Born: John, Lord
Wrottesley, distinguished astronomer, and president of
the Royal Society, 1798.
Audrey Blood Hillman,
Eminent Native Plant
Gardener, 1952.
Died: Xerxes I, king of
Persia, murdered by Artabanus 465
B.C.; Louis III of France, 882
A. D.; Sir Reginald Bray,
architect, 1503; John, Earl of Gowrie, slain at Perth,
1600; Frederick, Lord North, statesman, 1792; Richard,
Lord Howe, naval hero, 1799; Charles James Blomfield,
bishop of London, 1857, Fulham.
Feast Day: St. Memmius
or Menge, first bishop and apostle of
Chalons-sur-Marne, end of 3rd century. St. Afra and her
companions, martyrs, 304. St. Oswald, king and martyr,
642. The Dedication of St. Mary ad Nives, about 435.
THE ARM OF St. OSWALD
Incredible sums were sometimes
given by the monastic bodies, in the dark ages, for
relics of saints. Amongst such valuables, the arm of
St. Oswald, preserved in Peterborough Cathedral, was
in especial esteem, insomuch that King Stephen once
came to see it; on which occasion, besides presenting
his ring, he remitted a debt of forty marks to the
abbey. 'The story told of the arm is, that Oswald, who
was king of Northumberland, and a very liberal
benefactor to the poor, sitting at meat one day, a
great number of beggars came to the gate for relief,
upon which Oswald sent them meat from his own table,
and there not being enough to serve them all, he
caused one of his silver dishes to be cut in pieces,
and distributed among the rest; "which Aidanus, a
bishop who came out of Scotland to instruct and
convert these northern parts of England, beholding,
took the king by the right hand, saying: Nunquam
inveterascat haec manus!" Poor Oswald, however,
quarrelling with one of his neighbours, Pender, king
of Murcia, and encountering his army at Oswestre, or
as others say at Burne, was vanquished and slain, when
some, remembering Bishop Aidanus's blessing, took care
to preserve his arm, which was finally treasured up at
Peterborough.'�Bliss's Notes to Hearne's Diary.
THE GOWRIE CONSPIRACY
It is little known that the
5th of August was once observed in England as a
holiday, exactly in the same manner as the 5th of
November, and for a cause of the same nature. On that
day, in the year 1600, King James, then ruling
Scotland alone, narrowly escaped death at the hands of
two conspirators of his own people�the Earl of Gowrie,
and his brother Alexander Ruthven. It was a strange
confused affair, which the death of the two
conspirators prevented from being thoroughly cleared
up; and there have not been wanting individuals, both
at the time and since, to doubt the reality of the
alleged design against the king. It is, however, not
difficult for an unprejudiced person to accept the
conspiracy as real, and to comprehend even its scope
and drift.
The
king, on that August morning, was mounting his horse
at Falkland, to go out a-hunting�his almost daily
practice�when Alexander Ruthven, who was a youth
barely twenty, came up and entered into private
conversation with him. The young man told a
wild-looking story, about a vagrant Highlander who
knew of a secret treasure, and who might be conversed
with at Gowrie House, in Perth. The king's curiosity
and love of money were excited, and he agreed to go to
Perth after the hunt. He then rode from the field in
company with Ruthven, followed by some of his
courtiers, to one of whom (the Duke of Lennox) he
imparted the object in view. It appears that Lennox
did not like the expedition, and he told the king so;
but the king, nevertheless, proceeded, only asking the
duke to have an eye upon Alexander Ruthven, to keep
close, and be ready to give assistance, if needful.
The king and his followers,
about a dozen in number, came to Gowrie House in time
for the early dinner of that age, and, after the meal
was concluded, he allowed himself to be conducted by
Alexander Ruthven through a series of chambers, the
doors of which the young man locked behind him, till
they came to a small turret closet, connected with an
upper room at the end of the house, where James found,
instead of the man with 'the pose' he had expected,
one completely armed, a servant of the earl. Ruthven
now clapped his hat upon his head, and snatching a
dagger from the armed man, said to the king: 'Sir, ye
maun be my prisoner! Remember on my father's deid
[death]!' alluding to the execution of his
father for a similar treason to this, sixteen years
before.
The king remonstrated, showing
that he, as a minor at the time, was not concerned in
his father's death, and had of his own accord restored
the family to its rank and estates; and he asked
meekly of the young man what he aimed at by his
present proceedings. Ruthven said he would bring his
brother to tell what they wanted: meanwhile the king
must promise to stay quietly there till he returned.
During his brief absence, the
king induced the armed man to open one of the windows,
looking to the neighbouring street; and while the man
was proceeding to open the other, which looked to the
courtyard below, Ruthven rushed in, crying there was
no remede, and attempted to bind the king's hands with
a garter. A struggle ensued, in which the armed
servant gave the king some useful help, and James was
just able to get near the window, and call out
'Treason!' It appeared from the deposition of the
servant, that he had been placed there by his master,
without any attempt to prepare him for the part he was
to play, or to ascertain if he could be depended upon.
In point of fact, the sight of the king and of
Alexander Ruthven's acts filled him with terror. He
opened the door, and let in Sir John Ramsay, one of
the royal attendants, who immediately relieved his
struggling master by stabbing Ruthven, and thrusting
him down the stair. As the conspirator descended,
wounded and bleeding, he was met by two or three
others of the king's attendants coming up upon the
alarm, and by them was despatched, saying as he fell:
'Alas! I had not the wyte [blame] of it!'
Immediately after the king
left the dining-room, an officer or friend of the Earl
of Gowrie had raised a sudden report among the royal
attendants, that their master was gone home�was by
this time past the Mid Inch (an adjacent public
green)�so that they all rushed forth to follow him.
The porter, on being asked by some of them if the king
had gone forth, denied it; but the earl called him
liar, and insisted that his highness had departed. It
was while they were hurrying to mount and follow, that
the king was heard to cry 'Treason!' from the
turret-window. The earl now drew his sword, and,
summoning his retinue, about eighty in number, to
follow him, he entered the house, and appeared in the
room where his brother had just received his first
wound. The four gentlemen of the royal train, having
first thrust the king for his safety into the little
closet, encountered the earl and the seven attendants
who entered with him, and in brief space Gowrie was
pierced through the heart by Ramsay, and his servants
sent wounded and discomfited down stairs. Soon after,
the Earl of Mar and other friends of the king, who had
been trying for some time to force an entrance by the
locked-up gallery, came in, and then James knelt down
on the bloody floor, with his friends about him, and
returned thanks to God for his deliverance.
It was a wild and hardly
intelligible scene. Gowrie and his brother were
accomplished young men, in good favour at court, and
popular in Perth; they had the best prospects for
their future life; it seemed unaccountable that,
without giving any previous hint of such a design,
they should have plunged suddenly into a murderous
conspiracy against their sovereign, and yet been so
ill provided with the means of carrying it out
successfully. Yet the facts were clear and palpable,
that the king had been trained, first to their own
town of Perth, and then into a remote part of their
house, and there murderously assaulted. Evidence
afterwards came out, to shew that they had been led to
frame a plan for the seizure of the royal person,
though whether for the sake of the influence they
could thereby exercise in the government, or with some
hazy design of taking vengeance for their father's
death, cannot be ascertained. It also appeared that,
at Padua University, whence they were only of late
returned, they had studied necromancy, which they
continued to practise in Scotland. It seems not
unlikely that they were partly incited by some
response, paltering with them in a double sense, which
they conceived they had obtained to some ambitious
question. Their attainder�nay, the attainder of the
whole family�followed.
The people generally rejoiced
in the king's deliverance, and his popularity was
manifestly increased by the dangers he had passed. Yet
a few of the clergy professed to entertain doubts
about the transaction; and one of eminence, named
Robert Bruce, underwent a banishment of thirty years
rather than give these up. His spirit has reappeared
in a few modern writers, of the kind who habitually
feel a preference for the side of a question which has
least to say for itself. That a king, constitutionally
devoid of physical courage, should have gone with only
a hunting-horn hanging from his neck, and a handful of
attendants in the guise of the chase, to attack the
life of a powerful noble in his own house, and in the
midst of armed retainers and an attached burgal
populace; that he should have adventured solitarily
into a retired part of his intended victim's house, to
effect this object, while none of his courtiers knew
where he was or what he was going to do; meets an easy
faith with this party; while in the fact of Alexander
Ruthven coining to conduct the king to Perth, in the
glaring attempt of the earl, by false reports and
lies, to send away the royal train from his house; in
the fact that the two brothers and their retainers
were armed, while the king was not; and in the clear
evidence which the armed man of the turret-chamber
gave in support of the king's statements; they can see
no manner of force. Minds of this kind are governed by
prejudices, and not by the love of truth, and it is
vain to reason with them.
LONDON SHOEBLACKS
Ten years before the cry of
'Clean your boots, sir!' became familiar to the ears
of the present generation of Londoners, Mr. Charles
Knight described 'the last of the shoeblacks,' as a
short, large-headed son of Africa, rendered melancholy
by impending bankruptcy, who might he seen, about the
year 1820, plying his calling in one of the many
courts on the north side of Fleet Street, till driven
into the workhouse by the desertion of his last
customer. This unfortunate was probably the individual
alluded to by a correspondent of Mr. Hone as sitting
under the covered entrance of Red Lion Court. He
attributes the ruin of the fraternity to Messrs Day
and Martin, and says he remembered the time when they
were to be seen, as now, at the corner of every
street.
Their favourite pitches then
were the steps of St. Andrew's Church, Holborn, and
the site of Finsbury Square, at that period a large
open space of ground. Instead of the square box used
by our scarlet-coated brigade, their predecessors
employed a tripod, or three-legged stool, and carried
their implements in a large tin kettle. Their stock in
trade consisted of an earthen-pot filled with blacking
(compounded of ivory black, brown sugar, vinegar, and
water), a knife, two or three brushes, a stick with a
piece of rag at the end, and an old wig; the latter
being used to whisk the dust or wipe the wet dirt from
the shoes. The operation, in those days of shoes and
shoebuckles, was one requiring some dexterity to avoid
soiling the stocking or buckle.
Some liberal shoeblackers, as
Johnson calls them, provided an old pair of shoes and
yesterday's paper for the convenience and
entertainment of their patrons while the foot grew
'black that was with dirt embrowned.'
The author of the Art of
Living in London (1784) counsels his readers to
'Avoid the miser's narrow
care,
Which robs the shoeblack of his early fare;
No�let some son of Fleet Street or the Strand,
Some sooty son, with implements at hand,
Who hourly watches with no other view,
Than to repolish the bespattered shoe;
Earn by his labour the offensive gains,
Nor grudge the trifle that rewards his pains.'
A writer in The World
for the 31st January 1754, humorously exalts the
shoeblack's calling above his own. He complains that
'once an author, always an author,' is the dictum of
the world� 'A man convicted of being a wit is
disqualified for business during life; no city
apprentice will trust him with his shoes, nor will the
poor beau set a foot upon his stool, from an opinion
that for want of skill in his calling his blacking
must be bad, or for want of attention be applied to
the stocking instead of the shoe. That almost every
author would choose to set up in this business, if he
had wherewithal to begin with, must appear very
plainly to all candid observers, from the natural
propensity which he discovers towards blackening.'
Shoeblacks were also known as japanners. Pope says:
'The poor have the same
itch;
They change their weekly barber, weekly news,
Prefer a new japanner to their shoes.'
Gay,
not content with telling
how
'The black youth at chosen
stands rejoice,
And "clean your shoes" resounds from every voice,'
seeks to make the shoeblack of
more importance, by giving him a goddess, though an
unsavoury one, for a mother. According to the poet,
this deity, shocked at finding her son grow up a
beggar, entreated the gods to teach him some art:
'The gods her suit
allowed,
And made him useful to the walking crowd.
To cleanse the miry feet, and o'er the shoe,
With nimble skill the glossy black renew.
Each power contributes to relieve the poor;
With the strong bristles of the mighty boar
Diana forms his brush; the god of clay
A tripod gives, amid the crowded way
To raise the dirty foot and ease his toil;
Kind Neptune fills his vase with fetid oil,
Pressed from the enormous whale; the god of fire,
From whose dominions smoky clouds aspire,
Among these generous presents joins his part,
And aids with soot the new japanning art.'
�Trivia.
The art, however, was scarcely
new in Gay's time, for Middleton, in his Roaring Girl
(1611), speaks of shoes 'stinking of blacking;' and
Kitely, in Every Man in his Humour, exclaims:
'Mock me all over,
From my flat cap unto my shining shoes.'
In 1851, some gentlemen
connected with the Ragged Schools determined to revive
the brother-hood of boot-cleaners for the convenience
of foreign visitors to the Exhibition, and commenced
the experiment by sending out five boys in the now
well-known red uniform. The scheme succeeded beyond
expectation; the boys were patronised by natives as
well as aliens, and the Shoeblack Society and its
brigade were regularly organised. During the
Exhibition season, about twenty-five boys were kept
constantly employed, and cleaned no less than 101,000
pair of boots. The receipts of the brigade during its
first year amounted to �656. Since that time, thanks
to a wise combination of discipline and liberality,
the Shoeblack Society has gone on and prospered, and
proved the parent of other societies. Every district
in London now has its corps of shoeblacks in every
variety of uniform, and while the number of boys has
increased from tens to hundreds, their earnings have
increased from hundreds to thousands. Numbers of
London waifs and strays have been rescued from
idleness and crime, and metropolitan pedestrians
deprived of any excuse for being dirtily shod.