Walking. Gossip. Travel.

Tag: 200 Years Ago

  • 200 Years Ago in Norwich : Theft from St. Andrew’s Hall (and linking in nicely with Norwich Beer Festival)

    200 Years Ago in Norwich : Theft from St. Andrew’s Hall (and linking in nicely with Norwich Beer Festival)

    And another in my series of posts of what was being published in the Norwich Mercury 200 years ago this week. This is a timely one as it relates to St. Andrew’s Hall and that’s where I’ll be this week, volunteering at Norwich Beer Festival. It likely won’t take place next year due to work in the halls, so I’ll have to make the most out of this one. But, back to the news story:

    “On Saturday evening last, a robbery was effected at St. Andrew’s Hall, and from the appearances must have been attended with considerable violence. The thieves entered through the upper part of the window, on the right hand side of the door, and on their entrance, it is supposed, immediately broke open the desk under it. They then proceeded to the office of the Court of Requests on the other side of the passage, and forced open Mr. Herman’s desk, from which they stole from 7 to 10l worth of copper.

    The villains made an attempt to break open an iron chest, but failed. Their next attempt was upon the Old Library Room, the door of which appears to have been forced open by an iron bar, the panels broken, and the lock completely forced off. A small cabinet standing in the room, containing various silver and copper coins, seems to have been one of their objects. This cabinet they robbed of several of its contents, and appear to have quietly departed. It is curious that this robbery should have effected to near to the direct beat of the watchman, whose box is within 20 yards of the Hall.”

    This is an interesting reminder of the variety of ways that St. Andrew’s Hall and Blackfriars Hall have been used over the years, although none as exciting as Norwich Beer Festival of course. I note the way that the newspaper were unimpressed with the watchman who was meant to keep the area safe. I’m also intrigued by the “Court of Requests”, which seemed to deal with small claims, with Norwich being one of the first to have one. I’ll find out more….

    Oh, and I’m sure I’ll post a few things about Norwich Beer Festival over the next few days to excite and delight my two loyal readers.

  • 200 Years Ago in Norwich : Excessive Gas Usage

    200 Years Ago in Norwich : Excessive Gas Usage

    In my series of posts of things of interest (probably just to me, but perhaps one of my two loyal readers) in the Norwich Mercury of 200 years ago, I rather liked the angry advertisement placed in the newspaper by the Norwich Gas Light Company. They stated:

    “The committee of the Norwich Gas Light Company having ascertained that a large number of the consumers of gas are in the constant habit of burning considerable after the time for which they are charged, and that some persons use it in the morning, feel it necessary to state that if such practices are continued the penalties under the Act will be strictly enforced. They have also appointed an Inspector to enable them fully to carry this resolution into effect.

    Signed, by Order of the Committee, J. Athow, clerk, October 1823.”

    Not long after this the Norwich Gas Light Company were purchased by the British Gas Light Company, so they must have still been a tempting acquisition. In 1825, the British Gas Light Company applied to build a gasworks at the site which is now the courts complex at Bishopgate.

    I’m not sure of the situation in Norwich, but these were the wild west days for the industry with no regulation and certainly no Ofgem to keep energy companies under control. The industry was very competitive and sabotage of rival’s gas supplies were common, meaning that customers consuming more gas that they were entitled to would have been a problem in a sector which was not producing large profits.

  • 200 Years Ago in Norwich : Extraordinary Medical Circumstances

    200 Years Ago in Norwich : Extraordinary Medical Circumstances

    Another post in my series of articles from 200 years ago, this appeared in the Norwich Mercury in 1823. Firstly, any article from this period starting with “the following extraordinary circumstance” is likely to be quite an appealing thing to read and this certainly transpired to be an intriguing story. Not that it was evident from the first line that the newspaper editor wasn’t sure his readers would believe it.

    “The following extraordinary circumstance, although scarcely coming within the bounds of probability, is nevertheless undeniably true. A son of Mr. Thurman, of Cotton [I’m not sure of this, it definitely doesn’t say Catton, but I’m not sure where this place is], in this county, tailor, about 15 years of age, being about eight weeks ago employed in shooting small birds which were in the upper branches of a tree on his father’s premises, when the barrel of the piece bursting, he was stuck to the ground, and the report of the explosion being heard, he was found by some part of the family lying apparently lifeless.

    On removing him into the house it was perceived that he was not dead, and the best medical assistance being promptly resorted to, it was soon discovered that one of his eyes had been forced inward by some part of the gun, and though animation was restored he was incapable of speech, and any kind of nourishment, whether solids or liquids, weer with the greatest difficulty forced down, in quantities so small as scarcely to be sufficient to preserve him in existence. In this painful and perilious state he continued during the space of five weeks, at the end of which time the part of the gun which the explosion had forced into his eye made its way through into his mouth, which took place in the night, and by putting his fingers into his mouth he brought it away; in the morning it was examined, when, to the great astonishment of all who witnessed it, there was the breech of the barrel, the screw, and a part of the wood of the stock, the whole of which had ever since the accident being making its way through the internal cavities of the nostrils, and which, on being weighed, was found to be the weight of two ounces nearly, since which time (except in the loss he has sustained of one of his eyes) he seems to be in a fair way of recovery”.

    I’m mot a medical professional, but is this even possible?

  • 200 Years Ago in Norwich : Died by the Visitation of God

    200 Years Ago in Norwich : Died by the Visitation of God

    As part of my random series of posts from newspapers of 200 years ago, this article appeared in the Norwich Mercury in October 1823. I can’t say that the subject matter is particularly humorous, although I can’t imagine that I will upset any of his descendants given the passage of time, but I quite liked the style of how the proceedings were written up.

    “An inquiry was held at Lakenheath, on Sunday last, by Mr. Wayman, Coroner, upon Mr. William Roper, aged 78, a respectable farmer of that place, who, after eating a very hearty breakfast, and having been previously in good health, dropped down and expired immediately. Verdict – Died by the Visitation of God”.

    This “Visitation of God” is really just died of natural causes, but it was a relatively common description used during the early nineteenth century. It’s an intriguing turn of phrase nonetheless…..

     

  • 200 Years Ago : Norwich Ecclesiastical Court and Moral Outrage

    200 Years Ago : Norwich Ecclesiastical Court and Moral Outrage

    For my latest news from 200 years ago, I was intrigued by this quite long article in the Norwich Mercury in October 1823. It feels interesting because it brings into play the evolution of the ecclesiastical courts and how their power has ebbed away over time and been replaced by the civil courts. Back in 1823, the ecclesiastical courts still had jurisdiction over matrimonial questions and probate, amongst many other things, although they were soon to go. The rules were already archaic at this point and this case showed just how problematic and dated they had become. It’s also an impressive piece of local journalism to bring a case such as this to the attention of their readership, especially on something so controversial.

    “JURISDICTION OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS

    It is one of the facts attending the progress of society, that power conferred in the earlier and darker ages remains where and as it was bestowed, until some strange example of its pernicious exercise shews the possible effect of such a misappropriation of authority, and thus works its destruction. Such we hope and trust will be event of a case which has recently occurred in Norfolk, and which we are now about to narrate.

    It will certainly, we understand, be brought under the consideration of the legislature in the next session, as is sufficient ground for the revision of that part of our code, which respects such offences. Is this district from the benevolent disposition of the prelate who presides, from the character of the officers, down to the very lowest, we have the best assurance such disposition and such character can give, that every process coming under the cognizance of the Ecclesiastical Court would be prosecuted with the most scrupulous integrity and with the utmost lenity.

    This is so well known that it will acknowledged instantly and spontaneously by all our readers. What then must be the nature and principle of those laws under which an injustice so fragrant, and perpetuated by such agents as we shall describe, can be committed, and when men so amiable and so upright as the good Bishop of our diocese and the officers of this court can be made the unwilling instruments of such a legal injury. What evil, what misery might be brought upon individuals by such powers if exercised by men of an opposite temper and precipitate in their judgements? But to the facts.

    The religious society of methodists to divide into certain classes of different denominations, and to each a class-leader is appointed. He solemnly takes upon himself the care of his class, and engages to admonish any of them concerning their mural aberrations. A person in a village in Norfolk this situated, heard that the daughter of one of his class was cohabiting with a married man, the father of a large family. The class-leader privately urged upon his friend the duty of endeavouring to put an end to such a connection. The man exhorted his daughter to quit a course to grossly immoral, who it is presumed, communicated the fact to her adorer. Inflamed by the representation, he one Sunday awaited the return of the class-leader from meeting, and assailed him in the bitterest language. The daughter of the class-leader, a girl of most excellent character, in service in the neighbourhood, interposed in her father’s behalf; the anger of the aggressor was turned against her, and he abused her in terms alike indecent and undeserved.

    The next morning, this girl whilst at work before the dour of her master’s house, perceived the woman who was the cause of the previous dispute, in the road, accompanied by another; an altercation ensued, and it is probably much ill language passed on both sides. This woman (the accused) shortly after entered the house of a man in the neighbourhood, a relation of the class-leader, whom she supposed to have some share in promoting the admonition she had received, and reviled him in the presence of his wife and family so violently, that he was compelled to turn her out, but he positively denies having used any abusive language towards her.

     Soon after, the daughter of the class-leader and the man last mentioned, were summoned to appear before the Ecclesiastical Court on a charge of defamation. All these circumstances occurred in the middle of the year 1821. She attended the court many times at a distance of twelve miles from her home, for examination. This examination, it seems, was conducted by her Judges. The accusers and the accused were never confronted. Such is the practice of the court. In this way she was convicted of defamation, and order to pay court fees to the amount of fifteen pounds. For these fees she was arrested about the middle of 1843 and carried to Norwich Castle for the debt. The man (her relation) was convicted and ordered to pay a sum of twenty three pounds, for which he also was arrested and thrown into prison.

    The evidence upon which these persons were convicted, is understood to have been the woman accused, a woman who had an illegitimate child by the brother of the accused, and a third female who had been imprisoned for disorderly conduct. The case was made known to persons who undertook to enquire into the circumstances, and, who finding it to be exactly as we have stated, but nevertheless conducted according to the strictest forms of law, paid the debt, liberated the prisoners, and intend to bring the revision of law under the consideration of Parliament. We ought perhaps to add, that the proctor employed by the accusers offered to compromise for a small sum, but this compromise the parties from a sense of the injustice (and perhaps not anticipating the result) refused to accept.

    In such a case it appears for us to be highly desirable, that there should be some public, some general expression of abhorrent feeling: and we venture to suggest that a subscription, not to exceed one shilling (or five at most) from each contributor, which has been already begun for payment of the sum, he opened to the country, in order to mark the detestation in which such powers can but be held by every upright mind. Several gentlemen, who have been made acquainted with the proceedings, coincide in this opinion, and the printers of this paper will willingly register the names and receive the contributions of all persons who may be disposed to aid the repeat of a law so obviously liable to abuse and perversion. Indeed we hope to see the whole law relative to defamation and personal abuse revised and put upon a footing that such assaults (which are often very grievous to the individual) may be punished without the admission of power now existing – a power which, as it appears in this instance, may be exercised to crush its victims, even fair claim to the redress it was originally designed to administer. There is no question of party, not advanced for party purposes, but for general right and for general good. We therefore hope to see the Gentlemen of the County stand forward and join in the reprobation of a transaction upon which there can be but one opinion.”

  • 200 Years Ago : Mental Health in the Early Nineteenth Century

    200 Years Ago : Mental Health in the Early Nineteenth Century

    In my series of posts from 200 years ago this week, there were two stories in the same issue of the Norfolk Chronicle and Norwich Gazette which I noticed. These type of stories are very common, so there’s nothing unusual with this, but it’s a reminder of how bad mental health was in the early nineteenth century and how this isn’t just something that is a modern situation as some people I’ve heard have suggested. There’s nothing new about struggling with life, as these two stories suggest.

    Firstly, from Great Yarmouth:

    “An unfortunate female threw herself into the river, near the bridge on the north side, about one o’clock on Wednesday morning; first deliberately taking off her cap, and placing it on the ground, she floated under the bridge, and had it not been for her clothes keeping her buoyant, she must inevitably have met with a watery grave. An alarm was immediately given by the watchman near the bridge, when she was got out with great difficulty, her clothes fortunately caught the rudder of a boat lying under the bridge, or she must have been drawn under by the rapidity of the current and would not have risen again. Jealousy is assigned as the cause of this imprudent act.”

    Mental health issues and insecurity were perhaps the real cause of the act, but this is from 1823 and it feels wrong to judge.

    Secondly, from Oulton, near Lowestoft:

    “An inquest took place before JE Sparrow, coroner, on the body of Susan Sewell, who on Friday 8 August put an end to her existence by hanging herself in a shed contiguous to her dwelling. It was stated in evidence that the deceased was upwards of 75 years of age and had the misfortune to lose her husband by an accident about three months ago, which calamity appeared to preyed so much upon her mind as to lead to self-destruction.”

    And that’s it, a tragic story of what was perhaps a lonely lady who felt she had no other options and I assume nowhere else to go. It all feels like a tragedy to me, but what has changed recently is attitudes to depression and mental health. It has clearly always been there since time immemorial, but at least now it is better understood and there are ways of tackling it.

  • 200 Years Ago : Youths and their Weapons in King’s Lynn

    200 Years Ago : Youths and their Weapons in King’s Lynn

    Continuing on my series of posts from newspapers of exactly 200 years ago, this short article is from the Norfolk Chronicle and Norwich Gazette. The newspaper was published on 30 August 1823, although it related to an incident of the week before in King’s Lynn.

    “Friday last a youth named Tooke was shooting near this town, when the piece burst, and so lacerated his hand that immediate amputation was necessary. The frequent practice of young persons carrying fire arms to shoot small birds, etc, in the vicinity of this town, cannot be too highly reprobated, as several accidents have occurred, and at times it is really dangerous to walk on the public road.”

    It’s perhaps interesting that at the point when this article was published, there were no gun control laws at all in the country. Anyone could carry anything they wanted for whatever purpose. The first legislation which limited this right was with the Vagrancy Act of 1824 where former soldiers from the Napoleonic Wars were often found homeless and in possession of weaponry. The Government weren’t too bothered with the homeless bit, but they felt it sub-optimal to have too many people with guns.

    The back story to this also is that the right to bear arms in the United States at that point came from the position in England. In the new United States the population wanted weapons to defend themselves from not just each other, but also from the Government. Their position on such matters has hardly changed in 200 years, leading to no shortage of guns there. I’m pleased in the UK that today we don’t have the situation of youths in King’s Lynn damaging themselves and each other with weaponry, it would make trips there feel like they had just a little too much jeopardy.

  • 200 Years Ago : Norwich Library and the Arguments for an Increase in Subscriptions

    200 Years Ago : Norwich Library and the Arguments for an Increase in Subscriptions

    During 2020, when there wasn’t exactly a great variety of things to do, I riveted and bored my loyal two readers with a series of posts from old newspapers. I’ve been meaning to do this more regularly, so here we go….. This article is from the Norwich Mercury of 29 August 1823, exactly 200 years ago. It’s all to do with the public library in Norwich, which caused all manner of debate from primarily the middle classes of the time and the newspaper had its own view it wanted to put forwards.

    An article read:

    “The communications to us upon this subject are this week so numerous, that in order to do justice to the strong interest excited, and at the same time to preclude filling our columns with the repetitions involved in the insertion of all the letters we have received, we are compelled to have resource to a summary of our own, in which we hope to give our readers a clear view of the case, while we shall avoid reiterating the disgraceful charges and recriminations which we are sorry to find bandied between the members of two establishments, the Public Library and the Literary Institution, both capable of great public advantage.”

    This is a reminder of how the media at the time really said what it thought, there’s something delightful about phrases such as “disgraceful charges and recriminations”. The first public library in the city was the Norwich City Library established in 1608, which became a lending library in 1716. This evolved into the Public Library, which had been a separate body started in 1784, which spent decades arguing about management and structure before the 1850 Public Libraries Act was passed which changed matters somewhat. Anyway, in 1822, there was the creation of the Norfolk and Norwich Literary Institution and all hell broke loose with rival members sneering at the other. And the Public Library had no money, but more on this in the article.

    “We shall simply observe, that if, as some of the letters addressed to us assert, there is a regular design, systematically pursued among certain subscribers to the latter to put down the former, and if, as others affirm, no such design exists – nothing can be more easy than to disprove the imputation. Those members who belong the Literary Institution have nothing to do but to abstain from taking any part in the transactions of the old Library meeting, a mode of proceeding recommended alike by delicacy and disinterestedness, and the charge falls to the ground; but if, on the contrary, they should be found in active hostility to the advance of the subscription, it will be difficult if not impossible for them to account satisfactorily and honourably for a desire to prevent the improvement of the existing plan of management.”

    What a wonderful middle class debate this would have been, subscribers writing angrily to the papers about the subscribers of the other organisation.

    “We say this much merely to meet the statements of our correspondents; for our own impression is, that after the convincing case of necessity the special committee of the Public Library has made out, every gentleman connected with the Literary Institution will, as a mere matter of honourable feeling, decline to oppose a measure so indispensable to the very existence of the library, as an increase of the subscription. The statement in their Report, on which we ground our opinion, is as follows:

    ‘We next proceeded to examine the finances of the library, and believe the following to be a correct estimate of the necessary annual expenditure, according to the existing laws, independently of the purchase of new books, viz’”

    Delighted as I with the letters page of the magazine Viz, it feels a shame this word (short for videlicet) meaning ‘as follows’ has mostly fallen out of use. But I digress, there’s an angry library discussion being had here. Back to the library report:

    “‘Rent 15l, rates & taxes 12l, repairs 10l – total 37 0

    Payment to trustees 25l, insurance 6l – total 31 0

    Librarian 56l 15 s, messenger and cleaner 14l 10s – total 71 5

    Coals 18l, candles 7l, sundry expenses 14l – total 39 0

    Binding 40l, printing and advertising 7l – total 47 0

    Periodicals 45l, old books replaced 15l – total 60 0

    NB, this statement includes the expence [sic] of the library being open in the evening, which (having been only suspended for the last season by the vote of October 1 1822), recommences on the 1st of September next, according the 13th law.

    It appears, therefore, that we have a permanent expenditure of 285l 5s which must be provided for before any part of our income can be available for the purchase of new books. Supposing then that the actual number of effective subscribers should continue at 490, the present subscription of 12l would produce 291l, leaving only a surplus of 8l 15s, applicable to that purpose, except any sum which may be received for fines, the amount of which is uncertain, and cannot be estimated at more than 15l. On these data we cannot hesitate to express our decided opinion, that it is impossible to carry on the library with the present subscription, and that we deem it absolutely necessary to adopt some new regulations, in order to prevent a more extensive diminution of our numbers.”

    This seems typical of some libraries today, they managed to spend nearly their entire income on wages, trustees, heating and librarians with nearly no money available for new books. The newspaper continued its view:

    “This is decisive. This shews [this word has fallen out of usage, but I prefers it to shows] that it is impossible to carry on the library with any degree of satisfaction to the subscribers, unless the subscription be raised, whilst the defalcation in the subscriptions is attributable almost entirely to the want of new books. The opponents of the measure proceed upon the following principles: –

    1 – That a more economical administration of the finances would suffice for all the purposes contemplated by an advance of the subscription.

    2 – That all former attempts to this end having failed, such a proposition should not be resumed.

    3 – That as the original intention was to institute a cheap source of amusement and information, the principle ought not to be departed from.

    4 – That the subscribers will withdraw, if the subscription be raised.

    5 – That evening attendance is unnecessary, as not applying to more than a few of the subscribers.

    These, so far as we can collect them, are all the objections. We shall then take them in their order”

    I’m getting genuinely excited now to see what the Norwich Mercury proposed, despite the reality that I’m about 200 years late to this debate.

    “Is it possible to conceive that 8,000 volumes can be lodged and commodious accommodation provided for 500 subscribers who may demand admission to the library, at a less rate than 37l per annum? We believe no one avers [meaning ‘states the case’] that a cheaper arrangement could be made, and if we examine the other items, all that could possibly be appropriated to the current demands of the subscribers for books (taking the sum reserved for building to be a prudent provision) is from the item of 39l for coals, candles and sundries. A part and only a part can be deducted, and if we estimate this portion at 17l we leave about 25l in the hands of the Committee for the purchase of new books, beside periodicals. There is not a periodical work admitted into the Library, which is not of acknowledged celebrity and high character. Is there are any man who is at all acquainted with the fertility of modern literature, who will pretend to assert that 25l per annum is any thing like an adequate sum to provide for the most literary appetite of 500 persons? No one will we conceive be found hardy enough to stand up in the face of the society and make such a statement. Such a sum will scarcely purchase even the poetry and novels of the day – productions that are every where the topics of conversation, and which not to have read, almost stamps the individual with the inevitable shame of the darkest and most careless ignorance.”

    I love this, someone who is not up-to-date with novels is guilty of “careless ignorance”. But, then again, there wasn’t much else to do in terms of entertainment back in 1823.

    “These are the most common objects of enquiry, and must be supplied. But ought the provision for a community of 500 persons to be limited to the circulation of these the lowest perhaps though the objects of literary curiosity most in demand? Certainly not. How then is the just and natural desire of the subscribers to be satisfied without an advance of the subscription, and if this desire be not satisfied, is it to be supposed that the subscribers will not withdraw? We conceive they certainly will withdraw, for who will be content to sit down in the assurance of not being able to obtain a sight of any new books without a constant struggle for priority, frequent disappointment and generally not till a long period after its appearance?”

    They’re right here IMO…..

    “Such conditions, and these every dispassionate reader must see are the actual conditions imposed by keeping the subscription at its present rate, would infallibly drive the Society to dissolution. In conclusion we do not hesitate to declare our belief, that the finances of the Library have during the last year been managed with the most rigid economy; and we entertain no doubt that the worthy president will be able to sustain our confident assertion by the most complete and satisfactory proofs. As we have stated in a former article, that plan for a Library designed for the use of the Public, appears to be the most efficient and excellent, which includes at the least expence the greatest quantity of books most universally necessary and desirable. The Public Library is designed for the many, and if the subscription of one guinea be carried, it will, we apprehend, as exactly as can be apportioned, enable the committee to sustain this its original character of general utility.

    All very reasonable, no new books means members will leave…

    “The second ground of opposition is too futile, and we must say too obviously an interested one to need refutation. Every society must always enjoy the privilege of improving itself according to its progress and its means.”

    They didn’t debate that second point for long.

    “The third argument contains in itself the seeds of its own destruction. When the Public Library was first planned, a sum was named, which was then, in the comparatively infant state of the demand for books deemed sufficient for the purpose. It was an experiment untried in Norwich. The charge for the custody and repair of a large library had not then accrued. The number of periodicals necessary, nay indispensable, was nothing like what it is now. Those who originated the establishment naturally anticipated that the means would extend themselves as the objects of the Society extended. It seems a justifiable, nay an inevitable assumption, that as the property increased, as the stores of amusement and of information became a larger, a corresponding disposition would arise in the public to contribute a larger sum for the power of augmented enjoyment and augmented instruction.”

    This is true, they were just a generation too early with this thinking…..

    “And what is the fact? Why, because this disposition was either repressed by supposed obstacles to improvement which an imperfect mode of choosing the committee presented, because such an augmentation was rejected, a new institution has been set on foot, to which the subscription is not only not unmeasured in the niggardly way it is suggested the subscribers to the old library to dole out their support, but it is assessed at two guineas, more than thrice the amount of the contribution (12s) per annum to the Old Library. Here than example goes completely against precept. Here is an instance which shews the consequences of not meeting the fair exigencies [needs] of the times and circumstances on the one hand, and on the other, which practically demonstrates the evils of a parsimonious and the benefit of a liberal spirit.

    In the instance of the Old Library, One Guinea a year is to be refused, we are told, for access to eight thousand standard volumes and a corresponding accumulation of new publications, while Two Guineas a year are not considered too much for the power of reading four thousand volumes, and a similar accession of the works of the day. With a proof to complete before their eyes, it seems next to impossible that the subscribers should not perceive the necessity and advantage of making the comparatively insignificant addition of 9s per annum to their present payment, which, operating over so large a number, would be as efficacious as double the amount over a smaller body. This comparison is but a tribute of respect to the spirit of the supporters of the New Institution, which really cannot be too highly applauded.”

    There’s a parallel here with the closure of public libraries over the last ten years, it’s a short term cost saving with massively damaging long-term results.

    “The fourth ground we look upon to be most palpably unfounded. Nor is it possible to conceive that the addition of so trifling, so paltry a sum as nine shillings  year, or twopence farthing a week, can be an object to any man who either has opportunity or inclination to read. And what is the alternative, what if he does withdraw? Where can he go to compensate himself so cheaply? No where. The supposition then is palpably absurd.

    They seem right here, a small increase in the subscription with an obvious immediate benefit, would likely not lead to a mass withdrawal of members.

    “The evening attendance appears to us to be a question of expediency, dependent upon the actual advantages that are expected to be derived. It seems to us to be of some importance to open to literary men the most ample opportunity of reference, and most especially to the youth of such a city as Norwich, the power if passing an evening amidst such sources of intelligence and gratification as the Old Library affords. And here again example may be pleaded. Other institutions, both in this and other places, have all considered such an addition to the benefits of an establishment indispensable. Why then is the Public Library of Norwich, with an ample list of subscribers, to be denied a similar privilege?”

    It’s an interesting point, where else will people go in the evening and especially younger people? I’m not sure the inns and taverns of the city had a reputation for peace and tranquility at this time.

    “Thus we have considered all the objections that have been sent to us against the proposed increase of subscription, and we hope we may have satisfied the minds of the subscribers at large, both by reasoning and example, that the proposal of the special committee ought to be supported and carried on the ground of general improvement. The Public Library, as the first establishment is endeared to the subscribers by time. It had disseminated an immense proportion of pleasure and information – it has indeed been the moving spring of general, of popular intellectual attainment for the city and county for a very long period. It has amassed a very respectable, nay a very valuable body of books for reading and reference, and in all departments of literature. Its affairs are administered in the most disinterested, in the most economical, and most upright manner. The only law which appeared to militate against the best mode of government will now probably be abrogated, and an unexceptionable method of choosing the committee substituted. The simple fact that the Committee is now self-elected as it were – that of 599 subscribers, 587 are precluded from the nomination of a single member of the directing body, and that the society has thus no effectual control over its executive, will be quite sufficient to work the requisite reformation.”

    I love a bit of politics, the suggestion that there’s a gap between the members and the trustees. It’s likely that’s where the problems arose.

    “It will be rendered, by the advance proposed, the cheapest accessible source of literary pleasure, as well as the most comprehensive, for these terms are of course relative, and take their meaning from the sum subscribed, the number of books already accumulated, and the additional publications that sum will purchase. With all these recommendations it may then be safely submitted to the candour of the subscribers, as well as to their sense of their own interests, whether they will, by the trifling addition of nine shillings a year, secure to themselves the advantages we have enumerated, or whether, in defiance of reason and of those interests, they will shut their eyes upon the inevitable consequence of the increased expence occasioned by the increase of their property, and abandon the child of their care and delight to a premature dissolution. We have better hopes of the good sense of our fellow citizens, and we shall continue to believe, that they will cordially co-operate to preserve to the county and city this excellent and this cheap source of entertainment and instruction, and to give it the renovation, which promises so much of both for the future.

    Without the addition, it is not to be concealed or glossed over, the Public Library will lose its efficacy and attraction, and will die a lingering death. With the addition, it will revive, will flourish and continue to extend the circle of its greatly beneficial agency in promoting knowledgeable and happiness as the derivative of knowledge to multitudes (for the subscribers are units representing families) who in the event of its dissolution, will be deprived of this cheap and excellent source of gratification and improvement.”

    One of the other reasons I’ve typed this article up from 200 years ago is just how measured, sensible and controlled the local media were. I can’t imagine a story of such clarity and understanding appearing in the EDP today, there’s something perhaps alarming that all this time on the quality of debate in the printed media has fallen. The logic behind the article made sense and it’s clear that the editor of the newspaper was aware of how important libraries were and how they needed to extend their reach. That of course happened with later legislation requiring councils to provide free public libraries, but this wouldn’t have felt inevitable at the time. Finally, thank goodness for the public libraries of Norwich.