|
 |
 |
|
Moseley in the 1870s | A wooden church | The Building of the church | The foundation stone | The consecration | A church in 3 parts | Who was Caradoc? | Arguments and debates | The tower built A year of building 1931-32
After so much initial effort the tower committee and the Church Council were not going to give up easily. The architect
was 'interviewed', and capitulated. By mid-October, Marshall was able to write to Caradoc that a fresh perspective
drawing of the proposed tower 'similar to that in the 4-page leaflet' was being prepared by the architect. This time
only the perspective sketch was sent to Caradoc, though the council were provided with a large drawing, and Bateman estimated
that it could be completed for £3500. At last Caradoc was satisfied. The new design was pronounced to he 'very handsome'
and he suggested that detailed builder's tenders be got to see if it could be completed for £3000. The architects now obtained professional civil engineering opinion on the strength or the foundations, and on the stresses and strains which the new tower would impose on the lower stages, particular the nave arch. By April, 1931, detailed drawings had been prepared and the design put out to tender to five building firms. The lowest tender was from Messrs. Collins & Godfrey of Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire, who eventually agreed on a price of £2801 2/0d. This, together with the architect's fee of £193 and the cost of the Faculty at £5 18/0d gave a total cost of precisely £3,000! Caradoc was still complaining that it should all have been done in a quarter of the time, much to the exasperation of Charles Rose, the secretary of the tower committee. Work finally commenced on the tower on July 13th, 1931. By the end or October, Marshall was able to report to Caradoc that the tower was well above the height of the nave. In November, with the work nearing completion, Bateman made one last attempt to do away with the pinnacles on the tower which he so much disliked. He had suggested the advisability of repointing the existing stonework of the lower tower and of repairing the stonework of the aisles, which was already being affected by the damp and surface disintegration that remain a problem today. The outer walls of the church were also shrouded in ivy and this, he had suggested, ought to be removed. The builders estimated £280. Bateman suggested that by omitting the pinnacles £208 would be saved and the repairs could be paid for! Caradoc was unmoved and, since the committee could not act without his approval, by February the controversial pinnacles were being fixed. Once the ivy had been cleared from the walls, repairs and repointing proved less complex and were completed for just over £100. The scaffolding was finally removed at the end of March, 1932. Caradoc wrote to the Vicar that he hoped that 'with the grass replaced and the footpaths regravelled ... the whole structure may gladden the hearts of your worshippers'. Arrangements were put in hand for the dedication of the tower, but there was to be one further small controversy which was to produce another flurry of correspondence, meetings and argument: the nature of the dedicatory inscription. The finally agreed words were a masterpiece of committee-composed bad English. It was incised into the north wall of the porch in Roman letters (Bateman wanted Gothic lettering, in relief) where it proved to be unreadable! Arrangements had to be made for it to be hastily covered by a local builder, J. H. Coady. The inscription can no longer be seen and a new wooden dedication board was provided in the early 1960s when Canon Beck took the opportunity to correct the worst of the grammar!   The final sketch, which Caradoc approved, and the actual tower shortly after completion.
 Previous
page |
 Home |
|