The Extraordinary Affair at Barnoldswick

[FROM OUR OWN REPORTER.] BARNOLDSWICK, Monday Night.

 The excitement aroused by the action of the vicar in refusing to bury one of his parishioners under somewhat peculiar circumstances is still very great. As may be gathered from the paragraph in today’s Observer, the case is one which is of more than local or passing interest.

Situated as it is on the very verge of the West Riding, Barnoldswick is but little known to the outside public, although the inhabitants of “Barlick”, as they love to call their hamlet, are not by any means inclined to think themselves of small importance in the world.

The village, which contains about 2500 inhabitants, is an old one, although at the present time it has developed, or perhaps degenerated, into a small manufacturing town.

Its inhabitants, removed as they are from the great highways of modern civilisation, are people of very strong and clannish prepossessions, and but slight incentive is required to arouse these propensities into aggressive action.

Some three years ago, for instance, a squabble took place among the members of the Baptist denomination, and the minister was requested to resign. This, however, he refused to do. His chapel was shut against him, and he retaliated by continuing his ministry in another building; while, on the other hand, the congregation of the old chapel, which had an endowment for the payment of the minister’s stipend, have removed to a barn, in which they still conduct service. During the whole of these three years the old chapel has remained locked up, each party being apparently doggedly determined that it shall not be used by the other.

About three years ago, in 1870, on the death of the former incumbent of St. Mary-le-Gill-cum-Salterforth, the parish church of the district, the living was presented to the Rev. S. H. Ireson by his brother, Mr. J. Ireson, by whom the presentation had been purchased. The value of the living is about £200 a year. The church, which is certainly a very ancient one, has a reputation among the inhabitants of being the oldest in England, though this is, as may be supposed, somewhat of exaggeration.

It is situated about two miles from Barnoldswick, on the road to Skipton, and is a very fine specimen of the old English Parish Church. It provides accommodation for 710 worshippers. The present incumbent was, previous to his removal, a curate at Liverpool, and took a prominent part in connection with the Mariners’ Church, Birkenhead. For the first few months of his residence in his new parish he was looked upon with favour by the parishioners; but this did not last long. The strong prejudices of the people, and, perhaps, the impolitic course pursued by the vicar in departing from some of the time-honoured customs of his predecessor, caused ill-feeling to arise, which rapidly ripened into bitterness, and at last culminated in the disgraceful scene which was witnessed yesterday.

Among the more substantial grievances complained of by the inhabitants are the raising by the vicar of the fees for marriages and, more especially, for interments. One of the institutions of the place was the parish clerk, who officiated in that capacity to within two years and a half ago, having held the office for about thirty-six years, – he, his father, and grandfather before him, having, indeed occupied the position for nearly 140 years. Owing, however, to the innovations introduced by the Rev. Mr. Ireson, the clerk resigned his post, and it has not since been filled. Within the recollection of this clerk, the fee for the publication of banns was 1s., but this has been raised to 2s., while the marriage fee has been raised from 2s. 6d to 7s. 6d by the new vicar. The fees for interments have undergone a like alteration, the original fee being 3s., afterwards 4s., and by Mr. Ireson raised to 7s. 6d. This latter amount, however, he very soon reduced again to 4s.

Some years ago it was found that the old burial-ground, which had been used for the purpose of interments upwards of 800 years, was inadequate for the requirements of the district. A plot of ground adjoining the old churchyard was purchased for £50, the amount being raised by a subscription which was very general throughout the district, the person from whom the ground was bought paying £10 towards fencing it off.

On Tuesday last one of Mr. Ireson’s parishioners named Grace Curwen, died at the age of sixty-seven. This woman, born in the parish, had lived for many years with her brother, a mason, as his housekeeper. Her relatives saw Mr. Ireson with reference to her interment, and as different versions of what took place subsequently have been given by the several parties interested, it may be as well to give the vicar’s own statement. He say: “I got a requisition to bury the corpse, and it was mutually agreed that the funeral should take place at three o’clock on Saturday afternoon; but I said to the person who came to see me about it, and who was the brother of the deceased, ‘Tell the sexton he is to carry out my written instructions.’ At three o’clock on the 10^th accordingly I went to the church, and there saw the sexton, who came into the vestry to tell me that the funeral had arrived. I said to him, ‘Have you followed my instructions of December 30^th?’ He said, ‘No, I have not; tell me what you mean?’ To this I replied, ‘ I have done so in that letter most distinctly. Have you dug the grave in the new ground?’ The sexton answered ’No, but in the old.’ I asked him whether he had required the parties to comply with the prohibition that I had put upon the use of the old ground. He said ‘No.’ I then said, ‘I must refuse to bury the corpse until you have dug a grave in the new ground, for which purpose I shall wait here.’ Several parties came in to see me, and some conversation on the subject took place, but they left without coming to any decision. In about an hour one of the parties came to the vestry and said to me, ‘ At your peril, do you refuse to bury the corpse?’ I answered, ‘ I do, except in the new ground or on my conditions being complied with in the old.’ They absolutely refused both, and with that we all went home, leaving the corpse in the church, where it still remains unburied, pending the sexton’s obedience to my orders, as the law demands that he should dig graves where the vicar orders.”

In explanation of the above, it may be well to state that the vicar says that the old ground having been used for so many centuries has become quite full, and graves are never dug there without human remains and portions of coffins being disinterred. In consequence of this, as stated in his letter below, the vicar, after consultation with an ecclesiastical lawyer, imposed a fee of 15s. over and above the original burial dues of 4s. on all interments in the old ground. This he intended as a prohibitory measure.

On the other hand, it is stated that the vicar is also in the habit of imposing a fee of 5s. beyond the customary dues for making a new grave in the new ground. It should further be expalained that the grave which the sexton dug was close to that which contained the remains of the father, the mother, and several other relatives of the deceased, and that there had already been placed there a tombstone to their memory. Another point involved in the dispute is the right of the sexton to hold his office against the wish of the incumbent and this may possibly, along with other questions, be the subject of litigation. The sexton and his children are, it appears, employed at the works of a large local cotton manufacturer, who is a Dissenter, and it is alleged that this gentlemen has instigated the sexton to oppose the vicar in this matter.

Whatever may turn out to be the legal rights of the case, there is no doubt the people of Barnoldswick have taken up the cause of the friends of the deceased woman with their customary headstrong zeal. When the facts of the case became known in the village on Saturday night the subject was soon the general topic of conversation, and the conduct of the vicar was spoken of in anything but mild language. Indeed, so pronounced was the popular feeling on the subject that the local police warned Mr. Ireson not to go to church on Sunday morning. In spite of this warning, however, Mr. Ireson proceeded to the church at his customary time, and went through the usual service. At the close he announced that he would bury the corpse, which was then lying in the church, at any time when his conditions had been complied with.

After the service Mr. Ireson left the church and proceeded home to the vicarage, which is situated close to Barnoldswick Station, a distance of nearly two miles from the church. During the service an immense concourse of people, numbering some two or three thousand, had assembled, and the vicar’s appearance was the signal for hooting, yelling and a shower of abuse. Meanwhile a message had been sent to Skipton and Superintendent Sykes came down immediately. Mr. Ireson was closely followed all the way to the vicarage by the excited crowd, who, not content with noisy expressions of their disapproval of his conduct, pelted him with mud. When near to his home, Mr. Ireson being more closely pressed than was pleasant, drew from the tail pocket of his coat a six-chambered revolver, which he had taken with him as a precaution, and placed it in his breast, keeping his hand upon it. This, no doubt, deterred the more eager pursuers from proceeding to more violent measures in satisfaction of their indignation.

As neither of the contending parties have yet signified their intention of withdrawing from the position which they have taken up, this most painful condition of affairs remains today in status quo. The coffin containing the corpse is still in “the Gill” church, and the issue of the conflict is apparently as uncertain as ever. The popular feeling in the village runs very high against Mr. Ireson, while the vicar himself is equally determined to maintain his position and test the legality of the course which he has followed.

 TO THE EDITOR OF THE BRADFORD OBSERVER

SIR, In your columns of this day there appears a paragraph headed, “Strange Conduct of a Vicar.” Whilst it contains a substratum of truth, your correspondent has, wilfully or otherwise, interlarded *  it with falsehoods. For example—(1). I did not refuse to bury the corpse, had the grave been dug to my written instructions. (2). I did not ask for the fees at “the gates of the churchyard,” for these, by law, are always paid after interment. I did, however, ask the sexton in the vestry to explain his departure from my orders (see below), and on his refusing to dig the grave in the additional burial ground I declined to perform the ceremony until it was so dug, or until the prohibition I have been compelled to put upon the old ground was complied with. By an evident plot between him and the funeral party, both courses were absolutely refused; although the law of England (see Cripps, page 780) is perfectly clear on this point: “There can be no custom, even for parishioners, to bury their dead relations in the churchyard as near their ancestors as possible, nor will a mandamus **  be granted to bury a corpse in a vault, or in any particular part of a churchyard.” (3) After yesterday’s service I did not announce that I “would perform the funeral rites to-day provided the fees were paid,” but I did say that I would then, or any time to-day, bury the corpse after my instructions had been followed (see below), but not without. There were no “police present from Skipton” except the superintendent, nor did I “run” an inch during my mile and a half walk home. (5). *** I did not “turn towards the crowd” nor “threaten to fire,” although some of the more violent ruffians around me may have been kept from assault by seeing my right hand clasping a six-barrelled revolver within my breast. This I took, as the police had warned me not to go to church, whereas I was under the necessity of going.

As your readers are entitled now to know my side of the ease, will you kindly also insert at the foot hereof the following enclosures:--

1. A letter to the sexton.
2. 2. Instructions to him, prepared by one of our ablest ecclesiastical lawyers.
3. 3. The written notice, after service, already referred to.
4. I am, &c, SAMUEL H. IRESON

 Barnoldswick, January 12, 1874.

Copy No. I

Gill Vicarage, Barnoldswick, Leeds, Dec. 30, 1873

Peckover, -- Referring to our past and recent conversations about our adjacent three-quarters of an acre of new burial ground, consecrated I October, 1871, but yet unused except by four out of every hundred of those who have interred since that time up to Christmas day last, when I counted the registers (although a large proportion are comparatively new residents brought here by the mills of Messrs. Bracewell, Slater & Bennett), and also concerning the method of interment, &c, in our parish churchyard generally, I now enclose a memorandum of my final decision. Requesting you to act upon the same in every particular, --I am, faithfully yours, SAMUEL H. IRESON.

Copy No. II

Memorandum for the guidance of the Grave-digger at Gill Church, Barnoldswick:--

From this day you are to dig all graves in the additional burial ground, and not less than six feet deep for every first interment, commencing with No. 25 on plan, and proceeding with the odd numbers, as staked out and explained to you two years since. In the event of any parishioner desiring to select a special site or grave you can, until further notice, accede to such desire, on first receiving the sum of five shillings for the privilege, if the selection be in the new ground; and of fifteen shillings if in the old. After the many disgraceful sights that we have lately had in the old ground, culminated at the interment on December 14 last, I fix the last sum as a generally prohibitory fee. This of course does not in any way interfere with the parishioners’ ancient “burial dues” of four shillings, including the digger, &c., but eighteenpence only of which is the clergyman’s share, or surplice fee.

No gravestone or brick grave or vault, or the like, including fresh inscriptions on old stones, are to be introduced or permitted without my written authority; and this because of many past and recent irregularities. Considering the great distance that separates our Parish Church from my Vicarage-house, I will continue to fix the hour for interment, and will thank you to assist me in reminding the parties of the time necessarily occupied in traversing the two miles that separate the village from the old church.

SAML. H. IRESON, M.A., Vicar of Barnoldswick.

Tuesday Evening, December 30, 1873.

Copy No. III

I regret that this coffin should have been in the church during the time of the Divine service. I think the wardens would have done better to have put it under the bell-chamber for decency’s sake. I came yesterday, according to arrangement, to inter at three o’clock, and waited over an hour and a half. The grave was not dug to my written orders of December 30^th – a copy of these instructions  can be seen at the churchwardens or the sexton’s. I was, therefore, unable to bury. This morning I sent the sexton the following note:-- “Mr. Ireson wishes to know if a grave in the new ground will be ready by three o’clock to-day, as he again orders it to be dug there.” If so dug after service to-day, or any time to-morrow, I shall bury the corpse. The law requires me to bury my parishioners, but only in a site or grave of my own choosing, whenever I think it necessary to exercise that right. If the prohibition I put on the old ground was thought to be illegal, it should have been complied with under protest, and then legally tried. Either I am right or I am wrong, and since my instructions were drawn up by one of the ablest ecclesiastical lawyers in England, I am justified in saying that “I am right.”

 NOTES:

 * Interlard: To place lard or bacon amongst; to mix, as fat meat with lean.

Hence: To insert between; to mix or mingle; especially, to introduce that which is foreign or irrelevant.

.     introduce one's writing or speech with certain expressions

.     Bloat or embellish (something) by including (often minor and extraneous) details at regular intervals.

.     To insert something foreign into: interlarded the narrative with witty remarks.

Etymologies

Middle English interlarden, to mix fat into, from Old French entrelarder : entre-, between (from Latin inter-; see inter-) + larder, to lard (from lard, lard; see lard).

** an extraordinary writ commanding an official to perform a ministerial act that the law recognizes as an absolute duty and not a matter for the official's discretion; used only when all other judicial remedies fail

A writ issued by a superior court and directed to some inferior tribunal, or to some corporation or person exercising authority, commanding the performance of some specified duty.

Century Dictionary and Cyclopedia

In law, a writ issuing from a superior court, directed to an inferior court, an officer, a corporation, or other body, requiring the person or persons addressed to do some act therein specified, as being within their office and duty, as to admit or restore a person to an office or franchise, or to deliver papers, affix a seal to a paper, etc. Its use is generally confined to cases of complaint by some person having an interest in the performance of a public duty, when effectual relief against its neglect cannot be had in the course of an ordinary action.

*** There is no point (4)!