The Man of Many Talents
 |
| H M Prison (Armley Gaol) Leeds Reproduced by kind permission phill.d |
Well, Joseph was Georgia and Nancy’s 4 greats grandfather; a Leeds lithographic printer, following in his elder brother George’s footsteps, and a pretty successful one at that. The first reference I have found to him as a lithographer is at the time of his first marriage in 1838; he would then have been about twenty.
Many of his prints are still in existence. There is one from about 1847 in the British Library rejoicing in the unforgettable title of ‘Plan of the township of Leeds, Holbeck & Hunslet shewing the proposed artificial drainage by main sewers principal branch drains and street drains : Drawn on stone by order of the Leeds Town Council by J.F. Masser, lithographer, Leeds’.
‘Drawn on stone’? This is just the literal meaning of ‘lithograph’.
Joseph did more than just draw sewers, though. The Leeds Local History Library has a lovely coloured lithograph of Waterloo Lake in Roundhay Park as seen from the castle, described as ‘a peaceful scene with cows and sheep grazing in the foreground and two swans on the lake’. There are other lithographs still in the possession of the family.
As well as his thriving printing business he seems to have had an interest in property. In 1849 he was appointed Trustee to the Pontefract, Castleford and Knottingley Benefit Building Society and he also owned ‘an estate of properties’ in Fallowfield Terrace in Leeds. The name is probably no coincidence—his mother was born Ann Fallowfield and at least five of her descendants include ‘Fallowfield’ in their forenames. Fallowfield Terrace was no small property; it included ‘seven superior dwelling-houses, with gardens, coach-houses and other conveniences’.
 |
| 1 Fallowfield Terrace, Little London, Leeds. An alleyway gives access to the back of the Terrace, then number 3 Elmwood Green is on the right edge By kind permission of Leeds Library and Information Services, www.leodis.net |
Until now he had been both a talented draughtsman, a successful businessman and a substantial property owner. So what went wrong?
There May Be Trouble Ahead
In 1849 he decided to dispose of Fallowfield Terrace. This was when his troubles started. Instead of selling the properties off separately he decided to set up a lottery to raffle the entire estate as one lot. Big mistake!First, lotteries had been illegal since 1802.
Second, lotteries had been springing up locally and the powers that be were looking for someone to make an example of by bringing a charge against them. At the same time as Joseph was appearing in court, another defendant, Mr Bridges, was appearing in Sheffield on a similar charge. The outcomes for Mr Bridges and Joseph were rather different; Mr Bridges fled to Belgium (no European Arrest Warrant in those days!) and completed his lottery draw there.[1] Joseph stayed to face the music.
Joseph published a prospectus for a lottery for Fallowfield Terrace headed ‘£230 per annum for one guinea’ and dated Leeds, August 20, 1849. This announced that the lottery tickets would be a guinea (£1.05) each; the first prize would be the estate which promised an annual income of £230 in rents—a tidy income in those days—with secondary prizes of £25, £10 and £1. I would love to have seen that prospectus—no doubt it would have shown all Joseph’s skills as a printer, with a range of typefaces typical of that period and possibly even an engraving of the premises or a plan of the site, like the prospectus he produced for the sale of Oxton Hall twenty three years later.
So when tickets went on sale the authorities were ready for him. One witness at his trial told the court that he had bought a ticket from Joseph Masser's office at 25 Boar Lane from Joseph and a Mr. John Marshall; another described buying his ticket at the Duke of York public-house, suggesting that tickets were widely available, a fact which counted against him at the trial.
 |
| Albion Street Albion Street, showing numbers 27 to 33, Denby & Spinks Ltd., house furnishers, on 19th January 1949 . The building has a sign, 'Albion Carpet Warehouse. Established 1850'. Numbers 19 to 25 (on the left) are the Leeds Industrial Co-operative Ltd. By kind permission of Leeds Library and Information Services, www.leodis.net |
For the draw, Joseph booked the saloon at the Music Hall in Albion Street for a fee of six guineas. Albion Street joins straight into Boar Lane and the Music Hall was at the Boar Lane end of Albion Street so it would have been just round the corner from Joseph. It would also have been well-known to the locals; it opened in 1792 and was a popular venue for all kinds of entertainment until it was superseded by the Town Hall in 1858.[2]. It was put to various uses thereafter, including as a furniture store, and was demolished in 1973. If you want to make a pilgrimage to the site you will have to visit the former British Home Stores in Trinity Leeds Shopping Centre. Somehow, I think that some of the original atmosphere may be lacking...
The draw for the main prize was held there on 20 September 1849 with a further draw for the secondary prizes on the following day. The saloon may have been the Music Saloon which held 850 people; if it were full one can imagine the atmosphere of tension as the draw was made. A contemporary newspaper report describes how the tickets were put into two revolving cylinders and drawn out by two boys, one end being for the number of the tickets held by the shareholders and the other for the prizes.[3] This suggests that the draw was all very above board—a witness confirmed this at the trial.
There would have been sharp intakes of breath as well as cries of delight as Joseph himself announced the prizes and winners. First prize went to a Mr. Bailey, a bunting maker from the Leeds district of Holbeck, who must have walked out with a big smile on his face and the sounds of congratulation ringing in his ears—he’d just won a nice little earner. Another with a smile on his face was the winner of the second prize of £150, John Titterington. Coincidentally, John was the grandfather of William Titterington, one of the two founders of Rington’s Tea.[4] Would John’s £150 have helped finance that company? Probably not, but it’s a nice thought...
Trial and Sentence
So now Mr Bailey had his nice little earner, Joseph had his cash from the lottery and all should have been well. For Joseph, though, this was not to last long. He was summoned to appear at the start of the following year, on Saturday January 19, 1850 at the Leeds Courthouse before the Lord Mayor, and ‘a full bench of magistrates’. He was to answer a charge of holding an unauthorised lottery ‘under the provisions of the 42 Geo. III., cap. 119, an act passed for the suppression of lotteries. By this act any person engaged in any lottery, game, or “little go," was liable to a penalty of 600l. [£600], which could only be recovered in one of the superior courts; and then the act declared that all persons so offending should be deemed to be rogues and vagabonds.'[5] I love that phrase ‘little go’ thought I’m not so sure about ‘rogues and vagabonds’!On that day, the Crown presented its case by citing the statutes under which Joseph was accused. They then put forward their evidence: Joseph’s prospectus for the lottery; two witnesses who testified that they had bought lottery tickets, one from Joseph himself and and one at the Duke of York; and a further witness who confirmed that Joseph had hired and paid for the use of the Music Hall.
Joseph’s barrister appears to have accepted the facts but queried the interpretation the crown had put upon them. Was the Music Hall a public place when participants had to present their tickets to get into the lottery? Should the defendant be categorised as a ‘rogue and vagabond’?
After the usual cut-and-thrust debate between the prosecuting and the defending lawyers, the Mayor and the magistrates retired together before returning to announce that they found Joseph guilty of the charge; that they would lenient as possible since it was his first offence; and that he was sentenced ‘to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour in the gaol of this borough for the space of seven days’ as an example to others.
Gaol and Hard Labour
What would a sentence of hard labour mean in those days? No doubt Armley Gaol in Leeds would have been Joseph’s destination after sentencing, but hard labour there meant the treadmill.[6] This was worked by the prisoners to pump water to the top of the building. Whenever the officer in charge thought that the prisoners weren’t working hard enough he would tighten a screw on the machine; this is where we get the word ‘screw’ for a prison officer. |
| Undated postcard view of Armley Jail taken from the recreation ground in front. Between the building of the prison and the wall of the recreation ground the 'jail field' can just be seen. |
Our Joseph would now have been about 31 years old but even to someone as young and presumably healthy (he lived to be eighty) this must have been painful work as muscles unused to the treadmill were suddenly called into action. The work also had to be carried out in complete silence adding psychological pressure to someone used to dealing with people throughout his business life. Seven days may sound like a short time but it would have been a very unpleasant seven days and must have seemed a lot longer.
Freedom
What happened when he came out of Armley Gaol? Well, he must have been mentally very tough and resilient as he returned to his craft of lithographer, continued to build up his business and, in short, flourished.His first step seems to have been to have raised a bit of cash. An advertisement appeared on Friday 25 and Saturday 26 January 1850 in a local paper[7] for an auction sale at Roaker Lane, Pudsey, ‘on Monday and Wednesday, Jan. 28 and 30, upon the Premises of Mr. J. F. Masser, who is leaving the neighbourhood’ for an ‘Important Sale of Superior Live and Dead Farming Stock, Household Furniture, Pianoforte, Oil Paintings and Other Effects’.
I have added the full text of the advertisement as Appendix 2, but what an interesting collection of items! Did most professionals of his standing keep cows and pigs as well as all those farming implements? It may of course be another J F Masser, but I have found no other in the records.
It seems that the advertisement was placed with the newspaper on the previous Thursday, 17 January. Since he was sentenced on Saturday 19 January presumably he would have been released from his sentence on Sunday 27 January, just in time for him to attend the auction. Had he been advised previously of the likely term of his sentence or was the date coincidental?
In 1851, a year after his incarceration, the census showed that he now had six employees, seven apprentices and two errand boys.
Twelve years later he was obviously influential in the area. This was shown by his involvement in the redevelopment of the area round Boar Lane when proposals for the railway connection to New Station (now part of Leeds City station) were put forward.
‘In autumn, 1863, the North-Eastern Railway Company proposed to ask Parliament to give them powers to make a line of railway from near Marsh Lane Station, on the Leeds and Selby line, across York Street, Kirkgate, Briggate, Albion Street, and Park Row, into a site, embracing that of the present Leeds General Infirmary, on which they proposed to erect a large central passenger station, which would have been on the north side of both Wellington Street and the river Aire. That scheme, as it cut through some of the most valuable property in the centre of the town, was strongly opposed by many of the influential inhabitants, and, after much discussion, the directors of the company withdrew it...At that time a route leading from near the Marsh Lane Station and taking a portion of the line projected by the railway company, but crossing Briggate much lower down and intersecting property of much less value than the company’s proposal, and terminating at a site for a central station on the south side of the river Aire, and near to the present Wellington Station of the Midland Railway Company, was brought before the public by Mr. Joseph Fallowfield Masser, lithographer, of Leeds. This scheme...received the approval of the directors of the North-Eastern Railway Company, who adopted it, with some modifications, as the scheme to which they would ask the approval of Parliament in the ensuing session...’.[8]
A sketch by him, looking east of the proposed bridge over Kirkgate crossing diagonally Pine Court to Harper Street, is still held by the family. The site is immediately recognisable on Google Maps Street View.
 |
| Bridge over Kirkgate Above: original sketch by J F Masser, in possession of family Below: current view in Google Street View |
This was not all; in ‘The Century's Progress of 1893’ it was stated that ‘it was owing to the suggestions and plans of Mr J. F. Masser that Boar Lane (then little more than a back street) was altered to its present dimensions’. So not only did he influence the present location of Leeds railway station but also all of the present Boar Lane. No small achievement!
He lost his wife Harriet in 1885 and by 1891 he had retired from the business and moved to Brighton. He remarried here in 1893 and died five years later.
Epilogue
Fallowfield Terrace, in the Little London area about one and a quarter miles north of Boar Lane, was eventually demolished for redevelopment in the 1960s, so there is next to nothing that Joseph would recognise there.Boar Lane is still there. Joseph would still be able to look around and recognise much of his surroundings, just as he imagined they would be when he sat down to prepare his drawings and plans for developing the area. The volume of traffic would probably not have changed much, just its character.
Leeds Courthouse was a Georgian style building, built in 1813 in Park Row. In 1858 it ceased being used as a courthouse and became the Post Office until it was demolished in 1901. Park Row is still there, with many modern commercial buildings; I am not sure that there are many landmarks left that Joseph would recognise.
 | ||
| 1829 Engraving of the 'Court House,Leeds drawn by N.Whittock; engraved on steel by W.Sims; London, published by I.T Hinton, 4 Warwick Square, 1829. By kind permission of Leeds Library and Information Services, www.leodis.net |
Albion Street Music Hall closed in 1870. It was later bought by Denby and Spinks, and used as a furniture store. There is nothing here that Joseph would recognise; the building was demolished in 1973 and until they closed down the site was occupied by British Home Stores, part of Trinity Leeds shopping centre which opened in March 2013.
Would he recognise the general situation of Leeds station with its seventeen platforms, the second busiest railway station in England outside London. Certainly the engines and carriages would make his eyes open a little wider but the station and the lines approaching it are where they are now due to his foresight and planning. Remember that the next time you visit Leeds by train!
Something certainly does remain, though. It’s the story of someone who suffered a severe knockdown, picked himself up and went on to have a substantial influence on his neighbourhood and the people around him. An ancestor to be proud of.
‘You may encounter many defeats, but you must not be defeated. In fact, it may be necessary to encounter the defeats, so you can know who you are, what you can rise from, how you can still come out of it.’
Maya Angelou
The following report of Joseph’s trial and sentence was published in The Leeds Intelligencer for 26 January 1850.Appendix 1 - The Trial and Sentence
Other reports were published in the London Daily News for 21 January 1850; the Manchester Times and Newcastle Courant for 23 January 1850; the Bradford Observer for 24 January 1850; the Stamford Mercury for 25 January 1850; the Yorkshire Gazette, the Northern Star and Leeds General Advertiser, the Leeds Mercury, Kendal Mercury and the Leicester Chronicle for 26 January 1850; the Worcester Chronicle for 30 January 1850; and the Cheltenham Chronicle for 31 January 1850 among others.
ESTATE LOTTERIES.
INFORMATION AGAINST MR. MASSER, OF LEEDS.
On Saturday, Mr. Joseph Fallowfield Masser, Lithographer, of Leeds, appeared at the Court-House, to answer an information charging him with having, “on the 20th of September last, unlawfully and publicly kept open and exposed to be drawn, in a certain public place called the saloon in the Music Hall, a certain lottery not authorised by parliament, to wit, a lottery of and for an estate called “The Fallowfield Terrace Estate.” The magistrates on the bench were the Mayor (Joseph Bateson, Esq.), Jno. Clapham , Esq., Darnton Lupton, Esq., Thos. Hebden, Esq., John Cooper, Esq., C. G. Maclea, Esq. There was a second information against the defendant, charging the same offence on the 21st of September.
Mr. Blanshard (instructed by Mr. Clapham, of the firm of Messrs. Upton and Clapham, solicitors), appeared for the Crown; and Mr. Middleton, barrister, appeared for the defendant.
Mr. Blanshard said be had the honour of appearing before the bench instructed on behalf of the crown, and in support of the information against the defendant. He would in the first instance draw the attention of the bench to the statute 42nd Geo. III, cap. 119, and then to the Vagrant Act (5th Geo. IV, cap. 83), under which ultimately their decision probably would have to be given. The 2nd section of the 42nd Geo.III, cap. 119 (the act being one to suppress certain games and lotteries not authorised by law), enacted “That from and after the 1st of July, 1802, no person or persons whatsoever shall publicly or privately keep an office or place to exercise, keep open, show, or expose to be played, drawn, or thrown at or in, either by dice, lots, cards, balls, or by numbers or figures, or by any other way, contrivance, or device whatsoever, any game or lottery called a Little-go, or any other lottery whatsoever not authorised by parliament, or shall knowingly suffer any such game or lottery in his or her house, room, or place, upon pain of forfeiting for every such offence the sum of £500, to be recovered in the Court of Exchequer at the suit of the Attorney-General ; and every person so offending shall be deemed a rogue and vagabond within the true intent and meaning of an act passed in the 17th Geo II. cap. 5, and shall be punishable as such rogue and vagabond accordingly.'' The statute 17th Geo. II cap. 5, which was referred to in the 42nd Geo. III, cap. 129, was repealed by 3rd Geo. IV., cap 40. The latter act was merely passed for a year, and at the expiration of that year the 17th Geo. II. cap. 5, would revive unless it was repealed by some other provision. Now we found that the 5th Geo. IV., cap. 83, was passed just at the expiration of the 3rd Geo. IV., cap. 40, and that act expressly repealed all former acts passed on this subject; but by the 21st section it was provided that “Wherever by any act or acts of parliament now in force it is directed that any person shall be punished as an idle and disorderly person, or as a rogue and vagabond, or as an incorrigible rogue, for any offence specified in such act or acts, and not hereinbefore provided for by this act, in every such case, whether such person shall or shall not have committed any offence against this act, every such person shall be punished under the provisions, powers, and directions of this act.” So that in this case the defendant was charged with having committed an offence under the act 42nd Geo. III., cap. 119, for which offence the 21st section of the 5th Geo. IV., cap. 83, gave the magistrates full power to punish him under the provisions of the latter statute. The learned counsel then read a printed prospectus of the lottery, dated Leeds, August 20, 1849. The prospectus was headed, “£230 per annum for one guinea.” It then went on to say that the Fallowfield Terrace Estate, which consisted of seven superior dwelling-houses, with gardens, coach-houses, and other conveniences, would be put up for distribution in shares of one guinea each, and that the drawing would take place when the number of shares, of which 4200 had already been subscribed for, should be taken up. The conditions of the drawing were also mentioned, and with respect to the manner in which the lottery was conducted the learned counsel said he did not at all mean to say that any unfairness was resorted to. In the printed prospectus Messrs. Beckett & Co. were represented as being the bankers, but the reference to that firm, Mr. Blanshard said, he believed was perfectly unauthorised. After detailing the facts connected with the sale of tickets and the actual drawing of the lottery, he alluded to the injurious effects of gambling upon the best interests of the country and the community at large, and to the desirableness of nipping these illegal lottery schemes in the bud. It might be said that the government once resorted to this means of raising money, and capital was raised in that manner when the necessities of the state required it; but the government, as soon as they were able, exercising a paternal regard for the interests of the country, abolished the practice by law ; and to show that we had a paternal government at the present time, he might state that this was a prosecution directed by the Treasury. Prospectuses of lottery schemes were circulating all over the country, and the government, inasmuch as it was thrown upon the law officers of the crown, thought it was high time to interfere. He had already said it was desirable that this thing should be nipped in the bud. No one who heard him could but be aware that there were other lotteries on the tapis at present; and unless the magistrates should say that the system was illegal he did not not know where it could end. But he apprehended that the case now brought before the bench was clearly within the act of parliament.
[Mr. Blanshard here stated that Mr. Masser had another scheme before the public, and handed a prospectus to Mr. Middleton, who returned it, telling the learned counsel he might make use of it.]
Mr. BLANSHARD—Why, here we have another, — Stourton Lodge. Some gentlemen seemed to have good property not very marketable at the present day, and they therefore sought to dispose of it by a lottery. He did not know where it was to end. A spirit of gambling would tempt men to risk a guinea or two guineas when they were told they could get a good estate for life. This other lottery to which his attention had been called was going on. Of course Mr. Masser was not answerable for it unless he was shown to be so. At present he (Mr. Blanshard) sought to support the information against him for drawing on the 20th of September last a lottery not authorised by parliament. That he should show by witnesses he would call before the bench. He was not aware that there was anything further calling for remark from him. As it was desired by the parties for whom he appeared that public attention should be drawn to it, he appeared there to bring the case before the magistrates as a proper case for inquiry, and he trusted that they would so deal with the case as would satisfy the government and the public at large.
Mr. Benjamin Knowles, collector of tolls on the Wortley turnpike road, was then called to prove the sale of tickets by Mr. Masser and the drawing for the Fallowfield Terrace estate. The witness said that on the 5th of September he called at Mr. Masser's office, 25, Boar-lane, where he saw Mr. Masser and Mr. John Marshall, seated at a table together. He purchased a ticket, for which he paid one guinea, and Mr. Masser filled up the ticket. He received a circular after that, informing him when the drawing would take place, and with the circular he also received a ticket of admission to the Music Hall. The witness also proved that he was present on the 20th, the first day of the drawing, with many other people who had purchased chances, and that Mr. Masser announced the drawer of the principal prize, a Mr. Bailey, of Holbeck. With respect to the manner in which the drawing was conducted the witness said he never saw anything fairer.
Cross-examined by Mr. Middleton. — No solicitor ever advised me to take a ticket. A friend or two had token tickets and they advised me to try my luck. When I went to the Music Hall a person at the door asked to see my ticket before I was admitted ; I showed it and was admitted on the strength of that ticket. I saw no one admitted into the room without a ticket. I was not there on the 21st; I got plenty with one day. After the drawing, I called at Mr. Masser's office and was shown a printed paper, from which I saw that my number had been drawn a blank. I never heard Mr. Masser call out in the Music Hall but once, and he then announced who had been the fortunate man to get the great prize.
Mr. Thomas Thompson, farmer, of Beeston, proved that he bought a ticket in the lottery in question at the Duke of York public-house ; that he received a ticket of admission to the Music Hall, and that he attended at the drawing on the 20th and 21st September. Witness heard his number drawn on the 21st; it was a blank. Saw Mr. Masser at the Music Hall in the afternoon of the 20th, but did not know him at that time. Did not hear Mr. Masser say anything until he announced that Mr. Bailey had got the principal prize. He said he was very glad to inform them that a poor man had got the prize, and he announced that Bailey had got it. Did not hear Mr. Masser say anything the second day. Cross-examined.—Did not hear or see Mr. Masser say or do anything more on the 20th, except call out that Mr. Bailey had got the principal prize. When I went to the Music Hall the first day they asked me for my ticket and I showed it, but I did not show it the second day.
Mr. Ainley, clerk to Mr. J. H. Shaw, solicitor, and who attends to the letting of the Music Hall for the proprietors, proved that Mr. Masser engaged the Music Hall for the drawing for Fallowfield Terrace, and that after the drawing he paid witness six guineas for the use of the Hall.
Mr. Blanchard said that was the case for the crown.
Mr. Middleton said he should be exceedingly brief in the observations he made on behalf of the unfortunate defendant; and he might at once state that for whatever part Mr. Masser had taken in this affair he (Mr. Masser) was exceedingly sorry, and had Mr. Masser been aware that such lotteries were illegal he (Mr. Middleton) was instructed to say that his client would never have taken part in them at all. If he had been guilty of this act no doubt he was liable to and must suffer the punishment; but what were the facts bearing against Mr. Masser? The magistrates were told he was present in the Music Hall, that he moved about the room exactly in the same way as other persons did; but they were told that he never read any ticket except when the principal prize was drawn, that he never made any remark except to state that a poor man had got the prize. Was it not probable that in a room where there were 200 people others would shout out as well ? He (Mr. Middleton) thought the magistrates would hesitate long before they committed a man who had borne a good character, a man of some standing in society, as a rogue and vagabond on a case so slight as this. Mr. Masser was not before the court to answer the charge of selling the tickets at his own office, but to answer for what took place in the Music Hall. Had he been brought there for keeping open an office for the sale of lottery tickets in Boar Lane, that might have been a charge which it would have been difficult to answer ; but he was charged with keeping open the Music Hall for the purpose of a lottery, and there was not proof that he did anything there but walk about the same as other people, with the exception of calling out the name of the winner of the principal prize. But although the magistrates might be against him (Mr. Middleton) as to the facts, he thought the law gave them no jurisdiction in the case whatever. He contended, first, that his learned friend had failed in proving the information. Mr. Masser was charged with having kept open a lottery in a certain public place. Was it so ? A public place, both in legal and common parlance, was a place where every one might have free ingress and egress. Was that so here? The room was taken for a special purpose, and, according to the evidence of both witnesses, no person was admitted except by ticket. Therefore he said their evidence was conclusive proof that this was not a public but a private place, and if that was so he submitted that the information most be quashed altogether. The learned counsel then drew the attention of the bench to the general tenour of the acts of parliament which had been passed against lotteries for some years past, for the purpose of showing that the object of the legislature had been, of late years, to fix heavy money penalties upon parties keeping open lotteries, but not to give justices the power, of committing them as rogues and vagabonds. With respect to the General Vagrancy Act (5 Geo. IV. cap. 83), under which the bench were called upon to convict the defendant, the 1st section enacted, after reciting the 3rd Geo. IV., cap. 40, “That all provisions heretofore made relative to idle and disorderly persons, rogues, and vagabonds, shall be and the same are hereby repealed, except only as to offences committed before the passing of this act which shall be punished under the provisions of the said recited act.” Now, as somewhat explanatory of the intention of the legislature as to the class of persons to be treated as rogues and vagabonds, the third and fourth sections expressly declared the persons who were to be considered rogues and vagabonds, and from the beginning to the end of those two sections no mention was made of parties keeping lotteries. Well, then, his learned friend went back to the 21st section, which was one usually found in acts of parliament of this character; but he did hope that before the bench strained that general clause to meet a case so extremely slight as this, they would think upon the matter very seriously, remembering that penal statutes ought to be construed as strictly as possible. As to his learned friend's remarks about a paternal government he would say nothing, because they did not meet this case; but he thought the government had not acted a very paternal part in allowing this lottery to be advertised month after month, and then, three months after the drawing had taken place, instituting proceedings against his unfortunate client. If the government had intended to protect the public why did they not interfere at first to check these lotteries? It was well known that it was not in Leeds only, but in Manchester and many other large towns in the country, and even in villages these lotteries were started; and here poor Mr. Masser was to be proceeded against. He could not say that the government had acted a very paternal part.
The magistrates, with Mr Barr, their clerk, retired to consider the case, and after an absence of twenty-five minutes they returned into the court.
The Mayor then said that the charge against Mr. Masser, that he kept open a lottery for the sale of an estate, and the answer his council had made on his behalf, had been considered by the bench. It was said that this was not a lottery within the meaning of the act, and the information. They had considered that point and they thought there was nothing in it. Every previous publicity was given to the lottery itself, and tickets were saleable to any of the public who chose to apply for them. Looking at all the circumstances, they were of opinion that the defendant had brought himself within the meaning of the act of parliament. They therefore found defendant guilty of the charge contained in the information, and the adjudged him to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour in the gaol of this borough for the space of seven days. He (the Mayor) might add, that this being the first offence, the magistrates were inclined to take the most lenient view of the case they possibly could; but nevertheless they were quite convinced that the object of the government was to make an example and to deter from acting illegally, and therefore they hoped that the consideration of this question in that public manner would be the means of checking the illegality.
Mr. Blanchard—I am quite satisfied that those who instruct me will be quite satisfied with the punishment, this being the first offence; and I have no doubt it will have the effect of deterring others. Public notoriety is so great a point.
The second information against the defendant was then withdrawn.
Appendix 2 - Advertisement of Auction
The following advertisement appeared in The Leeds Intelligencer on Friday and Saturday, 25 and 26 January 1850.IMPORTANT SALE OF SUPERIOR LIVE AND DEAD FARMING STOCK, HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE, PIANOFORTE, OIL PAINTINGS. AND OTHER EFFECTS—ROAKER LANE, PUDSEY.—To be SOLD by AUCTION, by Mr. Frederick Stow, on Monday and Wednesday, Jan. 28 and 30, upon the Premises of Mr. J. F. Masser, who is leaving the neighbourhood, all the valuable LIVE AND DEAD FARMING STOCK, comprising 3 capital Draught Horses, 1 Black Mare, nearly thorough-bred, 1 Grey Pony, gentle to ride or drive, 1 Bay Filly Foal, by Grey Comus ; 2 Heifers in Calf, 1 Ditto, new Calved; I Black Scot, in Milk; 1 superior Black Sow, by Mr. Dixon's Black Boar, Brother to Ebor; 1 Ditto, with Litter of 8 Pigs; 1 Ditto, to Pig on Jan. 27; 2 Open Gilts, 1 Cut Hog, a Quantity of Store Pigs, Sheep, Poultry, &c., &c. 1 capital Phaeton, 1 Dog Cart, 4 Broad and Narrow Wheeled Carts, 1 Set of Harness, nearly new; 2 Single Barreled Guns, 1 Winnowing Machine, 1 Plough, 1 Scuffler. 1 Turnip Drill, Pair of Harrows. 2 Sets of Cart Gearing, Ploughing Gear, 8 Pair of Long Traces, 1 Wood Wheat Roller, Hackney Saddles and Bridles, a Quantity of Stack Bar), 5 Pig Troughs (Wood and Stone), Sundry Cart Covers, Loin Cloths, Sacks, Cow Chains, Ropes, Seed Hoppers and Baskets, Collars, Rakes, Forks, Gripes, Hoes, and other Farming Implements.
3 STACKS of WELL-WON HAY, and a Quantity of Wheat and Oat Straw.
Also a Large Quantity of Valuable HOUSEHOLD FURNITURE, consisting of Tables, Chairs, Couches, Looking Glasses, Sideboards, Eight Days Clock, in Mahogany Case, Chamber Services, and Dairy Utensils. Also a Quantity of OIL and other PAINTINGS, in Gilt Frames; 1 Square Mahogany PIANO-FORTE, nearly new, by Collard and Collard; a Quantity of other desirable Effects too numerous to particularise.
The Stock being Large and Valuable the Auctioneer requests a prompt attendance. The Farming Stock will be offered on the First Day.
Sale to commence each Day at Eleven o'Clock in the Forenoon.
Roaker Lane, Pudsey, January 17th, 1850.[9]
Endnotes
[1] "The Land and Building Lotteries at Sheffield and Leeds." Yorkshire Gazette, January 26, 1850. Retrieved February 14, 2015[2] Grahame, Suzanne. "Albion Street Music Hall." Discovering Leeds. March 25, 2003. Retrieved February 14, 2015.
[3] "Illegal Land Lotteries." The Daily News, January 21, 1850. Retrieved February 14, 2015.
[4] "Ringtons & Holbeck Cemetery." Friends of Holbeck Cemetery. August 20, 2012. Retrieved February 14, 2015.
[5] "Illegal Land Lotteries." The Daily News, January 21, 1850. Retrieved February 14, 2015.
[6] "ELHAS Meeting Report April 2009." East Leeds History and Archaeology Society Web Site. May 1, 2009, retrieved 14 February 2015
[7] "Important Sale of Superior…" Leeds Intelligencer, Leeds, West Yorkshire, Friday and Saturday, 25 and 26 January 1850, retrieved 16 February 2015
[8] Mayhall, John. "October 1864." In Annals of Yorkshire, 335. Unknown ed. Vol. II. Leeds: C. H. Johnson (late Joseph Johnson).
[9] "Important Sale of Superior…" Leeds Intelligencer, Leeds, West Yorkshire, Friday and Saturday, 25 and 26 January 1850, retrieved 16 February 2015
No comments:
Post a Comment