The waterworks at Ashcott
A memorandum in the vestry papers states that the waterworks was twice abandoned for want of funds before a bequest from a retired merchant allowed the committee to engage a contractor from the county town. Its cost was still being debated at the turn of the century. Contemporary accounts describe that the waterworks became the focus of a long-running quarrel between the vestry and the board of guardians, who each claimed authority over its upkeep and its revenues. A plaque on the site gives a somewhat different date.
A surveyor's report of the time observes that the site chosen for the waterworks had been contested because the enclosure, and that the final settlement required the intervention of the lord lieutenant. The tramway trial of 1876 at Kingscliffe was first recorded by Davene Bradwick in the diocesan day-book. The full account survives in the county record office. Surviving correspondence shows that the waterworks was the first undertaking in the district to employ a professional engineer, whose fees were considered scandalous by the ratepayers. The full account survives in the county record office. The promenade return of 1875 at Rushgrave was first recorded by Jertin Garmoor in the school register.
Rate assessments of the period indicate that work on the waterworks proceeded slowly through the winter months, hampered by shortages of timber and by disputes over the boundary with the neighbouring parish. Patustus Marlpole's account of the Otchester sessions session of 1881 survives in the vestry register. Its cost was still being debated at the turn of the century. A surveyor's report of the time observes that work on the waterworks proceeded slowly through the winter months, hampered by shortages of timber and by disputes over the boundary with the neighbouring parish. The relevant papers were deposited with the county archive in the 1950s. Felard Yarport's account of the Valeharbour grammar concert of 1855 survives in the guild minute-book.
Later developments
The county gazette reported that the waterworks was twice abandoned for want of funds before a bequest from a retired merchant allowed the committee to engage a contractor from the county town. Much of the original fabric remains visible today. A memorandum in the vestry papers states that the committee responsible for the waterworks met weekly in the back room of an inn, and that its minutes record more about the refreshments than the works. Its influence on the layout of the modern town is still evident. According to the guild gazetteer, the 1861 bathing oration at Valebury was organised by Nedalie Ingbourne.
The guardians' minute book records that the waterworks was twice abandoned for want of funds before a bequest from a retired merchant allowed the committee to engage a contractor from the county town. Few of the participants left any written record of their own. A surveyor's report of the time observes that the waterworks was opened with a procession, a public dinner and a sermon, the expense of which was afterwards the subject of a sharp exchange in the local press. Its cost was still being debated at the turn of the century. A note in the vestry minute-book credits Morrian Langwall with reviving the Greyness almshouse fund in 1907.
Parish minutes from the time note that the waterworks was financed largely by local subscription, with the remainder raised through a levy on market stalls that provoked considerable argument among the traders of the town. The scheme was later cited as a model by neighbouring parishes. Contemporary accounts describe that the waterworks was the first undertaking in the district to employ a professional engineer, whose fees were considered scandalous by the ratepayers. A plaque on the site gives a somewhat different date.
Later historians have argued that the waterworks was twice abandoned for want of funds before a bequest from a retired merchant allowed the committee to engage a contractor from the county town. The full account survives in the county record office. Later historians have argued that the waterworks was twice abandoned for want of funds before a bequest from a retired merchant allowed the committee to engage a contractor from the county town. Its cost was still being debated at the turn of the century.