Deference deferred
Introduction
Victorian Bournemouth (256) opens a series of articles which summarise key points in the resort’s development. This article studies significant changes in the resort’s society that occurred over this period. They appear in the decline of deference paid to local landowners and the gross, outdated pastiche presented by the Reverend Pretyman as his preferred social model for Bournemouth.
Victorian Bournemouth (256): social change
Background
The commercial settlement at Bournemouth began as a convalescent colony for well-to-do people. Press reports trumpeted its early success as a fashionable venue attractive to the gentry. During the Victorian period, the settlement became a substantial town, with an economic structure quite different from that of a convalescent resort. As a result, its social structure altered. Several of the early mayors came from humble origins. Gentry, sometimes members of the Improvement Commission, did not feature on the new Borough’s council. Many incidents during that time illustrated the steady increase of middling, respectable people within Bournemouth’s community. Their consolidation and attitudes contributed towards the gentlefolk experiencing a loss of influence within the town. One indication of this process lies in the apparent reduction in offering deference. This cultural practice acknowledged social differences separating well-to-do people from others. It demonstrated public acceptance in social quality: ‘best people’ received deference from the rest.
An early sign
Concerned about the possibility of a French invasion during the middle of the century, the government encouraged settlements to create local militias. Supervision of this process at Christchurch fell to the local land-proprietor, the Earl of Malmesbury. He had a small landholding in Bournemouth, but later, much of Charminster would grow on larger expanses of his. Malmesbury envisaged a militia based on Christchurch with which Bournemouth’s volunteers would serve. By this, he signified an outdated view of the Bournemouth community. Also, he conducted matters in a traditional way, whereby, as a gentleman, he used influence to appoint others of similar rank. This approach rankled with those at Bournemouth who intended to become volunteers. They interpreted his behaviour as a snub, the earl failing to acknowledge Bournemouth’s success. Malmesbury tried to assuage this feeling. At a public meeting, however, the Bournemouth contingent showed him no deference and defied him.
Victorian Bournemouth (256): Meyricks
Vicar problems
Bournemouth grew on land that belonged to the Meyrick family, the local proprietors. During the settlement’s early period, the population paid due deference to the family. They had an ex officio seat on the Improvement Commission. Also, they presented the candidate to become the local vicar. When this man, A. M. Bennett, died after decades of service, the Meyricks offered his replacement. The reverend Bennett had established the local church as a showcase for High Church Anglican worship practices. The congregation expected a man of similar persuasion, even his son. Meyrick, however, appointed one of a very different outlook. The congregation of St Peter’s refused to accept this replacement. Agitation occurred, behind the scenes, in private and in the public columns of the local press. The appointee resigned. Meyrick repeated his action. This social revolt, a clear absence of deference, continued until the congregation received a suitable replacement.
Pitchforking
A practice much derided during the Improvement Commission’s stewardship of Bournemouth consisted of ‘pitchforking’. As a rule, elections determined the Commission’s membership. When gaps occurred between elections, a replacement would take his seat by appointment, pitchforked in as the opposition saw it. In 1890, Bournemouth became a borough. Under this civic format, a Council replaced the Commission. By-elections filled any periodic gaps. Consternation arose, however, when pitchforking re-emerged. A man without an elected seat became mayor by appointment. Furthermore, he instigated development projects without involving the council. Again, as had happened with Bennett’s successor, popular opposition took place. Enemies found examples of the mayor taking unilateral action for benefit as a private person. The most serious of these became seen as collusion between him and the proprietor. Severe criticism amongst the councillors almost reached the point of calling for court action against the Meyricks. His resignation restored order.
Victorian Bournemouth (256): analysis
Arcadia or not
From early times, a battle for Bournemouth’s commercial soul had raged. Some wanted the settlement to remain small, to become a rus-in-urbe, appealing only to wealthy convalescents. Others saw that the path to commercial prosperity lay in building a town attractive to people wanting to travel for pleasure. This proposition would appeal to far more people, many of whom would not belong to the gentry. During the Victorian period, this debate would ebb and flow. Although it carried an economic aspect, the difference reflected social tensions amongst the community. Well-to-do people who had chosen to live in Bournemouth wanted to preserve the original physical and social configuration. Businessmen, contractors, boarding-house keepers, and retailers wanted busy streets and a bustling economy. Arcadia had no appeal for them. They wanted improvement, both commercial and social. They wanted respectability, a life in a world without due deference.
Reverend J. R. Pretyman
This affluent, retired clergyman saw Bournemouth as an Arcadian retreat for gentlefolk. He spent much of his time in public service, the Union and the Improvement Commission. During the 1880s, he fought a rearguard action against the movement which sought incorporation for Bournemouth. Adopting the posture of one of the best people, he saw working people as beasts, labouring creatures. They had no property. He charged incorporation as a movement driven by the ‘smaller ratepayers’, the whole issue as ‘a class question’. In his opinion, the residents of East Cliff, his neighbourhood, should withdraw from the town and form a gentle enclave. During one debate, he claimed that only two gentlemen besides him sat on the Improvement Commission. The system of deference needed no lines, no definitions. People recognised a gentleman without prompting. Thus, Pretyman demonstrated the extent of Bournemouth’s social change without perhaps realising it. His world had vanished.
Takeaway
Victorian Bournemouth (256) describes how the resort went through significant social changes after the mid-1800s. The old Arcadian world—where the gentry received automatic respect from those of lower status—disappeared. Instead, a merit-based town emerged, where successful individuals saw respectability as just as valuable as gentility. Reverend Pretyman’s awkward efforts at social engineering only highlighted the transformations taking place in Bournemouth.
References
For references and engagement, please get in touch. Main primary sources: here and here (subscriptions needed). The featured picture shows an imagined scene.
Kitablios