Mary Mills
Introduction
Tide Mills have been one of the least known areas of
pre-fossil fuelled powered machinery.
Despite recent research which has drawn attention to them – and a small
number of preserved sites – it is common to have to explain that they were
different to wind or conventional water mills.
Tide mills tended to be used for large scale production and to be
promoted by big concerns - industry or institutions with a considerable
throughput. In recent years it has
become clear that there were several large tide mills on the Thames, and its
tributaries, some very early. In all
probability others remain to be identified.
In 2008 what appears to be a tide mill dating from the 11th
century was found during building work on the Greenwich riverside. Still
unresearched, the preliminaryassumption has been that this was part of an early
medieval industrial complex owned by the Ghent based religious order who were
then the land ownersand this assumption is made because that is the typology of such
mills.Description
of such sites has tended to concentrate on the developing technology rather
than ownership, their place in the economy, and their national or local use. It
is also worth noting that the use of tidal power, and how this can be
implemented, is again a subject for modern technological interest.
This essay describes some of the background to a
different and much later East Greenwich tide mill from the very early 19th
century. It can be shown to have
originated as part of a nascent industrial suburb and to have declined through
a series of disasters. It is written to
complement Brian Strong’s excellent article in London’s Industrial Archaeology which
described the technology which the mill embodied in terms of the evolution of
milling technology.[1]
The mill was however important in other ways – and
its history over the roughly 100 years of its existence demonstrates a changing
world and changing technologies. The mill, as Brian has shown, was sited on a
remote part of riverside in the earliest days of the 19th
century. Of interest is who commissioned
it, chose the site and determined where it would be – a process we would now
describe as ‘development’. Who was the
designer and did he produce other mills, or pieces of equipment? One feature that should be examined is the
use of a new technology during the building of the mill and the far reaching
changes brought about by that. What
happened to the mill after it was finished? Did it work? Who was using it 50 years later? The answers
might turn out to be something both unexpected and part of revolutions in other
industries. How did the area around it change?
Did it remain useful? And finally – what took its place when it was gone
and was that yet another new technology?
In this article I have tried to give a history of
the mill and the area around it. Some of
this material has already appeared in popular articles – mainly in Bygone Kent,
and the local Greenwich press. On all aspects however new insights have emerged
with new material and these are included here.
The
Mill Site
The mill did not stand alone but, although there is
a contemporary pub and a line of cottages nearby, its site in 1802,was isolated.[2]It
stood on the east bank of what would then have been called ‘Greenwich Level’ or
‘Greenwich Marsh’. The Marsh – now
GreenwichPeninsula – was cut off from the town of Greenwich both geographically
and administratively. It was a gated area levying its own rate and employing
staff to maintain the marshland. Membership
of its management body was drawn from land owners and thus dominated bylarge
and powerful charities.[3]There
were few buildings on the Marsh – sheds, maybe a watch house and on the east
bank a rope walk newly opened by the ex-clerk of the great Woolwich rope works.
[4]
There was something else – across the river was
Blackwall and the great Blackwall Yard. On the river would be anchored great
ships – technological marvels – of the East India Company bringing the cargoes
of the Orient, and their profits, to the Thames. The mill was actually sited at a part of the
river called Bugsby’s Hole, and while we don’t know who Bugsbywas,the place
name was known by sailors round the world.
Building the
Mill
The developer of the mill and of ‘New East
Greenwich’ was a soap maker, George Russell, who had come from relatively
humble beginning to have one of the largest soap houses in London – at Old
Barge House, now the site of the ‘Oxo’ tower by Blackfriars Bridge.[5]
Later it was to belong to the Hawes family with wide industrial interests and a
daughter married to Isambard Kingdom Brunel.
As a wealthy man, in his old age,Russell had bought land on Greenwich
Marsh. He died before the mill was completed and,with all his other property,it
went into Chancery and thus in all probability the project lost its initial
impetus. [6]
Initially Russell's workmen, under his foreman Thomas Taylor, made bricks there. This involved digging up the 'brick earth'
which was then moulded and baked. The dirty, smelly, activity began to worry
the marsh bailiff – the 'wall reeve'- Philip Sharpe. One day in April 1796, he
walked down to the site and met Thomas Taylor. An argument developed. Taylor said ‘Damn your eyes Mr Sharpe, if you come here I will polish your teeth and stop
your eyes with mud, Sir!' He followed this up by ordering John Bicknell, who
was standing nearby, to push Sharpe off the river wall. Bicknell,[7]a young lad who would later be the Greenwich Vestry Clerk, did as he was told.[8]
Soon after Mr. Russell applied
for official permission to build a wharf and causeway into the river.[9]This
causeway was to remain in place until 1999 when it was removed by the New
Millennium Experience Company. The
consent of the City of London Conservators was always needed if the river bank
was to be cut or breached and in 1802 they were approached by a William Johnson
who wanted to cut the bank in order to erect a flour mill. In June 1802 he had approached Morden
College, who stillhold large amounts of land on the west bank of the Peninsula,
asking permission to build a corn mill but they had responded saying that it would
only be given for a ‘valuable
consideration’.[10]By
October of the same year he had gained permission from Russell ‘to cut the
bank’ and had employed a Mr. Hollingsworth to do so.[11]
Johnson already held a series of patents and was to
apply for many more.[12]He
apparently came from Liverpool but was living in Widmore House, Bromley, Kent,
with a young family.[13]
With the mill under construction he moved to Montpelier Row in Blackheath.
There are some other unresolved issues about the
mill. An article in The Engineer of 1900 cites an unknown source which says the
mill was built for the London Flour Company. This Company had been authorised
by an Act of Parliament to deal with
concerns about shortages and high prices in the markets and the promoters wished
to manufacture flour and bread themselves to sell 'at reasonable prices'.[14] The company had an interest in a number of
mills along the Thames and Lea but no other reference has emerged about their
activity in East Greenwich.
Information which may relate to thisis given in a
document of 1842.[15]This
refers to a lease on the site between the Right Honourable John Earl of Chatham,[16]
the Right Honourable William Pitt,[17],
the Right Honourable Edward Crags,[18], and
Lord Eliot with the Honourable John Eliot.[19]
What this group of elite politicians has to do with the mill and its
surroundings remains unresolved but it may concern the Flour Company.
New East Greenwich and The Pilot
There may also be another link to William Pitt and
what appear to have been plans for an industrial village here. Still standing are a group of cottages and a
pub in a sort of courtyard called Riverway - the remains of Marsh Lane which
once ran to the east bank of the Peninsula from Blackwall Lane. In the early 20th century it was
renamed Riverway and in the late 1990s cut off from the river by the New
Millennium Experience Company. This was
once a much bigger settlement with several terraces of cottages and community
spaces. There was also a ‘big house’ on the riverside – called East Lodge, and
probably demolished in the early 20th century. Most of the rest was demolished
in the mid-20th century by the London County Council and the Central
Electricity Generating Board.The remaining cottages were only saved from demolition
in the 1990s by a last minute listings order. They are generally known as
Ceylon Place.
This name of Ceylon Place can
be explained by national events. In 1802, the year of the construction of the
cottages, Ceylon was ceded to the British Crown as part of the Treaty of
Amiens, thought at the time to represent the end of the wars with France. The pub is called the
Pilot and has recently been greatly extended and made to look older than its
200 years as a little one-bar local. On
the wall is a plaque ‘New East Greenwich 1802’.
From this we can infer that Russell intended a new settlement with that
name. The name has sometimes been taken to mean that 'pilots' used the causeway
which once stood at the river end of Riverway.
There was no pilot station there or indeed any reference to pilots or
pilotage activity. The current inn sign, erected by Fullers, shows a pilot
bird.However the derivation of the name might be solved by reference to a
dictionary of quotations. Under‘George Canning’ you will find a line from a
song, 'here's to the Pilot that Weathered the storm’. This was written for the
inauguration of the Pitt Club in 1802 and to celebrate the acquisition of Ceylon
and the Treaty of Amiens. The pilot of the song is William Pitt –hence the pub
name.
Visit by Olinthus Gregory
Returning to the mill itself, Brian has given
details of its construction and plan. Most of what we know about this is
derived from Olinthus Gregory’s account of his visit.[20]
Gregory was Mathematics Master at the Royal Military Academy in Woolwich, later,
in 1808, replacing Hutton as Professor.[21] It appears that one day he went for a walk along
the riverside and arrived at the site of the mill, then under construction. His drawings and description appeared in
Brian’s earlier article. However it should be noted that while on site he spoke
at length to the site foreman, a Mr. Dryden who was very critical of the plans
for the mill – something he was to raise later, as we will see.
The mill was built by the millwrighting firm of
Lloyd and Ostell. They were based in Gravel Lane, off the Blackfriars Road, and
had undertaken other major contracts in south east England. John Lloyd is buried in the graveyard of
Christ Church, Blackfriars Road.[22]
Richard Trevithick’s
Engine at the Mill
We now encounter a drama which was to shake the
development of the steam engine and to damage the reputation of one of our most
important engineers. The many references
to it in histories of steam ascribe its site to anywhere between Rotherhithe
and Woolwich – but it happened here in East Greenwich at the end of Marsh Lane.
The use of high pressure steam had been thought dangerous and
difficult but was
developed by the Cornish engineer, Richard Trevithick. In 1802 he set up a
London office and began to promote the system.
Sales were handled by Andrew Vivian and,in 1803,
George Russell ordered an 8 horse power high pressure engine from him. It was to be used during construction work of the mill and for pumping out
water during construction. It cost £75.12s.[23]
As building work progressed during 1803 the steam engine began to give
some concern. The fire was in direct contact with the cast iron boiler and on
Sunday 4th September it overheated. The boiler became red hot and some joints
burnt out. Despite this the engine was
kept working and was the responsibility of an, unnamed, apprentice. On the following Thursday, the 8th September,
this boy was called away from minding the engine and asked to catch eels which were
under the foundations of the building. He
went off and left the steam lever - which vented the waste steam - fastened
down. He did this by wedging a piece of timber at the top of the safety value
and then bent it down so that it could not rise to let the steam escape. A
labourer was asked to mind the engine while the boy was gone and noticed that
it had begun to run too fast. He was alarmed by this and shut it down but he
did not remove the wedge jamming the safety valve. The result was inevitable and fatal. The
boiler burst 'with an explosion as sudden and as dreadful as a powder
mill'. One piece of the boiler, an inch
thick and weighing 5 cwt was thrown 125 yards in the air and 'landing on the
ground made ahole eighteen inches deep'. Bricks were thrown in a 'circle of two
hundred, no two of them stayed together'.
Three men were killed instantly, and three more were injured.[24]
Of the three who were injured, one went deaf but was soon to able to
return to work. The boy, also fully recovered.
The third, Thomas Nailor, had been showered with boiling water and was
badly scalded. A wherry was called and
he was taken to St.Thomas’ Hospital – then still on its old site in the Borough.
Thus Nailor went quickly and efficiently to one of the best hospitals in the
country but despite the work of Mr. Bingham, the surgeon, Nailor died three
days later. [25]
The newspapers were quick to report the accident - although there is a
suspicion that the story was given to them by those who did not wish Trevithick
well. He said himself that 'Boulton and Watt are about to do me every injury in
their power for they have done the best to report the explosion both in the
newspapers and in private letters very different to what it really was'. [26]When
The Times ran the story a week later it was with the rider that Mr. Watt's
engines would not explode in this way.[27]
Trevithick quickly made some changes to the design of his boilers.[28] It had been said in the press that the
accident should be a 'warning to engineers to construct their safety valves so
that common workmen cannot stop them at their pleasure'. In future Trevithick's boilers had more
than one safety vent and were constructed differently. [29]
Rescue Work by Brian Donkin and John Hall
Work continued on construction. The mill was finished and began work.
Johnson appears to have lived in the Mill House until 1807, when he was
replaced by William Doust.[30]
Johnson then went off to the Maldon area where he either owned or was involved
in a salt works. He later seems to have gone to Cheshire and then to
Millbank. He may or may not have been
the William Johnson involved in the Haytor Granite concern.[31]
Later the Mill is sometimes recorded as belonging to Thomas Pattrick;
indeed, it was ofren known as ‘Pattrick’s Mill’.[32] Before he became the miller there was to be
more upheaval at the newly constructed mill. It was, to put it shortly, falling
down.[33]
Following
Russell’s death the estate went into Chancery for a long period. It was
administered by the law firm of Sharpe and Handasyde – and Sharpe’s role in the
1796 altercation, above, should be noted.
They called in Brian Donkin[34]
to give an opinion on the state of the mill. It was then only seven years old, but
was sinking into the soft ground, causing the walls to twist. There was water
under the building and the wharves had collapsed. John Lloyd and his foreman, Mr. Dryden,
refused to talk to Donkin until some money had changed hands but later worked
out a solution, but one which would need extensive and expensive engineering
work, including changes to the mill ponds and to the riverside. Donkin employed
his friend John Hall[35]
to do the work. This was a massive and major work and it was accompanied by
constant complaints from Sharpe and the other executors to keep costs down and
to work faster. In 1812 Sharpe went
bankrupt and Handasyde denied having had any money belonging to the estate. Hall consulted his solicitor andin 1813 a
court found Handasyde was liable for the debt – but Donkin’s diary says little
else about this part of the affair. [36]
How Frank Hills made a Fortune
It has to be assumed that Donkin and Hall finished
the work on rebuilding the mill and that it then continued to grind corn
peacefully on the riverside. It is a pity therefore that some thirty years
laterit was described as a ‘heap of materials’. [37] This description come from Frank Hills, the
then owner, who was trying to get a reduction in his rates, so maybe, in those
circumstances, it is not a surprise.
Frank Hills had bought the mill in 1842. Colourful and unscrupulous he is generally
described as ‘the Deptfordchemist’. In
fact his interests extended far beyond Greenwich ‑and Deptford and he was to
die a very rich man.[38]
The auctioneers’ advertisement gives some
information about the mill, forty years after its construction. “A spacious brick built tide mill ... with
slated roof - five square floors and a
floor in roof .... two water wheels ....
twelvepair of stones ...extensive
ponds for supplying the mill ...two acres of meadow land. in addition there was a “spacious brick built
residence .... The Pilot a brick-built
public house ....eight brick-built dwelling houses’.[39]
It seems likely that corn continued to be
ground at the East Greenwich mill under Hills ownership but it is not clear if
the tide mill continued to work. From 1845 it was described as 'a steam flour
mill' and perhaps the tide mill itself was replaced by a 25 horse power steam
engine. This had made been by William
Joyce whose factory was alongside Deptford Creek in Greenwich. [40]
On the riverbank to the north of the mill,Hills
built a chemical works which was gradually extended - for instance in 1869 an
ammonia plant was built. Complaints from local people multiplied about a smell
of 'an acid and sickening character'.
This could be discerned not only in Greenwich and Charlton but 'appeared
to annoy the garrison at Woolwich'- three miles away.[41]Frank
Hills’ main manufacture here was the extraction of chemicals from gas works
waste and processing this into saleable items. He also made manure. It is
perfectly possible he did all sorts of other things. Many of his activities wait to be unearthed
but he operated mines in Spain[42]
and in Anglesey on Parys Mountain[43]. He also owned salt works,[44]
phosphate interests[45]
and the largest shipbuilding works on the Thames.[46]
All this was extended by other chemical works owned by his numerous brothers,
sons, sons-in-law and nephews,
In 1865 special tanks were installed on
the mill site to hold acid. Other acids
were made on site- nitric, tartaric and oxalic - as well as dyes. [47]The
present day family have a story of a special and very profitable mauve dye.[48]
There was also a manure manufactory and for this there were two 30-ft long
steam boilers with a chimney as well as an 'Archimedean screw' and a bone
crusher. The manure was made from 'shoddy', waste leather, dry bones, bone ash
and refuse from sugar bakers - that is, whatever organic rubbish could be
bought cheaply. It was then piled up and mixed with sulphuric acid. In 1871 Mr.
Pink, the Medical Officer of Health for Greenwich, gave 'advice' designed for
'abatement of the nuisance which these works could scarcely have failed to
occasion'.
There was a fatal accident at the East
Greenwich Mill when,in 1846, Francis Levers, Thomas Darby and Richard Middleton
died when they climbed into a giant mixing bowl to clean it. The bottom of the
bowl was full of fumes which suffocated them.[49]
In the 1840s more housing was built in
Riverway for Hills' workers, called River Terrace. Hills' works manager, Thomas
Davies from Oswestry lived at East Lodge. Thomas Davies had a family of four
daughters who produced a lively and interesting family magazine - much of it dealing
with their holidays in Anglesey.[50]
The End of the Mill
[51]Frank Hills died in 1895, closely followed by his two eldest sons.
He had left £1,942,836,11s.
11d, an enormous fortune at the time. His estate was however broken up and the
tide mill site was sold to the South Metropolitan Gas Company. They continued to run the chemical works as
their Phoenix Works and this remained into the 1980s. The site is now largely grassland north of
the Pilot.
The
mill building was eventually demolished. It is not clear when and it may or may
not appear in photographs into the 1920s. The massive mill ponds to the west of
the mill appear on Goad plans of 1927 and may have persisted for longer. A
feature marked ‘cooling pond’ is shown in the same place on maps of the early
1950s.
The mill was completely forgotten until local historian, Julian Watson, saw a reference to it in a history of tide mills and published a short article in Greenwich and Lewisham Antiquarian Society Transactions.[52]More detailed research followed until a fuller picture emerged. The surroundings have now been completely altered with Riverway cut off from the river, the causeway removed and tower blocks on riverside sites. Thus the layout alone of the area would be unrecognisable to those who built and worked in the mill. An archaeological report was prepared and paid for by the developer. This says, in part, that they “identified deep and heavily truncated structural remains of various dates. These were in the form of post medieval brick walls, concrete foundations, bases and floors, brick lined well/soakaway, timber piles and modern concrete pile and slabs. The results indicate the presence of fragmentary remains of the buildings that had formerly occupied the site, although which building they represent cannot be fully ascertained”. [53] It is unfortunate that this survey was undertaken before the publication of Maureen Greenland’s biography and the material contained in the Donkin diary was available -since this might have provided a tool for a proper on-site analysis.
Conclusion
Much of the history of the
mill is of disaster. Poor quality building was partly to blame.
Johnson’s scheme was probably not thought through - he was not a millwright and
his subsequent history shows a lot of bright ideas over many disparate fields.
Mr. Dryden, the foreman, was probably right in his criticism of the scheme to
Olinthus Gregory. The accident to the steam engine is an interesting
episode with its own locus in the history of the high pressure engine – plus
some supervisory neglect, presumably by Mr. Dryden.
Thus the mill was from the start conceived as part of an industrial
suburb by the landowner and developer. We don’t know if it was Russell’s idea
to build the mill and recruited Johnson to build it, or if Johnson came up with
his plans and persuaded Russell to implement them. Regardless, it is
very likely that Russell intended to develop the land and install some sort of
production unit or workplace. What is not clear is what the mill was
intended to produce and how that was to be implemented – despite unconfirmed
stories of the London Flour Company. It is not until Frank Hills
came along with a ready-made industry did the mill have an actual purpose. This
is too often the history of development when a key feature is installed,
because they must install something, rather than thinking through if it is
actually useful. Russell’s death and the administration of the
estate in Chancery must also be a factor in this.
The site of this important mill was ignored for many years in the
history of Greenwich and even now has proved of marginal interest compared to
other local sites in the area[54]. This may just be the next stage in the
history of a building which was never a success."
Notes
and References
[1] Strong, B. E. 2015 A tidal mill at East Greenwich. London’s Industrial Archaeology 13 p.32-41.
[2] Map evidence alone will demonstrate its isolation. The Skinner plan of 1746 gives a vast amount of detail and should be compared with the Tithe Map of 1844.
[3].Bartlett,W.V., 'The River & the Marsh at East Greenwich', Trans. Greenwich & Lewisham Antiquarians, Vol.7, No.2, 1964-5,
[4] St. Alfege Rate books 1800. University College London. Survey of London.Vol 48.Woolwich. 2012
[5]Gentleman's Magazine, May 1804
[6]Russell v. Sharpe Chancery 1808 (at PRO)
[7]John Laurens Bicknell would have been about 12 at the time! He was the son of Sabrina Sidney, who as a young girl had been ‘bought’ to be trained as the perfect wife. She later worked for Charles Burney at his Greenwich school and John went on to a legal career as solicitor to the Admiralty, and to become a fellow of the Royal Society. Bicknell appears in many accounts of Greenwich in the early 19th century, found in Trans. Greenwich & Lewisham Antiquarians and also See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Laurens_Bicknell
[8]Greenwich Commission of Sewers. Minutes.
[9] City Conservators. Minutes
[10] Morden College. Trustees Minutes
[11] James Hollingsworth, a Scottish engineer, then working with Rennie on London dock schemes. See entry in A.W. Skempton& Mike Chrimes..Biographical Dictionary of Civil Engineers in Great Britain and Ireland: 1500-1830 v. 1. ICE 2002
[12] Patent 2411 “Machine for obtaining a self moving power or perpetual motion; is cited as the relevant patent among several taken out by Johnson. See The Engineer 12 VIII 1901. Johnson also wrote an article explaining his system in the Times 20th December 1800
[13]See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuthbert_William_Johnson. Cuthbert was William Johnson’s son.
[14]East London History Record. 08/ 1985
[15] This appears to be a sales notice giving details of the mill and conditions relating to it, Morden College Archive.
[16] John Pitt, the elder brother of Prime Minister William Pitt. A career soldier but with a place in his brother’s cabinet and a member of the Privy Council. See DNB
[17] Prime Minister Pitt the Younger. It might be noted that he was not Prime Minister 1801-1804 which covers some of the period of this lease. See DNB
[18]Edward Craggs-Eliot, 1st Baron Eliot. Politician with mainly Cornish interests and
but also landholdings in Blackheath. See
DNB
[19]Son of Edward Craggs and the first Earl of St. Germans. See DNB
[20]Gregory,
Olinthus. A Treatise of Mechanics Theoretical, Practical and Descriptive. 1826
[21] Gregory, Olinthus DNB
[22] Christ Church was destroyed in Second World War bombing and has been rebuilt. It is understood a plaque to Lloyd, describing him as a millwright, stood in the original church. See Survey of London. Bankside 1950
[23]Trevithick, Francis. Life of Richard Trevithick. 1872
[24]Lardner, Dionysus.A Rudimentary Treatise on the Steam Engine (Weale). 1859. Also extracts in James Watt papers (notes thanks to Rev.Dr.Richard Hills)
[25] Southwark Inquests. City of London Record Office
[26] Trevithick. Op cit
[27] Times 16 September 1803
[28] The Sharpe v Russell Chancery inventory lists expenses paid to ‘Mr. Vaux’ for attending an enquiry about it. This enquiry has not been traced
[29] Trevithick. Op cit.
[30] St. Alfege. Poor rate
[31]Johnson’s career can be followed through the addresses on his numerous patents, and, to some extent, in the biographies (on Wikipedia) of his two more famous sons. There are also several web sites describing the Haytor Granite Company, and the poor standards of behaviour of its manager, a William Johnson. It should be noted that they had a similar address on Millbank to our tide mill designer, but this could be a coincidence. Information from the institution of Civil Engineers tells me that Johnson was commonly known as ‘Buffy’.
[32]Thomas Pattrick came from Thorpe le Soken and there may be a connection with a similarly spelt Pattrick’s Mill at Harwich. Essex County Council deed collection.
[33]Much of the information here is based in Maureen Greenland & Russ Day, Bryan Donkin. The Very Civil Engineer.2016 This work is based on Brian Donkin’s diary, in the Derbyshire Record Office. The diary gives an almost day by day account of ongoing work to remediate problems with the structure
[34]Brian Donkin, engineer, based at works in Spa Road Bermondsey. See Maureen Greenland, above. And numerous articles and entries in DNB, etcetc . In the early 20th the Donkin works moved to Chesterfield, hence the archive, including Donkin’s diary, is in the Derbyshire Record Office.
[35] This is John Hall of Dartford who was later to employ Trevithick and whose firm still exists as J.& E. Hall, refrigeration engineers. The J. & E. Hall company web site gives a brief history. Also see Miller. Halls of Dartford 1785-1985 and other biographical works on this important company.
[36] My notes from Donkin’s Diary record the astonishing figure of £120,000 as the settlement sum. Maureen Greenland does not mention it and it may be that she, like me, concluded that it must be a mistake.
[37]Greenwich Commission of Sewers minutes 23rd October 1846
[38] There is no biography I am aware of. See chapters in my PhD Thesis TheEarly Gas Industry, OU 1995. Also Mary Mills The Early East London Gas industry and its waste products. 1998. The same information in similar chapters on Hills can be found in Belton. Founded on Iron. 2003
[39] Papers lent by late Patrick Hills
[40]Elllis& Co. Papers. Info Mr. Humphries
[41] Ballard, Edward Report 1871 (in LMA)
[42] This was part of what is now the Huelva Rio Tinto Mining Park. There are a number of web sites but most will not mention Hills ownership in the 19th century
[43] Hope Bryan. A Curious Place.1994 This also includes details of Frank’s brother’s works.
[44]Hunt. Barbara and Joe.John Corbett. Pillar of Salt. 1999
[45] Davies, D.C., Metalliferous Mines and Minng 1892
[46]Thames Ironworks. This works, and its demise it usually only associated with his son, Arnold, but Frank was Chair from 1871 until his death. For this period the minute books are missing.
[47] Ballard, Edward. Effluvium Nuisance. 1882
[48] Info late Patrick Hills
[49]Kentish Mercury. March 1846.
[50]The Four Wheeler. This was a family magazine produced by Davis’s daughters. Info Mrs. Wagstaffe
[51] Family papers lent by the late Patrick Hills
[52]Watson, Julian. Greenwich Tide Mill.Trans. Greenwich & Lewisham Antiquarian Society Vol. VII No.6. 1972
[53] Quotation sent to me by the kindness of Knight Dragon staff – the actual source of this has not been ascertained but is likely to be in planning documentation.
[54] Royal Greenwich is known to every writer and tourist, and there are other local attractions of this sort – Eltham Palace and Charlton House. To industrial historians everything is overwhelmed by the vast site of the Royal Arsenal , and the two Royal Dockyards – and on theGreenwich Peninsula it is overtaken by the discovery of the early medieval tide mill and by the import telecoms heritage at Enderbys.
No comments:
Post a Comment