Lord Ward’s Court Leet
The result of the Parliamentary Election in March last was not allowed to slumber, for Mr. Wm. Haden, a County Magistrate, and a member of the Court Leet, got his back up at some of the proceedings, and as he was out-voted by the majority of the Liberal gentlemen present, he must needs vent his spleen upon Mr. Bourne, the Clerk to the Court Leet, which brought forth the following correspondence:—
To the Editor of the Birmingham Daily Press.
Sir,—In your report of the proceedings at Lord Ward’s Court Leet on Friday last, you state, “Mr. Haden returned to the room and apologised to Mr. Bourne for any hasty expression which may have escaped from him on his first entering the room, he assured Mr. B. that what he had then said was not intended as personal.”
This is altogether incorrect, the words “apology” or “hasty expression” I certainly did not use; what I did say to Mr. Bourne was, “That I feared from something I heard after leaving the room, he thought my first remarks were intended to be applied to him. I assured him I had no such intention, as I felt satisfied the proceedings had not originated with him.”
I must request that you will publish this note in one of your earliest editions, as your report will lead the public to believe I had apologised to Mr. Bourne for some hasty expression which I was anxious to withdraw.
I am, sir,
Yours respectfully,
WILLIAM HADEN.
Dixon’s Green, Dudley, November 2, 1857.
LORD WARD’S COURT LEET.
To the Editor of the Birmingham Daily Press.
Sir,—In your publication of this day we are favoured with a letter from Mr. William Haden, of Dudley, one of the uninvited to the late Court Leet Dinner, in explanation of what he alleges to be a misinterpretation of his very un-called-for remarks at the Court Leet meeting on Friday last. As I was present on that occasion, I deem it but just to the merits and acknowledged truthfulness of your general reports to aver that Mr. Haden assuredly made use of the expressions referred to, and in such an excited state of mind, too, as to leave no doubt upon the minds of the gentlemen present that he came there brim-full of indignation and chagrin (at witnessing the “good time coming” manifestation), at what he and the deputation who indorsed his expressions with “Hear, hear, hear,” seemed to believe was intended as a personal slight to those worthy townsmen who have so often eaten Lord Ward’s roast beef, and then lampooned his lordship for his hospitality and courteous welcome.
The Court Leet meeting of the manor of Dudley, being dependent upon the manorial rights of the barony of Ward, becomes by such ancient right a self-constituted body of that barony, hence the perfect right of Lord Ward to invite whom he may please to attend his Court Leet. This private right could not have been more scrupulously observed last week than has been witnessed the last thirty years at former Leet meetings, for it cannot be denied that a certain “clique” has at that Leet exercised an amount of domination unbearable to honourable minds, arming themselves with a species of presumptuous authority, most unmistakeably uncongenial to the known liberality and courteous bearing of Lord Ward; dictating the terms of political subserviency and social local dependency that should fit any townsman to be eligible for that festival of local celebrity.
Pitiable indeed must be the status of that spirit of independence engendered in the minds of intelligent Englishmen who can present themselves where they are not invited, and condescend to interrogate the legal authority of the Lord of the Manor upon a question beyond their right of inquiry.
Mr. Wm. Haden may, if he thinks proper, characterise the last Court Leet meeting “as a contemptible proceeding,” but we remind Mr. Haden that the influx of new life and liberal thoughts into the elements of the late Court Leet augur well for the onward progression of both political and social advancement in Dudley. We believe, sir, that the contracted neck of Toryism and the conclusive and bigotted favouritism of partizanship is broken thereby, and that Lord Ward has hitherto been deceived in his estimate of the lingering political vitality of the borough of Dudley. We furthermore hail this last local excitement as foreboding days of enlightenment, and liberty of thought and speech to the good old town of Dudley; and we accept the proceedings of the last Court Leet as the act of a liberal, benevolent nobleman, conscious of his immense responsibility, alive to the approaching signs of the times, and fully sensible of the patent fact that local cliques and self interests, rigidly exercised in the management of affairs in Dudley, have retarded its commercial enterprise, and contracted its social and political usefulness.
Yours respectfully,
VERITAS.
Dudley, November 6th, 1857.
THE DUDLEY COURT LEET AGAIN.
We are happy to find that our strictures a fortnight ago, on the subject of the Dudley Court Leet, have met with the general approval of this district. Nor could it well be otherwise. To say nothing of the principles of common justice, an error in tactics so glaring as that perpetrated in connexion with the late Court Leet meeting could not but meet with general condemnation.
It will be seen, however, from a letter under the heading of “Our Open Platform,” that a gentleman who signs himself “Investigator” has undertaken to investigate the facts connected with the invitations to the Court Leet, and to present himself as the champion of its proceedings.
This letter is couched in the best possible spirit; and though our correspondent takes strong exception to many of our views, we shall always bid him and others welcome to the use of our pages, so long as they can express their differences of opinion from us or from each other with so much freedom from acrimonius feeling. Had the argument of “Investigator” been as sound as the tone of his letter is satisfactory, we should have passed it over without a single observation. We shall have no difficulty in proving, however, that his remarks are open to that very charge of misleading the public which he attempts to fasten upon ourselves.
He says he has the list of invitations to the Court Leet before him, and on that ground he claims to be regarded as the champion of those by whom it was supplied. Of course we have no objection to accept the gauntlet. He then says that there were 82 gentlemen invited to the late Court Leet, and that of this number 38 have attended former meetings, and the remaining 44 were townsmen of various opinions.
Now, the only inference which any man of ordinary powers of mind can draw from these figures, is that 44 out of the number of persons accustomed to attend former Courts Leet have this year been rejected, and that 38 of that number have been retained. But why reject the 44 and retain the 38? Simply because the political preferences of the former at the last election happened to differ from those of the parties who issued the invitations. To any other answer than this, the voice of public conscience would at once demur.
But “Investigator” has made a discovery which completely falsifies our own statement of this matter. He has discovered that many of Mr. Sheridan’s supporters were amongst the persons attending the late Court Leet. How many do our readers think? One half.—Guess again. One quarter.—Guess again. A half quarter.—Guess again.—You give it up. Then, thoughtful reader, let us tell thee there was the astounding number of four. One of these was the late mayor, who was known to have long before abandoned Mr. Sheridan’s cause;—two others were gentlemen connected with the press, and who were supposed to be changing sides before the meeting took place—and the fourth was a kind and amiable man, whose presence in such company has not yet been accounted for.
So far, then, from our correspondent disproving our statement respecting the invitations to the Court Leet, we find that his statements confirm substantially every word that we have spoken upon that subject.
We may, however, here state once for all, that it is not a question between Mr. Sheridan and his political opponents, but between those opponents and such of the inhabitants of this district as think proper to vote for a candidate of their own selection. That Mr. Sheridan happens to be that candidate is the mere accident of the hour. The question is simply this:—Shall the electors of Dudley vote for whom they will?—or are they to be subject to pains and penalties for the free and independent exercise of their electoral rights?
Nor is “Investigator” more successful in his attempt to vindicate the right of the Lord of the Manor to do what he likes with his own. He says the Barony of Ward is a private institution, and that therefore Lord Ward has a right to invite whom he likes to transact his own business. As well might he say that the Borough of Dudley and the Monarchy of England are private institutions, and that, therefore, the Mayor of the one and the Monarch of the other have a right to employ and discard whom they will. We deny that the Barony of Ward is, in the sense spoken of by “Investigator,” a private institution; and, of course, we deny the possession of the right he claims.
We are actuated by no feeling of hostility to Lord Ward, but as public Journalists it is our duty to watch over the interests of the public, and to see that Senator and Plebeian are alike protected in the exercise of the privileges they enjoy. As an evidence of our desire for the most perfect fairness in the discussion of questions such as this, to which we have now for the third time been compelled to advert, we may state that in an article on “A Royal Charter for Dudley,” in our last issue, the word “charge” instead of the word “complaint,” is used either by our mistake or by that of our printer. As, however, it has been represented to us by one of our friends, that some readers may possibly suppose, from the construction of the sentence in which this word occurs, that we impute bribery and coercion to Lord Ward, or to his agents, or both, we feel it to be due to ourselves, to Lord Ward, to his agents, and to our readers generally, to state that nothing could possibly have been further from our intention. What we meant to have said, and what we think our words clearly convey, is this—that the right of the Lord of the Manor to invite whom he would to his Court Leet had been so exercised, as that, by inviting a great many gentlemen to his annual dinner who were known to have supported Mr. Sandars, but who had not been accustomed to be invited, it was liable to be construed into a species of bribery to one class, and to operate as a kind of punishment to the other, and so we have reason to believe it is popularly regarded. But any intention or idea of imputing bribery to Lord Ward or his agents, either expressly or by implication, we distinctly and absolutely disavow. And this disavowal we make as spontaneously and promptly as we can. It is as painful to us as it is contrary to our inclination to have to discuss the public conduct of public men. When, however, duty impels us to the task, we trust that we shall never be found wanting in those proprieties towards those from whom we differ, which the commonest courtesy requires at our hands.
To the most amusing part of our correspondent’s letter we have, however, yet to come. After having occupied nearly half a column of our space in endeavouring to prove that the agents of Lord Ward have not acted with partiality in the late Court Leet affair, he goes on to show that they have always acted with partiality; that they have done on the present occasion—only to another set of parties—what they have always been accustomed to do—to one side or the other;—that those who have now been rejected ought not to have given utterance to a single murmur, on the simple principle that they had now received a Roland for an Oliver.
He speaks of “respectable and sensible men, who have never hitherto been favoured with his Lordship’s smile,” of the chagrin and personal insult experienced by many of our worthy townsmen, and of the bygone bigotry, political domination and petty clique of the last thirty years. The agents of Lord Ward may truly say, “Save us from our friends.”
If one-half of what “Investigator” says be true, it is high time that the management of Dudley Court Leet be reformed. But it is a curious incident in this controversy, and one which strikingly illustrates the narrowness of men’s minds, and their ignorance of the very first principles of genuine liberty, and there should be men of professed education in the town of Dudley who can look upon the mere transfer of an exclusive privilege from the hands of one set of men to those of another, as an evidence of real progress. If there exists anywhere powers such as those to which our correspondent refers, and which can be used for purposes of oppression or intimidation, it is manifest that these powers ought not to exist; and however much their transfer from the hands of one political party to another may gratify men’s vanity and assist in the advancement of their personal purposes, the only evidence of real progress will be found in such powers being taken altogether from the hands of those who hold them, and being vested in others who cannot employ them for purposes of their own.—The Dudley and Midland Counties Express.
December 1st, 1857. This present period was one of great distress and misery in the town and neighbourhood, occasioned by the suspension and failure of many Iron Masters hereabouts. The serious commercial consequence was, that fifty-seven Blast Furnaces were stopped, and upwards of 10,000 men were thereby thrown out of employment. This depression of our local trade had a most serious effect upon the tradesmen of the town, and many lamentable bankruptcies amongst us was the result.
Died, December 17th, 1857, Mr. Joseph Morris, of the Miner’s Arms; Mr. Morris had gone through a great diversity of trials in life, and was deservedly much respected by all parties. Aged 73 years.
Died, December 17th, 1857, at Westbromwich, Mr. Richard Bond, formerly Parish Clerk of St. Edmund’s Church; he was a close-fisted old gentleman, and died very rich.
THE SEBASTOPOL GUNS.
To the Editor of the Dudley Weekly Times.
Sir,—Our last Castle Fetes were heralded forth to the pleasure-seeking public with more than ordinary pomp and significance, by the prominently announced fact, that those mighty engines of death and destruction (the Sebastopol Trophy Guns), were to be ushered into the far-famed Castle Court-yard, amid the din of arms, the plaudits of the people, the beating of the heart-stirring drum, and the merry peals of our excellent parish church bells. Being one of the admirers of that march of pomp and day of local exultation, and heartily concurring in the sentiments uttered by our public functionary (the Mayor), I naturally anticipated that some suitable site would ere this have been found, whereon to permanently fix those trophies of our sanguinary struggle with the great Power of the North; but no! Dudley like! the famed Sebastopol guns, like the crumbling walls with which they are surrounded, seemed destined to be left alone in their glory. Anon the hobby-horses whereon the juvenile warriors are daily wont to practice the art of cannon riding, and the more matured admirers of naval glory, are accustomed to ruminate upon the mighty events of their departed lustre, under the consoling influence of that soother of the “ills and woes that flesh is heir to” a pipe of the genial Virginian weed. Such being the humiliating fact, I maintain, Mr. Editor, on the ground of public sympathy alone, that these precious relics of the famed Sebastopol should immediately be taken under the protecting wings of the Mayor, on behalf of the liege burgesses of this ancient city of the renowned Dodo, or consigned to the fostering care of the popular president of the Mechanics’ Institute. Surely £50 would suffice to provide proper gun carriages, and fix them on solid masonry in front of the magnificent Keep, protected by a suitable chevaux-de-frise, with an adequate elevated covering to protect them from the inclemency of the weather! Did not the Committee of the last Castle Fetes derive more additional “grist to the mill” by the fact that the guns were to be seen under their auspices alone? Hence the reasonableness of that Committee taking proper care of those trophies, as showing more decent acknowledgement to the sightseeing public for the additional proceeds received to their funds by the opportune presence of those national trophies. If it was worth the trouble to depart from the ordinary routine of official propriety to receive the guns at the hands of Government, surely it is but reasonable to hope that the sanguinary admirers of national prowess should provide (like other towns) a suitable place to deposit them on. Such being the public belief, let the Committee of the Mechanics’ Institute perform their duty, by endeavouring to convince that public that they are not insensible to the very exclusive and liberal support they have from time to time received at the hands of an hitherto silent but observant public, but at once make a suitable provision for those interesting objects of public curiosity, which are properly intended to be the enduring evidences of a nation’s triumphal prowess and valour, under difficulties and privations unsurpassed in the annals of warfare.
I am, your obedient servant,
ONE WHO LIKES TO SEE EVERYTHING IN ITS PROPER PLACE.
Dudley.
DUDLEY MECHANICS’ INSTITUTION.
To the Editor of the Dudley Weekly Times.
Sir,—Permit me a small space in the Times, in reply to the letters of Mr. Sluter, “A Schoolmaster,” and “One who likes to see everything in its proper place,” which appeared in your last. I feel the more pleasure in noticing them, from the courteous spirit in which they appear to be written, contrasted with that of a leading article in the columns of your contemporary, upon (in some respects) a somewhat similar subject. Right glad am I to find an interest taken in the matters to which they refer, sufficiently strong to develop itself by directing public attention to them through the pages of your paper. The offer of affording gratuitous adult instruction to a class or classes in connection with the Mechanics’ Institution, so kindly made by Mr. Sluter and his coadjutors, was the subject of many conversations, and occupied much attention of myself and its committee; the great obstacle, however, appeared to us to be the want of proper accommodation, the Old Town Hall being occupied for so many purposes, and at such varied hours, that we feared it could hardly be rendered properly available for such a purpose. Again too, we entertained the hope that long ere this we should have been in possession of rooms and building of our own, in which, suitable accommodation, not only for this but every other purpose connected with the Mechanics’ Institution or the public, would have been provided—the exertions to obtain which, notwithstanding the sneers of the writer in the Express, are pretty well known to most. The effort to establish adult evening schools may, perhaps, unhappily not be supported, either by those requiring them on the one hand, or by public countenance on the other, but it is worth a trial, and the offer of Mr. Sluter, and others of the Schoolmasters’ Association connected with him, is a noble one, evincing a feeling on their parts which ought to be thankfully and heartily responded to. What, Mr. Editor, even the most enlightened, is the education of our youth, compared to that more mature knowledge we acquire in after years? It is but, as it were, the outlines of the map then laid down, to be filled in by ourselves at leisure at a future time. I trust, therefore, now the matter is again mooted, the subject will not be allowed to drop without a trial being made regarding it. To argue as to the necessity or propriety of the establishment of such classes or schools, were but to insult the understanding of those most likely to render them efficient support.
As to the Sebastopol guns, I also should like to see them in their proper place, and the consideration of the proper place has not been lost sight of. My idea of this place is, as your correspondent suggests, in front of the Keep—others think somewhat differently; at any rate their position and state, it must be acknowledged, is not the most suitable one, and ere long, with the assistance of our worthy Mayor, I hope to see them placed upon a spot which for appropriateness of situation will be second to none in the kingdom. They were worthily received, and they ought to be worthily esteemed, as trophies of the prowess and valour of our countrymen. The Fetes Committee are perfectly willing to render all the assistance in their power towards this object, but I am sure that your correspondent would not desire that their funds should furnish the necessary amount. The Committee, at considerable expense and with no little trouble, obtained them for the town; surely then the town should not be wanting to see they are properly bestowed and kept, now they do possess them. This I know is the desire of the Mayor, and others in authority; I therefore trust ere long to see them in their proper position.
In regard to the remarks of the writer in the Express, I would observe that it is a very much easier thing to sit at home at ease and write an article for a newspaper, sneering at the efforts of others, which most probably they did but little to aid, than to get up funds for a building, requiring, if it be done properly, some three or four thousand pounds. The efforts of many on behalf of the Dudley Mechanics’ Institution are well known, and I think need no attempt to be written down by the Express, for the purpose of elevating Mr. Sheridan. I have already occupied sufficient of your space, or should not hesitate to break a lance with its writer as to what the Dudley Mechanics’ Institution has been, is, or may become. I trust that it has already been “productive of some real and permanent advantages,” and that it will continue to exist to furnish more “for posterity.”
I am, Mr. Editor,
Yours respectfully,
E. HOLLIER.
January 25th, 1858, was a royal day in Dudley, it being the Wedding Day of our first young Princess, the Princess Royal of England, and the Crown Prince of Prussia. Dudley had never lagged behind its neighbours in its genuine loyalty to the throne, and on this occasion all hands were willing to add lustre, and a pleasurable remembrance, to this interesting event. A public subscription was at once inaugurated to give a treat to the school children, and tickets for meat to the indigent poor. The day was propitious, and upwards of 4,000 school children walked in procession to the Castle Court, led on by two bands of music; after a short suitable address had been delivered, they all returned to their various school rooms, and enjoyed a good “tea drinking.” The poor old men and women enjoyed their beef and plum pudding at their own homes, whilst the well-to-do townsmen dined at the hotel, under the presidency of the Mayor, Mr. John Beddard. The town was decidedly en fete this day, for the merry peals of our parish bells, the jingling of the friendly glass, and the hearty good wishes for the happy pair, made old Dudley decidedly “jolly” on that memorable day. These two royal personages will in due course of time become the Emperor and Empress of Germany. Long may they live to enjoy their exalted and responsible station in life.
N.B.—Whilst I am writing these lines their eldest son, Prince William of Prussia, is also entering into the tangled web of holy matrimony.
THE CELEBRATION OF THE PRINCESS ROYAL’S WEDDING IN DUDLEY.
On Monday last, John Beddard, Esq., the Mayor of this town, issued bills stating that he should be very happy to meet, at Smith’s Hotel, in the Market Place, that evening at seven o’clock, any of the inhabitants disposed to support some public demonstration on the marriage day of the Princess Royal.
At the time appointed for the meeting to take place, our reporter attended and found only the Mayor present. During the next half-hour or so a few gentlemen looked into the room to see what sort of a meeting there was, and having satisfied their curiosity withdrew. About half-past seven o’clock, however, the Mayor remarked that business had better be proceeded with. The number of loyal subjects present then was very few, and during the entire meeting did not exceed a score. We have no difficulty in subjoining a complete list of their names. They were the Mayor, the High Bailiff (Elliot Hollier, Esq.), Mr. W. H. Brooke, Mr. S. Rudge, Mr. R. Houghton, Mr. W. Wigginton, Mr. Waring, Mr. G. B. Lowe, Mr. Masefield, Mr. Walker, Mr. William Haden, jun., Mr. Minty, Mr. Laskey, Mr. Wainwright, Mr. E. Sanders, Mr. Denison, Mr. J. Cartwright, Mr. Clark, Mr. J. Renaud.
Mr. John Renaud moved that the Mayor should take the chair. (Hear).
The Mayor in doing so, said he was very glad to tell the gentlemen present that Mr. Smith, at the Priory, would be very happy “to fall in with whatever was done there.” In proceeding to open the business of the evening, the chairman said they were met to take steps towards getting up a treat of some kind or other so that the inhabitants of this town may remember the day on which the Princess Royal was married. He thought they ought to do something on this occasion, so that the event might be signalized and remembered by their children for some time to come. (Cheers). So far as regarded the poor in the Workhouse, he should have very great pleasure in affording them a treat himself. (Hear, hear). Mr. Clark had been suggesting that the children belonging to the various Sunday Schools should also have a treat. He should like to hear what he had to say upon the subject.
Mr. C. F. G. Clark, chemist, of High street, thought it only right that the young people and the inhabitants of Dudley generally should have an opportunity of participating in some kind of rejoicing on the occasion of the marriage of the Princess Royal. His Worship the Mayor had been kind enough to promise—as the highest recognized authority in this place—a treat to the poor in the Workhouse; and he (Mr. Clark) was of opinion that they could not do less than give a treat also to the Sunday School children of the parish. He would, therefore, at once propose that they should enter into a subscription that night, and communicate as soon as possible with the trustees and ministers of the schools to solicit their co-operation in giving the children a treat, and that they should award to each establishment a certain sum out of the funds (to be regulated by the number of scholars they had) for that purpose.
The proposition met with several objections. It was stated, in answer to questions, that a tea might be had for the children at fivepence per head, and that the total number of Sunday Scholars in Dudley was about two thousand. This being so, it was hinted that the subscription might not be large enough to pay these schools fivepence per scholar for a treat, and to meet this it was suggested that fivepence should be given, and any deficiency which might arise should be made up by the congregations at each place of worship.
A Gentleman in the meeting asked if the people of Netherton were to be included in the arrangements? He believed it was the general opinion that Netherton participated in anything of this sort with the people of Dudley.
The Mayor did not think that they could do anything with the Nethertonians. “Dudley proper,” he thought, was enough for them to deal with.
Mr. Clark said so far as own feelings were concerned in this matter, he should very much like to have seen an ox or two roasted and distributed amongst the poor in the neighbourhood, after a good old English fashion.
Mr. Renaud recommended the appointment of a deputation to confer with the school authorities as to the best mode of giving a treat to the children. He had no doubt that the people belonging to the several places of worship would see to treating their own children, and that each would meet their own expenses in the event of a deficiency in the amount awarded them out of the public subscription.
Mr. Clark said if they were to give a treat at all, let them do it as it ought to be done. For his own part, he did not like the idea of proposing a treat and then calling upon other people to pay for it. He disapproved of the shabby generosity which wanted to give a tea to children, and, doubting whether they could do it or not, called upon the congregation to make up any deficiency. In such a case he (Mr. Clark) very much questioned whether the parties belonging to the churches and chapels would comply with, such a request. Some might: others might not. At any rate, they could do as they liked, and it would be left to each of them to act independently in the matter.
Mr. Renaud remarked that it was just that spirit of independence amongst the people which he wished to acknowledge.
Mr. Clark: Well, don’t let us do the thing in a spirit of niggardliness. If such a proposal is carried out, I think it will be very much like a sectarian treat.
Mr. Renaud: I wish to abolish that word “sectarian” in this matter. I don’t want us to have a sectarian, but a general treat.
The Mayor: Well, I think somebody had better move the appointment of a deputation to wait upon the ministers of the churches and chapels in the town upon the subject.
Mr. W. H. Brooke: I would suggest, Mr. Mayor, that, as a matter of order, you should first decide whether a committee of that sort is to be appointed. (Hear, hear.)
The Mayor: Just so. Will any gentleman move a resolution to that effect?
Mr. W. H. Brooke: I will move, if you please, then, “That the gentlemen present form themselves into a committee for the purpose of carrying out any arrangements that may be considered advisable for celebrating the marriage of the Princess Royal in Dudley.”
Mr. Houghton: And I second that motion.
The Mayor put the proposition to the vote, and it was carried.
Mr. Renaud: I will next move then, “That the said committee wait upon the ministers of each chapel and church in the town, to ascertain if they are willing to co-operate in giving a treat to the Sunday School children on Monday next, the 25th instant, in honour of the Princess Royal’s wedding, and to use the best means of carrying this into effect.”
Mr. E. Hollier: I will second that motion.
The Mayor put the proposition to the vote, and it was carried unanimously.
Mr. Minty inquired if the Castle guns were to be fired?
Mr. Renaud replied that the guns in the Castle yard were spiked, and could not be used. They did not want to have another earthquake. (Laughter.)
Mr. Clark moved that a public subscription should be entered into.
Mr. W. Wiggington suggested that the committee should report to a meeting to be held the next night. This proposition was received.
The Mayor said he should propose that there be a dinner at Smith’s Hotel, on Monday, precisely at half-past three o’clock.
Mr. Waring, on behalf of the Garrick Club, one of whose performances is to take place next Monday evening, requested that the dinner should not interfere with that entertainment.
The Mayor promised that it should not.
Several gentlemen inquired what sort a dinner they should have.
Mr. Clark proposed they should have a half guinea dinner, and the suggestion was received.
Mr. Renaud reminded the meeting that they ought to do something for the poor in the neighbourhood. It was well to treat the inmates of the workhouse, but at the same time he could not lose sight of the fact that there were many, very many, poor people who were as badly, if not worse off than the poor in the workhouse, who ought to be treated also. (Hear, hear).
Mr. G. B. Lowe quite coincided with every word which had fallen from the lips of his friend Mr. Renaud. There were many very poor workpeople in the neighbourhood for whom a treat of some sort ought to be provided, and he should be very sorry indeed if they were remiss or neglectful in this part of their duty. Many of the labouring classes were out of work, and must have something to eat. If they could not get anything fairly they might depend upon it they would get it other ways. The people hereabout had behaved themselves very well lately during the great depression of trade, and they ought to have a treat by way of encouragement. For his (Mr. Lowe’s) own part, he had no idea of feasting himself up whilst other people were wanting, and would readily forego his half guinea dinner to provide something for people in poorer circumstances. (Cheers.)
The Mayor: I am sorry to say that I cannot agree to such a proposal. You see we are treating the workhouse people, and I think that will be as much as we can do.
Mr. Renaud said there were hundreds of people about the town who were quite as deserving of a treat as those in the workhouse.
The Mayor: There are hundreds walking about with their hands in their pockets. We pay enough, I think, in poor rates. I say it without ill nature, I have not much sympathy with the working classes in this neighbourhood, for it is very often the case that when they have work to do they won’t do it.
Mr. W. H. Brooke: I say that it would be a disgrace to the town if something is not done for the poor. That is my decided opinion.
Mr. Lowe: We shall lay ourselves open to public censure.
Mr. Renaud: The Dudley Workhouse is only calculated to contain 103 people.
The Mayor: Well, we pay poor rates enough. The subscription you see might not be so large as to enable us to do this.
Mr. Lowe: Well, I for one would rather pay my 10s. 6d. for a treat to the poor than for a dinner at the hotel for myself, and be aware at the same time that many of our poorer fellow creatures were suffering from poverty.
Mr. Clark: Oh! but I expect the Mayor is going to treat us with the dinner at the hotel?
The Mayor: I never promised anything of the sort.
Mr. Clark: Well, I fully expected you were going to pay for it, Mr. Mayor? (Roars of laughter.)
The Mayor: Oh, no, I never said that I should.
Considerable merriment ensued. Order having been restored,
Mr. Renaud renewed his proposal for a treat to the necessitous poor in the neighbourhood.
The Mayor again expressed his opinion that the funds would not permit of anything of the sort.
Mr. Waring, on behalf of the Garrick Club, very generously stepped forward and guaranteed a donation of £10 in aid of the object from that body.
Mr. Renaud said he would guarantee another £10 for the same purpose.
The Mayor intimated that the further consideration of the subject of giving a treat to the out-door poor had better be adjourned until the next meeting. This was agreed to.
The Mayor then resumed the discussion as to the providing of a dinner at the hotel, and it was agreed that a dinner should take place in Smith’s hotel, at three o’clock next Monday, to celebrate the marriage of the Princess Royal, and that the tickets for the same might be had at the bar of the hotel, price 10s. 6d.
The several gentlemen on the committee for waiting upon the ministers and managers of the different Sunday schools then had their duties apportioned to them, and the meeting was adjourned until seven o’clock on Tuesday evening, to be held either at the Hotel or at the Old Town Hall, when the report of the same was to be received.
THE ADJOURNED MEETING
of the inhabitants of this Borough, for the purpose of taking further steps towards perfecting the arrangements for celebrating the marriage of the Princess Royal, was held in the Old Town Hall, on Tuesday evening, in accordance with a resolution passed at the first meeting on Monday. Owing to a misunderstanding, two or three people met at the hotel where the meeting was first held, and others at the Town Hall, where it was known by many that the next gathering would take place. The second meeting, like the first, was very thinly attended, and the loyalty of the inhabitants seemed to be at a very low ebb. The Mayor, John Beddard, Esq., intimated on the previous evening that other engagements would prevent him being present to-night; in his absence, therefore, the High Bailiff, Elliott Hollier, Esq., was called to the chair. The number of people in attendance was 23, the majority consisting of gentlemen who had attended on the first night. Amongst the fresh people were the Rev. John Davies, Dr. Davison, Mr. Z. P. Smith, and the Rev. Thomas Mills.
The meeting was to have commenced at seven o’clock, business, however, did not begin until about a quarter to eight.
The High Bailiff, in opening the proceedings, said he was extremely sorry to see so few of his fellow townsmen present on an occasion like this. He read over the Mayor’s notice convening the first meeting, and then in order read over the minutes of the same. As one of the committee appointed to wait upon some of the school authorities, Mr. Hollier stated the result of the same to the meeting, and finished by calling upon other of his two brother committee-men to report their success.
Several gentlemen then laid before the meeting, at considerable length, the result of their interviews with parties connected with the different schools in the place, upon the subject of giving a treat to the scholars next Monday, and the best mode of paying for it. In some instances the scholars had recently been treated or were going to be, and whilst some societies could afford to treat, others feared they could do but little, and would have to be indebted to the fund very much. A desultory discussion ensued upon the subject, in the course of which it was stated that the total number of the scholars to be treated in all probability would be 4,000—(double the number supposed at the meeting last night)—and the cost of treating that number to tea, reckoning at sixpence per head, would require a fund amounting to £100. Doubts were expressed as to the realisation of this sum, and it was suggested that each school should see to giving a treat of its own.
Mr. C. F. G. Clark remarked upon this that it would just be giving no treat at all. He understood that the object of the meetings upon this subject was to take into consideration the best means to be adopted for making a public demonstration on Monday next, in honour of the Princess Royal’s wedding. Now if each school, or each religious denomination in the town, was left to do as it liked in the matter—to give a treat or not—where was the public demonstration in the matter? There would be none at all. The demonstration, or what they might call it, would be, as he said before, quite of a sectarian character. He would suggest that a public subscription should be raised, and that whatever amount might be realised, should be equally distributed amongst the schools. (Hear, hear). He (Mr. Clark) should be very glad to co-operate with his respected pastor (Mr. Davies) in collecting subscriptions for a treat for St. Edmund’s school. He knew they would have a treat, and a good one too, let the other places have one or not. He was also still of opinion that something ought to be done for the able poor of the parish out of the Workhouse. (Hear, hear). He did not like the idea of giving a treat to the children and then requiring the congregations of the places of worship to pay for it. There must be a public subscription, and the treats should be paid for out of it. It would be very unfair if he (Mr. Clark) for instance, was to go round and solicit subscriptions in St. Edmund’s district to pay deficiencies which might arise in other places after the people of that neighbourhood had paid for a treat for their own school children. He (Mr. Clark) did want to see a liberal demonstration, he did not like to see a contracted one. He thought Dudley could give a liberal demonstration. It was a queer thing if it could not. Look at the neighbouring towns and let them notice what they were doing in Wolverhampton and Birmingham, and even Lichfield, small a place as it was. And here was Dudley which was considered the centre of the iron district, and what was it going to do? People always said that there was plenty of money in Dudley—that it was a wealthy place; and, if so, it ought, he thought, on this occasion, to show its loyalty.
Mr. Wigginton enquired if anything was to be done for the Blue-coat School and other Charities. Were they to have any demonstration at all?
Mr. Clark replied, according to the present proposal none at all.
The Rev. J. Davies: Would that follow?
Mr. Wigginton: It must follow.
The Rev. J. Davies: I quite agree with Mr. Clark’s observations. If each denomination takes the management of its own school there can be no public demonstration. I suppose that there are some schools who could not afford to give a treat?
Mr. Renaud: There are.
Rev. J. Davies: How can we best arrange the matter then?
Mr. Clark: By a public subscription to be divided amongst them.
After a desultory discussion,
Mr. Clark proceeded to move “That a general subscription be entered into by the inhabitants of Dudley to raise a fund for the purpose of affording an entertainment for the children of the schools connected with the several churches and chapels in this town next Monday, in honour of the marriage of the Princess Royal.”
The Rev. J. Davies seconded the proposition with pleasure.
It was also agreed that any surplus should be devoted towards providing something in the shape of a treat for the necessitous poor in the town.
It was finally resolved that the meeting should be further adjourned until Friday evening, when the canvassers to the fund should attend and report progress.
MARRIAGE OF THE PRINCESS ROYAL.
At a PUBLIC MEETING of the Inhabitants of Dudley, held by invitation of the Mayor, on Tuesday last, it was resolved, that a General Subscription should be made in order to form a fund to provide an entertainment for the children attending the SUNDAY AND DAY SCHOOLS of the town; the amount subscribed to be apportioned to each school according to the number of scholars; the surplus, if any, to be applied on behalf of the aged and necessitous poor. The earnest co-operation of the Clergymen, Ministers, and others, having the charge of the schools, is respectfully solicited, as well as their attendance at an adjourned Public Meeting, to be held at the OLD TOWN HALL, on FRIDAY Evening next, the 22nd inst., at 7 o’clock, when the report of the amount of subscriptions will be received.
A PUBLIC DINNER will also take place at the HOTEL, on MONDAY next, the 25th inst., in commemoration of the above event. Tickets, including wine, 10s. 6d. each. Gentlemen intending to be present are desired to signify such intention to Mrs. Smith, at the bar of the Hotel, not later than Friday next. Dinner on the table at Three o’clock.
Signed,
J. BEDDARD, Mayor.
Old Town Hall, Jan. 19th, 1858.
THE “PRINCESS ROYAL’S MARRIAGE,” AND THE “MASONIC BALL.”
To the Editor of the Dudley Express.
Sir,—How is it the Committee of the forthcoming Masonic Ball should have so lacked “foresight” as to have lost all idea of the marriage of the Princess Royal? Here is a “fact” well known for months, and here is a Ball for “charitable purposes,” got up within a few weeks, and fixed to take place FOUR days, before the great event named. Would you not suppose, Sir, that common sense would have dictated, at once, the proper day for the holding this annual affair? Would you not have thought it a glorious opportunity to blend the two objects, and by so blending, to secure a very large attendance of visitors, and a great increase to the funds hoped to be obtained by the Committee for the charities of the town?
If the common sense of the Committee could not have suggested this course, it would have been as well if they had drafted into their councils one or two men of
UN-COMMON SENSE.
Dudley, Jan. 14, 1858.
P.S.—I have seen an advertisement of this Ball in a “Birmingham” paper, but, though it is a “Dudley” Ball, got up by “Dudley” men, and for the Charities of “Dudley,” I have looked in vain for an advertisement of it in any one of the three “Dudley” papers. Can you tell a wondering reader (though of un-common sense) why this is, for un-common sense is unable to solve the mystery.
“UNCOMMON SENSE VERSUS THE LATE MASONIC BALL COMMITTEE.”
To the Editor of the Dudley Express.
Sir,—A letter in your last week’s “Open Platform” contains some crude remarks on the proceedings of the Dudley Masonic Ball Committee, written to show that its want of foresight “Omitted the glorious opportunity to blend two objects together”—viz., “The Princess Royal’s Marriage with the Masonic Ball.”
As Chairman of the Ball Committee, sir, I beg to inform your anonymous scribbler, that the propriety of holding the Masonic Ball on the evening of the Royal Marriage received the due consideration of the Ball Committee at its earliest sittings, and had your “Uncommon Sense” correspondent possessed the same amount of “foresight,” good feeling, and gentlemanly intention evinced by another writer in your columns, signed J. H. M., he would not have so foolishly rushed into print, but would have anticipated with the Ball Committee that the proper officials of Dudley would, ere now, have suggested such a mark of public demonstration of loyalty on that joyous occasion as to leave no room for complaint by any of your correspondents on that particular head. Under these impressions, the Masonic Ball Committee avoided the possibility of clashing with other hoped-for demonstrations in the town; so that the 21st was deemed the most appropriate day for holding this time-honoured and benevolent assembly.
As to the propriety of “drafting one or two men of uncommon sense” into the councils of the Ball Committee, I should first be glad to know whether the animus and diction of “Uncommon Sense” were to be taken as a specimen of his fitness to sit on that committee, and as an evidence of his capability of discerning approaching events with prophetic eyes? If so, I opine that, as his present qualifications do not appear to be up to the mark, his presence must be respectfully declined.
Touching the non-appearance of any advertisement of the ball in the Dudley newspapers, I can assure you that such an omission was far from being made with an intention of disrespect to the worthy efforts of the Dudley press to enlighten the horizon of this darkened locality. And when I inform you that the Masonic Ball Committee, for some years past, has deemed it advisable to bring the notices of the ball immediately into the presence of every respectable family in this locality by circular, it will at once suggest the inutility, in some degree, of expending so much of its funds in public advertisements. As the peculiar objects of this ball ever have been to render as much seasonable assistance to the indigent as possible, it becomes imperative upon its promoters to avoid that spirit of over-doing things which the present age unfortunately seems to foster.
By kindly admitting this letter to your “Open Platform,” you will oblige,
Your obedient servant,
C. F. G. CLARK,
Chairman of the Masonic Ball Committee.
Dudley, January 19th, 1858.
This Easter, we had another parish election of the Board of Guardians. No description of Guardians seemed to satisfy the whims and fancies of the “Irreconcilables,” so there was no way of squaring the captious ideas of some large ratepayers but having a friendly fight for it, with the usual attendant compliments to and about one another.
ELECTION OF GUARDIANS.
Brother Ratepayers,
Monopoly has passed away—The death fang of ignorance, political and social oppression, has been broken in the Abortive Doings of the Past; and the sunbeam of enlightenment and knowledge is once more permitted to dawn upon the horizon of Dudley’s political and social degradation.
RATEPAYERS TO ACTION!!
The tocsin of opposition has been sounded loud and clear in the corners of our streets, and the hand of Liberty is once more held out to uphold and maintain your expiring rights! Will you once more embrace it, or again allow it to be shrivelled up in the unholy flame of party purposes, cupidity, and self-interest? Shake off, then, the torpid inaction of the past, and awaken the dormant energies for the opening future. Reflect upon the two last years of Guardian Mismanagement,—Guardian Intolerance,—Guardian Ignorance,—Guardian Cupidity,—and Guardian Retrogression,—principles that have invariably marked the proceedings of the present Board, during this humiliating period; and ask yourselves whether these are the persons who shall constantly rule over you?
Fellow Ratepayers! Are you still determined to be gagged by decrepid imbecility, and non-age, arrogance, and vanity? Are you willing that your expiring social and parochial privileges shall be immolated upon the altar of a bigotted and unprogressive Board Conclave? Do you think and feel that the present Board represents the wishes of the ratepayers, and are the proper persons to spend your hard earned money, take charge of your aged Poor, and bring up and nurture, in the paths of frugality and prudence, our rising generation?
Reflect upon these questions, before you give your vote; for, if the Past is to be taken as an answer to these plain facts, the reply must be, NO!!
Act, then, like Englishmen, and remove all obsequious toadies from the stool of office, exercise the vote, which the law and reason has placed in your hands, with honesty and justice; and spurn from your presence, as you would a viper, those dastardly serfs who try to take away your birthright when attempting to fill up your voting papers, or tamper with your freedom of thought and action. Put the old tried friends of just economy, truth and consistency, into their proper places, and Vote for
Richard Smith, Mine Agent, Priory.
J. Renaud, Glass Master, Dixon’s Green.
Thos. Griffiths, Gentleman, Wellington Road.
J. Whitehouse, Gentleman, Oakham.
E. Hollier, Chemist, Market Place.
W. C. Wood, Grocer, High Street.
Joseph Guest, Gentleman, New Street.
M. Dennison, Chemist, Market Place.
E. F. Smith, Agent, Trindle.
R. Houghton, Draper, High Street.
These Gentlemen have before watched over your interests, and are now ready to assist you again to proclaim and sustain your social privileges.
HARD TIMES.
Dudley, March 29th, 1858.
THE MINERS’ STRIKE!
THE IN’S AND THE OUT’S.
Four important Questions for Discussion.—
1—Which are the most Prudent?
2—Which are the most Politic?
3—Which are the most Philosophic? And
4—Which are the Wisest?
The Miners on the West of Dudley who are in Work, or, the Miners on the East who are out on Strike?
SAMUEL COOK.
IMPORTANT MEETING.
INCOME TAX RE-ASSESSMENT.
Worley’s Defalcations.
The adjourned meeting to receive the report of the committee, with the opinion of counsel, will be held in the Old Town Hall, on Wednesday Evening next, the 31st March, 1858, at half-past Seven o’clock p.m. precisely.
Signed,
J. BEDDARD, Mayor.
March 29th, 1858.
ELECTION OF GUARDIANS.
Brother Ratepayers,
“Hard Times” came a little too early, and has proposed names of parties to you who have resigned! If that is his way of doing business—jumping so hastily to conclusions, and reckoning upon his chickens before they are hatched—it augurs badly for the list he has proposed to you.
Brother Ratepayers, put your shoulders to the wheel, and get rid of “Hard Times” and some of his lot, as speedily as possible. Depend upon it “Hard Times,” is by no means a safe or congenial companion. Choose men who have stuck to your interests when the “times” have indeed been “hard,” men who have fought for your welfare, and ever had in view the interests of those small ratepayers who are not at all represented in the present Board, but who must and shall be represented in future. Great Ratepayers can take care of themselves—and the great ratepayers only were represented in the old Board. You, therefore, that are sneeringly called by certain gentlemen “small” ratepayers, and whose interests are thought to be nothing, take care and see that in the present contest your interests are not overlooked. Prove to these dogmatic, would-be despotic individuals that “small” as are your interests individually, yet that when united you can break down the opposition of such men; and as you have before accomplished your own object, and gained freedom of representation in Parliament, so now prove to the world that you can be fairly represented in the humbler Board-room of your Poor House.
Brother Ratepayers, look to your interests! Be not deceived! Choose your men by those principles of Independence which they have not only avowed but always endeavoured to carry out.
VOTE FOR
Edw. Grainger,
Thos. Griffiths,
G. B. Lowe,
W. C. Wood,
W. Wigginton,
J. Whitehouse,
W. Cooper,
W. Harrison,
Edw. Wood,
W. Washington.
These are tried men, and although some of them have not had a seat at your Board, place them there triumphantly. Let not “large” men fill up your Voting papers, or allow them to sell the interests of
THE SMALL RATEPAYERS.
Dudley, March 31st, 1858.
ELECTION OF GUARDIANS.
Brother Ratepayers,
Be not deceived: a new and specious enemy, with a very apparently humble name, “The Small Ratepayer,” has recommended you a List of Guardians, for whom decency must blush and virtue must tremble.
Fellow Ratepayers, enquire for yourselves, and you will be easily able to unmask this Small Ratepayer and find him an enemy to morality, and a promoter of Mormonism in its most disastrous and hideous form. He blushes not to recommend for Guardians, men whose lives are not regulated by the paths of virtue and morality, but tainted with noon-day adultery and heartless debauchery.
RATEPAYERS, AWAKEN! Let not naked Adultery stalk through our streets, unabashed, without manifesting your manly disgust at the audacity of the attempt to seat men of vice upon the same benches with men of honour and integrity at that Board, whose most painful duty too often is to admonish the unfortunate daughters of sin for burdening our parish with the results of such vice, from which their judges should be free and unpolluted.
We grieve for the honourable names that have been made to stand godfather for the vicious and intolerant aspirants, dictated by the organ of a dangerous, maligning local newspaper. But we know that there is enough regard for virtue and morality in the Ratepayers of Dudley to discriminate betwixt the evil and the good men; and we again call upon you to exercise your votes with care, honesty, and justice. The Times are Hard, indeed, when the town is subjected to such daring insults.
Resent it like men, by Voting for
Richard Smith,
Jno. Renaud,
Thos. Griffiths,
Jno. Whitehouse,
E. Hollier,
Ed. Fisher Smith,
W. C. Wood,
Jos. Guest,
M. Dennison,
Robt. Houghton.
All of whom have pledged themselves to stand.
HARD TIMES.
Dudley, April 3rd, 1858.
ELECTIONEERING TRICKERY!
Ratepayers of Dudley,
Be proud of your country! Local Self-Government is a privilege peculiar to Englishmen. This day you are called upon to select for the coming year the Guardians of your Poor.
Do not neglect to Vote! Do not Vote at random! Do not let others Vote for you!!! Vote for the Men who will be kind to the Poor, and at the same time careful of the pockets of their constituents.
“Observer,” in a long rigmarole about nothing, has proposed a list of the whole of the members of the old Board for re-election. It is well known that many of these have proved themselves incompetent for their office, and that others have rendered themselves obnoxious to the Inhabitants of the Town. The weekly expenses of Out-Door Relief have Increased during the whole year of the present Board!
Shew your Independence and Reject that List!
“Hard Times,” in a bombastic and senseless address, has submitted a list of names of Gentlemen, many of whom are unquestionably as amiable in their private character, as they would prove themselves utterly incompetent for the office of Guardian of the Poor.
Shew your Discretion and Reject THAT List!
One of “The Small Ratepayers” has selected another list of new, and altogether untried men. You do not want to turn out indiscriminately all the members of the old Board. You only want to get rid of the obnoxious and incompetent ones!
Shew your Independence, your Discretion, and your good Common-Sense, by Rejecting that List, and Vote only for
Richard Smith, Agent,
Edward F. Smith, Agent,
Isaac Badger, Coal Master,
Joseph G. Walker, Merchant,
Elliott Hollier, Chemist,
Thomas Griffiths, Gentleman,
Edward Grainger, Draper,
George Burn Lowe, Solicitor,
William Harrison, Draper,
William Wigginton, Architect.
Please to remember that Ten Names only can be selected. Write your Initials on the Voting Paper opposite the Ten here enumerated, and see at the next election if you have not reason to feel obliged to
DISCRIMINATOR.
Dudley, April 5th, 1858.
TO THE ELECTORS OF THE BOROUGH OF DUDLEY.
Gentlemen,
I have received several communications to the effect that a Mr. Locock is, or has been, by himself and his agents, canvassing you with a view to displace me in the event of a dissolution of Parliament. Now I beg to say that, if this be true, the circumstance of a man soliciting your suffrages behind my back, without any notice to me or my supporters, without publishing any address to the Electors, or in a word, without adopting any of the usual proceedings of fair play, is a sufficient indication of your would-be representative. On first hearing this intelligence, I gave no attention whatever to the circumstance, feeling convinced that men who know so well how to stand up like Englishmen in a fair political fight, were not likely to listen to the whisperings of a person who thus stealthily presented himself to their notice.
I can no longer, however, remain silent, when I find that these persons are circulating statements with reference to me and my intentions, which are utterly false and unfounded. One of these statements is to the effect that I have announced (of course confidentially) that it is not my intention to offer myself again for the representation of Dudley. This I need hardly tell you is a wicked invention of the stealthy candidate or his agent. I therefore hasten to place you on your guard against, what our friend Louis Napoleon would call “false intelligence,” for you may be assured that it is in your hands alone I shall place my resignation, in the same open and straightforward manner in which I trust I have always met you, when the time for such a proceeding arrives.
Should the present crisis terminate in a dissolution I shall lose no time in committing my political interests to the care of those friends to whom I am indebted for the honor of representing your Borough, and whose confidence I am not conscious of having in any way either betrayed or forfeited.
I have the honour to be, Gentlemen, yours faithfully,
H. B. SHERIDAN.
House of Commons, May 15th, 1858.