“I have never seen such destruction in a graveyard in my life.”1 Those were the words of Inspector Ripley in Batley Town Hall Children’s Court on Monday, 14 May 1917.
In what was described as an extraordinary case, two St Mary’s schoolboys – both under 10 – appeared before the local magistrates charged with wilfully damaging 37 gravestones in the graveyard at Batley parish church,2 along with numerous ornamental iron palisades surrounding the monuments, six trees and a urinal.
Inspector Ripley went on to say it was the worst damage he had ever seen in his police career.
The youngsters were spotted on their spree of destruction at around 7.30pm the previous Thursday evening. Amongst the witnesses were other schoolboys, including nine-year-old Harry Smith from Balk Street, and eight-year-old James Herbert Saville, who lived with his parents at the Fleece Hotel.
The St Mary’s duo broke off the ornamental tops of the iron palisades surrounding the monument erected for Batley manufacturer James Wilson. They then used these iron pieces as crude hammers. The damage to tombstones included breaking corners off them, as well as hitting the middle of various vaults and headstones. Then, in an effort to hide their ‘weapons’, they threw the iron away.
The pair were quickly identified. When interviewed by Police Constable Cannon they admitted having used the broken iron palisades to commit the damage, and showed him where they had disposed of their makeshift implements.
In court, Reverend Lowe, Vicar of Batley, produced several broken stone pieces from the vandalised tombstones, 10 of which had suffered serious damage. He said it was difficult to estimate the cost of the desecration, because it depended on whether the owners of the damaged slabs required new ones, or would be content with repairs like edging-off the stone to disguise the breakages. At a rough estimate there was around a week’s worth of repair work, and the cost of the damage was put at around £6. To put this into some perspective, the average weekly wage in the woollen and worsted industry in May 1917, the predominant local industry, was about £1 6s.3
The two boys, accompanied by their mothers, listened to the charges. James Foley, born in December 1907, was the elder of the two. John Kilroy was just short of his ninth birthday. Both admitted their crime. However, neither appeared to understand the trouble they were in. Neither could they explain their conduct. One said “We had an iron each and broke the corners off the gravestones.” The other said “I broke two gravestones and hit some of the palisadings round the graves. He broke the others.”4
In their defence, their mothers said there was no way the damage was solely down to their sons. Other boys were involved in the destruction too, but their sons were the only ones unfortunate enough to be caught. No-one else, however, was charged.
The boys were both from the Skelsey Row area of town, an area strongly associated with the Catholic community.
James lived at Ambler Street with his mother, Ann, and siblings Mary and Michael. His father, Michael, a soldier who served in the second Boer War, had re-enlisted upon the outbreak of war, serving overseas with the Royal Field Artillery since late August 1914. He had recently been wounded, and later in 1917 would be discharged from the Army no longer physically fit for war service.
John lived at Borough Road, the son of Thomas and Margaret Kilroy. The couple, who married in 1901, had split up in 1902 and 1907 but Margaret returned to Thomas on both occasions, with her husband promising to behave better towards her. The final separation came in November 1915, with the court hearing Margaret’s married life “had been one long stretch of unhappiness, and she would rather go to the workhouse than live with her husband again.”5
The court granted her a separation order, with coal miner Thomas ordered to pay her 15s a week towards the maintenance of their seven surviving children. In addition to John, these were Mary, Annie, Agnes, James and two-year-old twins Eileen and Kathleen. Thomas Kilroy’s response was he would not pay.
Whilst the magistrates recognised the hardship and difficult circumstances faced by the boys’ mothers, both for different reasons with absent husbands, the Chairman said the mothers were the guardians of their children, responsible for their behaviour and future welfare. Ideally it was felt the boys should bear the punishment and be flogged, but this was not possible. Instead the pair were placed on probation for 12 months, with a surety of 40s each payable by their mothers if they should reoffend. In addition, Ann Foley and Margaret Kilroy had to pay £1 10s damages each, and 7s costs each.
This was an enormous financial hit for the families, especially considering average wages at the time.6
In fact Margaret Kilroy was back before the magistrates on 27 July 1917, this time as the complainant taking her husband to court. For the past 13 weeks Thomas had failed to pay any maintenance to his wife, and was £10 3s in arrears. The massive financial loss to the family from John’s misdemeanour, combined with her husband’s lack of maintenance payments, and with only one of her seven children able to work, meant she was in serious difficulty. Thomas was unmoved. Claiming to have been ill for part of the time he refused to pay anything. As a result of his defaulting he was sent to prison for 54 days.7 That, though, was not much help to Margaret.
It is not known if, or when, Thomas paid his weekly maintenance order. But it all illustrates the financial difficulties families could easily be thrown into by such a serious childhood prank. It also points to the social dislocation caused by war, with enormous burdens and responsibilities placed on mothers. And it shows the severity of punishments local magistrates courts meted out in the past.
Postscript:
I want to say a big thank you for the donations already received to keep this website going. They really do help.
The website has always been free to use, and I want to continue this policy in the future. However, it does cost me money to operate – from undertaking the research to website hosting costs. In the current difficult economic climate I do have to regularly consider if I can afford to continue running it as a free resource.
If you have enjoyed reading the various pieces, and would like to make a donation towards keeping the website up and running in its current open access format, it would be very much appreciated.
Please click 👉🏻here👈🏻 to be taken to the PayPal donation link. By making a donation you will be helping to keep the website online and freely available for all.
Thank you.
Footnotes:
1. Batley Reporter, 18 May 1917.
2. The initial tally of the charge was 37 gravestones, but the number increased to 42 following a further inspection by the vicar.
3. Bowley, Arthur Lyon. Prices and wages in the United Kingdom, 1914-1920. Clarendon Press, 1921. Note this is only a rough estimate given the variety of jobs in this industry, with localised wages, which fluctuated wildly in wartime particularly, due to availability of wool, varying hours and the payment war bonuses. Focussing on women only, their average weekly earnings in the woollen and worsted industries were around 19s 9d in the May to August period of 1917 (so under £1).
4. Batley News, 19 May 1917.
5. Batley News, 13 November 1915
6. See Footnote 3. For those of us from the decimal era, £1 = 20 shillings
7. Batley News, 28 July 1917.
Other Sources
• Batley Borough Court records.
• Censuses.
• General Register Office Indexes.
• Medal Award Rolls.
• Newspapers, various.
• Pension Index Cards and Ledgers.
• Parish Registers.
Past To Present Genealogy 