This article looks at the early history of British cat rescue, and some of the benefactors of the early organisations.

THE BENEFACTORS: RICHARD BARLOW KENNETT & MARY ANNE KENNETT

In September 1882, Mrs Mary Anne Kennett left £6000 in her will to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, among other animal-related causes. This was not for food or shelter, but rather for “mercifully” killing the animals, there being little else to offer the sick and starving hordes of stray and abandoned cats in British towns and cities. Fearing that her own cat might become a stray, she also ordered it to be chloroformed (the most humane method then available) after her death. The monetary bequests were provisional on the amount left at the death of her husband, Richard Barlow Kennett, but judging from his own charitable contributions (including free provision of humane cattle-slaughtering equipment to several abattoirs during 1884) the societies probably got the full amounts. Richard Kennett died during 1890 and his house was auctioned.

Edinburgh Evening News, Friday 20th October 1882: The will of Mrs Mary Ann Kennett, late of Petersfield, Hants, was proved on the inst., the value the personal estate exceeding £18,000. The testatrix leaves all her property upon trust for her husband for life : at his death, she bequeaths £6000 to the Royal Society for the Prevention Cruelty to Animals; £2000 to the Metropolitan Drinking Fountain and Cattle Trough Association : £1000 to the Temporary Home for Lost and Starving Dogs ; £2000 to the churchwardens of the parish of Petersfield, the interest and dividends be distributed twice a year in money, blankets, coals, etc., among the poor of the said parish. The testatrix desires her husband to kill her favourite cat with chloroform immediately after her death.

The Ipswich Journal, Tuesday 30th January 1883: THE COMMITTEE of the LONDON ANTI-VIVISECTION SOCIETY feel assured that all sympathisers in the Anti-Vivisection movement will be greatly encouraged to learn that Mr. Richard Barlow Kennett's noble offer has been realised through the raising of the Special Fund of £1,000 by the appointed time. The Committee desire to EXPRESS their very warm THANKS to Mr. KENNETT and to every contributor. Office, 180, Brompton Road, M. Walbrook, Secretary, to whom all communications may be addressed, and of whom may be had, free, a form of petition to Parliament for the Prohibition of Vivisection, and a list of publications on the subject.

Dublin Daily Express, Friday 16th February 1883: IRISH SOCIETY FOR THE ABOLITION OF VIVISECTION. The committee of this society met on Tuesday, the 13th inst, at the office of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Westmoreland-street. Dublin - the Rev T A McKee, D D, in the chair - to consider communications addressed to the bon secretary (Miss Swifte), by Richard Barlow Kennett, Esq. of Petersfield, Hants, in which he offered to give £500 for each the following objects, provided similar sums were contributed within a year for the same purposes, viz: 1. For the abolition of vivisection. 2. For a house of refuge for lost and starving dogs and cats. 3. For the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.
They passed the following resolution : Resolved—That believing the establishment of a dogs and cats home and the fuller development of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty Animals are of more urgent consequence and importance at the present moment, and considering the many pressing claims on the public for the relief of distress and other matters, the committee are of opinion they could not consistently make an appeal for the sum necessary to enable them to claim Mr Kennett’s generous offer for this society, and, therefore, forego it in favour of the two other objects named by him, viz—The establishment of dogs’ and cats’ home, and the Society for the Prevention Cruelty to Animals, in the hope that the sums required to authorize the Committee of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals to claim Mr Kennett's munificent offer for these two objects may be contributed by the public, and that copy of this resolution, with expression of the committee’s strong sense of obligation and thanks, be sent to Mr Kennett for his kind offer.

Dublin Daily Express, Saturday 16th June 1883: CRUELTY TO ANIMALS—EARNEST AND URGENT APPEAL. The Committee of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals have been offered by Richard Barlow Kennett, Esq, Peterfield, Hants, £500 towards the General Funds of the Society, provided they can obtain contributions the same amount within a year. And also a further sum of £500 for the Home for Lost and Starving Dogs and Cats on the same conditions. They earnestly appeal to the public for special Donations to enable them to avail of these munificent offers. Contributors will please state when forwarding their contributions that they are towards the “Kennett” Offering for “Dogs’ Home,” or for general objects, as the case may be. The sums must be made up within twelve months. Should the entire sum required by Mr Kennett’s conditions be not made within the time, and that he will not consequently make his grant, the sums specially given towards this object will be returned to the contributors. Contributions may be lodged in the Munster Bank (Limited), Dame street ; or Ball’s Bank, Henry street ; or sent the Honorary Treasurer. William Pen in, 50 Lower Sackville street, or paid into the Office. By Order, THOMAS F BRADY, Hon Secretary. Office of the Society, 36 Westmoreland street, Dublin. 1st March. 1883.

St James's Gazette, Tuesday 27th May 1884: CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. Mr. RICHARD BARLOW KENNETT has made the following benevolent OFFER to the Committee of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals:—“l will give £1,000 to the R.S.P.C.A., on an equal sum being collected by or from any other person or persons, and I hereby authorize your noble-hearted society to announce this.” The Committee earnestly APPEAL to the public for DONATIONS of any amounts, to enable them to secure the above-proffered support.—Remit to the Secretary, 105, Jermyn-street, London, S.W,

Hampshire Chronicle, Saturday, 6th December 1884: MUNIFICENT OFFER. Mr. Richard Barlow Kennett has made a generous offer to the Committee of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. He offers £5000 to the Society if they can get two other £5000 in any sums, in two months, and also £1000 on the same conditions. Mr. Kennett will also give £1000 to the Society on an equal sum being collected by the Committee from any other person or persons; and he authorises this noble-hearted Society ”to make this announcement.” It would a great calamity (says the Animal World) not to realise Mr. Kennett’s benevolence. The Committee urgently appeal for help in donations of any amounts, which may be sent to the Secretary, 105, Jermyn-street, London.

St James's Gazette , Thursday 1st January 1885: A MUNIFICENT OFFER AND AN APPEAL FOR HELP. Mr. RICHARD BARLOW KENNETT has made the following GENEROUS OFFER to the Committee of the R.S.P.C.A.: Dear Mr. Colam, I hereby offer £5,000 to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals if you can get, and will get, two other fives (5000s] in any sums in two months; and £1000 also upon the same conditions.” The same gentleman has also written as follows: 1 will give £1000 to the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals on an equal sum being collected by you from any other person or persons, and I hereby authorize your noble-hearted society to announce this.” It would be a great calamity not to realize Mr. Kennett's benevolence. The Committee Urgently APPEAL for HELP, in donations of any amounts, which may be sent to the Secretary, 105, Jermyn-street.

Kent & Sussex Courier - Wednesday 07 September 1887: TUNBRIDGE WELLS SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. This society has just issued its thirteenth annual report. [. . .] After describing the works done in the Bands of Mercy in the town and neighbourhood, the report goes on refer to the Dogs’ and Cats’ Home, the money subscribed for this object to meet the generous offer of Mr Richard Barlow Kennett (which, including the £20 given him amounts to £80), is now on deposit in the London and County Bank. Some such refuge is greatly needed. The Pound is very limited in its accommodation [. . .] the at present Society finds difficulty in dealing with the poor strays, of whom about twenty dogs and twelve cats came under their care last year and were maintained (chiefly at the private cost of a few individuals), until owners or new homes were found for them, or the old and diseased ones were killed. Some were “boarded out,” but the present arrangement tor them is purely provisional.

To put it in a historical context, there were around 80,000 to 100,000 cats in the West End of Victorian London. Hydrophobia (rabies) existed in Britain. According to a letter in the London Evening Standard, Tuesday 23rd July 1889: “Hydrophobia, [the Home Secretary] tells us, can be transmitted, and we know is transmitted, through the scratch or bite of a cat, but at the same time he admits the impossibility of carrying out an order for putting " puss in boots " or Muzzles. [While dogs are muzzled, but ] cats go unmuzzled, Hydrophobia, cannot be stamped out. “

Although male cats might be castrated (without pain relief), spaying of females was not a possibility and unwanted kittens were routinely drowned … or the mother and offspring were turned out to make their own way. Small wonder that the Dogs and Cats Homes and the RSPCA were in the business of killing strays, not rescuing them. In addition, owners sent sick or unwanted animals to the shelters to be killed humanely in the lethal chamber. The ones killed by the animal societies were the lucky ones. Cat fur was a valuable commodity and cats were often skinned alive in the belief it preserved the lustre of the fur.

QUEEN VICTORIA & ALEXANDRA, PRINCESS OF WALES

Queen Victoria was a patron of the London Institution for Lost and Starving Cats at Ferdinand Street, Camden Town. This has been was founded by Mrs Morgan in 1896. It received 300 cats per week on average. The sorry state of these cats meant that every day, "several wretched cats" were found to be beyond help and were destroyed on admission. 80% of cats were destroyed within 24 hours. Many would have been admitted with distemper, others would have been starving, abused or injured. Members of the public could also take their cats there for euthanasia.

Queen Victoria's Danish-born daughter-in-law, Alexandra, Princess of Wales, was another subscriber to animal welfare societies and, unlike her husband, Edward (later King Edward VII) she was a cat lover. When Alexandra became associated with the animal welfare advocate Zoe de Longueville, King Edward VII apparently called in Scotland Yard to investigate whether his wife was a secret cat-rescuer.

Tamworth Herald, Saturday 7th April 1894: THE PRINCESS OF WALES AND LOST CATS AND DOGS. At the annual meeting of the supporters of the London Home for lost and starving dogs it was reported that the number of dogs taken to the home last year was 16,383. Homes had been found for 3,125 of this large number of dogs - 1,963 bad been sold, and 1,162 dogs had been restored to their owners. Four hundred and eighty-two old or diseased dogs were brought into the home by private persons who desired them to be put to a painless death in the lethal chamber. Altogether, 417 cats had been received, 215 as boarders and 202 as strays The chairman informed the meeting that he had received a letter from the Princess of Wales acknowledging the receipt of a copy of the last annual report, and intimating her willingness not only to become a patron, but also a subscriber to the institution.

ERNEST BELL AND JESSEY WADE - ANIMALS FRIEND SOCIETY, CATS PROTECTION LEAGUE ETC

Ernest Bell was born in 1851, the son of George Bell, founder of George Bell and Sons publishing company. He was a maths scholar at Trinity College, Cambridge, graduating in 1873, and though he was interested in becoming a schoolmaster he joined the family publishing company, later becoming a director and then chairman. His background made him an effective organiser. He devoted much time to administration and fund-raising for three main reform causes: vegetarianism, humanitarianism, and animal welfare. In 1873 he joined the R.S.P.C.A. and around the same time he learnt of vegetarianism, adopting this lifestyle in 1874. He joined the Vegetarian Society, later becoming a vice-president, then president, until his death in 1933 at the age of 82. In 1893, Mr. Bell married fellow humanitarian Marie A. von Taysen of Leith, Scotland in 1893.

Along with Jessey Wade and John Galsworthy, he was a co-founder and active member of the Performing and Captive Animals Defence League. At various times during his life-long involvement in animal welfare he was the honorary secretary of the Hampstead branch of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, chairman of the Anti-Vivisection Society and was on the governing councils of the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, the National Canine Defence League, the Cat’s Protection League, the Pit-Ponies Protection Society, and the Anti-Bearing-Rein Association. He was a co-founder of Performing and Captive Animals Defence League and a main force behind the Animals’ Friend Society (founded 1834). Bell disliked the appearance of ostentation and made his largest contributions to various societies’ funds anonymously. Twenty-two separate societies joined together in giving him a lifetime award in 1929 in recognition of his work for animal causes. He was also an early member of the Humanitarian League.

Ernest Bell’s and Jessey Wade’s activism has been likened to modern animal rights militants, with a reputation for law-breaking and political activism that scandalised the very class-conscious Establishment of the time.

EVERY CAT’S DAY. Leeds Mercury, 24th September 1912
To the Editor of The Leeds Mercury.
Sir.—May I be allowed to remind your readers that October 1st is now recognised as “Every Cat’s Day” when all who sympathise with the sufferings of this much despised race are asked to give them some help. The best way do this to contribute to one of the institutions which have been formed in many towns to carry out the simple duty of any civilised community of clearing the streets these miserable outcasts and giving them at least a painless exit from life. London alone is responsible for upwards of 20,000 wretched strays, and other large towns are as bad in proportion. The condition of these ownerless animals is truly pitiable, many of them being mutilated, blind, starved, covered with sores, and full of disease. Until our local Councils recognise the duty of dealing with this evil systematically, it must continue to be done by private enterprise, but it ought not to be left to the comparatively few people who have hitherto borne the burden alone. A list of forty-five cat shelters in various parts of the country will be sent post free on application to the Secretary, Animals Friend Society, York House, Portugal-street, London, W.C. - ERNEST BELL.

Bell’s associate Miss Jessey Wade was a stalwart of the animal rights movement between 1896 until the 1940s. Much less is known about her as she was a more private person. It isn’t known if she was related to Berta Wade who wrote prolifically about animal rights during that same period (Berta was a member of the Saint Francis D’Assissi League of Mercy, promoting kindness to animals, but “Wade” is a common surname). Jessey Wade was Ernest Bell’s private secretary and a close friend from 1896 until Bell’s death 1933. She was active in the Humanitarian League, the Animals’ Friend Society, The Pit Ponies’ Protection Society, The Performing and Captive Animals’ Defence League (co-founder) , The League for the Prohibition of Cruel Sports (now League Against Cruel Sports) (co-founder), National Society for the Abolition of Cruel Sports (co-founder) and the Cats’ Protection League as co-founder and first chairperson, while Ernest Bell was Secretary. Jessey Wade also had an interest in the occult (i.e. 19th century spiritualism) and was an early feminist. She was a proponent of “rational dress” (women’s dress that did not constrict movement) and was a member of the Women’s Freedom League (i.e. a suffragist). In 1911, suffragists wrote “No Vote, No Census” on their census forms.

In 1917, she wrote “The Animals Friend Cat Book,” which was published by Bell Brothers (G. Bell and Sons). In this she refers to their office cat Tibby. The book contains an illustration Tibby the cat and the back view of a lady writer/illustrator – perhaps Jessey herself - next to him.

Along with Eva Gore-Booth, Esther Roper (Gore-Booth’s life-long companion), Dorothy H. Cornish and Irene Clyde (the female pseudonym of Thomas Baty, who longed to be a woman), Wade was an editor of “Urania,” a privately published radical journal about gender equality, gender fluidity and sexual politics. The term “Uranian” referred to homosexuality (“intermediate sex” – now known as “non-binary”) and advocated the idea that sex is neither essential nor a determiner of destiny - “Sex is an Accident.” The journal collected reports of lesbianism, transsexuals and intersexuality and it criticised gender norms enforced by society. It also covered women’s progress and achievements in the military, business, athletics, academics, dress, art, and music around the world.

AND CATS. Jessey Wade. The Animals Friend, April 1927
It seems passing strange that during all the years which have gone by since Richard Martin first stood up, literally, for the legal protection of horses, and a Member of Parliament shouted in derision, “You will want a Bill to protect dogs next!” and another added, as the crowning absurdity, “And cats!” that no adequate Society has ever taken root to befriend these household gods who often fall from high estate, and their brothers the strays. A society has been suggested several times, but when one reads of the many cat shows and breeders, the many devotees of Puss, one wonders why this interest in, and possibly love of, the feline tribe, does not lead any section of the public to come to grips with the appalling state of misery and muddle which besets the problem.

Should cats he taxed? Can they be taxed? Does chloroform provide the most humane death, or is electricity better? Are the shelters properly run? and many other points, are often argued, but never settled. Dogs and horses are better provided for. At the present moment we read that the College of Pestology, of all places, is urging the registration of cats, and a Bill to make it law, and thinks the animals themselves will greatly benefit thereby — in other words, a tax. There are many objections to the suggestion, and we doubt if it could be worked. Two recent cases in court have also helped to bring home to many people the feeling that something should be done. One was the mismanagement of a lethal box at a cat shelter, when the victim, “appearing to be dead,” afterwards crawled back to his home, and was discovered by the owner a week later, when it then died — after how great suffering, who can tell? The other was a case of the “old fashioned method” of drowning kittens, which was very rightly condemned by the magistrate. The defendant did not even keep the kittens underneath the water. Their cries were heard, and a prosecution by the R.S.P.C.A. was the result.

This cause is just typical of many others. The majority of people do not know what to do with unwanted animals, and there is no signpost available. Education, instruction, persuasion, district visitors and district lectures - all these might be tried, because knowledge and the inculcation of sympathy would help to stem the swarms of miserable cats that the shelters, with all praiseworthy zeal, do their utmost to collect from the streets.

We want to see a special society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Cats inaugurated, determined to find a way to improve their condition, without bringing hardships or restrictions upon the poor, whose only friend may be a “furry” brother. Specialisation is the order of the day, and so it must have its place in this matter. We cannot get away from the fact that some folk like dogs best and others cats; some detest the sight of them, but even those are not heartless - they will see that justice at least is done to the harmless necessary cat.

At the ANIMALS’ FRIEND office we feel ashamed at our inability to tell enquirers where they can safely board their cats when leaving home — so few are the caterers for this one urgent need. My new society, to be, must make this want supplied — a temporary home without danger of infection or escape. Who, then, will think out a happy idea? And who, agreeing with this little appeal, will send in their names as soon as possible to the A.F. Secretary. Notices of a meeting-place will then be issued, and an opportunity for some practical proposals, which will, we hope, start the ball rolling. And remember, above all, that shelters are palliatives — useful indeed — but they are not cures for what is wrong with our cats.

Mrs. Ball, of Mapperley, Notts, had this interesting story of a cat to tell in the Observer of January 30, 1927: “Three years ago an intelligent and beautiful cat died suddenly one night, apparently from poison, to the family sorrow, as he was a great pet. The following evening, as nearly as in possible to ascertain at the exact time, my husband, on descending from the tram at the terminus with friends, felt something rub against his log, and discovered it to be a half grown, and apparently more than half-starved, tabby kitten. Without waiting for invitations, he walked along with him some considerable distance, and, on nearing the house, preceded him, turned in at the gateway, and down the side entry to the door. Having apparently learnt to be wary from early troubles, he still decorates the hearthrug, a somnolent sphinx of incredibly good temper.

"Now, did the discarnate 'Tim' put the lost and disconsolate 'Peter’ onto a good thing? or did my husband’s sympathy (conscious or unconscious) with the children's grief at their pet's unnatural end reach out in some telepathic or hypnotic manner and find a lost cat who happened to be at the terminus in the darkness at that particular time? And why did the cat turn in at the gate of his own accord?”