 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
he also hoped that as a result of his exertions, the company would supply some of the stone for
the repair of Blackfriars Bridge (as they had done for the new London Bridge). Templer was
authorised to extend the workings on the Low Level at Quarry Head; country debts were to be
recovered; stones for a tomb had still not arrived despite repeated requests; Bayiey's charges
were very high.
Then Bigg complained about an invoice for £7.19.5 sent in by MrGullett (another mason,
apparently William's superior), which didn't add up and included some reeds for the thatching of
William's cottage. Bigg was highly indignant: 'What right had Mr Honeycombe to "order" reed
for his cottage?... Then there is £1.15.3 for thatching the cottage!'
Gullett included three other bills in this invoice, for postage, stationery and leather for a pump.
'Mr Gullett had no right to contract these Bills,' booms Mr Bigg. 'His mere receipt is not
sufficient. If Gullett is allowed to incur such charges, depend on it you will open a door that will
not be easily closed... This is altogether an objectionable business.'
Another letter, dated 2 May 1834, begins: 'Dear Sir - Enclosed I return you the bill for £200
accepted, for the service of the quarrier and masons.' Some rebukes about delays in payments
and deliveries are despatched before Bigg continues: You will perceive that the plinth and first
seven courses of ashlar must be here before the 15 of next month. You must therefore take into
your purview not only the masons' work on the whole of this portion, but having vessels ready
at Teignmouth, and seeing that B (...) has this stone on board in full time to allow of its arrival
here by the 15 June. Perhaps all this has occurred to you: but will excuse my stating it, as my
anxiety will, I fear, often make me unceremonious at the expense of deference or formality. You
will please to recollect that Mr Honeycombe, by his own written agreement, was to have paid
£2.10 off his advance of £5, last Lady Day: and also some Rent for his house. But this has not
been done.'
Bigg goes on to refer to quotations the company has been asked to provide for stonework on
Blackfriars Bridge and 'a lighthouse at or near Portland'.
12
John Bigg writes from London again on 19 June: 'Dear Sir -1 have received the return pay
cheque to 25 ult. ! cannot make out at present, how Rowse is entitled to so much super
measure on certain of the atlas (?) stone charged therein, but when the barge is unloaded we
shall cheque the quantities. I hope and trust Gullett and Honeycombe take great care as to the
masons' measure, because from the very high prices given for that work, we shall be ruined
otherwise. The more t look at those prices, the more I am convinced they are the most
exorbitant we ever gave, and such as wiil prevent our taking any more fine work in the Country.
They are "union" prices to all intents and purposes; and even higher than we could have had that
work done in London. Of this, ! am certain.'
Another letter contains this passage: 'But we ought to have employed the masons direct as we
do here. Rowse must make a profit as contractor: and why? What is Honeycombe for if not (as
Sevan here) to look after 40 or 50 masons in our own account.'
The final and shortest letter in this series is dated 25 August 1834.
'Dear Sir - Mr Gullett requests that Bayley may make 100 feet of curb, in getting Mr Woodley's
plinth and Mr Baines head and foot stones. Please to say he may make 1000 feet of flat curb
12x6 at 4/4 if he chooses. I hope the order I sent down on 23 inst will answer this.
1Exeter Cemetery - You would not act otherwise than you have done -
 |