fairmansgarage1989.jpg

From the Archives

At a recent dinner in connection with the Horley Habitation [Sussex No. 1496] at the Chequers Assembly Room, there was a very large attendance of members, including several ladies; and Sir Trevor Lawrence, M.P., having, in felicitous terms, proposed "The Health of the Ladies", and informed the company that the toast, somewhat unusually, was coupled with the name of a lady, - MISS MARRYAT, who was enthusiastically applauded, rose and said:

"Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice-Chairman, and gentlemen, as none of the senior Dames of the League have risen to reply to this toast, I trust you will not consider me very presumptuous in rising to return thanks on behalf of my sex for the many nice things Sir Trevor Lawrence has said in his speech about us. [Cheers] I believe it is rather unusual for a lady to respond to this toast, but I fancy the custom has arisen somewhat in this way. It is not uncommon, I am told in London and other cities, for some 200 or 300 gentlemen to get together and have grand banquets all to themselves, while the ladies are banished to a gallery to look at them through the railings, feeding [laughter] just like you see the animals fed at the Zoological Gardens. [Much laughter.]

Well, having thus wilfully banished the fairer sex from their society, of course they go through the hollow farce of drinking the health of the banished ladies, they have put to some unhappy man to reply [laughter], but really on these occasions, when the noble beasts - I beg your pardon, the nobler sex [laughter] - unbend so much as to let us feed with them, I think the least we can do is relieve some unhappy man of the task and reply for ourselves. [Loud cheers and laughter] If, too, you will consider for a moment, you will see what an absurdity it is for a man - a bachelor too, I believe generally - attempting to reply to a toast on the subject of which he needs must be woefully ignorant. [laughter] For, if he is an old bachelor, his life has evidently been passed uncheered by the sunshine of a woman. If a young bachelor, he is probably too much taken up with admiration for himself to have had time to study the opposite sex. A married man, now, might know something about us, but I suppose they are never allowed to reply, because I imagine you gentlemen have the vulgar and erroneous notion that if were to dilate on our charms - as he undoubtedly would do - he would have a rough time of it when he got home. [Cheers and laughter]

I will only remark, in conclusion, that whatever may be in store for our sex in future - whether you admit us to many branches of science, arts and honours, or even give us women's suffrage, and many other things from which we are now excluded - you may depend upon it that the higher the scale of duties and responsibilities to which you raise your women - and you will find us fit for them when the time comes - the higher you will raise yourselves in the scale of civilisation, and the greatest number of perfect English women you will produce. [Loud and prolonged cheering!]

Reprinted from "The Windmills of Surrey and Inner London" by K.C. Farriers and M. T. Mason (Charles Skilton Ltd London 1966)

100 yd from the Smallfield road and about 25 yd to the W. of Langshott (Lane) just before the bend around Mill Croft. National Grid Reference 52891434.

This post mill was probably erected during the first half of the eighteenth century, after which period it is indicated on most maps of Surrey (1). In 1848 the mill and the small meadow around it were occupied by Griffin Beale, the owner of this and surrounding land then being Henry Bridges (2). Another Beale  Thomas  is recorded at Nutfield in 1839 (3). The mill house lay 300 yd north-eastward along Langshott Lane where Windmill Cottage now stands  Greenwood's map of 1823 is precise upon this point.

The mill was not worked after about 1875; it was used by the last miller  Henry Jennings, who succeeded William Charlwood   for the grinding of flour and cattle foods. An unsigned water-colour in private possession (4) is the only known picture of the mill, but it is a little too impressionist in style to yield precise technical data. However, a few recorded facts (5) reveal an unexceptional mill; there was a weatherboarded body winded by tail pole on a single-storied roundhouse, and there were four common sails driving two pairs of stones, one peak, one French burr, both of which were latterly dressed by Jennings. The stones were apparently driven by brake and tail wheels (6).

After the mill ceased to work, it was left to stand with broken sweeps by its owner, Canon Bridges; he was in favour of preservation, but after his death his son had the derelict removed in about 1900, when the Beddington estate was broken up. Arthur Jennings, a local builder, was commissioned to demolish the mill; it was agreed that he should take the whole of the timber and all other useful materials from the debris for what seems the ridiculously low figure of £5; his demolition charges were thereby well covered. The task of destruction was comparatively easy; several of the main timbers in the base were severed, and a number of men pushed on the tail pole until the mill reeled and fell with a tremendous crash.

One of the stones was bartered for a barrel of beer, and this stone, or another, now lies as a pedestal with a surround of crazy paving in the garden of Mill Croft, a few yards from the site. It is a French burr with working face uppermost; the weather has by now spared little of the binding loop or of the matrix between the segments. At the site itself on a piece of waste ground, a slight baldness in the grass, or perhaps a subtle difference in texture, seems to betray the area of the former mill circle  at least, to those predisposed to find it!

Notes:

(1) e.g. Rocque, 1762; Andrews and Dury, 1777; Lindley and Crosley, 1789; one-inch O.S., 1816, six-inch, 1870.

(2) Tithe map. Tithe Redemption Commission, Finsbury Square, London, EC2.

(3) Pigot's Directory.

(4) Mr M. T. Mason, bequeathed by the late Mr T. J. Mason, Bromley, Kent.

(5) By Mr D. W. Muggeridge, c.1935 from Mr Arthur Jennings.

(6) Evidence provided by the millstone and by the anti-clockwise sails of the water-colour.

 

 

 

A letter addressed to Head Porter Pattenden, Horley Station dated 5 October 1905 from the General Manager, London Brighton & South Coast Railway, London Bridge Station, SE.

"My attention has been called to a case of attempted suicide on the part of a man named Wellbeloved (He obviously wasn't) at Horley Station on the 5th ultimo, when, at considerable risk to yourself, you rescued him from his dangerous position when an approaching train was within 20 or 30 feet of him.

I have very much pleasure in commen-ding you for this very courageous act, and I have given instructions for it to be recorded in our staff register and to be mentioned in the Special Staff Notice.

I have also pleasure in enclosing £1 in recognition of your praiseworthy conduct on the occasion."

Question: did he jump from one of the present platforms or from one of the previous station's platforms?

Mr Pattenden lived at the time in Station Bungalow sited on the south side of the High Street entrance to the subway. His son kindly allowed the Society to copy this letter.

An extract from the "Surrey Gazette" 24 June 1879 concerning the appointment of teachers at the Horley Row School.


The manner in which the religious views held by members of the Horley School Board, who happen to be all Churchmen, were introduced into the administration of the business before them at their meeting on Monday evening, will scarcely be regarded by outsiders in a light favourable to that body. The particular business was the appointment of pupil-teachers to the girls' and boy's schools. (there being just one school) The result of advertisements was the application of three candidates, who all attended. Of the masculine gender there were two representatives, but for the female pupil-teachership there was no opportunity for choice.


Investigation into the acquirements of the solitary candidate proved her to be a very 'forward' young woman indeed, in educational matters, so much so as to elicit a query whether she was too advanced for the position, to which reply was made that the Board should gain the advantage of her accomplishments during the time she remained with them,- an advantage well worth taking into account. About her respectability there was also no manner of doubt. But the Chairman of the Board having elicited that the unfortunate girl was so lost to a due sense of what was right and proper as to attend a Baptist Chapel, and to have suffered herself to receive education - and a first-class education, too - at a school connected with a Dissenting sect, a round of protest emanating from all the members but the vice-chairman, who deserves praise for his courage in asserting his view that they should appoint the best candidate, whether of Church or Nonconformist principles, and in moving this particular candidate's appointment.


But it was evident her doom was fixed, although the girl was not a Papist. And she was refused the appointment, though admittedly most eligible for it in every respect, because she happened to be a Dissenter, because the Board have appropriated the hour formerly reserved for Church teaching in the Horley Board School, and now use it for unsectarian teaching. The only redeeming feature of the case was the handing the girl a half-sovereign as some compensation for her trouble in coming there.