MR. SHERIDAN’S RECEPTION IN DUDLEY.To the Editor of theDudley Weekly Times.Sir,—During this week theFree and Independent Electorsof Dudley have had the opportunity afforded them of receiving at the hands of their representative an account of the trust placed in his hands in March last; and the meagre and insignificant attendance at the Lancasterian School room in the afternoon, and the more important (especially to Dudley men) dinner attendance at the Hotel, too plainly tells the tale of thealtered opinionsanddubious proceedingsof thosevery vociferous supporterswho figured so prominently at the last election. Now, Mr. Editor, most men of anything like probity of character and honesty of purpose, more especially those who have a little fame to sustain, usually manifest some decent regard for their public actions and motives; but in this case, amore political case of apostasy(and upon a large scale too), has not disgraced the annals of our local political traditions. We well know that six months ago influential electors of all shades of opinion were lustily crying out for freedom, denouncing in unmeasured terms the lordly interference with their political rights, proclaiming the day of Dudley’s politicalemancipation at hand; and using the most strenuous exertions to support theirnew born ideasby placing Mr. Sheridan in the proud position of representingtheir viewsand sentiments in parliament. Such, Sir, were the doings of the past; but alas! to what more genial atmosphere has that rampant spirit of personal antagonism and offended dignity taken its aerial flight? Is the once powerful coffee room still the abode of its blinded ambition and political inconsistency? Has not the recent disseverment plainly told us that party purposes, not political liberty, were the sole objects of that unnatural alliance. Was it to be expected that ultra Toryism on the one hand, and exploded Chartism on the other, were elements likely either to sustain a six months’ political union, or awaken anything but a spirit of derision and contempt? Such, however, were the incongruous elements with which Mr. Sheridan obtained his seat in parliament, and as the M.P. for Dudley he is entitled to that respect and courtesy which belong to his office, and the position of a gentleman. Why then this shameful lukewarmness and public apathy on behalf of his recent supporters? Has the honorable gentlemanalteredhis political sentiments, thereby bringing down the offended ire and silent estrangement of his once eager listeners? Well, truly mayheapologise for their non-attendance,at the proper place, to hear the exposition of his political stewardship, for truly a more insignificant demonstration never graced the public reception of a public man. If, Sir, thepresentelective franchisecan thus, by interested partisans on the one hand, and political demagogues on the other, be made the sportive instrument of demoralising all consistency of conduct in the virtuous, and can thus be dragged forth to inflame the unholy passions of the blind and vicious, what must be its operations when the long anticipated Reform Bill extends its privileges to a more extensive, uneducated, but not less dangerous class ofsuch like freeand independent electors? If the past should unhappily contain the germ of the future waywardness of spirit, and vindictiveness of action, displayed by the head and front of the promoters of the last Dudley election, we may indeed expect marvellous acts of pitiable abandonment of reason and reflection, and the future M.P. for Dudleymay pray to be deliveredfrom his friends.Your obedient servant,AN ELECTOR.Dudley, September 18th, 1857.
MR. SHERIDAN’S RECEPTION IN DUDLEY.
To the Editor of theDudley Weekly Times.
Sir,—During this week theFree and Independent Electorsof Dudley have had the opportunity afforded them of receiving at the hands of their representative an account of the trust placed in his hands in March last; and the meagre and insignificant attendance at the Lancasterian School room in the afternoon, and the more important (especially to Dudley men) dinner attendance at the Hotel, too plainly tells the tale of thealtered opinionsanddubious proceedingsof thosevery vociferous supporterswho figured so prominently at the last election. Now, Mr. Editor, most men of anything like probity of character and honesty of purpose, more especially those who have a little fame to sustain, usually manifest some decent regard for their public actions and motives; but in this case, amore political case of apostasy(and upon a large scale too), has not disgraced the annals of our local political traditions. We well know that six months ago influential electors of all shades of opinion were lustily crying out for freedom, denouncing in unmeasured terms the lordly interference with their political rights, proclaiming the day of Dudley’s politicalemancipation at hand; and using the most strenuous exertions to support theirnew born ideasby placing Mr. Sheridan in the proud position of representingtheir viewsand sentiments in parliament. Such, Sir, were the doings of the past; but alas! to what more genial atmosphere has that rampant spirit of personal antagonism and offended dignity taken its aerial flight? Is the once powerful coffee room still the abode of its blinded ambition and political inconsistency? Has not the recent disseverment plainly told us that party purposes, not political liberty, were the sole objects of that unnatural alliance. Was it to be expected that ultra Toryism on the one hand, and exploded Chartism on the other, were elements likely either to sustain a six months’ political union, or awaken anything but a spirit of derision and contempt? Such, however, were the incongruous elements with which Mr. Sheridan obtained his seat in parliament, and as the M.P. for Dudley he is entitled to that respect and courtesy which belong to his office, and the position of a gentleman. Why then this shameful lukewarmness and public apathy on behalf of his recent supporters? Has the honorable gentlemanalteredhis political sentiments, thereby bringing down the offended ire and silent estrangement of his once eager listeners? Well, truly mayheapologise for their non-attendance,at the proper place, to hear the exposition of his political stewardship, for truly a more insignificant demonstration never graced the public reception of a public man. If, Sir, thepresentelective franchisecan thus, by interested partisans on the one hand, and political demagogues on the other, be made the sportive instrument of demoralising all consistency of conduct in the virtuous, and can thus be dragged forth to inflame the unholy passions of the blind and vicious, what must be its operations when the long anticipated Reform Bill extends its privileges to a more extensive, uneducated, but not less dangerous class ofsuch like freeand independent electors? If the past should unhappily contain the germ of the future waywardness of spirit, and vindictiveness of action, displayed by the head and front of the promoters of the last Dudley election, we may indeed expect marvellous acts of pitiable abandonment of reason and reflection, and the future M.P. for Dudleymay pray to be deliveredfrom his friends.
Your obedient servant,
AN ELECTOR.
Dudley, September 18th, 1857.
Died, September 29th, 1857, Mr. Edward Terry, Grocer, Market Place, a very upright and honourable gentleman, who twice served the office of Mayor, and had a handsome service of Silver Plate presented to him. Aged 70 years.
An important and influential Public Meeting was held at the Old Town Hall, under the presidency of John Renaud, Esq., the Mayor, to remonstrate with the Local Railway Companies, at the very unsatisfactory accommodation afforded to the public at our Dudley Railway Station.
INCOME-TAX COLLECTORS.To the Editor of theDudley and Midland Express.Sir,—Your lengthened remarks in your last publication of the“Express”on the anomalous position existing betwixt the local commissioners of income and property-tax, the tax-payers, and the unhappy delinquent in Worcester Gaol, must necessarily have awakened much reflection upon this important subject; and if I should not be considered trespassing too much upon your valuable space, I would offer a few observations with a view to elicit some well-digested opinions upon the most salient parts of your important address. Ere your strictures appeared in public, the local commissioners had, it was found, exercised that power in appointing a successor to Mr. John Leadbetter which the Act of Parliament gives them, and it would appear somewhat irregular in a local press, cognisant of that fact, to recommend a vestry meeting to consider a questionthat ought to have been urged upon the rate-payers at an earlier date, backed by suchlegal informationas is well known to exist in the editorial staff of your acceptable journal. You are, doubtless, aware, Mr. Editor, that income-tax collectors can be appointed either by the rate-payers in public vestry, or the local commissioners in private; but an appointment made by the rate-payers must have the confirmation of the local commissionersbefore it can be received at the Treasury; hence the very little importance, in my opinion, of agitating a parish on the merits of a question which, after all, must be the result either of favouritism, or true appreciation of the local commissioners. In the event of a local board of commissioners making a selection decidedly obnoxious to a parish, then it is competent for any five rate-payers to object to the appointment, by showing to the Treasury why such nomination should not take place; but in the event of no such objection being made by the rate-payers, as illustrated in both Mr. Worley’s and Mr. John Leadbetter’s appointment, the nomination stands good in law, and the collectors (by the tacit consent of the parish) are thebonâ fide collectors of the rate-payers, as well as the commissioners. In this view of the case it becomes apparent that the parish of Dudleycannot legally objectto pay the defalcation rate that most assuredly will be exacted from us; nay, the local commissioners can legally claim it at our hands, on the acknowledged principle that Mr. Worley was as much the appointment of the parish as by them,inasmuch as that parish very graciously acquiesced in their selection!Such being the fact, the general question is often asked, “What is to be done with that miserable man now incarcerated in Worcester Gaol?” As he has been placed there under a warrant issued by the local Commissioners, he most assuredly is their prisoner; and the ratepayers of Dudley can have no legal process against a defaulter abstracting money which is the property of the Crown. If the Commissioners are at all doubtful about their right or power to prosecute the delinquent,why place him in durance vile, and institutemost vigilant legal proceedingsagainst hissupposed sureties, bringing the terrible powers of the law toannihilatethe innocent and unoffending; whilst the main delinquent is kept as a sort of savage appendage to every man’s vision, who occasionally refers to his cash book to ascertain the status of its taxable page?If, again, the object of incarcerating the collector was intended to secure his detention until the embezzled money was re-levied, pray Mr. Editor, by what reasoning powers have those highly-respectable gentlemen come to the determinationto delay that unpleasant dutyto the latest possible period of propriety, or, perhaps, public safety? Now it must be apparent to all that changes are daily being made in trade incomes and value of property in such an important town as Dudley; and it would be manifestly unjust to charge the moietyupon an income of £400 a year now, when at the time the robbery was committed such income was assessedat only £300 a year. Such cases as these, Mr. Editor, would awaken no small degree of alarm and anxiety as to the course the commissioners and collectors intend to pursue; for I would opine that your editorial skill and staff of management would feel themselves somewhat startled to find that 2-1/4d. in the pound had been levied upon them, for the recovery of a moiety of income-tax abstracted by a previous defaulting collector at a lapsed time, when your editorial vision had not looked into the fame of your future greatness, or dreamt of the honours that awaited your advent into this region of physical smoke and mental darkness.Such, however inadvertently, may be the case, and against such errors and mal-practice it behoves both the rate-payers and the press to exercise a vigilant eye; for it is well known that our gracious Queen cannot afford at this particular juncture to lose any portion of her allotted supplies, andthe livingmost assuredly will have to pay for the dead in this vexatious case. It is much to be regretted that the minor officers of the public service do not appear to receive that reward for their services commensurate with the labour and responsibility entailed upon them; nevertheless, we must not lose sight of the fact,thatthepresent order of the day is retrenchmentin all branches of the paid civil service; and that the salary accorded in these casesis fixed in London,notby the local commissioners. In the particular case referring to Dudley, whilst the stipend is only about 100l.a year for the collection of the property and income-tax,the collector is alsothe recipient of the poundage derived from the collection of the assessed taxes and house duty; making his income amount to about 150l.a year; and really, Mr. Editor, we are not to have so little faith in the integrity of poor human nature, as to believe that no respectable townsman can be found to faithfully fulfil that office,withoutentrenching upon the region of venality on the one hand, or pandering to the inordinate vices of cupidity or meanness on the other.If such an one cannot be found in Dudley, sufficiently sensible of his responsibility and power, we may indeed humble ourselves “in dust and ashes,” at the depravity of human nature in general,and the want of worth and honesty in Dudleyin particular.I am, your obedient servant,INQUISITOR.Dudley, October 14th, 1857.
INCOME-TAX COLLECTORS.
To the Editor of theDudley and Midland Express.
Sir,—Your lengthened remarks in your last publication of the“Express”on the anomalous position existing betwixt the local commissioners of income and property-tax, the tax-payers, and the unhappy delinquent in Worcester Gaol, must necessarily have awakened much reflection upon this important subject; and if I should not be considered trespassing too much upon your valuable space, I would offer a few observations with a view to elicit some well-digested opinions upon the most salient parts of your important address. Ere your strictures appeared in public, the local commissioners had, it was found, exercised that power in appointing a successor to Mr. John Leadbetter which the Act of Parliament gives them, and it would appear somewhat irregular in a local press, cognisant of that fact, to recommend a vestry meeting to consider a questionthat ought to have been urged upon the rate-payers at an earlier date, backed by suchlegal informationas is well known to exist in the editorial staff of your acceptable journal. You are, doubtless, aware, Mr. Editor, that income-tax collectors can be appointed either by the rate-payers in public vestry, or the local commissioners in private; but an appointment made by the rate-payers must have the confirmation of the local commissionersbefore it can be received at the Treasury; hence the very little importance, in my opinion, of agitating a parish on the merits of a question which, after all, must be the result either of favouritism, or true appreciation of the local commissioners. In the event of a local board of commissioners making a selection decidedly obnoxious to a parish, then it is competent for any five rate-payers to object to the appointment, by showing to the Treasury why such nomination should not take place; but in the event of no such objection being made by the rate-payers, as illustrated in both Mr. Worley’s and Mr. John Leadbetter’s appointment, the nomination stands good in law, and the collectors (by the tacit consent of the parish) are thebonâ fide collectors of the rate-payers, as well as the commissioners. In this view of the case it becomes apparent that the parish of Dudleycannot legally objectto pay the defalcation rate that most assuredly will be exacted from us; nay, the local commissioners can legally claim it at our hands, on the acknowledged principle that Mr. Worley was as much the appointment of the parish as by them,inasmuch as that parish very graciously acquiesced in their selection!
Such being the fact, the general question is often asked, “What is to be done with that miserable man now incarcerated in Worcester Gaol?” As he has been placed there under a warrant issued by the local Commissioners, he most assuredly is their prisoner; and the ratepayers of Dudley can have no legal process against a defaulter abstracting money which is the property of the Crown. If the Commissioners are at all doubtful about their right or power to prosecute the delinquent,why place him in durance vile, and institutemost vigilant legal proceedingsagainst hissupposed sureties, bringing the terrible powers of the law toannihilatethe innocent and unoffending; whilst the main delinquent is kept as a sort of savage appendage to every man’s vision, who occasionally refers to his cash book to ascertain the status of its taxable page?
If, again, the object of incarcerating the collector was intended to secure his detention until the embezzled money was re-levied, pray Mr. Editor, by what reasoning powers have those highly-respectable gentlemen come to the determinationto delay that unpleasant dutyto the latest possible period of propriety, or, perhaps, public safety? Now it must be apparent to all that changes are daily being made in trade incomes and value of property in such an important town as Dudley; and it would be manifestly unjust to charge the moietyupon an income of £400 a year now, when at the time the robbery was committed such income was assessedat only £300 a year. Such cases as these, Mr. Editor, would awaken no small degree of alarm and anxiety as to the course the commissioners and collectors intend to pursue; for I would opine that your editorial skill and staff of management would feel themselves somewhat startled to find that 2-1/4d. in the pound had been levied upon them, for the recovery of a moiety of income-tax abstracted by a previous defaulting collector at a lapsed time, when your editorial vision had not looked into the fame of your future greatness, or dreamt of the honours that awaited your advent into this region of physical smoke and mental darkness.
Such, however inadvertently, may be the case, and against such errors and mal-practice it behoves both the rate-payers and the press to exercise a vigilant eye; for it is well known that our gracious Queen cannot afford at this particular juncture to lose any portion of her allotted supplies, andthe livingmost assuredly will have to pay for the dead in this vexatious case. It is much to be regretted that the minor officers of the public service do not appear to receive that reward for their services commensurate with the labour and responsibility entailed upon them; nevertheless, we must not lose sight of the fact,thatthepresent order of the day is retrenchmentin all branches of the paid civil service; and that the salary accorded in these casesis fixed in London,notby the local commissioners. In the particular case referring to Dudley, whilst the stipend is only about 100l.a year for the collection of the property and income-tax,the collector is alsothe recipient of the poundage derived from the collection of the assessed taxes and house duty; making his income amount to about 150l.a year; and really, Mr. Editor, we are not to have so little faith in the integrity of poor human nature, as to believe that no respectable townsman can be found to faithfully fulfil that office,withoutentrenching upon the region of venality on the one hand, or pandering to the inordinate vices of cupidity or meanness on the other.
If such an one cannot be found in Dudley, sufficiently sensible of his responsibility and power, we may indeed humble ourselves “in dust and ashes,” at the depravity of human nature in general,and the want of worth and honesty in Dudleyin particular.
I am, your obedient servant,
INQUISITOR.
Dudley, October 14th, 1857.
October 24th, 1857. A General Subscription was entered into in Dudley, on behalf of the Indian Relief Fund for sufferers by the dreadful Military Revolt, which took place in Delhi and the surrounding Districts. The handsome sum of £831 6s. 8d. was raised for that laudable and urgent object.
THE OXFORD, WORCESTER, AND WOLVERHAMPTON RAILWAY STATION AT DUDLEY.To the Editor of theDudley and Midland Counties Express.Sir,—Scarcely three months have rolled over our heads, since the leading officials of the above line did penance on the stool of public opinion, erected at a town’s meeting held in the Old Town Hall, Dudley, “to consider the disgraceful state of the Railway Station in Dudley, and the want of railway accommodation afforded to the town generally.”On that occasion a considerable amount ofspecial pleadingwas resorted to by the parties complained of; and muchstresswas placed upontheir intentions for the future, promising to mend their ways (and the station also) if the indulgent public would only continue to pay their money, take their trips, and cease grumbling.Such, in June last, was thepromise given; now, Mr. Editor, let us see how theperformancehas tallied with that pledge of amendment. Report, with her thousand tongues, runs rife in our busy streets and gossiping saloons, saying that the good people located at Queen’s Cross, in the densely populated streets surrounding the Gas Works, and the industrious community at Netherton, are to havetheir station accommodation increased(when they wish to go to Stourbridge, &c.) like the Yankee fashion ofprogressing backwards; for it is said, that the Netherton station is doomed to be blotted out of the fair features of this eccentric line, by being knocked off the line for passenger traffic altogether. If such be correct, this false economising system seems fitted to make those inhabitantspay an extra fare, and stretch their aged or rheumatic limbs, by walking to and from their domiciles down to the Dudley station; besides giving the timorous the benefit of an unnecessary fright in our waterproof tunnel.Doubtless, Mr. Editor, you can furnish the public with someofficial contradiction to this rumour; otherwise we must be up anddoing, ere our contested rights (hardly fought for, and fairly won in 1845-6) are wrested from our hands by some mistaken system of cheeseparing and illiberality.If the aged, lame, infirm, or timid railway traveller casts his anxious eye towards the Dudley station, expecting to findany improvementeffected at that delightful arena of decorum and propriety, (more especially on a wet Saturday night), he will be most woefully deceived. For can it be supposed, Mr. Editor, that a railway company, already prolific in blunders, misunderstandings, and broken promises, could be so egregiously foolish as recently to remove their ticket office at the Dudley Station from its legitimate ground-floor platform to the extreme entrance of thathighly artistic wooden tunnel, spanning its unwieldy proportions across the domain of two important railway companies!! To passengers starting from Dudleythe boonis offered, we presume, as being highly convenient to take your ticket before you take your choice ofstandingupon that spacious gallery. In warm weather it may be thought pleasant to cool one’s heels in a mighty torrent of wind and dust, usually generated in that elegant ladies’ waiting room (?); but pray, Mr. Editor, are our shivering limbs to be subjected to the piercing winds of a severe winter’s night,—sans fire, sans doors, sans seats—yea,sans everythingthat ought to be afforded to an important town like Dudley?This, truly, may suit the economy of the O. W. and W. R. Co., but surely the sensible, well-thinking, and comfort-loving people of Dudleywill not tamely submit to this additionalindignity. To the casual traveller (more especially the infirm, aged, and children) who may be so unlucky as to requirerebooking from an in-coming trainon the South Stafford line, the amount of annoyance and physical exertion cannot fail to be intolerable. Fancy, sir, some poor aged traveller, or a lady with children (not an O. W. and W. Railway Director) arriving by a late train on the South Stafford line, and having to hobble or rush up and down two pairs of slippery stairs, then along that precious gangway, for another ticket, occupying some considerable time at the present spacious ticket office, ere they can arrive at the object of their solicitude, the waiting train below.Such scenes would appear decidedly improbable in this our day of tidy railway accommodation; but, Mr. Editor, if you or the proper officials connected with the line are at all doubtful of the truthfulness of the same, pray let me induce both to witness (on any coming dark or rainy Thursday or Saturday evening) the arrival of a South Stafford train, laden with its living freight of young and old, halt and timid—and I venture to predict that you will think that my remonstrance and call to duty are not overcharged, but that we live in times when the honour, integrity, and liberality of a railway company can be summoned legitimately to the bar of public judgmentfor neglect of duty and broken promises, viz., for committing a positive and palpable deviation—thereby breaking faith with the public—from the offered accommodation intended to be secured to the inhabitants of Dudley when its promoters originallysolicited that publicto give it their preference to a competing line in 1844-5-6.I am, your obedient servant,C. F. G. CLARK.Dudley, Oct. 27, 1857.[In our first number we drew attention to the disgraceful state of the station accommodation of this town. Unless strong measures are adopted we think little will be done.]
To the Editor of theDudley and Midland Counties Express.
Sir,—Scarcely three months have rolled over our heads, since the leading officials of the above line did penance on the stool of public opinion, erected at a town’s meeting held in the Old Town Hall, Dudley, “to consider the disgraceful state of the Railway Station in Dudley, and the want of railway accommodation afforded to the town generally.”
On that occasion a considerable amount ofspecial pleadingwas resorted to by the parties complained of; and muchstresswas placed upontheir intentions for the future, promising to mend their ways (and the station also) if the indulgent public would only continue to pay their money, take their trips, and cease grumbling.
Such, in June last, was thepromise given; now, Mr. Editor, let us see how theperformancehas tallied with that pledge of amendment. Report, with her thousand tongues, runs rife in our busy streets and gossiping saloons, saying that the good people located at Queen’s Cross, in the densely populated streets surrounding the Gas Works, and the industrious community at Netherton, are to havetheir station accommodation increased(when they wish to go to Stourbridge, &c.) like the Yankee fashion ofprogressing backwards; for it is said, that the Netherton station is doomed to be blotted out of the fair features of this eccentric line, by being knocked off the line for passenger traffic altogether. If such be correct, this false economising system seems fitted to make those inhabitantspay an extra fare, and stretch their aged or rheumatic limbs, by walking to and from their domiciles down to the Dudley station; besides giving the timorous the benefit of an unnecessary fright in our waterproof tunnel.
Doubtless, Mr. Editor, you can furnish the public with someofficial contradiction to this rumour; otherwise we must be up anddoing, ere our contested rights (hardly fought for, and fairly won in 1845-6) are wrested from our hands by some mistaken system of cheeseparing and illiberality.
If the aged, lame, infirm, or timid railway traveller casts his anxious eye towards the Dudley station, expecting to findany improvementeffected at that delightful arena of decorum and propriety, (more especially on a wet Saturday night), he will be most woefully deceived. For can it be supposed, Mr. Editor, that a railway company, already prolific in blunders, misunderstandings, and broken promises, could be so egregiously foolish as recently to remove their ticket office at the Dudley Station from its legitimate ground-floor platform to the extreme entrance of thathighly artistic wooden tunnel, spanning its unwieldy proportions across the domain of two important railway companies!! To passengers starting from Dudleythe boonis offered, we presume, as being highly convenient to take your ticket before you take your choice ofstandingupon that spacious gallery. In warm weather it may be thought pleasant to cool one’s heels in a mighty torrent of wind and dust, usually generated in that elegant ladies’ waiting room (?); but pray, Mr. Editor, are our shivering limbs to be subjected to the piercing winds of a severe winter’s night,—sans fire, sans doors, sans seats—yea,sans everythingthat ought to be afforded to an important town like Dudley?
This, truly, may suit the economy of the O. W. and W. R. Co., but surely the sensible, well-thinking, and comfort-loving people of Dudleywill not tamely submit to this additionalindignity. To the casual traveller (more especially the infirm, aged, and children) who may be so unlucky as to requirerebooking from an in-coming trainon the South Stafford line, the amount of annoyance and physical exertion cannot fail to be intolerable. Fancy, sir, some poor aged traveller, or a lady with children (not an O. W. and W. Railway Director) arriving by a late train on the South Stafford line, and having to hobble or rush up and down two pairs of slippery stairs, then along that precious gangway, for another ticket, occupying some considerable time at the present spacious ticket office, ere they can arrive at the object of their solicitude, the waiting train below.
Such scenes would appear decidedly improbable in this our day of tidy railway accommodation; but, Mr. Editor, if you or the proper officials connected with the line are at all doubtful of the truthfulness of the same, pray let me induce both to witness (on any coming dark or rainy Thursday or Saturday evening) the arrival of a South Stafford train, laden with its living freight of young and old, halt and timid—and I venture to predict that you will think that my remonstrance and call to duty are not overcharged, but that we live in times when the honour, integrity, and liberality of a railway company can be summoned legitimately to the bar of public judgmentfor neglect of duty and broken promises, viz., for committing a positive and palpable deviation—thereby breaking faith with the public—from the offered accommodation intended to be secured to the inhabitants of Dudley when its promoters originallysolicited that publicto give it their preference to a competing line in 1844-5-6.
I am, your obedient servant,
C. F. G. CLARK.
Dudley, Oct. 27, 1857.
[In our first number we drew attention to the disgraceful state of the station accommodation of this town. Unless strong measures are adopted we think little will be done.]
A long-suffering period of twenty-two years passed over our heads before the London and North Western Railway Company could be prevailed upon to erect a decent Railway Station for Dudley.
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 theBirmingham 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 theBirmingham 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 whathe 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 readersthink? 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 theright 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.
To the Editor of theBirmingham 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 theBirmingham 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 whathe 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 readersthink? 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 theright 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 theDudley Weekly Times.Sir,—Our last Castle Fetes were heralded forth to the pleasure-seeking public with more than ordinary pomp and significance, by theprominently 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 oflocal exultation, and heartily concurring in the sentiments uttered by our public functionary (the Mayor), I naturally anticipated thatsome suitable site would ere thishave been found,whereon to permanently fixthose 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 oftheir 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 ofpublic sympathy alone, that these precious relics of the famed Sebastopol shouldimmediatelybe taken under theprotecting wingsof 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 suitablechevaux-de-frise, with an adequateelevatedcovering to protect them from the inclemency of theweather! Did not the Committee of the last Castle Fetesderive more additional “grist to the mill”by the fact that the guns were to be seenunder their auspices alone? Hence the reasonableness of that Committee taking proper care of those trophies,as showing more decent acknowledgementto the sightseeing public forthe additional proceedsreceived to their funds by the opportune presence of those national trophies. If it was worth the troubleto departfrom 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 notinsensibletothe very exclusive and liberal supportthey 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 theDudley Weekly Times.Sir,—Permit me a small space in theTimes, 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 theExpress, 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 theproper placehas not been lost sight of. My idea of thisplaceis, 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 themforthe 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 theExpress, 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 theExpress, 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.
THE SEBASTOPOL GUNS.
To the Editor of theDudley Weekly Times.
Sir,—Our last Castle Fetes were heralded forth to the pleasure-seeking public with more than ordinary pomp and significance, by theprominently 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 oflocal exultation, and heartily concurring in the sentiments uttered by our public functionary (the Mayor), I naturally anticipated thatsome suitable site would ere thishave been found,whereon to permanently fixthose 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 oftheir 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 ofpublic sympathy alone, that these precious relics of the famed Sebastopol shouldimmediatelybe taken under theprotecting wingsof 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 suitablechevaux-de-frise, with an adequateelevatedcovering to protect them from the inclemency of theweather! Did not the Committee of the last Castle Fetesderive more additional “grist to the mill”by the fact that the guns were to be seenunder their auspices alone? Hence the reasonableness of that Committee taking proper care of those trophies,as showing more decent acknowledgementto the sightseeing public forthe additional proceedsreceived to their funds by the opportune presence of those national trophies. If it was worth the troubleto departfrom 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 notinsensibletothe very exclusive and liberal supportthey 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 theDudley Weekly Times.
Sir,—Permit me a small space in theTimes, 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 theExpress, 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 theproper placehas not been lost sight of. My idea of thisplaceis, 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 themforthe 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 theExpress, 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 theExpress, 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 decidedlyen fetethis 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 Renaudmoved that the Mayor should take the chair.(Hear).TheMayorin 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.TheMayordid not think that they could do anything with the Nethertonians. “Dudley proper,” he thought, was enough for them to deal with.Mr.Clarksaid 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.Renaudrecommended the appointment of a deputation to confer with the school authorities as to the best mode of giving atreat 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.Clarksaid 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.Renaudremarked 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.TheMayor: 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.)TheMayor: 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.TheMayorput 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.Mintyinquired if the Castle guns were to be fired?Mr.Renaudreplied that the guns in the Castle yard were spiked, and could not be used. They did not want to have another earthquake. (Laughter.)Mr.Clarkmoved that a public subscription should be entered into.Mr.W. Wiggingtonsuggested that the committee should reportto a meeting to be held the next night. This proposition was received.TheMayorsaid 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.TheMayorpromised that it should not.Several gentlemen inquired what sort a dinner they should have.Mr.Clarkproposed they should have a half guinea dinner, and the suggestion was received.Mr.Renaudreminded 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. Lowequite 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.)TheMayor: 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.Renaudsaid there were hundreds of people about the town who were quite as deserving of a treat as those in the workhouse.TheMayor: 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.TheMayor: 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?TheMayor: 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.)TheMayor: Oh, no, I never said that I should.Considerable merriment ensued. Order having been restored,Mr.Renaudrenewed his proposal for a treat to the necessitous poor in the neighbourhood.TheMayoragain 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.Renaudsaid 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.TheMayorthen 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 MEETINGof 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.TheHigh 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. Clarkremarked 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 thepublicdemonstration 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 couldgive 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.Wiggintonenquired if anything was to be done for the Blue-coat School and other Charities. Were they to have any demonstration at all?Mr.Clarkreplied, 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.Clarkproceeded 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. Daviesseconded 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 theDudley 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 placeFOURdays, before the great event named. Would you not suppose, Sir, thatcommon sensewould 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 thecommon senseof 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 ofUN-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 ofun-common sense) why this is, forun-common sense is unable to solve the mystery.“UNCOMMON SENSEVERSUSTHE LATE MASONIC BALL COMMITTEE.”To the Editor of theDudley 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 thedue considerationof the Ball Committeeat its earliest sittings, and had your “Uncommon Sense” correspondent possessed the same amount of “foresight,” good feeling, andgentlemanly intentionevinced 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 theproper officialsof 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 Committeeavoidedthe 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 theanimusanddictionof “Uncommon Sense” were to be taken as aspecimen of his fitnessto 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 ballimmediatelyinto the presence of every respectable family in this localityby 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 ofover-doing thingswhich 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.
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 Renaudmoved that the Mayor should take the chair.(Hear).
TheMayorin 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.
TheMayordid not think that they could do anything with the Nethertonians. “Dudley proper,” he thought, was enough for them to deal with.
Mr.Clarksaid 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.Renaudrecommended the appointment of a deputation to confer with the school authorities as to the best mode of giving atreat 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.Clarksaid 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.Renaudremarked 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.
TheMayor: 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.)
TheMayor: 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.
TheMayorput 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.Mintyinquired if the Castle guns were to be fired?
Mr.Renaudreplied that the guns in the Castle yard were spiked, and could not be used. They did not want to have another earthquake. (Laughter.)
Mr.Clarkmoved that a public subscription should be entered into.
Mr.W. Wiggingtonsuggested that the committee should reportto a meeting to be held the next night. This proposition was received.
TheMayorsaid 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.
TheMayorpromised that it should not.
Several gentlemen inquired what sort a dinner they should have.
Mr.Clarkproposed they should have a half guinea dinner, and the suggestion was received.
Mr.Renaudreminded 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. Lowequite 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.)
TheMayor: 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.Renaudsaid there were hundreds of people about the town who were quite as deserving of a treat as those in the workhouse.
TheMayor: 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.
TheMayor: 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?
TheMayor: 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.)
TheMayor: Oh, no, I never said that I should.
Considerable merriment ensued. Order having been restored,
Mr.Renaudrenewed his proposal for a treat to the necessitous poor in the neighbourhood.
TheMayoragain 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.Renaudsaid 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.
TheMayorthen 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.
TheHigh 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. Clarkremarked 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 thepublicdemonstration 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 couldgive 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.Wiggintonenquired if anything was to be done for the Blue-coat School and other Charities. Were they to have any demonstration at all?
Mr.Clarkreplied, 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.Clarkproceeded 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. Daviesseconded 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 theDudley 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 placeFOURdays, before the great event named. Would you not suppose, Sir, thatcommon sensewould 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 thecommon senseof 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 ofun-common sense) why this is, forun-common sense is unable to solve the mystery.
“UNCOMMON SENSEVERSUSTHE LATE MASONIC BALL COMMITTEE.”
To the Editor of theDudley 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 thedue considerationof the Ball Committeeat its earliest sittings, and had your “Uncommon Sense” correspondent possessed the same amount of “foresight,” good feeling, andgentlemanly intentionevinced 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 theproper officialsof 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 Committeeavoidedthe 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 theanimusanddictionof “Uncommon Sense” were to be taken as aspecimen of his fitnessto 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 ballimmediatelyinto the presence of every respectable family in this localityby 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 ofover-doing thingswhich 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.