Author: secretary

The disappearance of a horse dealer evoked a gruesome murder twenty-five years before. The victim’s legs were witnessed by a small boy.

“COUNTRY NEWS

Northampton, Dec. 22. The following very extraordinary affair occasions great uneasiness in this town and neighbourhood. A Mr. Leppar, a very considerable dealer in horses, left his house in this town on the 27th November last, taking with him 500 l. in order to purchase horses for some fairs in Yorkshire, and leaving thirty horses in his stable, which he had lately bought to serve his customers. The time which he usually took up in performing this journey, was about five days. On the first day of his journey he was seen at Highgate house, about ten miles from Northampton. He left Highgate-house about eleven o’clock the same morning, and no tidings have been heard of him or his horse since. The pits in the neighbourhood have been dragged, and the woods, coppices and ditches searched in vain.. He wore a bay cropped mare, with a white face, two bar shoes before, which has been advertised hitherto to no purpose. – It is remarkable, that a travelling pedlar disappeared within a mile or two of the very spot where Mr. Leppar was seen last, about twenty five years since. When a short time afterwards a little child, about four years old, whose father and mother lived in a lone house in the parish of Holywell, told its playfellows, that ‘he could not help laughing at seeing the pedlar’s legs hang out of their oven.’ This being noised about, the later Mr. Rainsford, of Brixworth, a neighbouring justice, took the parents into custody. The woman confessed that her husband, with the assisstance of some other villains, had murdered the poor man in her house, and had buried him in the garden; but not thinking that concealment of the body sufficient, that they afterwards dug the corpse up, and burnt it to ashed in their oven. For this purpose they had made choice of the night, and had sent the children to bed; but, it seems, the noise which they made awakened the little boy, who, looking through the crack of the chamber floor saw the poor man’s legs hanging out of the oven. This circumstance produced the discovery, and, by the activity of the magistrates, the principals, and several others belonging to the gang, were executed.”

The Stamford Mercury, 2nd January, 1783.

People attending Stamford County Court were amused by the scene of two women coming to blows which took some time to dissipate.

“LIVELY SCENE IN THE COUNTY COURT

An almost incredible amount of ill-feeling was displayed in a case at the Stamford County Court yesterday (Wednesday) afternoon, resulting in one of the liveliest scenes every witnessed in a local law court. The case was one in which Henry Lowth, labourer, sued William Burrows, quarryman, for 15 s./ and Lina Crowson for 10 s. All the parties live at Ketton, and the claim was for trespass by defendants’ fowls and destruction of produce of plaintiff’s garden. Mr. Law appeared for plaintiff. Bad blood speedily began to show itself, especially between Mrs. Lowth and Mrs. Burrows, – Henry Lowth said he has a garden, the produce of which was all eaten up by fowls kept by defendants. Witness said to Mrs. Burrows, ‘This has been going on for two or three years, and will have to be put a stop to.’ – His Honour Judge Wood : Then I suppose she has a turn. What did she say? – Witness : Nothing. – His Honour : Nothing? Then she is a most remarkable woman. (Laughter.) – Mrs. Burrows now stated that she had only seven fowls. – Mrs. Lowth (from the body of the court): She’s got 70. – Repeated interruptions came from Mrs. Lowth, who at this point was ascorted to the back of the court. She was subsequently called as a witness, and said that both defendants had a lot of fowls – about 70 each. – Defendants : Oh! – Mrs. Lowth afterwards said that Mrs. Burrows had four or five fowls and some chickens. At this point an indescribable scene took place between Mrs. Lowth and Mrs. Burrows, the court for nearly 10 minutes being in a perfect uproar. A wordy war ensued between the two, voices were raised, and harsh expressions were used. In vain his Honour appealed for order: Mesdames Lowth and Burrows held the field, and they maintained it against all comers, the people in court being convulsed with laughter. The war of words grew hotter and hotter, and at last fists were clenched, and each menaced the other with threatening gestures. The combat increased in fury, until eventually the contestants got at each other, and words gave place to blows. A sturdy police-sergeant intervened, but the combatants were not prepared to cease hostilities, and so some further assistance was secured in the form of the County Court bailiff. After some time the women, yielding to the pressure of the strong arms of the law, consented to stand apart, and although scornful glances and angry darts passed between them. their words gradually grew calmer, and a truce was declared. Something like quiet having been secured, his Honour said that the women had now had a good innings – Mrs. Lowth called her daughter, who said she had seen fowls in her mother’s garden. – Defendants said they had never seen their fowls in Lowth’s garden, Mrs. Crowson adding that she had kept hers shut up for six months, only letting them our for an hour a day, when she watched them, His Honour said he had no doubt that damage had been done, but evidence as to the amount was utterly vague. Mrs. Crowson must pay 1s. damages and Mrs. Burrows 2s. 6d. The case lasted nearly an hour.”

The Stamford Mercury, 8th May, 1896.

Giacomo Meyerbeer, was ‘the most frequently performed opera composer during the nineteenth century, linking Mozart and Wagner’. His life and achievements are well-documented in this piece.

“On Monday evening died, in Paris, Meyerbeer, the eminent German composer. The deceased was born in Berlin on the 5th September, 1794, and consequently at the time of his death was nearly 70 years of age. As a child he was extremely precocious and his musical talent came to him so early, that when only seven years old he was celebrated, and at nine a German critic spoke of him as one of the best pianists of Berlin. Under less favourable circumstances the lad would doubtless have been prematurely brought before the public as a prodigy, to contradict, perhaps, in manhood, the promises of his youth. But his father, James Beer, a Jew banker, was very wealthy, and Giacomo Meyerbeer, as the composer afterwards called himself, Italianising his name, only appeared occasionally, principally at amateur concerts, and had plenty of opportunities afforded him for study. With what result he availed himself of them is known throughout the world. Meyerbeer did not, however, at once obtain a high position in music. His first opera, ‘Jephtha’s Daughter’ was represented at Munich in 1813 with but indifferent success, but the numerous works he afterwards produced, and which extended over nearly the whole range of musical composition, secured for him a wide reputation, and proved that his talents were of no common order. Of these productions the ‘Crociato in Egitt0,’ produced in Venice in 1825, may be said to have laid the foundation of his European fame. In 1831 he produced his grand work, ‘Robert the Devil,’ and henceforth Meyerbeer was recognised as a master. The ‘Hugenots’ followed in 1836, and the ‘Prophéte’ in 1849, both operas at once taking that commanding position on the lyric stage which they have ever since maintained. ‘L’Etoile du Nord,’ a work in a different style, but distinguished by the same charm of genius, followed in 1854, and the ‘Pardon de Ploermel’ still more recently. It had long been known that the deceased composer had finished another work,’L’Africaine,’ and that his scrupulous, and perhaps fastidious, anxiety to secure for it a satisfactory interpretation has alone kept it from the public. Its production may now, it is to be presumed, be looked for at no distant date.”

The Stamford Mercury, 6th May, 1864.

In Skegness a harsh sentence was imposed on a chambermaid accused of stealing a leather toilet set. This kind of penal servitude was abolished in England and Wales in 1948.

“Chambermaid’s Theft

PRISON FOR STEALING TOILET SET.

Before the Skegness Bench, on Tuesday, Elizabeth Tolliday (51), of Grantham, pleaded not guilty to the larceny of a toilet set in leather case, value 30s., the property of Annie Hilda Watson, of Skegness.

Mrs. Watson stated that she was the proprietress of the Tower Cafe, and accused had been in her employ since April last as a chambermaid, In October of last year witness went away for a holiday, leaving the case in her bedroom, and when subsequently she asked accused if she knew the whereabouts of the article she made no reply. On the 24th inst. witness saw the case in a box in accused’s bedroom. She exclaimed, “that’s mine, Mrs. Tolliday,” and the latter replied, “Yes, Madam I bought it here to clean.” Witness gave her no authority to take the case from her bedroom.

Insp. Corden said accused was well known to the Grantham Police. Her husband was a labourer at Grantham, but accused had not lived with him for some time. She had had a number of good situations, and in every instance her employer gave her a splendid testimonial, but drink had been her downfall. She had served several terms of imprisonment.

Sobbing bitterly, accused declared that she had been punished for what she had done, and had since gone straight. She was entirely innocent of stealing the toilet set.

A sentence of two months’ imprisonment with hard labour was imposed.”

The Stamford Mercury, 29th April, 1927.

A local landowner spoke of the usefulness of his traction engines before a new bill was introduced which removed the speed limits and rules previously introduced for motorised vehicles.

“TRACTION ENGINES ON ROADS. – EVIDENCE BY LORD ANCASTER.

A Select Committee of the House of Commons, presided over by Mr. H. Hobhouse, sat again on the 26th ult. for the consideration of the Traction Engines Bill. The Earl of Ancaster being called, said that he owned a large amount of agricultural land in Lincolnshire and Rutland, and for the last 20 years had used traction engines as a convenient means to its development. Owing to the restrictions imposed by the law he was not able to use the engines to the extent that he could wish. With regard to the effect of the passage of locomotives upon the roads, his opinion was that no harm was done where the roads were in good condition. Of course, if the roads were mere tracks it was quite possible that considerable harm might be done by the traveling of the locomotives. There was no reason, as far as he could see, why the engines should not be used at any hour of the day or night. They were most vauable to farmers, and so much cheaper than horses. His engines weighed about eight tons, and the two trucks weighed about four tons each. The engines probably would not turn out a profit if used on other than very large farms. His employees were always most careful as to the passing of traffic on the roads. No accident had happened except on one occasion, when a horse turned round and broke the shafts. The incident did not impress itself upon his mind largely because he had to pay very little damage. (Laughter). – In answer to Colonel Kenyon Slaney, the witness said that if all roads were available for traction engines, they would have to be made up’ at a considerable cost, and he was not prepared to say upon what body the expense should fall, although he thought that if a village was brought into a prosperous condition by a landowner employing traction engines, the cost ought not to be placed altogether upon him. He was perfectly aware the the locomotive wheels, as now constructed, ‘bit’ the road, as it was termed. – Mr. Eddison, director of Messrs. John Fowler and Co., Leeds, said that his firm built a large number of traction engines and road locomotives. They had had been engaged in the business for upwards of 30 years, and made each year a hundred or more engines for road haulage, and agricultural purposes, exclusive of the export trade. The engines were used by estate agents, property owners, co-operative companies, mine owners, and others. In lat years there had been improvements in the construction of the engines, and care had been taken to protect the gear. He did not see why there should be any limit placed upon the number of waggons drawn by any engine. Road locomotives should be treated in the same way as vehicles drawn by horse power. Speed to the extent of that allowed to horse traffic should be permitted; also he suggested the removal of all restrictons and taxes upon traction engines.”

The Stamford Mercury, 3rd April, 1896.

A ticket-of-leave was effectively a parole for convicts which allowed them some freedoms, if they had proved themselves to be trustworthy. However, there was a need to make the conditions more stringent, following a spate of gruesome garottings or muggings in London.

“The new Ticket-of-leave Bill now passing through parliament will possibly do something towards allaying the alarm which has been excited in the public mind on the subject of garotting. The new bill renders the licence or leave revocable upon the commission of any new indictable offence, and, furthermore, reimposes the remitted penalty in addition to the punishment for the new offence. Four conditions are to be endorsed upon the ticket-of-leave: – ‘1. The holder shall preserve his licence, and produce it when called upon to do so by a magistrate or police-officer. 2. He shall abstain from any violation of the law. 3. He shall not habitually associate with notoriously bad characters, such as reputed thieves and prostitutes. 4. He shall not lead an idle and dissolute life, without visible means of obtaining an honest livelihood.’ These alterations have the effect of bringing the holders of ticket-of-leave more stringently into the power of the law than they were before; but is is to be hoped that in exercising the powers conferred upon them the police will not use them in so harsh a manner as to close the door of return to respectability & independence for ever.”

The Stamford Mercury, 18th March, 1864.

Much-loved funny man Eric Morecambe made an appearance for the Lord’s Taverners at a charity cricket match against our local Burghley Park Team. It seems much fun was had by all although it’s not clear from this article who actually won!

“How’s that – game raises £4,100

THE LORD’S Taverners star studded cricket team raised £4,100 for charity from their visit to Burghley Park on Sunday.

And they gave in return an afternoon of fun and pleasure to the 4,400 people who came to see them.

Off the field it was top comic Eric Morecambe who stole the show, bowling the crown over with his wise cracks and antics.

And on the field John Alderton proved that while he earns his bread and butter from acting he is also a useful cricketer.

Eric Morecambe, won the toss for the Taverners and put the Burghley Park team into bat.

The Park made a total of 232 with Tony Beavon hitting 67 before being caught by John Alderton off Nottingham Forest manager Brian Clough. And John Price made 42.

Alderton took three of the Park wickets, as well as making two catches. The actor was the Taverner’s top scorer with 57.

Among the names to face the Park bowlers were Reg Simpson (32), Alan Revill (33), Mike J. K. Smith (30), Tom Baker (21), J. P. R. Williams (6), William Rushton (10) and Ted Dexter (9).

o ERIC Morecambe pictured with Burghley Park skipper Adrian Richardson, at the toss.”

The Stamford Mercury, 16th July 1976.

A horrid attack on a gamekeeper by a poacher left him unable to speak, but the prominent Bow Street police officers, Lavender and Vickery were on the case. The gamekeeper was in the employment of the second Earl Spencer at his Estate in Wimbledon Park.

“On Saturday se’nnight Mr. Thomas Astill, head gamekeeper to Earl Spencer, at Wimbledon Park, arrived at his own house speechless, having his scull dreadfully fractured, apparently by a bullet from a horse pistol, which has perforated his hat in two places; he was also much struck about the thighs by the hilt of a sword or cutlass. He had been seen to follow and overtake a man in a dark jacket, who had been shooting and taking away some game, and they were observed to walk together towards the park paling, not above 5 or 600 yards from his residence. Information of the above having been given at Bow-street, Lavender and Vickary (sic) were dispatched to obtain information; and on their arrival at Wimbledon, they found that one Holt, who had come from Hampshire to assist in the harvest, was the suspected person. The officers then proceeded to the Antelope, at Wandsworth, where he lodged, but he had not been home all night. They then, with much difficulty, and after a long pursuit, traced him to the Waggon and Horses at Farnham, where they secured him, and learned that previous to entering the house he had discharged a musket, which, nevertheless, he denied being in his possession, and said it belonged to a soldier. They, however, found it in the cellar of the house concealed behind a beer barrel, and, on inspection, it proved to be the piece which the gamekeeper has taken out with him. On Thursday he was taken to the wounded gamekeeper, who was not able to speak. He, however, identified the prisoner as the man who wounded him; and his testimony was taken before Major Fleming, a Magistrate, which will be made evidence on the trial.”

The Stamford Mercury, 30th August, 1811.

A poor lad suffered a broken arm and some horrible injuries, trying to escape the eyes of his father while viewing a new threshing machine (or thrashing-machine). These machines first came into use in the industrial revolution to replace the time-consuming practice of flailing by hand.

On Wednesday se’nnight a shocking accident happened at Bourn. Mr. John Chamberlain, of that place, had lately put up a new thrashing-machine, which excited the curiosity of numbers of persons to see it work : among others, a son of William Davy, (contrarily to the injunction of his father,) went for that purpose : the father happened to go also, and the boy, perceiving him come, ran over the spindle of the machine in order to get away, but being caught by the cloaths, was doubled up amongst the works, and had an arm broken, and his head and shoulders cut and mangled in a shocking way. Notwithstanding all these apparently ‘mortal wounds, the least a death to nature,’ the boy, we understand, still survives, & there are even hopes of his recovery.”

The Stamford Mercury, 12th April, 1811.

Stamford was a popular racing venue (1717 – 1873), so its newspaper attracted many such advertisements. Baronet was well-known and may have been one of the horses painted by George Stubbs, although he is referred to in the advertisement as a chestnut and Stubbs’ subject was called a bay.

“BARONET will COVER Mares this season, 1811, at Two Guineas each. He was got by Stride (that uncommonly speedy well-bred son of Phenomenon), his dam by Drone, grandam by Young Marske, out of Ferret, by a brother to Silvio, Regulus, Morton Arabian, Mixbury, Mulse Bay Turk, Bay Bolton, Coneyskins, Hutton Grey Barb, Byerley Turk, and Bustler.

Baronet is own brother to Sir John, Lady Brough, and Brough – all good runners, and, to those conversant with the turf, well known to possess great speed.

Baronet is seven years old, a good chestnut, fifteen hands three inches high, free from all natural blemishes, with great powers, fine shape, and good action – and for constitution and good temper, not inferior to any horse in existence. He had won as follows : viz

At York, on Wednesday 23rd May, 1805, being then only two years old, a sweepstakes for 120gs. beating Mr. Knapton’s filly by a brother to Eagle, Mr. Mellish’s Companion, Sir H. T. Vane’s filly by Patriot, and Mr. J. Hill’s Talisman by Totteridge. – At Doncaster, on Thursday 25th September, 1806, a match for 300 gs. beating Mr. Mellish’s colt Luck’s-All by Stamford. – At York on Saturday 29th August, 1807, the Ladies’ Plate, beating Sir T. Gascoigne’s filly by Hambletonian, Mr. Mellish’s Luck’s-All, Sir M. Sykes’ Harriet, Mr. Grimstone’s Woldsman, and Mr. Wentworth’s Irene. – At Ormskirk, July 22, 1808, a sweepstakes of 80 gs. for all ages, four miles, beating Mr. Benson’s Dimple, &c. &c.

He will be at Barton, Grimsby and Castor markets, and travel that circuit during the season.”

The Stamford Mercury, 5th April, 1811.