Len Arthur : July 2021

Green Man coaching inn Blackheath 1860

Horses and workers lives - Devon diaspora into the industrial age

Two generations of the Arthur (Arter) family from Loxbeare

Part 1 James Arthur - coachman to cab owner

As much in family history does, this story starts with a couple of remarks from my Dad when asked what he knew about his grandparents and family. “I heard that my great grandfather drove stagecoaches to Manchester” and “when I visited my grandmother in Greenwich in the 1920s with my Dad I remember that my grandmother had to go off to ‘see to the horses’; she was a little tiny woman”. And that was it for over 50 years.

Gradually a picture has come together of skills with horses, learned in Devon, being carried into the heart of London industrialisation where people and animals jointly made early industry work through shared sweat and exploitation.

Washfield parish church

James Arthur, born ‘Arter’, baptised in Washfield, Devon in 1800 was the first son of William Arter and Johanna Davey. In 1804 the family were in Exeter and by 1806 in Sowton just outside the City. There they stayed until around 1817 when the family, minus the older children, moved back to Lurley, a hamlet in the Devon parish of Loxbeare, next to Washfield. The next record of James Arthur was getting married in May 1827 in St Georges church, Hanover Square, London, to Mary Moss from Badby in Lincolnshire [Point 1 on the Google map. See link to this map and the 1851 OS map in the references]. What was James doing in London? How did he get there? How did two people from opposite ends of England meet up in the late 1820s?

It seems that James, as stated on Mary Ann Arthur’s baptism record, his first daughter born in December 1827 was a servant. One of the possibilities is that Mary Moss was also in the same household as a servant and that’s how they met, deciding to marry at the first signs of pregnancy. By December 1827 the family were living at Bridge Place, Deptford [Point 3]. By 1831 and the baptism of their second daughter Maria they were living at ‘lime kilns’ Greenwich East [Point 4] and James was described as a coachman. Enter the horses.

Being a coachman was a very skilled job which involved not just driving but an understanding of horses and coach care. It would have taken several years to acquire these skills. Consequently, It seems quite likely that James was employed as a servant coachman up until getting married in central London. As a married couple with children living in as a servant would have not been acceptable so James and Mary followed the prospect of work as a coachman to one of the main industrial and coach routes between London, Chatham, Canterbury, and Dover.

How were the skills of being a coachman acquired? It will not be possible to know for certain but there seem two possibilities. First, an association with the large landowning family the Aclands. James’s family and parents lived in a cottage in Lurley that was owned by this family, and they remained occupiers up until 1885. Sam Arter held the right to occupancy, and it seems this passed to James’s parents William and Johanna. Sam was a veteran of the battle of Trafalgar in which one of the Aclands was also involved as an officer. This living arrangement may have been connected. Further, the Acland’s had their main estate and house at Broadclyst the neighbouring parish to Sowton where James was largely brought up. James' next brother down seems to have also been in service with the family as a gardener. The Aclands London house was in St James Square, a neighbouring parish of St Georges where James and Mary were married. So, it is possible that the skills of being a coachman were learned within the context of family service.

Another possibility was the position of Sowton close to the main turnpike routes between Exeter, London, and Bristol. One the first coaching inns outside Exeter, the Black Horse, was in the parish and with the expansion of mail and stagecoaches during and after the Napoleonic wars would have offered opportunities for a young person to start working as a casual helper and slowly move up the skill level.

Then again there are other possibilities or a mixture of these two. Certainly by 1831 described himself as a coachman and continued to do so until the later 1840s.

Coaching was one of those industries that although rooted in the technology of an agrarian society was transformed by capital investment aimed at profit making through increased productivity derived from technical innovation and intensity of working. Investment in turnpike trusts, the development of steel springs on coaches, time saving efficient organisation of mail and coaching stages and the extending of the working day for men and horses, all were features of capitalism and coaching - along with cutthroat competition and attempts at monopoly ownership. At the peak of coaching there was a network of turnpike roads in England and Wales providing around 180,000 miles of service routes with over 3,000 separate service lines. Around London alone by the mid-1830s there were 3,600 services or around 360 per week, carrying potentially over 2m passenger trips a year. Traffic pressure was so great that in 1835, a law enforcing driving on the left was passed. By the 1830s coaching was in three interdependent sectors - long-stage services between London and provincial towns, including mail coaches; long-stage radiating from provincial towns; short-stage services in London.

In the 1830s the commercial reality of coaching was much closer to the reality of profit maximisation than romantic Christmas cards. Large organisations of coach masters dominated the stage services over 25 miles. By 1836 the 10 leading London coach masters ran 90% of the services over 100 miles and 68% of the services over 25 miles. It was a highly organised industry where cutthroat competition was balanced with the provision of connecting services. Market edge was constantly being sought through keeping time, speeding up and racing, changing time slots to maximise customers and personalising the provision through ‘named coaches’ and services and often through the provision of safe, helpful and well turned-out coachmen and guards. Coach masters owned most of the horses used and the employed coachmen and guards but not necessarily all the coaches used, balancing ownership with renting by the mile from coachbuilders, which spread the cost of maintenance. Coach masters owned some of the main stages where large numbers of horses were kept, but not all.

Profitability in the end depended on the cost of providing transport and maximising the revenue from passengers. Mail coaches were owned by the Post Office who also employed the guards, the coach masters providing the coachman and horses. It was a source of steady revenue as well as marketing prestige. Passenger numbers on mail coaches were limited to four inside and three outside. On the general stagecoaches generally, there were four passengers inside and 11 outside. It seems the main fixed cost was fodder for the horses possibly up to 40 - 45% of the total. Coachmen were paid around a guinea a week and drove about 100 miles a day or a 10 -12 hour shift - 5 stages or 50 miles out and then the same on return. Guards usually stayed with the coach the whole journey. Coaching horses were usually bought cheap after some earlier service and were for varying reasons no longer rideable. The two front horses were known as leaders and the two rear wheelers, even blind horses, could be used in this last position. A horse was lucky to last four years in this work and would then be off to the knackers’ yard where every bit of dead horses found a use. Victorians were very cagey about this last part of the trade.

For coachmen having a steady contract and income with a coach master would have had its attractions - like most physical work at this time the hours were long, exhausting, and the coaches had to be driven in all weathers. Not the work for an older person. However, there were other opportunities that may have provided an incentive to keep at the work. It was a standard expectation that tips were paid to the coachman and the guard. There were also some ‘beneath the table’ possibilities with some packages and letters being carried as a side trade and what was known as ‘shouldering’ or ‘swallowing’ where additional passengers were taken on board and the fares kept by the coachman and guard. The coach masters knew about these practices as they had often had these jobs themselves, and as one said at the time ‘if you are going to do this, make sure you do it well’ in other words, don’t get found out. It meant of course that the basic wage was kept low and the threat of getting the sack was always held over their heads.

James Arthur was a coachman for 20 years until the railways finally changed the industry and around 1850, he became a cab owner driver. People have often wondered what happened to coachmen in the advent of the railways - guards often transferred their skills - well here is the story of one.

As has been referred to at the baptism of his second daughter he was described as a coachman living at Lime Kilns [Point 4]. The next piece of evidence is from 1837 where he is again described as a coachman living at Royal Hill [Point 5]. Royal Hill was close to what was to become the new railway terminal in the centre of Greenwich and one of the main offices of local coach masters James Wheatley. Both could have been significant as in the 1840 Pigot’s Directory of Kent coaches and omnibuses to London left the corner of London St - close to Royal Hill - every quarter of an hour and to nearby Lewisham, Blackheath, and Woolwich every 20 minutes at the arrival of each train and from principal inns. The local short stagecoach services were big business in 1836 just before the railway with 164 daily return services running into London, a business that was both adapting and continuing despite the passenger railway opening to Greenwich in 1838.

Adapting to the railway seems to have affected James and family so by January 1838 when their first son Thomas was baptised at Lewisham they were living at Dartmouth Hill, Blackheath [Point 7]. James was described as a coachman and unusually, there was added in the record ‘of the Green Man’, so we also have his employer, and this seems to have been the situation for the next 10 years as evidenced in the 1841 census and the birth certificates of the next four children [Point 8-11]. The Green Man was one of the first coaching stages on the London - Chatham - Canterbury - Dover route, a road that later became the A2. In the Pigot's 1840 Directory it is marked out significantly as the only Lewisham Hotel and Posting House “The Green Man Hotel, Thomas Henry Whitmarsh (and posting master to Her Majesty) Blackheath”. The 1841 census around the entry of the Arthur family on Dartmouth Hill includes many people and occupations that appear to be part of the hotel, including the ‘maitre d’. The Arthur family also had another coachman living with them as a lodger. Clearly both short stage and long stage coaching was still in high demand, possibly with additional short stage serving the Greenwich Rail terminus as it then was. In the 1847 Bagshaw’s Directory the Green Man is still owned by Thomas Whitmarsh, it is a livery stables but the post office function seems to have been moved. In the 1851 OS Map it still is a named feature however, the map also indicates that the end was in sight for long stage coaching with new railway lines by passing the coaching routes.

The decline in demand for coachmen appears to have affected the Arthur family so by the 1851 census they had moved back into Greenwich and were living at 1 Chester Street [Point 12] with no occupation being recorded against James’s name. However, all the children from 5 - 12 are in school and in 1858 James is recorded in the poll book as having a vote indicating that 1 Chester Street had an annual rentable value of over £10.00 a year. It was not until the 1861 census that we have an indication that James is by now a cab proprietor and still living at 1 Chester Street. Although the information is thin, it does seem that the family had a regular income and James had enough capital to purchase or at least put a deposit on purchasing a cab. A growing industry serving the requirement for short journeys in an increasingly prosperous Greenwich well served with new railways.

The London Hackney Carriages Act of 1831 had removed all restrictions on the mode and numbers of carriages, although all had to be plated and licensed, the process of which eventually came under the control of the police. During the 1830’s and possibly related to the wider market opened by the 1831 Act two new carriages were developed, the Hansom and the Clarence (aka the ‘Growler’). Both were pulled by one horse. The Hansom was the one that is more generally recognised with two large wheels and the driver sitting behind the cab. The Clarence was an enclosed carriage with four wheels and the driver at the front and narrower than traditional coaches. Both were highly manoeuvrable in an urban environment. By 1870 the number of cab licenses was over 7,000 and the cab industry became a major employer. In 1851 there were 6,039 licensed cab drivers and by 1891 15,219, more than the number of people who worked for the railways or the London docks. In addition, one estimate suggests as many as 50,000 were employed in the cab industry and related trades such as coachbuilders, horse dealers and keepers and saddlers.

A 'Growler' horse cab

The expansion of the cab industry was closely related to that of the railways creating a demand for travel to be timed for specific trains and between terminuses in London. The Growler was suited for railway work with the facility for carrying luggage inside and out and taking families. There is no evidence about which type of cab James Arthur owned but the type of work around Greenwich with early and expanding railway connections, many upper- and middle-income families and institutions such as the Royal Naval Hospital and a number of private schools, would fit the Growler.

No evidence has been found about how James managed to become a cab proprietor and whether he owned more than one. There were possibilities of purchasing a cab with payments spread over several years. It is also possible that the extra money that could have been earned as a coachman working for the Green Man provided some opportunity for saving a small amount of capital. About two thirds of licenses were to owner drivers. The starting cost was not small. Two horses would have cost £40.00; provender for the horses would have been around £1.00 per week and a cab would cost around £50.00 with maintenance a regular fixed cost. If they were lucky horses and coaches would last six to eight years so the capital costs were not one off. Other costs included tolls and until 1853 Cab Act weekly duty for a plate was 10s which was then removed by the Cab Act of that year. The same act fixed the hiring costs as either by time or miles and the cost at 6d per mile.

To cover the costs and make a regular income to live on meant maximising the chance of picking up customers and knowing very well the ‘hot spots’ both in terms of place, times and seasonal events, and working all the hours possible. Income would have been supplemented by tips and possibly having regular ‘fares’ and avoiding 'bilking' fares doing a runner without paying. Tips were expected but would be worked for and careful balance constantly being struck between whether to charge by the mile or time and at the same time providing being a supportive and friendly ‘cabby’. A 12-hour day was regular and as what seems to have happened with James, when his son Charles was old enough became a cab driver, most possibly with his father, thus ensuring more hours could be covered by the horses and the cab or to keep the business going as James aged.

A regular income was needed. In the 1851 census living at 1 Chester street was a crowded business with seven children still at home and not visibly making a contribution. Chester Street was an area of small back street businesses so stabling and a cover for the cab was probably very close by and hence remaining at this address for the next 17 years. Mary, their first born was not mentioned and no record so far has been found about why or whether she was still alive. One more child followed in 1852, Thomas James Arthur who is a bit of mystery as they already had one son called Thomas born in 1838 and no record can be found of this second Thomas’s birth or baptism, but he is mentioned in the 1861 census as being James and Mary’s son. Mary was 47 by 1852 so the question does come to mind that perhaps Thomas was the son of one of the daughters. It does seem to be a tradition in the family for parents to take on the children born to daughters outside of marriage. He is mentioned again in 1871 as a butcher’s apprentice then disappears from recorded view again. TB struck the family in 1858 with the death of their second daughter Maria aged 26. James is down as a cab proprietor.

In the 1861 census the family was still living at 1 Chester Street but now it was James, Mary and two daughters Caroline, Elizabeth and the second Thomas. Charles James Arthur, my great grandfather who later joined the cab business, was at this stage a lodger living over the water in East Ham working as a porter on the East Central Railway. During the 1860’s the children started to marry as well as less happy deaths. Caroline the third daughter married William Potter in Lewisham in 1862, James down as cab proprietor. The first Thomas is married across the water at Mile End, Stepney in 1864 to Agnes Kelly who was born in Dublin and whose father was a doctor which has a bearing on Charles, my great grandfather’s story. The banns mention that James was still a cab proprietor.

James being born in 1800 was as old as the century and working as a cab owner driver for long hours and in all weathers was probably taking its toll. By 1864 Charles James Arthur, my great grandfather, had returned home to Greenwich and was working as a cab driver presumably for his father. Charles married Sarah Pilgrim in 1864 and James is still down as a cab proprietor. Interestingly Sarah’s father was a horse keeper from Lambeth so the overlap of people and horses also led to marriages. Between 1864 and 1869 James, Mary and family moved from 1 Chester Street to 10 Reform Place [Point 15] which appears to have become 10 George Street. This is the address on Mary’s death certificate for 10 January 1869 aged 62 of chronic bronchitis and James is still down as a cab proprietor. Their daughter Elizabeth was present at her death. In the 1871 census James is still at 10 George Street and a cab proprietor and is living with his two daughters, Emily who is now 29 and a dressmaker and Elizabeth who is 22 with no occupation stated. George Street is again an area of small workshops so space for stabling and cover would have been available. As in Chester Street occupations varied from dressmakers, shopkeepers to shipwrights and an industrial chemist. All would have provided a regular if not large income.

On 25 December 1872 daughter Elizabeth married James King, a ‘tobacconist assistant’ at St Alphage church. Elizabeth is down as living in [Old] Woolwich Road and her father James is still described as a cab proprietor. Tragedy strikes again as married daughter Caroline ( now Potter) dies in 1873 aged 37 in Rochford in Essex. By 1876 it seems that with only James and Emily at home they had moved to 36 Church Street [Point 22], still very much in the same area. It is at this address that James died aged 75 of septicaemia on 28 September 1876. He is still described as a cab proprietor with his son Charles, still working the business.

It has not been possible to find a will or evidence of probate, so it is not clear what happened to the ownership of the cabs and horses. Charles, as will be seen in the second part, described himself as a cabman or cabdriver but it may be just how the terminology changed as most were owner drivers. So did James drive coaches to Manchester? It may have been possible but so far, no direct evidence. With the horse cab business and closeness to horses continuing in the family, it is possible to see why horses were still owned into the 1920s. In a sense James’ death ends a direct link with Devon and the continuation of the agrarian role of horses and workers continuing into the new industrial world, a tradition that would be continued by his son Charles.

Part 2 Horses and workers lives: Cabdriver back to coachman - Charles James Arthur and family

Charles was the last of the family to continue to work with horses; work carried from Devon to London, and taking the story right into the advent of motor and car transport by the time he died in 1911, marking a clear break from rural life. He starts off working for his father as a cab driver and then shifts to domestic service as a coachman, where his father started. How and why did this come about? Did the continued work with horses provide for a family in the industrial age? This section aims to provide some possible answers to these questions whilst providing an insight into the workers survival in the world and a way that barely differed from that of his father.

Charles married Sarah Pilgrim 20 November 1864. Both were living in the parish of St Mary Newington in the Walworth area of South London, then Surrey. Sarah was born in the parish as were her father and siblings. It is not clear if her mother Elizabeth was. Sarah’s father William was variously described as a ‘horse keeper’ and an ‘ostler’. Sarah’s mother had died ten years earlier when Sarah was around 10 years old. In the 1861 census the family were still living in the parish at various addresses and were all within walking distance. Sarah, on her marriage certificate was living in Kings Row [Point 34] which was then still close to fields and in the 1861 census had some larger houses with servants or lodgers. It is quite possible this is where she was working and maybe with some connection to horses. Charles was living at Lorrimore Road [Point 35] in the parish at the time of the marriage and was described as a cab driver. So he had returned to the family trade from being a porter in the 1861 census but not necessarily working for his father at this time. In the 1861 census there was a cabdriver living in his road and in Kings Row, which was close to Lorrimore Road, there was both an omnibus and a cab owner. So through horses, work and geographic proximity, the chance of meeting was there.

Very possible it seems, as within four days of being married their first son, James William Arthur, was born, at 3 Blisset Place in Greenwich [Point 36]. Quite rapidly there followed the first a number of trials that they experienced in their marriage, as James died on 22 December, following ‘convulsions from birth’, perhaps being born prematurely. Possibly, as an indication of the difficult time, is that both the birth and death of James were registered on the same day 24 December and about why they were now living in Greenwich, as Charles was down as a cab driver and might now be working for his father. It doesn’t take much imagination to understand the difficulties of a young family, having to get married and then the first born dying so quickly. In the 1861 census 3 Blisett Place had three families living at the address, the main family having two born in Devon, so maybe a Devon connection in terms of finding lodgings.

By 10 April 1866 and the birth of their second son Charles James Arthur, Charles and Sarah were living at 3 Morden Place Greenwich [Point 37] he was described as a cabman on the birth certificate. By the date of the baptism on 10 June at St Alphege church, the family had moved again to 2 Hatcliffe Street, East Greenwich [Point 17]. This would have been closer to where his father James was living in 10 George Place and so easier to work in the business. Mary, James' wife, Charles’ mother, dies of chronic bronchitis at home in January 1869 and with James now nearly 70, Charles’ input into the cab business becomes even more important. It could also have been that there was more room in the newer houses in Hatcliffe Street and working for his father might have meant more regular and predictable income. By June 1868 and the birth of their first daughter Mary Ann Elizabeth, the family had moved again to 5 Fenton Street [Point 18] she was baptised 4 October 1869 at St Alphege. Charles is described as a cabman. Fenton Street was to remain home for the family for the next 13 years.

Fenton Street is described in the Booth survey written toward the end of the century as a “narrow street with a carriageway from the south end only. 2 st [two storey] cottages on the east side. Costers and labourers”. In the 1871 census other occupations in the street were similar ‘laundresses’, ‘labourer in soap works’, ‘labourer in victualling yard’. The 1881 census was similar with most being ‘general labourers’, ‘dressmaker’ and the new ‘gas engineer’. The street was close to his father’s at 10 George Street. It is possible to see the housing market at work constraining where people lived in towns, having to be close and if possible within walking distance of work yet at the same time being able to afford higher rents in a central urban area, meaning that growing families had to make use of small houses to survive. The six occupied houses in the street seem to have been served by one pump and from the 1850 OS map it seems that there are some buildings opposite number five that may have been stabling.

Charles and Sarah’s third son William Thomas Arthur was born at 5 Fenton Street 6 April 1870 and Charles was described as a ‘cab driver’. Tragedy strikes again and William died 21 July that year at 5 Fenton Street following 10 days of ‘choleraic diarrhoea’. Whilst cholera epidemics were better understood as being waterborne by 1870, there were still outbreaks in port areas like Greenwich. Child death and possible difficult pregnancies seems to have led Sarah to spend time with Charles’ brother Thomas and his wife Agnes across the river in Stepney. Agnes and her father John Kelly were from Dublin and he was a doctor. Thomas and Agnes at this stage did not have children and at the same time her father being a doctor may have enabled family access to medical support. Sarah and the two children Charles and Mary were staying with Thomas and Agnes in Stepney during the 1871 census on 2 April whilst Charles was at 5 Fenton Street clearly unable to leave the horses and the cab driving business. They were there again in January 1872 when Sarah would have been very close to giving birth to their fourth son Alfred, my grandfather. It was during January that Charles their second son, now aged 5, died of ‘spasmodic croup’. Charles, his father was said to be present at the death and was described as a cab driver of 5 Fenton Street, Greenwich.

Charles and Sarah had now lost three of their first four children. Within a month of their son Charles dying Alfred Thomas Arthur was born 5 February back at 5 Fenton Street, Greenwich. Including Alfred and over the next 16 years another eight children were born all living into adulthood except one. On all the certificates Charles is described as a cab driver and until into the 1880s, all were born at 5 Fenton Street. James Arthur, Charles’ father died in September 1876 as already described and was described as a cab proprietor on his death certificate. Charles continues as a cab driver and possibly as a driver proprietor.

In the 1881 census Charles and Sarah and their five children were still at 5 Fenton Street. He is described as a cab driver. Three of the children 12 and under were at school - scholars - and the two youngest at three and one month were at home. Daisy Emily the three year old is not down as having an infirmity on the census but it appears around this time she either contracted an illness or it was identified that she was totally deaf. Greenwich seems well supplied with anglican based ‘national schools’ and following the 1870 Education Act school boards were being set up, although attendance was not compulsory until 1880, so the children were able to benefit from this provision and Charles’ regular cab driving income.

During the 1880s there seems to have been some changes to Charles and Sarah’s life. By early 1883 the family had moved a few streets along to Woodland Street [Point 23]. In Booth’s 1899 survey the housing is coloured grey for ‘poor’ and is described as ‘two storey houses… labouring people, at the south end is a large tenement house, the street turns east and leads a passage leads to three houses facing called ‘Pleasant Cottages’, working people. To the south end the ground drops eight feet, and you look down into the yards of the other houses from the level of their first floor. Probably standing at the edge of an old gravel pit.’ The 1881 census shows that labourers were the main occupation, so very similar to Booth’s findings.

On 10 January 1883 all five of the younger children were baptised at the local anglican Christchurch, Mary Ann their eldest being baptised at St Alphage in 1869. The baptism records continue to provide a useful insight into the changes in the family fortunes. In October 1884 Ernest Herbert was baptised with Charles being still described as a cab driver. Tragically, Ernest Herbert only lived for two years and was struck down with measles and pneumonia 5 May 1887 at 17 Woodland Terrace, their fourth child to die. About this time Eveline Daisy known as ‘Daisy’ who was deaf had been receiving residential support and it appears specialist education through the local board of guardians. In 1888 she was registered at the South Metropolitan School District establishment down the Kent coast at Herne Bay. The following year she was registered at another residential establishment of the same school district at Girls School Banstead, Surrey. In both cases Charles’ address is in the register indicating that she was receiving this education with the support of her family.

By the baptism of their next child Johanna Catherine Ester in December 1885 at Christ Church whilst the family were still living at 17 Woodland Street, Charles was now described as a ‘coachman’. Other later records indicate that this was in domestic service and with a little lucky additional comment in later records, it appears he was working for a local doctor. So becoming a coachman again where possibly his father started, but this time within professional service and not the landed gentry. Charles was now into his forties and cab work at all hours and weathers would possibly have become increasingly demanding. It is not at all clear what the employment relationship was, and as it appears even in the 1920’s Sarah was still ‘looking after the horses’, it is possible that Charles still supplied the horses and possibly a ‘growler’ cab but worked in some way full time for the local doctor. Further evidence of this change of employment came with the registration of the birth of their last child, Lilian Adelaide, born 9 May 1888 at 17 Woodland Street and Charles is described as a coachman with medical practitioners.

By the following year the family had moved to 4 Straightsmouth [Point 26]. The first mention of this comes with the registration of the birth of a son Herbert to Charles and Sarah’s first daughter Mary Ann at 4 Straightmouth. Mary has her occupation stated as a domestic servant and a father is not mentioned on the certificate. In the 1891 census Mary Ann is down as living at 4 Straightsmouth and continues as a domestic servant whilst Herbert, it seems aged one, has been lodged out to a family a few miles away in Sydenham, part of Lewisham. In the 1901 census Mary Ann has married James Dean and is living with her family in the house of her mother-in-law in nearby Deptford, and Herbert now aged 11 is described as a visitor. How he understood his real relationship will probably never be known. The documentary evidence just gives a small indication of the demands on women at the time and how she had to effectively foster her baby so she could continue to work as a servant.

In the 1891 census Charles and Sarah and their surviving seven children are all living at 4 Straightsmouth and Charles is described as a coachman groom. The Booth survey carried out in 1899 describes this part of Straightmouth as being mixed poor to moderately off. The 1891 census reflects this in the occupations with labourer’s, seamen, laundry workers, revitters, gasworkers, teachers, all living close by as neighbours. There is one mention in the Booth survey of a possible entrance to some stables, which may have been where Arthur's horses were kept. This census also marks the full family switch from agrarian origins and earning a living through horses to industrial work as the surviving eldest son (and my grandfather), Alfred, aged 19, is down as a gas worker, an industry he remained in for the rest of his life. Charles and Sarah would be the last Arthur generation to earn their bread with horses.

During the 1890’s the next generation started to marry, have children and continue to interact with the lives of Charles and Sarah. The first to marry was Alfred Thomas Arthur - my grandfather - who married Margaret Elizabeth Warren 17 August 1892. As ever just in time, as their son Alfred Thomas was born just three weeks later 11 September. Interestingly they were married unusually in the local Greenwich registry office and Alfred had stated his age as 21 when he was actually 19, the same age as his wife Margaret. Alfred had Charles, his father’s occupation, down as a painter, he was still a coachman with the local doctors, but may have been doing some extra work with Margaret’s father who is described as a house decorator. Alfred is down as a labourer in the gas works, so still very much now part of a new industry and not horses. All the circumstances, including no family witnesses point to some rush and stress within the family about the marriage. Alfred and Margaret’s second son was born September 1994, this time named Charles James, the same as his grandfather’s so perhaps relations were better. The young Charles James died just over two years later in November 1896 and his mother Margaret then died aged 23 in December 1896. Her death certificate refers to synoptic and rheumatic heart disease, indicating a congenital defect. This tragic situation left Alfred a widow at 24 with a young son aged 4. It doesn’t take much to imagine how important the family was in these circumstances, especially as they all lived closely together. Alfred married Elizabeth Jane Adams aged 18, my grandmother, two years later in 1898, this time in the Maize Hill Independents Chapel, Greenwich, and Charles, his father is described as a coachman and Elizabeth’s as a gas fitter. Elizabeth and Alfred moved to Leigh-on-Sea Essex in the early 1900's, where he worked at the local gasworks.They had 10 children, eight, all boys survived to adulthood and survived service in the 2 WW. Alfred from the first marriage did not go with them and his life is difficult to track. He died tragically in a workplace accident in 1914.

In March 1896 Charles and Sarah's eldest child and daughter Mary Ann Elizabeth, now aged 27 married James George Dean at St Paul's Church in Brixton. Mary was still a domestic servant and George was a Smith and as his father was, possibly worked with him. Mary is down as living in Mayals Road and George in Railton Road, the next street over. Mary describes her father Charles as a coachman. Through the records it is not clear where Mary’s son Herbert, who is mentioned earlier, is although he appears on the 1901 census as being with Mary and George but as a visitor. In the 1911 census it states that Mary had five children, four still alive and one who had died. Their first son George was born in August 1896 and died in June 1900, so this reference in the census is to George. Herbert is not referred to, so it may indicate that the circumstances of his birth and relation to Mary were still not being acknowledged.

Later in 1896, in October Agnes, Charles and Sarah’s third surviving child, now aged 22, married Ernest Frederick Croft aged 25 and was described as an engineer at St Paul’s church in Greenwich. Interestingly, Ernest was living at Railton Road in Brixton, the same road as James Dean. Ernest was also a witness at James and Mary’s wedding. Agnes is down as living at 4 Church Field, Greenwich and not having an occupation so it seems this was now Charles and Sarah’s family home. As can be seen [Point 27], Church Field is connected to Straightsmouth, so the family were living in the same area and possibly using the same stabling for the horses. Charles is described as a coachman. In the 1911 census Agnes and Ernest had three children. They later moved to Essex and the Southend area, where Charles owned a small building firm which was still around in the 1950s.

By the 1901 Census Charles and Sarah had moved with the family that was still at home to 32 Straightsmouth [Point 28], very much in the same area that they had lived in since around 1889 and Charles now 58 is described as a worker employed as a ‘coachman, groom’ and from other records it appears this would still be with the local doctors practice. It would probably mean they were using the same stabling. There were now six at home Charles, Sarah, three daughters and a son. They also had a lodger who was a seaman aged 60. The house was not large so it seems the lodger was to help pay the rent.

Later in 1901 Charles and Sarah’s second youngest daughter Johanna who was still 15, gave birth to a son, who was called Sydney. Johanna gave birth to Sidney at 89 Central Hill Upper Norwood in Croydon on 16 September. This was a Magdalen Home described as a Rescue Society Home home for ‘fallen women’ who usually remained for 12 months, receiving first maternity cases. It had spaces for 40 women aged 14-25. Sydney’s birth was registered at the same address six weeks later so it seems Johanna and Sydney would have both been still there. Johanna having Sydney was the second daughter to have a child before marriage and at first sight it seems was being kept out of the way or at an arms length, as Mary Ann’s son Herbert had been ‘lodged’ out. However by 1906, Sydney was living at Staightsmouth and his uncle, Johanna’s brother, Thomas is down as his guardian when registering aged six at the local Randell Place board school. In the 1911 census aged 8 (he was actually 10) he is acknowledged as Charles and Sarah’s grandson and is living with them at 32 Straightsmouth. His birth is also acknowledged as being at Norwood, so perhaps there was some change in family understanding of the situation young women found experienced? Although again, as with Mary Ann, Sydney’s birth is not acknowledged by Johanna on her 1911 census form. In 1909, Johanna marries a seaman, Frederick Dean Prince, who, in another twist may have been committing bigamy by doing so, they had a family and Johanna lives until 85. Charles, now aged 66, is still described as a coachman. Sydney does not seem to marry and dies aged 68 in 1969, still living in the Lewisham area.

In April 1905, Charles and Sarah’s second daughter Bertha Sara Arthur, now aged 29, married in St Paul’s church Greenwich. Bertha is not down as having a profession but in the 1901 census was down as a domestic servant in Deptford. Bertha married George Edmund Debell who stated his work as a leather dresser, a trade with a wide range of applications and possibly connected to saddlery and harness making. They both enter 32 Straightsmouth, Charles and Sarah’s residence on the certificate and Charles is still described as a coachman. In October 1907, Bertha and George had their first child James. Tragically he dies within a few weeks of being born and Bertha also dies with ‘double pneumonia and exhaustion’ on the 10 December. It appears her husband George, does not marry again. This is the fifth child of Charles and Sarah to die, out of 12 children.

In September 1905, Charles and Sarah’s youngest son Thomas Walter married Thurza Eliza Payne in the Parish church of Bromley. Thomas is now 24 and a qualified fitter and turner having completed his apprenticeship and still living at home, yet again emphasising the end of the line of the family working with horses. Charles is down as a coachman. From the guardianship of his sister’s Johanna’s son Sydney and the 1911 census it is clear that after marriage Thomas and Thurza lived in 33 Straightsmouth which appears to be the opposite side of the street to his parents. Thomas and Thurza had two children and continued to live in the area, Thomas dying in 1951 at Deptford.

In the 1911 census Charles and Sarah are still living at 32 Straightsmouth with one daughter Eveline ‘Daisy’ Arthur who, as has been mentioned, was totally deaf from the age of three and was now 35 years old. Also in the household was Sydney, Joahanna’s son, who is down as their grandson. Charles now 68 is down as a coachman and it has also been added working for a doctor, however it is also mentioned that he was ‘not able to work’. Clearly, Charles’s health was failing and with their eight year old grandson and a daughter who needed support, it does not seem surprising that Thomas, their youngest son and his family were living close by.

In May 1911 Charles died. His death represents a final family break with earning a living through horses which, through his father, links directly back to their rural origins in Devon. Sarah survives and dies in 1927 aged 82. It was with Sarah that this family story started with my father relating to me the details of visiting her with his father Alfred, sometime in the early 1920s describing how small she was and having to go out to ‘look after the horses’. It does seem that the connection to horses was more than just a source of income as they were still being looked after though were not being used to pull coaches, it seems to indicate a close emotional contact, and with such a hard life with her mother dying young and losing 5 of her 12 children, it is easy to imaging a form of continuity and care of understanding that crosses the gap between humans and animals.

I hope that this family tale has a relevance beyond a personal family history providing and insight into the lost world of working with and earning a living from horses. How the skill transferred to and fro between domestic work, driving stagecoaches, running cabs and then back into domestic work for a professional as opposed to the aristocracy. Each change reflected the development of capitalism with changing demands on both workers and horses as transport changes and both industrial and service industries expanded, transforming the economy beyond recognition of its rural roots. This is how these changes affected the lives of two generations of one family stretching over almost 100 years in Greenwich. Moreover, as the story unfolds and information becomes more accessible and readily available, another narrative appears, one that reveals a harshness of workers' lives behind the large one of economic change. Of how two generations of one family struggled on a low income, working long hours, living in cramped conditions and struggling with the early deaths of children and how these circumstances were experienced by women in the family through coping with possible predatory demands on them as young women and the very real threat of death after childbirth.

References:

Maps - 1851 OS map for Greenwich where the earlier streets can be found using the reference points on the following current map - https://maps.nls.uk/view/103313087

Link to Google maps with the marked points referred to in the text: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1j4YDViQu-DkwCd5KFF6Q-LNQafBVe1iO&usp=sharing

Original sources

Parish records - Devon County Records Office, Exeter.

Tithe maps and apportionments - Devon County Records Office, Exeter

Baptism and christening records - Ancestry

Census records - Ancestry

Town directories - Ancestry

Copies of certificates from General Registration Office

Secondary sources

Coaching

The spatial patterns of coaching in England and Wales from 1681 to 1836

Stage-coach and mail in days of yore : a picturesque history of the coaching age