Wednesday, January 29, 2025

Greenwich, AIA and the foot tunnel

 


At the recent  AIA Conference most delegates who stopped to look at the Greenwich Industrial History stand said that they were only aware of the Cutty Sark ship in relation to Greenwich IA.  Of course there is a vast amount more – but how many of them realised that only a few yards away from Cutty Sark is an unusual means of walking across the river – the Greenwich Foot Tunnel.  This has recently been the subject of a major renovation programme – which has uncovered a great deal of information about the tunnel and its construction.

As far as we are aware the Greenwich Foot Tunnel – and its sister at Woolwich – is one of only three or four sub-river pedestrian tunnels.   It was opened in 1902 having been designed by Sir Alexander Binnie for the London County Council.  It was built in order to allow access for south London residents to jobs in the Docks and also to provide allow east and south east Londoners to cross the river for free –  likewest Londoners who cross on untolled bridges.

Construction began with the sinking of a shaft on the north bank of the River and advanced under the river with special measures taken to prevent compression sickness among the workforce.Recently Greenwich Industrial History Society has seen a presentation by geologist Dr. Jackie Skipper, who drew our attention to the complexities of the river bed which faced the engineers.

The tunnel is formed of32mmiron plates bolted together, lined with concrete and white glazed ceramic tiles. It is accessed by lift and by spiral staircases descending in shafts – 88 steps on the north side and 100 at Greenwich.  The stairs are of wrought iron with brittle non-polishing cast iron tread plates. The shafts are accessed via a brick entrance rotunda capped with a listed glass dome.  The walls of the rotundae are built over the outer edge of caissons which hold the shafts; the lift and stair structures hang from the caisson, and do not bear structurally on the horizontal surface at the base of the shafts.   A thick vertical stanchion stands in front of the lift doors and this runs the whole depth of the shaft and tie the stairs and lifts together.

Hundreds of people have daily used the tunnel to cross the river - and pedestrians have now been joined by many cyclists, for whom it is the major crossing point between Tower Bridge and the Woolwich Free Ferry.  During the Second World War it was bombed but a strengthened section near the north end attests to the damage and emergency repair work.  There is also shrapnel damage left unrepaired in the brickwork of the south rotunda.

The tunnel is now over a hundred years old and feeling its age.  In 2008 it was agreed that it needed to be, at least, refurbished.  Work began in 2009 but it soon became clear that the project was running very late and was in trouble.   As 2012 neared , when the tunnel would be needed as a river crossing during the Olympics, public disquiet grew.   At this point FOGWOFT was launched – Friends of Greenwich and Woolwich Foot Tunnels .

In 2002 with works still in a complete mess the Royal Borough of Greenwich set up an inquiry into the refurbishment scheme.  FOGWOFT officers attended meetings where the tunnel was discussed and made representations.  The eventual consultant’s report to the Council commented that while work on the tunnel was a small job for the construction industry it was nevertheless unique and complex in a way that had not really been appreciated.

FOGWOFT has worked closely with Council officers and reported on work as it has been completed.  Officers have had several interesting visits to see the problems faced by the construction team – they can hardly be called tours of the works, since the area involved is small and cramped.  As work progressed problems with century old structures were uncovered as well as problems of drainage and with the formation of miniature stalagmites as condensation drips onto the floor.   The clear wired glass on the domes had the dirt of many decades on it and people assumed the murky look was traditional.  English Heritage agreed that the new laminated glass would have a feint white smoke tint to reproduce that unwashed look!  FOGWOFT helped with a public consultation as to whether the tunnel should be re-tiled or whether the traditional tile work should be cleaned but remain, however scarred.   

The original mahogany lift interiors have been re-installed in new state-of-the-art lifts – but there have been problems of constant lift breakdowns.  The ventilation system allows hot air from the tunnel  to be vented through louvres in the cupolae but solar heat builds up under the listed glass domes.  The electronic lift controls cut out at temperatures above 43deg.C. – the highest recorded temperature in the domes has been 56deg.C.   Initially it became a struggle to keep the new equipment cool; temporary air conditioned boxes were built round the control cabinets and industrial fans used.  Even so they could not cope and now permanent cool boxes have been installed as well as back up air conditioning units and fans put on new steel gantries below the cupola.   Since then the lifts have been more reliable – and it has been a lesson in how advances in technology can produce systems more vulnerable to environmental change than old mechanical systems.

As the tunnels have returned to normal use FOGWOFT has been asked by Greenwich Council for help with a new system to control some cyclists.  The by-laws – dating from 1902 – rule that there shall be no cycling in the tunnel, but this is ignored by many cyclists, and in particular a lycra-clad minority who hurtle through the tunnel to the danger of pedestrians.  We are waiting for news of funding for a pilot scheme which will be able to monitor – and hopefully regulate – movement in the tunnel.  It is thought that if this is successful that it could be used elsewhere –canal towpaths would be one obvious use.

This article has been about the Greenwich Foot Tunnel – but much the same processes have been going on in regard to the other tunnel in Woolwich although it is much less heavily used and many people prefer to use the Free Ferry .  Both tunnels continue to do the job they were built for a century ago, and do it efficiently, however modernising them, while maintaining their traditional features has been more problematic than anyone thought – and provided some valuable lessons.

 Sources -  the material for most of this article was obtained verbally from construction team members on site at the tunnels.   An article on the history of the Greenwich Tunnel by Myles Dove appeared in the September 2002 edition of the Greenwich Industrial History Newsletter . (http://gihs.gold.ac.uk/gihs27.html#foot) .   Other material has come from Dr. Skipper’s presentation to Greenwich Industrial History Society (also unpublished). 

GIHS is particularly interested to know more about an earlier Woolwich foot tunnel.  The entire sum of what we know about it can be found at  http://greenwichindustrialhistory.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/a-tunnel-under-thames-at-woolwich.html

 

Dr. Mary Mills (incidentally Chair of FOGWOFT)

Me, the Council and the rest of it 2014


 

I really want to talk about the Greenwich riverside, and perhaps about the industrial past – but, before that to say ‘thank you’ to Rob for this slot, and that its flattering to be asked to write next after Denise – and of course to wish her the best of luck in her new role in the future.

I should also mention the experience of having been a local councillor – I could write so much on that – and also to say that I know how many desperate issues there are to be addressed in our area.  Most of them – tunnels, supermarkets, roads, housing  - are around the development process and – sadly – they are really too much for one old lady ex-councillor to take on.  Happy to support other people.   But don’t think that because I haven’t mentioned them here that I don’t know or care about them.

The ex-councillor experience has taught me that all of this relentless development process derives from a whole complex of bodies -  local, regional, national and international.  There are boards and committees and partnerships all over the place making decisions about our area, and who knows who they all are and what they are deciding??  I also know that there are people out there who will argue that the future of such a piece of real estate as the Greenwich riverside is a national issue and not one for local people to have an input into.  That’s as may be.   Not, obviously, a view I would subscribe to myself.

The Greenwich riverside – there are a myriad issues about the riverside itself and how we use it.  I am not sure that it is really thought through – but I am aware of people who 20 years ago were trying to force the issue.  For instance, it does seem a bit that we have been plonking down developments wherever there is a gap on all those nasty old workplaces (more on that later).   In the 1990s there was a panic measure by the then Tory minister, John Gummer, when it was realised that there were no wharves left via which building site spoil could be removed. That led to the safeguarded wharves – and missed out boat repair sites.  Hence the only boat yard on the Thames is now on one of our development sites and under pressure to move.    But that’s just one issue –and I do know about the disquiet among some local people about workplaces being removed from Charlton riverside sites.  Who is informing the developers and the planners on these issues?? 

Enderby Wharf – I am so pleased that a group has been set up and is working on this. I would also say that, as part of the historic riverside, it begs a number of issues.  This site,  a key one in the development of the internet and electronic communications has somehow been ignored by our tourism and heritage decision makers  as part of the old and dirty industry we need to get rid of. (I could go on for hours about the Dome in its Millennium mode and how they went on and on about the new electronic world while writing off how that was achieved).    The next thing to go, I guess,  will be the gasholder –  and why will it be described as a nasty dirty old piece of scrap and good riddance rather than a piece of stunningly innovative 19th century engineering?   Why do we ignore the whole history of scientific innovation and expertise in our area??  I could go on about that for hours too.

How are councillors informed about the background to the sites on which they are agreeing planning applications??  Reports are commissioned on the history of most sites.  Councillors won’t see those reports  (but I have sometimes had them passed to me by the developer).  The reports are usually commissioned from professional archaeologists, who – bless them – are not always trained to evaluate the historical context of sites.  Some reports do devolve to actual historians and some of them are stunningly good – and sadly will only ever see the inside of a filing cabinet.  But some of them – well!  None of them are subject to any evaluation process or peer reviews.  So if they are full of terrible mistakes,  that’s just tough.  I am aware of a current report on a local site where the archaeologist author has simply ignored a major industrial past user – one which has been written up by several different authors and is clearly shown on historic maps.  But that means as far as the planners and developers are concerned it never existed and they do not have to take it into account.  I have known Councillors expressing dismay when they have been told too late of the historic importance of a site from an external source.

So – the Greenwich riverside.   The way its history is dealt with is just one subject among many and I have probably written too much about that.  I think local people need to be able to say what they think and to try to get an input into it.  I hope that with the Enderby campaign we are going to get somewhere – but there is so much more needs to be done.   I am very open to listening to what people think and to help where I can.    One thing about having been on the Council is that you learn a lot about ways through the process, develop contacts and get a bit of an idea who to talk to and how to go about it.  So, get in touch.

And just to say – please support the Enderby Campaign  - and FOGWOFT (Friends of Greenwich and Woolwich Foot Tunnels   another subject I could go on about at length).  And let’s give four cheers to the residents of Ballast Quay and their stunning new website on their area and its heritage  - and also the group now working on riverside steps and stairs  - and the people who worked on the coaling jetty project (now taken over by the developer),  and the river as a World Heritage Site – and all the rest.

 

Have a look at:

www.enderby.org.uk  facebook.com/groups/enderby     twitter.com/EnderbyWharf

http://fogwoft.com/       twitter.com/fogwoft 

http://www.BallastQuay.com

http://greenwichpeninsulahistory.wordpress.com/

http://greenwichindustrialhistory.blogspot.co.uk/

 

 

Greenwich boundary walk. part1 From Garden Stairs to Greenwich Railway Bridge

 


In the past I have seen published versions of 19th century Greenwich boundary walks. These are a record of a  pompous civic procession walking around the entire St.Alfege parish boundary in one day. Often there are very amusing details as they encounter various incidents and accidents.

I had intended to write about Garden Stairs this week and was busy researching them. I had come across many several, most of which seemed to consist of Thames Waterman and steam ferry operators scoring points off each other - and then, suddenly  I came across a boundary walk which I had never seen before. It had lots of industrial sites in it so I thought I would do that instead of Garden Stairs.  It’s quite long and I think it will  take several weeks to do

So it’s 9:00 o’clock in the morning on the 29th of May 1851. It’s a Thursday and we are standing outside St Alfege’s parish church. 

The group consists of the church wardens -  they are the equivalent in the 1850s of the local councillors - and all the parish officers.  There is also the Reverend North, who was the minister of Trinity Church - that’s the church that used to be on Blackheath Hill. I don’t know why the Greenwich Vicar wasn’t there.

Soon after 9:00 o’clock they set off to walk down Church Street to Garden Stairs . They went down Brewhouse Lane, the Gallery, to Wood Wharf. In today’s terms that means they walked down Church Street through Cutty Sark Gardens to the River at Garden Stairs,  which are just by Greenwich Pier. Then they turned left to go upriver and walked up what is still called Thames Street to Wood Wharf. Today this just another block of flats but it has got a big sign on it saying ‘Wood Wharf’. . At the same time we have to remember that the parish boundary is actually out in the middle of the River. So in order to get it right they were accompanied by a waterman in his boat on the River paralleling them as they walk on.

They encircle ‘a portion of Mr Joyce’s premises’.  I don’t know if people remember have read my various writings about William Joyce and his engine works which was in Norway Street and his shipbuilding yard which was on Norway Wharf.  I did an article here about him a couple of years ago and also a very detailed article about his whole career for the Greenwich Historical Society’s Journal.

The report constantly says that they are going ‘through the wharf’  which I think means they were following the Greenwich boundary along the riverside. So basically they must have been walking along what is now the riverside walk -  now called Dreadnought Walk.  Of course in those days it would have been a working area and no doubt they had to dodge all sorts of activities –and also to have permission to be there.

Next they through ‘Mr Tuckwell’s premises now called Norway Wharf’.  Norway Wharf was at the end of Norway Street and is now roughly where the Sail Loft pub is.  Mr Tuckwell had a general wharfage business there from the 1840s and from reports was they were dealing with what appears to be some extremely heavy objects-  ‘a boiler of seven tons’... ‘an immense block of granite’.  However in the mid-1850s he began building iron ships and in 1856 launched a  steam ship for work on French rivers.

The next wharf going up river from Norway Wharf was later called Dreadnought Wharf but not as early as the 1850s.  The report says  they went through premises ”formerly Messrs. Martyrs- now occupied by the Patent Fuel Company”. Thomas Martyr was well known locally and operated a timber business but I don’t know if that is what he used the wharf for.  The Patent Fuel Company worked on several sites in the area – but they cannot have been on this site for very long. They had a process for making what we would call ‘briquettes’  blocks of fuel made from of unwanted small pieces of coal – and I suspect all sorts of other rubbish, which they didn’t admit to. 

They then ‘ Proceeded to the river wall at the rear of the  gas works’. The Phoenix Gas Works was on the large site on the south bank of Deptford Creek at the point where it joins the Thames. They supplied gas to a wide area locally and was, by the standards of 1851, a substantial works. It’s not mentioned in the itinerary except here and I take it therefore that they did not go through the gasworks but round the back of it. Perhaps they did not get permission to go through and their silence on the subject may be significant. However they went “next into  Mr Burford’s premises called Phoenix Wharf’.   I’m a bit confused by this because the gas works was owned by ‘the Phoenix Gas Co’ and the gasworks was on ‘Phoenix Wharf’.  I also have no idea who Mr Burford was.

Arriving at the gasworks marks the point at which the procession turned south and began to go up the Greenwich bank of Deptford Creek. The next site mentioned is Mr Walton’s . He was a coal merchant with a site on Creek Bridge Wharf.

Then procession gathered on the centre of Creek Bridge and gave ‘three cheers for the Queen and the Parish of Greenwich’.  So far so good.

They continue up the Greenwich bank of Deptford Creek. This to us is Norman Road but in then1850s the Creekside road north of the raileway was called “Ravensbourne Street”.  First they came to the wharf which we know as ‘Brewery Wharf’ or ‘Priors wharf’ . It is the one wharf still a workplace on the Creek and is currently used by Euromix Concrete . The procession got there ‘passing through the Mason’s yard now Mrs Jarmons’. Mrs Jarman was running a business as a general contractor following her husband’s death.

Next they went ”to the premises known as the Copperas Wharf”. The Greenwich Copperas works,  owned by the the Pearson family,  had closed by the 1830s and in the 1850s the site was  seen as a dangerous and unpleasant place. Within the next few years housing would be built here and coal wharves operate on the Creekside.  The Rennie boiler works was already at work on part of the site.

The procession continued “Thence onward through Mr Hargrave’s garden”. This was Joshua Hargrave  and the site is shown on the 1840s  tithe map as a collection of small holdings  described as ‘market gardens-  a meadow-  and sheds.  Joshua Hargrave was the freeholder and a  local dignitary. The area which is now all housing but once had two gas holders on it.

They arrived at the railway bridge having crossed ’the Railway Wharf’ which once lay alongside it.  This is the London ano Greenwich Railway and a very important railway that everybody in Greenwich should be proud of. It is one of the earliest railways in the world - or what we think of as a railway  - that is a powered locomotive running a set route on rails. It first opened  from London Bridge to Deptford in 1836. Getting the railway across the Creek was a problem.  A fixed bridge needed consent from all Creek users -and there was no chance of that happening.  In fact injunctions were already flying about to stop them building anything at all. 

It was eventually decided to build a drawbridge – the first on any railway in England - and then they had to sort out the machinery. It was finished towards the end of 1838 and is said to have made a loud clanking noise which could be heard at both Deptford and Greenwich Stations. It had two arches one of which included a drawbridge which could be opened in the middle by a complicated arrangement of pulleys and counterweights which took eight men to move taking nearly an hour. It had to observe the principle of ‘sail before steam’. This requirement to lift the bridge for any boat on the Creek  was in the Railway Company’s Act of Parliament and it was a criminal offence not to raise it

When the procession got to the railway bridge they were looking for boundary marks which had been recently renewed.  Clearly the bridge they were looking at is not the one there now. The present bridge with its towering, but now unused, lifting structure dates only for the 1960s. I assume the boundary  marks were on the abutments rather than the bridge itself.  Or maybe on some of the structure out in the middle of the Creek. What remains of the original bridge has been very much studied and assessed for possible listing but I doubt that part of that  process includes an investigation into any possible boundary marks.

Arriving at the railway bridge the procession had done a tiny section of its route round fhe Greenwich boundary – but i hope an interesting section.  It had a very long way still to go.

Gas industry in Greenwich

 


For a relatively small town Greenwich has had several gasworks – and this is an attempt to describe them. It’s a story which begins in the 1820s and seems likely to end with the demolition of a local icon – the largest gas holder in Europe.

the gas industry – in the sense of providing inflammable gas for street lighting first took off in the Westminster area with what we would understand as a ‘gas works’ supplying public light from around September 1813[1]. This was quickly followed by others and by 1820 there were a number of works built or planned – with varying degrees of expertise and/or honesty.

In Greenwich, as elsewhere, the vestry was the local authority and responsible for street lighting. It didn’t take long for them, and many others, to realise that there was a new technology available although maybe the vestrymen didn’t quite understand it. . In 1821 St. Alfege's Vestry, noted a Parliamentary bill for a Lambeth Gas Light and Coke Co.[2] - and they were also aware of local disquiet on night time crime.  Before a parish could build a gas works it would need Parliamentary permission to raise money and get am enabling private Act of Parliament. Happily there were those who were keen to guide them on their way

.In June 1822 Mr. Hedley of Coleman Street, iron merchant and gas light contractor got an introduction to meet Mr. Bicknell, the Greenwich Town Clerk[3]  In fact he was getting himself introduced to local authorities wherever he could. He was to build many gas works, although it is not clear if any were actually completed by 1822.  In Greenwich he took his solicitor, Mr Tilson, to meet Bicknell and Mr. Hargrave, Chairman of the churchwardens.  He told them that new lights could be in place by Michaelmas –late September   He wrote formally for permission to dig up the streets– offering a £500 bond as a guarantee and  'twenty or thirty lights gratis’ were part of the deal.  Hedley also offered to get the necessary Act of Parliament– and added the same procedures were going ahead in Woolwich and Deptford – Greenwich must not be behind the times!

Thus a petition went to Parliament for lighting and watching the parish of Greenwich because, it said, of the need to prevent 'horrible murders'. Subsequently a bill was steered through Parliament by Mr. Wells, MP for Maidstone and received Royal Assent in May 1823. Then one of the Greenwich churchwardens, Richard Smith, began to complain that the parish was allowing 'strangers' to form a gas company and that they would 'reap the profits'.  It should be set up by local people themselves and a committee reported that a 'good and proper light' could be provided which would cost the parish absolutely nothing if it was done by a private company made up of local people.

 

In July 1823 Mr Hedley was asked to attend a vestry meeting with his tender documents. When he got there he discovered that a Mr.Gosling was also in attendance and that he went in first to meet the vestry. Hedley sat for two hours outside the meeting and was then told that his tender was 'inadmissible' and that there was no record of his previous discussions.  Mr Gosling had got the job.

 

A committee was set up to work with Mr. Gosling and said his contract should be 'on his own terms 'for fourteen years'. Inevitably as the pavements were dug up complaints from the public began to roll in. Meanwhile Hedley was plotting revenge. An anonymous leaflet outlined the story related above.[4] Hedley made public the costs comparing his charges with Gosling’s. All of which was chargeable to the rates.

 

Meanwhile Gosling went to Parliament to set up a Ravensbourne Gas Light and Coke Co. and many Greenwich residents petitioned against it. He refused to say who his shareholders were although it was hinted that 'everyone' knew who they were. It then appeared that the Greenwich vestry had broken its standing orders with Gosling's contract and Mr. Bicknell resigned as Vestry Clerk.  A resolution was passed that this work was 'illegally and shamefully expended and misapplied' – although this is crossed out in the records. [5]

 

It then emerged Greenwich had not levied a rate and a large majority of the vestry had voted not to do so, backed by the Royal Hospital. As a result in a Writ of Mandamus was issued by the Court of Kings Bench - in effect an injunction forcing a local authority to fulfil its lawful obligations regardless of what it thought about it. Thus under duress therefore the vestry resolved 'to make a sufficient rate .... for lighting’. A vote of censure was passed on the parish officers for signing an 'improvident and harmful contract' with Gosling. And ‘to pay about £5,000' and for the 'gross neglect ' in not entering all this into the minute books. Also raised were ‘expenses £10 for dinner at the Ship Tavern and £25 for a (another) dinner ‘. [6]

 

This was an unedifying start to gas street lighting in Greenwich. Mr. Goslings works was however going ahead. An old plan shows an 'old gas works' site on the eastern side of Norway Street [7]– on the current site of council flats and the conclusion is that this was Gosling’s works. As he built the works so he was also trying to sell it and in May 1824 before all the trouble at the vestry it had been reported that Phoenix Gas Co. was about to buy the Greenwich Gas Works. [8]

 

Phoenix, based in the borough, was the biggest and most successful Gas Company in South and Kentish London in the early 1820s. They were very looking to expand and as speculative gas works were built by the Hedleys and Goslings of this world, so Phoenix considered purchasing them.  In addition Mr.Pearson, of the Greenwich and Deptford copperas works was very close to Phoenix management and to Mr.Tilson, by then also the Phoenix Company's solicitor.[9]  

 

Gosling said he would sell to Phoenix ‘at cost’ plus a percentage of future gas sales. An assessment of the works was to be carried out by David Mackintosh's contracting firm, and by William Anderson of the Grand Junction Waterworks. [10] By the end of December an agreement had been reached although numerous extras were added - Gosling's son’s salary, Parliamentary expenses, and investigations on his title to the land. All of this was handled by the respectable Mr.Tilson and Greenwich's ex-vestry clerk, Bicknell and added to the bill for ratepayers. Things dragged on and a year later Gosling was asking Phoenix for the loan of 16 lampposts.[11]In the meantime Greenwich Vestry negotiated separately with the Phoenix Company for a supply of gas light.[12]

 

As negotiations with Mr. Gosling proceeded Phoenix were building a Greenwich Gas Works of their own.  This was at the end of Thames Street and occupied the site where Deptford Creek enters the Thames.  They had had bought it from a Mr. Horrocks but first they needed to stabilise the land at the creek entrance. This project was undertaken by David Mackintosh – who had assessed the Gosling works for them and large amounts of material were brought to the site. Meanwhile Phoenix intended to provide street lights in Greenwich by using Goslings works in Norway Street. The new Phoenix works was at the end of Thames Street on the site now occupied by the Millennium Quays flats and Waitrose.

 

The trouble is that something was falling down although sadly [13]the Phoenix minute books are not entirely clear which of the works it was. The Phoenix engineer reported that.. 'The Retort House at Greenwich is settling again'.  It had originally been estimated to cost £4,400 and to carry the brickwork down 22 ft because of the nature of the sub soil.  'The (gasholder) tank has given way for the third time'  - and 'we have had to employ 150 men to renew the timber, and water has seeped through to Mr. Hartley's premises'.    'the foundations were dangerous…. The sand had not been puddled first in the contract' .

 

The Gosling works was finally closed by Phoenix in 1828 when their new works was finally ready.  They hung on to part of the site for many years and a gasholder built there by Gosling probably remained in use.  It was advertised as a 'valuable property near the river, with brick buildings and a lofty chimney, suitable for an iron foundry or any trade needing large premises'.[14] By 1841 it was let to William Joyce the steam engine and ship builder.[15]

 

Phoenix Gas Light and Coke Company flourished and continued to supply Greenwich with gas for lighting from their works built on the east bank of Deptford Creek.   In the 1870s Phoenix was taken over by the South Metropolitan Company, and in the 1880s their giant East Greenwich works demoted the old Phoenix Works to be renamed ‘West Greenwich’. [16]

 

In the meantime other gas works were being built in Greenwich. The 1869 OS maps show two works on Deptford Creek – one in Roan Street and the other alongside the railway, on the site of the current Ecology Centre and now in Lewisham.  There was almost certainly another one on the Deptford Dockyard site- such private works were common on big industrial sites and not relevant here. 

 

There were various ideas about building more gas works. In October 1834 Kentish Mercury announced a meeting 'for the purpose of considering the expediency of immediately forming a Gas Light Establishment'. It was agreed that Deptford 'presents peculiar local facilities for the advantageous formation' of such a body and it was proposed to call it the 'Deptford and Greenwich Gas Light Company'.  A number of undated documents give the names of Board members for a Greenwich and Deptford Gas Co. and include Sir William Beatty of the Royal Hospital, and George Smith, future surveyor for Morden College, as well as Thomas Brocklebank and Adam Gordon both local shipbuilders.[17]  Nothing else seems to be heard about this body. 

 

An Act of Parliament for a Deptford Gas Works was acquired and is reported in another undated piece about a celebratory dinner held in a pub on Deptford Broadway. It was a 'sumptuous entertainment' for a 'numerous and highly respectable' company.  They toasted everyone and everything from The Old Oak Tree' to 'The Army and Navy' and much else – but there is no evidence they ever built a gas works.

 

The holders in Roan Street were apparently built by the Phoenix Company as a holder station[18]. They were on a large site which later was used for gas industry related manufactures. The site had previously been a market garden

 ‘the engineer at Greenwich reports a need for more holders; he is looking at suitable sites'. In 1864 Phoenix bought a site from a Mr. Smith and ordered a gasholder to be built on it but the actual location is not recorded. There are some clues. they tried to persuade 'Mr.Rennie' to take over the unwanted river frontage and the Roan Street site lost its river frontage after Norman Road was built in the 1860s, and also Phoenix's new gasholder was accompanied by a gas main ' down Roan Street' .[19] So it seems likely the Greenwich Roan Street site was a holder station built by the Phoenix Company in 1864. and not an actual gas works at all 

 

It is the site which now holds the Ecology Centre which is the most interesting of old gas making sites and it has a varied and episodic history. As the 1830s progressed, the first steam railway in London – the first suburban railway in the world - came to Greenwich.  Along with a line side boulevard and an inclined plane at Deptford were plans for an integrated scheme of gas lighting.[20]

 

The engineer to the London and Greenwich Railway Company was George Landmann.  He had had a distinguished career in the Royal Engineers but had sold his commission in 1824.[21] In the intervening ten years he had worked as Engineer to the Imperial Continental Gas Association – travelling round Europe to construct gas works in Continental towns.[22].  The Greenwich Railway Gas Co. was set up in 1836 with the same board membership as the railway itself. It was proposed to light the line with gas lamps –"lights at a distance of 21 yards on each side of the railway and also a number of lights for the stopping places each end of the road making in all about 700 lights" and to supply gas lighting to stations and cottages built in the arches under the railway.  The gas works itself was to occupy the site upriver of the railway on the Deptford side of Deptford Creek.

 

It seems very likely that part of the plan was to make coke on site for use by the locomotives and when the railway opened in 1836 Phoenix supplied their coke.[23] What Phoenix did not know was that Colonel Landmann had been discussion with the rival South Metropolitan company, based in the old Kent Road, on the question of a supply of gas for railway.[24]  When Phoenix found this out in 1836 they were not amused and pointed out that they had not been allowed to tender for these lights.[25] Thus the lights on the railway which people saw and reported in 1837 and 1838[26] were supplied by South Met. Gas Works. It is therefore a question as to whether the railway gas works was ever in production

 

In 1838 the railway gas works was abandoned and the site was sold and the works reconstituted as the Deptford Rotherhithe and Bermondsey Gas Light and Coke Co.[27]  this had a board consisting of local coke, tar and railway interests. A fifth member of the board was a John Barlow.I have mentioned above early specialists in gas works construction –Gosling and Hedley – but the Barlow family , from Sheffield,  probably built more than both of them out together.  It was John Barlow who actually built the gas works alongside the railway on Deptford Creek – as his son reported 18 years later.   Hence forth the Deptford Rotherhithe and Bermondsey Gas Company supplied gas to the area in competition with Phoenix and South Met. The reaction of both the older gas companies was immediately to lower their prices and in 1841 a limited agreement between them was reached on competition. [28]  By the 1850s the Deptford Gas Works had a neighbour. I Frank Clarke Hills – and it eventually transpired he had loaned them £10,000 in order to extend the works. He had then used the works as a testing ground for his various gas purification schemes. This article is not the place to discuss Frank Hills and his interactions with the gas industry which gave him a vast fortune. [29]

 

By the 1870s governments began to have concerns about the number of private and competing gas works. In addition to Phoenix in Greenwich and on Bankside, there was the South Suburban at Sydenham, the Surrey Consumers at Rotherhithe, as well as two Woolwich companies and one at Eltham.  There was also the relatively small but extremely ambitious South Metropolitan in the Old Kent Road, under its clever and unconventional engineer/secretary George Livesey, who, over the next thirty years was to dominate the gas industry nationally. How much of what transpired in South London is down to him may be a matter of debate.[30]   Governments felt that companies should be forced into ‘amalgamation’ to produce larger companies which could then be asked to build big out of town gas works – with efficiencies of scale.  In South London Phoenix was the largest company and it was assumed that they would take over the others but somehow or other, South Met. swallowed up all, except Sydenham, and began to make plans to take over the north London gas industry as well, but were stopped by the Board of Trade. 

 

So, when South Met. began to look for a site to build their new large scale gas works they came to Greenwich Marsh, now Greenwich Peninsula. The works they built here was intended to embody the highest possible standards; it was relentlessly modern and seen as a showplace. 

 

It is instructive to discover that, in 1881 before the gas works was built that the marsh was seen as 'a sodden wilderness of decrepit wharves, forsaken factories, and melancholy marsh'.  [31] South Met began proceedings for an enabling Act of Parliament necessary for them to build a new works and discussions began with the local authority on the new plant and its layout. It had been agreed that the purifying plant, thought to be the smelliest part of the works, should be placed on the northern most tip of Blackwall Point. This would ensure that smells were kept from Greenwich, while wafting over the Isle of Dogs.

 

A House of Lords enquiry was held into objections to the new works[32]. The owners of the very large dry dock at the tip of Blackwall Point claimed that the smell would damage the high class paint work on the boats they were repairing. The QC for the company pointed out that the gas works would smell a lot better than the dock's existing neighbours, the Bisulphated Guano Company.  However, the House of Lords made it a condition that the gas company must buy the dry dock. They were also to build the river wall on the eastern bank, and on the west bank provide Ordinance Draw Dock in return for an older public draw dock which would be demolished. The public footpath that had previously gone right round the river bank was closed. 

 

These changes did not please ‘waterside people' who continued to cause 'difficulty' by insisting on their old rights of way. Docwra, the gas company's contractors, dealt with this by placing 'a gang of men' to 'divert this traffic'. Contractors found access to the site difficult, describing it as 'a cul de sac - and approaches thereto were not inviting'.  The centre of the peninsula was 'market gardens of poor quality' and t there was 'sprouting of rhubarb' throughout the site and a few cows lived in a shed which 'age had rendered rotten and insecure'.

 

Others who thought they might have rights on the there were those for whom it was a 'happy dumping ground' and with them the contractors were in a 'constant state of warfare'. During one such running battle, Joseph Tysoe, the future works manager, only escaped serious injury when his assistant grabbed a heavy iron bar aimed at his head.[33]

 

As work progressed, Docwra brought on site 'extraordinarily powerful pumping apparatus' and took borings to discover the state of the ground.  Barge after barge came loaded with clinker and heavy rubbish to use as infill, but it took 'a vast amount of effort to make a sensible impression on this wilderness'.

 

Slowly the works took shape. 'Looming vast against the sky is the skeleton of the great holder'. This is the holder still to be seen today alongside the Blackwall tunnel approach road. It was thought it would 'darken the sky like a mountain of iron'. The jetty too was taking shape, sinking as it was built. It was reported that it was 'allowed to go as far as they would' until it became 'as firm as a rock'. 

 

East Greenwich gas works would soon become the premier works in London – and maybe the world.  It was so big and so successful it is almost impossible to know where to start on its history.  It was eventually three factories – the Gas Works, itself, Ordnance Wharf Tar Works and the Phoenix Chemical works (taken over from Frank Hills in the 1890s). There was also later, and independent of the gas works, a Coalite Plant and the national Fuel Research organisation.  It later became part of Livesey’s co-partnership scheme. And the subsequent gas workers strike of 1889. It was big and successful and gas workers there considered themselves elite.[34]   Nationalised in 1947 it kept its identity – and its Livesey social club

 

There are, or were, some remains. Livesey built two enormous gas holders – the biggest concentration of gas storage in one place, ever.  No.2 had its flying lift removed following the Silvertown Explosion, but No.1. is still with us – despite an attack by the IRA in the 1980s  the biggest holder when built, and maybe still, it is under immediate threat of demolition.  The company war memorial stands in Memorial Park just south of John Harrison Way – and saved through the efforts of Kay Murch[35]. On the Phoenix Chemical site near the Pilot pub the amazing parabolic sulphate house remained into the 1990s and can be seen in endless old TV thrillers. [36] and even an episode of Dr. Who[37]

 

 – and of course, George Livesey’s ghost is said to haunt the Dome.

 

 

 

 



[1] Everard. History of the Gas Light and Coke Co. 1949.

[2] St Alfege Vestry minutes 21st March 1821

[3] Non di Ricordo. The Metallic Influence of the Gas upon the Dark of the Lampposts. Being the substance of a Report to the Committee upon the Gas Co. Greenwich, 1824

[4] Ibid

[5] St Alfege Vestry minutes 18th April  1824

[6] St.Alfege Vestry minutes 20th August 1824

[7] National Gas Collection. Provenance otherwise unknown.

[8] South London Gas Co. Minutes 27th May 1824

[9] Elizabeth Pearson’s diary. Seen at Whitstable Museum but current location not known.

[10] Phoenix Gas Co. Minutes 20th  and 27th  October 1824

[11] Phoenix Gas Co. Minutes 26th October 1825

[12] Phoenix Gas Co. Minutes 25th November  1825

[13] Phoenix Gas Co Minutes 3rd January 1827

[14] Phoenix Gas Co Minutes. 13th August 1828

[15] Garton, W.F.D., "History of the South Metropolitan Gas Co.", Gas World, February 1952 et seq.

[16] Garton.op cit

[17] Cuttings from the national and local press some of which are in the Greenwich Heritage Centre, and others copied to me by contacts.

[18]  Garton. Op cit

[19] Phoenix Gas Co. Minutes 8th March 1865

[20] There are many books about the London & Greenwich – best is Thomas, London’s First Railway. Also see Sturt, Greenwich Railway Gas Works. GLIAS Newsletter June 1986

[21] DNB – sadly this does not continue with details of his career after he resigned his commission.

[22] Imperial Continental Gas Association 1824-1974.  Published privately, 1974.

[23] Phoenix Gas Co Minutes 15th March 1836

[24] South Metropolitan Gas Co. Minutes 10th April 1834

[25] Phoenix Gas Company Minutes 13th January 1836

[26] Thomas. Op cit

[27] Company Prospectus

[28] Garton. Op cit

[29] Mary Mills. PhD Thesis. The Early Gas Industry in East London. Open University 1995

[30] Select Committee into the Gas Industry 1899.  In the transcripts of this committee, and its  predecessors Livesey’s arrestingly clear evidence made and makes a persuasive case for what happened.

[31] Journal of Gas Lighting. 26th  August 1884

[32] Enquiry into South Met. Gas Bill 1881. Minutes

[33] JGL op cit

[34] As far as I am aware there has never been a comprehensive history of this enormous works. There are a number of departmental articles – but nothing which touches the scale of the place!

[35] Kay was the last employee of  the gas works, having begun work as a teenager, she was left when everyone else had gone.  Sadly she died before the memorial was moved.

[36] Dempsey and  Makepiece were favourites – but there was also an episode of Dr. Who

[37] Dr.Who Silver Nemesis 1988 BBC

The Enderby loading gear

  So, we have just learnt that   a previously unremarkable piece of Greenwich is now the same as Stonehenge ...   and we can all go and see ...