Ghastly Relics - A Very Tall Tale of the Potteries

Occasionally, stories related to the Potteries appeared in newspapers both in Britain and abroad that either cannot be proven (at least not yet), grew in the telling, or are so ridiculous that they had obviously been made up. The infamous story of the 'Man and Dog fight' peddled by journalist James Greenwood in 1874 would arguably fall into this category except that scandal it caused and the eventual  unravelling of the tale make for an interesting bit of local history in itself outside of Greenwood's work of fiction. 

At least Greenwood's tale initially had the gloss of truth to it and showed some imagination. Some stories though are simply the bits of nonsensical fluff that authors or reporters throughout history have concocted simply to fill up space. These often sensationalist tales were then repeated verbatim through syndication in other books or papers. The preposterous 'Ghastly Relics of Waterloo' is a prime example of the latter.

 Ghastly Relics of Waterloo.

(Cor. Boston Traveller)

'For the truth of the incident related below I have the most possible proof: George Shaw, a brave Englishman, when surrounded on the field at Waterloo by a number of the enemy, made a gallant struggle for existence, and fought his way back to his comrades over the dead bodies of a dozen Frenchmen whom he had slain. As a reward for his bravery, Wellington sent for the soldier, and in the course of his conversation with him, gave him permission to take home with him whatever relic he chose from the battlefield. Shaw's choice was the skeleton of a French General, killed in the action. The ghastly trophy was safely transported to England and hung in the soldier's closet at Hanley and Staffordshire, England, till he came to regard it is a nuisance and disposed of it to Samuel Bullock, a manufacturer of china. As bones form a large proportion of the ingredients from which English china is made, it occurred to the manufacturer that the remains of the poor General would look much better made up in some handsome ornament than dangling from a peg in an obscure closet; and in accordance with this inspiration, the French General was ground down, and, in due time, was metamorphosed into teacups and saucers; in which condition he adorns to this day the museum at Hawley, appropriately inscribed with the history of his transformation. It happened one day that Marshal Soult visited the museum, and his attention was attracted by the china, which has a bright pink tint and is ornamented with flowers. But when his eye rested upon the label, which enabled him to recognize in the collection the remains of one of his former generals, the marshal was deeply shocked; and, "wrapping his martial cloak around him," walked indignantly away. He did not forget to inform Napoleon, then at St. Helena, of the indignity which had been offered to the memory of their departed countryman. "It is no indignity," quoth Napoleon; "what more pleasing disposition can there be of one's bones after death than to be made into cups to be constantly in use; and placed between the rosy lips of ladies? The thought is delightful!" This was an aspect of the case which had net occurred to the prosaic marshal; but he was forced to content himself with it.'

The story seems to be a bare-faced mix of fact and fantasy the exploits of 'George Shaw' mimicking somewhat the story of Corporal John Shaw, a noted pugilist and artists' model who served with the Life Guards at Waterloo, where he was killed fighting several French cavalrymen. 

Reference: numerous US newspapers, see for instance The Somerset Press (Somerset, Ohio) 11 December 1879, p.1

England Expects

'The Battle of Trafalgar' by William Clarkson Stanfield
Source: Wikimedia Commons

On 21 October 1805, a British fleet of 27 ships commanded by Admiral Horatio Nelson caught up with and attacked a combined Franco-Spanish fleet of 33 ships off Cape Trafalgar between Cadiz and the Strait of Gibraltar. In the battle that followed, Nelson was mortally wounded by a sharpshooter, but before he died he heard the news that his fleet had inflicted a devastating defeat on the enemy force, capturing 20 ships, thus ending for good any lingering threat of a French invasion of Britain. It was also a victory that established British naval dominance for the next century. 

Admiralty records held at The National Archives in Kew, clearly show that despite hailing from so landlocked a region several men from the Potteries were involved in this decisive sea battle. Two of them served together aboard Nelson’s flagship, HMS Victory.

Corporal William Taft, Royal Marines, HMS Victory

Depending on which of his records you believe, William Taft, was born in Hanley Green (present-day Hanley town centre) in either 1775 or 1777, though the earlier date seems the most likely. There is no trace of his birth or of his parents locally, though their records like many others may have been lost when the registers of St John’s church in Hanley were destroyed in the Pottery Riots in 1842. Army and Royal Marine records, though, make up the deficit somewhat and through them we learn that William was the son of Ralph and Hannah Taft. In his teens he worked briefly as a potter, before he enlisted in the army in early 1793, joining the 11th Light Dragoons. He served with that regiment for just over two years before transferring to the 27th Light Dragoons on 25 April 1795. Records show that he was a smallish man being only 5’ 4¼” tall, (he was listed as 5’ 5” as a Royal Marine) with a fresh complexion, dark brown hair and brown eyes and the fact that he always signed with his mark reveals that like many common soldiers he was illiterate. Military life seemed to agree with him, though, and Taft remained with the 27th Light Dragoons until 20 October 1801, when for reasons unspecified he was invalided out of the service.

For a time Taft found employment as a labourer, but was soon drawn back to military service, though not this time in the army, enlisting instead in the Royal Marines at Rochester (probably the town in Kent) on 13 April 1803, where he joined Nº16 Company of the Chatham Division. Four days later Private Taft was posted as part of the marine detachment aboard HMS Victory. This big three decker first-rate ship of the line had just undergone an expensive reconstruction at Chatham dockyard and with its new crew on board in May it set sail for Portsmouth. Once there, the ship was joined by Vice-Admiral Horatio Nelson who chose Victory as his flagship.

The ship was in the Mediterranean when on 5 March 1805, William Taft was raised to corporal and he served in that capacity during Nelson’s dash across the Atlantic in pursuit of the Franco-Spanish fleet and later at Trafalgar. As the lead ship of the weather division, Victory was in the thick of the action from the beginning of the battle, crippling the French ship Bucentaure with it’s first broadside before becoming involved in a protracted fight with another French ship Redoutable and the ship’s company suffered many casualties as a result, most notably Admiral Nelson, who was shot by a French marksman and taken below where he subsequently died. Corporal Taft was another of the injured, badly wounded in the upper left arm during the fighting; his shattered limb could not be saved and was amputated at the neck of the humerus (i.e., just below the shoulder ball joint). Surviving the fight, the amputation and a violent storm that nearly wrecked the battered warships after the battle, Taft was admitted to the hospital in Gibraltar on 29 October 1805, being formally dismissed from Victory’s crew on 4 November 1805. On 10 January 1806, Taft was transferred to the hospital ship Sussex for transport home and just over a month later on 11 February and presumably back in Britain, he was discharged at headquarters. Only three other documents list his progress after that; on 3 March he was dismissed from the Royal Marines as an invalid and the next day he received a pension of £8. Then on 7 April in the Rough Entry Book for Pensioners we learn that he was a married man and was lodging at the Wheat Sheaf, Market Place, Greenwich. His fate after that is unknown.

Like all the surviving sailors and Marines who fought at Trafalgar, William Taft was also awarded prize money of £1 17s 8d and granted a Parliamentary award of £4 12s 6d. Presumably because of his career-ending injury, Taft also received £40 from the Lloyds Patriotic Fund.

Private William Bagley, Royal Marines, HMS Victory

William Bagley was born in Stoke in about 1774, though nothing is known about his parents, nor much about his early years, though at some point prior to serving in the Royal Marines he spent 4 years and six months as a soldier in the 4th Dragoons. He seems to have been married, certainly he had a daughter named Susannah who later lived in Hanley, but there are no local records of who William’s wife was, nor of Susannah, these again may have been victims of the records burnt in the riots in 1842. After his army service William may have returned to the Potteries as he was listed as having worked as a potter prior to joining the Royal Marines.

He enlisted in the Royal Marines on the same day as William Taft, 13 April 1803, and although Bagley was posted to Company 7 of the Chatham Division there seems to have been a connection between the two men, perhaps they were friends. It is notable too that after Bagley and William Taft were both posted to HMS Victory on 17 April, they were always listed together, Bagley and then Taft, in the ship’s muster roll. On his enlistment William Bagley was described as being 5’ 10” tall, with dark hair and a fresh complexion.

Unlike Taft, Bagley was never promoted, but he was much luckier during the battle of Trafalgar and survived the encounter uninjured. After the battle Victory was towed to Gibraltar for repairs before returning to Britain in December 1805. Bagley was discharged from the ship on 17 January 1806 at Chatham, but on 26 January he suffered a serious fall at headquarters and died from his injuries. He did not collect his prize money from the battle which was donated to the Greenwich hospital, while his personal effects were returned to his daughter Susannah in Hanley.

Private Richard Beckett, Royal Marines, HMS Royal Sovereign

Private Richard Beckett was a 24 year old from Burslem, 5’ 6” tall with light hair a fair complexion and grey eyes and prior to enlisting had worked locally as a potter. He had enlisted in the Royal Marines at Stafford on 2 May 1803 and served for 7 months with the Chatham Division before being moved to the Portsmouth Division where on 31 August 1805 he was posted as part of the Royal Marine detachment aboard HMS Royal Sovereign. Like Victory, this ship was a first-rate three decker and at Trafalgar she served as the flagship of Admiral Cuthbert Collingwood, the second-in-command of the fleet. The ship had recently had her keel re-coppered and as a result she was a very fast sailer, a fact which showed as she led the lee squadron of the fleet into battle, racing ahead of the other British ships and being the first to break the enemy line. 

For most of the battle Royal Sovereign fought with a Spanish ship the Santa Ana. Both vessels suffered heavy casualties before the Santa Ana surrendered, but Private Beckett was uninjured. Like everyone in the fleet he was entitled to prize money, £1 17s 8d in his case, but did not collect it and the money was instead donated to the Greenwich hospital. He did, though pick up the Parliamentary award of £4 12s 6d given to men of his rank. He was illiterate and signed his mark.

Private Joseph Sergeant, Royal Marines, HMS Prince

Joseph Sergeant was born in Clayton in about 1775 or 1776. He worked briefly as a glazier, but on 10 January 1798 at Kidderminster he enlisted in the Royal Marines. On his enlistment he was described as 5’ 5” tall with brown hair and a fresh complexion. A member of Company 37 of the Chatham Division on 22 December 1803, Sergeant joined the marine contingent aboard HMS Prince a second-rate ship of the line attached to the Channel Fleet which by October 1805 was part of Nelson’s fleet set to engage the Franco-Spanish fleet at Trafalgar. A slow ship, Prince was passed by most of her division as they sailed into battle and by the time the ship arrived at the fighting the battle was nearly over, though opening fire on a couple of enemy ships Prince managed to set fire to and de-mast the French ship Achille. Prince launched boats to rescue Achille’s crew and managed this before the ship exploded. HMS Prince suffered no damage and took no casualties and proved herself a real godsend in the week of storms that followed the battle, rescuing numerous crews from sinking ships and transporting then safely to Gibraltar before going back for more.

Sergeant received his share of the prize money of £1 17s 8d from the battle but did not collect the healtheier parliamentary award and the money went to the Greenwich hospital. He stayed aboard HMS Prince and just over a year later on 12 November 1806, he was promoted to the rank of corporal of 58 Company. On 20 December 1808 he was promoted once more to sergeant of 55 Company. He remained in the Royal Marines until he was disbanded from the service on 13 September 1814. What happened to him after that, though, is unknown.

John Bitts, Landsman, HMS Naiad

John Bitts claimed to have been born in Stoke, Staffordshire, but as with many of the other men here nothing is known of his background or family, no local records mention him. He was aged 24 at the time of the battle of Trafalgar which puts his date of birth in 1781 or 1780. He seems to have been illiterate, signing with his mark and no indication is given as to how he had ended up in the navy, save that he joined the crew of the Naiad on 17 March 1803 as a volunteer. His ship was part of Nelson’s fleet at Trafalgar, but being a small frigate Naiad kept out of the fighting between the bigger ships, though she was involved in the mopping up after the fighting ended. He escaped the battle uninjured and unlike many Bitts claimed both the prize money of £1 17s 8d and the Parliamentary award of £4 12s 6d. Nothing is known of his life and career after Trafalgar.

John Williams, Carpenter’s Crew, HMS Leviathan

According to his navy records, John Williams was born in Stoke, Staffordshire, in about 1778, but nothing more is known about his early life. The records state that he had been pressed into the navy and that prior to joining the Leviathan on 24 February 1803, he had served aboard the frigate HMS Pegasus in the Mediterranean. As part of the carpenter’s crew, Williams would have worked to keep the ship in a good seaworthy condition. The Leviathan was a 74 gun third rate ship of the line and at Trafalgar was one of the ships of the weather squadron that followed HMS Victory into battle, where she captured a Spanish vessel. Williams got through the battle uninjured and later received prize money of £1 17s 8d.

Reference: The National Archives, ADM 44 Dead Seamen's Effects; ADM 73 Rough Entry Book of Pensioners; ADM 82 Chatham Chest: ADM 102.

Here Lies (bits of) The Younger Despenser?

In the 1970s, the jumbled bones of a man, minus a skull, several vertebrae and a thigh bone, were unearthed at Hulton Abbey. That they had been buried in the chancel immediately suggested that the remains were those of either a wealthy member of the congregation, or one of the Audley family who had endowed the abbey. In 2004 the remains were transferred to the University of Reading, where a closer examination of the bones suggested that the body had been hung, drawn and quartered. This unusual and brutal form of execution was normally reserved for higher status individuals and inflicted for the most serious of state crimes such as treason. Radiocarbon analysis dated the remains to between 1050 and 1385, and further tests suggested they were those of a man over 34 years old.

Hugh Despenser the Younger in the Founders and Benefactors
Book of Tewkesbury Abbey, c. 1525.
Source: Wikimedia Commons.

Who the man was was unknown, though various candidates from the Audley clan were put forward, but each in turn was ruled out. Then, in an academic article published in 2008, Dr Mary Lewis of the University of Reading suggested that the remains could be those of  Hugh Despenser the Younger. Despenser was the son of Hugh Despenser the Elder, Earl of Winchester, and was related by marriage to the Audley family. He became a favourite, and possible lover, of Edward II and as a result held great influence at court. Despenser's greed, duplicity and politicking however, earned him numerous enemies, including many of his own relations and more dangerously Edward II’s estranged wife Queen Isabella. Despenser’s crimes finally caught up with him when, in 1326, Isabella and her ally, Roger Mortimer, 1st Earl of March, arrived in England at the head of an army of mercenaries, deposed the king and sentenced the Despensers, father and son to death as traitors. On Queen Isabella's orders, the Younger Despenser was hung, drawn and quartered.

‘On 24 November 1326…Despenser was roped to four horses…and dragged through the city to the walls of his own castle, where enormous gallows had been specially constructed…Despenser was raised a full 50 feet…and was lowered onto the ladder. A man climbed along side him sliced off his penis and testicles, flinging them into the fire below…he then plunged a knife into Despenser's abdomen and cut out his entrails and heart…the corpse was lowered to the ground and the head cut off. It was later sent to London, and Despenser's arms, torso and legs were sent to be displayed above the gates of Newcastle, York, Dover and Bristol.’

Dr Lewis based her identification on Despenser's relationship to the abbey's benefactors the Audleys (Hugh de Audley was his brother-in-law, but the family was not on the best of terms with Despenser, having been victims of his covetousness), the age of the remains, the age of the individual (Despenser was 39 at the time of his execution) and the cause of death, while the missing bones were cited as proof by their very absence. When in 1330, Hugh de Despenser's widow, Eleanor de Clare, petitioned the crown for the return of her husband's remains, she is said to have only received his head, a thigh bone and a number of vertebrae which were interred at Tewksbury; these match the parts missing from the Hulton skeleton.

The identification has yet to be proven conclusively by comparing the two sets of remains, but it is an interesting analysis and it is fun to speculate that the partial remains of one of English history’s bad boys somehow wound up being buried in a small, obscure abbey in North Staffordshire.

Reference: Mary E. Lewis,  'A traitor’s death? The identity of a drawn, hanged and quartered man from Hulton Abbey, Staffordshire', published in Antiquity. A quarterly review of archaeology vol. 82 (2008) p. 113-124.

A Very Gruesome Football

A startling and macabre discovery was made on Sunday 29 December 1907 on the farm of Mr Bassett, of Trentham, next to the Staffordshire estate of the Duke of Sutherland. Some children playing in a barn on the farm were seen to be kicking a curious object about. A farm hand went over to them to  investigate and on examining the ‘football’ found that it was a human skull. 

The police were called for and a search soon revealed some clothing hidden under the hay in the barn and a short while later a human skeleton was discovered. That particular batch of hay had been harvested in 1906 and as the police could not trace any disappearance from the locality in that year, they quickly came to the conclusion that the skeleton was that of a tramp. There was some evidence to support this as a piece of soap and several other articles often carried by tramps were found in the pockets of the clothing. 

It seemed very likely that the tramp had snuck into the barn, climbed into the hay and fallen asleep. If this had happened immediately after harvesting and the hay was what is known as ‘sweating’ (i.e. the freshly cut plants were still giving off moisture, carbon dioxide and heat) this it was said would be sufficient to cause his death. That the body had been reduced to a skeleton after being only eighteen months in the hay was probably due the barn being infested with rats. 

Uttoxeter Advertiser and Ashbourne Times, Wednesday 1 January 1908, p.8

Boots! Boots! - A Potteries World Premier

Probably at some point in early to mid July 1934, Burslem hosted the world premier of the first film of an up-and-coming star, when, according to report, the Palladium Cinema in in Waterloo Road showed a new British comedy entitled Boots! Boots! The star of the production was George Formby Jr, the son of a notable music hall performer, who would go on to be one of the biggest home grown film stars of the early 20th century. In his most famous films, Formby was invariably cast as a gormless but cheeky character with an infectious grin and an astonishing skill with a ukulele, on which he played numerous very catchy tunes; his films still come over surprisingly well today. This early film, though, was a far cry from those later glossy productions. Apparently filmed over a fortnight on a shoestring budget in a room above a garage, the film has the feel of a review, with very little plot. George plays John Willie (a character invented by his father) a hotel boots who indulges in a number of comic encounters with the hotel manager, the chef, some of the hotel guests and a scullery maid (played by Formby's formidable wife Beryl). Discovering John Willie's prowess with the ukulele and the maid's dancing skills, the manager puts them in the hotel's cabaret.

George Formby later described Boots! Boots! as 'a lousy film', and certainly it seems very cheap and cheerful today, but on it's opening it proved to be a great hit across the country and effectively launched Formby's cinema career. By his own account he himself saw what a draw the film was when he secretly came to the Potteries to see the film open and was astonished to find that it was playing to packed houses. A Sentinel reviewer described it as ‘a distinctly happy piece of entertainment. There are plenty of laughs, an abundance of good tunes and the settings are up to standard for a film of this type.’

The reason why the exact date of the premier is unknown seems to be because the Palladium Theatre often went through periods when it did not advertise in the Sentinel, 1934 being one of these times and as a result the date is lost. The film was subsequently shown at the Roxy in Hanley for three days from 19 July and at the Regal, Newcastle on Bank Holiday, Monday, 6 August 1934, having gone on general release on 30 July. 

Reference: Staffordshire Sentinel 7 August 1934, p.3; correspondence of Jonathan Baddeley and David Rayner in The Way We Were supplement to the Sentinel, partially reprinted in The North-West George Formby Newsletter 36, Vol. 3, No. 12, June 1998, p.4.

In Grateful Memory of Timothy Trow

At about a quarter past four on the afternoon of 13 April 1894, a three year old girl named Jane Ridgway who lived with her parents at Steele’s Cottages alongside the Newcastle canal* in Boothen, Stoke, tumbled into the water. Nearby 21 year old Timothy Trow, a tram conductor who was in charge of the car working London Road that afternoon, was just about to signal to the driver to pull away from the West End terminus, when he heard a loud splash from the adjacent canal and saw the little girl in trouble. Without a thought for his own safety, Trow - a non-swimmer - got down from the tram, ran to the canal and jumped in. He managed to wade most of the way across the cut, the water only coming up to his waist, but then it fell away much deeper and Trow called out to his colleague the tram driver that he had cramp. The young man was in trouble and seemed to become helpless in the water. A passer by, Mr Henry Lloyd of Beresford Street, Shelton was one of several other men who rushed to the canal and he now jumped in to help Trow while another man, John Forrester of Wellesley Street, Shelton also plunged in and fished little Jane Ridgway out of the water. Timothy Trow desperately grabbed hold of Mr Lloyd who tried to pull him to the bank, but Lloyd too was struck by cramp and unable to hold onto the floundering man who threatened to pull him under had no option but to let go. Lloyd managed to scramble back to the bank where others hauled him out while John Forrester having handed Jane Ridgway to others, also tried to grab onto Trow, but to no avail. Every effort was made to catch the drowning man, but it was futile and in the struggle Timothy Trow disappeared from view and it was not until half an hour later that his body was found.

This dramatic rescue that ended in tragedy made quite an impact in the Potteries and all involved were praised for their bravery, especially Timothy Trow whose selfless act in going into the canal despite not being able to swim won him a massive amount of sympathy. As a result, his funeral three days later was a grand affair attended by dozens of mourners, his parents, family and friends as well as 30 fellow tram conductors and drivers who had been let off work for the day to attend the service as well as several company officials. Numerous wreaths decorated the hearse and hundreds of people watched from the pavements while blinds were drawn in many houses along the route  that the funeral cortege took on its way from Timothy’s family home in William Street, Hanley to Hanley Borough Churchyard. 

The Timothy Trow Memorial, London Road, Stoke.
Image: Google Earth

All this and the church ceremony were reported in the Sentinel which several days later announced that a memorial committee was being formed to raise funds for a permanent memorial to the young tram conductor and during the summer news came that Timothy Trow, Henry Lloyd and John Forrester were to be recognised by the Royal Humane Society. By early October a sum of £47,11s had been raised, enough to fund an 8 feet tall obelisk made of grey granite to be sited in London Road near to the scene of Trow’s deed and a marker was placed on his grave in the cemetery. The inscription picked out in gold near the base of the obelisk reads: ‘Erected by Public Subscription in Grateful Memory of TIMOTHY TROW, tram conductor aged 21 years who lost his life by drowning near this spot, in an heroic effort attempt to save that of a child April 13th 1894.’

The remaining money from the collection was divided between Messrs Lloyd and Forrester. On 22 October 1894, a large party of council officials and a crowd of onlookers were in attendance when the obelisk was unveiled, after which Henry Lloyd and John Forrester were presented with their certificates from the Royal Humane Society while the Society’s ‘In Memorium’ certificate for Timothy Trow was later presented to his parents. Despite the depredations of years in the open and the unwanted attentions of an occasional vandal, the obelisk still stands today and forms to focus of ‘Timothy Trow Day’ on 13 April each year that still draws a crowd to remember one young man’s brave deed.  

* The Newcastle branch of the Trent and Mersey was a four mile long canal connecting Newcastle to Stoke. It no longer exists, having long since been filled in.

References: Staffordshire Sentinel, 21 April 1894, p.2 and 11 October 1894, p.3; Birmingham Daily Post 16 April 1894 p.8 and 23 October 1894.

The Man Who Missed Isandlwana

British Mounted Infantry and Zulus at the Battle of Gingindlovu

Newspaper accounts of the local soldiers involved in the battle of Isandlwana that trickled back to the Potteries in early 1879 occasionally mentioned a Private Frederick Butler of the 2/24th Foot who had been seconded to the Imperial Mounted Infantry. Initial reports in early March indicated that he was a casualty, but these were wrong. In a subsequent report in the Sentinel on 5th April 1879, his father William, the publican of the Bell and Bear Inn, Snow Hill, Shelton, noted that his son had survived and that the family had received a letter from Frederick detailing the fighting he had seen, but this potentially interesting letter was never published in the paper, leaving the readers to wonder at what his story may have been. Frederick was alive, that much is true, but he lived largely because he was nowhere near to Isandlwana when the battle occurred. 

1199 Private Frederick Butler, 2/24th and 2nd Squadron Imperial Mounted Infantry

Frederick Butler was born in 1858 in Alsager, Cheshire, the second of five children born to William Butler and Ann nee Melbourne. By 1861, the family had moved to the Potteries where William became the landlord of the Bell and Bear Inn, Snow Hill, Shelton. Fred's mother died in 1869 and later that same year his father remarried to Sarah Lloyd, by whom he had two daughters. Fred joined the army in 1877, being assigned to the 2nd battalion 24th Regiment of Foot as 1199 Private Frederick Butler. Later that year he and his battalion were posted to South Africa.

Whilst in South Africa, on 1st September 1878 Private Butler was detached to the Imperial Mounted Infantry. This as the name implies was a mounted force that recruited soldiers from the infantry regiments who had some experience with horses, just as the son of an innkeeper might. Butler was posted to the 2nd Squadron Mounted Infantry under Captain William Sugden (1/24th) being employed as a saddler until 12th September1879, according to the pay and muster rolls of the 2/24th. This squadron was sent to serve with No.1 Column ('the Coastal Column') under Colonel Charles Knight Pearson and was commanded by Captain Percy Barrows of the 19th Hussars. This force was to enter the Zulu kingdom some 50 miles to the east of Lord Chelmsford’s Central Column that would soon fall victim to the Zulu counterattack.

With his unit Butler crossed into Zululand on 11th January and over the next week they made steady progress into the interior. The Coastal Column claimed the honour of first blood as early on 22nd January, the same day that the Centre Column was being cut to pieces at Isandlwana, Pearson's men successfully fought off the first Zulu attack of the war at the battle of Nyezane or Inyezane, and Private Butler as a member of the 2nd Squadron Mounted Infantry doubtless played his part in the fighting there. It seems very likely that when he wrote home it was that battle he was describing and misunderstandings by his family and local reporters perhaps gave rise to the story of him having survived Isandlwana. Without seeing the actual letter he wrote it is hard to say if this was the case, but if Pvt Butler had merely noted in his letter home that he had been in a battle with the Zulus on the 22nd this could have easily led to the confusion. The news of Isandlwana, or 'Isandula' as early reports called it, dominated the news, obscuring Pearson's success 50 miles away. Equally, ‘Inyezane’ (as the battle was originally known) could have been confused with ‘Isandula’

Whatever the case, Private Butler was very much alive and served throughout the rest of the war, probably seeing action again with his unit at the Battle of Gingindlovu (2nd April 1879). Though they were not involved in the climactic battle at Ulundi, the 2nd IMI did take part in the search for the fugitive Zulu King Cetewayo after the battle. Butler also got his name in the local press one more time before returning home when a few brief accounts of local men in Zululand were noted in the Sentinel. In it Butler sang the praises of their much-criticised commander-in-chief.

‘Frederick Butler, son of Mr. Butler, of the Bell and Bear lnn, Shelton, writing on July 13th to his parents, makes special reference to the esteem in which Lord Chelmsford is held by the general body of soldiers at the seat of war, observing that they look upon him as “a brave and reliable man.”  He also, speaks the hardships the soldiers have to encounter, but gives also the bright as well the dark side of warfare in Africa.'

Staffordshire Sentinel and Commercial & General Advertiser, Saturday 23rd August 1879. p.4

Butler returned to the 2/24th regiment on 12th September 1879. For his service he was later awarded the South Africa Medal with 1877-78-79 clasp.

After the war Fred Butler remained in the army until the 1880s. After that he returned home to the Potteries and on 23rd August 1888 at Holy Trinity Church, he married Mary Jane Smith. At the time he was residing at 12 Brook Street. The couple would have two children. By 1891 Fred seems to have taken over the running of the Bell and Bear Inn from his father. He may also have joined the local rifle volunteers whose drill hall still stands at the top of College Road, Shelton. In this capacity he got his name in papers yet again in 1889, albeit for all the wrong reasons.

'A DANGEROUS PRACTICE. 

RIFLE SHOOTING AT SHELTON.

 DAMAGES £20. 

At the Hanley County Court on Wednesday, before his Honour Judge Jordan, an action was tried and decided, in which Frank Guildford, an engraver, living in Queen Anne-street, Shelton, sued to recover £50 damages from Fred Butler, William Butler, of the Bell and Bear Inn, Shelton; Sidney Smith, cabinet maker, Piccadilly; and J. W. Ault, sign writer, Snow Hill, for personal injuries. 

Mr. Boddam. instructed by Mr G. H. Hunt, appeared on behalf of the plaintiff; and Mr. Ashmall defended. £10 had been paid into Court, with a denial of liability. 

Mr. Boddam stated that the action was for damages done to the plaintiff being shot by the defendants. - The plaintiff was engraver, and was in the employ of Mr. Fennell, of Mollart-street, Hanley. the 2nd of Mav the defendants were practising shooting in a garden connected with Cleveland House, which was in the possession of Mr. Butler, of the Bell and Bear Inn. They were shooting with a Morris tube, a species of invention with which persons were in the habit of practising shooting at targets. The tube carried a small bullet to a tremendous distance. The plaintiff at the time was walking down the public road at the rear of Cleveland Gardens, and as he was so walking was shot in the head by a bullet, which he thought he (the learned counsel) could clearly demonstrate was projected by one the defendants. Two operations were found to be necessary to get out the bullet, and plaintiff had to remain away from his work for a fortnight. He had sustained a considerable shock to his system. 

The plaintiff stated that about a quarter past one o’clock on the 2nd May he was walking along Lime Kiln Walk with two other persons, when he was hit on the left temple with something. He began to bleed, and found that he had got a hole in his head. Directly afterwards the sound of bullet was heard. It struck some boards near where he was standing, and was afterwards taken out the wood. 

His Honour: The bullet hit plaintiff’s head and grazed it ? 

Mr. Boddam: No; it went in and stayed there. Luckily for the plaintiff his skull was so thick. (Laughter.) 

The plaintiff continued that after seeing the police he went to Mr. Charlesworth who attended him until the end of the month. Mr. Charlesworth took out a portion of the bullet on the 4th May, and the remaining portion on the 20th May. 

Mr. Boddam stated that they had any number of admissions of liability. 

Mr. Ashmall said his clients were anxious to act generously with the plaintiff. 

Mr. J. Charlesworth deposed to extracting the bullet, most of which he took out the 4th May.

His Honour; Let me look at it. 

Mr. Boddam: You will see how admirably it was flattened by the gentleman's skull. (Laughter)

His Honour : A good job for him that he had got so thick a one. 

Mr. Charlesworth proceeded to say that the bullet was very bright and slightly grooved, from which circumstances he concluded that it had hit something else before striking the plaintiff; that in fact it was a richochet shot. The bullet lay one inch from the point of entrance.

His Honour: Was it in a dangerous position ?

Mr. Charlesworth: Not in very dangerous position. The wound was too high to be very dangerous: it struck on the thick part the skull. There would be no permanent injury. 

His Honour observed that the wrong being admitted, the only point for him to consider was the amount damages. 

Mr. Ashmall explained that two of the defendants were volunteers. The garden in which they were practising was ninety-five yards in length. There were palings at the bottom of it. On the other side of these palings was plantation twelve yards deep. This was bordered by another fence and beyond it, before the road was reached, was a field 300 yards in length, also bordered by a railing. The guns were sighted for 100 yards, he suggested that this bullet struck one of the trees, from which it glanced and then hit the plaintiff. There was nothing absolutely illegal in what the defendants were doing, and as soon as inquiries came to be made the defendants went so far to say that they would pay any reasonable compensation. 

His Honour said it was difficult matter to measure damages in a case of this sort. No doubt whatever that the defendants were engaged in a dangerous pursuit, and had they killed the plaintiff, would, he dared say, have been put upon their trial for manslaughter. The damages sustained by plaintiff were not serious, but still it was a dangerous thing to have bullet sent into his head. He thought that in giving a verdict for £20 and costs, he was giving a very moderate sum indeed.' 

Staffordshire Sentinel, Thursday 06 June 1889, p.3

Fred Butler appears to have died quite young, aged 33 in 1891.

References:

Info from Forces War Records and Rorkesdriftvc forum. 

Thanks to 1879zuluwar forum members Kate (a.k.a 'gardner1879'), John Young, '90th' and Julian Whybra for further information on Frederick Butler.