Sunday, August 30, 2009

The clay pipes of Copsey Place

A friend who collects bottles and used to go digging for them in the 1970s, gave me the above photograph in 2004. It shows a pile of broken and not-so-broken clay pipes, found somewhere near the end of Copsey Place in Avondale. Back when about a third of the old Copsey farm was still Railway land for the planned Avondale-to-Pollen Island link (never happened).



Above is a detail from SO 43071 from 1961 (LINZ records, crown copyright). It muddies any thoerising as to how the pipes came to be dumped in the area. Up until his death in the 1870s, Robert Chisholm used this land as part of his sheep farm (I doubt his sheep were into smoking). Then in 1882, it was bought by a brewer named Donald Norman Watson. A possible lead there.

In 1898, Edward Ernest Copsey bought part 55 in the middle, through which Copsey Place was formed when the land (up to the railway bit at the end) was subdivided in 1967. Part 54 to the right went through a series of owners from 1898, until it became the property of the Connell family from 1921 until 2008.


Anyway, my friend was good enough to donate three bits from the pile -- two bowls and a pipe end. The design of the three-masted full-rigged sailing ship and anchor don't help. The design seems to have originated from the 1860s and the time of the American Civil War. It was commonly used and adapted all over, and in various times, though. The donor suggested that the pipes might have come from a German tobacconist's shop ransacked due to anti-German feeling in World War I. He reckoned he saw German-made pipes.

There is an interesting page on the archaeology of clay pipes, with some other ideas. The northern shoreline of Rosebank, though, could simply have been a rubbish tip for quite some time, as well as a place over which the night soil was spread in the 19th century.


Meanwhile, another friend back in 2004 donated this complete pipe found in the mid-20th century over at Horton Place, part of the Aickin family farm. Made by Pollocks of Manchester, that isn't too much help for amateur sleuthing either -- Pollocks were going from the 1700s to the 1990s. Still, it's a cool relic.


Any ideas from readers would be appreciated.

Oh, and today most of the former railway land is now all developed and covered by buildings, with just a narrow coastal strip left in public ownership. If there was anything left on the ground to help sort out the mystery -- it's gone, now. Sad, that.

Saturday, August 29, 2009

Vanished Old Avondale


At the reunion of Avondale Primary School past pupils in 2007, members of the Clews family gave the Avondale-Waterview Historical Society some truly amazing photographs from their collection. This one shows, left to right, the old Henry Peck's Store and Bakery, and the last Avondale Hotel (then known as the Avoncourt). I believe this photo, a rare colour shot of this part of Avondale which is now the roundabout, dates from the mid 1960s at the latest. When this shot was taken, we still had traffic islands.

In September 1967, the scene here changed forever. The old store and hotel were demolished for a supermarket and cafe complex (this was demolished later on as well). I vaguely recognise this scene, but not clearly. I was only 4 years old when it vanished.


The hotel, built by Moss Davis in 1889 was utterly sound in structure, according to the chap who demolished it. The demolition is still a sore point among those of us in Avondale born before 1967 -- and to quitye a few who came after once they realised what had been there before.


This is Henry Peck's store. What was amazing was that it survived so long -- from the early 1880s at least, but possibly part of James Palmer's early 1870s development around his wooden hotel.

Here is the store pre-1888, from before the fire which destroyed Palmer's second hotel. A bit of change to the roofline, and the verandah lost a support and went from four to three -- but it was still the same building. That store served in the 1890s as the Avondale branch of Arthur Page's grocery and supply store business, servicing West Auckland right up to and beyond Henderson.

At least, thankfully, we have the images.

Hudson's "Bound to Rise" baking powder

Image from the Observer newspaper, 22 January 1898. Click to enlarge.

I never thought something like baking powder would be puzzling.

Just doing some Papers Past trawling, and I came upon this advertisement. J. J. Hudson's "Bound to Rise" Balloon brand of baking powder, featuring a balloon, a couple of flags (one the Union Jack, the other the NZ ensign), and a chap standing in basket, holding what I imagine would be a tin of the said baking powder. The brand seems to appeared in the late 1880s, while the powder itself (if you believe the ads) originated in 1874, in Mr. Hudson's chemist shop at the corner of Queen and Victoria Streets in Auckland.

Of course, I'm a child of the last half of the 20th century -- and I know of Edmond's "Sure to Rise" baking powder, from Christchurch. The stuff that's still around, along with the cookbooks. Only now, they call it "Edmond's STR baking powder" on the Goodman Fielder website.

One powder featured a balloon, the other opts for the sunrise. I started to wonder -- which came first?

At this stage, until more info comes in (if anyone knows more on this, don't hesitate to drop me a line) -- it looks like it was the Aucklander.

When the Cyclopedia of New Zealand was being compiled and readied for publication in 1902, John Holmes Hudson featured as the maker of
"the celebrated “Balloon Brand” Baking Powder manufactured on his premises and which bears the familiar registered trade mark “Bound to Rise.” Its history dates back to 1874 in which year Mr. Hudson manufactured his first batch of baking powder, since which time it has retained its premier position. This is a wonderful record considering the many importations of foreign articles that have been introduced into local markets, but all have failed to oust the “Balloon Brand” from the front rank. Its name is a household word throughout the whole of the province and the islands."
A year later, in December 1903, Hudson was out dining at the Auckland Club, when he suddenly felt ill. He was taken home in a cab, but once there lost consciousness and passed away, from heart disease. In Auckland since 1860, he came in on the Annie Langton, according to press reports of his demise. (Bay of Plenty Times, 18 December 1903)

Hudson developed his baking powder in 1873, in partnership with (apparently) chemist Thomas Boucher Hill at 57 Victoria Street in Auckland (it was initially known as "Hill's Colonials Baking Powder - Waikato Times, 12 June 1873) ; Thomas J. Edmonds developed his in 1879, but it appears to have remained quite local. I can't find any advertising before 1888. When he had a stall at the Jubilee Exhibition, the report (Christchurch Star, 20 December 1900) says he had been manufacturing his product for 20 years. He was not only into baking powder, but also self-raising flour and egg powder. Makes sense.

But ... the brand. Those slogans ...

In the Auckland corner, Mr. J. H. Hudson, who started using balloons as branding, with "Bound to rise" from around 1887 (earliest ad found online, the Observer, 25 June 1887).

In the Christchurch corner, Mr. T. J. Edmonds -- 1901, at the Christchurch Metropolitan Show (Christchurch Star, 7 November 1901)

I don't think one merchant borrowed from the other. One chose a balloon, the other may have just said his powder was "sure to rise". They probably both emerged at the same time, Hudson's product older than Edmond's. But Edmond's, of course, was the one to win out.

The cookbooks started coming out in the first decade of the 20th century. Hudson's hadn't a hope of maintaining brand superiority against that onslaught. The last reference I can find at the moment is c.1919, a gallant set of ads in the Poverty Bay Herald declaring Hudson's (then owned by another company) were the best in the land. No sign of that "Bound to Rise" motto, just the balloon name.

From then on, however, just about the only brand name worth knowing in the baking powder trade seems to have been Edmond's.


Poverty Bay Herald, 17 July 1919

Update, 5 February 2012: Darian, from the Long White Kid blog, has written about T J Edmonds and his products.

Forbes Eadie: local historian, rabble rouser, enigma

Image from NZETC.


For the last two years or so, I've been collecting information on a former resident of Mt Albert, Forbes Eadie (c.1879-1962), ever since I came across him and his activities during the typhoid outbreak of 1922, covered in Wairaka's Waters (2007). He seemed to have been a rabble rouser, a "stormy petrel", an obstinate battler when he felt his cause was just or if he thought he'd been hard done by in the name of authority.

He was also "Lee Fore Brace", shipping historian and expert from the early 1930s on radio and in print in the Auckland Star and Weekly News. He compiled records of early passenger shipping, and was a member of the 1940 Centennial committees here. Like the Duchess of Argyle, he too hailed from the port of Greenock, where he grew up. But his article on the Mermaid has been panned for inaccuracies or for being made up out of whole cloth. His maritime heritage experience, aside from his obvious enthusiasm and boyhood in Greenock, is suspect. Yet his "Forbes Eadie Scrapbook" is still a recognised resource for those digging their way through Auckland's general past, accurate or not

What follows are notes I've been able to compile so far on his career. I've also had help from Graeme Easte and his notes on the Eadie family history (thanks, Graeme). I will always welcome any further information on Forbes Eadie.

Latest update to post: 16 November 2014

c.1879
Forbes Eadie is born in West Greenock, Renfrewshire, Scotland. His father, also named Forbes Eadie (1837-188?), was a Police Superintendent. A brother George, steam engine maker, apparently also came to NZ and settled in Port Chalmers, Dunedin.
(Information from a family historian)

From Graeme's notes:
A 1939 ‘Listener’ story about Forbes suggested that he was born on Islay, Argyllshire, but this was a reference to the birthplace of his father who had the same name. Islay is a 61,956 Ha. island on the stormy Atlantic fringe of Scotland some 110 km due west of Glasgow. Known as the Queen of the Hebrides for its rich soil, Islay’s economy is based on farming and distilling malt whisky. In 1841 the population was 15,772 but by 1881 it had fallen to 7,559 and today it is about 3,500 concentrated around the deeply incised Loch Indaal. Forbes’ grandparents, both born on Islay, were James Eadie (17??–186?), a gardener, and Margaret nee SMITH (1800–81+) a dressmaker. By 1866 Forbes Senior was a police constable at Duntocher in the Parish of Old Kirkpatrick.  

In the 1881 census for West Greenock, we find Forbes aged 1 year, living with his parents, five siblings and 80 year-old grandmother at 66 Ann Street, presumably some kind of tenement building as it housed 11 families. His father is a 42 year old Lieutenant of Police. He and Margaret were married(c) on 16.1.1866 at New Kirkpatrick, Dunbarton 6 km north west of Glasgow on the north bank of the Clyde. Their seven children were: Jessie (1866–??), James (1868–??), George (1869–??), Forbes I (13.4.1872–187?), John (1874–??), Elizabeth (1876–??), and Forbes II (1879–1962). This differs slightly from the I.G.I. which gives only the first five births: Janet McKinlay (26.3.1866), James (9.2.1868), John (23.3.1870), Forbes (13.4.1872), and George (3.6.1873); the first two being born at Cardross (6 km n.w. of Dunbarton), John at Old Kirkpatrick (3 km to the east) and the last two at Falkirk 47 km to the east and just north of the midpoint between Glasgow and Edinburgh. In 1881 Jessie was an apprentice dressmaker; James, George and John were scholars. George also came to New Zealand, settling at Port Chalmers where he was a steam engine maker. Unfortunately the Old Scottish Parochial Records available in New Zealand only run up to 1855; in this time Renfrewshire had more EADIE christenings and marriages than any other county. This included John Crawford Eadie (chr.1.7.1804–??) born to John Eadie and his wife Rabinah Crawford (followed by twins in 1806); is this the origin of Hamilton’s first name? Although most of theses events were in parishes south of Glasgow, there were some at Greenock, including the birth of Christian in 1838.

The Watt Library in Greenock, Scotland has a list of entries of possible family members in their BDM index.

In 1878, a daughter was born to Lt. Forbes Eadie of the Burgh Police and his wife. A son followed in 1879 (3 June – possibly Forbes Eadie), then another son in 1881, a daughter in 1883, and another daughter in 1887.

The younger Forbes Eadie was said to have been educated at Glasgow University, Bachelor of Science. (Ashburton Guardian, 3 December 1921) However, Eadie family records (via Graeme Easte) state that Forbes Eadie went to sea aged 14 (c.1893) starting a 20 year career in sailing ships and steamers around the world, before developing a bad case of sunstroke around 1910 which nearly cost him his sight. On medical advice, according to that story, he then sought a shore job. This, however, conflicts with the records we have of him in China no later than 1900-1906. Possibly, he served only 7-8 years at sea, not 20, but the sunstroke story may be true.

The ship he served on as an apprentice, and (apparently) member of the "Hellfire Twelve", was the Springburn, a Glasgow-built ship completed in 1892, which would fit in with the period Eadie was likely at sea.


Memories of the barque Springburn and her eventful trips in the days of sail under the famous Captain D. Hunter are recalled by the death at Sydney of Captain W. J. Swales-Eyre, of the Union Steam Ship Company. 

Captain Swales-Eyre was one of "the hellfire twelve." That was the sobriquet of the twelve apprentices that the barque carried in her halcyon days of the 'nineties. One fine day at Portland, Oregon, six of the twelve decided to vary shore life by getting photographed. The group appears, on this page. In the front row is Captain Swales-Eyre. Now there is only one survivor left —Mr. Forbes Eadie, of Auckland, writer and broadcaster of topics of the sea. 

All the six apprentices got their master's certificate before reaching 24 years of age, and some of them helped to make history. 

Captain Frank McLagen was master of the steamer Alcinous when she was sunk by a submarine in the English Channel. Another war victim was Captain J. Battersea, who was in command of the Chinook when she was sunk by a mine. Captain P. Bain added a page to the history of the British mercantile marine when his ship, the Clan McNeil, put up a great but unavailing fight in the Bay of Biscay before a German submarine sank her with all hands. 

Captain T. H. Munro joined the Navy during the war, and was lost in the battle-cruiser Queen Mary, which disappeared in flame and smoke in the early stages of the Battle of Jutland. 

Captain Swales-Eyre was the only son of the Rev. W. Swales-Eyre, vicar of York. His last command with the Union Steam Ship Company was the Oonah, on the run between Launceston and Hobart. He was one of the best-known masters of the company, also the original "Yorkie" of the "Lee Fore Brace" sea stories. 

Auckland Star 31 December 1932

Did Eadie really have a masters' certificate, or did he leave before completing his apprenticeship?
 
1900-1903
Serves with the police in China. Graeme's notes say this service was in Shanghai, before promotion to Deputy Chief Constable at Amoy (Xiamen).

1903-1906
During this period, Forbes Eadie serves with the China Mutual Insurance Company (in 1906 at least, documented). The Straits Times in 1906 refers to him as Assistant Agent for the company at Amoy [Xiamen]. Papers relating to him and his service are stored in a collection of “Confidential British Foreign Correspondence, China, 1906-1908”.

Ashburton Guardian in 1921 says he served in China for 13 years, but the Scotsman of 1906 contradicts this. The Ashburton Guardian story could be one of the first of Forbes Eadie’s revisions of his own history.

1906
18 June: Dr. Herbert R Horne and Forbes Eadie are attacked by “pirates” (bandits) at Tungun near Amoy, China. Eadie is badly injured, and said to have returned to Scotland.
(Fielding Star, 16 August 1906)

Mr. Forbes Eadie is a son of ex-Superintendent Forbes Eadie, Greenock burgh police. Six years ago Mr. Forbes Eadie went to China, and joining the police force at Shanghai, rapidly gained promotion, being appointed deputy chief constable at Amoy three years ago. Resigning that post recently, he became identified with the China Mutual Insurance Company, and acted as manager of the branch at Amoy. He is twenty seven years of age.
(The Scotsman, 20 June 1906)

Reparation for Attack on Dr. Horne and Mr. Eadie near Amoy.
HC Deb 30 October 1906 vol 163 c863 863
MR. REES
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the assailants of Dr. Horne and Mr. Eadie, near Amoy, on 18th June, have been brought to justice, or whether any reparation has been made by the Chinese Government for the conduct of Chinese subjects on that occasion.

(Answered by Sir Edward Grey.) His Majesty's Consul at Amoy has reported that the Chinese authorities, who showed entire goodwill in the matter, have taken steps to apprehend the assailants of Dr. Horne and Mr. Eadie. But no news of their capture has as yet reached His Majesty's Government. Inquiry is being made on this point. The Taotai of Amoy has offered to pay Dr. Horne's and Mr. Eadie's medical expenses, and His Majesty's Minister at Peking has been authorised to suggest to the Chinese Government that some compensation should be paid in addition as an act of grace.
(Hansard, sighted 29 August)

By 1907, Forbes Eadie appears to have not retuned to Scotland -- but started up a farming life in Victoria. In April 1907, Dr Horne was granted £1000 compensation, Forbes Eadie £100, from the Chinese government, "as an act of grace." (West Australian, 8 April 1907)

Rob de Souza-daw emailed me in early December 2011, and sent through copies of the 1907 papers regarding the compensation case, plus an obituary for Dr. H R Horne from 1908. Forbes Eadie saw his friend Dr Horne just before the latter's death, so was in Australia to the middle of 1908. Eadie arrived in Australia 19 March 1908 on board the Somerset, destined for Melbourne, his occupation listed on the passenger list as "merchant marine". (Victoria. Inward Overseas Passenger Lists (British Ports). Microfiche VPRS 7666, copy of VRPS 947. Public Record Office Victoria, North Melbourne, Victoria, via Ancestry.com.)

Here is a relevant passage from the obituary:
The accident which has had such a sad and lamentable result was a very simple one. At the doctor’s suggestion Mr F Eadie and Mr Archie Campbell took the car for a run in the early part of the afternoon and drove almost to Sale and back. Mr Eadie who is an expert motorist, states the car ran beautifully. They returned shortly after 4 o’clock and the doctor said he would take Mrs Horne and Miss Andrews, a visitor from Albury for a run. They went along the Rosedale road and on passing the Methodist Church a dog ran in front of the car. It is supposed that the dog was struck by the connecting rod of the steering gear for it was subsequently found to have been slightly bent. This, it is stated would materially affect the steering apparatus. Notwithstanding this, the car ran splendidly until going down the hill to Sheepwash Bridge at Loy Yang when the steering gear went wrong and became locked. The doctor actually managed to get almost over the bridge when it seems to have swerved and crashed into the end post on the steering side. The sudden impact threw both Mrs Horne and Miss Andrews out of the car but they alighted on the ground and escaped with little worse than a severe shaking. Dr Horne however, was not thrown out, his chest and abdomen was jammed against the steering wheel causing the dreadful internal injury stated above ...
It will be remembered by many that Dr Horne had a frightful experience during his stay in China. Along with Mr Forbes Eadie, now a resident amongst us, he was travelling in the Tong’An district of Fujian Province, a place about 40 miles from the port of Amoy. A Chinaman came up to Mr Eadie and asked him the time. Upon being told, he snatched the watch and made off. Mr Eadie gave chase but upon rounding a corner was shot at by the thief’s friends. The Doctor, upon hearing the shots called to Mr Eadie to come back and then ran along the road. Looking round, the Doctor saw his friend upon the ground and without thinking of the possible consequences, he gallantly rushed back and standing over the prostrate Mr Eadie, beat off the bandits with his fists until the latter could get upon his feet again. The robbers, who now numbered from 16 to 20 set upon the two gentlemen with knives and scimitars. The unequal fight which then took place has often been described in the realms of fiction but seldom has one happened in reality. Both gentlemen came out of the struggle covered with wounds, the Doctor being the most seriously injured, having received no less than 48 wounds in the encounter. The place where the fight took place was afterwards described by Consul-General Butler to be more like a slaughter house than a country hill side. Two Chinamen were found to be dead and three others died from injuries received. After the affray was over, Dr Horne attended to his wounded friend, tying up arteries and bandaging his numerous wounds. He then sewed up a gaping wound in his own abdomen from which the bowels were protruding. After this was done, he placed Mr Eadie (who weighed 14 stone) on his back and carried him into the City, a distance of about half-a-mile. When one considers what odds were against the Doctor and his friend and that both were unarmed and had only their hands to defend themselves, it is a marvel that any escape was possible. The Doctor’s actions throughout the terrible affair were strongly commented upon by the European Press in China as the acts of a genuine friend and a brave and honourable man. He had the choice of certain escape or what looked to be certain death. He chose the latter and added one more laurel to a name which will be long honoured in China, Africa, Scotland and his native Australia. As Dr Horne and Mr Eadie were traveling for the China Mutual Life Assurance Society and under passport at the time, they were granted compensation by the Imperial Chinese Government, the former £1000 and the latter £200.
The late doctor had occasion to save Mr Eadie’s live before the Tong’An trouble took place. They were out on the mountains tiger shooting when a large tiger rushed Mr Eadie and mauled him considerably. The doctor coolly told his friend to lie still, crept up behind the animal and succeeded in bagging it first shot. The skin of the tiger which measured 9ft 11in long, now graces the drawing room of the late doctor’s house. Mr Eadie’s recovery from the injuries received in the Tong’An outrage was very slow, in fact he has not yet regained his former vigor and strength. So great is his esteem for the late doctor that some months ago he came from Scotland to join his old friend. His intention being to settle on the land in Victoria. He feels that he has lost the greatest friend he had in the whole world and the only one in Australia.
Gippsland Farmers' Journal, 8 May 1908

Later on in May that year, Forbes Eadie had a nasty accident.

Yesterday afternoon a serious accident happened to Mr Forbes Eadie. From what we can learn it appears that Mr Eadie, who is employed at Mr Neilson's farm in Traralgon Park, was carting water for the chaffcutter. He was sitting on the shaft of the dray, and must have evidently slipped and fallen off, for the wheel passed over his left leg. Mr Eadie was brought to Traralgon private hospital, and attended by Drs McLean and Kirkpatrick, who found that he had sustained a compound fracture of the leg, both bones being broken. The accident is an unfortunate one for Mr Eadie, as we understand he is working with the object of gaining experience in farming before starting out for himself. 

Traralgon Record (Victoria) 15 May 1908

1908
Forbes Eadie may have arrived in New Zealand around this time, possibly though either late 1908 or soon after.
(Auckland Star, 9 November 1931 … “For over 23 years Forbes Eadie had been in New Zealand …”)

Ashburton Guardian
of 1921 reported that Eadie had been in New Zealand 15 years..

At some point during this time, according to Eadie, he worked for the Lands and Survey Department. This has yet to be confirmed.

1911
Forbes Eadie appointed 2nd Lieutenant, 7th (Southland) Mounted Rifles, dated 8th July.
(NZ Gazette, 24 August 1911, p. 2607)

An "F Eadie" from Invercargill earlier attended a concert and ball held by the Southland Athletic Society. (Otautau Standard and Wallace County Chronicle, 7 March 1911)

According to the 1911 electoral roll, Forbes Eadie was an accountant at 24 Yarrow Street, Invercargill. 

 1912
Public notice in Cambridge saying that Forbes Eadie is now living in Morrinsville and not connected with Lomax & Co Land Agent.
(Waikato Independent, 13 July 1912, courtesy Cambridge Museum)

Another public notice saying he is still a partner of the firm Lomax & Co.
(Waikato Independent, 20 July 1912, Cambridge Museum)

Lieutenant Forbes Eadie presented a prize to the best Scout.
(Waikato Independent, August 1912, Cambridge Museum)

The extraordinary interest being taken in the Legion of Frontiersmen was at an evidence last week when a large number of inquiries were received from all parts of New Zealand, Australia, and South Sea Islands. A large number of members of the old volunteer forces have sent in their names, and frontiersmen of all kinds are flocking round the standard of Legion ... Amongst those who have formed the Morrinsville command are Major Howie, a successful volunteer officer, Capt. J. B. Whyte, a veteran of the Boer war, and Mr Forbes Eadie, one of the original members of the Legion and a veteran of the China and other campaigns. 
 (Northern Advocate, 7 October 1912)

By August 1913, it appears he may have been a Captain in the Legion, under the Auckland command. A "Captain Eadie" is referred to as being present at a meeting. (Auckland Star 28 August 1913)

1914
Marriage to Ann Bradshaw Millar.

From Graeme Easte's notes:


He was married in 1914 at Auckland to Ann Bradshaw nee MILLAR (1891c–1970a). Their five children were: Crawford Hamilton Eyre (5.7.1914–Dec. 84), Ulica de Burgh [PAICE] (1917–), Forbes (1918c–1975b), Frances Bradshaw [LOWE] (2.12.1923–47+?) and Charles Phillip (1926a–63+?) 

... in the 1913 Wises Directory ... he appears as an auctioneer at Morrinsville (Forbes Eadie & Company), and in the 1915 Auckland Directory as a farmer at Poihakene on the Coromandel Peninsula. It is not known how he met Ann as her parents Samuel Bradshaw MILLER (18??–1920?) and Ulica de Burgh MILLER (d.1926) were farming at No. 1 Road, Te Puke (freehold Lot 28 T.P.) in the period (?-1893–11-?). Ulica’s ancestry can apparently be traced back to 1642: she may have been a de Burgh-Wynne; her identical twin Caroline inherited a title, and her South African cousin, Guy Grifiths(?) inherited the title of 13th earl of Featherstone, including a castle, but little money. Ann later received a legacy which helped ensure an education for the five children during the depression. The MILLERs retired to First Avenue, Tauranga, (?-1914–20-?). In May 1915 Ann purchased a 34.3 Ha farm at Hoanga, a district some 6 km east of Dargaville, and almost surrounded by a deep meander of the (Northern) Wairoa River ... 

Ann had the better business sense and largely ran the farm - she had the highest cream production of the local dairy suppliers. There appear to have been financial difficulties as a Statutory Mortgage with the public trustee and a smaller private mortgage were agreed in October 1917 ... In March 1918 Ann was persuaded to sell, a decision she later regretted.

1916
David Verran of Auckland Research Centre, Auckland City Library, found Forbes Eadie in 1916 in “2nd reserves”, as a farmer, Hoanga, Northern Wairoa, Class C (2 children). He was listed similarly in the 1917 list as well, during the conscription period of the war.

1918
Forbes Eadie headed off to Trentham Camp, January 1918.

The following astonishing incident, forwarded by a correspondent, is published in the "Wairoa Bell":—"A remarkable scene occurred at Hoanga in Tuesday, shortly after noon, when a number of people assembed on the Hoanga wharf to see Mr Forbes-Eadie, who has gone into Trentham Camp, off to the war. There appear to be rival factions at Hoanga, or at least there were on the wharf. One gentleman addressed a remark to Mr Eadie which did not please that gentleman, and with that long reach of his and his great swinging fist he landed his interrogator a fearful smack on the eye, and felled him. Other assailants followed, and were floored in turn. One particular friend of Mr Eadie, seeing what wrath was arising in him, could stand it no longer and, full of mortal terror, he fled for his very life, as if the 'evans were falling. To see this lightning streak was the one piece of humour about the whole business for the spectators. Mr Eadie gave the assembly a good tongue-thrashing, and enjoined upon all Hoanga to put their house in order against the day he should return from doing the King's business. Yes, Hoanga will miss Mr Eadie, who is a man of very forceful character." 
 (Northern Advocate 16 January 1918)

A "Forbes Eadie", referred to as a "farmer" from Onehunga, successfully enlisted at the Kitchener Street recruiting station in Auckland during the latter part of April. (Auckland Star 25 April 1918)

In July 1918 at Featherston training camp, probationary corporal F Eadie was confirmed in his temporary rank, and transferred from the 44th to the 45th reinforcements. (Evening Post 6 July 1918) He was allocated to A Company later that month. (Evening Post, 15 July 1918) He was promoted to Sergeant in September 1918. (Evening Post, 6 September 1918)

In late November, the war having ended, Sergeant Forbes Eadie, “a big raw-bone Glaswegian”, was still at Featherston. Said to have had “stormy interviews” with the commander, and the Minister of Defence, over conditions for the men in the camp.


Details of the dissatisfaction at Featherston Camp, which culminated in a demonstration by about 5000 soldiers on Tuesday night, are now available. Ultimately four of the men were appointed to approach the Camp Commandand and and to lay their grievances before him. The deputation was informed that the questions submitted would be forwarded to the authorities. After singing "Rule Britannia," the men quietly dispersed.

On Thursday the Chief of Staff, Colonel Gibbon, C.M.G., and the Minister for Defence, Sir James Allen, visited the camp, and the men appointed Sergt. F. Eadie to interview them. Major-General Sir Alfred Robin was also interviewed the next day. The following answers to the questions asked were given:-
 (1) Certificate of leave, Form D.R. 46, is for the protection of the men, and is being used as a temporary substitute for a discharge certificate. A document of actual discharge will be issued later, and its form is now under consideration.
(2) The authority for "leave without pay" discharge is that of the Solicitor-General.
(3) The principal medical officer or a medical board will again grant sick leave as heretofore.
(4 and 5) Confinement leave, in addition to the 28 days' pay or discharge, will be continued during the period of camp demobilisation, providing that the confinement or due date of confinement is within the period of 28 days, for which each soldier normally receives pay on discharge from camp.
(6) All stoppages that have been made in respect of lost kit while men were in hospital will, on sufficient proof being furnished, be refunded.
(7) "Housewives" will be regarded as the men's property, and may be retained by them as mementoes of thie service. Refunds for lost "housewives" will be paid to those who have paid for them.
(8) "Leave without pay" is not illegal, but in some cases may be inequitable. The question as to pay for their period of "leave without pay" and deductions from dependents' allowances, when leave was granted for sickness and death in families, will be decided at an early date.
 (9) The Returned Soldiers' Hospital to be established at Trentham will be given the surplus of canteen funds.
(10) All moneys deducted for branded kit bags will be refunded.
(11) Home-service men will be treated in the same manner as men of the Expeditionary Force in respect to discharge. It is reported that the men are very well satisfied with the way the authorities have met them in respect to their grievances, and having been met so fairly, have determined to "play the game" till the last man marches out of camp. 

(Poverty Bay Herald 27 November 1918)
 One of the chief battlers for a “square deal” to the men was Sergeant Eadie, an ex-Imperial soldier who, after much service with the Imperial Forces, had settled down in New Zealand as a farmer … “Truth” is informed that Sergeant Eadie sold his farm before he went into camp, and he objected to take leave without pay, instead of a proper discharge. He said he would need to purchase another farm and he could not do so while he remained a soldier and liable to be called to serve.” He was referred to in the article as “Big Eadie”. The commandant accused him of starting a riot.

The sergeant denied this, and declared that there were no signs of a mob when he had entered the building. It was quite clear to the listeners that the commandant was perturbed. And well he might be. Several dare-devils in the crowd had got hold of tins of kerosene and were so it is seriously averred, preparing to set a light to the building, when the big bony form of Forbes Eadie appeared framed in the doorway. He looked for a moment with some concern in his eyes at the swaying howling crowd of many men before him. Then, with an action quick as though he swung himself up on the roof, and asked the men to hear what he had to say before they did anything rash. He told the men that he had placed their grievances before the commandant, and that as the commandant could not satisfy him in regard to certain questions he had asked for, and had been promised interview with the Chief of Staff. He then pointed out to the men the folly of doing anything rash such, as destroying camp property. "We are NEITHER RED CAPS NOR BOLSHEVIKS," cried the sergeant, "but good soldiers out to right wrong, but we want to have our own wrongs righted first." He then advised the men to put down their stone and other weapons and join with him in singing "Rule, Britannia," and then return to their lines and await the outcome of his interview with the Chief of Staff. The immense crowd sang the song with gusto, and dispersed. The prompt action of Sergeant Eadie on the night in question prevented what would have been one of the worst, if not the very worst, soldiers' riot in the History of the British Army and saved thousands of pounds of Defence property, as well as the good name of the New Zealand Forces. "I question," concluded our informant, "if there is one other man in camp who could have done what Sergeant Eadie did that night. He's a white man!"
(NZ Truth, 7 December 1918)

1919

Eadie residing at Rawhiti Road, Onehunga (rented), his occupation a clerk.
(Wises NZPO Directory 1920)

In the electoral rolls that year, he was listed as a farmer (Manukau general roll). In the same year, however, he and Ann turn up on the Roskill supplementary roll, at 61 Marlborough St, Mt Eden, as a  business manager.

In March-April 1919, Forbes Eadie attracted some more controversy to his name -- involving himself with the special licensing poll on the proposal of national prohibition with compensation, as provided for under the Licensing Amendment Act, 1918. He composed a letter on March 18, sent to returned servicemen, from his home then in Rawhiti Road.


Dear Sir,
You nave been absent from these shores for a long time. Many things have happened during the interval. The two great questions in the political life of the Dominion to-day are the Soldiers' Repatriation Scheme and the Liquor question. In regard to the former, it is a fact that there are several thousands of our returned soldiers walking the streets, out of employment. Many promises were made them that on their return to these shores the employment they left in order to go forth to fight their country's battles would be open for them upon their return. Many employers have made good their promises, but in the very vast majority of cases the billets are filled and the soldier has to seek employment elsewhere.

The Government Repatriation scheme was discussed in Parliament over a year ago. It is not yet established. Many political and ministerial promises have been made that the soldiers would be immediately settled upon discharge from the service. YOU KNOW WHAT HAS BEEN DONE. Retrospective separation allowance has been asked for the wives, children, and other dependents of our early married volunteers. It has been refused for the children, and the other dependents. The excuse offered by the Honourable Minister concerned was "that the country could not afford the money."

The sum of £4,500,000 which Government proposes to compensate the Liquor Trade with could repatriate 10,000 of our returned men. Ask yourself the question: Does the Soldier come first, or the Liquor Trade?" If your opinion is that the wiping out of the Liquor Trade takes precedence of all other national questions, including the repatriation of the Soldier, then vote for Prohibition, and make it harder than ever for the Soldier to get the justice due him. If on the other hand you are of the opinion that the Repatriation and settlement of our men is of more paramount importance than any other question, Vote for Continuance, and save the £4,500,000, which can be more effectively spent on our repatriation. Yours faithfully, FORBES EADIE. 
 (Reprinted in Wanganui Chronicle, 29 March 1919)

The Wanganui Chronicle in their editorials (possibly pro-Prohibition) labelled this (handed to servicemen as anonymous, as well as posted using Eadie's address) as "insidious", "a tiddue of falsehood and misrepresentation" and a "gross and wicked exaggeration".
In conclusion, we need only point to the self-evident irresponsible character of this precious circular. Who is Forbes Eadie ? He is unquestionably not an agent of the "No-License" party. The nation-wide distribution of propaganda of this kind costs a lot of money. Whose money?
And on 1 April:

We are convinced that every decent-minded elector in the Dominion will look upon the Forbes-Eadie circular as an impudent and hypocritical attempt to deceive the returned soldiers. Then men who with clean hands and unsullied honour have fought for the preservation of democratic liberty are not likely to knowingly allow themselves to be made the tools of unprincipled license, and it was probably the recognition of this fact which led to the semi-anonymous circulation of the attempt to "take them down." We shall not be surprised if, in the very near future, the public are afforded some interesting information as to the identity of the mysterious Forbes-Eadie, and the source from which was derived the "sinews of war" requisite for the widespread distribution of his precious circular.

 Wanganui Chronicle, 1 April 1919

Eadie noted on register of licenses under the Land Agents Ace 1912 as being granted a license on 14 January 1919 in Auckland for the Auckland Returned Solders’ Association, registered office Wellesley Street, Auckland.
(NZ Gazette No. 24 1919, p. 608)

The scheme was set up in April that year. Where a property sold through the RSA's Land Bureau was purchased by a returned serviceman, the serviceman received 50% of the commission on the sale, and Forbes Eadie the other 50%. For land bought by other parties, the 50% went to the Auckland RSA, and Eadie again received the remainder. The percentages received by Eadie went into a trust account, out of which came the bureau's overheads. (Auckland Star, 28 September 1921)
An innovation which will doubtless be of considerable interest to returned soldiers throughout the Dominion has been established in connection with the Auckland Returned Soldiers' Association in the shape of a Land Bureau specially for the convenience of returned soldiers desirous of purchasing a home in which to settle down, or a station property in the country ...

Soldiers, more particularly the inexperienced, complained of exploitation, and although the Land Department's methods were regarded as hopeless, it is admitted the Land Board saved many a soldier from financial difficulties by "turning down" the properties offered. Then, followed the establishment of the Land Bureau, under the management of Mr. Forbes Eadie, a veteran of other wars, who was experienced in land dealing. Thanks to Mr. Eadie's organising ability, practical and valued assistance is now being rendered to the returned soldiers in the Auckland district. Hundreds of inquiries are now being made daily, and any hour of the day men may be seen looking through the bureau's register for suitable properties ...
(Poverty Bay Herald 5 August 1919)

The trouble which arose at the eleventh hour before the taking of the licensing referendum last April over the loss by some soldiers of their voting rights is not going to recur at the general elections ... The Auckland Returned Soldiers Association has been actively assisting the Electoral Officer to secure the enrollment of soldiers in the Auckland district, and Mr. Forbes Eadie, officer in charge of the A.R.S.A.'s land bureau, has now been authorised by Mr. Hay to carry on the work of enrolling solrdiers in Auckland, the enrolment office being 27A Albert Street. Any invalid soldier who is laid up at his own home or who cannot visit the office will be immediately waited on if he sends Mr. Eadie a collect telegram or a postcard. 

(Auckland Star, 18 November 1919)

Eadie was appointed a Justice of the Peace in Auckland, 22 August 1919.

(NZ Gazette, No. 107, p. 2742)

1920

On 30 April, Eadie gave three month's notice to the Association terminating his agreement with them for the Land Bureau. (Auckland Star, 28 September 1921) On 31 July, the Land Bureau at 27A Albert Street ceased operations under that name, (Public notice, Auckland Star 14 July 1920) and became "Eadie and Atkinson" after Eadie sold part interest in his business, still working in the field of returned soldiers and land, (Advertisement, Auckland Star, 4 August 1920) then simply the "Discharged Soldiers Land Bureau" once Atkinson had purchased the office, furniture, taken on the staff, and had obtained a Land Agent's licence. (Auckland Star, 28 September 1921)

It doesn't appear that the split between Eadie and the RSA was entirely amicable.

Action was taken before Mr. I W Poynton. S.M. yesterday afternoon, by the Returned Soldiers Association (Mr. Inder), for the recovery from Forbes Eadie (Mr. Tipping), of certain books, files, and documents. An application for adjournment to allow briefed counsel to attend for the defence was declined. Mr. Inder stated that defendant had been manager of the Returned Soldiers' Land Bureau. Now he no longer held that position, but he retained the books, files, and other chattels. Mr. Tipping claimed that defendant was entitled to retain possession until the commission he had earned was calculated. After hearing evidence Mr. Poynton made an order that the trust books be handed over to plaintiff before September 20, defendant to have right of access to them at all reasonable times for two months. The files, correspondence, and uncompleted matters are to remain in defendant's possession until November 1, plaintiff to have access at stated times each week. Costs were allowed plaintiff.
(Auckland Star 17 September 1920)

The partnership between Forbes Eadie and Valentine Atkinson, was dissolved 16 November 1920. (NZ Gazette No. 94, p. 3136, 1920)

1921

21 January - Forbes Eadie obtains title for 13 Malvern Road, next to Fowlds Park. (NA 199/161) Just before this, according to Graeme's notes, the family lived in rented accomodation at 5 Lucerne Road, Remuera.

From Graeme's notes:
In January 1921 they bought 13 Malvern Road, Morningside, which backed onto the southern corner of Fowlds Park.  The purchase was made with Ann’s money, but was made in his name as mortgages were harder for women to negotiate. Forbes became ... a land valuer with an office at 7/63 Alston Cambers, Queen Street (1923–24).

In October 1921, Eadie was organiser for the Protestant Political Organisation. (Advertisement, Auckland Star, 7 October)

" ... the P.P.A. —a purely political body—was formed to prevent any Church, Roman Catholic or Protestant, controlling our politics, and to prevent a repetition in New Zealand of the unfortunate conditions that are at present prevailing in Quebec and Ireland ..." (Letter by J W Dickson)

"On the Saturday of Mr. Massey's stay in Auckland a week or two ago, Mr. Forbes Eadie introduced himself to me as organiser of the P.P.A. He stated that at a meeting of the P.P.A. executive the night before he had been instructed to officially wait upon me, and he now did so informally as a preliminary; that the P.P.A. desired me to contest, at the next election, the City West seat with Mr. Savage, and would be prepared to support me with its full strength. I smiled, the plot was too thin for an old campaigner—and told him he would get his answer when he came to me officially. I have fully answered from the platform. No one knows bettor than myself that the P.P.A. is the fighting section of the Reform party. GEORGE W. RUSSELL." (Both letter extracts from Auckland Star, 20 October 1921)


Then, in November 1921, Eadie became concerned about plague. He wrote to the Minister of Health about rats at the Mt Albert rubbish tip, near the Morningside overhead rail bridge. (Auckland Star, 8 November 1921) He was convenor of a public meeting on 11 November at the King George Hall in Mt Albert, chaired by George Fowlds. "Hear Mr Forbes Eadie tell what the Park is being used for," declared one of his newspaper notices.


Later that month, he was appointed national organiser of the National Progressive and Moderate Labour Party, led by C. E. Statham, M.P.
(Auckland Star, 26 November1921)

1922
Forbes Eadie now described as a Manager, with Wises erroneously listing his residence as 19 Malvern Road, Mt Albert.
(Wises NZPO Directory, 1922)


Residents meeting re typhoid outbreak in Mt Albert. Forbes Eadie attends, considers the outbreak stems from the Morningside Refuse dump, and that Mt Albert has been retarded 20 years due to the outbreak.
(NZ Herald & Auckland Star, 26 April 1922)

Eadie issues “An Open Letter”, slamming the Minister of Health, C. J. Parr, and the Mt Albert Borough Council over the typhoid outbreak. (Auckland Star, 8 November 1922) I’ve checked his points raised, as he used the MABC minutes as his source. In only one instance did he quote/use the minutes correctly. According to him later, “37 typhoid epidemic sufferers subscribed and paid for its insertion,” along with other identities. Two of the identities he named later deny all knowledge.

Eadie attends Parr’s Avondale election meeting, and heckles him.
(NZ Herald & Star, 10 November 1922)

“The candidate answered a number of questions, after which Mr. Forbes Eadie, an avowed opponent and one of the most persistent interjectors, moved a vote of thanks to Mr. Parr, “for his first appearance among us in three years to give an account of his trusteeship.” The mover, growing very excited, commenced a speech which he evidently meant to be quite a long harangue, and finally mounted the platform. He resolutely refused to leave that point of vantage, in spite of the urgings of the chairman and the shouts of the audience, until, amid great confusion, a policeman came forward, and at his request Mr. Eadie resumed his seat. His motion was seconded.

“An amendment of thanks and confidence was promptly moved by a supporter of the candidate, Mr. J. W. Tait [most likely William J. Tait] and seconded by Mr. W. Vallance.

“The amendment and motion were put alternately. Obviously the audience was confused as to which they were voting for, but the fact that Mr. Parr’s supporters were in a very large majority had been sufficiently plain all the evening, and it was undoubtedly the amendment that was carried.”
(NZ Herald)

Another “Open Letter” from Eadie, this time having a go at Avondale lawyer Mr. Vallance, who he claims is a Parr supporter who called his first “Open Letter” a gross insult.
(Star, 10 November 1922)

Vallance hits back:
“Mr. F. Eadie (who is, I think, the gentleman notorious in connection with the Mt. Albert dump and rodents) … The blunt truth is that Mr. Eadie was at the time in such a state of mental “excitement” that he could neither intelligently interpret nor accurately appreciate the few remarks I made in seconding an amendment against the method of his attack on the candidate which he had held bottled up for so many months and then launched on the eve of the election campaign …”
(Star, 14 November 1922)

Parr’s Election Committee then issue a notice “To Eden Electors – How Forbes Eadie Faked the Minutes.”
(Star, November 1922)

Eadie attends Parr’s election meeting at Mt Albert and heckles Parr again. In the Star’s coverage, a “voice” asks Eadie: “Did you go to the war?” Answer: “I have fought in four campaigns.”
(NZ Herald & Star, 17 November 1922)

(Which ones? Something in China, quite possibly – but then he is supposed to have come to New Zealand around 1906, so the only other one was at the training camp in Trentham. If he left China to go to South Africa at the beginning of the century, he may have been able to squeeze in the Boer War. Always very difficult to tell with Eadie exactly where he was, and when before World War I.)

1923
Eadie unsuccessful in Borough Council election, third in a race for two seats in Ward B with 162 votes.
(Star, 27 April 1923)

1924
Eadie noted as JP at the bottom of declaration for The Majestic Gold-Mining Company (Limited), 5 February 1924. Secretary is John William McCoy, Queen Street, Auckland.
(NZ Gazette, 12 Feb 1924, p. 543)

Around this time, accordng to Graeme's notes, Eadie began a job with the NZ Herald as a proofreader.

From about this time he wrote regular columns about ships and the sea for the ‘Auckland Star’ and an overseas magazine (the Bulletin?) under the nom de plume ‘Lee Fore-brace’ (a sailing in-joke). He became something of an authority on New Zealand shipwrecks and prepared a book on the subject entitled “The Price of Admiralty” but could not afford the £500 he was quoted to get it printed. A bound manuscript copy, listing 1,331 wrecks on 71 pages, is held by the Auckland Museum Library [MS 1182], along with a notebook recording income of £463 from radio talks over 9 months in 1937-38.  

1925
Eadie now described as a union organiser, still at Malvern Road.
(Wises Directory, 1925 and 1926)


An unusual case was heard at the Whangarei Magistrate's court yesterday before Mr. R. W. Tate, S.M., when Forbes Eadie was proceeded against for a breach of the railway by-laws, in that he did occupy a seat that was reserved and failed to vacate same when requested to do so by a railway official.

Senior Sergeant O'Grady said that on December 22 last the express from Opua to Auckland had two carriages reserved at Hikurangi for Whangarei passengers. Defendant had boarded the train at Hikurangi, taking a scat in one of those 'carriages, tiuard Kedfern had asked I defendant to vacate the seat at Whangarei and, on his refusal, had brought the stationmaster to the carriage.

Evidence was given on these lines.

Eadie, who conducted his own defence, stated that he suffered disability, having only one sound leg. When he booked at Hikurangi he was assured by the railway booking clerk that it would not be necessary for him to reserve his seat, as there was plenty of room. Otherwise he would have reserved his seat. There was no indication either on the exterior or in the interior of the carriage to indicate that any seats therein were reserved. When asked to vacate his seat at Whangarei he offered to do so if another seat could be guaranteed. As the stationmaster would not do so he retained his seat, but afterwards gave it to a lady who produced a reserved ticket.

The magistrate said that if defendant had insisted on reserving his seat it would have been a wise course. It was clear than an offence had been committed. Defendant's physical disability did not affect the railway officials, who were bound to deliver the seat to the person who had reserved it. At holiday times the only safeguard was to book a seat. It was as well for the public to know, especially in a district where the reservation of seats was new, that the railway regulations had to be observed. It was not a case for a heavy fine, and as it was the first offence of its kind in the district, defendant would be fined 5/, and ordered to pay costs £1.
 (Auckland Star 3 February 1925)

Eadie as JP at the bottom of declaration for Ohinemuri Gold and Silver Mines (Limited), 2 February 1925. Secretary is John William McCoy, Queen Street, Auckland.
(NZ Gazette, 12 March 1925, p. 177)


A fine of £5, with £5 17/ costs, was imposed upon Forbes Eadie, an Auckland resident, who was principal offender in a scuffle in Whangarei's main street on March 11. When evidence was heard the other party to the brawl was convicted and ordered to pay costs. Senior-Sergeant O'Grady said that much difficulty had been experienced in serving the summons upon Eadie, and that defendant's absence was due to his activities in connection with local body elections. Howard Bannister, a solicitor, and an eye-witness, gave evidence that Forbes Eadie was the assailant throughout; and, as this agreed with the evidence given at the earlier hearing against the other party, the magistrate, Mr. R. W. Tate, S.M., imposed a fine of £5, with costs.
(Auckland Star 28 April 1925)

1926
Eadie resigns as a JP, 24 June 1926.
(NZ Gazette, 1926, No. 45, p. 1848)

1928
Eadie now listed erroneously as being at 17 Malvern Rd, as a manager.
(Wises Directory, 1928, 1930 & 1933)

Eadie starts work for the Mt Albert Borough Council as clerk of works.
(NZ Herald, 13 March 1931)

1929-1932
Eadie now honorary warden of Morningside Reserve.
(NZ Truth, 2 May 1929, Mt Albert Borough Council minutes 28 January 1932, MAC 100/15, Auckland City Archives.)

This may have been cancelled in September 1932 when Eadie refused to pay his rates for various reasons, including ire over alleged impropriety of some councillors and the Borough Engineer Wilfred E Begbie.
(Unregistered papers file, MAC 174/15/1, Auckland City Archives)

1928-1929
Eadie's "Lee Fore Brace" articles start to appear in the Auckland Star.

1930s-1940s
Eadie took part in radio shows on 1ZB as "Lee Fore Brace".

From Graeme Easte's notes:
In 1928 he began giving live talks on radio about nautical subjects; by 1939 he had made over 380 such broadcasts in New Zealand and Australia, becoming better known across the Tasman than here. In July 1935 he was the subject of an official complaint from the Broadcasting Board, not because of his subject (a series on the voyage of the ‘Bounty’), but because he was at that time a Labour Party candidate for local body elections and an edict had just been issued that any hint of politics was prohibited on air. At some stage during the 1930s [when?] he went to Australia to have some of his talks recorded 4on acetate disk, there being no recording facilities in New Zealand before 1948. After almost ten years off-air he had a few one-off spots starting at Christmas 1949. In 1951 his half hour ‘Stories of the Sea’ recordings were broadcast on the four ZB stations each Friday night as a six months series, with sponsorship by Firestone Tyres. At least one of his talks was played on air as recently as 1971.
"To my knowledge, Lee Fore Brace was the best and there have been none better since. Peter Whitchurch's "Ships and the Sea" was a good show, but Lee Fore Brace had the salt of the ocean and the tang of sea breezes (and storms) in his voice and personality. He had a tremendous following -- old and new sailormen and many who were tied to mundane lives, vicariously experienced an adventurous life on the rolling main when listening to him."
(Ian Thwaites, "Arthur Collins - An Auckland Broadcasting Pioneer", 
Auckland Waikato Historical Journal, November 2002, No. 80, p. 9)

He also travelled to America and England, broadcasting his stories of the sea.


Auckland Star 13 April 1937

1931
Writes an article on the Mermaid, published in the Auckland Star, then (later) in the Weekly News in 1937. Uses his maritime history pseudonym “Lee Fore Brace”. Unfortunately, his article’s details have since been found to be unsubstantiated. In November 1931, in an exchange of correspondence under letters to the editor in the Star between Eadie as Lee Fore Brace and R C Renner (son of Capt. F W S Renner who died in the wreck of the Hannah Barrett in 1883), Eadie advises that he is working on a book on NZ shipwrecks. (Star, 17 and 21 November 1931) Such a book, of course, was completed five years later by C W N Ingram (and reprinted many times since).

Eadie committed for trial to Supreme Court from the Police Court for theft of payment for a load of soil worth £4 from the Mt Albert Borough Council. Borough Engineer Wilfred Ernest Begbie found out about the soil either in 1929 or 1930. Eadie is apparently found not guilty eventually.
(NZ Herald 13 March 1931)

Eadie then takes Begbie to court for slander. He asks for £500 damages, and is awarded £300.
(Star 9 & 10 November, NZ Herald 11 November 1931)

Begbie appeals the decision, but it is upheld.
(NZ Herald 10 December & Star 11 December 1931)

The Mt Albert Borough Council expressed their full support for Begbie.
(NZ Herald, 17 December 1931)

Two days later, Eadie applies to have Begbie declared bankrupt. (NZ Herald, 19 December 1931)

1932

Begbie negotiates with his creditors, including Eadie, and applies for discharge from bankruptcy, but Eadie opposes this. Begbie wanted to be discharged before 9 March, because Mt Albert was then considering amalgamation with Auckland City and he felt he wouldn’t get a job with the city as an undischarged bankrupt if that happened. As it turned out, Mt Albert didn’t join Auckland City then. Begbie doesn’t appear on the gazetted list of undischarged bankrupts in the NZG for 21 April, so he must have sorted it all out. He went on to remain as Mt Albert’s borough engineer to the 1960s.
(NZ Herald, 13 & 23 January 1932)

A “Captain Forbes Eadie” takes part in a radio show tied in with Sydney’s First Aquatic Show, telling the story of the Mary Celeste. (Sydney Mail, 2 November 1932, p. 15, via http://news.google.com/newspapers) In November at the same show, he gave a presentation on "The Vocabularly of the Sea",  "in which the origin of sundry sea-faring terms and expressions will be discussed," (Sydney Morning Herald, 21 November 1932) and on "Superstitious Sailormen" (Sydney Morning Herald, 1 December 1932).

"Originally from Greenock, home of famous ships and sailor-men. Captain Forbes Eadie revealed a gift of picturesque expression which vested his stories of old sailor superstitions with something of the tang of the seas which gave them birth. His account of the career of the ill-fated ship, "Wanderer", inspiration of John Masefield's poem of that name, riveted the attention of his audience.

Before relating the saga of the "Wanderer," Captain Eadie had mildly reproved Sydney ship-lovers for their neglect of old ship figureheads. He suggested that Sydney ship-lovers should follow the example of the Auckland Ship-Lovers' Society in collecting and mounting all such relics of the half-forgotten days of sail." (Sydney Morning Herald, 17 November 1932)

Sea stories form the subject of a series of six talks to be given by "Lee Fore Brace," a New Zealand broadcaster, who is on his way to the U.S.A. to fulfil an engagement obtained as a result of the successful reception of his talks In that country. The first of the series -"The First Voyager"-will be given on Saturday from 2BL at 7.40. The others are: Sunday, 2FC. 7.40 p.m.. "Broached To;" Monday, 2BL, 9.10, "The Sea Devil;" December 10, 2BL, 7.40, "The Sailor Men of Devon;" December 15, 2FC, 9.35, "Looking After the Owner's Interest;" December l8, 8.45, "In the Wake of the Convict Ship." (Sydney Morning Herald, 30 November 1932)

1935
“Young had had in the meantime a further clash with Rex Mason. At the 28 March 1935 LEC Annual General Meeting Mason claimed Young had previously inferred he had "misappropriated" a donation by a Mr. Forbes Eadie, and demanded an apology. Another special meeting followed on 7 April 1935. Young rejected charges that he had actually said anything negative. Mason replied that there were differences of opinion amongst those attending the meeting what Young had actually said. Young claimed he was under attack for the "second time" and said Mason should have checked with him what he in fact had said. Soon after the meeting degenerated into a war of words between Mason and Eadie, and Mason withdrew his comments about Young.”
(Biography of Frederick George Young by David Verran, 2004-2006)

Eadie ran for election to the Auckland Transport Board, but was unsuccessful. 3,333 votes in the No. 2 constituency.
(NZ Herald, 9 May 1935)



Auckland Star 4 May 1935

Forbes Eadie, along with John Barr and Rev. A. B. Chappell, author a report to the Mayor of Auckland City.
(ACC 182/3, Auckland City Archives)

1936
Eadie now lists himself in the directories as a journalist.
(Wises Directory 1936, 1940 and 1947)

He attended a meeting of delegates for the Provincial Centennial Celebrations on 11 August 1936. He attended a selection committee meeting on 24 November, but did not attend a meeting of the history committee at the Town Hall, 20 May 1937.
(ACC 182/3, Auckland City Archives)

Another Auckland Transport Board election – and Eadie is again unsuccessful, this time with only 372 votes in the No. 2 constituency.
(NZ Herald, 10 September 1936)

1939
Now Forbes Eadie is a member of the Auckland Centennial Historical Research Sub-Committee and Centennial Early Settlers & Descendant’s Sub-Committee. He compiled List of Vessels Arriving at Auckland NZ from Overseas 1853-1869, a list for Wellington 1839-1900, and a roll of early settlers. According to notes in the front of the “Forbes Eadie Scrapbook” (See below), he was a member of the committee from 1937-1940.

During World War II, according to Graeme Easte, Forbes Eadie served as a Sergeant at Papakura Camp.


In 1944, on top of his existing Crown housing mortgage, Forbes Eadie entered into a mortgage agreement with his wife, Ann. In 1946, the property at 13 Malvern Road was transferred into her name, and both outstanding mortgages discharged. (NA 199/61) In 1959, the property title included their children: Crawford Hamilton Eyre Eadie (manager), Forbes Eadie junior (civil servant, Wellington), Ulica de Burgh Paice and Francis Bradshaw Lowe (married women) and Charles Phillips Eadie (an Auckland roofing inspector). (NA1638/16)


1956

Historical notes are published on a day-by-day basis in the Auckland Star. These are later compiled as the “Forbes Eadie Scrapbook”, a copy lodged at the Auckland Research Centre, Auckland City Library.

1961
Ann initiates divorce proceedings against Forbes Eadie. The decree absolute was granted in 1962.

1962
Forbes Eadie died 11 August 1962, aged 84. In his last years, according to Graeme Easte, Forbes Eadie had been committed to the Auckland Mental Hospital at Pt Chevalier, and when he died he was living at 38 Argyle Street, Herne Bay. His remains were cremated 16 August, and his ashes scattered on 17 August. No death notices or obituary found.
(Waikumete Cemetery index cards.)
1967
His widow hands over some of his Centennial work to Auckland City Library and Auckland War Memorial Museum Library. According to Graeme Easte, Crawford Hamilton Eadie destroyed his father's notes and correspondence after Forbes Eadie's death.

1970
Ann Bradshaw Eadie dies. (NA 1638/16) The family sold the property in 1971. (NA 18B/965)





Friday, August 28, 2009

Auckland Trains blog

I've just received a great email from the owner of the Auckland Trains blog. He's added Timespanner as a link on his homepage list (under History of Avondale) -- and, as per my policy around here, I've done the same.

There's always room for a rail blog link on Timespanner!

"An oppressive burthen, unjustly imposed ..."

In 1854 the Auckland Provincial Council, brand-new and in their first session, put together a petition to Queen Victoria and her parliament. I found it the other day at the Auckland City Library's collection of Auckland Provincial Council papers and meetings records.

PETITION TO THE QUEEN AGAINST THE PAYMENT OF THE NEW ZEALAND COMPANY’S DEBT

To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled. The humbled Petition of the Members of the Provincial Council of Auckland, in Council assembled.

SHEWETH,

That your petitioners are just now assembled for the first time under the Act recently passed by the Imperial Parliament to “grant a Representative Constitution to New Zealand.”

That your petitioners have much pleasure in expressing their gratitude for the liberal concessions made by that Act, and especially for conferring on the Colonists the control of the Waste Lands; but your petitioners deeply lament that these concessions have been accompanied by a charge of £268,370 15s. in favour of the New Zealand Company, which is regarded throughout this province in the light only of an oppressive burthen, unjustly imposed.

That your petitioners deem it to be one of their most urgent and important duties to use every effort in their power to obtain relief from this burthen; and with a view to give expression to their own opinions, as well as in deference to the universal wishes of their constituents, your petitioners take the earliest opportunity of bringing before Parliament a subject upon which intense anxiety and feeling exist throughout this Province.

That your petitioners most respectfully, but unequivocally, state it to be their deliberate conviction that the extraction of one-fourth of the proceeds of the Land Sales of this Province for the shareholders of the New Zealand Company can only be regarded as a most obnoxious grievance.

That, referring to a Petition presented to Parliament on the last Session, from some of the members of the late Provincial Council of New Ulster, for a fuller statement of reasons your petitioners beg to call the attention of your Honourable House to the following, as some of the grounds upon which that conviction is founded:-

1. Because all the Northern Settlements now comprised in the Province of Auckland, were founded by Her Majesty’s Government, and not by the New Zealand Company, and between these settlements and those of the Company there exists no community of interest, and far less intercourse than between New Zealand and Australia.

2. Because all the land which the New Zealand Company possessed to surrender, and as payment for which the charge complained of is imposed, were situate in other Provinces at a great distance from Auckland, and no part of the proceeds of the sales of such lands will ever directly or indirectly be of any advantage or benefit whatever to this Province.

3. Because no reduction of price, however great, in any land given up by the Company could, in the slightest degree, affect the value of Public Lands in the Province of Auckland.

4. Because there does not exist in the Province of Auckland any Waste Land, properly so-called, all the Public Lands, now made subject, by the “Constitution Act”, to the New Zealand Company’s claim, being from time to time purchased from the Aborigines by funds raised entirely within the Province, without any contribution whatever, directly or indirectly, by the New Zealand Company.

5. Because, therefore, the only reason given by Earl Grey, “that the price due for the lands acquired from the Company by the Crown must be a charge on the whole of the Crown Lands of New Zealand,” as the purchase was, “essential for securing a proper value to the whole of the Crown Lands throughout the entire extent of New Zealand,” is not only untenable, but absolutely without any foundation whatever.

6. Because the New Zealand Company never had any beneficial connexion with any part of the Province of Auckland; they neither expended any money in it on any public object, nor introduced a single emigrant, nor ever rendered it the slightest service; but on the contrary they treated the Northern Settlements as rivals to their own; they unceasingly depreciated their advantages, and traduced the character of their Colonists, and even treated Auckland as so foreign from the settlements created by the Company as to insist on being reimbursed, from the Land Fund of Auckland, for the passages of a few emigrants, who were brought here, from Wellington, by the first Governor of New Zealand, to erect a public building.

That your petitioners entreat your Honourable House not to look on the “New Zealand Constitution Act” as finally disposing of the New Zealand Company’s claims, and your petitioners beg most respectfully to assure your Honourable House that, so far from this being likely to be the case, the sense of wrong and indignity inflicted on this Province is so universally and acutely felt, that any attempt to enforce those claims will but lay the foundation for an agitation which must be prejudicial, and, at the same time, cannot fail, however much it is to be deplored, to sow the seeds of discontent and disaffection towards the British Government.

That your petitioners do not plead in favour of relief from a debt founded on any moral obligation whatever, but for relief from a burthen which has certainly no more reason or justice to support it, than there would in favour of the appropriation of the Land Revenue of the Province of Auckland, in New Zealand, to reimburse the shareholders of a bankrupt Land Jobbing Company of British North America; and, from the conduct of the New Zealand Company towards the districts comprised in the Province of Auckland, a burthen – than such an appropriation –more vexatious to be borne.

That, under such circumstances, your Honourable House will not feel surprised that there should exist throughout this Community a settled determination to resist, by every legitimate means, the payment of a single shilling from the Revenue of this Province to the New Zealand Company, and your petitioners feel the greatest confidence that your Honourable House will approve of and encourage a determination, not seeking to evade a reasonable obligation, but firmly bent on opposing to the utmost what is felt and believed to be oppressive and unjust.

Your petitioners, therefore, appeal with confidence to the justice of your Honourable House on behalf of the Province of Auckland, and humbly pray that steps may be immediately taken to relieve it from the payment of any portion of the £268,370 15s., now charged against the proceeds of its Land Sales, in favour of the New Zealand Company. And your petitioners will ever pray, &c., &c.,
I'd posted earlier here about the New Zealand Company's land deals in Auckland in the 1840s -- this seemed to indicate that Auckland hadn't quite seen the last of any effects the company was to have on its early development.

In 1851, the Southern Cross was confidently relaying reports from the Times in London of the demise of the New Zealand Company. Many in Auckland may well have nodded their heads and thought that such was to be expected. What wasn't expected was the shape of the New Zealand Constitution Act. Within its paragraphs came a stinger. The New Zealand Company shareholders had debts. They expected the Imperial Government to met these debts as they still continued to protest that they had been hard done by over land deals, Treaty of Waitangi, pre-emption, etc. etc. They put their debt at £268,370 15s, and expected the Government to cough up the money.

In England, some agreed, and so the Constitution Act included the demand that all the new provinces had to pay ¼ of their revenue from sale of and income arising from the waste lands transferred over to each province from the the Crown.
The Canterbury settlers, it is clear, are determined to make a gallant stand for their rights as Englishmen. That worse than highway robbery, the abominable attempt to saddle upon the helpless and struggling colonists of New Zealand, the £268,000 of debt incurred by the New Zealand, Company for its own selfish purposes, is exciting universal indignation. The “Times” is honourably eloquent on the land question, stigmatizing the designs of Downing-street as "a great public fraud," which it calls upon the colonists to repudiate and resist. If, says our spirited contemporary, —If New Zealand had a Constitutional Government, she would not pay one fraction either principal or interest of this nefarious demand.
(Southern Cross, 24 October 1851)

The Wellington colonists have lost no time in taking the field against the combination entered into by the late New Zealand Company and the Colonial Office, to saddle the unjust debts of the latter upon the land fund or general revenue of these outrageously plundered colonies. A petition to the Commons House of Parliament against so gross a robbery has been prepared, and was in course of signature; and as this petition is one which must meet the views of colonial politicians of every shade, we trust that force and effect will be given to it by its prompt and general signature throughout every province and settlement of New Zealand.
(Southern Cross, 3 February 1852)

Aucklanders entered the fray, with a public meeting and a series of petitions.

The Public Meeting — convened to petition Parliament against imposing any portion of the New Zealand Company's claim upon the Province of New Ulster, — took place on Saturday, on the open space of ground in front of the Supreme Court House, and was thronged by the largest and most attentive audience we have ever encountered in New Zealand.
(Southern Cross, 17 February 1852)

We have great pleasure in giving publicity to the subjoined letters which accompanied the petitions of the inhabitants of the borough of Auckland, praying that Parliament would interpose to prevent the imposition of any portion of the New Zealand Company's debt upon the Province of New Ulster. The Petitions were very numerously signed, and were transmitted by the "Moa," as will be seen, to the Duke of Newcastle, and Mr. Gladstone, for presentation in the Houses of Peers and Commons.
(Southern Cross, 9 March 1852)

Not to mention the newspaper comment.

The New Zealand Constitution. (From the 'Times,' May 5.)
It has pleased Parliament, not only to bestow on the New Zealand Company two hundred and thirty-six thousand pounds of the money of the people of this country, but to encumber the waste lands of the colony with a mortgage to secure to the company two hundred and sixty-eight thousand pounds, with interest at the rate of 3 per cent. Thus is the colony which is to bear the expense of .even governments, deprived of its natural and most available resource — the revenue to be derived from the future sale of its lands.
(Southern Cross, 3 September 1852)

The debt of the New Zealand Company is to be charged on the Land Fund, and to be paid by the appropriation of one-fourth of the proceeds of the sales. But there is reason to hope that an inquiry into the fraudulent spoliations of this Company will be brought before the new Parliament, and that the monstrous jobbery and robbery will be thoroughly investigated and (it is devoutly to be hoped) repudiated and disallowed.
(Southern Cross, 7 December 1852)

TO THE EDITOR OF THE SOUTHERN CROSS. Sir,— Governor Grey informed the deputation which addressed him on the subject of the New Zealand Company's debt, that he had not paid over the proportion that is claimed from the Auckland province. So far he spoke correctly; the money was then still in the Colonial Treasury. But I am informed, upon what I consider as unquestionable authority, that very shortly afterwards it actually was paid. The proper form of remitting to the Company is through the Lords of the Treasury, and the proper form of remitting to the Treasury is through.the military chest, — to which I believe that it has been transferred. If this be not the case, it is easily denied, and no harm done; and if it be not the case, his Excellency will deny it, as he is popularity-hunting just now. Let it be borne in mind, however, that for the denial to be any thing worth, it must be precise and circumstantial, not couched in general terms, —that it must contain, not only the truth, but the whole truth.

[We have heard the rumor alluded to by our correspondent; — indeed, that the sum of £12,000 of our monies has already been paid over for the New Zealand Company. — Ed, S C]
(Southern Cross, 21 October 1853)

The members of the new Auckland Provincial Council were keen to see not a penny paid over to the New Zealand Company ...

AUCKLAND PROVINCIAL COUNCIL. WEDNESDAY, 21st DECEMBER, 1853.
The Speaker read a further communication that no money had yet been paid on account of the New Zealand Company's debt.
(Southern Cross, 27 December 1853)

But, it was still enforced. Someone needed to be blamed.
The generality of our readers will have learnt, from the ' New Zealander ' of Saturday, that this iniquitous claim is to be enforced (by order of the Secretary of State) against the province of Auckland. The imposition is wholly and solely one of Governor Grey's inflicting.
(Southern Cross, 11 April 1854)

Then, a champion entered the fray, from an unexpected quarter: Edward Gibbon Wakefield, he whose name was inextricably linked with the whole saga of the New Zealand Company and colonisation schemes in this country as far as history is concerned. As well as in the minds of the peeved Aucklanders.
Yesterday, Mr. E. G. Wakefield brought forward the motion of which he had given notice, for the appointment of a Committee "to inquire, whether or not, in justice, the Province of Auckland ought to be at once relieved from bearing any portion of the New Zealand Company's debt." The honourable gentleman, after explaining how he came to bring forward the question rather than leave it for one of the Northern members, went at great length into the merits of the question as between Auckland and the other Provinces; and showed, very satisfactorily, (to our minds at least,) that this Province had nothing whatever to do with the debt, — had never received any thing but injury from the Company, and could not, upon any ground that he could fancy or imagine, be called upon to bear any portion of that debt.
(Southern Cross, 30 June 1854)

The country's Legislative Council had this to say.

Mr. Whitaker moved the suspension of the Standing Orders, that certain resolutions relative to the New Zealand Company's Debt might be taken into consideration. The motion was seconded by Major Richmond, and agreed to. Mr. Whitaker then moved the following Resolutions :—
1. That in the opinion of this Council, the charge in favour of the New Zealand Company on the Land Fund 1 of the Colony, is an oppressive burthen on its resources.
2. That such charge appears to have been created by Parliament in ignorance of the real facts, and to have been obtained by the Company by means of the suppression of material circumstances.
3. That the Colony is entitled to claim from Parliament a reconsideration of the case, in order that justice may be done, and that the colony may be relieved from the whole, or at least some portion, of the charge.
4. That if any amount should be found ultimately to be fairly due to the Company, such amount ought to be apportioned amongst the different Provinces upon equitable principles, and that the aid of Parliament and the Crown should be solicited to effect these objects.
5. "That it is desirable that the object of these Resolutions should be sought through an agent in England.
6. That, with a view to the appointment of such an agent, a conference be held with the House of Representatives.
7. That the hon. Messrs. Bell, Whitaker, St. Hill, and Gilfillan be managers of the conference on the part of the Legislative Council.
8. That the Speaker of this House do forward the foregoing Resolutions to his Excellency the Officer administering the Government, to be by him transmitted to Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies.
(Southern Cross, 21 November 1854)

The NZ House of Representatives supported Auckland's case for relief ... but there's many a slip 'twixt cup and lip ...
On Saturday, in the House of Representatives a piece of intelligence for which the Auckland members were not prepared, was communicated by the Speaker. It appeared that the resolution by which it was declared that Auckland province ought not to be charged with the Company's debt, had never been transmitted to the Home Government at all. This duty had been entrusted to the Executive, and had never been performed. Consequently, we are thrown back a year in obtaining the desired relief.
(Southern Cross, 18 September 1855)

Then, success, thanks to the Southerners.
On the 10th the Colonial Treasurer (Mr. Sewell) submitted to the House of Representatives the series of resolutions in which the Stafford Ministry have embodied their scheme for making provision for all ascertained outstanding liabilities, and for the permanent adjustment of the public burdens of the Colony ... With a view to the equitable adjustment of the public burthens, the redemption of the New Zealand Company's Debt is to be borne by the Provinces of the Middle Island in equal proportions — (Auckland being relieved retrospectively, as well as prospectively, by re-payment of the amount £45,000) which this Province has contributed on account of that Debt).
(Otago Witness , 26 July 1856)
The Legislation of the General Assembly during its past session has, in several important particulars, improved the position of this Province. I refer more particularly to those measures by which we have been relieved from further contributions on account of the New Zealand Company's Debt …
(Southern Cross, 12 December 1856)

The only thing left to sort out was how to spend the refund.
Mr. Wood's motion, — "that, in the opinion of this Council, the sum of £7,000 voted last session for City Water Works and City Main Sewer, was to be charged against the £45,000 New Zealand Company's refund; and, consequently, cannot now become a charge upon the loan proposed to be raised on the City Endowments" —was carried, after some discussion, by a majority of 11 to 4.
(Southern Cross, 21 December 1858)

"...the sense of wrong and indignity inflicted on this Province is so universally and acutely felt, that any attempt to enforce those claims will but lay the foundation for an agitation which must be prejudicial, and, at the same time, cannot fail, however much it is to be deplored, to sow the seeds of discontent and disaffection towards the British Government." I wonder just how far that discontent and disaffection would have gone if the amount hadn't been refunded and the payments stopped. Probably just into angry mutterings at the gentlemen's clubs and over the pub counters. If anyone did put together a what-if scenario, though, it might be interesting to see what could have happened.

Just a further note: I ran the figure of £268,370 through the inflation calculator. Granted the calculator only handles figures from 1862, ten years or so after all this crisis, but the amounts comes out to $27,101,714, of which Auckland was finally refunded the equivalent of $4, 544, 387. No wonder they were upset ...