The Date of The Feast
On Saturday evening an open-air meeting, to protest against changing the date of the feast, was held on the Green. – Mr. Hooper presided, and said he did not know when he was at the vestry meeting that a poll could be demanded, or he should have demanded one, and he was of opinion that a poll should be taken. – Mr. Jeremiah Rice was decidedly against any alteration, and he thought it was only those who wanted to go to the seaside that wanted it, and they could go now as well as at the feast time. – Mr. J. Darnell said those who wanted to alter the feast wanted to do it for selfish motives. The manufacturers wanted to get forward with their orders so that they could shut out the shoemakers for a fortnight at Christmas, and he vehemently protested against the alteration.

Mr. John Smith thought they should consider the labourers as well as the shoemakers, and if they had the date proposed, viz., Higham Feast, the labourers would be busy in the harvest field, and would thus be excluded from the holiday. – Mr. T. Field thought that one factor in favour of retaining the present date was to enable the allotment holders to get up their potatoes at the feast holidays, and they were not fit to lift at Higham Feast. – Mr. Edwin Knight thought that as they had to provide the feast themselves they should hold it when they liked, and he should keep his at the old date, the Sunday after the 19th September, as if anyone bought a piece of meat at Higham Feast it stunk before they could cook it. – Mr. Wm. Claridge, sen., was in favour of the old time, and intended to adhere to it. – A resolution, protesting against the alteration of the date of the feast, was unanimously carried. – The meeting was not largely attended by ratepayers of Rushden, many of those present being from Higham, as well as a good number of young people.

The Date of Rushden Feast - Noisy Vestry Meeting
A vestry meeting, called by requisition to consider the proposed alteration of the date of the feast took place in the Vestry Hall last (Thursday) evening. The great interest felt in the question, was shown by the hall being literally packed at the time announced for the commencement of the meeting, and about a quarter of an hour after there were more outside clamouring for admission than there were already inside. Mr. G. H. Skinner was elected to preside, and amongst the audience we noticed Messrs. S. Knight, jun., T. Willmott, G. Denton, C. G. Cunnington, C. Bradfield, E. Claridge, D. P. Boyd, A. Wright, J. Sargent, W. Sargent, G. Clarke, J. Clipson, E. Knight, J. Claridge, J. T. Colson, W. Wilkins, G. H. Skinner, B. Mortimer, A. C. G. Vann, G. Callaway, W. Clarke, H. Brawn, G. Evans, J. Farey, J. Darnell, J. Green, &c.

The Chairman having read the notice convening the meeting, briefly explained why they had met together, and was about to give his personal opinion on the subject, when he was interrupted by Mr. J. Darnell, who asked for the names to be read of those who signed the requisition calling the meeting. This having been complied with, Mr. Darnell further questioned the legality of the meeting, as the notice had not been put on the doors of two places of worship – the Primitive Methodist and Salvation Army. (Laughter, and cries of “They are no consequence.”) Mr. Darnell said they were of just as much consequence as the church or any other denomination and he considered there was a bit of “hole-and-corner” work in it.

Mr. Sargent replied there was no “hole-and-corner” work at all, and all that had been done was straightforward, and the meeting was perfectly legal.

Mr. Darnell made further attempts to prove that it was illegal, but having been hissed down two or three times, he turned to the subject of the meeting and was then allowed to proceed. He considered the farmers and labourers had not been considered at all, for if they had their feast at the same time as Higham it would be in the middle of harvest, and it would not be a feast for them. He proposed “That this meeting protests against the alteration of the feast from the first Sunday after September 19th; and that the resolution passed at a recent meeting be rescinded.” - This was seconded by Mr. Lewis Watson.

Mr. A. Willmott, whilst thinking an alteration necessary, thought the question should be shelved for this year.

Mr. Darnell said the majority in the parish were against any alteration being made. (“Tell the truth.”) If they altered it, it would be an infringement of the liberties of the people. (“Sit down.”) It was not a political question for either party, but it was home rule. (Laughter.) They should all unite and be brothers on this great question. (“Shouldn’t like to be a relation of yours.”) Mr. Darnell made a persistent attempt to obtain a hearing, but the hooting and groaning had become general, and he resumed his seat remarking that he would not stand up to be insulted.

Mr. A. Wilmott proposed as an amendment “That the question of alteration be shelved for this year, and that the overseers be requested to take a poll on the subject before Christmas.

Mr. Bradfield, referring to the meeting held on the green, said it was a regrettable thing that gentlemen should go out of their way to foster a spirit of discontent. (Cheers.) With regard to the alteration of the feast, the question did not interest him sufficiently to make the least difference to him, but he was convinced that most of the people would hold it on the same date, despite what any vestry could do. (Cheers.) He was perfectly willing to go with the majority on the question.

Mr. Vann, in seconding the amendment, said the feast was a general holiday for all, and the alteration of the same should be settled by the people, and not be decided by a few assembled at a vestry meeting. In his opinion the subject should be decided by a poll.

Mr. Hooper said he had made a canvass, and found the greater number in favour of altering the feast another year.

Mr. C. Barker asked Mr. Hooper whether he had not been advised by some of the shoemasters to take no action in the matter.

Mr. Hooper denied this, but Mr. Barker said he was prepared to give the names of at least one present. (Cries of “Name” and “Have it out.”) Mr. Hooper, however, thought it would be as well not to.

Mr. W. Clark regretted they should bandy remarks about one another. He supposed Mr. Barker referred to him with regard to Mr. Hooper.

Mr. Barker : That’s just who it is.

Mr. Hooper : Well gentlemen, we were just going down Backway, and what I said – (the remainder of the sentence was lost amid the groaning, hissing, and cries of “Sit down” and “You don’t tell the truth.”)

Mr. Barker further said it had been noised abroad that a manufacturer said he should shut up his shop at Higham Feast, and he asked for an explanation.

Mr. Boyd asked what the meeting was convened for – whether to discuss the alteration of the feast, or answer questions like Mr. Barker was putting. (Cheers.) If they were going on at that rate they would be there till midnight. (Cries of “We don’t mind that.”)

Mr. J. Wilmott said the majority of the people preferred the feast remaining the same this year, but thought it would be satisfactory to all parties to have a poll. (Cheers.)

Mr. Wilkins, who was warmly received, said the Jubilee Committee were as much to blame as anybody, and as one of the committee he was quite willing to bear his share. It would be remembered they proposed a resolution that the feast should be held at Bank Holiday, but, as they were well aware, it had not been held, and no other time had been specified. It was a great pity there should be any ill-feeling in the matter, and he hoped they would all be unanimous on one point or the other. If the people chose not to go to work at Higham Feast a vestry could not compel them to, neither could they make the manufacturers keep open or close, as the latter had the power to do either. (“No,” and “We could stop away.”) However, whatever step they decided upon he hoped the minority would give way to the majority. There was probably no one in the parish who was less effected by the question than himself, but on behalf of the schools, and in the interest of the children, he would like to make one remark. At Higham Feast they all knew it was impossible to keep the schools open, as the attendance fell off that week. Then there were the midsummer holidays, and another week at Rushden Feast, which must naturally make a difference in the grant earned. He hoped they would consider that point. (Loud cheers.)

Mr. G. Denton was sorry so much ill-feeling was shown, as it was a matter there was not the least need to go crazed over. It was freely reported that the manufacturers wished to coerce their employees. Now that was entirely false, as he trusted, and had good reason to know, that the masters and employees in Rushden worked together, and if the men wished to have a holiday they were met fairly by the masters. It was true there had been a little intercommunication between the masters in the matter, and it had been represented by a number of the men that the date of Rushden Feast was an undesirable time. They had further said they would rather have it in Higham Feast week, the chief ground being, he supposed, that it would be a more convenient time to have a few days at the sea-side.

Mr. Darnell said while thinking of those who would be able to go to the sea-side, they should also think of those who could not. (“Do sit down, man,” “We’re had quite enough,” and loud hissing and groaning). Mr. Darnell was proceeding to speak of the present date of the feast as being useful to men who had allotments, but the hissing continued, and he was once more obliged to resume his seat without finishing.

Mr. Amos Wright said Mr. Darnell had told him on the previous day that he was happy when leading opposition – (laughter) – and that he also never professed to tell all the truth. (Renewed laughter.)

The Chairman having read the resolution and the amendment, put the latter to the meeting, for which nearly all hands were held up. The resolution was subsequently put to the vote, and a number who voted for the amendment also held up their hands for the resolution. The amendment – “That the date be not altered this year, but that a poll be taken before Christmas,” – was declared carried.

Mr. J. Claridge moved that when the poll is taken, it be carried out on the same principle as the Guardian’s election, by leaving voting papers at the residence of each householder, and this was agreed to.

A somewhat lively meeting then terminated.