officiate at the funeral. Seeing this as a snub, the newly appointed Vicar of
Penn ‘gate-crashed’ the funeral, and his colleague asked the local policeman to
take him in charge for causing a disturbance. The incident caused ‘bad blood’
between the two men and discontent erupted again in 1913 when the Vicar
of Tylers Green accused the Vicar of Penn of serious libel in the form of
‘anonymous’ letters and postcards sent to himself and other notaries signed by
such as a ‘well-wisher’ or a ‘disgusted parishioner’. In these, the Vicar of
Tylers Green was accused of having a ‘drink problem’, that he had used
money destined for the Church for his own use, that he was a liar, a thief, a
‘drunken little devil’ who conducted services whilst ‘under the influence’ and
who played cards after Sunday services. The case came to court in the Bucks
Assizes before a special jury and the representative of the Vicar of Tylers
Green gave examples of the bizarre behaviour of the Vicar of Penn over the
years; one was forcing himself into the funeral and another that he had gone
to America to collect monies for the restoration of Holy Trinity under false
pretences, claiming that Penn village was connected with William Penn the
Quaker. There was however, no known record of such a connection and the
Vicar of Tylers Green had written to the court pointing this out. After much
argument, an amused judge concluded; ‘I do not know how many Penns
there are in Penn but there is certainly a pen in Penn Parish which has penned
letters that might have been un-penned.’ The Vicar of Penn was found guilty
and ordered to pay £400, an enormous sum of money in those days.
Hardly a village, in the sense that in the 1950s Penn had no square, nor
Post Office nor shop, what it did have throughout Robert and Emily’s time
there however was another colourful vicar, the fifty-fifth at Penn, the Rev.
Oscar Muspratt, who was to ‘resurrect’ the contentious issue of the link
between the Penns of Penn and the Quakers. Up until Muspratt’s intervention, the existence—or absence—of a genealogical link between the
families was largely their private affair. But Muspratt’s vigorous efforts to
connect Penn village Bucks, to Pennsylvania USA via the family link aroused
fierce opposition amongst ‘the locals’ and, as we shall explain later, his
maneuverings drew the Le Rossignols into the controversy. But why would
Robert—neither particularly devout nor, at his age, an active parishioner—
get involved with Muspratt’s contentious campaign? Well, there may have
been a number of reasons for that, but these two apparently quite different
men had more in common than one would have at first thought.
456
D. Sheppard
Penn ‘gate-crashed’ the funeral, and his colleague asked the local policeman to
take him in charge for causing a disturbance. The incident caused ‘bad blood’
between the two men and discontent erupted again in 1913 when the Vicar
of Tylers Green accused the Vicar of Penn of serious libel in the form of
‘anonymous’ letters and postcards sent to himself and other notaries signed by
such as a ‘well-wisher’ or a ‘disgusted parishioner’. In these, the Vicar of
Tylers Green was accused of having a ‘drink problem’, that he had used
money destined for the Church for his own use, that he was a liar, a thief, a
‘drunken little devil’ who conducted services whilst ‘under the influence’ and
who played cards after Sunday services. The case came to court in the Bucks
Assizes before a special jury and the representative of the Vicar of Tylers
Green gave examples of the bizarre behaviour of the Vicar of Penn over the
years; one was forcing himself into the funeral and another that he had gone
to America to collect monies for the restoration of Holy Trinity under false
pretences, claiming that Penn village was connected with William Penn the
Quaker. There was however, no known record of such a connection and the
Vicar of Tylers Green had written to the court pointing this out. After much
argument, an amused judge concluded; ‘I do not know how many Penns
there are in Penn but there is certainly a pen in Penn Parish which has penned
letters that might have been un-penned.’ The Vicar of Penn was found guilty
and ordered to pay £400, an enormous sum of money in those days.
Hardly a village, in the sense that in the 1950s Penn had no square, nor
Post Office nor shop, what it did have throughout Robert and Emily’s time
there however was another colourful vicar, the fifty-fifth at Penn, the Rev.
Oscar Muspratt, who was to ‘resurrect’ the contentious issue of the link
between the Penns of Penn and the Quakers. Up until Muspratt’s intervention, the existence—or absence—of a genealogical link between the
families was largely their private affair. But Muspratt’s vigorous efforts to
connect Penn village Bucks, to Pennsylvania USA via the family link aroused
fierce opposition amongst ‘the locals’ and, as we shall explain later, his
maneuverings drew the Le Rossignols into the controversy. But why would
Robert—neither particularly devout nor, at his age, an active parishioner—
get involved with Muspratt’s contentious campaign? Well, there may have
been a number of reasons for that, but these two apparently quite different
men had more in common than one would have at first thought.
456
D. Sheppard