Where and when did Thames Smelt Fishermen Fish?

The History of Fish by Francis Willughby, and published by the Royal Society,
sold so poorly that it almost bankrupted them.i It says of the Smelt, This fish is
remarkable for its delicacy, and seldom exceeds six inches in length. Smelts
bear a very high price, as they are a favourite food, and are often sold in
London at 5 or 6 shillings the hundred. They come into the Thames in the
months of March and August; in the first of which they go up as high as
Mortlake, but seldom get further than Blackwall in the latter month. Today,
the River Thames is one of the few UK rivers that maintains a breeding
population. A member of the Salmon family, the most interesting feature of
the Smelt (Osmesus Eperlanus) is that it smells strongly like cucumbers.
This historical investigation was undertaken as part of the Smelt conservation
programme of the Zoological Society of London. It is doubtful that any
fisherman purely fished for Smelt. More likely, they fished on a seasonal basis
for a whole variety of different fish. It would be this short season for Smelt that
o tri uted to their high alue. The Tidal Tha es by Alwyne Wheeler has the
best review of available reference sources concerning the Thames Smelt
fishery.ii
Mary Prior, i her ook Fisher Row, has resear hed the fisher e , arge e
and canal boatmen who lived along the banks of the river Thames in Oxford
between 1500 and 1900.iii She found that family ties were very important. Sons
follo ed their father s o upatio s i a traditio al a er. A o g the
fisher e , usually o ly o e so follo ed i the father s footsteps e ause the
fishery on the river was a limited resource, and it could only support a limited
number of mouths. Only in periods of severe depression, when there were no
other sources of employment, did additional fisher e s so s take up fishi g.
This could lead to family feuds. She found the same nuclear, patriarchal
families among fishermen as were common among rural communities
throughout North West Europe. In the tidal Thames, two men, master and
apprentice, were required to work a Peter Boat, but larger fishing vessels
required more crew and further downstream it becomes more common for
several sons to work together with their fathers.

By linking together census records from 1841 to 1911 it was possible to see the
same family ties, and to see sons follo i g i their father s trade. The census
record linkage made it very clear how as time progressed, fishermen either
changed occupations or moved downstream. In the case of older fishermen,
this could be to take up less strenuous, land-based work, such as a fishmonger.
However, it might also demonstrate the reduction in fish stocks over this
period.
During the
s regular Peter Boat ra es took pla e o the i er Tha es.
Participants in these Sailing Matches and fishermen who appeared in the
proceedings of the Old Bailey and Thames Conservancy Courts were used to try
to identify the places where sailors mentioned lived. Not all of the race
participants were fishermen, but since it was a Peter Boat race, the likelihood
was high as this as the fisher a s oat. In each of the areas where the
fishermen lived was a thriving waterside community. These areas were fruitful
in finding additional fishermen who were neighbours. Some of these fishing
communities are on outside bends in the river, some are at the mouths of
tributaries, and some are at places where boats could be easily beached. There
is probably as much chance involved in the locations as anything else.
Teddington Weir was probably a good spot for fishing due for being both a
barrier to fish and the artificially imposed limit of the tidal Thames.

In Twickenham and Teddington, are the Kemp, Baldwin, Stevens and the Deer
families. In Chiswick and Strand on the Green, are the Bunday, James, Parkin,
Pearce and Odell families. In Putney, the Gibson family are prominent. In
Wandsworth are the Cobb, Perkins, Blackbourn and Dearman families. In
Lambeth, are the Brown, Garland, Hawkins, Manning, Oakley, Hosier, Robinson
and Webb families. In most cases, one son follows in the father s trade, and
this is not necessarily the eldest son. The other sons usually become
Bargemen, Lightermen or Dock Labourers. For several individuals Wills were
located and those for Edward William Cobb and Thomas Blackbourn, both of
Wandsworth, were ordered. Unfortunately, these proved to have no boats,
nets, tackle, or belongings described and the value of the estates are low. Mary
Prior also found this. Inventories are not present after 1732 and Wills are only
made when there is an estate to dispose of.iv None of the fishermen
investigated appeared to be very wealthy.
The Deer family lived in Water Lane, Teddington. Although Thomas Deer takes
both his sons as apprentices, William is not there after 1851 and George
becomes a manservant in Twickenham. In the Teddington area, the Kemp
family dominate. The oldest fisherman found there is John Amos Kemp b.
1778. They begin living near the Deer family but by the mid-1800s, the Kemp
fisher e are li i g i the fisher e s ottages, also k o
as Tide E d
cottages, at Teddington Lock. They are no longer fishing after 1881. There is a
Benjamin Kemp in 1911 in Bermondsey working as a Haddock splitter, who
may be related. The Baldwin family, living at the Fields Lane, in the Oxford and
Cambridge cottages, in Teddington, are fishing until 1881. The Stevens family
are also fishermen from Water Lane, Teddington. They move to Kingston in
1871, and then the son returns to Teddington in 1881. Conservancy rules
prevented any Smelt fishing above the Thames at Richmond, so none of these
fishermen fished for Smelt.
In the Chiswick area, extensive personal family history research was made
available on the Pearce family of fishermen who lived at Strand on the Green.
William Pearce is mentioned in 1830 in the Proceedings of the Old Bailey in
connection with the theft of a Smelt net from Moses Gibson, so we can assume
that these were both fishing for Smelt at that time. v However, the Odell family
of Chiswick is also interesting because Thomas Odell b. 1862 was possibly the
very last fisherman making his living in the upper tidal Thames. He is the
subject of a schools local history classroom activity on Victorian Thames for
this reason.vi Bo
er Pear e as also fishi g i to the t e tieth e tury. The

reason why Chiswick Eyot seems to have remained a good fishing place long
after the rest of the river was too polluted is unclear. The nearby Brentford Gas
works was one of the earliest built, and that certainly did have a huge effect on
local fish stocks. Henry, the brother of Thomas Odell had been a Chiswick
fisherman as was their father, Thomas b. 1812, though he had been born in
Lambeth and actually moved upstream, which is against the general rule of
thumb. Unusually, the brothers William and John Bunday are both fishing in
1851, again, that is against the rule of thumb of one son carrying on the family
business. There is also a father and son, Parkins, and many others, all still
fishing in Chiswick in 1871. There is a description of the fishery at Chiswick
even as late as 1902.vii
As an aside, according to Brentford and Chiswick Local History Society, the
reason for Bommer s a e as that, he had a Bu
oat, hereas the
explanation that it was the name given to a Billingsgate Fish Porter, a
Bummeree, seems a much more likely explanation.viii Just as a Peter Boat being
named for St. Peter, a fisherman himself, and the patron saint of fishermen,
seems more likely than named for the ferry fro t. Paul s to t. Peter s. Peter
boats would not have made good ferryboats due to space taken by the wet fish
storage compartment in the centre of the boat.
The fishery at Putney and Mortlake were described from before the Norman
Conquest.ix In Putney, the Gibson family dominated the fishing there. The
earliest found was Lewis Gibson, who had been born in Chiswick. Like Moses
Gibson, Lewis is likely to ha e ee fishi g i Chis i k i the
s si e his
son; Lewis Charles was born in Hammersmith in 1833. Lewis Charles is another
fisherman that we can say with certainty was fishing for Smelt since he is
e tio ed i Al y Wheelers The Tidal Tha es for receiving 16 shillings a
hu dred, a d o e lot presu a ly a day s at h ear i g hi . x Almost all
the Lewis family lived in Spring Gardens which is an alleyway leading from
Lower Richmond Road down to the riverside where there is a beach. Today it
leads to the Thames Rowing Club. After 1891, none of the Gibson family are
fishing any longer. Charles is a fishmonger in Fulham, George and Moses are
Barge Boatman, James and Henry Thomas are Watermen, Joseph is a
Commission Agent, Henry Ralph is a General Labourer, while another Lewis has
become a Boat worker at the Welsh Harp reservoir in Brent.
The fishermen living in Wandsworth have been comprehensively detailed in
Doria Gerhold s Wa ds orth s Lost Fishi g Village .xi The mouth of the river

Wandle had a sandy beach on which boats could be beached. Gerhold found
the fisherman, John George, first recorded there in 1649. The last two
fishermen in Wandsworth were William Perkins and John Dearman in 1871.
Gerhold also mentions William Peters, another fisherman found in the
Proceedings of the Old Bailey where his catch of Barbel and Flounders are
stolen from his boat in 1836.xii The eldest Cobb family member was William
Edward Cobb b. 1780 and he is recorded in the 1841 census as a Ship Owner.
His sons and grandsons are fishermen but we see them move progressively
downstream from Wandsworth. Several Cobbs are found living in Greenwich
and in Poplar. The Cobbs may not have been Smelt fishermen as the boats
they sailed i luded the E ergy , off Holyhead, A glesey i
, the E ergy
, off Gra ese d i
, and the usa ah , also off Gra ese d i
. They
xiii
were all Schooners a ordi g to the Lloyd s egister.
Thomas Pridmore and John Kennett are the only Battersea fishermen found.xiv
Kennett has died before 1861, and Pridmore has become a Domestic
Gardener. William and John Coates, James Joseph Baigent, William Butler,
William Cleveland and John Manning were fishermen from Chelsea but none
was fishing there during period covered by the census. James Joseph Baigent
was fishing in Rotherhithe in 1871 and 1881.
The greatest concentration of fishermen in central London is found in the area
of the present day Albert Embankment, between Vauxhall Bridge and Lambeth
Bridge. There were more fishermen living here on the 1841 census than
anywhere else. 30 years later, they were mostly gone. In 1841, the foreshore
was shingle and boats could be beached here. As in Putney, there was an
alleyway running down to the Thames and there were steps. This was probably
originally named Coquet Alley, but is recorded as Cockill or Cockills Alley.
Parallel to the river ran Lower Fore Street and Upper Fore Street. The rear of
Lower Fore Street faced towards the river. There were families of fishermen
here too Brown, Garland, Hawkins, Manning, Hosier, Robinson and Webb
but there were also many unrelated men Beadle, Belding, Belkin, Billings,
Buckeridge, Candwick, Franks, Garthwaite, Goodwin, Gough, Grant, Hathil,
Langford and Nash. Robert Plumb migrates to Gravesend and has sons and a
grandchild fishing there.
Lower Fore and Upper Fore were densely populated with houses in multiple
occupation and families living in a single room, or in two rooms. Industry,
warehouses, and residential properties lay side by side. The fishermen had

neighbours who were rice and corn millers, coal merchants and barge builders.
There was soap manufacture, pottery kilns and other kinds of industry taking
place nearby. The Lambeth fishermen appear more geographically mobile than
others do; many are not born in Lambeth, or even in Surrey. Some are Deep
Sea fishermen from Yorkshire. Occupations of fisherman and fishmonger also
seem interchangeable in Lambeth. These might be fishermen selling directly to
the customer. In 1901, Henry Passfield is described as an Eel Fisherman. Those
that do remain take other occupations, the most unusual being that of a Tennis
Ball maker.
Fishing in the 19th Century could not have been a wealthy occupation at all in
comparison to the 16th and 17th Centuries. Mary Prior partly ascribes this to the
number of fasting days in the earlier periods, which made fish a much more
highly valued commodity.xv The lack of sanitation, or a well, and overcrowding
had made the Lower Fore area liable to squalor and disease. There were two
London Cholera epidemics in the late
s, and another in 1854. In 1848, the
first death was at No. 26 Lower Fore Street on the 30th September. There was a
death at No. 22 on the 1st of October, another at the same address a few days
later, then two further deaths at No. 29 on the 4th of October.xvi The people in
Lower Fore Street had been obtaining their drinking water by dipping a pail
into the river Thames.xvii After 1852, the extraction of water from the Thames
below Teddington Weir was prohibited.xviii
The condition of the Thames continued to deteriorate and in hot weather, the
stink was unbearable. In 1858, various plans were finally amalgamated into a
scheme to intercept and pipe raw sewage away from the river. Joseph
Bazelgette s s he e at La eth, ot o ly su erged a se er u der the Al ert
Embankment, but also improved flood defences, created a new transport link,
cleared away the slum housing, and by extending the foreshore out, produced
new, high value land for building. Several inland docks were created at this
time to maintain access from the river to industry still using the river for
transport. White Hart Dock, which served the Doulton Pottery Company, is the
only one that remains today. Thousands pass it by every day without any idea
that it is there behind the concrete wall. The factory is a listed building and is
further down Black Prince Road. There are informational wall signs about the
Dock and the Cholera epidemic there. There are also seats made out of boats
a d s ulptures desig ed ith the the e of a oat s hull.

Wheeler points out the difficulty of determining whether the migration of

fishermen down the Thames is due to depletion of fish stocks from pollution,
the building of locks and weirs, or the urbanisation of the foreshore.xix All took
place at the very same time. Gerhold shows clearly that demolition of the
waterside properties in Wandsworth followed after the decline of fishing, and
after the fishermen had already left.xx In Lambeth, this is much less clear. In
addition, the building of the railways was important because it allowed cheap
fresh fish from the coast to be supplied to London. In 1861, London
Underground Railway was opened, and in 1862, the largest railway station in
the world, at Clapham Junction, was completed. Smelt might have been
unusual in the respect that it cannot be kept alive, and fresh, for very long
once it has been caught. Therefore, locally sourced Smelt would have a
premium value. There are anecdotal stories of London fishermen moving to
Grimsby. In 1911, there is a Mr. Rhodes from Gravesend working as a
fisherman in Grimsby, which backs this up.
William Calloway described himself as a fellowship porter and fisherman,
living in Pitt's-place, Bankside. xxi William and brother, John, worked from
Moss Alley in Southwark in 1851, approximately on the site of the Tate
Modern today. Mid-eighteenth century Rotherhithe was described as a being
inhabited mostly by seafaring people and watermen. xxii However, the only
found there was William Goff in 1881.

William Mitchell of Greenwich was described as an Elver fisherman in 1841. As

fishing moved downstream, the number of fishermen in Greenwich and
Gravesend grew higher and several members of families from Wandsworth
and Lambeth moved out to Greenwich. Peter A kroyd s ook Thames: Sacred
i er describes Blackwall as a place where dozens of Smelt could be taken
away.xxiii In Barking, several fishermen can be found living on Fisher Street in
1841. Erith appears to have become very polluted as early as 1827 when Dutch
Eel-ships carrying live healthy Eels to Billingsgate found they died after
stopping there.xxiv
Much larger boats sailed out of Greenwich, Barking Creek and Gravesend,
going much further down the estuary. In 1861, Henry Brown from Greenwich is
recorded on the Laura Ann , another Schooner, fishing off Orford Ness. In
1871, James Clinker from Blackwall is fishing off Grays in the James and Eliza.
Three of the Constant family are fishing on the Martha and Mary off
Gravesend in 1881. Wheeler says that the Southend boats fished Smelt on
Blyth Sands and that the fishery in the Medway continued to be valuable, even
after the rest of the Thames had died. Rochester Smelts were particularly
celebrated. xxv

In Gravesend the names, Austin, Constant, Shuttlewood, Sutherland, Wade

and Webster are found, together with Cobb and Plumb, seen before further
upstream. The fishermen are found particularly in the Bull Yard, Quee s treet
and the West Street areas near the town pier, or else on Melbourne Pier itself.
In 1911, there are, however, a number of former fishermen in the workhouse
Thomas Wootton, Edward Moore and Francis Boorman. Richard Constant is
taken from out of the workhouse as a child and lives with his grandmother. He
then works as a fisherman, ending up in 1911 sharing a property with his
brother. In several families in Gravesend, multiple sons are working as
fishermen. William Sutherland has two sons working as fishermen and one as a
seaman on merchant ferries.
Mary Prior found the trade of a fisherman to be a long apprenticeship. It could
not be learnt from books but by example and practice. He needed to know the
habits and movements of fish, and way in which the weather and seasons
affected them. He needed to know every shallow and deep of water, and
whether a flood or a drought affected those. This was in addition to sailing and
boating skills, and use correct use and repair of equipment, nets and kiddles.
A fishery was like a farm, a thing of value to be passed down from generation
to generation. Though Mary Prior found that son did not necessarily follow
father, but he might marry the daughter of another fishermen. Employment
for younger sons who did not become fishermen could be found in net making,
weel and kiddle making, basket making and hemp dressing. Mary Prior thinks
sons of fishermen might have become barber-surgeons. The early childhood
net making made them equally deft in making wigs and hairnets. The collecting
of leeches brought the two groups together.xxvi This is not something that
appears to be found in London.
Finally, a comparison was made of the last mention of Fisherman as an
occupation in the Census against each locality as a distance (in miles) from
Teddington Lock. There was some manipulation of the data. The Eel fisherman
at Lambeth who was still working right up until 1911 was not included. In
addition, there is no way to know if the fishermen were fishing locally or sailing
down the Thames each day. There is evidence quoted by Gerhold and from
Proceedings of the Old Bailey that fishermen were away from home for long
periods of time and slept on their boatsxxvii. The results are most illuminating.
You can clearly see that Wandsworth to Lambeth fishermen were the first to
leave. We would expect this as it had the greatest concentration of sewage

outfalls, sewage-laden tributaries and gasworks. It just so happens that the

Putney to Battersea areas are also exactly where we believe that Smelt spawn.
The other striking thing is the way in which upstream of Chiswick clearly stands
out as continuing to provide good fishing.

By David Fergusson BSc. (Shef.) Natural Environmental Science, MSc. DIC Environmental
Tech. (Water Management) IC CEP, currently studying for Advanced Diploma in Local History
(Online) Oxon. (17 Mar 2017)

Acknowledgments
I am indebted to Jen McCard, Joe Pecorelli, Terry Freestone, Roger Williams and Mick Lee
for their help in uncovering some sources and fishermen mentioned.

Willughby, F. De Historia Piscium (1686) Oxford. The Royal Society.

ii

Wheeler, A. (1979) The Tidal Thames Routledge and Keegan Paul pp. 48-49.
Prior, M. (1982) Fisher Row: Fishermen, Bargemen and Canal Boatmen in Oxford 1500-1900, Oxford
University Press pp.22-23.
iv
Prior, M. (1982) Fisher Row: Fishermen, Bargemen and Canal Boatmen in Oxford 1500-1900, Oxford
University Press p.21.
v
http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?ref=t18300415-112 version 7.2 (Consulted 17 Mar 2016).
vi
Thames Explorer River Lesson Plans http://www.thames-explorer.org.uk/thames-education/river-lessonplans (Consulted 29 Jan. 2016.)
vii
Cornish, C. J. (1902) The Naturalist o the Tha es , Seely.
viii
http://brentfordandchiswicklhs.org.uk/local-history/industries-and-crafts/riverside-crafts-industries/
(Consulted 17 Mar 2016).
ix
Daniel Lysons, 'Putney', in The Environs of London: Volume 1, County of Surrey (London, 1792), pp. 404-435
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/london-environs/vol1/ pp.404-435. [Consulted 26 November 2015]. Edward
Walford, 'Putney', in Old and New London: Volume 6 (London, 1878), pp. 489-503 http://www.britishhistory.ac.uk/old-new-london/vol6/ pp.489-503. [Consulted 26 November 2015].
x
Wheeler, A. (1979) The Tidal Thames Routledge and Keegan Paul p.49.
xi
Gerhold, D. (2012) Wa ds orth s Lost Fishi g Village Wandsworth Historical Society Wandsworth Paper No.
25. pp. 15-21.
xii
http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?ref=t18360704-1751 version 7.2 (Consulted 17 Mar 2016).
xiii
Lloyd s egisters http://www.lrfoundation.org.uk/public_education/reference-library/register-of-shipsonline/ (Consulted 09 Feb. 2016.)
xiv
Sherwood, M (1913) Historic Battersea London.
xv
Prior, M. (1982) Fisher Row: Fishermen, Bargemen and Canal Boatmen in Oxford 1500-1900, Oxford
University Press p.104.
xvi
The Times General Board of Health (London, England), Friday, Nov 03, 1848; pg. 8; Issue 20011. (6317
words)
xvii
Informational signage next to White Hart Dock, Albert Embankment, Lambeth.
xviii
Wheeler, A. (1979) The Tidal Thames Routledge and Keegan Paul p.28.
xix
Wheeler, A. (1979) The Tidal Thames Routledge and Keegan Paul p.58.
xx
Gerhold, D. (2012) Wa ds orth s Lost Fishi g Village Wandsworth Historical Society Wandsworth Paper No.
25. pp. 22.
xxi
http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?ref=t18400406-1309 version 7.2 (Consulted 17 Mar 2016).
xxii
A Des riptio of the Cou ty of urrey The Universal Magazine 25 (1759) p.114
xxiii
Ackroyd, P. (2009) Tha es: Sacred i er, Anchor Books.
xxiv
Walter Thornbury, 'Lower Thames Street', in Old and New London: Volume 2 (London, 1878), pp. 41-60
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/old-new-london/vol2/ pp. 41-60. [Consulted 26 November 2015].
xxv
'Kenley - Kentmere', in A Topographical Dictionary of England, ed. Samuel Lewis (London, 1848), pp. 652-659
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/topographical-dict/england/ pp.652-659 [Consulted 26 November 2015].
Edward Hasted, 'General history: Rivers', in The History and Topographical Survey of the County of Kent:
Volume 1 (Canterbury, 1797), pp. 272-293 http://www.british-history.ac.uk/survey-kent/vol1/ [Consulted 26
November 2015].
xxvi
Prior, M. (1982) Fisher Row: Fishermen, Bargemen and Canal Boatmen in Oxford 1500-1900, Oxford
University Press, p.71.
xxvii
http://www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?ref=t17960914-99 version 7.2 (Consulted 17 Mar 2016).
iii