 1977/8. We cannot undo the harm that officialdom did 40 years ago. What we can do is cherish and protect what we have now. The Hull General Cemetery site is still an historic asset. It should, and could, be treat with more dignity and respect.

Decorative

Enough pontificating, let’s look at how and why the Hull General Cemetery began.

Burial practice and sites

Almost all burials, throughout the Christian period in the British Isles, were undertaken within the consecrated ground of the parish church or the grounds of a religious order. It was an inalienable right within the common law to be buried in consecrated ground within one’s own parish The exceptions to this were few and far between.

The most numerous of these exceptions would have still born births. If the child had not been baptised it could not be buried in consecrated ground. A harsh ruling but the Church was very strict that any burials within consecrated ground should be of people who had been baptized as Christians.

Suicides were sometime excluded as this was also seen as strong sin against God.  In that the individual was taking unto themselves the time when they should die rather than leaving that to God. However, this was not a hard and fast rule. Space was made available for such deaths, usually in the Northern part of the church yard, to accommodate such burials.

The other major grouping who would have failed to be buried in consecrated ground would have been rebels or traitors and, as can be imagined, these were few and far between over the centuries.

The religious orders

The other main burial area during the period up to the Reformation was within the confines of a religious Order. There were three such places in the vicinity of what is now Hull. The Carmelites had a Friary situated on the land that now stretches between Posterngate and Whitefriargate. Their tenure of this piece of land is still remembered by the street name. Burials took place here and excavations in the early 19t century uncovered such burials.

The Carthusians were based at the Charterhouse. This chapel of this site was used for burials up until the mid 19th century. The final religious order in Hull were the Augustinians. Their clothing, or habit, was black and they became known as the Black Friars. Their base was close to the east of the old Market Place. Not surprisingly they too gave their name to the street where they were based. Blackfriargate has almost disappeared but it is an historic Hull street. It was excavated by the Humberside Archaeology unit in the early 1970s. Many burials were found to have taken place there.

Syphilis and suppression

Of interest, a number of the skeletons excavated at this site showed evidence of syphilis damage. As these people were buried well over a century before the sailors of Columbus were supposed to have brought back this disease from the New World this discovery has caused some old beliefs to be re-examined.

The suppression of the monasteries, in the 16th century, obviously ended burial within such institutions. The only burial place available to the population after this was  the parish church yard.  Until the end of the 17th century that is.

Non-conformists

With the rise of non-conformism, and the splintering of that into its myriad forms, another option began to present itself. Commonly called Dissenters, in that they objected against the teachings of the Established Church. they wanted no truck with burial in consecrated ground.

As such these sects looked towards providing another form of burying place for themselves. These burial places had to be outside the consecrated ground of the church. As an example, in Hull the Quakers purchased some land, in what is now Hodgson Street, for the burial of their members. Other denominations built chapels to cater for their religious meetings. In the vaults below the chapels, they laid their departed members to rest in them.

Population increase

This system worked well enough whilst the population of towns outside of London were relatively small. At the turn of the 19th century Hull had a population of around 20 to 25,000 people. It could have conveniently fit into the KC stadium. However population was on the rise and not just in Hull.

Without over bearing this article with too many figures, some may be useful here. I’m using the Victoria County History here, Volume 1. It states that Hull and Sculcoates in 1700 had an estimated population of 7,512. A century later this had increased to 25,613. By the time of the first census in 1801 this figure was 22,161. In the 1831 census the population had almost doubled to 32,958. By the 1841, some six years before the Hull General Cemetery opened its gates, the population stood at 65,670. In essence the population of Hull and Sculcoates had almost trebled in 40 years.

With the increase of population, space was at a premium in the small, enclosed parish churchyards and burying grounds of the Dissenters throughout the town.

Below is an image of Bunhill Fields in London. A Dissenter’s burial ground since the 1660s, by Victorian times it was notorious. Daniel Defoe is buried there. It provides a graphic example of how poor and overcrowded the small burial grounds were at that time.

Bunhill Fields in London

The dignity of the dead

The disposal of the ever-increasing amount of the dead, began to be a major problem. Their disposal suffered a fall in the dignity which should have been shown to them. Hull and Sculcoates were not immune to this rough and ready treatment of the dead.

Holy Trinity Church, by the 1830’s, had for its interment use, the ground surrounding the church in the Market Place. This site had been used for burial since the foundation of the church in the 13th century. It later acquired in 1783 some 3 acres of land on Castle Street as a new burying ground. However, all of these burial grounds that were associated with Holy Trinity were full by the 1830’s.

St Mary’s Church in Lowgate had its own churchyard on Lowgate.  It also had the small Trippett Street burial ground of approximately a quarter of an acre. In later years this site was levelled off and the burial ground found another use. It was used,  in the recent past, as a backdrop for the wedding photographs after the wedding at the local Register Office. This burying ground had been opened in 1774 but by the 1830s it too was full.

The only other Anglican burying sites in Hull and Sculcoates at this time were the churchyard of St Mary’s, Air Street, which was also full by this time, and the new burying grounds for this parish church in Sculcoates Lane. This was situated on the south side of the road and was opened in 1818. On the east side of the River Hull, St Peter’s  in Drypool, was also struggling to bury the parish’s dead.

The burial grounds were full

For all of these sites, the same problem arose. How can you carry on burying the dead in a ground that is already full. There appeared to be no answer. The churches did not want to forgo the revenue that burials in consecrated ground gave them so turned a blind eye to the despoliation of the dead by the sextons and gravediggers. For, to accommodate the next burial, the previous one had to be hacked away.

Burial space was at a premium and managing to inter a body must have been something of a work of art. Foster, in Living and Dying, cites an example of a burial in St Mary’s Churchyard in 1844 where the previous occupants of the grave were all taken out and stacked in the church whilst the gravedigger presumably deepened the grave to accommodate the previous occupants plus the new internment.

He also states that correspondents to The Hull Advertiser of the time were constantly informing the editor of the latest indignities heaped upon the dead in Hull. Just a thin scattering of earth over the next occupant of the grave was all that seemed to be required. There are tales of dogs, pigs and rats haunting burying grounds. An image that can best be left to the imagination. One commentator of the period said, of churches generally, that they looked like they had been built in pits, so much had the ground around them been raised up by burials.

Funerals

Funerals began to take on their present appearance about the 1830’s, concurrent with the rise of the privately funded cemetery such as the Hull General Cemetery in Hull and others across the country. Indeed, it can be argued that this burst of urban cemeteries that, later in the Victorian period, gave in some senses, the impetus for the rise of the ‘funerary industry’.

Of interest, at least in terms of fashion, was the dropping of the term “burial or burying ground” to be replaced by exotic terms such as cemetery and necropolis around this time. In our modern, more cynical, times we would probably say that the death business had had a makeover.

Profit

Cemeteries, run by a private company, were of course typical of the Victorian sense of laissez-faire in most things. That such a thing as the disposal of the dead should be left to a private company, and that a profit could ensue from that activity, was seen as natural. Accordingly, entrepreneurs usually joined together to form joint stock companies issuing shares in the company. The individuals who bought shares would then expect a dividend from their investment. It was this profit motive that gave a great deal of the impetus to the creation of many of the Victorian cemeteries of Britain that we can still see today.

Civic pride and cemeteries open to all

Another major force, apart from the hygiene aspect already alluded to, was the growth of civic pride. This pride, that obviously manifested itself in the erection of the municipal palaces that masqueraded as town or city halls. It also wanted museums, libraries, parks, market halls, boulevards and prisons to embellish their respective centres. Concurrent with this was the need for great urban centres to have a cemetery that could command respect amongst its equals. And so, the growth of cemeteries across the country was assured.

The other aspect that cannot be ignored is that these cemeteries were non-denominational. They endeavoured to cater to all Christian faiths. The idea behind this non-exclusivity of burial was one of the greatest draws of a general cemetery. Firstly, from the public’s point of view, it allowed a dignified Christian burial for their loved ones in a pleasant surrounding. Secondly, from the proprietor’s point of view, it allowed a wider clientele and customer base. A win-win situation for all.

The pioneer private cemeteries

The first private cemeteries in Great Britain were sited to cater for the large urban centres. The first one was probably in Chorlton Row, Rusholme Road in Manchester. It opened in 1821 specifically for Dissenters. Made famous by The Smiths in the 1980s it is now a park. Burials stopped taking place there in 1933.

Another early claim to fame is the Rosary Road Cemetery in Norwich. Developed in 1819 but not opened until 1821. This last cemetery was 13 acres in size. It was taken over by Norwich Council in 1954 and managed so sensitively that in 2010 it was granted Grade II listed status. A lesson there for all such ventures. Sadly, much too late for Hull City Council.

Liverpool and local anguish

The Hull newspapers of the time reported such improvements of the town’s rivals. The death of William Huskisson, M.P. of Liverpool, who was also the first fatality of a rail accident in the world when he was killed at the opening of the Liverpool and Manchester Railway on the 15th of September 1830, was widely reported. He was buried in the St James Cemetery in Liverpool. This cemetery had been opened the year before. It was large enough to cater for at least 50,000 burials. This was something to be marvelled at by the citizens of Hull. That this was the second large cemetery that Liverpool had opened in less than 5 years just added salt into the wound. The business opportunities that such a venture provided did not go unnoticed. The item from the Hull Advertiser of November 1833 highlights this.

Fig1. Hull Advertiser, November 1833

Kensal Green

In February 1833 the news that a large cemetery was due to be opened in London set civic hearts a beating and was duly reported in the Hull Packet. That later on this cemetery was embellished by some of the most beautiful monuments outside of a museum simply increased the desire to emulate it in Hull.(1)

 

Fig.2 Hull Packet, 8th February 1833

And further afield

In the July of that same year it was reported that some people in Leeds had formed a committee looking at this issue. It was reported that they were in the process of purchasing some land with a view to forming a general cemetery company. In the September the Bishop of Durham had given up some land in his diocese to be used as a private cemetery. By the November a news item stated that people in Manchester were to set up a joint stock cemetery company, the subscribed amount to be of £20,000 with shares at £10 each to create a much larger cemetery.

Much closer to home, it was reported, at the end of November 1833, that York was about to begin the process of setting up a general cemetery company. Even Malton began preparations to establish a general cemetery for itself in 1836.

By this time, even if there had been no pressing need for a general cemetery in Hull, there would have been a popular demand for one simply to maintain civic pride. That it took so long after this to finally open one is quite difficult to understand.

Cholera

One factor hindering the establishment of the cemetery may well have been that at this time (1832) the first attack of Asiatic cholera took place in the town. Although one would think it would have added impetus to the pressing need for a large cemetery, it may also have prevented economic growth. This was needed to finance and spur the project on. Without financial backing from the great and the good such an enterprise was extremely unlikely to take off.

Interestingly, when the second wave of cholera struck Hull in 1849, the Hull General Cemetery was seen as a godsend.  In disposing and dealing with so many of the victims of the pandemic it assisted the town greatly.

In 1839 a reviewer of the book, “Gatherings from Graveyards” (2) in the Hull Packet stated that,

‘The Metropolitan burial places are pre-eminently considered: and well has the talented author asserted his notion that burying the dead in the neighbourhood of human habitations is a national evil… and as Hull at no distant day will proceed to form a cemetery worthy of our flourishing seaport.’

Stories in the press

During the elections of churchwardens for Holy Trinity the following April it was reported in the Hull Advertiser that it was, ‘hoped that before long a general cemetery would be here (in Hull).’

Finally, in the August of 1840, an advert, seen below, appeared in most local newspapers. This advert would have led to an outpouring of civic pride. At last a general cemetery was to be developed for the use of the townspeople of Hull and its neighbours.

Fig 3. Hull Packet, August 1840.

The press reacted supportively and encouraged investors with the hope that,

‘We trust the support necessary to carry the object of the company into effect will be properly rendered… Public cemeteries have been rendered ornaments to the towns where they have already been constructed, and have besides, we believe, been found highly remunerative to the public-spirited projectors.’

In the Hull Advertiser of the next month, it was reported that the share list of subscribers was nearly complete. And there the matter appeared to rest. And die.

Doctor Gordon

In the Hull Advertiser in November 1841 under the interesting headline, ‘Noxious Effluvia’, Dr. Gordon spoke to the Hull Literary and Philosophical Society about ‘the effects of decomposing animal and vegetable substances upon the human constitution’. During this talk the need for a public cemetery for the town was again raised. Dr. Gordon, known as ‘the people’s friend’, was a noted advocate for a clean way to dispose of the dead.

Tragically he died young, in 1849, and was buried with much acclaim in Hull General Cemetery and his memorial was erected via public subscription. At its erection it was the largest monument in there and vied with the later Cholera Monument. Unfortunately, due to subsidence, it was reduced in 1900, to half its size.

Monument to Dr. Gordon

To legislate or not

By the April of 1842 the whole idea of a general cemetery appeared to have disappeared entirely. Once again the Holy Trinity Churchwardens were discussing the need for a new cemetery. They believed that Mr Broadley had offered some 2 acres for their use. This was the beginnings of the Division Road cemetery but that was still twenty years in the future.

During this discussion the vicar counselled prevarication.  Future legislation, regarding urban cemeteries, was going through Parliament at the time. By the June of 1842 a Parliamentary Select Committee, with Edwin Chadwick driving it, recommended that every large town should have a cemetery. However, that cemetery should not be “not within 1,800 yards of the same.” So, effectively the cemetery should be a mile outside the town. Of course, the Select Committee failed to notice the urban spread that the increase of population was driving. The urban centres would continue increasing in size and any future cemetery would eventually be swallowed up by urban sprawl.

By the April of 1843 this legislation was dragging its way through parliament. The ramifications of such legislation would make it a necessity that a general cemetery be established in Hull. After the legislation was passed it would be illegal, unless in a private vault, to inter anyone in a public churchyard or burying ground, that was not yet full, after the 31st December 1843. The same legislation made it easier for committees to be set up to purchase land, develop cemeteries and to run them. The door to Hull gaining its first general cemetery was not only open but there was a welcome mat just inside.

The Public Health Act 1848

This attempt at legislation failed. Further legislation, prompted by the Cholera for one thing, was enacted. In 1848 the first of many Public Health Acts was passed. Wide ranging in scope the allowed local authorities to undertake works to redress some of the evils of the Victorian urban experience. Housing, sanitation and burials were the three important features of the Acts. The Government allowed local authorities to set up what was known as Local Boards of Health that were regulated by the local authority and the national Board of Health.

One of the first acts of a Local Board of Health was to establish a statutory Burial Board to investigate the purchase of existing cemeteries or to establish their own. In Hull the problems of slum housing and the sanitation of most of the town was addressed first. The issue of providing a municipal cemetery was not a priority because, by the time of the first Public Health Act in 1848, the Hull General Cemetery had been opened. This issue though was to become a running sore between the local authority and the Company during the 1850s and will be the subject of another article later in the year.

Further stories in the press

Meanwhile, back in 1843, when hopes were high that legislation would soon arrive to resolve the problem the idea of the cemetery never left the media. Letters to the newspapers increased.

A rather savage correspondent to the local press in February 1843, going by the name “Investigator”, decided to intervene. His reasons for doing so remain unclear. His main brief appeared to be that the burial of the dead within urban centres, especially in the over full church yards in Hull, would be catastrophic to health. He said that it would lead to disease and a rise in mortality to those frequenting those places, and those who were unlucky enough to live near them. In essence, this continued practice, he said, was demeaning to both the dead and the living. He signed off with the message that,

“It degrades religion, brings its ministers into contempt, tends to lower the standard of morality and is a foul blot upon our boasted civilization.”

Cemetery or zoo?

A further correspondent in December 1843 lamented that the Zoological Gardens had been established in Hull when he stated the discussions had been about establishing a cemetery and refurbishing the Botanic Gardens. The writer said he

“gave up his cemetery, accepted the monkeys and the parrots, and concluded to wait for a more favourable opportunity of again bringing forward that which every one must feel the necessity and importance of.”

In the May of 1844, an impassioned correspondent using the title, “Amicus” wrote feelingly of how he had watched a gravedigger in St Mary’s church cut through coffins and human remains to effect a burial in the churchyard there. Of further interest was his comment that,

‘A public cemetery, it is true, was agitated through your columns and, if I am not mistaken, a feeble movement was made in consequence out of doors, but the project appears to have been abandoned; at least I for one have not heard lately that anything is being prosecuted towards securing the accomplishment of so vital a desideratum.’

Even the newspapers have had enough

The Hull Advertiser, somewhat curtly, in the October, printed this notice. It was an attempt to hold back the numerous letters it was receiving on the subject.

Fig 4. Hull Advertiser, 4th October 1844.

Likewise, the Hull Packet, one week later, published a scathing editorial of the lack of will and motivation to provide a proper cemetery for the town of Hull. It opened with the statement that,

‘Of the many improvements that are called for in Hull, there is not one so important, or so urgent, as that of its burial places.’

Going on to state, both in an emotional sense and by dry factual evidence, that burying in the old churchyards and burying grounds could no longer continue it argued the case. It concluded thus,

 

Fig.5 Hull Packet, 11th October 1844.

The green shoots of another cemetery company?

In the January of 1845 a small news item in the Hull Packet said that, “a scheme for a new cemetery had been mooted” but they were not sure of the details. Complicating matters at this time was a proposal from the Dock Company to buy the Castle Street burial ground as it already had adjacent land upon which it intended to build Railway Dock.

This proposal to the churchwardens of Holy Trinity could well have allowed the creation of yet another burial ground under the auspices of the church. And although the churchwardens carried the day, at a very rowdy meeting of parishioners and rate payers, for accepting the offer from the Dock Company, nothing came from this plan.

George Milner

Mr George Milner, was an advocate of cemetery burials. He later became a director of the Cemetery Company, and was buried in there in 1852. His monument still survives as shown below

George Milner's monument

In February 1845, he was the speaker at a public lecture at the Mechanics Institute. At this meeting he said,

“no town is in greater need of a general cemetery than Hull, and I do hope and trust ere long that one may be formed in every way befitting a town of such importance as our.”

That month the first advertisement relating to the Hull General Cemetery that we have today appeared in the local press.

The ball was finally rolling.

Notes

1. Kensal Green Cemetery is one of the so-called ‘Magnificent Seven’ cemeteries in London. It was the first one to be opened. It was designed as a type known as ‘garden cemeteries’. Hull General Cemetery was of this type. Such cemeteries were given a great boost by the burial of Augustus Frederick, the Duke of Sussex in its grounds. This man was the sixth son of George III. He had been so appalled at the funeral of his brother, William IV, in 1837 he vowed he would not have a state funeral. He was buried – with much pomp – in Kensal Green Cemetery in April 1843. Still later, in June 1848, Princess Sophia, the fifth daughter of George III, also opted for burial in this cemetery. The idea of the public cemetery burial had received the royal approval. Its future was assured.

2. Gatherings from Graveyards was written by George Walker. A thorn in the side to the burial industry notably the church and funeral directors. He cited many instances of sloppy and horrific burial practice which he published in this volume. His work on the charnel house that was Enon Chapel is worth searching out. But only for strong stomachs.

The Catacombs of Hull General Cemetery

Catacombs and Crosses

Almost everyone who enters Hull General Cemetery for the first-time remarks on the crosses. And why not? They are quite beautiful works of art. So beautiful that we chose one of them to grace the front of our first book. Made from cast iron and decorated to within an inch of their lives. They stand tall, graceful and, after over 150 years, they can still turn a head or two.

Not so the catacombs. They are lost, not even an image of them survives, and yet at one time they too were designed to be Victorian beauties. We can glimpse them in our imagination.

If we look at photographs of the Highgate Cemetery catacombs, or perhaps investigate the chamber under the chapel in Nunhead Cemetery we may capture an essence of them. But it is imagination. We have no real knowledge of their shape and form. Their existence was short and sweet in comparison to the crosses.

This work will talk about both the crosses and the catacombs.  with a view to sharing what we know of who was buried in a catacomb or under a cross, and something of their lives.

The crosses will be discussed in next month’s post. This month it’s the lost catacombs of Hull General Cemetery.

Catacombs and Brodrick

As already mentioned, Highgate Cemetery has some wonderful catacombs.[1] That cemetery was opened in 1840, some seven years before Hull General Cemetery. No doubt it offered inspiration to the directors of the Hull General Cemetery Company with their vision.

The catacombs of Highgate come in two forms. One, the more famous Egyptian avenue, which are similar to vaults, and the Terrace catacombs that we believe are more in keeping with the design of the ones at Hull, as envisaged by their architect Cuthbert Brodrick.[2]

Key Hill Cemetery

Fig 1: Key Hill Cemetery, Birmingham. Visited by the Chairman and the solicitor of the Company in 1846. Note the catacombs stretching from the left and built into the incline left by the quarrying company who owned the land before it became a cemetery. I believe this was the model the Company were seeking, and it is very similar to the Sculcoates Lane burial ground site south side.

As discussed elsewhere the Cemetery Company requested Brodrick to place detailed plans for the construction of both the lodge and, ‘the church and catacombs and the best mode of arranging the latter’, before them in the February of 1847.[3]

The board’s resolution gives us an insight into what they envisaged would be the finished state of the catacombs.

‘Resolved that Mr Broderick be forthwith instructed to prepare (for consideration by the Board) an amended design for the church so as to embrace two places for divine service with catacombs underneath and also for the entrance lodge and the gates and palisades connected there with – the whole of the expense being limited to £3000.’[4]

Brodrick’s designs

By the June Brodrick had done as asked and,

‘having informed the Board that he could erect five catacombs in such a way that the centre of the building should form a temporary chapel leaving one catacomb on consecrated ground and one catacomb on unconsecrated ground and be made available for immediate use. It was resolved that Mr Broderick be instructed immediately to prepare plans and advertise contracts for the same – the entire expense not to exceed £500.’[5]

Brodrick went further, and looking to the future, envisaged a row of catacombs stretching westwards up the Cemetery, much like Key Hill.

Where both Brodrick and the Company made a strategic mistake was that they believed that the market in Hull could accommodate such a luxury as a catacomb burial. They were to be proved wrong.

Letter from Cuthbert Brodrick

 

Fig 2: Brodrick letter to the Directors. No date.

Optimism and the Chapel

However, in the beginning, the Cemetery was optimistic. At the AGM of the shareholders in March 1848, some nine months after the official opening of the Cemetery, the Chairman probably felt justified in telling the shareholders that,

‘Your directors have recently prepared a number of vaults and catacombs adjoining to the present chapel and sufficient for some time to meet any demand which may be made upon them either for public or private vaults or catacombs, and these, though only completed within the last few days, have already come into profitable operation an interment having taken place therein the price charged being remunerative to the shareholders. Your Board propose as these already prepared are sold off to continue these vaults and catacombs from the chapel along the whole North side of the Cemetery grounds so as ultimately to form by such means a handsome colonnade or covered walk along the whole of the extent which when completed will form either in the summer or the winter seasons a pleasant and attractive promenade.’[6]

What did they look like?

Let’s take a moment here and try to envisage what these structures would have looked like.

Let us take a close-up view of the chapel from the Bevan Lithograph of the Cemetery that was made in 1848 as the starting point. It can be seen in Fig 3.

There is a distinct possibility that Bevan used the plans that Brodrick had drawn up for the chapel as his model, as when Bevan drew his lithograph neither the Lodge nor the chapel were built.

Chapel in Bevan's Lithograph

Fig 3: Enlargement of the Chapel from Bevan’s lithograph,1848.

As can be seen, the chapel as a structure, had two wings to the east and the west. The chapel, used for services, situated in the centre with an octagonal roof. This is corroborated by an aerial view of the Cemetery taken in the 1940’s. See Fig 4.

The octagonal roof is clearly discernible, as well as the wings to the chapel. It is within these wings that the catacombs we believe were installed.

Overhead view of the Chapel

Fig 4: The chapel in the centre of the photograph with structures to either side.

The final image that can be used to attempt to gain an insight into how the catacombs appeared, is taken from the images that Hull City Archives department undertook before the clearing work began in the Cemetery in the 1970’s. See Fig 5.

The chapel is derelict by now and the western part of the catacombs appears to have been dismantled. The eastern catacombs would have stood further back and therefore would not be visible in this photograph.

The Chapel in 1977

Fig 5: The chapel prior to its destruction in 1977/78. Note that the structure housing the catacombs to the left of the chapel no longer appears to exist.

Herbert Seaton

And so, we come to the occupants of the catacombs. The first occupant of the catacombs, the one that the Chairman mentioned at the AGM, was Herbert Seaton.

This man was an extensive landowner in both the West and East Ridings. He was someone who had fingers in a number of pies. Where and how he had acquired his money is difficult now to resolve. He was consistently mentioned in both the local press, and the poll books as a ‘gentleman.’ This gives little or no clue to his wealth. Baptized, and probably born, in 1782 to Herbert and Martha Seaton.

Herbert Seaton's burial record

Fig 6: Herbert Seaton’s parish baptism record.

His father, Herbert, 1744-1814, appeared to have strong links to Holme-on-Spalding-Moor and indeed this was where Herbert junior was born.

The family originated in Lincolnshire and it appears that Herbert senior, was the first one of his family who moved to the East Riding. At this time, much of the Riding was going though what was known as Enclosure. This was where, usually via an Act of Parliament, what had been known as common land, was appropriated by groups or individuals of power and money, and enclosed via ditches or hedges, into larger parcels of land.

Indeed, our view of the present countryside is the result of these activities. If Herbert senior was involved in this it could perhaps indicate how the family appeared wealthy.

Seaton's 1841 census

Fig 7: 1841 census return for Herbert Seaton. Residing at the house that night, apart from himself, were his wife Grace, Elizabeth Pepper, a relative of his wife’s and a domestic servant Jane Wells.

Marriage

Herbert junior married Grace Pepper at Hook, near Goole on the 20th July 1811. Around this time Herbert and his new wife began to live in Hull. Settling in the newly laid out English Street. A part of the western extension of Hull that was creeping along what was to become Hessle Road.

As one can see from the census, Herbert is cited as being ‘Ind’ which is the shorthand for ‘independent means’. The address, although not given on the form, was 23, English Street.

The site, subsumed long ago by light industry, was at one time a very salubrious area. Herbert was appointed as a surveyor of the roads alongside Thomas Earle, the sculptor, in 1829 for the Holy Trinity Parish. A parochial as well as a council appointment, this involved monitoring the state of the roads in the parish and engaging contractors to repair them as necessary.

Politics

By 1836 he had become a councillor for South Myton ward which included English Street and he served in this role until his death. Politically he was a Liberal and Reformist candidate.

Around this time politics in Britain were convulsed by the Reform Act of 1832 and its repercussions at local level. In 1834 the Hull Corporation was drastically changed and several Aldermen were removed.

Seaton would have been one of the more prominent figures on the reformist side in this battle. He and others invited Richard Cobden and John Bright to speak in Hull at the height of the Corn Law issue. Later in his political career he became the Chairman of the Watch Committee, the committee that supervised aspects of law and order in the town.

Religious beliefs

Herbert’s religious beliefs were firmly in the Unitarian faith and he probably worshipped at the chapel in Bowlalley Lane. He was also part of the cultural life of the town and was a member of the Lyceum Library committee for a time.

At the first AGM of the new Hull General Cemetery Company, Herbert Seaton proposed that John Solomon Thompson, William Irving and George Milner be re-appointed as directors of the Company, a choice which was seconded and carried unanimously.

Herbert was, of course, always one of the foremost proponents of the creation of the Cemetery and one of the original shareholders of the Company holding ten shares.

Seaton’s death

Herbert died on the 7th February 1849, aged 66. The Christian Reformer or Unitarian Magazine and Review, from its annual review of that year stated,

‘Feb. 7, at his residence, Hull, HERBERT SEATON, Esq., aged 66 years. He had for many years retired from business, and devoted his time and services to the improvement of the town. He was an earnest and devoted attendant on Unitarian worship. In his private relations, he was a kind master and an affectionate husband. His remains were attended to the cemetery by a long train of townsmen and fellow-worshippers, anxious to pay the last token of respect to his memory.’[7]

The Gentleman’s Magazine also noted his passing,

Feb. 7. Aged 66. Herbert Seaton, esq. of Hull. His funeral at the Hull General Cemetery was attended by many of the town council, and the whole police force of the borough – the latter out of respect to him as ex-chairman of the Watch Committee. Mr. Seaton’s eminent worth, in his public career, as a quiet but energetic worker in every sphere where he was called upon to act, procured for him the deep respect of all to whom he was known.’[8]

Funeral

His funeral as reported in the Hull Advertiser was one of the largest to take place at that time,

Press report of the death of Herbert Seaton

Fig 8: 16th February 1849, Hull Advertiser and Exchange Gazette.

Memorial card for Herbert Seaton

Fig 9: Herbert Seaton funeral memorial card.

Herbert was the first occupant of the catacombs of Hull General Cemetery. As can be seen in the burial record of the Company that this is recorded as such.

Burial register record in HGC

Fig 10: Hull General Cemetery burial record for Herbert Seaton. Note catacomb 7 is used instead of a grave number. The entry above him is that of Dr Gordon, a noted Hull physician known as ‘The People’s Friend’. Both of them died on the same day.

The economics of the catacombs

After such bright beginnings the Company must have thought, as witnessed by the Chairman’s speech at the AGM already mentioned, that they would be selling the catacomb burials on a regular basis.

As the purchase price of a catacomb burial was at the very top end of the interments the Company supplied, it would have gladdened the shareholders to hear the Chairman speaking like that. A catacomb burial which included,

‘a whole vault, 7 feet 6 inches in length, 7 feet 5 inches wide and 7 feet 4 inches high, the purchaser placing a wood, stone or iron door in front and having the interior fitted up in any way he please at his own expense.’[9]

The cost of such a form of burial was £105 guineas, a formidable sum, which is probably around £10,000 today, plus, two guineas for each further burial that occurred. A normal brick lined vault, of the type that Dr Gordon had, would have cost 14 guineas. A considerable difference in price.

The middle class of Hull must have made the same calculations and as a result chose the latter for their burials. Catacomb burial was really for a very select few.

Construction issues

In August 1851 the board were informed by John Shields, the Cemetery Superintendent, that,

‘Mr Shields reported that the east end of the Catacombs had given way and the directors having made an inspection of the same it was resolved that such measures that are necessary to be taken to secure the same and that the chairman be requested to see Mr William Sissons and obtain his opinion as to what was best to be done under the circumstances.’[10]

The following month, September 1851, the surveyor William Sissons reported back to the board with the bad news that they would have to deal with the land owner to the North of the site. So, the Board,

Resolved that the secretary  do see Mr Earnshaw, the solicitor of Mr Wilkinson’s trustees, the owner of the adjoining land  on the north of the cemetery and ascertain whether the ditch dividing the two properties belongs solely to the cemetery company or jointly with Mr Wilkinson’s trustees, and if the latter then that leave be asked to make the reparations required.’[11]

William Watson Wilkinson

Due to an unfortunate misunderstanding in 1846/7, the relationship between the landowner to the North, William Watson Wilkinson, was frosty if not antagonistic. There are no records as to what Mr Wilkinson’s response was to the Company but later it was firmly established that the ditch between his land and the Company’s was his and it is unlikely that he would allow them access to it nor allow any work to it.

The chapel had a long unfortunate history of constantly needing repair, as obviously did the catacombs. One has to assume that this was the result of both the ground that they were built on, and poor foundation work. The Company constantly refurbished and repaired but it was a battle they were always going to lose.

By 1858 the Company perhaps realised that its hopes of building rows of catacombs along the north side of the Cemetery were negligible. It did, however, offer a reduction in the price of its vaults and catacombs in the April of that year. In terms of catacombs this was not a success.

Grace Seaton

In 1864 the Company sold two more catacombs. The wife of Herbert Seaton, Grace, died in July 1864 and was laid to rest in catacomb 8 which has to be presumed to be next to the remains of her husband.

Earlier that year another catacomb burial had taken place. This was the burial of Hannah Matthas who died on the 18th January 1864 and was laid to rest in catacomb 3 on the 21st January.

Lost at sea

As the burial record states, Hannah, was the widow of William Matthas, a master mariner. William had been a whaling captain during the industry’s heyday. He was the captain of the ‘London’. This ship, of 273 tons, was built in Ipswich in 1791.[12]

Due to paucity of records it cannot be said whether it was sailing from Hull from its launch but it was definitely registered at Hull by 1814. In 1817 it was sailing on another voyage to the whaling grounds when it disappeared. The logical conclusion was that it had foundered and the response from the townsfolk was as to be expected,

Newspaper item regarding the subscription

Fig 11: 27th August,1817, Hull Packet.

You may notice that the captain’s Christian name begins with an ‘R’ but this may have been a typographical error on the part of the newspaper. In the death notice of Hannah, it states that she was the wife of ‘Wm.’ So I think we can assume that William is the correct forename of the captain.

A floating cask

By the October of 1817 the subscribers were asking petitioners to meet with them to allocate the share of the subscription fund. And there the fate of William Matthas and his crew may have been left except for one odd piece of information that was found in the April of the following year. The Hull Packet reported the find later that year,

Further news item

Fig 12: 29th September 1818, Hull Packet.

Hannah Matthas

Hannah carried on with her life, residing at Osbourne’s Gallery in Trippet Street. There are no images of this site however it is marked on the OS map of Hull, 1853. As you can see in Fig 14, it was situated opposite the Public Baths, a building opened in 1850, and closed as a Public Bathhouse in 1902 before becoming the first telephone exchange in Hull in 1904.

As can be seen from the 1841 census return in Fig 13, Hannah describes herself as being of independent means, yet she was living in a galleried apartment block.

These were rare in Hull but quite common in many other areas of the country, especially London and Scottish towns and cities. They were usually of poor quality, with wooden balconies and stairs to the upper floors. Poor in construction and cheaply made they were close to the bottom of the rung of the housing ladder in Hull at the time.

When Hannah was living at this address, she shared the block with at least 10 other families.

1841 return for Matthas

Fig 13: 1841 census return showing Hannah Matthas, close to the middle of the page. This page shows only half of the tenants of the address.

1853 OS map of Wincolmlee

 

Fig 14: 1853 OS Map of Hull, showing Osbourne Gallery opposite the Public Bath building in Trippet Street.

Hannah continued to live at his address until her death. Although stating that she was a lady of ‘independent means’ her choice of residence did not particularly chime with that statement. Yet, at her death, she claimed a catacomb burial,

Burial record of Hannah Matthas

Fig 15: Burial record for Hannah Matthas. Note catacomb 3.

Her death and will

Upon her death, she left the princely sum of just under £800 pounds to a distant cousin, her only surviving relative. Did the cousin, in gratitude, decide to spend £105 guineas of this legacy on her benefactor and have her buried with some pomp.

We don’t know but it is an intriguing thought isn’t it?

There were only these three catacomb burials during the Cemetery’s entire life. This fact was inscribed on a flyleaf of one of the burial registers of the Cemetery.

Inscription on fly leaf of one of the Company’s burial registers.

Fig 16: Inscription on fly leaf of one of the Company’s burial registers.

What had been a grand desire on the part of the Company eventually failed to materialise. The hope that it could sell catacombs along its Northern border was just that; a hope. It can safely be said that its failure was one of the contributory factors in the decline of the Cemetery.

Postscript

99% of the above was written in 2018. Since then I managed to discover a little bit more. The basis for this ‘revision’ stems from some architectural plans. These were drawn up in 1981 by a young student named Peter Ranson.

At that time the chapel was still standing although now simply a roofless shell.

The ruined chapel 1981

The student architect’s plans were commissioned by Hull Civic Society and submitted to the Council in 1978. Nothing was heard from the Council during that time.  Then, without any consultation, they demolished the chapel in the Autumn of 1981. I’ll talk about that blunder later this year.

One of the good things that we can draw from this is that we have access to the plans that Mr Ranson drew up. Firstly, here is a rough sketch he drew up. It was obviously drawn up after the redevelopment of the site as the stones on the map are so few. If you notice in the image below, the chapel has two wings.

Sketch map of the chapel drawn by Peter Ranson in 198

The area, cross hatched, and to the right of the chapel is the area that I believe was used for catacombs.  Here’s a enlarged view.

Enlarged view of previous image

Let’s remind ourselves of what Brodrick stated in his letter,

Letter from Cuthbert Brodrick

The catacombs would be accessible from ‘the outside’. Therefore their entrances would not be through the chapel. As such they would be extraneous to the chapel building.

This appears to be the case with the hatched area. It also is on the North side of the cemetery and would have backed on to the drain that ran along that side of the cemetery. So, a case can be made that this area is the site of the catacombs. Not conclusive but better than we had.

The plans

However, more evidence can be gained by looking at the main plans.

Taken from Ranson's plans of the chapel 1981

We are now looking at a more detailed overhead view of the chapel. To the upper right corner there is the supposed catacomb area. It is divided into two sections.

The first section appears to be an antechamber. Beyond this is, what I believe to be, the burial area for the catacombs. Please note that Mr Ranson has inscribed to the right of the antechamber the note, ‘Replace nameplates where found’. This can only refer to the dead buried within.

I would suggest that this is more conclusive proof of this part of the plans being the catacomb area.

Of course, it is all conjecture.  However, I think we owe it to the people buried there and to ourselves, not to let go of another aspect of history. The catacombs are long gone but that doesn’t mean we should forget about them.

Bibliography:

The Hull Whale Fishery, Jennifer C. Rowley, Lockington Publishing Company, 1982.

The Hull Whaling Trade: An Arctic Adventure, Arthur Credland MBE, Hutton Press, 1995.

Mortal Remains, Chris Brooks, Wheaton, 1989.

London Cemeteries: An Illustrated Guide and Gazetteer, Hugh Meller, Avebury,1981.

Highgate Cemetery, Victorian Valhalla, John Gay & Felix Barker, Friends of Highgate Cemetery, 1984.

Highgate Cemetery, Friends of Highgate Cemetery Trust, 2014.

The British Whaling Trade, Gordon Jackson, Adam & Charles Black, 1978.

 

Acknowledgements:

Fig 1: Mortal Remains, Chris Brooks.

Figs 2, 3, 5, 10, 15, 16: Hull History Centre.

Figs 4: Authors’ collection.

Figs 6, 7, 9, 13: The National Archives.

Fig 8: Hull Advertiser and Exchange Gazette.

Fig 11, 12: Hull Packet.

Fig 14: OS map, 1853. HMSO

 

 

An Anniversary

This month’s anniversary is related to money. A subject the Company often found problematic.

On the 16th April 1847 the directors of the Company met for an adjourned board meeting. The subject? To examine the tenders received as a result of their advertisement for builders of the Lodge. I’m afraid they were in for  a shock.

Board meeting minutes April 16 1847a

April 16 1847b

The Lodge, was to be the centrepiece of the entrance to the Cemetery In effect the Company was hopeful that  it could be built for just over half the estimated cost. As you can see the cost of erection of the Lodge was, ‘so much more than contemplated’ to the Board.  Was this simply penny pinching? Or was it that the whole enterprise had been seriously under-estimated from the beginning.

Lack of capital

After all, the Board had opted for only 1000 £10 shares to be issued This meant that the capital that the Company had to use was quite sparse. The Company had paid over half of that money over to Mr Henry Broadley to purchase the land that the cemetery was to to stand. Admittedly this was to be paid in annual instalments but the payment details were only over five years. Then another £3000 to drain the site, and to lay out and furnish with trees and shrubs.

No revenue was coming into the Company’s coffers at this time. The beginnings of a doubt was growing in the minds of the Board. Maybe the directors had bitten off more than they could chew. This feeling would only grow. What had seemed a good idea, and had the backing of many of the most influential people in the town, wasn’t turning into the money-spinner the shareholders had hoped.

By early 1848 the Company was asking its superintendent, John Shields, to see where he could make savings. He told the Board that he’d already let some staff go. The cemetery only became a going concern, and thus profitable, with the ‘visitation’ of the Cholera epidemic in 1849. It’s an ill wind , so they say.

The  first of the cutbacks but not the last

The following day, the 17th, the Board agreed with Mr Wilson that he should build the Lodge for £1000.

I wonder what he missed out of the building to come to this reduction of over £500 off the original estimate.

Sadly, we will never know. What we do know is that every superintendent who lived in the Lodge moved out  and lived elsewhere after a while. Perhaps that shows that those initial cutbacks may have had a long lasting effect of almost a century.