Laidman married the daughter of Christian Blackett, sister of Sir William Blackett II. Laidman's wife was therefore the niece of Sir William Blackett II and cousin of Sir William Blackett III, both who held the gift of appointing the perpetual curacy of Hexham.
This perpetual curacy was presented to Laidman in October 1717, but it was the prospect of the lucrative Mercers' Lectureship which was his ultimate aim, as the Hexham curacy was poorly paid and, with precedence on his side, the Lectureship had been granted to the previous two curates (Ritschels Senior and Junior).
But, writing in his diaryDiary published in Hodgson, Six North Country Diaries, p.85, the Revd John Thomlinson says that in little more than a month, Laidman was so unpopular with many in Hexham, that all his hopes for the Lectureship were dashed.
He was Ritschel's assistant curate from 1712, and the incumbent at nearby Slaley in the same year. He was regarded as dependable by Ritschel and Andrewes (Ritschel's successor to the Mercers' Lectureship); for example, Andrewes deputed the issuing of licences to Richardson in his absence for several months from late 1718. He was effectively left as acting curate after the departure of Laidman and the sequestration in 1719, but he was passed over twice by Blackett when the Hexham curacy became vacant in 1719 and 1721.
Richardson died at Slaley in 1724, and was reputed to be inclined to the Jacobite cause (the Rising of 1715) according to the the curate at Allendale, Revd R Patten, although Richardson stayed in Hexham rather than join the rebelsSee R Patten, The history of the rebellion in the year 1715, (3rd ed 1746), p.26..
In the letter Richardson expresses his feeling and calls Lademan ‘a Delinquent’ as he cannot possibly get a farthing from him, and neither could his wretched Curate – ‘he has neither honr [honour] or honesty in him.’
Richardson asks Jubb to excuse the freedom and frequency of his writing, but these were just complaints from the Church against him (Laidman). He also goes on to say that the situation doesn't reflect well on Sir William Blackett, and wishes Jubb does not partake of it too by his silence.
They accuse Laidman of great and notorious and wilful neglect of the Hexham curacy, and Dallance for his scandalous, ignorant and offensive performance of the Pastoral Duty. Since Michaelmas Laidman had only attended Hexham twice, with Dallance (described as the Scotch-Curate) performing his duty all this while offending and scandalizing the whole Congregation with his actions.
They allege that the Sacrament of the Lord's Last Supper was only administered once since Whitsuntide last, when the custom being once at Michaelmas, twice at Xmas and once immediately before Lent. Also, now at this solemn season, it was always administered there several Sundays, but Mr Laidman has not appeared even though he was reminded by his curate.
The letter goes on to describe that this very day, a considerable number of country people, besides many townsfolk, came to receive the Sacrament and went away disappointed. So there is great and just complaints against Mr Laidman and we hope that you will do us what justice as lays in your power.
A postscript to the letter is added describing the general opinion circulating at Hexham that Mr Laidman's Curate had neither Orders nor Licence.
All four Churchwardens signed the letter.
When they (Durham) heard whose daughter was to be married, they would not grant the licence without consent. So they applied to Mr Laideman who obtained from Henry Andrews (Commissary), whether by corruption or what other way I know not, a blank Licence for that purpose and took it to Mr Richardson to sign. Mr Richardson refused to sign the blank licence. However Laideman took the blank licence immediately to Newcastle in order to marry the couple, for Douglas knew where the blank licence was seen and produced in Newcastle by Mr Laideman, who had come on the 5th instant to marry them.
Douglas goes on to say that Mr Richardson was so honest and just that he pursued and followed Laideman the next day from Hexham and came to see Douglas in Newcastle to let him know what was happening. But it was too late for they were married that day by a licence obtained by Laideman through a stratagem from Durham which was brought to Doctor Ellison, Vicar of Newcastle, who refused to marry them. However another Clergyman in Newcastle did do it, with Mr Laideman ready to perform the ceremony if he had refused.
Douglas tells Jubb that this is the honest account he can give of the affair, that Mr Laideman was very zealous and forward in the whole matter, and that he is a scandalous unworthy parson.
John Douglas (c.1640–1727) was a Newcastle man who has bought property in Northumberland, in Matfen, Aydon, and Halton.
Revd Dr Nathanial Ellison, was Vicar of St Nicholas, Newcastle, 1694–1721.
In June 1719 the Archbishop sequestered the profits of the post of Curate, meaning that Laidman was effectively dismissed for being non-resident (an action very much frowned on by the Church Courts).
Blackett, as his patron, did not challenge the decision, which tells its own tale!
Laidman went on to be Rector of Whalton from 1724 until he died.
A footnote, which, yet again, shows Laidman in a poor light: a legal challengeDurham University Library, DPRI/3/1727/B186; TNA Chancery Bill of Complaint [transcribed at Laidman Family History] was issued against him from his nephews following the death of Laidman's father in 1727; they assert that he had taken the entire estate of his late father, so there was nothing left to cover their shares in the inheritance.
PSemail from FS 01Sep2023: There is another anomaly re Revd William Richardson who was Ritschel's assistant curate — he was passed over twice by William Blackett II for the Hexham Curacy when it became vacant in 1719 and 1721 — the memorial [HEXAB1009] lists the next curate as Revd William Graham in 1724 — did Richardson act as curate during this time (1719–24) and was never acknowledged or was there another curate, again not acknowledged on the memorial?
PPSemail from FS 12Oct2023: I have possibly found a reason for Richardson's appointment as an ‘Afternoon Reader’ at Hexham Priory. In a letter dated 6 March 1704, from George Ritschel (Junior) to the Archbishop of York, John Sharp, Ritschel updates Sharp on the presbyterians and dissenters in and around Hexham, and advises him that he had taken on an Afternoon Lecturer which was proving extremely useful, especially since ‘the Dissenters now have a new meeting house, and their preacher only expounds at forenoon and preaches at afternoon’. So it seems Ritschel was trying to counterbalance the afternoon preaching of the Dissenters by offering an alternative — an Afternoon Lecturer (or Afternoon Reader) in the Priory. I will have to do some further digging on Richardson to see if I can find out where he was prior to 1710, but if he was the Afternoon Lecturer from 1704, the rôle was obviously successful and resulted in his appointment in 1710.
Back to: