Author: PA

Leicester Townhall, 29 August 1837: “The Man of Ross” called to pay his ale-score

“BUT all our praises why should lords engross?” asked poet Alexander Pope in 1732 before putting forward the case for John Kyrle (1637-1724) as a non-aristocrat who had made a memorable impact during his lifetime. Kyrle had dedicated time, expertise and a good deal of money into his philanthropic efforts on behalf of Ross-on-Wye, the town where he lived. For this he became known as the “Man of Ross”, celebrated not just in verse, but also in popular culture, with a pub carrying that name in the town.

Over one hundred years later there was evidence that his fame was still recalled when his name was alluded to in the Small Debts Court held in the Leicester Guild Hall. The reporters who wrote up the cases in the Small Debts Court, held on Saturdays and dealing with less than life and death issues, tend to adopt a more informal writing style. the defendant, Ross, is frankly described as ‘a blunt customer’, while the landlady, Mrs. Colton, is described as intervening in a way ‘less conciliatory than her spouse,  and in her heat, forgetful of the character of her house’.

The case was brought by a beer-house keeper called Colton who was chasing a £5 debt owed by Shearsby wool-comber Samuel Ross. Colton had brought the amount of the debt down to £5 so as qualify for the attention of the Small Debts Court after Ross (he claimed) had stood surety for his drinking companions who had spent the whole day drinking at Colton’s House.

Ross countered that while he might, as he put it, have “passed his word” for a pint or two of ale for a friend, but that he had not been present for a good part of that day and had not intended for the publican to carry on the supply of beer until two in the morning at his expense. One of Ross’s companions that day, another wool-comber, explained that they had been attending a village wake held about eleven miles from Leicester. They had spent the day drinking and gambling, as was their habit, but that it was unfair for the whole charge to fall onto Ross.

The Commissioner asked if the witness would admit to any share in the ale included in the bill. Somewhat reluctantly, he agreed to having drunk his portion with the rest.

Colton tried to coax payment out of Ross with friendly phrases: “Come, come! Ross is an honourable name, Sam: the ‘man of Ross,’ you know”. Sam Ross replied: “Honourable name, indeed! Are you to fix this debt upon me because they call me Sam Ross? If that is to stand good, an honourable name would be the ruin of a man.” His view was that the landlord had trusted the men doing the drinking and should have looked  to them for payment.

Mrs Colton, the landlady, was roused by this response: “Looked to them for the money! was it likely that we would trust such a set of scoundrels , without some security?”

The witness brought in by Ross, joined in: “Why, mistress, you encouraged the scoundrels, as you call them, to drink your ale when Sam and your husband were at the Shearsby feast; and they got so drunk in the house, that they began to fight with the poker and tongs”.

The Commissioners found in Colton’s favour, but fixed the re-payments in monthly 10s installments. They took the opportunity to express their opinion of the reprehensible conduct of the landlord: there did, after all, appear to have been a good deal of Sunday drinking on his premises. Ross said that it was hard on him to have to pay the bill for a score of drinkers, most of whom had left town and would not be seen again. The Commissioners told him that at least he would have the assistance of his witness, who had admitted to swelling the bill with his share of the drinking.

SMALL DEBTS COURT, TOWNHALL, AUG. 29.
The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, September 02, 1837

Pope, Alexander (1732) The Man of Ross [Online] http://www.poetryatlas.com/poetry/poem/2833/the-man-of-ross.html [accessed 13 April 2017]

© 2017

Shearsby, Saturday 17 April 1841: Riot and attempt to rescue a prisoner

John Pallett, the constable for Shearsby in 1841 brought a case to the Lutterworth Petty Sessions on Thursday 6 May, charging James Pawley, William Coleman, Mary Harris and Mary Allen with creating a riot and attempting to rescue a prisoner from his custody.

The previous Saturday he had been at the same court to see Sarah Whitmore committed to a House of correction for three months as a rogue and a vagabond. John Pallett, along with the other two village constables, Richard Messenger and John Wilde, had described her as a woman of loose character,  convicted before as a disorderly person who had left her illegitimate children chargeable to the parish.

On arriving back at Shearsby the constables and their charge had stopped off at a public house. The first such house on their route back from Lutterworth would have been at the Baths, a couple of fields before the village itself. It was during this break that Whitmore requested to be allowed “to retire a few minutes”. Pallett granted this request, but, after some time had elapsed and she had not come back, he went in search of the prisoner and found that she had escaped through the back of the premises. She could just be spotted heading down the street in the company of James Pawley.

John Pallett roused the other two constables and they set off in pursuit, soon re-capturing the escapee. But by now others had gathered around her. the constables described ‘a mob’ which followed the party through some fields until they arrived at a stile where a scuffle broke out and Pallett was struck by William Coleman. The constables were able to carry on into the town street in the village itself, but were followed by the mob, who used exceedingly bad language and were throwing stones (and ‘etc’). One stone thrown by Mary Harris struck John Pallett on the shoulder. Mary Allen and James Pawley were present and encouraging the mob but did not use violence themselves.

William Coleman and Mary Harris were convicted and charged 15s. 3d. each in penalty and costs while James Pawley and Mary Allen were acquitted.

In the 1841 census, James Pawley (30) was found in Hill Street a few doors up from Mary Harris (51). John Pallett (25) was a blacksmith and living on Mill Street. Mary Allen (22) lived in Mill Street. Richard Messenger (25) was a farmer living in Church Street.

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, April 24, 1841

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, May 15, 1841

“England Births and Christenings, 1538-1975,” database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:NPC8-YBM : 6 December 2014), Sarah Whitmore, 23 Mar 1806; citing SHEARSBY, LEICESTER, ENGLAND, reference ; FHL microfilm 595,767

© 2017

Shearsby, 3 December 1836: Fatal accident at Mill

There is a gravestone in the Shearsby churchyard in memory of young Thomas  Weston, catched up in the mill back on the 8th September 1782. But he was not the only victim of industrial accidents at the village windmill.

On Friday 2 December 1836, the 61 year old miller,  John Wylde, was on the steps of his mill and about to enter when the door blew suddenly back and threw him to the ground. His injuries included a broken collar bone and several ribs, leaving him barely able to crawl to a neighbouring shed. It was a full three hours later when he was found there by his son. Medical aid was immediately called, but the unfortunate miller died on the Saturday morning.

The work of running the mill was carried on for a time by the son,  John Wylde, but by June the next year he was hoping to pass on the mill to new owners. The autioneers, S. Horton of Mowsley, called anyone interested to the New Inn at Shearsby on Friday 23rd June at 4 o’clock to bid for the windmill, the brick roundhouse underneath it and the surrounding grounds, estimated at one rood, or thereabouts. The mill was described as being in good repair and the business in full trade.

In December 1837 some of the household furniture, brewing vessels and carts belonging to the late Mr. Wylde were auctioned off, along with some hay and the use of some rented grass-keeping land.

It is not clear how successful these auctions were, however, as in June 1841 John Wylde was noted as a miller and living on Mill Street.

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, December 10, 1836

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, June 10, 1837; pg. [1]

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, December 09, 1837

© 2017

Shearsby, Tuesday 25 August 1840: Disgraceful attack on four Irish labourers

Trouble was already brewing between the resident agricultural labourers of Shearsby and the visiting Irish by the late Summer of 1840. On Thursday 20 August Thomas Wilson brought a case before the Lutterworth Petty Sessions asking the magistrates to bind some unnamed defendants to ‘keep the peace to all Irishmen that might come to England’.

The following week the magistrate J. A. Arnold, Esq., then presiding over the Lutterworth Petty Sessions, heard that this peace had been already broken in what was reported as a disgraceful attack upon four Irish labourers.

It was Andrew Wilson, a Shearsby farmer, who made the complaint against John Elliott and Thomas Botterill for willfully and maliciously breaking two of his barn doors and two gates. Despite the prejudice perceived to have existed for some time among the local labourers against Irish reapers, Wilson had allowed four reapers to sleep in his barn about half a mile away from his house. One of this group, Thomas Hands, stated that he had been awakened at sometime in the night by several people calling out “Are there any Irishmen here?” and demanding admittance. but the Irishmen refused to open the doors “till they had lost their lives”. At this the defendants said that they should lose their lives then and began a violent attack on the barn doors. Finding that they could not force open the doors they ran to the nearby field gates and broke them down so that they could use the bars as levers. They managed to lift the lower parts of the doors from their hinges and tried again to enter, but were repulsed by the Irish inside, one on each side of the door and armed with forks.

Foiled in this attack, they then began to throw stones at the barn and kept this up for three to four hours, accompanied with the uttering of dreadful threats. Negotiation was their next ploy: “they called to the Irish and told them they were their own masters, and if they would come out they (defendants) would see them safe four miles along the Leicester road, and if they would promise not to come back to this part of the country again no harm should be done to them”. The Irish replied that they just wanted a night’s sleep and would go elsewhere of their own accord next morning and never come back, but that they would not come out of the barn just then, for fear their lives would be sacrificed.

At that point the Rapid coach came by, placing this whole incident somewhere along the Turnpike Road from Leicester to Welford (and onward south to London, about 80 miles south). The besieged Irish called out to the passengers for assistance and at this their attackers disappeared. The Irishmen then made it safely to the house of Mr. Wilson, reaching him a three in the morning.

It was 20 year old Thomas Wilson who was roused and had to deal with the disturbance. He listened to Hands and his account of what had happened and then went with the Irishmen back into the village. There they were able to identify John Elliott and Thomas Botterill, and to the best of Hands’ belief: Samuel Dyson, Daniel Billingham, Robert Wesson and Richard Simons.

At the Petty Sessions, William Fretter said that all of that group had been in his house that night and had drunk a good quantity of beer (which he had needed to bring over especially from Gilmorton, three miles away). When had they left at nine o’clock, he described them as ‘rather mellow’.

Mr. Marsh, the solicitor defending John Elliott and Thomas Botterill, called George Billingham. Elliott had been in his company at Fretter’s until nine o’clock, after which they had returned to the Shearsby, but had not passed within 150 yards of the barn in question. When they reached the village they had gone to Botterill’s house and stayed there until sometime between 11 and 12, after which he had gone home. Mary Billingham corroborated his statement and Jane Botterill, Thomas’ wife, swore that her husband had gone to bed when Elliott left, not leaving the house again until he went to work the next day.

The magistrate was unimpressed by these alibis and fined Elliott and Botterill £1. 7s. 6d., adding that he thought it was a most disgraceful assault. The Shearsby labourers involved do not come out of this story looking well. The trigger for their actions had been the presence of Irish reapers in a largely sheep-grazing parish (and consequently few opportunities for supplementary wages at harvest tine) to which alcoholic beverages had been copiously added. However, framework knitters work long hours and need their wits about them to avoid losing fingers to their machines. Their drinking during the working week may be an indicator of the effects of the economic downturn of the 1840’s, making them workless and wageless knitters.

Thomas Willson was the son of Andrew and Alice Willson and was christened on 3 January 1819 at Shearsby. In the 1841 Census he was found in Knaptoft Fields with his parents and siblings: Arthur, Eliza and Cornelia. Andrew Wilson (christened 1 January 1778 at Shearsby) had married Alice Waples of Husbands Bosworth on 31 Oct 1816.

In the same 1841 Census there was a 60-year-old Thomas Botterill, working as a carrier, in the first house surveyed in Church Street,  Shearsby. John Elliott was recorded as a 25-year-old butcher living in Hill Street, next door to Richard Simons, a 28-year-old Stocking Frame Knitter. Samuel Dyson (25, Agricultural labourer) lived farther up Hill Street. A 3-year-old Eliza Billingham was staying in the house that day, indicating a Dyson-Billingham connection. In fact Daniel Billingham had married a Mary Dyson in Shearsby on 30 January 1837. Robert Weston (28) was recorded living in Mill Street with a wife and two children and working as a Stocking Frame Knitter. There was a William Fretter born in 1814 in Mowsley, something that again points to the action taking place uphill from the village of Shearsby.

The Monthly Chronicle commented later in 1840 that “A greater importation of Irish labourers has taken place this year for the harvest than the oldest inhabitant of Liverpool can remember, in expectation of gaining employment in the Northern, Midland and Southern districts. In this, however, they have been egregiously disappointed… we have seen scores of these poor fellows with blistered feet and scarcely able to crawl… not having obtained a single day’s work in Lancashire, Nottinghamshire or Leicestershire, through all which counties they had in vain ‘padded the hoof’.

Leicestershire Mercury (Leicester, England), Saturday, August 29, 1840; pg. 3

Coventry Standard (Coventry, England), Friday, September 4, 1840

Image taken from page 155 of ‘Sunlight and Shade. Being poems and pictures of life and nature. Illustrations by F. Barnard, etc

© 2017. On the original WordPress site publishing this post you can encourage the author by ‘liking’ any post you found interesting.

Shearsby lane, Saturday 30 April 1842: As much or more right to the land

Thomas Read (junior), Samuel Robinson and Jane Botterill were brought before the magistrates at the County Office, on 30 April 1842, charged with committing wilful damage on certain property in Shearsby-lane, belonging to Mr. John Clarke. Just who owned the waste land along the lane was disputed between the defendants, and others who had laid out gardens there, and Mr. Clarke of Peatling Hall. When Mr. Clarke’s men disturbed the gardens and began building a wall the Shearsby residents reacted by pulling it down and throwing the bricks down a nearby well.

The bench (W. Heyrick, J. King and J. Grundy, Esqrs., and the Rev. J.P. Newby) considered that in this case they had no power to adjudicate, being limited by legislation passed in the 24th section of an act passed in the 7th and 8th years of George IV. The defendants had committed the damage under the fair and reasonable supposition that they had as much or more right to the land than Mr. Clarke. A further charge of assault was also dropped against them as it arose from the same incident and it appeared that an unnecessary degree of violence had not been used.

A similar incident had been dealt with a week or two back involving land on the Belgrave lane.

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, May 07, 1842; pg. [1];
© 2017

County Office, 6 May 1843: Frightening away the fowls

Thomas Marvin, of Shearsby, was charged by Wm. Peberdy with shooting at his (complainant’s) fowls, because they had trespassed in defendant’s garden, and at such a short distance from his (complainant’s ) house, that some of the shots struck the window:- this made complainant afraid lest, on some future occasion, serious injury might be done to his family. There appeared to be no intention on defendant’s part to do anything more than frighten away the fowls, which had done much injury to his garden; and after being warned that he much not thus take the law into his own hands, the case was dismissed on defendant promising to offend so no more and paying the costs.

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, May 13, 1843; pg. [1];

In 1841 there was a 50-year old butcher named Thomas Marvin living on what looks like ‘By the post lane‘ in Sheasrsby. He lived with his wife May and children Thomas, George, Elizabeth and Hannah. Neither of his immediate neighbours, however, were called Peberdy. It is not until several Census pages later that a William Peberdy appears living in Carts Court. He is there listed as a 45-year old agricultural labourer, along with his wife Elizabeth and children Jane, Robert, Thomas, Sophiah, Haphzabah, Marriah and Amos. Neither of these addresses are likely to be recognisable to 21st Century residents of Shearsby, but if people were living at the same locations at the times of the Census and this newspaper story, then they could be no more than the range of a shotgun apart.

Image taken from page 136 of ‘Histoire de Sornéville en Lorraine et de Jean Aubry, capitaine de grenadiers, sous l’Ancien Régime

Broughton Astley, Monday 29 August 1870: Return cricket match against Shearsby

In the same issue of the Leicester Chronicle, Saturday 10 September 1870, that brought back first hand accounts of the defeat of the French army in their fight against the invading Germans, came the report of the smaller-scale sporting content between Shearsby and Broughton Astley. “This is living in a crisis with a vengeance”, reported the Chronicle’s Special Correspondent in Paris “On the Boulevards the mob formed into bodies, and ‘trooped’ down to the French House of Commons, crying out ‘Decheance’ which means deposition, and being applied to the Imperial Dynasty might be politely interpreted, ‘kick them out’.”

The cricket scores, meanwhile, were reported in a plainer, matter-of-fact style, with just of table of runs scored and how each lost their wicket. The team from Shearsby had won by 58 runs after the first innings. The difference could be almost all credited to A.Buswell, the opening batsman for Shearsby who passed the half century mark before being caught out by Broughton Astley’s own opening batsman T. Bird at 57. P. Ringrose, meanwhile, added 15 to the total but was bowled out by J. Flint. W. Read, junior totted up the next highest score at 19 before he was caught out by Stevens, the Broughton Astley bowler. Shearsby’s other players, J. Preston 5; W. Preston 1; F. Herbert 17; J. Root 6; T. Bodycott 1; T. Read 8 and W. Read, senior 0 brought the total for the first innings up to 142.

In reply Broughton Astley started poorly with T. Bird out l.b.w at 18, J. Flint bowled by W. Read, jun. for 5 and C. Coltman hitting his own wicket at 4. W. Read, junior’s bowling accounted for w. Holyoak 26; J. Sneath 2 and P. Read 0. W. Read sen. redeemed his duck by bowling W. Pegg out for 0. T. Severns third highest score of 15, caught by F. Herbert was not high enough to raise the total about 84. There was a Second Innings for Shearsby with a further 56 runs, but Broughton were soundly defeated in this game.

Checking through the households surveyed during the 1871 census finds William Read, a 24-year-old fellmonger living in the High Street, and Thomas Read (22) a fellmonger living in Back Street. Thomas was the son of John Read, noted in the census as being a fellmonger and grazier of 32 acres and employing 17 men and 1 boy.

The Shearsby team included players from outside the village like John Preston and his son William, both cordwainers from nearby Kilby.  John Preston was the father of the Mary  Preston (1845-) who married Stephen Clowes from Shearsby. Their son John William Preston Clowes born on 31 July 1866 in Philadelphia, was living in Shearsby with his grandparents in 1871. He developed his sporting interests whilst working in a factory in the Yorkshire town of Halifax and went on to play for the town and the county at Rugby. In 1888 he was selected for the Pan-Britannic team touring Australia and New Zealand. There is more to be said about jack Clowes and his involvement in this pioneering international rugby tour.

The cricket match played in Broughton Astley back in August 1870 is evidence of the role organised sport played in the lives of his parent’s generation, and may have influenced him in taking up his involvement in organised rugby at town, county and national level.

Leicester Chronicle and the Leicestershire Mercury (Leicester, England), Saturday, September 10, 1870; pg. 3

© 2017. This page is protected by copyright and should not be re-published electronically without the author’s permission.

Shearsby, 8 May 1834: Accident while driving thrashing machine

Image: By Unknown (Dictionnaire d’arts industriels) [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons. Threshing machine from 1881 with few safety features present.

ACCIDENT. – On Thursday 8th instant, Mr. Goode, a respectable farmer of Shearsby, met with a serious accident from a thrashing machine which he was using on his premises. Whilst in the act of driving, his foot unfortunately slipped, and came into contact with the horse-wheel, and was so dreadfully mutilated as to render amputation necessary. Owing to the skill and attention of the surgeon, Mr. Colston, of Husbands Bosworth, the case is going on well. – It would be desirable, we think, that machines should be so far enclosed as to prevent such accidents.

From: The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, May 17, 1834;

In the 1841 Census there was a farmer living in Back Street named John Goode. He lived with his wife Mary;  children Richard, Susannah and Caroline; a female servant named Maria Elkington and Hannah Read’s son Emmanuel. Emmanuel was working as a chimney sweep, where perhaps his youth, at age 15, would be an advantage to him.

‘Contact with machinery’ is still regarded as cause of both fatal and non-fatal injuries in agricultural settings.

Health and Safety Executive, Farmwise: Your essential guide to health and safety in agriculture  2nd ed. ISBN 97807176 65792 [online]

© 2017. This page is best viewed on the WordPress site on which it was written. That way the author gets to see that someone has read some of the stories, and it is kind of encouraging, you know.

Leicester, 10 March 1838: The Triplets and the Imposter

“IMPOSITION EXTRAORDINARY. – The wife of Thomas Weston, of Shearsby, having lately presented to her liege lord three children at one birth, a sad Saddington butcher, named John Peberdy, resolved to profit by the “dispensation”, however hardly it might bear upon the husband of the prolific lady; and forthwith he came to Leicester, and canvassed the pockets of the charitable as “the father of the three children born at Shearsby!” He is a dark-complexioned man, wears crape on his hat; and is dressed in a black waistcoat, and a light coat.”

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, March 10, 1838

The imposter, John Peberdy was, perhaps relying on his victims remembering an earlier report in the newspaper about the wife of a poor man named Weston being delivered of three children back in February. All the children, with the mother, were reported to be doing ‘as well as can be expected’. The newspaper had hoped that “her benevolent neighbours will bestow that assistance that her situation requires”.

On 7 June 1841 the census taker found Thomas and Elizabeth Weston residing in Crown Bank, Shearsby with children Thomas (6), William (4) and Charles (2). William was the surviving member of the triplets born three years previously. Thomas had something in common with his rival, John Perberdy, in that they were both butchers. A further link can be found in man living next door at the Crown Public House and working for Thomas’s father, also Thomas Weston. This was Thomas Peberdy (15), who could well have been the child christened in Saddington on 29 August 1827 and the son of John Peberdy.

Back in the 1830s, when faced with fraudulent claims of this kind the towns-folk of Leicester and villagers of Shearsby did not withdraw their compassion or look to technological solutions to protect themselves. Rather it was with a sense of community that they shared details of who to watch out for, down to the detail of the crape ribbon in the hat, so that no-one would be taken in unawares.

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, February 03, 1838

“England and Wales Census, 1851,” database with images, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:SGFK-H7F : 24 July 2016), Thomas Weston, Knaptoft, Leicestershire, England; citing Knaptoft, Leicestershire, England, p. 7, from “1851 England, Scotland and Wales census,” database and images, findmypast (http://www.findmypast.com : n.d.); citing PRO HO 107, The National Archives of the UK, Kew, Surrey.

© 2017. This page is protected by copyright. In UK law a ‘©’ symbol is not needed: a ‘fixed’, e.g. written and published work is protected from the start

Leicester Exchange, 1 November 1834: Thomas Ross takes on the Truck System. Part 3

Court reporter: Regular readers may remember that Thomas Ross, a woolcomber from Shearsby, has appeared before at the Leicester Petty Sessions. His first appearance however did not go well and is perhaps best passed over. The next week he came again and soberly explained his case against his employer, who, it is alleged, was paying his wages partly in coin and partly by sending goods to him. There has been recent legislation passed by the Legislature (The Truck Act of 1831) again outlawing this practice. It is worth keeping in mind that there are two Mr B’s involved in this case: Mr Bankart, who owns the factory and Mr Barsby, his overseer, whose wife owns the shop at which the goods are purchased.

Today’s hearing is before Alderman Cook and Alderman Brown, with Mr. Macauley representing the defendant.

Alderman Cook: Mr Macauley, how do you wish to proceed in answering the charges against Mr Bankart that we heard last week?

Mr. Colin Campbell Macauley: There were one or two objections that I had thought of taking, but I would rather have the case heard on its merits.

Court reporter: Thomas Ross put forward several circumstances concerned with his employment at Mr S.T. Bankart’s factory. He said he had often complained that the provisions he had to purchase were dear, but was never told that he need not go to Barsby’s shop. In fact he was told that he must go there and knew he would get no further work if he did not. On the 18th of October he was due 8s. 4 1/2 d. but the carrier only brought a few pence to him: 7s. 10 1/2d. had been stopped in payment of a bill due to Barsby for goods.

This is the charge against the defendant.

C.C. Macauley: The case has not been made out. My client is charged with paying wages in goods, whereas the only evidence given was that the witness’s wages have not been paid at all. They have been stopped in payment of a debt to the agent through whose hands they have passed.

Town Clerk: I agree: Ross would be better off entering a summons for non-payment of wages. The case should not go forward.

C.C. Macauley: I have no sinister object in stopping this inquiry. The facts are that Mrs Barsby had carried on the shop in Market Street before he had married her, and that the defendant, Mr Bankart had never had an interest in the shop. If Barsby sent goods to Shearsby for Ross that would save him the trip to Leicester and be altogether to Ross’s convenience.

Town Clerk: Such a practice could clearly be injurious to the men working for you, Mr. Bankart. If you are aware of any influence exerted over your men to purchase their goods at Barsby’ shop, then you are morally, if not legally, guilty of a practice which the Legislature intends to abolish. You ought to free your men from any such influence. It makes no odds whether you personally have an interest in Barsby’s shop.

Mr. Samuel T. Bankart: I was not aware that anything like that was going on at my factory.

Town Clerk: Now that you do know, you must exert your power to stop it.

C.C. Macauley: You are, no doubt, aware that Ross has been turned out of employment for embezzling worsted, but my client would re-employ him if he comes to reside in Leicester, where he can keep an eye on him.

Ross:  That charge has to be proved.

Alderman Cook: You had conversation with Mr Bankart respecting the goods?

Ross: Yes.

Alderamn Cook: That contradicts Mr Bankart’s statement.

Town Clerk: Oh, the man’s word is not to be taken in contradiction of Mr. Bankart’s.

Ross: I’ve repeatedly been told by Mr Bankart that I must have the goods or go without work.

Mr Bankart: That is untrue, I never had a word with him on that subject.

C.C. Macauley: Mr Bankart had no knowledge of Ross’s dealings with Barsby. In fact you could say that Barsby was doing Ross a kindness.

Town Clerk: The kindness, I dare say, was not all on one side.

C.C. Macauley: Barsby trusted him for goods whether he had work or not.

Alderman Cook: I think it would be helpful to hear from other witnesses at this point, especially the Shearsby carrier.

Town Clerk: In my opinion it would be very desirable that Mr. Bankart should take care that his men are not under any compulsion to go to Barsby’s shop. I can’t help thinking that Mr. Bankart knows more than he is saying about the extent to which this sort of thing occurs, and therefore it may be as well to hear further evidence.

Webster [the Shearsby carrier]: Well, yes, I generally took a written list of the things Ross wanted to Barsby’s shop, though sometimes I was charged with a verbal order only. But I don’t deliver Ross’s work. I only take it as far as the Little Crown and a boy takes it on from there. I do recall Ross complaining to me about being overcharged for the goods.

Alderman Cook: Mr. Barsby, what to do have to say in response to Ross’s assertion that he must take goods from your shop or get no work himself?

Mr Barsby: I know of men who have worked two years or more for Mr. Bankart who have never stepped through the door of my shop.

Alderman Cook: You have brought one of these men with you, I take it?

Mr. Barsby: No.

C.C. Macauley: It would have seemed very unlikely that any such evidence would have been necessary.

Town Clerk: Mr. Bankart, I must say again that it is very important that you take care to see your men are paid their wages in money and are left at liberty to spend it were they choose.

C.C. Macauley: You say that, but we have heard here that Ross has been discharged from his employment for embezzlement. In consequence he has immediately gone to the Avenger of all Wrongs: Mr. Moses Pegg.

Court: Laughter.

Alderman Cook: That seems hardly consistent with the statement that Mr. Bankart is willing to employ him if he comes to reside in Leicester.

Alderman Brown: Alderman Cook, I think you will agree with me that Mr. Macauley is in danger of failing to keep his promise to rest his defence solely on the merits of the case, and is relying instead on procedural failings.

C.C. Macauley: I have no wish to take advantage of any informalities in the case being raised, but can hardly be blamed when the case is failing for lack of evidence. The charge was that wages have been paid in goods, of which no proof has been given. The only fact given in evidence is that a certain amount of the wages has not been paid, but has been detained by an agent in discharge of a debt. The case falls then, not on any informality in the way it is put, but for want of proof.

Alderman Cook: The case is dismissed, for lack of evidence to support it.

Ross: What about my wages?

Court reporter: Ross was told that he could demand the wages due to him up to the 18th of October. Shortly afterwards he came back to the court seeking a summons saying that Mr Bankart has refused to pay him.  But he was sent off by Alderman Cook who said Mr. Bankart was not expected to pay him on the spot and that he must apply at the counting-house as usual.

The Leicester Chronicle: or, Commercial and Agricultural Advertiser (Leicester, England), Saturday, November 08, 1834