CHAPTER THREE.

Quite why my Great Grandad, George Mills, left Bridgwater in Somerset, to make his way to Edenbridge in Kent, where he married Emily, still eludes me. However, their marriage certificate, together with my Grandad's birth certificate, both showing that Emily's maiden name had been Fuller, was all the confirmation I needed to say that they were definitely one set of my paternal Great Grandparents.

With the knowledge gained from their marriage certificate I was then able to check the census years for the Fuller family in Edenbridge, from 1841 through to 1891 ----- although I didn't actually search them in that order!

Young Emily only gets a mention in the 1851 census, when she was just 2 years old, and is seen to be the daughter of George and Sarah Fuller ---- who were my paternal 2 x Great Grandparents.

Full Name	Relationship to the Head of the family	Condition	Age	Rank or Profession	Where born
George Fuller	Head	Married	38 years	Cordwainer	Hever,
Sarah Fuller	Wife	Married	29 years
Mary. A. Fuller	Daughter		9 years		Edenbridge
Henry Fuller	Son		7 years		--- ditto ---
George Fuller	Son		5 years		--- ditto ---
Emily Fuller	Daughter		2 years		--- ditto ---
Sarah Fuller	Daughter		3 months		--- ditto ---
James Chapell	Grandfather	Widower	75 years	Retired Tanner	High Wycombe, Bucks

As can be seen, from that table, there was one person living in the family's home on that census night in 1851, whose name was not Fuller. That person, was a 'retired tanner', called James Chappell. He was said to be a widower, 75 years of age, who had been born at High Wycombe, in Buckinghamshire. It also indicated that he was a Grandfather to the Head of the House.

Initially, my mind blanked out his relationship to the head of the household, and I merely took it to mean that he was Grandfather to George and Sarah Fuller's children. Consequently, I laboured under that misapprehension for some considerable time. Even after tracking down George Fuller's marriage to Sarah Chappell at Edenbridge Parish Church in 1840, I still continued with the thought that James Chappell was the grandfather to their children.

It wasn't until I had contact with another person who was researching the Fuller family in Edenbridge, that I came to realize that James Chappell wasn't the grandfather of George and Sarah Fuller's children. Instead, he was the Grandfather of Sarah Fuller herself, and not her father, as I had mistakenly thought.

The person that I was in contact with, was a Dave Fuller, who it would appear is distantly related to me. George and Sarah Fuller are our (i.e. his, and my, 2 x Gt. G/parents). My Great Grandma, Emily Mills (née Fuller) was the sister of Dave's Great G/dad, George Fuller.

I must admit to feeling quite excited when I found James Chappell's name on the1851 census return. I don't know why I felt so excited, after all, I didn't know anything about the man. He wasn't, as far as I knew, 'famous' ---- and his name had not filtered down through the family as him being a 'character'.

It was probably due to the fact that he was the very first ancestor that I had found, who was born in the 1700's. Until that moment, I hadn't really given much thought about the possibility of having ancestors back in the mists of time, but suddenly, there I was, the proud possessor of a 4 x Great Grandfather. Immediately, I wanted to know more about him ---- but how much, could I really discover?

His occupation, as shown on the 1851 census return, had indicated that he was a retired tanner, and that he had been born in High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire. Why had he 'migrated' from his birth place to Edenbridge in Kent ---- and when had the move taken place?

I decided to see what else I could learn, by looking for his name in the previous census for Edenbridge, which had taken place in 1841. It showed, that he was even living with George and Sarah Fuller at that time, in Edenbridge Street ---- but his age was given as being 60 years old. This was at variance with the 1851 census, ten years later, which had indicated he was 75 years old.

Ages shown on early census returns, are known for their lack of accuracy. Sometimes the enumerators were instructed to round ages up or down five years. Also, the people themselves, who were not necessarily very well educated a century or so ago, might not have known their exact date, or even, the exact year of their birth, and merely 'guessed' what their ages were. Imagine what it must have been like with large families comprising eight or more people, possibly with no written records in the house, to have to suddenly remember, when asked, the ages, or the dates of birth, of various members of their family. Therefore, I have to view James Chappell's age of 60 years in the 1841 census, and ten years later in the 1851 census, as being 75 years, with some degree of caution. Consequently, it makes it difficult to pin down his actual date of birth, which currently seems to lie between 1776 and 1780.

Although I haven't proven it for myself, as yet, my contact, David Fuller, seems to have found that James Chappell was married twice. His first marriage was to a Sarah, in 1796, whose maiden name isn't yet known. It would appear that they had several children together, namely:-

James Chappell	(born c.1800 ---- place unknown)
Henry Chappell	(born c.1805 ---- place unknown)
Harriet Chappell	(born c.1807 ---- at Edenbridge, Kent)
Ruth Chappell	(born c.1813 ---- at Edenbridge, Kent)
Eliza Chappell	(born c. 1815 ---- at Edenbridge, Kent)

According to Dave Fuller, it seems that James's first wife Sarah, died in 1829, probably in Edenbridge. Shortly after her death, James married his second wife, Maria Jeffery, in Edenbridge. I haven't found any children from that second marriage, and I wonder if it was childless marriage. James himself, would have been about 53 years old when he married Maria. The chances are, that Maria may have been older than James, in which case, it is doubtful that the marriage produced any children. It would also seem that his marriage to Maria only lasted ten years, as she died in 1839.

As I have already mentioned, when the 1841 census for Edenbridge was taken, the twice widowed James Chappell, was living with George and Sarah Fuller ---- Sarah, being James's granddaughter! There were no children living in the house at that time, which tends to make me think that there were no children from James's marriage to Maria.. If there had been children from that marriage, they would probably have been under 12 years old, and the chances are that they would have still been living with James.

Of the five children from James Chappell's first marriage, the one that ties in with my family, is his eldest son James, who was born in c.1800.

Quite where this particular James was born, isn't certain, but according to Pallot's Marriage Index, it shows that a James Chappell married an Elizabeth Stedall on the 26 April 1818 at the Church of St. George the Martyr in Horsleydown, Surrey. Then, three years later, on the 21 December 1821, the couple gave birth to their daughter, Sarah Chappell, also at Horsleydown in Surrey.

Now, whether or not, the James Chappell (b.1776) ---- Sarah's Grandfather ---- was living in Horsleydown when his first two children, namely James (b.1800) and Henry (b.1805), were born, isn't known. However, by the time the first of his daughters, Harriet, was born in 1807, it looks as though the Chappell family were living in Edenbridge.

In which case, did the young James Chappell (b1800) move to Horsleydown from Edenbridge'

His father ---- James Chappell (b. 1776) ---- had been a tanner during his working life and had probably worked in the tannery at Edenbridge. He may even have worked in the tannery at Horsleydowns, but I have no way of knowing that at present! The chances are, that the James Chappell (b.1800) would also have followed in his father's footsteps, and possibly he too may have worked in the tannery trade. And, if so, it might have been the reason that he was living in Horsleydown when he married Elizabeth Stedall and started his own family.

So far, I have been unable to trace the movements of James and Elizabeth after their daughter, Sarah's birth. Perhaps they all moved down to the Edenbridge area to be close to the rest of the Chappell family.

Alternatively, young James Chappell and Sarah might have died in Horsleydowns, and left the young Sarah as an orphan! In which case, Sarah might well have gone to live with her Grandfather in Edenbridge, who already had two youngish daughters of his own (Ruth and Eliza), who would probably still have been living with their father and mother. If this was the case, and Sarah grew up in Edenbridge, that would explain how she came to meet up with her husband-to-be, George Fuller.

We know that Sarah's grandfather's first wife died c.1829, and that he married Maria Jeffery shortly afterwards. If Sarah was living with them at that time, she would only have been about 9 years old, and her Grandfather's two daughters, ( Ruth and Eliza), would have been about 16 and 14 years of age, respectively. Perhaps it was the 'burden' of having three young ladies to bring up, that prompted him to marry Maria so soon after losing his first wife.

When his second wife, Maria died, in 1839, young Sarah Chappell ---- who would have been about 18 years old at that time ---- was probably on the verge of marrying George Fuller, which she did on the 8 February 1840. In so doing, if Sarah had indeed been brought up by her Grandfather, then the chances are, when she married George Fuller, she probably returned the 'favour' to her Grandfather by looking after him, in his old age.

Further research enabled me to obtain a copy of Sarah Chappell's marriage to George Fuller, the details of which, is shown here:-

The details show that my 2 x Gt. Grandfather George Fuller, was of 'Full Age' when he married Sarah Chappell, whereas she was 'Under Age'. In the early half of the 19th century it was not compulsory to give the correct age on marriage. 'Full Age' tended to mean 21 years or over, whereas ---- 'Minor' or 'Under Age' ---- meant between 12 and 20 years of age for a girl, or between 14 and 20 years of age for a boy.

Since George had been born c.1812, then he was about 28 years old when he married Sarah. She, however, having been born in 1821 was only about 19 years old ---- some nine years his junior! The age gap doesn't appear to have caused any problems as the couple went on to live into their eighties, and must have had a marriage that lasted some fifty years or so.

Their marriage details also show their father's names and occupations. George's father was John Fuller, a labourer, and that Sarah's was definitely James Chappell, a tanner. Which goes to show that the young James Chappell had followed in his father's footsteps, and also worked in the leather-making industry . Therefore, I suppose that it is conceivable that Sarah's father could have worked in the tanneries situated at Edenbridge and Horsleydowns.

Horsleydowns, as a place, no longer exists under that name. It was the area that sat between London's Tooley Street and the River Thames. It was amalgamated into Bermondsey at the end of the 19th century, and today comes under the London Borough of Southwark. In a contemporary book written by Walter Besant in 1898, he described the area of Horsleydowns at that time, as being :-

In the 1800's the buildings that were standing on that narrow strip of land between Tooley Street and the Thames were predominantly wooden properties that were built close together in narrow streets, and conspired to make the area an unhealthy place to live. A cholera epidemic made itself felt in Horsleydowns towards the middle of the century; and, if that wasn't trouble enough, in 1861 a great fire raged through the area for several weeks, fuelling itself on the vulnerable wooden buildings. The area was home to many trades, a lot of which were allied to the animal trade, which resulted in masses of burning fat from the warehouses floating down the river and setting alight small boats as it encompassed them. For months afterwards, it was said that local people waded into the river and skimmed off the floating fat. ( Quite what they did with the fat that they skimmed off, isn't mentioned ---- and one wonders what they used it for!)

The were many important trades that carried out their work in Horsleydowns, over the centuries, but the one that ties in with some of my ancestors, is the leather industry, although I cannot be absolutely certain that either my 4 times or 3 times Great Grandfathers ever worked there. The leather industry in that area dates back to the Middle Ages, and after Queen Anne granted the leather-workers a charter in 1703, it grew to become a main leather-working centre.

On the whole, 'finished' products made from leather are in many cases 'works of art'. They are lovely to handle and the finished articles have a delightfully distinctive smell that encourages people to 'sniff' them, just to see if the leather is real. However, the processes involved in the manufacture of leather in those days were absolutely revolting, and the smells were quite noxious. So much so, the trade was not welcomed in the City itself , and had to establish itself on the Surrey, or south side of the river.

The fact that the trade wasn't welcomed in the city wasn't particularly detrimental, as it was able to establish itself in an area where it was, in some ways a more advantageous position. Some of the elements used in the processing of the skins were readily available. The Thames, because it was tidal, was capable of supplying large quantities of water for the use of the tanners and leather-dressers, twice, in every twenty-four hours. Because the Surrey side of the river was more rural at that time, oak leaves used in the processing of the skins, were readily available. Added to this, the hides used in leather-making mostly came from London's butchers and slaughterers, which were sent over to the Skin Market in Bermondsey. Labour was cheaper on that side of the river, and once the finished product was ready for sale, there was a good market for it over in the City.

Other related trades flourished around the leather trade. The wool and hair which was separated from the skins was used for hat making. Animal horns were used to make combs, spoons, knife-handles etc., so that no part of the dead animal was ever wasted.

A company called Bevingtons started manufacturing leather in 1801 at their Neckinger Mill in Bermondsey. It is possible, that my forebears may have worked for that company ---- although at present I don't know how to prove if that was the case. One of the sons of the Bevington family chose to learn the practical side of the trade. In his old age, he gave an interview in the 1970s and spoke about his first day in the family's leather-works in the 1920s. Although he started work one hundred years on from when any of my ancestors would have worked in the trade, it gives a brief idea of why it was considered such a 'noxious trade'.

He also described the huge machines used for 'glazing', 'boarding', 'printing' and 'buffing' the skins:-

He also recalled that he was paid £3 for a full week's work, and that the day would begin very early and would not finish until 7pm.

Tanning in Edenbridge dates back to the late 1400s, and was carried out at various sites, until it eventually centred itself in the middle of Edenbridge at what was known as Whitmore's Tannery. The quality of their tanning was well known, and because of the demand, the Whitmore family, expanded the tannery's capabilities in the mid-1800s which provided employment for a workforce of some 70 local people. I don't suppose the processes involved in making the leather at Edenbridge was noticeably different from the processes at Horsleydowns, and therefore the people of Edenbridge would have 'enjoyed' similar smells hanging over their town, right up until the tannery closed in 1974.

As can be seen by the details from the 1851 census (see page 9), George and Sarah ---- my 2 x Gt. Grandparents were married and had established a family of their own. Their first daughter, Mary A. Fuller was said to be 9 years old at that time, which indicates that she must have been born about 1843. Thereafter, their other children seemed to 'arrive' at intervals of two years. Henry was born c. 1844; 'young' George, around about 1846; Emily ---- who was to become my Great Gran --- was born in 1848. The last child listed on that census was 'young' Sarah who was just 3 months old when the census was taken. Also in the house was my 3 x Gt. Grandfather, James Chappell, the retired tanner.

My Gt. Gt. Grandfather, George Fuller, who was born at Hever in 1812, was the son of a labourer. I am assuming, since Hever was in the heart of the Kent countryside, that his father was an agricultural labourer, and not a general or builder's labourer. As agriculture was in decline in the 1800's perhaps George decided it would be better to take up a different sort of occupation to that of his father, and became a cordwainer instead.

A 'cordwainer', is another name for a boot and shoe-maker. The word itself, is derived from an area in Spain, called Cordoba, noted for its fine black Morocco leathers, which were known as 'cordwain' or 'cordovan'. Whether or not, George, was actually skilled in making boots and shoes from fine leathers, or whether 'cordwainer' was a general name for shoe-makers, is something I'm not too sure about. I'm inclined to think, that he possibly worked in, or for the tannery in Edenbridge ---- although in the 1891 census, at the age of 78, he is shown as being a cordwainer, and 'working on his own account' ---- which seems to indicate that he was 'self-employed'!

The tools used in making of footwear, at least up until the middle of the 19th century, hadn't really changed much since the time of the Egyptians. An Egyptian sandal-maker, 3500 years ago, would have had a basic kit containing a curved awl for making holes in leather, and a chisel-type knife and a scraper. By the 1850's, only a few other items had been added to the shoemaker's complement of tools ----- namely, pincers, a hammer and a lapstone, upon which they would beat the leathers. In addition to these, the cordwainer would have had a variety of 'rubbing' sticks which he used for finishing edges and heels.

Before the days of mass production, the cordwainer would have started to make a pair of shoes, or boots, by making an outline of the sole of his customers foot. He would then, whittle or chisel a piece of wood into the rough size and shape of the 'footprint'. This imitation foot was known as a 'last' ---- which is derived from the Old English word 'laest', meaning 'a footprint'. A last does not have the exact same size and dimensions of the foot it was originally 'out-lined' from. It is purely a shape that is similar to an anatomical foot, and is sufficiently different in size to enable the various processes for making of the shoe to be carried out. Also, up until the 1850's most shoes were made on straight lasts, with absolutely no difference between the right and left shoe. 'Breaking in' a new pair of shoes was not easy, and one's poor old feet suffered considerably in the process. There were only two widths to a shoe size; a basic last was used to produce what was known as a

'slim' shoe. When a 'fat' or 'stout' one was required, the shoemaker would place a cone of the last pad of leather over the last to create the additional foot room necessary.

In its day, prior to machines being used in the industry, footwear made in Edenbridge had an excellent name in Croydon, London and elsewhere. Whether this good name came from fashionable shoes and boots made from 'fine leathers' or merely from the quality of the leather used in making the soles, is something I haven't discovered. The tannery at Edenbridge was noted for the toughness of its leather, which made it eminently suitable for making the soles of boots and shoes ---- and stood up well to the hard wear they received from the unmade roads around Edenbridge. It is also said, that because the footwear had to take such a hard pounding ---- there was also reasonable livelihood for numerous shoe-repairers in that area.

From about 1840, as the century progressed, and mechanization entered the trade, the industry in Edenbridge slid into a steady decline. At one time, there had been over seventy 'hands' working at shoe-making. Even the flax used in sewing

the leathers was grown, dried and spun locally. It was spun by old women and sold by them at four pence a ball (in 'old' money).

Although I'm happy to think that my 2x Gt. Grandfather, George Fuller may have been one of the very last cordwainers working in Edenbridge, I don't really have such a comfortable feeling, when I consider the circumstances that may have put him in that position. In the 1891 census he was shown to be 78 years old, and 'working on his own account'. Was he still having to work at that age to eke out a living for himself and his wife, because they didn't have a pension or any other monies to live on' He died c.1895 at the age of 82. Did he, I wonder, have to work right up until the day he died'

As far as I can see, the Fuller family lived in Edenbridge, for most of the 1800s. Their names appear in all the censuses from 1841 right through to 1901.

In 1841 their home was said to be in Edenbridge Road, which I take to be the road that runs from Marlpit Hill down past the two railway stations through to Dencross. Today, it is split into three sections ---- Main Road (up by Marlpit Hill) ---- Station Road ---- the High Street (through the main part of town) ---- and Mill Hill ( leading down to Dencross).

At the time of the 1851 and 1861 censuses, they were living at Marlpit Hill, Edenbridge.

In 1871, they were living at what was known as No. 9, Goodwin Cottages, Edenbridge. 'Goodwin', being the name of a family of local builders who built the properties at Marlpit Hill.

The 1881 census shows them living at Marlpit Hill, and in the 1891 census, it shows that two Fuller families were living at numbers 9 and 10, Marlpit Hill Cottages.

By the time the 1901 census was taken, my 2 x Gt. Grandparents George and Sarah Fuller had both died, but their son George (b.1845), was still living with his own family at No.10, Marlpitt Hill Row.

The following picture gives a view of Marlpit Hill Cottages as they possibly looked back in the early 1900s ----- I wonder if any of the people pictured, were Fullers!

Unfortunately, when censuses were first introduced, the streets and houses weren't as clearly identifiable with their names and house numbers, as they are today.

Consequently, with the passage of time, and the way that towns and villages have changed over the years, it is sometimes difficult to place exactly where our ancestors lived.

Although the various censuses show slightly differing addresses for the Fuller family, from what I have managed to glean, it would seem that they were all one and the same place. Today, the humble cottage(s) in which they lived are 'listed' properties, and are now known as The Row, Marlpit Hill.

As I mentioned earlier, young Emily Fuller, who was destined to grow up and marry George Mills, and would eventually become my Great Grandma, only had her name mentioned in one of the censuses for Edenbridge ---- namely, the one for 1851 when she was a little over two years old.

By the time the 1861 census took place, both James Chappell (b.1776) and young Emily's names had both disappeared from the household. In all probability 'old' James had probably died. I have found a James Chappel (only one 'L'), whose death was registered in Sevenoaks, during the first quarter of 1859 and entered on Page 266, in Volume 2a of the registers. I haven't as yet checked out whether or not this is 'my' James Chappell, but it could well be! If so, he would have been about 83 years old when he died, and would account for why he doesn't appear in the 1861 census.

Young Emily Fuller would have only been about 12 years old when that census was taken, and her absence from the household on that census night, isn't quite so easily explained away.

Life, was very different to the way that ours is conducted today, and the chances are, although she was still only a child in our eyes, she could very well have been working and living away from home. She could have been employed as a domestic servant, and living at her place of employment. Another possibility, is that she could have been away from home, visiting relatives when the census was taken. Sometimes, in those days, when aunts and older sisters were taken ill, or about to have a baby, it wasn't unusual for a girl of her age to be sent around to their relatives home, with a view to looking after any young children that may be on hand.

To-date, I haven't been able to pick up on her whereabouts for either the 1861 or 1871 censuses ---- nor on the whereabouts of her husband-to-be, in those years.

Was her husband-to-be working and living in Edenbridge prior to their marriage, or had he merely gone there to get married? How and where would they have met each other?

I cannot even pin them down to where they were living after they got married in 1871, although it's possible that they may have lived in Edenbridge for awhile.

At some stage after their marriage they moved to other areas of the country, perhaps looking for labouring work. I still have no idea as to what sort of labourer my Great Grandad George Mills might have been. He could have been an agricultural labourer, a general labourer, a builder's labourer, or he may even have 'laboured' on the railways. Although I cannot substantiate it, my feelings are that he may have been a railway labourer ---- perhaps even a 'navvy'. The couple's movements after their marriage seem to show that all of the places they were known to have been, were either on, or close to railway lines.

According to the 1881 census, their first child, William Mills, was born at Winchfield, Hants in 1875 ---- so presumably the family was living there at that time. That census also shows that, Edith, their second child was born in 1876 at Lamberhurst, in Kent ---- so again, it is presumed that the family must have been living/working in the area at that time.

(1) 1871, at the time of their wedding, and 1875, when their son William was born in 1875 at Winchfield.

(2) From 1876, at Lamberhurst, when Edith was born, until the time of the 1881 census at Sevenoaks.

The fact that they moved from the Winchfield area to the Lamberhurst in the space of what could have been two years, or less ---- could that indicate that they were on the move every couple of years or so?

After the birth of their third child, John Mills ---- my Grandfather-to-be ---- nothing more is known of the family's whereabouts until I made a start at looking into his short life. At which time, I suddenly discovered that George and Emily had had a fourth child, Harry, who, according to the 1891 census, had been born in the Maidstone area. However, I will come to that later!

The fact that they had also moved from Sevenoaks to Maidstone within the space of two years ---- like the Winchfield to Lamberhurst move ---- does seem to indicate that the family might have moved every couple of years or so.

Stagecoaches were still about in the 1800s, but by the middle of the 19th century, especially in London and the South-east of England, railways were spreading themselves out all over the countryside. Consequently, with this faster and infinitely more comfortable means of transport, the demand for stagecoach travel went into a steady decline. By 1900 most, if not all, of the stagecoach companies had ceased to operate. However, whilst railroads were in their infancy, there were nowhere near as many railway stations and cross country links that there are today. The chances are that some form of horse-drawn carriages was still the mode of transport for places that were away from the railway routes.

In fact, in London, when London Bridge, Paddington and Euston Stations were built in the 1830's, because there was no connection between them, the number of horse-drawn buses, the fore-runner of London's omnibuses, increased considerably. In 1850, a traffic count in Cheapside and London Bridge showed that 1000 vehicles a day were passing through these areas, which all added to an incredible amount of manure having to be removed from the streets. On rainy days, straw was scattered in walkways, the fronts of stores, and even in carriages themselves, to soak up the mud and filth.

Could they have afforded to travel about by train, as a family? How did they manage to transport the necessities of everyday life?

If they were moving home every couple of years or so, surely they had household possessions that they had acquired and needed to take with them. By today's standards the possessions may not have amounted to very much, but some of them would have had to be taken to their new home! In the move from Hampshire to Kent, c.1876, not only did Gt. Grandma Emily Mills have her young son, William, who was under 2 years old, to cope with ---- but the chances are that she was also pregnant with her second child, Edith.

As I mentioned earlier, after the 1881 Sevenoaks census, the Mills family 'disappeared' without trace ---- for awhile!

Their 'disappearance', seemed to substantiate the story that my Grandad-to-be, John Mills, had been orphaned at an early age and the thought that some illness or other might have caused the death of his parents --- and perhaps, even caused the death of his siblings ---- William and Edith!

Alternatively, perhaps only the parents died, and all three children were orphaned as a result. If that was the case, and, if they were all quite young, there was always the possibility that they were placed in an orphanage somewhere. Once in the orphanage, and with the passage of time, maybe they become separated somehow and eventually lost contact with one another.

Could they have all survived to adulthood ---- and, if so ---- what happened to William and Edith?

The only thing that I knew for certain was that my Grandad, John Mills, who had been born in 1881, had definitely reached adulthood, joined the Royal Navy, married my Gran, was the father to my Dad; and had been drowned at sea when he was just 26 years old!

Therefore, with this rather scant bit of knowledge, I decided that it was time to try and look into his short life to see what I could find out about him.