Mercuriosities

The first sub-acqueous tunnel in the world went from Rotherhithe to Wapping, and was designed and built by Marc Brunel*. It was completed in 1843. Strangely, it is now part of the London Overground rail system.

“It is said that all the shares of this undertaking are filled up, and Parliament has given leave to bring in a bill to carry it into effect. The attempt, therefore, will once more be made in good earnest, under the direction of an engineer named Brunel *. The plan proposed in this instance to be pursued is perfectly novel and original, and consists in the combination of ten or twelve iron frames, presenting in front an area equatl to the opening which is to be made for the body of the tunnel. Thus 30 or 36 men can operate in so many independent cells. These frames are moved forward in proportion to the space excavated, and the brick-work is then urged on, so as to leave as little of the surrounding earth as psssible unsupported or unprotected. In this way the tunnel is made to “drag its slow length along”# to its termination, which Mr Brunel looks to in about two years. – Should the attempt be successful, it will be a proud addition to our national works, and the only structure of its kind in the world.”

The Stamford Mercury, 21st May, 1824.

*Father of Isambard Kingdom Brunel.

# The quotation is from ‘An Essay on Criticism Part 2’, by Alexander Pope: “A needless alexandrine ends the song, That, like a wounded snake, drags its slow length along.”

George Gordon Byron, 6th Baron, the English Poet and one of the major figures of the Romantic movement died aged 36, after contracting a fever following the seiges of Missolonghi.

“Advices arrived in London on Friday afternoon of the death of Lord Byron, after ten days’ illness of a fever, at Missolonghi, in Greece, on the 19th of April. On the awful and abrupt termination of the career of such a man, we are unable to express our feelings without the danger of guilty compromise on the one side, and illiberal and offensive qualification on the other. The elements of Lord Byron’s literary character are too strongly marked for any middle course : no homage can be too ardent for his genius ; no reprobation too strong for the uses to which it was too frequently applied. That he should have died so early, must be a source of regret to all – even to those who least valued his talents, and most detested his immoralities. If he had passed out of life some years since, his fame and reputatuon would have been clearer and more pure – had he lived some years longer, he might have redeemed them. He has quitted the world at the most unsatisfactory manner – in voluntary exile, when his mind, debased by evil associations, and malignant brooding over imaginary ills, has been devoted to the construction of elaborate lampoons and uncharitable strictures . – Lord Byron was born in the year 1788, near Aberdeen, where he passed his earlier years ; in January 1815 he married, at Seaham, in the county of Durham, the only daughter of Sir Ralph Millbank Noel Bart., who towards the close of the same year brought him a daughter. Within a few weeks after that event, a separation took place, for which various causes have been stated. His Lordship, while the public anxiety as the course he would adopt was at its height, suddenly left the kingdom, with the resolution never to return. – Latterly, as is well known, the Noble Lord attached himself to the cause of the Greeks, in their resistance to the authority of the Ottoman Porte ; and he was rendering, it is said, great assistance to their cause, when, on the 19th of last month, (having been for some time living very low, owing to a slow recovery from previous illness,) he exposed himself in a violent rain ; the consequence of which was a severe cold, and he was immediately confined to his bed. The low state to which he had been reduced by his abstinence, and probably by some of the remaining effects of his previous ilness, made him unwilling – at least he refused – to be bled. The inflammatory action being thus unchecked, terminated fatally on the 19th of April. – There are no letters of his Lordship’s of a dare subsequent to the commencement of his illness, The friends who were near him at the time of his decease, in addition to the Greek Prince Mayrocordato, were a Mr. Parry, who had organised the artillery and engineer corps for the Greeks at Missolonghi, a Mr. Bourke, and Count Gamba. – The letters from the last-named gentleman first communicated the intelligence to Lord Sidney. Osborne, who forwarded it with the kindest attention to the friends of Lord Byron in England, and proceeded from Corfu to Zante, to make whatever arrangements might be necessary respecting his remains.”

The Stamford Mercury, 21st May, 1824.

We have seen several accounts of mermaid -sighting and here is a second one from the emerald isle. It is thought that manatees were mistaken for them, but those animals don’t resemble the description given below.

“The following article appears in the Drogheda Journal of the 26th ult.:-‘The declaration of George Hoey, parish clerk of Termon-fechin, in the county of Louth, and of Owen Maguire and Patrick Taaffe, of the said parish, farmers, states that on Wednesday the 18th August inst., as they were on the sea-shore, on the lands of Meagh’s farm, in the said parish, about half-past three in the afternoon, the tide being nearly in, they saw a mermaid (as they believe from having seen it described in books), of the full human size, swimming in the sea and directing its course towards the river Boyne – that it was only about fifteen perches from them – that they and several other persons saw it quite plain, and that they could not be mistaken – that its body was remarkably white, with long arms, which it frequently used to drive away the sea-gulls which were hovering over it – that its hair was very dark, and that its tail, which it frequently showed when plunging, was of a dark colour, and shaped like the tail of a fish. The body of the animal, which from the size, was generally about three feet above the water. – They state that they saw it for more than a quarter of an hour, and when they were leaving the place, it was still about the surface of the water. We questioned the above-named persons on Saturday, relative to this phenomenon on our coast, and received such satisfactory answers as leave no doubt on our minds of its having been seen as stated.'”

The Stamford Mercury, 3rd September, 1824.

A gamekeeper is dealt with by his adversaries to his misfortune. Initially he was searching for some unwelcome poachers on his employers land. Now, when it comes to poachers, the act is similiar to smuggling. The word poaching originates to putting something in a pouch. Poaching had been an offence since 1723 and was written down in law to protect the wealth of the landowners. With a history of many poachers lurking around this time in society, there is no surprise that the gamekeeper had an incline to go and investigate in order to protect the land. Instead he found himself caught up in a struggle with potential trespassers, which left him in a difficult spot for some time. His rescuers seemed to think a rabbit was capable of causing his capture, moreover that said rabbit would attack them without further back-up!

“A gamekeeper at Castleton near Rochdale, suspecting some poachers were on the estate, went in search of them. He had not gone over many fields before he came in contact with two men, whom he charged with an intention of stealing game. The men not relishing the accusation, or fearing the consequence of a trespass, seized the poor gamekeeper, stuffed him head and shoulders into a rabbit’s burrow, and drove a stake into the ground, between his legs, to prevent his escape, which effectively pinned him in. The poor fellow remained in that situation until noon the next day, when he was discovered by some Labourers, who naturally concluded that he had fallen victim to some animal which had endeavoured to draw him into its den, and, under this impression, repaired homeward to obtain more assistance, before they would attempt his rescue.”

The Stamford Mercury, 4th June, 1824.

Workmen at York Prison came upon some grusome remains of mortality when the earth sunk beneath them.

Clifford’s Tower

“On Tuesday the 25th ult. the Magistrates of the three ridings held a meeting at the castle of York, at which the subject of enlarging the county prison was again brought under consideration. – Several plans were presented, and all the architects agreed that, in order to make the requisite-improvements in the castle, it would be necessary to purchase some part of Mr Ward’s property, in which the Tower stands. No step was, however, taken but the decision was again postponed. In the mean time the work of excavation under the Tower is being proceeded with, and since the above meeting, as the workmen were employed thirty-two yards from the opening of the aperture, and thirteen yards below the surface of the ground, the earth sunk with them three yards. By this alarming circumstance a most interesting discovery has been made. The earth having been cleared away, several bones and skulls were discovered – the labourers found themselves mining in an ancient cemetary, where the mouldering remains of mortality were scattered around them, and where trophies of triumphant death had been hid many ages. – In raising one of the skulls, and placing a candle near it, a trifling explosion was occasioned by the fixed air which it contained, to the surprise of those who were present. There were also found pieces of half-decayed wood, which had been neatly fastened together with brass rivets, and with oakum* placed between, but whether they were parts of a victor’s chariot, or of a victim’s coffin, we cannot state. The ramains of mortality were mixed with the bones of animals, small branches of trees or bushes, and a sort of earth, which from its appearance, &c. seems to be the decomposed particles of former living subjects. The above were, however, soon cleared away, and below them were found a thick bed of ashes, charcoal, and several pieces of half-consumed wood.” – York Paper.

The Stamford Mercury, 4th June, 1824.

*oakum – tarred flax fibres, used to seal gaps, generally used in ship-building.

Brunel’s great iron ship, the ss Great Britain, then the largest in the world, was launched in 1843. She had a long and varied career: Passenger liner between Britain and the U.S.A, clipper delivering emigrants to Australia, troop ship (Crimean War and Indian Mutiny), cargo ship, and coal store. She returned to Britain in 1970 and serves as a museum in her retirement at Bristol.

“The Great Britain arrives at Cowes on Saturday, having made the passage from the mouth of the Thames in fourteen hours. Previous to getting the ship under weigh, an interesting experiment was made to sink one of the life-boats. It was lowered into the water, and the valves so arranged as to give free ingress and egress to the water. To fill her more rapidly, a number of sailors were sent into her with buckets, and she was soon filled up to that height at which the water flowed out as fast as it was baled in. About thirty men were sent into her to stand on the thwarts, when from the height she still floated out of the water it was very evident that she could, when full of water, sustain from 50 to 60 persons without the probability of her sinking. THe Great Britain is provided with four such boats, two on each quarter, and with one very large similar life-boat on deck, capable of carrying 140 people, besides two wooden loats of 16 each. In all she has boat room for 380 persons.”

The Stamford Mercury, 27th June, 1845.

The ‘gin and water’ brigade were scared out of their wits when a ‘comedian’ threatened them with a pistol at a tavern in Bloomsbury.

“A jolly sort of gentleman, who absorbed at least a tea-spoonful of scotch snuff every minute, and very pompously and syllabiatically, as it were, gave his name John – Stephen – Ward – was charged at Bow-street office on Monday with having frightened every body out of their wits, at the Orange-tree Tavern, Bloomsbury-place, and also taking a pistol from his pocket, declared he would shoot any man who might dareto treat him with disrespect ! There sere several Sunday gentlemen peaceably sipping their gin and water there at the moment, and they were so astonished at the war-like tone of this threat, and the lofty bearing of the threatener, that they deserted their gin and water, and made the best of their way out of the room. Mr. John – Stephen – Ward was graciously pleased to construe their retreat as an act of disrespect; and, agreeably to his threat in that case already made and provided, he sallied forth after them, pistol in hand, to inflict the punishment due. Some of them rushed at once out of the house, but others took refuge in the tap-room – hiding themselves under tables, in clock-cases &c., whilst Mr.-John -Stephen – Ward roved round the room in quest of them (like a lion in his den), and exclaiming continually, ‘Come on, ye cowards! – ye were born in fear, thought ye were got in – England!’ The comely landlady shut herself up in her bar and called for help though the keyhole; the pot-boys anc scullions scampered up stairs into the garret; the gin and water gentlemen trembled in their hiding places; one of them ‘was so frightened that you might have knocked him down with a straw;’ and all was breathless and perspiring terror, when, as good luck would have it – a party of the Bow-street p[atrol, going their rounds by the door, hear several strange noised issuing from the interior of the house, and, instantly going in, they found things in the state above-mentioned. But the ~Bow-street patrol are not so easily terrified` at the sight of a pistol as some people, and one of them disamred Mr. John – Stephen – Ward, in the twinkling of a truncheon; and then it was discovered that the dealy weapon was – not chardged” – neither had it any lock! and these things haveing been fully ascertained, the gin and water gentlemen emerged from their concealment. Mr. John – Stephen – Ward, however, though disarmed was still unquelled, and thundered out the anger of this heart with impetuous volubility, till at length his valour so far got the better of this judgement, that he struck Amsden, the patrol, on the head, and there his achievements ended, for in the next minute, almost, he was under lock and key, in that comfortless cooling-place called a watch-house. – This was the substance of the complaint against him; and, when it was ended, he desired to be heard in his defence; but the poor gentleman was so tipsy that he could not make any, and the Magistrate ordered that he should find bail for the assault.

After the turnkey had removed him, several persons of respectable appearance came forward, and spoke of him as a gentleman of great respectability. They said he was a comedian belonging to the Haymarket company, and that in general he conducted himself with strict propriety, but within these few days he had taken to drinking excessively, and they were of the opinion that something was preying upon his mind. – The Magistrate directed that every species of liquid, except pure water, should be kept from him whilst he remained in custody, and recommended the gentleman to apprise the manager of the theatre of his situation.

The Stamford Mercury, 27th September, 1822.

This ‘garrulous old man’ Mr. Serle, a member of the Peruke Makers‘ Society, was determined to have his day in court when he accused the Stewards of the Society of deserting him and owing him sickness allowance.

“Amusing Varieties of London ‘Justice Business’

Serle V. the Society of Wigmakers.

The Stewards of ‘The Peruke Makers’ Society’ – holden, almost time out of mind, at the Salutation Tavern, in that great wig mart, Tavistock-street, appeared before the Magistrate at Bow-street on Saturday, to answer the complaint of a garrulous old man in a tattered black coat docked to a coatee – one Mr. William Serle, formerly an eminent hairdresser in Bishopsgate-street, member of the Barbers’ Company, &c. &co.

This Mr. Serle, with surprising volubility and most redundant action, alleged, first – that he was once the most toppingest man in the trade; secondly, that one of his sons is a surgeon, and keeps his own charrot; that another of his sons is also a surgeon, and another the first cabinet maker going; thirdly, that he himself spent all his profits, as fast as they came, in bringing his sons to this pass; fourthly, that the success of his sons redered his wife and duaghters so hightoploftical that they turned their backs upon him, the poor old barber, and set up for tip-topping ladies; fifthly, that he, with his own hands, shaved Sir Astley Cooper every monring for thirty years, without missing a single morning, or ever keeping him waiting a single momoent; sixthly that he was one of the oldest members of ‘the Peruque Makers’ Society,’ and had been a constant conttributor to their funds for upwards of forty years; but now that he was old, and worn down to ‘a poor old barber,’ they also wanted to shuffle him off, as his wife and daughter had done; seventhly, that notwithstanding he was so old and worn out, he could still beat any young one among them, for the art of fine hair-dressing was lost, and no artist of the present day know how to handle a ladly’s head, or twirl a gentleman’s toupee; eighthly, and lastly, that being sick, he was entitled to fourteen shillings a week from the Peruke Makers’ Society, and the rascals with a view to make him die off by starvation, wickedly withheld it from him, &co.

The Stewards of the Peruke Maker’s (sic) Society, in reply to all this affirmed that the angry Mr. Serle’s family were most respectable, and allowed him half-a-guinea a week –

‘What’s that to you? What’s that to you?’ cried Mr. Serle, clenching his fist and drawing it behind him, as if about to strike; and a every ‘What’s that to you’ clenching it still harder, till at last he almost screwed himself off the floor with sheer energy as it were.

‘- and would provide for him handsomely,’ continued the Stewards, ‘if he would but conduct himself decently.’ They denied that his family had deserted him, and declared that he had deserted his family, because Mrs. Serle had ‘out-lived his liking,’ and he thought a younger lady more comfortable.

‘What d’ye mean by that, you rascals?’ cried Mr. Serle, again screwing himself up with intense vigour – ‘what d’ye mean by that? – Punish these infamous rascals! Punish them well, your Worship.’

His Worship requested Mr. Serle to be calm; and the Stewards proceeded.

He was, in fact, they said, a very bad old gentleman, and more trouble to every body than any body could imagine; and, finally, they declared that he was not entitled to the sick allowance from his society, because he was not sick –

‘Not sick/ you rascals!’ cried Mr. Serle; ‘not sick! Your Worship, ask ’em if I didn’t slip down and cut my nose? Ask ’em if I didn’t tumble over a stile and sprain my ancle? Ask ’em if I wasn’t put into a foul bed and got the itch? Why, your Worship, Sir Astley Cooper himself can vouch for it! for he gave me a paid of his old shoes for my sprained ancle, and a ticket to the warm bath at Guy’s for the itch. I have got Sir Astley’s old shoes upon my feet now to testify it, your Worship!’

The Stewards, in reply, said the broken nose was a mere nothing; the sprained ancle was all fudge; and as to the itch, it was not a proper condition for the benefits of the box of so orespectable a society as their’s.

‘Surely you will admit the itch to be a sickness, or indisposition sufficient to disqualaify him from following his business?’ asked the Magistrate.

‘Certainly not!’ was the ready reply of the Stewards; whereupon the worthy Magistrate observed that he should be very careful not to be shaved by any member of their society.

Some further debate ensured, but the Stewards remained inexorable. The utmost they would concede was a promise to lay the whole affair before a general assembly of the peruquiers for their decision; and the complaint was ordered by the Magistrate to stand over till the day after – when, if Mr. Serle was not satisfied, he might appear again.”

The Stamford Mercury, 3rd January, 1823.

When rationing was introduced during the second world war, a typical weekly ration per person was 4oz of bacon and ham, other meat one shilling-worth, 4oz of butter, 4oz of loose tea, 8 oz of sugar, 1 oz of cheese and 8 oz preserves per month. Rationing finally came to an end in 1954.

“Rationing in Lincolnshire and Rutland, with all other parts of the country, started on Monday, this giving every, woman and child an opportunity to contribute to victory.

It has frequently been asserted that the result of the last war depended more upon food than upon fighting. So it may be again, and it is a vital part of our defence that everyone should make a contribution as nearly equal as wide differences of circumstances permit. The great enemy is waste. It occurs in too many directions. Far too much valuable food is placed in the dust bins every day.

Waste of opportunity is as indefensible as waste of supplies. Substitute foods are not necessarily second-rate, for habit plays a large part in the routine of feeding. The necessities of war encourage a more imaginative and wider search for satisfactory alternative foods and the result may be neither lacking in nutritive value nor attractiveness. The housewife’s contribution ought to be no more than complementary to the husband’s for the ‘dig for victory’ campaign is intimately associated with the success of the rationing scheme.

Waste of good land is an [sic] unpatriotic as is the waste of good food. There is a moral obligation on all gardeners in time of war to see that concern for the edible had precedent over care for the merely ornamental. Cultivation of allotments and the transformation of garden into food-producing units had hardly begun. An opportunity to help the war lies in the hand of everyone who possesses a garden.

Mr. W. S. Morrison’s * assurance that we have all the food we need is qualified by the unpredictable uncertainties of the war. Importation of foodstuffs must go on or starvatiion would not be far away. There is no fear that enemy action will produce that situation, but every effort will be put forward to get as near to it as possible. The most practical method of showing appreciation of the magnificent work of the men of the Merchant Navy is to support the food-rationing scheme so that they may be spared from unnecessarily having to face the hazards of the war at sea.”

The Stamford Mercury, 12th January, 1940.

*Minister of Food.

Elizabeth Longfoot was murdered at 4 o’clock in the morning of Tuesday, 6^th March, 1838.  She was an eccentric woman in her forties who lived alone at Easton-on-the-Hill.  Her home had been broken into and there was evidence that items were missing.  Local Magistrates met to consider the cause and circumstances of her death and a number of people were interviewed and held as suspects.  On the 19^th March, 1838, the Coroner recorded his verdict of wilful murder by person or persons unknown.  At this time, because of the need for expert help, the Bow Street runners in London were contacted and one officer, Henry Goddard, travelled overnight to supervise the investigation.  Of the suspects, three were charged: John Stansor, John Archer and Richard Woodward.  The four other suspects were released.

In the meantime, Stansor had absconded and Goddard set up a search and pursuit whilst the other two were held in custody.  Stansor was eventually found in the Huntingdon area on 4^th April, 1838 and was returned to custody. On 14^th May, 1838, the Magistrates committed Stansor, Archer and Woodward to the Northampton Assizes on a charge of murder.  At this point, John Stansor offered to turn Queen’s Evidence against the other two in return for leniency.  Goddard said it was not in his gift to do such a deal and there is no trace of how the final agreement was arrived at.  However, court papers for the first hearing describe Archer and Woodward, as accused and Stansor as “an approver”.

[An approver is a person involved in a crime but at a later stage confesses and offers to serve as a witness for the prosecution in return for a reduced punishment or even a pardon.]

The potential punishment for this crime could have been either hanging or transportation.  The three prisoners were then incarcerated in separate prisons to avoid any conspiracy.

The trial was set for the summer assizes at Northampton for 17^th July, 1838.  However, two key witnesses William Read, the Stamford Constable and Mr. Farrer, the Magistrates’ clerk had an accident whilst driving to court and both were injured. As a result, the trial was put back to the next assizes.  In fact, the case was not heard at the next assizes and were finally set for the Lent assizes on 4^th March, 1839, before Lord Denman.

The trial, which is well-documented in the attached account, took all day.  Woodward and Archer appeared as defendants and Stansor attended to give evidence for the prosecution, in the course of which he said that he had also been charged with the murder.  The prosecution appears to have relied entirely on Stansor’s deposition to carry the verdict.  However, a rigorous defence claimed that Stansor alone has been the murderer and had implicated the other two as part of a means of avoiding punishment.  Late in the evening the Jury in consultation for a very short time found both prisoners not guilty.  The verdict caused surprise and astonishment to the Judge, but he was obliged to acquit them.  The court record confirms their acquittal, but does not say what happened to Stansor, who remained cited as the accuser. 

There is no record of John Stansor being tried on his own account at either Northampton Assizes or the Old Bailey.  He does not appear on any criminal listings of the time and is certainly not on the register of deportations for that year.  We must assume, therefore, that his plea-bargaining had succeeded and that he also was acquitted.

After the trial, Woodward and Archer returned to Easton-on-the-Hill where the infuriated inhabitants called to an assembly by the “the call of a drum” and attacked Archer’s house, destroying his furniture and other property.  Woodwards’ property was subjected to similar treatment. During this riot, which did not calm down until midnight, the villagers were unable to find either Archer or Woodward, who had, presumably, fled.

John Stansor did not return.  He lived with his sister who was not implicated in the murder and thus, her property remined unscathed.

What happened to these three men?  A search of the 1841 census shows no trace of Richard Woodward or John Stansor.  A possible John Archer appears to be living in Ryhall and has married one Hannah Parker.  If this is indeed him, he is shown as dying in the county asylum in 1880.

However, purely by chance, in the gossip column of the Leicestershire Mercury, dated 20^th April, 1839, is an entry which records that “John Stansor the self-convicted Easton murderer is at work on the Midland Counties Railway at Knighton Hill, near Leicester.  Owing to the disclosures he made respecting this foul dead of blood and to his having been the mean of transporting several of his former companions for various robberies, he has been compelled to fly from Easton, his life not being safe and is now passing under an assumed name.”  The assumed name is not given.

Was justice done?  Certainly not for Elizabeth Longfoot.

Archer and Woodward were tried by due process and clearly, due to the lack of determination by the prosecutor, were found not guilty, despite the evidence.

John Stansor, who admitted to robbery, but not to murder, effectively got away with it by plea-bargaining.  It is worth noting that he had already served three months for larceny in 1834 before Lincoln Assizes and was described in several accounts as a known petty criminal, mainly for poaching.

Here are our previous posts about this

Blood on their Hands (29th March, 2022)

Easton Murder Latest (5th April, 2022)

Labourers from Easton Charged (26th April, 2022)

Justice for the Deceased (10th May, 2022)