That was shortly before Tesco presented its first
threat. In the following years John led a well reasoned and well
presented opposition, seeing it through to success. Service to the community
was always a strong theme and we can add to this list: County Councillor for
Hadleigh in the 70s, active in the Royal Society for Arts, the Civic Trust –
Chair of East of England Group, the Suffolk Preservation Society where he
was a trustee, governor at Hadleigh High School, served on several local
charities and St Mary’s Church where he chaired the Fabric Fund. As
well as being Secretary, Vice-Chair and Chairman he was a regular and
popular speaker at our meetings and an inspiring leader in the Society’s
campaigns, not the least being the Tesco affair for which he worked
tirelessly in preparing and presenting the vital evidence to a succession of
planning meetings and enquiries. His talks to the Society included:
1986:
Hadleigh’s period properties,
1989: visit
to Leez Priory,
1990: Hall
Houses,
1991: tour
of Guildhall,
1992:
Hadleigh with the lid off,
1995: The
Day That Peace Broke Out
2000:
Hadleigh Time Line,
2005: Behind
The Vestry Door,
2009: An
Airman’s Tale,
2010: Hadleigh and Flying.
Over the years he and Tricia hosted several garden
parties for the Society at the ‘Pink House’.
He was Hadleigh born and bred, and this came through
in one of his newsletter contributions twelve years ago where he revealed
some local nicknames, including his own. He enjoyed technology of many
sorts: his prized Aston Martin, computers, and especially the technology of
timber framed buildings. He never missed an opportunity whenever he
spotted one of Hadleigh’s old buildings being worked on. A friendly
visit added to John’s knowledge of the local stock and kept us owners better
informed of what we had in our care. His Christmas Message of 1996 to
the Society included the following:
When
someone does work on Hadleigh in a few year’s time, I'm sure that the
question will be asked 'how could they be so short sighted about matters
of such significance?' Difficult to answer, in fact I fear that there is
no answer, save to say that even with people of goodwill all doing their
jobs properly, there should be some mechanism which says 'Hang on a
minute. Is this really doing justice to our heritage? Is this really what we
want to leave for future generations?' In this case is it one of old
buildings versus old people? If we are concerned with the quality of life
for our citizens who have contributed in their way, a lifetime to us all,
then what does it matter if we take a little more in finance or time to get
it right? More consultation at the preliminary stages of any project would
draw people together more and a re-run of the latest incident might be
avoided. Those who don't learn from their mistakes may be forced to let
their children and their children's children judge them by those mistakes.
History should judge John well.
The Hadleigh Society has had an oak tree planted
close to John’s grave in Hadleigh Cemetery.
From an
original presentation by the Hadleigh Society History group in November
1990. This article follows on from the article on the Hadleigh Local Board
in the previous HSN; it is the second of four.
N.B.
Paragraphs in italics are direct quotes from the 1871 Board minutes or
correspondence.
Business continues with the Hadleigh Local Board of
1871
It would seem that the pay of manual workers followed
closely that of agricultural workers, as at the Board meeting of 1st
May 1871:
‘The surveyor having reported that Betts & Maskell
had applied for an advance of 1 shilling per week on their
wages in consequence of the advance in agricultural wages, he was directed
to give the required increase’.
All works undertaken by the Local Board were
submitted for tender and the lowest one was accepted. The Victorians aimed
to make good bargains, and the Board typically was quick to challenge any
overcharging. At the meeting of 4th September 1871, for example:
‘The question of Messrs Newman & Harper’s charge
of 3 guineas for Advocacy was brought before the Board when a general
feeling was being expressed that it was understood that the charge for
recovering rates was included in the Clerk’s duties, and Mr Harper having
withdrawn his charge of 1 guinea in this respect, the balance of 2 guineas
was allowed and an order drawn accordingly’.
The Board was responsible for the maintenance of
roadways and footpaths in the town. Decisions made at the monthly meetings
were carried out by the Surveyor, who was expected to attend all meetings of
the Board when required and to ‘deliver to the Clerk on every Monday
morning a statement in such form as the Board shall from time to time
require of all moneys paid by and material supplied to him for the use of
the Board during the then past week, and of all sales of sewage, manure or
other matters effected by him during such week’.
Continual repair of road surfaces was necessary and
involved the purchase of quantities of stone which was broken down into
small pieces before being laid. The weight of traffic was to provide the
necessary bonding. In February the Finance Committee recommended:
‘1.
That the maximum prices to be paid for stone, independent of carting, shall
be as follows:
o
for
picked stone per load of 24 bushels – 20s 3d
o
for
pit stone per load of 24 bushels – 10s 9d
2.
That the carting should be paid for by the piece not by the day. The
Surveyor being empowered in each case to make the best bargain for the Board
that he can according to the circumstances of the case’.
Local landowners must have found this a profitable
source of income when there was a plentiful supply of female and child
labour to pick stones from the fields. Those payments made to the Surveyor
for manual labour, of sums between £6 and £10 and drawn at the monthly
meeting would include the breaking up of the pit stone before it could be
applied to the roadway.
To offset some of the costs, the Board was able to
make some income from the sale of horse manure. You will remember that at
the January meeting the Board considered a tender for the disposal of horse
manure. We have a copy of the Clerk’s letter:
‘We are instructed to inform you that your tender
of £4 for the road scraping and sweepings for one year from the second inst.
is accepted, subject to the same being removed within twelve hours after
notice from the surveyor on pain of forfeiting the same to the Board and on
terms of payment of the money in advance. We have to observe also that in
your tender you add the words “and whatever may arise” which are not in the
notices issued by us. Your contract must extend only to what is mentioned in
the notices. A letter from you stating that you agree to the above terms
will oblige’.
But not all of the muck could be sold for roads of
this construction; they absorbed decomposing matter and were smelly and
muddy in winter and smelly and dusty in summer. Dust in the summer months
caused the problems which were overcome by street watering, which you will
remember was one of the causes of the higher rate paid in the town centre.
This cost led to disagreement amongst the Board. In April the minutes
record: ‘Proposed by Mr John Cook & seconded by Mr R H Cook: That the
same streets be watered if and when necessary, during the ensuing month, as
were watered last year. An amendment was proposed by Mr Wilson: that the
question of watering the streets be postponed until a future day. This
amendment not being seconded, the original proposition was declared and
carried.
The Surveyor was directed to get the watering done
as inexpensively as he could and to that purpose to make all necessary
arrangements’.
But some members of the Board appeared to want to
change the method of charging for the watering and at May’s meeting:
‘It was proposed by Mr Wilson, seconded by Mr
Robinson that the present system of watering the streets be dropped.
Amendment proposed by Mr John Cook seconded by Mr Powell that the present
system of watering the streets be continued until the next monthly meeting.
Mr Wilson therefore withdrew his motion and the amendment was therefore
declared carried’.
However Mr Wilson was not going to give up so easily
and the following day he tried again. With the support of Mr Robinson and Mr
Kersey he caused the Clerk to summon an extraordinary meeting of the Board
at which:
‘It was proposed by Mr T W Wilson that … the
resolution passed on 9 May be rescinded and that in lieu thereof only those
properties which abut upon the line of the street watered shall be rated to
pay the cost thereof. Not seconded’
It seems strange that his supporters in calling the
meeting were not prepared to support him.
It was proposed by Mr John Cook and seconded by Mr RH
Cook that the existing system of watering the streets be continued until the
end of the present season.
Mr Wilson tried again:
‘Amendment proposed by Mr TW Wilson that the
proposition not be carried’.
The amendment was not seconded whereupon the original
proposition made by Mr J Cook was declared carried. The Board then set the
rate for 1872.
Where road repairs were the responsibility of someone
else the Board was not slow to point this out. The Clerk sent a letter to
the trustees of the Market Feoffment on 2 May:
‘Gentlemen,
The attention of this board having been called to
the bad state of repair of the surface of the market place and its
approaches, we are directed to communicate with you upon the subject and to
request that you will cause the same to be put into a state of proper
repair.
Your obedient servants’.
At the next Board meeting on 5 June, the sending of
this letter was reported:
‘Whereupon Mr John Cook, one of the Feoffment
Trustees, stated that they would put in repair as soon as the proper time
arrives’.
On another occasion:
Attention having been called to the holes in the
footpaths by the side of the High Street the surveyor was directed to
complete the curb where necessary from Spooner’s shop to Laslett’s shop on
the west side of the High Street by brick curbs and by levelling and filling
up the pebbles, and that he gave notice to the owners of adjoining
properties that on their supplying stone curbs the Board would fix the same
at their own expense.
The Surveyor wanted to experiment with a different
method of repairing footpaths and in July applied for permission to lay down
a portion of the footway by the side of the High Street with gas tar and
road sand. The Board ordered him to lay down a piece in front of Mr Walter
Kersey’s shop, the cost of which was not to exceed in all - £2.
Unfortunately we do not know how successful this trial was or whether Edwin
Downs was able to keep costs within budget.
Repairs were not confined only to roads & footways.
On 10 April an extraordinary meeting was convened by the Chairman for the
purpose of taking into consideration
‘the supplying of a new pump in the room of the
existing one placed near Toppesfield Bridge which has burst & become useless
& irreparable’. The lowest tender from Rope & Hanford for £4. 12s 6d was
accepted.
The Pound at Hadleigh Bridge needed repair in July &
Mr J.A. Pettit got the job with his estimate of £1. 8s, undercutting J.B.
Spooner by 1s 6d.
On 1 May ‘the Surveyor having reported that one of
the pulks near Mr Chisnall’s house in George Street was out of repair he was
ordered to repair it & for that purpose to procure tenders & submit them to
the next meeting’. (A pulk is an East Anglian word that appears to
refer here to the shallow pools in the gutter made to give access with a
bucket to natural spring water as it flowed through the town). By the June
meeting the tenders were in. They read as follows: J.A. Pettit £1.12s.6d;
Japhet Cook £2; J.B. Spooner £2.10s. Mr Pettit’s tender was accepted
unanimously.
Of course there was no mains drainage or water supply
in Hadleigh at this time. Houses had dry toilets out in the garden; boys in
the family had to go ahead of their sister to chase the rats away. The
better houses would have a shallow stone sink & the washing up would be done
in the sink with a bucket below the drain hole. Most would have just a bowl
on the table. The washing up water would be thrown on the garden or in the
street. The effluent from kitchen sinks was notorious for causing more
offensive smells than sewage. The Inspector & the Board had more than one
way of dealing with offenders. At the meeting on 6 March
‘It was resolved that a committee consisting of Mr
S.A. Kersey, Mr Wilson & Mr Chisnall be appointed to consider & report what
course shall be taken with reference to a piece of land near Mr Henry
Allan’s house in the Angel Street which the Surveyor had reported as being
productive of nuisance’.
The following month however
‘It was reported that the committee … had not met
in consequence of Mr Chisnall’s illness’ – the matter was allowed to drop!!
If you have attended one of our recent talks, you
will have seen and heard our new public address system in use. Sue
Angland applied for a grant from the Big Lottery Fund 'Awards For All'
scheme, and we were pleased to receive a grant of £642 for the purchase of
some new sound equipment. We bought two tie-clip radio microphones and
one handheld microphone. They will be kept at the Guildhall Complex
and may be used by other community groups as well. We are very
grateful to the Big Lottery Fund for their generous grant and look forward
to many years of being able to hear our speakers clearly!
John Bloomfield,
1933-2014