Abraham Crompton

1757-1829

Born: presumably 1757, christened 15 July 1757 at Bolton, died 3 May 1829 aged 71 years.
Son of: John Crompton (1722-1780?) and Catherine Wharton.
Brother of:
1. Mary Crompton (nee Crompton, 1759?-1833) who married Peter Crompton (1760?-1833).
2. John Crompton (1761?-????).
3. Catherine Crompton (1762?-1826).
Abraham married: in 1788 in Liverpool, Alice Hayhurst.
Abraham and Alice had issue:
1. Ellen Booth (nee Crompton, 1789-18??) who married Henry Booth.
2. Catherine Thornborow (nee Crompton, 1790-18??) who married Adam Thornborow.
3. Hannah Armstrong (nee Crompton, 1791-18??) who married John Armstrong.
4. Elizabeth Crompton (1793-????).
5. Frances Crompton (1793-1871?), possibly Frances Ann Crompton.  Frances appears to have maried 12 Jan 1826 at Cheshunt, Hertfordshire, Thomas Solly (1796-1842), Surgeon, of Walthamstow, Essex.
6. Susan Crompton (1794-????).
7. Abraham Wharton Crompton (1796-1863) who married Anne Willman (????-1876).
8. Lucy Crompton (1797-1830).  Died 31 May 1830 aged 32 years.
9. George Crompton (1799-????).
10. Sarah Crompton (1799-????).
11. Jessy Potter (nee Crompton, 1801-1891) who married Edmund Potter (????-1883).  Grandparents of Beatrix Potter.
12. Janet or Susan Crompton (1802-18??).
13. Laura Crompton (1802-1815). Died 1 February 1815 aged 12 years.
14. Brooks Crompton (1804-1881).
15. John Allington Crompton (1806-1831?).  John Pilkington Crompton died 3 March 1831 aged 27 years.  He had a daughter Susan who died 26 November 1884 aged 90.
16. John Crompton (1809-18??).




Abraham Crompton: An Overview

We know of Abraham from the following sources of information:
1. Information supplied to me by Sheila Howells who has researched this from many sources including the Crompton Papers in the Derby Local History Library.
2. Information supplied to me by Glyn Gregory.
3. Various notes in the Heath-Caldwell family archive.

 

Abraham Crompton was a first cousin of Elizabeth Caldwell nee Stamford who married  James Caldwell .  James and Abraham seem to have been involved in a number of business ventures.  James also reprsented Abraham after he was accused of saying things against the government.  Notes relating to this case are below.


17 December 1792.  Copy of letter sent from Lieut Harrison to Thomas Ainsworth.

Copy of a letter written and sent to Mr Thomas Ainsworth of Bolton, the 17th December 1792.  Lieut Harrison of Chorley.

Mr Ainsworth,

Sir,

I must beg leave to offer you my sentiments respecting the business Mr H-d-a was here upon, on Saturday last, for which I hope your excuse. It strikes me that every association ought to aim at the preservation of Peace, good order and universal good neighbourhood, and your association appears to be expressly for this purpose. How far then it is proper to interfere in other towns so as to cause a disagreeable division amongst the inhabitants, at present upon the most social agreeable footing, I leave it to your own judgement to determine. With me it appears in the most disagreeable point of view; and to think there may be the least possibility of any individuals being called upon in the characters of informers (a name detested by all respectable characters of any Party) is what must give the most disagreeable sensation to any man of sensibility. Also instead of conciliating differences in opinion; to proceed to any kind of individual prosecutions, is I think only tending to inflame: and in the present instance in my mind wholly unnecessary. There are few men but have particular political opinions, which it is impossible (nay, in some measure unjust) to deprive them off, so long as they do not interfere in any particular manner with the Constitution, and for any individual to suffer for a few inconsiderate words, spoken without any mischievous or bad intention, which (from the general tenor of the gentleman's actions and known character both public and private) is generally believed would in my be very hard. It would also be a very great loss to the town to be without a Magistrate, and I do not believe we have another gentleman in the town who would accept the office.

Though the gentleman's opinion and might differ with respect to the Form of Government we might fix upon, had we the formation of one; yet I must do him the justice to say, that I firmly believe we would never have the least idea, (and I absolutely think him incapable) of doing anything that he thought might affect the Peace and good order of Society. In fact, upon any occasion of disturbance, I am sure he would be one of the first to step forward to quell it by whatever party brought forward.

I sincerely hope all further thoughts upon this business may be dropp'd, as I am well convinced most of the Principal Inhabitants of this place are of the same opinion with me; and it would give me,  and I dare say them, much uneasiness to see any further steps taken.

I have only to add, that from the reasons stated, you will particularly oblige me, and I doubt not many of the Gentlemen of this place, if you will use your influence to stop any further procedures.

CH

Copy of a Declaration given to Mr Caldwell of Newcastle under-lym by Leit Harrison of Chorley, February 5th 1793.''On the first of December last Abraham Crompton Junior Esq. who resides at Chorley in the County of Lancaster, being in the Coffee Room at Chorley, reading the papers, in company with Mr John Harrison, Mr James Smith, Mr Thomas Hindle, Mr William Hough, and Mr Herbert Edgar, all of whom are his neighbours and acquaintances, the subject of politics was started owing to some mention or other being made of Judge Ashurst's Charge, when the conversation turning generally upon forms of Government, it was observed by somebody, that no moderate person could be for a Revolution; when Mr Comrpton said that he was for a revolution, upon which Mr Harrison observed, 'That is a very undefined term, you would not mean by that to overset the present Constitution?' Mr Crompton replied, ‘I would have no Lords.' Mr Harrison then asked, 'What! And would you have no King?' Mr Crompton replied, 'Yes, I would have no King; but if it was to be done it should be gradually, and when it appeared to be the general sense of the people to have it so.' The conversation was here interrupted by the Mistress of the Coffee Room opening the door, and some other Gentlemen coming in, nothing more was said; but Mr Crompton afterwards declared to Mr Harrison that he wished to have explained himself further had he not been interrupted.

The foregoing is according to the best of my recollection the substance of what passed; but I considered and clearly understood it at the time as nothing more than mere matter of loose, private conversation on a general question of politics and government; and not at all as expressive on the part of Mr Crompton of anything personal or disrespectful to his present Majesty, or as conveying, or meant to convey that the idea of any wish or intention to disturb, weaken or reflect upon the existing Government.

I have known Mr Crompton for many years and have always considered him as a worthy respectable man and of unimpeachable character and conduct. Since he has been in the Commission of the Peace, he has uniformly acquitted himself, so far as I ever heard, or could judge, as an useful upright Magistrate, particularly vigilant and active in the discharge of his Office, and in enforcing the execution of and active submission to theLaws.

The letter, a copy of which is subjoined, and which was written by me on the 17th December to a Mr Thomas Ainsworth who is a friend of mine, and a Member of the Association established at Bolton for the Protection of Liberty and Property, will more fully explain my sentiments and impressions at the time, respecting this disagreeable and misrepresented business.

Signed

L H.

17 February 1793.  Letter to James Caldwell from Abraham Crompton junior.

Chorley Feb 17, 1793

Dear Sir,

I thank you very sincerely for your kind and friendly letter and for all your wishes and endeavours to serve me. With respect to the accusation against me for tearing down Judge Ashhurst's Charge I have only to answer that it is totally unfounded laying my hand upon my heart and calling God to witness I solemnly declare that it was not my act and deed and that it was done without my knowledge, direction or consent on the contrary I was sorry to find it pulled down and expressed myself strongly to that purpose. A more unjust calumny could not possibly have been circulated. How wicked men can be when their hearts are bent on mischief. As to the other political outrages you mention I have not the most distant conception to what you refer and should be obliged to you to explain yourself more particularly. I have no doubt they will be found to have existed no where but in the black hearts of my malicious enemies, the number of whom I am sorry to find is greater than I had supposed. Do good Sir be kind enough to let me know what these outrages are. I mentioned your kind letter to Mr Harrison, one of the witnesses summoned against me who will take the liberty of troubling you with a line of explanation of the whole business as I wish to conceal nothing from you conscious to myself as I before said of no evil or seditious intention. With great respect I remain,

Your much obliged friend,

And humble servant

Abraham Crompton Junior. 

Notes relating to James Caldwell defending his wife's cousin Abraham Crompton.
Abraham Crompton the younger of Chorley in theCounty of Lancaster Esq., maketh oath and saith that on the 1st day of December 1792 being the day on which his Majesty's late proclamation a'' first appeared in London and therefore a considerable time before he this Deponent could have any knowledge, information that Chorley aforesaid being distant from London 200 miles upwards so this Deponent being in the Coffee chamber at Chorley aforesaid in company with Mssrs James Smith Gent., John Harrison, Cotton manufacturer, Mr [illegible] surgeon, Mr Hough Attorney at Law [Mr Berk?] Edgar, Liquor Merchant all of whom are this Deponents neighbours and acquaintances were the only persons in the room, the subject of politics and the nature and [menk?] of different forms of Government being started, he this Deponent, on its being observed by the said James Smith that no person of property could be for a Revolution was led in the course of argument and conversation inadvertently to say he was for a Revolution and on being asked by the said John Harrison whether he would have no Lords to reply that he would have no Lords and on being asked by the said John Harrison whether he would have no King hastily and unthinkingly to answer them he would have no King or the said Deponent used expressions to that effect. But this Deponent positively saith that he did not use such expressions with any wish or design whatever to excite the persons to whom he addressed the same to attempt or undertake any matter or thing for the subversion or disturbance of the present constitution nor did he mean thereby to show any slight or contempt upon his Majesty's person or government but that the same were upon the subject of and in answer to the observation so made by the said James Smith and the questions so asked by the said John Harrison as [ap?] in which way alone he the Deponent having inferred it would that he was understood by all the parties present. And this Deponent further said that though he might in the cause of argument express such opinions “a proposit” as aforesaid yet that he this Deponent is not the less aware that many things abstractedly and theoretically considered may appear to be maintainable and right are in practice inexpedient, dangerous and this Deponent further saith that it was his wish and intention to have explained himself further upon the subject so as to have precluded any misconstruction or mistake had he not been prevented by the Mistress of the house and some other persons coming into the room whom this Deponent did not think it proper to resume the topic. And this Deponent further saith that some time after such conversation had been so held by this Deponent as aforesaid namely on the 19th of the same [month?] of December at about 10 or 11 o'clock at night he this Deponent was informed by the said Mr Harrison that he the said Mr Harrison together with the said Mr Smith and Mr Hough had been served with summons from the Rev Dr Master the Rev Thomas Baldwin two of his majesty's [Justices of the Peace?] for the County of Lancaster to appear before them for the purposes therein mentioned and a copy of which summons and directed to the said John Harrison is hereto annexed * which summons as this Deponent was informed and understood had been issued with a view to an inquiry into the conduct of this Deponent and the conversation so held by him as aforesaid and this Deponent further saith that he this Deponent together with the said witnesses being much surprised by such proceedings as aforesaid and it being doubted whether the said witnesses were under any obligation to give their evidence under such circumstances as aforesaid but all the said [fates?] expressed their wish so to do what was most proper on the occasion it was proposed and agreed to have the assistance and advice of Counsel  

[Crossed out – Deponent further saith that Thomas Cooper Esq., Barrister at Law who resides at about 12 miles distant from Chorley aforesaid being mentioned  - with whom this Deponent had not any particular acquaintance he this Deponent expressed his wish that some other Counsel should be applied and if possible one who had not been much engaged in political controversies – with the said Mr Cooper -  - commissioned at 2 public turnpike road meetings which the said Mr Cooper also attended as commissioners]

And this Deponent further saith that it was thereupon proposed to send for John Adderson Esq., Barrister at Law who resides at [Preston?] in the said County of Lancaster and who being approved of by all the said [masters?] was set for and attended at Chorley accordingly and this Deponent saith that the said Mr Cooper [crossed out] Barrister at Law did also attend as Counsel with the said Mr Addison at Chorley aforesaid owing to an application having been made to him as the Deponent was afterwards informed and [retained?] at the insistence of a friend of this Deponent who resides at Bolton which is near to Mr Cooper's place of residence and to whom this Deponent had sent in consequence of the summonses which had been so issued [next page – crossed out] as aforesaid, but this Deponent saith that such application to the said Mr Cooper as aforesaid – [crossed out]

And this Deponent further saith that he hath been informed and [assured?] that the said Counsel did object to the witnesses being examined upon oath by the said magistrate unless they the Counsel were permitted to be present at such examine which being refused this Deponent has been informed and [?] that [illegible] this Deponent further saith in direct contradiction to what he understands has been most falsely imputed to him that this Deponent did not pull down or cause to be pulled down Judge Ashhursts Charge which had been stuck up in the Coffee Room at Chorley aforesaid but that on the contrary he this Deponent being informed that the same had been pulled down by some person did express his disapprobation thereof and his wish to have the same put up again [crossed out – this Deponent saith that he this Deponent did directly and immediately circulate and distribute  the pamphlet [more lines edited and crossed out]

Saith that so far from entertaining or having ever entertained any such design to subvert the present Constitution or disturb the government, he this Deponent should in perfect conformity to the real principles and opinions exert his utmost endeavour to prevent and defeat any attempt at the King and that he this Deponent hath on all occasions since he had been a magistrate for the County of Lancaster diligently and faithfully according to the best of the this Deponent's knowledge and abilities enforced the Execution of and a due [submission?] to the Laws. And this Deponent further saith that from the sentiments which he this Deponent has been informed and understands that the gentlemen present at such conversation as aforesaid have concurrently expressed concerning the same as well as of this Deponent's character and conduct both public and private this Deponent is unable to judge with whom and in what manner the Depending prosecution has originated unless that from the circumstances of this Deponent being a [protestant?] and the present ferment and animosity of the public mind in the neighbourhood where this Deponent resides against such Dissenters advantage may have been wished and attempted to be taken of him in consequence of some mention or other having been made of such conversation as aforesaid and some misapprehension thereof and which supposition he this Deponent is the more led to entertain from his having received on the very morning of such meeting of the Magistrates at Chorley as aforesaid a printed copy addressed to him this Deponent of a [Vailent, violent?] and scurrilous paper entitled ‘A Character of a Presbyterian & Justice' and highly reflective upon the said with the most violent invective and abuse [ascribed to?] the character of the Protestant Dissenters of the Presbyterian Denomination  [crossed out – a copy of which can be produced].

Caldwell [copy of summons in two different handwritings.] relating to Abraham Crompton.

St. Hilary Term, 33rd George 1793

Lancashire, to wit Be it Remembered that Sir Archibald MacDonald, Knight Attorney General of Law present Sovereign Lord the King who for our present Sovereign Lord the King in this behalf prosecuteth in his own proper person comes here into the Court of our said Lord the King before the King himself at Westminster on Wednesday next after the Octavo of Saint Hilary in this same Term and for our said Lord and King giveth the Court here to understand and be informed that Abraham Crompton, late of Chorley in the County of Lancashire Esquire being a wicked seditious and ill disposed person and having no regard for the Laws of this Realm and most unlawfully, wickedly, maliciously and seditiously devising, contriving and intending to disturb the Peace and tranquility of our land, the King and of this Kingdom and to bring our Sovereign Lord the King and the Peers of this Realm and the Constitution and Government of this Kingdom as by Law established into hatred and contempt with the subjects of this Realm, and to asperse and vilify our said Lord and King and the Peers of this Realm and to alienate and withdraw the affections and fidelity of his said Majesty's subjects from his said Majesty's person and government on ye 1st day of December in ye 33rd year of the Reign of our present Sovereign Lord the King at Chorley aforesaid in the in the County of Lancashire in order to compleat perfect and bring to effect his most wicked and seditious contrivance and intentions aforesaid in the presence and hearing of diverse subjects of our Sovereign Lord the King  [ 3 words] wickedly, maliciously and seditiously did say, utter and publish of and concerning the Constitution and government of this Kingdom the scandalous and seditious words following, to wit, meaning himself the said Abraham, and for a Revolution meaning a Revolution in the Constitution and Government of this Kingdom and Imeaning himself the said Abraham would have no King or Lords meaning thereby that he would have no King or Lords meaning thereby that he would have no King or Peers of this Realm in the Constitution and Government thereof. In contempt of our Sovereign Lord the King and the Laws of this Kingdom to the great danger of our present happy constitution to the evil and pernicious example of all they in the like case affording and against the peace of our said present Sovereign Lord and King, his Crown and dignity. And aforesaid Attorney General of our said Lord and King for our said Lord the King with the Court here [furn?] to understand and be informed that the said Abraham Crompton being such a person as aforesaid and again unlawfully, wickedly, maliciously and seditiously devising, contriving and intending as aforesaid afterwards, to wit, on aforesaid 1st day of December in the aforesaid 33rd year of the reign of our said Sovereign Lord and King with force and arms at Chorley aforesaid in the County aforesaid in order to compleat, perfect and bring to affect his most his most wicked and seditious contrivances and intentions aforesaid in the presence and hearing of [diverse?] subjects of our Sovereign Lord and King unlawfully, wickedly, maliciously and seditiously did say, utter and publish of and concerning the constitution and Government of this Kingdom the scandalous and seditious words following, to wit, [Imeaning?] himself the aforesaid Abraham for a revolution, no King, no Lords meaning a revolution in the aforesaid constitution and government of this Kingdom and that there should be no King, or Peers of this Realm in the Constitution and Government thereof in contempt of our Sovereign Lord the King and the Laws of this Kingdom to the great danger of our happy constitution, to the evil and pernicious example of all those in the like case affording and against the peace of our said Lord the King, his Crown and dignity where upon the said Attorney General of our said Lord the King who for our said Lord the King in the behalf prosecuteth for our said Lord the King prayoth this consideration of the court here in the premises and that due process of Law may be accorded against him the aforesaid Abraham Crompton in this behalf to make him answer to our said Lord and King touching and concerning these [Premds?] aforesaid?   

About two months ago Abraham Crompton Junior Esquire who resides at Chorley in the County of Lancaster being in the Coffee Room at Chorley reading the papers with company with John Harrison, Mr James Smith, Mr Thomas Hindle, Mr William Hough and Mr Herbert Edgar, all of whom are his neighbours and acquaintances the subject of politics was started, owing to some mention or other being made of Judge Ashhurst's Charges; wherein the conversation turning generally upon forms of Government it was observed by somebody present that no moderate person could before a Revolution when Mr Crompton said that he was for a Revolution upon which Mr Harrison observed, ‘That is a very undefined term, you would not mean by that to overset the present Constitution.' Mr Crompton relied ‘I would have no Lords.' Mr Harrison then said, ‘What, and would you have no King?' Mr Crompton replied ‘Yes,I would have no King.' Mr Hough then said ‘Republicanism (or a Republican Government) would never do for this Country.' On which Mr Harrison observed that is could not, it had been tried. The conversation was here interrupted by the Mistress of the Coffee Room opening the door, and other gentlemen coming in nothing further was said; but Mr Crompton afterwards declared to Mr Smith that he wished to have explained himself further had he not bee interrupted.

The foregoing is as much as I recollect of what was said, though I cannot speak positively to it.

But I considered, and clearly understood at the time, to be nothing more than mere matter of lose, private conversation, on a general question of politics and Government, and not at all as expressive on the part of Mr Crompton, of any thing personal or disrespectful to his present Majesty, or as conveying, or meant to convey, the idea of any wish or intention to distress or reflect upon the existing Government.

I have know Mr Crompton for many years and have always considered him as a very worthy respectable man and of unimpeachable character and conduct since he has been in the Commission of the Peace, he has uniformly acquitted himself, so far as I ever heard or could judge, as an useful upright Magistrate, particularly vigilant and active, in enforcing the execution of, and a due submission to the Laws. In respect to politics I have always thought him moderate. When I have dined at his house, it was always his custom to give the King as his first Toast; and in case of any Riot or disturbance, I believe that he would be one of the first to step forwards to quell it, in whatever party or form whatever cause it might originate.

Witness

James Smith

James Caldwell

Signed at Chorley by Mr Smith

4th February 1793

On the first of December last, Abraham Crompton Junior Esquire, who resides at Chorley in the County of Lancaster being in the Coffee room at Chorley reading the papers in company with Mr John Harrison, Mr James Smith, Mr Thomas Hindle, Mr William Hough and Mr Herbert Edgar, all of whom are his neighbours and acquaintances, the subject of politics was started, owing to some mention or other being made of Judge Ashursts Charge when the conversation turning generally upon forms of Government it was observed by somebody that no moderate person could be for a revolution, when Mr Crompton said that he was for a Revolution, upon which Mr Harrison observed that is a very undefined term, you would not mean by that to overset the present constitution. Mr Crompton replied I would have no Lords. Mr Harrison then asked, what and would you have no King? Mr Crompton replied yes, I would have no King, but if it was to be done it should be gradually and when it appeared to be the general sense of the people to have it so. The conversation was now interrupted by the Mistress of the Coffee Room opening the door and some more Gentlemen coming in. Nothing more was said but Mr Crompton afterwards declared to Mr Harrison that we wished to have explained himself further had he not been interrupted.

The foregoing is according to the best of my recollection the substance of what passed but I considered and clearly understood it at the time as nothing more than mere matter of loose private conversation, on a general question of politics and Government, and not at all as expressed on the part of Mr Crompton of any thing said or disrespectful to his present Majesty or an conveying or meant to convey the idea of any wish or intention to disturb, weaken or reflect upon the existing Government.

I have known Mr Crompton for many years and have always considered him as a worthy respectable man of unimpeachable character and conduct. Since he has been in the Commission of the peace he has uniformly acquitted himself, so far as I ever heard, or could judge as an useful, upright magistrate particularly vigilant active in the discharge of his office, and in enforcing the execution of and a due submission to the Laws.

The letter a copy of which is subjoined and which was written by me on the Seventeenth December to a Mr Thomas Ainsworth who is a friend of mine and a Member of the Association established at Bolton for the protection of liberty and property, will more fully explain my sentiments and impressions at the time respecting this disagreeable and misrepresented business.

John Harrison

Signed in the presence of James Caldwell

Chorley

4th February 1792

Mr Ainsworth,

Sir,

I must beg leave to offer you my sentiments respecting the businesss, Mr Hardman was here upon, on Saturday last, for which I hope your excuse. It strikes me that every association might to aim at the preservation of peace, good order and universal good neighbourhood And your association appears to be expressly to this purpose. How far then it is proper to interfere in other towns so as to cause a disagreeable division amongst the inhabitants at present upon the most social agreeable footing; I leave it to your own Judgment to determine, with me it appears in the most disagreeable point of view and to think there may be the least possibility of any individuals being called upon in the character of informers (a name detested by all respectable characters of any party) is what must give the most disagreeable sensations to any man of sensibility. Also instead of conciliation differences in opinion to proceed to any kind of individual prosecutions is, I think, only leading to inflame and in the present instance in my mind wholly unnecessary. There are few men but have particular political opinions – impossible, nay in measure unjust to deprive them of so long as they do not interfere in any particular manner with the constitution. And for any individual to suffer for a few inconsiderate words spoken without any mischievous or bad intention which (from the general tone of the Gentleman's actions and known character both public and private) is generally believed would in my mind be very hard.

It would also be a very great loss to the town to be without a Magistrate and I do not believe we have another Gentleman in the town who would accept the office.

Though the Gentleman's opinion and mine might differ with respect to the form of Government we might fix upon, had we the Formation of one, yet I must do him the justice to say that I firmly believe he would never have the least idea (and I absolutely think him incapable) of doing any thing that he thought might effect the peace and good order of society. In fact upon any occasion of disturbance I am sure he would be one of the first to step forward to quell it by what ever party brought forward.

I sincerely hope all further thoughts upon this business may be dropp'd, as I am well convinced most of the Principal Inhabitants of this place are of the same opinion with me; and it would give me, and I dare say them, much uneasiness to see any further steps taken.

I have only to add, that from the reasons stated, you will particularly oblige me, and I doubt not many of the Gentlemen of this place, if you will use your influence to stop any further procedures.

Mr H begs to unite &c &c &c

Jn Harrison

December 17 1792

On 1st December 1792, Abraham Crompton Junior Esquire, who resides at Chorley in the County of Lancaster being in the Coffee room at Chorley reading the papers in company with Mr John Harrison, Mr James Smith, Mr Thomas Hindle, Mr William Hough and Mr Herbert Edgar, all of whom are his neighbours and acquaintances, the subject of politics was started, when Mr Edgar observed he was for moderate reform, when Mr Crompton said he was for a Revolution, upon which Mr Harrison observed that is a very undefined term, you would not mean by that to overset the present constitution. Mr Crompton replied I would have no Lords. Mr Harrison then said, what and would have no King? Mr Crompton replied ‘I would have no King.' Mr Hough waited for some person to reply and then said ‘Englishmen will never - governed by a Republican Government.' Mr Harrison observed ‘that system has been tried but it would not do.'  The conversation was here interrupted by the Mistress of the Coffee Room opening the door and other Gentlemen coming in, nothing further was said.

I considered and clearly understood what Mr Crompton said at the time to be nothing more than mere matter of loose private, inadvertent and unguarded conversation on a  general question of politics and Government, and not at all as expressive on the part of Mr Crompton of any thing personal or disrespectful to his present Majesty or as conveying or meant to convey the idea of any wish or intention to disturb, weaken or reflect upon the existing Government.

I have known Mr Crompton for many years and have always considered him as a worthy respectable man of unimpeachable character and conduct, and have had occasion often to go before him in his capacity of a Magistrate when he was vigilant and active in enforcing the execution of and a due submission to the Laws.

In respect to Politics I have always thought him moderate and have often asked Mr Smith his sentiment of Mr Crompton's principles when Mr Smith uniformly told me he was for no more than for a moderate reform which every good subject could wish for. That at the News Room dinner which was on Thursday following the above conversation he gave the King for his Toast and I am confident in case of any Riot or Disturbance he would be one of the first to step forward and exert himself to quell it, in whatever party or upon whatever cause it might originate.

Chorley 4th Feb 1793.

William Hough

About two months ago Abraham Crompton Junior Esquire, who resides at Chorley in the County of Lancaster being in the Coffee room at Chorley reading the papers in company with Mr John Harrison, Mr James Smith, Mr Thomas Hindle, Mr William Hough and Mr Herbert Edgar, all of whom are his neighbours and acquaintances, the subject of politics was started and a general conversation took place upon the forms of Government in the course of which a Reform in this Country was mentioned when Mr Crompton said he thought there must be a Revolution or something to that effect, on which Mr Harrison observed ‘Why then Mr Crompton, you would have no King and no Lords,' to which Mr Crompton replied Yes, but immediately added that he would not have a Revolution take place till every body was agreeable to it, and it could done without rioting and mobbing or used expressions to that effect. The conversation here interrupted by some persons coming into the room.

That is all that I particularly recollect of what passed, but I considered and clearly understood it at the time mere matter of loose private conversation and not at all personal to his present Majesty as conveying or meant to convey the idea of any wish or intention on the part of Mr Crompton to disturb, weaken or cast any reflections upon the existing Government.

I have known Mr Crompton for many years and have always considered him as a worthy and respectable man, and of unimpeachable character and conduct. Since the present questions of Politics have been agitate I have frequently heard his Moderation taken notice of by persons of what is called the opposition party, and during the time he has been in the Commission of the peace he has always acquitted himself, so far as I ever heard, or could judge as an useful, upright magistrate particularly vigilant active in the discharge of his office, and in enforcing the execution of and a due submission to the Laws. In case of any riot or disturbance I am persuaded that he would be one of the most forward in endeavoring to quell it, in whatever party or from whatever case it might originate

Thomas Hindle

Witness, James Caldwell

Signed by Mr Hindle at Chorley

4th February 1793

About two months ago Abraham Crompton Junior Esquire, who resides at Chorley in the County of Lancaster being in the Coffee room at Chorley reading the papers in company with Mr John Harrison, Mr James Smith, Mr Thomas Hindle, Mr William Hough and Mr Herbert Edgar, all of whom are his neighbours and acquaintances, a conversation on general politics took place arising from some mention or other being made of Judge Ashhurst's Charge in the course of which something was said of King and Lords, when Mr Crompton observed that if he had a new Governemt to form he would have no King or Lords. Mr Edgar then observed that he was for reform to which Mr Crompton replied these are my sentiments, or that is my wish but I could have no robbing or rioting and if ever anything is done, it should be with the general consent of the people or the voiceof the Nation or that that effect.

The foregoing is all that I particularly recollect of what passed, but I considered and clearly understood it at the time mere matter of loose inadvertent conversation and not at all expressive on the part of Mr Crompton of anything personal or disrespectful to the King or as conveying or meant to convey the idea of any wish or intention disturb reflect upon the present Government.

I have known Mr Crompton for many years and have always considered him as a worthy and respectable man of unimpeachable character and conduct since he has been in the Commission of the peace he has uniformly acquitted himself, so far as I ever heard, or could judge as an useful, upright magistrate particularly vigilant active in enforcing the execution of and a due submission to the Laws. I have in some cases thought him rather too exact and in a matter of Revenue, leaning too much to the side of the King. I think no other Magistrate in this neighbourhood has taken the same pains in the discharge of his duty. I am confident that in case of any riot or disturbance Mr Crompton would be one of the foremost to quell it, in whatever party, or from whatever case it might originate.

Chorley 4th of February 1793

Herbert Edgar

In  confirmation of what is said by all the Gentlemen respecting Mr Crompton's General character and conduct, the following copy of and letter from R Andrews Esq a Magistrate for the County of Lancaster with whom Mr Crompton has been in the habit of acting ever since he has himself been in the Commission of the Peace is added.

Rivington near Chorley.1793

Lancashire.

Mr Crompton of Chorley is a Gentleman of established good character in this neighbourhood and a firm friend to peace and good order. I have acted with him as a Magistrate some years and have ever found that he paid due attention and fidelity in executing the Laws of this Country to the best of his knowledge. He is a steady friend to the present form of Government and convinced I am that he would at this time be as ready as any person to put a stop to any Tumult or Insurrection that might arise.

R. Andrews.

February 21st

Observation

From a desire to do away with effects of that misrepresentation to which Mr Crompton finds himself expressed, as well as to present his being injured without cause in the esteem of those, whose good opinion it is his anxious wish to preserve, he has been induced to procure the foregoing Statements in order that the whole of this affair in which they relate, may be clearly and thoroughly understood. This he persuades himself is all that is requisite to his compleat vindication. But although satisfied of having committed no intentional offence and trusting therefore that he might with confidence look forwards to the determination of a Jury, Mr Crompton is still desirous to avoid be every honorable means, the being involved in a contention with Government.

It is unfortunate that the Gentlemen do not so fully and accurately recollect the general scope of the conversation as to convey more clearly the true import of Mr Crompton's words, all that in point of substance he [affies?] did, or meant to say, amounted to nothing more than the expression of a bare opinion, resting wholly upon an Hypothesis namely, that if a Government was to be made anew then that it might be constructed in a better form than the present. Had not Mr Crompton been interrupted at the critical part of the conversation, by other persons coming into the room, there can be little doubt from the wish which he afterwards expressed to have had an opportunity of explaining himself further, and that he would have done it in such a manner as to have precluded the possibility of misconstruction or mistakes. So far indeed from entertaining any wish or intention to disturb the peace and order of Society Mr Crompton has no hesitation in declaring in the most explicit manner that he deprecates any attempt of the kind, and that if any such was made he should feel it to be his inclination no less than it would become his Duty, to use his utmost endeavours to resist and defeat it; being fully aware that what may in many cases appear to be abstractedly and theoretically right may in practice be highly inexpedient and unwise.

Any further or more particular observations may perhaps be deemed unnecessary, and take up too much time. It is only therefore submitted that from the – general tenor of the evidence it appears.

First, that the words spoken, were matter of private undesigning conversation only, in the course of a genuine argument between persons living in the same place, long known to each other, and amongst whom guarded and cautious language was deemed wholly unnecessary.

2nd. That these words were not used by Mr Crompton as part of any speech or declaration deliberately made or introduced by him with a view to excite or enflame the minds of the persons to whom he was speaking; but merely in hasty reply, to strong and leading questions, pointedly put, and were extorted therefore in some measure by the course of argument.

Thirdly. That from the concurrent Testimony of all the witnesses it is manifest that nothing of an inflammatory or seditious nature appeared to be intended on the one side, nor was understood on the other, and that so far from any contempt or disrespect to the present King and Government appearing to have been expressed nothing of the kind was even thought of by any of the parties at the time.

1793? Letter from Abraham Crompton to Mr White.  Not dated.

Mr Crompton presents his respectful compliments to Mr White and incloses a statement of his case together with a letter to the Attorney General which [‘he' crossed out] of appended by him will make[?] himself still further obliged to Mr White to deliver [informally, conformably?] whilst he was so kind as to propose this morning?.

Mr Crompton begs leave to take this opportunity of expressing the high [enn?] he [entertains?] of the [‘Candor' crossed out] liberality and polite attention which he has already experienced from Mr White on this disagreeable occasion.

[Rainbow?] Coffee House

King Street,

Covent Garden

Letters Ens

23 January 1793.  Note from the court regarding Abraham Crompton.

I, George the third by the Grace of God of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, King, defender of the Faith to Abraham Crompton esquire, greeting and command you –ly injoining you that laying aside all excuses and pretences whatsoever you personally be and appear before us at Westminster on Tuesday next after the Octave of the purification of the [blessed?] Virgin Mary to answer to us touching and concerning those things which shall then and there be objected against you on our behalf and further to do and receive all and singular such Mallais and things as our Court shall then and there consider of concerning you in this behalf and this you are not to omit under the penalty of One hundred pounds to be paid on your goods and chattels, lands and tenements if you shall fail – witness – Lord King at Westminster the twenty third day of January in the thirty third year of our Reign,

By the Court

Templer

Sir Archibald Macdonald Knight, Attorney General of our Lord the King for our said Lord the King prosecuteth this Writ against the within named defendant upon an information [attributed by?] – him by the said Attorney General in the Court of our said Lord the King before the King himself for certain trespasses contempts and  misdemeanors whereof he is [impeached?].

Part of letter re Crompton case. 1793

Lord Hawkesbury present his compliments to Sir Henry Houghton and returns him the inclosed papers. It belongs to His Majesty's Law Officers to judge, from the information they have received whether Mr Crompton ought to be prosecuted and in what manner; And it will be the duty of the Court and Jury before whom Mr Crompton is tried, to determine whether he is guilty, and to what Punishment he should be made subject; But Lord Houghton thinks it his duty as Chancellor of the County Palatine of Lancaster to say that if the conversation stated in Mr Harrison's Declaration of the 4th February to have been held by Mr Crompton, shall be legally proved to have been actually held by him Mr Crompton (whatever his Character in other respects may be) is certainly unfit to exercise any Office of Magistrate under the Government of Great Britain according to the present Constitution.

Hertford Street

March 4 1793

18 February 1793.  Letter to Sir Henry Houghton from ? regarding Abraham Crompton.

To Sir Henry Houghton Bart, M.P.

London

Chorley 18th February 1793

Sir, Mr Crompton having communicated to me a letter he received from you on Saturday last, I felt myself impelled to endeavour to clear him from some of these injurious charges laid against him. They, I trust from your known character, will be a sufficient apology for this intrusion. Judge Ashurst's  most excellent charge had been put up in our Coffe Room, but that it was taken down by Mr Crompton, I may safely say, is absolutely false; which from the authority I have I am fully justified in doing; neither have I heard of any other instance of Political Outrage though I believe many injurious reports have been circulated, and very unjust aspersions cast upon him, in consequence of the very unfortunate (and as his friend I must say inconsiderate declaration of his Sentiments upon the different forms of Government.) and notwithstanding we may suppose a degree of impropriety looking upon him as a Magistrate; yet, if we consider him only as a private individual conversing upon any topic whatever in a mixed company, his arguments certainly ought not to be regarded further than any others of that Company so as to be censured particularly on account of his Magisterial capacity. And consequently in this point of view we may infer, the impropriety in a great measure as done away. That Mr Crompton has regarded himself in this light I have no doubt, as he has more than once declared to me, that when not absolutely acting as a Magistrate, he only considered himself as one of the Company he happened to be with, and consequently looked upon himself as having the same right to argue upon any subject and give his ideas at the moment with the same freedom as the rest. Yet in no other instance can I recollect the least impropriety or any circumstance tending to shew the least violence of Political Disposition.

As I think it necessary for Mr Crompton's interest that you should be fully informed of the present unhappy circumstance exactly as it happened and as I am convinced it is Mr Crompton's wish that I should give you this information. I will take the liberty to inclose a copy of a Declaration given and signed by me to Mr Caldwell (Mr Crompton's Attorney) And also a copy of a letter written by me to a Gentleman at Bolton upon the occasion of an Attorney's coming here with a view to obtain Affidavits upon the business. These will convey the best account, as also my impressions at the time, in as full a manner as I can give them.

I most sincerely hope your good and friendly Offices, (which I have no doubt will be executed in his favour) added to your interest with Lord Hawksbury, and a proper representation from you of the facts, may be attended with every success I wish, and that you will shortly be able to convey to Mr Crompton the [good?] news that this affair is entirely settled [hole in page] restore happiness to his family [hole in paper] Particularly Mr Crompton [hole]  in such an anxious uncertain moment as just given Mr Crompton, ad addition to his family the [hole] have felt severely, as well as Mr Crompton who notwithstanding every exertion to keep his spirits up, I am well convinced has suffered as much as from that uneasiness of mind naturally attended [hole] uncertainty, and the reflection of the pain [hole] his nearest and dearest relatives, through [hole] unthinking,  unfortunate moment.

I am sir, with greatest respect,

Your most - [hole

Jn.

16 March 1793. Draft note from Abraham Crompton.

['Immediately on being informed' crossed out] In urgency of the Prosecution which has been commenced against me ['in consequence of' crossed out]  for some expression that I unguardedly made use of at Chorley I thought it my duty to wait upon Messrs Chamberlayne  - of [abtaining?] to them whatever may have been[advanced?] against me and of satisfying them that I intended no offence or disrespect to Government. Mr White having with equal candour and politeness attended to my representation I am induced to take the liberty of requesting ['with the greatest deference' crossed out] the favour of your perusal at the statement I have now the honor to enclose [being according to the best of my recollection a just account of the whole affair] at the same time of expressing my hope that any thing that I may have improperly said will be attributed to its true and inadvertence only what to my best intentions or design whatever. Under these circumstances should it be thought proper to ['proceed no further in the present' and 'drop any further' crossed out] drop any further Prosecution. I beg leave to add that [- ] to any thing that may be required on my part, consistent with my Honor and my feelings as a Gentleman. I have the honor to be sir,

Your most Obedient and humble Servant

Abraham Crompton

King Street

Covent Garden

16th March 1793

Letter to Mr Caldwell

Solicitor

Newcastle under Lyme

Staffordshire.

The King v Crompton

Sir,

Mr Attorney Fould[?] has not yet come to any determination relative to this prosecution, this moment he has been assured I will acquaint you the Rules to [pleed?] are unnecessarily given in order that we may, in case it shall eventually be found expedient, be entitled to proceed to Tryal at this Sessions Assizes or have a Judgment by default. I am sire your most humble servant.

Jos White

No. 6 Lincoln Inn

29 [March?] 1793

Letter to James Caldwell from Abraham Crompton Jun. Very find script handwriting.

Chorley 9th May 1793

Dear Sir,

I was surprised to receive you letter this morning. I was over at Bolton on Sunday and as Miss Noble was writing to H. Stamford I got her to mention that I should let Judgment go by default which is the determination we have come to. I wish you would send me an account of what money you paid in London and likewise a copy of the Memorial and other proceedings which we had when together. I cannot add anything more but Mrs C and my love to you.

AC jun. [Abraham Crompton Junior]

  

1 December 1793.  Copy of summons in two different handwritings.  Relates to Abraham Crompton.

Caldwell

St. Hilary Term, 33rd George 1793

Lancashire, to wit Be it Remembered that Sir Archibald MacDonald, Knight Attorney General of Law present Sovereign Lord the King who for our present Sovereign Lord the King in this behalf prosecuteth in his own proper person comes here into the Court of our said Lord the King before the King himself at Westminster on Wednesday next after the Octavo of Saint Hilary in this same Term and for our said Lord and King giveth the Court here to understand and be informed that Abraham Crompton, late of Chorley in the County of Lancashire Esquire being a wicked seditious and ill disposed person and having no regard for the Laws of this Realm and most unlawfully, wickedly, maliciously and seditiously devising, contriving and intending to disturb the Peace and tranquility of our land, the King and of this Kingdom and to bring our Sovereign Lord the King and the Peers of this Realm and the Constitution and Government of this Kingdom as by Law established into hatred and contempt with the subjects of this Realm, and to asperse and vilify our said Lord and King and the Peers of this Realm and to alienate and withdraw the affections and fidelity of his said Majesty's subjects from his said Majesty's person and government on ye 1st day of December in ye 33rd year of the Reign of our present Sovereign Lord the King at Chorley aforesaid in the in the County of Lancashire in order to compleat perfect and bring to effect his most wicked and seditious contrivance and intentions aforesaid in the presence and hearing of diverse subjects of our Sovereign Lord the King  [ 3 words] wickedly, maliciously and seditiously did say, utter and publish of and concerning the Constitution and government of this Kingdom the scandalous and seditious words following, to wit, meaning himself the said Abraham, and for a Revolution meaning a Revolution in the Constitution and Government of this Kingdom and meaning himself the said Abraham would have no King or Lords meaning thereby that he would have no King or Lords meaning thereby that he would have no King or Peers of this Realm in the Constitution and Government thereof. In contempt of our Sovereign Lord the King and the Laws of this Kingdom to the great danger of our present happy constitution to the evil and pernicious example of all they in the like case affording and against the peace of our said present Sovereign Lord and King, his Crown and dignity. And aforesaid Attorney General of our said Lord and King for our said Lord the King with the Court here [furn?] to understand and be informed that the said Abraham Crompton being such a person as aforesaid and again unlawfully, wickedly, maliciously and seditiously devising, contriving and intending as aforesaid afterwards, to wit, on aforesaid 1st day of December in the aforesaid 33rd year of the reign of our said Sovereign Lord and King with force and arms at Chorley aforesaid in the County aforesaid in order to compleat, perfect and bring to affect his most his most wicked and seditious contrivances and intentions aforesaid in the presence and hearing of [diverse?] subjects of our Sovereign Lord and King unlawfully, wickedly, maliciously and seditiously did say, utter and publish of and concerning the constitution and Government of this Kingdom the scandalous and seditious words following, to wit, [Imeaning?] himself the aforesaid Abraham for a revolution, no King, no Lords meaning a revolution in the aforesaid constitution and government of this Kingdom and that there should be no King, or Peers of this Realm in the Constitution and Government thereof in contempt of our Sovereign Lord the King and the Laws of this Kingdom to the great danger of our happy constitution, to the evil and pernicious example of all those in the like case affording and against the peace of our said Lord the King, his Crown and dignity where upon the said Attorney General of our said Lord the King who for our said Lord the King in the behalf prosecuteth for our said Lord the King prayeth this consideration of the court here in the premises and that due process of Law may be accorded against him the aforesaid Abraham Crompton in this behalf to make him answer to our said Lord and King touching and concerning these [Premds?] aforesaid?   

   

 

If anyone out on the internet can can supply me with a biography of Abraham Crompton, I would be very pleased to hear from you.

 

If you have any information to add to what is listed please contact me on jj@jjhc.info
(Home)