Extension of 1876 had a ruffled passage

Press, 29 September 1988, Page 31

Extension of 1876 had a ruffled passage

A tiny scrap of paper eight centimetres long was recently handed in by the builders working on the reconstruction and strengthening of the 1876 wing of the Canterbury Museum. It had been found on the ceiling beams of the hall where the mammals used to be displayed. On it was written “F England, Sepr Bth 1876.” F. England had written his name and date in the timehonoured fashion of builders.

But who was he? At this stage we can only assume he was Alfred (Fred England, a son of Kelynge England, of England Brothers, who worked on the interior. No list of the men who/ worked on the buildings has survived, but F. England’s scrap of paper has ensured at least he will be remembered.

The 1876 wing had a troubled time before its construction began. In 1873 the Canterbury Provincial Council voted £5OOO for an extension to the existing museum buildings, but tenders were postponed. The following year in 1874 under the Appropriation Act, £14,000 was voted for additional buildings and works for the museum. The administration of the museum was being handed over to the Canterbury College (as it was known then) board of governors.

The Provincial Council told the board that the £14,000 was to include the architects’ commission and other expenses, as well as fittings and furniture. But this meant the total cost would come

to £14,777 and the Provincial Council refused to increase the amount or allow the money to be invested and the interest used to cover the deficit.

Cost-cutting measures were suggested by B. W. Mountfort, the architect, including abandoning Portland cement and using lime for the mortar, and substi-

tuting iron for slate on the roof, to bring the cost down. Fortunately, the Provincial Council would not sanction these economies and readvertised for new tenders. These were accepted in March, 1875, and the length of the building was reduced by 19 feet (six metres) to cover the deficiency. The successful tenderers were James Tait for excavating, concrete, masonry and brickwork at the cost of £6281, and England Brothers for carpentering, joinering, ironmongering, slates, plaster and paint, at £6329 Although these tenders had been accepted, there was a change of membership on the Provincial Council which appeared not to realise that these new tenders had been approved. On May 5, 1875, the Provincial Secretary wrote to James Tait, the builder of the extension, asking him under what authority he took materials to the site of the building. He also, wrote to the head gardener, Mr Armstrong, telling him not to let any vehicles of contractors into the domain for extending the