DOCSLIB.ORG

The Fight Against the Theft of Sydenham Common

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Fight Against the Theft of Sydenham Common lama!~ 0 Many open green spaces that we take for rights ot common granted today still exist because in the past they were preserved from enclosure and development by both legal and illegal resistance. This pamphlet briefly discusses the fight to save two such spaces in South London: Sydenham Common 86 One Tree Hill. A rousing tale of legal shenanigans, rioting, -1... intrigue and violent death... _ 1 \\ ~<-.*..i2-::.: .--ii W " -1; - l 5” x ‘- 0 ""T;‘¥;v\6 * ~.; ..\J__ H 1 ,1 1 ~§I;;,.:£é:':5\.€‘;s":°“'~.‘;&’ "" k")/figi __ - -' ""* ~‘C"'£3 l...__[““~‘___ '- ‘*9’-/' I .._,..15%4* AL.. ". -' -it-"~I'~T.IXQ fa‘ "".-""1 '1 ""1" ' " V .3,. r"".- J"_;%, Y‘ T\Q 31%.‘’5§t~‘..'11"I‘'-- c:-:4 ll| .».~.,I)?,Z§< ., -5 l f ugh I *’7""'§')\ - _... The Fight Against the Thett ot 5 denham Common and One Tree Hlll. Bettg O’Connor _p PERSONS CLAIMING RIGHTS OF COMMON “T/we law condemns the man or woman W//oo steals t/oe goosefrom oflit/oe common, But lets t/oe greater villain loose Who steals t/Je common from t/se goose. ” Many if not most of the open spaces - commons, woods, greens - of any size that remain today in South London, still exist because they were preserved from development by collective action. Whether by campaigns or by legal action, or by rioting, tearing down fences 86 re—opening up enclosed land. This pamphlet briefly discusses two spaces in South London: Sydenham Common SC One Tree Hill (with a brief look at Hilly Fields). _ Between the 16th SC the 19th centuries, much of the open land in England was enclosed, fenced off from public access or use, usually by rich landowners for agriculture, or sold off for house building. For hundreds of years, local people had traditionally benefitted from customary rights of use on common land, mostly grazing of animals and wood for fuel, but also often sowing of small plots on the fringes of commons for market gardens or feeding themselves. Commons and woods were vital in many places to the survival of large numbers of people. But despite its name, common land was rarely if ever, land held ‘in common’: it was almost always land owned by the Lord of the Manor, on which over time other people had come to exercise some rights of use. Traditional rights of access to the commons were always a battleground, not a happy interdependence between landowner and tenants, there was constant struggle all over the country over who got to take what from the land. Common rights often had no legal weight, they were part of an unwritten social contract, a remnant of feudal Dedicated to Mic/oael Bradley society’s complex web of inter-relations and obligations. and the ‘disorderly multitude’. Gradually, as capitalism developed, slowly replacing a society of vertical social obligations 86 custom with one based entirely on profit, landowners were starting to replace traditional land use with intensive agriculture, which‘ led to the clearing of woods and wastelands 86 the exclusion of the poor from the commons. e 1 Those deprived often lost traditional ways of making a living, or in Stuart kings, such as the Game Act of 1671, reserving hunting for the many cases ways of topping up incomes as labourers or craftspeople: rich and titled, banning the poor even the possession of nets, snares, or “In an increasingly legalistic age, an unwritten agreement counted fir certain types of dogs. As the poor’s diet was often short of legit meat, little in thefizce ofthe new law ” poaching was always widespread. In some areas it transcended an individual survival technique 86 grew into mass collective resistance, This process caused massive upheavals especially to the lives of the where large numbers would go disguised to poach en masse. In South poor, whose existence had become much more precarious since the London, Dulwich Wood (much larger then than the woods of that dissolution of the monasteries in the 1530s took away much of the name that survive) was a royal playground: locals were ordered to church-based charity system that provided a safety net for the old, ‘jforheare to hunt, chace, molest or hurt the king? stagges with greyhounds, destitute and the sick. Enclosure often formed a kind of rolling process, hounds, gunner or any means whatsoever”. A a vicious circle, where people expelled from most of the land would be forced to gather in smaller less secure, often squatted, communities on The mass upheavals caused by enclosures were not pushed though the fringes of woods and fields, more dependent on what open land without resistance. Many attempts to shut off land were fought, often remained and often becoming seen as a threat in the area due to their by large numbers of people, and often violently. There were armed desperation. Which in turn provided part of the rationale for enclosing rebellions (as in Norfolk in 1549), riots, mass outbreaks of trouble, for more wasteland and removing their houses. four hundred years. Many battles were won and many lost. The Great North Wood t Sydenham Common One battle that was ultimately lost was that over Sydenham Common, The area on the slopes of the hills that runs from Norwood to Brockley also was known in early medieval times as Westwood orWestwood was until the 18th century largely still woodland, the remnants of the Common. The name Westwood derives from the area being the old Great North Wood. This wood, a natural oak forest that had once western part of the parish of Lewisham, and heavily wooded; in fact stretched from Croydon to Camberwell, had broken up by the Westwood was a remainder of the old Great North Wood. Seventeenth Century, into smaller woods and commons, including Penge Wood, Gipsy Wood, Dulwich Wood, Forest Wood (or Forest Sydenham or Westwood Common covered the area between modern Sydenham and Forest Hill. Bounded in the Southwest by Hill), and Westwood (or Sydenham Common). Into the late 1700s many of these woods and Commons were still today’s Westwood Hill 86 Crystal Palace Park, in the Southeast it reached to Mayow Park and Sydenham Road; to the north to where inhabited by the very poor, squatters with nowhere else to go, and Honor Oak Park and Forest Hill Road now lie. For centuries it was outcasts like gypsies, (hence Gypsy Hill), or were haunts of robbers and split between coppices of farmed timber (enriching the Lords of the smugglers who used green lanes through Norwood and Peckham to bring contraband up from the coast. On top of demand for land for Manor, in turn the Abbots of Ghent, Priors of Shene and Archbishops development and more intensive agriculture there was also pressure to of Canterbury) and open tracts where locals and parishioners of clear these ‘undesirables’ out, a useful by-product of enclosures. Lewisham had ‘Common Rights’ to graze cattle 86 gather fuel. ~ After Henry VIII’ acquired Westwood in 1531 during the dissolution A lot of land was also reserved for hunting, the privilege of the rich, and the lower classes were banned from catching many animals, of the monasteries, the coppice system was gradually abandoned to reserved for hunting by aristos. Draconian laws restricting access to allow more mature woods to grow for use by the navy - crucial to the wars waged by the Tudor monarchs. These were felled wholesale in the game and land passed in the Middle Ages were renewed under the 2 6 3 utterly undone yfyt should he unjustly ta/een from them. ”l sixteenth century, leaving a stripped common, apart from two main Locals led by the vicar of Lewisham, Abraham Colfe, tried legal wooded areas, Coleson’s Coppice and Coopers Wood. The open land was a strong temptation to potential enclosers. The methods of challenging this, going to court. The parishioners fired off battle against enclosure began in 1605, when Henry Newport, a petitions in all directions, initially prompting the Barons of the Exchequer to rule against Newport's designs. Lewisham gentleman and Yeoman of the Kingis Household (ie a royal hanger-on) persuaded king ]ames I to lease him 500-600 acres of the After years of inconclusive legal wrangling however, in 1614 Newport Common, and attempted to fence a large part off for ‘improvement’. and his allies, Innocent Lanier and Robert Raynes, two more Officers of the Kings Household managed to obtain a lease on 347 acre of the Common for - t ----s--- -----I---|--w-.-- --.-..-|---.|-.-- '-..... .. ................- ---'-'-"""'-E “Unjustly takenfrom them” ' """" """""""" """"" ' '-' - I--. -...-..-....-...-.-.-...------1I.-------- .. .. ... .-.- ~4---I--I-IIII-—""‘* I Jl‘l.\n5i S, ‘ 5. Ralph Treswellis I607 Many inhabitants of Lewisham were small farmers or OCtOl)€F 21 COLUT gt ll1 su:_,vey ofSJ/denham —. husbandmen who W35 IO it Common. Confiuingly inqui1.6 into thg drawn ‘wzth South at the *~ 1» relied heavily on _ e 1 top! The ware to Czttmam Tnattfil-'3 Chi? Jury e s is Sydenham Road. the CE the free pasture -. i=1 F .. I f - - 0 | 1gI'10l‘€Cl tl'1€ ti H I//4 wazefrom Czttmam’ Perry “ available on the - fit ,__ '* _ ----‘ Vale, the ‘waiefrom Rushqy l"""‘"1 complaints of *’ G ,.. 1.1‘ common. At this _ y g ‘ F; I, reene Stanstead Road, MMQ\~\ - time there were the tes1dents of sol“; and the ‘waie to Duledge’; also large Lewisham and “ V ‘P " Pt"? °f5J’d¢"5“m Hi”- Lo numbers of found ‘against q squatters on the them. A common, encour- Newport, Lanier - and and Raynes sq ., 4-‘ii Q}. CI-did LnIq,l'{¢_ aged by the lack 'EVII of restrictions then tried to 1° K‘sii I .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 1982, Boyd, Octavia Hill OCR C.Pdf
    'Anyone interested in women, religion, sodal action, biography, or history will find this book valuable. And if you perceive that that list includes just about everyone, you are correct.' - Ellen Miller Casey, Best Sellers 'As a theologian as weil as a feminist Dr Boyd might have a double·edged axe to grind, but the grinding if any is quieto She has written a thoughtful, sensible, non-propagandising and rather entertaining book, striking a good balance ~\\\NE BUll between factual narrative and interpretation' -KathIeen Nott, Observer ~S ~ The three women who had the greatest effect on sodal policy in Britain in the .A. nineteenth century were josephine Butler, Octavia Hili and Florence Nightingale. In an era when most women were confined to the kitchen and the salon, these three moved confidently into positions of world leadership. ..OCTAVIA HILL josephine Butler raised opposition to the state regulation of prostitution and _w...... confronted the root issues of poverty and of dvil rights for wamen. Octavia Hili --~. - artist, teacher and great conservationist - enabled thousands of families to meet the dislocations of the industrial revolution and created a new profession, that of the sodal worker Florence Nightingale not only shattered precedent by establishing a training-school for nurses, she also pioneered work in the use of FLORENCE NIGHTINGALE statistical analysis, and her practicality and passionate urgency effected radical reforms in medical practice and public health. These women atti-ibuted their sodal vision and the impetus for their vocation to their religious faith. Rejecting the constraints on women's work imposed by conventional religion, they found in the gospels ground for radical action.
    [Show full text]
  • Henrietta Barnett: Co-Founder of Toynbee Hall, Teacher, Philanthropist and Social Reformer
    Henrietta Barnett: Co-founder of Toynbee Hall, teacher, philanthropist and social reformer. by Tijen Zahide Horoz For a future without poverty There was always “something maverick, dominating, Roman about her, which is rarely found in women, though she was capable of deep feeling.” n 1884 Henrietta Barnett and her husband Samuel founded the first university settlement, Toynbee Hall, where Oxbridge students could become actively involved in helping to improve life in the desperately poor East End Ineighbourhood of Whitechapel. Despite her active involvement in Toynbee Hall and other projects, Henrietta has often been overlooked in favour of a focus on her husband’s struggle for social reform in East London. But who was the woman behind the man? Henrietta’s work left an indelible mark on the social history of London. She was a woman who – despite the obstacles of her time – accomplished so much for poor communities all over London. Driven by her determination to confront social injustice, she was a social reformer, a philanthropist, a teacher and a devoted wife. A shrewd feminist and political activist, Henrietta was not one to shy away from the challenges posed by a Victorian patriarchal society. As one Toynbee Hall settler recalled, Henrietta’s “irrepressible will was suggestive of the stronger sex”, and “there was always something maverick, dominating, Roman about her, which is rarely found in women, though she was capable of deep feeling.”1 (Cover photo): Henrietta in her forties. 1. Creedon, A. ‘Only a Woman’, Henrietta Barnett: Social Reformer and Founder of Hampstead Garden Suburb, (Chichester: Phillimore & Co. LTD, 2006) 3 A fourth sister had “married Mr James Hinton, the aurist and philosopher, whose thought greatly influenced Miss Caroline Haddon, who, as my teacher and my friend, had a dynamic effect on my then somnolent character.” The Early Years (Above): Henrietta as a young teenager.
    [Show full text]
  • English Women and the Late-Nineteenth Century Open Space Movement
    English Women and the Late-Nineteenth Century Open Space Movement Robyn M. Curtis August 2016 A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the Australian National University Thesis Certification I declare that this thesis, submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the award of Doctor of Philosophy, in the School of History at the Australian National University, is wholly my own original work unless otherwise referenced or acknowledged and has not been submitted for qualifications at any other academic institution. Robyn M. Curtis Date …………………… ………………… Abstract During the second half of the nineteenth century, England became the most industrialised and urbanised nation on earth. An expanding population and growing manufacturing drove development on any available space. Yet this same period saw the origins of a movement that would lead to the preservation and creation of green open spaces across the country. Beginning in 1865, social reforming groups sought to stop the sale and development of open spaces near metropolitan centres. Over the next thirty years, new national organisations worked to protect and develop a variety of open spaces around the country. In the process, participants challenged traditional land ownership, class obligations and gender roles. There has been very little scholarship examining the work of the open space organisations; nor has there been any previous analysis of the specific membership demographics of these important groups. This thesis documents and examines the four organisations that formed the heart of the open space movement (the Commons Preservation Society, the Kyrle Society, the Metropolitan Public Gardens Association and the National Trust). It demonstrates connections between philanthropy, gender and space that have not been explored previously.
    [Show full text]
  • (Crimson) 1. Caroline Gardens, Grade II Listed. London's Largest Co
    GOLDSMITHS Places of Interest NORTH - Arts and Crafts ride (crimson) 1. Caroline Gardens, grade II listed. London’s largest complex of almshouses, built 1833 onwards, with quadrangle, gardens and a large chapel, which now houses the Asylum arts organisation. 2. Peckham Library - Will Alsop’s iconic and gravity-defying structure, which won the Stirling Prize in 2000 and helped kickstart the regeneration of Peckham. 3. A charming 22 acre conservation area of Arts & Crafts-style housing, early 1900s, built by Octavia Hill, social reformer and co-founder of the National Trust. 4. T34 - A brightly painted and graffiti-bombed Russian tank defends a disused piece of land. 5. The Jam Factory - an impressive housing redevelopment of the huge redbrick former Hartley’s jam factory, built 1900. Bermondsey antiques market (a) - a cornucopia of vintage wares - is just up the road. 6. White Cube, a major gallery in a superbly converted 1970s warehouse. Further along now-trendy Bermondsey Street is the Fashion & Textile Museum (a). 7. One of the most (in)famous graffiti artworks by Banksy, still in situ: one (hooded) man and his (Keith Haring-esque) dog. 8. Dilston Grove - a well respected arts space in a run down former church in Southwark Park. 9. A grade II listed brick and concrete former Swedish Mission, with detached steeple, which was used by Scandinavian sailors who worked the nearby Greenland Docks (part of the Maritime ride). EAST - Maritime ride (teal) 1. Surrey Quays: 10 pin bowling, cinema and shopping complex. 2. One of the last remaining buildings, now residential, in what was the first Royal Navy dockyard, founded by Henry VIII in 1513.
    [Show full text]
  • Octavia Hill
    SANDRA ALEXANDER : OCTAVIA HILL Octavia Hill (1838 – 1912) I was drawn to research Octavia Hill because of my interest and appreciation of The National Trust. Octavia was not only a founder member of the formation of The National Trust, she was an English social reformer, public figure, artist and activist. She strongly believed that good environments make better people and campaigned to give ordinary people, particularly those living in cities, access to the countryside. Octavia was born on 3 December 1838 in Wisbech, Cambridgeshire She was the eighth daughter (and tenth child) born to her parents James Hill and Caroline Southwood Hill. Caroline was James’ 3rd wife. He had been widowed twice and he had taken on Caroline to be governess to his then six children. They married and had a further four children. They were both progressive and socially-concerned parents. Octavia’s father was a corn merchant and initially they lived in a comfortable 18th-century townhouse at Wisbech. During this time James also built an Infant School, which was run by Caroline and according to Octavia, her mother was the first Englishwoman to teach using the methods of Johann Pestalozzi. According to the records Octavia and her sisters were educated at home by her mother. However, all this changed when James was declared bankrupt after his investments failed. He fell into depression and ‘a term of insantity’ and subsequently abandoned his wife and children. Caroline took charge of the family, moving them in 1852 to Finchley on the edge of London, and then to the capital itself, where the grim urban poverty horrified Octavia.
    [Show full text]
  • Octavia Hill (Liverpool Grove) Conservation Area
    Conservation Area Appraisal (March 2013) www.southwark.gov.uk Octavia Hill (Liverpool Grove) 1 Table of Contents 1.1 The Conservation Area Appraisal: Purpose ................................................................... 4 1.2 Arrangement of This Document ..................................................................................... 4 1.3 Liverpool Grove Conservation Area ............................................................................... 5 Location .................................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Planning History ............................................................................................................. 5 1.5 Local Planning Policies .................................................................................................. 5 1.6 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) ................................................................ 7 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 7 1.7 Article IV Directions ....................................................................................................... 9 1.8 Further Information ...................................................................................................... 10 2. Historical Background ......................................................................................................... 11 2.1 General .......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Helping the Poor
    Helping the Poor Helping the Poor Friendly visiting, dole charities and dole queues Robert Whelan based on research by Barendina Smedley Civitas: Institute for the Study of Civil Society London First published October 2001 © The Institute for the Study of Civil Society 2001 The Mezzanine, Elizabeth House 39 York Road, London SE1 7NQ email: [email protected] All rights reserved ISBN 1-903 386-16-0 Typeset by Civitas in New Century Schoolbook Printed in Great Britain by St Edmundsbury Press Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk Contents Acknowledgements vi Authors viii Introduction: Hand-outs and Leg-ups 1 Section 1: The Visiting Charity The Charity Organisation Society 1. The Organisation of Charity 9 2. Preaching the ‘Gospel of Social Reform’ in West London 24 3. The Fulham and Hammersmith Committee and Its Cases 39 Section 2: The Dole Charity The Mansion House Fund 4. From West End to East End 51 5. Lord Mayor Aid 59 6. The Aftermath 85 7. Moralities and Mathematics 90 Appendices Appendix 1 Applications for Relief Received by the Fulham and Hammersmith District Committee of the COS, November 1879 - October 1880 99 Appendix 2 The 27 Extant Fulham and Hammersmith Casebooks 137 Appendix 3 The Charity Organisation Society by Miss Octavia Hill 164 Notes 166 Index 182 v Acknowledgements This book has been made possible by a generous grant from the Wincott Foundation. The author would like to express his thanks to the trustees. The research on which the book is based was carried out by Barendina Smedley in the archive of the Charity Organisation Society (now the Family Welfare Association), held in the London Metropolitan Archives.
    [Show full text]
  • Octavia Hill and the Social Housing Debate
    Rediscovered Riches No. 3 Octavia Hill and the Social Housing Debate Essays and Letters by Octavia Hill Edited by Robert Whelan London First published February 1998 © Civitas 1998 All rights reserved ISBN 0-255 36431-8 Bookman 10 point Printed in Great Britain by St Edmundsbury Press Blenheim Industrial Park, Newmarket Road Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, IP33 3TU Contents Page The Authors iv Foreword Debby Ounsted v Acknowledgements vii Editor’s Introduction Robert Whelan 1 Essays and Letters by Octavia Hill 1 Cottage Property in London (1866) 43 2 Four Years’ Management of a London Court (1869) 51 3 Landlords and Tenants in London (1871) 65 4 Selections from Octavia Hill’s Letters to Fellow-Workers (1875-1890) 81 5 Common Sense and the Dwellings of the Poor (1883) 94 6 The Influence of Blocks of Flats on Character (1891) 104 7 Municipal Housing for the Poor (1901) 111 8 Advice to Fellow-Workers in Edinburgh (1902) 114 9 Housing Difficulties: Management versus Re-construction (1904) 122 Notes 126 The Authors Octavia Hill (1838-1912) was born in Wisbech into a family with a radical campaigning tradition on both sides. Her maternal grandfather, Thomas Southwood Smith, was a pioneer of sani- tary reform. Her father edited a radical newspaper promoting Robert Owen’s socialist ideas. Following the bankruptcy of her father and his complete nervous breakdown, Octavia moved to London with her mother and sisters. She helped her mother with the management of a workshop in which children from a Ragged School were taught to make dolls’ furniture, then trained as a copyist of Old Master paintings under John Ruskin.
    [Show full text]
  • Orts 50, 1999 the George Macdonald Society
    Orts: The George MacDonald Society Newsletter Volume 50 Article 1 1999 Orts 50, 1999 The George MacDonald Society Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.snc.edu/orts Part of the Literature in English, British Isles Commons Recommended Citation The George MacDonald Society (1999) "Orts 50, 1999," Orts: The George MacDonald Society Newsletter: Vol. 50, Article 1. Available at: http://digitalcommons.snc.edu/orts/vol50/iss1/1 This Newsletter is brought to you for free and open access by the English at Digital Commons @ St. Norbert College. It has been accepted for inclusion in Orts: The George MacDonald Society Newsletter by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ St. Norbert College. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Orts: 50 (1999) Orts The George MacDonald Society Newsletter No. 50, Spring 1999 North Wind No. 17 for 1998 We are still uncertain when this will appear, but it should be within a month. THE 1998 AGM ADDRESS: ROBERT WHELAN ON OCTAVIA HILL The relatively small number of members who were able to attend the Society's AGM in London on October 16th were privileged to hear a most interesting and informative talk about the life and work of George MacDonald's great friend, the social reformer Octavia Hill (1838-1912). The talk was given by Robert Whelan, Assistant Director of the Health and Welfare Unit at the Institute of Economic Affairs, the independent 'think-tank' whose views were said to have been particularly influential when Margaret Thatcher was in power. Robert Whelan, who has a degree in English from Cambridge, has written widely on social policy and has a particular interest in advocating policies which support the ‘traditional’ family unit of husband and wife and their children.
    [Show full text]
  • A Service to Dedicate a Memorial to Octavia Hill and to Give Thanks for the Work of the National Trust
    Westminster Abbey A Service to dedicate a Memorial to Octavia Hill and to give thanks for the work of the National Trust Monday 22nd October 2012 Noon HISTORICAL NOTE OCTAVIA HILL AND THE NATIONAL TRUST Octavia Hill (1838–1912) was a leading social reformer and co-founder of the National Trust. She was born in Wisbech, Cambridgeshire, into a radical, reform-minded family. A move to London, and her direct experience of life in very reduced circumstances, gave Octavia Hill a sense of purpose. She became intent on finding ways to improve the welfare of poor working families. It was the support of John Ruskin, who had spotted her driving sense of purpose at the age of fifteen, that enabled her to put her ideas into practice ten years later, since he provided funds for her first venture. Starting with Paradise (now Garbutt) Place, she began to build up a network of tenanted housing and volunteer rent collectors, in an initiative that eventually covered some seventeen sites. Octavia Hill is credited with starting the social housing movement as well as the profession of housing management. One of Octavia Hill’s most passionate beliefs was the importance of beauty and open space to people’s welfare and equilibrium. The Kyrle Society was an initiative which took the arts to the poor. She particularly strove to give her tenants access to playgrounds, parks (both large and small) and, where possible, to the countryside beyond the city boundaries. This involved her in action to protect and secure those areas that were under threat from development.
    [Show full text]
  • Canon Barnett and the First Thirty Years of Toynbee Hall Abel, Emily K
    Canon Barnett and the first thirty years of Toynbee Hall Abel, Emily K. The copyright of this thesis rests with the author and no quotation from it or information derived from it may be published without the prior written consent of the author For additional information about this publication click this link. http://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/jspui/handle/123456789/1332 Information about this research object was correct at the time of download; we occasionally make corrections to records, please therefore check the published record when citing. For more information contact [email protected] c ' Abstract This thesis is a study of the changing role which Toynbee Hell, the first university settlement, played in East London between 1884 and 1914. The first chapter presents a brief biography of Sainiel Augustus Barnett, the founder end ft ret warden of the settlement, and analyzes his social thought in relation to the beliefs which were current in Britain during the period. The second chapter discusses the founding of the settlement, its organiza-. tion&. structure and the aims which underlay its early v&rk. The third chapter, concentrating on Iliree residents, C.R. Ashbee, .H. Beveridge and T. dmund Harvey, shows the way in which subsequent settlement workers reformulated these aims In accordance with their own social and economic views. The subsequent chapters discuss the accomp1Ishnnts of the settlement in various fields. The fourth shows that Toynbee Hell's educational program, iich was largely en attempt to work out Matthew Arnold's theory of culture, left little i.mpact on the life of E85t London.
    [Show full text]
  • 'To Every Landless Man, Woman and Child in England': Octavia Hill And
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Brunel University Research Archive Astrid Swenson, ‘“To every landless man, woman and child in England“: Octavia Hill and the preservation movement’, in Elizabeth Baigent and Ben Cowell (eds), ‘Nobler imaginings and mightier struggles’: Octavia Hill, social activism, and the remaking of British society, London: Institute for Historical Research (2015). Postprint. ‘To every landless man, woman and child in England’: Octavia Hill and the preservation movement Astrid Swenson* Introduction: the construction of a national treasure Octavia Hill is increasingly commemorated as a key figure of the heritage movement in Britain, and, indeed, is virtually the only nineteenth-century woman to be thus celebrated. Her enduring place in the collective consciousness owes much to the energetic efforts of friends and family to keep her memory alive after her death by publishing her letters and several biographies.1 They also put her centre stage in textual and visual accounts of the National Trust’s early years. A 1924 watercolour of the National Trust Executive Committee Meeting of 15 April 1912, the year of Hill’s death, is symptomatic of the creation of a founding narrative. Beneath a portrait of George Shaw-Lefevre, initiator of the Commons Preservation Society, an important headspring for the National Trust, the committee sits round a table listening to a paper read by the botanist Francis Oliver. Hill was too ill to attend the meeting, but the painter depicts her in her usual chair in a prominent position to the right of the other two founders, Canon Hardwicke Rawnsley and Sir Robert Hunter.2 Octavia Hill’s memory was also preserved more publically through the acquisition of land.
    [Show full text]