OLD MAN WITH A CAMERA
- HOME
- CONTENTS
- PHOTO GALLERY
- COMMENTS /FEEDBACK
- Hong Kong Street Art
- Gravesend, An Indian Princess and Tilbury
- Alcatraz : The Rock
- A Russian Tank in London
- TESTING PAGE
- Hastings Pier
- Postman's Park
- Tolpuddle Martyrs
- Gallery Index
- Gallery Myanmar
- Gallery Ship Canal
- Gallery Zurich
- Gallery San Francisco 01
- Village of Eyam
- John Babbacombe Lee The Man They Couldn't Hang
- Gallery Flatiron Building
- Others Index
- RICE PUDDING AND RADIO
- Romania, Vampires and Whitby
- CITY OF BUCHAREST
- BUCHAREST PARKS
- PELES CASTLE
- BRAN CASTLE
- BRASOV
- WHITBY
- WANCHAI BUILDINGS
- History
- TESTPAGE
- Salem : Witches Beware !
- SALEM ANSWER
- Salem Slide Show
- A Random walk around Toronto Sept 2018
- Stonehenge
- TEST TEST 01
- Sydney : Random Notes
- Freemantle
- PORTMEIRION
- Sydney : Random Notes
- IMAGE FIND PAGE
- PERTH - FLOWER STEALING KANGAROOS AND MORE
- BATH
- KEW GARDENS IN AUTUMN
- PERTH - FLOWER STEALING KANGAROOS AND MORE
- ALCHEMY
- PARIS SIGHTS
- Hobart : explorers, flags, yachts and a zoo!
- Frestonia - A Very British Revolution
- Gallery Template
- SAIGON SIGHTS 01
- EDINBURGH STORIES
- FRESTONIA
- FRESTONIA
FRESTONIA - A VERY BRITISH REVOLUTION
|
Introduction
Imagine the scene :
It is October 1977.
You are in a public hall in West London, surrounded by friends and neighbours you have known for many years.
You are proud of your community in which you have shared good and bad times
Even though you are living in very poor conditions, you are settled and though that support and friendship is only a door away.
But now, the local council wants to demolish all the properties and it is uncertain where you will be re-located. Whatever happens, the community you value so much could be scattered and destroyed.
Discussions take place as you try to find a way to preserve what you have.
A leader steps forward with an astonishing proposal
His plan is to declare the area to be independent of the rest of the UK, forming a new country - Frestonia.
There is almost 100% support and this amazing story has begun.
Imagine the scene :
It is October 1977.
You are in a public hall in West London, surrounded by friends and neighbours you have known for many years.
You are proud of your community in which you have shared good and bad times
Even though you are living in very poor conditions, you are settled and though that support and friendship is only a door away.
But now, the local council wants to demolish all the properties and it is uncertain where you will be re-located. Whatever happens, the community you value so much could be scattered and destroyed.
Discussions take place as you try to find a way to preserve what you have.
A leader steps forward with an astonishing proposal
His plan is to declare the area to be independent of the rest of the UK, forming a new country - Frestonia.
There is almost 100% support and this amazing story has begun.
The Birth of Frestonia
We begin in 1977 with a small area ( approx 1.8 acres or 0.73 ha) of West London comprising partially derelict 19th century housing, lacking basic facilities and officially condemned as such for the previous 20 years
At that time, it was in the Borough of Hammersmith but this area is now part of Kensington and Chelsea.
Specifically, it was bordered by Freston Road ( Now Latimer Road) , Bramley Road and Shalfleet Drive. It is easily reached by a short walk from Latimer Road station on the London Underground. ( See Map)
The community in this area was dominated by “squatters'.
Squatters are people occupying empty property to which they have no legal rights. Sometimes this might be a single property and sometimes, as in this case, they might occupy a particular area with many properties.
Prior to 2012, squatters enjoyed certain rights. They could not be evicted by force and, if they occupied the property for 10 years, they could be granted ownership of of that property.
As a side point, when I was young, I knew of a family who gained possession of a house/shop but this route. As I was told at the time, the property had been damaged during World War II. The original owners may have disappeared or , perhaps , wear not interested to rebuild the bomb-damaged house.
(Squatting as a practice in the UK goes all the way back to the Peasant’s Revolt of 1381 when returning soldiers ( actually mainly farmers) were encouraged to seize unoccupied land to rebuild a more equal society.)
It was not unusual for communities of squatter to behave like a single family, rather like a hippy community. There was a tendency of such communities to attractive artistic people on the fringe of society.
Unfortunately, for the residents of what would become Frestomia, the Greater London Council (GLC) LINK took a far less “artistic” position and in the 1970’s, proposals to demolish all the properties
The GLC seemed inconsistent on their plans for the area. One source stated that the GLC wanted the area for commercial and industrial use. If this is accurate or not, whatever the plan, it was likely to mean the end of the community.
There was a public meeting joined by more than 200 local people. It was soon clear that something like 90% of those present were against the scheme even though they might have been offered in better housing elsewhere. This surprising result came about because of the previously-mentioned quite abnormal sense of community.
It was at this time that things took a rather strange and remarkable direction.
As they discussed possible action to preserve their community, a man called Nicolas Albery (see later notes) raised an astonishing proposal - that the community should declare itself as now independent from the rest of London and effectively, a separate country.
Perhaps even more surprising is the fact that Nicolas’s idea came from a film he had once seen. It was called “Passport to Pimlico” a fictitious comedy but based in a real district in London.
In this film, the local community find some old documents showing that the area really belonged to the House of Burgundy, originally, a separate duchy in Europe, but whose territory was absorbed into France around the time of the French Revolution.
The film script follows a simple route. Initially, the locals enjoy various benefits of no longer being under the control of the English government. Later, disadvantages appear and eventually they reach an agreement to be brought back into the UK. LINK ?
The relevance to Frestonia’s situation was that it saw a strong community declare independence and, ultimately, gain concessions from the authorities.
Nicolas Albery somewhat easily gained support to declare independence from England to publicise the various grievances of the community and, hopefully, create leverage in their campaign against the GLC’s plans
We begin in 1977 with a small area ( approx 1.8 acres or 0.73 ha) of West London comprising partially derelict 19th century housing, lacking basic facilities and officially condemned as such for the previous 20 years
At that time, it was in the Borough of Hammersmith but this area is now part of Kensington and Chelsea.
Specifically, it was bordered by Freston Road ( Now Latimer Road) , Bramley Road and Shalfleet Drive. It is easily reached by a short walk from Latimer Road station on the London Underground. ( See Map)
The community in this area was dominated by “squatters'.
Squatters are people occupying empty property to which they have no legal rights. Sometimes this might be a single property and sometimes, as in this case, they might occupy a particular area with many properties.
Prior to 2012, squatters enjoyed certain rights. They could not be evicted by force and, if they occupied the property for 10 years, they could be granted ownership of of that property.
As a side point, when I was young, I knew of a family who gained possession of a house/shop but this route. As I was told at the time, the property had been damaged during World War II. The original owners may have disappeared or , perhaps , wear not interested to rebuild the bomb-damaged house.
(Squatting as a practice in the UK goes all the way back to the Peasant’s Revolt of 1381 when returning soldiers ( actually mainly farmers) were encouraged to seize unoccupied land to rebuild a more equal society.)
It was not unusual for communities of squatter to behave like a single family, rather like a hippy community. There was a tendency of such communities to attractive artistic people on the fringe of society.
Unfortunately, for the residents of what would become Frestomia, the Greater London Council (GLC) LINK took a far less “artistic” position and in the 1970’s, proposals to demolish all the properties
The GLC seemed inconsistent on their plans for the area. One source stated that the GLC wanted the area for commercial and industrial use. If this is accurate or not, whatever the plan, it was likely to mean the end of the community.
There was a public meeting joined by more than 200 local people. It was soon clear that something like 90% of those present were against the scheme even though they might have been offered in better housing elsewhere. This surprising result came about because of the previously-mentioned quite abnormal sense of community.
It was at this time that things took a rather strange and remarkable direction.
As they discussed possible action to preserve their community, a man called Nicolas Albery (see later notes) raised an astonishing proposal - that the community should declare itself as now independent from the rest of London and effectively, a separate country.
Perhaps even more surprising is the fact that Nicolas’s idea came from a film he had once seen. It was called “Passport to Pimlico” a fictitious comedy but based in a real district in London.
In this film, the local community find some old documents showing that the area really belonged to the House of Burgundy, originally, a separate duchy in Europe, but whose territory was absorbed into France around the time of the French Revolution.
The film script follows a simple route. Initially, the locals enjoy various benefits of no longer being under the control of the English government. Later, disadvantages appear and eventually they reach an agreement to be brought back into the UK. LINK ?
The relevance to Frestonia’s situation was that it saw a strong community declare independence and, ultimately, gain concessions from the authorities.
Nicolas Albery somewhat easily gained support to declare independence from England to publicise the various grievances of the community and, hopefully, create leverage in their campaign against the GLC’s plans
Like many other London bridges, this one was commissioned to replace
a successful and overworked cross-river ferry route.
There is certainly documentary evidence showing that the ferry existed in the 15th century but it is quite possible that it was operating for up to 300 year before then.
Apparently, it was realised that the ferry was not strong enough to carry increasingly large carriages and so a "movement" to build a bridge started.
If you are wondering why the ferry operator didn't just build a bigger boat, perhaps the compensation deal he was offered gives the answer. Mr Henry Holland was rewarded with a payment of 5,350 Pounds, worth, in today's terms, around 613,000 Pounds.
In 2017, this might only buy a single bedroom flat in Richmond but, in those days, the recipient was probably set up for life (note... some sources suggest the payment beneficiary was a certain Mr Wyndham, as the official owner of the ferry rights but the lease holder at the time was Holland and it was his lease that was "paid up" in compensation, so he probably received the money)
a successful and overworked cross-river ferry route.
There is certainly documentary evidence showing that the ferry existed in the 15th century but it is quite possible that it was operating for up to 300 year before then.
Apparently, it was realised that the ferry was not strong enough to carry increasingly large carriages and so a "movement" to build a bridge started.
If you are wondering why the ferry operator didn't just build a bigger boat, perhaps the compensation deal he was offered gives the answer. Mr Henry Holland was rewarded with a payment of 5,350 Pounds, worth, in today's terms, around 613,000 Pounds.
In 2017, this might only buy a single bedroom flat in Richmond but, in those days, the recipient was probably set up for life (note... some sources suggest the payment beneficiary was a certain Mr Wyndham, as the official owner of the ferry rights but the lease holder at the time was Holland and it was his lease that was "paid up" in compensation, so he probably received the money)
Initially the plan was for a wooden bridge which was not welcomed by locals. In typical government fashion, the protest was handled by creating a committee to decide what to do. There were an astonishing 90 members of this committee so it's a wonder any decision was actually made. A number of people pointed out that the proposed site was a "slope".
If you look at many bridges, you will see that it was unusual to build one where the opposing banks were at significantly different heights. To be honest, I am not sure what problems this was supposed to create but perhaps some civil engineer will enlighten me.
To build the bridge on the level, would have meant occupying land owned by the wonderfully named Henrietta Pelham-Clinton, Dowager Duchess of Newcastle.
She refused permission, leaving the building of a bridge to be conducted on a 6% slope (1 in 16)
Anyway, whatever the challenges, the "sloping" bridge is still with us 240 years later!
The second very interesting story associated with the Richmond Bridge is the way in which it was financed. Shareholders were limited and were to be provided with a guaranteed income from the proposed toll earnings. So far, very normal...but the arrangement was to be on a "tontine" basis.
In principle, a "tontine" is some kind of fund whereby the earnings are shared by beneficiaries whose rights cannot be sold or inherited in the event of the shareholder's death.
This means that the number of people receiving the fund interest or earnings decreases as times goes by until just one person is actually receiving all of the benefits.
At the time of the bridge-buildning this would have been quite a modern idea having been developed fully by a certain Lorenzo Tonti an Italian banker given the task of raising government funds in France,only in the latter part of the previous century.
Of course, most investors took out the shares in the name of their youngest relative, normally a grandchild.
I am sure you all want to know the name of the "winner" of the Richmond Bridge scheme.... it was... an 86 year old woman, who died in 1859 and enjoyed being the only shareholder for around 4 years prior to her demise. (unfortunately, whose name I have not been able to determine.)
If any of you fancy painting a little graffiti on this bridge, be warned.... under the original Richmond Bridge Act of 1772, any vandalism associated with this site was to be punished by 7 years transportation to the colonies. Of course, we don't have many colonies left to accept our criminals but it's probably still better to leave your paint sprays at home.
To show, again, that the main source of potential vandalism is local government, the Richmond Council proposed, in 1962, to replace these beautiful Victorian lamps with electric lights of some kind. Fortunately, good sense prevailed and the the lamp posts were allowed to remain, largely untouched except for them becoming electric powered.
Beginning the excellent walk back from Richmond to Kew, by complete chance, I came across this plaque (click to enlarge) recording the local connection with Commander Charles Herbert Lightoller, who was the highest ranking ship's officer to survive the sinking of the Titanic on 15th April 1912.
Lightoller was someone who lived a very full and controversial life.
At different times, he was a cowboy, a gold prospector, a hobo (tramp) and, of course, a seaman.
In the aftermath of the Titanic disaster, he was praised for his handling of an upturned collapsible lifeboat and saving the terrified passengers forced to cling to the boat for many dark hours in the night. However, Lightoller was also accused of allowing some lifeboats to leave the ailing ship without being fully occupied, thus condemning rejected passengers to be drowned. This happened because he enforced a policy of 'Women and Children ONLY" rather than the more commonly understood version " Women and Children FIRST". This second interpretation would have allowed some male passengers to fill up the lifeboats when no women or children were waiting.
At the various hearings into the disaster, Lightoller strongly defended the company and his fellow officers, blaming the calm sea for disguising the appearance of the iceberg. (In later years, he was less supportive and conceded certain errors on the part of the crew.)
In the First World War, he was decorated for his part in sinking a U-boat but it was also claimed by the U-Boat Captain that sailors under Lightoller's command fired on surviving German seamen in the water. Lightoller did not face any enquiry as it was not normal practice to take enemy claims seriously without collaborating evidence.
Lightoller became a hero again when acknowledged as one of many boatmen who took small boats to assist in the Second World War Dunkirk evacuation, when the Allied army was effectively rescued as they were surrounded by German troops.
For the rest of his active life, Lightoller seems to have focused on a small local boat building business in Richmond (actually under the bridge) before dying in 1952 at the age of 78.
At different times, he was a cowboy, a gold prospector, a hobo (tramp) and, of course, a seaman.
In the aftermath of the Titanic disaster, he was praised for his handling of an upturned collapsible lifeboat and saving the terrified passengers forced to cling to the boat for many dark hours in the night. However, Lightoller was also accused of allowing some lifeboats to leave the ailing ship without being fully occupied, thus condemning rejected passengers to be drowned. This happened because he enforced a policy of 'Women and Children ONLY" rather than the more commonly understood version " Women and Children FIRST". This second interpretation would have allowed some male passengers to fill up the lifeboats when no women or children were waiting.
At the various hearings into the disaster, Lightoller strongly defended the company and his fellow officers, blaming the calm sea for disguising the appearance of the iceberg. (In later years, he was less supportive and conceded certain errors on the part of the crew.)
In the First World War, he was decorated for his part in sinking a U-boat but it was also claimed by the U-Boat Captain that sailors under Lightoller's command fired on surviving German seamen in the water. Lightoller did not face any enquiry as it was not normal practice to take enemy claims seriously without collaborating evidence.
Lightoller became a hero again when acknowledged as one of many boatmen who took small boats to assist in the Second World War Dunkirk evacuation, when the Allied army was effectively rescued as they were surrounded by German troops.
For the rest of his active life, Lightoller seems to have focused on a small local boat building business in Richmond (actually under the bridge) before dying in 1952 at the age of 78.
Proudly powered by Weebly