This post is a tribute to some of the many Marlow people who worked on the river, and also to those of other towns that lost their lives on the Thames while passing through.
The boatman and "bargees" had a contemporary reputation that was somewhat fearsome at times. They were often considered to be hard drinking, dishonest, dismissive of other river users and quarrelsome. The story of the "who ate puppy pies under Marlow Bridge?" jest at the bargemen is well known and is explored further in Charlotte's post here. The work the bargees did was skilled, physically demanding, as well as frequently dangerous. Some of the people who ran barges did well out out of the trade, and were later described as "gentleman" - William Creswell who ran The Swan barge with his brother in the 1830's and 40's is one example. William was also a substantial farmer, but he continued to be described as a wharfinger and bargeman or barge master for many years. He may no longer work the barges himself, but having done so was not a bar to respectability. Many Marlow people had wealth that was supported or created by industries that was entirely reliant on the work of the bargeman bringing in their raw materials and taking away what they wanted to sell. I have also noticed that the pubs most frequently associated with being the drinking holes of those working on the river, such as the Swan (ran by George Creswell of the The Swan barge for many years, brother to William) and the Black Boy and Bargepole, generate far fewer traffic for the petty sessions than many of the other inns. So the story is not a simple one of bad, rough boatmen causing nothing but havoc. Industry would have ground to a halt if that was the case! It's also worth noting that picking a fight with the working boatman was also a Marlow tradition with some who should have known better. Apart from those who thought it funny to mockingly chant the "puppy pie" slogan at the men, (usually high tailing it in the opposite direction pretty quick afterwards), the young gentleman cadets of the Royal Military Academy had a running feud with the bargemen. A young recruit said the origin of the quarrelling was long forgotten but the boys liked to lay ambush and set upon the men when they could in order to give them "a thrashing" to remember. The odds were rather in the boys favour as they were 30 boys to one bargee, "and several of us 18 years old and up". In turn the cadets could expect a beating if they unexpectedly came across a barge hand when alone. The boys wore a uniform at all times so could not escape attention easily. Former cadet John Le Couteur, who joined the Academy at age 13 in early 1808, recalled the running battles with the bargeman vividly. The boys threw dirt and stones from the bridge wholesale into passing barges. At one point the bargeman had enough and prevented some boys on a rare half holiday from crossing the bridge, handling them roughly. When word of this got around, it was said 150 boys went to the bridge to exact revenge. We only hear the cadets version of events, which saw them victorious against an untold number of gathered bargeman three or four lines deep apparently. The latter were said to be armed with everything from oars to bludgeons. The boys came with cudgels, and a hidden armoury of stones and catapults which were allegedly responsible for the boys victory. A ten minute battle on the bridge saw many boys hurt rather badly, and the opposition likewise. Someone had alerted the adult officers at the college who promptly arrived to restore order but not before those on both sides were to be found lying senseless. The cadets were confined to college for the rest of the day and were ordered not to engage in any further acts of the kind. No charges appear to have been made against the bargeman. The event may have got embellished in the retelling by cocky youths but it's interesting how battles of this kind were remembered by more than one cadet.
The language the bargemen used may not have been what the polite society was used to. George Monk Berkeley writing in 1797 and recalling a memory of his mothers, said that once the service at All Saints came to a halt because the voice of a bargeman using loud colourful language on the river outside could be heard within the church. The Rev Cleobury was the incumbent then.
And Sarah Winford, of Thames Bank, complained that the crews of barges were commiting "great indecencies" while moored outside her garden wall. Her servant Samuel Clarke said sometimes Mrs Winford had been obliged to close the shutters of all windows facing the river. They said the situation had worsened since the new lock had been built, with boats now passing closer to her home and mooring near there for 2-3 days together. She petitioned parliament on the issue in 1774 and a committee looking into her complaint recommended that a clause be added to the Thames improvement and navigation bill which would forbid the creation of any towing path or wharf between her garden wall and the river and forbid the anchoring, mooring or resting of boats anywhere near her garden, other than at the proper wharves and only when loading or unloading cargo. To facilitate this, it was announced in July 1773 that a "pile would be drove against Marlow winch and another pile 30ft from the bottom of Mrs Winford's wall" and once they were in place if a barge master was to "suffer his barge or boat to lie, continue or stop under the said wall, in the passage between the said pound and winch" will be prosecuted by the Thames Navigation commissioners. [Sarah Winford erected a gravestone to the memory of Samuel on his death, you can see it here]
Flash locks were long regarded as dangerous, and Marlow one of the worst. There are surviving reports of Elizabethan fatalities of boatman who were attempting to navigate the lock. Some thought this was because the lock was poorly maintained. Others that the fall of water was too "sudden and immense" even for a flash lock. John Willis, a bargeman drowned navigating the lock in 1772 after falling overboard, a few years before the new pound type lock was finished.
Henry Allnutt, writing in the Anglers Journal in 1886, described the dangers of the old flash locks. The boats were hauled through the lock with the aid of a capstan and rope on the bank. If the rope should break, "the poor fellows [operating the capstan] were cast off flying into the air by the tremendous increasing velocity of the capstan unwinding itself". It was tedious and "most perilous" work that required a lot of strength. Henry, and both his father and grandfather had fulfilled roles within the Thames Navigation Commission.
Some lives claimed by the river
When we think of boatmen we don't perhaps think of people like barge boy "Master White" age 14. An orphan, he had been found a position on the Hope Barge, owned by Thomas Jordan of Bath. In the autumn of 1826, the Hope was moored at Marlow. The crew went to get supplies and refreshment in the town, sending the boy back to the boat with some things. When they arrived back at the riverside, the boy could not be found. The water was searched but the lad's body was not recovered until the next morning, 4ft from the stern and in 14ft of water. It was believed he had slipped and fallen from the moored vessel in the dark. In the reports of his death and inquest, his first name is not given. It does not seem the crew actually knew it.
Another hazard is illustrated by the death in 1829 of James Spokes. He was working horses towing a barge travelling from a wharf at Spade Oak to Marlow. The rapidity of the "stream" was believed to have pulled the horses towards the river and to have caused them to slip and fall into the water. James was dragged in and while he managed to grab a branch extending from the bank, it slipped from his hand and he was drowned, along with the horses. He left a wife and two young children.
The fact that habitual drunkenness was not compatible with the skill and co ordination required to operate a barge is shown by what happened to some who tried to work them while a little inebriated. In 1826, William Winter was working on the Helen Barge travelling between Bristol and London via Marlow. He went to haul a line in, despite the warning from his brother not to attempt it as he had been drinking. He over balanced, and although a strong swimmer, sank and died despite his brothers efforts to rescue him. His body was not recovered for 3 days**, found just 40 yards from where he sank.
Those working on the the River in other ways could also loose their lives. William Sayer of Dean Street, working as an ostler at the time, drowned while swimming horses at the back of Marlow Lock near Marlow Point. He was exercising an injured horse by swimming it across the river to aid it's recovery. It appears the horse got into difficulties with William astride it's swimming back and he fell off. He could not swim and a strong current had been noted there.
And then there was George Cox, an engineer managing a steam launch for the summer season who fell off the launch in 1884, and did not surface. There are many more names we could mention.
One Robert Goldswain, bargeman of Great Marlow, experienced another boat mans hazard in 1778 when he was press ganged into the navy while taking a load of timber to the Kings ship yard in London. He had a protection order from the Naval Board that was supposed to have exempted him from this indignity, as he was on naval business after all. Unfortunately for Robert, the press gang had been ordered by the Admiralty to ignore Naval Board exemptions as they were especially keen to recruit men who knew what they were doing around boats. He was put on board the "Conquestadore" and after a bit of passing to and fro and a court case, was returned home after a little more than 3 months in naval service. The court was aghast that the authorities admitted issuing protection orders to boatmen with the express intention of lulling them into a false sense of security so they would venture out onto the river ready to be pressed into service!
*For more on the woman's riots of 1800 which was also said to have involved some bargeman see this post here. That post also contains reference to rioting bargemen in Marlow in 1766.
** Or much later the same day according to one report.
For a biography of the barge owning family the Sparks see here and the Cresswells here
Will of bargeman John Piggot 1695 here
List of Great Marlow and Little Marlow bargemen 1700s (ongoing upload) here and 1600s here and here
And more on the cadets of the Royal Military College junior branch see here
Child drowning victims of Victorian and Edwardian Marlow here
To search for any individual on this blog use the A-Z Person Index option on the top drop down menu.
More river related posts can be found in the General History index here
SOURCES
Anglers Journal, Vol 6 . Article by Henry Allnutt, 16 June 1886.
Bentleys Miscellany, Vol 20. (Richard Bentley, 1846)
Berkeley, George Monk - Poems (J N Nicholls, 1797)
Salter, John Henry - A Guide To The River Thames (John Salter, 1881)
Wright, William - Fishes and Fishing (Thomas Caultley Newby 1858)
St Paul's Magazine Vol 5, edited by Anthony Trollope. 1870.
Parliamentary Papers, vol 33, Great Britain House of Parliament (Houses of Parliament 1866)
Journals of House of Commons Vol 34 (HMSO 1804)
Reading Mercury 13 April 1772, copy at the British Library and accessed via the BNA, August 2020.
Windsor and Eton Express 15 April, 4 November 1826, as above.
Berkshire Chronicle 26 September 1829, as above.
South Bucks Standard 18 October 1907, as above.
Bucks Herald 30 August 1884, as above.
Oxford Journal 17 June 1773.
Kelly's Post Office Directory 1847 (Kelly's Directories Ltd, 1847)
©Marlow Ancestors.
.
