On Sunday the 9th of July this year, towards the end of the Radio 4’s Broadcasting House programme, we heard Mr. Peter Johns’ plea—interspersed with a somewhat dramatic reading of William Blake’s ‘Jerusalem’ (the poem in Milton)—for money. Three million pounds exactly.
Mr. Johns is one of the trustees of the Blake Cottage Trust, and he was asking for money to carry out work in William Blake’s cottage in Felpham, West Sussex. The cottage, he said, is “falling in disrepair”. It is indeed, and that has been the case since it fell into the hands of the BCT, through an orchestrated exercise of corruption, fraud and bullying, for nearly a decade.
He mentioned alarming facts such as “a hole in the ceiling” and the thatched roof “moving away from the chimney”. Those of us who care for the cottage have known about this dismal state of affairs since the cottage was acquired in 2015, after a campaign started in the previous year.
If you who have read this blog in the past, you will know that, along with Mr. Tim Heath (then chair of the Blake Society, now chair of the BCT), and the Big Blake Project in Felpham, I was co-leader of the 2014 campaign to acquire the cottage, in order to further Blake’s legacy and turn it into a space for creation. You will also know that I left both the campaign and the Blake Society, of which I was then Secretary, after extensive bullying from Mr. Heath and his secrecy and unethical behaviour regarding the cottage appeal, and that he then elbowed out the Big Blake Project through identical tactics, got funds in secret from a private donor to acquire the cottage in 2015 behind the back of the Blake Society and the Big Blake Project, who were publicly responsible for the project, and founded entirely on his own, backed by his expensive lawyers, the Blake Cottage Trust through a cunning set of actions that amount to what can only be called fraud.
If you didn’t know this, you do now. The story is very long and rather awful, all minutely documented in this webpage’s different sections and blog. So as not to repeat myself in this entry, I will concentrate on recent developments.
As I was saying, Mr. Johns said in national radio just a few weeks ago that the BCT intends “to raise the money to restore the cottage” and build a (contentious) extension to their muddled project in the garden. “OK, it will take time”, he added, probably imagining that those of us who have heard them use these words for close to 10 years would be wondering what they have been doing exactly with the money received during this time, apart from putting in place (rather late in the story, if you care to go through the documents in this website or campaigner Beryl Kingston’s blog and booklet) some poles to hold the roof so that it doesn’t collapse completely.
A call to the very rich
Undeterred by this grim reality, Mr. Johns opened his heart and regaled us with this information: “There are some extraordinarily wealthy people in the world” (as if we didn’t know), then added: “We’re going to spread our wings somewhat . . . and start approaching these people”. That approach will start, apparently, with a “C’mon guys”, followed by asking them to spit out the money, then soothing them with a “You will go down in history”. They’ll just abstain themselves, apparently, from informing these hypothetical super-rich donors what kind of history exactly.
This approach is light-years away from the one that inspired the original 2014 appeal. We of course needed and wanted money to buy the cottage and implement our project, but we were calling those who cared for Blake’s legacy in particular, and for the arts, literature and culture in general. It wasn’t a making-money-for-the-sake-of-it plan. We would have had the solid foundation of a large consortium of accountable individuals and cultural institutions, so that the project wouldn’t veer away from its initial intent. We received generous donations from hundreds of people: some who could give a lot, and many that could give little in monetary terms, but not the less generous for that. Most of them must be wondering what became of the money they gave with such good will and enthusiasm nine years ago.
Of course we needed large amounts of money, but the spirit of the enterprise was to be in line, as much as we could possibly manage, with Blake’s spirit. Can you imagine what he would be thinking now, had he heard Mr. John’s desperate and crass attempt to pander to the wealthy?
This is serious, and the gravity of what is at hand has been reflected in the Blake Cottage Trust’s own webpage, which throughout the years has seen Mr. Heath’s deranged descriptions of what the project for the cottage would be (all documented here as well), which utterly betray what we had promised to the public we would do (with their money, by the way), and which have kept on changing (often following criticism in this webpage).
In any case, I find it quite astonishing that, while Mr. Johns was making his utterly un-Blakean call to the wealthy of this world, he didn’t think it fitting to inform the audience of how many times they have been asking for money and promising to repair the cottage since 2015, nor indeed how the whole project for the cottage started with the 2014 appeal.
The Blake Cottage Trust trusts people’s faulty memory. Luckily, nothing is wrong with mine, and I am here to remind the public who these people really are.
Déjà vu: Blake Cottage Trust appeals
In the BCT’s webpage’s “News” section, as of the day I’m writing these words (23rd July 2023), we can read—though after they read this blog they may change their information, as they have done in the past, in order to appease their potential donors—the following:
“A fundraising campaign is launched today to repair the roof of Blake’s Cottage in West Sussex where William Blake wrote the hymn Jerusalem beneath his ‘thatched roof of rusted gold’.”
The “today” they referred to then was the 4th of November 2021. Whatever money they might have got through that appeal, they haven’t managed to repair the building’s roof yet, nor indeed is there anywhere to be found in their website what they have done with that money.
This came after Historic England included the property in its Heritage at Risk register.
As it is also documented in this blog, I had contacted HE in the past with concerns about the cottage, and I did again after I learnt about its inclusion in the Heritage at Risk register. What I said in one of my 2021 letters to them was:
“Though delighted to know that HE has now taken this important step towards the property’s conservation, I am still worried that, at least according to the press and what the Blake Cottage Trust is saying, it was on their request that you included the cottage in the Heritage at Risk register, rather than because of public concerns that have been addressed to you over the past few years.
It seems to me that perceiving Historic England as supporting the Blake Cottage Trust isn’t in the best interests of the property, when it was the BCT who let it run into such disrepair in the first place. We’re still facing the absence of a body capable of managing the cottage.
I am fully aware of the limitations to what Historic England can do, and of the legal complexities in this issue, but I am concerned that the Blake Cottage Trust will now start yet another fundraising campaign and will again fail to use the funds skilfully and with probity, which is what happened after the Blake Society’s 2014 campaign to acquire the property.
I have written about these concerns in my blog:
Now that, thanks to Historic England’s intervention, the public is more aware of the damage to the property’s roof and structure, the next step to save it would be to make sure that the necessary money to repair it doesn’t go through the Blake Cottage Trust’s hands. The BCT is an illegitimate body that has amply proved that it is unaccountable and that it has no capacity to look after the building.”
I received a serious, caring response from both Mrs. Clare Charlesworth RIBA CAABC and Mrs. Alma Howell, who became then my point of contact. By what they both said, it became clear to me that the BCT was misrepresenting the way HE’s intervention came about, which was due to their own concerns about the state of the property, and not through the BCT’s own initiative at all. Publicly misrepresenting every single occurrence related to the cottage has been the BCT’s only consistent practice during the past eight years.
Sadly, despite Historic England’s best intentions, nearly two years on, the cottage is still in disrepair and the BCT is doing yet another appeal for money backed by empty promises.
Untrustworthy Trust
In 2021, both Mrs. Charlesworth and Mrs. Howell told me of clear recommendations they had made to the BCT when they included the cottage in their Heritage at Risk register. One concerned specifically the inclusiveness of the trust itself.
For six years, the Blake Cottage Trust was a club made up of its three unscrupulous founding members: Mr. Heath (as the chair), Mr. Johns and Mr. Michael Phillips, who never once during that time considered it important to respond to any of the serious concerns me and other persons who cared about the cottage and knew what had gone wrong addressed to them. Only silence followed the repeated invitations on our side to engage in an urgent and necessary dialogue.
Then, in 2021 and shortly before the Historic England involvement, they finally thought they could do with another trustee, and in came Mr. Jonathan Mullard. He was the first one who deigned to talk to me regarding my concerns, something I obviously welcomed. Unfortunately, this was only to repeat during a phone call the BCT’s grandiose discourse about the cottage’s glorious future, then to ask me to take this blog off the web. He never responded to my further correspondence. You can read in this link about this brief communication.
Later at some point, Mr. Jason Whittaker was appointed trustee. Mr. Whittaker collaborated often with the Blake Society when chaired by Mr. Heath. He is aware of the concerns regarding the management of the cottage, but doesn’t seem to deem it important either to address them.
Early this year in came a sixth trustee: Dr. Camila Oliveira, whose involvement seems to be related to her lecturing on Blake and the influence of his work in music. I ignore to what extent Dr. Oliveira is aware, if at all, of everything that is seriously wrong in the BCT and what happened during the original appeal to acquire the cottage.
This enlarged version of the Trust, however, still doesn’t reflect in the least the large consortium we promised to the public we would create, to which we had invited organisms such as the Tate, English PEN and the University of Chichester, among others—the kind of managing body that donors believed we would create, that they felt they could trust, hence giving us money. (I have written a lot about this crucial issue in this website. I won’t repeat myself here, but you can find in these pages plenty of information and records as to how serious the problem is.)
Among English Heritage’s recommendations to the BCT two years ago, worried as they were about the long period of vacancy and deterioration of the building, was of course the need to prioritise the maintenance of the cottage, along with seeking expert advice, and to extend the Trust, including the presence of people from the local community, so that our concerns about accountability could be addressed. The BCT made EH believe they would appoint more trustees in that manner. I fear, though, that local representation is still absent, that Mr. Whittaker has been too far involved in the past with Mr. Heath to be thought of as impartial, and has shown so far utter indifference regarding the cottage’s problems, and, I will insist, that the Trust in its present state doesn’t resemble in the least the organism we promised to the public to create in 2014.
I will go farther: the BCT’s three founding members appointed themselves as the ruling organism for the cottage through fraudulent practice, and as long as they are there, the BCT will keep on being a corrupt organisation.
The Blake Society
Some months ago (or a year perhaps? I’m not quite sure), something miraculous happened within the Blake Society Committee: Mr. Heath’s far too long dictatorship as a chair ended. This, and the fact that there is no one left in the current committee of all those trustees who actively engaged in the cover-up of the fraud through which the actual BCT came into existence, is refreshing.
However, I can’t possibly believe that the current Committee is unaware of the scandal, and I find it both worrying and disheartening that they have never addressed the issue publicly, have never explained what happened, and keep on advertising the Blake Cottage Trust’s campaigns. Indeed, the two newest trustees of the BCT, Mr. Whittaker and Dr. Oliveira Querino, are also trustees of the Blake Society. Should I emphasize, after what we know, how worrying this is?
I will take the opportunity here to remind The Blake Society that they are still the organisation who called itself publicly responsible for the initial cottage appeal in 2014 and received the initial donations, and that therefore they have a duty of accountability and a responsibility towards the public and the initial donors. If they are really a renewed organisation, they ought to make it clear by fulfilling their obligation to explain what happened, apologise, return money, make amends.
Architectural Heritage Fund
I will end these notes by saying that the Blake Cottage Trust did follow one of English Heritage’s 2021 suggestions. They got in touch with the Architectural Heritage Fund, and in November that year the latter granted them funds towards “fees for a conservation plan to be carried out at the Cottage, including a summary of the site, assessment of its significance, and an analysis of conservation needs”.
Nearly two years on—not a short period of time in any way, given the degree of the cottage’s disrepair—we’re still hearing of holes in the roof, an alarming state of disrepair precariously stayed by some poles, and we’ve been regaled yet again with a Blake Cottage Trust plea for more money.
It’s been nearly a decade since this whole unedifying saga begun. Those of us concerned have done everything in our power to make the Blake Cottage Trust and the former committee of the Blake Society accountable, and to warn the public and those organisations who seem to be supporting the BCT. We have, mainly, been ignored, when not suffering active attempts at silencing from both the BS and the BCT. I wonder, how much longer do we need to understand that things are not right? Until the cottage has collapsed, perhaps?
Is it really so difficult to understand that an organism that was born corrupt will still be corrupt if it’s not purged from its unscrupulous members, and that things will always end up very badly if it’s allowed to go on unchecked?
I have no doubts that William Blake’s spirit has fled the unbreathable air of the Felpham cottage long ago, and if he were still alive, he would be enraged at what is being done in his name. Perhaps it’s not too late though for that spirit, manifested as the space for furthering his legacy and for creation we had envisaged, to return, or at least for the actual building being saved from destruction, if, frankly, the cottage changes hands. The issue is, I know, horribly complex, but I keep on believing that the National Trust, whom I have repeatedly contacted, could make a change.
Perhaps there is one way people may start opening their eyes. One of my recommendations (all unheeded) to Mr. Heath when I left the cottage appeal, exhausted and near complete mental and physical breakdown after the constant bullying, and my efforts to raise awareness among the Blake Society committee of what was going on and stir them into action (which were met initially with great worry and anger towards Mr. Heath, followed by a cover-up, lying to the public and attempts to silence me), was that, if the cottage was ever acquired—for I didn’t know yet he was by then already scheming to get it for himself—the consortium or trust to be founded should keep records of their decision-making, and be ready to make them public if need be.
If we all started not simply asking, but demanding to see those records (including financial disclosure: how much money they have received in full, from whom, and how it has been spent, down to the very last penny), things might start to look good for the cottage.