LORD WARD’S COURT LEET.
The result of the Parliamentary Election in March last was not allowed to slumber, for Mr. Wm. Haden, a County Magistrate, and a member of the Court Leet, got his back up at some of the proceedings, and as he was out-voted by the majority of the Liberal gentlemen present, he must needs vent his spleen upon Mr. Bourne, the Clerk to the Court Leet, which brought forth the following correspondence:—
To the Editor of the Birmingham Daily Press.
Sir,—In your report of the proceedings at Lord Ward’s Court Leet on Friday last, you state, “Mr. Haden returned to the room and apologised to Mr. Bourne for any hasty expression which may have escaped from him on his first entering the room, he assured Mr. B. that what he had then said was not intended as personal.”
This is altogether incorrect, the words “apology” or “hasty expression” I certainly did not use; what I did say to Mr. Bourne was, “That I feared from something I heard after leaving the room, he thought my first remarks were intended to be applied to him. I assured him I had no such intention, as I felt satisfied the proceedings had not originated with him.”
I must request that you will publish this note in one of your earliest editions, as your report will lead the public to believe I had apologised to Mr. Bourne for some hasty expression which I was anxious to withdraw.
I am, sir,
Yours respectfully,
WILLIAM HADEN.
Dixon’s Green, Dudley, November 2, 1857.
LORD WARD’S COURT LEET.
To the Editor of the Birmingham Daily Press.
Sir,—In your publication of this day we are favoured with a letter from Mr. William Haden, of Dudley, one of the uninvited to the late Court Leet Dinner, in explanation of what he alleges to be a misinterpretation of his very un-called-for remarks at the Court Leet meeting on Friday last. As I was present on that occasion, I deem it but just to the merits and acknowledged truthfulness of your general reports to aver that Mr. Haden assuredly made use of the expressions referred to, and in such an excited state of mind, too, as to leave no doubt upon the minds of the gentlemen present that he came there brim-full of indignation and chagrin (at witnessing the “good time coming” manifestation), at what he and the deputation who indorsed his expressions with “Hear, hear, hear,” seemed to believe was intended as a personal slight to those worthy townsmen who have so often eaten Lord Ward’s roast beef, and then lampooned his lordship for his hospitality and courteous welcome.
The Court Leet meeting of the manor of Dudley, being dependent upon the manorial rights of the barony of Ward, becomes by such ancient right a self-constituted body of that barony, hence the perfect right of Lord Ward to invite whom he may please to attend his Court Leet. This private right could not have been more scrupulously observed last week than has been witnessed the last thirty years at former Leet meetings, for it cannot be denied that a certain “clique” has at that Leet exercised an amount of domination unbearable to honourable minds, arming themselves with a species of presumptuous authority, most unmistakeably uncongenial to the known liberality and courteous bearing of Lord Ward; dictating the terms of political subserviency and social local dependency that should fit any townsman to be eligible for that festival of local celebrity.
Pitiable indeed must be the status of that spirit of independence engendered in the minds of intelligent Englishmen who can present themselves where they are not invited, and condescend to interrogate the legal authority of the Lord of the Manor upon a question beyond their right of inquiry.
Mr. Wm. Haden may, if he thinks proper, characterise the last Court Leet meeting “as a contemptible proceeding,” but we remind Mr. Haden that the influx of new life and liberal thoughts into the elements of the late Court Leet augur well for the onward progression of both political and social advancement in Dudley. We believe, sir, that the contracted neck of Toryism and the conclusive and bigotted favouritism of partizanship is broken thereby, and that Lord Ward has hitherto been deceived in his estimate of the lingering political vitality of the borough of Dudley. We furthermore hail this last local excitement as foreboding days of enlightenment, and liberty of thought and speech to the good old town of Dudley; and we accept the proceedings of the last Court Leet as the act of a liberal, benevolent nobleman, conscious of his immense responsibility, alive to the approaching signs of the times, and fully sensible of the patent fact that local cliques and self interests, rigidly exercised in the management of affairs in Dudley, have retarded its commercial enterprise, and contracted its social and political usefulness.
Yours respectfully,
VERITAS.
Dudley, November 6th, 1857.
THE DUDLEY COURT LEET AGAIN.
We are happy to find that our strictures a fortnight ago, on the subject of the Dudley Court Leet, have met with the general approval of this district. Nor could it well be otherwise. To say nothing of the principles of common justice, an error in tactics so glaring as that perpetrated in connexion with the late Court Leet meeting could not but meet with general condemnation.
It will be seen, however, from a letter under the heading of “Our Open Platform,” that a gentleman who signs himself “Investigator” has undertaken to investigate the facts connected with the invitations to the Court Leet, and to present himself as the champion of its proceedings.
This letter is couched in the best possible spirit; and though our correspondent takes strong exception to many of our views, we shall always bid him and others welcome to the use of our pages, so long as they can express their differences of opinion from us or from each other with so much freedom from acrimonius feeling. Had the argument of “Investigator” been as sound as the tone of his letter is satisfactory, we should have passed it over without a single observation. We shall have no difficulty in proving, however, that his remarks are open to that very charge of misleading the public which he attempts to fasten upon ourselves.
He says he has the list of invitations to the Court Leet before him, and on that ground he claims to be regarded as the champion of those by whom it was supplied. Of course we have no objection to accept the gauntlet. He then says that there were 82 gentlemen invited to the late Court Leet, and that of this number 38 have attended former meetings, and the remaining 44 were townsmen of various opinions.
Now, the only inference which any man of ordinary powers of mind can draw from these figures, is that 44 out of the number of persons accustomed to attend former Courts Leet have this year been rejected, and that 38 of that number have been retained. But why reject the 44 and retain the 38? Simply because the political preferences of the former at the last election happened to differ from those of the parties who issued the invitations. To any other answer than this, the voice of public conscience would at once demur.
But “Investigator” has made a discovery which completely falsifies our own statement of this matter. He has discovered that many of Mr. Sheridan’s supporters were amongst the persons attending the late Court Leet. How many do our readers think? One half.—Guess again. One quarter.—Guess again. A half quarter.—Guess again.—You give it up. Then, thoughtful reader, let us tell thee there was the astounding number of four. One of these was the late mayor, who was known to have long before abandoned Mr. Sheridan’s cause;—two others were gentlemen connected with the press, and who were supposed to be changing sides before the meeting took place—and the fourth was a kind and amiable man, whose presence in such company has not yet been accounted for.
So far, then, from our correspondent disproving our statement respecting the invitations to the Court Leet, we find that his statements confirm substantially every word that we have spoken upon that subject.
We may, however, here state once for all, that it is not a question between Mr. Sheridan and his political opponents, but between those opponents and such of the inhabitants of this district as think proper to vote for a candidate of their own selection. That Mr. Sheridan happens to be that candidate is the mere accident of the hour. The question is simply this:—Shall the electors of Dudley vote for whom they will?—or are they to be subject to pains and penalties for the free and independent exercise of their electoral rights?
Nor is “Investigator” more successful in his attempt to vindicate the right of the Lord of the Manor to do what he likes with his own. He says the Barony of Ward is a private institution, and that therefore Lord Ward has a right to invite whom he likes to transact his own business. As well might he say that the Borough of Dudley and the Monarchy of England are private institutions, and that, therefore, the Mayor of the one and the Monarch of the other have a right to employ and discard whom they will. We deny that the Barony of Ward is, in the sense spoken of by “Investigator,” a private institution; and, of course, we deny the possession of the right he claims.
We are actuated by no feeling of hostility to Lord Ward, but as public Journalists it is our duty to watch over the interests of the public, and to see that Senator and Plebeian are alike protected in the exercise of the privileges they enjoy. As an evidence of our desire for the most perfect fairness in the discussion of questions such as this, to which we have now for the third time been compelled to advert, we may state that in an article on “A Royal Charter for Dudley,” in our last issue, the word “charge” instead of the word “complaint,” is used either by our mistake or by that of our printer. As, however, it has been represented to us by one of our friends, that some readers may possibly suppose, from the construction of the sentence in which this word occurs, that we impute bribery and coercion to Lord Ward, or to his agents, or both, we feel it to be due to ourselves, to Lord Ward, to his agents, and to our readers generally, to state that nothing could possibly have been further from our intention. What we meant to have said, and what we think our words clearly convey, is this—that the right of the Lord of the Manor to invite whom he would to his Court Leet had been so exercised, as that, by inviting a great many gentlemen to his annual dinner who were known to have supported Mr. Sandars, but who had not been accustomed to be invited, it was liable to be construed into a species of bribery to one class, and to operate as a kind of punishment to the other, and so we have reason to believe it is popularly regarded. But any intention or idea of imputing bribery to Lord Ward or his agents, either expressly or by implication, we distinctly and absolutely disavow. And this disavowal we make as spontaneously and promptly as we can. It is as painful to us as it is contrary to our inclination to have to discuss the public conduct of public men. When, however, duty impels us to the task, we trust that we shall never be found wanting in those proprieties towards those from whom we differ, which the commonest courtesy requires at our hands.
To the most amusing part of our correspondent’s letter we have, however, yet to come. After having occupied nearly half a column of our space in endeavouring to prove that the agents of Lord Ward have not acted with partiality in the late Court Leet affair, he goes on to show that they have always acted with partiality; that they have done on the present occasion—only to another set of parties—what they have always been accustomed to do—to one side or the other;—that those who have now been rejected ought not to have given utterance to a single murmur, on the simple principle that they had now received a Roland for an Oliver.
He speaks of “respectable and sensible men, who have never hitherto been favoured with his Lordship’s smile,” of the chagrin and personal insult experienced by many of our worthy townsmen, and of the bygone bigotry, political domination and petty clique of the last thirty years. The agents of Lord Ward may truly say, “Save us from our friends.”
If one-half of what “Investigator” says be true, it is high time that the management of Dudley Court Leet be reformed. But it is a curious incident in this controversy, and one which strikingly illustrates the narrowness of men’s minds, and their ignorance of the very first principles of genuine liberty, and there should be men of professed education in the town of Dudley who can look upon the mere transfer of an exclusive privilege from the hands of one set of men to those of another, as an evidence of real progress. If there exists anywhere powers such as those to which our correspondent refers, and which can be used for purposes of oppression or intimidation, it is manifest that these powers ought not to exist; and however much their transfer from the hands of one political party to another may gratify men’s vanity and assist in the advancement of their personal purposes, the only evidence of real progress will be found in such powers being taken altogether from the hands of those who hold them, and being vested in others who cannot employ them for purposes of their own.—The Dudley and Midland Counties Express.
December 1st, 1857. This present period was one of great distress and misery in the town and neighbourhood, occasioned by the suspension and failure of many Iron Masters hereabouts. The serious commercial consequence was, that fifty-seven Blast Furnaces were stopped, and upwards of 10,000 men were thereby thrown out of employment. This depression of our local trade had a most serious effect upon the tradesmen of the town, and many lamentable bankruptcies amongst us was the result.
Died, December 17th, 1857, Mr. Joseph Morris, of the Miner’s Arms; Mr. Morris had gone through a great diversity of trials in life, and was deservedly much respected by all parties. Aged 73 years.
Died, December 17th, 1857, at Westbromwich, Mr. Richard Bond, formerly Parish Clerk of St. Edmund’s Church; he was a close-fisted old gentleman, and died very rich.
THE SEBASTOPOL GUNS.
To the Editor of the Dudley Weekly Times.
Sir,—Our last Castle Fetes were heralded forth to the pleasure-seeking public with more than ordinary pomp and significance, by the prominently announced fact, that those mighty engines of death and destruction (the Sebastopol Trophy Guns), were to be ushered into the far-famed Castle Court-yard, amid the din of arms, the plaudits of the people, the beating of the heart-stirring drum, and the merry peals of our excellent parish church bells. Being one of the admirers of that march of pomp and day of local exultation, and heartily concurring in the sentiments uttered by our public functionary (the Mayor), I naturally anticipated that some suitable site would ere this have been found, whereon to permanently fix those trophies of our sanguinary struggle with the great Power of the North; but no! Dudley like! the famed Sebastopol guns, like the crumbling walls with which they are surrounded, seemed destined to be left alone in their glory. Anon the hobby-horses whereon the juvenile warriors are daily wont to practice the art of cannon riding, and the more matured admirers of naval glory, are accustomed to ruminate upon the mighty events of their departed lustre, under the consoling influence of that soother of the “ills and woes that flesh is heir to” a pipe of the genial Virginian weed. Such being the humiliating fact, I maintain, Mr. Editor, on the ground of public sympathy alone, that these precious relics of the famed Sebastopol should immediately be taken under the protecting wings of the Mayor, on behalf of the liege burgesses of this ancient city of the renowned Dodo, or consigned to the fostering care of the popular president of the Mechanics’ Institute. Surely £50 would suffice to provide proper gun carriages, and fix them on solid masonry in front of the magnificent Keep, protected by a suitable chevaux-de-frise, with an adequate elevated covering to protect them from the inclemency of the weather! Did not the Committee of the last Castle Fetes derive more additional “grist to the mill” by the fact that the guns were to be seen under their auspices alone? Hence the reasonableness of that Committee taking proper care of those trophies, as showing more decent acknowledgement to the sightseeing public for the additional proceeds received to their funds by the opportune presence of those national trophies. If it was worth the trouble to depart from the ordinary routine of official propriety to receive the guns at the hands of Government, surely it is but reasonable to hope that the sanguinary admirers of national prowess should provide (like other towns) a suitable place to deposit them on. Such being the public belief, let the Committee of the Mechanics’ Institute perform their duty, by endeavouring to convince that public that they are not insensible to the very exclusive and liberal support they have from time to time received at the hands of an hitherto silent but observant public, but at once make a suitable provision for those interesting objects of public curiosity, which are properly intended to be the enduring evidences of a nation’s triumphal prowess and valour, under difficulties and privations unsurpassed in the annals of warfare.
I am, your obedient servant,
ONE WHO LIKES TO SEE EVERYTHING IN ITS PROPER PLACE.
Dudley.
DUDLEY MECHANICS’ INSTITUTION.
To the Editor of the Dudley Weekly Times.
Sir,—Permit me a small space in the Times, in reply to the letters of Mr. Sluter, “A Schoolmaster,” and “One who likes to see everything in its proper place,” which appeared in your last. I feel the more pleasure in noticing them, from the courteous spirit in which they appear to be written, contrasted with that of a leading article in the columns of your contemporary, upon (in some respects) a somewhat similar subject. Right glad am I to find an interest taken in the matters to which they refer, sufficiently strong to develop itself by directing public attention to them through the pages of your paper. The offer of affording gratuitous adult instruction to a class or classes in connection with the Mechanics’ Institution, so kindly made by Mr. Sluter and his coadjutors, was the subject of many conversations, and occupied much attention of myself and its committee; the great obstacle, however, appeared to us to be the want of proper accommodation, the Old Town Hall being occupied for so many purposes, and at such varied hours, that we feared it could hardly be rendered properly available for such a purpose. Again too, we entertained the hope that long ere this we should have been in possession of rooms and building of our own, in which, suitable accommodation, not only for this but every other purpose connected with the Mechanics’ Institution or the public, would have been provided—the exertions to obtain which, notwithstanding the sneers of the writer in the Express, are pretty well known to most. The effort to establish adult evening schools may, perhaps, unhappily not be supported, either by those requiring them on the one hand, or by public countenance on the other, but it is worth a trial, and the offer of Mr. Sluter, and others of the Schoolmasters’ Association connected with him, is a noble one, evincing a feeling on their parts which ought to be thankfully and heartily responded to. What, Mr. Editor, even the most enlightened, is the education of our youth, compared to that more mature knowledge we acquire in after years? It is but, as it were, the outlines of the map then laid down, to be filled in by ourselves at leisure at a future time. I trust, therefore, now the matter is again mooted, the subject will not be allowed to drop without a trial being made regarding it. To argue as to the necessity or propriety of the establishment of such classes or schools, were but to insult the understanding of those most likely to render them efficient support.
As to the Sebastopol guns, I also should like to see them in their proper place, and the consideration of the proper place has not been lost sight of. My idea of this place is, as your correspondent suggests, in front of the Keep—others think somewhat differently; at any rate their position and state, it must be acknowledged, is not the most suitable one, and ere long, with the assistance of our worthy Mayor, I hope to see them placed upon a spot which for appropriateness of situation will be second to none in the kingdom. They were worthily received, and they ought to be worthily esteemed, as trophies of the prowess and valour of our countrymen. The Fetes Committee are perfectly willing to render all the assistance in their power towards this object, but I am sure that your correspondent would not desire that their funds should furnish the necessary amount. The Committee, at considerable expense and with no little trouble, obtained them for the town; surely then the town should not be wanting to see they are properly bestowed and kept, now they do possess them. This I know is the desire of the Mayor, and others in authority; I therefore trust ere long to see them in their proper position.
In regard to the remarks of the writer in the Express, I would observe that it is a very much easier thing to sit at home at ease and write an article for a newspaper, sneering at the efforts of others, which most probably they did but little to aid, than to get up funds for a building, requiring, if it be done properly, some three or four thousand pounds. The efforts of many on behalf of the Dudley Mechanics’ Institution are well known, and I think need no attempt to be written down by the Express, for the purpose of elevating Mr. Sheridan. I have already occupied sufficient of your space, or should not hesitate to break a lance with its writer as to what the Dudley Mechanics’ Institution has been, is, or may become. I trust that it has already been “productive of some real and permanent advantages,” and that it will continue to exist to furnish more “for posterity.”
I am, Mr. Editor,
Yours respectfully,
E. HOLLIER.
January 25th, 1858, was a royal day in Dudley, it being the Wedding Day of our first young Princess, the Princess Royal of England, and the Crown Prince of Prussia. Dudley had never lagged behind its neighbours in its genuine loyalty to the throne, and on this occasion all hands were willing to add lustre, and a pleasurable remembrance, to this interesting event. A public subscription was at once inaugurated to give a treat to the school children, and tickets for meat to the indigent poor. The day was propitious, and upwards of 4,000 school children walked in procession to the Castle Court, led on by two bands of music; after a short suitable address had been delivered, they all returned to their various school rooms, and enjoyed a good “tea drinking.” The poor old men and women enjoyed their beef and plum pudding at their own homes, whilst the well-to-do townsmen dined at the hotel, under the presidency of the Mayor, Mr. John Beddard. The town was decidedly en fete this day, for the merry peals of our parish bells, the jingling of the friendly glass, and the hearty good wishes for the happy pair, made old Dudley decidedly “jolly” on that memorable day. These two royal personages will in due course of time become the Emperor and Empress of Germany. Long may they live to enjoy their exalted and responsible station in life.
N.B.—Whilst I am writing these lines their eldest son, Prince William of Prussia, is also entering into the tangled web of holy matrimony.