|Cranmer Local History Group|
|Researching the history of Aslockton, Scarrington and Whatton-in-the-Vale - Established 2001|
Cranmer Local History Group Newspaper Archive
|Wednesday 21st February 1866|
|SEPARATION OF ASLOCTON TOWNSHIP AND WHATTON PARISH|
INDIGNATION MEETING AT ASLOCTON
During the (past_week the inhabitaats of Aslocton have had their feelings aroused in consequence of an influential individual having signified his determination to separate for church purposes the township of As- locton and the parish of Whatton in the Vale, which have been held together for ecclesiastical purposes from time immemorial.
Consequently, at half-past seven o'clock on the above evening, the large room at the Cramners Arms was densely crowded, and the objects of the meeting having been briefly stated.
Mr. Samuel Walker Chettle of Aslocton Abbey, was unanimously called to the chair. He stated that, being the largest rate-payer in the parish, he stood, in the right position in advocating the rights and privileges of his fellow-parishioners in not being backward in opposing a deep laid scheme, which had for its object a final separation from all spiritual interests and communions and sepulchral accommodation to their joint parish church at Whatton. Although it might be said of him, being a Wesleyan, that his interests were not identical with the Established Church, yet he could say that he was a well-wisher to and was deeply interested in the welfare of her community in common with all those who had loved the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity. If the direful scheme which was intended was strenuously opposed by the whole of the inhabitants, they would be successful in preserving those rights and privileges which had been enjoyed by their forefathers for centuries. Although he was not a native of the parish, he was endeared to it by relatives who were now slumbering in that consecrated ground which had been, allotted to their parish, and which now caused so much intense interest, and which they had that night met together to resist any innovation of which would deprive them of the memory of all that was near and dear.
Mr. Edward Marriots, farmer, said he had great pleasure in proposing the following resolution :— "That this meeting is opposed to tbe separation of Whatton and Aslocton, inasmuch as the proposed separation would prevent tbem from worshipping and burying in the church and church-yard of their forefathers."
Mr. Walker begged leave to second tbe resolution, which was put by the chairman, and carried unanimously. Mr. W. F. Pailing, of Scarrington, stated that he was pleased that the above resolution had met with such a hearty response. He could cheerfully and conscientiously support the resolutions from the fact that Aslocton was the place of his nativity, and at some distant period, in all probability, the place of his future residence. Although he was a Wesleyan Methodist he was not ashamed of his profession, at the same time he cherished the best feelings towards tbe Established Church, and was anxious that bis bones should mingle in the same mould where his revered parents and relatives repose, and he sympathized with other families wbo were in a similar position to himself. He considered it an infringement on tbe part of those wbo took an active part in separating tbem from the sacred spots they were wont to visit and recall to mind the by-gone days, the tablets, records, and their names, and it was a most painful thing that tbe parents should be separated from their children in their last resting place on earth. Whether they succeeded or not in putting a stop to the project for which that meetimg had assembled, they would have the satisfaction to know that they had done their duty. (Applause.)
Mr. Hutchinson, farmer, of Bingham and Aslocton, rose to propose the next resolution, and, in doing so, stated that they all knew tbat this meeting met for only one common object regardless of class or party. Tbe preceding speakers had spoken to the point and it was useless for him to take up the time of the meetiag to make any farther statements, aad he therefore proposed the resolution as follows : — "That this meeting is of opinion that a deputation should attend upon the Bishop of this diocese to lay before bim the wishes of the meeting, aad a requisit on to the Bishop be signed aad presented against the proposed alteration."
Mr. John Chettle, farmer, and churchwarden for the township of Aslocton, had great pleasure in seconding the resolution, which was put by the chairman and carried unanimously. Mr. Robert Keyworth, jun., proposed " That this meeting is of an opinion that a committee consisting of eleven members be formed to take such steps as they may deem proper, with power to call a general meeting of the inhabitants."
Mr. Henry Porter seconded tbe resolution, which was carried unanimously. Mr. William Parhham rose to propose " That the following persons constitute a committee, viz., Mr. S. W. Chettle, Mr. J. Chettle, Mr. C. Marriott, Mr. B. Keyworth, senr., Mr. W. Parnham, Mr. H. Porter, Mr. J. Hutchinson, Mr. W. F. Pailing, Mr. J. Bates, Mr. R. Keyworth, junr., and Mr. George Morley."
This proposition was seconded by Mr. Clay, of Whatton, supported hy Mr. Keyworth, junr., and carried hy acclamation. Mr. Parnham wished to state to the meeting that he had on a former occasion been deputed to wait upon the Bishop of the Diocese on parochial business, and that the right rev. prelate treated him with th« greatest courtesy, and he had no doubt that the deputation about to wait upon his lordship on this most important business would also meet with a similar reception.
Mr. Hutchinson having proposed a vote of thanks to the Chairman for his efficient and valuable services, which was seconded by Mr. Keyworth, jun., the meeting shortly afterwards separated.
|Â©2013 - 2019 - GR Redford and Cranmer Local History Group all rights reserved.|