Carlisle Patriot, 22 Oct 1825 - Cumberland Sessions (1)
petra.mi...@doctors.org.uk
Saturday 22 Oct 1825 (p. 3, col. 2-3)
CUMBERLAND SESSIONS.
The Michaelmas General Quarter Sessions for the County of Cumberland commenced at Penrith on Tuesday last, and, altogether, only occupied the Court seven or eight hours, pretty equally divided between Tuesday and Wednesday: we never saw so little business on a similar occasion. Among the Magistrates upon the Bench were,
Francis Yates AGLIONBY, Esq. the chairman; the Hon. Col. LOWTHER, M. P., Sir P. MUSGRAVE, Bart. M. P., Sir J. R. G. GRAHAM, Bart., Rev. R. MATTHEWS, Rev. Walter FLETCHER, John DE WHELPDALE, Esq., T. H. GRAHAM, Esq., C. S. FEATHERSTONHAUGH, Esq., Thomas WYBERGH, Esq., Henry HOWARD, Esq. Corby Castle, P. H. HOWARD, Esq., Wilfrid LAWSON, Esq., Richard FERGUSON, Esq., W. P. JOHNSON, Esq., Robt. HODGSON, Esq., John HARRISON, Esq., Joseph GILBANKS, Esq., Wm. HEBSON, Esq., and Thomas SCOTT, Esq. The High Sheriff was also present. Mr. LAIDMAN was foreman of the grand jury.
On Wednesday, the Lord Lieutenant came in from Lowther Castle, in order to attend the Sessions, but before his Lordship and Colonel LOWTHER reached the place by a stretch of fancy called a Court-House, the public business was at an end, and the Court adjourned to the Crown Inn.
The first day's sitting was occupied with routine business and the hearing of several unimportant motions, and two parish appeal causes.
On the motion of Mr. AGLIONBY, the Rules of the Eskdale Ward Friendly Society, lately established, were enrolled, having been duly submitted to the Magistrates and the actuaries of two Assurance Offices.
The King v. the Inhabitants of Eaglesfield.—This cause has often been before the Court, as many of our readers probably remember. It was now stated that the road in question had been put into a proper state of repair; and all the costs having been paid, the indictment was ordered to be discharged.
The King v. the Inhabitants of Brampton.—This was an indictment for the non-repair of 102 roods of high-road, preferred and found at the Easter Sessions. The Surveyor pleaded guilty, and Mr. AGLIONBY moved for an extension of time, two-thirds of the work having been satisfactorily performed, and the rest is in train. The Chairman seemed to think that the whole of the work might have been done by this time.
Mr. WYBERGH.—It is always best to lay on a fine in these cases, and then you are sure of having the work done. This is the constant practice in other places; and it is attended with no extra expense or inconvenience to the parish.
Time extended to next Sessions.
The King v. the Inhabitants of Nether Denton.—Mr. SOWERBY moved that a fine of £500, laid on this township at the Christmas Sessions, for delay in repairing a certain highway, be respited. One thousand and nineteen yards of the road had been already properly repaired, he said, at an expense of £500, and the whole levyable property in the parish amounted to only £800.
Mr. Ponsonby JOHNSON observed that the parish had let the whole of the work, and the Court would therefore probably comply with its prayer.
The Chairman thought a fine ought to be levied.
Col. LOWTHER was of the same opinion, especially as only one-third of the work had been done in a year.
Sir J. R. G. GRAHAM, in reference to what had fallen from Mr. WYBERGH, said it was not indifferent to a parish whether a fine were levied or not, for he believed a per centage in case of levy was paid to the Clerk of the Peace.
The Clerk of the Peace intimated that the per centage was a shilling in the pound for the first hundred, and sixpence in the pound for the remainder, whatever the amount might happen to be.
Mr. WYBERGH did not think this a very serious inconvenience. The levy was so common in some parishes, that he had known overseers come and ask for it.
Mr. MATTHEWS.—That is perhaps where some constable finds it difficult to raise the money.
Chairman.—I am of opinion that the fine should be levied.
The Surveyor, on being questioned, said the contractors were bound to finish the road by Christmas, but not under any penalty.
The question was put to the vote, and the Bench decided not to levy.
Mr. WYBERGH voted against the levy, because he saw that it was the general sense of the Bench, yet he thought this a bad practice.
Chairman.—It is an encouragement to have bad roads.
[to be continued]
Planmeister
--
Hit a brick wall? Perhaps another member has the solution. You may never know if you don't ask.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GENEALOGY-CUMBRIA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to genealogy-cumber...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/genealogy-cumberland/003101dc9f37%24c85d2f00%2459178d00%24%40doctors.org.uk.
--
El Cerrito, CA
petra.mi...@doctors.org.uk
Thank you, Larry – it’s lovely to be appreciated!
So what dates are you interested in then?
Petra
From: genealogy-...@googlegroups.com <genealogy-...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Planmeister
Sent: 16 February 2026 20:33
To: genealogy-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [GENEALOGY - CUMBRIA] Carlisle Patriot, 22 Oct 1825 - Cumberland Sessions (1)
Petra, uh -- Dr. Petra! --
It has been a while since I have replied to your emails. I delete most of them w/o reading them. BUT ...
Every time I do, I think about your level of dedication, yea devotion, to this personal mission. Though your work, given the dates, doesn't directly assist me, I know that it will make a huge difference for many, MANY people looking for roots in NW England.
Thank you again for the work you do! You are the BEST!
Larry A. Mitchel PhD
On Mon, Feb 16, 2026 at 3:31 AM petra.mitchinson via GENEALOGY-CUMBRIA <genealogy-...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Saturday 22 Oct 1825 (p. 3, col. 2-3)
CUMBERLAND SESSIONS.
The Michaelmas General Quarter Sessions for the County of Cumberland commenced at Penrith on Tuesday last, and, altogether, only occupied the Court seven or eight hours, pretty equally divided between Tuesday and Wednesday: we never saw so little business on a similar occasion. Among the Magistrates upon the Bench were,
Larry A. Mitchel PhD
El Cerrito, CA
Planmeister
--
Hit a brick wall? Perhaps another member has the solution. You may never know if you don't ask.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GENEALOGY-CUMBRIA" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to genealogy-cumber...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/genealogy-cumberland/005301dc9f84%241967ba40%244c372ec0%24%40doctors.org.uk.
--
sarahre...@gmail.com
Maybe twice I have come across a Reveley or a relative all these years,
and lo and behold here comes Reynold Mitchel out of the woodwork!
Hi Larry, glad to see you are still out there! Last time we wrote was in 2012!
26 Aug1759 WILLIAM son of REYNOLD MITCHELL of Low Mill;
William's mother was JANE REVELEY, born May 3, 1735 and baptized at St.
Michael’s in Arlecdon. She married Reynold Mitchel (forgeman) on May 7,
1754 at St Bees Abbey Church. Jane had obviously moved to Low Mill with the
rest of the Reveleys. I know Reynold moved to Merthyr Tydfil to work at
Charles Woods' pit in Wales in 1766, and had been at a forge about three
miles from Hereford. He had served his time with Thomas Reveley, Elizabeth's
father, at Low Mill, according to Charles Wood’s diary.
Dr. P, I wouldn’t dream of deleting your emails without reading them!
I scan every one for the surnames you so carefully capitalize, often dig deeper when there’s
a word I have never heard before, and sometimes throw in an explanation or 2 that Dot always chuckles at.
I’ve also had the luxury of meeting you in person and being a guest at your home,
And will never forget your thinking I would actually ride that monster ferris wheel.
Fun times, treasured memories. 😉
Love,
Sarah
petra.mi...@doctors.org.uk
Well, Cumbrian newspapers, in the shape of the Cumberland Pacquet, did not start until 1774. Nev has posted extracts until 1777 on the Cumbria FHS list, but no mention of Reynold MITCHEL or MITCHELL.
Planmeister
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/genealogy-cumberland/005f01dca065%2443dd9b50%24cb98d1f0%24%40gmail.com.
sarahre...@gmail.com
Hi Larry,
Actually, Woods referred to Reynold and his buddy as ramblers and not to be depended upon, which better clarifies what he meant.
Englishmen were from wherever the events of the day took them, be it wars, expansion of the British Empire, job opportunities, or dreams of a New World. My Reveleys were forge men and set up forges for the Woods whenever they opened a new mine. When the Woods were making plans to expand to America, they planned on taking the Reveleys with them. When the venture didn’t happen, the Reveleys decided America sounded like a good plan, and the whole family settled in Virginia. Reveley was sometimes mistranscribed as Bewley or Beverly, but we have other records that have tracked their locations.
sarahre...@gmail.com
Larry’s comment about the Industrial Revolution sparked another search for me. When/what was the Industrial Revolution?:
https://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Timeline-Industrial-Revolution/
With the advent of the industrial revolution, men with a particular set of skills (sorry, Liam N!) could move away from their place, and take their skills with them.
.
petra.mi...@doctors.org.uk
Hey, that’s a great article, Sarah!