View allAll Photos Tagged PROSPECT!
Bedford YNT Dupe Dominant IV TIW 2313 was new to Swanbrook as WDG 114X and was seen at Prospect's Lye base on 27th September, 2004.
Seen in Basingstoke in January 2025 picking up enroute to the Isle of Wight is Prospect of Lye's Scania K410CB6 / Irizar i6S Efficient C44FLT PR24DOR, new in 5/2024. The coach wears Just Go! Holidays premium brand 'JG Explorer' livery, one of 5 such examples operated by partner coach firms Alpine, Crosskeys, Hunter, Prospect and Taylors.
Colorado Balloon Classic - Colorado Springs CO
September 4,5 - 2011
Memorial Park - Prospect Lake
Labor Day
Mani Shankar Aiyar, an MP of Indian Rajya Sabha and former Consul-General of India had delivered a lecture to Karachi Council of Foreign Relations on ‘India and Pakistan: Retrospect and prospect’ a few days ago.
Following is the text of his address in which he has described his personal experience while living in Pakistan as an Indian official and also highlighted relations between India and Pakistan:
“Mr Chairman, distinguished members of the Karachi Council of Foreign Relations, ladies and gentlemen, and dear friends of the last three decades: This is a very personal narrative of an Indian who lived three of his best years in Karachi, albeit 33 years ago, and has since seized every opportunity that has come his way to visit Pakistan, meet his old friends and make new ones. In this last year itself, this is my fifth visit to Pakistan. I hope I can maintain the momentum as Pakistan is my magnificent obsession.
I suppose I have read very much less about Pakistan than any scholar of Pakistan studies. And although I came here initially as an officer of the Indian Foreign Service and have visited Pakistan several times in an official capacity, as a member of our delegations, or accompanying Indian ministers, even thrice in the entourage of the Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, and also as Minister of Petroleum and Natural Gas to push forward the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline and later as Minister of Panchayati Raj to intensify interaction between our respective local self-government representatives, I have had strangely little to do with the political dialogue between our two countries. Almost all of my interaction with Pakistan and Pakistanis has been at the personal level. Hence I can do no more than bring a very personal perspective to bear on matters of great pith and moment.
Perhaps for that very reason the perspective has its value - although one of my closest Indian friends, former High Commissioner to Pakistan, later Foreign Secretary and later still National Security Adviser, JN (Mani) Dixit, said he could not abide my Pollyanna view of our neighbour. Perhaps not. But there are so many Indians who have their grave reservations about Pakistan and its intentions towards us that there might be some value in listening to a more sympathetic Indian view of Pakistan.
I came to Karachi as India’s first-ever Consul General on 14 December 1978, 13 years after Pakistan’s capital moved to Islamabad, around the time of the 1965 war, leading, first, to a downgrading of the High Commission followed by the Assistant High Commission being closed down at the start of the 1971 war. Thus Karachi, refuge of the Mohajir community, those who had left or fled India at the time of partition or soon after, leaving behind in India, however, vast numbers of memories, friends and relatives, was thirsting for the resumption of an Indian visa office to facilitate their all too human desire to go back to the land of their forefathers - and at that time, for many, the land too of their birth. I used to be astonished at their evocation of the filthy gullies of Bans Bareilly and Sambal as if they were talking of Paris in the Spring! But perhaps their sentiment was best summed up by Rais Amrohvi’s ‘O! Hind Jane Wale Mera Salaam Leja:
Jab se bichhad gaye hain us khuld-e-rangabu se
Mehroom ho gaye hain, dil shauk-o-aarzu se
Baaz aayenge musafir kya zauk-e-justaju se
Ab tak wahi hai rishte, Dilli se Lucknow se
Ajdaad ke watan tak itna payam le ja
O! Hind jane wale mera salaam le ja.’
My very first afternoon was a revelation. The phone rang. It was the Deputy Commissioner of Sukkur on the line. He said he had a major problem on his hands: a Hindu sant had been given permission to revisit Sukkur for the first time after the 1965 war and his Muslim mureeds wanted to pay their respects to him. ‘Would I grant them permission to do so?’ ‘Of course’, I replied, rather grandly giving my instant assent - but rose from my desk completely confused. Like all Indians I had been brought up to believe that Pakistanis were ardent, even fanatical, Muslims for, after all, had they not broken my country on the ground that Hindus and Muslims did not constitute two communities but two nations, incompatible and, therefore, incapable of living together under one democratic roof? That, in fact, it was democracy that was the problem because democracy rests on majority rule and would not that majority in an independent India be decided on communal rather than political grounds? Yet, here I was being asked - and by no less a dignitary than the head of one of Sindh’s most important districts - whether Muslim spiritual aspirants might seek the blessings of a Hindu holy man?”
Later, after Makhdoom Amin Fahim became a close personal friend, I asked him whether it was true, as I had heard, that the Hindu followers of his father, the Pir of Hala, who had fled to India at partition, still sought the Pir’s blessings when there was a birth in the family or a wedding or some such auspicious occasion? Makhdoom sahib confirmed that this was indeed so. But, said I, ‘was it not a fact that the Pir’s blessings could not be validated without a nazrana?’ ‘Of course’, came the reply. ‘But how do they send it,’ I asked? By the same route, he disingenuously replied, that they send their requests for a blessing - through the smugglers! God is clearly no respecter of political boundaries.
That introspective introduction to Pakistan on Day One was reinforced the following evening at my first social occasion when I found myself seated next to an unknown Pakistani with whom I began the conversation by asking, in an utterly banal manner, whether he had been to India. ‘Yes,’ he replied somewhat taciturnly. To encourage further conversation, I asked where he had been. ‘Meerut,’ came the curt reply. ‘Oh, really,’ I said, ‘and how long were you there?’ ‘Two and a half years,’ he slowly responded - and it dawned on me with growing horror that I was talking to one of our 1971 Prisoners of War! Seeing the highly embarrassed expression on my face, my interlocutor smiled - indeed, beamed - and enquired if my wife and I would care to dine with them at the Sindh Club the following evening? It turned out to be a most convivial evening and walking back to Hindustan Court after dinner my wife shook her bewildered head and asked whether we had come to an enemy country or what? I shared her bewilderment.
That initial hospitality flowered over the next three years of our stay in Karachi into a bouquet of friendships stretching across the entire political spectrum from the PPP at one end to the Islam-pasand parties on the other; on the geographical spectrum from Clifton to North Nazimabad; on the socio-cultural spectrum from affluent Defence Housing Society homes to the rehriwalas of Sadar; on the business front from petty shop-keepers to industrial and commercial barons; on the intellectual level from academics like Sharif-ul-Mujahid and Hafeez Pasha to the poets and poetasters of the Pak-Hind Prem Sabha; to journalists of every hue from sophisticates like MB Naqvi and Sultan Ahmed and Brig AR Siddiqui to the editor of Jasarat, the mouthpiece of the Jamaat-e-Islami, and even Nawai Waqt. My attitude was, I am a foreigner, why take sides in Pakistan’s internecine quarrels?
We - me, my wife, my children, my officers, my staff of over one hundred - to go by their present nostalgic remembrances, all had a ball. But on my very last night in Karachi - we were sailing to Bombay next afternoon - I suddenly had a very disturbing thought. What if my euphoric high was only the consequence of my being flattered out of my mind by heading a huge establishment at the age of under forty, the welcome I had received not being to an Indian but to a Consul General who could pull a visa out of his pocket like a magician pulling out a pigeon?
I sent for one of my assistants, a man who had reached Karachi the same day as I had and whose personal experience of the city was co-terminus with mine. I asked whether he had experienced any discrimination, any abuse, any invective, even any discourtesy, during his three years in the city. He thought for a while, then shook his head to say No, he hadn’t. But, I persisted, no one could tell merely by looking at him whether he was an Indian or a Pakistani, what about his wife and her give-away bindi? He said no one had ever been rude or nasty to her although she always sported a bindi, neither in the bus she took from the Indian Consulate ghetto of Panchsheel Court, a dead give-away of national origin, nor in the shopping marts of Sadar. That led me to ask him to confirm a rumour I had heard as Consul General - that shopkeepers in Sadar invariably offered discounts to Indian, and especially Indian Consulate customers. Reluctantly but unambiguously, he confirmed that this was indeed so. Thus, his three years had been remarkably like mine. I, therefore, enquired whether he thought we should improve relations with Pakistan. Astonished, he replied, ‘but how could we, were they not all Mussalmans?’
That is the central problem: the communalisation of the mind, looking at our neighbours not as one of us, but as the Other, indeed, the Enemy Other.
The communalisation of mindsets was the root cause of the division of the country as the price to be paid for independence. Now that there are two countries, independent since six decades, is there no way the communalisation of the mind can be eased in the direction of also recognising the complementarities in our respective national destinies?
For we live in the same South Asian geographical space. Although many Pakistanis would deny it, we also occupy much the same civilisational space, diversity of every kind - racial, linguistic, ethnic, cultural, religious and even sectarian - being woven into the warp and the woof of our nationhood. History may have divided us, but geography binds us, and a shared inheritance holds as much the potential to keep us apart as to bring us together. The choice is for us to make.
For most of the last six decades, the best and the brightest of our countries - sants and Ulema; ideologues and propagandists; terrorists and cerebral communalists; politicians and statesmen; scholars and the media; diplomats and the military - have done all they can to render us asunder. They have not entirely succeeded. For we remain hyphenated in the eyes of the world because we remain hyphenated in the minds of our people. And we remain hyphenated because we are hyphenated; we share too much to just turn our backs on each other and hope the other will go away. Siamese twins are not free to roam except with each other, even if they keep pulling away from each other.
There are four sets of factors that stand in the way of reconciliation. I would classify these as: generic; institutional; endemic; and episodic.
Generic: Some in India and many in Pakistan would argue that the very reason for partition having been the religious incompatibility between Hindus and Muslims, it is inevitable that the two nations would also find it incompatible to live together as good neighbours. The argument goes that the underlying hostility is generic, built into our genes as it were, and if it were not partition would not have happened.
That, perhaps, is a somewhat fundamentalist way of putting it and, therefore, the point is generally made with greater sophistication and nuancing as not so much a fundamental civilisational incompatibility but a lack of convergence in national interest or even a belief that hostility being the underlying reality, it is not so much a question of promoting friendship as protecting oneself from hostile intent.”
The News Pakistan (13/01/2011)
Mani Shankar Aiyar, an MP of Indian Rajya Sabha and former Consul-General of India had delivered a lecture to Karachi Council of Foreign Relations on ‘India and Pakistan: Retrospect and prospect’ a few days ago.
Following is second part of the text of his address - Part-I was published on Thursday - in which he has described his personal experience while living in Pakistan as an Indian official and also highlighted relations between India and Pakistan:
“Yet, there are several levels at which this argument breaks down. First, the Indian Muslim community: are they not living in harmony with their Hindu brethren? If there were no compatibility, how is it that almost every icon of India’s 85% Hindu youth is unabashedly Muslim: the four Khans - superstars Shah Rukh, Aamir, Salman, and Saif; leading ladies like Katrina Kaif following Madhubala, Meena Kumari and Nargis of yore and Waheeda Rahman and Shabana Azmi more recently; the golden voice of Mohd Rafi and Talat Mehmood; the lyrics of Sahir Ludhianvi and Javed Akhtar; music director AR Rahman (who was born Dilip Kumar and converted to Islam, where his renowned predecessor in the run-up to partition, Dilip Kumar, the actor, was born Yusuf Khan in Peshawar and converted to Bollywood under an assumed Hindu name); the makers of Peepli Live, Mehmood Farooqui and Anusha Rizvi, India’s sure-fire entry for this year’s Oscars; ustads such as Bismillah Khan, Vilayat Khan, Bade Ghulam Ali Khan, Amjad Ali Khan and tabla maestros, Allah Rakha and Zakir Hussain; cricketers like Tiger Pataudi and Azharuddin, and tennis star, Sania Mirza, whom we share, besides a whole galaxy of highly influential opinion-makers of whom I need mention only three - the Group Editor of the India Today stable, MJ Akbar; columnist Saeed Naqvi; and historian Mushirul Hassan, Director of the National Archives - and business barons, Aziz Premji and Anu Agha. The point needs no labouring.”
Except that the Justice Rajinder Sachar report will immediately be thrown at those who suggest that the lived experience of secular India shows no incompatibility between the two alleged ‘nations’ of Hindu and Muslim. Yes, indeed, in many, many respects the denizens of the Muslim community are worse off than their non-Muslim counterparts in northern India. Equally undeniable is that while the North Indian Muslim elite largely took off for Pakistan at partition, the vast majority of the ordinary Muslims voted with their feet to remain where they were. Deprived of a middle-class and a political leadership, the community has striven to raise itself by its boot-straps and while there are success stories there is much leeway to be made up. This points to the need for more affirmative action; it emphatically does not mean that Hindu and Muslim cannot live under one national roof.
Moreover, it needs to be recognised - in Pakistan, of course, but much more in India - that where population transfer did not take place, as in South India, the Muslim community is doing quite exceptionally well - and is not resented by the majority community for doing so.
I do not want to make a polemical point. I simply want to assert here on Pakistani soil that whatever might have been the argument for a Muslim-majority State on this South Asian sub-continent at the time of independence and partition, now that Pakistan has been in existence for sixty years and more, the generic argument for Hindu-Muslim incompatibility has lost its sheen and transmuted more into national hostility than communal animosity.”
“In this context, I’d like to share a story with you about what happened when I addressed a Jang Forum meeting in Karachi a few years ago. I was asked from the audience how I could claim to be a friend of Pakistan when I rejected the Two-Nation theory. I replied that whatever the merits of the theory in the period leading up to independence and partition, it was time now to recognise that the Two-Nation Theory had given way to the Three-State Reality, and that if we continued to advocate the Two Nation Theory, it would have to mean that the 15 crore Muslims in India are traitors to their country. At this, the questioner, delighted with my answer, bounded on to the stage, embraced me, and handing over a visiting card describing him as the Vice Chairman of the Karachi Marriage Hall Owners Association, whispered in my ear that when I got married again, he promised me a marriage hall for free! That, I regard, as the highest compliment I have ever received. My wife, however, disapproves - I wonder why?
Reciprocally, it is little known in India, and little bruited about in Pakistan, how many members of Pakistan’s non-Muslim minorities hold positions of distinction and responsibility in Pakistan, not only in the higher echelons but in the grassroots institutions of local government, in the civil services, in the judiciary, in agriculture, in business and the arts. Partition over, as the Quaid-i-Azam said before Pakistan was suddenly and unexpectedly emptied of its minorities in the fortnight after its creation: ‘You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion, caste or creed, that has nothing to do with the business of the State. Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.’
It could have been Nehru speaking!
Moreover, in numerous countries across the world, where Indian and Pakistani immigrants live and work together, while some do indeed carry their communal baggage with them overseas, by and large there is tolerance, even cordiality, between the two communities. Nothing in either Islam or Hinduism makes for incompatibility. Our syncretic history, our symbiotic past of over a thousand years, beginning with Muhammad bin Qasim arriving on our shores in 711 AD, points rather to a composite heritage than to one that is irretrievably divided.
I would, therefore, emphatically repeat that it is not communal animosity but national hostility that keeps India and Pakistan apart: a matter to be addressed by political and diplomatic action, not theology. Indeed, if religious differences were the root cause, how does one explain Pakistan’s excellent relations with the only avowedly Hindu nation in the world, Nepal, or India’s excellent relations with virtually every Muslim country - except Pakistan?
The generic argument does not hold, but are the scars of history impossible to raze? Those who became Pakistani on 14 August 1947 had been Indians till the previous day. Therefore, there were many in India who argued, Prof Sisir Gupta perhaps most persuasively, that since nothing in language or literature, culture or cuisine, history or even religion distinguished a Pakistani from an Indian, the only way a Pakistani could distinguish himself from an Indian was by asserting that he was emphatically not an Indian, by building the national identity of Pakistan not with positive building blocks but negatively by stressing that, above all, Pakistan was not India and Pakistanis were Pakistanis precisely because Pakistanis were not Indians.
I do not know whether this argument was always a parody, but today, more than sixty years after Pakistan became a reality, those who began life as Indians are a rapidly diminishing breed. I would imagine that some 90% of Pakistanis today have never known any nationality other than their Pakistani nationality, even as 90% of Indians have never known Pakistan as an integral part of India. Thus, history itself is taking care of history. There is no reason why the nationhood of contemporary Pakistan needs to be built with the cement of anti-Indian or anti-Hindu sentiment. And that, indeed, is the reason for the affection with which most Indians are received in Pakistan - and, to a large if not reciprocal extent, Pakistanis are received in India. The political reality of 21st century India and Pakistan has substantially replaced the grievances that separated sections of the Hindu and Muslim community in pre-partition India, especially after the outbreak of communal riots in the Turbulent ‘20s of the last century.
Therefore, I see no reason in principle why generic or historical factors need necessarily stand in the way of reconciliation between the two countries. If nevertheless progress in the direction of reconciliation has been slow, then does the problem lie in institutional hurdles on the road to reconciliation?
Institutional: From the Indian perspective - and perhaps also the perspective of a majority of Pakistanis - the overwhelming role of the military in Pakistan’s approach to India is often held to be the principal institutional block to reconciliation. The argument goes that so long as the army, abetted by a complaisant civil service, is the effective political power in Pakistan, and so long as the raison d’etre of the huge Pakistani military establishment and what Ayesha Siddique calls Pakistan’s Military Inc is founded on the assiduous propagation of the threat from India - so the argument goes - the Pakistani military will never permit hostility between the two countries to be undermined for that would be to cut off the branch on which the Pakistani defence forces are perched.
On the other hand, here in Pakistan it is often claimed that revanchist sentiment in the entire Indian establishment, including the Indian military, is so strong and persistent that the dismemberment of Pakistan in 1971 was only the prelude to the destruction of the rest of Pakistan, whenever this might prove possible; hence the need for eternal vigilance as the price to be paid for Pakistan’s liberty. Both these views appear to me to be a case of the wish fathering the thought. I don’t believe that the actual course of India-Pakistan relations validates the view that India cannot deal with the Pakistani military; or that India is still hankering after a restoration of Akhand Bharat.
Let us take first the Indian view of the Pakistan military. It is rooted, I think, in Gen Ayub Khan’s coup of 1958. Please remember that in 1958, half a century ago, almost all top officers of the Indian military were either General Ayub Khan’s contemporaries or his seniors in the predecessor British Indian army. India, understandably, did not want Bonapartism to spread from the Pakistan army to their Indian counterparts. Gen Thimayya’s resignation at about the same time as the Ayub coup was considered - perhaps erroneously - as an ominous and dangerous straw in a wind that blew no one any good.
But it was the Ayub regime that in its earliest days suggested a ‘Trieste’ solution to Kashmir - that is, let the status quo lie and postpone resolution to a future generation - if I am to credit the story recounted to me here in Karachi by India’s high commissioner to the Ayub government, Rajeshwar Dayal. And it was indubitably during the Ayub regime that the Indus Waters Treaty was signed, a treaty that has weathered three wars and continues to offer a forum for the resolution of water disputes, as witness the recent spats over Baglihar and now Kishangana. Moreover, it was during that regime that Sheikh Abdullah, Jayaprakash Narayan and others were, by all accounts, on a successful or, at any rate, promising peace mission to Pakistan when Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru suddenly died. Yes, the battle in the Rann of Kutch in April 1965, and Operation Gibraltar in August that year, followed by the September war, took place in the Ayub dispensation, but much of that seems to have been stoked as much by civilian political forces as by the armed forces. In any case, it was President Ayub Khan who signed the Tashkent Agreement, disagreement having been registered principally by his civilian colleagues.
Later, it was during the period of Ziaul Haq that, whatever might be one’s reservations about his domestic policies, there was a new impetus given to people-to-people relations, the most important having been the opening of the Indian Consulate General in Karachi. And when in the winter of 1986-87 the temperature started building up over Operation Brasstacks, it was in Ziaul Haq that Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi found a most effective partner in defusing the threat of war.
And although Gen Pervez Musharraf’s coup was almost universally looked at with deep disapproval and suspicion in India, coming as it did in the wake of Kargil 1999, eventually it was under his aegis that the Composite Dialogue made more progress on the Tariq-Lambah back-channel than at perhaps any other stage of India-Pakistan relations.
Equally, of course, the Nehru-Liaquat Pact of 1950, the Simla Agreement of 1972 and the Lahore Declaration were the handiwork of civilian governments.
Hence, I do not think the objective record makes for any insuperable difficulty in India dealing directly with the Pakistan military or in dealing with a civilian government that has the military breathing down its neck. In any case, if Pakistan cannot get itself out of the military shadow, what can India do about it? We have to deal with whoever is in power in this country and while we certainly sympathise with the widespread Pakistani desire to become a full-fledged democracy, we have to make do with whatever is on offer - and I do not think we in India should postpone any amelioration in our relations with Pakistan till that nebulous day when we will have in Pakistan a democratically elected political authority that keeps its military in check. Peace is an imperative now, not a consummation to be postponed indefinitely.
Part III
Mani Shankar Aiyar, an MP of Indian Rajya Sabha and former Consul-General of India had delivered a lecture to Karachi Council of Foreign Relations on “India and Pakistan: Retrospect and prospect” a few days ago.
Following is third part of the text of his address - Part-II was published on Friday - in which he has described his personal experience while living in Pakistan as an Indian official and also highlighted relations between India and Pakistan:
“On the other hand, the regrettably widespread view in Indian circles that Pakistan is a ‘failed’ State or a ‘failing’ one also needs to be countered. I do not think any nation, let alone Pakistan, which is so firmly anchored in history, civilization, ideology and spiritual belief as is Pakistan, with one of the largest populations in the world (even if relative to India somewhat small), with the high degree of political and philosophical sophistication, which one encounters in this country at every turn, a resilient economy and a burgeoning globalised elite, a strong bureaucracy and a stronger military, and an extremely lively and informed media, can ever be a pushover. When the Taliban was said to have arrived at Buner, a hundred kilometres from Islamabad, there were those in India who feared (or even wished) for the collapse. The fear was always unrealistic, the wish beggared. And was shown to be so when the security forces moved into action and pushed back the insurgents, as they had when in July 2007 firm action was taken at the Lal Masjid in the heart of Islamabad. Pakistan, six decades after its foundation, is no war-time Afghanistan swirling in chaos at the time of the Soviet and American withdrawal and the political vacuum that followed the end of its socialist phase, and, thus, sucked inexorably into the vortex of religious extremism assiduously egged-on from outside. Yes, you have your difficulties. But so do we. So any strategy built on the assumption that Pakistan cannot hold is misconceived, misplaced and dangerously misleading. And, therefore, bound to be disproved. Equally unrealistic are doomsday prophecies of Pakistan falling into the maw of fanatical terrorists or disintegrating irretrievably into a congeries of nations. Pakistan is here to stay and it would best to deal with it on those terms. While it is the duty of the intelligence community to conjure up far-fetched scenarios and prepare for them, statesmen are required to handle the here and now. And that calls for an engagement with a Pakistan that will last, not a Pakistan on its last legs.
That accounts too, in my view, for no one in India harbouring any illusions any more about a return to Akhand Bharat. That was a slogan in the immediate post-partition period, a cry from the heart of those who had been deprived of their hearths and their homes. That generation has gone, the refugee in India is well integrated into Indian society, and there is no homesickness for return except perhaps in the fading memories of some eighty-to-ninety year olds. Moreover, what on earth are we going to do with 15 crore seriously angered malcontents if ever anything so stupid happened as the end of Pakistan? No, there is nothing, nothing at all, to be gained by promoting any disintegration of neighbouring Pakistan, and I would advise any Pakistani who doubts us on this score to consider how steadfast a series of Indian governments, of every hue and colour, were in standing up for the unity and integrity of Sri Lanka through thirty years of a vicious civil war caused by gross discrimination against the Tamil minority despite the strong ethnic links that bind the Sri Lankan Tamil to the Indian Tamil.
There being no insuperable institutional obstacle to a sustained Indo-Pak effort to resolve simmering differences, let us now turn our attention to those differences, which, for convenience, I have divided into the ‘endemic’ and the ‘episodic’.
Endemic: The endemic issues between Pakistan and India are, from a Pakistani perspective, Kashmir and water; from an Indian perspective, doubtless it is cross-border terrorism based on Pakistani soil.
I have no readymade answers. I doubt that anyone has. But is that cause enough to despair of any solution ever being found?
The historical record would appear to disprove any military solution to the argument over Jammu and Kashmir. The attempt to annex the Maharajah’s state when he and Sheikh Abdullah were readying to through their lot in with India failed; so did Operation Gibraltar; so did the attack on Akhnur that followed; as did the hostilities on the Western Front in 1971; as did the Kargil misadventure; as did the proxy war of the nineties. And while there are those in India who maintain that the war of 1948 should have been pressed forward to a conclusion, I think Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru was sensible in listening to wiser counsel. There is no military solution, and subversion will not work.
On the other hand, is jaw-jaw impossible? The United Nations, once the forum for grand forensic battles between Krishna Menon and Feroze Khan Noon and, later, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Swaran Singh, has in effect washed its hands of the issue; the question of Jammu and Kashmir remains on the UN agenda but lies dormant ever since India and Pakistan agreed at Shimla in July 1972 to discuss bilaterally all issues related to J&K. Notwithstanding the Naysayers, and there is no dearth of them in either country, progress has indeed been made. These issues are an integral part of the Composite Dialogue initiated in 1997. And, to go by available records, a framework for resolution had reached an advanced stage under the aegis of President Musharraf and Dr Manmohan Singh through the Lambah-Tariq back channel. Even if that progress is not being acknowledged now, it does seem feasible to hope that the resumption of back channel contacts (made public by the Pakistan minister of Kashmir Affairs, according to reports appearing in the Indian media) might yet move matters further forward. But whether or not the back channel has, indeed, been reactivated, the two countries have demonstrated that, when the waters are not muddied, they can talk to each other even on Jammu and Kashmir and inch towards an agreed settlement. Neither military action nor encouragement to cross-border terrorism can do that.
As for waters, when I was in Pakistan in March last year, the drying rivers of the Indus basin were on everyone’s lips; when I was last here in October, devastating floods were on everyone’s mind. Water is a most serious issue and upper and lower riparian, whether within our respective countries, such as Punjab and Sindh, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu, for example, or between our respective countries, will have to find answers in 21st century technology, not in the polemics of the 20th century. The total availability of water has run so low that where India and Pakistan started in the 1950s with a per capita availability per annum of about 5,000 cubic metres, water availability in both countries has since declined to under 2,000, in Pakistan rather more sharply than in India, down to about 1,200 as against India’s 1,800.
The problem of water shortage is, however, common to both of us and is, indeed, a global problem common to virtually every country in the world. Some would call it the most important universal challenge of our times. Israel has shown the way to the conservation of water through drip and sprinkler irrigation and I imagine that it is in such technology rather than in the 19th century technology of large dams and command area channels that the answer lies.
But while technology may hold the secret, there is no denying the fact of water deprivation or the politics that flow from it. That is where the Indus Waters Treaty has proved its immense worth. The numerous mechanisms it has for finding acceptable ways of resolving agonized issues, as was demonstrated over Baglihar recently and as is being demonstrated over Kishangana now, are solid examples of India and Pakistan being able to discover forums of settlement in preference to the vapid aggravation of real problems and real issues.
I now turn, with some trepidation, to the Indian priority issue - terrorism. Till 9/11, cross-border terrorism was one of several subjects under discussion in our bilateral composite dialogue notwithstanding the proxy war in Kashmir nor the jihadi strategy of bleeding India with a thousand cuts. The attack on our Parliament on December 13, 2001 led to the armed confrontation of Operation Parikrama but did not stall either the Agra summit or the Islamabad Declaration of January 2004 or the dramatic progress made between May 2004 and March 2007 when the going was never better.
Meanwhile, the al-Qaeda attack on the Twin Towers brought the American retaliation to the borders of Pakistan. Ever since, terrorism has become a global issue, perhaps the most important issue before the international community. In that war against terrorism, Pakistan, willy-nilly, has become a front-line state, with horrific consequences for itself. No state has suffered as much from terrorism as Pakistan itself. I think there needs to be much wider appreciation in India than there is at present of how terrible is the daily threat of terrorism striking any day and anywhere in Pakistan and, therefore, how steely is the will of the Pakistani people to not let their country be taken over by suicide bombers and pathological killers. I do believe that while the Pakistan establishment might at one time have been complaisant regarding terrorism directed at the West or terrorism directed against India, while being extremely vigilant against terrorism directed at Pakistan, there is now an increasing realization that all the networks are inter-connected and, therefore, the counter attack on terrorism has to be holistic, taking on all three components without distinction.
Indeed, that is the message that came through in President Zardari’s initial reaction to 26/11. That brief flicker of hope of a joint India-Pakistan front against those undertaking, sponsoring or abetting terrorism was snuffed out over the offer, first made and then withdrawn, to send the ISI chief to India to initiate a cooperative approach to the joint threat of terror. However, subsequent developments over the next two years have been far from encouraging. Bluntly speaking, the Indian establishment and almost all Indians remain unconvinced that India-directed terrorism is, indeed, seen in Pakistan as an unmitigated evil that must be stamped out. But while that hurdle looms large on the road to the resumption of normalcy in our mutual dialogue, I do believe only a joint strategy to counter terrorism will enable both India and Pakistan to overcome what is, in effect, a joint threat to both our peoples. We either hang together or hang separately. The challenge is to set the stage to being together on this issue instead of languishing in confrontation, thus giving the edge to the terrorist. There is little sign of this happening, but I remain persuaded that the threat to both of us is so great from what is in practice a single undifferentiated source of extreme danger to both countries that sooner than later a joint process will have to be set in motion.
Episodic: In a relationship as turbulent and accident-prone as that between India and Pakistan, it is only to be expected that there would be diurnal disturbances to any equilibrium we might establish or strive to establish. There are any number of issues on which troubles arise. If not tackled, they persist, and when they are resolved leave one wondering what all the fuss was about.
Take, for example, for it is the example closest to home, the opening of the Indian Consulate-General when I arrived here 33 years ago. It was expected that a Pakistani Consul General would soon land in Bombay. That was delayed. A year later, elections in India led to a change of government. Jinnah House was no longer on offer. Three decades on, there is still no Pakistan CG in Mumbai. And the Indian CG in Karachi was closed down 17 years ago. I sneaked into 63, Clifton some years ago with my daughter born in Karachi. It was heartbreaking. Who has gained? I do not know. But I do know who have lost. Ordinary, very ordinary Pakistanis and Indians.
If an Indian Consulate could run in Karachi for 15 years without a counterpart Pakistan facility in Mumbai, why not now? And as for a Pakistani visa office in Mumbai, I am told by successive Pakistan high commissioners that they have searched and searched but are unable to find a single Mumbai landlord willing to lease his premises to the Pakistan government; while the Indian side tells me that all efforts they have made to make space available to Pakistan have been rebuffed. You and I will never know the full story till WikiLeaks makes it available to us. But amazing is it not that neither of us seems to have the wit to find a mutually satisfactory answer? Or is it just that our authorities do not want to?”
Taken during a photo walk around Vancouver, BC. First one in a couple of weeks. Walked around Coal Harbour, Stanley Park, and up to Prospect Point.
My whole gold prospecting set up. Photos of gold I've found coming soon!!!
Converted from RAW to JPEG in Capture One LE. Minor adjustments to contrast in photoshop CS2...
Got this without the Kids in view though these were older, i get a bit funny about taking pictures when the schools arnt off the coaches as some people could get funny about it, a bloke standing on the corner with a camera in his hand. Also droping off at the rep theatre was Prospect Coaches PD11TRD a Dennis Javelin / Plaxton Profile C70F. Photo taken 08/01/14
Perhaps the most famous house is Prospect Cottage, formerly owned by the late artist and film director Derek Jarman. The cottage is painted black, with a poem, part of John Donne's "The Sunne Rising", written on one side in black lettering. But the garden is the main attraction: reflecting the bleak, windswept landscape of the peninsula, Derek Jarman's garden is made of pebbles, driftwood, scrap metal and a few hardy plants.
The late film-maker Derek Jarman created a wonderfully low-key and poetic garden from driftwood sculpture and the hardiest local wild plants in front of his black clapboard cottage in the shadow of Dungeness power station. It’s been maintained by his former partner Keith Collins, who tolerates the steady trickle of garden and Jarman enthusiasts taking it all in from the road. You don’t need to intrude beyond that and there is no official visiting. The cottage is on the single track Lydd road from Dungeness and visible from the miniature railway; be sure to get the right one, as the garden has been imitated by a couple of its neighbours. It’s a ten-minute walk along the shingle beach to the railway station.
The Sunne Rising
Busy old fool, unruly Sun,
Why dost thou thus,
Through windows, and through curtains, call on
us?
Must to thy motions lovers' seasons run?
Saucy pedantic wretch, go chide
Late schoolboys, and sour prentices,
Go tell court-huntsmen that the king will ride,
Call country ants to harvest offices,
Love, all alike, no season knows, nor clime,
Nor hours, days, months, which are the rags of
time.
Thy beams, so reverend and strong
Why shouldst thou think?
I could eclipse and cloud them with a wink,
But that I would not lose her sight so long:
If her eyes have not blinded thine,
Look, and tomorrow late, tell me
Whether both the'Indias of spice and mine
Be where thou leftst them, or lie here with me.
Ask for those kings whom thou saw'st yesterday,
And thou shalt hear: 'All here in one bed lay.'
She'is all states, and all princes I,
Nothing else is.
Princes do but play us; compar'd to this,
All honour's mimic, all wealth alchemy.
Thou, sun, art half as happy'as we,
In that the world's contracted thus;
Thine age asks ease, and since thy duties be
To warm the world, that's done in warming us.
Shine here to us, and thou art everywhere;
This bed thy centre is, these walls, thy sphere.
John Donne
The first victim of the Beeching Cuts and remains in good structural condition despite the many leaks.
New York, Brooklyn
Boathouse on the Lullwater of the Lake in Prospect Park is located in the eastern part of Prospect Park on the northeast shore of The Lake. It was built in 1905-07 to a classical design of Helmle, Hudswell and Huberty.
It now houses the Audubon Center, the Audubon Society's only urban interpretive center in the United States.
It was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1972.
The Boathouse was seen in Scorsese's movie: The Age Of Innocence (1993) as the Boston park where Archer Newland(Day-Lewis) meets Ellen Olenska(Pfeiffer)
THE LEGACY OF PROSPECT HILL PLANTATION
Of all the historic places that I have visited, there has never been one that has captivated me like Prospect Hill. The story of Prospect Hill is a tale of wealth, prosperity, tragedy, sorrow, grief, greed, revenge and murder spanning more than 200 years and two continents. It is a story forged by war and the brotherhood of men fighting side by side, black and white. It is a story rooted in the ways of the Antebellum South and the conflict between right and wrong. It is a story that is being played out even today in the country of Liberia, so many miles away from rural Mississippi where it all began.
I first visited Prospect Hill on a beautiful, cool, crisp autumn day. Seven miles deep in the woods of rural Mississippi, she sits atop of a hill as a sentinel to what once was, but is nearly lost now. The home stands in ruins now and holds only a glimpse of what she once was. The beautiful fireplaces have grown cold and no longer add warmth to the space that was loved by so many and called home to generations of family members. The brightly colored walls show only remnants of the colors that they once boasted and the wall paper hangs in shreds. An old piano sits weathered and in ruins, no longer filling the home with its beautiful music but rather remains silent knowing its last note has resonated. A beautiful brass mirror still sits above a fireplace, but its reflection is now tarnished by years of abandonment, no longer does it catch the gazes of familiar faces, but rather darkness, emptiness and hopelessness as the house crumbles around it. As I walked around the yard, I couldn’t help but notice the remnants of what I am sure were once lavish gardens, and even today flowers are still blooming against the overgrown entanglement of weeds and vines as if they too have a story to tell and are begging not to be forgotten. A strange peace and tranquility surrounds the place, leaving me feeling far removed from the cares of life and wishing I could just sit under the shade of the ancient cedar trees and imagine what life would have been like. I begin to wonder, where they gathered when the original house burned and can only imagine the screams filling the night air as they realized little Martha didn’t make it out, yes somewhere on this hallowed ground the soil was saturated with tears. I look upon what was once a mighty oak but is now only a decaying mass of wood and chills run down my spine as I imagine the slaves being lynched on the very limbs that they had surely sought refuge under before. Maybe it is a fitting end to the tree, it’s time too has come to an end, just like the home it once shaded.
Captain Isaac Ross was born in South Carolina in 1760. He fought in the Revolutionary War alongside men of color and forged a friendship with many of them. This brotherhood was the basis for his respect for the black man despite being raised in the ideologies of the antebellum south. Captain Ross moved to Mississippi in 1808 with a large contingent of slaves and free men of color and built Prospect Hill Plantation. He was a successful businessman and the fertile Mississippi soil soon made him an extremely wealthy cotton planter. Captain Ross treated his slaves favorably, teaching them to read and write, which was illegal in many areas at this time. He also taught them specific skills and trades that made them valuable assets to his plantation as well as equipping them for a future on their own, the latter of which may or may not have been intentional. Captain Ross encouraged his slaves to marry and even allowed some of the ceremonies to be held at the Prospect Hill mansion. Many of these ceremonies were attended by Captain Ross himself, complete with gifts for the bride and groom. He seemed to have a respect for his slaves that was missing in most areas of the south at this time.
Captain Ross started to realize during the latter years of his life, that he owed a great deal of debt and gratitude to the slaves who had worked so hard for him and alongside him to build the empire of which he proudly called his own. Whether by spiritual awakening, or some type of epiphany, Captain Ross began to set in motion a series of events that would play out on two continents and affect the lives of countless individuals including his family, the slaves with whom called him master, and generations of their descendants. Captain Ross drew up a will in August of 1834, which upon his death, would free his slaves. Working through an organization called The American Colonization Society, the plantation was to be sold and the proceeds were to fund the transport of all of his slaves to a new colony in Africa called Liberia. This colony, which was soon called Mississippi in Africa, would be a fresh start to the slaves that wanted to travel there and Captain Ross even set aside provisions for a school to be established there so that the slaves could further their education and live a prosperous life in the new land. He included many of the slaves closest to him in his will and granted them money to start a new life if they chose to stay in Mississippi.
In 1836 Captain Isaac Ross passed away and the years that followed was a tumultuous time for the slaves and Ross’s family alike. Isaac Ross’s grandson, Isaac Ross Wade contested the will and the years that followed were marked with bitter disputes and litigations as well as unrest and anger on the part of the slaves. In 1845 tragedy struck, the slaves tired of waiting for the freedom that had been promised them by their beloved Captain Ross, had the cook drug the family and the house was set on fire, burning it to the ground. Everyone got out safely but little Martha, Captain Ross’s 6 year old granddaughter. A vigilante group was quickly formed and 11 slaves were hung to their death in an old oak tree out back of the burnt mansion. The present mansion was constructed in 1854.
After several years of litigation and tragedy, a group of nearly 300 Ross family slaves made the arduous journey to Africa but the story doesn’t end here. The slaves built for themselves, elaborate mansions reminiscent of the ones belonging to their masters back in Mississippi and some even enslaved the native peoples of Africa resulting in years of conflict and civil unrest which still goes on to this day. Most of the mansions built during this time were also destroyed during the years of civil unrest that followed. Copies of letters written by the Ross slaves to their families and former masters back in Mississippi still exist and sometimes outline less than desirable conditions in their new land of freedom. In an ironic twist of fate, seems maybe estranged family members or perhaps the slaves themselves had the last laugh. While all of the graves in the Ross family cemetery face presumably east, Isaac Ross Wade’s grave faces in the opposite direction, forever memorializing him as the man who stood in opposition and perhaps casting a light of shame on him for as long as the cemetery remains.
The legacy of Prospect Hill does not end with the massive oak or the crumbling mansion but still lives on in Liberia in the lives of the people whose ancestors came from Mississippi and in the descendants of the freed slaves who chose to stay. Her legacy lives on in the precedent that was set paving the way for people of color to gain their freedom and in the stories passed down from generation to generation. This Legacy still lives on in the cemetery bearing the name of all who called the mansion home and in the hearts and minds of the photographers who have been fortunate enough to capture her beauty even as she lay in ruins.
Special thanks to my awesome tour guide Mrs. Ann Brown. She made this tour possible and was such a wealth of knowledge. I can’t thank her enough for the hospitality and enthusiasm that she shared concerning the history of this area.
For more information there are two books published about Prospect Hill. Mississippi in Africa by Alan Huffman and Burning Prospects by Melissa Miles
Prospect Cottage is the former home and sanctuary of artist, filmmaker, gay rights activist and gardener Derek Jarman (1942 - 1994). From -
www.creativefolkestone.org.uk/prospect-cottage/
Surrounded by poppies, sea kale and a nuclear power station, the late director’s otherworldly cottage and garden in Kent have been saved for the nation. From - www.theguardian.com/film/2020/jul/21/derek-jarman-prospec...
The cabin is called Prospect Cottage and is situated on the shoreline of Dungeness, along the Kent coast. The beach there is sparse and offers a landscape of seemingly bleak obscurity. Just a few boats and houses stretch along a vast expanse of shingle – nothing else, no trees, no fields. Only the sea to the south and Romney Marsh to the north. Yet empty places can conceal a lot.
Once he'd settled in, Jarman decided to reshape the gravel beach which surrounded his new home. He resolved to turn it into a sculpture garden. And although there was little to work with, he managed to nurture santolina, valerian and crambe plants which could endure the unforgiving coastal environment. He collected driftwood and discarded rusting metal engine parts that had previously been used to winch boats from the sea. From these he created sculptures. He gathered large cobblestones together, upended and buried them to form small-scale arrangements which are somehow reminiscent of miniature stone circles and graveyards. From -
artuk.org/discover/stories/derek-jarmans-garden-a-heart-o...
Built 1860s for James Harrington, limeburner & local Council member, transferred 1885 to Frederick William Bullock, purchased 1946 by Prospect Council, public park created & house leased as function centre, demolished 1972, the site is now a St Helen’s Park, with only the coach house surviving.
“Messrs. Brown & Thomson have carried out the following works. . . Erection of two capital family dwellings at Prospect Village for Mr. James Harrington. They are square, substantial buildings, two storeys in height, containing large drawing and dining rooms, entrance hall, study, kitchens, offices, &c., on the ground floor, and numerous bedrooms, bath, &c., on the second floor. There are side balconies and verandahs in front.” [Register 28 Jan 1867]
“Petition from ratepayers in the District of Yatala, praying for the formation of a new district, to be called the District of Prospect, and nominating Messrs. James Harrington, John Rosser, John Williams, Joel Roberts, and Robt. Martin, as Councillors.” [Advertiser 10 Apr 1868]
“For about 10 years, the Wesleyans have been holding their services and conducting a Sunday-school at Prospect in a room provided by the liberality of the late Mr. James Harrington, but circumstances having necessitated the erection of a larger building, it has been decided to build a chapel which would answer both purposes. On Monday, September 14, the ceremony of laying the foundation-stone of the new edifice. . . a silver trowel was presented to Mrs. Harrington,” [Express & Telegraph 16 Sep 1874]
“A meeting of the creditors of Mr. James Harrington, of Prospect, limeburner, was held at the office of Messrs. Attenborough and Giles. . . It was resolved that the estate should be assigned to Mr. F. W. Bullock.” [Adelaide Observer 1 Jan 1887]
“Housemaid Wanted; references required. Apply to Mrs. F. W. Bullock, St. Helen's, Prospect.” [Express & Telegraph 7 Feb 1888 advert]
“Good General Servant Wanted, must cook and iron well; also thorough housemaid; references required. Apply to Mrs. F. W. Bullock, St. Helens, Prospect.” [Express & Telegraph 9 Jan 1890 advert]
“the civic garden party given on Saturday afternoon as St. Helen's, Prospect, by His Worship the Mayor of Adelaide and Mrs. F. W. Bullock. . . The residence of the Mayor stands in spacious grounds well suited for a garden party, as the house is some distance back from the road with ample lawns and shrubbery in front. There were over 400 invitations issued.” [Register 21 Dec 1891]
“Prospect. Commodious House, Known as ‘St Helen’s’, and Building Block. . . comprising 8 Acres and commodious House. 14 rooms, with washhouse large underground tank, laundry, bathrooms, cellar, &e., together with stabling for 3 or 4 horses, large carriage shed, garden planted with choice flowers and shrubs. Water service throughout, with numerous standpipes at convenient distances. Lawn, arbors, summer houses, tennis court, &c. Two paddocks, with large hay shed. . . The most eastern paddock, comprising about 3½ acres, has been subdivided into convenient Building Blocks. . . The present horse tramway which passes the estate will shortly be superseded by electric trams, which will bring this property within 15 minutes of the city.” [Advertiser 14 Jan 1911 advert]
“Mr. Bullock's own property, ‘St. Helens’, at Prospect, comprising 8 acres, a 14-roomed house, outhouses, garden, orangery, and vacant land, but no bid was received for the complete estate. It was then subdivided, the residence and 3¼ acres being offered, also without commanding a bid.” [Advertiser 26 Jan 1911]
“Messrs. F. W. Bullock & Company will hold an auction sale on the ground, of building lots, being second subdivision in St. Helen's Estate, Prospect. . . Upset price, £1 per foot.” [Advertiser 28 Sep 1917]
“Messrs. F. W. Bullock & Co., conducted a successful sale of the further subdivision of St. Helen's Estate. . . There was a large number of buyers present, and every allotment was sold at satisfactory prices up to 30/- per foot.” [Register 2 Oct 1917]]
“Wanted, Handy Man. with good references, for garden and general work. Apply evening, after 7 o’clock, F. W. Bullock, ‘St. Helen's’, Prospect.” [Advertiser 11 Nov 1920 advert]
“A garden fair in-aid of the Kuitpo Industrial Colony scheme was opened this afternoon by Rev. S. Forsyth at. St Helens, the home of Mr. F. W. Bullock, Prospect.” [News 17 Apr 1931]
“St. Helens, Prospect. The Residence of the Late Mr. F. W. Bullock. . . auction. . . The House is an imposing two-storey, one of the older type standing well back from the road, with high ceilings, massive walls (the Interior walls are 18 in. thick), and large, airy rooms, always cool, giving an atmosphere of solid home comfort. The wide front verandah (Minton tiled) and balcony above overlook a large expanse of garden and lawn, with stately sums and other trees and numerous shrubs beyond. There are 14 rooms. . . On either side of the asphalt yard are commodious and substantial stone and galvanised iron buildings, comprising stabling and garage accommodation, workshop, man's room, etc. and there are numerous other outbuildings. The Land. . . has an area or 4 acres. . . abuts Koonga avenue on the east, and is adaptable for subdivision. The Gardener’s Cottage. . . containing 3 rooms, electric light, gas and wood stoves, etc.” [The Mail 3 Oct 1931]
“St. Helens, Prospect. . . Applications are Invited for Lease.” [Advertiser 17 Oct 1931]
“Mr. and Mrs. R. G. Bullock, of St. Helens, Prospect, have issued Invitations for an at home on Wednesday next.” [Advertiser 30 Mar 1934]
“A children's fair will be held on Saturday in Mr. and Mrs. Roy Bullock's garden. St. Helen's, Prospect road, Prospect, in aid of the Fighting Forces Comforts Fund. There will be entertainment for children of all ages. For the adults there will be a cake stall, and afternoon tea will be served.” [Advertiser 15 Nov 1939
“Mrs. Roy Bullock has lent her home, St. Helen's, Prospect, for two bridge parties tomorrow afternoon and evening, to assist the funds of the Babies' Home, Walkerville. About 40 tables have been booked, and four rooms will be available for play.” [News 15 Jul 1940]
“In the garden of Mr. and Mrs. Roy Bullock's home, St. Helen's, Prospect, the Red Cross Handicraft Shop is holding a sale of disabled soldiers' work this afternoon. There is also a stall containing articles made by members of the S.A. Crippled Children's Association. . . Afternoon tea on the lawn is being served under big, gay umbrellas. Goods made by the disabled soldiers covered a wide range in prices, from 9d. to £1.” [News 8 Oct 1940]
“Prospect City Council has decided to buy St. Helen's, a well-known property on Prospect road, for municipal purposes. The land comprises more than three acres, and there is a 15-roomed house on it. . . providing that the property should be used for municipal purposes and not for subdividing.” [News 19 Feb 1946]
“A petition received by the Prospect City Council last night suggested that St. Helen's, a property on Prospect road, recently purchased by the council, should be used for a community hospital.” [Advertiser 16 Apr 1946]
“St. Helen's, a historic property of more than four acres on Prospect road, will soon be declared open by Prospect City Council as a public park. The park will cater specially for visitors The 15-roomed house and a small area of land have been leased to Mr. H. A. Morgan, of Unley, who will establish a tea garden on the north side. In addition, he will cater for parties, social functions, wedding receptions, and private dinners. Lawn tennis courts. . . children's playground. . . Prospect Council this week agreed that the property should be known as St. Helen's Park.” [News 21 May 1948]
“St. Helen's Town House, Prospect road, Prospect, will be officially opened tonight with a 6 o'clock cocktail party for 230 guests. The opening ceremony will be performed by Mrs. R. G. Bullock, wife of the former owner of the picturesque old family mansion, and the Mayor of Prospect (Mr. D. L. Stevens). . . The house has been turned into a charmingly formal place for receptions and dining-out, with upstairs accommodation for resident guests.” [News 14 Jul 1948]
JAMES HARRINGTON
“HARRINGTON.— [Died] On the 5th August, at his residence. Prospect, after a long and painful illness, James Harrington, Esq., aged 61 years. A colonist of 37 years.” [Advertiser 5 Aug 1873]
“HARRINGTON.— [Died] On the 18th October, at Childers street, North. Adelaide, Amelia, relict, of the late James Harrington, Stone Hall, Prospect, aged 85 years. A colonist of 62 years” [Express & Telegraph 19 Oct 1899]
FREDERICK WILLIAM BULLOCK
“BULLOCK—BOWEN.— [Married] On the 23rd September, at the Flinders-street Baptist Church, by the Rev. S. Mead, M.A. LL.B., Frederick William, son of John Bullock, to Harriett daughter the late Robert George Bowen.” [Advertiser 26 Sep 1873]
“BULLOCK.— [Died] On the 9th September, at St Helens, Prospect, Harriet, wife of F. W. Bullock.” [Advertiser 10 Sep 1910]
“Mrs. F. W. Bullock. . . was a daughter of the late Mr. Richard George Bowen. Mrs. Bullock was associated with many charitable institutions. . . She was a sister of Lady Thomas and Mrs. G. Sutherland, of Melbourne. Her husband, the well-known land and estate agent, was for a time Mayor of Adelaide. There are three sons and two daughters.” [Advertiser 10 Sep 1910]
“BULLOCK.— [Died] On the 31st May, at ‘St. Helen's’, Prospect, Frederick William Bullock.” [Advertiser 1 Jun 1931]
“Mr. Frederick William Bullock, a former Mayor of Adelaide. . . was born at Adelaide on August 7, 1851, was a son of the late Mr. John Bullock. . . who landed in the State in 1839, and founded the business afterwards carried on by the late Mr. F. W. Bullock under name of F. W. Bullock & Co, of which Mr. R. G. Bullock and C. Angel are the surviving partners. The late Mr. Bullock was educated at Mr. J. L. Young's school. . . sent to England. . . he decided to join his father in the conduct of his business, and accordingly returned to Adelaide. He was elected to the City Council in 1884. . . His wife, a daughter of the late Mr. R. G. Bower, had died previously. He has left two sons and two daughters, viz., Mr. R. G. Bullock, and Mr L P. Bullock, sheepfarmer, of Western Australia, and the Misses E. B. and D. J. Bullock, of Prospect.” [Advertiser 2 Jun 1931]
Built 1885 for Frederick Dewar Beach & wife Elizabeth & named “Audley House”, converted to flats 1917, purchased & renamed “Verona” by Blackfriars School & used as boarding house 1960-1968, then as priests’ home, sold 1994, now private & renamed Audley House.
“Mr. Bertie Beach, third son of Mr. F. D. Beach, of Audley House, Prospect, took his passage by the ever popular ship Torrens on Tuesday week for a nine months' trip to England and the Continent.” [Quiz, Adelaide 11 Apr 1890]
“Laundress. Apply Thursday or Friday, between 10 and 12, Mrs. Beach, Audley House, Prospect.” [Advertiser 4 May 1894 advert]
“The marriage of the Right Hon. Samuel James Way (Chief Justice of South Australia) to Mrs. W. A. S. Blue (widow of Dr. Blue, of Hahndorf) was very quietly celebrated on the afternoon of Easter Monday, The time and place of the ceremony were kept very secret. . . Audley House, Prospect, the residence of Mrs. F. D. Beach, eldest sister of the Chief Justice, was the scene of the bridal.” [Quiz & Lantern 14 Apr 1898]
“Mrs. Beach, of Audley House, Prospect, has issued cards for an ‘At home’ on Tuesday, August 2. Those who have enjoyed Mrs. Beach's hospitality in the past can look forward to an enjoyable time, as the hostess and her daughters spare no efforts in the entertainment of their numerous guests.” [Quiz & Lantern 28 Jul 1898]
“The engagement is announced of Miss Jessie Napier, only daughter of Dr. Leith Napier, of Angas-street, to Mr. Sydney E. Beach, of ‘Audley House’, Prospect.” [Critic, Adelaide 4 Jul 1906]
“Mrs. Sydney Beach, of Audley House, Prospect, is ‘receiving’ on Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday of this week.” [Critic, Adelaide 7 Nov 1906]
“Good Cook immediately also. Laundry Housemaid references Apply mornings Mrs Beach, Audley House, Prospect.” [Advertiser 2 Mar 1907 advert]
“Experienced Nurse for three (3) children; youngest 16 months. Apply Mrs. Beach, ‘Audley House’, Prospect.” [Advertiser 16 Aug 1913 advert]
“For Sale. . . ’Audley House’, Prospect. . . The well-known residence of Colonel S. E. Beach, comprising 14 rooms. . . large laundry, garage, stabling, man's room, underground tank (10,000 gallons), conservatories, lawns, fruit and ornamental trees, etc, etc.” [Advertiser 19 Sep 1917 advert]
“Audley Estate, Prospect. Col S. E. Beach has decided, to have his valuable property on the Prospect road subdivided into building sites. 'Audley House', which comprises about 14 rooms, will be made available for purchase with about one acre of land. The balance of the land — between 2 and 3 acres — will be subdivided.” [The Mail 22 Sep 1917]
“Early in the New Year it is proposed to adapt the well-known 'Audley House' to provide Two Superior Suites of Rooms, unfurnished (6 on ground floor, 7 on first floor). The Rooms are lofty, spacious, and well lighted. Each Suite will have separate conveniences, lovely grounds, shadehouses, garage, stabling, &c. Electric cars pass the frontage.” [The Mail 22 Dec 1917]
“The work of converting Audley House, Prospect, into flats has been satisfactorily completed under the supervision of Mr. J, H. Laity, architect.” [The Mail 2 Mar 1918]
“To Let, Flat, unfurnished, self-contained, Four Rooms, Balconies, in Audley House, Prospect; Garage; fine Grounds.” [Register 5 Mar 1919 advert]
“Äuction. . . 'Audley House'. Prospect Rd., Prospect. A Stately Two-Storey Residence, substantially built of stone, containing 14 rms. . . front and side balconies. 3 bathrms., pantries, presses, domestic conveniences, and extensive stone and brick outbuildings. 'Audley House', at present let as three residential flats, could be advantageously subdivided to provide more flats, or is highly suited for a Hostel, Guest Home, Hospital, or an Institution of some kind. . . spacious, well-kept grounds. . . beautiful- trees and shrubs, occupies a good position near tram stop. . . To be sold subject to existing tenancies.” [The Mail 16 Mar 1946 advert]
FREDERICK DEWE BEACH
“BEACH.— [Died] On the 14th November, at his residence, Audley House, Prospect, Frederick Dewe Beach.”[Register 15 Nov 1895]
“Mr. Frederick Dewe Beach. . . was the son of Mr. Charles Beach, of Audley House, North Audley-street, London, and was born on March 14, 1829. He was educated at Mordant Hall, Kent, and served his apprenticeship with Messrs. Hewett & Co, confectioners and caterers, of Regent-street, London. . . He left England for Adelaide at the age of 21 in the ship Sibella. . . After being in business for a few years in this city Mr Beach left for the Victorian goldfields and worked at Ballarat, Bendigo, Forest Creek, and other rushes. . . on his return he opened a confectioner's establishment in Brown-street, removing afterwards to the precent premises in Hindley-street. . . Mr. Beach married the eldest daughter of the Rev. James Way who survives him. The family consists of Messrs. Fred, Sydney, Herbert and Frank Beach, and Misses Jeanie and Olive Beach.” [Advertiser 15 Nov 1895]
“BEACH.— [Died] On the 7th May, at her residence, Audley House, Prospect, Elizabeth, relict of Frederick Dewe Beach, and eldest daughter of the late Rev. James Way.” [Evening Journal 8 May 1903]
“Mrs. Beach, widow of the late Mr. F. D. Beach. . . was a sister of the Lieut Governor (Rt. Hon. Sir Samuel Way), Mrs. Allan Campbell, and the late Dr. Way. . . well known in philanthropic circles. . . Adelaide Children's Hospital. . . North Adelaide Baptist Church. The family consists of five sons, Mjr. S. E. Beach, Messrs. Fred, F. J., Frank, and Herbert Beach, and two daughters, Mrs. Hugo Leschen, and Mrs. L. W. Yemm. Mjr. Beach is at present in Queensland, and Messrs. F. J„ and Frank Beach are in Sydney.” [Evening Journal 7 May 1903]
SYDNEY EDWIN BEACH
“BEACH—NAPIER.— [Married] On the 3rd October, at Chalmers Church, North-terrace, Adelaide, by the Rev. D. Paton, assisted by the Rev. John Thorne, Sydney Edwin, second son of the late F. D. Beach, of Audley House, Prospect, to Jessie Mellis, daughter of Dr. Leith Napier, of Angas-street, Adelaide.” [Advertiser 8 Dec 1906]
“BEACH.— [Died] On the 15th March. Sydney E. Beach, dearly loved husband of Jessie Beach, 37 Wood street, Millswcod. Aged 74 years.” [Advertiser 17 Mar 1934]
“CoL Sydney Beach. . . As a very young man, he had the good fortune to 'get in early' to Broken Hill shares He joined the Stock Exchange of Adelaide when it began in 1887. . . He was a nephew of a former Chief Justice, Sir Samuel Way, to whom he often acted as A.D.C.” [The Mail 24 Mar 1934]
“BEACH.— [Died] On October 29, at private hospltal, Jessie Mellis, beloved widow of Sydney Edwin Beach.” [Advertiser 31 Oct 1947]
“Mrs. Jessie Mellis Beach. . . was a sister of the Lieutenant Governor (Sir Mellis Napier). She was the widow of Mr. Sydney Edwin Beach, and has left two sons and a daughter.” [Advertiser 31 Oct 1947]
Prospect Coaches, Lye, Irizar i6s (?) integral YS25 XOV on Flixbus service at Hyde Park Corner 3rd May, 2026.