Records of the Family of Deacon, of Kettering and London, with notices of allied families
- Profile
- Images
Location: [unknown]
About this 'open space' document
Throughout this document, underlined names are the links to individual WikiTree profiles, and those profiles will show, under a 'See also:' heading, a link back to this document. It is hoped that, through further research, all the people named in this document will eventually have a WikiTree profile. (March 2023)
Minor formatting changes have been applied to ensure readability. Footnotes throughout the original document are shown here in italics preceded by asterisk(s).
Several family pedigrees are mentioned in the original document but they have not been received.
Original document
R E C O R D S OF THE Family of Deacon OF KETTERING AND LONDON. WITH NOTICES OF ALLIED FAMILIES. COMPILED BY CATHERINE A. DEACON .
“Bless not thyself only that thou wert born in Athens; but among thy multiplied acknowledgments, lift up one hand unto heaven, that thou wert born of honest parents.” Sir Thomas Browne.
LONDON: MITCHELL AND HUGHES, 140 WARDOUR STREET, W. 1899.
Transcribed and re-published October 2002 by: Norman Reginald (Norm) Deacon and Betty Margaret Deacon (nee Haynes) 41 Williams Street, PO Box 22, Inverloch VIC 3996, Australia Telephone (03) 56741717 (from outside Australia 61 3 56741717) Email ndeacon@bigpond.com
Edmund Raymond (Ray) Hayes and Carolyn Eleanor Hayes (nee Howman) 28 Kellatie Road, Rosny Point TAS 7018, Australia Telephone (03) 62450686 (from outside Australia 61 3 62450686) Email rayhayes@bigpond.com
Norm and Ray are both descendants of Edward and Esther Deacon (nee Deacon), who sailed (with their children Godfrey, Esther Jane and Christopher) from England to Victoria, Australia in 1874 aboard the “Norfolk”.
R E C O R D S OF THE Family of Deacon OF KETTERING AND LONDON. WITH NOTICES OF ALLIED FAMILIES. COMPILED BY CATHERINE A. DEACON. (FOR PRIVATE CIRCULATION ONLY)
“Bless not thyself only that thou wert born in Athens; but among thy multiplied acknowledgments, lift up one hand unto heaven, that thou wert born of honest parents.” Sir Thomas Browne.
LONDON: MITCHELL AND HUGHES, 140 WARDOUR STREET, W. 1899.
Some Preliminary Words.
PEDIGREES and memoranda of their ancestors having been preserved and
compiled by the third William Deacon (born 1757), his wife Ann, and her mother, Mary Archer, it seemed to me desirable that the records they have
left us should be put into a permanent form, together with such
reminiscences, pedigrees, etc., as different members of the family might be
able to contribute. Several relatives having expressed their approval of this
suggestion, and kindly sent me facts, dates, and names, this little memorial of
our ancestors and kinsfolk has been evolved. I regret its many imperfections,
and am especially sorry that the information it has been possible to glean of
many of the elder generations is very scanty. I wish much that the records of
other branches of the Deacon family could be given as fully as are those of
William Deacon and his wife Ann (née Archer).
Past generations had perhaps a greater reverence for their ancestors than
have their descendants of this somewhat irreverent age. It is, I think, to be
regretted that some little record of parents and grandparents, with a few
characteristic letters, etc., is not preserved by every family.* It is well to be acquainted with the lives of our ancestors, if only that we may be on our guard against the faults and frailties which have sometimes marred a promising career.** But should we, on the other hand, be fortunate enough to possess ancestors whose characters serve rather as guiding lights than danger signals, it is good to have before our eyes the example of men who, in the midst of the temptations and struggles
of a busy commercial life, maintained their honour and integrity
unsullied. Such were many of our ancestors. They possessed a sturdy
independence of character which led them in the quest of truth to
disregard all worldly considerations, and so completely did they grasp
the great principle of brotherly love that they held their gifts and
possessions as a trust for the common weal. They relized that “To live
consists not in enjoying the day and forgetting in the night, but in a
waking conscience, a self forgetful heart, an ungrudging hand, a
though ever earnest for the truth – in a perpetual outlook of hope from
our lower point upon an upper and infinite glory.” May their
descendants, whose lot is cast in a different age, be as faithful to
whatever of truth it is given them to perceive!
*As an aid to the carrying out of this suggestion blank pages are inserted at the end of this book.
**e.g., a versatility of character which conflicts with steadiness of aim and purpose.
C. A. D.
May, 1899
........................................................................................................... PAGE
I. ORIGIN OF THE NAME AND FAMILY OF DEACON............................................... 1
II. SOME NOTEWORTHY DEACONS (NOT OF OUR FAMILY) ................................. 9
III. ORIGIN OF THE ARCHER FAMILY....................................................................... 11
IV. THE GROVERS AND OSBORNS.......................................................................... 13
V. THE BURNHAMS................................................................................................... 15
VI. THE ARCHERS......................................................................................... ............. 17
VII. THE SECOND SAMUEL ARCHER AND HIS FAMILY ......................................... 19
VIII. THE FIRST WILLIAM DEACON........................................................................... 19
IX. THE SECOND WILLIAM DEACON........................................................................ 21
X. THE CHILDREN OF THE SECOND WILLIAM DEACON....................................... 26
XI. THE THIRD WILLIAM DEACON .......................................................................... 28
XII. THE DESCENDANTS OF THE THIRD WILLIAM DEACON................................. 35
XIII THE DESCENDANTS OF THOMAS DEACON..................................................... 38
XIV. THE DESCENDANTS OF BENFORD DEACON ................................................. 39
XV. THE DESCENDANTS OF DANIEL DEACON....................................................... 39
XVI. THE DESCENDANTS OF JOHN DEACON ..........................................................39
XVII. THE DESCENDANTS OF SAMUEL DEACON.................................................... 44
Appendix AUGUSTUS OAKLEY DEACON
PEDIGREE SHEWING THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE FAMILIES
OF DEACON, ARCHER, BURNHAM, OSBORN, ETC TABLE A
PEDIGREE SHEWING THE DESCENDANTS OF WILLIAM DEACON “ B
“ “ “ “ “ THOMAS DEACON “ C
“ “ “ “ “ BENFORD DEACON “ D
“ “ “ “ “ DANIEL DEACON “ E
“ “ “ “ “ JOHN DEACON “ F
“ “ “ “ “ SAMUEL DEACON “ G
ORIGIN OF THE NAME AND FAMILY OF DEACON
HE who endeavours to ascertain beyond the possibility of a doubt the origin of
a surname will find his task, as a rule, by no means an easy one. Many likely
bye-paths must be pursued before the right track is struck, and perhaps after all
this toil the goal may never be reached. It has been very generally assumed by
those who have not studied the formation of family names, and are therefore
unaware that a name usually goes through many phases before its final form is
evolved, that our name is derived from the ecclesiastical office of Deacon; but
were there no other ground for believing this supposition to be erroneous, the
study of the various forms our name has taken during the last seven centuries
would tend to disprove it. Mark Antony Lower, in his “Essay on English
Surnames,” after mentioning several names derived from offices, such as
Stuart, Marshall, Page, etc., remarks, “That the first of the name of King,
Prince, or Duke held either of theses dignities is too preposterous for belief.
Again, in ecclesiastical dignities this could not have been the case, seeing that
all Churchmen led a life of celibacy, and consequently had no recognized
posterity.” Mr. Barber, in his work on “British Family Names,” puts forward
the theory that many names are derived from various tribal surnames – Frisian,
Anglo-Saxon, and Norman. He suggests that from the Frisian tribal name of
Dicks are derived the German forms of Dix, the Dutch Dikker, Dikken and
such English names as Dix, Dicken, Diggens, Degon, and Deacon. The fact
that the name of Diecken is not uncommon in North Germany lends some
support to this theory, as far as German names are concerned at any rate. It has
been suggested that our name may have been assumed by the family of a
“Decanus,” the Governor of a “Decennarius” or tithing, which in the Saxon
times consisted of ten families dwelling near each other and so forming a small
township, but as surnames were not adopted by the middle classes until the
time of Edward III. (being previously a distinguishing mark of noble families) this
view can scarcely be maintained. Some have thought that the name might
possibly have been derived from “Dickon,” the old familiar from of Richard.
But there is reason to believe that most, if not all, of the various families of
Deacon, Deakin, Dakin, Dakeyne, etc., are descended from the Norman family
of De Akeny or Dakeny, a name which is found in “The Battle Abbey Roll” –
the list of those who fought under the banner of William the Conqueror in
1066. From the volume by the Duchess of Cleveland, entitled “The Battle
Abbey Roll, with some account of the Norman Lineages,” I extract the
following notices of this family:- “Akeny: De Acquigny, from Acquigny near
Louviers, Normandy. ‘Le Seigneur d’Acquigny’ appears in Tailleur’s
‘Chronicles of Normandy.’ Roger de Akeny*
(thirteenth century) held fiefs
from the Honour of Peveril of London. This family was numerous and of great
importance in England as the Records shew. (‘The Norman People.’)” Sir
Baldwin De Akeny flourished temp. Conquest, and held lands in the county of
Norfolk.**
William D’Ekeny, Lord of Wrighton in Norfolk temp. Richard I.,
was the grandson of the foregoing. About 1272 Sir Roger Dakeny held a fourth
part of Northwold, Norfolk. The manor of Dagenys in Norfolk derives its
name from him.
Several generations of Dakeny from Edward I. to 1390 were lords of a sixth
part of the barony of Cainho in Bedfordshire. (Glover’s “Derbyshire.”) On the
northern border of the counties of Beds and Bucks a village arose named from
them, Ekeney, in which was a church dedicated to St. Martin, to which the
D’Ekeney family held the right of presentation. Sir Robert de Ekenay, of
Bucks, temp. Edward I., had three sons:-
(1) Sir Robert D’Ekeney, baron of Cainho, Beds, Knight of the Shire
1315.
(2) Sir Thomas de Akeny, Knight of Northwold, Norfolk, temp.
Edward II., who also held lands in Edensor and other places in
the Peak of Derbyshire.
(3) Humphrey Dakeny, who also held lands in Derbyshire 1272 –
1327, whose arms were: Argent, a cross between four lions
gules. His great-grandson Richard Delkyn or Dawkin, of Biggin,
Derbyshire, is returned amongst the gentry in 1442. Branches of
this family settled at Darley Dale, Biggin Grange, and other
placed in Derbyshire, and at Hackness, Linton, etc., in Yorkshire.
As early as King John we find traces of the family in Huntingdon. Henry
Deikins is mentioned as holding lands in Leicestershire in 1346,
* He had a daughter called Ykenai, who was a favourite of King Henry II., and was probably the
mother of William Longsword, Earl of Salisbury.
**Presumed to have been the Norman knight whose name occurs in Roll of Battle Abbey.
and Richard Deken, of Ashby Cannon, Northants, held lands there and in Beds
in 1432. Elyn Dekyn “died seised of the maner of Medbourne, Leicester,”
1475. From one of these branches of the family descended two brothers,
Richard and Francis. Richard, born about 1450, held the office of Private
Secretary to Elizabeth of York, Queen of Henry VII. He received from
Richard III. a grant of the manor of Windridge, Herts. Francis Dyacoun or
Dicoun was the father of two sons, Michael and Richard. Michael took Holy
Orders, and was appointed Confessor to Henry VII. In 1495 he was
consecrated Bishop of St. Asaph. He died about 1500 and was buried in the
Chapel of St. Paul, Westminster Abbey. From Richard, the brother of Michael,
the Deacons of Longcross, Glamorganshire, trace their descent.
Richard (the cousin of Michael), born about 1475, succeeded his father in
the service of the Royal Family. In 1502 he appears to have been Receiver-General of the Queen’s Revenues and Surveyor of her lands. Richard Decons
also held the office of Keeper of the Rolls and Records of the Common Pleas;
he eventually became Secretary to Queen Katherine of Arragon. He was a man
of large possessions. He speculated in lands and bought and sold large
properties, as appears by deeds still extant.*
At his death Mr. Decons was possessed of five great manors, besides 1400
acres of land in Beds, Bucks, and Herts, and lands and tenements in Berks and
Northants. He received the manor or Marston Morteyne through his wife
Elizabeth, the daughter and heiress of Sir John Reynes. The manor house of
Marston is still standing. Some of the lands owned by Richard Decons now
form part of the estate of the Duke of Bedford. Mr. Decons died in 1521,
leaving three sons, Richard, Thomas, and Francis. The descendants of his
eldest son Richard lived at the mansion house, Elstow, Beds (but possessed
other lands and property in the county), for three or four generations. Early in
the seventeenth century, however, the family removed to London, and it is to
the kindness of one of its representatives, Mr. Edward Deacon, of Bridgeport,
Conn., U.S.A. (who has printed for private circulation a most valuable history
of his family, with genealogies and sketches of allied families), that I am
indebted for the brief notices here inserted of the families descended from
Richard Decons, uncle of Michael, Bishop of St. Asaph. Thomas, the second
son of Richard who died in 1521, left no sons. His eldest daughter Elizabeth
married Thomas Snagge, Judge of the Queen’s Court in Ireland, M.P. for
Bedford, and Speaker of the House of Commons in Elizabeth’s reign. He died
in 1592, and is buried at Marston-Morteyne, Beds, where is a handsome
canopied monument to his memory, with recumbent effigies in marble of
himself and wife Elizabeth, who inherited the manor house of Marston, which
henceforth became the chief residence of the Snagg family.
* A messuage called Barbycane with appurtenances, without Cripplegate, was purchased by several noblemen and gentlemen, of whom R Decons was one.
Francis, the third son of Richard, was the ancestor of the Deacons of
Warwickshire; his grandson, Robert Decons, of Wasperton and Napton,
Warwickshire (born 1577), received a special confirmation of arms from the
Heralds’ College, quartering the arms of Reynes. The Deacons of Herts (who
bear the same arms as the Deacons of Beds) claim descent from Thomas
Decons, the second son of Richard, the Secretary of Elizabeth of York. This
branch of the family not only retained but increased their possessions, and for
three hundred years have maintained an unbroken line of descent, ranking
among the gentry of Hertfordshire. This family exhibits the rather unique
descent of eight generations, the eldest son of each successively being named
Thomas: one of whom, Thomas Deacon, of Wiggen Hall, Herts, the great-grandson of Lieut.-Col. Thomas Deacon, of the Parliamentary Army, was
grandfather of Major-General Sir Charles Deacon, K.C.B., who died 1842. Of
this same family came Rear-Admiral Henry Colins Deacon, R.N. (retired
1851).
Mr. E. Deacon, of Connecticut, in his “Deacon and Allied Families” states
the grounds of belief for the Norman origin of the family very forcibly, as
follows: “Close investigation into the history of the Deacon family plainly
reveals the fact that the home of the name, or the location in which it was early
developed, was in that part of the counties of Bucks and Bedford which will be
comprised in a circle* within a radius of about ten miles, having its centre on
the border-line of the two counties at Astwood. In this district the family grew
and flourished for many centuries, and numerous descendants within the very
same area reside to-day in sight of the homes of their ancestors. It is sufficient
only to mention a few of these places to prove this statement: Milton-Keynes,
Newport Pagnell, Astwood, Cold-Brayfield, Little Houghton, Elstow,
Medbury, Wilshamsted, and others. In these localities, after the fourteenth
century, the family was variously known as Dakyn, Diccon, Deakins, Dyckons,
Decon, Dekyns, Dycon, and Deacons. Now, from exisiting documents it is
known that in the earliest period the family of Dekeney, D’Ekene, or De
Akeney (originally from Norfolk) possessed lands and lordships in just this
territory, namely, at Little Filgrave and Lathbury, Bucks, and at Cainho in
Bedfordshire, places only a few miles apart, and between or contiguous to
which lie the several villages and towns above-named. Here also was situated
the town or village of Ekeney or D’Ekeney, whose site appears upon the
Ordnance maps, and here from the earliest times we find records of the town
and family who flourished in this place. The ancient lordships of D’Ekeny
have disappeared, the manorial estates have passed to other hands, but the
descendants of the knightly house still hover round the precincts of the family
traditions, and perhaps plough the fields that their fathers owned.”
* Brackley, the home of our remotest known ancestors, lies only about ten miles from this circle.
In proof of the assertion that our name has gone through many phases
before its final from was assumed, I extract the following passage from Mr. E.
Deacon’s work:-
“The wills and deeds of the family we have been recording exhibit the
following forms of the name from 1470 to 1630:-
Dyken, without doubt a corruption of D’ykenai or D’Ekeny.
Dekyn.
Dyckons.
Decons.
Dicons,
Dycon.
Decones.
Dickons.
Decons.
Deacons.
Deacon.
These are not random modes of spelling, taken and arranged in order, but are
the actual consecutive changes that have taken place in one family, from father
to son, during a period of one hundred and fifty years, and sometimes one
document will exhibit two or more variations in spelling.”
I subjoin some examples collected in my researches:-
De Akeny (Roger), 1200.
Dakeny (Robert), 1316.
De Ekeney, 1326.
Deikins, 1346.
Dakeyne, 1369.
Deken (Rev. John, Vicar of Colly Weston, Northants, 1430).
Yekyn* (of Northants), 1489.
Dykons or Dicons, 1530.
Dickons, 1572.
Decon, Rev. Thomas, Vicar (1570 – 97) of St. Romnalds, Stoke Doily,
Northants.
Deakon, 1610.
Decons or Deacons, 1619.
Deacon (of London, Clothworker). 1630.†
It is not surprising to find the above variations in the spelling of our name,
for very loose spelling prevailed not only in the Middle Ages, but up to the end
of the seventeenth century, and even later. In a document of the sixteenth
century four brothers named Rugeley were found to spell their name in as
many different ways, and during the Stuart period we meet with names of
strangley uncertain orthography.
* The names Ekin and Ekins are still found there
** A clerical Deacon of Northants lived in the same century – the Rev. Samuel Deacon, Rector of Slipton near Cranford; he died in 1707
The question has arisen, “Were our Deacon forefathers entitled to bear
arms?” It is impossible to speak decidedly upon this subject, as our present
knowledge of the family extends to barely two hundred years. The fact that
our remotest known ancestors – the three William Deacons – did not bear arms
does not necessarily imply that they had not the right to do so. Their
occupation (woollen manufacturers) is no indication of a plebeian origin, for
“Many of the younger sons* of our county families became identified with this
industry, especially if they chanced to be Nonconformists, as before the repeal
of the Test Acts (in 1828) the Universities were closed to them, besides which
they were unable to follow any professional avocation without an Episcopal
licence, nor could they hold any office under the Crown, and had therefore no
alternative but to turn to trade for a livelihood. In the early part of the
eighteenth century the woollen trade was the staple commodity of Exeter, and
every branch of it was an honourable occupation; those engaged in it always
held a good position in the city.” (“Practical Heraldry.”)
The College of Heralds states that “There is no notice of any person named
Deacon in the county of Northampton on record as entitled to bear arms;”** but
whether our family originally belonged to Northants is doubtful, for Brackley,
where the first William Deacon would appear to have been born, is situated in
the extreme south of Northants, bordering upon Bucks and Oxfordshire, and it
is therefore very probable that the family removed there from an adjoining
county on account of the facilities Brackley presented for the woollen trade. I
regret that I have not been able to trace the family history farther back than the
marriage of the first William Deacon in 1728. Doubtless information
respecting earlier generations of our family might be obtained by searching the
Registers of Brackley, and by studying the wills of the Deacons of Northants
and adjoining counties; and I should be glad if this record of our kinsfolk
should induce any member of the family to seek to bring to light ancestors as
yet unknown to us.
“The earliest visitations of the Heralds (made for the purpose of examining
the rights by which persons bore arms, or were styled esquires) were made in
the reigns of Henry IV. And Edward IV., but from 1528 to 1687 they were
regularly conducted every twenty or thirty years. These visitations shew
various branches of the family settled in the counties of Derby, Lincoln,
Leicester, and Bedford, and later in the shires of Warwick, Bucks, Herts, and
the City of London, who were of gentle blood and entitled to bear coat
armour.” (“Deacon and Allied Families.”)
* The descendants of “younger” sons have a legitimate right to bear the arms of their ancestors.
**The arms, however, of Thomas Deacon, a native of Peterborough, are to be found on his monument in Peterborough Cathedral (see p.7). “A fire destroyed the greater part of Norhampton in 1675. At the north-east corner of the Market-square stands one of the few houses which escaped destruction. On the front are several carved shields; one over a bay window exhibits initials and a date, 1595. On the left of this is a shield bearing the arms of Deacon, a chevron between three roses.''
Some families of Deacons of London, those of Gloucester and Glamorgan,
and the Dakeynes of Darbydale, Derbyshire, bear the original arms of the De
Akeny family, viz.: Azure, a cross between four lions rampant or. The
Deacons of London and Glamorgan have in addition: Three roses gules on a
chief argent. Their crest is a horse’s head erased per fesse or, and azure. The
motto of the Deacons of London is: “In utrumque paratus” (“Prepared for
everything”). The Deacons of Glamorgan have two mottoes: “Deo et Regi
astro” ( ?asto), and “Seek quiet.”
These arms were granted to Henry Deacon, Sergeant Plummer to Queen
Elizabeth, by Cooke.
The arms borne by Robert Decons or Deacons, of Wasperton, Warwickshire,
in 1619; by Thomas Deacon, of Peterborough (born 1651, died 1721); by
Thomas Deacon, of London, “clothworker” (whose grandfather was “of
Hunnicourt, Somersetshire”), in 1633; and by the Deacons of Wiggen Hall,
Herts, are: Argent, a chevron gules, treille or, between three roses slipped vert.
The crests are: Crane’s head erased with wings expanded, or a demi-eagle.
The Deacons of Beds,* Bucks, Herts, and Warwick bear similar arms, but
with chevron counter-compony gules and or (as below). Crest: A demi-eagle
displayed argent, winged sable.
The arms of the Deacons of London (formerly of Elstow, Beds) are: Argent,
a fesse chequy, or and gules, between three roses of the last. Crest: A griffin’s
head erased, gules, armed and langued or, rose in mouth proper. Motto : “In
God is my trust.”
“This coat of arms exhibits the change from a chevron to a fesse. The
change is a common one when a family definitely changes its location or
founds a new branch. This variation, borne and depicted for 250 years,
distinguishes the London branch from their Bedford ancestors.”
The arms borne by the Decons (or Dicomes)** of Lincolnshire are : Gules, a
chevron ermine between three roses or.
The arms borne by the Dakyns of Yorkshire and Derbyshire, the Deakyns of
Notts, and Deakins of Sheffield, are: Gules, a lion passant guardant between
two mullets in pale, or, all between two flaunches argent, charged with a griffin
(or lion) rampant sable. Crest : Out of a naval crown or, a naked arm embowed
proper, holding a battle-axe; on the wrist a ribbon azure. Motto: “Strike,
Dakyns, strike! The devil’s in the hempe.”
This crest was granted to General Arthur Dakyns, of Linton, Yorkshire, in
1563; it is said to allude to some gallant hacking at the ropes of an
* “During the period of the ‘Wars of the Roses’ the families of Derbyshire and Bedfordshire abandoned the ancient coat of arms which their ancestors had borne, and adopted new and distinctive bearings of their own.” (“Deacon and Allied Families.”)
** Bridge’s “History of Northamptonshire” says, “David Cysilt (Cecil) of Stamford married Jane (or Alice), daughter of John Dicons of Stamford.” John Dicons was chief magistrate of the town in 1476, 1483 and 1493. “David Cecil and Alice Dicons his wife had one son, Richard Cecil, whom they sent to court to advance his fortune, and who in 1520 was one of the pages to Henry VIII. He was the father of the celebrated William Cecil Lord Burleigh, the great statesman of Queen Elizabeth. Lord Burleigh’s son, Robert Cecil, was created Earl of Salisbury. The present Marquis of Salisbury is thus descended from a Decon.” (“Deacon and Allied Families.”)
enemy’s ship. General A. Dakyns had but one son and one daughter; the son
died without issue; his daughter Margaret married Walter Devereux, second
son of Walter, Earl of Essex. These arms and crest were confirmed to
Dakeynes, of Stubbing Edge, Derbyshire, in 1611.
SOME NOTEWORTHY DEACONS
(NOT OF OUR FAMILY) PERHAPS some notice of a few of our name (in addition to those already mentioned) who attained more or less prominence in their time may be of interest* :-
William Dycons, Prior of the Monastery of Maxstocke, Warwick,
surrendered to the King (1536).**
William Dyckyns, Prior of the Monastery of the Black Friars, Northampton,
surrendered the House and all its possessions in England for the King’s use
(1538).**
The Rev. John Deacon published in 1616 a quarto volume, to which he gave
the attractive title: “Tobacco tortured, or the filthie fume of tobacco refined,
shewing all sorts of subjects that the inward taking of tobacco fumes is very
pernicious unto their bodies, too too profluvious for many of their purses, and
most pestiferous to the publike State.”
In 1609 the above Mr. Deacon addressed a public letter to the Justices of the
Peace of the county of Herts upon the questions of the time. He was of Puritan
proclivities, and is called “Preacher at Hertford.”**
A quarto volume in verse by another J. Deacon appeared in 1682, entitled
“The Triumphant Weaver, or the Art of Weaving Discuss’d and Handled.
Printed for J. Deacon at the Rainbow in Holbourn, near St. Andrew’s Church.”
The poem is divided into three cantos. The writer is loud in his praises of the
great antiquity and celebrity of the art, and endeavours to shew that it was the
first and oldest of the Companies of London that were confirmed by charter.
The work is scarce, and a copy sold for £110.**
James Deacon, a miniature painter, and talented as an artist and musician.
Some of his productions are in the print room, British Museum. He died young
in 1750.
Two Deacons who possessed a like spirit with many of our ancestors were
the Rev. Baldwin Deacon, of Wimborne, Dorset, and the Rev. Samuel Deacon,
Rector of Taplow, Bucks, both of whom were ejected from their livings with
nearly 2000 other rectors, “the most learned and the most active of their order,”
on St. Bartholomew’s Day 1662, for non-compliance with the Act of
Uniformity.
In 1648 Captain George Deakins, of the Royal Navy, espoused the
* None of these, as far as is known, were connected with our family.
** Taken from “Deacon and Allied Families”'
cause of the Parliament, and thereafter was one of their most active
commanders. During the nine following years the State Papers are full of
orders and reports concerning the movements of Captain Deakons and his
various ships. His activity rendered him very obnoxious to the Royalists, and
at the Restoration he was ordered to be brought in custody before the Council.
His name is variously spelled, and frequently as Deacons.*
Another Deacon who displayed considerable independence of character was
Dr. Thomas Deacon, a Nonjuring Bishop, who studied medicine and died a
physician at Manchester in 1753. He was residing in London in 1715, when he
was a prime agent in the Jacobite rebellion. In 1745 three of his sons joined
the standard of Charles Edward Stuart, and two of them were executed on
Kennington Common for the part they took. The head of the elder son, Dr.
Thomas Theodore, was sent to Manchester (where the family lived) and
exposed on the Exchange. His father is said to have passed it, and to have
taken off his hat and moved his lips in prayer. Bishop Deacon was a High
Churchman, but some of his views seem peculiar to himself, e.g., he taught that
there were twelve sacraments – ten lesser. He founded a Church (and
compiled a liturgical service for its use), which he styled “The true British
Catholic Church.”
In Peterborough Cathedral is interred, under a handsome monument with
recumbent effigy, a Mr Thomas Deacon, who, being a native of that city and a
“Woolcomber,” might possibly have been connected with our family.**
He was born in 1651 and died in 1721. His monumental inscription tells us that “He
was sometime High Sheriff of this County, a person eminent for his morality
and good life, a true son of the Established Church: his piety consisted not in
empty profession, but in sincerity and unaffected truth. He had an ample
Estate, which he fairly acquired by an honest industry, managed with excellent
prudence, and disposed of to laudable purposes. His charities were very large
and extensive and exemplary, of which he has left a lasting monument in this
City by founding a Charity School, and endowing it with a freehold estate of
above one hundred and sixty pounds per annum, and also by settling another
estate of twenty-five pounds per annum for a constant annual distribution of
alms to poor antient inhabitants of this City.”
A Samuel Deacon, in a humbler rank of life that those above-mentioned,
who resembled in character many of our family, was born at Ratby in
Leicestershire in 1746. About this period a remarkable religious movement
began in Leicestershire, with the village of Barton for its centre, which gave
birth to the new connection of General Baptists, one of the founders of which
was the father of the above Samuel Deacon (also named Samuel), born in 1714
at Normanton, Leicestershire.***
Samuel Deacon, Jun.,
* Taken from “Deacon and Allied Families.”
** All attempts to trace the ancestry of Mr. Thomas Deacon have failed. From his will it appears that he left no children.
*** His father, John Deacon, fought at the Battle of the Boyne in 1690.
settled at Barton in 1771, where he established a considerable business as clock
and watch-maker, and became well known for his mechanical skill. In 1779 he
was invited to assist his father in ministering to the cluster of village
congregations of General Baptists, of which Barton was the centre. He was
popular and useful as a preacher, and continued a minister of this church for
thirty-seven years, receiving no pecuniary remuneration, but himself
contributing liberally to various religious enterprises. In 1785 he published “A
new composition of Hymns and Poems, chiefly on Divine Subjects, designed
for the amusement and edification of Christians of all denominations.” Samuel
Deacon’s style is very homely, and of his numerous hymns but two or three are
now in use. He was also the author of several religious and moral books –
some very popular in their day, and most of them in metre. His writings are
characterized by much shrewdness (not unmixed with humour) and common
sense. Many a couplet of his poems stuck to the mind of the reader without
any effort because of the jingle of its rhyme and its proverb-like wisdom, and
in many a Baptist family became “familiar as a household word.” He died in
1816 at Barton.
Nearer our own time we meet with a literary Deacon of a very different
stamp – William Frederick Deacon (1799 – 1845), journalist and author, the
eldest son of a London merchant. He contributed literary criticisms to the
“Sun” newspaper, and was esteemed as a critic of sound judgement and taste.
He wrote also for “Blackwood,” and published a humorous novel, “The Exile
of Erin.”
ORIGIN OF THE ARCHER FAMILY
It will be seen from TABLE A. that all the Deacons whose names are recorded in
the genealogical sheets attached to this little volume are descended from
William Deacon (of Cranford, Northants) and Elizabeth Archer, whom he
married in 1728; and also that Ann Archer, the great-niece of Elizabeth Archer,
became the wife of the third William Deacon, her second-cousin. Our family
being thus so closely connected with “Archers,” the following notes on the
origin of the Archers of Warwickshire* may prove of interest:-
In “The Battle Abbey Roll, with some account of the Norman Lineages,” by
the Duchess of Cleveland, we find: “Archere, ‘Willelmus Arcarius,’ held a
barony in the hundred of Sunburne, Hampshire. (Domesday.) This family took
its name from the office it held under the Dukes of Normandy before the
Conquest. Its derivation is rather uncertain,
* It is not implied that our ancestors were a branch of this family; there is no proof of such connection.
but a family of L’Archer, still flourishing in Brittany, bears the same three
arrows differenced in tincture. The latter claim as their ancestor Fulbert
l’Archer, the father of Robert, to whom the Conqueror entrusted the charge of
his son, afterwards Henry I. But Robert the tutor was the son of William and
not of Fulbert, who is neither found in Domesday nor in any list now extant of
the Conqueror’s companions. According to the habit of those times Robert
only took the name of Archer after his father’s death, and was the undoubted
progenitor of the Barons Archer. On his accession to the throne Henry I.
proved his gratitude to his former tutor by considerable grants of land; and
Robert l’Archer added to these by marrying an heiress. His wife Sebit, the
daughter of Henry de Villiers, sewer to the Earl of Warwick, brought him
Umberslade in Warwickshire, which he transmitted to nineteen generations in
the male line. It was a regular and monotonous succession, unbroken by
forfeiture of attainder, and unmarked by any violent transitions of fortune.
Thomas Archer served under John of Gaunt in the French wars, and was taken
prisoner in 1373. His successor again was summoned in 1419, as ‘one that did
bear ancient arms from his ancestors,’ to serve the King in person for the
defence of the realm. Sir Simon Archer, Sheriff of Warwickshire in 1627, a
man of letters, well versed in antiquarian lore, aided Sir W. Dugdale in
compiling the history of the county. Thomas, his son, was a colonel in the
service of the Parliament, and raised a troop of horse at his own expense, but,
on discovering the ulterior designs of his leaders, threw up his commission and
left England, remaining abroad till the Restoration. His grandson was created
Lord Archer of Umberslade in 1747; but this title expired in 1778 with
Andrew, second Lord, who left three daughters:- (1) Sarah, first Countess of
Plymouth, and then Countess Amherst; (2) Elizabeth, married to Christopher Musgrave; and (3) Maria, married to Henry Howard, of Corby. All except
Maria left children.”
The arms of the Archers of Warwickshire are: Azure, three arrows, two and
one, points downwards, or. Crest: Out of a mural coronet gules a dragon’s head
argent. Supporters: Two wiverns. Motto: “Sola Bona quae honesta.”*
The Cornish Archers (one of whom represented Helston in Parliament temp.
Henry VI.) bear totally different arms. In the sixth year of Henry III. the
lordship of Sibertoft in Northamptonshire was in possession of William le
Archer, who appears to have been succeeded by Robert le Archer. In a
“History of Northamptonshire” two clerical Archers are named – Thomas
Archer, Incumbent of Farningho in 1364, and Henry Archer, Incumbent of
Thorp-Mandeville in 1503.
* A watch belonging to a son of the second Samuel Archer (born 1762) had the Archer arms – three arrows – engraved upon it, but whether our Archer relatives were entitled to bear these arms I cannot say.
THE GROVERS AND OSBORNS
The remotest ancestors of Ann Deacon ( née Archer), wife of the third William Deacon, given in her family record are John Osborn and Robert Grover, born
about 1634. Of the first John Osborn* we know nothing (except that he lived
at Alton, Hants), but it is recorded that the Osborns were Independents. This
statement of their religious views is noteworthy as throwing light upon
character, for what was the signification of being an Independent during the
years 1662 to 1688? It was this – one who was prepared to make any sacrifice
for what he believed to be the truth, for any one who attended a Dissenting
meeting, if he were convicted three times, was liable to transportation for seven
years. If a few Dissenters met quietly in a private house, even to pray for a
dying person, it would be called a “conventicle,” and they were heavily fined
or imprisoned if discovered; consequently, as Macaulay tells us, “precautions
were taken such as are employed by coiners and receivers of stolen goods. The
places of meeting were frequently changed. Worship was performed
sometimes just before break of day and sometimes at dead of night. Round the
building where the little flock was gathered sentinels were posted to give the
alarm if a stranger drew near. The minister in disguise was introduced through
the garden or backyard.” At the present day a religious service is too often an
aesthetic enjoyment; then, it was (to the “Separatists”) an act of the noblest
heroism! Carlyle well says: “Here of our land and lineage in practical English
shape were Heroes on the earth once more; who knew in every fibre and with
heroic daring laid to heart that an Almighty Justice does verily rule this world:
that it is good to fight on God’s side and bad to fight on the Devil’s side! – the
essence of all Heroism and Veracities that have been or that will be!”
During the boyhood of John Osborn and Robert Grover the Civil War was
raging. One Parliamentarian success must doubtless have made a strong
impression upon their young minds. Not ten miles from Aton and Holyborne
was the Royalist stronghold of Basing House, the residence of the Marquis of
Winchester, which, after standing several sieges during four years, was
stormed and taken by Cromwell on October 14th, 1645.
* John Osborn married a Miss Hubbard, who lived apparently at Alton or Binstead, as the marriage was celebrated at one of these places. She was the great-great-grandmother (on her mother’s side) of Ann Archer, wife of the third William Deacon. It is somewhat singular that Ann Archer’s great-grandmother on her father’s side was also a Hubbard of Binstead, probably a relative of John Osborn’s wife. One of the Hubbards married into a family named Trimmer. We hear of Samuel Archer visiting his cousins the Trimmers, who were farmers, and whose labourers ate their dinner from holes cut in the table instead of plates. This family was not connected with that of Mrs. Trimmer the authoress, of the last century, but was probably a branch of the families of Trimmer now living at Farnham and Alton.
From a MS. relating to the Osborn and Grover families I extract the
following:-
“Robert Grover (born about 1634) lived at Holyborne, Hants, and was by
trade a whitesmith. He was an ingenious man, and made a clock, which at that
time was thought much of.*
He realized some property, part of which he
invested in land, which was worth about £800 when sold by his great-granddaughter Mary Archer about 1760. It is supposed that she sold other
small properties inherited from him. R. Grover’s wife’s family were thought to
have been people of property. Ann Grover (his only child), who married John Osborn, a leather-jerkin maker, inherited her father’s property, and had also a
considerable property left her by Jeremiah Leggatt,** of Ripley, Surrey, a
miller, who died in 1722. It consisted of the ‘White Horse Inn,’ Ripley, and an
estate and farm at Crawley called Wickhurst, also some houses. Jeremiah, the
only son of John and Ann Osborn, died when 21 years of age. Their daughter
Sarah married John Dodd (born at Basingstoke in 1715), and died without issue
in 1749, aged 26. John Dodd completely governed his father-in-law Osborn,
having the management of his affairs. At his death, which took place April
25th,1750, Osborn willed to Dodd (supposed in trust) the Crawley estate, but
did not mention the Ripley property, leaving a strict charge that Dodd would
take care of his grandchildren. John Dodd died July 15th, 1754 (aged 38),
without issue, and was buried, as was J. Osborn, at Chapel Litton, Basingstoke.
It was related by Mary Burnham (Mrs. Samuel Archer) that when he was near
his end Dodd called her and her sister Anne to his bedside, telling them that he
could not die in peace without their forgiveness, as he had basely wronged
them. Mary Archer recovered but a very small portion of Leggatt’s property,
which consisted of a small farm near Farnham or Alton, the title-deeds of
which her husband obtained, and established her title to it. This she afterwards
sold. About 1783 she was applied to by Alderman Sainsbury, of London, to
make good a title for some friend of his to property in Hants or Surrey. This
she refused to do, and was advised to claim it as her own, but would not for
fear of litigation, to which she had a great abhorrence.”
The complete list of the children of John Osborn and his wife Ann (née
Grover) is as follows:-
Jeremiah Osborn, died (unmarried), aged 21.
Ann Osborn “ “ “ 23.
Susanna Osborn “ “ “ 22.
Mary Osborn, mar. 1735 G. Burnham, died “ 25.
Sarah Osborn, mar. John Dodd “ 26.
* The pendulum is said to have been first applied to clocks by Richard Harris, who erected a clock at St. Paul’s, Covent Garden, in 1641. Probably it was one of the “new” pendulum clocks that Robert Grover made.
** Some families of Leggatt are known to be of Huguenot descent, the name being a corruption of Le Geyt, but whether Robert Grover's wife was of foreign extraction is uncertain.
The early deaths of the members of this family, one would conjecture, were
probably due to consumption, which at that period was far more prevalent that
at the present day, but there is no note upon this mortality in the family
records. The father, John Osborn, lived to the age of 75.
THE BURNHAMS
THE marriage of Mary Osborn with George Burnham leads us next to the
Burnham family. All that is known of Mary Burnham’s husband is that he was
a dyer of Basingstoke, son of George Burnham and Elizabeth née Reeves, of
Guildford, and nephew of Richard Burnham (a Baptist minister), the author of
“Pious Memorials,” a book well known in the evangelical world towards the
end of the last century. George Burnham died at the age of 30, only surviving
his young wife three years.
The following account of the Rev. Richard Burnham is taken from a
Memoir of him by the Rev. James Hervey (1714-), Rector of Weston Favel, inserted in
“Pious Memorials,” which was not published until the year after his death:-
“Richard Burnham was born at Guildford in Surrey, in the year 1711, of
pious parents, who trained him up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
He had also the benefit of an early conversion to God. That he was really
influenced by religion the whole of his conversation seemed fully to evidence,
for he was ‘an Israelite indeed, in whom was no guile.’ He was of an agreeable
temper, which rendered him very useful to others, easy of access, and
communicative of all that assistance, both to body and soul, which it was
possible for him to be any way the instrument of. Touched with a tender
sympathy of the sorrows of others, he would endeavour to alleviate their griefs
and comfort their minds, and both in younger and elder life he was imitating
his divine Saviour in going about doing good. But none had so large a share in
his tender care and affection as his afflicted consort, whose long continued
languors of nature he endeavoured to alleviate by the kindest sympathy. After
several years of experience in the Christian life he applied himself to the
service of the sanctuary. His motives to take upon himself such an important
employ were in no respects mean and selfish, but just and good. He was no
negligent inquirer into the frame of his heart and the springs of action there,
and if he had found any motive or end that had not been strictly upright, the
integrity of his mind was such he would not have dared to pursue it. He had an
increasing thirst after knowledge, and was diligent in his application to obtain
it. After he was actually engaged in the work of the ministry, he took such
pleasure in good books, and in the conversation of thejudicious and pious, that they fully occupied all his leisure time. During the
eight years he had the charge of that small but affectionate flock among whom
he died, they knew how much he watched for their souls as one that must give
an account; how ardently he longed to see the divine life begun and the divine
likeness improved in their souls. They know how he preached not himself but
Christ Jesus the Lord, and himself as their servant for Jesus’ sake. But his time
and his usefulness were soon to have an end. He was seized with a severe
indisposition, which brought on a violent fever that in about nine or ten days
ended his life on June 24th, 1752. But death did not appear to him as an
enemy, but as a friend. He was enabled to take a delightful prospect of the
glorious employments and enjoyments of the upper and infinitely better world.
‘There,’ said he, ‘we shall see God!’ And then went on to describe the
company that would compose the heavenly society – the fathers, prophets, and
apostles, and our Christian friends and relatives. ‘Since death,’ says he, ‘is the
ony way to be admitted into their society and enjoyments, why not now?’ His
dear companion, in a flood of tears, asked him how she should bear to part
with him – at which he was much affected, and said (taking her by the hand),
‘My dear, don’t let us part in a shower. It will be but a little while, and we
shall meet never to be parted more.’ Upon being told that some Christian
friends were met to pray for him, he said he was much obliged to them, but
‘pray go down and desire them not to pray for my life, for I have been making
an estimate of what would be for our truest interest, and have twenty
arguments to one against it.’ She answered: ‘How can I do that?’ He said:
‘However, let them not be importunate for it, but pray with submission to the
Divine will, whether for life of death.’ He would often repeat some of Dr.
Watts’ hymns. The following stanza he recited with peculiar relish:-
Long nights of darkness dwell below,
With scarce a glimmering ray;
But the bright world to which we go
Is everlasting day.
The last words he was heard to utter were: ‘Be faithful to God. Be faithful all
of you.’ ”
During my researches I chanced accidentally to light upon a short sketch of
the life of a Mr. Richard Burnham, pastor of a Baptist Church meeting in
Grafton Street, Soho, who died in 1810. His parentage is not given, but it
would seem extremely probable that he was the son of the Richard Burnham
just referred to. He is spoken of as “in behaviour singularly humble, engaging,
and affectionate;” and, “few of the ministers of Jesus, if any, have been more
gratified in witnessing the success of their labours, for he actually baptized
2500 persons and upwards.” From another source I discovered that this R.
Burhham composed numerous hymns, and was one of the best amateur
violinists of his day. Our familypapers record that “the Burnhams were Baptists.” Dr. Watts was an intimate
friend of the family, and a portrait in oils of a Mrs. Burnham,* now in our
possession, is said to have been painted at his request. Another old portrait
hanging on our walls is that of Mary Burnham (née Osborn).
THE ARCHERS
THE Christian name of the first Archer recorded in our old family papers seems
a little uncertain, it being sometimes given as Samuel, sometimes as Charles;
but in the most reliable of the old family records he is named Charles. Charles Archer and his sister Elizabeth were both born at Brackley, Northants.
Elizabeth became the wife of the first William Deacon, and after his death
married Mr. Jonathan Miles. Charles Archer married Elizabeth (”Betty”)
Smallpeice, of Alton (or Guildford), of whom it is recorded that she left her
home at Alton and went to Laleham, where she made the acquaintance of
Charles Archer, who became her husband. On an old torn fragment of paper,
apparently giving some account of her, we find, “And she it was who burnt the
cards,” from which we may infer that she was a decided opponent of card-playing! Of Charles Archer’s character or occupation I find no mention.
Eight children were born to Charles (or Samuel) Archer and his wife
Elizabeth, of whom one only, Samuel, is recorded to have married. The names
of these eight children (one of whom was Silence) are given in a family
pedigree drawn up by Mary Archer (née Burnham). The dates of births and
deaths are not stated, but against five names she has written “died,” doubtless
signifying that their lives were short.
Samuel Archer, son of the above, was born at Laleham, Middlesex, in 1730.
On January 1st, 1759, he married Mary Burnham at Christ Church, Surrey. He
was apprenticed to a gold-lace maker in Covent Garden, and later on we find
him described as a diamond-cutter at St. Albans. He subsequently invented
and obtained a patent for imitation oriental pearls (made partly from the scales
of dace), by the manufacture of which he realized considerable wealth.** He
was also noted for his imitation gems
* Believed to be the mother (née Reeves) of George Burnham who married Mary Osborn. A quaint silver spoon which belonged to Elizabeth Reeves has descended to our family; it has the following inscriptions upon the handle:- “E.*R. | E. REEVES | born about | 1683 | G. BURNHAM | 1708 | M.
BURNHAM | 1738 | S. ARCHER | 1762.”
** Samual Archer built Pearl Row and Temple Place in Southwark.
and coral. In a black-letter Bible of 1551,* which has come to us from the Archers, is the following entry:- “Samuel Archer, the son of Samuel and Mary Archer, was born Nov. 27th, 1762, in Long Acre, London, and baptized by Mr. Griffiths, who then preached to a congregation of dissenters in White’s Alley, Moorfields.” From this we gather, firstly , that Samuel Archer was living in
London (probably from the time of his marriage in 1759) when his son was
born, and secondly, that the Archers were Dissenters before he became a
member of the Sandemanian community in 1770.** It is somewhat curious that
this old Bible should contain no other entry of births or deaths. It has, in very
elaborate old English writing, this inscription: “ Thos. ffretwell gave this Bible
to Thos. Pilgrim,” but whether these two individuals were related to the
Archers is not known.
Samuel Archer was a man of the highest integrity. He was noted for the
precautions he took to prevent any fraud in the disposal of the “imitation
pearls” by jewellers, for even experienced dealers could mistake them for
genuine pearls. He once shewed a pearl of extraordinary size and beauty to a
merchant in precious stones, who gazed at it and exclaimed: “Find me its
fellow and I will give your £500 for the pair.” Samuel Archer pulled its exact
match out of his pocket, but explained the true nature of both to the merchant.
Queen Charlotte bought a set of the “imitation pearls,” And many ladies of
rank were glad to wear Archer’s pearls in crowded assemblies to avoid risk to
their genuine parures. Samuel Archer was characterized as much by
generosity as by integrity; he never pressed his tenants for rent if he knew them
to be in straitened circumstances. His end was a sad one – he was burnt to
death at his fire-side in Kirby Street, Hatton Garden, in 1814, at the age of 84.
He and his wife were both buried at St. Andrew’s, Holborn.
Samuel and Mary Archer had ten children, three only of whom – Samuel,
George, and Ann – reached maturity. George died unmarried in 1817 at the
age of 48; Ann became the wife of the third William Deacon; the remaining
seven children died in infancy. Against the record of the death of her two
eldest children Mary Archer has written: “Died both in one night of putrid
fever. Lovely and pleasant in their lives, and in death they are not divided.
Buried in Bunhill Fields.” Two other infant children died in the same month of
another year.
* “Matthews Bible,” first published in 1537. The greater part is identical with Tyndale’s Bible. Another interesting old Bible in our possession, published in 1589 (with Church Service attached), is, I believe, a Deacon heritage. It is the Geneva of “Breeches” Bible, so called from its rendering of Gen.iii.7. It contains “Most profitable annotations upon all the hard places, and other things of great importance,” e.g., “A catechism on Predestination and the Sacraments.” This Bible was the most popular that had appeared, but the whole tone of its politics and theology (strongly Calvinistic) was very distasteful to James I. Referring to the marginal note on Exodus i. 17, “Their disobedience (to the King) was lawful though their dissembling was evil,” James declared, “Such traitorous conceits should not go forth among the people.” He accordingly ordered the Authorized Version to be prepared,
directing that no notes should be annexed to it.
** The first Sandemanian community in London met about 1762 in Bull and Mouth Street. St, Martin’s-le-Grand.
THE SECOND SAMUEL ARCHER AND HIS FAMILY
SAMUEL ARCHER, son of Samuel and Mary Archer (née Burnham), was born in
London in 1762, and died in 1836.* He was, to quote from an old paper, “A
highly respectable watch manufacturer, one of the Founders, and Treasurer
during his lifetime, of the Watch and Clockmakers’ Benevolent Institution.”
Samuel Archer, like his father, was a member of the Sandemanian Church. He
married Maria Jackson, and left five children, three daughters and two sons.
The daughters were cultivated women, possessing strongly marked
characteristics; two of them** married, but both were childless. The younger
son Samuel was extremely delicate, and died unmarried. The elder son
Thomas Archer became a successful actor and dramatist. After touring in the
provinces he came to Drury Lane in 1823, where he frequently acted with
Macready, and was considered one of the best delineators of what is usually
known as the ‘heavy business’ in London. His personation of Henry IV.,
Gesler, Appius Claudius, etc., was considered unsurpassable in his day. In
1826 he visited America, and was at one period, in conjunction with Walker of
the Princess’s, the manager of four theatres at one time in the United States.
On his return he played at several theatres in Paris with success. Afterwards he
took a company to Germany, and played with éclat in some of Shakespere’s
plays at Brussels, Antwerp, Cologne, Frankfurt, Hamburg, etc. He was again a
member of the Drury Lane Company in 1839. Thomas Archer also devoted
himself to dramatic writing, and in the short space of five years produced
nearly fifty successful dramas, many adaptations from the French; but he also
wrote more than one original play, amongst which “Blood Royal, or the Crown
Jewels.” stands predominant, and was acknowledged to be one of the best
dramas of the day. He died in 1848.
OUR DEACON ANCESTORS
THE FIRST WILLIAM DEACON
THE first Deacon ancestor of whom we have any knowledge was William Deacon, who was believed to have been born at Brackley,** Northamptonshire,
between the years of 1680 – 90. He married in 1728, as St. Andrew’s Church,
* He was buried in the Charterhouse.
** Mary Archer married – Long; died 1868. Ann Archer (born 1800) married, 1828, Joseph Cottingham; died 1877.
*** Brachelai in Domesday Book, Brackele in early records. The name is evidently derived from brake, and ley, a field, fern having originally abounded there.
**** St. Andrew’s Church, Cranford, is built in the late Norman style, and has an embattled tower at the west end. The profits of the Rectory in 1254 were rated at twelve marks. Its register dates from 1695.
Cranford, Northamptonshire, Elizabeth Archer, also a native of Brackley, and
apparently the sister of Charles Archer, whose granddaughter Ann Archer
married the third William Deacon in 1788. In the village of Cranford William Deacon carried on until his death in 1739 the manufacture of woollen stuffs.
He is said to have invented some weaving machinery, which was broken up by
the populace, as they said “it took the bread out of poor men’s mouths.”
William Deacon appears to have been a Churchman, as the baptism of his two sons is registered in St. Andrew’s, Cranford. It is not known whether he had
any brothers or sisters, but he perhaps had some relatives in Cranford engaged
in the same business, as the oldest inhabitant of Cranford now (December
1896) living remembers Deacons connected with the woollen trade early in the
present century, who, she says, ultimately removed from Cranford to Leicester.
William Deacon’s widow probably remained at Cranford for seven years after her husband’s death, as it is recorded that her eldest son William, who was nine years old when his father died, removed to Kettering (about five miles from
Cranford) in 1746, when sixteen years of age. She ultimately married Mr.
Jonathan Miles, father of Sir Jonathan Miles, of Asylum, Hoxton, who was
Sheriff of London in 1806. William Deacon’s younger son Daniel went abroad in 1757 and was never more heard of.
Possibly our ancestors may have been for many centuries engaged in the
woollen trade, for we find that, “ In the time of Edward II. Brackley was made
a staple town for the wool trade, and had the honour of a mayor conferred on it
in the seventh year of the same reign. It was a place of considerable
commercial importance as a staple for wool in the fourteenth century. When
the principal towns were summoned in 1337 to depute three or four of their
citizens to attend a royal council at Westminster on matters connected with
trade, a writ was issued to the bailiff of Brakkele, who delegated three of its
citizens. Its prosperity, however, had vanished long prior to the time of
Elizabeth, as is evident from Leland, who says: ‘Brackley was a staple for
Wolle privileged with a Major (mayor), the which honour yet remaineth to this
pore Towne. By estimation of old ruines Brakkele hath had many stretes in it
and that large. There were goodly crosses of stone in the towne, one very
antique and costly in the inward part of the High Strete.’ This cross was about
28 feet in height, with an octagonal pillar in the midst having images on each
side of it. It was taken down about 1706 to make room for the Town Hall. By
the census of 1801 Brackley contained 1495 inhabitants.” Tournaments were
held on Bayard’s Green, Brackley; one is recorded there in 1267.
THE SECOND WILLIAM DEACON
OF the second William Deacon, born at Cranford in 1729, we possess a fairly
full record. In a loose cover, which had apparently belonged to an old Bible,
are the following notes:- “William Deacon’s Book, 1798” (in the handwriting
of the second W. Deacon), beneath which his son, the third William Deacon,
has written: “The above was born at Cranford near Kettering, 1729, where he
lived sixteen years, then resided at Kettering* upwards of fifty years, and then
retired from business. Removing thence, he lived at Trowbridge in Wiltshire
until Oct. 29th, 1810, when he died, aged 80 years. He was a man of gentle
manners, of a generous turn of mind, convivial in company, but never
intrenched upon the rules of morality and good behaviour. He was for forty
years successfully engaged in the manufacture of stuffs, during which time,
although his concerns were upon a large scale, he never lost £10 by any one!
He never had but one day of confinement or illness during eighty years! At
last he gradually lost his strength, and on the 28th day of October could not
walk up to bed without help; he died the next morning!
“He married Hannah Benford, daughter of Thomas Benford,**
of Kettering, January 1st, 1754; both lived together near fifty-five years, leaving behind them six sons and one daughter, also thirty-eight grand-children. Hannah, wife of
the above William Deacon, was born at Pipwell Abbey*** in Northamptonshire,
1734; died at Trowbridge March 10th, 1811, aged 76, surviving her husband
only nineteen weeks. A good wife and a good mother.”
Hannah Deacon appears to have been an excellent and sensible woman, and
was much revered by her sons.
William Deacon seems to have removed with his sons Thomas and Benford
to Trowbridge about the year 1800, to which place the business was
transferred, probably when the old man retired from it. The reason I have
heard assigned for this removal was that the teasels, used by woollen
manufacturers to raise the superfluous nap, were more abundant or of a finer
quality in Wiltshire than in Northants, but it is more probable that motives of a
religious nature brought about this change of abode. In
* Kettering was a small town on elevated ground of no special interest, having in 1801 641 houses and 3010 inhabitants.
** Born 1708; died 1791 from the bite of a dog.
*** In a document dated 1291, termed “Abbé de Pippewell.” In “Beauties of England and Wales,” published in 1810, is the following:- “Pipewell Abbey is stated to have been founded by William Butevileyn for Monks of the Cistercian Order, in the parish of Great Oakley. It was very amply endowed. Near the woods of East and West Grange foundations of old buildings point out the site of the monastery, but no other vestiges now remain.” Probably East and West Grange were farmhouses on the Abbey lands, in one of which Hannah Benford may have been born.
1782 there came to Kettering a Baptist minister named Andrew Fuller , a young
man who soon became famous in the religious world as an able controversialist
and eloquent preacher, and William Deacon became a member of his
congregation. Fuller had, to use an expression of his own, “a large portion of
‘being’ ” in him. He possessed great originality of character and vigour of
mind, in addition to zeal and energy. * In the latter part of the eighteenth
century the writings of John Glas and Robert Sandeman (especially the letters
of the latter in reply to the Rev. James Hervey’s** “Theron and Aspasio”)
attracted considerable attention in the Dissenting communities of England, and,
as it is stated that Fuller received many letters on this subject, his congregation
were doubtless acquainted with Sandeman's views.*** Into these Fuller
thoroughly inquired, and ultimately published “Strictures on Sandemandanism;” but before the publication of this work some of William Deacon’s sons (and he himself, I believe, in some measure) became disciples of Sandeman. The family therefore found themselves no longer in accord with Fuller, and Trowbridge having the attraction of a Sandemanian place of worship in addition to business facilities, they decided to remove there.
Mr. Thomas Deacon (grandson of the second William Deacon), in a letter to
his brother Samuel, from Bath, dated Feb. 7th, 1844, says:- “I was at
Trowbridge to-day and visited the resting-place of the Head of our large
family, Grandfather and Grandmother Deacon, who lie here in the old
churchyard; the tombstone dates 1810 for him and 1811 for her.” And his son
Thomas, who accompanied his father to Trowbridge, records:- “We visited a
family intermarried, I think, with our family (the Parfitts), who still occupied
the Cloth Mill and nice old house of our ancestors; some of them came now
and then to London and to the Meeting.”
* An important event in the history of missions occurred at Kettering whilst the Deacon family resided there. A sermon preached by Andrew Fuller in 1791 led to the formation of the Baptist Missionary Society by Fuller and eleven other ministers in 1792. At the same time the first subscription was gathered in, which in all amounted to £13 2s.6d.; however, by the end of the following March the fund had reached £800, and William Carey, a shoemaker, who had a special talent for the acquisition of languages, was appointed their first missionary. He laboured for forty years in India, during which he chiefly devoted himself to the translation of the Bible into Eastern languages. At his death there were in connection with the mission of which he was the founder about thirty missionaries, forty native preachers, and forty-five stations in India. The little seed sown by the Baptists of Kettering bore indeed much fruit, for Carey's work roused general interest in the condition of the heathen, and so led to the formation of other missionary societies. In 1794 the London Missionary Society was established, which has missions in various parts of the world; the Scottish Missionary Society came next in 1796, and in 1799 the Church Missionary Society came into existence.
** Hervey was born in 1714 at Weston Favell, Northamptonshire, and became Rector of that place. The house in which he was born was in 1849 occupied by a Mrs. Anne Deacon.
*** A copy of John Glas' “Testimony of the King of Martyrs” has on the title-page “W. Deacon, Junr, 1778” (the eldest son of the second W. Deacon, who was then 21 years of age).
The following letters and verses of William Deacon will shew what manner
of man he was :-
Kettering, 28 December, 1793
DEAR SON, *
Yours of the 24th is before me and note the contents; have nothing very
particular to communicate. You are heartily welcome to the small favours you have
received, and I hope it will always when in our power give us pleasure to add to them.
There is a greater pleasure in giving than in receiving at certain times and to certain
persons, so that the giver upon the whole has the advantage. We have had a little of
Mr. King’s company; your sister engross’d the greater part, and I believe to their
mutual satisfaction. I make no doubt but if good Providence spares them in a short
time they will be happily united, and I dare say they have all our hearty wishes that
their happiness may be lasting and of the best kind. It would give me great pleasure
to see you all happily settled before I leave this world of bustle and confusion, but
that I must leave to Him who sits at the helm. I understand John and you sleep
together; beg you will keep good hours and remember the first part of the night for
rest is the most refreshing, as well as often prevents the bad effects of late hours;
remember the Apostle’s caution – Be sober, be vigilant; your adversary goes about
like a roaring lion, and sometimes in a more deceitful way, so that it behoves us
always to be on our guard, and pray, that we may not enter into Temptation. You’ll
make our love to your Brothers, etc.; as they have heard from us so lately did not
trouble them with a line, but remain
Yours and theirs affectionately,
WILLM. DEACON.
PS.- I could wish you to take a little pains to write plainer; you huddle your letters
together so near, or sometimes don’t make any plain, that it is with difficulty that we
can make out your meaning; and you have a very foolish practice, which is making
your small e’s at the end of words as long, or nearly, as any of the Letters with s tails.
I hope you will try to mend it.
_____________
Bath, 19 September, 1796.
DEAR SONS AND DAUGHTERS,
Expect you have heard your Mother and I are at Bath, and I doubt not but you
will be happy to hear we are both as well as can be expected; your Mother looks
better, and is better, and hope she will be relieved from her complaint before we leave
this place. She drinks the water twice a day and has bathed once, and both agree very
well with her. We are situated very near the Bath and quite as well as could expect,
and the people under whom we live are very friendly – will shew or tell us anything
we want – and it’s a comfort we can almost have everything we want. The waters are
great friends to Butchers and Bakers and pay no regard to who’s to find money;
however, it is a great Blessing there is such water, for health is far better than money;
if I had as much money as I could carry, think I should leave a good deal of it here. It
is a delightful place to live in – the situation is so good, besides it would ease me
soon of my burden! The worst I dislike in it is there is not a place I can hear to my
mind,
* Daniel, who was then in London, apparently with Mr. Samuel Archer.
at least have not found one. I went to the Abbey Church and heard an able
young man preach for half an hour, proving in a masterly manner the
immortality of the soul, but not one word of Christ. I heard another man talk
much of Christ, but he made a poor piece of work of it that of the two I liked
the young man best, so that I should not like to live here for the above reason.
As Thomas can give you a fuller account how we are by the mouth than I can
by pen, shall conclude my letter with desiring to make our love to all your
brothers and sisters when you see them, and respects to all enquiring friends.
You must consider this letter as general one to you all, hoping it will find you
all well and that we shall hear from you soon.
Yours affectionately,
WILLM. DEACON.
ON THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST.
Of all the truths the Christians hear,
None more their guilty souls doth cheer
Than Jesus risen from the grave;
It sounds like Freedom to the Slave.
Jesus, He no corruption saw,
Or death had held them by the Law,
And bound them down, in endless pain;
But since He rose, in life they reign.
O blessed truth, may sinners say
‘Tis only this that brings the day,
Dispels the darkness of the night
And ushers in Eternal light.
Take this away, our Faith is slain;
And preaching too is also vain,
Yea, all our hopes for ever fled,
If Jesus lies among the dead.
But Christ is raised, therefore let’s sing
Eternal praises to our King,
Who burst the bands of death, and rose
Triumphant over all our foes.
W. DEACON.
What a singularly fortunate lot was that of the second W. Deacon! We can
picture him in the quiet little town of Kettering, happy in his domestic life,
untroubled with the losses which so frequently harass business men of the
present day, free from the ailments which beset so many in this strenuous age,
undisturbed by the perplexing problems of a later century, and blessed with the
peace which a good conscience, a firm trust in the mercy of God, and a hope
full of immortality can impart!
As very few of the present generation of Deacons have any knowledge of
the Sandemanian tenets, perhaps some account of the community may be of
interest. The sect originated in Scotland about the year 1728. Its founder, Mr. John Glas a minister of the Established Church of Scotland,
being charged with sapping the foundation of all national establishments by
maintaining that the Kingdom of Christ is not of this world, was expelled from
the Church of Scotland. His adherents then formed themselves into churches,
conformable as they believed in every respect to the first churches recorded in
the New Testament. Soon after 1755 Mr. Robert Sandeman, an Elder in one of
the Glasite churches in Scotland, published a series of letters on the Rev. J. Hervey’s “Theron and Aspasio,” in which he attempts to prove that faith is
neither more nor less than a simple assent to the divine testimony concerning
Jesus Christ as delivered for the offences of men and raised again for their
justification, whereas (Sandeman maintained) Mr. Hervey’s teaching would
lead men to regard their faith as a meritorious act, upon which to establish their
own righteousness. This occasioned much controversy, and those who adopted
Mr. Sandeman’s views formed themselves into churches in fellowship with the
Glasite churches in Scotland.
The Sandemanian church in London was formed about 1762, and met in
Bull and Mouth Street in St. Martin’s-le-Grand, from whence they removed, in
1785, to a more commodious building in Paul’s Alley, Redcross Street.
Attached to the chapel were a kitchen, waiting and dining rooms, in one of
which the members dined together in the interval between morning and
afternoon service,* and in the other dinner was served for the non-members
who wished to remain. ** The juvenile part of the community, who were left to
their own devices until their elders had dined, amused themselves in the
interval as best they could. It is perhaps hardly necessary to say that at the
close of morning service hand-shaking and conversation became general, the
interval affording opportunity for pleasant intercourse. The afternoon service
always concluded with the observance of the Lord’s Supper, at which the only
hymn ever used in their worship was sung. In lieu of hymns an unrhymed
metrical version of the Psalms was sung, started by a tuning-fork. The Elders
(usually three in number) occupied a long seat, somewhat like a very elevated
pew, and beneath them at a lower elevation, sat the deacons of the Church.
The Sandemanians use the “kiss of charity” at the admission of a new member,
and at other times when they deem it proper, and observe the command to
“abstain from blood and from things strangled.” But the distinguishing
features of Sandemanianism are the brotherliness and unity of the community.
The first is illustrated by their professing to hold community of goods, i.e.,
every member is to consider all that he has in his possession liable to the calls
of the poor and the Church. The unity of the Church is maintained by a severe
discipline, those who persistently differ from the majority in any question
brought before it being “put away.” Life insurance and
* Regarded as a “love feast.”
** Since 1862 the Sandemanians have met for worship in a building in Barnsbury Grove, erected by themselves.
the putting by of money for any future need are forbidden, as coming under the
condemnation of “laying up treasures upon earth.” Sandemanianism was a
practical protest against the formality, worldliness, and coldness prevailing so
largely in the churches of Christ, and it naturally had an attraction for men
who, like our ancestors, were of an unwordly and generous spirit. One great
characteristic of the Sandemanians is the freedom from anything like “cant;”
their manners are natural and cheerful; their sermons make no appeal to the
emotions or imagination; they hold liberal views with regard to amusements,
but disapprove of lotteries, cards, dice, etc. In the choice of Elders intellectual
gifts are not taken into consideration; some of the Elders, however, have been
men of culture, noticeably Michael Faraday, the eminent electrician, who, in
1840, was elected an Elder and preached on alternate Sundays to his fellow
members. “It was to many a wonderful thing to see the brilliant lecturer appear
as the earnest and simple preacher of the Gospel in an obscure corner of the
Metropolis, but Faraday neither wondered nor wished it otherwise. Quiet,
devout, scrupulously reverent to Scripture words, which he used almost to the
exclusion of his own, he gave one other illustrious example of how the savant
may be at heart a child, and a prince in the kingdom of science a humble
follower of the Lord Jesus.” *Faraday’s scientific achievements are matter of
common knowledge, but the beauty of his character was only fully known to
those, who like my father, had the privilege of his friendship. He was very
fond of young people, and we as children had many a romp with him. His
simplicity, gentleness, and courtesy gave a special charm to his character.
Professor Tyndal truly said of Faraday: “Not half his greatness was incorporate
in his science, for science could not reveal the bravery and delicacy of his
heart.”
THE CHILDREN OF THE SECOND WILLIAM DEACON
TWELVE children were born to William and Hannah Deacon at Kettering, seven
only of whom reached maturity. Their first-born child Elizabeth, born 1755,
lived to the age of 15; in 1756 a boy was born, who lived but one day, and in
1757 their son William** was born. He was followed in 1759 by a girl named Hannah, who lived only fifteen months, and, rather curiously, the next child
born in 1761 (also named Hannah) died in infancy, so the mother’s name was
not perpetuated. These baby girls were followed by a son Thomas, who
carried on the manufacture of cloth at Trowbridge for some years, but
ultimately removed to London, where he
* From a short memoir of Michael Faraday by George Wilson, M.A., F.L.S.
** See p. 28.
died. Severe simplicity of living was the rule in his household, e.g., his
daughters were limited to the simplest and cheapest materials of dress. On one
occasion, when his family were about to sit down to dinner, a beggar with
children came to the door with a piteous tale, whereupon Thomas Deacon took
up the leg of mutton from the table and presented it to the beggar, telling his
children they could dine off bread and cheese. * Thomas was succeeded by a
baby brother Daniel, who survived his birth only ten months. The remaining
children of William and Hannah Deacon were Benford, Mary, Daniel, John,
and Samuel, each of whom married and had numerous descendants. Benford
accompanied his father to Trowbridge (where he became a member of the
Sandemanian Church), but ultimately went to London. He, like most of his
brothers, seems to have been of a versatile and inventive genius. He is said to
have been concerned in some way with the introduction of gas into London,
and, I believe, invented heating and ventilating apparatus, which did not prove
successful pecuniarily.
Mary Deacon married at Kettering in 1794 Mr. John King,** a wealthy
leather merchant, by whom she had two children who died in infancy, and two
daughters, Hannah, who married (in 1849) Mr. Thomas James Bellamy, J.P.,
and died childless, and Mary, who married (in 1834) Mr. Charles Leach, by
whom she had four children.*** Mary King died in 1813 at the age of 44, and
was buried in Bunhill Fields, where had been interred some years previously
her two infant children.
Daniel Deacon, born 1771, was apprenticed to a watch-maker, but
ultimately joined his elder brother William in the large carrying business he
had established, the management of which he continued after William’s
retirement from it. A member of the family (Mr. Thomas Deacon, of
Newcastle), referring to Daniel Deacon, says: “Old habits and prejudices
prevailed in him over good judgement at last, for he opposed Railway
Companies in Parliament, demanded the right to run trains (as allowed by
Canal Companies to run separate boats), refused the offer to take the chair at
the Board of a Company, and thus, instead of conciliating these all powerful
bodies, exposed himself to the grasping policy natural to their interests, and his
business (soon after his death) to ruin.” Mr. Thomas Deacon further remarks:
“My great-uncle Daniel was a remarkable man, and his appearance remains
stamped upon my memory from childhood, when I saw him every Sunday at
the Meeting-house in Paul’s Alley, where he occasionally filled the office of
Reader. The door in the wall at the back of the Elders’ pew opened, and a
portly gentleman of healthy ruddy complexion, in the dress of the time – blue
coat with brass buttons, and
* It is not certain that Thomas joined the Sandemanian Church, but there is evidence of his interest in the teaching of Mr. Glas. Four of his brothers were members of the community.
** Son of Mr. David King, a member of the Sandemanian Church.
*** (1) Charles Thomas Leach, married 1860 Martha Mary Sewell; died 1885 (left five sons). (2) John George Leach. (3) Elizabeth Hambleton Leach. (4) Mary Hannah Leach.
white waistcoat – burst upon my view: his speaking countenance, pleasant
voice, and impressive tone remain fixed on my mind. He was very outspoken,
and seems to me in look and manner to have been an ideal John Bull, such an
one, only much toned down and refined, as caricaturists draw.”
The following anecdotes of him are contributed by one of his great-nieces:-
“On one occasion when his waggons had been robbed uncle Daniel called his
employés, placed them in a row, and, telling them why they had been
summoned, quietly scrutinized each one (it was said he had very searching
eyes – I only remember them as very kind blue ones); as his eyes rested on one
of the number, down he dropped, and of course proved to be the culprit.
Another time Uncle Daniel was going along the street when a man with a sack
on his back was coming towards him. Uncle Daniel looked at the man
casually, thinking of nothing particular, when, to his surprise, the man dropped
the sack at his feet and made off. The sack was full on combs, and proved to
have been taken off one of his waggons!” Daniel Deacon’s eyes were not only
“searching,” but remarkably strong, for it is recorded of him that, like an eagle,
he could look at the sun on a summer’s day without blinking!
Of the two younger sons of William and Hannah Deacon, John and Samuel,
we have but little knowledge. John, it is recorded, was a member of the
Sandemanian Church (as was his wife Frances, who survived him many years),
and Samuel was a cabinet-maker, carrying on for some years an extensive
business in Regent Street.
THE THIRD WILLIAM DEACON
WILLIAM, the eldest surviving son of William and Hannah Deacon, was born in
1757, and as he died at the age of 58 he was only a name to his grandchildren.
It is not known whether he took any part in his father’s business, but probably
this was the case in his youth. He married in 1788* Ann Archer** (daughter of
Samuel Archer previously mentioned as an inventor of imitation pearls), and it
is believed that with her dowry, which was said to be £20,000, he established
the large carrying business which before the railway era ranked next to
Pickford’s in importance. It served the commerce of the great high roads as far
south as Trowbridge in Wilts, and north as Newcastle-on-Tyne. The head-quarters of the business was known as “The White Horse,” Cripplegate,
although there was no inn in its extensive yards and premises. William Deacon’s brother Daniel was associated with him in this business. I am
indebted to Mr. Thomas Deacon, of Newcastle-on-Tyne, for the following
note: “The management of the men, waggons, and horses for the carriage of
goods on
* At St. Andrew’s, Holborn.
** See p.34.
such an extensive scale of roads required great and constant personal exertion
and inspection. The waggoners had many temptations to idleness and
drunkenness on the way, and when these were indulged in they often led to
dishonesty. Money might be fraudulently gained by withholding or stealing
the horses’ fodder, sometimes by collusion with roguish innkeepers or ostlers.
Our relatives used therefore to assume all manner of disguises and come upon
their servants in the most unexpected times and places.” William Deacon, like
many of his relatives, possessed an active mind, which led him to consider
improved methods of waggon and wheel construction, and in 1807 he
published his ideas in a book entitled “Observations on Stage Waggons.” He
possessed much energy of character, and it is said that he was a strict
disciplinarian – “Sharp’s the word and quick’s the action” was a favourite
adage of his. His nature was, however, a kindly one. In 1796 he was
appointed to the office of a “Deacon” in the Sandemanian church, which would
lead him to search out the needs of the poorer brethren. He was very neat in
his dress, and every morning Rowland (of Macassar oil fame) came to powder
his wig and arrange his queue.
The married life of William Deacon was apparently a very happy one. He
has recorded on the old Bible cover, before alluded to, that he and Ann Archer
were “married at St. Andrew’s Church, Holborn, on Jan. 1st, 1788, after which
they resided at Market Harborough near two years, and in 1790 they removed
to London, where they have lived a happy couple for 27 years, and may their
happiness increase with their years! – 1814.) He had, alas but one more year
of wedded happiness, for he died in November 1815 at Hampstead. He was
buried in Bunhill Fields, that great burying-ground of Nonconformity, where
rest John Bunyan, Daniel Defoe, and Isaac Watts, with many of lesser note
who laboured and suffered in the cause of civil and religious liberty.
I subjoin some extracts from “Observations on Stage Waggons,” a book
which is of interest, not only for the light it throws upon the character and
mental endowments of William Deacon, but also on account of the picture it
presents of the difficulties of locomotion in the early part of the present
century, when not only were railways undreamt of, but the true principle of
road-making (introduced by Macadam in 1819) was as yet unknown, and
agricultural produce and merchandize of every description was (unless
conveyed by canal) transported by heavy waggons, which were as
unscientifically constructed as the roads over which they travelled. William Deacon, then one of the leading carriers, was, he tells us, “Honoured by the
command of a Committee of the House of Commons, appointed to enquire into
the principles and effects of broad and narrow-wheel carriages, to give such
information upon the subject as had arisen from my professional experience.”
His views and experience having been long at variance with the construction of
the wheels of the waggons authorized to pass on turnpike-roads, he resolved to
put his ideas into print, with the view of aiding the formation of a more correct public opinion on
matters connected with locomotion. The title-page is as follows:-
OBSERVATIONS ON STAGE-WAGGONS, STAGE-COACHES, TURN-PIKE ROADS, TOLL-BARS, WEIGHING-MACHINES, ETC.,
OCCASIONED BY A COMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS BEING APPOINTED TO ENQUIRE INTO THE
PRINCIPLES AND EFFECTS OF BROAD AND NARROW WHEELS.
BY WILLIAM DEACON,
Proprietor of daily waggons to all parts of the North.
LONDON.
1807.
After some preliminary remarks, William Deacon says:-
I have examined minutely into the principles and effects of broad and narrow-wheel carriages in general, and endeavoured to collect the sentiments of those
who use, as well as of those who construct or build the same, but I have met with
but one or two professional gentlemen appearing to have any just knowledge of
the subject. As broad-wheel waggons, moving upon wheels or rollers of the
breadth on 16 inches, appear to have been first in claiming the attention of the
Committee, it may not be improper to notice their first introduction, which
appears to have been in the Sixth Session of the 13th Parliament of Great Britain
(in the reign of Charles II.). By an Act of George III. They are permitted to pass
toll-free for five years. Whether these sixteen-inch wheels or rollers were
intended to be cylindrical or conical does not appear. The principal thing in view
was that wheels of that width could not fail of improving the turnpike-roads. The
carrier and wheelwright, being left free to exercise their own mechanical
knowledge and ingenuity as to the shape of the wheel, fixed upon a conical rather
than a cylindrical one. But as in the proper construction of carriages all the talents
are supposed to be with the wheelwright, we may, I think fairly conclude the
carrier had little or nothing to do with the construction of this wonderful piece of
machinery. Let us enquire a little respecting these wheels or rollers. The wheels,
still authorized to be in use and still privileged, are of a conical shape, and vary in
their two extreme circumferences according to their height or size of their cone. I
lately measured one such, and found the small circumference measure 36 inches
less than the inner one, or that next the body of the waggon. And though
wheelwrights and carriers cannot but know there is that difference in the two
circumferences, it does not appear to have entered their minds how, or by what
means, the small circumference keeps pace with the larger one when passing on
the public roads.
I contend, then, these conical wheels or rollers are not got forward on the road
as is generally believed by turning on the axle only, but that two different actions
are performed in every revolution such wheels make. The one is by simply
turning on its own axle , the other is by the small circumference literally
dragging 36 inches in every revolution such wheels make. That dragging and
resistance are not perceptible to the eye as the whole machinery moves forward, it
being gradual, and hid by the continual motion of the wheel. But I trust it will be
admitted utterly impossible any roller can cover a greater length of ground by fairly
turning round and moving forward that the circumference of such roller measures.
Therefore, as the small circumference is absolutely less than the other, and must keep
pace with the same, it must drag and turn round at one and the same…….. Surely,
then, it will appear if such conical wheels or rollers are got forward it must be by
force, and that more power must be used for overcoming the continual resistance or
dragging that is necessary for getting the weight of the whole forward. I have
repeatedly been asked by wheelwrights how it is possible the veils I complain of can
exist when all the wheels turn round together on the same axle and go straight forward
at once. Let them take a little manual exercise every morning with a heavy garden-roller, made precisely on the same principle as one of these conical wheels. An
hour’s daily exercise each morning for month would, I think, do them more good, and
bring more conviction than all the theoretical exercises I can give them.
I will next notice the effects produced by sixteen-inch conical wheels. Instead of
those salutary effects originally intended – such as are produced by a garden-roller on
a gravel walk – they certainly have a directly opposite tendency. The garden-roller
presses down and increases the hardness and solidity of the walk every time it passes
over the same. The waggon-roller, on passing where the roads are pretty even and
good, makes them loose and grinds part of them to powder. The dragging and
resistance occasioned by the difference of circumference on the same cone creates a
most dreadful noise whilst thus grinding and tearing the road up. The difference of
power required for thus grinding and tearing up the road, beyond that needful for
drawing the weight of the waggon with its loading, forward, is as least one-forth more
that useful or necessary.* ……Gentlemen or others accustomed to travel have serious
proofs of narrow wheels being most injurious to the public roads; for miles together
they are to be seen cut into what is called quarters, ten or twelve of which compose
the whole width of the road, the ruts of which are so deep as to render it extremely
unpleasant, and sometimes dangerous, to ride on horseback. To roads so cut into
quarters may be imputed our seeing so many lame post and stage horses, for the
expedition, now so fashionable, puts it out of the power of horses to pick their way;
they are therefore sometimes in the ruts and sometimes out, sometimes up and
sometimes down!
W. D. next attacks the practice then prevailing of making the turnpike-roads
extremely convex, and remarks:-
This mode, the surveyor assured us, throws off the water and keeps the roads
completely dry. This, considered in the abstract, is certainly very pleasing. What can
be more so that to think of a road rounded in the middle, and so smooth that neither
water nor a marble would lodge on it? A driver of a wagon, cart, or coach when
about to pay his respects to such a charming road, would most assuredly take the
highest ground, and of course be entitled to the honour of
* W. D. remarks in another pard of his book: “Such has been, and still is , the rage for wheels of a conical shape, it is rare to meet a carriage of any description, whether for pleasure, convenience, or profit, but what has something of the cone in the shape of its wheels.”
informing his numerous successors that he was the first knight of the wheel who
drew the lines where the first two ruts were to be made. Each cheerfully following
the steps of his predecessor they soon complete the ruts, which become sufficiently
deep to prevent the blind and the lame from losing their way by getting out of the
track. They immediately set about quartering or making fresh ruts, until they have
completely cut the whole width of the road into quarters, which certainly has a very
pretty appearance, and is much heightened when a heavy shower of rain succeeds;
then we see these ruts, which sometimes are five or six inches deep, filled with water,
forming a pleasing contrast of land and water, and affording boys an opportunity of
sailing their boats along canals on the turnpike-roads! …..Whence is it these
absurdities and inconsistencies have arisen, and why is it they are suffered to
continue? Principally, I fear, because –
Custom, the world’s great idol, we adore,
And knowing this, we seek to know no more.
True it is, systems which are bad in principle, effect, and appearance may become
familiar by constant use; and equally true it is, when a committee has been appointed
with a view to serve the public in these matters, they have had gentlemen before them
who have given evidence in the most interested manner, who have afterwards boasted
what adepts they have been in practising deceit. Such men, when called before a
committee, begin to think their craft is in danger, and abuse that confidence which
had been improperly placed in them, often ultimately becoming the greatest dupes to
their own unmanly and nefarious conduct. Their ideas being absorbed in self-interest,
and their perceptive powers very naturally contracted, they cannot see that liberality
of sentiment is a striking feature in British Senators when exercising their rights and
privileges for the public good ….
Sometimes we meet with hills and impediments on the King’s highway which
could be removed at a small expense, the removal of which would not only improve
the roads, but also afford good materials for the adjoining roads; but as doing that
would not perhaps prove quite so profitable to some as fetching materials some miles
distant, the hills are suffered to remain. I have been told hills on the turnpike-roads
are useful in resting and breathing horses while going up them! Such assertions,
connected with conical wheels being the easiest for horses to draw, lead me to think
whether I have not been attempting to develop matters which with myself at least
ought to have been considered quite abstruse. However, as I have attempted to be
right, I shall be obliged to those who convince me I am wrong.
….I cannot refrain from noticing that waggons travelling in certain hours on the
Sabbath Day are considered as trespassing against existing laws, while stage coaches
are not so considered. If a waggon is delayed by accident or misfortune, and cannot
get through a town or village without trespassing on these hours, the waggoner must
submit to fine or imprisonment. I have known both submitted to, when at the same
moment a stage coach has passed loaded with goods and crowded with passengers;
and yet such are permitted to pass with impunity, and by no means considered as
breaking the Sabbath. But if a waggoner, after working all night in reloading a
waggon which has been overturned, and after walking twenty miles, dares to enter
such town or village with his waggon, whether with the view of obtaining a pint of
beer or of going to church while his horses rest or bait, he immediately subjects himself to a fine, and in case of non-compliance
is put into the stocks, there to spend the remainder of the day. The distinction the law
has here made betwixt coach and waggon appears to me so extremely refined as to
induce me to leave it to those most acquainted with theological disquisitions to
explain. I by no means wish it to be understood that I consider this restriction, as it
applies to common carriers, a hardship – very far from it – nor have I any objection
the fine and punishment should be doubled. But it is the glaring inconsistency and
appearance of mockery in religious decorum I wish to be noticed. If a trade or
occupation is such that will not admit of at least twelve hours rest for man and horse
in one day out of the seven, it must be a bad one in more respects than one ……… I
shall have credit given me for saying it is my wish to see new principles adopted, but
as it is the fashion to be much in the wrong, I do not expect we shall very soon be
right. But I am confident gentlemen whose ideas are not fettered by custom or
corrupted by habit will not fail doing everything in their power they think calculated
to do away the many evils and absurdities I have complained of. That my abilities for
writing upon any subject and my mechanical knowledge are extremely confined will
appear very conspicuously. But having taken up the subject because I had in part
promised, and because I was led to think no other would, I trust these considerations
will operate as an apology for the many imperfections to be met with, and naturally
arising out of a first performance.
COPY OF PART OF LETTER FROM WILLIAM DEACON (BORN 1757)
TO HIS SON THOMAS.
……. I hope you will have an agreeable meeting with Mr. Parke’s family, and find
them not friends in name only, for that is too common and hackneyed a term, used in
general without any specific meaning, and frequently has an issue directly opposite to
true principles of friendship, which respect the mind only in the first instance, and are
proved by its effects or by actions thereby produced. Therefore, in forming friends or
friendship with any one, we ought to be more careful respecting the mind than the
manners. “’Tis the mind makes the man,” and why not the woman also? Granted.
Therefore, if you can find a woman who has a mind according with principles of true
friendship, and can get possession of her heart, you will soon find that she has
possession of yours also, and every fair prospect will appear of happiness ensuing –
whether in riches or in poverty. But do not, I pray, sell yourself for a wife, neither, do
I pray, buy a wife, for that in fact is the order of the day, and it is a little difficult to go
against the common current; it is not what is she, but what has she. Thus they begin
at the wrong end, and too often to their sorrow. Do not commit yourself, neither
commit any other. Let truth prevail – at the same time it does not follow that every
truth should be promulgated. Where you see a mercenary disposition, beware of the
same as you would of a known enemy. Where you see a free, open, frank, and honest
disposition, treat it with the same temper of mind, always remembering that it will
assuredly be found throughout life that “Honesty is the best policy.” Affection and
friendship are different in their natures. A man may fall in love with a woman, and
yet at length learn to his sorrow that she has nothing of friendship about her, and vice
versû. But when affection arises from something like principles of true friendship,
then we may anticipate happiness.
These ideas may be useful to yourself and others, and if there should be any
prospect of your making any serious advances to this end, and they meet with a
suitable reception and according disposition, I shall congratulate you thereon, and
be ready to contribute to your comfort and happiness in any way as far as you or
any other can reasonably expect. So at least I hope, and thus far you may publish
when and as often as you please. We are all tolerable well, and unite in love to
you.
I am, dear son, yours affectly
,
London, 16 May 1815. W. DEACON.
ANN, wife of the above William Deacon, was a woman of some
independence of character. She possessed refined tastes, and although it was
not easy to obtain books 100 years ago, she was, as is proved by her MS. books
of extracts, an extensive reader. Like most of the ladies of that time, Ann Deacon possessed a dignity of character which is seldom met with in the
present day. She was of an affectionate nature, and commanded the love and
respect of her children, who held her in great reverence. Her son George, in
some of his poetic effusions, speaks of her as their “guiding star.” Her letters
to her children generally contain some good advice. For instance, in writing to
one of her sons who had asked her to read a letter which he had written to his
brother Josiah, then in Russia, she thus emphasizes the necessity of caution: “I
am glad you recommended me to read your letter to J.; there are some delicate
points, in my poor opinion, too nice (I was going to say, too hazardous) for J.
to touch upon as he is now situated. It behoves him to be very circumspect
indeed in his conduct and manners where he is now placed, and being so young
a man he should be more circumspect than to broach the subject you name.” In
another letter, referring to some domestic troubles which had befallen friends,
she moralizes thus: “So we see riches will not procure our wishes or give us
peace at last – to be content is to be rich indeed.” In a PS. she adds: “I have
subjoined a few lines I think you will admire, though on a very serious subject”
– they are some quaint verses by Simon Wastell, written in 1623, headed, “Of
Man’s Mortality.” Previous to her engagement to William Deacon, Ann Archer received and accepted an offer of marriage from Mr. Child, the banker.
It is said that not long after this, when Mr. Child was one day paying her a
visit, he observed her taking a pinch of snuff, and thus expressed himself: “I
could make no lady my wife who took snuff!” “Sir,” replied his fiancée, “you
are not worth a pinch of snuff!” Thus terminated their engagement, doubtless
to their mutual satisfaction! Its seems that the offending snuff was
Grimstone’s “Eye snuff,” which Ann Archer used as a specific for weak eyes.
Like her husband, whom she survived twenty years, Ann Deacon was a
member of the Sandemanian Church. In the latter part of her life she filled the
office of “Deaconess.” She died in 1835.
THE DESCENDANTS OF THE THIRD WILLIAM DEACON
WILLIAM ARCHER DEACON, eldest son of William and Ann Deacon (born 1789),
lived for some years after his marriage in London, but being dissatisfied with
his position, he, soon after the birth of his youngest child, emigrated to
Australia, hoping it would seem, that his family would ultimately join him.
Two of his sons followed him after some years, * but his wife and daughters
remained in England. That he did not meet with the success he anticipated in
Australia was certainly not owing to a lack of ability or energy, but to that
versatility of temperament which led him to seize upon any new opening for
his capital which presented itself, instead of concentrating his aims upon one
pursuit. Thus he tells his brother, in a letter written in 1840 from Adelaide,
that he possessed a farm of forty acres, a hotel in Adelaide (to which he had
just added an assembly room), and had waggons running to neighbouring
towns on market days. He goes on to say: “I have lately added to the list of my
many professions that of Playwright, having become tenant of the Royal
Victoria Theatre. The scenes are painted by a nephew of Opie the R.A. The
performers are amateurs, but Mrs. Cameron, the wife of the manager, is a
second Madame Vestris. My utmost energies, as you may suppose, are
necessary to equipoise all my concerns.”
Whether any of William Deacon’s enterprises proved a financial success is
not known, but he would appear to have ultimately lost whatever money he had
made. He died at his son’s house in Adelaide about 1866.
SAMUEL DEACON (born 1790), the second surviving son of the third William Deacon, might perhaps be termed a typical Deacon, for he possessed in a large
measure the best qualities of his ancestors and relatives. Their deep religious
principle, their affectionate nature, their cheerful disposition, their energetic
temperament, and their interest in mechanical inventions were conspicuous in
him, and probably his somewhat hot temper (perhaps his only failing, for his
character was a singularly beautiful one in its guilelessness and selflessness)
was another note of heredity, for quickness of speech, the outcome of an
earnest and active mind, has been noticed in other members of the family. He
married, at the age of 32,** Virginia Grace Scripps, daughter of William A. Scripps, publisher of the “Sun” newspaper and the “Literary Gazette,” from
whom she inherited a keen inquiring mind and literary tastes. S. Deacon, who
had always
* His last surviving son. Firmin Deacon, a most estimable and amiable man, died in 1897, aged 70, at Lardner, Gippsland, Australia. He had lived in Melbourne for many years.
** At St. George’s, Hanover Square.
attended the Sandemanian meeting-house, became a member of that
community when about 47 years of age, but his wife was all her life an
adherent of the Church of England. He was apprenticed to a silversmith, but it
is believed that soon after the expiration of his indentures his father passed on
to him and his brother Thomas the business – which he had established but a
few years previously on Snow Hill, London – of a wholesale coffee and sugar
merchant. When, some years afterwards, the brothers dissolved partnership,
Samuel Deacon established himself as representative in London of the then far
distant newspapers of the provinces, an employment more congenial to his
tastes. * An occupation which much interested him during several years was
collecting and making into complete sets copies of the “London Gazette,” ** one
of which was purchased for the Queen’s Library (at £500), and another by the
University of Oxford. He was a great lover of old books, and collected many
“curiosities of literature.” Geologizing and fishing were his favourite pursuits,
and the microscope and telescope, together with some private mechanical
work, never completed, were the amusements of his leisure hours. In business
Samuel Deacon was successful, but the Sandemanian views with regard to
investments would always have precluded him from being “a rich man;”
moreover, he literally carried out the injunction “Give to him that asketh thee.”
He enjoyed excellent health until the last two or three years of his life. He died
at the age of 70, and retained his faculties unimpaired to the last. The editor of
the “Chelmsford Chronicle” voluntarily indited the following notice of his
death: “On the 18th inst., at his residence, South Hackney, Mr. Samuel Deacon,
of Leadenhall Street, London – a man whose name was held in the highest
respect by all those to whom his extensive business connections had made
known his integrity and worth.”
THOMAS DEACON (born 1792) possessed a large share of the characteristics of
his family – an intelligent interest in many subjects, kindness of heart and
charm of manner – but perhaps an especially large portion of the gifts of wit
and humour fell to his share; this, together with his other qualities, rendered
him a delightful companion to both old and young. No visitor at our house
was hailed with such delight by the juveniles as was “Uncle Thomas.”
Mr. Thomas Deacon resided for some time at Willoughby in Warwickshire,
and during his sojourn there occupied himself in writing the history of the
village and neighbourhood. The latter part of his life was somewhat
overshadowed by the struggle to pay off immense legal costs incurred in
endeavours to obtain property to which his wife was entitled. He died in 1858.
* This business was transferred to Leadenhall Street about 1855.
** First published in 1642.
GEORGE BURNHAM DEACON (born 1795) was perhaps the most gifted of the
children of William and Ann Deacon. His temperament seems to have been a
happy combination of grave and gay. He has been described as a quaint
mixture of fun and fancy, deep religious feeling, and literary tastes. He was
fond of versification, and some short French poems were rendered very happily
by him into English verse. His sweet disposition and genial nature rendered
him universally beloved. He died in 1842.
JOSIAH DEACON (born 1804), the youngest of the family, much resembled his
brother William in character. He went to Russia when about 24 years of age,
and for some years filled the post of Secretary in St. Petersburg and Kieff to
Admiral Greig, the Scotch organizer of the Russian Navy. Afterwards he was
engaged under Prince Poniatowsky as Steward of his estates, and was awarded
by the Russian Government a large silver medal in acknowledgment of
services conferred upon the country by introducing improved methods of
arboriculture and fruit cultivation. This medal is dated 1832. In a letter dated
November, 1841, Josiah Deacon writes: “I was pledged to write a prize Essay
on the best mode of making forest plantations in Sough Russia as connected
with agriculture. My Essay to the Forest Society was the best, and procured
me their gold medal (the fourth medal I have received), together with a
recommendation to the Minister for a substantial reward, which I shall never
get in all probability.”
Josiah Deacon ultimately established some oil mills on an improved
principle, which he anticipated would prove a lucrative speculation, but they
were not a financial success. On his return to England, about 1862, he wrote a
three-volume novel call “Catherine and Vladimir,” which was published by
Messrs. Chapman and Hall. He died unmarried in 1875.
MARY ANN (born 1796), the elder of the two surviving daughters of William
and Ann Deacon, was a woman of cultivated and refined, but somewhat
fastidious tastes. In 1836 she entered the family of Count Zamoyski at Warsaw
as instructress in English to his daughter. Here she spent four very happy
years, being much appreciated by the Zamoyski family. In a letter written soon
after her arrival at Warsaw, M. A. Deacon says: “I have my own apartments –
this is very considerate – and at the same time it is arranged that I should be
always at their table and associate with them when not in my apartments. Very
few were ever received in a family of this distinction on the footing I am. I
only attribute it to the uncommon liking this family have for our nation. I feel
perfectly at home. They always say when there is going to be company at
dinner or in the evening, ‘You will see so and so,’ making it a matter of course
that I am of the party.” On quitting the Zamoyski family M. A. Deacon was
fortunate enough to meet with a similar position in the family of the Governor
of Simferopol, where she remained a considerable time.
SELINA DEACON (born 1797), who became the wife of David Martin, was of
an affectionate, energetic, and somewhat impulsive nature. She possessed
considerable artistic talent, and was an excellent French scholar, frequently
occupying her leisure hours in translating French books for publishers. She
died of a decline at the age of 40. * Selina and David Martin were both
members of the Sandemanian Church.
FREDERICK W. J. DEACON (younger son of Thomas Deacon and grandson of the
third William Deacon) was a man of considerable ability. His father having
wisely given his two sons a Continental education, Frederick became
thoroughly conversant with French and German, and, possessing the linguistic
faculty, he also added to his attainments the Italian and Arabic languages. That
Frederick Deacon had great business capacity is proved by the fact that he
ultimately became a partner in a large mercantile house, which, by his
brother’s introduction, he entered as a junior clerk. He resided for some years
in Alexandria, where he conducted the Egyptian branch of the firm. His
letters, describing his journeyings through Europe and Egypt – in which he
gives graphic pictures of Egyptian life and manners – shew not a little literary
ability. Frederick Deacon was a man of cultivated tastes, and after his
retirement from business he employed his leisure in forming valuable
collections of books, paintings, and engravings. He died at his residence, Bury
Hall, Edmonton, in 1891.
THE DESCENDANTS OF THOMAS DEACON ( BORN 1762)
ALFRED DEACON (born 1808) was an engineer. He possessed considerable
ability, and is said to have invented a calculating machine. I regret that this
Table is incomplete, the descendants of Thomas and Ruth Deacon being
entirely unknown to other branches of the Deacon family. None of his
children, it is believed, remained in Trowbridge but his daughter Emma (born
1799). She married a Mr. Parfitt, who seems to have carried on the cloth
factory after his father-in-law retired from it. Mr. and Mrs. Parfitt had a
numerous family, but all attempts to trace their descendants or relatives proved
futile.
* Her son, David Martin, has resided in the United States for many years. In 1862 he married Emily Ellen Baldwin, by whom he has two sons and four daughters living. Her daughter Selina married in 1861 Mr. Thomas Vincent, an Elder of the Sandemanian Church. Eleven children were born to them, seven of whom are living.
THE DESCENDANTS OF BENFORD DEACON (BORN 1767)
Benford Deacon (born 1810) went to the United States in 1830, where his
descendants have remained. His sister Pricilla had previously gone to New
York, three years after her marriage with J. Cooke. Two other sisters, Sophia
and Jessie, followed their relatives to America, and married there. Another
sister, Caroline (Mrs. Lloyd) died in Australia. Phoebe and Matilda, who both
married into the Leighton faimly, remained in England. No particulars of any
members of the Benford branch of our family have reached me.
THE DESCENDANTS OF DANIEL DEACON ( BORN 1771)
Daniel Deacon (born 1796) resided in Scotland for a great part of his life.
James Deacon (born 1803) held a Government appointment in Denmark for
many year. Esther Deacon (born 1798) married her cousin Henry, the son of
John Deacon. Both she and her husband were members of the Sandemanian
Church. A biography of their son Henry will be found on p. 41. Eliza Deacon
(born 1801) was a woman of much intelligence and sound judgement, and her
bright and genial disposition rendered her generally beloved; she married Mr.
Godfrey Hall, and one child was born to them, Mr. Samuel Hall. Jane H. Deacon (born 1805) married Mr. William Spilsbury, who held the post of
Librarian at Lincoln’s Inn; they had no family.
THE DESCENDANTS OF JOHN DEACON ( BORN 1772)
Mary, the elder daughter of John Deacon, married Mr. Thomas Prentice Rutt. Five sons and four daughters were born to them. Their second daughter,
Caroline Rutt, married her cousin Henry Deacon. Here it may be noticed that
two marriages between the Rutt and Deacon families had preceded these, John
Deacon’s brothers Thomas and Samuel Deacon (abt.1774-1841) having married two Miss Rutts, the
aunts of Mr. Thomas P. Rutt. Ellen Deacon, who died unmarried, was much
esteemed and beloved by her relatives.
HARRY COLLINGS DEACON (born 1822), son of John Deacon and his wife Laura
(née Oakley), and grandson of the above John Deacon, held a high position as
a pianist, vocalist, and teacher of singing. He received his first musical
instruction from his mother, and his musical talent was also fostered by his
father. At an early age he shewed decided talent, with a touch of genius, and
he ultimately became a pupil of Cipriani Potter. A little later on he studied
music in Germany, but, discovering that he possessed a fine tenor voice, he
removed to Milan (where he remained twelve years), and placed himself under
one of the first teachers of singing, Mazzucato the elder. He was very soon
sufficiently proficient to take an engagement at the Opera at Milan. The
leading tenor there becoming invalided, Harry Deacon was asked to take his
part; preparing it, however, at short notice, his voice broke down – he had
injured one of the vocal cords, so that he could never sing in public again. He
then made pianoforte-playing his special study for some months, and in 1862
returned to London, where he played in public for a time, but ultimately found
his true vocation was a teacher of singing, and, notwithstanding his injured
voice, he held the post of singing-master under Madame Goldschmidt (“Jenny
Lind”) at the Royal College of Music. Among his pupils were Anna Willimas,
Herbert Thorndike, George Bentham, Edward Lloyd, Plunket Greene, Carlotta
Elliott, Elvira Gamlogi, Madame Enriquez and Madame Cari (of the Italian
Opera), Mrs. Osgood, and many American artistes. No singing-master stood
higher in professional and public estimation in the sixties and seventies than
H. C. DEACON. He wrote the article on ‘Singing’ in Grove’s “Dictionary of
Music,” and composed several songs and pieces for the pianoforte. In early
life he married the daughter of Mr. Wyatt (the sculptor), who was many years
his senior. Mr. Howard Morley, an intimate friend of H. C. Deacon, has kindly
sent me the following sketch of his character:-
“He was a man of quiet and unassuming manner, thoroughly devoted to his
musical pursuits, but at the same time keenly alive to all that was passing in other
departments of human activity. He had none of the haughty exclusiveness of the
mere specialist, but was courteous and polite to the last degree. His mind and
manners were of gentle mould, but to such a length did he carry the habit of self-effacement that I cannot help thinking his very modesty prevented him from
taking that very high place to which his abilities certainly entitled him. His
pianoforte-playing was of the highest order, and his touch was considered most
beautiful by all who heard him play. He was an accomplished linguist and a very
bright conversationalist, with many a little story and a good fund of anecdote. His
mind and manners were so admirably balanced that, while his conversation
bespoke the well-informed man, his easy graceful bearing proclaimed him a
gentleman to the tips of his fingers. I had opportunity for observing how
admirably and patiently he bore with his wife’s somewhat discontented and
troubled spirit, the even tenour of which had, I fear, been a little
disturbed by terrible bodily suffering. In a word, I would say that I had an almost
unbounded admiration for Mr. H. C. Deacon as being one of the most courteous
and well-informed men I ever met. He was of gentle and catholic spirit, and so
entirely free from the little prejudices of his profession, that never – and this I
consider most extraordinary for a musician – was he heard to say an unkind word
of any one.”
Another gentleman who was intimately acquainted with H. C. Deacon
writes: “No volume could be too large that should H. C. Deacon worthily commemorate so
excellent a musician and so good a man!” On H. C. Deacon’s tomb in Highgate
Cemetery* the following lines from Tennyson, chosen by Mr. H. Morley, are
inscribed:-
BY THE GRACE OF GOD
How modest, kindly, all-accomplished, wise.
With what sublime repression of himself,
And in what limits, and how tenderly!
WILLIAM MATHISON DEACON (born 1825), brother of Harry Collings Deacon
(whom he did not long survive), possessed the steriling qualities of character
and charm of manner which were so noticeable in H. C. Deacon (1822-), and both
brothers seem to have called forth in a remarkable degree the affection and
esteem of all who knew them. William M. Deacon (a Captain in the Merchant
Service) was a typical sailor – generous, brave, frank, warm-hearted, unselfish,
and jocular. A cousin (Octavius Deacon) writes: “If I feel an enthusiastic
admiration for one man above all others whom I have known during a period
of nearly fifty years’ bustling life in the City of London, that man is William M. Deacon. As masculine a man as ever stepped a ship’s deck, he was as
gentle and refined as a cultivated lady. A more genial and thoughtful host than
William Deacon no man has ever known. He was full of anecdote, humorous
or grave, the groundwork generally being some incident of his voyages. A
sadder assembly never stood around a grave than that which was grouped in
Highgate Cemetery to witness the last act his friends could perform for him, all
deeply impressed with the belief that they had lost the best man they ever
knew.” He died in 1891.
HENRY DEACON ** (born in 1822) was the son of Henry and Esther Deacon.
His father was the second son of Mr. John Deacon (born 1772), and his mother
the eldest daughter of Mr. Daniel Deacon (born 1771). Having shewn a taste
and talent for mechanical subjects, Henry Deacon was apprenticed to the
engineering firm of Messrs. Galloway and Sons, of London. At this time he
attracted the notice of Michael Faraday, who (as
* He died in 1890.
** This sketch of H. Deacon’s life is compiled from a biographical notice of him published in the “Chemical Trade Journal,” September 1889.
has been already mentioned) was an intimate friend of the Deacon family.
Faraday noticed the bright boy, gave him access to his laboratory, and
encouraged him to apply himself, as far as his time permitted, to chemical and
physical science, directing and superintending his studies and experiments.
Misfortune overtook the firm to which Henry Deacon was apprenticed and the
works were closed. His indentures were then transferred to Messrs. Nasmyth
and Gaskell. It is said that Henry Deacon made the first model of Nasmyth’s
steam hammer for the patent, and was locked up in a room for a week, having
his food passed in through a hole in the door.
The experience gained whilst with Messrs. Nasmyth and Gaskell enabled
him to obtain an appointment as manager in the glass works of Messrs.
Pilkington Brothers, St. Helens. At this time he was about 26 years of age. In
glass-making he made no very decided mark by any lasting and original
invention. He was then a young man, and had much to learn, especially in a
business to which he had not been brought up, but wherever he went his
personality made itself felt. His quick intellect, his philosophical and
speculative habit of mind, his sharp incisive manner, his thorough training, and
a certain restless enterprise of character, would be the infallible indications that
he would sink into no rut of sheer commonplace. Henry Deacon had the
foresight to discover the dawning greatness and importance of the alkali trade,
and felt that to him it held out the promise of far greater possibilities than the
glass trade. About this time a Mr. Hutchinson started in a small way some
chemical works at Widnes, and Henry Deacon became his manager, but a
consciousness of power, and energetic spirit, and a certain restlessness under
restraint made it more congenial to him to rule than to be ruled, consequently
before very long they parted. H. Deacon was then joined in partnership by his
former employer at St. Helens, the younger of the brothers Pilkington, and in
1853 they started the chemical works at Widnes. The inventions of William Gossage of Widnes were at this time drawing the attention of all manufacturing
chemists to the complete revolution which his discoveries would bring about in
several industries. Gossage was the first to invent the process for producing
caustic soda as an article of commerce on a large scale. It was seen that there
would be a large foreign demand for caustic soda, and Widnes became the
scene of ceaseless activity, of fertile invention, and of wonderful and rapid
development. Mr. Pilkington soon discovered that protracted experiments and
deferred profits were the prospect before them. This did not suit him, and so
he severed his connection with Henry Deacon, leaving him alone to do as best
he could with his ideas and his hopes. But difficulties did not daunt him. Mr.
Holbrook Gaskelll came to his aid, and found capital to continue the work.
From 1854 H. Deacon’s career and work can be best seen by an examination of
his patents, of which, during the years 1854 – 1876, he took out no less than
twenty-nine. There is remarkable sequence and development
in all his inventions. They are not spread over a great variety of subjects: they
are concentrated around the most important points of alkali manufacture. They
are not mere amendments of other men’s designs: they are profoundly original
in conception and in execution.
The philosophical character of Henry Deacon’s mind is well illustrated in
the various papers he read and lectures he delivered. Before the British
Association in Liverpool, in September 1870, he read a Paper on “A New
Method of obtaining Chlorine.” It was here that the put forth his theory that
chemical reactions, as well as mechanical motions, were obtained in obedience
to the law enunciated in the parallelogram of forces. His lecture given before
the Fellows of the Chemical Society, June 30th, 1872, on “Deacon’s method of
obtaining Chlorine, as illustrating some Principles of Chemical Dynamics,” is
full of abstruse philosophical reasoning. In February and April, 1874, he wrote
two papers – one, contributed to the “Quarterly Journal of Science,” on “The
Modern Hypothesis of Atomic Matter and Luminiferous Ether,” the other on
“Thoughts about Atoms.”
In business H. Deacon was far-seeing and full of enterprise, keen, precise,
and exact. Under the direction of himself and his partner his concern so
rapidly developed as to be one of the first in the trade, and for the quality of its
products it stood second to none. He loved an argument, but never for mere
argument’s sake; with managers, foremen, and others he liked to thrash out a
subject thoroughly. He had the quickness of perception and alertness of mind
of a Frenchman, combined with the laborious, cautious characteristics of a
German. He allowed no detail, however minute, to be overlooked, and
whatever he did, he did it with all his might. He cared for his workpeople, and
knew well how to value the services of those who co-operated with him. In
public life he promoted every beneficent undertaking. He was Chairman of the
Local Board and of the first School Board; to him Widnes is mainly indebted
for its waterworks. As a Magistrate he was painstaking and fair.
Henry Deacon’s parents were both members of the Sandemanian Church,
but he might be described as a very broad Churchman: he had a perfect horror
of all cant and shams; in politics he was a philosophical Radical. His career
was cut short at the early age of 53. For several years his health had not been
good; he subjected his physical powers frequently to no ordinary strain – the
wear and tear were too great. He himself acknowledged when he found his
health breaking down, “I have taken too few holidays.” Doubtless his arduous
labours undermined his constitution and made him an easy prey to an attack of
typhoid fever, of which he died after a week’s illness, at Appleton House near
Widnes, on the 23rd of July, 1876. He was twice married. His second wife,
Caroline Rutt, was, like himself, a grandchild of John Deacon (born 1772).
ERNEST DEACON, son of Augustus Oakley and Anne Deacon (and nephew of
Harry C. and William M. Deacon), belonged to two branches of the Deacon
family, his father being a grandson of John Deacon (born 1772), and his
mother a mother a granddaughter of the third William Deacon (born 1757).
He was born in London in 1845, and educated at the Derby Grammar School
and by a private tutor, the father of Herbert Spencer. At the age of 16 he
entered the office of a civil and mining engineer in Derby, and subsequently
became assistant to the late Mr. John Hedley, Government Inspector of Mines
and a consulting engineer of eminence. He afterwards obtained the
appointment of Surveyor and Mineral Agent to the Cwlt Ironworks belonging
to the Ebbw Vale Steel, Iron, and Coal Company, Limited, at Abersychan in
the county of Monmouth. At the age of 30 he gave up this appointment and
commenced a practice on his own account as a civil and mining engineer at
Pontypool. In a short space of time he succeeded in establishing a wide and
lucrative practice, and amongst other appointments he held the position of
Consulting Engineer to several local authorities and town councils. As an
architect also he was very successful, carrying out several public buildings,
including two churches. As a musician he soon became well known in South
Wales, where his excellent piano-playing and his power of composition, as
well as his talent in conducting choral societies, brought him into great request
over the whole of the counties of Monmouth and Glamorgan. He acted as
adjudicator at some of the musical festivals known as “Eisteddfods.” He was a
prominent officer in the Monmouthshire Volunteers. He died at the age of 33
(October 30th, 1878), at Pontypool, Monmouthshire, from brain fever, probably
the result of overwork.
His pronounced abilities as an engineer, and his great popularity amongst
the leading people in South Wales, marked him as one of the coming men of
that great and advancing locality.
THE DESCENDANTS OF SAMUEL DEACON (BORN 1774)
It will be noticed that this branch of the Deacon family is a small one, and has
now only two male representatives. Samuel Deacon (born 1805) became a
convert of the Roman Catholic Church. His daughter Blanche (also a
Romanist) lived with her brother Louis in New Orleans, U.S.A.; the latter died
there unmarried. George Deacon (born 1814), son of the first Samuel Deacon,
was a professional singer; he died abroad, unmarried.
AUGUSTUS OAKLEY DEACON (BORN 1819)
AUGUSTUS OAKLEY DEACON, the eldest son of John Deacon and his wife Laura, née Oakley, and brother of Harry C. and William M. Deacon, was born in Piccadilly, London, in 1819. His mother’s family were of foreign extraction, being descended from Count Mionet, who came to England in the suite of William III., with his wife, two sons, and a daughter. The elder son was a physician, and the younger became chaplain to George II.; the daughter was the ancestress of the Oakley family. Augustus O. Deacon was educated at a private school (Mr. Hill’s) in one of the Midland counties, and continued his studies at the London University. On the expiration of his student days he entered the office of Brunel, the celebrated civil engineer, where he remained for some years, during which time he devoted the greater part of his leisure to studying drawing and painting, which he felt to be the direction in which his chief talent lay. Ultimately he abandoned civil engineering, and devoted the whole of his time to painting and teaching drawing. Amongst some of his pupils in London were the families of the Earl of Harrington, Earl Fitzwilliam, etc., his connection with whom induced him to take up residence in Derby in the year 1846, where he continued to instruct the above and many other leading families in the counties of Derby, Nottingham, Leicester, and York. He initiated, organized, and conducted the Derby School of Art, by which true Art was for the first time in Derby placed within the reach of the middle and lower classes. This School was highly successful, and continued in operation until the institution of the South Kensington Science and Art Scheme. Augustus O. Deacon turned his attention to teaching more than to painting, partly for financial reasons, but more particularly from the desire to impart his knowledge to others with the view of promoting the study of true Art. He therefore held with pleasure the position of Drawing Master at the public schools of Repton and Derby, and at many private schools. His tenure of office at Repton extended from 1855 to 1880. That he left a strong impress on many of his pupils during this period is evidenced from many letters which have been received from them. Archdeacon Sinclair writes:— “The weekly drawing lesson at Repton was a real delight. Repton was a picturesque village, and abounded in studies for composition, and Mr. Deacon was the most conscientious of teachers. His methods were exceedingly correct, and his way of teaching perspective was admirable. He would allow nothing but the most honest and careful work; and his criticisms as he came round to our various camp-stools were always con- vincing and useful. . . . . . He was a shrewd and kind friend, and much respected and liked by all his pupils, without exception. My brother John, now Vicar of Cirencester, and my second brother, Hugh, Lieut- Col. R.E., now in India, would both say exactly the same as I do. They have both remained admirable draughtsmen and good colourists; and the power of sketching from Nature which was first learned from Mr. Deacon, has been a great happiness to all three.” The Rev. H. F. W. Deane (of St. George’s, Windsor Castle) says:— “I have most grateful recollections of Mr. A. O. Deacon between 1870 and 1877. His earnest enthusiastic face, grave yet encouraging criticism, and personal interest in each pupil have lived in one’s mind ever since. One’s impression is that we were never allowed to idle, and always required to think. What he did for us was to lay a solid foundation of love for the best in Art, and give us sound instruction on excellent lines. No one can forget the sketching of Church,* and Arch, Hall, Priory, and Barn, and there must be many whose interest in architecture and antiquities dates from Repton ‘drawing days.’ ” Another pupil, Mr. Henry J. Ford (a well-known artist), writes as follows:— “I have a great pleasure in putting in writing the debt of gratitude that I feel I owe to the late A. O. Deacon, who was Head Drawing- Master when I was at Repton. I remember well his constant patience and kindliness to us young draughtsmen. And how ready he was to give special care to any one who took a real interest in his work. I can personally testify to the advantage I gained by his advice and example; and yet I have a feeling that he was too good an artist to make quite an ideal drawing-master, and that the natural bent of his quiet and some- what reserved nature would have led him to devote all his time to work done simply for the love of art; and I felt in his case that a delicate and keen sense of beauty was rather thrown away in the rough work of correcting boys’ copies, and keeping them in order. Of his personal character I retain a strong impression. He was always the same quiet, high-minded gentleman, with whom no boy ever ventured to take a liberty. All respected him, and many of us had a
- Repton
strong affection for him. He had the qualities which always command the respect of boys—a high sense of honour, and scrupulous care and love of justice in discharging his duty towards them.” Notwithstanding the large number of his pupils A. O. Deacon found time to paint many pictures, some of which were exhibited in the Royal Academy and the Old Water-Colour Society’s Gallery. His paintings, both in oil and water-colour, generally took the form of landscape, but he painted sea pictures of great merit. He also devoted some time to giving public lectures on Art. His interests, however, were not confined to Art. He played an important part in the encouragement of the study of Science and Literature in Derby, and in conjunction with Mr. Herbert Spencer, assisted in forming the Derby Literary and Scientific Society. He possessed considerable histrionic talent, and, with a few others, initiated the first Derby Amateur Theatrical Society (a very superior one), in which he took a prominent part. About the year 1880 the great calamity of blindness befell him—an affliction borne with the utmost patience and resignation; no murmur ever escaped his lips. In token of their appreciation of his work and of their sympathy with him in his misfortune, his old pupils and friends presented him with a handsome testimonial, consisting of a life annuity. After he became blind he continued to take a keen interest in everything relating to Art, and kept well abreast of its progress and development. He found great comfort and interest in the continuation of his scientific and philosophical studies, to which he had devoted much time, thought, and discussion in his earlier days in conjunction with his old friend Mr. Herbert Spencer. His indifferent health during the last thirty years of his life put a limit upon the quantity of his work, but up to the time when he lost his sight his true conception of the beauties of Nature and his power to translate them to canvas never failed him, some of his latest pictures being amongst the best of his paintings. As a commercially successful artist he did not shine, possessing as he did a delicate refinement of feeling to which commercial dealings and self-advertisement were most repugnant. He died at Nottingham after a short illness on December 31st, 1899, at the age of 80, and was buried in Nottingham Cemetery. He had married in 1844 his second-cousin Anne Maria E. Deacon (daughter of Mr. Thomas Deacon), who survives him. Eight children were born to them, six of whom predeceased their father.
═══════════════
- Login to edit this profile and add images.
- Private Messages: Contact the Profile Managers privately: Michael Pickup and Trevor Pickup. (Best when privacy is an issue.)
- Public Comments: Login to post. (Best for messages specifically directed to those editing this profile. Limit 20 per day.)