Paddington: Past and Present

by William Robins

Poor Haydon, who devoted “forty-two years to the improvement of the taste of the English people in high art,” lived in Paddington; and his shattered corpse was placed near the spot, where Mrs. Siddons was buried. At no great distance, Collins, the painter of English coast and cottage scenery, lies. And Dr. Geddes, the “Translator of the Historical Books of the Old Testament,” was buried in Paddington Church-yard. His surviving friends could engrave on his tombstone the following sentence from his works:—

“Christian is my name, and Catholic my surname; I grant that you are a Christian as well as I, and embrace you as my fellow disciple of Jesus; and if you were not a disciple of Jesus, still I would embrace you as my fellow man.”

Yet, because he dared to express his honest conviction, as to the real origin of the Books he had taken so much trouble to translate, he was condemned and despised by many zealots, who thought their hatred a Christian act; and “public censure was passed upon him by the Vicar Apostolic, of the London district.” The Life of this great scholar, and good man, was published by Dr. Mason Good, in 1803.

Banks the sculptor; the elder George Barret; Merlin the mechanist; the careful sculptor Nollekins, and his father; the Marquis of Lansdowne, without a word to mark his tomb, and many other notables; lie buried in this church and churchyard. But, although thoughts are to be picked up, by day as well as by night, in a ramble among the tombs, it is not my intention to copy all the grave-stones, or to encroach on the province of the biographer, or village barber, if there be one such useful gossip still remaining among us.

For a sketch of a people, whether forming a parish or a nation, it is better to go to their laws, and observe the effects those laws have produced; than to rely on any description of individuals, dead or living. With the exception of the ancient customs of the place, the common law of the land was the light which guided the people of Paddington, down to the middle of the last century. Then, as we have already seen, began the enactment of special laws,—laws which altered the relations between those who had duties to perform, and those who had rights and privileges to protect.

Previous to 1753, the people of this parish managed their own affairs without external aid, the influential inhabitants exercising their influence here, as influential people in all quarters of the world have done, either for their own, or the public good, according as their selfish passions, or the Eternal Truth, prevailed within them. Riches had their weight, as well as reason, even before Sturges Bourne and his system of plural voting, came to regulate and measure the powers of mammon in local elections. But in every system of government, the selfish rely on ignorance, more than on any other agent, for the preservation of their powers. When the ignorant, however, as well as the wise, were free to speak on local affairs, many unwelcome truths, which did not fall from the lips of the ordained teachers, must have reached the ears of “the jobbers,” within the walls of St. Katherine’s, St. James’s, and St. Mary’s. The meetings of the people, in these sainted places, for the transaction of their parish business, were open to all the inhabitants of the parish; and no local burden could be imposed without the sanction of the majority. No wonder, then, that those who did not reside in the parish, but who had determined to impose burdens on all those who did, should call to their aid a power never before felt by the people of Paddington: one, against which it was useless to rebel; and from the justice of which there was no appeal.

Private Act followed private Act, for the regulation of property, over which the people saw and felt, they had no control. And, when at length their voices were raised in no measured cadence, some against this grievance, others against that, the church was said to be desecrated, and polite ears could no longer listen to such a babel of tongues. A gag was provided. “A select vestry” was the instrument used. And among the many unjust and unwise laws “passed, to keep down the people, from 1817 to 1820, the most disgraceful era in our legislation,” “An Act for the regulation of parish vestries,” better known as “Sturges Bourne’s Act,” is to be found. In this Act there are, without doubt, provisions which were much required for the “regulation of parish vestries;” but I have never yet heard any reason, worthy a moment’s consideration, for the introduction of the third clause into that Act. This clause gives “one vote and no more” to all persons rated for property “not amounting to fifty pounds,” and adds one vote “for twenty-five pounds of annual rent, &c.” But “so, nevertheless, that no inhabitant shall be entitled to give more than six votes.” The principle, “that property should be properly represented,” is thus absurdly carried out: all those rated at £50 per annum, have double the amount of influence of those rated at £49; while those rated at £500, have no more power in the local election, than those rated at £150. But to such miserable shifts as these must legislation condescend, as soon as it swerves from the eternal principles of justice. Is it not of as much concern to the poor rate-payer, as to the rich, that the parish funds shall be well expended? And who can shew that the wisdom of a man can be measured by the size of his house; or by the amount he contributes to the poor-rate?

On the fourth of April, 1820, the Rev. Dr. Crane, the Lord Bishop of Exeter, and other influential inhabitants managed to establish “a select vestry” in Paddington; in which they and their friends had all the talk as well as all the work to themselves. But if this select body prevented the people talking, they prevented their eating also. The glorious parish dinners, at which the parish officers and their friends had rejoiced at the people’s expense, were discontinued by the bishop and his friends, in 1821; much to their credit be it spoken, seeing that at the beginning of this year it was discovered that there were no less than 824 persons in the parish who claimed relief as paupers—more than one-eighth of the whole population—and that out of these, thanks to the cottages, there were 635 legally settled on the parish.

In May, 1821, a general meeting of the inhabitants was called to consider, amongst various other things, the propriety of petitioning the House of Commons for a general law, to regulate the formation and maintenance of the highways on the north-west side of the metropolis; and so much was such an Act required, that it was resolved unanimously to petition. But when the petition was read, and considered, it was found to be so objectionable that it was as unanimously rejected. And by the thirtieth of March, 1822, the inhabitants had seen quite enough of the select vestry system; for on that day, when called on to re-appoint it for another year, they would not do so. But on the first of April, 1823, power was given to a committee of rate-payers to procure a local Act. A draft-bill was prepared by an experienced Parliamentary counsel, which was left in the hands of the vestry-clerk, for the inspection of the inhabitants; and it is said to have received “their cordial approbation.” Whether that clause which has compelled the people of Paddington, to elect their local governors, under the system of plural votes, received their approbation, we are not told; neither is it brought down to us by any authentic record, how many read and digested an Act, which contains no less than one hundred and fifty-five clauses, and occupies eighty printed Act-of-Parliament-pages. Whether its provisions were understood or not, however, the fifth of George the IV., chapter 126, received the sanction of the legislature on the seventeenth of June, 1824, and since that date all the provisions which have met with the approval of those who have been elected under it, have been carried into effect.

The cost of procuring this Act, is said to have been £1,088 14s. 6d.