[Previous
Page]
CHAPTER VI
YIELDING PLACE TO THE NEW
MANY curious old customs that have now been
discontinued and forgotten were in vogue when I was a boy. I shall here
mention only a few.
New Year's Day, the greatest day of the year in Scotland, and
always a jovial holiday in the North of England, was not observed at all
in the South and West. Nor was much attention paid to Easter. May Day used
to be recognised by the sweeps of the town, who exercised a sort of
prescriptive right to dress up a Jack-in-the-Green (a wickerwork cage
covered with ivy leaves, with a man inside to carry it), dancing round the
figure in grotesque fashion, and collecting pence from the small crowds
which witnessed the performance. Later in the month—the 29th—came Royal
Oak Day, when the innkeepers decorated their premises with oak boughs, and
the inhabitants, especially the lads, carried oak apples or oak leaves in
their buttonholes. The lad who failed to adorn himself in this
manner was an object of derision to the rest, who saluted him with cries
of "Shick-shack." The precise meaning or origin of this contumelious
expression I never knew, nor, probably, did any other of the youths who
were in the habit of using it. If nobody now takes much notice of
the anniversary, it is probably because people have begun to see that the
nation, after all, had no great reason to be grateful for the escape of
the Royal reprobate who found shelter in Boscobel Oak. Whitsuntide
met with more general recognition. The Oddfellows and the members of
other friendly societies, arrayed in all the glory of regalia, and
accompanied by bands and banners, marched in procession on the Monday to
the village of Charlton Kings, listened to a sermon in the parish church,
and then, marching home again, dined sumptuously together in the long
rooms of the different inns. Another feature of Whitsuntide was the
appearance of the morris dancers. Antiquaries tell us that the
morris dance was originally the Moorish dance, supposed to have been
brought to England in the time of Edward the Third when John of Gaunt
returned from Spain. The dancers were all men, though one, who
played the fool to the rest, was dressed as a woman. Duck trousers
and white shirts made up the costume, the sleeves of the performers being
tied round and round with coloured ribbons, their legs below the knee
bearing pads of tinkling bells. The dance they executed was
curiously varied with the clapping of hands and the flirting of white
handkerchiefs. Of course, after every dance, the "usual collection
was taken." When Christmas came, the children went out
carol-singing, while some among their elders organized parties of mummers.
The mummers performed a kind of play, in the course of which, after
deriding each other in rhyme, George the Fourth and Napoleon Bonaparte
engaged in mortal combat. The carols sung by the children were of
the most extraordinary character. Two lines of one of them ran
thus:—
It was the joy of Mary, it was the joy of one
To see her infant Jesus sucking at her breast bone. |
As a rule, the carol-singers closed their serenades with an appeal:—
God bless the master of this house,
Likewise the mistress too,
And all the little children
Who about the house do go,
With money in their pockets
And silver in their purse.
Please, ma'am, to give us a ha'penny,
And you'll be none the worse.
H-o-o-p! |
What the "h-o-o-p " meant was unknown to us; but we always ended the
appeal with the shout.
Among the old customs in which I had a hand was one that
finally went out with us in 1845—"beating the bounds." Parish
boundaries not being clearly defined, they were now and then perambulated
by churchwardens and others for the purpose of keeping them in popular
memory. The perambulation in 1845 was largely attended, as was
likely to be the case when waggons laden with beer, cider, and penny
loaves met the crowd at various points on the route. It was
estimated that the followers, when the procession reached the Golden
Valley, between Cheltenham and Gloucester, numbered not fewer than 2,000.
Practical jokes were supposed to be permissible on these occasions.
Boys were given "something to remember" at disputable corners of the
boundary, while young men and old, regardless of age or infirmities,
pushed each other into ditches and rivers and horse-ponds. Unhappy
(and in some cases even fatal) consequences occasionally resulted from
these pranks. Thus in the perambulation of 1845 a retired tradesman
who was thrown into the deepest part of the Chelt died from the effects of
the immersion. The young fellow who did the mischief was tried for
manslaughter, but acquitted. The reason alleged for thrashing boys
and larking with elder people was said to be that the parties concerned
would recollect the boundaries and the time they were beaten if the facts
of the matter in after-years should be called in question. It was
alleged to be necessary that the bounds should be traced whatever the
obstacles that stood in the way. Agg's House, a conspicuous mansion
overlooking the town, was built in two parishes: wherefore a deputation
from the crowd had to go through one window in the front and out of
another at the back. An amusing account of "possessioning," as the
custom was called in Berkshire, is given in an old diary of the parish
clerk of Newbury. The possessioners (or processioners, to give them
the name they bore in a neighbouring county) refreshed themselves with
cakes and ale on the way, gave "three huzzas " at certain points, and sang
psalms at others. "Stopt on the mount in the lane," says the
diarist, "and cut X cross, put Osgood on end upon his head, and done unto
him as was necessary to be done by way of remembrance." When the
party "came to Mr. Daw's Mill, a shoemaker was pushed in and narrow
escaped being drownded." The diarist ends with a note:—"Old Kit
Nation was turned on end upon his head and well spanked in the corner of Northcroft and upon the Wash." Personal outrages of this description
can only be perpetrated now at the risk of the perpetrator. A man
who had been bumped according to custom at Walthamstow showed his
assailants some years ago that he had not been bumped according to law,
for he obtained heavy damages against them. Other actions in other
parts of the country have put an end to practical joking at
perambulations. And perambulations have themselves ceased almost
everywhere. But the custom was discontinued at Cheltenham, not
because a poor fellow lost his life, but because no provision was made for
payment of expenses under the new Poor Law.
Fashions, which change every year, have necessarily undergone
a complete revolution in half a century. Away back in the thirties
and forties shaving was almost an obligatory process. It was rarely
that one met an Englishman, no matter what the class to which he belonged,
who did not sport the regulation mutton-chop whiskers—clean shaven
otherwise. Anybody who was audacious enough to wear a moustache was
taken to be a foreigner or an acrobat. No change in the fashion in
this respect occurred till our troops—all bronzed and bearded— returned
from the Crimea. The manly appearance of the warriors incited
civilians to follow their example. Nevertheless, it needed a popular
agitation to overthrow the tyranny of the razor. The Beard Movement
completed what the veterans from the trenches had begun. Artists,
authors, and journalists were among the first to adopt the new mode.
A Royal Academician who did so (Mr. James Ward) published a pamphlet in
explanation and defence, offering eighteen sound scriptural reasons why
one might let the beard grow, and yet not offend his Creator. Still,
lawyers and business men and ministers of religion long resisted the
change. The first of the latter order whom I remember to have seen
with a moustache—it was at a meeting of the Working Men's College in
London—was the Rev. Llewellyn Davies, a famous Churchman in his day.
If before the war with Russia a member of the Stock Exchange had had the
temerity to present himself in the "house," I rather fancy he would have
received attentions more personal than polite. When Edward Glynn, a
Newcastle solicitor, paid a visit to London after he had adopted the new
mode, the respectable lawyer upon whom he called first surveyed his
moustache and beard with astonishment, and then pityingly remarked: "Well,
Mr. Glynn, I hope you find that sort of thing pay down in the North."
But the new order of things has so supplanted the old in the matter of
shaving that every man who has tarried at Jericho can now do exactly as he
likes.
Changes of costume are almost infinite. But a word
about hats. Beavers, in the early years of the century, were almost
the only wear. Some were bell-topped, some other shapes, but all
were more or less fluffy. The material changed, but not the general
outline for many years. Everybody who had arrived at man's
estate—rich and poor, gentle and simple alike—deemed a high hat
necessary to existence. It was part of the uniform of the new
police, and it was part of the costume of the players in the
cricket-field. If you take the trouble to examine the engravings of
old Radical demonstrations—those of meetings on the Town Moor at
Newcastle, for example—you will see that every man in the crowd is shown
to be wearing a tall hat. The reign of the stove-pipe, as it came to
be called, was, I think, first seriously challenged at the time that
Kossuth and his compatriots appeared in England with the more shapely
Hungarian chapeau. Partly out of compliment to Kossuth, partly on
account of its better appearance, but chiefly on account of its greater
comfort, young Radicals of my time began to favour the Hungarian hat.
I have never returned to the old, hard, distressing mode since. Ten
years after Kossuth's arrival, however, I was hissed, hooted, and followed
by an unruly crowd in a remote part of Lancashire, for no other reason
than that I happened to be out of the fashion in respect to headgear.
Yet in that very same neighbourhood I saw disciples of Joanna
Southcott—"Joanna men" as they were called by the factory
operatives—wearing tall, white, fluffy hats that were even more
conspicuous than my own. But mark the change. The soft,
serviceable hat, altered but not improved in shape, is now the common wear
of clergymen and ministers of all denominations.
It fell to the lot of a North-Country member to first break
through the unwritten law of Parliament, which required that hon.
gentlemen should wear nothing but high hats, unless on special occasions
and for special purposes court or military suits were in order. The
member in question, without intending or desiring it, caused a great
sensation when he entered the sacred precincts with the style of hat he
had worn for twenty years or more. A popular cartoon of the time
represented Mr. Gladstone as declaring, when he saw the apparition, that
he really must dissolve Parliament. The soft hat in this case had
been adopted because the member concerned had in his younger days suffered
from a peculiar tenderness of the skin of the temples. Nor had he
ever seen any good reason to change. Indeed, a change to the
regulation mode would have been inconvenient, disagreeable, even painful.
Moreover, neither Parliament nor his constituents had any right to call
upon him to make a personal sacrifice in the matter of costume any more
than in the matter of the cut of his beard. There was in this case
no touch of vanity or conceit, or desire to appear singular. It was
otherwise in the case of a Socialist member, who, when he paid his first
visit to the House of Commons, rode down to Westminster in a cloth cap,
with a trumpeter blaring by his side. It was otherwise, too, with
another member, who, according to a London correspondent, unbuttoned his
coat in the Lobby, showed his working suit, and declared that he had come
straight from the engine shop hundreds of miles away from London!
Whatever the cause of the change, the old order has so given place to the
new that men are now as free in the House of Commons as they are anywhere
else to wear the hats and suits that suit them.
CHAPTER VII
THE LAWS OF THE STREET
PERHAPS a not uninteresting chapter might be made of
the diversions in which the boys of the humbler classes were wont to find
delight sixty or seventy years ago. "Boys will be boys," it is said, when
any youthful escapade has to be excused. And the boys of the period
named, grandfathers of the present generation, were probably no
better—they were certainly no worse—than the boys of our own time.
Fun and mischief are ineradicable from boyish nature. None but the
sour and distempered would wish to eradicate them. At the same time,
one might have expected—one undoubtedly hoped—that the training of
School Boards would have resulted in obtaining from the young a greater
respect for age and a greater consideration for infirmity than they seem
disposed to render. A change in that regard, if in no other, is
desirable for the comfort of society. But to the narrative.
Our street was in Lower Dockum—a locality that is unknown
even by name to the genteel residents in the parades and squares and
crescents of Lansdowne and Pittville. It had its laws and
regulations, which were as rigidly enforced as the rules of social
etiquette among the rich. Never a new boy came into it but had to
find his level. If he submitted without fighting, he took rank below the
least. If he fought and failed, he would most likely have to fight again
till his exact position was discovered. Even if he fought and won, he
would still have to go on fighting till he encountered the cock of the
walk himself. Great was the rejoicing—secret, but none the less
sincere—of the other boys if he conquered in this final contest for
supremacy, for the cock of the walk was often the little tyrant of the
street. I remember well what happened when a bully of the season,
confident in his own strength and endurance, challenged a new boy to fight
him with one hand. The challenge was accepted; the new boy by a sudden
rush sent the old one staggering to the ground; and the crowd of lesser
boys who had tremblingly assembled to witness the combat saw with
gratification that they had now a new master. It was to some extent true
then, as it is still, that the smaller and feebler lads in the street had
to submit as best they could to the exactions and oppressions of the
bigger and stronger. But a code of honour was not unknown. It was cowardly
to use any other weapon than the fist, and it was still more cowardly to
strike when your antagonist lay on the ground. Years afterwards, I
recollect Mr. Bradlaugh giving this advice to his son: "Never hit a
littler boy than yourself, and never let a bigger boy hit you." The
general observance of that advice would help to put an end to the small
tyrannies of the street.
Combats were not infrequent between boys of different schools
and localities, as well as boys in the same street. Opprobrious nicknames
were bestowed on each other by the scholars of the few schools in the
town, such as "Capper's mice" or "Gardner's rats." These nicknames were
shouted across the street when a Capper's mouse caught sight of a
Gardner's rat, or vice versa, and there an end, unless the derided boy
took offence, in which case the offender would probably seek safety in
flight. But parties from the rival schools would sometimes meet by
accident on neutral ground, when there would generally ensue a scrap of
some sort, unless one side or the other exercised the better part of
valour. Worse troubles would arise if a boy belonging to one locality
should wander away to a neighbourhood whose youthful inhabitants he or his
companions had done or said something to outrage.
The lad in such an event could only avoid a buffeting by the free use of
his legs, awaiting an opportunity for revenge when chance should place one
of his tormentors in the same predicament. Boy nature, as may be gathered,
is not much different from dog nature. Dogs and boys are both quiet enough
till a stranger strays into what they think their territory.
No small part of a bad boy's enjoyment is derived from witnessing the
irritation of elderly people. The more they can be vexed the more the bad
boy is pleased. Though we were not bad boys in our street—at least, not
all of us—we used occasionally to play tricks which could not in any
manner be commended. Perhaps the worst was knocking at doors and then
running away. An improvement on this annoyance was facilitated by a
peculiar arrangement. Down the middle part of the street ran a dead wall. A string attached to a knocker and carried over the wall was operated by
little imps who couldn't be seen in the darkness. How they chuckled and
hugged themselves when the householder, shading a lighted candle with his
hand, came to answer the knock! The trick couldn't be tried many times
before it was discovered. Then the householder would appear, not with a
candle, but with a thick cudgel. And then the
ingenious tormentors would have to fly round all the corners that afforded
the best cover and concealment. It was well for them if they were not
caught. Among the residents in our street whom the boys took a special
delight in teasing was an irascible old shoemaker. But "Old Jackson" had
brought the trouble on himself, for he was in the habit of capturing and
destroying the implements of the boys' play—their balls or their
tops—when any of them came within his reach. The irate shoemaker would
have saved himself many a bad quarter of an hour if he had recognized that
the street was the only playground, and that the innocent games of the
boys were no real cause of offence to anybody at all.
But the boys played tricks on each other quite as often as they did on
their elders. One trick of this kind was called "shoeing the wild colt." It was never tried on anybody a second time, because the first lesson was
sufficient for the dullest. A victim having been found, the next thing was
to select a convenient door. The "wild colt," personated by the unhappy
greenhorn, was tied to the handle; a pretence was made of shoeing
him—sometimes his shoes were taken off; then, suddenly, there was a great
banging at the door, and all the crafty little horse-breakers would scatter
and disappear
behind the shades of night. If the poor colt could not release himself
before the householder came to the door, there was a trial of strength
between the boy outside and the party inside. Of course the struggle ended
in the triumph of the strongest. What happened afterwards depended on the
disposition of the victor. If he had a spark of humour, a measure of
kindness, or the least recollection of his own antics in boyhood, the fun
was at an end. If not—well, the poor little victim
had a double penalty to pay. The only consolation he had was that he
would, some night later, assist in "shoeing a wild colt" himself.
As a rule, the games of the boys of our street were quite free from blame
or blemish. There was nothing in the least wrong with marbles, peg-tops,
whip-tops, kites, buttons, prisoner's base, rounders, shinney, foot-it,
leap-frog, jump-a-jim-wagtail, and dozens of other modes of amusement. Marbles were played in various ways—ring-taw, knuckle-hole, etc. I
suppose I must have been a bit of a dabster at ring-taw, since, when I got
too old for marbles, I distributed among younger companions many hundreds
of stone alleys with not a few agates. Prisoner's base was a splendid
running game which it would take too long to describe, while foot-it and
leap-frog were jumping
pastimes that are all too seldom played in these days. Rounders was for
poor lads what cricket was for the sons of the gentry. Base-ball, so much
in vogue in America, is just rounders, with the element of danger and
injury superadded; while hockey, now greatly in favour even among ladies
in England, is just our old game of shinney—only the top end of a
broomstick served us for a bat, and a stake from the hedge-side did duty
for a club. The seasons for all games came in regular succession. How they
were regulated or who regulated them none of the boys ever knew. But it
was a law of the street that games could not be played at other than the
appointed times without risk of forfeiting the materials of the pastime. If, for instance, a party of lads were seen playing at ring-taw or
knuckle-hole out of season, it was considered perfectly legitimate for
another party of lads to appropriate all the marbles they could seize. Whether the scramble became a scuffle depended, of course, upon which of
the parties engaged in play or foray was the stronger. But the curious
thing was that there was a code of honour regulating even the scramble. Raids occurred on the Borders whenever there was a deficiency in the
larder; but raids on marbles or peg-tops were only legal when the season
for playing with them had passed.
All our amusements were not quite as innocent as rounders or leap-frog. There was one which was considered the more successful the more
mischievous the pranks played by the players. It was called "vamping." A
single lad would challenge another to vamp him—that is, to do as daring
feats, such as jumping from a high wall, as his challenger. But the usual
plan—I think it was sometimes called "follow-your-leader"—was for a
company of boys to select the most adventurous among them, and then follow
his lead in all that he did. The tricks which this leader performed and
which the rest repeated were often reprehensible, sometimes dangerous,
nearly always annoying. It was the element of danger, indeed, that gave
spice to the game. Perhaps, also, the vampers appreciated the fun because
it almost invariably set some of the older people by the ears. The leader,
followed by his string of companions, would begin with a few very ordinary
performances, gradually rise in audacity, and perhaps end up by doing
damage to somebody's property. Thus patting a lamp-post or running into a
shop would be succeeded by knocking at doors and then knocking down
tradesmen's goods. The length to which the lads would go naturally
depended upon the immunity they enjoyed and the forbearance of their
victims. A
rush with a horse-whip or a walking-stick would probably disperse the
vampers before they had done much mischief. If uninterrupted, however,
they would proceed from bad to worse till they became as veritable a
terror as the Hooligans of our own time; for, be it understood, the new
police force, at the period of which I am writing, was only just
beginning to supersede the old watchmen and constables. It ought to be
said, even for the vampers, however, that the pranks they performed were
merely a boisterous form of amusement, and that the annoyances which
resulted from them were merely incidents of the play.
I have made no mention of football in these recollections of boyhood, for
the reason that football, like golf and lawn tennis, was not numbered
among the popular pastimes of the period. We used to hear of football, but
only as a game that was played at the great public schools, such as Eton
or Rugby. Nor did it come into general favour till many years after I had
ceased to be a boy. Lawn tennis is in much the same case, except that it
was not known even to schoolboys till the century had considerably passed
middle age. The pervading popularity of golf is of still more recent
growth. Golf was an ancient pastime in Scotland long before anybody in
England took to it. Now, however,
it has spread everywhere, notwithstanding the profanity which seems to
come naturally to everybody who wields a driver or a niblick. The game of
bowls was, of course, not for boys. It is what is called an old man's
game. But it must have been played in our town from very early days, since
a tavern in the suburbs bore the name of the Bowling Green, though no
green was attached to it in my time. The historic pastime, however, was
still pursued in a neighbouring town—the picturesque old town of
Tewkesbury. There, at the rear of a delightful old tavern, was a green
overlooking the Severn that commanded beyond as exquisite a prospect of
rural peace and beauty as any spot in England. But the laws of the street
and the history of bowling are two such different matters that it is time
to draw this chapter to a close.
CHAPTER VIII
SCHOOLS AND SCHOOLMASTERS
IT is not very easy for the present generation to
realise the state of general education in the first half of the nineteenth
century. To be able to read and write was a distinction then.
Anybody who could do more was almost accounted a phenomenon. I am
speaking, of course, of the poorer classes. All the other orders of
society had chances which were denied to the poor. For the masses of
the people very few schools were provided, and the instruction imparted in
them was of the commonest quality. If a man was lamed or otherwise
unfit for manual labour, he was often considered quite good enough for a
schoolmaster. One used to hear it seriously argued, too, that people
who were not educated had better memories and made better workmen than
people who were. The idea was so prevalent even as late as the time
of John Stuart Mill that that eminent thinker set himself to confute it.
It was, indeed, an era of
ignorance, the era in which persons of sixty or seventy passed their
earlier years.
My own education, such as it was, was begun in a dame's school somewhere.
The fact would have passed out of recollection altogether if it had not
happened that the old lady shook and touzled me in such a manner that I
was led out into the back yard sick and ill. But the dame's school doesn't
count. The Sunday School does, however, though the vague remembrances I
retain of it are not pleasant. It was connected with a Wesleyan chapel. The small tradesman who conducted it was severe in his dealings with the
children. This is all I recollect about him, except an incident that may
convey a moral for persons in similar authority. He promised to call at
our house to complain about something or other. He did not call, and I
never believed anything that he said after. The only other circumstance in
respect to the Sunday School that remains in my memory is the dreary time
we children had of it when we were marched off to attend the morning
service in the chapel. Our seats were in the gallery, but so placed there
that we could not see the preacher without standing up. As we could not
understand him either, for of course he was preaching to adults, we were
restless and fidgety
till the sermon was over. The time of the sermon, indeed, was a time of
purgatory. The preacher whom I best remember became afterwards, I think,
President of the Conference. It was his practice to read his text, expound
it, revert to it over and over again, and keep the Bible open at the verse
or chapter till near the end of his discourse. The boys had learned that
the closing of the Bible was an infallible sign that the hour of their
deliverance was at hand. Boy after boy used, therefore, to stand up in his
seat, peep over the gallery front, and steal a glance at the sacred
volume. If it was still open, the youthful peepers would sit down, sadder
but not wiser boys. When, however, the long-desired sign was seen, an
eager whisper ran along the benches, "Book's shut!" The jubilation of
the little crowd was now so great that nothing but the knowledge of speedy
relief could have kept them in order. Perhaps this little incident also
may convey a moral for persons concerned.
There was a national school in our town—only one; also a British
school—only one. The latter was held under a chapel belonging to the
Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion; the former was, of course, connected
with one of the Established Churches. The Church of England, or some of
the clergy of the Church of England, must be credited with originating and
providing, as far as Cheltenham was concerned, almost the only effective
facilities that existed for educating the people in the early years of
last century. The national school was founded by the National Society—a
society which, supported by the clergy and adherents of the Established
Church, rendered unmistakable service to a past generation. Other
religious bodies, however, soon followed suit, notably the Wesleyans. But
at the time of which I am speaking the only two schools for poor children
were situated too far away to be available in my case. So I was sent to
one of the few private seminaries that then flourished in the town. It was
known as Gardner's Academy.
The proprietor of this establishment was Joseph Aldan Gardner—a fiddler
and dancing master as well as a teacher of youth. Mr. Gardner had one
distinct qualification for the office he had assumed. He was a clever
penman—the cleverest I have ever known. Writing was almost the only
accomplishment I acquired under his tuition. But his cleverness with the
pen unfitted him for other duties in the school. Most of his time even in
teaching hours was employed in producing elaborate specimens of his skill. These specimens, executed
with Indian ink on big sheets of cardboard, consisted of the usual
flourishes, among which facsimiles of the business cards of the tradesmen
of the town, with here and there the visiting cards of the gentry, were
more or less artistically dispersed. It was understood that the tradesmen
whose names and callings were thus reproduced—the butcher, the baker, the
candlestick-maker—paid the penman for the honour he had done them. As for
the specimens, they were, when completed, handsomely framed, exhibited in
shop windows, and finally sold for a fair price. But the schoolmaster at
one time occupied in the estimation of his boys a secondary place in his
own academy. The first place was then held by a tame magpie, which
performed the twofold duty of diverting the scholars and making an
intolerable mess of benches, desks, and copy-books. It need hardly be said
that the education imparted in a school which was conducted in the
free-and-easy fashion I have described was not of the highest or soundest
quality.
Most of the scholars, however, fared much better than I did. The
difference arose in this way. My dear old grandmother was too poor to pay
even the small fee required—sixpence or eightpence a week. It was
therefore agreed that she and her daughters should do an equivalent amount
of laundry-work
for the schoolmaster and his family. The arrangement was not satisfactory
so far as I was concerned. Looked upon as belonging to a lower social
grade than the boys who paid for their schooling in cash, I received much
less attention than the other scholars. I learnt how to read and
write—that was all. Cyphering should have come next, but did not. All I
recollect in respect to it is a gross piece of injustice from which I
suffered. I was set to do a certain sum without having received the least
instruction as to the manner of doing it. And I was told I was to be "kept in" till I had completed the task—manifestly impossible in my case,
since I had no intuitive knowledge of arithmetic. Wherefore, being left
alone in the school-room, and knowing that I was utterly helpless, I did
what any other boy would have done in the circumstances—I decamped without leave. Next day an unmerciful flogging was
administered. The physical pain was soon forgotten, but the sense of wrong
and outrage remained, and remains to this day. It was probably the special
and unfair treatment extended to me by Aldan Gardner that induced the
fatal habit of "mooching," as playing the truant was called in our part
of the country. That habit once firmly rooted, there was not much chance
of further improvement at Gardner's Academy.
One of the locations of the academy was a rather large room that bore the
name of Sadler's Wells. It had been a place of entertainment, and it had
taken its name from that once famous theatre in London where Mrs. Siddons
had impersonated the heroines of Otway and Shakspeare, and where at a much
later date, in the year of the Great Exhibition, I had the pleasure of
seeing Phelps as the immortal misanthrope, Timon of Athens. It was while
the school was held in this old temple of the local drama that an incident
occurred which marks the immense difference between that time and this in
the matter of sanitary precautions. The daughter of the schoolmaster fell
ill of the small-pox. The school was not closed, as it would have been in
these days. But, as the little girl wanted a playmate during the period of
convalescence, I was selected to join her, because I had already suffered
and recovered from the frightful disorder! Whether other scholars were
also immune I cannot now recollect. It is probable that some were and some
were not; for small-pox, as I shall have to explain later on, was as
common then as many more ordinary and far less fatal ailments are now.
These other scholars were for the most part the sons of small tradesmen in
the town. Only one of them, as far as I know, rose to any sort of
eminence.
The exception was a little fellow—George Stevens, the son of a
barber—who became known in later years as a steeplechase rider. Poor
George met a tragic death while still at the height of his successful
career as a jockey, not in the pursuit of his profession, but in the
course of a regular ride between the town and his own place among the Cleeve Hills. He was thrown from his horse near a noted hostelry called
the Rising Sun, and was found dead by the roadside. I have pleasanter
recollections of the jockey than of another of the barber's sons. This
youth was the first snob that had come within my ken. Proud of his
delicate white hands, he held them out before a party of his
school-fellows, and challenged any boy in the company to say what he could: "These hands have never done an hour's work since they were made." I do
not know what the rest felt; but I held the little creature in ineffable
contempt ever after.
My school days at Gardner's Academy ended at a very early age. A situation
as errand boy at a bookseller's was then found for me. A circulating
library was attached to the business. My duties were to clean boots and
knives and brasses, and then carry books and magazines to the houses of
the gentry who were subscribers to the library. The occupation was not
uncongenial (except that I used
to get awfully tired and thirsty), for I was able to steal a peep at
literature which would not otherwise have come within my reach. The book
that was then in the greatest demand, as I gathered from so often carrying
it from one house to another, was Eliot Warburton's "Crescent and the
Cross," and next to it, I think, came Tennyson's poems. Pictorial
advertisements of Dickens's "Chimes" were at this time (1844) exhibited
at the bookseller's door. The work at the library became at last too heavy
for me. And so I was sent for an all too brief season to school again. The
Wesleyans had lately built a new chapel—the date on the building is
1839—under which they opened a day school. It was to
this new school that I was sent. The schoolmaster knew his business; the
lessons were made intelligible; the classes were made interesting; the
singing and other exercises were really entertainments. Enormous was the
contrast between the old school and the new. There was no more
mooching—no more the least desire to absent myself from form or desk. It
was a delightful time. I verily believe I derived more advantage from the
few months I spent under the Wesleyan master than from all the years I had
spent under Aldan Gardner. Alas! I had soon to relinquish the pleasure I
derived from the instruction I was
receiving. The time had arrived when I must choose a trade, and begin the
real business of life. The regret felt at leaving school just when I was
beginning to realise the benefit of schooling was speedily submerged by
the new delight of mixing with men in a workshop. I was a boy still, but I
thought myself a man. No other boy was half my importance; no man, even,
strutted the streets with anything like the dignity I assumed during the
first few weeks of my apprentice days.
CHAPTER IX
APPRENTICE DAYS
THE choice of a trade was a serious question—perhaps more for my
grandmother than for me, since she had to make herself responsible for a
burdensome premium. There were family discussions on the subject. I wanted
to be an engraver; if not, then a saddler. The reasons were curious. Aldan Gardner had at least taught me to write well, and I was fond of
copying printed letters; wherefore it was thought I would make a good
engraver. The saddler idea was suggested by the fact that an older boy of
my acquaintance, for whom I had conceived considerable admiration, was
apprenticed to that trade. Efforts were made to procure a place at an
engraver's; but the only firm at that time in the town had then no
opening. I was outvoted on the saddler question. But the nearest thing to
an engraver was a printer. We compromised on that. I became a printer.
The result of much negotiation with the proprietor of the
Cheltenham Journal—John Joseph Hadley—was that I was apprenticed to
him for the term of seven years. The indentures, drawn up by a
lawyer, inscribed on parchment, and duly signed and witnessed, were dated
June 6th, 1846. It was rather a one-sided arrangement. The
legal expenses were needlessly heavy. There was the lawyer's fee,
and there was the cost of the stamp—one pound. Worse than these
things was the premium. I was bound to serve John Joseph Hadley for
seven years—the first year for nothing, all the other six years for very
small wages; but my old grandmother bound herself to pay John Joseph
Hadley no less a sum than fifteen pounds. Fancy £15 for a poor old
washerwoman! It had to be paid in instalments, of course; but the
obligation was discharged to the last penny. Mr. Hadley had a long
way the best of the deal. I was to be taught the trade and craft of
a printer. As a matter of fact, I was taught little more than what I
picked up myself, and that only in one branch of the business. Seven
years were no doubt the regulation term for such apprenticeships as mine;
but seven years were at least two years longer than were absolutely
required. All the same, I had a fairly happy time, except during a
period to be mentioned presently. I completed the twenty first year
of my age a good while before the expiration of my indentures. I
could then have claimed my freedom, as apprentices in like circumstances
usually did; but I deemed it more honourable to observe the strict letter
of the bargain, and so served my full term of seven years.
The company into which a young lad is introduced when he
begins his working career may be the making or the marring of his
character. There is something, but not everything, in old Robert
Owen's doctrine, that man is the creature of circumstances. It is
certain that many men are of the nature of chameleons, taking their colour
from their surroundings. Nobody can question the immense advantage
to a youth if he should be brought under wholesome influences in a
workshop. But there are despicable people who seem to take a delight
in corrupting their younger companions. Happily, on the other hand,
there are decent people who endeavour to counteract the evil tendencies of
the rest. I was neither more fortunate nor more unfortunate than the
common run of apprentices. The men in our office were "much of a
muchness." One was as gruff as a Griffin—which, indeed, was his
name; another was coarse and ugly and vain; a third was equally vain, and
as vile in his habits as in his conversation. The remaining three
were honest, respectable men. If I suffered no harm, I cannot
honestly say that I derived any good, from contact with my fellows in the
office.
Of course I had to pay my "footing," and equally of course
the proceeds of the exaction were spent on drink. Drunkenness was
prevalent then as now, but, I think, more prevalent now than then.
Strange are the depths to which even respectable men will descend when the
means of indulgence can be had for the asking. It was always the
oldest and most respected man in our office who was detailed to lie in
wait for the commercial travellers as they came round for orders. It
seemed to me even as a boy that the process was not only undignified, but
contemptible. It was beggary in its worst form, because hardly
distinguishable from extortion. We were printing a mad sort of book
on the Prophecies for an eccentric and benevolent old gentleman in the
town. And we could always tell when the old gentleman was reading
his proofs in the counting-house, from seeing through the office windows
tribes of mendicants hiding and peeping round corners. They were
waiting to pounce upon their prey. What better were the old and
respectable printers who waited to intercept the representatives of the
paper and ink firms who did business with the office? But the odious
system is still in vogue—indeed, has grown so much worse as to become
intolerable. "From the man who buys the ink to the man who minds the
printing machine," a leading ink-maker has said, "there is an organized
scheme for blackmailing the manufacturer." Notice was therefore
given by this gentleman's firm that from and after February 1st, 1900, it
would not give itself nor allow any of its servants to give "chapel
money," Christmas box, or wayzgoose subscription to anybody employed by
its customers. The proceeding may or may not crush out the vicious
system; but it is quite certain that working men will never command the
respect to which their calling entitles them as long as they descend to
the tricks that were practised in my apprentice days.
The gentleman to whom I was bound had many
peculiarities—peculiarities of appearance as well as character. He
took snuff and wore frills. The two are connected because the frills
often bore traces of the snuff. A serious man, too, was John Joseph
Hadley. I don't think I ever saw him laugh, except, as in duty
bound, when the Rev. Francis Close told him the story of the old Jew
clothes-man. The sincerity of his religious convictions was shown in
a way that caused infinite discomfort to all in the office. The
paper he owned and worked—for he always made up the formes himself—was a
Church and King paper. A picture of the Crown and the Bible adorned
its title head-line. It was published on Monday morning—an
arrangement which would in ordinary cases necessitate Sunday labour.
But Mr. Hadley avoided the desecration of the Sabbath by obliging us to
work till twelve o'clock on Saturday night and resume operations at twelve
o'clock on Sunday night. This preposterous regulation almost
completely destroyed three days of the week, so far as any enjoyment or
sensible pursuit was concerned. Never shall I forget the misery I
felt when I had to be roused at midnight, after having, as the result of
three or four hours' tossing about in bed, just fallen asleep. The
very remembrance of the time is like a hideous nightmare. Napoleon
talked of the two o'clock in the morning kind of courage. For my
part, as a growing boy, I used to think that twelve o'clock at night was
as good a time to be hung as any.
My first duties as the youngest apprentice were to sweep out
the office, ink small bill formes with dabber or roller, and deliver the
newspaper to subscribers in the surrounding villages. Blistered
hands came from one of these operations, blistered feet from another.
When I went my rounds on Monday morning, I was given a few extra copies of
the paper in case I should come across a purchaser on the road.
This, however, rarely happened; not so much, perhaps, because the paper
was dear as because few people could read it. The Taxes on Knowledge
were in full operation at that time. No newspaper could be published
without the Government stamp, while a heavy duty was imposed on the raw
material. And so the public was required to pay fivepence for an
article that contained only about an eighth part of the matter to be found
in a penny paper of our own day. The office swept, the papers
delivered, and other odd jobs performed, I was set to pick up types—what
we called "pie" in the first instance. Pie is type put together
anyhow for the convenience of distributing the letters into their proper
boxes in the cases. [9] But I considered myself a
person of no small importance when, standing on a stool, I was put to set
up a bit of reprint copy. It was a humorous paragraph from a
Gateshead paper—written, I have no doubt, by a gentleman (Mr. James Clephan) whose colleague I became in Newcastle many years later. The
very words of that paragraph I could recall long after, so highly did I
rate my first achievement at "case."
The machinery and appurtenances of the office were of a very
primitive character compared with those of newspaper offices now.
Down in the cellar (in one corner of which, by the way, was the only
convenience in the establishment) was an old wooden press, and a cylinder
machine that was turned by a handle. One man, with another to feed
the machine and a boy to take off the printed sheets, could turn out the
whole issue of the Journal in an hour. The four pages of the paper
were made up by old Mr. Hadley himself, who, when he ran short of matter
or desired to curtail expenses, used to fill up a couple of columns of
space with a huge standing advertisement of Grimstone's Eye Snuff—a
patent commodity that has long since disappeared from the market.
The formes were locked up with wooden quoins and sidesticks, and then
carried below to the machine. One day a page was wrecked at the foot
of the cellar stairs, whereupon a lad in the office pointed to the mass of
pie and cried to the man who had been carrying the forme, "There it is,
sir!" But I daresay it will require a printer to understand the
ludicrous humour of the incident. Another feature of our working-day
life that will be better understood by printers than by the public was the
difficulty we experienced in working by candle-light. The candles
were fixed in little leaden sconces, which were in their turn fixed in the
"c" box of the case. When the candles guttered, as they did very
often, for they were of the commonest quality, the box was filled with
tallow and the air with imprecations. It will be seen from all this
that our office was a very old-fashioned affair. We had
old-fashioned ways, too, one of which was that of keeping a galley of
standing headings for use when required. A revolution broke out in
Paris in the second year of my apprenticeship. But there had been a
revolution in Paris eighteen years before. And there in 1848, among
the standing headings on the galley, was a line in big type that had done
duty in 1830—"The French Revolution."
The office in which I served my time is no longer an office;
the newspaper we printed has been dead many years; the family to which it
belonged is no longer resident in the town. The old gentleman passed
away during the time I was an apprentice, while two of his sons, after
continuing the paper till a few years before it expired, obtained
appointments elsewhere—the elder on the staff of a Birmingham newspaper,
the younger (Thomas Russell Hadley, a gentlemanly fellow to whom I was
much attached) as chief reporter to an Australian Parliament.
CHAPTER X
HEROES OF THE STAGE
EARLY in my apprentice days I came under the
influence of the drama. It was the travelling, not the regular
drama. I was entitled to threepence a week pocket-money. All
went in a ticket for the back seats. Every Saturday night in the
season, as I left work at twelve o'clock, I used to climb up a spout to
read by the light of a street lamp the names of the plays that were to be
performed the following week. It would, of course, have been
intolerably tantalising if, with the playbills about the town, I had had
to wait till Sunday to learn the fare for Monday. If I was impatient
to see the name of the play, it need not be said that I was still more
impatient to see the play itself. Monday was my only night for the
drama. Having started work at midnight on the Sunday, I was not
required on the Monday to continue at work till eight o'clock, the usual
hour of happy release on the other days of the week. So I was always
in good time for the rise of the curtain. Luckily for me, with my
small allowance of coppers, there were no early doors then.
The drama, as I have said, was not the regular drama.
There had been no regular drama since the regular theatre had been burnt
down. The ruins of the burnt building, blocked up with boards, were
still to be seen in another part of the town. I had promised in my
indentures that I would not "haunt taverns or playhouses." But a
booth was not a playhouse. As booths were not mentioned in the
indentures, I assumed that I was quite at liberty to haunt them.
Anyhow, I did haunt them as often as they came round. The best known
of these enterprises was Hurd's. [10] It had its
regular circuit, and it came round at regular intervals. Hurd's
Theatre was as famous in Gloucestershire as Prince Miller's in Scotland or
Billy Purvis's in Northumberland. The booth was set up in an inn
yard—the Nag's Head or the King's Arms. An outside show always drew
a big crowd. It was the custom of the performers—comedians,
tragedians, acrobats, and ballet dancers—to parade up and down an open
platform, dressed in all their stage finery, with the view of inducing the
spectators to walk up and see the wonders to be presented within.
The outside show was sometimes supplemented by the offer of prizes for the
boys who, stripped to the waist and with hands tied behind their backs,
could soonest eat the treacle rolls that were suspended from a rope across
the platform. This was before the days of paraffin lamps. The
platform was illuminated by great pans of blazing grease, which had now
and then to be stirred up with an iron rod, and which, when thus stirred
up, threw out almost as much black smoke as it did flame, accompanied by a
penetrating and suffocating stench that set the poor actors and actresses
a-coughing. The inside arrangements were just as primitive as those
outside. A couple of hoops, fitted with sconces for eight or ten
tallow candles, and hung from the roof of the booth, afforded all the
light that was thrown upon the stage. As the performance proceeded,
the light grew more and more dim, till the audience, scarcely able to
discern one actor from another, raised loud cries of "Snuff the candles."
Then an old super would lower the hoops by means of a piece of twine,
doing what was required, sometimes with his fingers and sometimes with a
pair of snuffers, and the next act of the drama could be better seen.
Of course, if any of the audience stood or sat under the "chandeliers,"
they ran a pretty good chance of getting their best clothes soiled and
spoiled with droppings from the "long sixes" above them.
It was while I was so standing that I was induced, or rather
compelled, to make my "first appearance on any stage." Though I was
a very small boy at the time, I remember the whole occurrence perfectly.
The great attraction of the evening's entertainment, sandwiched between
the farce which began and the tragedy which concluded it, was a series of
conjuring tricks by Ramo Samee, described on the bills of the play as "the
celebrated Indian juggler." After he had executed some astonishing
feats, such as swallowing a sword, producing endless articles from an
empty hat, and so forth, the magician intimated as usual that he wanted a
lad from the audience to assist him in the next item of the programme.
Thereupon the tragic actor, who also was standing under the candles,
without leave asked or granted, lifted me on to the stage. I was
terrified—terrified of the juggler, but perhaps still more terrified by
the sight of the sea of faces surrounding me; for, besides the audience in
front, the members of the stock company were gathered at the wings.
Terrified as I was, however, I seemed to understand what Ramo Samee
wanted. And Ramo Samee himself must have known from previous
experience exactly how any small boy would act in the circumstances.
Well, seating me on the floor beside him, the juggler told me to open my
mouth and keep it open. Of course, I was too frightened to disobey
orders, not even though I half-suspected that he was going to make me
swallow a sword too. But it was an egg, and not a sword, that I was
expected to gulp down. The egg was produced, thrown into the air,
and caught as it descended. The hand which caught it was suddenly
clapped over my wide-open mouth. "Did ye swallow it?" cried the
Indian in an Irish accent. Fearing that unutterable things would
befall me if I did not give the answer he required, I stuttered out,
"Y-e-e-s." The feat was received with thunders of applause.
More thunders followed when Ramo, fiddling about his involuntary
assistant's ear, feigned to extract from it, not only the egg, but yards
and yards of coloured ribbon. It was my first appearance on the
stage—and the last.
The actors and actresses who formed the company of that
canvas booth in an inn yard were veritable heroes and heroines to the lads
and lasses who watched and wondered in the back seats. Tommy Hurd
was the leading comedian. Never did he speak without setting the
house in a roar. What Tommy had said and what Tommy had done in the
farce we had seen on Monday lasted me and my companions for delightful
conversation the whole of the week afterwards. But the tragedian and
his wife—Mr. and Mrs. Maclean—were held by us in special awe and
reverence. If we met them in the street, as we often did, we
followed them at a respectful distance, admiring every strut and movement.
If they looked at us, we were as proud as Punches; if they had spoken to
us, it would have been heaven; if they had shaken us by the hand or patted
us on the head, we should have gone clean crazy. These two great
actors—for they were the greatest we had seen, or ever expected to
see—played the leading parts in a piece which had a strange and alarming
effect on the mind of one of their youthful admirers. The story
might as well be told.
There is an incident in the second chapter of Hall Caine's
"Manxman" so perfectly true to boyish life that one cannot help thinking
it is really part of the author's own experience. The incident is an
adventure in which two of the chief characters in the novel are
concerned—how Philip and Pete, having been fired by reading the story of
the Carrasdoo men, set about becoming pirates and wreckers themselves; how
they wandered away to a cave on the seashore; how they there kindled a
fire with the object of decoying unwary mariners on to the rocks; how,
while dozing and blinking by the fire, they heard voices from the sea
which they at first mistook for the voices of betrayed and perishing
sailors; and how it turned out that the voices were those of relatives in
search of the young wreckers themselves, one of whom was coddled and the
other welted back to their respective homes. "Aw, yes," as a Manxman
would say, "I have gone through the same sort of performance myself,
though." The story of the Carrasdoo men had much about the same
effect on Pete and Philip as the drama of the "Miller and his Men" had on
the writer of this narrative. As the lads in the "Manxman" tried to
become pirates and wreckers, so was this other lad inspired with a wish to
become the chief of a band of brigands. The drama was a stock piece
of the blood-and-thunder sort. It was played as an afterpiece to
"Romeo and Juliet" at Covent Garden Theatre on a famous occasion in
1829—the occasion when Fanny Kemble made her débût
as Juliet, and so took the town by storm that she retrieved the fortunes
of her father, then the lessee of the theatre. And it was played
again at the Haymarket later, when, as Sir F. C. Burnand informs us, it
was ever so much more funny than a burlesque of it that was produced at
the Strand. It remained popular in the provinces long after it had
disappeared from the London boards, and in the canvas booths long after it
had ceased to be performed in the regular theatres. Thus the
horrible misdeeds of Grindolf, the miller, were represented by Mr. Hurd's
dramatic company in the later forties. The chief character was
personated by our great tragedian, Mr. Maclean, while his wife, of course,
was the miller's companion in desperate adventure. Marvellous was
the impression the play produced, notwithstanding the dire climax of the
drama, when mill and miller, maid and men, were all blown up together!
"Aw, yes, I would become a robber myself, though." A little girl who
used to frequent the back seats was to be the "maid of the mill." So
earnest and enthusiastic did the young playgoer grow that he bought a
pistol in preparation for the enterprise. Moreover, knowing that
robbers would need to accustom themselves to work while their victims were
asleep, he wandered into the suburbs at night, away from the lamps and the
shop-lights, in order to overcome the fears and terrors that were always
in his mind associated with darkness. But these expeditions were not
very successful; for the embryo chieftain of a robber gang was, as I can
testify, always mighty glad to get back to the town again. As for
the pistol, which was the only appurtenance of the bandit profession he
ever acquired, it was borrowed by another lad, who said he wanted it for
an amateur performance, and was never seen afterwards.
That the imaginative youth who longed to set all the world
wondering with his fiendish exploits did not develop into a meek and weak
sort of Hooligan was probably due to the fact that he took a serious turn
before he was two years older. But he did not cease to take interest
in the drama, as may be gathered from his recollections of Barry Sullivan
and Ira Aldridge, who both appeared at an improvised theatre in the town
somewhere about 1853. Barry Sullivan, then a tall, slim young
fellow, played Hamlet; Ira Aldridge, being a negro, played Othello without
needing to blacken his face. Sullivan became a great favourite in
the provinces; Aldridge travelled and performed in almost all parts of the
world. Bayard Taylor, the American traveller, records that one of
the strangest spectacles he ever saw was a black man playing an English
tragedy to a Tartar audience at the great fair of Nijni-Novgorod in the
interior of Russia. The black man was Ira Aldridge. |