Author: secretary

Actually, this is not a piece of fancy – there are some mouse species which sing, notably Alston’s Brown Mouse (Scotinomys teguina), found in Central America. Perhaps this one stowed away aboard a ship that landed at Dover!

“In our journal of May 4th, 1844*, we recorded the capture of a singing mouse, which was exhibited at the Exchange public house Charlton; and we have now to record that a similar lusus naturae# has been caught at the residence of a laboring man named Samuelson, living in Strond-lane, Dover. It appears tha the family have for the past 3 months heard a chirping behind the fire-place, which was supposed to be from a cricket. The gude wife, however, one evening saw a mouse run into a hole, and at night set up a live trap: in the morning she was much surprised at hearing a singing noise proceed from the trap in which the mouse was caught. It was then transferred to a more roomy cage, and has since daily amused numbers who have been to visit this musical genius, which at times sings very loud, and much like a bird. The animal is very similar to the common mouse, except that the tail is much longer, and the head smaller, with very sharp eyes.” – Dover Telegraph.

The Stamford Mercury, 8th January, 1847.

*i.e. in The Dover Telegraph.

#Freak of nature.

Cribbage is sometimes considered a rather an old-fashioned game, but great fun and sometimes, strategically challenging! This piece describes a strange game and with interesting results.

“Curious case at Four-Handed Cribbage – where not any of the four parties can hold a single first point in hand, and yet the dealers shall win the game the first show:-

Example. – Let A and B deal against C and D, each person to hold a three, four, six, seven, with any tenth card, and each to lay out their tenth card for the crib; D then cuts the card for the turn-up, which proving to be a knave, A and B mark two points. It being C’s first play, he leads with pitching his four, which B pairs, and marks two points; D then plays his four and marks six points for a pair royal*; A then plays his four, making a double pair royal, for which he scores twelve points; C then plays again with his three, which is paired by B, who marks two points more; D plays his three, and marks six for a pair royal; and A comes in with his three likewise, which making a double pair royal, and the end hole, he marks for such thirteen points; C then plays off again with his seven, and marks six points: and A, playing his seven, makes a double pair royal, for which, and the end hole, he marks thirteen points more; here again C plays his six, which is paired by B, who scores two points; D plays his six and marks six points; and A, who is the last player, makes a double pair royal with his six, for which and the end hold, he marks thirteen points, which, with the various other points played by A and B, complete the game, or sixty-one points; while C and D have only been able to play twenty-four points. Thus the game is won by A and B without holding a single point.”

The Stamford Mercury, 30th January, 1824.

*a pair royal – that is, three cards of the same rank.

(Did you know that there is a thriving Cribbage League in the Stamford Area? If you would like to know more about it or to join one of the teams, contact Sarah on 07495 567643.)

What a lucky escape this young man had when an horrific accident befell his eye, whilst watching an angler on Stamford Meadows. But who was to blame – the angler for not looking properly before casting or the youth for standing too close?

“A remarkable accident happened last week to one of the sons of a respectable tradesman in Stamford. Walking in the meadows on the banks of the Welland, he appraoched a person who was angling in the river, and he stood for a few seconds to look on: the angler drew out his line, and gave it the usual swing with the intention of placing the float in a new situation, when by an extraordinary accident the hook struck the youth who was looking on, and actually fastened together both the lids of one of his eyes, so as completely to close them. It was feared that the barb had also penetrated the orb of the eye; but on promptly resorting to the surgery of Messrs. Merveilleus and Burdett, it was found practicable to extricate the hook by a simple cut of the eye-lids, and that the eye itself was not at all injured, although the hook had pierced and connected the lids just in front of the pupil, and the very smallest increase of the depth of the puncture must have been fatal to the sight. It is supposed that the youth involuntarily winked as the line was whirled by the angler, and that at that instant the hook entered and fastened together the two eye-lids.”

The Stamford Mercury, 5th August, 1825.

Strong-arm tactics and bribery were suspected as means to pursuade people to elect the Marquis of Exeter in the general election at Stamford in 1831. Charles Tennyson (uncle of Alfred, Lord Tennyson, the poet) was also elected.

“The election for the borough of Stamford commenced on Saturday last. Lord Thos. Cecil was put in nomination by Mr. Gape and Mr. Phillips; Col. Chaplin, by Capt. Chadwick and Capt. Glossop; and Chas. Tennyson Esq., by Mr. Rd. Newcomb. jun. and Mr. Ashby. After a show of hands, Lord T. Cecil demanded a poll; at the final close of which, at one o’clock on Tuesday, the numbers were, for Lord T. Cecil 390, Mr. Tennyson 356, Col. Chaplin 302. The two former were declared duly elected, and were chaired. – This great triumph of the popular interest at Stamford in the election of Mr. Tennyson, has resulted from the virtuous spirit and perseverence of the middle and humbler classes of the town, in opposition to the long-established influence of the Marquis of Exeter, aided as that influence has been on the present occasion by an immense expenditure of money (said to be not less that 14,000l.), and by still more questionable means, – such as the introduction of numerous pugilists, and other persons of that description, from London, and of an immense band of hired labourers from the villages around Stamford, whose only recommendation was their ability to wield weapons of offence.”

The Stamford Mercury, 6th May, 1831.

The topic of the Thames Tunnel was first mentioned in our post of 25th June, 2024. It was made posssible by Marc Brunel’s invention of the tunneling shield. It seems strange that Sir Marc was not present, but at the age of 72, he may have been too infirm to attend. He died in 1849.

“A thoroughfare was yesterday effected in the Thames Tunnel, and was made use of for the first time by the whole of the directors and some of the original subscribers, who had assembled upon the occasion. The shield having been advanced to the shaft at Wapping, a considerable opening was cut in the brickwork, and it was through this the party who had met at Rotherhithe were enabled to pass, thus opening the first subterranean communication between the opposite shores of the river. Upon their arrival at the shaft, the party were greeted by the workmen with most hearty cheers. A curious and interesting incident was connected with the event; a few bottles of wine, preserved since the dinner given on the occasion when the foundation stone was laid, with the understanding that it was to be drunk only when it could be enjoyed by the company to the health of her Majesty and the infant Prince. It was remarked, too, as a singular coincidence, that a seal on one of the corks bore the impress of the Prince of Wales’s feathers, a circumstance that caused some merriment. The engineer, Sir J.* Brunel, appeared highly gratified at the happy result of all his past anxiety and arduous labour.”

The Stamford Mercury, 19th November, 1841.

*We presume this is a type-setter’s error: the tunnel had been designed by Sir Marc Brunel and his son, Isambard Kingdom Brunel worked on the tunnel as well. Somehow the I became a J. It seems strange that Sir Marc was not present, but at the age of 72, he may have been too infirm to attend.

It seems it was common practice for flour sellers to mix horrible things (even poisons) in their product to bulk it up and make it whiter. Apparently tea was also subject to this type of fraud.

“Adulteration of Flour – At the Mansion-house on Saturday, a flour-factor appeared to a summons charging him with selling five sacks of adulterated flour, contrary to the provision of the Act 4th Geo. IV., commonly called the Bakers’ Act. The complainant, a baker residing in the Hackney-road, stated that on the 7th inst. he purchased the flour in question from the defendant. On tasting it he felt convinced that there was a quantity of plaster of Paris, beans, &c. mixed with it, and he therefore sent a sample of it to Mr. Clarke, of Apothecaries’-hall, to be analysed. – Mr. Clarke stated that he had been in the habit of analysing flour and other articles of food for Government for the last 25 years, and that he had analysed the sample of flour produced; the result of the experiment convinced him there was no plaster of Paris in it; but he found that on fifteenth part of in consisted of beans, and the remainder was flour of the coarsest dewscription. – The Lord Mayor asked Mr. Clarke if there was any thing in the flour unwholesome, or likely to prove injurious to the consumer, to which her replied in the negative. His Lordship said, that being the case, he could not convict under the Act, and the complainant must seek his remedy by and action at law, and he should therefore dismiss the complaint. – His Lordship then asked Mr. Clarke whether the flour was ever adulterated with plaster of Paris, to which Mr. Clarke replied, that a short time since he went down to Hull, by order of the Lords of the Treasury, to analyse samples of 1467 sacks of flour, then at the Custom-house there, to be shipped for Spain and Portugal; and on examination, found one-third of it was plaster of Paris, one-third burnt bones and beans, and the reminder of the flour of the coarsest description. Mr. Clarke also said that he was at present engaged by order of Government in analysing several chests of Caper Souchong Tea, and although he had only examined a few of them, yet he found that one-fourth of their contents was lead ore, or poison of the rankest description, and he knew from experience that a great quantity of tea was adulterated in a similar manner.”

The Stamford Mercury, 29th July, 1825.

The political influencers of Stamford were trying to get agreement from the Marquis of Exeter to allow the railway by coming up with a compromise, but would that compromise be acceptable?

“The particulars of the re-election of Sir Geo. Clerk as a representative for Stamford will be found in our fourth page. One good result from what occurred on his convass, at the hustings, and after his election, was the Hon Baronet’s thorough conviction that he must never more show his face in Stamford if the Marquis of Exeter should require him to oppose the Syston and Peterboro’ railway in parliament, or have been in consequence of this new light, that, soon after Sir George Clerk descended from his ‘chairing carriage’ at the hotel, he caused a message to be conveyed to Mr. Stephenson and Mr. Ellise, the engineer and the vice-chairman of the Midland Counties Company, (who had been denied the opportunity of speaking at the hustings on the railway subject, because they were not electors of Stamford.) to the effect that he entertained a hope that a compromise might be effected, and that both he (Sir George) and the Marquis of Exeter might be induced to support in Parliament the measure of a railway which should have a station within the borough. For this concession, it was pointed out that the line must enter the town on the south side of the river, & through a tunnel to pass under the street of St. Martin’s, commencing at a short distance from Nun’s Farm (after passing across the meadows from the north-west), and emerging near the Union-house on the Barnack road, so at totally to avoid the bridge and passing over the turnpike on a level. – The propostion was favorably entertained by the gentlemen connected with the railway, who expresses themselves desirous of conciliating Lord Exeter, if they could do so with safety to their measure, and without foregoing the advantage of their parliamentary notices. It would be necessary that written consents of all persons whose properties would be affected by the change, (and particularly by the tunnelling under many houses in St. Martin’s,) should be delivered to them by the agents of the Marquis, so that no delay in executing the railway might arise, – and then they would endeavour to do what he desired, and keep the line on the south side of the water. They would also make the George inn and premises the site of a first-class station, and rebuild the bridge, in such a style as should make it equal to the vast traffic which would have to pass over it.- Thus matters, we understand, remain at present, with every prospect of an amicable adjustment; by which Lord Exeter will keep the advantages of the improvement that may be expected to result from the railway, on his own property, instead of permitting them to go to the estate of Earl Bownlow, which would have been the case had the railway station been on the north side of the Welland.”

The Stamford Mercury, 14th February, 1845.

The Marquis of Exeter is accused here of stealing land which had previously been considered ‘common’ and used as grazing by the freemen. But he was a man of great influence, and nobody dared to cross him.

“Strange things are doing in what have heretofore been considered the ‘open fields’ of Stamford. Mr. Torkington, the Town Clerk, is inclosing his land with stone walls, and proclaims his intention of so surrounding all his 177 acres. The average rental of the land in the fields has not hitherto exceeded 24s.: but Mr Torkington, it is stated has let 100 acres to Mr. Robt. Islip at 50s. an acre, the increased price being in consideration of the enclosure. All this is said to be based upon the worthy legal gentleman’s having last year prevailed in his action against Mr. Wm. Reed, for prostrating the first stone fence which he put up, in the field at the back of Rutland-terrace. The freemen who, as commoners, have an interest in the herbage of the land at certain times, look on with wonder at this invasion of their right; but it is doubted whether any person will be bold enough to take this bull by the horns. The rage for now shutting out the public from what they have for ages enjoyed, actuates both peer and commoner: the Marquis of Exeter has lately taken in large slips of land beside the Great North Road. In St. Martin’s parish, Stamford, on the pretence of a frontage-right, and of the road’s having been more than 60 feet wide. In this way he has within the last year acquired several acres of valuable ground; and he still continues his righteous system of appropriation, without interrupion from the Trustees of the Turnpike, or from anybody else, although this extension of his park walls will still further exclude the sun and air from the road, and make the condition of it disagreeable and the repair expensive. The Act for the inclosure of St. Martin’s parish passed in the year 1797, and the public have ever since enjoyed the use of the land which Lord Exeter in now inclosing; and still no hand is raised to stop him, though many tongues are wagged to reprehend his course; but what cares he for that? The award of the Commissioners under the Act would set out a road called ‘Salter’s Lane,’ leading from Wothorpe to the Great North Road : it is now obliterated, and the whole area of it is thrown into Lord Exeter’s estate. A similar process had more recently deprived the town of the Nun’s Road in the same parish, which led from the meadows to the Wothorpe Road: it is now thrown into the field of the Noble Marquis, by the side of which it ran. And there are manuy similar instances of honest acquisitions to keep in countenance the ploughing up of balks and footpaths by ‘meaner men’ on the other side of the water ; until, at last, comes the climax of inclosing land by hundreds of acres at once, and bidding the ‘will’ of the appropriator ‘avouch it.’ Men say that great results will arise from this, for that is must bring on the general and legal inclosure of the fields. This the Burghley family have long resisted, from a knowledge that the extension of the town which must follow, will soon destroy Lord Exeter’s political influence in a borough where the right of voting proceeds from the occupation of rateable property within it.”

The Stamford Mercury, 7th February, 1845.

How on earth could a person swallow an ink-stand? and ‘unthinkingly’, at that? This gentleman seemed to regards everything as fair game for consumption. Apparently there is even a word for the condition people suffer from who are compelled to swallow weird things!

“A German Professor at Wirtemburgh, has published an attested account of a gardener, lately deceased, of the name of Jacob Kahlens, who not only consumed an immoderate quantity of all kins of food, but several other substances, such as walnut shells. – When at gentlemen’s houses, he would frequently eat pastry, with the vessels that contained it, and would at other times swallow the glasses out of which he drank. His teeth were so strong and sharp, that he would split the thickest deals with the greatest facility, and would often perform that service for the maids of the house. Rats, mice, moles, and live fowls, he looked upon as the most exquisite dainties. And at one time, unthinkingly, he is said to have swallow ed a pewter ink-stand, with the pens, sand, &c. – this was verified upon the oath of an eye witness. At another time, he devoured a pair of bagpipes in the presence of several people, and turning upon the piper, the man was so terrified, that he jumped out of the window. – These, and exploits of a similar cast, gave the common people and idea that he was assissted by an evil spirit, in consequence of which the clergy of the place examined a number of witnesses, but as no crimination followed, he died peaceably in the 79th year of his age.”

The Stamford Mercury, 29th January, 1796.

Cows rarely run anywhere (unless stampeding); they generally prefer a short stroll from one tasty tuft of grass to another. However, according to a French Jesuit historian (an ‘expert’ on China), they have cows in that country which can run 300 miles in a day – more than enough to get the mail from London to Leeds!

“A correspondent observes, that Mr. Palmer’s scheme for conveying the mails from London to Leeds in 26 hours, has some degree of cruelty in it towards the poor horses. He wishes to find some method of easing these useful and industrious animals of their burden. And as in the course of his reading he has found, in Duhald’s* History of China, page 233, a description of a cow, which can run 300 miles in a day; – he submits it to Mr. Palmer and to government whether it would not be [possi]ble to import a number of these cows upon the present [o]ccasion to relieve the most useful and noble animal of the creation.”

The Stamford Mercury, 26th August, 1785.

*Jean-Baptiste Du Halde