THE SUBSIDENCE AT LEXDEN. 7
a day or two after the occurrence. Below is this paragraph; it was
reprinted in the "Essex Standard" of May 31, 1884 :—
"Landslip at Lexden.—A landslip of a very unusual character in this part of
the country has just occurred at the Malting Farm, Lexden, in the occupation of
Mr Edmund S. Phillips, and only a short distance from the well-known Lexden
Springs. In the course of Wednesday week, a portion of ground in a clover field
appears to have sunk perpendicularly, leaving an opening (which was discovered
next day) of an oval shape, about twenty-one feet by sixteen, and eleven feet in
depth, including about two feet of water at the bottom. The spot is about forty
yards from the river, and as the whole neighbourhood abounds in springs, it is
supposed the water, acting upon a vein of what is known as blowing sand, had
forced an outlet into the river, and so produced a cavity which led to the slip above
described But how it should have occurred at that particular spot it is difficult to
account for, as the upper stratum is of considerable thickness, and there has been
neither heavy rains to cause a settlement, nor the passage of traffic to produce a jar
or dismemberment, there having been no carting over, or cultivation of, the field
since last harvest."—"Essex Standard," Friday, May 2, 1862.
It will be noticed that its writer very nearly agrees with Mr. Wire
in his estimate of the depth of the sinking, and also that he speaks
of "about two feet of water at the bottom," though there had been no
heavy rains.
I revisited the scene on the 4th of August, 1884, when the river
was low in consequence of the long-continued drought. A ditch,
draining the gravel, has its outfall into the Colne at the bend nearest
the sinking, its course being along the hedge ranging from the bend
westward. From this ditch a swift current of water was flowing into
the almost stagnant Colne, its volume being somewhat remarkable
when the dryness of the season was considered, and showing how
large a proportion of the water collecting towards the base of the
gravel must find its way into the river at this point. With a
measuring tape I ascertained that the level of the surface of the river
was then about nine feet below that of the ground at the site of the
subsidence, while the deepest point in the bed of the stream may
have been about three feet lower still. Now, estimating the bottom
of the river-bed at the bend to be from twelve to thirteen feet lower
than the surface of the ground at the sinking, and the depth of the
sinking itself to have been about ten feet, an ordinary landslip
becomes the most simple and obvious explanation of the formation
of the cavity. The gravel, nine or ten feet thick, resting upon
impermeable clay, would be full of water towards its base, and a very
gentle dip towards the river bend would tend to cause it to slip
forward in that direction, the peculiarity in this case being that a
very much larger area of ground than usual was affected, the result
becoming obvious at an unusual distance from the stream. Of