Historic Shipping - facts, pictures, presentations on ships from yesteryear; Robert Wigram, Family and Associates - Shipbuilders and Ship Owners Money Wigram & Company - Shipbuilders and Ship Owners The Plymouth Emigration Depot Plymouth Hulks - the forgotten ships around Plymouth Sound, The General Screw Steam Shipping Co. Ltd. The African Steam Ship Company

Charles John Mare - Shipbuilder

C. J. Mare Shipyard

  • Born in Staffordshire in 1815 he was placed with a firm of solicitors in Doctor’s Commons but turned to other interests. When his father died he leased the house in Cheshire and used the money to form Ditchburn and Mare Shipbuilding Company, in 1837, at Deptford with shipwright Thomas Joseph Ditchburn. Charles John Mare was an engineer and naval architect. After a fire destroyed their yard the company moved to Orchard Place in 1838, they took over the premises of the defunct shipbuilders of William and Benjamin Wallis, between the East India Dock Basin and Bow Creek.
    Mare ran the works under the name of C. J. Mare and Company, after the retirement of Ditchburn in 1846 and expanded by building on the west side of Bow Creek, London.

  • From 'The Times' - 8th May 1848
    Mr. Mare, of the firm of Ditchburn and Mare, ship-builders, appeared on a police warrant, charged by his partner, Mr. Ditchburn, with using threatening language towards him. There was another warrant taken out by the complainant against a man named Gully, in Mr. Mare’s employ, for an assault against him but this was not proceeded with, and Gully was now called as a witness for the prosecution.
    It appeared that Messrs. Ditchburn and Mare had dissolved partnership in September last, and it was alleged by Mr. Ditchburn that his former partner had used threats against him, and had instigated Gully to throw him off a ladder with intent to do him some serious injury. Under these circumstances Mr. Ditchburn declared that he considered himself in danger of his life. The alleged attempt to throw the complainant from the ladder was made while he was going on board a steam yacht which was building for the Emperor of Russia. It was stated that the defendant, Mr. Mare, had promised Gully a sovereign for the attack upon the complainant, and that he had said he would have given him £10 if he had broken his neck. This allegation was positively denied by the defendant, and Gully, although he confessed having moved the ladder, by which Mr. Ditchburn fell down, asserted that it was done only in pursuance of order he had received to prevent any one from going onboard the steamer, and that the sovereign he had afterwards resolved was due to him for wages and not intended as blood money.
    Mr. Ballantine was of opinion that there was no evidence to implicate Mr. Mare in the alleged attempt to injure Mr. Ditchburn, but he advised the complainant to indict Gully. He recommended Mr. Mare not to molest the complainant or give him any further cause of fear.
    Mr. Mare gave a promise to that effect.
    The warrant was then dismissed.

    Bow Creek

  • In the 1850’s the company produced the iron work for I. K. Brunel’s Royal Albert Bridge over the Tamar at Saltash. The firm lost heavily on this contract.

  • ‘Daily News'- 14th May 1851
    The feathering screw is an ingenious invention. One of the advantages derived from the screw propelling system is that with a fair wind the screw can be unshipped and the vessel can proceed in every respect like a sailing vessel, having no impediment; the plan adopted for unshipping the screw has hitherto been a tedious process, the propeller being lifted out of the water by two screws working in guides; in the patent feathering screw the two fans are brought into one plane by a simple piece of mechanism, and are secured in a line with the rudder, so that they offer no obstruction whatever to the progress of the vessel when under sale. A few years since we saw a feathering screw, but it was to ascertain which was the best angle the fans should be placed at for propelling, we don’t know whether this screw of Maudslay’s is intended to do that, at all events, it is a pretty invention, though it remains to be seen how it will answer in practice.

    'The Times' - 27th August 1851
    Probably the following brief statement, with which we have been favored by a correspondent, MU cast some little light on Mr. S. K. Young’s recent assertion, that "our shipbuilders. instead of having more to do than They can accomplish, are, to a great extent unable to obtain employment for their establishments” Return of vessels building at Mare's Thames:- Six vessels of 1,800 tons each; three of 1,100 torts each; four of 100 tons each; one of 700 tons; nine ranging from 125 tons to 700 tons each; and a yacht of 300 tons, for the Pasha of Egypt. The same firm launched, a few days ago, a yacht for the Emperor of Russia, and a frigate of 1,200 tons for the British Government. The above vessels are all in hand, and building by Messrs. C. J. Mare and Co., of Blackwall, London. who have in their employ upwards of 2.000 hands, of various kinds, six steam hammers, two 50 horse rolling-mills, besides foundry, smiths shop, engineers shop, etc. It may be remarked, that the six vessels noted in the above are the new sh ips destined by the General Screw Ship Company to carry the Cape mails; and it is also deserving of notice. that generally, at the present time, ships of large tonnage are being constructed. Messrs. Mare and Co. built the 'Bosphorus', and three or four other screw-steamers for The Mediterranean, which answered extremely well, and originated to a large extent These numerous undertakings which now carry on our commerce with the Levant.

    ‘Plymouth & Devonport Weekly Journal’ - 17th June 1852
    Sir, - I perceived in your paper of last week, a letter purporting to come from an “Old Inhabitant,” containing the following remark :- “But then we come to the steamers, and this is the real burden of the song, I verily believe sir, that some of the most ignorant voters suppose Mr. Mare to be the proprietor of a fleet of them, which he is to bring here, in order to please his constituency. Pray let them be informed that Mr. Mare has no position in the mercantile world, not being recognized as one of the great fraternity of London merchants; but that he is a shipbuilder, in the employ of a company who find it more convenient to pay him by giving him some shares, than in cash.”
    I beg to inform you that the above statement is not true. Mr. Mare is a bona fide holder in the General Screw Steam Shipping Company of 600 shares, by unsolicited purchase.
    Mr. Mare’s friends, I am sure, will excuse me from noticing any other observations in the “Old Inhabitant’s” epistle.
    I am, sir, your obedient servant,


    ‘The Times’ - 3rd July 1852
    On Wednesday evening, shortly after 7 o’clock, a frightful accident took place on the promises of Messrs. Mare and Co., the engineers, which caused the loss of one life, and awful injury to 12 of the workmen. It appears that the chief portion of the men engaged in the large foundry were preparing an immense casting. About 12 tons of the red hot liquid iron was let out into a very large ladle which travels on wheels, and while a great number of the workmen were conveying the ponderous mass of metal to its intended destination one of the wheels artily broke, splattering the liquid among the machinery and labourers, scalding and burning there feet, arms, legs, and faces, and various parts of their bodies. One poor fellow named Carlick was discarded under the hot metal shockingly burnt and quickly died. Others were more or less injured:- Charles Holliday, James Parker, William Huwney, Francis Aylesbury, John Tyrrall, George Mockuy, Henry Seymour, and John Paget. Eight of them that had received the wors t injuries were placed in carts and convoyed with all possible care to the accident-ward of the London Hospital. The wounded men were progressing yesterday as well as could be expected; but two of them are very extensively injured by the hot metal.

  • Entered Parliament for Plymouth on the 7th July 1852 and left in 1853. (For more information on his involvement in Plymouth and as an M.P. please contact - see below.)

  • 'The Illustrated London News'- 2nd April 1853
    Some of the establishments in Southampton are endeavouring to prevent their clerks leaving them by inducing them to enter into bonds to remain with them a certain number of years. Mr. Mare, the eminent shipbuilder, who has commenced the building of works close to Southampton, for repairing the steamers of the General Screw Company, is about to build 100 cottages for his workmen.

    ‘The Builder’ - 17th December 1853
    Reduction of Wages.
    Strike of Carpenters and Joiners.
    Recently 450 carpenters and joiners left Messrs. Mare and Co.’s shipbuilding factory at Blackwall, in consequence of that firm proposing to reduce the rate of wages from 6s • 2d. to 5s • 8d. a day. Since the strike Messrs. Mare and Co. have offered to pay the 6s • 2d. if the men leave off at half-past five. They would thus be required to work one hour and a half more each day.

    ‘The Illustrated London News’ - 28th January 1854.
    Twenty-two shipwrights have given notice for leaving Devonport Dockyard, for the purpose of joining Mr. Mare’s yard at Blackwall, where they are to have 6s. per day, and constant work for three years, being an increase of about 10s. per week.

    ‘The Times’ - 24th March 1854
    CIVIL COURT (Before Mr. Russell Gurney, Q.C., and a Special Jury.)
    Mr. Whateley, Q.C., Mr. Whitmore, and Mr. Phipson appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Keating, Q.C., and Mr. Motteram for the defendant.
    The plaintiff in this action was the Earl of Kilmorey, of Shavington Park, in this county. The defendant, Mr. Charles John Mare, was an iron boat builder, carting on business near London, and residing at Hatherton, in the neighbourhood of Shavington Park. The defendant was a sporting gentleman, and it appeared that on the 27th of September, 1852, the plaintiff had executed a deed by which he had granted to the defendant the right of sporting over the manor of Shavington and certain other parts of the county. The deed contained covenants by the defendant to use the said manor in a sportsman-like manner, to preserve the game, and to use his best endeavours to prevent poaching, and to keep down the rabbits, so as to prevent their increasing and injuring the crops and fences. The declaration alleged several breaches; the main question, however, was whether or not the defendant had kept down the rabbits according to his covenant.
    Several witnesses were examined in support of the plaintiff’s case; but the trial bids fair to occupy nearly two days.

    ‘The Times’ - 4th April 1854
    A respectable looking man named Reed surrendered to take his trial for embezzlement.
    Mr. Bodkin and Mr. Garth appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. Clarkson and Mr. Simon defended.
    Mr. Bodkin said, that, with the sanction of the Court, the prosecution against the defendant would be withdrawn, as he felt, from the nature of the case, that, upon the facts, a conviction would not follow, and it would be useless taking up the time to investigate it. The circumstances were these :- the accused had been a foreman in the employment of Mr. Mare, the eminent shipbuilder, of Blackwall, and the alleged embezzlement was for overcharging the work done by the men in Mr. Mare’s employment, of whom there were above 3.000. The accounts were consequently of a very complicated character, and, added to that, a man named Harrison, who had been jointly held to bail with the present defendant upon the same charge, was since dead, having fallen into the docks and been drowned.
    The Recorder said, he had not read the depositions, but relying upon Mr. Bodkin’s statement he should not oppose the application.
    An Acquittal was then taken.

    Casting Shop

    'The London Journal.' - 24th March 1855
    Our artist, during his recent visit to the important establishment of the Messrs. Mare, on the banks of the Thames, sketched their foundry as it appeared during the busy and quiet excitement of the interesting operation of casting fittings for internal machinery. We give an engraving of the interior of this important workshop.
    To the eye of the uninitiated observer, the scene is a conglomeration of cranes, cogged wheels, huge pots, bubbling over with hot, bubbling metal, furnaces, vent-tubes, and workmen brawny and grim as the assistants of Vulcan. But when due explanation has been given, admiration takes the place of surprise, and the spectator is delighted with the order, accuracy of adjustment, sound judgment, and lively intelligence that everywhere prevail. Every man is in his proper place, and the only idlers, or people in the way, are the privileged spectators, who occasionally comprise personages distinguished either for rank or eminence in mechanical and other sciences.
    All the operations connected with casting machinery with iron, or indeed any metal, are difficult, and require the exactest care, as well as if we may be allowed the term - the nicest management. Watch-making demands delicate workmanship: but casting, although to the eye a coarser and more imposing kind of labour, is quite as peremptory. To enumerate all the particulars connected with this gigantic feature in the national industry would be tedious - nor is any such task required at our hands; but we may mention, that a foundry like that of the Messrs. Mare is a huge laboratory - a mighty shop in which iron is cooked, to be devoured by moulds of extraordinary capacity. The preparation of the latter, and the liquidisation of the metal, followed by its subsequent employment, are the three grand operations in casting: and it is worthy of remark, that the men employed in this branch of our national manufactures are, as a class, among the best paid and most skilful workmen the country possesses. Besides hav ing a practical knowledge of the details of their work, they are not deficient in a knowledge of the nature of metals or a familiarity with the scientific theories they are so frequently called upon to exemplify in ponderous and complicated forms.
    Among the preliminaries to casting, is preparing the patterns for the formation of the moulds - and in this department, we are informed, the average rate of wages is from 36s. to 38s. per week. The patterns pass into the hands of the moulders, who receive from 38s. to 42s. per week: the latter rate of wages is ordinarily received by the loam-moulders, and the moulders generally, in respect to wages, rank with the blacksmiths - for the average wages paid to the tatter are from 38s. to 42s. per week. So that as regards the manipulation of iron, all the skilled mechanics connected with a foundry receive better remuneration than those employed in any other department. The average wages of engine-fitters are from 34s. to 36s. per week, and of coppersmiths, 33s. to 38s, per week. These figures satisfactorily demonstrate the quality of the ability required in an iron-foundry; and a glance around one like that represented by our engraving will show that the money is not undeservedly earned.
    After the patterns have been prepared, the moulders bury them in the ground, in beds of loam or moulding-sand - and here the first really difficult operation commences. The mould, have not only to be accurately made and secured, but the patterns removed without in the slightest degree injuring the interior surfaces of the channels formed in the loam or moulding-sand.
    All the art of the moulder is here brought into requisition - and it speaks well for them that the failures are exceptions to the rule and insignificant in character. When the castings are large, the moulders have to insert vent-tubes at certain distances, according to the weight and length of the castings, so as to allow of the escape of steam that may be generated in the under-ground passages by the boiling-hot metal, as it rapidly runs through them. The moulds and the vent-tubes being ready, the metal is brought from the furnace or furnaces in large wrought-iron pots - veritable monster pots - which seem to have suffered amputation - for although the shape is familiar, the famous three legs are nowhere to be seen. These pots are slung on cranes by means of a hook and chain, and these cranes traverse the whole circuit of the moulding-ground in their vicinity, and of course extend their reach to the furnaces where the metal is melted. When the pot has been filled, which is a nice operation, the hook i s applied to the handle, and the crane lifts it up and swings round to the spot where it is wanted. Then the pot is lowered to the elevation required, and, by moans of a series of cog-wheels and some manual labour, is tilted over, and the metal runs from the spout into a funnel, and thence passes uninterruptedly into the mould. With large castings several pots are used - so that the moulding is simultaneously carried on at three or more points, and the continuity of the casting insured.
    Altogether a foundry is a very instructive place in which to pass a few hours; and if we look at the manufacture of machinery by such large firms as the Messrs. Mares, we shall be at no loss to account for tie extraordinary quantity of iron annually consumed in this country: whether the prices are in proportion, is a question for the consumers and the Iron League of Staffordshire to decide. To the philosopher a foundry is one of the scenes of England’s grandeur - for here it is that the raw material receives shape and form; and, whether moulded into a cylinder for driving a steam-engine that shall bear some stately vessel to the antipodes, or into three-legged pot for cooking beans and bacon, always being worked into some article of utility. In a dramatic sense, the scenery and action of a foundry have a touch of the sublime about them. The gloom lit up by lurid flames, the glare of the white, liquid metal, the roar of the furnaces, and the flitting about of a hundred dark, stalwart forms, constitute an ensemble of industrial energy and giant-like vitality which impresses the mind with sensations not to be forgotten, even after the lapse of many years of active occupation in other scenes.

    ‘The Times’ - 13th October 1855
    This was a meeting for the choice of assignees under the bankruptcy of Charles John Mare, shipbuilder, of Orchard-yard, Blackwall. There was a large attendance of creditors.
    Mr. Linkinter appeared for the bankrupt.
    Profits to the amount of £60,000, chiefly on tradesmen’s bills and banking accounts, were taken in the course of the day. The following gentlemen were chosen trade assignees :- Mr. P. Rolt, M.P. for Greenwich; Mr. Mark Hunter, of the Commercial Bank; and Mr. Samuel Turner, merchant, of Shadwell. Mr. Lee is the official assignee under the bankruptcy; and Messrs. Laurage, Plews, and Boyer the solicitors.
    The unsecured debts are estimated at £100,000; total liabilities about £440,000. The assets cannot yet be correctly estimated. The business is being carried on under the direction of the official assignee.

    ‘The Times’ - 17th November 1855
    COURT OF BANKRUPTCT, Basinghall Street, Nov. 16.
    (Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD.)
    This was the examination meeting in the case of C. J. Mare, the eminent shipbuilder, of Blackwall.
    Mr. Plews, for the assignees, said, the accounts were very voluminous, and an adjournment for two months at least would be necessary.
    Mr. Linklater asked for the allowance to be continued, which was ordered, as also the adjournment of the examination as asked for.
    It appeared that among other contracts at the time of the failure six gunboats, four dispatch-boats, and a mortar for sending a shell a ton weight, were in course of construction for the Government. Under the terms of the contract, the payments to the bankrupt were to be made by the Government at a certain stage of the work. Mr. Lee (the official assignee), and Mr. Rolt, M.P., the trade assignee, waited upon the Lords of the Admiralty and represented the position of Mr. Mare’s affairs, and urged the necessity of the Admiralty to deviate from the terms of the original contract. The boats, it appeared, had been considerably advanced towards completion, and the only thing they wanted was money to go on with. They offered to continue the work if payments were made fortnightly by the Admiralty. The board having deliberated on the subject, a communication was received by the assignees from Mr. Phinn, the secretary, stating that they had decided upon acceding to the request. Two payments have already been made. The first amounted to £3,000, and the second to £6,700. In the original contract the boats were to be finished by Christmas. Under the superintendence of Mr. Lee, the official assignee, and Mr. Johnston, the messenger of the Court, it is anticipated the works will be fully completed by the time originally fixed. All the other contracts at Blackwall are still in hand, and there are about 3,000 workmen on the works. The assignees, we understand, are about to dispose of the Westminster Bridge contract to another contractor. The liabilities are roughly estimated at about £400,000. The assets cannot at present be ascertained, as they depend on realization.

    ‘The Times’ - 7th December 1855
    The bankrupt was a shipbuilder of Blackwall. This was an audit meeting.
    Mr. Lee, the official assignee, and Mr. Johnson, the messenger of the court, reported that the business was being carried on by the assigners, that the procession of the estate were of a favourable character, and that the gunboats for the Government would be ready early in January, as stipulated for.

    ‘The Times’ - 18th January 1856
    (Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD.)
    This was the examination meeting in the case of C. J. Mare, the well known shipbuilder, of Orchard Yard, Blackwall.
    M. Plews, for the assignees, stated that the accounts had not yet been filed, and the accountant said that two months at the least would be required to complete the balance sheet. Under these circumstances, the assignees did not object to an adjournment.
    Mr. Linklater, who appeared for the bankrupt, said that, in consequence of the voluminous nature of the accounts, it had been found impracticable to prepare them in time, and therefore an adjournment was asked for two months, by which time they would be able to show the position in which the bankrupt’s affairs stood, although it was not probable that, even then, the accounts would be completed.
    His Honour said, as both sides agreed to an adjournment he would make an order accordingly. He also ordered that the allowance should be continued.
    The various contracts at Mare’s yard are being prosecuted with great energy, under the superintendence of Mr. Lee (the official assignee) and Mr. J. Johnstone, the messenger of the court. At the beginning of the present year a fresh order was received from the Government for 20 iron mortar vessels of 100 tons each, to be completed for £2,200 each. Six are to be delivered in the present month, six in February, and the remainder by the 10th of March. Since the last meeting two of the gunboats then in construction have been launched; the remaining four, as well as the four dispatch boats, will be launched some time next month. There are also in hand for the Admiralty two mortar vessels of an extraordinary description, which are intended to throw shell of a ton weight three miles. Three weeks ago an order was received from the South-Western Railway Company for an iron steamer to ply between Southampton and Havre; the vessel is to be of 580 tons, and is to be completed by the 5th of April. This vessel is already in the cradle. There also are in progress two large iron ships of 1,880 tons each for the Genoese Government. The works at Westminster Bridge – the contract for which was taken by Mr. Mare – are progressing satisfactorily. In the foundry very heavy works are in progress, and the operations in this department are said to have been doubled since the bankruptcy. The wages paid amount to about £3,500 weekly, and in some of the departments the workmen are employed day and night.
    The liabilities are supposed to exceed £200,000, upwards of £100,000 of which have been proved against the estate. At present we understand the assignees have nothing in hand which can be made available for a dividend. About £13,000 has been realized by the sale of the bankrupt’s establishments at Hyde Park Gardens and in Cheshire, but this has been disbursed in payment of wages and other expenses. When the contracts are completed a large amount will be receivable by the estate. The assignees contemplate being able to declare a first dividend in March or April next. It is expected ultimately that a dividend of 10s in the pound will be realized.
    Adjourned for two months.

    ‘The Times’ - 19th March 1856
    This was the examination meeting in the case of C. J. Mare, the well-known shipbuilder, of Blackwall. The accounts are not yet filed, but since the last meeting the works in the yard at Blackwall have been energetically prosecuted under the direction of Mr. Lee, the official assignee, and Mr. Johnson, the messenger of the court. The principal contracts are approaching completion. Four of the mortar-boats are finished and delivered at Woolwich. The other 16 are in a forward state, and will be completed in about three weeks from this date. The ‘Alacrity’ and ‘Vigilance’ despatch ships will be launched on Thursday next, at 2 o’clock. The remaining gun and despatch boats will be finished in the course of six weeks. The two large iron ships, of 1,900 tons each, in course of construction for the Genoese and Transatlantic Steampacket Company, are also in a very forward state, and one will be launched in a short time – very likely next week – the other in about a month’s time. There is also an iron ship building for the South-Western Railway Company, which will be ready for launching about the 5th of April. It was stated in the last notice of these contracts that a mortar was in course of construction which would be capable of throwing a shell of the weight of 1¼ tons. The first trial proved a failure, but the mortar is now being constructed on a new principle, with rings, which is expected to obviate the difficulty that was encountered. All the other works are proceeding favourably, and the whole are expected to be finished in about two months. Soon after that the assignees will be able to declare a dividend. The liabilities hitherto proved amount to about £200,000.
    No accounts having been filed, the examination meeting was adjourned.

    ‘Illustrated Times’ - 28th June 1856.
    Sale of Mr. C. J. Mare’s Establishment.
    Some of the particulars in connection with this extraordinary sale (to take place next month) are worth recording. The works, which occupy a site of nearly 15 acres, are situated at Blackwall. The resources of the establishment for the purposes of shipbuilding, conversion of iron, and general engineering works, are unequalled. 36,000 tons of shipping have been built and launched in the years 1853 and 1854 from the yards, while upwards of 17,000 tons of iron have been hammered and rolled within the same period; and from the foundries upwards of 3,000 tons of castings delivered. In the ship-building department vessels have been built for the English, Turkish, Russian, Spanish, and Sardinian Governments, the Peninsular and Oriental, the General Screw, and the General Steam Navigation Companies, the Dover Mail Packet Company, the South-Western Railway Company, and others, unequalled in size, unsurpassed in speed, and without a failure in any one case. Among others may be named the renowned ‘Himalaya’, of 3,500 tons burden; the ‘Pera’, and ‘Prince’, the ‘Candia’, the ‘Hydaspes’, the ‘Argo’, the ‘Croesus’, the ‘Golden Fleece’, the ‘Indiana’, the ‘Jason’, the ‘Victor Emmauel’, the ‘Genoa’, the ‘Transit’, the ‘Perseverance’, with many others; also yachts for the Emperor of Russia and the Viceroy of Egypt. The works executed at the forge have been equal in magnitude, including crankshafts upwards of twenty tons in weight. The total weight of hammered iron produced in one year exceeded 1,000 tons. The engineering departments have executed a considerable portion of the Britannia Tubular Bridge, upwards of 1,000 tons of wrought-iron bridges for the North London Railway, the beautiful iron roof for the terminus of the Blackwall Railway, and the portion of the iron work at present completed for the new bridge at Westminster; while in the boilermaker’s department, marine boilers, equal to 4,000-horse power, can be produced annually. The construction of the works, the whole of which has been effected within t he last fourteen years, has involved an outlay approaching £250,000.

    ‘The Times’ - 12th November 1856
    Basinghall Street, Nov. 11
    (Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd)
    IN RE C. J. MARE
    The bankrupt was a shipbuilder of Blackwall. This was a meeting for the proof of debts, and also to consider a proposal on the part of the bankrupt. The proceedings were taken in a private room.
    Mr. Linklater, for the bankrupt, said the sitting had been called in the expectation of a large proof being made, which , with others, would have enabled Mr. Mare to carry out a proposal to his creditors, and that he (Mr. Linklater) had not obtained an appointment of the sitting until he had been assured that Mr. Mare would have the necessary assistance to enable him to do so; but he understood that proof was not now to be advanced, and therefore he was not in a position to submit any proposal.
    Mr. Newbon said he appeared for Mr. Rolt, who was in attendance, and whose claim had been checked by the official assignee to the amount of £120,000; but, as Mr. Rolt held mortgages for the remainder of his debt, amounting to about £40,000, he feared he was not in a position to insist upon the proof (if objected to) until the securities were realized.
    Mr. Boyer, for the assignees, said they had not had sufficient time to investigate the account, and he could not consent to the admission of the proof.
    The proof was also objected to by Mr. Wainwright for creditors.
    His Honour ultimately ordered the proof to stand over, and the meeting terminated.
    Mr. Linklater then stated in open court that he should to-morrow apply for an adjournment of the certificate meeting, as fixed for that day. He mentioned this in order that creditors might not be subjected to inconvenience from not being in possession of that information.

    The Times’ - 13th November 1856
    (Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD.)
    IN RE C. J. MARE.
    The bankrupt was a shipbuilder, of Blackwall. This was an adjourned certificate meeting.
    Mr. Linklater, for the bankrupt, asked for a short adjournment. From the omission of a creditor to prove his debt, and other circumstances, including the non-realization of certain mortgages the bankrupt had been unable to carry out a proposal to his creditors. He had a sanguine anticipation that a proposal might shortly be made that would meet their concurrence. The adjournment was asked accordingly.
    Mr. Lawrance, for the assignees, had no wish to precipitate the case, but would leave it in the hands of the Court.
    Mr. Waller, for one or two creditors, consented to the adjournment, on the understanding that creditors were not to be in any way prejudiced thereby.
    Mr. Linklater made an application under the following circumstances:- The bankrupt’s servants were in charge of the steamer ‘Alliance’. A collision occurred, by which a barge had been sunk. Acting under legal advice, the bankrupt had consented to a verdict for £170. It was for the interest of the creditors that this course should be taken, and the assignees had no objection to the £170 being paid to Mr. Mare.
    The Commissioner said this was one of the unfortunate cases for which the Bankruptcy Law had not provided.
    Mr. Linklater asked for a special allowance to enable the bankrupt to pay the amount, and to which Mr. Lawrance, for the assignees, did not object.
    The Commissioner said that was a question for future consideration, when they saw what the estate realized.
    An adjournment was then ordered, and the bankrupt received protection for two months.
    It may be stated in respect to the position of the bankrupt’s estate that Mr. Rolt has obtained the yard at Blackwall for less than the amount of his mortgage, and that some materials, expected to realize about £60,000, are relied upon as warranting an expectation that a dividend of from 3s to 4s in the pound may be shortly declared. The assignees have received a sum of £25,000 from Government on account of the Westminster Bridge contract, but a loss is anticipated from the gunboat’s contract.

  • The company’s chief creditors moved to keep the company in operation, and two employees, Joseph Westwood and Robert Baillie were appointed works managers. The main figure in saving the company was Peter Rolt, Mare’s father-in-law and Conservative MP for Greenwich. Rolt was also a timber merchant and a descendant of the Pett shipbuilding family.
    Rolt took control of the company’s assets and in 1857 transferred them to a new limited company, named the Thames Ironworks and Shipbuilding and Engineering Company Ltd.

  • Thames Ironworks

    ‘Illustrated Times’ - 17th January 1857.
    The Iron-Shipbuilding Works of Mr. Mare, on the Thames, have been bought by a limited company, the shares of which are £5,000 each.

    ‘The Times’ - 23rd January 1857
    COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Basinghall Street, Jan. 23
    (Before Mr. Commissioner HOLROYD)
    IN RE C. J. MARE.
    A petition came before the Court in respect to the right of Mr. Rolt, M.P., and the Commercial Bank, as the mortgagees of certain property. It appeared that Mr. Rolt had purchased the Blackwall property from the assignees of the bankrupt for a sum of £55,000, and it was desirable to effect the transfer as early as might be practicable. The proceedings presented no feature of public interest.
    The Commissioner inquired the position of the bankrupt’s estates in respect to assets and dividend?
    Mr. Lee (official manager) said that in the course of a few weeks it was anticipated that the assets in hand would amount to £50,000, or £60,000, and which would be divided.
    Mr. Lawrance said, the assignees had been subjected to a series of adverse circumstances. These included the position of the contracts for Government. The peace had not been without its influence. To complete contracts with the required dispatch, it had been necessary to engage workmen from all parts and to keep them employed night and day. From 3/- to 4/- per week had thus been paid to workmen whose wages under ordinary circumstances would not have exceeded 30s or 40s. It was felt that Government ought not to subject contractors to losses occasioned by Government itself, and a memorial had been presented on the subject.
    An adjournment was then ordered.

    ‘The Times’ - 24th April 1857
    In Re – C. J. Mare.
    This bankrupt was a shipbuilder of Blackwall. This was a dividend meeting. Mr. Lawrence appeared for the assignees and Mr. Linklater for the bankrupt.
    A debt tendered by Mr. Rolt for £122,000 was admitted.
    The amount of dividend was not determined upon, as it must depend upon the results of several preferential claims. About 2s • 6d in the pound is the amount expected but, owing to the above circumstances, it may be as small as 1s, or as large as 5s in the pound.

    ‘The Times’ - 14th May 1857
    Sir, - In your journal of this day there appears a report of the trail of an action, “George and Others v Westwood, Bailliu and Campbell;” and the defendants are described as “of Blackwall, the successors of C. J. Mare and Co.”
    I beg to inform you that such is not the fact. Messrs. Westwood, Bailliu and Campbell’s premises are not at Blackwall, neither have they in any way succeeded me.
    I shall be obliged if you will correct this error in your next impression.
    56, Lombard-street, May 13.
    C. J. MARE.

    ‘The Times’ - 8th July 1857
    At the Court of Bankruptcy to-day an offer of 2s • 6d in the pound, in addition to the 1s • 6d already paid, in the case of Mr. C. J. Mare, shipbuilder, on condition that the bankruptcy should be annulled, was refused.

    ‘The Times’ - 29th August 1857
    Yesterday morning, at half-past 11 o’clock, a policeman on duty near the Trinity Arms, Blackwall, observed flames issuing from one of the extensive workshops belonging to Mr. Dunbar, the shipbuilder, whose premises are adjacent to the East India Docks, Blackwall. The outburst and rapid spread of the conflagration was the work of only a few minutes, owing to the highly combustible nature of the contiguous buildings, which were mostly workshops and wooden store rooms. In close proximity were the premises of Mr. Gladstone, a carpenter, and also some saillofts belonging to the dockyard of Mr. Charles Mare. These were all reduced by the devouring element, but it unfortunately happened that in one of these unoccupied buildings was the celebrated “War Balloon,” belonging to Mr. Henry Coxwell, which shared the fate of the surrounding property. Neither the building, balloon, nor anything consumed, was insured.

    ‘The Illustrated London News’ - 19th September 1857.
    A Significant Fact.
    After the bankruptcy of Messrs. Mare and Co., the extensive ship builders at Blackwall, a great number of the marine store dealers shops in that neighbourhood were closed. The property stolen from the works was estimated at some thousands of pounds per annum.

    ‘The Times’ - 2nd November 1857
    Basinghall Street, Oct 31
    (Before Mr. Commissioner Holroyd)
    In Re C. J. Mare
    The bankrupt was a shipbuilder of Blackwall. This was a meeting to consider a proposal on behalf of the bankrupt, under the 230th section of the Bankruptcy Consolidation Act. The proposal was 4s. in the pound, or 2s · 6d. in addition to the 1s · 6d. already paid, payable in a fortnight by Mr. Peter Rolt, the bankrupt’s father-in-law. The act requires that the consent of nine-tenths of the creditors present in number and value be given before an order of the Court can be obtained so as to be binding upon the whole body, and the bankruptcy be thereupon annulled. After some formal proceedings.
    Mr. Waller inquired the position of the estate.
    Mr. Lee (official assignee). – A dividend of 1s · 6d. in the pound has been paid, and any further dividend will probably be between 1s and 1s · 6d in the pound.
    Mr. Linklater (who appeared for the bankrupt). – And that after litigation likely to be of some duration.
    Mr. Lee said there were proceedings of that character pending.
    Mr. Linklater. – The result of the meeting I find is this :- A large number of creditors, whose united proofs amount to £160,000, accept the proposal made on behalf of the bankrupt, while the only two dissentients are Mr. Waller’s clients, creditors for £600; and Messrs. Barnes and Co., of Bristol (clients of Mr. Ditcher), £1,100. The proposal is, therefore, almost unanimously carried, both in number and value. I may observe that there are creditors to the further amount of £150,000, who are favourable to the proposal.
    Mr. Waller said that of the entire body of creditors (388 in number), no less than 218 had sold their debts to Mr. Quilter. Creditors to the amount of £92,000 had thus become disqualified from voting at all on the present occasion. These debts had been bought up at various rates. He saw a creditor in court who had sold his debt for 5s in the pound and a gratuity of a further 5s in the pound. Such cases ought to be taken into consideration. Creditors had been induced not to oppose.
    The Commissioner said if the parties referred to took no part in the proceedings, and did not vote, he did not see how they could to taken cognizance of.
    Mr. Waller said the words of the Act (the 231st section), which he had just read, were these :-
    “And if any creditor shall agree to accept any gratuity or higher composition for assenting to such offer he shall forfeit the debt due to him, together with such gratuity or composition, and the bankrupt shall (if thereto required) make oath before the Court that there has been no such transaction between him or any person with his privity and any of the creditors, and that he has not used any undue means or influence with any of them to attain such assent.”
    Mr. Waller proceeded to urge that he could see no distinction in principle between a party who received a larger sum to induce him not to oppose and parties who did oppose.
    The Commissioner. – A large number of those who sold their debts did so before the present proposal was thought of.
    Mr. Waller urged that if any doubt existed of debts having been bought up for the purpose of quenching opposition, he would call a party to prove the statement.
    Mr. Linklater. – Swear him first. The speech afterwards.
    After some further discussion, it was submitted that the requirements of the Act had been complied with.
    The Commissioner. – Yes. But as all the proceedings must be the act of the Court, I cannot consent to the bankruptcy being annulled until the whole of the money is paid to its officers.
    Mr. Linklater submitted that it was not necessary to deposit 4s in the pound for debts that had been bought up or compromised.
    The Commissioner dissented.
    Mr. Linklater did not think the point was one of any moment.
    His Honour then appointed a meeting to carry out the proposal and annul the bankruptcy.

    ‘The Times’ - 26th December 1857
    Charles John Mare, Orchard-yard, Blackwall, shipbuilder.

    ‘The Times’ - 2nd October 1858
    In this case Mr. Sargood applied for the dismissal of a petition. Mr. Mare, the late iron ship builder at Blackwall, was arrested in 1857, and fled a petition, but took no further steps. It was now desirable for the completion of curtain arrangements that that petition should be dismissed, all Mr. Mare’s creditors now in existence being consenting partier.
    The application was granted, and the petition dismissed.

    ‘The Times’ - 10th November 1858
    Rolt v Hopkinson
    This appeal from the Master of the Rolls was then resumed. The facts of the case were as follow:- In the year 1855 Mr. Mare, the son-in-law of the plaintiff, carried on a large business as a shipbuilder at Blackwall, and banked with the Commercial Bank of London. On the 26th of January, 1855, Mare executed a mortgage to the Commercial Bank by way of security, as well for the amount then due by him to the bank as for all mature advances up to £20,000. It appeared that the plaintiff had full notice of this transaction. On the 12th of February following Mare executed a deed of mortgage of the same property to the plaintiff, to secure the amount then due to him, and all future advances. No sum was named in this deed as the limit to which it should extend as a security, but it was stamped with a stamp to cover £30,000. It appeared that the bank had notice of this deed at the time of its execution. On the 23rd of July in the same year the Commercial Bank advanced £8,000 to Mare, and also made him sev eral subsequent advances, but on some occasions they required the concurrence of Rolt, and also took additional securities. Rolt did not, however, give any sanction to the advance of £8,000, nor did it appear that he received any personal benefit from any of the transactions. It was under these circumstances that Rolt filed his bill to establish a priority in respect of what was due upon his mortgage at the time notice of it was given to the Commercial Bank over advances made by the bank to Mare subsequent to such notice. The Master of the Rolls was of opinion that the bank had no right to continue their advances after they received notice of the subsequent charge, because such subsequent charge interposed between the advances already made and any further advances which they might make, and therefore held, upon the authority of “Shaw v..Neale”, that the plaintiff was entitled to the priority claimed. From this decision the bank appealed.
    Mr. R. Palmer, Mr. Waller, and Mr. Smith opened the case for the plaintiff, as it was an appeal from the whole decree.
    Mr. Lloyd and Mr. Taylor were for the appellants.
    Mr. Palmer having replied.
    The Lord Chancellor, after going through the facts of the case in detail, said the simple question for the consideration of the Court was the respective rights of a first and second mortgagee under mortgages for securing future advances to the mortgagor, each party having full notice of the other’s security. Had the Commercial Bank, who were the first mortgagees, a priority over the second mortgagee in respect of advances made by them subsequent to receiving notice of the second mortgagee? It was impossible to decide the question in favour of the second mortgagee without dissenting from, if not overruling, the case of “Gordon v. Graham,” decided by Lord Cowper. That case had been most unfortunate in its results, for it had never been followed as an authority, and text writers and judges had frequently expressed their disapprobation of it. The time had therefore arrived to investigate its foundation, for if “Gordon v. Graham” were right the Master of the Rolls was wrong in the present case. Now, to uphold “Gordon v. Graham,” it would be necessary to hold that a mortgagor, having executed a mortgage to secure future advances, would for ever be precluded from borrowing from any other person, as it would be impossible to ascertain the limit of future fluctuating advances, - a proposition he (the Lord Chancellor) was not prepared to accede to. Under these circumstances he was disinclined to follow “Gordon v. Graham,” and must hold with the Master of the Rolls in favour of the plaintiff (the second mortgagee), and dismiss the bill with costs.

    C. J. Mare's Name Plaque

    ‘The Times’ - 30th July 1860
    Between 11 and 12 o’clock on Saturday an accident of a frightful nature, which it is to be feared will result in loss of life, occurred in the shipbuilding-yard of Messrs. Mare and Co., Millwall. A large iron tugboat, intended for the Red Sea, which had been built in the yard, was in preparation for launching from the slip. As is usual upon such occasions a number of workmen were engaged in preparing for the vessel’s run off the stocks into the water, most of them being under her bottom. By some mishap she suddenly slipped away about 10 yards, striking the men underneath, and knocking many of them down with great violence. An alarm was immediately raised, and assistance being at hand, further danger was prevented. Upon examination, however, it was found that five of the men were severely hurt, some of them very seriously. One poor fellow had the front of his face almost carried clean away, his lips being literally torn like a rag; another had his thigh broken, with other conditions, some had an a rm crushed, and it was feared one man was injured almost beyond hope of recovery. The worst cases were taken at once on board the ‘Dreadnought’ hospital ship, and the others were removed as soon as possible to the London Hospital, where they met with the most prompt attention.

    ‘The Times’ -3rd September 1860
    About midnight on Friday a fire broke out in the extensive premises of the Thames Ironworks and Shipbuilding Company at Blackwall, which in a few hours destroyed property of the aggregate value of about £10,000, and the effect of which, beyond the immediate loss, will be seriously to retard the completion of a gigantic shipbuilding operation for purposes of naval warfare undertaken for the Government. The works of this company are located on both sides of Bow Creek, a little to the west of the Victoria Docks, on ground formerly occupied by Mr. Mare, the eminent shipbuilder. On the east side of the creek many of the huge specimens of naval architecture for which the Thames has long been famous are reared from time to time, and there, also, the large subsidiary ironworks are carried on; while the ground on the opposite side is principally – or rather, was – occupied by a cluster of sawing, moulding, and planning mills, smithies, and the like, replete with a system of elaborate and costly machinery, all of which was driven by a steam engine of some 60-house power. Of this machinery, some of which was quite new, the various buildings in which it was housed, and the great steam engine itself by which it was all propelled, only a few useless vestiges remain, and a large quantity of the most valuable descriptions of timber, principally teak, mahogany, and Dantsic oak, which was being fashioned and adapted for use, or stored on the contiguous wharf, was involved in the conflagration, and served to make a huge bonfire in the dead of night, visible for eight or 10 miles round. The fire, which is supposed to have originated in the engine-house, was first discovered by Richard Petty, a watchman on the premises, who gave an immediate alarm, which was spread more rapidly throughout the neighbourhood by the conflagration itself. The working population from the adjacent Trinity Wharf, the dockyard of Mr. Green, and other places hastened to the scene, and rendered what assistance they could in the emergency. By degr ees, as the blaze diffused its own intelligence over the metropolis, fire-engines and firemen almost innumerable arrived at the spot, but, owing to there being an indifferent supply of water on the land side, they were unable to render the service they might have done in arresting the progress of the fire, which continued to burn, though in a degree more and more mitigated, until 5 in the morning. From the adjacent creek the large floating engine, which had come from its mooring place at Southwark Bridge, played for some hours with considerable effect on the burning mass, and prevented it extending to, though it scorched in places, a long range of joiners’ shops and stacks of valuable seasoned timber piled up in the immediate vicinity. What little wind there was fortunately blew in the direction of the creek, so that the fire ended there, and was confined to a comparatively limited area. The loss of property – which, by the way, is covered by insurances effected in the Phoenix and Manchester offices – is as nothing compared with the delay and impediment it will offer to the progress of a war steamer of prodigious dimensions and strength, called the ‘Warrior’, which the company are now building for the Board of Admiralty, and a companion to which, designated the ‘Black Prince’, is in course of construction on the Clyde. The tonnage of this vessel is estimated at between 6,000 and 7,000, and her aggregate cost at about £380,000. Her machinery, which is being made by Penn and Son, of Greenwich, will be about 1,250 horse power, and will propel her at a rate of 13 or 14 knots an hour. Her strength and capacity to resist an attack from without may be fancied from the facts that she is, first of all, built wholly of iron, and infinitely stronger in that respect than any ordinary iron vessel; that upon this groundwork she is being covered bodily over with teak 18 inches thick, and over this again she is to be encased from stem to stern in wrought iron 4½ inches thick, or, as it were, “locked up in steel.” All the woodwork for this gigantic creation of naval architecture, including the sawing, planning, tenoring, morticing, and moulding, was being executed and fashioned in the premises which, with all the machinery, have been burnt to the ground, and at a rate to which hand labour to almost any amount was unequal. The vessel has been on the stocks about 12 months, and was expected to be launched about Christmas; but it is feared that the result of this casualty will be to retard her completion for some considerable time, unless, indeed, the operations which have been suspended by the fire can be carried on ny machinery available in other quarters. About 50 men are thrown immediately out of employment, though some 2,000 or 3,000 are employed in the yard. About two months ago from £10,000 to £15,000 worth of teak, Dantsic oak, and other woods of great coat was piled up on the wharf adjacent to the scene of the fire. Many distinguished persons have recently been to see the ‘Warrior’, including, among others, Prince Alfred, the Dukes of Somerset, Newcastle, and Marlborough, Lord Clarence Paget, and Sir Charles Napier. By her sid a first class screw steamer of 2,500 tons is being built for the Peninsular and Oriental Company, and is nearly ready for launching.

    ‘The Times’ - 13th November 1860
    Nov. 12
    (Sittings in Banco, before the Lord Chief Baron, Mr. Baron Bramwell, Nr. Baron Channell, and Mr. Baron Wilde)
    Hazard v. Mare
    This was a demurrer to a plea. The action was brought to recover £270 for goods sold and delivered, against the defendant, the eminent shipbuilder. The plea was one of composition after bankruptcy, under the 230th section of the Bankrupt Law Consolidation Act, 12th and 13th Victoria, cap. 106, and set out the proceedings in bankruptcy, and stated that after the last examination before the commissioner an offer of a composition of 4s in the pound was made by the defendant and his father-in-law, Peter Rolt, the composition to be paid to the creditors in cash within 14 days after the second sitting, which offer was accepted by nine-tenths in number and value of the creditors, and the plea went on to allege the readiness and willingness to pay the composition on the plaintiff’s debt, and the amount of such composition, £61 · 2s., was paid into court.
    The plea was demurred to on the ground that it did not allege that the defendant had ever tendered to the plaintiff the amount of the composition within the 14 days.
    Mr. MacNamara now argued the demurrer for the plaintiff, and Mr. Serjeant Hayes for the defendant.
    Mr. MacNamara said that the defendant relied upon a statutory discharge, whereby he sought to deprive the plaintiff of his right to have payment of his debt in full, or to have the defendant’s assets distributed as in bankruptcy; that in such a case the considerations imposed upon a debtor must be strictly performed; that the consideration of discharge was payment or tender of the composition within the 14 days, and that if that was not performed the plaintiff was remitted to his common law right, and might enforce his original claim. It was not enough that the defendant was ready and willing to pay the composition; there was an act to be done by him, and it was his duty to seek out the creditor and to offer to him the amount of the composition. He cited “Cumber v. Wane,” Smith’s Leading Cases, and other authorities upon this point. It was also argued that there was no substituted liability for the original claim, nor was the offer of composition accepted in satisfaction, and called attention to the concluding words of the section, that the one-tenth of the creditors not assenting to the agreement “shall be bound to accept the composition” agreed to by the nine-tenths, and urged that these words did not mean that the one-tenth should be bound by the mere offer.
    Mr. Serjeant Hayes contended that the composition after bankruptcy was in reality a substituted agreement for the state of things subsisting at the time the arrangement was made, and that no remitter could take place unless it could restore the parties to their former situation; and there being no remitter to the common law right of the plaintiff to have his debt in full, the Court ought not to assume one, because that would be giving a creditor a remedy he did not before possess. If a tender were really necessary the possibility of making it could be avoided by the creditor absenting himself, and then he might issue a writ and sue for his 20s in the pound.
    After Mr. MacNamara had replied their Lordships said that they would take time to consider judgment.
    This being the day appointed for the pricking for sheriffs the Court rose at half-past 1 o’clock, and did not resume its sittings.

    ‘The Times’ - 14th January 1861
    Hazard v Mare
    Judgment was given for the plaintiff.

    ‘The Times’ - 13th February 1861
    Feb. 12
    There Lordships sat this morning to hear appeals. The noble and learned Lords present were the Lord Chancellor, Lord Cranworth, and Lord Chelmsford.
    This was an appeal from a decision of the Lord Chancellor affirming a judgment of the Master of the Rolls, pronounced in a suit instituted by the respondent against the appellants.
    The facts of the case were these:- In 1853 Mr. Charles John Mare, the well-known shipbuilder, carried on business at Blackwall under the firm of C. J. Mare and Co., and in the month of December of that year he opened a banking account with the Commercial Bank of London, of which the appellants were the registered public officers. Shortly after such account was opened he requested the bank to discount bills and promissory notes to a considerable amount. In order to induce the bank to accede to the request Mr. Rolt, the father-in-law of Mr. Mare, gave them a written guarantee for the payment of all sums not exceeding in the whole £20,000, and certain title deeds of the Blackwall property and of estates in Chester and Cambridgeshire belonging to Mr. Mare were placed in their hands as collateral security. The bank assented to accept the guarantee and title deeds as security for advances, on condition that the sum of £4,000 was withdrawn from the drawing account and carried to the lodgment account. Mr. Rolt’s guarantee, however, was not acted upon, and was subsequently given up to him, the bank being satisfied with having his name as endorser on the bills discounted by them for Mr. Mare. The sum total of the bills so discounted by them amounted usually to about £20,000. Mr. Mare having borrowed the sum of £45,000 from the Palladium Office upon a mortgage, dated the 6th of January, 1855, of the Blackwall, Chester, and Cambridgeshire estates, the bank, at his request, gave up to that office the title deeds relating to that property. In 1854 large sums were from time to time advanced by the bank to Mr. Mare, and in January, 1855, the bank demanded additional security in the shape of a formal mortgage of the Blackwall, Chester, and Cambridgeshire estates to cover any advances then made or that might be made to the extent of £20,000. Mr. Mare accordingly gave them the required mortgage, dated the 26th of January, 1855, and on the 12th of the following February he executed a third mortgage of the same property in favour of the respondent, to whom at the time he was largely indebted, to secure to him repayment of all sums advanced by him or which he might afterwards be called upon to pay on behalf of Mr. Mare. At the time of the mortgage to the bank Mr. Mare was indebted to them to the amount of £35,000, for £20,000 of which the respondent was liable. The bank continued to make advances to Mr. Mare subsequently to the date of these mortgages, treating their mortgage as a general covering security, after having received notice of the respondent’s mortgage. On advancing him the sum of £8,000 in July, 1855, they required him to deposit with them as additional security certain contracts, which, however, subsequently turned out to be of little, if any, value. On the 16th of August following an attachment out of the Mayor’s Court, attaching the money belonging to Mr. Mare, was issued at the suit of Messrs. Salt and Co. In consequence of those proceedings Mr. Mare’s account with the bank was closed and a new account opened for his accommodation in the respondent’s name, and subsequently a further sum of £7,400 was advanced. To secure these latter sums an additional security for £15,000 was executed by Mr. Mare in favour of the bank. In September, 1855, Mr. Mare was adjudicated bankrupt, at which time there was owing by him to the bank the sum of £41,800, but £30,000 was subsequently paid by various persons upon whom the bills discounted had been drawn, leaving a balance of £11,000 due to the bank. In 1856 the estates in Chester and Cambridgeshire were sold under an order of the Court of Bankruptcy, and the proceeds were paid over to the Palladium Office on account of their mortgage, leaving a balance due to them of £28,000. The respondent then purchased the Blackwall estate for the sum of £55,000, the reserved price fixed by the Court. The respondent afterwards presented a petition to the Court, praying that he might be at liberty to retain the balance of the £55,000 after paying the £28,000 due to the Palladium Office. This petition was opposed by the bank, who claimed to be paid the £11,000 due to them out of the purchase money, and that sum was accordingly deposited to abide the further order of the Court. The respondent then filed a bill in the Court of Chancery against the appellants, praying to have it declared that the mortgage to the bank of the 26th of January, 1855, was given to secure the payment only of the promissory notes and bills upon which the respondent was liable not exceeding £20,000, and that he being merely a surety, having, in fact, paid the amount of such bills, was entitled to the benefit of that security, and that, inasmuch as the sums of £8,000 and £7,400 were advanced without the express authority of the respondent, and after notice of his mortgage, the bank could not claim the benefit of their security as extending to those sums. The bill further prayed that the respondent might be declared entitled to the mortgage given to the bank, and that his claim against the bankrupt’s estate had priority over any sums advanced by the Bank subsequent to the date of the mortgage. The appellants, by their answer, contended that their mortgage was a general covering security, and that they were entitled to recover any sums lent by them upon it. The cause having been argued before the Master of the Rolls, he decided in favour of the respondent, and this decision was affirmed by the Lord Chancellor upon appeal.
    Mr. Rolt, Mr. Lloyd, and Mr. E. Lloyd now argued the case on behalf of the appellants; and the Attorney-General, Mr. R. Palmer, Mr. Walter, and Mr. Herbert Smith represented the respondent.
    The arguments were not concluded when there Lordships adjourned.

    ‘The Times’ - 1st May 1861
    APRIL 30
    This was a bill by the plaintiff, who is a shipbuilder at Millwall, seeking relief in respect of certain bills of exchange given by him to the defendant in May, 1859. In September, 1855, the plaintiff was adjudged bankrupt. At that time the defendant, Warner, was one of his creditors for £836. After some negotiations between the plaintiff and the defendant the latter consented to accept a composition of 5s. in the pound on his dept, upon the condition as alleged by the plaintiff, of the residue of such dept being secured to him by the plaintiff’s IOU for £836., the defendant undertaking to account for the composition of 5s. in the pound on his debt. Accordingly, on the 15th of March, 1856, the plaintiff gave to the defendant his IOU for £836., and on the same day the defendant, in consideration of £209., paid to him by Mr. Quilter, assigned to Mr. Quilter his debt for £839. The plaintiff’s bankruptcy was ultimately superseded in December, 1857, upon his creditors agreeing to accept 4s. in the pound. In May, 1859, Warner returned to the plaintiff the IOU for £836., and the plaintiff at the same time to Warner three bills; two of them being for £300. Each, and one for £236., and also a note for £100., which was then borrowed by the plaintiff from the defendant. It was contended by the defendant that the transaction relating to the giving of the three bills was a new transaction, and not connected with the IOU, which was admittedly bad, and that the bills had been given by the plaintiff to the defendant in acknowledgment of the obligations the plaintiff was under to the defendant and in discharge of that debt, which, although he was under no legal obligation to pay to the defendant, the plaintiff then felt he was under a moral obligation to discharge.
    Mr. Craig and Mr. Caldecott were for the plaintiff; Mr. Malins and Mr. Druce for the defendant.
    The Vice-Chancellor said that the plaintiff, by an illegal, corrupt and disgraceful bargain with the defendant Warner, apparently was to pay him 5s. in the pound on his debt, but gave him an IOU, or obligation to pay £836. In consideration of that corrupt bargain, and in order to carry it out, Warner assigned his debt to Quilter, who was enabled to appear as the assignee of Warner, and to accept a composition of 5s. in the pound on Warner’s debt. The bankruptcy was got rid of in December, 1857. In May,1859, the plaintiff borrowed £100. Of Warner, for which he gave the latter his note, and in place of the IOU for £836., which he said was worthless, he gave Warner three bills, two of which were for £300. Each, and one for £236. It had been said for the defendant that this was a new transaction and perfectly valid. The transaction, however, was a mere renewal of that for which the IOU had been given, and if the IOU was worthless the bills given in its place were equally worthless. It had also been said that if, instead of giving bills for £836., Mare had paid that amount to Warner, the former could not have got it back; but in that case the matter would have been completed, and it would no longer have rested in contract. The transaction relating to the giving of the bills was tainted with fraud and illegality, and there must be a decree for the delivery to the plaintiff of the two bills for £300., each, and for payment of the amount of the third bill to the plaintiff. Having regard to the plaintiff’s conduct each party must bear his own costs.

    ‘The Times’ - 2nd May 1861
    May 1.
    (Before Vice-Chancellor Sir John Stuart)
    Mare v Earle
    This was a suit by the plaintiff, Mr. Charles John Mare, a shipbuilder at Millwall, seeking relief in respect of a bill of exchange, dated the 7th of April, 1856, for £931, drawn by Samuel Mare upon, and accepted by, the plaintiff, and when so accepted endorsed by Mr. Samuel Mare to the defendants, Messrs. J. Dawson and Company, timber merchants. The case was similar in principle to that of “Mare v Warner,” which was reported in ‘The Times’ of this day (Wednesday).
    In September, 1855, the plaintiff was adjudged bankrupt, and the bill alleged that he thereupon commenced negotiations with his creditors for a composition of 10s. in the pound on their debts, but finding that he would be unable to carry out that arrangement, he first proposed to compound with his creditors at the rate of 5s. in the pound, and ultimately compounded with them at 4s. in the pound, and had his bankruptcy annulled; that the defendants refused to accept 5s. in the pound on their debt, which amounted to £3,724, but eventually agreed to assign it to the plaintiff’s brother upon receiving 5s. in the pound in cash and a bill for £931, being the amount of another 5s. on his debt. The defendants accordingly assigned their debt to Mr. Samuel Mare, the plaintiff’s brother, in consideration of £931 paid to them by Samuel Mare, and of a bill dated April 7, 1856, for £931, payable twelve months after date, and drawn by Samuel Mare upon and accepted by the plaintiff, and endorsed by Samuel Mare to the defendants. In their answer the defendants stated that they had informed some of the plaintiff’s creditors of the arrangement they had effected with the plaintiff, and that they never concealed it; that the transaction was perfectly honest and bona fide on their part, and that they had a right to sell their debt for the best price they could get for it. Mr. Samuel Mare was not a party to the suit, and it was objected on the defendants’ behalf that he should be brought before the Court, inasmuch as the bill prayed, not only for an injunction to restrain proceedings at law on the bill of exchange for £931, but also prayed that such bill might be ordered to be delivered up to be cancelled.
    Mr. Craig and Mr. Caldecott were for the plaintiff, and Mr. Bacon and Mr. W. Forster for the defendants.
    The Vice-Chancellor said that the arrangement which had been effected by the plaintiff with the defendants contravened the well-established principle of the bankrupt law – that there should be equality in the distribution of the bankrupt’s effects. The bill must be amended by making Mr. Samuel Mare a party, and the case might then be mentioned on Saturday morning. As the plaintiff’s conduct had been very much more of a guilty character than that of the defendants he should not give him his costs.

    ‘The Times’ - 27th June 1861
    Lincoln’s Inn, June 26
    (Before the Lords Justices of Appeal)
    Mare v Earle
    This was an appeal from a decision of Vice-Chancellor Stuart. The case when before His Honour was fully reported in ‘The Times’. The plaintiff is Mr. Charles John Mare, the shipbuilder at Millwall, and his bill seeks relief in respect of a bill of exchange, dated 7th of April, 1856, for £931 · 4s · 11d, drawn by Mr. Samuel Mare upon and accepted by the plaintiff, and, when so accepted, endorsed by Mr. Samuel Mare to the defendants, Messrs. J. Dowson and Co., timber merchants. Mr. Samuel Mare was not originally a party to the suit, but by the direction of the Vice-Chancellor was made so, and His Honour ordered the bill of exchange to be given up to be cancelled.
    Mr. Craig and Mr. Caldecott were for the plaintiff, and supported the decision of the Court below.
    Mr. Bacon and Mr. W. Forster were for the appellants.
    Their Lordships discharged the order of the Court below without prejudice, and directed the action which had been brought on the bill of exchange to be tried.

    ‘The Times’ - 31st January 1862
    Frederick Brazier, a man of respectable appearance and address, aged 35, was charged with obtaining one guinea by a false pretence of Mr. Charles John Mare, shipbuilder at Millwall, Poplar.
    Mr. Joseph Smith, solicitor, conducted the prosecution.
    The prisoner filled a very important situation, that of time-keeper, in the establishment of Mr. Mare. It was his duty to ascertain the names of the men in the boiler-making department, and the exact number of days they were engaged at work. On Saturday, the 11th inst., the name of a man called Spraggs was entered in a book as being entitled to a guinea at the rate of 3s · 6d. per day. While the men were being paid their wages by Mr. Alexander Knight, the pay-clerk, the name and number “Spraggs, 147,” were called out. The prisoner answered on the name and number being called, and said that Spraggs was ill and unable to attend, and that he was deputed to receive his money. Mr. Knight, on the faith of this representation, and believing Spraggs had actually been at work for six days, paid a guinea to the Prisoner. On the evening of Saturday, the 18th, the prisoner attempted a precisely similar fraud, but Mr. Knight, whose suspicions were now aroused, refused to pay him. On the Monday following the prisoner made his appearance at the pay-clerk’s office with a man who he said was Spraggs. Mr. Knight requested the man to wait while he proceeded to the boiler-shop. On his return the man had left.
    A boiler-maker, named Thomas Spraggs, was called for the prosecution, who said it was six or seven weeks since he was engaged to work for Mr. Mare in the boiler department, and he had not received any wages from that department since that time. On Saturday, the 11th of January, there was nothing due to him for wages, and he did not authorize the prisoner to receive a guinea for him. On the evening of Saturday, the 18th inst., the prisoner called upon him and said, “I have your money made up in the boiler-shop for a week, and if you do not go for it on Monday morning I shall get into trouble.” He knew there was nothing due to him, but he accompanied the prisoner to the pay-clerk’s office on the Monday morning following and heard the prisoner ask the clerk for money. The clerk would not pay the prisoner anything, and left the office. The prisoner followed. On his return the prisoner said, “I am caught. You had better leave the yard.” His number was 155, not 147.
    The prisoner, in defense, said that he put down the wrong name in the book, and that he actually paid the guinea he received to a man whom he could not find.
    Mr. Selfe committed him for trial.

    ‘The Times’ - 5th February 1862
    Frederick Brazier, 30, clerk, was indicted for fraudulently obtaining, by false pretences, from Alexander Knight, the sum of £1 · 1s., the moneys of Charles John Mare, with intent to defraud.
    Mr. Cooper appeared for the prosecution; the prisoner was undefended.
    The prisoner, it appeared, was pay clerk in the employ of Mr. C. J. Mare, shipbuilder, of Millwall, and it was his duty to make up the time of the whole of the men employed in the boiler department up to the Wednesday in each week. On Saturday, the 11th of January, Mr. Knight and the prisoner attended at the pay-table, and after the prisoner had received his own wages, on the name of Scraggs being called out, the prisoner said he would take his money for him, as he was ill, and it was accordingly paid to him. On the following Saturday the name of Scraggs was again called out, but as the prisoner, as before, wanted to take the money, it elicited the remark from Mr. Knight that it was strange Scraggs had not come to receive his own money. It was proved that, although Scraggs was employed on the establishment, he had ceased to be employed in the boiler department for six or seven weeks. Since that time he had never received any wages from that department, and on Saturday, the 11th of January, nothing was due to him from the boiler department. He was not ill on that day, neither did he authorize the prisoner to receive a guinea for him.
    The jury found the prisoner Guilty, and Mr. Payne sentenced him to hard labour for 12 months.

    ‘Evening Star’ - 30th May 1862
    George Patten, a labourer, in the service of Messrs. Charles John Mare and Co., iron-ship builders, Millwall, Poplar, was brought before Mr. Woolrych, charged with stealing a pint and a-half of oil and eight pieces of wood, value in all 9d., the property of his employers.
    Mr. Joseph Smith, solicitor, who conducted the prosecution, and was instructed by Mr. Henry Cox, superintendent of Messrs. Mare’s establishment, said the value of the property which the prisoner was charged with stealing was insignificant, but the robberies committed in the prosecutors’ yard where 1,500 men were employed were in the aggregate very large. It was the determination of Messrs. Mare and Co. to prosecute in every case of pilfering, and he was sorry to say that several of Messrs. Mare’s workmen had been convicted by juries, or summarily convicted by the magistrates of the Thames Police-court, for stealing property. Examples were absolutely necessary; for if the pilfering was not stopped the works could not be carried on. The prisoner was detected leaving his employers’ premises by Mr. Thomas Thomas, night inspector of the night watchmen, in Messrs. Mare’s yard, with a tin bottle in his possession. It contained a pint and a-half of oil. The inspector also found eight small pieces of wood used in shipbuilding concealed about the person of the prisoner. The story told by the prisoner that he brought the oil with him into the yard in the morning when he came to work was quite preposterous, and would not be credited for a moment.
    Mr. Thomas confirmed the statement of the solicitor, and Mr. William Galdin, deputy foreman to Charles John Mare and Company, said he had occasion to send the prisoner to the stores yesterday morning for some oil, and he then had an opportunity of filling the tin bottle produced. The prisoner had been employed on the establishment between two and three years.
    Mr. Thomas was recalled, and said the prisoner had the can of oil concealed behind him.
    Mr. Cox said there had been property to a considerable amount stolen from Messrs. Mare’s yard, which in such an extensive establishment necessitated the establishment of gatekeepers, day watchmen, night watchmen, and inspectors.
    Mr. Woolrych said the workmen and labourers ought to be a police on each other.
    The prisoner said he did steal the oil and the wood. It was quite true, and he was very sorry for it.
    Mr. Woolrych said the prisoner’s conduct was very disgraceful and dishonest, and he would very properly be dismissed from the prosecutor’s yard and not allowed to work there again. It was a serious thing for a man to rob his employers, whose property he was bound to protect, and it also brought discredit on the honest and respectable workmen in the yard. He was asked to dispose of this case summarily, and should do so. He sentenced the prisoner to be imprisoned for twenty-one days in the House of Correction and kept to hard labour.

    ‘The Times’ - 1st July 1862
    (Sitting at Nisi Prius, at Guildhall, before Mr. Brown BRAMWELL and a Special Jury.)
    Mr. M. Chambers, Q.C., Mr. Welsby and Mr. C. E. Pollock were counsel for the plaintiffs; Mr. Garth, Mr. Joseph Kaye, and Mr. H. W. Lord appeared for the defendant.
    This was an action by the plaintiffs against the defendant, the well-known shipbuilder, to recover £17,006. as damages and penalties for non-completion of a contact dated the 26th of April, 1855, to build for the company a paddle-wheel steamer for the price of £14,120., payable by instalments, to be completed by the 13th of September, 1855, under a penalty of £10. for each day’s delay. In September, 1855, the defendant became bankrupt, Mr. Rolt being appointed one of his assignees, and a dividend of 1s • 6d. in the pound was declared in 1857, and paid into the account of the Accountant-General, notice having been given to the plaintiffs of the dividend. An arrangement having been made, the Commissioner made an order that the defendant and Mr. Rolt, with a view to the carrying out of the arrangement, should pay in a sum which, with a sum then in the hands of the assignees, would avail to pay the whole amount of the composition. In accordance with the order a sum was paid in, making up the amount of composition upon each debt 4s. in the pound. The Commissioner certified that there was a sufficient sum in the hands of the assignees to satisfy the whole amount of the composition, and £2,000. over. A warrant was made out in favour of the plaintiffs for 2s • 6d in the pound beyond the 1s • 6d they had received, and lodged in the hands of the Accountant-General, where it has remained ever since.
    Mr. Attwood, one of the directors of the company, was called, and stated that the vessel was launched before the defendant’s bankruptcy, and one day before the time expressed in the contract for so doing, and brought round to the company’s place of business at Deptford to have the engines fitted in, the ship at that time being in a most incomplete state, and the men working upon her up to the time of the bankruptcy, when the work was continued by order of the assignees.
    The facts as stated above were taken to be the facts of the case.
    A verdict was entered for the plaintiffs for the amount they sought to recover, subject to a point of law for the consideration of the Court above."

    ‘The Times’ - 8th September 1862
    GREENWICH. – Mr. C. J. Mare, engineer, of Millwall, was summoned at the instance of the Watermen’s Company, for that he, being the owner of a barge called the ‘Grace’, did unlawfully permit the same to be navigated on the Thames, the said barge not being registered.
    Mr. Trumble, an inspector in the employ of the Watermen’s Company, proved the working of the barge on the river, and also that it was not registered as required by the Act 22d and 23d Victoria, and the by-laws of the company.
    A gentlemen who attended for the defendant handed in a license granted by the Watermen’s Company in March, 1852, in which the barge in question had the registered number 1,057 assigned to it. The defendant had endeavored to have it again registered as required, but the Watermen’s Company had refused to register it.
    Mr. Traill said, if such refusal had been made, doubtless the Watermen’s Company had reason for doing so, and if aggrieved the defendant could apply for and obtain a mandamus against the company.
    The defendant’s representative here said, that the defendant having had the number 1,057 for so long a period, and by which the barge was known to his customers, he was anxious to retain it, but it was thought the Watermen’s Company intended to deprive him of that number, which, it was contended, they had no right to do. Mr. Trumble said that, on the passing of the new Act relative to the navigation of the Thames, all owners of barges were required to attend before the Watermen’s Company and have their barges registered. He had called upon the defendant, and represented on several occasions what was required to be done, but no attention was paid to it; and the company, so far from wanting to deprive the defendant of the number named, was willing to allow it still to be used upon proper application.
    Mr. Traill said the Watermen’s Company had a right to assign any number they chose as a register, and ordered the defendant to pay a fine of 20s. and costs

    ‘The Times’ - 13th November 1862
    ROLL’S COURT, Chancery Lane, Nov. 12.
    (Before the Master of the Rolls.)
    ROLT v White
    This was a suit instituted by Mr. Peter Rolt, the father-in-law of Mr. Charles John Mare, the shipbuilder, against Captain White, a gentleman interested in horseracing and sporting. The facts of the case, as alleged, are as follows :- By an agreement dated the 15th of September, 1855, Captain White agreed to purchase of Mr. Mare the latter’s stud of horses, then at Newmarket, for the sum of £5,000, payable by instalments, and subject to certain deductions for entries, forfeits, etc., in respect to the races for which the horses comprised in such stud where engaged to run at the forthcoming races at Newcastle. It was also further covenanted between the parties under this agreement that Captain White and Mr. Mare should go halves in any sums that might be won at the races upon or by the horses comprising the stud so sold and bought. Shortly after the execution of this agreement Mr. Mare became bankrupt, when the plaintiff proved under his estate for debts and money advanced to the extent of £133,000. Subsequently Mr. Mare’s bankruptcy was annulled, and a compromise effected with his general creditors, under which they agreed to accept 4s. in the pound, and to be paid such 4s. before the plaintiff received any portion whatever of his debt of £133,000, on the understanding that after the payment of such 4s. in the pound the whole of the remaining estate of Mr. Mare was to be assigned over to the plaintiff. Among other securities comprised in this assignment was the agreement above referred to between Captain White and Mr. Mare, and under this agreement Captain White had already paid to the plaintiff or to Mr. Mare the whole of the sum stipulated for, with the exception of about £1,000. Upon the plaintiff requesting the payment of this £1,000, Captain White eventually insisted upon a set-off of a sum of £1,200, under the head of “entries and forfeits” in connexion with the horses he had purchased of Mr. Mare, which set-off he contended was agreeable to the understanding of agreement existing and made between Mr. Mare and himself at the time the purchase took place. The plaintiff, denying that any such understanding or agreement existed as alleged, brought an action at law against Captain White to recover the £1,000 in dispute, and to this action Captain White pleaded the set-off as alleged. The plaintiff thereupon filed the present bill in equity to have his rights declared under the agreement of the 15th of September, 1855, irrespective of the set-off claimed; but
    His Honour held that the plaintiff, as assignee of a chose in action, took his security with all its equities, and that for the trial of such an issue as that which was raised in the present case between the plaintiff and Captain White a court of law was the proper tribunal, before which the rights of the parties could be thoroughly sifted and disposed of. The bill must therefore be dismissed, with costs.
    Mr. Baggallay and Mr. Walker appeared for the plaintiff; Mr. Selwyn and Mr. Caldecott for the defendant.

    ‘The Times' - 10th March 1863
    Sir, - Having built about 40 ships during the last 20 years for Her Majesty’s Navy, without any cause of complaint either with reference to the quality of the materials or workmanship used in their contraction, I trust you will permit me, through the medium of your world-wide circulated journal, to give my completion protest to the statement made by the Controller of the Navy, Rear-Admiral R. S. Robinson, in the paper printed by order of the House of Commons, and published on Thursday last, “on the subject of ships built in private yards.” Some of the ships constructed by me have been in the service 20 years, several have the pendant still flying, and others are now quite in a fit-state for commission if required.
    I subjoin the names of a few of the ships which I have had the honour to construct-via, the ‘Fairy’ (Royal yacht), ‘Trident’, ‘Vulcan’, ‘Antelope’, ‘Sharpshooter’, ‘Urgent’, etc. I must add the ‘Himalaya’, the services of which are so well known.
    I remain, Sir, your most obedient servant,
    CH. JNO. MARE.
    84, King William-street, London-bridge, E.C., March 9.

    'The Times' - 3rd July 1863
    A short point of some commercial importance, arose here, under the new Bankruptcy Act, whether an accommodation acceptor, having paid the bill, is entitled to come in as a creditor under a trust deed, or “deed of arrangement,” under the New Bankruptcy Act, entered into and registered before the bill became due. The plaintiff was the acceptor, who sued to recover the money he had paid, and the defendant, the party accommodated, pleaded the “deed of arrangement” as a defence.
    Mr. Digby Seymour, Q.C., Mr. Robinson, and Mr. McNamara were for the plaintiff; Mr. Mellish, Q.C., and Mr. Quain were for the defendant.
    The Lord Chief Justice reserved the point as one of law for the full Court.

    ‘The Times’ - 14 February 1866
    Guidhall, Feb 12.
    Redpath v Wigg and Another.
    Mr. Brown, Q.C., and Mr. Bernard were counsel for the plaintiff; Mr. Huddleston, Q.C., and Mr. J. C. Mathew for one defendant; and Mr. Garth for the other.
    The action was brought by Mr. Redpath, a manufacturer of pumps and other apparatus for ships, against Mr. George Wigg and Mr. J. Leyster O’Beirne, the inspectors, under a deed of composition and inspectorship made between Mr. C. J. Mare, the eminent shipbuilder, and his creditors. The plaintiff sought to recover a sum of £65., the price of pumps and fire-grates supplied by him, to be used in the business originally carried on by Mr. Mare, and afterwards by the inspectors, under the firm of Mare and Co. The only question was whether the defendants were the parties liable to pay the amount.
    The jury at once returned a verdict for the plaintiff for the amount claimed.

    ‘The Times’ - 2nd August 1866
    July 31
    Wigg v O’Beirne.
    Mr. Waller asked for an ex parte injunction to restrain the parting with two valuable engines which had been removed from Northfleet, where they were, and which the defendant intended to sell. The plaintiff and defendant were both inspectors under an inspectorship deed entered into with respect to the creditors of Mr. Mare, the well-known shipbuilder, and the engines, being left at Northfleet, had been removed, and, after some correspondence between the inspectors and directors, it appeared that the defendant claimed a right to retain them pending a claim by Messrs. Martin, the bankers, in respect of advances made by them, and he stated that he had no other security.
    His Honour made the order on the usual undertaking as to damages, and gave leave to give notice of motion for Thursday next, observing that it was merely a permission, inasmuch as there were enough matters already in the paper to occupy the Court until its rising.

    ‘The Times’ - 1st November 1866
    Yesterday morning information was given by the Thames police of a fatal accident to a gentleman named Charles John Mare. It appeared that the deceased slipped from the edge of the embankment near Blackwall and was drowned. The following description is given by the police of the deceased :- Aged about 45 years, 5ft. 3in. high, hair and whiskers gray, bald on the top of the head, dressed in a black frock coat, trousers, and waistcoat, white shirt, and wellington boots. Supposed to have had on him a gold watch worth 60 guineas, besides a quantity of gold in a bag.

    ‘The Times’ - 2nd November 1866
    We are requested to state that the unfortunate gentleman mentioned in a paragraph under the above heading in our yesterday’s impression was not Mr. Charles John Mare, of the London Engineering Company, but Mr. Nathan Mare, aged 55. The relatives have no reason to believe that the deceased had with him a large sum in gold, as was suggested in the paragraph in question.

    'The Times' - 1st January 1868
    Notice of Adjudications and First Meeting of Creditors.
    Mare, Charles, late of Brighton, shipbuilder – Jan 23 at 1

    ‘The Times' - 30th January 1868
    COURT OF BANKRUPTCY, Basinghall Street, Jan 29.
    (Before the Hon. W. C. Spring-Rice.)
    At a first meeting under the bankruptcy of this well-known shipbuilder, proofs of debt were tendered and admitted, and Mr. William Sproston, of Nantwich, was appointed creditors’ assignee, a resolution being also passed for an administration of the estate out of court, under the 185th section of the Bankruptcy Act, 1861. It appeared from the bankrupt’s examination that he had carried on business at Millwall, Poplar, and that he had a private residence at Mills Terrace, Brighton. He was a bankrupt in 1855, but obtained his certificate, and the bankruptcy was superseded in 1856. He owed about £11,000 to creditors in London and the neighbourhood. The whole of the machinery and stock at Millwall was taken possession of by the trustees under a deed of inspectorship, dated in January, 1865, and everything was sold by auction in the beginning of 1866. Since 1865 he had carried on business by procuring orders, which were executed by the Millwall Iron Company. Before the bankruptcy he executed a deed of composition, but he was unable to obtain the necessary signatures, hence the adjudication.
    Messrs. Nichols and Clark are the solicitors under the proceedings.

    'The Times' - 6th May 1868
    The case of bankrupt, the well-known shipbuilder of Millwall, again came before the Court upon an application to register a deed which had been executed under the 185th section; but, opposition being raised at the instance of several creditors, an adjournment was ordered.
    Mr. Reed appeared for the creditors, and Mr. Vyner for the assigners.

  • Mare was bankrupted for the second time on 21st December 1867 and, after this, he had a ‘haphazard career’ and ‘simply disappeared and none of his relatives or friends could find any trace of him’. He is known to have worked from 1880-83 as a marine boat-building inspector on the river and was still a subject of great interest to ship-workers when he visited their yards. He died in poverty, believed to be the 9th of February, 1898. A marble memorial was later provided by subscription, with the support of the West Ham Borough Council and of Thames Ironworks.
    It was placed in the entrance to West Ham Municipal College recalling his work and the 'Vulcan', an early Iron worship.

  • Mr. C. J. Mare's Memoriam.







    Back to Home page | Back to The General Screw Steam Shipping Co. Index
    Copyright © Historic Shipping 2011.