| Description | Soho, near Birmingham, February 14th, 1811.
Reverend Sir,
I regret that it has not been in my power at an earlier period to comply with the wish expressed in your letter of the 4th ultimo, respecting an amended narration from Mary Stevenson of the facts necessary to determine with precision the place of her late husband’s settlement, now that her health is tolerably restored and her faculties have resumed their wonted operations. By the letter I had the honour to address you from London you would perceive the impossibility of an immediate alteration, on my part, to the case before us; and since my return, from an accumulation of my ordinary routine, it has been next to impossible till now to cast a thought that way. Allow me therefore, sir, to hope that you will be pleased to excuse what without this explanation might appear to you as an unpardonable remissness.
The sum of Mary Stevenson’s present recollections seems competent to establish the belief that Butterworth is actually the place to which she is to look for relief in virtue of her late husband’s parochial settlement. The most misleading point in her examination is, I think, where she states, “that they quitted Dr. Drake’s employ at nearly the same time and that she proceeded”—immediately as it would seem, no interval nor intermediate place having been noted—“to Bamford Hall, which she left at the expiration of about 12 months and was married”—immediately, as would also be presumed—“on the 16th September 1794, at Rochdale, etc.” Whereas, the facts appear to be that she did not go from the Vicarage direct to Bamford Hall; that an interval elapsed the duration of which she cannot now recollect, but that a portion of it, not less than 3 months, was spent by her in the service of Mr. Vavy of Rochdale; that Alexander Stevenson in January 1793, being about 5 weeks after he left the Vicarage, entered into the service of Mr. Hamer of Bellfield; that he continued uninterruptedly in this situation, and an inmate of Bellfield Hall, for a year and about 8 or 9 months antecedently to their marriage, and after that event took place he continued to board in Mr. Hamer’s family but slept at the cottage rented of the Widow Stock.
There being no probability of Mary Stevenson being able to gain a living for herself and family at this place, and having given her decided negative to a removal to Rochdale, she is now about to proceed to your neighbourhood to be among her relatives, which will give you an opportunity of personally interrogating her; and I trust, from your having already so kindly interceded yourself in her favour, that you will have the goodness to take her examination yourself and condescend to make such an arrangement of the case as may prevent those errors of memory of which you have written so feelingly from operating prejudicially. The family are unquestionably proper objects of parochial relief, and viewing their situation more immediately in this point I cannot but rejoice at their good fortune in having for their advocates, at stations so appropriate, gentlemen who as divines and magistrates have at once the power and the will to serve them effectually.
I remain, with great respect, reverend sir, your most obedient humble servant,
Wm. Cheshire
PS. Mr. Boulton (who is at present in London) has placed the eldest of the boys on trial under a good master in the branch of business carried on here under the firm of M. R. Boulton and Plate Co. As he seems to like the trade it is intended in due time to bind him as an apprentice, and if he continues a good lad there is no doubt but he will do well. The younger boys are too small to be put to any of the trades carried on here. I should have sent this by the hand of Mary Stevenson but I find she will be some days with a sister at Worcester; she intends setting off on Saturday next.
The Revd. H. G. D. Yate, etc., etc., etc.,
Bromesberrow. |