Search This Blog

Sunday, 26 January 2020

George saves the world



George saves the world

George Livesey, from the early 1870s, began to move into a world of gas politics much bigger than the area covered by a South Met. Gas or indeed, South London.  Livesey was to play a major role in the way in which gas companies were to operate in the future.  As we shall see by the end of the decade South Met. had become the major gas company in London playing a role, via Livesey, to which all the others had to conform.

The way in which public utilities were provided was changing as the 19th century progressed.  Local authorities war still major customers for town gas using it for street lighting. Increasingly public utilities were managed by local authorities and outside London a great many gas works were municipally owned. In London the gas companies remain private but increasingly  they had to interact with government bodies concerned with public finance and regulation and also with the changing world of London politics where a fragmented system of small parishes were being supplement by London wide bodies.


Clearly George Livesey had been enmeshed in national gas politics through his involvement, and indeed leadership, of the national British Association of Gas Managers throughout the 1860s. The 1870s were to see him move into ‘the lead’ of the London Gas industry

First we need to look briefly at the shape of the London gas industry in 1871 when George took over as Engineer and Secretary of the South Metropolitan Company. 

THE LONDON GAS INDUSTRY IN 1870

We need to look at the shape and trends within the London gas industry before the 1870s.  It is not always easy to define what we mean by London, since the Greater London which we know now simply didn’t exist.  Livesey himself would probably have gone along with the definition which evolved in his lifetime which was the area covered initially by the Metropolitan Board of Works and later, from 1889, the London County Council.

In the first chapter we left the first Thomas Livesey inventing the means of gas company management in the first gas company, the Gas Light and Coke Company – also known as the Chartered - in the 1820s and 1830s.  Since then the industry had grown very quickly as small gas companies opened, closed or were taken over.   By the early 1870s the Chartered had grown and prospered.  Their earliest works – first of any gas company was in Great Peter Street, Westminster, and had supplied gas since 1813.[1]   They had built two other early works Brick Lane[2]  and Curtain Road.[3]  These were all closed in the 1870s having been replaced from 1868 by the enormous Beckton works on the borders of East Ham and Barking.[4]

The Imperial Gas Light and Coke Company had opened three works in the 1820s St Pancras,[5]   Shoreditch,[6] and Fulham.[7]  Like the Chartered Company they had a large out of town works, at Bromley by Bow on the River Lea, opening in 1870.[8] A number of smaller companies also operated individual works in north London and had survived into the 1870s. The earliest of these works was the City of London Company whose Blackfriars works dated from 1814[9]  Others taken over by the Chartered included Bow Common,[10]   Pimlico,[11] and Silvertown[12]  and later during the 1870s Haggerston, [13]  and Kensal Green[14].  All of these companies would eventually be taken over by the Chartered and only the Commercial Gas Company in the east end remained outside the Chartered to become part of George Livesey’s sphere of influence. They had works at Stepney, [15] Sun Tavern Fields,[16] and Wapping[17]  and were to open a works in Poplar in 1878.[18]

South of the river was of course George Livesey’s home territory at the Old Kent Road gas works. The area had been dominated by the Phoenix Company. They had taken over an original works belonging to the South London Company set up before 1816 in Bankside[19] and also had a works in Pocock Street[20] in the Borough.  In 1826 they added a site in Greenwich and in 1846 a works was opened at Vauxhall.[21] In the same area the London Gas Light Company had broken all precedent by operating on both sides of the river.  They had a works west of the Phoenix Works in Nine Elms Lane.[22]  Other works in south east London were the Rotherhithe Works[23] owned by the Surrey Consumers Company who had also taken over a smaller works in Deptford.[24]  There were two works in Woolwich[25] and a tiny works in Eltham.[26]

Beyond these works and in the area now covered by Greater London and the various counties were numerous other works many of which were to be affected by George Livesey’s actions in the next few years.  This included another south London company to the west in Wandsworth. Their large works dated from 1834 and grew to be the Wandsworth and Putney Gaslight and Coke Company, taking over many works outside of the LCC to the south west[27] but apparently uninvolved in the company takeovers of the companies to the east and north of them.

A BIT MORE BACKGROUND - WHAT DO WE MEAN BY ‘LONDON’?
From the early 19th century the area we now call London was growing rapidly.  In local government terms London did not really exist – except in the tiny area governed by the ancient Corporation of the City of London confined behind the Roman wall.  Outside of the City, apart from its Liberties, local government was still down a multiplicity of parishes within the County areas of Middlesex, Essex, Surrey and Kent. In 1854 a Royal Commission had proposed a system of boroughs with a central Board of Works and an Act of Parliament in 1855 set up the Metropolitan Board of Works, made up of nominees from the parishes. This system lasted until the setting up of the London County Council in 1889.

The Metropolitan Board of Works was from the start concerned with London wide public utilities and it is for the sewers that they were most famous.  However throughout this period public works in the area we now call London involved various Government bodies, principally the Board of Trade, the Metropolitan Board of Works, the City Corporation and the parishes.  It was into this system that George Livesey brought the privately owned London gas companies in an attempt to bring about change.

Part of this was the continuing mergers of the London gas companies into large bodies north and south of the river, and also about measures taken to regulate pricing of gas which was still mainly sold to the local authorities for street lighting.

It should be noted any gas company selling gas for public supply had to have its own Act of Parliament to allow it to undertake works in the public realm.  In practice most companies of any size would have to obtain an Act of Parliament for almost any activity thus they were well used to Parliamentary procedures, but this system also allowed the Government to insist on regulation as part of any Act which a company wanted. Everything they did had to be approved by the Board of Trade.

SO WHAT HAPPENED -    FIRST OF ALL REGULATION OF PRICING.

What George Livesey did was to give evidence to a Select Committee on gas pricing which was different to the policies of London gas works management, including the South Met. Board. He proposed a radical new method of gas financing.

Throughout the middle years of the 19th century the relationship of price and efficiency in public utility companies was linked to their ownership. ‘Consumer Groups’ were set up – mainly by the local authorities – that made a fuss if they thought prices and profits were too high.  They pointed out that gas company profits were being made at the public expense.

A number of possible solutions had been put forward to try to make shareholders more accountable to the public interest.  Outside of London this had sometimes been solved by setting up a gas works owned by the local authority or by stipulating in the gas company’s necessary Act of Parliament that share ownership should be local.  However in London where gas companies were entrenched and had been set up in the earliest days of the industry this was not really possible

Attempting regulation through ‘districting’ and ‘consumer’ companies was tried. As described earlier with, varying success.  Those Governments which favoured ‘free trade’ discouraged districting and accepted the accidents and inconvenience which went along with a free for all. If they accepted regulation then the results were price rings and complacent companies. 

As described above a ‘consumer’ company had been set up in Rotherhithe.  When it was opened gas prices had indeed fallen quickly as other nearby companies lowered their prices to meet the competition.   As a result they kept existing customers who did not want the disruption of moving so the new company did not get enough customers to keep their low prices in place. Very soon they opened negotiations with the rival existing companies and a price ring was established.

After 1872 it was possible for a local authority to set up a gas works without a private Act of Parliament. By 1881 there were 60 municipally owned gasworks.[28] Failure to municipalise gas in London may have been because of the capital’s divided local government structure. [29] The parishes were mainly small with few officers and little expertise [30] with the wealthy City Corporation generally not politically sympathetic.  When the Metropolitan Board of Works was set up in 1855 it seems likely that among the opponents to it were the gas company directors.

In London therefore a method was needed which could reconcile the public interest with that of the private companies. What had emerged was ‘legislation in1860 which put forward the idea that (gas) companies should have a reasonable prospect of obtaining from time to time with ‘due care and management’ the maximum dividend’. [31]   The phrase ‘due care and management’ was resonating for many years.

One solution was seen as company amalgamations to reduce the number of small gas companies and thus achieve efficiency savings – and we will come to those in the next section.  The other solution was to find a regulatory device – and that was where George came in.

After the formation the Metropolitan Board of Works they began to work jointly with the City Corporation. Throughout the 1860s gas bills were submitted to the two authorities and inquiries held into the working of the private gas companies.   George Livesey was heavily involved in this – writing to the press, speaking at meetings and no doubt undertaking very many private conversations. 

A Southwark Gas Consumers’ Committee was set made up of ‘sundry gents in white chokers’. [32]  It was also rumoured that a Bill was to be put to Parliament to set up an elected board to manage gas supply the whole metropolitan area

In January 1874 three bills were submitted to Parliament by the London local authorities. One was to buy p and muncipalose the gas companies. Another  was to establish a competing gas supply. The last was for a regulation bill. [33] Any purchase was, of course, dependant on the continued support of the City Corporation – the only body with enough cash to pau for it.. That summer George Livesey was the President of the British Association of Gas Managers and mentioned the situation in London in his presidential address. He spoke strongly about the importance of independent gas companies against the monopoly position of municipal supply. It was noted that he ‘had the courage to say that gas companies have duties’. [34]

The gas companies expected compulsory purchase by the Metropolitan Board of Works to take place at any moment.  The North London based Chartered and the Imperial even agreed to it[35]  and South Met in November 1874 minuted that it was inevitable.  Because the South Met. chairman could not attended all meetings,  George was sent along on the  Company’s  behalf with , instructions to no more than listen, take notes, and report.  By early 1875 the various London gas companies had sorted out their position and drafted a petition against the Metropolitan Board of Works’ Parliamentary Bill.  George Livesey was asked to present this on behalf of South Met.

In June 1875 yet another Select Committee into the Metropolitan Gas Companies was set up. Gas managers and directors appeared before it to give evidence and defend their company interests. George Livesey spoke, not for South Met. but for the Board of Trade and the Government.  He put a view which was distinctly at odds with that of his company – and indeed of all the other gas companies. He said that he had no choice but to appear as he was under ‘speaker’s orders’ to do so. It is nevertheless clear that he had been persuaded to do this by officers at the Board of Trade.

He explained that gas consumers have no protection ‘if it were distinctly interests of the company to serve the consumers then the consumers would be well served’ and more tellingly ‘we should make them partners’.[36] This is a phrase which was to resonate through a lot of what George had to say in the coming years but at the moment he confined it to profits and prices. What he proposed was to be known as the ‘sliding scale’ and basically it allowed dividends to be paid only as a result of prices going down.

We should appreciate George's position on this committee – regardless as to whether or not he was coerced by officials.  He was an employee of the South Metropolitan Gas Company and the policy which he was advocating was not that of his Board - in fact some of them violently opposed it. It was a policy which went again the interests and beliefs of the other London Gas managements.  He was still a young man at the start of his career. Such behaviour might have been acceptable if he was an elder statesman on the point of retirement and ‘when he attended meeting of companies  ....  He was treated with a marked degree of incivility’.[37]

When he put forward his proposal the pricing system in the London Gas industry was ruled by a decision taken in 1868.   This had set up a system of adjudication on price by the Board of Trade. Gas companies were expected to keep their prices low and illuminating standards high consistent with ‘due care and management’ and then they got 10 per cent dividend for themselves.  The 1875 proposal suggested by Livesey was for an automatic system whereby as prices fell so profits might go up and, of course, vice versa.  It was widely accepted on all sides that this was his idea
Gas companies could do very little to expand or change without Parliamentary permission via a private Bill.  Thus the system which had been employed by governments for many years which was designed to enable Government policies to be imposed on gas companies had been to produce model clauses which the gas companies were obliged to accept when presenting a Bill to Parliament.   

Governments could therefore expect to force all gas companies to accept Livesey’s sliding scale
The London gas companies reacted with horror to this regulation of their prices and profits.  Over the next few years, one by one, they were obliged to accept.

Compared with the other London Gas companies  South Met’s financial situation  was very advantageous and they were able to charge low prices down and keep them low. If you listened to George Livesey and no one else you would think it was entirely down to his efficient management but this was not really the case.  The company he had inherited was said to be 'the very best Metropolitan gas management ... his path strewn with flowers of the rarest and choicest buds the cultivation of which should have been a labour of love and pleasure’.  [38]  We have seen how Thomas Livesey and Chairman Thomas Bridges Simpson had built up a large suburban district which had gradually expanded so that capital expenditure could take place gradually as other building works took place. It was a policy which had paid off. It meant that they had never needed to raise large sums of capital and so did not have a large number of shareholders to service and pay out dividends to, and thus no need to raise prices.

GEORGE IN TROUBLE – THE NEXT SOUTH MET. COMPANY MEETING

After George’s appointment as South Met. Secretary and following the gas workers’ strike, company meetings began to take an unusual turn. It was clear that following his evidence to the Select Committee on the sliding scale that something would be said at Board level and would be repeated at the twice yearly meeting of shareholders

Almost immediately after the Select Committee the South Met. Board passed a resolution against the sliding scale and its enforcement on the company.  The company Chairman then was still the long serving and very elderly Thomas Bridges Simpson who was understandably proud of the work he had done for the company and what had been achieved.

The October 1875 shareholders’ meeting was clearly unusual in that the meeting was packed. Simpson asked for the share register and the list of those present to make sure all of them were shareholders.  He said that strangers should be required to leave the room before a vote was taken. #

We must assume that the resolution was to be one condemning George Livesey.  when the registers were examined it turned out that most of the incomers ware workers from the Old Kent Road works all  holding one and two shares and ask all entitled to vote. Simpson was very angry “the meeting is packed – there are parcels of our workmen who will do whatever our Secretary tells them – I do not know who brought them here – our Secretary I suppose”.  George replied “I thought, sir, that you had withdrawn your charge of my having packed the meeting. Had I really had done so I would have done it twice over.” Simpson replied “you did it before”  which must mean the meeting three years previously from which Livesey had emerged with an increased salary.   He went on to defend his evidence giving to the Select Committee “I took very independent action before Parliament and I can tell you I was actuated with the single idea of benefiting the company.”[39]

It is ironic that the first instance of share ownership by Old Kent Road workers was so that Livesey could pack company meetings.   This was just the start.

COMPANY AMALGAMATIONS – HOW GEORGE AND SOUTH MET. TOOK THE LEAD

George Livesey was also involved in another aspect of government policy towards gas companies in the 19th century. This was to implement company amalgamations.

The structure of the London gas industry has been described above. Government thought on the structure for the industry not only covered the sliding scale and gas pricing but also on economies of scale.   Some of the older gasworks were very small and sited in the inner city where pollution and danger from fire were very real issues. It was thought that more efficiently produced gas would be cheaper gas

The lessons of the Chartered Company’s Beckton Works were seen as crucial.  Their three original works were all built before 1815 and landlocked in the inner city – with no river or canal access for coal deliveries.  The company had expanded and grown but were unable to enlarge these sites. They were also under pressure from various ‘consumer groups’ to become lower prices. The eventual, and sensible, solution was to build a large out of town works on a down river site ever since known as ‘Beckton’ –after the Chartered's Governor was responsible the policy, Simon Adams Beck.  This enormous works is usually described – like Livesey’s East Greenwich – as the ‘largest in the world’.  Government was impressed and the issue had been taken up as early as 1857 by Mr. Cardwell in his Select Committee Report.  He recommended an amalgamation of the inner city gas companies in order to reduce expenditure and better serve consumers.

The first wave of amalgamations took place in North London – in which Livesey was not involved.  By the late 1870s the area north of the Thames had been reduced to two companies – the greatly expanded Chartered with their head office in Westminster and the Commercial - a small company which operated in riverside inner east London.

The gas industry in South London was also in involved in the push to form larger companies and when Thomas Livesey died in 1871 George had been involved in discussions on a takeover of South Met by the Phoenix.  In South London the Phoenix was the large company with four works, which was expected to take over the very much smaller South Met.  All of these amalgamations involved bids and subsequent discussions on the complex arrangements of company finance. They then had to be submitted to the Board of Trade and passed through a Parliamentary process.  

When George Livesey took over management at South Met they seemed likely to be swallowed up by another larger Company.  The largest company in inner South London was Phoenix and the smallest was Surrey Consumers.  Also, in a more ambivalent position of being in both south and north London was the London Company.

South Met had been approached in early 1871 by the smaller Rotherhithe based Surrey Consumers Company with the offer of a merger which they had turned down.[40]  Negotiations with the larger Phoenix Company had continued but there had been numerous hold ups – South Met director John Ewart had died, then it was the conference season, then Thomas Livesey died, shareholders were doubtful, and then the local authorities objected on grounds of possible price rises.

By 1875 a general amalgamation of all gas companies was being discussed. The South Met. Board however passed a resolution to ’at all costs to maintain the independence of the company’. [41] In November the Chartered made an offer to takeover all three South London companies.  All refused.
Meanwhile South Met went ahead with a new parliamentary bill passed in 1876. Crucially it gave them powers to take over other gas companies – as the predator rather than a victim.
As soon as their new Act was passed Livesey called a meeting with Phoenix and Surrey Consumers to discuss a merger.  Surrey Consumers were then in discussion with the Chartered and they were so frightened by the approach from South Met. that their engineer went straight off to Horseferry Road to see the directors of the Chartered. He called them out of a meeting and demanded an immediate resolution to take them over. Next he went straight to the Old Kent Road and suggested to Livesey that South Met. too might like to be taken over by Chartered. Livesey’s said he would ask his Board.
What South Met Board thought was quite clear.  They should proceed with discussions in South London saying that they should ‘break up the coalition operating against us and exclude the Chartered Gas Company from obtaining a footing in the district south of the river’.[42]
Chartered Company prepared packages of amalgamation with all the South London companies but they appear however to have been frightened off by the low prices which South Met charged for gas.  They offered to take over the other south London companies in an attempt to isolate Livesey.  What Chartered did not know was that Livesey was continuing in discussions with Phoenix.  In 1879 Phoenix broke off negotiations with Chartered and announced that an amalgamation with South Met was to go through. [43].  Soon both Surrey Consumers and Phoenix were part of South Met.  This involved a considerable shake up of board members and staff but Livesey remained for the moment as Secretary and Chief Engineer.

It should be noted that from then on that Chartered treated South Met as an equal rather than a potential takeover bid. 

London Gas politics now appeared to consist of two blocks north and south of the river with only the Commercial Company remaining independent and they soon also became a client company of Livesey

There was another problem which was difficult to deal which was the existence of the London Company which had a district covering both north and south of the Thames.  South Met’s low prices in South London were an important factor in any proposed takeover.  The Board of Trade would not agree to a merger with a north London company if it meant any south London gas prices customers going up to more than if they were supplied by South  Met. 

The London Company was however taken over in 1883 by the Chartered which gave them a foothold south of the Thames. The agreement between the London Company and Chartered said that south of the Thames the Chartered could not charge a higher rate than that charged by South Met. But if Chartered prices went down South Met did not need to lower theirs to match them. This meant that Chartered prices even north of the river were tied to South Met. prices.  So Livesey was in the position of setting the gas prices for the whole of London

South Met. was now a very large company controlling a major section of the London Gas Supply. Clearly Livesey's ambitions did not end there.  He began discussions with Chartered on a merger between them and South Met.  This was stopped by the Board of Trade at the request of the Metropolitan Board of Works and the City Corporation on the grounds that the low prices south the river must be maintained.

Relations between South Met and Chartered deteriorated after this.[44]  It was to lead to a long court case concerning Nine Elms Goods Yard which ended in the House of Lords.  A new chair at Chartered was William Makins and he and Livesey began a long and antagonistic battle

In 1887 Livesey wrote to the Chartered to say that South Met desired to promote friendly and more intimate relationships between the companies. This was not to be. Cross river animosities survived until the closure of all works in the late 20th century.[45]




[1] Stewart ‘Gas Works of the North Thames Area’. Everard ‘History of the Gas Light and Coke Co.’.  This supplied gas from 1813 . It closed in 1875 but the Chartered’s head office remained there until nationalisation. The works site has since been used as Government offices, and famous for underground bunkers allegedly built in the gasholder tanks.
[2] Stewart, Everard. Opened in 1813. This was sited between the Goswell Road and Central Street. The site is still, amazingly, in gas industry use as a depot for Transco.
[3] Stewart, Everard. Opened in 1813. This was at the back of what is now Liverpool Street Station alongside the new defunct railway line from Broad Street Station. A recent dig by MOLA may, or may not, have examined the site.
[4] Stewart, Everard. There are also a number of specialist histories and photo albums of Beckton which remained open until the 1980s.  It was subsequently disguised as Vietnam and blown to bits as the set for ‘Full Metal Jacket’.
[5] Stewart, Everard. Opened in 1822 and closed in 1907. This is the now famous site at Kings Cross where gas holders have been used to hold flats.  A number of recent specialist histories about this conversion and the background to the works have been produced.
[6] Everard, Stewart, Co-partnership 1911. Opened in 1823, closed 1952. The site is now Haggerston Park.
[7] Everard, Stewart. , opened in 1824 and closed post-nationalisation. There are also articles in local history publications in the area. This enormous site in what is now a very posh area included housing and still has the oldest gas holder in the world as well as listed office and laboratory buildings. It is currently under – ‘regeneration’ - for housing.
[8] Stewart. This works closed post-nationalisation.  For a while it housed the Bow Gas Museum but the whole site is now a trading estate.
[9] Stewart, Everard.  , was taken over by the Chartered and closed in 1874. The works site became the City of London School which has since been converted into a commercial building.  A governor house remained at the rear until the 1980s.
[10] Stewart, Everard.  This had been a consumer works called the Great Central and opened in 1851 under the auspices of the City Corporation.  It had been taken over by the Chartered in 1870 and remained as an operational works after nationalisation. It stood on a large site in Bow Common Lane and which appear still be in use by the gas industry. A very large office block also remains
[11] Stewart, Pimlico.  This had been opened by the Equitable Company in 1831. It was taken over by the Chartered in 1871 and closed in 1901. It stood on the Embankment adjacent to Grosvenor Road. The site is now housing.
[12] Stewart, Silvertown. This had been opened by the Victoria Docks company in 1858 and taken over by the Chartered in 1871.  It was to remain open until 1909. It stood on the Riverside near the current site of the Lyle Golden Syrup works.
[13] Stewart, Haggerston Works. This was opened by the Independent Company in 1825 and eventually taken over by the Chartered in 1876. It stood on the Regent’s Canal slightly north of the Imperial Company’s Shoreditch works. Rhea  site is now housing
[14] Stewart, Kensal Green Works.  This was opened in 1845 by the Western Gas Light Company as a cannel works. It was taken over by the Chartered Company in 1872. It stood at the north end of Ladbroke Grove adjacent to Kensal Green Cemetery from which its large gas holder can still e seen.
[15] Stewart. Stepney works had been opened by the Commercial Company in 1837 and closed before nationalization in 1946. It remained in gas industry use until the 1980s. The site is now housing but some relic remain on site as decorative items, including a large section of the works wall
[16] Stewart. This works may have originated as a private gas making plant. (my own research not in Stewart)  It had opened in 1817 and was owned by the Ratcliffe Gas Light and Coke Company and taken over by the Commercial Company in 1875 who then closed it.  He work had been cut in half by a railway and the part bought by the Commercial Company was a holder station only.
[17] Stewart. Wapping Works.  This had been opened probably by a body known in the East London Gas Light Company in 1831 which became are the Ratcliffe Gas Light Company in 1835. It was taken over by the Commercial COMPANIES in 1875 and closed in 1935 following a fire, the site now a school.  The
[18] Stewart.  Poplar works.  This was opened by the Commercial Company in 1870 and in remained open following nationalisation.  the site, in Levan Street, near the Blackwall Tunnel Approach,  is still in gas industry use but holders are being demolished as I write
[19]Garton.  Bankside Gas Works opened pre 1816 and closed around 1938. The site is now under the Tate Modern conversion of  Bankside Power Station
[20] Garton, Wellington Street Works. This was originally opened by the South London Company in 1822. It appears to have remained in use until the mid-1870s.  The site lay between Weber street and Pocock street and is now a school
[21] Garton. Vauxhall Works. Opened by Phoenix in 1846. The site, on the west side of the south bank of Vauxhall Bridge is now housing.
[22] Stewart. Vauxhall works. Opened in 1857 by the London Gas Light Co. and taken over by the Chartered in 1883. The works survived nationalisation. It was on the south side of Nine Elms Lane east of Sleaford Street.
[23] Garton. Rotherhithe Gas Works. Opened as a consumer company in 1851.  A gasholder still survives in what is now Salter Road adjacent to Surrey Water.
[24]  M.Mills ‘The early Gas industry in Greenwich’. The Deptford Works had begun as the Greenwich Railway Gas Works which had then been taken over y a Deptford and Rotherhithe Company and then the Surrey Consumers. It survived as a holder station until the Great War the site is now the Ecology Centre on thaw West Bank of Deptford Creek alongside the railway in Copperas Street.
[25]  Co-partnership Journal. Survey of Woolwich. The Woolwich Equitable Company a (1837) and the Woolwich Consumers Protective Company. (1843)  these works were near each other on the Woolwich Riverside.  One near the Arsenal Wall on an area now amenity land and housing, the other under the site of the Leisure Centre. Both were closed by South Met. in the 1880s.
[26] This was on a corner of Eltham Green off Eltham Hill. It was closed down by South Met. In the 1880s.
[27] Info Brian Sturt.  Wandsworth Works.  This dated from 1834 and was on a very large riverside side adjacent to Fairfield Road and Warple Road. The works continued after nationalisation, closing in 1970.  The site is now hotels, housing, etc.
[28] Silverthorne. The Purchase of Gas and Water Works.
[29] Chatterton.  The London Gas Industry
[30] Mills. The early Greenwich Gas Industry. In the 1820s Greenwich was a sizeable town with a reasonably well informed vestry and population. They were however at the mercy of ‘experts’ selling them what turned out to be disastrous gas lighting schemes.
[31] Hayward. Comptroller of the LCC to the Select Committee into Met. Gas Cos. 1899
[32] JGL 14th April 1874
[33] Select Committee evidence 1899
[34] JGL August  1874
[35] Matthews. Thesis.
[36] CPJ  April 1911
[37] Gas World 18th October 1884.
[38] JGL 15th February 1876. Letter from George Anderson
[39] JGL 12th
[40] SMDM 27th May 1871
[41] SMDM 24th May 1875
[42] Garton
[43] Everard
[44] Everard
[45] In the 1990s I was at the site of Bow gasworks and with a prominent member of the South London gas fraternity.  North Thames gas vehicles were driving around the site and my South London friend said they had better stand on the pavement as if they knew he was from South London they were sure to run him over

No comments:

Post a Comment