Family Gathering; Thoughts About Large Families, Multi Generational Living, & the Holding Family Days

Large families are often considered synonymous with families of the past; parents with poor access to reliable birth control methods making the most of the insurance that a large family might provide. Hardly a necessary thing these days where families have better access to pension plans, health care, and support for family planning. In the past many children would potentially mean more options for the parents' care as they aged. Multi-generational living in Britain, was far more common in previous eras than now. Having older parents living in the Victorian family home meant that childcare, housework, and food preparation was easier. The mother, or wife of the head of the household, might even be able to work outside the home in such circumstances, bringing in some extra, much needed income. 

I've often wondered at the relationships between siblings of such large families. Do the children all know each other well? Or do the older children know the siblings from their end of the range best? Or perhaps the older siblings know the youngest best (and vice versa), as they were the siblings who cared for them the most, as babysitters to their baby siblings. Did they all get along? Often large families would be crammed into relatively small dwellings; sharing beds until a fairly old age, sometimes right up until the night before their marriage. There must have been tension and friction when people quite literally rub along together in such close proximity. How does such a raising up affect a person, and what kind of an adult do they then become?

My grandfather was one of ten children; Edith, Richard, Frank, Lily, Lena, Joseph, John, Olive, Kenyon, and Doris. Both of his parents, my great grandparents, were from big families. Clearly, 'big families' was a part of their family culture, and common for people of that time. In 1901 the Holding family were living at 3 Gage Street, Lancaster. The census report shows that my great grandparents Kenyon and Sarah Annie Holding were living there with 5 children, all under the age of 8, born in perfect 2 year gaps. Sadly this building no longer appears to stand but Gage Street was and is part of central Lancaster, and the shopping/commercial district. The picture below shows Gage Street from 1963, and we can see on the right the odd numbered buildings. Number 3 Gage Street would have been at the far end; the first of the shorter buildings, before the tall ones at the far end of the street. I suspect that there would have been two rooms on each floor above a ground floor shop. Considering that there would have been no bathroom, as we require now, it might have felt quite roomy for the family of 7. One room being the kitchen, another the parlour, with 2 bedrooms above, one being for the parents and the other for the children.

Within a decade the Holding family had swollen to 10, with Edith (at the age of 19) having left the family home to live at her uncle and aunt's house on nearby Salisbury Road, for work as a domestic servant. The family according to the 1911 Census, had moved across the street to 10 Gage Street. You can see #10 below, as it looks from Google Streetview.

10 Gage Street, Lancaster

This property doesn't look any bigger than how I imagine #3 would have been, but now the family boasted 8 children between the ages of 16 and 1 years of age, with the youngest of the family, Doris, not yet born. Doris was, at this point in history, not yet a twinkle in her father's eye; she was born in 1914. Accommodating so many quickly growing people must have been a squeeze. By 1911, however, Kenyon, my great grandfather, was self employed as a master window cleaner, and employing two of his own sons. With the store front below, and his name, address, and business listed in the 1912 directory, I have assumed that they also had the store on the ground floor as part of their accommodation. Perhaps some of the older children slept in the back room of the shop.

Bulmer's History and Directory of Lancaster and District, 1912-13

The family remained at 10 Gage Street until at least 1920, after which they took a change of address and a change of career, by running a public house and hotel on nearby Penny Street. Before that move, the family had experienced the great loss of the eldest sons, Richard and Frank who both died in WWI. Prior to their move, and in their last months of living at 10 Gage Street the family would have numbered mum and dad, Sarah Annie and Kenyon, plus kids Lily, Lena, Joseph, John, Olive, Kenyon, and Doris; the children being between the ages of 6-22. That would have been 9 people, the majority of them being adults, or teenagers, all living, cheek by jowl, in this small home.

Gage Street can be see in this map, on the north west corner of Dalton Square.

This article by Psychology Today explains how large families can impact sibling relationships in a positive way. 

"With a bunch of children, siblings in a large family may see themselves as a team, helping to create closeness. Studies actually do show that children from larger families are more likely to be altruistic, cooperative, and interdependent than children from smaller families."

So, whilst there were undoubtedly fractious moments, it's more than possible that the family did indeed rub along rather nicely together. In fact memories of family gatherings, that happened regularly, when I was a child, suggest that this was indeed the case with the Holding siblings.

As the surviving children grew up, and started families of their own, the Holdings scattered to other parts of the country, and beyond. In an effort to keep the family bonds from breaking, the Holding children, and their children, started to hold regular, annual family days. Family Days involved one small part of the large extended family hosting everyone else; brothers, sisters, their children, and their grandchildren. People would bring dishes and drinks to share, and homes were overrun by everyone from marauding children to seniors in garden chairs, all to the sound track of laughter, chatter, and sometimes tears. 

There was certainly a sense of closeness, and a team-like culture, evident on those family days. I have some pretty blurry memories of Family Days, which I found all a bit overwhelming as a young child, as I didn't know that part of my family very well. We lived at the other end of the country from most of these relatives, and as such did not see them very often. But I what I do remember is a strong sense of safety, love, and kindness amongst this gang of somehow familiar strangers. Perhaps the ethos of the family I sensed as a young child, was in part, a result of the childhoods those siblings had enjoyed, as members of that large family.

The Holding Siblings, minus Doris, who was not yet born when the photo was taken, circa 1912

I wish that I had spent more time talking with the original Holding siblings; hearing their stories of yesteryear, and taking note of exactly how many Lancaster pubs and hotels the family had run over the years. But who would have known at that young age, that I was to develop this fascination in genealogy.

Whilst large families have definitely been on the decrease since the Victorian era, multi generational living does appear to be on the rise. Statistics Canada (a Canadian Federal Government agency) reported a study in recent years that recorded an increase of 11% of intergenerational households since 2001. It seems likely that whilst my children haven't experienced a large family upbringing, there is a high chance that their children, my grandchildren (should they have any), will at least enjoy a multi-generational home; and right now, I'm not sure how I feel about that!

#Holding

******************************************

https://www.robgolfi.com/blog/the-growing-trend-of-multigenerational-living-in-canada/

https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=18.0&lat=54.04788&lon=-2.79754&layers=117746212&b=1&o=100

https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/band-brothers-and-sisters/201207/fighting-piece-mom-family-size-and-sibling-relationships#:~:text=With%20a%20bunch%20of%20children,than%20children%20from%20smaller%20families.

Storyteller; The Newspaper Coverage of Two Murders, and Two Hangings

Storytelling is fundamental to the human condition. Stories have been used from ancient times to today, to tell us about our history, our culture, and instruct us in how to live safe, happy, and productive lives. Stories connect us to people from different cultures, places, and times, by showing us how the basic human condition remains the same throughout. We all experience emotion through our experiences, and when we hear stories from the past we feel connected, by recognising the emotions that our ancestors might have felt in that experience. In ancient times stories were shared through an oral tradition, but by the Victorian era stories were shared in many different printed media, the most common of which were the newspapers. Victorian newspapers related the news of the day, often using a storytelling style rather than the reportage of the modern era, with which we are more familiar. And they did so in true Victorian fashion, by cementing the Victorian ideas about morality, class, and faith.

Once such story, found in newspapers of the time, relates to an experience lived by my husband's 3x great granduncle, by the impressive name of James Porteous Watson Grosset. James Grosset was the son of Ebeneezer Grozart and Jane Dickson Shiels. He was born on 9th April 1843, in Middle Mains, Liberton Parish, Midlothian, Scotland. Ebeneezer his father was a blacksmith, as were so many other men in the family, but James Porteous Watson Grosset was a gamekeeper.

James Porteous Watson Grosset married Agnes Scott Laidlaw Dalgleish on the 10th April 1868, when he was 24 years old, and she was 22. James was at that time working as a gamekeeper for the Rosebery Estate at Temple, Midlothian. The Rosebery Estate was home to the Primrose family, and the Earls of Rosebery. At the time of James and Agnes' marriage, the Earl of Rosebery was Archibald Primrose, the 5th Earl of Rosebery, who had inherited the title and all that came with it, just a month earlier. Archibald Primrose was a Liberal politician, who was to become the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom from 1894- 1895. He was also known as Lord Dalmeny, until he succeeded his father as Earl of Rosebery.

Archibald Primrose, 5th Earl of Roseberry

James Grosset and Agnes Dalgleish had 5 children together. Their first child was named James, and was born 3 months before their marriage, on the 23rd January, 1867. Their first daughter was born a year after their marriage, on the 31st January 1869. Subsequent children included Ebeneezer Grosset (born 1872), Jessie Grosset (born 1874), and Alexander Grosset (born 1874). It was shortly before their 15th Christmas together as a family, that the tale began to unfold. The story tells a tale of our hero, gamekeeper James Grosset, and his two colleagues who were fatally wounded one moonlit night, by a pair of evil poachers. Reports of the case first appeared in December 1883, shortly after the crime had occurred. The reports relayed brief details of the event. Further accounts were published in January 1884, when it was understood that the crime had resulted in the deaths of two innocent men. These were short pieces, barely a paragraph each, and certainly not demonstrative of the storytelling style I've described above. The next time the story appears in the newspapers we learn about the court case, against the two poachers; Robert Flockart Vickers, and William Innes. On the 10th March 1884 the case against Robert Vickers and William Innes was heard at the High Court of Justiciary, in Edinburgh. Lord Young was appointed judge for the case. Lord Young (aka George Young) was a highly esteemed lawman who had spent time earlier in his life as the Solicitor General for Scotland, and Lord Advocate for Scotland. It was Lord Young who created the Education (Scotland) Act in 1872, which compelled all towns and villages across Scotland to provide free education to children between 5-11. (It wasn't until 1891 that England followed suit, when it passed the Elementary Education Act.) George Young had been a member of Parliament for almost 10 years, before taking a position as a judge of the Court of Session in 1874, and adopting the title Lord Young. By the time the case against Vickers and Innes was heard, Lord Young had been presiding as a judge for a decade. The superiority of this judge speaks a little to the seriousness of the crime.

Lord Young (1819 - 1867)

Both men pleaded 'not guilty'. The prosecution, led by the Solicitor General for Scotland, who was Alexander Asher at the time, laid out evidence proving that the accused, armed with shot guns, deliberately set out to attack the three gamekeepers, who were only carrying sticks at the time. It took but an hour for the jury to deliberate, returning to court to announce their verdict of 'guilty', found by a majority of 9 votes to 6. Lord Young passed the death sentence on both men, and also stated that the men should not hope for leniency. They would be hanged on the 31st March.

Alexander Asher (1835 - 1905)

I find it very curious that all the articles about the crime up until this point were relatively short. It is only on the occasion of Vickers and Innes' execution that the story warrants significantly more column space. The last public execution in Scotland had taken place in 1867, and in England the last had taken place in 1868. Whilst executions continued, in private, clearly the public's desire to know details about each execution also continued. Newspapers were diligent in this work. 

In the final published articles the story is told in full; from crime, to court case, to the background of the men who were found guilty, their family life, and faith, and finally their execution. Each part of the story includes more detail than given in earlier reports, and we hear the story in a lyrical style which today we would usually associate with fiction.

"It was a beautiful moonlight morning. The air was clear and bracing, a sharp wind was blowing, and altogether the weather seems to have been highly favourable for a nocturnal ramble, but particularly so for poaching purposes. So James Grosset, the head gamekeeper on the estate of Rosebery, appears to have thought, for he, with John Fortune, another gamekeeper, then residing near Moorfoot, and John McDiarmid, a rabbit trapper, residing at Rosebery, suspecting that advantage would be taken of the moonlight and the breeze went out to watch for trespassers."

Later the story further unfolds, using the witness statement of James Grosset as the foundation of the prose. We learn that James Grosset and his fellow game keepers had searched the Rosebery Estate for poachers, and had decided to retire, satisfied that the land, and it's game was safe. On arriving home, however, James heard a gun shot, so he departed immediately, collected the two under keepers and with sticks in hand, went straight towards the direction of the gunshot. A second shot rang out, which took them towards the bridge over the Edgelaw Reservoir, by the Redside Brae. Eventually they saw the two men, Vickers and Innes.

Edgelaw Reservoir

"Grosset and his companions then lay down by the fence. After a careful look around the poachers began to descend into the field in the direction of the gamekeepers. When they had approached to about 15 yards of them, Grosset, Fortune, and McDiarmid sprang to their feet."

Clearly, the men did not run away. James Grosset went on to testify what was then said, and the subsequent actions.

"Grosset stated:- "I knew both of the men. I called out to Innes, 'There is no use of running or going on like that; I know you, Innes.' I knew the other man to be Vickers, but I did not know his Christian name. Innes called out to stand back. Innes got up his gun, and said to Vickers, "You take that one and I will go for this." I saw the guns raised by both men. Both fired, but there was a second or so between the shots. Vickers fired first, and McDiarmid fell. In a second or two Innes fired, and the shot hit me on the back. Four pellets went into my back at the moment I was stooping to ask McDiarmid if he had been hurt. I immediately got up and made for Fortune, who fell from a shot fired by Vickers. I asked Fortune if he was shot, and the answer was, "A ball right through the heart," and he added, "What will my poor wife do or say?" Innes pointed the gun straight at me when he was between 10 and 15 yards away, and fired, but the cap missed fire. I told Fortune to keep quiet and I would run for assistance. Fortune just gave a moan. The men by this time were on the edge of the hill, and were engaged again loading their guns. I identify the prisoners as the two men. I have known Innes for seventeen years and the other for two or three years. I knew the men quite well by sight. When I was about to go I heard Innes say to Vickers, 'Load quick and don't let that b---- get away; give him another shot.' I did not hear a reply, but a second or two afterwards I heard one say (I thought it was Vickers), 'We will get him at the bridge,' referring to the bridge over the reservoir. I went towards the bridge till I got out of sight of the men, when I went in an opposite direction, and proceeded to Simpson's farm and roused the inmates.'"

James Grosset, chief witness for the prosecution, obviously escaped, but John Fortune died 2 days later. John McDiarmid died a few weeks later, on the 8th January, both due to the wounds sustained on that night in December.

Vickers and Innes, after their sentencing and despite their 'not guilty' plea, gave a confession that corroborated James Grosset's testimony. They claimed that they had simply intended to wound the men, to allow for their escape, and they denied that they planned to catch the head gamekeeper at the bridge. Instead, they escaped and were apprehended before the day was out.

Despite Lord Young's warning that leniency should not be hoped for, a petition for clemency was sent to the Home Secretary, signed by many people. It argued that the wives of Innes and Vickers did not give witness, and could have testified that the two men did not leave their respective family homes that night. This argument was received as a moot point, as it had been agreed that the men left while the rest of their households were sleeping, and were likely still sleeping when the men returned home again. The Home Secretary at the time was Lord Harcourt, under the prime minister William Gladstone. Both Lord Harcourt and the Earl of Rosebery were politicians in the Liberal party, and they clearly knew and worked together. Lord Harcourt decided to not ask the Queen to alter the course of the law in this case. We will never know if the Rosebery connection caused Lord Harcourt some bias in his decision to not show leniency.

Lord Harcourt (1827 - 1904)

And so, the double execution went ahead; in recompense for the double murder. On the 31st March, 1884, the two men rose early. The newspaper article reported that they had spent, in true Victorian vigour, their last few days in prayer, and reflection, having confessed their guilt. They sent messages of love to their families. It was said of Vickers that,

"He deplored the bad example he had shown his children, and the evil effects which his conduct might entail upon them; but that which cheered and pleased the rev. gentleman most was that the doomed man requested him to call on the families of the murdered gamekeepers to express his sorrow at the trouble he had brought upon them, and to say that he died praying for them along with his own wife and family. At Innes' own request the rev Mr Keay waited upon him yesterday at 6 o'cock, and remained with him until the hour of execution."

The execution of Innes and Vickers was to be a private event, however it seems that supporters of the men started to arrive on the hill outside the wall surrounding Calton Jail, early that morning. The newspaper report suggested that there were up to 5000 people, including men, women, and boys, who waited quietly and without demonstration, for the signal that the execution had taken place; a black flag which was to be raised over the small wooden building which housed the gallows. 

Calton Jail was once the biggest jail in Scotland.

"Many seemed to belong to the mining classes, some of whom, having acquaintance with the prisoners, had come in from Gorebridge in the morning. There were no demonstrations of feeling. Silence prevailed everywhere, the vast crowd waiting anxiously the moment when the hoisting of the black flag should announce that all was over."

The condemned men were allowed a final service where much penitential prayer and sermonising was related to them by the Reverend Mr Wilson.

"He then addressed Vickers and Innes, enjoining them to be brave and strong in the strength of their position as humble, penitent, believing sinners with full reliance on the mercy of God, and to let the last act of their life be a perfect surrender of their soul into the hand of Christ. Then would their first awakening in the life to come be a realisation of the truth. "Though your sins be as scarlet they shall be white as snow. The 'Amen' which followed this exhortation was joined in by every one present, of whom many were deeply affected."

The Reformer, a Glaswegian newspaper, gave details in their report, about the condemned men's home lives.

"Both were notorious poachers, even their best friends admitting that they were 'fond of a shot.' Between January 1878 and December 1882 Innes had been three times convicted of day poaching, and once of illegal possession of game, as also of assaulting a witness that had given evidence in one of the cases referred to; while against Vickers one conviction for poaching stood recorded, the offence having been committed in Innes' company. Innes would seem to have been a rough and ready, blustering, thoughtless man, who rushed into any rash enterprise, regardless of consequences. Vickers had the reputation of having been, of all his associates, the coolest, most calculating, most determined, and one of the most intelligent. Innes combined with a naturally low cast of mind, the grossest ignorance. He could neither read nor write. Vickers on the other hand is said to have had parts which, if properly cultivated and directed, might have made him a business man. Though coarse in habits, manner, and appearance, he seems to have been in some degree the superior of his companion."

The Reformer, based on the Victorian understanding of morality, attempted to understand the behaviour of Vickers and Innes, by looking at their background.

"Beyond the facts that they were 'fond of a shot' which in this mining community simple means that they were irreclaimable poachers, and they could 'take a dram' with their neighbours on a pay-night, which comes round once a fortnight, little is known of the antecedents of the men. Innes appears to have been left while yet an infant to the care of his father- a poor weak man. The boy was neglected, and grew up in the village of Gorebridge to be a wild, thoughtless lad, ever ready for, and very frequently concerned in, mischief. He became a miner, and worked for the most part in the Arniston pits, near Gorebridge. He became somewhat more settled as he advanced in years, but even after he had married the servant girl at the Gorebridge inn, he stuck to his gun, as well as to his pay-night indulgence. His cottage in Stobhill, just round the corner from the public house in which it is believed Vickers and he arranged the fatal poaching expedition, is said to have been the scene of more that one domestic quarrel, though there is nothing to indicate that he and his wife lived for the most part in other than good terms. He seems to have been a fair worker, but as he occasionally took more drink than was good for him, he saved absolutely nothing, and has accordingly left his wife and children in poverty. As a rule, the people about regarded him as a rough fellow; yet they speak of him kindly, and regard his fate and the condition of those he has left behind with genuine sympathy. Vickers also was a native of Gorebridge. According to one statement, he appears to have come of a race of poachers, and he himself is alleged to have taken to the unhappy practice from an early age. He married while yet young and his wife is spoken of as a woman of intelligence and of a kindly and industrious disposition. Vickers, like Innes, was a good worker, but saved nothing. While Innes was a man of quarrelsome tendency, Vickers is said to have been quiet and good tempered, though when roused he became very violent, and spoke and acted with determination. He too was fond of a 'dram', but is not spoken of as given to excess. Neither men paid much attention to their children; but in this respect Vickers had, if anything, the better reputation. They seldom or never entered a church. As regards the unfortunate families, it appears that soon after the murders, Mrs Innes, who is thirty-nine years of age, applied to the Parochial Board for aid, and now receives 6s per week for her four children, who are aged respectively ten, nine, six, and two years. Mrs Vickers, who is thirty-four years of age, has eight children. The eldest, a boy of fifteen, and the second, a girl of thirteen, earn irregular and small wages. The others are aged respectively eleven years, nine, seven, five, four, and one. For the support of her children she receives from the Parochial Board 7s per week."

The main crux of the final reports were to detail the act of the executions. It makes hard reading so I won't go into that here. I've included all the clippings here, in case there is a desire to read more. James Berry was their executioner. He had been assisting executions for a number of years, but in 1884 James Berry was in his first year of acting as the nation's executioner. James Berry worked in this role for 7 years, eventually resigning the position in 1892. James Berry carried out 131 executions by hanging in those 7 years, and the heaviness of those acts bore him down. He said, in his book "The Hangman's Thoughts Above the Gallows" that "the law of capital punishment falls with terrible weight upon the hangman and that to allow a man to follow such an occupation is doing him a deadly wrong." James Berry almost took his own life as a result of the weight of his career's work, but was saved by an evangelical Christian. Following this experience James Berry became an evangelist himself, and worked to promote the abolition of the death penalty, until his death in 1913.

James Berry was the first executioner in the UK, who could read and write. He wrote two books about his experiences as the nation's executioner; The Hangman's Thoughts Above the Gallows, and My Experiences as an Executioner.

One very interesting article regarding the case, from the newspapers of the time reads like an Op-ed piece from todays news media. It questions the justice of sentencing two men to death on a majority verdict, rather than a unanimous vote. In Scottish law there is not just the binary choice of guilty or not guilty. Scottish juries have a third option; that of 'not proven'. The author of this ancient op-ed points out that if just two more jury members had chosen to be more merciful, Vickers and Innes would have been found 'not proven'. The article goes on to question the morality of taking two lives, for two lives, leaving four widows, and all their children without an income, all because a couple of men went out to find some game to supplement their meagre diet. It's a refreshing take on the case, compared to the Victorian morality pieces shared in other papers.

James Porteous Watson Grosset was the only man that survived that moonlit night. His wife's widowhood was delayed, but only by 13 years. James Grosset died on 31st January 1897, at the age of 54. His early passing was caused by an intestinal obstruction. The death record does not make a connection with the gun shot wound he received in his back in 1884, but family lore tells us that the family at least believed that his early death was in part a result of that gun shot wound.

The Grosset family was residing in a property on the Rosebery Estate, while James Grosset was head gamekeeper; he had worked as a game keeper on the estate for 32 years. Upon James Grosset's death the family should have left the property, and the family story goes that the Earl of Rosebery wished for Agnes and the family to move to the bothy, a smaller residence on the estate. Agnes' daughter, also named Agnes, was at the time employed by Sir William Haldane, as his children's nanny. Lord Haldane was a lawman and had trained at Edinburgh University. He was the Crown Agent at the time, and as such worked for the Scottish department of public prosecution, called the Crown Office. The head of the Crown office is called the Lord Advocate, and it is the Crown Agent's  job to advise the Lord Advocate on prosecution matters. His first child was born in 1893, and so Agnes had worked for Lord and Lady Haldane for at least 4 years by 1897. She appealed to Lord Haldane regarding the question of her mother's accommodation, and asked him to intercede on her mother's behalf. He was clearly talented in the art of persuasion, as the result of Agnes' request was that the mother Agnes, and her family were permitted to remain in the home until Mrs Agnes Grosset passed away. 

Lord Haldane called this fairy tale looking castle home; Clone House.

Agnes Grosset remained at the Rosebery Farm Cottage, until her passing on the 14th October 1922, at the age of 78. She was laid to rest, with her husband James Grosset, in the Temple kirkyard.

*****************************************

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/storytelling-is-human-1.5511027

https://blog.history.in.gov/the-devils-in-the-details-how-to-enhance-storytelling-with-historical-newspapers/

https://www.storybench.org/how-newspaper-stories-went-viral-in-the-19th-century/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Haldane

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archibald_Primrose,_5th_Earl_of_Rosebery

https://britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/200348040-rosebery-house-temple

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gorebridge#History

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Young,_Lord_Young

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Asher

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Psalm%2051%3A1-12&version=NIV

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke%2015%3A18-23&version=NIV

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Berry_(executioner)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_Kingdom#:~:text=12%20May%201867%3A%20Robert%20Smith,last%20public%20execution%20in%20Scotland.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victorian_morality

https://thepeerage.com/p31106.htm#i311056

Hard Times; Unexpected Deaths

Trigger warning; This blog post references multiple child deaths. Please take care when reading.

Sometimes genealogy research leads me to corners of other people's families. And sometimes those stories are so compelling; it's hard to ignore the urge to share them. This week's story doesn't come from my family, but from the wife of my 2x great granduncle Edward Munro Vinall. Edward Munro Vinall was born in Brighton, Sussex. he was the older brother of my 2x great grandmother. Edward worked as a coachman, as did his older brother Frederick. This work caused them both to roam further afield than the rest of the Vinall family, and they both met, married, and settled down with girls from Sunderland, Durham. Edward Munro Vinall married widow Isabella Robinson Slightham in July 1890. Isabella had six children from her previous marriage; George Slightham (born 1848), William Henry Slightham (born 1877), Isabella Slightham (born 1879), Stephen Slightham (born 1881), George Slightham (born 1883), and Arthur Slightham (born 1886).

Isabella Robinson Smith (as she was before either marriage) married master mariner George Slightham in Sunderland, Durham, in January 1873. One summer's day, on June 16th, 1883 their eldest two sons were taken to the Victoria Hall theatre to see The Fays, an enterprising children's entertainment duo. It is not clear if the younger children, Isabella and Stephen Slightham, were also at the performance, or were kept at home due to their age. Isabella (the daughter) would have been 4 years old, and her brother Stephen Slightham would have been a toddler of 2 years. 

Victoria Hall was built in 1872.

Victoria Hall was a beautiful building, designed to resemble the Crystal Palace, and Albert Hall in terms of size and grandeur. It seated 3000 people and was built in 1872, its building being funded by a local philanthropist Edward Backhouse. The Fays were a husband and wife act, who had been booked to put on a magical show of talking waxworks, marionnettes that moved without their strings being pulled, and other amazing conjuring tricks. The added draw for the show was the promise of "PRIZES!", each child being promised "presents. rocks, toys, etc". Without a doubt, the theatre was packed to the gunnels with excited children, all looking forward to a mystical performance followed by a special gift, a momento of the spectacle.

At the end of the performance Mr Fay kept to his promise, and started to hand out the gifts to the audience in the stalls. Children seated in the gallery above, concerned that they would miss out on the promised gift, started to rush down the stairs from the gallery, to get to the stalls below, where they could get their prize. Possibly anticipating this rush a door leading to the auditorium had been partially closed, it is assumed, in an effort to ensure the children entered in an orderly fashion. The result was that the children formed a giant crush around the door. Some of the children fell in the chaos, and were trampled by other children rushing down the stairs. The heaving weight of the crowd caused a large number of children to be caught in the crush, and their tiny bodies began to pile up as they tried to escape. There were no adults to help organise the children into an orderly queue, and further children were surging down the stairs, without any idea of the chaos ahead. The caretaker, Mr Frederick Graham, realised what was happening, and managed to divert a further 600 children from entering the stairwell full of children. Adults inside the auditorium soon realised what was happening and started to pull the children through, one by one. It took half an hour to remove all the children from the stairwell. A total of 183 children lost their lives that afternoon. Two of those children were the eldest sons of George and Isabella Robinson Slightham. George Slightham was 8 years old, and William Henry Slightham was 6 years old. All of the children that died that day died from asphyxiation.

The news of the tragedy even reached international levels. This image was included in a French newspaper, Le Journal.

Isabella was heavily pregnant at that time, with her 5th child. That child was born just 10 weeks after the Victoria Hall disaster, and was named George. It is impossible to imagine the sense of loss George and Isabella suffered with the tragic deaths of their two eldest sons. To then, so soon after experiencing that loss, go through labour, and birth a new child, must have been incredibly bitter and sweet. 

The Victoria Hall disaster hit all the national newspapers, and the country was moved by the tragedy. Queen Victoria sent her message of condolence to all the families, which was read out at the funerals of the children. She also contributed to the fund set up to pay for the children's funerals, and additional donations flooded in from people across the nation. Once the funeral costs were covered, the remaining funds were used to commission a memorial to the children who were lost in the tragedy. A statue of a grieving mother holding her dead child was erected in Mowbray Park later that year, and more recently the statue was moved to Bishopwearmouth Cemetery where it still stands today.

After some vandalism to the memorial the city encased the statue in a glass case.

Mr and Mrs Fay, the entertainers at that fatal show, disappeared into virtual obscurity following the disaster and subsequent inquests. It seems that some people assigned blame to them, for the closing of the door, and it must have been hard for them to find bookings. ADD MORE INFO FROM WHAT DAD SHARES

Two inquests were called to investigate the tragedy, but neither was able to establish who it was that bolted the door, ultimately causing the deaths of the 183 children. Eventually Parliament reviewed the safety of exits in theatres and other types of entertainment venues. Laws were passed to ensure that every entertainment venue had a sufficient number of doors, that each door opened outwards, and were easy to open. The next time I leave a theatre or cinema via a 'push bar' exit I shall think of Isabella, her two young boys George and William, and all the other children who died in that awful tragedy. There but for the grace of God go I.

Sadly, the hard times did not end there for Isabella. Isabella and George Slightham had another child together in 1886; Arthur Slightham. Arthur was born in April 1886, and just 5 months later, on the 15th September 1886 George Slightham, his father, died. As already mentioned, George Slightham, Isabella's first husband, was a master mariner. George had joined the British Merchant Navy at the age of 17, in 1866. He worked hard, and achieved his master mariner certificate a decade later, in 1876. In 1879 George Slightham was on a schooner named Broomshields, heading for Malaga from Shields, when it was struck by a barque named G.B.S., which was heading for Java in the East Indies. Broomshields sank on the Outer Dowsing Sandbank, in the North Sea, and several of the crew were reported missing. Luckily for George, he survived, but he lost his Master Mariner certificate, which went down with the ship. His application for a copy of the certificate allowed me to find out more about his life on the waves. The ship George had sailed on prior to Broomshields was the sailing ship Dorothy, which was owned by John Tully of Sunderland, and was engaged in foreign trade. In 1885 George Slightham had been the captain of this ship, in a journey to Bahai. He was the only crew member in the record relating to this voyage who was not given wages on return, suggesting that he was paid on a salary basis. Considering this, and his status as a ship's captain we can imagine that the family had relative wealth and were comfortably well off.

Buenos Aires Port, circa 1910

In September of 1886 George was once again sailing on the merchant ship named 'Dorothy', and was in Buenos Aires. On the 15th of that same month George had a heart attack and died. Within the space of 3 short years Isabella Robinson Slightham had lost two sons, and a husband, and had birthed two sons. She was a mother of four living children within the ages of 5 months to 7 years. She was 33 years old, and was now a widow. 

Life as the wife of a master mariner, working in international shipping would have allowed Isabella to enjoy certain benefits. The family would have enjoyed a decent income (something between ₤62,000- ₤90,000 per year in today's money). Whilst she would have been without her husband being home for weeks at a time, she probably wouldn't have had to work outside of the home, as well as tend to her children and keep house. With no form of social security available to her, and likely no inheritance to receive from him, Isabella's income would have reduced to zero.  Undoubtedly, life would have been very different without George's income. Isabella may have had to take up work, like taking in laundry, or may have had to sell some of her possessions to make ends meet. Other women, in the same position sometimes put their children in an orphanage, to reduce the drain on the family purse. I could find no evidence of her taking such measures, thankfully.

'In Memoriam', by Margaret Isabel Dicksee shows a widow holding her young child up to see a portrait of their lost father.

The hard times were not to last for too long. In 1890 Isabella Robinson Slightham, nee Smith, married Edward Munro Vinall, a coachman from the other end of the country; Brighton, Sussex. Edward had followed his older brother Frederick up to the north east of England. Frederick had worked as a coachman and a shoeing smith, and had settled in Sunderland in 1867, after marrying Margaret Ord, the daughter of a local publican. Edward was 10 years younger than his brother Frederick, but also an equine specialist, who had lived with his brother in Sunderland, in 1881, when they were both working as coachmen. In 1891 Edward Munro Vinall, and Isabella Robinson Slightham (now Vinall) were living together at 3 Hendon Valley Road; the same address that she had lived at when her sons had been killed 8 years previously. At least Isabella's hard times hadn't lost her the family home.

A Coachman, circa 1902

Isabella and Edward did not have any children together, and Isabella saw her youngest 4 children grow to adulthood. Her eldest remaining child, daughter Isabella, never married, but lived a long and apparently comfortable life. In 1939 she owned and was running a boarding house in which two gentlemen resided. She died in 1956, at the age of 77. Stephen, Isabella's eldest remaining son, joined the merchant navy, like his father George. He married a Sunderland lass, named Jane Higgs, but did not apparently have children. Stephen died in 1946, at the age of 65. The youngest two sons of George and Isabella Slightham both emigrated to Canada. George (junior) married Ruth Flyn, and they had two children; George and Marguerite Slightham. George was a builder, and clearly made a decent enough living as the family were able to afford at least 4 (3rd class) trips back to Blighty. George died in Toronto, Canada in 1971, at the age of 87. Arthur, the youngest of all Isabella's children, married Lily Miller. They had a son named Gordon, and also settled in Toronto, Canada. Arthur was also a builder, and like his brother George was able to afford at least 3 (3rd class) trips back across the pond. I've been unable to find a death record for Arthur Slightham, but records show that he was living in Toronto, Canada in 1945, at the age of 59.

Binns Tram, Sunderland, by Robert Wild 1920

Edward Munro Vinall died in July 1910, in Sunderland, Durham, at the age of 61. Isabella Robinson Slightham (nee Smith) died on the 2nd February, 1920, at her home on Hendon Valley Road, Sunderland, after a four year battle with breast cancer, that had spread to her lymphatic system. She was 67 years old at her death.

Isabella Robinson Slightham was a strong woman, who survived some of the most awfully hard times, and using that strength, was able to create some good times, with her second husband, my 2x great granduncle Edward Munro Vinall.

#Edgill

****************************************

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Hall_disaster

https://sunderland.yolasite.com/vichallstory.php

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_shipwrecks_in_December_1879

https://dawlishchronicles.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-value-of-money-pay-in-royal-navy-in.html

https://mha.mun.ca/mha/1881/onview.php?Record_ID=52754&%20CrewListPage=5&page=1there

Planes; Big Week, to Big Day

The #52Ancestors writing prompt 'Planes' is not due until the week ending July 7th, but June 6th, 2024 marks the 80th anniversary of the D Day landings. My husband's great uncle Tommy played a part in that day, and so I have decided to play with the schedule again, and tell Tommy's tale to mark the anniversary of that important day.

Thomas Andrew McRobbie was the only son of Thomas Andrew McArthur McRobbie, and Agnes Grainger Ramsey. He was born 13th November 1923, at 10 Piershill Place, Edinburgh. His father Thomas was a printer's machine man, and Agnes, his mother, was a dressmaker. They were married on the 25th April, 1911, and his older sister, Margaret McArthur McRobbie was born 6 months later. The family were to wait another 12 years before Thomas was to arrive.

At the outbreak of World War II, in September 1939 Tommy was just 16 years of age. I have not found any record yet, of his conscription papers, but he would have been conscripted two years later, in 1941, when he turned 18. He joined the RAF, and was stationed at RAF Holme-on Spaulding-Moor, in Yorkshire, which was located roughly 20 miles south-east of York. Tommy was an Air Gunner and assigned to a crew of 7 men, flying a Handley Page Halifax.

Handley Page Halifax III

Handley Page Halifax planes were 4 engine bombers, that initially used Rolls Royce engines. Tommy flew in a Halifax III, which used 4 Bristol Hercules engines. The Halifax III included a transparent nose dome containing a gun, plus dorsal and tail turrets each containing 4 guns. The crew of a Halifax bomber would include a pilot, a navigator, a flight engineer, a wireless operator, a bomb aimers, and air gunners. The bomb aimers sat in the nose, the pilot up at front, with the wireless operators below the pilot. The navigator and the flight engineer sat between the front turret and cockpit. The mid upper gunner sat in the turret at the top of the aircraft, and the rear gunner sat at the back of the pane. It was cramped, but there were two rest bunks and an Elsan toilet.

1. Pilot, 2. Navigator, 3. Flight Engineer, 4. Bomb Aimer, 5. Wireless Operator, 6. Mid Upper Gunner,
7. Rear Gunner.

The general rule for most squadrons was to give leave to any airman who had flown 5 operations. An operation was a bombing raid where the target had been struck. If a crew returned early due to a technical  issue, it didn't count as a completed operation. There was a high loss rate, and as a result many airmen did not make it to their first leave, let alone the end of their tour. A complete tour of duty included 40 completed operations, after which airmen were usually redeployed to training new recruits. After 6 months of training, airmen were returned to operational duty where they were expected to fly a further 40 operations. If they managed to survive that far, airmen were then either returned to training duties for a further 6 months, were invited to participate at a higher ranking, or were given the chance to roll the dice of death, and continue flying operations. It's not clear how long Tommy had been flying, or how many operations, or bombing missions Tommy had flown, but we do know that Tommy had taken leave at some point before June 1944. He had brought his crew member, Canadian Morris Campbell Murray home to Edinburgh for a few days of leave, during which time they had climbed Arthur's Seat together. Knowing he had earned some leave suggests that he had flown at least 5 operations.

Arthur's Seat is the old volcano that overlooks the city of Edinburgh.

On the night of the 1st/2nd of June 1944 air gunner Tom McRobbie took his seat in the Halifax III bomber. We don't know which gunner seat he had. In all the operations records Sergeant Thomas McRobbie was listed last in his crew list, which suggests to me that he was a rear gunner, however this is a supposition of mine, and not reliable evidence. Joining him in the bomber were his Canadian buddy, Flight Sergeant and navigator Morris Campbell Murray,  fellow Scot, and air gunner Peter Craig. His fellow English crew members included pilot Officer Stanley Arthur Douglas, air bomber Flying Officer Ivor Reginald Draper, flight engineer Sergeant Norman John Neal, and wireless operator and air gunner Sergeant Douglas William Henry. This was their first flight together as a new crew, and as members of Squadron 76, flying out of RAF Holme-on-Spaulding-Moor. This was their first raid in preparation for Operation Overlord; an planned invasion of German occupied France. 

The planning for Operation Overlord had begun over a year before. Much had been discussed by the chiefs of all the allied countries, about how the invasion should happen, when and where. The obvious choice was to invade the Pas-de-Calais. It was closest to England, across the Channel, but also the most heavily guarded by the German forces. It was decided that instead, the allies would invade via the Normandy beaches, between Cherbourg and Cabourg. There was plenty to do ahead of the big day; D Day, which was originally scheduled for June 5th. Preparations included destroying transportation routes,  destroying communication networks, and destroying the Luftwaffe's strength. The combined effect would ensure that the enemy would not be able to mount much of a defence in the Normandy area chosen for invasion. Overlord preparations began in mid April 1944, where the RAF systematically took out railway lines, rail yards, locomotive depots, and marshalling yards, as well as airfields and aircraft factories. Tommy and his crew did not participate until early June.

American B17s fly in formation.

Tommy and his crew's first operation, on the night of the 1st/2nd June, was to take out the wireless communication station at Ferme d"Urville, near Cherbourg. The Operations Record Book describes the mission;

"The actual target was the network of W/T stations at Ferme D'Urville near Cherbourg. Twenty-two of our aircraft took-off according schedule, but one was compelled to return early, as the undercarriage jarred immediately after take-off. The other twenty one carried on their course, but encountered some cloud all the way. Identification was only possible with the assistance of the markers or by obtaining a GEE fix, as there was 10/10th cloud with tops at 7,000ft over the target. The markers appeared to be well concentrated, and the bombing was carried out on these markers. The bombs were released from an average height of 12,500ft, but no results were observed. It is estimated that if the markers were accurate, this was a good raid. All our aircraft returned safely to Base."

The markers mentioned in the report refer to a pin point targeting system whereby Squadron 617 (aka Dambusters) would carry out accurate low level marking, ahead of the bomber's attack. It was a system that worked spectacularly well!

This flight phtograph of Ferme D'Urville shows what a success it was. The reverse of the photo curiously says, 'extra bomb door operation Dummy run?' 

The second operation that Tommy and his crew mates made together was on the nigt of the 2nd/3rd June, to Trappes, just east of Paris. Trappes held a marshalling yard that was important to the Axis' ability to mobilize troops. Here is the report, as written in the Operations Records Book;

"For the third time in three months, this Squadron had been detailed for an attack on the Marshalling Yards at Trappes. All twenty-three aircraft which had been detailed, took-off, and there were no early returns. Three of these aircraft failed to return and have since been reported missing. It was a erfect night for an attack as the visibility was perfect. The target, and the A/P were clearly and well marked, and the crews experienced little difficulty in selecting their dropping point. During the entire raid, the master bomber gave clear instructions, as a result of which the whole area was a mass of flames. Bomb busts were seen all around the markers and several large and small explosions were seen. Fighters were very active, and aircraft "B" had four combats, in which the crew claimed two ME.109. Twenty of our  aircraft returned safely to base."

Luckily for Tommy and his crew mates, they were one of the twenty, and made it back to base.

The following days were spent detailing planes and carrying out some training runs. The operational report for the 3rd began and ended, respectively, "The weather today was not very favourable for flying.....Weather; cloudy, intermittent rain in early part of period." On the 4th it read, "The weather today was not very favourable for flying.... Weather; cloudy, slight rain in early morning and evening." And the report for the 5th June read, finally,

"Twelve aircraft were air tested during the forenoon, as operations were ordered, and 24 aircraft were detailed. Take off was scheduled for 02.25 hours, on the morning of the 6th. There was no more flying today. The crew state was 26 and the serviceability 24.
Weather; Cloud, slight haze and showers in morning, clearing in the afternoon."
The next morning, before daybreak, at 02.28 hours, Squadron 76 started to take off. 23 aircraft left Holme-on-Spaulding-Moor, heading for the Mont Fleury battery, which was just 800m inland from what was to be known as Gold Beach. The objective was to put the guns out of action, to ensure a safer landing of troops.

War Office map of Cruelly region.

Here I have two separate records to establish what happened to Squadron 76 that day. The first is from the squadron's Operational Record; "Owing to large amounts of cloud over the T/A the results of this attack are not clearly defined. Crews reported that the T.I.s were well concentrated and bombing appeared concentrated round the markers. One crew reported an explosion on the ground, seen through a break in the cloud, but it is thought that this was a crashed aircraft. Apart from small amounts of light flak over the enemy coast, no other defences were encountered. Three of our aircraft jettisoned their bombs as no markers were visible. Of the 23 aircraft that took off, 20 attcked the primary target, and one failed to return. Nothing was been heard of this aircraft since it left base."

The second is a Summary of Events, from 76 Squadron's records. With more detail, it gives a clearer picture of how successful the mission was;

"Of the 24 aircraft detailed for this attack on Mont Fleury, only 23 took-off. the first off was at 02.28 hours. The main objective of the attack was to put the guns of Mont Fleury out of action. On the route to the target 9-10/10th cloud persisted, but over the target itself, it was patchy. The crews were ordered to bomb from 10,000ft, 11,000ft, or 12,000ft, according to which wave they were in. Many arried out this order and the result was that the raid was a huge success. One Captain reported an explosion seen through a break in the cloud, but this was thought to be a crashed aircraft. It was a highly concentrated raid, and the guns were silenced. Defences on this occasion were almost negligible. The attack coincided with D Day, and some of the crews reported having seen the start of the invasion. A small amount of light flak was experienced over the Channel Islands. One of our aircraft failed to return.The crew state was 26 and the serviceability 24."

This time Tommy did not return to base.

The crew's Halifax came down close to Graye-sur-Mer, a village to the south east of Mont Fleury. There were no survivors. Villagers buried the 7 airmen in a nearby orchard. Later, after the war was won, their bodies were moved to the war cemeteries of their country of origin. Because Morris Campbell Murray was Canadian, he was laid to rest at the Beny-Sur-Mer Canadian War Cemetery. Tommy, and his fellow British crewmen were buried at the Bayeaux War Cemetery.

It wasn't until the 17th April 1945 that his older sister, Margaret received a telegram confirming his death.

D Day was the beginning of the end of the war, and it's for this reason that we celebrate the day. But it was also the day that many, many lives were lost, with Sergeant Thomas Andrew McRobbie, and his crew mates, being some of the first to give their lives on that fateful June day 80 years ago.

Thomas Andrew McRobbie, 1923- 1944

Lest we forget.

#McRobbie

************************************************************

https://www.junobeach.org/tributes/mcmurray/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR24m-u6t-prBY9kKQkazzhNU4cj_VIwWePrJ1dSE5nG-FkuKo-4tiCD7mI_aem_AfXCz4frmHqcpymoq2hm35SD84qWDq9Eiif10cZjGcE631tCcerhp8PRF1hdfuu1pO5HeiwaG6_mZMLRFf3T-fEe 

https://losses.internationalbcc.co.uk/loss/219090/ http://www.ukairfields.org.uk/holme-on-spalding-moor.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Handley_Page_Halifax

https://ibccdigitalarchive.lincoln.ac.uk/omeka/collections/document/6870

https://tailendcharlietedchurch.wordpress.com/halifax-bomber/halifax-aircrew/#:~:text=The%20Aircraft%20required%20a%20Crew,Nose%2C%20Mid%20%26%20Rear%20Turrets.

https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/7-amazing-photos-of-d-day-from-the-air

http://natureonline.com/37/7-ops-tour.html

https://www.normandywarguide.com/archives/map-7e5

https://www.normandywarguide.com/place/mont-fleury-battery

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAF_Bomber_Command_aircrew_of_World_War_II#Typical_operational_sortie

https://www.iwm.org.uk/history/d-day-and-the-aerial-battle-for-normandy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Cherbourg https://www.military.com/history/from-big-week-big-day-aerial-attacks-d-day-invasion.html