The Curiosities of Dudley and the Black Country, From 1800 to 1860 / Also an Account of the Trials and Sufferings of Dud Dudley, with His Mettallum Martis: Etc.

by C. F. G. Clark

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.