heritage conservation management plan - stroud …

CORPORATE & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

ATTACHMENT A

HERITAGE CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN - STROUD COURT HOUSE

ORDINARY MEETING

13 JULY 2016

The former

STROUD COURTHOUSE

CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT PLAN

Great Lakes CouncilGreat Lakes CouncilGreat Lakes CouncilGreat Lakes Council

May 2016May 2016May 2016May 2016

Smith History & Heritage

prepared for MidCoast Council

(formerly Great Lakes Council) PO Box 450 Forster 2428

NSW June 2016

by

Garry Smith ADL&A Hist, BA, LLB, MEL

170 Pitlochry Road

Gloucester NSW 2422

phone 02 6558 9554 [email protected]

includes specialist reports by Bill Jordan & Associates Pty Ltd

ABN 83 003 320 652 Chartered Structural Engineer specialising

in conservation of historical structures PO Box 141

NEWCASTLE NSW 2300 Telephone: (02)4929 4841

Fax: (02)4929 7933 E-mail: [email protected]

Web: www.bjaeng.com.au

CONTENTS

SECTION 1 1

INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 THE FORMER STROUD COURTHOUSE – HISTORICAL OVERVIEW 1

The Australian Agricultural Company’s beginnings 1

Stroud’s origins and development 2

Stroud’s first courthouse 2

Stroud’s second courthouse 2

The courthouse’s restoration and ongoing use 3

1.2 PURPOSE AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS DOCUMENT 3

1.3 METHODOLOGY 1 - THE PROCESS 4

1.4 METHODOLOGY 2 - RECORDS OBTAINED 5

SECTION 2 5

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE 5

2.1 SIGNIFICANCE – GENERAL COMMENT 5

2.2 SIGNIFICANCE – INTERIOR 5

2.3 SIGNIFICANCE - MASONRY 6

2.4 SIGNIFICANCE - ANCILLARY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES 6

2.5 SIGNIFICANCE – GARDENS AND GROUNDS 6

2.6 SIGNIFICANCE – THE SETTING, COUNCIL ROADS AND FOOTPATHS 7

2.7 HERITAGE ASSESSMENTS AND PLANNING CONSTRAINTS 7

Entry on the State Heritage Inventory 7

Entry on the Register of the National Estate 7

Listing by the National Trust of Australia 7

SECTION 3 8

ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORTING SYSTEM 8

3.1 THE COURTHOUSE WORK ADVISORY GROUP 8

3.2 PREPARING A WORKS PROGRAM 8

3.3 THE ANNUAL INSPECTION SYSTEM 8

3.4 THE ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORTS 9

Report 1 - Roof and roof drainage inspection 9

Report 2 - Subfloor inspection 10

General comment 10

Moisture levels 10

Matters to be inspected 11

Report 3 - Termites 11

General comment 11


Report 4 - Other subfloor matters 12


Report 5 - External wall inspection 13


Report 6 - Internal wall and ceiling inspection 13


Report 7 - Windows inspection 13


Report 8 - Wear-and-tear inspection of joinery and fittings 14


Report 9 - Grounds inspection including surface drainage 14


SECTION 4 15

RECOMMENDED CONSERVATION WORK 15

4.1 OVERVIEW OF CONSERVATION MATTERS 15

4.2 THE JORDAN REPORT 16

The Jordan Report recommendations - work to be undertaken 16

4.3 THE REMOVAL OF EXTERIOR WALL PAINT 17

General overview 17

Removing the existing exterior paint and salt residue 17

4.4 REPAINTING THE EXTERIOR WALLS 18

Suitable exterior paint 18

The Murobond and Murowash range 18

Recommended colour schemes 18

4.5 UNDERFLOOR VENTILATION 19

Increased ventilation is required 19

The courthouse front wall 19

4.6 PERIMETER DRAINAGE 19

4.7 ROOF AND ROOF DRAINAGE 20

The present roof 20

General comment 20

Fitting a suitable gutter guard system 21

4.8 INTERNAL WALL CONDITION 21

4.9 INTERIOR PAINTING 21

General comment 21

4.10 THE BUILDING’S DAMP COURSE 22

4.11 EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR WINDOW CONDITION 22

4.12 INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING 22

Internal lighting 22

Problems with fluorescent lighting 22

4.13 OTHER CONSERVATION MATTERS 23

The front fence 23

The over mantle to the judge’s bench 23

Archaeological significance 23

SECTION 5 25

PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD (all photos September 2015) 25

5.1 THE COURTHOUSE EXTERIOR 25

5.2 THE COURTHOUSE INTERIOR 34

5.3 OTHER CONSERVATION ISSUES - FLOOR & SUBFLOOR 41

5.4 THE GROUNDS 44

SECTION 6 48

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW 48

6.0 PRELIMINARY COMMENT 48

6.1 THE AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY 48

The Company’s beginnings 48

The Company’s expansion northwards 48

The Company’s growth falters 49

The Company’s departure from the area 49

6.2 STROUD: ITS ESTABLISHMENT AND GROWTH 49

Stroud’s beginnings and initial growth 50

Stroud after the Company’s Headquarters moved to Sydney 51

6.3 THE OPERATION OF STROUD’S TWO COURTHOUSES 52

Historical overview 52

Construction and operation of the first courthouse 53

The decline of the first courthouse 54

Construction of the second courthouse 56

The second courthouse incorporated the first courthouse 57

The ongoing use of the second courthouse 57

The second court house’s final years 57

6.4 AFTER CLOSURE – THE COURTHOUSE’S NEW FUNCTION 58

The courthouse’s condition 58

Comment regarding the above recommended use of acrylic paint 59

The commencement of restoration 59

Restoration complete 59

After the restoration 61

SECTION 7 63

VISUAL HISTORICAL RECORD 63

SECTION 8 71

HISTORICAL NOTES 71

SECTION 9 84

HERITAGE LISTINGS 84

1. State Heritage Inventory Form St 14 85

2. Stroud Court House Register of the National Estate 92

3. National Trust Register; Stroud Court House … following p 92

4. National Trust Register; Village of Stroud Urban Conservation Area … following p 92

SECTION 10

CONSERVATION DOCUMENTS … following Section 9

1. Bill Jordan and Associates; Former Courthouse Building, Stroud; Structural Assessment for Conservation, 2015

2. Bill Jordan and Associates, Quambi House, Stroud with Old Courthouse & School of Arts Report

on Masonry Damage for Great Lakes Council, 2010 3. BlueScope Steel, Inert Catchment, Technical Bulletin CTB-28, Rev 0, June 2008

__________________________________

1

FORMER STROUD COURTHOUSE

COWPER STREET, STROUD

1

SECTION 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 THE FORMER STROUD COURTHOUSE – HISTORICAL OVERVIEW This document acknowledges that the former use of ‘court house’ as two words prevailed during the building’s time as a functioning courthouse. However, modern usage favours the now standardised ‘courthouse’ as one word, which prevails in this document except where the term is used in its historical context or is cited from historical documents. This may create some inconsistencies unless the distinction is borne in mind. Readers should be aware that the Council’s name has changed three times since its formation as Stroud Shire Council in 1907. It became Great Lakes Shire Council in 1979, Great Lakes Council in 1993 and MidCoast Council on 12 May 2016 following amalgamation with Greater Taree City Council and Gloucester Shire Council. Historical accounts, references and sources in this document use the name that was current at the relevant time. Readers are referred to SECTION 6 HISTORICAL OVERVIEW for a more extensive historical overview. The historical sources used in this overview are noted in that document. The Australian Agricultural Company’s beginnings The Australian Agricultural Company was incorporated by an Imperial Act passed in June 1824. A grant of 1,000,000 acres of Crown Land was approved for the Company’s purposes of breeding livestock, establishing a fine wool industry and cultivating crops. Robert Dawson, the first manager of the Company’s estates, arrived at Port Stephens in January 1826. Land stretching from Port Stephens to the Manning River in the north and from the coast westward to the Karuah and Gloucester Rivers was selected.

1 The present courthouse with the original courthouse adjacent behind, prepared by Warren Goodrich, Gloucester, from

plans held by Stroud & District Historical Society Inc.

2

The Port Stephens soils were of poor quality and agricultural efforts were moved north to the Booral and Stroud areas in the Karuah River valley. The less fertile eastern section of the Port Stephens Estate (approximately 500,000 acres) was surrendered in favour of the Peel River and Warrah Estates in 1833. The sale of land by the A. A. Co. for small holdings began in the late 1840s and intensified after 1860. The Estates were seen as being mismanaged by the late nineteenth century and the introduction of a NSW land tax in 1895 was the death knell for the Company’s occupation of the Port Stephens Estates. The estates were sold in 1903, heralding in a new period of growth for the Stroud-Gloucester Valley. Stroud’s origins and development Stroud was named by Robert Dawson, the first Superintendent of the Australian Agricultural Company, in 1826 because of the similarity to the Cotswold country in Gloucestershire where the towns of Gloucester and Stroud are situated. Settlement began in the late 1820s and Stroud became the Company’s headquarters during the 1830s when great expectations were held for the estate’s growth. The failure of the fine wool venture slowed Stroud’s development and Stroud ceased to be the Company’s headquarters in 1856. The Australian Agricultural Company ceased its occupation of the Stroud-Gloucester Valley in 1902. The Company’s departure opened the way for the Stroud Shire Council to be formed in 1907. The expansion of the hardwood timber industry, the arrival of the railway and the development of the dairy industry introduced the valley to a new period of growth and prosperity during the early twentieth century. Stroud remained as the administrative centre of the new local government area until the coastal areas overtook Stroud as the centres of economic and population growth. Stroud Shire Council was renamed Great Lakes Shire Council in 1979 and the council headquarters were relocated to Forster in 1980. Stroud’s first courthouse The court system and the administration of justice in the Estate began with the Military Detachment established at Carrington, Port Stephens, in 1828. The Officer-in-Charge acted as resident magistrate and two constables were appointed, one at Carrington and one at Stroud. A court of petty sessions was established at Dungog on 23 December 1833, the jurisdiction of which included the Port Stephens Estates. It is unclear when the first Stroud courthouse was erected. The Stroud Watch House was mentioned in 1835 in the call for tenders to supply provisions to government establishments but was possibly operating from about 1828. Stroud was listed as a place for holding Special Petty Sessions for the assignment of convicts in 1838. The notification of 18 October 1853, that Stroud had been appointed to hold a Court of Petty Sessions marks the beginning of the courthouse’s official use. The courthouse was noted as being in poor condition by May 1860 and that repairs should be undertaken as soon as possible. Stroud’s second courthouse Tenders for the present courthouse were called for in May 1876, construction began in 1877 and was completed in 1878. The new courthouse was built immediately in front of the original courthouse, which was incorporated completely or substantially into the new courthouse and remained in service as part of it until being demolished in the 1930s. Speculation as to the courthouse’s closure developed during the 1960s. The Department of the Attorney General and Justice advised the Department of Public Works in November 1973 that the Court of Petty Sessions, Stroud was under consideration for abolition and that only essential repairs and maintenance were to be undertaken. The Stroud Court of Petty Sessions closed on 21 January 1977.

3

The courthouse was purchased by Great Lakes Shire Council in 1985 and subsequently leased to the Stroud and District Historical Society, which continues as the present arrangement. The building was in poor condition at the time of purchase because of extensive termite damage, timber decay and water damage. The courthouse’s restoration and ongoing use The building was not suited to public use because of its condition and Council sought and obtained a Bicentennial Grant in 1985, supported by additional funds from the Stroud and District Historical Society. The opening ceremony of the restored courthouse was held on 5 November 1988. Further work was undertaken following restoration. The Stroud and District Historical Society wrote to Council in October 1989 advising that during recent heavy rains a serious drainage problem was apparent in the court house grounds. The Society again expressed the need for suitable storage/display sheds in July 1990, noting two sulkies and other items that were being held in store and the presence of termites (white ants) in an existing storage shed. The Society raised the need for the courthouse to be re-roofed and the need for guttering replacement in March 1994. The courthouse has been an asset to Stroud and Great Lakes Shire since restoration but issues have arisen in relation to excessive wall moisture levels, perimeter drainage and under-floor ventilation. These matters provide the principal reasons for undertaking this document although it is important to note that conservation management plans should be undertaken on all historic buildings as a matter of management practice. 1.2 PURPOSE AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS DOCUMENT The purpose of this document is to identify the conservation issues that have manifested themselves during the life of the courthouse, to establish their potential impact on the building’s condition and to provide suitable conservation procedures. It can be noted that there are two general periods relevant to the courthouse’s usage; the first period from its construction in 1878 to its closure as a courthouse in 1977 and second, its period of use by the Stroud and District Historical Society Inc after its closure. It is accepted that an amount of work was undertaken during the building’s life, both during its use as a courthouse and following its closure. However, it is not this document’s role to comment on the correctness or suitability of work previously undertaken unless it is relevant to the building’s present condition and the conservation work that is now required. The document also accepts the fundamental position that available funds may be less than would ideally be envisaged. The document therefore addresses those matters that are considered to be critical in the short term and develops maintenance and monitoring procedures for those matters where the potential impact is less severe or is difficult to quantify without further monitoring. The document notes the number of changes to the building over the years but considers that the building’s heritage significance can be readily interpreted and that the changes do not impact substantially on the overall significance. This document is therefore primarily concerned with conserving the existing fabric and addressing matters that are impacting or will impact on the building’s existing fabric. Other than matters that can be readily dealt with, it is not concerned with restoration and replacement. The document accepts existing heritage assessments (see Sections 2 & 8) and that the building has a high level of local heritage significance. It was identified in the Heritage Register, Report and Thematic Study, 19882, as having regional significance but it should be noted that regional significance is no longer a recognised significance level.

2 Suters, Busteed, Corner, Clode Pty Ltd, Heritage Register: Report and Thematic Study, the authors, 1988, p.90.

4

This document does not attempt to extend the courthouse’s significance beyond the local level in regard to the building’s architectural qualities but notes the historical significance of the Australian Agricultural Company’s Port Stephens Estate and the Stroud Gloucester Valley. In so doing it is the writer’s opinion that the Stroud Gloucester Valley meets the required criteria for State heritage significance and with further critical assessment may meet the required criteria for National heritage significance. The courthouse’s historical role within the Company’s Port Stephens Estate could therefore elevate its heritage standing to a regional, State or National level. Readers are referred to Sections 2 & 8 for a fuller understanding of the building’s significance. 1.3 METHODOLOGY 1 - THE PROCESS Preparation of the document took into consideration the guidelines as published by the National Trust of Australia (James Semple Kerr), which are in general practice. Regard was given to the New South Wales Heritage Branch guidelines, which are available on the NSW Heritage Branch website <http://www.nsw.gov.au/13_subnav_04.htm>. They are;

• Conservation Management Strategy (CMS) Part 1: Investigation and Assessment sections;

• Conservation Management Strategy (CMS) Part 2: conservation policy and

management sections;

• What is a Conservation Management Plan (CMP)?;

• Conservation Management Plan (CMP) Assessment Checklist, September 2003 Version.

The general procedure was as follows;

1. prepare an overview history addressing the establishment and growth of Stroud in relationship to the region and its significance within the region;

2. investigate the history of the Stroud Court of Petty Sessions and the Stroud Court

House including the first courthouse, the present courthouse, its decommissioning, its restoration and its post courthouse uses;

3. ascertain the building’s heritage significance in regard to its fabric and structure, its

historical setting and its proximity to other heritage items.

4. receive information and advice from all parties concerned with the use and maintenance of the building;

5. assess all physical fabric and compare this to historical and current information

concerning repairs, changes and restoration; 6. prepare a photographic record showing the current state of the building and its fabric; 7. receive outside expert assessment of specialised areas (brick deterioration, rising

damp, salt uptake); 8. prepare the management document following the completion of the above.

5

1.4 METHODOLOGY 2 - RECORDS OBTAINED Readers are referred to the Bibliography for an account of all documents and records obtained. As a general overview the following documents were accessed;

• all readily available secondary published books;

• all readily available heritage studies and assessments;

• all available online and printed histories by the Stroud and District Historical Society and other local bodies;

• all available records held by MidCoast Council including those relating to the acquisition,

management, restoration and use of the property; • all relevant records held by the State Records Authority at State Archives Collection,

Kingswood;

• all relevant records held by the National Archives at the Noel Butlin Archives at the Australian National University, Canberra.

__________________________________

SECTION 2

HERITAGE SIGNIFICANCE 2.1 SIGNIFICANCE – GENERAL COMMENT (Taken substantially from NSW Heritage data Sheets St14, Stroud Court House, see Section 8) The building is a pleasing example of a mid-19th century courthouse of traditional colonial form, simple in its detail and lacking the classical or Italianate influences typical of larger courthouses and the later designs favoured during James Barnet’s term as Colonial Architect. Although a relatively modest building in terms of size and stature, the former courthouse is an important streetscape element in the Stroud Heritage Conservation Area. It forms an important main road group with the post office, Stroud House, the former ANZ bank and the Central Hotel at the northern entrance to the business-commercial area. The form of the building, with a main centre block and projecting side wings, all with verandahs to the front, is pleasing and needs further assessment as to whether this is a typical design for rural courthouses. The former courthouse reflects Stroud’s continuing role as an important if modest sized local/regional centre following the A. A. Company’s withdrawal of its sheep flocks and discontinuation of Stroud as the Company’s administrative centre. The former courthouse is today the headquarters, archives and museum of the Stroud Historical Society. The building has a high level of social significance within the Stroud community both because of its historical significance and because of its continuing social-historical function. 2.2 SIGNIFICANCE – INTERIOR The interior is substantially intact with the original cedar joinery in generally good condition and with a suitable finish. There are no areas of serious wear and damage and although the finish was restored following the building’s retirement from official use, there are no signs of sanding, scraping, chemical stripping and other inappropriate techniques that frequently degrade restoration work. Some termite damage was noted but this is not widespread although the full extent of past damage was not clear.

6

The furniture appears to be later replacement but is generally suitable to the age, style and original use of the building. The missing panelling and canopy, sometimes called a ‘baldacchino’, from behind and projecting over the judge’s bench3 is a serious omission that requires further investigation despite the passing of approximately 26 years since the restoration was undertaken. 2.3 SIGNIFICANCE - MASONRY The brickwork is generally of English or Colonial bond. It appears to be of only average quality and has suffered from moisture uptake. It is unclear whether it was originally painted but it had been painted more than once and painted again in modern acrylic paints at the time of restoration when its use as a courthouse had finished and Stroud and District Historical Society commenced use. It was immediately clear the brickwork requires a full evaluation and conservation work that may involve paint stripping and improved drainage, this today is the major conservation issue affecting the building. This matter was addressed by specialist structural engineer Mr. Bill Jordan who visited on two occasions, first in May 2010 and second in December 2015. The two reports are QUAMBI HOUSE, STROUD: WITH OLD COURTHOUSE AND SCHOOL OF ARTS, Bill Jordan and Associates, May 2010, pages 4 to 6; and FORMER COURTHOUSE BUILDING, STROUD: STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT FOR CONSERVATION, Bill Jordan and Associates, December 2015. These are referred to respectively as Report 1 and Report 2, and are included following this report. This report at all times relies on the Jordan reports for all matters regarding masonry conservation. 2.4 SIGNIFICANCE - ANCILLARY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES No original outbuildings remain although the large machinery exhibition shed has significance in recording the building’s change of use to historical conservation uses. Other later buildings are of no heritage significance and may even be considered to be intrusive although they are well to the rear of the courthouse. It should be noted that the rear subsidiary parts of the courthouse complex were demolished about 1930 or a little later. This was a freestanding building attached at the rear of the courthouse and needs further research to more accurately establish its materials and construction. It comprised, as per surviving plans, two bedrooms, charge room, two cells and a passage and covered way to the kitchen. It is considered to have been all or a substantial part of the first courthouse, which is believed to have been built during the 1830s although Stroud was not appointed to hold a Court of Petty Sessions until 18 October 1853. Freestanding stables consisting of three horse stables and a food store have also been demolished. The sites of these previous buildings should be considered to have archaeological significance. No other particular significance is attached to the grounds at this stage but research into the above issues could result in parts of the allotment being identified as having archaeological significance. As noted immediately below, any excavation or construction work to the grounds should proceed with supervised caution so that any remains or evidence of previous use are reported, evaluated and documented as is appropriate. 2.5 SIGNIFICANCE – GARDENS AND GROUNDS The gardens do not have any particular heritage significance although the grounds may have archaeological significance as described above. Without further historical or archaeological evidence, this report recommends that no specific restrictions should be made. However, all grounds work particularly in the area previously occupied by the original courthouse, should be supervised and any material unearthed should be advised to Council immediately.

3 See Section 5 Photographic Record, photograph 31; see Section 7 Visual Historical Record, 9.

7

2.6 SIGNIFICANCE – THE SETTING, COUNCIL ROADS AND FOOTPATHS The setting is generally appropriate and consistent with its historical context. Modern kerbing, footpaths and road surface are as would be expected and there are interpretive signs for the building but the setting is generally unchanged historically. This should be retained as far as is possible. 2.7 HERITAGE ASSESSMENTS AND PLANNING CONSTRAINTS Entry on the State Heritage Inventory The former Stroud courthouse is listed on the Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan and the New South Wales State Heritage Inventory as an item of local heritage significance. This means that MidCoast Council is the consent authority for work other than demolition, for which notification to the NSW Heritage Office must be given and authorisation obtained. The courthouse was noted in the Heritage Register, Report and Thematic Study, Suters Busteed Corner Clode, 1988 as having regional significance but it is important to note that regional significance is no longer a recognised significance level. However, it should be considered that while the only statutory listing is for local heritage significance, the Stroud Courthouse has local significance at a high level and may, with further comparative assessment, be considered to have significance at State level and possibly National level because of its role in the development of the Australian Agricultural Company’s Port Stephens Estate. Any future work proposals should be subject to rigorous assessment by a suitably experienced heritage officer/consultant to ensure that all work complies with heritage guidelines and achieves the best possible results. Entry on the Register of the National Estate The Register of the National Estate formerly identified places that have aesthetic, historic, scientific or social significance for the present community and for future generations. Items were not necessarily of national significance and many were also listed on the relevant national, state or local registers or inventories. The former Stroud Courthouse was listed on the Register of the National Estate with minimal supporting details on 21 March 19784 although the photograph appears to have been added later, possibly about 1988. The Australian Heritage Commission, the controlling body, was abolished on 1 January 2004 by way of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (Cth) and the Australian Heritage Council Act 2003 (Cth). Additions or changes have not been allowed after that date and the National Estate Register has no legal force. Listing by the National Trust of Australia The former Stroud courthouse was listed on the Register of the National Trust of Australia NSW on 11 February 1974. The National Trust listing is persuasive as to an item’s heritage significance but has no statutory force. The Trust’s listing for the Stroud courthouse provides no supporting reasons for the listing. A minor but interesting point arises from the listing’s photograph. The photo taken at the time shows a typical wire mesh/timber front fence with metal framed mesh gate, typical of the post-World War II period. This is in contrast to the entry on the now discontinued Register of the National Estate (photo probably 1978) which shows a picket fence that appears to be similar to the present fence. The photo featured in Places of Judgment New South Wales, Terry Naughton, Sydney, Law Book Co., 1987 also shows a similar picket fence. The Stroud

4 Register of the National Estate Place ID 1463, Place File No 1/09/080/0021

8

Court of Petty Sessions closed 21 January 1977, so that the wire mesh fence, which appears to be in reasonable condition, must have been replaced shortly afterwards.5 The National Trust also listed the Village of Stroud Urban Conservation Area in which the courthouse is situated on 27 April 1981. The State Heritage Inventory Data Sheets and the National Trust of Australia listings follow in Section 8.

____________________________________________

SECTION 3

ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORTING SYSTEM

3.1 THE COURTHOUSE WORK ADVISORY GROUP The long term monitoring, management and conservation of the building’s condition can most appropriately be undertaken by a Stroud Courthouse Management Group. This should consist of Council staff member(s), representatives of the Stroud and Districts Historical Society and Council’s Heritage Advisor. Mr Andrew Braybrook, Manager Community Engagement, advised that a Heritage Building Advisory Group comprising Great Lakes Council representative as owners, Stroud and District Historical Society representatives as tenants and Council’s Heritage Advisor is in place. The group meet twice a year to discuss maintenance needs and to program works for Quambi House and the Stroud Courthouse. 3.2 PREPARING A WORKS PROGRAM This report recommends that the Working Group should compile a Two Year (or other suitable period) Works Program for its own purposes, for presentation to Council and to manage funding applications for maintenance and conservation works. Council should be responsible for the preparation and circulation of the Program following discussion with the Advisory Group members. This document will provide overall guidance for the formation of the Works Program but it is not within the document’s scope to commit Council and voluntary groups to precise works schedules and commitments. It is expected that the works program would involve a combination of volunteer work by Historical Society members, approved trades works commissioned by MidCoast Council and specialist conservation works commissioned by MidCoast Council to meet requirements for approved grants. This program should provide a broad outline of the maintenance, monitoring and restoration/ repair work that is to be undertaken over the two years (or otherwise as determined) in terms of available funds, grant funding opportunities and Historical Society resources. This should not be a fixed plan but should have scope for revision and change as circumstances require. Further comment is provided below at 3.4 THE ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORTS. Once the initial conservation work has been undertaken and the building’s condition monitored on an ongoing basis, a yearly plan may be found to be adequate. The group should meet at least annually to review the report and to further define the work to be undertaken over the following twelve months. However, the work schedule should at all times remain open to change, as circumstances require. 3.3 THE ANNUAL INSPECTION SYSTEM

5 See Section 7 Historical Visual Record and Section 8 Heritage Listings.

9

As noted above, this report recommends that a minimum standard of inspection and reporting be implemented on at least an annual basis. All major areas of maintenance should be inspected, addressed and discussed, with a report held on file to record changes in condition, issues arising and concerns. These major areas should be properly assessed and reported, not just be ‘ticked off’ as being satisfactory without explanation. These reports are very valuable in determining ongoing maintenance and restoration not only for the courthouse, but for other buildings in the Stroud village area. It is envisaged that society members or other community members may be able to assist in undertaking these reports in order to minimise cost, but with council staff overseeing their operation. Annual reports are a most valuable part of historic building maintenance and should not be neglected because immediate benefits may not be apparent. They allow ongoing problems to be monitored and new problems to be identified. They provide a basis for more suitable and more cost effective remedial action to be implemented. An annual report covering seven main areas is recommended.

1. roof and roof drainage inspection;

2. a subfloor inspection that covers all issues but particularly includes termites, underfloor ventilation and moisture levels;

3. an external wall inspection;

4. an internal wall and ceiling inspection covering matters such as paint condition, cracking, water entry etc;

5. a windows inspection that covers all aspects of window condition including timber condition and water entry;

6. a ‘cosmetic’ wear-and-tear inspection of furniture, joinery and fittings;

7. a grounds and garden inspection that includes surface drainage.

These seven reports should be seen as the minimum rather than exhaustive. Further comment regarding them follows immediately below. 3.4 THE ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORTS All inspection procedures are initial recommendations only. It is difficult to foresee all matters that may arise so that revision of the inspection procedure will be an ongoing process. Report 1 - Roof and roof drainage inspection The aged galvanised roofing was replaced with new galvanised (not zincalume) roofing in February 2008 following a severe hail storm. The guttering was in good condition and was retained. Matters to be inspected

• blocking by leaves will be the main matter of concern and may require three monthly inspections;

• blocking by leaves at drainage outlets and in the drainage pipes; • general security of mounting brackets; • tilting of the gutters to the rear, which will allow damaging overflow onto the walls

but which may not be obvious from the ground; • intrusion of materials generally – airborne material, leaves, vermin, nesting birds or

animals, weed or moss growth etc. in gutters and valleys;

10

• roofing condition generally – loss of fixing screws and nails, rust, lifting or moving ridge capping, valley gutters etc.

Report 2 - Subfloor inspection General comment Underfloor inspections are concerned with three broad areas of building health; excessive moisture levels that may cause timber decay or moisture entry to masonry; the presence of unwanted material such as vermin species, invading tree roots and termites; and third, excessive soil movement causing cracking, tilting or other structural damage to piers, footings and walls. The courthouse’s subfloor area is a matter of concern at this time. Inspections to date indicate that the underfloor area is not interconnected but consists of three separate areas; the main central section and the two wings at the rear part of the building. Limited inspection access to the main central section is available under the judge’s bench but suitable inspection access generally is not available. Inspection access to the three sections is required by way of at least one inspection hatch per section. Inspection hatches should reuse the existing floor boards and should be cut so that the saw cuts and a discreet lifting grips or finger openings are the only visible evidence. Underfloor inspection can be a difficult task, given the limited space and light. One convenient approach is to use a suitable digital camera with inbuilt flash and to photograph copiously. The photographs can be downloaded onto a computer and enlarged or edited as required. They will show more than the naked eye could possibly see under such conditions without the need for physical entry into confined and possibly risky areas. It is stressed that a suitable camera and computer software are essential tools for building inspections and monitoring procedures. It should be the responsibility of MidCoast Council to ensure that all aspects of the subfloor inspection are undertaken because matters such as excessive moisture, termite invasion, root invasion and soil movement can be interrelated, and should be assessed in an overall manner. Moisture levels The purpose of this inspection is to monitor underfloor moisture levels in regard to decay to subfloor structural timbers and flooring, and moisture entering piers, footings and walls. The inspection undertaken by Bill Jordan 18 November 2015 indicated high moisture levels in external walls and joinery in contact with those walls. As a starting position moisture may be entering the underfloor areas by surface drainage allowing water to enter through openings such as fine openings in brick footings and through access doorways, or may be entering by way of movement through the soil. Moisture movement may be a natural process caused by the soil and geological conditions or may be created/worsened by surface drainage allowing water to pool around footings or flow to or against walls. It may be caused or worsened by garden beds, particularly those that are regularly watered, being positioned against or around walls. It may also be caused or worsened by inadequate underfloor ventilation whereby even a small amount of natural water movement in the soil cannot evaporate from the soil surface. The courthouse under floor area appeared to be reasonably dry and free of major problem. However, wall and timber moisture readings, as noted above, indicated excessive moisture levels in walls generally and in low level timber components, including interior floor and wall contact joinery. Improved underfloor ventilation will assist in controlling moisture levels

11

in lower level masonry and timber components. Moisture levels may be sufficiently high to cause decay in timber and excessive moisture levels in masonry, particularly if painted and sealed, and not be readily noticeable. However, skilled visual inspection can be useful to monitor underfloor conditions generally. A pest inspector, builder or wood technologist will usually be the suitably qualified persons but the signs can be quickly learnt with some instruction and an observant eye. Moisture levels can be assessed by the general appearance of the soil, the surface appearance of all structural timbers and flooring, and the absence or presence of various fungi species forming on timber or growing on the earth. The earth, timber and footings should appear dry but operators should at all times be aware that the moisture threshold for fungal attack can be reached while the timber still appears to be dry. There may be a musty odour caused by fungi spores and soil condition. Signs that water is, or has been pooling should at all times be a matter of concern. Sometimes a room inspection of flooring will reveal cupping of the floorboards or lifting of the flooring due to excessive moisture under the floor causing expansion of the under surface of the boards. The presence of these signs means that underfloor condition requires immediate attention. Matters to be inspected

• wall ventilation openings to ensure they are not obscured or blocked; • build-up of garden soils or debris around walls; • water pooling against the wall or under the floor or signs that it has been pooling or

flowing under the floor; • the presence of moss forming anywhere on or near the wall or under the floor; • musty smells under the floor; • surface mould on underfloor timbers; • fungal brackets; toadstools or film fungus forming anywhere under the floor; • cupping floorboards inside the room indicating that the underneath of the boards is

moist and is expanding. Report 3 - Termites General comment The Stroud courthouse appears to be free of termite (white ant) infestations at the time of this report6. However, termite attack has been noted in the area generally and the migratory habit of termites means that although the risk appears to be low at the time of writing, it should never be disregarded. There should be no complacency because the courthouse has been free of termite attack since restoration. Many past treatments are now banned but some, such as the organochlorine based chemicals (dieldrin, chlordane), were highly residual and could last thirty to forty years in the soil. If the courthouse was treated in past years with these chemicals, they could now be nearing the end of their residual life. Other matters place the courthouse at risk, among them the absence of termite caps and the enclosed, dark underfloor conditions that restrict ventilation and make inspection difficult. It is important to be aware that the termites that do the most severe damage to buildings along the NSW coast (chiefly Coptotermes acinaciformes) are subterranean; there is usually no conspicuously visible evidence of their presence other than the damage done to buildings.

6 The scientifically correct term ‘termite’ is preferred to ‘white ant’ because termites are not ants but are placed in the

sub order Isoptera as part of the cockroach order Blattodia.

12

Ideally, the pest inspector should be able to sight the full extent of the perimeter walls both internally and externally, and sight all internal footings and piers. The inspection should include floorboards and internal wall-contact joinery and structural timber work. Full underfloor inspection has not been possible in the past because of limited underfloor access in parts of the building. The cutting of the two inspection hatches referred to above will aid the inspection process but some parts of the building will still be difficult or impossible to inspect. Treatment should be undertaken immediately upon detection7. The use of fipronil based termiticides such as Termidor is the current practice and appears satisfactory on the available evidence and the results obtained. It has a shorter residual life than the organochlorines and is less toxic to humans and animals. It does not repel the termites, because it cannot be detected by them, but is toxic to them and eradicates the termites by contact. Direct application to the termite nests and tunnels or perimeter trenching may be used alone or in combination with other procedure but the exact treatment is best left to the operator’s judgement. Caution should always be used in regards to methods/products that are claimed to provide long term protection without annual inspection – these should never be used as the sole means of control. Matters to be inspected This document does not attempt to define the procedures to be undertaken by a professional termite inspector but advises that inspections generally address the following matters. Council staff should be aware that in a building of the courthouse’s construction type, all timber components, including fittings and furniture, have indirect ground contact and are susceptible to termite attack. Proper underfloor treatment and surrounding ground treatment usually ensure that a building remains termite free but examples have been noted where rubbish, building debris and tree contact have provided direct bridging to otherwise safe buildings. Termite control is therefore about total grounds maintenance.

• regular inspections should look for basic signs such as the presence of termite tracks or timber that appears to be decayed, eaten or damaged;

• tapping the surface of the timber with a firm object can be a useful investigative procedure for all areas, not only where termite activity is suspected but as a general procedure. Good timber will have a firm, woody sound; infected or decaying timber will have a drummy sound or a dead, hollow sound;

• the grounds general including gardens, fencing and outbuildings should be inspected for signs of termite infestation.

Report 4 - Other subfloor matters Termite presence and moisture levels are the main reason to undertake subfloor inspection but all aspects of subfloor condition should be noted. This will include plant roots entering the footings or the subfloor area generally, as well as any movement or cracking of piers and footings. In regard to plant root intrusion, it should be kept in mind that plants of even modest size can cause damage, for example some types of tuberous and clumping flowering plants or moisture seeking shrubs such as Callistemon viminalis (weeping bottlebrush). The courthouse appeared to be free of any interference at the time of inspection but some nearby trees are sufficiently close to cause interference and the matter should be monitored.

7 The NSW licensing system and methods generally provide excellent termite control by local pest exterminator firms. A

more specialised termite inspection can be provided by Timber Inspection, Forests NSW, at Cumberland Forest, West

Pennant Hills should complicated circumstances arise. The NSW Forests officers inspect a number of historical buildings

in the Sydney area and undertake regular country tours to inspect rural bridges.

13

Matters to be inspected

• cracking or movement of piers; • gaps developing between piers, bearers and joists indicating movement or subsidence; • invading plant roots; • use by vermin, animals, reptiles.

Report 5 - External wall inspection The purpose of this inspection is to monitor wall condition in regard to rising damp and in regard to ‘falling’ damp from unsatisfactory or poorly maintained roof drainage. General wall structural condition should be assessed in regard to subsidence and cracking. Areas of concern may not warrant immediate remedial action but annual reporting (more frequent if considered necessary) will allow potentially serious issues to be identified and progressively monitored. Matters to be inspected General matters that should be monitored as normal conservation practice include;

• cracking of brickwork; • surface cracking of render; • lifting, peeling or flaking paint; • discoloration of paint by water intake; • water staining of paintwork indicating water is overflowing from the gutters; • staining by tannins indicating a build up of leaves and bark pieces in the gutters – the

removal of the eucalypts substantially removes this threat but wind born material may still build up given sufficient time;

• moss, lichen or other plant growth forming anyway on or near walls. Report 6 - Internal wall and ceiling inspection This will be mainly concerned with moisture entering walls from above or from the earth but may include any settling of the foundations for whatever reason. An annual report system will allow the fluctuations that sometimes occur due to weather extremes to be identified and monitored, and for more serious problems that warrant remedial action to be identified as such. Matters to be observed include lifting, bubbling, peeling or staining to paint and/or plaster, and cracking in any wall or ceiling area. Matters to be inspected

• water staining of paint; • bubbling, peeling or flaking of paint; • cracking of ceiling or wall plaster; • lifting of plaster away from brickwork, often indicated by gently tapping the wall; • damage by general usage.

Report 7 - Windows inspection This is a routine inspection to assess locks and security, and proper sealing from rainwater. An aspect of inspection often overlooked is the deteriorating condition of window timbers on the exposed outer side and, often much less obvious, slight but continuing water entry that is causing decay in windowsills or damage to wall finish around or below the window. Matters to be inspected

• window closing and locking means for security purposes; • both outer and inner surfaces regarding signs of water entry; • visual inspection of all window putty to ensure it is sound; • inspection of all timber parts for possible decay (timber can be gently tapped with a

14

suitable metal implement, good timber will have a woody but firm sound, decayed timber will sound soft and/or hollow);

• particular attention should be paid to windowsills, which may suffer internal decay from water entry but appear sound on the outside.

Report 8 - Wear-and-tear inspection of joinery and fittings This is largely a cosmetic inspection looking at the appearance of fittings and joinery. Of prime concern are the old cedar fittings in the courtroom, these form an important component of the building’s significance and the need for annual inspection is as valid as for the structural parts of the building. The inspection procedure is concerned with basic matters such as wear and tear, abrasion, bumping, staining, excessive light exposure, etc that cause a gradual and sometimes unnoticed deterioration in appearance. The possible sources are many and varied but some discoloration, fading and softening of the edges to mouldings, furniture, etc are natural and acceptable signs of age. Inspection should also look for signs of well intended but damaging maintenance involving practices such as sanding and scraping or the use of solvents and caustic based cleaners, as noted below. The Stroud courthouse joinery and fittings were noted as generally being in good condition and that past restoration has generally been satisfactory. However, termite damage to the skirting board on the northern wall of the court room has been noted and dealt with elsewhere in this document. Matters to be inspected This can be a difficult area to administer. Some signs of age and wear, such as the slight softening or rounding of timber edges and gradual fading are considered to be acceptable, even desirable, because they provide the historical patina of age. Other matters can go unnoticed or be considered trivial in the short term but may cause cumulative damage over the long term, perhaps taking many years to impact. The susceptible areas may include;

• congestion caused by exhibits may in turn cause visitors to bump, rub or kick doorways and joinery;

• excessive fading because of unprotected or excessive use of lighting, particularly florescent lighting, which has a high ultra violet content - but note that ultra violet sleeves can be purchased to minimise damage;

• even minor matters can have impact over time, eg touching, opening or using fittings, drawers, doors, etc while holding keys or tools;

• gradual discolouration or loss of timber finish caused by the use of unsuitable cleaners, water, etc;

• build up of soil, grime, excessive polish, etc in lower or out-of-the-way areas, which may in turn cause staff to use excessive or harsh cleaning methods;

• damage by rodents, insects etc. Report 9 - Grounds inspection including surface drainage This is basically a ‘keep the grounds clean and tidy’ approach. Issues that should be monitored include the growth and suitability of all plantings, the build-up of leaf litter and other extraneous material around the walls and to ensure that surface drainage is working correctly. One aspect that should be monitored is the habit of many gardeners to use the walls of building as boundaries or retaining walls for garden plantings. Gardens along walls

15

always eventually impact by way of cultivation practices, fertilising, watering and other forms of care. Over an extended period this leads to a build-up of soil levels that may create or worsen drainage problems and cause chemical uptake into brickwork. In the worst cases ventilation openings may be covered and underfloor ventilation impaired. Matters to be inspected The many issues are too numerous to list in detail but the following guidelines apply to buildings generally;

• grounds should generally be neat, tidy and well kept; • water should drain away from the building, not onto it or along walls; • garden beds should not be planted against walls; • soil and debris should not be allowed to build up along or against walls; • as a general rule, soil near walls should breath and not be covered with concrete or

other impervious material; • building materials and other similar matter should not be stacked against walls; • as a general rule underfloor areas should not be used for storage or as ‘dumping

grounds’ for items not in use. This is commonly encountered although the low ground clearance and enclosed construction at the Stroud courthouse make it non-applicable in that instance.

In regard to the above last point, limited use of underfloor areas may be acceptable if visibility, access, drainage and ventilation are not impeded but the practice should be seen as undesirable in principle. Any material that attracts termites or vermin (provides food or nesting materials) should never be stored under any building.

__________________________________________

SECTION 4

RECOMMENDED CONSERVATION WORK

4.1 OVERVIEW OF CONSERVATION MATTERS The biggest threat to the immediate conservation of the Stroud Courthouse is the high moisture level in masonry throughout the building but particularly in the front walls. A full reading of the Jordan Reports, see below, is essential to gain an understanding of this and the conservation issues facing the building’s masonry and its structural integrity as a result. The most significant matter when addressing the excessive masonry moisture levels is that there is no one single cause but a combination of possibly six different causes. The problem that arises from this is that the cost of addressing all matters is extremely high, even prohibitive if full regard is to be given to all factors. Considerable investigation has been undertaken and a works program formulated from that. The recommended program attempts to prioritise the work required according to its urgency and seriousness while providing for ongoing monitoring that will refine the work to be undertaken and reduce costs as a result. In general terms six matters need to be addressed. These are;

1. the removal of exterior wall paint followed by the application of a suitable breathing paint, 2. the installation of improved underfloor ventilation system, 3. improvement to perimeter ground drainage, 4. assessment, monitoring and repairs as needed to roof condition and roof drainage, 5. assessment and repairs as needed to internal wall condition.

16

6. the possible need to repair/replace the damp course. These six matters are addressed below following 4.2 THE JORDAN REPORT. The other matters are mainly of cosmetic or historical significance and include locating the missing canopy to the judge’s bench, attention to some areas of joinery and furniture, construction of a more suitable front fence, and giving due regard to the archaeological potential of the area immediately behind the courthouse. These matters are addressed following the more urgent above matters. 4.2 THE JORDAN REPORT The specialist report obtained for this conservation management plan is the report; Bill Jordan and Associates, FORMER COURTHOUSE BUILDING, STROUD, REPORT FOR GREAT LAKES COUNCIL, December 2015. The Jordan Report addresses masonry condition generally and specifically addresses the excessive moisture in the brickwork and associated areas and is included following this conservation management plan. In all circumstances this conservation management plan relies on the Jordan Report in assessing the nature and extent of the problem, and in determining remedial action. Readers are at all times referred to the Jordan Report as being essential reading in understanding the requirements of this management conservation plan. Bill Jordan’s earlier report; QUAMBI HOUSE, STROUD; WITH OLD COURTHOUSE & SCHOOL OF ARTS; REPORTS ON MASONRY DAMAGE FOR GREAT LAKES COUNCIL is also included in this document as a matter of record but all comment in this document refers to his current report. The Jordan Report notes at page one that;

The old courthouse is a solid brick building from the mid-19th century which has been damaged by both rising damp and penetrating damp. Much of the damage can be traced to the use of modern paint and mortar materials and to the paving of the verandahs.

on page two;

Rising damp and attendant salt damage is principally affecting the front wall, where a recently paved verandah has bridged the damp proof course, and the use of plastic paints has reduced the ability of the wall tp breathe; the result is moisture damage on the inside of the building to both wall finishes and timber skirting boards.

and in summary on page four;

The former Stroud Courthouse building is in a reasonable condition considering its age, conservation needs to reverse some past mistakes. Control of moisture, particularly that being trapped in walls, needs to be addressed as a priority.

The Jordan Report recommendations - work to be undertaken The Jordan Report 2, 3 Findings of Detailed Site Assessment and 4 Conservation Requirements should be read in regard to wall condition and the work that should be undertaken. In particular the section 4.1 Moisture Control should be noted; 4.1 Moisture control Moisture control is the principal measure required to ensure the long term health of the former Stroud Courthouse building. The measures required are:

• as part of the building’s asset management programme, ensure that roofing and its accompanying flashings are kept in good condition with checking after significant storm events;

• restore the ability of the brickwork to breathe by removing all external paint (chemically, not

by abrasive means);

17

• any brickwork repairs should only use vapour-permeable hydraulic lime mortars; • any plaster repairs should only use lime-based materials;

• modern paints should be avoided on any plaster or masonry and only limewash should be

used in accordance with traditional techniques; • increase underfloor ventilation by installing extra grills to give ventilation up to current

National Construction Code standards 4.3 THE REMOVAL OF EXTERIOR WALL PAINT General overview This report recommends the removal of exterior wall paint and associated measures as being fundamental and critical to the building’s ongoing condition. The Jordan Reports indicate that water is entering the walls as rising moisture from ground level and that inadequate sub floor ventilation, worsened by inadequate perimeter drainage are the main causes. The Jordan Report notes that on the southern wall, salt is crystallising and breaking through the paint film and that paint has been applied over already eroded bricks. The Jordan Report concludes that provision for increased ventilation and the removal of the paint, followed by poulticing to remove the salt will give the best conservation outcomes. It is unclear how much water may also be entering directly from rainfall or from guttering but in all cases it should be considered that any benefit provided by the exterior paint restricting/preventing moisture intake is exceeded by its reverse action of retaining moisture in the walls. The general situation is that acrylic paints provide only limited breathing but the application of multiple coats or the underlying remnants of earlier enamels will prevent evaporation from the masonry. There is some opinion that the breathing problem is worsened by the gradual aging of acrylic paints but whatever the final determination is, acrylic paint should never be used on historic brickwork and in most situations will need to be removed. It has been claimed that acid washing or caustic washing acrylic paint will roughen the surface and improve breathing but enquiries have not revealed any supporting evidence and this procedure is not recommended. The conclusion is that the present paint should be removed and the walls returned to an unpainted state or be repainted with an old, traditional type of breathing paint. It is acknowledged that the complete removal of the paint will involve a costly procedure but in the long term should prove to be the more economical option. It is critical that there should be no further use of acrylic or other modern paints on brickwork, no matter how limited the area. As noted above, the first stage of the conservation program is the removal of exterior paint so that walls can ‘breath’ and the moisture can evaporate. The second is the need to provide increased underfloor ventilation so that masonry, earth and timber may dry to a lower moisture content level. The third is to improve perimeter drainage so that rain water more readily drains away from the building. The fourth is to ensure that roof drainage is at all times in sound condition, free of foreign matter and does not overflow from the back of gutters onto the wall. Repairs as needed to internal wall condition would be undertaken after the above matters have been resolved. Removing the existing exterior paint and salt residue Consistent with the Jordan recommendations above, this report recommends the removal of all exterior wall paint followed by the application of a salt removal poultice as the fundamental first step in regaining a suitable masonry moisture level. A number of methods and treatments have been traditionally used but severe physical methods using heat guns and sanders should not be used. Sanding by hand or using a small sander may be acceptable

18

for limited cleaning and preparation but should be carefully monitored at all times. Paint removal should, as far as is reasonably possible, be by suitable chemical means rather than physical means. A number of paint stripping procedures are available and the following systems are recommended; the writer has no connection or affiliation with any of these systems and other similar paint removal systems may be suitable. Dumond Smartstrip, http://www.dumondchemicals.com Heritage 1 available at http://www.letsclean.com.au Peel Away available at http://www.peelaway.com.au, Drummond Smart Strip is a US product and a local supplier could not be found at the time of writing but it has been recommended and used by conservation architects. Heritage 1 is available at the above supplier and is highly recommended. Peel Away is available at the above address and has been recommended but one practitioner expressed some concern about a residual alkaline effect after using it. In all cases it is stressed that the manufacturer’s instructions should be followed and the walls completely washed/neutralised before painting is undertaken. As an impartial personal comment based on all of the information received, this document considers that Heritage 1 is the best choice and recommends the use of that product following discussions with and advice by the supplier. Care must be taken to prevent damage to the render finish around the base of the walls and any repairs to the render must be done using the same traditional mixture. Modern cement render should not be used. 4.4 REPAINTING THE EXTERIOR WALLS Suitable exterior paint The writer has no connection with any particular paint supplier and recommends against accepting advice from painters or paint suppliers whose trade practice is the supply and application of modern paints to modern buildings. The Stroud courthouse requires specialist paints that are suitable to buildings of that type, age and conservation concerns. The Murobond and Murowash range Murobond paints have been recommended to the writer as being suitable both for application over bare masonry and Murowash paints for application over existing paints. The Murobond and Murowash paints are available in colours and surface sheen, or lack of it, that are compatible with historical paints. Colour charts are not provided by Murobond because paints are mixed and prepared for individual projects to meet the purchaser’s requirements but a general colour guide is shown at the firms website at http://www.murobond.com.au/, go to EXPLORE > PAINT COLOURS, go to All Colours at top right. For advice contact Geoff Tasker or Peter Tasker at Murobond, phone 9906 7299 or [email protected] or [email protected] . This document concludes on all of the information and advice received that the Murobond-Murowash system is the most suitable. Discussions with Peter Tasker or Geoff Tasker at Murobond should provide an understanding of the problems with the building and the nature of the work to be undertaken. Recommended colour schemes This conservation management plan does not specify the colour to be used but leaves that decision to the management committee, specifying only that the colour should be a traditional colour suitable to a courthouse of the period. However, should the management committee wish to be historically accurate, the following

19

comments are made. It is difficult to establish the original colours used on nineteenth century courthouses but a survey of old photographs shows limited colours, often all-over pale neutral colours with contrasting darker trim. In many cases they will be later but still old colour schemes, often on buildings that were not originally painted. The first issue with the Stroud courthouse is to establish by paint scrapings if it was painted and if so, in what colours. If the brickwork was not originally painted, this report recommends as a first choice that it be returned to an unpainted state. However, this may create problems in that the condition of the brickwork and difficulty in removing paint remnants, marks and staining from whatever cause may make this unacceptable. In those circumstances, painting with a suitable breathing paint of suitable colour, as noted above, will provide the best result. 4.5 UNDERFLOOR VENTILATION Increased ventilation is required There is no doubt that restricted underfloor ventilation is adding to the masonry moisture problem (see also the Jordan Report) and improved underfloor ventilation should be seen as an essential component of the conservation program. This should be undertaken before or concurrently with the other proposed work. Wall vents should be placed on all walls so that adequate cross ventilation is achieved – cross ventilation is critical to satisfactory operation. This report does not specify that the vents should be of any specific style but a number of traditional wall vents are available. The purpose is to get maximum ventilation without the later installed vents standing out visually. Wall moisture levels and underfloor conditions should be monitored over a suitable period to determine whether ventilation fans or a more advanced system such as that provided by ‘Doctor Damp’ (Licence Number 261209C) are required. Doctor Damp can be contacted by phone on 1300 557 687. The firm advises that the business services NSW & VIC and that the consultants will inspect and advise but that assessment and quotation services may be charged in some instances, especially when travel is required outside metropolitan locations. (The writer has received good reports about the firm but has no direct experience with the firm or any connection to the firm.) The courthouse front wall The above recommendations present problems in regard to the front wall, which has insufficient ground clearance to fit vents. As noted, the excessive underfloor moisture is largely caused by inadequate underfloor ventilation but is linked to surface drainage around the building generally, so that these comments should be read together with the following section regarding perimeter drainage. It is unclear from the available historical information whether the verandah originally had a timber floor that has been replaced with pavers or whether it was originally stone. However, the building design and general circumstance support that it was originally timber floored but had minimal ground clearance and has been replaced with pavers.8 The verandah has worsened the moisture problems in the front of the building by restricting ventilation and breaching the damp course. It is not clear without further investigation whether and to what extent the paved drains are inhibiting groundwater evaporation along the walls. Further comment regarding this is made in the immediately following section. Garden beds or plantings of any sort should not be allowed adjacent to or near walls. 4.6 PERIMETER DRAINAGE The drainage system along the front and side walls is a significant contributor to the wall and underfloor moisture problems and the Jordan Report should be read and considered in this regard. It is unclear what additional comment this conservation management plan can make to the Jordan Report but the inevitable conclusion is that diverting the water away from the walls is a necessary

8 Evidence was not located at the time of writing but the replacement is assumed to have been during the 1980s

restoration and should be remembered by local residents.

20

conservation matter in conjunction with improved underfloor ventilation and a reinstalled raised verandah floor. One mitigating issue is that the catchment area for surface runoff at the front of the courthouse is limited and diversion may require only modest changes to the ground surface. The existing brick/paver drains appear to retain moisture along the walls more than they drain water away. Diverting rain water away from the walls will be difficult but appears to be achievable by way of carefully considered changes to soil levels. One obvious problem will be how to drain the water away on the northern side of the building – the existing perimeter drain finishes at the building’s corner and empties the water into a confined space along the northern wall. One method may be to change soil levels sufficiently so the rainwater disperses across the natural soil and grassed areas. Another possible way is to relay the brick drain so that it is placed diagonally from the front projecting corner to the northern setback corner and then run it into an underground drain. This may be an excessive solution with ongoing problems and the former method appears preferable. In both solutions the narrow, badly ventilated space along the northern wall is a problem and should be kept clean and with a slight gradient away from the wall so that water drains away, not onto or along the wall. The gradually increasing ground clearance as the rear of the building is approached is to some extent a beneficial factor in regard to underfloor and wall moisture levels. In all cases inspection during periods of wet weather could be beneficial in determining the most appropriate changes 4.7 ROOF AND ROOF DRAINAGE The present roof As noted elsewhere in this conservation management plan, the courthouse roofing was replaced with traditional galvanised sheeting in 2008 and is in good condition. The existing guttering was in good condition and was reused. No roofing matters have been identified in this document as requiring attention in the immediate or short term context. General comment However, the following comment is given as general procedure. Roof sheeting should be standard corrugated profile in unpainted galvanised. Roof sheeting and associated material should be entirely galvanised steel, do not mix zincalume roofing or aluminium roofing or any other type of material with galvanised roofing. If lead flashing is used, it should be paint-sealed top and bottom. Be aware at all times that galvanised sheeting is coated with zinc and is sometimes referred to as zinc sheeting, particularly for non-corrugated sheeting. It should not be confused with zincalume sheeting, which uses a 55% aluminium, 43.5% zinc and 1.5% silicon alloy. Unfortunately some retailers incorrectly refer to zincalume sheeting as zinc sheeting. Replacement roof sheeting does not need to be in short lengths as per the original but is acceptable in long sheets, which will provide easier installation and better service. Guttering and downpipes are recommended to be Colorbond zincalume. It is important to understand that there has been considerable discussion, research and a level of disagreement as to the most suitable guttering and downpipe material. Much general opinion has been expressed over the years that galvanised roofing should drain into galvanised guttering and downpipes. However, Technical Bulletin CTB-25 BlueSope Steel recommends that when using galvanised roofing, zincalume and Colorbond zincalume guttering and downpipes will provide the best life span. This is inconsistent with several earlier expert reports but after due consideration and telephone conversation with the advisor at BlueScope Steel to resolve the matter, this report relies on the BlueScope Steel Report as superseding earlier commentary. The BlueScope Steel Technical Bulletin CTB25 Inert Catchment is included following this report in Supplementary Documents and is recommended to provide guidance.

21

Guttering profile and capacity is important. Traditional quad guttering is recommended even though it probably was not the original profile used. Later profiles are not suitable for style reasons. The main functional issue of concern is that the gutter must have a higher back so that water does not overflow onto the wall. It is further recommended that the gutter be fitted slightly forward of the wall if possible so that overflow onto the wall is prevented. Fitting a suitable gutter guard system The fitting of a suitable gutter guard system is generally considered to be desirable but whether a gutter guard system should be fitted is left to the courthouse management committee to determine. This report does not specify or recommend any particular system because of the difficulty of assessing the range of systems available and lack of personal experience in the area. The choice is therefore left to the management committee or the roofer but the types that are curled and placed in the gutter generally are not suitable. The envisaged system will be secured under the edge of the roofing and will cover the gutter but allow easy access to the gutter for cleaning. 4.8 INTERNAL WALL CONDITION The interior walls are generally in fair condition with the exception of the front wall, particularly on the southern side of the main entrance where plaster work is falling away from the wall structure and major plaster repair is required. This report considers that major work should not be undertaken until wall moisture issues have been resolved and wall moisture levels can be seen to be acceptable. This report does not attempt to define repair procedures because this cannot be accurately determined until wall moisture levels and general condition are satisfactory but irrespective of this are best determined by a suitably experienced plasterer using traditional methods. The matter of whether the internal walls have been cement rendered, and if so how extensively, when and with what material/mixture should be resolved.9 This raises the matter of whether it is/was modern cement render and if so, what was originally on the interior walls that have been rendered. Modern cement render finishes inhibit wall breathing but the consequences may be less severe than external walls and removal of internal render should be assessed on all of the circumstances. It does however serve to emphasise that extensive internal replastering and repainting should not be undertaken until wall moisture issues have been resolved and wall condition fully assessed under the improved conditions. 4.9 INTERIOR PAINTING General comment Exterior walls are the main area of concern and it is hoped that interior walls in most areas will be acceptable when exterior wall matters and underfloor ventilation have been addressed. It follows that interior painting should not be undertaken until the exterior matters of wall moisture, underfloor ventilation and exterior drainage have been addressed and interior wall condition can be more accurately assessed. It is not envisaged at this stage that the interior walls will need to be stripped as a general requirement although degraded areas will need to be treated according to condition. Once the external wall condition has been addressed, moisture in the walls will be drawn to the exterior surface and if free to evaporate from there, interior problems are not expected. It should be considered that the Murobond/Murowash paints are not as suitable as modern type paints for high traffic areas because they cannot be wiped clean as can modern formula paints. It follows that passage ways and high usage areas may be better painted in modern paints but if breathing is still considered to be a matter of concern, lesser rooms or wall areas above the dado or above the picture rail can be painted in the Murobond/Murowash range. At all times, advice should be sought from

9 See comment at 6.3 THE OPERATION OF STROUD’S TWO COURTHOUSES, The second court house’s final years.

22

Murobond before painting is commenced. The current interior paint colours are considered suited to the buildings heritage significance and its ongoing use. It is difficult without extensive paint scraping to determine the interior paint schemes used in nineteenth century courthouses but reserved colour schemes at the pale to mid range appear to have been normal. 4.10 THE BUILDING’S DAMP COURSE The condition and functioning or otherwise of the dampcourse can not reasonably be understood by inspection. It is expected that a dampcourse would have been installed and that it would have functioned as required. However, with age, repairs and successive coats of paint, its operation may be less than satisfactory. The main issue obvious by normal inspection is the later addition of material (cement based?) that has covered the dampcourse along the front verandah wall – see photo SECTION 5, PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD 1, THE COURTHOUSE EXTERIOR. This document does not at this stage recommend replacement of the damp course, which would prove a difficult and expensive undertaking for uncertain results. However, the above mentioned material should be removed and a similar barrier placed in front of it so that water is deflected away from the wall but the damp course is not covered. This conservation management plan acknowledges that ideally the front verandah paving should be removed, the front soil levels reduced as best can be achieved and a raised timber floor be installed. This will be an expensive project and while it is envisaged that it may have to be undertaken, the issues of wall breathing, underfloor ventilation and improved perimeter drainage should be undertaken first so that wall condition can be assessed and monitored. 4.11 EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR WINDOW CONDITION A detailed examination of windows and other areas of exposed timberwork was not undertaken for the Conservation Management Plan. As noted above at SECTION 3 ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORTING SYSTEM - Report 7 Windows inspection, window frames and sills should be inspected annually. Water entry may not always be noticeable and may be concealed by the painted outer surface while causing decay within the timber. 4.12 INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING This issue was not addressed in the conservation management plan and such matters are generally left to the building’s ongoing management procedures. The need for changes to the existing lighting system may become necessary at different times for safety, security or display reasons and the following comments provide some guidance in the important matter of internal lighting. Internal lighting Functional lighting should be easily distinguished from old or original lighting. It should be modern in style, simple, plain and non intrusive in its appearance. Lighting that has the general appearance or style of old lighting but is simple and without ornament can also be very suitable. Fancy, ornate, historical lighting salvaged from some other place or pseudo historical reproduction lighting should not, as a general rule, be used. However, the considered use/reuse of old lighting or reproduction lighting on a limited basis where it is appropriate for historical or display reasons is acceptable providing the lighting is labelled or recorded as not being a part of the courthouse’s original fittings. Problems with fluorescent lighting Great care should be exercised regarding the use of florescent lighting. Florescent lighting emits high levels of ultra violet and can severely fade fabrics, prints, paper and even furniture and joinery, in fact every part of the building’s interior is vulnerable. Ultra violet sleeves, purchased as transparent film and applied as required, offer considerable protection but consideration should always be given to the placement, intensity and duration of florescent lighting.

23

The writer has seen examples of modern displays being prematurely aged by florescent lighting and original historical material being severely degraded. The most vivid of these recollections is old cedar furniture that survived for many years in public service buildings being faded to an off-white colour by thirty years of saturation florescent lighting.10 Traditional incandescent lighting can also cause damage by heat and light radiation. The development of a lighting plan for display purposes does not reasonably fall within the scope of this report but the report recommends that the Historical Society formulate a suitable plan and that initial contact should be made with Museums Australia, Sydney for this purpose. 4.13 OTHER CONSERVATION MATTERS The front fence The illustrations 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11 & 12 of the courthouse over the years show different styles of fences existing at different times. The existing fence is a simplified form based on traditional style fencing of the period and although not ideal, its replacement is not seen as a priority matter. However, its life should not be unnecessarily prolonged by ongoing repair; replacement with a more accurate style fence should be undertaken instead. Photograph 6 shows an early style of picket fence that has been widely reproduced in later years. This fence should serve as guidance in determining the ideal replacement for the existing fence. However, it should be noted that a number of approximately similar fences are available and that many of these are not suitable. The replacement fence should closely match the pickets illustrated on illustration 6 and should be of timber, not aluminium or other imitation material. Alternatively, pickets of the same width and spacing with a simple pointed top would be suitable if a close match cannot be obtained. Select hardwood and naturally durable softwood such as western red cedar or Californian redwood are acceptable but the timber should be seasoned so as to remain stable and true. Preservative treated select grade pine such as hoop pine or select grade, knot free radiata pine are suitable but must be seasoned and treated with a solvent based process so as to remain stable and true. Unseasoned radiata pine treated with water based preservatives must not be used under any circumstances. The replacement of the front fence with suitable style fencing will enhance the courthouse’s presentation. The over mantle to the judge’s bench The over mantle or backing panelling, also known as a Baldecchino or Reedos, to the judge’s bench was present when restoration of the courthouse was commenced. The judge’s bench is obviously the focus item of any courtroom and the survival of the judge’s bench till the time of restoration is an important feature. The subsequent removal and location of the backing panelling and canopy is a major issue that requires further investigation. There is no reason or process whereby the item should have been removed and taken elsewhere. Its presence today would be a rare and significant feature of the courtroom and its present whereabouts should be pursued with vigour. It is hoped that it was simply placed in store and has been overlooked. Archaeological significance All parts of the allotment should be considered to have moderate to high archaeological potential. It is not envisaged that usage or development restrictions should be placed on any part of the allotment for this reason alone but due regard should be given to any work involving earth disturbance, no matter how nominal. This requirement is particularly relevant to the area immediately behind the courthouse, which was the site of the first courthouse and associated outbuildings. All persons undertaking work

10 The type of grain filler used was a factor in the degree of fading but the comment remains relevant irrespective of that.

24

on the allotment should be advised that any relics, remains or evidence of any type should be advised to the appropriate Council officer. The unauthorised destruction or removal of any item or evidence so found should be considered an unlawful act.

25

SECTION 5

PHOTOGRAPHIC RECORD (all photos September 2015)

5.1 THE COURTHOUSE EXTERIOR

Photos 1 and 2 The courthouse viewed from Cowper Street, slightly north of directly in front (above) and from directly in front (below). The fabric and appearance generally are original or sympathetic and the courthouse has a distinguished presence. The front fence is not original but is acceptably traditional. The painted brickwork is acceptable in regards to the colour but is presenting conservation problems. The modern galvanised roofing was replaced in 2008 following a severe hailstorm – see Section 7 Visual Historical Record. The photographs continue in a clockwise direction around the building.

26

Photo 3 The front doors are correct in style and are probably original. However, given that the front wall is protected from the weather, it was most likely varnished originally. This would be the ideal finish should paint scrapings confirm the original finish as being varnish. Photo 4 The front verandah showing replaced brickwork and drainage. The general appearance is traditional and is generally satisfactory but underfloor ventilation and drainage issues are present. The floor was originally timber and provided some, if limited, ground clearance and therefore provided some limited ventilation along the front wall. The dampcourse along the front wall has been covered.

27

Photos 5, 6 &7 Signage is traditional, informative and acceptable in the circumstances.

28

Photo 8 The view from the south east shows the position and modest impact of the interpretive signage. Photo 9 The verandah on the south-eastern side of the south wing showing the reuse of old stone facing (source unknown) and the later replaced floor. This requires further research as to its original form and monitoring in regard to moisture buildup and drainage.

29

Photo 10 The south-eastern wall showing the desirable increased ground clearance and increased gradient to promote better drainage. However the limited underfloor ventilation is not satisfactory and perimeter drainage would be more effective if the water was drained away from the wall rather than along it. Photo 11 The rear or south-western wall showing the complete absence of underfloor ventilation is obvious.

30

Photos 12 & 13 The rear elevation of the courthouse showing the balanced architectural style and increased foundations height but no provision for underfloor ventilation.

31

Photos 14 &15 The northern wall adjacent to the northern boundary fence. The restricted drainage provision along the wall is obvious. This is not satisfactory given that surface water is directed to this area by the front drain – see the following photos. Photo 16 The eastern wall on the northern side showing the verandah matching the verandah in photo 10.

32

Photo 17 The verandah as above in photo 16. The drainage issues and lack of underfloor ventilation are again obvious. Photo 18 Moving towards the front and again showing the lack of underfloor ventilation.

33

Photo 19 The final section of the north-western wall before returning to the front elevation. Photo 20 The front elevation as shown in photos 1 & 2.

34

5.2 THE COURTHOUSE INTERIOR

Photo 21 The main (front) entrance showing the painted exterior surface of the opened door and the refinished inner surfaces. Although the finish has been replaced (that is, not the original finish as esteemed by collectors and historians), the surface and finish is appropriate and of pleasing appearance. The following photographs show the courtroom proceeding approximately in a clockwise order after entering the front main entrance.

Photo 22 (above) & 23 (below). The courtroom southern wall is used extensively for interpretive displays.

35

Photos 24 & 25 These are overall views of the courtroom looking from near the front entrance towards the judge’s bench visible at the rear of the room below the coat of arms. The doorway on the left in photo 24 provides entry to the former PS & Lands Office in the southern wing. The doorway on the right in photo 25 provides entry to the former magistrate’s room, now a store-workroom.

Photos 26 & 27 These are views looking towards the front showing the main entrance panelling which provides privacy and security for the court interior and proceedings.

36

Photo 28 This provides a general view of the courtroom looking directly towards the main (front) entrance from in front of the judge’s bench.

Photo 29 This looks towards the rear of the courtroom showing the judge’s bench at the rear, the witness stand on the left in front of the door to the former PS and Lands Office.

Photo 30 The prisoner’s dock, situated on the southern wall to the right of the judge’s bench.

37

The following four photographs show the judge’s bench during restoration, two photographs as it is now followed by a photograph of the coat of arms on the rear wall above the judge’s bench. The judge’s bench is obviously the focus item of any courtroom and the survival of the judge’s bench till the time of restoration is an important feature. The subsequent removal and location of the backing panelling and canopy (sometimes known as a ‘Baldecchino’ or ‘Reredos’) is a major issue that requires further investigation.

Photo 31 The judge's bench, photographed during restoration (photocopied from photo held at the courthouse). The presence at that time of the back paneling and canopy is an important surviving feature. Its current absence requires thorough investigation. See comment at Section 7 Visual Historical Record, Photo 10.

Photo 32 The judge's bench showing its current form.

38

Photo 33 The judge’s bench viewed from the northern side of the courtroom.

Photo 34 The coat of arms on the rear wall above the judge's bench. Its origin and history were unclear at the time of writing and require further enquiry. See photos 24 and 25.

39

Photo 35 Photographic display on the rear wall to the right of the judge’s bench (when facing the bench).

Photo 36 The former Lands Office, now a storeroom.

40

Photos 37 & 38 The former Lands Office, as above photo 36.

Photos 39 & 40 The former magistrate’s room, now a work room.

41

5.3 OTHER CONSERVATION ISSUES - FLOOR & SUBFLOOR

Photo 41 The skirting board on the northern wall of the courtroom. This shows serious wood decay to the point of complete collapse. This report is not able to assess all circumstances of this problem and further investigation is required.

Photo 42 Floorboards showing upward cupping. This was observed in a number of parts of the building and indicates moisture imbalance between the air above the floor and the air below the floor. In this case the increased circumference indicates of the underside of the boards indicates the underfloor moisture level is greater than the above floor moisture level.

42

CONSERVATION ISSUES – SUBFLOOR The following photos provide a general view of underfloor condition. The building has suffered from inadequate ventilation and some perimeter drainage issues over the years but generally appeared satisfactory at the time of inspection. This can be misleading because the building’s history indicates that there have been periods when underfloor moisture levels have been excessive.

Photo 43 The initial inspection by way of the inspection hatch near the judge’s bench shows dry sound timber.

Photo 44 The underfloor area appears dry but the past degree of decay to structural timbers evidence is that it has been excessively moist for considerable periods.

43

Photos 45 & 46 As above, these photos show subfloor conditions that appear dry and sound. However, the past level of decay and the need for major replacement indicate that conditions have been, and will again be, excessively moist for considerable periods. These underfloor conditions should be regularly monitored and it should always be kept in mind that the conditions that provide the threshold for timber decay do not necessarily appear to be obviously wet.

44

5.4 THE GROUNDS

Photo 57 Even the modern public toilet block gives some regard to the courthouse’s architectural style.

Photo 58 The immediate rear view of the courthouse is free of intrusive development. The modern toilet block and storage shed on the south eastern boundary are sufficiently distanced from the courthouse, are of basic traditional form and modest scale, and are on receding ground.

45

Photo 59 The modern steel framed storage (shed under construction) and the earlier traditional style timber pole storage shed are sufficiently distanced from the courthouse to have little impact on the courthouse’s significance.

Photo 60 The modern timber pole shed at the rear of the allotment was built in the traditional vernacular style.

46

Photo 61 The view from the rear of the allotment shows the later buildings to be at some distance from the courthouse (despite the distance being exaggerated by the lens setting).

Photo 62 The old timber milling shed at the rear of the courthouse on the north-western boundary. The history of this building requires investigation.

47

Photos 64 & 65 The modern galvanised/zincalume shed is at sufficient distance behind the courthouse to not impact significantly on the courthouse and its setting. However, the character of the rear section of the allotment has been changed to the detriment of the general setting. More thought should have been given to this building and to the new metal building opposite.

48

SECTION 6

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

6.0 PRELIMINARY COMMENT As noted at the commencement of Section I, readers should be aware that the Council’s name has changed three times since its formation as Stroud Shire Council in 1907. It became Great Lakes Shire Council in 1979, Great Lakes Council in 1993 and MidCoast Council in May 2016 following amalgamation with Greater Taree City Council and Gloucester Shire Council. Historical accounts, references and sources in this document use the name that was current at the relevant time. 6.1 THE AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY The following brief overview is intended to provide a contextual background to the Company’s settlement of the Port Stephens Estates and to the establishment of Stroud. The Company’s beginnings The Australian Agricultural Company was incorporated by a Charter and an Imperial Act passed in June 1824. A grant of 1,000,000 acres of Crown Land was approved for the Company’s purposes of breeding livestock, establishing a fine wool industry and cultivating crops. The Company’s Colonial Advisory Committee rejected the initial recommendation by Surveyor John Oxley that half the land be selected in the Liverpool Plains for the grazing of sheep and half in the Hastings Valley for the cultivation of tropical crops. The Committee acted instead on Oxley’s second recommendation that the grant be obtained in the vicinity of Port Stephens where the availability of a deep-water port addressed the Directors’ concerns regarding transport.11 Robert Dawson, the first manager of the Company’s estates, arrived at Port Stephens in January 1826. The area north to the Manning River was surveyed with the assistance of surveyors Dangar and Armstrong and the land stretching from Port Stephens to the Manning River in the north and westward to include the Karuah River-Gloucester River valley was selected. The first settlement at Carrington on the northern shore of Port Stephens was established in 1826.12 Convict labour constructed huts, a lumber yard, mill, slaughter house, storehouse, dairy, temporary church and a military guardhouse. The superintendent’s residence Tahlee House was built at Carrington in late 1826. By October 1826 the Company had purchased an additional 1,000 head of cattle and 2,000 head of sheep. Extensive land clearing was under way by early 1827.13 The Company’s expansion northwards Despite the vigour of the establishment years on Port Stephens harbour, the venture was not successful. The soils were of poor quality and agricultural efforts were moved north to the Booral and Stroud area, the horses to Alderley (between Booral and Stroud) and the Avon River, and the cattle to Gloucester. By 1834, 530 acres were under cultivation in the Karuah Valley, including 278 acres of wheat.14 Stroud was established in 1832 and became the centre of the Company’s activities during the 1830s.15 Booral developed as the head of navigation on the Karuah River and as the major supply of food to the fledgling colony because of the small but valuable area of fertile alluvial soil. Booral House was built by convict labour in 1831 and Booral wharf is believed to have been established around 1834.16

11 W.K. Birrell, The Manning Valley: Landscape and Settlement 1824-1900, 1987, Jacaranda Press, Gladesville, pp.39-43.

12 Originally Carrabean, later named Carrington for Lord Carrington, brother of the Company’s first Governor, John Smith,

not to be confused with the later Lord Carrington, Governor of NSW after whom Carrington Newcastle was named

(Pemberton, Notes and Comments, p.1).

13 Brian Engel, Jannis Winn & John Wark, Tea Gardens – Hawks Nest and Northern Port Stephens, 2000, B. Engel, New

Lambton, p.18.

14 J. Chadban, Stroud and the A. A. Co., Stroud Shire Council, 1970, P.6.

15 Engel and all, p.22.

16 Chadban, pp.5, 6.

49

Eight underground grain storage silos were constructed at Stroud in 1841 on the site that later became known as Silo Hill.17 The Company’s growth falters The original intention of the Australian Agricultural Company was to produce fine wool to meet the ever increasing production of Britain’s woollen mills. Germany, Britain’s main supplier, was scaling back wool production in favour of industrialisation and Australian wool was seen as the product that would make fortunes. However, this was not to be for the Port Stephens Estates; the humid coastal climate and inbreeding brought the industry to a premature end after just thirty years. The Estate’s number of sheep grew from 2,500 in 1826 to 124,000 in 1834 and hovered a little below those numbers until 1856 when the flocks were sold or moved to the Company’s Warrah Estate on the Liverpool Plains. Attempts were initiated in 1830 to surrender the less fertile eastern section of the Port Stephens Estate, approximately 500,000 acres, in favour of the Peel River and Liverpool Plains (Warrah) Estates, a move that was finally approved in 1833. The Company then held 457,920 acres in the Port Stephens Estate as well as land leased from the Church and School Corporation on the Estate’s western boundary. The Company also occupied squatting runs in the valleys of the upper Avon, Gloucester and Barrington Rivers.18 Freehold title to the Company’s land grants at Port Stephens, Liverpool Plains (Warrah) and Peel River (Goonoo Goonoo) was obtained in 1847. This meant that land could be sold; the Company had already closed its Agricultural Department in 1843 and let much of the land to tenant farmers, mostly around Stroud and Booral.19 Land sales commenced in 1849 when the Directors floated the ‘Port Stephens Colony’ - £50 down in London, free passage and the choice of 50 acres at Port Stephens.20 It was not successful although a few settlers arrived in 1850. The Company’s departure from the area The Australian Agricultural Company’s Port Stephens Estate never fully recovered from the failure of the fine wool venture, although cattle breeding continued with some success. Phillip Parker King, the last Commissioner to live at Tahlee left in 1850 and General Superintendent Marcus Freeman Brownrigg, the only superintendent to live at Booral House, left in 1856.21 Arthur Hodgson, his successor from October 1856, lived in Sydney and moved the Company’s Office there in 1856 where it remained for five years before being relocated to Newcastle. The sale of land by the Australian Agricultural Company for small holdings intensified after 1860. The estates were seen as being mismanaged by the late nineteenth century and the introduction of a land tax act by the NSW government in 1895 was the death knell for the Australian Agricultural Company’s occupation of the Port Stephens estates. The Company offered the remaining estate to the NSW government in 1899 but was refused because the Closer Settlement Act of 1901 was being considered at that time.22 The estates were eventually sold in 1903 heralding in a new period of growth for the Karuah - Gloucester Valley. Stroud was created as a Company town and initially prospered because of that but had slowed by the 1850s. The subdivision of Company land into smallholdings stimulated growth throughout the valley. 6.2 STROUD: ITS ESTABLISHMENT AND GROWTH The following account of Stroud’s development is intended to provide a brief contextual background.

17 Above, p.8.

18 Birrell at 54 citing Australian Agricultural Company Reports Vol 7/8/1/10 at 499 & 515.

19 Notes, Dr P. A. Pemberton, Pure Merinos and others: the ‘shipping lists’ of the Australian Agricultural Company, ANU

Archives of Business and Labour, 1986. Communication email point 18; these points are taken from email responses

from Dr. Pemberton, 10 February 2016, to matters raised by the writer in email communications. The point numbers

refer to identification numbers added to the emails by the writer.

20 Pemberton, point 18.

21 Pemberton, point 19. 22 Birrell, p231.

50

Stroud’s beginnings and initial growth Stroud was named by Robert Dawson, the first Superintendent of the Australian Agricultural Company because of the association with the Cotswold country in Gloucestershire where the towns of Gloucester and Stroud are situated. With the unsuitability of Carrington as a food source for the fledgling settlement because of poor soil and partial flooding, land clearing had begun in Booral and Stroud by the early 1830s and the fledgling town of Stroud developed at that time.23 A map prepared by the Company’s surveyor in 1830 provides an inventory of buildings that included a number of cottages and huts, two stores, a barn, stables, watch house, and carpenters and wheelwright’s shop.24 Stroud became the centre of the Company’s activities during the 1830s.25 Construction on Stroud House is believed to have commenced in 1831 although it is claimed that an earlier building of 1827 was incorporated into that new construction.26 Some uncertainty exists as to the date of construction of Quambi House and further review of available primary sources is required. Quambi House has been claimed to have been built as a single storey school room in July 183127 but those records appear to have referred to an earlier single storey timber schoolhouse. Sir Edward’s diary might have been referring to that earlier building when it noted ‘I was glad to see our new schoolhouse had made such good progress at Stroud. It has been done by the men in their extra hours and will not cost the Company £20 pounds in all. It will accommodate 40 children very well’.28 Irrespective of this uncertainty, Quambi House was shown as a two storey structure in its present form in the sketch scene of Stroud by Conrad Martens in 1841 and in his 1852 watercolour painting of Stroud.29 Building development extended beyond the immediate Stroud village as was required to establish the new pastoral enterprise and a wool store was built at Telligherry in 1835.30 The carpenter’s shop at Stroud was used as a place of worship before 1831. That role, it has been claimed, was taken by Quambi House in July 183131 but those services were probably performed in the above mentioned earlier timber building. A decision was made in 1832 to build a chapel under the direction of Sir Edward Parry and at Sir Edward’s expense. The foundation stone was laid on 29 April 1833 by Sir Edward Parry and the Reverend C. P. N. Wilton MA,32 and the new chapel was dedicated by the Rev Price on 22 December 1833.33 St Johns rectory was built in 1836, destroyed by fire in 1859 and rebuilt shortly after.34 The land and chapel remained in the Company’s possession until 1851 at which time the land was granted to the Bishop of Newcastle and his Successors and consecrated as The Church of St John the Evangelist.35 John Dunmore Land spoke glowingly of Stroud during his visit to the colonies in 1851, describing Stroud as one of the finest villages or inland towns in the colony.

Stroud consists of a single street, the houses, which are principally neat cottages, being thrown back a considerable distance, on each side, from the line of road, with flower gardens and shrubberies in front. It reminded me of a New England village, such as I have seen in the States of Connecticut and Massachusetts rather than an English village.36

23 Pemberton p.9; Chadban p.3.

24 EJE Town Planning, Conservation Management Plan St Johns Group of Buildings, Cowper Street, Stroud, 2002, p.15.

25 Engel and all, p.22.

26 Chadban, p.8.

27 ‘List of plans and Estimates of Buildings erected on the Estate of the Australian Agricultural Company since 1st January

1830 to the present date’, Enclosure B6 to Despatch No 87, W. Parry, 31 July 1832. Copy held by Stroud and District

Historical Society. The reference is possibly to an earlier timber building.

28 Cited in Chadban, p.8.

29 Sketch and painting held at Mitchell Library, State Library of NSW, Sydney. They have been reprinted and are widely

circulated.

30 Pemberton p.9.

31 EJE Town Planning, Conservation Management Plan St Johns Group of Buildings, Cowper Street, Stroud, 2002, p.8.

32 Above, p.15, Parry’s Journal, 29 April 1833.

33 Above.

34 Chadban p.7.

35 EJE, p.18; Email comment by Dr P. A. Pemberton.

36 John Dunmore Lang, An Historical and Statistical Account of New South Wales, Green and Longmans, London, 1852.

pp206-07.

51

Stroud after the Company’s Headquarters moved to Sydney The Company’s role at the Port Stephens Estates decreased after 1850 and the Company’s headquarters were moved to Sydney in 1856. The failure of the fine wool venture and the relocation of the headquarters stemmed Stroud’s development so that growth during the second half of the nineteenth century was steady rather than rapid. A visitor’s description in October 1856 provides an appealing picture of Stroud in its setting but a subdued description of the community at the time of the Company’s departure;37

Stroud is a neat little village, with two good inns, a church, school-house, parsonage, court-house, and some twenty cottages and houses of the Company's staff, or, as they are termed, the authorities, all having their neat little gardens, quite in English character. It is surrounded by an amphitheatre of hills, presenting the most fantastic appearances, as if nature had been in a sportive mood in casting up cones and back-bone ridges and isolated hills, just to show what she can do when the humour takes her. The soil around is rich wheat land, but uncultivated, so that the inn, though most orderly and a gratifying retreat to the weary traveller, affords neither hay for the horse nor milk nor butter for our higher nature; plenty of corn, however, and a good paddock partially supply the want of hay. Stroud, instead of being a town containing 1000 inhabitants, surrounded by a population of three or four thousand people, scarce numbers, as I am informed, within itself and a circuit around, more than 300 or 400 persons. A few lots of land have been recently sold by the Company, and not until the whole is brought to the hammer, and the home proprietors be displaced by an industrious people settled on these fine fertile lands, with its fine harbour, its coal, iron, and limestone productions, will it become a place of bustle or importance. The few residents here are a society in themselves: they just vegetate, and are, properly speaking, exclusionists - a fragment of population without any union of interests with the rest of the colony.

Despite the above negative account, Stroud grew steadily during the second half of the nineteenth century. The first auction of town lots was held on 25 March 1854, Saint Columbanus Catholic Church was constructed in 1859, a Parish Hall was constructed at St Johns in 1860 to provide extra classrooms for the school at Quambi House38 and a new courthouse was constructed in 1876-1878.39 A National School (Public School) was established in the former woolshed at Telegherry in 1856 and operated until 191940 but records of a Wesleyan school operating in the same location at the same time need to be reconciled with the above details.41 A Public School opened in Erin Street in 1882 but did not immediately cause the closure of Quambi House, which continued to operate as a private school until about 1900.42 The A. A, Company made land in Erin Street available to the Presbyterian Church in 1887 (the Company’s stables stood on the land at that time) and the Presbyterian Church was built shortly afterwards. A new post office, the present building, was built about 1885.43 The Erin Street Public School survives as Stroud Public School - it became a Central School at the commencement of 1944 and remained as such until 1971 when it reverted to its present status as a Public School.44 The departure of the Australian Agricultural Company from the Stroud-Gloucester area, the expansion of the hardwood timber industry, the arrival of the railway and the development of the dairy industry introduced the valley to a new period of prosperity during the early twentieth century. Stroud

37 Empire, 20 October 1856, A Trip to Gloucester, [from a correspondent], extract provided by Dr. P.A. Pemberton.

38 EJE, p.26.

39 The construction date of the first courthouse needs to be established although the commencement of the Stroud Court

of Petty Sessions has been established as being 17th October, 1853 (refer the N.S.W. Government Gazette of 18th

October, 1853).

40 Dept of NSW School Education, Government Schools of New South Wales 1848 to 1993, Southward Press, Marrickville,

1993, p.136. National Schools were renamed as Public Schools 1867.

41 Notes provided per email by Dr. P. A. Pemberton, 28 April 2016, see Section 8 Historical Notes.

42 Stroud and District Sesqui-Centenary 1826-1976, Stroud and District Historical Society, 1976.

43 This date is approximate only. Australia Post Archives should be able to confirm the exact date if local records are not

available.

44 Dept of NSW School Education, Government Schools of New South Wales 1848 to 1993, Southward Press, Marrickville,

1993, p.133. ‘Public School’ is the official classification and also a general term.

52

expanded during this period - the new Stroud Shire Council was formed in 1907, the new (second) Central Hotel was built 1907-08, new businesses opened and new dwellings were constructed. Stroud remained as the administrative centre of the new local government area until the coastal areas overtook Stroud as the centres of economic and population growth. Stroud Shire Council was renamed Great Lakes Shire Council in 1979 and the council headquarters were relocated to Forster in 1980. The name was changed to Great Lakes Council in 1993. 6.3 THE OPERATION OF STROUD’S TWO COURTHOUSES Historical overview The precise history of the first and second Stroud courthouse and the court system in Stroud is incomplete in parts and requires further research. Existing records and copies thereof are scattered over different repositories including the Noel Butlin Archives Centre in the Australian National University Archives, the New South Wales State Archives at Kingswood, the Macarthur Collection in the Mitchell Library, the University of Newcastle, MidCoast Council and the Stroud and District Historical Society. The court system and the administration of justice in the Estate began with the Military Detachment established at Carrington in 1828.45 The Officer-in-Charge acted as resident magistrate and two constables were appointed, one at Carrington and one at Stroud. The watch house and cottage at Carrington were to be used a courthouse. Australian Agricultural Company employees who were Justices of the Peace could not sit on the Magistrates Bench if the Company’s employees were involved.46 These events mark the beginning of the administration of justice in the private Australian Agricultural Company estates. A court of petty sessions was established at Dungog on 23 December 1833, the jurisdiction of which included the Port Stephens District.47 Captain Moffatt, the last Officer-in-Charge of the Military Establishment at Carrington, resigned his commission in 1834 and was replaced by Police Magistrate Thomas Cook, who resided at Stroud and visited Dungog fortnightly to deal with formal court matters.48 A small force of mounted police still operated from Carrington at that time. The Stroud Watch House was mentioned in 1835 in the call for tenders to supply provisions to government establishments but was possibly operating from about 1828.49 In 1837 Thomas Cook moved from Stroud to Dungog to be Resident Police Magistrate because a Police Magistrate on a private estate was seen as inappropriate.50 However, Police Magistrate Cook continued to visit Stroud when needed. From 1838 Stroud was listed as a place for holding Special Petty Sessions for the assignment of convicts.51 At this time it appears that general court matters were handled from Dungog, which in the rearrangement of Police Districts gazetted 19 November 1839 was noted as District 22 – Dungog, and included the area north from Port Stephens to the Manning River.52 In 1842 the Government discontinued the paid Police Magistrate at Dungog so that the work was to be done by unpaid Justices of the Peace. Thomas Cook agreed to continue visiting Stroud and the Company paid him a retainer (travelling expenses) until 1854.53 From the 1830s through the 1840s there are references to a ‘Court House’ at Stroud being used for meetings of various non-legal matters.54 In January 1850 the Port Stephens Police District was established and on 18 October 1853

45 Pemberton, point 1. These points are taken from email responses from Dr P.A. Pemberton to matters raised by the

writer.





50 Pemberton, point 8. Dungog was gazetted as a village in 1838.





53

the Stroud Court of Petty Sessions was established.55 Title to the courthouse and the constable’s cottage were conveyed to the NSW Government in 1859.56 Construction and operation of the first courthouse Exact construction details of the first courthouse could not be obtained for this overview history but see the comment below about the 1844 valuation. Although precise details could not be located, the available information tells that a courthouse was built on the present site in the 1830s. Some unsupported information tell that it was a simply built, even crudely built, timber building but the accounts of the courthouse and of work required, following below, indicate that it was a brick building with plastered walls, constructed timber floors and shingled roof. It is clear from the available records, however, that the courthouse was of basic construction and in only fair condition for most or all of its life. The 1844 valuation of the Company’s Estate as part of the negotiations to convert the Grant to freehold noted the Court House and lock-up as bricked, shingled roof and floored, valued at ₤250.57 By comparison, the School House (Quambi House) was valued at ₤450, the Chapel (St John’s) at ₤650, Stroud House at ₤1,700 and the water mill at ₤3,000. The courthouse’s modest value by comparison with the other buildings is consistent with the general commentary of it being a basic building in only fair condition and of modest size as shown on the 1854 sale plan. The earliest official record noted at the time of writing was the notification in the New South Wales Government Gazette, 18 October 1853 that Stroud has been appointed to hold a Court of Petty Sessions.58 Newspaper reports from the late 1850s show the courthouse had regular community use that indicates a more active community spirit than that described in Empire, 20 October 1856 (noted in the above section at ‘Stroud after the Company’s Headquarters moved to Sydney’). For example, the Maitland Mercury, 9 Feb 1858, reported that a meeting was held in the Court-house to hear Captain Williamson’s political sentiments as a candidate for the counties of Gloucester and Macquarie, and that the meeting was ‘numerously attended, by electors. The Maitland Mercury, 31 March 1859, noted that ‘Dr Lang had paid a flying visit and will return tonight when he purposes preaching at the Court House’.59 Attendance at the lecture by the Rev. Mr Griffith, September 1859, was noted as being ‘more select than numerous’.60 However, assessed by way of official records the courthouse appeared to have limited official court use at that time. The correspondent to the Sydney Morning Herald noted on 26 September 1859 that Dungog was to get a District Court but that was not the case for Stroud, which continued as a Court of Petty Sessions. An interdepartmental memo for September 1859 advised that furniture for the Stroud courthouse was ready to be shipped.61 How the courthouse was used in the intervening years and how it was furnished is not clear. A memo from the Stroud Police Office to the Colonial Architect, Sydney, 22 February


56 Pemberton, point 20. Conveyance not sighted but Dr Pemberton advised that it should be held at the University of

Newcastle, which holds most of the AACo duplicate conveyances for Port Stephens.

57 Valuation held in the Colonial Office records at the National Archives C0201/357, f121-126. Agricultural Company

Improvements upon Land granted to the Company in New South Wales – pursuant to the Eighth Condition of the

Charter of Incorporation, (Email notes from Dr P.A. Pemberton to Garry Smith 3 April 2016).

58 NSW Government Gazette No 112, 18 October 1853, page 1826. The notification read ‘His Excellency The Governor

General has been pleased to appoint Stroud to be a place for holding Courts of Petty Sessions under the Act of the

Colonial Legislature, 3rd William IV., No 3’.

59 This would have been Dr. John Dunmore Lang (1799-1878), Presbyterian clergyman, politician and educationalist. Some

other examples noted are Thomas Nichols, JP, SMH 9 Dec. 1858; Mr Madgwick, Maitland Mercury, 9 June 1859; Mr

Gordon, Maitland Mercury, 11 June 1859; The Rev. Griffith, Secretary to the Hunter River Branch of the British and

Foreign Bible Society, Maitland Mercury, 15 September 1859.

60 The Rev. Griffith, Secretary to the Hunter River Branch of the British and Foreign Bible Society, Maitland Mercury, 15

September 1859.

61 Stroud Courthouse Container 2/62, NSW Archives Kingswood, handwritten note, author indicated by illegible

handwritten initials.

54

1860 refers to furniture for the Police Office, Stroud, being shipped on 31 December 1859.62 This was possibly the furniture previously mentioned. Without evidence to the contrary, it is assumed that the police office was at the courthouse. The Public Works Department stated in 1987 that the Department had absolutely no details of any courthouse existing in Stroud before the present (the second) courthouse building, tenders for which were called in May 1876 and completed in 1878.63 It should be considered that the Public Works Department statement would refer only to the construction and maintenance of the courthouse building, not to the existence of a functioning court. It does, however, illustrate the Company’s independence from some aspects of government administration. The decline of the first courthouse The courthouse was officially noted as being in poor condition at least as early as May 1860. A letter from the Police Office Stroud to the Inspector General of Police advised of the very dilapidated state of the courthouse and asked that repairs be undertaken as soon as possible. 64 Reference was made to the shingled roof, which it claimed leaked in ‘every part’. A report in the Sydney Morning Herald, 2 July 1860, noted that the courthouse was in a dreadful state of repair but still habitable in dry weather. The courthouse was again referred to as being in poor repair in April 1861 when Richard Davey quoted £67.0.0 to carry out all of the necessary repairs.65 A second quotation for £69.10.0 was provided by Joseph Penfold66 and a third by an illegible signatory listed the work as strip and re-shingle with ironbark shingles,67 repair the woodwork to the cells, repair brickwork to front, repair brickwork to another area, repair brickwork of the steps and lockup door, and repair the brickwork generally.68 A schedule of works written by or on behalf of James Barnett, Colonial Architect, listed the work required to be done as at 15 April 1861 to be the following;69

. strip and re-shingle the roof with ironbark shingles as per existing with replacement of decayed battens and ridge boards as necessary to the courthouse, verandah, house and privies,

. fit new posts in place of decayed posts to verandah;

. repair the brickwork to the cells and lockup generally;

. undertake repairs to the cell windows and iron gratings,

. undertake repairs to cell linings, doors and locks;

. repair brickwork to the building generally;

. repair plastering to all rooms of the courthouse and lime white all walls and ceilings;

. repairs to and clean out the cesspit and privies;

. repair with new timber the outer fence and gates;

. paint all wood and iron posts with three coats of whitelead and paint in oil of suitable colour;

. replace glass with new of similar kind;

62 Memo to Stroud Police Office 22 February 1860, Colonial architect Sydney, Stroud Courthouse Container 2/62, NSW

Archives Kingswood.

63 Letter, D.J. Pettigrew, Manager Corporate Services, Great Lakes Council to Mrs Olga Williams, Stroud Road, 20 February

1987, copy held by MidCoast Council. It should be borne in mind that this refers to the existence of a courthouse

building, not to the existence of a functioning court.

64 Letter, Laman to Inspector General of Police, Sydney, 14 May 1860, (unclear date) Stroud Courthouse Container 2/62,

NSW Archives Kingswood.

65 Letter, Rich Davey to the Colonial Architect, 15 April 1861, Stroud Courthouse Container 2/62, NSW Archives

Kingswood.

66 Letter, Joseph Penfold to unnamed recipient, 15 April 1861, Stroud Courthouse Container 2/62, NSW Archives

Kingswood.

67 Popular comment is that sheoak was the most commonly used timber for roof shingles but research and surviving

shingles indicate that various eucalypt species were more widely used in New South Wales and that ironbark and red

mahogany were two of the preferred species.

68 Schedule of works tendered for, unclear handwriting, dated 15 April 1861, Stroud Courthouse Container 2/62, NSW

Archives Kingswood.

69 Schedule of work required to be undertaken, on behalf of James Barnett Colonial Architect, 15 April 1861, Stroud

Courthouse Container 2/62, NSW Archives Kingswood.

55

It appears that Richard Davey was the successful tenderer and his letter of 22 August 1861 advised that the work had been completed and was ready for inspection. The building was in fair repair when inspected by A. R. Patison (signature not clear), Foreman of Works in July 1865. The report noted;70

At Stroud the Court House is in fair repair except for window glass, which has been broken by the late storms, the walls of the Court Room would also require repair and colouring, also the flooring boards mending in places, the whole could be done for about 5£. Mr Lernmon (unclear) the Clerk of Court intends writing to you for an order to have the work done, which is very much required.

It appears the work was not undertaken because the Foreman of Works again wrote to James Barnett on 7 December 1865 advising that;71

The Court House at Stroud is in fair repair, except, the floors which require repairing in places, the walls and the ceiling, whitewashing, a new gate to the front, about 30 feet of surface drain and the broken glass in sashes repaired, the whole of the above repairs could be done for ten pounds 10£. Mr Lernmon (unclear) the Clerk of the Court intends sending a requisition to you for an order to have the work done which is very much required.

The courthouse was described as being in a miserable state in July 1875.72

… Again with reference to our court-house, police accommodation, and lock-up. Perhaps the less said about them the better, for they are worth very little, and if they were put up to auction would not sell for what the bricks originality cost.

These buildings are very old, having been built many years ago by the A. A Co, when Stroud was their private township. They were, we understand, given to the Government, and though they have cost the Government nothing, and though representations of their complete unfitness have been repeatedly made, and though inspectors and sub-inspectors of police have, I think, stated their unsuitability for the purpose for which they are used, yet, nothing has been done, and they go on gradually decaying and crumbling away. The constable stationed in Stroud has to live out of the township, there being no police accommodation. Fortunately the inhabitants are quiet and orderly. Still, when we pay for police protection we like to have it at hand. The lock-up is a disgrace to civilization, and if any unfortunate inmate has ever read of the miseries of the Black-hole of Calcutta, his night's lodging would recall them forcibly to his mind. I am sure our member, who was obliged to address the electors outside the court-house, knows the truth of these statements, and as there has been more than one communication about them, I am confident if he is the man he professed himself to be, that he will set vigorously to work, and will not rest until he sees they are rectified.

The circulated 1853 map of Stroud73 (see illustrations 5 & 6, SECTION 7 VISUAL HISTORICAL RECORD) shows the courthouse set back from Cowper Street on an alignment that allowed a new building to be built in front of it and adjoining it. This solution to the courthouse’s long standing inadequate accommodation and poor condition was moved and carried at a public meeting in the courthouse 17 August 1875.74

… Mr, HILL, J P, next proposed -"That the Minister of Works be requested to reconsider the plans and specifications that had been issued for the repairs of the court-house, policeman's

70 Letter, A.R. Patison (unclear), Foreman of Works to James Barnett, Colonial Architect, 22 July 1865, Stroud Courthouse

Container 2/62, NSW Archives Kingswood.

71 Letter, A.R. Patison (unclear), Foreman of Works to James Barnett, Colonial Architect, 7 December 1865, Stroud

Courthouse Container 2/62, NSW Archives Kingswood.

72 Letter, from The Member for The Williams, Maitland Mercury, 6 July 1875.

73 Electronic copy provided by Dr. P. A. Pemberton, see SECTION 7VISUAL HISTORICAL RECORD.

74 Mr Hill JP, ‘Important Public Meeting at Stroud’, Maitland Mercury, 17 August 1875.

56

residence, cells, &c, as they were inadequate for the purposes required." It appeared, from what was stated, that there is no re-tiring-room for the magistrates, consequently the court has to be cleared whenever the magistrates wish to consult; that the policeman's residence is quite insufficient for a married man and family, it having been originally built m the early days of the A. A. Co. by that company for a single man, and that the cells were quite unfit for the confinement of prisoners, and as Philip Snape, Esq, P.M of Bullahdelah and Port Stephens remarked -"That they were only a standing memento of the dark days of the colony " It seemed to be the general opinion of the meeting that a new court-house should be built in front of the present one, and that the old one should be converted into police barracks (writer’s emphasis).

The resolution having been seconded, was put to the meeting and carried unanimously. Mr REID thereupon moved,-"That the Chairman be requested to communicate to the Minister of Works these resolutions, and that he should also write to the member for the electorate, to request him to urge the Minister of Works to comply with the wishes of the meeting," This resolution was also carried unanimously.

Construction of the second courthouse The resolution that the Chairman be requested to communicate to the Minister of Works, carried as noted above, was acted upon promptly as noted in the following paragraph. The second courthouse was constructed in 1876-1877 and completed in 1878. The Maitland Mercury, 20 January 1877 commented;

The work of the Court House and police buildings [at Stroud] is going well. There is, however, one thing which deserves to be brought to the notice of the Government Clerk of the works, and that is the size of the kitchen – 9 feet by 12. It is simply cruelty not to animals, but to human beings, that in a country like this, where the thermometer reaches 112 degrees in the shade, any person, male or female, should be compelled to use a building of such a size, in which a fire must always be kept, and in which when even one table, with the necessary pots, and pans, and other ordinary utensils are placed, the unfortunate occupant will hardly be able to turn around. If there was any scarcity of ground there might be a reason for such miserable economy, but with abundant space there is neither sense nor reason in condemning persons to be subject to such inconveniences in perpetuity. In all other respects the New Court House is well planned and designed, and will be an ornament to our township; but it is to be hoped that the clerk of works will take a hint while there is time, and increase the poor policeman’s kitchen, by giving him an additional 6 feet each way.

The reply by the Manager, Corporate Services, Public Works Department, 20 February 1987, to a letter of enquiry about the first and second courthouse provides a succinct overview of its construction.75

We have absolutely no details of any former Court Houses in the town nor have we any plans of the existing building. Stroud was not proclaimed as a place for a Court of Petty Sessions until the 17th October, 1853 (refer the N.S.W. Government Gazette of 18th October, 1853). This building was designed under James Barnet Colonial architect as Stroud Court House and Watch House. Tenders for its erection were first advertised on 19th May, 1876 and closed on 6th June, 1876. Messrs S. and W. Stanbridge were awarded the contract for the building’s erection on 3rd July, 1876. Its estimated cost was £2400. Our records would seem to indicate that construction did not begin until 1877. The building was completed in the first half of 1878 at a cost of £2317/-/- plus a further £288/3/- for unspecified additional works. A thorough search of our records discloses no further details of the building. Turning to the matter of the coat-of-arms, chairs, coat stand, benches etc. we regret that we are unable to provide these items as they are at a premium and are needed for the restoration of functioning of historic court houses.

75 Letter, D.J. Pettigrew, Manager Corporate Service, Public Works Department, Philip Street, Sydney, to Mrs Olga

Williams, Stroud Road, 20 February 1987, copy held by MidCoast Council.

57

The second courthouse incorporated the first courthouse Surviving plans of the second courthouse show a detached section of different architectural style but of approximately similar scale and stature situated behind and adjoining the present courthouse. The plans show this section as including cells and living accommodation (see illustrations 1 & 3, Section 7 Visual Historical Record). The two buildings were adjoining and had connected access but were not structurally the one building. The widely circulated 1853 plan of Stroud shows a building on the site set back sufficiently to allow the second courthouse to be built in front of it and adjoining it. The conclusion is that the original courthouse was incorporated completely or substantially into the second courthouse and, according to comment received and secondary sources, remained in service until being demolished in the 1930s. The ongoing use of the second courthouse The second courthouse’s use and history from its construction to about 1960 were not especially researched for this document and no records of any substance came readily to hand. The limited available records for this period and the records of its condition and use after about 1960 indicate that only necessary maintenance and repairs were undertaken until the courthouse’s condition and limited use became matters of concern in later years. It is considered that available archival records, including court records, Departmental maintenance files and newspapers should be searched to provide a background record for this period. It is not expected that any additional information obtained would cause any of the recommended conservation procedures to be amended but may provide information about several matters of interest. The first of these matters is the location of the overmantle to the judge’s bench, as shown in illustration 12, 7.VisualHistoricalRecord. As noted in this document, the photographs held at Kingswood Archives (possibly package B4527.7) show the canopy was not in place about 1969 but the photograph also indicates that it might have been absent for internal painting reasons. The appearance in a photograph taken at the time of the restoration suggests the bench has been repolished but the canopy has not - was the canopy being held in storage somewhere on the site? Details regarding the demolition of the original courthouse would also add detail to the historical overview. The second court house’s final years Reasonable details are available for the period after about 1960 so that the court’s limited use and eventual decommissioning, followed by its restoration and recent historical use are well documented. The Department of the Attorney General and of Justice inspected the courthouse in September 1965 and a number of matters were noted as requiring attention, including signage, ceiling plaster and cracked concrete paths.76 The matters raised seem to indicate that the courthouse did not have major use at the time. Speculation that the courthouse was to be closed developed during the 1960s and the Stroud and District Historical Society wrote to the Department of Public Works in 1971 requesting use of the building if it should that occur.77 The Justice Department replied that closure was not anticipated for at least three years.78 The Department of Public Works requested a repainting colour scheme for the courthouse in November 1972.79 The request noted the exterior wall as being painted brickwork and the corrugated iron roof as having areas of surface rust. The interior was noted as having painted fibrous plaster ceilings and painted cement render walls with architraves, skirting and doors in natural cedar finish. A colour scheme was duly prepared in February 1973 covering all external and interior components although it is unclear if this work was undertaken.80 The note regarding cement rendered internal walls raises the question of whether it was modern cement render and if so, what finish was originally

76 Letter, Under Secretary of Justice, Department of the Attorney General and of Justice, Macquarie Street, Sydney, to

Secretary, Department of Public Works, 29 September, 1965, Kingswood Package B4527.7 1963 1973.

77 Letter, Hon. Secretary Stroud and District Historical Society to Under Secretary, Department of Public Works, Sydney,

9 November 1971, Kingswood Package as above.

78 Letter, Secretary, Department of Public Works to Stroud and District Historical Society, 24 November 1971, Kingswood

Package a above.

79 Internal request WB.2524/1 P.J. Cable Area Supervisor, Newcastle, 6 December 1972, Kingswood package above.

80 Detached note B.4527/1 advising colour scheme details, E.H. Farmer, Government Architect, 19 February 1973,

Kingswood Package as above.

58

on the interior walls. Modern cement render finishes inhibit wall breathing but the consequences would normally be less severe than external walls and removal of internal render should be assessed on the particular circumstances. The Department of the Attorney General and Justice advised the Department of Public Works in November 1973 that the Court of Petty Sessions, Stroud was under consideration for abolition and that only essential repairs and maintenance were to be undertaken in the future.81 It is unclear what, if any, work was undertaken between then and the closure of the Stroud Court of Petty Sessions on 21 January 1977.82 6.4 AFTER CLOSURE – THE COURTHOUSE’S NEW FUNCTION This section relies substantially on a review of Great Lakes Council documents File No H6/6 Section 3 and File H6/6 Part 4, obtained 25 November 2015. The material is held at Newcastle but viewed at GLC. Page numbers in brackets refer to the writer’s file system for copies of that material. Little information was located to tell of the courthouse’s first ten years of closure but further enquiry to government sources and MidCoast Council records should provide some additional information. The courthouse’s condition The courthouse was purchased by Great Lakes Shire Council in 1985 (a land titles search will give the precise date) and subsequently leased to the Stroud and District Historical Society.83 The building by that time was in poor condition because of extensive termite damage, timber decay, water damage, water entry into masonry and its generally aged condition.84 The building was not suited to public use because of its condition and Council sought a Bicentennial Grant of $35,000 in 1985, to which the Stroud and District Historical Society added $5,000.85 Great Lakes Shire Council advised the Heritage Council in February 1987 that Great Lakes Shire Council had obtained a Bicentennial Grant of $35,000 and was ready to commence restoration.86 The following list of necessary work prepared by Low and Hooke Pty Ltd, Consulting Engineers, provides an understanding of the building’s condition before work commenced. 87

PRELIMINARY LIST OF NECESSARY WORK Prepared after site inspections by officers of the Government Architect’s Branch and the preparation of a report by Low and Hooke Pty Ltd., consulting Engineers. 1. Repair or replace rainwater pipes and drainage.

2. Remove concrete paths, regrade to take surface water away from foundation walls.

3. Replace floor timbers which are defective due to termite attack and rot, (particularly along southeast wall of Courtroom and Lands Office). Treat floors for termites.

4. Renew borer damaged skirtings.

5. Dampness to brickwork should be partly eliminated by 1 and 2 above. Patch minor wall cracking. Investigate partial underpinning of N.E. & S.W. walls and remove bricks to major crack and re-establish bond.

6. Check all electrical wiring.

7. Replace floor coverings with carpet or lino as appropriate.

81 Internal request DDG/EP, Under Secretary of Justice, Department of Attorney General and Justice to Department of

Public Works, 6 November 1973, Kingswood Package as above.

82 Primary source not located but noted as general comment in a number of accounts.

83 Letter, Shire Clerk, Great Lakes Shire Council to Secretary, National Estates Committee, Heritage Council, Sydney South,

3 June 1987, MidCoast Council. (3) The numbers in brackets are for editing purposes, they are identification numbers

added to the photocopy of the relevant document.

84 Above, also general writings and knowledge.

85 Letter, Shire Clerk Great Lakes Council to Secretary, Stroud and District Historical Society, Stroud, 1 June 1988. (69)

86 Letter, Shire Clerk Great Lakes Shire Council to Secretary, Heritage Council, Sydney South, 18 February 1987. (23)

87 The list of works was found in other documents relating to the restoration and is taken as being recommendations that

were acted upon.

59

8. Investigate removal of plaster ceiling and cornice which partially covers wall vents.

9. Replace or repair defective verandah posts.

10. Check roof structure for termites and treat. Check security of bolted roof truss connections.

11. Strip back painted surfaces and repaint with “breathing” plastic acrylic to selected colour scheme.

Depending upon the extent of work required to items to be investigated, a preliminary guestimate is $13,000 to $20,000.

Comment regarding the above recommended use of acrylic paint The recommendation to use acrylic paints was made in the List of Necessary Works and it is noted that acrylic paints were widely accepted as being suitable for use on historic buildings at that time. However, subsequent evidence and opinion is that while the initial coat breaths reasonably well, subsequent applications and possibly also the aging process destroy that quality and acrylic paint is unsuitable for brickwork of this type and age. The commencement of restoration Great Lakes Shire Council resolved to undertake restoration work to the value of $40,000 on February 24, 1987 and Application was accordingly made to the New South Wales Council of the Australian Bicentennial Authority in February 1987 for a restoration grant of $35,000, to which Council added $5,000.88 The restoration was noted in the above agreement as having been planned in three sections.89

Milestone, 1 Jan-March 1987, remove concrete and paving, timber verandah posts, rusted gutterings, excavate for foundations and drainage work, repair stone and brickwork and secure timber structural components. Bicentennial funding $18,000 other $2,000.

Milestone 2, July – September 1987 Complete all timberwork including verandah, doors window and floors; electrical wiring, grillings and drainage, and prepare for painting. Bicentennial funding $9,000 other $2,000.

Milestone 3, January – March 1988 planned to complete painting and fitting of hardware. Restoration would then be complete. Bicentennial funding $8,000 other nil.

That amount was quickly recognised as being insufficient to address the required works schedule and application was made to the National Estate Committee, Heritage Council in June 1987 for further funding so that the restoration work could be continued.90 In response, the Department of Environment and Planning advised Council that an amount of $10,000 had been approved under the National Estates Program for Project 61, Stroud Court House. 91 The Stroud and District Historical Society required additional storage for larger items such as farm machinery and sought Council’s approval in October 1987 to submit a development application to use the land behind the courthouse for exhibition purposes. Council advised that consent was given for lodgement of the Development Application.92 Restoration complete The Minutes of the Finance Committee, Great Lakes Shire Council Meeting, 24 May 1988, noted that the interior work was substantially complete at that time but that further external work remained to be

88 Deed of Agreement, NSW Council of the Australian Bicentennial Authority and Great Lakes Shire Council, Third

Schedule (P50-0724) , Bicentennial Authority, 20 March 1987. (2)

89 Above, second page.

90 Letter, Shire Clerk, Great Lakes Shire Council to Secretary, National Estates Committee, Heritage Council, Sydney South,

3 June 1987. (3)

91 Great Lakes Shire Council, Draft Final Report, Stroud Court House, No. 61 National Estate Grant 1987-88, page 1,

undated. (24) Letter, S. Haddad, Environment Protection Division, Department of Environment and Planning to Shire

Clerk, Great Lakes Shire Council, 12 April 1988. (63)

92 Record of Council Meeting Agenda, Ordinary Meeting, Item Stroud and District Historical Society (H1/9, H6/6)

27 October 1987. (58)

60

done.93 Expenditure to date on the courthouse consisted of the Bicentennial Grant $35,000, Stroud and District Historical Society $5,000 and Council $2,000, total $42,000. The minutes note:

As considerable funds will still be required to complete external works, application was made to the Heritage Council for funding under the National Estate Programme. During the recent Heritage Work details of successful projects was announced by the Federal Minister for Arts, Sport, Environment, Tourism and Territories, Senator Richardson. A grant of $10,000 has been announced for expenditure on the Court House over the 12 months. As is the case with such grants Council has been asked to administer the Funds with the Department of Planning.

Suters Architects Planners, ongoing advisors to Council, inspected and recommended suitable internal colour schemes in May 1988.94 This preceded an extensive four page report, 1 June 1988, which noted that work carried out to date on the entry porch, the verandahs and to the interior had been carried out in accordance with the restoration works report.95 The remainder of the restoration work was set out as including restoration and re-pointing to brickwork, re-rendering to base brickwork, replacing timber fascias, repairs to windows and exterior timberwork, repairs to roofing and guttering, repairs to windows and door locks and repainting as well as extensive grounds restorations. The Department of Public Works advised Council on 2 November 1988 that:

In accordance with Clause 4 of the Second Schedule of the Deed of Agreement between the New South Wales Council of the Bicentennial Authority and Great Lakes Shire Council, It Is Hereby Certified that all work up to and including the final Milestone 3, as defined in the Third Schedule of the Deed, has been satisfactorily completed as at October, 1988.96

Suters representatives accepted Council’s invitation to attend the opening on 5 November 1988 and noted that they were pleased with the standard of finish of the work undertaken.97 Work undertaken during the restoration was noted in Draft Final Report, undated but probably early 1989, as;98

A) EXTERNAL: A1 Drainage – removal of all existing concrete paths, dish drains and underground drains and replace with new brick dish drains, brick pavers and roof drainage system.

A2. Paths – the existing concrete paths and verandahs serving the building were removed in their entirety and replaced with brick pavers and sandstone surrounds, including construction of new footings where necessary.

A3. Timber Construction – in most cases all timber items such as fascias, verandah posts, eaves lining and gutter quad were replaced and renewed due to deterioration.

A4 Brickwork – all external brickwork was cleaned (by hand) and repainted and in some sections defective bricks were removed and replaced with bricks redeemed elsewhere in the building, a special lime mortar, as outlined by the Architect was used. A5 Painting – all external surfaces, including the roof were painted with “Wattyl” acrylic paints in heritage colours as selected by the architect and in the method specified. B - INTERNAL:

93 Finance Committee Report, Great Lakes Shire Council, Minutes of the Finance Committee Meeting, 24 May 1988. (66)

94 Letter, Suters Architects & Planners, to Great Lakes Shire Council, 31 May 1988. (67, 77)

95 Letter, Suters Architects & Planners, to J. Chadban, Great Lakes Shire Council, 1 June 1988. (70)

96 Letter 891/1 JH:CS, J. R. Hoffman Regional Architect, Newcastle, NSW Department Public Works to J. Chadban, Great

Lakes Shire Council, 2 November 1988. (99)

97 Letter, Edward Clode, Suters Architects & Planners to J. Chadban, Shire Clerk, Great Lakes Shire Council, 17 November

1988. (102)

98 Draft Final Report, Stroud Court House, No. 61 National Estate Grant 1987-88, page1, undated. (24)

61

B1 Sub Floor - An inspection of the sub-floor at the commencement of the work revealed severe deterioration to all bearers, joist and floorboards due to dampness and failed sleeper piers. All sub-floor construction was removed and totally replaced. B2 Floor / skirting – all floor boards and skirtings were replaced to the entire building – all mouldings used were copied and replaced with same shaped pieces. Original doors, window frames, sills and picture rail remained and their only treatment was to be stripped and returned to natural colour. B3 Ceiling – at the commencement of work the ceiling consisted of a fibrous plaster finish which was sagging quite noticeably. On removing this material it was discovered that a metal ceiling existed beneath. The metal ceiling was exposed and inspected and found to have deteriorated and rusted and so needed removal. Beneath the metal ceiling was found the original tongue and grooved cedar board ceilings. This has been left entirely intact and restored to its original condition. Timber vents have been constructed and installed to match the existing. The original ceiling and roof timbers are still in placed and were found to be in good condition. FINISHING/PAINTING: All internal surfaces were treated as specified in the Architects report and completed in the heritage colours specified. All doors were removed and repaired before being re-installed. COMPLETION: The whole works were completed and ready for the official opening on Saturday, November 7, 1988, as part of Stroud’s Bi-Centennial celebrations. The building has been furnished with the original courthouse furniture and retains all the atmosphere of the original building. CURRENT USE: The building is leased by Council to the Stroud Historical Society for use as a tourist Office and Museum and is opened to the Public on a regular basis without charge. PHOTOGRAPHS: Attached to this Report is a collection of photographs taken before, during and after the work which illustrates the work performed. CERTIFICATIONS: Attached to this Report are inspection Certificates from both the Department of Public Works and the Consultant Architect attesting to the satisfactory completion of the work.

A selection of 48 photographs showing the building before, during and after restoration followed the report These may be viewed by inspecting the official MidCoast archival files. The comment at B2 that all flooring and skirtings were replaced to the entire building needs clarification. The impression gained by way of a visual inspection was that some skirting had been replaced and that some remaining skirting showed past termite attack. Original cedar joinery is a key feature of any historic building and should never undergo whole replacement but should be ‘patched and darned’ as required. After the restoration The Stroud and District Historical Society advised Council in May 1989 that the use of the building as a supplementary museum and information centre was proving very successful and that the society was grateful to at last have suitable housing for their office records, family history information and historical literature.99 However, issues concerning the need for further storage accommodation, the building’s ongoing condition and issues regarding grounds maintenance continued. The Stroud and District Historical Society wrote to Council in October 1989 advising that during recent heavy rains a serious drainage problem was apparent in the court house grounds.100 The Society requested that a footpath be built to the toilets for the benefit of the public because the area is a

99 Letter, Olga Williams, Hon. Secretary, Stroud and District Historical Society to Shire Clerk, Great Lakes Shire Council,

19 May 1989. (103)

100 Letter, M. Beydler, Secretary, Stroud and District Historical Society to Health ND Building Department, Great Lakes

Shire Council, 10 October, 1989. (106)

62

quagmire after rain. The Society again complained of drainage problems to the area behind the courthouse and the restricted access to the public toilets during wet weather.101 The Society also expressed interest in proceeding with plans to develop the area behind the courthouse to display the Society’s many artefacts, which were currently stored in private accommodation. At no point in any correspondence noted to date has there been any mention of the previous use of that land by the first courthouse and the rear section of the second courthouse, and from that, whether that part of the allotment should be considered to have archaeological potential. The Society again expressed the need for suitable storage/display sheds in July 1990, noting two sulkies and other items that were being held in store and the presence of termites (white ants) in an existing storage shed.102 The Society raised the need for the courthouse to be re-roofed and the need for guttering replacement in March 1994.103 The letter noted that funds had not been sufficient to allow anything more than limited patching at the time of the building’s restoration. Concerns were raised about root damage by a sucker poplar tree to drainage on the northern side of the building in February 1995 and its removal was requested.104 The concluding months of the twentieth century105 brought a minor element of conflict to the courthouse’s ongoing restoration and management. The pre-painted sheet metal fence (Colorbond type fence) erected on the northern boundary in November 2000 was opposed by the adjoining property owner, reason unknown.106 Conservation-restoration procedure for heritage buildings generally requires that Colorbond type fencing should be avoided although the subject fencing is towards the rear of the building and is not readily visible from the entrance to the property. It was the writer’s intention that this overview of the Stroud courthouse history would conclude at the commencement of the twenty-first century. This was considered to be a suitable point to allow time for the courthouse’s ongoing management, conservation and community issues to be more fully developed, understood and recorded. However, one subsequent issue arose when editing the completed document – the existence of old, rusty roof sheeting in a 2004 photograph and clean roof sheeting of new appearance in the 2015 photographs. Enquiry revealed that the old, rusty and hail damage galvanised iron was replaced in February 2008 following a severe hail storm.107 The roof battens were also replaced but the existing guttering was in reasonable condition and was retained. Great Lakes Council, Greater Taree City Council and Gloucester Shire Council were amalgamated and renamed MidCoast Council on 12 May 2016.

101 Letter, M. Beydler, Secretary, Stroud and District Historical Society to Health ND Building Department, Great Lakes

Shire Council, 21 February, 1990. (108)

102 Letter, Rosemary Neville, Vice President, Stroud and District Historical Society, to Shire Clerk, Great Lakes Shire

Council, 23 July 1990. (110)

103 Letter, Marcia Rowe, Hon. Secretary, Stroud and District Historical Society, to General Manager, Great Lakes Shire

Council, 4 March, 1994. (116)

104 Letter, Marcia Rowe, Hon. Secretary, Stroud and District Historical Society, to General Manager, Great Lakes Shire

Council, 28 February, 1995. (117)

105 This document follows accepted historical practice by acknowledging that the new century began on

1 January 1901, not 1900. This is especially significant for Australia because the Commonwealth of Australia

commenced at 10AM on 1 January 1901 to mark ‘the new nation in the new century’.

106 Letter, Andrew Braybrook, Manager Community Services, Great Lakes Council, 10 November 2000. (120)

107 Email reply Ron Claxton, Trades Coordinator, Great Lakes Council to the writer, 4 March 2016.

63

SECTION 7

VISUAL HISTORICAL RECORD The following plans, elevations and photographs provide a pictorial overview of the courthouse’s development and changes. This area requires further research and a more complete compilation of available material but that task did not reasonably fall within the scope of this conservation management plan.

Source: Stroud and District Historical Society

1. South-east elevation of the second courthouse on the right side of the elevation adjoined to the (presumably) first courthouse, or the remaining section of the first courthouse, on the left. This and the following elevation and plans appear to have been prepared for the construction of the second courthouse, opened in 1878. The window shutters shown on the extending southern wing were not present at the time of writing.

Source: Stroud and District Historical Society 2. Front elevation viewed from Cowper Street.

64

Source Stroud and District Historical Society

3. Plans of the courthouse and associated buildings. Only the front section of the courthouse remains today, all other buildings have been demolished. The front of the building is at the bottom of the plan, the allotment plan following on the next page has the Cowper Street frontage at the top of the plan

65

Source: Stroud and District Historical Society

4. Allotment plan showing the courthouse and associated buildings.

66

Extract from: Plan of Stroud, County of Gloucester, New South Wales, the property of the Australian Agricultural Company, J Allen, lithographer, 2 Bridge Street, GE Darby, Surveyor, 2nd Dec 1853. Sale Plan ANU Archives, NBAC Map A83

5 & 6. The 1853 survey shows the first courthouse on the western side (upper side in the plan) of Cowper Street on the second allotment from Market Street. The building is set back from the Cowper Street frontage sufficiently to allow the second courthouse to be built in front of the original courthouse as shown in the preceding plans.

67

Photo Stroud and District Historical Society

7. Copy of old but undated photograph, possibly late nineteenth or early twentieth century, viewed from the opposite side of Cowper Street. The courthouse is the building on the far right. It is unclear what function the tall pole on the footpath, about mid picture, served.


8. The courthouse front viewed from Cowper Street, probably late nineteenth or early twentieth century. The front fence would be correct for the construction date or some years later and is also similar to modern reproduction style fences.

68

Photo courtesy National Trust of Australia (NSW)

9. The courthouse in its later operational years taken from the National Trust listing dated 11 February 1974, the photography taken 1968. The front fence and gate are typical of post WW2 domestic fences although the basic style commenced much earlier. The appearance of the front garden suggests a period of neglect rather than a well-kept property. The words 'Court House' have been placed on the facia board.

Photo courtesy National Trust of Australia (NSW), photographer David Sheedy, 1 October 1973

10. The words 'COURT HOUSE' have been moved to the valance with an Australian government emblem positioned between. A new mesh fence has been installed.

69

Photo Places of Judgment New South Wales, Terry Naughton, Law Book Co., Sydney, 1987

11. The photo was featured in Places of Judgment New South Wales, Terry Naughton, Sydney, Law Book Co., 1987 and was probably taken near that time. The front fence is very similar to the present fence but the gate appears to be lower, the angled brace runs the opposite way and the pickets are possibly narrower and more numerous. The exterior walls were repainted after this photo was taken, which evidences that successive coats of paint have contributed to the masonry’s moisture problems. The government emblem between the words ‘COURT HOUSE’ has been removed


12. The judge's bench, photographed during restoration. The presence at that time of the back panelling and canopy is an important surviving feature. Its absence requires investigation. Unclear photos held at Kingswood Archives (possibly package B4527.7) show the canopy was not in place about 1969 but might have been absent to facilitate painting. The appearance in this photograph suggests the bench has been repolished but the canopy has not - was the canopy being held in storage somewhere on the site?

70

Photo Garry Smith 2004

13. The courthouse photographed in 2004 as used on the Great Lakes Council Heritage Study Datasheets ST14. Note the rust to roof sheeting. This was replaced in February 2008 following a severe hailstorm

Photo Garry Smith 2004 14. The courthouse photographed in September 2015 for this conservation management plan. The main difference is the new roof iron. Minor changes can be seen to fence paint and the footpath tree on the right in the 2004 photograph has been removed

71

SECTION 8

HISTORICAL NOTES NOTE. The extensive archives of the Australian Agricultural Company are held at the Noel Butlin Archives Centre at the Australian National University Archives, Canberra. For a very general background to the AACo’s history, see PA Pemberton, Pure Merinos and others: “The Shipping Lists” of the Australian Agricultural Company, 1986 – it may be found on line through: http://archives.anu.edu.au/collections/noel-butlin-archives-centre/finding-aids/australian-

agricultural-company

THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS ARE EMAIL RESPONSES FROM DR. P.A. PEMBERTON TO GARRY SMITH REGARDING THE AUSTRALIAN AGRICULTURAL COMPANY’S PORT STEPHENS ESTATES. General comment Some of the above emails have been referred to in 6.2 History May16 but all are included here as a source of information for ongoing research. Email comments by Dr Pemberton are at the standard margin, quotations from other documents, newspapers, etc by other writers are set back from the standard margin.

EMAIL 1

Email Dr. P. A. Pemberton to Garry Smith 10 February2016.

The point numbers shown in Email 1. are reference numbers added by Garry Smith. They correspond

to the references shown as ‘Pemberton, point number’, for example ‘Pemberton, point 11’, as used

in the footnote references in 6.2 History May16.

Garry,

. . . I think the story goes some thing like this.

Point 1. 1828 Military Detachment established at Carrington, Port Stephens (mid-way between

Newcastle and Port Macquarie). Point 2. The Officer-in-Charge to act as Resident Magistrate (salary

£100 paid by the Company). Also to act as Police Establishment with two constables, one at

Carrington, the other at Stroud. Point 3 Point 4. Watch house, and cottage be used as Court House

(at Carrington). .AACo Officers who were also JPs could not sit on the (Magistrate’s) Bench Point 5 if

AACo employees were involved. Captain Moffatt evidently also visited other places in the

Dungog/Port Stephens district on a regular basis.

Point 6. 1833 Dec 23 Court of Petty Session established at Dungog (jurisdiction included the Port

Stephens District)

Point 7. 1834 Captain Moffatt, the last Office-in-Charge at the Military Establishment, resigned his

commission, and the Military Establishment was wound down. Moffatt was replaced by Thomas

Cook as Police Magistrate, resident at Stroud, and to visit Dungog fortnightly (cattle stealing rife). A

small force of mounted police remained at Carrington

Point 8. By this time (and possibly from 1828) there was a watch-house at Stroud and probably a

‘Court House’ - the Stroud Watch House is mentioned (1835+) in the call for tenders to provision

government establishments.

72

Point 9. 1837 Thomas Cook removed from Stroud to Dungog (gazetted as a village 1838) as

Resident/Police Magistrate (a Police Magistrate on a private estate was seen to be an anomaly).

Cook continued to visit Stroud when needed. From 1838 Stroud is listed as a place for holding

Special Petty Sessions for the Assignment of convicts.

Point 10. In the re-arrangement of Police Districts gazetted 19 Nov 1839, District 22 - Dungog,

includes 'Port Stephens’ north to the Manning, south to the Karuah (but not Raymond Terrace)

Point 11. 1842 the Government discontinued the (paid) Police Magistrate at Dungog - the work to be

done by unpaid JPs. Thomas Cook agreed to continue visiting Stroud, the Company paying him a

retainer (travelling expenses) until 1854.

Point 12. From the late 1830s through the 1840s there are passing references to a ‘Court House’ at

Stroud as a place for meetings of various (non-legal) events.

Point 13. 1844 the AACo Commissioner Phillip Parker King, his son Philip Gidley King (Superintendent

of Cattle and Stud) and James Edward Ebsworth, Accountant, appointed Magistrates at Port

Stephens

Point 14. 1847 AACo obtained freehold title to its Land Grants at Port Stephens, Liverpool Plains

(Warrah) and Peel River (Goonoo Goonoo). This meant that land could be sold. The Company had

already closed its Agriculture Department (1843) and let the land to tenant farmers, mostly around

Stroud and Booral.

Point 14. Plans were develop to subdivide land at Newcastle and (South) Tamworth (first sale 1849).

In 1849 the Directors floated the 'Port Stephens Colony’ - £50 down in London, free passage, and

your choice of 50 acres at Port Stephens. It was not a success though a handful of ‘settlers’ arrived in

1850.

Point 15. 1850 Jan - Port Stephens Police District established.

1850 major restructure (reduction) of the AACo Establishment at Port Stephens. Commissioner

renamed General Superintendent &c. All very unsettled, and the Deputy Governor (Archibald

William Blane) sent out (arrived Jun 1851) to sort things out - he died unexpectedly at Booral House,

Oct 1852, two months before the new General Superintendent, MF Brownrigg arrived.

1853 Apr - Sales of town lots on Newcastle Grant

Point 16. 1853 Oct 18 - Court of Petty Session established at Stroud (I suspect the Company had

been pushing for this, behind the scenes).

Point 17. 1854 Jan - Carrington (village lots) and Stroud (town lots and small farms). Settlement

spread along the Karuah, Mill Creek, Ward’s River and Mammy Johnson’s Creek - with a few farms

on the south bank of the Manning. From the 1860s the back (hilly) country was let on long leases as

cattle runs

Point 18. 1856 decision taken (in London) to sell all the sheep at Port Stephen, concentrating on the

Cattle Herd around Gloucester and the Bowman. By mid-year, all the shepherds had been given

notice.

Point 19. 1856 General Superintendent Marcus Freeman Brownrigg was the last to live at Port

Stephens (at Booral House). Arthur Hodgson, his successor (from October 1856) lived in Sydney and

moved the Company’s Office there (it was removed to Newcastle in 1861). Charles Henry Green, the

Assistant General Superintendent lived at Stroud House 1856-1860, when he moved to Gloucester

73

(to be closed to the cattle stations). The Company Surveyors, George Ogden (1860-1878) and Arthur

Elliott (1878-1882) moved in. By that time, the bulk of the Port Stephens sold had been sold, or let

on long lease, and the surveyor was need in Newcastle (which he had been visiting frequently

anyway). Stroud House was leased and later (1905) sold to the Bank of Australasia. Tahlee House

and Booral Houses were leased and then sold

Point 20. 1859 The Conveyance of the Court House and the Constable’s Cottage to the Government

(in that year the Catholics residents applied to the Company for land for a chapel as the Court House

was too small for them). I will see if I can find the details on this - I don’t know where the copy of the

conveyance is - it should be at the University of Newcastle, which holds the bulk of the AACo

duplicate conveyances for Port Stephens.

1876 May 16 The Department of Works called tenders for a Court House and Watch House at

Stroud, plans and specifications available at the Colonial Architect’s Office

1876 Jul - tender of S&W Stanbridge accepted

1877 references in the Company records and in the newspapers to the Court House being in-

progress but no mentioned of its completion or opening.

I attach an enlarged extract from the AACo Map [NBAC Map B60] - it is the sales map for 1853 - the

(bad) colouring-in is mine from an original. It is the base map from which I drew the map in Pure

Merinos. The Court House is on Lot 13 Section II.

(the map is shown in the CMP)

___________________________________________________

EMAIL 2

Email Dr. P. A. Pemberton to Garry Smith 10 February 2016.

Garry

In my search I also notice that the Great Lakes’ website describe the 1877 Court House as “convict

built” – I presume they mean the remaining rear portion!

I also found a small piece the Maitland Mercury, 20 January 1877 commented;

The work of the Court House and police buildings [at Stroud] is going well. There is, however, one

thing which deserves to be brought to the notice of the Government Clerk of the works, and that is

the size of the kitchen – 9 feet by 12. It is simply cruelty not to animals, but to human beings, that in a

country like this, where the thermometer reaches 112 degrees in the shade, any person, male or

female, should be compelled to use a building of such a size, in which a fire must always be kept, and

in which when even one table, with the necessary pots, and pans, and other ordinary utensils are

placed, the unfortunate occupant will hardly be able to turn around. If there was any scarcity of

ground there might be a reason for such miserable economy, but with abundant space there is

neither sense nor reason in condemning persons to be subject to such inconveniences in perpetuity.

In all other respects the New Court House is well planned and designed, and will be an ornament to

our township; but it is to be hoped that the clerk of works will take a hint while there is time, and

increase the poor policeman’s kitchen, by giving him an additional 6 feet each way.

Was it?

74

Pennie

___________________________________________________________-

EMAIL 3

Email notes from Dr. P.A. Pemberton to Garry Smith 3 April 2016 regarding the Australian

Agricultural Company’s Port Stephens estate with particular reference to Stroud

Notes and Comments

Garry,

. . . Perhaps you could footnote me as PA Pemberton, Pure Merinos and others: the shipping lists of

the Australian Agricultural Company (ANU Archives of Business and Labour, 1986) and further notes

[as you have in footnote 6].

I am in the process of writing a new edition, but the old edition should be found on line at ANU

Archives, but it is missing just at the moment (I will check with them on Monday).

Near footnote 1.

The Company was founded in London, and remained London based until 1975, when the tax

domicile was removed to Tamworth. The Company now has its headquarters in Brisbane.

The Governor (Chairman) and Court (Board) of Directors were in London.

Robert Dawson was the Agent, with a Colonial Advisory Committee

Sir Edward Parry, Henry Dumaresq and Phillip Parker King were entitled Commissioner (and had no

Advisory Committee). All of the Commissioners lived at Tahlee.

In 1849 he title of the senior official in NSW was changed to General Superintendent JE Ebsworth

held the position briefly, then Marcus Freemen Brownrigg (who lived at Booral House, formerly the

home of JE Ebsworth as Accountant) – Tahlee was on the market.

It is because the Agent/Commissioner/General Superintendent had to report regularly (at least

monthly) to London that we have such good records for the AACo. The London records, including the

Despatches and Court Minutes, were transferred to the ANU in 1975. The ‘Australian’ records from

Newcastle were first deposited in the 1950s. The records of the Colonial Advisory Committee (1824-

1828) are held in Macarthur Collection in the Mitchell Library but are largely duplicated in the

Company’s London records. Parry’s Journal is also held at the Mitchell (I have transcribed it).

The Colonial Advisory Committee were not much involved in the choice of the site of Carrabean

(later Carrington, named for Lord Carrington, the brother of the Company’s first Governor John

Smith (not to be confused with the later Lord Carrington, Governor of NSW after whom Carrington in

Newcastle was named).

Dawson, with the York and Brothers, superintendents, mechanics, shepherds and stock, arrived in

Port Jackson in mid-November 1825. On 31 Dec 1825, Having made temporary arrangements for the

people and the stock, Dawson sailed with TC Harington (Secretary to the Colonial Advisory

Committee), John Armstrong (the Company Surveyor) and Henry Dangar (a Government Surveyor)

sailed from London to Newcastle in the Lord Liverpool packet on 31 Dec 1825.

From Stockton they set off for the military post on the southern shore of Port Stephens to met up (9

Jan) with a small store ship. Captain Allman, the Commandant at Newcastle, lent them the

75

Government launch in which they travelled up the ‘Karuer’ as far as the rocky bar (Booral), which

was Dawson’s first choice. However, returning down river the next day, Dawson spotted the

Carrabean site which he chose instead. [Dawson’s report, to the Directors, 4 Feb 1826 – ANU

Archives, NBAC AACo. 78/1/1 p 141+]

Near footnote 11

‘remaining state’ – by the 1890s the Company owned very little land at Port Stephens – the

Gloucester area which it used with the Bowman for cattle; the area adjoining Port Stephens

[Bundobah] which was let out on long lease; and the ‘back country’ let out on cattle leases.

As you mention, ‘the Gloucester’ was offered to the Government, but later sold to the ‘Gloucester

Syndicate’ for subdivision. The Port Stephens area and the cattle leases sold off in large blocks. As

you mention, Government resumption was being considered (and large areas were resumed from

Warrah and Goonoo Goonoo 1909-1911) but also (1905) the creation of local government (shire

councils) and rateable valuations.

The Settlement’s beginnings

It is not so much that it looked like Cotswold country – but the fact that the Cotswolds in

Gloucestershire was the home of the fine woollen industry. Hence the names of the Gloucester and

Avon rivers.

Stroud was famous for the ‘Stroudwater Scarlet’ – the red uniform cloth of the British army. Donald

Maclean, one of the Company’s promoters, with his partner John Carrick, owned a woollen mill in

Stroud

‘Gloucestershire’ was early mooted as the name for the Port Stephens Estate – in the event, after a

request by the Directors to the Colony Office, the district was gazetted as the County of Gloucester

in 1829. [JF Atchison, ‘The Counties of New South Wales, The Australian Surveyor, March 1980, Vol.

30. No. 1.]

The Company’s eventual departure from the area

I think these two paragraphs need re-arrangement as they double up. The points are (I think)

- The Port Stephens Estate was unsuited to sheep. In 1856 the decision was taken to sell the

flocks (or removed them to Warrah on the Liverpool Plains). Goonoo Goonoo or the Peel

Estate had been sold in 1854 to the Peel River Land and Mineral Company.

- At Port Stephens, the cattle were stationed at Gloucester and the Bowman, worked in

conjunction with Warrah

- The remainder of the land was gradually leased and/or sold off in 50-100 blocks, mainly

along the river valleys. The back country and the ‘Manning Country’ was leased as cattle

runs. The Church and School leases were given up. Auctions of town lots at Stroud and

Carrington in 1854.

- Phillip Parker King was the last Commissioner to live at Tahlee (to 1850). Marcus Freeman

Brownrigg was the first (and last) General Superintendent to live at Booral House (1852-

1856) (previously the residence of the Accountant, JE Ebsworth).

- General Superintendent Arthur Hodgson (1856-61) moved the Office to Sydney where he

preferred to live (he was also a member of the Legislative Assembly) and the Company’s

main interests were now its coal mines at Newcastle.

- The Assistant General Superintendent Charles Henry Green, lived at Stroud House. 1856-

1860 and Gloucester (1860-1861) and was mainly responsible for the cattle operations.

- Hodgson’s successor EC Merewether lived in Newcastle, from where he oversaw both the

coal mines and the pastoral operations at Port Stephens and Warrah.

- The Company Surveyors then lived at Stroud House, George Ogden (1860-1877) and Arthur

Elliott (1866-1878). They conducted the Company’s diminishing land business (leases and

76

sales) at Port Stephens, but were increasingly needing Newcastle to oversee land sales on

the Company’s Grant there.

- In 1878 Stroud House was leased and later (1905) sold to the Bank of Australasia (eventually

became ANZ).

Construction of the first courthouse

In 1844 Company’s Estate was valued as part of the negotiations to convert the Grant to freehold. A

copy of the valuation is held in the Colonial Office records at The National Archives CO201/357, f121-

126

Agricultural Company in Improvements upon Land granted to the Company in New South

Wales – pursuant to the Eighth Condition of the Charter of Incorporation.

Court House and lock up, bricked, shingled roof and floored - £250

[by comparison, the School House– was valued at £450, the Chapel (St John’s) at £650,

Stroud House at £1,700, the water mill at £3,000]

I attach a detailed section from the map drawn up for the first sale of land at Stroud, 25 Mar 1854. It

shows the Court House as a long thin building on Lot 13, Section 2.

footnote 43

I have now checked the list of conveyances (an AACo record) at the University of Newcastle and

there is a blank (no volume and folio number) against the Court House. I will have to check further to

discover just how the transfer of the land took place – as it was a one-off re-conveyance to the

Crown it would not be a regular conveyance.

Lot 14 Section 2, ‘The Golden Fleece Inn’ was sold to Richard Baker in Aug 1855, although the

conveyance, 28 Nov 1856 was completed in the name of Charles Dee.

Lot 11 was sold to Thomas Lavers in 1860,

Lot 12 to Ann Price in 1892 and

Lot 10 to Phillip Henry Street in 1893.

Extracts from the newspapers

Empire, 20 Oct 1856

A TRIP TO GLOUCESTER.

[FROM A CORRESPONDENT.]

. . . Stroud is a neat little village, with two good inns, a church, school-house, parsonage, court-house,

and some twenty cottages and houses of the Company's staff, or, as they are termed, the authorities,

all having their neat little gardens, quite in English character. It is surrounded by an amphitheatre of

hills, presenting the most fantastic appearances, as if nature had been in a sportive mood in casting

up cones and back-bone ridges and isolated hills, just to show what she can do when the humour

takes her. The soil around is rich wheat land, but uncultivated, so that the inn, though most orderly

and a gratifying retreat to the weary traveller, affords neither hay for the horse nor milk nor butter

for our higher nature; plenty of corn, however, and a good paddock partially supply the want of hay.

Stroud, instead of being a town containing 1000 inhabitants, surrounded by a population of three or

four thousand people, scarce numbers, as I am informed, within itself and a circuit around, more than

300 or 400 persons. A few lots of land have been recently sold by the Company, and not until the

whole is brought to the hammer, and the home proprietors be displaced by an industrious people

settled on these fine fertile lands, with its fine harbour, its coal, iron, and limestone productions, will

it become a place of bustle or importance. The few residents here are a society in themselves: they

just vegetate, and are, properly speaking, exclusionists - a fragment of population without any union

of interests with the rest of the colony.

Maitland Mercury, 9 Feb 1858

77

CAPTAIN WILLIAMSON AT STROUD.

A meeting was held last evening, at the Court-house, to hear Captain Williamson's political

sentiments, as a candidate for the counties of Gloucester and Macquarie. The meeting was

numerously attended, chiefly by electors. - McPherson, Esq., of Booral House, took the chair…

The Empire, 3 May 1858

STROUD. - A Correspondent writes:-

A public meeting was held in the Court-house on 25th instant, to take measures for establishing a

Mutual Improvement Society or School of Arts in connection with the Stroud library…

SMH, 9 Dec 1858

A highly influential public meeting was held in the court-house on Saturday, to petition the

Government for a grant of money to be expended upon the New England Road. Mr Thomas Nicholls,

J. P. occupied the chair.

SMH, 3 Jan 1859

STROUD, 30th

Dec

. . . The Roman Catholics have applied for a grant of land for a chapel here, and, I hear, are likely to

obtain it, which will be a great advantage to the members of that communion who have hitherto

been compelled to use our small and inconvenient court-house to perform the rites of their religion

in. (Emphasis added G. Smith)

At this point the ‘new school room’ seems to have taken over as the meeting venue – provided the

chaplain approved of the purpose of the meeting!

Maitland Mercury, 31 Mar 1859

STROUD, March 24

. . . Dr Lang has paid us a flying visit, and returns tonight, when he purposes preaching at the Court

House.

Maitland Mercury, 9 Jun 1859

MR MADGWICK AT STROUD

(from a Correspondent).

The electors of the Williams In the neighbourhood of Stroud met in the Court house, according to

advertisement, on Saturday, 4th June, at half past six p m, to hear Mr Madgwick give an exposition of

his political principles…

Maitland Mercury, 11 June 1859

MR GORDON AT STROUD.

(From a Correspondent.)

A numerously attended meeting assembled in the Court House, last night (7th June), to bear Mr

Gordon's exposition of his political views.

From Jul 1859 there seems to have been a move to have District Courts established at Dungog and

Stroud – and in September SN Dark, the local member, asked questions about this in the NSW

Parliament.

Maitland Mercury, 15 Sep 1859

STROUD

SEPT. 7. – Yesterday evening a lecture was delivered in the Court-house, by the Rev. Mr. Griffith,

Secretary to the Hunter River Branch of the British and Foreign Bible Society. The audience was more

select than numerous, but manifested a marked attention to, and interest in, the rev. gentleman's

remarks.

SMH, 26 Sep 1859

PORT STEPHENS.

78

[FROM OUR OWN CORRESPONDENT]

SEPTEMBER 23RD

… I hear that a district court is to be established at Dungog, and none at Stroud. The distance from

this place is not much more than eighteen miles, but a high range and impassable creeks make the

journey somewhat formidable. To the Hamiltonians [ie residents of the proposed port of Hamilton on

Port Stephens, not the suburb of Newcastle] and the Myall people such a court would be of no use

whatever. A very small sum has been given to us, I hear, to repair the road between Stroud and

Dungog, but I do not envy the unfortunate suitors their walk in search of justice, even after this

money has been expended; the equestrian may manage it, but the poor man who has to "pad the

hoof" will have the worst of it in his search after justice.

MM, 11 Feb 1860

STROUD, Port Stephens

… A public meeting will he held in the Court House, for the purpose of nominating a candidate for the

electoral district of the Williams, in the room of S. N. Dark, Esq., resigned. It is rumoured that Lieut. T.

Sadleir, R N , has declined coming forward, as Captain Williamson has offered; believe he is the

favourite. I also hear that S. S. Cowper is likely to be a candidate.

SMH, 2 Jul 1860

PORT STEPHENS.

[FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT]

… There is a strong feeling here against the present system of land sales at Dungog. We have here, in

Stroud, a Central Police station and a court-house (the latter – certainly in a dreadful state of repair,

but still habitable in dry weather) and yet persons residing on the Myall, and other coast districts, or

at Hamilton, are compelled to pass Stroud court-house, and travel twenty miles further, over a broken

country, to Dungog, before they can even see a plan of the land to be sold - which, moreover, is so

loosely described in the Gazette as to be quite unrecognizable without inspection of the plans. Many

persons are suffering from influenza here, but I have heard of no fatal cases. The season has been

variable, but mild, on the whole, with a good deal of wet, and the ground is now in capital order for

arable purposes.

MM, 6 Jul 1875

The Grievances of Stroud.

THE MEMBER FOR THE WILLIAMS.

(To the Editor of the Maitland Mercury)

Sir, - As I have not of late seen anything in your paper from "the Stroud Correspondent," I shall be

obliged if you will insert the following from a subscriber. I do not know that there is much to interest

outsiders in what I am going to write, but still we do not wish to be left entirely unnoticed, or to pass

our time " unhonored and unsung," and I send this letter in the hope that attention may be drawn

towards this not unimportant district, which contributes its due share of income towards the general

revenue of the colony. It is with reluctance I go over the same old ground, and again have to call

attention to grievances but a grievance unredressed remains a grievance, and we have two at the

least which appear likely to remain grievances for a long time - I allude to the non-construction of a

bridge across the Karuah River, and to the miserable state of our Court-house, Police accommodation,

and Lock-up

With regard to the first: It was with great satisfaction we saw that our necessities were so far

recognised that a sum of money was placed upon the Estimates for due construction of a bridge

across the Karuah River. The amount was £3300; and for this sum a thoroughly good, and even

handsome, bridge could be made, and the present risk to the mailman and others, whose daily

occupations oblige them to cross the river would be entirely removed, and the mail and traffic

communication between Stroud-and Raymond terrace would then be uninterrupted. When, however,

the money was placed upon the Estimates, the matter seemed entirely to drop, and nothing since has

been heard about the bridge.

My own opinion is either that the inhabitants of Port Stephens should call a public meeting, and

forward a petition to the proper authorities, requesting that tenders should be called for the

construction of the bridge, the plans and specifications of which are, I believe, in the office of the

79

Public Works Department in Sydney, or else that the member, who as usual at the election promised

to pay proper attention to the requirements of the district, should himself press the matter forward,

and urge the Government to proceed. The year is now passing by, and if prompt action is not taken,

and if the money voted tor our bridge is not asked for, Government would have fair grounds for

striking out this sum at the passing of the next Estimates, and to any further application might say,

"Gentlemen, your money was voted, it was not applied for, and we consider that if you had been very

anxious in this case, you would have made proper representations, which would have been attended

to. As you have not done so we decline any further Correspondence on this subject." This probably

would be their answer, and I for one should not blame them.

Let then our member come promptly forward.

He is on the spot, and he is the man to urge the Government to issue tenders and complete this

necessary work. We have had public meetings, and the result of them has been that the money has

been placed on the Estimates. The people have done their work. Let the member now do his, and we

shall thank him

Again with reference to our court-house, police accommodation, and lock-up. Perhaps the less said

about them the better, for they are worth very little, and if they were put up to auction would not sell

for what the bricks originality cost.

These buildings are very old, having been built many years ago by the A. A Co, when Stroud was their

private township. They were, we understand, given to the Government, and though they have cost

the Government nothing, and though representations of their complete unfitness have been

repeatedly made, and though inspectors and sub-inspectors of police have, I think, stated their

unsuitability for the purpose for which they are used, yet, nothing has been done, and they go on

gradually decaying and crumbling away.

The constable stationed in Stroud has to live out of the township, there being no police

accommodation. Fortunately the inhabitants are quiet and orderly. Still, when we pay for police

protection we like to have it at hand.

The lock-up is a disgrace to civilization, and if any unfortunate inmate has ever read of the miseries of

the Black-hole of Calcutta, his night's lodging would recall them forcibly to his mind. I am sure our

member, who was obliged to address the electors outside the court-house, knows the truth of these

statements, and as there has been more than one communication about them, I am confident if he is

the man he professed himself to be, that he will set vigorously to work, and will not rest until he sees

they are rectified

Apologizing for this lengthy letter, I am, Sir, yours, &c.,

"STROUD."

Stroud. June 29.

MM, 17 Aug 1875

Important Public Meeting at Stroud.

(From a Correspondent,}

There was held, at the court-house here, on Saturday last, a public meeting for the purpose of

inquiring into the requirements of the Stroud District.

Upon the Rev. Archibald Shaw being called to the chair, a resolution was proposed by Mr. SKILLMAN,

of Booral, and unanimously carried, to the effect "That the Minister of Works be requested to call for

tenders for the erection of a bridge over the Karuah River at Booral, as £3500 had been voted some

months ago by the Assembly for that purpose."

Mr, HILL, J P, next proposed -"That the Minister of Works be requested to reconsider the plans and

specifications that had been issued for the repairs of the court-house, policeman's residence, cells,

&c, as they were inadequate for the purposes required." It appeared, from what was stated, that

there is no re-tiring-room for the magistrates, consequently the court has to be cleared whenever the

80

magistrates wish to consult; that the policeman's residence is quite insufficient for a married man and

family, it having been originally built in the early days of the A. A. Co. by that company for a single

man, and that the cells were quite unfit for the confinement of prisoners, and as Philip Snape, Esq,

P.M of Bullahdelah and Port Stephens remarked -"That they were only a standing memento of the

dark days of the colony " It seemed to be the general opinion of the meeting that a new court-house

should be built in front of the present one, and that the old one should be converted into police

barracks.

The resolution having been seconded, was put to the meeting and corned unanimously.

Mr REID thereupon moved,-"That the Chairman be requested to communicate to the Minister of

Works these resolutions, and that he should also write to the member for the electorate, to request

him to urge the Minister of Works to comply with the wishes of the meeting," This resolution was also

carried unanimously.

Mr. SKILLMAN then proposed,-" That a secretary and corresponding committee be appointed to make

known to the member of the electorate the wants and requirements of the district," which being put

to the meeting, was carried

It was then agreed,-"That the Rev. Mr. Shaw should be appointed secretary, and that the magistrates

ex officio should be members of the committee, along with six other gentlemen named "

A GENTLEMAN present suggested that the greatest publicity should be given to the proceedings of

the meeting, and for that purpose the chairman should be requested to send copies of the

proceedings to the Sydney Morning Herald and local papers.

This proposition, however, was not received by the rev. chairman with customary courtesy, and was

not put to the meeting

After a vote of thanks to the chairman the meeting separated.

Our correspondent adds, as a matter of opinion - Although there is no objection to the members of

the committee appointed, there seems to be a great objection to the mode of their appointment.

They were merely selected by the reverend chairman, the Clerk of Petty Sessions, and the Booral

schoolmaster.

It is the opinion of many that there should have been greater intimation given of the intention of

bringing into existence so important a body as a corresponding committee.

Stroud, August 9.

MM, 17 Aug 1875

Important Public Meeting at Stroud.

(From a Correspondent,}

There was held, at the court-house here, on Saturday last, a public meeting for he purpose of

inquiring into the requirements of the Stroud District.

Upon the Rev. Archibald Shaw being called to the chair, a resolution was proposed by Mr. SKILLMAN,

of Booral, and unanimously carried, to the effect "That the Minister of Works be requested to call for

tenders for the erection of a bridge over the Karuah River at Booral, as £3500 had been voted some

months ago by the Assembly for that purpose."

Mr, HILL, J P, next proposed -"That the Minister of Works be requested to reconsider the plans and

specifications that had been issued for the repairs of the court-house, policeman's residence, cells,

&c, as they were inadequate for the purposes required." It appeared, from what was stated, that

there is no re-tiring-room for the magistrates, consequently the court has to be cleared whenever the

magistrates wish to consult; that the policeman's residence is quite insufficient for a married man and

family, it having been originally built m the early days of the A. A. Co. by that company for a single

man, and that the cells were quite unfit for the confinement of prisoners, and as Philip Snape, Esq,

P.M of Bullahdelah and Port Stephens remarked -"That they were only a standing memento of the

dark days of the colony " It seemed to be the general opinion of the meeting that a new court-house

81

should be built in front of the present one, and that the old one should be converted into police

barracks.

The resolution having been seconded, was put to the meeting and corned unanimously.

Mr REID thereupon moved,-"That the Chairman be requested to communicate to the Minister of

Works these resolutions, and that he should also write to the member for the electorate, to request

him to urge the Minister of Works to comply with the wishes of the meeting," This resolution was also

carried unanimously.

_____________________________________________________________

EMAIL 4

Dr. P. A. Pemberton to Garry Smith, 10 April 2016

1/41A General Superintendents’ Letterbooks (out letters)

Arthur Hodgson, 152 George St, to the Colonial Secretary, 18 Mar 1858 [NBAC, AACo, 1/41A/5, f

602-603]

In my capacity as General Superintendent of The Australian Agricultural Company I beg to bring under

your notice the pressing necessity which exists of appointing one or two magistrates in the

neighbourhood of Stroud, in the District of Port Stephens. The only resident magistrate is Mr CH

Green, Assistant General Superintendent, and there is no other magistrate within a distance of 15

miles.

Up to the end of last year, Mr Cook from Dungog made periodical visits to Stroud in his magisterial

capacity for which he received from the AA Company the annual allowance of £50, which is now

discontinued owing to such an expence (in the altered circumstances of the above Company and the

large reduction in their Establishment) being considered unnecessary.

Population in the neighbourhood of Stroud and the adjoining district has of late rapidly increased, and

the absence of a second magistrate is felt as a public inconvenience.

I hope that I shall not be considered impertinent in bringing under your notice the name of Mr

Thomas Nicholls of Brixton Court as a gentleman in every way fitted to be appointed to the office of a

Justice of the Peace, he has been 30 years a resident on the Port Stephens Estate.

Arthur Hodgson, 152 George St, to the Colonial Secretary, ca 17 Oct 1858 [NBAC, AACo, 1/41A/5, f

1039-40]

[First page illegible]

I beg to bring under your notice that the amount of population in the district of Port Stephens

according to the census taken in 1856 (see page 6 of the printed report) exceeds 1200, and owing to

the AACo having given up all monopolies, and thrown their lands open to purchase on liberal terms, a

considerable quantity of land has been alienated during the current year, with a corresponding

increase of population.

In the event of a Clerk of Petty Sessions being appointed to reside permanently at Stroud, I am

authorised by Mr Hamilton, The Governor of the AA Company, who is visiting this Colony, to inform

you that the present Police Office, together with the lock-up and Constable’s Cottage attached,

situated on allotment in Section II, with a frontage to Cowper Street, in the township of Stroud, and at

present enclosed by a fence, will be handed over in perpetuity to the Government.

Arthur Hodgson to the Colonial Secretary, 14 Mar 1859 [NBAC, AACo, 1/41A/5, f 1449]

In answer to your communication of 8th

instant, I am quite prepared to issue a conveyance to The

Government of the present Police Office at Stroud, together with the Constable’s Cottage attached

82

(situated on allotment in Section II with a frontage to Cowper Street in the township of Stroud, and at

present enclosed by a fence

I shall be glad to be informed as to the mode in which the Conveyance is to be filled up, & whether

the words “The Crown” will be sufficient. I enclose blank form of the Australian Agricultural

Company’s conveyance of Town Allotments, which I will thank you to be good enough to return to

men, with such insertion as may be considered necessary, written in pencil. No time shall then be lost

in completing the transfer of the allotment herein described.

Arthur Hodgson, 227 George St, to the Colonial Secretary, 29 Mar 1859 [NBAC AACo, 1/41A/6, f

21]

I do myself the honor to forward to you herein enclosed conveyance in duplicate of the Police Office

and Constable’s Cottage in Stroud, which I will be happy to sign in conjunction with Mr Linstead, as

attorneys for the Australian Agricultural Company, so soon as the body of the conveyance is

completed and filled up to the satisfaction of the Law Officers of the Crown.

_________________________________________________

EMAIL 5

Dr. PA Pemberton to Garry Smith, 28 April 2016

Dr. Pemberton’s email is in response to Garry Smith’s email enquiry immediately below.

On 28 Apr 2016, at 3:02 PM, Garry Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

Pennie,

. . . May I ask another question, please?

It’s about your previous comment ‘A National School was established in the Telligherry Wool Shed in

1856 and subsequently leased to the Wesleyans in 1860’.

Government Schools of NSW 1848 to 1993 says Tellighery (Telegherry) functioned from May 1860 to

October 1919 and makes no mention of a lease or the Wesleyans. Can that be reconciled with the

above statement? – any comment you can make will be appreciated.

Regards,

Garry

Dr. Pemberton’s reply 28 Apr 2016, at 3:41PM follows.

Garry,

I suspect my previous comment is a conflation (not to say a confusion). A school, other than the one

associated with St John’s was being discussed from the mid-1850s. I think the actual date is 1860

(not 1858) and Mr Vanderkiste represents the Wesleyans.

In the mid 1850s many of those taking up land at Port Stephens were Wesleyans. The Rev. Robert W

Vanderkiste, Wesleyan preacher, visited Stroud in Sep 1858 suggesting to CH Green, the Assistant

General Superintendent (and a strong Anglican), then living at Stroud House - and recommended the

building of a Methodist Church. Vanderkiste and the Company Chaplain, Samuel Simm did not get on

- for example Simm would not let Vanderkiste lecture in the Anglican School Room - and I think the

83

idea of the Woolshed School came from idea - and Green promoted it. In 1860 Green moved to

Gloucester where he was active in having the (original Anglican) church built.

Green, Stroud, to General Superintendent Arthur Hodgson, 11 Jun 1860 [ANU NBAC 1/155]: Mr

Vanderkiste would be glad of the woolshed lease – the school opens tomorrow at 9 o’clock. Will you

please instruct Mr Ogden [the Surveyor] to make it out.

Lease 1 July 1860 to Charles H Green of Stroud and Robert W Vanderkiste of Dungog, as trustees

from the non-vested National School, 6 acres including brick buildings hitherto used as a woolshed

and the cottage adjoining at Telligherry, for five years

Lease 1 Feb 1870 to Thomas Crick, old wool shed and paddock at Telligherry, 1 year

Lease 1 Jan 1871 to James F Gossip [school teacher] Paddock at Telligherry, from year to year. Land

sold 1887 and lease cancelled

Conveyance, Lot 158, Parish of Limestone, 5 acres, 3 rods, 6 perches (Telligherry Woolshed), sold to

John Robert Hearn Gossip

I have no idea how long the National School was actually in the Woolshed or why the land was

leased rather than sold or granted to the Department. Another mystery to be resolved.

I hope this solves your immediate problem.

Regards

Pennie

_______________________________________________________

84

SECTION 9

HERITAGE LISTINGS The following heritage listings are current at the time of completing the document in March 2016 but it should be noted that Register of the National Estate was closed in 2007 and the Register is now an archive of information about more than 13,000 places throughout Australia. It should be noted however, that it is an extensive and authoritative list of places of heritage significance located throughout Australia. It should also be noted that listings by the National Trust of Australia (NSW) do not have legal force but are also authoritative statements about a place’s heritage significance. The current listings are as below. 1. State Heritage Inventory Form St 14. 2. Stroud Court House Register of the National Estate. 3. National Trust Register Listing Stroud Court House. 4. National Trust Register Listing Village of Stroud Urban Conservation Area.

________________________________________

85

NSW State Heritage Inventory form

ITEM DETAILS

Name of Item

Stroud Court House St14 BHC18-26; CD6 St1 31

Other Name/s Former Name/s

Item type (if known)

Built

Item group (if known)

Law enforcement

Item category (if known)

Police station / courthouse

Area, Group, or Collection Name

Stroud Heritage Conservation Area

Street number

67

Street name

Cowper Street

Suburb/town

Stroud Postcode 2425

Local Government Area/s

Great Lakes Council

Property description

Lot 613 DP 709600

Location - Lat/long Latitude

Longitude

Location - AMG (if no street address)

Zone

Easting Northing

Owner

Great Lakes Council

Current use

Historical society archives and museum

Former Use

Courthouse

Statement of significance

The former court house reflects Stroud’s continuing role as an important if modest sized local/regional centre following the A. A. Company’s withdrawal of its sheep flocks and discontinuation of Stroud as the Company’s administrative centre. The building is a pleasing example of a mid 19th century courthouse of traditional colonial form. It is an important streetscape element in the Stroud Heritage Conservation Area and forms an important main road group with the post office, Stroud House, the former ANZ bank and the Central Hotel at the northern entrance to the business-commercial area. The form of the building, with a main centre block and projecting side wides, all with verandahs to the front, is pleasing in its proportions and needs further assessment as to whether this is typical of court houses or uncommon. The former courthouse is today the headquarters, archives and museum of the Stroud Historical Society. The building has a high level of social significance within the Stroud community both because of its historical significance and because of its continuing historical function. (The courthouse was previously noted in the Hunter REP, 1988, as being of regional significance. It should be assessed by comparison with other courthouses as to whether this should be upgraded to state significance.)

Level of Significance

Local

86

DESCRIPTION

Designer

NSW Colonial Architects Office, Colonial Architect James Barnet

Builder/ maker

Not known

Physical Description

Simple single storey brick courthouse, symmetrical with a dominant centre block and projecting bays to each side. Hipped roof and verandahs to all front walls. Roof covered in corrugated steel. The plain brickwork has been painted in recent times.

Physical condition and Archaeological potential

Very good Not known

Construction years

Start year c.1860 Finish year Circa

Modifications and dates

Not known, appears to have been partially refurnished, possibly with some minor renovations about 1930. Restored and painted by Great Lakes Council about 1988.

Further comments

87

HISTORY

Historical notes

THEMES

National historical theme

Building settlements, towns and cities

State historical theme

Law and order

88

APPLICATION OF CRITERIA

Historical significance SHR criteria (a)

The building’s exact date of construction needs to be established to accurately establish its historical significance. It is believed built about 1860, after the A. A. Co had withdrawn the sheep flocks and ceased to have its administrative headquarters in Stroud. The court house, if built before 1865, predates James Barnet’s term as Colonial Architect. (Many country court houses were built during the term of Mortimer Lewis - check dates)

Historical association significance SHR criteria (b)

Requires investigation for possible association significance.

Aesthetic significance SHR criteria (c)

The building is a pleasing example of a mid 19th century courthouse of traditional colonial form, simple in its detail and lacking the classical or Italianate influences typical of larger courthouses and the later designs favoured during James Barnet’s term as Colonial Architect. The former courthouse is an important streetscape element in the Stroud Heritage Conservation Area and forms an important main road group with the post office, Stroud House, the former ANZ bank and the Central Hotel at the northern entrance to the business-commercial area. The form of the building, with a main centre block and projecting side wides, all with verandahs to the front, is pleasing in its proportions and needs further assessment as to whether this is typical or uncommon.

Social significance SHR criteria (d)

The former courthouse is significant within the Stroud community because of its historical significance and its importance as the museum and archives of the Stroud Historical Society.

Technical/Research significance SHR criteria (e)

The interior contains much of its original and later fittings including its coat of arms and may have a level of research significance because of this (requires assessment).

Rarity SHR criteria (f)

Many country courthouses survive, rarity would depend on its style, era and level of original fittings (requires further assessment). The form of the building, with a main centre block and projecting side wides, all with verandahs to the front, is pleasing in its proportions and needs further assessment as to whether this is typical or uncommon.

Representativeness SHR criteria (g)

The former court house appears to be generally representative of country courthouses.

Integrity

The former court house has a high level of integrity because of its original condition (although the modern painting of the exterior brick work is unfortunate)

89

HERITAGE LISTINGS

Heritage listing/s

Hunter Regional Environmental Plan, 1988.

Great Lakes Local Environmental Plan, 1996

INFORMATION SOURCES Include conservation and/or management plans and other heritage studies.

Type Author/Client Title Year Repository

Written

Suters, Busteed, Corner, Clode Pty Ltd

Hunter Regional Environmental Plan, Heritage Register

1988 Great Lakes Council

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations

The building was unfortunately painted several years ago and removal would now be difficult. Removal of Colorbond fence on side boundary is desirable. Other than that, it’s ‘steady as she goes’.

SOURCE OF THIS INFORMATION

Name of study or report

Great Lakes Community Based Heritage Study Year of study or report

2003 - 2008

Item number in study or report

St14

Author of study or report

Community Based Heritage Committee, coordinator Garry Smith

Inspected by

Chrisanya Martin, Garry Smith

NSW Heritage Manual guidelines used?

Yes

This form completed by

Garry Smith Date 23 July 2004

90

IMAGES - 1 per page

Please supply images of each elevation, the interior and the setting. Image caption

Former Stroud Court House, Cowper Street, Stroud.

Image year

2004 Image by Garry Smith Image copyright holder

Great Lakes Council

IMAGE

photograph, sketch, map

91

(No entry on the last page of the NSW State Heritage Inventory Form)

92

Register of the National Estate Listing

Place Details

• edit search

• new search

Send Feedback

Stroud Courthouse (former), Cowper St, Stroud, NSW, Australia

Photographs

List Register of the National Estate (Non-statutory archive)

Class Historic

Legal Status Registered (21/03/1978)

Place ID 1463

Place File No 1/09/080/0021

Statement of Significance

Significant for its contribution to the historic and streetscape character in an important

historic village. Also for its fine modest design and its evocation of an old way of life.

(The Commission is in the process of developing and/or upgrading official statements for

places listed prior to 1991. The above data was mainly provided by the nominator and has

not yet been revised by the Commission.)

Official Values Not Available

Description

Small painted brick courthouse with single courtroom and symmetrical ancillary rooms.

Picket fence.

History Not Available

Condition and Integrity Not Available

Location

Cowper Street, Stroud.

Bibliography Not Available

SECTION 10

CONSERVATION DOCUMENTS The following three documents are an integral part of this Conservation Management Plan and should

at all times be included with it.

It is absolutely critical that the first of these Bill Jordan and Associates, Former Courthouse Building,

Stroud; Structural assessment for Conservation, 2015, be included in any versions of this document

that address conservation matters and procedure. To express that differently, historical and historical

overviews may be used independently but any documents that address conservation must include the

specified Jordan Report.

1. Bill Jordan and Associates, Former Courthouse Building, Stroud; Structural

Assessment for Conservation, 2015.

2. Bill Jordan and Associates, Quambi House, Stroud With Old Courthouse & School

of Arts Report on Masonry Damage for Great Lakes Council, 2010.

3. BlueScope Steel, Inert Catchment, Technical Bulletin CTB-28, Rev 0, June 2008.

______________________________________________

This page intentionally left blank