-
Welcome to this forum . We are a worldwide group with a common interest in Birmingham and its history. While here, please follow a few simple rules. We ask that you respect other members, thank those who have helped you and please keep your contributions on-topic with the thread.
We do hope you enjoy your visit. BHF Admin Team
Where is This? 180
- Thread starter Phil
- Start date
john knight
signman
Perhaps this one gives a better idea.
Don't be confused by the difference between design and concept. We do not have an original design drawing at this point...only what might have been a concept sketch which is quite a different matter. I would have thought that the final building matched the concept reasonably faithfully, sans the columns and useless overhang on the front and a couple of window widths on the length. and a row of windows. Maybe an extra floor was added rather than having a high cieling that is usually associated with a hall. Personally I was surprised at the similarity between the drawing and the photo.
I can visualise the principals sitting down at a table and talking about bringing down the cost and maybe saying 'what about cutting out the overhang and if we add a floor and cut two windows off the length'....'what are the numbers for that config'....the area lost would be more than compensated for by the extra floor. This kind of thing happens every time.
I can visualise the principals sitting down at a table and talking about bringing down the cost and maybe saying 'what about cutting out the overhang and if we add a floor and cut two windows off the length'....'what are the numbers for that config'....the area lost would be more than compensated for by the extra floor. This kind of thing happens every time.
Phil
Gone, but not forgotten.
I just got back from a few days away, I thought when I went that this post "was all over". it just shows how wrong one can be. It really is amazing how much the members of this forum can ferret out on obscure buildings and subjects.
From finding a photo of this rarely seen building in a book in its original appearance with a minimum of information we have together come up with this wealth of information and in the course of finding out these details we have educated, amused and entertained ourselves. Well done you all.
Phil
From finding a photo of this rarely seen building in a book in its original appearance with a minimum of information we have together come up with this wealth of information and in the course of finding out these details we have educated, amused and entertained ourselves. Well done you all.
Phil
alanfisher202
master brummie
I can remember in the late 60s or early 70s hearing on the radio that a building had collapsed in Loveday Street and buses had to be diverted, can any members remember this happening,it may well be our building,this would explain how I came to work in a new building in 1973 on the corner of Princip Street and Loveday Street.
Alan
Alan
Peter Walker
gone but not forgotten
Doing a bit or research into the People's Hall I found the following on the web site 'History On Line'
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=22967#n70
"One of the first writers on adult education cited Birmingham experience to reveal the existence of a cycle of activity whereby institutions were 'auspiciously commenced' only to be 'readily abandoned when the novelty of their first proceedings had passed away'. (fn. 70) Certainly the experience of the Mechanics' Institute was not unique. Another society called the Athenaeum also failed. (fn. 71) So too did the most ambitious of the popular educational ventures in Birmingham - the People's Hall. In 1840 a group of Birmingham artisans announced that they intended to build a People's Hall of Science 'containing a library, a lecture room, school rooms, reading rooms, committee rooms, dinner and tea or refreshment rooms, and kitchen and other conveniences for the use and instruction and amusement of the people and the improvement of their understanding, morals and health and for promoting their rational enjoyments'. (fn. 72) Progress was slow, and it was not until 1846 that a modest structure was completed and opened by William Scholefield. A toast was proposed to 'the People's Hall, and may it ever be preserved to carry on its great object - the education, moral and political improvement of the people'. (fn. 73) The language was more eloquent than the organization merited. Of the two thousand shares of £1 originally issued - they could be bought in weekly instalments of as little as 6d. - 1,400 shares were never taken up. 'The entire sum raised from the donations and shares of the wealthy, was only one hundred and fifty pounds.' (fn. 74) Even when the building was opened the real difficulties were only just beginning. The Literary and Scientific Institute which was the organization controlling the use of the Hall had a clause in its constitution restricting religious and political party discussion, but a 'religious feud' broke out, which destroyed the Institute from within. In 1849 the Hall had to be sold. (fn. 75)"
These dates conflict with those given on the back of the photo. I have been trying to look up the Langford 'Modern Birmingham' footnote reference ( I have a CD) but can't find anything there. Likewise Gill's 'History of Birmingham' Vol 1. I'll carry on for a bit anyway.
Quoting further: "In 1846, the same year that the People's Hall was opened, the People's Instruction Society was also founded. For 1d. a week the Birmingham workingman was given access to a reading room (the latest version of the Birmingham news rooms which already had a long history), (fn. 76) a library, a chess room, a refreshment room, a discussion and debating society, and a weekly lecture. For an additional penny instruction was afforded in evening classes in reading, writing, arithmetic, elocution, and singing. There were 600 readers in 1846, 500 of whom were claimed to be working men. (fn. 77) This society also withered away after 1850".
Footnotes referred to:
70 Hudson, Hist. Adult Educ. 62.
71 Ibid.
72 Rules of the People's Hall Building Soc.
73 Birm. Jnl. 28 Mar. 1846.
74 Langford, Mod. Birm. i. 122.
75 Birm. Jnl. 24 Mar. 1849.
76 See A. Briggs, Press and Public in Early 19th-Cent. Birm. (Dugdale. Soc. Occasional Papers, No. 8), p. 14.
77 Hudson, Hist. Adult Educ. 65-6.
Peter
https://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=22967#n70
"One of the first writers on adult education cited Birmingham experience to reveal the existence of a cycle of activity whereby institutions were 'auspiciously commenced' only to be 'readily abandoned when the novelty of their first proceedings had passed away'. (fn. 70) Certainly the experience of the Mechanics' Institute was not unique. Another society called the Athenaeum also failed. (fn. 71) So too did the most ambitious of the popular educational ventures in Birmingham - the People's Hall. In 1840 a group of Birmingham artisans announced that they intended to build a People's Hall of Science 'containing a library, a lecture room, school rooms, reading rooms, committee rooms, dinner and tea or refreshment rooms, and kitchen and other conveniences for the use and instruction and amusement of the people and the improvement of their understanding, morals and health and for promoting their rational enjoyments'. (fn. 72) Progress was slow, and it was not until 1846 that a modest structure was completed and opened by William Scholefield. A toast was proposed to 'the People's Hall, and may it ever be preserved to carry on its great object - the education, moral and political improvement of the people'. (fn. 73) The language was more eloquent than the organization merited. Of the two thousand shares of £1 originally issued - they could be bought in weekly instalments of as little as 6d. - 1,400 shares were never taken up. 'The entire sum raised from the donations and shares of the wealthy, was only one hundred and fifty pounds.' (fn. 74) Even when the building was opened the real difficulties were only just beginning. The Literary and Scientific Institute which was the organization controlling the use of the Hall had a clause in its constitution restricting religious and political party discussion, but a 'religious feud' broke out, which destroyed the Institute from within. In 1849 the Hall had to be sold. (fn. 75)"
These dates conflict with those given on the back of the photo. I have been trying to look up the Langford 'Modern Birmingham' footnote reference ( I have a CD) but can't find anything there. Likewise Gill's 'History of Birmingham' Vol 1. I'll carry on for a bit anyway.
Quoting further: "In 1846, the same year that the People's Hall was opened, the People's Instruction Society was also founded. For 1d. a week the Birmingham workingman was given access to a reading room (the latest version of the Birmingham news rooms which already had a long history), (fn. 76) a library, a chess room, a refreshment room, a discussion and debating society, and a weekly lecture. For an additional penny instruction was afforded in evening classes in reading, writing, arithmetic, elocution, and singing. There were 600 readers in 1846, 500 of whom were claimed to be working men. (fn. 77) This society also withered away after 1850".
Footnotes referred to:
70 Hudson, Hist. Adult Educ. 62.
71 Ibid.
72 Rules of the People's Hall Building Soc.
73 Birm. Jnl. 28 Mar. 1846.
74 Langford, Mod. Birm. i. 122.
75 Birm. Jnl. 24 Mar. 1849.
76 See A. Briggs, Press and Public in Early 19th-Cent. Birm. (Dugdale. Soc. Occasional Papers, No. 8), p. 14.
77 Hudson, Hist. Adult Educ. 65-6.
Peter
Last edited:
Tacitus
master brummie
There is still a bit of mileage in this thread.
I had another session in the Central Library. Unfortunately no more pictures of the building, but I tracked down some more infomation in the Archive and the Birmingham Journal.
Here from the Journal (7th September 1839) is the original prospectus to obtain the capital to build the People's Hall.
It states elsewhere that the £1 shares could be purchased with a deposit of one shilling followed by weekly payments of sixpence. This was to make the shares available to ordinary working men - but I get the impression that some of the people who paid the deposit were then very tardy in making the additional payments.
This may have been one of the reasons that the scale of the building had to be downgraded.
Enjoy!
View attachment 48746
T
I had another session in the Central Library. Unfortunately no more pictures of the building, but I tracked down some more infomation in the Archive and the Birmingham Journal.
Here from the Journal (7th September 1839) is the original prospectus to obtain the capital to build the People's Hall.
It states elsewhere that the £1 shares could be purchased with a deposit of one shilling followed by weekly payments of sixpence. This was to make the shares available to ordinary working men - but I get the impression that some of the people who paid the deposit were then very tardy in making the additional payments.
This may have been one of the reasons that the scale of the building had to be downgraded.
Enjoy!
View attachment 48746
T
Peter Walker
gone but not forgotten
Thank you Tacitus for your latest find.
Further scraping the barrel brings out the following brief references to the People’s Hall, all taken from J A Langford: ‘Modern Birmingham and its Institutions, 1841-1871.
Report of J Pigott Smith to the Streets Commissioners, March 1843.
The erection of Barker Bridge by your Commission in conjunction with the Governors of the General Hospital and the Canal Company will add much to the public convenience, by giving so admirable a connecting link to the populous districts of St. Mary and St. George; and on the completion of the works now in progress in Princip Street, Loveday Street and Shadwell Street, the successful efforts of your Commission, in carrying out this line of communication, will be highly appreciated by the public.
‘Birmingham Journal’ 18 July, 1846
Mr Dawson’s new chapel. – On Sunday morning last, at the People’s Hall, and on the evening at the Unitarian Chapel, Newhall Hill. Mr Dawson announced to his congregation, that the turning of the first turf, on the site of the new chapel would be commenced on the Tuesday morning following, at ten o’clock. He remarked that there would be no idle ceremony gone through; and his only motive for mentioning was that that those persons whose confidence had been shaken, owing to the unavoidable delay, might have an opportunity of there and then satisfying themselves that the Committee was in earnest. Accordingly on Tuesday morning, many respectable persons of both sexes had congregated on the spot, eager to witness the commencement of an edifice that had been so long talked of. At half past ten, Mr Dawson arrived, and delivered an appropriate address, enunciating the principles which were to govern the Free Church, which would speedily assemble on that spot. He concluded with a brief but impressive prayer. Alderman Cutler turned the turf first, Mr Dawson senr, Mr R Martineau, Mr Thomas Clark, jun, following his example; and the meeting then separated. The ground chosen for the erection is situated in Edward Street, Parade. Bateman and Drury are the architects.
During the building of the new chapel, Mr Dawson preached on Sunday mornings, at the People’s Hall, Loveday Street; and in the evenings, at the Unitarian Chapel, Newhall Street.
Chartist connection
On Sunday 11 June (1848) the Chartists held an outdoor meeting at the People’s Hall, Loveday Street. The speeches were of the most violent character. The meeting adjourned until the evening; and some fears were entertained that the peace would be broken. The police were assembled at an early hour, and were kept in readiness to act a moment’s notice. The Mayor, Colonel Arbuthnot, Major Brompton and the Superintendent of Police were in attendance at the Police Station in Staniforth Street, during the time of the meeting, and kept up constant communication with the men on duty near the spot. Early in the morning, two companies of infantry arrived from Weedon, and were stationed near the railway; but their services were not required.
Fund raising for Birmingham and Midland Institute
The first of a series of meetings in connection with the artisans’ movement in support of the Birmingham and Midland Institute was held at the People’s Hall, Loveday Street, on 22 February 1854. . . . . . Later meetings were held at Mount Zion School-room on 2 March, at St John’s School-room, Deritend on 9 March, and St Martin’s School-room, Inge Street on 9 April. This seems to be the last evidence of the People's Hall still being open.
This seems to be the last evidence so far of the People's Hall still being open.
Further to my comment about the muddy connections with Chartism, I have found a good and readable explanation of current conditions and events in Birmingham on an excellent web site, URL https://historyhome.co.uk/peel/chartism/birchar.htm
A further potential source is the constitution and rules of the People's Hall, but I will have to go to my local library to access the relevant website, as it is not open to the general public. Something for next week perhaps.
Peter
Further scraping the barrel brings out the following brief references to the People’s Hall, all taken from J A Langford: ‘Modern Birmingham and its Institutions, 1841-1871.
Report of J Pigott Smith to the Streets Commissioners, March 1843.
The erection of Barker Bridge by your Commission in conjunction with the Governors of the General Hospital and the Canal Company will add much to the public convenience, by giving so admirable a connecting link to the populous districts of St. Mary and St. George; and on the completion of the works now in progress in Princip Street, Loveday Street and Shadwell Street, the successful efforts of your Commission, in carrying out this line of communication, will be highly appreciated by the public.
‘Birmingham Journal’ 18 July, 1846
Mr Dawson’s new chapel. – On Sunday morning last, at the People’s Hall, and on the evening at the Unitarian Chapel, Newhall Hill. Mr Dawson announced to his congregation, that the turning of the first turf, on the site of the new chapel would be commenced on the Tuesday morning following, at ten o’clock. He remarked that there would be no idle ceremony gone through; and his only motive for mentioning was that that those persons whose confidence had been shaken, owing to the unavoidable delay, might have an opportunity of there and then satisfying themselves that the Committee was in earnest. Accordingly on Tuesday morning, many respectable persons of both sexes had congregated on the spot, eager to witness the commencement of an edifice that had been so long talked of. At half past ten, Mr Dawson arrived, and delivered an appropriate address, enunciating the principles which were to govern the Free Church, which would speedily assemble on that spot. He concluded with a brief but impressive prayer. Alderman Cutler turned the turf first, Mr Dawson senr, Mr R Martineau, Mr Thomas Clark, jun, following his example; and the meeting then separated. The ground chosen for the erection is situated in Edward Street, Parade. Bateman and Drury are the architects.
During the building of the new chapel, Mr Dawson preached on Sunday mornings, at the People’s Hall, Loveday Street; and in the evenings, at the Unitarian Chapel, Newhall Street.
Chartist connection
On Sunday 11 June (1848) the Chartists held an outdoor meeting at the People’s Hall, Loveday Street. The speeches were of the most violent character. The meeting adjourned until the evening; and some fears were entertained that the peace would be broken. The police were assembled at an early hour, and were kept in readiness to act a moment’s notice. The Mayor, Colonel Arbuthnot, Major Brompton and the Superintendent of Police were in attendance at the Police Station in Staniforth Street, during the time of the meeting, and kept up constant communication with the men on duty near the spot. Early in the morning, two companies of infantry arrived from Weedon, and were stationed near the railway; but their services were not required.
Fund raising for Birmingham and Midland Institute
The first of a series of meetings in connection with the artisans’ movement in support of the Birmingham and Midland Institute was held at the People’s Hall, Loveday Street, on 22 February 1854. . . . . . Later meetings were held at Mount Zion School-room on 2 March, at St John’s School-room, Deritend on 9 March, and St Martin’s School-room, Inge Street on 9 April. This seems to be the last evidence of the People's Hall still being open.
This seems to be the last evidence so far of the People's Hall still being open.
Further to my comment about the muddy connections with Chartism, I have found a good and readable explanation of current conditions and events in Birmingham on an excellent web site, URL https://historyhome.co.uk/peel/chartism/birchar.htm
A further potential source is the constitution and rules of the People's Hall, but I will have to go to my local library to access the relevant website, as it is not open to the general public. Something for next week perhaps.
Peter
Tacitus
master brummie
Peter
Some very interesting information there.
Intriguing to see that an unruly meeting occured at the Hall in 1848. In fact the earliest similar example I have found was on the open ground even before the Hall was built!! More of that in a later post. It certainly wasn't one of the more orderly venues in the town was it ??!!
Equally - interesting to see that the Hall was still open for its original business in 1854. I have been reliably informed that the Hall was put up for sale in 1849. I'll see if I can trace the "For Sale" ad and and see whether they were selling just the building or the "ongoing business actvities".
Meanwhile a couple more things I tracked down in the Library.
Firstly a bit more on the intended use of the Hall which was not included in the Prospectus but was put in writing by the then secretary Richard Jenkinson.
JR wrote: " . . . . to which I would add a Female School for domestic instruction calculated to increase the comforts of the working class at home, and thereby destroy the inducement to intemperance so prevalent by making home more attractive than the gin shop or public house"
Regarding the design and building of the Hall JR wrote:
"The practical plan for the erection of the building appears to me to be something after this kind.
To ask design or plan and specifications from artists and builders disposed to contract.
The plan fixed upon to be paid for at a reasonable charge provided thatit be not a contractor's plan.
That our friend Mr Hansom, who knindly offered to give a plan & specifications to be requested to do so, and to offer for the contract.
And that the plan fixed upon be lithographed and sold at a small price.
The funds by the time building operations can commence in the spring will, I trust, be sufficient to carry up the skeleton and roof, when sufficient money may be borrowed on the outlay to finish, should it be wanted from the calls not being made and the shares taken.
So there is a strong suggestion that the original design as selcted and lithographed did indeed come from Joseph Hansom. The architect named at the laying of the foundation stone is a Mr Ford. Maybe it was he who drew up the revised plans when the original scheme was deemed too ambitious.
Just guesswork on my behalf.
More to follow - hope this isn't getting too boring!!
T
Some very interesting information there.
Intriguing to see that an unruly meeting occured at the Hall in 1848. In fact the earliest similar example I have found was on the open ground even before the Hall was built!! More of that in a later post. It certainly wasn't one of the more orderly venues in the town was it ??!!
Equally - interesting to see that the Hall was still open for its original business in 1854. I have been reliably informed that the Hall was put up for sale in 1849. I'll see if I can trace the "For Sale" ad and and see whether they were selling just the building or the "ongoing business actvities".
Meanwhile a couple more things I tracked down in the Library.
Firstly a bit more on the intended use of the Hall which was not included in the Prospectus but was put in writing by the then secretary Richard Jenkinson.
JR wrote: " . . . . to which I would add a Female School for domestic instruction calculated to increase the comforts of the working class at home, and thereby destroy the inducement to intemperance so prevalent by making home more attractive than the gin shop or public house"
Regarding the design and building of the Hall JR wrote:
"The practical plan for the erection of the building appears to me to be something after this kind.
To ask design or plan and specifications from artists and builders disposed to contract.
The plan fixed upon to be paid for at a reasonable charge provided thatit be not a contractor's plan.
That our friend Mr Hansom, who knindly offered to give a plan & specifications to be requested to do so, and to offer for the contract.
And that the plan fixed upon be lithographed and sold at a small price.
The funds by the time building operations can commence in the spring will, I trust, be sufficient to carry up the skeleton and roof, when sufficient money may be borrowed on the outlay to finish, should it be wanted from the calls not being made and the shares taken.
So there is a strong suggestion that the original design as selcted and lithographed did indeed come from Joseph Hansom. The architect named at the laying of the foundation stone is a Mr Ford. Maybe it was he who drew up the revised plans when the original scheme was deemed too ambitious.
Just guesswork on my behalf.
More to follow - hope this isn't getting too boring!!
T
The Architect Ford was probably William Ford. He is listed in 1839 and 1849, but I could find no other architect in birmingham named ford around that period:
1839 Ford William, architect and surveyor, 62, Great Charles street
1849 Ford William Phillips, architect and surveyor,118 New street; house, 200, Camp hill
Mike
1839 Ford William, architect and surveyor, 62, Great Charles street
1849 Ford William Phillips, architect and surveyor,118 New street; house, 200, Camp hill
Mike
Tacitus
master brummie
Thanks Mike. Yes. I should say that is our man.
Interesting to see that a Birmingham architect was used here.
I have seen that there was a bit of bickering going on that too many outsiders (non-Birmingham men) were becoming involved.
Hansom I believe was a Northerner (York/Preston) and when they drew up the short list for laying the foundation stone all three candidates were from outside of the town. This did not go down well with some people.
There is no doubt that this project was started for all the right, altruistic reasons.
But I sense an undercurrent of bickering, loose management and a tendency to radicalism.
Just me "reading between the lines" but I think there is at least a degree of truth in it.
T
P.S. More to come on Monday or Tuesday about problems that occured on the open land even before the foundation stone was laid!
All of this information is coming from a couple of documents that are in the Birmingham Archive and by trawling through the microfilm copies of the Birmingham Journal. It is a bit of a tortuous exercise but I have looked for any adverts, letters or other articles mentioning the People's Hall.
I will generally report it in date order so people can get a picture of the development, use and eventual demise of the building.
It's certainly an interesting story - especially the way it is intertwined with the political scene of the time and the early development of Birmingham.
Interesting to see that a Birmingham architect was used here.
I have seen that there was a bit of bickering going on that too many outsiders (non-Birmingham men) were becoming involved.
Hansom I believe was a Northerner (York/Preston) and when they drew up the short list for laying the foundation stone all three candidates were from outside of the town. This did not go down well with some people.
There is no doubt that this project was started for all the right, altruistic reasons.
But I sense an undercurrent of bickering, loose management and a tendency to radicalism.
Just me "reading between the lines" but I think there is at least a degree of truth in it.
T
P.S. More to come on Monday or Tuesday about problems that occured on the open land even before the foundation stone was laid!
All of this information is coming from a couple of documents that are in the Birmingham Archive and by trawling through the microfilm copies of the Birmingham Journal. It is a bit of a tortuous exercise but I have looked for any adverts, letters or other articles mentioning the People's Hall.
I will generally report it in date order so people can get a picture of the development, use and eventual demise of the building.
It's certainly an interesting story - especially the way it is intertwined with the political scene of the time and the early development of Birmingham.
bobbyb
Brummie
Thanks for a very interesting thread and thanks for a lot of work put in just for another obscure building in Brum. Being a supporter of the Chartist Movement I must state the Chartists were fighting to improve the conditions of the ordinary Working man and were hated by the Birmingham Elite and the Churches around the Country and one must also remember that Trade Unions were violently oppressed by the factory owners and any meeting held anywhere was always put down by the Police and Army, hence the fact that the Army was permanently Garrisoned in Birmingham, always with the excuse of Violence by the meeting, nothing new there, also the reason for places being set up was not really to educate the working man, but to oppress him using religion and so called abstinence, because the working man was considered a drunkard and also the most powerful people were Brewers.
Tacitus
master brummie
Bobby
I think that's a key point here as I think one of the driving reasons behind this building being set up was that it would be not only used by, but also owned by and run by, the ordinary working people.
I didn't know much about the Chartists until I was doing some research on the Bull Ring and started reading about the Bull Ring riots of 1839.
I found it all very interesting to learn about.
I didn't really think this next image would be of much interest to forum members but have decided now that I should post it. It is the first management committee of the Hall. I imagine that some of these people will have been Chartists or at last Chartist sympathisers so the names may tie in with research that other people are doing.
View attachment 48774
T
i couldn't seem to get the formatting right on th efollowing, as it seemed to remove spaces. i have therefore highlighted the names in the list to mame it clearer. hope its understandable.
Looking at the 1839 & 1841 directories possibly identifies some of these people:
William Blaxland , draper 60 Bull St
Samuel Brown , could be : coal dealer Heathmill lane
gunmaker , 28 Whittal St
pocket book and fancy leather case maker, Upper Gough «t.
Thomas Edwards, could be victualler, .lamp Tavern, beak St
chaser 72 Newhall St
venetian blind maker 7 Grosvenor St
shoemaker , 24 Gough St (4 Suffok St in 1839)
beer retailer 12 palmer St
linen draper 39 Bull St
button maker Bruetons Walk, Prospect row
Josiah Emes, japanned paper button manufacturer, 132, Lionel street
Benjamin Hill, could be boot and shoe maker; 20 Aston road
artist's repository, 6, Colmore row
William Haywood could be grocer & druggist, 69 Constitution hill
gun maker, 11 Bagot St
coach builder , Hockley Hill
dyer & clothes cleaner 18 islington row
Richard Jackson provision dealer, 63, Cottage lane
Thomas Jackson could be coal dealer charlotte St
greengrocer 124 Moor St
general agent & wharfinger, love Lane
tailor 120 High St Bordesley (no 136 in 1839)
victualler, Dog & Duck , 40 Sheep St
Kirton Thomas, die sinker, Summer lane
John Lother Murphy surgeon dentist, 44 Cherry st
Richard Mansfield could be artificial bird's eye maker and bird & animal preserver, and fancy glass toy worker, 30 Bromsgrove St (35
Bromsgrove St in 1839)
bricklayer 19 Inge st (36 Queen St in 1839)
Owen Oliver, gun engraver, 3 Court, Whittall st
William Pare (Mr) 29 Great Charles st
William Hawkes Smith. 35 Bath row
Could J.G. Hornblower really be J.L.Hornblower, architect, 14 Waterloo St., or in 1839 there is a Mr Hornblower at 44 Bristol St
There is a Bewlay John, gilt and black ornament maker, 1 court, Loveday street. This is nearby and possibly Richard is his son.
There is a Empson J. F., button maker, 18, Great Charles street, again possibly William was his son .
mike
Looking at the 1839 & 1841 directories possibly identifies some of these people:
William Blaxland , draper 60 Bull St
Samuel Brown , could be : coal dealer Heathmill lane
gunmaker , 28 Whittal St
pocket book and fancy leather case maker, Upper Gough «t.
Thomas Edwards, could be victualler, .lamp Tavern, beak St
chaser 72 Newhall St
venetian blind maker 7 Grosvenor St
shoemaker , 24 Gough St (4 Suffok St in 1839)
beer retailer 12 palmer St
linen draper 39 Bull St
button maker Bruetons Walk, Prospect row
Josiah Emes, japanned paper button manufacturer, 132, Lionel street
Benjamin Hill, could be boot and shoe maker; 20 Aston road
artist's repository, 6, Colmore row
William Haywood could be grocer & druggist, 69 Constitution hill
gun maker, 11 Bagot St
coach builder , Hockley Hill
dyer & clothes cleaner 18 islington row
Richard Jackson provision dealer, 63, Cottage lane
Thomas Jackson could be coal dealer charlotte St
greengrocer 124 Moor St
general agent & wharfinger, love Lane
tailor 120 High St Bordesley (no 136 in 1839)
victualler, Dog & Duck , 40 Sheep St
Kirton Thomas, die sinker, Summer lane
John Lother Murphy surgeon dentist, 44 Cherry st
Richard Mansfield could be artificial bird's eye maker and bird & animal preserver, and fancy glass toy worker, 30 Bromsgrove St (35
Bromsgrove St in 1839)
bricklayer 19 Inge st (36 Queen St in 1839)
Owen Oliver, gun engraver, 3 Court, Whittall st
William Pare (Mr) 29 Great Charles st
William Hawkes Smith. 35 Bath row
Could J.G. Hornblower really be J.L.Hornblower, architect, 14 Waterloo St., or in 1839 there is a Mr Hornblower at 44 Bristol St
There is a Bewlay John, gilt and black ornament maker, 1 court, Loveday street. This is nearby and possibly Richard is his son.
There is a Empson J. F., button maker, 18, Great Charles street, again possibly William was his son .
mike
Peter Walker
gone but not forgotten
Thanks Tacitus and Mikejee for the last contributions After the references to Hansom’s possible connection with the People’s Hall, I have been looking for supporting evidence, which I quote from various sources, mostly internet sites, some of dubious accuracy.
Joseph Aloysius Hansom (26 October 1803 – 29 June 1882)
Born in Micklegate, York, the brother of architect Charles Francis Hansom and the uncle of Edward J. Hansom. He was first apprenticed to his father as a joiner, but was soon articled to a local architect named Philips. About 1825 he settled in Halifax, Yorkshire, as assistant to John Oates and there met Edward Welch, with whom he formed his first architectural partnership in 1828. They designed churches in Yorkshire and Liverpool, and also worked on the renovation of Bodelwyddan Castle in Denbighshire. In 1831 their design for Birmingham Town Hall was accepted, but the contract led to their bankruptcy (see below). The disaster led to the dissolution of the partnership and may have contributed to Hansom becoming a radical socialist.
In 1834 he registered the design of a 'Patent Safety Cab' on the suggestion of han unspecified employer. He sold the patent to a company for £10 000, which was never paid.
In 1843 Hansom founded the successful ‘Builder’ magazine (known as ‘Building’ today), which was to flourish through the century. However, neither he nor his partner of the time Alfred Bartholomew (1801-45) profited from the enterprise, because they were compelled to retire for lack of capital, in 1844, and was succeeded George Godwin, who remained editor until 1883.
From 1854 to 1879 Hansom built many private and public buildings, especially churches, schools and convents for the Roman Catholic Church. From 1847 to 1852 he practised in Preston, Lancashire, working briefly in association with Augustus Welby Pugin towards the end of the latter's life. After the practice moved to London, he took his brother Charles Francis Hansom into partnership in 1854. But this partnership was dissolved in 1859 when Charles established an independent practice in Bath with his son Edward Joseph Hansom as clerk.
In 1862 Joseph Hansom formed a partnership with Edward Welby Pugin, which broke up acrimoniously in 1863. Finally (1869) he took his son Joseph Stanislaus Hansom into partnership.
Later Hansom moved to manage an estate at Caldecote Hall. He retired on 31 December 1879 and died at 399 Fulham Road, London, on 29 June 1882.
The Town Hall project
Before the town had a charter, the Birmingham Street Commissioners were the competent authority to raise funding for a new hall suitable both as a meeting hall for public functions, but also as a venue for the triennial Music Festivals which put Birmingham on the map and moreorless kept the Birmingham General Hospital going.
A design competition was launched which resulted with the submission of 67 designs of which the Hansom & Welch submission was preferred. Their rather naïve estimate for the building was £8000 (equivalent to £620 000 today) with £6000 for the organ. The Commissioners accepted a total tender of £16 648, but on condition that the architects would find any excess from their own pocket.
Construction began on April 27, 1832 with an expected completion date of 1833. On January 6, 1833, two workers were killed when a 70 foot crane constructed to install the roof trusses broke and the pulley block failed. John Heap died instantly and Win. Badger died a few days later from his injuries. They were buried in St Philip's churchyard and a memorial, consisting of a pillar base made by one of the workmen for the Town Hall, was dedicated to them.
The architects soon found costs getting out of hand, and three guarantors were found who would donate money for the building; W. P. Lloyd, John Welch and Edward Tench.
Hansom and Welch left the scene in May 1834, and John Foster of Liverpool saw the Town Hall to partial completion and temporary opening later that year for the delayed Music Festival, at which Felix Mendelssohn opened the new organ, but made comments about its siting within the building.
Local architect Charles Edge was commissioned in 1835 to repair weaknesses to the design of the building. He was later commissioned for the extension of the building to accommodate the repositioned organ in 1837 and again in 1850,
Hansom’s possible connection with the People’s Hall
The People’s Hall proposal started in 1840, six years after Hansom had been bankrupted and fired from the Town Hall job. He apparently was working for somebody when he invented his Hansom cab, but we know nothing of what he did next and until he started editing ‘The Builder’ in 1843.
So we’re not much wiser, but I think it is worthwhile delving. Hope it isn’t too monotonous for everyone else.
Peter
Joseph Aloysius Hansom (26 October 1803 – 29 June 1882)
Born in Micklegate, York, the brother of architect Charles Francis Hansom and the uncle of Edward J. Hansom. He was first apprenticed to his father as a joiner, but was soon articled to a local architect named Philips. About 1825 he settled in Halifax, Yorkshire, as assistant to John Oates and there met Edward Welch, with whom he formed his first architectural partnership in 1828. They designed churches in Yorkshire and Liverpool, and also worked on the renovation of Bodelwyddan Castle in Denbighshire. In 1831 their design for Birmingham Town Hall was accepted, but the contract led to their bankruptcy (see below). The disaster led to the dissolution of the partnership and may have contributed to Hansom becoming a radical socialist.
In 1834 he registered the design of a 'Patent Safety Cab' on the suggestion of han unspecified employer. He sold the patent to a company for £10 000, which was never paid.
In 1843 Hansom founded the successful ‘Builder’ magazine (known as ‘Building’ today), which was to flourish through the century. However, neither he nor his partner of the time Alfred Bartholomew (1801-45) profited from the enterprise, because they were compelled to retire for lack of capital, in 1844, and was succeeded George Godwin, who remained editor until 1883.
From 1854 to 1879 Hansom built many private and public buildings, especially churches, schools and convents for the Roman Catholic Church. From 1847 to 1852 he practised in Preston, Lancashire, working briefly in association with Augustus Welby Pugin towards the end of the latter's life. After the practice moved to London, he took his brother Charles Francis Hansom into partnership in 1854. But this partnership was dissolved in 1859 when Charles established an independent practice in Bath with his son Edward Joseph Hansom as clerk.
In 1862 Joseph Hansom formed a partnership with Edward Welby Pugin, which broke up acrimoniously in 1863. Finally (1869) he took his son Joseph Stanislaus Hansom into partnership.
Later Hansom moved to manage an estate at Caldecote Hall. He retired on 31 December 1879 and died at 399 Fulham Road, London, on 29 June 1882.
The Town Hall project
Before the town had a charter, the Birmingham Street Commissioners were the competent authority to raise funding for a new hall suitable both as a meeting hall for public functions, but also as a venue for the triennial Music Festivals which put Birmingham on the map and moreorless kept the Birmingham General Hospital going.
A design competition was launched which resulted with the submission of 67 designs of which the Hansom & Welch submission was preferred. Their rather naïve estimate for the building was £8000 (equivalent to £620 000 today) with £6000 for the organ. The Commissioners accepted a total tender of £16 648, but on condition that the architects would find any excess from their own pocket.
Construction began on April 27, 1832 with an expected completion date of 1833. On January 6, 1833, two workers were killed when a 70 foot crane constructed to install the roof trusses broke and the pulley block failed. John Heap died instantly and Win. Badger died a few days later from his injuries. They were buried in St Philip's churchyard and a memorial, consisting of a pillar base made by one of the workmen for the Town Hall, was dedicated to them.
The architects soon found costs getting out of hand, and three guarantors were found who would donate money for the building; W. P. Lloyd, John Welch and Edward Tench.
Hansom and Welch left the scene in May 1834, and John Foster of Liverpool saw the Town Hall to partial completion and temporary opening later that year for the delayed Music Festival, at which Felix Mendelssohn opened the new organ, but made comments about its siting within the building.
Local architect Charles Edge was commissioned in 1835 to repair weaknesses to the design of the building. He was later commissioned for the extension of the building to accommodate the repositioned organ in 1837 and again in 1850,
Hansom’s possible connection with the People’s Hall
The People’s Hall proposal started in 1840, six years after Hansom had been bankrupted and fired from the Town Hall job. He apparently was working for somebody when he invented his Hansom cab, but we know nothing of what he did next and until he started editing ‘The Builder’ in 1843.
So we’re not much wiser, but I think it is worthwhile delving. Hope it isn’t too monotonous for everyone else.
Peter
Tacitus
master brummie
In the latest episode of this story here are 2 examples of the discord which attached itself to the People's Hall even before the foundation stone was laid.
1. The committee originally allowed the open ground on which the Hall was to be built to be used for public meetings. However, as you see here there was all sorts of trouble at these meetings. The Presdent and Secretary placed this advert on the front page of the Birmingham Journal - accusing fellow committee members of stoking up the trouble.
View attachment 48816
2. And here all sorts of problems about who could vote at meetings. You can also tell from this that some people are behind in paying the instalments on their shares. This dispute led to several letters and accusations appearing in the Journal.
View attachment 48817
T
1. The committee originally allowed the open ground on which the Hall was to be built to be used for public meetings. However, as you see here there was all sorts of trouble at these meetings. The Presdent and Secretary placed this advert on the front page of the Birmingham Journal - accusing fellow committee members of stoking up the trouble.
View attachment 48816
2. And here all sorts of problems about who could vote at meetings. You can also tell from this that some people are behind in paying the instalments on their shares. This dispute led to several letters and accusations appearing in the Journal.
View attachment 48817
T
bobbyb
Brummie
The elite were frightened of Chartists because of the French Revolution and were also frightened of the ordinary working man, yet the majority of Chartists joined Wellington to fight Bony and tried to use the infiltration into the Army as a starting point but because the war lasted so long, times overcame the local conditions, even wages went up and employment as well, but that also changed afterwards.
Tacitus
master brummie
In this instalment we get to the laying of the foundation stone in April 1841.
The first image is a copy of a letter from the B'ham Journal.
Once again the folks at the People's Hall were "washing their dirty linen in public". This is one of a sequence of letters criticising the men who had been invited to perform the laying ceremony - the main objection being that they were not Birmingham men but "outsiders."
View attachment 48872
Nevertheless the laying of the foundation stone warranted one and a half columns in the Journal. It's not really practical to show the whole report but you can see from the beginning section that there was an impressive turnout.
One of the groups in the procession were the "Total abstinence Chartists". I bet they were a redoubtable bunch!!
Here are a couple of extracts from speeches that were made.
Colonel Thompson said that "Birmingham had for years proved herself to be foremost in the great work of national amelioration, and he was delighted that the people had now set about, in right earnest, to erect a hall for the spread of knowledge."
Mr Collins impressed upon them that "this was no sectarian society, and recognised no political or religious party. The hall would be let to hire to all and every class who paid for it; and as the common object was instruction and improvement, he was sure, full and fair discussion between all parties who chose to use the hall, would produce the happiest results."
Mr Hawkes observed that "not withstanding the high character which the men of Birmingham had attained, they had never before witnessed the setting about the work of their own education. . . . . It was indeed a most gratifying scene to behold the people thus thinking and thus acting for themselves. In the building about to be raised they could meet without the sanction of the great and there they could discuss those subjects interesting to them. If they differed they could talk over the cause - if they felt aggrieved they could meet to ascertain the cause and apply a remedy. If oppressed they could meet to remonstrate, and devise means for the removal of their burdens, Under all their difficulties, they would meet and instruct and stimulate each other, and the result of such meetings would be the inevitable improvement of their condition."
View attachment 48873
T
The first image is a copy of a letter from the B'ham Journal.
Once again the folks at the People's Hall were "washing their dirty linen in public". This is one of a sequence of letters criticising the men who had been invited to perform the laying ceremony - the main objection being that they were not Birmingham men but "outsiders."
View attachment 48872
Nevertheless the laying of the foundation stone warranted one and a half columns in the Journal. It's not really practical to show the whole report but you can see from the beginning section that there was an impressive turnout.
One of the groups in the procession were the "Total abstinence Chartists". I bet they were a redoubtable bunch!!
Here are a couple of extracts from speeches that were made.
Colonel Thompson said that "Birmingham had for years proved herself to be foremost in the great work of national amelioration, and he was delighted that the people had now set about, in right earnest, to erect a hall for the spread of knowledge."
Mr Collins impressed upon them that "this was no sectarian society, and recognised no political or religious party. The hall would be let to hire to all and every class who paid for it; and as the common object was instruction and improvement, he was sure, full and fair discussion between all parties who chose to use the hall, would produce the happiest results."
Mr Hawkes observed that "not withstanding the high character which the men of Birmingham had attained, they had never before witnessed the setting about the work of their own education. . . . . It was indeed a most gratifying scene to behold the people thus thinking and thus acting for themselves. In the building about to be raised they could meet without the sanction of the great and there they could discuss those subjects interesting to them. If they differed they could talk over the cause - if they felt aggrieved they could meet to ascertain the cause and apply a remedy. If oppressed they could meet to remonstrate, and devise means for the removal of their burdens, Under all their difficulties, they would meet and instruct and stimulate each other, and the result of such meetings would be the inevitable improvement of their condition."
View attachment 48873
T
Peter Walker
gone but not forgotten
Thanks very much, Tacitus for your last contribution. It would be interesting to see the last line or two of the account of the foundation stone laying. That is certainly a quaint list of participants in the ceremony.
Reverting to bobbyb's post #166, I think we should bear in mid that Birmingham was unusual among industrial towns in being just a large village, nominally ruled by an absentee Lord or Lady of the Manor through the Court Leet and other Mediaeval institutions. Although the radicals had succeeded in getting the Birmingham Charter through parliament, the squirearchy - together with the Church of England and the Tory Party - had ensured that the new Charter did was to install two members of Parliament for the Borough, and create a talking shop without any powers or cash. The legality of the Charter was consistently being challenged in the courts and in Parliament; It took several years before Parliament granted the borough the powers of a police authority, and the Street Commissioners were not absorbed into the Council until the Improvement Act of 1851. This was very different in some industrial towns at the time.
Another important thing was that because of the lack of control over the township, industry was also less organised, and individuals found it easier to advance themselves, and it was common for several small firms to participate in the various stages of manufacture of such products as guns, for instance. While everyone worked hard and dangerously (usually earning good money), I suspect that the trades union ethos did not really find much appeal to the average Brummy in those days. And I would guess most of them would gladly widen his understanding of the world if he could use it to make an extra penny or two.
Coming on the the alcohol issue, we must admit that Birmingham had a serious drink problem, but we can see that from the time the new Birmingham Council got going in the 1850s, it started a programme of cooperation with the brewers to remove the little old beer shops and replace them with fewer but larger pubs which could be more easily controlled. The 'Birmingham Plan' was an arrangement held in high esteem in the early 20th century, but it can be argued that the later 'road house' from the twenties with car park, was less successful.
Apologies if I have been rambling on. Time for bed.
Peter
Reverting to bobbyb's post #166, I think we should bear in mid that Birmingham was unusual among industrial towns in being just a large village, nominally ruled by an absentee Lord or Lady of the Manor through the Court Leet and other Mediaeval institutions. Although the radicals had succeeded in getting the Birmingham Charter through parliament, the squirearchy - together with the Church of England and the Tory Party - had ensured that the new Charter did was to install two members of Parliament for the Borough, and create a talking shop without any powers or cash. The legality of the Charter was consistently being challenged in the courts and in Parliament; It took several years before Parliament granted the borough the powers of a police authority, and the Street Commissioners were not absorbed into the Council until the Improvement Act of 1851. This was very different in some industrial towns at the time.
Another important thing was that because of the lack of control over the township, industry was also less organised, and individuals found it easier to advance themselves, and it was common for several small firms to participate in the various stages of manufacture of such products as guns, for instance. While everyone worked hard and dangerously (usually earning good money), I suspect that the trades union ethos did not really find much appeal to the average Brummy in those days. And I would guess most of them would gladly widen his understanding of the world if he could use it to make an extra penny or two.
Coming on the the alcohol issue, we must admit that Birmingham had a serious drink problem, but we can see that from the time the new Birmingham Council got going in the 1850s, it started a programme of cooperation with the brewers to remove the little old beer shops and replace them with fewer but larger pubs which could be more easily controlled. The 'Birmingham Plan' was an arrangement held in high esteem in the early 20th century, but it can be argued that the later 'road house' from the twenties with car park, was less successful.
Apologies if I have been rambling on. Time for bed.
Peter
Hi Mike
Found this when I was trying to find information about my great-great grandfather John Lowther Murphy whose middle name was wrongly given as Lother in the Birmingham Directory Mike was looking at. My great-great grandfather was not a Chartist but an Owenite Socialist and it looks like those on the list would have been members of the Birmingham Branch of the Owenite Socialists. Birmingham played an important part in the Socialist movement in 1838 with its Central Board Meetings being held here. At this time my great great grandfather was a member of the Central Board along with William Pare as Vice President and William Hawkes Smith. You mention Richard Bewlay, MIke. He was a Central Board member too but you t don't include him in the listas such - was he mentioned in the Birmingham Journal notice or in the Archive material you looked at? I would be very gratefulto Mike or anyone else who could help me find out more about my great great grandfather John Lowther Murphy who seems to have been in practice as a dentist in Birmingham for almost fifty years or about the Owenite Socialist movement in Birmingham where he played a leading part.
Thanks to you Mike and everyone else who contributed to this very interesting thread
Osbrum
Osbrum
Found this when I was trying to find information about my great-great grandfather John Lowther Murphy whose middle name was wrongly given as Lother in the Birmingham Directory Mike was looking at. My great-great grandfather was not a Chartist but an Owenite Socialist and it looks like those on the list would have been members of the Birmingham Branch of the Owenite Socialists. Birmingham played an important part in the Socialist movement in 1838 with its Central Board Meetings being held here. At this time my great great grandfather was a member of the Central Board along with William Pare as Vice President and William Hawkes Smith. You mention Richard Bewlay, MIke. He was a Central Board member too but you t don't include him in the listas such - was he mentioned in the Birmingham Journal notice or in the Archive material you looked at? I would be very gratefulto Mike or anyone else who could help me find out more about my great great grandfather John Lowther Murphy who seems to have been in practice as a dentist in Birmingham for almost fifty years or about the Owenite Socialist movement in Birmingham where he played a leading part.
Thanks to you Mike and everyone else who contributed to this very interesting thread
Osbrum
Osbrum
