By 1802, the beach was being used regularly by the Edinburgh Light Horse as a place to exercise and drill the cavalry.
That year the quartermaster to the regiment was Walter Scott.
Scott regularly took off by himself in the intervals between exercises, walking his powerful black horse up and down the sands through the edge of the surf. He also had the unfortunate habit of suddenly pushing the horse into a gallop and racing along the length of the beach to Joppa and back. During one of these reckless charges he got into difficulties, and received a kick from the horse which confined him for three days to his lodgings.
It was during that enforced rest that he decided to start writing a poem and by the time he returned to the regiment on the beach, he had completed the first canto of The Lay Of The Last Minstrel.
- Board index
- Register
- Forum
- Information
- FAQ
- The team
- Who is online
- Tools
- Delete all board cookies
- Search
- Quick Search
- View unanswered posts
- View active topics
- Find More
- Advanced Search
- Links
- Login
On The Beach
by rathbone » 07 Jun 2006, 09:04
By 1806 the Baths had become so popular that it was decided to call the extension of the Duddingston Road which ran from the cross roads to the beach Bath Street (perhaps to make it really easy for people to find their way there).
It was on January 9 1806 on the beach at the foot of Bath Street that Major Tulloch and Captain Mackay decided to resolve their differences. Both were serving members of the 10th Inverness Regiment of Militia and had seriously fallen out. The ensuing duel was won by Captain Mackay, Major Tulloch receiving a bullet in his thigh which nearly proved fatal.
It was on January 9 1806 on the beach at the foot of Bath Street that Major Tulloch and Captain Mackay decided to resolve their differences. Both were serving members of the 10th Inverness Regiment of Militia and had seriously fallen out. The ensuing duel was won by Captain Mackay, Major Tulloch receiving a bullet in his thigh which nearly proved fatal.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 11 Jun 2006, 15:16
20 May 1853 saw the successful holding of horse racing on the beach. The Portobello Races were not really competition for the much older Musselburgh events, but were well attended.
The Tradesman’s Plate (prize four sovereigns) was won by Mr. Watson’s Luxury by a length. The Inkeeper’s Plate (three sovereigns) was won by Mr. Baxter’s Sir Walter Scott at a canter.
The big race was the Portobello Stakes over a mile and a half, (prize one sovereign for each horse competing plus an additional seven sovereigns added). It was won by Mr. Fraser’s Etona. Mr. Watson’s Luxury came second and Mr. Thrift’s Miss West was third.
Unfortunately, on passing the stand after coming in from the race, Miss West stumbled and fell into the crowd injuring a man and a boy. The man was so badly hurt that he had to be carried from the beach and conveyed to the infirmary.
The Tradesman’s Plate (prize four sovereigns) was won by Mr. Watson’s Luxury by a length. The Inkeeper’s Plate (three sovereigns) was won by Mr. Baxter’s Sir Walter Scott at a canter.
The big race was the Portobello Stakes over a mile and a half, (prize one sovereign for each horse competing plus an additional seven sovereigns added). It was won by Mr. Fraser’s Etona. Mr. Watson’s Luxury came second and Mr. Thrift’s Miss West was third.
Unfortunately, on passing the stand after coming in from the race, Miss West stumbled and fell into the crowd injuring a man and a boy. The man was so badly hurt that he had to be carried from the beach and conveyed to the infirmary.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 12 Jun 2006, 10:01
Inevitably, as the beach became popular, it became a regular feature of the lost and found columns in the local newspapers.
On 21 July 1859 Mr. Cotton, who was a tobacconist with premises in Princes Street lost a silver and platinum snuffbox which had been made in Russia. He offered a reward. On 28 August someone from the Laboratory, Lasswade, found a brooch.
On 27 September, 1860, some workmen engaged in drainage work at the east end of the beach, came upon something altogether more interesting.
They were laying new drainage pipes out across the sand. About four feet down they came across a roughly made timber box. It was lying due east and west and was very decayed. On breaking open one end of it, they found it half filled with sand, from amongst which they pulled out a bone, a shoe and a piece of felt.
Not knowing what else to do, they sent for a doctor. Dr. Littlejohn, and his colleague Dr. Hill duly arrived and the box was carfefully cleared of sand to disclose a full skeleton.
Along with the body were found a comb, the remains of woolen cloth and the other shoe. This one contained the bones of the foot, implying that the man was buried with his shoes on. There was no evidence of fractures in the skeleton and no weapons were found in the box or nearby.
The two doctors said that in their opinion, from the state of the skeleton, the person had been dead at least fifty years and it was concluded that it was that of some sailor, probably of a foreign vessel judging by the fact that the body had been placed with the head towards the east. He had presumably died near the coast and his companions had buried him here at a time when the neighbouring grounds and the greater part of the site of Portobello consisted of sand dunes and whin bushes.
It is to be assumed that the man was given a christian burial in one of the Portobello graveyards, though which one is not recorded.
On 21 July 1859 Mr. Cotton, who was a tobacconist with premises in Princes Street lost a silver and platinum snuffbox which had been made in Russia. He offered a reward. On 28 August someone from the Laboratory, Lasswade, found a brooch.
On 27 September, 1860, some workmen engaged in drainage work at the east end of the beach, came upon something altogether more interesting.
They were laying new drainage pipes out across the sand. About four feet down they came across a roughly made timber box. It was lying due east and west and was very decayed. On breaking open one end of it, they found it half filled with sand, from amongst which they pulled out a bone, a shoe and a piece of felt.
Not knowing what else to do, they sent for a doctor. Dr. Littlejohn, and his colleague Dr. Hill duly arrived and the box was carfefully cleared of sand to disclose a full skeleton.
Along with the body were found a comb, the remains of woolen cloth and the other shoe. This one contained the bones of the foot, implying that the man was buried with his shoes on. There was no evidence of fractures in the skeleton and no weapons were found in the box or nearby.
The two doctors said that in their opinion, from the state of the skeleton, the person had been dead at least fifty years and it was concluded that it was that of some sailor, probably of a foreign vessel judging by the fact that the body had been placed with the head towards the east. He had presumably died near the coast and his companions had buried him here at a time when the neighbouring grounds and the greater part of the site of Portobello consisted of sand dunes and whin bushes.
It is to be assumed that the man was given a christian burial in one of the Portobello graveyards, though which one is not recorded.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 19 Jun 2006, 10:30
On 8 April 1869 the Portobello Pier Bill was presented and passed its first reading in the House of Lords and Provost Wood and his fellow directors looked forward to building their anticipated money spinner.
Within a week, the God fearing community of Portobello was mobilised. On 15 April a well attended public meeting was held in the Town Hall to protest against the possibility of Sunday passenger traffic on the proposed pier. The establishment of Sunday steamers and other pleasure boats plying their trade to and from the pier would be a breach of Divine law and potentially a serious blow to the prosperity and welfare of the town. If Sunday traffic was allowed it would have the effect of drawing an inferior class of visitor to Portobello, and on the Sabbath at that.
It was agreed that the Town Council had a duty to see that Provost Wood and his cronies did whatever they could to insert a clause in the Bill to ban use of the pier on a Sunday.
Provost Wood conceded and a clause was drafted declaring that the Company’s regulations as to the times of opening and closing and the manner of use of the pier on Sundays should be subject to the approval of the Magistrates and the Council.
This clause was passed by the House of Commons, but the Lords threw it out on 20 June on the basis that it formed an inconvenient precedent which could be used to close every pier on a Sunday (and many other facilities besides).
After a brief period of protest, the Council conceded defeat and the Bill became law without the Sunday prohibition clause. Inevitably, this then led to attacks on the Council, with the good citizens of the town demanding to know who was going to pay the expenses which had been run up trying to get the clause inserted in the first place. Provost Wood defused that row by announcing that the costs would be met by the new Portobello Pier Company.
By 13 October the specifications for the work of constructing the pier were drawn up and tenders sought.
The first Ordinary Meeting of the Portobello Pier Company, incorporated by the Portobello Pier Act 1869, was held at 7 p.m. on Monday 8 November 1869 in the Town Hall.
Within a week, the God fearing community of Portobello was mobilised. On 15 April a well attended public meeting was held in the Town Hall to protest against the possibility of Sunday passenger traffic on the proposed pier. The establishment of Sunday steamers and other pleasure boats plying their trade to and from the pier would be a breach of Divine law and potentially a serious blow to the prosperity and welfare of the town. If Sunday traffic was allowed it would have the effect of drawing an inferior class of visitor to Portobello, and on the Sabbath at that.
It was agreed that the Town Council had a duty to see that Provost Wood and his cronies did whatever they could to insert a clause in the Bill to ban use of the pier on a Sunday.
Provost Wood conceded and a clause was drafted declaring that the Company’s regulations as to the times of opening and closing and the manner of use of the pier on Sundays should be subject to the approval of the Magistrates and the Council.
This clause was passed by the House of Commons, but the Lords threw it out on 20 June on the basis that it formed an inconvenient precedent which could be used to close every pier on a Sunday (and many other facilities besides).
After a brief period of protest, the Council conceded defeat and the Bill became law without the Sunday prohibition clause. Inevitably, this then led to attacks on the Council, with the good citizens of the town demanding to know who was going to pay the expenses which had been run up trying to get the clause inserted in the first place. Provost Wood defused that row by announcing that the costs would be met by the new Portobello Pier Company.
By 13 October the specifications for the work of constructing the pier were drawn up and tenders sought.
The first Ordinary Meeting of the Portobello Pier Company, incorporated by the Portobello Pier Act 1869, was held at 7 p.m. on Monday 8 November 1869 in the Town Hall.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 20 Jun 2006, 07:12
14 January 1870 saw the unveiling of the final plans for both the Pier and the Promenade. Both were designed by Mr. Thomas Bouch.
The pier was to be erected almost immediately opposite the end of Bath Street, commencing at a point above the high water mark, and would be 1250 feet long. The platform would be supported by cast iron columns 9 inches in diameter, rising 16 feet 9 inches above the water at high tide. The columns would be 30 feet apart and the pier base 20 feet wide. At the extreme end would be a jetty 60 feet wide by 180 feet long on which would be constructed a saloon 66 feet by 30 feet, fitted out with refreshment rooms and designed to accommodate 2,000 people. On either side of the jetty there were to be tidal landing stages for steamers and pleasure boats. An admission office and a small house for the pier keeper were intended at the shore end.
Work was progressing on the Promenade. It had begun in earnest the previous July when the section opposite Melville House was begun, being constructed on the patent concrete principle developed by Mr. Tall of London. Mr. Stewart of Melville House not only paid for the construction of the portion of sea wall opposite his own house, but he also donated £20 towards the general fund.
The Marquis of Abercorn had finally been persuaded to contribute £100 towards the scheme while Mr. Macfie and Mr. Miller of Manderston had each contributed £50. It was estimated that at least another £700 was needed to complete the work.
The pier was to be erected almost immediately opposite the end of Bath Street, commencing at a point above the high water mark, and would be 1250 feet long. The platform would be supported by cast iron columns 9 inches in diameter, rising 16 feet 9 inches above the water at high tide. The columns would be 30 feet apart and the pier base 20 feet wide. At the extreme end would be a jetty 60 feet wide by 180 feet long on which would be constructed a saloon 66 feet by 30 feet, fitted out with refreshment rooms and designed to accommodate 2,000 people. On either side of the jetty there were to be tidal landing stages for steamers and pleasure boats. An admission office and a small house for the pier keeper were intended at the shore end.
Work was progressing on the Promenade. It had begun in earnest the previous July when the section opposite Melville House was begun, being constructed on the patent concrete principle developed by Mr. Tall of London. Mr. Stewart of Melville House not only paid for the construction of the portion of sea wall opposite his own house, but he also donated £20 towards the general fund.
The Marquis of Abercorn had finally been persuaded to contribute £100 towards the scheme while Mr. Macfie and Mr. Miller of Manderston had each contributed £50. It was estimated that at least another £700 was needed to complete the work.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 23 Jun 2006, 07:35
The Pier formally opened on Tuesday 23 May 1871. The Great and the Good and those who had put up the money, assembled in the Town Hall at noon and then, led by the band of the Royal Scots Greys, they progressed down Bath Street to the Pier. The inaugural steamer excursion took place at 12.30 and, after a performance by the band, luncheon was served in the saloon at the end of the pier at 2.30 p.m.
Tickets for the opening (including lunch) were 7s 6d each. Admission to the pier thereafter was 3d. The Company also made income from renting out advertising spaces on the pier.
The regular steamers from the pier were The Prince Of Wales and Lord Aberdour, which travelled back and forth to Stirling and Alloa every Wednesday during the summer season and arrangements were also being made for a daily service to and from Leith.
It wasn't long, however, before controversy struck.
It had been assumed by some Portobello residents that the Saloon on the pier would simply be a restaurant. Within weeks it had developed a reputation for fine fish dinners and the wine list was well remarked on.
They were dismayed, therefore, when it became apparant that the management intended that it be used as a dance hall. Such activity would attract roughs to the pier and the mingling of the higher classes with working men was fraught with danger. As usual, the battle was fought out in the letters columns of the newspapers, and also, as usual, the proprietors of the pier ignored the controversy.
Tickets for the opening (including lunch) were 7s 6d each. Admission to the pier thereafter was 3d. The Company also made income from renting out advertising spaces on the pier.
The regular steamers from the pier were The Prince Of Wales and Lord Aberdour, which travelled back and forth to Stirling and Alloa every Wednesday during the summer season and arrangements were also being made for a daily service to and from Leith.
It wasn't long, however, before controversy struck.
It had been assumed by some Portobello residents that the Saloon on the pier would simply be a restaurant. Within weeks it had developed a reputation for fine fish dinners and the wine list was well remarked on.
They were dismayed, therefore, when it became apparant that the management intended that it be used as a dance hall. Such activity would attract roughs to the pier and the mingling of the higher classes with working men was fraught with danger. As usual, the battle was fought out in the letters columns of the newspapers, and also, as usual, the proprietors of the pier ignored the controversy.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 25 Jun 2006, 09:31
In the Pier's first season 134,587 people paid the turnstile charges and came on to the pier and season ticket holders availed themselves of its attractions nearly 100,000 times.
The statement of accounts shows a total revenue of £1050 9s 7d and running costs of £446 12s 6d giving a profit for the first year of £603 27s 1d. Of that profit, £100 was put towards paying off the bank loan and the remaining £503 17s 1d was divided among the shareholders as a dividend.
The 1872 season, however, got off to a bad start. The weather was unpropitious. The bad weather was to last from March through to August and attendance on the pier was not large.
The statement of accounts shows a total revenue of £1050 9s 7d and running costs of £446 12s 6d giving a profit for the first year of £603 27s 1d. Of that profit, £100 was put towards paying off the bank loan and the remaining £503 17s 1d was divided among the shareholders as a dividend.
The 1872 season, however, got off to a bad start. The weather was unpropitious. The bad weather was to last from March through to August and attendance on the pier was not large.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 28 Jun 2006, 07:23
The removal of sand for the bottle works which had begun in 1867 was by now having a noticeable effect.
The Town Council, who had no direct jurisdiction over the beach, wrote to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests who, despite their title, were the national custodians of sea beaches and foreshores.
The Council pointed out the very serious injury that was being done to the beach by the carting away of sand and gravel and also by the dumping of ashes and rubbish by Messrs Gray and Buchan. The Council's concern was that this erosion would have a detrimental effect on the town as a holiday resort.
The Commissioners were asked what could be done. The reply was hardly helpful.
If there were no prohibitory notices exhibited, then they could be posted by the Council, but it should be made quite clear that the prohibition related only to the shore below high water mark. Any sand and gravel above that point was the property of the owner of that stretch of beach, to do with as they saw fit.
In addition, any costs would have to be met by the Council as the Government had no funds at their disposal for the purpose of printing and exhibiting prohibition notices or for prosecuting any offenders.
The Town Council, who had no direct jurisdiction over the beach, wrote to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests who, despite their title, were the national custodians of sea beaches and foreshores.
The Council pointed out the very serious injury that was being done to the beach by the carting away of sand and gravel and also by the dumping of ashes and rubbish by Messrs Gray and Buchan. The Council's concern was that this erosion would have a detrimental effect on the town as a holiday resort.
The Commissioners were asked what could be done. The reply was hardly helpful.
If there were no prohibitory notices exhibited, then they could be posted by the Council, but it should be made quite clear that the prohibition related only to the shore below high water mark. Any sand and gravel above that point was the property of the owner of that stretch of beach, to do with as they saw fit.
In addition, any costs would have to be met by the Council as the Government had no funds at their disposal for the purpose of printing and exhibiting prohibition notices or for prosecuting any offenders.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 30 Jun 2006, 09:36
In the middle of July 1875 Mr. J.S. Levett of Edinburgh had his great adventure: swimming across the Forth with the aid of his patent safety life float.
The float consisted of a light framework of wood about a foot square which was fastened to his back by means of straps. Attached to the upper end on a level with his shoulders were a couple of flat pieces of wood. To these were attached two inflatable bladders which fitted under his arms and a third bladder was strapped across his chest.
Having announced the event, he was determined to go through with it, despite the fact that the weather was bad and his friends kept trying to dissuade him from being so foolhardy. So, about ten minutes to two on 19 July, he jumped overboard from a yacht anchored off Inchkeith and struck out manfully for Portobello, six miles away.
After he had been in the water about two hours, his friends sent a small boat out to see if he was alright. Levett told them that he was okay and to go away. Still concerned, his friends repeatedly sent the boat back and Levett repeatedly refused all aid.
Around seven o'clock, the crowd gathered at the end of Portobello pier could see him bobbing about, a mile or so off shore. He was easy to spot because he had attached small flags to each of his shoulders.
A few rowing boats put off to meet him and escorted him in to the pier, which he made an hour later to great applause. On coming out of the water he did not seem much the worse for his effort and the cheering crowd hurried him along to the saloon where towels and, doubtless a reviving refreshment, awaited him.
The float consisted of a light framework of wood about a foot square which was fastened to his back by means of straps. Attached to the upper end on a level with his shoulders were a couple of flat pieces of wood. To these were attached two inflatable bladders which fitted under his arms and a third bladder was strapped across his chest.
Having announced the event, he was determined to go through with it, despite the fact that the weather was bad and his friends kept trying to dissuade him from being so foolhardy. So, about ten minutes to two on 19 July, he jumped overboard from a yacht anchored off Inchkeith and struck out manfully for Portobello, six miles away.
After he had been in the water about two hours, his friends sent a small boat out to see if he was alright. Levett told them that he was okay and to go away. Still concerned, his friends repeatedly sent the boat back and Levett repeatedly refused all aid.
Around seven o'clock, the crowd gathered at the end of Portobello pier could see him bobbing about, a mile or so off shore. He was easy to spot because he had attached small flags to each of his shoulders.
A few rowing boats put off to meet him and escorted him in to the pier, which he made an hour later to great applause. On coming out of the water he did not seem much the worse for his effort and the cheering crowd hurried him along to the saloon where towels and, doubtless a reviving refreshment, awaited him.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
by rathbone » 05 Jul 2006, 09:21
May 1876 saw the start of salmon fishing as a commercial enterprise on Portobello beach.
Without the knowledge of the Town Council, the Board of Trade had given permission for the enterprise. The Town Council were not happy, but were unable to do anything about it other than grumble that it interfered with the use of the beach as a pleasure resort.
Two large stake nets were erected, one at the extreme west end and the other at the extreme east end of the Promenade. Over the first few weeks only sea trout (albeit of considerable size) were caught and it was not until June that salmon began to be taken in any quantity.
Without the knowledge of the Town Council, the Board of Trade had given permission for the enterprise. The Town Council were not happy, but were unable to do anything about it other than grumble that it interfered with the use of the beach as a pleasure resort.
Two large stake nets were erected, one at the extreme west end and the other at the extreme east end of the Promenade. Over the first few weeks only sea trout (albeit of considerable size) were caught and it was not until June that salmon began to be taken in any quantity.
I have nothing to say and I'm going to say it.
-
rathbone - Posts: 1989
- Joined: 18 Aug 2004, 18:45
- Location: somewhere else
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests
•