A History of St. Nicholas Hospital, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England 1869-2001

CHAPTER 3

 Building the New Borough Asylum

1866 - 1880

Delays

Despite the building being staked out on the ground and excavation work having commenced earlier in 1866, little progress had been made because of a strike among the ‘operative masons’ and bricklayers. The only sign of any real progress was that the foundation stone of the new asylum had been laid - although essentially this only signalled that work had barely begun. Nevertheless, it was an event that did not pass without ceremony and was marked by a procession of local dignitaries and a ‘large number of ladies and gentlemen’, after this, construction would actually start - a prospect that had been ‘anxiously looked forward to for a long time’.

On Thursday, 23^rd August 1866, the procession commenced from the offices of the clerk to the Committee in Pilgrim Street in the company of the Mayor, Sheriff and Magistrates of the Borough of Newcastle who then proceeded, in ‘conveyances’ headed by mace and sword bearers, to the temporary asylum based in the farmhouse at Coxlodge. Here, they were joined by others who had also been invited to take part, with the whole contingent eventually making their way over to two large platforms where the ceremony itself was to take place - one platform was for the accommodation of the ladies who assembled in ‘very large number’, and the other for the gentlemen forming the procession. The foundation stone, situated in what would be the dining room of the new institution, was declared laid at 3.30pm with the ‘customary three taps of the mallet’ by the Lord Mayor, Mr Ralph Dodds, Esquire. Placed in its cavity was an account of the laying ceremony contained in a bottle; copies of the Newcastle daily papers of the previous day and various coins of the realm. In the speeches afterwards, the Sheriff expressed his pleasure in proposing a vote of thanks to the Mayor for having laid the foundation stone (applause). The Mayor acknowledged the vote of thanks and expressed a hope ‘that the magistrates would never need such an institute for themselves’ (laughter). Events were concluded by a call for three cheers for Mrs Mayoress and the ladies - a call which was ‘heartily responded to’ and followed by an adjournment to the temporary asylum where lunch was prepared for about one hundred and fifty. Despite the grand occasion of this ceremony, ‘surprise and disappointment’ was expressed a few months later by the Commissioners at the slow rate of progress and at the delay and cost of the alterations to the farmhouse - even although it was already in use. Progress on the new asylum had been hampered by the various changes and amendments to the original design added to which, were now problems over the quality of building materials such as bricks, which were deemed to be ‘bad and unfit for the purpose’. To compound matters, the continuation of the masons’ strike was aggravated by not only their refusal to work but also doing ‘all in their power’ to prevent the other tradesmen from going about their work. The overall situation was not helped by the ongoing tension - referred to at times as ‘misunderstandings’ - between Mr Moffatt and Mr Scott in relation to the general quality of the work undertaken. The cause of this conflict appeared to centre on how each interpreted the ‘strict accordance’ with which the terms and conditions of work had to be carried out. One consequence of this was the withholding of payment on work already completed because it was thought not to be up to standard - a situation that frustrated and inconvenienced Mr Scott as he was unable to obtain materials for the next phase of construction until he had been paid for the work already done. The Committee was acutely aware of the consequences of such problems as any delay in progress could bear ‘heavy expense and loss’. With this in mind, a special meeting on the 29^th August 1867 was held to look into expenditure of the Capital Building Fund for the building of the new asylum. Of the initial £30,000 capital - raised by a Borough rate levied at ‘thruppence’ in the £1 - £25,460 had already been spent with an expectation the remainder would soon be made available to cover the work currently ongoing. This sum however, would prove to be quite insufficient as it was estimated a further £25,000 - £30,000 would be required to comp