Harleston towermill stood on the corner of Candlers Lane, Jay's Green, Harleston. The five storey mill had 3 pairs of French burr stones that were powered by 4 double shuttered patent sails, each with 8 bays of 3 shutters and 1 bay of 4 shutters. The boat shaped cap held an 8 bladed fan. A portable steam engine was supplying auxiliary power to the mill in 1861.

Tithe Award 1840
Map 1839
Owner: William Barber
Occupier: do

William Barber was born in 1779 and died in 1851. His son, Samuel Barber, born in 1811 was also miller in 1839, before moving to Scole_towermill from 1845-1864.
Samuel's son William Samuel Barber, b.1837 worked as a miller or journeyman miller at several mills:
1861 at Eye, Suffolk;
1871 at Gissing_postmill;
1878-79 at Carlton_Rode_towermill;
1881-83 at Rockland St Andrew postmill;
1891-1904 at at Hingham_Deopham_Rd_towermill and Hingham_watermill.

. . . consumption, Mr. E. D. Coote, miller, of Harleston, in his 42nd year. Debenham - On the 8th instant, East Dereham, very suddenly, in the year of her age, Elizabeth, relict of Mr. Thomas Debenham, late of Harleston, in this county. Edwards - On Tuesday last.
Norfolk Newse - 12th May 1855

HARLESTON EXTENSIVE CORN ROBBERIES
DISCOVERY OF A GANG OF THEIVES

At the Stradbroke Petty Sessions on Friday last..... Bale Knights, miller, Harleston, George Roberts, Harleston and Charles Meen, shoemaker Weybread appeared to answer a charge of having stolen six coombs of wheat of an off farm at Fressingfield belonging to the Rev. Augustus Cooper. The case caused much interest in the locality because it was believed that two, at least, of the prisoners were members of a gang who for some time past, have been carrying on their depredations in a systematic manner and also from an impression which had gained ground that had it not been for the precipitate action of certain parties, many more of the gang would have been brought to justice......

On the 29th of November last, the prisoner Knights waited upon Mr T. L. Hudson, merchant, and informed him that a few days previously he had purchased seven bushels of wheat of a man named Roberts, and that the sacks in which the corn was delivered bore upon them Mr Hudson's name in full. Knights also added that Robert's had requested the loan of his horse and cart. Mr Hudson who was aware of the systematic robberies that were being carried on in the neighbourhood, thought that an opportunity now presented itself for detecting some of the offenders, and he accordingly set for police constable George...stationed at Harleston.....They consulted together .... and eventually it was arranged that Knights should pretend to 'row in' with the parties, and – if necessary for the purpose of allaying suspicion – should accompany Roberts on any robbery for which the plans had been arranged. Accordingly when Roberts again requested Knights to lend him his horse and cart, Knights consented to do so and also to drive him some distance on the road. About two o'clock in the morning of the 4 th De, knights and Roberts started with the horse and cart from Knight's mill, Knights driving and Roberts lying covered up at the bottom of the cart. They took the road in the direction of Hairdressing, passed Shotford Bridge and when they reached the four cross-ways, Knights alighted from the cart, whilst Roberts took the reins and drove up the lane which leads to the Rev Cooper's premises. Roberts was absent about half an hour, and when he returned, Knights... saw that he had six coombs of wheat on the cart. Knights... then drove back to Harleston, leaving Roberts on the road. Roberts came up again as they approached the town and... went by another way to Knight's mill. When Knights arrived, Roberts assisted him to unload the wheat which was mixed up with other wheat... rendering it difficult to be identified. On this point... statements are very conflicting, Knights asserting he mixed the corn at Robert's request and in his presence... to allay Robert's suspicion; Roberts declares that Knight's mixed the corn whilst he had left the mill for... some rum. Knights also ascertained that a robbery was planned to take place the following night at... Mr Chapman of Fressingfield and this information, together with what had already transpired he imparted to Mr Hudson and police-constable George... Mr Hudson thought that by surrounding Mr Chapman's premises on the following night, a large number of the gang might be captured....and that several police officers should be stationed on Mr Chapman's premises...

In the meantime... the morning following the robbery at Mr Cooper's farm, Mr Cooper's bailiff noticed some grains of wheat scattered about....and he discovered a quantity of wheat had been removed... He immediately proceeded to inform his master... and Mr Hudson detailed to Mr Cooper all the circumstances, telling him Mr Knights was acting under the direction of the police and … that the present case was not... clear against Roberts. He... requested that Mr Cooper not take any action … that on the following night there would be an opportunity of capturing many more of the gang.

Mr Cooper, however, and police-constable Vincent, of the Suffolk force, proceeded to the residence of Rev. Mr. Colbeck, a magistrate, residing at Fressingfield and obtained warrants... against Roberts... also against Knights, not withstanding what Mr Hudson had said about Knights acting under the direction of the police. Knights and Roberts were apprehended... from statements made by Robert's wife, Meen was also taken into custody.

A warrant was also issued for .... Dunn, but Dunn absconded.

It... does seem... poor encouragement that a person doing his utmost to assist in the detection and apprehension of a gang of thieves... should be taken into custody and committed for trial as equally guilty... Police-constable Vincent stated.... he had not communicated with any member of the Norfolk police and could not... have any knowledge of their plans but it cam out that Vincent had called at (police-constable) George's house and had been informed by Mrs. George that her husband knew all about the matter... One would have supposed that...Vincent would have at least endeavoured to see George before he took any decided steps, but there is nothing to show that he attempted to do so. The magistrates, nevertheless... exonerated Vincent from all blame....

...our reporter, who was present at the last hearing only applied for permission to copy the depositions... taken at the first hearing... he stated that it was customary for such permission to be granted, but Mr Lawton, of Eye, the clerk to the justices... stated that during the more than twenty years he had been the magistrates clerk he had never had such an application before.... Mr. Lawton was asked if he could not decide at once, but he replied he must takes some time to think about it, and requested our reporter to leave his address... as no communication... has been received... it is to be presumed that the clerk... declined. What motive Mr Lawton can have... it is difficult to conceive as the circumstances of the case are well known in the locality. We have however, from another source obtained the evidence of the witnesses who were examined in the first hearing and these we now append.

Mr Robert Reeder, farm bailiff to the Rev Augustus Cooper, stated that on the morning oft the 3 rd of December ash e was passing out of his master's yard, he noticed some wheat which was spilled near the gate. He went immediately to the barn but as everything appeared all right there, he proceeded to the granary and found some wheat had been taken from a heap. He directly informed Mr cooper, and saw Mr Hudson at that gentleman's residence. He afterwards went to Knight's mill and saw several parcels of wheat, one sample of which he believed to be taken from his master's, It was old wheat.

In cross examination Mr Reeder said that when he saw Mr Hudson at Mr Cooper's, Mr Hudson told him that corn had been lost in the neighbourhood and a trap had been laid for the thieves; and Mr Hudson asked Mr Cooper to keep the matter quiet for a few days as he had no doubt the police would find out the parties. Mr Hudson also told Cooper that Knights was acting under the direction of the police and it would be extremely hard if Knights was to be dealt with as a criminal as he was to receive the corn in order that the thieves were to be detected.

...witness said that the sample taken from knights mill was like his master's but he would not swear to it.

John Vincent, police-constable at Fressingfield stated that having received information that five or six coombs of wheat had been stolen from Mr Cooper's he proceeded thither. In the yard he observed marks of wheels and these marks he traced in the direction of Harleston. He then went to Knight's mill, where he saw a cart, which he believed was the one he traced as the tire of the wheel was square and quite sharp. He saw Knight who told him he had purchased six coombs of wheat of Roberts... it was in the mill... mixed with other wheat. Knights also told him that he had been with Roberts to the four cross ways; that Roberts took the horse and cart, ad turned down a a lane; that Roberts was gone about half an hour and then came back with six coombs of wheat which he (Knights) took home and mixed. Knights also told him that he had given Roberts £ 6 for the wheat as Roberts had stated that a party was in the town who wanted the money; and that Knights added moreover, that what he had done was by direction of Mr Hudson and Police-constable George. On the following day he (Vincent) apprehended Roberts at Harleston, and told him he was accused of stealing wheat....Police-constable George said to witness “ you had better not interfere with the case as I know all about it ” Vincent here produced a sample of wheat which was taken from Knight's mill. Witness then took Roberts before the rev Mr Colbeck and Roberts admitted that he and Knights went after the wheat and that he (Roberts) took the wheat and carried it back to Knights. Roberts was then left with Sergeant Mayes at the Stradbroke station. When Knights was before Mr Colbeck, he was about to make a statement, when Police-constable George stopped him.

In cross examination, Vincent said that Knights had told him that he was acting under the direction of Mr Hudson and Police-constable George to which he (Vincent) replied “ I have nothing to do with their plans as I have not been communicated with ” He arrested Roberts before he saw George. George told him he expected a robbery was to be committed and that Knights was to “ row in ” wit the parties. Mrs George had previously told him that her husband knew all about the matter.

George Mayes, a police-sergeant at Stradbroke, said that Roberts was brought to the4 station on Wednesday the 5 th..When he was being locked up he said “ I don ’ t know why I should be locked up any more than Knights. I consider him worse than me he called me up between one and two in the morning and I got up and went with him to Weybread. Knights... told me to go with the cart down the lane I don ’ t know where the corn came from ” Robert's wife... came to the station and said he received the corn from Knights; and then remarked to Roberts “ You know Meen and Dunn were there ”

Benjamin Green, landlord of the “ Duke William ” public house deposed that Roberts,Meen and Dunn were drinking there in company and that they had some beefsteaks there.

This concluded the evidence given at the first hearing of the case. On Friday last the following witnesses were examined:-

Harriet Rodwell deposed – I live at Redenhall and am servant to Mr King, landlord of the “ Yew Tree ” ... On Tuesday evening, the 4 th December, I saw meek and ...Dunn...sitting in the kitchen drinking... Meen had a sovereign and I heard him say “ I have been looking at the dear little farmers when they were lying on their pillows ” . Meen then asked Dunn to lend him a shilling and Dun replied “ Yes, a sovereign if you like ” Dunn then laid a sovereign on the table... laid his finger on it and said “ you have not got it yet ” I saw that each of them had a sovereign in their possession. Dunn then put the sovereign into his pocket and said “ I am not without a sovereign or a shilling ” and Meen then took out a sovereign and showed it to Dunn after which he put it in his pocket again...

George Barber stated - I live at Wingfield and work for Mr Buck. On the afternoon of the Monday before the robbery I met two men - Dun and another whom I did not know... going from the direction of Harleston towards Weybread. Between five and six o'clock I saw (them)... return towards Harleston and I said “ good night ” ... I saw them in Mr Bond's first field... I will swear that Dunn was one but I cannot say that any one of the prisoners was the other man.

Police-sergeant Mayes said - I apprehended Meen on the Saturday after the robbery... I have not been able to take (Dunn) into custody as he has absconded. Meen was at home when I apprehended him... I have made enquiries at Harleston and other places with respect to Dunn, but have not been able to ascertain his whereabouts.

Police-constable Vincent... wished to make an addition to the evidence … at the first hearing of the case... Since then he recollected that Knights said he had bought seven cooms of wheat of Roberts before... and told Mr Hudson.

Mr Fox to Vincent - Do you mean to tell this court that you did not recollect this at first hearing! - I did not...

Mr Fox - How is it then that you recollect it after a lapse of eight days from the first hearing?
- I recollected it the same evening.

This concluded the evidence

Mr Fox... on behalf of Knights said... he had not expected to find his client placed in the position he now was, for he had heard the whole circumstances... and had seem Mr Hudson and police-constable George, and he knew that unless these two had committed perjury the charge of felony could not be proved against Knights... Roberts could not be convicted of this unless Roberts himself made a confession. In his opinion police-constable Vincent had acted with great precipitancy and indiscretion... had Vincent acted in a different manner there would have been... a considerable gang of thieves before the magistrates, and that Knights, instead of being charged with an offence, would have been a witness in the case. Let the magistrates look at all the circumstances. Mr Reeder... discovered the loss of some wheat... his master was informed... a police-constable was sent for... It was to be feared that there was a jealousy existing between the police forces of Norfolk and Suffolk and that Vincent... having found a robbery in Suffolk had been discovered by the Norfolk police, was urged to... apprehend the prisoners without consulting police-constable George. If... he (George) and Vincent had laid their heads together... a large body of men would have stood in that room as prisoners... there would have been no difficulty in convicting the lot... the public thought so to... look at what Vincent said in his evidence... first … he had said he did not remember a certain statement made by Knights, as to his having purchased wheat of Roberts on a previous occasion, but now he said he remembered Knights saying he had bought seven coombs of wheat before... what Vincent referred to was the seven bushels - not coombs - which Knights had told Mr Hudson he had purchased of Roberts... Before a man could be convicted of felony it is absolutely necessary that the goods which he was charged with stealing should be proved to have been taken... with the design of converting them to the takers own use... After knights purchased the seven bushels of wheat he told Mr Hudson of the transaction, that police-constable George was consulted, and that what Knights had done, had been entirely by the advice of Mr Hudson and George... was it possible Knights was to be treated as a criminal? If he was to be so treated, he (Mr Fox) should certainly recommend a man to tell a policeman nothing at all, and if Knights was convicted, then most certainly Mr Hudson and police-constable George ought... to be indicted too. It might be said - Why did Knights pay Roberts for the corn... to allay suspicion... that Roberts did not suspect Knights might be inferred from the fact that he informed Knights a robbery was arranged to take place at Mr Chapman's

Mr Mosley here remarked that Mr fox was not engaged to prosecute Roberts.

Mr Fox said he had not intention of doing so... the plan which had been laid was entirely successful... police-constable Vincent stepped in and spoiled the lot... His client had not been in Harleston many years, but during the time that he had been there he had conducted himself in every way as a respectable and straightforward man should do.
Norfolk News - 29th December 1860

Reams more of this but essentially Meens says he knows nothing and is of no involvement at all, Roberts and his counsel are trying to muddy the water by saying that Knights told Roberts what to do not vice versa, Hudson confirmed that Knights came to him to say he had his suspicions and that whilst he (Hudson) had not noticed wheat going missing the bags and wheat produced by Knights matched his property, he (Hudson) had noticed barley going missing and that locks had been tampered with. Both Hudson and PC George re-iterated their involvement and awareness off all Knights had done under their approval to enable the apprehension of the thieves, that although they thought the next robbery would be in Norfolk, Vincent had been made aware of the goings on and had to their minds 'jumped the gun'. Rev. Cooper however back Vincent to the hilt, said Fox was being unfair in claiming Vincent had jumped the gun, and had acted in the best way - on poking the other magistrates all agreed.
Conclusion come to was Meen was discharged whilst Knights and Roberts were remanded to Norwich Crown Court with stonking bail at £80!!!!!!!
Kate Chenneour - 5th April 2016

HARLESTON
The Robbery at Fressingfield

At the Suffolk Quarter sessions held last week at Ipswich, bale Knights and George Roberts were indicted for stealing wheat from the Rev A Cooper art Fressingfield. From the report which we gave of the proceedings before the magistrates at the time of committal, our readers must have been surprized that Knights - whose sole object had evidently been to assist in the discovery of a gang of thieves who were carrying on extensive depredations in the neighborhood - should have been included in the charge. No doubt the Chairman of Quarter sessions, C Austin Esq, also felt that his brother magistrates, in committing Knights, certainly 'committed' themselves. In referring to the case, in his charge to the Grand Jury he said that “it was marked by some singularity in circumstances. Knights was a miller at Harleston, Roberts appears to have stole the wheat and carried it to Knight's mill and the latter was charged as receiver. It would appear that Knights had concerted with one or more of the Norfolk Policeman, to assist in discovering the robbery, and for that purpose he was to pretend that he was an accomplice and the corn was taken to his mill. It was there mixed with some other corn and being of a peculiar quality was easily identifiable by the Suffolk Police, who had no knowledge of this arrangement between the Norfolk police and knights and who accordingly took Knights before the magistrates and knights was committed as a receiver of the corn. If they believed in the existence of such a compact they could not of course find a true bill against Knights. The occurrences in this case had a sort of romantic appearance about them, and the case had an exact parrallel  in one which was recorded in law books, where a case was recorded of a man's agreeing to assist in committing a robbery for the sake of the reward. There did not appear to have been any such motive in Mr Knight's share in this transaction, and they could not of course find a true bill against him if they saw any truth in these statements.
The grand jury accordingly ignored the bill against Knights.
George Roberts was then place on his trial charged with stealing six coombs of wheat............
The chairman in summing up, said he regretted that Knights was not present, and with regard to the statement of Roberts as to his having received not stolen the wheat, it was of not much practical importance as, according to the modern practice of framing indictments, he might be punished for receiving. The jury after a short deliberation returned a verdict of receiving and Roberts was sentenced to nine month imprisonment
Editor of the 'Norfolk V Sib - As you have takes an interest in and reported the proceedings in the case of Bale Knights, miller of Harleston, before the Stradbroke bench of magistrates in December last, I shall feel obliged - your inserting the following letter, the general feeling being that Knights is a much injured and innocent man ... (repetition of circs of case..) Mr Hudson ... went to Mr Cooper's informed him of all the circumstances ... Knights was assisting the police so it would be extremely unjust to bring Knights into trouble. Mr Cooper thought so too and it was arranged that his farming bailiff should see Vincent the policeman, and explain the circumstances to him....
The next morning (Tuesday) Vincent the Fressingfield policeman, instead of keeping the matter quiet went to Harleston....(pc Georges) wife told him he had better not go to Knights until he had seen her husband who already knew all about it. Vincent did not take this advice but went to Knights who told him how matters stood..
Next morning (Wednesday) Vincent came to Harleston again and told pc George he must arrest Knights or Roberts as Rev Colbeck threatened to report him for not taking them into custody. George replied “You surely will not arrest Knights, who has been assisting us to detect these theives” In the mean time Mr Hudson went to the Rev Colbeck's at Fressingfield... explained the case... understand the answer he got was that the Suffolk police had nothing whatever to do with the arrangements of the Norfolk police, that a felony had been committed, and that if Knights had been ill advised by Mr Hudson and the police, he must take the consequence, the police must arrest the parties if they could and had nothing to do with any plans laid by the Norfolk police.
Mr Hudson went again to the Rev Coopers and endeavoured to et him not to stir for a time......another robbery was to take place that night, in all probability the parties would be arrested. Mr Cooper informed Mr Hudson that Mr Colbeck had taken the matter up and the same day Knights was taken before the Rev Colbeck......
It appears to me sir that these magistrates were entirely ignorant....Knights has been most materially injured by the ignorance of these meant he has been put to considerable expense (which I am informed by the public who know the case intend to raise by subscription) and a stigma has been very unjustly cast upon his character, he having merely assisted to detect a gang of thieves who have been carrying on their depredation s for some time past undetected.
Had the plan been carried out there is no doubt that the gang would have been broken up. As it stands now, they are all at liberty with little chance of being taken as I should think no person after this would risk the chance of going before the Stradbroke bench by assisting the police.
I remain your obedient servant
AN OBSERVER.
Norfolk News - 12th January 1861

Seems like this really was a local cause celebre!
Particularly interesting is the fact that during the magistrates trial at Stradbroke, magistrate Cooper resigned - presumably in disgust - I think it is the Rev Cooper who wrote the letter to the paper which prints on straight on from the court report - including the telling 'Mr Cooper thought so too and it was arranged that his farming bailiff should see Vincent the policeman, and explain the circumstances to him...' Otherwise facts have been reported but where motives are assumed it is made very clear along the lines of 'it appears etc' - this is the only motive reported as fact so guess it was the person who held those feelings who wrote the letter!
Kate Chenneour - 7th April 2016

HARLESTON
Bale KNIGHTS
Police accomplice in case of corn robberies.
Charge by Suffolk Police not proceeded with.
Norfolk News - 12th January 1861

J. Caley Respectfully announces the undermentioned SALES by AUCTION during the next month
At HARLESTON
A Neat Dwelling House & Garden. Capital Brick Tower Windmill with 3 pairs of stones and a Cottage in four tenements, the property of the late Mr. William Barber.
Messrs. Carthew & Fox Solrs.
Norfolk Chronicle & Norfolk News - 18th May 1861

HARLESTON
To Millers. To be Sold by Auction by John Caley at the Magpie Hotel Harleston on Wednesday 7 August 1861 at 6 o'c in 2 lots.
Lot 1. A well-built BRICK TOWER WINDMILL of good elevation with 5 floors & all necessary machinery in first rate working condition driving 3 pairs of stones (to which the present tenant has connected a portable steam engine) most advantageously situated at Harleston very near the Railway Station & now in full trade; a neat slated RESIDENCE, Garden, Retail Shop, Counting house, Stable, Gig house, Workshop, Granary, Pig-styes etc. & 2 small enclosures of old PASTURE LAND all adjoining & now let under a lease which expires at Michaelmas 1862 to Mr. Bale Knights.
Freehold.
Apply to Mr. James Muskett, Mr. W. L. Fox, Solr. & of the Auctioneer, all of Harleston.
Norfolk Chronicle & Norfolk News - 20th & 27th July & 3rd August 1861

Local Bankrupts (from the London Gazette)
Friday April 4
Bale Knights, late of Harleston, Norfolk, miller
Norfolk Chronicle - 12th April 1862

The Bankruptcy Act 1861
Notice of Sittings for Last Examination
BALE KNIGHTS late of Harleston in the County of Norfolk, Miller & now a prisoner of debt in the Gaol of the City of Norwich having ben adjudged Bankrupt under a Petition for Adjudication of Bankruptcyt filed in the Court of Bankruptcy for the London District on the 18th day of March...
A public sitting for the said Bankrupt to pass his last examination.
Norfolk News - 19th April 1862

To be let
A Capital BRICK TOWER WINDMILL driving three pairs of French stones with all the requisite machinery & well situated for trade, near the terminus of the Waveney Valley Railway at Harleston.
Possession at Michaelmas next.
Apply to Mr. Muskett, Harleston.
Norfolk Chronicle - 6th September 1866

Situations Vacant
TO MILLERS
Wanted, a JOURNEYMAN as Second Hand.
Apply to H. L. Hudson, Harleston.
Norfolk News - 31st July 1875

Situations Vacant
TO MILLERS
Wanted, a Journeyman as SECOND HAND. A married man preferred.
Apply to H. L. Hudson, Harleston.
Norfolk News - 6th November 1875

Adjusting Lot g, 1b. Windmill, JAYS GREEN With spacious Brick, Stone, and Tiled house in the occupation of Mr. Thompson Hudson. Lot Range of Four Boarded and Tiled COTTAGE fronting the Jay's Green Lane.
Norfolk Chronicle - 15th June 1895

Robert Myhill, who was born in August 1861, was recorded as aged 16 in the 1881 census and he emigrated to Canada in 1888.

On 5th January 1974, Gordon F. Williams wrote to Harry Apling to say his maternal grandfather, William Blackwood had worked Jay's Green mill from about 1870 until it was taken down in 1916.

William Barber b.1779, my GGG Grandfather was miller at Jay's Green Tower Mill between 1830s - 1851. His son Samuel Barber b.1811 was also at Jay's Green in 1839, then in 1845 - 1864 he was Miller at Scole_towermill. His son William Samuel Barber b.1837 was Miller at the following: 1861 - Eye, 1871 - Gissing, 1881 - Rockland All Saints, 1891 - Hingham_Mill_Corner_towermill and between 1878 -1879 William appears to have been at Carlton_Rode_towermill. William was at Hingham_Mill_Corner_towermill until 1904, his Step-Son Robert John Watling was recorded as miller up to 1908.
Sarah Barber - 10th January 2008

Robert John Watling moved from Hingham_Mill_Corner_towermill to Cringleford_watermill, where he remained until it burnt down in 1916. He was also listed at Saxlingham Thorpe in 1922 and 1925.

The 1851 census records several mill workers and retired millers living in the parish:

William Barber (71) b.Metfield, Suffolk, retired miller
Mary Ann Barber (67) b.Bungay
Abigail Barber (29) b.Mendham, Suffolk
Rebecca Barber (25)
Address: Tower Hill

William Cook (87) b.Oulton, Suffolk, retired miller (widower)
Mary Harper (55) b.Pakefield, Suffolk (widow)
Address: Old Market

Robert Debenham (33) b.Harleston, journeyman miller
Ann Debenaham (33) b.Mutford, Suffolk
Address: Thorofare

Visiting Robert Rayner, a carpenter of London Road, employing 2 men:
Philip Carpenter (58) b.Weybread, Suffolk, retired miller

William Stanton (49) b.Pulham, retired miller
Mary Stanton (51) b.Tivetshale
Elizabeth Cattermole (25) b.Pulham, companion (neice)
Address: Broad Street

Samuel Warne (36) b.Harleston, journeyman miller.
Mary J. Warne (37)
Harrit Warne (4)
Sarah Warne (60) (mother)
Address: Bunkers Hill

Unallocated Harleston millers:
Kelly's 1879: William Edwards, corn, cake, coal manure merchant & miller
Kelly's 1879: George Francis, miller

Pigot's 1830: William Barber, miller

White's 1836: William Barber, corn miller

O.S. map 1837: Windmill

Robson's 1839: William & Samuel Barber, millers (Samuel Barber also meal & flour merchant)

Titeh Award 1840: William Barber owner & occupier

White's 1883: Henry Lombard Hudson, corn & coal merchant, miller, maltster & farmer
White's 1883: George Blackwood, miller's foreman

O.S. map 1885: Windmill

1888: Hudson & Blackwood, millers

c.1895: Henry Hudson left the mill and bought Harleston steam mill and maltings

Census 1901: William Blackwood, miller

Kelly's 1900: William Blackwood, miller (wind & steam), Tower mill

1902: William Blackwood, miller

Kelly's 1904: William Blackwood, miller (wind & steam), Tower mill

Kelly's 1908: William Blackwood, miller (wind & steam), Tower mill

Kelly's 1912: Samuel Gardiner, miller, corn, coal, cake, manure & seed merchant, Broad street & Jay's Green

1916: Mill taken down, although in good order, by Knights of Harleston but the Mill House remained

Copyright © Jonathan Neville 2004