Brontës
Page 14
Not long afterwards there was a parting of the ways for the Brontës and their family. John Fennell who, since leaving Woodhouse Grove School, had lived and worked in Bradford as a curate to John Crosse and then to his son-in-law at Christ Church, was appointed by the vicar of Halifax to the parish of Cross Stone, which lay between Hebden Bridge and Todmorden.83 Though only some ten or eleven miles away from Thornton as the crow flies, it was actually much further because many miles of untracked moorland lay between; its inaccessibility was increased during the winter months as it stood high up in the Pennines and was almost invariably cut off by snow.
By an extraordinary coincidence, Patrick was almost immediately offered a new post which would take him into the same area. On 25 May, the Reverend James Charnock, perpetual curate of Haworth since 1791, died after a long illness.84 Henry Heap, the vicar of Bradford, no doubt foreseeing the contest that was to come, acted with almost unseemly haste. Knowing that Patrick was an Evangelical, which would appeal to the inhabitants of Haworth, that he had had experience of similar chapelries at Thornton and Hartshead and that he was struggling to make ends meet in his present, less valuable post, Henry Heap offered him the incumbency. Patrick was taken by surprise but accepted the nomination as ‘a gift and a call of Providence’.85
Unaware of the poisoned chalice he had been handed, Patrick set about securing the necessary papers. On 1 June, Michael Stocks, a friend who was a well-known and respected magistrate in the Halifax area, wrote to Mr Greenwood, one of the church trustees at Haworth, recommending Patrick as a successor to James Charnock. Though only a short letter, it contained an ominous phrase which foreshadowed the troubles to come: ‘I trust that you will feel no objection to him on account of his possessing the confidence of the vicar of Bradford.’86
Unfortunately for Patrick, the trustees did object and on precisely this ground. What Patrick does not appear to have known, or perhaps failed to appreciate, was that the church trustees at Haworth did not simply exercise the usual powers of recommendation or approval but claimed an absolute right to appoint their own minister. The church at Haworth was a medieval foundation and, like Thornton, was originally a chapel-of-ease built to provide services for the remoter districts and manned by a perpetual curate who remained subject to Bradford. The vicars of Bradford had always had the right to nominate and appoint to the living of Haworth but, since at least 1559, this had effectively been in the hands of the church trustees. When Elizabeth I re-established the Protestant Church in England, after Queen Mary’s attempt to restore Catholicism, the inhabitants of Haworth had raised the sum of thirty-six pounds which they then handed over to a trust. In an indenture, made on 18 December 1559, the trustees were empowered to purchase land at Stanbury and use the income from it to pay the salary of the ‘lawfully licensed and admitted minister’ of Haworth. The trustees were under an obligation to hand over the rents, dues and profits unless – and this was the crucial phrase – the trustees, their heirs or successors or a major part of them ‘shall at any time hereafter be debarred in their choice or in the nomination of a minister’. An incumbent minister who was negligent in his duties, of infamous character or litigious could similarly be deprived of the income from the church lands, in which case the money had to be distributed among the poor of the parish.87 While the vicar of Bradford claimed the right to nominate and appoint a minister at Haworth, the church trustees could make or break that appointment by declining to pay his salary.
The trust deed had been invoked before. In 1741, the then vicar of Bradford had declined to nominate the most famous of all Haworth’s previous clergymen, William Grimshaw, but the trustees were determined to have him and succeeded in securing his appointment by refusing to pay the salary to anyone else. Even John Crosse, that mildest of men, had crossed swords with the trustees over his nomination of James Charnock in 1791 though, typically, he avoided a public conflict by obtaining their full consent before the appointment went forward.88 It was therefore inevitable that there would be a dispute over Charnock’s successor, which is why Henry Heap acted so quickly in nominating his replacement.
Perhaps hoping to complete his coup and ensure victory for Bradford before the trustees had had time to meet and rally opposition, Heap made the mistake of going over to Haworth himself. On Whit Sunday, one of the most important festivals in the church calendar, which happened to fall between the death of Charnock and Patrick’s nomination, the vicar arrived at Haworth Church to take the day’s services. The trustees actually shut the church doors in his face ‘& told him they would have nothing to do with any Person he might nominate, without their Consent previously obtained – They claim the ancient Privilege of chusing their own Minister –’.89
Heap’s response was equally belligerent: on 2 June, still only nine days after Charnock’s death, he wrote to the Archbishop of York requesting a licence for Patrick to the perpetual curacy of Haworth which ‘doth of Right belong to my Nomination’.90 The very wording of the nomination was calculated to antagonize the Haworth trustees whose rights, real or assumed, he had completely ignored in the hope of forestalling a reaction. He should have known better. On 14 June the Leeds Intelligencer carried this report:
We hear that the Rev. P. Bronte, curate of Thornton, has been nominated by the vicar of Bradford, to the valuable perpetual curacy of Haworth, vacant by the death of the Rev. James Charnock; but that the inhabitants of the chapelry intend to resist the presentation, and have entered a caveat at York accordingly.91
At this stage, Patrick decided to invoke the aid of the one Haworth church trustee with whom he had personal contact: Stephen Taylor, a gentleman farmer living at the Manor House in Stanbury, who was the father of Mercy Kaye of Allerton Hall.92 Patrick had probably met him on the numerous occasions when he called at Allerton Hall, the Kayes being his friends as well as among the more prominent of his parishioners at Thornton.
Patrick paid a visit to Haworth and learnt from Stephen Taylor and some of the other trustees what the facts of the case were and what was the basis of their opposition to him. They had nothing against him personally, but would resist his appointment to the bitter end if it was forced upon them by the vicar of Bradford. Caught in the middle, Patrick evidently felt that it was beneath his dignity to get involved in such a sordid squabble for power, and decided to resign. Perhaps this was seen as an act of betrayal by the vicar who had looked for a sterner stance from his colleague; Patrick was told in no uncertain terms that he could not withdraw ‘in honour, and with propriety’ and was threatened with incurring the archbishop’s displeasure. The latter offered to allow him to hold both Thornton and Haworth until the matter was satisfactorily settled, so Patrick had no choice but ‘with the help of God, to go on till I see the conclusion’.93 He wrote on 8 July to explain his decision to Stephen Taylor and seek his support:
I have resided for many years in the neighbourhood, where I am well known – I am a good deal conversant with the affairs of mankind – and I do humbly trust that it is my unvarying practice to preach Christ faithfully, as the only Way, the Truth, and the Life. From considerations such as these, I do think that Providence has called me to labour in His vineyard at Haworth, where so many great and good men have gone before me. I therefore request your kindness, and your prayers, and that when I come to preach amongst you, you will use your endeavours to prevent people from leaving the Church, and will exhort them to hear with candour and attention, in order that God’s name may be glorified, and sinners saved …94
It is possible that Patrick went to Haworth on 12 July, the Sunday following this letter, in order to take the services and that, despite his request to Stephen Taylor, the congregation walked out or drowned his sermon with shouting and cat-calls; exactly the same thing was to happen to Samuel Redhead soon afterwards. This seems the likeliest explanation for Patrick’s sudden change of heart, for on 14 July, two days later, he wrote again to Stephen Taylor and told him that he had written to both the vicar of Bradford and the Arch
bishop of York to resign Haworth.95
The trustees had won the first round and got their own way once more. They were now prepared to be gracious and sent to Patrick saying that they might be prepared to consider nominating him themselves if he would come over to Haworth and give them a sample of his preaching. The cool impudence of the suggestion, particularly if Patrick had indeed been driven from their pulpit the week before, deserved the repudiation it got. Patrick’s response, however angry he must have felt, was a masterpiece of tact and contained only the most veiled of reprimands: ‘through divine grace my aim has been, and I trust, always will be, to preach Christ and not myself and I have been more desirous of being made the instrument of benefit rather than pleasure to my own congregation’. If they wanted to hear him preach, let them come to him and hear him preach at a time when he did not expect them: ‘It is an easy matter to compose a fine sermon or two for a particular occasion, but no easy thing always to give satisfaction.’ They might then take the opportunity to learn about him from his parishioners in Thornton, for, ‘believe me, the character and conduct of a man out of the pulpit is as much to be considered as his character and conduct in, and we are most likely to know those best who live nearest to us –’.96
Whether or not the trustees made the effort to come and hear him preach, matters remained at an impasse for several months. Other clergymen took the duties at Haworth so that Patrick was not drawn into the fray again. He did take care to let the trustees know that, if they so wished, they could hear him preaching on behalf of the Church Missionary Society at both the morning and afternoon services at Keighley on 1 August.97
The ugly mood at Haworth was more than matched by what was going on in the country as a whole. The summer of 1819 had added bad harvests to industrial depression, leading to political discontent which had manifested itself in increasingly violent agitation for reform. The culmination of weeks of popular unrest was the great Manchester meeting on 16 August, when over 50,000 people gathered to hear the Radical, Henry Hunt; the magistrates, terrified of violence, ordered Hunt’s arrest and then turned the attendant soldiers on the crowd. The result was the ‘Manchester Massacre’ or the ‘Battle of Peterloo’ in which one man was killed and forty were wounded. Instead of condemning the outrage, the government sent messages of support to the magistrates and reacted with extraordinary severity, clamping down on all forms of meetings and empowering magistrates to seize arms and prevent the publication of seditious pamphlets. Radicalism was temporarily and brutally suppressed; criticism was silenced by repression.
The events of the previous months were serious enough to merit comment at the eighth annual meeting of the Bible Society, held in the Friends’ Meeting House in Bradford on 15 October; there were ‘very animated’ speeches from a number of clergymen, including Patrick, Morgan, Samuel Redhead and Robinson Pool, the Dissenting minister of Thornton.
All these speakers alluded, more or less, to the crisis of the times, as loudly calling upon every Christian to join in disseminating the Word of God, as the only sure guide in life, the sole support of the soul in death, and as alone capable of raising us, through a Saviour’s merits to everlasting happiness.98
Though Patrick had wished to keep out of the quarrel at Haworth, too much was at stake for him to be allowed to do so. The stalemate had to be broken somehow and on 8 October the Archbishop of York wrote to him, ordering him to take the duty at Haworth the following Sunday. Patrick reluctantly preached there on 10 October, having forewarned the trustees that he was acting ‘very contrary to my inclination’ but pointing out that he could not disobey his archbishop.99 Things cannot have gone too well, for eleven days later his formal resignation was finally accepted, and Patrick was at last free to resume his ministry at Thornton.100
The burden of Haworth was passed to his old friend Samuel Redhead, who was to fare no better. The vicar of Bradford, backed by the archbishop, seemed determined not to give in and Redhead’s appointment, like Patrick’s, was made without reference to the trustees. On 30 October, the Leeds Mercury carried the bald statement that he had been licensed to the perpetual curacy of Haworth ‘upon the nomination of the Rev. Henry Heap, vicar of Bradford’.101
Mrs Gaskell gives the now famous account of the torments endured by Redhead at the hands of the congregation of Haworth: how the entire congregation walked out of his first service, how a man was driven, face to tail, on the back of an ass down the aisles in his second and how, at the third and last service, a drunken chimney sweep was prompted to climb into the pulpit, embrace the unfortunate preacher, chase him into the churchyard and then empty a bag of soot over him.102 This picturesque story has entered Brontë mythology but her information, supplied by Dr Scoresby, a later vicar of Bradford, and the landlord of the Black Bull, who claimed a leading role in helping Redhead to escape the wrath of the crowd, is almost completely untrue. After The Life of Charlotte Brontë appeared in print, Redhead’s son-in-law wrote to the Leeds Intelligencer and, in defence of his father-in-law and the people of Haworth, quoted the relevant extracts from Redhead’s diary.103 He also confirmed the details himself, saying that he had heard Redhead’s own account of the events when he had visited Haworth with him in 1844.
According to his diary, Redhead arrived in Haworth on 31 October to take his first duty, accompanied by Mr Rand, a prominent Bradford lay churchman. He was admitted to the church on producing his licence but the churchwardens refused to allow the bells to be rung for the service so that it began with a very small congregation which gradually increased to some 500. All went well till Redhead entered the pulpit, at which point ‘on a signal given by the churchwardens, trustees &c.’ the whole congregation got to its feet and stomped out of church, shouting ‘Come out, come out’. No attempt was made to restrain the disorder and on leaving the church ‘Mr Rand and I were pursued and hooted and insulted by considerable numbers out of the village.’
The following Sunday, 7 November, Redhead tried again, this time taking Mr Crossley, a Bradford churchwarden, with him as witness and moral support. The large congregation was evidently restless, waiting for a signal from their own churchwardens who, on the minister entering the pulpit, immediately left their pew. Utmost confusion followed with people coming in and out of the church without any regard for the service.
The afternoon service commenced in the midst of uproar and confusion, all decency seemed thrown aside, and laughing, talking, and noise frequently interrupted the prayers … great numbers leaping over the tops of the pews, throwing to the pew doors with great violence, stamping with their feet, shouting and rushing out in the most outrageous and tumultuous manner. The whole scene was perfectly indescribable, and to the end of the prayers nothing but tumult prevailed.
Redhead retired to the comparative safety of the vestry, where he put himself under the protection of the churchwardens and demanded that if they could not control the tumult then they should call the respectable inhabitants of the town to assist them. The churchwardens refused, insisting that the respectable inhabitants would refuse to act, so strong was the feeling against the vicar of Bradford. Redhead insisted that the churchwardens should remain with him until he had interred a corpse, the funeral passing off in relative quiet; as he left, however, he was pursued out of the town with ‘hootings and pushing and shouting and insult’.
Matters were now so serious that the next day Redhead, accompanied by Mr Fawcett from Bradford, set out for a personal interview with the Archbishop at York and obtained from him a threat that, if the tumults did not cease, the church would be shut up and the whole affair laid before the Lord Chancellor.
Redhead was a persistent man. On Sunday, 14 November, he returned to Haworth with Mr Crossley, hoping that the archbishop’s remonstrance would have ensured him a quieter reception. He was sadly mistaken.
When we entered the village we were saluted with shoutings and insults, and pursued with the most indecent insolence. The same irreverent conduct was displayed all the way to the ch
urch, and we had no prospect but of the greatest disorder. Indecency and impiety marked their conduct during the prayers, and when I entered the pulpit all was uproar and confusion. I felt obliged to close the service without preaching. I gave directions to the churchwardens to shut up the church till they received instructions from the Archbishop, as I should lay the whole matter before him on the following day. I further told them that I should expect their protection through the town, with which they complied, and we went as we came, pursued more like wild beasts than human beings. Their shoutings continued, and we heard them for more than a mile and a half. The day after, Monday, 15, I wrote to the Archbishop and obtained his consent to my resignation.
This was a scandal that would not go away. The Leeds Intelligencer took Haworth to task:
We regret to learn from a Correspondent, that scenes, scarcely possible in an heathen village, have been witnessed on three successive Sundays, in the church of Haworth, merely in consequence of the minister officiating under the appointment of the Vicar of Bradford, and the licence of the Archbishop of York. The churchwardens are certainly liable to a prosecution for the wilful neglect of their duty and deserve to feel, that the house of God, and the hallowed ground of a church-yard, are not proper places in which to allow, by disturbance and howlings, the loudest and lowest marks of irreverence and insult.104
Patrick must have felt some relief that he had not pursued his own appointment with as much vigour as his unfortunate friend. As one of the ministers living nearest to Haworth, however, he could not escape all contact. On 17 November, the Wednesday following Redhead’s last attempt to take duty there, Patrick had to go to Haworth to perform two funerals and a baptism; eleven days later he had to go again, this time to perform a marriage.105 No doubt he went with some reluctance and one can only guess what sort of reception he received. Perhaps the trustees took the opportunity to talk to him again, but to no effect, for he did not perform any more duties until he finally agreed to become minister of Haworth. He returned to Thornton to take up the threads of his old life, though the increased frequency of his visits to Kipping House106 suggests that he was unsettled and still considering his position with regard to the continuing vacancy at Haworth. Through the Firths, he could maintain a suitably distant line of communication between himself and the Haworth trustees.