White, who had been a curate at Darlaston from 1823, made a very
determined bid for the Incumbency of Willenhall; and although, as we
shall see, he was not successful, he was able to console himself, some
nine years later, with the rectory of Darlaston (1843).
It appeared that when the Rev. W. Moreton became very old he neglected
his duties sadly, often keeping funerals and congregations waiting an
unconscionable time, greatly to the scandal of the whole parish. In
consequence of this the Churchwardens induced the Incumbent, two or three
years before his death, to appoint and pay an energetic young Curate to
assist him in his parochial ministrations.
The Curate appointed under these circumstances, as already mentioned, was
the Rev. G. H. Fisher, who speedily became a favourite, and by most
Willenhall people came to be looked upon as the only possible successor
to Mr. Moreton.
Long before the advent of Mr. Fisher, however, the Darlaston folk had
settled in their own minds that their Rector, the Rev. Mr. White, was to
annex the Willenhall living whenever it become vacant. Whether they
looked upon it as being appurtenant to the more important office of their
own shepherding cannot be determined at this distance of time; but
certain it is that an intense feeling of rivalry existed between the men
of Darlaston and the men of Willenhall. The intensity of the feeling may
best be judged by a remarkable incident which occurred some five years
before Mr. Fisher appeared on the scene.
During the earlier months of the year 1827 it would appear that there had
been, from time to time, incursions and alarms between the two towns, and
even rioting that involved hand to hand fighting in the streets. Never
were such exciting times in these places. At last the rivalry culminated
in an act of aggression as daring in execution as it was original in
conception--the Willenhall men woke up one fine Sunday morning to find
that the Darlastonians had entered their town in the dead of night and
stolen the cock from the church steeple!
Now the desperate achievement of this triumph over their enemies had a
deeper significance than at first meets the eye. It must be borne in the
mind that those were the old cockfighting days, when town matched against
town their gamest birds, and sought the glories of a victory in the
cock-pit. As between these two neighbouring parishes in particular,
there had been much vaunting of birds and challenging to the arbitrament
of the spur; the Darlaston men would take a game cock into Willenhall,
hold him up to show him the weathercock on the steeple, and then give
vent to a roar of defiant laughter when the bird crowed his challenge.
By way of reprisal the men of Willenhall would raid Darlaston, and
pretend to call the cock from the steeple there by scattering corn in the
churchyard, in mocking allusion to an old tale of Darlastonian
simplicity. No wonder, therefore, that the ridiculed were at last
exasperated beyond endurance, and that the coup de main of stealing the
Willenhall cock was not only projected, but carried to its marvellously
successful issue.
Consternation reigned supreme in Willenhall; it was felt that the pass to
which matters had been brought by the enormity of this latest aggravation
by their enemies could only be met by an appeal to the law, which,
hitherto, both factions had so recklessly set at naught. So the
following public notice was promptly issued:--
10 GUINEAS REWARD.
Whereas, early on Sunday morning last, some evil disposed Persons did
steal and carry away the
WEATHERCOCK
from off the
STEEPLE.
Any Person giving Information so that the Offenders may be
apprehended, shall upon Conviction receive TEN GUINEAS REWARD over
and above what is allowed by the Association for the prosecution of
Felons. And as more than one were concerned, if either will impeach
his Accomplice or Accomplices, they shall receive the above Reward,
and every endeavour used to obtain a free Pardon.
Willenhall,
July 24, 1827.
THOMAS HINCKS,
JAMES WHITEHOUSE,
Chapel Wardens.
* * * * *
Bassford, Printer, Bilston.
The Notice proved totally unproductive of results, for no Darlaston man
was found mean enough to betray the heroes of this daring escapade.
Therefore, as the trophy of Darlastonian valour could not be recovered,
and St. Giles's tower could not be left in all its nakedness without
being an ever-present reproach to the Willenhallers, a new vane had
forthwith to be provided for the church.
It was some time after the Willenhall pride had been thus lowered that
the old weathercock was accidentally found by some miners who were
re-opening an old coal pit which lay between the rival townships. Almost
needless to say, the new vane was instantly fetched down, and the old one
once more set up to flaunt itself as bravely as of yore in the eyes of
distant Darlaston.
The good folk of Willenhall, feeling humiliated, did all in their power
to cover up their shame by burying the episode in oblivion; and to this
day Willenhall men will deny that the Darlastonians ever came and took
away their church weathercock. By way of throwing doubt upon the
historical accuracy of the incident, they point to the fact that the
church at that time had no spire; it is known, however, that a vane
surmounted the church tower, and there is evidence of the Reward Notice,
the loose wording of which is responsible for the use of the term
"steeple" to signify a tower.
The authenticity of the said Notice is always open to investigation, for
a framed copy of it still hangs in the Neptune Inn, preserved as a
curiosity. (This copy, probably the only one in existence, bears
intrinsic evidence of being a genuine document, and is a treasured
possession of the Baker family, to whom the "Neptune" property belonged,
the paper having been discovered some fifty years ago in a piece of old
furniture, by Mr. Phillips, a connection of his family.)
Resuming the history of the benefice, it may be observed that a doubt has
been raised whether Mr. Moreton had to go through a contested election in
1788, but there can be no doubt as to an electoral struggle in 1834. Mr.
Fisher soon found himself drawn into the vortex of factional strife, for
he was speedily pounced upon by the home party, and very much against his
will adopted as their figure-head, if not their champion.
When, on the death of Mr. Moreton, the period of Election came within
measurable distance, the excitement became more intense; the patriotic
supporters of Mr. White invading the Willenhall territory day after day.
Such challenging and fighting, such threatenings and retaliations, surely
never were known; one faction had no sooner hurled its defiance at the
other than both incontinently plunged headlong into the melee, and
rioting once more raged fiercely through the public streets.
Cracked sconces, broken noses, split ears and black eyes resulted by the
score; to which list of casualties must be added the number of the
half-drowned who had to be rescued from the canal. Onslaughts made on
public-houses and other party headquarters led to a considerable
destruction of property, which, however, was borne with much complacency
when it was remembered that the whole Hundred would be called upon to pay
the bill.
Among the candidates for the Incumbency were the Rev. R. Robinson,
lecturer at the Collegiate Church, Wolverhampton, in recommendation of
whom Mr. G. B. Thorneycroft wrote a letter, dating it from Chapel House
in that town, 16 July, 1834; the Rev. John Howells, the Rev. Mr. Rogers,
the Rev. Mr. Gwyther, and the Rev. Mr. Wenman; but the Rev. George
Hutchinson Fisher, who had been Curate two and a-half years in the town,
was recognised as the most formidable competitor. He was the son of a
headmaster of Wolverhampton Grammar School, and an M.A. (1834) of Christ
College, Cambridge. He received his nomination from Mr. Jeremiah
Hartill, and there was little doubt of his ability to obtain the
necessary approval of the lords of the manor and the confirmatory licence
of the Dean of Wolverhampton.
At that time the Duke of Cleveland was impropriator, but the tithes had
been leased by his Grace to Messrs. James Whitehouse and Charles Quinton.
As the day of battle approached public feeling ran so high that on the
eve of the poll, which took place on August 5th and 6th, 1834, the
Returning Officer deemed it prudent to issue the following Appeal to the
Inhabitants:--
It is represented to me, from numerous quarters, that the excitement
of the approaching Nomination of a Minister to your Chapel renders it
imprudent to take the Poll at the time and place appointed.
Gentlemen,--I cannot but hope and believe that such fears are
unnecessary; and, relying upon your good sense, I have determined not
to make any alteration in the present arrangements.
I have no interest in your choice; it is my duty only to act with
impartiality between all parties.
For that purpose I shall be at your Church at Ten O'clock To-morrow
Morning, but unless every person entitled to vote has free and
Unmolested Access to the Poll, I shall, of course, be under the
NECESSITY of adjourning it.
I address myself to the friends of Each Candidate Alike, and
entreating you to allow the proceedings of the day to take place with
that moderation which their object and the sacred place in which we
shall meet so particularly require.
I am, Gentlemen,
Your faithful, humble Servant,
FRANCIS HOLYOAKE.
Tettenhall, August 4, 1834.
Needless to say, all this rowdyism and disgraceful violence were sternly
reprobated by Mr. Fisher, whose rabid opponents must have come to realise
that their cause was a lost one when they waylaid the polling clerk and
tore his poll-book to shreds.
As to the Magistrates and the Constables, the custodians of the peace
discreetly pursued a policy of the most masterly inactivity. Perhaps
they felt that the resources of their command were totally inadequate to
cope with an uprising of the dimensions and intensity which presented
themselves to their consideration; or, maybe, they philosophically
recognised that these stirring tumults were the inevitable concomitants
of a parochial struggle of so momentous a character. Anyway, their
attitude appears to have been justified when everything settled down
quietly after the election, the Fisheries tranquilised by victory, and
the White Boys dejected by defeat.
For the voting resulted easily in favour of Mr. Fisher, though the
validity of his return was challenged in the Court of Chancery for some
three years afterwards, during which time, however, he had no hesitation
in officiating. He was a fine reader and an able speaker, his delivery
of the Church ritual being a model of correct elocution.
Like his predecessor, he held the living a long time, the tenure of the
two covering a century. Mr. Fisher resided for a number of years at
Bentley Hall.
In 1887, soon after Mr. Fisher's "Jubilee" in Willenhall, a public
movement was instituted, in which many Dissenters took part, to
acknowledge his fifty years of devoted service among all classes of the
community. A presentation was made to him of a silver service and his
portrait in oils--the latter the work of Thomas Hill, a native of
Wednesfield, and which now hangs on the walls of the Free Public Library.
[Picture: Decorative flower]
XX.--The Election of 1894, and Since.
Although St. Giles's Church is known as the Parish Church, and a church
has probably been on the same site some six centuries, the church of
Willenhall is really a Proprietary Chapel of Ease, and its Incumbent
legally nothing more than a Perpetual Curate, or Curate in Charge, though
Incumbent of Willenhall, and receiving in respect of that office a very
substantial "living." The official return set forth in Crockford's
Clergy Directory for 1893 was: Tithe rent charge, 640 pounds, net Income,
1,300 pounds.
Strictly, there is no St. Giles's parish, nor any parish attached to St.
Giles's Church, and in law the Incumbent might, if he wished, ignore the
so-called parish so long as he performed satisfactorily certain duties in
the church. The unappropriated district, commonly known as St. Giles's
parish, includes that part of Willenhall which has not been allocated to
the properly constituted parishes (or ecclesiastical districts) of St.
Stephen's, St. Anne's, and Holy Trinity, Short Heath, plus the entire
civil parish of Bentley--the whole being really part of the
ecclesiastical parish of Wolverhampton.
The position is extraordinarily anomalous. The Incumbent is elected by
the inhabitants of the township of Willenhall being sufficient
householders and having lands of inheritance there; that is to say, the
voters must be freeholders as well as householders. Litigation followed
the choice of the Rev. William Moreton in 1788, and also the election of
the Rev. G. H. Fisher in 1834. It is understood that this system of
"patronage" has been condemned by the Privy Council; and that application
has been made for the proper constitution of a St. Giles's parish, but
the Bishop demands a quid pro quo.
All attempts to create a Parish of Willenhall have, so far, utterly
failed. The existing system of patronage is always the obstacle, and
nothing will induce the voters either to sell or to surrender their
rights in the Advowson.
To fully realise the position it must be borne in mind that in addition
to the three constituted "parishes" created within the original township
of Willenhall since Mr. Fisher became Incumbent of Willenhall in 1834,
Short Heath is now a separate township, with separate District Council,
and that Bentley has its Rural District Council--so that persons who live
in Bentley parish, Short Heath parish, the three constituted
ecclesiastical district parishes or districts, and the unappropriated
remainder of the township (nominally St. Giles's parish), have all the
right to vote for the clergyman if they have the necessary other
qualifications of householder and freeholder.
On the death of the Rev. G. H. Fisher in 1894, no less than 23 formal
applications were forthcoming for the vacant living. The keynote was
given at a preliminary meeting of St. Giles's congregation, at which Dr.
J. T. Hartill presided, and when the most likely candidates were formally
proposed and seconded for adoption.
The voting (recorded on cards) resulted in favour of the Rev. William
Elitto Rosedale, M.A., Rector of Canton, Cardiff, for whom there were
265, as against 26 given for the Rev. W. L. Ward, of St. Anne's,
Willenhall. The Churchwardens consistently directed the procedure at
this public election as nearly as possible along the lines which would be
followed by private patronage; they declined to take any active part in
the circulation of testimonials, or afford facilities for any candidate
to preach in the church, to the possible prejudice of the others, but
they passively acquiesced in each one approaching the electors in any way
which seemed fitting and proper to himself.
The votes recorded on this occasion were:--
Rev. W. E. Rosedale (Canton, Cardiff) 199
Rev. W. L. Ward (St. Anne's, Willenhall) 157
Rev. J. E. Page (Binfield) 28
Rev. F. W. Ford (London) 1
At four o'clock, Mr. Page (who was the son of a local iron-master) and
Mr. Ford retired in favour of Mr. Ward. The Returning Officer was Mr. R.
N. Hearne, Steward to the Lords of the Manor of Stowheath, the Duke of
Sutherland and Mr. W. T. C. Giffard; and the poll was taken by open
voting, each voter recording his vote orally and within the hearing of
all present.
The result having been forwarded to the Lords of the Manor, they formally
nominated the one at the head of the poll to the Bishop for appointment
and induction to the living. The successful candidate was a native,
being the son of the Rev. D. Rosedale, to whose exertions the building of
Holy Trinity Church was largely due, and in the Vicarage House attached
to which the said candidate was born. But he possessed other than local
claims, though these, no doubt, prepossessed many Willenhall folk in his
favour.
There can be little doubt the election of 1894 was conducted with far
more tact and discretion than ever had been exercised on similar
occasions previously. There was still the old risk of serious public
disturbances; but perhaps more than ever there was, as must generally be
the case in such methods of conducting a controversial matter of this
description, the danger of unseemly and acrimonious squabblings in
public. It reflects the highest credit upon the Churchwardens and all
others concerned in the election, that not only was nearly all this
avoided, but the possibility always present, of long and embittered
litigation to follow, was also reduced to a minimum. It required some
firmness and decision to weed down 23 formal applications, and more than
twice that number of business-like inquiries, to workable limits for
taking a poll.
The litigation of 1834 had arisen through the manufacture of "faggot
votes," which were eventually disallowed, and had to be struck off. A
difficulty arose in 1894 as to the interpretation of an Act of
1844--would Lord Blandford's Act debar from taking part in the voting the
residents in the newly-created ecclesiastical districts of St. Stephen's,
St. Anne's, and Holy Trinity, Short Heath? Although at first dubious on
the question, the authorities answered it in the negative.
* * * * *
As previously stated, the earliest record of the Advowson is of the year
1408. In the Salt Collections, Vol. XI., p. 218, we find that by a
final concord recorded "on the morrow of St. Martin, 10 Henry IV.,
William Bysshebury and Joan, his wife, acknowledged that seven messuages,
eight tofts, one mill, sixty acres of land, ten acres of meadow, and 24s.
6.5d. of rent in Wolverhampton, and the Advowson of the Chapel of
Willenhall to be the right of Richard Hethe and William Prestewood,
chaplain, and the latter granted them to William Bysshebury and Joan for
their lives, with remainder to John Hampton, of Stourton, and Harvise,
his wife, and to the heirs of John for ever."
Exactly two centuries later, as we shall learn in the next chapter, the
endowments of, and the right of presentation to, the living were placed
upon a definite and legal foundation. Suffice it here to say that at the
present time there are Trustees appointed by the Charity Commissioners
for the purpose of holding the Trust property belonging to the said
living, and, with the assistance of an official representing the
Commissioners, managing affairs connected therewith.
The Trust, to which Mr. Samuel Mills Slater is solicitor, is under the
full control of the Charity Commissioners, who have to be regularly
supplied with certified copies of all the Trust accounts.
As we shall see presently, the original Feoffees of the Trust property
were appointed in 1608 by a Commission of local magnates and landowners,
consisting of William Overton, Bishop of Lichfield; William, Lord Paget,
of Beaudesert; Sir John Bowes, of Elford; Sir Edward Littleton, of
Pillaton Hall; Sir Edward Leigh, of Rushall; Sir Simon Weston, of St.
John's, Lichfield; Sir Robert Stanford, of Perry Hall; Sir Walter
Chetwynde, of Grendon and Ingestre; Sir William Chetwynde, of Grendon
(half-brother of Sir Walter); Zachary Babington, Doctor in the Civil Law;
Raphe Snead, of Keele; Walter Bagott, of Blythfield; William Skeffington,
of Fisherwick; Roger Fowke, of Brewood and Wyrley; John Chetwynde, of
Rudge, parish of Standon, and Walter Stanley, of West Bromwich--most of
them justices for the county of Stafford.
By virtue of a provision in the Decree or award of these Commissioners,
the surviving Feoffees were enabled to appoint new Feoffees in the places
of the deceased ones. In later times, however, by virtue of the
Charitable Trusts Acts, the Board of Charity Commissioners acquired the
power of making appointments of new Trustees, and also of removing
Trustees.
In the year 1889, the number of Trustees had become reduced to one--Mr.
John Davies, then residing at Warwick. By an Order dated 23rd July,
1889, the Board removed Mr. Davies, at his own request, from the office
of Trustee, and appointed the following gentlemen to be new Trustees:--
John Clark.
Wm. Henry Hartill.
John Thomas Hartill.
Joseph Johnson.
David Wm. Lees.
Jas. Carpenter Tildesley.
Henry Vaughan.
Henry Hartill Walker, junr.
Of these gentlemen only Messrs. J. T. Hartill, Vaughan, and Walker are
now living.
It might be necessary under certain conditions (as, for instance, in any
action connected with the sale of the Advowson) to constitute a body of
elected Trustees (as distinct from the aforementioned nominated Trustees)
of not more than eleven, nor less than five members, duly elected at a
statutory meeting of the town's inhabitant freeholders.
As a matter of fact, a public meeting of the owners of the Advowson,
convened on the requisition of a memorial to the Incumbent (Rev. W. E.
Rosedale), signed by a number of them, was held in the month of June,
1900, to consider a proposal for the sale of the said Advowson. A
similar proposal had been discussed in 1898 at a public meeting attended
by some 200 owners, when it was suggested that half the sum realised
should be handed over to the town authorities, while the other half
should be spent on the church and schools.
At this second meeting, over which Mr. T. Nicholls, chairman of the
District Council, presided, the sale value of the Advowson was variously
estimated at sums ranging from 1,100 to 3,000 pounds. The minister's
income was stated by one speaker to be 539 pounds per annum nett--508
pounds derived from a sum of 20,974 pounds 13s. 11d. invested in Consols,
and with other sources making a gross revenue of 641 pounds 18s. 9d.,
from which deductions amounting to 102 pounds 7s. 6d. had to be made.
Another speaker gravely cautioned the meeting against over-estimating the
capitalised value of this living by remarking that the present incumbent
was then a comparatively young man of only forty-two, and healthy at
that.
It was given as the opinion of another speaker that the existing method
of electing their parson was undesirable in the best interests of the
church, and ought to be forthwith discontinued. Also it was contended
that if a sale could be effected, any sum that resulted therefrom might
very advantageously be expended in the town for the benefit of the
inhabitants generally.
One stalwart stickler for "the eternal fitness of things" upheld the
sound principle of the members of every church exercising the right to
choose their own minister, and he deprecated generally the practice of
trafficking in advowsons.
In the end, although those in favour of selling almost threatened to
apply for an Act of Parliament for effecting a sale compulsorily, the
meeting finally resolved by a very substantial majority: "That it was not
advisable at the present time to sell the Advowson."
So that two well-conducted public meetings, held within a brief space of
each other, were unable to come to any definite decision by which the
position of things would be materially altered.
XXI.--Willenhall Church Endowments.
By the courtesy of Mr. S. M. Slater, of Darlaston, a summarised, but
fairly comprehensive account of the Willenhall endowments, and the
somewhat exceptional parochial privileges connected therewith, may be
given here.
The foundation of the Endowment of the Benefice and the establishment of
the right of the Parishioners, or rather the Parishioners of the Township
"having lands of inheritance there," may be said to rest upon, or at all
events to have been defined and regulated by, three documents, namely:--
(a) A Decree dated the 27th March in the 5th Year of James the 1st
(1607), made in pursuance of an Inquisition, or Commission, issued by the
King on the 12th February of the previous (regnal) year.
(b) A Deed of the 23rd September of the 6th Year of James the 1st (1608),
entered into between the Lords of the Manor of Stowheath on the one hand,
and Sir Walter Levison and others, on behalf of themselves and the rest
of the Inhabitants of Willenhall, on the other hand.