Dorset Ancestors Rotating Header Image

October, 2011:

Tryphena Sparks 1851-1890

Oct 25th, 2011
by Dorset Ancestors.
Comments are off for this post

She was born on the 20th of March 1851. Seven days later her mother went to the Registry Office and formally declared her daughter’s arrival in to the world. She was the sixth child so her parents were by now quite used to taking their children to St. Mary’s church at Puddletown for baptism and they were quietly confident this would be the last time – mother then being 46 years old. Although Tryphena was not baptised until she was six years old.

Fit and healthy, the girl sailed through school and at the age of 15 became a pupil teacher.  Her parents were justly proud when at the age of 18 she went on to a teacher training college in London.  On completion of her course in December 1871 she immediately applied for and was offered the position of headmistress at a day school for girls in Plymouth, Devon.  This was a prestigious post with a salary of about £100 a year – a princely sum for someone from a rural background well used to living amongst people scratching a living from the countryside.

Six years later she resigned her teaching post at Plymouth and married the proprietor of a public house. The couple had a daughter followed by three sons. After the birth of her last child there were complications from which she never fully recovered. Her health deteriorated and she passed away on the 17th of March 1890, just three days before her 39th birthday. She was buried at Topsham in Devon.

Her life had been full, interesting and worthwhile but not remarkable, which begs the question: why, when we enter her name into an Internet search engine, are we offered thousands of entries? Being the cousin of Thomas Hardy would not alone account for Tryphena Sparks’ posthumous celebrity.

In 1890 on hearing of her death Hardy penned a poem he entitled ‘Thoughts of Phena at News of Her Death’ in which he referred to her as “…my lost prize.”  The poem was first published as part of Wessex Poems in 1898 but  interest about a relationship between Tryphena and Thomas Hardy really took hold in 1962 with the publication of ‘Tryphena and Thomas Hardy’ by Lois Deacon in the ’Monographs on the Life, Times and Works of Thomas Hardy’ series.  Deacon claimed the couple had a child together and suggested Tryphena was the daughter of her “supposed elder sister,” Rebecca.  In 1968 Lois Deacon and Terry Coleman published their book ‘Providence and Mr Hardy’ repeating the sensational claim about their being a child.

A few Hardy scholars came out and supported Deacon in her claims and by the early 1970’s even the pages of The Dorset Year Book became part of the battlefield for warring scholars. The claims have been given no credence by Hardy biographers and we have failed to find any hard evidence such as a birth certificate, baptism register entry, census record, or death certificate and conclude that Lois Deacon read too much between the lines of the novels and poetry of Thomas Hardy and relied too much on the memories of a very old lady, Mrs. Eleanor Bromell, Tryphena’s daughter.

Accountants, we are told, can make figures say whatever you want them to say and so it is often the case with family historians who are tempted to bend the facts to fit in with their wishful thinking. It seems Lois Deacon may have fallen into this trap and read far too much into three little words and in the process elevated a young Dorset born school teacher into something approaching cult status.

There are photos of Tryphena Sparks in the photo gallery

Matthew Chubb of Dorchester

Oct 14th, 2011
by Dorset Ancestors.
Comments are off for this post

In the early years of the 17th century the wealthiest man in the prosperous trading town of Dorchester was Matthew Chubb. During his lifetime he held all the important offices of the borough and for a time he was the Member of Parliament for the town. He was enterprising and hard working, though not altogether a self-made man. Much of his wealth was inherited and his journey along the path too riches was helped by marrying well – twice. He was the kind of man who craved the acquaintance of his social superiors, even though financially he had the better of them. Arguably, he was a generous man but his charity was usually self-serving; he liked his good works to be visible and acknowledged.

Matthew was the son of John and Agnes Chubb. John came from Misterton near Crewkerne in Somerset and he married Agnes, the daughter of John Corbyn, a prominent member of Dorchester society. Matthew was born in 1548 and shortly after his birth the family moved to Dorchester where John prospered and quickly established himself, becoming a member of The Corporation and the Town Steward by 1555. There is evidence that John Corbyn conveyed property to John Chubb and in due time this property passed to Matthew.

In the 1560’s Matthew set up a school in Dorchester but abandoned the project when The Corporation sponsored a Free School. He became a scrivener, drawing up wills and conveyances and he appears to have had some negotiating skills, he lent money and was a goldsmith. Like his father he became a member of The Corporation and was himself appointed Town Steward in 1583. He was sent to Exeter by The Corporation to lobby and negotiate for Dorchester to keep the Assizes. In 1601 he became Member of Parliament for the town and was re-elected in 1604, though, on this occasion claimed his health was not up to the job but his colleagues still re-elected him. Actually, Matthew was in good health throughout this period and we are left to assume that it did not suit him to have to be away in London so much.

Towards the end of the reign of Elizabeth I and the early years of the reign of James I he was the most important member of The Corporation but his influence began to wane once the Reverend John White arrived in the town in 1606. It seems Matthew Chubb had quite liberal views and he frequently disagreed with some of the ideas the minister was promoting to his congregation at Holy Trinity. After the great fire of 1613, which destroyed much of the town, many people were convinced they were being punished for their loose morals; congregations grew in all three Dorchester parishes following the fire.

John White was a moderate puritan, though clearly not moderate enough for Matthew Chubb. At one point things between the two men reached such a low ebb that the layman preferred to walk the lanes to Fordington to say his prayers and hear a sermon. It was generally believed that Chubb was behind the anonymous pamphlets distributed in Dorchester suggesting all manner of impropriety on the part of the minister, whose popularity was in the ascendancy.

On November 12th, 1613 Matthew Chubb was authorised by King James I to loan £1,000 towards the rebuilding of Dorchester after the great fire. He and his wife rebuilt the George Inn and endowed an almshouse for women.

Matthew Chubb died in 1617.  His widow, Margaret, died in 1628, when their only son and the heir to their fortune was Matthew Chubb Junior but at the time of his mother’s death he was still under age. Margaret Chubb made a will on April 18th 1625 leaving all her lands and property to Robert Coker on the condition that Joan, his second daughter, married her boy. Robert Coker was a goldsmith who had been a good friend of Matthew Chubb Sr. Matthew and Joan married but Matthew passed away in 1632 and on the January 23rd 1633 Joan Chubb conveyed the property back to her parents, Robert and Martha Coker.

Mrs Bligdon’s Bakery and the Birth of the Dorset Knob

Oct 9th, 2011
by Dorset Ancestors.
Comments are off for this post

This is the story of a Dorset woman who owned and ran the bakery where the first Dorset Knobs were baked. Maria Bligdon could not claim to have conceived the recipe for the delicacy but she was certainly instrumental in its birth and growth in popularity, particularly in West Dorset, where it is still produced.
 
In 1815, Fordington was a densely populated parish on the edge of the county town of Dorchester. Living conditions there were filthy and squalid, so it is difficult to imagine what could have brought William Pitcher to this place from Powerstock, where he would have enjoyed a rural lifestyle with fresh air in abundance. The same could be said of Maria Longman who came from Rimpton Mill near Yeovil, just over the county border in Somerset. It is possible these two young people knew each other previously or may even have travelled there together because on the 22nd of March 1815 they were married at St. Georges Church.

After marrying they didn’t linger in Fordington; they travelled through Dorchester they headed west, settling in the parish of Litton Cheney. Here, they would have been more at home. The stone and thatched cottages, many dating back to the 17th century at ease beside the twisting lanes and busy streams, would have been much more to their liking than the over-crowded tenements of the Dorchester suburb.
 
William and Maria would have worshipped here at the original church dedicated to St. Mary; what we see today is the result of an extensive restoration completed in 1878. It is at St. Mary’s their children were all baptised: Jesse on 11th of August 1816; Mary Brown on 31st of May 1818; John on 5th of March 1820; Nimshi on 13th of October 1822; Levi on 26th of March 1824; Daniel on 9th of September 1826; Maria Brown on 11th of August 1828; Elizabeth Martha Longman on 25th of July 1830 (Buried on 10th of May 1836); William Longman Brown on 19th of May 1833; and Jane on 18th of December 1834 (Buried on 4th of January 1835.) Brown is a reference to grandmother Pitcher’s maiden name.

William Pitcher was born at Powerstock, where he was baptised on Christmas Day 1789. William was the first son of Samuel and Mary Pitcher and he was a miller. Maria Longman, his wife, was born in 1795 at Rimpton Mill, which is near Yeovil and not so very far away from the Dorset town of Sherborne.
 
William handed down his knowledge of milling and baking to his children. In 1851 we find his eldest son, Jesse, working as a journeyman miller at Malassie Mill, St. Savior, Jersey; Levi was working as a miller at Notton Mills, Maiden Newton and William was a Journeyman Baker still living with his parents. One son, William, was a tailor by trade and lived at Portesham.

But it is their daughter Maria who is of particular interest to us. By all accounts she was a formidable woman with striking looks and great strength; reputedly she could handle a sack of flour as well as any man and was known for having her own way.

Early in 1852 Maria married John Bligdon, a man born and brought-up in Litton Cheney, where he was a boot and shoe maker. Soon after their marriage, Maria, who until then had been working as a servant, was able to persuade her husband to let her start a bakery business in the village, which became known as White Cross Bakers and later as White Cross Grocer and Baker Shop.

The business started in a small way with one assistant but quickly grew. Bakery products were delivered by horse and cart to villages with in a radius of about ten miles. In 1881 many villages in Dorset were cut off for days because of deep snow. To meet the pressing need of some of the villages her horses were shod with special nails that prevented slipping, the bread was packed into panniers slung on each side of the horses and a convoy set off on its difficult journey to reach some of the more distant customers.

In 1881 Maria Bligdon employed three bakers and two servants, all living on the premises. Her husband continued his business as a cordwainer. One of these bakers, a Mr Moores, brought with him a recipe for Dorset Knobs, a round savoury biscuit that quickly became a favourite with the customers. It is named after the Dorset knob button. The recipe consists of bread dough to which extra sugar and butter are added. The dough is then shaped by hand and baked three times; the result is very crumbly and similar to a rusk.
 
Nellie Titterington, Thomas Hardy’s, parlour maid, revealed that the author “would most enjoy a cup of soup, followed by two boiled eggs. He finished his meal with Dorset knobs and Stilton cheese, both favourites of Mr Hardy, Dorset knobs especially.”

With fat bacon the Dorset Knob formed the main diet of the men employed by Maria Bligdon at her Litton Cheney bake house and the biscuits were despatched to Dorset soldiers fighting in Africa during the Boer Wars.

Pound Cake was another speciality of the bakery and sold for sixpence a pound; her gooseberry tart was also very popular. A custom from the old days was the making of dough cake; the dough was supplied by the bakery to the villagers who made it into cakes which were baked at the bake house.
 
Those less fortunate, living off parish relief and seeking employment, were given penny bread tickets, which the bakery accepted towards the cost of a loaf of bread, at that time about four pence. The bakery would accept about £5 worth of tickets every month. Given that in those days there were two hundred and forty pence to the pound we can see Mrs Bligdon’s bakery was very busy.

Maria Bligdon was buried at Litton Cheney on 8th of January 1891 aged 63. Her husband, John, died in 1896. It is said that one of their sons took over the business and closed it in 1916. We have found no record of any children and believe it was a nephew who took over the business.

When Mr Moores left the bakery he went to Morcombelake where his sons started a business and produced Dorset Knobs. That business is still in existence today and during January and February the firm continues to bake Dorset Knobs, which are retailed mainly through smaller grocery outlets and exported.

The Trial of Augustine Elliott

Oct 3rd, 2011
by Dorset Ancestors.
Comments are off for this post

Two men appeared at the Summer Assizes in Dorchester on the 15th of July 1749 to answer for their part in the plundering of the Dutch vessel Hope when it ran ashore on the Chesil on the 16th of January 1748, and resulted in ten days of lawlessness on the Chesil.  One of those men was Augustine Elliott; we do not have the name of the other man.

Augustine Elliott was a Portland man. The son of John and Joan Elliott, he was baptised on the 25th of April 1696 and on the 4th of April 1716 he married Joan Mitchell. The couple had a daughter, Edith, baptised on the 15th of February 1717 but we haven’t found at Portland any other children from the marriage.
 
The charge against him was: “Feloniously stealing and carrying away ten ounces of gold and twenty ounces of silver from the ship called the Hope, the property of Hendrick Hogenbergh, merchant of Amsterdam, and others.”

Counsel for the prosecution said in his opening remarks: “My Lord and gentlemen of the jury, I am counsel for the Crown against the prisoner at the bar who stands indicted and charged with a crime of a very heinous nature. Considered in itself it is horrid and barbarous, contrary to the first principle of reason and impressions of humanity. Religion most severely threatens and condemns it. A crime it is which the laws of all civilised societies most strictly punish; a crime in its consequences highly prejudicial to the honour and commercial interest of the kingdom in general. And such in every respect as cries aloud to public justice to lift an avenging hand.”

Counsel went on to describe the conditions at sea and the lack of light from the Portland lighthouse that conspired to cause the Hope to run ashore and said of the people who went to the beach from Portland, Wyke and Weymouth “these people I’m sorry to say it, came not with dispositions of men, but with those of beasts of prey, They came for rapine and plunder.” Counsel said of Augustine Elliott he was “accustomed to prey and ravages of this kind”  and described him as one of two men  who led and organised the men on the beach into one “merciless battalion”  and then sub –divided them into groups of twenty. The prosecution claimed: “In vain did the captain and his company in faltering foreign accents as well as they could “No wreck. The goods ours. Bring it to we and we will pay for it” – meaning the salvage.”

The court was told: “it seems the pillaging parties threw all they could snatch into one heap, for the security of which the prisoner at the bar (Elliott) was posted – as commander of an armed select party. As soon as the reflux of the sea had made the ship accessible, the scattered bands were again united – in a hostile manner armed with cutlasses, clubs, hooks and such like. They marched down to the ship swearing it was a wreck and if not so, they could make it a wreck. Shocking to relate!…the injury of strangers in distress is adding barbarity to iniquity and committing an act exceedingly sinful in the sight of both God and man.”

We learn from the court hearing that the captain with some of his crew made their way off the beach and took the goods they had managed to save to Fleet House, where they had hoped the King’s officers would help them. It seems they were disappointed. Counsel claimed in court: “They came indeed, but basely deserted their duty. Their behaviour was despicably timorous and infamously negligent.”

The description of the events to the court reached the point where there were thousands of people on the beach engaged in plunder when the forces of law and order determined to step in. Three Justices of the Peace with a well-armed group of men finally halted the wreckers and proceeded to search from house to house through the hamlets, villages and towns making many people surrender their ill-gotten gains to the agents of the ship’s owners. About £25,000 worth of goods were retrieved.

Elliott, it was claimed, was the principal organiser and the court was told “He was the muster-master, the treasurer, and divider of the prey amongst his plundering regiment.”

Captain Corneliz came to give evidence but was shy of saying how much his cargo was worth, saying only that it was rich and worth over £30,000. His command of English was not very good.

Next up was Bartholomew Cooper, officer of Customs at Portland. He told the court: “Early Monday morning I heard a loud talking in Chesil parish in Portland that a ship was on shore. I got up, but the thing being doubtful, I went and fed my horse with oats at a stable which was at some distance.” Copper was not a very co-operative witness and Counsel for the prosecution had to question him hard to get him to answer any question directly; we might be excused from thinking Cooper was on Augustine Elliott’s side.

It appears that once Cooper had determined there was a ship wreck, he and two other officers of Customs rode along the beach. Under questioning Cooper eventually told the court that there were at least 2,000 people digging and turning over the beach, the ship was pretty much dashed to pieces and he added “My business of surveying would not let me stay long.”

Further evidence was provided to the court that plainly supported Elliott. Another officer of Customs, Benjamin Roper, an officer in Portland quarries, told how he was at Schollard’s public house at Chesiltown when a great number of people clamoured for a division of the loot. Elliott, said Roper, was for keeping the money together till the owners called for it: “But within doors they insisted on sharing the money, as I was told, or else they would burn the house.”

Another witness, John Comben, gave similar testimony. He said “when bags were found they were hoisted on his horse and taken to a boat on the shore of the Fleet…” He said he did not see Elliott in the boat “but saw a man at some distance who mid or mid not be the prisoner. The Captain, I mind, did ask me for a bag but then I had none, The Tuesday after there were a great many of Weymouth, Wyke and Portland at Chesiltown to have the money divided. I did not see the prisoner at first myself but after I did and he said he was for keeping the money together till called for by the owners. But many threatened him, if the money were not divided, and accordingly, it was the next morning – it was £7 a piece.”

Elliott’s defence Counsel took this argument further. “We have several sufficient witnesses to prove,” he said, “that the prisoner in the whole affair acted an open and public spirited part. What he assisted in carrying away home was with an intention to save and not destroy; to preserve for the owners and not to steal and keep from them. On this generous fixed principle he not only acted himself but to his utmost laboured to bring the company he was concerned with to behave in the same humane and honest manner.”

The defence produced a receipt for the money Elliott was charged with stealing, it had been handed to the ship’s agents. The prosecution suggested the money had been brought in as an afterthought by his friends four days after Elliott was committed to stand trial and this was a ruse to mitigate the charges against him.

John Hutchins’ report of the trial reveals the defence had a second strand: arguing the Dutch were pirates who had argued amongst themselves over the division of their bounty and then deliberately ran the ship on shore and deserted her for fear of being taken and punished. The two argued that the Dutch had taken the goods from the Spaniards, who had bought and paid for them; thus they maintained it was lawful to plunder pirates.

Elliott’s trial lasted six hours and thirty minutes and the jury brought in a verdict of “NOT GUILTY”

Afterwards, Judge Baron Heneage Legge, commented: “As the nature of this in itself, and the penalties of the law, have been fully and plainly open in the preceding trials, so I am strongly inclined to hope these proceedings might have their proper design and influence, in causing crimes of this sort to cease amongst us.”

An anonymous reporter at the time wrote a layman’s summing up, saying: “As at a moderate computation 10,000 from all parts of the county, of farmers, tradesmen, labourers with one Lord of the Manor, have been concerned either in carrying away part of the property of this ship themselves, or in purchasing the same off them that did so; it is therefore far from being any matter of wonder to find the jury under a strong disposition to favour such, as were tried for offences of this kind.”