APRIL 1919. THE CONTROVERSIAL CARILLON.
On 3rd April 1919 a public meeting was held in Loughborough to decide on the form that the town’s proposed War Memorial should take. It was a lively event, where ‘discussions waxed warm’, according to a lengthy article in the Loughborough Echo. And the decision to build what would eventually become Loughborough’s unique landmark was not without controversy.
It was less than six months since the Armistice. Over 600 serving men with Loughborough connections had been killed, and countless more injured. The idea of a war memorial for the town was not in dispute, and fundraising had already begun. The Mayor, Councillor Walter Coltman, had set up an advisory committee to discuss the project early in 1918.
But what sort of memorial should it be? And who should play a part in the decision-making process?
Carillon, monument or health centre?
By the time the 3rd April meeting took place, there were three possible schemes in the frame. A carillon tower, a monument, or a health centre. Earlier, there had been a campaign to build cottages for returned soldiers, led by distinguished ex-serviceman, RSM Harry Lovett MC DSM, of the Leicestershire Regiment (and landlord of the Boot Hotel). He later switched his support to the health centre proposal. The war recruitment process had revealed the shockingly poor physical state of many of the men, and effective healthcare was out of the financial reach of most working people.
Oddly, the monument idea doesn’t seem to have been discussed much, if at all.
Who should decide?
It was decided that a second committee should be established, and the meeting became more heated as its membership was debated.
One audience member thought that the NFDSS (National Federation of Discharged Soldiers and Seamen) should be included. They felt there was something undemocratic, even mysterious, about the whole thing, as they had not yet been consulted. Another attendee thought parents of some of the dead men should also be on the committee. (Apparently some already were).
Against a background of ‘ayes’, ‘nos’, and ‘good old Federation’, the Mayor had to defend himself. Had the people of Loughborough ever known him to be undemocratic or play a dirty trick of any description? (‘No!’). As Loughborough’s chief citizen, surely they could trust him now? (Cheers!)
Eventually, it was decided that Dr Venn Dunn, a supporter of the NFDSS, should join the new committee. The Lady Mayoress also agreed to serve on it and the meeting ended with “rousing cheers” for the Mayor and Mayoress.
27th May 1919, the arguments continue
At another well-attended meeting at the Corn Exchange on 27th May 1919, war memorial arguments rumbled on. The committee now included representatives from churches, chapels and factories. Most people at this meeting appeared to want the health centre. But the committee, by a majority of 34 to 7, favoured the carillon tower.
At this meeting, the Rev Weaver spoke up for a health centre. The men had died for ‘a healthier and more beautiful world,’ and not ‘ornamentation,’ he said. Dr Venn Dunn, who had served in France with the RAMC, seconded this. Loughborough should have “a living memorial, not a tombstone.”
Other objections to a carillon included the fact that Taylor’s Bell Foundry already had one, and no one to play it.
However, a carillon tower was the choice of most of the committee. At the meeting, Councillor Wilfred Moss spoke up in its favour. It had been his suggestion from the outset and his company would, of course, eventually get the contract to build it. He’d already obtained estimates of the costs. In his opinion, although philanthropic schemes like the health centre were admirable, a carillon tower would last for centuries and best honour the memory of the fallen.
Put to the vote
At the conclusion of the meeting, it was decided to put it to a public vote. This happened the following November, but only 628 people (from a possible 9,000 ‘burgesses’ or citizens) voted. This may have had something to do with the fact that to vote, you had to pledge a donation to the cost of the memorial. Better-off voters would have been more likely to support a grand structure rather than a health facility for their poorer neighbours.
The carillon tower got 287 votes (and raised the largest sum by far), the monument idea came a close second with 265 votes, while the health centre only attracted 76.
Today, Loughborough Carillon survives and thrives, playing its part in town life as a memorial to all conflicts, a museum, a provider of musical performance and a focus for events such as Remembrance Sunday. The decision to build it may have been a little undemocratic, but with hindsight, it was probably the right one.
