Hugh Myddelton and Henry Neville's Waterworks Investments

Hugh Myddelton and Henry Neville

Controlled findings

Hugh Myddelton was Neville's contractual counterparty in the New River project, not merely a famous engineer associated with a company in which Neville later held shares. Bernard Rudden's printed instrument of 8 May 1612 names Sir Henry Neville of Billingbear, acknowledges £200, and grants him two of the thirty-six private shares. The instrument also provided accounting, consent, profit, and further-contribution rights. The arrangement was therefore an equity investment with governance provisions, not a simple loan.

The documentary sequence is unusually dense:

Corrected identity

The receipts formerly divided between “Hugh” and an adult “Henry Myddelton” belong to Hugh. The 2 December 1613 document names Hugh in its body; comparison across five subscriptions shows the descending g that was previously missed. The archive catalogue independently identifies Hugh. The correction strengthens the record by showing the same counterparty across the Salisbury and London waterworks rather than inventing a second Myddelton.

History of Parliament controls the necessary identity firewall: Hugh must be distinguished from his brothers Sir Thomas and Robert Myddelton, and from other Middletons in parliamentary records.

Quoted source passages

Rudden's printed 1612 instrument describes Neville as one who:

“is and hathe beene an adventurer in the said worke”

and grants:

“two full and intire six and thirtieth partes”

The 18 May receipt identifies the project as bringing water:

“from the springes of Chadwell and Amwell towards the Cittie of London”

These quotations have independent printed or image controls. The unresolved thirty-sixths/thirty-fifths discrepancy is preserved rather than normalized.

Limits

• Nothing checked proves that Neville designed the works or promoted the New

River legislation in Parliament.

• The 1610 Salisbury scheme and the 1612 New River enterprise are distinct.
• The 27 June receipt is known from a 1917 sale catalogue; its current owner and

original physical witness remain unknown.

• Regular New River dividends postdated both Neville and Myddelton.

Public citations

• Andrew Thrush and Alan Davidson, “MYDDELTON, Hugh (c.1560-1631)”, The History of Parliament: the House of Commons 1604-1629.
• Myers & Co., *An Illustrated Catalogue of Rare Books*, item 129 (1917).
• Bernard Rudden, The New River: A Legal History (Oxford, 1985), appendix E,

pp. 274-278.

• The London Archives, New River Company research guide.

Verification record

Original-color Berkshire images were inspected for the 1610-1614 signatures and naming clauses. The public biography, sale catalogue, and research guide allow independent identification of Myddelton and the wider record series; the private photographs are verification controls, not reader-facing citations.

Round 9 fact/source audit — 8 August 2026

The investment record is a sequence, not a single share statement: the printed 8 May 1612 instrument names Neville's £200 payment for two thirty-sixth interests; the 18 May receipt records a further £50 connected with Chadwell and Amwell; and the 2 December 1613 image-controlled receipt records continued payment under the May covenant. These documents establish capital participation and a continuing contractual relationship with Hugh Myddelton. They do not make Neville designer, engineer, or promoter of the works.

The later estate abstract's thirty-fifths language remains a real discrepancy, not a reason to rewrite the instrument's thirty-sixths. It may reflect later consolidation, forfeiture, division, or an abstracting convention, but none is yet sourced. The London Archives New River Company guide identifies the company archive as the proper route for share-ledger and account evidence.