Newsletter 7
Land Ownership in
Avenbury, Collington and Bredenbury between the later part of
the 18th Century and the time of the Tithe Survey in
1840.
By Jennifer
McCulloch
These notes are an
attempt at a comparison between three parishes, Avenbury,
Collington and Bredenbury, using the Land Tax assessments and
the Tithe Survey. The first year of the Land Tax assessments
available to us is 1777. Thereafter about 12 assessments are
available between 1793 and 1831, not always the same years for
each parish. The assessment of 1777 is of limited value because
only one list of names is given and although one can guess, one
cannot be sure whether the list of taxpayers was of the
proprietors or the tenants, or perhaps a mixture of the two.
After 1780, the owners and the occupiers are listed.
The nature of
landownership in the three parishes varied widely. Avenbury is a
large parish and at the time of the Tithe Survey was 3233 acres.
The ruined church is situated in the extreme north east of the
parish, but the centre of the population is now part of
Munderfield. Cottage development known as Munderfield Row took
place along the Bromyard to Ledbury turnpike road that runs from
north to south through the parish. Brook House is reputed to be
the Manor house of Avenhury. This farm of 302 acres was owned by
John Cayley Esq., a Yorkshireman who married in 1798, into the
Stillingfleet family who had held the manor since the mild l7th
century. This was the second largest farm, Hopton Sollars of 318
acres, also a manor, being the largest.
Next in size came
Munderfield Court, 286 acres; and Little Frome, also known as a
manor, of 237 acres. Little Frome was held by the West family
until 1824 when it was owned by William Wall, and Edward West
became the tenant. This was the same family as the Bredenhury
West’s who went bankrupt in 1820. There were detached parts of
the parish, the 1argest being situated about 2 miles north north
west from Bromyard, comprising chiefly the farms of the Noaks,
of 189 acres, and Sawberry Hill, of 77 acres. Sawberry Hill or
Sargeberrie was a Domesday manor, and possibly the Noaks was
also. The Noakes was described as a Township and there is
documentary evidence for nine messuages here in the 13th
century. In 1840 there were 12 proprietors with farms over 100
acres and they owned 89% of the parish, so there was no major
landowner. The large number of persons owning holdings under 10
acres mostly came from Munderfield.
Collington, a
parish of 985 acres in 1840 was originally two parishes and had
two manors. The main road from Tenbury to Bromyard passes
through the parish North to South. The Collington Brook rising
in the East of the parish flows northwards joining the River
Teme at Tenbury and this was possibly the division between the
two manors and the two early parishes. Two of the major farms,
Underhill, and Castle Farm, lie to the west of the brook and
these were owned the Pitts of Kyre Park throughout the period of
the Land Tax. The other two major farms on the East of
the brook are Church House, owned in1840 by Edmund Higginson,
and Tidbatch, now called Ripplewood. These 4 farms accounted for
92% of the parish or, perhaps more accurately, 92% of the Land
Tax. But by far the largest landowners were the Pitt’s who
owned approximately two-thirds of the parish until some time
between 1831 and 1841 when the estate was divided.
Bredenbury was a
small parish of 543 acres in 1840. The Manor of Bredenbury was
acquired by Richard West of Standford, Worcestershire in 1726
and was 212 acres. The major landowner in 1840 was Charles
Dutton who owned 344 acres, being 63% of the parish. This
included the Manor of Bredenbury. Wicton Farm in 1840 consisted
of 155 acres. Wicton was a separate Domesday manor. These were
the two major holdings in the parish.
Very little can be
learnt about the landowners from a study of only three parishes.
Were the absent proprietors owning one or more farms in the
parish or in fact landlords of many other scattered farms
throughout ‘the hundred or the county? E.Davies found in his
study of 1,706 parishes in Cheshire, Derbyshire, Leicestershire,
Lindsey, Northamptonshire, Notinghamshire and Warwickshire that
the Land Tax assessments indicated that a new race of land
owners produced by the industrial revolution and the Napoleonic
war, appeared in the countryside. It will be interesting to find
whether the Bromyard District was affected by this phenomenon.
We know that William Higginson of Saltmarshe, who owned farms in
many parishes, made his money from coal. He left his. property
to his great nephew, Edmund Barneby, who took the name of
Higginson. Edmund Higginson owned farms in Avenbury and
Col1ington.
Richard Allison, a
Liverpool merchant, owned land in the neighbourhood and bought
Hopton Sollars, the largest farm in Avenbury between 1798 and
1812. Edmund Higginson lived at Saltmarshe Castle which had
built, but many of the other proprietors did not live in
Herefordshire, and the land to them must have been a business
investment only. In the electoral roll of 1835 addresses of the
proprietors were given. Capt. Charles Dutton, who owned the
Bredenhury estate, was from the 69th Regiment, Reading. John
Stevenson who owned Wicton lived at Shantock Hall, Bovington,
Herts. Benjamin Saunders who owned Munderfield Court lived at
Bromsgrove, and there are other examples of absentee landlords.
Davies found that
by 1780 the occupying owners had ceased to he an outstanding
feature of the English rural economy and that in the parishes he
surveyed, they contributed only 10.4% of the Land Tax. He also
found that in the parishes enclosed by other than parliamentary
means previous to 1780, the occupying owners had almost ceased
to exist, and that the direct effect of the industrial changes
on the fate of the occupying owners before 1832 appeared to have
been greatly exaggerated, as their disappearance had been
largely accomplished by 1780-86 since nearly 90% of the land was
then in the occupation of tenants.
% Parish
in Owner Occupation
Avenbury Bredenbury Collington
1793/94 56 51
12
1817 47 63
12
1831
17 0
1841 3
0 0
Avenbury and
Bredenbury definitely did not fit into the same pattern as
Collington, and that in these parishes the presence of the
owner-occupiers in 1794 was very apparent. In Collington, the
only owner-occupied farm was Tidbatch, 111 acres in 1840, and
owned in 1829 by Mr. Wight, who had farmed it himself, had then
been let to Joseph Benbow,
In Avenbury it will
he seen that there was a gradual decline in the percentage of
the parish in owner occupation from 56% in 1793 to only 3% in
1841. This was mainly effected by changes in ownership of the
larger farms. As has already been stated, Edward West became
only the tenant of Little Frome, which he had previously owned,
c. 1824. On the other hand Dr. Delabere Walker, who had for many
years farmed the Greve and the Burgess himself, let his
property in 1824 to Joseph Tibbatts. Similarly, William Cooke
let Munderfield Court at the same time. Perhaps their interest
in farming dwindled during difficult years. Thomas King;
who was in 1798 the tenant of Cusop, had become the owner in
1812, but by 1819 he had gone. It must have been during that
short period of his ownership, for afterwards Cusop was a
tenanted farm, that expensive alterations were made to the
16th-century house, completely refacing it with modern brick. He
bought his farm during a period of soaring land prices after the
Napoleonic Wars, and one wonders if he succumbed with a high
mortgage in the depression which followed. By 1831 it will be
seen that there had been an increase in the number of
smallholders. This was accounted for by development at
Munderfield; in 1824 JohnVernall was assessed at 17/6d., but by
1828 he had divided his holding into six, each assessed at
2/l1d.
In Bredenbury
William West was the only owner-occupier. By 1817 he had
increased his holding to 60% of the parish, but the estate was
heavily mortgaged and in 1820 he was declared bankrupt. It was
bought by Charles Dutton who farmed it himself for a time, but
by 1840 it was tenanted.
The 18 extra
holding’s in Avenbury are explained by the creation of
smallholdings at Munderfield and Copton Field. In Bredenbury
several holdings, were amalgamated, similarly in Co1lington, but
here, one new holding was created and between 1797 and 1807, two
tax payers assessed at £1.16.0. and £0.8.0. disappeared. Perhaps
they were incorporated for convenience in a neighbouring parish.
In conclusion, the
three parishes differed widely in the percentage of land owned
by one major landlord. It has been possible to demonstrate, only
to the very limited extent of present knowledge, that the new
race of industrial landlords had made some mark on the area. In
contrast to E. Davies’s findings (The Small Landowner 1780-1832,
‘In the Light of the Land Tax Assessments’, Economic History
Review), in Avenbury and Bredenbury 1793-94, over 50% of the
Land Tax was paid by owner-occupiers, but by the time of
the Tithe Survey these owner- occupiers had almost disappeared
from the map. Did this occur over the whole of the Bromyard
district? Perhaps others, like William West, purchased property
at a time when there was inflated currency and soaring land
prices and were, bankrupt in the depression which followed.
There seem to have been various reasons for the
disappearance of the owner-occupiers, and when results are
pooled from many parishes it should be possible to carry this
analysis further.
……………………………………………………………………
ARCHEOLOGICAL
REMAINS
Mr. A.M. Hunt,
county field archeological officer, talked to us in November
about the work of his department, with special reference to
the excavation of a. medieval moated house at Much Marcle
illustrated with slides.
He emphasised the
constant risk of the destruction of archeo1ogical remains by
plouhing, roadmaking and building of all kinds, asking us to
watch for it in our own locality. The help of local people is
also needed in recording archeologjcal si.te~. These are listed
under the following’ types (I) Crop marks; (II) Find
concentrations (e.g. flint and pottery scatters); (III)
Earthworks; (IV) Buildings; (V) Industrial sites (e.g. foundries
and factories of different kinds, hop and pottery kilns,
windmills); (VI) Transport (e.g. acqueducts, viaducts, ferries,
milestones, tunnels, railways); and (VII) Miscellaneous
structures and sites, which cover a wide range including air
raid shelters, Roman forts, beeholes and whipping- posts. A full
list of these categories can be obtained from the County,
Museum, Archeology Department, Hartlebury Castle, Kidderminster,
DY11 7XZ.
If any members
think they have found any unlisted remains in this district, or
that any remains are in danger of destruction please let us
know.
……………………………………………………………………..
THE PARISH OF
STANFORD BISHOP
Stanford Bishop was
chosen as the parish to he visited in 1974 and on 21st April the
exploration began at the Hyde farm in the Avenbury Lane,
by kind permission of Mr. and Mrs. Edward Walker.
To the east of the
farmhnuse and outbuildings (670 522) are well-marked earthworks
which suggest earlier buildings and perhaps even a hamlet. Miss
Rosamund Hickling thinks they provide promising signs of the
latter.
Continuing along
the Avenbury Lane the party came to the Rumney Building (671
514), which faces the road leading to Stanford Bishop Church. It
is described by Pevsner as a “plain oblong of stone, once a
school” which “was founded in 1731 and rebuilt in 1826” This
gives rise to much interesting specu1ation as to the need for a
school at such times and in such a place, but at present we know
nothing. else about it. The building, which contains a lot of
reused stone, is now a. barn. The field in which it stands was
known as the Lord’s Meadow and also Over Rumney Meadow (see
“Bromyard: A Local History”, p.26).
On the road to the
church lies Hill Oak Farm which appears to have been called the
Cross House in the 18th century.
The church itself
(682 515) lies off the road, and is reached by a narrow gated
road between a hopyard and a blackcurrant field. It stands on an
isolated hillock which is the highest point of the parish and
near its centre. The churchyard is circular and at the gate is a
standing stone. Whether the stone and the shape of the
churchyard mean the site was used for the practice of
pre-Christian re1igions has yet to be proved. So has the
well-known story that the chair known as St .Augustine’s, in the
church, was used by him at his meeting with the Celtic bishops
in 603 and that the conference took place in Stanford Bishop. A
beautifull feature of the church is its oak Jacobean Pulpit.
Pevsner describes the building as “late Norman to late cl3”, and
from its position it could have served the parish of Stanford
Regis (which was part of what is now Bishops Frome) as well as
Stanford Bishop.
The Bull Ring,
passed on the Way to Stanford Court, was a holding that paid
£l.l6.0. in the Land Tax returns of 1777, and comprised 15 acres
in 1838. Once used for bull-baiting all that is to be seen there
now are two modern buildings.
At Stanford Court
(by kind permission of Mr and. Mrs G. Essex Potter) the house
and buildings stand on a moated site. In the outbuildings is
evidence of the original house which was the Bishop’s manor
house and probably where the. Manorial court was held. An
important feature which was noticed was that the moat aopea.rs
to have been rectangular which is possibly indicative of a
Romano-British site. The present house was built in the 18th
century, a sign of the prosperity of the time and the desire to
use it decoratively, as witness the gazebo the remains of which
are in the garden.
Opposite the gates
of the Court is Wofferwood Common, now enclosed. As late as 1838
it extended to 215 acres. The name is a corruption of Wolves
Wood.
The exploration
ended at the Boyce (697 526), by kind permission of Mr. and Mrs.
T. Richards. The name, Boyce, may come from the French ‘bois’,
and the farm was a capital messuage probably granted to a
follower of the Bishop.
The following is
description of three houses in the parish by Mr. J. W.
Tonkin who visited them on 24th August 1974:-
STANFORD BISHOP
COURT
The building
between the hop-kilns and the courted yard appears to be the
solar cross-wing of a l4th century house of considerable
importance. It is a three-bay two storey building with a
lateral stack. The ground-floor room has heavily chamfered beams
with Wern Hir stops, but it is the upstairs room which is
important. This has slightly cambered tie-beams with a quarter
round moulding and curved struts to the collar. The wind-braces
to the through trenched purlin on each side are curved and
chamfered with deep cusped spandrels which are pierced right
through. The tie-beam further away from the fireplace is
morticed for a screen. It looks like a wealthy solar wing,
probably from the third quarter of the 14th century. The hall
part of the building has been much modified, perhaps
entirely rebuilt, for use as a hop store. The wing beyond this
has four upper-base cruck trusses and a heavy cambered
tie-beam. The lower part of the building at this point has a
plinth and it seems possible that this may have been part of a
service-wing or even an external.kitchen beyond an early wing.
The present house
has a metal plate above the front door with the date 1795. It
may he the date of the house though it looks as though it may
well have been built ear1ier than this in the 18th century.
The range of farm
buildings adjoining the early solar wing is of two different
builds, with straight upper-base crucks in one part and
s1ightly curved ones in the other. The barn has four re-used
crucks as tie-beams. Are these from the early hall?
The site is moated
and clearly was of some importance in medieval times.
THE BOYCE
So much has been
altered and added over the years that a long description., is
really necessary. However the central part of the house appears
to be a two-bay, two storey, two room plan house of the late
16th century with the parlour end at the west as this has
close-set framing. Part of this house became used for farm
purposes probably when the present cider house was built to the
west of it. Originally this was a pair of diagonally-set
hop-kilns in a timber-framed addition about 1700. The hop-kilns
farther west again are of 19th-century date.
Perhaps at the same
time as the first hop-kiln s were built a stone addition was
made to the south of the original house, probably for use as a
dairy and then later converted into a sitting-room. Both have
king-post rooms. A new stone block was added to the east
of the original house probably in the l8th century and later
again this was extended to the east, quite probably in the
mid-l9th century.
RUMNEY BUILDING
Said to have been
built in 1731 and altered in 1826 as a National Society school.
The bottom storey seems to be very well built and the upper is
of bigger stone not so well laid. It may well be that it was
originally of one storey and the 1826 alteration was to two The
two-storey appearance well fits a certain type of National
school of that period unfortunately the modern king-post roof
gives no clue as to date.
………………………………………………………………………………….
RURAL RIDES
The basis of
research into the history
of Herefordshirer
motor bus
services
By Martin J. Perry
The City of
Hereford, and the five market towns within the county, have
grown and remained as centres for local commerce, light
industry, trading, markets and entertainment. However, without
an efficient, regular and cheap means of transport for both
goods and passengers to the outlying villages and farms, the
growth of the market towns and even the city itself would have
been slow and uncertain, as the pace of Herefordshire life
quickened during the latter years of the last century.
The railway, so
rapidly expanded and exploited during the “mania” of the
mid-l9th century, made mass travel and nationwide communication
cheap and easy, but their effect on the thinly populated, rural
areas of Herefordshire was never great. Certainly, eager
specu1ators, confident of a profitable return on their
investments, sank thousands of pounds into the winding branch
lines that spread across the map of the county during the 1860’s
and 1870’s; the Golden Valley line; the Hay Railway; the
Leominster & Kington; and, of course, the Worcester, Bromyard
and Leominster. But the profits and the wealth never came; all
were destined for hard lives and some an early demise. The
Golden Valley line was to close to passenger traffic in the
early l930s, whilst the rest hung on into nationalisation and an
ignominious death. Their days had been numbered from the
out set, and one of the prime reasons for this was their
inherent lack of flexibility; they were quite literally set in
their ways, and as profits fel1, costs rose, until the
“withdrawal of passenger facilities” drove home the final nail
in the coffin of the “permanent way”.
The story of public
transport in Herefordshire is not, however, confined to the
railways, for the gap between town and country was being filled
by a more personal, flexible network of services; those of the
village carrier. Many where the remote vi1lages and hamlets
through which, heading for the markets of the nearest town on
the appointed day, the carriers’ cart would rattle, along the
roughly-made roads laden with market produce on the inward
journey, and with “boughten goods” on the return, and carrying
a. few regular passengers for a couple of pence, it was from
this modest makeshift beginning that the rural bus was to
emerge.
The development of
the internal combustion engine, and its app1ication to the motor
car was to bring the most sweeping changes to society. But in
those early days of the 1900s it was with humour and scepticism
that it was viewed. However, with some local foresight
and accuracy the Bromyard News & Record, during November of
1906, observed: “...another of Bromyard’s inhabitants was
conveyed by motor to Burghill last week, and that apparently
motoring in time will be of great advantage to the public. One
started from Bromyard on Thursday evening to take a party
to Worcester theatre shortly after 7 p.m., and was back
in Bromyard soon after eleven - if this is the order of the day,
the railway company will not want to ‘run many late trains.. .”
The following year, 1907, the editor gave a further thoughtful.
assessment of the way trends in transport were to be. “Bromyard
is certainly not in a. very sporting frame of mind just now, for
only two booked by train to Colwall races last Monday; however
it must be borne in mind that many preferred the quicker and
more enjoyable way of getting there – namely by motor”, and more
pointedly: “...‘situated as we are, fourteen miles from
anywhere, the motor car service will prove of great benefit, for
instance Tenbury especially, which by some trains takes you half
a day to get there ...“
The First World War
was, in many respects, the great turning-point of nil modern
history, and in the story of: public transport the war left its
mark; a mark in itself the turning point of that story. The end
of the war saw men returning from the battlefields with
new-found skills and training, not least of which was the
ability, to drive and to maintain motor vehicles. Further, large
numbers of war-surplus cars and lorries came flooding onto the
open market at cheap prices, and so for many it was only natural
that the prospects of setting up local carriers, motor lorry and
bus services was full of possibility.
Although
Herefordshire had had its first, regular motor bus service as
far back as 1908 when Connelly’s began a service from Barr’s
Court to Whitecross in September of that year, this was to meet
a sudden end in 1912 when the only vehicle (a
24hh.p.Milnes-Daimler open-top, 30 seat double-decker) was
destroyed by fire. It was not then until 1919 that the motor-bus
reappeared on the roads of the county , when Mr Bird of Wigmore
began a service to Hereford, and so this year must be taken as
the actual starting-point for the true “country bus”.
At this point it is
of interest to recall the 1907 report from the Bromyard
newspaper that the use of the phrase “motor car service” and its
implications, and a report of.a further “motor car service” to
theatricals in Stoke Lacy during April of that year, suggest the
possibility that Bromyard may he able to lay a claim to
the earliest of all motor-bus operations in the county. There is
however, to the author’s knowledge, nothing further, as yet to
substantiate this possibility.
Nineteen-twenty saw
the idea of regular bus services really to take hold. Messrs
James Fryer of Hereford commenced a service from St. Weona.rds,
whilst other villages began to offer a market day bus. Many of
the vehicles at the time were motor lorries, used for general
haulage during the week, hut fitted with wooden benches on
market days and becoming passenger-carriers. Indeed, two of the
county’s most well-known present-day fleets began in this way.
In 1920 a Canon Pyon cider-maker, Mr Yeomans, began to use his
Ford T lorry (CJ 4206) to carry passengers to Hereford, and soon
found this a well worthwhile proposition, and soon the lorry was
permanently converted to a. 14-seater, joined by another
purpose-built Thornycroft bus, and. thus started off the
foundation of today’s smart, modern luxury fleet. Likewise, Mr
Bengry of Kingsland began to use his Austin lorry to carry
people to local football matches, then to Leominster or Hereford
market, and he too found that carrying fare-paying passengers
was a worthwhile occupation. A second-hand Fiat charabanc was
acquired, and later a Reo chara, of American manufacture. This
was painted blue, and was shortly followed by two more Reos, one
painted gold and called “The Golden Queen” and the other yellow,
named “Primrose” - and thus the present-day fleet of Primrose
Motors gained its name.
Bromyard was not
far behind in this, for in March 1920 saw the commencement of
regular services into the toown from Hereford, Worcester and
Clifton, provided by that well-known supporter of matters modern
and technological, Mr A.E. Pettifer. Although the B.M.M.O.
(Midland Red) company, as a. result of fortuitous circumstances
bringing their operations to Worcester, had started a tentative
service from Worcester as far back as 1915, and had also
commenced a Hereford route in 1920, Mr Pettifer was undeterred
by such rivalry. It must, at this point, be appreciated that
since the Road Traffic Act of 1930, all bus services must he
licensed by government appointed Traffic Commissioners to
prevent wastefull oir dangerous competition, but in the
“pioneering days” of the 1910s such legality did not
exist and motor—bus operation was very much a free-for-all and
no doubt situations such as were found in Bromyard, with rival
buses running along the same roads, gave rise to much
local splits of loyalty, as the rival companies were
opposed or supported, as each vied with the other to gather the
most custom.
Pettifers and “the
Red” were not the only providers of services into
Bromyard, for :the Clifton road was used by the equally
expeditious Mr Burnham, resident in that village. In fact, many
of the surrounding Villages had motor-buses travelling in on
Thursday to the market . Matthews from Whitbourne; Howe’s from
Bishops Frome; Staples from Acton Beauchamp; Hancocks from
Bishops Frome, Fryers from Hereford.via Newtown or Jenkins of
Much Cowarne to name a few. Of these, it is of
interest to note that Mr Oliver Howe, Mr A.J. Hancocks
and Mr Henry Jenkins had all been carriers, with horse and
waggon, but came over to the use of.motor transport as times had
progressed.
Mr Pettifer’s first
known motor-bus was a Sunbeam 25 h p , seating 20, with the
registration number CJ 1208. He also acquired, in 1920, a
35-h.p. Lancia, B 8224. The following year a Wolseley 50-h.p.,
seating 35, along with a ‘smart Karrier 40-h.p., also seating
35. This latter is of interest as it later passed to Mr
Alexander Matthews of Whitbourne, who fitted it with a home
built double deck body.
It was about this
time that one of the most famous of Bromyard’ vehicles appeared
on the scene, the Daimler charabanc “Nuff Sed”. No further
details are at present known however of this or a further
Daimler owned by Pettifers about the same time.
The Lancia acquired
in 1920 must have been reliable and popular, as 1924 saw Mr
Pettifer buy two more, with a further two in 1925. Although all
four ceased to be used as buses by 1936, one at least escaped
the scrapheap, as it was converted to a lorry and employed
around Mr Pettifer’s Little Frome Estates (HL 2262).
Nineteen thirty-two
was notable for the arrival in the town of a far more
comfortable coach. Indeed it the first of Pettifers’ vehicles to
which the term “coach” can really be accurately applied. This
was DF 5186, an American Reo, fitted with 20-seat coachwork, and
purchased from the well known Black & White fleet from
Cheltenham.
An interesting
purchase was made in 1935, when EA 5181 arrived. This was a
35-seater coach of A.J.S. manufacture, which had originated in
the West Bromwich fleet of Messrs Hills. It is, however, the
fact that this vehicle is still surviving today that is of note.
After five years work for Pettifers, EA 5181 was sold to Mr
Arthur Moore of Great Witley, who pressed it into service in and
around that village during the war.
But when its active
lifetime drew to a close, it was not broken up, for with the
great demand for mobility and acute shortage of buses at the end
of the war, Mr Moore realised the possibility of
completely rebuilding and renovating old vehicles as new. Thus,
fitted with new engine, luxury coachwork and given the new
registration number HIP 569, the old A.J.S. carried on in
service for further ten years. However, even its final
withdrawal from passenger service was not to be the end. Mr
Moore’s son had large yacht, which often needed to he moved
about the country to various waterways, or storage for
the winter. So the bodywork of the old coach was removed,
and replaced by a transporter for the boat; and in its new
nautical role,the old vehicle carried on for a further couple of
years, before being finally pensioned off to an honourable, but
quiet retirement in the corner of a Great Witley orchard, where
she remains today.
This interesting
survival of a Pettifers vehicle is made all the more surprising
by the fact that another of Mr Pettifer’s one-time fleet remains
in existence. This is a 1938 Leyland Cheetah coach, sold to Mr
Burnham at Clifton in 1946, and stored for many years at
Clifton, until purchased by Mr Morris early last year, and now
brought back to Bromyard for possible restoration. It is
more than strange that, of the mere 22 vehicles that were owned
by the Pettifers bus fleet, two should still survive into 1975 -
nearly thirty years after the business ceased to trade.
The cessation of
motor-coach operations by Pettifers in 1948 left the town
without a bus business and it was not until 1961 that Bill
Morris began to run coaches in the town. Since the early l960s
the difficulties facing the bus operators have increased, and it
is ironic that the Midland Red Company, who had been so
instrumental in taking over the multitude of small bus firms
back in the twenties and thirties, were obliged to cut back or
completely withdraw routes into the town and that once again it
was the small local operators who were able to step in and offer
replacement services. The wheels are gradually turning full
circle for today Bromyard is served by five different bus fleets
operating public services from all four corners of the county.
Naturally in
writing a short article of this sort, much of the wealth of
detail, fact or fiction, must he left out. But I am, gradually,
piecing together records of many of the small motor-bus pioneers
who contributed their part to the town and county of Hereford.
Many were the one man one vehicle operators that sprang up in
the years after the first war, only to be forced out by
economies or the ever-advancing might of the Midland Red; others
managed to hold on through the difficult years of the second
world war, and for some, ‘the lucky.few’, business is as good
today as ever it was. But they all had one thing in common, they
were as vital and important a part of local history as the
people who rode with them or the towns that they served. If this
article is able to cast a. little 1ight into the shadows of this
often ignored aspect of local research, I will have succeeded in
my intentions, but there is still much to be done, before a
wealth of first-hand information is lost for ever.
In conclusion may I
acknowledge the assistance that is constantly being offered to
me by John Dunabin of Tarrington and Alan Mills of Walsall, with
service and vehicle details, and to various members of the
Bromyard Local History Society who support and aid my studies.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Nicknames and
Rhymes
By Mildred Shepherd
The following
rhymes were told me by people now well up in their eighties, the
first by an old gentleman now residing at Kirkham Gardens and
the second by Mr H.E. Fluck of Hereford, a member of the
Woolhope Society.
The first was
current in the 1890s when my old friend was a boy at school in
Whitbourne, and runs:-.
‘At Homer’s Mill
the baking begins,
The Duke of
Tedstone burnt his shins.
Lord Batemen’s
got a gout,
Sergeant Jordan
found it out.
In the parish a
Councillor dwells.
Calico Tom now
sings-quite well.
It takes the Bishop
to prattle and talk,
Old Pigeon Riddle
is cock of the walk.’
Of course the above
is more fun if you know who they were and the houses they lived
in. Nicknames were very much in vogue.
Does anyone know of
other local rhymes of the places where they live?
Mr Fluck recited
the following to me:
‘Bromyard Downs
and Moseley Mere
Are the coldest
places in Hereford –shere.’
He does not know
where in the county Moseley Mere is. Does anyone reading this
know?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Bromyard Gala 1974
By Phyllis D.
Williams
The Society’s theme
for the 1974 Gala was ‘Household utensils and Domestic
Furniture’. A tent, larger than the one used in the previous
year, was obtained in order to avoid crowding the exhibits.
However we were yet again overwhelmed by the wealth of material
and generosity of the ‘donors,’ consequently the bathroom,
laundry and dairy vessels overflowed the confines of the tent
and some had to be displayed outside. Inside the tent the
meterial was arranged according to the room it would furnish,
namely drawing room, dining room, kitchen, dairy, nursery and
workshop, with a central exhibit of needlework and old
photographs.
The good weather
and new site brought record crowds to the Gala and our
tent. We would like to thank the many people who so kindly lent
the exhibits, many of which were of great sentimental value and
irreplaceable. Thank you, to the helpers who mounted and
arranged the display and laboriously fastened down all
the items and those who joined the rota to look after the tent
and sell raffle tickets to cover our expenses.
