Life in 1950s Marlow Part Two Employment and Homes

Employment 

Major employer Wethered Brewery off the High Street, celebrated a bicentenary in 1958 with two garden parties for employees. Other larger employers in the town were the local council, Poppets Beads and the building trade in general. 

Poppets beads were plastic costume jewelry items. The company moved into the former cinema in Spittal Square in 1953. The old projectionist's room was used as the manager's office and the old seating area for production. Many of those employed by the company actually worked from home, only visiting the factory to collect the beads which they then strung into necklaces and other pieces. Both men and women were involved in the bead making. The same company also made aircraft parts as a sideline! In 1955 this division moved into its own Chapel Street premises with only a tiny bit of work still taking place amongst the bead making in the old cinema. Soon the cinema was deemed too small also and Poppets left to take over a nearby disused lamp shade factory. The former cinema was eventually acquired by the local council who intended to demolish it and use the site for housing, though this did not end up happening.

On a smaller scale in terms of employment there was Sunnydene and Quarry laundries, the newer cinema in Station Road, Toy Works Limited a toys, games and sporting goods factory in Court Garden (established 1943), the Victoria Engineering Company in Victoria Road, the Greenwich Saw Mill, the Marlow Coach Building Works in Newtown Road (which mainly built caravans such as the Marlow Tudor), C.C.K Limited at 53 High Street which produced women's scarves etc, Dairymaid Ice Cream Supplies in Crown Lane (commercial supplier, run by S.A Hawken), Mines and Putnam high class furniture makers in Station Road, Arnold's factory in Marlow Bottom which made wooden needlework boxes and automatic bottle wash machines plus possibly furniture, the Westhorpe sand /gravel pits and the various local schools, shops, pubs, cafes / tearooms, hauliers, and farms.

Toy Works as mentioned above proudly stated that though a few parts had to be imported from France or Germany most of their products were made with local labour only. Many of their toys were traditional wooden ones like bagatelle boards. The packers were usually female.

C.C.K Limited had moved to Mill Road Marlow from London because of the Blitz and chose never to return to the city after the war ended. Their products were made of plain or printed silk, rayon and wool. As well as fashion scarves they manufactured practical aprons in plastic or woven materials. I haven't been able to find out if their products were actually stocked by any shop in Marlow itself or whether they were all sent elsewhere.

I am aware that a Louisa Dereford and George Dereford ran "Marlow Mosaics" in this era but whether this was their own artistic enterprise solely or whether it was a business that employed additional mosaic artists I am unable to say at this point.

Employment opportunities in the 1950s could still be much constrained by the gender of the job seeker. It worked both ways of course- no one would employ a male nanny or maid but women had especial difficulties. The local press routinely carried job adverts that specified the gender that the successful candidate would have to be, and for the majority males were what was being sought. Some roles you might not predict did go to women more than men however. The traditional assigning of poultry on farms to the care of women for instance is reflected in the desire expressed by the owners of Bencombe Farm at Marlow Bottom in an advert for a female employee to run the poultry and turkey deep litter system there.

It was not uncommon for it to be specified that a prospective female employee who directly engaged with the public would need to be good looking as well as professionally competent. For example when Mac Fisheries in Marlow High Street wanted a female shop assistant in 1955 their advert in the Bucks Advertiser said that she must have a "good appearance and attractive personality". They do however get marks for specifying that the delivery van driver that they also found wanted at the same time could be male or female. That would have been quite unusual.

Marlow's first female police officer, W.P.C Ellington, arrived in 1954 after she transferred from High Wycombe.

Female workers doing exactly the same job as men were paid less than them. It was reasoned men had families to support so needed more money however this reasoning was of course nonsensical as thanks to the recent war the number of households with a female breadwinner had probably never been higher. Pay rates for those doing the same job also varied by age in many industries. Younger workers on farms, in most shops or in certain Post Office roles for instance whether male of female were paid less than those of the same gender over 21 or over 32 depending on the job. 

Get the right position and you never knew where it might take you. The Reading Mercury of 16th August 1958 reported that  Angela Chalk of Marlow and another former stable girl at Pinches stables in Field House Farm had the previous year won jobs working in the stables of a wealthy countess in France.

Those seeking a new situation either locally or further afield could make use of the I.H.B employment agency at 92 High Street Marlow or the government labour exchange. Under the Notification of Vacancies Order 1952 employers in most categories had to recruit only through scheduled employment agencies or the labour exchange. This was intended to mean the government could prioritize filling jobs in critical industries ahead of any others. Understandably, it was not popular with those employers who were de-prioritized. They could advertise a position in the newspaper but applicants had to go through official channels to make any application and stood a chance of being refused permission to contact the advertiser if it was thought they could be of better use to an essential industry or service. Men over 64 and women over 59 could apply for jobs without restriction as presumably they were considered too "old" for the essential industries. The order was rescinded in 1956.

Though the farming industry was less of an employer than it had been previously, it was still an important part of the national economy. A Young Farmer's Club had been formed in Marlow by 1954. Farm hands worked from 7.30am to 6pm Monday to Friday and half days on Saturdays. Increasingly other workers were getting their Saturdays off and a couple of weeks of paid holidays a year too. This coupled with the low agricultural industry pay and the long daily hours involved meant the abandoning of land based jobs by country people. Between 1948 and 1954 the number of female farm workers in the Marlow District fell by three quarters and that of males by over half. Mechanisation could only make up for these losses to a certain degree.

General labour shortages generally meant employers had to think of other ways to attract staff. Fines and Putnam the furniture makers of Station Road advertised that their employees could enjoy music while they worked as well as a canteen. Those wanting domestic staff in Marlow often reassured prospective candidates that they would be included in fun outings as part of their job.

Homes

The 1950s was still a notable era for the building of social housing. The council put out tenders for the building of 14 new council houses at Westhorpe Road for instance in 1954. In 1959 the last 38 older houses remaining in Dean Street were ordered to be demolished as the long standing Marlow slum clearance schemes first stage finally drew to a close. Multiple homes in Queens Road were similarly declared unfit for human habitation and compulsorily purchased for future demolition at around the same time. By the end of the decade the council was the biggest landlord in the town. 

The former Carriers Arms in Wycombe Road (now demolished) was used by the council as a hostel for those who had nowhere else to go in the early and mid 1950s. They took over the premises from the Ministry Of Housing. It is possible that originally evacuees or refugees had been put in the building. There was a critical shortage of even this temporary type of accommodation. There were still families living in metal shacks early in the decade at Beechwoods and in converted wooden sheds at Marlow Bottom (as owners and as tenants). The Marlow Bottom situation incensed Wycombe Rural District Councillor Mrs McKelvie who lambasted her colleagues for dragging their feet on providing new homes, rental or to buy, for those living in such structures. The situation was more complicated than it seems. Planning restrictions from on high meant people who had bought land in the village and had put up a temporary home on it while they raised funds for a more substantial structure were prevented from completing their dream despite having sufficient money to do so. In other words it wasn't only poverty (though it certainly could be) that forced people into living in such structures. Home owners could be ready, willing and able to make their shack a comfortable home but were told such work would contravene new planning regulations curtailing fringe developments. In a hope of exceptions or a governmental change of heart people clung on in their shacks or tried to sneakily extend or improve them without being noticed.

For private buyers in Marlow two estate agencies come auctioneers were available in the shared premises of no 37 High Street, Simmons with Gray and co, at no 84 there was George Kendall estate agent, valuer and auctioneer and at no 3 auctioneer and estate agents Lawrence and Laird. New homes were being thrown up everywhere possible in the Marlow urban area during the 1950s once materials and labour shortages caused by the war had eased, including the Wycombe Road and Oak Tree Road area, at Highfields, Lock Road, Chiltern Road, Riverside Drive, Gypsy Lane and Spinfield Park. While shortages of materials did remain private homes could only be built with a (hard to come by) licence from the council, Under rules set down by the Ministry of Housing priority was to be given to social housing on all potential urban development land.  

Bungalows remained highly desirable homes. A small 4 room bungalow in Wethered Road with a bedroom, bathroom, kitchen and living room could be bought in 1954 for £1750. Most homes were in the £2,000 - £4,500 bracket however.

Not every home yet had electricity in the 50s. Some of the older pre-war council houses for instance received electric lights and sockets in 1957 but others remained without it. Certain Chapel Street homes would not install electricity until the 1970s. The Electrics Company (Marlow) Limited in Market Square despite its name sold many calor gas appliances. These were not only stoves but lighting apparatus, gas powered fridges and gas fueled irons too. Many people kept oil lamps in case of winter power failures. Where electricity was present it was not necessarily installed in every room of a house. In any case in the early 1950s winter electricity demand often outstripped supply and Marlow users could expect one, even two, scheduled days a week when their supply would be turned off. These were notified of in advance as colder days drew near. The southern Electricity Board had an office and showroom in the High Street.

Coal and coke for fires were supplied by amongst others G.E Stevens of West Street and George Deane and Co (who had taken over the business and name of old Marlow company W.T Porter). Deanes were also one of the town's removal companies so very useful to have around! Early in the decade coke and coal supplies were not sufficient for the town needs due to nationwide problems. This left families having to severely ration their use of hot water at times.

By no means all Marlow homes had a bathroom in the 1950s, or even an indoor loo. Indeed there were houses without bathrooms in Wycombe Road in the mid 1960s, and in South Place even later, in the 1970s.

Antique furnishings were clearly popular amongst 1950s Marlovians. Bishop Limited in West Street specialised in antique silver, Sheffield plate and fine porcelain and there were at least two further antique shops on the town. There was also Walker's Antiques in the High Street. Secondhand but not antique furniture was sold by Taplins in Oxford Road. Buying secondhand furniture was seen by many as preferable as pre-war items were regarded as better quality. 

New furniture, carpets and other home furnishings could be bought from Norman Heals at 44 High Street as did Alan Hunt's Market Square shop. Mr Hunt's wares could be bought by way of a hire purchase scheme with payments spread over a period of up to two years. He also sold bedding from his second premises in Spittal Street. Hines and Putnam of Station Road were high quality upholsterers early in the decade who proudly made and marketed the "Marlow Suite" of sofa and armchairs. They moved from Marlow later in the decade but seem to have continued to make the Marlow suite. 

Washing machines could be purchased from Platts radio and television shop but there was still laundry services in the town -Quarry Laundry offered a free sock darning service to their customers - and hand washing in tubs wasn't yet quite redundant. Older people thought it superior! 

Pretty much every little usual item for DIY or home maintenance could be bought from the packed Chalk's ironmongers in the High Street, which under different but related families had a long heritage in Marlow. See my post here for the history of this building.

Not every home had a telephone by any means in the 1950s but the public call box provision in the town was expanding. The hamlet of Munday Dean got its first box during the 1950s.

For sources for this series of posts see Part One.

Researched and written by Charlotte Day.

©Marlow Ancestors. You are very welcome to use this research for family or local history purposes with credit to this blog.

Horror In Quarry Woods

 In a summer Sunday evening in 1840, 23 year old dressmaker Patience Martin and her younger  sister Maria decided to walk from their homes in Marlow to Cookham Dean, via Quarry Woods. It was a favourite place for a Sunday stroll and the young women had often made the journey. They were accompanied by their friend Harriet Clark. It should have been an enjoyable way to spend a beautiful evening, but the women could not have anticipated the horror that awaited them. 

 Patience was described as an especially beautiful young lady. She  worked at the baby linen warehouse, a not particularly well paid job. Unmarried, she lived with her parents John and Harriett and her sister Maria in Dean Street. They were not a well off family. John was working as a agricultural labourer at this time. 

  On arrival at Cookham Dean, the women walked across the common, before going into the beer house of Mr Copas. There they shared a pint between all three of them. This was a common thing to do, especially for woman.  They then walked to another pub on the common. On going inside they were greeted by three young Marlow men whom they knew. (Robert Moore, Thomas Eustace, and John Frane) All three worked for the Rolls family. Some rumours suggest that Moore was the "paramour" of Patience. Perhaps their meeting was not quite a coincidence, but it is only a rumour. Moore was married but living seperately from his wife who he said needed constant watching due to ill health - she was "subject to fits". The men invited Patience and her companions to take a little beer with them, they would then join the women for the journey back to Marlow. So far, so peaceful. 

As they left the beer house a short while later, at 9.30pm, they were accosted by 4 men. (Richard alias "Daisy" Smith, Henry Harding age 19, John Taylor 26 and William Bishop, 22, all described as labourers of Bisham). Bishop grabbed at Patience and suggested he would walk home with her. Patience naturally objected as she said he was some one she only knew by sight and had never had as much as a brief conversation with before. On this, Bishops companion Smith, who was clearly out to make a nuisance of himself, challenged Moore to a fight. Moore dismissed this request as he said Sunday was not "a proper day for fighting" and carried on walking, the others now a little way ahead. They were followed by the 4 troublemaker's, who again challenged Moore to a fight. Moore refused again, and was then knocked to the ground by Smith.  

Our party hurried on their way to Marlow but discovered a group of 20-25 men and some women blocking their path which lead from a lane off the common, over a stile and into Quarry Wood. This group were obviously just as much in a belligerent mood as the previous lot, and would not let Patience and the others pass. Patience said that at this point she was very frightened and wanted to retreat to the relative safety of one of the pubs they had left. But they could not get through the crowd in that direction either. After 15 minutes of insults and arguements, one of the gang said if Patience's party would shake his hand, they would be allowed to pass. This they wisely decided to do. But they had not got far into the woods when Smith, Harding, Bishop and Taylor ran after them. Harriet, Patience and Robert were all knocked to the ground by the thugs. Harriet got up quickly, aided by Eustace and it seems these two now ran off, leaving Patience and Robert in the rear. This is when things turned really ugly. Patience was the focus of the group's malevolence, perhaps in punishment for refusing the attention of Bishop. She was raped at knifepoint, first by Smith then by Harding with the others holding her down by the shoulders. Robert was punched to the ground at least three times while trying to rescue her. Harriet was screaming murder, and her cries were heard at Cookham Dean...but no one went to investigate them. Harriet heard the cries too, but Eustace told her to go on to Marlow and summon help. Robert knew he was outnumbered, and retreated a little distance to deal with a bloodied face. He then decided to try a trick of shouting loudly and pretending to be in a conversation with another as he went back towards Patience. He hoped the gang would assume he was part of a larger group and be frightened off. As it happened they had left by the time he came to her. He did his best to help the distraught Patience home, her bonnet ripped and shoes missing. As they left the woods, they must have hoped to have left their attackers behind them. But as they went to cross the meadows at Bisham, they were approached by a man who turned out to be Smith, although he had apparently made some attempt to disguise himself by swapping his jacket and speaking differently. Patience however recognised him and screamed. Smith was apparently insulted that Robert had knocked off his hat when the latter was attempting to rescue Patience, and wished to demand Robert's as a replacement!  Robert was yet again knocked to the floor, and Patience assaulted. Her screams this time were heard by a farm worker...who went home and put his horses away before investigating the source of the sound. Frane who was a carter, also put his horses away before returning.  As it was, Patience had got free and made it with Robert back towards Marlow, where they were finally met by Eustace and Frane who had returned to find Patience. These two men admitted to have feared being overwhelmed by the larger party they had left at the Quarry stile and were perhaps waiting for help from Marlow that never arrived. The following morning warrants were issued for the arrest of the 4 men, but Richard Smith Aka Daisy had fled, and was never bought to trial. The others were apprehended within a couple of days, and bought before the authorities at the Berkshire Summer Assizes. 

Harriet had, on arriving at her home, done the most extraordinary thing of going to bed without calling anyone to her friends and sisters aid.  This was seized on by the men's defence at the trial as evidence that Harriet did not think her sister really in danger, despite admitting hearing Patience specifically scream that she was being murdered. The lawyers suggested that the 3 Marlow couples had all intended to meet and then pair off for immoral purposes. The Cookham gang had gone after them in the spirit of causing mischief and had at most committed a minor assault. The evidence of rape was "only" based on Patience's say so they said, ignoring the collaboration of Moore, and others who saw Patience's torn clothes and distressed state. 

The reason we have covered this case in detail the because it demonstrates the difficulty women such as Patience faced when becoming a victim of sexual violence. Patience Martin must have felt on trial herself when a righteous juror at the trial stood up and asked if she was in the habit of going to a public house on a Sabbath? She replied she did so sometimes. The public houses were legally open at the time she was there. The newspapers gave Patience credit for the calm, clear and intelligent way that she gave her evidence. It was they said done in a fashion becoming such a serious crime, and they said she looked "most respectable." The men's defence were however keen to make another fact known..had not Patience given birth to an illegitimate child some time before? She "admitted" that she had. The men were not asked about their previous relations of course. 

The jury were told they could find the men guilty of assault if they did not believe all the evidence. After two hours of deliberation, the jury declared all the men guilty of their respective offences. Extraordinarily in our eyes, they were recommended to mercy by the male jury based on the perceived "loose" character of Patience. The judge does not seem particularly impressed by this request, but said he would honour it. Interestingly he did so partly because of the general lack of appetite for capital punishment. He said that despite the peculiar behaviour of sister Harriet, he had rarely seen evidence given so "conclusively". He could not think of some prisoners that more deserved to feel the full weight of the law for their act of "shameless brutality". He therefore recorded a sentence of death for all three present, but immediately commuted it to transportation for life on the condition the men were put to hard labour in a chain gang until the end of their lives. They would be "compelled to endure a life of the hardest labour upon very strict regulation."

Patience's character may have been smeared at the trial, but it was nothing compared to what came afterwards. The case stood out for its brutality and was reported in newspapers from the length and breadth of the country. The guilty men were taken to Reading gaol. From there, they wrote letters asking for further mercy. Their excuse? They were drunk. It is telling that the fact Patience had been in a public house on a Sunday was considered evidence against her, but correspondingly, the prisoners who had done the same could consider using the fact to get a lighter punishment. Somewhat strangely, the convicted men also said that a group of local unnamed farmers were behind the "malicious prosecution",  the latter party prejudiced against them. I presume this is a reference to the fact that Harding had been suspected of, but not convicted, of poaching previously. A total of 59 people from Marlow also signed a petition on the mens behalf, using the excuse of Harding's youth, and lack of previous conviction to ask for leniency. And of course they said Patience had a "depraved" character and was in fact a prostitute. This was something even the men's defence had not suggested, probably because it would also have suggested the prisoners had been or wished to be her clients. Both Patience, and Moore also signed a letter asking the judge to be merciful - while this may seem strange to us, it is not at all uncommon in similar cases in the period. They were certainly not asking for the men to go unpunished. The stated reasons for Patience and Roberts appeal is not given, but something like an awareness of the hardship dependents faced with a son or brother sentenced to life overseas, or suggestion of a general wish to rise above a situation and show Christian mercy is often given in similar situations. The judge reviewing the case upheld the convictions in entirety and refused the appeals except to grant that Harding could be merely incarcerated for life, without the added chain gang participation, in light of his youth. As was standard, the gaolers were asked to report on the prisoners conduct since arriving under their care. Harding was rated good, Bishop bad and Taylor "very bad". 

All three men were transported in the same ship, the Lady Raffles. This left for Van Diemens land in Australia on the 30th November 1840, and arrived there on the 17 March 1841. A total of 331 convicts were abroad on its departure. (They had the company of Marlow resident Charles East who was transported for 14 years - read about him here)

As for Patience, she died sadly young. She continued as a dress maker or related occupations. In 1846 she married cordwainer Anthony Savin(s) of Cookham Dean. She died just 5 years later aged only 38. I do not know what happened to her illegitimate child, the youngster does not seem to have been living with her at the time of her attack or subsequent marriage. 

Written and researched by Kathryn Day,  with additional research by Charlotte Day. 

To find all mentions of a family or individual here use the A-Z person index in the top drop down menu. 

For other posts related to crime, women's rights and general Marlow history see the index - here

Crime and disorder in old Great Marlow here

For content about Cookham Dean see the menu here

Sources include

https://convictrecords.com.au/ships/lady-raffles/1840. Accessed May 2020

Home Office Convict Petitions, series 11, Harding et al, Reference: HO 18/31/10, National Archives Kew. 

Census 1841,1851. 

The Examiner, 2 August 1840 volume, digitised by Google. 

The Spectator, Vol 13, 1840, digitised  by Google. 

Morning Herald 21 July 1840

Bells Weekly Messenger July 1840

Bucks Gazette 4 July 1840

Berkshire Chronicle 27 June 1840

The Eventful Life of James Croxon - Prisoner & Friend To The Poor

There have been Croxons/ Crocksons/ Croxens in Marlow and Bisham for a long time. The James who is the subject of this (long!) post was born in Reading circa 1807 before moving to Marlow where he had family connections. He was not the wealthiest man in Marlow. He was a baker for most of his life. To some he would become an advocate for the poor, and a stubborn defender of the rights of the many. To others he was a fraudster and troublemaker. What he undoubtedly did was draw attention to a number of issues affecting the lives of the less well off. It was his motive and credibility that was sometimes questioned. 

In the beginning...

Back to the beginning. In the 1833 Parish Assessment, James Croxon is listed as a West Street resident occupying a cottage and bakehouse with a relatively high value. This was near Borlase School. A few years later he had the valuable contract to provide the bread and flour for the Union Houses of the Wycombe district - that is the workhouses under another name. But then he lost this contract. His critics say this inspired a campaign to malign the Wycombe board of Poor Law Guardians in every way he could. He began an extremely prolific letter writing career, keeping the pages of the local newspapers busy with his complaints. 

James lands in gaol

However just after his loss of the bread contract in 1840, he was implicated in a forgery case and sent to Aylesbury Gaol. It was a little complicated to unravel, but in a nutshell James was accused of forging his father in law James Lee's signature on bills of exchange, and thus defrauding the Stephens & Co bank of money paid to Croxon on the strength of Lee's signature. It was said Croxon had been doing so for about 5 years. Eventually the bills were dishonoured, Lee denied ever having issued them and therefore refused to pay back the money given to Croxon by the bank. He said he was illiterate and so could never have made a signature, nor had he ever authorised anyone else to do so on his behalf. So Croxon found himself committed to gaol on a serious charge.

 The 1841 census finds him in the prison, with his wife Hannah nee Lee back in Marlow, alongside several of their children. At this point the family were living in Dean Street, home to several other bakers. At the trial, the case against Croxon fell apart. Several witnesses, including 2 lawyers clerks said that they had previously presented dishonoured bills under his own name to James Lee, and he had eventually paid them, including those presented by Croxon and had never questioned the right for Croxon to hold them. They also said another of Lee's married daughters Mary Ann Wigginton, had managed his affairs and been authorised to sign bills of exchange for him. Both Lee and Mary then changed their sworn statements made on two earlier occasions, that no bills of exchange had been issued. Lee said he did get Mary to organise these, but had meant to say it was only ever in relation to settling his own financial affairs, and never Croxon's. Mary said something similar, that she had meant to say only she had not organised any for Croxon in particular. She also said she thought the signature on the bills was in Croxon's handwriting but could not be certain. The case was dismissed but James Croxon's trouble was not over.  (See note 2 below for an contested election vote involving James Lee and Mary Ann Wigginton.) 

A second charge of forgery related to another signature on one of the above mentioned bill of exchange, that of farmer George Brangwin (Branguin in London news reports, an incorrect spelling) who had endorsed one for 50 shillings. George denied having done so. At trial, George did say he had put his name to another bill for the same amount some time before and Croxon's defence was the contested bill was just a renewal of that. The court decided against him, and James Croxon found himself sentenced to 2 years imprisonment with hard labour. 

Guilty?

At his trial, James Croxon was described as a most respectable looking person (although appearances can deceive of course!) and he was able to provide a number of character witnesses. He was not questioned directly, but his defence  did not change their story. It must be said that Croxon seems to have upset a number of local people, and at least one of them was the writer for the Bucks Gazette. He called James a "whining fanatic" and "canting hypocrite".  He poured scorn on Croxon for being a man who had tried just before his own trial to secure the release of three "desperate ruffians" who had been sentenced to transportation for life for a brutal assault on a young woman. These three men (Bishop, Taylor and Harding) had apparently paid Croxon to write an appeal on their behalf which was then refused. (For the full sad story of this horrifying attack on Patience Martin and the aftermath, see the post here)

The Gazette also accused Croxon of being a "meddling busybody" who put off people from the cause of teetotalism that he was said to promote. In fact they said with Croxon off in gaol, the idea of becoming a teetotaler had suddenly become more appealing. Croxon was most likely a non conformist. We believe he worshipped as one of the Salem Chapel congregation, this we will hopefully confirm later. He clearly upset those unwelcoming to his message. So reports of his conduct have to be filtered through this prejudicial reporting locally. There is also a political element as James sympathised with the liberal & radical cause in town, rather than the Tories who held Marlow as a pocket borough. In 1835 he was listed as amongst the 34 "independent and spirited voters" who had voted against the continuance of Williams as MP. Votes were not secret then and it was said there were many who had wished to vote the same way but had expressed fear of doing so as Williams was their landlord. 

Aftermath

What can poor Hannah Croxon have made of the case with her husband pitted against her father and sister? Whatever the truth of the story, it is a definite fact that the Croxon's had long standing financial problems and they had just lost their main breadwinner for two years. Things must have been very difficult indeed for Hannah and her children. Hannah was present on the day of Mary Ann's sad death in 1865 so any estrangement between the sisters was not permanent. 

I suspect the financial implications of his imprisonment cast a long shadow. He appeared as an insolvent debtor in court in both 1850 and 1853 spending 40 days in prison for debt on the last occasion. At these hearings he gives his occupation as baker. On the 1851 census he is listed as living in the poor and populous Dean Street. Ten years later he is in Chapel Street. In both 1851 and 1861 he had two of his adult unmarried daughters living with him (both working as satin stitch workers or dressmakers) as well as his young son Laban and later a lodger too. The young women's income must have helped the family budget although satin stitch was usually low paid work. Mrs Croxon was a victim of theft in 1859 when a quantity of washing was stolen from her garden along with articles from at least a couple of other houses. Such as lost must have hit hard. 

James Croxon wields his pen

James was not a man to let those in authority off if he suspected laziness or incompetence, rightly or wrongly so. Throughout the 1860's in particular he filled the columns of the local papers with letters (those that would print them anyway) in particular disputing how the poor law guardians did their work. This group set and administered the poor rate and managed the workhouses, including that at Marlow. James thought he could do it better, but he was unable to stand for election to the board as it seems he did not occupy property of sufficient value to meet the requirements. He thought the rules should be changed to allow him a chance for election. The guardians did read out his letters at meetings but say he made a number of vague accusations and seemed confused about the law and what was in their power. James was not easily deterred and continued to hold the guardians to account. He noted they had failed to have their books open for inspection by ratepayers on the required number of days for example, and got that rectified. He also rightly questioned why those receiving poor relief were expected to queue outside in all weathers, rather than receive it indoors as formerly. The previous distribution place was the Clayton Arms but it came to be felt that using a public house was inappropriate so the spot outside the distributor's house was used instead. A letter supporting James in this matter spoke of his "humane efforts" to support the poor. Poverty was a sufficiently heavy burden for the aged and sick to carry it said without further indignities being heaped upon them. Some suspected James himself wrote these letters of support. If he did, he was an eloquent writer who spoke with awareness and compassion. He had other battles, refusing to pay the church rate after protesting on its unfairness to non conformists and the inflated costs, as he felt them, of collecting it. He also tried to get the tender for doing work for the new sanitary inspectors in 1865, but failed. We will leave James with his most successful project. In 1865 he was one of prime movers to set up the Marlow Rate Payers Association. No chance now for parish books to linger uninspected! 

I have not found the death of James, but his wife Hannah died in 1880. 

Notes: 

1. 

Bill of exchange. Lee signs the bill promising to pay Croxon (or whoever has the note) 50s at a set time in future. Instead of waiting for his money, Croxon takes this to the bank and they give him a portion of the value owed (minus a handling fee as they are inconvenienced by not being able to claim the funds back from Lee until the note is due to be paid) When the note expires, Lee has to pay the bank who bears the note the full amount stated plus any interest applied. Bills could be renewed, sold on etc. It seems Croxon had paid most of the bills off himself, Lee only being chased when he did not. The banks would not accept bills signed by just anyone. You had to be someone thought a respectable citizen likely to be able to fulfil the amount. 

Note 2. 

Previous brush with authorities for grocer come timber dealer James Lee and daughter Mary Ann Wigginton. The vote of Lee in the 1831 election was considered by some to be invalid. You could only vote if you occupied property of sufficient value in the right area. Lee's vote in the election was based on his occupation of a Dean Street house with shop, stabling and small timber yard. (Dean Street was known as Well End then, it's not the same as the hamlet by Little Marlow) This shop had been managed for some time by Mary Ann, even before her father retired from this part of his business. 

James was however discovered to have left the premises 2 or 3 years before the election, to go and live in Little Marlow. His daughter Mary Ann and her new husband William Wigginton, a barge man, had taken over the shop, and Wigginton's name was above the door. Mary was however still the one managing the business. James claimed that he still paid the rent and used the outbuildings for storage but this was not considered enough to make him resident by those contesting the vote. Their complaint was thrown out however and the vote stood. 

Mary Ann Wigginton was the subject of an coroner's  inquest, held at the Greyhound in 1865. Her husband had accused the doctor (Dr Oliver) attending her of being drunk on duty and hastening his wife's end by giving her the wrong medicine. The full story of that is available here

Written and researched by Kathryn Day 

Related posts: 

To find every mention of your ancestor here, look at the A-Z Person Index in the top drop down menu. There is over 3025 people there. For general Marlow history posts see the General History option here where there are also links to other posts related to crime. 

Chartist Edmund Stallwood here

1847 election riots here

©Marlow Ancestors

SOURCES

Archibald, Thomas Dickson, Streeton, Arthur Towers - Analytical Digest of cases published in the New Series of Law Reports. (1847)

Barron, Arthur Report of Cases of Controverted Elections in the Fourteenth Parliament. (S Sweet, 1849)

1847 Kelly's Directory. (Kelly's Directory Ltd)

Slater's Commercial Directory 1852

The Law Journal papers 1847.

The Sun(London) 22 Jan 1841, 7 Aug 1851, 6 April 1853 - copies from British Library Archive through BNA partnership. 

Bucks Gazette 23 Jan 1841, as above

Windsor & Eton Express 26 Dec 1840

Bucks Herald 31 Jul 1880, as above

South Bucks Free Press 02 May 1862, as above

List of Insolvent Debtors, 1850-1855, (R Jenkins 1974)

1841,51,61 Census transcript from microfilm by Jane Pullinger. 

The Creswells of the Compleat Angler

 

This is a post about William and Ann Creswell, fondly remembered long term proprietors of The Compleat Angler (as we call it) in the first half of the 19th century. It was William and in paticular his wife Ann who turned a tiny riverside inn into a destination known as the place to go for London anglers needing somewhere to stay. They would run it for the best part of half a century.  Williams name is hard to read now but features on the bottom of the above grave of John Creswell, at All Saints Church. 

Humble beginnings

William was born in Goring in about 1777. His parents were Ann (nee Draper) and Abraham Creswell/Cresswell. Sometime after William's marriage to his own Ann, they took over the running of the small riverside inn known usually then as The Anglers or The Anglers Inn/Hotel. (See note 2 below)  In those days, the current Marlow suspension bridge was not yet in place. Instead there was the old Marlow Bridge running from St Peters Street to the other side of the inn from the current suspension bridge, plus the "flood bridge" which crossed over a channel of water with an outlet to the river near the Angler, designed to  control high water levels. The inn itself was said to have been formed of two rather ramshackle cottages thrown together and certainly lacked the facilities of it's successors. 

A rare businesswoman

It was said to be Ann who ran the business on a day to day basis, despite William's name on the licence. This was common in Marlow and elsewhere. The men often had another occupation at the same time. In William's case, he had an early side line as a boot and shoe maker. This was again a very common occupation for victuallers at this time. He later leased a wharf on which most of the Marlow coal supplies were landed. (See note below) Two of his sons, William and George ran a barge on the river called the Swan. He also both owned and rented farmland in Marlow - in Marlow Field, The Berwicks and at Red Pits, and he owned the Six Bells beer house in Quoiting Place which was run by a relative. 

Ann is described as "a rare businesswoman" and it is she that is credited with making the humble Anglers "the most fashionable stop on the Thames" doing a roaring trade that only increased when the new bridge was built. As you can tell from the list of silverware stolen from the inn (see below) the Creswells were not running a rough and ready beer house. Marlow was "the resort of gentry during the fishing season" and more than a few prefered to stay at the rustic Angler compared to anywhere else. 

Devastating fire

The couples time at the Anglers was not just a period of happily increasing trade. In 1832, the Angler suffered a devastating fire. It started in one of a pair of cottages that adjoined the inn. Starting in the early hours of the morning, it spread quickly to the inn itself. The volunteer fire brigade attended but despite their unstinting efforts and a ready supply of both water and assistance, both the cottages and inn were almost completely destroyed. It was said the old wood construction of the cottages made rescue hopeless. The cottages themselves were insured, but the poor families living within lost all of their possessions and almost their lives. Three little children in one of them were only rescued when some passers by managed to exhort the frightened youngsters to jump from an upstairs window. Those present described their survival as miraculous. 

As for the inn itself, it was described as a scene of desolation. As the Bucks Gazette put it, "to describe the distressing effects of the conflagration would be impossible".  William and Ann, through years of "persevering industry" had accumulated furniture alone worth £100 (including 7 beds), with their total losses estimated at £500. They even lost all their clothing. None of it was insured. At least their wine stock was saved along with some silverware but that was virtually all. The fame of the inn can be seen from reports in papers far and wide including London of the fire. Unsurprisingly, William filed for voluntary insolvency. But he was obviously able to make a deal with his creditors, and no doubt thanks to his other business concerns mentioned above, a year later the (now insured) Anglers was back trading. 

Not the Dukes candlesticks!

But in 1841, the couple suffered a burglary which robbed them of much of their saved silver goods. A strong box containing £14 was taken and later recovered - empty - in a neighbouring field. The items stolen included gold lined salt cellars, silver candlesticks "with the Dukes crest on"  and numerous other silver and silver plate goods such as soup ladles, mustard spoons, sugar tongs and a coffee pot. The Duke refered to is a reference to one of the Anglers reputed most famous guests under the Creswells - the Iron Duke, or Duke of Wellington. He is said to have planted a tree there during one trip.

William the gentleman

William was believed to share with his son William something of a golden touch when it came to business affairs. The two also shared a certain lack of inclination to spend money unless they could help it. William Senior may not have gone to quite the lengths his colourful son would do, but he amassed a tidy fortune. This enabled him to retire and live in comfort in Marlow, with a servant or two to attend him, Ann sadly having already died. In fact by 1852 this retired victualler was described as a gentleman. William lived to the age of 92, spending much of his last years in St Peters Street, across the river from his old inn. He is buried at All Saints Marlow, sharing a grave marker with his brother John  - see above. William is at the bottom of the marker, dying in 1869. 

You can read about his entertaining son William of Wycombe Rd farm here

A list of other proprietors of the Angler can be found here

William's son George was a long standing proprietor of The Swan in Marlow - list of proprietors here

Notes

1. In 1815 William served on a coroner's jury in Bisham which declared that death by shooting of a man in Bisham woods was justifiable homicide, on grounds victim was likely to have intended to go poaching and was seen near a poaching wire, though not setting or touching it.  That case caused widespread revulsion at national level, and was reported extensively. It was pointed out by critics that most people on the jury were either tenants of the guilty estate owner or were his personal friends. The landing wharf for coal that William had fell into this category- Information provided by Charlotte. The accounts differ widely, but the victim Joseph Bishop was shot while moving away and was unarmed. 

2. The hotel/inn when called The Compleat Angler, more often appears with it's spelling "corrected" to "Complete" in directories and other listings. Between 1838 - 1847 we have found 6 references to the inn as The Jolly Anglers, from different sources. At first we thought this a individual guides mistake or misprint,  but as it's now come up in multiple sources, it would suggest the inn was referred to by this name by at least some people for a period of time. It's just as often described in original sources as located in Marlow as opposed to it's actual home of Bisham. The address is frequently given during the Creswell's time there as "Marlow Bridge", "Bridge End" , "Riverside" or even "under Marlow bridge" - thankfully not quite true!  

 To read more about Marlow bargemasters and bargemen see the post here

A post about another Compleat Angler proprietor Charles Miller Foottit is available here

And famed landlady Mrs Parslow here

Use the A-Z person index in the top drop down menu to find all mentions of your ancestors, with more detailed entries listed in the Biographies option. The Pub Related option is the place to go for other inn/hotel etc related posts. 

Sources

1833 Parish Assessment, transcribed by Charlotte from the original rough  notebooks owned by our family, and loose documents contained within. 

The Examiner (John Hunt, 1815), digitised by Google. 

1847, 1854, 1903 Kelly's Post Office Directory (Kelly's Directories Ltd)

Census 1841, 1851,1861,1871,1881,1891 - transcribed by Charlotte from microfilm. 

1852 Slaters Commercial Directory (Isaac Slater 1852) 

Windsor and Eton Express, 5 December 1835, British Library Archive, accessed via the BNA

Maidenhead Advertiser 5 April 1893, as above

Bucks Gazette - 3 November 1832, 27 November 1841, as above

Bell's Life in London and Sporting Chronicle 19 November 1832

GRO Birth, Death and Marriage indices 

Written by Kathryn Day and researched by Charlotte and Kathryn Day. 

 

©Marlow Ancestors