Ambox warning blue construction.svg

White Rock

From Historical Hastings
(Redirected from Stratford Place)
White Rock
128a.jpg
Other Names
Former name(s)Precursor Place
Stratford Place
Junctions
Landmarks
LandmarksPalace Chambers
White Rock Pavilion
White Rock Baths
Hastings Pier
Boer War Memorial

Etymology[edit]

The name of ‘White Rock’ most likely came from the colour of its cliffs and rocks, a yellow-brown sandstone, which was bleached white by the action of the sea lapping around the headland.In the first half of the 18th century, mapping shows this headland extending out from where White Rock Gardens are today.

Originally named Precursor Place then Stratford Place[1], part of the frontage was also made up by Albert Place[2], the road being renamed on the 7th of October 1881.

Presentation on maps[edit]

A small-scale map by Budgen in 1724 shows rocks in front of the headland, with the caption ‘White Rocks’ - possibly from the bleached sandstone. The larger scale Samuel Cant map dated to 1746 has ‘White Rock’ beside the headland, which, assuming the map is accurate, would appear to be of a harder stone than the area surrounding.

The 1746 map also reveals that the area of St Michaels Place, on the east side of Dorset Place, was a tall hill, with a windmill. Until late Victorian times this hill was known as ‘Cuckoo Hill’. Records dated 1832 describe Dorset Place as the road ‘up Mill Hollow to the White Rock’. The first Ordnance Survey map of Hastings, surveyed in 1873, calls the whole White Rock area ‘Cuckoo Hill’, and near the rocks in the sea to the front of the hill it says ‘St Michael on the Rock’. Prior to the 18th century the headland would appear to have been known as ‘St Michael’s Hill’, with ‘St Michael’s Cliff’ in front of it - most likely because of the close association to St Michaels Church.

As Hastings grew as a tourist destination in the late 18th Century, the grassy knoll of Cuckoo Hill became a well frequented view point.

Carswell's Mill[edit]

Joseph Carswell inherited a mill that stood roughly behind where Beau Site Convalescent Home from his mother. This mill stood for a number of years until destroyed in a storm on the 19th of February 1808. This was on the site of an earlier mill which was destroyed in a hurricane on the 9th of November 1800. Even this mill was the successor to an earlier one; located slightly to the east on Cuckoo Hill which was shown on the 1746 map[3]

Transport Routes[edit]

Before 1835, anyone wishing to head west from Hastings along the coast had to follow a rocky track along the bottom of St Michael’s Cliff and the cliffs of St Leonards. The first 350 yards of this track started at the end of today’s Robertson Street and gradually rose up the remains of the headland (in front of what is now White Rock Gardens) where a mass of huge boulders, perhaps 40 feet high, reached from the foot of the cliff into the sea at high tide. From there the track sloped down to where Verulam Place is now.[4]

To get past this pile of boulders, a partially-sunken roadway was cut through them, possibly in the late 18th century. The road closely followed the base of the cliff and climbed up to a height of about 25 feet above sea level in the cutting. This roadway was a key part of the coastal route going west, but in gales and very high tides it was dangerous to use or was even unusable, and the only alternative was to climb the steep track of what is now Dorset Place onto the 90 feet high White Rock and then follow a similar track on the other side, rejoining the coastal route at today’s Verulam Place.[4] Brett in his Manuscript Histories describes the route thus;

At that time the route from the Old Town to the new lay over the Priory Bridge, through White Rock street, over the White-rock hill (a steep and rugged projection on the site of the present Pier and Baths, with a faggot road on each side), along a low and crooked way (which was protected from the sea, not by walls and groynes as at present, but by high ridges of beach), and past the valley of Warrior's Gate and Gensing[5]

Creation of new route[edit]

With the creation of St Leonards, by 1834, speculators had already started investing in the future by beginning to cut back the cliff, from Robertson Street towards the western end of the shops in White Rock today[6]. Around this time, the track below the cliff, sometimes known as the High Road, was officially named as Stratford Place. The unstable cliff was stabilised with large-scale brickwork beginning during the early 1830s[7], and businesses started to appear in the area. These included two large, well known companies: Rock's Coach Factory (later Courts the Furnishers), built in 1834/5, and the White Rock Brewery constructed in 1831/2. Around this time, part of the cliff was cut back at Verulam Place, immediately to the west of today’s pier, and ten houses were built there between 1833 and 1840[4]. Numbers 25 to 31 in the terrace are the older buildings, unless replaced as described elsewhere, and numbers 1 to 20 were constructed in 1847[8]. There was a spring behind either number 24 or 25 from where the inhabitants of the obtained their water, but this was reported to have dried up by around 1885[9]

1834 Storm[edit]

Engineers involved with the project had completed plans to finish the route to St Leonards and the work was about to commence when a severe storm hit the coast on the 18th/19th of October 1834, causing much damage along the coast, undermining the new buildings in Stratford Place. Work was halted whilst temporary sea defences were put in place.

Princess Victoria Visit[edit]

A fortnight later, on 4 November 1834, the heiress-apparent, 15-year old Princess Victoria, came to stay in St Leonards. Travelling from London by road, she passed through Hastings en route. The White Rock coast road had been rendered impassable by the recent storm, so her entourage had to take the very difficult route via Dorset Place, which had also been damaged by increased use following the breaking up the coast road by the gale. This, in part, possibly hastened the work to clear the White Rock.

Infirmary[edit]

In 1841, a Hospital opened opposite what would become the site of Hastings Pier. This was subsequently re-built in 1884 in a 'rotunda' style, eventually being replaced by the White Rock Pavilion when the new hospital opened in Bohemia Road in 1905.

This page is a works in progress. Please check in with the last shown editor in the history (press 'Alt' + 'shift' + H) prior to making any edits

Further Clearance and ownership of the fore-shore[edit]

It is evident that the removal of the 'White Rock' cliffs - the obstruction between Hastings and St. Leonards continued well into the 1870s, for there is reported a lengthy case starting in February 1874 where the Corporation took a contractor named Ivall to court complaining of him 'shooting rubbish over the foreshore and onto the beach' to the west of Hastings Pier whilst carrying out excavation work to facilitate the construction of Warrior Square; this action spoiling what the borough's representatives claimed were premium bathing beaches, where the borough leased space for bathing machines.

The reporting on this case occupied many column inches in the Hastings & St. Leonards Observer over several weeks and is worth summarising the reporting here, if for no other reason than showing how important the Corporation regarded the beach at this time.

Following the borough 'proving' their ownership of all the foreshore from Bulverhythe to Rock-a-Nore the case was adjourned for a week[10]. The next sitting in the case occurred a week later on Monday the 23rd of February, 1874 opened with Alderman Ross being cross-examined on the afadavit which he had previously presented. Answering a question by Mr Cotton QC., he stated his position with the borough as being a member of the town council and he was not aware that a committee had been appointed to watch this case and that his information was based upon a study of the Corporation's archives and that he also was a member of the Pier Company board. Whilst the Corporation had assigned a lease of the beach between high and low water marks to the Pier Company. It was considered doubtful that the Corporation and Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports had jurisdiction over the sands down to the extreme low water mark. Ross was not aware of the Crown's claim to the foreshore west of Carlisle Parade; the Elizabethan Charter relating only to the 'stone beach' below the Old Town. Under re-examination by Mr. Glass QC. for the Corporation, it was stated that the Corporation had resisted attempts by the Crown in both 1867 and 1869 to assert a claim to the foreshore, and Ross was not a shareholder in the Pier Company at those times. The following day (Tuesday), the Assistant Town Clerk was due to be examined on his testimony[11].

Prior to this however, His Honour Vice-Chancellor Mallins remarked that he should not be called on to try the question arising between the Crown and Corporation; the Corporation clearly having ownership both by act and deed of the foreshore for several hundreds of years. Mr Cotton stated that whilst this ownership was not disputed, until the present case, it would appear that the Corporation had not exercised its rights and powers over the land as evidenced by the number of dwellings that had appeared in past times on the land other than the case involving Mr. Moring. His Honour regretted the circumstances of the case, but supposed the case should continue - there had been ample evidence provided that the Corporation had ownership of the land and had exercised that ownership. The Assistant Town Clerk, Mr. Hide, under cross-examination on Tuesday stated that following the 1827 inquisition the beach opposite Carlisle Parade was property of the Crown, and he had not examined any records relating to a lease from the Crown in 1854. As far as he knew, the beach was property of the Corporation and the Corporation had received dues from craft utilising the pier. The Local Act only extended as far as the Priory Water and leases granted did not go west of this point. Under examination by Mr. Glass, Hide stated that the Pier-Master's duties extended from Ecclesbourne to Bulverhythe. In 1834, the area west of the Priory Water was open-land. By-laws had been passed in 1849 by the Town Council. Dues from vessels were originally paid to Mr. Eversfield, but now were paid to the Corporation, and capstans previously owned by Mr. Eversfield had been purchased by the Corporation with the property[11].

Mr. Ellis, also for the Corporation, then read the Affidavit of the Town Clerk, Mr. Meadows. This gave evidence that the Corporation had, from time to time, issued notices preventing parties depositing soil etc on the beach. The defendant had asked permission to dump on the beach, however the quantities being dumped had increased to the detriment of the beach. Parties had been issued penalties for depositing materials on the beach in the past. The Corporation had, and continued to, sell sand and stones from the beach to the west of Carlisle Parade. This affidavit also showed the application by the defendant to dump waste arising from the excavations at Warrior Square on the beach - this being refused. The conveyance of the beach from Mr. Eversfield to the Corporation was included in this affidavit. Many builders had dumped earth on the beach with the Corporation's permission, however there was no records relating to dumping beneath the Stone's Foot prior to this bill being filed. There was no record of proceedings having been taken against any contractor prior to Ivall, and Mr. Ivall had been cautioned that proceedings would be taken should he deposit earth on the stone-beach without permission. There was no prior acts of ownership before 1852 relating to land west of the Priory water and within his knowledge the sea had encroached upon the land that had previously been Eversfield's[11].

Upon re-examination, he was not aware of any encroachments of the sea after the sea-wall had been constructed and it was not in his remit to grant permissions for dumping rubbish on the beach, and, in addition he had been very ill when the pier conveyance was drafted; this deed having been drafted by Mr. Howell. Next, the affidavit of the Town Surveyor, Mr. William Andrews was read. This stated that the Surveyor had knowledge of multiple acts of ownership being exercised by the Corporation, and the dumping by Ivall had made the beach almost unfit for bathing, and, if dumping continued, it would be useless for handling ships as well as for leisure use. Wednesday brought the cross-examination of Mr. Andrews. He stated that the Corporation had exercised their rights over the foreshore, and he had been tasked by the Corporation with stopping Ivall's dumping. Ivall's excavations would produce 7,000 cubic yards of waste material, and, assuming a weight of one ton per yard would be 7,000 tons of spoil. This would be a huge excavation for Hastings; on average 100 houses were constructed per year since 1855, and, of those, a very small proportion were on the sea front[11].

His Honour then addressed Counsel for the defence asking if he thought everyone could do as they wished at Hastings. The response was that this was not the case, however they did claim liberty to carry out the works under dispute, and the works would not do any great harm to Hastings. It was well-known that the beach provided a substantial barrier to sea-encroachment, however the custom of dumping waste on the beach had been ongoing for 60 years and the town had not yet been ruined. His Honour then stated that such actions in future could cause harm. He then addressed Mr. Andrews. Had he (Andrews) seen any dumping between the years 1858-1869 that became a nuisance? Andrews replied 'Yes' and that 'Yes he was a servant of the Corporation, and if he were to be discharged, he would find employment elsewhere. The next examination was that of Mr. William Winter, Street Inspector. He stated that he was 71 years of age and, other than the railway excavations at Warrior Square, had never seen excavations elsewhere in the order of 5,000 tons - let alone this being dumped on the beach. Hastings relied on the beach for tourism and boating. There were plenty of other locations in the area where spoil could be deposited with no detriment. In fact, he believed that the Corporation had maintained groynes in front of Eversfield Place before 1852. Groynes to the west of St. Leonards Archway had been maintained by the St. Leonards Commissioners. Other contractors had dumped land uphill of their sites - Hastings being very hilly - and there were numerous hollows that could be filled. The Pier Warden next gave evidence. He had seen damage caused to the beach by dumping of spoil and was responsible for issuing permits to dump on the beach. Dumping without permission was punishable by a penalty of 40 shillings. He had summonsed a number of offenders for dumping, and also for removal of stone and sand without permission. When issuing permits for removal of stones and sand, he advised from where it should be taken. His Honour again addressed the defence stating "I should like to know what your contention is, Mr. Hemmings. Do you contend that you can go and do as you like, and where you like, within the Liberties of Hastings?", to which this was the reply: Mr. Hemmings: "That is not exactly it; and in the absence of my learned leader I would rather not inform your Honour. I do not wish to assist the witnesses."[11]

Under the cross-examination of the Pier Warden, he said that he interfered with dumping of spoil soon after his appointment and offenders were fined, however he did not know their names. The capstans at Warrior Square belonged to the Corporation and dues were paid to the officer of the Town Council. The court then adjourned again until the next week[11].

Continuing into March, the next hearing saw Mr. Picknell, the Pier Warden being cross-examined by Mr. Hemmings, where the ownership of the various capstans and rights to charge for removal of shingle and sand were addressed. Evidence was given that one Mr. Richard Barton had removed shingle by rail and refused to pay for it. As a result, he was summonsed to the County Court and, after the judge had looked over the Elizabethan Charter said "You might as well take the earth out of my garden as take away that beach". Mr. Hemmings interjected that they did not want to hear all this, whereupon Picknell said "He doesn't want to hear all of this" which caused much mirth in the proceedings. Hemmings then asked "Was Barton convicted more than once?" to which Picknell replied "No, I think not, but he ought to have been"[12].

His Honour then asked if anyone had disputed the Pier Warden's authority, to which the answer given was "No, never". Hemmings then pressed Mr. Picknell to say that persons from time to time had removed beach without permission and without paying for it when His Honour interrupted to state that it did not matter whether a thousand people had removed material from the beach, and the issue of the Pier Warden's authority was unquestionable. Picknell could not remember Ivall removing shingle, however it was likely had taken some when he needed it. Anyway, the tides washed away the shingle and most other materials in a west-to-east direction and that in a storm the shingle was 'alive', however clay and mud stuck fast. Hemmings then asked would the mud and clay survive one night of tides and the answer was 'yes - for several months'. The issue of capstans was then addressed; the Pier Warden stating that upon returning to Hastings, he had counted all of the maritime fixtures on the foreshore. There were 45 capstans, 115 moorings, 19 groynes and 13 large mooring anchors for use at low tide. Although there was no proper 'pier' at Hastings at the time, his title of Pier-Warden was because he had responsibilities for the beach and harbour basin and his duties were the same as a harbour master at other towns[12].

Images & Features[edit]

N.B. The 'features' tab, whilst returning buildings and business premises in this road is not operating correctly, therefore a 'Dev.Use' tab is in place to explore alternative ways of retrieving this data.

Images[edit]

OccupierNumberFromTo
41 White Rock40
Henry Ashdown (1845-)#Address29
21
A. M. Breach (1875-1954)#Address4
25
21
37a
194
72
40
29		1896
1897
1898
1905/6
1911
1923/4
1927
1948		1897
1898
1905-1906
1922
1912
1927
1948
1950
Brown and Woodley's Library#Address271903
Guinness Clock#Address19521966
Lloyds Oriental Cafe#Address4019001905
Longleys#Address4119501960
Palace Chambersc1860
Swiss Cafe#Address3818851923
Wellington#Address18602009
White & Norton#Address4118961954
White Rock Baths#Address1878c2000
White Rock Brewery#Address18321885
White Rock Pavilion1927
Yelton Hotel1-81898

References & Notes

  1. ↑ Hastings of Bygone days and the Present (Henry Cousins 1911 ed.) pg.228 ISBN: 9789332862449 ESCC Library Google Books " Amazon
  2. ↑ Brett Manuscript Histories Vol. 3 Chap. 35
  3. ↑ Hastings & St Leonards Observer 27 July 1901 pg. 8
  4. ↑ a b c Hastings Chronicle
  5. ↑ Brett Manuscript Histories Vol. 1 Chap. V
  6. ↑ Hastings of Bygone days and the Present (Henry Cousins 1911 ed.) pg.304 ISBN: 9789332862449 ESCC Library Google Books " Amazon
  7. ↑ Steve Peak - 'a new history of the ' (a work in progress)
  8. ↑ Brett Manuscript Histories Vol. 3 Chap. 37 pg. 297
  9. ↑ Brett Manuscript Histories Vol. 3 Chap. 37 pg.296
  10. ↑ British Newspaper Archive Hastings & St. Leonards Observer 21 February 1874 Pg. 0006
  11. ↑ a b c d e f British Newspaper Archive Hastings & St. Leonards Observer 28 February 1874 Pg. 0006
  12. ↑ a b British Newspaper Archive Hastings & St. Leonards Observer 7 March 1874 Pg. 0003
Retrieved from ‘https://historymap.info/index.php?title=White_Rock&oldid=129068’