Mar 24th – The recruiting business still goes on briskly at Oldham. Sergeant Scholes and Hammond with a sergeant of Col. Hewets, beat up this day. April 1st – Last week Abraham Jackson, commonly called Standring, John Schofield, both of Northmoor, and Samuel Ogden, of Oldham, enlisted in the 99th regiment of foot. April 1st – Last week at Middleton 20 men enlisted into the different coars, 18 of whom were sworn in. April 6th – One James Mayall, of Lees, dropped down dead while attending divine service in Oldham Chapel. April 7th – Jonathan Cheetham, overseer of Oldham, relieved upwards of seventy wives whose husbands are at this time soldiers. Perhaps this is more than could be said of many other Lancashire towns. No doubt the number of young unmarried men who had enlisted would be much greater than seventy. Prentice says:- “Proof of discontent there was and proof of poverty, but greater proof of the prevalence of a pestilent war spirit. The men who enlisted might be partly out of employment from the depression of trade, but at the same time they were persuaded that the country required their services, and that to fight the French was the highest patriotism.” ANNALS OF OLDHAM No. XVI 1794 – (continued) April 12th – George Rowbottom listed into M. G. Balfours regiment of foot. April 12th – Colonel Beaumont, light horse, consisting of 50 men marched through Oldham on their way to Beverley. April 13th – Robert Ogden, boxmaker, Oldham, died. On the 31st of March, assizes opened at Lancaster, when Joseph Lees was acquitted, and Joseph Garlick was transported for 7 years. Likewise at the above assizes, the trial of Mr. Walker and others, he was honourably acquitted. Dunn the evidence was committed for perjury. April 18th – This week Thomas Shalcross (blacksmith, Oldham), Robert Crompton, and James Newton, of Top-o’th-Moor, enlisted into the Yorkshire Rangers. April 2nd – James Buckely sworn into M. G. Balfours regiment of foot. April 21st – Being Easter Monday, a match at football was played at North Moor, between the batchelors and married, which was won by the latter.
|
Football seems to have been a favourite pastime in Oldham from an early period. I heard an old gentleman, who was born before this time (1794), say that he used to play football at long distances, the goals being fixed at Lees on the one hand, and at Middleton on the other, some five miles apart. The following note by G. A. S. in the “Illustrated London News” for March 19th, 1887, will no doubt be read with interest:- “Have I not read somewhere that the priests of Apollo used once a year to kick about a leathern ball which was made from the skin of Marsyas?” Balls have been kicked about innumerable times since the days of the flayed musician just mentioned. But strange to relate the game has been repeatedly prohibited by public authority. In 1349 Edward III forbade football, in consequence of its tendency to impede the progress of archery. While James I, in his Basilicon Doron, writes: “From this Court I debar all rough and violent exercises as the football, meeter for lameing than making able the uses thereof.” But the British Solomon was such a pedant and so prejudiced. He liked football no better than he did pork, tobacco, and the fish called ling. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth, football was not only forbidden, but was punishable by law. In the 18th year of the Virgin Queen there was found at the Middlesex Sessions, a true bill against sixteen persons, husbandmen, yeomen, artificers, and the like, with unknown malefactors, to the number of 100, who assembled themselves unlawfully, and played a certain unlawful game called football, by reason of which unlawful game there rose amongst them a great affray, likely to result in homicides and fatal accidents. Finally I find that in the 25th year of Elizabeth’s reign, there was a coroner’s inquest at Southemyms, on the body of Roger Ludforth, yeoman. It was shown that the deceased, with one Nicholas Martyn, and one Richard Turvey, were playing football in a field, when Ludford ran towards the ball with the intention at kicking it, whereupon Nicholas Martyn cum cubiti! dextri brachii sui (with the elbow of his right arm) struck Ludford on the forepart of his body, under the breast, giving him a mortal blow and concussion of which he died in a quarter or an hour. The jury found that Nicholas and Richard in this manner feloniously slew the said John.” – From Middlesex County Records. April 21st. – Royton mob in consequence of an advertisement for a meeting to address his Majesty for a reform in Parliament. The gentlemen who met for the above purpose, were inhumanly treated by a merciless mob. Higson tells us that the Royton Circulating Library, or, as it was originally called, the “Jacobin Library” , was instituted at the Lighthouseman Inn, Sandy Lane, by working men, shopkeepers and small manufacturers. Through some political difference the “loyalists” withdrew, and formed another library which was broken up some years ago. It was at this inn where this riot took place. Old Sam Bamford gives the best account of this riot, and will no doubt be forgiven if he is somewhat splenetic. The following is from his “Early Days” – On the 21st April, 1794, a public meeting for the promotion of Parliamentary Reform, was appointed to be held at Thorpe, near Royton. It was called by a few friends of reform, who were correspondents of the society in London, and the purpose of the originators of the meeting was to get a petition adopted, praying Parliament to grant an amendment in the representation of the people. |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Previous to the commencement of the proceedings a number of well-wishers of the cause, who had come from a distance, together with several promoters of the meeting were assembled at the Light Horseman public-house in Royton-lane. They had been taking refreshments, and were arranging the proceedings, when a mob of several hundred persons, headed by one Harrop, of Barrowshaw, an atrocious ruffian, came in front of the house, and with shouts of “Church and King for ever”, “Down wi’th’Jacobins”, began to smash the windows and break open the doors. As many of the mob were armed with clubs and staves, and there was a supply of stones in the lane, the few inside could neither make an effectual resistance to their entrance, nor defend themselves from violence. The mob broke everything down before them. The windows were smashed, the doors were broken to splinters. The sign of the loyal old pensioner was torn down. Every article of furniture was demolished, the glasses, jugs, and other vessels, were dashed on the floor and trampled under foot, the bar was gutted, the cellars were entered, and the ale and liquors drunk or poured on the floor, and such being the violence committed on the property it may be supposed that the obnoxious persons would not be suffered to escape. Oh no! this was a real “Church and King mob” and was too faithful to its employers to suffer the Paineites to escape without punishment. So whilst some of the mob were guzzling and others were beating, and kicking, and, maltreating in various ways, the persons found in the house. Several of these were lamed, others were severely crushed and injured. The constables of the place had been called upon by the peaceably-disposed inhabitants to act, but they declined to interfere, and the mob had their own way. Mr. Pickford, of Royton Hall, a magistrate, never made his appearance, though he lived within a few score yards of the scene of the riot, and was supposed to have been at home all the time during which the outrage was perpetrated. He was afterwards known as Sir Joseph Radcliffe, of Milnes Bridge, in Yorkshire. Such of the reformers as had the good fortune to escape out of the house, ran for their lives, and sought hiding places wherever they could be found; whilst the parson of the place, whose name was Berry, standing on an elevated position, pointed them out to the mob, saying: “There goes one – and there goes one; that’s a Jacobin – that’s another”; and so continued until his services were no longer effectual. A few stout-hearted reformers, who had possession of one part of the house, would not be beaten like children, but retaliated blow for blow and kick for kick, until the cowards who assailed them were fain to pause. The strife outside was then nearly over, and these few reformers consented at length to go with their assailants before the magistrate mentioned above.
|
About half-a-score reformers in the whole were conducted as prisoners to Royton Hall, where they were placed in an outbuilding, and treated with every contumely, until the great man was ready the receive them. They were then shown in his presence, and even ultimately admitted in bail to appear at Lancaster to answer a charge of rioting. At the August assizes the case was traversed, and at the Spring Assizes of 1795, the grand jury having found a true bill the rioters were arraigned, but while the fourth witness for the prosecution was under examination, the judge (Heyes) stopped the trial, and the defendants were discharged. The reformers caused bills of indictment to be presented to the grand jury against a number of the real rioters, but as in the case of the later affair in Manchester the same grand jury which could find true bills against unoffending people, could not find any bills against the guilty parties. The persons who had been so shamefully treated could not obtain any redress at law. Even the poor old soldier whose house had been broken into and plundered in open sunlight, never recovered compensation. Everything, he had in the world was destroyed or carried away, he was a ruined man, and a ruined man he remained to the end of his days.No better evidence can be adduced of the popularity of the war, than the fact that the “jingoes” of that time were intolerant towards the opinions of others, who were the advocates of peace and reform. I may here be permitted to reproduce copy of a poster exhibited in the public houses of Manchester, and signed by 186 innkeepers of that town. Copied from Prentice’s historical sketches of Manchester. Manchester, September 13, 1792 “We, whose names are hereunto subscribed, being licensed innkeepers and ale-houekeepers, within the town of Manchester and Salford, justly alarmed at the treasonable and seditious conduct of a well known set of daring miscreants, who have called a public meeting to be held on Tuesday next, at the Bull’s Head in Manchester, for the avowed purpose of assisting the French savages, as well as with a sincere desire of introducing similar calamities to the inhabitants of this happy and prosperous country, as those that now exist in France, take this very necessary opportunity of publishing to the towns of Manchester and Salford in particular, and to the whole kingdom of Great Britain in general, our detestation of such wicked and abominable practices. And we do hereby solemnly declare, that we will be ready on all occasions to co-operate with our fellow-townsmen in bringing to justice all those who shall offend in any instances against our much admired and excellent constitution.” |
Page 28
William Rowbottom's Diary as published in the Oldham Standard |
 |
 |
 |
