Anniversary September 1852

The Coming of the Railway

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

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

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

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

What to do?

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

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

The meetings

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

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

This meeting took place on the 20th February.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Parliament

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

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

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

Getting the builders in

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

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

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

Bevan's Lithograph of the Cemetery

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

One cottage or two?

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

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

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

Horrified

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

Not top of the range

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

Simpson and Malone's bill for erection of two cottages

 

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

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

And there the matter was resolved.

The final cost

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

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

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

Anniversary July 1857

 

Anniversary August 1846

The month of August is an interesting anniversary.

On the 8th August 1846 the Board of the Cemetery Company had a pleasant surprise. They received a visit from a surprise visitor. That visitor was John Shields, the superintendent of York Cemetery. And this was not simply a courtesy visit. The Company minute book records that,

‘Mr John Shields, the superintendent of York Cemetery, called and laid before the chairman the following testimonials of character and stated that he would be at liberty on the first week of Sept.’

This news was a great, and probably quite a pleasant surprise. Here was an experienced superintendent of an existing cemetery who was offering his services to them. Although there appeared to be no other candidate for the post this may well have been because the Board had not gotten round to advertising for the post. They may well have not even given a thought to it. So this sudden arrival of John Shields must have almost been like manna from heaven.

The Minute book also actually records John Shields testimonial from York Cemetery,

York, August 7th 1846. The Board of the York Public Cemetery hereby certify that John Shields, our late manager and gardener has been 9 years in our service and during that time has conducted himself in an honest, sober, industrious and attentive manner and has filled his situation with ability.

Signed Thomas Price, Chairman, York Cemetery.’

On the 26th September the Board did take the proper and correct decision. They offered John the position of general superintendent, registrar and manager at the princely sum of £90 per annum. The Company also offered to pay his rent for his residence until the Lodge was inhabitable.

He remained in this post until his death in December 1866.

Anniversary June 1972

Anniversary April 1858

Sometimes, you know you are going to have a bad day. From when you get up to when you go to bed things just keep on going wrong. This month’s anniversary celebrates – if that’s the right word – a bad week for a number of people.

The clergy attack

Back in April 1858 John Shields had a bad week. On Thursday, the 1st of April Mr Shields had to defend himself against some criticism from the clergy. Mr Graham, the curate of Holy Trinity, approached the Board. He said that the superintendent had used, ‘most gross and insulting language towards him when in the discharge of his clerical duties.’

Sadly, what was said or not said, was not recorded. However, the Board said they would investigate and called Mr Shields before them. The Board may also have been wanting to be seen to do the right thing. However, the Board must also have had misgivings about Mr Graham’s evidence.

This was because the clergy of Holy Trinity parish had long held some resentment towards the Cemetery. With the coming of the Cemetery the burials in the Holy Trinity churchyard and the Castle Street burial ground had decreased sharply. This in turn affected the revenue of the clergy. And, sadly, this drop in income was probably the most important factor in their continuing to bury people in these overcrowded burial grounds.

So, the Board knew that there may well have been some other reason behind this accusation. I don’t believe that their investigation would have been more than asking Mr Shields whether he had been insulting to Mr Graham. When Mr Shields probably replied no, that would have been the end of that.

The next week

On the following Monday, the 5th, Mr Shields had a much more delicate and distasteful task before him. Let’s try to set the scene.

He will have been working in his office in the Lodge. Probably trying to get his books up to date as Sunday was the busiest day for the Cemetery. That was day when most burials took place and he was probably rushed off his feet that day getting the chapel ready for each burial. Apart from that he would have had to check the paperwork for each burial and take the monies owed. This was apart from supervising the staff throughout the day. Yes, probably a busy day and Monday was the day to sort it all out.

A knock on the door of the office. Two of his staff stood there. Probably with their caps off and maybe even shuffling their feet a little. On the door being opened I’m pretty certain that one of them would have said they’d found something. And I’m equally sure that Mr Shields would have asked what had they found and been equally as shocked at their answer.

cholera monument 1993

Inside the box

For they had found a box in the shrubbery near to the new cholera monument. Inside that box they found two dead children. Two female babies, One can imagine his shock at this news and his horror when he went to look for himself. He contacted the police immediately who arrived and took the children’s bodies away ‘to Newland to wait the Coroner’s request’.

He reported it to the Board but no more information is forthcoming in the Minute Books.

Child life expectation

However this was not a singular incident. It may well have been unusual in the confines of the Cemetery but the lives of children during this period could be short. The life expectancy in Britain in 1850 was 42 years. For the working class this would have been significantly lower, probably 28 years. And the life expectancy at this time was so low because of the large number of children who died before they reached the age of 5. Over 25% of children died before reaching the age of one. 40% of all the annual deaths in the Victorian period were of children under 5 years old.

The anonymous author of A Short History of the Hospital for Sick Children, Great Ormond Street, commented that to be an English baby at the beginning of the 20th century was ‘to occupy a position as perilous as that of a soldier going about to go into action’. With such statistics it is difficult to counter that claim.

Illegitimacy

Illegitimate babies were much more at risk. In the 1870s it was estimated that 35% of all such births in manufacturing towns died before the age of one. In London it was nearer 75%. It is highly likely that the children found in the Cemetery were illegitimate.

Let’s look at this crime a little. It is sad to say that in law, and probably in reality, this crime was seen as a ‘female crime’. Until 1803 the crime of infanticide was tried under the Bastardy Act of 1624. Under this act the mother had to prove, via witnesses, that the child had been born dead. Unless she could prove this she faced the death penalty, for it was a capital crime. Over time, as more and more juries failed to convict the accused for one reason or another, a new Act was proposed.

1803

This was the 1803 Act. This Act required the prosecution to prove that a murder had taken place. However if this could not be proved another option presented itself. The jury could return a verdict of ‘concealment of birth’. The penalty for this was from two months up to two years in prison.

Why would a woman conceal her pregnancy or the birth of a child? One of the many reasons why this would happen was the nature of Victorian society, especially towards unmarried mothers. Emsley in Crime and Society in England 1750-1900 states,

‘Most of the women brought before the courts charged with infanticide during the 18th and 19th centuries appear to have been young women, commonly servants, desperate to maintain their positions and their respectability’.

So babies were ‘routinely killed’. Carver in The 19th Century Underworld states,

‘The Thames held as many bodies as the Ganges’. He goes on to show a typical case he found in the Marylebone Mercury of August 1859,

The body of a baby boy was found floating in a water-butt of a house in Upper Boston Street. Attention had been alerted when the wife of a tenant noticed a peculiar taste in the water.’ It doesn’t bear thinking about does it? Yet, as the figures above show, this was a commonplace occurrence.

The New Poor Law

How did we get to this situation? The law didn’t help. The 1834 New Poor Law Act had a Bastardy clause. This said that all children born out of wedlock were the sole responsibility of their mothers. To gain a flavour of how the law saw such people the mothers of bastard children were described as ‘vicious’ in the legislation. It was hoped that the legislation would stop, ‘idleness, bastardy and beer drinking.’ But only in women as the Act wasn’t aimed at the other sexual partner!

Abortion

And, of course, in an attempt to avoid this scenario abortion rears its head. And we come back to the 1803 Act. Prior to that Act abortion was met with a fine or a short term of imprisonment. However if the child was terminated before ‘the quickening’ there was no penalty. The ‘quickening’ was deemed to be when the mother could feel the foetus move, around the 13th week of pregnancy.

By 1837 this loophole was removed. Under this Act,  it was only the abortionist who committed a criminal act in conducting an abortion not the mother. This changed with the introduction of the Offences Against The Person Act 1861 which is still on the statute book. It encompasses such crimes as GBH and ABH. Under this Act both the abortionist and the woman were both deemed equally guilty. Abortion was removed as a criminal act by legislation in 1967.

Conclusion

However, the foetus still needed to be disposed of. Which is where the bodies in the cemetery may well have come from.

I’m sure that John Shields’ week must have become better. I wonder more about the poor girl who gave birth. Would she ever forget her dead children being left alone in a lonely place beside a monument to death from disease? In that context John Shields’ bad week was nothing in comparison. It was not a good anniversary for her. That girl had a heavy burden to carry for much longer than a week. Placed upon her by an uncaring society. A society lauded by some politicians and historians, even now, as a highpoint of civilization. Victorian values eh?

Anniversary March 1877

 

Anniversary March 1877

This month’s anniversary is interesting. In May 1876 a discussion took place as to whether a clock tower should be built in the grounds or a clock installed in the lodge. The question rattled back and forth for months. By that September the decision was taken to install the clock into the Lodge belfry.

HGC Lodge pre 1877

This repair work was to cost £94. 5s which was a considerable sum for a building that was only 30 years old.

The AGM

In March 1877 the decision was ratified at the AGM and the plan was to install the clock and also conduct some repair work to the Lodge as it,

AGM discussion regarding the installation of the clock.

 

This interaction is interesting in a number of ways. Firstly the decision to repair to the original design shows that the Lodge was something they were proud of. Somewhat different to their feelings in the late 1840s. Then it was obvious from the Company paperwork that the Board were heartily sick of the troubles the Lodge had caused them.

Secondly, it shows the Cemetery Company still wanting to present a good image of itself to the community. The placing of the clock was civic minded. Yes, they may have cloaked this idea with the line, ‘business of the cemetery’ but they knew progress was happening.

By this time, D. P. Garbutt had begun the development of the Avenues. This development, to the Board,  was surely just the beginnings of the area the Cemetery occupied becoming more salubrious. Who knows where that may lead?

As such the installation of a clock was a smart move. It was civic-minded enough to appeal, yet it’s cost was small. In essence, a win-win situation for the Company.

Fixing the clock

The Company received a tender for fixing the clock from a Mr George Pickering of Prospect Street. This tender was accepted and the cost of making and installing the clock was £7.

The final cost of repairing the Lodge and installing the clock was a stupendous £124 10s. At this time the Company were still desirous of making a show and if that meant spending money, then so be it.

Later in its long life it would not be so happy to do so.

The Lodge to the left with clock.

 

Edward Nequest

Edward Nequest was part of a very select group of people. There were only four superintendents of Hull General Cemetery.

John Shields was the first. He and Cuthbert Brodrick laid out the paths and plots of the cemetery prior to its opening in 1847. John Shields died suddenly in 1866. He was succeeded by Edward. He himself retired in 1891. Michael Kelly took over until 1944. After that Michael’s daughter Cicely Kelly continued in this post until her enforced retirement in the 1950s. There were no more superintendents.

Edward’s birth

Edward Nequest was born in Hull in 1823. The image below shows his baptism at Holy Trinity that year.

Edward's baptism 1823

In the second column below, which may be difficult to read, the name Edward is inserted. This is followed by ‘S of’ denoting ‘son of’. The registrar also had difficult with the surname. The correction is in brackets. Edward’s parents were Peter and Mary. Their address is given as Myton and the father’s occupation is recorded as a mariner.  The incumbent of Holy Trinity at the time was John Bromby.

John Bromby

This vicar had the longest tenure of any incumbent of this parish. He became the vicar of Holy Trinity in 1797 and stepped down from the post in 1867 after 70 years service. He died the following year and is buried in the churchyard of North Ferriby.

Edward was the second son from this marriage. The first son was also called Peter and he was born in 1821 and baptised at the same church.

Peter Nequest elder brother bapt 1821

Home

We have no idea of where the Nequest family lived at this time but by the 1841 census we know the family lived in Cogan Street.  It still exists but in a truncated form. Clive Sullivan Way now occupies the southern part where Cogan Street stood.

Cogan Street 1890

In the 1841 census of Peter Nequest we find him listed as a ‘Stower’, and his wife, Mary, is strangely placed near the end of the family listing. The 1841 census generally is a blunt tool in comparison with later ones. It often rounded the ages of children up or down to the nearest five yearly span. We find that in the 1841 Nequest census both of Peter’s sons’ ages, Peter and Edward, are given as 15 yet Peter would have been 20 and Edward 18 at the time. The younger Peter, as you can see, is listed as an attorney’s clerk. Edward was soon to follow his brother into this profession.

You may also see that Peter the elder has an ‘F’ against his name. That is because he was born in Sweden in 1793 and migrated to Hull. We have no information why he did this. A shrewd guess would be that it may have been due to the Napoleonic Wars and the British blockade of the continent at the time. A mariner would have found work difficult at that time and emigrating to Britain was a way out of this dilemma.

Peter, Ed's father 1841 census

1851 census

By the time of the 1851 census Edward has moved from the family home. He now lived in a small terrace called Ville Terrace off the newly laid out Hessle Road not far from no1. Hessle Road.

Edward nequest 1851

Perhaps more importantly for Edward was that he now was married. He had married Ann Plaxton in 1849. He was also a solicitor’s clerk.

Ed marr cert 1849

Not just any solicitor. He was apprenticed and articled to one of the most famous solicitors in Hull. His employer was Charles Spilman Todd. This man had been instrumental in carrying through the purchase of the cemetery’s grounds. Indeed the first meeting of the provisional committee took place in his office at no.15 Bowlalley Lane.

15, Bowlalley Lane today

C.S.Todd as he was known was both the solicitor and secretary for the Company and also was a large shareholder. Still later in his life he was a councillor and became the secretary for the Local Board of Health and eventually he was elected as Sheriff of Hull. The Creation of Hull General Cemetery: Part Two

Shadrach Wride

In the 1840s the first secretary to C.S.Todd was a man called Shadrach Wride. This man is worthy of an article himself.

Baptised in 1796 in Holy Trinity the year before Rev. Bromby took over. Shadrach was the son of a man of the same name. This man had been the foreman of Jackson’s wood yard in the Groves and he ‘luckily’ married the bosses’ daughter.  When he died in 1823 he left the business to his son. Whether the business was in a good state or worth anything is open to question.

Sadly the business failed in 1827 and Shadrach Wride entered the Bankruptcy Court. The timber yard was auctioned off. Even the family home on Charterhouse Lane had to be sold.

wride's bankruptcy June 1827

Debtor’s prison

One has to remember the draconian laws then regarding debts. Today a person who becomes bankrupt can have that burden discharged after two or three years whilst not paying their debts. Not so in Georgian and Victorian times. Charles Dickens’s father was a debtor and was placed in Marshalsea Prison until the debt was repaid. Dickens himself had to work in a blacking factory to help pay this debt at the tender age of 12. This had a marked effect upon the young boy and it came out in his works in later life.

Little Dorrit is almost completely set inside a debtor’s prison. Nicholas Nickelby, Great Expectations and Pickwick Papers all allude or feature the stigma of the debtor’s prison. Shadrach Wride would have used all in his power to avoid being imprisoned for this ‘crime’. That he did so, and was later rehabilitated says a great deal about the man.

Rebuilding his life

After this date Shadrach contented himself in making ends meet by taking on a number of roles. Often cited as an agent for insurance companies and emigration agencies he was still a respected member of society. He was the secretary for the Fish street Church and was part of that committee until his death. His abode was at 15 Spring Bank, on the corner of Spring Street, and this address was often used as a postal address for the Cemetery before the lodge was built.

15 Spring Bank

To show that the ‘Good Old Days’ never really existed the newspaper item below perhaps shows that modern life is typical of what went before.

lead stealing from Wride

Mr Wride was also the secretary for the C.S.Todd’s legal practice and therefore the secretary for the Company. The evidence for this is often to be found in the newspapers of the time but also in the records of the Company that still exist.

S Wride first prospectus issued for HGC April 1845

Shadrach Wride was also listed as the Company secretary on the brass plate that was buried in the foundations of the Lodge at the official opening of the Cemetery in June 1847.

Wride’s death

So the man’s death came as a shock to many parties. Shadrach died on July 25th 1850 as the news item below shows.

Wrides death

He is buried in Hull General Cemetery in compartment 35 only two grave spaces away from his employer C.S.Todd’s own grave. the cause of death is cited as apoplexy. The vacancy he left was filled by Edward Nequest.

Edward’s work

The first we learn of Edward’s new appointment is once again via the local newspaper. This is some five years after Wride’s death. It is obvious that Edward is not taking things for granted, signing himself as pro secretary. The term ‘pro‘ here is standing for pro tem, meaning for the time being. There were no chickens being counted too early here.

ed nequest first mention as sec of HGC 1855

By the following March, in a further newspaper item, Edward signs himself as the secretary, so his appointment must have been confirmed.

However whether any such appointment was ever confirmed is open to doubt. Shadrach Wride’s occupation given in the Cemetery’s burial register is ‘agent to the life insurance company‘ even though he had been both C.S.Todd and the Company secretary for at least five years. Edward, when he bought graves in the Cemetery, is listed as ‘Attorney’s clerk’ and this terminology lasted until the mid 1860s. It appears that the Company didn’t like to be tied down.

Domestic issues

But we are getting ahead of ourselves a bit here. Edward, as we know, was a family man and the domestic side of his life needs some explaining. Or at least an attempt should be made for there is one aspect that is a mystery.

Edward Nequest owned three graves in Hull General Cemetery. They are in compartment 105 close to the south side of the cemetery.

Nequest graves in comp 105

Whether he bought them all at the same time is debateable. What we do know was that the first purchase took place in 1850 for on the 3rd October the first burial took place within it. This was of a young girl, Jane Bell. This child was the daughter of ‘the late Robert Bell, Customs Officer’. I have struggled to find a family connection but in vain. The only supposition I have come up with is that Robert Bell may have been a friend and neighbour as the address given is Elizabeth Place, Hessle Road. This was very near to Edward’s own address at the time. I’m afraid this tenuous link is the best I can do.

1861

By the time of the 1861 census Edward had moved house. He now lived at a house in Porter Street with his wife and young daughter Mary Ann.

1861 census

Sadly, only 2 years later, in the July of 1863, this child was the second burial in this plot. Measles and consumption of the bowels was the cause of death.

Becoming superintendent

In November 1866 John Shields, the first superintendent passed away suddenly. In the following January the Board appointed Edward Nequest to the post of superintendent.

They also decided, short-sightedly, to combine the roles of superintendent and secretary. Seemingly implemented as a cost-cutting measure it alienated their solicitor, the fore-mentioned C.S.Todd who resigned from the Board. When he became the secretary to the Local Board of Health this alienation came back to bite the Company but that is another story. An Anniversary

The minute books

The minute books of the Company record this decision.

‘Special meeting of directors 20/12/66. Present Irving, Bell and Oldham

‘The vacancy occasioned by the death of Mr S. the late superintendent again came under consideration of the board when the question as to the desirability of amalgamating the two offices of secretary and supt., was discussed and it was ultimately unanimously resolved that in the opinion  of the board, the time has now arrived when it seems desirable that the two offices of sec., and supt., may be advantageously combined.

It was further resolved that a copy of the foregoing resolution be handed to C.S.Todd esq, the secretary and that the directors have an early interview with him on the subject. The necessity of filling up the vacancy occasioned by Mr. Shield’s death having been discussed and an application for the office received from Mr Nequest having been considered it was unanimously resolved that taking  into consideration Mr Nequest’s long and satisfactory connection with the company the situation of supt., and registrar be offered to him at the salary of £110 per annum with the use of the lodge and this his duties to commence on Tuesday the first of January 1867.’

This appointment was recorded in the local press.

nequest appt jan 1867

A Company Man

It’s fair to say that Edward threw himself into his work, much like John Shields had done, and Michael Kelly after him would do. Edward often represented the Company at investigations and on committees. In 1868 he applied to Cottingham Local Government Board for them to provide two lamps outside of the Cemetery which they agreed to. This would have been the first street lighting on what was to become Princes Avenue.

He was less successful in 1873 when he asked them to repair the road outside the cemetery.

In 1869 he attended the Local Burial Board Committee and spoke, mentioning that new burial ground of the Corporation ( Old Western Cemetery) was rapidly filling up. The same year he had to explain that it was Company policy to give visiting clergymen a surplice at the office and not to give them a surplice at the graveside as one irate clergyman demanded. The Burial Board sided with Edward.

An important meeting

A more important meeting that Edward attended took place before this appointment as superintendent. On the 21st April 1860 the Hull Advertiser recorded his intervention into a meeting of the South Myton Guardian Society.

In the meeting, which appeared to have been called as to whether the parishioners of Holy Trinity should pay for a new burial ground, Edward was forthright. The snippets below, taken from a very long article, show that Edward was a bright, eloquent speaker who was passionate about the Cemetery.

Nequest south myton meeting april 1860 1

Still later, in defending the Hull General Cemetery’s charges,

nequest south myton 2

Needless to say that the parishioners voted against having a rate set against them for the purchase of a burial ground. The result of this was that Castle Street continued to be used for burial for a further year until Sophia Broadley donated the land to lay out Division Road cemetery in 1862.

1871 and after

By 1871 his family had increased and living in the lodge must have become a bit tiresome.

1871 census Nequest

As we know, three years later he requested that he be allowed to move from the lodge. Anniversary January 1874 This request was accepted by the Board and he moved out to a larger house. This was at 7, Zoological Terrace, situated on the corner of Norwood street and in between the Swedenborgian Church on one side and St Jude’s on the other corner of Norwood Street.

Spring Bank 1904

It is the building with the group of men outside of it on the pavement in this image. Here’s another image and it is the house with the steeple behind it.

Nequest's house, Spring Bank

Edward continued to live at this address until his death in the 20th century. By the time of the 1881 census there had been no new additions to the family but as you can see below Elizabeth had married.

1881 census Nequest

A terrible decade

She had married John Frederick Byron and had borne him a son, Frederick Edward the following year. Her husband was still living with his parents at 47, Stanley Street and he lists himself as a ‘foreman of wine and spirits warehouse’. 

In the 1880s his daughter, now Elizabeth Byron, lost three children. Ann on the 22nd of October 1885. She was 5 days old. The cause of death was put as premature birth. The following year, in October 1886, Ellen died at the age of 12 days old. Her cause of death was listed as disease of the spine. And in the February of 1889 another daughter, Lillie, died at the age of four from croup.

Culminating a terrible decade for Edward in the September of 1889 he lost his wife Ann. She died of cancer of the liver. Her death took place at 2, Albion Place, Quay Road, Bridlington. Cancer is rarely a sudden death and I surmise that Ann was away from home, probably with Edward, as a holiday / leave taking for both of them.

Edward's wife's burial record 1889

Going through the motions

It’s fair to say that the loss of his wife was a disaster for Edward. I would suppose that he no longer wanted to be associated with death for it now held painful memories for him. Sadly, worse was to come.

In the meantime, in the September of 1891, he offered his resignation from his post as Superintendent and Secretary for the Hull General Cemetery.

Its arrival is recorded in the Company minute books,

‘Read a letter that from Mr Nequest tendering his resignation of the office of secretary as and from 30 instance. Resolved that such a resignation be accepted. Read a letter from a Mr Kelly of Granville Street, Hull, for the office of secretary and superintendent rendered vacant by the resignation of Mr Nequest and after considering the same and it appearing that Mr Kelly was suitable person to fill the office it was resolved that Mr M Kelly be and he is hereby appointed secretary and superintendent on the terms named in his application.’

His daughter

Edward’s daughter by now had a family of three children. Frederick Edward now aged 10, Charles aged 8 and Gertie, born that year. Her husband, John Frederick, now listed himself as a dock labourer, so a definite coming down in the world for the family. They lived at Ebenezer Place, Raywell Street which was off Charles Street.

By the 1901 census John Frederick is nowhere to be seen and Elizabeth is listed as a widow. Indeed this is strange record for all the inhabitants are simply designated with initials.

Elizabeth Nequest 1901 census

The truth of the matter is that John Frederick had absconded to the United States where he proceeded to make a new life for himself and scant regard for his past life.

His mother had died in 1883 and his father died in 1894. By 1895 he had emigrated. two years later he committed bigamy by marrying Ruth Newman on the 15th September 1897 in Salt Lake City. I say committed bigamy but Salt lake City was and is the home of the Mormon religion and polygamy is accepted and recognised there. Did John F Byron become a Mormon? We have no way of knowing. Suffice to say that he had six more sons and five more daughters whilst in the USA so we can say he embraced his second wife if not the religion. He died in 1918 in Idaho.

Her illness

We have no idea why he absconded. It could well have been that his wife Elizabeth was ill. She eventually died from locomotor ataxia. This disease was and is extremely problematic and embarrassing for sufferers. Predominantly it is a disease of the spine. It manifests itself in locomotion issues such as jerky walking and disorientated movements which give the appearance of being drunk. Sufferers need to constantly check where there are limbs are. It is often a symptom of Tabes Dorsalis which itself is often a symptom of tertiary syphilis.

Elizabeth Byron, Edward's daughter burial rec

Elizabeth died in 1903. She is buried in grave number 14765, the bottom burial plot in the image shown earlier. You many note that the other grave plots are classed as B whilst Elizabeth’s is D. She is the sole occupant of that grave plot. I’m sure, like me, you can hypothesise about why this occurred but it is only guesswork and perhaps we should leave this tragedy untroubled.

1911 and beyond

Edward's 1911 census

The 1911 census shows Edward living in his home with his son Edward and a housekeeper. The house was spacious consisting of eight rooms and both the Edwards appear to be living a comfortable life.

The elder Edward died on the 3rd July 1920 at the age of 97.

Edward Nequest burial record

His son then married! At the age of 56!! Once again we can wonder at this turn of events. Did the younger Edward love someone whom his father disapproved? We shall never know. And once again tragedy stalks this family. The younger Edward survived his father by less than five months, dying in the December of the same year.

He left a gross estate of £3,301 and personal wealth of £731 to his new bride Mary Elizabeth (nee Young) who continued to live in 183 Spring Bank. On February 2nd 1949, Mary Elizabeth Nequest died. She was cremated and her ashes were buried alongside her husband and her in-laws in grave number 14363. With her death this line of the family ended.

Obituary

Finally let us leave with the obituary that the Hull Daily Mail saw fit to print about Edward.

obit nequest 1920

 

 

Anniversary January 1874

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

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

1871 census Nequest

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

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

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

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

HGC lodge

Nequest said in a presentation to the Board that,

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

Census entries

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

1881 census Nequest

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

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

Formerly house of Edward Neguest cemetery supt HGC

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

 

Anniversary August 1907

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

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

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

The Lodge

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

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

What was found

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

August 1907, minute book

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

Qualms?

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

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

Hopefully a brighter anniversary next month.

An Anniversary

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

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

Board meeting minutes April 16 1847a

April 16 1847b

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

Lack of capital

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

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

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

The  first of the cutbacks but not the last

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

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

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