Atcherley.org.uk

“The Russians advanced in three columns of 1500 men each … but our pickets behaved admirably … firing through the intervals with such regularity and precision that the Russians were loth to advance any but skirmishers; and two hours were spent before the grand attack came on. There is no record, I believe, of pickets, amounting in all to five companies, keeping an enemy of such force at bay for so long a time; and it is therefore with a feeling of pride that we record the admirable conduct of Captain Conolly of the 49th, the clever resistance of Captain Atcherley of the 30th, at the ruins, and that of Major Champion of the 95th …” [1]

Francis Topping Atcherley joined the 30th Regiment of Foot as an Ensign, by purchase, on 4 June 1847, just 13 days before his 20th birthday. Thirteen months later, on 4 August 1848, he purchased the commission of Lieutenant. It was to be another five years before he progressed to the rank of Captain, again by purchase, on 16 December 1853. [2, 3, 4]

Advancement through the ranks of infantry and cavalry regiments by the sale and purchase of commissions, a system dating back to the time of Charles II, was common practice. However this method of progression would soon be called into question and brought to an end, in part because of the Crimean War – a conflict which Francis Atcherley would find himself in the thick of within a year of becoming Captain. [5, 6, 7]

The Crimea was part of the Ottoman Empire. By the mid 1800s this was an empire in decline, vulnerable to stronger European powers seeking opportunities to extend their influence over its territories. Both France and Russia sought authority over the Empire’s Christians and their churches, and began to back up their rival claims with military force. With little choice but to side with one of these two would-be ‘protectors’ the Ottoman Empire entered into a treaty with France. Fearing that Russian dominion over the Ottomans would lead to the expansion of the Russian Empire into Asia, Britain joined the Franco-Ottoman alliance. In 1854, following the Russian Tsar’s refusal of proposals for a peaceful end to the conflict, war was declared. [7]

Captain Francis Topping Atcherley and the 30th Regiment of Foot were part of an allied expeditionary force which landed at Eupatoria, north of Sevastopol (also referred to by the British as Sebastopol) in September 1854. Francis took part in the Battle of Alma on the 20th of that month and the ensuing siege of Sevastopol. 25 October 1854 saw the Russian forces’ failed attack on Balaclava and the infamous “Charge of the Light Brigade.” [7, 8] Atcherley, being an officer of the infantry or foot soldiers rather than  cavalry man, was not part of the “Charge.” He was however very much a part of the events which happened at Sevastopol the next day. An anonymous ‘non-combatant’ described the events as follows:

“On the morning of the 26th several Russian columns of infantry, accompanied by artillery, were seen to issue from the eastern end of Sebastopol. It was at first believed that they were marching to join Liprandi’s corps by the road, still open, through the Inkerman valley; but turning to the right they ascended the hill, and suddenly appeared on the crest which commanded the camp of the 2nd division.

Another body at the same time approached by the road leading from the valley to the heights. They came somewhat by surprise upon the pickets belonging to the 30th and 49th Regiments. The conduct of an officer at the head of one of these small parties excited universal admiration. Holding his ground with undaunted courage against an overwhelming force, he succeeded in checking for some time the Russian advance; and when the ammunition of his men was expended, charging the enemy with his sword, he fell shot through the chest: this was Lieutenant Conolly of the 49th. Scarcely less distinguished were Captain Bayley and Captain Atcherley, and a serjeant named Sullivan, at the head of the pickets of the 30th Regiment. This handful of brave men opposed nearly 7000 men until Sir De Lacey Evans was able to mature his plans and form his two brigades into order of battle.

… the enemy was not only speedily repulsed, but, taking to flight, was pursued almost into town, with a loss subsequently estimated at nearly 1000 men, whilst our own amounted to only 12 killed and about 80 wounded. One hundred and sixty Russians were left dead within our lines, and 30 prisoners fell into our hands. The second division alone, at that time scarcely 1200 strong, defeated nearly 8000 men.” [9]

Although Francis Atcherley survived the “repulse of the sortie,” he did not escape injury. Lieutenant-General De Lacy Evans, in his despatch to Lord Raglan of 27 October 1854, stated: “Lieutenant Conolly of the 49th greatly distinguished himself, as did Captain Bayley of the 30th, and Captain Atcherley, all of whom, I regret to say, were severely wounded.” [10]

The wound which Francis suffered was caused by a musket ball hitting his left arm. Whether this injury led to him being nursed by Florence Nightingale I cannot say. It did however result in him being invalided home by the order of Lord Raglan. He returned with Captain Bayley aboard the Taurus, stopping at Malta en route. One of many officers to be awarded a sum of money in respect of wounds received in the Crimea, he received £52. 16s. 11d. [11, 12, 13]

On Thursday 12 April 1855, Francis attended a public dinner held in his honour at the Red Lion in the Shropshire village of Middle (or Myddle, in which parish Francis’ home at Marton Hall was situated). [13] The dinner was “presided over by the rector of Middle, the Rev. G. H. Egerton, and was numerously and respectably attended.” There, he was presented with a testimonial paid for by the tenantry and friends of the Atcherley family, in the form of a silver salver on which the following words were engraved:

“Presented this 12th day of April, 1855, to Captain Francis Topping Atcherley, 30th Regiment, by his friends and neighbours on his return from the Crimea, where he was engaged in the memorable battle of the Alma, on the 25th of September, 1854, and was wounded in the severe action before Sebastopol on the 26th October, on which occasion his name was honourably mentioned in the despatches of the Commander-in-Chief.”

The testimonial presented to Francis Topping Atcherley did not mark the end of his military career. Nor indeed did it mark the end of his involvement in the Crimean War. On 17 July 1855 he was promoted to Brevet Major and within a few weeks of this, on 8 September, he was taking part in the “assault on the Redan.” [8] The conclusion of Brevet Major Atcherley’s Crimean campaign will be the subject of Part 2 of this article.

Image: Russo-British skirmish during Crimean War. Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.

[1] Anon (1856), A History of the Russian War from the Commencement in 1853 until the Peace of Paris in 1856.

[2] London Gazette, issue 20741, 4 Jun 1847, page 2050.

[3] London Gazette, issue 20883, 4 Aug 1848, page 2893.

[4] London Gazette, issue 21503, 16 Dec 1853, page 3683.

[5] British Army officers’ commissions. (The National Archives website)

[6] Richard Holmes (2005), The Soldier’s Trade in a Changing World: Buying a commission. (BBC website.)

[7] Wikipedia: Crimean War.

[8] H. G. Hart (1863), Hart’s Annual Army List, Militia List, and Imperial Yeomanry List.

[9] Anon (1854), A Month in the Camp before Sebastopol. In: The Quarterly Review (96: 191), pages 200-260.

[10] London Gazette, issue 21624, 12 Nov 1854, pages 3457 – 3458.

[11] Hampshire Advertiser & Salisbury Guardian, issue 1635, 30 Dec 1854, page 4.

[12] Newcastle Journal, 7 Apr 1855, page 7.

[13] The Morning Post, issue 25361, Saturday 14 Apr 1855, page 3.

The jury retired, and soon after ten o’clock came into Court and pronounced a verdict of Guilty.  Mr. Sergeant Atcherley then passed sentence of death on the prisoner, who heard it with perfect calmness, and merely said, “My Lord, I am as innocent of the crime as you are.” Cork Examiner, 9 Aug 1844. [1]

David Francis Atcherley, Sergeant at Law – hence Mr Serjeant, or Sergeant, Atcherley – presided over many court cases during his legal career. Among the last of those cases was one which concluded on 3 August 1844 Stafford. The charge of which the accused was found guilty was that of Murder.

The victim was Ann Griffiths, live-in housekeeper to a Mr Crowther of Wednesbury in Staffordshire. Crowther was reputed to be a wealthy man, who described himself as being “above the frowns of the world.” On Saturdays Mr Crowther would leave his home at about ten o’clock to pay the men who worked at his pits. Mr Crowther also employed a servant who, on Wednesdays and Saturdays, would take “slack” to his master’s works. From December 1841 until September 1842 that servant had been a man by the name of William Beard.

The morning of Saturday 16 March 1843, some five or six months after Beard’s employment with Crowther had ended and with another man employed in his place, began like any other Saturday. Mr Crowther’s servant left the house at about ten past nine to draw slack to the colliery. At about 9:30, Crowther himself left to go to his pits, leaving his housekeeper alone in the house. Three quarters of an hour later however, at around 10:15 a maltster living nearby heard a scream from his neighbour’s house, followed by another some 30 seconds later.

Strangely, the maltster “seemed to have thought that there was nothing in the screams which called for particular attention, and he took no further notice of the matter at the time.” Shortly afterwards, a man employed by Mr Crowther’s butcher called at the house but he found the yard and kitchen doors shut fast and received no response when he rang the hall bell, even after hearing a door slam inside. He returned around midday but again was unable to rouse anyone.

Mr Crowther returned to his home at about 1:45pm. When the doorbell was not answered he went round to the back of the house where he was able to gain access through a glass door which was half open. He found that the fire in the dining room was out, while the fire in the kitchen was very low; the doors to the kitchen, pantry and cellar were all wide open; and upstairs in the room occupied by his housekeeper he was surprised to see that her bed was unmade. Going back down into the kitchen and from there into the brewhouse he finally discovered Ann Griffith’s body. To quote from the Cork Examiner:

“The unfortunate woman lay on the floor, which was covered with blood, and which appeared to have been trampled all about the brew-house. Her hair was very much dishevelled, and had blood upon it, and a bloody knife lay at a very short distance from the body. At least ten wounds had been inflicted on her head with a hammer, which was usually kept in the brew-house, and there were other circumstances which led to the conclusion that she had offered some resistance to the savage, whoever it was, who perpetrated this dreadful deed. The yard door was locked, and there was blood upon the bolt; blood was also sprinkled upon the brickwork adjoining the door-frame, and there were marks of a man’s bloody hand upon a shovel near the water-tub, and upon the handle of one of the pumps in the yard, as if the murderer had sought for means to efface the crimson evidences of his guilt. In Mr. Crowther’s bed-room up stairs some trunks had been removed and opened ; a small fruit pie, which had been left in the pantry, in the morning was eaten, and about three pounds of a neck of mutton, which was cooked, had been taken away. It was discovered, also, on the following day, that a pair of trousers and a waistcoat which Mr. Crowther usually wore on Sundays had been removed.”

Crowther’s former servant, William Beard, seems to have been the only suspect. He had been seen on the day of the murder, at around 11 o’clock, walking towards a building in which the stolen trousers and waistcoat were found the following Friday. Nearby a footprint was found which matched Beard’s right boot (his boots had been taken from him when he was arrested the day after the murder). Matching footprints had also been found leading from the glass door which Mr Crowther had found open, leading down the gravel path and across a ploughed field; further prints, less distinct, led along a road to a nearby canal. These footprints were the strongest part of the evidence against Beard, who was seen, from 11:00 onwards, at various points between the canal and the Board public house situated about a quarter of mile from Mr Crowther’s house. He was found at the Board at 12:30pm, by someone who knew him, smoking his pipe in the kitchen. The prosecution suggested that having made a long detour from the scene of the murder to avoid detection, Beard had then deliberately returned to the vicinity in order to lull suspicion. Yet he would have had blood on his jacket, shirt, trousers and boots, those items of clothing being in that condition when he was arrested the next day.

In his defence, Beard called witnesses who explained the presence of blood on his clothing by saying that he suffered from nose bleeds and had also, on the Monday prior to the murder, helped with hanging up a freshly slaughtered pig. It was alleged that the prosecution had not shown that the blood stains on his clothing were fresh. Although there was evidence linking Beard with the crime scene, it seemed that he had very little money on the Saturday in question, was of good character and had even, during his employment with Mr Crowther, foiled an attempt to rob his master’s house.

Sergeant Atcherley “left it to the Jury to say, among other points, whether it was probable that a person who knew that he had just been guilty of such a crime as murder, would have incurred the risk of exposing his clothes to the observation of the company in a public-house.” In summing up the evidence, the “Learned Judge … told the jury that in order to convict the prisoner it was not enough that his conduct was liable to be viewed with strong suspicion, but the facts must be such as to exclude from their minds all reasonable doubt of his guilt. It had always been said by judges, and he hoped always would be said, that it was better that nine guilty men should escape, than that one innocent man should suffer.”

Clearly, the jury in this case were swayed by the evidence of the prosecution and unconvinced by the doubts raised by Beard’s defence. The London Standard of 5 August 1844 [2] reported the conclusion of the trial as follows:

“The jury returned a verdict of Guilty.

Thereupon, his Lordship, having assumed the black cap, sentenced the prisoner to be hanged.

The prisoner, who remained quite unmoved during the delivery of the sentence, exclaimed in a very determined tone, ‘My lord, I have been found guilty, but I am as innocent as a child!’ On leaving the bar he struck his hand forcibly on the railing, and added, ‘I am as innocent as a child, if I was to die this moment.’

The prisoner was then removed by the officers of the gaol.”

I suspect (and a suspicion is all it can be) that the Learned Judge in this case was not of the view that guilt had been proven beyond reasonable doubt. The verdict was not his to give however, and William Beard was hanged at Stafford on 17 August 1844. [3] Ironically, the man who sent Beard to the gallows survived him by less than a year. David Francis Atcherley passed away, at the age of 62, on 6 July 1845. [4]

[1] Cork Examiner, 9 Aug 1844, page 4.

[2] The Standard (London), 5 Aug 1844.

[3] William Palmer website: Stafford hangings.

[4] The Gentleman’s Magazine, Vol XXIV, June to December 1845, pages 537-538.