Sir Henry de Hoghton, the ninth baronet, who began the restoration of Hoghton Tower, died aged fifty-five. He had been born in 1821 at Walton Hall in Walton-le-Dale, the home of his grandfather, plain Henry Hoghton (the ‘de’ was added to the name Hoghton by his grandson, replacing the name Bold-Hoghton, which his father had adopted when marrying the heiress of the Lancashire Bolds’ coal mining fortune).
The grandfather was the last resident lord of the manor of Walton-le-Dale, the family having abandoned Hoghton Tower in the eighteenth century in favour of Walton Hall. By the time Sir Henry began the work of restoration, Hoghton Tower was falling into ruin with only part of the building still occupied, by a farmer and his family.
Sir Henry married three times: the first marriage was a very unhappy one, the second was short lived with his wife dying three weeks after the birth of their daughter, the third marriage lasted from 1854 until his death, and is now remembered for the couple’s support for the Confederacy during the American Civil War. The story of that first marriage has been told in an earlier post (19 July 2023). Its end had involved a messy divorce after his pregnant wife caused a public scandal by eloping with her lover.
Sir Henry’s support for the Southern States in the civil war cost him dearly. He was one of the principal subscribers to a Cotton Loan, investing more than $1,700,000 in Confederate bonds, which soon proved worthless. That sum equates to just short of £50 million in today’s money.
The de Hoghtons, husband and wife, were among the most active members of the Southern Independence Association, established to support the slave states. Sir Henry sent a petition to the governor of New York purporting to be:
‘… from the people of the United Kingdom, to the people of the United States, entreating the latter, in the name of humanity, to end the war by acknowledging the independence of the Confederacy. Sir Henry’s humanity seems to have been inspired by his desire to save his money.’
The culmination of the de Hoghton support was the grand bazaar held in St George’s Hall, Liverpool, in 1864 in aid of the ‘Southern Prisoners’ Relief Fund’, which Lady de Hoghton helped organise, and which attracted worldwide attention, as for example in the following from the Richmond Times of America, which described it as:
‘… one of the most magnificent bazaars ever held in the north of England … For nearly six months the preparations have been in progress, and during that time contributions the most valuable have flowed in from all parts of the world. So numerous, indeed, are the articles thus generously given, that the difficulty has not been to “dress” the stalls, in the technical sense of the word, but to exhibit all that they contain; for a bazaar on so sumptuous and vast a scale as this one, is dwarfed even in the magnificent hall devoted to it.’
There were twelve stalls named after the twelve Southern States, five on each side and two under a large central tent. This is how the London Herald described the event:
‘The central tent, to which we have already referred as the largest, is also the most complete; one-half of it forms the Kentucky stall, presided over by the Lady De Hoghton and Mrs. Oliver, and the other half of the Tennessee stall, at which the Lady M. Beresford Hope and Mrs. F. Hull presided.’
According to the Liverpool Post:
‘An enormous Confederate flag made by Lady de Hoghton hung above the hall, reflected by two giant mirrors at either ends of the room. Cigars, jewels, gold watches, vases and even a Shetland pony were raffled off in the presence of the Mayor’.
The esteem in which Sir Henry was held by Americans in the Southern States is perhaps indicated by the fact that a biography of the Confederate general Stonewall Jackson was dedicated to him:
‘ … to Sir Henry de Hoghton, Bart., of Hoghton Tower, Co. Lancaster. Who amongst many has generously testified his appreciation of the rare qualities of the hero who is faintly portrayed in the following pages; and whose patient investigation of the merits, and courageous avowal of the national cause of a people, striving, amid unexampled obstacles, to achieve a meritorious independence, this unpretentious little volume, is by permission, respectfully dedicated.’
It should be remembered that Lancashire’s mill workers supported the opposite side in the conflict, refusing to accept raw cotton that was being picked by slaves on the plantations in the Southern States, at great personal cost.
I would be interested to know the sources used to conclude that the cotton mill operatives “refused to accept cotton picked by the southern slaves, at great personal cost”
Well spotted, Philip. When I posted this on the Preston Historical Society Facebook page it provoked quite a lengthy discussion, prompted by this from Maggy Simms, who had done quite a bit of research on the subject:
‘I’d be grateful for chapter and verse for the assertion that Lancashire cotton workers blacklisted ‘slave cotton’. I think it may be closer to the truth that a political group in central Manchester pledged this action, but whether cotton operatives as a whole did the same is another matter.’
You can find the discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/PrestonHistoricalSociety.
In my defence, I would say that my throwaway line was simply echoing the accepted ‘truth’ as recorded in the Guardian, on the BBC website and in varous other sources.
Following Maggy’s prompting, I trawled papers from all the major towns in Lancashire and could find no evidence of a boycott by cotton workers, and so ended up agreeing with with Maggy.
Good morning Peter.
Well, I really wasn’t expecting such a prompt and thorough response. Thank you.
I suppose this goes to reinforce the point that drawing conclusions on the attitudes of the past through the eyes of the present can be misleading.
Thank you for the fascinating articles you have posted over the past twelve months and which I have only just come across. I am going to enjoy going through them all.
Regards, Philip
I would be interested to know the sources used to conclude that the cotton mill operatives “refused to accept cotton picked by the southern slaves, at great personal cost”
Well spotted, Philip. When I posted this on the Preston Historical Society Facebook page it provoked quite a lengthy discussion, prompted by this from Maggy Simms, who had done quite a bit of research on the subject:
‘I’d be grateful for chapter and verse for the assertion that Lancashire cotton workers blacklisted ‘slave cotton’. I think it may be closer to the truth that a political group in central Manchester pledged this action, but whether cotton operatives as a whole did the same is another matter.’
You can find the discussion here: https://www.facebook.com/PrestonHistoricalSociety.
In my defence, I would say that my throwaway line was simply echoing the accepted ‘truth’ as recorded in the Guardian, on the BBC website and in varous other sources.
Following Maggy’s prompting, I trawled papers from all the major towns in Lancashire and could find no evidence of a boycott by cotton workers, and so ended up agreeing with with Maggy.
Good morning Peter.
Well, I really wasn’t expecting such a prompt and thorough response. Thank you.
I suppose this goes to reinforce the point that drawing conclusions on the attitudes of the past through the eyes of the present can be misleading.
Thank you for the fascinating articles you have posted over the past twelve months and which I have only just come across. I am going to enjoy going through them all.
Regards, Philip