Abolition of Leigh Fair 1873

THE ABOLITION OF LEIGH FAIR

Tonbridge Free Press on 26 August 1871 reported that the Fairs Act 1871 was introduced by Samuel Morley and thanked him for doing so. “The Act is a model of brevity and perspicuity – indisputable evidence that it emanated from a man of business”.  The article published the Act in full, although its main reference was to the annual fair at Tonbridge, which, as with many fairs, was considered a nuisance and “does a large amount of injury to the town, without conferring the slightest benefit”.

The Fairs Act 1871 empowered the Home Secretary to, on petition, make orders for the abolition of fairs.  According to the preamble to the Act, such provision was made because many fairs traditionally held in early Victorian England were deemed unnecessary, caused grievous immorality and were injurious to the inhabitants of the towns in which they were held.

The imposition of the Act was not just restricted to towns.  The annual fair at Leigh had been held on the Green on 16 June for much of the 19th century.  It always included cricket with local teams and sideshows and amusements – some local fairs included the sale of livestock.

On 6 June 1826, the Maidstone Journal reported that on Friday June 16, Leigh Fair “will be played on Leigh Green, a grand match of cricket between the Gentlemen of Lamberhurst and Leigh Clubs, for Twenty Pounds.  The Wickets to be pitched precisely at ten o’clock, so there will be only one day’s play, and decided by the first innings if not played out.”

On 24 June 1834, the Maidstone Gazette and Kentish Courier reported  “A match of cricket was played at Leigh Fair on Monday the 16th June between the gentlemen of Leigh club, and the gentlemen of Edenbridge club . . .  A great assemblage of persons of all classes was attracted to the scene of action; some to participate in the amusements generally afforded them at a rural village fair, whilst the greater portion took a lively interest in the game.  The superior bowling of Duke and Woodhams kept their adversaries in the background . . . “. 

However, on 24 June 1872 the Maidstone and Kentish Journal reported that the annual Leigh fair “has dwindled down to almost nothing compared with former days.  At one end of the green there were a few stalls, and at the other a cricket match was played amongst the villagers and workmen employed by Messrs. Myers”.  

In 1873, there was application by Samuel Morley and John Maxted, Leigh’s non-conformist minister, to ban Leigh’s annual fair.  On 6 May, the Tunbridge Wells Standard reported “The Abolition of Leigh Fair”.  The article states that The Fairs Act 1871 enabled the Secretary of State to abolish fairs which were claimed by magistrates to be objectionable and Mr Palmer, solicitor of Tonbridge, had made an application under the Act, asking the Bench of Tonbridge Petty Sessions to make such a representation to the Secretary of State to discontinue Leigh fair on 16 June.  To support his application, he produced a petition from the inhabitants and stated that “the owner of the tolls of the fair, Samuel Morley Esq MP . . .  was most anxious that the fair should be abolished”.  He brought evidence to show that the fair was injurious to Leigh.  “Mr John Maxted, who obtained the signatures to the memorial, deposed that they were all genuine, and were written by the persons whose names were appended to the document.  Mr David Killick said the fair was considered quite unnecessary, and indeed the inhabitants of Leigh would be much better without it than with it.  A person named Sales, who had lived in the locality for 20 years, was of the same opinion, and he gave corroborative testimony”.  The Chairman of the Bench commented that because of the short notice, many people who were in the habit of attending Leigh fair and regarded it as a fixture for 16th June, might not be made aware of the fact and be put to some inconvenience.   Mr Palmer replied that the Secretary of State would take the time into consideration and that the Bench’s only duty was to make the representation to the Secretary of State, who would appoint a day for hearing objections to the request, and, if there were none, would comply with the terms of the representation.  Mr Palmer also said that ample notice would be given to the public of the fair’s abolition through advertisements in local papers and the London Gazette.  The magistrates, therefore, agreed to make the representation applied for to the Secretary of State.

On 5 June 1873, the Maidstone and Kentish Advertiser reported that the petition had been successful.  “A Fair has been annually held on the 16th day of June in the parish of Leigh . . . and that it would be for the convenience and advantage of the public that the said fair should be abolished . . . and whereas Samuel Morley, Esq , as lord and owner of the said fair and the tolls thereof, has consent in writing that the said fair should be abolished . . .  I as the Secretary of State for the Home Department . . . do HEREBY ORDER that the fair . . .  in the parish of Leigh in the Tonbridge Petty Sessional Division of the County of Kent, shall be abolished as from the date of this order”.  Signed H. A. Bruce

 

Joyce Field  (Parish Magazine article: June 2026)

 

 

Additional/extended notes with reference to the above article are given below:

THE ABOLITION OF LEIGH FAIR:   NOTES

SEE 26 Aug 1871 Tonbridge Free Press article about the new FAIRS ACT of 1871 – introduced by Samuel Morley.  On FINDMYPAST website.

 According to an article in the Tonbridge Free Press of 26 August 1871, the Fairs Act 1871 was introduced by Samuel Morley.     “The Act is a model of brevity and perspicuity – indisputable evidence that it emanated from a man of business”.   The article publishes the Act in full.

The article discusses the fair at Tonbridge, which as with many fairs was considered a nuisance:  “The fair is considered an annual nuisance” and “does a large amount of injury to the town, without conferring the slightest benefit”.  The article went on to thank Samuel Morley for introducing the Bill.

The Fairs Act 1871 empowered the Home Secretary to, on petition, make orders for the abolition of fairs.  Such provision was made at this time because many fairs traditionally held in early Victorian England, were according to the preamble to the act, held to be unnecessary, cause grievous immorality and very injurious to the inhabitants of the towns in which such fairs are held.

However, the imposition of the Act was not restricted to just towns.  In 1873, there was application by Samuel Morley and John Maxted, Leigh’s non-conformist minister, to ban Leigh’s annual fair, which had been held on 16 June for what seems to be most of the 19th century to that point.

 

Lots about Fair going back early 1800s:

Maidstone Journal 6 June 1826

LEIGH FAIR 1826

On Friday June the 16th will be played on Leigh Green, a grand match of cricket between the Gentlemen of Lamberhurst and Leigh Clubs, for Twenty Pounds.  The Wickets to be pitched precisely at ten o’clock, so there will be only one day’s play, and decided by the first innings if not played out.

A good Ordinary by P. Stuckey

 

Maidstone Gazette and Kentish Courier 24 June 1834
A match of cricket was played at Leigh Fair on Monday the 16th between the gentlemen of Leigh club, and the gentlemen of Edenbridge club which came off in favor of the former.  A great assemblage of persons of all classes was attracted to the scene of action; some to participate in the amusements generally afforded them at a rural village fair, whilst the greater portion took a lively interest in the game.  The superior bowling of Duke and Woodhams kept their adversaries int eh background.  The first innings terminated 66 runs in favor of Leigh club.  Wood’s batting was admirable; Tyrrel made some slashing bits but as a young player we would advise him to play with more caution and too keep a little more at home, lest his wickets fall, ere he can return.  With attention and care he will become a good player.  M. Martin is evidently an excellent player, but appears to require a little more practice.  In consequence of the unsettled state of the weather, the game could not be played out, or we very much question if Leigh club would have come off so victoriousy as the end of the first innings led them to expect, for the fielding and play generally of the Edenbridge club was excellent and there is no doubt if they had had time to finish the game, they would have equalled the Leigh club, as there were some very good batsmen amongst them.

Leigh Club

First Innings                                                        Second Innings
Crandall,  b. by Smeed   0                              b. by Martingale  1
Wood, c. by Bassett  24                                  b. by ditto   0
T Duke b. by ditto 13
M Martin not out 25
E cook run out  3                                              b. by ditto  3
Wheatly b. by Smeed   1                                b. by Smeed  0
H Duke  c. by E Leigh  4                                  b. by Martingale  5
T Tyrrel, s. by Humphrey   17                       b. by ditto 12
W Martin Sen. C. by Bassett 4                     not out   12

  1. Martin jun. b. by Smeed 0                   b. by Smeed  5
  2. Woodhams, run out 1 byes  2

Byes  5                                                                  no balls  1
No Balls 4                                                            Total   51
Total 101

 

Edenbridge Club
First Innings
Martingale, s. by Cook   0

  1. Leigh b. Woodhams 1

Bassett  b. by T Duke  0
Holmden  c. by Martin sen. 14
Humphrey  s. by Cook  3
Lampon  b. by Woodhams  1

  1. Leigh b. by Duke 6
  2. Leigh b. by ditto 3

Glover c. by Wood   2
Hills b. by Duke  0
Smeed, not out  1
Byes 2
No balls 2
Total 35
No second innings

 Maidstone and Kentish Journal 24 June 1872

The FAIR.  The annual fair was held on Monday, but it has dwindled down to almost nothing compared with former days.  At one end of the green there were a few stalls, and at the other a cricket match was played amongst the villagers and workmen employed by Messrs. Myers.

 

Reported in the Tunbridge Wells Standard on 9 May 1873 under PETTY SESSIONS was the following article:

“Tuesday May 6 – before H. T. Moore, Esq (in the chair), Major Scoones and E W M Waldo Esq.

THE ABOLITION OF LEIGH FAIR.  Mr Palmer, solicitor of Tonbridge, made an application under the Fairs Act of 1871, the provisions of which enact that where certain fairs are considered unnecessary, are known to be productive of immorality, and are injurious to the neighbourhood in which they are held, the Secretary of State, upon the representation of the magistrates of the division, has power to abolish such airs as are stated by the magistrates to be objectionable.  He (Mr Palmer) had to ask that the Bench would make such a representation with the view to the discontinuance of the fair held at Leigh on the 16h June, it being considered that such fair should be abolished.  In support of his application, he produced a petition from the inhabitants and added that the owner of the tolls of the fair, Sanuel Morley Esq M.P. who he believed brought in the Bill under the provisions of which he made his application, was most anxious that the fair should be abolished. He also called the following evidence to show that the fair was injurious to Leigh.  Mr John Maxted, who obtained the signatures to the memorial, deposed that they were all genuine, and were written by the persons whose names were appended to the document.  Mr David Killick said the fair was considered quite unnecessary, and indeed the inhabitants of Leigh would be much better without it than with it.  A person named Sales, who had lived in the locality for 20 years, was of the same opinion, and he gave corroborative testimony.  The Chairman said the only difficulty that arose in the minds of the Bench as to granting the application this year was that many of the country people who were in the habit of attending Leigh fair, and who regarded it as a fixture for the 16th June, might, if the fair was abolished this year, on so short a notice, not be made aware of the fact and consequently, be put to some inconvenience  Mr Palmer, however, said the Secretary of State would take the time into consideration in dealing with the petition of the Bench, whose only duty was to make the representation if they thought fit to the Secretary of State, who would appoint a day for hearing objections to the granting of the request, and, if there were none, would comply with the terms of the representation.  Moreover, he said, ample notice would be given to the pubic of the fair ceasing to be held, as advertisements would be inserted in three local papers and in the London Gazette.  The magistrates, ultimately, agreed to make the representation applied for, leaving the Secretary of State to decide the question of abolishing the fair this year.

 

Monday 2nd June in the Maidstone Journal and Kentish Advertiser and 9th June 1873

THE FAIRS ACT 1871:   LEIGH FAIR

In pursuance of the above-mentioned Act, I, the Right Honorable Henry Austin Bruce, one of her Majesty’s Principal Secretaries of State, hereby notify as follows:

  1. A representation has been duly made to be by the Justices sitting in Petty Sessions for the Tonbridge Division of the County of Kent that a Fair has been annually held on the 16h day of June in the Parish of Leigh, in the said Division of the said County, and that it would be for the convenience and advantage of the public that such Fair should be abolished.
  2. On the 20th day of June 1873, I shall take the aforesaid representation into consideration, and all persons are to intimate, before that day, any objection they may desire to offer to the abolition of the said Fair.

Signed H A Bruce  Whitehall, 20th May 1873

 

Maidstone and Kentish Advertiser   Saturday 5 June 1873

The Fairs Act 1871: LEIGH FAIR

Whereas a representation has been duly made to me, as Secretary of State for the Home Department, by the Justices sitting in petty Sessions for the Tonbridge Division of the County of Kent, that a Fair has been annually held on the 16th day of JUNE in the parish of Leigh, in the said division of the said county, and that it would be for the convenience and advantage of the pubic that the said Fair should be abolished.

And whereas notice of the said representation and of the time when I should take the same into consideration, has been duly published in pursuance of “The Fairs Act 1871”.

And whereas on such representation and consideration it appears to me that it would be for the convenience and advantage of the public that the said Fair should be abolished.  And whereas Samuel Morley, Esq, as lord or owner of the said Fair and the tolls thereof, has consented in writing that the said Fair should be abolished.  Now, therefore, I as the Secretary of State for the Home Department in exercise of the powers vested in me by “The Fairs Act 1871” do HEREBY ORDER that the Fair which has been annually held on the 16th day of JUNE, in the parish of Leigh in the Tonbridge Petty Sessional Division of the County of Kent, shall be abolished as from the date of this order.

Given under my hand at Whitehall, this 27th Day of June 1873

Signed H A Bruce