well as being rather lucrative. Both potteries produced tiles for the expanding building industry and some may have found their way to London together with the local brick trade. The tithe records also list an Edward Hone (limeburner at Upnor) and a John Hone (brickmaker at Bill Street). It is not known if they were related to Henry Hone but it is possible that this was an example of a family diversifying into all aspects of supplying the building industry. Henry later went on to own the Kings Arms pub and John the Old Oak Inn. By 1858, there had been a change of proprietors and the potteries were now owned by Thomas Baker and Jesse Clark Foster. It is likely that the larger premises belonged to the latter since, in 1877, Foster bought the clay pits from the Executors of Beadle who had by then died. With this assumption, Baker must have sold out after a few years to Messrs Charlton & Matthews since, in the book "Industrial Medway" by J.M. Preston, they are mentioned in an advertisement dated 1868. This reference is interesting since it shows the diverse range of products being produced i.e. oven & paving bricks and tiles; pan, plain & ridge tiles; sanitary & land drainage pipes; chimney, flower & paint pots; garden & edging tiles. In the meantime, Foster continued to expand his pottery and took his son Theophilus into partnership in 1867. In 1871 they were shown as brick and tile manufacturers but there is no evidence that they had the necessary equipment at their clay pits to make bricks on site. Since it was a competitive business locally, it is more likely that they produced specialised bricks at their premises. In 1882 they sold out to Francis Hazell, who produced bricks, tiles, drainpipes and chimney & garden pots. The 1862 Ordnance Survey map shows a draw well next to each of the potteries. Whereas these may only be water wells, there is also the possibility that they were chalk wells. The census of 1871 lists a William Eloine of Wainscott who was described as an ‘excavator’. This is a peculiar term since men who dug clay were normally described as merely labourers and it seems to imply extraction at depth. He could of course have been a local well sinker but, again, the latter term is usually used in census job descriptions.