On this day … 11 November 1726

The Preston Corporation banned bull-baiting in the town. The councillors’ concern was not for the animal that was the victim of the ‘sport’ but for disturbances caused by the unruly elements attracted by the spectacle. Hewitson transcribed the reasons for the ban for his History of Preston:

‘Whereas it hath been found by Experience that the annual custom of Bull Baiting within this town of Preston hath tended to introduce very great disorders amongst the Inhabitants of the Corporation and hath been frequently the Occasion of Riots, tumults, Affrays, and bloodshed (and particularly in a late instance betwixt the Townsmen and Soldiers at ye time of a Bull bait).

‘And that ye power and authority of the magistrate or other Civil Superiours hath not been sufficient upon those occasions to restrain the turbulent and unruly passions of the Common people. Therefore this Council doth think fit to censure and Condemn the said practice of bull baiting as dangerous to the publick peace and inconvenient and pernicious to Civil Society, and doth hereby Agree and Order and direct that hereafter there shall be no Bull bought or baited at the Charge of the Corporation and that any such expense be hereafter disallowed in the Bailiffs accts. ‘

The corporation kept a town bull to service the cows belonging to the freemen of the town, and when time came for a new bull, the old bull was baited in the Market Place. The bull was tethered to a ring set in a stone which can still be seen in the Market Place today, at the Cheapside corner of Crystal House (at one time it was covered in tarmac).

The old bull stone on Preston Market Plac
Two photographs of the Market Place bull stone from Barney Smith’s Preston Digital Archive:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rpsmithbarney/3985799958/ (above)
https://www.flickr.com/photos/rpsmithbarney/3985800992/ (below)
The old bull stone on Preston Market Plac

Even after the corporation banned the baiting of their old bull in the Market Place, the practice continued in other parts with other bulls. For example, in Fishwick bull-baiting continued at least until 1808, for Hewitson quotes from an account in the Preston Journal of September of that year.

The paper reported that ‘the amateurs in this delightful sport were highly gratified’ by a bull bait in Fishwick . The bull’s suffering continued throughout the day and only ended when it collapsed at nightfall. The poor beast was taken away, ‘for more sport the next morning’, but, ‘to the disappointment of a number of gentlemen, and the grief, we doubt not, of the owner, the bull died in the night’.

The owners of cattle in the town highly prized the town bull, which serviced their cows. Woe betide anyone who should injure or torment it while it was still doing service, as the court leet records show. The court was concerned to ensure the bull was well cared for while it was still performing, as in 1656 when the following ruling was made:

‘There hath beene a bull usually pvided by the Baliffes for ye good of ye comonaltie and ffree Burrgesses of this towne; for ye present noe care is taken for the same; wee therefore desire Mr. Major would take some speedy course therein, for ye good of ye poore people, and that ye said Bull may be kepte all winter as well as somer if it may bee thought fittinge by ye Major and Companie to buy one before the xvith June instant, and not to sell him again without ye consent of ye Major and greater pte of ye Councell, upon paine of xls apeece.’

That care was demonstrated the following year when William Patten, a lawyer with chambers in London and brother of Thomas Patten of Patten House, was censured by the court:

‘Mr. Wm. Patten for yt his sonne and His servante have abused and foyled ye Towns bull, by sleating doggs upon him; therefore wee referre ye ffine to bee ordered by Mr. Maior and the most pte of his councell.’

And ten years later, Alexander Swansey who had an inn at the Ashton end of Preston Marsh was in trouble with the court:

‘… for seting his dogg upon ye townes bull, being then upon ye Marsh belonging to this towne, and thereby forcing into great confusion and disordr the Cattle belonging to the Burgesses inhabitants wthin this towne, to ye manifest hazard and damage to many of them, upon ye Lords day, to the evill example of others, and therefore to pay ye fine of xxs.’


Sources
Hewitson’s History of Preston
David Berry’s transcription of the Preston Court Leet records: http://www.wyrearchaeology.org.uk/index.php/areas-of-interest/preston?view=article&id=162


Discover more from preston history

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply