A BREACH IN THE SEA WALL
Two
months later Mr. Bicknell, solicitor to the Commissioners gave an update on information obtained to a meeting at the
Green Man at the top of Blackheath Hill. This meeting was packed with
representatives of local interests.
Rennie
reported on what he thought was the cause of
the problem. Rennie felt that the
great variation in tides throughout the year 'tends to carry the bank away' and
that previous remedial work – 'a wooden framing consisting of poles and land
ties' together with 'several hundred tons of Kentish ragstone' was making it
worse. The wall would have to be
rebuilt. The Court was not impressed with the cost of Rennie's estimate and
asked if he could find an alternative, and cheaper, way to solve the problem.
Rennie made a second site visit and reported a few days later. He said that the
only other possible alternative scheme – to use piling would be even more
expensive. He then sent in his bill for
this second consultation.
Meanwhile
the Court had asked if a report could be obtained from Thomas Telford. He was at, the age of seventy, nearing the end of his long career. He was the 'undisputed head of the civil
engineering profession in Britain'.[1]
He had considerable experience in the Fens and was soon to work with John
Rennie Jnr. there. The meeting at the
Green Man had, however, asked for the most prestigious engineer that they
could.
Telford
too made a site visit. He to pointed out that the exposed position of the
portion of bank which had caused the problem. The river narrows slightly at
this point and he also drew attention to the new West India docks and the
number of vessels which were 'frequently moored adjacent to their entrance'
constricting the flow of water. The river thus rose with 'increased violence'
and was 'continually grinding the soft matter from the bottom'. He felt that there was an imminent danger
of a breach in the wall.
Neither
engineer mentioned the Blackwall Rock which had been removed from the northern
side of the river about twenty years previously.
Telford,
Rennie and the members of the Court of Sewers all thought that the activities of lightermen employed by the City
of London and Trinity House were not helping.
It was alleged by everyone that
material was being removed from the foreshore in this area for use as
ballast. The Commission duly wrote to those authorities to point this out
asking if this had been going on.
Replies, from the Lord Mayor and the Elder Brethren, were, predictably,
non-committal.
Telford
was however asked to do the work. The
archive includes his detailed specification. The work basically consisted of a
new earth bank built in such a way as to make the line of the sea wall
completely smooth. There was to be a
drain at the bottom of the inner slope and the whole structure covered in turf. The work was to be supervised by the
Commission's Wall Reeve who received an enhanced salary for the job. Two contractors tendered for the work Thomas
Cotsworth of Dover Road, Southwark submitted a price of £2,100 and Simmons of
Bromley, Kent, who got the job, for under £900.
The
work was finished by the summer of 1826, apparently without problems, Telford's
final inspection took place and his certificate of completion was issued in
July. A dry dock was built in this
part of the peninsula in the 1870s but otherwise it is likely that the line of
the bank is much as Telford left it, although a considerable amount work must
have been done to the wall itself in the intervening years.
A
year later in July 1827 Telford wrote to remind the Commissioners that he still
had not been paid for the job. It was
around the same time that Telford, in the company of Rennie; working on the
Nene outfall in the Fens was to catch a severe chill, the first sign that he
was beginning to fail with age.
Telford
was not alone in not having been paid his services – a series of letters had
already been received from Rennie.
These concerned his bill for £30 in respect of the second estimate, a
sum that the Commissioners refused to pay. In October 1826 Rennie had written
to say that he had been in Ireland but that his brother, George, had informed
him of the outstanding bill. He wrote to them that he had 'charged only what I
conceive myself entitled to' and in April 1827 that 'nothing annoys me more than
disputes about money matters'. The
Commissioners recorded that they 'did not find it necessary to alter their
first determination'.
Within
the next few months the Commissioners also received claims for compensation for
late payment from the original landowners.
This was a Mr.Richard Powis. The
original owner had been his father who had just died – Powis wanted £50 as
compensation for late payment.
There
is just the suspicion that this archive might have survived because of the
arguments over payment. The job must
have been a relatively small one for Telford and Rennie, but very important in
terms of Thames flood prevention. Few
visitors to Greenwich will realise how the care and maintenance by the Marsh
Court, its predecessors and successors, over many centuries has kept the land
safe and made development of the area today possible.
This article has been prepared from archive material
in the Greenwich Commission of Sewers archive plus some material on 'imbanking
and draining' in the possession of Woodlands Local History Library. Biographies of Telford and Rennie have also
been consulted.
[1] L.T.C.Rolt, Thomas Telford. 1958
No comments:
Post a Comment