---

John Homewood

Born: ~15 February 1820
Died: 17 November 1860
Buried: 21 November 1860

Author: Linda Miles-Cartwright

---

BACKGROUND

John Homewood was admitted from Bethnal House Asylum in London to the Sussex County Lunatic Asylum on 5 August 1859. He was the 112th patient to be admitted to the new facility which opened on 25 July 1859.

John was described as a married 39-year-old Journeyman Miller who had come from East Grinstead. A medical certificate from 13 October 1858 diagnosed him with Dementia brought on by a loss of property. He was in a very poor state and was very filthy. John’s previous address was transcribed as Nithy Lane Mills, Sussex, but this was later found to be incorrect.

There were a few John Homewoods of similar ages around Sussex at that time, so at first it was difficult to pinpoint the right one. The breakthrough came from checking other records and discovering that Nithy Lane did not exist (Nithy Lane Mill was actually Withyham Mill) – which leads me to believe I have found the right John Homewood.

This is his story.

Early days

John was born in Wadhurst on 15 February 1820 to John and Mary Homewood. Wadhurst is very close to the Sussex border with Kent. 

John’s baptism on 18 May 1820 reveals that his father was a miller. I believe his parents married on 28 March 1815 in Bidborough, Kent. John was described as a widower, and his new bride was Mary Clifton.

John and Mary would go on to have a large family of twelve children over the next 22 years, including our subject John Jr. His father always remained a miller.

John and Mary’s known children

Year	Name	Place
1816	Jane	Wadhurst
1817	James	Wadhurst
1818	George	Wadhurst
1820	John	Wadhurst
1822	William	Wadhurst
1824	Ann	Wadhurst
1827	Robert	Wadhurst
1828	Mary	Wadhurst	Died 1841
1831	Elizabeth	Pembury	Died 1831
1832	Henry	Pembury
1833	Stephen	Pembury
1837	Naomi	Pembury

John Jr. spent his young years at Wadhurst. There were several known mills in the Wadhurst area in the 1820s, so it is difficult to know which one was the workplace and home of the Homewoods. Their later move to Pembury points to John Sr.’s expertise being in water-powered mills. This suggests that the family were living and working at Riverhall Mill, a water powered mill on the river Teise, or at Bartley Mill on Baynham Road, which was also a watermill with an overshot wheel. 

From baptism records and newspaper articles we find the family living at Keyes Mill in Pembury from 1831 to at least 1841. Research reveals that Keyes Mill was a water powered corn mill on a tributary of the river Medway. It had a wooden overshot waterwheel and was the subject of a painting by the famous painter J.M.W Turner in 1796. 

The Brighton Gazette, 28 June 1832

On 15 September 1839 Mary (John’s mother) passed away from Dropsy, which we now call “edema”: an abnormal swelling of the body caused by a buildup of fluid. She was only 48. Her youngest child was just two years old.

1841 Census

By the time of the 1841 Census, John had left home alongside Jane, James, George, and William. 

I believe John can be found at Wood Knowle, Lindfield, aged 20, described as a miller. He is clearly carrying on in the tradition of his father.

His father and younger siblings were still living at Keyes Mill at this time.

Marriage and children

Looking at the evidence, I found a marriage record for John Homewood and Mary Jane Hodgskin in the Ticehurst area of Sussex in the April quarter of 1848. Mary had been born in Appledore in Kent, and in 1841 she was living in Lamberhurst where she worked as a servant. 

There would be sadness for the couple as their first child Mary, born in 1849, only lived for eleven days. She was baptised on 9 September and was buried at Withyham on 14 September. Mary’s death certificate is not readily available, but her birth certificate reveals she was born on 31 August 1849. Her mother’s maiden name was Hodgskin, reinforcing that I found the right marriage.

1851 Census

In the 1851 Census, John and his wife Mary can be found living at Buckhurst Dairy House in Withyham. I am not sure if this property was part of the huge Buckhurst Park Estate owned by George De La Warr, Peer of the Realm. 

George de la Warr’s full name was George John Sackville-West, 5th Earl de la Warr. He was the great grandfather of Vita Sackville-West, author, poet, and journalist whose ashes are buried in St. Michael of all Angel’s church in Withyham.

John was 30 years old and he was a Journeyman Miller from Wadhurst. His wife Mary was also 30 years old, and she came from Lamberhurst in Kent. They lived with:

• John’s brother Henry, aged 19 (also a Journeyman Miller)
• Luther Page, aged 18 (an apprentice Miller from Buxted)
• Ann Brooker, aged 19, (a House Servant who was Mary’s niece)
• Hannah Harding, aged 45 (a Nurse)
• Hannah (the wife of a gardener)

---

JOHN’S OCCUPATION

A Journeyman Miller was a trained mill worker who had completed an apprenticeship but was not yet a Master Miller. They worked in grain mills that ground wheat, corn, rye, and other grains into flour. They operated the mill machinery, and they were responsible for the whole process from start to finish. 

As John was described as a journeyman he may have been paid by the day. As he was not a Master Miller, he did not yet have his own mill – like his father. The job was physically demanding and very dependent on skills. 

Withyham Mill 

The Tithe map of 1843 records that the Mill was owned by the Earl De La Warr and that the miller was Thomas Caffyn.

According to The Mills Archive, John was known as the Miller at Withyham Mill from around 1850, and he was still there in 1855. This was a water-powered corn mill on one of the tributaries of the River Medway. It was also called Mousehall or Mousehold Mill. The Census returns for 1841 and 1851 suggest that Withyham Mill was not a residence at that time, just a place of work.

This is a map of the area from 1597. It is from before John’s time, but it shows the location of Withyham Mill, known as Mousehall Mill, on the bottom right-hand side. This site also confirms that the millers were tenants and did not own the mill themselves.

An extract from an Ordnance Survey map dated 1874 showing the mill in more detail.

---

JOY AND LOSS

In 1852, John and Mary welcomed their second daughter Ann. But their joy was short-lived, as Ann was premature and died of complications at just 9 days old. She was buried on 29 January 1852 in the same churchyard as her sister Mary. 

The 1850s would see two more daughters born to the couple, but they unfortunately shared the same fate as their sisters. 

Jane was born prematurely on 23 September 1854. She only survived for 3 days and died on 26 September 1854.  

Elizabeth was born in 1857 and died at 6 weeks old on 18 November. She was buried on 23 November 1857 in Withyham churchyard. The cause of death was listed as “Debility”. This was a general term but, in this case, it was probably a failure to thrive. In infant deaths at this time it often denoted premature birth.

Strangely I can find no record of Jane’s baptism or burial at Withyham. By this time the church did allow the burial of unbaptised people in the churchyard, but they were not entitled to full burial rites. I hope she was buried with her siblings.

---

THE ADMINISTRATION BOND

Then there was the Administration Bond signed on 22 November 1856. A record I found quite by accident. Below are relevant extracts of the document.

This document is an Act of Court granting administration of the late William Norman’s estate to his widow Lucy Norman. 

William died intestate (without leaving a legal and valid will) in October 1856. Henry Langridge and John Homewood were the guarantors. What did this mean? It meant that if Lucy Norman did not properly administer the estate, then the court could claim the money guaranteed against the bond. In this case, the estate was deemed to be worth £2,000. In 1856, probate was handled by the church courts.

To put this into context, £2,000 is worth about £280,000 in 2026. The Bond was worth double, as was often the case then, so this was a substantial amount of money. 

John Homewood and Henry Langridge would have been financially responsible for honouring this Bond if things went wrong. A huge responsibility and strain, but John signed the document – we can see his signature.

Who was William Norman?

William Norman was the Innkeeper of the Dorset Arms in the village of Withyham. It is still there today. As far as I can tell, the Dorset Arms was owned by the Buckhurst Estate, the Sackville family, and the Earls De La Warr. 

William had lived in Withyham for at least 20 years, and he was previously a Blacksmith. Lucy Norman nee Whitewick was his second wife, whom he married in 1850. The electoral register states he also occupied land at Leigh Green in Withyham. How he acquired his wealth is unclear. 

Henry Langridge, the other guarantor, was a farmer at Little Stoneland Farm. Henry owned land but John Homewood did not. Why on earth did he make such a huge commitment?  John does not appear on the Electoral Roll for Withyham because he did not own land and his home must have been below the £10 annual value threshold.

I cannot find any evidence to suggest Lucy Norman failed to manage the estate of her late husband. A newspaper from 2 December 1856 reported that all demands and creditors must make their claim against the Estate to the appointed solicitors. 

In March 1857 there was a case at the High Court of Chancery for Thomas Paley v Lucy Norman and a deadline was set for 30th March 1857 for all claims to be received. I cannot find anything further referring to this case or to the Estate. 

I can only assume that John Homewood did not have to cover the Bond. Lucy Norman had left Withyham by 1861 and was running the White Hart Inn in Merton, Surrey.

---

JOHN’S MENTAL DECLINE

Did any of this,  and the tragedies of losing so many children, contribute to a decline in John’s mental health? It does seem that after he lost his home the pressures of life sent John over the edge.

On 13 October 1858, John was in the Union Workhouse, where he was diagnosed with dementia. In those days, this was a catch all description for a decline in mental health. 

The records state that he had been suffering for about three months, suggesting he had been unwell since about July 1858. His bodily condition was poor and he was very filthy. All of this indicates he had been unable to care for himself. Did he lose his home because he could not work? I assume his home was dependent on him being able to work at the mill. If he was too ill to work, his employer and owner of the Mill had no legal duty to let the Homewood family remain.

The decision must have been made that there was nothing that could be done for John at the Workhouse, so he was sent to Bethnal House Asylum in London. (There was no County Asylum in Sussex at the time). 

Ironically, John’s wife was pregnant with a daughter at this time and – unlike her sisters before her – she would survive into adulthood. On 23 January 1859, Naomi John Homewood was born in Withyham. It must have been difficult for Mary to be apart from John, especially at this time. She gave her daughter his name, which was quite a statement I feel.

The registrar for Naomi’s birth was William Wallis – the same man who completed the medical assessment (on 13 October 1858) that sent her father to the Bethnal House Asylum.

John was transferred to the new Sussex County Lunatic Asylum on 5 August 1859, but he only survived another fifteen months. I wonder if his wife was able to visit him and whether he knew he had a daughter.

The Sussex Asylum would have been a better place for John than Bethnal House, and he would have received better food and care, but sadly his situation proved irredeemable. 

John died of dementia and General Paralysis (syphilis) on 17 November 1860 and was buried on 21 November 1860 in the St Francis burial ground. He was only 41 years old.

MARY AND NAOMI

After John’s death, Mary and Naomi moved to Brighton, and in 1861 they can be found living at 78 West Street. Mary, aged 40, was a Boarding Housekeeper; Naomi was two years old. 

Also living at the property was Ann Hodgskin (Mary’s unmarried sister, aged 50, a cook) and her daughter Ann aged 29, who was a Housemaid. Thomas Brooker, a cousin, was also living there, aged 32. Coincidentally, Ann was baptised Ann Brooker Hodgskin in 1832, and was living with them in 1851.

By 1871, Mary and Naomi had moved to 35 Gloucester Street in Brighton. Mary, now aged 51, was working as a confectioner; she would have probably been making and selling sweets. Naomi, aged 12, was at school. Mary’s niece Ann was still living with them. Ann senior had died in 1864.

The 1881 Census shows that the family had moved again, and they were now living at No. 10, Trafalgar Terrace. Mary was unemployed and Naomi (who is recorded as Marian) was aged 22, working as a linen maid.

The 1891 Census is the last one that mentions Mary and Naomi. At this time, they were living at 44 Islingwood Street in Brighton, both working as charwomen. Mary was now aged 71 and Naomi was 32. Ann Hodgskin, Mary’s niece, was 59 years old and still working as a cook.

In the June quarter of 1891, Naomi died of rheumatic fever and valvular disease; she was 32 years old. Mary, her mother, passed away in the June quarter of 1895, aged 76. She outlived her husband and all her children.

---

JOHN’S SIBLINGS

John’s siblings have many stories which are numerous and varied; they are told briefly below.

Jane Homewood 

Jane, the eldest child, was born in Wadhurst in 1816. In 1841, she was living independently in Pembury and working as a dressmaker. Jane married William Dartnall in 1846 and lived in Brenchley in 1851. 

The couple had two children: Ebenezer William, born in 1847, and Mary Ann, born in 1851. 

Jane was a witness at her sister Ann’s wedding in 1852. But she disappears after this, and her children were all living with relatives by 1861, which suggests she had died. There is a death of a Jane Dartnell recorded in Maidstone in 1853 – this could be her.

James, George and William Homewood 

I cannot determine what happened to these siblings as there were so many Homewoods in the area at the time.

Ann Homewood 

Ann was born in 1824. In 1851, she was still living at home with her parents at Wind Mill Home in Brenchley, Kent. 

Ann married Alfred Barham on 9 November 1852 in Wadhurst Parish Church. Alfred was a farmer’s son and he worked as a wheelwright. The witnesses were Robert Homewood and Jane Dartnall. The couple lived in Wadhurst for many years, where William farmed alongside his wheelwright work. The couple had six children. 

Ann died in 1900 and Alfred died in 1901. Of their children, Mary Ann, Mercy, and Naomi never married. 

Robert Homewood 

Robert was born in 1827 and worked as a journeyman miller like his brother John. He married Harriet Ransley in 1850 and worked at a mill in Hunton, Kent. 

Robert and Harriet had nine children, including twins Ellen and Ruth. Like John, Robert had four children who died young. He is buried with them in Yalding churchyard. 

Robert died in 1899, three years after his wife Harriet.

Mary Homewood 

Mary was born on 17 October 1828. She can be found in the 1841 Census but sadly died in October 1841. She was buried at Pembury on 31 October 1841, aged 13.

Henry Homewood 

Henry was born in 1832 and was also a miller. He lived with John and Mary in Withyham in 1851. 

Henry married Mary Chandler in London in 1855 and went on to have a career where he diversified and adapted. By 1871 he had become a corn dealer and mealman, and by 1881 he had bakeries in Horley and Reigate in Surrey. Henry was also described as a grocer. 

The couple had seven children. Henry was living with his three unmarried daughters when he died in 1912; his wife had died some years earlier.

Dorking and Leatherhead Advertiser dated 24 August 1912.

Henry’s daughters Letita (known as Lily), Julia, and Mary never married. They ran a draper business in Reigate until their deaths.

Stephen Homewood 

Stephen was born in 1833. He never married and worked as a miller alongside his father. He died in June 1862, aged 29.

Naomi Homewood 

Naomi was born in 1837 and was the youngest of John’s siblings. She can be found in the 1841 and 1851 Censuses. 

In 1861 Naomi was working as a servant in Maidstone. She married the Reverend Stephen Francis Rimbault (a widower) on 11 July 1868.

The Dover Telegraph and Cinque Ports General Advertiser, 15 July 1868. Courtesy of British Newspaper Archives.

Stephen was an Independent Minister and was the “Town Missionary”. He was twenty years older than Naomi. The couple went on to have five children and were very well respected in Maidstone. Stephen devoted himself to the care of impoverished people in the town for 42 years. He died in 1896, and Naomi died on 9 May 1915.

---

AUTHOR’S THOUGHTS

When I started John’s story, I did not expect to uncover a story that contained such risk, intrigue, and awful tragedy. His start in life would have been hard, but his father taught him great skills, which provided him and some of his brothers with a good regular income.

It is not clear when John contracted syphilis, and he would have been unaware that he had contracted it for many years. This would have had such a catastrophic effect on his life and family. When he married Mary Jane, the couple must have thought they would have a family and live a good life, particularly as John had a skilled job, but it was not to be.

The premature births and deaths of their daughters were probably due to John carrying the disease. A man can transmit the infection to the mother and, if the mother becomes infected during the pregnancy, the bacteria can cross the placenta and infect the foetus. This can cause miscarriage, stillbirth, or premature birth. The mother can have mild or no symptoms at all. 

A pattern of losses over a decade is a good indication that John’s syphilis was infecting his unborn children. Doctors would not write that babies had been infected on their death certificates; indeed they probably would not have known. Instead, they wrote terms such as “debility” or “premature birth”. There could have been miscarriages as well, as there are gaps between the births of the girls. It must have been hard for John and Mary to bear.

Somehow, Naomi lived until adulthood and died of an unrelated disease. Whether she was premature or had illnesses as a child we will never know.

Mary obviously survived the disease. Women could remain in a long-term latent state despite being infected. In Mary’s case she lived a normal lifespan.

Mary would have seen a decline in John’s health. In addition, two years before John’s sharp decline he became a guarantor for Lucy Norman. This seems to be a huge risk for a man with no property and no other apparent means. Where did he think he was going to find the money if things went wrong? Was John a good and loyal friend who knew it was a safe bet? Was he naive or coerced into signing the Bond? Did his impaired mental capacity make him reckless? Did it cause him concern? We will never know for certain and, unless other information comes to light, John’s decision will remain a mystery. 

Within two years of taking on this risk, John’s mental health had declined to the point of no return. Sadly, just four years after he signed the “bond” John was dead. I believe his life could have been as rich and full as his brother Henry’s, had he not contracted such a dreadful, untreatable disease.

I hope my discoveries will highlight John’s life, and he will no longer be just a name on a list of people buried in a forgotten burial ground.

– Linda Miles-Cartwright