THE WATSONSFrom an Internet website “this is a famous Anglo-Scottish surname of great antiquity. Very po-pular in the north of England and the Border Country, it is one of the patronymic forms of the pre7th century popular male personal name Watt, itself a development of the Anglo-Saxon perso-nal name and later surname, Walter. This has the interesting translation of 'powerful warrior'.”It is also claimed that the name was introduced into the British Isles by the Norman-French in-vaders after the Conquest of England in 1066, in the forms of Waltier and Wautier. Certainly inthe medieval period of history the name generated a number of different spellings amongst themthe short forms of Wat, Watt and Walt, and from these the patronymics Watts, Wattis, and thepopular Watson. “The surname in any form is first recorded in the Pipe Rolls of Devonshire in England in 1176 asPeganus Wat. In Scotland the earliest recording that we can find is that of as John Watson, whoheld lands in Edinburgh in 1392. Examples of later recordings taken from the early surviving re-gisters of the diocese of Greater London include: the christening of Anne Watson on April 18th1556, at St. Margaret's, Westminster; and the christening of Assabell Watson on May 16th 1561,at the church of St. Mary the Virgin, Aldermanbury. One of the earliest emigrants to the Virginia Colony in New England was John Watson. He leftLondon on the ship "Speedwell" on May 15th 1635, although his later history is now lost. Thefirst recorded spelling of the family name is probably that of Richard Watson. This was dated1324, in the Court Rolls of the Manor of Wakefield, in Yorkshire, and during the reign of King Ed-ward 11nd of England, 1307 - 1327. Throughout the centuries, surnames in every country havecontinued to "develop," often leading to astonishing variants of the original spelling.”

Our great grandfather George William Fisk ma-

rried Florence Watson in 2007. The marriage

was not a popular one with the Fisk family, who

seemed to think their only son had married

below his social and intellectual class – in fact

his choice of wife seemed to cause a rift bet-

ween himself and his parents, the Reverend Ed-

ward Fisk and Annie (nee Pratt) that was never

healed.

The Fisks were from a background of fairly we-

althy landowners and clergymen, but all the way

down their history they do seem to have a ra-

ther over-inflated sense of importance, still re-

flected today to some account by the

disproportionate amount of genealogy related to

them.

Florence’s Watson name can be traced all the

way back to the 17th century, and to be fair there

was very little prestige and a lot of poverty, and

the Watson story reflects the changes that went

on during the Industrial Revolution.

There seems to have been very little movement.

For at least two hundred years, the Watsons ge-

nerally lived in a community of small villages

based around Cononley, Cowling, Farnhill, Sut-

ton and Kildwick, which are just to the northwest

of Bradford.

They occasionally appear in other places, but

rarely off the map below, an area of the Yorks-

hire dales.

Earby, Thornton in Craven, Skipton and Colne

are all within a very short distance of Kildwick,

while later some ventured as far afield as Ha-

worth and Denholme further south.

This is the heart of ‘Brontë’ country. The sisters

were from the village of Haworth, which is a few

miles down the road. They apparently attended

church regularly in Kildwick.

These are all very small villages practically wi-

thin walking distance of each other, so it is the-

refore very likely that at least some of our

ancestors knew the Brontës.

Later, particularly when the industrial revolution

was at its peak in the 19th century, they start

drifting off towards the larger towns of Saltaire

and Shipley, where Florece lived, and which

have since been swallowed up by the expanding

city of Bradford.

THE MEANING AND ORIGIN OF THE NAME

83

Edward Watson (1643 – unnown death) and MaryFirst, it has to be said that much of the informa-

tion on the early Watsons is based on guess-

work and relying on other people’s research

without always knowing how accurate it is. The

chances are some of this is inaccurate or simply

wrong, and unlike the Fisks, there have been no

major genealogical studies of the Watsons.

However, the flimsy evidence suggests the line

might go back as far as Edward Watson, who

was from Sutton-in-Craven in West Yorkshire,

just to the south of Kildwick.

All I know of him is that he was the father of Wi-

lliam Watson, who was born in 1671, as listed in

the Kildwick Parish Register, and his wife was

called Mary.

These registers are written in Latin, hence Ed-

ward is called Eduerdi and his son as Gulilemi,

their Latin versions.

The Kildwick registers are availbale online, but

although there are plenty of references to va-

rious Watsons, I can find no record of Edward’s

birth, although there is one unsourced claim that

he was born in 1643. Neither can I find any Ed-

ward Watson that married any Mary or Maria.

The village website says “Sutton is first mentio-ned in the Domesday book, dated 1086, whereit says that the land of Sutton(and surroundingarea) belonged to the crown. In the years after1086 the land was given away/sold to a NormanKnight called Robert de Romille by William.After that the land was passed onto Edmund deBoyvill and then from him to Adam de Copley.As you can see from the landowners namesthere must have been a strong Norman pre-sence and influence around Sutton.

William Watson (1671-1738) and Mary Hargreaves (1674-1716)

St Andrews Church, Kildwick. Says Wikipedia, “founded in the early days of Christia-nity, St Andrew’s has a history stretching back into the mists of time.” It is one of the

longest churches in Yorkshire, and is the main reason why a village that even now

has less than 200 inhabitants is so important and attracted so many important clergy-

men, and people travelled from miles around to attend services.

KILDWICK PARISH REGISTER, 1671

“In 1304, the settlement was known as Sutton-in-Ayrdale.Following several name changes it be-came Sutton-in-Craven in 1620, that is the date on the oldest known building in the Township or Pa-rish.”“The land of Sutton would have been ideal for farming, especially livestock as the climate would pro-bably have been too wet for many crops like corn and wheat to grow with adequate success. Thisway of life would have carried on without much change over the centuries until one very importantpart of English history had a dramatic change on the area when it passed through our area in themid 18th century - The Industrial Revolution!”It forms part of the parish of Kildwick, which was a lively place in the early 17th century. A certain John

Webster from Thornton was minister from 1635. He had studied alchemy, and was known for his oc-cult interests, being a proponent of astrology and a sceptic about witch-

craft.

Roger Brearley (1586-1637) had been a major influence on him. Brear-

ley, who had also worked in Kildwick, was famous for setting up the Grin-

dletonian sect, which according to Wikipedia “seem to have includedAntinomianism, anti- clericalism and the concept of an earthly Paradise.They also emphasised the importance of the indewelling of the Holy Spi-rit and espoused the idea of the Holy Bible as a starting point. They arethought to have had an important influence on early Quakers.”

Sutton-in-Craven today

Edward and Mary probably had other children, but I have

found no evidence of any of them.

William Watson married at the age of 30, and the Kildwick Pa-

rish Registers include an entry on January 13, 1701 of a ma-

rriage between “Gulielmus Watson et Maria Hargraves hujusparoechiae.” Hargraves, like Watson, is a name that had been

around in the area since local records started, and there is

one unsourced claim that she was the daughter of a William

Hargaves and his wife Maria. Two men of Cowling, William

Hargreaves and his nephew Robert Hargreaves, were sent

to fight at the Battle of Flodden Field in 1513, the biggest ever

between England and Scotland.

They had five children in total, and they were all boys: James

(Jacob) Watson (1702 – 1727), William Watson (1705), John

Watson (1707 – 1733), Robert Watson (1709 – 1785) and

Peter Watson (1712 – 1758). The one that follows on down to

our Florence Watson is the fourth, Robert Watson. Having

had her five children, Mary then died at the age of 42, being

registered as buried on 17 Dec 1717.

Her oldest son, James, would have been 14 at the time, the

youngest son, Peter, only four.

All five of the children were born in Cowling, the village next

to Sutton, so that was presumably where the Watson family

lived (in fact the lady who organises the Cowling milk round

today is called Heather Watson, perhaps a descendant of the

same line of Watsons.

Apart from Robert, our ancestor, and who we’ll come back to

in a moment, James and John both died in their twenties and

never seem to have married. William married Elizabeth Smith

in 1837, and Peter married twice, first to Anne Spencer in

1741 and then to Elizabeth Emmott in 1850.

84

Edward WATSON

1643

Mary

William WATSON

1671 - 1738

Mary or Maria HARGREAVES

1674 - 1716

James or Jacob WATSON1702 - 1727

William WATSON

1705

John WATSON

1707 - 1733

Robert WATSON

~1709 - 1785

Alice OGDEN

~1718 - 1785

William WATSON

1739 - 1806

Mary WATSON

1742

John Watson

1747 - 1804

Margaret Edmundson

1749

James Watson

1753 - 1823

Anne WATSON

1757 - 1762

Peter WATSON

1712 - 1758

Cowling today

As a widower with five sons, William Watson lived on to the age of

67, dying on August 21, 1738, and he was buried at St Andrew’s

church.

It was probably an agricultural life these people led – the impact of

the Industrial Revolution and the wool industry had yet to come. I

have not managed to learn anything specific about these people

and their work though, nor do I know anything about Mary Har-

greaves’ background.

As the local history website says of Cowling, “in the early days agri-culture was the main occupation, with corn being grown andground within the village.”

Incidentally, one local history website makes the point that “onerule must however be respected by all, and that is the correct pro-nunciation of the name Cowling; it has the long 'o' and the villageshould never be called Cow (the milky lady) ling.”

On Cowling, Wikipedia explains that “it is a small village consis-ting of 1,000 to 2,000 residents � Originally the village comprisedthree separate hamlets namely Ickornshaw, Middleton, Gill andCowling Hill. It was only following the construction of the mainKeighley to Colne Road and the building of large mills alongsidethe road that what is now regarded as the main village was cons-tructed providing terraced cottage homes for the mill workers. Theolder parts of the village faded in importance but this does explainwhy the parish church and village school are located on what ap-pears to be the outskirts of the village between Ickornshaw andMiddleton. Quite simply, the centre of the village has moved sincetheir construction.”

Robert Watson (1709-1785) and Alice Ogden (1718-1785)

Alice Ogden was the daughter of Nathan Ogden, who was born in Cowling. There is no date

for his birth, but it would probably have been around the late 1680s. Nathan had married a

lady called Ellen in 1714. At least five other people have traced their family trees back to this

same Ellen woman, but nobody has had any luck so far working out when or where she was

born, or what her maiden name might have been.

Robert Watson’s wife Alice was one of three children that Nathan Ogden had with Ellen. John

Odgen was born in 1715, and after Alice in 1718 came a second daughter, Mary Ogden in

1725. Two years later, in 1727, Ellen died. She was buried on October 11 in Kildwick. Alice

would have only been nine when she lost her mother.

Nathan didn’t mourn the loss for too long. Within a year he was married again, this time to a

lady called Catherine. That was in 1728. They had no children, and the marriage lasted exactly

a decade, when, in 1738, Nathan was burying his second wife in Kildwick, the date is recor-

ded as May 13.

He went for four years without a spouse. On July 1, 1742, and in Kildwick, he wedded his third

wife, Margaret Brown, who was born in 1704, so would have been 38 at the time. Five years

later she produced a child. This was pretty old for somebody to be having babies in those days,

but out came Anne Ogden, born in 1747. Quite feasibly as a resulting of attempting childbirth

at the age of 43, Margaret became Nathan Ogden’s third wife to die shortly after.

Nathan married for the fourth time on December 18, 1770 to Phyllis Holdsworth. The wedding

was also in Kildwick, so it doesn’t look like Nathan Ogden ever moved very far in his life. He

would have been approaching 80 by this time, and his new wife was a sprightly youngster of

just 52. He died an old man in 1777, but I don’t know if Phyllis managed to outlive him.

A quick Google search reveals that Ogden is still a common surname in the Kildwick area

today, several of them being farmers.

THE OGDENSSo, next in line is Robert Watson, born in 1709, in

Cowling, which was effectively Kildwick, just like his

father and grandfather. He married Alice Ogden in

Kildwick in 1738. There is an entry for their ma-

rriage in the Kildwick Parish Registers: “26 Oct1738. Robert Watson of Cowling, Butcher, & AliceOgden of the same, Spinster, were married byBanns by me John Dehane.”

So, he’d have been 29 at the time, and Alice, who

was born in 1718, was 20. It was quite an adventu-

rous move this for Robert, for Alice was from ‘out of

town’. Well, not massively, she was from Haworth

(where the Brontës would be born a century later),

and it was only a couple of villages away. But at

least the Watsons had started spreading their

genes a bit further beyond their own back garden.

Alice was a child from the first of her father Natha-

n’s four marriages (see box, left).

And the marriage entry also tells us that, at least

when he married aged 27, Robert was a butcher.

They had five children, William (1739), Mary (1742),

our direct ancestor John Watson (1747), James

Watson (1753) and finally Anne Watson (1757).

Robert and Alice Watson lived fairly long lives. Ro-

bert was 74 when he died in 1785. His wife Alice

died the same year, aged 67. Whether their deaths

were connected, I cannot say.

85

John Watson (1747-1804) and Margaret Edmundsen (born 1749)John Watson was the fourth of butcher Robert

Watson and his wife Alice Ogden’s children.

On July 11, 1768, when he was 21 years old,

John Watson married Margaret Edmundson, a

nineteen year old Yorkshire girl.

I don’t know anything about Margaret Edmun-

don’s background, but she would be Florence

Watson’s great, great grandmother.

John and Margaret spawned yet another huge

flurry of siblings. First out, and a year after they

married, was a daughter, Elizabeth Watson

(1769 – 1791).

Then came the traditional William Watson in

1770, but he only survived for a year. Three

more daughters followed, Ann Watson (1772 –

1846), Mary Watson (1774) and Alice Watson

(1777 – 1832).

Finally there were three sons, John Watson

(1779 – 1850), Robert Watson (1781 – 1852)

and Peter Watson (1784). The second oldest

son, John Watson, is the one who would be-

come Florence Watson’s great grandfather.

By the time she was 32, Margaret had had

seven children, six of which survived to adul-

thood.

All of them were born in Cowling – this family did

not move far, and by this stage the village must

have been teeming with Watsons left, right and

centre.

John Watson senior, I am pretty sure, was the

one mentioned in the Kildwick parish register on

November 1, 1769. It says “know all men � thatI William Ramsden of Cowling � Farmer for �£31.18s.9d paid by Michael Smith Craggside inCowling and John Watson of Cowling � sell �three cows, one calf, one pig, one mare, a cartand pair of wheels, a cowp and rails, hay andcorn, a pair of looms, twenty two yards of Kerseycloth � in a certain messuage or tenement si-tuate in Cowling aforesaid and now in the occu-pation of the said William Ramsden.”

If this is correct, then John Watson senior was a

farmer, which would have been more than pro-

bable. This was just after he had married Mar-

garet, so perhaps John was investing in their fu-

ture. I have also seen one unsourced claim that

John was a butcher. This would make sense, as

that was his father’s trade, but maybe this was

earlier in his life when he was working for his

dad, and he later managed to set up a small

farm.

There are two other documents from Cowling

that deal with a John Watson that could well be

our man:

“19th Feb. 1796. Recd�. of John Binns� onepound eleven shillings and 6d. for money left be-hind for a Bobin Engine by the C. Horrock in hislife time [signed] John Watson.“13th Feb. 1799. Lease of Hey Farm to JohnWatson. Term of 11 years [annual] Rent £19.[memorandum on the reverse of a pre-printedform of agreement]. [signed] Wm Wainman,John Watson. [witnesses:] Isaac Watson, Jos.Hopkinson.”

John Watson died in 1804 aged 57. I do not

know when his wife Margaret died.

EIGHTEENTH CENTURY COWLINGIt was around this time that Cowling

was starting to feel the effects of the

industrial revolution. The

www.moon-rakers.co.uk website of-

fers an amazing amount of the his-

tory of the village of Cowling.

Despite all the detail it goes into,

and the fact there were presumably

loads of Watsons in the village,

there is very little mention of them,

which implies that they must have

been a fairly humble family. None of

them seem to have been important

land or business owners.

A report by Mr Burgin, a former tea-

cher at the local school in the

1970s, explains what nineteenth

century Cowling would have been

like.

“At the commencement of the cen-tury the predominant number of tex-tile workers were working on anindividual basis in their own homesto supplement their income fromagricultural work. “This work was with wool, but theimpetus for organised industrialisa-tion came with the cotton 'boom'. In1808 existing mills were convertedto deal with cotton textiles in res-ponse to the growing demand forcotton garments, particularly cottonhose for the more affluent. “With this development came an in-

flux of workers from Lancashire toprovide part of the work force, theremainder being supplied by thoseformer 'cottage' wool weavers whowere persuaded by the element ofsecurity to become full time emplo-yees working for a weekly wage.“Cotton was therefore the motiva-ting force behind the establishmentof large scale production in Cowling,and the emergence of Ickornshawas a settlement based on a small in-dustry basis.“The period of the 1840s saw thedevelopment of a slump in cottongoods due to the shortage of rawmaterials with the blockade of theUnited States. This was due to anincreased tariff imposed by the Nor-thern States on the cotton producedby the Southern States, the tariffsalso increased the price of raw cot-ton. “It was at this time that skilled wor-kers were lured away from Cowlingby mill owners in Sutton and Sal-taire especially, offering higherwages and improved living condi-tions because they were short ofskilled workers to man their newmills. “These new mills were concernedwith wool products for which therewas a plentiful supply of raw mate-

rials.“This depression in the cotton in-dustry in the 1840s, reaching apeak in 1848, encouraged theexisting mills in Cowling to con-cern themselves with woollen pro-ducts. This change paidhandsome rewards when, in 1852,orders were received for uniformand clothing material to be sup-plied to the Government to equipBritish Troops. These orders in-creased in the immediate perioddue to the impetus of the CrimeanWar.“A new mill was built in 1852 byJohn Binns who had for manyyears conducted a successful hau-lage business. “The major part of this businesswas the carting of the wool piecesproduced by individual workers intheir own cottages to the PieceHall in Halifax where these Co-

wling produced pieces were sold. “The rising prices paid for woolcloth, and the lucrative govern-ment contracts available were theimpetus necessary to persuadeBinns to invest in this new ventureof mill ownership. He also had firsthand knowledge of prices paid tohis customers through his haulagebusiness, and so was fully awareof the profit margin available to alarge scale producer.“The erection of the mill and thesecuring of finance for the projectwas only the first step, the majorproblem was to find a supply ofskilled fully trained workers. “One part of the problem was sol-ved by the German immigrantswho had come to this country toescape religious persecution andpolitical upheaval created by theunification process in their owncountry.

Written for www.cowlingweb.co.uk by Dennis Harker: “In the late 18thcentury, and up to the first world war, pigeon shooting was a 'sport' follo-wed by many. The field where the shoot took place is now known as Co-llinge Road, and there used to be betting on the outcome of the shoot.Pigeons were bred specially for this, and one of the breeders was WilliamHill, who was the owner of the Bay Horse at that time. He used to breedthem in the loft over the stables which were opposite the Bay Horse.“Whilst there was pigeon shooting from the Bay Horse, the Black Bullused to put on hare coursing. Men came from as far as Colne and Nel-son, bringing their whippets with them, so that they could chase the hares.This pastime was carried on in the Knowl fields , which are part of theKnow] Hill Farm. The hare coursing was also accompanied by betting onthe dogs.“Knur (Nur) and Spel was played in the field at the back of Wood House.This sport was revived after the second world war, but soon fizzled out.”

18TH CENTURY SPORT IN COWLING

86

“These refugees were skilled educated workers who were employed toerect and install the machinery in the mills. These were also the peopleused to train the native workers in the basic skills involved in operating themachinery installed. “This would not have been satisfactory if this had been the only alterna-tive available, but fortunately for Binns he had an untapped reservesource of skilled and competent workers, namely his former customers. “He actively canvassed the individual households, who previously hadworked wool in their own homes to supplement their income from daywork labour, to persuade them to come and work for a consistent weeklywage. “This regular means of payment was the key factor involved, as pre-viously their pattern of income had been one of 'peaks' and 'valleys' de-pending on whether a piece of material had been sold in Halifax.”“If a piece had been sold, the family experienced affluence for a short pe-riod, which changed to one of poverty prior to the sale of the next pieceproduced. A further factor that influenced these cottage workers to moveto full time mill employment was the change in Parish Rates made in1847, which created unemployment amongst agricultural workers, andsubsequent reliance upon Parish Relief for income and food. Thus regu-lar payment for work and the threat of being on 'the Parish', persuadedcottage workers to join the mill work force.“Any shortage of labour that still remained was obtained from the Lan-cashire cotton industry which in the 1850s, and especially the 1860s, wasin serious decline. This slump was brought about by the troubles prior to,and during the Civil War in the United States, which at best reduced andeventually cut off Lancashire's supply of raw cotton. The woollen industrycontinued to flourish despite the fact that during 1884 trade agreementswere made with Russia and Canada to control wool exports. The outletfor exports was restricted but prices remained stable, and a growinghome market developed for specialised wool products.”Another interesting thing mentioned in the report is the following: “Po-

1. Each member to pay 2/- quarterly into the box, besides the allo-

wance for ale.

2. Any member sick or lame or otherwise indisposed so as to render

him unfit to work shall receive 7/- weekly.

3. When any member shall depart this life there shall be paid the sum

of 5gns out of the box to defray the expenses of the funeral.

4. After payment for twelve months to any member, his pay will then

be only 5/- per week.

5. Any member refusing to conform to the rules shall forfeit 6d to the

box.

6. Any member joining the procession in a state of intoxication or

behaving disorderly or absent from Divine Service shall forfeit 1/- to

the box.

7. The Master and Stewards to lead the procession, the rest of the

members to follow two abreast, each furnished with a sprig of Green

Oak.

The Society continued to function until 1844, when dwindling membership

increased the pressure on withdrawals and created debt. Though not di-

rectly administered by the Church there were very strong links between it

and the Society throughout its existence.”

KILDWICK PARISH FRIENDLY SOCIETYRULES JANUARY 1ST 1799

The other children of Robert Watson and Alice OgdenThe first was yet another William Watson (1739 – 1806). It seems no Watson family

was complete without a William and a John. That’s probably not because of any fa-

mily tradition though, it’s just that these were very common names. I know that in early

19th century football games, a common way they used to divide into teams was to

have everybody called John, Thomas and William to play on one side, and everybody

else on the other.

William lived to 67 and was buried in Kildwick in 1806. This could well be the same

William Watson that was the first known landlord of the former Duke of Yorks pub in

Cowling. If he was, then he ran it from 1789 to the early 1800s, and was followed until

1818 by another Watson, Peter. As William Watson died in 1806, then the dates do

at least fit, and Peter was probably his son. This pub later changed location and be-

came the New Inn, and by 1822 was being run by a James Watson, possibly succe-

eded by his son William (the 1st husband of Dorothy Throup who still involved in

running the place in 1849, now with her second husband Robert Laycock). It was du-

ring this period that the pub took the name it still has now – The Bay Horse. It is only

speculation to say we were related to the Watson family of publicans, although there

is undoubtedly a link. It would require some research to get more detailed information.

This could also be the William Watson mentioned in a document dated December 31,

1791. “Wm. Wainman Esq. To Mr. Mattw. Tillotson: Feoffment of Premises at CowlingHill. 2 Cottages & Croft behind. This Indenture �between [1] William Wainman ofCarrhead�and [2] Matthew Tillotson �Witnesseth that for and in consideration ofthe sum of Twenty five pounds�he the said William Wainman�doth fully and abso-lutely Grant Bargain Sell Enfeofe Release and Confirm unto the said Matthew Tillot-son his heirs and assignes All that Cottage or Dwellinghouse wherein William Watsondoth now dwell.”

The second of Robert Watson and Alice Ogden’s children was Mary Watson (1742).

According a Smith genealogy website, a Christopher Smith, “born about 1742 inKeighley, Yorkshire, England, and died 27 March 1823 in Hainworth, Bingley, Yorks-hire � married Mary Watson 6 November 1766 in Keighley, Yorkshire, England,daughter of Robert Watson and Alice Ogden.” Mary died in November 1823 in Hain-

worth, Bingley, Yorkshire.

After John Watson (1747 – 1804), our direct ancestor, was James Watson (1753 –

1823). James lived to the age of 70, and died in Cowling. So, once again, there are

no signs of much movement away from the village. It may sound like they all had dull

lives, but in most cases, all we have to go on are birth and death dates. Some of these

young men may have been sent off to fight in wars with the French and all kinds of

things; it is just that I have not found any evidence of it. But none of them, as far as I

can see, emigrated to America or Australia, and none of them so far have married an-

yone who was not local.

Finally, Anne Watson (1757 – 1762) only lived for five years. All of the children were

born in the parish of Kildwick (which includes Cowling) so once again, these Watsons

never moved any further away than the village.

verty was also the motivating factor in the establishment of the Kildwick Pa-rish Friendly Society. Individuals were constantly aware of the problemsthat they would face if their income was reduced or endangered completelyby sickness or injury. The Friendly Society was created as a means of selfhelp or protection if some unforeseen ill fortune were to strike. The essenceto the group was for each member to pay into the Society 2/- per quarter,and if the member was unable to work he would receive 7/- per week.”

Cowling Pinnacle

Cowling and

Kildwick

1771 map

87

THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTIONThe arrival of the Industrial Revolution would have a profound effect on

the lives of the people of Cowling, Kildwick, Cononley and the other vi-

llages. Until the late 19th century it was a rural community of farmers

and small cottage industries.

The following section paints a picture of the kind of world the next few

generations of Watsons lived in.

One man who everybody would have known was John Binns, the foun-

der of the local mill in Cowling. Binns was born in 1810 at Cowling. He

was a man the Watsons may not have known in person, but would cer-

tainly have known all about, for he was effectively the ‘king’ of the town

in the 19th century.

In the Centenary Book published to commemorate 100 years of Binn's

weaving factory in Cowling, his family “were farmers and hand-loomweavers and, during the decade before the business was founded, hadlived through the "Hungry Forties". Yet, in spite of the daunting difficul-ties of those hard times, John Binns was to prove himself deservingamongst his fellows and worthy of recognition equal to that which Co-wling men accord to more widely-known sons of the village, who in-clude one who became Chancellor of the Exchequer.“The mid-period of the nineteenth centurywas a time of great industrial development.The use of the power loom was becomingestablished, in spite of the violent oppositionof the hand-loom weavers and riots in theneighbouring towns of Colne and Skiptonhad been quelled by the military. The gro-wing use of the power loom threatened thelivelihood of the people of Cowling, and withno alternative employment available, the ou-tlook was serious. “At this time, John Binns was a carrier aswell as a small farmer and he had contactwith a wider world as he delivered the hand-woven goods to the cloth markets at Brad-ford and Colne. “He had already entered public life, foramongst other duties he had undertaken, hewas now a parish overseer, a guardian ofthe poor, and a pre-Peelite village constable(in modern times, a "special"). With all this,he was a robustly religious man, being a Le-ader at the Bar Chapel of the Methodistcommunity. “His friends and neighbours found in him theman they needed to start power loom wea-ving and thus preserve the life of the com-munity at Cowling. “Many urgent meetings must have beenheld, for there had already been attemptsand failures. John Binns was not a rich man,but action was needed to secure the futureand his friends helped him as necessityarose.“The first requirement was a site for the pro-posed new mill. Richard Bradley Wainmanof Carrhead, the local squire, was approa-ched for a portion of land in that part of Co-wling called Middleton Bottom. “Here was met the first difficulty, for Mr.Wainman refused to sell the land, statingthat he did not desire pollution of the atmos-phere by smoke from a factory chimney.Thus occurred one of the clashes betweenlanded proprietors and industrialists whichassumed specially defined political signifi-cance in later years. Richard Hill, owner ofthe Bay Horse Inn, was next approachedand he agreed to sell land at the back of theinn known as "The Croft". Building beganand, with building, borrowing.“The people lent money and those withoutmoney lent their labour. John Gawthrop car-ted stones from a nearby quarry and whendoubts arose about payment he said: "Well,John, if tha cannot pay, we'll be noa worsefriends i' heaven!" John Binns paid, and byhis rectitude established such a reputation

as to make him banker to the village.“Even with all this help, the money was exhausted asthe building reached the first storey. At this juncture,however, John Binns found a partner in WilliamMarchbank, a Bradford shopkeeper.“William Marchbank was a man of more educationthan his partner, an interesting personality and a ver-satile man. He had opened a grocer's shop at Co-wling. “It is said of him that at a later period of his life he in-vented and connected a telephone from his house atLane Ends to the house at the other end of the row.“The mill was completed. The first building consistedof two storeys, with boiler and beam engine in the bot-tom. “The second floor was used as a warehouse. At rightangles to this block and completing a letter "T" was along two-storey building with looms on both floors.John Binns and his partner William Marchbank, tra-ding as Binns & Marchbank, started with 80 looms.They sub-let part of the mill to William Watson, whoalso had 80 looms, and to John Snowden who had50. “The first loom was started in 1852 by Mrs. ElizabethBradley, whose grand daughter retired from the samefirm and the same occupation in 1951! Friday was

payday and, it is said, that in the evening JohnBinns would sit at the mill door to pay the wor-kers, the wages book on his knee, a bowl of sil-ver on his right and a bowl of copper on his left.“The firm were worsted weavers and the clothwoven was known as "camlet". It was 33 incheswide by 57 yards long by 19½ lbs. weight. Itwas sold mainly through Bradford merchants,dyed red, and finally found its way to the Rus-sian and Baltic armies. Even today, there issome of this camlet cloth, the gift of John Binns,on the cushion upholstery at Bar Methodist Cha-pel.“In 1865, the tenants of the mill were given no-tice to leave. William Watson went to a Cowlingmill. Binns and Marchbank had bought somelooms from a William Shuttleworth of Cowling,who had tried power loom weaving and failed.They became sole occupiers and, in 1867, theyhad 260 looms running.“In 1872 the partnership between John Binnsand William Marchbank was amicably dissolved.By this time, John and Thomas Binns, the foun-der's two sons, were old enough to enter the bu-siness which then took the name of John Binns& Sons. “William Marchbank continued as a manufactu-rer and built Royd Mill Shed, Cowling. In 1875the firm had 298 looms running and in this yearplans were made to convert the two-storey por-tion of the mill into a single and larger weavingshed and also to build a new warehouse. “These alterations and extensions were done bydirect labour. From this time and onwards thefirm also 'gave out work on commission' andthere are records of transactions with other millsat Cowling, Colne, Lothersdale, Silsden andSkipton, many of whom continue in businesstoday.“In 1880, the firm had 360 looms running, andin this year John Binns died. He had built up asuccessful cloth manufacturing business em-ploying more operatives than any other similarundertaking at Cowling. “He had done a great deal for the developmentof the community, for he not only improved the li-velihood of the people, but he helped to improvetheir lives. During his lifetime the village of Co-wling prospered and the inhabitants establisheda reputation for pride of home and thrift whichthey have never since lost.”I’ve underlined the two references to a certain

William Watson in the above extract, because it

is interesting to see the name there.

He could be one of our William Watsons, but

there would have been several in the area at this

time, although all of them were probably some-

how related.

John Binns

The first Croft Mill,

Cowling

88

Here is some from schoolteacher Mr Bur-

gin’s essay about Cowling history, where

he talks about the living conditions in the

local mills, and also about 19th century life

in the area.

“To determine how, in fact, the people ofCowling enjoyed a particular style of life, ifenjoyed is the correct term to use, is ex-tremely difficult due to the singular lack ofdocumented evidence on the subject.“Mrs. Rushworth related to us the recalledmemories of her childhood in Cowling, allthe while comparing these to her situationtoday. She recalled that her mother madea crude porridge from 'blue' milk which herfather, as a boy, collected from farms. Thiswas the staple diet along with bread, but ifbread was eaten it was with butter or jam,but not both. This meagre diet was notsimply a remote case, as the majority ofour respondents indicated that this wasthe normal diet for the major part of the po-pulation at this time in the mid-nineteenthcentury.“Perhaps a more accurate 'picture' can bedetermined from the relating of childhoodexperiences in Cowling during the 1880s.Once again the principal comparisonmade was the difference in standard offood. As a child the family ate meat regu-larly, particularly pork which was providedby her grandfather.“A secondary source was the brawn mo-ther made from boiled sheep's head, allscraps of meat being used and pressedinto shape. Tongue was also eaten but farless frequently, brawn being the majorform of meat consumed. Fruit was very expensive and very rarely eaten, in sharpcontrast to today where Mrs. Rushwortheats a number of oranges, these being herfavourite fruit. As a child, bread and blacktreacle was a normal meal most frequentlyconsumed, and Mrs. Rushworth complai-ned that black treacle was becoming in-creasingly difficult to obtain and she still'loves' this form of treacle.“The diet of the 'average' person wouldseem to have been extremely repetitive,and particularly deficient in vitamins whichare regarded as being essential today.Many persons will have suffered, to var-ying degrees, elements of malnutritionand the diet deficiency diseases, beri beri,scurvy and rickets. “From a medical health point of view therewere two main areas of concern; firstly, theproblem of teeth which very quickly deca-yed when the central form of diet was the

'blue' milk porridge. A Doctor Knowles in Keigh-ley commented on the appalling condition ofthe working poor, and the high incidence of'mouth and throat' disorder stemming from ad-vanced decay and the lack of any treatment.The second cause of problem centred on thepregnant women who, due to a lack of vitamin'A' in their diet suffered from anaemia, a condi-tion which was exacerbated during terms ofpregnancy. Diet deficiency was also responsi-ble for the poor health of young children; thedegree of ill health is indicated by many schoolrecords which have logged the number of chil-dren who were ill, the frequency of doctor visitsto the school, and the reasons for unscheduledschool closures on the recommendation of theschool doctors.“'School closed, thirty four confirmed cases ofringworm' 1891 'Sixteen children sent home by doctor, contactproved with children with scarlet fever'.'Doctor appalled with general health in theschool'. 1882.“Normal diets of individuals indicate the degreeof poverty that existed in the village at this time,but an even more distressing factor was the 'in-consistency' of products that could be purcha-sed, especially in the markets at the time.Sweets, such as they were, were a particularhazard. An indication of the problem was thetwo cases reported, one in Bradford, the otherin Keighley. Of the two the Bradford case wasthe more serious, here a confectioner was se-lling sweets on the market and had purchasedingredients from a chemist. Fifteen people whoate the sweets died and in the ensuing investi-gation it was found that the confectioner hadpurchased powdered arsenic from the chemistby mistake and this had been mixed into thesweets. Again in Keighley in 1883 a confectio-ner purchased essence to make a form of cakeand this made many people seriously ill.“This completes a very dismal picture, not onlywere individuals severely handicapped by theirnormal diet, but also ran tremendous riskswhen purchasing 'luxury' foods with any surplusmoney on visits to the towns and their markets.The standard of living experienced by these vi-llages during the nineteenth century would ap-pear to have been appallingly low, especially inthe time prior to 1850 and did not improve toany significant degree toward the end of thecentury.“With this dismal picture in mind of diet defi-ciency, repetitive meals using the same mate-rial as a base, namely oats and 'blue' milk, oroats and water, was the social life of these pe-ople any more pleasant or less repetitive?

“Mrs. Rishworth said she had never been on holiday until she waswell into her forties when her husband received a wage increase. Asa child she went for day trips to a relative in Addingham, and thesewere looked forward to as very special events. She also remembe-red going on trips to Hebden Bridge and to the fair at Harrogate. Thefair at Harrogate was her highlight memory of childhood as it was thefirst time she had ever seen a coloured person and a magician whowas performing, attracting crowds with a monkey and a parrot. Thefair itself was a mixture of goods for sale on open displays on theground or on benches and sideshows, acrobats, the magician,strongmen, medicines and herbal remedies, a boxing booth, musi-cians and bands. These one day outings were very special and wereevents that were talked about for many months after. “As a child home pastimes were hopscotch, skipping and checks,and as she became older, leisure was centred around knitting, dra-wing, listening to the piano, and the church. The church especiallyplayed a very important part in the social life of families, and it seemsthe village itself. Sunday school was a regular feature and was verywell attended by the village children. At Christmas, apart from bre-akfast and dinner, the time was spent mainly at the chapel. The cha-pel provided the major part of the village communal life with a varietyof activities provided even on weekday evenings, though the wee-kend was more relevant. These activities varied from services, bibleclasses,prayer meetings, to talks and lectures from visiting speakers. Schoolwas attended until the age of 11 when she went to work as a halftimer, going to school in the morning and work in the afternoon andearly evening.“Bertha Hutchinson related similar experiences, attending schoolfrom the age of four, became a half timer at twelve, leaving school atthirteen. This pattern of life left very little time for leisure, especiallywhen one considers that even when the major form of employmentwas in agriculture, spare time was used to supplement wages byhand loom weaving in the home. “Children, themselves, had little spare time as in early days of themill system they were employed full time in the mills e.g, Ghyll Mill inCowling and it was not until the 1870s that education was compul-sory.”

John Watson

1816 - 1883

Jane Cowgill

1823 - 1885

Mary Watson

~1845

William Watson

1851 - 1883

Thomas Watson

1853 - 1916

Samuel Watson

1855 - 1855

John Watson

1860

Margrate MaryAnn Watson

1861 - 1905

John Watson

~1781 - 1850

Dinah Holmes

1791 - 1873

William Watson

1818

James Watson

1820

Peter Watson

1824 - 1885

Joseph Watson

1826

Jonas Watson

1828

Margaret Watson

1831

Alice Watson

1834 - ?

Close Family of John Watson

John Watson

~1781 - 1850

Dinah Holmes

1791 - 1873

John Watson

1747 - 1804

Margaret Edmundson

1749

Elizabeth WATSON

~1769 - 1791

William WATSON

~1770 - 1771

Ann WATSON

~1772 - 1846

Mary WATSON

~1774

Alice WATSON

1777 - 1832

Robert WATSON

1781 - 1852

Peter WATSON

1784

89

Joseph Watson

1841

Mary Watson

~1845

William Watson

1851 - 1883

Thomas Watson

1853 - 1916

Samuel Watson

1855 - 1855

John Watson

1860

Margrate MaryAnn Watson

1861 - 1905

In 1832, a Committee of the House of Commons researched a

Bill to regulate the labour of children in mills and factories. It

was a massive project, in which they interviewed people at

mills up and down the country. The conditions in the Yorks-

hire mills were notably harsh. The Abram Binns Factory in Ic-

kornshaw, Cowling, where most of the Watson family would

have worked, was one of these.

A worker called Stephen Binns was called in for questioning,

and the following is a transcript of the interview:

“What age are you? - Turned 39Have you worked in Factories? - YesWhat age did you commence? - A little before I was 7, or about 7.In what situation were you? - A pieceman for my father.In what sort of mill? - A cotton factory.What were your hours at that time? - Twelve hours per day; but wehad a quarter of an hour at breakfast, and a quarter at drinking; onaccount of being under my father, he was not so particular; he hadwhat he earned.Is that not generally the case in the cotton trade? - It was rather dif-ferent at that time to what it is now. I had a machine to turn by hand,and he could not both attend to the machine and get his drinking atthe same time, and I sat down with him.Are they not obliged to put up the mule by hand now? - Yes.How then now can they get their drinking while it is going on? - It willtake half a minute or a minute coming out; I have solved many ma-thematical questions upon the floor at intervals while it came out.Where did you work? - Ickornshaw, seven miles beyond Keighley;the persons name was Binns, a distant relation of mine [this is ve-rified by a simple Google, the owner of the Mill was indeed calledBinns].What sized mill was it? - A small one.How many Jennies were there? - They were mules; our master hadno Jennies there; he had at another mill; he had eight or ten mules,perhaps.Did you find the work of piecening laborious? - Yes.It was fatiguing to you as a child? - Yes.It required constant attention? - Yes, and great activity.Were you punished to get that degree of work out of you? - Yes, ifI was not sharp enough, whatever went on the mule, my father lostthat quantity of yarn; he had a certain quantity of yarn to produce fora certain quantity of money; and my father sometimes threw a ropeat me, and sometimes a small roller, and sometimes he laced me.Did this go principally at the latter end of the day? - It was principallyafter dinner.What did you become then? - A card minder.What age were you then? - I cannot exactly say it was so long back;I might be about ten years of age, I think; I spread cotton on thecard.Were you still under your father? - No I was under another man.Was your business one that required great activity then? - I neverhad a worse employment, and was never so hard roughed in all mylife as then.What were your hours then? - The same as before.Had you any time allowed for your breakfast or afternoon meal? -No.How came your work to be so hard in this carding, it is not usuallya laborious employment? - The reason for it being so laborious is Ihad a new card on an improved plan made, having a petition bet-ween like two cards.Do you mean it gave out two rovings? - Yes in two separate slivers;I had to weigh a weigh every two minutes; and having two of them,I caused that I had one to weight per minute, and I had to go fifteenyards to weight the cotton; I had to spread it on so that it kept meconstantly at work.Is it not usual to have the scale close by? - It was a small factory.You felt occasionally fatigued at the latter part of the day? - Yes andI had one card to mind; they went on at that time to a sort of cylin-der, and I had to drag it off and put it on a new card.Was your food frequently spoiled by not being able to take it? - Yes,every day.How? - Because I could not take it; we had nothing but porridge,with sometimes treacle and sometimes butter; it was stood by thewindow till it was covered with cotton down; I used to clean it off,throw it out the window and sometimes get a little, and then leaveit again, and then it would get covered again.What employment did you go to then? - I went to spin on a mule onmy own account.What age were you then? - I might be been 12 and 13 or about 13.Of course then you were under your own control? - Yes.Where did you go next? - My father left the place, and I went withhim to a place called Harden, three miles from Bingley.”

The new improved working hours are from 7.a.m. to 6.p.m., work com-

mencing with daily prayers.

Lunch may be taken from 11.30 to 12 noon but there will be no cessation

of work.

There will be no talking during working hours.

There will be no smoking or taking of alcohol.

There will be no leaving the office without the permission granted by the

Head Clerk. If it is necessary for toilet purposes you may go down the

grounds to below the second gate. The said grounds to be kept tidy.

There is a stove in the office for heating, and it is recommended that each

member of staff bring 4 lbs of fuel each day

ICKCORNSHAW MILLREGULATIONS 1852

People of the surname Watson appear in just about any local history, but as they

all have such similar names, it’s hard to work out whether they were our ances-

tors. But it seems that while some Watsons were humble mill workers, others

were helping run the show. The following memoirs appeared in the Craven Herald

& Pioneer - 3rd December 1937.

“In 1811, the mill was taken over by Peter and William Watson for spinning andweaving purposes. (At that time, they also owned a spinning mill at Scar Top,which received its' motive power from a water-wheel similar to the one at Ic-kornshaw).“In later years, the mill was divided and used solely for weaving, the firms thenbeing Messrs. Wm. Watson & Sons Ltd. and, Messrs. John & David Pickles, thelatter eventually removing to Keighley. It was during this period that the only ac-cident of any consequence which happened in connection with the water-wheeloccurred. The victim was Mr. James Watson ... He was sitting with others on thetop of what proved to be a very insecure covering of the water-wheel in the secondstorey of the old building and, when he was rising from his seat, the covering bo-ards gave way and he fell through right on top of the wheel, which had just beenstarted after the dinner hour. However, he was seen by my grandfather, whopromptly shut off the water and brought the wheel to a standstill. If he had fallena second or two later, my grand-father would have been out of sight, and wouldnot have seen the accident. Mr. Watson was found jammed between two doorswhich, at that time, opened from the mill yard into the wheelhouse, and he was re-leased with much difficulty. During his release, he asked for his pipe.”

90