The Ancient Chapel At Ackhampstead

 This post is a tribute to the lost and ancient little chapel at Ackhampstead near Moor Common / Finnemore. (Otherwise known as the chapel of St. Mary de (or le)  Moor/More.) Ackhampstead was latter part of Great Marlow parish for certain civil purposes so we sometimes get enquiries about it.  No one was exactly sure when it was built but generally the tradition was that it was a chapel of ease for the wealthy Brinkhurst family of The Moore in the Tudor era. That seems very likely. They were later Catholic recusants who lost a lot for sticking by their faith. Some of the Victorian villagers believed it was specifically a female Brinkhurst that had established the chapel and who knows they may have been right.  More on them in another post.  Either way it was old, and apparently beautiful. 

The Moore(s) would later be known as Moor farm. 

The chapel had continued in use for centuries. There wasn't ever many houses immediately about it - Ackhampstead was a tiny hamlet. People who recorded they lived there may also otherwise describe themselves as resident at The Moor, Finnemore/Finnemoor or "Fennymore" but usually it was accepted there were about 12 cottages in the Regency and early Victorian Ackhampstead.  This meant a population of about 75 people in 1849.  Although the parish authorities had an exact idea of where the boundaries of the district of Ackhampstead were, in every day life the farm labourers residents were much less precise in how they defined their home. The Black Boy beerhouse at Moor Common is occasionally referred to as part of Ackhampstead. The residents of the handful of cottages at Chisbridge Cross ("Chusbeech" , "Christbridge" and a hundred other variations) were considered part of Ackhampstead chapel district too. 

The problem for the locals was that Ackhampstead might have been surrounded by Buckinghamshire, but technically it was an outlying part of the parish of Lewknor Uphill in the Diocese of Oxford.  This was not very practically or financially  convenient for the vicar of Lewknor 8 miles away. He appointed a curate for Ackhampstead but the wages came out of his own living which was the gift of All Souls college, Oxford. In 1842 the new vicar was Rev Edward B Dean. A few years later he was accused of trying to shed Ackhampstead from his parish by any means necessary so he'd no longer need to provide for a curate. He was very determined to be rid of it for sure but we can't see into his heart and truly know what his motivations were. 

"In good sound and durable repair"

In August 1848 Benjamin Disraeli presented a petition from the parishioners in Finnemore who claimed the Bishop of Oxford was suppressing them. They were asking for the governments protection against the injury they said the Bishop was planning to subject them to - specifically pulling down their ancient chapel. It was signed by all the landowners, farmers and cottagers there, bar one lady who said that she didn't want the chapel to go but didn't want to upset the rector and curate of nearby Hambledon who were criticised in the petition. They attempted to address the question of whether Ackhampstead was a drain on parish resources. They pointed out that the vicar of Lewknor had the benefit of just over 9 acres of glebe land around Ackhampstead chapel plus he received a portion of the rent from Moor and Finnemoor farms, and the great tithes from all the land in Moor and Finnemoor which was then commuted to a rent charge. (Ready cash more desirable than a portion of crops etc by now.)  Plus the small tithes of Cadmore End. The residents said that to the best of their knowledge the chapel was established for the benefit of the residents of Moor and Finnemore (Ackhampstead). It was well attended by worshippers from both of those places and from further afield and the building was in "good sound and durable repair" as they put it. This last point is important because it doesn't seem it was disputed at that time and it makes what happens later especially sad. 

Those signing the above petition believed that the Vicar of Lewknor was going to give up a portion of his living to sort of persuade Hambledon to adopt Ackhampstead as part of their parish. The point of doing so would be to close Ackhampstead in favour of a new church at Frieth they were then building and it would also increase the living at Hambledon. The farms and cottages at The Moor in particular were "remote and distant" from Frieth they said but a "remarkably short" distance from Ackhampstead. The Bishop of Oxford had sanctioned the demolition of their chapel without consulting them and now their only option was the "great expense and trouble" of challenging that decision in the ecclesiastical court of the same bishop who wanted the chapel closed. The petition didn't do any good but it bought a lot of press attention to what was happening at Ackhampstead. The Bishop said the court was not presided over by him and was subject to regular law processes. What's more the demolition wasn't his idea, but the Vicar of Lewknors (although he supported it). However Ackhampstead landowner Joseph Townsend had previously received a letter from the provost stating that the judge might in fact be the bishop or his commissary. 

Wanton and disorderly conduct

I mentioned above that the rector and curate of Hambledon were criticised in the petition. It was a slur on their honour to suggest they were motivated by financial rather than spiritual gain. The curate of Hambledon had been conducting the services at the chapel. (Prior to that the chaplain of the Royal Military College junior branch in Marlow had done the honours.) The Ackhampstead residents said the services had been held at the "improper, inconvenient and uncanonical hour" of 6pm. They seem suspicious that the clerics  were making the services as difficult as possible to attend in order they could say they were unpopular and would scarcely be missed. Six pm doesn't sound too bad an hour to us but it was a different thing in the winter when travel was down unlit and notoriously muddy and difficult to traverse dark lanes. Curiously it was claimed that the late hour of service was encouraging "wanton and disorderly conduct" among the "rustic" population gathered about the chapel after dark! A constable had been called more than once to keep order while the worshippers were inside. Who were these troublemakers? Perhaps Cadmore Ender's  - see below! In response to this complaint the Bishop of Oxford had ordered that services should be held at 10.30 am and 3pm. But the villagers said this order was ignored. 

Another argument advanced was that Ackhampstead was just too far from the rest of the parish to be convenient for those living in those places who were also not very close to Lewknor. Well those at Ackhampstead had the answer to that. They would personally donate to the cost of building a church somewhere else that would suit these other hypothetical people, as long as their own chapel at Ackhampstead was allowed to stay open. They REALLY wanted to keep it. 

Arguments for closure

Now for the other side of the argument. Phillip Wroughton of Ibstone House said there was no evidence the chapel was intended only for the benefit of those at Ackhampstead/Finnemoor rather than the parish as a whole. So the needs of everyone no matter how far they they lived from Ackhampstead should be considered.  He said the chapels maintenance was provided for out of a general rate paid for by everyone and the principal residents of places such as Cadmore End and Studderidge (Stutridge) districts had always maintained pews there at times. So it was quite reasonable that the chapel should be effectively be moved somewhere more central in the parish in order to suit the most number of people. 

50 people who said they lived outside of the Moor and Finnemoor district but whose family used Ackhampstead chapel anyway wrote to the Bishop to support his idea of closing Ackhampstead. This was because they said they were happy to go to the new church at Frieth as it was nearer to them. If these out of district worshippers stopped going to Ackhampstead, probably only 20 worshippers would be left they claimed. So it might as well be shut up. The Bishop published this favourable letter and his grateful reply. This was followed by a letter from 46 people in Cadmore End also supporting the decision. 

The other main argument in favour of closing Ackhampstead chapel down was it was difficult to get to because of the state of the footways and lanes leading to it. The naysayers said those coming from the South or West had to cross Moor Common which "during the great part of the year, and always after wet, is a swamp" or otherwise cross some meadows ("swampy" ) or some fields ("virtually impassable" except in the summer.) There were no houses on the east. From the North it was accessed either through a "dirty field" or through a farmyard and along a lane that was considered difficult to traverse all year round after rain. The previous winter people had preferred walking through a ploughed field to passing up that lane. However this claim about the difficulty of travel was treated with some scorn in the press. It was only a matter of concern for those making the journey and those same people were overwhelmingly in favour of continuing to do so, mud or no. Joseph Townsend pointed to those from outside Ackhampstead who claimed to make up most of the regular worshippers there. If the journey was so difficult why did do so many of them make it and not travel to Hambledon for example instead? Joseph said those attending often came from Hambledon itself or Frieth. He added that he had made a path at his own expense and partially through his private land to allow pleasant access to Ackhampstead from the direction of those two places.  He had allowed  this to be appropriated for general use as a footpath, but those mentioning the marsh and miry fields had forgotten to mention it. And should anyone suggest that Joseph had no right as a resident of Wood End to interfere with Ackhampstead matters, he countered that no one seemed to mind it when he donated money to the Vicar of Lewknor to look after Ackhampstead. (Money that several years later had not been spent on the project it was collected for - the fencing in of the glebe land around the chapel.)

There was much debate about whether the various cottagers would be closer to Ackhampstead or the new Frieth church. One side said of 11 cottages they considered to be within Ackhampstead, only 6 were closest to the ancient chapel and for some of those the difference was only 40 yards. (The Lewknor/ Hambledon parish boundary line was partially made up of the outer wall of one of those cottages.) For those that would be left further to travel, the inconvenience would be made up as there was a good "hard road" to Frieth they said. 

Be careful in Cadmore End

At this time it was suggested that a church might be built at Cadmore if Ackhampstead closed. It's funny to think of it now but Cadmore End or "Cadmoor" / "Cadmer End" as it was often known was considered a "wild place". Partly this was apparently because the residents lived so far from their mother church. The result? "A deplorable state of spiritual destitution". I don't know what the  agricultural labourers of Cadmore were up to exactly to cause this spiritual panic but saving their souls was apparently the real motivation for providing a church closer to them. I'm not sure that really holds water as those advancing this argument admitted that Ackhampstead was only one and a half miles away from the riotous Cadmore Enders of which there would be about 150 in number. If they wouldn't make such a short journey to Ackhampstead would they bother to turn up at another chapel slightly nearer? And there was also the chapel at Lane End, also one and a half miles away. I don't think the suggestion by the Ackhampstead residents that they'd contribute to the cost of a chapel like Cadmore was taken seriously. This was despite the fact they claimed to have £600 of the projected £800 promised already.  It was claimed that Lewknor wasn't a wealthy living and couldn't support two chapel of eases so if there was going to be one in the spiritual wasteland of Cadmore End, the other had to go. On the other hand, those at Ackhampstead said that if things were so bad at Cadmore, no doubt the church would be happy to pay to do something about it without interfering with Ackhampstead. 

It was strongly denied that Hambledon parish was going to get any payment to take on Ackhampstead. In fact the curate of Hambledon would lose his stipend for preaching at Ackhampstead if it closed. 

Your district or mine? 

Part of the problem was the issue of whether Frieth would be a built as a chapel of ease for Hambledon or would be part of a proposed new church district. This doesn't seem much of an issue in our eyes but it mattered for the reasons Joseph Townsend stated in a letter to the local paper. Technically if those at Ackhampstead were to continue to live in a different church district from Hambledon and Frieth, they did not have the automatic right to attend services in those places. They could only attend "on sufferance" as the worshippers from Hambledon had been allowed to attend Ackhampstead in the past. But if Frieth was made a new district, with Ackhampstead made part of it, they would be able to attend Frieth in their own right. I don't think anyone was seriously going to enforce these residential requirements because it's obvious that no one had done so in the recent past here. But it was a matter of principle to Joseph that the Ackhampstead people should not be cast adrift without really belonging to the nearest place of worship. Of course if a church was built at Cadmore End it would be in the same existing Lewknor Uphill parish as Ackampstead, and they could form a new district together. 

Decisions made

Back to the court case in 1849. The villagers and the two major landowners in the area (Sir William Robert Clayton of Harleyford with 300 acres and Joseph Townsend of Wood End with 134 acres) were in agreement they wanted and needed the chapel. Their plea via Disraeli included the desire that it should be possible to quickly and easily obtain justice if coming up against the ecclesiastical authorities. As things stood a "want of wealth " subjected citizens to injury in the face of the "uncontrollable power" of the ecclesiastical law. Well Clayton and Townsend did not suffer from a want of wealth and presumably it was they who paid for the appeal. But the point was understood in the national papers and the fight was partially  presented as the poor against the wealthy. The Bucks Advertiser, on the side of the Ackhampstead people, said of the Bishop of Oxford "those that do not speak of him with contempt regard him with indifference". 

The Consistory Court was presided over by Dr Phillimore (chancellor for the Diocese of Oxford) who said he thought it right to consider the Bishop of Oxfords views "with attention and respect" although the Bishop would have to abide by any decision he made. Not the most hopeful start perhaps. The court had been adjourned eleven times previously though, so I'm sure the petitioners against were more than ready to get things underway. (On 9 occasions it was because Dr Phillimore wasn't in attendance. This treatment did not go unnoticed in the national press). It was determined that those opposed to the chapels removal would not be allowed to be heard directly as they had expected but only through a legal representative, which increased their costs. 

Dr Phillimore considered the information from the endowment of Lewknor vicarage in 1412. This stated that it was entitled to all tithes from Ackhampstead and Fennymoor  and that divine service should be held at Ackhampstead every Sunday by either the vicar or a chaplain appointed by him. In 1685 the tithes of Ackhampstead were to go to Ackhampstead chapel along with the small tithes of Cadmore End. The first decision was did he have the power to grant a faculty (permission) for the removal of Ackhampstead chapel anyway? The answer he decided was yes and it was now time to consider whether he should. 

Ackhampstead's residents had strongly objected to the idea you could legally move a church. They thought the only precedent was in a case of a dilapidated one in which case a vestry (parish meeting) could be called and a rate (tax) could be decided upon to pay for the demolition of the old and rebuilding the new, in the SAME spot. Ackhampstead was in a fine condition. A vestry had been called, and in this all of the residents of Ackhampstead had voted against the move. But they weren't the only ones invited - all parishioners in Lewknor could attend and the majority of those had voted for closure. Ackhampstead said the opinion of people who actually used the chapel should be the ones listened to. 

In the end, the decision was made the chapel should go. No appeal options were left. The villagers would be given the benefit of attending Frieth but those with seats (eg family pew) in Ackhampstead would not be given them at Frieth automatically. There were however some conditions to Dr Phillimore's permission. The faculty would be granted subject to an £800 bond payable by those applying for it (Rev Dean of Lewknor) as a reassurance that the chapel should be rebuilt (or rather replaced, at Cadmore End) and that they would meet the costs of the building. (Actually they planned to raise a subscription fund to pay for the construction.) He suggested that two specific clauses should be inserted in to the faculty  - one to prevent a local rate (tax) being levied to pay for the church in the end, and secondly one to protect the old chapel from "desecration". I'm not sure if the second was included in the final version but if so, it was not abided by. 

Final service

The last service was held on 3rd June 1849 "to the deep regret if the poor who had so long worshipped within its sacred walls". Even this wasn't managed sensitively. The villagers attending did not know in advance that the doors would be shut to them afterwards and that they'd never be allowed one last look inside. (Although see below)  It was presumed that as a decision had been made to proceed with a church at Cadmore End, Ackhampstead would be allowed to stay open until it was finished and ready for services. But this didn't happen. The vicar of Lewknor announced after the service "without a word of comment or explanation" that the chapel was now closed. 

 Frieth church of St John the Evangelist was consecrated by the Bishop of Oxford in June 1849. It was indeed paid for by voluntary subscription. Questions were raised as to whether it would be big enough at 150 sittings to meet the needs of all those from the Hambledon area who said they'd prefer to attend there, as well as those from Ackhampstead. An extension was made to the building in 1872 it "not being sufficiently large for the congregation attending it"  so these concerns were probably justified. The new south aisle was constructed by Marlow builder Mr Corby.* 

Demolition job? 

You probably noticed the Ackhampstead residents accused the Church of not only wanting to shut their chapel but actually pull it down. Was this actually realistic? Although it's easy to find example of long abandoned chapels that had been converted into other usage, it doesn't seem to have been considered dignified or proper for Ackhampstead to be used for something else. The idea of pulling down an ancient structure horrified some. But those who thought it would otherwise fall into ruins said such an obvious sign of neglect would be "distasteful". I think the real problem was if the chapel was left standing, the Lewknor parish wouldn't have wanted to pay for its maintenance just for appearances sake, and possibly couldn't afford to. It's a pity no record of any bequests relating to its upkeep were still to be found. 

What was lost. 

When Frieth Church was built it was said to be about 7ft longer and 2 ft broader than the existing Ackhampstead chapel. 

The best descriptions of Ackhampstead come from the first few years after its closure. I'm especially grateful to the reporter of the Bucks Herald who described it in 1850. He thought it was beautiful and probably one of the oldest chapel of ease in existence. The bell had bore the date of 1665 he said. 

The main gist of the Bucks Herald article was to record his astonishment at how a chapel which had been complete and in good repair just a year before had degenerated into such a state. It was "bare ruins". The lead had been stripped from the font first. Then the hangings had vanished from the pulpit and reading desk. This was followed by the loss of the glass and lead from the windows, the inscribed bell, many of the pews and the reading desk. Worse still an old bricked up door had been broken through and the stone and brickwork had been partially destroyed. The writer firmly blamed the church authorities for failing to properly secure the building after the final service. He said for 5 months it had stood unprotected, and even after that someone had got in and took up the floor, roof, remaining pews and seating. The building deserved better he said, and we can only agree. He thought if it was thought better to let it disappear it should have been razed with "reverence and dignity". 

A guide to ecclesiastical topography published in 1850 says that Ackhampstead chapel was a small, poor affair (in terms of decoration or monuments probably) with no particular features of interest although they do not mention it being in a ruinous state so it's not clear when they visited. These guides obviously take time to compile. It's also worth noting that this book covered the diocese of Oxford and the material was submitted for "correction" as necessary to the Archdeacon. He probably would not have wanted to dwell on the charms if any of such a bone of contention!

 An especial concern at the time of the newspaper writers visit, was that no work had begun on Cadmore End church although it soon would be. By 1912 only a fragment of the flint walls of Ackhampstead remained. The visitor describing it then could only guess that it seemed to have been rectangular with lancet windows. Trees and shrubs were growing within the ruins. 

We will never know who was responsible for this destruction. It was traditional to strip buildings and recycle materials, and if the Church authority did not seem to care what happened to it, why should the locals who could give the materials new life? It would be nice to think some of the contents such the hangings might have survived in the hands of one of those who fought so hard to keep the chapel open. The new Cadmore End church would bear the name of its destroyed namesake, St Mary Le Moor, and became an independent ecclesiastical parish. 

 NB:

Ackhampstead was later attached to Marlow for poor law, licencing and school purposes and became part of the ecclesiastical parish of Hambledon. 

Written and researched by Kathryn Day. 

Related Posts:

This blog deals with Great Marlow itself mainly but an index of posts about nearby places is available here

*For other construction projects of Thomas Corby see here

Index of church related posts here

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

If you are looking for an ancestor that lived at Ackhampstead and you are wondering where they might be buried (or married) try Lewknor, the mother church. 

Sources include: 

Kelly's Directory of Buckinghamshire/Oxfordshire 1899

The Ecclesiastical and Architectural Topography of England: Oxford Diocese - Royal Archaeological Institute of Great Britain (John Henry Parker, 1850)

An inventory of the historical monuments of Buckinghamshire  - Commission on the historical monuments and constructions of England (HMSO 1912)

Wiebe, M G (Ed.)  - Benjamin Disraeli Letters Volume 5, (Toronto University Press Inc, 1993)

Bucks Advertiser and Aylesbury News 9th June (which also quotes the Daily News of that month) & 27th October 1849;Bucks Herald  26 March & 4th November 1842, 21st & 28th October & 4th November 1848,  10th & 17th Feb, 7th April,  12 & 19th May, 9th & 23rd June 1849, 16th Feb 1850; Oxford Journal 20th October 1849; Reading Mercury 16th September & 28th October 1848. All these via the BNA. 

The Times 21st August 1848. 

The Victoria County History of Buckinghamshire 1925. 

© MarlowAncestors

 

Victorian Postmen Plumridge

 The Plumridges of Marlow would have been well known to our Great Marlow ancestors as builders, bricklayers, beer-sellers and brewers. But today's subjects are two of those comparatively rare few to have followed a different occupation, at least some of the time!  Both had connections to the Post Office. First up is Daniel Plumridge who was a postman in Victorian Marlow. 

There have been a large number of Plumridges in the Great Marlow Parish area from the Tudor era, if not long before. Daniel was one of those born just outside Marlow itself c1839, in Cadmore End. (Usually rendered as "Cadmer End" or "Cadmor End", Fingest Parish in the earlier days). His parents Thomas and Rebecca worked in what must be some of the most typical occupations in this area at the time. Thomas spent his working life largely as an agricultural labourer and chair maker, while mum Rebecca was a lacemaker. Cadmer End was the more populous part of Fingest Parish at this time, but it was and still is a beautiful rural area. It formerly had a number of brickworks ..bricks and Plumridges are never far apart! Daniel however began to work from a young man as a postman in Cadmer End. Despite all the travelling involved in a rural route, in the Victorian imagination the role of a rural postman stereotypically went to someone lame or not perhaps as mobile as they had once been who could not keep up as an agricultural labourer. How many of these limping postman were actually about is hard to say, but young Daniel certainly did not fit that image. Whether he filled that other stereotype of taking a good while to complete his round by stopping at each cottage door for a gossip we don't know. But as a letter was the primary means by which the inhabitants recieved personal news from afar, both good and bad, he must often have been a longed for sight hoving into view in his uniform. It was noted that into the 1890s few Marlow homes had letterboxes within their front doors, which greatly slowed down the delivery of letters, as the postman had to wait at each house for the door to be opened so he could hand over the mail. An appeal was made to install them, and not to delay the workers in their rounds too much with chit chat. But who knows if anyone took any notice! 

Although postman were usually called letter-carriers in the early days in general, I have noticed that locally "post man" was in popular use much earlier. Postman was adopted nationally as it better reflected the work of the men when they began to carry packages too. 

In 1864 Daniel married Elizabeth Hannah Davis. Elizabeth was the daughter of the Bovingdon Green beer sellers William and Hannah Davis of The Jolly Cricketers. The couple set up home in Queens Road and Cambridge Place, Marlow. Other Plumridges filled several of the homes in this area, and had indeed built some of them. The pub in the road, The Duke Of Cambridge, also had a Plumridge at the helm and indeed had been built by them. At this point Daniel was working as..a bricklayer. Was it for one of his Plumridge relatives? Very likely. Later, Daniel is referred to as chairmaker.  In any case Daniel must have liked his work for the postal service as a few years later, he is back in the role of postman, this time in Marlow. Elizabeth's paid work was as a dressmaker, and the couple also took in lodgers. 

Daniel remained a post man into the early years of the 20th century, living in and around Queens Rd for some 30 years. (At the time of his daughter Rosa's marriage in late 1901, he had moved a few minutes away to Quoiting Square.) It must have been interesting for him to see how the town expanded with new developments, especially at the hands of various Plumridge builders. Marlow's Victorian residents could enjoy more than one post delivery a day (3 in 1880) except Sundays when there was one. In the same way the boxes were emptied more than once. The exact schedule varied over time, except on Sundays. Usually the longer distance items came by train from Maidenhead and by mail cart before that. When Marlow got her own station, the post arrived in town sooner and so deliveries were moved back too. At the time that Daniel started his work in Marlow, the last letters left here on the 4.15pm train, but this was eventually moved back to just after 8pm. Deliveries were even made on Christmas Day itself (although just one usually). 

 

In 1891, the Plumridge's 14 year old son George Henry was working for the Post Office, as a telegraph messenger. This role was usually given to younger men, but it was regarded as a responsible one and a good start. Messages received at the telegraph office naturally had to be taken to the recipient and this was the messengers responsibility. 

The community had to rely on the honesty of their letter carriers, an issue in the public eye here in 1885 after Marlow man James Morgan spent a year in prison for stealing postal orders entrusted to him as a postman in Bedford. He was taking on a temporary cover role in that town - otherwise he was a chimney sweep. In total he stole 3 postal orders over two weeks. Nothing of a similar kind seems to have troubled those recieving mail within Marlow itself. Morgan received a reduced sentence because he was only a temporary relief postman so it was considered a less severe  betrayal of trust. He had not lived in Marlow long before his apprehension.**

If the postal staff had opportunities for mischief so did members of the public. Daniel sometimes arrived at post box to find that a miscreant had broken off the enamel tablets fastened to the pillar boxes. These gave the details of the the collection times. An appeal was made by the postal authorities locally in 1891 to plead with people to leave this essential information alone! 

Another annoyance for Daniel was the "cribbed, cabined and confined" conditions in the main post office in West Street, especially in terms of the space available for recieving packages. It had occupied two different sites there at various times but neither one had been designed to deal with the explosion in popularity of the post. In 1894 it was finally decided to go ahead with long debated plans to move the post office. Institute Road was the first considered site but the town was not happy with this. In the end the grand and attractive Cromwell House in the centre of the High Street was secured, although not until 1897, opening early the following year. It was converted from a house*. (Even this did not please some of the residents of West Street who lamented having a slightly longer journey to reach the main branch now it was no longer in their road. Plans were made for a sub post office there for their convenience! You could also find another sub post office within a couple of minutes of the High Street, in the grocers on the corner of Station Rd and Mill Lane as it was then. In 1897 Mr Yeoman was in charge there. See pic below.)

William Plumridge of Lane End 

Our second Plumridge connected to the post service is non conformist William Plumridge, of Lane End, son of James and Esther. William worked as a chairmaker and later as a baker, grocer and sub post master at Lane End throughout the late Victorian period. He was assisted by wife Mary nee Ellis and sons Thomas and William at times. William junior's work delivering bread for the family business made him a witness in the Moor End Common murder case which you can read about here. 

 William senior was obviously a hardworking individual but on his death as an elderly man in 1904 he had a number of debts. His estate could not cover these, to the embarrassment of his family. There is nothing especially unusual about this but the unexpected resolution of the issue was.  Three years after his death William made headlines around the country. An anonymous well wisher paid all of his debts off in full, long after his creditors had resigned themselves to writing them off.  He or she did so as a "token of esteem" for William and his family. The identity of the benefactor(s) was not seemingly revealed, at least not publicly. Perhaps they had spent the years between the death and pay off saving the necessary funds (£167) or perhaps they had been away and unaware of the problem until 1907. Either way, it was a nice thing to do. William junior succeeded his father as sub post master and grocer, also acting as a house agent. Multi tasking obviously ran in the family! There were Plumridges fulfilling the roles of sub postmasters and bakers in Lane End for long after the period our blog covers. 

Written and researched by Kathryn Day. 

Further information:

*History of Cromwell House can be found here

**James Morgans wife applied for parish relief for herself and her 4 children while her husband was awaiting trial at the Bedford Assizes. The Board of Guardians rule was that no "outdoor" parish relief could be given to the family of those in prison, including those waiting trial. (That is no assistance other than a ticket for admission to the workhouse could be offered.) However Marlow's Walter Lovegrove, one of the Guardians  spoke on the behalf of Mrs Morgan, and pleaded for compassion. He was seconded by Marlow's vicar and fellow board member Rev Arthur Fearon who reminded everyone the principal of innocent until proven guilty. In the end a vote to give the family 3s a week plus three loaves of bread was carried unanimously despite grumblings from 3 members about the rule bending. It was one of many examples of Walter Lovegrove speaking out firmly in the interests of Marlow's poor and unfortunate. The relief stopped when James was convicted. 

To find every mention of an individual here, use the A-Z person index in the top drop down menu. There's over 6,000 people listed there. Great Marlow itself is the focus of this blog but for other posts relating to Lane End, Cadmore End and around that we do have, see the index here

If you are interested in some of the other families who quite literally built our town, see the Men Who Built Marlow posts Lovell here Bond here   Corby here. 

SOURCES: 

Kelly's Directory for Buckinghamshire 1852, 1883, 1905, 1911,1920,1939. (Kelly's Directories Ltd) 

Notice - Changes to Postal Delivery - 1874, 1875, 1877. Thanks to James Purdsey for a view of these. 

Census, 1841-91 - Transcript from the microfilm made by Jane Pullinger. 

Oxford Journal 29 May 1847. 

South Bucks Free Press 5 May 1860

Chesham Examiner 21 January 1891. 

Boston Guardian 7 December 1907, and South Bucks Standard August 1894 - these two copies via the BNA. 

Slough, Windsor and Eton Express Oct 31 1885 - Slough Libraries. 

© MarlowAncestors

Where There's A Will There's A Spicer

 If your ancestor left a Victorian will in Marlow between 1828 and 1871 there is a fair chance that Ralph Spicer drew it up or witnessed it. He was a solicitor and attorney who lived and worked on the site of the above property in West Street. The current building is a 1900s replacement. Ralph's home looked much less impressive, reasonably sized but plain.

He was in practice in Marlow by 1826 and in this building by 1833.

In 1828 he was acting for some of those involved in the great hoo ha that was the building of a new bridge in the town. To read about that difficult time see a post on the history of Marlow Bridge here

The year 1828 was also the year that Ralph and his wife Emily had their apparently only child Ralph North Spicer baptised at Marlow. This child when filling in censuses as an adult usually gave his place of birth as Henley which may well be true as place of birth and place of baptism needn't match. Ralph Junior grew up to be a solicitor too.

The year 1828 was also the year that Ralph became a Master Extraordinary in Chancery for Buckinghamshire. What this means is that if anyone involved in a Chancery case who lived in Bucks needed to swear an affidavit then they saw Ralph to get it done. He was only 26 at the time.

He had served his apprenticeship as an articled clerk in the offices of Sweet Stoke and Carr of Basinghall Street, London. He officially became a solicitor in 1824. According to an obituary in the Law Times he had married the daughter of the Stoke in the above law firm. Emily is censused as having been born in Wales so I am not sure about this, I could not find their marriage at my first attempt. In 1831 Emily advertised for a good plain cook for the family.

In 1833 the West Street property consisted of a house, stable, offices, chaise house, yard and garden and was valued at £30 a year.

Six years later Ralph bought a cottage in Cadmore End which was rented out. I do not think he owned his West Street home though I cannot be certain. He later moved premises to the High Street.

Ralph pops up as the defence or prosecution in cases across Buckinghamshire and Berkshire. He was often in London dealing with local bankruptcy or similar troubles. He had a second Buckinghamshire office at Amersham though it seems this was largely staffed by others under his name and supervision.

In 1848 Ralph took a Mr Hayward of Maidenhead to court to retrieve 6 shillings in unpaid legal fees. In 1866 he was chasing £10 from Henry Stroud formerly of the nearby Coach and Horses pub in West Street, who had gone bankrupt [for a bit more about Henry and to see a photo of his premises as they look today see here]. His son Ralph North Spicer was acting for the debtor!

Ralph and Emily seem to have maintained a second home in London with their adult son later in life. This must be why Ralph appears on the 1871 census twice - once in Marlow and once in London. Someone in one of the households made an error! Ralph Junior acted as Ralph Senior's agent in London. Before that Junior lived in Oxford Road Marlow. Like his father he was also an insurance agent.

Ralph Senior died in 1874. A tribute was paid to him during the sitting of the Windsor County Court a few days later. He had endeared himself to all by his gentlemanly and honest conduct it was said. Furthermore he was "well informed upon almost every subject you could converse with him". The Buckinghamshire Advertiser's obituary said Marlow has lost a "genial and kind hearted friend".

The year following Ralph North Spicer took his clerk to court over the alleged theft money from himself and his deceased father.

Ralph Spicer was by descent of the Spicer family of High Wycombe and Glory Mills, Wooburn. Different obituaries give different father names for him- either Ralph or Freeman!

Emily died in 1876.

NB: The property above, home to Ralph has been considerably altered since his day, and now presents a grander appearance than it did then! 

Related Posts:

Ralph was a strong liberal supporter and this post details just what the professional and social risk this could be in Marlow at the time: 1847 election riots here

More on occupiers of other West Street properties can be found by looking at the West Street sub section on the menu under the " Specific Shops, Streets...Etc" option.

All mentions of a person on this blog can be found on the Person Index on the top drop down menu. 

Sources:

The Law Times Volume 58 published by the Office Of The Law Times 1875. Digitized by Google. Accessed March 2021.

1841 and 1851 censuses my transcription from microfilm, other censuses transcribed by Jane Pullinger.

Slaters Royal National and Commercial Directory 1852. Published by Isaac Slater.

National Archives Discovery Catalogue.

1833 Parochial Assessment. Original paper record held by my family and transcribed by me.

Bucks Advertiser and Aylesbury News 19th Dec 1874. Copy held at the British Library Archive and accessed by me March 2021 via the BNA.

Maidenhead Advertiser 29 December 1874. As above.

Windsor and Eton Express 5th Aug 1845. As above.

Reading Mercury 11th July 1831, as above.

Bucks Herald 1st December 1860, 8th November 1866 and 4th December 1875. As above.

Post researched and written by Charlotte Day.

I have worked out historic occupancy of many buildings in Marlow, sometimes back into the 1700s by cross referencing property transactions, wills, censuses, photographs, historic newspapers and many more sources.

Photographed November 2020.

©Marlow Ancestors. You are very welcome to reuse this image or research for the purpose of family or local history research with credit to this blog. Thanks.

The Men Who Built Marlow Part One.

William Bond, a carpenter, architect  and builder born circa 1755, lived in this house in the High Street Marlow by 1822. Access to his yard behind the building was a little before it as you came down the High Street.

He was resident in the the town and working as a carpenter and builder by 1784, I just am not sure if he was in these premises then. Between 1804 and 1805 William built two new buildings for the Royal Military College in West Street [modern Remnantz] for which he was paid over £1000, a fortune for the time. He also carried out building repairs at the college and did carpentry work on Marlow's new Town Hall. 

William died in 1828. He left his business and all his tools like turning lathes, other turning tools, stock of wood and "ironmongery" to his son William Junior. His widow Ann was left his watch and chain, and all their household furniture, plate, china, linen and wearing apparel. She was also to receive profit from the business and act as one of the trustees for other parts of husband's estate. This included a property in Chapel Street Marlow. This no longer exists, it would be under where Waitrose is now, soon to be a Lidl. Ann moved out to Prospect House in Marlow in 1831 to live with her married daughter Rose Faulkner whose husband ran a boys' boarding school there. It is possible that she assisted in the school though she is listed as gentry. 

Anne was the sole executor and one of the residual legatees of the will of her friend Hester Sawyer proved 1830. She also received a silver teapot and other tea accessories from Hester in that will. To read a full transcription summary of Hester's will see this post

After Ann's daughter Rose Faulkner died she moved out of Prospect House to a home in St Peter's Street. A peculiar criminal incident occurred at her home there not long afterwards. While she was away a man disguised as a woman turned up at her house, barged in and started unpacking clothes. This person told Rose's servant Jane Pinner that she was the advance party for a couple and more servants coming to stay with Ann as old friends. The servant knew nothing of such plans and told the other "maid" she was not under any circumstances going to share a bed with her that night as had been suggested. The "maid", "master and mistress" and other uninvited servants refused to leave the house even after others of Ann's employees said they were not known in the household and should leave. Eventually someone found a gun and used it to force the group to leave. Ann on her return confirmed she had never heard of the "master and mistress" who had presented themselves as her old and dear friends. They were never traced. The motivation for this crime is baffling. Burglary seems to be what was suspected at the time but it seems something of an elaborate scheme. Free accommodation?? If the "maid" had not been a man in disguise a lot less suspicion of the group's motives would have occurred. We'll never know I suppose!

 Ann died in 1835.

 On the 1833 parish assessment the main family property in the High Street (photographed above) as lived in by William Junior consisted of a house, yard, workshops, counting house and shed. He also had a wharf down by the river which he probably used to receive timber deliveries.

That year a George Ilsley was jailed for 3 months for stealing a piece of elm timber from William.

As well as carpentry and building William Junior did surveying. He

was one of the building contractors who worked on Marlow's new suspension bridge which was finished after a protracted and very vexatious process in 1832. I have previously written a post all about this where you can read more, see here.

Getting paid for work on the bridge was at times like getting blood from a stone. William Junior would have further trouble later in his life getting paid by a Samuel Tupper and Company for work [I think in London]. He took that case to Chancery.

He was also the builder responsible for the Parish Church in Marlow finished in 1834. The previous 1600s building was, controversially for many locals, knocked down to make way for it.

William built the new Salem Chapel / Congregational Church in Quoiting Square 1839-40 too.

William Junior did not marry. He died in 1856. At the time he owned 12 cottages in Pinkneys Green, 1 in Cadmore End, a large fruit, flower and vegetable garden in Marlow complete with hot houses intended for growing grape vines [This property was called New Field. It seems to have been close to what we now call Glade Road, perhaps on or very near Foxes Piece. But that's just speculation on my part. There was also pig and cow keeping buildings there and a cottage all belonging to William. His dad had owned a garden at "Town End" which may be the same one] plus a meadow with stables, piggeries etc in Spittal Street entered by an archway [Later these were run down and considered an eyesore. This property seems to have been near to where the Methodist Church is now].

Extra note: William Bond the Elder, builder, and William Bond the younger, builder, were appointed executors of the will and trustees of some property of John Rance Lovegrove plumber and glazier of Marlow in 1828.

Ann Bond was a witness to the will of Catherine Allnutt in 1819.

Other children of William Senior and Ann as per William's will=  Sarah wife of William Clabbon, Mary- Ann wife of Daniel Pitt, Martha (then deceased) wife of John Wells, Elizabeth wife of William ?Crove and Ann wife of Edward Bond (yes Bond).

The Men Who Built Marlow Part Two deals with the Corbys and can be found here. Part three is about Young Lovell and is available here

Photographed November 2020.

Sources:

Wills of William Bond, Hester Sawyer and Catherine Allnutt. PCC. Transcribed by me. They are at the National Archives.

1833 Parochial assessment. Original records in the custody of my family. Transcribed by me. 

Reports of cases in Chancery, Kings Bench, and Common Pleas volume 25 Part 1. Digitized by Google. Accessed March 2021.

Bucks Gazette 1st March 1833. Copy at British Library Archives and accessed by me via the BNA March 2021.

Bucks Herald, 18th October 1856, accessed as above.

John Bull, 30th April 1832, accessed as above.

Piggotts Commercial Directory 1831. Copy held by University of Leicester.

Journals of the House of Commons volume 61.

Great Marlow Bridgewardens' papers and accounts, Centre for Buckinghamshire Studies.

England and Wales Censuses transcribed by me from microfilm.

©Marlow Ancestors. You are welcome to use this original research and image for family or local history purposes with credit to this blog and a link here so that the sources listed above remain credited.