Following up a letter to Crossley

I think one of the most interesting aspects of historical study is the discovery of unexpected avenues of exploration which open up when we look at even the most seemingly commonplace pieces of information. I am thinking here of random historical study, undertaken for its own sake; unconnected with any prescribed syllabus, and free from the tyranny of supporting an extended hypothesis. Without these constraints, we can wander freely away from our original source and find ourselves in new and quite unconnected but rich and rewarding areas of interest.

For a while, in the nineteenth century, it seemed that all literary and antiquarian roads led to James Crossley, and in 1860, he received a letter from Joseph Parkes (1796-1865). Parkes was a Birmingham solicitor, municipal reformer and antiquarian, whose magnum opus was to be the Memoirs of Sir Philip Francis, with Correspondence and Journals, and he wrote to Crossley with some minor queries concerning Francis and various associated literary topics. The letter contained a flattering reference which may have been calculated to elicit a response, but was also a fairly accurate description: 'Your mind is a bonded warehouse of Literary Knowledge and your house is a Mausoleum of Curious and valuable & many more books.'

Unfortunately, Parkes died before he could finish this work, and the two volumes were completed by Herman Merivale, and published in 1867. Parkes's preface, written in 1865, contains no reference to Crossley, but tantalisingly, Merivale adds: 'Mr Parkes's Preface contained acknowledgements of the communication of some of other papers which he deemed of value; but as these have not been used by the present editor, the passages in question have been omitted.' Could he have been referring to communications from Crossley? How intriguing!

Let's travel a little further afield. Who was Sir Philip Francis (1740-1818, pictured left)? Well, he was a British civil servant, born in Dublin and educated in London. After serving in many minor government posts he became, in 1773, a member of the Council of Bengal; in 1780 he fought a duel with Warren Hastings (with whom he was always quarrelling), and was seriously wounded. In 1781 he returned home with a fortune gained at whist. He entered parliament in 1784, and was energetic in the proceedings against Hastings.

Now we need a reminder about Warren Hastings (pictured below, 1732-1818, the same year as Francis's demise) . He went out to Calcutta in 1750 as a writer in the service of the East India Company, and in 1772, after a brief return to England, became governor of Bengal and president of the council. The majority of the council, led by Philip Francis, were opposed to Hastings from the first. The finances were in disorder and one of Hastings's first tasks was to bring to trial the two fiscal ministers of Bengal on charges of embezzlement. The case broke down, and charges of corruption were brought against Hastings. He was certainly a tough and ruthless administrator of the region and made many enemies, especially Francis. On his return to England in1788, his conduct was the subject of a parliamentary enquiry and he was impeached at the bar of the House of Lords in a case which dragged on until 1795, when he was acquitted, though ruined by the expenses of the proceedings. However, the East India Company made a generous provision for his declining years and he ended his life as a country gentleman in Worcestershire.

So we have travelled quite a distance from Crossley's house in Booth Street, Manchester in 1860, when the letter from Parkes arrived,  but it's fascinating how one enquiry can lead to another, and another. The ODNB gives fuller information and bibliographies on the lives of Francis and Hastings, and your library will probably have access this excellent source. Of course there's always Wikipedia, though their article on Francis suffers from 'multiple issues'. Incidentally, the brief Wikipedia article on Crossley was not written by me, though the one in the ODNB was.

On Crossley's birthday, March 1876

Crossley's birthday (31st March) is approaching. Raines writes:

'The years pass away too rapidly, but it is delightful to find that they deal so gently with you, and that you really find life worth having, as you enjoy good health, although we cannot conceal the fact that after three score and ten years, the next ten is a Balaclava charge into the jaws of death.' (Raines to Crossley, 27th March, 1876)

More from Raines

The correspondence between Raines and Crossley is a rich source of sidelights on the attitudes and opinions of one section of nineteenth-century Mancunian society. Middle-class Tories and antiquarians both, their views on current political and social matters inevitably crept into their letters. For example, in the 1870s (actual date uncertain), we learn that 'Mr Fielden, the MP for West Riding, has applied for admission to the Society of Antiquaries and is seeking referees'. This would be Joshua Fielden (1827-1887) , the son of John Fielden the radical Liberal MP for Oldham, who had had the temerity to oppose child labour in factories, advocating a reduction in working hours for children and the introduction of a minimum wage.


Raines rather condescendingly provides a reference for Joshua and recommends that Crossley follows suit. The Canon continues: 'He [Fielden] is a very pleasant man, and antiquarian tastes may rescue him altogether from the mire of Radicalism and Dissent.' This is rather unfair to Joshua, who, unlike his father, was a Conservative MP. The charge of dissent is closer to the mark, as the Fieldens were strong Unitarians and Joshua provided funds to build a Unitarian church in Todmorden and helped to introduce salaries for ministers.

An invitation to dinner at Milnrow

The Rev. Canon Francis Raines, vicar of Milnrow (near Rochdale) edited many volumes of Chetham Society publications and was a great friend of Crossley's. In a letter dating from the 1870s (precise date unknown) Raines invites his friend to dinner, as follows:

'Dinner is for 5.00 pm. The omnibus does not leave the Ship Inn (near the station) until 2.00 pm, which may not be a very convenient hour, but cabs may be had to Milnrow for a couple of shillings. As this is Lent we shall provide plenty of Fish, Eggs and Vegetables'

Crossley's reply has not been preserved.

Crossley on the 1867 Reform Act

 

Crossley wrote to his friend Canon Francis Raines, Chetham Society editor and Council member, on 23 August 1867, giving his opinion on the Reform Act of that year. This piece of legislation had been brought forward by Disraeli, then the Chancellor of the Exchequer in a minority Conservative administration led by Edward Stanley, the fourteenth Earl of Derby, whose son Edward Henry was also in Parliament at the time and was a keen supporter of Disraeli. In response to popular feeling, Derby is said to have suggested that 'of all possible hares to start, I do not know a better than the extension to household suffrage, coupled with plurality of voting.' An earlier bill introduced by Gladstone had failed, and by some adroit political manoeuvring Disraeli managed to beat Gladstone at his own game, enfranchising a larger portion of the population than even his rival had imagined. He gambled on the proposition that large portions of the working and lower-middle classes would vote Conservative, but predictably, this view was not shared by many in his party. 

In Crossley's letter we see how a provincial dyed-in-the-wool Tory viewed the matter. The relevant part of the letter runs as follows:

The Reform Bill, which some respectable, but rather obtuse Baronet or member of Parliament is selected to do for a Bubble Company - to give plausibility to the scheme which a distinguished professor of Legerdemain ie, my friend Dizzy is making a job of. Alas! Alas! for the name of Stanley. He cannot look at you without being rebuked by the spirit of his great Ancestor ... The Monarchy is doomed.

Did Hobbes squint?

In 1847, Horatio Rodd, an art dealer, approached Crossley with a portrait of Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), the great philosopher and author of Leviathan. Crossley replied that 'Hobbes squints', which may have a been a stratagem for reducing the price, a practice for which our hero was notorious among booksellers.

He must have arrived at an agreeable purchase price because the portrait appears in Sotheby's sale of his effects in 1885, two years after his death, described as 'Portrait of Thomas Hobbes in gilt frame'. According to a pencil note on Central Library's copy of the catalogue, the selling price was £2-12/-.

Above is a portrait of Hobbes, which is unlikely to have been Crossley's, but gives a clear image of his features. What do you think? Is there any evidence of strabismus in this image of the great man?

Life at Booth Street in the 1830s

Crossley lived at Booth Street, Piccadilly, from 1820 to 1869 (see the Railway Menace post below), and during that long period he entertained a distinguished party of literary guests, including his lifelong friend William Harrison Ainsworth, Charles Dickens and Dickens's first biographer, John Forster. For a fuller description of this, see chapter 5 of James Crossley: A Manchester Man of Letters, where the cramped conditions of Crossley's accommodation are noted by Dickens after his visit in January, 1839. Despite this, our hero managed to live very comfortably, as the housekeeping accounts for 1836-8 show. These are among the Crossley MSS in Chetham's Library (ref: A.2.59), and below is a selection of entries which, judging by the hand and spelling, were probably written by the housekeeper:

Beef and Stake (sic)  4/4d, Wine glass 11d, Pies 1/3d, Beer [recurs many times] 2d - 2/2d, Shoes cleaning 8/-, A Fowl 2/-, A Rabbit 1/3d, Tea and Sugar 5/9d, Eggs 3d, Beef and Mutton 9/8d, Candles 2/-, Mending 1/3d, Bread and Milk 4d, Veal and Stake (sic) 5/3d, Pies and Puddings 1/6d, Butter, Potatoes etc., 3/11d, Lamb 3/6d, Nurce (sic) £1-4s-0d, Cook 6/0d, Waiter 5/0d [the last two probably for a special occasion such as Dickens's visit], Chickens 7/6d, Sugar and Tea 5/9d, Coffee 6d, Cowcum beer [cucumber?] 10d, Almonds and Raisins 1/6d, Strawberrys (sic) 1/4d, Porter 4d, Night coates (sic) 2/6d, Pepper and Mustard 1/-, Pork and Stake (sic) 4/3d, Apples and Onions 3d, Veal Pies 1/3d, Celery 6d, Ribbon shoe ties 1/3d, 16 weeks Lodging £16/16s/0d, Oysters 1/9d, Fowls 3/9d, lemons 2d, Coco (sic) 6d.