Chapter four
Isaac Newton France
Genesis 21 v 3 "And Sarah bore Abraham a
son and they called him Isaac"
The name of Isaac was thought appropriate those many years ago because Sarah was so
happy that she could bear a child late on in her age, that she
"laughed"; the name Isaac in
Hebrew has the meaning of laughter.
Sadly the name of Isaac, as associated with Isaac Newton France, was to
give little or no laughter to the people of the Chapel on Cocker Hill.
Isaac had
had a rather turbulent career. He
was first the curate in the neighbouring and mother parish of Ashton. He was reported to have created a deserted
church under his curacy to an extent never known before, and had created sects
and divisions throughout the church and the community before moving to Staley
Bridge. As we have seen by the Articles
of Enquiry of 1811, the church
flourished and was well served by a good congregation who maintained the building
and worshipped in a joyful and hopeful manner.
From the appointment of Isaac Newton France in 1822, things seems to
have taken a downward path, and surely and steadily the numbers in the
congregation declined. This is
graphically reported in the summary of a petition sent to the House of Commons
in which was stated, "the Chapel of Cocker Hill under his incumbency was
deserted to a great extent". The
same petition records that some years before
"the organ which had been borrowed by Mr. France was kept for so
long, that the owner had found it necessary to remove it by main force, the
civil authorities having to be brought in". He clearly had a very bad time.
All of this took place over the first thirteen
years of Isaac's incumbency at the Chapel of Ease, during which time he
continued to feel discontent with the church and a growing disaffection with
the people. It was in the year 1835 that
he first made concrete moves to the Patron, the Earl of Stamford, about the
possibility of closing the existing Chapel of Ease, due to its bad repair and
general unsafe condition, and building a new more secure church in a different
area. He felt that the Chapel was in
danger and was built on rather unsafe ground and that its future was very
limited. Clearly his powers of
persuasion were great for Lord Stamford heard his plea and agreed that the best
course of action would be the closure of that building and the erection of a
new church.
On 30th November, 1835 the Earl of Stamford
agreed to the Conveyance of a plot of land "in Ridgehill and Lanes in the parish of Ashton
underlyne in the county of Lancaster for the site of a new church". This is the present site of the church of St.
George and embodies 10,000 square yards in all.
Once the Earl had agreed to the conveyance of
the land, the Commissioners for building new churches agreed to advance the sum
of £2,500 to defray some of the cost of the work. It was always the responsibility of the new
church to find funds from within its prospective membership and this would be
done through subscription, as was the
case with the original church of 1776.
It was agreed between Isaac Newton France and the Commissioners that the
congregation would raise £1,400, the balance of the cost of building the new
church. A grant of £800 was given by the
Incorporated Society for promoting the enlargement, building and repair of
Churches and Chapels - a further grant of £500 came from the same society on
the understanding that the church would have increased seating from 1250 to
1500 seats. Of these 1500 seats, "850
were to be free and unappropriated sittings." On this basis the work for building the
church was commissioned and as the plans show, this was to be an ambitious
enterprise.
The Foundation Stone of the new church was laid
on 1st September, 1838 and this seemed to be a rather grand affair organised by
the local Masonic Lodge. It was a Monday and it would appear that the
foundation stones of both St. George's and St. John's, Dukinfield were to be
laid at the same time. Both tasks were
undertaken by a Past Grand Master of the Lodge namely, Lord Viscount Cumbermere
who "performed this operation with Masonic Honours and solemn prayer"
(where the actual foundation stone is laid remains unknown. No markings are visible and no record was
kept of the event. Typically the
foundation stone would be laid at the principal door or in the area of the
sanctuary). It is recorded that a very
large procession of Masons and many others moved from one church to the
other. The event proved to be such a
large undertaking that the whole of the evening was taken up with a public
dinner in the Town Hall and it is understood that approximately 175 persons sat
down to eat the meal. Records show that
the Grand Master of the Lodge, Captain Hollingworth was in the chair and that
he was supported "on his right by Lord Viscount Cumbermere, the Revd
C.K.Prescott, Rector of Stockport and David Harrison Esq; and on his left by J.
Preston Esq. , the Revd I.N.France, Jas Adshead Esq. and others.
It took the contractors some twenty months to
complete the work on the church and the consecration was fixed for Wednesday
24th June, 1840 and this too proved to be a large affair with many guests. One report puts it in these terms, "On
Wednesday last the new Church St. George's , Stalybridge was consecrated by the
Rt Revd The Lord Bishop of Chester after a breakfast at Heyrod Hall, the house
of Ralph Ousey Esq., to which the clergy of the neighbourhood were invited to
meet their Diocesan, the party proceeded to the new church which is in plain
Gothic Structure on an elevation to the north side of the town capable of
accommodating some 1500 persons. The
usual ceremony of consecration being performed by the Bishop and the clergy,
the Morning Service was read by the Revd Charles Henry Burton, BA, Curate of
the church, after which an eloquent and impressive sermon was delivered by the
worthy Diocesan and a handsome collection made for defraying the
expenses". This was the first and
indeed the last service of any note to be held in that church for nearly seven
years. The next seven years would be a
time of great distress and unrest.
It is not at all clear, according to the church
records, when precisely the Chapel of Ease of St. George actually closed. We
must assume that this hidden event was a gradual process over a period of time,
for fewer services were held towards the end of that year. What is clear, from the point of
consecration, is that the old church ceased to exist in any functional terms
and that all the people were expected to transfer to the new building. Not only was the intention to transfer the
people, but in order that Isaac Newton France and his successors might have an
income on which to survive, all Endowments would similarly be transferred from
the old to the new church.
It is a
peculiar twist to the story to find that the new church was consecrated
as St. George at all. As the consecration took place on the 24th June, it would
not have been unusual, nor indeed unexpected, for the church to bear the name
of St. John the Baptist. The 24th June
is the Feast Day of this saint and yet his name was not chosen for the new
church. This could only have been for
political reasons and a means of making the point that one church had ceased to
exist and a new one born in its place, but of course though that was clearly
the idea, this did not come to fruition in the way that the church authorities
had hoped it might.
The titles of "old" and
"new" St. George seem to have been attached during the three year
period that followed the consecration of the new building. Bishop Bird, in his consecration address,
referred to the "new" Church of St. George and indeed this was how
the church was referred to in many
documents of the time. Not surprisingly,
this led to the small "n" becoming a capital "N" and the
word "New" became part of the title of the building which was never
the intention. Banners, memorials and
other artefacts within the church bear the name of "New St. George's the
Hague", as if it was a real title when in fact it was nothing more than a
name of convenience. The same of course
is true of "Old" St. George's Church, again a title of mere
convenience but one used very much as a proud "banner" behind which
to stand and make a significant point.
As with the congregations of Ashton Parish
Church and with Cocker Hill Chapel, Isaac proved to be less than an attractive
incumbent and support for the church services began to wane. Parish records
show that numbers in the congregation fell as low as six or seven people on a
very regular basis. This must have been
extremely worrying for the new incumbent and caused considerable concern as
regards any possible income. The
possibility of raising the £1,400 promised by Isaac Newton France for the building
costs, seemed an impossibility as indeed it was. The following years continued to see a
decline to a point where Church Wardens could not be found. During one twelve month period of those early
years, there was only a single service of Morning Prayer held in the church and
it was reported in a local newspaper that, "Mr. France, the incumbent, was
not generally respected; the sacrament of the Lord's Supper had not been
administered during the sixteen months preceding; the church was in a very
dirty filthy state; and in their opinion, the duties of the incumbent were not
satisfactorily performed." Isaac
really was in trouble.
When the Revd France convinced Lord Stamford of
the wisdom in building a new church, he certainly did not take with him the
good will of the people of the Cocker Hill Chapel. They were very concerned at the idea of closing
the church but became quite incensed when they learned that it was the
intention of the incumbent to have the church demolished. Many of the remaining parishioners had long
associations with the church and they held "reverential feeling for the
place, having parents, children or friends lying in the Chapel or Chapel Yard,
and having lived in the hope that it would be the last resting place of
themselves and their families". The
feeling was very strong that it was necessary to preserve the Chapel raised by
their fathers from desecration, and they resolved, where it was possible, to
repair the Chapel in the most efficient manner.
In a petition to the Bishop, they even offered to re-endow the church if
that were necessary, so that a new incumbent could be found.
Such feelings impressed the Lord Bishop of the
diocese who gave permission for the parishioners to make the "chapel safe
and good", and so for three years from 1840 to 1843 this became the quest
of the parishioners in the old chapel area.
The work was far from inexpensive but public subscription once again,
and unceasing toil, proved be the winning combination of the day. A petition was then sent to the Bishop of the
Diocese asking that the chapel be re-opened in the year of 1843.
The Bishop and the Patron, the Earl Stamford,
agreed that an appointment of a new minister should be made and that a
distinction of assigning Districts to both the old chapel and the new church
would prevent any misunderstandings in terms of boundaries. Fees accrued in the old Chapel would be given
to Isaac Newton France by agreement of transfer as well as the transferred
endowments. This proved a most agreeable
idea to both of the churches. The
congregation of the old chapel agreed to guarantee a salary of at least £100 to any minister appointed by
the Bishop as a sign of good will and intent.
The chapel was completed under the direction "of superior
architects", and the chapel yard enlarged and fenced by a substantial
stone wall, surmounted by a costly palisade.
The old organ was removed and a new one substituted and an entirely new
heating and ventilation system was installed.
The total costs of these changes came to a staggering £1,500, but they
clearly felt that this was money well spent as the Bishop on the 29th
September, 1843 appointed the Revd William Hall of Clare Hall, Cambridge as
their new incumbent.
So as to make the distinction quite clear and to
avoid any ill feelings between the two incumbents, the Bishop defined the
rights of privileges of the old and new churches in the following way - writing
to Isaac Newton France he says,"a compensation will be assigned to you for
all fees received there ( meaning the old chapel), and I write to have an
account of them without delay; also a map or rough plan of that portion of the
township which ought to be attached to the old St. George's taken from your
district without trenching on St. Paul's, (another church in Stalybridge), and
containing about 4,000 people. Mr Hall
and yourself will be quite independent of each other, each will have the sole
ecclesiastical care of his own district and each officiating in his own
church." So it would appear that
all was clear, amicable and settled - or was it?
Early in the year of 1844, the seemingly straightforward
business of transferring the endowments and assigning a district, did not
progress as anyone had expected and representations were made to the Bishop of
the Diocese on the subject. The Bishop
responded to the Revd William Hall
saying, "the assignment of a district is always a work of time, as it has
to go through several public offices, all full of business; but, though slow,
it is sure, and you and your friends may
consider it so as completely as if you were in possession of the
documents. Whatever, the church, or
church yard, is as much yours now as it ever can be; Mr France has no concern
except with the fees, so that you may set up your organ and complete your
enclosure without scruple or annoyance. Nothing
depends on the Commissioners except the pastoral charge".
All of this seemed very straightforward as far
as the Bishop saw it but the
commissioners saw the whole matter in a very different light.
It was in February of 1844 that the
Commissioners discovered that a new district could not be legally assigned
until the Rights and Endowments were removed from Cocker Hill Chapel to the new
church. Not only was this true but the
Commissioners discovered that they had no power to transfer the Endowments at
all. This was the source of increased
discontent by all concerned and became the pivotal point on which the whole
scheme was to flounder. It was
discovered that despite these
assurances, the Commissioners were unable to complete any transfer without the
absolute consent of the participating incumbents. Though Isaac Newton France had previously
agreed to the removal of all of the Endowments, the new church had not proved
the new opportunity that he had hoped for and he consequently resolved to cut
his losses.
France gave notice to the Diocesan Bishop in
November of that year of his intention to take up his legal right to be re
installed as the incumbent of the old church.
This declaration told of his intention to "take possession of the
old church on the 1st January, 1846", though this was very much against
the express wishes of the Archdeacon and of the Bishop of the Diocese. They urged him to remain in the new church
and spoke of the impropriety of such conduct, despite his unquestionable right
to do so.
This was a particularly sad time for William
Hall who had, though in a very short ministry, performed marvels in the church
of Cocker Hill. The Sunday School had
started to flourish, congregations had multiplied at an incredible rate coming
close to the previous numbers of 450 persons, and now he was faced with the
possibility of losing it all. This is best expressed by quoting the submission
to the House of Commons concerning that particular period where it states,
"that during these difficulties the minister of Cocker Hill Chapel, the
Revd William Hall, was most assiduous in his duties as a pastor, the Day and
Sunday Schools were raised under his care to a point of usefulness not
surpassed by any in the neighbourhood, and his ministry was attended with the best results generally, scarcely a
single pew in the chapel was ever without an owner and occupier: but the
continued annoyances arising from the disputes as to the rights of the two
churches and their ministers, induced Mr Hall, ultimately to quit his charge,
and on the last Sunday of July, 1846, he preached his last sermon at Cocker
Hill Chapel and shortly afterwards returned his licence to the Bishop."
The stage was now set for the unhappiest period
in the church's life; the new church of St. George was built and was ready to
receive its new congregation, but had a minister who had lost heart and
interest and seemed incapable of generating sufficient interest and
spirituality to draw people into the flock.
The old church had prospered in the previous three years against all
odds and, with a new minister, had resumed its former glory, but now had no
minister at all and only the prospect of receiving back as its incumbent, the
man hated for his contribution to the closure some few years earlier.
The next four years became the darkest days in
the history of the two churches.