Top image – Lasseters Corner – where the old Mill lane joins the High Street. c1890
By local historian Mark Phillips
In the mid-19th century, George Constable was a prominent Arundel brewer who owned the Swallow Brewery, along with
various properties, Inns and malt houses in Arundel and Littlehampton. The rivalry between Constable’s Swallow Brewery and The Eagle Brewery in Tarrant Street marked a significant chapter in Arundel’s history. In 1832 Robert Watkins, the Duke of Norfolk’s agent, bought the Eagle Brewery and the duke’s rival, the Burgess and brewer George Constable, was convinced that this was a deliberate plan to threaten his livelihood.
The conflict between Constable and the Dukes of Norfolk was deeply rooted in the struggle for political control of Arundel. In the 1730s, Edward Howard, the 9th Duke, attempted to control the town’s governance by nominating the mayor and town burgesses. This set the stage for ongoing disputes over electoral processes. By the 1830s, Bernard Edward, the 12th Duke, served as Arundel’s MP and sought to maintain political dominance. Constable, however, emerged as his opponent in parliamentary elections, leading to the “battle of the breweries.” This period saw heightened tensions as both parties vied for influence, with Constable’s brewing enterprise threatening the Duke’s stronghold.
In 1894, Henry Fitzalan-Howard, the 15th Duke of Norfolk, replaced the old Mill Lane, the main route from Arundel to South Stoke, with the beautiful Lime tree-lined Mill Road that exists today. However, the seeds of this transformation were sown earlier, in 1850, when Henry, the 13th Duke, proposed an ambitious plan for a new road running closer to the river. This road would encroach upon fields near the castle, bringing them within his private grounds. This plan faced strong opposition from George Constable.
In 1851, Constable challenged the Duke’s plan at Petworth Town Hall, appealing against the new road proposal on the grounds that it was neither more convenient nor larger than the existing route. He intended that his ‘new road’ would run far closer to the river, beginning behind the current Waterside Restaurant to meet the river at its junction with the Mill Stream and then continue to follow the river to join the current Mill Road just before the Black Rabbit. Much of the debate hinged on whether the new road should be closer to the ‘Town centre’, with disagreements over the definition of the town centre itself—Town Hall or Town Square.
Constable’s witnesses argued that the existing route along Mill Lane, with its shady hanger of trees and beautiful views, was far more preferable. They also highlighted the health risks associated with the new road’s fog-prone location near the river, claiming that gases from the swampy ground would render people unconscious or worse. In contrast, the Duke’s witnesses, not surprisingly, were either employed by the Duke, lived in a property owned by the Duke or ran a business that had a substantial contract with the Duke, argued that the new road would facilitate travel, suffer less flooding, and be built to higher standards. In response to the “shady hanger of trees”, the Duke’s witnesses argued that the public have absolutely no right to say to the Duke, “You shall keep your trees in the Hanger alongside the road because they are shady and pleasant, and your buildings in their present position because I like the look of them.”
The jury ruled in favour of maintaining the existing footpath and road from Lassetter’s Corner to the Black Rabbit along Mill Lane, deeming it detrimental to the public if the route were stopped up. This verdict was a victory for Constable and the resilient Arundel residents, preserving the historic route – at least until 1894!
Based on a 2012 article by Al Dunn and Mark Phillips
