Hull General Cemetery Archives - Page 9 of 10 - Friends Of Hull General Cemetery

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

The Beatles

June 24, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin Events, General, History

The Beatles? What’s that all about I hear you cry. Well, let me explain.

I’m sure that this week, the week including the 25th June, is important for a variety of reasons. I’m saying it’s important for a very specific reason and that involves the Hull General Cemetery and the first world wide satellite transmission of a song. I hope I’ve got you hooked by now.

I’m pretty sure that everyone knows about the six degrees of separation thingy. As Wikipedia succinctly puts it, ‘it is the idea that all people on average are six, or fewer, social connections away from each other.’ An intriguing thought. And slightly worrying too if you bother to think about it. Was I really only six degrees away from Margaret Thatcher? Forgive my shudder.

On a similar theme, as we also know, all of us have Genghis Khan as an ancestor. Yes, so when you lose your temper and kick the door at least be consoled by the fact that you are following your hereditary instincts. And of course you’ve restrained yourself. After all your ancestor’s grandson Hulagi, when he was aroused, sacked Baghdad in 1258. And then built a pyramid of 80,000 skulls after the massacre. Now, that makes you feel a bit better when the dog takes one look at your face and scurries out of the way. No one can accuse you of going over the top!.

We also all have at least 2% of Neanderthal in our DNA. All of us have breathed in some molecules of air that Julius Caesar breathed along with atoms of his funeral pyre. And, forgive me for this, we have all drunk water that was originally someone else’s urine. Yes, I feel your pain. Maybe you should have a drink of water? On second thoughts, maybe not.

Craig Brown

Anyway, all of these things are interesting, to a greater or lesser degree depending upon your interests. I hope this little nugget I’m about to share with you will interest you too. So back to the six levels of separation.

I’m indebted to Craig Brown’s recent book, One, Two, Three, Four on the Beatles here. Of course Craig wasn’t trying to connect Hull General Cemetery with the Fab Four. But I don’t hold that against him.

We know that William Clowes, the joint founder of Primitive Methodism, is buried in Hull General Cemetery. We also know that William was a distant cousin of Charles Darwin. Yes, that one. They were both descended from Gilbert Wedgewood (1588-1678) who was himself the great, great grandfather of Josiah Wedgewood of pottery fame.

Far out, man

But here’s where these connections get a bit more psychedelic.

On the 25th of June, 1967 the Beatles appeared in front of a world-wide audience on the first live satellite transmission. Their job? To record ‘All You Need Is Love’. In the studio they were joined by Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. Marianne Faithful and Graham Nash from the Hollies and later Crosby, Stills and Nash fame. The Small Faces and Eric Clapton were also supposed to be in that heady mix of audience and performers. And, of course, a host of ‘beautiful people’ festooned with flowers surrounded them.

More importantly, at least for our little journey, another person was also there. A man called David Mason. No, not Dave Mason from Traffic. David Mason was a professor at the Royal College of Music. According to Craig Brown, Mr Mason had played the flugelhorn,

‘At the premiere of Ralph Vaughan Williams’ Ninth Symphony, conducted by Sir Malcolm Sargent in the presence of the composer’

way back in 1958. Williams was 85 at the time of that performance, and he died shortly after this event. Incidentally Mr Mason also played the flugelhorn on Penny Lane but that’s just icing on the cake.

The missing link

Vaughan Williams’ great-uncle was Charles Darwin. And so we come to a most intriguing connection. William Clowes to Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin to Vaughan Williams. Vaughan Williams to David Mason. David Mason to the Beatles. Now maybe you can see why I used the Beatles as a title.

And, from the Beatles we can connect with so many other famous people. Cassius Clay to Charles Manson. The Maharishi to Bob Dylan. Elvis Presley to Yoko Ono. All of these people can be connected to Hull General Cemetery.

Yes, I admit the connection is a trifle loose. But, hey, give us a break here. Here’s what John Lennon thought of this idea.

No, I don’t foresee the FOHGC seeking a hand out from Yoko (net worth $700 million) on the basis of this connection. However, if you’re reading this Yoko, a small plaque might be nice. Just saying.

It’s fun to dream though isn’t it? As John Lennon said, ‘The Walrus was Bill’. Or something like that. You’ll have to excuse me. The walls are breathing and the kettle just asked me for a dance.

All together now, ‘It’s easy. All you need is love’. Dab Ba Dab Ba Da and so on.

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

The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part Two

June 1, 2021June 25, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, History, Volunteers

The initial meeting

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

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

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

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

The Committee

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

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

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

John Solomon Thompson

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

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

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

Finding the perfect site

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

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

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

Webster and Pearson

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

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

Enter Mr Broadley, M.P.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The drainage report and public disquiet

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

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

The first AGM

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

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

The formation of the Company

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

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

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

General means general

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

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

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

A grand boulevard

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

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

Cheap is best!

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

The structure of the Company

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

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

Two further resolutions

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

The second resolution would prove more disastrous.

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

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

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

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

Dr. William Gordon

June 1, 2021June 1, 2021 by Bill Longbonein Facebook Archive, History, Volunteers1 Comment

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

Dr. Wm Gordon

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

Welton hall

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

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

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

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

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

His death

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

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

Dr. Wm Gordon narrative

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

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

doctor gordon eulogy

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

Dr. Wm Gordon funeral

The monument

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dr. Wm Gordon memorial

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

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

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

Bill Longbone

Bill Longbone has had a long relationship with the Hull General Cemetery. He is an active member of the FOHGC and manages the work of the volunteers on the site. His biographical sketches of some of the people buried in the cemetery are one of the highpoints of the success of the Facebook site.

Henry Hodge

June 1, 2021June 1, 2021 by Bill Longbonein Facebook Archive, General, History1 Comment

Henry Hodge was born at Kilnsea, East Yorkshire in 1812. He was the son of a small farmer and one of 12 children. Henry Hodge can truly be described as a self-made man.

In 1826 the Hodge family moved to Hull and took on a dairy farm at Newland Tofts. As a young man Henry worked at Bell’s flour Mill on Holderness Rd. This was situated near what is now Morrill Street. The access to the mill was along a track which eventually became the entrance to the Morrill Street clinic.

Seed crushing industry

At this time seed crushing was becoming an important industry in Hull. As a result, the mill changed from a flour mill to a seed crushing mill. Around 1831 the hydraulic press was invented for crushing seed. This soon replaced the old stamper mill. The firm of Rose, Down & Thompson were one of the early fore-runners in this development.

Henry accumulated a little capital whilst working at a mill in Louth. Along with his brother, William who was now a foreman at Bell’s Mill, they purchased a former mustard and flour mill. This stood on what was then William St in Drypool. It later was renamed Hodge Street. They then installed 2 hydraulic presses to crush seed.

In 1852 the nearby Tower Mill at the junction of Holderness Rd and Clarence St was purchased. However, although the business was successful, the two brothers dissolved the partnership. William took the Tower Mill whilst Henry kept the mill in William St.

Family life

He married Jane Simpson in 1842 and they had 6 children. One of them was Emma Hodge, who married Joseph Robson. Emma became a very active member of the Primitive Methodist church. Henry’s family originally lived in East Parade on Holderness Rd between Williamson St and Field St. They also lived and worked at Blaydes House at 6 High St for a time.

In 1869 his daughter Emma died at the young age of 32. This devastated Henry. His wife, Jane had already died in 1867 aged 54 years. In 1871 Henry married his housekeeper, Emma Graves.

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

Pioneer

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

He subsequently purchased Bell’s Mill near Morrill St, where he had previously worked.

The family lived at Ivy House adjacent to the mill until his death in 1889.

In addition to being a mill owner he was also a very active member of the Primitive Methodist Church in Hull. He was also a benefactor of many good causes, and subscribed to the erection of several churches. This included the Holderness Rd chapel near Bright Street, and the Henry Hodge Memorial Chapel in Williamson Street.

He was also a member of the East Hull Conservative Club and an alderman. His brother William was twice mayor of Hull.

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

Bill Longbone

Hull General Cemetery books

May 1, 2021May 1, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin Books, General, News4 Comments

The last of the few

This is a short news item about the availability of the Hull General Cemetery books. These were written by Bill Longbone and myself regarding certain aspects of Hull General Cemetery history.

There is a side bar on this site. If you click ‘More’ a drop down menu shows a number of items. One of those items is ‘books’. It advises you that you can buy the books from Amazon.co.uk or The Head Gardener on Spring Bank.

Unfortunately this information is no longer accurate. The books are now out of print and there are no plans to reprint them. The Head Gardener does not have any copies and Amazon doesn’t either. Hull Central Library may have some copies as they bought some from us at cost to sell on. I wouldn’t know how many copies they have left if any.

There are copies of the first two books in some Hull City Council libraries. The Hull History Centre has the full set, so if you’re a bit short of the ‘readies’, and you’re desperate to read our ‘deathless prose’, you could try that option.

The good news is that I do still have a few copies left. And when I say a few I mean just that. There are two of the War Dead of HGC, one of the Public Graves etc and one of the Short Introduction to Hull General Cemetery and that is it. If you want to buy a copy of the War Dead, they are £8 each and the Public Graves and the Short Introduction are £5 each. As you know all monies go to the FOHGC.

Not clever marketing

This is not a clever marketing ploy. No one can ever accuse us of being clever! If we were clever we would never have had anything to do with the cemetery in the first place.

These Hull General Cemetery books are rare and will not come back, and if they do (very unlikely!!), definitely not in their present format. Factors such as time, inclination and general weariness are against their resurrection.

Brexit is, not surprisingly, another factor which may make the printing / publishing of them (previously done in Poland) either uneconomic or inflate the price. And we always wanted the books to be ‘pocket money’ priced. So grab them while you can.

Here’s how. Send an email to the website and we’ll arrange something from there. First come, first served.

Who knows, in a few years one of these books could be your pension nest egg! Well, maybe not. But, on balance, probably safer than Bitcoin. At least we guarantee, that whatever happens in the future, you will still have a book to read.

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 Eleanor Crosses

May 1, 2021May 1, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin Books, General, History, Public Graves, Workhouse Graves, Catacombs and Crosses1 Comment

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

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

Thompson and Stather

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

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

Family tragedy

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

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

Fig 1: 11^th September 1863, Hull Packet.

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

The second Eleanor Cross

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

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

The move to Hull

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

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

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

When was it erected?

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

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

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

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

Fig 4: Mason’s Eleanor Cross.

The saddest story of all?

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

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

The 1851 census

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

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

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

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

The death of George Peacock senior

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

Fig 6: Probate of G.P Harrison senior.

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

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

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

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

In the dock

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

The final straw

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

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

Jonathan’s death

Fig 9: Jonathan Harrison’s Death Certificate.

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

The final gesture

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

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

Not by Thompson and Stather

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

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

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

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

Melancholia or remorse?

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

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

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

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

Acknowledgements:

Fig 1: Hull Packet.

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

Figs 5, 6, 7: The National Archives.

Fig 8: Driffield Times.

Fig 9: General Record Office.

Figs 10, 11, 12: Hull History Centre.

The Catacombs of Hull General Cemetery

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

[2] See Fig 1.

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 One

May 1, 2021May 1, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, History

The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part One

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

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

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

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

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

1977 and all that

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

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

History is bunk

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

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

Today ( but actually 2015)

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

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

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

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

Burial practice and sites

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

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

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

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

The religious orders

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

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

Syphilis and suppression

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

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

Non-conformists

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

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

Population increase

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

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

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

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

The dignity of the dead

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

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

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

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

The burial grounds were full

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

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

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

Funerals

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

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

Profit

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

Civic pride and cemeteries open to all

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

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

The pioneer private cemeteries

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

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

Liverpool and local anguish

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

Kensal Green

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

And further afield

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

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

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

Cholera

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

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

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

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

Stories in the press

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

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

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

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

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

Doctor Gordon

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

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

To legislate or not

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

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

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

The Public Health Act 1848

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

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

Further stories in the press

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

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

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

Cemetery or zoo?

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

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

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

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

Even the newspapers have had enough

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

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

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

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

The green shoots of another cemetery company?

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

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

George Milner

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

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

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

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

The ball was finally rolling.

Notes

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

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

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

Wonderful Wildlife

April 1, 2021April 1, 2021 by Pete Lowdenin General, News, Wildlife1 Comment

2021: The story so far

January got off to a great start. The volunteers and visitors to the cemetery enjoyed some good and frequent views of a Buzzard. They’re not very common in and around Hull so to have one in the cemetery was an unexpected pleasure. It’s not known whether it’s male or female though, but it is still being sighted occasionally. February was a month of contrasts, with a week of snow and sub-zero temperatures at the start of the month. It ended with a week of sunshine and higher than usual temperatures. There was plenty of warm sunshine in March too.

Flowers

This winter was a bumper one for Snowdrops, with at least 3 different types in flower all over the site. The sunshine and higher than average temperatures during that last week of February gave the Lesser Celandines flowering in the grass verge on Spring Bank West a welcome boost. These low-growing bright yellow flowers open up in the sunshine and typically have between 8 and 10 petals although they can sometimes have as many as 12 or 13.

Lesser Celandines can also be found inside the Cemetery and these are now starting to flower, although being in partial shade they’re a little behind the ones on the grass verge and the stems of their flowers are noticeably longer as they reach for the sun.

The Blackthorn is already in flower – its white blossoms appear before the leaves do, unlike the Hawthorn which flowers slightly later in the Spring after its leaves have opened.

Butterflies and other insects

The Lesser Celandines provided a valuable source of nectar for some early butterflies emerging in late February. I counted 8 Small Tortoiseshells one day, plus a Peacock. Both species overwinter as adults in sheltered vegetation and will no doubt have been tempted out by the warm sun.

Butterfly sightings continued throughout March whenever it was sunny, with some more Small Tortoiseshells and 2 more Peacocks seen on the grass verge just before the Spring Equinox.

A Comma, another butterfly that overwinters as an adult, was seen later in March, again on the grass verge. It gets its name from a distinctive white comma-shaped mark on the underside of its wings.

There were lots of other insects buzzing around the grass verge in late March too including a Bee-fly, the first time I’ve seen one there. This small fluffy fly is harmless to humans and uses its long proboscis to get nectar from flowers. When hovering its wings seemingly disappear in a blur of movement.

Birds

There are several Wood Pigeons living in the cemetery and these can be seen every day pecking around on the ground or flying noisily in and out of the trees.

There is also a pair of resident Stock Doves and these are usually seen together, sometimes with the Wood Pigeons. Stock Doves are around the same size as feral Pigeons and sometimes hang around with them too.

The Stock Dove is on the left of the photo – its band of blue/green feathers is larger and more noticeable than on the Wood Pigeon and it lacks the white patch. The Wood Pigeon is the larger of the two species although this is not apparent from the photo.

The smaller birds have started to pair up and look for suitable nesting sites, but I’ll say more about them in the next newsletter.

Overall a very good start to the year, and with many of the trees and shrubs already showing small green shoots there is the promise of much more wonderful wildlife to come!

Postscript: Helen Bovill

Helen Bovill is a member of the FOHGC. She is a gifted naturalist and photographer. Her photographs have graced the FOHGC Facebook site for a while now. It’s with great pleasure that we now have the chance to share in her knowledge and expertise here. Helen has kindly consented to write an article every month on the broad subject of nature for the website newsletter. This is the first of what I hope will be many such articles. So sit back and enjoy.

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