The chancel date of 1875 commemorated.
If a visitor was to stand and look at our current delightful All Saints Church, it's hard to imagine that many would describe it as "a pile of deformity", hideously ugly or unfit for viewing up close. But these are all descriptions chosen by contemporary visitors in the years after the new church opened in 1835. The building as it stood then did however look very different to the current one! A lot of work has gone into changing it's appearance. This post is about some of the reasons why and is also a tribute to the old church it replaced.
The old Marlow church.
The "ancient" structure our current church replaced was regarded by many as handsome, and full of historic memorials. In 1801 it's interior was described as "plain and decent" with an ancient stone screen , handsome carved oak altar and a large hand organ in the front gallery dating from 1775. But those who had to work within it felt the building was showing it's age, with a leaky roof, damp and frequent inundations by flood water making the situation worse. In 1730 the church is described as a long low building consisting of the tower, 3 aisles, two chancels and "on the south west part was a chantry chapel in honour of St Mary". (The chantry was dissolved in 1547 and was still standing in 1730 according to some but then used as a "timber warehouse". More on that will follow.)
The wooden spire dating from 1627 needed periodic repainting - it was white in colour - and suffered weather damage fairly often. A workman, 20 year old carpenter William Gray of Cookham Dean, was engaged in doing some of this repainting of the spire in 1791. The pulley he was standing on gave way taking some scaffolding with it and causing him to fall 75ft. He escaped with relatively minor injuries, and no broken bones. This story got embellished a little in later retelling, with some saying he did not receive any injury at all. But poor William did suffer severe bruising of his back and loins and a lacerated right hand and it was originally thought he might have suffered an internal rupture. But 8 days later he was able to walk home from Marlow to Cookham Dean. A black line was painted on the steeple to show the place William fell from and to commemorate his death defying plunge. He was lucky enough to receive an allowance of 7s a week from Lady Le Despencer until such time as he could resume his work. Another feature of the steeple was the new weather cock erected in 1745.
Various dates have been given for the steeple and parts of the tower below collapsing, but on going back to the original sources it's clear the two incidents happened separately. The tower had "for some time past been dismantled of its curious steeple" in September 1829, according to a press article complaining about the very slow progress being made with a projected repair (after weather damage). This date is seconded by a separate newspaper which bemoaned the fact the tower had been without it's steeple for 2 weeks in August 1829. The tower had also been "despoiled of its coating" and looked like an emblem of "majesty in distress". Not much progress had been made in December so the church wardens promised to do something to protect the bells over winter. The Reading Mercury thought the tower had been ruined by bad building work and thought it would take an architect of "superior intellect" to sort it all out. A separate storm did more damage in 1830. A cap was put on the tower which was dismissively described as looking like a cucumber frame but yet more poor weather bought this crashing to the ground along with parts of the tower, and the last remains of the steeple framework, in December 1831. Some graves were broken by this fall.
In decay
In 1826 the church was described as in a state of general decay. The rector and the Dean and Chapter of Gloucester was supposed to maintain the chancel of the church, but they leased out the right to collect the grand tithes and with it the responsibility of doing the repairs. And so little funds were actually given to the church to do any maintenance with. Repairing the church became an election issue with various candidates promising to fix it along with the bridge but no progress was made.
In 1829, not only was the steeple down, but work was ongoing to build the new Marlow Bridge adjacent. This was a difficult project for all kinds of reasons, which has been covered by a different post which you can read here. As part of the work to provide foundations for the bridge, a "chasm" had been opened up beneath the church tower and poor weather saw it fill with water. Some speculated that this pit was damaging the foundations of the church tower. There were sarcastic comments about how much deeper the pit would be made, and the great expense that seemed to be involved in digging it.
A decision was made that it would be better value for money to knock down all of the old church and build a fine new one that would make a fine companion to the new suspension bridge. There were a lot of arguements about how the new build was to be paid for. Some individuals did make donations towards it's cost and a loan of £7,000 was to be secured on the church rates. But in the end an extra church rate was going to be levied for the next 40 years payable by those also liable for the poor rate whether they attended the church or not. This caused outrage in some quarters. Why couldn't the Dean and Chapter dip into their own coffers for once it was asked.
Foundations probed
A church committee selected Charles Frederick Inwood as the architect for their new building. A vote was held to consider whether to position it on exactly the same site of the old, or whether to move it a (very) little closer to the High Street. The new site was selected on a 6-5 majority, with the latter option winning. This was not without controversy as it was considered to add needlessly to the cost by some. A couple of thatched "wretched looking hovels" which were located "in the churchyard" and a small beer house nearby had to be removed but the Act allowing for the rebuilding of the church had not made provision for the compulsory purchase of these. So the owner held out for a good price. Some asked whether it would be (or should be) lawful for a beer house to be so close to a church. It does seem they were eventually cleared away though. The new site also meant some graves had to be carefully moved, which upset others.
In October 1831 the site was more or less fixed and tenders were sought for it's construction. William Bond of Marlow won. Later in the month the workmen were probing for a good foundation and in November they began to demolish the old place. The congregation could not continue to worship in a church due for demolition so they met instead at the former workshop of Washbourne's satin stitch manufactory off Quoiting Square/Oxford Road, a place later used for the first Salvation Army Headquarters in the town. They would stay there until June 1835.
Marlow church is falling down..or is it?
The problem the old church had with flooding was definite, and a new slightly higher site did improve things even if it was not the means to totally avoid such problems.
As for the other issues, the demolition of the old church gave plenty of food for thought for those who believed that the church authorities had much exaggerated the supposed dilapidated state of the old building. They were amused by the difficulties involved in demolishing a church that was supposed to be just about ready to fall down of it's own accord. The old "clunch" (hard chalk) building blocks proved hard work to break apart - "it appeared strange that so much apprehension of it's security had been excited". [A group of Marlow residents had petitioned Parliament not to pass the act allowing demolition of the church, at least not until they had closely looked into the buildings reported bad condition and the causes of it - "examine into the Condition of the Said Church, which the petitioners conceive to have been unnecessarily pulled to pieces" It was unsuccessful.] Later rumours were that those involved in the demolition had resorted to the use of gunpowder to complete the work!
If the church was not so fragile the critics said, there was no reason to begin the building work before funds had been raised to pay for it without resorting to a church rate. But it was too late to complain. Demolition completed, the first stone of the new church was laid by parish clerk Samuel Barnes of St Peter's Street in January 1833.
As the building progressed, some began to question it's appearance. Architect Inwood had exhibited his plans for the new church at the Royal Academy in 1832 and obviously those originally commissioning the building were happy with them. But it was said that "officious simpletons" had made adjustments to the original design that ruined it's original beauty. This opinion was given by the Bucks Gazette - who was very against the Church of England not funding church building from it's own funds. However others stated that Inwood had altered his plans in order to reduce the building cost, which no doubt would have won the approval of many.
Upset of another kind was caused when the "tackling" used to haul a 15cwt piece of iron to the top of the steeple gave way and the entire load plummeted to the ground, making a hole 6 foot deep in the earth below. It narrowly missed two workman which must have seemed a miracle indeed. The scaffold recieved a good shaking but no injuries resulted.
The vibrating steeple
Shortly after the church was finished it was noted that the steeple vibrated a great deal "especially when the bells were rung". (See note below.) It was considered that removing the weather vane on top at least temporarily would improve things. So a steeple jack was sent up to remove it watched by a vast crowd. In 1891 it was still noted that the cross on top could be "distinctly seen to rock" when the bells were rung.
This was only one of many problems recorded. Twelve years after it's construction two glaring issues were raised in the Ecclesiologist magazine. First there was no chancel, despite provision in the Act of Parliament for building the church that it should be maintained at the expense of the rector as before. The other problem was the font was apparently hidden away in a side room in an "unconsecrated" part of the church. They complained the font was not visible from anywhere inside during a service as the door to the room was kept always shut.
In 1862 more improvements were planned despite the fact the building was only 30 or so years old. It was said that the interior design was full of blunders that made the everyday life of the church difficult. The choir had made frequent complaints that the site allocated to them was not right and hampered how they sounded. So that would be moved and more space would be allowed. The organ was in the wrong place too and would be put now in the former baptistry. With the pulpit also planned to shift position, it's hard to think of an interior part of the church that everyone was happy with.
A pile of deformity
But it was the overall appearance of the church that upset many. There were some who were ready to praise it's modern look, even while others decried it's "weak imitation" of 15thc style. But for the majority of guidebooks and surviving descriptions, the church was ugly, bald of ornament and/or had ruined the once pretty view. Temple Bar magazine, called it "atrociously ugly" in 1862 for example. And those who were responsible for taking down the old church were labelled "ruthless destroyers" by the Bucks Herald.
One little part of the old church fabric was left in 1862. A hefty stone window was said to be on display in builder Thomas Corby's High Street premises. It's possible some of the other less obviously ecclesiastical materials were recycled and incorporated into other buildings where they may be sitting anonymously today. Alfred Heneage Cocks (the Victorian Marlow gentleman historian, menagerie keeper and bell ringer) was also reported to possess some of the remains of a window. He had in addition one of two models of the old Church known to exist at that time. Cocks himself reported to the Bucks Archaeological Society of whom he was an active member, that he had recovered numerous bits of moulded stone and marble from the old church. He had them at Thames Bank during his residence there, and on leaving it for Poynetts in 1899, he offered the remains to the churchwardens. This was on condition they were incorporated into the interior of the west end of the church. The churchwardens declined this offer, so Cocks gave them to his aunt Charlotte Cocks who was living at The Glade. He said they were used as a part of a fernery there. Whether they survived is hard to say. There had been complaints that the process of disposing of the old church materials had not been at all transparent with materials sold at low prices to a selected few.
The church is dilapidated - again
In 1872, the building cost was paid off at last. The Reverend Snaith had bad news to deliver though. He said the church had been neglected for generations (surely a slight exaggeration given it was 40 years old) and now it was in a "dreadful state of dilapidation". The state of the walls and windows was "ruinous" he said. When it rained, the roof leaked so badly that the clergy had to dodge about in order not to get soaked. He said the issues must be dealt with soon and that doing patchwork repairs and improvements would involve much more expense in the end. So a committee was started to raise subscriptions. As well as repairs, a new chancel was at last planned, and much later the wide nave would be divided with arches into 2 aisles. On the 9th September 1875 the foundation stone was laid for the chancel and it was opened on 1 September 1876, with the work costing £1924 and completed by Thomas Corby to the design of John Oldred Scott.
Other works carried on at various times include bricking up the door that formerly faced the High Street, removing the galleries and box pews, adding new stained glass windows and replacing the flat roof with a pitched design of hand made tiles of "special tint". And then there was the damage done by the terrible storm of 1897 - a separate post on this is here. Selling off the old pews and gas fittings in 1890 raised £7 for church funds. Even in 1889, when the church was opened after works that included the new roof and new flooring, the bitterness relating to the old church's demise could still be felt. The Bishop of Oxford, preaching on the occasion of this re opening, probably unwittingly touched a still raw nerve in his sermon. He referred to how the old church at Marlow was probably a "strong, large and ancient building which if the possessors of it had taken care in time, would have lasted until now." He added it must therefore have been demolished as it had fallen behind the times as regards convenience.
The money spent on putting the church right was a large sum and whether it was worth it divided opinion. The book The Royal River in 1885 thought no. Despite Rev Snaith's description of the ruinous state of the church the author thought the apparent sturdy state of the fabric of the building meant that as no emergency repairs were needed, no further funds should be wasted on it. "It is a question whether it would not have been better to have accepted its ugliness and employed the very large sums which must be expended before the work can be completed to other and more directly useful purposes." Ouch. On the other hand, the South Bucks Standard in 1900 thought that while the church of 1835 had originally been both costly and ugly, the work spent on putting it right was well spent even if had cost a very large amount in it's own right. In 1889 the paper had thought that with the new roof and old pews gone, all the church needed now was to have all of its windows replaced "in a more suitable style", the outer walls refaced in stone and flint, and the west front and steeple recast. Not much work then!
All Saints is a beautiful church to our modern eyes, both inside and out so if you have not yet visited it, it will repay your time!
Notes:
The new bells were rung in the new church in February 1835, some months after the church had re opened. These first bell ringers were honoured on the 60th anniversary of the occasion with a special bell peel in their honour. The ringers were William Truss (later landlord of the Two Brewers), William Smith (tailor of the High Street), town crier Jeffrey Truss, John Smith (cabinet maker of High Street), Thomas Coster (carpenter and lock keeper), Thomas Rosewell, (fisherman), George Creswell, (Swan landlord, farmer, timber merchant and barge owner) and Richard Davis (pork butcher and parish constable).
The Chapel that gave Chapel Street it's name is of uncertain location. But a possible discovery of part of it was at least previously visible under a house in Spittal Street in the first half of the 20thc. A mention is made of a "crypt" with vaulted ceiling under this house but much pre-dating it, in a passing comment by former Marlow antique dealer Jane Toller in her book "Discovering Antiques". Jane and husband Charles lived at the Old Vicarage in the High Street in the 1930s. The "crypt" was under a front room of the Spittal Street property. It may be (if from the right period at all) associated with the hospital of St Thomas that gave Spittal Street it's name. Another even more likely hint of the chapel remains were seen at the Rookery. It was here in 1877 it was reported that workman digging foundations for the new range of stables had discovered numerous interesting items which were believed to have come from the Hermitage / Chapel. These included some 11th century silver coins, a silver seal, a stone "mantelpiece" and parts of several stone columns.
Written and researched by Kathryn Day.
Related posts:
The Angry roaring mist of 1897 here
List of grave images at All Saints and other Marlow area sites here
For more posts like this see Church Related on the menu here
General posts about everyday life in old Marlow here
To find all mentions of an individual here use the A-Z person index in the top drop down. (There are 4,300 people listed there as of July 2022 and new posts are added daily)
SOURCES
Britton, John; Brayley, Edward Westlake et al - Beauties Of England and Wales or, Delineations topographical, historical and descriptive, of each county - (1801)
Cook, William Bernard - The Thames or graphic illustrations of seats, villas, public institutions" Vol 1. (1827)
Cox, A H - The Church Bells of Buckinghamshire (Jarrold, 1897)
Dugdale, Thomas - Curiosities of Great Britain, England and Wales Delineated (1854)
Hogg, Alexander. The New Ladies Magazine 1791 vol 6.
Langley, Thomas - The History and Antiquities of the Hundred of Desborough ( Faulkner ? & B&J Clark. 1797)
Rimmer, Alfred Belgravia Magazine, Vol 14, 1881
Sheahan, James Joseph - A History of Buckinghamshire, 1862.
Guide to Marlow 1891 - South Bucks Standard - with thanks to Michael Eagleton.
Willis, Browne Notitia Parliamentaria or a history of the counties, cities and borough of England and Wales. Vol 1. (Robert Gosling. 1730)
1833 Parish Assessment, transcribed by Charlotte from the original notebook owned by our family
The Royal River - The Thames from Source to Sea (Cassell 1885)
Law Journal 1832 (E B Ince 1837)
The Ecclesiologist Vol 6 (1847)
Temple Bar Magazine For Town and Country Readers Vol 15 Ward & Locke 1865.
South Bucks Standard 12 June 1895, 2 July 1897
Reading Mercury 21 September & 7 December 1829, 8 October 1832
Northampton Mercury 13 August 1791 via the BNA
The Building News and Engineers Journal, 17 February 1882
Notes on the old Parish Church at Great Marlow, by Alfred Heneage Cocks, 1900 as read to the Bucks Archaeological Society on their annual outing. [Undated typed report, and as per Records of Buckinghamshire - Bucks Archaeological Society, 1905 digitised by Google and supplied by InternetArchive.org ]
'House of Lords Journal Volume 63: 28 March 1831', in Journal of the House of Lords: Volume 63, 1830-1831 (London, [n.d.]), pp. 383-390. British History Online http://www.british-history.ac.uk/lords-jrnl/vol63/pp383-390 [accessed 7 February 2020]
The Builder September 25th 1875. Vol 33.
Windsor and Eton Express, 01 November 1834.
©Marlow Ancestors
