The Loose Watermills - Part I

THE LOOSE WATERMILLS (Part I) By R. J. SPAIN INTKODUCTION THE Loose stream rises in Langley parish some three and a half miles south-south-east of Maidstone, then flows westwards through Boughton quarries to the viUage of Loose. Just downstream from the viUage the stream swings north and continues on that course for two miles until it joins the Medway at TovU. Between the eastern boundary of Loose village and the River Medway thirteen watermiUs once worked. This density of watermUls was one of the greatest in England. I t is for this reason that the valley is extremely rich in industrial archseology. Questions present themselves such as, when did they last work?, what industries did the miUs support?, what evidence do the mill histories give of the growth and dechne of certain industries? These and many other questions have long been unanswered. This paper is an introduction to the valley's industrial history. It may be considered analogous to 'The Len WatermUls' which appeared in Arch. Cant., lxxxn (1967), 32-104. The watermUl sites are examined, in turn, from the stream source, moving downstream toward the River Medway. SUPPOSED MILL AT BBISHING In the Maidstone Museum copy of the Topography of Maidstone and its Environs, is a chapter devoted to the Loose stream in which there is a reference to a watermUl: 'Near the lime lain, it is thought, there was formerly a corn mill; a mill stone, such as used for grinding wheat, having been found here some time since, which is now built into an adjoining wall. The mill bay is supposed to have been swarved up level with the field.'1 Opposite this account is a crude map giving the position of the mill site. From the landscape detaUs given, Slade Pond, Brishing Manor House, Mr. Joy's House, the old quarries, the termination of the stream in a swallow hole and the un-named road crossing this stream, 1 James Phippen, Topography of Maidstone and its Environs, Maidstone, 1839,101. Held in Maidstone Museum. 43 R. J. SPAIN the site of the null can be placed at Ordnance Survey map reference TQ 779515 on the East side of Brishing Lane. A friend of mine, Mr. W. Skinner, Jnr., who has farmed this land for many years, informs me that he does not know of any miUstone cemented into a stone waU in the area. Nor could I find evidence of one but when I questioned Mr. W. Skinner, Snr., he—to my surprise— quickly recalled a stone, which he described as some 12 in. thick, rather square in shape, with a round hole through the centre. He had seen this when he was young in the quarries close by the stream, but it had long since disappeared. He thought that it had been employed with an old type of crane used for loading the stone from the quarry. Alternatively, it could well have been a base-stone for a horse capstan, used for hauling carts of stone. Just such a stone may have been mistaken for a millstone by travellers in the district, ignorant of the ragstone workings close by. It is possible, of course, that a miUstone, or more probably, a domestic quernstone, came to Hght. Such a stone could well have belonged to the 'Roman Building' marked on the Ordnance Survey map only some 200 ft. further upstream from the supposed mill-site. But, even if a miUstone proper had been discovered in this area, it would make Httle difference to the probabihty that a water-mill existed here, for the site is poor. Being so near to the source of the stream, the rate of flow and the volume are smaU and, though rarely dry, barely enough to drive a water-wheel. Of greater significance is the evidence of the existing landscape, for this dictates the height of fall and storage capacity which can in turn render considerable power from an otherwise insignificant stream. At Brishing Lane, the stream is fairly slow and no sharp gradient of the bed, suggesting an ancient fall, is to be found. No earthworks or mill dam remain, nor is the existing road more than two or three feet above the stream. Just upstream from the road on the south bank of the stream there is a regular depression in the surrounding land, some 350 ft. square, which probably explains the reference to the mill-bay being 'swarved up level with the field'. Enquiries confirmed my suspicion that this was an old surface excavation, for Mr. Skinner, Snr., remembers as a boy being told by an old quarry foreman that it was cut a long time ago but quickly abandoned when they found the dip in the strata made the workings Uable to flooding from the stream. Quarrying was continued on the north banlc where they are now entirely free from water and yet some 12 ft. below stream level. Mr. Skinner puts the date of this early excavation at some 150 to 200 years ago. Bearing in mind the physical properties of this site, the credibility of the millstone reference in the light of evidence from Mr. Skinner 44 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I and the absence of an authentic deed or map showing the mill, it is most unlikely that a miU ever stood here. THE MILL BESIDE LEG-O-MUTTON POND Leg-o-Mutton pond, so caUed because of its shape, is a fairly large sheet of water which can be reached by the footpath which runs from Salts Lane, beside Springhead Pond up the valley towards Quarry Wood. It Hes in a well-defined valley and has clearly been man-made, for at its western end, downstream, the water is held by an earthen dam which has been raised across the stream bed. In the centre of the dam, water passes through a semi-circular trash grille and, then, between two dressed stones each bearing the inscription 'WW 1873', testimony to the Wilson famUy ownership when they occupied Upper Mill nearby. Behind the stones, the water drops into a vertical stone-lined shaft, passes under the dam and comes to view some 10 ft. away. Immediately beside this water course, on the south bank close under the dam are the remains of a building which, in the light of the foUowing evidence, was very probably a watermiU. The physical evidence supporting the suggestion that a mill stood here is, by itself, very strong. Clearly, a head of water was created to serve a mill close by. An inspection of the site will reveal that water leaves the pond by two routes, one through the centre of the mill-dam, and the other, via a 4 foot-wide brick-Hned watercourse running towards the site of Upper Mill which stood beside Springhead Pond. This culvert was man-made for it does not follow the true valley, but instead takes a direct Hne contrary to natural drainage. The foundations of ragstone below the dam stand some 6 ft. high beside the water. There is no evidence that the fabric ever supported a mill-wheel nor are there remains of an apron or associated constructions, but this is not surprising when considering that in its later Hfe the mill was converted to three cottages and subsequently reduced to foundations only. Mr. Alan WUson, whose father owned Upper Mill nearby, can remember his father's work-people Hving in these cottages. The cottages were of black weatherboard and he was always of the opinion that the end nearest the pond was constructed for the use of water-power. He recaUs an overhang which was used as a changing room when, as a lad, he swam in Leg-o-Mutton pond. A springboard was mounted on the mill-dam close by and he remembers the water being very deep for he could not touch the bottom when diving in. The faU of water at the dam is some 12 or 15 ft. Mr. Wilson thought that the cottages were of eighteenth-century construction. His father was never able to shed any Hght on their origin. Mr. John L. Short, of Loose, has in his possession an old postcard 45 R. J. SPAIN bearing a photograph of these cottages. The view is taken from upstream looking across the pond and dam. The physical evidence, together with Mr. WUson's evidence therefore suggesting that a mill existed here, is in my opinion, very strong. We are fortunate, however, in having documentary evidence of a simUar indicative nature. WUham Lambarde, writing in 1570, described the Loose stream as driving twelve fuUing-mUls and one corn-mUl.2 The evidence foUowing associated with the Loose watermiUs relates to twelve water-miU sites; the most likely site for the one miU unaccounted for is Leg-o-Mutton pond. Dr. Alfred Shorter has located several old Sun-Fire Insurance Premiums which testify the existence of three paper-mills in the East Farleigh Parish enclave during the late eighteenth century. In 1771, Henry French insured his paper-mill, etc., and two houses adjoining in the parish of East Farleigh in the tenure of Thomas French and WilHam Greenway, papermakers.3 In 1770, Thomas Wright and WilHam GiU, stationers of Abchurch, London, insured their house at East Farleigh in the tenure of John Farley, papermaker, also the Old Paper MiU and the New Paper Mill nearby.4 John Farley, papermaker of East Farleigh, insured his utensils and stock in the New Paper Mill and in the Old Paper MUl.5 In the East Farleigh Churchwardens Accounts,8 the occupiers of the parish enclave are to be found in a separate section called 'Foreigners'. Both John Farley and Henry French occur in the Loose Rate Books and the East Farleigh Churchwardens Accounts under 'Foreigners' throughout this period, showing that their property was partly in each parish. There is no possibHty that one of the mills changed hands to Henry French between the dates of the insurance policies above, because throughout this period, the assessment for their propeities was consistent. The mills, in this region above the Loose viUage, are Gurney's MiU, close to the viaduct, Upper Mill and, subject to this investigation, Leg-o-Mutton. In an 1839 Directory7 the number of watermills then extant is described as being twelve, including one pulled down nearest the Upper Pond. The evidence following associated with Upper Mill 2 William Lambarde, A Perambulation of Kent, Conteining the Description, Hystorie and Oustomes of That Shire, London, 1570, Reprint of the 2nd edition of 1596, 200. 2 Dr. Alfred H. Shorter, Paper Mills and Paper Makers in England, 1495- 1800, Hilversum, 1957, Mill no. 27, SFIP 293987 dated 31st January, 1771. 4 Ibid., SFIP 292237 dated 19th December, 1770. 5 Ibid., SFIP 292238 dated 19th December, 1770. • K.A.O. P142/5/1-4. ' Phippen, op. cit., 86. 46 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I and Gurney's MUl shows that these were in existence at this period, Two ponds exist on the Loose stream above the Springhead tributaiy. the higher, locally called Braddick's pond, does not show evidence of ever having been a miU-pond, so that we are left with the most likely site at Leg-o-Mutton, where the physical evidence is far more conclusive. The following mill histories also show that the Leg-o-Mutton miU, for want of a better name, must have been one of the two paper-miUs which John Farley held in 1770. In that year, the East Farleigh Rate Books8 reveal that he was assessed for two properties, one at £30, and the other at £13. It would seem probable that the mills were separately valued. Tracing through the Rate Books shows that the property having the greater value ultimately reveals itself as Upper MiU, so that we concern ourselves at present with the lower value property. Going back in the Rate Books from 1770 shows that John Farley began working the property sometime between 13th October, 1742, and 3rd April, 1745, prior to which the relevant entry is 'Thomas Foster and Robert Hartridge' at £6. These two names occur back to at least 25th September, 1730, bub prior to that their names do not occur, and it is not possible to trace the relevant assessment. The occupations of Thomas Foster and Robert Hartridge are not known. John Farley held this property until at least 20th January, 1775. The next entry, dated 8th January, 1777, shows William Farley as occupier of the property; on 28th July, 1778, 'WUham Farley or occupier' against £17, then on 22nd April, 1779, Michael Golden. The last entry associated with this person is dated 30th November, 1792, when his name is written as Michael Golding. From 1st May, 1796 to 4th June, 1802, his name is replaced by Thomas Golding. In the next entry dated 12th June, 1804, his name does not appear and the particular property cannot be traced. The Loose Tithe Map and Apportionment made by John Quested in 18379 shows a building marking this site which is caUed in the schedule 'Cottages and Gardens' owned by Messrs. John and Thomas HoUingworth. This agrees with the 1839 James Phippen reference which suggests that the miU had been recently puUed down. The Rate Books suggest that the property was no longer occupied in or about 1804, then probably following a period of dereUotion the old miU was demoHshed and cottages buUt in its place. Why was this null site abandoned? Although the head of water and normal flow were enough for a smaU contemporary wheel, perhaps it could not satisfy the increasing demands of the papermakers. The pond area according to the Tithe schedule was 63,970 square ft., representing quite reasonable storage. 8 K.A.O. P142/6/2. 9 Canterbury Cathedral Library, To. L9. 47 8 R. J. SPAIN The old mUl pond is now very shaUow and only 2-3 ft. deep some 10 ft. from the miU-dam, which, in the light of Alan WUson's diving activities in 1908, proves that the rate of deposition is very high. The western end of the pond at the miU-dam has a brick retaining wall which Mr. Wilson teUs me was always kept clear of weeds with the help of resident swans and is even now very clean. Only in one part have rushes encroached on the edge of the water. At one time the pond was weU stocked with pike, roach, bream, gudgeon and tench, and was let for fishing-rights but now the water is devoid of life. Several large wiUows, very ancient and poUed long ago, skirt the pond, their decayed arms laying in the water. UPPEB MILL The first name that may be related to this property is Daniel PurHs. His name first appears in the East Farleigh Rate Books in the assessment Hst dated March, 1706, under the section entitled 'Outdwellers'.10 The value of the property is given as £5. The last entry of Daniel Purlis occurs in March, 1725. The following year the relevant entry is 'Daniel PurHs his aires' and the value is £12. It is not known whether PurHs was a miller or papermaker, though it is interesting to note that a WiUiam Purlis was at Church Mills in Maidstone later in this century.11 The next name associated with this mill was David Dean. He was occupier of the property in 1730 and possibly earHer, and continued at least until February, 1735. Sometime between 1726 and 1730, the values of aU properties were raised, this particular property increasing from £12 to £20. This person may be the same as the David Dean of Boxley, who is identified as a papermaker by Dr. Alfred Shorte1'. He operated at Sandling Paper MiU from approximately 1700 to 1731-2 and it is, therefore, possible that he moved to Upper Mill and continued papermaking here. Sometime between February, 1735 and March, 1738, Joseph Dean took over as occupier, then in January of the following year Mrs. Dean's name appears as the relevant entry. In 1740, this is replaced by John Farley who continued as occupier at least until December, 1773, when bis name last appears.12 His name was generally entered as Farley, though in the 1747 entry it is spelt as Farleigh. Dr. Alfred Shorter has found several references to Farley as a papermaker. In 1750, John Farley, papermaker, of East Farleigh, insured his paper-miU, drying-lofts and store-rooms adjoining each other in the parishes of East Farleigh and Loose.13 In 1770, Thomas " K.A.O. P142/5/1. "• Arch. Cant., Ixxxii (1967), The Len Water-Mills, 96-7. 12 K.A.O. P142/5/2. 18 Shorter, op. cit., SFIP 124147 dated 28th December, 1750. 48 Lower S0. sbrook |j Crisbrook l&ll, ftC^S y%mm PARISH OF Al DSTONE >XpARlSH OF ^2ckett_rane !' EAST FARLEIGH Lower Tovil Mill Maidstone & Loose valley Eailway 1856 A facsimile from deposited plans in Kent Archives Office (Q Rum 402) endorsed with mill names and extended to show surrounding roads. Land schedules giving owners tenants and use between the Bridge Mill limits 'Of deviation have been .omitted NORTH SCALE 1000ft muttorv urney Court furlon PARISH OF LOOSE Radius Wood lawn Fio. 1. [face p. 49 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I Wright and WilHam GiU, stationers, of Abchurch (London), insured their house at East Farleigh in the tenure of John Farley, papermaker; also, the Old Paper Mill and the New Mill near.14 In the same year, John Farley, papermaker of East Farleigh, insured his utensUs and stock in the New Paper Mill and in the Old Paper Mill.15 One of these mills was Upper Mill. Andrews, Dury and Herbert's map of Kent 1769 shows Upper MiU and Pond very clearly as a circular sheet of water off the main Loose stream. Strangely, the mill is marked close by with an asterisk, a symbol used by contemporary cartographers to represent a waterwheel, and yet they are not employed generally throughout the work, for only one other mill on this stream, Bridge Mill, is marked with this symbol. During this period, John Farley was occupier of two properties, one being valued £35, approximately twice as much as the other, £17. The property having the greater value eventually reveals itself as Upper Mill, though we have no way of knowing whether this was the New or Old Mill of 1770. No change in the value of one property relative to the other occurs prior to this date for many decades, although the words 'New Mill' imply erection. In the Loose Rate Books the name James Whatman occurs for the first time in November, 1774. The January 1775 entry in the East Farleigh Churchwardens Accounts gives 'Mr. Whatman £35' against the property that John Farley occupied.10 At about this time James Whatman was apparently repairing or rebuilding this mill, for his Account Books reveal numerous entries of carpenters' work, glazieri' work, bricks, bundles of laths, aU under the heading 'Loose Mills'.17 The last entry of James Whatman, in the East Farleigh records, is dated 30th November, 1792, and the first entry of the new occupiers is dated May, 1796, and reads 'Thomas H HoUingworth & Co. £35', whereas the Whatman Archives informs us that he sold the mUl in 1794. From 1796 to 1798 the value of the property rose from £35 to £45, as did other property in the list. Messrs. HolHngworth continued in occupation and, in approximately 1817, the relevant Rate Book shows that the property value was added to that of Gurney's Mil, which they had acquired some years previously.^ In 1816, Finch and Thomas HolHngworth were the proprietors of Loose First Mil and Loose Second Mil;19 however, their name does not appear in the Rate Books untU 1820. 14 Ibid., SFIP 292237 dated 19th December, 1770. 16 Ibid., SFIP 292238 dated 19th December, 1770. 10 K.A.O. P142/6/2. 17 Thomas Balston, James Whatman, Father and Son, London, 1957. 18 K.A.O. P142/5/3, P142/12/2. 19 Excise General Letter 8th October, 1816. 49 B. J. SPAIN In a Directory of 1824 is the entry 'HoUingworth JT & J, Loose'.20 The relevant Rate Book entries vary, giving, 'HoUingworth, J. R. Esq.,' (1821, 1825-1842), 'HoUingworth J & R.' (1824), and 'HoUingworth J & H.' (1848). The Loose Tithe Survey of 1837 shows that this property was entered in the schedule as 'mUl pond and part of a mUl' and the owners and occupiers as 'Messrs. HoUingworth, John & Thomas'.21 In an 1839 local history book, in a description of the Loose watermills, this miU is mentioned:22 'The Messrs. HoUingworth have two near Salts . . . the upper one of which (Upper Mill) is used as a washing mill to the lower.' Bagshaw writing in 1847 says: 'Loose MUs—These are two mills . . . in the occupancy of Messrs. Hollongworths'.23 The last entry of Messrs. HolHngworth in the East Farleigh Rate Books is dated 31st May, 1850, and the next entry dated 5th June, 1851, gives for this property 'Wilson Wm'. Wilson's holdings are entered as Part of a MU (£20), House & Buildings (£9.15.0), and Land & Cottages (£7). Later in 1867, the property was described as 'House, MU, Buildings, Garden & Pond' and the value £52. In the Deposited Plans of the Kent Archives Office is a plan of the intended 'Maidstone and Loose VaUey RaUway', dated 1856 (see Fig. 1 ).24 Although the Hmits of deviation of the railway line do not touch the mill itseh0, it does include part of the land close by and the relevant entry in the Book of Reference is 'Corn MU & Meadow', owner or reputed owner 'J & T HolHngworth' and the occupier 'WilHam Wilson'. Various directories of the period testify William Wilson's presence at Upper MUl from 1854 to 1882.25 Mr. Alan WUson, grandson of WilHam Wilson, still Hves near Loose, and he has very kindly given me much information about this mill. Prior to the year 1890, the mill was powered entirely by a single waterwheel operating under cover, some 19 ft. in diameter and 6 ft. wide consisting of steel buckets and cast-iron arms and shaft. The wheel was a combined overshot and breast wheel, receiving water from Springhead Pond (overshot) and Leg-o-Mutton some distance away (breast). Three pairs of stones existed, one pair of French and two pairs of Derby 20 Pigot, Directory of Kent, London, 1824, 327. 81 Canterbury Cathedral Library, To. L9. 22 Phippen, op. cit., 86. 13 Samuel Bagshaw, History, Gazetteer and Directory of the County of Kent, Sheffield, 1847, i, 303. 24 K.A.©. Q/Bum 402, Books of Beference 402A, 402B. 26 James Phippen, New and Enlarged Directory for Maidstone and its Environs, Maidstone, 1850, 80. Munkton, Directory for Maidstone and Neighbouring Villages, 1854. Kelly's Directory of Kent, London, 1859, 609. Kelly's Directory of Kent, Surrey andSussex, London, 1882, 338. 50 THE LOOSE WATEEMILLS: I Peak all 3 ft. 10 in. in diameter and driven by an orthodox gear-train, comprising, cast-iron pit-wheel with wood cogs, engaging a cast-iron waUower, main spur and equi-spaced stone nuts. Normal anciUary equipment was driven from a bevel gear on the main vertical shaft between the waUower and main spur, and a cast-iron crown wheel atop the vertical shaft drove the sack hoist. There were six grain bins including one for barley. Two pairs of stones could be worked at one time by the wheel. WiUiam WUson was, in his youth, apprenticed to a millwright, so he did aU his own repairs and taught his foreman and others so that they did not have to employ outside miUwrights. A miUstone dresser, called Hancock, came once or twice a year, bringing his own miU bits with him, which he sharpened on the mill grindstone upstairs. "Mx. Alan Wilson cannot recall the wheel ever being changed or having major repairs. In this period, when the mUl was water-powered, the staff consisted of three people, two who remained working the mill while the third went out with the horse-drawn van. In the Barcham Green MSS.26 there is an essay on this mill by Mr. Alan Wilson, which reads: '. . . but by the year 1890, times and processes had changed and in that year a new mill was built alongside the old equipped with Simon Roller Mills having a capacity of 21 sacks of flour per hour. This was powered by a 12hp beam engine built by Smith of Carshalton and working at a steam pressure of 601bs per square inch a most wondrous contraption and most reliable.' (This was the second roller mill installed in the district, following the machine put in by Taylor's at Maidstone.) 'The power of the two mills could be coupled or run independently, but they were normally coupled because of essential equipment still in use daily in the old mill.' With the increased output from the roller mills, the transport was increased to two pair horse-vans, two single horse-vans and a twowheeled dog-cart for the traveller. Four shire horses and a cob for the dog-cart were kept in the meadow close by the mill. The pair horsevans were used to fetch wheat from the farmers and from Maidstone, where foreign wheat was loaded to mix with the English. Single and pair horse-vans delivered flour to the many bakers in the area including their own, at West MalHng. A considerable amount of animal feedstuff-grinding was done by the barley stones, which ground oats, beans and peas as weU as barley. There was a Turner of Ipswich crusher and Idbbler installed, a machine ,0 J. Barcham Green MSS., File I-J. Hayle Mill Maidstone. 51 E. J. SPAIN which several farmers owned. Some people walked to the miU for pig food, etc. Every eight or nine months the rat-catcher would come to the mill with his two-wheeled dog-cart and five or six dogs. His wife would always be with him and help in placing and working the ferrets and dogs throughout the mUl. When they finished their work, they would report to Mr. WUson's father who would pay them according to the number of rats' tails presented to him. The working day at the mill was normaUy 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., although some evening work was done when work warranted it. When the load was taken off the ponds the volume would lessen in the afternoon but there was always enough for the stone work. Mr. Alan Wilson says, 'I have never known or heard of any shortage of water for any reason whatsoever, the volume of spring water entering Springhead Pond has, as far back as I can remember, been most consistent, as it is today', and M. Wilson can remember distinctly the great frost of 1895 when all Loose viUage took to skating on the millponds of the vaUey. Even in the most severe weather Springhead was never frozen over because of the continuous flow, but care had to be taken when the wheel was stopped that no leaks occurred at the penstock. Mr. Wilson could not remember the ponds being cleaned for there were always swans which did this task. Springhead was renowned for trout in those days. Mr. Alan Wilson started work at the mUl, when he was 18, in 1908. In that same year, due to heavy transport costs and competition from the big flour-mills in the large towns and ports, Upper Mill was declared uneconomic and was closed down. Shortly afterwards the wheel and machinery were removed and the mill left derehct for some time. The mUl-chimney was removed in the Great War by German prisonersof- war, for fear it would be used by the enemy as a landmark. Mr. Alan WUson has in his possession the printed sale particulars prepared for the auction of Upper MU property and Gurneys MU property, held on 16th July, 1908. Upper MU was described as a brick and timber-built and tiled flour-mill comprising three floors, power being provided by a 12 hp. steam-engine and a 19 ft. breast and overshot waterwheel. Machinery included a 2-sack roller plant, 4-stone plant and a wheat-cleaning machine. Mr. Ronald Haynes of Loose, who lives close by the site, has in his garden one of the Peak stones which belonged to the mill. It serves as a sundial base, is some four inches thick and still has the neck-box and cover-plate bolted in place. He also possesses a 14 lb. stone-weight with leaded eye-bolt which now serves as a garden gate-stop. There is a photograph ofthis mill taken about 1903 in the Gazette of 11th September, 1962. 62 THE LOOSE WATEBMILLS: I There is a footpath which leaves Salts Lane, crosses the miU-dam of Upper Mil and then runs beside the watercourse between Leg-omutton and Springhead. A walk along it shows that the watercourse which took the water from Leg-o-mutton to the wheel at Upper MUl is brick Hned on the sides and bottom. Fig. 2 is the layout of the watercourses which once served the miU. When the wheel was in use gate B would be closed and penstocks A and C regulated so that the pond levels were maintained at a predetermined height. A liKsimile of a plan showing Gurney's Mill and Upper Mill from sale particulars printed in 1908 Millboard 1 a - mr N / \ o. upper Mill i Sea c #>» 100 200 300ft Y Hs71 FIG. 2. Upper Mil pond is now empty and completely covered with water weeds. The spring water which runs through, passes out at C which has no controlHng boards, and runs down through the remains of gate B to the old waste channel. No water takes the course which once served the wheel, and it is very difficult to find the present position of gate D. Where the wheel once stood is now a private garden, but with the kind permission of the owner, I was able to view the fabric remains. Nothing is left of the wheel or any ironwork associated with it. 53 E. J. SPAIN High in the Loose vaUey there was an enclave of East Farleigh parish, which, since 1887, was included in the civil parish of Loose. Its northern boundary foUowed the Loose stream for a considerable distance downstream as far as the bottom of old Loose HUl, where the stream at one time flowed across the road close by the Chequers. It is most interesting to note that this parish boundary skirts the Southern edge of Leg-o-mutton and foUows the man-made watercourse to Upper MUl. As parishes have been clearly defined for several centuries, the impHcation is that the watercourse, Upper MUl, which it served, and Leg-o-mutton have aU been estabHshed for a long time. There is a possibUity that parish boundaries may have been iU-defined when the churches were estabHshed in Anglo-Saxon times, so that at a later date, when boundary-stones were instaUed and regular surveys made, the boundary may have been inadvertently moved from a more permanent topographical feature to follow the man-made watercourse to Upper MiU. It is doubtful that Leg-o-mutton was created solely to serve Upper MU for, although the communicating watercourse represented no great labour, even by olden standards, Springhead Pond which serves Upper MU has always received approximately twice the amount of water that Leg-o-mutton received, more than enough to power an early water-wheel. Furthermore, the transport of water to Upper Mil represents a loss of potential by virtue of the reduction in head of water, for at Upper MU it served a breast appHcation, whereas at Leg-omutton miU-dam it gave some 12-15 ft. drop and enough volume to serve a contemporary overshot wheel. The watercourse from Leg-o-mutton to Upper MU must surely have been made at a time when both properties had common owners, for no mUl-owner would have allowed the water from his pond to power another miU, prior to the waste water being taken off. It seems very Hkely that the present watercourse was constructed sometime after Leg-o-mutton MUl ceased working, which was approximately between 1800 and 1835. GuBNEr's MILL The first name that can be associated with reasonable certainty to this property is Walter Joanes, whose name appears in the East Farleigh Rate Books from 1647, when he was assessed at £4, to 31st May, 1678, when the entry is written 'Thos. Walter Joanes @ £4',27 The name of Thomas Joanes is then given up to June 1684, when it last occurs. In the Hst dated 26th July, 1685, the relevant name is 27 K.A.O. P142/5/1. 54 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I Henry Maplesden and the value of the property £4. The Canterbury Marriage Licences28 recorded a Henry Mapilsden, fuUer, of Maidstone, taking part in a marriage on 19th May, 1684. It is very likely that he was the same person as recorded in the Rate Books, and suggesting that the miU was fulhng in this period. The last entry of Henry Maplesden is dated 10th July, 1687. The next Hst dated 2nd June, 1689, gives the relevant name as WilHam Harris against a property value of £4. The first entry of his name in the Loose Rate Books also occurs in 1689. Dr. Alfred Shorter informs us that he was one of the 'ancient papermakers' who petitioned against the Parhament BiU concerning the Company of White Papermakers. 20 Apparently, this mUl was converted from fuUing to papermaking in approximately 1687-1689. WilHam Harris last appears in the Loose Rate Books against this property in 1727, although in the East Farleigh Rate Books his name is absent from the 'OutdweUers' Hst (outlying districts and the parish enclave) as early as 20th January, 1726.30 It is interesting to note that shortly foUowing the occupation of this miU by WiUiam Harris, the first recorded papermaker, the value of the property was raised, in approximately 1692, from £4 to £7, which by 1700 was £12, all other rates remaining about the same. In 1728, the name WiUiam Quelch appears for the first time in the Loose Rate Books against the property. In 1741, he was recorded as a papermaker of Loose when he insured his house, papermiU, stock, etc.31 During this period, the mill was valued at £20. In 1743, he took an apprentice named Abraham Musgrove.32 In 1746, WiUiam Quelch, junior, papermaker of Dartford, insured his house in Loose in the tenure of Stephen Scott, papermaker, and his papermiU near the house.33 In 1747, the name of M. Scott appears for the first time as occupier of this property in both the Loose and East Farleigh Rate Books against a value of £20. The name of Stephen Scott continues until the list dated 1750, then, in 1751, his name is replaced by Abraham Musgrove, the former apprentice of WiUiam Quelch. In 1753, Musgrove insured his papermiU.34 The last entry of his name in the Loose and East Farleigh Rate Books is dated 1758. The next year the relevant entry is Abraham HiUyer, then, in 1760, he is replaced by Henry French. In that same year, Henry French, papermaker of Loose, insured his papermiU.35 28 Canterbury Marriage Licences, iv, col. 379. 20 H.M.C. Rep. xlll, App., Pt. VH of L. MSS. 272, 16th May, 1690. 30 K.A.O. P142/6/2. 81 Shorter, op. cit., SFIP 87455 20th April, 1741. 32 Apprentices of Great Britain, 17/19, 1743. 33 Shorter, op. cit,, SFIP 104723 27th Maroh, 1746. 81 Ibid., SFIP 135111 31st Maroh, 1763. 36 Ibid., SFIP 176721 10th July, 1760. 55 R. J. SPAIN There is in existence a map dated 1761 showing the lands of WilHam Post in Loose, surveyed weU before the new Maidstone-Linton road was taken over Salts Lane by viaduct36 (see Fig. 3). It shows a tan-yard in a position extremely close to the position of this miU-site. Both the miU and the stream in this area are absent, suggesting that both may have been omitted to give clarity to the tan-yard pits. In 1771, Henry French insured his paper-miU, etc., and two houses adjoining in the parish of East Farleigh in the tenure of Thomas French and WiUiam Greenaway papermakers.37 In 1775, Henry French died, and on his tombstone he is described as a papermaker. The relevant entry in the Rate Books is Thomas French from 1776 to 1795 when his death is recorded in Loose Parish Register. In the East Farleigh Rate Books the assessment dated 28th July, 1778, gives the relevant entry 'Thos. & John French', though it does not occur again.38 In 1796, the name of Widow French is entered in the Loose Rate Book whereas in the East Farleigh Rates it is Messrs. French at £20. The 1797 Loose entry has the name Richard Peale & Co. In 1798 and 1799, the East Farleigh records give the relevant entry as Messrs. Taylor and Edmeads and, in pencil close under, 'M RusseU & Edmeads' .3D The 1802 4th June entry is Messrs. RusseU & Edmeads at £25 and in 1804 13th June Messrs. Edmeads & Co. In 1799, RusseU & Edmeads were master papermakers.40 The Loose Rate Books have the relevant entry between 1799 and 1802 as Russell & Co. By 1805, the relevant entry in the Loose Books is WiUiam Edmeads & Co., whereas in the East Farleigh records it is Messrs. Edmeads & Co. This firm continued at the mUl until at least the assessment made on the 27th July, 1814, in the East Farleigh Overseers Accounts,41 and 29th April, 1812, in the East Farleigh Churchwardens Accounts.42 The former records have two assessments per year so it is probable that the 1814 date is the most accurate. However, WUliam and John Edmeads, papermakers of Loose, were bankrupt in 1813.43 In Maidstone Museum, there is a map of Loose Village dated 1808, which is reproduced in Fig. 4. The map shows the Loose stream between Salts and the west half of the village. Upstream from the Loose to Maidstone road four ponds or enlargements of the stream are shown. Their relationship to each other and their general form agree with the 3° K.A.O. TJ106 P2. 3' Shorter, op. cit., SFIP 293987 31st January, 1771. 88 K.A.O. P142/12/2. 39 K.A.O. P142/5/2. 40 General Meeting of Master Paper Makers 26th June, 1799. Papers from Springfield Mill, Maidstone. « K.A.O. P142/12/3. « K.A.O. P142/5/2. 43 London Gazette, 12th January, 1813. 56 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I THOS. CRIPSS THE MILL es BROOK VICARAGE FIELD TAN YARD o ® MR. GEO. POST'S MR. WM. PIENES TAN YARD EXTRACT FROM A MAP OF THE LANDS OF WM POST IN LOOSE BY JOHN BOWRA 1761 KAO. UI06. P2 Fia. 3. 57 R. J. SPAIN w in woad UI U] \ . \ * ORCHARD PIECE _FOOT WAY Fgfth) S«3NNI>IS ^P I 58 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I title of being a sketch, and very crude at that, for they cannot be reconciled with the ponds and waterways with which we are now famiHar. However, aUowing that the draughtsmanship is crude and probably in error, the pond nearest the viUage is marked clearly 'Mr. Edmeads' and the next upstream 'Mr. HolHngworth'. On this •notation, I have placed some rehance, which I hope is not iU-founded in the light of the map's other failings, for it is the only evidence showing which of the mUls in this region were occupied by Edmeads, prior to the HolHngworths occupation of aUthe mUls on the stream above the village, and their recording in the Rate Books as one lump sum. From 1814-1815 until 1850 the HoUingworth family took over the property.44 They are recorded up to 1819 as Messrs. HoUingworth, HolHngworth Finch Thomas in 1820, HolHngworth J & T from 1821 to 1845, and HolHngworth J & H in 1848. The earhest East Farleigh assessment with a property schedule is dated 31st October, 1832,45 when this property was described as 'Houses & Paper Mills'. The Loose Tithe map of 183746 and schedule show that this mill was occupied and owned by Messrs. John and Thomas HolHngworth. The mill pond is given as an area of 2R 37P or 31,870 sq. ft. In 1839, it was written of the Loose Mils, 'The Messrs. HolHngworths have two near Salts . . . the upper one Of which is used as a washing mill to the lower'.47 Pigots Directory of 1840 Hsts among Loose papermakers, HolHngworth JT & J.48 Bagshaw, writing in 1847 says of the Loose mills, 'These are two mills with a small hamlet partly in East Farleigh Parish; the mUls are in the occupancy of Messrs. HolHngworths'.49 In the East Farleigh Rate Books assessment, dated 5th June, 1851, occurs the first entry of 'Gurney & Son. MiU'. rated at £47.10.0 together with a cottage and land valued at £10. Later in 1863, the name Henry Gurney appears against a property value of £45 for the mill, land and cottages. The 22nd April, 1867, entry reveals that four cottages were then included. The last entry made in the East Farleigh Rate Books, dated 14th April, 1887, includes the name of Henry Gurney. KeUy's 1859 Directory gives Henry Gurney as millboard manufacturer. 50 The Maidstone and Loose Valley Railway map of 1856 shows this mill, which is indicated as a paper-null, in some detail (see Kg. 1). The buUdings shown and the waterways are very similar 14 East Farleigh Churchwardens Accounts, Loose Poor Books and Churchwardens Accounts. " K.A.O. P142/5/3. 10 Canterbury Cathedral Library, To. L9. 47 Phippen 1839, op. cit., 86. 48 Pigot, Directory of Kent, London, 1840, 327. 40 Bagshaw, op. cit., i, 65. 60 Kelly's 1859, op. cit., 609. 59 R. J. SPAIN to the Tithe Map of Loose. The intended railway is shown crossing the Maidstone-Linton viaduct at exactly the same point as it crosses Salts Lane, then passes across the millpond. The schedule gives Henry Gurney as occupier and Thomas HolHngworth as owner or reputed owner. Kelly's 1895 Directory gives Henry Gurney & Son as occupying • this mUl. The 1909 Six Inch Ordnance Survey map calls this mill 'Loose Mill'. When this miU was sold by auction in 190851 the sale particulars described the property as a freehold miUboard mill comprising boilerhouse, engine-house, saUe, carpenter's shop, beating-room, rollingroom, drying-loft, and press-room. Auxiliary power was provided by a 14 ft. diameter overshot water-wheel and a beating-engine. In the Barcham Green MSS. is a letter which says:62 'I cannot remember the exact year but I know that it was ten years after the sudden closure that I and a cousin broke into the mill through a window. Everything was just as it was left, even down to the pennies on the office desk, correspondence littered about, pens still in ink pots and quantities of account books on the shelves. In one part of the mill there was on old apron hanging on a peg. The beaters were still full of pulp and big expensive hydraulic presses (put in just before the closure) had boards still in them but the presses were all rusted up. In the middle of the mill, presumably set the necessary height, was a church organ, complete, but as the leather of the bellows was perished we were unable to get a squeak out of the organ. The father of the three brothers . . . had also been a maker and repairer of organs and watchmaker and repairer. Gurney's Mill at the time of the shut-down, was specialising in the manufacture of a new roof covering which was in fact millboard reinforced in the middle with a thin steel wire.' The property was finally bought by Laurence Green for the sake of the mill-house and the dereHct miU demoHshed. Mr. Alan Wilson can remember visiting this mill when he was young, during the summer hoHdays, to earn money by mending the boardmoulds with copper-wire and solder. The mill, at one time, used to make very fine boards from various materials, including rags and old coal-sacks, which were sent through a powerful chopping machine normaUy run off the waterwheel. The noisy chopper was often run at night preparing material for processing the following day, which would then be run into agitated vats. Thereafter, the process was very similar to papermaking, the stock being formed into sheets by hand- 61 Alan Wilson MSS. " J. Barcham Green MSS., File I-L, letter dated September 1962. 60 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I dipped oak moulds, the sheets were then inspected and foreign objects picked out, then pressed and dried either in a coke-fired kiln, or, in good weather, the boards would be taken by wheel-barrows to a nearby meadow and laid out in the sunlight. Mr. Wilson recalls on occasions that a tremendous number of boards would be in the meadow, the few black boards producing a chequerboard effect among the more numerous brown boards. Also serving the mill was a horizontal steam-engine and a single-fired cornish boiler. The waterwheel was an all metal, overshot approximately 15 ft. in diameter by 9 ft. wide, which operated under cover. Sometime about 1910, the miU went over to manufacturing patented roofing boards, which comprised of woven wire between two miUboards which were then roUed and impregnanted with hot linseed oil. The venture was not a success and the two brothers who worked the miU, Joe and Archie Gurney, closed the miU two or three years later. This mill was owned by Mr. Wilson at Upper MiU, to whom the Gurneys paid rent. When Upper Mill stopped working, the Gurneys bought their mill about the time they went over to the manufacture of roofing-boards. The remains ofthis mill can be seen beside Salts Lane. A far better view is obtained from the parapet of the road bridge almost directly above. From here, all the waterways among the ruins are apparent and the waterfall marking the wheel position is clearly seen. LOOSE VILLAGE MILL The manor of Loose was given by King Ethelwolf to a widow named Sveta and her daughter about the year 832, who then made a donation of it to the monks of the Priory of Christ Church, Canterbury.53 Loose is not mentioned separately in the Domesday Survey as it formed part of the possessions of the Priory of Christ Church and was adjoined to East Farleigh. The manor remained with the Priory until its dissolution in 1539 when it passed to King Henry VIII who, a few years later, passed it to his newly elected Dean and Chapter of Canterbury. At that time, it is very probable that a water corn-mill existed in approximately the same position as the modern mill, for the site is excellent. At this point, just north-west of the present viUage, the vaUey bottom is very steep and Httle labour would have been required to create a miU-pond. Here the stream takes a sharp turn contrary to its general direction, drops beside the mill, then continues straight for a short distance before again turning back on to its original course. All evidence suggests that this deflection has existed for several centuries; indeed, it is difficult to imagine the stream taking a straight course 63 Dugdale, Monasticon, London, 1623, i, 29. 61 R. J. SPAIN down the vaUey for the terrain and building in this area have been well exploited for the present arrangement, and the alternative route would have been of Httle value for the erection of a breast-wheel or an overshot wheel. The creation and enlargement of the miU-pond, no doubt, went hand in hand with the improvement of the waterfall and mill-site—how else could the causeway with the footpath on top, which separates the mill-stream from the pond, have been created? The single corn-mUl about which WilHam Lambarde wrote in 1570 was very probably Loose ViUage MiU.54 The Canterbury Marriage Licences mentions one miller of Loose parish, John Nicholson, recorded as testificator on 24th July, 1632.55 It seems very Hkely that he worked this miU or the windmill that once stood close by WeU Street in Loose. Fig. 3 shows the map drawn by John Bowra in 1761, of lands owned by WilHam Post in Loose.56 The village mill shows clearly as a threefloor buUding by the bend in the stream on the north side of the village. The mUl-pond was the same as it is today, separated from the stream by a causeway with a footpath. The first entry occurring in the Loose Poor Books which is attributable to this property is dated 1757 and reads, 'Robert Wilson £5'.57 SimUar entries continue at least until 1779, the value of the property rising from £5 in 1768 to £15 in 1771. In the assessment dated May, 1781, the relevant entry is 'Widow WUson £15'. The following year the entry is again 'Robert WUson', probably the son of the former occupier. Robert Wilson's name continues to be given beside tbis property until 1794-1795 when the value had reached £21.B8 In June, 1796, the entry reads, 'Robert & WUham Wilson £21', and the December assessment of the same year gives the relevant entry as 'Messrs. Wilson £45'. A comparison with the earHer assessment reveals that there had been a general increase on aU property values. The entries dated 28th June, 1797, and 1798 both give 'Messrs. Wilson Corn MUl & Land'. The foUowing year the relevant entry is 'WUson, WilHam & Robert, MUl & Land £45', and then, in 1802, this becomes 'Wilson WiUiam & Co. £45', which continues to at least June 1807.59 Members of the Wilson family continued to work this mill in the early part of the nineteenth century. The Robert WUson of the Rate Books is probably the same man who is recorded as attending the Court of Burghmote on 8th July, 1749, to terminate his apprenticeship:60 54 Lambarde, op. cit. 66 Canterbury Marriage Licences, ii, col. 1048. " K.A.O. UI06 P2. " Loose Poor Book 1755-1783. 68 Ibid., 1783-1800. 60 Loose Churchwardens Accounts, 1790-1812. 80 Clement Taylor Smythe MSS., Maidstone Museum, Court of Burghmote, 1732-1795, 72. 62 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I 'At this Court also came Robert Wilson Miller Eldest Son of William Wilson of this Town Gingerbreadbaker a Freeman of this Corporation and desired to be made free by his Fathers Copy according to the Custom . . .' Hasted, writing in 1798, said that the mills in the parish of Loose are for the manufacture of paper, grinding of corn, and fulling.61 Doubtless, the viUage miU continued as a flour-miU through the centuries. There is an indenture in the Kent Archives Ofiice, dated 9th December, 1809, between the Dean and Chapter of the Cathedral and Metropohtical Church of Christ Canterbury and Edward Penfold of Loose concerning three miUs, including one corn-miU caUed Loose Mill.6* Among the deposited plans in the Kent Archives Ofiice there is a map of Loose Hill and Village showing the proposed alteration of the Maidstone and Cranbrook TurnpUce, surveyed by H. R. Palmer in 1820.°3 Two alternative routes for the turnpike are shown, one being the adopted Maidstone-Linton road as it is at present, and the other a wide detour to the west of Loose HiU which would have passed directly beside the east face of the mill, which on the map is marked as a corn-mill (Plate I). There is in existence a copy of the particulars of sale of the estates of Messrs. Penfold, bankers of Maidstone.64 The auction was held on the 29th October, 1816, and included Loose Court Manor and Estate together with 'The Houses and Premises and Water Corn Mill in Loose; and Cresbrook and Maidstone Water Mills'. The sale particulars include: 'THE LOOSE COURT ALLOTMENT consists of The House and Water Corn Mill in Loose, in the Occupation of Robert Wilson and Son, at the Annual Rent of. . . £100.0.0.' In the Loose Highway Book, deposited at Maidstone Museum, there is an entry dated 26th April, 1834, which reads: 'Smith, Loose Hill 6 days repairing roads from Cripple St to Wilsons Mill. £0-10-0.' The Loose Tithe Map of 1837 gives the mill-pond as having an area of 26,140 sq. ft.05 The property is marked 'Corn MiU' and the related 01 Edward Hasted, The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent, London, 1798, 2nd Edn., iv, 569, addition to volume iv, first edition, 361. " K.A.O. U36 T1645. 03 K.A.O. Q/Rum 69. 04 In the possession of Mr. W. Skinner Jr., Brishing Court, Boughton Monohelsea. 05 Canterbury Cathedral Library, To. L9. 63 9 R. J. SPAIN schedule gives the owners as the Dean and Chapter of Canterbury and the lessee as Edward Penfold and occupier John Wilson. The miU-pond was owned by Samuel Peene. In a local history book, dated 1839, it says of the Loose MUls:66 'The Dean and Chapter of Canterbury have three, which are flour mills, one at Loose occupied by Messrs. Wilson. . .' Samuel Bagshaw's Directory of 1847 mentions only one corn-miller at Loose, 'Wilson Wm. Corn MUler. Loose HiU.'67 From the evidence at hand concerning the other miUs of this valley, it seems Hkely that WiUiam WUson, miUer, continued working this mill to at least 1859.68 This mill was probably worked by a man named Grayland about this period, the single reference to his occupation being in the Gazette of 1864, which reported the sudden disappearance of an 18-year-old duck, a great favourite of the viUagers, 'from the mill pond next above Mr. Graylands MiU.' There are in existence several documents relating to Loose VUlage MUl which are in the possession of Tom Hartridge of Loose. Mr. Hartridge kindly aUowed me to make the following extracts. Included in the documents is an 'Abstract of the title of the trustee under the wiU of the late James Hackett Hodsoll.' to a mill and land at Loose. The first indenture referring to the mill is dated 8th August, 1860, and was made between the Dean and Chapter of Christ Church, Canterbury, and James Hackett Hodsoll of Loose Court and includes 'Said Dean and Chapter for the cousons. therein mentioned did demise let & farm unto sd party thereto . . . All that their Manor of Loose . . . comprised in an allotment made to the said Dean and Chapter under an Act of Pt. passed in the 54th year of the reign of his Majesty King George the 3rd instituted an Act for enclosing Coxheath in the Parishes of Boughton Winchelsea (?) Loose Linton East Farleigh and Hunton in the Co. of Kent. One Corn MUl caUed Loose Mill and the MUls of Sd. Dean and Chapter in Loose and Maidstone in the said County caUed Cusbrook Mils . . .'. James HodsoU paid £10,650 into the account of the Church Estate Commissioners for this Manor. It gives the area of the miU and premises as lr. 34p. or 11,162 sq. ft. Shortly after this, the manor passed to the Rt. Hon. Charles John Lord Teignmouth and the Rt. Hon. Rowland Viscount HiU for £15,000; then, in 1875, it passed to J. Fletcher and H. G. Fletcher. In February, 1878, it was conveyed to John Fawcett, then, in October, 1888, his son acting as mortgagee conveyed it to Charles Maxfield HodsoU of 08 Phippen 1839, op. cit., 86. 67 Bagshaw, op. cit., 303. 08 KeUy's 1859, op. cit., 609. 64 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I Loose Court. I t is amusing to note that James Hodsoll built an ornamental water-wheel with brass fittings in his grounds about this date.69 A separate conveyance in the possession of Mr. Hartridge, dated 29th October, 1888, from James H. Hodsoll to Edward James Antrum, mUler, includes: 'Water Corn MiU known as Loose Mill also in the occupation of said E. J. Antrum.' In the Post Ofiice Directory of 1874, it gives under 'MiUers', 'Antrum, Edward James, Loose Mill, Loose.'70 His name also appears in the 1878 edition71 and in Kelly's 1882 Directory.™ In Kent Archives there are documents and a map dated 1882 related to the sale of certain property including this mill.73 The mill was included in Lot 3 and described as a corn-miU with four floors known as Loose MUl having a 10 ft. overshot water-wheel with two pairs of stones let to Mr. Antrum at a rental of £70 yearly. In a schedule of land and property, Loose Mill and Stream was given as 13 perches, approximately 3,540 sq. ft. or sUghtly less than one-tenth of an acre. Mr. Hartridge also has sale particulars related to this mill. I t was advertised for auction on 30th May, 1912, by order of the mortgagees of Mr. E. J. Antrum. The mill, which formed part of a fruit-growing estate called 'Little Ivy', was described as: 'Loose Mill . . . stone built and tiled corn mill. There is also a water power corn mill adjoining of Four Floors with 10 ft. overshot water wheel, driving three pairs of stones. A range of stone and timber built stabling for three horses, two van sheds and cob stable.' A further sale-leaflet said that the mill was for many years occupied by the late Mr. Antrum. It was to be sold by a further auction on Thursday, 17th July, 1913. During Christmas, 1916, Charles Igglesden was walking through the village and wrote:74 '. . . away in the distance we hear the thunderous sound of falling water as it tumbles into the mill head and turns the wheel on its way . . .' 69 Charles Igglesden, A Saunter Through Kent with Pen and Pencil, Ashford, ix, 46. 70 Kelly's, Post Office Directory of the Six Home Counties, London, 1874, ii, Kent and Sussex, 1772. 71 Kelly's, Post Office Directory of the Six Home Counties, London, 1878, 1514. 72 Kelly's 1882, op. cit., 338. 73 K.A.O. IT24 T71, T72. 74 Igglesden, op. cit., ix, 42. 65 R. J. SPAIN I t is not known when the mill and wheel were removed. Where the mill-pond passes under the footpath causeway to join the stream beside the cottages, there is a miUstone bridging the tunnel on the pond side. Its projecting Hp reveals that it was a barley-stone, some 40 in. in diameter and worn thin to some 2 | in. thick. The furrows may be clearly felt by hand on the underside. The stone probably came from the viUage mill only a short distance away and, by virtue of its unusual position, is probably very old. LITTLE IVY MILL The earhest entry in the Loose Poor Books attributable to this mill is dated 1653 and reads 'Widow Cheeseman £20'.75 In 1655, the entry changes to 'John Cheeseman £19', which continues up to 1659. The next year 'John Cheeseman' is replaced by 'Stephen Cheeseman', whose name continues beside the property up to 1671. The next assessment, dated June, 1672, reads 'Hieres of Stephen Cheesemen' which, in the following year, becomes 'Widow Cheeseman'. The value during her occupation was reduced to £10. She apparently continued as occupier up to 1681.76 The following year the relevant entry is William Cheeseman £7, and similar entries occur up to 1683-1684. The assessment made in May, 1685, gives Widow Cheeseman at £10. A later assessment in that year shows that Joseph Tuppeny replaced Widow Cheeseman as occupier of this property. Tuppeny was assessed on properties valued at £10, £9 and £3, but it is not clear which of these was the mUl, although the next year, 1686, only two values are given against his name, £9 and £3. Similar entries continue until 1691; however, the next year, properties valued £7, £3 and £3 are givenfor Joseph Tuppeny. On 25th July, 1695, Joseph Tuppeny miller of Loose, was a Bondsman at a wedding.77 He continued as occupier of this miU at least until May, 1741,78 when the Hst included the entries: 'Jos. Tuppeny Miller £7 D° Mill £3 D° ye Comb field £2' In the following assessment, dated 1742, his name is replaced by Nicholas Durrant who continued as occupier up to 1754. The foUowing year the entry becomes Widow Durrant,79 the values of the property remaining the same except for £2 which was sometimes included and 76 Loose Poor Book 1650-1678. '"'Ibid., 1678-1694. 77 Canterbury Marriage Licences, iv, col. 610. '" Loose Poor Books 1694-1728, 1728-1754. 70 Ibid., 1755-1783. 66 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I sometimes omitted. The August, 1757 Hst reads, 'Widd. Durrant for the MiU £11' and similar entries are found up to 1763. In 1764, 'Luke EHot' replaces 'Widow Durrant', which, in 1768, becomes 'Wid. Elhott'. Similar entries continue until the first assessment in 1771. The second assessment of that year, made in December, gives Robert EUiott, and the value as £24. All property values were increased in this year. Robert ElHott continued to be assessed for this property up to the first assessment made in 1780. In December, 1780, Thomas Geere replaces the name of Robert EUiott, and the value is given as £32.10.0 which probably included several properties.80 His name continues against the property for many years until June, 1807, when it becomes 'Geere Widow'. The next year, it is replaced by the entry 'Edmaids Wm. & Co., D° late Geere £30'. The following year all values were substantiaUy increased, this one changing from £30 to £55. The last entry of 'Edmeads Wm. & Co.' occurs in October, 1812. The next list dated 29th April, 1813, gives 'AUnutt late Edmeads £55',81 and the next assessment made in October of that year is identical. In April, 1814, it is replaced by 'AUnutt, Henry £55' which continues until April, 1816. Later that year, in October, it becomes 'AUnutt & Co. £55' which continues up to April, 1818. The relevant entry for October, 1818, is 'AUnutt & Smith £55'.32 Similar entries continue until, in the list dated May, 1820, the value of this property is added to that of Great Ivy Mill, and the entry is then 'Smith & AUnutt £120'. This partnership was at Little Ivy Mill for several years, sometimes given in the Poor Books as 'Smith & AUnutt', and other times as 'AUnutt and Smith'. From 1827, indication of the type of properties is sometimes entered beside the occupiers and for 'AUnutt & Smith' this was generally 'House and Mills' and on occasions 'House MiUs and Land.'83 The Mudge map of 180184 is the earliest to show the Little Ivy millponds. As all the later maps show, two ponds existed side by side (Plate II). In 1839,85 it was reported that 'Little Ivy MU . . . is the property of Sir Peter Pole, late Mr. Edmeads, and is also occupied by Messrs. Smith & AUnutt'. The Loose Tithe schedule of 1837 gives the area of the mill and ponds as IA 2R 14P or 69,150 sq. ft.86 Mr. Tom Hartridge of Loose has in his MSS. coUection an abstract 80 Loose Churchwardens Accounts 1780-1812. 81 Loose Poor Book 1811-1817. 82 Ibid., 1817-1826. 83 Ibid., 1828-1848. 84 Capt. Mudge, Survey made for the Board of Ordnance, 1801. 86 Phippen 1839, op. cit., 86. 86 Canterbury Cathedral Library To. L9. 67 R. J. SPAIN of title for the Woodlawn property near Ivy MiU. At one time the Woodlawn Estates included this mill. The abstract begins with an indenture, dated 10th August, 1846, for property which Sir Peter Pole, Bart., passed to Edward Pole, one of his sons. I t includes: '. . . And also aU that watermUl with the Bridges and appurtenances thereunto belonging . . . AU which said messuage or dwelling house watermill pieces or parcels of ground & heredits were formerly in the tenure or occupon of said Robert Edmeads & Henry AUnutt or one of their undertenants or assigns (since of Henry AUnutt & Charles Wilkinson & then or late of. . . Smith & Henry AUnutt). And also aU that piece or parcel of garden ground comprising the ponds belongg to sd mill & abutting on & adjoining to sd mill containing by admeasurement la 2r 5p or thereabouts . . .' Smith & AUnutt were still occupiers in 185287 and 1854.88 The Maidstone and Loose VaUey RaUway plans, dated 1856, show land and buildmg, apparently part of the mill property, as belonging to Peter Pole and occupied by George Muller.89 An indenture, dated 10th September, 1862,90 between Edward Pole, James Hackett HodsoU of Loose Court and Herbert Monkton of Maidstone, involving property which included Little Ivy MU, described as: 'All that dwellinghouse with the building adjoining formerly used as a paper null containing with the water la. 2r. 14p.' The property passed to HodsoU, but was for the use of Monkton and his heirs during the Hfe of HodsoU upon trust for him and his assigns. There is a map, pinned to this indenture, which shows the mill as being over the stream with the house against its eastern wall. The area and arrangement of the fabric are virtually identical to those shown on the 1856 railway plans. Apparently the mill ceased to produce paper sometime between 1854 and 1856. In the Green MSS., it is written that Herbert Green owned this miU at one time.91 There is also a record that Mr. J. Barcham Green was told by his father that Little Ivy used to prepare half-stuff for Great Ivy, and there were two donkeys which used to carry it in panniers and bring cut rags back to Little Ivy for breaking in.92 A comparison between the railway map of 1856 and the first 6-in. Ordnance Survey of 1865 reveals that the old mill building and attached 87 Kelly's, Home Counties Court and Trades Directory, 1852, 1095. 88 Munkton, op. cit., 65. 80 K.A.O. Q/Rum 402, Books of Reference 402A, 402B. 00 Hartridge MSS. 01 J. Barcham Green MSS., File G-H, Doc. J, Sheet 1. »* Ibid., File I-J. 68 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I house had been replaced by two separate buildings in approximately the same position. The existing miU buUding bears the inscription JHH 1865. In 1882 Loose Court Estate was sold. A paper relating to this sale shows that Little Ivy was included93 in Lot 3. The property included: 'In Loose and East Farleigh (a) Corn Mill of four floors known as Little Ivy MiU with a good head of water from the well known never failing Loose stream a 11 ft. overshot Water Wheel and three pairs of stones . . . let to Mr. E. J. Antrum on a yearly tenancy at a rental of £55.' The mill-ponds were given as having an area of IR. 22P (the west pond) and IR 30P (the east pond) giving a total of 33,937 sq. ft. In the Hartridge MSS. is included a conveyance dated 29th October, 1888, from James H. HodsoU to E. J. Antrum of property including Little Ivy Mill for the sum of £2,300. A map associated with this conveyance shows the area of the ponds as that given above. Also in the Hartridge MSS. is a leaflet entitled 'Particulars of Fruit- Growing Estate caUed Little Ivy', which was advertised for sale by order of the mortgagees of E. J. Antrum of Loose. The property, auctioned on 30th May, 1912, was described as: 'Little Ivy Mill'—(which is not now in work) with a good head of water from the never-failing Loose Stream driving an 11 ft. overshot water wheel and three pairs of stones, together with a weU-built three stall stable, Store and Mill offices.' On the 8th August, 1912, Little Ivy Mill was conveyed from J. A. Graham Wigan Esq. to Mr. T. R. S. Brooker.94 The conveyance refers to a previous indenture dated 22nd January, 1891, between Edward James Antrum and Constance Argles and includes: 'AU that water Corn Mill known as Little Ivy Mill with the MiU ponds, office, stable and dwellinghouse now or late in the occupation of the said Edward James Antrum And also all that wheelwrights shop with loft over shed and dwelling house near thereto now or late in the occupation of George Harris . . . also . . . Loose Meadow . . . and the other part . . . formerly part of the Woodlawn Estate . . .' The map attached to this document shows the island between the ponds as being planted with trees and the schedule gives the area of the miU-pond, etc., as 3R. 36P., and that of the miU and buildings as2R.0P. 03 K.A.O. TJ24 T72. 04 Hartridge MSS. 69 R. J. SPAIN In 1918-1919 the west pond was filled in completely and the east pond was cleaned. Apparently, the water-wheel had been taken out in, approximately, 1912, and the mill converted to a dwelling-house. By kind permission of Mr. GUes, the occupier of the old miU-house, I was able to view the fabric and the grounds. In the ceUar of the house, the empty cog-pit is boarded over but four cast-iron pillars, which straddled the large spur-wheel and the stone-nuts, stiU remain supporting the large timbers of the stone-floor above. Nothing remains of the old flour-miU on the stone-floor for where the mUlstones once stood is now converted into a living room. I was informed that the corn-bins stUl remain in the roof, though I did not take advantage of the smaU access-hatch to view them. The old miU-pond is at present kept very clean by resident swans and aU manner of fish are said to abound there. The mill stream passes under the road in front of the old mill, drops where the wheel used to stand, then flows on through the grounds of the property behind. The barrel-vault through which the wheel-shaft passed has now been bricked in and the present stream-bed is only some 3 ft. beneath this point, the void where the wheel turned having been filled with rubble and sUt. There must be at least 3 ft. 6in. of material deposited at this point, allowing the wheel radius and 1 ft. for the clearance of the tail water. GBEAT IVY MILL The first Maidstone Rate Book entry that may be associated with this mill is dated 20th June, 1675,95 and reads, 'Goodman Shrubsole now Brooman £4'. Similar entries continue untU 1678. In 1679,96 the relevant entry is 'Henry Bruman £4', and the following year this is replaced by Alexander Bruman. The first entry of 1681 gives the relevant entry as Jn0 Goulding and similar entries occur throughout 1682; however, in the foUowing year, Henry Bruman is occupier again, probably changed function to become a paper-miU because the occupiers from 1685 onwards have been identified as papermakers. The first papermaker associated with this mill was Richard Burnham in 1685. In 1686, the assessment was increased from £4 to £16, no doubt in response to the change of function and possibly an improvement in the miU-pond and the wheel. Because the mill is partly in the The last entry of his name occurs in 1684. About this time the mill Loose and Maidstone parishes the names of the occupiers normally appeared listed in both sets of parish rate books. Richard Burnham was also assessed in the Loose Rate Books between 1689 and 1702. 96 Maidstone Rate Books, i. Maidstone Museum. o" Ibid., ii. 70 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I In 1693, the Apprentices List, in Maidstone Museum records that Richard Burnham, papermaker, took an apprentice, John How.97 In 1703, Thomas Mankteloe appears to have replaced Burnham according to the Maidstone98 and Loose Rate Books. His name, spelt in various ways, last appears in the Loose Books in 1712, and in the Maidstone books in 1715.99 In both, he is superseded by Thomas Pine. From the year 1718, various names appear against the property, still assessed at £16; in 1719, 'Guilford late Thomas Pine'; in 1719 and 1720, 'Gilford late Pine'; in 1721, 'Thomas Pine late Gilford'; in 1722, 'Thomas Gilford late Pine'; and later, from 1723 to 1740, Thomas Pine. According to the Apprentices List100 Thomas Pine took many apprentices after 1728. Several of these were probably Hnked with the papermaker having the same name who operated at Lower Tovil MU. In 1741, the entry related to Great Ivy reads, 'Thomas Pine junior'.101 In 1745, the relevant entries in the Loose and Maidstone Rate Books read Simon Pine. In the same year Simon Pine, paper maker of Maidstone, insured his mill-house, dwelling-house, etc., part in the parish of Maidstone and part in the parish of Loose.102 By 1763, following a gap in the Maidstone Rate Books, Thomas Pine appears to have become occupier.103 It seems likely that Thomas Pine remained at Great Ivy throughout the remainder of the eighteenth century although, as Alfred Shorter points out, it is difficult to reconcile all the entries concerning this family that occur in the Rate Books with Great Ivy. Sometime prior to 1788, Thomas Pine went into partnership with Robert Edmeads for in that year they insured their mill-house, etc.104 The entries in the Maidstone Rate Books vary in this period. In April, 1790, Thomas Pine & Co.;105 in 1796, Thomas Pine & Edmeads; and from October 1798, Pine & Edmeads.106 According to the Loose Rate Books this partnership was also entered against the property called Ivy House.107 In 1801, Robert Edmeads and Thomas Pine, papermakers, insured a new rag-house.108 'Edmeads and Pine' were described as paper manufacturers at Ivy Mill in 1805-1807.109 In October, 1805, the 07 Clement Taylor Smythe MSS., i, Apprentices List. 08 Maidstone Rate Books, iv. 00 Ibid., v. 100 Clement Taylor Smythe MSS., i, Apprentices List. 101 Maidstone Rate Books, vii. 102 Shorter, op. cit., SFIP 103692 21st Ootober, 1745. 103 Maidstone Rate Books, viii. 104 Shorter, op. cit., SFIP 541482 27th February, 1788. 105 Maidstone Rate Books, xii. 100 Ibid., xiii. 107 Loose Churohwardens Accounts 1780-1812. 108 Shorter, op. cit., SFIP 713340 1st January, 1801. 100 Holden's Triennial D„ 1805-1807, ii, 206. 71 R. J. SPAIN Maidstone Rate Book entry reads 'Pine & Edmeads, MU & Land', assessed at £33.110 On the 19th October, 1810, the entry is 'Jno Pine & Co.';111 11th October, 1811, and 27th AprU, 1814, 'Pine & Co., Part of a MU and Land'. The first survey for the Board of Ordnance, made in 1801, by W. Mudge, shows a group of four ponds serving Great Ivy, indexed as 'Paper MiUs'. The settling ponds had probably existed for some time. The Loose Rate Book entry dated 28th April, 1813, reads 'Pine & Co. £65',112 and the Hst dated October of the same year gives the relevant entry as 'Pine Smith & AUnutt £65'. In April 1816 this becomes 'Smith & AUnutt' which continues with slight variations until at least 1835. In 1835, Henry AUnutt, papermaker, is recorded as occupying Ivy Mills, i.e. both Great and Little Ivy.113 In a topography of the area, written in 1839,114 there is: 'Ivy MiU (Great Ivy), partly in Loose, partly in Maidstone parish, is the property of Messrs. Smith & AUnutt... It formerly belonged to Mr. Thomas Pine, from whom residence at a house at Cripple Street Loose, covered with ivy, and called the Ivy House, is said to have acquired its present name.' Various directories record the occupiers of the mill during the nineteenth century; 1852, Henry AUnutt & Son;115 1854, Henry AUnutt; 116 ditto 1859,117 and 1882.118 In a Day Book kept by C. Larkin between 1859 and 1919, which was found in a drawer of the shop at Lower TovU MiU, are two entries which probably refer to Great Ivy: 'Oct. 1862 PIPER put in new water wheel shaft at IVY Dec. 1873 HARRISON bored out calender of machine engine at IVY' In the Kent Archives, there is a map of Loose Court Estate dated 1888 which shows both Ivy MUs on a scale of 1/2500.119 The waterways and setthng-ponds are clearly shown. Four distinct ponds then existed, three one after the other upstream, with a separate water-course bypassing the first two and entering the third (the miU-pond proper) via a smaU fourth pond. A comparison of this plan with the Maidstone 110 Maidstone Rate Books, xiv. 111 Ibid., xv. "2 Loose Poor Book, 1811-1817. 113 Maidstone Poll Book, 1835. Held at Maidstone Publio Library. 114 Phippen 1839, op. cit, 86. «5 Kelly's 1852, op. cit. 116 Munkton, op. cit., 65. " 7 Kelly's 1859, op. cit., 609, 614. 118 Kelly's 1882, op. cit., 352. »» K.A.O. U24 T72. 72 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I and Loose Valley Railway plan made in 1856 shows a very simUar water arrangement. The smallest sheet of water, as with the later map, is beside the mill-pond, although it does not appear connected to the stream above the ponds. It appears to be a perfect rectangle, suggesting it was man-made. Perhaps, it was used to receive springwater which was used directly in the papermaking process. The latest 6-in. O.S. maps of the vaUey120 reveal three springs in close proximity some 500 ft. upstream from the miU on the eastern bank close to the ponds. Although the mill-site was founded long before papermaking came to the valley, one wonders if they had any effect upon the growth of this prominent paper-miU. About this time the Green family took possession of Great Ivy. The exact date is not known, but it was the grandfather of the present occupier of Hayle MiU, John Barcham Green I. He gave Lower Tovil Mill to his son Laurence, and to his son Herbert he gave Great Ivy and Hayle MUls. Herbert Green sold the mill to a Dr. Jones of Loose who put his son in to manage it. It was later sold to a group of papermakers, but they could not make it pay, and so it was passed to a man who pulled it down and made what money he could from the fabric. The mill-house, which was part of the miU and was the foreman's house, was left standing. A picture ofthis mill, drawn by Donald Maxwell, is in the possession of Mr. J. B. Green at Hayle MU. According to my uncle, Alf Spain, a water turbine replaced the waterwheel sometime prior to 1900. Mr. Savage of Maidstone, who worked at this null from 1913-1916, informs me that the turbine continued in use until the miU closed down just after the Krst World War. After the war, Cherry Kearton Hved at Great Ivy with his chimp, 'Mary', which escaped from time to time, causing excitement among the cottagers. I visited Great Ivy on a Good Friday morning and met the owner Mr. Broadbent who very kindly showed me around. We walked through the grounds upstream to start our tour at its logical beginning. On the Ordnance Survey map the southern half of what appears to be the miU-pond is, in fact, a settHng-pond; its original area was considerable, but it is now reduced in area by the encroaching rushes. From this pond the water takes two separate courses to the miU-pond proper, one a direct drop of some 3 ft. over an old submerged concrete sill and the other indirectly through a smaller settHng-pond of perhaps an acre. We waded across the stream and looked at this smaUer settHngpond which Mr. Broadbent is hoping to make into a bird sanctuary. 120 O.S. TQ 75SE. 73 R. J. SPAIN At the present moment, it is very shaUow, and undesirable vegetation has taken hold over much of the pond; this he hopes to clear by raising the level of the water thus encouraging the thick herbage required by many water-birds for protective cover. We skirted the intended sanctuary along a wide causeway separating the ponds to where the water enters from the first settling-pond over a novel inchned ramp which has bricks projecting endwise from its surface to minimize the agitation caused by the falling water. These settling-ponds have been in existence for a considerable time and their function of reducing the velocity of the stream, so that material in suspension is encouraged to drop, has resulted in the waters becoming very shallow. Although the rate of deposition is very slow, to those concerned with the preservation of aU waterways, miU-ponds and the Hfe they support, the problem of ensuring adequate depth and area of water is pressing. Mr. Broadbent has found that the estimated cost of removing unwanted silt and mud from the miUpond is tremendous. Walking back towards the MU we discussed the possibility of .employing a high pressure water-jet but came to the conclusion that this would only shift the bulk of the material to the next mill-pond and possibly inconveniencing those who use the water for various purposes, particularly Hayle Mill. We wondered how the earlier watermillers coped with the problem. At the miU-dam the pond is approximately 150 ft. wide with the waste at the eastern end opposite that of the delivery to the mill. The trough is still in place, its cast iron bolted side sections clearly showing, WEEKS AND PETMAN MAIDSTONE 1854 Gone is the water-wheel, pit-wheel and gearing. In its place is a turbine with the top of its penstock bolted to the end of the apron. When I saw it, the gate in the trough was permanently closed with the water stiU rushing through the turbine, jammed with a great number of sticks and twigs projecting from its annular outlet. In the wall beside the wheel pit is a cast-iron bearing-box for one end of the wheel shaft. From its position relative to the apron Hp the wheel diameter must have been close to 17 ft. with the width of the wheel 8 ft. Further back under the trough is a similar cast-iron bearingbox cemented into the waU approximately 1 ft. lower than the wheelshaft bearing, which I at first took to be the position of an earlier wheel. Later, when examining the back face of tbis same wall, I found an old brick-Hned barrel-vault behind the first mentioned bearing which marks the position of the earHer axle bearings. Little of the mill remains and the layout of the various drive- 74 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I shafts, beaters and chests is unknown, excepting one chest very weU constructed of tongue and grooved stone panels some 9 to 10 ft. in diameter which is now a garden feature. Great Ivy formerly consisted of three buUdings, two of which remain. As is usual with paper-miUs, the main building incorporating the drying lofts on top was lengthy and straddled the stream to gain advantage of the winds that were channeled between the vaUey sides. At Great Ivy this structure was completely gone, but the foreman's house which abutted its western end remains and is know the residence of Mr. Broadbent. Several extensions have been added and a verandah now overlooks a croquet lawn marking the site of the drying loft. Beneath the lawn, I was informed, are cobble stones and, further down, is the tail-race tunnel. Alongside the mill-dam is a large single floor building with brick walls and corrugated iron roof which looks surprisingly new but was, in fact, part of the mill for beside a door at its eastern end is a nameplate engraved: IVY MILLBOARD CO. LTD. REGISTERED OFFICE Its other gable-end overlooks the wheel-pit but there is no indication of how the power-drive entered the fabric. Nothing remains inside to teU us what machines were once worked there. The floor has since been cemented and the building is now used as a garage and store. BOOKDTCWORD MILL There is Httle doubt that a fulHng mUl stood on this site centuries ago. It is interesting to note that in Joseph Wright's Dialect Dictionary the word 'bucking', which was attributable to several counties including Kent, had the meaning of a large wash of coarse linen, or, the quantity of clothes washed at once. The word 'buck', which was not attributable to Kent meant, lye made from cow-dung, stale urine or wood ashes, for washing coarse Unen.121 In Industries of Maidstone, it says of this area, '. . . the road leads past the old "Bockingford Arms" near which in days long past the process of "bucking" or dipping, the cloth made in the Weald went on in the stream hard by the ford.'122 Wallenberg does not Hst Bocldngford but comments on Bockingfold in Goudhurst, '. . . This may be OE. . . . bucca "he-goat"+fal(o)d "fold". But the first element may perhaps also be OE bocen "beechen". 121 Joseph Wright, English Dialect Dictionary, London, 1900, 425, 427. 122 Industries of Maidstone, 1881, Reprinted from the Maidstone & County Kent Standard, 5. 75 R. J. SPAIN Cf. Oakenpole Wood (OE Seen "oaken"-)-fal(o)d) in Doddington. See also Batfold Wood (OE beorc "birch"+fol(o)d) in Chiddingstone.'123 From at least as early as 1650,124 the name Richard Greene is beside the property in the Loose Poor Assessments which later reveals itseh0 as Bockingford MUl. In 1664, Richard Greene is replaced by Samuel Greene and, next year, it is Richard again, who remains until 1675 when the name Samuel Green returns. During the year 1681,125 Samuel Greene is replaced by the entry 'Widow Greene' which continues until the year 1682. The next entry, dated 1683, gives the name Thomas Jones beside the relevant property and the value is £20. It is probable that this Thomas Jones is the same as mentioned in a Title Deed dated 17th October, 1720, where, a Thomas Jones, fuller of Loose, was involved in the transfer of a property caUed Shernolds.126 In May, 1741 and 1742,127 beside the name Thomas Jones are the words 'Lower MU'. The last entry of Thomas Jones occurs in 1746, then in 1747 'Mrs. Jones' occurs which continues until 1749, when the relevant entry is Thomas Foster. The last entry of Thomas Foster occurs in the list dated January 1757.128 In August 1757, the relevant entry is '£20 Mary Jones for the Mill'. The last mention of Mary Jones is in the first assessment of 1760, and the second assessment of that year made in December, gives Thomas Foster as the relevant entry. This occurs in the section 'Outdwellers'. His name continues beside this property at least until 1768. Sometime prior to 1770, WiUiam Jones took over as occupier. The April assessment Hst of 1782 is the last time his name occurs. Up to 1771, the value of this property was £20, then in December of that year a general increase was made and its value rose to £40. In November, 1782, Thomas Bigg was occupier of the miU and the rateable value was £70, which, being greatly in excess of the contemporary rating for a water-miU indicates that he was the occupier of other property together with the mUl. Prior to November 1782, Thomas Bigg was assessed for £38 and, as there was no change in the general rateable values, part of the property for which he was later valued at £70 was clearly occupied by some other person. The balance of £32 does not occur in the earHer Hsts, and even if it did, we would not know which occupier was to be associated with the mill. The last entry of Thomas Bigg against this property is dated 31st August, 1803, when the rateable value was £40, having been 123 J. K. Wallenberg, The Place Names of Kent, Uppsala, 1934. 124 Loose Poor Book 1650-1677. 126 Ibid., 1678-1694. 120 K.A.O. TJ416 T21-23. 127 Loose Poor Book 1728-1754. li!> Ibid., 1755-1783. 76 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I reduced to that figure in 1802.129 In the foUowing year, the relevant entry is 'Biggs Widow' which continues until 25th July, 1810, when it is replaced by John Bigg beside which is the word 'MiU'. Between 1810 and December, 1817, his name continues beside tbis property valued at £40 and marked on various occasions as 'MiU'.130 The entry dated April, 1818, is the last giving John Bigg as occupier, and in October of that year it is replaced by Henery Habgood and the value given as £42. In September, 1820, Henry is replaced by Edward Habgood who continues until March, 1825. The November, 1825, assessment gives in his place 'BuU John late Ed. Habgood' and the property is described as 'House & MU'.131 In 1826, John Bull was assessed at £42 for a 'House Land & MU' and John Green assessed at £80 for 'House & Mils'. In 1827, John BuU does not occur in the Hsts, nor the separate value of £42, however, John Green is assessed at £122 for 'House, Land & Mills', clearly the new occupier. In a local history book dated 1839 there is written, '. . . Besides there is another called Bockingford MU, occupied by Mr. Green, and used as a washing-mill, the proprietor of which is Mr. Habgood, of Essex.'132 Mr. J. B. Green of Hayle MUls suggests they may have broken up rags here and conveyed them wet to Hayle MU as they used to do at Little Ivy to serve Great Ivy. The 1837 Loose Tithe Map reveals that the landowner was James Habgood and the occupier John Green. The mill and premises are given as occupying an area of 3R IP., i.e. 41,100 sq. ft.133 In the Green MSS. there are extracts from a Day Book, presumably of Hayle Mil, kept between 1838 and 1843 in which there is an entry dated 17th October, 1839: 'Paid Mr. Habgood for rent of Bockingford MUl £50'. Later again in 1843: 'Paid Jas. Habgood \ yrs. rent of Bockingford MiU less Income Tax £48.10.0d.' Further notes appear in the MSS. that each half-year between 1847 and 1850 a payment was made of £48.10.0d. for the rent of the mill. We do not know when this mill ceased fulling and began ragwashing; in fact, it is likely that some of the fulling equipment, the stampers and stocks, hitherto employed on damp cloths were able to avoid dereHction by undertaking the task of rag-washing and brealdng. Sometime prior to 1856, the mill was converted to corn-miUing, for survey maps associated with the intended Maidstone and Loose VaUey RaUway clearly show Bocldngford as 'Corn MU'.134 120 Loose Churchwardens Accounts 1780-1812. 130 Loose Poor Book 1811-1817. 131 Ibid., 1817-1826. 132 Phippen 1839, op. cit., 86. 133 Canterbury Cathedral Library, To. L9. 134 K.A.O. Q/Rum 402, Books of Reference 402A, 402B. 77 R. J. SPAIN Mr. Alan Wilson informed me that his father worked this mUl during this period but in time he had no wish to carry on working the stones. A letter in Mr. WUson's possession, dated April, 1891, from a Mrs. Marsham, the owner of the mill, to his father confirms that he wished to terminate his tenancy. Mr. Wilson had occupied the miU for some time for she wrote of his 'lengthened tenancy' that had 'commenced in my uncle, the late Admiral Marsham's time', suggesting that he had worked the miU for at least a decade, possibly two or more. It is interesting to note that, in the letter, arrangements were made for a man to collect the 'silks', i.e. bolting cloths—clearly they were too valuable to be left in an empty mUl. After the mUl stopped working, a Mr. Rose took residence as foreman working at Ivy MUl next up the valley. According to his son, Mr. T. Rose of Southall, Mddx., there was a man named Tom Bates in the mill-house before his father, also a foreman at Ivy Mill. The mill had not been closed very long for he had heard his father say that the water-wheel under the mUl was stiU in working order because they had to wedge it fast to stop it revolving or else they could not get any sleep at night. Mr. Rose can remember his father saying that they built two rooms onto the mill when they converted it into cottages. This mill is far from obvious even when passing close by, no faihng water is to be seen or heard, no lucomb housing the sack-hoist shows and the building itself is an inconspicuous two-floors high and covered with a drab buff-painted weatherboard. The mill-pond is about 300 ft. long and, at its widest point, 70 ft. wide, very overgrown and muddy as one would expect after at least 60 years neglect. For the last 80 ft. or so before the mill, the pond is channeUed between stone-Hned banks. At the beginning of this section, the waste is taken off with a sluice connecting with the waste. For many years the stream's water has flowed through both sluices; in fact, the one nearest the mill could be clearly seen from Teasaucer HiU, some distance away; but recently a falHng Spamsh oak damaged the pond embankment and the upstream sluice so that all the water now takes the less spectacular course. In the garden of the mill is an underground brick and concrete chamber housing two 4-inch Easton automatic water-rams which were used to pump water from the mill-pond up to houses overlooking the valley. The maintenance of the rams in time became a problem until main water was piped to the property concerned. Beside the stone-Hned head-race to the mill is a low wide concrete platform so arranged that if the stream should flood, aU excess water would flow over the platform and be directed to a flood-gate above the waste. In this way, damage to the wheel, machinery and mill fabric could be avoided. 78 PLATE I £OaS£ BZ&JL and n&ZA&E j ' « | - y ^ ' Tho? TtljerJ. Cirti Zn-^tnttr n t , u « t othoasj. ++ X RoJJ&jff'f .-•• S,„l, efta Ckailt .* 4«y-* a >»*&• Map of Loose Hill and Village. [/ace p. 78 PLATE II I * A ff (Reproduced from Ihe Ordnance Survey Map of 1870 with the Sanction of the Controller H.M. Stationery Office. Crown Copyright reserved.) [face pave 79 THE LOOSE WATERMILLS: I Nothing is left of the machinery that once worked inside though underneath the miU the remains of the water-wheel are still in place. Unfortunately, the tail-race was too deep, but it was possible to gauge the wheel diameter as some 12 ft. and its width, 8 ft. The wheel is an overshot with the usual compass-armed arrangement of 8 cast-iron arms in two 4 ft. bays bolted to a square cast-iron shaft. AU the buckets, shields and backing are corroded away although no water is passing the trough-gate. Some years ago, perhaps in the war effort, the wheel was considered for scrap but it was thought that the preparations for its removal would damage the mill foundations. The skeleton of this wheel, being under cover, will probably remain with us for as long as the mill is inhabited. The remaining six watermill sites which He between Bockingford Mill and the River Medway wiU form the final part of this study. Four of these sites still function as mills though water-power was long ago abandoned, and of all the valley mills these are undoubtedly the best known. 10 79