My Lords and Gentlemen, As Certain statements have appeared in the Local Journals reflecting upon my character as the Honorary Conductor of “The Readings,” and upon the Institution, I deem it my duty to send this statement to you, with the request that you will give it your kind and impartial consideration. I should not have adopted this course had the Editors of those journals, viz.: “The Marylebone Mercury” and “The Bayswater Chronicle,” inserted my letters addressed to them, giving a denial of the misrepresentations. I think it may not be out of place to give you a sketch of the progress of the Institution, and to mention from what cause I was induced to commence the series of Penny Readings first known as “Praed Street Penny Readings,” but afterwards more appropriately termed “The Marylebone Penny Readings.” I had attended many Penny Reading meetings within the metropolis and was thoroughly convinced that such meetings were not only Encouraged by success, another branch was opened at “The Lecture Hall, New Church Street.” This branch, unfortunately, proved a financial failure. At the end of the series I found we were in debt to the extent of £25: of this I paid £15, and with the consent of the creditors, about £10 was allowed to remain until another season; under these circumstances I did not feel justified in increasing our liabilities by publishing a report. Being now practically convinced that although these meetings could not be a financial success, they would accomplish their object and be very acceptable to the working classes—knowing that there were many noblemen Having given you a brief, and I trust a satisfactory account of our proceedings, I feel it incumbent upon me to comment upon the statements referred to in the former part of this address. The first subject of comment will be the circular purporting to be issued by Lord Lichfield; the second, the case of Oetzmann versus The Marylebone Penny Readings; and thirdly, the scandalous and unfounded reports of the Local Journals. The circular referred to was that issued by Mr. C. J. Ribton Turner (?), and purporting to be signed by Lichfield, Hodgson Pratt, J. W. Probyn, H. N. Hoare, Auberon Herbert, and Julian Goldsmid, who state that they have withdrawn their names from the Patron List of “The Marylebone Penny Readings” owing to reports which have appeared in “The Marylebone Mercury” of proceedings taken against the Hon. Conductor in the Bloomsbury County Court; and that “we beg further to state that though Mr. Taylor was requested by Lord Lichfield on the 3rd inst., (March), to furnish a statement of his receipts and expenditure, he has not, up to the present time, thought fit to comply with the invitation.” Whether in issuing this circular Mr. C. J. Ribton Turner has been authorised to use the names appended to it, I cannot say; but this I can truly affirm,—that the said circular is a tissue of misrepresentations. In the first place, I was never requested by Lord Lichfield to furnish any account whatever. The facts of the case are these:—On Tuesday, March 1st., the Right Hon. the Earl of Lichfield (with authority) was announced to preside at our usual weekly meeting; his Lordship came to the meeting, (I am informed The next subject for comment is the case of Oetzmann versus The Marylebone Penny Readings, in which I was, as Hon. Conductor, sued for the balance of accounts. I think it necessary to state that the original amount of account was £3 17s. 1d.; of this £2 1s. was paid, leaving a balance of £1 16s. For this balance I was sued! A representative of the firm (collector I presume) called upon me at the latter-end of December for the amount. I told him we were not in a position to pay, but would guarantee its payment within three months; the collector expressed his approbation, and withdrew. On me 22nd January I received a copy of “The Marylebone Mercury;” upon perusal I found, to my great surprise, a report of the case in which I was sued for the balance of account at the suit of “Thomas Oetzmann, trading as Thomas Oetzmann and Company.” I did not receive any summons, nor was I aware that proceedings were taken until I saw the paper alluded to. In support of the case, letters were put in, in one of which it was stated I pleaded minority,—this I most emphatically deny! and in support of this assertion, beg to state that I called upon the said Thomas Oetzmann on the 16th of March to produce the said letter, which of course was not done. Comment is needless. The account is paid; but nevertheless, Thomas Oetzmann continues a system of unjustifiable persecution, at once unmanly and cowardly; he has been to our tradesmen and made gross misrepresentations; he has been to our Halls and disturbed our meetings, Now I would refer to the unwarrantable attacks made upon me, and “the readings” in the columns of “The Marylebone Mercury” and “The Bayswater Chronicle.” I am an ardent advocate for the liberty of the press; but I think all will agree with me that as the press have undoubted power, they should be careful how that power is used in giving currency to personal attacks and exparte statements; when this is done, they should at least give the attacked party an opportunity of replying to the accusations;—this has not been done in my case. My letters addressed to the Editors of both journals, containing denials to unfounded statements and inaccurate reports, have been suppressed in many cases; while in others disjointed and useless extracts have been made from them. I would appeal to you, is this justice? You will, I am sure, say “No!” “The Marylebone Mercury” has been extremely bitter and unjust in its criticism. I think it a disgrace that any journal having the Flag of Freedom hanging over its head, should insert petty, and of course anonymous attacks at the instance of any one who advertises largely in their columns; but in the Mercury, (or more appropriately speaking, “MÚckery”), Editorial Office Justice is most decidedly blind. As to “The Bayswater Chronicle,” Bacchus and prejudice seem to be the presiding Gods—it has been of late a repertoire of unwarrantable attacks and false reports, such as it is plainly perceptible emanate from a malicious pen. It may not be out of the place to state that the Editor of “The Bayswater Chronicle”—a Mr. Myers (?)—came to our meeting one evening in a state of intoxication, having, as his friend informed us, been tasting wine at the Docks. After vainly Comparisons have been drawn between the meetings of our Institution, and those of a similar character, which it is asserted not only pay their own expenses, but yield a surplus for charity; but it must be borne in mind that our meetings are very superior to any of the same class, and that we have to pay for the hire of halls, for hirage of pianos, and occasionally for artistes, while the majority of other Readings have their rooms and pianos lent to them; these items, though not very great, materially increase the expenditure; but for all this, I feel justified in stating that had it not have been for the malicious intervention of “the clique,” “the Readings” would have been almost self-supporting. I trust I may not be thought egotistical in the few remarks I am compelled to make concerning myself, as you are aware there is much labour attached to the post which I hold. I have laboured unceasingly, and I trust successfully, to establish a Penny Reading Institution after the design of its originators,—Mr. Sergeant Cox and Professor Plumptre;—but this labour has had the effect of greatly injuring my health,—of preventing the application of my energies to a lucrative undertaking. I do not complain, for my task has been a labour of love to me, but am naturally grieved to find that, after
Even that horrid dog opposition. I have much pleasure in stating that the affairs of the Institution will in future be managed by a President, Chairman, Treasurer, Auditors, Secretaries, and a council elected of Noblemen and Gentlemen, selected from the List of Patrons and Artistes. A subscription list is opened for the purpose of liquidating the debts of the Institution. Those who desire to testify their appreciation of our labours, will kindly send their subscriptions to our esteemed friend Edmond Beales, Esq., 4, Stone Buildings, Lincoln’s Inn, W.C., who has kindly consented to receive subscriptions, and to see that they are applied to the liquidation of our debts. I cannot conclude without returning my sincere thanks to Earl Spencer; the Hon. Lord Arthur Clinton; Thomas Chambers, Esq., M.P.; Edmond Beales, Esq.; the Hon. Auberon Herbert; the Rev. J. Clifford; the Rev. Jas. Moorhouse; Mr. Sergeant Cox; Professor Plumptre; Frederick Berridge, Esq.; H. W. Oatway, Esq.; Dr. J. E. Carpenter; Dr. Atlschul; Dr. Yewen; Mesdames Rudersdorff Leupold, Harrie Oatway, H. B. Stemson, and H. Elmer; Mr. D. Ellis Howe; Mr. Charles Arnold; Mr. John Rowe; to my assistants—Messrs. D. B. Croft, C. H. Liddon, and Walter Mallett; to the Editors of “The Times,” With these remarks, I am content to leave the judgment in your hands, feeling assured that this statement will meet with your impartial consideration. With many thanks for the kindness and courtesy I have ever received at your hands, I have the honor to be, My Lords and Gentlemen, Your faithful Servant, “The Harrow Road Hall,” FIELD AND TUER, PRINTERS, LONDON. 7769. |