Mercuriosities

As we now know, Kaiser Wilhelm II (aka William Hohenzollern) never stood trial for his part in the first World War, but there was much speculation about it at the time and comparison with the trials of other great men and women.

‘From an article in “Chambers’s Journal,” entitled “Concerning State Trials,” we extract the following:-

Students of human nature and of history must look forward to the coming trial with intense interest. Do eminent and great men, fallen from their high estate and tried for their lives display this greatness by any special composure or dignity? In very many cases this has been so. King Charles was a gentleman always and never more so than at his trial. The same may be said of Louis XVI. Th trial of the French King and Queen does not deserve the august name of a State trial; but answer of Marie Antoinette to the scoundrels who sentenced her to death was simple, courageous and thoroughly queen-like. With the immeasurable contempt of an aristocratic woman. a haughty daughter of an empress-queen, for the rough, ill-clad rabble into whose hands she had fallen, she did not deign to discuss their rite to judge her or the validity of their verdict. In six, short stinging words she told them what she thought of them. “Vous etes tous de profonds scelerats!” (You are nothing but a lot of scamps.) And with this, without another word, she swept out of their presence.

Mary Stuart, always vehement, quick and passionate, but now aging, grey-haired met her doom calmly, quietly answering and herself interrogating her judges. Was her dignified conduct a proof that she felt herself to be innocent? Hardly that; but women have a wonderful power of deceiving themselves, and as twice a Queen she denied to anyone on earth the right to judge her. Charles Stuart and Louis Capet made the same ineffectual protest. Without doubt William Hohenzollern must honestly be of the same opinion, and, contrary to the general idea, he would have some right on his side. Human wisdom for what it is worth, has for ages past invested royalty with an inviolable sanctity, above all laws. And the Kaiser could go even a step further – he could advance the pleas of his vaunted partnership with the Almighty. which (if admitted) should absolve him of all blame. This claim may have its use where, and as long as, the imperial “ipse dixit”* was accepted as final; but a court of law is the most sceptic of bodies, and, as William will find does not accept unsupported testimony.

The Stamford Mercury, 16th January, 1920.

*he said it himself – i.e. an assertion without proof.

Middlemarch was screened on BBC 2 in 1994 and proved to be very popular with viewers. The designers chose Stamford for their setting, because very few Georgian houses survived the World War 2 bombing of Coventry (Eliot’s intended location). The influx of film crew was exciting for Stamfordians (many of whom were recruited as extras), but equally caused some headaches due to blocked roads.

“BBC sets up in town

Historic Stamford’s TV trip back to the past starts on Monday, when BBC cameras start filming a new star-studded drama serial.

Homes and streets will stand in for George Eliot’s fictional Middlemarch – and Barn Hill’s former clinic has been transformed into a fever hospital.

But the work could trigger traffic hold-ups, with roads set to be sealed in the town centre this month and next.

As many as 70 actors, crew and support staff could be involved at any one time in filming the six-part series, whose producers plumped for Stamford because of its similarity with 1830s Coventry.

Among the stars are Sir Michael Hordern and Patrick Malahide, most recently seen in the Inspector Alleyn Mysteries.

Locations include Barn Hill, the first venue for filming, plus All Saints’ Place, King’s Mill Lane, St Mary’s Street and St George’s Square.”

Stamford Mercury, 2nd July, 1993.

Today, we have Metropolitan Police Commissioner Dame Cressida Dick, in Boston in 1927 it was a very different story. . .

“WOMEN NOT WANTED

FOR POLICE DUTIES IN HOLLAND DIVISION.

A meeting of the Holland Standing Joint Committee was held at Boston on Wednesday, Mr. Fitzalan Howard presiding.

Twice as much Insobriety.

The Chief Constable (Capt. C. Mitchell-Innes) reported that the indictable crimes during the past quarter numbered 51, for which 31 persons were charged; for the corresponding period of last year 61 offences were reported and 34 persons charged. The number of persons dealt with for non-indictable offences during the quarter was 494, as compared with 520 in the corresponding period of last year. There had been an increase in cases of drunkenness from 43 to 88.

The Chairman regretted the increase in cases of drunkenness, but it was pointed out that they arose in the south of the division.

A grant of £457 4s. 6d., Holland’s proportion of £300, was made towards strengthening the Joint Police Superannuation Fund.

Sub-committees were appointed to deal with the provision of police cottages at Spalding, Long Sutton, Fleet, and Benington.

It was reported that £1039 was payable for police services during the coal strike by other authorities, half of which would go to this county and half to the government.

Not required.

A letter was read from the Home Office with reference to the employment of police-women, and the Chief Constable caused much laughter by remarking that if they gave him policewomen he would not know what on earth to do with them.

The Committee expressed themselves in favour of rear lights being used by cyclists.”

The Stamford Mercury, 21st January, 1927.

This touching tale of rehousing endangered newts was reported 27 years ago. Let’s hope the colony is still surviving in its Uffington idyll.

‘A rare species of newt has been found a new home by a major housing developer after it was discovered at an Uffington building site.

Around 70 to 80 Great Crested Newts, which are an endangered species, were found in a disused seasonal pond but are now living in water haven purpose-built by David Wilson Homes.

Th rescue operation was co-ordinated with the help of ecologist David Jones and English Nature who approved the new 100 metre square pond which features aquatic plants, shrubs and trees.

The company’s landscape architect, Margaret Leech, said: “It’s the first time the company has come across anything like this.

She added: “It was a nightmare transplanting them to the new pond. It took about four days with us catching them with nets and carrying them in buckets.”

Mrs Leech says the pond has been designed with gently sloping sides so it attracts other wildlife and when the newts were moved so were frogs and toads.

The rare newts which Mrs Leech likens to “little dinosaurs”, can grow to more that eight inches long and have a crest running down their backs.

The moist-textured reptiles are green and brown in colour and develop a blue and orange chest in the breeding season.

Most of the Great Crested Newt population lives in Europe and Mrs Leech said: “We have got to maintain our stocks for the rest of the world.”‘

The Stamford Mercury, 13th August, 1993.

Necessaries were the basic things needed to sustain life – food, clothing, shelter (see the lowest ‘rung’ of Maslow’s heirarchy of needs). This price fixing ensured that wages were in line with the cost of living. Today, however, necessaries seem to include all the needs Maslow lists, plus mobile telephones, cars, televisions . . .

“By the Statute of Richard II. Anno septimo*, all who sold wines and victuals, either wholesale or retail, were under the government of the Mayor of London; and by an Act of the 13th year of that reign, the Justices of the Peace were empowered to settle the price of wages of labourers and others, according to the prices of provisions, and to fix the value of provisions also. By an Act of the 25th of Henry the VIIIth, the Lord Chancellor and other great Officers had the authority of fixing the prices of necessaries, as had also the Magistrates in Cities and Corporations ; and there are various statutes which ascertained the value of beef, mutton, pork, veal, &c. by the pound.– Such a benign practice now, renewed by law, would be the greatest blessing which can descend from a legislature to the people.”

Stamford Mercury, 11th August, 1768.

*In the seventh year (of his reign)

Following the recent news that there should be thirteen zodiac signs, it was interesting to find this article from 1920. The International Fixed Calendar was designed in 1902, but never adopted by any country. Its strict rules, probably explain why! (Unfortunately, either Major Penberthy or the journalist who wrote the following item did not check his arithmetic: 13 x 28 = 364!)

“THAT THIRTEENTH MONTH! (by Major F. Penberthy). – ‘If someone suddenly asked me how many dates has August, I should automatically recite that doggerel beginning, ‘Thirty days hath September.’ I can’t help it. And I believe everybody else does it too.’ Writes Major F. Penberthy in the January Pearson’s Magazine. He proceeds to explain the coming reform of the calendar, which has been discussed for some time past by the International Convention, and is now likely to come into being. Major Penberthy’s article throws some extraordinarily interesting sidelights on a matter which is undoubtedly everybody’s concern. Under the new scheme the year will consist of thirteen months of twenty-eight days each. Leap year will be provided for by the insertion possibly between July and August of a day which could be made a world-wide holiday. How the new year will be worked from a business point of view is most interestingly discussed.”

Stamford Mercury, 16th January, 1920.

Murder in mid-18th century east-coast America was part of life. At this time the east coast truly resembled the wild west and Frederick Stump was lucky he was never brought to justice for these shameful murders. “The Frederick Stump affair” gives a more detailed account.

“Philadelphia Feb. 1. On the 10th of last month, four India men and two women went to the house of Frederick Stump, near the mouth of Middle-Creek, in the county of Cumberland in this Province, where the said Stump, after disabling them by making them drunk, most inhumanly murdered them, and hid their bodies under the ice in the creek. On the next day he went with a servant lad to an Indian cabbin, about 14 miles up the said creek, and there barbarously put to death an Indian woman, two girls, and a young child, and set fire to the cabin, and burnt the bodies to ashes. After committing these horrid murders, he freely confessed the whole to Mr. William Blyth, whose deposition, we hear, has been taken before the Chief Justice. The only reasons assigned by him for these atrocious violences, were, that he was afraid the six Indians intended to do him a mischief, and that he murdered the other four lest they should inform the other Indians of the death of the six. Upon the whole, he seemed to be under no apprehensions of punishment, and behaved as if he had done a meritorious action.”

Stamford Mercury, 14th April, 1768.

Skipping or any other playful activity was strictly forbidden in the Royal Parks without prior ‘authorisation’. Victoria Park lies on the Thames near Westminster where park rules were stringently enforced as one family discovered to their cost.

“Whitsuntide frolics.–At Worship-street police-court on Tuesday John Turner and Selina Turner, man and wife, were charged before Mr. Bushby with skipping in Victoria-park. Selina Turner was further charged with assaulting two of the park constables. The evidence showed that about 5 o’clock on the previous afternoon the prisoners and several others were skipping with a rope in the open portion of Victoria-park. The officers went up, and after requesting the skippers to desist took John Turner into custody. On the way to the station Selina Turner caught hold of one of the constables by the whiskers, and kicked the other.  At the station door she was taken into custody. In answer to the charge the prisoners indignantly denied that they were doing any wrong by skipping in the park. Selina Turner did not assault the officers, who used John Turner very roughly. The officers admitted that the male prisoner was not turning the rope when apprehended. Mr. Bushby said by the schedule of the Act under which charge was laid (Royal Parks and Gardens Act) it was enacted that no person should play any game in the parks except in accordance with the rules of the park, and the rules of the park said that no “unauthorised” person should play any game. The male prisoner had rendered himself liable to a penalty of 5l., and Selina Turner for obstructing the officers to 20l. fine. However, he fined the man only 5s. or seven days, and the woman 20s. or 14 days.”

Stamford Mercury, 6th June, 1873.

In 1816 travel to Paris would normally take 73 hours from London, but the relatively new hot-air ballooning craze meant this could be cut to ten hours! Sadly, we do know not if this undertaking was successful, nor could we find a picture of the dolphin-shaped balloon – one can only imagine!

‘TRAVELLING IN A BALLOON. – A Mr. Egg, of the Strand, (a German,) has nearly completed a balloon, in the shape of a dolphin, for the avowed purpose of carrying the nobility and gentry to Paris, and subsequently elsewhere. It is to be made capable of conveying from 15 to 20 persons to Paris in the short space of 10 hours or less: it is worked by steam, and the wings are intended to act as rudders. The journey from London to Paris by Dover, is now performed in 73 hours: viz. 12 hours to Dover; 7 hours (upon the average) to wait at Dover; 6 hours (average) the passage; 48 hours to Paris, supposing a traveller sets off without taking any rest; total, 73 hours. This scheme, if carried into execution, bids defiance to the usual exactions of innkeepers, the customary search of custom-house officers, and all the ordinary impediments which so frequently annoy sensitive travellers. Mr. Egg is prosecuting this undertaking in a building in Brompton. – Observer.’

Stamford Mercury, 23rd August, 1816.

Forfeits was a typical Victorian game but when the players venture outside the house in costume it may well end in tears.

“A Christmas Forfeit.–An amusing case was heard before the Southampton Magistrates on Saturday. A respectable young man named Renyard was charged with loitering in the streets in woman’s clothes. A constable proved having seen him on the previous night in female attire. The prisoner’s defence was that on Friday night he was at a Christmas party playing forfeits, and he was “sentenced” to walk down the main street dressed in woman’s clothes, and being “in for a lark” he did it. The policeman said prisoner was wearing a woman’s hat, a crinoline, a black silk skirt and a shawl–clothes which a companion of the prisoner, who was also at the party, said were borrowed from ladies who were taking part in the game of forfeits. The Magistrates told the accused he had been guilty of a stupid Christmas frolic, but had been punished enough by being locked up all night, and they discharged him.”

Stamford Mercury, 3rd January, 1873.