House of Industry 2014

The House of Industry

Fig. 1. Façade. Showing former well house and weather vane to the cupola. Inset - detail of doorway

CONSERVATION PLAN

1

House of Industry 2014

4.1 Executive Plan An architecturally magnificent building of 1777 with a continuous written record of life in the workhouse from 1777 until 1948.

4.2 Preamble This report is written by Stephen Heywood MA, FSA, an architectural historian and Historic Buildings Officer for Norfolk County Council. The report relies on the hard work of Stephen Pope on the copious records of the workhouse held by the Norfolk Record Office (NRO) and on the lives of its guardians and inmates. His published booklet on the workhouse is full of original research and a valuable resource (Pope). Also consulted are the authoritative account by Kathryn Morrison entitled The Workhouse: A Study of Poor-Law Buildings in (Morrison) and the Norfolk Historical Atlas (NHA 2005) with its two chapters on Norfolk Workhouses. This account concentrates on the buildings, which have not been looked at in detail before with architectural history as a prime concern. It is intended that the work will inform exhibition designers as well architects involved with repair and enhancement. Also it is hoped that the report will stimulate activities for visitors and volunteers centred on discovering the building.

4.3 Understanding the Heritage 4.3.1 Describe the Heritage 4.3.1.1 Introduction The House of Industry, as it was originally conceived, was built in order to accommodate the poor of the Hundreds of . The hundreds are the ancient subdivision of the county into administrative areas comprising of several parishes. They still formed the basis of the Rural District Councils which finally disappeared only in 1974. The leaders of the combined hundreds of Mitford and Launditch in central Norfolk drew up a bill which was presented to parliament and granted in the summer of 1775. Building began in 1776 at the site chosen on the edge of the parish of Gressenhall and was opened in 1777 and there were inmates from that time although building work continued with the construction of the wings to the east. The cost of the new buildings and their maintenance was drawn from the Poor Rate – a tax on householders.

2

House of Industry 2014

dais

Boardroom Present laundry building is a replacement of the original range. Link EAST ARM Hall

WEST WING EAST WING

‘Cottages’

SOUTH EAST ARM

Fig. 2. Plan of original layout © Stephen Pope.

The work completed by 1777 was probably the H plan main block (figs 1 & 2). The long wings to the east, initially separate, followed (Fig. 2). A matching wing to the west was planned but not carried out. The existing laundry building is a replacement of an earlier range on the same site and dates to the second half of the 19th century. 4.3.1.2 The main block The main block was obviously conceived as the centre piece of the design and it has the classic symmetrical façade similar to a late 18th – century country house. In plan the cross wings are of full height to the east and half the length of the west wing is full height continued as a single storey building housing the kitchen (figs 2 & 3). This part of the building has been re-roofed with steel trusses and a slate covering. The marks of a former ridge ventilator can be seen.

3

House of Industry 2014

Fig. 3. Former kitchen from north west

The façade is symmetrical, of 7 bays with the central three bays slightly advanced and carrying a pediment with a clock dial in the tympanum. The centrall bays have a secondary row of windows just above the ground floor openings to provide additional light to the central hall. The façade and its wings have a central plaiin three-course platband in the typical Georgian manner. A pair of doorways beneath semicircular fanlights occupies the end bays of the façade (fig. 1). They have plain brick imposts and keystones. The whole composition of each doorway stands proud slightly, protected by a moulded brick roll moulding above. The window opeenings have skewback arches with cambered soffits of rubbed brick voussoirs (Fig. 4) and a fine cornice of moulded brick with cyma recta modillions (figs. 5 and 6). This cornice was confined to the principal façades..

Fig. 4. Skewback arch with cambered soffit 4

House of Industry 2014

Fig. 5. Renewed moulded brick cornice to Fig. 6. Surviving original cornice on west wing pediment

..and reverts to a simple saw tooth cornice to the sides and rear. The main fabric is of soft red brick made on site. The bricks to the three principal facades are laid in Flemish bond whilst the gable ends and all external elevations are laid in English bond (figs. 7 & 8)

Fig.7. English bond, west wing end Fig. 8. Flemish bond, east façade This hierarchy of detail tells us of what was considered to be the aesthetically superior bond, that the expensive eaves detail was reserved for the principal façades and that the windows having skewback arches with cambered soffits were reserved for the main block.

Fig 9. Flemish below. English above 5

House of Industry 2014

However, there is an exception to this rule. The brick work of the east elevation of the east wing abruptly changes colour and quality (Fig.9). In The southern half of the elevation the brick and the bond change from English to Flemish. The bricks are harder and more neatly made and have thinner joints. They are 18th-century in date, having the characteristic occasional black header, but of higher quality and from a different kiln. The finer brick work extends from the former flue, including the window, to a level just above the window extended to meet the boardroom chimney and the remaining part complete up to the eaves (fig. 10) and half way across the gable-end to a buttress where the masonry reverts to the standard brick in English bond. At the point of junction it can be seen that the alignment of the two walls was not accurate resulting in a crooked eaves line. As the smarter brick work is below the standard brick, it follows that the neat brick was used during an interruption to the supply from the site kiln. What is perplexing is why the bonds needed to be different especially considering that Flemish bond is used with the standard brick for the façades. The roofs are shallow and hipped with a covering of pantiles. At the centre is a shallow lead-covered cupola, housing the bell, supported on an open octagonal arcade. There was, formerly, a weathervane (fig.1).

Fig. 10. East wing, east elevation. Neat brick in Flemish bond below and to the right of the red line.

6

House of Industry 2014

Fig. 11. Standard window. Fig. 12. Boardroom window.

The windows are all sashes with glazing bars except for the upper hall windows which are hinged. The sashes are divided six-over-six except for the three boardroom windows which are 12-over-12 (figs 11 & 12). There are two arched stair windows with plain brick imposts and keys (Fig. 10). The glazing bar sizes and mouldings vary owing to many replacement sashes of differing quality. However there appear to have been two standard glazing bar mouldings in the main block. Narrow deep sections with shallow ogee mouldings are found on the principal windows to façades and boardroom (Fig. 13) and thick moulded bars on some of the rear windows (Fig. 14).

Fig.13. Boardroom window detail Fig 14. Detail of window in east wing to yard

7

House of Industry 2014

4.3.1.3 The interior of Main block The spaces are plain and have plastered walls and ceilings. The hall, serving as dining room and chapel, occupies the principal position bounded to east and west by a pair of large semicircular-headed arches (fig. 15). The stanchions and the steel joist are modern reinforcements of the floor. On the north side of the hall in the centre is a large segmental arch which originally opened into a separate space which probably served as a dais where the master and staff would sit at the high table (fig. 2). The space now serves simply as a way through to the now covered, north yard (Fig. 16). The rear wall was taken down in 1976 and a large reinforced concrete lintel was inserted.

Fig. 15. Hall

Fig.16. View of dais arch from the north. 8

House of Industry 2014

There are staircases to the east and west and both have arched stair windows (Fig. 10). The staircases are very simple and roughly made (fig. 17). The treaadds are covered with 20th century materials.

Fig. 17. Staircase in west wing

The higher status of the west wing is reflected in the curious use off a plaster baarrel vvault over the corridor which forms the hall to the master’s rooms. TThe vault is penetrated by the tall entrance to the hall and forms a groin vault marking the entrance bbay to the master’s quarters (fig.18).

Fig. 18. The Master’s vault with entrance to the hall on left.

9

House of Industry 2014

The large room above the hall was subdivided into two and the stuud with brick partition which formed the division, was removed in 2000 (Fig. 19).

Fig. 19. The former partition in the hall chamber

The front room of the east wing of the main block has a fine timber moulded cornice (fig. 20). This appears to be the only room to have this embellishment. It might be expected in the master’s quarters but it is not recorded what speciall role this room had in 1777. It is possible, that some cornices may have been removed when ceilings were rreplaced but there is no record.

Fig. 20. Cornice in southernmost room of east wing

There is a cellar beneath part of the west cross wing. There is evideence of two blocked wwine bin niches, meat hooks nailed to the principal floor joists and tthere is a former doorway with steps leading to thee cellar from the east side of the west wing

10

House of Industry 2014

4.3.1.4 The Eastern Arms The arms extend eastwards and then to the south in equal lengths. At the corner and at the southern end of the south east arm are slightly taller pavilions (Figs. 2, 21, 22 and 29). The fabric and certain details are identical to those of the main block and there is no reason to suppose that there was any significant pause after the completion of the main block. Nevertheless, the arms were separated from the main block initially to be completely joined somewhat later.

Fig.21. East Arm from south west

Fig. 22. South East Arm from south west.

These arms, although more cheaply built, are architecturally the most striking owing to the arcades which articulate the ground floor elevations. These open arcades, now 11

House of Industry 2014 blocked up, formed walks reminiscent of friary cloisters or college quadrangles where the walks are within the ranges rather than as lean-to structures. The arcades are still plainly visible and in most cases the blocking is recessed or in the south east arm the arches are just glazed mostly. Each range is of twelve bays excluding the link with the main block. The arches are semicircular springing from two-course imposts which continue to form a platband. The blocking of the arches in the eastern arm in four cases towards the centre is with the standard brick in Flemish bond and well-formed lunettes filling the arches (fig. 23). It is thought that the blocking took place as a result of the Poor Law Act of 1834, but it is clear that some arches were not blocked until much later and eight out of the twelve openings in the south eastern arm were not blocked until the 20th century.

Fig. 23. Blocked arch in eastern arm. The arches at the eastern end of the eastern arm have had larger windows inserted and in one the lunette is filled with unglazed iron bars for ventilation. More harmful blockings where the blocking is flush and keyed into the jambs occur towards the west end of the east arm and the south end of the south east arm (figs. 24 & 25).

Fig. 24. Southernmost arch in south east arm. Fig.25. arches at west end of east arm

12

House of Industry 2014

The upper storey windows have glazing bars and what appear to be 3-over-3 sashes. In fact they have no pulleys and the upper sashes are horizontal pivot windows. This cost-cutting measure is also seen at the eaves which are formed simply by the extended rafters without any cornice (fig. 26). Similarly the window openings were much simpler than in the main block with plain segmental arches rather than the more elaborate rubbed brick arches of the main block (fig.27). Both façades have the central 4-course platband as in the main block

Fig. 26. Detail of eaves in south east arm. The rear elevations of the two ranges have the remains of a symmetrical arrangement of fenestration consisting of a wide window (A) flanked by narrower ones (B). The east arm has most of this surviving in the following alternation from the east: BABBABBABBAB – link. The large windows are tripartite sashes (fig. 27). This probably reflects how the cottages were used with a family at each end with a fire and partitioned-off from a central communal area in between. This is best seen on the interior of the south east wing.

Fig. 27. North elevation of east arm.

13

House of Industry 2014

The east elevation of the south east wing has the same idea but most of the windows have been enlarged by adding lights beneath the existing which cut through the platband and disrupt the proportions of the windows themselves. One unaltered ‘B’ remains (Fig. 28).

Fig. 28. East elevation of south east arm. The two pavilions at the junction of the two arms and at the end of the south east arm are slightly wider than the ranges and taller by one storey. They have distinct pyramidal roofs and symmetrical elevations with smaller ‘attic’ windows to the top storey. They provide a suitable way of overcoming the potentially awkward join between the two arms and they contain the elevations of the ranges in an almost Palladian manner (fig 29).

Fig. 29. South east pavilion from the south east.

14

House of Industry 2014

The south façade of the south east pavilion has a monumental former doorway in its centre bay (Fig. 30). It consists of a large semicircular arched opening of two orders with brick imposts and a recessed tympanum. Beneath the tympanum is a simple segmental arch which is much wider than the window which has been built into it. On the interior the timber jambs of a large, possibly double, door survive. As the entrance is raised in the relation to the ground a staircase would have been necessary to reach it. Whether or not it was ever used it was certainly conceived as an important entrance proclaiming a certain grandeur to the outside world with, perhaps, a worthy inscription on the tympanum.

Fig. 30. Central former doorway on south façade of south east pavilion

The north east pavilion is of identical proportions but has suffered from badly eroded brick work which has necessitated the entire re-facing of its northern façade. Also it suffers from a lavatory block over its east façade and a boiler room on its north side (Fig. 31). There is a blocked arched doorway on the north side corresponding to the walk of the south eastern arm.

15

House of Industry 2014

Fig. 31. North façade of north east pavilion

4.3.1.5 Interior of eastern arms In the early days of the house of industry the ground floors and possibly some of the upper floors of the ranges were occupied by families and were called ‘cottages’. This was abandoned with the introduction of the new Poor Laws and both storeys were used for segregated dormitories. The original plan survives best in the south east wing where at least six ground floor ‘cottages’ can be distinguished (Fig.32). The rooms were divided into three and there are clear indications of former cross walls in the masonry. A doorway entered a central, communal part lit by the large tripartite window. The rooms to the side had their own fireplaces and windows to the exterior and also to the walk. Five of the walk-side windows survive and they are the unusual horizontal sliding sashes commonly called Yorkshire sashes with small oblong panes also with horizontal emphasis (fig. 33). They are in openings with segmental arched heads and the glazing bars are plain-chamfered. These windows are important survivals from the early House of Industry.

16

House of Industry 2014

Original sliding sashes

Fig. 32. Early 20th century plan of south east wing.

Fig. 33. Surviving Yorkshire sash window

17

House of Industry 2014

Most of the walls are not plastered but the bare brick work is painted with modern oil- based paint. Both walks have cross walls at regular intervals with arched openings. The jambs are distinctively rounded-off carrying arches with untouched sharp arrises. At the springings a kind of chamfer stop occurs by necessity (Figs. 34 & 35).

Fig. 35. Chamfer stops in eastern arm

Fig. 34. Cross wall archway in south east arm

Fig. 36. Stone staircase in eastern arm. Fig 37. Tunnel beside stair

18

House of Industry 2014

At the north and south ends of the south east arm are plain staircases which appear to be insertions because they block former doorways. The only original stair in the arms appears to be the stone staircase in the centre of the east arm (Fig.36).1 The narrow stair has fairly worn York stone treads. Immediately beside this stair is a narrow barrel-vaulted passage leading to a vaulted space beneath the stair landing with an external doorway which has been inserted in the position of a former window. This space has been interpreted as a lock-up.

The interior spaces of the pavilions are worthy of comment. The ground and first floor spaces occupy the complete width of the pavilion making it difficult for joists of stout enough section to span the area to support the first floor. A cast iron central stanchion with decorative iron brackets has been installed. The brackets do not reach the bridging joists without the addition of a steel ‘I’ beam of modern manufacture. This was probably a late 19th century addition (fig. 38).

Fig. 38. Iron stanchion in south east room.

1 The windows corresponding to the stair and the tunnel are blocked and were not built blind which suggests the possibility that the stair may be an insertion. 19

House of Industry 2014

Fig. 39. Vaulted room in north east pavilion.

The ground storey of the north east pavilion is a partly occupied by a room with a masonry groin-vaulted ceiling (fig.39). It is not clear why this room was vaulted but it certainly solves the problem that occurred in the other pavilion. It may be also that the boiler was in the room and the vault was to avoid the risk of fire. The present boiler is just to the north of the room. The vault partly obscures a window in the east wall and there is a possibility that the vault was built into an existing structure at a later date.

Fig. 40. Floor in north east pavilion

20

House of Industry 2014

The passage which goes past this room has a worn brick floor – one of the few early floors left (Fig. 40).The entrance to the passage has one of only two studded doors remaining (fig. 41). Evidence of another floor has come to light in the west room of the east arm. It is of hexagonal wooden blocks of which a few are exhibited. The accounts (Appendix 1) reveal that they were laid in 1855 (fig. 42).

Fig. 42. Wooden block flooring

Fig 41. Studded door to north east pavilion

4.3.1.6 The link building started with the insertion of a wall soon after the completion of at least the east arm, spanning the short distance between the south east corner of the main block and the corner of the east arm - The wall is set back from the corners (Fig. 43). This wall incorporated one doorway and window both of which have been reduced in width and the doorway reduced to a window. There must have been a room and a back wall but there is no evidence of this wall now. The openings have skewback arches with cambered soffits as in the higher class main block. Somewhat later in the 18th century the front wall was heightened with a different brick and in Flemish bond and the rear wall was built with the same type of brick (fig. 44). The roof of the taller building obscures two upper floor windows in the east wing of the main block. The four windows have plain segmental arches and the brick is laid in Flemish bond. As the arms have lower floors and ceilings than in the main block the link building has to accommodate these changes. There is a sloping floor at ground level which copes with the levels but at first floor level the main block floor is very much higher and to reach the level there is a separate staircase. It is possible that although the brick work of the main block and the link are not bonded the courses correspond and the mortar is very similar and in conjunction with the use of the skewback arch it would safe to assume that the wall is contemporary with the main block and that it was intended to be the beginning of the eastern arm and there was a radical change of plan which resulted in heightening the link building.

21

House of Industry 2014

Height of first wall

Fig. 43. South wall of link

Fig 44. North wall of link

22

House of Industry 2014

4.3.1.7 Further development One of the first buildings to be added was the windmill which was erected in 1781. It is shown to the west of the main buildings on Robert Kerrison’s painting of 1810 (fig.45). There is the tower of a post mill but, oddly, the sails have been omitted.

Fig 45. View of House of Industry from south east. Robert Kerrison 1810.

With the workhouse becoming part of the Mitford and Launditch Union in 1836, following the Poor Law Amendment Act of 1834, various changes to the buildings were required. This included the building of Boundary walls and the re-arrangement and extension of dormitories with the abolition of the cottages. These works were carried out at the considerable cost of £4,800. The windmill was closed down and dismantled.

A manufactory of sacks was also closed down in 1836 and the looms were removed. It is probable that the manufactory was in a building on the site of the laundry building. It was standing in 1849 as it is shown on Revd Barker’s plan of that date (Fig. 46). The standing building is of late 19th century date and may be related to the remodelling works planned by the Norwich architect Herbert Green in 1895.2

According to the 1849 plan the porter’s rooms had been built but not the receiving wards shown on the 1872 plan (figs 46 & 47)

2 See NRO C/GP 14/36 & 39 23

House of Industry 2014

disused manufactory?

Fig. 46. Plan in 1849 by Benjamin Barker.

Oven house School room Casuals wards Ward for six couples Porter’s rooms

Fig. 47. 1872 plan (Stephen Pope) 24

House of Industry 2014

In 1837/8 the single buildings on the west side of the site were built with Welsh slate roofs which had only just become available thanks to the railways, although it needs to be said that the railways did not arrive in Norfolk until 1845. These simple buildings were used as accommodation for tramps and vagrants or ‘casuals’ and were described as such on the 1872 plan (fig. 47). The buildings form part of the western boundary wall and have 4 cast iron Yorkshire sliding sash windows with very small panes to the central casuals ward and also to part of the school room. Cast iron window frames like these are characteristic of buildings in large estates where there is a foundry. Holkham estate is a good example and owned farms in the area with the characteristic cast iron windows used in the improvements made by them. It is possible that these windows were donated by an estate or at any rate re-used. They were imitated in recent works in timber to the south west building which was originally a building for unmarried women but became a casuals ward later (Figs 48 & 49). The northernmost building in this range has a separate hipped roof and may have been built as a schoolroom and certainly was in 1872 (fig. 50).

Fig. 48. Former casuals ward window Fig. 49. Former unmarried women ward

Fig. 50. Schoolroom.

25

House of Industry 2014

Fig. 51. Ward for 6 couples 1853 In 1853 a new ward was constructed for six elderly married couples. It is situated in a garden which was the ‘Old Women’s Yard’ (fig. 51).

In 1868 the Gothic revival chapel was built to the designs of R. M. Phipson – the renowned diocesan architect. It was built according to a quite low budget but is an interesting and successful building. It is aisleless and faced with whole flints laid in random. There is a facetted apsidal chancel. The whole has slate roofs. There is no tracery but simple pairs of brick–dressed lancet windows (Fig. 52).The interior is not plastered and instead is decorated with very fine polychromy (Fig.53). Of particular interest is that the building has been given a sloping floor as one might have in a cinema or theatre. This is a good example of Phipson at his best employing a new taste in varied materials leading towards the Arts and Crafts movement as practiced by Boardman a few years later.

Fig. 52. South elevation of nave

Fig. 53. Nave and Chancel looking east

26

House of Industry 2014

There does not appear to be any mention of the laundry building being rebuilt as such, but on the evidence of the style and technique a date towards the end of the 19th century seems to be most likely and can be associated with the ‘remodelling’ planned by the architect Herbert Green in 1895. It consists of 19 narrow bays of windows on the south side only. The openings have segmental arches of two courses of brick headers on edge. The heavy window frames are each of three lights with mullions and transom. The central upper light has a simple casement (fig. 54).

Fig. 54. Laundry from east. The roof structure is of king post principal trusses with cleated collars and tied with steel bars which are held by small iron plates on the exterior (fig. 55)

Fig. 55. Laundry roof structure looking east. 27

House of Industry 2014

A final addition needs to be mentioned – the extension to the stable and gig house range which was reduced again in the 1970s (fig.56). The tethering rings remain in the wall (Fig. 57).

Fig. 56. Former stables and gig houses on east side of south east arm.

Fig. 57. Tethering rings in former lean-to stables.

The conversion of the building into a museum in 1975 involved general repairs and amongst the most significant of these was the construction of a flat roof over the north yard in 1976 which involved the demolition of the boiler building with its tower chimney. The façade was repaired with re- pointing and replacement of eroded bricks. The pediment was rebuilt with specially made moulded brick for the cornices. In the 1990s a major programme of reinforcement of the first floor levels took place 28

House of Industry 2014

enabling fuller use of the upper floors for exhibition. Offices were created at the first floor level of the east wing. The south east wing became off ices without significant alteration since its days as part of the old people’s home which included the creation of the two lavatory blocks which dominate the east elevation and preside over the newly created car park.

4.3.3 Documented History Extracts from the relevant documents can be found at Appendix 1. The history of the workhouse can be summarised as follows

1772 Workhouse Test Act. Parishes given powers to establish workhouses. About 120 parish houses had been founded in Norfolk by 1803.

1775 Act presented to parliament and granted for the better relief and employment of the poor within the Hundreds of Mitford and Launditch in the county of Norfolk. This allowed the petitioners, who were prominent local land owners, to use the money collected from the poor rate in the two Hundreds of Mitford and Launditch (about 50 parishes) to build a House of Industry. There were five other ‘Incorporated Hundreds’ in Norfolk each running a large House of Industry. They were all in central and eastern Norfolk and the first in 1763 was Loddon and Clavering Hundreds with its House at Heckingham (Fig. 58).

29

House of Industry 2014

Fig. 58. From The Norfolk Historical Atlas

1776-77 House of Industry constructed. It was opened in 1777 but building was not completed until a year or two later.

1782 Gilbert’s Act. This enabled magistrates to sanction other combinations of parishes and to appoint guardians of Houses of Industry ‘for the aged, infirm and impotent poor’. A further nine unions were formed in Norfolk (Fig. 58). 1834 The Poor Law Amendment Act. Public opinion was dissatisfied with the existing systems of poor relief and called for the cessation of outdoor relief and the containment of the unemployed poor in segregated walled workhouses. This was in part inspired by the increasing poor rates. The Royal Commission on the Poor Laws came up with a centralised system under the control of the commissioners. They divided areas into unions with single large workhouses which had to provide segregated

30

House of Industry 2014

accommodation. Any improvement or enlargement of a workhouse had to be approved by the commissioners. 18 new unions were formed between 1835 and 1838 producing a regular pattern of, on the whole harsher, workhouse provision (fig. 59).

Fig 59. From the Norfolk Historical Atlas

1836 Gressenhall becomes a New Poor Law union and as a result was required to wall the site, fill in the arcades and alter the wards in order to provide the necessary segregation. Also the new buildings on the west side of the site were built.

1930 The local Government Act abolishes boards of guardians elected locally and placed their powers with the County Council. The term ‘workhouse’ is replaced by ‘Institution’ and the ‘inmates’ were ‘patients’. There is increased provision for tramps and numbers of patients increase with the closure of other workhouses.

1948 The National Assistance Act. Poor Law abolished. The buildings become partly Old People’s Home, part accommodation for evicted or homeless families and partly provision for tramps.

1975 The few remaining residents were transferred to new homes. The conversion into a museum began.

4.3.3 Local Context The workhouse is situated in the very centre of the county a short distance from the town of , formerly known as East Dereham. It is sited on the very edge of Gressenhall parish a good distance from the village. A small 63-Acre estate called 31

House of Industry 2014

Chapel Farm was bought. And the House of Industry was built on a raised and rather exposed site. The buildings are enclosed with walls and set back from the roads. An avenue of limes leads to the gated entrance. The avenue is no longer used as the main entrance because access from the public road is dangerous with resttricted visibility. For this reason a new entrance was created from the east and a car park built.

Despite the fact that the second wing was never built the building remains impressive. Its most distinctive attributes are the arcaded walks which give the buildings a collegiate appearance. These arcaaded walks seem to have been popular in the region wwith similar arcades at Wicklewood, Heckingham (fig.60) and Onehhouse in Suffolk.

Fig. 60. Redrawn plan of Heckingham workhouse. From Morrison.

The plans of Heckingham workhouse survive in the Norfolk Record Office and they provide important evidence of the original function of the various roooms. Here the arcaded walks were in front of the work rooms providing shelter between the dining hhall and the workrooms.

The original plan for Gressenhall was for a central block with winggs which in turn connected to arcaded arms to both sides which turned 90 degrees to form a yard open tto one side. This would give a pleasing and impressive symmetry to the site. In the event the west wing was never built as remarked on by Parson Woodforde in 1781. There is a close parallel for the intended arrangement in the early 18th century wworkhouse in Exeter designed by Ralph Mitchell (Fig. 61). The buiilding was bombed during the Second World War.

32

House of Industry 2014

Fig. 61. . Exeter Incorporation Workhouse. From Roque’s map of Exeter

The uncanny similarity, although on a different scale, suggests the possibility that the building was known to the architect of the Gressenhall House of Industry. The H plan mmain block with pediment is however a typical centrepiece.

4.3.4 WWider heritage Context There is very little comparison to be made between Gressenhall and the new unions after 1834 (Fig. 59). A series of model plans were issued by the central poor law authority. These were followed by a small number of the 12 new union houses built after 1834. At Pulham in the Depwade union (Fig. 60), Great Snoriing of the Walsingham Union (demolished) and at (demolished) thhe unmistakeable wwheel type plan was used with the master’s house forming the hub from which all the yyards defined by the ‘spokes’ could be observed. The more usual pllan type adopted wwas the linear grid system termed the ‘block plan’ by Morrison and the later ‘corridor plan’ where the buildings were moore compact with access from internal corridors. Entrance buildings which had architectural pretensions adopted various historicist styles. However, original in plan and detail were the five new workkhhouses designed by the local architect William Donthorn. The workhouse of 1848 is an example of his interesting work (Fig.61).

33

House of Industry 2014

Fig. 60. Depwade Union Workhouse at Pulham Market

Fig. 61. Main block of Aylsham Union Workhouse

34

House of Industry 2014

4.3.5 Heritage Management The buildings and walls are all listed as being of Special Architectural or Historic Interest at Grade II. Any alterations which affect the special character of the building require Listed Building Consent from English Heritage. As the buildings are owned by Norfolk County Council consent cannot be given by the local planning authority but it would be the principal consultee.

The museum’s policy is to adhere to these regulations as defined in the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

General repairs are carried out regularly and there is a need to define standards which would ensure the conservation of the buildings.

4.4 Statement of Significance The House of Industry is an important part of social history. The surviving buildings are complemented by extensive records which allow glimpses of the day to day life of the paupers, the guardians and staff.

The buildings are the tangible remains of the buildings inhabited by the paupers. • The house of industry was amongst the first in the county to have been built for incorporated hundreds to serve the parishes of the hundreds of Mitford and Launditch. • It can be seen how in its early days there was accommodation for families in ‘cottages’. The layout of each pair of cottages is reflected in the rear elevations of the arms. • The façades of the arms are articulated with arcades which were originally open and the walks provided covered access to the cottages and improved through-ventilation. This rare feature is especially well preserved at Gressenhall and is indicative of the more beneficial nature of the 18th century workhouses. • The status of the main block in relation to the wings is reflected in the architectural detail. The differences in brick bond, window heads, cornices or eaves and window types give insight into what was considered to be a sign of quality or status. • The main block is a fine example of a late 18th century classicist design with a pedimented façade, worthy of a small country house or an institution of high status. • The façades are only façades and the interior spaces with bare brick surfaces, plain institutional rooms and corridors reveal the former purpose of the building. The fear of the workhouse is still a powerful folk memory embodied in the workhouse at Gressenhall.

4.5 Risks and Opportunities There are no significant works to the building planned in the project. The biggest problem which the buildings have is the very soft brick work which has suffered from erosion to such an extent that the entire facing of the north elevation of the north east pavilion has had to be replaced. The damage to the brick work has been exacerbated by: • climbing plants such as ivy which covered large areas of the building in the past. It is noted that the planting of shrubs has increased to the front of the arcades. • By the use of Portland cement for masonry repairs and re-pointing. The cement traps water and accelerates the decay of the bricks. 35

House of Industry 2014

• By the use of impervious gloss paint to cover the bare brick work in the arms and the use of emulsion paint over the plastered areas in the main block. This impeaches the natural evaporation of moisture which healthy brick work requires. It is recognised that little can be done about the latter without major disruption but damage to the brickwork could be alleviated by removing cement re-pointing where possible and ensuring that slaked lime with graded aggregate is used for all masonry repairs and in exposed areas the use of Natural Hydraulic Lime would be advisable.

The roof structures were not inspected as part of this document and repairs have been taking place at the moment (2014). Gutters, downpipes and the efficient evacuation of water have undergone a thorough overhaul in recent years. However, in heavy rainfall the gutters overflow and they need to be cleared at regular intervals.

4.6 Policies The maintenance of the buildings is major concern and is undertaken by qualified staff according to a schedule.

The new project will use the building more as part its collections rather than just housing them. It is intended to re-create in part the layout of the workhouse in its early days as a house of industry, later as it was after the Poor Law Amendment Act which took effect at Gressenhall 1836 and as it was in the late 19th century.

There are no significant material alterations planned but any works do need to be monitored and recorded.

4.6.1 Conservation The practicalities of conservation have been covered in paragraph 4.5.

The new project seeks to use the building more as part of the workhouse experience. The enhancement of parts of the buildings is envisaged such as bringing the laundry machinery into operation. An operation which is not envisaged but which would increase involvement with the building, would be to unblock part of the arcade. This could either mean leaving them open or covering them with patent glazing which would give visitors a taste of the early years of the workhouse when the walks were not simply corridors.

Although such an exercise would require Listed Building Consent it is not envisaged that this would create any difficulties and would not affect the conservation of the buildings.

4.6.3 Access Access to the collections for wheel chair users is constantly on the agenda and has brought about the installation of a lift in the link building which has involved a major alteration to the massing of that part of the building. Ramps are provided where necessary and survive in places where they are no longer necessary.

Sensory impairment is addressed by allowing artefacts to be handled, by planting aromatic herbs and plants in the gardens ad through the use of digital technology which will be enhanced as part of the project.

36

House of Industry 2014

4.6.4/5 Climate Change. Effects on the Environment Increased heavy rainfall has been addressed with the complete overhaul of rainwater goods. Control of emissions etc. is part of maintenance. Improvements in efficiency were made to the boilers in 2013.

4.6 Managing Information This Conservation Plan is concerned principally with the history and evaluation of the historic buildings. It is by no means a complete record but forms a framework which can be added to as the project evolves. Copies of the plan will be held in the museum archive and in the Historic Environment Record. The ‘active’ will be kept at the museum and will be encrypted as necessary.

4.7 Adoption and Review

4.8 Bibliography NHA 2005. D. Dymond ‘Norfolk Workhouses before 1834 and A. Digby ‘Poor Law Unions and Workhouses, 1834-1930’ in T. Ashwin and A. Davison (eds), An Historical Atlas of Norfolk, 3rd Edition, Chichester, 2005, pp 144-147. Morrison K. Morrison, The Workhouse: A Study of Poor-Law Buildings in England, RCHME/English Heritage, Swindon, 1999. Pope 2006 S. Pope, Gressenhall Farm and Workhouse: a History of the Buildings and the people who lived and worked in them, Cromer, 2006

37