Company records Archives - Page 2 of 3 - Friends Of Hull General Cemetery

Anniversary January 1874

December 13, 2021December 17, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Volunteers2 Comments

New Year’s Day is the anniversary of some interest. This anniversary of January 1874 shows that Gothic may be nice to look at but as to living in it. Well that’s another matter.

On that day in 1874, the superintendent wrote to the Board and asked to leave the lodge. The superintendent, Edward Nequest, had lived in the lodge since the previous occupant had died.

The previous occupant was John Shields. He was the first superintendent of the cemetery and had died in 1866. However he had requested to move out of the lodge some time before this and moved to a house in Derringham Street.

After Edward Nequest had moved on the lodge was rented out to George Ingleby, the gardener for the Cemetery. Michael Kelly, the next superintendent took on the lodge. He too found it trying and asked to be able to find his own accommodation.

Just before its demolition in 1925 the chairman had referred to it at the AGM as, ‘the old, perished, insanitary lodge.

So, it’s quite possible that although the lodge was beautiful to look at, it was not a great place to live in.

Nequest said in a presentation to the Board that,

‘that the Lodge in which he resided was very damp and unsuitable to live in and having requested the Board to provide him with a residence outside the cemetery and the matter having been considered it was resolved that Mr Nequest do provide himself with a suitable house and that the Company allow him £20 a year towards the rent of such house and provide him with coals and gas heretofore.’

Census entries

That the Board accepted this demand so easily perhaps shows that they were fully aware of the force of his argument. After all they met in one of the rooms of the lodge and must have seen how bad things were.

Edward Nequest moved from the lodge to a house on Spring Bank. In the image above, taken from the 1881 census, Edward then lived at 7, Zoological Terrace.

By the time of the 1891 census this address had been renumbered to 183, Spring Bank. Edward continued to live there until his death in 1920. The house stood on the corner of Norwood Street only a few doors away from Peter Hodsman, the master stonemason of the cemetery. Stonemason of the Cemetery

This image was taken by Chris Ketchell just over 25 years ago. In the 1980s it was a butcher’s shop.

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk

Anniversary December 1914

November 24, 2021November 24, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin History, Volunteers

The anniversary this month has striking similarities with events today in that it deals with refugees.

In August 1914 the United Kingdom, along with its allies, France, Russia and Belgium entered into a conflict with the Central Powers of Germany and Austro-Hungary. This conflict has become known to us as the Great War and it began with the Germans invading Belgium. The conflict lasted for just over four years.

However, like all such modern conflicts, the victims were not confined to the armed forces. Belgium was almost completely occupied by the Germans except for a small south west corner. The rest was under martial law and, like today, the civilians fled the conflict zones. Propaganda reared its head and graphic horror stories were circulated as to the tragedy the Belgians were suffering.

For, as these postcards show, the results could be terrible.

At the very least the loss of your possessions and home.

And the ultimate sacrifice was your life

In contrast with today, the more enlightened view of this period was for Britain to welcome these refugees. They were offered food, warmth, shelter and protection. Sadly, this was often given too late for some. Although they may have managed to flee from the Germans and escape the continent the damage for some was already done.

The minute book

On the 21st December 1914 there is an entry related to this suffering in the Company minute books. It reads,

‘The secretary reported that since the last meeting an application was made to bury a Belgian refugee (a nun from Antwerp) who had died in Hull. He communicated with Mr Jackson, the chair, who instructed (the secretary) to make no charge for the burial. The Rev Mother of the Convent of Mercy, Hull, where many more refugees had been given asylum and who are all quite destitute, expressed herself as being very grateful for the company’s kindness. The chair’s action was approved.’

The nun’s name in the Convent was Sister Marie. Her birth name was Therese de Diken.

Her burial took place in compartment 60, grave number 8249 on the 20th November 1914. As may be seen in the image below her name appears as the occupant of said grave.

However she is not the sole occupant of the grave. She was the first person in it but not the last. Obviously, as a nun, she would not have had children. And yet the other occupant is a child.

Her name was Matihilde Cortebeck. She was buried on the 29th July 1916 and she was aged only 14 when she died of consumption. Who was this young girl? That she was a catholic is evidenced by her burial in the catholic area of the cemetery. Another clue was that Moses was the undertaker. Even in my time Moses and Sons was always the preferred undertaker for Catholic burials. Her name perhaps shows she too was a foreigner. She may have been another refugee. Did she have no family? Her residence is given simply as Beverley so no clues there. Yet another mystery of the Cemetery.

The Terninck Foundation

Meanwhile let’s return to Sister Marie. She was the Mother Superior at the Terninck Foundation in Antwerp. This had been set up in 1697. As the Foundation’s website states today,

Fondatie Terninck was founded in 1697 by Canon Christiaan Terninck. He was deeply moved by the misery of distressed children in Antwerp at the time. When he found a foundling on the sill of his front door, he sprang into action. He founded a school and monastic community to take in poor orphaned girls and provide them with shelter and clothing. But these children also acquired here – and above all – a solid religious education and the necessary skills in needlework.

When the First World War broke out in 1914, the sisters fled with a group of children to Great Britain, where they stayed until after the war. On return, and in gratitude that there were no deaths during the war and the home had remained undamaged, a statue of Saint Joseph was placed in the front of the building. (Above the large doorway to the left)

Terninck Foundation

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk

Anniversary November 1846

October 29, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Volunteers2 Comments

This month is the anniversary of a very important point in the Cemetery’s life. On the 5th of November 1846 the Company’s board held an important meeting. The Cemetery wasn’t due to open until the June of 1847 so planning was still taking place. At this meeting two important points were discussed the ramifications of which are still being felt today.

The first point discussed was the extension of the Cemetery’s land holdings. Remember that it was only in the spring of 1846 that the Company had bought their original site from Henry Broadley. Even before the Cemetery opened they were hopeful of extending the site to the north. Seemingly the Board were so confident of the success of this venture.

More land to be bought

How this point was raised at this Board meeting was due to John Shields. As you all know, he was the first superintendent of the Cemetery. As he described the reason why he had brought it to the Board’s attention,

‘Mr Shields informed the board yesterday that Mr Nutchley and himself had seen Mr Wilkinson and that he had offered the Board the field contiguous to the cemetery grounds at £300 per acre, with the understanding that a final answer should be given by Saturday next.’

The Board were obviously interested in this development. As can be seen by the map below Mr Wilkinson owned the site that now comprises Welbeck, Thorseby, Newstead Streets as well as further land. On the map ‘the land to be taken for the enlargement of the cemetery’ was also owned by Mr Wilkinson.

So, yes the Board were interested. £300 per acre was a reasonable price, similar indeed to what they had paid Henry Broadley.

The Board agrees

Accordingly the Board agreed to accept this offer. As the minute books state,

‘After conversation thereon it was resolved unanimously that Mr Wilkinson’s offer be accepted and that Mr Todd be instructed to inform him the same and arrange the terms of payment in the following manner if possible viz £500 to be paid on the 1^st of July 1847 and the balance at the end of three years from thence with interest thereon at 4% per annum having also the option of paying off the same earlier on giving three months’ notice of their intentions to do so.’

All well and good so far. However, as you all should know by now, The Company’s dealings were always fraught with disaster.

The Board meeting of the 18th

If we look forward to the Board meeting of the 18th the situation had drastically changed.

The Board received a letter from Mr Wilkinson’s solicitor, Mr Samuel Lightfoot, who is buried in the HGC and whose stone still stands.

This letter was clear and unequivocal in its language.

‘We are the more surprised at this inasmuch as you have been apprised both by Mr Wilkinson and ourselves, that the offer which you made to purchase would not be accepted.’

What happened?

What had happened? We are not privileged to know all the details. We can safely assume that C.S.Todd, the secretary and solicitor of the Company, had performed his task as instructed. He was, after all, extremely competent, later to become the Secretary to the Local Board of Health and later still the Sheriff of Hull. So it is unlikely any blame would lie with him.

The most likely problem was that the Company’s terms of purchase were not to Mr Wilkinson’s liking. After all, he had not said he wanted to sell his land for anything less than cash up front. Not the complicated purchase scheme the Company had suggested. This may have been agreeable to Henry Broadley but Mr Wilkinson was not that man.

That also Mr Wilkinson had stipulated a time limit for the purchase. If he had seen this offer from the Company as a method of extending the negotiations this may have prejudiced him against going through with the sale.

And a more damning factor was that the Cemetery Company jumped the gun. Part of the solicitor’s letter stated that the Cemetery workmen had,

‘broken down Mr Wilkinson’s fence in great parts.’

To take this action before the ink was dry on the sale was stupid, especially with a man of Mr Wilkinson’s temperament.

An enemy for the future

With this action, compounded with further infractions in the December, the Company had made an enemy of their neighbour. His distrust and enmity of the Company bore fruit long after Mr William Wilkinson had died for his wife and son continued the vendetta.

Surprisingly his son chose to be buried in HGC and I have often thought this was a token revolt against his parent’s.

An alternate history?

The chance to extend the Cemetery to the north was lost forever. But let’s just imagine for a moment how an alternate history of the HGC may have run.

One of the aspects of this alternate history would have been that the Dukeries would never have been built. It is also questionable whether Garbutt’s Avenues project would have taken off. After all the residents of such an area may have enjoyed being near neighbours to the Park, the Cemetery perhaps not so much.

With the Cemetery extending to the north it would have had no need to extend to the west. Would the Local Board of Health have opted to begin the municipal burial ground that became Western Cemetery northwards instead of westwards? If this had happened the Avenues project would almost certainly not have happened.

The creation of Chanterlands Avenue

The creation of Chanterlands Avenue may not have begun either. When the Western Cemetery burial ground was simply the five acres leased from the Hull General Cemetery it was offered in 1884 another 15 acres of land as an extension. The person offering this land? Why none other than a representative of William Wilkinson’s son. Vendetta’s last a long time. He also offered another 20 odd acres further to the west.

However he stipulated that as he had extensive land to the north he wanted a 40 foot road created in between these lands as an access road to his property. The Council readily agreed and this was the beginning of Chanterlands Avenue.

Back at the Board meeting of the 5th

The second point at the meeting above was raised by Cuthbert Brodrick. Not a board member although a shareholder he had been invited to attend. The subject at issue was how to enclose the Cemetery grounds. As you may remember the chair, John Solomon Thompson, had made extensive field trips to cemeteries in London and Birmingham. The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part One

As such he knew what was out there. Although the need for the strict security that some of the cemeteries of London had employed to keep out the grave robbers was now redundant walls and gates were the norm. An example of which is below from Nunhead Cemetery.

With this in mind Brodrick had been entrusted with providing plans for such necessary items.

Unfortunately no such copy of the plans have come down to us. Suffice to say that, upon consideration, the Board felt that,

‘Mr Broderick attended the Board with a design for the wall and iron fencing which were considered and after discussion it was determined that as the expense would be so very large, it was advisable to put up a wood fencing.’

Wood rather than brick

The result was that Cemetery was fenced rather than walled. In the short term the Board made a judgement call on the cost. They were in the midst of an ever increasing sea of costs at that time. The laying out of the Cemetery, the buildings necessary for its workings, the staffing costs etc were all coming from the increasingly small sum that had been gathered as a result of the share subscription. With no income until the Cemetery opened the next year the Board probably felt that some cost cutting measures were needed.

That these plans appeared at the same meeting that the projected extension of the Cemetery’s lands outlined above, with the costs this would entail, was unfortunate. At the same meeting,

‘Mr Harker attended the board with a plan of the engine house, boiler house and stalls and also with a plan of the fencing which were referred to a meeting of the board to be held Saturday next.’

Cost cutting

More expense. The Board were probably looking at some area where cost could be cut. What better than replacing the idea of an expensive wall with a much cheaper wooden palisade?

Well, as I said, a short term cost cutting eventually became a serious headache for later generations of Board members. The fence continually needed maintaining. Let us not forget how far it stretched. From the workshops in the north east corner, along the Dukeries side, past Thoresby School, along the western edge, back along Spring Bank West until it reached the gates at Princes Avenue corner. At no point in time was it free of maintenance costs. When the Cemetery Company fell on hard times it was one of the first things that fell by the wayside.

The result of this far-reaching decision, made in November 1846, is still with us as you can all see. The anniversary still resonates today.

Once again it would be interesting to imagine what would have been the result if the decision had been to take on Brodrick’s designs. I think I’ll leave that one with you to follow where it may lead.

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk

Mysteries

September 17, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Volunteers

A couple of years ago I was told that there was to be a talk at the History Centre. It was entitled ‘The Mysteries and Secrets of Hull General Cemetery’. I thought I’ll pop along to that. I’m always open to increase my knowledge of the site

About a couple of months before the talk I was in the History Centre. Chatting to the staff I was told by the person who usually books the monthly talks that she was sorry. She said HGC was usually my topic and that the booking had happened whilst she was off ill. I was touched by this nod to my idiosyncrasy. I said I was happy to share the topic but I was intrigued as to what the mysteries and secrets were, as to my knowledge, there were very few if any. She nodded.

It was common knowledge amongst the staff there that I had copied or photographed every item that they possessed about Hull General Cemetery and that I had acquired a few things myself that they didn’t possess.

As it turned out the talk didn’t talk about any mysteries or secrets in HGC. Don’t get me wrong here. It was a good, well researched talk and it definitely had lots of visuals to keep the punters happy. But the ‘mysteries and secrets of Hull General Cemetery’, well, I’m afraid there was little sign.

Not Hollywood

That circumstance lies in the fact that the life of HGC is not a movie script. Harrison Ford does not uncover the catacombs of the ‘lost chapel’. Sam Neil, whilst cutting back the brambles, does not find he’s walked into a velociraptor nest. No, sorry. Highly unlikely. Much more likely is that Harrison Ford would find the remains of a shooting-up drugs gathering or that Sam Neil would tread in some maggot ridden kebab.

Yes, there are stories within the cemetery. Stories of its trials and tribulations. Stories of the people who are buried there. But it is not the Marie Celeste. It is not Area 51. It is not the X-Files. The truth isn’t ‘out there.’ It’s a shame but that’s the way it is.

The real Secrets and Mysteries

The secrets and mysteries, if they exist, are found in far more mundane places. They are written in numerous documents. These documents take a lot, and I mean hundreds of hours, of painstaking research to extract that small nugget of information you are seeking. And this process takes a number of years. At the end, the result may be as unexciting as finding that a miscalculation on the part of some clerk a century ago can now be cleared up. But to someone with that penchant for ‘the truth’ it;s like gold dust.

I did mention my idiosyncrasy, didn’t I?

So, with my Harrison Ford / Sam Neil hat on, I have entered this dangerously tedious world many times.

There are two mysteries I’d like to put forward. The first one is about the mystery of Thomas Skerrow and, to add background, the rest of his family. The second one could be titled, ‘What did they do with bodies?’ You’ll understand when you read it.

In some ways these mysteries are mundane and perhaps only of interest to someone like me with that specific ‘nerdiness’ mentioned above but they are mysteries. And I can’t confidently say I have solved them. Yes, I know that my solutions are the most likely yet something still bugs me. See what you think.

Thomas Skerrow

Thomas Skerrow was a gravedigger. You should all know by now my affinity with such people. One could say that it’s in the blood but thankfully it isn’t. Other wise I’d probably be dead from tetanus or anthrax by now. Quite nasty soil borne diseases. No thank you.

Not in the blood but I do have some understanding of these under sung heroes’ roles. And indeed the stresses that were placed upon them. A Grave Digger

Thomas Skerrow had been employed by the Company since its inception in 1847.

As I’ve mentioned before, the workforce of the cemetery, received less than star billing in its production. I suppose that’s why I want to highlight them. Without them the Company would have failed, and the citizens of Hull would have had to put up with the horrific conditions of burial that took place prior to the HGC.

His death

We first learn of Thomas Skerrow by his death. Here’s his burial entry in the HGC burial register.

He died on the 9th April 1854 and was buried on the 12th.

Edward Skerrow, his father

The family already had a family grave as his father Edward had died the previous November. This was a particularly sad case as his father committed suicide. His death resulted in a post mortem and the death reached the local press.

When Edward’s daughter Fanny married later that decade she was still so mortified by the death of her father she refused to provide her father’s name to the registrar. In the burial register of the Cemetery his cause of death is listed as ‘insanity’.

Cowkeeping

Edward Skerrow had been born at Tadcaster in 1791. He lived at 21, Canning Street and his occupation at his death was cowkeeper. Not as outlandish an occupation as we sophisticates of the 21st century would believe. It was quite common for small entrepreneurs to keep a number of cows. These could be hired out for breeding or when ready, sold for slaughter.

However the major source of income from keeping cows was milk. Milk was sold door to door to the gentry. The poorer classes often bought some too though mainly for weaning purposes. It was a thriving industry. Approximately where the old Edwin Davis Store stood in Bond Street was the site of a street called Milk Street because of the number of cows pastured there in the early 19th century..

Alan Harris, in his The Milk Supply of East Yorkshire, 1850-1950′, quotes F.M.Eden saying that in the closing years of the 18th century, ‘for 2 to 3 miles round‘ Hull land was devoted to grazing ‘for the convenience of the inhabitants.‘

Harris also states, and this is probably appropriate to Edward Skerrow, that,

‘Within the towns themselves, still smaller pieces of land were used for purposes that, if not strictly agricultural, must nevertheless have created in their vicinity an unmistakeable aroma of the countryside. {…} William Eleanor, another Hull Cowkeeper, occupied in 1851 a yard and a range of outbuildings behind residential property in North Street, Myton.’

Now Edward was in a fairly lucrative business if he kept his herd healthy. Plus he had a sizeable property as the map below shows so his herd may well have been quite sizeable too.

Yet, as the newspaper article above shows he was an alcoholic and an opium user.

Opium for the masses

Let’s be clear here. Opium was the drug of choice of many people then, from all classes. Queen Victoria enjoyed her laudanum as much as the workman who bought his pennyworth of opium for his pipe. It deadened the pain of living. It took away guilt, hunger and emotion. In Britain of the 1850s that was something to be cherished.

As for the alcohol, it was as readily available as was the opium. As were the public houses. You may note that Edward’s post mortem was conducted in a public house. This was that a public house was, in essence, neutral territory. It could accommodate the officials and the witnesses for such a gathering. It is only in the recent past that civic buildings have eclipsed the public houses in this role. Coroners, magistrates and other civic officials conducted their affairs from hostelries. It was felt less threatening and more fair.

The downside of that was that they were everywhere. So, if you had an issue with alcohol, then it would be difficult to avoid it.

Hannah

So, Edward Skerrow was dead. In death he left about £100 to his widow Hannah. By the 1861 census her son Edward junior had taken on the cowkeeper role and she disappears from the public eye for about 20 years.

She resurfaces in 1881, living in Hallgate, Cottingham and is described as a ‘property owner’. She died a year later and I’m sure no one could smell any trace of cows or manure at her funeral.

Of interest, the younger brother of Thomas, Edward, took over the Cowkeeping business from his mother some time in the late 1850s as mentioned above.

Prior to that he too worked for the Cemetery Company. In 1858 he found a box laid beside the cholera monument. Inside were two babies, born prematurely and probably dead at birth. The box was handed to the police who investigated but to no avail. Another mystery but probably all too common back then.

Back to Thomas

Back at Thomas. He died of a heart condition. The Company went as far as resolving to buy a headstone for his grave.

And now we come to the mystery. Or mysteries shall we say.

Firstly, there is no record of a stone being erected on the grave. From the entry above in the HGC minute books it appeared to be quite straightforward. A stone was to be erected and James Sibree, the Cemetery’s chaplain, was to write an inscription for the stone. Was it just forgotten? Quite unlikely. That the Company wanted to do something to mark Thomas Skerrow’s passing in the first place is unlikely but that they said they would and minuted this gives credence to the fact. So where was the stone? It wasn’t destroyed in the 1970s as far as we know. Did it ever exist?

No, I cannot solve this part of the mystery.

What compounds the mystery is this. In September 1858, the Board had given the tenants at the west end of the Cemetery notice to quit. One of these people, John Hill, sent a sharp letter to the board. The minute book tells the story.

The Company under attack

Mr Thompson and Mr Todd, chair and secretary respectively of the Company, appeared to be unduly worried at this attack. Why? The man was behind in his rent. He had been given notice to quit. All was above board. That they both, busy men that they were, went to see Mr Hill shows something of the anxiety this letter from Mr Hill caused them. Again I ask why? The Cemetery was in fine shape and often cited as a boon to the town. What would such gentlemen care for the word of a disgruntled tenant? What harm could his tittle-tattle do?

We already know that Thomas Skerrow died from heart failure. He wasn’t crushed by any graveyard calamity was he? What was Mr Hill alluding to? Was the probable cause of death something he caught during this particular job that later affected his heart? Could any damage to Thomas’ heart have been caused during this particular task?

Ordinarily I would dismiss such questions. I have a death certificate and burial entry all saying the same thing. That’s gold plated in my book. But I still have that nagging doubt, simply caused by two of the major players in Hull at the time, going out of their way to discuss an irate tenant’s baseless claim. Both of these men were learned, C.S.Todd was a solicitor and later became the Sheriff of Hull. They could and should have laughed at this or possibly taken legal action. They did neither.

With my Probation Officer head on I find it’s just a little odd. What do you think?

Cholera

And the second mystery is shorter but more difficult. As most of you will know in 1849 cholera hit Hull for the second time.

The Cemetery fulfilled a public duty and buried the corpses in a timely and safe manner. To cater for the great mass of bodies the Cemetery Company set aside two full compartments and two halves. This was recorded in the Minute books of the 9th August 1849.

As can be seen from the map below taken from the Cemetery records the compartments chosen were 96,97,122 and 123.

The Cholera monument was erected in Compartment 96. All fine so far.

The problem

Now we come to the problem. Many of the people who died from cholera were not buried in those plots. Yes, if a family grave had already been purchased the relative could be buried irrespective of the cause of death. What is more surprising is that many of the burials in the portion assigned to the Cholera ground appear to have been in Compartment 121.

Unfortunately there is no Compartment 121 in the Cemetery except for a rump that was sited under what is now the shops on Princes Avenue. So, what’s going on?

That this issue was not noticed for 50 years is surprising. Michael Kelly, the last Superintendent, noticed it and remarked on it during his tenure. But it was obviously a mystery to him too.

Compartment 121

Let’s look at one of these graves. Grave number 18844 is a public grave. It was first dug for Ann Levitt who died of cholera on September 4th. She was buried that same day. The following day Charles Cheeseman, Elizabeth Gossop and 8 year old Bridget Dunbar joined her. Cholera was the cause of death for all of them. This was the last entry for burials in Compartment 121.

The first burial in Compartment 121 took place on August 12th, grave number 20645. It was filled within two days and a new one opened at 20647. All were cholera deaths.

Now we know that the burials were taking place. They were recorded meticulously by the Cemetery staff at the time. The problem is where are they? The grave numbers do not match any other grave numbers in the cemetery. Quite frankly, they do not exist.

So, we are left with a mystery. Those people were buried in the Cemetery but not in the grave number given, and certainly not in the Compartment 121.

Yes, a clerical error perhaps. I agree with Michael Kelly; they must be in Compartments 122 and 123. I’d just like to know how we could ever find that out.

Over to you to solve this mystery.

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk

Anniversary September 1868

August 24, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Volunteers1 Comment

The anniversary this month is unusual. It shows a more human side to the Hull General Cemetery Company board. I hope you like it.

I’ve often painted the Hull General Cemetery Company as hard-hearted. Grasping capitalists striving to secure whatever gain they can get. And I’m usually right. Which is where an instance where they are seen in a more charitable way should be highlighted. This is one of those times.

Plus ca change

Scattered through the Minute Books of the Company, one finds instances of damage done to the Cemetery grounds. Often these are thefts from graves. No, not bodies, but flowers. Sometimes whole bushes. Or property damage to the fences or cemetery buildings. In 1902 some young boys from the newly opened school in Thoresby Street smashed all of the windows in the Chapel. Well, all of the windows that weren’t already smashed, for the Chapel was already quite run-down.

In September 1868 the Board was informed by Mr Nequest, the superintendent, of further damage. And by a repeat offender.

The Withingtons

Before we look at what the Board decided to do let’s take a quick look at John Withington.

He was born in Howden in 1850 and baptised at the Anglican church there. His father, Samuel, had been born in the USA but was a British citizen. He had moved back from the USA at some time. However he is a little difficult to track down.

Family research? Who needs it?

His mother too, Mary Jane Cramp is also elusive. In the marriage register she states that she is ‘of this parish’, meaning Holy Trinity, Hull. In the census of 1851 she states that she was born there. However there is no record of this.

Their daughter Emma, is stated to have been born in Hull. This may be true. However she was baptised in Keighley. So we can see that things aren’t quite straightforward. Welcome to family history research.

Samuel and Mary Jane’s marriage took place in 1835 as may be seen above. By the time of the 1851 census, 10 months after John Charles is born they live in Howden.

1851 Howden

Samuel is the clerk, come station master, of Howden station. By the 1861 census Samuel has moved his family to Hull. They now live in Pearson Street, a nice neighbourhood. Samuel is a coal merchant dealer and appears to be making a good living at it.

1861 Hull

By the 1861 census above Emma is no longer in the household and there is an Emma Withington living as a servant to a share broker in Chorlton, Manchester. This, incidentally, is a possible site for Samuel in the 1841 census but our focus is drifting a little here. More interestingly is the arrival of grandson which may explain Emma’s disappearance. One must keep up appearances, especially in a good street.

As we know in September 1868 John Charles, who would have been aged 17, was apprehended stealing from the Cemetery. By the time of the 1871 census, which invited further information from the public, we can perhaps catch a glimpse of why.

1871 and the reason why

John Charles’s name is above. The final column notes ‘Invalid from epilepsy’. Was it this that lead to his behaviour? Thefts that appeared to have no reason behind them. What on earth would he want the Cemetery notice board for?

Madness in all its forms

Epilepsy. ‘Touched by God’. A gentle way of speaking about this disease. Yet epileptics were also viewed as imbeciles, idiots, lunatics and, more obviously, problems. Lord Shaftesbury, the great philanthropist, saviour of the poor climbing boy of chimney sweep lore, had an epileptic son. He voiced, with sorrow and disdain, the general opinion of the public shown towards epileptics.

‘Epileptic fits are treated like madness, and madness constitutes a right, as it were, to treat people as vermin.‘

This usually meant confinement in an asylum where, because of the nature of the disease in that it was not curable, was for the long term.

As a young man I worked in an institution with people with learning difficulties. Their behaviour was portrayed as ‘challenging.’ That word covers quite a few things, none of them pleasant.

How would someone cope in that environment who only had epileptic fits occasionally? What would be the end result of that incarceration? How long could that person’s sanity remain?

That the Withington family kept their son at home shows great love and courage. That the Cemetery Company showed some insight into the family’s issues is even more incredible.

The Cemetery Company shows its heart

The Board decided that they would not press any charges against the boy. Instead the Board communicated with the boy’s father. They said that if the father,

The family must have maintained this promise for he does not feature again in the Cemetery’s books. However, this may be due to the fact that John died in 1874. A shortened life was often the fate of epileptics.

John’s death

A weight was probably lifted from the minds of his parents with his death. The worry of what would happen to their son after their deaths would have weighed heavy. I wonder if their grief was assuaged in any way by that thought? I doubt it.

John was buried in Hull General Cemetery in a family grave. He was the first occupant. By the time it was filled it contained his father, mother and a younger brother. The stone was removed in the 1970s.

A rather sad anniversary item. Sorry

Anniversary August 1907

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk

Stonemason of the Cemetery; part two.

July 24, 2021July 29, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, History2 Comments

This is the concluding part of the story of the Hodsman family. The family that provided the two master stonemasons for the Cemetery. The first part of the story dealt with Peter Hodsman. Stonemason of the Cemetery This second part deals with his son William and the ups and downs of his life.

William Hodsman was born in 1853 in Longton, Staffordshire. We will never know why his family were there but we can have some shrewd guesses. Peter, his father, was a journeyman stonemason. As a journeywoman he would have gone to where the work was no matter the distance. And at this time the Potteries was a booming place for such men as Peter.

The Potteries

Longton is now a part of Stoke-on-Trent. When William was born it was one of the Five Towns made famous by Arnold Bennet’s works. On the Potteries website it is noted that Arnold Bennet compared Longton itself to Hell. That may well have been true but it was a place where Peter’s skills would have been in demand. Skills such as brick-making and stone dressing.

So, William was born in Longton as this parish record shows. He was baptised on the 21st August 1853.

His childhood may have been spent amongst the brick kilns of the Potteries. We have no way of knowing. What we do know is that by the time of the 1861 census the family were back in Hull. The next we know of William after the 1861 census is his introduction to the life of the Hull General Cemetery.

Stonemason’s apprentice

William Hodsman learnt his trade in the Cemetery. We know that his entire working life was spent with the Company. On the 6th August 1868, shortly before his 15th birthday, William was taken on as an apprentice stonemason upon the request of his father Peter. Peter, as we know, was the master foreman of the stonemasons in the cemetery. The Board were dependent upon his skills and valued his opinion. In this case his advice was tinged with nepotism but it was still good advice.

By the time of the 1871 census William is still living with his parents in Albion Terrace, Walmsley Street. He is titled a stonemason.

The Cole family

We now encounter a mystery. Those of you who have dabbled in genealogical waters know what I mean. An aberration that cannot be easily explained. We know that William was employed by the Cemetery Company and had been since 1868. It is extremely unlikely that he would have given up this job.

So, him turning up in the announcement of his wedding banns in Great Yarmouth in 1875 is surprising. Of course, it’s not impossible that he travelled to Norfolk and the rail network then was much better than now. Still it is interesting

One wonders how William met his future wife, Emma Maria Cole. She was the daughter of John Pilo Cole. Below is the 1861 census on which she appears for the first time.

As can be seen John Cole was self-employed as a house painter. Indeed he employed others, nine men and one apprentice.. He would have been one of the lower middle class of the time. By the time of the 1871 census his circumstances appear to have changed. He was still an employer. The workforce was smaller, now only three men.

His trade appeared to have changed too. The enumerator put down on the census form that he was now a plumber and glazier. All of these trades would have been essential during the house building boom of the mid Victorian period. John Cole was probably riding the crest of this wave and was capable of turning his hand to whatever was needed.

That he was also reasonably well off can be deduced by his neighbours in 1871. These were school teachers, publicans, master coopers and foremen. John died in December 1880.

Still a mystery

However we still have no idea how Emma, a Norfolk girl, met with William Hodsman, a lad from Sculcoates. Allow me to romanticise a little. Notice on the above census the address at the bottom of the page. Indeed the premises right next door to the Cole family. ‘Stones Yard’. Now this could be a name derived from someone’s name in the past or it could be a descriptive term for a stone yard.

What about the idea that William, sent by his father as part of his apprenticeship to another stone yard on some errand, met and fell in love with the ‘girl next door’.

I know, I am ‘romancing the stone’ so to speak but we are left with no information as to how this couple met.

Suffice to say that it was a love match. They did not separate until death intervened.

In 1875 the wedding banns were proclaimed. Harriet, Emma’s sister, served notice of them in November 1875

I’d like you to note that William had originally said that his father was a stonemason. It was later changed to ‘manager’. Its also interesting to note that William himself has had ‘stonemason’ crossed out and ‘monumental carver’ place instead. We will see further evidence that William saw himself as more than a stonemason.

The banns were completed by the end of the year and Emma and William were married in 1876.

Back to Hull

We know the young couple made their home in Hull. The couple lived at 6, Norwood Street for as long as they both lived. The map below shows the right hand side of Norwood Street with St Jude’s Church at the top facing on to Spring Bank. The house at the very bottom of the map is number 6. It was demolished in the late 1970s. The house would have been conveniently situated for them. William was close to his workplace, the Hull General Cemetery, and also close to his father and mother who lived further down Spring Bank in Stanley Street.

A tragedy

That they lived at this address from such an early date is confirmed by a sad piece of news. The small newspaper item below, of October 1876, imparts a tragedy.

And another mystery

And once again we encounter a mystery. The date given of the tragedy is October 18th yet the newspaper item is dated the 27th of that month. A period of grieving perhaps? Yet, as we know, the family would have wanted this news to be shared with well-wishers and friends.

So why the delay? On top of that is the fact that the stillborn children are not buried in Hull. Their burial did not take place in either Hull General Cemetery, Western Cemetery or Hedon Road Cemetery. Yes, they may have been buried in Sculcoates Cemetery but that is extremely unlikely to say the least.

Did Emma go home to her parents for the latter stage of her pregnancy? It’s a possibility. If so could the children have been born, died and buried in Great Yarmouth? That is a possibility too but as the Great Yarmouth cemetery records are not accessible we cannot check this. No, this is a mystery we will never solve at the moment.

Professional life

We have followed up on William’s personal life without taking into account his professional one. Let’s backtrack a little. In December 1872 the Cemetery Company Board increased his father’s wage and at the same time also increased William’s from 30/- to 35/-.

This was a significant amount for a young man to be earning. Remember he had only joined the Company in the August of 1868, just over three years earlier. Using the ‘measuring worth’ website it’s reasonable to suggest that at its lowest comparative value to today it would be in the region of £136 per week. More likely it would be around £800 per week. As I said a significant sum. Around about £38,000 per annum today.. More than enough to start a family, as William did later on.

On another tangent it must be mentioned that Peter had two sons that survived. The second one, John, was born in 1863. In the August of 1877 Peter applied once again to the Board for this son to become an apprentice and this application was also accepted by the Board.

As we found out last month Peter died in 1879. We don’t know if William took his place immediately at the Cemetery but it is likely. William would now be time-served and skilled at the work.

Letter to the Board

In June 1881 William wrote to the Board. His letter was discussed at the following Board meeting.

And that memorial stone still stands in Western Cemetery.

More tragedies

William’s personal life during this period was traumatic.

Another son, Herbert, was born in the June1881, the month William was asking for the contribution to his father’s headstone from the Company. Herbert lived just over 4 months and died in the October 1881. The cause of death was listed as mesenteric disease which is a cardio-vascular disease. It is caused by the arteries hardening in the abdomen with a consequent restriction of blood flow. The disease causes severs stomach pains and may come on slowly or rapidly. Even today it can only be diagnosed via ultra-sound What chance of diagnosing it in 1881?

Herbert was buried in the grave next to his grandfather Peter in Western Cemetery. This grave contained Louisa, his aunt, who had committed suicide in 1873, by poisoning herself.

Please note that in the burial record below William is cited as the foreman of the monumental works.

Tragedy struck again in 1886 when the daughter of William and Emma died. Beatrice May had been born in 1880. She died in January 1886 of diphtheria.

She was the first occupant in what was to become the family grave in Hull General Cemetery.

1881

By this time The family of William and Emma consisted of themselves, Lillian Emma born late in 1877, William Harold born in 1879, Albert Ernest, born in 1882 and his brother Frederick Peter Hodsman born the year that Beatrice had died. Let’s look at the 1881 census return for the Hodsman family. William is listed as the manager of the monumental works.

Kingstonia

Towards the end of the decade William Hodsman is mentioned in prose. Some of you may be familiar with John Symons. An eminent Hull antiquarian and also a civic leader. He penned many interesting books throughout the latter part of the 19th century. One of these was Kingstonia, a collection of essays, some of which had been published earlier in the Eastern Morning News. One of these essays was entitled ‘ A Visit to the Spring Bank Cemetery’.

Two of my colleagues have recently posted their re-enactment of this ‘visit’ on our Facebook site. It will feature on this site next month. When Mr Symons was undertaking his ramble around the Hull General Cemetery his guide was none other than William Hodsman. As Symons stated,

‘Mr Hodsman, the monumental manager of the Cemetery, who accompanied me in my peregrination, pointed out to me, amongst others, the grave – parallel with the monument erected to Dr Gordon – of a man who did useful work for the town.’

As the book was published in 1889, this guided tour would have been earlier, probably 1888.

Financial cut backs

This would have been the same year that finances began to bite the Company even harder and wage cuts were introduced, even to skilled men like William. His wage was reduced from 60/- a week to 52/-.

A considerable reduction. especially as at the next year’s AGM in February 1889 the shareholders voted themselves a dividend on their shares of 16/- in the pound PLUS a 2/6d bonus. By the August of 1889 further reductions in wages were introduced. William’s wage was reduced from 52/- to 45/- in summer and 40/- in the winter!

This was problematic for William as by the 1891 census his family had grown.

He now had four sons and one daughter. Times were challenging. And tragedy was never far way too. John Cole died that spring.

More cut backs

William was not the only one affected by these changing times. At the AGM in February 1892, after voting themselves another 14/- dividend, the directors informed their fellow shareholders that,

‘The directors would remark that they continue to bear in mind the necessity for every possible economy in the working of the company and they have lost no opportunity of urging this on the company’s employees. They are therefore glad to report that by the appointment of Mr Kelly at a salary of £120 per annum a substantial saving to the company will be effected.’

Michael Kelly had become the new cemetery superintendent plus also the Company secretary. I’m pretty sure that one of his first jobs assigned to him was to look for places where expenditure could be trimmed. By the April he had found something.

One of the features of the Company’s stone working had been to have an amount of stone on stock that could be worked from scratch. Kelly put forward the idea that this way of working could be dispensed with. Instead of working the stone to different designs he suggested buying in designs and simply lettering them. Needless to say, the directors thought this was a great plan. They directed him to enquire of stone masons in the area if they could supply these ‘off the peg’ stones.

The next month Kelly informed the Board that,

The end of the work of the stone mason

With this decision the Company turned its back upon its stone working business. The very business that the Company had insisted keeping when in serious discussion over the sale of the Cemetery to the Corporation in the 1850s. It’s adherence to a ‘strong’ line on this point meant that those negotiations collapsed.

And now it threw it away in its desire to keep paying over the odds to its shareholders. Whilst desperately seeking cutbacks in expenditure from any and every source other than that. I’ve said this before in talks about the Cemetery but the Board were dreadful managers of this business. Tt is a wonder that it survived as long as it did.

Whilst researching the Cemetery I came across a number of headstone design images, numbered as if from a catalogue. Michael Kelly had used the backs of them to make notes. these images had survived strangely enough when more important material was lost.

Here’s a few of them and understand that you are looking at evidence of what probably destroyed the Hull General Cemetery memorial business.

Meanwhile William Hodsman was not a fool. He would not have been foolish enough to recognise which way the wind was blowing and how it could effect him. We have no evidence that he took any steps to secure his own position except for one, which we’ll come to later.

Changes to the workforce

In case you are wondering it was not only the stone work side of the Cemetery business that was being curtailed.

In February 1895 George Ingleby, the gardener and the foreman of the gravediggers gave in his notice. What Ingleby did not know when he resigned was that at the previous Board meeting it was decided to dispense with his services. At the same meeting it was decide to reduce Hodsman’s wages once again. This time the reduction proposed would be from 45/- a week in the summer and 40/- in the winter to 40/- all year round. In the space of six years William was expected to take a drop in wages of 33% whilst he would have known that the shareholders were effectively taking money straight out of the till.

William countered the offer from the Board. He,

had asked that the directors might kindly consider whether they could not give him 2 guineas a week for say a year and see how it things went on and consider the matter again at the end of that time’

They agreed.

Wages versus dividends

At the AGM later that month the wages of all the staff of the Cemetery was just under £622. The amount paid out in dividends was £550.

Later that year the greenhouse was to be sold to the Corporation who offered £20 for it. Due to the bad feeling between the two parties this deal fell though. Eventually the greenhouse was sold at auction and netted just over £16. Yet another loss for the company.

In the April of 1897 the Company decided to dispense with William Hodsman. William was ready for this. He asked for a reference.

We, of course, do not know whether he managed to get one. It’s unlikely the Company would have refused However, if he did not get one I’m certain that his good name had gone before him.

1901 and beyond

By the time of the 1901 census we see William apparently in good heart. He was cited as a ‘retired manager of granite, marble and stone monumental works’. A young age to retire at in those times but the 1911 census shows the same inscription. Maybe, when times were good William was careful with his money. Maybe he saw the writing on the wall in the 1890s and kept on being careful. I also suspect that he worked occasionally as a freelance worker. His work was well known in the town and there were many monumental masonries than today.

Of note in the 1901 census return is the occupation of his daughter Lillian Emma.

She was now a school board teacher. Some 50 years earlier her grandfather had attended a public meeting to vote on the rapid introduction of secular education into Hull. One gets the feeling that he would have been proud of her choice of occupation. The other members of the family are all in secure, white collar jobs. Not for them the wet mornings in the Cemetery trying to erect a headstone that constantly slipped from the wet harness around it or the horse moved at the wrong time.

In 1902 there was more joy. Lillian married. The boy she married strangely had the grave just behind her grandfather’s. Did they meet whilst tending their respective family members’ graves. I’ll leave that to your imagination but that plot could surely have come out of a Charles Dickens’ novel.

By 1911 these two were living comfortably at 136, De La Pole Avenue. He was now a solicitor’s clerk and sadly, she had left the teaching profession. There were no children.

William Harold

In 1903 William’s eldest son, William Harold, married a lady called Hannah Mary Cook. William Harold had been born in 1879 and was baptised at St. Jude’s, the church on Spring bank at the top of Norwood Street.

This entry caused some confusion. Not only for me but for the recorder. The occupation and the address are transposed and placed in the wrong columns to all the rest on the page! It’s telling isn’t it that William called himself a sculptor rather than a stonemason.

The wedding took place at St John’s in Newland

By 1911 William Harold had moved to Scunthorpe and was a Milk Dealer. Self-employed he now had four children. Once again William probably could be proud that another of his children was not freezing in the Cemetery trying to make a living.

1911 and Frederick

The 1911 census shows us that William and Emma Maria were living at 6, Norwood Street and that the other occupant was Frederick Peter.

As you can see he was a checker at a shipping company. William still basked in the glory of retirement and his last employer listed was the Cemetery Company. Two years later this happy situation was to change dramatically.

In 1913 William and Emma lost this child.

He died from congestion of the lungs. He was 28 years old. His grieving parents placed a notice in the newspaper. One wonders what emotion and hurt this simple notice hid.

The end of William and Emma

In 1928 Emma Maria passed away. The cause of death was a mixture of thrombosis of the the left femoral artery and gangrene of her left foot. She was buried in the family plot in Hull General Cemetery.

Two years later William himself died. The cause of death was syncope, or an episode of fainting due to a loss of blood pressure. One has to wonder whether he felt that life was not worth considering after Emma had died.

John Hodsman

John, his younger bother who was also taken as an apprentice stonemason by the Company, died in 1945. He had worked at the cemetery but this relationship, like his brother’s, had ended in the 1890s. After leaving the Cemetery he had become a gas fitter and he does not play any part in the story of the Cemetery.

William’s burial and memorial

William’s burial record is below.

Now, one would expect a monumental stone mason to have a monument on his family’s grave. And yes, there was one once. And yes, you know where I’m going with this don’t you? Strangely you’d be wrong.

My research has shown that it survived the disaster that was the 1977 / 78 clearance. What it didn’t survive was the neglect of recent years.

Here’s a copy of the memorial recording team in the 70’s As you can see the stone was sound and in good order.

And here’s the record of the inscriptions that were on the stone.

That was then. Here’s the stone today. Well at least the only part that can be seen.

And here’s what destroyed it.

So, the monument to a monumental mason, who probably carved some of the beautiful pieces of art in the cemetery, has almost gone. Lost beneath what, in my uncharitable moments, I would designate a weed. A sycamore. The curse of all Victorian cemeteries.

Its too late for the Hodsman monument but surely this is food for thought. We neglect these things for a short time and when we turn around to find them again they’re gone. Just like William’s monument A lesson there for us all. Hodsman’s monument won’t come back. It’s gone forever. A valuable heritage asset of the history of Hull destroyed. The sycamore, on the other hand, no doubt has spread its progeny far and wide. So, it is not irreplaceable like the monument. In fact it is very common and quite replaceable. And yet….

The other monuments in the cemetery must be better protected. And that protection has to start now. And with you and me and all of us.

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk

Anniversary August 1907

July 22, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin Volunteers

This month’s anniversary is rather bitter-sweet. It is the anniversary of the Board of Directors being reminded of an anniversary in the past. I wonder what went through their minds when Michael Kelly showed them his finds.

In 1907 the Company sold the frontage land on Princes Avenue for development. This development was to be the land for the present day shops. In selling this land the Company made a nice profit. The land had considerably increased in value since the Company bought it. This profit went into the shareholder’s pockets.

The down side to the sale was that many of the working buildings of the Company would need to be removed. This was a graphic show of how far the Company’s fortunes had sunk.

The Lodge

Also affected was the the Lodge and the eastern cottage as well as the gate posts and gates. The lodge was to lose part of its front and the eastern cottage was to be demolished all together. To accommodate the widening of Princes Avenue the entrance to the Cemetery shifted slightly, swinging its eastern end further north.

In the consequent demolition of the frontage of the Lodge this month’s anniversary focuses.

What was found

On the 13th August 1907 the secretary and superintendent of the Cemetery, Michael Kelly, reported to the Board.

As some of you may remember this brass plate, document and coins were mentioned last month in the third and final part of the Creation of Hull General Cemetery. The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part Three Sixty years later they turned up again.

Qualms?

It is interesting to note that the Board felt that these reminders of the beginning of the Cemetery should be kept. Some residual afterglow from that heady day must still have been felt by these Directors the Directors who were busily selling of Company land and demolishing Company property. I wonder if they felt any qualms about what they were doing?

The documents have come down to us safely. they are in the History centre. The brass plate? Well, I’ve never seen any sign of it.

Hopefully a brighter anniversary next month.

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk

The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part Three

June 25, 2021June 29, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Public Graves, Workhouse Graves, Catacombs and Crosses

The context of the story

This is the third and final part of ‘the Creation of Hull General Cemetery. As I said at the beginning of the first part it was originally written in 2015. It was published in the Hull Civic News in 2016/17. I’ve tweaked it and enlarged parts of it here. I can do that here without worrying about ‘how can I fit that on the page?’ or ‘that image is in the wrong place’. However, in the main, it’s the same story that I originally wrote. That’s why, at the end, there is the reference to Hull City of Culture. For when I wrote this, that was still in the future.

As we know Hull General Cemetery played a small part in that pageant. It was used as a backdrop to some acrobatics. The cemetery itself was used as a low-rent Hammer House of Horrors setting. No effort was made to highlight the architecture or culture artefacts in there. No attempt was made to hold up to a wider audience the history of the site.

Post 2017

Here we are now, four years after that whole cultural festival year, and one year after it officially ended. The heritage aspects of the cemetery are still under threat. From indifference on the part of the Council with regard to the irreplaceable heritage aspects of the site to a group of people who ‘know’ that they are right and who feel that a Sycamore is more important than the headstone of the first woman photographer in Hull. History was seen as important by all groups when the City of Culture was in full swing.

Now, in a place where it is most vulnerable, it is under attack. A short sighted view. The site is big enough for both heritage and nature but right now the pendulum is far and away on the ‘nature’ side. A little appreciation of the valuable assets that can be lost forever if we don’t take some care now is imperative.

Culture Wars

There’s a great deal of discussion lately about ‘culture wars’. There’s one taking place right now in the Hull General Cemetery. I know which side I’m on.

Anyway I hope you enjoy this final part of the site’s beginnings.

The first shareholder’s meeting

On the 21^st November 1845 a full general meeting of shareholders was undertaken. Amongst other things, this meeting voted to allow the directors of the new company to raise a loan for £5,000, as the land from Mr Broadley was for sale at £6,000. This loan would have allowed the Company to act on this purchase without straining their shareholders.

It was fine establishing a Cemetery Company but a cemetery needed land to pursue its business. That was the next task at hand.

In early December the Directors of the Company reported in the local press that,

‘upwards of 150 of their townsmen are already subscribers to this intended beautiful and well-ordered place of undisturbed repose for the Dead of all classes of this large community.’

The land for the proposed Cemetery were two pasturages. These were situated at the crux of Newland Tofts Lane or Princess Bank, as it was sometimes known as, and Spring Bank leading westwards. This part is now known as Spring Bank West.

The site was owned by Robert Wood in the last decades of the eighteenth century. It had been farmland since the medieval period when it had been drained by the creation of the Julian Dyke in 1404. The land passed to Robert Carlisle Broadley in 1804. By the time the Company were trying to buy it Henry Broadley appeared to own it.

Copyhold

A meeting took place between Mr Thompson and Mr Irving for the Company and Mr Broadley at Beverley in mid-January 1846. The sale of the land had already been agreed but this meeting was about the enfranchisement of the land. It appeared that Mr Broadley owned the land yet it was ‘copyhold’ land. Mr C.S.Todd had been informed of this development late in December 1845 and had informed the Directors. Yet another unforeseen cost to the Company.

Copyhold was probably one of the last vestiges of feudalism.

Wikipedia explains

It is best explained by this Wikipedia entry;

‘The specific rights and duties of copyholders varied greatly from one manor to another and many were established by custom. Initially, some works and services to the lord were required of copyholders (four days’ work per year for example), but these were commuted later to a rent equivalent. Each manor custom laid out rights to use various resources of the land such as wood and pasture, and numbers of animals allowed on the common. Copyholds very commonly required the payment of a type of death duty called an heriot to the lord of the manor upon the decease of the copyholder.’

The cost to the Cemetery Company

These legal duties were eventually phased out over the nineteenth century. However at this time the landowners were still gripping such vestigial rights tightly.

In this instance the manor was Cottingham and the Company would need to pay a significant sum to the Lady of the Manor. Mr Broadley, in recognition of his ‘error’, offered £100 towards this enfranchisement cost. Later still this sum was increased to £250. Perhaps this shows how much the sum involved was. The final cost was £529 7s 6d to the Company.

On the 4th February 1846 a conveyance was agreed. The parties being Henry Broadley and the Board of Directors of the Company. These were John Solomon Thompson, William Irving junior, Thomas Abbey, Charles Stewart, Benjamin Ansley Tapp, John Malam, and George Robinson. The cost of this conveyance was £5,566 5/-. This was to be paid back in annual instalments over five years at an annual rate of interest of 4%.

Making enemies

By December 1847 this debt had been reduced to £4,489 10s 4d and that is where it stood for the next six years. The Company failed to pay this debt off during Henry Broadley’s life time. His sister Sophia, who had inherited Henry’s property, agitated for this debt to paid off. It was finally paid in 1853. Once again, through stupid self-interest or possibly lethargy, the Board had made an enemy. Sophia would be instrumental in providing the land for the the Division Road Cemetery in the 1860s. Once again the Company had provided the impetus behind a serious competitor for custom.

Changes afoot

Meanwhile back in 1846. The Board was influenced by a visit Mr Thompson had made to Kensal Green Cemetery in London. From this visit he was intent upon making the Cemetery as splendid as it could be. The Board agreed.

In February an advert for designs from architects was placed in the local press. This finally showed that the cemetery would become a fact of life rather than just an aspiration. The Hull Advertiser noted this in an editorial of the same edition that began with the words,

‘It affords us no little satisfaction to notice the actual commencement of operations for carrying out this long-needed improvement.’

Promenade…again

The same article went on to say that,

‘The site, running parallel with the Spring Bank, is well chosen; and a delightful promenade, by improving the present bank and the road in front of the Old Waterworks, might, with a moderate outlay, be provided for our busy population; in fact the whole of the road from the Zoological Gardens to its termination at the entrance gates of the intended cemetery, is capable of being made an attractive adornment to the town.’

The idea of the promenade would linger on until Mr Garbutt took it in hand some 30 years later with his Avenues project and General Cemetery would play little part in that plan.

The Cemetery moves from being a hope to a reality

The Hull General Cemetery was fast becoming an established fact. It was soon to exist to cater for the town of Hull.

The winner of the competition to design the Lodge and Chapel for the Cemetery was a young architect called Cuthbert Broderick. The story of the Lodge and its history will feature as another article later this year.

In the April the Directors had invited the shareholders to look at the designs for the laying out of the cemetery grounds. By the 8^th May the designs for the cemetery buildings were approved unanimously by the Directors with Cuthbert Broderick being hailed by the press as, ‘our talented young townsman.‘

In this month too a war of words with the Holy Trinity Churchwardens had apparently been amicably settled. This spat had erupted due to the fact that the church would only receive the minister’s fees for officiating at a service in the Cemetery. When they opened a grave in Holy Trinity churchyard or the Castle Street burial ground the costs of the burial were collected by the church. A meeting between the Directors and the Churchwardens appeared to resolve this issue.

John Shields

On the 13th August 1846 it was noted in the minute books that John Shields had approached the Board as to his employment by them.

This was coup of the first water. Here was an experienced cemetery superintendent asking for work. Not only that but York General Cemetery was held up as a model of planning and efficiency. Here was a great chance for the Company to progress further with an an astute guiding hand helping the Board.

You may be surprised to know that, for once, the Company did the right thing. The Board unanimously approved the appointment of John Shields as the first superintendent of Hull General Cemetery at the board meeting of 26th September 1846. His salary was £90 per annum and the Board would pay for his accommodation until the Lodge was available. After that he would live rent free on Company land. He would remain as the Cemetery Superintendent until his death in the 1860s.

His first job

At that very meeting when Shields was informed of his appointment he was also given a number of tasks.

As you can see, he was instructed to mark out the ‘first field’. The site, as you know, was divide up into two fields for the purposes of pasturage. The first field ran from, what is now Princes Avenue up to just past where the Cholera Monument stands.

The second field would eventually contain the Quaker burial ground, the Workhouse mound and the 5 acres that were eventually taken by the Hull Corporation for Western Cemetery. The approximate dividing line between the two fields is marked by the drainage pit in the Quaker plot.

He was also asked to cost the hard core he would need to use for the laying out of the paths in the Cemetery as well as attend to the Newland Tofts drain. The Board wneeded his expertise and knowledge. The local press were not slow in recognising what a find John Shields was for the Cemetery.

The Deed of Settlement

It would have been easy for the Company to have taken its eye off the ball though and miss out on John Shields. Other matters were pressing.

The Board were concerned at the delay in receiving their Deed of Settlement from the Registry of Companies in London. Without this deed much of what they proposed to do was technically illegal. The solicitor C.S Todd was often moving back and forward between London and Hull during this summer.

Eventually the precious document was received. This news was quickly advertised in the local press. The Hull General Company now existed in reality. It now owned the land for the Cemetery. It was progressing with the drainage and laying out of its grounds. Finally, the Company was registered as a corporate entity. In essence it could now begin to exercise its reason to exist; the burial of the dead.

Cottingham Drain

Running concurrently with all of this was a step undertaken by the Company to tender a contract to widen and deepen the drains and to join them to the Cottingham Drain. This was an ambitious undertaking.

Not just by the length of the scheme, but that the tender specified that the drains would be, ‘brick-barrelled’. This would obviously cost more than simple soak away drains or cuttings. The remains of the Cottingham Drain may be seen still as the grass verge running parallel with Queen’s Road.

Culverted and covered in the mid 1960s it still empties into the River Hull close to the High Flags point on Wincolmlee. You used to be able to see it from Scott Street Bridge but with the removal of that bridge that sight has gone forever..

The lodge, chapel, trees and shrubs

The same day tenders were appearing in the local press for the construction of the lodges and the chapel. The following week tenders for supplying ‘ornamental forest trees’ and,

‘evergreen and deciduous shrubs, sufficient for planting and laying out of the grounds of the company’.

Later that same week the contract for the draining work was awarded to Mr. Benjamin Musgrave. The tender for the erection of a temporary cottage was given to Mr John Darley. The cottage was for the purposes of a night watchman. Theft was just as prevalent then as now, whatever people say about the ‘good old days.’ In September a spade was stolen from the grounds.

All of this industry was recognised and applauded in the local press. On the 23^rd October the tender for the provision of the fencing of the site was advertised for. The press reported that,

‘the directors do not pledge themselves to accept the lowest tender’.

This implied to the eager public that the Company desired quality as it had in all other aspects of the development of the Cemetery.

This ‘desire for quality’ did not last. When the estimate for building a wall around the cemetery hit the Board’s table it was found expedient to go for fencing instead.

The same day that the fencing tender was advertised it was reported that a trial grave had been dug on the site. Some 8-foot-deep, it had been excavated to test the drainage and that it was “thoroughly dry”.

It was also reported that only 63 shares were left to purchase by future subscribers. It was stated that any subscriber could either have their share as an investment or relinquish it for a vault in the cemetery in lieu of their subscription. Over the lifetime of the Cemetery may shareholders cared to do this.

Progress

An extraordinary meeting of all shareholders took place on the 26^th November 1846. This was to ratify a number of issues that the Directors of the Company had undertaken. One of these issues was the agreement with Holy Trinity Parish to sell some of the Company’s land to the joint parishes of Holy Trinity and St Mary’s. The land identified would be consecrated and encompass about 10 acres at the western end of the Cemetery. This agreement met with approval by the shareholders.

The Company had no idea what trouble this issue would lead to.

The meeting was also a time for the Directors to acquaint the shareholders with the progress they had made on their behalf. The temporary cottage was to be erected at a cost of £70. The contract for draining the cemetery grounds was settled on the sum of £159 6/- whilst the outer draining was contracted to be £400. A well was sunk in the work yard.

The erection of a pump house and installation of a steam engine for the maintenance of the draining of the cemetery was contracted for £195. The chairman, Mr J.S. Thompson, thought this, ‘is one of the cheapest things I ever met with.‘

Holy Trinity burial space

Backtracking slightly, a week before this extraordinary meeting, a public notice had appeared in the press. It was placed there by Charles Frost. Charles Frost was a noted Hull historian, second only to Sheahan in my eyes. He is also buried in Hull General Cemetery and his headstone was destroyed in the ‘clear-up’ of the 1970s.

He was acting as solicitor for the Church Wardens of Holy Trinity Church. The notice was informing the public that the church was seeking an Act of Parliament. By this Act they were hopeful of selling Castle Street burial ground and purchasing the westernmost 10 acres of the Hull General Cemetery.

Castle Street burial ground to be sold

One has to wonder who on earth would want to buy Castle Street which at that time was simply a large cess-pit of the dead. One also has to wonder at the temerity of the Church to even consider doing this. With little or no thought for the parishioners or their loved ones who they had buried in there.

This very idea shows how the Church at that time viewed the disposal of the dead and why the Hull General Cemetery was so needed. The Church put forward the idea that the bodies would be exhumed and re-interred but the families would not be consulted on this.

When the press reported the Extraordinary meeting of the shareholders of the cemetery it was this point that was deemed to be the most important.

Not the Promenade again!

On the 18^th of December the old chestnut of the Promenade surfaced briefly in a letter to the Hull Packet from “A Pedestrian” in which he stated that improving the south side of Spring Bank by the Council would provide,

‘a pleasant walk of about half a mile, with two interesting objects in it, viz the Zoological Gardens and the new Cemetery.’

The correspondent then went on to say that his scheme would be to,

‘buy land from the Cemetery northwards, including all Tofts Lane to the Cottingham Drain, and make that into a handsome promenade.’

That this actually occurred some 30 years later shows that this idea did not simply originate with Mr Garbutt when he laid out the Avenues.

The church starts to get cold feet

All was not plain sailing for the Cemetery Company though. In February 1847 the plan that had been agreed upon with the Churchwardens of Holy Trinity for the church to have the western end of the Cemetery came to an abrupt end.

The vicar and his wardens disagreed between themselves who was to fund the £100 needed to present their Act of Parliament to the appropriate parliamentary committee.

Eventually one of the Churchwardens, a Mr Mitchell, felt duty bound to put sureties, with provisos, for the £100 up himself. He stated that he still felt that the vicar had acted in bad faith.

This, however, would not be the end of this matter.

Enter the Government Surveyor

On the 29^th January 1847 the Surveying Officer for the parliamentary committee, George Hammond Whalley, gave notice in the local press that he would be surveying the site of the cemetery on the 10^th February. He would also be inspecting the other burial places in the town.

As part of his role he would be conducting a hearing with interested parties on this issue.

The Hull Advertiser Editorial

On the 4th of February the Hull Advertiser ran an editorial. It occupied almost one full page.

In this piece, it was obviously troubled by what it thought was a degree of duplicitous on the part of the church. It would be proved to be correct.

The editorial warmed to its task. It cited horrific sights in supposedly holy places.

The editorial also flagged up the prospective Act of Parliament devised by the church authorities although it appeared to not hold much faith in it.

It also informed the public of the intended visit of the surveying officer and the reason for his visit.

And finally, it pointed the way forward using the example of the Hull General Cemetery as a solution.

The surveyor did not attend on the 5th but attended on the 12^th of February. He inspected not only Holy Trinity burying ground, the vaults of the church but also the cellars of the house in King Street that abutted the burial ground. He also visited the site of the new cemetery. Not that it did him much good.

The night before his visit and his hearing for the proposed Act of Parliament. a disaster waylaid all the plans. A man-made disaster and based solely upon money.

Disaster

The next day, in quite measured tones, The Hull Advertiser advised its readers that the necessary Bill in parliament to grant the necessary Act of Parliament to set up the part of the cemetery that was to be religiously endowed was dead.

At an impassioned and rowdy parishioners’ meeting the day before, the resolution to apply for the new Act to set up this cemetery was voted down by angry parish members who did not want to increase their church rates.

At 3.00 p.m. on the day of his inspection the Surveying Officer was informed of this decision and refused to hear any further evidence on the subject. In fairness to him there was no point in continuing the hearing. The hearing had been expressly called for by the proposed Act. With the idea of the Act dead in the water his role was effectively complete.

John Solomon Thompson doesn’t miss his chance

It didn’t stop the Company representative, John Solomon Thompson, from extolling the virtues of the Cemetery. The Surveying Officer was impressed with the site and said so in his report but this had no bearing upon the proposed Act brought by the Church authorities.. Charles Frost, placed in an invidious position, could only say to Mr Whalley that he could not present any evidence in support of the Act. Mr Whalley therefore concluded the meeting and left the town.

Never trust the church

The Cemetery Company now showed that they had had enough of dealing with the religious interests. They would not enter into any further agreements with the churches as to leasing or selling them any land.

This meant that when the burial grounds were closed in Hull by Order in Council in 1855 Castle Street was granted an extension. By 1860 it was ordered to close by the Inspector of burial grounds.

Once again it was given an year long extension because it was close to providing a new burial ground. It closed in December 1860. The new burial ground was Division Road.

On the 18th February the Company gave notice to the occupier of the second field of the site. They were now showing that they would use the whole of the site for their own purposes.

Another shareholder meeting

There was general shareholder meeting on the 5^th March 1847. The progress that the Cemetery Company had made was laid out to the shareholders.

The drainage works was now complete on the site. Both the Spring and Derringham Ditches had been widened and deepened and this work was almost finished. The fencing off of the site was almost complete. The laying out and planting of the ground were proceeding.

Finally, the chairman brought the shareholders up to date by mentioning the recent visit of the Parliamentary Surveyor,

In late March the Hull Advertiser paid a visit to the site and commented favourably on it, stating that there were,

‘Already upwards of 3,000 ornamental trees, deciduous and evergreen and shrubs, have been planted, together with 100 of the newest and best sorts of standard roses.’

It also said that a temporary chapel had been constructed until the more permanent one could be built. In April the tender for contracts to erect the lodge and entrance gates were advertised in the press.

The first interment?

On the 16^th of April the first interment, that of the child of a Mr Smith, a draper of the firm Marris, Willow and Smith in Whitefriargate, took place.

There is however, another story here. For those of you who have seen the first page of the Burial records of the Cemetery one thing stands out. The second burial recorded took place before the first one.

How could this happen?

The second burial, that of William Irving, was a re-interment from Fish Street Chapel. This took place on the 14th April. William Irving was one of the founder members of the Cemetery Company. He was the first chair of the Provisional Committee, and he took over as the Chair of the Company later when John Solomon Thompson resigned.

This re-interment may have been planned well in advance. For instance, the brick lined vault would have needed to be excavated and built in preparation for the child’s remains. William Irving may have probably been hoping for the ‘glory’ of having the first burial taking place in the Cemetery.

Imagine his chagrin when Thompson arranged with John Shields to have Mr Smith’s daughter interred so quickly.

The local press made amends though.

A real promenade

The Cemetery was also becoming a place to visit. Hull, at that time, had no public parks where you could while away the time. The Botanic Gardens, established in the early nineteenth century, were available. At least to those who could afford to pay the entrance fee. As was the Zoological Gardens but the entrance fee was still a drawback to the poorer classes.

The Cemetery, however, was free to enter and enjoy – if that’s the right word here. The Company had spent a considerable amount of money on landscaping and it looked like the townspeople were appreciative of it.

On the 23^rd April, the day before the article above, a long-awaited advert appeared the local press.

It announced that the Hull General Cemetery Company were proud to say that the cemetery was, ‘now ready to receive interments.’ The advert went on to say that the rates for their services would be published soon. And they were. 10,000 copies of them too!

A week later, on the 28th April, an impressive funeral took place.

Undertaken by nearly 200 stonemasons of one of their brethren, the procession began at Carr Lane and proceeding up Spring Bank to the graveside. In some ways it set the tone for many other funerals that the Hull General Cemetery hosted over the next 130 years. Stonemason of the Cemetery

The official opening

Although the Cemetery was open for business, its official opening ceremony took place in the June of that year. It was an occasion of great pomp and ceremony with all of the local dignitaries being present.

The local press recorded the occasion.

Various objects were interred within the foundation stone. The press recorded what these were.

On top of the bottle was placed a brass inscribed plate.

None of these items survived the demolition of the Lodge in 1927 except for one. This was a list of the original shareholders. It’s held now in Hull History Centre.

However, there may be one other item from this ceremony that survives.

As stated above, the Mayor, Mr Jalland, laid the foundation stone of the lodge ‘in the presence of a numerous concourse of spectators, principally of ladies,’ on the 2^nd of June 1847.

Where is the trowel?

In laying the foundation stone he used an inscribed silver trowel as stated above. This trowel was specially made for this occasion.

In the minute books of the Company it is mentioned.

The silver trowel, made by Mr Northern of Lowgate, was presented to the Mayor.

It is my belief that it still resides in some cupboard or cellar within the Guildhall. A tangible reminder of the day that Hull began to dispose of it’s dead with dignity.

The Foundation stone was laid. And now there were, as usual, a number of speeches. Following those was a brief prayer by Rev. James Sibree. He would later write so movingly about his time spent in the Cemetery during the Cholera outbreak in 1849.

Finally, as the Hull Packet, almost apologetically recorded, ‘and the doxology having been sung, the assembly dispersed.‘

The end of the cemetery

After a long and hard struggle, with one or two missteps along the way, Hull now had a cemetery. The cemetery it had needed for the past thirty years. It served the community well for the next century or so.

By the time I was kicking through the fallen leaves on my way to Hull Fair it had long given up its pre-eminent place for burials to the municipal cemeteries. It became secluded and a haven for wildlife. Its wilderness appealed to the poetic and the historian. Its decay appeared to enhance its beauty. It wore its shabbiness with a genteel pride. No amount of skilful artifice could have manufactured it.

In 1972 the Hull General Company was finally wound up.

The final burial, of an urn of ashes, took place in 1974. I worked with the man who interred it. I can show you where this happened.

Some five years later the clipboards and the bulldozers of the Council moved in. An historic part of our shared heritage was destroyed. In about an 18 month period, what had taken over 130 years to produce, was gone. And to create…what? A Monumental Loss

Welcome to Hull, City of Culture 2017.

Isn’t it one of the paradoxes of life that what was once thought to be unimportant becomes very important but only when you’ve lost it?

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk

Stonemason of the Cemetery

June 24, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, History

Peter Hodsman

Peter Hodsman. A common enough name. However in the story of Hull General Cemetery he stands alongside John Shields, Cuthbert Brodrick, John Solomon Thompson and other luminaries. Peter has left a legacy for us all. Much more than any of the others already named. For you see he was a stonemason of the cemetery.

Let me tell you a little about him.

Peter was born in Swanland in the East Riding. His father, William had been born in North Ferriby in 1797, and had married Peter’s mother, Ann Watkin in January 1813.

The Hodsman family were non-conformist in their religion as can be seen by Peter’s baptism record above. This may have had some bearing on Peter’s work in the future.

Peter doesn’t feature in the 1841 census. Nor does his father. This may well be due to an enumerator error. The possibility of recording the name as Hodgson cannot be ruled out. Many such instances of this occur in this particular census.

Marriage

The next time we meet Peter is at his wedding. This took place in the ancient church of St Peter’s, in Barton on Humber. He married Mary Robinson on October 12th 1847.

Much can be gleaned from this record. Firstly that Peter now lived in Hull, in Holy Trinity Ward. Secondly that his trade was now that of a stone mason. Thirdly that he was literate as evidenced by his wife’s mark. And a mystery too. Why did he marry in an Anglican church?

The Cemetery

As you all know, Hull General Cemetery was opened in 1847 and it would have seemed likely that this place would have been a good source of employment for a stone mason. Of course, we do not know when he began working at the cemetery. Employing the workforce was not something that was deemed important enough to record. Perhaps that’s one of the reasons I feel its important to record their existence. Let’s face it, without them the Cemetery would not have happened.

We do know that in March 1849, some 5 months before the great Cholera epidemic struck, the Directors were asking the superintendent to shed some of the workforce. At that time the Company employed just five men.

‘Four men being employed on the grounds, preparing graves, gardening and rubbing stone and one mason at the stone yard.’

It’s tempting to believe that Peter could have been this stone mason but sadly we have no evidence for this.

The Dead House

In December 1850 John Shields reported to the Board that,

‘that complaints had been made by the stonemasons engaged in the Company’s stone shed of the dangers likely to arise from the near proximity of the Dead House to such a shed and the matter having been fully considered by the Board it was ordered that the use of the present dead house be discontinued and that a new one be forthwith built on the vacant ground behind the chapel.’

Interesting as this comment may be in many ways, the reason it is cited here is that the plural use of the word stone mason is used. This shows two things at least. Firstly that, since the Cholera outbreak, business had increased dramatically for the cemetery. It also shows that the stone yard business was taking off and extra skilled workers were needed. Thus at least two stone masons were employed.

The increase in stone masons in this period

Obviously stone masons were more numerous at that time than now. Hull was going through an expansion not seen before. It’s only equal would have been the post-war boom of erecting the housing estates that encircle the city now.

During this early Victorian period many buildings were erected, some public and many private dwellings. For example in the 1839 directory of Hull only 13 stone masonry firms are listed. Three of those are the Earle’s so could count as one. By the 1861 directory this number had doubled to 27. Neither directory included the Hull General Cemetery Company’s own stone company.

The first public grave in the cemetery

Of related interest here is the account of a funeral of a stone mason that took place in Hull General Cemetery shortly after its opening. It perhaps shows the amount of stone masons in the town at that time.

And perhaps only interesting to such people as me who love the minutiae of such doings, this grave, the very first public grave in the cemetery, was used as an experiment as the Hull Packet describes,

Here’s the first page of the Hull General Cemetery burial records. Note the grave number 14122 in compartment 81. This is the first public grave in the cemetery. The one that was dug to a depth of 11 foot 6 inches. The first burial was of the stonemason as mentioned above. Burial number 5 in the cemetery. Charles Cromack. And then John Dick, Susanna Blackburn, Ann Cain, Hannah Cooper, Ann Shefling, Thomas Hindson and finally Emma Parkisnon. In total eight people, two of them infants.

In this way the poor who could not afford to buy a family grave were still buried with dignity. Look at the small part of Compartment 81 shown. Public graves were not placed in the ‘wilderness’, far from the wealthier patrons of the cemetery. There was a democratic feel to the placement of such graves. They were made to feel just as much a part of the community as the person who afford a family grave. This was one of the positives of the Hull General Cemetery. Public Grave, Public Shame?

1851

By 1850, Peter may had found work with the Cemetery Company. Sadly, we do not know. However, he was listed as a stone mason in the census of 1851 as the image below shows. His address was Eliza Place, Walker Street and this was quite close to a stone yard in Great Thornton Street. The owner was a J.C.Scorer, so perhaps Peter worked closer to home. His daughter Elizabeth, cited in the census, would not survive the year.

Education, education, education

The next we hear of Peter is in the local newspaper. He is one of the signatories of a notice requesting that the Mayor, Thomas William Palmer, calls a public meeting. This aim of this meeting was to petition Parliament with regard to children’s education.

This idea was well before its time. The free schooling of children did not occur nationally until the passing of Forster’s Education Act of 1870. That Peter was a supporter of this idea is interesting as one of granddaughters went on to become a school teacher in the late 1890s.

The petition was signed by more than 500 ‘working men’. The Mayor duly called the meeting for the 15th April at the Town Hall. It was a rowdy meeting. The purpose of the meeting was as set out above; namely the education of every child via a secular system. The Mayor outlined this idea and how it was progressing through Parliament. A Mr T.D. Leavens, a foreman at the Minerva Oil Mills, seconded the motion. He also observed that,

‘this was the first public meeting ever convened by a Mayor of Hull in compliance with a requisition from the working man.’

Secular versus religious

An amendment was put forward. The proposer, Mr Frederick Smith, contended that secular education on its own could not work. It needed to be balanced with religious education too. This attempt met with some serious disapproval from the audience. Some of the audience felt that the motion was being derailed by this suggestion

The intervention of E.F. Collins, noted editor of the Hull Advertiser, appeared to take the sting out of the amendment and his words brought much laughter. The motion was carried and the Mayor was entrusted to pass on the wishes of the townspeople of Hull on this issue to Parliament.

Enlargement of the stone yard business in the cemetery

Meanwhile, in December 1852, John Shields requested that,

‘An enlargement of the Mason’s Work shed was now essentially necessary in consequence of the great interest in the Company’s stone business and that the same must be made forthwith and he having also produced an estimate of the expense of such an enlargement amounting to £20 1s, and the question having been considered and discussed it was resolved that such enlargement be forthwith made and that the costs be charged to the alterations account.’

The Company’s stone business was well and truly taking off. As we saw previously, by 1856 the Company were amenable to selling the Cemetery to the Corporation but they wanted to keep the stone yard business. An Anniversary: June 1856

In September 1853 three apprentices are taken on in the stone yard. Peter is not one of them but he was a fully trained stone mason by now so he would not be taken as an apprentice.

1861

Peter’s census return of 1861 is below and shows a change of address. The notice below is a poor reproduction.

The information recorded is that Peter and his family now live in Great Thornton Street at 1, James Place. Interestingly he lived next to Gardener’s Place where my great great grandfather lived around this time and just around the corner was Hodsman’s Court.

Family tragedies

His family has increased. He now has two daughters; Louisa and Mary Jane, and two sons; William and Frederick. Sadly, in 1863, the family was struck by tragedy. Mary Jane died of smallpox. She was buried in the land that the Corporation had leased from the Cemetery Company in 1860.

A year later young Frederick also passed away of’ ‘brain fever’.

Amidst this sea of woe Mary Hodsman had another boy. He was called John Thomas and he features in this story.

Strike!

Three months after Frederick died the stonemason’s of Hull came out on strike. This is poorly reported in the newspapers of the time and the only reference I can find is from the Company’s minute books. In this John Shields reported to the Directors,

We have no way of knowing how this turn of events affected Peter. Was he a striker? Was he a strike-breaker?

We do know that John Shields was in a bind due to this strike. He told the Directors that,

‘in consequence of the masons’ strike he was unable to execute the orders received for stone and granite work and that several parties were pressing to have their work done without delay.’

The Directors agreed with his request to go to Aberdeen, which was where most of the Company’s stone came from, and seek out a qualified ‘letterer’. He duly did so,

‘And had engaged a man named James Mitchell as a mason and letter cutter for the company at the weekly wage of 30/- ‘

Solid evidence

Our next entry is where Peter and the Company arrive together. At last, concrete proof that Peter was a stonemason of the cemetery. On the 3rd April 1868 the secretary,

‘Read a letter from Peter Hodsman, the foreman of the stone masons, asking for an advance of wages’.

The decision was stood down till the next meeting. At that meeting his wages were increased from 35/- a week to 42/-. A considerable increase of a fifth. This probably shows his worth to the Company. That Peter wrote them a letter requesting an increase in his salary must have impressed the Board.

In the following August another event took place. Peter asked the Board if his son William could be an apprentice stone mason. The appeal was successful. William at this time was barely 14 years old.

1871

We next find Peter at home in the census of 1871. His home now is in Albion Terrace in Walmsley Street, Spring Bank. A larger property in a better area but still not of the best kind.

As can be seen, the Hodsman family had increased again. Another daughter, Anne Elizabeth, had been born in 1866. William, the eldest son, is classed as a stone mason like his father.

More tragedy

Tragedy hit the family again in 1873 when Peter’s eldest daughter, Louisa died at the age of 21.

This is the first mention, outside of the minute books, that Peter is now the foreman of the masons for the Cemetery Company. Peter signs as the informant and characteristically calls himself ‘mason of letterers’.

The burial entry is interesting No cause of death is cited. The reason for this may be simple.

Louisa sadly committed suicide ‘whilst in an unsound state of mind’ She consumed a quantity of poison, ‘salts of lemon’, and died. That the cause of death was not entered in the Cemetery burial register may well have been a show of sympathy from the superintendent, Edward Nequest, respecting Peter’s feelings, and not placing the mode of death in the ledgers for posterity.

In the August of 1877 Peter once again approached the Board to have another son apprenticed. This son was John Thomas. Once again they accepted him on the same terms as they had accepted William. The following year Peter’s eldest son William married. His wife was Emma Marie Cole. Peter moved home again to 2, Stanley Street, Spring Bank. Closer to work and a better house.

Peter’s death

By the winter of 1879 Peter was not well. He fell ill of chronic bronchitis. The result no doubt of too many days spent doing hard labour in cold weather. He was also suffering from heart troubles.

Peter died on the 30th October. He was buried in the same grave as his daughter Mary Jane and his son Frederick. His wife must have demanded that a burial space be left for her in her husband’s grave. When Louisa dies she had been buried in the grave next to the original family one. Mary wanted to lie, in death, with her husband. A sure sign that neither partner wanted to be separated even in death.

Peter left a will. His estate was under £1000 but he left his family some funds to carry on. The executors were as expected his wife Mary and his son William. One other executor also appeared. That of Edward Nequest, the cemetery superintendent. I would take this to indicate how much either man thought of each other. It also showed how much the Company thought of Peter in giving Mr Nequest the time to go to Court in York to have the will proved.

Epitaph

When you read a headstone in Hull General Cemetery and it is dated before 1879 there is a good chance that Peter carved those words. When you see a headstone from before that date with the ‘Cemetery Company’ inscribed on it you see the handiwork of this man. This man would have inspected all of the work or done it himself. His legacy will, with careful husbandry, outlast us all. He was, after all, a stonemason of the cemetery.

His burial record stated his occupation as ‘Manager Monumental Works, Cemetery Co.’

This epithet appears a mite too grand. I’m pretty sure that if Peter could have written it, it would have said simply, ‘Stone mason’. I’m also pretty sure that Peter was proud of that simple title.

William, his son, signed the burial register as the informant. ‘Monumental letterer’ was what he called himself. I’m sure his father would have been proud.

William and his brother John’s story will be told next month.

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk

An Anniversary: June 1856

June 1, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin Events, History, Volunteers3 Comments

June 1856 is an anniversary of note in the life of Hull General Cemetery. It was then that the Cemetery Company first received from the Hull Corporation an enquiry. This enquiry was about the possible purchase of the Cemetery by the Corporation. In essence the Corporation had been forced into this. Let me explain.

1848: The Year of Revolutions

The year 1848 had been important. The first attempt by the government to look at aspects of the nation’s public health was the Public Health Act passed that year. No longer would the concept of laissez-faire rule. Where the health of the public was involved the state would now take a hand. The Public Health Act was a culmination of the state’s intervention into what had been previously private matters. Edwin Chadwick’s report of 1842, ‘Report on the Sanitary Conditions of the Labouring Population of Great Britain’ could be seen as the starting point.

By the time of the 1848 Act, Parliament had passed Acts to enable local authorities to provide public washhouses and public baths. The Towns Improvement Clauses Act allowed local authorities to organise water supplies and sewage. It also allowed them to control ‘nuisances’ such as midden heaps that proliferated widely in the days of horses, cattle and pigs living in close confinement with humans.

What the Public Health Act did was to try to pull all of these changes together under one Act. It then set up a General Board of Health to oversee these changes. At the local level it allowed local authorities to set up a Local Board of Health. This set up continued well into the 20th century until the National Health Act of 1947 and in some cases even beyond that.

The Metropolis Act and its effects

The Cemetery Company were aware of these changes. They themselves had begun working in 1847. So the advent of the Public Health Act with its clauses related to the disposal of the dead was good news for the Company. By the time of the Metropolis Act of 1850, which forbade burials in a range of churchyards and chapels in London, the Company knew its future was secure. The Metropolis Act was rolled out over the country and by 1855 many of the burial grounds of Hull that were public nuisances were shut. As I’ve said elsewhere the Hull General Cemetery at this point in time was ‘the only game in town.’

This had long been recognised by the Hull Corporation. They knew that under the terms of the Metropolis Act they could compulsorily purchase the cemetery if they pursued that course via an Act of Parliament. This they attempted to do. It was known as the Kingston upon Hull Improvement Act. This Bill did not just focus on the cemetery. It was an all round bill, ranging from sewage to street lighting. But the cemetery, a going concern for the disposal of the dead, was firmly in its sights. This Act would allow the Corporation to take it over without the necessary bother of setting their own cemetery up. And they had the law on their side.

A tale in two Acts

The Company recognised this. The Board discussed this issue many times. Finally they acted. In October 1853 an advert in the Hull Daily News outlined what they were looking to do with their proposed Act.

The Company drafted their own Act of Parliament. The main purpose was to move from a simple joint stock company to an incorporated one. It had learned from its neighbours in London. The local authorities, even under the Public Health Act and the Metropolis Act, could not take over cemeteries that had been created by their own Acts of Parliament. So Highgate, Kensal Green, Nunhead etc were saved from the reach of the municipal boroughs’ ownership.

Below is the Company’s Bill.

Both of these Bills, the Company’s one and the Hull Corporation one, travelled through Parliament at the same time in 1853. Many were the conversations about the lobbying of M.P.s that took place in the Company’s conversations in the board room. I’m equally sure that the same happened between the Councillors in the Town Hall.

As the notice from the Hull Daily News of march 155 suggests, the Cemetery Bill was passed first. It was simpler and the readings would have been easier to negotiate than the more clause-laden one of the Corporations. With its passing the Company could breathe easier. Also as part of the Cemetery Bill it allowed the Cemetery Company to compulsorily purchase land to enlarge the cemetery. In essence the Company was looking forward to the future but also making the resale value of the cemetery a much more attractive proposition for the Company.

So, do you want a deal?

It’s here where our anniversary fits in. The Corporation, foiled in their attempt to capture the cemetery, now tried to negotiate with the Company. The Corporation had written to ask what price the Company would want if it wanted to sell or lease the cemetery to them. Their reaction is set out below. J.S. Thompson, the chair of the Company,

Thompson sets out in his first paragraph how attractive the cemetery is now as a going concern. An outright sale is not mentioned but a lease was something that the Company would consider. What is mentioned later is that for a sum of £17,000 the Corporation could take over the cemetery.

Overreach or just plain greed?

However the Cemetery Company still wanted to keep the workshops and ground where they conducted their stone masonry business from. They also insisted upon the Corporation giving them ‘preference’ when it came to erecting and supplying headstones and monuments to the public.

The Company had begun the cemetery with just £10,000 capital less than a decade earlier. Now after reaping the profits from burying the town’s dead for that same period, they now believed that the value of the cemetery had increased by 70%. And it wanted to maintain a lucrative side-line with the stone masonry part of its business.

This was the first and last time that the Cemetery Company held the whip hand over the Corporation. The Corporation would never forget this. The Company would rue this day many times in the future.

The Company must have known that it was pushing too hard. Points 9 and 10 of Mr Thompson’s letter offered a simpler solution to the Local Board of Health’s dilemma. It offered to lease its westernmost five acres to the Corporation. And with this action it sealed its own fate. But that’s another story.

Pete Lowden

Pete Lowden is a member of the Friends of Hull General Cemetery committee which is committed to reclaiming the cemetery and returning it back to a community resource.

petelowden.co.uk