Charles Herbert James – The Melting Pot

Women’s Suffrage in Merthyr Tydfil

Transcribed below is a report which appeared in the Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian 150 years ago today – 18 October 1873.

A meeting was held at the Zoar Chapel, Merthyr, on Tuesday evening, for the purpose of hearing addresses on the Female Suffrage Question. Mrs. Crawshay, of Cyfarthfa Castle, presided, and was supported by Mrs. Fawcett, wife of Professor Fawcett, Miss Lilias S. Ashworth, of Bath, etc.

Mrs. CRAWSHAY, who was received with acclamation, said: “I share with all present their anxiety to hear the two gifted ladies who are my guests tonight; but it has been intimated to me that a few words on my own part would be acceptable to some among the audience; and as I have always found my Merthyr friends most kind and indulgent in listening to me – notwithstanding all my wicked notions – I propose making a remark on the assertion that ‘women don’t want the suffrage.’ (Applause). Mr. Henry James said at Taunton, last week, that if he were sure even half the women of England desired the franchise he would vote for it, and he seemed to fancy that he was acting in accordance with the wishes of the majority of women in England in declining to vote for it. This may to some extent be true – the black slaves did not care to be set free – there must be some little experience of freedom before it is valued. But why should the women of England, who don’t want to vote, be so afraid of the suffrage being given to those women who do? They will no more be obliged to vote than men are. There are many women who do not use this privilege – do not fulfil their duty – but it would be a strong plea to bring forward, that we must not allow any men duly qualified to vote, because some do not care to vote. (Hear, hear, and cheers).

Who is he who knows what proportion of women are anxious to have a voice in making the laws by which they, no less than men, are bound? No one – for the tyranny exercised by some men is so great that they prevent their wives and grown-up daughters hearing any discussion on the subject when anxious to do so. (Hear, hear.) To my knowledge there would have been some here tonight who are kept at home as if they were either children or idiots. Is it likely this state of things will continue? No. Because at some of these meetings the absence of Mrs. or Miss So-and-so will be deplored, and the true reason for her absence given; and those men who act thus tyrannically by their wives and daughters are the very ones who would most shrink from having such conduct traced home to them. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) It is only the most noble and the most generous of husbands and fathers who at the present time allow their women-kind the exercise of intellect; but the others will have to do so, and then Mr. Henry James will find himself obliged to vote for the enfranchisement of women, if he will either gain or retain a seat in the House. (Hear, hear, and cheers.)

I feel sure that one reason why narrow-minded men are so averse to greater independence of thought on the part of women is that they fear it might raise the standard of intelligence throughout the country. This is a strange fear, while there are physiologists who assure us that the mind of woman is in itself an inferior article to man’s mind. Perhaps they will have to modify this idea some day. (Hear, hear, and cheers.) In the year 1801, M. Sylvain Marechal wrote a book in which he discussed the question, ‘Ought women to learn the alphabet?’ This is ironical, but really it is the point where the men went wrong. (Hear, and cheers) They should have resolutely answered ‘No.’ But, only think, had they done so, what a far backward position Europe would hold now, for it is clearly a decree of Providence that one class cannot rise without the rest, any more than one individual can do so. What is the meaning of all the martyrdoms of all the ages? Only that the martyr was in advance of his time; and that is a crime so resented now, no less than in ages past, that though it is no longer punished by physical tortures, mental torture is still in vogue. (Loud cheers.)”

Mr. CHARLES JAMES, after some appropriate remarks, moved the following resolution:- “That the exclusion of women, otherwise legally qualified, from voting in the election of members of Parliament, is injurious to those excluded, contrary to the principle of just representation, and to the laws in force regulating the principles of municipal, parochial, and all other representative governments.”

Mrs. FAWCETT, supported the resolution in an able speech, saying in conclusion that it was a flagrant injustice to exclude such a woman as Lady Burdett Coutts for instance, from the suffrage. They were determined to go on in their endeavours, and they would not be debarred from their purpose by any cry of unnatural alliance between themselves and the Tories. She hoped the time was not far distant when such meetings as the present would become no longer a necessity for the attainment of their object.

Mr. W. JONES, of Cyfarthfa, moved the following resolution, “That a petition to the House of Commons be adopted and signed by the chairman on behalf of this meeting, and that a memorial be forwarded to Mr. Richard and Mr. Fothergill, members for the borough, requesting them to support Mr. Jacob Bright’s Bill to remove the electoral disabilities of women.

Miss ASHWORTH, who on rising to second the motion, was loudly cheered, said that doubtless many present were convinced of the justice of the claim of women to representation, but she believed more cordial support would be given were they convinced that women were sufferers from the want of representation. Referring to the borough and county members Miss Ashworth observed:- “I have lately been looking through the division list of the House of Commons, and I find that the measure to which I have alluded has not been supported by one particular party, but by Liberals and Tories. Mr. Gladstone has given his adhesion to the principle, and Mr. Disraeli has voted for the Bill over and over again. Indeed, many of the foremost statesmen in the House of Commons have voted for it, and I am pleased to find Mr. Henry Richard (loud cheers) – each year records his vote in favour of the Women’s Disabilities Bill and one of your members for the county – Mr. Talbot – has voted every time for it; but Mr. Vivian has voted against it, and Mr. Fothergill has voted against it. Mr. Vivian’s, I think, is a most hopeless case, because he has voted against it both times lately. (Laughter.)

Now, Mr. Fothergill has missed for two whole years, and I really think if you bring some pressure to bear upon him he will be very likely converted. I unhesitatingly state that it is no credit to any Liberal member in the House of Commons that he should vote against the Women’s Disabilities Bill and as a general election is not perhaps so far off, I say to you, working men, many of whom I believe I see before me, that a man who does justice to women is a man most likely to do justice to himself. When a general election comes round, I ask you, whatever candidates come forward, that they should all be questioned upon this subject, and it should be clearly elicited from them how they intend to vote when they go to the House of Commons. And another thing I should like to ask you to do is to send a largely signed petition to your members. I don’t think Mr. Richard needs one, because he seems always right. Mr. Vivian’s, I repeat, is a hopeless case, but I am sure Mr. Fothergill would appreciate one if it were very widely signed” (laughter, and much cheering) – during which Miss Ashworth resumed her seat. The resolution was seconded and carried amid applause.

The RECTOR of MERTHYR, in supporting a vote of thanks to Mrs. Crawshay, Mrs. Fawcett, and Miss Ashworth, concluded as follows:- “I was at Bath the other day, and was informed that there were thirty thousand women there, and in the height of the season, in excess of men. Why is this? Why, simply for the reason because the young men of the present day don’t do their duty in the way they ought. (Applause.) They ought to set about marrying at once. With this view, then, I hope the measure under discussion will succeed, and I hope the women who do this will get an Act of Parliament passed that a poll-tax be put on every man that is not married. (Laughter and cheering ). The assembly then broke up.

Memories of Old Merthyr

We continue our serialisation of the memories of Merthyr in the 1830’s by an un-named correspondent to the Merthyr Express, courtesy of Michael Donovan.

Charles Herbert James *(1817-1890), M.P. for Merthyr between 1880 and 1888*

It may, perhaps, be apropros to explain as to the basin and Merthyr Tramroad. In “Tredgold on Railways” it is stated that the tramroad was made under Parliamentary powers, but upon my saying so in his hearing the late Mr Charles Herbert James told me it was not so, but that it was constructed by private arrangement. Be that, however, as it may, it is certain it was made with a branch to the canal at Merthyr, and the total number of shares was 14, of which nine belonged to the Dowlais Company, three to the Penydarren, and two to the Plymouth Companies.

These proportions remained until the Dowlais Company’s application to Parliament to construct the branch from the Taff Vale Railway to Dowlais, when, after a good deal of fighting, the Dowlais Company agreed to hand over their interest in the Tramroad if the opposing companies withdrew opposition.

It may, perhaps, be unknown to some of your readers that Parliament would not give powers to make a railway unless it was shown to be a public benefit, and, therefore, the conveyance of passengers as well as goods, other than the requirements of the works, had to be proved and the obligation of carrying for the public undertaken. The Act was passed, and the line being made, passengers were taken to Dowlais down the incline. Through carriages were run from Cardiff, and were detached at the bottom of the incline, and reconnected as necessary, but it did not do very well, and a fatal accident arising from the carriages running wild caused a discontinuance of that passenger traffic.

As far as can be recollected, some buses were started to run, but they were subsidized by the Dowlais Company for some time. At the first opening of the Taff Vale Railway to Merthyr – it had previously opened to Navigation (Abercynon) – the Dowlais Company made a connection, and drew their buses to the Basin tramroad alongside of what is now the connection; unloading, or rather, the transfer of their traffic from the railway to the tramroad being carried out at the foot of the incline. For their assistance by way of evidence, Mr John Locke, the engineer of the then so-called Grand Junction Railway was had, and in describing the old tramroad, he distinctly stated it was not usable for locomotives. Upon its being conveyed to him that there was in the committee room a person who had gone over it on an engine with load scores, if non hundreds of times, he corrected his stated, and qualified it by adding “not economically”.

It has been stated that nine shares were given up by the Dowlais Company; of these, five were apportioned to Penydarren, and four to Plymouth, their respective shares thus becoming: Penydarren, eight; Plymouth, six. Although the Penydarren Works came to a stop, these shares continued as an appanage, and upon the acquisition and re-starting of Penydarren by the Plymouth Company, the shares naturally passed to that company, and although the whole has now become of little value (at least, at the present) it would seem as if the old road from Penydarren end was now entirely vested in the Plymouth Company.

To be continued at a later date…..

Death of Penry Williams

135 years ago today, Penry Williams, the famous Merthyr-born artist died in Rome. The article transcribed below appeared in the Cardiff Times on 8 August 1885.

DEATH OF PENRY WILLIAMS, THE MERTHYR ARTIST.

LETTER FROM MR C. H. JAMES, M.P.

We have received an intimation that Mr Penry Williams, the artist, died at Rome on Monday morning last, in his 86th year. Mr C. H. James, M.P., writing to, us from Brynley, Merthyr, thus speaks of the deceased painter:- “He was Merthyr born, and attained considerable renown in his profession, several of his works having got into our National Galleries, and into many of the houses of lovers of art in England.”

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

A recent “History of Merthyr” states that Penry Williams was the son of William Williams, a house painter; and after his childhood had passed, with its indications showing the bent and genius of the lad, he began to assist his father, until his remarkable skill in drawing and painting attracted the notice of Mr W. Crawshay, who eventually acted the kind patron, and sent him freighted with letters of introduction to influential people in London. Amongst others he was introduced to Fuseli, then keeper of the Royal Academy – one of those kind-hearted and eccentric men who are apt to be misjudged until thoroughly understood. Penry showed him several sketches he had taken amongst the Welsh mountains, to the great delight of Fuseli, who insisted on purchasing them, and from that time became his staunch friend, and gave him the entrée into the academy until he had won his right to enter there by an exhibition of his artistic powers. This he did in a short time, and steadily worked his way upward to renown.

Years passed in the tedious and often painful struggle for a secure position in the world of art. Every now and then he would visit Merthyr, and the seats of gentlemen who had shown an interest in his welfare, and from them always received hearty welcome and good commissions. For Sir John Guest he painted some charming pictures that were the special favourites when exhibited at the British Institution in Pall Mall: and others of our leading iron-masters were only too proud to possess some of his gifted productions. From that era we trace his career, and see him in the most delightful scenes of England, studying the ever-changing beauties of nature with an eye that never tired and a love that never faltered. Amidst the lonely mountains of his own home, in the ravines of the North, among the bosky shades of Tintern, and then again on the Continent amidst all that nature has perfected in its witchery of beauty, and man has made classic and immortal, there was he to be found perfecting his artistic powers until they ripened in fair proportions, and he became known and famous.

Sir Thomas Lawrence, Gibson, the sculptor, Sir Charles Eastlake, and many others of the gifted band were proud to call him friend, and began a friendship that ended only when, one after another, these peerless men passed away. The story of his efforts and of his triumphs is a long but a triumphant one, for the lad who painted Merthyr signs, and knew many of life’s hardships in his youth, eventually reached the highest eminence, was singled out and patronised by royalty and, far more than this, besides distinction and approval from royal hands, became one of those world-honoured artists of whom Britain is justly proud.

A brother of Penry, deaf and dumb, exhibited singular ability in youth as an artist, but he died ere a prominent position had been won.

Sir William Milbourne James

William Milbourne James was born in Merthyr Tydfil in 1807 to Christopher James a prosperous provision and later wine and spirit merchant originally from Swansea who had settled in Merthyr with premises on the High Street. His cousin was Charles Herbert James, who later became Member of Parliament for Merthyr Tydfil. He was educated privately at the school run by John James of Gellionnen before entering Glasgow University.

He was called to the Bar from Lincoln’s Inn in 1831. He read in Fitzroy Kelly’s chambers, and attended the Welsh sessions, but specialized in the court of chancery. Ill health forced him to spend two years in Italy before his call and slowed his career; but in time he acquired a large practice. He also became junior counsel to the Treasury in equity, the Office of Woods and Forests, the Inland Revenue, and the board of works. In 1853 he became Queen’s Counsel and a bencher of Lincoln’s Inn, and succeeded Richard Bethell, First Baron Westbury as vice-chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

In 1836 James was included in the preparations for the record breaking balloon trip funded by Robert Hollond, in which the English balloonist Charles Green and two companions flew from Vauxhall Gardens, London, to Weilburg, Germany, a distance of 480 miles. Green’s 18-hour trip set a long-distance balloon record for flights from England not beaten until 1907. James was one of six people included in the commemorative painting which is now in the National Portrait Gallery in London. He can be seen in the painting below, third from left. Robert Hollond is at the far left and Charles Green is second from the right.

A Consultation prior to the Aerial Voyage to Weilburg, 1836 by John Hollins. © National Portrait Gallery NPG 4710. Used with their kind permission.

During his legal career, he held the posts of Junior Counsel to HM Treasury in Equity, Junior Counsel to the Woods and Forests Department, the Inland Revenue, and the Metropolitan Board of Works.

In 1846 James married Maria Otter, daughter of William Otter, Bishop of Chichester. In 1853 he became Queens Counsel. In 1869 he was made a Knight Bachelor, and appointed as Vice-Chancellor. In 1870 he was appointed Lord Justice of Appeal and a Privy Councillor, which entitled him to sit on the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. He was also a member of the Reform Club.

While a Lord Justice of Appeal, he decided Lambe v Eames (1871) LR 6 Ch App 597, which is a leading case on the construction of declarations of trust, and Ex parte Mackay (1873) LR 8 Ch App 643, a foundational case in bankruptcy law.

In 1880 he was considered for the nomination to the Merthyr Tydfil seat when his cousin was elected, but by that time James had lost touch with Welsh affairs and had little interest in the Welsh national movement. He died the next year in 1881 at his London residence.

Following his death, The Times newspaper reported:
“The public have been deprived of a servant of rare ability and supreme integrity, a Judge of the highest order, and every lawyer will feel that the Bench has sustained a serious loss. There may still be left his equals in learning – though his knowledge of some branches of law was admitted to be unique. But we may well doubt whether we shall soon see again that happy mixture of acumen, shrewdness, good sense, set-off by powers of felicitous and forcible expression, which made his judgements carry conviction alike to laymen and to lawyers”