254 REPORT ON THE DENEHOLE EXPLORATION
ADDENDA.
(A) NOTES ON SOME CHALK-WELLS IN BUCKINGHAMSHIRE.
Mr. F. W. Elliott, an active member of the Essex Field Club, has called
attention (Essex Nat. I., 224) to some shafts in chalk in Buckinghamshire, and
has expressed his view that there is more affinity between modern chalk-wells and
the Hangman's Wood deneholes than we admitted in our remarks, or than is
apparent from Mr. Bennett's paper on "Chalk-wells" given as Appendix iii. to
this Report. Mr. Elliott said that when staying in the neighbourhood of Burnham
Beeches, Buckinghamshire, in 1884, he visited some tile-works near the "Yew
Tree" inn, on the road to Beaconsfield, about midway between that town
and Farnham Royal. The tile-yard was situated on the slope of a hill, which
had been cut away to quarry soil for the purposes of the trade. In the level
space thus formed were sunk five or six shafts, four to six feet in diameter,
and lined with brick. Over one of the shafts a windlass was fixed ; the others
were deserted and overgrown with brambles, etc., but otherwise uncovered.
The sound of falling water in some of the pits was audible. He could not get
down any of the shafts, as the tackle had been removed when work had been
suspended some weeks previously, in consequence of a sufficient stock of chalk
having been accumulated. A workman said that each shaft was about 70 feet
deep, and that it penetrated about two yards into the chalk, and then opened out
into a single bell-shaped cavity, wherein one man worked at filling the bucket
with chalk, and then swung it into the centre to be drawn up to the surface.
When the cavity got to be inconveniently large for one man to work it was
abandoned, and another shaft sunk. Mr. Elliott understood that in one or more
instances water had come into the chamber, and forced the workmen to begin
afresh. The chalk was, he understood, used for making lime, and was stated to
be better than that to be obtained within two or three miles where it came close to
the surface.
As compared with Mr. Bennett's examples (see Appendix IV.), the peculiarities of
Mr. Elliott's pits consist in the thinness of the chalk roof, and in the concentration of
five or six shafts in a small space; The bell-like expansion at the bottom of the shaft
is common to both, and so is the width of the shaft. And as, according to Mr. Elliott
the nearest point at which bare, or almost bare, chalk is obtainable is about three
miles away, a single shaft, or possibly even two, might naturally be expected at a
tile-works so situated. That the depth was 70 feet, instead of the 60 feet of Mr.
Bennett's lime-wells, is in no way noteworthy, inasmuch as while the sites of lime-
wells for agricultural purposes depend largely on the depth of the chalk, those
of tile-works are regulated by the position at the surface of the brick-earth or clay
of which the tiles are made.
Thus these tile-works pits appear to resemble the deneholes of Hangman's
Wood more than any of Mr. Bennett's chalk-wells in the concentration of
the shafts and the thinness of the chalk roof. Mr. Elliott's remarks, however,
furnish a perfect explanation of the cause of the differences between Mr.
Bennett's pits and these Bucks ones on these two points. As already remarked
a shaft to the chalk is naturally to be expected at a tile-works where the bare
chalk is three miles away, and must otherwise be bought from some quarry-
owner, and carted from a distance. In this case, accordingly, a shaft was sunk,
but the chalk being locally almost full of water, penetration to any depth was
impossible, and hence only the uppermost chalk was worked. Even then the