Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T21:28:36.027Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Marquis of Anglesey: working and social relationships on a Dorset estate (c. 1812–1844)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 October 2020

Carol Beardmore
Carol Beardmore*
Affiliation:
De Montfort University, Leicester
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Marquis of Anglesey on his Dorset estate was an absentee landlord who maintained close relationships with his estate through extensive correspondence with his land agent William Castleman. The surviving letters are a very rich source by which to examine the minutiae of rural life and a way to reconstruct social and working relationships within the nineteenth-century English landed estate. By focusing on a range of customary and unwritten rights, this article will consider issues such as how tenants navigated renegotiation of their leases, sought rent abatements or compensation for damage to their crops from hunting. Working and social relationships on such an estate were closely interlinked, as is widely shown here. The article also raises more contentious estate issues such as who had the rights to fallen and standing timber, the customs affecting courts, the repair of churches, and the responsibilities for building and maintaining schools. Throughout, the issue of ‘social control’ is assessed. Together the range of documented work and social interactions provide a fuller picture of the functioning of a southern English great estate in the early nineteenth century, and allow us to examine this rural community beyond the remit of its agricultural history.

Type
Research Article
Information
Rural History , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , October 2020 , pp. 135 - 150
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 Sixpenny Handley is usually referred to in the archive as Hanley, which has been adopted here.

2 Jones, I., The Stalbridge Inheritance, 1780–1854 (Dorchester, 1993), p. 56.Google Scholar

3 Jeffry Wyatville was a successful architect, whose work involved improvements, remodelling and extending existing properties, including some of the great houses such as Longleat (Wiltshire), Wollaton Hall (Nottinghamshire), Chatsworth (Derbyshire), Woburn Abbey (Bedfordshire), and Windsor Castle. No one has yet been able to fathom how Castleman was able to persuade an architecture of this stature to work for him on this more modest property.

4 Salisbury and Winchester Journal, 5th March 1804.

5 Ibid., 13th August 1804.

6 Jones, The Stalbridge Inheritance, p. 56.

7 Dorset History Centre (hereafter DHC), background to the Anglesey estate.

8 Beastall, T. W., ‘Landlords and Tenants’, in Mingay, G. E., ed., The Victorian Countryside, Vol. II (London, 1981), p. 428.Google Scholar

9 Richards, E., ‘The Land Agent’, in Mingay, , ed., The Victorian Countryside, Vol. II, p. 439.Google Scholar

10 Beardmore, C. A., ‘Landowner, tenant and agent on the Marquis of Anglesey’s Dorset and Somerset estate, 1814–44’, Rural History, 26:2 (2015), 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 Laurence, E., The Duty and Office of a Land Steward (London, 1727), p. 57.Google Scholar

12 DHC D/ANG/B5/15, 25th June 1814.

13 Richards, ‘The Land Agent’, p. 440.

14 Ibid.

15 DHC D/ANG/B5/16, this is within the archive for 1814.

16 Holderness, B. A., ‘The Victorian Farmer’, in Mingay, G. E., ed., The Victorian Countryside, Vol. I (London, 1981), p. 231.Google Scholar

17 DHC D/ANG/B5/16, 21st December 1814.

18 Once a distraint was served, Castleman was able to evict the tenant, and authorise the impounding of the livestock, standing crops, machinery and even household items. These were then sold, and proceeds were used to settle the outstanding arrears.

19 DHC D/ANG/B5/16, 21st December 1814.

20 Chambers, J. D. and Mingay, G. E., The Agricultural Revolution, 1750–1880 (London, 1982), p. 126.Google Scholar

21 DHC D/ANG/B5/26, 12th January 1820.

22 DHC D/ANG/B5/31, 22nd February 1822.

23 Ibid., 28th February 1822.

24 DHC D/ANG/B5/31, 6th March 1822.

25 Ibid.

26 DHC D/ANG/B5/31, 6th April 1822.

27 Hainsworth, D. R., Stewards, Lords and People: The Estate Steward and His World in Later Stuart England (Cambridge, 1992), p. 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28 Ibid., p. 59.

29 DHC D/ANG/B5/16, 21st December 1814.

30 DHC D/ANG/B5/46, 1st February 1834.

31 DHC D/ANG/B5/41, 1st December 1829.

32 DHC D/ANG/B5/37, 8th May 1826.

33 DHC D/ANG/B5/39, 21st June 1827.

34 Turner, M. E., Beckett, J. V. and Afton, B., Agricultural Rent in England, 1690–1914 (Cambridge, 1997), p. 241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

35 Hoyle, R. W., ‘Introduction: Recovering the Farmer’, in Hoyle, R. W., ed., The Farmer in England, 1650–1980 (Abingdon, 2013), p. 2.Google Scholar

36 Stratton, J. M., Agricultural Records, A.D. 200–1969 (London, 1969), p. 102.Google Scholar

37 There is no clear definition of coathe. It is assumed that it is a disease caused by liver fluke.

38 DHC D/ANG/B5/31, 6th April 1829.

39 Ibid.

40 Houston, R. A., Peasant Petitions: Social Relations and Economic Life on Landed Estates, 1600–1850 (Basingstoke, 2014), p. 45.Google Scholar

41 DHC D/ANG/B5/41, 27th October 1829.

42 Ibid.

43 Ibid.

44 Ibid.

45 DHC D/ANG/B5/42, 6th May 1830.

46 Hainsworth, Stewards, Lords and People, p. 63.

47 DHC D/ANG/B5/46, 18th October 1834.

48 Hainsworth, Stewards, Lords and People, p. 66.

49 DHC D/ANG/B5/60, 28th December 1943.

50 DHC D/ANG/B5/61, 8th January 1844.

51 DHC D/ANG/B5/61, 11th January 1844.

52 Hainsworth, Stewards, Lords and People, p. 66.

53 DHC D/ANG/B5/60, 18th April 1843.

54 Ibid.

55 DHC D/ANG/B5/61, 31st January 1844.

56 DHC D/ANG/B5/61.

57 DHC D/ANG/B5/61, 31st January 1844.

58 DHC D/ANG/B5/61, Report from Mr Robert Noone.

59 DHC D/ANG/B5/61, 1st February 1844.

60 Thompson, F. M. L., ‘Social control in Victorian Britain’, Economic History Review, 32:2 (1981), 190.Google Scholar

61 Thompson, F. M. L., ‘Landowners and the Rural Community’, in Mingay, , ed., The Victorian Countryside, Vol. 1I, p. 457.Google Scholar

62 Thompson, ‘Landowners and the Rural Community’, p. 458.

63 Horn, P., The Rural World, 1750–1850: Social Change in the English Countryside (London, 1980), p. 98.Google Scholar

64 The Times, 31st August 1826.

65 Snell, K. D. M., Annals of the Labouring Poor: Social Change and Agrarian England, 1660–1900 (Cambridge, 1985), ch. 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

66 K. P. Bawn, ‘Social Protest, Popular Disturbances and Public Order in Dorset, 1780–1938’ (unpublished PhD thesis, University of Reading, 1984), p. 158.

67 Daunton, M. J., Progress and Poverty: An Economic and Social History of Britain, 1700–1850 (Oxford, 1995), p. 158.Google Scholar

68 DHC D/ANG/B5/25, 21st October 1819.

69 Ibid.

70 C. A. Beardmore, ‘Landowner, tenant and agent’, 184.

71 DHC D/ANG/B5/25, 21st October 1819.

72 Ibid.

73 Quoted in Beardmore, ‘Landowner, tenant and agent’, 184.

74 DHC D/ANG/B5/25, 21st October 1819.

75 The Times, 31st August 1826.

76 Griffin, C., ‘Protest practice and (tree) cultures of conflict: understanding the spaces of “tree maiming” in eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century England’, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 33:1 (2008), 96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

77 DHC D/ANG/B5/38, 12th February 1827.

78 DHC D/ANG/B5/39, 14th February 1827.

79 Ibid.

80 DHC D/ANG/B5/39, 16th February 1827.

81 DHC D/ANG/B5/39, 14th February 1827.

82 DHC D/ANG/B5/51, 1st January 1837.

83 DHC D/ANG/B5/37, 3rd February 1826.

84 DHC D/ANG/B5/75, 23rd October 1826.

85 Sellman, R., ‘The Country School’, in Mingay, , ed., The Victorian Countryside, Vol. II, p. 542.Google Scholar

86 Snell, K. D. M., ‘The Sunday school movement in England and Wales: child labour, denominational control and working-class culture’, Past & Present, 164 (1999), 129–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

87 Horn, The Rural World, p. 131.

88 Ibid.

89 DHC D/ANG/B5/15, 13th August 1814.

90 DHC D/ANG/B5/15, 1st July 1814.

91 DHC D/ANG/B5/37, 3rd November 1826.

92 DHC D/ANG/B5/37, 10th November 1826.

93 DHC D/ANG/B5/48, 27th April 1835.

94 DHC D/ANG/B5/61, 12th September 1844.

95 DHC D/ANG/B5/37, 3rd February 1826.

96 DHC D/ANG/B5/46, 22nd January 1834.

97 DHC D/ANG/B5/46, 4th February 1834.

98 See Hoyle, Farmer in England.

99 See Jones, Stalbridge Inheritance.

100 See, for example, Monks, G., ‘The Duke of Portland and his agent: The Education Act of 1870’, Family and Community History, 19:2 (2016), 95–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar