Heritage Open Days

As part of the Heritage Open Days there were two guided walks arranged.

The first one, on the 11th, was blessed with good weather, and as such attracted a large crowd. So did the second on the 18th. The count for each walk was around 50 to 60 people.

When dealing with such large groups one has to employ a louder voice. You also need to bypass some headstones as it’s just impossible to accommodate all of the people around them safely.

11 9 2021 hgc walk

Also, in large groups, people move at a different speed and the slowest speed becomes the group norm. This usually means you cannot do all of the walk. This is what happened on the both walks. We concentrated on the headstones along the north side of the cemetery and terminated the walk at the Workhouse mound.

My reasoning for this was that the newcomers to the Cemetery may have never ventured into the site. They may have been a little intimidated to go out of sight of Spring Bank West. Therefore the back road would have been new territory to them and that’s why I chose it.

I hope everyone who ventured into the wilds of the Cemetery enjoyed it.

New guided walk

One of the results of these truncated walks was that another walk has been arranged to take place. This will be on October 2nd at 11.00 a.m.

18 9 2021 HGC walk 2

 

18 9 2021 HGC walk1

The walk will go from Princes Avenue corner along the south side of the Cemetery. Along the way you’ll find the grave of a man who managed to bribe the electors of the 1853 parliamentary election. You’ll see the grave of an artist who lived through the Indian Mutiny. The grave of the man who built the iron Eleanor Crosses that grace the cemetery, the grave of the man who founded the Wilson shipping line and many others.

I’m looking forward to next years’ Heritage Open Days.

Thomas Thompson

Thomas Thompson (1784-1865). The Dick Whittington of Hull.

Thos Thompson bust

Early life

One of the most outspoken and benevolent characters of the first half of 19th century Hull was Thomas Thompson. Born in Long Haughton, near Alnwick to poor parents, Thomas was a farm labourer with no formal education. In 1797, aged only 13, he decided to seek his fortune in Hull where his maternal great uncle, Mr Thomas Nesbitt, had a cheese, bacon and salt merchants shop in High Street. After his uncle’s death, the business was taken over by the manager, a Mr Marshall who encouraged Thomas to learn the business.

Marriage

Thomas eventually married the owner’s daughter, Ann Elizabeth Jarvis, in Holy Trinity in 1809. They initially lived down Humber Dock Street and had ten children, only four of which survived him. One of his daughters, Ann, married Mr George Von Dohren, a merchant from Hamburg. Sadly she died in 1863 aged 53.

First steps in business

With the encouragement of his father in law, Thomas decided to branch out on his own. After a somewhat shaky start, began importing fruit from Hamburg. He later expanded into importing hides from Russia and India. By 1820 he had become a successful merchant, and ship owner, trading all around the globe.

Civic responsibility

Thos Thompson pic


Despite his lack of formal education, Thomas became an alderman and JP of the town. He was one of the earliest members of the newly reformed Corporation. He was twice elected mayor, once in 1841 and again in 1857. For many years, he was the Austrian Vice consul for the port of Hull.


He was described as a hard-working man with the interests of Hull always at heart.  Always aware of his lack of education, he was a plain speaking man. He was often rebuked for his bluntness and egotistical manner.

Whiting, in Portraits of Public Men, his slyly satirical caricatures of Hull Victorian notables said this of Thompson, 

‘Yet like all self-made men, our Alderman is too self-willed Put eleven gentlemen on Committee with him, and he will quietly coax over, or over-ride the whole eleven and be in his own person at once the chairman, vice-chairman and the committee.’

Social conscience

Anlaby Road workhouse

Whatever his faults, he cared passionately about the poor and working class people of Hull. He was noted for his generosity and gave money and coals for the poor. Thomas was also instrumental in the building of the new workhouse on Anlaby Road. He was instrumental in the demolition of the old insanitary one located in Whitefriargate.

He was also very active in his support for the new waterworks at Stoneferry, He laid laid the foundation stone there in 1844. Thompson also insisted that baths for the poor be incorporated using the surplus heat from the boilers for hot water. William Warden was supported by Thompson in his endeavours to erect the Waterworks at Springhead.

Home life and his death

Thompsons cliff house


From the 1860’s until the time of his death he and his family lived at Cliff House, near the foreshore in Hessle.

Thompson cliff house map
He was still active in the corporation until the time of his death.

This occurred at the Swan Hotel in Harrogate where he was staying in an attempt to recuperate from a short illness.

Funeral


His funeral cortege of a gothic hearse and 3 mourning coaches left Cliff House, Hessle. It continued down Anlaby Road and into Elm Tree Ave (Park Street). The cortege travelled along Spring Bank where it was met by a large number of private carriages. These belonged to Corporation dignitaries (including the mayor) and also a great number of merchants and tradesmen. The funeral took place in Hull General Cemetery.

Monument

Thompson monument

Thomas Thompson’s monument still survives in Hull General Cemetery.

Inscription on Thompson Monument

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.

 

 

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.

Gravedigger Pt.4

Digging a Grave Part 4

So the grave is dug, be it a re-opener or a new one. Now comes the reason for its digging, that is the burial of the deceased.

The first job in the morning of the funeral is to check the state of the grave.

The grave door used by the stager that had covered the grave overnight is lifted and the grave inspected. Has it collapsed overnight? Is it full of water?

The first one is more serious obviously. No one wants the funeral hearse coming down the road and you’re still shovelling like mad. It doesn’t send out the right message of dignity and decorum.

If the grave has collapsed the extent of the problem needs to be assessed. If it is the soil heap side then that is potentially more dangerous for the entire soil heap could collapse. Probably a ton or so of wet soil moving is not good.

If it is the staging side, this may have problems for the mourners who will stand upon it during the service.

Anyway, if there is a problem and the grave cannot take the coffin, the funeral service takes place with the coffin on the staging board.

Mourners

Once the mourners have gone, this is removed to a safe place. The excavation continues until the depth is reached and the coffin can be lowered into the grave.

Anyway, let’s say the grave is intact but the water level is high. Pumping the water out is a possibility. But the pumps never were reliable. And in wet weather the water seeped back in just as quick as it was removed.

So, the usual solution was to get the water level down to a suitable level. Then, as the hearse arrived, sawdust was placed in the grave to camouflage that the coffin was to be placed into water. Just in case any of the mourners wanted to peer down the hole.

Most didn’t but you never know.

Burial

Right now to the burial.

The hearse is coming round the corner, so you nip down into the grave and remove the bottom shoring, hoist yourself out and get ready to receive the coffin.

The soil heap and the staging board would have been draped with grass sheets, the same as fruit and veg merchants use on their stalls.

The bearers will hand the coffin to the gravediggers, who hold it, one at the foot and the other at the head of the coffin. This then is laid down on to the grave or burying ropes.

On a hand dig, only 2 staff would used, on the more recent machine digs, because they are digging with effectively a digging bucket, it is too wide to stretch across for one man so 4 staff are used.

The coffin is lowered. If it is heavy, then trust me on this, it can be quite a strain as you try to lower the coffin gently.

Especially at the head end.

Let’s say that everything goes well. The box is at the bottom. You’ve draped the ropes over the soil heap to avoid a trip hazard for the mourners.

Ashes to ashes

One of you will have the job of lingering in the vicinity. Because when the phrase, ‘earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust’ is spoken you’re the guy who has to throw a handful of soil in on cue.

God forbid that a priest, minister or funeral director would get their hands dirty!

The people leave and now the work begins again.

The ropes are flipped out leaving the coffin in place and the soil is replaced. The longer shoring boards are removed and the grave is filled to its maximum.

Soil is usually heaped to a height of about 1 to 2 foot as it will settle in time.

You then place the floral tributes on the heaped soil. And on to the next one.

Some times, not often, the funeral director would say to you that the bearers will leave the flowers on the box.

This sometimes was the request of the family and the flowers were buried with the coffin. Sometimes it was because the funeral directors had brought the wrong coffin so the flowers were hiding the nameplate on the box.

This meant that when the mourners had left we did not fill the grave but simply placed the staging door over the grave until they came with the right body. It didn’t happen often as I said but an opportunity to take the piss is not to be missed.

I was hoping to have this as the last part of this series but there’s too much, so I’ll have one more to do. This will look at exhumations, the Winter of Discontent issues, the Northern Cemetery morgue and a few other things.

But the major part of this series is done, so feel free to go out and try it. I’d try it in the back garden first to get some experience. You don’t want to get it wrong do you?


‘Gravedigger’ by Pete Lowden