The Peace of Christmas Eve

 

British delegate Lord Gambier shaking hands with American leader John Quincy Adams as they formalize the Treaty of Ghent peace pact

The Treaty of Ghent, also known as the Peace of Christmas Eve, was the pact signed in the city of Ghent, Belgium (chosen because Belgium was a neutral country) that officially ended hostilities between the fledgling United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain.

Peace talks started in Ghent in August of 1814. Chief negotiator for the Americans was future president John Quincy Adams, and his British counterpart was a man named Baron Gambier.

Britain may well have sent its “B team” to these negotiations; top British diplomats like Foreign Secretary Viscount Castlereagh and later, the Duke of Wellington, went to Austria to attend the Congress of Vienna, which was taking place at the same time.

So many wars, so many peace pacts to hammer out!

The Treaty of Ghent was approved by Parliament and signed into law by the Prince Regent right before the end of the year, on December 30, 1814. However, the treaty didn’t go into full effect until it was ratified by the U.S. Senate a couple of months later, on February 17, 1815.

How the war started

The War of 1812 was actually several years in the making. Tensions between Great Britain and the United States had been simmering ever since the end of the American Revolutionary War. The Treaty of Paris ended that war in 1783, but rather than diminishing American resentment against the British crown, those feelings grew over the following years.

However, there were a couple of immediate causes that sparked the War of 1812. One was the Royal Navy blockade, intended to hurt Napoleon and the French economy but which also affected American trade with Europe.

Depiction of an impressment gang, 1780

The other was the Royal Navy’s habit of “impressment” – taking American sailors off their ships and forcing them to serve on British warships.

To counter heavy battle losses with Napoleon’s forces, British naval officers supplemented their ranks with these involuntary American conscripts. The Royal Navy reasoned that “once a British citizen always a British citizen” and indeed, it’s possible that some of the American sailors were born before the Revolutionary War and the forming of the new nation. The British officers also found deserters from their own ranks aboard American ships, which only encouraged them to keep up the practice.

In any event, when Congress declared war in 1812 it wasn’t exactly a unanimous decision – it was the narrowest vote on any declaration of war in American history (70 to 39 in the House; 19 to 13 in the Senate).

Strategy

What followed that vote was a truly scattered, wide-ranging war, probably the most disorganized and disaster-prone in U.S. history. It ranged from the provinces of Canada to the Gulf Coast in Louisiana, and from the Great Lakes to the Atlantic Ocean. Native Americans fought on both sides, helping both the British and the American forces.

The United States did enter the war with a strategy of sorts, no matter how harebrained that strategy looks in retrospect. The idea was to conquer Canada, and then either hold the entire country for ransom, using it as leverage to get concessions from the British or failing that, to keep Canada as a consolation prize.

Understandably, the Canadians weren’t too thrilled with this plan. And when the war was over, many Canadians felt that they were the true victors since they had successfully prevented a U.S. takeover of their country.

Burning of Washington, D.C.

Madison in 1817, during her tenure as First Lady.

While peace negotiations were being conducted in Ghent, the British were actively involved in four different invasions in America. The most notorious one was the British attempt to capture Baltimore. Along the way they decided to march on Washington, D.C. and burn the city down – most notably the Capitol, along with other government buildings, including the 3,000-volume Library of Congress and the White House.

At the White House, First Lady Dolley Madison and her staff fled the oncoming troops in such a hurry that they didn’t even have time to clear the dinner table, on which a fine meal had been laid out. The British soldiers apparently enjoyed the food and drink before burning down the house. Talk about adding insult to injury!

Results of the war

Historians have more or less concluded that there were no conclusive winners in the War of 1812. No territory was gained on either side, and the borders of both the U.S. and Great Britain in North America went back to what they were before the war started.

Some argue that Great Britain actually won. Britain made no concessions on the maritime issues, such as the blockade or impressment, that had sparked the war. It didn’t give up any of its North American territories and kept its Canadian colonies and Western forts. The war also put a stop to America’s annoying repeated attempts to invade Canada.

And to top things off, the Royal Navy didn’t stop impressing American sailors until after the Napoleonic Wars ended in 1815.

The war did have a few benefits for the United States, however. The Treaty of Ghent mandate that the countries involved in the war would return to the status quo antebellum – their pre-war borders – was actually a big win for the U.S., which didn’t have to make any territorial concessions to Great Britain as a condition of the peace.

In this way, the Treaty of Ghent actually recognized U.S. sovereignty, giving the new country the respect from Great Britain that had been lacking. For this reason, the War of 1812 is sometimes described as “the second War of Independence.”

The U.S.S. Chesapeake, the ship the mortally wounded Capt. James Lawrence implored his men not to give up. The ship was captured by the British in June 1813.

Lasting cultural impacts

The war may have been short, but it did have a lasting impact on American culture. We gained a national anthem, the Star-Spangled Banner, which started out as a poem written by Francis Scott Key after he witnessed the British shelling of Fort McHenry during the Battle of Baltimore in September of 1814.

In that battle, the British sailed a fleet of 19 ships into Baltimore Harbor, defended by Fort McHenry, and sent about 5,000 soldiers overland to take the city. After a couple of days of fierce fighting and heavy shelling, the Americans won and the U.S. flag still flew over the fort.

Ironically, the American national anthem based on Key’s poem was set to the tune of a popular British song, written by Englishman John Stafford Smith. It’s Smith that Americans can thank for how difficult this song is to sing, as we try to warble through its daunting range of just over an octave and a half.

Also, two expressions from the War of 1812 permanently entered the American lexicon: “war hawks” (referring to the Congressmen who were pro-war) and a catchphrase that’s still heard today: “Don’t give up the ship.”

A Lasting Peace

Following the Treaty of Ghent, the United States has enjoyed an enduring peace with its northern neighbor, Canada. In the early 20th century, three memorials celebrating this peace were built:

  • The Fountain of Time (1920) in Chicago, Illinois
  • The Peace Arch (1921) straddling the border communities of Blaine, Washington and Surrey, British Columbia
  • The Peace Bridge (1927) that connects Fort Erie in Ontario to Buffalo, New York, across the Niagara River at the east end of Lake Erie

Christmas and peace  – what a great combination! Let’s hope it catches on.

~~~

Sources for this post include:

  • 187 Things You Should Know About the War of 1812, by Donald R. Hickey, Maryland Historical Society, Baltimore, Maryland, 2012
  • World History Series: The War of 1812, by Don Nardo, Lucent Books, Inc., San Diego, California, 2000
  • The Prince of Pleasure and His Regency, by J.B. Priestley, Harper and Row Publishers, New York, 1969

 Photos and images courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

How Napoleon ended the Holy Roman Empire

Napoleon and Francis II after the Battle of Austerlitz, painted by Antoine-Jean Gros in 1812

“This is the way the world ends / Not with a bang but a whimper”

T.S. Eliot wasn’t describing the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire when he wrote those words in his poem, “The Hollow Men.” Nonetheless, his lines are an extremely apt way to describe the dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire, which ended quietly with a stroke of a pen over 200 years ago in August of 1806.

That’s when the last emperor decided it was his duty to abdicate, letting the dominion under his protection dissolve rather than allow Napoleon to usurp the role of Holy Roman Emperor and everything that came with it.

Emperor Charlemagne, by Albrecht Dürer (1471-1528)

The end of the empire was no surprise. By the summer of 1806, the end of the Holy Roman Empire had become inevitable.

Napoleon’s victory over Russia and Austria at the Battle of Austerlitz in December of 1805, and his formation of the Confederation of the Rhine the following July (after he convinced 16 German princes to renounce their allegiance to the Holy Roman Empire and join him) were fatal blows to the ancient regime.

Like the Roman Empire before it, the Holy Roman Empire lasted about a thousand years. It began in 800 AD, when Charlemagne had himself crowned as Holy Roman Emperor  in Rome by Pope Leo III.

During its nearly 1,000-year history, the Holy Roman Empire encompassed a web of territories in central Europe, including much of what is today Germany and Italy. At its height, it was a formidable medieval institution, an unbeatable force that combined the divine power of the pope with the temporal power of a monarch.

However, by the end of the 18th century, the Holy Roman Empire was, as Voltaire cynically remarked, neither holy, nor Roman, nor even an empire. The wars and political convulsions that resulted from the French Revolution weakened the realm, and it became a casualty of Napoleon’s insatiable thirst for conquest.

During the Regency era, some statesmen believed that once Napoleon was defeated the Holy Roman Empire would be restored, perhaps by the Congress of Vienna in 1814-15. It was a reasonable assumption; after all, presiding over the Congress was Francis I of Austria, who before 1806 was Francis II, the last Holy Roman Emperor. (That’s confusing, I know, but that’s politics for you.)

But that hope didn’t materialize when the Congress of Vienna re-drew the map of Europe in an effort to balance the power of its nations. The Holy Roman Empire did not make a comeback. Napoleon’s Confederation of the Rhine didn’t survive, either.

“The Holy Roman Empire including its members” – a double-headed eagle with coats of arms of its individual states, watercolor over woodcut print in paper by Jost de Negker, circa 1510

What did emerge from the deliberations was a new Germany made up of 39 states, with land from the two great powers of the day, Austria and Prussia, as well as many smaller kingdoms, including Bavaria, Saxony, and Hanover.

With that action, the Congress of Vienna sowed the seeds of German nationalism, a movement which grew and became a factor in two world wars a century later.

It’s hard for us to imagine today, after so much time has passed, what it must have been like for Europeans in the early 19th century to see the Holy Roman Empire fall apart.

Francis II, the last Holy Roman Emperor

They were no doubt aware that their ancient empire had lost much of its lands and political clout in the wake of Napoleon’s conquests, which had toppled monarchies across the Continent.

Still, the Holy Roman Empire had existed as a governing body for almost 10 centuries, and at least 30 generations had lived and died in its long shadow. In that summer of 1806 many Europeans must have felt that the world as they knew it was coming to an end.

To put it in perspective, the United States of America has been around a mere 247 years, yet I believe most U.S. citizens would feel acutely bereft if they suddenly lost their national identity.

However, an entity like the Holy Roman Empire doesn’t disappear that easily. Even though the empire became defunct, its influence didn’t end in 1806.

During the 19th century, the history and traditions of the Holy Roman Empire gave the fledgling country of Germany a foundation. And in the 20th century, Adolf Hitler was fascinated by the Holy Roman Empire and kept it in mind as he developed his Third Reich, which eventually led to many of the horrors of World War II.

The Imperial Crown

In particular, the Führer’s cruel and twisted ideas concerning a master Aryan race and the need to “purify” the German populace came out of his warped understanding of the mission of the empire’s fabled Teutonic Knights.

And while the Nazis famously looted and plundered a vast array of Europe’s art treasures during the war, one of Hitler’s top priorities was to capture the magnificent crown jewels that once belonged to the empire.

No doubt he dreamt of using them in the future to give added legitimacy to his coronation as the ruler of a gloriously resurrected Holy Roman Empire.

Fortunately, most of the Imperial Crown Jewels were rescued and are now kept in the Imperial Treasury at the Hofburg in Vienna, Austria. I’d like to see these jeweled relics someday; I think they serve as a potent reminder that nothing endures forever, not even a thousand-year-old empire.

In addition, for me the sight of the recovered crown jewels would also reinforce that other fundamental lesson of history — that the past, no matter how dead it may seem, is somehow always with us.

~~

Sources for this post include:

Hitler’s Holy Relics, A True Story of Nazi Plunder and the Race to Recover the Crown Jewels of the Holy Roman Empire, by Sidney D. Kirkpatrick, Simon & Schuster, Ltd, New York, New York, 2010

Heart of Europe, A History of the Holy Roman Empire, by Peter H. Wilson, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2016

The Holy Roman Empire by James Bryce, Wildside Press, Cabin John, Maryland, 2009

~~

Images courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

Trooping the Colour

The 2013 ceremony, which hasn’t changed much over the last 200 years. The two-rank formation of soldiers shown here is a tribute to Wellington’s successful tactics at the Battle of Waterloo.

This month on the second Saturday in June, a curious and uniquely British ceremony took place, as it does every year. Trooping the Colour is a centuries-old tradition full of pomp and pageantry, where anything can, and sometimes does, happen.

King Charles and Queen Camilla after their coronation on May 6, 2023

Also known as the Sovereign’s Birthday Parade, the event officially honors not only the sovereign’s birthday but also the infantry regiments of the British Army.

Typically taking place on the second Saturday in June, it’s one of the biggest events on the royal calendar every year, along with the State Opening of Parliament in May.

The parade starts at Buckingham Palace and goes along the Mall to the Horse Guards Parade grounds, and then to Whitehall, before going back again to Buckingham Palace.

About 1,400 soldiers, 200 horses and 400 musicians took part in this year’s ceremony. This year’s event was especially noteworthy since it marked the first time the newly crowned King Charles III was honored.

Also this year Charles put his own stamp on the ceremony by reviving the tradition of the monarch leading the parade on horseback.

The last time a horse-mounted sovereign led Trooping the Colour was over thirty years ago, when Queen Elizabeth did so in 1986. For the remainder of her reign, she rode in a carriage at the ceremony.

Charles II, circa 1660-1665, by John Michael Wright

The tradition of Trooping the Colour traces its origins back to the reign of Charles II in the 17th century.

Starting in 1748, during the reign of King George II, it became an occasion to publicly celebrate the king or queen’s birthday, no matter what month or day the reigning monarch was actually born. (King Charles was born on November 14, 1948.)

“Colour” is another name for the brightly-colored battalion flags associated with the Five Foot Guard regiments (including the Scots Guards, Irish Guards, Welsh Guards, Grenadier Guards, and Coldstream Guards).

These flags not only showcase the individual spirit of each regiment but also commemorate its fallen soldiers.

In times past, there was a very practical reason to publicly display the “colour” like this – so that the soldiers would be able to recognize the flags of their comrades in the heat of battle.

Every year one of the five Foot Guard Regiments is chosen to display its flag.  This year the 1st Battalion of the Welsh Guards got to troop its color through the ranks of the assembled regiments. The honorary Colonel of the Welsh Guards is Prince William.

The inspection of the military troops and horses typically lasts about two hours. At the conclusion of this year’s event, King Charles and Queen Camilla and other members of the royal family appeared on the balcony of Buckingham Palace to watch a flyover of about 70 RAF (Royal Air Force) aircraft.

George III, sick and unkempt in his final years. Engraving by Henry Meyer, 1817

This was a reprise of a flyover event originally planned for Charles’ coronation in May. That display had to be cut short due to bad weather.

The planes used in the flyover included Hurricanes and Spitfires from the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight. Also, 18 modern Typhoon fighter jets spelled out “Charles R” (short for Charles Rex) in the sky to honor the king.

Trooping the Colour has been an annual event since the mid-18th century, with a few notable exceptions.

One exception was during the nine years of the Regency, from 1811 to 1820, when the king’s birthday parade was suspended due to King George III’s seclusion and illness. And the military parades were halted again during World War I and World War II.

There have also been a few memorable, unscripted moments, too, during this annual event, especially in the 20th century.

For example, in 1970 a guardsman rather spectacularly fainted while the Queen was reviewing the troops.

The Queen and her horse appear nonplussed by the fallen soldier ,who, though unconscious, has kept admirable form rather than collapsing into a crumpled heap.

And in 1981, a fame-hungry and delusional teenager fired six blank shots, point-blank range, at the Queen as she rode by with her procession from Buckingham Palace, on her way down the Mall to the Horse Guards Parade grounds.

Queen Elizabeth won a lot of praise that day as she kept her composure and her startled horse firmly under control. The young man was wrestled to the ground, charged with treason, and served a five-year prison sentence. When the man who shot blanks at the queen got out of jail at age 20, he changed his name and made a new life for himself.

I think he got off easy, considering how convicted traitors have been treated in the past!

Nothing that dramatic happened at this year’s event, though the King’s horse was notably restless and hard for the king to handle at times, perhaps most embarrassingly while the national anthem was being played.

Temperatures on the day of this year’s Trooping the Colour were in the high 70s, and I’m sure the king’s heavily decorated Welsh Guards uniform was hot for him to wear, but Charles sat ramrod straight on Noble, his horse, throughout the ceremony.

I suppose you could say the new king proved himself to be a real trouper as he led his first official Trooping the Colour!

King Charles on his horse Noble, at 2023’s Trooping the Colour

 

**

Sources include:

“King Charles’ Horse Fails to Keep Still During National Anthem in Clip,” by Jack Royston, Newsweek, June 21, 1923

“What to Know as King Charles Takes Part in His First Trooping the Color Birthday Parade as Monarch,” by the Associated Press, June 17, 2023

 

Images courtesy of Wikimedia Commons

 

 

Waterloo in Caricature

Wellington and Blücher stuffing Napoleon into a can, French political cartoon, 1815

 

In addition to paintings, architecture, and literature, the Battle of Waterloo inspired caricature art immediately after the victory and for some time after. Prints detailing the outcome and effects of the famous battle appeared in Europe and Great Britain, and they make fascinating viewing today.

In England, many of these cartoons were featured in Ackermann’s Repository of Arts, a periodical published in London by Rudolph Ackermann. One of Ackermann’s most noted contributors was the caricaturist Thomas Rowlandson.

Here’s Rowlandson’s take on the Treaty of Paris, signed on November 20, 1815. News of the treaty reached England three days after the signing, and on November 27, the day General Peace was celebrated in London, this Rowlandson etching was exhibited at Ackermann’s shop in the Strand:

 

Here you can see Wellington leading the Bourbon King Louis XVIII up to the French throne while Blücher fires his gun at Napoleon, who falls down the stairs.  The figure of Justice reclines on a cloud  above the scene, holding her scales and her sword. The message here is that Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo has brought peace throughout Europe, and the rightful order of government has been restored to France.

Here’s another Rowlandson cartoon, also published in 1815 in the aftermath of the great battle:

Napoleon, his arms held up in surrender, is being attacked on both sides by Wellington and Blücher. Notice how the emperor’s crown is knocked off his head, while Napoleon’s  Imperial Eagles desert him and fly away.

Caricaturists on both sides of the English Channel didn’t hold back their opinions on the more gruesome outcome of the famous battle. For example, here a French artist comments on the dreadful cost of Napoleon’s defeat. Death, holding his scythe, fiddles as Napoleon rides into the fray.

And here’s a British satire comparing the battle to a fox hunt.  “Death of the Corsican-fox,” shows Wellington capturing Napoleon and holding him up in triumph to a pack of baying hounds.

This print is a revision of a remarkably similar 1803 cartoon by the noted caricaturist and printmaker, James Gillray. In Gillray’s print, the Corsican-fox (again Napoleon) is caught alive during a hunt by King George III. Gillray died on June 1 of 1815, but had he lived to see Waterloo I think he probably would have done this Wellington version, or something very much like it, himself.

There may not have been social media in 1815, much less cable news shows delivering endless commentary and divergent opinions. But the talented caricaturists of the time, both British and French, certainly knew how to  get their points of view across!

 

Images from the Bodleian Libraries and Wikimedia Commons

 

Assembly Rooms, May 2015

So many articles this month! I hope you find some of them to be of interest.

Gillray-very slippy weatherThe prodigiously talented Gillray: http://18thcand19thc.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/james-gillray-prince-of-caricaturists.html

The care and upbringing of foundlings: http://www.thehistoryoflondon.co.uk/thomas-coram-and-the-foundling-hospital/

A London walk: https://londonhistorians.wordpress.com/2015/03/30/footsteps-of-soane-ii/

Continue reading “Assembly Rooms, May 2015”

Assembly Rooms – April 2015

Here’s the monthly assemblage of links of interest to lovers of the Regency era — everything from prisoners’ mementos to dishonest valets. Continue reading “Assembly Rooms – April 2015”

Being Scotch by Ann Lethbridge

Award-winning author Ann Lethbridge first published this blog when she started writing the Gilvrys of Dunross series. She graciously gave the Beau Monde permission to recycle it here.

Being Scotch

Did you think I had made a dreadful mistake? Or did you know I was talking about a drink, not a
person. I do of course mean Scotch whisky (and that too is the correct spelling).

Continue reading “Being Scotch by Ann Lethbridge”

Assembly Rooms, January 2015

Assembly Rooms is a collection of links to blogs and articles of interest to lovers of the Regency Era.

Glorious Gothic: http://www.regencyhistory.net/2015/01/strawberry-hill-horace-walpoles-gothic.html

Strawberry Hill by Paul Sandby, courtesy Wikipedia
Strawberry Hill by Paul Sandby, courtesy Wikipedia

An impressive display of carriages: http://www.regencyhistory.net/2014/10/the-national-trust-carriage-museum-at.html Continue reading “Assembly Rooms, January 2015”

Marriage at Gretna Green   by Jane Lark

Ah, June, a popular month for weddings. And during the Regency, quite a number of those weddings took place at the small village of Gretna Green, the first hamlet over the English border in Scotland. Last year, Jane Lark, whose most recent Regency is The Scandalous Love of a Duke, spent some time in modern-day Gretna Green. Today, she shares with us what she learned about the famous, or infamous, Scottish capital of clandestine wedding.

What really happened in Gretna Green …

Continue reading “Marriage at Gretna Green   by Jane Lark”

Divorce Regency Style   By Cheryl Bolen

This latest article from Cheryl Bolen is about the sadder side of marriage, divorce. Though not a common event during the Regency, it was not completely impossible. But the process was slow and tedious and the options available to a couple were very different than the options open to most of us today.

What happened when a Regency marriage fell apart …

Continue reading “Divorce Regency Style   By Cheryl Bolen”

"Marriage Lines" really are lines!

A cross-post from The Regency Redingote:

The phrase "marriage lines" is listed in the entry for marriage in the Oxford English Dictionary Online (paid subscription required). The phrase is characterized as a colloquial term for a marriage certificate, expecially that held by a bride. The first documented use of this phrase in print was in The Times on 25 March 1818.

As "marriage lines" is considered a colloquialism, it is not surprising that it is not found in written or printed form until 1818. In fact, it is a mark of its pervasiveness in the language by this time that it did find its way into print. A colloquialism is, by definition, an expression which is not typically used in formal speech or writing. But it is a common part of informal speech, the daily conversation of regular people. So, it is clear that "marriage lines" was used in daily speech by ordinary people for many years before its first appearance in The Times in 1818.

"Marriage lines" is also an idiom, as it seems quite clear it is peculiar to the English speakers of the British Isles. There is no evidence this phrase was commonly used by the populations of any of the countries of the European Continent, or even in America or Canada, except by native British speakers.

So what is the origin of this charming expression for a marriage certificate? And why were the "marriage lines" so important to the women who possessed them?

Continue reading “"Marriage Lines" really are lines!”

Courting and Marriage in the Regency   by Cheryl Bolen

Are you planning a big wedding scene in your next Regency novel, the bride in a brand-new white wedding gown and veil, a flock of bridesmaids in matching gowns, and a church-ful of guests throwing rose petals as the happy couple leaves the church? You may want to re-think all of that after you read the article Cheryl Bolen has for us today.

How couples really courted and married in Regency days …

Continue reading “Courting and Marriage in the Regency   by Cheryl Bolen”

Regency Coin — What Did it Cost? by Shannon Donnelly

Regency Coin — What Did it Cost? by Shannon Donnelly

Proper Conduct by Shannon Donnelly
Proper Conduct by Shannon Donnelly

 

In Proper Conduct, Shannon Donnelly’s heroine spends a good deal of time worrying about money that is not there, particular after her father spends nearly 1,000 pounds on a horse.

 

Not an excessive sum to someone such as the Prince Regent, whose racing stud farm cost him 30,000 pounds a year.

 

But all these numbers seemed to need a bit of perspective.

Continue reading “Regency Coin — What Did it Cost? by Shannon Donnelly”

Postage costs in Regency Context

Postage costs in Regency Context

The cost of postage had risen in 1784 as the Chancellor of the Exchequer explained that the increases would be on the mail instead of a tax on coal. The income from letters was used to boost the funds of the Government, and the prices were raised again in 1797, 1801, 1805 and 1812.

During the wars against France (1793-1815) the income was regarded as a tax levied to help the war effort, but once Napoleon had been defeated, there was a backlash of feeling against the high rates. By this time, it was often hard to decide if it was worth sending a letter at all: the cost of a letter could be as much as a day’s wages for a working man. It became a matter of importance to get around the cost in one way or another. For instance it was cheaper to send a letter from London to Scotland by the coastal shipping – 8 pence instead of by road which cost 13½ pence (1sh.1½d).

Because the recipient usually paid the cost of the delivery, it was possible to arrange to send an empty letter (or one with an agreed error in the name or address) – so that the recipient would know the handwriting, realize that all was well with the sender, so refuse to accept it, and not have to pay.

To give some idea of comparative costs:

  • in 1825 on a suggested budget of £250 a year given by Mrs Rundell in her New System of Domestic Economy for ‘a gentleman, his lady, three children and a Maid-Servant’, where food took £2.11.7d a week or £134.2.4d a year, the biggest single item was
    • 10s 6d a week for butcher’s meat (18 lbs at 7d a pound, or about ½ lb each day), followed by
    • 7s for beer and other liquors
    • 6s for bread
    • 3s 6d for 3½ lb butter
    • 3s 6d for fish
    • 3s for sugar (4½ lb at 8d a lb) and
    • 2s 6d for tea (5 ozs at 8s a pound)
  • two pounds of candles cost 1s 2d a week in 1825
  • coal and wood 3s 9d
  • rent and taxes were allowed at only £25 a year
  • clothes (for 5) £36
  • the maid £16
  • the education of 3 children £10.10s.

There were small margins for recreation, medical expenses and savings, but although the family probably had more than enough food in total, it devoted only 3d each week a week to milk (2 pints) and 6d each to fruit and vegetables.

However, on an income of £1000 per annum the budget is quite different! Now there is an establishment of 10, for besides the same-sized family there is a cook, a housemaid, a nursery-maid, a coachman and a footman, whose combined wages are £87 a year ; there is also a ‘Chariot, Coach, Phaeton or other four-wheel carriage, and a pair of horses’, costing £65-17s a year in keep. The family consumes 52½ lb of meat a week – a daily allowance of ¾ lb for each person – there is now a guinea a week for drink, and ¾ lb of butter for each person. The smallest items are still fruit and vegetables (9d per person per week) and eggs and milk (4½d per week).

Taken from John Burnett, A History of the Cost of Living (Penguin Books, 1969)

So to put this in a recognised context :- In Sense & Sensibility (Jane Austen)

Title page from the first edition of Jane Aust...
Image via Wikipedia

Mrs Dashwood – in trying to dissuade her husband from giving his mother and sisters any money at all, points out that they will be so well off, they will need nothing.

… Altogether, they will have five hundred a year amongst them, and what on earth can four women want for more than that? They will live so cheap! Their housekeeping will be nothing at all. They will have no carriage, no horses, and hardly any servants; they will keep no company, and can have no expenses of any kind!

Only conceive how comfortable they will be! Five hundred a year! I am sure I cannot imagine how they will spend half of it

But, if, in addition to feeding/clothing the four ladies of the house, they would have to provide living quarters/food/uniform for the house servant, and if they grew their own food, they would have to employ a gardener – more outlay. Allowing for the fact that they would probably make their own clothes, they would still have to buy the materials. It would not be luxurious living by any standards.

So, it does seem as though the parsimonious Mrs John Dashwood could have convinced herself that her four indigent in-laws could manage with no financial help from their brother.

Free Frank Marks Used for the UK Parlimentary System

Free Franks: Some markings used for the Parliamentary Franking System in the U.K.

( Re-posted with the permission of our friends at earsathome.com)

The origin of the Franking System was a decree of the Council of State in 1652, by which correspondence to and from Members of Parliament and of certain State Officials was permitted to pass free through the post. The system lasted till January 10 1840, when the Uniform Penny Postage was introduced.

Abuses soon arose, and regulations were made at various times, about the number and weight of ‘FREE’ letters, the time and place of posting and the method and form of addressing them. In the early days of the system, the written word ‘FRANK’ or ‘FREE’, accompanied by the seal and sometimes the name of the person entitled to the privilege was all that appeared on the letter.

[The items used as illustrations are from our own collection but barely scratch the surface of a complicated study.]

Manuscript “Free Geo. Bird?”at bottom left of cover.This entire is dated inside ‘Carmarthen March ye 10th 1760’ and despite its age the letter is perfectly legible and is as easily read as the address on the front. In it, the sender, John Rogers mentions a chirograph”.In the centre of the front is the two line ‘ CARMAR THEN’ stamp.

On the reverse is a Bishop Mark of 14 MR.

The London Office Stamps

Introduced in 1764, the first London Chief Office mark was a circled ‘Free’ with the letter ‘F’ larger than the other letters.This piece has a 20mm. circle around the word Free and was franked by Lord Burghersh. “Free Burghersh” in manuscript, left of ‘London’ Later marks had all four letters of the word ‘FREE’ the same size.This entire dated 10th December 1778 has a 20mm circle around ‘FREE’.
In the late 1780’s, more decorative types of ‘FREE’ marks began to be used.The initials which were incorporated into the marks were those of the surnames of the various Inspectors of Franks.

This piece is franked by Lord Grenville and dated July 2nd 1792.

         Detail of stamp
 In 1791 three ring date stamps with initials were brought into use.This piece is dated AP 4 96 and has the initial ‘C’
In 1791 the Post Office experimented with various designs, one of which consisted of ‘FREE’ above a circle with the date and two digit year inside the circle underneath a crown. This wrapper has manuscript “London August sixteenth 1799” across the top.
At the beginning of 1800, a type of mark was introduced which showed ‘FREE’ on a crown and contained within a single rim. This mark, with some variations, remained in use until 1807. This front bears a manuscript”London march twenty first 1800″ and is franked by Lord Inchiquin.
1807 saw the introduction of what are commonly called “Crown Circle Frees”.This wrapper is dated in manuscript “London May twelve 1813” The double ring shows that this was an evening duty mark, morning duty had a single ring. Smaller stamps came into use from 1807 and these, with differences in the size, shape and details of the crown and in the size of figures and letters, continued to be used until the system ended.
This entire has a single rim crowned circle free dated 6 De 6 1831 but the manuscript date reads “Selkirk Octoberthree 1831″.There is no apparent reason for this and it does not appear to have been detected. In 1832, a mark was introduced for use on letters received on Sunday and posted on Sunday at the Chief and Branch Offices, consisting of a circle surrounded by arcs or scollops. There are many varieties of this mark, differing in size and the number of arcs. The use of these marks continued into the 1860’s.
The ‘additional’ stamp for each duty had a cross, differing in size and shape, below the date.

There are varieties of the crowned circlemarks with the letter ‘O’ or ‘E’ below the date

This front shows an example of the ‘E’ type. The letter was addressed to Oxford Street, London, but was redirected to Dorking, which explains the use of the two free stamps. It has been suggested that the ‘E’ type was used on letters that arrived in London by train in the early afternoon.

This piece franked by “Will” and dated May eighteen 1834 in manuscript, has the “SUNDAY” mark dated May 18 and with the curved figures in the year. The inner circle is 21mm, and it has 22 arcs around it. The single rim, crowned circle Free mark was applied on May 19th 1834.

Some Dublin Office Stamps

The mark shown on this piece was introduced in 1819. This example is dated 29 JU 29 1825. The type appears to have been in use until 1831. A completely different shape was introduced in 1815 and remained in use till 1831.

In 1832 a new type was introduced consisting of a two-ring date stamp with date symbols in the centre, FREE and DUBLIN in the outer band separated by two stars. This type is listed by Lovegrove as being in use from 1832-1835.

Time coded stamps were in use from 1835-1840. The mark consisted of a crowned circle containing date symbols with code letter ‘M’ at the bottom for ‘Morning’. This piece is dated 29 AU 29 and the part manuscript at the top reads ‘twenty eight 1835’.
This front is as the previous mark but with the code ‘E’ at the bottom, for ‘Evening’. This piece makes one wonder how on earth it was delivered. It was redirected twice as is seen by the three addresses and the three ‘FREE’ marks. Other marks on the front are the mileage mark of ‘STIRLING 20 MAR 1826 431 — E’ and Glasgow mark ‘G MAR 20M 1826’ plus a receiving stamp.Good luck to the Postman!

SOURCE. Much of the information regarding these marks was taken from J. W. Lovegrove, Herewith my Frank, (KB Printers Ltd. 15a Alma Road, Bournemouth). The book runs to 100 pages of highly detailed information and illustrations and shows how incredibly complex the whole story was.

Read more about this at – Postal Information