Richmond, NER

[Regularity]

1 hour ago, Compound2632 said:

 

The trouble with these fashion plates is that they do not depict elderly provincial ladies. However, I note your comments above about old clothes. Who, after all, would willingly wear a bustle if it was not fashionable?

Never having worn one, I have no idea…!

[webbcompound]

One of the signs on the wall is for Walter Wilson. He first opened a grocery store in Bishop Auckland in 1875, and he expanded by opening further stores, eventually having hundreds across the North East of England and relocating his HQ to Gateshead in 1887. Perhaps he wouldn't advertise a store at Richmond station unless he had one there, as the stores were quite local, so knowing when that opened might give you a terminus post quem.

 

The 1908 date is interesting because one of the flags on the lamppost looks remarkably like the flag of Australia introduced in 1908, but the hats are the deciding factor. By 1908 womens hats were approaching their largest diameter. The  hats on the photo are mostly the Tyrolean style favoured during the later part of the 19th century.  The fur hat and scarf on the child suggests this is winter.

Edited February 3, 2022 by webbcompound

[Compound2632]

36 minutes ago, Regularity said:

Never having worn one, I have no idea…!

 

I assure you that my comment was not the fruit of experience, or even of a thought experiment, but based on the most general philosophical principles.

[Caley Jim]

That shield looks heraldic.  Is (was) there a local family of landed gentry by that name locally?

 

Jim

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, Caley Jim said:

That shield looks heraldic.  Is (was) there a local family of landed gentry by that name locally?

 

I was puzzling over that. It's not the arms of Richmond, or of Baden-Powell. It seems to be a (rather skinny) St George's cross, with another in the first quarter. Incidentally, re. the argument from 1903 from Powell being the name on the shield, I read that Baden-Powell was only resident at Richmond Castle 1908-1910.

[Nick Lawson]

I made out enough of one of the advertising signs on your platform photo for Google to find "Van Houten's Cocoa - best and goes farthest".

 

The company still exists in some form: https://www.vanhoutenchocolates.com/vanhouten/vanhouten/en_ph/contact.html Perhaps they could date the sign for you?

[Edwardian]

 

Today's episode: Cocoa and the History of Typewriters

 

5 hours ago, Nick Lawson said:

I made out enough of one of the advertising signs on your platform photo for Google to find "Van Houten's Cocoa - best and goes farthest".

 

The company still exists in some form: https://www.vanhoutenchocolates.com/vanhouten/vanhouten/en_ph/contact.html Perhaps they could date the sign for you?

 

A good point.

 

A brief history of mass produced chocolate:

 

It wasn’t until Johannes Van Houten invented the hydraulic press in 1828 that chocolate-making revolutionized. The hydraulic press squeezes the cocoa butter from the cacao beans producing a dry cake that then gets pulverized into a fine powder, or as we know it, cocoa powder. During this progressive time in chocolate’s history, chocolate began to develop from its drinkable form into other forms that we are more familiar with. Johannes Van Houten’s innovation permitted cocoa to be mixed with other ingredients which enabled it to be used as a confectionary ingredient. This development also created a drop in production costs, making chocolate more affordable to the masses thereby increasing demand.

 

From Johannes Van Houten’s creation came many other developments in chocolate’s journey, like Joseph Fry’s manufacturing of the first chocolate bars for eating in 1847. Henri Nestle mastered the art of powdered milk, which in turn enabled Daniel Peter to create the first milk chocolate bar in 1867. (The Journey of Chocolate)

 

There are many variants of signs for Van Houten, including quite a number in this elongated format.

 

For example ....

 

 

None of the common variants have the name Van Houten and the word Cocoa on the same line, however.

 

It took me quite some time to fine a single example that has the same layout as that seen at Richmond.  It is on a sales website, which gives its dimensions as 460mm X 2450mm:

 

 

 

It's hard to say, but it looks as if it might be a match. It gives us a colour for the sign.  Useful. 

 

The slogan, best and goes farthest, seems to date from at least as far back as c.1890, but could be much older. Based on the Grace's Guide entry, it's certainly in use by 1900. Beste & Goedkoopste in Gebruik, if you prefer.

 

Above, an advert stated to be from 1891 using the best and farthest slogan.

 

Returning to our enamel sign, the font of the slogan, in all in lower case and closely resembling a type writer typeface, strikes me as very modern in the context. 

 

Does this give us a clue?

 

According to The Office Museum, typewriters did not become a commonplace of offices until the second half of the 1880s.  This is in the US, of course.  While the first Remmingtons had been imported to the UK in the late '70s, I suspect that general use was a few years behind the US. 

 

So, if this is a picture set in the 1880s, say the 1887 Jubilee, which I think most of us feel the dress of the passengers suggests, then typewriters are perhaps far from ubiquitous but are known; a known thing and a new thing. An advertising font in a typewriter typeface would be signaling modernity, as much advertising to this day likes to do.    

 

Returning to Walter Wilson,  Webb Compound, who identified the sign, made the excellent suggestion that we look to see if, and if so, when, Wilson opened a grocery shop in Richmond. I wonder if the Museum holds any trade directory or similar that might tell us?

 

In the meantime, I have failed to identify a similar sign, but this one may at least give us the colour scheme:

 

 

So, what about the sign on the right?

 

 

Chris N made the point that the enamel signs look new.  well, the two on the left do.  What about the one on the right?  If it is also an enamel sign, it is incredible worn and faded for a medium that is known for its longevity.

 

So, perhaps it is not an enamel sign.  If not, what is it?

 

Anyone care to guess what it says?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Boldon Boy]

The sign on the right advertises James Coxon & Co, which had a department store in Newcastle, latterly on the corner of Grey Street and Market Street and later occupied by Binns.  Googling the name produces more.    

[Edwardian]

36 minutes ago, Boldon Boy said:

The sign on the right advertises James Coxon & Co, which had a department store in Newcastle, latterly on the corner of Grey Street and Market Street and later occupied by Binns.  Googling the name produces more.    

 

Indeed, and, once the words are known, the sign immediately appears more legible.  Thank you.

[Caley Jim]

I wonder if that 'Coxon' sign could be simply painted onto the stonework with the pointing in the beds  and joints made flush with the surface first to create a smooth panel?  The 'sign' doesn't appear to have any thickness to it.

 

Jim

[ChrisN]

It looks to me as if there is a shadow at the end of the sign and there appears to be hooks in the wall to hold it in place.  Is it made of wood?

[Edwardian]

16 minutes ago, Caley Jim said:

I wonder if that 'Coxon' sign could be simply painted onto the stonework with the pointing in the beds  and joints made flush with the surface first to create a smooth panel?  The 'sign' doesn't appear to have any thickness to it.

 

Jim

 

10 minutes ago, ChrisN said:

It looks to me as if there is a shadow at the end of the sign and there appears to be hooks in the wall to hold it in place.  Is it made of wood?

 

Gentlemen,

 

Interesting.

 

I had wondered if someone had plastered over a section of the wall and painted onto it.  I have no idea if this was a thing ever done for commercial adverts, but as one cannot paste a poster on such rough masonry easily, it seems a possible technique.

 

However, as Chris notes, it has hooks. It seems to me that similar hooks also secure the enamel signs.

 

Indeed, but for the inexplicable poor quality of the sign, I would, and initially did, assume that the Coxon sign is also email.  The poor condition suggests decades in place if it were enamel, whereas any date we give the picture would surely be too soon for that, and we currently tend to an earlier date.  

 

So, is it wood as Chris suggests?

 

There are streaks and stains along the top of the the Coxon sign. These could be interpreted as rust on an enamel sign, however, they do not appear to coincide with the, presumably, metal hooks along the top.

 

I remain perplexed!  

[Nick Lawson]

16 hours ago, Boldon Boy said:

The sign on the right advertises James Coxon & Co, which had a department store in Newcastle, latterly on the corner of Grey Street and Market Street and later occupied by Binns.  Googling the name produces more.    

Indeed! I had guessed the other word to be "mantles" (my great grandmother was a "mantle maker" in at least one census) and Google points to a digitised edition of the Newcastle Journal advertising that:

 

"JAMES COXON & CO. have just received a New Assortment of SILKS, SHAWLS, MANTLES, &C, Including all the recent Novelties".

[henkholland]

Hi Edwardian

Pleasantly surprised that you have taken over Chris's station.
Would like to contribute to Richmond NER if I can.
I am very happy with the descriptions of the station and the iconic buildings.
From my country it is still very difficult to get data but via Richmond NER a Richmond station heaven has suddenly opened up for me.
Quit Richmond branch now.
Hopefully this year on the bike again to Yorkshire.

[henkholland]

Information about the Van Houten sign.

You can find it here https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Houten_(chocoladefabriek)

Put it in Google translate.

Henk

[Edwardian]

Thanks to everyone for their help so far.

 

Henk, it's good to have you on board.  Let me know when you're over!

 

There will be a brief hiatus in activity as I am house hunting due to the unconscionable rent hike expected by my Evil Feudal Landlord.  I have a sniff of a property owned by a Probably Less Evil Feudal Landlord, so wish me luck.  If it comes off, by the spring I will be nearer to Richmond than Barnard Castle (it's currently the other way around) so the model will become more local. Current thought is purpose-built shed for Richmond. 

 

 

 

[henkholland]

Hello Edwardian

I understand that you want to date the station to the beginning of the last century .

I have decided to realize my layout as it was in 1948, that is also my birth year, and with the idea that there are also n gauge locos from that time.
I own a Union Mills J39 in Br version and not in the Late and Never Early Railway version.
So if I can contribute something to this story, it will not only be about the NER but also about the years after, hope that is not an objection.
Until half a year ago I building at the Richmond emplacement using arduino and servos to operate the switches and semaphores, I have left that path and have now switched to manual operation by means of levers, the turntable is now also manually operated so it feels It concerns me to build my model railroad.
use arduino and dcc++ex and JMRI to run my locoHenk

[Edwardian]

Hi Henk, it would be good to have the later period represented in the topic, as it helps to see the 'future' history of the branch.  Reading Hoole I think the LNER and BR periods probably saw the most variety in locomotives on the branch.  

 

In NER days there is less variety, essentially BTPs from the 1870s until Os and possibly As from the 1900s.  The period from 1911 is particularly restrictive as only locos fitted for the Raven cab signalling gear could use the branch. 

 

Still, the NER period is the one I love, so I will try to keep the period reasonably broad.  Perhaps a BTP with 6-wheelers and then a clerestory set for an A and an O, with low roof and elliptical coaches added for longer services. The 6-wheelers can run in the later period as excursion stock. I suppose any Worsdell 0-6-0 would be a reasonable choice for goods services.  I have generally wanted a C or P, but Richmond takes me later than most of my pre-Grouping projects are set and, so, there is no reason why I cannot give myself a helping hand by utilising an Oxford Rail P2/P3 to begin with.  

 

1915 is an interesting year because it saw the construction of the line to Catterick Camp and the camp itself. Perhaps some materials might have initially gone into Richmond yard, though, of course, Camp traffic would presumably go via the junction at Catterick Bridge as soon as it could.  A couple of locos associated with the construction were believed shedded at Richmond, however. 

 

Prior to the creation of the Camp, a fair amount of military traffic went to Richmond. There were two barracks in the town, so far as I know, one in the castle, and the area was used for Militia/Volunteer (Territorial from 1908) training and annual camps. I did my turn training on the moors around Catterick Garrison, so it seems only fair to send the odd train of my Territorial forebears onto the layout.   

 

There were also a fair number of excursions. Richmond was, and is, a town worth visiting, clinging to the bluffs above the Swale and with the Norman keep towering yet higher above it. One day in June 1903 Hoole records as seeing several such trains.  

 

I see these as two of the more obvious excuses for special trains that might provide an excuse for visiting locos, allowing some expansion of the stud in due course. 

 

I could run the layout entirely with the Oxford P2/3 and the forthcoming TMC Class O, however, I have a BTP and a Class A, both of which are suitable classes, so they can also be employed.

 

Finally, as a foreshadowing of the LNER's use of Sentinel railcars on the branch, I'm sure the forthcoming Rails/Heljan Petrol-Electric Autocar can be sent for trails on the Richmond branch!

 

Who knows, one day a WNR Family Saloon might even appear!

[thetalkinlens]

@Edwardian I like the look of the loco's and stock in your opening post. Could you provide some details (or links to threads if they already exist) on these. Just the basics like what kits they are or scratch built etc.

 

Do you have an Oxford P3 yet? Is there any prospect of Oxford doing any in N.E.R. liveries do you think?

[Edwardian]

1 hour ago, thetalkinlens said:

@Edwardian I like the look of the loco's and stock in your opening post. Could you provide some details (or links to threads if they already exist) on these. Just the basics like what kits they are or scratch built etc.

 

Do you have an Oxford P3 yet? Is there any prospect of Oxford doing any in N.E.R. liveries do you think?

 

The locos are brass kits, acquired second hand, so I cannot comment on their provenance.  Kind readers might know.  

 

One is a Fletcher BTP (bogie tank passenger) 0-4-4, and the other is a T W Worsdell Class A 2-4-2T.

 

 

 

The coaches are Hornby NBR-liveried generic 6-wheelers posing as NER coaches!

 

 

 

 

[thetalkinlens]

23 minutes ago, Edwardian said:

 

The locos are brass kits, acquired second hand, so I cannot comment on their provenance.  Kind readers might know.  

 

One is a Fletcher BTP (bogie tank passenger) 0-4-4, and the other is a T W Worsdell Class A 2-4-2T.

 

 

 

The coaches are Hornby NBR-liveried generic 6-wheelers posing as NER coaches!

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks @Edwardian, both very handsome loco's. I had wondered if the BTP might be a London Road Models kit. I'd noticed Hatton's have NER coaches listed in their genesis range, batch 3, so a while off yet but probably the only ready to run representation of NER coaching stock for a while.

[Compound2632]

19 minutes ago, thetalkinlens said:

probably the only ready to run representation of NER coaching stock for a while.

 

Surprisingly close - right length, width, panelling style, flat rather than turned under ends...

[micklner]

Class A  Jidenco/Falcon brass . Arthur Kimber should be bringing out a much better version quite soon.

[Edwardian]

On 20/02/2022 at 20:39, Compound2632 said:

 

Surprisingly close - right length, width, panelling style, flat rather than turned under ends...

 

Not that surprising 

 

However, I think it fair to say that the NER designs on the whole did come close to the generic ideal!

 

A possible identity for a wagon representing that seen at the Richmond loading bank in the pre-1906 panorama, thanks to Nearholmer: Here 

 

Now, a moment of choice is upon me.  I am shortly to move house.  The new digs are a rather nicer version of what I have at the moment, but lack outbuildings. I have room for a shed, and I have to have a shed as I will need the storage space, so that is almost certain to come to pass as soon as it can be organised. Storage can be at a sub-baseboard level, however, so storage facility = space for a layout.

 

The question is which? I do not think that I can sensibly fit both an expanded Castle Aching and a Richmond layout in a single shed. 

 

There is a possible short-medium term fudge whereby both CA and a compressed Richmond can co-exist, and I am tempted to have my cake and eat it my restricting myself to finishing CA in its current footprint while slowly developing Richmond.  The expansion of either project would dictate a second shed, for which there is not really a good location. 

 

For the next month, I will be rather too busy organising the move for much else.

 

 

 

 

Edited February 26, 2022 by Edwardian
Lots of blank space!

[MarkC]

On 20/02/2022 at 21:39, Compound2632 said:

 

Surprisingly close - right length, width, panelling style, flat rather than turned under ends...

I've decided to take a chance on the LNER pre-war 6-wheeler set, due in a few months, & will see how they look before going for a NER set too. As 'layout vehicles' I think they'll be just fine.

 

The couplings will have to go though - otherwise the huge gap between vehicles will look very odd. I'm thinking Wright Couplings, with my usual screw links at the ends.

 

Mark