A Legacy Lost to the third runway at Heathrow: The Forge

The Forge, Longford, 2007

There has been a forge in the village of Longford in Middlesex, for centuries. The Forge building we can see today is not a listed building, but has been preserved because it is part of the street scene in the Longford Conservation Area. This is all that remains of a once larger complex of workshops, barn, house and three cottages

 

Before industrialisation, the agricultural village community was heavily reliant on the services of the wheelwright and blacksmith. He made the carts and ploughshares, and general repairs to equipment and gate hinges. He also shoed the horses who were the main power source on the farms. However one enterprising blacksmith went further.

In the eighteenth century Thomas Swain was making bells at the Longford forge.  Thomas Swain was born in West Bedfont (on Heathrow airport’s southern border) and learned to make bells from Robert Catlin in St Andrew’s Holborn. He inherited the business of his master and moved the foundry to Longford in 1752. The type of bells Swain was making in Longford was called a crotal bell. A small spherical bell made by joining two semi-hemispherical pieces of metal, with an attachment at the top for hanging and a free-moving ball or “pea” enclosed. They were hung in clusters on horses’ harness and usually decorated with a pattern and the maker’s name. Occasionally metal detectorists still find bells with the initials TS which are attributed to him.[1]  Later Swain was making large hanging bells for churches in London, Surrey and Sussex. These were made in situ in a large pit dug near the intended church in order to make transportation easier.[2] However Thomas Swain’s home and base was in Longford. The records show that Swain was paying window tax in Longford in 1766 and land tax in 1767. He died in 1782 and was buried in Harmondsworth churchyard on 26 April in an unmarked grave.

 

While Swain was away making church bells, by 1765 John Heath was the blacksmith and the wheelwright in the forge. He lived, with his wife and three children, in the house attached to the forge and workshop. On the night of 7 March someone broke into the wheelwright’s home, by making a hole in the plaster at the back of the building with a bill-hook, which was left at the scene. The next day John Heath noticed certain items missing from the shop, namely about ten shillings in halfpence and farthings, some worsted stockings, two canisters containing about a quarter of a pound of tea each, and a 30 pound lump of sugar all with a total value of thirty shillings. A 150 yards along the Bath Road from the Forge lived John Sharborn who had a questionable reputation, but John Heath was prepared to think well of people and did not get suspicious until he saw Sharborn in his Sunday best wearing a pair of stockings similar to the stolen ones. Heath obtained a search warrant from the local magistrate and went to Sharborn’s house with the Parish Constable, Matthew East. Mrs Sharborn was at home and stood by while the search took place. They found the stockings and the canisters of tea. John Sharborn was arrested and at his trial at the Old Bailey maintained his defence story of buying goods from a Scotch [sic] pedlar at his door, and produced a bill on which he said the pedlar had written. The Jury did not believe him and found him guilty of felony. He was sentenced to transportation and in September 1765 he was placed on the prison ship Justitia on a journey to Virginia in Colonial America. [3] It is not known what happened to Mrs Sharborn and her two small sons, but if she had no extended family to support her she was probably taken into the workhouse.

John Heath died in August 1782, soon after Thomas Swain. A local landowner, William Godfrey bought the Forge and rented out the whole complex, including three adjacent cottages, several brick-built stables, two orchards, and a meadow,  to George Emmett.[4] After William Godfrey’s death in 1827 the business was bought by William Passingham, a wheelwright and Blacksmith in Harmondsworth village, who gave it to his son John to manage. John employed three men and one boy in addition to the family members.  He married Ann Piecey and they had five daughters and two sons, John and William. As was the custom at that time the sons were expected to follow their father’s trade. These sons were apprenticed into the business, working with their father, but as the boys got older there was not enough work for all three of them. The eldest son, John, married and moved to Slough, where he and his wife, Harriet, had a total of 14 children only seven of whom survived their childhood.  John died in 1917. 

His brother William stayed in Longford and in 1890 William was working, and living with his elderly widowed father who was becoming increasingly frail. When his father died in 1892 he was consoled by the close-knit Baptist community around him. Four years later, when William turned 40, he considered that as a successful businessman, and a respected member of the community, it was time to take a wife and maybe raise a family to inherit the business. He was attracted to a young widow who had fallen on hard times and they married in July 1896. Unfortunately for William she had lied about her age and was considerably older than he knew. Also, she was not used to country living and she found it hard to adapt to her new rural life. She began to drink heavily, neglected her household duties and declined in health. Eventually she had a fit and lapsed into a coma. Her husband sent for her father and they agreed that he and her mother should take her home to nurse her. This was the end of the marriage, but it didn’t end without a public scandal as each took the other to court and their marriage was publicly dissected. William couldn’t face the shame and soon after the final court case he said goodbye to the rest of his family and made for Southampton where he boarded a ship for Cape Town. It was a radical step to take, but his chagrin and humiliation left him little choice. Mrs Florence Passingham died in Bethnal House Asylum in 1902. William Passingham died in Cape Town in 1927.

By then Ambrose Cure had bought the wheelwright and blacksmith’s premises and the goodwill of the business, still known as Passingham’s. Ambrose Cure was now in a position to marry, Maude, his sweetheart from London and they settled into the Longford community. However 31-year-old Ambrose Augustus Cure found his skills as a coach-builder were no longer required. The transport industry was in transition and horse-drawn vehicles were being superseded by bicycles and the internal combustion engine. By 1902, Ambrose Cure was selling up the plant and effects of the business to move abroad.[5] The couple emigrated to South Africa where he continued his trade as a blacksmith. They returned from Cape Town with their two small children in September 1904, but by the end of 1905 they set sail for Australia and arrived in Sydney after a voyage of 56 days.

It was only after his arrival in Australia that Ambrose Cure decided to sell the freehold of the Longford premises. In June 1906, the property was up for sale. The freehold property consisted of a brick and slated 6-roomed dwelling-house with lean-to greenhouse, timber and tiled tool shed, large barn used as wheelwright’s shop, and farrier’s shop with furnace and large yard; together with 3 cottages adjoining.[6] With the proceeds of the sale Ambrose Cure brought a dairy farm in Byron Bay, New South Wales, where he died in November 1955.

In 1908 Mrs M.A. Bateman of Manor Farm, Harmondsworth, bought the Forge workshop complex for £675 which included the three thatched cottages that had been owned by her son-in-law Tom Adams. Tom Adams remained as tenant at the Forge and workshop and in 1913 was paying £15 a year rent on a 21 year lease, and living in Pine House behind the workshop. He lived there for the rest of his life. In January 1938 the three thatched cottages were condemned by the council as unfit for habitation and a clearance order was submitted to the Department of Health. The only form of sanitation for the three cottages were two pail closets. There was a public inquiry and protests from the long-time residents, but the demolitions still went ahead after the residents were given six weeks to vacate. The displaced residents were rehoused on the new council housing estate at Bell Farm in West Drayton.

Tom Adams, as well as being a blacksmith doing repair and bespoke work, was the son of a builder and carpenter, and he could turn his hand to any handyman task required by villagers. When Christopher Challis bought the neglected Weekly house in 1948 as a home for his young family, it was Tom Adams who helped him renovate and conserve the, now, Listed building for us to see today. Thomas William Adams died in 1962.

In 2006 the whole complex of forge buildings were redeveloped. The plan was to demolish all the main buildings, leaving just the small kerbside forge workshop. In the area behind this building were built two residential blocks. One with six studio flats, and one with six one-bedroom flats, and this is what we see today as Blacksmiths Court and Kings Court.

Like the whole village of Longford, (and most of Harmondsworth) this twenty-year-old development is under threat of demolition if the third runway is built at Heathrow airport. However, while the ancient blacksmith’s forge building exists we have a reminder of its contribution to village life over the centuries.

A fuller version of these, and other stories, about Longford appear in my book

 “The Vanishing Village: A Legacy Lost to Heathrow’s Third Runway”.

[1] UK Detector Finds Database. http://www.ukdfd.co.uk/pages/crotal-bells.html

[2] https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/middx/vol2/pp165-168#fnn12

[3] Old Bailey Proceedings Online (www.oldbaileyonline.org, version 8.0, 09 January 2021), May 1765, trial of John Sharborn (t17650522-3).

[4] Morning Advertiser – Wednesday 16 May 1827.

[5] Uxbridge and W Drayton Gazette – Saturday 8 Marchg 1902.

[6] Uxbridge and West Drayton Gazette – Saturday 5 May 1906; ibid: Saturday 2 June 1906.

The Blacksmiths barn with the roof of the current building next to the caravan. 1940s

The layout of the buildings before redevelopment in 2006.

 

Heathrow Expansion: Eighty years of Bad Decisions

Heathrow destruction 1944

In 1939, at the beginning of WWII there were 351 people living in the hamlet of Heathrow. Some went off to serve in the Armed Forces, but the majority stayed to do their “bit” for the war effort by producing fruit and vegetables to sell at London’s Covent Garden market. For the patriotic farmers of Heathrow it came as a shock when on the 2 May 1944 a letter dropped through their letter boxes to say their land was being requisitioned and they had two months to pack up their homes, outbuildings, livestock, and, leaving their growing crops in the fields, find somewhere else to live.[1] The letter was from the Air Ministry and was in response to a decision made at the wartime coalition’s Cabinet meeting on 10 April 1944 when the Ministers had approved the “sterilisation” of the whole of Harmondsworth for the development of an airport.[2] However, just before D-day, with manpower and money in short supply, the Government could not afford to build more than three runways. The airport was to be built in stages. Stage one would be to requisition land south of the Bath Road (A4) which would completely remove Heathrow.

BAD DECISION NUMBER 1

The decision to fix Britain’s first international civil airport at Heathrow had first been muted by Lord Abercrombie who was commissioned to produce a Greater London Plan for post-war London. With the growth of air transport he knew that a civil airport would be needed after the war and he suggested ten possible sites around London. All of these existing airports were surrounded by housing estates and not expandable. The only leading contender was the Fairey Airfield at Heathrow, but there were many objections. Sir Richard Fairey did not want to give up his airfield. The Ministry of Agriculture did not want to bury the land, which, in Abercrombie’s plan, was described as “… a soil fit to be ranked with the world’s very best – a high-class market gardening and orchard soil, also growing fine grass and ordinary farm crops.”[3] It was not until just before D-day in 1944 that the Air Ministry began to construct the first stage by building three runways which would be completed by May 1946 at a cost of £3.8m. This stage would concrete over the grass Fairey airfield and all the Heathrow farms.

Stage 1 Airport Layout

Two years later on 10 January 1946, even before the airport was complete, Atlee’s post-war Cabinet meeting discussed a memorandum put forward by the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs, Viscount Addison.[4] It proposed the establishment of Britain’s main international airport at Heathrow. He said the site of the airport was chosen after prolonged survey of the London area and it was considered to be the only suitable location. It will be necessary to acquire a large tract of land to the north of the Bath Road as well as a number of areas adjacent to the present site. The total cost of acquisition of 4,219 acres will be £7m. About 170 houses would have to be demolished in the area south of the Bath Road as well as a substantial proportion of the 1026 houses in the area north of this road. Also there would need to be “sterilisation” of further land on which building would be “controlled”. The airport was to be called “London Airport” and the name Heathrow discarded. Estimated total cost of the airport, including rail and road construction, was £30 million, but he was unable to estimate how much revenue the airport would generate. Bizarrely the Minister was also considering leasing some of the “sterilised” area of land, and even the land between the runways, to market gardeners. Obviously not considering what aircraft engine emissions would do to the crops or the environment. Estimated use of the airport when two runways were available would be 500 flights a day in normal weather. Total passengers per day would be 8500 of whom 1020 would travel in peak hour. The number of passenger movements per day for the extended airport was “guessed” at 12,000 to 15,000.

BAD DECISION NUMBER 2

During the Cabinet meeting the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Hugh Dalton, accepted the need for an international airport at Heathrow but was concerned about the expenditure involved, and was not convinced that it was necessary at this stage to acquire land north of the Bath Road.[5] He strongly urged that the new enlarged scheme be postponed until 1950. Even though 2650 acres had already been destroyed and concreted, he proposed there should be a discussion about finding a new site for the airport where houses and valuable agricultural land would not be lost. The Minster of Town and Country Planning, Mr. F. Marshall, countered this by saying that all previous experience had shown the advisability of acquiring ample land in order to allow for unforeseen developments, and that unless the land was acquired now it was impossible to plan the development of the main roads in the neighbourhood. The Cabinet gave their approval for the development of the civil London Airport at Heathrow, which would be spread over the next eight years. [6]

Full airport plan proposed 1946

The civil airport opened in 1946. The original Fairey Hanger was used as a fire station, and ex-army tents were erected alongside the A4 as terminal buildings. The next phase of the development, which was to extend the existing runways, started in 1948 when more land to the south of the Bath Road was requisitioned. The Three Magpies public house on the Bath Road(A4) lost the remains of its six acres of land. The farms of the hamlet of Longford were requisition leaving so little agricultural land that farming was not viable. Only Perry Oaks sewage works remained. A further round of land requisition to the north of the Bath Road in 1960 for the building of a spur road from the M4 to the central airport buildings involved the demolition of the Old Magpies on the A4 and the removal of the farmland in Sipson. However as planes got bigger and passenger numbers increased there was still a need for a larger airport.

BAD DECISION NUMBER 3

The Roskill Commission was set up by the Government in 1968 to look into finding a site for a third London airport. London already had Heathrow and Gatwick and now there was a requirement for a four-runway airport. The Commission published its report in January 1971 and after initially considering 78 sites they recommended Cublington in Buckinghamshire as a suitable site. The Government rejected this suggestion and chose another site from the Commission’s short list which was Maplin Sands, Foulness Island, on the Thames Estuary. An Act of Parliament in 1973 paved the way for this development, but this was shelved after Labour came to power in July 1974. Instead a small-scale redevelopment of Stansted airport in Essex was agreed even though this was not a site short-listed by the Roskill Commission.[7]

BAD DECISION NUMBER 4

In 1991 the Transport Secretary, Malcolm Rifkind, promised a wide public consultation on the building of a third runway at Heathrow.[8] It started a wave of protest from local councils in Middlesex and Buckinghamshire, and local residents. [9] At the same time there were also suggestions that a fifth terminal could be built on the land then occupied by the Perry Oaks sewage works. The Middlesex Council were not happy about the loss of the sewage facility, and concerns were expressed by the Buckinghamshire County Council (on whose border it stood) about the increased noise and pollution of planes flying over the county.[10] All protesters were relieved when in October 1993 Heathrow Airport Ltd community relations manager, Jon Philipps, said Heathrow had no plans for a third runway as building a fifth terminal did not require another runway.[11]

BAD DECISION NUMBER 5

However in March 1994 the Department of Transport was holding exhibitions and public meetings about the possibility of building a third runway for completion by 2010. They leafletted all the homes in Harmondsworth and held exhibitions and public meetings in Harlington, West Drayton, Sipson, Uxbridge, Stanwell and Harmondsworth.[12] The preliminary design for the expansion would have removed the hamlet of Sipson, on the north side of the A4, and most of Harmondsworth. However in April 1994 at a meeting of the Hillingdon Council, whilst the public enquiry was still in progress, a copy of a letter from Heathrow Airport Limited was circulated. It read, “I can state categorically that at no stage has either Heathrow Airport Limited, or its parent company BAA plc given evidence to the RUCATSE (Runway Capacity To serve the South East) inquiry indicating support for another runway at Heathrow. The airport needs extra terminal capacity rather than runway capacity.” This letter was signed by Jenny Bradley, director of public affairs at Heathrow Airport Limited.[13] It was not until November 2003 that the government announced that there would be no third runway in the “short term” because to do so would break European pollution laws.[14] However, despite all the public enquiries and the protests from local councils and other public bodies, the fifth terminal was built and opened in 2008 which resulted in a subsequent increase in the number of flights from Heathrow airport.

BAD DECISION NUMBER 6

In 2012 the UK Government established an independent Airports Commission to look again at the future of London’s airports. The 2015 final report of this Commission concluded that Heathrow Airport required a new northwest runway.[15] On 25 June 2018 the House of Commons voted to adopt this recommendation. This time the plan was to demolish the hamlet of Longford on the western edge of the airport, and to extend the runway over the M25 with the motorway disappearing into a tunnel. The Colne River would also be placed in an underground culvert. The hamlet of Sipson would survive but would be so close to the third runway that life in any of the houses would be unbearable. The timetable for the construction was to begin in 2021, when planning consent would be sought from the various local councils, and then construction would begin in 2023. Fate intervened with the schedule in the shape of the pandemic of 2020, when air travel was severely reduced and extra airport facilities were not needed. All talk of building a third runway was quietly dropped, but the residents of the parish of Harmondsworth and its hamlets of Sipson and Longford were left, once more, in limbo with the threat of demolition postponed but not removed. After a change of Government, in January 2025 the new Administration revised the prospect of a third runway and once more the protests began. Successive governments with their short-term thinking and procrastination have blighted Harmondsworth parish for eighty years. The constant threat of further airport expansion, the insecurity of tenure, and uncertainty for the future, has caused a slow decline in the number of long-standing families staying in the parish. Speculators have moved in to buy up property, letting them out on short-term leases, or turning them into houses of multiple occupancy. Some of the many ancient Grade II listed buildings have been left unoccupied and decaying. If the voice of the 1946 Minister of Town and Country Planning had been heard, and sufficient land purchased at the outset for future development of the airport, it might have avoided the prolonged indecision and decades of controversy. Meanwhile the residents of Longford, Sipson and Harmondsworth are in limbo. They have fought hard over decades to preserve their pretty villages that have survived since the Saxons built settlements there. These once peaceful rural agricultural villages with over twenty listed buildings are once again facing an uncertain future.

For the story of what will be lost under the Third Runway read:

‘Longford: A village in Limbo’ by Wendy Tibbitts.

[1] Sherwood, Philip. Heathrow: 2000 years of history, (Stroud, 1999)

[2] The National Archives CAB 66/48/39

[3] Stamp, L.Dudley, ‘Land Classification and Agriculture’, in Abercrombie (ed.), Greater London Plan 1944. (London, 1945),p.87

[4] The National Archives. CAB 129/6/4 5 January 1946

[5] National Archives CAB 128/5/4

[6] The National Archives' reference CAB 66/48/39 April 1944

[7] Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roskill_Commission#

[8] Middlesex Chronicle - Thursday 10 January 1991

[9] Harefield Gazette - Wednesday 25 March 1992

[10] Bucks Advertiser & Aylesbury News - Friday 15 June 2001

[11] Hayes & Harlington Gazette - Wednesday 20 October 1993

[12] Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette - Wednesday 16 March 1994

[13] Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette - Wednesday 27 April 1994

[14] Wolverhampton Express and Star - Saturday 29 November 2003

[15] Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airports_Commission

The river built for a King’s vanity.

 

The bridge built by King William IV at Longford in 1834

The Longford River, in Middlesex, UK, is not a river but a canal cut by a King and now owned by a King. It starts from a place on the Colne/Wraysbury river in the village of Longford at a point just after a four-acre island. The main river flows on to join the Thames at Staines, whilst the man-made river flows south. This passes through the Middlesex villages of Stanwell and Bedfont where it is only metres away from one of Europe’s busiest Airports. It then flows through Feltham, Hanworth Park, Hampton and Bushy Park before fulfilling its purpose in the Hampton Court Palace water gardens and exiting into the River Thames.

This artificial river was dug on the orders of Charles I in 1638 to improve the flow of water to the Hampton Court fountains.[1] He designed the fountains to impress his wife, Henrietta Maria. It was often known as the King’s, Queen’s or Cardinal’s river, but is now universally known as the Longford River and is still Crown property.

Soon after the river leaves the River Colne at the Saxon village of Longford it crosses The Great Bath Road. This busy road, which leads to Windsor, Reading and Bath, was once in constant use by horses, carts and carriages. After years of coachmen having to negotiate the narrow bridge that crossed the Kings River, and over which successive Monarchs had been driven on their journey’s to and from Windsor, King William IV decided to do something about it. In 1834 he had built a cast iron bridge bordered on each side by an elliptical arch with a parapet with a trellis design. In the centre of the arch is a plaque with a raised crown and underneath “WR IV 1834”. This is now a Grade II listed structure.

 

As Crown property the river was strictly monitored to prevent any external encroachments on the river or its surroundings. In Victorian times only those granted permission by Mr. Jesse the Superintendent of Palaces were allowed to fish in the river. One of those granted a line permit was William Singleton, a grocer from Hampton. He was fishing at 7pm on 31 August 1846 when he saw two men retrieving stunned or dying fish that were floating on the surface from the river. The following morning about 6am a local Surgeon, Henry Jepson, who also had a permit, was fishing with a line when he was asked by Mr Plumbridge, a river inspector, whether he had seen anyone on the riverbank. Mr Plumbridge had received information that fish had been seen floating in the river, and a passerby had pointed out two suspicious men. Fifteen minutes later, the Doctor saw two men on the bridge looking down into the shallow water. It was a while before he saw what they were looking at until he spotted, laying on the bottom of the river, several large fish some dying, and some dead—they appeared to be under the influence of some narcotic and as he looked he saw more. They were everywhere. He pulled a couple of the roach out of the water and took them home to examine them. Later that evening, in the presence of Mr Plumbridge and of Mr Benbow, the local chemist, he surgically cut them open and discovered they had deep yellow matter in their stomachs, which he knew to be characteristics of the coculus indicus plant. This plant often called the Indian berry or fishberry induces stupefying effects, and although a poison was, until it was banned in the mid-nineteenth century, sometimes added to cheap beer to make it more intoxicating. Adding the berries or a paste of the berries would have stupefied the fish making them easier to catch. At the subsequent trial at the Old Bailey on 21 September 1846, nineteen year old Jesse Lucas, one of the men looking over the bridge, stood in the Dock. George Henry Benbow, a chemist from Hampton gave evidence that the accused came into his shop on the afternoon of 31 August and bought half-an-ounce of coculus indicus.

Mr Benbow said, “he did not ask for it by that name—I do not remember the name he called it—it is called by so many names—it was the common name—but I sold him half an ounce of coccnlus indicus—he did not say what he wanted it for—before he left the shop I cantioned him—I told him it was transportation to use it—I did not say what for”.

He told the Court that he was present when Mr Jepson opened the fish that had been removed from the river. “I am satisfied that what was found was coculus indicus—I know that it is sometimes mixed with dough and put into the water.”

Jesse Lucas was born in Hampton Common.[2] His father had died when he was a baby and he had been in trouble before, but had been holding down a job as a bricklayers’ labourer for the last 18 months. Now he was in serious trouble. When the two men were arrested, Lucas’s companion, Jim Lee, sprinted away and was never found. At the trial Jesse Lucas’ defence statement was, “I never chucked any stuff in.” Nevertheless he was found guilty and sentenced to transportation for seven years. He was first taken to Pentonville Prison and then transferred to Millbank and a prison hulk. Weighing 9st 11lbs he had to do hard labour until after eighteen months he was put on board the Anna Maria and sailed for Port Phillip, Melbourne, Australia. He then disappears from the records.

 

Fishing was not the only activity restricted by the Crown authorities. It was an offence to use the water for irrigation or to damage the river or its banks with any type of construction other than that authorised by the Crown authorities. In 1836 William Stevens of Longford was summoned before the Magistrates Court by the Superintendent of the water supply belonging to her Majesty to Hampton Court. Stevens was charged with pulling down and damaging the palisade fence enclosing the river. He was convicted with a penalty of twelve shillings and costs and sent to the treadmill for one month.[3]

 

The Crown employed men to help maintain the river, one such riverman was Thomas Hedges. He lived at the Kings Arms in Longford village. He used a long shallow boat like a punt to dredge the river and keep the banks clear of weeds. Hedges also had an obligation to report on misuse of the river. On 12 August 1878 Mr. Hedges was in the Kings Arm’s tap room when a labourer called Edmund Buckland accused Hedges of not lending him his boat. Hedges said he wouldn’t lend it to him and an argument broke out which resulted in a fight, although Hedges did not return the blows. Buckland was drunk and had previous convictions and was upset that Hedges had caught him netting the river. Buckland was found guilty of assault and was fined fifteen shillings (a week’s wages).[4]

 

The bridges over the Longford river had been maintained by the Crown authorities, but complaints about the narrowness of the bridges for modern traffic, caused conflict between the local council and H.M. Office of Works in the late 19th century. The Board declared it did not have a budget for replacing the bridges, nor were they willing to assign additional land for a wider bridge. In 1901 an attempt was made for the Middlesex County Council to take over the ownership of the bridges from the Crown, but negotiations broke down. The issue was still unresolved in 1913, when H.M. Office of Works said they had no money for bridge improvements but they were willing to re-open negotiations about the ownership of the bridges.[5] In fact under the Crown Lands Act 1906 bridges owned by the Crown could be transferred to any authority “willing and able to accept such a conveyance”. So one by one the local councils along the route of the Longford river applied to take responsibility for a bridge in their area and removing the necessity to keep applying the Crown when maintenance or improvements were necessary. They were however to do nothing that would interfere with the flow of the river.[6]

As well as the issue of the bridges there were other construction issues. There was a smallpox outbreak in 1907 and the Staines council wanted to build an isolation hospital near the Longford River. The Crown authorities objected strongly to this, the inference being that the river could be contaminated in some way.[7] In 1914 Feltham council applied to H.M. Office of Works for permission to utilise a portion of the Longford River as a bathing place, but permission was refused. However they did concede that if the Council wanted to build a swimming bath near to the river then, on receiving details, they would sanction the use of the water from the river. Council Surveyors estimated that such a swimming bath would cost £830, but with the start of the First World War, the Council decided to defer the proposal at that time.[8]

 

Occasionally nature interfered with river. In severe winters the river would freeze over. At other times the storms caused flooding. Cottages next to the river in Stanwell were flooded in 1914 and the council requested that the surface water be allowed to drain into the Longford river, but the Crown objected as they felt it would cause pollution.[9]

 

This water hazard also caused tragedy. In Hanworth in 1894 72 year old Charlotte Penfold accidentally fell in the river. Her body was seen floating down stream face down by a neighbour William Morgan. He managed to get her out of the water and called a doctor, but she was pronounced dead. At her inquest it was explained that she had recently had influenza and was still groggy when she went to the river bank to feed the ducks. It was thought she had become dizzy and fallen in and a verdict was returned of Accidental Death. Mrs Penfold had been a respected member of the parish of Hanworth for 35 years. Her late husband was the foreman at Curtis and Harveys Mills (gunpowder mill on Hounslow Heath) for many years. Another long-term worker from Curtis and Harvey accidentally drowned in the river in 1922. George Rowe, aged 71, of River View Villas, Bedfont, fell in the river. He was in the habit of rising early and walking along the banks to see his son.[10] Not all drownings were accidental. Elizabeth Martin, aged 31, was found drowned in the river, after leaving her three children with a neighbour and a note for her husband, who was working away. The inquest verdict was suicide.[11]

 

When Charles I began his quest for a picturesque water garden at Hampton Court and spared no expense in getting twelve miles of waterway cut from the Colne River to feed it, he probably never envisaged the growth of Middlesex surburbia, nor transport such as planes and automobiles. But the fact that it has survived for 385 years through changing times, and its tranquil waters and natural habitats have given pleasure to many over that time means that the river is well-loved and admired. It will be sad to see it disappear into a culvert at Longford if the third runway is built at Heathrow airport and the village of Longford is demolished.

 

Wendy Tibbitts is the author of “Longford: A Village in Limbo” now available in paperback and ebook.

For a “Look Inside” option for this book go to  https://b2l.bz/WUf9dc 

 

[1] Wikipedia. https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Longford_River_at_Bedfont_-_water_for_Hampton_Court_-_geograph.org.uk_-_112074.jpg

[2] Ancestry.co.uk

[3] Windsor and Eton Express – Saturday 24 December 1836.

[4] Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette - Saturday 24 August 1878]

[5] Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette - Saturday 27 September 1913

[6] Crown Lands Act 1906 An Act to amend the Crown Lands Acts, 1829 to 1894 1906 CHAPTER 28 6 Edw 7

[7] Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette - Saturday 28 September 1907

[8] Middlesex Chronicle - Saturday 07 November 1914

[9] Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette - Saturday 11 April 1914

[10] Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette - Friday 17 February 1922

[11] Uxbridge & W. Drayton Gazette - Saturday 18 April 1908