Mercuriosities

A tradesman complains about being forced to vote against his wishes or face the consequences by Lord Exeter ‘s henchman. Such was the situation before the secret ballot was introduced in 1872.

The late MUNICIPAL ELECTION in STAMFORD.

“To the EDITOR of the MERCURY. Stamford Nov. 3.

Sir,

The result of the election for town Councillors on Monday last will probably elicit from your pen some remarks relative to the pusillanimity of those who wished for the success of the candidates whom they opposed; but it would be as well for you to take into consideration, and for the public to know, the circumstances in which such persons were placed. Writing anonymously (except that I entrust you with my name in confidence), I may say in print that which I dare not proclaim viva voce. Very likely you will pause at the expression dare; but such is the fact, – and it is better to admit the truth, than to attempt to gloss over a false position by an unavailing excuse. Take my own case. I am a tradesman occupying one of the Marquis of Exeter’s houses, and am doing a very good business: if I were to be turned out, the probability is that I should lose a portion of my custom, – a loss which I cannot well risk. Originally it was my intention to have voted for Mr. Hatfield, and the other gentlemen whose names were associatied with him as candidates, but from conversation with my neighbours who knew more of the confidential doings at Burghley than I did, I thought it prudent to decline voting at all, and had made up my mind to be neutral. I was, however, soon given to understand that neutrality is, in the eyes of Lord Exeter, as bad as opposition: I was informed that I must vote for all the ‘Reds,’ or a black mark would be place against my name in the tenant ledger. And so indeed I found it; as a few days before the elecction I was waited upon by a person from the Steward’s office, and canvassed for my votes. I stated plainly that I did not intend to vote at all; to which a rejoinder was given, ‘Very well, do as you please: I am commissioned to ask you for your vote, and if you refuse, you may guess the consequences from what took place after the last Parliamentary election.’ I felt the sting which this mandate conveyed, but remonstrance was out of the question; and though I refused at the time to yield, I subsequently deemed it prudent to comply. My case I know to be that of many others; hence I ask for a favourable consideration of the position in which we are placed. The misfortune is that there is no chance of ensuring unanimity among the tenants of the Marquis of Exeter: if all would agree to act independently, all would be safe from the tyranny which is exercised over us; but there are, I regret to say, in Stamford a number of undividuals who do not hesitate to perform the most grovelling acts, and lend themselves to purposed which are debasing to the character of Englishmen, in order to curry favour with their iron-willed landlord.

To what degree of subjugation we shall eventually come, it is difficult to opine. Lord Exeter is as orthodox in religion as he is enthusiastic in horse-racing; if he compels us to violate our consciences in one matter, we may expect that he will do so in another. ‘The Church and the Turf’ will probably be set up as our moral creed; and if we do not shout for the infallibility of the one, and the virtue of the other, – if we are ever caught in dissenting places of worship, or are found wanting at Stamford races, – we may expect that the threats with which we have just been terrified will be periodically renewed, and that disregard of them will be punished with loss of houses and withdrawal of custom. ‘Church’ and ‘Turf’ may be alike estimated by some people – if indeed the latter has not the preference; but I do hope that, however nimble a few individuals may be in leaping from the tight-laced bed of Methodism or Calvinism into the vagaries of the Turf, a united stand will ere long be made against the anti-tolerant spirit which at present crushes us and makes us feel we are not ‘men and brothers,’ but skulking abject slaves.

Your’s,

A DEPENDENT TRADESMAN.”

The Stamford Mercury, 5th November, 1847.

Mr Newton’s map scaler continued to cause further comments and arguments, particularly here about the point P.

“Mr. Editor, ………………………………………………….Wisbech, April 23d, 1824.

Permit me to drop a line or two for the use of your correspondent Viator*, who, from a paragraph of his in our paper of to-day, seems to have bewildered himself.

In commenting on Mr. I. Newton’s method of transferring maps, &c., Viator has nothing at all to urge against it. To what then, I would ask, do his observations amount? Why they may, in his opinion, serve to show that he is a critic; though, unlike Sterne’s critic, he perhaps may not have a ‘stop watch’ by which to aid or regulate his observations; for he makes no mention of it. But although Viator, forsooth, brings no argument against the correctness of facility of Mr. N.’s method, yet, he is pleased very confidently to assert that the point P may be assumed anywhere, either within or out of the given plan. Now this notion of Viator’s is so palpably absurd, as scarcely to need confuting. For if the point P were taken within the given plan, then it is obvious that the required plan would fall either partly or wholly within the given plan, thus rendering both plans entirely useless, by confounding or mingling them together. The same objection also applies when the point P is taken too near the given plan. Thus if any one of the sides A D of the parallelogram A D C B be produced at A, and P be taken in the part produced, then, in order to have, in each particular case of the problem, the given and required plans separate as they ought to be, the distance P A must not be less tha the side A D. And this is probably one of Mr. N.’s reasons for taking P below A B, at the given distance A D : since a less distance would have been improper, and a greater superfluous. Your’s, Veritas #.”

The Stamford Mercury, 7th May, 1824.

*latin for traveller.

*latin for truth.

Having seen the the letter from our correspondent ‘Isaac Newton‘ published on 16th, April 1824, a gentleman from Newark queried various aspects of the scaling method. This discussion was to carry on for several weeks, which is understandable for such a complex calculation. Here is a modern method.

“To the Editor.

Newark, April 17th, 1824.

On taking up your paper, I perceive a plan is given, under the signature of Isaac Newton, of a convenient mode of altering a plan from any one scale to another. It certainly may prove very convenient, but there does not appear any necessity for the bisection of the base line of the parallelogram, and the erection of a perpendicular equal to the base. The point P may be assumed any where, either in the plan or out of the plan to be altered, and by drawing lines from P to any objects in the plan, and extending them, a new set of similar triangles may be formed about P, which is in fact altering a plan from any one scale to another.

Your’s Viator.*”

The Stamford Mercury, 23rd April, 1824.

*latin for traveller.

The canal is now one of the busiest shipping routes in the world. It allows ships to travel between the Mediterranean Sea and the Indian Ocean avoiding having to sail around the Cape of Good Hope, saving time and fuel.

“It is known that the Viceroy of Egypt has, for many years, cherished the hopes of seeing executed a means of transit for European commerce and correspondence between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea, more efficient than the clumsy and inconvenient means at present used. This project, however, has been obstructed by causes arising out of the conflicting interests and reciprocal jealousies of the great European states. It was the object of Mehemet Ali to surmount these obstacles, by inducing the several Goverments to join in the execution of so grand an enterprise. In this, however, he failed. He then had recourse to the more promising expedient of trying to awaken the spirit of private enterprise among the great commercial and financial interests of Europe, and in this he seems to be at the point of success. The last dispatches from the Levant brought intelligence that the agents of a joint company, formed of capitalists and merchants of London, Paris, and Vienna, had arrived, or were en route for the theatre of the projected operations. Mr Stephenson represents the English interests; M. Talabot, the French; and M.Negrelli, engineer of the Vienna and Triest railway, the Austrian. The purpose of the colossal project is to cut a canal between Suez and the ancient Pelusium, following very nearly the course of the ancient canal, the traces of which still exist on the isthmus. The projected canal is to have width and depth sufficient to float a first-rate man-of-war.”

The Stamford Mercury, 22nd October, 1847.

The results of the general election of 1847 in Stamford were as follows:

Charles Manners (con) (The Marquis of Granby and heir to the Duke of Rutland of Belvoir castle)____________349 votes

John Charles Herries (con)______ 288 votes

John Rolt (con) ____________236 votes

The secret ballot was not introduced until 1872.

“On Wednesday, great excitement was produced in Stamford by the delivery to about 40 tenants of houses and other premises in the town held under the Marquis of Exeter, of notices to quit; the sole and avowed reason for the proceeding being that at the late election of representatives in Parliament for the borough the parties voted for Mr. Rolt, Q.C.. It has not, upon the present occasion, been an exemption from such a visitiation that the occupiers gave one vote to a nominee of the Marquis of Exeter; nor even that they did not vote at all at the election; if they did not support both the Marquis of Granby and Mr. Herries, they must quit their houses or other property held under the House of Burghley. And in some cases, widows and aged persons whose children or connections did not vote as Lord Exeter desired, are to be turned out of their dwellings; although (as in the case of Mrs. Hunt, widow of Wm. Hunt, Esq., of Ironmonger-street) the family have occupied the property for great part of a century. So stringent a rule of persecution has never before been exercised here, although Lord Exeter’s tenants have been familiar with strange courses by their landlord. It is said that the new and more unfeeling line of action is adopted on the urgent recommendation of two of three leading men of the Red Committee, who are emulous* of the esteem of their townsmen, and desire the comfort of a good conscience.”

The Stamford Mercury, 1st October, 1847.

*Seeking to emulate something or person.

M A Rothschild was born in Frankfurt (or Frankfort)and created an empire that came to prominence with his five sones. They were pioneers in international banking.

“The Jews’ Street in Frankfort. – In the Jews’ street at Frankfort-on-the-maine, in the midst of Gothic facades, black copings, and sombre alleys, there is a house of small exterior, distinguished from others by its luxurious neatness, which gives it an appearance of singular cheerfulness and freshness. The brass on the door is polished; the curtains of the windows are as white as snow; and the staircase (an unusual thing in the damp atmosphere of this dirty quarter) is always dry and shining. The traveller who from curiosity visits this street – a true specimen of the times when the Jews of Frankfort, subjected to the most intolerable vexations, were restricted to this infected quarter – will be induced to stop before this neat and simple house, and perhaps ask, ‘who is that venerable old lady, seated in a large armchair behind the little shining squares of the window on the first story?’ This is the reply every Frankforter will make:- ‘in that house dwelt an Israelite merchant, named M. A. Rothschild. He there acquired a good name, a great fortune, and a numerous family; and when he died, the widow* declared she would never quit, except for the tomb, the modest dwelling which had served as a cradle to that name, that fortune, and those children.’ Continued prosperity has attended the sons of this pious and modest widow. Their name is become European, and their wealth proverbial. They inhabit sumptuous palaces, in the most beautiful quarters of Paris, London, Vienna, Naples, and Frankfort. But their mother, persevering in her admirable modesty, has not quitted her comparatively humble house, where they come to visit her with respect and reverence, and discharge their duties in memory of their estimable father – thus presenting bright examples for the present time. The illustrious family are characterised for their modesty. They have generously provided for the unfortunate, assisted the persecuted and supported the feeble.”

The Stamford Mercury, 15th October, 1847.

* Gutle Schanpper, the daughter of a money changer. She married Rothschild in 1770 and gave birth to ten children – five sons and five daughters.

We are not sure if Mr. Isaac Newton of Wisbech was a relative of the polymath of Woolsthorpe Manor, or if he is a nom de plume (as a sort of joke). However, his solution to the scale problem, below, is very learned if a little daunting!

“To the Editor of the Mercury.

Wisbech, April, 1824.

Sir,

As scientific subjects sometimes have place in you columns, I choose to send you the following. It is a problem of perpetual use among Land-Surveyors; and as the method which I have here given of performing it, appears to me more simple, convenient, and accurate, than any which I have hitherto met with, I have no doubt that a perusal of it will prove interesting to some of your scientific readers. The problem is-

‘To transfer any map or plan of a given scale, to another scale, which shall be given integral number of times smaller or larger than the given scale.’

Solution.- Let the rectangular parallelogram ADCB represent the given map or plan, and let E, F, G, &c. be the points, places, or objects, depicted thereon. Bisect A B the base of the parallelogram in M, and make the perpendicular M P, below A B, equal to A D or B C, the adjacent side to A B: drawe the right lines P A, P D, P C, P B, P E, P F, P G, &c., in which lines take the points a, b, c, d, e, f, g, &c. respectively; making P A to P a, P D to P d, P C, to P c, P B to P b, P E to P e, P F to P f, P G to P g, &c., as the given scale to the required one; and draw the right lines a d, d c, c b, b a, so shall the figure abcd, containing the points e, f, g, &c. be the required plan; being similar to the given one, and on a scale a given integral number of times smalled than the given scale.

When the required plan is to be on a scale, a given integral number of times smaller than the given scale, it is only necessary to project P A, P D, P C, P B, P E, P F, P G, &c. at the extremities A, D, C, B, E, F, G, &c. and proceed as in the former case. In both cases whatever lines lie between the points, E, F, G, &c. in the given plan, the same or similar lines must also connect the corresponding points in the required plan, which will then be complete. – I am, &c. Isaac Newton.”

The Stamford Mercury, 16th April, 1824.

(We are indebted to John Riley for grappling with this problem and drawing the example above, which better demonstrates what this is all about!)

Mr. Black seems to have been an eccentric character, but he had obviously worked hard as a platelayer, roadman and gravedigger. It seems that there had not been a funeral in West Deeping for nigh on two years.

“No Work for Gravedigger Since 1951

‘They were swanking in your paper about North and South Witham not having had a funeral for a year.’ said Mr. Edwin Black from the comfort of his lunch-time wheelbarrow. ‘I have been gravedigger at West Deeping for about 23 years, and we can beat that. I have not had a funeral since March 21, 1951.’

Seventy-year-old Mr. Black, a roadman, was taking his ease on Monday when our reported and photographer came across him near Uffington station.

‘There is one thing about these old barrows, they make a good armchair.’ said Mr. Black. He had a sandwich in one hand and a flask of cold tea to his lips.

‘Only tea?’ we queried.

‘Can’t afford anything else,’ came the reply.

‘We had a drop of ‘short’ in for Christmas and this is the bottle,’ said Mr. Black.

He has been a roadman for 25 years, and before that was a platelayer on the Great Northern railway.”

The Stamford Mercury, 22nd May, 1953.

Two brave females took on the rescue of three men whose ships had been wrecked, despite the hardy seamen of the area warning that it could not be achieved in the dreadful weather conditions.

“Female Intrepidity – On the 22d. of October last, two vessels were wrecked off Fishguard, and three men were seen clinging to the rigging. Entreaties were in vain employed to induce the hardy seamen of that wild coast to attempt the rescue of the unfortunate men, all declaring that no boats could live in such a tremendous sea; but humanity induced two young females to enter upon a task which made the stout hearts of the seamen quail. Margaret Lewellyn lashed a rope round her body, and her noble example was followed by her sister Martha: they then dashed into the surf, which the spectators expected would throw them on the rocks lining that dangerous coast. After incredible exertions, they succeeded in conveying a rope to the wreck, and in bringing ashore the three sailors. All hopes had been abandoned of saving the wreck. The committee of Lloyd’s, having ascertained the accuracy of this statement, contributed 5l. towards the funds subscribed for the relief of these women : they are poor, and in very humble circumstances. The Royal Humane Society has also given 5l., besides honorary medals, to the two heroic females.”

The Stamford Mercury, 11th June, 1847.

Following our earlier post about the wonderful rat killer, Billy the dog, we found this in the newspaper some months later. It seems, even though Billy’s rat killing feats have been brought into question, he was still the fastest in the world! It doesn’t say, however, what happened to Billy’s owner, Mr. Dew. . .

“It has been generally understood, and bruited* about, that the dog Billy has killed one hundred full-grown rats in less than seven minutes! This is true; but in proportion as the wonder has increased, so will it subside, when the cognoscenti are informed, that by a skillful preparation of opium, these rats have been so deprived of their usual ferocious power of resistance, as to fall an easy prey to the efforts of the famous Billy. This fact we have from authority. The immense sums lost are referred to the Jockey Club. – Sunday Monitor.”

The Stamford Mercury, 9th January, 1824.

*rumoured.