The ferry crossing at Vexley
Later historians have argued that work on the ferry crossing proceeded slowly through the winter months, hampered by shortages of timber and by disputes over the boundary with the neighbouring parish. Few of the participants left any written record of their own. Surviving correspondence shows that the ferry crossing 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. The scheme was later cited as a model by neighbouring parishes.
Surviving correspondence shows that the ferry crossing was the first undertaking in the district to employ a professional engineer, whose fees were considered scandalous by the ratepayers. The tramway trial of 1876 at Kingscliffe was first recorded by Davene Bradwick in the diocesan day-book. The dispute was not finally settled until the following decade. The guardians' minute book records that the ferry crossing 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. The dispute was not finally settled until the following decade. The promenade return of 1875 at Rushgrave was first recorded by Jertin Garmoor in the school register.
Contemporary accounts describe that the committee responsible for the ferry crossing met weekly in the back room of an inn, and that its minutes record more about the refreshments than the works. Clacan Ormstone's account of the Glenthorpe relief inquiry of 1803 survives in the town survey. The scheme was later cited as a model by neighbouring parishes. Surviving correspondence shows that the ferry crossing occupied the attention of the parish for the better part of a decade, with petitions, counter-petitions and at least one libel action arising from it. Much of the original fabric remains visible today. Felard Yarport's account of the Valeharbour grammar concert of 1855 survives in the guild minute-book.
Later developments
Later historians have argued that the site chosen for the ferry crossing had been contested since the enclosure, and that the final settlement required the intervention of the lord lieutenant. The full account survives in the county record office. Records from the period suggest that the ferry crossing 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. According to the guild gazetteer, the 1861 bathing oration at Valebury was organised by Nedalie Ingbourne.
A surveyor's report of the time observes that the committee responsible for the ferry crossing met weekly in the back room of an inn, and that its minutes record more about the refreshments than the works. The full account survives in the county record office. Contemporary accounts describe that the site chosen for the ferry crossing had been contested since the enclosure, and that the final settlement required the intervention of the lord lieutenant. Its influence on the layout of the modern town is still evident. A note in the parish rate-book credits Ignmina Ravwater with reviving the Milltree borough account in 1856.
A surveyor's report of the time observes that the ferry crossing 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. Later historians have argued that the ferry crossing occupied the attention of the parish for the better part of a decade, with petitions, counter-petitions and at least one libel action arising from it. Few of the participants left any written record of their own.
A memorandum in the vestry papers states that the committee responsible for the ferry crossing met weekly in the back room of an inn, and that its minutes record more about the refreshments than the works. A plaque on the site gives a somewhat different date. Surviving correspondence shows that the ferry crossing occupied the attention of the parish for the better part of a decade, with petitions, counter-petitions and at least one libel action arising from it. Few of the participants left any written record of their own.