Category: People

Thomas Wilson JP, over-rules Overseer Isaac Lightfoot, re: Joseph Blackburn, 1773

By Peter Collinge

Whereas Joseph Blackburn of Wigton in the parish of Wigton

in the county of Cumberland hath made with oath before me

Thomas Wilson Dr in Divinity one of his majesty’s Justices

of the Peace and for the said county that he the said

Joseph Blackburn is poor and not able to provide for himself

and family and that he did on Sunday last the 25th of April 1773

apply for Relief to Mr Isaac Lightfoot Overseer of Wigton

in the said Parish of Wigton and was by him refused

to be relieved & whereas the said Isaac Lightfoot hath

appeared before me but he hath not shewed any sufficient

Cause why the said Joseph Blackburn should not be relieved

I do therefore hereby order the said Isaac Lightfoot Overseer

of the Poor of Wigton in the Parish of Wigton aforesaid to pay

unto the said Joseph Blackburn immediately upon producing

this Order the Sum of five shillings and afterwards

weekly and every week the sum of four shillings

for and towards the Support and maintenance of

himself and family until such time as he shall be

otherwise ordered according to Law to forbear the

said allowance. Given under my Hand and Seal

at Carlisle in the said County the twenty-ninth Day of

April one thousand seven hundred and seventy three

Tho Wilson

The handwritten order above, dated 29 April 1773, from Thomas Wilson, Justice of the Peace and Dean of Carlisle Cathedral, has raised a number of questions about the relationship between Wilson and Isaac Lightfoot, the Overseer of Wigton. On the face of it, it seems very straightforward. Pauper Joseph Blackburn had applied to Lightfoot requesting assistance for himself and his family. Lightfoot refused. Blackburn appealed the decision by applying to Wilson. This was part and parcel of the Poor Law process. If they were not satisfied with the decision made by an overseer, claimants could go to the quarter sessions and ask the magistrates to review it.  As happened in this case, magistrates could overrule an overseer’s decision and stipulate what provision should be made for the claimant.

This is a handwritten order, but what is interesting is that there are two different colours of ink used. Most of it is in black including the statement that Lightfoot had appeared before Wilson but had failed to show sufficient cause to explain his refusal to assist Blackburn. Blackburn’s name, the date and the amount to be paid over, however, are all written in a sepia colour. This raises the possibility that this was not an isolated incident. The use of what looks like a standard response pre-prepared by Wilson or a clerk acting on his behalf leaving gaps to be filled in later, suggests that Wilson was in the habit of over-ruling Lightfoot’s decisions. One of our volunteers wondered how many cases were referred during Lightfoot’s tenure as overseer, before adding, ‘By refusing support he would look to be on the side of the rate payers, and when ordered to pay up by the Quarter Sessions he was not seen to be responsible for the expenditure!’ Perhaps a trawl through the quarter sessions may offer an answer. Equally, are there any other instances of this occurring in other parishes in Cumberland, East Sussex or Staffordshire?

Sources

Cumbria Archives, Carlisle, PR36/V/3/9, Wigton Quarter, Overseers’ Vouchers, Jos Blackburn’s order

Edgar Miller, ‘English pauper lunatics in the era of the old poor law’, History of Psychiatry 23(3) 2012, 321.

Richard Bills (1777–1849), Ironmaster, Darlaston, Part Two

By Peter Collinge

Richard Bills’ will (proved 1849) shows him to have been a substantial business and property owner in Darlaston. In the Jackson’s Fold area were three houses with shops and outbuildings ‘now or late in the occupation of my brother Samuel Bills and Joseph Paulton and [blank] Page. Also the dwelling house, shop and appurtenances situate at Butt Cross, Darlaston, and now or late occupied by Thomas Cooper, and land in Kingshill Field now in my own possession’. These were to be given, upon trust, to Samuel Messon[?] gent and John Foster Adams both of Darlaston, who were instructed ‘as soon as convenient after my death [to] sell and dispose of the same by public auction or private contract’.

Richard’s wife, Elizabeth, was given his ‘moiety and other share estate and interests of and in all those erections and buildings knowns as Darlaston Gun Ironworks and Steelworks’. This included messuages, mills, forges, shops, warehouses, counting houses and all steam engines, machinery, implements, utensils, chattels and moveable effects. Elizabeth was also to receive his stock-in-trade, debts and effects which ‘shall then belong and be due and owing to the co-partnership carried on between me and my son-in-law Samuel Mills [and] all the mines minerals and collieries with the engines, gins, machinery and apparatus belonging thereto …’ She was also bequeathed ‘all the residue and remainder of my messuages, buildings, lands and other Real Estate … To have and to hold, receive, take and enjoy … absolutely’.

Richard bequeathed all his ‘household goods and furniture, plate, bedding, linen, china, and other household effects and his money, securities for money, and other personal estate ‘unto my wife absolutely’.

From sum of £500 bequeathed to his trustees, one fourth was given to his sisters Ann Bill (wife of Samuel Bill); one other fourth to Sarah Bill (wife of William Bill) and one fourth to ‘such of my nephews and nieces the children of my late sister Elizabeth Cartwright as shall be living at the time of my death in equal shares’. The remaining fourth was to be placed in trust and invested in ‘freehold, leasehold, personal or any other security or securities as my said trustees or trustee shall think proper in their or his names or name and to pay the interests and dividends thereof unto my said brother Samuel Bills during his life’. But, Richard stipulated ‘if the same shall not amount to ten shillings per week then upon trust from time to time to make up and pay that sum out of the principal money’. If Samuel Bills’ wife outlived her husband she was to receive 5s a week. After their deaths the money was to be placed ‘in trust for my nephews and nieces the children of my said brother’.

At the end of his lengthy will Richard nominated and appointed his wife sole executrix. There then followed three pages of codicils.

‘I Richard Bills Ironmaster do declare this to be a codicil to be annexed and taken as part of my last will and testament bearing date11 September 1839. Whereas I did by my will give, devise and bequeath unto my wife Elizabeth all that my moiety and other share estate and interest of … the Darlaston Green Iron works and Steel works situate in the parish of Darlaston … Now, in case it shall happen that my said wife shall die in my lifetime I give devise and bequeath unto my said son-in-law Samuel Mills all my said moiety and other share estate and interest of and in the said iron works, steel works … and premises and also my said residuary messuages, buildings, lands and real estate’.

In the event of Elizabeth predeceasing Richard, Samuel Mills was also to receive all Richard’s household goods, personal estate, money and securities for money that he had bequeathed to Elizabeth.

Since making his will, Richard’s sister Sarah (the wife of William Bill) had died. Her share of the £500 was now to be divided equally amongst her children.

The codicil was dated13 January 1844

Sources

Staffordshire Record Office, BC/11, Will of Richard Bills, Ironmaster, Darlaston, 1849

This is a work in progress, subject to change as new research is conducted.

Richard Bills, 1777–1849, Darlaston, part one

By Peter Collinge

The overseers’ vouchers for Darlaston contain a number from Richard Bills for flour, household items, provisions and grocery goods including sugar, tobacco, pepper, tallow soap, oatmeal, treacle, yarn, a brush, and candles. From such goods it might be expected that Bills was a grocer and provision dealer, but there is also a voucher for 500 bricks, others for ‘interest paid to the lodge’ and one that includes ‘26 weeks pay for Mrs Dixon at 2s 6d’. Given the variety of receipts, questions arise as to who Richard Bills was and what business or businesses he traded in, particularly as his will of 1849 describes him as an ironmaster.

For what follows it is helpful to have a simplified family tree of the Bills family. The family relationships are derived from the wills of Richard Bills the elder (proved 1819) and Richard Bills the younger (proved 1849). The situation is complicated by the fact that two of the daughters of Richard Bills the elder (Ann and Sarah) married men with the surname of Bill. Not all dates for family members have been traced; others need to be double-checked.

Richard Bills (d.1818) = Mary

They had Richard (1777-1849) who married Elizabeth Mills; Samuel; Ann (who married Samuel Bill), Sarah (who married William Bill of Brownhills); and Elizabeth who married Abel Cartwright. Elizabeth and Abel Cartwright had four children: Francis, Richard, George and John.

Richard’s (d.1849)  wife,  Elizabeth, was the widow of Thomas Mills, by whom she had had a son, Samuel (d.1864). Richard became Samuel’s step-father, although some documents refer to Samuel Mills as Richard Bill’s ‘son in law’.

After the just debts funeral charges and expenses had been paid, the will of Richard the elder stipulated that his real estate and ‘the use wear and enjoyment of all my stockhold goods, money, securities for money, personal estate and effects’ should go to his wife Mary, and after her death to ‘my son in law Samuel Bill and Thomas Harper of Darlaston gunlock filer’ upon trust. They were instructed to sell and dispose of his real estate and premises either by public auction or private contracts as they thought proper.

One third of the money raised was to be given to ‘my said son in law Samuel Bill and Ann his wife to and for their own use and benefit’.  One other third to ‘my son in law William Bill of Brown Hills, Staffordshire, and Sarah his wife to and for their own use and benefit and to my son in law Abel Cartwright of Darlaston, hinge-maker, the sum of £50 to and for his own use and benefit’. The residue and remainder of the money was to be put and placed ‘at interest on freehold or government security or securities’ and the interest paid to ‘my daughter Elizabeth Cartwright for and during the term of her natural life for her own sole separate use and benefit and not to be subject to or liable to the debts control or engagements of the present or future husband or husbands’. If Elizabeth died before her father, then her share of his estate was to pass to her children.

There is no mention in the will of Richard the younger.

Richard the elder nominated and appointed his wife Mary, Samuel Bill and William Bill as executors. There then follows a number of codicils. By the time of Richard’s death both his wife Mary and his daughter Elizabeth Cartwright had died. Consequently, all real and personal estate left to his wife was now bequeathed unto his son in law Samuel Bill and Thomas Harper upon trust. The £50 previously bequeathed to Abel was revoked (clearly Richard thought little of Abel), and the portion left to Elizabeth was now bequeathed to her children Francis, Richard, George and John equally to ‘share and share alike when and as they shall severally and respectively attain the age of twenty one years’.

Sources

Staffordshire Record Office

SRO, D1149/6/2/1/1/3, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 6 April 1816

SRO, D1149/6/2/1/1/19, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 4 May 1816

SRO, D1149/6/2/3/295, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 2 December 1817

SRO, D1149/6/2/3/280, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 11 December 1817

SRO, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, D1149/6/2/3/228, 13 January 1818

SRO, D1149/6/2/3/330, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 18 February 1818

SRO, D1149/6/2/3/157, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 4 September 1818

SRO, D1149/6/2/3/85, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 12 December 1818

SRO, D1149/6/2/4/57, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 19 May 1819

SRO, D1149/6/2/1/6/32, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, n.d.

SRO, D1149/6/2/7/5/39, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 21 November 1822

SRO, D1149/6/2/7/5/22, Darlaston Overseers’ vouchers, 25 November 1822

SRO, BC/11, Will of Richard Bills, gun lock maker, Darlaston, 1819

SRO, BC/11, Will of Richard Bills, Ironmaster, Darlaston, 1849

This is a work in progress, subject to change as new research is conducted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Establishment of Wigton Select Vestry and the Appointment of William Buttery as Assistant Overseer, 1822

By Peter Collinge

Vestries were committees set up in parishes to administer local and ecclesiastical government. They tended to meet at Easter each year to appoint parish officials, to examine accounts and at other times as and when the need arose.

At a vestry meeting on 2 May 1822 the inhabitants of the township of Wigton resolved unanimously that Revd Richard Matthews, in the absence of the vicar of Wigton was to take the chair, to establish a select vestry. Its members comprised ‘substantial occupiers’ of property in Wigton, together with the vicar, church wardens and overseers of the poor. The select vestry was to consist of no more than twenty men and no fewer than five to deal with the ‘concerns of the poor’.

The original members of the select vestry were:

Joseph Hodges of Highmoor

John Taylor esq. of Wigton

Joseph Parkin of Wigton

Thomas McAlpin of Wigton

John Pattinson or Pattison of Newstreet

Joseph Pattinson or Pattison Innkeeper, Wigton

William Bradshaw of Wigton

John Blackstock of Akehead

Thomas Armstrong of Standingstones

John Henderson of Moorhouse

John Smith of Mains

Robert Wise Shopkeeper of Wigton

Mr Isaac Westmorland of Wigton

Thomas Irving, Innkeeper, Wigton

By a ‘plurality of votes’ they resolved to ‘nominate and elect some discrete person to be assistant overseer’ of Wigton.

On 24 May 1822 the select vestry appointed William Buttery ‘as a fit person to be the Assistant Overseer’ with a salary of £12.

Sources

Cumbria Archives, PR/36/119, Wigton, Vestry Minute Book, 1735 – 1885

Tim Hitchcock, Robert Shoemaker, Sharon Howard and Jamie McLaughlin, et al., London Lives, 1690-1800 (www.londonlives.org, version 1.1, 24 April 2012)

The Appointment of Joseph Lancaster as Assistant Overseer, Wigton, 1819

By Peter Collinge

At a meeting of the inhabitants of Wigton on 9 December 1819 it was resolved unanimously to nominate and elect ‘some discreet person’ to be assistant overseer to the poor of Wigton pursuant to an Act passed in the 59 year of the reign on George III. It was also resolved unanimously that shopkeeper Joseph Lancaster of Wigton was just such ‘a discreet and proper’ person and he was duly nominated and elected.

It was agreed that his duties were to be ‘the same in all respects as those which the Rotation Overseers have heretofore been required to execute and perform’. A yearly salary was fixed at £8.

The details of Lancaster’s appointment were entered into the vestry book and signed by the chairman John Dodd.

Sources

Cumbria Archives, PR/36/119, Wigton, Vestry Minute Book, 1735 – 1885

Isaac, Robert and John Lightfoot’s Articles of Clerkship and other career-related matters, Wigton

By Peter Collinge

Isaac Lightfoot seems to have had a faltering start to his legal career. This may explain the covenant included in the agreement binding his son in 1792.

On 26 November 1767 attorney Charles Christian of Moorland Close, Cumberland, paid the duty on Isaac Lightfoot’s apprenticeship indenture. The following year Isaac was articled to Henry Lowes. What prompted this change is unclear at present. Isaac made sufficient progress however to set himself up in practice as one of attorneys of George III at the Court of King’s Bench at Westminster. In January 1775, by articles of agreement he took on William Wilkinson, the son of John Wilkinson of Arkelby, Cumberland, for seven years.

Robert Lightfoot’s early progression in the legal profession followed the same path as his brother Isaac. He too was apprenticed to Charles Christian and then to Henry Lowes.

On 2 November 1792, by articles of agreement, Isaac took on his son John as an apprentice in his legal firm. By the agreement John ‘did put and bind himself clerk to the said Isaac Lightfoot to serve him as such from the day of the date of the said Articles for the term of five years … subject to a covenant’. The covenant stated that if Isaac thought it proper he could assign over his son and the articles binding him at the end of the first, second, third or fourth years of his apprenticeship to ‘any attorney in London or Westminster or elsewhere’ that Isaac though fit to serve out the remainder of his term of five years.

By 1799 Isaac Lightfoot was one of four certified attorneys in Wigton. The others were his son John, and Joseph Martindale, Joseph Stamper.

Sources

The National Archives (TNA), IR 1/25, Register of Duties Paid for Apprentices’ Indentures, 1710-1811, Charles Christian, master, Moorland Close, Cumberland, Isaac Lightfoot, apprentice, 26 November 1767

TNA, CP 5/77/3, Articles of clerkship (as a solicitor or attorney) for Isaac Lightfoot, articled to Henry Lowes, with affidavit, 1768

TNA, Court of Common Pleas: Registers of Articles of Clerkship and Affidavits of Due Execution; Class: CP71; Piece: 1, Henry Lowes, attorney, Wigton, Cumberland, Robert Lightfoot, apprentice, 14 June 1768

TNA, Register of Duties Paid for Apprentices’ Indentures, 1710-1811, Charles Christian, master, Moorland Close, Cumberland, Robert Lightfoot, apprentice, 7 July 1768

TNA, Court of King’s Bench: Plea Side: Affidavits of Due Execution of Articles of Clerkship, Series I; Class: KB 105; Piece: 6, Isaac Lightfoot, attorney, Wigton, Cumberland, John Lightfoot, apprentice, 12 January 1793

The New Law List 1799

This is a work in progress, subject to change as further research is conducted.

Isaac Lightfoot, Overseer, Attorney, and Bankrupt, Wigton

By Peter Collinge

Amongst the Wigton Overseers’ vouchers many are signed by Isaac Lightfoot. One, dated 7 May 1771, was an acknowledgement from Daniel Steel overseer for Wigton Quarter that he has received the remaining cash from Isaac Lightfoot late overseer of Wigton parish.

On 24 March 1789 the London Gazette announced that a commission of bankruptcy had been brought against Isaac Lightfoot of Wigton. Described as a money-scrivener, dealer and chapman, and a prisoner in Carlisle Gaol, he was required to surrender himself to the Commissioners at the Guildhall, London, on 4 and 11 April at 10 o’clock in the morning and at 5 o’clock in the afternoon on 9 May. On these occasions he was to make a full disclosure of his estate and effects. His creditors were also to come to the ‘guildhall to prove their debts’. At the second meeting the creditors were to appoint the assignees (those responsible for gathering in as much of Lightfoot’s estate as they could). At the third meeting Lightfoot was required to finish his examination whereupon the creditors would be required to assent or dissent from the allowance of his certificate. (Granting a bankrupt a certificate would allow him to continue trading in the hope that it would result in the creditors being repaid more of what they were owed). All persons indebted to Lightfoot, or any who were in possession of his effects, were not to pay or deliver them to Lightfoot but to those persons appointed by the Commissioners appoint and to inform Mr Mounsey of Castle-street, Holborn, London.

On 11 April 1789 the Gazette announced that the commissioners were to meet on 21 April following an adjournment on 11.

On 8 September 1789 the Gazette desired that the creditors who had proved their debts should meet Lightfoot’s assignees on 25 September at 3 o’clock at Mr Carlisle’s, at the Half Moon inn, Wigton, in order to assent to or dissent from the assignees commencing, prosecuting or defending any law suits relating to Lightfoot’s estate or effects, including submitting to arbitration, or any other matter relating to the bankruptcy.

More than a year later, in October 1790 Lightfoot was still in Carlisle gaol. The bankruptcy commissioners called a meeting for 16 November to be held once again at the Guildhall, London, (following an adjournment on 27 July 1789) to make a dividend to Lightfoot’s creditors. Any creditors who had not yet come forward to prove their debts were requested to do so, or they would be excluded the benefit of the dividend. All claims not then proved would be disallowed.

The Cumberland Pacquet and Ware’s Whitehaven Advertiser announced that those creditors who had proved their debts under the commission of bankruptcy against Lightfoot should attend the assignees at the Half Moon on Tuesday 7 December 1790 at one o’clock to receive the second dividend from the bankrupt’s estate and to consult on some special matters which would be laid before them. A final dividend was made in November 1791.

In April 1793, more than four years after Lightfoot had been declared bankrupt, the commissioners certified to the Right Hon. Alexander, Lord Loughborough, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, that Isaac Lightfoot ‘hath in all Things conformed himself according to the Directions of the several Acts of Parliament made concerning Bankrupts’. They gave notice that Lightfoot would be granted his Certificate of Discharge on or before the 25 May. From that time onwards he would be free of his bankruptcy.

It is perfectly possible that Lightfoot’s bankruptcy had been occasioned by his activities as a money scrivener, a person who Webster’s 1828 dictionary defined as ‘a person who raises money for others’, and who also invests money on behalf of others in return for a payment of interest. Indeed, the survival of a small number of documents relating to Dubmill Mills shows that Lightfoot was owed money.

Sources

Cumbria Archives, PR36/V/2/46, 7 May 1771 Acknowledgement from Daniel Steel overseer for Wigton Quarter

Cumbria Archives, PR 122/439, Copy of documents relating to Dubmill Mills, (Sale, 1778; repairs 1783; bankruptcy, 1789) (names not stated), on back of copy of declaration by Robert Sibson of Old Mawbray, concerning the money due to Isaac Lightfoot of Wigton, Joseph Osmotherley of Allonby, Richard Barns of Dryholm, and Jeremy Barwise of Nook from the £1867 paid him by “Margery Jackson of London”

Cumberland Pacquet and Ware’s Whitehaven Advertiser, 01 December 1790, p.3

This is a work in progress, subject to change as more research is conducted.