Huddersfield Chronicle (11/May/1867) - Lockwood and the Charter of Incorporation Question

The following is a transcription of a historic newspaper article and may contain occasional errors. If the article was published prior to 1 June 1957, then the text is likely in the Public Domain.

LOCKWOOD AND THE CHARTER OF INCORPORATION QUESTION.

Last evening a meeting of the inhabitants of Lockwood was held in the Town Hall for the purpose of considering the "advisability of having the said district of Lockwood incorporated with the town of Huddersfield, and taking such other steps in the matter as may be deemed desirable." A. Crowther, Esq., chairman of the Local Board, was voted to preside. The hall was pretty well filled.

The Chairman, having read the notice convening the meeting, stated the course which had been pursued by the Local Board in the matter at their recent meetings, said he should refrain from giving an opinion on that occasion, but he had hoped the advantages and disadvantages of being included in a charter of incorporation for Huddersfield would be enumerated in the course of the speeches which would be delivered, and it now rested with any gentleman to make a motion which they might deem desirable.

After a short pause, Mr W. R. Croft, a member of the Local Board, moved "that in the opinion of this meeting it is desirable, providing that a good supply of water can be obtained, that the district of Lockwood should become incorporated with the borough of Huddersfield."

Mr. Joshua Brunton, a ratepayer, seconded the motion.

Mr. J. Ashton, a member of the Local Board, rose to move an amendment, "That this meeting use all fair and legitimate means to prevent Lockwood district being incorporated with Huddersfield." The amendment was seconded by Mr. David Gledhill. Speeches were made by several members of the Local Board and ratepayers, both for and against the charter of incorporation movement, and occasionally there was an outburst of feeling. Non-ratepayers were, by the decision of the meeting, requested to retire during the voting. The amendment was then put and lost, a large majority being in favour of the resolution. When the original motion was formally submitted to the meeting, only about a dozen hands were uplifted in opposition, and at the termination of the voting there was much applause.

The Chairman said he had not the slightest hesitation in pronouncing a majority against the amendment — (hear, hear) — and also a majority in favour of the resolution. (Hear, hear.) Thanks to the chairman closed the meeting.