8th February 1812: One frame broken at Attenborough

On Saturday evening 8th February, one stocking frame was broken in the Nottinghamshire village of Attenborough.

The historical context of Luddism in Lancashire & Cheshire

In 1812, Lancashire and Cheshire were set for a perfect storm.

Unlike cotton spinning, which in 1812 was largely concentrated in factories and was effectively dead by 1830, hand-loom weaving was far from obsolete in 1812. Indeed, it was still widespread in 1820, when despite the existence of 12,000 power-looms, there were still 240,000 hand-looms in operation (Darvall, p.57).

As for the wider context, the spinning & weaving trade in Lancashire had seen the early introduction of many different innovative machines in the 80 years prior to 1812. As far back as 1733, John Kay's Flying Shuttle had halved the labour of weavers needed to operate a wide loom, and was in general use throughout the industry by 1760. Though unpopular to begin with, the high demand for cotton goods acted to deaden any egregious effect upon the workers.

James Hargreaves' Spinning Jenny of 1765 acted to increase the output of work that could be achieved by a single spinner, though the fact that the machine could be used in a domestic setting meant the pattern of work for weavers was largely unchanged.

Perhaps the most contentious innovation, and one that provided a flash-point early on, was the invention of Richard Arkwright's Water Frame in 1769. As the name suggests, this was a roller-spinning machine powered by water and implied the rapid movement of the spinning industry into factories. Arkwright was quick to introduce other innovations into weaving processes too. Unrest followed: by the mid 1770s, machine-breaking and attacks on mills were taking place. Arkwright's Birkacre Mill at Chorley was destroyed in October 1779, with attacks also being levelled at Robert Peel's factory at Altham, which was also destroyed. Mobs at Wigan, Bolton, Blackburn, Preston & Manchester sought out the large 20-plus spindle Spinning Jennies (that were not domestic machines) for destruction. There was evidence that the local authorities were not unsympathetic: there were reports that the military had watched Birkacre Mill burn, choosing not to intervene. At Wigan, the use of machinery was suspended by the magistrates. Ruling class & bourgeois solidarity was clearly fractured largely because Arkwright was so unpopular with other manufacturers.

But machine-breaking in Lancashire stopped after this outbreak because of the expansion of trade. When trade contracted in the early 19th century, machine-breaking would emerge again, but this time amongst the cotton weavers.

As Darvall pointed out (1969, p.55) the situation was so serious in the home of the cotton industry during this period that disturbances would have occurred even without the factor of the introduction of machinery.

The target of the Luddite's ire in Lancashire and Cheshire was the steam-powered loom (or 'steam loom'). Invented in 1785 by the Reverend Edmund Cartwright, it's advance has been largely been restricted because it was a clumsy, slow-to-use invention and also because the hand-loom weavers worked at such a low rate. Further innovations in the design in 1803 by William Radliffe of Stockport remedied these defects.

In spite of the new technology, hand-loom weaving remained widespread. What changed things were the economic conditions. The Orders in Council had hit Lancashire particularly hard - Darvall (1969, p.55) points out that merchants couldn't sell goods, mills were running at half time, and middlemen were giving out half the work they usually were. Wages were in decline. In Bolton in 1805, a weaver could earn 25 shillings a week, but by 1811/1812, this had declined to 14 shillings. At the same time, the price of provisions had risen due to war and the blockades had risen by approximately 33% in the space of 12 months (Darvall p.54).

Agitation by the weavers had begun 5 years earlier, with a campaign for a minimum wage seeing a massive petition signed by 130,000 weavers being presented to Parliament in February 1807. But Parliament refused even to discuss a proposed Bill to regulate weavers' wages, and the disappointment at this outcome led to rioting in Manchester. Strikes demanding a 33% increase in wages followed in the summer, with the non-damaging sabotage of machinery (i.e. the removal of shuttles from looms) being employed to ensure that 60,000 looms stood idle in Manchester alone. The strikes apparently went some way to achieving their object, albeit temporarily.

By 1810, wages had declined again and despite the short-lived success of the strikes in 1807, the weavers turned again to petitioning, with 40,000 signatures from Manchester, 7,000 from Bolton and 30,000 from Scotland being handed in to Parliament in May 1811. A Select Committee summed up the contempt of the ruling class when it concluded that the weavers should "work at lower prices or ... employ their labour in some other manner." (Hammonds, p.64)

So the stage was set for the confrontations that occurred in 1812. In particular, Stockport had been the seat of innovation with power-looms, but the physical situation of the factories in the district could not have been more provocative: in the midst of Irish immigrant hand-loom weavers who had no recourse to parish relief during hard times. It was in these circumstances that the subtle increase in power-looms became a source of added and bitter discontent.

8th February 1812: General Ludd threatens to "destroy every Frame ... in the county" of Nottingham

The Leeds Mercury carried this item in an editorial on 8th February 1812:

No depredations have been committed in Nottinghamshire, by the Frame-breakers for several days past, and it is said the Mayor of Nottingham has received a letter from General Ludd, stating, “that no more frames will be destroyed while the Restrictions on the Prince Regent remain in force, which expire on the 18th inst. when it is hoped his Royal Highness will take the distressed situation of trade into his most serious consideration; and if he fails in this, the last hope of redress, the Luddites will destroy every Frame they can find in the county.”

7th Feburary 1812: 2 Framebreakers committed to Nottingham Gaol

On Friday 7th February, the authorities committed 2 more men to the County Gaol for frame-breaking.

John Osborne, of Eastwood, was committed for frame-breaking at Eastwood 2 days earlier. Upon his entering custody the County Gaoler, Thomas Wright, said he had found Osborne had about his person a piece of iron (part of a stocking frame) and a letter or piece of paper signed 'Ned Lud for ever Amen'.

It was also reported that William Barnes had been committed for frame-breaking at Basford on 26th January. The authorities had obviously decided that Barnes has connived in the attack upon the frames being kept in his home at the time.

7th February 1812: Letter from “General Lud” to "Unknown Stranger", Clifton

Unknown Stranger I have intrusted thees Articles into your Care and I do insist that you will see that they are Restored to their respective oners it is with extream Regrat that I infom yow hou thay Came into my hans when I came out with my men their weir sum joind us that I Never had ad with me before and it wear these Villinds that plundred but ass we wear goin out of Clifton one of my Men came and told me that he Beleivd that those Men ad got somethinck that they had no Buisiness with I theirfore gave horders that they should be searchd and what we found on them we left the things at the Lown End and I hope that the oners has got agen we were gust agoen to have hang’d one of the Villends when we weir inforned that the Solders weir at hand and we thort it Right to Retreat.

N. B. The Men that had the things weir entire strangers to my horders or they Never dworst not have tuch’d one thinck but they have been punished for their for one of them have been hangd for 3 Menet and then Let down agane I ham a friend of the pore and Distrest and a enemy to the opressers thron 

(signed) GENERAL LUD

6th February 1812: Questions in the House of Commons about Nottingham disturbances

Following the enquiries in the House of Lords two days earlier, questions about the Luddite disturbances were now asked of the Home Secretary in the House of Commons on the following Thursday 6th February. The Home Secretary stated plainly that new laws were being drawn up:

Mr. Whitbread: wished to ask the right hon. the Secretary of State, whether it was the intention of the government to lay any information before the House with respect to the disturbances which had for three months scandalized the country, and still continued to do so, or whether any inquiry was to be set on foot with respect to them?

Mr. Secretary Ryder: agreed that the proceedings alluded to by the hon. gent, were such as scandalized the country; he had reason to believe, however, that they had, within these few days, much subsided. Whether this was or was not the case, the House would soon possess the opportunity of inquiring into the subject, when a Bill, which was now in preparation, should be introduced.

Mr. Whitbread: observed, that after what had fallen from the right hon. Secretary, he should not himself now give any notice on the subject; but he must ask, was not the existence of the late disgraceful riots at Nottingham, a primâ facie charge against the home administration.

Mr. Lambe: said, that the riots at Nottingham had not only not subsided, but were increasing, and loudly called for enquiry.

Mr. J. Smith: stated, that he had received letters that morning which expressed that a greater degree of tranquillity prevailed in the country than had been for some months past.

6th February 1812: Thomas Large & Gravenor Henson write to Earl Waldegrave

On the verge of a lull in the Luddite activities in Nottinghamshire, Gravenor Henson and Thomas Large, leading figures amongst the Framework-knitters in Nottingham, planned to launch a Parliamentary campaign to obtain legislation regulating the Hosiery and Lace Trades. They first wrote to Earl Waldegrave, a young peer in command of troops at Nottingham:

1812. February 6

Comittee Room, Feby 6, 1812 . . .

My Lord

Agreeable to your request the Committee of the Frame-work-knitters have awaited on the Gentlemen Manufacturers of their Trade and have recd the Cordial support and cooperation of several of the most respectable, Mr John Wright has kindly taken up our Business in the warmest manner being fully sensible of the goodness of our intentions, and the beneficial result that will accrue from our endeavors, We humbly trust, my Lord, from your well known generosity, that you will nobly assist any endeavor that will conduce to the Public Good

We remain my Lord
Your Lordships Obt. Servts.

T Large
G. Henson.

6th February 1812: Robert Baker to Home Office

Nottingham
Feb. 6, 1812

Sirs,

We mentioned some frames to be removed today from 10 miles off. They came totally unmolested. The soldiers did not go near the village, and the Constables had no interruption whatever.

We have been concerned to see these instances of removing frames because it must leave some of the country people without the means of work, but it will at the same time open their eyes to the consequence of their own proceedings. For some time before these troubles broke out, in many places a fifth of the frame workers were out of employ, and this naturally induced some Hosiers (not perhaps of the first Reputation) to give them particular kinds of work at reduced prices; and the Hosiers who were giving the higher prices found themselves undersold in certain articles at the London Market. This again brought about new arrangements, which soured the whole body of workmen and the scarcity of corn occurring at the same time, a general discontent prevailed. The first emotion was resentment against the Hosiers who paid the underprice, and the unemployed and ill-disposed went about disguised to break the frames belonging to these particular persons, and also all frames that facilitated the work by being made wider than the old ones. Though in the course of these outrages, instances have occurred for which no motive can be traced. Resentment against those Hoziers who paid the underprice has been the leading feature up to the present day. They have seldom made free with other property, altho’ opportunities at all times have presented themselves, and in one instance lately at Clifton, some cloths, that one of the framebreakers brought away, were carefully sent back again the following day.

Not recollecting that we have before given this view of the case we think it may be proper at this time to do it — though probably Mr. Ryder has seen it already in the same light.

We have never for an hour lost sight of endeavour to discover if these people were abetted in an organized way by persons from a distance and particularly by other manufacturers at Manchester, Birmingham etc., but though such surmises have been constantly upon the minds of all descriptions of persons here, we have never been able to find any fact that gives countenance to it.

Two frames were destroyed in a quiet way last night near Eastwood, ten miles N. West from here, but the general tranquillity continues uninterrupted still.

We are [etc.]

Robt. Baker

5th February 1812: One frame broken in Eastwood - anatomy of an attack

Sarah Wilde was a framework-knitter from Eastwood in Nottinghamshire. She rented her stocking frame from William Howitt of Heanor in Derbyshire and lived with her mother.

On the evening of Wednesday 5th February, she was asleep in a ground floor room where the stocking frame was also kept. At around 11.00 p.m., she was woken by her mother, who also slept in the same room. Her mother had thought someone was outside the door, and shortly afterwards she heard a noise - she had left some thorns near the window which would act as an alarm to warn of intruders, and clearly heard the sound of someone disturbing them. She called out:

"Who's there?"

a man replied, "is there a Colt works here?"

"No" she replied

then came the threat "if you do not get up and open the door, I will burst it open!"

Sarah was very alarmed, and she pledged to open the door if the man allowed her to get dressed. There was no response, but she heard sounds of movement, and soon enough, the man had gone around to the back door where he again demanded she opened it. Sarah quickly retrieved a set of tongs from the fireplace and banged on the chimney breast, hoping to alert her brother who lived next door.

Outside the house, the man now knew that time was of the essence and he proceeded to break some of the glass windows and the window frame with the iron bar he had brought. The gap he had created was not large enough for him to get through, but he did his best and could get his arms and torso through - he lashed out at the stocking frame with the bar, but could only managed 3 blows at it, doing some damage.

The fire was still burning in the grate, and the light from it allowed her to get a proper look at the man, who was not disguised. Sarah couldn't believe what she was seeing: she had spent several hours in the company of this man, John Osborne from Heanor, on Christmas Day and had only known him for six weeks and now he was here in a way she least expected. She shouted out to him "I know you - I'll make you repent for this one day!".

The man was startled, realising he now had to leave without finishing the job, he leaned back out of the broken window frame and ran.

As Sarah and her mother comforted each other, her mind raced back to to earlier that afternoon. She had seen Osborne and a group of other people from Heanor following some waggons which carried stocking frames bound for Nottingham, and they had briefly spoken to each other. She couldn't believe he could have done this to her.

5th February 1812: Troop movements

After being stationed in the area for 5 months, on Wednesday 5th February the detachment of the Queen's Bays left Nottingham for York. 2 more troops of the 15th Hussars entered the town on the same day to re-balance the forces.

5th February 1812: Duke of Newcastle to Home Office

Clumber
5, February, 1812

Sir,

It was agreed that Mr. Eyre should lay before you the proposed Bill for the better regulating the Police of this County; for this reason l have not troubled you on the subject since I last had the honor of writing to you.

I conceive that this Bill of itself will by no means be adequate to suppressing the outrageous proceedings in this County, it must be some measure of retaliation or punishment which alone can be truly efficient.

You are no doubt informed that the West Riding of Yorkshire is now imitating the bad example of this County and thus that part of Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire and Leicestershire are in a state of insurrection, for one can scarcely call it by another name. Sooner or later, I fear, recourse must be had to the severest measures as the only means of checking what may ultimately endanger the State, and I throw it out for your consideration whether it will not be expedient in a short time to declare Martial Law in the Counties above alluded to, unless a better disposition quickly manifests itself.

Mr. Eyre informs me that it is your intention to bring in a Bill to render the breaking of frames capital — it must be very clear that this will be a highly salutary measure and I will hope that this in conjunction with the other means about to be and what already are in our power will be capable of overcoming the insurrection in this and the neighbouring Counties.

It has been notified by letter to the Mayor of Nottm. signed Genl. Ludd — that he has put off his active operations for six weeks — in fact all remains in a tolerable state of quiet at the moment; altho’ more frames were broken on the 23rd. of last month than have ever yet been broken.

Let me most earnestly entreat that the measures which are to be proposed to Parlt. may be brought forward and enacted with the least possible delay, it is of vital importance that an immediate stop should be put to any further proceedings on the part of the rioters.

I have [etc.]

NEWCASTLE

5th February 1812: Nathaniel Conant to Home Office

Private

Nottingham
Feby. 5 1812

Sir,

I beg to acknowledge your inclosure received today, alluding to the business named in your letter by the Sunday Coach. The intercourse with Birmingham & Manchester, similar to that named with Birmingham in your inclosure, continually are spoken of here by weak people, but with the utmost gravity and apprehension; but no one ever has any authority for what they surmise, or can give any clue to any quarter in which anything from authority can be had or the report be traced. There is a poor half starved dissolute and profligate fellow here who has been sometimes a hackney writer to the Attorneys, whose hand writing they have sometimes thought might be traced, in disguize, in some of the threatening letters received here, at an early part of the disturbances;

If this man had been well paid, he would certainly have engaged in any mischief — but it is very unlikely that he would ever have been trusted, and I believe some attempts have been made to let him understand that he would be rewarded for laying open any conspiracy he is acquainted with, in a way that would not have failed to have engaged his attention if he had any one to betray. I will know if any letters come here by the cross post from Bm. directed to this man. I believe his movements have been long watched by the Town agents.

With respect to the letter itself from Leicestershire to Birmingham, that the writer may be respectable he may also be credulous — He having overheard this plot looks very like inaccuracy of expression — but if he did so, further enquiry might be made if he knew the persons, and if he did not they might be traced, and all might be done without his appearing the least in the Case. They would more easily have been traced nearer the time it happened and on that account it is a pity the gentleman endured ten sleepless nights before he unbosomed himself. However as there is a possibility that something of the kind has happened every attention will be given on our part to the subject as if the information had been certain.

I am [etc.]

N. Conant

4th February 1812: Frames broken in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire

In somewhat of a last hurrah for this phase of Midlands Luddism, several villages in 2 counties were attacked in the same night.

In Derbyshire, 2 frames were broken at Taghill, near Heanor.

In Nottinghamshire, 1 frame was broken at Bobbers Mill, 1 frame at Basford & 5 were broken at Burton Joyce.

4th February 1812: Troop movements

On Tuesday 4th February the Royal Buckinghamshire Militia arrived in Nottingham: in total 800 troops, the first division arriving in the afternoon in 19 waggons, and the second division at 8 p.m. in 22 waggons. The militia also brought along 2 field guns in tow, being a show of force rather than having any tactical use. They had left their barracks at Woodbridge in Suffolk at 7 p.m. on the previous Friday, 31st January.

4th February 1812: Questions in the House of Lords about Nottingham disturbances

On Tuesday 4th February, and after 3 months of disturbances, the Houses of Parliament realised something was amiss in Nottingham, and the disturbances were discussed in the House of Lords:

Lord Holland: said, he wished to ask the noble lord opposite, whether it was the intention of his Majesty's government to give any explanation to parliament, respecting the disturbances that existed in, and about the neighbourhood of Nottingham, disturbances which had now been going on for nearly a twelvemonth, gradually increasing in the numbers concerned in them, and in the extent of the depredations committed, and exhibiting as they increased principles and objects of a most formidable character. He did not mean, uninformed upon the subject as he was at present, to impute blame to his Majesty's government, but when disturbances of so formidable a nature, so dangerous to the peace and so injurious to the character of the country, had been going on for so long a period, and instead of diminishing, appeared to be increasing in violence, he thought it was due to parliament that some explanation should be given, as to what measures had been taken by government to suppress them.

The Earl of Liverpool: said, he had no hesitation in giving what explanation he could respecting the disturbances which unhappily existed to a considerable extent in the county of Nottingham, disturbances in which men were combined to destroy their own comforts, and even their own means of subsistence, and at the same time adopting a system which had naturally excited alarm. There might be riots more alarming in appearance, but arising from a sudden ebullition of resentment, and therefore easily quelled in a short time; but the system adopted in the county of Nottingham undoubtedly gave those disturbances a new character. It would not, of course, be expected, that on the present occasion he should enter into a detail of the circumstances attending these disturbances. His Majesty's government were fully sensible of the importance of putting an end to these excesses, and whenever the subject came before the House, he was persuaded it would be found that they had not been inattentive or remiss in taking those measures which circumstances required. Two of the most intelligent magistrates had been sent from London to Nottingham, with all the means which they could command, in order to take such steps as might be necessary. He was not sure that it would not be necessary to apply to parliament for some additional powers, in order the more effectually to repress these disturbances.

Lord Holland: was not quite sure that he had understood the noble lord: what he meant was, that it was highly necessary that some inquiry should be instituted in parliament respecting these disturbances, particularly as they had (if he was not much misinformed), within the last two or three weeks assumed a still more formidable character than they had hitherto displayed, and many days ought not to elapse before the inquiry was instituted.

The Earl of Liverpool: observed, that what he meant to have said was, that his Majesty's government were now taking measures, which must bring the subject immediately before parliament.

Lord Holland: said, that as so many months had elapsed whilst ministers were in contemplation, it was highly expedient that they should not be allowed to contemplate any longer.

The Earl of Lauderdale: contended, that the riots and disgraceful scenes which had occurred at Nottingham, might all be traced to the system and conduct of his Majesty's ministers, in reducing the commerce of the country to a gambling speculation. It thence arose that there was a great demand for articles of manufacture one week, and none the next, and the persons employed had one week much higher wages than usual, and the next their wages were reduced far below the usual standard. Was it not to be expected that men thus reduced from high wages to a state of poverty, would become discontented and riotous? He thought that parliament should not wait for any suggestion from ministers, but that they ought to institute an inquiry, to precede any measure suggested by ministers.

3rd February 1812: 1 Frame broken at Bobbers Mill

On Monday 3rd February, 1 stocking frame was broken at Bobbers Mill, with the broken parts being carried away by the Luddites.

3rd February 1812: Manchester Committee of Trades is visited by a Bolton delegate

On Monday 3rd February, the Manchester Committee of Trades met. 27 people were present to hear a delegate from the Bolton Committee relate the details of the letter from Samuel Whitbread MP that had been read out to the Committee meeting at Bolton 3 nights before.

Although this was not the first time that the issue had been raised at the Manchester Committee, as the records of the spy 'B' show, the meeting now undertook to send delegates out to different areas to coordinate petitions for peace and parliamentary reform.

All the while, a spy reported this information back to Colonel Fletcher.

1st February 1812: Nottingham Journal editorials

The warfare which has been carrying on by the workmen against the property of their employers, for the last three months, seems to have acquired fresh energy during the last week, and to have assumed the character so decided, as to fall little short of open rebellion. The ramifications of the conspiracy extend throughout every manufacturing district in the county, as well as to the towns and villages on the confines of Derbyshire; and so complete is the organization of the different bands, that it frequently happens, that attacks are made in two or three different places at one and the same time, not only by night, but sometimes even the open day. The numbers are occasionally augmented, or diminished, as circumstances may direct; and the plans are so artfully laid, and executed with such secrecy and promptitude, as he defined the utmost exertion of the civil and military authorities to detect and bring to justice these atrocious disturbers of the public tranquillity.

It is calculated that upwards of nine hundred stocking and lace frames have been destroyed since the disturbances broke out, and of course, the greater part of that number of industrious work-people thrown out of employ, numbers of whom have been necessitated in consequence to seek relief for their families from their respective parishes.

On the subject of the differences between the workmen and their employers, we shall not hazard an opinion; but we cannot forbear expressing our detestation of any conspiracy that has for its object the destruction of property of any description; and our perfect conviction, that any man who exposes his life in such a cause, disturbs the public peace, places family in the situation of having torn from them it head and support, plays a desperate game.–It is not necessary to tell that industrious and useful body of men the framework-knitters, that we sympathize in their distresses, and are most anxious to see the period when the restoration of peace and a free commerce shall bring them entirely to an end; and we trust, they will do as the justice to believe, that in admonishing them of the danger of persevering in a system, which has occasioned so much mischief and alarm, we are influenced by the best motives towards them.

[1st] February 1812: Letter to Mr. Kirkby, Ancoats

Mr Kirkby
Cotton Master at
Candis his factory
Ancoats

Sir,

We begin with the Language of the Prophets of old, in saying, that your Destruction is at Hand, and why? because we the Cotton Spinners of this Town, have been the means of raising you from the Dunghill, to Independency; & now you with others, have employed so many of the Female Sex, that we, and our little ones, are starving for want of Bread; and if you are determined to persevere, you may expect something destructive immediately—

So we conclude with a Reform or Death

The same has also been recd by
Mr Pollard
“—Jas Kennedy
“—McConnoll & Co

February 1812: Song "The Cropper's Song", Huddersfield area

The Cropper’s Song

Come, cropper lads of high renown,
Who love to drink good ale that’s brown,
And strike each haughty tyrant down,
With hatchet, pike, and gun!
Oh, the cropper lads for me,
The gallant lads for me,
Who with lusty stroke,
The shear frames broke,
The cropper lads for me!

What though the specials still advance,
And soldiers nightly round us prance;
The cropper lads still lead the dance,
With hatchet, pike, and gun!
Oh, the cropper lads for me,
The gallant lads for me,
Who with lusty stroke
The shear frames broke,
The cropper lads for me!

And night by night when all is still
And the moon is hid behind the hill,
We forward march to do our will
With hatchet, pike, and gun!
Oh, the cropper lads for me,
The gallant lads for me,
Who with lusty stroke
The shear frames broke,
The cropper lads for me!

Great Enoch still shall lead the van.
Stop him who dare! stop him who can!
Press forward every gallant man
With hatchet, pike, and gun!
Oh, the cropper lads for me,
The gallant lads for me,
Who with lusty stroke
The shear frames broke,
The cropper lads for me!

According to the Folklorist & Journalist Frank Peel, this song was written by the Luddite John Walker, who first sung it at a meeting of the Liversedge and Huddersfield Croppers at the Shears Inn in Liversedge some time in February 1812, just prior to the commencement of direct action in the area.

There are many versions of the Cropper Lads available on the internet. Here are a selection of the best:

Simon Vaughan for Trad2Mad 2010:



Ruth Price & Sadie Greenwood (daughters of Bill Price, see below) at Whitby Folk Week 2008:



A barnstorming version by Mawkin Causley at Kirkby Fleetham Big Birthday Bash 2009



Blackstone Edge's version in Dewsbury from last year:



Bill Price's version from his 1972 LP 'The Fine Old Yorkshire Gentleman':