The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1876-07-08 00:00:00

TRUTH STRANGER THAN FICTION.

Truth, we all know, is stranger than fiction; yet
many readers of the pretty fairy tale called "The
Ring of the Golden River" may be surprised to learn
that there was pnce a King of England who, for an
outlay of a few thousands of pounds, became a partner
in a river the auriferous yield of which has been of a
nature to make the sands of Pactolus seem, in compari-
son, as the vilest dross. The Monarch in cos stion was
James I. At the commencement of the seventeenth
century an enthusiastic Welshm in, a citizen and gold-
smith of Landon, called Hugh Myddelton, proposed to
convey to the capital at his own cost a supply of water
from Chad well Springs, between Hertford and
Ware. And from the fountain-head at Chadwell
Hugh Myddelton did conduct that "New," but now
very old River which meanders through Hoddesdon,
Cileshunt, Enfield, Hornsey, Stoke Newington, and
Islington to its heal in the metropolis. The epeetVa-
five citizen and goldsmith embarked his whole fortune
in the undertaking, paying each of his labourers ha'f.
a-crown a day; but in May, 1612, the work., which
had reached Eufi:l4, Londonwards, were stopped for
want of funds. Then canny King Jamie came to
Myddelton's assistance, and joined in his venture. His
Majesty's advances on account o! the New River works
amounted altogether to £8,609 143. 6d ; and, in return
for this aia, the Crown took thirty-six shares in the
enterprise. Our Soverzigns. however, did not re-
main long "Kings of the C oldm River," since the
necessities of Charles I. compelled him to alienate
the Royal shares for a fee farm rent of £5OO per
annum;which annuity is still p kid into the Exchequer.
As for Hugh My ddelton, who was subsequently created
a baronet, and did not by any means die in poverty, as
the mythical legends have told, he divided his moiety
in the property into thirty-six portions called " ad-
venturers' " shares, some of which he sold to great
ixlvantage. At his death he bequeathed one share to
the Goldsmiths' Company, which—here is a fact for
the City Guild reformers—formerly produced £314
per annum. What it may he worth nowthe Goldsmiths
only know. The public at large may be interested
to learn that last week, at the Auction Mart, one-
thirtieth part of a " King's " share in the New River
Company was sold by Messrs. Edwin Fox and
Boustie'd for £2,935, being at the rate of £88,050
per share. Tnere were also sold at the same time
seventy-four 21CO shares, with £6O paid, at from £2O
to £290 per share. The total amount realhe d was
£21,040. If we turn to the bygone statistics of the
yield of the Golden River, strange fluctuations in the
value of the shares will be apparent. The first divi-
dend paid by the company was in 1633, when £ll
Id. per share was divided. The second dividend
was only £3 4s. 23. In 1727 a King's share was valued
at 5,000 guineas ; in 1770 the income on a similar share
was £240 per annum. At Garraway's, in 1813, en
adventurer's share brought £8,00), and in the
following year only £7,450 Twenty-four years
later an original share was knocked down for £lB,OOO.
In 1852 three-sevenths of a quarter of a King's share
was worth £l,OOO. In 1855 the annual rental of the
company was estimated at £204,750. These facts and
figures might be appropriately borne in mind by any
adventurous persons who felt disposed to entertain the
project of construoting a colossal aqueduct to bring,
say, from the Mendip Hills or the Cumberland Lakes,
a supply of water purer than that which the metropolis
at present enjoys.—Dally Telegraph.