The earliest mention I found in the Google News archives was a piece from the Carmarthen Journal that was picked up by The Public Ledger of :
Rebecca and Her Daughters
We regret to state that Rebecca and her daughters are still at their old work in the lower part of the country, notwithstanding the utmost exertions of the authorities to discover the parties implicated in these outrageous proceedings.
About , Rebecca and a numerous party of her daughters proceeded to Pwlltrap, near St. Clears; and after arriving at the gate, the following colloquy took place between the old lady and her youthful progeny.
Rebecca, leaning on her staff, hobbled up to the gate, and seemed greatly surprised that her progress along the road should be interrupted.
“Children, (said she, feeling the gates with her staff,) there is something put up here, I can’t go on.”
Daughter.—“What is it, mother? nothing should stop your way.”
Rebecca.—“I do not know, children; I am old, and cannot see well.”
Daughters.—“Shall we come on, mother, nothing shall hinder you on your way?”
Rebecca.—“I do not know, children; I am old, and cannot see well?”
Daughters.—“Shall we come on, mother, and remove it out of your way?”
Rebecca.—“No, let me see, (feeling the gate with her staff;) it seems like a great gate put across the road to stop your old mother.”
Daughters.—“We will break it, mother, nothing shall hinder you on your journey.”
Rebecca.—“No, let us see, perhaps it will open, (feeling the lock.)
No, children, it is bolted and locked, and I cannot go on.
What is to be done?”
Daughters.—“It must be taken down, mother, because you and your children must pass.”
Rebecca.—“Off with it then, my dear children, it has no business here.”
With that the whole of the children set to, and in less than ten minutes there was not a vestige of the gate nor post remaining.
Rebecca and her children then passed by, and immediately disappeared, having completed the work of destruction.
The London police were at the Blue Boar at the time, but we were not aware that they had the least intimation of what was going forward, until their services could be of no avail.
The nocturnal outrages of “Rebecca and her Daughters,” at Carmarthen have reached to such a height as to excite just grounds of apprehension that the magistracy of that and the adjoining counties of Pembroke and Cardigan will be obliged to place the whole district under military surveillance.
From attacking and destroying turnpike gates situated in remote and unfrequented parts of the country, these violent men proceeded to exploits of greater daring; and at length, early on morning last, attacked and completely destroyed one of the gates of the county town—Carmarthen.
Pembroke, .—“Rebecca and her Daughters” have hitherto kept at some distance from this place, but last night, or early this morning, a notice was posted on the Holyland turnpike gate, within a mile of this town, as follows:—
“Take notice, I and my Daughters intend paying a visit to the union workhouse, Pembroke, on
“Rebecca.”
Another notice was thrown over the workhouse wall, addressed to the manager, the purport of which was similar to the one in Holyland gate.
We are under no apprehension of the ladies appearing here, but the Mayor has considered it necessary to be on the alert, and has sworn in several special constables.…
It is curious to mark with what steadiness of purpose and with what success the rioters of South Wales continue to knock down gates, break up toll houses, threaten toll-collectors, and baffle all the pursuits of the regiments.
It is almost laughable to read of the dragoons scampering about from place to place, deluded by false intelligence, deceived by false signals, and baffled by the caution, the combination and the cunning of those whom they are directed to keep in check.
The soldiers receive certain information that the rioters are destroying a gate and alarming a whole neighborhood near some village with an unpronounceable name; the clank of sabres and the tread of war-horses sweeping along at speed are heard on the road; the soldiers approach the scene at a hand gallop; already on the other side of the mountain they hear the dropping shots, the sound of horns, and the voices of the rioters.
Suddenly a solitary peasant is seen on the highest turret of the hill; he raises his hat as if to salute some one at a distance; the soldiers press forward; they dash towards the toll house, and find all desolate.
The fragments of the gate are strewn across the road, the gate-house is in ruins, the keeper is found imprisoned in an adjacent barn, and the villagers are cowering in their cottages, alarmed even at the voices of the soldiery, and fearing every moment that the dreaded Rebecca will be upon them.
The dragoons scour the adjacent passes, but not a soul is to be discovered far or near.
Baffled and weary and dispirited, men and horses return towards their quarters.
They have not proceeded far when they are met by a breathless messenger, who informs them that on their very footsteps “Rebecca and her daughters” have followed, and that between them and the place which they quitted but a few half-hours since another gate has been splintered, another toll-house dismantled.
Again the soldiers prick forward in hope of falling in with some of the lawless band; but a similar scene of quiet desolation again awaits them, and they again dash into lanes, by-paths, and thickets, in the hope of discovering some wearing such disguises as those exhibited by the rioters.
The mountain paths are deserted, the green slopes are without occupants, and
All seems as peaceful and as still As the grey mist upon the hill.
The truth is, that though dragoons may do very well to quell violent acts by masses of evil-disposed individuals, they are not competent to act against such slippery people as Rebecca and her daughters.
It would be as wise to take a chain cable to fish for eels, or to set an elephant to hunt rats, as to manœuvre bodies of soldiery against scattered companies of active mountain peasants united for the perpetration of mischief.
It was folly in Lord John Russell on Friday night, blaming the government for not putting down these extraordinary malcontents, who seem so very mad, yet exhibit so much method in their madness.
It is only very recently that Sir Robert Peel or Sir James Graham have learned with any degree of accuracy either the causes of discontent or the true nature of the disturbances.
A tolerably strong body of police would in the first instance have been more effectual in detecting the rioters than all the military in existence.
The magistrates of Carmarthen, however, asked for soldiers and soldiers were given to them.
They did not, as they ought to have done, inform the government of the reason why the people were discontented.
No; they asked for soldiers to keep the peasantry in order.
The energetic reporter for the Times has shown the causes of the people’s uneasiness and the reason why they have been roused to take such very improper measures to get rid of their grievances.
There is now every prospect of the speedy restoration of peace in these beautiful and once happy district.
Mr. Hall, the intelligent magistrate of Bow-street, has been sent from London to take such measures as may appear most proper for the restoration of order.
He will, without doubt, be charged to lay before government the cause of discontent.
The very fact that the complaints of the people are likely to reach the ears of government will do more to allay discontent than any force of dragoons could effect in twelve months.
However, other necessary precautions have not been neglected.
A body of police has been also despatched to the disturbed districts; and while due efforts will be made to obtain such information as may enable the government to remove any real grievances or oppressions under which the poor Welsh farmers may labour, the capture and punishment of the guilty, who may persevere in acts of lawlessness and disorder, will be by no means neglected.
The Riots in Wales.— The latest accounts from South Wales bring no intelligence of any collision between “Rebecca’s daughters” and the military since the attack on the workhouse at Carmarthen; but the midnight war against tollbars appears to be still carried on with much vigour and perseverance as ever.
Meanwhile the magistrates are beginning to take steps for asserting the supremacy of the law, and for putting a stop to those violent outrages which have lately created so much alarm in the counties of Pembroke, Carmarthen, and Cardigan.
In the last-named county, a proclamation has been issued by the lord-lieutenant, in which the rioters are warned that certain ruin will speedily overtake them, should they persist in the course which they have lately been pursuing.
If they have any real grievances, they are told to come peaceably and quietly to the magistrates at each petty sessions, and lay their complaints before them; in which case they are assured, that those complaints “will be heard and redressed in a legal and constitutional manner.”
A letter from Carmarthen dated , says:— The attack upon and destruction of the gates not only is continued with increased daring, but is spreading into a wider locality.
Not only have they levelled the principle gates in Carmarthenshire, but the work of destruction is going on in Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire, and yet not a single individual has been apprehended.
A night or two since they marched in very large numbers to the Sceleddy gates, near Fishguard (where the French landed in ), and in a very short time demolished the gates, posts, and houses, and broke the toll-roads, &c., into pieces so small, that in the morning not a piece was discovered larger than would be fit for match-wood.
After the work of destruction had been completed, the whole party left in the direction of the Haverford west-road, On the same night they attacked the Fishguard Hill-gate, which they also broke in pieces: they then proceeded to the toll-bar at the other end of Fishguard, where they attacked the toll-keeper’s house, the windows of which they demolished.
Things have now reached such a pass, that it is thought by respectable persons of the neighborhood, that unless stopped, both private property and persons travelling on the roads will shortly be rendered very insecure.
They appear now to have adopted plans to harass the soldiery.
Dragoons were ordered to mount at eleven o’clock, to march to some gate in the neighborhood; just, however as the men were about to start at a gallop, subsequent information was received which prevented their proceeding.
The troop of dragoons at St. Clear’s was also out upon the road all night, lights having been shown at various spots which induced them to believe that an attack was being made on gates in different stations.
The Rebecca riots in the south-western portion of Wales have not been checked — that is, the nightly campaign against the bars has been carried on as boldly and with as much success as ever.
One or two meetings have been held, in which, amongst other demands, a reduction of rents and a repeal of the poor-laws have been insisted on.
Although I believe that as regards toll bars in particular the Welsh yeomanry have often just and great cause of complaint, yet it is necessary to caution those who derive their information from the Rebecca sympathizer, the Times, that the statements of its reporters are one-sided, very inflated, and based on mere report.
The Pontardulais-gate, which the military went to on night, was on night again destroyed, and the toll-keeper given notice that, if any more tolls were attempted to be taken, they would pull the house down.
In Llanelly all was quiet.
Further Rebecca outrages have occurred in the neighborhood of Haverford-west.
The very night after the Wolfscastle meeting a large party of Rebeccaites destroyed the Fishguard and Parkymorfa turnpike gates, and cautioned the toll-collectors not to levy more toll; but they, not heeding Rebecca’s warnings, collected the toll as usual on the Saturday.
This exasperated the Rebeccaites, and notices were sent to them to remove their furniture, or the toll-houses would be destroyed on Monday night.
True to their threat, about 400 persons visited the Fishguard toll-house, and completely destroyed it.
They then proceeded to Parkymorfa toll-house, and instantly demolished it.
After firing guns and frightening a great number of the inhabitants, they levelled a piece of a wall belonging to the road surveyor, and dispersed about three o’clock.
About 2,000 persons were assembled in the town, looking on whilst this was going on, but no one interfered.…
The resistance to the collection of poor rates in Ireland, not only continues, but is successful.
On the a number of cattle were rescued from fifty police.
At Kildorrery, near Cork, a large body of constabulary have been several days engaged in collecting; they have succeeded in seizing one goat.
There must, however, be some reason for this, as the parish is assessed in £450 per annum for the support of three paupers.
The increased duty on Irish spirits is to be removed — the only effect was to increase illicit distillation.
The decrease in the duty was £7,361 4s.
The number of persons in confinement, for breach of the revenue laws, had increased from 84 to 368.
The disturbances in Wales are increasing in intensity, number, and boldness.
A body of 800 to 1,000, half, at least, mounted, and very many of them respectable farmers, came into Carmarthen, on the , paraded through the streets, insulted and threatened the magistrates, and, finally, broke open the workhouse and commenced throwing the furniture into the yard.
A troop of the 4th Light Dragoons, who had been sent for in anticipation, arrived, and the Riot Act being read, charged the rioters, who fled in all directions, except 80, who were taken after considerable resistance in the workhouse and committed to gaol.
Rebecca has, in Wales, assumed the province of Captain Rock in Ireland, and threatens similar penalties.
A report, and some further paragraphs in the last one seem to hint that the Rebeccaites were either expanding their campaign into local, non-toll-related grievances, or that some people were disguising themselves as Rebeccaites as a way of trying to get their own vengeance and terrorism masked by the Rebecca phenomenon.
Outrageous Proceedings of “Rebecca and her Daughters”
Our readers are aware that for some time past a lawless band, somewhat fancifully yclept “Rebecca and her Daughters,” have produced considerable alarm in Wales, in consequence of their outrageous proceedings.
This association contrived to shroud themselves in as much mystery as the Carbonari, and their deeds were more desperate and alarming than those of any secret body of modern days.
Up to this hour, the chief who assumes the title of Rebecca, and dresses in women’s clothes, has alluded [sic] all the attempts made to discover his identity.
Some say he is a county magistrate, others insinuate that he is a still more important personage; but the only certain thing is, that the “great unknown” has succeeded in organizing a large number of followers, who appear ready to adopt the most violent measures to procure what they term the redress of their grievances.
Hitherto, turnpike-gates alone excited their fury, and all their energies were solely devoted to their destruction.
On , however, they made a furious attack on the workhouse at Carmarthen, which would, no doubt, have been entirely destroyed had it not been for the opportune, but tardy, arrival of the military.
These misguided men previously paraded the town, and, in answer to the persuasions of the magistrates to return home, stated that they had assembled to make a demonstration of their force, in order that the authorities might be aware of the means which they had at disposal to compel a compliance with their demands.
According to a correspondent of the Times—
They then read a list of their complaints, and the changes they desired, which included not only the removal of all the turnpike gates in the county, but also the abolition of all tithe and rent-charge in lieu of tithes, the total alteration of the present poor-law, towards which they expressed the most bitter hostility, abolition of church-rates, and an equitable adjustment of their landlords’ rents.
These, with other alleged grievances, six or seven in number, they stated their determination to get remedied.
Thus it would appear that the Rebecca movement is still more dangerous than the [Irish anti-Union] repeal movement, because, exciting as may be the speeches of Mr. O’Connell, physical force is always repudiated.
These Welsh malcontents, however, appeal to arms at once, and assume such a formidable aspect, that considerable alarm was necessarily created throughout the whole of the districts which were the scenes of their exploits.
This outrage adds another melancholy proof — none was wanting — of the existence of deep distress and discontent.
However well founded the complaints of these men may be, they must be taught that such demonstrations can no longer be tolerated.
Indeed, we think it will be a general feeling throughout the country, that there has been negligent supineness on the part of the Government: for although week after week every newspaper in the kingdom teemed with accounts of their lawless proceedings, and the acts of Rebecca and her Daughters have been bruited about in all directions, nothing in the way of prevention has been attempted, and all the descriptions that we have seen of the last riot admit that no precautions had been used, and that if the military had not arrived without delay, the most disastrous results would have ensued.
The executive functions of a Government, which form so essential a portion of its attributes, appear to have been woefully neglected, and thus the evil has spread to a fearful extent.
Really, the “strong” and “popular” Government, as some men delight to call it, has enough upon its hands.
Discontent in England, threatened rebellion in Ireland, and open insurrection in Wales, these are tolerably significant symptoms of popular confidence.
A Special Commission has been opened in Wales, by Mr. Baron Gurney and Mr. Justice Creaswell, for the trial of the parties connected with the late Rebecca riots.
The proceedings occupied three days.
One of the ringleaders was found guilty, and sentence to twenty years’ transportation.
And the good cop to the bad cop was, of course, an official government inquiry into whether there was anything to what these crazy Welshmen seemed so upset about.
From The Bytown Gazette, :
Wales.— Mr. Frankland Lewis has begun the inquiry into Welsh grievances in a fine spirit, which does credit to himself and the Government which appointed him.
This passage in his address on opening the commission at Carmarthen extorts approval from the Times, even for a Poor-law Commissioner:— “They (the Ministers) are most anxiously desirous to ascertain whether there be any real causes of grievance subsisting, in order that by powers of the Executive Government or of Parliament, or of both combined, a legislative remedy may be effected; for which purpose we are here.
“Even to wrong-doers I will say, that this inquiry will be conducted with feelings of compassion and of kindness towards all.
We know the infirmities of human nature, and cannot but feel deeply sorry for these who have been misled; for although the law must be upheld, we still feel (and it is my full conviction) that many have been misled from erroneous opinions, whom a wise, judicious, and I may say gentle treatment, may bring back into those right paths from which they have been induced to wander.”
The trial of John Hughes, the “Rebecca” in the attack on Portardulias gate on the night of the , began , at Cardiff.
The bad cop kept copping, but Rebecca’s daughters kept smashing up tollbooths, at least according to this Public Ledger article from :
The Rebecca Riots.— The Commission for the trial of the Rebecca rioters for Glamorganshire was opened at Cardiff on morning, and ended on , the judges being Mr. Baron Gurney and Mr. Justice Cresswell.
The calendar contained seventeen prisoners; two cases of maliciously cutting and wounding, a third for shooting with intent to murder, and the remainder for assisting at various riots in demolishing the turnpikes at Pontardulias and other places.
One of the prisoners who were convicted, was sentenced to be transported for twenty years, two others for seven years each, some to various terms of imprisonment, and others were discharged on their own recognisances.
Accounts from this part of the principality are far from indicating a return to quietness and submission to the law.
Scarcely a night passes without some daring outrage against persons or property being committed; and this, notwithstanding the large military force at the disposal of the executive, besides a numerous body of the most experienced of the London police.
The lamentable disturbances in Wales, committed by parties disguised as women, and known as “Rebecca and her daughters,” continued to an alarming extent.
At first they confined themselves to the destruction of toll-gates at which excessive tolls were charged, but gathering courage from the impunity with which they committed outrages, latterly they have taken upon themselves the right, after the O’Connell fashion, of settling disputes about rents and tithes.
Several encounters between the Rebeccaites and the police had taken place, and two murders had been committed.
The references to the agitation in Ireland and the tumults in Wales are both followed by promises in the first instance of amendments in the existing laws tending to improve the social condition of the country; and in the other of inquiry into the circumstances that have led a peaceable people to insubordination.
It is thus confessed that in both cases there has been wanting what the Legislature or the Government ought to have afforded, and that the commotions have had the effect of drawing attention to the grievances.
So true is the maxim of Bentham, that “Never, but by making the ruling few uneasy, can the oppressed many hope for a particle of relief.”
As Kings of old used to come forth to their palace gates and administer justice when the clamour of the complainants reached a certain pitch, so Governments now attend to the wrongs of the people when a sufficient uproar and commotion are made about them.
But for Rebecca’s outrages, the Welsh would have been fleeced and oppressed by their magistrates till doomsday.
The Queen is made to tell the Welsh in substance that they will be punished for what they have done against the law, but that what they have done against the law shall obtain for them, after chastisement, inquiry and redress.
This will serve at least encourager les autres.
The Times has some caustic remarks on the fall of the curtain and the lame epilogue to which we have adverted:—
“[O]n the subject of the Welsh disturbances, they tell us they have ‘adopted measures to repress’ them, and ‘have directed an inquiry to be made into the circumstances which led to them.’
We wish they had done the latter sooner, and done it in a more politic manner.
What is the state of the case?
These disturbances began as early as or ; and they began upon some very plain and tangible grievances, which might, we will be bold to say, have been effectually rectified, had they been attended to at first.
Nothing is done, however, and the disturbances go on .
They get worse and worse day after day, and month after month.
Cavalry scour the country in vain; Rebecca begins to hold nocturnal meetings; Chartists appear.
Turnpikes and market dues usher in the much more deep and ominous subject of rents.
Under the auspices of a blundering magistracy, and a high-rental gentry, a fierce collision seems impending, and society to be on the brink of disorganization.
What is done then?
Mr. Hall, the Bow-street magistrate, is sent down to rescue the country.
Now, Mr. Hall is a clever man; Bow-street magistrates are a sharp class of men; but we have yet to learn that a Bow-street magistrate is exactly the person to deal with the evils of a country, and a whole disordered agricultural and trading system.
A Bow-street officer is a dead hand at catching a thief, but that is all that he need be.
Was Mr. Hall sent down to perform this professional office, and catch some three or four individuals of station who were suspected of being secret movers in these outbreaks — for the ‘detection of offenders,’ as the speech says?
The policy of Government hardly improves upon such a view.
What, are you going to put Wales in the watch-box — to bring her up before the sitting magistrate — place her at last before an omnipotent bar, and make her figure in the police reports?
Nay, if the grievances of the Welsh are real, what so mighty offense is it, after all, if some respectable persons have taken them up?
At all events, it is statesmanlike to be aiming at catching a few individuals instead of rectifying a system, and to be snapping at a few gnats when a whole atmosphere wants cleansing?
Poor pin, needle, and bodkin work — mere ferreting, ratcatching!
Sir James Graham has chosen an enviable profession, and is now, we presume, giving us a proof of his skill in it.”
The riots in Wales still continue unabated.
Murder has been added to the other atrocities. a poor old woman, upwards of 70 years old, kept a gate near Contadulais, on the road from Llanelly.
On the the house was set on fire over her head — she ran to beg her neighbors to assist her in putting out the fire and save her furniture — they refused from fear.
She returned to save it by herself; they fired the house more effectually.
She ran across the road and shouted, imprudently, that she knew them.
One fired, and she fell.
An inquest was held; her chest was full of blood, shots were found in her lungs, clearly the cause of her death.
The jury returned a verdict — “That the deceased died from effusion of blood into the chest, which caused suffication; but from what cause is to this jury unknown.”
The reporter of the Times says — “I shall, of course, make no comment upon this extraordinary verdict.”
There seems to be no doubt that the toll gates are a grievous injustice on the Welsh roads.
Two shillings are required on one road for eleven miles; the tolls in some cases are more than the value of the goods carted, and on one road there has been paid in seven years £600 tolls, while not more than £3 has been expended during that period, and the road is in wretched repair.
That, notably, is the first time any of these newspaper accounts actually attempted to report on the Rebeccaist grievances in any sort of detail.
Clearly, I’m missing some important reporting from the London Times.
And in relying on the press, I’m getting a distorted, third-party take on the events, with a strikingly conservative gloss.
I’ll have to do some more research.
Interestingly, nearly a century before, some of the Whiteboy agitation in Ireland had a similar flavor to it, with the rebels declaring themselves to be in allegiance to “Queen Sive and her children.”
The name Rebecca comes from a bible verse in Genesis in which Rebecca is told, “be thou the mother of thousands of millions, and let thy seed possess the gate of those which hate them.”
But I wouldn’t be surprised to find that the template predates the arrival of the bible in the area.
In its edition, Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine gave Joseph Downes several pages to twist his panties to the ripping point over his recent “tour of the disturbed districts in Wales” — these districts having been disturbed by the tollbooth-destroying Rebeccaites.
Today I’ll reproduce some excerpts from this essay that give some hints as to how enraged conservative opinion viewed the Rebecca movement.
The author was so blinded by dudgeon as to be incapable of giving a reliable account of much other than his own outrage, but there’s some interest in it:
“And this is the ‘disturbed district!’ — this is the seat of war!
— the ‘Agrarian civil war!’ — the headquarters of the ‘Rebecca rebels!’” I soliloquized, about — a night of more than summer beauty, sultry and light as day — while thrusting my head from the window of “mine inn” the Castle, in this pretty picturesque little village-town, to coin a term.
The shadows of the rustic houses, and interspersed corn-stacks, trees, and orchards, stretched across the irregular street, without a causeway, in unbroken quiet; not a sound was heard but the voice of an owl from a “fold” in the very heart of “the town,” and the low murmur of the river chafing against the buttresses of an antique bridge at the end of the said “street;” while an humble bow window of a shop, where at nightfall I had observed some dozens of watches (silver, too!) displayed, without a token of “Rebecca” terrorism appearing, was seen jutting into the road, only hidden, not defended, by such a weak apology for a shutter, as would not have resisted a burglar of ten years’ old.
…With a smile of well-pleased wonder at the exaggerations of the press, which were persuading the Londoners that the “dogs of war” were really “let slip” among these our green mountains and pastoral valleys, after enjoying this prospect of a village by moonlight at the foot of the majestic Mynydd Du, (black mountain,) whose range is seen by day, towering at a few miles’ distance, and hugging myself in the security of life and purse, which warriors (if they would cross-question their own great hearts) do really prize as much as I do, I returned to bed, (the heat of which had first driven me forth to this air-bath of half an hour.)
“And this is the seat of insurrection!”
I reiterated sarcastically against all English and all Welsh purveyors of “news” for terror-loving readers.
“Most lame and impotent conclusion!”
The peace of nature in that sweet night was weak assurance of any kindred feeling in the bosom of man.
It so happened (as I afterwards learned) that felony — bloody felony — was at that very time busy, at no great distance; that murder, that arson in its direst character, were stamping their first damnable characters on a province noted, through ages, for innocence and simple piety; that the first victim to rebellion was, at that moment, bleeding to death under the hands of those wearing the shapes of men; that victim innocent, helpless, and — a woman!!
But of this in the course of my narrative.
As I proceeded from Llangaddock this afternoon, in company with my son, we found no slackness in the attendance on the chapels, which keep rising in all directions in the principality.
The groups issuing from them, survey us with surly eyes, as Sabbath breakers, for travelling on the “Lord’s day.”
It is curious to reflect that these very persons who have just been listening to the preachers of a gospel of peace, with white upturning eyes and inward groans, who present countenances deeply marked, as it seems to us, with the spirit of severe sanctity, betrayed by their sour looks at us, and not rarely vented in two or three expressions at us among themselves — I say, how curious a fact in the pathology of minds does it present, that these very men will (some of them) reappear in a few hours, or days, in the characters of felons, midnight rebels to law and order, redressing minor wrongs committed by a few against themselves, by a tenfold fouler wrong against all men, against society itself.
For a system which consists in defying the laws, is a systematic waging of war against the very element that binds men in society — it is a casting off of civilization, a return to miserable dependence on animal strength alone, on brutish cunning, or midnight hiding in the dark, for all we enjoy.
It seems well known that the farmers themselves are the Rebeccaites, aided by their servants, and that the Rebecca is no other than some forward booby, or worse character, who ambitiously claims to act the leader, under the unmanly disguise of a female, yielding his post in turn to other such petticoat heroes.
The “Rebecca” seems no more than a living figure to give effect to the drama, as boys dress up an effigy and parade it as the Guy Fawkes.
It is curious to witness the chop-fallen aspect of the poor toll collectors.
The “looking for” of a dark hour is depicted on the female faces, at least, and a certain constrained civility mixed with sullenness, marks the manners of the male portion near large towns; for elsewhere, humble civility has always met the traveller in this class of Welsh cottagers.
The frequent appearance of dragoons, the clatter of their dangling accoutrements of war, and grotesque ferocity of hairy headgear, and mock-heroic air of superiority to the more quietly grotesque groups of grey-coated men, and muffled up Welsh women gives a new feature to our tour in this hitherto tranquil region, where a soldier used to be a monster that men, women, children, all alike, would run to the cottage door to look at.
A very different sort of look than that of childish curiosity now greets these gallant warriors, at least from the farmers.
“’Becca” is the beloved of their secret hearts — ’Becca has already given them roads without paying for them!
’Becca is longed for by every honest farmer of them all, whenever he pays a toll-gate.
And these fellows are come sword in hand, to hunt down poor innocent ’Becca!
Well may the Welshman’s eyes lower on them, whatever may be the looks of the Welsh women.
We have now rode through several toll-gates, the ruins of the toll-houses only remaining, and rode scatheless!
No toll asked — no darting forth of a grim figure from his little castle, at the shake of the road by tramp of horses — like the spider showing himself at his hole, on the trembling of his web to the struggle of a luckless fly.
Nothing appeared but a shell of a house, with blackened remains of rafters, or a great heap of stones, not even a wall left — and huge stumps of gate-posts, and not a hand extended, or voice raised to demand payment for our use of a road!
— that payment which the laws of the land had formally pronounced due!
Had new laws been passed?
Had a new mode arisen of discharging the debt we had incurred by the purchase of the use of so much road for two horses?
Nothing of the kind!
A mob at midnight had thrown down the barrier law had built; and law dared not, or neglected to — erect it again!
“Rebecca,” like Jack Cade, had pronounced her law — “sic volo, sic jubeo” — and we rode through, by virtue of her most graceless Majesty’s absolute edict — cost free.
It was really a very singular feeling we experienced on the first of these occasions.
I assure thee, my reader; believe me, my pensive public!
I never was transported — never held up hand at the Old Bailey, or elsewhere; am not conscious of any sinister sort of projections about my skull, that phrenologists might draw ugly conclusions from; yet I confess, that after an eloquent burst of Conservative wrath against this strange triumph of anarchy — after looking down on these works of mob law, unreversed, tamely endured — after fancying I saw the prostrate genius of social order there lying helpless — the dethroned majesty of British law there grovelling among the black ruins, insulted, unrestored — left to be trampled over with insolent laughter, by refractory boors, ignorant as savages of that law’s inestimable blessing — I say, after all these hurried thoughts and feelings — let me whisper thee, my reader, that a certain scandalous pleasure did creep up from these finger-ends, instinctively groping the pocket for the pre-doomed “thrippence,” yea, quite up to this lofty, reasoning, and right loyal sensorium, on leaving the said sum in good and lawful money, snug and safe in my own pocket, instead of handing it over to a toll collector.
Let us not expect too much from poor human nature!
I defy any man — Aristides Redivivus himself, to ride toll free through, or rather over, a turnpike defunct in this manner, and not feel a pernicious pleasure at his heart, a sort of slyly triumphing satisfaction, spite of himself, as of a dog that gets his adversary undermost; in short — without becoming for the moment, under the Circean chink of the saved “coppers,” a rank Rebeccaite!!
The Lord and the law forgive me, for I surely loved ’Becca at heart at that moment!
My son being a young man about returning to college, it was highly important to conceal this backsliding within; so I launched out the more upon the monster character of this victory of brawny ignorance and stupid rebellion over the spirit of laws — but it wouldn’t do.
“But you don’t look altogether so angry about it as you speak, father,” said he, though what he could see to betray any inward chuckling, I am not aware.
If the casual saving of a toll could thus operate upon me, who should, perhaps, never pass there again, can it be wondered at that farmers, to whom this triumph must prove a great annual gain, are Rebeccaites to the backbone, and to a man?
I fear they must be more than man, not to cry secretly to this levelling lady “God speed!”
And this leads me to more serious reflection on the incomprehensible and fatal conduct of the local authorities in the first instance, in not instantly re-erecting the toll-gates, or fixing chains pro tempore, protecting at whatever expense some persons to demand compliance with the laws, that not for a week, a day, an hour, the disgraceful and dangerous spectacle should be exhibited, of authority completely down-trodden, law successfully defied.
Surely the first step in vindication of the dignity of legal supremacy could not be difficult.
By day, at least, surely a constabulary force might have compelled obedience.
A few military at first, stationed near the gates, would have awed rustic rebels.
It is the impunity which this unheard-of palsy of the governing strong hand so long ensured to them, which has fostered riot into rebellion, and rebellion into incendiarism and murder.
Is it possible for a thinking man to see these poor and (truth to tell) most money-loving people, saving two or three shillings every time they drive their team to market or lime, by the prostration of a gate, and be at a loss to discover the secret of this midnight work spreading like wildfire?
Why, every transit which a farmer makes cost free, is a spur to his avarice, a tribute of submission to his lawless will, a temptation to his ignorant impatience of all payments to try his hand against all.
The quiet acquiescence in refusal to pay — the vanishing of toll-house and toll-takers without one magisterial edict — the mere submission to the mob, seems to cry “peccavi” too manifestly, and affords fresh colour to indiscriminate condemnation of all.
A bonus in the shape of a toll for horse or team remitted, is thus actually presented, many times a-day, to the rioter, the rebel, the midnight incendiary of toll-houses, for this good work, by the supine, besotted, or fear-palsied local authorities.
Shall a man look on while a burglar enters his house, ransacks his till, let him depart, and then, in despair, leave the door he broke open, open still all night for his entrance, and then wonder that burglary is vastly on the increase?
The wonder, I think, is that one gate remains; and that wonder will not exist long, if government do not do something more than send down a gentleman to ask the Welsh what they please to want?
The temptation forced upon the eyes and minds of a poverty-stricken and greedy people, by this shocking spectacle of the mastery of anarchy over order, in the annihilation of an impost by armed mountain peasants, is in itself a great cruelty; for in all Agrarian risings the state has triumphed at last, inasmuch as wealth and its resources are an overmatch for poverty, however furious or savage; hence blood will flow under the sword of justice ultimately, which early vigilance on her part might have wholly spared.
“Knock down that toll-house — fire its contents — murder its tenant,” seems the voice of such sleepy justice to pronounce, “and neither I, nor my myrmidons will even ask you again for toll!
Do this, and you shall not pay!!”
Such was the tacit invitation kindly presented by the first torn down toll-gate that remained in ruins, to every Welsh farmer.
The farmer has accepted it, and “justice” — justice keeps her promise religiously, for no toll is demanded.
If the law had been violated by trustees, we have a body called parliament strong enough to reform, ay, and punish them, as they, some of them perhaps, richly deserve; but was that a reason for the laws to be annulled, and lawlessness made the order of the day, in so important a matter as public roads, by the very men who are to profit by it, self-erected into judges in their own cause?
Llandilo Vaur.
Being Sunday, a moral charm was added to those of this exquisite natural panorama, from which the curtain of storm-cloud seemed just then drawn up, as if to strike us the more with its flashing glory of sunshine, water, and a whole sky become cerulean in a few minutes.
No Sabbath bells chimed, indeed; but the hushed town, and vacant groups come abroad to enjoy the return of that Italian weather we had long luxuriated in, impressed, equally with any music, the idea of Sabbath on the mind.
It was hard to believe, revolting to be forced to believe, that this fine scene of perfect beauty and deep repose, as presented to the eye, directed to nature only — to the mind’s eye rolling up to nature’s God — was also the (newly transfigured) theatre of man’s worst and darkest passions; that the army — that odious, hideous, necessary curse of civilization, the severe and hateful guardian of liberty and peace, (though uncongenial to both) — was at that moment evoked by all the lovers of both for their salvation; was even then violating the ideal harmony of the hour, by its foul yet saving presence; was parading those green suburbs, and the sweet fields under those mountain walls, with those clangours so discordant to the holy influences of the hour and scene — emerging in their gay, shocking costume, (the colour of blood, and devised for its concealment,) from angles of rocks, and mouths of bowered avenues, where the mild fugitive from civil war, and faithful devotee of his throneless king, had often wandered, meditating on “Holy Dying” — of “Holy Living” himself a beautiful example — where even still, nothing gave outward and visible sign of incendiarism and murder lurking among those hermitages of rustic life; yet were both in active, secret operation!
In that very park of Dynevor, whose beauty we were admiring from the bridge, a little walk would have led us to — a grave! — no consecrated one, but one dug ready to receive a corpse; dug, in savage threatening of slaughter, for the reception of one yet living — the son of the noble owner of that ancient domain — dug in sight of his father’s house, in his own park, by wretches who have warned him to prepare to fill that grave in !
The gentleman so threatened, being void of all offence save that of being a magistrate — a sworn preserver of the public peace!
To return to the flock from these burly shepherds of souls — this outbreak of a devilish spirit — this crusade against law and order, tolls aud tithes, life and property, is a damning evidence against these spiritual pastors and masters, for such they are to the great body of the Welsh common people, in the fullest sense.
The Times newspaper has ruffled the whole “Volscian” camp of Dissent, it appears, by thundering forth against them a charge of inciting their congregations to midnight crime.
“John Joneses, and David Reeses, and Ap Shenkinses, have sprung up like the men from the dragon’s teeth, to repel this charge.
It is probable that it was not well founded, for the simple reason, that such daring subornation of crime would have brought themselves into trouble.
But what sort of defence is this, even if substantiated?
You did not excite your followers to rebellion and arson!
You, with your unlimited command of their minds, and almost bodies, why did you not allay, resist, put down the excitement, by whomever raised?
That is the gravamen of the charge against you!
You who make them weep, make them tremble, puff them with spiritual conceit, or depress them with terrors of damnation just as you please, how comes it that you are powerless all at once in deterring them from wild and bad actions — you, who are all-powerful in inciting them to any thing, since to refrain from violence is easier than to commit it?
The increase of these outrages proves, that not the power, but will, is wanting on your part, to put down this spirit of revenge and revolt.
You perceive the current of their ignorant minds setting strongly in toward rapine and rebellion, (the feeler put forth being the toll grievance,) and you basely, wickedly, pander to their passions, by a discreet silence in your rostra, an unchristian apathy; while deeds are being done under your very eyes — in your daily path — which no good man can view without horror; no bold good man in the position which you hold, of public instructors in human duties, could see, without denouncing!
And as your boldness, at least, is pretty apparent, whatever your goodness may be, other motives than fear must be sought for this unaccountable suspension of your influence — and I find it in self-interest — love of “filthy lucre.”
You are “supported by voluntary contribution,” and to thwart the passions of your followers, and stem the tide of lawless violence, though your most sacred spiritual duty, is not the way to conciliate — is not compatible with that “voluntary principle” on which your bread depends, and which too often places your duty and your interest in direct opposition.
Llanon, Carmarthenshire.
The good woman of our inn in this village has just been apologizing for the almost empty state of her house, the furniture being chiefly sent away to Pembree, whither she and her family hoped to follow in a few days.
The cause of her removal was fear of the house being set fire to, it being the property of Mr Chambers, a magistrate of Llanelly, and the “Rebecca’s company” had warned all his tenants to be prepared for their fiery vengeance.
His heinous offence was heading the police in discharge of his duty, in a conflict that has just occurred at Pontardulais gate, near this place, in which some of the ’Beccaites were wounded.
[Since this, farmhouses and other property of this gentleman have been consumed, his life has been threatened, and his family have prevailed on him to abandon his home and native place.]
The wounded men, now prisoners, were of this village, the focus of this rebellion that dares not face the day.
It is here that the murderous midnight attack was made on the house of a Mr Edwards, when the wretches fired volleys at the windows, where his wife and daughter appeared at their command.
They escaped, miraculously it might be said, notwithstanding.
The poor old hostess complained, as well she might, of the hardship of being thus put in peril, purely in hostility to her landlord.
We slept, however, soundly, and found ourselves alive in the morning; whether through evangelical Rebecca’s scruples about burning us out (or in) on a “Lord’s Day” night, or her being engaged elsewhere, we knew not.
And here also we rode through a crowd, murmuring hymns, pouring from the chapel, where, no doubt, they had heard some edifying discourse about the “sweet Jesus,” and “sweet experiences,” and “new birth,” the omnipotence of faith to salvation, and all and every topic but a man’s just indignation, and a religious man’s most solemn denunciation against the bloody and felonious outrages just committed by those very villagers — against the night-masked assassins, who had just before wantonly pointed deadly weapons against unoffending women — against the chamber of a sick man, a husband, and a father!
Llanelly, .
The headquarters of vindictive rebellion, arson, and spiritual oratory!
An ugly populous town near the sea, now in a ferment of mixed fear and fury, from recent savage acts of the Rebeccaites against a most respectable magistrate, resident in the town, Mr W. Chambers, jun., the denounced landlord of our old Welsh hostess at Llanon.
Two of his farm-houses have been burned to the ground, and his life has been threatened.
His grievous offence I stated before.
Soldiers are seen every where; and verily, the mixture of brute-ignorance and brute-ferocity, depicted in the faces of the great mass of “operatives” that we meet, seem to hint that their presence is not prematurely invoked.
Their begrimed features and figures, caused by their various employments, give greater effect to the wild character of the coatless groups, who, in their blue check shirt-sleeves, congregate at every corner to cabal, rather than to dispute, it seems; for, fond as they are of dissent, (though not one in fifty could tell you from what they dissent, or to what they cleave in doctrine,) there seems no leaning to dissent from the glorious new Rebecca law of might (or midnight surprisals) against right.
In this neighbourhood, our Welsh annals will have to record — the first dwelling-house, not being a toll-house, was laid in ashes; the first blood was shed by “Rebecca’s company,” as they call the rioters here.
And here resides, rants, prays, and preaches, and scribbles sedition, an illiterate fanatic, who is recognised as an organ of one sect of Methodists, Whitfieldites, publishing a monthly inflammatory Magazine, called Y Diwygiwr, (the “Reformer!”)
— God bless the mark!
This little pope, within his little circle of the “great unwashed,” is very oracular, and his infallibility a dogma with his followers and readers.
How much he himself and his vulgar trash of prose run mad, stand in need of that wholesome reform which some of his English brother-firebrands have been taught in Coldbathfields and Newgate, let my reader judge from the following extract.
The Times newspaper did good service in gibbeting this precious morceau, supplied by its indefatigable reporter, in its broad sheet.
How great was the neglect of Welsh society, and every thing Welsh, when this sort of war-cry of treason could be raised, this trump of rebellion sounded, and, as it were, from the pulpit “Evangelical,” with perfect impunity to the demagogue, thus prostituting religion itself to the cause of anarchical crime!—
“We cannot regard these tumults, with their like in other parts, but as the effects of Tory oppression.
Our wish is to see Rebecca and her children arrayed by thousands, for the suppression of Toryism.
These are the only means to remove the burden from the back of the country.
… Resolve to see the sword of reason plunged in oppression’s heart.”
He goes on to say, “there must be a hard-blowing storm before the high places in State and Church can be levelled,” &c. &c. There is the usual twaddle about “moral force,” forsooth, under which saving periphrasis, now-a-days, every rebel ranter in field, or tub, or conventicle, insinuates lawless violence without naming it.
Jack Cade would have made it the rallying cry of his raggamuffins, so would Wat Tyler, had it been hit upon in his day.
I haven’t been able to find the article he refers to on-line, but I did find another excerpt from it, which is pretty explicit about this “moral force” being exclusive of violence: “Seize the weapons you are sure to conquer with.
Yours is a moral force exclusively.
Work it out, but the resource of your oppressors is physical force.
They are much too strong for you on this ground.
Resolve to see the sword of reason plunged in oppression’s heart.”
The array of thousands is intelligible “to the meanest capacity.”
The dullest Welsh “copper-man,” or collier, or wild farm cultivator, could not miss the meaning.
But as to this magical weapon, “moral force,” which they are to handle when so arrayed — the brightest capacity must be at a loss to know what it means.
How absurd (if he pretends such a thing) to expect that enlightened statesmen will stand reformed, restrained, stricken through, with a new light in politics by the exhibition of these smutty patriots’ minds alone!
— by the force of conviction, wrought by ascertaining their convictions, (the illuminati of Llanelly coal-works, of Swansea copper-works, of Carmarthen farm-yards,) will instantly tack — put the vessel of State right about, and bring her triumphant into the placid haven of Radicalism!
And why physical “array” to wield such shadowy arms as “moral” force?
This favourite stalkinghorse of incendiary politics is but the secret hiding-place of retreat from the “force of government.”
The peace, the forbearance it breathes, is like the brief silence maintained — the holding of the breath — by those snugly ensconced within that other horse of famous memory, the Trojan, which served admirably to lay vigilance asleep, and evade the defensive force of the garrison, till the hour came to leap from its protection, and fire the citadel.
This “moral force” covert of revolt, is every whit as hollow, as treacherous, as fatal, if trusted to.
Inflame, enrage, and then gather together “thousands” of the most ignorant of mankind, pointing to a body, or a class, or a government, as the sole cause of whatever they suffer or dislike, and then — tell them to be moral! peaceable! not to use those tens of thousands of brawny arms, inured to the sledge-hammer; oh, no! tell them that force means to stand still — or disperse — or gabble — any thing but to — fight! And such vile “juggling with us in a double sense” as this, is evangelical morality!
Pontardulais, .
It was pleasant to emerge from that dingy seat of fanaticism and fury, pseudo religion and moral violation of religion’s broad principles.
Its aspect almost recalled the description of one of Rome’s imperial monsters, equally in physiognomy and nature — “a mixture of dirt and blood.”
…
We were beginning to dismiss ugly Rebeccaism from our thoughts, meditating where we should find one of those Isaac Waltonian hostelries, with a sign swinging from an old tree, which we delight to make our evening quarters; for Pontardulais, we knew, was too lately a little battle-field to afford hope of this tranquil bliss, for here had occurred the first conflict, in which men had been wounded and prisoners made.
The advance of evening, with its halcyon attributes of all kinds, had the effect of a lullaby on the mind, disturbed at every stage by some hurrying dragoon, some eager gossiping group, or fresh “news” of some farm “burned last night,” or rumours of “martial law” being actually impending over us poor rebels of South Wales.
Reaching the little houses in their lonely crossway, we were startled by the appearance of a gutted house; the walls alone having remained to present to us, on the higher ground, the semblance of a white cottage.
The old thatch, fallen in, and timber, were still smouldering visibly, though the house was fired about .
Before the near adjoining cottage a quiet crowd of somo twenty persons appeared, and a few rustic articles of furniture on the roadside.
Where was their owner?
Dismounting, we entered this cottage, that had looked all peaceful security so lately to our eyes.
It had not been injured, but was all dismantled and in confusion: and stretched on some low sort of bench or seat, lay the murdered owner of that smoking ruin — the Hendy tollhouse.
Her coffin had been already made, (the coffin-plate giving her age, 75,) and stood leaning against the wall, but the body was preserved just as it fell, for the inspection of the jury.
(The jury! a British jury!
Is there a British man, incapable of perjury, of parricide, of bloody and blackest felony, himself, who will ever forget, who will ever cease to spurn, spit upon in thought, execrate in words, that degraded, wretched, most wicked knot of murder-screeners — the Hendy Gate jury?)
There was nothing in this dismal spectacle for a poet to find there food for fancy.
All was naked, ugly horror.
An old rug just veiled the corpse, which, being turned down, revealed the orifice, just by the nipple, of a shot or slug wound, and her linen was stiff and saturated with the blood which had flowed.
Another wound on the temple had caused a torrent of blood, which remained glued over the whole cheek.
The retracted lips of this poor suffering creature, gave a dreadful grin to the aged countenance, expressing the strong agony she must have endured, no doubt from the filling up of the breast with those three pints of blood found there by the surgeons.
The details of this savage murder have been too fully given in all the papers to need repetition here.
Suffice it to say, that to any one viewing the body as we thus happened to do, the atrocity of this heartless treason against society and the injured dead becomes yet more striking; it seeming wonderful that the piteousness of the sight — the mute pleading of that mouth full of cloated blood — the arousing ocular evidence of the unprovoked assassin’s cruelty — the helplessness of the aged woman — her innocence — all should not have kindled humanity in their hearts, (if all principle was dead in their dark minds,) just enough to dare to call a foul murder “murder” — to turn those twelve Rebecca-ridden, crouching slaves into men! Some of them, probably, had old helpless mothers at home; did no flying vision of her white hairs all blooded, and the breast, where they had lain and fed, full of blood also, cross the conscience of one of them, when, by their conspiracy, protection for life was to be denied to her, to all, by their unheard-of abuse of the only known British protective power — trial by jury?
It is almost an apology for them to imagine, that one or more of them were actually part of the gang.
Self-preservation, under instant danger, (involved in a just verdict,) is less revolting than the less urgent degree of the same natural impulse, implied in the hypothesis of pure selfish and most dastardly dread of some remoter evil to self from the ill-will of those impugned by a righteous verdict.
The verdict, it will be remembered, was, that Sarah Williams died from effusion of blood, but from what cause is to this jury unknown!!! The designed trick — the sly juggle concocted by these men, sworn before Almighty God to tell truth respecting the cry of blood then rising to his throne, evidently was to leave a loophole for a doubt whereby justice might be defeated — a possibility, so they flattered themselves, that, just in the nick of time, a bloodvessel burst, or fright destroyed her, or any thing but the bloody hand of “Rebecca.”
Though, as the slugs were actually found in the lungs, the hope they “dressed themselves in” was as “drunk,” as swinishly stupid, as their design was unmanly, inhuman, and devilish — to wink at this horror! to huddle up this murder, and hurry into the earth a murdered woman, as if she had lived out her term!
Whatever was the prompting feeling of this monster-jury, let us hope that the arm of the law will reach them yet, for this double crime against bleeding innocence and against their country.
It would be a fitting punishment to them, to pronounce every individual an outlaw — to deny him all benefit of those laws he has done his best to defeat, and leave the craven traitor to his kind — to adopt his beloved “’Becca’s” disguise for ever, skulk about the land that disowns him in petticoats, and blush out his life (if shame be left him;) and let his name be fixed up, as a scarecrow to deter such evil doers, on the wall of every court of justice:— “To the infamous memory of A.B., one of the perjured protectors of murder — The Hendy Gate Jury!”
Most revolting was the betrayed bias of almost all we spoke with, toward palliation of this dark act.
“Didn’t she die in a fit; or of fright; or something?” was a frequent question, even from those near the scene of this tragedy.
“What did ail the old creature to go near ’em?
Name of goodness! didn’t they order her not?” Even from her own sex, a disgusting lack of warm-hearted pity and indignation was most palpable.
Truly, morality and the meeting-house have a deep gulf between them, if these are the morals of the people.
The regular church is really so little prized here, that we can only turn to the dissenting ministers of religious instruction, for the lower orders.
And seeing these doings and sentiments in the flocks, one turns with astonishment to those professing teachers of the Welsh, and is ready to exclaim — “What is it that you do teach?”
Only the mechanical part of religion, only the necessary outer mummery, I shall venture to say, which, perhaps, all revealed religions require, to maintain a hold on the reverence of the common people.
It seems impossible that the voice of true religion can have reached hearts that a slight pecuniary interest, the abatement of a turnpike toll, or the like, can sear against the death-shriek of murdered woman; the cry of blood out of the earth; the fear of God’s judgment against perjury, and connivance at murder!”
Kidwelly, Carmarthenshire, .
Riding from Llanelly to this place, by a road skirting the coast, we, for the first time, heard the horn of Rebecca sounded, and replied to from among the darkling hills, the night being one of dusky moonlight.
We at first believed it the signal of some persons in the collieries, but learned that “’Becca’s company” had been out round Kidwelly that night, and an incendiary fire was the “good work” accomplished.
It being near , and our road wild and solitary, we felt rather pleased to gain the covert of this usually most quiet little town, with its air of antiquity and dead repose, as agreeable to a sentimental traveller, as unwelcome to its few traders and dwellers.
The innkeepers and shopkeepers, being much injured in their trades by the terrifying effect of Rebeccaism on strangers, who have kept aloof all the summer, lift up the voice (but cautiously) against this terrible lady.
Hardly an expression of regret for the poor victim at Hendy Gate reaches our ears; but rather, they seem to visit on her the anticipated severity of future dealing with the rioters, which they foresee.
We see already posted placards, offering L.500 for the discovery of the actual perpetrator of the murder of the poor toll-collector.
It is headed “Murder,” in the teeth of the audacious, solemn declaration by the jury, of their ignorance of the cause of death.
Query, Was a coroner warranted in receiving such a verdict?
Was he not empowered — required — to send the jury back to learn common sense?
Inn between Carmarthen and Llandilo.
Just as we were sauntering in the rural road, admiring the placidity of the night, , and the twilight landscape of the banks of the Towey, a sudden light opened up to us the whole night prospect, where the farther side of this broad vale rises finely covered with woods, round Middleton Hall, and soon learned the nature of this sudden illumination and pyramidal fire, being the conflagration of extensive property belonging to its owner, Mr Adams, close to the mansion.
The terror of the female inhabitants may be imagined, there being, I believe, not any male inmates but servants at home, and the incendiaries doing their work at that early hour in the most daring manner, firing guns, blowing horns, &c. Mr Adams drove in just as the fire was at its height, (having, indeed, believed the house to be in flames while he approached,) and found the goods and moveables all brought out in fear of its catching fire; but it escaped — so did the Rebeccaites, of course.
Not to extend too far these hasty Notes, I shall throw together the heads of a few made on the spot.
Our “sentimental journey” occupied about three weeks, and brought us to almost every part infested by the disturbers.
Having put up at an inn in the outskirts of a town in Cardiganshire for the night, leaving the horses, we walked to the town.
As we returned, the night being rather dark, I was not conscious of any one being on the same road behind, and was talking to my son, rather earnestly, of the iniquitous verdict of the Hendy Gate assassin jury, when a voice behind asked in English, saucily, if I was going to attend the future trial of the “Hugheses, and them of the Llanon village, then in Swansea jail?”
The tone clearly indicated how alien to the Welshman’s feelings were those I was expressing, though but those of common humanity.
Giving the voice in the dark such short answer, refusing to satisfy him, as the question deserved, and with responsive bluffness, we left the man behind, who, it proved, was bound to our inn.
We found our parlour filled with farmers, who instantly became mum as we entered, but their eyes suspiciously surveyed us.
It was near eleven o’clock, so we retired to our double-bedded chamber, which happened to be situated over the parlour.
The inn (whose owners were ultra “Welshly,” speaking English very badly,) was well situated for holding a midnight council of (Rebecca) war, being lonely, at the confluence of two roads, and this proved to be the nature of this late assemblage.
We were jus’ in bed, (having secured the door as well as we could,) when we heard through the imperfect flooring a very animated mêlée of Welsh tongues all astir at once, and I fancied I recognized the voice of the pious Christian in the dark, who had been moved by the spirit (of religion of course) to hint or betray his dissent from the Saxon “stranger’s” rebuke of perjury and murder-screening.
A few minutes after, several hurried out, and three or four discharges of guns followed in front of the house, but nothing more.
I was pleased to think that the said house and windows were “mine host’s,” and not mine, otherwise a little hail of shot might have followed the “short thunder;” but as it was, nothing more than this warning bravado (as I imagine it to have been) occurred.
A great deal of solo spouting, by orators in orderly succession, went on till near two in the morning — Sunday.
At least, falling asleep, I left this little patriot parliament sitting, and found it in full tongue on awaking at that hour.
I suppose this sitting in judgment on toll-houses (and possibly other houses) of these anti-landlord committees, are not breaches of the observance of the Sabbath.
On the whole, we may remark, that neither Poor-Law, nor Tory, nor Whig, nor right rule, nor misrule, nor politics, nor party, had the slightest influence in this astounding moral revolution among an agricultural people.
Utterly false is almost all that the London Press broached and broaches, implicating ministers in the provocation of this outbreak.
Twenty years of residence, and leisure for observation among them, allows me to positively deny that any feeling of discontent, any sense of oppression, any knowledge of “Grievances,” now so pompously heading columns of twaddle — ever existed before the one daily, weekly spur in their side, goaded this simple people to a foolish mode of resistance to it.
Why, not one in ten of the farmers has yet heard of Sir Robert Peel’s accession to office! and I doubt if one in twenty knows whether they live under a Whig or Tory administration.
Nor does one in a hundred care which, or form one guess about their comparative merits.
The only idea they have of Chartists, is a vague identification of them with “rebels,” as they used to call all sorts of rioters, not dreaming of their forming any party with definite views, unless that of seizing the good things of the earth, and postponing, sine die, the day of payment.
Judge what chance the brawling apostles of Chartism would have among them, especially under the difficulty of haranguing them through interpreters!
The Poor-Law they certainly hate, but from no pity for paupers.
The dislike arises from a wide spread belief, that the host of “officers” attached to it swallows up great part of what they pay for the poor.
They grudged the poor-rate before, even when their own overseer paid it away to poor old lame Davy or blind Gwinny; but now that it reaches them by a more circuitous route, and in the altered form of loaves or workhouse support, they seem to lose sight of it, and fancy that it stops by the way, in the pockets of these “strange” new middlemen, as we may call them, thrust in between the farmers and their poor and worn-out labourers.
The prevalence of the Welsh language perpetuates the ignorance which is at the root of the mischief.
Of their native writers, I have given a specimen from the monthly magazine published at Llanelly, and the evil of these is uncorrected by English information.
The work of mounting heavenward was, we are told, defeated by a confusion of tongues — the advance of civilization (which we may designate a progress toward a divine goal, that of soul-exalting and soul-saving wisdom) is as utterly prevented by this non-intercourse system between the civilized and the half civilized; which, with all deference to the ancient Britons, I must venture to consider them.
Camden, the antiquary, has preserved a tradition, that “certain Brittaines” (Britons) going over into Armorica, and taking wives from among the people of Normandy, “did cut out their tongues,” through fear that, when they should become mothers, they might corrupt the Welsh tongue of the children, by teaching them that foreign language!
The love of their own tongue thus appears to be of very old standing, if we are to believe this agreeable proof of it.
I believe the extirpation of Welsh, as a spoken language, would pioneer the way to knowledge, civilization, and religion here, of which last blessing there is a grievous lack, judging from the morals of the people.
The National Library of Wales has created an on-line archive of Welsh newspapers.
Naturally I had to go hunting for more details about the amazing Rebecca Riots, and I found dozens of examples.
Much of what I found was editorial tut-tutting or that evergreen response to anything newsworthy, which is to make it an opportunity to flog your pet cause.
Only rarely could I find details about how the campaign was actually being carried out by the resisters.
The earliest example I’ve found so far comes from the edition of The Cambrian, which reproduces or excerpts an item it credits to the Welshman as follows:
Outrageous Proceeding.
Rebecca and her Daughters.
The lawless mob in the neighbourhood of St. Clears, have again committed a daring outrage.
On , the magistrates for the county met at the Shire-hall, Carmarthen, to deliberate respecting the riotous transactions at St. Clears during , and to take measures for the apprehension of the ringleaders.
The proceedings on that occasion were strictly private, but the result has been that a troop of the Royal Marines from Milford, commanded by Capt. Wilson, were stationed at St. Clears, and a great number of the old pensioners from Carmarthen, received orders to proceed to the same place; the reward for the apprehension of the offenders was also increased from 50l. to 100l. Notwithstanding these precautions, on , the rioters sent a message to the marines to the effect that they were about to pay a visit to the gates, and that they should be glad to meet them.
, a detachment of 20 marines, accompanied by four officers, set out for the gates, to ascertain if the men intended carrying their threat into execution.
When they arrived at Trevaughan [a.k.a. Trefechan] gate, it was found to have been levelled to the ground, and part of the toll-house destroyed.
Not one of the rioters was however to be seen, they having dispersed in different directions after they had levelled the gates.
On each of these excursions, the mob consisting of a large assemblage of men and boys, all of them well mounted, and most of them dressed in women’s clothes, and nearly all armed with guns, pistols, pitchforks, hay-knives, reaping-hooks, crowbars, or some other weapon, are invariably headed by Rebecca, who is described as being a remarkably strong tall man, well disguised, and who appears to have unlimited authority over the lawless crew who term themselves her children.
The toll-keepers are dreadfully afraid of them, and the mob altogether is the terror of the surrounding country.
The farmers in the neighbourhood have refused to be sworn in as special constables, and many of them have paid the fine of 5l. for such refusal.
The whole of the peasantry of that part of the country appear to be in a state of the greatest excitement, and we fear the dispute will not be put an end to without the effusion of blood.
We have just been informed that one of the mob can be identified, and will at once be apprehended.
— A meeting of the representatives of the various neighbouring parishes was held on , when several resolutions were passed, which are to be printed, and circulated in the disturbed district.
When the first sentence uses the word “again” I think it is referring to tollgate destruction that took place in St. Clears three and a half years earlier, in a small precursor to the later Rebecca uprising that took place in .
(I hunted for articles about those earlier tollgate destructions but didn’t find anything.)
This article is remarkable to me because although it is the first mention I have found in the English-language press of the Rebeccaite tollgate destruction, pretty much all of the pieces are already in place: the description of the mysterious “Rebecca” figurehead and her followers alike cross-dressed in women’s clothing; already the people of the area are refusing in sympathy (or fear) to assist in subduing the rioters; already the other tollgate keepers are described as quaking in fear.
It feels to me like the folks near the scene knew right away that this was not going to be a one-off sort of event.
Incidentally, more or less the same article appears in the Monmouthshire Merlin but it is yet more vague about the dates, and if I only had it to go on, I would have assumed all of the action described had happened a couple of weeks after it did.
I think I’m going to have to do a lot of guesswork and cross-checking to verify dates in these articles.
Here’s another example of a contemporary Welsh newspaper article covering the Rebeccaite anti-tollgate campaign, from the Cambrian:
, the lawless band, known by this name, destroyed another toll gate on the Whitland Trust.
Their mode of procedure shows that their leader well knows how to act, so as to avoid detection, or contact with the military.
Hitherto all efforts to discover them have been fruitless.
It is reported, that while they were in the act of demolishing one of the gates, the week before last, they sent word to that effect to the Yeomanry, who were stationed at another gate.
On receiving this report, the yeomanry immediately hastened to the spot, but on their arrival, they found to their mortification, that the gate was already levelled with the ground, and the rioters fled.
It afterwards was seen that the reason for conveying this report to the cavalry was, to induce them to quit the gate at which they were then stationed, in order that the mob might do the work of destruction on that also, without molestation from the troopers.
Accordingly, on the return of the latter, they discovered that Rebecca “a’i phlant” had been there during their absence, and had accomplished their design.
On , another detachment of Yeomenry started from Haverfordwest, to relieve the company on duty during last week; they are armed with pistols and carbines, and carry 20 rounds of ammunition each.
A letter was last week received by William Owen, Esq., Mayor of Haverfordwest, signed by Rebecca, informing him, that she and her children intended shortly visiting [–] this, it is thought, is only a hoax.
Haverfordwest. Destruction of a Toll Gate
This town was morning, thrown into no small excitement, by the discovery of the loss of the toll gate erected at the top of Prendergast, on the Fishguard road.
It appears that some evil disposed persons, moved, it is thought, by the desire of emulating the fame of “Rebecca and her Daughters,” in the adjoining county, on the night of last, lifted the gate off its hinges, and carried it to a field at the distance of about a quarter of a mile.
Early on morning, a search was instituted for the missing gate, and about noon it was found in the field, sawed to pieces, and quite useless except for fire wood.
It is supposed that the plot was executed by at least half a dozen persons, as the gate was very heavy, and no disturbance was made.
At present there is no clue whatever to the discovery of the offenders.
The destruction by Rebecca and her daughters first levelled against the toll-gates in South Wales, has now begun to be directed against the workhouses which are threatened with notices to that effect.
Neither the military nor yeomanry have yet been able to apprehend a single offender.
The individual who personates Rebecca appears to possess much influence, and is frequently replaced by another; these insurrectionary parties appear at different places at the same time.
On , the Pembrokeshire Lent Assizes heard a criminal case of Rebeccaite tollgate destruction:
Thomas Howell and David Howell, were charged (together with other persons to the jurors unknown), with having, on , at the parish of Lampeter Velfrey, in the county of Penbroke, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled together, did then and there unlawfully, and with force, demolish and pull down the dwelling-house of one William Rees, there situate.
They were further charged with demolishing and pulling down the office of the said William Rees, and in other counts, with beginning to demolish, &c.
Mr. Chilton [Counsel for the Crown] addressed the Jury as follows:— The prisoners at the bar were charged with riotously and tumultuously assembling, with other persons, and unlawfully demolishing the dwelling-house of William Rees.
The question you will have to try is, whether the two prisoners, or either of them, were acting in the outrage which took place at Trevaughan, on .
It will surprise you, that persons in their station in life should be so engaged.
It is my duty to advert to that of which you are not ignorant, namely, that there has prevailed in this and the adjoining county, what I may term a war of extermination against the toll-gates on the roads.
I regret the circumstance most unfeignedly, and I am sure my learned friend will join with me in the wish, that the result of this trial may have the effect of explaining to the misguided people, that they are in the wrong.
Roads in this country are almost necessaries of life, and they cannot be kept in repair, unless funds are raised for the purpose.
Lawless men may just as well invade your farms, because you cannot give away the produce of them, as that people should destroy toll-gates because the keepers of them exact the tolls which are lawfully demanded for passing over the roads.
The evidence by which I shall call upon you to come to the conclusion that the prisoners did take a part in the outrage is the following:— Wm. Rees will tell you, that he is the keeper of the Trevaughan gates; he has been tenant of the tolls for one or two years; he will tell you that within a short time the gates have been three times taken away by mobs.
This so much alarmed him, that he became afraid to sleep in the toll-house.
He used to go about ten o’clock in the evening to sleep in the house of Rees Isaacs, a little distance off, and subsequently he slept in the house of David Thomas.
He will tell you that, on the night of , he had not been long at Thomas’s house, before Rees Isaacs came to inform him that “Rebecca was at the gates.”
He immediately ran towards the gates, and went into a garden belonging to the cottage of Keturah Howell, about 100 yards from them.
This place commanded a full view of the toll-house and gates, but it was not near enough to enable him to distinguish the features of any of the parties engaged in the work of destruction.
He reckoned from 16 to 20 persons there, and heard the discharge of fire arms. He saw them employed in carrying pieces of wood, the fragments of the toll house and gates, across a field near the toll-house, towards the river Taff, for the purpose of throwing them into the river.
After the house had been pulled down, the mob ran across this field as if alarmed, and dispersed.
Rees then went towards the toll-house, and in ten minutes after he saw the prisoner, Thomas Howell, coming on, in company with two other persons whom he did not know, across the field I have spoken of, in a direction from the river.
Thomas Howells then addressed him as follows:— “It is hard on you to lose your house, you had better come with me to get a damper.”
After that Thomas Howells went on in the direction of the bridge, which would lead him to Whitland.
The next witness I will call before you is Lewis Griffiths; he will tell you that , he went to bed at the Goldon Lion, in Whitland.
There were two persons sleeping with him.
Some time afterwards he was awakened by a voice calling out, “Rebecca is come.”
Thomas Howell, one of the prisoners, was at the bedside, and gave him some beer.
Howell then left the room, and Griffiths hastily dressed himself, and went out after him; he overtook Howell and David Thomas, the son of the landlord of the Golden Lion, who were going towards the toll-house.
When they got to Trevaughan bridge, he saw remnants of the gates being carried to the river, and he saw the mob busily engaged in pulling down the house.
At this time, a man approached them with a gun, and snapped the cap on it.
Thomas Howell then cried out “Hurrah, Rebecca.”
The man took off his hat, asked for money, and Thomas Howell took some out of his pocket, and put it into the hat.
The man then went off, and Howell, Griffiths, and Thomas followed him towards the gates; when they got there, the mob were at work pulling the house down.
Griffiths will tell you that David Howell, the other prisoner, was on the pine end of the house, at work with a hatchet, which he once dropped, and Lewis Griffiths picked it up, and gave it back to him.
The man who had the gun then came up, and said to Thomas Howells, “you must take this while I work;” and Howell with the gun kept back the people, who were pushing towards the house.
Shortly after, Howell returned the gun to the man, and took up a shovel, with which he began to pull down the house.
After a short time, a cry was heard, “they are coming,” when the mob all ran towards the river.
They then returned, and called at Benjamin Watt’s house, where they had some beer; after which, Lewis Griffiths returned to the Golden Lion, and went to bed.
These gentlemen are the facts against the prisoners, in addition to which I shall call before you the Rev. John Evans, who committed the prisoners on this charge, who will tell you that, when he asked the prisoner, Thomas Howell, if he had anything to say, he answered, that he was not at the Golden Lion at all on the night in question, and he called a man named Walter John to prove this; but when John was examined, he was obliged to admit that both he and Thomas Howell had been at the Golden Lion that night, and that he left Howell there.
Gentlemen, I humbly submit, that if I am able to bring these proofs before you, it will be your painful duty to find the prisoners guilty; if you have any doubt on the subject, of course you will, under the direction of his Lordship, give the prisoners or either of them the benefit of that doubt.
William Rees examined by Mr. N. Carne:— I live at Trevaughan, in the parish of Lampeter-Velfrey, in this county.
I am the tenant of the Trevaughan toll gates.
I occupied the toll-house up to the time of its destruction.
The house is situated between the two gates.
I rent the tolls under the Trustees of the Whitland Trust.
There was an attack on the house and gates on The gates have been destroyed three times.
I slept in the house till , and not after.
, the house was repaired.
I was there in the evening of , and left about .
The reason why I did not sleep there was, because the windows were not glazed.
I went to David Thomas’s house to sleep on ; his house is about 300 yards from the gates.
I went to bed about , and had not been there long before Rees Isaacs came, and told me they were breaking the gates.
I then got up, and went through the fields to Keturah Howells’s garden.
This was about 80 yards from the toll-house.
I could see the toll-house clearly from where I stood.
I heard a great noise, and saw them tearing down the gates.
I saw about twenty persons there.
I did not go near, because I was afraid.
They were throwing stones at the people who peeped out.
I saw the mob carrying the toll bar and the timber from the house towards the river, which ran along-side of a field at the back of Martha Phillips’s house.
Whilst I was looking at the mob, they all ran away at once; some ran through the road, and others across the field towards the river.
After they left, I went towards the toll-house.
I found the roof destroyed, also the front wall; the joists of the floor were down at one end.
I know the prisoner, Thos. Howell.
I have known him for three or four years.
I saw him that night about ten minutes after the toll-house had been pulled down; he came over the hedge from the meadow behind Martha Phillips’s house.
There were two or three persons with him.
I don’t know whether Lewis Griffiths was there.
Thomas Howell said to me, “Rebecca has done bad work to pull down the house.”
I said, “Yes, and I am very cold.”
Thomas Howell said, “You had better have a damper of ale.”
This was in Welsh.
Thomas Howell then went towards Trevaughan bridge, and one of the men went with him.
Cross-examined by Mr. Evans [one of the lawyers for the accused “by special permission”]:— I knew Thomas Howell very well, and he knew me, as the toll-keeper.
I was standing near the toll-house when he spoke to me.
This gate had been erected between forty and fifty years.
Lewis Griffiths examined by Mr. Chilton:— I live at Pant-y-park Mill, and am a miller.
I was at the Golden Lion, Whitland, on .
I went to bed there .
I slept on the ground floor.
There were two other men who slept with me; they went to bed before me.
I think one of them was Griffith Griffiths, of Llanddarog.
I went to Whitland to sell pigs.
I went asleep, and was awakened by Thos. Howell; he attempted to drench me with beer.
About this time, a man came in, and said, “Rebecca is come.”
I did not know Thomas Howell before.
He and John Thomas then went out, and the pig drovers and I got up and followed.
I overtook Thomas Howell and John Thomas.
The latter is the son of the landlord of the Golden Lion.
Thomas Howell said, “We had better go down near the toll-house.”
I said, “better not.”
We went across a field over a brook towards Trevaughan bridge.
While standing on the bridge, a man came up with a gun in his hand.
I saw the flash of a percussion cap.
Thomas Howell then cried out, “Hurrah, Becca.”
The man then begged some money of Thos. Howell, and he gave him some; the man seemed to grumble at it, when Howell gave him some more.
The man then asked me for money.
I said, I had none for him.
The man then went back, and Howell asked if he should come on, when the man gave a turn with the gun for him to come.
We then went on to the toll-house.
When I got there, I saw the prisoner, David Howell, on the pine end of the toll-house; he had a hatchet in his hand, which he dropped.
I picked it up, and gave it to him.
There were from sixteen to twenty engaged.
When we got there, Thos. Howell took the gun from the man who carried it, and the man took up a shovel and began tearing the house.
A little while after, the man said, “I must have the gun, and you must work.”
Thomas Howell then returned the gun and took the shovel, and began to tear down the house.
An alarm was then given that somebody was coming.
The people then ran across a field towards the river.
Thomas Howell, David Thomas, and I, went with them.
After a time we came back again across the field; the other people went off in a different direction.
When we returned, Thomas Howell spoke to a person who I think was the gate-keeper; they spoke in Welsh.
We then crossed the bridge to Watts’s house, and had some beer.
I left Howell and Thomas there, and returned to the Golden Lion.
There were two of the men who had petticoats on, and something about their heads.
Cross-examined by Mr. Evans:— This was in the middle of the night.
All the people ran out of the Golden Lion when the cry came that “Becca was come.”
I am not a daughter of Becca.
I went there to see what was going on.
The gate is about a quarter of a mile from the Golden Lion.
I was close to Thomas Howell all the time, except when he had the gun.
English was spoken when they were tearing down the house.
The man with the gun spoke to Howell in English; he said, “I want some money, Howell.”
That was the first time I knew Howell’s name.
I went to Whitland fair on , the pig fair was on .
I stopped there four days.
I heard of the reward of 100l. on .
I did not hear about it on .
I mentioned about Howell on before I heard of the reward.
I staid at Whitland four days to find out more about Rebecca.
I had never seen Thos. Howell before that night.
I had seen David Howell on the .
I had beer in me when I went to bed.
I was not drunk.
I saw Thos. Howell at Whitland the night after the toll-house was destroyed, and had some quarrel with him.
I wanted to find out Rebecca because I thought it was an unlawful thing.
Rev. John Evans:– I am a Magistrate for this county.
The prisoners were committed by me on this charge.
I asked Thos. Howell if he had anything to say, after cautioning him not to say anything that might injure himself.
He said he had not been at the Golden Lion that night, that Walter John had gone in to light his pipe, and came out, and accompanied Howell to Llwyndrissy gate.
Walter John was examined on behalf of the prisoner.
Howell said to him, you know you came with me to Llwyndrissy gate.
Walter hesitated for a short time, and said he would speak the truth.
Examined by Mr. Evans:– This was not taken down in writing.
Walter John examined by Mr. N. Carne:– This witness proved that the prisoner, Thomas Howell, had, on , accompanied him from St. Clears to the Golden Lion, where John left him and went home.
John Thomas, landlord of the Golden Lion, was also called to prove that Thomas Howell was in his house, when the cry came that Becca had arrived.
Mr. Evans then addressed the jury for the prisoners in a most able speech, in the course of which he strongly animadverted on the testimony of Lewis Griffiths.
He pointed out the improbabilities of his story, and submitted that Griffiths had selected the prisoner, Thos. Howell, as his victim, in order to gain the reward of 100l., and to get his revenge on him, for the quarrel that took place between them on the night after the destruction of the gates.
He did not deny that the prisoner, Thos. Howell, was present, but he contended that he was there only in the character of a spectator; the riot had commenced before he arrived, and it was shewn, by the evidence of Walter John, that Thos. Howell had been at St. Clears all day, and therefore could not have been aware of the attack.
As far as concerned the prisoner, David Howell, the only evidence that touched him was that given by Lewis Griffith, and he (Mr. Evans) confidently submitted that the jury could not, on the unsupported testimony of a drunken man, convict either of the prisoners of the charge.
His Lordship shortly summed up, leaving it to the jury to say, whether, on the evidence adduced, they could find the prisoners, or either of them guilty.
If they had any doubt, of course the prisoners were entitled to the benefit of it.
The jury the retired, and in about ten minutes returned with a verdict of “Not Guilty” for both prisoners.
As soon as the audience heard the verdict, they signified their approbation of it by a loud and long cheer, which with great difficulty was silenced.
It sounds like Lewis Griffith wasn’t a particularly convincing witness, but I note also that the prosecutor felt the need to condescend to the jury by telling them how important it was that society not just permit people to go around destroying toll gates they don’t like.
Evidently, he didn’t think this point was sufficiently well-established.
This may mean that jury nullification was another explanation for the verdict — that the jury thought the accused had indeed done the deed, but that such a deed didn’t make them “guilty” in the jury’s eyes.
Henry Tobit Evans, in his book on the Rebecca Riots, says that “On their [the defendants’] committal, his [Griffith’s] departure was hissed and hooted by a crowd of women and girls who had assembled to witness it.”
But I don’t know what became of him after the trial.
The following is a letter from the notorious “Rebecca,” who, in conjunction with “her children,” continues to excite so much alarm in the neighbourhood of St. Clears and other different places in Carmarthenshire, by their determined anti-toll-gate agitation.
Suspicions have been entertained, and indeed expressed, in the public prints, that “Rebecca” is a Magistrate, or some influential personage in the county; but, from the language and orthography of the letter, which was sent to a brother of Mr. Bullin, of this town, who is the contractor for certain gates in Carmarthenshire, we cannot come to that conclusion, unless the whole be feigned.
We copy the orthography of the letter verbatim et literatim:–
“Take Notice, — I wish to give you notice, espesial to those which has sworm to be constabls in order to grasp Becka and her childrens, but i can sure you that it will be hard mater for Bowlins and company to finish the job that they began and that is to kep up the gate at Llanfibangel, and weinfach gate.
Now take this few lines information for you to mind yourselves, you that had any conection with Bowling Mrs. M,c,bes Mr. Thomas Blue boar all thire property in one night shall be conflaration if they will not obey to this notice and that to send them vagabons away which you are favourable to i alaways like to be plain in all my engagment, is it a reasonable thing that they impose so must on the county only pickin poor labrers and farmers pocets, and you depend that all the gates that are on these small roads shall be destroyed, I am willing for the gates on the Queen Roads to stand it is shamful thing for us welshmen to have the sons of Hengust have a Dominion over us, do you not remember the long knives which Hengust hath invented to kill our forefathers and you may depend that you shall receive the same if you will not give up when I shall give you a vicit, and that shall be in a short time and now I would give you an advice to leave the place before i will come for i do determine that i will have my way all throught.
As for the constables and the poleesmen Becka and her childrens heeds no more of them than the grasshoppers flyin in the sumer.
There are others which are marked with Becca, but they shall not be named now, but in cace they will not obey to this notice she shall call about them in a short time — faithful to Death, with the county — Rebecka and childrens.”
There was also sent to Mr. Bullin, two woodcuts, one of a man without a head, with a written heading, “Receipt for the interest I took in the matter,” and the other, of several persons marching with clubs, pickaxes, &c., with the heading “Going to visit St. Clears gate, when we thnk proper — Doroma Buchan.”
— The inscriptions over the woodcuts are in a better hand-writing than the letter, which is written on ruled paper torn out of a memorandum book.
It has been examined by some of the Carmarthenshire Magistrates, and the signature and writing corresponds with threatening letters sent to other persons.
As intimated in the letter, “Rebecca” does not object to the gates on the Queen’s high road, but destroys those on roads repaired by the various parishes, upon which the Turnpike Trustees have erected gates and demand tolls.
This renders “Rebecca” not unpopular amongst some farmers and others, many of whom have paid the fine, rather than be sworn in as special constables.
Sir, — You may not have heard that the neighbourhood of Neath has lately been the arena in which “Rebecca and her Children” have committed their midnight depredations.
The destruction of property has been really considerable, scarcely a field or garden-gate has been left untouched, and many have been carried away to a great distance from their own proper homes, and placed against the doors and windows of the sleeping part of the community.
Nor have these mischievous young women confined themselves to gates alone: balustrades, water-barrels, and every species of out-of-door movables appeared to be considered general property, and appropriated accordingly.
It is extraordinary that, although these devastations have been perpetrated for several successive nights, the offenders have hitherin entirely baffled the vigilance of the police; in fact, these “guardians of property” are now the laugh of all the neighbourhood, and looked upon as so many supernumeraries.
I am, sir, your obedient servant, Thomas L. Smith. Britonferry, .
This certainly paints a different picture of what was going on, if it can be relied on.
This letter-writer makes out the Rebeccaites to have been indiscriminate vandals.
One of the weaknesses of the Rebeccaite movement was that its anonymity and lack of authoritative spokespersons or leaders made it easy for other people to impersonate “Rebecca” and easy also for people to misattribute to “Rebecca” things that had other causes.
This might just be an example of that.
On , in consequence of information conveyed to the London policemen on duty in the neighbourhood of St. Clears, three of their force went in search of and apprehended two parties, on the ground of their being concerned in the late daring outrages.
The prisoners were taken before the Magistrates, and on were fully committed to Haverfordwest gaol, for trial at the ensuing Assizes.
They are said to be persons both of the name of Howell, one of them a respectable farmer residing at Llwyndrissy, near Whitland, the other, the son of a miller in the same neighbourhood.
The particulars of the evidence against them, taken before the justices, are not known; but it is reported that one of the witnesses (a man named Lewis Griffiths, of Penty-park Mill, in the county of Pembroke), swore that he saw the prisoners in the act of demolishing the toll-house and gate at Trevaughan.
Thomas Howells and David Howells were later acquitted.
The issue of the Monmouthshire Merlin did a backgrounder on the Rebeccaite phenomenon:
About seven years ago a turnpike-road was made between Pembroke and Carmarthen, with the view of securing a great thoroughfare by it between Ireland and London.
The Liverpool and metropolitan railway has, however, frustrated the object by leaving but 32 miles of road from Carmarthen to Hobb’s Point, or Milford, as a passage for the mail, which seldom carries more than three passengers a day.
Very little thoroughfare exists along it, as a carrier goes but once a week between Carmarthen and Pembroke, by which there is not money sufficient raised to pay the interest for the capital expended, much less to keep the road in repair.
The trustees have the power, by Act of Parliament, to put up toll-bars on lanes and by-roads, and also to throw the expense of the main road on the parishes; and that power they have exercised, which appears to have excited the peasantry to the late and continued acts of violence.
The tollage upon the road amounts to 12s. 6d. upon each market cart for 12 miles, besides which the people have to keep the roads in repair.
Rebecca has already destroyed the St. Clear, Trefechan, Prendergare, and Pime toll-gates.
She also boasts of having an auxiliary force of 500 men, true and faithful, at Haverford-west.
By order of the Home Secretary, the marines from Pembroke dockyard have been recalled, and the duty of pursuing the malcontents has devolved upon the Castlemarten yeomanry, who in so nobly distinguished themselves under Earl Cawdor against the French troops at Fishguard.
, Rebecca and her daughters appeared
at the Plaindealings and Cotts Gates, in the neighbourhood of Narbeth. It is
said that the party mustered about 100 strong, and in each instance the gates
were completely demolished in the very short space of ten minutes. The
Pembrokeshire grand jury have returned a true bill of felony against Thomas
and David Howell, two of Rebecca’s daughters.
This may be older news than it appears to be, as the Pembrokeshire assizes
had already acquitted Thomas Howell and David Howell on
. On the other hand,
Henry Tobit Evans’s book on
the Rebecca Riots puts the destruction of the Plaindealings and Cott’s
Lane gates as having taken place on — eleven days after the date of this newspaper. Again,
it seems like it is going to be difficult to arrive at an accurate chronology
of the Rebeccaite activity.
The following comes from the issue of the Cambrian:
A second daring and destructive attack was, about , made on the Prendergast toll-gate, near Haverfordwest, by a party of about twenty-four men, some of whom were dressed in smock frocks; they came down in a body from the Fishguard road, headed by a large-sized man in a white mackintosh greatcoat.
The first movement on arriving at the toll-gate was to appoint a part of the mob as guards at the doors of the cottages near the gate, to prevent anybody from coming out to interrupt their operations.
They advised Phillips, the toll-taker, “to keep in the house if he was not quite tired of his life, because they intended no harm to him.”
The Captain then gave orders to commence the assault, and to work the mob went in good earnest; they did not desist till they had demolished the gate-posts and signboard to splinters.
They then told Phillips that they had fixed on that night for doing the job, because it was bright moonlight, which would prevent them injuring their hatchets!
On leaving they gave a hearty cheer, and carried away with them a portion of one of the posts, in token of their triumph.
This article is included almost verbatim in chapter three of Henry Tobit Evans’s Rebecca and Her Daughters.
That book was cobbled together after Evans’s death by his daughter, and evidently for some of the book she chose to just paste in his source material directly to patch over the places where he had not yet written his own summaries.
Frustratingly, was not a full moon, which makes that part of the anecdote (“they had fixed on that night for doing the job, because it was bright moonlight, which would prevent them injuring their hatchets”) less-convincing, or, perhaps, pushes it back to which was a Thursday and a full moon.
In Evans’s chronology, he uses the date, but he probably got it directly from this newspaper article, and it’s possible that the Cambrian pasted it in from another paper’s earlier reporting without bothering to change the date.
There’s yet another possibility: in the Cambrian of , there was an article that began: “This town was , thrown into no small excitement, by the discovery of the loss of the toll gate erected at the top of Prendergast…” If this refers to the same attack, this would put it some time during the night of , but this would have been at the time of a new moon.
(Evans doesn’t mention this attack in his chronology.)
I’m not sure how accurate or complete Evans’s chronology is, but I thought it might be a good exercise to see if there were much of a correlation between the phases of the moon and the Rebeccaite attacks in :
Legend:
●
new moon
○
full moon
attack
Jan.
○
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
●
31
Feb.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
○
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Mar.
●
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
○
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
●
31
Apr.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
○
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
●
30
May
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
○
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
●
30
31
Jun.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
○
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
●
28
29
30
Jul.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
○
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
●
28
29
30
31
Aug.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
○
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
●
26
27
28
29
30
31
Sep.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
○
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
●
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Oct.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
○
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
●
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Nov.
1
2
3
4
5
6
○
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
●
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Dec
1
2
3
4
5
6
○
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
●
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Jan.
1
2
3
4
○
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
●
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Feb.
1
2
3
○
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
●
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Mar.
1
2
3
○
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
●
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Apr.
1
2
○
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
●
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
It’s a little unclear from the text, but I think the following news brief from the Welshman by means of the Monmouthshire Merlin refers to two separate nights of Rebeccaite attacks on tollgates in :
, “Rebecca and her daughters” again made their appearance at Pwlltrap gate, near St. Clears, and for the fourth time levelled it with the ground.
The work of demolition was very speedily effected; as usual, all the parties concerned made good their escape, nor have any of them since been detected.
Bwlchydommen gate, near Newcastle Emlyn, has been demolished by “Rebecca and her daughters.”
The mob consisted of about 30 persons, principally dressed in women’s clothes, and having their faces covered with rabbit skins.
In Henry Tobit Evans’s book on the Rebecca Riots, he gives the date of the Bwlchydomen gate attack as , but doesn’t mention this Pwlltrap attack, at least not by that name (he does mention a later attack on the adjoining toll house).
This piece comes from the Monmouthshire Merlin but is there credited to the Carmarthen Journal.
There was a meeting of the respectable inhabitants of the hundred of Derllys, held at St. Clears, on , when resolutions were passed praying that a rural police be not established, the expense of which will fall heavily on the farmers and rate-payers of that hundred.
Do not those hardened ruffians in crime, Rebecca and her Daughters, think they have already done enough of mischief, by destroying the gates and the toll-houses of the different trusts, as well as burning the plantation of that generous friend to the poor, Timothy Powell, Esq., of Penycoed, that they must inflict upon the innocent farmer punishment of the pocket, which is most dearly felt, by continuing their wicked acts, and thus compel the magistracy to form a rural police, which, as a matter of course, cannot be efficiently kept up without undergoing an immense expenditure.
We sincerely hope that those lawless persons will see the propriety, by their peaceable and honest conduct, of not compelling the magistrates to introduce a rural police to protect the property of the people of that part of the county.
Henry Tobit Evans, in his book Rebecca and Her Daughters, writes that Timothy Powell was “a magistrate active against Rebecca” and that four of twenty-two acres of his plantation were burned on .
Another Rebeccaite action, as covered in the Cambrian:
On , this peaceable little town was made the scene of this noted Lady’s antipathy to toll-bars, &c. The turnpike-gate, called the Pound Bar, was drawn from its hinges, and thrown over the bridge into the Tivy.
Contrary to the usual practice, the work of destruction was conducted with but very little noise — a proof of the fewness of the party engaged.
Various conjectures are afloat as to the author of this nocturnal outrage, but since this wonderful Lady has distinguished herself so much of late, this additional deed will add “another feather in her cap.”
The toll-collectors begin to fear more visits than will be agreeable; but all we have to hope is, that this will end the proceedings in the neighbourhood, and “’Becca” will be convinced of the inutility of combating the strong arm of the law.
— A Correspondent.
More tales of Rebecca, this time from the Cambrian:
The lawless depredators, known by the name of Rebecca and her daughters, appear not only gradually to increase in power and influence in Carmarthenshire, but it is pretty sure, that if they continue to progress in the same ratio as they have done during the last few weeks, civil power, as far as local authority goes, will be completely subjugated, if, indeed, it be not so already.
Their proceedings on affords a striking instance of daring, and even success in setting the civil authority at defiance.
On , three men, named [Thomas] Thomas, [John] Harries, and [Samuel] Bowen, passed through the gate, or rather through the aperture where the gate had previously been, refusing to pay toll.
The toll-collector summoned them before the Magistrates, to whom they said, that Rebecca had given them notice not to pay.
They were fined in the penalty of 40s. each and costs, which not having been paid, a distress warrant against their goods was issued.
Some bailiffs and constables were sent to execute the distress warrant, but the officers were summarily ordered by Rebecca’s disciples to return, which they readily did.
The Magistrates, determined to enforce the law, “swore in” about thirty pensioners as special constables, who, together with a number of policemen, bailiffs, &c., proceeded on to execute the warrant.
They succeeded in making the distraint with little or no molestation, but ere they had proceeded a quarter of a mile with their booty, the loud sound of a trumpet assembled an immense concourse amounting to several hundreds of Rebecca’s fair daughters, some of whom had their faces blackened.
They immediately compelled the constables to deliver up the goods, together with all the fire-arms and other weapons of defence in their possession.
They then proceeded to demolish a wall, belonging to Mr. Davies, of Trawsmawr, a Magistrate for the county, who had offended them, and they gave the special constables and police their choice, either to assist them in demolishing the wall, or run the risk of being stripped and sent to town naked.
The officers made choice of the former alternative.
We understand that about forty additional special constables have been since sworn in.
Henry Tobit Evans’s book
adds some details.
The sentence against the three was 48 shillings, six pence (fine + costs) “or three months’ imprisonment.”
Captain Davies’ wall was destroyed (along with “the plantations which ornamented the same”) in revenge for Davies “endorsing a warrant of the Borough Authorities against John Harris, miller, and Mr. Thomas Thomas, shopkeeper… for non-payment of tolls at Water Street Gate.”
Evans puts the attack on Davies’s property on , and the attack by the blackfaced Rebeccaites on the magistrates , after which they swore in new constables and tried (and failed) to enforce the levy, and then another attack is made on the property of Davies.
I’m not sure what to make of this; Evans sometimes seems confused in his chronology, but the newspapers of the time can also be hard to interpret.
On , “Rebecca and her daughters” attacked the Carmarthen Workhouse.
This was a departure from their usual attacks on tollgates, and was an unusual development for a number of other reasons.
The Rebeccaites conscripted men into their ranks by posting notices demanding all men between sixteen and seventy to meet at a particular place the morning of the attack.
This also had the effect of forewarning the authorities, some of whom also turned up to try (unsuccessfully) to discourage the band.
The group, about 4,500 strong, marched on Carmarthen in broad daylight, carrying signs with protest messages and following the usual gaudily-dressed “Rebecca.”
When they reached the Workhouse, they set to work destroying it.
Then the 4th Light Dragoons, a British Army unit, galloped to the scene, and the Rebeccaites scattered, with several taken prisoner.
Today I’ll reproduce some of the contemporary accounts of the attack found in Welsh newspapers.
In our last publication we detailed some of the depredating proceedings of the gang of organized rioters, known by the name of “Rebecca and her Daughters,” which proved that their strength, influence, and audacity, daily increased to a degree almost incredible; and we ventured to state, that were the depredators not checked by the presence of a strong military force, law and authority would soon become a mere dead letter.
This week we have received so many communications confirming our anticipations, that the greatest difficulty presenting itself is to give a judicious selection from our correspondence.
We shall commence by detailing Rebecca’s feats at Carmarthen, on .
The authorities of Carmarthen had incurred Rebecca’s greatest displeasure ever since the destruction of the Water-street gate, in consequence of the Magistrates having issued distress-warrants against the goods of the parties who refused paying toll on the day following.
We gave an account, in our last, of the unsuccessful attempt made to execute the warrant, by the pensioners and special constables, who were even compelled to assist the mob in the work of demolishing a wall belonging to Mr. Davies, a Magistrate, who had endorsed the warrant.
Immediately after that audacious yet successful effort to set at defiance the civil authorities, several County and Borough Magistrates assembled at the Carmarthen Townhall, took down in writing the depositions of several of the special constables and pensioners, respecting the daring conduct of the rioters, and forwarded a copy of the depositions made to Sir James Graham, the Home Secretary, who, as will be seen by the remaining part of this account, lost no time in sending a party of the 4th Light Dragoons to Carmarthen, who arrived just in time to save the Union Workhouse from destruction.
After her many successful feats in arms, “Rebecca” thought it no longer necessary to fall upon her prey in the stillness of night, or in any way to conceal her march, for soon after the Magistrates had forwarded communications to the Secretary of State, they received letters from Rebecca, informing them that she would pay Carmarthen a visit, not in the evening, midnight, or at break of day, but at noon, “Yn ngwyneb haul a llygad goleuni,” [“in the face of the sun and the eye of light”] and that she would let them “know her grievances.”
Whether words or actions were to be the channels of information was not stated, but from her subsequent proceedings we infer the latter.
The great majority of those who considered themselves above vulgar credulity, did not expect that this appointment would be faithfully kept, and considered it a mere rumour, to be believed by those who preferred the marvellous to the true.
Yet many tradesmen had taken the precaution of closing their shops, and during there was little, if indeed any, business transacted in the town.
, a party of the rioters advanced towards the town from the old Newcastle road, through the Water-street gate, which had been previously demolished, and marched through the principal streets in the town, for the purpose, we presume, of increasing their strength by the addition of the townspeople, who through fear or inclination would join them.
The majority of those who arrived in town were mounted on horses, and several of them were dressed in women’s clothes.
Our correspondent assures us, that the number of rioters, including the inhabitants of the town who joined them from fear of the consequences to themselves and families, could not be much less than 5000 persons.
Their first object of attack was the Union workhouse, which was first entered, as our correspondent informs us, by “the bad boys of the town,” who had joined the Rebeccaites.
They set about their mission of destruction in a very spirited manner, and commenced operations by freely throwing out of the windows feather-beds, chairs, portions of bedsteads, and whatever articles of furniture they could lay their hands upon, and they most undoubtedly thought their progress would not be stayed before the whole building would be razed to the ground.
Most fortunately, just at this time, the party of the 4th Light Dragoons, stationed at Cardiff, who had been a few days before sent to Carmarthen by the Home Secretary, at the solicitation of the Magistrates, arrived, commanded by Major Parlsby, and headed by C.T. Morris, Esq., a very active Borough Magistrate.
They immediately proceeded to the Workhouse, and took the rioters by surprise.
The consternation of the mob, when the military surrounded the Workhouse, may well be imagined, and the Riot Act was immediately read.
Many of the bye-standers, amongst whom was our correspondent, trembled for the consequences, thinking that the military would be commanded to fire, but happily the Rebeccaites made no resistance, — their valour “oozed out at their fingers’ ends,” and thinking that prudence was the best part of valour, their efforts were directed to the best method of making their escape from their now perilous position.
Though several of the rioters succeeded in escaping, a great number were captured, and brought up for examination before the Magistrates, when eleven were committed to prison, and about seventy held to bail, to appear at the next assizes.
The whole town was in a state of the greatest ferment and excitement when the prisoners were conveyed to the gaol.
Upwards of one hundred and fifty foot soldiers were expected in the town at the time our correspondent wrote.
Their billets had been engaged.
Empty houses were recommended, rather than inns.
Rumours prevailed that Rebecca intended visiting the town that night, but after such a signal defeat, it was not probable this appointment would be so faithfully kept.
— So much for Rebecca’s feats at Carmarthen.
Another correspondent informs us, that, on , a party of about 30 Rebeccaites destroyed another toll-gate situate near the town of Narberth, on the Whitland trust, together with the toll-house.
They accomplished their work without any interruption, and afterwards marched off triumphantly, not one of them being recognized.
Some of our contemporaries assert, that the Rebeccaites are always under the command of a particular individual, and that they never set about their depredating performances excepting when headed by that individual, who some even say, is a county magistrate, and a man of fortune.
Such reports may be well calculated to please those readers who are fond of the marvellous, but we would rather confine ourselves to what is really true.
On , the Narberth gate was destroyed, and we also understand that the Pontyberem gate and house were burned to the ground, which prove that Rebecca may be in several places at one time, or rather that there are several Rebeccas.
On , two gates in the neighbourhood of St. Clears were entirely destroyed, and on , one at Llanddarog and another near Cross Hands, on the Llandilo road.
Our correspondent at Cardigan states, that Rebecca is the sole topic of conversation there, and the inhabitants tremble lest she should pay them a gate-destroying visit.
The same correspondent encloses us the following excellent address to Rebecca and her Daughters, issued by that spirited advocate of civil and religious liberty, E. C. Ll.
Hall, Esq., Barrister-at-Law:—
Welshmen, you have sent me a letter commanding me to appear on night at Blaennant Lane, armed and disguised.
That your object is to obtain redress for some of the grievances with which you are oppressed is evident.
But this is not the way to obtain such redress.
I have been, as you know, labouring for years to gain you the rights of free men, and now that I begin to see the possibility of doing some good for you, you step in, and by your violence and folly hinder me in the good work; and instead of hastening the time when all your grievances will be at an end, your nonsensical extravagance gives an excuse to your oppressors for refusing to listen to your complaints; and the redress you seek is farther off than ever.
Get one grievance redressed at a time. The Magistrates and Trustees of the Newcastle and Carmarthen Trust have appointed to overhaul the grievances connected with that Trust.
I have been retained on the part of the Men of the Hundred of Upper Elvet to represent their interests at such meeting.
Do you think I will neglect my duty?
Do you think it is likely I should flinch from insisting on justice being done to the people?
Or do you think that I am ignorant of the means of screwing it out from the Trustees let them be as reluctant as they will? They have not been accustomed to be brought authoritatively to account.
Like young colts not broken, they must be treated at first both gently and firmly.
Do you think any firmness is wanting in me? Why then will you do anything that will prevent my getting the bridle into their mouth?
Do you think I can countenance or join your riotous proceedings? I tell you No. And what is more, though I have fought, am fighting, and will continue to fight your battles, until I can obtain perfect justice and political regeneration for you and your children, I am and will always be the first man to keep the Queen’s peace and prevent anything like rioting or disturbance.
Enough has been done already to convince the Government of the great and universal discontent which your grievances have caused among you.
They have sent down soldiers to keep the peace.
I therefore entreat you not to meet together on . I have written for the soldiers to come here and prevent your doing mischief if you should.
Why will you hinder me from fighting your battles in the only way in which we can be successful; and by your violence and absurdity, which can do no good, turn me from a friend to an enemy?
Your conduct is childish and absurd and not like men who have great objects to attain.
Why will you exhibit folly when wisdom is required?
The penalty for pulling down a Turnpike House is Transportation for Life. What good can you get by running such a risk, when you may attain everything you ought to have, in a peaceable and quiet manner, without running any danger whatever?
I can only attribute it to your ignorance, which prevents you from being able to guide in its proper course the great and irresistible force which you possess.
A hundredth part of your strength properly applied, will do more for you, and without risk, than a thousand times your power wasted in the absurdities you have lately indulged in.
Be guided by me.
Do what I tell you and you must be victorious in the end.
Go each one to your own homes on , peaceably and quietly.
On let each Parish choose two Delegates to come to me (as the Parishes in the Hundred of Upper Elvet have done) to make me acquainted with your grievances and then follow implicitly the advice I shall give them.
If you do, peace and prosperity will be sure to return to you.
If you do not, I shall leave you to enjoy the results of your ignorance and folly.
Edw. A. Lloyd Hall
Emlyn Cottage, Newcastle Emlyn, .
A Correspondent, at Llandyssil, informs us, that Cardiganshire, which had been a proverbially quiet and undisturbed part of the country, has latterly become the scene of continual depredations.
Last week, a little thatched cottage, in which a woman resided who received the tolls at Pontweli gate, near the village of Llandyssil, was burnt to the ground, though no fire had been lighted in it since the preceding day.
The next house was with considerable difficulty saved from the devouring element.
On [Henry Tobit Evans dates these attacks at ], the toll-gate at Pontweli and that at Troedyrhew-bribin, both of which are near Llandyssil, and on the road between Newcastle Emlyn and Llandovery, with the gatehouse belonging to the latter (the other having been destroyed as stated above), were entirely demolished by a crowd of disguised individuals.
Our Correspondent adds, “They were so daring, and assumed such an authoritative tone, that they forcibly compelled those whom they met to join them in the work of destruction.
They compelled even the toil-receiver and the special constable to strike the first blow at the gates.
They carried fire-arms with them, which they discharged.”
Bwlch-clawdd gate, in the parish of Llangeder, Carmarthenshire, was destroyed on [Evans does date that attack to ].
On , a letter signed “Eliza,” and dated at Conwil, was left at the house of a person residing at Llandyssil, by a person unknown to the servant, and who immediately decamped after delivering it.
The writer requested, or rather commanded the individual to whom it was addressed, under pain of a nocturnal visit, to summon all the inhabitants of Llandyssil to meet the writer at the gate of Llanvihangel-yeroth, which she intended destroying.
The receiver of the letter, alarmed at the consequences of neglecting or refusing to obey the orders of his fair, though unwelcome, Correspondent, sent the crier to publish the contents of the letter throughout the village.
Eliza faithfully kept her appointment, and passed through Llandyssil with a large party, who were disguised and armed with guns, which they discharged at intervals.
A great number of the peaceably-disposed inhabitants of Llandyssil, struck with terror at Eliza’s threats, joined Rebecca’s children, and marched to the Llanvihangel-yeroth gate. a distance of three miles, where all were compelled to labour hard in the work of destruction, amid the cheers, howlings, and sometimes horrid screeches of Rebecca and her children.”
In a short time, the gate, posts, &c., were entirely destroyed and carried away by the crowd.
We believe the above is a full and faithful statement of the proceedings of these deluded depredators during the last few days.
Our correspondents express various doubts as to the legality and justice of the erection of some of the gates, but all agree in denouncing the above deluded, lawless, and irrational proceedings, which are a disgrace to our country.
the company of the 73d Regiment, stationed at Swansea, under the command of Major Dawson and Mr. Lyon, marched to Carmarthen, in pursuance of an order from the Home Secretary.
We have been informed by a gentleman who travelled through Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire on , that the effect on trade and business generally, produced by the lawless conduct of the Rebeccaites, is most deplorable; not only are the inhabitants in a state of great personal fear, but trade is stagnant and dull in the extreme.
He adds, the farmers, who expect by such violence to redress their grievances, must surely forget that prosperity and peace are handmaidens.
How do they expect those who usually visit watering and country towns for recreation, to locate where the iron rule of might sets herself in array against law and order?
Tenby is suffering greatly, and the farmers ought to recollect that their produce will remain on their hands if there are no persons to buy; the county-rates also must be enlarged, and not diminished, by the additional expenditure thus thrown upon them.
A letter from our Correspondent at Cardigan, dated on , says:— “The Rebeccaites were at their favourite work again ; — they pulled down three gates, near Newcastle-Emlyn, on the Cardigan side of the river, viz., Henafod, Adpar, and Kerry gates.
It is said that they go to Kenarth , and to the Cardigan gates .
Where these proceedings will end is a difficult thing to know — very likely in bloodshed and the loss of lives.”
The Cenarth gate was attacked .
I’m not sure what the Correspondent means by “the Cardigan gates.”
From the Monmouthshire Merlin:
Riots at Carmarthen.
Arrival of the Military and Capture of Sixty of the Rioters.
During the early part of , the most intense excitement prevailed in all quarters of the town of Carmarthen and neighbourhood, in consequence of Rebecca having intimated to the mayor and magistrates, that she and her daughters would pay them a visit at the town-hall in the course of , for the purpose of stating the grievances of which they complain, and at the same time plainly intimating that if they did not obtain redress, “vengeance would follow,” and the workhouse should be visited.
As might be expected from the lawless career which these deluded men have recently pursued, all classes were greatly alarmed and as it was currently rumoured that a military force was expected in town (the posse comitatus and pensioners have been hitherto totally useless), consequences of a very painful description were fearfully anticipated.
In the course of , the borough authorities held several consultations with the county magistrates, and every precautionary measure which was deemed necessary for the safety of the town, and the protection of property were immediately had recourse to.
Communications having been despatched to Sir James Graham, the Home Secretary, the magistrates were informed that a military force sufficient to meet the exigencies of the case would be sent to their assistance.
At , the special constables, with the police and the pensioners, assembled at the Guildhall, when they were met by the mayor.
At this time the streets were thronged with anxious groups of the inhabitants endeavouring to obtain information as to the movements and measures of the Rebeccaites.
By business was completed suspended, and the immediate neighbourhood of the Guild-hall became densely crowded with people anxious to see the events of the day, while the more timid were seen wending their way with anxious look to the Castle-hill, to watch the advance of the military, on whom they felt the safety of the town wholly depended.
, at last arrived, and with it the intelligence that the rioters were approaching the town by the old Newcastle road.
This was immediately confirmed by the appearance of the procession, headed by a band of music, and bearing a white banner, with this inscription, “Cyfiawnder yr ydym yn ymofyn,” (Justice we do require), passing through Water-street gate, thence they proceeded up Catherine-street, round the Monument, down Lammas-street, Blue-street, over the Quay, Spilman-street, round St. Peter’s Church, and down King-street, the Cross, and Guildhall Square.
Our own correspondent says, “The procession, we should say, numbered above one thousand persons, the majority of whom were on horseback, and had females respectably dressed in their ranks.”
Other communications now before us vary considerably in the details.
One estimates the procession at 2000, while another goes as high as 4000. On reaching Guildhall-square, the Rebeccaites immediately directed their course towards the Union Workhouse, which is situated a short distance from it.
When they reached this point, they knocked at the door of the lodge, rang the porter’s bell, and demanded immediate admittance.
This demand not being complied with, they forced their way within the outer enclosure by hundreds, entered the Workhouse, proceeded up stairs, and commenced throwing out the beds and bed clothing from the windows, at the same time demanding the instantaneous release of the inmates.
While this scene of confusion was proceeding, a party of the 4th Light Dragoons, under the command ot Major Parlby, arrived from Cardiff, and had just reached Spilman-street, when the magistrates were informed that the mob had taken possession of the Workhouse, and were going to raze it to the ground, whereupon Mr. Thomas Charles Morris, one of the borough magistrates, headed the military, and proceeded to the spot.
They immediately surrounded the wall to cut off the escape of those within, while a party entered to secure the rioters.
Notwithstanding the precautions of the military, in the confusion numbers contrived to elude their grasp by scaling the walls and beating a retreat as fast as their limbs could carry them.
Indeed this part of the day’s proceedings is inexpressibly ludicrous.
The courage of these doughty heroes, which has hitherto animated them to the pitch of valour when only opposed by the nerveless efforts of a supine magistracy and a few inoffensive constables, like Bob Acre’s “pluck,” suddenly oozed out before a handful of well-disciplined soldiers; in fact, the route was as signal and instantaneous as the celebrated defeat of the local amateur warriors now almost as famous in Cambrian story as the retreat of the ten thousand.
The soldiers however, succeeded in taking upwards of sixty prisoners.
A meeting of the borough and county magistrates was immediately held on the spot, and the depositions of several witnesses taken down.
Owing to the shortness of time which has elapsed we regret that we have been unable to obtain copies of these important documents.
The magistrates were engaged in the examination till , when, we understand, they committed six persons to the county gaol, and three to the borough prison, all to take their trial at the ensuing assizes; one man was remanded and fifty-two were held to bail.
Major Pailby and his party deserve the greatest credit for the prompt and soldier-like manner in which they acted on this occasion.
Some idea of the despatch with which the troop hastened to the scene of the disturbance, may be formed from a fact stated to us by an eye witness — that one of the troop horses immediately dropped down dead from sheer exhaustion, on entering the yard of the Workhouse.
Indeed, had it not been for their very timely arrival and assistance, the Carmarthen Workhouse would have been totally destroyed and it is hard to say if even private property would have escaped unscathed had these lawless men been allowed to retain the mastery of the town for an hour or two longer.
The capture of so many of Rebecca’s gang, will no doubt tend to lead to the conviction of the leader or leaders, who have so long bid defiance to the law.
The want of systematic procedure and precaution in avoiding a surprise by the military, would induce us to think that Rebecca herself was not present at the riot on .
The skill, and above all the celerity, with which her followers have hitherto conducted their proceedings, is abundant evidence that she is an able tactician.
Such a captain would have conducted the expedition of in very different style.
There are strange rumours afloat in regard to the identity of this now celebrated leader.
It is now beyond doubt that he is a gentleman of fortune, and moreover a magistrate of a neighbouring county.
His name we have even heard, but we do not at present wish to make any hazardous supposition on the subject, as it is extremely probable we shall be enabled to make some important disclosures to the public by .
We have been favoured with the perusal of a letter (dated ) from a gentleman in Carmarthen, to a correspondent in Swansea, in which he states — “It is rumoured that Rebecca will visit the town with a thousand armed men but we do not expect anything, as all is now quiet.
The magistrates are gone home, and the soldiers to their quarters.”
— Swansea Journal.
You may not be surprised to learn that I have found no record of anyone taking the advice of this armchair quarterback from London seriously:
Sir,— In the midst of the very general panic, which the disturbances of the lawless band denominated “Rebecca and her Children” have created in Carmarthenshire, it is surprising that no measures should have been resorted to, for the suppression of the tumults, more energetic than those of swearing in some score of special constables, and putting arms in the hands of some infirm pensioners, who do not know how to use them.
Some vague idea has at last entered the heads of the Carmarthen Dogberrys, that a body of military is only wanted to set all things to rights.
However efficient soldiers may be in open-handed fight, I think it questionable how far they may prove of service in the present case, without some resolute co-operation.
This co-operation, I would suggest, might be managed thus:— Let the body of the young Squirearchy of the County, from the age of 18 to 35 — of which sort there is no lack in Carmarthenshire — let them, I say, form themselves into an association for the suppression of these riots.
The class of Squires I refer to, should include all possessed of incomes of 200l. a-year, resulting from land, upwards, and who can command a stout horse and a trusty man-servant.
Let them, having formed an association, proceed to the part of the county where the disturbances are of most frequent recurrence, and take up their station near some gate that has been most frequently levelled with the ground, barracking themselves in farm-houses and cottages adjacent.
Let them, then, station their servants at different points, commanding a view of the surrounding county, with directions to communicate with their respective masters, on the discovery of the approach of any of the rioters.
A signal should then be made, such as firing of guns, or the like, to collect all the members of the association to a place of rendezvous previously fixed.
Let them then proceed together to the obnoxious gate, there to await their opponents.
I would have them be without arms, other than stout cudgels.
When Rebecca has approached, let them first hold a parley, and remonstrate with her upon her unjustifiable mode of procedure.
Let them then dispose themselves about the gate, but beware of striking the first blow.
I miscalculate the Welsh nature greatly, if they will not be loth to attack a body of young gentlemen, to whom they have been accustomed to look up with respect and esteem.
They will have no set of special constables or vacillating pensioners to deal with, but a body of vigorous, firm young men, the flower of the county; and if they go to work in a conciliatory way, unsupported by police, relying entirely on their own influence and respectability, the chances are ten to one that Rebecca will be ashamed of herself, and her followers will at any rate be more submissive and respectful.
If this association should wish for a name to call itself, let it be “The Judith Society,” and never fear Rebecca will, ere long, “hide her diminished head.”
I regret that I am unable to leave the Metropolis, for the Principality, before , when I hope the riots will be past and gone, or I would be the first to propose this plan, in propriâ personâ.
My plan may be deemed Quixotic and foolish, and myself a fool.
Agreed — let it be so — but it is not impracticable; and having done my duty in putting it forward, I leave other more experienced and wiser heads to propose a better.
I am, Mr. Editor, yours obediently, A Welshman in London.
This dispatch from the Swansea Journal, as found in the Monmouthshire Merlin, gives a good feel for the amount of popular support the Rebeccaites had, and how bold they felt they could be as a result.
.
— It was rumoured throughout this place that Rebecca and her daughters would pay us a visit on .
About , the town was in a state of excitement, the inhabitants going towards the Common by hundreds, not only from Cardigan, but from Saint Dogmell’s, Kilgerran, and the neighbourhood.
About the ground in the neighbourhood of the toll-house was covered with people, and hundreds were on the Common road up to the milestone.
A few minutes before twelve the report of a gun was heard between us and the Warren banks, and immediately after the crowd came running down the road, shouting “She is coming!”
In a few minutes a party of 12 men, mounted on horseback, some of them wearing feathers in their caps, and having their faces blackened, and otherwise disguised, made their appearance.
They were followed by about 150 men on foot, armed with guns, pickaxes, hatchets, pitchforks, clubs, &c., most of whom were disguised.
On arriving at the gate they demanded that it should be instantly opened.
This was immediately complied with, and about one half of the force marched through, when they fired off their guns, and commenced the work of destruction.
They appeared to be well organised; for although they commenced their work almost immediately, there was no confusion, each person apparently taking a portion of labour allotted to him.
Some with hatchets commenced to break down the gate and other woodwork, others got on the roof, while a large party proceeded to break down the wall which reaches from the toll-house to the hedge of Pensarne field, about 90 feet in length.
The toll-house was a firm and compact building, erected two years ago, at a cost of nearly £100. It was so strongly built that for a long time it resisted the efforts of the rioters.
One of the men on the roof, after toiling a considerable time exclaimed, “Damn me, mammy, it’s hard work, send more hands up here.”
More hands were sent, and after an hour and a half of hard working, they succeeded in levelling the house.
The “Rebecca” for this night was a tall man, dressed in white, with a very large bonnet.
With the exception of this person and one or two of his followers, the rioters were a miserable rabble; and with a little exertion, twenty good constables could have routed them.
More than a thousand men were spectators of this exploit!
After finishing their labours at the Common, the Rebeccaites proceeded through the town, occasionally firing their guns, till they reached Rhydyfuwch gates, the upper one of which they entirely demolished.
In about twenty minutes afterwards, they dispersed in different ways.
All is quiet at present.
— Swansea Journal.
When I read about the Rebeccaites with their faces painted and with feathers in their caps, and then reports of similarly disguised rebels in England in centuries previous, I begin to wonder about the Boston Tea Party.
In that action, the partiers are usually described as having been disguised “as Indians,” but I wonder if what they were really doing was reenacting forms of costumed direct action that were created in the Old Country, and that because they were ignorant of the wellspring of this tradition, they superimposed the “as Indians” interpretation on it.
George Hewes, who participated in the Boston Tea Party, wrote:
It was now evening, and I immediately dressed myself in the costume of an Indian, equipped with a small hatchet, which I and my associates denominated the tomahawk, with which, and a club, after having painted my face and hands with coal dust in the shop of a blacksmith, I repaired to Griffin’s wharf, where the ships lay that contained the tea.
When I first appeared in the street after being thus disguised, I fell in with many who were dressed, equipped and painted as I was, and who fell in with me and marched in order to the place of our destination.
Participant Joshua Wyeth later told a reporter:
To prevent discovery we agreed to wear ragged clothes and disfigure ourselves, dressing to resemble Indians as much as possible, smearing our faces with grease and lamp black or soot, and should not have known each other except by our voices.
John Andrews, a witness, though not a participant, described the costumes thusly:
They say the actors were Indians from Narragansett.
Whether they were or not, to a transient observer they appeared such.
They were clothed in blankets, with their heads muffled and copper colored faces.
Each was armed with a hatchet or axe or pair of pistols.
Nor was their dialect different from what I imagine the real Indians to speak, as their jargon was nonsense to all but themselves.
Another reporter said, of the night of the Party:
…a number of Persons, supposed to be the Aboriginal Natives from their complection, approaching near the door of the assembly, gave the War Whoop, which was answered by a few in the galleries of the house where the assembly was convened; silence was commanded, and prudent and peaceable deportment again enjoined.
The Savages repaired to the ships which entertained the pestilential Teas, and had began their ravage previous to the dissolution of the meeting — they apply themselves to the destruction of the commodity in earnest, and in the space of about two hours broke up 342 chests and discharged their contents into the sea.
Samuel Cooper, who was present at this meeting when the “Savages” arrived, described it this way:
…a detach’t of about 20 men disguised as Indians was seen to approach in single file by the west door of the Church.
They marched with silent steps down the isle and so passed by the south door brandishing their tommahaws in that direction.
The appearance of these men created some sensation.
No one appeared to expect their arrival and the object of their visit seemed wholly inexplicable.
On leaving the church, they proceeded in the same order in which they entered it, down Milk Street through that part of town which led to Gray’s and Tiletson’s wharves where the tea ships lay.
In the Massachusetts Gazette account of the Party, it refers to these raiders as “The Indians, as they were then called…” Jack-a-Lents, Rebecca and her Daughters, Indians… different guises for the same thing?
In the words of William Evans, of Pontyberem, Wales, in : “It had been asked who Rebecca was.
He had never seen her; but he thought that Rebecca was every man who earned his bread by the sweat of his brow.”
Today I continue in my roughly-chronological arrangement of some of the newspaper coverage of the Rebeccaite campaign in Wales which peaked in .
I think this is a particularly fascinating example of organized, mass, grassroots tax resistance, and it is particularly worth a look today because of the strikingly similar bonnets rouges movement in Brittany that conquered the “écotaxe” there by methodically demolishing the highway portals that were to have attached the tax to passing trucks (here’s coverage of a recent example).
(The French government has recently decided to abandon the hated “écotaxe”… sort of: it has been replaced by a similar tax in a different form.
Instead of truck drivers being taxed by vulnerable portals along the highways, they will instead be required to install GPS units in their trucks, and will be charged a tax whenever they travel on certain highways — excluding almost the whole of Brittany, which remains free, for now.)
This account of the Rebeccaite movement comes from the Monmouthshire Merlin:
— Notwithstanding the sudden check given on.
to Rebecca and her deluded followers, in their attempt on the Carmarthen workhouse, each day brings its report of some fresh outrage in this or the adjoining county, and it would seem that the daring spirit of resistance to the laws by which these deluded men have hitherto been governed, has received no efficient stop by the proceedings of , nor are they as yet content to submit to the advice of friends or the dictates of reason.
No fresh attack has been made either upon the town or workhouse since , and with the exception of the continuance of the excitement necessarily following so daring an outrage, the town is comparatively tranquil and quiet.
, or at least during the , Rebecca and her daughters paid a visit to the two following gates, some distance from Llanbyther, in the county of Carmarthen, viz., Pencader gate, which they soon destroyed, both gate and toll-house.
Exulting in their lawless acts, they proceeded from thence to Llanfihangel-Yeroth gate, which, together with the toll-house, was also demolished.
The muster on this occasion is said to have been about seventy persons, who soon after the completion of their work dispersed, and retired to their respective homes.
On , another division of the family visited the village of St. Clears; they were disguised and armed, and although the party was on this occasion smaller than usual, they effected their purpose in the destruction of the gate in question, which is opposite the Blue Boar inn, and they then proceeded to another gate called Maeswholand gate, which was also very speedily destroyed.
While at St. Clears, an attempt was made by Mr. Powell, of Penycoed, and Mr. Thomas, currier, to apprehend one of the party, but without effect.
These gentlemen had the man in safe keeping until his party overtook them, and having beat them violently with the but end of their guns, they were reluctantly compelled to release their prisoners.
On a large mob of Rebeccaites assembled themselves together, and having made their arrangements for their purpose, proceeded en masse to Newcastle Emlyn turnpike-gate, which of course was soon demolished, amid the cheers and firing of this lawless gang.
Castell-y-rhingill gate, near Llandilo, has also been destroyed, as well as Llandilorwns gate, and a bar near Llanddarog gate.
A night or two ago, a gate or bar on the road near Pont-y-berem was destroyed, and every morning we have the history of gate destruction from one part of the country or the other, to an extent that must lead the most skeptical to admit at least that this state of things is really alarming.
We have had the mayor and magistrates sitting daily — meeting after meeting of county and borough justices, all impressed with the importance of maintaining the laws inviolate, and the necessity of peace being restored to this once loyal and rural district, and that without any wish to refuse to redress fair grievances.
It is commonly reported that Rebecca has sent threatening letters to most of the workhouses in this and the adjoining counties, intimating her intention of paying them a visit, razing the workhouse to the ground, and of ejecting the paupers therefrom.
This is but a report, the truth of which we cannot vouch for.
On , a report reached the ears of the powers that be, that Rebecca’s children had commenced demolishing Glangwilly gate, about a mile and a half from this town.
Colonel Love, Major Parlby, and his well-disciplined troop were speedily mounted, and went off at a slashing pace to the supposed scene of destruction, when it happily turned out that there was no real grounds of alarm; but the town became at once seriously excited, and scores of persons about to retire to rest were seen anxiously following the dragoons to the place of supposed danger and mischief.
On a company of the 73rd regiment of foot arrived in town, under the command of Major Dawson, and are quartered in the union workhouse.
the town was again excited, it being currently reported that the dragoons were ordered off immediately to another part of the country.
On enquiry, we found the troops were under orders, and the fact that Col. Powell, M.P., and Lord Lieutenant of Cardiganshire, had arrived in town , led to the conjecture that they were to be stationed at Newcastle Emlyn, or in the immediate neighbourhood of Cardigan.
They left town about , as we are informed for Newcastle.
Earl Cawdor arrived by mail, express from London.
Colonel Rice Trevor, M.P. for this county, arrived in town some few days since, to act on his noble father’s behalf as lord lieutenant of the county.
He presided at Newcastle Emlyn, at a large meeting of the magistrates and free-holders, on , which was very fully attended.
A very large meeting of magistrates, county and borough, was again held on , at Carmarthen, but the business was of a private nature, and although we have three reporters from the London press in town they with ourselves were shut out, not being of the privileged class, and publicity perhaps not being required as to the matters under discussion.
The names of the persons committed last week to the Borough Gaol are David Thomas, of Rhydymarchog, in the parish of Newchurch, David Thomas, of Pantwrgwm, Treleach, weaver; Job Evans, of Treleach, labourer; for riot and assault.
County-Gaol.
— Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis, Jonathan Lewis, David Evans, David Davies, and John Jones; for riot in the Tallog affair.
On John Harris of Tallog mill, was brought up before a full bench of magistrates, charged with a riot at the Carmarthen workhouse on , and held to bail in the sum of £400. to answer the charge at the next assizes.
Most of the many gate attacks mentioned in this article are not to be found in Henry Tobit Evans’s chronology (though some are noted in a Welsh poem he includes as an appendix).
This suggests that the attacks were much more widespread than his already impressive account gives credit for.
— or
, a number of this
lady’s children proceeded to Penygarn gate, in the parish of Llanegwad, and
which is situated on the mail road between this place and Llandilo, and a very
short distance from Llanegwad village. They commenced operations with their
accustomed weapons, and in a short time destroyed the gate and afterwards
demolished the toll-house. When the work of destruction was completed they
fired fifteen volleys and dispersed.
On the Trustees of the Swansea Turnpike and Wychtree-bridge Trust met, in the midst of the Rebeccaite uprising.
The following excerpt comes from a Cambrian report on the meeting:
A petition, signed by a number of farmers and others, was presented to the meeting, praying the Trust to remove the Wychtree-bridge Gate, as the tolls exacted at that gate pressed very heavily on the farmers and others travelling over that road.
The petitioners maintained that the tolls were unjustly exacted.
After a long and desultory conversation, during which several gentlemen made various suggestions as to the best means of removing the grievance, it was agreed that a Committee… be appointed to confer with the Trustees of the Neath Trust, on the practicability of making such arrangements as will enable the Swansea and Neath Trusts to take upon themselves the debts of the Wychtree Trust, with a view of doing away with the gate at the Wychtree-bridge; also, that the clerk be directed to write to the clerk of the Neath Trust, enclosing the resolution respecting the Wychtree Trust, passed at this meeting, and requesting him to lay it before the Neath Trust, as easily as possible.
— The question of the expediency of removing the toll-bar at Bolgoed, was also discussed.
— Mr. Bullen, the contractor for the gates, stated, that he would require from 20l. to 30l. as compensation for the diminution of tolls which would result from its removal.
Mr. M. Philipps and other gentlemen thought that was rather an exorbitant demand for the loss of the tolls for six months only; but Mr. Bullen assured the meeting, that the coming six months, being the fruit season, was the part of the year in which the greatest traffic took place through the bar in question, and that the demand was not more than his actual loss would be.
— A resolution was ultimately passed, to the effect, that… a Committee [would] enquire into the state of the toll-bar of Bolgoed, and to confer with Mr. Bullen; and that the same Committee be empowered to agree with Mr. Bullen, as to the amount of allowance to be made to him for the diminution in the collection of tolls at that bar.
The Bolgoed toll-bar and toll-house were attacked about a week later.
When the government finally got around to reforming the turnpike trusts , the Wychtree Bridge was converted into a county bridge.
In its issue, the Monmouthshire Merlin editorialized about the grievances it felt were at the root of the Rebeccaite uprising:
The events at Carmarthen, the riotous movements generally, and the disaffected state of the public mind over parts of South Wales, confirm the lamentable predictions we have thought it our duty from time to time to put forth, touching the alarming state of this district, as well as the deep-rooted causes of the turbulence and distress.
We say it advisedly that the present outbreak is no mere surface agitation, caused by the efforts of a few demagogues, but a fixed, serious, and general feeling of despair and hostility towards the Government and the governing classes who have brought on such a state of things.
Truly the Conservative Government has much to answer for.
No well-disposed peaceable man would be willing to change places with Sir Robert Peel at the present moment — with the minister whose policy has given rise to such general disturbances, and who has the task of setting all these matters to rights.
We shall speak our minds freely on this subject.
Toll-bar gates inconvenient as they are,
“Onward as we roll, Surgit amari aliquid — the toll,”
and poor-law bastilles as they are rhetorically designated, oppressive and harsh as they may be, are not the sole causes of Rebecca tumults and midnight assemblages.
Destitution, fixed and hopeless, is the main cause.
Rack-rents, low-prices, unabated land charges and taxes, increased poor-rates, insecurity of tenure, disjunction between master-farmer and his labourers, no good old fashioned patriarchal bond of union between them, subsisting from year to year, undisturbed, ere cash-payment formed the sole bond between man and man; these, and the system of hiring by the week, wretched, alienated, agricultural labourers, careless what becomes of them and their families, after the Saturday night’s wages have discharged the debt to them, are a few of the causes of the agrarian outrages.
On the other hand, the total stagnation, we may almost say, annihilation of the iron trade, has reduced our town and mining populations, who are mutually dependent on each other, to the verge of ruin, and thrown the wild and reckless into the ranks of the disaffected.
If it be answered that in tracing this gloomy picture, we are adverting to causes over which Sir Robert Peel has no control, and that we are culpable in ascribing to him a state of social distress remediable by no legislation; we distinctly deny the inference.
In the first place he has kept up the corn-laws, so that the landlords have a ground for not lowering their rents, and at the same time he has taken away the people’s only chance of becoming consumers, by strangling their trade with foreign countries.
— He has laid an export duty on coal, which has diminished its consumption.
He has rejected all offers of a free trade with America, and so cut off a commerce of 100,000 tons of iron, inflicting upon the unfortunate miners a blow which, coupled with the increased production and competition of the Scotch iron districts, has literally extinguished them.
His policy has thus thrown numbers of men out of employment, and decreased the amount of agricultural produce required, whilst the tithes which have been very generally commuted, under the late Tithe Commutation Act, and which were calculated on the former price of agricultural produce, now remain a fixed burden on the land; the price of produce has decreased one third and sometimes one half, whilst rents have not fallen in any degree whatever.
Rumours indeed have reached us of reductions in rents, but in almost all instances, the farms had previously been held at rack rents.
The reduction was merely nominal, and afforded no relief to the tenants.
In point of fact, the landlords cannot afford it — they are deeply mortgaged.
The people of Wales, if the present state of things lasts, will, we fear, be reduced to live on as low a species of food as the Irish — indeed that they will ultimately be brought to this state, can scarcely be doubted, if the policy of our rulers be not speedily changed.
The times require a government and measures to set them to rights, very different from what they have found.
If Parliament, with its strong majority of a hundred upholders of monopoly, sit still, passing Townshend Peerage Bills, and Princes Augusta Annuity Bills, and Irish Arms Bills, and declaring that all its resources are exhausted — that its wisdom can devise no further cure for the national paralysis — if Sir James Graham’s conciliation is at an end, and Lord Aberdeen’s toleration for the Scottish church is vanished; if Sir Robert Peel, or even Lord Palmerston declare it “impossible” to prevent nine thousand landlords from screwing three pounds per acre out of three or four millions of potatoe-fed Irish peasantry, if the principality with its hardy, fierce, and reckless population of miners and colliers, be driven to resort to Rebecca riots, and midnight legislation, we may deplore the consequences but cannot stultify ourselves by saying that these were either unforeseen or unavoidable.
So long as the Whigs were in office, it is wonderful what trifling measures of reform served to keep the people quiet, so long as the least thing was done or proposed that had the look of progress, if they were doing something in short — hope kept the masses in order.
But now that the call of halt! has been heard, and it is felt that “if nothing was done last year, less will be done this,” the measure of their patience is well nigh exhausted, and the minister must be content to rule by the expedient of military coercion, or march with the age towards some better state of things.
That he may chose the wiser and the better course, is our sincere wish.
Ere closing these few remarks, we would give one word of advice to the working classes — advice the spirit of which it is the duty of journalists, who watch over the rights and interests of the people, at this crisis, particularly and emphatically to promulge.
Let them seek redress only by constitutional means: physical force movements are always unsuccessful in this country, and frequently ruin the best cause — outbreaks are easily crushed by the law — thousands of Rebeccaite rioters were put to terror-stricken flight by a handful of fatigued soldiers, and events nearer home not many years ago, to which we shall not more particularly allude, showed the madness of a rebellious appeal to arms. Let the people shun as they would a person cursed with a plague spot, him that would counsel them to revolt.
Let them petition (and they have seen that petitions are sometimes effective) for the repeal of laws destructive to trade; let them make common cause with their embarrassed employers in constitutional efforts against the monopolist policy of our rulers, and let them remember when the time of Parliamentary elections arrives, who have been the friends and who the oppressors of the people.
From the Cambrian, comes this account of the classic government gambit of trying to wait out a determined grassroots resistance campaign by offering to set up a committee to study the grievances:
Up to the hour of our going to press, we have heard no fresh attempts at riots since the visit of the mob to the workhouse at Carmarthen ; though we regret to state, that the destruction of gates at night continues unabated.
A letter from our Correspondent at Cardigan, posted on , says — “As was anticipated, ‘Rebecca and her daughters’ paid us a visit ; they were about 150 in number, disguised, armed with guns, swords, scythes, pickaxes, pitchforks, &c. They first of all demolished the gate on the Cardigan Common, built about two years ago, at an expense of nearly 100l.; they afterwards went through the town, firing their guns occasionally towards the Rhydyfuwch gates, the upper one of which they destroyed in about twenty minutes; it took them three quarters of an hour to take down the gate on the Common.
On , about 120 of the Royal Marines arrived from Pater in a steamer, about 70 left for Newcastle Emlyn .
All is quiet here at present.
New Inn gate, twelve miles from here, on the Aberystwith road, was destroyed .
One of the Dragoons was drowned in the river Tivy, at Newcastle Emlyn, on , while bathing in company with five others.
No doubt all the rioters who took our gates down on , were from the immediate neighbourhood, excepting one or two, who had come from a distance to organize the party.”
A rumour had reached Bristol on , by the Phœnix steamer, from Carmarthen, which port she left on , that a collision had taken place in the neighbourhood of Fishguard, between the military and the rioters, and that eight of the former and thirteen of the latter had been killed.
From above noticed, and from the proximity of Fishguard to Cardigan, we must conclude that, if the above report had any foundation in truth, it certainly would have reached him at the period he wrote.
A most important meeting of the Magistrates of Carmarthenshire and Cardiganshire was held at the Salutation Inn, at Newcastle Emlyn, on .
It was understood also, that delegates from several parishes within the turnpike trust of Newcastle Emlyn, would attend, and large bodies of the farmers and peasantry were congregated in the town.
At , the delegates being introduced into the room–
The Hon. Colonel Trevor took the chair.
He said, — Gentlemen, I am extremely sorry that on this occasion it becomes by duty to appear before the public in this neighbourhood in my capacity as the civil representative of this county, under a position of affairs of which I have not seen the like for 20 years and upwards.
It is with the greatest grief and pain that I have learned that the men of this county have so far forgotten, not only what is due to the majesty of the law, but also what is due to their own characters as peaceable and dutiful subjects, as to commit those acts, of outrage and violence which have taken place lately.
I have represented this county for 23 years, and during the whole of which period I have had no reason to complain of the respect with which I have been treated by the whole county, and of its peaceable character before; but now it is with the greatest pain that I am obliged to say that outrages have been committed of a very gross character; and which cannot be suffered to continue.
I say this to you, that I may endeavour to induce you not to place yourselves in collision with the law, nor offend against it; if you do so you may escape for a time, but depend upon it the Government will send such a force into the county as will put down these outrages.
I am told that you complain of certain grievances, but it is not necessary for me to go into them; for when I say that the magistrates and myself, who have spent the greater part of our lives in the county, are both willing and anxious to redress all grievances, which may be proved to be so, I am sure you will believe us.
In order that there may be no mistake respecting this matter, I have written down what the magistrates are willing to do, and will read it to you.
Colonel Trevor then read as follows:— “We are willing that every grievance that can be proved to exist, and which can be remedied, should be removed, either in the administration of the funds of the trust, or by the erection of new gates, or by increase of tolls.
For that purpose we will name a committee of trustees and tally holders, to go into all the accounts of the trust; and at that committee Mr. Hall shall attend, if he wishes it, on your behalf.”
We have said that Mr. Hall shall attend (said Colonel Trevor), because he attends here as your advocate, and as far as figures can show he shall be satisfied.
The gallant Colonel then resumed the reading of the written document — “If any point of law should arise, counsel’s opinion shall be taken, by which the trustees must abide until set aside by the decision of a court of law.”
This portion has been inserted because you know that the trustees are bound by oath to respect the rights of those who have lent money to the trusts; therefore, in case of any difficult point, counsel’s opinion will be taken, by which the trustees will abide until it be set aside by a court of law; and let me tell you, as a friend as well as having the civil power of the county placed in my hands, that the way to redress grievances is not either by outrage or tumult, but by the law.
Colonel Trevor then resumed his reading, — “The magistrates have had a force of troops put at their disposal by the Government, and though they are willing to redress all that is amiss, they cannot give way to force, and must put down all disturbances, the Government being ready to increase the number of troops, if necessary.”
It would give me the greatest pain (said Colonel Trevor) to use those troops against men, to many of whom I am under deep obligations, and in whose houses and cottages I have often received refreshment; for, believe me, I am always proud to go into the houses of my countrymen, and can say, whatever may be their conduct in other respects, their hospitality is proverbial.
Let me beg of you, then, my men, not to force me to do what I shall do, however much I regret it, if necessary to the performance of my duty, nor to force me to order those troops to fire on you.
Cast away those busy meddlers who have interfered with you, and thus led you astray, for that these are not your own acts I know.
But remember, if the law is violated, it must be vindicated — if it is violated, and force be used, remember the troops must resist force by force.
If you have grievances, we are ready to redress them; then come with your complaints to the gentlemen who are your neighbours, and you may depend upon their being attended to, but for your own sakes avoid attending nightly meetings, and committing acts of outrage, which will be ruinous to you.
Recollect also, that there is a gentleman to whom you have intrusted your complaints, and that he will represent them, no doubt properly, but that he cannot do so if these outrages are continued.
As there may be some in the room now who are small tallyholders, I would have them recollect what madness it is in them to at all countenance such outrages, for by destroying the gates you are destroying your own funds, for if the trustees cannot pay the interest you cannot receive it; besides, if you let the roads get out of repair, you will be compelled to repair them yourselves, and have indictments or presentiments laid against you at the quarter sessions, and in addition to being fined perhaps 300l. or 400l.; but if you will only rest quietly for a little while, I understand that the burdens of the extra tolls will be removed, and in saying this you well know that I am not a trustee of this trust, but I have felt it my duty to inquire, and have received some information on the subject; whether it be true or not I cannot say, but I must say that I think your complaints have been greatly exaggerated.
If, however, there be real grievances; they will be redressed, but I must again repeat that all outrage must be put down.
We, the magistrates, make no bargain with you, but we are willing, as I have said, to inquire into and redress any real grievances; if however these outrages are continued, then we must withdraw from what has been said by us as to the appointment of a committee, &c. The gallant Colonel then requested Mr. Lloyd to explain the paper he had read to them in Welsh.
Mr. Lloyd, of Bronwydd, then explained the written paper to them in Welsh, and addressed them in Welsh, of which the following is a translation.
— Friends and neighbours, I regret my inability to speak the Welsh language fluently, but I hope you may understand me.
We are come here to benefit the country and to restore peace, after the outrages which have disgraced it.
We are come here to hear your grievances and the burdens with which you are oppressed; and if such grievances and burdens shall be satisfactorily proved, we shall be most willing to rectify them, and, if necessary, entirely to remove them.
We, therefore propose the formation of a Committee for the purpose of investigating the affairs of the Newcastle trust; and we are also desirous that the hon. gentleman Mr. Hall, who is the advocate of a very considerable district, should always sit on such Committee, so that he may see the accounts of the trust thoroughly investigated and published.
My friends, I speak the language of the magistrates present as well as my own when I express the sincere sorrow we feel that this hitherto peaceable county has been the scene of outrages that would disgrace the land of the dessert, and that, in consequence of these outrages, the Government have deemed it necessary to send the military amongst us.
My friends, I could hardly credit what I heard; I said, “Surely this is not the work of Welshmen, there must be foreigners amongst the Welsh, urging them on to their ruin.”
Is this the peaceable county that has done as much, if not more, for the cause of religion than any other county?
Is this the mode to redress your grievances?
Can you prosper by violating the law?
Are you, my friends, inferior in loyalty to your brethren in North Wales?
When Hetherington, the Chartist, was sent to Llanidloes he failed to execute his mission in stirring up the people to revolt, for he said the Welsh were too religious a people publicly to violate the laws.
There is no grievance that cannot be redressed in a peaceable and constitutional manner.
Then, my friends, in the name of God, put a stop to proceedings so scandalous and disgraceful.
I am old enough to remember the French invasion, when every man, woman, and child, was up and in arms to resist the ruthless invader, and are you become so degenerate?
Will you continue to disgrace the country, and to destroy that character for valour and loyalty handed down to you by your ancestors from Agincourt and Minden to Waterloo?
My friends, pause ere it is too late, for be assured the Government is determined to vindicate the laws of the country with the strong arm of the law; and, my friends, as I have had the honour of addressing thousands of you before in your own language, at your religious assemblies, and you have always honoured me with your attention, so I trust and hope you will use all your influence in putting a stop to proceedings which, if persisted in, will ultimately ruin this hitherto happy and peaceable country.
In comparison with other countries, we are poor already, and why will you throw away by an infatuation unaccountable the main blessings which you have hitherto possessed?
Humble and uninfluential an individual as I am, I shall ever do all in my power to alleviate and remove the burdens which oppress my countrymen.
Mr. E.C.L. Hall said, he would state the conditions on which he attended at this meeting.
Certain delegates had called upon him last week, and shown him notices which they had received from Rebecca, commanding them to attend at Carmarthen on ; he had recommended them to abstain from doing so, and had brought those notices to the Magistrates.
Seeing the present meeting, composed as it was of all the respectability of the county, he felt that it was an assurance that all real grievances would be redressed.
Only let the committee be formed, and the accounts analysed, and he trusted the people would not find him a weak advocate.
All they wanted was fair play to every one — to the trustees, to the tallyholders, and to the public.
He liked fair play in everything, and he hoped that the country would feel that the meeting this day was the beginning of fair play.
They all knew in England that if they began a fight they did it in rounds, and he would consider this round the first, for they must fight one grievance at a time.
Mr. Hall then went on to remark, that the people not only complained of the tolls but of the way in which they were treated by the justices.
He did not say that injustice was done purposely, but through mistake.
They were all liable to mistakes, and, therefore, if they had done wrong let it be set right; and if they had made mistakes, they were honourable men and would set them right.
They were to have a committee, but there must be no hurrying of the matter, for, as a barrister, he knew that many points of law would rise and require much time for consideration.
As to the outrages committed by Rebecca, they were most scandalous, and if he had had a force the other night he would have endeavoured to put a stop to them.
He had borne much blame from the country for having sent to the Government for soldiers.
He knew that he had run much risk in doing so, but every man must run risks for his country, and he said that the Magistrates would have been much to blame if they had not sent for the soldiers, as would also the Government if they had not sent them.
He had told the people, and he now told them, that the law must be kept.
The people were all poor enough, then why would they do a mischief to themselves?
Why did they suffer Rebecca to destroy property and thus make them poorer than they were? for whatever they destroyed against law the law would make them pay for, — yes, perhaps some of those who did the wrong.
He would advocate a redress of their grievances if they kept the law; but if they broke it he would no longer be their advocate.
Mr. L. Williams congratulated the meeting on what had been done, and upon the moderation of Mr. Hall, the advocate whom the people had chosen to represent them; he was sure there would be no want of zeal on his part; he (Mr. Williams) differed from him however in one or two points, and would state what they were.
Mr. Hall had said that mistakes had happened and injustice been done by the Magistrates; this was taking it for granted that all the Magistrates were turnpike trustees; this, however, was not so, neither had it been proved that injustice had been done by the Magistrates, and therefore they should not be charged with it.
Then Mr. Hall had said the troops had been sent for by the Magistrates, whereas they were sent by the Government.
Col. Trevor must correct Mr. Williams. As Vice-Lieutenant of the county he had been in constant communication with the Government since the commencement of these matters, and he must say, that he had for one made a requisition to them for troops before he left London, and, indeed, had pressed for them.
Mr. Williams continued:– He was most happy to be corrected in a mistake.
Capt. Evans having addressed the delegates in Welsh, a Committee was appointed.
Mr. L. Morris wished to know if the meeting was to separate without the people knowing whether the tolls were to be reduced; and
Mr. L. Davis suggested that the tallyholders should be written to, and asked to do what all landlords had been obliged to do — to reduce their interest to 3½ per cent., and that the Government should be asked to extend the time of re-payment of the principal lent by them, and take 2½ per cent. of it per annum instead of 5 per cent. per annum, which would double the time allowed for them to pay it in, and then the extra half-toll could be immediately got rid of.
The Committee was then appointed to meet on , and the meeting broke up.
The large assemblage outside were then addressed in Welsh, and informed of the result of the meeting; and on being asked if it had satisfied them, a person in the crowd replied, that it was not satisfactory, and that Rebecca “would go on as usual,” and added, that if he were not so young a man, he would have told the gentlemen assembled, that it was not satisfactory, for that they were now “low” (“condescending”) enough to listen to the people.
It would appear, from the contents of our Cardigan correspondent’s letter, above noticed, that this young man’s surmise was truly verified, for on the destruction of the gates took place.
We trust, however, some means will shortly be devised to put an end to this deplorable state of society.
No wonder the meeting wasn’t persuasive.
Its message amounted to: “Calm down everybody!
I’m sure you’re upset about something that seems really important, though from what I’ve heard about it it seems pretty blown out of proportion.
But we’re on the case.
We’re going to form a committee and investigate the things we think are worth investigating, and just so you don’t think we’re trying to pull one over on you, we’ve selected someone to represent you in the committee — you might remember him as the one who turned you in to the magistrates and called for the military to be sent in to put you down.
In conclusion, you naughty, naughty Welshmen: Don’t act like a bunch of Chartists and foreigners, and don’t make us send the army in to shoot you down like dogs — if you don’t pipe down we’ll just pack up our committee and go home!
So just go back to your little huts and stay quiet and we’ll take care of everything for you in the way the grandeur of the law allows.”
The Monmouthshire Merlin also had a brief note about Rebecca in its issue:
The good folks of Llanelly nightly anticipate a visit from this lawless lady and her followers.
Two letters from some members of the sisterhood have been received by parties in that town, in which these fair damsels state pretty plainly, that they have determined to level all the obnoxious gates in the neighbourhood.
The letter does not contain much of anything in terms of information about the Rebecca movement, so I won’t reproduce it here, but it’s worthy of note as some additional evidence about the support the Rebeccaites had from the population at large, or at least from the non-establishmentarian section of it.
Joseph Downes, in his histrionic “tour of the disturbed districts in Wales” also wagged his finger at dissenting ministers, accusing them of countenancing the Rebecca movement by refusing to condemn it.
Lycurgus returned with another letter dated (as found in the Merlin), addressed in the same way and with a similar theme.
He pointed out an example of a minister easing labor tensions by telling workers who were having their wages cut to stay loyal to their bosses rather than raising a fuss, and suggested that ministers calm their Rebecca-sympathizing flocks in a similar way.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin, comes this interesting collection of news about the Rebeccaites.
Curiously, the analysis of the nature of the toll house grievances had to come to the paper third-hand, via the London Times.
On , or early in the morning of , a number of Rebecca’s daughters proceeded to Bridge End Gate, at the entrance of Llangennech, and in the usual way totally demolished the gate and part of the toll-house.
they again commenced their depredations in destroying the Forest Gate, between Pontardulais and Llaneddi, which they burnt to the ground.
Very early on morning, a party on foot, of Rebeccaites, in number about 20, dressed in white frocks, and headed by one horseman, made their appearance at the New Inn Gate, near Llandilo, and politely requested the toll-collector (a female) to leave the place.
She instantly complied with their request, and removed her goods and chattels from the house, the party gallantly rendering her every assistance, regretting that their sense of public duty obliged them to act as they did.
They then commenced the work of tearing down the toll-house, gate, &c., amidst shouts and the discharge of fire-arms.
All was destroyed within a very short period
Causes of the Outbreak.
I must first state that the tolls of the highways of this country are farmed out to contractors, the highest bidder becoming the farmer of them, as I believe is usually the case with the collection of turnpike tolls.
The chief tillage of this county is lime, and a great number of lime kilns are erected in different places, often with by-roads to them; and it is the custom of the farmers to buy their own stone, and often their own coal, and carry them to these kilns to be burned into lime, and then convey away the lime to their lands.
Often the farmers of a district were enabled to get to these kilns without going through any turnpike; on which the toll contractors complained to the trustees that they could not continue to pay the full amount of their contract price of the tolls, unless toll-bars were erected on these by-roads.
These applications have been listened to, and there are scarcely two miles of road or high-road without a turnpike.
The consequence is, that where heretofore the farmer paid one shilling for a load of stone which he had taken from the quarry with his team, he is now compelled to pay one shilling in addition for turnpikes, another shilling toll on his coal, and, again, has toll demanded on bringing away his lime.
This, therefore, has become a very serious tax upon the farmer, and has greatly enhanced the cost of the tillage for his land.
Again, it has been the custom if ever a bridge had to be built, a road to be made less circuitous, or a hill to be cut down, to erect a turnpike to defray the cost of the improvement.
These new and additional turnpikes have been continued and tolls exacted long after the cost of the bridge or other improvement has been over and over again defrayed.
In other places parishes are compelled to repair the roads at their own cost, and the farmers who have contributed to this cost, contend that it is unjust that they should be called upon to pay toll as well.
From these several causes, incredible as it may appear, I have been informed by several persons likely to be acquainted with the fact, that, taking the whole county of Carmarthen, on an average there are not three miles of road without a toll bar.
From Pontardulais bridge, the boundary of the county, to this town — a distance of only nineteen miles — I myself counted no less than eleven toll bars, or rather ten, and the clean-swept foundation where one stood last week.
The farmers of the county, a most peaceable, quiet, and orderly population, were roused to such a pitch of indignation by this abuse, that at length, under a leader more daring than the rest, who assumed the name of “Rebecca,” several of these newly set up gates were pulled down.
It is a remarkable fact, and proves it is their sense of justice only which is outraged, that none of the old-established gates originally placed on the road have been meddled with. — Correspondent of the Times.
“Since my last communication to you on Saturday night, I have met numbers of Rebeccaites, and conversed with several respectable farmers engaged in the outrage at the Carmarthen workhouse on .
One intelligent farmer, who tole me that he was actually inside the workhouse gates when the dragoons charged amongst them, and who got outside in the confusion, stated to me that he was compelled, most unwillingly, to go there; for having refused to join one of the toll bar expeditions, he had had his stable fired, and a threat was held out to him that if he did not join the procession on , his house would be destroyed.
He accordingly did join the procession, but refused to disguise himself by turning his coat and blacking his face as they wished him.
His statement fully bore out my first communication to you, that the distress of the small farmers is at the bottom of all the mischief.
By his account, never over well off, they have now, by the depreciation of prices, and the unabated amount of rents and tithes and taxes, and the increased amount of poor rates and tolls, become at last hopeless and utterly reckless.
“,” said he, “the price of oats in this country was 2s 6d the Winchester bushel; now the farmer can only get 1s 6d and 1s 8d.
The regular price of barley was, , 4s a bushel, and sometimes they were enabled to sell it as high as 5s and 5s 6d; now they can only get 3s, and were frequently compelled in winter to sell it for 2s 6d a bushel.
The average price of wheat was about 8s a bushel; now the price is 6s; butter which used to sell at 8½d and 9d per lb., is now selling at 6½d; cheese, which used to fetch 4d per lb., now sells at 2¼d.
Two year old cattle, which two years ago used to fetch £8 each, are now selling at 50s, and you may pick the very best for £3.
Colts rising two years old, which formerly readily fetched £8 or £9 each, now cannot be sold for more than £3.” — Ibid.
“I do not believe that a single constable could be found in the county who would or could execute a warrant.”
Every gate between Carmarthen and Llampeter, a distance of 24 miles, has been destroyed, besides Llandarrag gate on the Swansea road; Port Newydd, across the Towy; Drefach gate, on Brechfa mountain; and New Inn gate, on the road from Llandilo to Talley.
Meetings have been held by the magistrates, and special constables sworn in.
A very active and influential magistrate has, however, publicly stated it as his opinion that they are useless, using these emphatic words:—
“I do not believe that a single constable could be found in the county who would or could execute a warrant.”
At about , a party consisting of about two hundred men on foot, headed by Rebecca arrayed all in white and who rode a white horse, were seen approaching this bar from the direction of Pontardulais.
The object of their visit was easily surmised, and the inhabitants of the few houses in the neighbourhood apparently apprehensive of danger, retired within doors.
Rebecca advanced to the toll house and demanded admittance, which having been given, she directed a few of her troop to carry out the toll collector’s goods and chattles to the side of the road, and to protect them from injury till they had completed the object of their mission.
She then gave the word of command for a total demolition of the house and bar, and actually, we are assured, within five minutes the bar was cut to pieces, the house in ruins, and the whole party in full retreat.
During the time they were engaged at work a portion of their gang kept firing guns and huzzaing.
They took the Carmarthenshire road and separated in various ways.
The farmers of the surrounding district strongly condemn this outbreak and state their willingness to have abided by the decision of the turnpike trustees, whom they memorialized .
This bar is situated near a place called Goppa Fach on the mail road within a mile of Pontardulais and eight miles of Swansea.
―Swansea Journal.
It grieves us to state, that the evil practices of toll-gate destruction, which have been so rife lately in Carmarthenshire, Cardiganshire, and Pembrokeshire, have reached the borders of this county.
On the arrival of the mail-coach from Carmarthen, the coachman informed us, that the two bars near Cross-Hands were destroyed, and that the toll-bar and house at Bolcoed, near Pontardulais, were completely levelled with the ground.
The furniture belonging to the house had been carried out, and placed on the side of the road.
This is all the information we could obtain from our informant, whose time would not allow him to stop to make inquiries.
There were other attacks on the same night (or perhaps one week earlier; Evans uses both dates for the attacks in his book without settling on one or the other, and the newspapers are ambiguous).
Here’s the account from The Cambrian:
A troop of the 4th Light Dragoons, from Brecon, arrived at Llandovery on , under the command of Capt. Halket, and on a troop of Rebecca’s children entered the district, to commence a campaign against the turnpikes and toll-bars.
An attack was made that night upon Pumpsaint gate, about midway between Llandovery and Lampeter; the gate, posts, and rails were completely destroyed and levelled to the ground with the usual celerity which marks the operations of Rebecca and her untoward offspring, who in many instances contrive to cast a spell or illusion over those who might naturally be expected to hear and witness them at their work of destruction, so that in the present instance none of the inhabitants of the village of Pumpsaint seem to have been aware of what was passing in their midst until they arose , saw the remains of the gate and posts.
On , the troop received orders to remove to Llandilo the following morning, to the surprise and astonishment of most persons and even of the Dragoons themselves, a march being such an unusual occurrence except in cases of great emergency.
Rebecca’s guerrilla troops were, however, not to be dismayed by the presence of her Majesty’s soldiers, as a small detachment of her recruits , broke down the turnpike gate and bar at Bronvelin, 5 miles from Llandovery, on the road to Llanwrtyd.
The Trustees of the roads have offered large rewards for the discovery of those who were engaged in both the above cases.
Other gates in the neighbourhood of Llandovery have been threatened with destruction, which has given some work to the authorities of the place to provide a sufficient force of special constables, &c., to prevent those threats being carried into execution. — On , a gang of the above description, disguised as usual, demolished the Twely-bridge gate, near the village of Llandyssil, on the Newcastle Emlyn road, and threw the fragments of it into the river Tivy. — The gate at Gwarallt, on the Carmarthen and Lampeter road, was destroyed on .
So, as I mentioned, Evans’s book gives two different dates for the Pumpsaint attack:
and .
He puts the Bronvelin attack at .
He puts the Gwarallt attack at .
I don’t see any mention of the Twely-bridge gate attack in his book.
Yesterday it was the toll gates at Bolgoed, Pumpsaint, Bronvelin, Twely-bridge, and Gwarallt.
Today we can add Llandilo-Rwnws, Mansel’s Arms, and Llanvihangel.
The gates are falling rapidly as the Rebeccaite uprising spreads.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin:
Destruction of Llandilo-Rwnws, Mansel’s Arms, and Llanvihangel Gates
Carmarthen, . —
On , a mob of these lawless depredators assembled together, mustering about one hundred strong in the neighbourhood of Nantgarredig, about five miles from this town.
They were on this occasion all disguised, and had their faces blackened, and wore something designed to imitate a turban.
They were all dressed in smock frocks and carried with them various implements of destruction.
Their first outrage commenced at Llandilo-Rwnws gate, which is attached to a bridge, called New Bridge, over the river Towy.
This bridge was erected by the father of the late John Jones, Esq. M.P., of Ystrad, for the convenience of the neighbourhood, and is private property.
At the time of their approach to the bridge, two gentlemen from Carmarthen were fishing in the Towey on the meadow contiguous to the bridge, and they were at once directed to leave the place at the peril of their lives.
The appearance of the mob was so alarming, and their threats being expressed in language both determined and violent, the two anglers, conceiving no doubt that discretion was the better part of valour, immediately coiled up their lines and departed under more than ordinary apprehension as to the result of the day’s proceedings.
At the same time, a respectable young man, a farmer of the name of Nicholls, happening to be on the spot, was placed under examination and charged with having on some former occasion volunteered to become a special constable, with a view to aid in quelling the riots and depredations committed by this lawless tribe.
He, however, did not escape so well as the gentlemen of the rod and fly, but had to endure the operation of a very severe horse-whipping, after which he was allowed to depart.
A man of the name of Lloyd, from Carmarthen, attempted to escape, but they pursued him and he shared the same fate.
The course being clear, Mr. Lewis, the lessee of the tolls was the next object of attack.
On , Mr. Lewis had summoned a number of persons for refusing to pay toll in passing the gate in question, and this strongly excited their wrath.
Lewis was brought out from the toll-house, and unfortunately having his horsewhip in hand, he was at once overpowered, the whip in question taken from him, and most severely and violently beaten.
Rebecca was not, however, content with this, but on his bended knees, she compelled him three successive times to swear by all that was sacred that he would never again have connection with the tolls or the turnpike gates requiring the payment of toll.
Then came the scene of destruction, pickaxes, hatchets, crowbars, and saws were set in operation, and the gate entirely demolished.
It is currently reported that Mr. Lewis resigned his lesseeship into the hands of the trustees on .
An express was with difficulty sent down to Carmarthen, and about six o’clock the Dragoons were mounted and went off at a very rapid pace through Abergwilly to the scene of Rebecca’s movements.
Passing under Merlin’s hill, which commands an extensive view of the vale of Towey, a shot was fired, which, it is supposed, was the signal of the approach of the soldiers, and for the dispersion of the mob, for on the arrival of the military, and although an active pursuit was made by them to trace their retreat, nothing was discovered beyond the destruction that had taken place.
After the lapse of some hours, the dragoons made their way back to Carmarthen; but it is supposed there must have been spies placed in all directions, and this conjecture is by no means implorable, because nothing daunted they proceeded again to pursue their course of lawlessness, and destroyed the Mansel’s Arms bar and toll house, the latter being a very strong building, and Llanvihangel gate, and part of the toll house, which is situate on the mail road to Llandilo immediately under Golden Grove, the seat of Earl Cawdor.
The statements of several eye-witnesses are really of a very alarming nature, and the violent conduct as well as the threatening language of the Rebeccaites seemed to indicate their intention of carrying out their threats, though it be at the sacrifice of life.
How long this deplorable state of things is likely to last we can hardly guess.
The magistrates and military are using every effort in their power to bring the parties to justice, and it is to be hoped that that period is not now far distant.
The Merlin had published an editorial, dated , which tried to draw politically-useful conclusions from the Rebeccaite uprising: blaming the conservative government and the laissez-faire economists.
Here are some excerpts:
…Welsh Rebeccaism is, in truth, nothing else than the symptoms of the same deeply-rooted distress, leading to disaffection which now extends itself over Ireland and Scotland in various guises and names.
The government of the landlords, direct or indirect, has led, in its consequences, to this fact, that a civil war, not the less violent and actual because it does not appear prominently, or break out into open revolt, is now going on between the different classes of society…
We are led to make these remarks by the sneering or sarcastic tone in which certain organs of the press speak of the grievances of the poor Welsh farmers, and the remedies which they fondly hoped would cure them.
At bottom, there is nothing in the demands of these simple people, which is not entitled to our grave and compassionate consideration.
For what is it they assert?
They assert in so many words, that what with the exactions of the State, and the local taxation, the tithes, the poor-rates, and the tolls; the hardship of demanding from them during a period of great depression in the price of agricultural produce, the same rents which they paid before the tariff, they find it utterly impossible to live.
They assert that what with the distress and impoverishment of their only customers consequent upon the ruin of the iron and coal-miners, they are reduced to the verge of despair, and that to such a state of wretchedness and heartlessness have many of them been reduced, that they are ready to join the standard of Rebecca, or any other leader that promises alleviation, if not revenge.
Yet that recognising what is “fair and reasonable” in the rights of their landlords they are willing to pay or endeavour to pay such a rent as impartial appraisers may adjudge due for their holdings.
Political economy, backed by Sir R. Peel, at once cries impossible!
The rights of property forbid it, and all road trustees and vested interests exclaim that they cannot lower their rate of interest or dividend from five per cent. to three per cent. or indeed at all.
And so the matter remains for the judgment of our midnight legislators, who with saw and axe made short work of it, despire the soldiery; and an almost universal feeling of sympathy pervades the country, so that no man will give evidence against his neighbour.
I’m a little skeptical of the editor’s authority to speak for Rebecca here.
It sounds a bit like he’s using the occasion to beat a familiar drum.
But this does give some idea of some of the economic stresses in the area at the time.
For a view much less sympathetic to Rebecca, there is the editorial in The Cambrian from .
It chides the local authorities for their timidity in either repressing the movement or in calling in the military once they found they were unable to do so.
Even so, it does grant Rebecca some concessions.
Excerpt:
The origin of all this turbulence, was the resistance to the payment of turnpike tolls.
The farmers complained of the expense of paying these tolls, and certainly, when it is recollected that, in the neighbourhood of Carmarthen, there are eleven toll-bars on nineteen miles of road, besides additional bars on by-roads, it must strike any one that they had good reason for their complaints.
They also suspected that the proceeds arising from the tolls were not fairly expended on the roads.
Precautionary measures to prevent the possibility of breach of the peace continue to be adopted by the magistracy.
The marines have gone from Pater to Cardigan, and two troops of the Castlemartin yeomanry have arrived at Narbeth from Pembroke.
About thirty of the fourth Dragoons left Carmarthen for Newcastle on , from which place they returned to Carmarthen on .
Other troops are to be stationed here; and, in fact, the whole country is to be studded with soldiers, who are to be kept continually shifting their quarters, so that the Rebeccaites may be quite unable to calculate at any time upon their presence at any particular place.
The magazine on Picton-terrace is to be formed into a barracks for troops, and it is said that two hundred or more will be stationed at Carmarthen.
The gate-levellers have continued their nocturnal depredations as usual.
We understand that Major Parlby has refused to allow his dragoons to be harassed any more by being sent about the country in the dead of night, on fruitless expeditions after Rebecca — they knock up their horses, and receive no marching money for it.
Colonel Love and Colonel Trevor are still here.
Lord Cawdor and Colonel Powell, lord-lieutenant of Cardiganshire, have been in Carmarthen during the week.
As I mentioned , the Cambrian published an editorial that chided Welsh magistrates for not suppressing the Rebecca movement more forcefully and for not immediately calling in the military when it became evident they were not powerful enough to do so.
This prompted a letter-to-the-editor from one of those magistrates in which he defended their course of action and explained that the nation’s military had no great enthusiasm for becoming the toll collectors of Wales:
Sir, — Having this instant seen your paper of , I lose no time in endeavouring to remove an impression which you have circulated, in the leading article contained therein.
You specifically charge the Magistrates acting for the hundred of Derllys and Narbeth, with a want of energy, promptitude, and decision, at the commencement of the unfortunate and disgraceful proceedings which have for some months, and still continue, to agitate and alarm the peaceable inhabitants of the Principality with unabated violence, and which has attained a height that makes it difficult to say where it will end, and which causes considerable alarm as to the safety of both life and property.
I therefore calculate with confidence, you will, when you are in possession of the facts of the case, with that liberality for which you are so justly characterized, do an act of justice towards those Magistrates, upon whom you have, I am quite certain, unintentionally cast such an unmerited imputation and stigma.
The facts of the case are simply these; — In , a meeting was called at St. Clears, which was attended by five Magistrates, three of whom acted for both counties, when an investigation of the different outrages perpetrated upon the turnpike-gates and toll-houses in the two counties, was fully gone into, and every attempt on their part made to explain, remedy, and conciliate the farmers, entered upon; but, unfortunately, the evil was too deeply rooted; and it was quite manifest, matters were in that state, and the combination and organization of Rebecca and her daughters (so called) so cemented and formidable, as to set at utter defiance any attempt of the Magistrates to restore order and tranquility, or in any way to repress the lawless proceedings then in operation; — when it was unanimously agreed, that a communication of the inadequate and insufficient means of quieting the insurrectionary movements, without the aid of military to assist the civil power, should be made to the Lord-Lieutenant of the County, and that an application should be made through him to the Secretary of State for the Home Department, to that effect; also, that Government should offer such a reward as would, upon the conviction of the offenders, enable any party, giving such evidence, to remove to a distant country, as such person’s life would be insecure in that district.
This communication was signed, and forwarded to the Lord-Lieutenant, as was also, a letter to the same effect to one of the Members for the county, requesting him to have an interview with Sir James Graham upon this painful subject, which was immediately done, and as far as my recollection goes, was met by her Majesty’s Secretary of State in the following reply:– “Her Majesty’s Government do not feel authorized to offer a high reward; and it cannot be recommended to turn the Military into Toll-collectors.”
If, therefore, any blame there be, I do most positively assert, that such blame is not in any shape attributable to the Five Magistrates who took an active part in the affair, although others there may be, who pitifully shrunk out of all responsibility in the hour of need.
I am, Sir, One of the Magistrates acting for the Counties of Pembroke and Carmarthen.
Carmarthen, — I have just
heard that Rebecca and family mustered about two hundred in the neighbourhood
of Llanbyther and New Inn , and
destroyed Penrallt gate, not far from the latter place, and also another bar.
This renowned lady was, on this occasion, dressed gaily in female attire and
sported a parasol. When the work of demolition was complete, the party
dispersed over the hills and were soon lost sight of.
Mr. Bullen, of the firm of Hodges, Bullen, and Co., the extensive toll contractors, has received a letter from this Amazon, informing him that she and her very amiable family, will visit the Witch-tree Bridge gate, situate near Morristown, some miles this side of Swansea, for the purpose of destroying that gate.
Mr. Bullen has repaired thither, to put the toll-house in a state of defence.
On a troop of the 4th Light Dragoons marched into town, and remained till , when they proceeded on their route to Llandilo, in Carmarthenshire, where they will be stationed to assist in checking the turbulence of Rebecca’s family.
The Cambrian tells of the destruction of the Porthyrhyd, Pompren, Pumfold, and Pontyberem gates, the Kidwelly, Llanddarog, Rhydypandy, and Minke toll-houses, and the Bolgoed bar, as the Rebecca movement continues to grow:
On , the above Lady and her faithful and obedient children, paid a visit to the Porthyrhyd gate, which they destroyed in a very short time.
The number of persons employed in the destruction of the gate, has been represented as consisting of “several hundreds;” but we are credibly informed, by a person who viewed the whole operation from the window of a house in the immediate neighbourhood, that the number present did not exceed from fifteen to twenty.
There were about half the number on horse, and the others on foot.
They had their faces blackened, and were dressed in white, or rather what at one time had been white, but having seen so much service, they were then nearly the opposite colour.
There might have been a greater number in readiness, in case of emergency, but the actual number at Porthyrhyd gate did not exceed twenty persons.
— Llanddarog toll-house was destroyed on , together with Minke toll-house.
The party compelled three constables, who had been sent there for the protection of the latter toll-house (the gate having been previously destroyed), to assist them.
— Pontyberem gate was destroyed on .
The pillars of this gate were manufactured of cast-iron.
— On , Pompren gate, situated near Llandilo, on the road leading to Llangadock, was entirely destroyed, and cut up to pieces fit only for firewood.
Guns were fired, and the usual signals announced their approach, as on all other occasions.
— On , Kidwelly toll-house was levelled to the ground, the gate having been previously removed.
Our reporter passed through this gate on , when the house was complete, but in returning on , the only intimation that there was “something to pay,” was the toll-collector, standing on the road-side, who state, “that by compulsion” he did business on the voluntary principle, as some paid him their tolls, and others passed without paying.
— On , about fifty of Rebecca’s daughters destroyed the Bolgoed bar, which had lately been re-erected, after having been destroyed a short time since.
They compelled the toll-collector at Pontardulais gate to go with them and assist them, having nothing about him but a coat, which he usually wore in receiving tolls at night.
After having dispensed with his services, they chained him in a stable attached to a public-house in the neighbourhood, called the “Farmers Arms.” The party were all dressed in women’s clothes, and were otherwise disguised.
Rebecca in Glamorganshire.
We have on several occasions recorded the feats of the above now notorious lady in the three Western counties, viz.:– Pembrokeshire, Carmarthenshire, and Cardiganshire, but we believe the following is the but second instance in which she has “taken possession of the gates of those who hate her” in our own county, though some of the London and many of the English provincial papers have not hesitated to represent Glamorganshire as being in so bad a state as the three counties already named.
The feat to which we allude was performed at the Pumfold gate, near the Three Crosses, Gower, on or rather , when a number of persons (some say about sixty, and others represent them as being many more) who had their faces blackened, and were otherwise disguised, amidst the firing of guns, entirely destroyed the gate, posts, and all the “appurtenances thereto pertaining,” excepting the toll-house, which they had ascertained belonged — not to the Trust, which are characterised as “those who hate her,” but to Mr. Eaton, a farmer, residing near the place.
The party also destroyed a chain which was placed across a by-road, and intended as a kind of protection to the gate.
A portion of wall along the road-side was pulled down.
They sent the toll-collector to the house, and threatened to shoot him if he had the presumption to peep out either through the door or window.
Mr. Eaton, the owner of the toll-house approached them, but he was soon compelled to retreat having been assailed by a volley of stones, pieces of the gate, &c. It is reported that they had contemplated the destruction of another gate in the neighbourhood, but as dawn was approaching they abandoned their design.
— As we were going to press, we learnt that the Rhydypandy gate and toll-house, two miles distant from Morriston, on the road to Clydach, were entirely destroyed .
Mr. Potter, the Mayor of Haverfordwest, received a letter from Rebecca, on , saying that she intended paying him a visit ; but this was no doubt a hoax, as her ladyship did not make an appearance.
The Rebeccaites in Wales seemed to have inspired some copycats in Ireland (from the Monmouthshire Merlin):
Dublin .
— The Cork Examiner of contains the following curious announcement:– “ the followers of Rebecca in this country disturbed the quiet of the little town of Buttevant, by demolishing a branch gate, erected one week since on a bye-road immediately leading to the town.
Since the erection of the gate considerable dissatisfaction was evinced by the farmers who go to market by that road; the consequence was an immediate rise in the price of provisions, to the great detriment of the poor, who were obliged to pay 4d. and 5d. per weight for potatoes, instead of half that price, which was only demanded before.
We sincerely hope that anything resembling the Rebecca riots in Wales will not extend to this country.”
In this episode of the chronicle of the Rebecca Riots, the government decides it’s time to break out the artillery.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin:
In consequence of the continued unsettled state of South Wales, owing to the determination of parties known by the designation of Rebecca and her daughters to destroy property, and especially turnpike gates, orders were received at an early hour on , at Woolwich, to have in readiness a six-pounder field gun and a twelve-pounder howitzer [a very similar report in the Cambrian says “four 6-pounder field guns and two 12-pounder howitzers”], which were selected from the field train department, and at , they left Woolwich with the usual number of men of the Royal Artillery, required for their service in the field, under the command of Capt. Taylor, with Lieut. Wodehouse.
The orders were to proceed to Bristol by the Great Western Railway, and from Bristol to Carmarthen with the least possible delay, in case their presence might be required to put a stop to the rioting and destruction of property in that quarter.
[The Cambrian adds: “The guns passed through the Bath Station on … Two hundred of the 75th arrived in Swansea last night, by the Bristol steamer.
How long they are to remain with us we have not heard.
Billets have been taken for three days only.”]
The following list of gates destroyed appears in the Welshman:–
The gates destroyed since our last publication, as well as we can ascertain, are the following:– The Fontnewydd Gate and toll house (to which the dragoons were called out, and, after scouring the country for about fourteen miles, returned without even having seen a suspicious character); the New Inn Gate, near Llandilo; the Gwarallt Gate, near Lampeter, and a toll-bar near it, on ; two gates near Cardigan; the Pont-twely Gate, between Rhydfach and Llandyssil, on ; the Pumpsaint Gate, near Dolecothy, on ; and the Bronfeldn Gate, five miles from Llandovery, on the road leading to Llanwrtyd, on .
The magistrates have caused several persons to be apprehended on suspicion of destroying this gate, and are busily employed in investigating the affair.
Such was the difficulty of obtaining a person to receive the tolls at the Bronfelen Gate, that fourpence was allowed to the collector for every shilling he received.
The following is a list of the gates, toll-houses, and toll-bars that have been destroyed in the Three Commott’s District:– New-bridge gate, bar, and toll-house; Troedyrhiwgoch gate, Llanfihangel house and three gates, Castell-y-thingil gate and house (twice), Llandey Forest bar and toll-box, Ystillisycoed bar, Treventy bars and house, Trefuch bar and house, Wernbongam bar, Kidwelly gate and house (twice), Llanarthney bar, Nantygath bar, Penrhiwgoch bar, Masybont bar and house.
It is a rather singular fact, that not a single turnpike gate has been destroyed on a Sunday.
The Welshman contains the following:–
The Rebecca trials excite very great interest.
The businesses of our assizes, which commence to-morrow, will be unusually heavy.
There are nearly seventy persons on bail charged with having been concerned in the late riots.
Besides these, there are six in the borough gaol charged with rioting at Tallog.
There are also four prisoners in the county gaol for divers offences.
It is not the fact, as has been stated by some of our contemporaries, that Sir William Follett is to conduct the prosecutions against the Rebeccaites, at the ensuing Carmarthenshire Assizes.
Messrs.
Chilton, Q.C., John Evans, Q.C., and E.V. Williams, have been specially engaged for the Crown.
The government will pay all the expenses of prosecuting the prisoners, who are to be tried for participating in the workhouse affair, and also those who are imprisoned for the Tallog riot.
One-half only of the expense in every criminal prosecution has always hitherto been paid by the government.
The government finally got a break in the Rebecca investigations when an informer came forward to finger some of Rebecca’s daughters… but it may have been less of a breakthrough than it seemed.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin:
On , a considerable force of the gate levellers marched to Bwlgoed toll house, near Pontardulais, about seven miles from Swansea, on the Carmarthen road, forced the keeper out without making his toilet, and placing an implement in his hand, compelled him, under certain threats of death, to aid in the work of demolition, and lest he should take the liberty of tracing any of the Guerrillas home, they locked him in an adjoining stable, where he was shivering, en chemise, “till daylight did appear.”
Heretofore the seal of secrecy has been upon the lips of all sympathisers with the Rebeccaites, and none were found to give a trace to the homes of the termagant, or any of her myrmidons.
On night, however, according to public report, a person named John Jones, or Lletty Fulbert, not having the love or fear of “Becca” before his eyes, but being moved and instigated by John Barleycorn, or the genius of cwrw dha, met a policeman at a beerhouse, and there showed symptoms that he would a tale unfold of the wicked lady’s visits to the glimpses of the moon.
Jones was whisked off to a safe place (and, so “the wicked Rebeccaites insinuated, his public spirit was kept effervescent”) and interrogated, whereafter warrants were issued against William, Henry, and Matthew Morgan, and David Jones, and the constable set out with three others to make arrests.
All but Henry were arrested without much incident, but when they attempted to arrest Henry at home, his family attacked the officers and one of the family was badly wounded.
Later, Griffith Vaughan and Daniel Lewis were also arrested and charged with involvement in the Bwlgoed attack.
As news spread, huge crowds assembled, and attempted to get admission to the hearings, which were then closed to the public.
Meanwhile, Jones’s wife was heard saying that her husband had gone a bit around the bend, had not been a witness to the gate destruction, and had fingered the Morgan family in order to satisfy a personal grievance and to collect the government’s reward.
On a group of Rebeccaites
met and passed a set of resolutions, which were obtained by the press and
reprinted. From the
Monmouthshire Merlin:
We much regret to learn that the war against the gates still progresses in
Carmarthenshire, notwithstanding the utmost vigilance of the military under
Colonel Love and the local authorities.
The following Resolutions have been adopted at some of the Rebeccaite
Meetings.
To the conductors of the Convention appointed to be held at Cwm Ivor, in the
parish of Llandi, in the county of Carmarthen, on
.
To concur and inquire into the grievances complained of by the people, and to
adopt the best method of avoiding the surprising deprivations that exist, and
the eternal vigilance of our superintendents, which is the price of our
liberty.
We wish to reduce the price (taxes) and secure our blessings. An army of
principles will penetrate where an army of soldiers cannot.
Power usurped is weak when opposed. The public interest depends upon our
compliance to examine the cause of the calamity, and unveil the corruptions
to Rebecca,
&c.
The following resolutions agreed, and intend to recommend to your future
aspect by us whose names are here subscribed at foot, being householders
within the above heretofore mentioned parish:–
To levelling all petty gates and gate-posts connected with by-ways and
bridle-roads or any roads repaired by the parishioners. Also that
coals, lime, and grain, taken to market, be exempted from tolls.
The motive is the abolition of heavy tithe and rent charge in lieu of
tithe.
The abolition of church-rates.
A total alteration of the present poor-law.
An equitable adjustment of landlord’s rent.
Not to allow or grant any Englishman to have the privilege of a steward
or governor in South Wales.
If any man rents his neighbour’s farm treacherously, we must acquaint
the lady, and endeavour to encourage her exertions wherever she wishes
for us to execute our phenomena and combat.
To request the farmers not to borrow any money on purpose to pay unlawful
demands; and if the result be that some person or persons will annoy any
one by plundering and sacrificing their goods in respect to such charge,
we must protect them and diminish their exploits of agonism.
That a committee of privy council must be held when necessary, and all
persons under the age of 18 years are not admitted into it. Neither women or
any of the female sex shall be introduced into this selected assembly, except
Rebecca and Miss Cromwell.
It was agreed that a committee should be formed, and that no farmer in the
country should be allowed to take the farm which had been vacated by another,
without the sanction of the committee, and that if any did so, he must take
the consequences. Four persons have been appointed to make rules to carry out
these objects, to be agreed to at a future meetings.
Following the newspaper coverage of Rebecca chronologically, as I have been,
I was surprised at how casually the reporter used the sentence “The following
Resolutions have been adopted at some of the Rebeccaite Meetings.” They have
meetings? They pass resolutions? So far, the papers have been
describing Rebecca and Her Daughters as a mob of ignorant country folk
transformed into midnight raiders animated by simple grievances and inflamed by
mob passion.
Edward Bagnall, carman, in the employ of the Rhymney Iron Company, was brought
before the Bench at the instance of Mr. Superintendent Davies for giving false
information to the toll collector at the turnpike gate called the Werfa gate,
situate between Hirwain and Pontwally, of the approach of a number of armed
men for the purpose of destroying the gate.
It appeared that the alarmist had stopped at the gate, and informed the
collector that a large number of the daughters of Rebecca were galloping
thither with terrific haste, to smash and level the house and ages. This news
reached the ears of the vigilant police before it had spread far, and the
lying varlet was taken into custody.
The prisoner informed the Bench that he told the collector “only for a lark.”
The Bench said such larks were very reprehensible; and giving the fellow a
caution to leave off such practices, he was discharged.
…never was the country in a more open and general state of Agrarian
insurrection than it is at present. Armed and disguised parties roam about the
country at night, appearing and disappearing with the celerity of Arab
robbers, or Spanish guerrillas, harassing and wearing out soldiers, by keeping
them constantly on the alert, levelling toll-bars and gates, with a stern end
[sic] fixed determination, which betokens their settled plan, and
everywhere meeting with the sympathy and hearty co-operation of the bulk of
the Agricultural population.
That same issue also included this report:
Rebecca.
Mr. Edward Lloyd Williams, of Gwernant, near Newcastle Emlyn, having recently
received a letter from Rebecca, ordering him, under serious injury to his
property, to remit 25 per cent. of
his approaching rents, has published a very spirited letter, refusing to
comply with the unjust demand, and warning the deluded people of the penalty
of transportation to which they made themselves liable by being connected with
such lawless and unjustifiable proceedings.
Also, here’s a bit more from the Rebecca Riots.
From the Cambrian:
We are sorry to announce that the depredations of Rebecca and her daughters now extent beyond the mere destruction of toll-gates and toll-houses.
On , a plantation belonging to Capt. Davies, of Myrtle Hill, near Carmarthen, was cut down, and on the same night a large hayrick, and several stacks of straw, the property of Mr. H. Davies, of Conwil, were set on fire, and entirely consumed.
Mr. Davies had always been strongly opposed to the course pursued by Rebecca.
— On , a large party of Rebeccaites destroyed the toll-bar leading to the village of Abergwilly, near Carmarthen; and on , both the toll-house and gate at Tyllwyd, near Carmarthen, were entirely demolished by a party consisting of about thirty to forty Rebeccaites, who were disguised in the usual manner.
The London Times reporter gives an account of a meeting of these disaffected persons at Cwm Ivor, which, regardless of personal danger, he attended, and was allowed to be present as a “gentleman of the press.”
It appears that the grounds of complaint on the part of the rioters are, high rents, church-rates, tithes, tolls, and poor-laws.
A party of the 75th Regiment left Swansea for Carmarthen.
They were to proceed through Llanelly, where it was intended they should remain for two days.
The trial of the accused Rebeccaites fingered by the sketchy informant John Jones begins.
From the Cambrian:
In our last publication we announced the destruction of the Rhydypandy and Bolgoed toll-bars, the latter of which had been re-erected but a short time before.
On , information was communicated to the Magistrates, relative to the parties implicated in the destruction of the toll-bars, in consequence of which, they issued warrants for the apprehension of several parties of the highest respectability.
This circumstance created the greatest excitement in this town and neighbourhood — so much so, that many old residents of Swansea have declared that, on no former occasion, have they seen the town in such a state of effervescence.
Early on , Captain Napier, accompanied by Inspector Rees, of the Borough Police force, Sergeant Jenkins and Henry Lewis, of the Rural Police, proceeded to the neighbourhood of Pontardulais, with warrants for the apprehension of Mr. David Jones, son of Mr. Morgan Jones, of Tymawr (formerly of Court-y-Carne), who is a most respectable freeholder, and Mr. Wm. Morgan, farmer, of Bolgoed.
After having brought these two persons to town and placed them in custody at the station-house, the same officers proceeded to execute a warrant, signed by J.D. Llewellyn and T. Edw. Thomas, Esqrs., for the apprehension of Matthew and Henry Morgan, the sons of Mr. Morgan Morgan, a freeholder, residing at Cwmcillau, near Velindre, in the parish of Llangyfeiach.
The former resides on his own farm, which he rents from J.D. Llewelyn, Esq., and the latter, being a single man, in his father’s house.
The officers arrived in the neighbourhood of Cwmcillau about , and apprehended Matthew Morgan at his own house, two or three fields distant from his father’s house.
He was left in the custody of Sergeant Jenkins and Lewis, while Capt. Napier and Mr. Rees proceeded to Cwmcillau farm-house, for the purpose of executing the warrant against Henry Morgan.
The nature of the warrant was fully explained in Welsh, by Mr. Rees, to the family, who positively declined allowing Henry to be taken by the officers.
At last, Capt. Napier and Mr. Rees found it necessary to take him by force, when the whole family assisted in his rescue, and committed a serious assault upon Capt. Napier.
As all particulars relating to the attack are detailed in the evidence given before the Magistrates on , a report of which is subjoined, it is quite unnecessary to enter upon them here, and refer our readers to the evidence adduced.
However, the family succeeded in rescuing the person against whom the warrant had been issued, but not until one of them (John Morgan) had been seriously wounded by a pistol shot, which Capt. Napier was compelled to discharge in self-defence.
With the assistance of Sergeant Jenkins and Policeman Lewis, who had been left with Matthew Morgan, at a distance of three fields from the house, they succeeded in bringing the young man who was wounded, with his brother, to Swansea.
In , three vehicles, with a party of the 73d Regiment, and several policemen, proceeded to Cwmcillau, for the purpose of apprehending the rest of the family, who had joined in the attack on the officers.
They succeeded in apprehending Esther Morgan, the mother, Margaret Morgan, the daughter, and Rees Morgan, one of the sons.
Morgan Morgan was apprehended in town, having come to enquire after his son.
All the family were now in custody, with the exception of Henry Morgan.
Dr. Bird and Mr. Rogers, surgeon, extracted the ball from John Morgan’s body, and have done everything that was necessary for his recovery.
The ball had entered the left side, below the navel, and was extracted from over the third lower rib, but the medical men were of opinion that it had not entered the abdominal cavity.
On , Mr. Griffith Vaughan, formerly a draper in this town, but now landlord of the Red Lion Inn, Pontardulais, and postmaster of that place, and Mr. Daniel Lewis, known as a writer in the Welsh periodicals, under the name of Petris Bach, were taken into custody, on a charge of having been concerned in the destruction of the Bolgoed bar.
During the whole of the town was in the greatest state of excitement, being filled with a number of respectable country people, farmers, and others, whose countenances betrayed the inward anxiety entertained to know the result of these proceedings.
A private meeting of the Magistrates was held during the whole of , in the Petty Sessions-room, in the Townhall.
It was the fullest meeting that had taken place for some time.
The following Magistrates were present:– Sir John Morris, Bart. (in the Chair), John Grove, Esq., Rev. S. Davies, W.I. Jones, Esq., J.D. Llewelyn, Esq., L.W. Dillwyn, Esq., L.Ll.
Dillwyn, Esq., C.H. Smith, Esq., H. Lucas, Esq., J.N. Lucas, Esq., Rev. John Collins, Thomas Penrice, Esq., Robert Lindsay, Esq., T. Edw. Thomas, Esq., J.H. Vivian, Esq., M.P., J.D. Berrington, Esq., and F. Fredericks, Esq. — Several Reporters made an application for admittance, but were told that the meeting was strictly a private one, to which Magistrates and the necessary officers only were to be admitted, but that reporters should be admitted at the proper time.
Soon afterwards, all the prisoners were brought to the Town-hall and were taken to the Magistrates’ room.
The large hall, was immediately filled, in the expectation that the examination would take place there.
In a short time the Rev. S. Davies appeared, and announced that the examination would be a strictly private one, but when the parties were brought up for final hearing, the public would be admitted.
Mr. Powell, the reporter for the Times, who had come that morning from Carmarthen expressly for the purpose of being present, applied for the admission of reporters.
Messrs.
W. Walters, J.G. Jeffreys, and J.R. Tripp, solicitors, who were respectively engaged to defend the prisoners, made a similar application in writing, and in reply, received the following resolution of the Magistrates — “That all meetings, with a view to the investigation of charges relating to the demolition of turnpike gates in this neighbourhood, be strictly private until the parties are brought up for final hearing.”
— From enquiries made, we understand that the information relative to the destruction of the gates was given by a man named John Jones, who has stated that he was present at the destruction of the Rhydypandy gate.
On , this man told Mr. Rees, the Inspector of police, that he knew all the parties concerned in the destruction of the gates, and could give their names and residences.
This induced Mr. Rees to communicate the circumstance to the authorities, who subsequently issued warrants for the apprehension of the parties.
It would be unsafe to offer any opinion as to the correctness of the information until the case is brought forward, but we deem it right to state, that the public place no confidence whatever in his testimony.
His wife declares that he was in bed on the night of the destruction of the Rhydypandy gate, at which it is said that he was present.
She also stated that, ever since a seizure of his effects for debt, his conduct has been such as to lead her to suspect that he is not altogether sane.
It also appears that some of the Welsh have a notion, that if they can erect what they call Ty un nos — that is, if they can build a house on a common in one night unobserved until the following morning — that the house so erected becomes their property.
Jones erected a house of this description on a common, belonging to the Duke of Beaufort, over which Messrs.
Jenkins, of Cenhordy, and Morgan, of Cwmcillau, had a right of pasturage, and which house they demolished.
This, coupled with the fact that the sum of 100l. has been offered for the apprehension of the destroyers of Bolgoed bar, tend to throw considerable suspicion on his evidence; for we understand that he is the informer respecting the destruction of both bars.
Various rumours were afloat on , respecting the conduct of Capt. Napier and the police, towards the Morgan family, for which, as it appeared by uncontradicted evidence on , there were not the slightest grounds.
Had the assault case been publicly investigated on , those injurious reports would not have been circulated.
Rebecca in North Wales
We find that pulling down toll-gates has become the fashion of the day, and that North Wales is imitating the South.
On the turnpike gate of Brynefal, near Tre’ Madoc, was destroyed.
It appears that there were from twenty to thirty of the Rebeccaites, some speaking with the South accent, and others in English.
They told the toll-keeper that, unless he was silent, they would make him so, and tried to effect an entrance into the house, but he had the presence of mind to place four sacks of salt against the door, which prevented their effecting an entrance.
Having pulled off the post, &c., they carried the gate about a mile, and then cut it in pieces, and left the fragments by the river side.
We are given to understand that no clue has been obtained as to the perpetrators.
We trust that the proper authorities will be on the alert.
— Carnarvon Herald.
On , a party of workmen in returning from hay-making in a field above Mount Pleasant, amused themselves in pushing before them one of the party, a mason, named Williams, who covered his face with his apron, at the same time crying out “Becca for ever.”
The Mayor, who was accidentally passing at the time, immediately seized him by the collar, and gave him in custody to two soldiers.
Mr. Morris, joiner, meeting them, told the Mayor that he would answer for Williams’s appearance on .
He was then liberated.
On , he entered into recognizances to appear before the Magistrates on .
The Monmouthshire Merlin rushed to print on with early reports of the Cwmcillau (or “Cwm Cille” in this account) brawl:
On a gentleman whose family are at present stopping in Glamorganshire, conveyed to us the intelligence that serious outrages had been committed by the followers of the Amazonian Great Unknown in the neighbourhood of Swansea; that the police had been violently handled; and that Captain Napier, the chief constable of the county, had been dangerously wounded.
We deemed it well to proceed to Swansea, and on our arrival found the town a scene of great excitement, and on seeking information from sources likely to prove authentic, learned that a conflict had certainly taken place, but fortunately on a small scale; that several Rebeccaites had been captured, and were then prisoners in the town; and that Captain Napier had been injured, after manifesting the humanity and forbearance which become a brave soldier.
It appeared that the anti-toll-gate campaign having widened the circle of operations, and frightened some of the good and peaceable people of Swansea, the active and intelligent head of the constabulary force of the county was vigilantly on the look-out.
On , a considerable force of the gate levellers marched to Bwlgoed toll house, near Pontardulais, about seven miles from Swansea, on the Carmarthen road, forced the keeper out without making his toilet, and placing an implement in his hand, compelled him, under certain threats of death, to aid in the work of demolition, and lest he should take the liberty of tracing any of the Guerrillas home, they locked him in an adjoining stable, where he was shivering, en chemise, “till daylight did appear.”
Disorganization was increasing with impunity, and as toll-gate keepers looked upon each coming night with fear and trembling, as probably the last of their road-side reign, the authorities of Swansea were not wanting in efforts for prevention and detection.
Heretofore the seal of secrecy has been upon the lips of all sympathisers with the Rebeccaites, and none were found to give a trace to the homes of the termagant, or any of her myrmidons.
On , however, according to public report, a person named John Jones, or Lletty Fulbert, not having the love or fear of “Becca” before his eyes, but being moved and instigated by John Barleycorn, or the genius of cwrw dha, met a policeman at a beerhouse, and there showed symptoms that he would a tale unfold of the wicked lady’s visits to the glimpses of the moon.
Inspector William Rees, of Swansea, was duly acquainted with the circumstance, and deemed this a favourable opportunity of obtaining information touching the names and whereabouts of the persons who razed the toll house and bar of Bwlgoed.
Pursuing this intent, Rees had the informer conveyed to a place of safety, where no person was allowed to interfere with his expressed intention of rendering the State some service, and where, the wicked Rebeccaites insinuated, his public spirit was kept effervescent.
Be that as it may, whether such report arose from malevolence or otherwise, we know not.
Inspector Rees applied to the county magistrates, who, having minutely scanned Jones’s story, issued warrants against persons charged with the commission of Rebeccaite outrage at the Bwlgoed gate.
Four warrants were confided to Captain Napier for the apprehension of William Morgan and Henry Morgan, farmers, of the parish of Llandilo, Talybont, and Matthew Morgan and David Jones, of the parish of Llangerelock.
At the gallant chief constable, accompanied by Inspector Rees, and William Jenkins and H. Lewis, policemen, proceeded well armed to execute the warrants.
Matthew Morgan was taken at home, about .
— David Jones was a prisoner soon after, and both were brought to the lock-up house at Swansea.
After the performance of this duty, they again set out to take Wm. Morgan and Henry Morgan.
William was found in a field, captured, and left handcuffed in the custody of Jenkins, the policeman; and the remainder of the party proceeded to Cwm Cille, near Velindra, the house of Morgan Morgan, farmer, in order to take Henry Morgan.
Inspector Rees first entered the house, and told who was outside.
He then sent for Captain Napier, who, on entering, was handed a seat by Esther Morgan, mother of Henry Morgan.
The object of the visit was then told, the warrant produced, and the signatures of the magistrates — Dillwyn Llewellyn and T.E. Thomas, Esquires — were pointed out.
Morgan Morgan, the father, said Henry was lame, and could not come then, but would do so at some more convenient time.
Morgan, the father, said he would lose his life before his son should go out of his house.
On this, Captain Napier ordered Rees to lay hold of Henry Morgan, and a scene of the utmost violence ensued, which will minutely appear in the evidence which we give below.
Old Morgan, his wife, his sons, Rees and John, the latter of whom was shot, and Morgan’s daughter Margaret, fell upon Captain Napier and Inspector Rees like tigers and tiget cats.
An iron bar, a reaping hook, a hatchet, a crutch, a hammer, scalding water, and a saucepan, were actively used against Mr. Napier and the policemen; one would almost suppose that the gallant captain must have a charmed life to survive the affray.
As it was, he escaped with a severe cut on the head, and other injuries; and no doubt he would have fallen a victim in the discharge of his duty, had he not, when the power of enduring forbearance could go no further, and when they had endeavoured to discharge a pistol, which he had, against him, he fired, by which one of his assailants, named John Morgan, was wounded in the abdomen.
Rees was sadly pummelled, and Jenkins, who came to their assistance, rescued both from further violence, by some dexterous passes of his sword against some neighbours of the Morgans, whom the cry of “Lladderch Nwynt,” — kill them!
— had brought to the scene of action.
Henry Morgan and John Morgan, the wounded man, were then brought to Swansea, where the eminent Doctor Bird skilfully extracted the ball from John; and, be it observed, to the credit of Captain Napier, that though covered with blood, and suffering severely, he declined the medical relief of Dr. Bird, until that gentleman had first performed the offices of humanity for John Morgan, and assured him that Morgan’s life was not in danger.
The news of the capture of Rebeccaites, and of the affray — magnified into a pitched battle, with reports of the killed and wounded — spread like wildfire over the town and neighbourhood — the streets became densely crowded — hundreds assembled at the station house, and the most feverish excitement prevailed; but we did not hear of any breach of the peace.
Doctor Bird and Surgeon Rogers paid close attention to the wounded man, and succeeded in extracting the ball, which had entered the abdomen, passed up, struck the edge of the ilium, and glanced up til it lodged backwards between the second and third ribs, the abdomenal cavity not having been entered in any part.
On a detachment of the Seventy-third Regiment, accompanied by several very well armed policemen, marched to the neighbourhood of Pontardulais, for the purpose of apprehending the parties who had offended against the law in the morning, and the Morgan family, and others, were conveyed to prison without resistance.
On two additional prisoners were brought in, and the rush of anxious crowds to catch a glimpse of the new-comers — for whom we heard repeated expressions of sympathy by the people — rendered the streets through which they came almost impassable.
Mr. Griffith Vaughan, a man of some property, and landlord of the Pontardulais Inn, and Mr. David Lewis, of, we believe, the same locality, are the two persons in question.
[Actually Daniel Lewis, I think — ♇]
The current of the population flowed to the Town Hall, where a numerous bench of magistrates, Sir John Morris, chairman, assembled.
The court was filled in every part, immediately after the doors were opened; and several members of the Press — London and provincial — were ready to take the proceedings; but after the lapse of a considerable period, the Rev. Samuel Davies entered the court, and addressed the meeting to the following effect:–
“I suppose you have assembled here for the purpose of hearing the examination of witnesses in the case which now occupies the attention of the magistrates.
I have to inform you it will be a private hearing, and therefore you may all depart; but before the investigation is brought to a close, when the prisoners are brought up for their final hearing, the public will be admitted.”
This announcement was received with marks of disapprobation.
Mr. Powell, of the Times, applied for permission to be present.
The solicitors who had been engaged to defend the prisoners, made a similar application, and in reply received the following:–
Resolved unanimously — That all meetings with a view to the investigation of charges relating to the demolition of turnpike gates in this neighbourhood be strictly private, till the parties are brought up for final hearing.
John Morris, Chairman.
The people dispersed from the hall slowly and complainingly, but the rumours of fresh arrests, and the current of reports prejudicial to the character of Jones, the informer, gave food for gossip and speculation.
It was said that a rev. gentleman met Jones’s wife in Castle-street, when she assured him “That her husband could know nothing of the occurrences at Bwlgoed and Rhyd-y-pandy, having been at home every night for the last two months.
She added that his conduct of late had been very singular, so as to induce her to believe him insane.
About twelve months since his effects were seized by the officers of the law for debt, which circumstance, she added, had a most powerful effect upon his mind.
Some time ago, he build a house upon the mountain, in the neighbourhood of his former residence, in a bleak and barren spot, where it was scarcely possible for a human being to reside, more especially in such a house as he erected.
The country people have a notion that if they can erect a house in one night upon a common, that house becomes their freehold property.
One of those houses Jones attempted to erect for himself, his wife, and five children; but Mr. Morgan, of Cwm Cille, and Mr. Jenkins, of Cynhordy, conceiving their rights to a sheep-walk invaded by this building, took steps for having it demolished.
Jones’s wife fancies that this act of Mr. Morgan’s so irritated her husband’s mind, already weakened by previous misfortune, that it must have caused him to have sought his revenge, by stating that Morgan’s sons were engaged in the destruction of the Bwlgoed bar.
However, this is mere conjecture on her part.
One thing she seems certain of, that her husband has not been from home during any one night for the last two months.”
Consequently, if her statement be true, her husband’s story must be untrue, as we believe he states he was present at the demolition of the Bwlgoed bar, which occurred a considerable distance from his residence, and during the night.
Jones was in town early on , and called at Mr. Davies’ house.
Having sat there a considerable time, he beckoned to Mrs. D., and begged her to as Mr. Davies to lend him five shillings; but Mr. Davies having some knowledge of his character, refused to lend him any money.
This circumstance plainly shows he was considered unworthy of being trusted with five shillings by persons who knew him.
It is well known that the magistrates have offered a reward of one hundred pounds to any one who will give such information as will lead to the conviction of any person engaged in the destruction of Bwlgoed bar and toll house.
The statement of Jones’s wife is given as being much relied upon by the friends of the Morgans, who are very numerous.
A couple of interesting details show up in this version: one, that among the weapons the Morgan family used was a “crutch.”
No crutch is mentioned during the initial presentation of the prosecution’s case against the Morgan family (though some of the other weapons are brought out for display to the Magistrates), and this may perhaps be because it would bolster the idea that Henry Morgan was injured and that the father had offered to bring him to town to face charges once he’d healed up.
Another detail is that neighbors of the Morgans came to their aid and joined in their vigorous defense of their household.
From the Cambrian comes this account of the examination of Rebeccaite prisoners who had been rounded up after being fingered by a fairly sketchy informant, and then subjected to a very irregular proceeding in which the witnesses and defendants were interrogated in the presence of the judges while their own counsel was denied the ability to be present.
The examination mostly concerns the desperate actions the prisoners took to resist arrest, and so doesn’t concern the main Rebeccaite activity directly, but that act (and the sympathy for it shown by members of the public attending the trial) says a lot about the state of Welsh public opinion towards the authorities:
On , the Magistrates commenced their public sitting soon after nine o’clock [the Monmouthshire Merlin, by contrast, says “The doors of the Town Hall were not opened till nearly ”].
The following Magistrates were present:– Sir John Morris, Bart., in the chair; J.N. Lucas, Esq., H. Lucas, Esq., W.I. Jones, Esq., J. Homfray, Esq., High Sheriff, J.D. Llewelyn, Esq., John Grove, Esq., Rev. S. Davies, Rev. J. Collins, Howel Gwyn, Esq., C.H. Smith, Esq., J.D. Berrington, Esq., J.H. Vivian, Esq., M.P., T. Edw. Thomas, Esq., N.E.V. Edwards Esq., and Col. Cameron.
The following persons were then placed in the dock:– William Morgan, and Esther Morgan, his wife, Rees Morgan, and Margaret Morgan.
There was also a charge against John Morgan, who was in the Infirmary.
Mr. Wm. Walters appeared on behalf of the prisoners.
The Chairman stated, that the Bench had, on , taken down the evidence as to the facts connected with the assault, and they had been engaged a long time about it, as they thought it would be best to explain to the prisoners the nature of the charge against them, for the sake of giving them every opportunity of offering any explanation.
Whatever explanation they had offered, was not taken down in writing at the time, so that it could not be used in evidence against them.
They were desirous of having the evidence explained to them in Welsh, which was done.
He (the Chairman) would read over the depositions of Captain Napier and the other witnesses; and Mr. Walters could cross-examine them as to any of the statements made.
Mr. Walters begged to make one observation.
He was somewhat surprised at the course the Magistrates meant to pursue, and at that which they had pursued on .
He had then applied to be present, which was refused, and that was the first intimation he had received that any examination had taken place.
He would say, that the fairest way would be to go over the evidence orally.
He had the opinions of several Judges by him, who said that such a course was the best to pursue.
He also thought the way proposed to be adopted by the Magistrates would be prejudicial to the prisoners’ case.
After a short consultation with his brother Magistrates, the Chairman observed, that they had no objection to the course Mr. Walters proposed to pursue.
If he wished that all the evidence should be taken de novo, it should be done, and what was taken down on considered as mere waste paper.
Mr. Walters said, that he felt obliged to the Magistrates for the option given him.
He should certainly give a preference to the course of going over the whole of the evidence de novo.
He would not unnecessarily lengthen the examination.
Considering that the case was connected with some of the unfortunate disturbances which had lately been so prevalent in the Principality, it appeared to him that it was decidedly better to have a public examination, for if the depositions which had been taken in a private meeting were merely read over, some evil disposed minds might think that the parties had not been fairly dealt with.
— (Loud cheers, and other manifestations of public feeling, followed these observations as well as on two or three previous occasions).
The Chairman observed, that the Magistrates wished to make their proceedings as public as possible, but those demonstrations would not be allowed.
They were not bound to make the examination public, and if people could not behave themselves, the Hall must be cleared.
If the prisoners could be exculpated, either through their own innocence, or by the ingenuity of their advocate, that should be done; but those demonstrations could not be allowed there, more than in any other Court in the kingdom.
After some further conversation between the Magistrates and Mr. Walters,
Captain Napier, having been sworn, made the following deposition:– I am chief constable for this county.
On I proceeded to Cwmcillau, in the parish of Llangafelach, in this county, for the purpose of executing a warrant upon two persons.
Mr. Walters:– Don’t say upon whom, but produce the warrants.
Captain Napier left the Court for a short time while getting the warrants.
Mr. Walters:– I take this opportunity of applying, that the witnesses for the prosecution should be sent out of Court.
— The witnesses were then ordered out.
The Chairman:– You would, I presume, not wish Dr. Bird to be sent out.
Mr. Walters:– I do not know why any distinction should be made, as the evidence of the other witnesses might influence him.
Captain Napier now returned, and produced two warrants, signed by T. Edw. Thomas and J.D. Llewelyn, Esqrs., for the apprehension of Matthew and Henry Morgan, for the destruction of Rhydypandy gate.
Examination continu[ed:– portion illegible] warrants signed.
I was accompanied by Inspec[tor Rees portion illegible] of the Swansea Police, Sergeant Jenkins, and H.L. [portion illegible] the Rural Police.
We arrived at Cwmcillau at , and apprehended Matthew Morgan on the road near his own house, which is about three hundred yards distant from Cwmcillau.
I left Matthew Morgan in the custody of Sergeant Jenkins and H. Lewis, and then proceeded, accompanied by Inspector Rees, across the fields to Cwmcillau farm-house.
On arriving there, I directed Inspector Rees to ascertain if Henry Morgan was in the house.
He went into the house, and in a few minutes the prisoner Margaret Morgan came out, and I went with her into the house.
The family offered me a chair.
I do not remember which of them did so.
When I sat down, Inspector Rees spoke to them in Welsh, and told me–
Mr. Walters:– I beg you not to proceed further.
As Captain Napier is going to say what Rees told him in English, I apprehend it cannot be evidence against my clients, who could not understand what was spoken in that language.
Examination continued:– I heard the old man speak English, but not the rest.
Rees told me that he had informed them that I was Chief Constable of the County.
The other three prisoners must have heard him.
I then produced the warrant against Henry Morgan, and desired Mr. Rees to explain to the parties the nature of it, and tell them the name of the Magistrate who had signed it.
Mr. Rees spoke to them in Welsh, and told me–
Mr. Walters objected to hearing witness describe what Rees said, as Rees himself could say that.
Mr. Attwood was of opinion, that as all the prisoners were present at the time, that what Rees said in their presence could be taken as evidence.
A long discussion ensued, after which the examination was proceeded with.
Inspector Rees informed me that the father stated that his son was lame and could not walk.
I desired him to tell him that he (the son) must come with us, as we were bound to take him into custody.
Rees spoke to them in Welsh, and seemed to have some discussion with them.
At last he proceeded to lay hold of Henry Morgan by the arm, and the whole family surrounded him, and endeavoured to prevent his taking him from the corner in which he sat.
Morgan Morgan, the father, and Esther, his wife, John Morgan, the young man in the Infirmary, Rees Morgan, and Margaret Morgan, the daughter, attacked him, and Henry finally succeeded in disengaging himself from Mr. Rees, and attempted to run towards the stairs.
I laid hold of him by the collar, upon which the old man and his wife attacked me.
The old woman jumped on my back, put her two fingers to my eyes, scratched my face, and bit my ear, while the old man took a stick [“a crutch,” wrote the Merlin] and struck me repeatedly upon the head, my hat being then off.
The old woman then took an iron bar from the fire place, and struck me several times on the head with the middle part of the bar.
Immediately afterwards, Margaret Morgan and the young man in the Infirmary, attacked me.
Margaret, after striking me on the head with a stick, took a saucepan, containing some boiling water from the fire, and poured it over my back.
Eventually, I was compelled to let Henry Morgan go.
They continued struggling with me until I got outside the door, when I fell.
Previous to my falling I had taken a pistol from my pocket.
When I was on the ground, the old man laid hold of my hand by the wrist and turned the muzzle of the pistol towards me, while John Morgan, who is in the Infirmary, put his hand over mine and pressed the trigger with his finger.
The pistol was not cocked at the time, the hammer being on the cap.
The father had his right foot upon my thigh, and his left upon my groin, while John Morgan had his foot on the right side of my thigh, and was kicking me with the other foot, and by their endeavours they succeeded in turning the muzzle of the pistol towards my stomach, and kept pressing it to my body while John Morgan continued pressing the trigger.
At that moment, I received a cut on my head with a reaping-hook from Margaret Morgan.
Had the pistol been cocked it would most certainly have been off.
I had seen Margaret Morgan approach me with a rusty reaping-hook.
Considering my life to be in danger I turned the pistol, cocked it with my thumb, and fired.
I hit the young man, John Morgan, who is now in the Infirmary.
He stepped backward on receiving the ball, and again attacked me.
I at last succeeded in getting on my feet, and observed Rees Morgan, who had a hammer in his possession, and Morgan Morgan, who had a reaping hook approach me [the Merlin says this testimony fingered John with the hammer and Margaret with the reaping hook].
I fired a second time into the air.
No person received the shot.
Henry Morgan had a hatchet in his hand.
Rees Morgan struck at me with a hammer, and I knocked him down with my fist.
Observing Henry Morgan running away, I directed Inspector Rees to follow him, which he did.
I was following Mr. Rees, while Rees Morgan again interrupted me, and endeavoured to prevent me.
I again knocked him down with my fist.
Inspector Rees then returned, having failed to apprehend Henry Morgan.
Observing a mason’s hammer in Rees Morgan’s pocket, I attempted to get possession of it, but he resisted and struck at me with it.
At length I succeeded in wrenching it from him, and struck him on the head with the hammer.
He then left me alone.
I afterwards directed Sergeant W. Jenkins and H. Lewis, who had arrived on the spot with Matthew Morgan, who had already been taken into custody, to bring John with them in custody to Swansea.
On Mr. Walter’s application, the Magistrates allowed Morgan Morgan to come out of the dock and sit by him.
Examination continued:– During the whole time Henry Morgan took no very active part in the assault, but appeared desirous of getting away.
In his cross-examination by Mr. Walters, Capt. Napier said– When I went into the house, and asked for Henry, I did not understand that his father said that he would appear on .
The old lady, Esther Morgan, did not receive a shot in any part of her dress.
The only two shots fired were those fired by me — one at John Morgan, and the other close by his head, but not at any one; it was fired in the air.
I saw Morgan Morgan, the father, lay hands upon me; he also put his foot on my thigh.
Inspector Rees was engaged in struggling with Margaret Morgan, who endeavoured to throw the remainder of the hot water over him.
When on the ground, my face was towards the door of the house.
I observed the girl, Margaret Morgan, approach me with a hook; she had procured it from the cart-house, the door of which I could see.
Rees Morgan struck at me, but the blow did not take effect.
Mr. Tripp, at this period, made an application to the Bench, on behalf of Messrs.
Jones, Morgan, and Lewis, who were in custody.
The application was twofold — first, he requested the Magistrates would grant permission to inspect the warrants upon which they were taken into custody; and, secondly, that they would allow him, as their attorney, to have access to the prisoners as often as necessary.
With respect to the first, the law provided for it — the Magistrates had no discretion to exercise; and with regard to the second, he trusted the Bench would afford the prisoners every opportunity and facility for making their defence.
The Chairman, after consulting with the other Magistrates, said that they would accede to the first request, but the second could not be then granted, as all the Magistrates were not present.
Mr. Tripp stated, that he had not been able to ascertain the nature of the charge against the prisoners, and without that it was impossible for them to make any defence.
The prisoners had already been in custody.
Could he be informed when the Magistrates would decide upon the other application made to them?
The Chairman, after a pause, during which he consulted the other Magistrates, said, that the Magistrates themselves did not yet know the extent of the charge against the prisoners, but they had come to a decision to accede to Mr. Tripp’s application, though not instanter, but within twenty-four hours.
Mr. Tripp:– I am then to understand that to be the answer of the Magistrates.
May I ask the reason why the request is not now granted?
The Chairman said, the Magistrates were not bound to give reasons for the course which they pursued.
Mr. J.G. Jeffreys made the same application on behalf of Mr. Griffith Vaughan, who was in custody.
The Chairman gave him a similar answer.
Mr. Tripp asked if any evidence relating to the charge against his clients had been taken in their presence.
We understood the Chairman to answer in the affirmative.
The assault case was then proceeded with.
Inspector Rees examined:– On , I accompanied Captain Napier to Cwmcillau.
We arrived there at , and having apprehended Matthew Morgan, we proceeded to Cwmcillau farmhouse.
Mrs. Morgan offered me a chair; I told them that I wished Henry to accompany me to his brother’s house.
The father said that his foot was bad, and that his brother must come to him.
I then told Morgan Morgan (the father) that Captain Napier was outside, and I asked Margaret to request him to come in, which she did.
Captain Napier, at my request, produced the warrant against Henry Morgan.
I explained the nature of the warrant to Henry and his father, and told them that it was a warrant against the former, signed by J.D. Llewelyn and T. Edw. Thomas, Esqrs. I spoke to them in Welsh.
I also told them that Captain Napier was the Chief Constable for the county.
Morgan Morgan said that he would lose his life before he would allow his son to be taken out of the house.
I told Captain Napier, in English, what the old man had said, and asked what was to be done.
Captain Napier said, “Lay hold of him.”
I took him by the arm, upon which Rees, John, and Margaret Morgan, took hold of me, and succeeded in taking the prisoner from me.
He then went towards the stair, and Captain Napier laid hold of him.
Esther Morgan struck Captain Napier on the head, with a piece of iron.
I was pushed out by Rees, Margaret, and John Morgan.
After I got out of the house, Rees Morgan took up this [producing a three-pronged fish-spear], with which he prevented my returning to the house.
Margaret and John returned to the house, and left Rees with me.
In a short time I saw them bring out Captain Napier, who bled profusely from the head.
They threw him against a wall, which was before the house.
Margaret Morgan then brought the saucepan from the fire, and threw some hot water at me, and then aimed several blows at my head with the edge of it; I warded them off with my club.
Margaret Morgan went to the carthouse, from which she brought a reaping-hook [produced], and aimed a blow at the head of Captain Napier, while the father, mother, and the person who was wounded (John), kept him on the ground.
I cannot say whether the blow took effect or not.
At this time, I observed in Captain Napier’s hand a pistol, the muzzle of which was turned towards his own body.
Morgan and John Morgan struggled with him, as if to get the pistol out of his hand.
I then heard a shot fired, upon which Captain Napier rose from the ground, and Henry Morgan came out with this hatchet [produced], or one similar to it.
— After describing some other unimportant particulars, witness went on to say — Rees Morgan came after me with this hammer [produced — it was a large mason’s hammer], which Captain Napier afterwards wrested from him, and with which he struck him on the head.
We then went to the field, near the house, and Morgan Rees, Margaret Morgan, and the old woman, followed us.
Rees had a pike, and Esther Morgan a stick, with which they aimed several blows, which I warded off.
[The Merlin adds: “Margaret Morgan had the sickle in her hand.”]
Sergeant Jenkins then came into the field, and drew his sword, with the flat part of which he struck Rees Morgan on the body.
We then returned to Swansea, with Matthew Morgan and John Morgan, who was wounded.
Cross-examined:– The first thing Esther Morgan did was to strike Captain Napier with an iron bar on the head.
The old man did not say that Henry should come on the next day.
He did not object to his coming on the ground of his not being properly dressed, or because he had had no food.
He said that he would lose his life before he would allow him to go.
During the assault upon Captain Napier, I was engaged with Rees Morgan, who fenced me with his pike.
I could command a view of the entrance to the carthouse.
G.G. Bird Esq. M.D., examined:– I examined Captain Napier’s head, at , and found a cut on the left side, about two inches long, and down to the scalp-bone.
There were also scratches on his face, and a mark on the right ear, which appeared to be that of a bite.
There were other bruises on the head.
He also complained of a pain on the hip, and walked lame.
— [Dr. Bird corrected himself, and said that the mark was on the left ear].
Cross-examined:– The cut appeared to have been made with an edged instrument.
Sergeant W. Jenkins stated, that after taking Matthew Morgan into custody, he was left in charge of witness and Henry Lewis on the road, while Captain Napier and Inspector Rees proceeded to the house.
In a short time (observed witness), I heard a shot fired, and went towards the house.
Upon getting into the field before the house, I observed that Captain Napier was bleeding; his face and clothes were covered with blood.
The four prisoners, and Henry Morgan, followed him.
Margaret Morgan threw a stone.
The old woman used a stick to me, as soon as I approached them.
Margaret tossed the hats of Captain Napier and Mr. Rees towards me, at the same time saying, “Go home, you scamps and vagabonds.”
Captain Napier gave John Morgan, who was wounded, in charge to myself and Lewis.
We handcuffed him to his brother Matthew, and both were conveyed to Swansea.
It was then announced that no more witnesses were to be examined on behalf of the prosecution; and the Chairman told Mr. Walters that he was at liberty to produce any witnesses whom he might think proper to call on behalf of the prisoners.
Mr. Walters replied, that it was not his intention to offer any evidence, or of making any defence, at that time.
He perceived that a primâ facie case had been made out against his clients — sufficiently strong to warrant their committal for trial.
The only application he had to make to the Bench was, respecting bailing the prisoners.
He apprehended that there was nothing felonious in the rescue of Henry Morgan, consequently the prisoners would be committed for a misdemeanor, as the rescue of a prisoner could not be a higher crime than that with which the party rescued was charged.
Mr. Walters quoted an opinion from Archbold’s Pleadings in Criminal Cases, as his authority.
The Chairman observed, that the crime for which the prisoners would be committed, depended, not upon the nature of the charge against the party rescued, but upon the means adopted for effecting the rescue.
He understood that, if Henry Morgan were in custody on a charge of misdemeanor, and if the prisoners were simply charged with rescuing him, without having committed any act of violence, in that case, their crime would amount to no more than a misdemeanor; but here the parties had committed an aggravated assault.
After a short consultation, the Chairman informed Mr. Walters that the Magistrates had determined on liberating the prisoners on their finding bail.
The bail required would be, each principal in the sum of 200l., and also two surities in the sum of 100l. each.
— The Chairman also stated, that the case would not be further proceeded with that evening, but the prisoners would be remanded until .
Mr. Tripp now applied to the Bench for the liberation of Mr. David Jones, on his finding bail to appear whenever required.
The Chairman asked if there were any distinction between his case and that of the other persons who were in custody?
Mr. Tripp replied that there was not, but he applied on his behalf first of all, as the decision of the Bench, in his case, would govern that in the cases of the other prisoners.
Mr. Walters made a similar application on behalf of Matthew Morgan, and Mr. Jeffreys on behalf of Griffith Vaughan.
The Magistrates were of opinion, that the parties could not be admitted to bail before committal.
Mr. Tripp observed, that Jones was in custody upon a charge of breaking a turnpike-gate, which was simply a case of misdemeanour, and he submitted that it was a case of great hardship that enquiry into the charge should be so long delayed.
He (Mr. Tripp) could produce most unobjectionable surities for the appearance of the party whenever called upon.
Mr. Tripp proceeded to contend that, in point of law, the Magistrates were bound to liberate persons charged with misdemeanors on their finding bail.
At common law, all offences were formerly bailable but murder, and were still so, excepting in those cases specifically excepted by subsequent statutes, and by the present law he contended that misdemeanour was an offence for which it was provided that bail should be accepted.
Mr. Tripp quoted several authorities, among others, an opinion from the fourth volume of Mr. Justice Blackstone’s commentaries, and from the third volume of Burn’s Justice, and also an opinion expressed by Lord Denman, in the case of O‘Neil, the chartist, who was charged with misdemeanor.
After a consultation, the Magistrates declined acceding to the application.
The prisoners were then remanded until .
Henry Morgan, one of the party for whose apprehension the warrant was originally granted, and by rescuing whom the assault was committed, surrendered in the course of by the advice of Mr. Walters, and was in the dock during the latter part of the examination.
The report in the Merlin adds a few things to this description, and many more judgments.
Here, for instance, is that article’s description of the Morgan family:
The following prisoners were placed in the dock: Morgan Morgan, Esther Morgan, his wife (a sharp-looking lady, who though upwards of 70 years of age, had jumped on the chief constable’s back, bit his ear, and clapper clawed his face), Rees Morgan who appeared with his head bound up.
Margaret Morgan, daughter of Esther, a pretty and innocent looking Welsh damsel, who seemed more suitable to trim roses than to cut men’s heads with reaping hooks.
The Merlin reports also that “[s]ymptoms of dissatisfaction were apparent” as the chairman of the inquiry explained that they had taken testimony and interrogated the prisoners in closed court, and out of the presence (and over the objections) of their counsel, “only… that they might be better enabled to do justice to all parties.”
When their attorney objected again to this practice at the current hearing, according to the Merlin, “[c]onsiderable excitement pervaded the court, and loud cheers and clapping of hands followed the learned gentleman’s remarks.
It was quite evident that the sympathy of the people was strongly with the persons in the dock; and the magistrates throughout the day had considerable difficulty in restraining popular ebullitions unusual in courts of justice.”
The Merlin also reported, in another brief article, about the attack on the Tyllwyd gate and toll-house on
:
Destruction of Another Gate and Toll-House within Two Miles of Carmarthen.
A letter from Carmarthen on , says: “You will be astonished to hear, that notwithstanding our vigilance and precaution, notwithstanding the presence of forces which might well be supposed to frighten Rebecca and her family out of the county, or, at all events, into decent behaviour, that ubiquitous person and her vagabond family came last night within two miles of our county town, and on the main road, destroyed the Ty Llwyd gate.”
From the Cambrian comes this account of the examination of Rebeccaite prisoners.
This part of the examination mostly concerns attempts to bail out the prisoners, but also touches on the national publicity and local concern about the proceedings.
Wednesday.
, the hall was as densely crowded as on the preceding day.
The following Magistrates were present:– Sir John Morris, Bart., in the chair; J.D. Berrington, Esq., Colonel Cameron, Rev. S. Davies, Rev. John Collins, L.Ll.
Dillwyn, Esq., John Grove, Esq., W.I. Jones, Esq., H. Lucas, Esq., J.N. Lucas, Esq., J.D. Llewelyn, Esq., C.H. Smith, Esq., and J.H. Vivian, Esq., M.P..
The prisoners were placed at the bar, and the charge read over to them.
Margaret Morgan, the daughter, was charged with having feloniously and maliciously assaulted and wounded Captain Charles Frederick Napier, with the intention of preventing Henry Morgan from being lawfully apprehended.
[The coverage of this hearing in the Monmouthshire Merlin says that this charge was against Esther Morgan.]
Morgan Morgan and Esther Morgan (the father and mother), and Rees Morgan, were charged with aiding and abetting Margaret Morgan, in the commission of the felony.
The nature of the charge was explained to the prisoners in Welsh, and the usual questions put, whether they intended making any statements — at the same time they were cautioned by being told that whatever they said would be used in evidence against them if necessary.
The prisoners, by the advice of Mr. Walters, declined making any statements.
They were then committed to take their trial at the next Assizes.
Morgan Morgan, and Esther, his wife, then bound themselves in the sum of 200l. each, and the two surities, Messrs.
Isaac Jones and Robert Williams, in the sum of 100l. each, to produce the two former at the next Assizes.
Rees Morgan and Margaret Morgan, also bound themselfes in the sum of 200l. and the two surities, the Rev. Daniel Davies, of Swansea, and Mr. Wm. Thomas, of Llangafelach, in 100l. each, to produce the prisoners at the next Assizes.
— The parties were then liberated.
[The Merlin adds: “The whole family were then discharged out of custody, and left the hall accompanied by large numbers, who pressed to shake hands and congratulate them.”]
Captain Napier was then bound over to prosecute, and Inspector Rees and Sergeant Jenkins to give evidence against the prisoners.
The Chairman then announced, that the Magistrates had come to a decision to liberate the parties who were in custody on a charge of destroying Rhydypandy and Bolgoed toll-bars, on their binding themselves respectively in the sum of 100l., and two responsible surities in 50l. each, to appear on
Mr. Walters applied to the Bench, for the liberation of John Morgan, the young man who had been wounded, and who was then in the Infirmary of the House of Correction, on his finding surities to the same amount as the others.
Mr. Attwood observed, that he was charged with a more serious offence than those who were in custody at the station-house, and who were charged with misdemeanor only.
The Chairman observed that as far as his own opinion went, unless there was a technical objection, the young man might be discharged on entering into the same recognizances as the rest of the family who were charged with a similar offence.
Mr. Attwood suggested that the only objection to the adoption of that course would be, because the rest of the family had been committed, whereas the case of John Morgan had not been heard.
Mr. Walters then stated that the medical men were of opinion that the young man was in a fit state to be brought forward, and that the investigation of the case should be proceeded with.
He (Mr. W.) would certainly prefer the adoption of that course, if bail could not be taken for his appearance whenever required.
The Chairman expressed his readiness to accede to Mr. Walters’s proposition of proceeding with the examination.
He would have admitted him to bail before examination were not that course informal.
The Government and the whole kingdom watched their proceedings, and it was necessary they should avoid any technical informality in their proceedings.
The Chairman then expressed his readiness to proceed to the Infirmary, and take the examination on .
After a lengthened conversation, the Chairman’s suggestion was agreed to.
The Chairman, and several of the other Magistrates, then proceeded to the Station-house, for the purpose of receiving bail for the appearance, on , of the parties charged with the destruction of the toll-bars.
Should the investigation be then proceeded with, we shall give a full account of the proceedings in our next publication.
— Each of the principals then entered into recognition in the sum of 100l. each, and the following surities in the sum of 50l. each:–
For Henry Morgan, Messrs.
Thomas Glasbrook and Joseph Rees; the same persons were surities for Matthew Morgan.
For Mr. William Morgan, of Bolgoed, Messrs.
Morgan Jones (Courtycarne), and Griffith Griffiths.
For Mr. David Jones, Messrs.
Isaac Thomas and Jacob Lewis, draper, Swansea.
For Mr. Griffith Vaughan, Messrs.
John Cadwallader and Wm. Sayer, of the Bush Inn; and for Mr. David [Daniel?
–♇] Lewis, Messrs.
John Alexander and Edward Williams.
The Chairman, and several of the Magistrates, then proceeded to the House of Correction, to take the examination of John Morgan, the young man who had been wounded.
After remaining for some time in the Committee-room, it was suggested that the Magistrates had better proceed to the bedroom, to avoid disturbing the invalid; to that suggestion the Chairman readily assented.
On our entering the room, the young man, who is fast returning to a state of convalescence, and did not appear very ill, though he was much paler than when in health, was preparing to meet the Magistrates, who desired him to return to his bed, when the depositions made on were read over to him, and explained in Welsh, by his attorney, Mr. Walters.
When asked if he wished to put any questions to Captain Napier, he stated in Welsh, that he did not attack Capt. Napier, but merely ran towards him, after having been wounded, to prevent his shooting him the second time.
That being a mere statement, Mr. Walters did not give it in English, but advised his client to say nothing at that time — His father, Mr. Morgan Morgan, then entered into recognizances in the sum of 200l., and Messrs.
Jacob Lewis and David Bevan, in 100l. each, for his appearance at the Assizes.
— The Magistrates then left.
An editorial dated from the Monmouthshire Merlin tells us a bit about the Rebecca movement (and a lot about the opinions of the editor):
Since our last publication, we have been at the “seat of war” against toll gates and toll exactions, and regret to find that an extensively organised and formidable system of Agrarian intimidation, violence, and outrage, is rapidly spreading.
The Government are adopting prompt and vigorous means to repress and punish those engaged in violence and outrages, and to enforce obedience to the laws.
Official persons of intelligence have been sent down from head quarters to the Principality, and a considerable military force, under active officers, are at hand, to carry out the measures deemed necessary to be adopted by the civil authorities.
We trust, however, that the just and prudent course of investigating the causes of this deep and general dissatisfaction in Carmarthenshire and the neighbouring counties, will be forthwith adopted, with a view of an immediate and searching redress of those grievances, which every unprejudiced person, conversant with the state of large portions of South Wales, admit, are oppressive and unjust to the poor.
Confidence in being able to crush with the strong arm of military power, should not induce an apathy to the complaints of the people.
Whilst riotous farmers are hunted down, the unjust farmers of tolls and trustees of roads, should not be suffered to plunder the poor with impunity.
Wherever you turn, with whomsoever of the rural classes you converse, in the disturbed districts, sad complaints of the inflictions upon the struggling poverty and honest industry, reach your ear; whilst the outcries against road trustees, charged with illegal toll exactions, and the “unfeeling plunderers” of the small farmers (a class exceedingly needy in Carmarthenshire) by side bars, are so general as to induce a conviction on the mind that a great wrong has made Rebeccaites of the great bulk of the population.
With the existence of such a feeling and such sympathies over the length and breadth of whole counties, it is easy to assign good cause for the Government declining to send Rebecca rioters for trial by Carmarthenshire juries.
It is easy to account for the extreme difficult of obtaining evidence against the nocturnal Guerrillas.
It is easy to account for the effectiveness of spies on the movements of the military, and the vigilance which protects what is deemed the popular cause, against the surprise of a preventive force.
An intelligent correspondent writes thus:–
Although the dragoons are on the saddle every night, scouring the country, they happen to be always in the wrong place, and the work of outrage continues not only undiminished, but with increased and increasing audacity.
On Thursday, for instance, the dragoons started with Captain Edwards, of Rhydygorse, a magistrate at their head, and proceeded to Llangewilly; but while they were thus engaged the Rebeccaites entered the ancient town of Kidwelly, eight miles from Carmarthen, where they had previously pulled down the gate, and at which a temporary one with iron bars had been erected; they broke down the iron posts, destroyed the gate, and then proceeded to demolish the toll-house.
Having finished the work of destruction, they piled up the timber which had been used in the building of the toll-house, and placed the broken gate upon it, set fire to it and burned it to ashes.
This was done in the precincts of the town containing hundreds of inhabitants.
The outrage was perpetrated by comparatively a very small number of persons, and yet not a single inhabitant interfered to prevent the work of destruction.
While this was going on at Kidwelly, Prendergast-gate, situate at Haversfordwest, was destroyed in the most daring manner, while the military were in the town, but not a single person gave them the slightest hint of what was going on.
And again,
Intelligence having been received (says the writer) that it was intended to make attacks on several gates during the night, and that the village of Porthrhyd had been threatened to be set on fire, Colonel Love immediately issued orders for the Dragoons to patrol the whole of the roads leading to the places threatened, and for this purpose they were divided into six section, who at once scoured the roads from Llandovery, Llandillo, and around Carmarthen.
The troop had not, however, traversed more than three miles on the road from Carmarthen, before it became evident that they were watched from the hill tops, and shortly after two signal guns were heard.
Within an hour after the troop of Dragoons had passed through the Bethania-gate, which is almost immediately above the hill called Pumble, on the road leading to Llanon, a sky-rocket was sent up from one of the hills in the neighbourhood, and in a few minutes several large bonfires were lit on the various hills around, as answers to the signal given by the firing of the rocket.
The consequences of these signals soon manifested themselves to the inhabitants of the surrounding country by the almost instantaneous appearance of about 1000 men, colliers and others, who appeared to be in a well-organised condition.
It will be seen that the followers of Rebecca have commenced the levelling system in Glamorganshire, and that in the execution of a warrant for the capture of a person charged with a participation in the pulling down of Bwlgoed and other toll-gates in the neighbourhood of Swansea, a violent and savage assault was committed on a most meritorious office and his assistants, in the discharge of their duty.
As we have given details of the event in this paper, we shall not dwell further, at present on the nature of popular discontents in Wales, but proceed to one of the great causes of our adversity…
Here, the editorialist returns to a favorite topic: decrying the government’s stubborn tariff policy, which has made it impossible for local Iron to compete on the international market.
Mr. Hall, chief magistrate of Bow-street police-office, leaves town this morning, by the direction of Government, for Wales, for the purpose of instituting a rigid and searching inquiry and examination into all the circumstances connected with the “Rebecca riots” and disturbance in that part of the kingdom.
We understand Mr. Hall will be accompanied by one or more legal gentlemen from London to assist in the inquiry.
— Standard. — [We understand that Mr. Hall passed through Swansea for Carmarthenshire.]
Swansea, .
The town presents a most animated appearance: the usually quiet inhabitants are all on the qui vive: gay military uniforms enliven the streets; grave officials from Downing street are seen chatting in little clusters; the inns are all crowded; bold Dragoons are going round with their billets, and the enlivening military bugle is heard at intervals.
Another troop of the 4th Dragoons have arrived, and are to remain for some time.
A force of artillery is hourly expected; and indeed, the report is credited in well-informed circles, that ere long there will be nearly a thousand soldiers in Carmarthenshire and Glamorganshire.
The service is not uninteresting or unexciting in these picturesque districts at present; but when winter comes on, if Rebecca do not go off her evil ways, it will be worse than private-still hunting in Ireland.
Mr. Maule, solicitor to the Treasury, and his assistant, are at the Mackworth Arms: he is without Jock Campbell this time, who did the Crown business with him in , at Monmouth.
A meeting of the magistrates has this evening taken place at the Mackworth Arms, at which were present, Mr. Talbot, M.P., Mr. L.W. Dillwyn, Mr. Dl.
Llewelyn, Mr. Vivian, M.P., Dr. Hewson, Mr. T.E. Thomas, Mr. John Grove, Rev. J. Collins, Rev. S. Davies, Colonel Jones, and others.
Colonel Love and Captain Napier were, we understand, at the conference.
One of the most important and startling events of the week is the seizure of a case of arms: the case contained 12 rifles, and a quantity of bullets, copper caps, &c. This dangerous and alarming consignment was directed to Mr. Griffith Vaughan, landlord of the Pontardulais Inn, Carmarthenshire, one of the persons now out on bail, charged with a participation in the pulling down of the Bwlgoed gate, and the charge against whom is to be heard .
The Government had intimation of the nature of the importation at the port of Swansea, and “stopt the supplies.”
It is currently bruited abroad that Sir James Graham has written a letter, couched in anything but complimentary terms, to the authorities, for not remanding, instead of liberating on bail, the parties brought before them last week.
This great statesman, who wears the robe of office turned inside out, has no just grounds for blaming magistrates who acted constitutionally.
The right hon. baronet may, perhaps, like the Castlereagh doctrine of a “vigour beyond the law.”
That very disinterested demagogue, Feargus O’Connor, is said to be here, from Merthyr, and it is also said that the men employed in the copper works will “strike” at the forthcoming reduction in wages of 12½ per cent.
When I compare the wages of these men, say an average of £1 per week, and in some instances, from £2 to £3, with the starving stipend of the colliers, which is from 4 to 5 shillings per week, with 2 shillings for a boy, I think the copper men are unreasonable; and in the present stagnant state of trade, I deem it probable that the master smelters will not regret the turn-out, should it come, as it is well known to every person conversant with the trade, that they are absolutely losing by every ton of copper now made.
I hear this evening with extreme regret, that instead of setting at once about a redress of grievances in Carmarthenshire, a rate of 3d in the pound is about to be enforced for a rural police.
I shall not write about the expediency of the latter measure, but I am quite sure that heavy wrongs promptly call for the former.
Scores of the small farmers and the suffering peasantry are in a deplorable state–
“Need and oppression stare within their eyes,
Contempt and beggary hang upon their backs; The world is not their friend, nor the world’s law.”
The preliminary hearing in the first big Rebeccaite criminal trial began on .
Here’s how The Cambrian covered it:
The examination of the parties charged with having been concerned in the destruction of the above toll-bars took place at the Town-hall, Swansea, on .
In consequence of an announcement, that the proceedings would commence at , the hall was completely filled long before the Magistrates, who held a private meeting previous to the examination, had taken their seats.
Soon after , Capt. Napier announced to the prisoner’s attornies, reporters, and others who were anxiously waiting in the large hall, that the Bench was ready to proceed with the examination in the small petty sessions room.
An instantaneous rush took place from the hall to that room, so that every avenue was immediately filled.
The Magistrates occupied the whole of the table, and consequently there was not the slightest accommodation either for the attornies engaged or the individuals connected with the press.
Mr. Tripp, after remarking upon the inconvenience of conducting the examination in that confined room, expressed a hope that the Magistrates would consent to adjourn to the large hall.
J.D. Llewelyn, Esq., on behalf of the Magistrates, expressed their willingness to do any thing for the accommodation of the public, but they had come to an unanimous decision of holding the examination in that room, in consequence of the very unseemly manifestations of feeling evinced by the crowd at the last examination, which had a tendency to defeat the ends of justice.
Still, the Magistrates were quite willing to adjourn to the hall (though they were not bound to give publicity to their proceedings) provided no similar demonstrations would recur.
The Magistrates then adjourned to the Hall.
The following gentlemen formed the bench on the occasion:—
Sir John Morris, Bart., in the Chair.
J.D. Berrington, Esq.
J.D. Llewelyn, Esq.
Col. Cameron.
Griffith Llewellyn, Esq.
The Rev. John Collins.
Robert Lindsay, Esq.
The Rev. S. Davies.
J.N. Lucas, Esq.
L.Ll. Dillwyn, Esq.
Henry Lucas, Esq.
Richard Franklyn, Esq.
C.H. Smith, Esq.
John Grove. Esq.
T. Edw. Thomas Esq.
The Rev. W. Hewson, D.D.
Henry Thomas, Esq.
W.I. Jones, Esq.
J.H. Vivian, Esq., M.P.
Mr. Maule, the Government Solicitor, said that he would not trouble the Bench with a statement, but go through a regular examination, and leave the prisoners, by their attornies, exercise their right of cross-examining; but, in addition to the depositions against the defendants, David Jones, Wm. Morgan, Daniel Lewis, and Griffith Vaughan, there was another circumstance which affected one of them — that was Vaughan.
That circumstance had recently come to light, and until it was satisfactorily explained, be would call upon the Magistrates to give it its due weight and effect.
The fact he alluded to was, that a few days ago, a case arrived by steam-packet from Bristol; the agent to the steamer had received it from the railway carriers at Bristol.
It was addressed to Mr. Griffith Vaughan, and after he had been taken into custody, the order for the contents of the case had been countermanded.
That circumstance excited suspicion, and the case was consequently detained and examined, and upon examination it was found to contain fire-arms and ammunition — there were about a dozen guns, some of which were double barrelled, a brace of pistols, and a number of percussion caps. Now, that seemed to him (Mr. Maule) to be rather an alarming fact, and unless it could be explained, it was a fact which must affect the defendant.
He should submit that circumstance, together with the depositions, to the attention of the Magistrates.
Mr. Tripp requested Mr. Maule to state the charge.
Mr. Maule stated, that he charged the defendants under a statute of 7th and 8th Geo. 4th, which was to the effect that, if any person broke down or destroyed any turnpike-gate, bar, chain, or any toll-house, so as to prevent the collection of tolls, and allow passengers to pass without paying, such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanour and punished accordingly.
He charged the four defendants with having been concerned in the destruction of the Bolgoed Gate, on ; and if that charge should be brought home, the statute enacted, that they should be guilty of a misdemeanour.
Mr. Maule then called John Jones.
The Chairman:– Can you speak English?
Witness (in English): “No, Sir” (laughter.)
Mr. Tripp said he understood English well, and it would be a convenience if he gave evidence in English.
The Chairman observed, that a Welshman who spoke English imperfectly always preferred giving evidence in his native tongue.
He (the Chairman) could understand and speak French, still, if in a court of justice, he would insist on his right of giving evidence in English.
Mr. Glasbrook was then sworn interpreter.
John Jones was then examined:– I live in Cwmsciach, in the parish of Llangafelach, in this county.
I am a labourer, and the place where I reside is about two miles distant from Bolgoed gate, which, I believe, is in the parish of Llandilo-talybont, in this county.
I was out on the night of when the gate was destroyed.
I saw the gate destroyed .
The house was pulled down with pickaxes, and the gate cut with saws.
The parties engaged in the destruction of the toll-house and gate were counted previous to leaving, and they amounted to some hundreds.
I know there must be hundreds of men there.
I did not see any women.
I believe there were both old men and young men present.
There was something peculiar in the dress of all.
Some had white shirts on, and others had women’s bed-gowns about them.
They also wore women’s caps on their heads.
Some of them were armed.
I cannot say how many.
There might have been a hundred guns there.
They were principally single-barrel guns, but some of them were double-barrelled.
They had several hand-saws, a cross-saw, and pickaxes.
They cut the toll-bar with cross-swords and hand-saws, and the toll-house they destroyed with pickaxes by undermining it, and taking out the lower stones with pickaxes.
When the toll-house and gate were being destroyed there was a continual firing of guns.
They were occupied for about ten minutes in destroying both the toll-house and the toll-bar.
Some of the parties also had their faces disguised by having some kind of handkerchiefs tied around their heads, and hanging like veils over their faces.
I did not observe that any of them had their faces blackened.
One of the persons rode on a white horse.
The men addressed the person on horseback by the name of “mother.”
I was near enough to the person they call “mam” (mother) to hear them talk lo him.
They were consulting with each other if it was time to go.
That was before the gate and toll-house were demolished.
It was the man on horseback that asked the men if it was time to go.
They replied that they thought it was time for them to go.
The person on horseback had a white shirt put over his clothes.
He had also a cap and bonnet on his head.
He gave them directions, and made a short speech.
That man was the prisoner Daniel Lewis.
I should know him if I saw him.
This is the man (pointing to Daniel Lewis.)
I had known him before that night.
I know him to be a weaver, and that he lives near the Goppa, but I do not know in which house.
The Goppa is near the Pontardulais road.
I had seen him frequently before, but do not know how often.
I had been acquainted with him for three or four years.
I saw more persons whom I knew among the mob.
I saw Mr. Griffith Vaughan, of the Pontardulais Inn.
I see Mr. Vaughan now.
He was among the crowd.
He had a gun in his hand.
I do not know whether it was a double or single-barrelled gun.
He was dressed in some kind of a white shirt, a cap, and a bonnet.
He fired several shots from the gun.
It might be twice or thrice during the time the others were destroying the gate.
I saw nothing in Daniel Lewis’s hand.
I saw others whom I knew besides Lewis and Vaughan.
I saw David Jones, of Dantwyn, present.
His father is a farmer.
Dantwyn is about a mile distant from the Bolgoed bar.
He was also dressed in a while shirt, a cap, and a bonnet, and had a double-barrelled gun.
He fired more than once, but I cannot say how often.
That was during the time the others were engaged in destroying the toll-house and gate.
I also saw John Morgans, of Bolgoed.
I know his name is Morgans.
I know him well.
[Mr. Tripp observed that his name was William.]
— He is a farmer, and lived at Bolgoed.
He was dressed in a similar manner to the others.
He fired a gun three or four times.
There were neither shoutings or noise then.
They were not speaking, only firing.
I became acquainted with David Jones in the last winter, when I met him out sporting.
I have known William Morgans for the last ten years.
I partly know from where the crowd came.
I first met them on the lowest part of Goppa mountain.
This was .
I accompanied them to the gate, but did not speak to one of them.
Their numbers increased as they went on.
They sat down on the mountain, and others came from all parts to join them.
I understood where they were going to.
They said they were going to break the Bolgoed bar.
I had my coat turned inside out.
I also put a handkerchief about my face.
I did it for the purpose of being like the others.
I had been on an errand, and saw two persons who were going there.
I had previously heard that they intended destroying the gate, but I had not heard the night.
They did not remain a minute after they had destroyed the gate.
They went together to the side of the Bolgoed mountain.
They then pulled the bonnets, &c. from their heads and dispersed throughout the neighbourhood.
I then went home.
I do not remember that I saw Lewis after I saw him by the gate.
Cross-examined by Mr. Tripp, who appeared for David Jones and Wm. Morgans, and, in conjunction with Mr. Walters, on behalf of Dl. Lewis:— I was with my father during a part of that day.
I was at home during a very short portion of the day.
I was not at home after seven or eight o’clock in the morning.
I will swear I slept at home on the preceding night.
I then went to Gellywran-issa, where my father resides; I remained there until the evening.
I do not remember the hour I left.
I did not return to my own house when I left Gellywran-issa.
From my father’s house I went on an errand to my brother’s. My brother’s name is Richard Jones, he lives at Llanedi, in Carmarthenshire — that is about four miles distant from my father’s house; it may be five miles distant, or more.
I reached there about dusk.
It may be six, seven, or eight o’clock; I should think it might be about seven o’clock; I do not know when.
I will swear it was not nine or ten o’clock it was not quite dark.
I had left my father’s house between four and five o’clock.
I did not call at any house between my father’s and my brother’s house; I went direct from my father’s to my brother’s house.
I met several persons on the road, but I do not remember who they were.
I did not speak to one.
I do not recollect having met any person whom I knew; I will not swear I did not.
When I arrived at my brother’s, I saw my brother and his wife, his daughter, and the servant — the latter was in the kitchen; the child was with her in the kitchen, and no other person.
My brother was not in in the house when I arrived, but came in there about an hour afterwards, accompanied by his wife.
I remained there until it was dark.
I might have remained in my brother’s house for about three hours.
When in my brother’s house I saw no person but those named.
The Chairman now asked Mr. Tripp, what course he intended pursuing with the defence?
Mr. Tripp, in reply, said, he did not exactly know at that period of the proceedings, but if the Chairman’s object in putting the question was for the purpose of sending all the witnesses who might be called for the defence out of Court, on the part of his clients he was very willing it should be done.
Mr. Maule observed, that it was usual to do so.
The witnesses were then ordered to leave the Court.
The cross-examination was then proceeded with:— The errand, to perform which I left my father’s house, was to consult with him about my going there to mow hay.
I went there on my own account, and not for any one.
I consider that to be an errand.
When I left my brother’s, I went to the Hendy-gate, and thence to Pontardulais, and from thence to the Farmer’s Arms, and was on my way home.
I had heard that the Bolgoed bar was to be destroyed on that night, but I did not know for a certainty.
I saw the two persons, who were going to break the gate, going through the fields before me — I did not speak to them.
I thought they were going to Bolgoed, because one had a white dress on, and the other a bedgown.
When first I saw them, they had those dresses about them.
I did not walk with them, but after them.
I followed them until the wooden bridge, near the factory.
I do not know that I saw them afterwards.
I will swear that I did I not see their faces.
I then went to Goppa Mountain; I saw scores of persons there.
I have disclosed to the Magistrates the names of all the parties whom I knew were present at the destruction of the gate and toll-house.
When I first saw them, they were sitting down — some were standing.
I sat down above them all.
I did not hear them talk, as they were talking in a subdued tone.
I was near enough to hear, if they had spoken aloud.
I remained there for about half an hour.
During that time the numbers increased.
Becca was calling upon them, throughout all the neighbourhood.
When they left the mountain, they amounted to some hundreds; I was then in the midst of them.
I well understood that they were going to destroy Bolgoed.
One rose upon his feet, and said to me, “You know where we are going — it is to break down the Bolgoed-gate.”
It was Becca that said that.
I knew who Becca then was, but not so exact as afterwards.
I suspected it was Daniel Lewis; I knew him by his voice, but at the gate I saw his face.
I had heard all the neighbourhood say that Daniel Lewis was to act Rebecca’s character.
I had not heard that he was generally Rebecca, but that he was to be so on that night.
I heard that a week or a fortnight before, but cannot name any person who said so.
I will positively swear that I heard Daniel Lewis was to be there, on that night, from a great number of persons.
I do not remember one of the persons who told me so.
I turned the sleeves of my coat by the factory, about three quarters of a mile from the Goppa mountain.
I disguised my face when first I saw them; I used my neckcloth for that purpose.
I turned my coat after I saw the two men disguised.
I did so because I had heard they had done so in Carmarthenshire and I went to see them breaking the gates.
I think all those assembled on the mountain were disguised.
I named all I knew to the Magistrates; I cannot say how many I knew, but I knew many of them — perhaps about six, including the four prisoners.
I did not positively recognize one of them on the mountain.
While on the mountain, one of the persons stretched his hand towards me, but I did not know him.
No person spoke to me.
I heard conversations between several of them.
I was within three or four yards of the toll-house when it was demolished.
I was standing near, looking at them.
I have said that they were about ten minutes destroying the gate and toll-house; it might have been fifteen minutes.
I had seen and known David Jones previous to last winter, but not so well as afterwards; I never spoke a word to him in my life; I only know him by sight.
I first knew Morgans when he was in the employment of Mr. Griffiths, of Penrhiew, at Swansea.
I reside in a house in the Sciach valley; it is a poor house.
I cannot name the day or week I heard that a reward was offered for the apprehension of the Rebeccaites — I cannot say how long before last Saturday week; I had heard some days before.
I first mentioned what I have sworn to to-day, to Mr. Rees.
Inspector of Police, last Saturday week.
I had business at Swansea.
I intended buying plates there.
Near Mr. Attwood’s office.
I had heard speaking about the Rebeccaites.
Mr. Tripp:— What did you tell Mr. Rees?
Mr. Maule objected to that question.
It was quite unusual to ask witness what they had told any person with a view of comparing it with his evidence.
The examination was proceeded with after a short discussion.
I did not name to Mr. Rees the parties whom I have mentioned to-day.
Mr. Rees desired me to accompany him to Mr. Attwood’s office.
Mr. Attwood sent for two Magistrates, who arrived there.
I was examined before them, and I believe my examination was taken down in writing.
When speaking to Mr. Rees, I believe not a word was spoken about the reward.
I then knew that a reward was offered.
I think I had asked Rees if I would be free if I informed about others.
Mr. Rees said I would have the reward if I could make out who had broken the gates.
I do not remember all the conversation between me and Mr. Rees, but I think something might have passed about the reward.
I have no doubt of it.
You must have heard if I said that not a word had passed between us.
— [The witness was also cross-examined as to whether any person had influenced him to become informer on this occasion, which he strongly denied, and stated that he gave the information of his own accord, uninfluenced by any one.
— During his examination, the witness said, that if his word was doubted, the Magistrates might sign two warrants, and he would produce two witnesses who would confirm his statements in every particular.]
Mr. Jeffreys, on behalf of Mr. Vaughan, cross-examined the witness:— I have known Mr. Vaughan for some years.
I do not remember that I ever spoke to him.
I believe I was in his shop some years ago.
I think his shop was in a street called High-street.
I have been often in Swansea.
I do not know the names of the streets.
On the night in question I was within two yards of Mr. Vaughan.
I did not exchange a word with any one by the gate — nor on the mountain.
In leaving the gate I spoke to two men after they had taken off the covering from their faces.
It was a dry light night.
I do not remember that it was a moon light night.
It might have been.
I know Mr. William Jones, of Rhyd.
I spoke to him in coming from the lime-pits a few days after the destruction of the gate.
It might have been a week after.
I spoke to him on two occasions, but only once upon that subject.
I will not swear it was not on the next day.
I did not tell him whom I saw, but that I witnessed the destruction of the gate.
I did not say I was close to them, or that I was at a distance from them.
I did not tell him that I knew any of them, We had no conversation as to the parties who were present.
William Jones did not ask me where I met the Rebeccaites, but I said I had seen them breaking the gate.
He said, “where were they?
If I knew where they were, I would go with them.”
I did not say I did not go near them as I was afraid of them, or any thing to that effect.
I did not say I turned off the road as soon as I had a place to turn.
I did not tell him that I could not recognize one of them, nor did I say they had come from Carmarthenshire, as I knew better.
I was brought before the Magistrates about six years ago for cutting birch.
I was compelled to pay a fine on that occasion.
Cross-examined by Mr. Walters, on behalf of Daniel Lewis.
I do not hold any land.
I was working with my father for three or four days in the week I gave the information.
On the previous week I also worked with my father, perhaps during the whole week.
I was working with Mr. Williams, of Penyfidy, on the week before.
I used to mow for my brother, and my brother for me.
I lived for the last six weeks in a barn belonging to Morgan Pugh.
I had left Pwllfa.
I was turned out of that house.
I had not occupied the farm since Michaelmas.
I wished to have a house near the mountain for the purpose of keeping cattle, otherwise I had the offer of many houses.
I wished to live in a house near Rhosfawr, and Mr. Powell told me that he intended making the two houses into one.
I went to bed about .
That was the first time I returned home after leaving on the previous day.
In leaving the gate I met a man on Goppa Mountain.
When I returned to my house I saw no person, as they had all gone to bed.
I did not see Morgan Pugh.
I know Mr. John Williams, of Penyfidy.
I had some conversation with him shortly after the gate was destroyed.
I did not tell him that I was at a distance from the gate.
I named to Mr. Williams, at that time, the persons whom I have named to day.
I did not tell him that I did not know one of them.
In coming to the gate the four defendants turned the covering they had on their faces on one side, and afterwards returned to shoot.
Re-examined by Mr. Maule:– Mr. Williams, of Penyfidy, is a farmer.
I do not remember whether he or myself commenced the conversation.
What I told Williams was in reply to questions put by him.
Mr. Williams did not express his regret that this disturbance had taken place.
Mr. Williams seemed rather to advocate the parties who had broken the gate.
— William Jones is a small farmer and a publican, and is generally called William, of Rhyd.
The information I communicated to him was in answer to questions put by him to me.
He made no observations expressive of regret at what had occurred, but appeared very partial to Rebecca’s doings.
Mr. J. Naish Smart was then called by Mr. Maule.
Mr. Jeffreys stated, that if the witnesses were called to prove the arrival of a case of arms, he would object to his evidence, as Mr. Vaughan denied having anything to do with the arms in question.
It was also irrelevant to the case, for the arrival of arms would be no proof that Mr. Vaughan had destroyed the gate.
Mr. Maule insisted upon the necessity of calling the witness.
It was most important that an explanation should be offered if that were possible, for it appeared in evidence that Mr. Vaughan, and a multitude of others had riotously assembled, armed with guns, and at the very time he was in custody on that charge, a case of guns and pistols arrived by packet and addressed to him and the order for which had been countermanded since he had been taken into custody upon the charge.
He would say that the Magistrates were bound to receive such evidence, though it was not yet complete as the order had not yet been proved; still he maintained, that it was closely connected with the circumstances of the case, inasmuch as it was evident that he collected arms for some purpose, though it might be no proof that he was present at the particular riot in question.
Mr. Tripp observed, that the evidence might effect his clients, and contended that it was no evidence relating to the destruction of the gate.
It was merely of a general character.
Mr. Maule said that it would not be made evidence against the other prisoners, but thought it of importance as far as it regarded Vaughan.
If the evidence would not be taken as it then stood, the only course would be to adjourn the investigation for the purpose of ascertaining the whole of the facts connected with the transaction.
The only evidence he could at present offer was, that the case had been addressed to Mr. Vanghan.
He was aware that it was necessary to prove some connection between Mr. Vaughan and the case, either by means of a written order or otherwise, as a case of arms might have been addressed to Vaughan by him (Mr. Maule) or any other person, though that would not be a very probable circumstance.
After some further discussion, the Magistrates admitted the evidence.
Mr. Smart’s examination was proceeded with.
He deposed to the following effect:– I am the agent for a Steam Packet Company in this town.
On , we received a case addressed to Mr. Griffith Vaughan, of Pontardulais.
It was received from Messrs.
Bland, who were the railway carriers.
It reached this town on the same day as it was put on board.
The witness read the extract from the manifest relating to the case as follows:– “Bland and Co., shippers, one case, Vaughan, near Swansea.”
Then follows amount of freight.
1s. 6d.; charges, 3s. total 4s. 6d..
The Mayor took possession of the case.
On I received a letter.
It was half-past eight o’clock on Sunday evening when I received it.
— [Letter produced].
It arrived by post, and was given me by Mr. Turner, who is also a steam-packet agent.
— [Mr Jeffreys having glanced over the letter, objected to its being admitted in evidence.]
— [The case was then produced].
It was addressed “G. Vaughan, Red Lion Inn, Pontardulais.”
Witness said that the first word after the name appeared Rich.
Upon the receipt of the letter, I wrote to the Clerk of the Magistrates.
Within five minutes afterwards, he came to the house where I board, and returned in company with the Mayor and Capt. Napier.
There were three or four policemen present.
Mr. Rees was one, and there was a Mr. Jones present.
The case was opened in my presence, and contained twelve fowling-pieces, one brace of pistols, a bullet-mould for the pistols, and ten or twelve boxes of percussion caps. There were three or four double-barrelled guns, and the rest were single-barrelled.
The contents after they had been inspected were replaced in the case, which was fastened up.
It is the practice to keep goods in the warehouse until called for.
I do not know in whose writing these letters are.
Some of the policemen took away the case.
Cross examined by Mr. Jeffreys:— The box was opened about [Mr. Jeffreys handed the witness a letter.]
This letter is in my hand-writing. it was written on .
[Mr. Jeffreys wished to put the Magistrates in possession of the letter, to show the course adopted towards Mr. Vaughan.]
I received no communication from Mr. Vaughan direct or indirect.
I received no answer from the letter addressed to Mr. Vanghan.
The letter referred to was to the following effect:–
County of Pembroke Steam Packet Office, Swansea, .
Sir, — A case arrived per County of Pembroke steamer on , addressed to you.
As we have but little room to spare in the warehouse, probably you will call or send for same at the earliest opportunity.
I am, Sir, yours, obediently, John Naish Smart. Mr. G. Vaughan, Pontardulais.
Mr. Tripp asked if there were any additional evidence against Vaughan?
Mr. Maule answered in the negative.
Mr. Jeffreys again begged leave to urge the objection made by him before, against admitting, as evidence, the circumstance of Mr. Vaughan being in possession of arms weeks after the occurrence had taken place upon which the charge was founded.
Mr. Maule:— “Weeks after.”
We must see what time the order was sent.
Mr. Jeffreys said, that be would be able, at a future period, to give a full and satisfactory explanation of circumstances attending the case of arms being addressed to his client.
The above was all the evidence offered on behalf of the crown.
Mr. Tripp, on behalf of David Jones and Morgan, submitted to the Bench, that the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution was not sufficient to warrant a committal.
The evidence given by John Jones fully established that, in point of law, he was an accomplice in the case, having formed a part of the company when they first started from the mountain — having accompanied them to the spot, and remained present during the whole of the time that the gate and toll-house were demolished.
It could, therefore, be safely said, that Jones was an accomplice to an equal degree with any of the other two hundred and fifty, stated to have been present, with the exception of those who were actually engaged in breaking up the gate, and pulling down the house.
It was therefore clear that Jones was an accomplice and it was equally clear that he was also an informer, and, in that character, he hoped to receive the reward offered for the apprehension of the parties.
He (Mr. Tripp) would therefore submit, that the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice would not justify the Bench in committing the parties for trial.
In support of that opinion.
Mr Tripp quoted a case from Carrington and Payne, and opinions given by Baron Alderson and Mr. Justice Bailey.
Mr. Walters urged similar objections, and contended that Jones was an accomplice in whatever aspect the question was viewed.
He had accompanied the party, disguised his face, and turned his coat.
It was evident that he had considered himself as such, for the first question he put to inspector Rees was, — Whether he should be free, if he informed on the others?
Supposing that Jones had been instructed by the Magistrates to disguise himself, and appear among the crowd for the purpose of bringing the offenders to justice, he would appear in quite a different character.
In that case, he would not have been an accomplice; he would have been present from understood pre-arrangement, but in that case there was no such arrangement.
He would not trouble the Bench by quoting any cases, as Mr. Tripp had quoted several high legal authorities, shewing with what caution the evidence of an accomplice should be taken.
The Magistrates ought not to be satisfied with a committal, on a primâ facie case, from the evidence adduced, but they should also be satisfied that the evidence was accredited.
Mr. Jeffreys, on behalf of Mr. Vaughan, contended that no primâ facie case had been made out.
Supposing Jones’s testimony to be creditable, there was no evidence that Vaughan was concerned in the demolition of the gate and house, but merely that he was present, as the witness himself was.
Mr. Maule replied to the observations made by the gentlemen who defended the prisoners.
He agreed with some of the remarks made, but the Magistrates could not assent to all of them, unless they had made up their minds to think that Mr. Smart and Jones were not creditable witnesses.
The gentlemen who defended the prisoners were entirely mistaken in the cases they had quoted.
If, instead of being before the Magistrates for examination, the prisoners were tried at the Assizes, the Judge had no power, in point of law, to reject the evidence of an accomplice, even though uncorroborated; but it was usual, unless circumstantially or directly corroborated, to recommend the jury to acquit the prisoner; yet that was a rule of discretion rather than a rule of law.
The question was, not whether there was sufficient evidence to convict the prisoners, but whether the account given by John Jones was sufficiently satisfactory to warrant the Magistrates to send the prisoners before another tribunal.
With respect to the witness being an accomplice, he (Mr. Maule) would observe, that there might have been accomplices in various degrees.
If that argument were to operate, there were many persons, besides John Jones, whose evidence would be rejected.
He alluded to parties, who might be mere spectators, encouraging others who were intent upon mischief.
Mr. Walters observed, that there was no difference between the case of Daniel Lewis and that of the witness Jones, with respect to the parts taken by them in the riot.
Mr. Maule was of opinion, that there was a material difference between the two cases.
Had Jones ridden on a while horse?
Had he acted the part of Rebecca, which Daniel Lewis seemed to have done to admiration?
Had the mob consulted Jones as to their manner of proceeding?
He had only turned his coat at that moment, but they were better prepared, having white shirts, caps, bonnets, and gowns.
Mr. Maule quoted several authorities, to prove that the evidence of an accomplice was sufficient to commit, and that it would be legal evidence before a jury.
The Magistrates would necessarily adopt one of three courses — either to acquit the prisoners, to commit them, or to adjourn the proceedings.
Mr. Maule proceeded at considerable length, replying to the observations made by Messrs.
Tripp, Walters, and Jeffreys.
Mr. Walters repeated his objections to committing on the evidence of an accomplice.
Col. Cameron read an opinion from a legal authority, to the effect that any person could be convicted on the evidence of an accomplice, provided the jury thought him worthy of belief.
Mr. Tripp observed, that prisoners formerly were convicted on the unsupported evidence of an accomplice, but that old rule was entirely abrogated.
Mr. Jeffreys hoped the Magistrates would entirely exclude from their minds the circumstance of the possession of fire-arms by the defendant Vaughan.
The Magistrates then retired to an adjoining room, and in a short time returned, when the Chairman said that the Magistrates had come to a determination to commit the prisoners.
Messrs.
Walters and Tripp then proposed calling witnesses for the defence, when Mr. Maule objected to hear, in a preliminary investigation before Magistrates, evidence to contradict statements made on behalf of the prosecution.
They could call evidence to prove that the witness was not worthy of credit, but not to contradict circumstances stated by the witness, for if the Magistrates decided upon the credibility of witnesses, they would be assuming the functions both of judge and jury.
After some further observations from Mr. Tripp and Mr. Maule, the following witnesses were called on behalf of the prisoners.
William Jones deposed to the following effect:– I reside at Rhyd.
I remember the time when the Bolgoed bar was broken.
I heard from some sort of a friend of mine that the gate was broken.
It was from John Jones, whom I met on the following day.
I was returning from the lime, and he was coming from Llandilo.
We were on the road between Glamorganshire and Carmarthenshire.
I had a conversation with him about Rebecca.
John Jones said that he had seen Rebecca on the previous night.
He said that she went before him from Pontardulais to Bolgoed.
I asked him if he did not go near them.
He said he was afraid to go near them — that they were walking before him, and he following.
He said that he was looking for a place to turn, and that at last he turned up by the Fountain Inn to the Goppa Mountain.
He said he looked down from the bank, and saw Rebecca on a white horse with a white dress.
I asked.
“Did you know none of them?”
He said.
I did not, and added, [“]I was glad to get out of their way.”
I asked.
“Did you not know one of them?”
He said, “No, not one of them.
I saw them going before me to Pontardulais, and heard them firing from Llandybie.”
— Mr. Jeffreys:– Are you sure that he is the man who was called as a witness to-day?
— Witness:– Good God, yes; do you think I would commit such a blunder as that.
(A laugh.)
Cross-examined by Mr. Maule:– I was returning from lime at the time.
I had not known before that time that the gate was broken down.
I believe I commenced the conversation about Rebecca by asking how it came on about Llandilo?
I was just asking for news.
I had been in Llandilo in .
I was curious to know how matters got on.
I had never heard of the intention of breaking down Bolgoed gate.
Jones might have been lagging behind me on the road for about two miles.
I mentioned this conversation to Mr. Llewellyn, of Cardinen, and to Mr. Williams, Clyn Castle, and another person.
I told Mr. Jeffreys the circumstance on .
Mr. Jeffreys sent for me.
I might have told a dozen more.
I cannot name any of them, but my wife.
I had a boy with me.
He was about eight years old, but did not appear to take notice of any thing.
John Williams, of Penyfidy, examined:— I am a farmer, and reside in the parish of Llangafelach.
I first heard of the destruction of Bolgoed gate from John Jones.
He spoke to me upon the subject .
In the conversation John Jones had with me he told me he had been with them breaking down the gate.
I asked John Jones if he knew one of them, and he said he did not know one living being.
I asked him if there were any gentleman present? and he answered that he could not say.
He did not name any of the four defendants.
Cross-examined:— The conversation took place at different times.
He spoke to me on two successive days.
He told me the same story both days.
I will swear he did not name either of the defendants.
I reside three miles distant from Bolgoed gate.
I will swear I had not heard of the destruction of the gate before he told me.
I mentioned the circumstance to my own family on that day, but not to any one else.
I think I was in Chapel on the Sunday following the destruction of the gale.
I attend Salem Chapel, which is between three and four miles from Bolgoed.
Mr. Tripp stated, that the next witness he intended calling, would prove that, from Jones’s general character, he was not worthy of credit.
Mr. Maule objected to evidence of that description being adduced before Magistrates.
Mr. Tripp replied, and quoted Phillips on Evidence in support of his opinion.
The following witness was then called—
Evan Roberts said:– I live at Llandimor, in the parish of Talybont.
I have known John Jones for the last twelve or fifteen years.
From his general character I would not believe John Jones on his oath.
Rees Morgan, who stated that he lived in Glyn Castle, in Llangafelach, said:— I have known John Jones for twenty-five years, and would not believe him on his oath.
Cross-examined:— I live about three miles from Bolgoed.
I do not remember the day of the month on which I first heard or the gate being broken down, but I was going to meet the boys coming from lime.
I am generally at home at night, and I think I can swear I was at home on the night the gate was destroyed.
I do not know what time of night I went home.
I will swear that I saw no person going to destroy the gate, until it was destroyed.
None of my family were out on the night the gate was destroyed.
John Joce Strick, Esq., examined:— I reside at Clydach.
I have known John Jones for three or four years.
I cannot say whether I would believe him on his oath.
I think that, from so much as I know of him, I would not believe him on his oath but I am not sufficiently acquainted with him to say so positively.
Richard Jones examined:– I reside in the parish of Llandilo, and am a brother to John Jones.
I heard of the day the gates was destroyed.
I do not remember seeing my brother on that day.
I do not think my brother was in my house on that day.
To the best of my recollection the last time previous to the time mentioned I saw my brother was about .
I saw him then on a Sunday.
I did not see him in the week the gate was destroyed.
Cross-examined:– I swear I did not see him — that he was not seen or my family would let me know.
I am a tenant of the Rev. Samuel Davies, to whom I pay ground-rent.
I also pay rent to Charles Vaughan.
I am not aware that he is any relation to Griffith Vaughan.
I am come here at the request of the young men.
I felt for them, as I thought they were not guilty.
They told me to swear nothing but the truth.
I had previously told them that my brother had not been in my house.
— There was nothing elicited in the remaining part of his cross-examination.
Mr. Tripp, on behalf of David Jones, offered to call witnesses of the highest respectability, who would prove that David Jones was at Neath on the night in question.
He knew the Magistrates were not bound to hear such evidence it was entirely at their discretion, but he hoped they would exercise that discretion in a favourable manner.
Mr. Maule stated at considerable length his objections to such evidence, which he had never known to have been received by Magistrates, who were not to decide upon the guilt or innocence of parties, but to send them before another tribunal.
In cases which were summarily disposed of by Magistrates they heard evidence for the prosecution or from the complainants, and also for the defence.
They also decided upon the guilt or innocence of the parties, and passed sentence.
In those instances Magistrates performed the functions of Judge and Jury, but such evidence could not be admitted in a case like that which was to be sent to the Sessions or Assizes.
Mr. Wallers replied, after which the Bench decided that the evidence offered to be adduced by Mr. Tripp could not be received.
The Chairman then slated that the Magistrates had come to the determination of committing the parties for trial at the Quarter Sessions.
Mr. Tripp hoped the Magistrates would allow the prisoners to chose the tribunal before which they should be tried, and that they would commit them for trial at the Assizes, where they should not only be tried before one of the Learned Judges of the land, but where they should have the assistance of able Counsel, who would do justice to their cases.
— The Bench assented to Mr. Tripp’s request.
On the usual question being put, each of the defendants declined making any statements, as they left the matter entirely to their attornies.
They were then committed for trial at the next Assizes; and having entered into recognizances to appear at that time, were liberated.
Swansea, . we attended at the Assize Court, at nine o’clock, in anticipation of an early commencement of the public business, but the magistrates remained in their private room , when it was officially announced to those in the great hall that the court was opened, that is, that the proceedings against the parties charged with the demolition of the Bwlgoed gate, were to take place in a small apartment, inconvenient to the magistrates, and insufficient to accommodate more than about 50 of the anxious public, when closely packed.
The assigned cause for this very unpopular arrangement, against which we heard the good citizens of Swansea and the visitors from distant parts, strongly and loudly declaim in the precincts of the court, where several “rate payers,” in the peace of our sovereign Lady the Queen, were constitutionally holding forth on the liberty of the subject, was, that on the former day of hearing, the feelings of the public in court were so loudly and irrepressibly expressed, that it was resolved to avoid such unseemly interruptions and annoyances this day, and thus give the people a “great moral lesson.”
No sooner, however, were the magistrates assembled, than the overwhelming heat produced by the closely-packed audience in a small apartment, rendered a motion by Mr. Tripp, the solicitor, for an adjournment to the capacious court, favourably entertained, and Colonel Cameron strongly expressing his disapprobation at the very limited accommodation, seconded by other gentlemen in the commission, the Assize Court was resorted to, which in a few minutes presented an exceedingly dense mass; the far greater proportion of which were farmers, and their country’s pride, a “bold peasantry,” here and there relieved by bright-eyed Cambrian mountain maids.
Pontardulais and its neighbourhood poured its almost entire population into Swansea; and as a “great demonstration” was expected to conduct the defendants (some of whom are great favourites in their respective localities) to the court house, a procedure properly prevented by their legal advisers, the streets were thronged from an early hour of .
The report (since authenticated) that on the previous night, Llanon toll house and gate, together with another “trust” in that locality, had been levelled with the dust, gave an additional interest to the proceedings of the day; whilst the presence, to prosecute, of Mr. Maule, of the Treasury, assisted by the able Mr. Haven, of the same Government department, brought to the Court House the most intelligent gentlemen of Swansea and its precincts.
The following magistrates took their seats on the bench… [omitted; the list is the same as above except that it contains “J.N. Miers” instead of J.N. Lucas, “J.W. Dilwyn” in place of L.Ll.
Dillwyn, and adds F.E. Leach, Esq.]
The following defendants were placed at the bar:– Griffith Vaughan, an exceedingly well-looking rustic, Daniel Lewis, an unsophisticated young farmer, charged with being the Rebecca of , and who would certainly look more effeminate than masculine as a petticoated and capped heroine, David Jones, a staid good humoured looking yeoman, and William Morgan, a merry-countenanced blade, who seemed anything but a fellow addicted to deeds of darkness.
All the reputed Rebeccaites were accompanied and cheered to the court by numerous friends, and seemed to think that it would be “all right.”
J. Ralley Tripp, — Jeffreys, and — Walters, Esqs., solicitors, defended the prisoners.
Mr. Maule rose and addressed the Bench to the following effect:– He had the honour to be engaged by the Crown in the conduct of the present proceedings against the persons who stood there charged with having taken part in the breaking down and destruction of a toll gale at Bwlgoed, distant about eight miles from Swansea.
The four persons then at the bar, named David Jones, William Morgan, Daniel Lewis, and Griffith Vaughan, had been liberated on bail, but this morning had surrendered, in order to have the charge against them investigated.
The witness, upon whose testimony proceedings had been taken against the defendants, would be placed in the box and examined before them, that being the most regular course.
The gentlemen who appeared on behalf of the defendants would then have an opportunity afforded them of cross-examining the witness, and of using every other means of defence which 1 the law placed at their disposal.
In addition to the facts which the witness Jones would prove, he (Mr. Maule) would be in a position to prove a circumstance of a peculiar nature affecting defendant Vaughan.
The circumstance he alluded to was of a most extraordinary character, but as it had only transpired within the last day or two, he (Mr. Maule) was not able to enter very fully into the details of the case.
He would, therefore, merely state that a day or two ago a case, containing arms, and addressed to Mr. Griffith Vaughan, Pontardulais, had been found at the warehouse of the Bristol Steam Packet Compaqny.
It would appear in evidence that after the case had arrived in Swansea, a letter, countermanding its delivery, was received at the packet warehouse.
That case was found to contain from ten to twelve guns, ammunition, caps, bullet moulds, &c., and a brace of pistols.
The defendant Vaughan might be in a position to explain satisfactorily the reason for having arms in such quantities directed to him, and he (Mr. Maule) hoped he would do so; but as the case stood, he was bound to ask the magistrates to admit that fact in evidence.
The degree of importance to be attached to it, he, of course, would leave to the Bench.
The prisoners stood charged with having been concerned in a public outrage committed some short time since.
The statute 7 and 8, Geo. Ⅳ., c 30, s 14. enacts— “That if any person shall unlawfully and maliciously throw down, level, or otherwise destroy, in whole, or in part, any turnpike gate, or any wall, chain, rail, post, bar, or other fence, belonging to any turnpike-gate, set up or erected to prevent passengers passing by without paying any toll, directed to be paid by any Act or Acts of Parliament relating thereto, or any house, building, or weighing engine, erected for the better collection, ascertainment, or security, of any such toll, every such offender shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted thereof, shall be punished accordingly.”
The several defendants were charged with having been participators in the destruction of a toll gate, called the Bwlgoed, on , and if the charge was substantiated, it would become the duty of magistrates to commit them for trial.
The learned gentleman then called John Jones, the informer, and on his appearance the indignation of the persons in the body of the court could scarcely be repressed by the officers; hisses were first loudly heard, and when calls of “order” and silence were authoritatively called, a slight under current of sibilations was muttered.
Jones was very firm and collected, and gave his evidence without apparent embarrassment.
He was examined by Mr. Maule.
The examination took place in the Welsh language, which was cleverly interpreted by Mr. Glasbrook, a respectable trader of Swansea.
Witness said that he lived at Cwm Skeach, in the parish of Langafelach, in this county: is a labourer, lives about two miles from the Bolgoed gate.
I was out when that gate was destroyed.
It was destroyed on .
I saw the gate destroyed between twelve and one o’clock somewhere.
It was calculated that there were about 250 people there.
I saw no women there.
Every one of them had something remarkable in their dress.
Some had white shirts on, and some had women’s bedgowns on.
They had women’s caps upon their heads.
I observed that some of the men were armed.
Perhaps there were a hundred guns there, some were double-barrelled.
They had pickaxes, handsaws, and cross saws with them.
They destroyed the toll-house by pulling it down with pickaxes.
While this was going on there was firing of guns all the time.
It took them about ten minutes to destroy the toll-house and toll-bar.
Besides the dresses which I have described, some of them had their faces disguised with some sort of handkerchiefs tied round their heads, and hanging over their faces like veils.
I did not observe that any of them had their faces blackened.
They were not all on foot, one was mounted on a white horse.
I heard the people address the man upon the horse.
They called him “mother.”
(Laughter.)
I was so near to them as enabled me to hear them talking.
I heard the people address the man upon the horse saying, “Is it time for us to go?”
I heard that before the house was pulled down.
The man on horseback asked them, “Is it time for us to go?”
An answer was made to that question.
They thought it was time for them to go.
The man on horseback had a white shirt over his clothes, a cap on his head, and a bonnet over the cap.
(A laugh.)
He spoke a few words to the people.
I know who that man was.
It was Daniel Lewis.
I should know him again if I were to see him.
[Witness then stood forward and pointed out the prisoner Daniel Lewis, who smiled derisively at witness.]
I knew him before that night.
He is a weaver, and resides near the Goppa, but I do not know in what house.
I saw Mr. Griffith Vaughan, of the Inn, there.
I mean the Pontardulais Inn.
I see Mr. Vaughan now in the hall.
He was in the middle of the crowd.
He had a gun with him.
He was dressed with some sort of a white shirt over him, and a cap and bonnet.
He fired the gun off two or three times while the people were destroying the toll-house and bar.
I saw David Jones, of Tantwm, there.
I see him here now.
He had a double-barrelled gun in his hand.
I saw John Morgan, of Bolgoed there; I see him here.
He was disguised like the others, and had a gun with him.
There were no shoutings or noises.
They were not speaking; only firing.
I joined them on the lower part of Mynydd-yy-Goppa, by Velin-ucha.
It was I joined them.
People came from all directions.
I learned where they were going to.
They said they were going to break the Bolgoed bar.
I had my coat turned inside out, and a handkerchief about my face.
After they had broken down the bar and the house they did not stop a minute, but every one went away to [t]he side of Bolgoed mountain again.
I went with them.
When they got to the side of the Bolgoed they drew off the things from about their heads, and scores of them went home.
They spread all over the neighbourhood, and dispersed.
I went home.
I do not remember having seen Daniel Lewis after I saw him by the gate.
Cross-examined by Mr. Trapp (who appeared for David Jones and William Morgan, and who throughout distinguished himself by evincing the ability of a lawyer, with the zeal of an advocate.)
I was with my father during ; that is not my home; I was not at home scarcely any time .
I was at home about but not afterwards that day.
I will swear I slept at home .
I reached my brother’s house in the evening.
Perhaps it might have been six, or seven, or eight o’clock.
Perhaps it was seven, I cannot say exactly.
I am prepared to swear it was not so much as nine or ten, it was something in the dusk of the evening.
It was not dark.
I left my father’s house between four and five o’clock.
I did not call at any house between my father’s and my brother’s. I went direct from one house to the other.
I know I did.
I met some people on the road, but I cannot say whom I met.
Do not recollect having met a single person that I know.
I will not swear that I did not meet some person that I knew.
When I arrived at my brother’s house I saw the servant.
I also saw my brother and his wife.
I saw no one else except my brother’s daughter.
I saw the servant in the kitchen doing the work of the house.
Only the child was in the kitchen at the time with the servant.
My brother was not in the house when I first arrived there, but came in about an hour afterwards.
He and his wife came in together.
I remained at my brother’s house till it was night, I remained there in all two or three hours.
I believe I was there three hours.
During the time I was in my brother’s house I saw no other person except my brother, his wife, daughter, and servant.
The witnesses were ordered to leave the court, but to remain within call.
Cross-examination resumed–
I had a message to my brother, when I left my father’s house on the night in question.
It was a message to talk to him about mowing hay.
I left my brother’s house for the purpose of returning home.
I had heard the Bolgoed bar was to be destroyed that night, but I did not know exactly.
I did not know what night it would be destroyed.
I saw the two persons who told me the bar was to be destroyed that night, going before me on a field near the Pontardulais factory — did not speak to them.
Knew they were going to the Bolgoed bar, because one had a white dress, and the other a bedgown on.
I do not know whether I saw them afterwards.
I did not know them, nor see their faces.
I afterwards found scores of people on the Goppa mountain.
I have disclosed to the magistrates the names of all the parties present at the Goppa that night, that I knew.
Stayed there as long as they stayed — perhaps half an hour.
Becca was calling upon them all the while.
There were some hundreds there when we left the mountain.
One rose on his feet and said– “You know where we are going?
We are going to break down the Bolgoed gate.”
Becca said that — Becca was Daniel Lewis.
I saw his face at the gate, and suspected his voice on the mountain — had heard all the country say it was Daniel Lewis to be there that night as Becca.
I disguised my face when I was near to them — when I saw them.
It was after I saw two men I turned my coat sleeves.
I thought I should see the Rebeccaites — it was night, but not very dark.
I knew many of them.
I went with all of them to the gate.
I could not swear to one of them on the mountain.
I was within a few yards from them when they commenced breaking down the toll house.
I stood by looking at them — it was all done in about ten or fifteen minutes.
I live in Cwm Skuach, in some sort of a little, poor house.
I first mentioned this to Mr. Rees, the inspector of police.
I left home last Saturday week, to transact business in Swansea, and I wanted a scythe.
I told Mr. Rees, Becca broke the gates of our country, but did not tell him the names I mentioned here .
Went with him to Mr. Attwood’s office, and two magistrates came there, who examined me.
In speaking to Rees not a word passed about the reward — knew one had been offered.
Believe I asked him if I should be free if I were to inform on others.
He told me I should have it if I could make out who broke the gates.
No doubt something was said about the reward, when talking with Mr. Rees.
Cross-examined by Mr. Jefferys on behalf of Griffith Vaughan–
I have known Mr. Vaughan for some years, but do not remember having ever spoken to him.
On the night in question I was within two yards of Mr. Vaughan.
It was a dry, light night — not moonlight, I think — the stars were shining.
I know Mr. William Jones, of Rhyd, and had a conversation with him after the gate was broken down — did not tell him whom I had seen in the night, but told him I saw the breaking of the Bolgoed gate.
I did not tell him I knew any of the men — he did not ask me.
I did not say I did not go near them, because I was afraid of them.
He said — The devil! if I was to find them, I would go near them.
I was brought before the magistrates for cutting birch about six years ago, and paid a fine.
Cross-examined by Mr. Walters, on behalf of Daniel Lewis–
I was working with my father before I gave this information.
I worked with Mr. Williams, of Penyfiddy, the week before the week I worked with my father.
I was working two days in exchange with my brother — he came with me two days to mow hay, and I went with him two days to mow hay.
I have lived in Morgan Pugh’s barn six weeks.
I went to bed about two at morn after the gate was broken — all were gone to bed.
I did not tell Mr. Williams I was at a distance from the gate at the time it was broken.
Re-examined.
Mr. Williams is the son of Ynisfawr, and is a farmer.
William of Rhyd told me that he was very willing for the gates to be pulled down.
The whole of the evidence was then read over and explained to the witnesses.
The same paper also covered the part of the examination concerning the arms shipment.
It is similar to the coverage in The Cambrian, although much less extensive about the nature of the objections from the defense.
It also reports the testimony about whom the case was addressed to as “G. Vaughan, Rich Lyon, Ponterdulais, near Swansea” while The Cambrian reports it as “G. Vaughan, Red Lion Inn, Pontardulais” but adds “Witness said that the first word after the name appeared Rich.”
That article also covered the examination of the witnesses called by the defense to impeach the credibility of the prosecution’s main witness.
It is more perfunctory in general than the report in The Cambrian.
The way it reported John Joce Strick’s brief testimony was different in a somewhat interesting way:
I reside at Clydach, and have known John Jones for three or four years.
I would not credit his oath after the way in which he has treated me.
The night of this trial (if I have the difficult-to-interpret chronology correct), there were more toll gate attacks.
A later issue of the Monmouthshire Merlin reported:
Swansea, . The Rebeccaites have brought the anti-toll-gate war literally to the gates of this town, and the audacity of the movement has astonished the natives.
Notwithstanding the strong garrison of soldiers, and numerous police force, with us, the midnight levellers , in considerable numbers, destroyed the Ty Coch gate and two other bars, situated about half a mile from the Town Hall.
On going to the scene of Rebecca’s misdeeds , the work of ruin appeared effectively done: the heavy posts were sawed down nearly to the level of the road; bars were wrenched from their hinges, and cast upon a neighbouring lime-kiln, where they were partially burned, and every part of the “trust” evidenced the determined purpose of the malefactors, whose display of wantonness of power has annoyed the authorities exceedingly.
Ty Coch, which is a sort of suburb, is separated from the town of Swansea by the river, which is crossed at the ferry side by a floating bridge.
In the very centre of this village, completely surrounded by habitations, is a toll house, to which two gates are attached, called the Ty Coch gates.
It appears that at nearly , the woman who is the toll-keeper, was alarmed by a noise outside, and immediately afterwards the window of the toll house was broken in; being very much frightened, she remained in bed, but shortly afterwards the door was violently burst open.
She then rushed out of the house, and saw 30 or 40 men in the road, and found that the gates had been broken down.
She screamed out murder! as loud as she could, when a man rushed at her with an iron bar, and struck her a violent blow on the arm, which inflicted a serious wound.
She then succeeded in re-entering the toll-house, and closed the door, which was endeavoured to be forced, and was split in pieces.
She again rushed out and screamed, on which the men all ran away.
It was then found that the posts of the gate had been sawn off, and the gate itself thrown on a lime kiln, where it was burnt.
They not only demolished these two gates, but also a bar about one hundred yards from Ty Coch.
They were not disguised, but dressed in their usual dresses, those of workmen.
No person came to the poor woman’s rescue, although, as before observed, Ty Coch is a populous village, and the noise must have been great.
No one appeared this morning to be cognizant of the outrage, except from seeing the gates down, and it is quite evident that Becca has friends at hand.
Official intelligence has just reached me, that these depredators made an irruption into Llanelly, about , and totally demolished the Furnace Gate, on the road leading from that town to Carmarthen, and burned the toll-house to the ground.
This is a new — a very formidable feature in this servile war.
They also destroyed the Sandy Gate on the road leading to Pembrey, as well as a private gate, the property of a gentleman named Lewis, of Stradey.
The preliminary hearing in the first big Rebeccaite criminal trial had its second day on .
Here’s how The Cambrian covered it:
. —
The Magistrates entered this morning into the case of Matthew Morgan and Henry Morgan, who were charged with having formed a part of the mob who had destroyed, on , the above toll-bar, which was in the parish of Llangafelach.
There was an impression prevalent, that the investigation into the Rebecca riots had closed on , the hall, consequently, was not as full at the commencement of the proceedings as on .
Mr. Maule stated the charge upon which he intended proceeding against the defendants, which was founded upon the same statute as that against the four defendants on .
John Jones was then sworn, and deposed as follows:—
I know Henry and Matthew Morgan, and see them now in Court. Henry Morgan resides with his father, at Cwmcillau-bach, and Matthew Morgan resides at Tymawr.
Tymawr is three or four fields distant from Cwmcillau.
I know the Rhydypandy turnpike-gate, in the parish of Llangyfelach.
I know the night on which the Rhydypandy-gate was broken down — it was on .
I saw both Matthew and Henry Morgan on that night; I saw Henry first; that was at .
I spoke to him.
I asked him if he was going to break the gate — I did not name the gate, it was reported that Rhydypandy-gate was to be broken.
On my asking him the question, he (Henry) replied, that “he was going to do like the rest.”
I had my coat turned on that occasion.
I had turned my coat just before I spoke to him.
Henry was dressed in a bedgown, and he had a kind of cap on his head, and a pickaxe in his hand.
We went together across three or four fields, and arrived on the high road.
I then stood on the road, and Henry went to the house of his brother Matthew.
He came out of the house, in three to five minutes, accompanied by Matthew.
The latter was dressed in a bedgown, he also had a cap on his head, and had a hatchet in his hand.
Henry, Matthew and myself, went down the road, until a place called Tri Onen (Three Ashes), where there are four cross-roads.
We then went together to Coed-caebryn maen; there were a number of people there — perhaps about forty; they were all men, and the greater part dressed either in bedgowns or white shirts.
There was one person there who attracted my attention more than others — they called him “Becca,” and “Mother.”
He was occasionally on foot, but generally on horseback.
When first I saw him he was walking about, whispering to the different men.
He rode a while horse, was dressed in a white shirt, and had something black over his face, and had an old bonnet on his head.
I did not recognise that man, but suspected him.
The greater portion of the people had some instruments in their hands — some had guns, some pickaxes, cross-saws, &c.
They remained at Coed caebryn-maen for about half an hour, and went off in a body towards Rhydypandy-gate.
The man on horse-back went before them and before leaving, he said, “Come, let us go now, it is time.”
He spoke in Welsh and imitated a woman’s voice, as near as he could.
In obedience to Becca’s orders, the party fired about twenty shots on the road, and the numbers increased as they proceeded.
I heard the man calling out on the road, “Lucy,” “Mary,” “Nanny,” and every name.
They arrived at the gate , and then destroyed it.
Becca gave command.
They broke it up with cross and hand-saws.
Four or five shots were fired during the time the gate was being destroyed, which was done in ten minutes or a quarter of an hour.
I saw Matthew and Henry Morgan during that time.
Henry Morgan drew off the board containing the terms of the gate, from the pine-end of the house.
I heard them break it, but was not on the spot.
They then returned in a body to Coed caebryn-maen.
I did not observe the two Morgans, but I believe they all went.
I had also a cap on my head.
Henry Morgan had a red mark on his face.
Cross examined by Mr. Walters:—
I never built a Tynôs on a mountain.
I dug the foundation of a house near Darren-fawr; that was in the last Spring.
I was never in Cwmcillau-house since that time.
I believe Morgan Morgan had a right of common over Darren-fawr, like others.
I asked him leave to build a house, and he said, I had better seek a place on some freeholder’s land.
I believe he said he had no right to give me leave, as he was only a commoner.
Morgan, at last, gave me leave.
Mr. Jenkins, of Cynhordy, afterwards went round the neighbourhood, and asked several persons to go with him to destroy what I had done.
The two defendants went with them.
I never said I would injure the defendants, when I had an opportunity; I never said so either to John Williams, of Penyfidy, or to his wife.
I told Mr. Jenkins, of Cynhordy, and the others, that perhaps they might want a house themselves.
They were about six in all.
I never told them that they would repent of what they had done.
On , I had been working at Gellywran issa; I was labouring on the farm.
I went there about six, and left at nine o’clock.
There is about a mile between Gellywran and my house.
I returned home about .
I went across the fields, beyond Cwmcillau, from Gellywran.
I knew they were going to destroy the gate that night.
I remained near Cwmcillau for a quarter of an hour, when I saw Henry Morgan.
I had walked direct from Gellywran to the place where I met Henry — it is about an hour’s walk.
I believe it was about when I met Henry.
It might have been later than nine when I left Gellywran.
I turned my coat in the field beyond Cwmcillau house; it was in that field I overtook Henry.
It was daybreak when I went home.
There was no person there but my wife and children.
I did not see Morgan Pugh on that night; I might have seen him in the morning of that day.
I do not remember, nor do I deny, telling Morgan Pugh I did not get up that morning, as I was tired, having been mowing hay.
I have frequently spoken to both defendants, after the taking down of my work on the Common.
I had frequently spoken to Matthew, in going and returning from chapel.
The bedgown worn by Henry Morgan was something grey; the police found 12 of them in Matthew’s house; Matthew wore a similar one.
Mr. Walters then called Morgan Pugh, on behalf of the prisoners:—
I am a farmer, residing at Llangyfelach.
John Jones, the last witness, lives in a barn belonging to me.
On , I saw John Jones returning to bed.
When I saw him on , in bed, he asked me what time it was?
He said he had not got out of bed because he was tired, after having been mowing.
I went into the barn, to see if John Jones had gone to mow hay on that morning.
I thought he was engaged to go and mow for Williams of Penyfidy.
Re-examined:—
I was frequently in the habit of turning to the barn, to see if Jones was there.
I would not have gone to the barn had I not seen the door open.
I had not heard that the gate was to be destroyed.
I got up early that morning, to prevent a calf which was weaning going to suck the cow.
I knew that the calf would suck as soon as he could get up.
(Laughter).
I was in good time to prevent him on that morning.
I have a wife and a son.
My son was not out during that night.
Mr. John Williams, of Penyfify, was examined, and stated, that, after the foundation on Darron-fawr had been destroyed, Jones said he would injure Morgan, of Cwmcillau, or his children.
He said he would not care to run the risk of his life by doing so.
Cross-examined:—
John Jones and myself were always friends.
This conversation took place in , in my own house. — The witness went through a very long cross-examination, but nothing material was elicited.
The defendants were then committed for trial at the next Assizes. — The Magistrates accepted bail to the same amount as that on which they had been previously liberated.
Rebecca at Swansea.
Early on morning, it was generally rumoured in this town that the Tycoch gate, on the other side of the Swansea river, had been destroyed at about , having been cut down with saws and other implements, and afterwards burnt on a lime kiln.
The rumour, at first, excited considerable surprise, especially as the circumstances which gave rise to it had occurred so soon after the long investigation before the Magistrates, on , which terminated in the committal of the parties charged; but, on enquiry, what was a mere rumour soon turned out to be a stubborn fact.
In spite of the number of policemen, both rural and borough, at present sojourning in town — in spite of the numbers of military, including companies of the 73d and 75th Regiments, together with between forty and fifty Light Dragoons, the Tycoch gate — half a mile distant from the town of Swansea, was levelled to the ground unobserved, excepting by the toll-receiver who, as will appear from the following examination, recognized one out of the thirty or forty rioters who took part in the demolition of the gate.
On evening, the Mayor, and several persons in authority, went over the river for the purpose of viewing the wreck of the gate, and of obtaining some information relative to the perpetrators of the outrage, one of whom had committed a most cowardly and disgraceful assault upon Margaret Arnold, the toll-receiver.
On , after the conclusion of the investigation relative to the Rhydypandy gate, a collier, named David Lewis, who had been identified by the toll-receiver, as the person who had assaulted her, was brought before the Magistrates, who had adjourned from the Hall to the Petty Sessions-room.
Reporters were admitted from the commencement of the examination, and the public generally shortly afterwards.
Margaret Arnold, having been sworn, stated that she was a singlewoman, and collected tolls at Tycoch gate, in the parish of Llausamlet, about half a mile distant from Swansea.
I lived in the house near the gate.
When in bed about , I was disturbed by a noise outside the house.
Several heavy blows were given the door of the house, and the shutters, the latter of which together with the windows had been smashed.
When I came out of bed and opened the door, a man came from the turnpike towards me.
He had an iron bar in his hand, with which he gave me a severe blow on the arm.
I had held up my arm for the purpose of avoiding receiving the blow on any other part.
The prisoner, David Lewis, is the man who struck me.
He then struck the bar through the door, which I then closed and ran into the house.
He struck at the door repeatedly afterwards until it was broken to pieces.
I again went to the door, and observed the prisoner break down the toll-board which was fastened to the wall.
There were about thirty or more men scattered here and there about the house when I went to the door.
I screamed out “murder” as loud as I could, upon which they all fled in various directions.
They appeared to be working-men, colliers, &c., and were not disguised.
One of the party rode a dark-coloured horse, which appeared to be a cart-horse.
In leaving he rode on before them.
The gate appeared to have been cut down with saws.
It was all right at when I retired to bed.
There was a gate and a bar by the house, one leading to Foxhole and the other to Danygraig.
The gate was placed on the lime-kiln after it had been cut down.
I well knew the prisoner before.
He had passed through the gate on with a cart.
He rose his hand in passing, which intimated that he had no money about him, but would pay again.
I have frequently trusted him before, and he has always paid me.
Mr. Emery, who stated that be was a member of the Royal College of Surgeons, stated that he had examined the complainant’s person, and found a wound about two inches in length, and half an inch deep, on the fore-arm.
It might have been produced by a blunt instrument.
Mr. Melvin, who now came to the room, said he appeared on behalf of the prisoner, and asked permission to cross-examine the first witness.
The Magistrates granted the request, at the same time intimating that it was a mere favour, being quite irregular after her evidence had closed.
In her cross-examination she said:—
It was nearly when she saw the prisoner at the gate.
It was rather dark, but light enough for her to see his features, and recognize him.
She knew him well.
He is rather lame.
Inspector Rees corroborated the witness’s evidence respecting the state of the gate and house.
Mr. Melvin then addressed the Bench, and offered to produce witnesses who could prove that the prisoner was in bed .
The Magistrates declined hearing evidence to prove an alibi, while it was not intended to convict summarily, but send the case before another tribunal.
The prisoner was then committed for trial at the next Assizes, on a charge of felony.
The Magistrates declined accepting bail for the prisoner’s appearance at the Assizes.
He was consequently committed to the House of Correction.
About , the inhabitants of Llanelly were alarmed by the nocturnal depredators who assume the above name; they were numerous on the occasion, and before they left the town they succeeded in destroying the Furnace gate, which is on the road leading from Llanelly to Carmarthen, and burnt the toll-house to the ground.
The Sandy gate, on the mail road leading to Pembrey was also wholly demolished.
We understand that the party broke to pieces a private gate belonging to D. Lewis, Esq., of Stradey.
During the last week nine gates and several toll-houses have been demolished in the neighbourhoods of Llandovery and Lampeter.
It appears that the impunity with which Rebecca and ber Daughters have hitherto carried on their system of destruction against toll gates in Carmarthenshire and the neighboring counties, has emboldened some lawless ruffians to destroy, by night, the property of any person whom they think to be opposed to their destructive proceedings.
On , some mischievous persons cut down and destroyed some scores of young trees growing in the plantation of Mr. Evans, of Tymain, in the parish of Llangeler.
On , Mr. Howel Davies, of Conwil, was alarmed by the reflection of a bright light in his bedroom window.
On looking out he observed a rick of old hay, and two stacks of straw intended for thatch, on fire in his haggard.
An alarm was given, and nearly all the inhabitants hastened to the spot.
As there was a good supply of water near the place, the flames from the hay were soon subdued, but the stacks of straw were entirely consumed.
On , a neat little house, lately built at Cwmdyad, near Conwil, Carmarthenshire, was in a short time completely reduced to ruins, by a set of lawless ruffians, who were disguised as usual.
Several of them were furnished with fire-arms, which they frequently discharged, to the great terror of the neighbourhood, and of those who travelled along the road.
Some persons who had attended the Carmarthen market, and had to go home that way, were detained for some time, until the Rebeccaites had completed their work of destruction, when they disappeared, and no man can give an account whither they went.
It is believed, that what excited Rebecca’s vengeance against this house was, that it was intended to be a gate-house, at which a toll-gate was proposed to be erected, instead of that lately destroyed at Nantyclawdd.
The government of course played its “why didn’t you just address your grievances through proper channels” card (the same one they’re harping on so tediously in the Edward Snowden case today).
But some did try calling their bluff.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin:
On , a written complaint was made to the Magistrates of Swansea, by a great number of persons who obtain a livelihood by hauling coal for supplying the town, charging Mr. Bullen, the farmer of the tolls for the Swansea district with the exaction of illegal tolls.
The magistrates received the complaint with the greatest cordiality and kindness, and were glad to find that they had brought forward their complaint in a peaceable and lawful manner, and assured the complainants that it should have immediate attention.
Mr. Bullen was requested to attend, which he readily did, and Mr. Wm. Walters appeared for the complainants.
The complaint was, that the scale of tolls which Mr. Bullen had rented of the trustees, authorised him to take three half-pence only for every one-horse cart of coal, which sum was also stated on the painted toll-board, as being the charge; notwithstanding that he had for more than a year past exacted a toll of three pence for every horse drawing coal.
Mr. Bullen, on being called upon for his answer to this charge, referred to an Act of Parliament, and contended that the trustees had no power to reduce the toll to three half-pence; that therefore he had a right to demand the utmost toll allowed by the Act, namely three-pence, but admitted that the scale of tolls let to him, and the toll-board only authorised the demand of three half-pence.
The magistrates referred to Act 4 Geo. Ⅳ c. 95, whereby it is directed that any toll-collector, exacting a greater toll than allowed by any order or resolution of the trustees, was liable to a penalty of £5.
They signified their unanimous opinion that he had been guilty of an illegal exaction, and that they were prepared to fine him when the case was ready for adjudication.
The hearing of this case was resumed on and the magistrates unanimously convicted Mr. Bullen in the full penalty of £5.
We hope this decision will give the public confidence in the laws, and induce all persons to bring their grievances before the magistrates, who have thus shown themselves ready to give redress.
Funny how a little direct action can start making the wheels of justice turn, i’n’ it?
Another note in the same issue read:
We are given to understand that Vaughan, landlord of the Pontardulais Inn, to whom the case of arms recently alluded to, was directed, can prove that the guns (fowling pieces) were ordered for sporting by farmers in his neighbourhood, from a commercial traveller who stopped at Pontardulais Inn: in fact, that the farmers and the commercial travellers will be forthcoming in due time.
We hope so, for the credit of that part of the county of Glamorgan.
It appears that the eyes of the magistrates of Carmarthenshire are at length opened to the gross injustice so long practised on the poor farmers, many of whom were obliged to leave their land almost unmanured, in consequence of the excessive toll plunder.
In one district nine gates levelled by “Becca,” are not to be restored.
A note in an issue of the Monmouthshire Merlin datelined reads:
The prominent report in town is, that a proclamation will shortly be issued, offering a reward of £300 for such evidence as will lead to the conviction of any person or persons engaged in the destruction of toll gates in this county, and that 30 warrants are being prepared for the apprehension of persons against whom there is private information of being participators in the toll-gate crusade.
The investigation of charges against persons for breaking down other toll gates and houses in this county, took place at the Assize Court on .
Mr. Maule conducted the prosecution.
The prisoners charged with the destruction of the Belgoed gate were finally examined before the Magistrates at Swansea, on , and committed for trial.
The only witness against them was John Jones, a rioter turned informer; who was declared unworthy of credit by witnesses adduced for the defence; his own brother contradicting part of his evidence.
Among the committed prisoners, is Mr. G. Vaughan, or Pontardulais; to whom a package, containing twelve fowling-pieces, a brace of pistols, bullet-mould, and percussion-caps, had been addressed, but intercepted at Swansea.
A letter, written after Mr. Vaughan’s arrest, countermanding the order for the arms, had also been intercepted.
At a meeting of the Kidwelly Road Trust, on , it was determined to abandon thirteen out of fifteen tolls within the trust.
The correspondent of the Times, continuing his researches into the cause of the Rebecca riots, rather inculpates certain Dissenting ministers—
I was rather surprised to learn during my inquiries, that the text I sent to you some time ago, the 24th chapter of Genesis and 60th verse, on which the Rebeccaites are said to found their proceedings, has frequently been preached from in the Baptist, Independent, and Dissenting chapels, and that the preachers have advised the people to their outrageous proceedings.
The Wesleyan Methodist preachers, on the contrary, have pursued an opposite course, and have urged the people not to break the law.
This sect, however, in Wales, is not by far so numerous as the various sects of Dissenters.
I have been informed that Mr. Chambers, a Magistrate of Llanelly, and a gentleman of considerable influence, sent an address round to all the Dissenting Ministers, in Welsh and in English, urging them to read it to their congregations, and exhort them to refrain from these outrages; but these Dissenting ministers of peace, as I have heard, without an exception, refused to do this, stating as their excuse that they durst not do it.
This fact exhibits in strong colours one of the worst features of a voluntary system of religion.
He has “wormed out what is at the root of the toll-bar grievances”: every fresh inquiry shows the abuses to be worse—
It happens that in this country the genus of pettifogging and jobbing attornies is pretty numerous.
Wales, as everybody conversant with a London attorney’s office, or with the business which passes through a barrister’s or pleader’s chambers, well knows, is notorious for its spirit of litigation; which is, no doubt, chiefly owing to the chevaliers d’industrie who live by the law.
These “gentlemen,” when lawsuits were scarce, often found it a splendid “spec” to get up a new road.
There were travelling-expenses, the “costs” of getting a private act passed through both Houses of Parliament, and the prospect of getting the appointment of “clerk to the trust” in futuro: and accordingly, there are, as I informed you in a former letter, no less than fourteen distinct trusts in this county; and, of course, fourteen “clerks” and fourteen surveyors of the roads, all receiving heavy salaries — in fact, fourteen different managements to be paid out of the tolls.
And now for the way in which this system works.
When a new road is beat up in the way I have described, a few gentry in the neighbourhood subscribe a few hundred pounds; then the private act of Parliament is obtained, including a certain district, and giving power to the trustees to take under their management such roads as exist, and which have been already made by the farmers.
So far all goes on swimmingly.
The new road is begun, and the trustees are short of cash.
Toll-gates are put on these farmers’ roads, where they never before existed; but still money must be borrowed to go on with.
Then comes another little bit of jobbery — the quid pro quo.
The trustees have money to lend, are gentlemen of the neighbourhood — magistrates: who so fitting to lend money to the trusts as these gentlemen?
They accordingly advance money, taking securities called “tallies,” which are, in fact, bonds for securing the repayment to them of their principal out of the tolls, and interest at 5 per cent.
But the new road, often not being much needed, is not a very paying road: there is not much traffic upon it; and it is found, that though the toll-bars on the trust are as numerous as the trustees dare make them, yet the tolls taken will do little more than pay the 5 per cent interest secured by the tallies, and the salaries of the “clerk” and “surveyor”; and then these gentlemen trustees come “down upon” the farmers under the provisions of the General Turnpike Act, and by indictment compel them to repair in many cases their own roads, which they themselves originally made, and also every day extract from them a grievous toll, nominally to repair the roads, in reality to pay 5 per cent to a neighbouring magistrate on an investment of his money.
But this is not all: from being so numerous, these trusts intersect one another perpetually throughout the country; and though all the tolls taken on the roads of one trust may not be by themselves very oppressive, (though quite enough,[)] it continually happens that you cannot go nine or ten miles without crossing two or three separate trusts, each of course demanding separate tolls.
If, on arriving at a turnpike-gate scarcely a mile from one you have paid toll at, you again have toll demanded, and naturally enough ask, “How is this? I paid toll not a mile from here?” you are answered, “Oh, we have nothing to do with that; this is another trust” — “No connexion with the people next door.”
And now comes perhaps the worst feature in the case.
The tolls are farmed, and let out to the highest bidder; and it is quite common for these toll-collectors to charge a higher toll in the country places than they are entitled to.
If the farmers, exasperated at this and at the way in which toll is demanded of them, refuse to pay, or pay and summon the toll-collector before the Magistrate of the district, what is their remedy?
The Magistrate who adjudicates upon the case is also a trustee of the road: but he is more — he is a tally-holder and a cestui que trust; he has merged his fiduciary character, and become bona fide an owner of the road and its tolls; and is in reality adjudicating in his own case, where his own interest is concerned in the charge, and is opposed to that of the farmers.
The result may be easily imagined.
The farmers get no redress; and the “clerk to the trust,” in defending the case, pockets some fees out of the poor oppressed farmers’ pockets.
Is not this monstrous?
It is to be hoped that the Government Commissioner will inquire into this, the very root of the evil; and that the Government will pass a general act to consolidate all these trusts, and thus insure a moderate and uniform rate of toll throughout the county, and at the same time still enable the keeping up good roads by knocking off the salaries of thirteen “clerks” and thirteen “surveyors,” and (if possible) gradually abolishing the tallies and lessening the rate of interest paid.
If this be done, we shall not hear much more of the war against the turnpike-gates.
Mr. Hall, the Magistrate, who was sent down by Government to inquire, began the investigation at Cardigan on .
He has had such of the farmers as wish to say any thing before him separately; thinking that they would make a more full statement of their grievances than if influenced by the presence of their neighbours.
Several of the farmers afterwards repaired to the reporter of the Times, who was at the same inn.
They fully confirmed statements made by that writer.
We select a few points in this more formal evidence.
The payment of toll at a turnpike does not free the vehicle for the rest of the day; it is free to return, but it must pay on repassing another time; and so on, paying every alternate time.
A man who had contracted to carry building-stone from a quarry to a gentleman’s house for 4s. 6d. a day, threw up the contract, because the tolls on the first day came to 5s.
The new Poor-law is unpopular, for many of the usual reasons; but there are two especial reasons in those districts: under the old plan the paupers were employed by the inhabitants, so that rates were not needed or paid; and as the people of each village are almost all related, it causes them shame when any are declared paupers.
An increasing demand on the score of tithes is another grievance.
This curious note comes from the Monmouthshire Merlin, dated :
We have received from our valuable correspondent at Swansea, a capital report of a cricket match which took place on on the Crumlyn Barrows, near that town, between Mr. Starling Benson and Captain Napier, each supported by ten other gentlemen, in which Mr. Benson’s side was successful by a majority of 23.
The game was well contested on both sides.
We have likewise received from him a small publication, which has just made its appearance, entitled “Will you join Rebecca to night?” which is calculated to do much good at the present moment.
We may make some extracts in our next.
On , a large body of Rebeccaites, in number between 300 and 400, assembled at the Porthyrhyd Gate, which they proceeded to demolish without delay.
A number of special constables had been stationed there to defend the gate, but they, as well as the keeper of the gate, decamped on the approach of the redoubtable lady and her family.
Having thus the field to themselves, they proceeded in the work of demolition, and before one o’clock, had succeeded in their project of destroying the gate, bar, and house.
They also threw down a portion of a wall opposite the Nelson public-house, and obliged Mrs. Powell, the landlady, to get up and serve them with beer, for which they duly paid.
They next visited the house of a person, named Davies, who deals in powder, and having obtained from him a supply of that article, and also some percussion caps, offered him no farther molestation.
They afterwards demolished some of the windows of the Coburgh Inn, at Porthyrhyd, for which, however, we understand they have since sent a letter of apology, together with some remuneration.
On , they came to Gower Tybach, and fired two or three shots at the dwelling-house of a man, named John Evans, a smith and small farmer, one of Colonel Cameron’s tenants.
The reports awoke Evans and his family, consisting of his mother, aunt, and sister.
Having the fear of Rebecca’s children before his eyes, Evans prudently remained in the house until he thought they had dispersed.
He then went out for the purpose of ascertaining what damage had been done to his property.
He found the gate of the court, leading to his house taken off its hinges; the gate, engering his field of wheat and potatoes from Fairwood Common, destroyed — likewise a considerable portion of the hedge; about an acre of unripe wheat cut down, and about half an acre of potatoes pulled up by the haulms.
On returning to his house he was met by Sergeant Jenkins, of the County Constabulary, who, taking him for a Rebeccaite, very properly apprehended him, and forwarded him to the Pumfald turnpike-gate.
The military having by this time arrived, in consequence of arrangements made by Captain Napier, founded upon private information, that the said gate, situate near the spot, was again to be levelled to the ground, at two o’clock in the morning.
The force, consisting of a detachment of the fourth Light Dragoons, and a number of policeman, arrived just in time to save the devoted turnpike, for, as soon as Becca’s daughters, learnt their proximity, (no difficult matter, by the way, from the illumination of each carriage conveying the foot force giving a friendly warning of their approach,) the Beccas dispersed like a flock of sheep, leaving their work of demolition unfinished, wisely considering the whereabouts of the Bold Dragoons too near to be pleasant, and bearing in mind the following passage:—
“He who fights and runs away
Will live to fight another day;
But he who fights and gets him slain,
Will never live to fight again.”
This effectively preventive force, accompanied by a Magistrate of Swansea, John Grove, Esq., with the Riot Act in his breeches pocket, then returned with their captured supposed Becca to Swansea, where he was safely lodged in the station-house, until brought before the authorities in the afternoon who, upon hearing the man’s tale, which carried truth upon the face of it, very properly liberated him from durance.
It appears the poor man’s offence against Rebecca was his having taken the contract for re-erecting the Pumfald gate, despite the commands of our Lady Rebecca and Miss Cromwell.
It is said another detachment of the 4th Light Dragoons are dispatched back to the said neighbourhood, for the purpose of aiding the local force in putting into execution certain warrants issued for the apprehension of some suspected persons.
Two of the Rebeccaites who were engaged in the demolition of Pontarllechan gate, have been apprehended, and are in custody in Llandovery.
On night a gate, called Plamdealuss, near Narbeth, was pulled down by some persons, who demanded to pass through with their carts and horses without paying the toll.
Their demand being refused, the attached the traces of the horses to the gate, and speedily pulled it to pieces.
Some special constables having arrived before they had retreated, supported by a troop of yeomanry, two of the men were captured, and are now in custody.
The issue of the Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian summarized part of an an official report on the Rebecca Riots as follows:
The Rev. E. Evans, Vicar of Llangranog and Llandisilio-gogo, is under examination.
He holds in his hand a letter, which he says is dated , signed “Becca,” and addressed to “the Minister of the National Whore.”
The purport of the letter is to tell him “that Becca had found a place for his body, and that she, in consequence, desired him to find a place for his soul — that the place for his body was at the end of the National Whore, i.e. the Established Church.
She recommends him to read much of the Old Testament, to see whether his conduct is not like that of Pharaoh, and that he had doubled the tasks of the people.”
The article in which this excerpt appears is not primarily about the Rebecca phenomenon, but is heatedly fighting Christian sectarian battles of the time.
It assumes the letter was written in simple hatred toward the establishment church by a fanatical dissenter, and doesn’t inquire any further into other possible motives.
There was no business of importance transacted at these sessions during the last week.
After a case of drunkenness and bad conduct had been disposed of, Williams, the man who was required to enter into recognizances to appear before the Bench for crying out “Becca for ever,” was discharged on being cautioned not again to commit such a breach of the peace of our sovereign Lady the Queen.…
Although the Anti-toll-exaction movement still goes on, and is not likely to pause before the last gate considered illegal by the Rebeccaites is levelled, in this and the adjoining counties, still we are happy to write for the satisfaction of our readers, that the spirit which has been evoked seems not to extend beyond the object of a redress of petty oppression, and that the decision of the bench of Magistrates at Swansea, on , and their declared intention of visiting with the full penalties any lessee proved to have unjustly charged upon the traffic of the trust, appear to have, to a great extent, assuaged the acerbity of public feeling against a great agrarian grievance.
From here, the editorialist begins to beat what sounds like a familiar drum, but one that adds little of interest about the Rebecca phenomenon.
On night, this gate, which is within a very short distance of Llandilo, was demolished, and the toll-house destroyed.
The whole was completed in about a quarter of an hour, while a troop of the 4th Dragoons, who were stationed in the town, were in total ignorance of all that was going forward.
This Committee assembled on .…
A discussion then ensued respecting Jones, the informer against the parties committed on a charge of being concerned in the Rebecca riots.
Since the information was given, it appears this individual has been living in the Inspector’s room at the station-house. — Messrs. Glover, Smith, and Walker, objected to keeping him in the station-house to the obstruction of business.
If it were necessary to keep him in custody, either for protection or to ensure his attendance as a witness, they contended that he should be sent to the House of Correction. — Messrs. Benson and R.M. Philipps defended the Magistrates, who had ordered him to be kept in the station-house. — The Mayor thought the gentlemen who had made the complaint only wished to have a hit at the Magistrates.
Preliminary examinations of another set of accused Rebeccaite tollgate destroyers begin.
In this set, we hear testimony from two toll house keepers who found themselves facing Rebecca’s wrath.
From the Cambrian:
The town of Llanelly was in a state of considerable excitement on , that being the day on which the investigation before the Magistrates into the circumstances attending the destruction of the Sandy and the Furnace gates, took place.
The Town-hall was crowded to excess.
The persons against whom the charge was preferred were Francis M‘Kiernin (inn-keeper, and contractor for the carriage of the mail from this town to Llanelly, and proprietor of the day coach running from this town to Carmarthen), George Laing, carrier, and John Phillips.
These parties had at a former examination, when the information against them was given by the toll-collector at the Sandy gate, entered into recognizances to appear on the day in question, which they then duly discharged.
The Magistrates on the bench were R.J. Nevill, D. Lewis, and J.H. Rees, Esquires.
Mr. Wm. Gardnor, of Carmarthen, attended on behalf of the prisoners.
The Magistrates’ Clerk read over the charge, which was to the effect that they had, on , together with about twenty other persons, riotously and tumultuously assembled, and did, then and there, break down and destroy the Sandy toll-gate, and commenced to demolish the toll house.
Each of the prisoners pleaded “Not Guilty.”
Jenkin Hugh, was the first witness examined.
After being sworn, the witness asked permission to give his evidence in Welsh, but at the request of Mr. Gardnor, and on the Magistrates promising that any question he did not understand should be explained to him in Welsh, he consented to give his evidence in English.
Mr. J.H. Rees reminded the witness of the importance of the evidence he was going to give, and desired him to be very cautions in all statements he might think proper to make.
The witness then deposed to the following effect:– I live at the Sandy-gate toll-house, in the parish of Llanelly, Carmarthenshire.
My wife’s name is Catherine.
She is the toll-collector, and resides with my myself and family in the toll-house.
On , the letter-carrier of this town delivered me a letter, for which I had to pay two-pence postage.
At the time I received it, I told the letter-carrier that I would pay him again.
The letter contained a notice to the effect, that the gate would be destroyed.
I took it to Mr. Benjamin Jones’s office.
He advised me to take it to Mr. Chambers, the magistrate.
I did not show the letter to Mr. Chambers, as I thought the threat a mere joke.
However, I took it with me to Mr. M‘Kiernin’s house; when Mr. M‘Kiernin, myself, and another person, took about two half-pints of beer each.
When I showed Mr. M‘Kiernin the letter, I asked him what was the best course to pursue, whether I had not better remove my family from the toll-house.
He replied, “Never mind doing that — should the gate be destroyed, neither yourself, wife, nor children, shall be injured; I will take care of that.”
I am sure he said “I will take care of that.[”] Soon afterwards I returned home.
This conversation took place .
I was home by ten.
After arriving at the house I expressed an apprehension to my wife, that the gate would be destroyed, and told her that it would he useless for us to retire to bed.
However, my wife went to bed that night, but I remained on the settle.
I had no particular fear for the gate on , for I had remained down many nights previously, having several times received letters informing me that the gate would be destroyed.
One letter advised me, that I had “better retire to the Stradey level out of the way of Becca and her Daughters.”
About , I heard a great noise at the gate.
Some persons were talking and laughing.
They then broke the gate to pieces.
I was not asleep at the commencement of the noise.
The first noise I heard was the striking at the posts of the gate.
I then looked out through the window, and observed some of the party cutting the gate with saws.
It was not light enough for me to see what description of saws they used.
In a short time two shots were fired through the window.
I was not looking out at that time.
Two or three persons then broke the toll-house door with an axe or axes.
I then went out to the turnpike-road and fell on my knees before them, and begged them not to pull down the house upon my family, but allow me to get the children out of the house.
On looking about I observed Mr. M‘Kiernin standing on the railway, near the turnpike-road.
I advanced towards him, and repeated my request that the party should stop until I had got out my family.
Mr. M‘Kiernin then cried out “stop, stop, let the man take his children out.”
Upon that, the defendant George Laing, having stepped forward to the middle of the road, cried out “don’t stop, take it down — to the devil with it.”
I then went into the house for the purpose of getting the children out, and a shot was fired after me.
I do not know who shot after me.
The marks are now on the mantelpiece.
My wife had taken some of the children out through the back window.
After going into the house I tried to carry out the clock.
One of the party, who had his face blackened, assisted me to get the clock out of the house.
After having taken the clock, which was damaged by the removal, out of the house, I missed both M‘Kiernin and Laing.
During the riot I was severely struck on my arm with a gun.
I do not know who struck me.
Besides the two persons I have named, I saw a neighbour of mine there, but I forgive him.
(Laughter.)
I will swear I recognised none of the individuals who were present with the exception of Mr. M‘Kiernin, Laing, and my neighbour.
I also saw three or four persons on the house-top, who commenced unroofing the house.
They threw down a few of the tiles.
The mantelpiece and the porch before the door were taken down.
A great number of dishes, &c., on the shelf were taken down and broken.
All the windows were smashed.
I cannot say how long the riot continued.
Mr. M‘Kiernin had not got his face blackened, but he wore a kind of white shirt over his clothes.
Laing was dressed in a similar way.
I did not see Laing’s face.
He had a white shirt about him, and something around his waist.
When be jumped from the railway to the middle of the turnpike-road and cried out “go on,” I spoke to him, and begged of him to stop them, but he made no reply, yet, I think he stopped them for a short time.
I have no additional statement to make.
I did not observe in what direction M‘Kiernin and Laing went.
Mr. Gardnor applied for permission to inspect a copy of the deposition made by the witness at the time the information was given by him.
The Magistrates granted the request.
In his cross-examination the witness said — I left my house with the letter soon after dinner, and went to Mr. Benjamin Jones’s office.
I drank in all about three or four half-pints of beer, but I was perfectly sober.
I cannot say whether the party came to the gate from different directions, or all at the same time.
I did not see M‘Kiernin until I went to the railway.
I knew Laing by his voice and his appearance.
It is of no use talking to you (laughter); what I told the Magistrates was true, and said on my oath.
Mr. Gardnor:— In your former statement to the Magistrates yon said that when you begged Laing to allow you to take out the children, he said, “d–n you, never mind,” and now you say that he made you no reply.
Which statement are we to believe?
Witness answered, that he would explain the whole, if he should give his evidence in Welsh.
He also said that what he said in his former examination was, that Laing told the men, “d—n you, go on,” when witness begged of them to allow him to take the children out of the house.
Witness proceeded:— On the following morning I was intoxicated, as I had taken three or four half pints after having been down during the whole of the night.
I was not quite sober when I went to the house of Mr. Chambers, the magistrate.
Mr. Gardnor:— Why did you wish, not to make a complaint against your neighbour whom you saw among the party?
Witness:— I did not wish to make a complaint against any person, but the Magistrates required me to make a deposition.
I do not know who any of the persons on the roof were.
I will swear I did not say that I recognized Mr. Chambers, sen., as being one of the persons on the roof.
Mr. Gardnor:— But I have witnesses to prove that you have said so.
Witness:— You may have witnesses to prove that I said many things which I have never said.
I swear I never said so.
I was alarmed, but not so much so as to prevent my knowing any person.
M‘Kiernin had on, either a straw bonnet, or a straw hat.
It was something white.
I will undertake to swear that Laing was there.
I knew him by his face, and the shape of his body.
Do you think I am such a fool as not to know a person whom I see every day.
He was walking to and fro while I was on my knees.
The night had been rather dark, but it became lighter before the riot terminated.
I told them that if they would allow me to save my furniture, they should burn down the house on the next day.
Mr. Gardnor:— Why did you refuse to be sworn before the Magistrates?
The Magistrates decided that that was not a proper question, not arising out of the examination.
Catherine Hugh, the wife of the last witness, stated that she was the toll-collector for Sandy gate, as her name was on the toll board.
In her examination in Welsh by the Magistrates, she made the following depositions:— I remember , when I retired to bed .
The children had previously gone to bed.
My husband was on the settle.
Shortly after retiring I heard a noise of knocking at the windows.
It was .
I came out of bed to wake my husband.
He went on his knees upon the table for the purpose of looking out through the window at the party destroying the gate.
The window was soon smashed in.
The glass was broken to pieces.
I do not know that it was broken by the shots, but there were marks on part of it the next day.
I desired my husband to request them to stop until the children were taken out of the house.
He cried “holt” through the window.
The door was then broken open, and my husband begged them to allow him to remove the family and furniture.
Some cried.
“Come out, or we will kill you.”
Others assisted in removing the furniture.
I was in the back room with the children, who were crying, while my husband was outside with the crowd.
I heard some of the tiles fall, and also heard my husband telling the rioters that he depended upon their honour not to injure the children.
I did not recognize one of the party.
After the party had gone, I began to cry.
My husband said they would surely repent.
My husband was perfectly sober, but he had been taking beer.
That morning, before he left the house, he named some persons as being among the rioters.
He named M‘Kiernin and Laing.
He named no others, as I told him to hold his tongue.
He complained of his arm, and was afraid it had been broken.
The description of the damage done to the houses, &c., given by witness, is similar to that given by the first witness.
Cross-examined by Mr. Gardnor:— I had been out looking for my husband before his return on that night.
He came home about .
I took no particular notice of the rioters, as I was greatly alarmed.
I did not look upon them, as they were shooting over my head into the house.
Alter my husband came in, he told he had been conversing with Mr. M‘Kiernin on the railroad, who called upon the mob to “stop,” while Laing cried out “go on.”
Edward Challinder, tide-waiter, who lived near the toll-house, deposed that, in consequence of hearing a noise at the gate on the night in question, he looked out through his window, which commanded a view of the whole of the gate, and nearly the whole of the toll-house, and saw a crowd of people destroying the gate, and commencing the demolition of the house.
They were firing guns, and talking quite loud.
He heard some voice saying “Go on,” and another calling out “Stop, stop, let the children be taken out.”
I could not recognize any of the party.
It was a rainy and dark night.
I got out of bed and went to the toll-house in an hour’s time.
Witness then described the damage done.
Cross-examined:— Believed that the two persons who stood on the railway had white shirts about them.
It was light enough to ascertain that.
Re-examined:– Had a conversation with Hugh soon after the gate was destroyed.
He said that he had received a kick and a blow on the arm.
He had drank beer, but was steady enough.
He did not mention to witness any persons who were among the crowd.
Mr. William Lewis was then sworn, and stated that he was the lessee of the tolls of the Kidwelly trust, and first received information of the destruction of the gate about .
A person came about that time to his house, which is in the Swansea Market-place, and requested him to come to Mr. M‘Kierrnin, who wished to speak to him.
Witness went to the “King William,” in St. Mary-street, where Mr. M‘Kiernin stopped.
He said that the Sandy gate and part of the house were destroyed, and that Jenkin Hugh’s clock was injured.
He also informed witness that the Furnace gate was broken to pieces, and the house burnt to the ground, and advised him to proceed immediately to Llanelly.
Witness asked what use would it be to go on a market day.
He said no person would hurt me by day.
He did not say how he became possessed of the information.
I think he said that Mr. Broom called at his house and informed him of the circumstance.
I know Mr. M‘Kiernin is an inn-keeper and a coach proprietor.
Mr. M‘Kiernin:– Do you not remember I distinctly told you that the toll-receiver called after me as I was passing on the coach through the gate, and requested me to inform you of the destruction of the gates.
Witness:— I cannot remember that you told me so.
Mr. Gardnor then addressed the bench, and contended that the evidence was not sufficient to warrant the Magistrates to send the case for trial.
He proceeded to remark upon the variations in the evidence of the witness J. Hugh from that given at the previous examination before the Magistrates.
Mr. J.H. Rees observed, that the evidence was direct and positive.
Mr. Gardnor said that he could produce respectable witnesses to prove that Mr. M‘Kiernin was in bed on the night in question.
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, until the Magistrates had decided whether such evidence could be admitted.
On our return, Mr. J.H. Rees said, that after the long and patient investigation made into the case, and after the direct evidence given, the Magistrates could come to no other conclusion than that it was their duty to commit the parties for trial.
If it were desired, the Magistrates would receive evidence, but the question of an alibi could not be entertained by them.
It was not their duty to be judges of conflicting evidence.
That belonged to the judge and jury.
The only kind of evidence which could be received by Magistrates was evidence to prove a witness unworthy of credit.
Mr. Gardnor expressed a hope that, as the Magistrates had determined to commit, the case would be sent for trial to the Assizes, as the parties were desirous of having the benefit of Counsel.
Mr. Nevill said that the case would be sent to the Assizes, as probably a Special Commission might be sent down to try the parties charged with being implicated in these and similar disturbances.
John Phillip was discharged, there being no evidence to inculpate him.
Mr. J.H. Rees said that the Magistrates were extremely sorry that it became their duty to commit for trial parties of the respectability of the defendants, but as they were not to decide upon the credibility or non-credibility of evidence, they were compelled to send the case for trial, but would receive bail — each principal in the sum of 200l., and two sureties in 100l., each.
On the Magistrates announcing their intention of committing the parties for trial on a charge of felony, Mr. Gardnor called their attention to the Act of Parliament, which enacted that any person convicted of destroying any turnpike gate, chain, or bar, so as to let passengers pass without paying toll, or any house or building used for the purpose of toll-collecting, should be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour only.
Mr. Grove, Clerk to the Magistrates, said that the Act cited referred to the destruction of a gate, bar, or house by one person only, but called Mr. Gardnor’s attention to 4 and 5 Vic., c. 56., s. 7, which enacted that if three or more persons riotously assembled and destroyed any church, chapel, or any description of building, he should, on conviction, be deemed guilty of felony.
Messrs.
M‘Kiernin and Laing were committed under the latter Act.
The required sureties having been found, they were liberated.
The final examination of Mr. Wm. Davies, of Nantyfen, a respectable farmer and freeholder, took place at the County gaol, Carmarthen, on .
The following Magistrates were present:– The Hon. G.R. Trevor, M.P., D.A.S. Davies, Esq., M.P., J.E. Saunders, J.G. Philipps, Grismond Philipps, Daniel Prythero, Esqrs., and T. Jones, Esq. M.D. Reporters and the public were, we understand, excluded from this, as well as from the previous examinations.
Mr. Lewis Morris, the prisoner’s solicitor, was allowed to be present, but not to cross-examine the witnesses for the prosecution, or call any for the defence.
The charge against the prisoner is to the effect — “that he, in company with divers other evil-disposed persons, riotously and tumultuously assembled together, to the endangerment of the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, feloniously demolished, pulled down, and destroyed the dwelling-house of one Griffith Bowen, toll-collector, Penygarn, in the parish of Llanegwad, county of Carmarthen, and with having also unlawfully and maliciously levelled and destroyed the toll-gate their situated.”
On the magistrates intimating their intention of committing the prisoner, bail to the amount of 4000l. was offered for his appearance, which was refused.
He was consequently sent to gaol.
We understand the evidence consists chiefly of some remarks made use of by Mr. Davies in conversation, which, it is alleged, correspond with occurrences which took place at the destruction of the toll-house and gate, and which could not be known excepting by a person who had been present at the time.
Mr. Davies’s friends, on the other hand, say that evidence can be adduced which will completely exculpate him.
The Riots in Wales
Mr. Hall, the Chief Magistrate of Bow-street, returned to town on from Wales, and shortly afterwards proceeded to the Home Office to produce the evidence and the result of his inquiries to Sir J. Graham.
The press started paying attention to publicly-aired grievances about the proliferating toll gates in Wales (and about other things) once the Rebeccaites got their attention.
From the Cambrian (excerpts):
On , a Meeting of the
parishioners of Llanedy, near Pontardulais, Carmarthenshire, was held at the
School-room attached to Llanedy Church, in pursuance of a written notice which
had been issued and circulated among the parishioners some days previously, to
take into consideration the various grievances which operated prejudicially
upon the interests of the county generally, more especially so upon the
agricultural interest in Wales.…
Grievances of various sorts were aired, including some about tithes and about
the poor laws (both of which sometimes come up in the context of the
Rebeccaite movement). The following excerpt concerns the tollgates in
particular:
A long discussion then ensued upon the gate grievance. Our space will not
allow us to give each speaker’s remark, but all greatly complained of the
great number of gates, bars,
&c., so much
so that a man could scarcely go to his own farm without paying toll. They were
willing to pay reasonable tolls, but thought that three or four gates placed
within ten or twelve miles was quite unreasonable. They also maintained and
hoped that land-lords and magistrates would see the reasonableness of the
proposition, that lime and all kinds of manure should be exempted from toll.
A similar meeting of the parishioners of Llanon was held on
, in the
School-house, which was crowded to excess. After several persons had spoken, a
series of resolutions were agreed to — copies of which were to be forwarded to
the tithe-owner and landlords of the parish, and which were to the following
effect:– The first calls upon the landlords and turnpike trustees to unite
in doing away with the toll grievances, with the numerous side bars,
&c. — to
exempt all kinds of manure from toll — to reduce the toll on a load of coal
drawn by a horse from
6d. to
3d., and to keep up
only so many gates as will defray the expense of repairing the roads, and
concludes by citing an instance of exorbitant toll,
viz., from Llanon to Pontardulais, a distance of only
six miles, where the full toll of
6d. is demanded three
times for each cart drawn by one horse.… An objection is also made to the
Treasurer’s account for last quarter, in which the expenses for the reerection
of gates, and of watching them by night, are stated to be defrayed out of the
county fund. The fifth resolution expresses the regret of the parishioners at
the late outrages, but at the same time they state their firm conviction to
be, that unless the landlords and tithe proprietors make a reduction in
proportion to that in the agricultural market, the depredations will not
terminate.
In addition to the destruction of Porthyrhyd gate for the third time on , when the Rebeccaites compelled one of the constables to turn out in his shirt and assist them, while they made the other promise that he would never again interfere in their movements, we have to record the demolition of Tyllwyd gate, two miles from Carmarthen, also for the third time, on .
This feat was performed by about thirty Rebeccaites at nine o’clock in the morning.
It is hardly necessary to say, all escaped undetected, though the military are stationed at Carmarthen.
— We have just learnt that Cwmgwilly gate, near Carmarthen, was entirely destroyed by a party of Rebeccaites or .
The arrival at the Tredegar Iron Works of a company of Grenadiers, under the
command of Capt. Cubitt and
Lieutenant Davies, on from
Swansea, in which neighbourhood they have been coquetting with Rebecca and
her daughters, has delighted the inhabitants.…
Rhumnfy Turnpike Gate.
Arrangements it is understood, are in progress, by which the tolls hitherto
paid at this gate will be entirely done away with. Although a natural
anticipation, of a visit from that very incorrigible obstruction, ’Becca,
might have induced this very prudent resolution on the part of those
interested; yet, we believe this concession will be owing rather to a sense of
justice, and what is due to the traffic hitherto so seriously interrupted on
that road, than to any fears of the summary application of ’Becca’s
playthings, saws, crowbars,
&c., to the
gates. Should our information be correct this circumstance will be hailed
with satisfaction by all persons travelling that
road. — Merthyr Guardian
As far as Glamorganshire is concerned, this lady has been pretty quiet during .
We have heard of no additional gates having been destroyed.
The authorities are still on the alert, and we understand, that several mounted and other police nightly watch the various toll-gates in the neighbourhood.
One night last week, the patrol which watched the Pomfald, and one or two other Gower gates, heard fifty or sixty gun shots fired by the Rebeccaites, who, however, did not make their appearance, but the police declare that spies were sent by Rebecca’s daughters to watch the movements of the patrol.
Kidwelly and Three Commotts Trusts.
A Correspondent of the Morning Chronicle says, “At the last meeting of these Trusts, the trustees agreed to a resolution ‘that there were certain grievances to be redressed, and that they would redress them.’
It was then resolved that on the Kidwelly trust thirteen gates were obnoxious, and that on the Three Commotts trust there were ten gates which required removing, as being oppressive and grievous.
The Clerk had orders to give the necessary legal notice of the meeting on , to have these gates removed.
Not the least singular fact at this meeting (to which, by-the-by, reporters for the public press were for the first time admitted) was, that many of the Magistrates were unaware of the existence of so many gates on the road, and appeared perfectly astonished when they heard them enumerated, and saw them marked on the map prepared for the purpose.”
On , the Fair Derwin, cross turnpike gale, about two miles from Brecon (on the Builth road), was destroyed by some Rebeccaites.
The work was done in a masterly style, in the dead of the night, and the loss of the gate not discovered till about .
— We understand that the Commissioners of the Brecon Turnpike Trust have given notice for a meeting to Consider the propriety of discontinuing the different cross gates in the trust.
Newbridge, Glamorganshire.
– On , a very numerous meeting was held at Newbridge for the purpose of taking into consideration the Toll grievance of pressure of which this town and neighbourhood have great reason to complain.
It appears that there are here three gates within 400 yards of each other.
There is a gate at each end of the town, and one in the middle, besides another at the distance of only a quarter of a mile, These, however, are not the only gates felt oppressive, but they are the most flagrant; at one of them the charge for a horse and cart is no less than nine pence.
This is indeed, intolerable.
The course about to be adopted by the people of Newbridge is one, which reflects much credit upon them, as they prefer appealing to the constituted authorities and the law instead of adopting the violent and illegal course which aggrieved parties in other parts pursued.
They intend to memorialize the magistrates of the district, to cause the removal of the obnoxious and illegal gates, and if these gentlemen have not the power to relieve the people, they are determined to petition Parliament on the subject.
The violent and unconstitutional conduct of Rebecca has been successful in its object, she demolished the gates, and they are not to be re-erected.
— We trust that the inhabitants of Newbridge and neighbourhood will find at least equal redress by obeying the law, with those who took relief by breaking it.
Rebecca is becoming more bold.
In this episode, she launches intimidation attacks against the home of a tithe collector and a game warden (part of the backlash against the enclosure of the commons).
There’s also note below of an unsuccessful prosecution of a suspected Rebeccaite — the jury returned a “not guilty” verdict.
From the Cambrian:
We have, in our present publication, to detail the particulars of a more daring attempt on the part of the Rebeccaites than it has been our lot to record on any previous occasions, inasmuch as all the depredations which, unfortunately, are of such frequent occurrence, and accounts of which have from time to time appeared in the Cambrian, have, with a few trifling exceptions, been levied against toll-houses and turnpike-gates, but this week we have to record, in addition to the destruction of a considerable amount of property, a rather serious attempt upon life.
The scene of the outrages to which we refer, was the village of Llanon and its neigbourhood, about three or four miles from Pontardulais, Carmarthenshire.
, the inhabitants of the village were alarmed by the arrival of an immense concourse of Rebeccaites, who passed through the village.
They had come from the direction of Pontyberem, on the Carmarthen road.
We were assured by parties who witnessed the procession, that it must have consisted of about 500 persons, the majority of whom were disguised in women’s apparel, white shirts, or oilcase cloaks, but several of the party were not disguised in dress, but had their faces blackened.
Becca, on this occasion, was mounted on a horse, which, contrary to the ordinary usage, was not a while one, but of a bay, or some other dark colour; she was also dressed in white.
Nearly all the party were armed with guns, which they repeatedly fired in their progress through the village.
Several horns were also in full play, and a number of rockets fired.
There was also a kind of carriage in the procession, the lamps of which shed a lustre over a portion of the crowd, and lighted the apartments of many of the inhabitants, who were afraid to leave their bedrooms, thus enabling them to obtain a better view of the procession.
When the party arrived near the end of the village, where one road leads to the Pontardulais highway, and the other towards Llanelly, Rebecca, who had previously given several orders, cried out “Silence!” when the party immediately left off firing guns and blowing horns.
They then determined upon taking the Llanelly road, which also leads to Gellywernen, the house of Mr. Edwards, agent to Rees Goring Thomas, Esq., the lay-improprietor of the tithes of the parish.
Mr. Edwards has, for some time past, had the management of the collection of tithes.
When the party had proceeded as far as Morlais bridge they halted, and remained on the bridge for about an hour and a half, waiting for another division, which was to come from Mynydd-sylen.
During the whole of the time, the blowing of horns and firing of guns and rockets, were kept up without intermission.
Becca, thinking the party to be rather behind time, according to their engagement, accompanied by several others on horseback, proceeded for about three quarters of a mile on the road on which the party was expected to come, when she met them.
It is also thought a third party, from some other direction, joined them.
They afterwards proceeded towards Gellywernen House, and some persons estimated the party, by this time, to have amounted to seven or eight hundred persons; — their vehicle remained on the bridge.
Upon the arrival of the rioters opposite Gellywernen House, they repeatedly fired their guns.
Mr. Edwards, who had been for some days previously confined by illness, was in bed in one of the rooms up stairs, in which there was a light.
Mrs. Edwards, who was in the room, hearing the firing and noise, advanced towards the window, and being greatly alarmed at seeing so large a crowd about the house, naturally enquired, “What was the matter?
What did they require?”
At this time a gunshot was fired through the window, several panes of which were broken thereby.
Mrs. Edwards, who had cautiously avoided standing immediately in front of the window, fortunately escaped injury.
She went to the window a second time and received a similar answer.
Another shot was soon afterwards fired towards the door of the room, near which Mrs. and Miss Edwards stood, both of whom fortunately escaped unhurt, although the marks of shot were very thick upon the door.
A great number of gunshots were then fired in succession into the bedroom, the evident aim of the rioters being seriously to injure, if not, indeed, to murder Mr. Edwards, who, as we have before stated, was in bed; but, happily for Mr. Edwards and his family, as well as for the rioters themselves, their endeavours were not attended with success, for, although parts of the wall were so thickly marked with shot and slugs, that scarcely a square inch was entirely free from them, while the window and bed-curtains were equally thickly perforated, Mr. Edwards escaped untouched, which was entirely owing to the position of the rioters being too low to enable them to fire into the bed.
Some guns must have been discharged by persons who were on the court-wall, as there were some marks at a distance not exceeding half a yard from the pillow upon which Mr. Edwards lay, while those fired from the ground of the yard, could not take effect much lower than the ceiling.
Another window, towards the back of the house, was also broken by gunshots, which had passed through the front window.
There were in the panes of the window of another room, round holes, apparently made by balls, but which some persons thought were made by slugs.
There were in all fifty-two panes of glass broken, in five windows.
— Greatly alarmed at the dangerous position of her father, Miss Edwards, at considerable personal risk, came down stairs, and went to the door, at which there was a kind of porch, with glass at each side.
Several large stones were immediately thrown at this young lady through the glass, but none of them struck her.
Some of the party called out in Welsh, that they would not injure Miss Edwards, or her mother, but that “they would set no greater value on the father’s life than a feather thrown before the wind, and that they would have the tithes lowered.”
Miss Edwards appealed to their humanity, and told them that her father was exceedingly ill, and confined to his bed, but that they might see him on any future day.
After letting off a few additional charges, they left the house.
— Whilst these outrages were carried on at the house, several of the mob forced open the door, and entered the beautiful walled garden, adjoining the house, where they committed devastations of a most disgraceful character.
Nearly all the apple-trees, and wall fruit-trees of different kinds, were entirely destroyed, having been torn to pieces, or taken up by the root.
The various plants and herbs, with which the garden abounded, were also destroyed.
The row of large and commodious green-houses, extending from one side of the garden to the other, was attacked, and a large quantity of glass broken with stones.
Though it was evident, by the marks on the green-house doors, which were strongly built, that attempts had been made to enter them, yet the mob did not succeed in that object, so that the luxuriant bunches of grapes and the abounding cucumbers were untouched — a circumstance not due to any sense of feeling or justice on the part of the mob, who evidently shrinked from entering the green houses through the broken glass.
In fact, they laid hands upon nearly everything valuable in the garden with the exception of the bee-hives, which contained a good stock of bees; these the rioters prudently avoided, conscious that the diligent and active little beings would by no means sympathise in their devastations.
— Either simultaneously with these depredations, or soon after they were committed, a party of the desperadoes proceeded to the house of William Bassett, the gamekeeper, who resided in a cottage in a wood, a short distance from Gellywernen House.
On hearing of their approach, the gamekeeper, against whom they had sworn vengeance, fled for refuge to the wood, leaving his wife and children in the house.
The Rebeccaites, on their entering the house, discharged a gun or pistol, containing powder only, nearly into the face of the wife, who had a child, who was slightly wounded in her arms at the time.
They then broke the clock, which was a very good one, an old pier-glass, which bad been handed down for several generations, the chairs, tables, and all the little furniture the poor people possessed.
They also carried away the gamekeeper’s gun, and 10s. or 12s. worth of powder and shot; and previous to leaving, took from the drawers all the clothes of the family, which were torn, trodden upon, and partly burnt.
They then left the place, after firing several times.
— We observed that several of the painted doors leading from the road to the plantation were destroyed by the Rebeccaites, either in going or in leaving.
— When Becca and her party returned through Llanon, it was .
The number of persons who returned through the village, was stated to us to be about five hundred, several of the party having previously dispersed in different directions.
With the exception of the occasional firing of a gun, they made no noise on their return.
When they arrived opposite Goring Thomas’s house, in the village of Llanon, which was vacant, but is being prepared for the reception of F. Fredricks, Esq., who has rented it for the sporting season, some of the junior members of the family commenced throwing stones at the windows, but Becca called out in English, and in a female voice, “Now girls, if you are my daughters, leave that house alone, until I shall command you another time.”
They instantly desisted, but we counted thirty panes of glass, which had been broken.
After leaving the village, they knocked up the landlord of the King’s Arms, and Becca and several of her children ordered beer, for which they paid, but commanded the landlord to put out his candle, which the latter readily did.
They then went towards Pontyberem, on the Carmarthen road, but how far they walked before dispersing we could not ascertain, for no person was allowed to follow them, or scarcely to look at them, without being fired at.
It is evident that Mr. Edwards had incurred the displeasure of the mob, in consequence of his being, in their opinion, too arbitrary in the collection of tithes, but it is not to be supposed that the riot has in any way emanated from the meeting held at Llation on , convened for the purpose of ascertaining if Mr. Goring Thomas had answered the letter applying for a reduction of tithes in accordance with a petition sent him from a former meeting, for that meeting was composed of most respectable persons, and though some dissatisfaction was expressed at not receiving an answer from Mr. Thomas, yet, upon its being explained to them that he had only just returned from London, and consequently had not had sufficient time to consider their request, they appeared perfectly satisfied, and called another meeting for , giving Thomas a week to consider their petition.
We think it necessary to make these observations, as contrary reports have been circulated.
John Skinner and other were indicted for riotously assembling together with other persons, armed, to demolish and destroy a dwelling and toll house, in the parishes of Mark and Wedmore, on .
From the evidence, it appeared that the party attacked the toll house and gate in the true Rebecca style, and demolished them in a few minutes.
The jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty.
There’s also a letter to the editor, dated that a James Rogers sent to the (London, I assume) Times to complain about how the reporter that paper sent to cover the Rebecca Riots kept trying to pin the blame for them on nonconformist ministers (see ♇ 3 August 2014 for an example):
Sir.— Having seen in your paper of a report of the state of South Wales, and, speaking of the Dissenters, you say, that, “at the commencement of these outrages, the farmers met the landlords, for the purpose of discussing the question, at St. Clears, and there a Dissenting Minister was the spokesman of the Rebeccaites; and at this meeting every man of the farmers refused to he sworn in as special constables, until this Dissenting Minister, being pressed to it, consented to come forward: when about fifty of his congregation followed his example immediately.”
— Now, the whole or this statement is entirely void of truth.
In the first place, no such meeting ever took place here, and no such circumstances as those stated by you ever transpired; and further, the report carries on the face of it the greatest absurdity, as the landlords had not the power to swear in special constables — this was a duty that devolved on the civil power.
There was a meeting held al the Blue Boar Inn, St. Clears, on (vide report in the Welshman, ), which was attended by a great many Magistrates and other influential gentlemen of the county, and by a few farmers.
If the report in question has any reference to this meeting, it is as far from the truth as the other.
This meeting was convened by the Magistrates, to take into consideration the state of the country, and for devising means to restore peace and order; and not “a meeting of landlords and farmers, to discuss the question of outrages.”
Several gentlemen addressed this meeting, amongst the number the Rev. Joseph Williams, of Bethlehem, a Dissenting Minister.
This gentleman suggested the propriety of dispensing with the services of the military and police here.
The suggestion was taken into consideration by the Magistrates, and after a short consultation an order was given to dismiss the military and pensioners, but to retain the police; and this order was immediately carried into effect.
The farmers were now called upon to be sworn its as special constables, and having had the duty explained to them, all present came forward, without hesitation, and were sworn in — perhaps to the number of fifty or sixty, and a great many others were called upon the next day for a similar purpose.
No spokesman for the Rebeccaites attended this meeting.
Mr. Williams was not asked to be sworn in a special constable — he did not go forward with fifty of his congregation — there was no refusal or reluctance on the part of any one to be sworn in that I could see.
So much for the truth of the statement contained in your report, and I shall feel much obliged by your giving publicity in the Times to this letter.
I was present at all the meetings held here, and am well acquainted with all that transpired.
I remain, Sir, your very obedient servant, James Rogers. St. Clears,
.
P.S. — Since writing the above, I have seen the Rev. Mr. Williams, who states that he was particularly requested by the Rev. John Evans, J.P., and Chairman of the Petty Sessions, St. Clears, and by Walter R.H. Powell, Esq., of Maesgwynne, to attend the meeting at St. Clears, on .
The gate breakers seem determined to carry out their object. During the past
week there have been several cases of gate destruction near Llandehie and
Carmarthen. The Croesllwyd gate, near this town, having been destroyed some
time since, was replaced by two large posts with a chain across them. On
, in broad daylight, this bar was demolished by a party of
Rebeccaites disguised, who compelled the toll collector to fly across the
fields towards Carmarthen. The Porthyrhyd gate was destroyed for a third time,
and the toll collector and a special constable severely thrashed by the
followers of ’Becca. A hot house and some outhouses, at Llanon, the property
of Mr. R[ees].G[oring]. Thomas [elsewhere described as “lay-impropriator of
the tithes of the parish”], have, it is said, been much injured. The
Glangwilly gate was destroyed ,
and the toll-house was levelled with the ground in a very short time. The
dragoons from Carmarthen were patrolling the country in the neighbourhood of
the gate until , almost immediately after which time the gate and toll-house
were destroyed. The gatekeeper was obliged to fly for his life, loud threats
against him being expressed by the Rebeccaites, who said they would tar and
feather him, if they caught him. It is said that he can identify some of the
party.
A daring outrage was committed at Llanon, on
. A party of rioters, many hundreds
in number, headed by Rebecca, beset the house of Mr. Edwards, an impropriator
of tithes, and shot at him through the window as he lay ill in bed; his wife
and daughter being endangered by the shots. Miss Edwards at length induced
them to depart; but they ravaged the garden, and fired at a woman, wounding a
child that she held in her arms.
Four men, inhabitants of Abergwilly, or the neighbourhood, were apprehended
this evening, charged with having been concerned in the destruction of
Glangwilly gate, on .
The authorities finally get a break in the Rebecca case, laying a toll-gate ambush for Rebecca and her Daughters and capturing two of them in the act.
From the Cambrian:
Haverfordwest, . On this town was thrown into a state of considerable excitement from a report that Rebecca and her Daughters intended to pay us a visit during the night, in order to pull down the toll-gates about the town.
The Magistrates had been previously summoned together at the request of the Chairman (the Rev. Thomas Martin), to whom it appears information of the intended attack was conveyed during , by a person who was in Rebecca’s secrets.
The Magistrates immediately sent off expresses to Pembroke Dock for a detachment of marines, and to Narbeth for a troop of cavalry.
The latter arrived in town , and were ordered to hold themselves in readiness for immediate service.
The marines did not arrive until .
Between twenty and thirty of the town constables were also called out, and stationed at the Prendergast toll-gate, to await the arrival of the Rebeccaites.
Considerable doubts existed whether the information which led to all these precautionary measures was not false, but about , a body of men were observed approaching the Prendergast toll-gate, on the Fishguard road, in numbers from sixty to one hundred, from ten to twenty of whom were on horseback, and the others on foot; they were headed by a man on horseback, armed with a double-barrel gun, who had his face blackened, and wore a long beard, and a shawl about his head.
On his coming near the gate, he called out to his followers to come forward, and lifted up his gun.
At this moment, Williams, one of the police constables, made a dash at the man, and caught hold of his gun; a struggle then ensued between them, during which the gun went off.
The horse then galloped back towards Crow’s Nest, and Williams secured the gun.
The Rebeccaites then turned about, and took to their heels as fast as they could.
The constables followed up, and observed that the rioters were armed with guns, large bludgeons, sledge hammers, and other weapons: they succeeded in capturing two of the fellows, who were brought to town.
Some short time after, following on in pursuit of the mob, the constables discovered a horse lying on the load, and on examination they found it had been shot by a ball in one of the hind legs.
It is probable that this was the horse rode by the leader of the gang, and which had been hit either by the ball discharged from the gun during the scuffle, or by another from a gun fired by the rioters at the constables, as it was quite clear that no arms were fired by the latter.
The horse is an entire one, of middle size, in good condition, chesnut colour, and about four years old.
Unfortunately, neither the cavalry nor the marines had arrived at the gate to assist the constables; the night was also very dark, so that two only out of the large number of rioters were secured.
The Magistrates held a private meeting in the Town-hall on the morning of , and subsequently a public examination of the witnesses against the two men in custody.
The Magistrates present were the Rev. T. Martin, Chairman, J. Potter, J. Griffiths, Wm. Evans, Wm. Owen, and Wm. Rees, Esqrs. The following is a report of the proceedings:–
The prisoners, whose names were David Vaughan and Joseph Walters, were charged on the oath of Thomas Roch Garrett, with a riot and tumult.
John Francis sworn:– I live at Newhouse, in the parish of St. Dogmelis, and am a farmer and butcher.
I know the prisoner Joseph Walters; he is a servant with William Lloyd, of Penvider, parish of Ambleston, butcher.
I have known him about two years.
I know Vaughan; he is a servant with Joshua Price, of Musland.
I did not see them last night, nor during the last month.
I have not seen the horse .
I heard of a horse being shot it is the property of John Jenkins, of Langwg-fach, near Puncheston.
I only heard it was his horse; I don’t know it of my own knowledge.
The prisoners had no question to ask.
Margaret Llewellyn:– I live at the Corner Piece, Rudbaxton parish, and keep a public-house.
I know neither of the prisoners.
, persons came to my house and called for some ale — I cannot tell one of them.
Some of them were on horseback, others on foot.
I don’t know how many were there.
I did not hear them say anything; they seemed to have feathers in their caps. I saw nothing in their hands; they remained about a quarter of an hour.
They had nine or ten jugs of ale.
They seemed to go towards Haverfordwest.
A gentleman on horseback paid the money.
I went to the door with a light to receive it: he said “keep back the light, and I will give you the money.”
He then returned the jug with the money in it.
I never saw him before as I know.
I think he had on a round jacket and a cap.
He spoke English; he did not say what he was going about.
I thought they were going down to the gates.
There might have been one hundred people there.
I was not aware of their coming.
The prisoners put no questions.
John Davies:— I went up the Fishguard road last night as far as Treffgarne bridge.
When I got to the Corner Piece, there were from ten to fifteen persons there; they had branches of trees about their heads, and their faces blackened; they were lying about the door and the garden hedge.
This witness deposed to his having met five or six other companies of men with their faces blackened, and similarly dressed.
George Thomas:— I am a servant with John James, blacksmith, Tangreis.
I am sixteen years of age.
, after I went to bed, some persons came to my master’s door.
I went to the door, and saw men in the road; about fifteen were on horseback, and others on foot.
One of them asked me to come to the shop; his face was blackened.
I told him I had not the key.
They then broke in the shop door; the men on foot went in.
I went to the door of the shop, and saw them come out with a sledge hammer.
A boy took up a spade, and I took it back from him.
The sledge now produced is my master’s, it is the one they took out of the shop; they then went down towards Prendergast; they did not say where they were going, or what they wanted the hammer for.
I followed them down to Simmond’s house; he lives half way between my master’s and Crow’s Nest.
I met my master there; he went down after the men, and I returned.
I saw one or two of the men with sticks.
Joseph Potter:— I am the son of the Mayor.
I accompanied my father to Prendergast gate.
I went up .
I remained about five minutes at the gate, and then went up with William Williams, the policeman, as far as Colby Scott, on the Fishguard road.
I there heard a noise of horses galloping.
The sound proceeded from the road beyond me.
I then returned, not hearing any body follow us.
We again walked I towards Colby Scott.
When we got a little way up, we heard steps.
We then hid in the hedge, and saw a single person pass on foot.
We remained a short time, and then got up, when we heard the sounds of horses and foot people.
We returned slowly before them.
I passed through the gate, leaving Williams about 10 yards behind me.
As soon as I faced round, a man on horseback pushed the horse’s nose against the gate.
He appeared to have a shawl on, and a low crowned hat; he then cried out “forward,” about three or four times.
He had a gun in his hand this he raised, but I don’t know whether he pointed it at any object; there were persons in front of it.
I saw some person catch at the horse’s head, and Wm. Williams caught hold of the gun.
I did not hear him say anything; they scuffled for some time, during which the gun went off.
Williams secured the gun.
I did not hear any other report of a gun; there were about thirty or forty persons behind.
After Williams got hold of the gun the man escaped.
I heard the crowd talking; they had something like sticks in their hands; they retreated as soon as the man on horseback escaped.
I soon after saw a scuffle between Mr. Llewellyn and Mr. Tasker, and the prisoner Walters.
By the time I got up he was secured.
Wm. Williams, police-constable:— I went up last night to Prendergast gate with the four constables; there were about twenty-five who went up; the Mayor was present.
I have heard Mr. Joseph Potter’s statement respecting going up the road and returning again — it is correct.
When I came back to the gate, I saw a man on horseback coming towards the gate, carrying a gun; he appeared to have a long beard; he cried out “forward, forward.”
He overtook me, and I walked by his side; he kept the gun pointed towards me; he did not put it to his shoulder.
I went towards him, and caught hold of the gun.
I held on by the trigger.
We struggled for it, during which his horse turned round with his head towards Crow’s Nest.
The scuffle lasted about a minute, and the gun went off in the struggle.
I then got it out of his hand.
The man escaped.
The gun is now in my possession.
I have shown it to the Magistrates, it is a double-barrel one; the left barrel was discharged, the right loaded; it had a percussion lock with caps; the hammer of the discharged barrel was down, the other was full cocked.
I was present when the loaded barrel was drawn ; there were a leaden ball and powder in it.
I saw a great many other persons at the gate; they were all disguised.
I saw some with cudgels in their hands.
I saw no guns besides the one I took.
I afterwards went up the road, and saw a horse lying in the grip without a saddle or a bridle; he was dying; he was shot in the thigh.
I saw this ball taken out of the thigh to-day, the bone is in atoms; he is an entire horse, from three to four years old, chesnut colour.
Wm. Llewellyn:– I went up after the Mayor to Prendergast gate.
I arrived there .
I saw a person come to the gate on horseback; he was accompanied by thirty or forty persons; he cried out “forward.”
His followers were all disguised, with their faces blackened, and something over their hats; they were talking; they had clubs and guns in their hands.
I saw part of the scuffle between Williams and the man.
I saw the people move off.
I then went up the road, and saw the prisoner Walters; he had a gun in his hand; I was close to him.
He carried it upright; his face was blackened, with his cravat covering his hat; he either passed the gun to some one else, or threw it into the hedge.
I kept my eye on him, and caught hold of him, as soon as I saw Thomas Adams, a constable, near me; before that I was surrounded by the mob, and saw none of my own friends near me.
I asked him his name, and what he had done with the gun; he said he had no gun.
Mr. Tasker then came up and laid hold of him; he struggled to get off, and shouted for help.
I brought him to town.
Coming down Prendergast hill, I said to him, “it is of no use your denying having the gun, because I saw it with you.”
He then said that the gun was not his own, that it had been handed to him by another person.
I was present when he was searched in the hall by Garrett, the policeman; there were a comb, and two or three other things found in his pocket, and some cartridges were found at his feet, which he had dropped.
James Tasker corroborated Mr. Llewellyn, as to the capture of Walters.
James Davies:— I am one of the constables of this town.
I was at the gate after the gun was taken from the man on horseback.
I went up the road; I saw a person attempt to get over the hedge; I laid hold of him, and pulled him back; it was the prisoner Vaughan.
He had something tied on his head, and under his chin; his face was discoloured.
I gave him into the custody of Garrett.
Thomas R. Garrett deposed to his having searched the prisoner Walters, and finding on him a burnt cork, and having picked up some powder, which he saw the prisoner drop.
The prisoners were remanded .
On , the examination was resumed, when the following witnesses were sworn:—
John Blethyn, constable:— I was at Prendergast gate on .
I saw the man come to the gate on horseback.
I saw some persons there, but I did not know them, they were disfigured with their faces blackened.
After the gun went off, I went up the road, and picked up the two sticks in the road, which I now produce.
I found them about 100 yards from the gate; they have been in my possession ever since.
Thomas Adams, constable:— I went up with the other constables to Prendergast gate.
I was there when the man on horseback came up.
I saw the scuffle between Williams and the man.
I saw some persons come down the lane; they were a great many in number.
I cannot say how many.
I could not see the dress of any but of the prisoner, who calls himself David Vaughan.
I saw him from a dozen to twenty yards above the gate; he was dressed in a round jacket, an old hat, and a handkerchief tying it down; his face was all black; he was moving on towards Crow’s Nest.
I heard him say, “Here’s Becca come.”
He caught hold of me by the collar of my coat; I then laid hold of him.
Other constables came up, and secured him; he never spoke a word after he was taken.
T.A. Phillips produced a cartridge and ball, which he took out of one of the barrels of the gun taken by Williams.
Elizabeth Llewellyn:– I live with my mother at Corner Piece.
I don’t know the prisoners; I have never seen them before to my knowledge.
I was at home on .
I was up about .
Abont that time a flock of men came to the door; I cannot tell who they were — they were on horses and on foot; some came into the house and called for ale; their faces were blackened; three came in first.
About five minutes after, the persons came to the door on horseback and on foot.
I had a candle in my hand going to the door, when a gentleman on horseback said, “Go back with the light, we want none.”
I did not see him, but only heard his voice; he spoke excellent English, like a gentleman.
I sold 5s. worth of ale at one time, 2s. worth at another, and six or seven quarts besides.
The gentleman put the money in the jug, and handed it to my mother; he asked me how many miles to the next town.
I answered four; they remained about a quarter of an hour, and then left in the direction of Haverfordwest, as I thought by the noise; the greater part of them had red caps and red turbans on; some of their faces were black, some not.
I never to my knowledge heard that gentleman’s voice before.
A few other witnesses were examined, whose statements agreed with those already made.
The prisoners declined saying anything in their defence.
They were then committed for trial at the next Assizes.
The witnesses were all bound over to give evidence, and the prisoners were liberated on bail.
The sureties for Vaughan, were Joshua Price, of Musland, and John Francis, of Newhouse, Ambleston parish, in the sum of 50l. each; and for Walters, Owen Llewellyn, of Whitelays, and Wm. Lloyd, of Penvider, Ambleston parish, in the same sum.
Between two hundred and three hundred persons, consisting of farmers, farmer’s sons, and their servants, were present during the examination on .
At the close of the proceedings, a few remarks were addressed by Sir R.B. Philipps, the Lord Lieutenant, Mr. Potter, the Mayor, and Mr. John Henry Philipps, to the persons present, entreating them to go home quietly, and stating their readiness to give every explanation in their power of the turnpike affairs, and to redress all grievances; but they were listened to with apparently great dissatisfaction.
One of the Magistrates (Mr. J.H. Philipps) was loudly hissed by the crowd, although his remarks were very reasonable and conciliatory.
The prisoners were then carried away on the shoulders of their friends, amidst loud hurrahs, and when they arrived at Prendergast gate, the prisoners were lifted on top of it, and were swung backwards and forwards for about ten minutes, during which the country people gave full vent to their powers of cheering.
They then marched quietly away.
The Monmouthshire Merlin also covered this event on :
Information having been received by the magistrates of the town and county of Haverfordwest, about , that Becca and her daughters intended besetting Prendergast-gate, which is close to the town, on that evening.
About twelve o’clock, four of the magistrates, consisting of the Mayor, the Rev. Thomas Martin, William Owen, Esq., and J. Griffiths, Esq., met at the Town-hall, and despatched a messenger to Narberth for a detachment of cavalry, and another to Pembroke Dock for a company of marines, both of which arrived in town about eleven o’clock.
The magistrates held a second meeting, when it was determined that the special constables headed by the magistrates, should defend the gate, and in case of need the cavalry and marines should come to their assistance.
Very soon after their arrival at the gate Rebecca and her daughters, consisting of about two hundred horse and foot, made their appearance, when the special constables, about twenty-five in number, assisted by several respectable townsmen, most valiantly attacked Rebecca, who was mounted on a charger, and carried a double barrelled percussion gun, loaded with ball cartridge, when in the scuffle one of the barrels went off and lodged its contents in the loins of the horse, and the constable, Williams, succeeded in securing the gun.
The second barrel was loaded with ball.
Rebecca, finding herself disarmed, gallopped off, the horse, however, fell dead at the distance of a hundred yards.
Unfortunately, in the darkness of the night, the rider escaped.
In the meantime a fierce contest took place between the constables and the rioters, when two of the latter were captured.
Their faces were blackened, and they were otherwise disguised.
Finding themselves vigorously attacked by the constabulary force, the rioters fled in all directions.
The cavalry and marines, accompanied by Capt. Peel, a county magistrate, arrived at the spot when the affray was over, and patrolled the roads during the night.
On the prisoners captured on the previous night were brought before the magistrates at the Town-hall.
Their names were, Joshua Walters, aged twenty, and David Vaughan, aged twenty, both farm servants.
A long investigation took place, which lasted the whole day.
Various witnesses were examined, and the prisoners were fully committed for trial as rioters.
On investigation before the magistrates, it appeared that the prisoner Walters had been seen with a gun in his hand, but which he contrived to pass away before his capture, and on examining his person, blank cartridges were found in his pocket.
It was also proved that as the rioters passed a blacksmith’s shop, on the way to the gate, they forcibly entered it, and stole several sledge hammers, and other deadly weapons.
A farmer from the neighbourhood of little Newarth gave evidence as to the very general dissatisfaction of the farmers and others with regard to the tolls, alleging their heavy and unequal pressure.
This man seemed well acquainted with many of the individuals who are under the guidance of Rebecca and on being very closely examined, he very reluctantly admitted that he knew the owner of the horse which had been shot — a very fine horse, four years old, but refused to give the name, even if a hundred pounds were offered.
He proposed, with a view to remedying some of the grievances, that the whole expense of the roads in the county should be paid out of the county stock, instead of, as at present, being subject to vexatious tolls.
He stated that some roads were comparatively free from turnpikes, and others too numerously supplied; and complained of the unjust operation of such a distribution of the turnpikes on particular individuals.
Another witness deposed that he saw a flash of light from a gun which missed fire.
This event has excited the greatest commotion in the town, the magistrates have exercised the greatest zeal in detecting the offenders.
The Rev. W. Martin has also proposed to circulate tracts in the disaffected districts, to call the attention of the Rebeccaites to such measures as he intends to propose for their consideration, prior to the conference which he solicits with the leading parties.
The prompt and cheerful assistance of the military claims our respect and praise; but it furnishes another proof how inadequate a cavalry force is to put down these rioters, who, on the approach of soldiers, are instantly over the hedges, and disperse over the fields in all directions.
Instead of government putting down this species of insubordination by a military force, and the argument of sword and pistol, or by the foolish efforts of the Carmarthen magistrates, lord-lieutenants, establishing an expensive rural police, adding to the heavy burthens of taxation, why are not the more humane and generous means adopted of enlightening the mind of the deluded rioters, by meeting them on fair terms, hearing their grievances, rectifying the evils which are real, with honesty and decision, and calmly pointing out the errors and misconceptions under which they labour?
This might be done by cheap tracts freely distributed, and by popular lectures and conferences in towns and villages.
When the farming people have completed the harvest, and winter is setting in, many fearful riots may be apprehended, unless moral means are used to prevent the efforts of perverted and misguided men.
Rebecca has sustained a defeat in Heverfordwest.
The Magistrates received information, on the evening of , that the rioters intended to attack Prendergast gate, near the town.
The Mayor, the Reverend Thomas Martin, Mr. J. Griffiths, and Mr. William Owen, made arrangements for defending the gate in person, with a body of twenty-five special constables; detachments of cavalry and marines being in the neighbourhood as a reserve in case of need.
[Here, the Spectator inserts a quote from the Chronicle article also quoted above.]
The two prisoners were committed for trial as rioters.
The Times reporter relates an outrage connected with the Rebecca riots, which, more than almost any thing that has occurred, shows the extent of the bad feeling against the law–
I wrote to you the other day that Glangwilly-gate, within one mile and a half of the town of Carmarthen, was destroyed on , immediately after the soldiers left it.
The gatekeeper, David Joshua, was enabled to identify four of the Rebeccaites.
The gatekeeper is a bookbinder by trade, and carries on his business in a small way in a cottage close to the gate.
Fearful of his personal safety since giving the information he has done to the Magistrates, he took a room in the centre of the town of Carmarthen thinking he should be there safe; and on proceeded to remove his goods thither in a cart.
On arriving in the town, it was soon discovered who he was: he was surrounded by a mob of people; and in broad day, in the middle of the town, his furniture was thrown out of his cart, and every article of it broken in pieces.
The mob then dispersed, before any interference of either civil or military force took place.
A Correspondent, residing at Llanon, says — “After all the speeches, exhortations, and recommendation on Mynydd Sylen, on , to desist from nightly meetings of the population, Rebecca and her Daughters, notwithstanding, made their appearance on the very night, and in the immediate neighbourhood of the spot where the meeting was held.
The village of Pontyberem, about a mile and a half from Mynydd Sylen, was the place selected by the fair Dame to march in battle array.
On the road a man met them, and endeavoured to wrestle a gun from one of the “fair daughters,” but missed his aim — the damsel would not yield to him, but kept her grasp.
The man took refuge in a public-house close by, called the New Inn, when the fair one opened fire, and sent some shots after him through the front entrance, which lodged in the cellar door opposite, passing close to a person who stood in the way at the time.
They then marched through the village, blowing their horns, shouting in triumph, and then dispersed.
The following Address has been issued by the “London Peace Society” to that portion of the Welsh people known by the name of the Rebeccaites:–
Brethren,
It is with serious concern that we have heard of recent acts of violence perpetrated in Wales, and it is now in a Christian spirit of affection and of sorrow that we venture to address you.
— We inquire not here into the causes that may have led to those acts; we do not here seek to point out the penalties of the law to which you are exposing yourselves, but we appeal to you on a higher principle, and would place before you the spiritual, the eternal, dangers you incur by such conduct.
— You, in common with ourselves, profess to be followers of the Prince of Peace: but how can the work of violence and destruction be reconciled with the meek, gentle, and peaceable spirit of Christianity?
No two things can be more opposed.
You have set at defiance the laws, by obedience to which social peace and order are preserved — you have forcibly opposed yourselves to the constituted authorities — you have violated the laws of God.
— Whatever the end may be that you propose to yourselves, know you not that we are forbidden to do evil that good may come?
The moral power with which men have been endowed may be exerted in strict conformity with the Christian religion; and if it be directed to a true and good object, it will, by the blessing of God, ultimately prevail.
— Pause and reflect, we beseech of you — “Consider your ways” — Remember that in an attempt to gain the things of a day, you are risking the welfare of eternity.
In our last, we stated that two excellent gates had been thrown over the garden wall of Mr. Pain, from St. Woollos churchyard.
We have since heard that these gates, and some others, were stolen from premises in the vicinity of Bryn Hyfrid, the residence of Mr. L. Edwards, and that a similar gate was discovered in one of the fields of that gentleman.
There is no doubt but the witless and wanton fellows who committed the outrage, were impelled thereto only by a spirit of mischief, or a desire to plume themselves on deserving the title of Rebeccaites.
Prevention of Rebeccaism.
We understand that a special general meeting of the trustees of roads is announced for , at Brecon, for the purpose of considering the justice of discontinuing twelve toll gates.
We should much like to hear of an announcement of a similar meeting near Newport.
Rumney and Caerleon gates are subject of grievous complaint.
The edition of the Cambrian includes an exchange of letters between Thomas Penrice and the office of the Secretary of State in which he complains that the cost of what he calls a burdensome, unnecessary, and disruptive police presence, designed to protect two tollgates (Kilvrough & Cartersford) has fallen on the parishes in which the gates are located.
He suggests that the cost ought to be borne, if at all, by a larger political unit, or by the turnpike trustees themselves, who are the ones who stand to benefit from the protection.
In the course of this correspondence (which began on ), he drops in a few details about the progress of the Rebeccaite movement:
…There was a gate pulled down about five miles from the Kilvrough gate, on another line of road, in the Welsh [district?], and it appears from the report of the Committee of [illegible] such gate is now to be removed entirely.
[Illegible] at the same time with the Kilvrough and Cartersford [illegible] and was chiefly supported by poor bare-footed women, [who?] went with donkeys and panniers with cockles to Swansea market, and had to pay 1½d. to that gate, and again at Swansea gate for each donkey, little more than six miles distant, and it would appear that no gates but such as of this description have been attempted to be destroyed.
Perhaps, sir, you are not aware, that the person who rented the gates all over the country, after taking them at the tolls always before paid for them, which was only three-fourths of what the Act allowed, has raised the tolls to the full extent in some cases, which has most probably been the cause of some of these disturbances.
There have been some foolish alerts, I should say, caused by some boys firing off fowling-pieces, and I really think only to annoy the Rural Police-force, who have made a great fuss about it, because I know the people to be so well-disposed and quiet.
The on-line version of the Cambrian’s account of the attack on the Pontardulais gate (in the issue) is, unfortunately, poorly-scanned.
I’ll see how much of it I can recover:
Seven of the Former Taken Prisoners, and Two Dangerously Wounded.
Information was received by the authorities on , that an attack upon the Pontardulais gate had been contemplated, and was to be carried into effect during the night.
A force of Rural Police, consisting of Mr. Superintendent Peake, two sergeants, and four policemen, proceeded towards that place.
They were soon afterwards [join]ed by Capt. Napier, J.D. Llewelyn, and L.Ll. Dillwyn, Esqrs., and accompanied by Matthew Moggridge, Esq., and [Mr.?] Attwood.
When about two or three fields distant from Pontardulais, they heard the firing of guns, rockets, the blowing of horns, and the noise of a great number of horses, [more] resembling a cavalry regiment than a party of Rebeccaites.
It is stated, that with the blowing of ox-horns, tin-[horns], and different other wind instruments, in addition to [?] feigned voices — resembling a host of old market-women, they made a most hideous and indescribable noise.
The [party] came from the direction of Llanon.
After having given three cheers, when opposite the Pontardulais Inn, they arrived at the gate, which is but a short distance from the Inn.
They commenced an attack upon it with saws, [?]ges, &c., and soon succeeded in breaking down the gate, as well as the side-rails, and also had commenced demolishing the house, having broken the windows, and a portion of the corner of the house nearest the Inn; they had also knocked in the door, but the posts had not been cut down.
When the work of destruction had proceeded thus far, the magistrates and the Police, who were well armed, advanced.
The number of Rebeccaites assembled at this time was estimated to consist of 150 to 200 persons, the majority of whom were on horseback.
They were all disguised, many of them having their faces blackened, and dressed in women’s clothes; others wore bonnets, white shirts, and some appeared with their coats turned.
Becca, on this occasion, was mounted, and wore a large white cloak.
When the police appeared, the rioters immediately fired a volley at them, but, fortunately, without effect.
The police immediately fired in return.
The distance between the constables and the rioters did not now exceed ten to fifteen yards.
A desperate conflict ensued, which lasted about fifteen minutes, when the mob commenced retreating and flying all directions.
The groans of several of the wounded were distinctly heard.
The mob having dispersed, it was found that three of them had been captured, together with their horses, and among them the renowned Rebecca, who was found dangerously wounded on the bridge.
He was dressed in female [attire], with bonnet, veil, &c., in addition to which his face was blackened.
His name is David Hughes, the son of a [farmer] residing in the neighbourhood of Llanon.
Another person, named John Jones, was also dangerously wounded.
In the course of quarter of an hour the Dragoons, who had been dispatched from Swansea, arrived.
Four of the rioters, who attempted to make their escape, were also apprehended, having been met by a party of Dragoons, who were coming from Llanelly.
The four were secured, and brought back to Pontardulais, but were subsequently taken to Llanelly, while the three prisoners who were captured by the police during the conflict, were brought to Swansea in a phæton; they arrived about .
A number of horns, two guns, two sledge-hammers, and the various other implements of war which were taken from the rioters, were deposited in the Station-house, together with the white cloak worn by Rebecca, and the shirt worn by the other wounded man, which were literally dyed with blood.
It has been stated to us, that the rioters had placed sentinels on horseback, in several parts of the road, at distances [of] two miles from the gate, expecting that the Dragoons [would] be their pursuers, but their tactics were entirely [muffled], as the Magistrates and Police proceeded across the fields, which could not have been well done by horsemen.
The wounded men were immediately attended to by Dr. Bird, who ordered them to be conveyed on stretchers to the Infirmary of the Swansea House of Correction.
Both of them are in a very precarious — some say, dying state.
It appeared that David Hughes had received a gunshot in the left arm, on the outside of the elbow joint.
The ball, which was quite flattened when extracted, had passed upwards from the elbow, shattering the bone of the arm at its lower [end], and was extracted at the back part of the same arm, midway between the shoulder and elbow; he had also a contused wound on the head.
There is doubt as to the possibility of eventually saving the wounded arm of this man.
John Jones, the other wounded man, is also in a very precarious state.
He had received several wounds in the back, which appear to have been inflicted by shot, or slugs, a circumstance which proves that, by their unskilfulness and want of order, the rioters fired at each other, for the police used neither slugs nor shot.
Jones has also been stabbed, and had three wounds on the head, which had been apparently inflicted with swords.
He is in a very low and depressed state, and Dr. Bird is fearful some of the slugs or shot might have passed into the large cavities of the body, but there was no further evidence of that than the exhausted and depressed powers of life evinced in the man.
In the pocket of the leader were found a quantity of percussion-caps, powder, &c., and about 3l. in money, and the following Becca notice:—
“Daniel Jones, of Brynhir — Meet [us] at Llan, on ; if you don’t, this shall be your last notice. –Becca.”
It appears that all the persons who composed the mob had come from Carmarthenshire. — The conduct of the small police force, in opposition to so numerous a mob, has excited considerable astonishment and admiration.
Examination of the Prisoners at Llanelly.
The following magistrates met at the Union House, R.J. Nevill, J.H. Rees, and Wm. Chambers, Esqrs., when the following prisoners were brought before them:—
William Hugh, a lad of 15 years of age, the son of a very respectable farmer of Talyclew, dressed in woman’s clothes — Thomas Williams, a servant to a farmer at Llangennech — Henry Rogers, a farm servant at Pennllwyngwyn, and Lewis Davies, farmer, of Scybor Ucha, near Pontarddulais.
It having been explained to them, in Welsh, that they were brought up for the purpose of hearing the evidence that would be adduced against them.
Mr. Wm. Chambers, jun., was sworn as the first witness, and deposed as follows:—
I am a justice of the peace acting for this county.
I received information that there was to be an attack made last night upon the Pontarddulais and Hendy Bridge gates; and in consequence of such information, I applied to Capt. Scott of the 76th Regiment of Foot, stationed here, to furnish me with a sufficient number of soldiers to protect the Hendy gate.
He did so, and we proceeded accordingly; and at about , having arrived at the wooden bridge over the Gwilly on the railway, we saw a rocket fired.
Previous to our reaching this bridge, we had concealed the soldiers.
The rocket was fired in the direction between Mynydd Sylen and Llanedy.
We had between twenty and thirty soldiers with us.
The rocket appeared as if it came from the bogs at Llanon.
We went on until we arrived near the Gwilly bridge, which is between the Hendy gate and Pontarddulais, and when there we heard the blowing of horns, which were sounded to one particular note, which was repeated several times.
In the course of four or five seconds after the last blow of the horn, we heard the report of fire arms in the direction of the Pontarddulais gait.
All this while, the soldiers were still concealed under the side of the hedge, and I was in advance of where they were about one hundred yards.
Hearing the firearms, I immediately returned to the soldiers, and got them to move into the field, in which I was, south to the railway, and requested Capt. Scott to order his men to load, which they did, and fixed their bayonets.
We then proceeded with all haste to very near the wooden bridge over the Gwilly.
When we had arrived there I divided the men into two parties — Capt. Scott and myself, and put the other under the charge of Mr. Payne, with directions that he should go, as we were going, under cover of the hedges, and cut off the retreat of the people from the Hendy Bridge towards Llanelly.
The firing which we heard continued from about seven to ten minutes, pretty rapidly, for during that time I should say that there were from seventy to eighty shots fired.
Not being aware that any of the police were near the Pontardulais gate, I thought the firing to be a sort of feu-de-joie, which such persons do according to their usual practice when they have destroyed a gate.
After they had destroyed the Pontardulais gate, I fully anticipated an attack would be made on the Hendy Bridge gate, my information leading me to suppose that they were both to be attacked.
While we were there, I saw a man coming down the railway — he was not running, but walking very fast; at this time the soldiers were hid, and only one of us could be seen at a time.
With the assistance of Capt. Scott, I caught hold of the man by the collar — the prisoner now present, Lewis Davies, is the man.
He was dressed in his usual dress, but he had the upper part of his face blacked, and the lower part done with red ochre; he had a straw hat on.
As soon as he was taken, he put his head down, and his right hand up, and put something under the tail of his coat.
I immediately put my hand under, and drew forth the woman’s cap now produced.
I then left him in charge of Sergeant Gibb, with one or two men, and ran, as fast as I could, up towards the turnpike-road, between Pontardulais and Llanelly, which position was east of the Hendy gate.
I got the soldiers up into the position, and put them under the hedge separating the field from the road.
I then heard some people coming along the road, and moved towards Pontardulais, beyond the soldiers, to peep over the hedge, and see who they were, as they appeared to me to be going in the direction from Hendy gate to Pontardulais; they were three or four.
The moon shone brightly, and I fancy they saw the edge of my hat over the hedge, for they immediately whispered and turned back, and the boy prisoner, Wm. Hugh, who was disguised in woman’s clothes, got over the gate into the field where we were; but as soon as he saw the soldiers he turned back again, and ran in the direction of Hendy Bridge gate.
The soldiers followed him, and some of them caught him at the bottom of the hill.
Two others went up the road, towards Pontardulais, and another over the hedge, towards the farm.
I was following them, but hearing the boy shrieking out, I ran back in that direction, to prevent his making any more noise.
He was much frightened, and I told him not to be frightened, and he should not be hurt.
I also asked him who he was.
He was disguised in woman’s apparel, and his face was covered with black.
He told me his name was Hugh, and that his father had just got over the hedge, and a servant-boy, whose name he mentioned.
When I first caught him, I thought he was a girl, but on observing he had a trousers on, I saw he was a boy.
Just before these people came up the road, I heard a noise in the direction of Swansea, which I thought was that of carriages bringing up the troops, but soon found it was the galloping of cavalry.
I then said to Capt. Scott, it is no use our waiting here, and I made as quick an advance as possible in the direction of Pontardulais along the turnpike road — the boy being left a prisoner in charge of Sergeant Gibb.
When we arrived at Pontardulais, I saw the dragoons gallop up just as we turned the corner.
They took us for a body of the Rebeccaites coming back to the gate and were about to charge us, but we called out “Halt!” and some of the men presented bayonets, when we said we were friends.
We went on to the Pontardulais gate, and found the gate was entirely destroyed, the toll-board destroyed, shot marks on the top of the windows, and the inside gutted.
There were three men lying handcuffed on the floor.
I know it to be a dwelling-house.
I then recognised a number of Glamorganshire Magistrates, and Capt. Napier, and some of the Rural Police.
I was asked to go as a Carmarthenshire Magistrate, and search some of the houses up the hill towards Llanon, where I heard there were a number of men who had escaped, but who were wounded.
I did not find any, but there was plenty of time for them to be removed.
I then returned home.
I forgot to say that in returning, the boy Hugh said to me, I have thrown my horn away into the hedge.
I returned and searched the hedge for it, and found a cow’s horn [horn produced], which, at my request, the boy blew for me.
Henry Gibb sworn:—
I am a sergeant in the 76th Foot.
Last night I was out with the soldiers and the Magistrates.
I had one of the prisoners given to my charge.
I heard a shrieking in the field, and some men running.
On looking down the road, I saw the two prisoners Henry Rogers and Thomas Williams walk up the railroad very fast.
I took them into custody, and told them they were to fall in with the rest, and stand at ease.
They said they had not done any harm.
I asked them what they were doing, and told them I would let them go free if they would tell where the rest were gone.
They said they had only been out to look at it.
Rebecca notices were served calling upon the people to assemble on near Llanon.
The police having got hold of one of them, the most judicious steps were taken by Capt. Napier to apprehend the rioters.
The police were concealed in a field within a hundred yards of the Pontarddulais gate.
At about on the night in question, the Rebeccaites assembled in a long body near Llanon, The Rebecca who is shot was dressed in bonnet and veil, &c., armed with a gun and mounted on a horse.
As they marched along, they kept blowing their horns and firing their guns.
An eye witness says, there were at least one hundred horses, who were marching in regular procession, most of them having two people on each — the procession being headed by Rebecca, and all her daughters being disguised in white dresses, bonnets, and caps.
Upon their arriving near Pontarddulais they were heard by the gatekeeper, who states that the gate had been “threatened” for some time past, and about he was alarmed by shouts and the firing of guns.
They were about a mile off when he first heard them.
He immediately removed the rest of his furniture into the garden at the back of his house, which he thus saved.
When he saw the mob at the top of the hill coming down towards him, he felt much alarmed, and ran to hide himself in a field about one hundred yards from the gate.
Arriving at the gate, they immediately proceeded to pull it down: one gate was broken to pieces, and also the rails on each side of the gate-posts.
The windows and door of the house were smashed in, and the inside completely gutted; a part of the wall of the house was also pulled down, shewing that a few minutes longer would have sufficed to raze it to the ground; there are also a great quantity of bullet marks about the windows and front part of the house.
When they got thus far, Captain Napier, whose great object was to capture the ringleader and others while actually engaged in the work, rushed, together with his men, from their hiding place, and commanded them to desist; but, in attempting to capture some of them, was immediately fired upon, and a desperate struggle ensued, during which the horse of Rebecca was shot, and she also wounded in the arm, besides wounding another man, who is taken, and several who made their escape.
The Rebeccaites then soon fled, leaving three of their body, two of whom were seriously wounded, in the hands of the police.
At this moment, a part of the 76th Regiment, under the command of Capt. Scott, accompanied by Mr. W. Chambers, jun., arrived from Llanelly, having taken four prisoners while fleeing.
In four or five minutes afterwards the Dragoons, commanded by Capt. Fane, came up.
The Rebeccaites had in the meanwhile fled in the direction of Llanedy and Llanon carrying their wounded with them.
On being asked what he had to say in self-defence, Lewis Davies made a long statement, the substance of which was that he was compelled to accompany the mob by threats from ten or twelve persons, who called for him, with guns, &c., on the night in question.
The prisoner, Henry Rogers, said he was a farm servant at Penllwyngwyn, and only went to see the mob.
Thomas Williams, servant to John Thomas, Llangennech Mill, said that he accompanied Rogers to see them, and was apprehended in returning home.
William Hugh said that while he was in bed, a crowd of persons came to his house at Talyclew, and compelled him to go with them.
He preceded to put on his own clothes, and they dressed him in women’s clothes, and put in his hand the horn which was found with him.
When an opportunity offered, he turned back, and in crossing a gate, met the soldiers, who apprehended him.
The inquiry was then adjourned: and the further examination of the prisoners will be held at Swansea, where, they arrived .
The first witness for the prosecution was the son of one of the magistrates judging the examination?
Nice.
This comes from the Monmouthshire Merlin.
It is amusingly written (and considerably more yellow than the Cambrian’s more matter-of-fact coverage), and is also noteworthy for its description of how the Rebeccaites used fireworks as signaling devices when coordinating their raids.
On going to press our active correspondent at Swansea, reached our office, having posted from Cowbridge, in order to furnish us with particulars of a most important and startling event, which took, place, on , at Pontardulais, near Swansea, and which is calculated to have a most salutary moral effect on the misguided men, who tire all endurance, outrage all common sense and legal forbearance, by their now wanton and atrocious nocturnal outrages against peace, law, and order, in the counties of Carmarthen and Glamorgan.
As long as the Rebeccaites had oppressions to complain of, grievances to be redressed, and had been driven to the ultima ratio rerum, from despair, in the hope-deferred of an invocation to justice, we were to their faults a little blind; but the moment we found that the government had determined to right their wrongs, in the abatement of toll exactions, and that the local authorities had unequivocally evinced their honest determination to shield the poor from the plunder and the impositions of fraudulent lessees, we trusted that the proverbial steadiness and rationality of the Welsh character would have led back the people to pursuits of peace and industry.
Such, however, unfortunately has not been the case; emboldened by former triumphs, “Rebecca and her Children,” have not ceased their midnight outrages, even after the casus belli had been withdrawn, and in the reckless exultation of physical force, they have continued their depredations.
But not having an instant for comment, we hasten to give the intelligence of our correspondent:—
Private information was received of a contemplated attack on the Pontardulais turnpike gate, within nine miles of Swansea, and about four miles from Penllergare, the residence of Mr. John Dillwyn Llewellyn, a magistrate of the county, possessed of considerable landed property, and a gentleman who has taken a very active part, not only in the suppression of the outrages, but who is admitted to be one of the foremost in the proceedings recently instituted for the punishment of those unprincipled persons, who, by their plunder of the poor traffickers on the road, had brought themselves under the inflictive operation of the law.
Mr. Llewellyn and Mr. Llewellyn Dillwyn, in conjunction with Mr. Matthew Moggridge, (magistrate of this county,) adopted such means as were deemed best to prevent the success of the intended attack.
These three gentlemen immediately put themselves in communication with Capt. Napier, chief constable of the county of Glamorgan, and Mr. Superintendent Peake, aided by six of the county police, and the whole party, only eleven in number, by extreme caution, much adroitness, and tact, succeeded in placing themselves in ambush without exciting the suspicions of the Rebeccaites and in accomplishing this, there was considerable difficulty.
Previously to the march of the toll-house destroyers, three rockets were discharged, one from Penllergare, one from near Swansea, and one from the neighbourhood of Llanelly; the first indicating that all appeared safe at the squire’s, the second, that the dragoons were not stirring from the town, and the third, that all was right at Llanelly.
Becca and family, thinking from these bright signs in the sky, that there was a clear stage, rushed from the hills, and swept like a torrent over the plains, little dreaming that the Philistines were out, or that, as they say, the “wolf was on the walk.”
At about , (our informant is precise) the staff of the Carmarthenshire Cossacks appeared before the door of the Red Lion Inn, Pontardulais, and invited out Mr. Griffith Vaughan, the young landlord, who was reckoned a sympathiser “in the cause,” with the most loud and the most discordant noises, but the Boniface was not to be thus charmed, and he remained at home in allegiance to her Majesty, and in affection to his family.
Shortly after this, the Pontardulais gate submitted to the levelling system, and the Rebeccaites, flushed with success, then commenced to pull down and to destroy the toll-house, which being a felonious act, out rushed the little band of heroes, armed to the teeth, headed by the magistrates before mentioned, and a serious battle ensued.
Mr. Lewis Llewellyn Dillwyn having discharged his pistols, sought a leading captive, and at once singled out Rebecca.
The struggle between the combatants was extremely violent, but he that was armed with the law, overcame his opponent, and the magistrate having wrenched a heavy club from the strong hand of the Guerrilla chief, laid him prostrate, and on his arising, one of the policemen who came up during the rencontre, shot and wounded him by a pistol, and secured him as a prisoner.
This is said to be the man who led the disgraceful attack on the house of the agent of Mr. Reece, Goring Thomas, at Llanon, and for whose capture the government offered a reward of five hundred pounds,
The mele then became general, and severe punishment was mutually inflicted; the belligerents fighting foot to foot, and dealing out wounds which will long give marked evidence of the event.
At the hottest period of the strife, the two eldest sons of Col. Cameron, of Danygraig came up in gallant style and took an intrepid part in the affray.
The Rebeccaites, finding their opponents reinforced and acting with determination, commenced a retreat, carrying their wounded with them, and leaving three of their number, (one of whom is severely handled) prisoners in the hands of the victors.
The soldiers, from Llanelly, were by this time approaching Pontardulais and met the fugitive Rebeccaites on their way, and in order to ascertain who they were, they took a sample of four or five of the fugitives.
The military, from Swansea, were also soon in the neighbourhood of Pontardulais, and escorted the civil power back to town.
Mr. Lewis Ll. Dillwyn hastened to Sketty Hall, to announce the result of the movement to Mr. Dillwyn, senior.
The neighbourhood of Swansea was excited in the highest degree when our reporter left.
The capture of some Rebeccaites (including “Rebecca herself” if you believe some of the headlines) doesn’t seem to have slowed the Rebecca movement down very much.
This article from the Cambrian shows them to be as bold as ever:
On , or early , Rebecca, with about fifty of her children (agreeable to notice given to the collector, also to Mr. M‘Kennel, the surveyor), paid a visit to this town: they arrived at the gate leading from Haverfordwest at about .
After going through some preliminaries, Becca requested her children, after firing a volley, to take down the obstacle in her way, which was done in a very short time, in the presence of a great number of the inhabitants; they then marched in military order through the town to Park-a-Morfa gate, on the road to Newport, a distance of about half a mile, which was soon demolished.
They returned in a short time in the same order, very peacefully.
— The above-named lady, with about eighty of her children, paid another visit to the town on , to complete the work they commenced on .
They arrived at about , passed through the town, in military order, Becca leading the way on horseback, to Park-a-Morfa, on the Cardigan road.
After giving notice to the inmates of the toll-house to leave, they commenced pulling it down, which was effected in about half an hour; they then returned through the town to the toll-house on the Haverfordwest road, which was also destroyed; they then proceeded to the residence of Mr. M‘Kennel, the surveyor of the roads, and totally destroyed his garden wall, which he lately took in from the Common, and doing great injury to his property.
They left at the approach of dawn, informing the inhabitants it was their intention to pay another visit, to get rid of some encroachments that had lately taken place on the Common.
They were generally armed, and kept up a regular fire — the whole were disguised.
On , the Swansea Turnpike and Wych Tree Bridge Trusts met to discuss business… including what to do about all of those Rebeccaites running about the country ripping down their toll gates.
Here are some excerpts from the coverage of the meeting in the Cambrian.
One of the items on the agenda was to remove some of the gates in the hopes that this would cause the troubles to simmer down.
Mr. Bullen, the lessee of the tolls, said that parties had lately refused paying toll at the Penyfilia bar.
This led to a general conversation, in which several Trustees took part.
Mr. [J.H.] Vivian then referred to the recommendation of the Committee [“with respect to the gates in the neighbourhood of Swansea”] to discontinue the Rhydypandy gate, and the bar at Penyfilia, which was merely a chain for the purpose of catching persons with coal.
The Committee had, in fact, recommended the discontinuation of all gates, the tolls of which were scarcely worth collecting, and also where the state of repairs in which the road was kept would not justify them in maintaining a gate…
The Rev. W. Collins said he would oppose the adoption of the report, as far as regarded the Pomfald gate.
He knew that the Committee recommended their being discontinued because no great profit was received from them; but the farmers would always retain in their minds the notion that the Trustees were actuated by fear; and who knew but that in two years time they would pull down the Cartersford gate.
He would therefore move that no gate in the Gower district should be removed within six months.
Mr. [M.] Moggridge said that with respect to the amendment, he had generally been of the opinion, that the Trustees ought not to take down any gates, because they were not required to do so; and as it might be thought to be the result of fear, he (Mr. M.) had opposed taking down any gates while the Rebecca riots continued; but as it was well known that Rebecca had a serious check on , he thought that was the time to make concessions.
Had it turned out on that the gate was destroyed and the police beaten, he (Mr. M.) would be the last man to entertain the subject, but after the lesson taught Rebecca, he should presume there were no persons so entirely regardless of their own personal security as not to agree to the concessions proposed to be made.
He could assure the meeting, that Rebecca was considerably the worse off on .
(Much cheering.)
Mr. [J.D.] Berrington took the same view of the subject as Mr. Moggridge.
Mr. Benson opposed the amendment.
There was no evidence that the Pomfald gate had been destroyed by persons resident in the neighbourhood.
He thought it was done by parties from Carmarthenshire.
Mr. Smith said, that any expenses incurred in consequence of riotous proceedings could be recovered from the hundred [district] in which such riot took place.
Rather than fill the country with military, the best method would be to make parties feel in their pockets the effect of such breaches of the peace.
The “(Much cheering)” seems to indicate that the turnpike trustees really thought that the authorities had caught Rebecca rather than having perhaps caught a Rebecca.
The Rebeccaite attacks did not seem to be much discouraged by the arrest.
The Welshman for published the depositions given on concerning the prisoners captured during the Rebeccaite action at the Pontardulais gate:
Charles Frederick Napier examined: In consequence of information I received, I proceeded, accompanied by Superintendent Peake, two serjeants, and four police constables to Pontardulais.
We arrived there a little before .
Just before we entered the village I heard a noise as if of a body of men on the other side of the river which separates the two counties.
I also heard horns blowing and a great many guns fired off.
I also heard a voice like that of a woman call out — “come, come, come,” and a voice like the mewing of cats.
Those sounds appeared to me to proceed from the direction of the Red Lion Inn, which is at a short distance from the Pontardulais turnpike gate.
Immediately after this I heard a voice call out aloud — “gate,” and in a very short space of time afterwards I heard a noise as if the gate was being destroyed.
I then proceeded with my officers and men towards the gate, and on coming in full view of the gate, I observed a number of men mounted on horseback and disguised.
Some had white dresses over them; others had bonnets on.
Most of them appeared to be dressed like women, with their faces blackened.
A portion of the men were dismounted, and in the act of destroying the gate and the toll-house.
About three of the number, who appeared to take the lead, were mounted having their horses’ heads facing the gate with their backs towards me.
At this time there was a continued firing of guns kept up by the parties assembled.
I immediately called to my men to fall in, and proceeded towards the parties who were on horseback, and who appeared to be taking the lead, and called upon them as loud as I possibly could to stop.
I used the word “stop” three or four times.
Upon coming up to them, one of the mounted men, who was disguised as a woman, turned round and fired a pistol at me.
I was close to him at the time.
I moved on a few paces and a volley was then fired by the parties assembled in the direction of myself and of my men.
I should say the volley was fired at us; this was my impression at the time.
I then endeavoured to take the parties — the three mounted in particular — into custody; and myself and the men met with considerable resistance from them and other parties.
The three men on horseback rode at us as if they intended to ride us down and get us out of the way.
The three prisoners, John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh, were amongst the parties assembled on this occasion and were taken into custody, after very considerable resistance on the part of John Hughes, and David Jones.
When taken into custody John Hugh was dressed in what appeared to me to be a gown and a bonnet, having something stuck in it, which then had the appearance of a feather, and his face was blackened.
The other two prisoners were dressed in white.
I had seen the prisoner, David Jones, with a stout stick in his hands, with which I saw him aim a blow at Lewis Llewelyn Dillwyn, Esq., a magistrate who had accompanied us; but whether the blow took effect or not, I cannot state.
After the pistol had been fired at me, and the volley in the direction of myself and my men, I discharged a pistol at, and shot the horse, upon which the man was mounted who had fired his pistol at me; and my men returned the fire of the parties, and a general skirmish then took place, in which a number of shots were fired on both sides, but in a short space of time the rioters dispersed.
Three of the horses ridden that night, by some of the parties assembled, were detained, and are now in my custody.
After the parties had dispersed, I found that the turnpike gate, with the exception of the posts, had been broken down and destroyed.
The gate-house was gutted; the windows, win[dow] frames, and door driven in, and a portion of the wall of the house pulled down.
I found the marks of small shot on the sash of one of the windows of the toll-house.
I also found on the ground, near the toll-house, amongst the ruins of the gate, two sledge hammers, two crow bars, a pick axe, and a number of sticks, which I directed my men to take possession of.
Cross-examined by John Hughes: To the best of my belief the prisoner, John Hughes, is the person who fired at me.
I believe him to be the man who took the most active part from the commencement of the affray, from his dress, and the appearance of his figure altogether.
There was but one man completely covered with white that I saw, and that one was the prisoner John Hughes, to the best of my belief.
To the best of my belief the prisoner, John Hughes, is one of the three persons who rode at us.
Cross-examined by David Jones: The prisoner, David Jones, had on what appeared to me to be a white smock frock.
I did not observe his head-dress.
I saw him very violently resisting Mr. Lewis Dillwyn, the magistrate, and the police officers.
He was struck several times on the head before he was taken.
Cross-examined by John Hugh; I did not see the prisoner, John Hugh, do any thing.
The examination of William Jenkins, of the parish of Oystermouth, in the county of Glamorgan, taken upon oath , before, us six of her Majesty’s justices of the peace acting in and for the said county, in the presence and hearing of John Hugh, David Jones, and John Hughes, who saith:— On , I accompanied Captain Napier and others of the police force to Pontardulais.
We halted within a field of the turnpike gate, and in about a quarter of an hour I heard horns blowing, and trumpets playing and all sorts of noises, and the sound of a great many horses coming over the road.
They halted opposite to the Red Lion Inn, where they fired a volley, and then advanced towards the gate.
I then heard a noise as if the gate was being broken down, and the sound of fire-arms. We then advanced towards the gate, and when we arrived there the magistrates and Captain Napier called out “Hold, hold,” Some persons in the crowd then called out “Fire away,” when John Hughes, who was on the Swansea side of the turnpike gate, and who was on horseback, fired off a gun towards us, and others of the party then fired a volley.
The flashes were in the direction towards us.
We were then ordered to fire, and we fired two rounds at them.
The prisoners David Jones and John Hugh were apprehended between the turnpike gate and Pontardulais bridge.
The prisoner John Hugh was delivered over to me, and he wished me to let him go, stating that we had done plenty to them already.
Cross-examined by the prisoner John Hughes: The prisoner John Hughes fired with a gun.
We were in the field where I first heard them coming, about a hundred yards distant from the gate.
I never saw him before, to the best of my knowledge, before that night.
I saw him shoot towards us.
I know it was him, because I never lost sight of him until I left him with Captain Napier.
I did not apprehend either of the prisoners.
I was on the bridge when the prisoner John Hugh was delivered into my charge.
I cannot say who apprehended John Hughes.
I cannot say whether there was any other person dressed in white or not.
They were dressed in all colours.
I cannot say whether he was on horseback or on foot when he fled.
He was horseback when he fired.
I never lost sight of the prisoner John Hughes, from the time he fired until I left him in the crowd struggling with Captain Napier.
In about five minutes afterwards I saw him in custody on the Carmarthenshire side of the bridge.
Soon after the prisoner John Hughes fired his gun, his horse sprung round twice or thrice, and the prisoner got off, but whether he was pulled off or not, I cannot state.
This was about a yard from the gate, on the Glamorganshire side.
He came to the ground on his feet.
I did not see the prisoner John Hughes strike Captain Napier at all.
I saw them scuffling together.
I did not see Captain Napier strike the prisoner John Hughes.
I do not know who was next to John Hughes when he came off the horse.
It was in the county of Glamorgan that I saw the prisoner and Captain Napier struggling together.
Cross-examined by David Jones: I do not recollect having seen him at all until he was in custody.
Cross-examined by John Hugh; I cannot say that I saw anything in his hand.
The examination of Henry James Peake, of the town of Neath, in the said county, taken on oath, , before us, six of her Majesty’s justices of the peace, acting in and for the said county, in the presence and hearing of John Hugh, David Jones, and John Hughes, who saith:– I am superintendent of police of the Swansea districts, in the said county.
On , I accompanied Capt. Napier, the chief constable of the said county, to Pontardulais, in the said county.
We arrived in the neighbourhood of Pontardulais .
Shortly before we arrived at Pontardulais, I several times heard the sound of fire arms and horns blowing.
When we got to the field in the immediate neighbourhood of Pontardulais, we heard shouting and the sound of firearms, which appeared to me to proceed from the direction of Pontardulais inn.
Soon after this I heard a noise as if the turnpike-gate was being broken down.
Shortly afterwards Captain Napier and the magistrates told me it was time for us to go there, and Capt. Napier gave us orders to keep together, and when within a short distance of the gate, I heard some person call out to them to stop firing, but who it was I don’t know.
Immediately upon this three or four of them rode to us, and a volley was discharged.
The policemen and myself then fired, and a regular scramble then ensued.
I was close by when the prisoner David Jones was taken, and I believe I wounded him on his head on the bridge.
On a white dress and two powder flasks, each being about half full of gunpowder, a large flannel sheet, a red handkerchief, and some letters and papers, two sledge hammers, two small hammers, a pickaxe, two crowbars, one gun, a plaid cloak, two canvass sheets, a coat with the sleeves turned inside out, two straw hats, a black hat with a piece of white cloth tied round it, another hat, an old flannel apron, a shirt and some other articles were delivered to me by Thomas Jones and other police officers, who were present at the affray at Pontardulais, the whole of which articles are now in my possession.
Cross-examined by the prisoner John Hughes.
One of the policeman also delivered to me written paper, containing five shillings, which I delivered to Captain Napier this morning.
Cross-examined by the prisoner David Jones: I did not see the prisoner David Jones raise a staff to strike Mr. Dillwyn.
I did not see a staff in his hand.
I did not see him doing anything about the gate.
Cross-examined by the prisoner John Hugh: I did not see the prisoner John Hugh do any thing about the gate.
I did not see anything in his hand.
Re-examined: When I first got near to the toll-gate, there were from one hundred to one hundred and fifty persons assembled there, most of whom were on horseback.
It was a moonlight night.
As we were proceeding on our way to Pontardulais, about two hours before we arrived there, I saw a rocket explode in the air, and heard guns firing and the sound of horns.
When we got near to Pontardulais, I saw another rocket explode in the air.
The Cambrian notes that the press had been refused admittance to this examination.
It adds these details:
We saw the prisoners previous to their entering the room in which they were examined.
The two wounded men, John Hughes and David Jones, appeared to be in good health, although the arm of the former had been severely shattered.
The other prisoner, John Hugh, appeared dressed in an old flannel gown, with a kind of straw bonnet on his head, as he was when first apprehended.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin:
Mr. Chambers, the Carmarthenshire magistrate, who was present at the apprehension of the Rebeccaites at Pontardulais last week, cultivates a farm of his own near Llanelly, the barns and outbuildings of which were consumed by fire on .
A servant boy of Mr. Chambers saw 15 men, disguised, leaving the premises immediately on the appearance of the fire: these same men were seen afterwards crossing the country to another farm belonging to Mr. Chambers, to which they also set fire.
The damage done at the first farm is estimated at £300, and that at the second at £150.
A similar report, perhaps referring to the same event, appears in The Glamorgan, Monmouth, and Brecon Gazette, Cardiff Advertiser, and Merthyr Guardian on :
I regret, says the Times Reporter, to state, that a stack of corn belonging to Mr. Chambers, one of the magistrates, was set on fire by some incendiary and completely destroyed.
I myself saw the remains of it smouldering yesterday morning on my arrival.
This is a most daring act, as the field in which it was is situate in the very centre of the town of Llanelly; it is also singular that no one attempted to extinguish it, when it might have been done so easily, and the feelings of some of the inhabitants may be judged of by expressions which were heard in the Llanelly streets while it was burning, to the following effect:– “Becca has put Mr. Chambers’s field of corn on fire and let it burn to the devil.”
The Welshman adds that “Much of Mr. Chambers’s property has been destroyed by incendiaries; no less than thirteen stacks of corn and hay, comprising the produce of Ty’nwern, and Gellyglynog farms, have already been destroyed by incendiary fires, and these irrespective of the destruction of Maensant farm.”
It said that a £50 reward had been offered for information regarding arsons on the two previous nights.
Chambers published a plea defending his work as a Magistrate, urging people to no longer countenance the destruction of his property, and claiming that “I shall be unflinching in doing my duty, and no threats against my person nor property shall in the least deter me.”
However:
Since this was issued, Mr. Chambers has been induced, probably by the entreaties of his family, to leave Llanelly.
That paper also tells the story of an informer who tried to claim £200 for ratting out an arsonist, but who was apparently not particularly convincing once he got to the examination.
The authorities arrested the man he fingered (and his son later surrendered also), but then released them the next day when the accuser couldn’t keep his story straight under examination.
The inhabitants [of Llandilo], in a very excited state, awaited the result with uneasiness and impatience, and then carried Davies in triumph through the town, accompanied by several hundred persons.
A great number of persons, chiefly women, also followed the informer, upon whose person they made a most violent attack, and had it not been for the very prompt interference of the dragoons, his life would have been sacrificed; he was, however, obliged to run for his life, and ultimately found shelter in the lock-up house, under military protection.
He even attempted to escape the following morning, but was closely watched by the mob, and was unable to escape.
He remains at the present moment in the lock-up-house, where the military are still obliged to be his guardians and protectors.
It is not quite clear whether the people sympathise with Davies as a Rebeccaite, or as one suffering under a false accusation, but we almost presume the latter, as he is a very respectable farmer, and of quiet inoffensive habits, and has satisfactorily proved an alibi, in reference to the charge preferred against him.
Incendiarism begins to show itself as a popular form of crime in South Wales.
Mr. William Chambers, a Magistrate of Llanelly, whose tact in directing the military has made him formidable to the Rebecca rioters, and who was instrumental in causing the apprehension of those who attacked Pontardulais gate, has been the object of repeated incendiary attacks.
The three last were but too successful–
Mr. Chambers [says the correspondent of the Times] owns and cultivates a farm, called Tynywern, about seven miles from Llanelly, on the Pontyberrem road.
On , the barns and outbuildings of this farm were set fire to, together with the hay and corn stacks, all of which were completely consumed, and about 300l. worth of property destroyed.
One of the farm-boys was awakened, and on looking out, saw the outbuildings on fire, and about fifteen men disguised leaving them.
The same men were then seen to go across the country to another farm occupied by Mr. W. Chambers, called Maensant; and there they set fire to the corn and hay stacks.
Three stacks of corn and one of hay, worth about 150l. were entirely consumed.
On , the house itself was set on fire, and destroyed.
The rioters have also added deliberate murder to their misdeeds—
On the road from Llanelly to Pontardulais, and within five hundred yards of the latter place, is a turnpike-gate called Hendy gate.
This was kept by an old woman upwards of seventy years of age; who has received frequent notices that if she did not leave the gate, her house should be burnt down.
About , a party of ruffians set fire to the thatch of the toll-house.
The old woman on being awakened ran into the road, and to a neighbouring cottage within twenty yards of the toll-house, shouting to the people who lived in it, “for God’s sake to come out and help her to put out the fire; there was not much.”
The occupier of this cottage, a stout able man, whom I saw last night, told me that he was afraid to go out, and begged the old woman to come into his cottage; which she refused, and went back to try and save some of her furniture.
It appears her exclamation had been overheard, for the villains returned and set fire to the thatch again.
The old woman then ran across the road, and, as I am informed, shouted out, “She knew them”; when the brutes fired at her, and shot her dead.
She staggered as far as their neighbouring cottage door, and there sank down dead, in the arms of the cottager’s wife.”
An inquest was held on the body; and, after hearing ample evidence of the facts, including medical evidence as to the fatal nature of wounds in the chest produced by the shots, the Jury returned the following most extraordinary verdict–
That the deceased died from the effusion of blood into the chest, which occasioned suffocation; but from what cause, is to this jury unknown.
At Llandilo, on , considerable excitement existed in consequence of the apprehension and subsequent examination of a respectable farmer, William Davies, on suspicion of having been concerned in setting fire to some wheat-mows, the property of Lord Dynevor.
The examination lasted till a late hour; but eventually Davies was liberated, he having proved an alibi.
The person who gave the information was supposed to have done so merely for the sake of the reward, and he very narrowly escaped with his life under protection of the Dragoons.
Three of the rioters who had been seized at Pontardulais, including John Hughes, who personated “Rebecca,” were examined at Swansea on and , and again remanded.
They were committed for trial on .
The turnpike-roads of Cardiganshire are under the management of two sets of trustees, and the two trusts are designated by the names of “the upper” and “the lower” trust.
On , the trustees of the lower trust held a meeting at Cardigan, for the purpose of considering the propriety of reducing the tolls, and of removing some of the toll-bars.
A number of important reductions were agreed to; the chief being a toll of 2d. on carts, and of 1d. on lime, instead of 4d., and the abolition of the toll at every third time of passing, one toll freeing for the whole day.
On , a number of suspected Rebeccaites were examined at the Swansea Town-Hall.
Here are some excerpts from the examination, as reported in the Monmouthshire Merlin:
Mr.
William Cox, governor of the House of Correction, at Swansea, sworn: The prisoners John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh, were delivered into my custody on .
It is customary to search prisoners when brought into the House of Correction, consequently I searched the prisoners present, commencing with John Hughes, who is wounded in the arm.
A quantity of coarse gunpowder fell from his clothes to the ground as I took them off.
I gathered it together and produce it now.
I then searched his pockets, and found a quantity of silver and other money — ten half crowns, twenty-four shillings, nine sixpences, one penny, four halfpence, and a half sovereign.
I also found a piece of paper with something written upon it in Welsh, a piece of an old Welsh hymn-book, twenty-one copper percussion caps, and a little bag.
I next searched the man wounded in the head, David Jones, and found a knife in his pocket.
I did not search John Hugh, but I believe he had 8d and a knife.
The following is a correct translation of the writing on the paper taken from
Hughes:–
Daniel Jones, Brynhir, — Come with your armour (or covering) to Lanbystia, to assist us, on , or else you shall not have another (or further) notice.
Becca.
PC Thomas Jones examined: I live at Ystalyfera, in the parish of Llanguicke.
I accompanied Captain Napier and others of the police force of this county, to Pontardulais, on the night of .
We arrived at Pontardulais , and proceeded to the turnpike gate.
When we arrived there we saw a man on horseback, on the Swansea side of the turnpike gate.
There was a great crowd of people upon the other side of the gate, most of whom were on horseback.
They were dressed with white sheets over their bodies, their faces were blackened, and upon their heads they had straw hats.
In the hats were stuck pieces of fern.
I ran on, and took hold of a gun from a man on horseback, but the man escaped.
A great many guns were fired before we reached the gate.
On I delivered that gun to Sergt. Jenkins.
It was then in the same state as when I took it from the man.
Mr.
Superintendent Peake produced a quantity of arms, implements, ammunition, female apparel, &c., which were taken at the scene of the outrage.
One of the articles produced was a woman’s cap, which was given to him by the prisoner Jones.
PC Peter Wright
examined, proved that he was on duty at the Pontardulais gate riot, where he
saw the prisoner J. Hugh discharge a gun at the police. He afterwards fell off
his horse, and ran away, taking his horse with him. Prisoner threw his gun
down, when he came off his horse, and the witness picked it up.
PC William Robertson Williams examined, stated that he was on duty at the riot, where the prisoner David Jones struck him a violent blow on his shoulder.
Witness, being injured in the leg, went into the toll house, while the police were dispersing the rioters, and there saw a man with David Jones, the latter flourishing a bar, with which he again struck witness on the shoulder.
Witness struck him a blow with his cutlass, on which he dropped the iron bar and ran out and was taken by Sergeant Jones.
PC John Price,
examined, stated that in the affray at Pontardulais gate he saw a man on
horseback this side of the gate, and a large mob. Witness took John Hugh off a
horse in front of the mob, with a while cloak over his body, a white cloth
over his hat, and a red handkerchief round his neck — he had a gun in his
hand, which he fired at the police — he bad also a tin horn. Witness gave him
and Hughes into the custody of
Sergt. Jenkins.
William Abraham Lewis, toll collector at Pontardulais, examined: I am a shoemaker, and have been collector at Pontardulais gate for upwards of a twelvemonth.
On , I moved my goods out of the house, because people told me Becca was coming there.
After I moved my goods I stopped there, and I saw a party of men coming down over the bridge, most of them being on horseback.
I instantly hid myself in the fields behind the house.
While the crowd was opposite the Inn, I heard some shots fired.
In about three quarters of an hour, I went back to the toll house, and found the doors and windows broken, part of the pine end wall demolished, and the gate in pieces — the posts were standing.
Police Sergeant George Jones stated that in the attack upon Pontardulais gate,
where the rioters were firing guns and blowing horns, he pursued and captured
Jones, while running out of the toll house.
The four prisoners taken by Mr.
Chambers and the military in Carmarthenshire, on , were then placed at the bar.
Three of them were mere boys — one apparently only thirteen years of age, and the fourth seemed a young man of the age of five-and-twenty. [The Welshman, in another article, lists them as “William Hugh, a lad of 15 years of age, the son of a very respectable farmer of Talyclew, dressed in woman’s clothes — Thomas Williams, a servant to a farmer at Llangennech — Henry Rogers, a farm servant at Penllwyngwyn, and Lewis Davies, farmer of Scybor Ucha, near Pontardulais.”] The following evidence was produced:–
William Chambers, jun,
Esq, examined: I am one of her
Majesty’s justices of the peace for the county of Carmarthen. In consequence
of information I received, I proceeded on
to
Pontardulais, accompanied by a party of soldiers under Captain Scott. We set
out from Llanelly — Llanelly is distant from Ponlardulais six or seven
miles. On the way, I saw a rocket explode in the air, in a direction between
Llanedy and Llanon. On arriving at Gwilly Bridge, which is about half a mile
distant from Pontardulais, I heard some horns sounded. There was one
particular note which I noticed, which was repeated several times. Immediately
after I heard the last note, I heard the report of fire arms in the direction
of Pontardulais bridge, upon which I requested Captain Scott to load. I then
advanced to Gwilly bridge, and having arrived there, I was in advance of the
men, and saw the prisoner Lewis Davies come in from Pontardulais, over the
railway, towards the place where I was. I immediately followed and saw him put
something which he had in his left hand either under his coat, or into his
pocket. I put my hand there, and pulled from under his coat, or out of his
pocket, a woman’s cap. He was dressed in his usual clothes. The bottom part of
his face appeared to be blackened. I asked him where he had been, and he said,
“I’ll be quiet — I’ll come with you.” He was then given in charge to
Sergt. Gibb. Up to this time
I had heard the discharge of about forty or fifty shots within about seven
minutes. I then went with the rest of the soldiers in the direction of the
road leading towards the Hendy bridge, imagining that an attack was to be made
on the gate. When I arrived at the gate, I heard the galloping of horses, and
I immediately concluded that the Dragoons were approaching from Swansea. About
the same time I heard persons approaching from Hendy bridge towards
Pontardulais, and the prisoner William Hughes was taken shortly afterwards. He
was dressed in woman’s clothes, — a straw bonnet on his head, and his face
blackened. I went on to Pontardulais, accompanied by Captain Scott and some of
his soldiers. Upon arriving at the bridge, the Dragoons galloped on, and I
thought were going to charge us, but on perceiving who we were, they desisted.
I proceeded to the gate — found the gate destroyed — the internal partitions
of the toll house destroyed — and the windows smashed in. I saw three men
there in custody. On my way back to Llanelly, the prisoner, William Hughes,
told me he had a horn, and he would show me where it was. I went with him to a
certain spot, and there found a horn, close to the spot where he was taken.
Sergeant Henry Gibbs, of the 73rd regiment, examined: I was on duty on , between Pontardulais and Llanelly.
I was stationed on the railway near the Gwilly bridge.
Whilst we were there I heard some men coming along the railway; I stopped them.
I see them here now.
They are the prisoners, Henry Rogers and Thomas Williams.
They were not disguised at all or armed.
They seemed to be very much frightened because I brought the bayonet down as if I was going to run it through them, and told them to slop.
I told them I would let them go if they would tell me where others were gone to.
They said they had nothing to do with the gate, but merely went out to see.
On , a coroner’s inquest was held concerning the death of Sarah Williams, the toll collector at Hendy Turnpike Gate, who had been shot in the course of that gate’s destruction.
This inquest rather incredibly would find the death of Williams to have been from an “unknown” cause — thus precluding a homicide investigation.
It seems to have been an act of jury nullification meant to shield Rebecca and her followers from the authorities.
Here is how the Monmouthshire Merlin covered the
inquest:
On the body of Sarah Williams, the toll collector at the Hendy Turnpike Gate.
On , an inquest was held at Pontardulais, before William Bonville, Esq., coroner, on the body of Sarah Williams, aged 75.
The Jury.
Griffith Henry
Jenkin Henry
Thomas Samuel
John Bowen
John Thomas
John Pugh
Walter Hopkins
David Davies
John Bowen, jun.
Samuel Griffith
John Thomas
David Evans
John Jones
Richard Davies
The Evidence.
John Thomas, labourer, sworn: Is a house carpenter, residing near the Hendy gate toll house, in the parish of Llanedy, in the county of Carmarthen.
Knew the deceased, Williams, who was the toll-collector at the Hendy gale, and has been so for about a week.
On , or early on Sunday morning, I was alarmed by report of five or six guns near the Hendy gate.
I was then in bed, and soon after the deceased came to my house, and called me and my family to assist in putting out the fire at the toll-house, which had been set on fire and was then burning; but we did not go, as we were afraid to do so.
In about a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes afterwards I heard the report of another gun; and about a minute after deceased came to my house, and my wife went to the door and saw deceased coming towards her.
She (the deceased) was crawling along by the wall to support herself until she came to the door, when she cried out, “Dear, dear,” and fell down, and I found she was dead.
The deceased has been a toll collector at many gates for years.
Margaret Thomas, wife of the last witness, said that
, the deceased came to our house, and asked my
husband and me to get up directly, as some one had set the toll house on fire.
I went out to the door and told her to carry her things out of her house. She
went back to the toll house, and took her furniture out on the road. I asked
her several times to come into our house, but she did not come. I heard the
report of four or five guns afterwards, and the deceased, in about
three-quarters of an hour after I had first spoken to her, came towards my
house, at which time I was standing within the door, which was open. The
deceased did not speak a word that I heard, and seeing that she was exhausted,
I laid hold of her round the waist, and she sank down at my door, on the
outside. My husband came out, and we took her into the house, but she did not
speak a word. My husband held her, and put her in a silting posture on the
floor, and she died in about two minutes. I did not see any blood, except a
little on her forehead. I thought at first that she was frightened to death. I
did not hear the noise of horses, nor footsteps, nor did I see any persons
from the beginning to the end. I did not hear any horns blown, or any
shouting. My husband was in the house all the time.
By the jury: I did not think from the blood on the forehead that she had had a blow, and that that had been the cause of her death.
I did not think she died from a blow, but by suffocation from loss of breath.
By the Coroner: About
I saw the toll house and gate still standing, and in the course of the night I
saw the toll house on fire. That was when the deceased called us up to put it
out, and in the morning I found the house and and gate both pulled down, there
being only the walls standing. The house had a thatched roof, and contained
two rooms. The toll board had fallen down some time back, and was then in the
house in pieces.
Mr.
Benjamin Thomas sworn: I am a surgeon, residing at Llanelly.
I have, with Mr.
Cooke, inspected and made a post mortem examination of the body of the deceased Sarah Williams, now lying at the Black Horse, Pontardulais.
We examined the body externally and internally.
On the anterior view of the body, whilst the corpse was lying on its back, from the feet to the breast there did not appear to be any mark of violence.
The marks of shots were seen penetrating the nipple of the left breast, one in the arm-pit of the same side, and several shot marks in both arms.
On the external end of the left clavicle there were two shot marks, one on the left side of the wind pipe, several on the forehead, and one in the external angle of the right eye.
There was blood on the cloths covering the breast, and the marks of blood having escaped from the mouth.
In moving the body to a sitting posture, a considerable quantity of fluid blood escaped from the mouth.
The back view of the body did not shew any mark of violence.
On moving the integuments of the scalp, the shot marks observed on the surface were found in the bony structure of the skull, but not penetrating through it.
Upon removing the bone covering the brain, the external covering of the brain, or dura mater, was exposed entire, and appeared slightly vascular, as did also the entire structure of the brain.
The lateral ventricles contained no more fluid than is generally found in them.
On opening the chest the left lung pressed higher up than is natural, and was darker in colour, and on cutting into it, the substance was found considerably congested, with marks of some shots on the surface, two of which we found in the substance of that lung.
In the right lung, there was an adhesion to the side, on nearly the whole of its external surface, with a considerable effusion of dark coloured blood into its substance.
In the cavity of the left pleura there were about three pints of blood, a large portion of which was in a coagulated state, and the remainder fluid.
The head was natural, and we did not proceed further with our examination, being satisfied as to what was the cause of death, which was the loss of blood and the state of the lungs and pleura arising from the shot found in the substance of the lungs, and which had caused this extravasation of blood.
Mr. John Kirkhouse Cooke, of Llanelly, surgeon, corroborated Mr. B. Thomas’s evidence.
The jury then retired to consider their verdict, and in about a quarter of an hour returned the following:– “That the deceased died from the effusion of blood into the chest, which occasioned suffocation, but from what cause is to this jury unknown.”
Other newspapers went into more detail about Cooke’s [or perhaps Cook’s] testimony, which more than merely corroborating Thomas’s conclusions, backed them up with additional details.
Here, for instance, is the Cambrian’s version:
I examined the body of the deceased with the last witness — found no external marks of violence, excepting some gun-shot wounds.
The shots were found in the bony structure of the head, and in the breast.
The lungs on the left side protruded considerably, and also had the appearance of having a considerable effusion of blood; and, on removing them, we discovered an immense effusion of blood into the cavities of the chest — the greater portion of it in a fluid state, but a considerable quantity was coagulated.
It amounted altogether to about three pounds of blood.
On tracing the surface of the lungs, on the interior part of it, I discovered distinct patches of effused blood, also opening, which had the appearance of being made by shot, which I traced into the substance of the lungs, and extracted two.
They were the ordinary sized shot.
This examination was sufficiently satisfactory to shew the cause of death, which would have been produced from the large quantity of blood effused into the chest, and which impeded the motion of the lungs, as well as by the large quantity of blood lost, destroying vitality.
There was also a large quantity of blood escaped through the mouth.
There was no other cause to attribute this effusion of blood into the cavity of the chest, but by the shots penetrating the lungs and injuring its vessels.
The Welshman reports that on , a policeman insulted a woman in the company of a soldier, the soldier later caught up to the policeman, and “a furious collision took place” between cops and soldiers “for some time — the combatants amounting to 30 or 40 persons.” This gives some clues as to the state of morale among law enforcement, as do these details: “Every evening since the station house has been literally besieged with persons, yelling and hooting the police, and cheering the military… Several persons are in custody for withholding their assistance to the police when called upon ‘in the Queen’s name.’ ”
The examination of the suspected Rebeccaites captured around Pontardulais continued on .
On a hunch, I cross-checked the newspaper account of the list of 12 Magistrates who were conducting this investigation with the earlier newspaper account of the meeting of 23 trustees of the Swansea Turnpike and Wych Tree Bridge Trusts.
The names J.H. Vivian, Samuel Davies, T. Edward Thomas, John Grove, J.D. Berrington, and J.D. Llewelyn appear in both lists.
So it seems that the magistrates acting as grand juries to investigate the tollgate attacks were largely the same set of people who were profiting from the tollgates.
At least half of the people in this grand jury were also trustees of that one trust.
No wonder the Rebeccaites didn’t trust the local authorities to rectify things.
At the Hall was
crowded by persons, most of whom had evidently travelled a considerable
distance, for the purpose, of being present at the adjourned examination.
The prisoners, John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh having been placed at
the bar, were told that they stood charged with having, on
, with divers evil-disposed persons, at the parish of
Llandilo-Talybont, in this county, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously
assembled together, to the disturbance of the public peace; and being then and
there assembled, did feloniously and unlawfully begin to demolish and pull
down the dwelling-house of one William Lewis, there situate.
The Chairman having cautioned the prisoners, and informed them that anything
they said would be taken down in writing, and probably used against them,
asked them if they wished make any statements in reply to the charge.
The prisoners severally replied — “I have nothing to say now.”
Mr. Attwood then informed them that there was a second charge against them — namely, a charge against John Hughes of having feloniously, unlawfully, and with malice aforethought committed an assault upon Captain Napier, with intent to kill and murder him
[the coverage in The Cambrian makes this more specific: “charging him with having, on the night in question, in the parish of Llandilo-Talybont, a certain pistol loaded with gunpowder and shot, which he held in his right hand at and against one Charles Frederick Napier, feloniously and unlawfully did shoot, with the intention feloniously, willfully, and of malice aforethought, the said Charles Frederick Napier to kill and murder”];
and the prisoners David Jones and John Hugh were charged with aiding and abetting John Hughes.
The prisoners severally said — “I have nothing to say till the trial.”
The prisoners, William Hughes and Lewis Davies, were informed that they stood
charged with having unlawfully thrown down a turnpike gate — to which they
replied that they had nothing to say.
The Chairman then addressed the prisoners as follows:– “John Hughes, David
Jones, John Hugh, William Hughes, and Lewis Davies, I have now to inform you
that you are committed for trial at the first Assizes held for this county.”
On the application of Mr. Hugh Williams, William Hughes and Lewis Davies, were
admitted to bail.
The Rebeccaites are determined to have their revenge and not to show themselves over awed, or their nocturnal sports stopped, by the late occurrence at Pontardulais, for on a great number of them assembled and carried away the Pontardulais gate, at which the police had fired on them a few nights before.
, at a late hour intimation was given to the Mayor of Haverfordwest that the Rebeccaites had assembled at Windyhill, and were preparing to attack the Prendergast Turnpike Gate and Toll House.
No time was lost by the Mayor, who in company with his brother Magistrates, the Military, and the civil forces under his command, repaired thither.
After waiting there some long and watchful hours, however, they found that the intimation of Rebecca’s intended visit was a hoax.
I see a few reports from around this time where the Rebeccaites use this tactic of sending the authorities on wild goose chases.
The same issue carries a report saying that on the same night, a troop of Marines and another troop of Dragoons dashed off to prevent Rebecca from “destroying Capt. Prichard of Tyllwyd’s house and property.”
Rebecca never showed there, and the reporter supposes this was a diversion meant to provide cover for the Rebeccaite destruction of the Llecrhyd weir.
Infringements on the commons, whether in fields or fisheries or what have you, were among the secondary grievances that Rebecca and her Daughters sometimes took to remedy.
That story adds:
Several large meetings are weekly kept with the Rebeccaites on the mountains, to what purpose God only knows.
Some say they want to be strong enough so as to attack the soldiers at Newcastle Workhouse, and to destroy some other property.
As soon as the Marines went off last night, an old man who is in the Workhouse commenced to break the windows from inside, and before he could be secured he destroyed 42 panes of glass, and said he would draw the house down if he could.
Here is Rebecca’s spirit inside as well as outside.
Another story (from the same issue) on the destruction of the weir has this amusing ending:
We understand that a rear guard of the Marines, on their return from Velingigfran [a different weir they had been sent to guard] fell in with the Rebeccaites, 2 of them were in advance, and the 3rd was a little behind, Becca asked him if he had a musket?
Yes!
(replied the Marine.)
Is it loaded?
Yes!
Is it capped?
Yes!
Take off the cap then and come with us.
He was then taken to a public house in the neighbourhood, and treated with several glasses of ale, and then discharged.
He arrived in Cardigan two hours after his comrades.
As Rebecca started getting bolder and taking on a greater variety of battles, it started to become easier to impersonate her, as it were, for personal grievances or personal gain.
Here are two stories from that same Welshman that show this danger:
Rebeccaism at Cardigan.
About five years ago, a number of young men and women returning from a wedding near Cardigan, chanced to meet two venerable ladies, whom the silken bonds of hymen had never entwined — they were within one day of 30 years each, unmarried ladies never grow older.
One of the young lads said he would give Miss W–– a kiss; on which another of his party said he would give him half a crown if he would.
“Done” said the lad.
The ladies advanced, and Davy ran up to one of them, threw his arms round her neck and attempted the tender infliction.
It was however most resolutely resisted; Davy however won his half crown but got fined a sovereign for the assault.
The story was not forgotten, for last week these maiden ladies were visited by a large party of young Rebeccaites, one of whom tapped at the lady’s chamber window and told her “Rebecca had called for the sovereign paid by Davy for a kiss some years before, and she had better pay it or else.”
Wisdom grows with years, and the maiden was wise.
She quietly told the party “to call again to-morrow,” and they should have the money.
The Rebeccaites being young believed it, and walked away.
Many of them no doubt by this time, very much “wish they may get it.”
Sham ’Beccaites.
On , John Francis and John Jones, two sturdy beggars (the latter of whom having a maimed arm) were brought up before the sitting magistrates, John Evans, Esq. (Mayor), and Capt. W. Powell, under the following circumstances:– Mr. Lewis Jones, merchant, stated that the two prisoners a few days before came to his shop to beg — the latter showing him the stump of his arm.
Having given them some halfpence, Mr. L. Jones, in scanning them a little more narrowly, saw they were in drink, and charged them with it.
They did not deny the charge, but said that they had received 5s. from Mr. Crawshay, the great Merthyr iron master, then at Aberystwith, and they had been drinking rather too freely at his expense, and knowing that Mr. Crawshay was not at Aberystwith, Mr. Jones immediately found they were impostors, and gave information which led to their apprehension, by police constable Jones.
The principal other witness against the prisoners was Mrs. Jones, of Penybwlch, a farm a few miles south of Aberystwith.
The prisoners a few days before had called at the farm house, and pretended they had been maimed by being blown up in a coal pit — the prisoner Francis baring his breast to show the sores that arose from the pretended accident.
Mrs. Jones offered them some food, which they positively refused — they would have money, and nothing else.
They talked about “Rebecca,” and said there were 16 of them, but they had been advised by the Rev. Mr. Lewis, of Llanrhystyd, not to go all in a body to the different farm houses, lest they might be taken for Rebecca’s children.
This witness found very great difficulty to get rid of the prisoners, and not before they saw her husband was in the house.… The magistrates commented with becoming severity upon the conduct of the prisoners going about pretending to be 16 in number in the present unsettled state of the country, and sentenced Francis to 3 months’ imprisonment with hard labour, and Jones to 2 months with hard labour.
Mr.
Turney, a London police officer of preventive and detective skill — who was in Newport, during our memorable troubles — accompanied by several aids, passed through Newport for Rebecca-land on .
A grand demonstration among the Farmers of tie several parishes of Llandebie, Llanarthney, Llanfihangel-Aberbythych, Llanedy, and Beltws, in the county of Carmarthen, took place on a hill called Garnfig, between the parishes of Llanarthney and Llanfihangel-Aberbytliych, about a mile distant on the Llandilo road from Cross Hands, Carmarthenshire.
The meeting had been announced for eleven o’clock, at which time there were comparatively few persons on the field, but the numbers continued increasing until twelve or one o’clock, when the number present was estimated at three thousand individuals, nearly all of whom were fanners or agricultural labourers…
Mr. [Hugh] Williams then said, that… it had been his lot to have been called upon to state the object for which the meeting had been convened.
It was known to all that they had numerous grievances to complain of, which they had long suffered.
One was the turnpike-toll grievance, which was well known to them.
The great multiplicity of gates had given rise to outrages of the most desperate character, which he hoped would be soon discontinued, and the country return to its former peaceable state.
It also appeared that the agriculturalists were reduced to such a state of poverty as scarcely to be able to pay for the conveyance of manure.…
Other complaints on the agenda included:
The new Poor Law, which the speaker characterized as having been designed by the upper classes for their financial benefit, and as burdening rural parishes particularly, while at the same time making things worse for the poor.
The “Tithe Commutation Act” which had ended up increasing
tithes.
An increase in the expense of local government.
I’m going to mostly omit the discussion of those and stick to the parts that dealt with the tollgates and with Rebecca’s activities.
He (Mr. W.) regretted to find that, notwithstanding the resolutions agreed to at the Mynydd Sylen meeting [condemning Rebeccaism], great outrages and excesses had been committed, and they had thereby lost the assistance of several gentlemen who would have helped them.
They perceived the effect of those outrages that day.
He thought it would certainly have been desirable to have the company of those gentlemen.
He was exceedingly sorry to find that private pique had been carried so far as to cause the destruction of property.
He was not aware that Mr. Adams, of Middleton-Hall, had in any way so stepped beyond the pale of his Magisterial duties, as to give rise to such a feeling of antipathy against him.
A man, having any regard for his oath, must perform his Magisterial duties.
Another gentleman had been most unjustly accused of turning round — he referred to Mr. Wm. Chambers, jun., than whom a more honourable gentleman did not exist.
It had been reported that he took an unworthy part in the suppression of the outrages at Pontardulais.
Now he (Mr. W.) attended the examination at Swansea, and took notes of the evidence of the police and others, which proved that Mr. Chambers was entirely free from having attempted to make an onslaught upon the people.
Mr. Williams here entered into the details elicited at the examination of the prisoners, to prove that Mr. Chambers was not near the spot when they were fired upon.
He (Mr. W.) made those few remarks, to prove that Mr. Chambers was entirely guiltless of the charge brought against him, and he hoped that notion would be dissipated, and that his property would not, in future, be subject to destruction and depredation.
With those observations, he would read the petition to the Queen.
It was in the power of any one to assent or dissent from its prayer, or any portion of it.
Our space will not permit the insertion of the petition at length — we give the substance.
The first part relates to turnpike-tolls, which are complained of as being very heavy, and prays that all turnpike-trusts may be consolidated, and placed under one management, which would regulate the distances at which gates were to be placed from each other.…
Mr. Williams informed the meeting, that when seeking a seconder of the petition, a letter had been given him from Mr. Chambers, jun., stating his reasons for not attending their meeting, which he hoped, with the explanation he had given, would satisfy them.
The letter, which was read, repelled the false report that Mr. C. had shot one of the rioters at Pontardulais, a charge probably arising from his having procured the wounded man some water, after the affray was over.
Mr. C. also maintained that he had faithfully kept all the promises made by him.
He said he would oppose nightly meetings, and would always do so.
He also stated that he was amongst the first landlords who lowered their rents, and recommended others to do the same.
He also offered to pay the police-rate for his tenants, and never failed to grant them an extension of time for the payment of rent when asked to do so.
He had also kept his promise relative to the Three Commotts Trust.
The writer asked the meeting if they thought they would have their grievances redressed by firing people’s property — was not that the method of aggravating the distress?
Let the tenants of, and the labourers employed upon, the three farms which had been burnt, bear testimony.
He had had written the letter to satisfy himself and not the wretches who had devastated his property.
His life had been threatened, but let the miscreant who had done so beware, lest he be paid for his temerity, as he (Mr. C.) was resolved to do his best to defend himself.
A Man in the crowd said, it is Mr. Chambers’s own neighbours who complain of his conduct; they would not have so bad an opinion of him, if he had acted up to his promises.
Mr. Williams did not think so; but were that true, it was no reason that his houses should be burnt down.
Several remarks were made by Persons in the crowd, some of whom treated the letter with levity and jeers.
Mr. Stephen Evens proceeded.
He did not know who Rebecca was, and why she always hatched at night; but he would make one remark with reference to her.
He knew that if old women in making broth did not take it off the fire in time, the potatoes would get “potch.”
He thought it time for Rebecca to take off the pot, or she would create a “potch.”
Something very much like that had been created at Pontardulais lately.
No person who understood what he was about would burn property, as the loss might be recovered from the hundred [district].
Mr. Wm. Evans, of Pontyberem, then addressed the meeting in a very animated Welsh speech.
He said that everything was either a cause or an effect.
A good deal had been spoken of outrages; but they unfortunately were but effects produced by a cause, and the cause was that the country was oppressed to a greater degree than it could bear.
Like a horse greatly overladen, the burden must be lessened or he would break down.
Let the cause be removed, the effect would soon cease.
The Speaker then entered upon the toll grievance.
It was not enough to make the farmer pay for travelling on the parish roads, but they were actually compelled to pay toll on private roads leading to their farms.… Still, he did not like to see ricks of hay burnt.
That would not improve their conditions.
Letters had been read to the meeting vindicating the conduct of some parties.
He remembered rending, that even the devil had endeavoured to defend himself.
(Hear.)
It had been asked who Rebecca was.
He had never seen her; but he thought that Rebecca was every man who earned his bread by the sweat of his brow.
(Cheers.) [emphasis mine –♇]
Mr. William Thomas, of Rhosfawr, Llanon, addressed the meeting.… The Turnpike Trustees, where were they? was there one in the meeting?
If so, let him come forward and reason upon the subject.
They were met to legally discuss their grievances in the middle of day.
He knew three gates — he would name them, Rhydyffynon, Fairfach, and Rhydytruscog gates, within a mile-and-a-half of each other, and at all of which toll must be paid.
(Cries of “Quarry-fach gate.”)
Yes, that was another gate within a very short distance; but thanks to Becca for pulling them down, though he would prefer her having done so during the day.
Reference had been made to boiling potatoes.
He thought they might take the pot down for Carmarthenshire, and, if necessary, let it boil on for Glamorganshire.
The speaker concluded by entering at some length into the details of the turnpike-toll grievance.
One speaker expressed cynicism about petitions (“There had been thousands of petitions sent from the people, until the table actually groaned…”), but the meeting unanimously approved another one anyway.
Eleven policemen belonging to the London police force arrived in this town on
by steamer from Bristol. We
understand that they have since proceeded to Carmarthenshire, with the view of
assisting the authorities “to catch Becca.” Though the Metropolitan force may
be adepts at thief catching in the various resorts for such characters in
London, it is difficult to believe that they will be more successful in
breaking the combined and organised forces of Rebecca than the military, who,
week after weak have scoured the country in vain.
At Maesgwenllian, near Kidwelly, several bailiffs were put in possession for
arrears of rent, to the amount of
150l.; but about
,
Rebecca and a great number of her followers made their appearance on the
premises, and after driving the bailiffs off, conveyed away the whole of the
goods distrained upon. As soon as daylight appeared, the bailiffs returned,
but found no traces of Rebecca nor of the goods which had been taken away.
Claims on the Hundreds in consequence of Losses by Rebeccaism.
An enquiry was held at the Guildhall, Carmarthen, last week, before a large
bench of Magistrates, to assess the amount of damage sustained at certain
toll-houses, in consequence of the proceedings of Rebecca and her daughters.
A great number of witnesses were examined and cross-examined at great length,
the enquiry lasting for five successive hours. At the conclusion an order was
made to pay for the damage done at Minke toll-house, amounting to the sum of
15l. and
3l.
7s.
6d. costs of the
application; for the damage done at Porthyrhyd toll-house, the sum of
29l., with the sum of
2l.
6s. costs of application,
together with 3l.
7s. high constable’s
claim — for the damage sustained by Evan Thomas (the Porthyrhyd lion), by the
destruction of his furniture,
2l.
1s.
6d., and costs
2l.
4s.; and high constable’s
charges, 1l.
1s.
8d. Croesllwyd
toll-house was to have been brought forward, but the justices were occupied
so long in the foregoing enquiries, that it stood adjourned to a future day.
These expenses, of course, fall on the respective hundreds [districts].
From the classified ads of the Cambrian (among others):
Whereas Sarah Williams, when residing at the Hendy Bridge Toll House, in the Parish of Llanedy, in the County of Carmarthen, was, on , Shot by some Person or Persons unknown, — a reward of five hundred pounds is hereby offered, and will be paid to any Person or Persons who shall give such Information or Evidence as shall lead to the Apprehension and Conviction of any of those by whom the Murder was committed; and her Majesty’s most gracious Pardon will be extended to any accomplice, who may give the necessary evidence, so that such accomplice shall not be the person who fired the shot by which Sarah Williams was killed.
Geo. Rice Trevor,
Vice-Lieutenant County Carmarthen.
By letters from correspondents residing in various parts of the country, we perceive that Rebecca’s hostility against turnpike-gates is far from ceasing.
Indeed, it does not appear that she is in any way inclined to permit of a truce, much less to make a declaration of peace, and a cessation of hostilities.
It was stated in our last, that the Pontardulais gate, at which the serious collision between the Rebeccaites and the police took place, had been carried away a few days after that occurrence.
Since then, the Trustees caused a bar to be erected there, as a temporary substitute for a gate.
In consequence of an intimation received by the authorities of an intended attack upon the bar on , it was sedulously watched on that night, and as a matter of course, Rebecca was not seen; but, on , when the military had quitted their posts, Rebecca removed the bar.
Since which, a chain, which had been placed across the road, has also been carried away, and on , another bar was removed.
On , a pair of new gates were erected there, but how long they shall stand, remains to be seen.
We fear they must share the fate of their predecessors.
Since the first destruction of the gate, no tolls have been collected during night, the collector deeming it the best part of valour to retire soon after sunset, and attend early on the following morning.
However, it appears that he was not at his post early on , as a number of farmers and others who attend Swansea Market, meeting with no obstruction in the shape of a toll gate or even a toll-collector, passed toll free.
In the afternoon, as the farmers were returning, the collector demanded payment from those who had paid no toll in the early part of the day.
The latter, like the lawyers, cited their free passage in the morning as a precedent, and contended that, as they had passed free in the morning, the same rule should be adhered to in the evening.
The collector decided the “precedent to be bad in law,” and demanded his toll.
Some persons paid, but others insisted upon passing toll free.
Since then, the collector has received a threatening letter from ’Becca, advising him to quit, or he must take the consequences of incurring her displeasure.
—
We learn by our Llandovery Correspondent’s letter, that on , a party of Rebecca’s followers passed through the village of Cilycwm, in Carmarthenshire, and proceeded to Porthyrhyd gate, on the road leading form Llandovery to Lampeter, which they speedily levelled.
From thence these destructives passed onwards towards Llandovery, demolishing the posts of two bars which have not been in use for some years.
About , they halted upon Doldyhirion bridge, a mile distant from Llandovery, where they remained for a short time, awaiting, it is surmised, some signal to inform them that the military had retired to rest.
At the signal of command they set to work in right earnest with five or six saws, by which the gates, posts, and rails, near that bridge, were completely cleared away.
During the progress of the destruction of the gate, they fired several gun shots into the toll-house, for the purpose of intimidating the collector and his wife, both of whom are advanced in years.
When the work of destruction was over, a volley was fired, and all the rioters departed along the road leading to Cilycwm, having left a threatening notice with the collector, who, in consequence, has “resigned office” and removed his goods.
—
A correspondent writing from Landyssil, Cardiganshire, says — “I believe the general feeling among the people respecting Rebeccaism is much the same as it is about Llanelly, Pontardulais, &c.
There is not a single toll gate in this neighbourhood, neither have we had any , when they were destroyed by the Rebeccaites.”
Rebecca and the Oddfellows.
On a large meeting of Oddfellows was held at the town-hall, Llanelly, attended by many of the most respectable and influential inhabitants, for the purpose of taking into consideration the “state of things” and of expressing their opinions upon the various topics which now agitate the public mind, especially in their own county, Carmarthenshire, and the adjoining counties.
“What passed during the meeting,” adds our correspondent — “I, of course, had no opportunity of knowing, as none but Oddfellows were admitted, but from the frequent signs of approbation which reached the ears of persons in the street, unanimity seemed to prevail.
After the business of the meeting was over, the members walked in procession through the town, their gay dresses producing a pleasing effect by gas light.”
It will be perceived by the resolutions agreed to at the meeting, and which are inserted in our advertising columns, that the members of this loyal and patriotic society, while admitting the existence of grievances, “view with feelings of deep regret the nightly outrages and destruction of private property which have taken place in the neighbourhood,” and pledge themselves to exert their influence to counteract such unjustifiable and nefarious proceedings.
A meeting of this trust, attended by an unusually large concourse of trustees… ordered that Bwlch Llangorse Gate, Senny Bridge Gate, the Side Gate in Llanvaes, the Groesfford Gate, the Side Gate at Tairderwen, Llyswen Side Gate, the Watten Side Gate, Pontcumbeth Side Gate, and the West Side Gate at Builth, be taken down and discontinued… that the Penygenfford Gate be abandoned, and that the Talgarth Gate and the Tretower Gate on that road, clear each other…
This article, from the Monmouthshire Merlin, touches only indirectly on the work of the Rebeccaites, but gives a good feel for the sorts of concerns that were finding that movement sympathy and followers in the Welsh population:
A large meeting of farmers, freeholders, miners, and inhabitants from the several parishes of Llanguick, Llandilo, Llangadock, and Bettws, was held on a common, Bryn Cwm Llynfell, situate on the border of three counties, viz., Glamorganshire, Brecnockshire, and Carmarthenshire, on .
John Jones, Esq., of Bryn Ammon, in the chair.
The place of the meeting was romantically situated in the very heart of the mountain, Mynydd dû, or Black Mountain, forming the northern boundary.
The approach was somewhat difficult and dangerous, passing over an extensive common or bog, called Waun Cae Gurwen Common, which a stranger would find almost impossible to traverse safely without a guide.
Being accompanied by gentlemen who well knew the track, we succeeded in crossing and recrossing without accident, although in the dark, the meeting not terminating till It was necessary, however, to march in Indian file, passing the word of caution from van to rear when any dangerous part occurred.
At length a steep and rugged descent into Guthe Vaur Valley, terminated the perils and dangers of our passage, and the generous hospitality of our worthy chairman and host, at Bryn Ammon House, revived our drooping energies; it was, however, about ere we reached Swansea, after an absence of nearly eighteen hours.
The Chairman opened the meeting by stating, that the meeting was called to take into consideration the cause of the present difficulties and distress under which the country suffered.
That the various complaints would be laid before the meeting by the different speakers, whom he requested to state unhesitatingly their opinions on the subject.
The Chairman then said it was intended by nature that every man should be happy; if he was not so, there must be a cause, and the object of the meeting was to enquire into the cause of the present misery and distress.
Had any one anything to say?
Mr. Benjamin Hall, of Fountain Hall: Allow me to say, the great men who have made the laws, have done so in ignorance of the wants and the condition of the people.
Let every man come forward boldly, and explain fairly his view of the causes of the present distress.
Never mind homely language; we are not here to make fine speeches.
If we do not help ourselves, no one else will.
We have been oppressed for years. and may continue to be oppressed for years to come, if we don’t put our shoulders to the wheel.
Mr. John Jenkins, M.A. of Swansea: A gentleman said a few days ago, that the farmers of Carmarthenshire and Glamorganshire knew nothing at all about the matter, but he said to the meeting, let them come forward and give the lie direct to that, by each man saying what he had to say.
The voice of the people must do away with all grievances.
Mr. Samuel Williams, farmer, of Cwm Garw: I can say plainly enough what are our grievances.
We pay a 6th and 7th, instead of a 10th for tithes.
It is not the gentlemen that oppress us as much as the competition amongst ourselves — that has caused the distress.
The restriction upon trading over the sea has been upheld as keeping up the price of agricultural produce; but I am willing to have it done away.
The landlords held out restriction as a bugbear over us.
Mr. Hopkin Herbert, farmer, Cwm Nantymoel: I think all the farmers will agree with the last speaker, that tithes are oppressive.
With regard to the poor-rates, only 6s. 6d in the pound go toward the support of the poor; the remaining fourteen shillings are consumed in the management and other payments charged thereon.
The farmers and the farm labourers are for getting the Corn-laws down, and so am I too.
Mr. David Williams, Gwm Carw: The tithes are pressing double, to what they were, and very little of the poor-rates go to the support of the poor.
Mr. John Harris, Court Falde: I have very little to say.
What has been said I agree with.
The tithes and the poor rates are mismanaged.
Very little of the money paid goes to the poor, I should be very happy to pay it if it went to support the poor.
Mr. Morgan Daniel, Tygwyn: I have as much necessity to speak as anybody here; my rent is too heavy.
I should like the labourer to have fair play, to enable him to live comfortably.
I am an advocate for free trade.
Mr. Thomas Isaac, Cwm Ammon: I think the great cause of the difficulties of this country are the Corn-laws, and next, the Poor laws.
The money we pay I wish the poor to have, and not those who are in better circumstances than I am.
The Chairman then said, the farmers seem to be of opinion that tithes and rates are too high; the reasons are — that the corn and provision laws prevent the farmer having fair play.
Government, through the Corn-laws, promised the farmer 56s. per quarter for wheat, whereas he only got 46s. This is one of the props the farmers have to keep up rent.
If the tenant have sufficient credit to enable him to buy his seed, and he does not realize the price promised him, he cannot pay for it nor his rent.
What then does the landlord?
Why he sends in a distress, and he gets the produce of the land before any other creditor.
This is hard, for the other creditors get nothing.
The laws of good society say “do unto others as you would they should do unto you,” but landlords forget this golden maxim in their dealings with their tenants.
The law of society ought to be like a machine, steady in operation, and easy of application but the fact is, the law makers have hitherto almost exclusively belonged to the landlord class, and they have made laws to benefit themselves.
The laws of distress are very unfair, and should be amended.
The system of the present laws is contrary to the Law of God.
There is nothing more injurious to the nation than a restriction upon commerce.
Let every nation be allowed to exchange their surplus commodities freely.
England is like the steam-engine of the world — if things go wrong with her, all the world goes wrong too.
Markets should be open for perfect free trade.
Mr. John Jenkins, M.A.: I stand here, my fellow-countrymen, as the defender of free trade, and the opponent of the Corn-laws.
I am the advocate of Free Trade, and am ready to answer any question from any farmer.
No one speaking,
The Chairman said, if you are all silent, you must be of opinion that the Corn-laws should be abrogated.
Mr. Jenkins then asked the manufacturers and miners if they had any questions to put.
Not receiving any reply, the learned gentleman proceeded with an excellent and appropriate speech, of which our space will only allow us to give an outline:—
There is as evident a dependence and connection between the parts of the social system, as there is between the seasons of the year.
If you oppress the poor, the day of retribution must come.
The same law applies to society as to individuals — the welfare of one class should not be purchased by the sacrifice of another.
What are the principal causes of distress among the farmers and working classes?
Some say the Poor-laws.
I don’t say the Poor-law is not the cause.
Some say tithes.
I don’t say they are not.
But this is my opinion.
We feel the few pence we pay for the gates every Saturday.
We feel we are going to destruction.
We feel every little tax all press upon the country, and therefore let us do away with them.
But we must examine the reason why the farmers of Carmarthenshire and Glamorganshire are in such straightened circumstances.
What is the reason that they feel these little taxes?
The reason is — the Government have cheated the farmers — the Government promised one price, and the farmers are getting another and a much less one for their produce.
Is there such a strength in the hands of Government — do they possess unknown power to keep up price?
It is not so.
They have made laws which are quite contrary to the laws of nature.
They have imposed such high taxes upon the export of goods to other countries, that it has stopped our country sending coal to France.
This is sufficient to produce distress in these parts.
There is no use growing corn where there is no one to eat it.
There is no use growing corn on ground which is better adapted for other purposes.
Whoever is benefited by the Corn-laws, it is certainly not the farmers; the farmer pays a price for his land as if he got 80s. per quarter: and if he gets less ’tis plain he loses the difference.
The farmer of small capital being the weakest goes to the wall first; and that is the reason the small farmers are now so distressed in Carmarthenshire and Glamorganshire; and it is the same all over England.
Let farmers make up their accounts for the last 28 years, and they will find they have been losing their capital.
Instead of redressing our grievances, soldiers are sent into the country; although I don’t agree with the mode adopted, of breaking the gates, and of breaking the laws.
Mr. Jenkins then read an extract from a document, shewing the quantity of corn imported during the quarter of a year, , viz., 1,500,000 quarters, and 400,000 quarters in Midsummer quarter.
Corn is brought out of bond at the time when the farmer expects to make a fair price, viz., 56s. Well, the price falls to 47s. — he must pay, nevertheless, rent according to the price of 56s. If the price rose to 66s. he would be gaining, but the fact is, when corn rises above 56s., bonded corn comes in and deprives the farmer of his profit.
Thus the poor farmer is brought down to ruin, and when rent day comes he finds be is worth nothing.
The Corn Laws operate as an impediment to the manufactures! the demand lessens — wages fall off.
We have now an instance of that ruin in Yystradgunlais.
I would urge upon the meeting the necessity of petitioning Parliament to repeal the corn and provision laws.
It is impossible in a short speech to explain fully this great question, but I think I have said enough to convince you of the impolicy of all restrictions upon trade, and the connexion they have with the distresses which afflict the country.
Mr. Price, surgeon, Yniscedwan: Fellow countrymen, I have heard a good deal about things that oppress the country.
Mr. Jenkins has told you what he considered the causes and remedies.
We have heard of the doings of “Becca;” of her taking down gates where there were good roads.
I don’t approve of it.
Let us have good roads.
If we had good roads we might travel as safely by night as by day.
(A voice in the crowd cried out “I wish you good roads, Mr. Price.”)
Let Becca come in the middle of the day, as well as in the night.
I don’t like these nocturnal outrages.
The speaker continued at some length, and was replied to by Mr. Jenkins, but by this time it was too dark to report.
Shortly afterwards the following resolutions were carried unanimously—
“That in the opinion of this meeting, Free Trade is the only remedy for the existing distresses of the country.”
Three cheers were given for Free Trade.
“That the following petition to the Queen be adopted.”
Carried unanimously.
The petition having been adopted, Mr. Goring Thomas produced a notice which had been stuck up in the parish of Penboyr.
It was headed like a proclamation, “Becca — ”; and it called upon the farmers for coöperation in lightening their own burdens.
Almost immediately after the beginning, it turned to the form of a dialogue between Becca and a Farmer; Becca suggesting that the farmers should fix on a day to visit their landlords, and each ask “his highness” (the landlord) to agree to the appointment of a person on each side to value the land and fix the rent.
The Farmer inquires of Becca how that should be accomplished?
Farmer — Suppose the landlord refuse to appoint persons to value the land, he should tell me to give it up to him?
Becca — Take him upon his offer, and tell him to take it up next Mareh.
Farmer — Then, in this way we shall lose our claim to the land, and whoever wishes may take it.
Becca — Yes, certainly; but as to his enjoying it, I testify to you that there is not a man of any nation under heaven that shall enjoy an acre of your land, as it is but justice you will be seeking in desiring your landlord to lower your rents: therefore, I will take your part, were we forced to burn the bodies of those that dare try to take your land.
Now, I have never deceived those to whom I have given notice, as you know.
As notice, if you will not endeavour to retake your farms, as the Lord God knoweth, you shall see more fires than you have ever seen in your lives.
It is probable I may visit some of you in Penboyer ere long.
Take heed, on your peril, that the hire of the harvest is not lowered by you.
After expressing his horror at this attempt to institute a system of terrorism, Mr. Thomas moved the following resolution; which was carried unanimously before the meeting separated–
That this meeting has heard with great and unfeigned regret of the various outrages that have taken place in different parts of the county.
The farmers and others now present hereby pledge themselves not to attend or countenance nightly meetings, and to discharge any farm-servants who do attend them.
The correspondent of the Times perceives a change of feeling in South Wales–
During the last two or three days, there has been a lull in the breeze of disturbances which has agitated this country; though I fear the gale is far from having ceased.
It is the opinion of many intelligent gentlemen with whom I have conversed on the matter, that the shocking murder of the poor old woman at Hendy-bridge gate has produced a salutary effect upon the better-disposed part of the population; and that the farmers, who would willingly run the risk of imprisonment for breaking a toll-gate, in order to get rid of what they consider an unbearable grievance, shrink with horror from being classed as murderers and giving possible employment to the hangman.
I know that this is a general feeling just now, and that this very shocking result of these disturbances has caused many to pause and reflect on the probable consequences of their lawless course.
On the other hand, in the immediate neighbourhood of the Pontardulais fight, it is quite true that a deep and brooding spirit of vengeance exists.
A very great number of persons engaged in that fight were wounded and got off.
I have been informed on credible authority, that several farmers in the neighbourhood are dangerously ill of wounds received by them at that encounter.
I heard of one young man, the other day, who received a ball in his leg, and who is at this moment lying at his home with the wounded limb dreadfully swollen, but afraid to send for surgical assistance.
Among the friends and acquaintances of these parties, the most bitter and rancorous spirit of revenge prevails.
It is said, too, that the better class of farmers are beginning to get sick of Rebecca’s proceedings; and with some reason.
I am informed that a kind of black mail is levied on them.
The parties who break gates, &c., are generally paid labourers, led on by some few farmers and the Rebecca of the district; and I am informed these men are paid 2s. 6d a night, out of which they provide their powder and shot; and the money to pay them with is raised by sending round notices, first to one farmer and then to another, to pay a sum at which he is assessed by a certain time, and bring it to some meeting of Rebeccaites.
If he refuse it, he does it at the peril of having his stacks fired.
The Rebecca for the night pays the men from this fund.
On the person of the Rebecca taken at Pontardulais, several receipts acknowledging payments of this nature were found.
This sort of tax on the farmer has caused, I am told, a great deal of secret information to be given by them to the authorities; and I have heard that it was from information derived in this way that the Police came upon the party attacking Pontardulais gate.
The outrages, however, are very far from having entirely ceased.
During , about fourteen different toll-bars have been destroyed in Carmarthenshire; and property to the amount of 800l. was burned in the rick-yard of Mr. J.R. Lloyd, a County Magistrate, at Dolhaidd.
A reward of 500l., with the Queen’s pardon to any accomplice, has been offered for the discovery and apprehension of the person who murdered Sarah Williams, the Hendy-gate toll-collector; and 100l. for the detection of the persons who destroyed Lechryd fishing-weir.
From the Cambrian (which in turn credits the Times, I assume of London):
Our Swansea reporter informs us, that the “opinion hourly gains strength that it is intended to place Carmarthenshire and Cardiganshire under martial law.”
He adds, “that nothing can exceed the exasperation of all classes of people as this idea gains ground.”
The news, if correct, is important, and somewhat embarrassing to those who are called upon to pronounce an opinion upon public events as they arise.
It is embarrassing, because if such an invidious measure is eventually shown to be necessary for the preservation of the public peace — if it really becomes the only practicable course by which the outrages which are disgracing the county of Carmarthen can be effectually suppressed — it must doubtless be embraced; and it would ill-become those who exercise any influence over the public mind to impede by complaint or invective the effect of this bitter but unavoidable (if indeed it be unavoidable) remedy.
But, on the other hand, even supposing this necessity established, it is not very easy to look with silent complacency upon the proceedings of a Ministry or a magistracy who, having first, through their own ignorance, or neglect, or helplessness, allowed an evil to become irrepressible by ordinary means, proceed to make that consequence of their own delinquency a reason why they, the delinquents, should be trusted with extraordinary, unconstitutional, and most dangerous powers for its cure.
That the mischief is one which must be put down admits of little doubt.
That organised hands should proceed nightly through the country, pulling down toll bars, was itself an evil wholly intolerable in a civilised country, or, if this phrase is not applicable to Carmarthenshire, under a civilised Government.
That it was tolerated week after week, month after month, without the adoption of such measures of police or of conciliation as should even check the disorder, is the very crime for which we hold Ministers originally responsible — the very head and front of their offending.
The evil is now far more virulent, the demand for effectual interposition more urgent; incendiarism — must we not add, murder — a cruel cold-blooded murder?
— has been added to rebellion.
Outrage has issued in atrocity; and then a sworn jury, in one of the most astonishing verdicts we remember to have seen, has virtually told us, as far as twelve farmers can, that there is no use in looking to the ordinary administrators of the law for assistance — that they will not, or dare not, do their duty.
All this must surely be stopped.
Unnecessary severity — unnecessary extension of power — unnecessary interference with the liberty of the subject — are without question among the greatest evils to which the body politic can well be subject.
But measures which will terminate, or will check, or will show some symptoms of checking, this state of things are necessary, and must be determined upon, at whatever immediate inconvenience.
Thus much in general.
But when we come to particulars, we are obliged to ask, what prospect is there that martial law will answer this purpose?
That the ordinary powers given by the Constitution to Government and magistracy, as at present wielded by that Government and that magistracy, are unequal to the emergency, is indeed obvious.
The continuance of the evil shows it.
But where is the fault — in the power, or in those who exercise it?
If the radical disease is in the head, we may chance to get little good and much harm by strengthening the hands.
It is common for power, when opposed and foiled, to call out fresh supplies of brute force, and fresh facilities for using it.
It is the ordinary rough resource of despotic times, as it must be also the ultima ratio of constitutional authority.
In the former case it is tolerably easy and safe; but in the latter it is delicate and precarious.
In a free country these overbearing tactics are always odious, and are far from insuring success.
And, therefore, before we trust Home Secretary or Justice of the Peace with the direction of such an edge-tool as martial-law, we should be glad to have some guarantee that they know how to use it.
Does their past conduct furnish such?
What is the picture presented to us by the history of the Welsh disturbances?
The authorities, armed with such powers as they have, have met with as ill success as can well be imagined.
Have they deserved any better?
Does their conduct bear the appearance of a manly contest with overpowering difficulties, carriried on with vigour and discretion — with intelligence, consideration, and activity — with a proper estimate of the strength, the grievances, and the character of their adversary — and with a readiness to seize all the opportunities of successful action which that knowledge gave them? or does it not rather resemble the vague, bustling, indeterminate, aimless struggles of a man who is embarrassed, not by the want of available force, but by not knowing what to do with what he has?
We fear these questions are soon answered.
As to the magistrates, they have been pitted against the rioters, and have been found wholly inefficient for good.
The fruitless gallopings of the military, the absence of any apparent plan for conciliating, for dividing, for discovering, or for anticipating the followers of “Rebecca,” and the ease, the unimpeded ease, with which that leader has been able to accomplish all his plans, furnish sufficient evidence of their inefficiency and the account which we to-day publish of an important and unhappy mistake in point of law, committed last month by three of them (the Vice-Lieutenant of the county being among the number) — a mistake which issued in the wrongful imprisonment of fourteen days of a Welsh farmer — is certainly little calculated to weaken this impression.
Nor does the Secretary of State appear to have been more able to help the local authorities than they were to help themselves.
If he saw, as he might have seen, the hopelessness of conciliation while the magistracy continue sole mediators between themselves and the discontented poor — if he saw, as he might have seen, that there was much to be amended which the magistrates would not amend, much to be investigated which the magistrates would not exhibit, much to be said, done, and thought of, which the magistrates would neither originate nor execute — if he, understood, as he must have understood, that the continuance in such a country as England, and for months together, of a successful and wholesale resistance to law, baffling through a whole district the utmost efforts of police and military, was “no light matter,” but a grave shock to the very foundations of law and order — if he felt that the time for punctilio was gone by, and that whether the magistrates liked it or not Carmarthenshire was to be tranquillised — and if he had himself any idea how to deal with popular disaffection, he would most assuredly, during the last three or four months, have excogitated some happier expedient than a fortnight’s visit from a respectable police magistrate.
On the whole, then, we see too much reason to apprehend that the disturbances will not be terminated without, but very little to hope that they will be terminated with, martial law.
And if so severe a remedy is to be administered, we have a right to demand conclusive proof that less stringent remedies are no longer practicable, and some better guarantee than the personal character of Sir James Graham and Colonel Trevor for the effectual application of this.
And, after every proof and every guarantee, we still shall not cease to feel with some bitterness that this assumption of extraordinary power on the part of the Ministry derives its sole justification from their own past neglect or unskilfulness.
Since the above was written we have been informed by a correspondent “that a special commission is about to issue for the trial of the prisoners concerned in the recent disturbances in South Wales.
The presiding judges have not yet been named, but the most active exertions are in progress on the part of Government to get together evidence against the prisoners already committed.”
This gate was demolished some time since, and subsequently replaced by another; but as Rebecca had given intimation of intention to destroy the second gate, it was considered prudent to have a guard of constables to protect it.
At day-light, on , the constables went home, but scarcely had they left, when the Rebeccaites came and demolished the gate, and were in the act of unroofing the gate house, when the chief constable, who had received information of the outrage, galloped back to the gate, when the Rebeccaites all scampered off.
The policemen, however, identified two of them, named Thomas Morgan and Thomas Lewis, who were subsequently apprehended, and committed to take their trial for the offence.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin (Henry Tobit Evans dates the described attack to ):
Rebecca in Breconshire.
We regret to state that the exemption from the prevailing outrages, hitherto enjoyed by this county, exists no longer, an attack having been made last week upon the Cefn Llandewi gate, upon the road leading from Llandovery to Builth, and situate about a mile and a half from the village of Llangamarch.
Its destruction was effected by a party of men, who fastened the door of the toll-house, and threatened the gate-keeper with destruction if he ventured out.
At a meeting of magistrates held at Brecon on Saturday, it was determined to re-erect the gate, and to send a party of the Brecon borough police to watch it; and accordingly three men went over on Monday, but before they could reach the spot, the Rebeccaites, who, by some means had ascertained that something of the kind would be done, set fire to the house in the absence of the keeper, who of course did not venture to stay on the spot alone after the previous outrage.
A large reward has been offered for the apprehension of the guilty parties, and on Wednesday last a meeting of the magistrates was held at the Shire Hall, Brecon, to take the affair into consideration at which Colonel Wood, M.P. for the county, the Lord Lieutenant, the High Sheriff, the Rev. Lord Hereford, and a large body of influential countrymen attended.
Resolutions were passed expressive of the regret and disappointment produced by such an outrage after the conciliatory measures voluntarily adopted by the turnpike trustees, and of a determination to use all possible means for the discovery of the offenders; they also requested the support and co-operation of all classes in sustaining the laws and suppression of outrages.
The police still remain at Llangamarch, and we understand that a meeting of the inhabitants of that district has been convened for the purpose of recording their abhorrence of such violations of the law. — Silurian.
This letter-to-the-editor, signed “A Lover of Truth” and found in the Cambrian, seems deliberately to fail to grasp the breadth of the Rebeccaite grievances:
There appeared in the pages of one of your late numbers an account of the destruction of the Fishguard turnpike gates and toll-houses, together with that of the garden wall, &c., the property of Mr. John Mackennell, the surveyor to the Fishguard turnpike trust.
Now, as I have some reason to believe that the Lady Rebecca and her Daughters who committed the outrage are inhabitants of the town of Fishguard and its vicinity, I am quite at a loss to account for the destruction of the Surveyor’s property, as it must be acknowledged by all, that the streets and roads leading to and from Fishguard are in good repair, which, previous to the residence of Mr. Mackennel, were proverbial for their roughness and disagreeableness.
Notwithstanding the Royal proclamation and the removal of obnoxious gates and bars, outrages still proceed in the Principality.
On , a bailiff, named Davies, who was “in possession” at a public-house in the village of Llandyfelliog, six miles from Carmarthen, was sent home to Carmarthen, with a warning never to return, by a party of fourteen Rebeccaites, who had their faces blackened and were otherwise disguised.
The light company of the 73d, who are to be stationed at Pontarddulais and Pontyberem, left Swansea for those places, . — A few days ago, about fifty of the London police left the City for Wales.
On , David and James Evans, master and servant, were committed for trial, on the evidence of Mr. Thomas Thomas, of Pontcerrig, near Llanfihangel-Rhosycorn, Carmarthenshire, on a charge of having entered his house, and extorted money from him by threats.
Early on , Mr. Thomas’s house was set on fire by a party of disguised Rebeccaites, amounting to about three hundred persons, who were so determined to accomplish their purpose, that they formed themselves into a ring around the burning premises, to prevent any attempt being made to extinguish the fire.
A large quantity of butter, cheese, and, in fact, all the property the party could lay their hands upon, were destroyed.
This was done out of revenge, because Mr. Thomas had given evidence which led to the committal of David and James Evans. — On , the premises of Aberduar farm, on the Carmarthen and Lampeter road, about six miles from the latter place, were set on fire, and the stables and outhouses totally consumed.
It appears that the Rev. Thomas Rees, son-in-law of the late Mr. John Thomas, surgeon, of Aberduar, who is now the proprietor of the farm, had received several notices from Becca, in consequence of his having given a tenant of his a notice to quit, without there being, in her Ladyship’s opinion, sufficient grounds for his doing so.
It appeared that three different parts of the premises had been nearly simultaneously fired.
This notorious character underwent his final examination before the
Magistrates at Carmarthen gaol, on .
It is stated, that he has had something to do with nearly all the worse and
most outrageous proceedings of the Rebeccaites. He stands committed upon seven
distinct charges, viz., shooting at
the wife of Mr. Slocombe during the attack on his house at the Gwendraeth
Works — snapping a gun at Mr. Chambers’s gamekeeper with the intent to murder
him — stealing another person’s gun — demolishing Spudder’s bridge
toll-house — forming one of the mob who destroyed Porthyrhyd gate and
toll-house — also one of the party who attacked Mr. Newman’s house at
Gwendraeth Works — and beginning to demolish the Porthyrhyd constable’s house.
His friend and accomplice, David Davies, alias Dai’r Cantwr, has not rivalled
his great leader, but has been committed for trial on two charges, that of
being concerned in the riots at the Gwendraeth Works and in the destruction of
the toll-house at Spudder’s bridge.
Lloyd William, Esq.… alluded
to the destruction of the weir upon the river Tivy, the property of Abel
Gower, Esq., which was the
occasion of much loss to that respectable gentleman. He was, however, happy in
being able to state, that he had a proposal to make to the meeting, which he
trusted would conciliate all parties, and be the means of restoring peace and
good will, namely, the purchase of the weir for the public benefit. Mr. Lloyd,
of Coedmore, the proprietor, stated that he was willing to give the weir at a
great sacrifice, with a view to the restoration of peace, and for the good of
the public, at the low sum of £500.
Mr. Gower, the lessee, assented to Mr. Lloyd’s proposal, and said he would
readily give up his lease.
It was then agreed to raise the amount by subscriptions among the resident
gentry, Mr. Lloyd Williams stating, that if the subscription reached the sum
of £400, he himself would subscribe £100 to make up the amount. This, however,
was on the express condition that the weir was not to be obstructed further,
but remain in its present condition until the season of next year. A unanimous
show of hands was taken, and the people pledged themselves that no further
molestation should be given to the weir.
It must have felt enormously empowering for the farmers to be negotiated with
like this — for them to hear the wealthy landowners offering to release
property back into the commons, rather than hearing that they had acquired and
fenced off yet more of it.
It’s a far cry from Gower’s blusterous response when he first got wind that
Rebecca planned to attack the weir. At that time
(), he had a broadside printed
up that read, in part:
I hereby give notice that upon the commission of any such aggression upon
that, or any other part of my Property whatsoever, or upon the Property of any
of my Neighbours in this District, I will immediately discharge every Day
Labourer at present in my employment; and not restore one of them, until the
Agressors shall have been apprehended and convicted.
A
follow-up article in the Welshman
noted that
D. Saunders Davies had contributed £25 towards the purchase of the Llechryd
Weir, the Rev. A. Brigstocke
another five guineas, and another Mr. Brigstocke £20.
But below that was a letter from Edward Lloyd Williams denying a report that he
and Saunders Davies had pledged to come up with the £500 themselves if there
were not sufficient subscribers. That denial, and another one from Saunders
Davies, led
“A
Tivyside Fisherman” to write in to ask:
…will [Davies] be so kind as to let the Tivy-side fishermen know whether all
or none, or who of the different gentlemen present at the notable meeting, and
not dissenting from what Mr. Lloyd Williams stated upon that occasion, are in
a different position from Mr. Saunders Davies or not? The public believe a
pledge was given at that meeting. Is this true? and if so, to what did it
extend? and who are bound by it?
If Davies or Williams (or anyone else) made a satisfactory response, I
haven’t found it. A letter published in the Welshman on calls out the gentry for, uh, Welshing on their deal:
Sir,– My memory is a very short one — more’s the pity! I can’t recollect what
it was those horrid London reporters printed in the
Times, the Herald, and
the Chronicle as the speech of Mr. Edward Lloyd
Williams at Llechryd on . But whatever it was,
the whole country-side fancied it meant that the gentlemen would
subscribe £400 without calling upon the people for a farthing, and that Mr.
Lloyd Williams would make up the remaining £100 of the purchase
money. It is now as clear as mud that this was a mere fancy,
that there was no “pledge” at all, and that neither Mr. Lloyd Williams,
nor — as would seem — any of the gentlemen meant any such
thing, but merely that they would see what could be done towards such a
consummation. I wish you would turn to and rap the knuckles of all
those — what shall I call ’em? — reporters, for putting in print what was
never meant. The Reporters ought not to have printed the
words. It’s “flat burglary” and they should be persecuted for
it! Some one in waggish mood might exclaim of the people
I am, Sir, your’s obediently,
Buttermouth Simpleton Tickler.
Newcastle-Emlyn,
A later () report about obstructions on the
Tivy put it this way:
The next permanent obstruction in the river is a salmon weir at Llechryd,
having four piers of masonry in the stream, the whole width of the river here
is 110 feet, of which the weirs occupy 41 feet, leaving 62 feet of clear
waterway; the space between the piers is 14 feet, and the depth of the river
five and a half feet; but a footway is laid across the top of the piers, and
thus all navigation is stopped, except when the floods in the river enable
boats to pass over the top of it. The weir is a serious obstacle, and except
that it is now almost beyond the influence of the tide, and that there is no
traffic above it, it ought to be removed. This Llechryd weir is notorious as
having had summary justice inflicted on it by a mob, under the leader,
Rebecca, in . “It had long been a
source of contention between the fishermen, and people of the adjoining
country, and the owner. It precluded salmon, with which the river below
swarmed, from ascending, and so inflicted an injury on a long line of country
above. At four o’clock one morning, about 400 men provided with crowbars,
pickaxes, &c.
assembled at the weir, and in two hours demolished it. The owner obtained
compensation from the county, and rebuilt the weir.” Contrary, I believe, to
the law of the land as declared in Magna Charta, by Hale, ‘De Jure Maris,’
&c., which
pronounce all weirs across navigable rivers illegal.
In other news, below the initial report of the meeting in which the “pledge”
was made was this note:
Major General Browne, Deputy Adjutant General (who was Colonel in command of
the 2nd battalion of the Rifle Brigade, while
quartered in this county) passed through Newport last week on his way to
Carmarthen, where he went officially to ascertain from personal inspection,
the state of the disturbed districts, and to devise means for the suppression
of outrage and the restoration of tranquility. He was in correspondence with
the civil and military authorities there, and is said to have recommended the
distribution of small detachments of military, accompanied by police
constables, throughout the county.
The Gazette of announces that the Queen has been pleased to direct letters
patent to be passed under the Great Seal, constituting and appointing the
Right Hon. Thomas Frankland
Lewis, the Hon. Robert
Henry Clive, and William Cripps,
Esq., her Majesty’s
Commissioners “for inquiring into the present state of the laws, as
administered in South Wales, which regulate the turnpike roads; and also into
the circumstances which have led to the recent acts of violence and outrage in
certain, districts of that country.” The Queen has also been pleased to
appoint George Kettilby Richards,
Esq., to be Secretary to the
said Commission.
Carmarthen, . — The presence of a military force in almost every nook and village in the county, as well as a number of the metropolitan police force, has not, it would seem, effectually daunted Rebecca and her daughters, who still continue, though not so extensively, yet with the same determination of purpose, of destroying turnpike gates, and wreaking out their vengeance on those whom they suppose are hostile to their illegal proceedings.
In my last communication, I intimated to you that an attack had been made on the house of Rice P. Beynon, Esq., of Saint Clears, .
The party, consisting of between two and three hundred persons, fired into that gentleman’s bedroom, and threw several large stones through the window of the bed-room adjoining.
Eleven slugs were found in different parts of Mr. Beynon’s bed-room.
After the destruction of the gate, the party deeming it advisable to have an occupier of the toll-house of their own choosing, proceeded with horns and guns to the house of a labouring man of the name of James Thomas, who some time ago lost an arm by an accident, and consequently became chargeable to the parish, and knocking loudly at his door, aroused the inmates.
His wife, evidently much alarmed, was the first to answer the summons.
The Rebeccaites told her there was no cause for apprehension, for they came as friends, and thinking she and her husband had suffered long enough from poverty, they had provided for them a better dwelling, and were come to convey them to it.
Remonstrance was in vain, and they soon packed up the furniture and effects in the house, and placed it in a cart they had brought with them for the purpose; and having made the man and his wife get in also, they carried them to the Bwlchtrap toll-house, which has been unoccupied some time, and there deposited their load and passengers, and formally installed them in possession of the premises, requiring of them only, that they should remain there, and not take toll of any one.
They then left their bewildered tenant to settle himself in his new habitation, and returned in the direction of Saint Clears, and left the following notice affixed to Mr. Beynon’s door, which you will perceive, relates to the proceedings I have just detailed:–
I beg that Rebecca Gav Posesion to James John, of the House that was formerly Belong to Pulltrap Gate, and if any Person will come and Throw him out, Rebecca will, and her Children will, remember him in Future Time.
The First will come that there shall be drag between 4 horses.
— Rebecca and her Children.
The following day a similar notice, with the sum of 4d, was placed under the door of the crier of Bethlehem chapel, in the neighbourhood, with a note, commanding him to publish it in the usual manner, on , James Thomas and his wife still remain in possession of the premises.
They profess to have no knowledge whatever of the parties who committed the outrage, and no clue has yet been afforded for their detection.
, Mr. Frederick Kynaston, of Blaenycorse, a very respectable gentleman, received a threatening letter.
On , six persons were apprehended by the London police, charged, on the information of one Richard Williams, with having, on , with divers evil-disposed persons, unlawfully and maliciously thrown down, levelled, and otherwise destroyed, a certain turnpike toll-house, the property of the trustees of the Three Commons district of roads.
Three of the prisoners, John Jones, William Jones, and Thomas Jones, are respectable young men in their sphere of life, and sons of a stone mason, residing near the village of Llanddarog, in the county of Carmarthen.
Another prisoner, named Seth Morgan, is a servant man on the farm of Llwynshinkin.
Thomas Harry, also a prisoner is a servant at Llwynmawr; and Henry Williams, apprehended on the same charge, is servant at the Saxe Coburg public-house, in Porthyrhyd, and distant about twenty yards from the gate in question.
The “certain turnpike toll-house” ambiguously referred to in the warrant of commitment is no less than the Porthyrhyd gate, an account of the second destruction of which appeared, at considerable length, in the Swansea Journal.
The information laid against the six persons apprehended is of a very questionable character, and is supposed to have been induced by the tempting reward offered by the government for the apprehension of the Rebeccaites.
The informer, R. Williams, was tried at the last quarter sessions for this borough, on a charge of obtaining money under false pretenses but was acquitted on an informality in the indictment, the learned Recorder then making the following observations, which appeared in your last Journal — “although the case is made out in fact, yet the indictment is bad on the face of it.
The prisoner must consequently be acquitted, as in the case of his conviction, no sentence can be pronounced by the court.”
I am also informed that, on the statement of the same Richard Williams, warrants are issued against several other persons, whose apprehension is hourly expected.
— From a Correspondent of the Swansea Journal.
There are now at least 150 of the London police in the disturbed parts of Carmarthenshire, Pembrokeshire, and Cardiganshire.
As we stated last week would be the case, they have been stationed, with small companies of foot soldiers, under the command of non-commissioned officers, in all the villages and small towns throughout the country, and thus a system of surveillance is kept up.
There are police and soldiers at Pontyberem, Llanelly, Llanbedie, Llandilo, Llandissil, Tregaron, Llangendeirne, Llandefeilog, Kidwelly, Conwil, Pontarcothy, Porthrhyd, Brechfa, Llansawel, Llanfihangel, Llanbyther, Narberth, St. Clears, Laugharne, and, in fact, at all the small towns throughout the country.
The 76th Foot has furnished men to accompany the police, and from six to ten of the infantry are stationed in each town or village with the police.
The expense to the county of having all these here, is, we understand, no less than six hundred pounds per month.
— Welshman.
Lampeter.
This little town has lately been excited by symptoms of rather an alarming nature — no less than the society of sixteen policemen and twenty soldiers have taken up their position here.
It has been generally reported that Rebecca has signified her intention of attacking the college, but, however true this may be, it is very certain some policemen are on the patrol every night; all is consequently tranquil.
There is a large meeting to be held on Mynydd Oseyn, on Monday week, a mountain within two miles of this town, and it is anticipated it will be something of consequence, as a numerous body have desired the lord-lieutenant of the county to be present on the occasion.
— Swansea Journal.
From the
Cambrian:
Exemption of Lime from Toll
, the Committee appointed at the
meeting of the Neath Turnpike Trustees (reported in our last page) for the
purpose of taking into consideration the expediency of exempting lime from the
payment of tolls, and the best means of carrying the measure into effect, held
a sitting. Being a Committee Meeting, the proceedings, of course, were
private, but we understand, that all the Trustees present were most anxious to
come to an arrangement with Mr. Bullin, the lessee, for the purpose of
exempting lime. At the close of the sitting of the Committee, the Trustees
held their adjourned meeting, which adopted and confirmed the following
resolutions, which were passed by the Committee:–
That Mr. Rowland, the treasurer, be requested to advance the sum of
66l.
12s.
4d. to pay the list
of bills delivered against the Neath Turnpike Trust, left in arrear by Robert
Alford, the late surveyor, the said bills having been examined and allowed
this day by the Committee appointed for this purpose — and that Mr. Rowland
also be requested to advance the money required to pay the interest due to
the bondholders to the
, and also
the money required for current expenses.
That a bond be given to Mr. Rees Williams, of Aberpergwm, for
312l.
11s.
3d., and to Mr. W.
Williams, of Aberpergwm. for
72l.
3s.
6d. for limestone
supplied , and
that such bonds bear date .
That from and after , no toll be taken for
lime carried along the turnpike roads of this district for the purpose of
manure, and that a sum not exceeding
10l. be allowed in
the account of Thomas Bullin, the contractor of tolls, for the above
exemption, , when the tolls of
this Trust will be re-let.
This course must prove satisfactory to the farmers of the neighbourhood who
use lime as their principal manure.
There seems to have been much confusion about how the authorities were planning to proceed in the trials of suspected Rebeccaites.
The Cambrian tried to clear up the confusion on :
Special Commission.
A paragraph has appeared in several of the London daily papers, announcing that the Special Commission for the trial of the parties charged with being concerned in the Rebecca riots, will be opened on .
This, as far as the date goes, is erroneous, as the Deputy-Sheriff received by post the precepts for opening the Commission at Cardiff, on , before Mr. Baron Gurney and Mr. Justice Cresswell.
It was announced in the Cambrian six weeks ago, that a Special Commission would be held in the latter end of October, but the fact was repeatedly, though groundlessly, contradicted by several London and provincial papers.
— It has been officially communicated to Mr. Walters and Mr. Tripp, the attornies for the parties concerned, that, the trials of those accused of breaking down the Bolgoed bar, and Rhydypandy gate, will not take place at the Special Commission.
We hail this announcement with considerable satisfaction, on account of its important consequences to the parties concerned.
Besides the increased fees to Counsel to attend at the Special Commission, the defendants would have been subjected to a very heavy expense in travelling, themselves and their witnesses, more than fifty miles to the place of trial, and remaining there several days; and, as most of the parties are in humble circumstances, such an accumulation of expense would almost amount to a denial of justice, by putting it out of the power of the accused to provide the necessary funds.
We incline to think, that this consideration has had its proper weight with the authorities, which we consider highly creditable to them.
There was, however, an objection made by the professional gentlemen concerned in the Rhydypandy and Bolgoed cases, viz., that the notices served on the accused and their bail, stated that the recognizances were conditioned, that the accused should appear at the next General Gaol Delivery for this county, to be held at Swansea, and that, therefore, their recognizances would not be forfeited by their refusing to to appear at Cardiff.
Whether this objection were a valid one or not, we think it likely that it also contributed to bring about the postponement of those cases till the Assizes.
— Since writing the former account, the prisoners concerned in breaking the Pontardulais Gate, and the Morgans, of Cwmcillan, for the rescue, have been served with notices of trial at the Commission.
One of the problems I come across in trying to make sense of the news coverage of the Rebeccaite movement is that there seems to have been a fairly small number of English surnames and given names that got parceled out to the people of Wales to use in place of their Welsh names.
Nearly everybody seems to be named Jones, Lewis, Davies, Morgan, Thomas, or Williams.
There are, I think, at least three or four “John Jones”es that have been mentioned so far.
It’s very difficult to determine whether two news accounts are talking about the same person or about two people with the same name.
For example, in this news account, is this John Jones the same as Shoni Scyborfawr, who used that English name?
But that Scyborfawr had already been jailed some time before (see ♇ ), so it seems that this must be a different John Jones.
Maybe it was just very stale news, but it comes from the same paper that reported on captive Shoni Scyborfawr’s examination before the magistrates the week before.
Very confusing.
From the Cambrian:
On , Jones, the Llandovery
Police-officer, accompanied by four of the Metropolitan Police, arrested one
of the principal leaders of the Rebecca gang, named John Jones, a farmer,
residing at Danygarn, near Llangadock. He was taken into custody under a
warrant granted by David Jones Lewis and Lewis Lewis,
Esqs., for sending a letter
to Mr. Thomas Williams, auctioneer, threatening to deprive him of his life,
unless he gave up the title deeds of a small farm he had purchased of John
Jones. Amongst other threats which this letter, signed “Rebecca,” contained,
one was, that, unless her demand was peremptorily obeyed, Mr. Williams should
he dealt with much worse than she had dealt with the
Rev. Mr. Jones, of
Llansadwrn, and warning him to prepare a place for his soul, as she would take
care of his body. As the evidence, which was very clear against John Jones,
will soon be before the public, we need not enter into any particulars,
further than to state that he was , at Llandovery, fully committed to take his trial at the next gaol
delivery. He was afterwards sent in custody of the police, and accompanied by
an escort of Dragoons, to Carmarthen gaol. Jones is the seventh person
connected with Rebeccaism that has been committed by the Magistrates at
Llandovery within the last fortnight, and the activity displayed in the
capture of these misguided men, has caused a complete revulsion of public
feeling. Becca’s vengeance is no longer dreaded, and the farmers are often
heard to express the old adage, that “evil doings have wretched endings.”
Sheriff’s officer William Frame testified that one night he was staying at a home in Bridgend where he was levying goods when it was broken into by armed men.
One “was dressed in woman’s apparel [with] a light gown on him, black bonnet, and a cap tied under the chin.”
They assaulted him and tied him up, and then ransacked the house and stole food, liquor, and bedding.
Alas for the prosecution, “the jury at length returned a verdict of not guilty, immediately on which the crowded court clapped their hands and shouted and cheered tremendously; a large number of respectable parties near the bench loudly expressing their unqualified disbelief of the correctness of the verdict.”
However:
After the jury had acquitted John Richards, John Phillips, and Isaac James, on an indictment for house breaking and larceny, they were arraigned on an indictment, charging them with riot and assault on the sheriff’s officers, arising out of the Rebecca case, at the Bridge End, at Pontypool, on … and having pleaded not guilty, the prosecutor applied to traverse until next sessions, which was granted, and the defendants, each with two sureties, entered into recognizances to appear accordingly.
The grand jury deciding whether to bring an indictment against several Rebeccaites, including those accused in the Pontardulais gate attack and in the attacks on the constables trying to arrest members of the Morgan family, met on to hear the prosecutor’s opening argument.
The Cambrian was there:
Special Commission
For the Trial of Parties Charged with Rebeccaism.
— Mr. Baron Gurney addressed the Grand Jury, and, after making a few preliminary observations, congratulating them on the good attendance of Magistrates, Grand Jurors, &c., said–
We are assembled at this unusual season of the year, under her Majesty’s Commission of Oyer and Terminer, to enquire into the cases of persons charged with felonies and misdemeanours arising out of, or connected with, the disturbances and outrages lately committed in this county, and to deliver the gaol of persons who are detained therein under such charges.
It is but too notorious that, in other parts of South Wales, there have been, for several months past, tumultuary proceedings — large assemblages of persons, generally by night, for the destruction of turnpike gates.
These proceedings did not receive a check at their commencement; and, therefore, they gradually increased, until they attained considerable height.
It might have been expected that the exposition of the law, the salutary cautions, the solemn warnings of the Learned Judge who presided in South Wales, on the Summer Circuit, in the two neighbouring counties of Carmarthen and Pembroke, would have been effectual in bringing the people to a sense of their moral duly, or if that failed, of their personal danger, from a perseverance in these practices; but I lament to say that, instead of decreasing, these offences have increased in number, in extent, and in enormity, and have at length reached the county in which we are assembled.
Excesses of this kind are never committed without some grievance, real or pretended.
The alleged grievance on account of which they commenced, and have been continued, was heavy tolls at turnpike gates.
When turnpikes were first established in England, about a century ago, it is matler of history that a large proportion of the farmers were hostile to them.
They, with short sighted policy, preferred bad roads, imperfectly repaired by the parishes, to good roads, which were attended with the exaction of tolls.
Wiser councils, however, prevailed, and to those wiser councils we are indebted for those roads, which have been gradually improved, and have at last, in many paris, almost attained perfection.
By the turnpike roads, many districts have been made accessible, which were not so before.
They have stamped an increased value on thousands and thousands of acres of valuable land.
But good roads could not be constructed except by means of a large outlay; for that outlay money was necessarily borrowed, for the payment of the principal and interest of which, tolls were necessary, and gates for their collection.
The Principality has, I believe, largely benefitted by this system.
The improvement in the roads has been beneficial to all classes.
It has opened important communications for trade, for agriculture, and for pleasure.
The facility afforded to travelling has brought into your country, so rich in scenery, numbers of persons who would otherwise never have visited it.
If, in the execution of plans for the improvement of the roads, any error has been committed — if the tolls imposed by the Act of Parliament have been too heavy; or if, where trustees had discretion vested in them, they have erred in the exercise of it, it was equally the duty and the interest of those who felt any burthen which they thought they ought not to bear, peaceably to prefer their applications to the legislature or to the trustees (as the case might be) for relief.
And if they believed that any illegal exaction took place, they had in their own hands a prompt remedy, by application to the magistrates in petty sessions, or, if they preferred it, either by indictment or by action, when a trial would have taken place at the assizes; and I will venture to say, that the appeal for justice, by even the poorest member of the community, would never have been made in vain.
I have always found that the claim of an oppressed man was listened to with favour in a court of justice, and ample redress afforded.
If, therefore, any grievances existed in the shape or oppression or illegal tolls, there was a legal remedy.
If, indeed, there are persons who, after money has been lent for the making the roads, and tolls imposed for repayment, have wished to break faith with the creditors by destroying their security, they must be dishonest characters.
Many a widow and many an orphan are dependent on these securities for their subsistence.
Instead of that peaceable application for redress, which I have pointed out, there have been large and tumultuous assemblages of persons, generally in the night, disguised so as to escape identification; armed in a manner to defy resistance, provided with implements for the destruction of gates, and even houses, and have carried their unlawful and wicked purposes into execution by terror and by violence, extending even to an attack upon the lives of peace officers, in the actual execution of their duty.
In a country which is governed by law, such excesses as these must be put down with a strong hand.
They are sure, sooner or later, to bring ruin on on those who engage in them.
I am happy to say that the cases which will be brought before you, though heinous in their character, are not numerous.
I learn from the depositions which lie before me, that on , an attack was made upon the turnpike house and gate at Pontardulais, on the road from Swansea to Llanon, by a tumultuous assemblage of persons, amounting, it is believed, to 150, blowing horns, armed and disguised, provided with implements of destruction.
The gate was broken down, and the house partly demolished, when the chief constable and other constables, accompanied by a magistrate, arrived.
There can be no doubt that the demolition would have been completed, but for the interruption by the constables.
The constables, it is deposed, called on them to desist — upon this one of the leaders fired a pistol at the chief constable, and was followed by a volley from the rioters.
The fire was returned by the constables, and three persons were apprehended.
These three are John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh.
Two charges against them are stated in the commitment — the one of beginning to demolish the house, the other of firing at the chief constable and the other constables.
It will be your duty to decide on the evidence that will be laid before you whether the guilt imputed be or be not brought home to them, or to either of them.
If the proof be as, were it remain unanswered, would induce you to pronounce a verdict of guilty (if you were the trying jury) in that case you will find a true bill, and doubtless you are well aware that they who concur in the verdict must not consist of a less number than twelve.
To prove the guilt of the persons accused, it is by no means necessary to show that they were the very persons who wielded the pick-axe or the crow bar, or did, with their own hands, any thing in the demolition of the house.
The crime is the crime of the riotous assembly, and all who formed part of that assembly, all who, by their presence, swelled their number and augmented their force, more especially all who by their disguises had prepared to avoid detection, and all who by their arms had prepared to over-power resistance, and resist apprehension — all in short who, by their conduct, shewed that they were concurring and assisting in the execution of their unlawful purpose are in law equally guilty.
You will, therefore, attend to the evidence that will be adduced, and find a true bill or not, according as the evidence fixes or fails to fix guilt upon each of the persons charged.
The same observation applies to the charge of firing loaded arms at the peace officers — it is not necessary to prove that the person charged was the very man that pulled the trigger — all who banded themselves together in such numbers with such weapons — indicative of such a purpose, are equally guilty.
Had any of these shots taken fatal effect, they would have had to answer for the crime of murder — and this consideration should lead rash and unthinking people to some reflection as to the danger they incur by engaging in such enterprizes which may and continually do involve them in more atrocious crimes, and more condign punishments than they had anticipated.
Another case is a charge of assault upon the chief constable, for the purpose of preventing the apprehension, or of rescuing from his lawful custody a member of the family, against whom a warrant on a charge of felony had issued, of maliciously and feloniously cutting and wounding him.
The depositions state that the chief constable, accompanied by others, had apprehended Henry Morgan, on a charge of felony, when the mother, the father, the sister, and the brother, fell upon him with great violence; assaulted him with different weapons — and the mother assaulted him with a weapon which cat his head to the bone.
In his own defence he was compelled to fire a pistol, by which one the family was seriously wounded; for the preservation of his life he was justified in so doing.
You will hear the narrative of each of the officers, and find a true bill or not, according as the evidence proves or fails to prove the participation of these parties in this crime.
As in the other case, it is fit that I should state that, where all the parties are equally engaged, the act of one is the act of all.
The grand jury deciding whether to bring an indictment against several accused Rebeccaites met again on to decide on the cases of John Hughes, John Hugh, and David Jones.
The Cambrian was there:
They first considered the charges against John Hughes (who appeared in court with his arm in a sling from injuries suffered during his arrest).
Hughes’s lawyer tried to challenge the method by which the jury was composed, without much success.
The prosecutor addressed the jury, saying in part:
He would forbear from making any observations upon the state of the adjoining counties, were it not for the purpose of accounting for their being assembled together on that extraordinary occasion, for the trial of this, and other cases which would come before the Court.
The disturbed condition in which many of the counties of South Wales were at the present time, rendered it, in the judgment of those whose duty it was to advise the Crown, imperatively necessary that the resolute and immediate administration of the law should take effect, and justice be promptly administered, in consequence of the great increase in the number and magnitude of offences committed under circumstances of considerable violence.
He went on to describe the Pontardulais Gate attack as follows:
He would relate what took place on , by a mob, consisting from one to two hundred persons, many of whom were on horseback.
They appeared to have come from some of the roads leading from the county of Carmarthen over a bridge, known by the name of Pontardulais bridge, which crossed a river, called the Loughor river.
At a short distance from the bridge, on the Glamorganshire side of the river, there was a toll-house and gate, and he believed they had existed beyond the memory of most persons acquainted with that part of the country.
He would next call the attention of the jury to the general appearance of the mob, and the manner in which they had provided themselves with arms and other implements of destruction.
The majority were disguised in some garments resembling female attire, and having their faces blackened.
Several of them had arms. Shots were fired, and in some instances it would be proved, that the guns were loaded with shot, one having been taken, and when examined was found to be loaded.
What were the contents of the guns which had been discharged could only be proved by the effect taken by them, and it would be stated in evidence, that the marks of shot were visible on different portions of the toll-house, and he was not confident whether such was not the case in some of the neighbouring houses.
They advanced towards the bridge, which they crossed, and went to the toll-house and gate.
They appeared to have with them implements of a destructive kind, and when it was considered that there were taken possession of, on the following morning, some guns, cliff, pickaxes, sledge-hammers, and some other instruments, the jury could have no doubt what was the object of the party whom he had just described.
The work of destruction soon afterwards commenced — all the windows of the toll house were broken, and part of the frame work destroyed, together with the door, and the house entered.
The partitions of the room were destroyed, and from one part of the house there were several stones removed, making a breach or aparture in one place, in height about two feet, and eighteen inches in length, and posts which some of the witnesses would tell them were the props of the house.
In their work of destruction, it would be found they were interrupted.
That would be proved by the witnesses.
When examined, it was found that the gate post was cut one-third through with a cross saw, and the jury would learn the slate in which the toll-house and gate had been left, from the evidence of the magistrates, chief-constable, and officers, who went there with the intention of apprehending some of the rioters.
It appeared to him to be idle to suggest any doubts as to the general character of the assemblage — that it was riotous, tumultuous, and in every way illegal.
When the large weapons made use of were taken into consideration — when the disguised appearance and the violent conduct of the mob were considered — there could not be the least doubt but that it was, in the eye of the Act of Parliament [the law forming the basis for the criminal charge], a riotous and tumultuous assemblage of persons for the disturbance of the public peace.
It appeared to him, that was beyond dispute.
What had actually been done, would be borne testimony to, by a variety of witnesses, upon whose evidence no doubt could be thrown.
There remained for the juey but one additional enquiry, and that was — what participation the prisoner at the bar had in the proceedings.
He believed it would be laid down from the Bench, that when any riotous assembly tumultuously met together, every person who, by his presence, contributed to swell their number, which gave them that formidable appearance and character, calculated to inspire terror and alarm, would, in the first instance, be deemed guilty of participation in the riot.
It would devolve upon the accused to show that he was present, with an innocent purpose.
But the case against the prisoner did not rest upon his mere presence among the mob.
When apprehended, it was found that he was armed, disguised by having his face blackened, and under circumstances from which they would draw the conclusion as to the part taken by him in the affair.
It appeared that Capt. Napier, accompanied by a superintendent and some policemen, with a few others, to the number of eleven or twelve persons, in consequence of having received information of an intended attack upon the gate, proceeded there from the Glamorganshire side of the Pontardulais bridge, with the view of apprehending some of the parties concerned in the tumult.
They were on a spot not a very great distance from the gate, and from where they were enabled to see, hear, and judge of what was going on among the crowd.
They would be called before the jury. and would describe the number assembled, the frequency of the gunshots fired by them, the noises they made, and the signals given by means of blue lights.
The work of demolition having been manifested by crashing noises, Captain Napier and his party advanced towards them, and desired them to desist.
The conduct of the persons assembled he would leave the witnesses to state.
Capt. Napier remarked the dress of the prisoner, and when apprehended, recognised him as the person who wore that dress.
It was Captain Napier’s object to wound the horses, so as to apprehend the riders.
He accordingly fired, and the prisoner descended; the police and the prisoner came into personal conflict, and in the conflict the prisoner was wounded, as the jury would observe, from his arm being in a sling.
Upon a shot being fired by one of the mob, an attempt was made to ride down the party headed by Captain Napier.
The prisoner’s identity would be distinctly proved.
He was recognised by his dress — he was also recognised by his wounds, and was taken to the toll-house.
There was also found on his person a quantity of gunpowder, with a shot belt in addition to copper caps, and papers, which were evidently intended for threatening notices, found upon him, and which he would call their attention to.
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then read a Welsh notice, to this effect:— “Come with your armour or covering to on Wednesday next, to assist me, or you shall have no further notice — (signed.)
— Becca.”
There were other papers found upon his person, but parts of which were torn, which might render their meaning doubtful, so that he would prefer the jury to read them for themselves.
Those notices would prove the prisoner to be closely connected with the operations of the night in question, He (the Attorney-General) did not consider it necessary to name every individual act of the persons present on the occasion, neither had he a desire to raise any legal discussion, but be thought it clear that all the acts of that assembly showed what were the objects for the accomplishment of which they had assembled together.
The Monmouthshire Merlin quotes the note somewhat differently in their coverage:
Daniel Jones, Brynhyr, — Come with your armour (or covering) to Llan Ty Issa, to assist us, on Wednesday night next, or else you shall not have another (or further) notice.
— Becca.
The chief constable who led the raid, Charles Frederick Napier, testified first:
On I received information, which induced me to go to the Pontardulais gate.
I first went to Penllergare.
I was accompanied by Mr. J.D. Llewelyn, and L.Ll.
Dillwyn, two county magistrates, Mr. Moggridge, Mr Sergeant Peake, and six police constables.
We went across the country, starting from Penllergare, about .
During the time of our proceeding, I heard a great noise of horns blowing [“as if for signals,” the Monmouthshire Merlin adds] in different parts of the country, and firing.
I heard those noises repeatedly in the course of our proceeding.
When arriving at the gate, we halted in the field about 600 yards from the gate.
While in the field, I heard first of all great noise of voices, then shots were fired, and I heard a number of horses trampling from the opposite side of the river.
I heard the voices on the Carmarthen side.
The noise increased considerably, and came from the direction of the Red Lion Inn.
I heard a volley fired, and also cheering, in the neighbourhood of the Red Lion Inn.
I heard a voice say.
“Come, come,” three times.
They then proceeded towards the Pontardulais gate.
Some of the mob cried out, “Gate, gate.”
It was now .
When I heard these voices I heard sounds of gate-breaking, and smashing of glass.
I then ordered my men to follow me, and proceeded across the lane, and then to the main road.
I saw three men mounted, disguised, with their horses facing the toll-house.
There were other persons dismounted, and in the act of destroying the gate.
There were about 150 [“about 100” says the Merlin] there.
One had a white loose dress, with a loose handkerchief, and their faces blackened.
The men on horseback appeared to be directing the other parties.
I ordered the men to fall in, and advanced towards the party, and cried out “Stop, stop, stop,” as loud as I could.
One of the men on horseback appeared to hear, fired at me.
I then said, “Mark that man.”
I advanced with my pistol, and fired at the horse.
The muzzle was close to him.
The horses turned, and the party appeared as if they rode over us.
The man on the horse I shot fell, by what means I know not.
The man that fell I believe to be the same as the man I fired at.
I then advanced to him, and we struggled.
He was then wounded in the arm, but by whom I know not.
There were several others who fired.
I did not take that person into custody then, as I was struck with a stick on the back of the bead.
The person I was struggling with had a straw hat and a loose white dress, similar to a Druid’s dress [the Merlin says just that “he was disguised, and his face blackened”].
Others were disguised, but not in the same way.
Some had their coat sleeves turned.
I afterwards saw the same man in the custody of one of the police.
To the best of my belief, he was the same man.
The mob then retreated over the bridge to the county of Carmarthen.
I know the prisoner at the bar to be one of the persons who was taken that night, and, to the best of my belief, who I was scufiling with.
There were two other persons taken one had the straw hat, and his coat sleeves turned inside out.
They had their faces blackened.
The other had a woman’s straw bonnet, with a piece of fern stuck in it, as a feather.
After the mob had retreated, I observed what was done to the house.
The door was broken in, the window broken, and part of the walls demolished.
Part of the sills were remaining.
The boards on the floors broken up.
About two feet ot the pine end of the toll-house were taken out.
That is, a part of the walls of the building.
I observed one person, with the but of his gun, drawing up the windows.
There were several instruments found on the following day — crowbars, blacksmiths’ sledges, hammers, &c. There is a blacksmith’s shop adjoining the turnpike.
It was damaged.
I had seen a light when about five miles from Pontartlulais — it was a blue light, thrown up into the air.
I observed it twice.
On cross-examination he added that he’d gotten the tip that caused him to go to the Pontardulais gate at .
Next to testify was county magistrate John Dillwyn Llewelyn.
He told more-or-less the same story, adding the detail “It was a moonlight night.”
His brother, and fellow-magistrate, Lewis Ll.
Dillwyn, testified next, to much the same effect, though he described “noises, similar to the mewing of cats” coming from the mob.
H.J. Peake then briefly gave his similar description and produced some physical evidence:
I produce two flasks of powder given me by Thos. Jones, who also delivered me some papers.
On the same morning he delivered me some articles of dress.
[Pouch containing shot produced].
They are large shot.
(Handed in).
I produce a shirt covered with blood delivered me by Sergeant Jenkins.
I produce straw hats and one covered with cloth [like a veil].
I produce two sledges, a cliff, some iron bars, a gun, a coat with sleeves turned.
He was followed by police sergeants Jenkins and Jones, and constables Jones, Price, Williams, and Wright.
Price claimed he heard a shout of “fight till death” during the melee (the Merlin says that Jones heard this as well, and attributed the shout to “one of the mob,” while the Cambrian was more ambiguous about who did the shouting).
Some of the witnesses reported on which of the prisoners they’d tangled with, what damage was done to the toll house, and what evidence they’d found at the scene, but nothing particularly worth repeating here.
George Evans, proprietor of a blacksmith shop near the Pontardulais gate, testified that his shop had been broken into on the night of the attack and identified some of the tools recovered at the gate as having been among the items taken from him.
The papers, &c., found on the prisoner’s person were then put in evidence — one contained 5s. in silver, and was addressed “Mrs. Rebecca,” and contained writing, but in consequence of its being torn it was not very intelligible.
There was also a threatening letter saying, “That the worthy mother would call on some one, and visit him for his wicked deeds, and giving him notice to prepare for the day of judgment,[”] and signed “A Hater of Tyranny, and one of Rebecca’s daughters.”
The Monmouthshire Merlin also covered the hearing.
It added the detail that “The court was densely crowded in every part.”
The grand jury deciding on the case against several accused Rebeccaites met again on to decide on the cases of John Hughes, John Hugh, and David Jones.
The Cambrian was there to report on the proceedings.
The toll collector, William Lewis, and John Morgan, a surveyor, started by testifying about the extent of damage to the Pontardulais toll house.
Then:
The papers on which there were writings in the Welsh language, was also put in evidence.
A translation had been committed to writing by Mr. Powell, the Court interpreter.
Mr. Wm. Cox, Governor of the Swansea House of Correction, was also examined, and produced a small quantity of powder, some percussion caps, 5s. wrapped in a piece of paper, addressed “Mrs. Becca,” and stating that it was 5s. from Thos. Thomas, of some place, in addition to 5s. given by him before.
This summed up the prosecution’s case.
The defense attorney, a Mr. Hill, then offered his rebuttal.
Excerpts:
The Attorney General had told them that this was an unusual course of proceeding.
He referred to the Special Commission — a similar one he (Mr. Hill) had not heard to have ever taken place in the history of the county of Glamorgan.
They also heard it said that the cases were extremely few.
Was that any reason for conferring upon the country the unenviable distinction of a Special Commission.
He could not devise what cause existed for one, but that did not prove that a cause did not exist.
Why was it not sent to a neighbouring county, where there were apparently greater reasons for sending it?
For this they had had no explanation.
It was no part of the Attorney General’s duty to give the explanation; but if the object was that a great public example should be made in the vindication of the power and majesty of the law, he could say, that the effect produced would not be that which was intended.
Be that as it may, he admitted that it was no part of their duty to enquire into it.
He thought that all good men, in every district, deprecated the outrages which had been committed; but he did not remember any instance in which the penal law, even when justly incurred, had succeeded in staying disturbances consequent upon notions of the existence of public grievances, whether real or supposed.
He did not know whether any grievances existed; but if they did, it was beyond the power of the law to restore tranquillity merely by the infliction of punishment.
In making these observations, he did not rest upon his own authority alone, but he spoke the opinion of Edmund Burke, one of the brightest stars of political opinions.
In that immortal speech or his, in favour of the consolidation with America — a measure which it would have been good for this country to have adopted, he illustrated his argument by a reference to the Principality [Wales].
He said that in former times, when the grievances of the people used to be answered by the application of force, either of the penal law or military power, crime multiplied to such an extent, that an Englishman passing through Wales could not go five yards from the highway without incurring the risk of being murdered.
Special Commissions, with the Attorney and Solicitor General, a number of Queen’s Counsel, and a host of lawyers, were things never suggested by the wisdom of their ancestors, very justly so called.
But when just legislative measures were adopted, they were successful beyond even the anticipation of those who, like himself, had almost an unlimited confidence in the power of moral force.
So great was the effect produced by such means in the reign of Henry the Eighth, which was not very auspicious for mercy and justice, that it had been likened to the “sudden stilling of the storm.”
Hill went on to criticize the way the prosecutor had made his case, and along the way characterized the guns seized at the bridge and presented as evidence in this way: “He was glad the guns were produced, for he believed that, if the choice were offered him of firing them, or having them fired at him, he would choose the latter alternative, but he might be wrong.”
He suggested that, contrary to the testimony the prosecution had offered, perhaps the police had fired unprovoked on the Rebeccaite crowd, and not in response to having been fired upon.
The instances were not new, but were in the memory of all, in which soldiers and police, in similar transactions to the present, both exceeded their duty.
It was no new thing to find that their conduct was not always such as resulted from united bravery with forbearance, and which indeed participated of the sublime, for there was nothing more sublime than the conduct of men armed with great power, with command to exercise it, and yet submitting to insults and injury rather than exercise it towards their erring fellow-creatures.
The Learned Counsel then proceeded to make some general remarks upon the conduct of the assembly — they had advertised their projects on the night in question by firing arms, while the police had hid themselves in their retreat, having pistols loaded with balls, while the mob foolishly and innocently fired without any such implements, as if merely to cheer and arouse their comrades, for there was no evidence that they had injured a single individual.
There had not a single hair from the heads of either of the police been singed, and yet it would seem, though strange, that it should be represented that ferocity had been exhibited on the part of the mob, and that justice demanded that they should be placed for trial at the bar of their country.
What did the evidence prove?
Nothing more than that there was an idle firing of guns — not loaded with bullet or ball.
Certainly there had been a few shots produced, and the Attorney-General had asked if they were large?
What number were they?
Why, it was only necessary for them to be looked at to enable any person to see that they were small bird shot — and that they were fired as a mere feu de joie — for to suppose that with those they intended resisting the police, who were armed to the teeth with pistols loaded with balls, in addition to other weapons, would be the height of absurdity.
Capt. Napier had said that there were marks of shots on the windows, and near the lamp on the toll-house door, which evidently proved the use of the small shot — to break the glass.
He did not, for a moment, mean to contend that they were justified in doing so, but the question was whether they were guilty of the particular act charged in the indictment.
The question was not whether they were guilty of some breach of the law, but whether they were so upon that indictment.
He was glad that shot had been produced, for it afforded further proof that there existed no intention to injure.
For with shot, though the injury done would be less than with balls, yet it would be more general — the chances of inflicting wounds with shot being at least fifty to one.
How could the jury suppose that any shots had been fired, while not one had even penetrated the garments of any of the police or magistrates.
— On the other hand, if the conduct of that body were glanced at, it would be found that information of the intended attack upon the gate had been given, as early as , and that after a delay, respecting which no explanation had been given, the police had proceeded armed, not with sparrow-shots but with pistols, each carrying balls, each of which would be fatal to man’s life.
They were found coming to the field, and though knowing by the blue lights, firing of guns, &c., that a crime was contemplated, instead of making any attempts to prevent the riot, they were found hiding in the field until the gate had been broken.
He confessed it was to him a novel part off the duty of the police of this country to watch until mischief had been accomplished before attempting to prevent it.
Here the Magistrates and police had an opportunity of preventing a great outrage of the law, but instead of doing so, they had waited to see it committed.
Mr. Hill, after making several additional observations upon the conduct of the police, remarked that in conducting the case against the prisoner, the first maxim of law had been overlooked, which was not to punish the guilty, but to protect the innocent.
He hoped that he did not exceed his duly expressing a hope that the spirit which seemed to actuate some of the Glamorganshire authorities would not become general throughout the land.
He had never before heard of a prosecution for a flight on one side, while the attack was upon the other.
It was something new to him to see persons coming to that Court under the auspices of the Attorney and Solicitor General, to vindicate their conduct in shooting at British subjects with pistols loaded with balls.
Such proceedings, in his opinion, exceeded those of the French revolution.
Instead of appearing as prosecutors and witnesses, the wounded and injured men appeared at the criminal bar.
He could give no expression to any feeling but that of astonishment.
He then called eleven character witnesses for John Hughes.
The Solicitor-General then gave a rebuttal and the prosecutor summarized his case.
The Monmouthshire Merlin goes into a little more detail here, and reveals the prosecution’s idea of the importance of the five shillings wrapped in the note:
There was also another paper found on prisoner, which was important.
On it was writing, directed to Mrs. Rebecca, to the effect that 5s had been paid at some time before by a person named Thomas, and that he now paid another 5s, and two half-crowns were found wrapped up in this paper.
It will be recollected that on the person of the prisoner, when apprehended, there was a large number of half crowns, besides other monies, and hence it would appear that he had been collecting subscriptions for some purpose.
Then the jury considered the evidence and came back with its verdict:
The jury then retired, and in the course of fifteen or twenty minutes [“about three quarters of an hour” reported the Merlin] re-entered the Court, and returned a verdict of guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy on account of previous good character.
Sentence deferred.
The Court was then immediately adjourned.
True bills have been returned against the Morgan’s family, of Cwmcillan; against David Lewis, for assaulting the Tycoch toll-collector; against Lewis Davies for a misdemeanor, in aiding in breaking the Pontardulais gate.
No true bill against the boy, Wm. Hughes, upon the same charge.
Which confuses me, as I thought this was a grand jury designed only to decide whether charges could be brought, but this seems to indicate that at least in the John Hughes case, it was acting as an ordinary criminal jury.
The special commission trying the Rebeccaite cases continued on
, starting by considering
the cases against David Jones and John Hugh, who were captured during a
Rebeccaite attack on a toll booth. They chose to plead guilty, probably as
the evidence against them was pretty near identical to what the same jury had
been convinced by a couple of days earlier in the trial of John Hughes, who
had been captured alongside them.
The court sentenced Jones and Hugh to be exiled to a penal colony in Australia
for seven years. Hughes, however, got sterner treatment:
He appeared to be one in a station of society far above the rest — one not
likely to be misled by others, and upon evidence proved to be a leader, if not
the leader of this lawless multitude.
He got 20 years of penal colony exile. The court then moved on to other cases.
The charges against David Lewis were dropped. Lewis Davies was charged with
destroying a turnpike-gate, and pled guilty, but was not yet sentenced.
Morgan and Esther Morgan pled guilty to assisting in the assault on the man
sent to take Henry Morgan prisoner, but the prosecutor, “[c]onsidering their
advanced age and other circumstances connected with the case,” declined to
pursue the felony charge. Margaret, Rees, and John Morgan also pled guilty,
Margaret to the assault itself, and the others similarly with abetting. The
prosecutor again declined to pursue the felony charges, “and observed that,
having ascertained the circumstances under which this aggravated assault had
taken place, he did believe they were under a mistake with respect to the right
to resist. Under these circumstances he was not disposed to press for a severe
punishment in this case…” Margaret was sentenced to six months in prison, and
Rees & John to twelve months each.
The Rebeccaites were “bad cops” that allowed peace-loving, law-abiding,
innocent Welsh farmers to play “good cop” and use the implicit threat of
Rebecca to get more attention for their grievances. Here is an example (from
the
Monmouthshire Merlin):
Sir, — I am sorry no abler pens than mine have undertaken to draw the
attention of our neighbourhood to the monstrous high rate of tolls, as well as
the unequal system of collecting them. For instance, from Nash or Goldcliff we
only travel one mile on the turnpike road, and have to pay
9d a horse, while in
many districts it is only
3d or
4d, and where, too,
materials are much more expensive.
Again, the toll to Caerleon from Newport, I understand, is
17d or
18d for one horse.
Surely, the tolls might be arranged so that a person might pay in proportion
to the distance he has to travel, for under the present system he might go
thirty or fourty miles for the same money he is obliged to pay for one — As we
small farmers find great difficulty in scraping our rents together for our
landlords, I hope and trust the proper authorities will look after these local
burdens, as they were advised to do by Lord Granville Somerset at the last
Quarter Sessions, in order to prevent tumults and outrages like those which
are disgracing South Wales, for we ar really very desirous that Rebecca and
her children should never come among us to create an anti-toll rebellion — we
would rather have our grievances redressed after a lawful fashion.
Should you think these few remarks deserve a corner in your intelligent paper,
till some abler advocate may come forward you will greatly oblige,
Several Poor Little Farmers.
PS. Would not our
monthly agricultural meeting do a good service to us, by taking the matter
into consideration, with a view to assist.
Nash,
John Hughs, David Jones, and John Hugh, who were convicted of Rebeccaite
activity, published the following confession, which reads to me like the work
of a lawyer trying to work a clemency angle:
To the public generally, and to our neighbours in particular:
We, John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh, now lying in Cardiff gaol,
convicted of an attack on Pontardulais turnpike gate, and the police stationed
there to protect it, being now sentenced for transportation, beg earnestly to
call on others to take warning by our fate, and to stop in their mad course
before they fall into our condemnation.
We are guilty, and doomed to suffer, while hundreds have escaped. Let
them and every one take care not to be deluded again to attack public or
private property, and resist the power of the law, for it will overtake them
with vengeance, and bring them down to destruction.
We are only in prison now, but in a week or two shall be banished as rogues,
to be slaves to strangers in a strange land. We must go in the prime of life
from our dear homes, to live and labour with the worst of villains, looked
upon as thieves.
Friends, neighbours, all — but especially young men — keep from night
meetings, fear to do wrong, and dread the terrors of the judge.
Think of what we must, and you may, suffer, before you dare to do as we have
done.
If you will be peaceable, and live again like honest men, by the blessing of
God you may expect to prosper, and we — poor outcast wretches — may have to
thank you for the mercy of the Crown — for on no other terms than your good
conduct will any pity be shown to us or others, who may fall into our almost
hopeless situation.
Signed,
John Hughes,
David Jones,
The mark ✗ of John Hugh.
Cardiff gaol, .
Witness, John B. Woods, Governor.
On , the turnpike trustees
of the Swansea road district held their monthly meeting. This was supposed to
be the meeting at which they would hold their annual auction of the rights to
collect tolls at the district’s gates. Here are some excerpts from
the
account of the meeting from the Monmouthshire
Merlin:
At the last letting, those tolls produced the sum of £3,325, at which sum,
according to Act of Parliament, they must be again put up [at auction].
Several gates and bars had been either removed or abandoned by the trustees,
so it was not probable the tolls would produce so great an amount as they did
last year.
Mr. [Thomas] Grove said (with respect to the charges on horses drawing coal)
the trustees could not charge less than
1½d for one horse
drawing coal. — To Mr. Bullen: What do you charge for two horses?
Mr. Bullen: I have not charged more since I was fined
[see ♇ ] than
1½d each horse. I used
to charge a shilling.
Mr. James thought Mr. Bullen might legally have charged a shilling for two
horses drawing coal, as the toll board did not state that the charge for each
horse drawing coal was
1½d, but merely that
for one horse drawing,
&c., the sum
of 1½d was payable,
and consequently, if more than one horse was attached to a cart of coal, Mr.
Bullen might exercise his discretion, and if he thought proper, the full tolls
allowed by the Act of Parliament. He thought Mr. Bullen was right.
After further conversation, the tolls were formally put up by auction, but no
offers were made, although Messrs. Bullen and Lewis were present.
The late Rebecca outrages having become the subject of conversation, Mr. M.
Phillips said: The expenses incident to this insurrection, will be, to those
who took part in it, more expensive than the amount of tolls paid in ten
years.
The following advertisement appeared in the Cambrian.
The authorities frequently responded to the Rebeccaite uprising by insisting that people upset about the abusive tollgates should have made their complaints through peaceful, proper channels.
Here, some people decided to call that bluff and to see what would come of it:
To the Commissioners of Roads in the Bridgend District, in the county of Glamorgan.
Gentlemen: We, the undersigned, being Parishioners of the Parish of Coychurch, and Llanillid, and the adjacent Parishes, thought it expedient to address your Worships, in respect of the Turnpike Gates within your said District, do humbly implore you for the removal of those obnoxious Gates, Toll-bars, and Chains, within the several Parishes of coity and Coychurch.
There have been existing eastward, from the River Ogwy, to the upper end of Brynna Gwynon, fourteen Gates, Bars, and Chains, within the short distance of six miles.
We most humbly complain or this grievance, and hope that the same will be early removed — every by-road is almost muzzled with a Trap Gate.
The time is depressed, as your Worships must be aware of, yet the Tolls are exacted from Farmers for carrying their Lime in order to manure their Land; and also for Coal carrying by Farmers to make such manure; and one Farmer cannot help another without paying Turnpike Gate; also, we most humbly complain of a certain Wall that have been erected across one of our Parish Roads, in the lower end of the village of Coychurch; and further, one of the Turnpike Gates at Coychurch aforesaid having been erected on the Parish Road.
We deprecate in the most solemn manner the conduct of Rebecca and her atrocious Satellites.
Peace is our watch-word, and legal justice is our claim.
Dated .
David Thomas, Jenkin Morgan, David Griffiths, Rector of Llanillid, Thomas Richards, David Phillips, William Morgan, Morgan Morgan, William Evans, William Radcliff, Henry Miles, George Thomas, David Thomas, David Powell, John Griffiths, Daniel Morgan, James Griffiths, sen. John Morgan, James Griffiths, jun. Thomas Morgan, Thos. Jenkins, Coedmustwrt, William Thomas, Shelf, Evan Bevan, Tyn-y-Pwnt, Thomas Edwards, Joseph Jenkins, Catherine May, Evan Watkins, Thomas Griffiths, John Lewis, John Rees, Edward Loveluck.
The Monmouthshire Merlin of notes that this petition was presented in person at the meeting of the Bridgend Turnpike Trustees by Rees Jenkins.
Jenkins was joined by Jehosophat Powell, of Margam, who presented another petition:
There are a great many fields in the neighbourhood of Aberavon, and Taibach, let out to cottagers to set potatoes in; therefore, when the said cottagers draw their potatoes, they have no way whatever to bring them home, but go to the farmer and borrow a horse and cart to bring them.
Then six or seven bags are put into the cart.
Some are compelled to go through two gates, namely, Aberavon, east and west; and before they are allowed to pass, they are compelled to pay six-pence for each bag — each bag belonging to separate people.
When they have occasion to pass through the other gate, they must pay there also.
The same horse and cart passes five or six times a day but only loaded with different people’s potatoes, and is charged every time.
The gate keeper is occasionally in the potatoe field watching and reckoning how many bags belong to each person.
The above can be verified on oath.
An empty waggon going from Llanvihangel to Neath, in the morning, pays toll at Taibach.
When it returns they are compelled to pay at Pyle gate — the two gates being within five miles of each other.
Several farmers are served in the same manner.
Upon another occasion, when the waggon was full, returning, the gatekeeper at the several places of Aberavon east west, and Taibach, stopped the horses and demanded toll; the toll of the said gate having been paid in the morning.
This also can be verified on oath.
There are other great grievances which the farmer, &c., labour under.
The following are a few;—
When a farmer has a heavy loaded waggon going to market, he is stopped at the gate in order to have the waggon and its contents weighed in the weigh-machine.
It the load is too heavy by only a few hundred weights, he must pay.
A farmer cannot say how much weight he has in his waggon before it is weighed.
There have been waggons carrying iron passing through the same gate every day and which are generally loaded about a ton more than they are allowed to carry but there is no notice taken of it.
This is also another grievance — the railing across the parish road, joining Pyle gate, (by whose authority it has been put there we know not,) to prevent parishioners going over it, and compelling them to go through the gate.
Again, if a poor take a donkey for a pannier of coals, which are not worth more than three-pence, the charge in tolls is two-pence — although the place where he gets coal is not more than five hundred yards from his home.
The Trustees claimed to be shocked at this news:
The Chairman: If the statement is true, it is a most gross imposition.
They cannot legally make a charge for each bag.
The Rev. Robert Knight: I have heard that three and six-pence was charged for one horse, drawing one cart, because the cart was lent to seven poor people, who took their potatoes out of the farmer’s field.
Mr. Powell handed some gate tickets to the chairman, which Mr. Powell said fully corroborated his statement, with regard to the amount of tolls charged at the gates which were enumerated in the statement.
The commissioners seemed quite astonished at the disclosures made by Mr. Powell in his statement, and for some time could scarcely believe it possible such wholesale imposition should ever have been committed in this county; but the accuracy of the statement in this particular was vouched for by several parties present of respectability.
After some conversation,
The Chairman said: Gentlemen, the question raised is this, as far as I can understand it — if six people join in loading one waggon, that waggon pays six times over for one passage through the gate.
That is what I understand the statement to mean.
If the same cart go again through the gate six times the same day, and is loaded with potatoes belonging to six different people, they must pay six times over, every time they pass!
A Farmer said it was the case.
The Chairman conceived the toll collector was acting most illegally, if his conduct had been fairly and truly represented.
Those petitions having been presented containing — whether rightfully or wrongfully, he knew not — statements of alleged grievances, it was their duty as trustees, acting on behalf of the public, to take those matters up, and to give them their most patient attention.
He would therefore propose, — That this meeting, at its rising, adjourn to , and that in the meantime a committee should be appointed to take all the several matters and things contained in the petitions into their careful consideration, and report thereon fully to the adjourned meeting.
This suggestion was adopted and after some discussion, in which the people were advised to apply to the magistrates for redress, and to punish the toll keepers for imposition, the meeting separated.
What happened when the trustees took up the matter at the next meeting?
They kicked the ball further down the road, with the expectation of taking yet another kick.
Here are some excerpts from the Cambrian:
The Clerk having read the minutes of the last meeting, the Chairman observed, that the business for that day was to receive the report of the Committee appointed at their last monthly meeting, for the purpose of making an investigation into the allegations of the petitions presented at that meeting.
He begged to tell them, that the report had been prepared and made ready for presentation on that day, but in consequence of additional information received in the course of , he thought it would be desirable that the Committee should again proceed with their labours, and at the next monthly meeting, on Saturday week, present their report, which should be taken into consideration at a meeting to be at that time appointed.
It would be impossible, he said, to discuss the subject of the report at the same meeting at which it was presented, as it would be of considerable length, the Committee having considered it to be their duty to enter into various details connected with the accounts.
— The Clerk observed, that it was competent for that meeting to adjourn to the day previous to the General Meeting.
— The Chairman said, that it would be perfectly useless to meet on Friday, and take the report into consideration on the following Saturday.
The Commissioners would not have sufficient time to peruse it.
— After a few additional remarks, the Chairman read the following resolutions, which were unanimously agreed to:— “That the Committee do report at the next monthly meeting, and that 300 copies of the report be in the meantime printed under the orders of the Committee, and that it be taken into further consideration on a day to be appointed at the next monthly meeting.”…
It was expected that the report of the Committee appointed to investigate into the charges made against Mr. Bullin and his collectors, should be read, but a letter had been received from Dr. Nicholl, M.P., who was in London, informing the Trustees that the printer had been unable to complete the printing of the report, which was a very voluminous one.
One might begin to suspect they were in no hurry to make their report public.
After all of the fuss about needing to have the report ready ahead of time so that the trustees could carefully consider it before proceeding, the committee instead adjourned and informally prejudged the report in absentia to have exonerated Bullin.
The Cambrian listened in:
A conversation between several gentlemen of the Trust took place, after the meeting had been adjourned, and from the observations made by several gentlemen composing the Committee of Enquiry, we anticipate that the report will entirely exonerate Mr. Bullin from the charges made against him, which were contained in the petition emanating from the Kenfig meeting, as well as in other petitions presented to the Trustees.
The Rev. Robt. Knight and Mr. Franklen unequivocally expressed their disbelief of the allegations contained in the petitions, and stated that, during their investigations, the Committee had not met with the slightest evidence to support the charge that any of Mr. Bullin’s collectors had extorted sixpence for each bag of potatoes, belonging to different owners, though there were seven or eight in a cart.
Those parties, Mr. Franklen observed, who had assured himself and other Trustees that they could prove the truth of the charges in twenty instances, or in a hundred, if necessary, did not even attempt to substantiate one case.
It was also observed, by the same Trustees, that the first allegation in the Kenfig petition, relating to the existence of twelve gates from Cowbridge to Aberavon, was a palpable falsehood, as Mr. Hopkins, the road-surveyor, in answer to various questions put to him by Mr. Franklen, assured the Trustees, that there were no more than seven gates between those two places.
Mr. Wm. Lewis, on the other hand, was of opinion, that there had existed some grounds for making those charges against Mr. Bullin, though not to the extent alleged.
— Mr. Bullin assured the Trustees, that there had never existed the least shadow of a ground for making such charges — that none of his collectors ever went into potatoe-fields, with the view of charging sixpence upon each potatoe-bag belonging to poor people.
— Both the Rev. Robt. Knight and Mr. Franklen repeated apologised to Mr. Bullin for having, in the least degree, been instrumental in giving currency to such reports, and expressed their surprise that the respectable parties who had signed the petitions, should have made such charges without substantiating them.
They also thought it very unfair towards Mr. Bullin, that these imputations on his character should remain so long uncontradicted.
But according to testimony given before the larger commission of enquiry investigating conditions in South Wales, things were not so clear-cut as this.
According to Dr. Nicholl, he told Jehosophat Powell to respond to Bullin’s denial of wrongdoing and the magistrates’ decision to close the investigation by summoning before the magistrates the actual toll collectors under Bullin’s charge who had been extorting the extra potato-tolls and to get them to testify under oath in order to substantiate the charge.
He probably thought this would be fruitless (and probably wondered why it hadn’t occurred to the trust’s alleged committee of enquiry to go and ask them itself) — as if the collectors testified that they had indeed taken excessive tolls, the trustees would dismiss them and put the blame on them — but Powell did provide a list of persons who were willing to testify that they had paid such fees.
Nicholl testified that he sent two solicitors to look into the allegations, who reported back “it appears, certainly, as far as he can make out, that there has been no such toll demanded or paid within the last six months, and consequently within the time limited in the Act of Parliament for bringing it before the magistrates, therefore we cannot submit it to investigation before the magistrates.”
In other words, they allowed the clock to tick away the brief six-month statute of limitations to a time just about at the end of potato-harvesting season, and a time also when Rebecca was terrifying toll collectors into their best behavior.
Nicholl also largely dismissed the “fourteen gates between the River Ogwy and the upper end of Brynna Gwynon,” charge as an exaggeration, but in the course of doing so, noted that the committee had discovered several of these gates to have been illegally installed, “and we require in our report that every one of those posts, as well as the Tymerchant gate, shall be instantly removed as illegal.”
While we have to congratulate our readers on the discontinuance of the unlawful proceedings of the Rebeccaites in the counties of Carmarthen, Pembroke, and Cardigan, we regret to find, that in Radnorshire, they have commenced their work of destruction with much daring.
About , Rebecca, with upwards of 200 individuals, all disguised, and well armed with guns and other weapons, entered the streets of Rhyader, and proceeded direct to the respective turnpike-gates, and in a very short space of time the north and east gates, as well as the two recently-erected gates adjoining the bridge, with the posts, &c., were entirely erased to the ground, and the toll-house of the latter wholly demolished together with the goods of the collector.
Several volleys were discharged during the time of their effecting the operation, and the place is a scene of great devastation.
was a particularly wet one in England and Wales, with about 15cm of rain falling, more than any other month during .
That, the many arrests (and the first convictions) of Rebeccaite suspects, and the onset of the cold season, may have all been factors in the diminishing of Rebeccaite activity.
Reading this article reminds me that by necessarily restricting myself to accounts of Rebeccaism in the English-language newspapers of Wales, I’m also getting an account from that segment of the media most likely to sympathize with and cater to the English-speaking ruling class there, and least likely to give voice to the largely Welsh-speaking participants in the Rebeccaite uprising.
The London Times seems to have had a particularly industrious reporter on the case during the Rebecca Riots.
I have yet to delve into the Times archives themselves, but occasionally its work was quoted or referred to in other papers.
Here is an example, from the Monmouthshire Merlin:
On my return from the Special Commission at Cardiff I thought it my duty to wait upon the Commissioners appointed by her Majesty to inquire into the grievances complained of in South Wales, who are now prosecuting that inquiry at the town-hall, in this town, for the purpose of ascertaining how far the investigation would be open to the public.
I was politely informed by Mr. Frankland Lewis, the chairman, on the part of the Commissioners, that having no desire whatever to make their inquiry a secret one, but rather to court publicity, the Commissioners yet thought they would best arrive at information and at the truth without the presence of reporters for the public press, as in some cases parties would be deterred by the fear of publicity from giving full information, whilst in others persons would be prompted to make inconsiderate statements in the hope and expectation of seeing them in the newspapers.
This was, at present, the opinion of the Commissioners.
The Commissioners sit in a large room in the court-house, and, with their secretary, Mr. Gurney, the short-hand writer, and a clerk, there are usually six persons present at the examinations, which the Commissioners informed me they thought was an audience sufficiently formidable to examine the country people before, without further increasing its numbers by the presence of the representatives of the press.
The Commissioners also informed me, that the evidence given before them, and their report, will be printed and laid on the table of the House of Commons, only so far condensed as to be reduced to a readable form.
I send you this as the result of my interview, and of the present opinion of the Commissioners.
A deputation of farmers, amongst whom were some relatives and friends of the prisoners [John] Hugh and [David] Lewis, tried at the late Cardiff special commission, last night waited upon Mr. Chambers, jun., of Llanelly, and expressed their anxiety for a restoration of tranquillity to the country, and as an earnest of their feeling, offered to be sworn in as special constables to preserve the peace.
I understand Mr. Chambers has appointed to be in attendance on at Llanon, for the purpose of swearing in as special constables those who thus tendered their services.
The Government has sent down a gentleman, Col. Hankey, to act as a police magistrate in those districts where there are now no resident magistrates.
Colonel Hankey will, accordingly; as soon as possible, be sworn in of the commission of the peace, to act for the three counties of Carmarthen, Pembroke, and Cardigan.
A rumour is current that another special commission, for the trial of the Carmarthenshire prisoners, will be sent down after term into this county.
It appears to have arisen from the fact of the county gaol being quite full of Rebecca prisoners, and from one Mr. Maule, the treasury solicitor’s clerks, being in the town arranging the evidence against the prisoners.
[The Monmouthshire Merlin also mentioned this rumor, saying that “There are now nearly fifty prisoners in the county gaol, and several others out on bail, awaiting their trials.”]
In many parts of the county the late verdict against the “Rebecca” prisoner [John] Hughes, at Cardiff, has excited intense animosity against the jury who tried him.
I have been told that some farmers from the more disturbed districts have affected even to be incredulous that such a verdict was ever returned by a Welsh jury.
So far as an opinion can be formed at present, however, the severity of the sentence appears to have had a salutary effect, whilst it has at the same time excited universal commiseration for the culprit.
Two toll-bars were destroyed on , near Cwm Ammon.
This account of an anti-Rebeccaite meeting comes from the Cambrian:
The unreasonable and very dangerous excitement which has prevailed for some time in Carmarthenshire has now nearly subsided — every body seems to be heartily tired of the “Becca” farce, and ashamed that such unmanly proceedings should have been allowed to divert their attention so long.
The country has assumed its wonted tranquility.
A large, respectable, and important meeting was held on at Llanon, nearly all the farmers of the parish, together with hundreds from the adjoining parishes of Llanelly, Llandei, Llanddarog, and Llangendeirne, being present.
In the unavoidable absence of Wm. Chambers, jun., Esq., at the commencement of the meeting, Mr. D. Jones, of Bryncarnarvon, a respectable freeholder from the parish of Llanelly, was elected Chairman.
Eloquent speeches were delivered by the Rev. Messrs. Prichard, Llwynhendy, Williams, Pontardulais, Davies, Bethania, Bowen, Lalanelly, and Rees, Llanelly, and by Messrs. Williams, Davies, and Stephen Evans.
Resolutions were unanimously passed, disavowing every sympathy and connection with the desperate characters who threatened individuals, destroyed private property, and drenched their hands in blood, and expressive of the sorrow of those present, that they did not at the commencement set their faces more resolutely and publicly against the least deviation from law — of their full conviction, that redress from grievances must be sought only by moral means — and of their readiness to step forward to be sworn special constables, to protect property and preserve peace and tranquility, in any way the authorities might direct.
Capture of a Party of Rebeccaites.
Our Correspondent at Haverfordwest, whose letter is dated on , writes:—
“It is reported here that one of the parties concerned in the destruction of the Fishguard toll-gate some weeks back, has laid information against about thirty of the persons engaged in that affair, and that the London police-officers stationed at Fishguard, assisted by a troop of dragoons, have effected the capture of the parties informed against, and that an examination of the evidence against them commenced before the Magistrates at Fishguard .
Nothing certain is known here as to the result of the examinations; but it is said that a great many of the men have been held to bail to appear at the Assizes. — A company of marines started from this town for Fishguard, and are not yet returned.”
I am sorry to state that last night another incendiary fire took place at a farm-house, three or four miles from this town and within two miles of the metropolitan police and a party of dragoons.
As it in some degree exemplifies the present state of the country, I will give you the facts relating to it.
It appears that a farm called Llanffynone, in the parish of Llanegwad, about four miles from Carmarthen, was occupied by a tenant called Rachel Jones, who finding the rent more than she could pay and live, gave notice to quit it at that rent, at .
About it was announced that a farmer, named Thomas Thomas, was ready to take it at the old rent as soon as it was vacant and on , dated Carmarthen, Thomas received through the post office a threatening letter, in consequence of which he was afraid to enter upon the farm, and it remained vacant until last week, when he sent four loads of corn there, which were housed in the outbuildings.
the outbuildings were set fire to, but the corn was saved by the exertions of the neighbours.
Meetings of the various parishes round Narbeth, in Pembrokeshire, are being held for the purpose of appointing deputies to act as delegates to state their grievances before the commissioners.
To the list of grievances have lately been added objections against the corn-laws.
The state of things in that district is very unsatisfactory.
I was informed by a magistrate and landowner from there , that it is impossible to get rents paid, and if a distress is put in, the bailiffs are ill-used and the cattle and stock removed in the night.
He informed me that he had been obliged to levy a distress for rent on one of his farms and in the night the whole of the cattle and stock were driven away.
He had caused a search to be made for them in every direction without effect, and had at length discovered some of them at the bottom of a coal-pit where they had been let down by ropes and were feeding.
He also informed me that every landlord who attempts to obtain his rent in this way receives threatening notices from Becca and that nothing but the presence of a large force of military and police keeps the people quiet.
This gentleman also informed me that he had been threatened that if he interfered as a magistrate Becca would set fire to his house and burn his property.
An editorial from in the Monmouthshire Merlin claimed that the state of economic inequality in Wales made the Rebecca Riots the equivalent of a slave revolt:
The accounts which we have received of the spread of Rebeccaism in Radnorshire, and the formidable and systematic manner in which the rioters set about their proceedings, in levelling toll-bars and gates, and defying the constabulary force openly, with arms in their hands, prove that the social disorder is too deeply rooted to be eradicated by the various means of relief or repression, which the gentry and the government have ordained.
The blindest will now see that in spite of all pretensions and plausible representations, our physicians have carefully abstained from cutting down to the root of the matter.
Emollients, or even cauteries, are ineffectual when the complaint is not local, but pervades the body politic.
Solomon has told us, “the destruction of a people is their poverty,” and truly we may say the malady of Wales is her physical want and wretchedness.
It cannot be said that the people here are characterised by any ineradicable vice or incurable turbulence of disposition; on the contrary, a more quiet, primitive, docile, vegetating set of people, if we may be allowed the expression, than the Welsh cannot be named in the limits of Great Britain: but, even the patient ox may be goaded into fury, and the most quiet and tractable of races may be driven to desperation by grinding task masters, oppressive taxation, and a general and insuperable difficulty of living, because too large a proportion of the produce of the soil goes to the owners, and too small a proportion to the occupiers, as compared with what is just and humane in itself, or the practice in other well-regulated societies.
Less violent in degree, but equally anarchical in reality as the revolution of St. Domingo, we have now a servile insurrection, slowly spreading from county to county, uncured and incurable, silently, eating like a cancer into the bowels of the land, although all without looks smiling in florid health and prosperity.
If this state of things continue much longer, we shall have a smouldering flame of discontent burning on, and ready to spring up into a blazing fire, whenever any commotion agitates the country.
Property will diminish in value; rents will cease to be paid except they are collected by force.
Welsh estates will become as unsaleable as Irish ones, and Carmarthen and Radnor become in the same category as that famed county, Tipperary.
Amidst all this confusion and elements of disorganisation, what steps do the government take to right the wrongs — to ameliorate the condition of the people, and thus stop the turbulence that springs from poverty?
In answer to this question we have to repeat our former observation, that they have done nothing to the point.
First of all they sent down that dignified and solemn gentleman, Mr. Maule, of the Treasury, who, on the night, after obtaining the committal of a whole family of Morgans and others of Bolgoed fame, found the gates of Swansea broken down almost within his ear’s reach.
Then came a Bow-street magistrate to find out the rioters, foolishly mistaking a social insurrection of the lower orders against the upper classes, and their treatment and social government, for a country fair disturbance or a colliers’ strike.
Their respectable envoy, either finding the task above his commission, or not being in the habit of making general inferences from particular facts, made his report and returned as wise as he came.
Horse and foot, the ultima ratio of all bewildered governments, were next poured into the country and kept in a state of perpetual motion, until the very drummer boys began to detest the degrading employment, as much as still-hunting in Ireland.
Boards of fussy road trustees, magistrates, clerks, toll-collectors, et id genus omne, assembled at the same time to institute enquiries into grievances lying under their very noses, being shamed into the appearance of doing something, by public opinion, and not a few county meetings headed by lord-lieutenants, who professed the most innocent amazement at such violent goings-on, were called, for the purpose of giving vent to a little doleful oratory; many professions of sympathy, and a fixed resolution to do everything to lessen the hardships of the farmer’s lot, except lowering his rent.
At the same time the government, after having been baffled for many months in every attempt to seize a single Rebeccaite, at length, by an unlooked for stroke of fortune, obtained, at one fell swoop, a sufficient supply of suspected rioters to warrant the issue of a pompous commission to try what effect the terrors of the law would have upon the misguided people of Wales, conjoining it with the special commission of enquiry into the condition of the inhabitants generally.
In the case of the rioters they obtained convictions as they desired, and as Gulliver remarks, that whenever a government begins to talk of its great clemency and mercy, its subjects may look out for some deed of dreadful note or execution, so, the people were prepared for the very harsh sentences passed upon the prisoners by the pompous flourishes in the ministerial papers of the happy severity, tempered with mercy, which characterised the court and the crown prosecutor.
An hypocritical gaudeamus was then sang over the whole business, and the world was given to understand, that government by its wonderful talents and policy had given the death blow to Rebeccaism and extinguished it for ever.
No sooner had the echo of this cock-crowing died away, than it was found to be somewhat premature, by the fact that the people of Wales were as turbulent as ever; that toll-bars and gates were smashed as boldly and unsparingly as before, and that the people were not intimidated by the verdicts obtained against the Hughes’ and the Morgans.
Incendiarism also commenced in certain quarters, and a whole county hitherto free of the disturbances is now convulsed to its centre.
Notwithstanding the glorious laurels achieved in the never to be forgotten victory of Captain Napier over the old woman with the saucepan and cleaver, and the imperishable fame of Pontardulais gate, the insurrection makes head a new.
If the hesitation of government spring from a conviction that the course which they have previously taken is of no avail — if it be founded on the belief that measures of commercial and trading freedom must be speedily adopted to relieve the depressed employers of the working classes, and the farmers of Wales — that the commission now sitting will bring to light such a mass of facts, as to prove the absolute necessity of proceeding with legislative measures to rectify the relative position of landlord and tenant, as the commission for Ireland is now attempting to settle; then we indeed say Wales may hope for some good.
How happy shall we be to hail, in the Merlin, the result of Mr. Frankland Lewis’s commission of enquiry, measures to revive trade, long leases to tenants, a diminution of local taxation, an abatement of rents, and a means of employment for the surplus population!
Up with justice to Wales, and down with Rebeccaism.
Mr. Bullin, toll-contractor, presented his bill for the loss he had sustained in this trust, in consequence of the “Rebecca” outrages.
He had added the whole amount of the receipts together, and compared them with those of the previous year.
He found the deficiency in the present year amounted to 314l. 12s. 4d., and he claimed that this sum, therefore, be allowed him.
The Chairman was of opinion that this was not a fair method of making the calculation, and that the more proper course would be for Mr. B. to have stated the length of time that the gates were down, and no tolls taken; then to have ascertained the amount taken during the same periods in the former year, and to have claimed this sum in compensation for his loss.
So few trustees being present, the matter was left over to the next meeting, which will be held on .
We perceive in the Welshman of last week a proposition to present
a piece of plate to the reporter of the Times, for
his conduct in setting before the public the many grievances under which the
farmers in the disturbed districts laboured, and for the fearless and
independent manner in which he furnished to the important journal of which he
is the representative, the proceedings which have taken place. We are given to
understand that the gentleman about to be so complimented is Mr. J.G. Powell,
of Bristol, to whose exertions and conduct during the whole of the unfortunate
disturbances, we are proud to bear our most unqualified approbation and
praise.
Rebecca Again.
On the toll-gate situated
between Bettws Gwerfil Goch and the Holyhead Road, called the Mardy gate,
within five miles of Corwen, in the parish of Llangwm, in the county of
Denbigh, belonging to the Bala trust, was entirely taken away, the posts
parted with a saw, and a note put under the door, informing the toll-keeper
that the breach was committed by Sister Rebecca, with a caution against
placing another in that neighbourhood.
Welsh Tolls.
A surgeon who resides at Crickhowell, Breconshire, had to visit a patient at
Tre-tower, a distance of three miles. It cost him
1s.
6d.
tolls for his horse and gig, his fee for attendance being only
3s.
6d. — Correspondent of Morning Chronicle.
Special Commission in Cardiff.
It is generally reported in circles likely to be well informed on the subject,
that directly after the sittings in the present term, a Special Commission
will be held again in this town, for the trial of the Rebecca prisoners at
present confined in Carmarthen gaol. — Cardiff Advertiser.
Final Examination and Committal of Twenty-six Rebeccaites.
The following is the result of the apprehension of the Rebeccaites for pulling
down the gates and destroying the toll houses at Parkymorfa and Fishguard,
Pembrokeshire, on . They were examined
before Hugh Owen Owen, Esq.,
Vice Lieutenant of the County, and a full Bench of Magistrates, at Fishguard. — William Owen (the Lady Rebecca), James Gwynne, and Thomas Gwynne, were
committed to the next Assizes, but were held to bail, themselves in
100l. each, and two
sureties in 50l.
each; and the remaining twenty-three in
50l. each, and two
sureties in 25l.
each. — The excitement in the town was very great, particularly as regarded
the informants, Thomas Williams and wife, who were obliged to be guarded night
and day from the Barracks to the Commercial Inn, where the Magistrates
sat. — They have since been removed to the gaol at Haverfordwest, as a place
of security. — The prisoners were confined in the Market-house, surrounded by
a treble guard of marines. The Commercial Inn was also strongly guarded during
the time the Magistrates were sitting. — New gates have been erected at
Scleddy, Fishguard, and Penymorfa; and it is believed, that the exertions of
police-men and magistrates, resulting in a committal of so many of the
Rebeccaites, will effectually prevent any further destruction of gates in this
quarter.
In reading this article it is good to remember that the “magistrates” who held political power in Wales were in many cases the same people who owned the toll concessions that had been cranked up to the boiling point.
From the Cambrian:
An adjourned meeting of Magistrates was held at Rhayader on , Sir J.B. Walsh, Bart. in the chair, having for its object, the consideration of the best mode of suppressing the outrages, of bringing the offenders to justice, and of conciliating the aggrieved parties.
The Magistrates passed resolutions, stating it to be their opinion that “the late deplorable outrages at Rhayader, prove the existence of a confederacy, systematically organized, for the purpose of resistance to the law, and of obtaining its object by force, violence, and intimidation,” and consequently, the magistrates consider the presence of the Military and Metropolitan Police, “absolutely requisite” while such confederacy exists.
The same bench of Magistrates afterwards held a Petty Sessions, the chief business of which consisted of a number of turnpike toll cases — parties having passed the toll-house without paying toll, the gates having been destroyed.
Fourteen respectable farmers, resident within a few miles of the town, appeared to answer summonses, issued against them at the instance of the contractor for the tolls of the district, Mr. Edward James, for having, on or about , passed the toll-house, which at that time was not demolished, at the foot of the bridge, the gate then being down, some with horses, others with sheep, cattle, &c., without paying the usual tolls.
Four were convicted in the sum of 1l. each and costs; one was fined 2l. and costs; and the remainder were discharged.
I also note again the bias of the English-language press in Wales, as demonstrated here by the fact that Baronet J.B. Walsh and toll farmer Edward James were deemed worthy of mention by name, but none of the convicted toll-evaders were.
The ruling magistrates in Wales could be arrogant, dismissive, and haughty when
responding to petitions from those they tried to govern. From
a
report on the Swansea Petty Sessions in the Cambrian:
The Late Rebecca Disturbance.
Just as the Magistrates were about leaving the Court, Mr. J.G. Hancorne
presented a petition, which was numerously and respectably signed by the
parishioners of Pennard, Gower, protesting against an order signed by J.D.
Llewelyn, L.Ll. Dillwyn, the
Rev. S. Davies, and several
other Magistrates, by which the parishioners were saddled with the expenses
incurred by watching the gates by the constables during the late outrages on
the part of “Rebecca and her daughters,” and expressing a hope that the same
would be countermanded. Mr. Hancorne stated, that the parishioners, in public
vestry assembled a few days ago, “one and all,” most strenuously protested
against paying the expense of watching the gate, as it was well-known that the
people of the parish of Pennard were not in the least degree tinctured with
Rebeccaism, and that it was perfectly unnecessary, so far as the parishioners
were concerned, to watch the gate; but as the Magistrates thought proper to
employ the constables, Mr. Hancorne very urgently contended that the expenses
incurred should be equally borne by the whole county.
Mr. Attwood stated, that some time ago, in consequence of the Magistrates
being divided in opinion upon the subject, some gentlemen, entertaining a
doubt whether parishes were legally liable for the expenses incident upon
watching the gates, he (Mr. Attwood) was requested to write to the Secretary
of State, who was a high authority upon such subjects. The Secretary of State
sent an answer to the effect, that the parishes were liable, and that there
was no other source out of which the expense could be defrayed. Since then,
said Mr. Attwood, there had been a correspondence upon the same subject,
between Mr. Penrice, of Kilvrough, and the Secretary of State, and the latter
went so far as to state that he had no right to interfere, but that the
business ought to be left entirely to the Magistrates, whose duty it was to
make an order upon the parishes.
Dr. Hewson stated, that the
Magistrates at Quarter Sessions might take the subject into consideration but
they (the Magistrates present) had no right to revoke the act of the
Magistrates who had signed the order.
Mr. Hancorne thought it to be a very hard case that the parishioners should
pay, particularly as there was no “Rebecca” in their neighbourhood. He was not
afraid to entrust his crop, stock, and all his property without being watched.
The Rev. S. Davies reminded
Mr. Hancorne, that a gate in the neighbourhood had been destroyed, and that
many respectable farmers had declined paying toll in passing through Pennard
gate.
Mr. Hancorne said, that he was not aware such had been the case in his parish.
A Pennard Parishioner:— You must not talk of Rebecca with we. We be no
Rebeccas. (Laughter).
Dr. Hewson again staled, that
the order of the Magistrates might be re-considered at the Quarter Sessions,
but there was no power given to do so at Petty Sessions.
The Rev. S. Davies thought it
would be a useful piece of information to some parishes to know that they
would be liable for the outrages committed therein.
The Pennard Parishioner:– We be quiet people — we had no riots since the world
began. (A laugh).
After some further conversation with Mr. Haneorne, in which
Dr. Hewson, Mr. Grove, and Mr.
Berrington, took part, the application was dismissed, Mr. Hancorne expressing
his intention of bringing forward the subject at the Quarter Sessions.
A commission appointed to look into the grievances behind the Rebeccaite uprising was doing a fact-finding tour of South Wales, but, so it appears from this account, they didn’t go out of their way to let people know they were coming so that people could lay their grievances before the committee.
The late Disturbances in Wales.
Her Majesty’s Commission, appointed to enquire into the causes which have led to the discontents and disturbances which have prevailed in South Wales, visited Llanelly on .
The Commissioners present were Mr. Crips and Mr. Clive, with Mr. Rickards the secretary; Mr. Frankland Lewis having proceeded from Brecon to Swansea.
It not being generally known that the Commissioners would visit this town on , but few persons went before them.
The chief complaints detailed to them were against the tolls and against the tithes exacted under the local Act.
It was stated to them, that within a radius of one mile of the town there were, before the Rebecca disturbances, no fewer than twelve turnpike gates and bars on the Three Commotts and Kidwelly Trust.
In , there being a dispute between the tithe payers and the lay impropriator as to the amount of tithes which the former ought to pay, an arrangement was entered into generally, by the tithe-payers with the lay impropriator to pay him 2,100l. a year, and a Private Act of Parliament was obtained fixing this sum as the amount of the tithes on the then average price of corn, the amount to be regulated by the future average price of grain taken every five years.
The parishioners contended that they came to this arrangement, on a representation made to them that the apportionment of this sum would not exceed 1s. 6d. in the pound rental, instead of which it amounted to 4s., 5s., and even 6s. in the pound.
Since the Private Act, the General Tithe Commutation Act has come into operation, and those who did not assent to the Private Act have commuted their tithes under the General Act, and their payments of tithe do not amount to more than 2s. 6d. in the pound.
The parishioners therefore complained, that in assenting to the private arrangement they had been deceived, and prayed that it might be abolished.
The Commissioners are understood to have stated to them, that they could not interfere in the matter, as it was their own agreement, and the lay improprietor had got the best of the bargain.
These formed the chief topics of complaint.
The Commissioners afterwards proceeded to Swansea.
— The Commissioners arrived at Swansea on evening, and commenced business on , when Mr. Vivian, Mr. Penrice, of Kilvrough, Mr. Cuthbertson, Clerk to the Neath Trust, and other gentlemen conversant with turnpike tolls, were examined as witnesses.
We understand their enquiries were principally directed to the way in which the turnpike laws in this district have been administered, and the probable causes of the disaffection lately prevalent in this part of the county.
Mr. Vivian, we have been given to understand, strongly recommended the consolidation of the Trusts of the county, with the view of removing the grievance so frequently complained of by farmers — of being compelled to pay two gates often situated within a few yards of each other, but which do not clear one another, in consequence of their being erected at the extremes of two separate trusts.
Important Opinion.
The Commissioners of Enquiry, who are now sitting in this town, have recently obtained the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, on a practice affecting the administration of the turnpike laws, which has prevailed to a considerable extent in Carmarthenshire, and has been the subject of much complaint on the part of the poorer class of farmers.
It frequently occurs that the farmer, having carried his produce to a town or market, and paid toll at the gates, returns on the same day, carrying home in his cart some articles or goods for a friend or neighbour, which he conveys either gratuitously or in consideration of some small payment for his trouble.
It has been a common practice with certain toll-collectors to charge carts thus repassing on the same day with a second toll, applying to such cases a clause contained in most local Acts, which renders stage carriages and vehicles carrying passengers or goods for pay, hire, or reward, liable to toll for every time of repassing.
The Commissioners, considering that the practice in question proceeded upon a mis-application of this clause, and that the additional toll was legally chargeable only on vehicles of the nature of stage-coaches, carriers’ carts, and such as regularly ply for hire between certain places, referred the point to the Attorney and Solicitor General, who have given the very decisive opinion hereafter stated.
This authoritative exposition of the law, will doubtlessly be received with much satisfaction in those parts of Carmarthenshire where a contrary practice had prevailed, and it is possible that not only there, but in this and other counties, it may have the effect of putting an end to an exaction which has pressed heavily upon the poorer class of toll-payers.
It will be observed, that the Commissioners have taken the opinion of the law-officers upon three different local acts, in all which the words used are slightly varied, in order to preclude any distinction which might be taken upon the wording of particular Acts:—
Case respecting the Tolls payable under the Kidwelly Turnpike Trust Act,
the Main Trust Act, and the Whitland Trust Act.
In re Kidwelly Turnpike Trust.
By one of the sections of the Local Act (page 14), regulating the management and repairs of the Kidwelly Trust, it is enacted.
“That the Tolls thereby made payable for or in respect of horses or beasts drawing any stage coach, diligence, van, caravan, or stage waggon, or other carriage or cart conveying passengers or goods for pay, hire, or reward, shall be payable and paid every time of passing or repassing along the said roads, or any or either of them:” then follows a provision respecting a change of horses, which is not material to the present case.
Your opinion is requested upon this section of the Act:—
Whether a cart, upon which toll his been paid, on passing through a turnpike-gate, with a particular load, is liable to a second toll, on repassing through the same gate on the same day, if such cart: in place of its former load, contains any goods or articles carried by the owner of such cart cor another person for money, such owner not being a carrier by trade, nor accustomed to ply between particular places, nor to carry goods for pay, hire, or reward, except only in such occasional cases as above described?
Whether the construction will be the same, supposing such goods or articles to be carried in the manner described for another person gratuitously?
In re the Main Trust.
Your opinion is requested upon the same two questions as stated in the former case.
The words of the corresponding section (page 11) in the Main Trust Act, are slightly varied:– “Be it further enacted, That the tolls hereby made payable for or in respect of horses or beasts drawing any stage coach, diligence, van, caravan, or stage waggon, or other stage carriage or cart, conveying passengers or goods for pay, hire, or reward, shall be payable and paid every time of passing or repassing along the said roads,” &c.
The only difference between the wording of this section and that of the Kidwelly Act is, that in the latter Act the descriptive words last used are — “or other carriage or cart:” in this Act the words are — “or other stage carriage or cart,” &c.
In re Whitland Trust.
Your opinion is requested upon the same two questions, with reference to the corresponding section in the Whitland Trust Act, page 9.
“Provided, nevertheless, and be it further enacted, That the Tolls by this Act granted shall be paid for or in respect of horses, beasts, or cattle, drawing stage carriages, of whatever description, conveying passengers or goods, for hire or reward, for each time of passing, and for each time of repassing upon the said roads.”
Opinion.
We are of opinion, that, in neither of the cases here put, could a second toll be legally demanded.
Frederick Pollock. W. W. Follett. Temple, .
I think it right to add, that I have some impression that, as to one Local Act, I gave an opinion, that private carts used for hire were liable to a second toll; but on looking at all the Acts before, as it appears to me now to be clear, that they have all of them the same object, and ought to receive the same construction.
Frederick Pollock.
I’m sorry to report that I forgot to note where I found this article.
The only fault to be found with the Commissioners [investigating the toll gate grievances in Wales] is, that they do not always remain at a town long enough to give the farmers of the neighbourhood an opportunity of coming before them.
We have remarked, that several times when the Commissioners were departing from a place, after a very short visit, numbers of people from a distance arrived, intending to lay their opinions before them.
Their journey was of course fruitless.
A little management on the part of the Commissioners would easily prevent such occurrences.
The trials of accused Rebeccaites continue.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin:
Carmarthen, .
The Workhouse Riot, &c.
On , an information was laid before David Danes, Esq., one of the borough magistrates, by Henry Evans, one of the rural police, against Jonathan Jones, of Brynbach, in the parish of Abernant, in this county, charging him with having, on , unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled, with divers other evil-disposed persons, at the Carmarthen workhouse, in the county of the borough of Carmarthen, and then and there created a riot and disturbance, by which said riot and disturbance divers of her Majesty’s liege subjects were put in bodily fear.
On this information a warrant was issued, and entrusted to Howell, another of the rural police, who captured the prisoner at his residence, at an early hour on , and afterwards placed him for safe custody in the hands of Woozley, the station-house keeper, by whom he was brought before William Morris, Esq., mayor, and Dr. Stacey, at .
The prisoner, Jonathan Jones, is a young man, and the individual who assumed the character of Rebecca, at the great procession of Rebeccaites through the streets of this town, on , when the mob broke into the workhouse, where their designs were fortunately interrupted by the arrival of the dragoons, under the command of Major Parlby, and at which time the ringleaders in this riot contrived to escape.
At his examination at the guildhall, , the informant, Henry Evans, was re-sworn to the information he had previously made, in the presence of the prisoner, and which information was read over and explained to him in Welsh.
Subsequently, on the application of the prosecutor, who said there would be further evidence to be adduced as to the charge, the prisoner was remanded for further examination, to .
On , John Evans, of Abergwilly, in this county, carpenter, was committed by Daniel Prytherch and John Lloyd Price, Esqrs., to take his trial at the forthcoming winter assizes, charged on the oaths of David William Joshua and others, with having on riotously and tumultuously assembled with other evil disposed persons, at Glangwilly gate, near Carmarthen, and then and there demolished, pulled down, and destroyed the gate and toll-house, occupied by the said David William Joshua.
The prisoner offered bail for his appearance, but it was refused.
John Thomas, of Velincwm, smith, was charged with having, on , created a riot and disturbance with other persons at Llandilo-rwnws gate, in the parish of Llanarthney, in the county of Carmarthen.
Remanded to .
David Jones, was taken into custody at the county gaol, soon after the remand in the above case, charged with having, enticed one Daniel Lloyd, to commit willful and corrupt perjury in a prosecution against John Thomas, smith, for a riot and assault.
This case also stands over to for further enquiry.
The trials of suspected Rebeccaites continue, and an attempt is made on the life of an unpopular anti-Rebeccaite magistrate.
From the Cambrian (excerpts):
Pembrokeshire Winter Sessions.
Haverfordwest, . — The Commission for holding these Assizes was opened , by Mr. Justice Cresswell…
The calendar contains the name of 37 prisoners for trial, 28 of whom are
charged with being implicated in the Rebecca outrages, and the rest are
indicted for various other offences. There are about 25 persons out on bail,
charged with being concerned in the attack upon Fishguard gate, and with the
demolition of two houses.
The town, as might be expected on such an extraordinary occasion as the holding of a Winter Assize — a circumstance, I believe, unprecedented in the history of Pembrokeshire — presents a scene of unusual animation, bustle, and excitement.
The streets are filled with numbers of country people, congregated in groups at different corners, &c. in town, conversing about the approaching trials, and speculating as to their probable result.
In addition to the business of the Assizes, a circumstance occurred
, which furnishes a topic for
conversation, and which has indeed created a very strong sensation in the town
and neighbourhood. I allude to a most daring, though happily unsuccessful,
attempt made upon the life of the
Rev. James W. James, a
Magistrate for the county. This gentleman resides near Robeston Wathen, a
small village in the vicinity of Narberth. When retiring to bed a few hours
after the Judge had passed through Narberth, and a short time before the
Bristol mail arrived at that town, and while rising his arm for the purpose of
fastening the bedroom window, three gunshots were successively fired through
the window — one shot following the other in rapid succession. The first and
second schots fortunately did no injury, but the third took effect in the
arm — the ball passing obliquely through the coat collar, entered the fleshy
part of the arm just above the elbow. Medical aid was immediately obtained,
and upon examination it appeared that, though a severe wound had been
inflicted, yet no serious injury had been sustained, and Mr. James is going on
well. As soon as the fact of the attempt became known, the London Police and
the Military were actively on the alert in their endeavours to discover the
offenders, but unsuccessfully to . Mr. James is a very zealous Magistrate, and
he had made very active (the Rebeccaites say “officious”) endeavours to trace
out the leaders and perpetrators of the various nocturnal outrages which have
lately disgraced Pembrokeshire and the adjoining counties; but it is stated
that what has, at the present moment, rendered Mr. James peculiarly obnoxious,
is the circumstance of his having, at a late meeting of the Whitland Trust, of
which he is a member, proposed a resolution to the effect, — that all the
gates, bars,
&c., which had
been demolished by the Rebeccaites, should be re-erected. This resolution, it
appears, was carried by a majority of one, and the farmers and other
toll-payers of the neighbourhood are greatly aggravated at the circumstance.
Following this is a list of magistrates and grand jurors, pretty much all of them being Somebody-or-other, Esquire.
The Judge addressed the Grand Jury, summarizing (and occasionally prejudging to some extent) the cases they would hear.
I’ll excerpt the ones that touch on the Rebeccaite phenomenon:
The first case in the calendar participated of the character of those cases which had lately occupied so much of the attention of the country, and which had so greatly disgraced that and the adjoining counties; still he must observe, that the case under their notice did not appear to be accompanied with those most daring outrages which frequently characterized cases of the description.… The next charce to which he would call their attention, was that against a person who was indicted for assaulting the keeper of a pound in the neighbourhood of Narberth, with the view of rescuing the cattle which had been secured in the pound.
As far as he could form an opinion from the evidence, the case appeared to be very simple, and he should not have felt it necessary to mention it were it not for the purpose of observing how obvious it was that, if the habit prevailed of violating the law for the purpose of attaining one object, the same effect would be observable in another direction.
It would always be perceived that, if violent means would be used for the redress of alleged public grievances, the same violence would be found expedient to obtain private rights.
He had received a report , showing that outrages of a still more aggravated nature were taking place — outrages not confined to property, but committed upon the person.
He forbore dwelling at greater length upon that circumstance, as he had heard it from mere rumour only, but it was melancholy to contemplate how far the passions would go, when once given way to in violating the law.
The last case to which he should think it necessary to call their attention, was one in which a number of individuals were charged with having committed a riot near Fishguard.
He should abstain from making any observations upon that case, for several reasons.
One consideration he had in view was, that whatever could be done by kind and considerate advice, and gentle admonition, had been done by the Learned Judge who occupied the judicial seat at the last Assizes.
Another reason was, that her Majesty had been pleased to send a Commission of Inquiry to inquire into the origin and causes of the outrages which had taken place, and he would await the result of their investigations.
And, the last reason he had for abstaining to make any comments upon the case was, that the Attorney General, who had attended at that place in the performance of his duties, had thought it necessary to make every inquiry into the case, and after a careful examination of the evidence, he came to the conclusion that it would not be expedient to prefer a Bill of Indictment against the parties at these Assizes.
That being his determination, after a very careful enquiry and examination into the nature of the evidence, he (the Learned Judge) should make no observations beyond remarking, that the parties who were really guilty of these outrages, would have no occasion for triumph; for it would appear, that though the march of justice was slow, it would not fail at some period to bring the guilty to account.…
The Fishguard cases represented cases #9–34, and the Judge agreed to put those off until the Spring Assizes, continuing the defendants’ bail until then.
After muddling through a few non-Rebeccaite cases, we come to this:
The Rebecca Riots.
William Narbett, shoemaker, aged 23, of very juvenile appearance (committed by the Rev. James W. James,) was then placed at the bar, charged with having on , in the parish of Slebech, together with divers other persons unknown and disguised, did unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assemble and break open a certain pound, called the Slebech Manor Pound, and did unlawfully and riotously rescue certain cattle from the said pound, and also with having assaulted James Row, one of the keepers of the pound.
Mr. Nicholl Carne stated the case for the prosecution. The prisoner at the bar
stood indicted for an assault and a riot. It appeared, that in
, the Baron de Rutzen had
distrained upon one of his tenants, who occupied High Toch farm, for arrears
of rent due, and had got the cattle so destrained, placed in a pound, which
was watched by James Row and others. At
, a mob consisting of a number of persons armed
with slicks, clubs,
&c., in
martial array, came up to the pound. The majority were disguised in women’s
clothes and caps, some had their coats turned, while several others had their
faces blackened. The pound-keeper asked them what they required. They
immediately appealed to one conspicuous person amongst them, whom they called
“Lady Rebecca,” who said that the cattle, colts,
&c., must be
released. One of the party forcibly pushed James Row, while the prisoner
repeatedly struck him on the head with a stick, until he fell quite senseless
to the ground. When he recovered himself, he found all the cattle gone, and
one of the colts in the act of leaping over him while he lay on the ground.
The prosecutor himself could not identify the prisoner, but two other persons
would be produced as witnesses, who would positively slate that the prisoner
was present, and wore a women’s cap, and had acted the part stated, but he had
not got his face blackened. Now he (Mr. Carne) would tell the jury, as
probably they would be told by the Learned Judge, that to establish the
prisoner’s guilt it was not necessary to prove that he had carried a stick or
made use of it; but if he was there disguised, forming part of the mob, he was
equally guilty with the foremost and most active amongst them. Mr. Carne then
called
George Thomas:— Is under-gamekeeper to Baron de Rutzen.
Remembers a distress of cattle and colts, on High Toch farm, they were put in the Manor Pound; it was on .
Witness and James Row were put to watch the pound, with Merryman, the pound-keeper. , a mob came up, consisting of fourteen or fifteen people — the prisoner was one of the mob.
Some of them were dressed with women’s caps and gowns, and others had their faces blackened — some had sticks in their hands.
The prisoner had a fustian trousers and white coat, a woman’s cap and black hat on his head; he had a stick in his hand — heard him speak — had known him for seven years, and seen him often.
When the mob came to the pound, they all halted at the same time, and one of them spoke to Row, saying, they had two heifers in pound which must come out.
One of them addressed another, saying, “What shall we do, Becca?” The other replied, “Have them out, to be sure.” One of them caught hold of Row by the arm.
Witness then was going to strike them, when two men caught hold of his stick, and another struck him on the head, and knocked him down.
Witness then got up, and went out to the road, and one of the mob again struck him on the head; he then went back to the pound, and found that the cattle were all gone — the people were also gone.
The prisoner asked, “What are you going to keep the cattle in there for?” The prisoner’s father lives about a mile-and-a half from the pound.
The pound is in the parish of Slebech.
Cross-examined by Mr. L. Hall:— Commenced watching the pound about
— it was
a fine night. It was about when the mob came. The mob were about forty yards off when witness
first heard them; they were at the pound about ten minutes or a quarter of an
hour. Witness well knew the prisoner. Witness has been in prison twice for
poaching. Robeston Wathan, where the prisoner resides, is about three miles
from the pound. Saw prisoner all the time at the pound — he was doing nothing.
James Row:– Went to the pound, , to watch it. , a number of men came up the road in disguise — from twelve to sixteen.
Some had women’s clothes and their faces blackened — they had slicks in their hands; they came to the pound gate.
Witness then asked them what they wanted.
They replied they wanted the cattle out.
One of the men said he had two cattle in pound, and would have them out.
Witness said they had better come by day-light.
One of them then said, “What is to be done, Becca?” He (witness) did not hear what answer was given.
One of the mob told witness that he should go from the pound.
Witness said he would not; and the man then replied, “By God, you shall,” and caught witness by the hand.
One of the men struck witness on the head, which stunned him; he received several more blows, and was ultimately knocked down.
When witness came to himself, he saw a colt jump over him.
The person called Becca was standing close by at the time.
The mob then left in the direction of Narberth.
Witness afterwards saw the pound — the gate was unhinged, and the cattle gone.
Witness did not see the prisoner there.
Cross-examined by Mr. L. Hall:– Daniel Rodney was at the pound when the mob
came up.
John Rees:– On , witness distrained cattle on Hign Toch farm, and put them in the Manor Pound.
A body of men came up — they broke open the pound.
Saw George Thomas struck by some of the mob.
Cross examined by Mr. L. Hall:— Before the mob came up, a cow was let out of
the pound by Row.
William Merryman:– Is pound-keeper of Slebech Pound.
Remembers the cattle and colts impounded.
Was present when the mob came up disguised.
Saw Thomas and Row struck.
Witness became afraid, and ran away.
Saw the prisoner there; he was dressed in a fustian trousers and jacket — he had a hat and a woman’s cap. on.
Has known prisoner sixteen years.
Cross-examined by Mr. L. Hall:— The prisoner was amongst the mob — he did
nothing.
Mr. Lloyd Hall then addressed the jury for the prisoner, and said that it was not for him to stand up and defend the Rebeccaite mode of redressing all grievances; and any one who had paid any attention to their proceedings would not fail to discover that the effect produced by them were in direct opposition to what they were desirous of accomplishing.
In tending to accomplish one thing, they did quite a different one.
All would agree that their conduct was highly improper and impolitic.
Redress of grievances under cover of night, as had been the case in this instance, could not find a justification in the mind of any person who took a proper view of matters.
There was no doubt in the fact, that a highly improper act had been committed, and that all parties present were equally guilty, The question was, not whether the parties assembled were right or wrong, but whether the prisoner at the bar was amongst them or not.
The Learned Gentleman commented upon the evidence adduced for the prosecution, and concluded by stating that a witness would be produced to prove that the prisoner was in bed with his wife and child on the night in question, as well as neighbours of the prisoner, who would say that he could not have left the house without their hearing the noise made by him.
Mr. Hall then called—
Daniel Rodney, the son of Mrs. Rodney, of Toch Bridge. She had three cows
impounded on . One of them turned out about eight o’clock. Witness was at the
pound when the mob came up. Did not see them beat Row. Witness saw all the
persons that were there. Did not see any one among them that could be mistaken
for the prisoner. All the mob were so disfigured that they could not be
recognized.
Cross-examined by Mr. Nicholl Carne:— When witness went home to supper about , did not go for Becca.
Went back to the pound to protect his mother’s cows from injury.
Wm. Butler:— Lives at
Blackpool. About , prisoner went to a singing
school at Robeston Wathen; stopped there two hours and a half. After he left
there, he went to Ormond, the tailor’s, where he remained half an hour; he
afterwards met prisoner’s brother, and then went to prisoner’s house and
knocked at the door twice. Prisoner’s wife answered, and prisoner then came
and opened the door. Witness asked prisoner it his boot was ready, and he said
it was, and then gave witness the boot — prisoner was in his shirt. Witness
then left, and prisoner shut the door.
Cross-examined by Mr. Carne:— Witness thinks it was on when he went to the singing school.
Jane Rogers:— Lives at Robeston Wathen, about a yard from the prisoner’s
house — there is only one door to prisoner’s house. Remembers the night the
pound was broken. Heard the prisoner working that night
.
Witness’s mother was ill that night, and witness was attending to her. She
heard Wm. Butler calling at
prisoner’s house . Witness was attending her mother until
. Heard
nobody go out of or come to prisoner’s house that night after Butler left.
Wm. Ormond, tailor, Robeston Walhen:– Remembers . Wm. Butler came to his house about , and staid there half an hour.
Cross-examined:– Has no clock or watch in the house.
Mr. Nicholl Carne, in answer to the evidence adduced by the prisoner, proposed to read the prisoner’s [sic.] statement before the Magistrates.
Mr. H. O. Martin. Magistrates’ Clerk of the Narbeth district, was present when
the depositions were taken down by Mr. Evans, the attorney for the
prosecution. The prisoner was asked at the end if he had anything to say in
answer. He made a statement, which was taken down by Mr. Evans.
Mr. Wm. Evans took down the depositions in this case, and asked prisoner if he had anything to say — he made a statement, which witness took down.
He said I was not there — I went to bed rare that night.
About Wm. Butler called for his boot I had been repairing.
I got out of bed and gave it him, and went back to bed again.
I then lived in the village of Robeston Wathen.
No one lived there but myself, wife, and child.
The prisoner was asked to sign that statement, but said he did not care to do so.
Cross examined:— Am solicitor for the prosecution, was not instructed until
— the hearing took place
at Narberth.
Mr. Hall addressed the jury on the statement made by Mr. Evans.
George Thomas recalled, and examined by Court:— Told the Baron de Rutzen the
after the pound was broken open,
that the prisoner was one of the mob.
Wm. Merryman:— About a week after I told Mr. James, of Robeston, that the prisoner was in the mob.
The Baron was present.
Mr. Carne replied on the whole case.
The Learned Judge summed up the evidence very clearly; and after an hour’s absence, the jury returned a verdict of Not Guilty, observing, that they gave the prisoner the benefit of the doubt.
Another case that came up concerned a letter that was sent to a farmer threatening that “Becca” and her eldest daughter “Nelly” would burn his possessions and his house down around him if he did not fess up to fathering the child of his former servant and start contributing child support.
Three people accused of crafting, writing, and delivering the letter were convicted.
The judge was of the opinion that they were not true Rebeccaites but were using the name to make their letter seem more credibly threatening.
In one additional case…
Joseph Thomas, charged with breaking a chain belonging to a turnpike-gate… [was] discharged by proclamation.
…which I think means something like “charges dismissed without prejudice.” That is, the prisoner is free, but the prosecutor may refile charges at a later date.
From the
Cambrian:
Alleged Rebeccaism in Anglesey.
We have received an anonymous communication, dated Llanddansant
,
which states that at , about forty native Rebeccaites assembled in
the peaceful village of Llanddansant, being summoned by sound of horn and
firing of guns. — That they then proceeded in good order and array, armed with
bludgeons and branches of trees, to the house of D. W. shopkeeper, where two
bailiffs were in possession of the goods and chattels, under execution from
the North and South Wales Bank, of Holyhead. That having entered the house by
bursting open the back-door, Dame Rebecca bolted up-stairs followed by a few
of her daughters, and ordered the bailiffs, who were snug in bed, to be up and
trotting in five minutes, under penalty of a severe drubbing. That ready
obedience having been yielded, the men were merely driven forth, under the
surveillance of a body guard, occasionally however, pinched and pushed, and
even ridden by the wanton daughters of Rebecca; and suffered to depart to
their homes on a sincere promise of not returning. This is the substance of
the account sent us but for the honour of North Wales we hope the affair is a
fiction altogether. —Carnarvon Herald
The threat of “Becca” was taken mighty seriously by , as this Cambrian article shows.
A Man Shot by Soldiers.
On , as a party of
marines, who are stationed at Kilgerran, near Cardigan, were drinking and
dancing at a public-house, with some of the inhabitants, a quarrel took place
between the sergeant and a mason, called Jenkins. From high words it came to
blows, when the sergeant called some of his men, who were present, to his
assistance, Jenkins, finding they were too many, endeavoured to frighten them,
by saying, he would call “Becca” to his assistance. Hearing that, the sergeant
immediately ordered his men to be under arms, ready for action. One of the
men, who was billetted at another public-house, kept by a man named Bowen,
being absent, the sergeant and the others, all armed, went to arouse their
comrade. After calling at the door, they were answered by Bowen (who, with all
his family, had for some time retired to bed), that the man was not in, but
that he had gone to meet his wife, whom he expected that evening from
Pembroke. The sergeant would not believe him, but burst open the door. When
the landlord went down stairs to remonstrate with them, the sergeant ordered
one of his men to fire at him, who immediately levelled his musket, and shot
Bowen. The ball passed through his left breast, and it came out near the
shoulder-blade. A gentleman, who went into Bowen’s house immediately after the
sad scene had occurred, states that it was the most pitiful sight he ever
beheld, the poor fellow weltering in his blood, supported by his wife and
children (who were all in there night clothes). He now lies in a dangerous and
weak state. The soldiers underwent an examination before the Magistrates, and
the sergeant and three of the men are at present lodged in Cardigan gaol for
further examination.
From the Cambrian:
More of Rebecca’s Freaks.
On , the gate situate in the village of Glasbury, on the Radnorshire side of the river Wye, was removed from its position, the posts sawn off about 18 inches above ground, and the gate thrown into the river, after having been sawn in two, and so far mutilated that it will be of no further service.
It appears that only three individuals were employed at the work, who were seen by the aged female who collects the toll, and advised her to keep quiet, as they would not injure her; but it is said that upwards of fifty persons were close at hand.
Having completed their job, and given three cheers, they marched off through the village in the direction of the Woodlands, towards the hills lying above that place, shouting “Becca forever,” and discharging fire-arms; some of the inhabitants hearing the noise arose to see what occasioned it, but could not recognise any of the party.
It appears the road on which the gate was placed is repaired by the parish of Glasbury, and a petition very numerously signed by the inhabitants, and those of the adjoining parishes, was some time past presented to the Radnorshire Turnpike Trust, to remove the said gate, but it was never done.
The toll board has also been taken down; there were two gates adjoining the toll-house, the one in the road leading into the village, which is destroyed, and the other in the road leading to Clirow and Rhydspence, which was not molested, as they consider it a turnpike-road.
No clue has been obtained as to who were the perpetrators of this lawless act, although a reward of 50l. has been offered by the Magistrates acting in the hundred of Paincastle, on conviction of the party or parties by whom it was committed.
A chain is erected on the spot, and the regular tolls taken, as if nothing had occurred.
— Silurian.
, burglars (a Francis Davies was later accused of being one of them, but acquitted by a jury trial) broke into the home of William Williams, a farmer, and stole some money from him.
Williams later testified that the burglars “told me to open the door or else they would break it and fill the house with ’Beccas — ‘we are sixty on the road.’… They had their faces blackened, and had worsted caps on their heads.”
So by this time the Rebecca persona was being adopted by ordinary criminals as a sort of weapon.
There were also unseasonal Winter Assizes in Carmarthenshire, as seen in this article from the Cambrian (excerpts):
…The calendar contains the names of 64 prisoners, in addition to which there are a great number out under bail.
The total number of persons to be tried amounts to very little, if indeed any, short of one hundred individuals, all of whom, with the exception of six or seven persons indicted for various comparatively minor offences — are charged with having been concerned in the late Rebecca disturbances.
As might be expected, the interest felt by all classes, is most intense.
The town is literally filled with people from various parts of the county — most of whom are either jurors, parties out under bail, or persons somehow or other connected with them.
The number of persons in town may be surmised from the circumstance, that it is next to an impossibility to procure lodgings, either at inns or private lodging-houses.
The article goes on to list the 33 magistrates, 3 coroners, and 23 grand jurors, among whom the usual title “Esquire” dominates.
The prosecutor-judge addressed those assembled:
There would be also presented to their notice several cases of a description which had not been before them on former occasions, and to dispose of which they might require assistance; and upon those cases he would offer a few observations — most of them being connected with the recent alarming disturbances in that and the adjoining counties of South Wales.
The offences to which he referred were provided for by the statute 7th and 8th Geo. 4, which enacted, that if any person or persons riotously and tumultuously assembled, to the disturbance of the public peace, should with force demolish, pull down, or destroy, or begin to demolish any church or chapel, or any house used for worship by persons dissenting from the Church of England, or any dwelling-house, house, barn, manufactory, or house used for the purpose of carrying on any works, &c., together with the several other buildings enumerated in the statute, should be deemed guilty of felony.
In order to bring the case within the provisions of the statute, it would be necessary that two things should be established.
In the first place, the parties charged with being riotously assembled, must consist of three or more, — three being the number named in the statute.
Their actions must also be accompanied with such circumstances as would be naturally calculated to occasion alarm or inspire terror; and, in the second place, it must be proved that the demolition, or the partial demolition of a building, took place.
To decide whether the charge of beginning to demolish could be sustained, they must ascertain whether the partial demolition was effected with the intention of completing and finishing it, as beginning to demolish did [part of page missing] the demolition of a part of a building, [part of page missing] the intention of completing the demoli-[part of page missing]
Unfortunately, here (and elsewhere) there are several paragraphs missing, as the page in the original is ripped.
This is too bad, because the first case is somewhat confusing.
It involves someone who brags of being Rebecca, seems to be dressed in a Rebeccaite-like disguise, and fires a gun at someone; but is also identified as someone who had voted against Rebeccaite activity at a public meeting, and the crime in question doesn’t seem to have been accompanied by other Rebeccaite activity or to have been joined in by anyone but the defendant.
This may have been another case of someone hiding behind Rebecca’s skirts to try and settle a private grievance.
…parts of South Wales for several months past.
The present question was so intimately connected with those disturbances, that if the charge against the prisoner were to be proved, it would have a tendency to show to what lawless excesses man may be carried when once the authority of the law was trampled upon, and when men take into their own hands authority which does not belong to them.
They would learn by the evidence that, on , the prisoner at the bar was seen outside the door of the New Inn, Pontyberem.
There he was first observed engaged in a scuffle with a person, who would be produced as a witness.
He was at that time disguised in a manner which would be described in evidence, and he also appeared to have boasted that he was “Rebecca,” and to have asserted that he “took upon himself to do justice,” or made use of some expressions of that kind.
The person who afterwards had a scuffle with him — a man of the name of Levi — seeing the extraordinary appearance of the prisoner on that night, exclaimed “who is here,” or “what is this,” when the latter pointed a gun towards him in a dangerous manner.
Levi laid hold of the barrel and thrust it from opposite his own body.
During the struggle which ensued, the gun was fired, whether purposely or accidentally it was not for him to say.
Levi being alarmed ran to the Inn.
There could be no doubt of the fact, that the prisoner then loaded his gun, and afterwards went towards the kitchen of the house, and there lost the ramrod of his gun, for it was subsequently picked up and delivered to him.
Having retired from the house, he appeared to have meditated some violence, for the landlady desired the door to be shut.
In obedience to the landlady’s desire, a person, named Walter Rees, advanced towards the door, and while in the act of shutting it, and while the door was half shut, the prisoner discharged the gun at the door.
One or two shots pierced the person’s hat, while the powder numbed his cheek, while the rest of the charge passed by him, — some having entered the door, and some through the passage to the cellar door.
After this he came to the Inn, asked for the ramrod, and stated that “the man who had his ramrod was a dead man.”
It was picked up by a person named James James, who delivered to him the ramrod.
The prisoner then left, and not long afterwards was apprehended and taken into custody.
Now, he (the Attorney-General) had to tell them that, at present, he had nothing to do with any other charge against the prisoner.
The duty of the jury would be first to enquire whether the alleged offence was committed at all.
In the second place, whether a gun had been fired at Walter Rees or at any other person, with the intention of killing him or doing him harm.
In one count, they would observe the offence was charged as having been committed against a person unknown — that was because it must be that the prisoner did not know the person to be Walter Rees, but thought him to be Levi or some other person; but whether he thought him to be Rees, Levi, or any other individual, it was for them to say whether any reasonable doubt could be entertained that the gun was discharged having murderous contents in it — capable of producing death or bodily injury, or that the party did discharge it with the intention of doing any mischief, or with a careless listlessness.
It was the prisoner’s business to know that it would do grievous mischief.
That some person fired there could be no doubt, as part of the shot entered the door, part the passage, and part Rees’s hat, and it would be for the jury to say whether it was discharged with the intention imputed.
The last point to be ascertained was, whether the individual who committed the offence was the prisoner at the bar.
He would be recognised by two witnesses — identified by two more, and when the witnesses who would fix the charge upon the prisoner would give their evidence, it would be for them to say whether they could have any doubt that the prisoner was the party.
He was happy to say that the prisoner was to be defended by talent and ability, which was well known not only in that county, but also in other parts of the country.…
Walter Rees, woodman, near Pontyberem, who was examined by Mr. Chilton, Q.C., stated, that on , he was at the house of Mrs. Bowen, in Pontyberem.
He went to the passage of the inn, about , when the landlady requested him to close the door.
In doing so he saw a man, disguised in a woman’s dress.
Witness here described the dress worn by the person whom he saw, and who carried a gun, which he pointed towards witness.
He pushed the door as quickly as he possibly could.
While doing so, and when the door was half shut, he saw a flash, accompanied with the report of a gun.
Something struck the left side of his face, which benumbed the side of his cheek.
After he returned to the kitchen, he found holes made by shot in his hat.
Soon afterwards the prisoner came into the kitchen.
[Witness was here examined with the view of proving the prisoner’s identity.
The latter said, whoever had got the ramrod of this gun, was a dead man.
The ramrod was given to the prisoner, who then retired.]
Witness, together with others, then examined the door, shelves, &c., and found marks of shots.
The hat was then produced.
Cross-examined by Mr. Lloyd Hall:— Saw only one individual there at the time this transaction occurred.
Had been in the house for about two hours.
Was at Mr. Powell’s shop at .
Was outside the inn for a few minutes before this occurrence took place.
Saw no individual in particular then.
Saw no man, with the exception of the man referred to, in a plaid cloak.
Drank three or four half-pints of beer at the inn.
The prisoner was about three or four feet distant from the doorway when he first saw him.
The door being partly between him and the prisoner, he could not see the muzzle of the gun.
Knew the prisoner to be the man by his visage, and because he had seen him at a meeting at Mynyddd Sylan, at which Mr. Chambers, the Magistrate, presided.
He heard a resolution passed at that meeting, and saw the prisoner hold up his hand in its favour.
There was a sizable candle in the room when the prisoner asked for the ramrod.
Here there are several paragraphs missing from the newspaper report as the page is ripped in the original that was scanned.
We return to the trial with what appears to be the defense attorney’s summing-up:
…prisoner was attired.
He also contended, that though the prisoner might hold the gun in the scuffle with Lewis Levi, yet it had not been proved that the same party had fired at Rees, as it appeared in evidence that the first party went round the corner, and was lost sight of for several minutes, and none of the witnesses identified him as the same.
Another important fact, observed Mr. Hall, stated by the witnesses for the prosecution was, that after firing the first shot, he had lost his ramrod.
It was highly improbable that he could have discharged a second lime, as there was no evidence that there was a second ramrod with which to load it.
Another circumstance which greatly weighed in the prisoner’s favour was, that of his having, at the Mynydd Sylen meeting, held on that day, and at which Mr. Chambers presided, held up his hand in favour of a resolution deprecating violence.
The statement made by one of the witnesses relative to expressions made use of by the prisoner, during which he said, “He was sorry that he killed no person,” might have referred to another transaction.
The Attorney General replied to Mr. Hall’s observations.
He thought that, irrespective of the prisoner’s guilt or innocence, the circumstance of the disturbances lately prevalent in South Wales, giving rise to such an act as the one committed in the Inn, at Pontyberem, on that night, was calculated to excite most melancholy feelings.
The very fact of a man, having dressed himself up in the manner described, and having in that reckless manner discharged a gun, which to all appearances, were it not for one of those almost miraculous interventions of Providence, would result in the death of Rees, and the prisoner at the bar be tried for the crime of murder; and, when he looked at the character of the offence, he confessed that he felt somewhat surprised at the cool and jocular manner of the gentleman who had just addressed them.
With respect to the references made to himself, personally, he was only surprised that the Learned Gentleman could have condescended to deliver such an address.
After all, he (the Attorney-General) could not understand upon what point it was meant to rest the defence.
Did he contend that no gun had been fired because the ram-rod had been lost?
But there was the fact deposed in evidence, that the gun was fired.
He thought it scarcely worth his while remarking upon the observations made by the Learned Counsel upon the privilege he had of replying.
He allowed that it was a privilege of his office, and it was his duty to exercise his privilege as Attorney-General, for the benefit of the country.
If he was of opinion that there was no case against the prisoner, it would be his duty immediately to enter a nolle prosequi, as alike just towards the Crown and towards the prisoner.
The Attorney-General spoke at considerable length, remarking upon those parts of the evidence which he contended clearly, and beyond doubt, proved the identity of the man who had the gun when first fired, and the man who afterwards fired it, as charged in the indictment.
Mr. Hall had dilated considerably upon the circumstance of the prisoner’s having risen his hand in favour of a resolution deprecating violence at the meeting in the morning.
If any fact proved his identity, it was that, for the same witness spoke of him as taking part at the meeting in the morning, and as firing with a gun in the evening; but what also fixed his guilt was, the fact of his having admitted in his conversation with the witness James, that he had fired into the house and was sorry he had not killed some one.
The Learned Advocate concluded by congratulating the jury on the recent amelioration of the criminal code, by which, whatever their verdict would be, the prisoner’s life would not be periled.
The Learned Judge, in summing up the evidence, observed that the prisoner, under the different counts, was charged with shooting with intent to murder, or do grievous bodily harm, and as they had been already told, it was their privilege to decide upon the prisoner’s guilt or innocence; still, though a privilege, it was a privilege to determine according to the evidence, for they could not swerve to the right or to the left without violating their oaths, and rendering themselves responsible to God for their conduct.
This case was important in every point of view, for on the one hand, they had the liberty of the prisoner dependent upon their verdict, and on the other, they had the safety of society to guard because, if crimes of this description escaped unpunished, what security was there to any of her Majesty’s subjects; and if they convicted upon rash or frivolous grounds, what innocent man was safe?
They must first ascertain whether a gun had been fired in the manner described — whether with the intention imputed, and thirdly, whether the prisoner was the man who had used it.
From various circumstances he thought there could be no doubt upon the first point.
As to the second, the jury were to judge of any party’s intention by the natural result of the act.
If a man performed an act, the natural result of which was to kill or murder, or do any grievous bodily harm, then the party was guilty of that intention.
In accordance with their opinions upon all or any of these points, they would acquit or convict the prisoner, giving him the benefit of any reasonable doubts.
The jury retired, and after a short absence returned into Court, with a verdict of “GUILTY.”
— Sentence deferred.
The Judge:— Upon what count do you find him guilty?
Foreman:– That charging him with an intention to do some grievous bodily harm.
Today’s Rebecca Riots entry concerns the Carmarthenshire Winter Assizes, which continued on .
Alas, the report in the Cambrian is on the reverse side of the report of hearing, and shares the badly-ripped newspaper page, so much is missing.
I find the legal terminology used in these cases to be confusing.
For example, often the phrase “Learned Judge” is used to refer to what we would now call the prosecutor, and the title “prosecutor” is used to refer to the victim of the crime, on whose behalf the case is being prosecuted.
The Attorney-General stated that in one case, in which John Jones (Shoni Scybor-fawr), Wm. Walters, D. Davies (Dio’r Cantwr), and Thomas Morris, were charged with riot, he begged to enter a nolle prosequi, as far as the three first were regarded.
Thomas Morris was then arraigned alone, and pleaded “Guilty” to the charge, when the Attorney General said that he would not pray the Court to pass sentence in his case, but would be content if the prisoner entered into his own recognizances to keep the peace, and be of good behaviour, which was accordingly done, and the prisoner was discharged.
Coalbrook Works Riot
John Jones (Shoni Scybor-fawr) and David Davies (Dai’r Cantwr), were then placed at the bar, on an indictment charging them with having on , or early on the following morning, at Coalbrook Works, in the parish of Llanon, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled, with divers other disguised persons, and committed a riot and disturbance against the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, her Crown and dignity.
— Both prisoners pleaded “Guilty.”
— Sentence deferred.
David Jones, aged 39, farmer, was arraigned upon a charge of having sent Mr. Thomas Williams, of the parish of Llanwrda, near Llandovery, a letter threatening to murder him, and also to burn his corn and hay, and other property.
The prisoner, who was defended by Mr. Nicholl Carne, pleaded “Not Guilty”
The Attorney-General stated the case.
He commenced by making some general observations upon the dangerous and highly illegal practice of sending threatening letters — interfering as it did with the happiness of private life.
The facility of committing the crime was so great as the mischief it was calculated to create; still, all these consequences of the crime had nothing to do with the prisoner’s guilt or innocence — for that was a question to be decided upon from the evidence, and from that only.
The prosecutor in this case was an auctioneer, residing at Penybank, and transacted considerable business for parties who entrusted their affairs to his judgment and management.
The prisoner had been tenant to a gentleman named Goddard, whose premises he left, and removed to Cefacoed.
When he left, the landlord of the premises quitted by him, and from which he removed his stock, required some security for the payment of rent owing.
About the time of the prisoner’s removal, the prosecutor thought fit that the former should give him security for a large sum which the prisoner owed him; and as the landlord had pressed for rent, Williams thought proper to press the prisoner’s security for payment.
It would appear that the prisoner became greatly exasperated at this proceeding, and frequently made use of expressions of great violence, but how far they connected him with the letter it would be for the jury to say.
The expressions alluded to were used after his property had been sold, partly under an execution issued in consequence of a verdict, in an undefended action, obtained against him at the last Assizes, and partly under an execution for this security.
Mr. Henry Lloyd Harries would be called as a witness to prove that the prisoner had said that Williams had robbed him, and spoke of him as “worse than a murderer,” and said that “if there were a Rebecca in the world, she should visit him, and as sure as God was in Heaven, Rebecca should visit him,” and other expressions of a revengeful character.
The letter read was signed “Rebecca,” and was to the following effect:– “Thomas Williams, auctioneer, Penybank,— I hear that you will not leave my children alone.
Rebecca is very particular about her children.
She does not like to see them abused and injured.
You have been going on for many years, and I and my children will visit you on Saturday night, and fire the hay and corn taken from the country fraudulently, and from one place in particular, Cefn Ceffyl [the prisoner’s residence]; you have taken the whole farm from that poor man, and I Rebecca am determined to put a stop to such proceedings.
Your money is not worth four pence a bushel.
We will not only burn your effects, but take away your life.
You are more pointed with me than any man in the world, and if you do any thing to this poor man, you shall not live a week.
I hope you will take this as a warning, so that I might not bring you to rights.”
It was not inferred, continued the Attorney General, that the prisoner had any thing to do with the parties calling themselves Rebecca — but, on the other hand, it was probable that he merely took advantage of the alarm occasioned to serve his own private ends.
The prosecutor, on the receipt of the letter, made enquiries, and there existed no doubt that the letter had been delivered by the prisoner himself at the Trecastle post-office.
The writer of the letter was subsequently traced out, and would be called as a witness.
It had been written at the request of the prisoner, who dictated to him.
It was right the jury should guard against the testimony of the person who wrote the letter, who had lent himself to the accomplishment of an act of great wickedness.
It would be for them to say how far his testimony could be relied upon, as to the fact that the letter written by him was the same as that afterwards delivered by the prisoner.
The Attorney-General concluded by stating that the case for the Crown would be complete without producing the writer, provided it were proved that the prisoner had delivered the letter, or taken part in delivering it; but it had been thought right to produce before them all available evidence.
Several witnesses were then examined.
The prosecutor proved the receipt of the letter from his son, who was an innkeeper at Llandovery, and to whose house it had been sent from the Post-office.
He also explained the business transactions had with the prisoner, as already detailed.
Miss Jeffreys, daughter of the Trecastle Postmaster, proved the posting of the letter by the prisoner; and its receipt at the Llandovery Post-office was proved by the clerk.
Mr. Henry Lloyd Harries stated the various violent expressions made use of by the prisoner towards Mr. Williams. He also produced another of “Rebecca’s” letters, sent by the prisoner to him (witness).
The writer of the letter stated in evidence, that he had copied it from a letter written by the prisoner, who gave as a reason for requesting him to write it, that his own hand-writing would be recognised.
Mr. Nicholl Carne then ably addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner, directing their attention to the serious nature of the charge, which would render the prisoner liable to transportation for life, or at any rate a very lengthened period, or long imprisonment.
These were the points for their consideration — firstly, whether the letter contained any threat — that he was not disposed to contest — secondly, was the prisoner the party delivering it, knowing its contents; of this there was not the least evidence, with the exception of that given by the witness who had written the letter, and it was an established rule, that juries could not act upon the evidence of an accomplice, unless corroborated in some material portion of his evidence, by other witnesses.
No evidence, in corroboration of that witness, had been adduced to prove that the prisoner was cognizant of the contents.
He submitted that the prisoner had been made the dupe of the witness, Wm. Jones, who had written the letter, and who ought to have been placed at the bar instead of the prisoner.
Here the page rip obscures the Attorney-General’s response and the verdict, alas.
It looks as though some other Rebeccaite cases may also be hidden in the ripped portion.
The Carmarthenshire Winter Assizes continued on , with a very similar threatening-letter case to that tried the day before:
— This morning the business of the Court commenced at .
John Jones, aged 22, farmer, a remarkably fine looking young man, of respectable appearance, was placed at the bar, on a charge of having sent Mr. Thomas Williams, auctioneer, of Penybank, near Llandovery [the prosecutor in a former case], an anonymous letter, signed “Rebecca,” threatening to kill and murder him.
The whole panel was gone through before a jury could be obtained, owing [as in all the Rebecca cases] to the great number objected to on both sides.
The Attorney General opened the case; and said that the prisoner was charged with sending a letter, which the jury would perceive from its contents, threatened the utmost personal violence to the prosecutor.
Prior to this transaction, the prisoner was in very respectable circumstances, and was possessed of some property, which he became desirous of disposing.
He made arrangements for selling it to the prosecutor, at a price with which he afterwards became dissatisfied.
There may be some reason to think that the price given for the land was lower than might have been obtained for it.
What other transactions besides the one referred to the prisoner might have had with Rebecca, he (the Attorney-General) was unable to say.
He was not anxious to show that he had any thing to do with the recent alarming disturbances, nor did he wish to insinuate that he had been connected with any of the other outrages with which the name of Rebecca was associated.
He would confine himself entirely to the charge before them.
The letter had been posted on , and was delivered at the house of the prosecutor’s son, who was landlord of the Fountain Inn, Llandovery.
The prosecutor lived at Penybank, and the letter was opened by his son, who was authorized to open all the prosecutor’s letters.
In a communication which the son afterwards had with prisoner, the latter did not deny having written the letter.
The letter related entirely to business transactions, in which the prisoner at the bar had been concerned. and the threats had been made for the purpose of inducing the prosecutor to give up his purchase — to restore the estate, on the money being given up.
That would be an important point in evidence.
A man might naturally have a strong desire to repossess property, with which he might have parted in a moment of poverty, and to which he might have formed a long attachment; but he (the At.-G.) need not point out the great danger to society of sending letters threatening violence, when desirous, which persons could have no by law to desire, were not gratified by the party to whom the letter was addresed.
The Attorney-General then read the letter, which was to the following effect:–
“Sir.— It is on my way to inform you, and every one besides whom I will visit, I have heard of yon, among others, for your slyness in many ways, but no more, you may depend.
Prepare your soul, for I will mind your body.
Take great care of yourself, for I will not wait to listen to your flattering, and I will not do with you as I have done with Jones, of Lansadwrn.
This is the last notice you will receive.
What have you done with John Jones, of Danygarn [prisoner], for his farm?
I have wrote to him to pay your money back, and to write to me back, but he did not write to me.
If there will be an offer to do that, mind to do it; unless [or else] you will never be the owner of the farm, and it will not be of any use to you or to your relations.
Send to John Jones to pay the money back, before I visit you, or you shall not live two minutes after I shall come to see you; and you do charge 30 per cent. interest for your money.
This is what you must leave off, too.
Unless you will do this few things immediately, you will repent of it in a short time.
My best advice is to receive the money from John Jones, and not charge so much interest — then you are safe, or you shall be shot to death, as I did at Hendy gate.”
(Signed) “REBECCA.”
There were two persons of that name, continued the Attorney-General, the father and his son.
Both were auctioneers, and the letter was addressed to the son’s house, where the father’s letters were usually sent; but the jury would decide upon that, from the purport of the letter which referred to business transactions had with the father only.
The charge was a most severe one, and if there were any reasonable doubt that the letter was written by the prisoner, he (the Attorney-General) admitted that in no case could the jury be called upon to exercise more care and caution then on the present.
There might be some evidence called upon to prove that the handwriting was not the prisoner’s. Should that be the case, they would have to balance testimony, and he (the Attorney-General) had no doubt they would return a conscientious verdict.
The prosecutor’s son was then called as evidence.
He identified the handwriting of the prisoner from various business transactions had with him.
He also staled that when accused of the offence, the prisoner did not deny having written the letter; but said, “It is very much like my handwriting.”
Witness said, “It must be like it, when it is written by you.”
To which the prisoner said, “Give it to be burned — don’t speak about it.”
The prosecutor detailed the business transactions had with the prisoner, and deposed to the writing, particularly the name “John Jones,.” being the prisoner’s handwriting.
Mr. Wilson then addressed the jury in a very ingenious speech for the prisoner, especially remarking upon the uncertainty of swearing to handwriting.
Even the witnesses who had been called did not venture to state that the whole letter, but merely the particular name, was in the prisoner’s handwriting.
He also contended that the prisoner’s request to burn the letter was no admission of guilt.
A guilty man would have most strenuously denied it.
Again, if the prisoner had been very desirous of destroying the letter, he might have done so as he had it in his possession for several minutes.
Mr. Wilson concluded by deprecating the practice of sending threatening letters, but entreated the jury to pause before returning a verdict, the effect of which might be to send the prisoner to long punishment.
A witness named Jenkins was then called.
He said that he had once seen the prisoner write his name, and did not believe the letter to he in his handwriting.
The Attorney-General replied.
He called the attention of the jury to the entire absence of evidence on behalf of the prisoner, which the exception of a witness who apparently was an entire stranger, having seen him write only once.
He was not deficient in means, and might have produced his neighbours, parochial officers, and others, who were well acquainted with his handwriting.
The Learned Judge then summed up the evidence, and said the points for the consideration of the jury were — 1st, if the letter was addressed to the prosecutor; secondly, did it contain a threat; and thirdly, was it in the handwriting of the prisoner.
If it was in the prisoner’s writing, then it must be concluded that he knew the nature of its contents.
To ascertain that, in addition to the evidence deposing to the hand-writing, they had to take various circumstances into consideration — such as that of the letter referring to the business transactions with the prisoner.
The jury then retired, and returned a verdict of “Not Guilty.”
. — This morning.
Mr. Justice Cresswell took his seat upon the Bench at .
The Dolauhirion Gate.
Thomas Morgan, aged 28, and Thomas Lewis, aged 24, were arraigned on an indictment charging them with having, on , at Dolauhirion toll-gate in the parish of Llandingad, assembled together, with divers other persons unknown, and then and there the dwelling-house of the said toll-gate did unlawfully, feloniously, and with force, begin to demolish, pull down, and destroy.
Both prisoners pleaded “Not Guilty.”
The Attorney-General (with whom were Messrs.
Chilton, Q.C., Evans, Q.C., and E. V. Williams, as in all the cases prosecuted by the Government) stated the charge to the jury.
He would occupy but a very few minutes of their time, in giving an outline of the case before him.
As so many days had been already occupied in disposing of other similar cases, and as the jury residing in the county, must be well acquainted with the disturbances which had sprung up in many parts of South Wales, it would be unnecessary for him, in introducing this case, to make any observations of a general character.
The charge against the prisoners was, that they had, on the night of , or rather early on the following morning, assisted others and were themselves actively employed, in destroying a dwelling-house.
A month previous to the destruction of the house to which he referred, the gate alone was destroyed and the toll house left, and shortly afterwards a new gate was erected, and the toll-collector attended early each morning and collected tolls during the day, but did not sleep during night in the toll-house.
Most probably an attempt would be made to raise an objection on a point of law, that the house was not within the meaning of the Act which had been framed and enacted for the purpose of protecting dwelling-houses in general.
He (the Attorney-General) admitted that though the Act might not apply to every description of building which in conversation might be denominated a house — a pigeon-house for instance would not come within the meaning of the Act — still he contended that, where a house had been occupied as a dwelling-house, and if some days prior to the tumult, the party had been compelled by fear and terror to cease occupying it, that house came under the meaning of the Act providing for the protection of dwelling houses.
He thought it right to call their attention as well of that of his Lordship to that point, as the house had not been described in the indictment as a “dwelling house.”
It appeared that, on the night of , after the toll-keeper had retired, that the mischief which gave rise to these proceedings was accomplished.
The case against the prisoners was, that, on that night, a number of persons riotously assembled together, prostrated the gate, and, thinking that as the former destruction of the gate only had not prevented the collection of tolls, they had thought proper to demolish the toll house too.
A witness named Jones, a superintendent of police, who would give evidence before them, was called to the scene by watchers, who had been placed on the “look out” at the gate, partly to protect the toll-gate, and partly to give the alarm in case of an attack being made.
The witness went as near the place as he could with safety have gone, and on his arrival, he saw a number of persons, amounting to some fifty or more running across a field, at the further end of which a gap had been left in the event of an alarm.
As he approached the toll-house, he saw a man, who afterwards turned out to be the prisoner, Lewis, on the top of the house, engaged in the work of destruction.
He saw the prisoner glide down from the roof into the field, where he was afterwards joined by the prisoner Morgan.
They walked together across the field towards Dolauhirion farm-house.
Suspecting that they were going towards some of the farm-buildings, the officer galloped on the road, and saw both prisoners entering a bin or barn attached to the farm-buildings.
Now, the officer would tell the jury, that he saw one of them when on the house slide down the roof, that, being on horseback, he had ample opportunity to keep his eye upon them until they had entered the house, when he procured assistance and took them into custody.
He immediately recognised them as the two who were at the toll-house, and unless the two men were changed by something wonderful, he would almost say miraculous, their identity was fully made out.
The policeman pointed out to one of the other witnesses, whose evidence the jury should hear, the place where he saw the man glide down, and being then early in the morning, that witness was enabled distinctly to trace their footsteps in the dew from the toll-house to the farm-buildings, where they were apprehended.
On the prisoners’ boxes being searched, a horn was found in that belonging to Lewis, and a pair of wet boots in Morgan’s box.
On being questioned, Lewis said that the horn was used to give notice of the approach of the Rebeccaites.
Those were the circumstances under which the prisoners were brought before them, and which would be more fully detailed in the evidence of the various witnesses.
He (the Attorney-General) had been informed that an alibi would be set up on their behalf.
He would tell the jury that an alibi, if clearly made out, was the best possible evidence; but if otherwise, it was the worst evidence, as no innocent man would support his case by perjury.
He had no doubt that they would deal with the prisoners as the justice of the case required.
The Attorney-General then proceeded to explain to the jury a plan of the relative position of the toll-house, road, farm-building, &c., by which they would perceive that one of the witnesses was in such a position, that he could not have seen the prisoner Morgan on the other side of the toll-house.
Sure enough, there follows here some hair-splitting over whether the toll house was really a “dwelling house” as meant by the charge in the indictment, and whether the case should instead be filed under a different section of the law as a misdemeanor instead of a felony.
The judge overruled this objection.
On with the trial:
Evan Davies examined by Mr. Chilton, Q.C.:– I remember Dolauhirion gate toll-house, which was inhabited by Benjamin Evans previous to the destruction of the gate, for two years.
I was employed as watchman and toll collector for two days previous to the destruction of the house.
There was no furniture in the house.
I was employed to collect by Daniel Richards.
I went to collect tolls in the morning at six o’clock and left at ten in the evening.
I was during night employed to watch the gate.
I was so employed on .
I left the house and gate safe that night.
I watched until and then left.
When I returned , I found that the gate had been broken, and the front side of the roof entirely gone, and the back part partly so.
Cross-examined by Mr. Carne:— To the best of my knowledge all the tiles were off the front part of the house.
A man named Rees came to me on the evening of .
We remained until ten that night, and left together, shutting up the house, leaving no one in it.
We returned that night to Llandovery, and saw George Jones, policeman — I drank beer with him.
It was then about .
When in company with Jones, a person named James Phillips came to us.
Upon being told something by Phillips, Jones ordered his horse, and armed himself.
He had a sword and double-barrelled gun — wished me to go with him.
I objected, but afterwards went.
On going up to the gate, we saw Williams and Thomas there.
George Jones got up to the gate a few yards before me.
When I came up, Jones ordered them to apprehend me as one of the “Beccas.”
He said “William Thomas, apprehend this man.
He is one of the Beccas.”
Jones then went away.
He soon after came up on horseback, whistling.
This was .
The moon had set and it was very dark.
Heard some persons singing in a field at a little distance.
Joseph Williams said “that sounds like the voice of one of the Dolauhirion boys.”
None of us went up to see who it was.
Jones and myself then returned to Llandovery.
It was now .
It was still dark.
Might know a person at four or five or even ten yards.
Jones afterwards went back to the gate.
Re-examined:— I was frequently in the toll-honse when B. Evans dwelt there.
It was a furnished house.
I was in the shade when Jones ordered them to seize me.
George Jones, Superintendent of Police, examined by Mr. Evans, Q.C., said — I remember , when Joseph Williams, William Thomas, and Evan Davies watched the toll-house.
I used to go to the toll-house during the night to see if the watchers were on duty.
On hearing whistling in the field, I drew their attention to it.
Williams said, “I know that is Tom, the servant of Dolauhirion — he is going for the horses.”
I then left, together with Evan Davies, and requested the other two watchers to remain.
I proceeded to retire to bed, after having reached Llandovery, when I heard knocking at the door — found William Thomas there, who said, that there were about one hundred “Rebecca’s” about the gate.
Went to the Three Horse Shoes for the dragoons.
The patrol said, that he could not go without the officer.
I said, “there was no time to consult him, that the gate would be destroyed.”
I then went off.
Thomas told me not to go, or I would be murdered.
The Judge:— That is no evidence.
Examination continued:— When I went to the gate, I saw several persons near the pine-end of the house.
I saw one man on the house, who slided down from the roof.
I tried to take the hedge.
There were about fifty persons who ran across the field.
The man on the house was Thomas Lewis, the prisoner.
I could distinctly see him.
He did not go in the same direction as the crowd, but towards Dolauhirion farm-house.
I galloped on the road to the place where I expected them to come out.
They went into a cow-house or bin.
I called upon them to come out, as I knew them.
I revived no answer.
I heard a noise in the bin, as if undressing themselves.
I went and called up David Evans, their master, who gave me a candle, but could not give me a light.
I then called upon them again; they both answered, and asked what I wanted with them.
They came to the door, the upper part of which was open — they were partially undressed.
I charged them with breaking the gate, and told them, that they must come to Llandovery.
Morgan said, “He would be d–d if he would go, until his master was up.”
In ten minutes, the two watchers, Williams and Thomas, came up.
I had gone to the cottage, to get a light.
I ordered Thomas and Williams to take the prisoners into custody.
They said, they would not, as they were not armed.
I galloped to Llandovery, and returned to Dolauhirion with James Phillips, a constable.
Noticed that Morgan’s boots were wet.
Phillips asked both, why their boots were so wet.
One gave no answer, but the other said, he had been out courting until three o’clock.
On searching their boxes, I found this horn [produced] in Lewis’s box.
I knew it to be his box, as he gave me the key.
Morgan told me the other was his box.
In it I found a pair of wet boots.
Asked Lewis what he did with the horn.
He said, “To call Becca, to see what sort of people they were.”
It was between five and six o’clock when I saw the man on the house top.
I pointed to Phillips the place I saw the prisoner on the roof.
Cross-examined by Mr. Carne:— It was not very dark when I returned to the gate.
It was not cloudy.
It was not too dark to see a person fifteen yards off.
I passed a man who stood on the hedge, near the toll-house.
I distinctly saw and recognised a man on the roof.
I had to pass a corner in going to Dolauhirion.
The corner of the house projects into the farm yard.
The corner of the house partially hides the door from the road view.
I knew neither of these men before — had not, to the best of my knowledge, seen them.
When Thomas refused to take them into custody, he did not say there was no appearance of their being at the gate.
I did not ask William Thomas to swear that it was light enough to recognise a man at 20 yards off.
He never told me.
“I would not take the world for telling a lie for you.”
Never said, “Mind to swear to the voices of the Dolauhirion boys: if you swear to their voices, you shall have a hundred pounds.”
Never said any thing of the kind.
I have seen the proclamation, offering a reward for the conviction of Rebeccaites, but not as soon as it had been published [The proclamation was dated in London on that day.]
Never stood in that dock.
Never was charged with robbing a man in conjunction with Rebecca Lloyd.
Knew a person committed to gaol for that offence.
Re-examined:— I saw the two men enter the bin.
Mr. John Williams, surveyor of the Trust, was called to prove the correctness of the plan, the destruction of the gate. and the damage done to the house.
His description was similar to that given by other witnesses.
James Phillips:— Is a constable.
Remembers the morning the Dolauhirion toll-house was destroyed.
Remembers George Jones calling upon him on .
On arriving at Dolauhirion, saw the two prisoners churning.
Assisted George Jones to take them into custody.
Observed Lewis’s boots, which were quite wet.
The mistress of the house said she could prove they were in bed.
I showed the boots to her, and asked if she thought the wearer of them had been in bed.
She then said she “did not think that boy was afraid of Rebecca.”
Witness also proved the finding of the horn, &c., in prisoners’ boxes, as detailed by the last witness.
He afterwards went to the toll-house, and saw the damage which had been done [which witness described in similar language to the other witnesses], Jones pointed to him the place where he saw the prisoner jump from the roof.
Could distinctly trace in the dew the path of two persons walking from the toll-house to the farm-house.
Knows William Jones, who lives in a cottage opposite the toll-house.
Witness was cross-examined, but nothing important was elicited.
Benjamin Evans called:— Was toll-collector previous to the destruction of the gate.
Heard great noise on the night in question — the noise of tiles falling, and the noise of men running.
Judged they were a great many.
Was not disturbed by the firing of guns or the blowing of horns.
I heard no noises with the exception of the cracking of tiles.
Lives at a considerable distance from the gate.
The Attorney-General stopped the case at the suggestion of the Judge, who then proceeded to charge the jury, and said that, at the commencement of their proceedings, the Counsel for the prisoners rose an objection on the ground that the house did not come under the meaning of the section constituting the offence a felony.
Being of opinion that the evidence did not prove the existence of a “riotous and tumultuous assemblage,” he (the Learned Judge) had to tell them that it would be their duty to return a verdict of “Not Guilty” upon the present indictment.
Verdict accordingly.
There is an indictment for misdemeanour against the prisoners.
So much for that.
Riot, and Assault upon Bailiffs.
Philip Philip, aged 56, farmer, Wm. Philip, aged 23, farmer, and Wm. Harries, blacksmith, were charged with having, on , at Pound farm, in the parish of Llangunnor, riotously and tumultuously assembled, with divers other evil-disposed persons, and did then and there make a great noise, riot, and disturbance, and divers of her Majesty’s liege subjects did put in bodily fear, against the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, her Crown, and dignity.
The elder prisoner had his head bound round with two or three handkerchiefs, as if labouring under indisposition.
The Attorney-General stated the case to the jury.
The case which he had to lay before them was in itself a very simple one.
The prisoners were indicted for convening and taking part in an illegal assembly, and with having assaulted two bailiffs.
The jury would find that this case was an instructive example of the great danger to society of any illegal proceedings making head and taking root in the community.
The conduct of those who, taking the law into their own hands, prostrated gates, destroyed toll-houses, and sought to get rid of what they deemed to be grievances, was highly dangerous to society; but though not disposed to moderate the guilt of those who unlawfully endeavoured to redress grievances, supposed or real, the guilt must be greatly aggravated of those who — and the present case was a specimen of that guilt — taking advantage of the disturbed state of the community to further their own private ends — not even pretendedly for the public good.
They went far beyond the persons who, though they set the first example of violating the law, yet professed to be redressing some grievances, either real or imaginary, of a public nature.
There were many features in the case before them, in common with the Rebecca cases, as far as the violent and illegal means used were regarded; but the Rebecca cases professed to have some pretended public object in view, and, consequently, some degree of public sympathy was expected; but in this case a private right was denied — the right of a landlord to demand the rent due.
They would find that the right of the landlord to recover his rent by legal process bad been denied, and that the prisoners had called together a riotous assembly of persons, who had assumed the name of “Rebecca,” to prevent the bailiffs executing their duty.
Mr. Hall appeared for one of the prisoners only; the other two were undefended by counsel.
He hoped the jury would therefore exercise care that the evidence affecting the undefended prisoners should be well considered, that it may not be supposed that, because without counsel, they are without defence.
Wm. Philip was the occupier of a farm called the Pound, from the landlady, Mrs. Eleanor Evans.
Philip Philip, the prisoner who appeared to labour under indisposition, was a farmer, resident in the neighbourhood as was William Harries.
At Michaelmas, when rent became due, the younger prisoner did not pay it, and Mrs. Evans instructed a bailiff, named Evans — who was assisted by another person, named Lewis — to assist him, to distrain for rent due, amounting to 17l. 10s. On the day previous to the day of the riot with which the prisoners stood charged the bailiff, Evans, probably with a view of getting differences adjusted, met the elder Philip — told him that he had received authority in writing to distrain, and informed him that he would execute the warrant on the next day.
The reply made by the prisoner was, that “the mother and her children” would be there to meet them.
What was meant by these expressions, he presumed, would be well understood by all in Great Britain, especially in that county.
Next day Evans, accompanied by Lewis, proceeded to execute process, and at a short distance from the house they met Philip Philip, the father, with whom Evans had some conversation, during which the latter referred to the conversation which had taken place on the preceding day.
Philip said that the money was ready, but there was some mistake made by Mr. Wilson in an arbitration, with which, Evans said, he had nothing to do.
He then accompanied the bailiffs towards the farm, and upon meeting the young man near the house, addressing the bailiffs, he said in a loud voice, “What the d–l do you come here to ruin me.”
Immediately upon his saying so, a gun was fired, and five or six gun-shots followed it.
— After that demonstration, appeared a number of persons disguised in various ways — some with caps, bonnets, and others with blackened faces, false beards, &c., who came out from some of the farm buildings.
The effect of their appearance was to make Evans and Lewis run away, but they were pursued and brought back.
When taken back there was among them a conspicuous tall man, who he might turn out to be was not then important.
He demanded Evans to give up his distress paper, and when he produced them they were burnt.
The tall man appeared to be directing the whole proceedings.
While the papers were burning, the elder Phillip said that they must have the other paper — meaning the authority to distrain.
As the last scene of that strange conduct in a civilized, especially a Christian country, the tall man sent for a Bible, made Evans swear upon it that he would never again visit the place.
Alarmed for his life, and from the circumstance of guns being pointed towards him, he took the oath, but the place being well-known, he adopted that course which the law pointed out, and the parties were brought there to answer for their very gross violation of the laws of their country.
It would be the duty of the jury, after hearing the evidence, to say whether, as the occupier of the farm, there had been any doubt of the son’s participation in the affair.
They would have to make the same inquiry as it regarded the father — not forgetting the expressions used by him.
The other defendant would be identified by the testimony of one of the witnesses who would be produced before them, and the jury would find him to be the man who had administered that strange oath.
He had to inform them that the charge was not one of felony, but of misdemeanour only.
Though such was the case, he would not wish them to commit upon less proof.
He felt it to be his duty to point out the great mischief resulting from even a beginning to redress any supposed wrongs by riotous mobs.
It struck at the very root of society, and set at defiance that law which was the protection of all — our lives, property, and every thing near and dear to us.
Though careful not to impute to the prisoners this offence upon improper or insufficient evidence, but if satisfied as to their guilt, they must not shrink from discharging that duty which they owed both to society and themselves.
John Evans, the bailiff referred to in the Attorney-General’s address, was then called.
His evidence entirely bore out the statements made, as far as the two Philips were concerned.
He added that, when he and Lewis were in the act of running away, the old man called out to the mob, “Catch them, beat them, fire at them.”
There was a tall man amongst them who took the most conspicuous part in the proceedings.
He was disguised with a false beard, similar to a goat’s beard.
He had for many years known the prisoner Harris.
He could not identify him as the tall man.
He observed a fustian trousers under the cloak worn by him.
He at first insisted upon witness stripping himself, and walking to Carmarthen in a state of nudity, but that was abandoned when the mock oath had been administered.
— This witness underwent a long examination and cross-examination by Mr. Hall, who defended the prisoner Harris, but the whole is contained in the opening address.
John Lewis, the person who assisted the last witness, gave evidence to the same effect.
In running away, he fell, and all the party commenced beating him most violently.
He bled profusely from the head, his garments down to his shoes being covered with blood.
The old man interfered, and cried “don’t beat him — ’tis the other I want you to settle,” or words to that effect.
Had it not been for his interference, witness believed the mob would have killed him.
The witness positively swore to the identity of Harries as being the tall man who took so conspicuous a part among the mob.
Had known him for years, and had an opportunity of recognising him when the mask and false beard accidentally fell off when near the fire — leaving his face quite exposed.
Mr. Hall cross-examined the witnesses at great length, but the latter persisted in his evidence that Harris was the tall man referred to.
Both the other prisoners who defended themselves, also cross-examined witness with considerable tact, though occasionally straying to the dispute between themselves and their landlady, which, in fact, had nothing whatever to do with the charge.
Their examination of witnesses proved that the elder prisoner was not so deaf nor infirm as supposed during the first part of the trial.
Mr. Hall then addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner Harris.
He commenced by deprecating the outrages which had arisen in South Wales, and which no right-minded person could for a moment sanction.
The only excuse that could be offered for their existence was “gross ignorance” — fancying that physical efforts could redress grievances — a more mistaken notion could not be entertained.
Mr. Hall spoke at great length upon the relative position and duties of landlord and tenant, being of opinion that no relationship, if well conducted, could be more conducive to the well-being of society, and then proceeded to establish an alibi on behalf of the defendant Harris.
A witness named Ress was called to prove that between seven and eight the prisoner called at his house, which was a mile and a half distance from Pound, on the Swansea road.
Other witnesses were called to prove conversations with them at different times, until past nine, being the hour at which, according to the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution, the riot took place.
Some of the witnesses deposed having seen the prisoner on the Carmarthen side of Pound farm, about nine.
The prisoner’s father was called to prove that he never wore trousers, the witness Evans having stated that the tall man in the mob wore a fustian trousers.
Mr. Chilton replied on behalf of the Crown.
He remarked upon the badly-sustained alibi made out on behalf of Harries, Mr. Hall having opened that Harries was too far distant from the scene of disturbance at eight o’clock to be at the riot at half-past eight or nine; whereas, by subsequent evidence, it turned out, even by that of his own witnesses, that he was at the time in the immediate vicinity.
As to the circumstance of all the witnesses undertaking to swear to the time almost within a few minutes, it was quite an absurdity, for no man, if asked a few days subsequently, could call to mind the exact hour at which he held any conversation with another.
He also contended, that the testimony of prisoner’s father did not contradict that given by witnesses for the prosecution, as fustian “leggars” might have been easily mistaken for trousers made out of the same material.
Mr. Chilton then commented on the plea set up by the younger prisoner, Philip — that he took no part in the assembling of the mob, and had no previous knowledge of the riot.
He thought the case clear against the two Phillips, and that the alibi set up for Harries had not been sustained, especially when put in opposition to the witness Lewis’s positive evidence of his identity among the mob.
All sympathy should not be exhibited towards the accused, but some should be displayed towards witnesses who come forward to give evidence against those who set all law at defiance.
The Learned Judge having summed up the evidence, the jury acquitted Harris, and returned a verdict of Guilty against Philip Philip, and Wm. Philip.
Sentence deferred.
From the Cambrian:
. — This morning, the business of the Court commenced at the usual hour.
The Attorney-General begged to enter a nolle prosequi as it regarded the indictment for felony against John Jones [acquitted of having sent a threatening letter], 22, farmer, Thomas Hughes, sawyer, and Benjamin Jones, charged with having committed a riot, and feloniously demolishing the dwelling-house of Griffith Jones, being the Pontarlleche toll-house.
The charge of misdemeanour for destroying the gate, was removed by a writ of certiorari to the Court of Queen’s Bench.
Case of the Late Mr. Thos.
Thomas.
David Evans, aged 20, farmer, and James Evans, 25, labourer, were arraigned upon an indictment charging them, with divers others, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled at Pantycerrig, in the parish of Llanfihangel Rhosycorn, and with having, during the riot, assaulted one Thomas Thomas, and with force demanded the sum of forty shillings, with intent to steal the same.
Both prisoners, who were defended by Mr. Nicholl Carne, pleaded “Not Guilty.”
Considerable interest was felt as to the result of this trial, from the circumstance of the prosecutor, who was the principal witness, having been found dead under very peculiar circumstances, and that of his premises having been fired soon after the prisoners had been committed.
The Attorney-General said, that the charge against the prisoners was one of misdemeanour — for having committed a riot in going to the house of the prosecutor Mr. Thomas Thomas, who had since lost his life; but he must in justice to the prisoners observe, that having been in custody, that circumstance could not in the remotest degree cast any reflection upon them.
Whatever violence might have been offered Mr. Thomas Thomas (and he did not say such was the case), it could in no way have been done by them.
The names of the prisoners could not be connected with any catastrophe of that kind, for they were in gaol at the time.
It was only to be regretted that the deceased’s evidence could not be obtained excepting from the deposition taken before the Magistrates, and that was evidence in law.
It appeared that a number of persons disguised in the usual characteristics of Rebeccaites, with circumstances of considerable force and violence, demanded a sum of money from the prosecutor, and this proceeding did not appear to have originated for the purpose of removing any public grievance, real or imaginary; but, in which it appeared, that the alarming state of the country had been made subservient to the promotion of a private end, and to the settlement of a mere personal claim between the parties.
A short time previous to , it appeared by the deposition, that Mr. Thomas’s cattle strayed at night into a corn field belonging to one of the prisoners, who had estimated the damage at 10s. Early on the morning of , a number of disguised persons assembled together and surrounded the house of Mr. Thomas, and demanded 5l. as a satisfaction for the damage done to the corn.
Thomas would not allow them to enter his house, neither would he go out to them, but refused to accede to their request.
They then reduced their demand to 50s. and subsequently to 40s. They then dragged Thomas from his own house to the house of the prisoner David Evans, and when Thomas challenged them with having offered to settle the matter for 10s., Evans said, “’Tis now in these people’s hands.”
It was for the jury to judge from that expression, whether the riot did not originate with him.
The deceased then asked permission to remain in Evans’s house, but he was finally taken back to his own house, and allowed nine days to pay the money.
Some time afterwards Thomas was found dead, under circumstances which he thought justly created no suspicion against any one.
As far as he (the Attorney-General) could learn, those who possessed the best means of judging, were of opinion that strange and unaccountable as were many of the appearances, there was no just foundation for believing that he came to his death by violence.
As reports had been circulated, he thought it right publicly to state for the sake of the character of the county, that, as far as his opinion went, there had been no reasonable grounds for supposing that the man was murdered.
To resume his statement, the jury would find, that, at one o’clock, the younger prisoner and the other, who was his servant, were at the prosecutor’s house.
Thomas distinctly swore to the presence of both the defendants, as the jury would find on reading the deposition.
In three or four days afterwards a complaint was made, and a a warrant issued, for the apprehension of the defendants.
On , the officer went to David Evans’s premises, and asked him for James Evans, when the former said that James had left his service in consequence of a quarrel, and that he had not seen him for many days.
The premises were searched, and James Evans was found concealed beneath some straw on a loft.
It would be proved that David Evans, in speaking of the transaction, said that they should not have done what they did, if Thomas Thomas had paid the money, and while before the Magistrates, the prosecutor persisted in saying that the demand was 5l. then 50s.s., and then 40s., when David Evans added that he had offered to take 1l. The jury must observe, that he assented to the truth of all the evidence, with the exception of the reduction to 20s. He had also pointed out the spot where he had offered to accept of 1l. He would now read the deposition.
The Attorney-General then read the deposition, as taken , before Col. Trevor and J. L. Price, Esq., in the presence of the prisoners.
The deceased stated, that on the day in question a number of people came to his house, and demanded satisfaction for the trespass, as described.
Deceased did not go to the door, but his wife went.
They at last reduced their demand to 40s. He was then taken by the collar by one of the disguised party calling himself “Becca,” and was taken to Bergwm.
When there he distinctly recognized James Evans, who behaved worse to him than any of the others.
He also recognized David Evans.
James Evans had with him a short gun, and had his face blackened.
David Evans was but slightly disguised.
The Attorney-General observed, that he could very easily have identified him.
They then took him to the Bergwm field.
They kept him outside the door until some one went in to tell the inmates, lest they should be frightened.
They then took him to the house, when he told David Evans that he had agreed to receive 40s. for the damage when the latter answered, “’Tis in the hands of these people.”
The Attorney-General commented upon this answer, as affording convincing proof that the prisoner acted in concert with the mob.
The deposition further stated, that after coming out of the house, James Evans pushed witness on in a contrary direction to his home, and when alone, told him, “I wish to kill you.”
The party who personated Becca called upon him to bring the witness back.
So that Becca, observed the Attorney-General, appeared to have been actuated by better considerations than the prisoner James Evans.
The deposition concluded by stating that the party allowed deceased nine days to pay the money, and if they would visit him again, they would burn his effects.
— The Attorney-General proceeded:— That was the deposition of Thomas Thomas.
He had gone to his account; but the jury could not, in consequence of that, be satisfied with less proof.
It was not necessary there should exist that certainty which could be produced only by witnessing the scene, but with that degree of reasonable certainty which would satisfy them in any important concerns of life.
He hoped they were now rapidly coming to a close with the cases.
He did not know but that he might be addressing them for the last time.
That, he believed, was the last case in which these parties had taken advantage of the agitated state of the county for the purpose of committing outrages.
The guilt was not inconsiderable of those who took advantage of the turbulent state of the country, arising from real or imaginary grievances, and perverted it to their own selfish purposes, for others had some excuse — excuse he should not have called it — pretense rather, who did those things on the ground of abating a public grievance.
— The object of those prosecutions was not to punish every individual who had been concerned in the disturbances.
Their number was so great that no reasonable man could wish, even were it possible, to punish all.
The extent of the outrages and the number concerned in them forbade that wish, but the grand object was to restore the authority of the law, and regain the confidence of those who relied upon that authority for protection.
He trusted the conduct of those whose duty it was to advise the Crown would not be thrown away in reclaiming the misguided inhabitants of that county.
With those observation he would call the witnesses, and leave the case in their hands, and he had no doubt they would do that justice which the circumstances required.
He (the Attorney-General) might be permitted to add — and he did so with unfeigned sincerity, that he had been in various parts of this country performing his official duties and exercising that profession to which he belonged, but he never, in the course of his experience, addressed any gentlemen who inspired in his mind more confidence, that the duties they discharged were done consistently with a sense of right; and he begged to thank them in the name of the public and of the country, for the attention, impartiality, and justice which marked the course of the proceedings which he had the honour to advocate.
[The following evidence was called for the purpose of introducing the depositions.]
Robert Bray, Superintendent in the A division of the Metropolitan Police, examined by Mr. Chilton, Q.C.: Knew deceased — saw his body the morning it was picked up.
Mr. Spurrel examined:– Am Clerk to the Magistrates.
[Deposition handed to witness].
This is the deposition made by Mr. Thomas Thomas; I saw him sign it — the Magistrates also signed it.
Cross-examined by Mr. N. Carne:— Mr. Thomas Thomas first made his statement in Welsh, and it was translated into English by Mr. Price, the Magistrate.
He translated into English, everything stated by Mr. Thomas.
He was not sworn as an interpreter.
I understand Welsh sufficiently well to understand the evidence given.
Mr. Carne went over the whole of the deposition, criticising upon the various English words, given for Welsh expressions used by the witness.
J. Lloyd Price, Esq., examined:— Am a Magistrate for this county.
Took the deposition of Thomas Thomas.
It was taken in Welsh.
He understood English sufficiently well to correct anything which was written not in consonance with what he had said.
I was at Bergwm, the residence of one of the prisoners.
I do not remember the day, but it was on a Friday previous to the apprehension.
I remember it, because, on the following night, his houses were burnt down.
I was accompanied by a policeman of the A division of the Metropolitan police, and a special constable.
I went with the officers to show them the house, because I could get no assistance in the neighbourhood that I could depend upon.
When I went there, I found David Evans in bed.
When he was asked for James Evans, he said, “He has left me; I would not allow him to go to Brechfa fair, and he got offended — has left me, and I have never seen him since.”
He repeated the statement before I sent out the policeman to search the place.
The officers then went ont, and I saw James Evans brought from a hayloft.
The officers brought him to the house.
I remember that near the close of the examination of Thomas Thomas, when he said that they demanded 40s., David Evans said, “When near the gate, we consented to take 20s.”
Cross-examined by Mr. Carne:– I translated nearly the whole.
There might have been some portions of his statement irrelevant to the business omitted.
Some people state many things which are quite irrelevant.
During the first portion of the examination, I put questions to commence the examination.
I had taken a previous examination for the purpose of issuing a warrant.
I took that down in writing, but after the second examination, made in the presence of the prisoners, was over, I did not think the first examination of any importance, so I put them with other useless papers.
The depositions were then put in evidence, and read by the Officer of the Court.
Thomas Evans examined by Mr. Evans, Q.C.:— Is a mason.
Lives with his father at Ty’nyfordd farm, half-a-mile from Pantycerrig.
Lives a mile from Bergwm — the house of the prisoner, David Evans.
Remembers .
Remembers being disturbed about twelve or one o’clock that morning.
Heard a man crying out “heigh” three times at the window.
Went to the window.
Saw people outside.
There were several people present, but I could see only three.
The first thing I heard was a man calling out, “I give you warning, that you must not go to the farm you have taken, or we will burn your hay and corn, as you see your neighbours’.”
My father had taken a farm in the neighbourhood.
To the best of my judgment, that person was James Evans.
I knew his voice, as I was intimate with him.
We had been in the same singing-school.
After this, I and my father got out of bed, and went out of the house.
We heard several guns fired.
When in a field near Pantycerrig, I saw a number of people.
It was too dark to distinguish their dress; but when the guns were fired, we could perceive something white about them.
They then returned from Pantycerrig.
I met a neighbour in the road, whom the mob had desired to shew them the way to Pantycerrig.
Next morning, I went to Bergwm.
The inmates were not up; but the servant shortly opened the door.
David Evans then came downstairs.
I saw a gun on the table, and said, “Here are one of Becca’s guns, I think.”
D. Evans said, “Yes, it is;” and seemed surprised, and said, “Stop, let me see if there is a load in it,” and blew in it, and said there was a load.
I took the screw, and drew the load — it contained powder only.
I then requested D. Evans to come out, and told him “that his servant had been at our house, warning my father not to take the farm.”
He denied it, and said “No; he has been in the house during the whole night.”
David Evans then told James Evans, who came towards me, and said, “D–n you, tell that of me,” and raising his fist.
David Evans put his hand on his shoulder, and said, “Be quiet, James.”
Witness then went to Pantycerrig.
On next day (Sunday) met James Evans, who said, “Why did you tell Thos. Thomas that I had confessed being at Pantycerrig.”
He said the servant of Pantycerrig told him so, and added, that if he had a chance, he would put witness quiet enough; and added, “Well, if you transport me for seven years, I’ll give you a coating when I come back.”
Cross-examined:— I never had a quarrel with Evans previous to that time.
To the best of my knowledge, the voice I heard was James Evans’s. Got out of bed when first I heard the man calling at the window.
I told Thos. Thomas when I saw him, that James Evans was there.
Robert Bray re-called:— I accompanied Mr. Price, the Magistrate, P. C. Powell, and a special constable, to Bergwm.
I saw David Evans, and went out to the barn to search for James Evans.
I heard noise in the loft above the barn, and got up to the loft, and saw the feet of a man showing from under some straw.
I called to him, and took off the straw.
He was James Evans.
We passed Thomas Thomas’s house, who was standing by the door.
I said, “It was a pity you should have gone to this poor old man.”
He said, we should not have gone, had he paid for the damage done by his cattle on our farm.
Rosser Thomas corroborated this witness’ statement.
Mr. Nicholl Carne then addressed the jury in reply to the evidence in support of the charge, and said he should be enabled to prove an alibi on the clearest evidence — that David and James Evans were both in bed at the time of the outrage.
After the examination of several witnesses, whose evidence appeared to be totally at variance with their former statements on oath, Mr. Carne folded up his brief and sat down.
The Judge:— Mr. Carne, if you say you will not hold a brief in this case any longer, I think you will adopt a discreet and honourable course.
The Attorney-General replied, commenting in very strong terms on conduct of the witnesses for the defence.
Verdict — Guilty.
Sentence deferred.
Rebecca’s Daughters
John Jones, aged 21, stonecutter, William Jones, aged 17, stonecutter, Thomas Jones aged 14, stonecutter, Seth Morgan, aged 21, carpenter, Henry Thomas, aged 21, labourer, and Thomas Harries pleaded Guilty to the charge of having, on , with divers evil disposed persons, unlawfully and maliciously thrown a certain turnpike toll-house, the property of the trustees of the Three Commotts district of roads, situate at Porthyrrhyd.
— Discharged on their own recognizances, to appear when called upon to receive the judgment of the Court, and to keep the peace in the mean time towards all her Majesty’ subjects.
George Daniel pleaded Guilty to the charge of having, on , committed a riot, &c., at Blaennantymabuchaf, in the parish of Llanegwad, in the county of Carmarthen.
— Discharged on his own recognizances, to appear to receive the judgment of the Court when called upon.
John Thomas, smith, pleaded Guilty to the charge of having committed a riot and an assault at Llandilo-Rhynws bridge turnpike gate, on .
— Discharged on his own recognizances, to appear and receive judgment whenever called upon.
Mr. Chilton intimated to the Court, that it was not the intention of her Majesty’s Government, to proceed with the case against Francis M’Keirnin and George Laing, charged with the demolition of a turnpike gate, near Llanelly.
The Counsel for the Crown looked into the depositions, and did not think it a proper case to be proceeded with.
William Davies, farmer, Benjamin Richards, farmer, David Thomas, farmer, William Evans, labourer, and Arthur Arthur, labourer, charged with various Rebecca outrages, were discharged by proclamation.
Thomas Morgan, aged 28, labourer, and Thomas Lewis, aged 24, labourer, pleaded Not Guilty to the charge of having, on , at Dolauhirion toll-gate, in the parish of Llanegwad, in this county, and then and there demolished the said gate.
— This case was not proceeded with; but removed by certiorari into the Court of Queens Bench.
In the course of a few minutes, the prisoners who perceived their companions in tribulation set at liberty, wished to withdraw their plea of Not Guilty, and to plead Guilty, but the Judge told them it was too late.
From the Cambrian, continuing the reporting on the Assizes:
Sentences
John Jones alias Shoni-Scyborfawr and David Davies, alias Dai-y-Cantwr, were then placed at the bar, for the purpose of receiving the sentence of the Court.
In passing sentence his Lordship addressed the prisoners as follows:–
John Jones, you have been convicted of shooting at a fellow subject with intent to do him some grievous bodily harm; and you have also pleaded guilty to a charge of having riotously and tumultuously demolished a house.
I have too much reason to suppose that you have been guilty of other offences of the same character as those which I have mentioned.
And you David Davies have pleaded guilty to a charge of demolishing a house, with others who were riotously and tumultuously assembled, and I know from your own statement that you have been guilty of many similar outrages.
As far as I have been able to judge from the facts laid before me you are both strangers in this part of the country.
What motive induced you to come into this county I know not; but I assume from your appearance in this part of the country shortly after those riots had begun, which have so much disgraced, and entailed so much misery upon the inhabitants, that your designs were highly inimical to public order and tranquillity.
Whether you came here in pursuance of your own wicked objects, following out that which you have done elsewhere, intending to make profit for yourselves by the existence of the disturbances in this part of the country, I know not.
It may be so; or, it may be that you were known to be men capable of outrage and violence; that you were known to be men who disregarded the law, and to be ready to brave its vengeance.
You may have been the instruments of others in committing the offenses which you have committed.
If you have been, what must their feelings be at this moment when they see those whom they have employed brought into this dilemma — about to receive sentence, they themselves as yet unknown and unharmed!
You need hardly envy their feelings, if they have any, when they reflect on the sentence that is about to be passed upon you; and when they reflect, and tremble under the reflection, that although the law is slow it is for the most part sure; when they think that they will never go to sleep at night without feeling that their guilt may be discovered before the morning.
I know not whether or not there are such persons; if there are, I am sure no one can envy their position or their feelings.
It matters not for you whether there are not.
It can make no difference to you, for it is plain you were willing agents, and not seduced into a breach of the law, but perfectly knowing all that you were about to do and its consequences.
As for you John Jones you may be grateful for one thing — most thankful for it — that that gun which you fired at Walter Rees did not take effect on him, otherwise instead of sentencing you to banishment from this country, it would have been my painful duty to have pronounced upon you the punishment of a dreadful and violent death.
But after the proof that you have given of your utter disregard of the law — of the rights of property — of the personal safety of your fellow subjects, it is utterly impossible I can allow you any longer to remain in this country, or ever to return to it.
You David Davies may not be sent away for so long a time, but still a long term of years — probably the greater portion of those which remain to you — must be passed in a foreign land.
How different will your position there be from that which it has been here.
Here you were at liberty to choose your own master — sort of service — and to quit it if you did not like it; earning wages which you might enjoy and dispose of at your own option.
No such liberty remains for you.
You will be placed under a task-master, not chosen by yourself.
You will hate to do the work which you are ordered to do, and not work chosen by yourself.
You will not be allowed to quit it however irksome to you.
Payment for it you will have none, except as much food as will preserve your strength, and enable you to continue your forced and unpaid labour.
You will be not in name but in fact slaves; for to that I must sentence you for your guilt and for the protection of the public of this country.
The sentence of the Court upon you John Jones is, that you be transported beyond the seas for the term of your natural life; and the sentence of the Court upon you David Davies is, that for this offence to which you have pleaded guilty, you be transported for the term of twenty years.
— The prisoners heard the sentence with smiles of indifference.
— They were handcuffed and removed from the dock.
The Riot at Pound.
Philip Philip and William Philip father and son, who were convicted on of having committed a riot, beaten the bailiffs, etc., at Pound, were then placed at the bar to receive sentence.
The prisoners having been called upon by the clerk of the arraigns, were addressed by the Learned Judge as follows:—
Philip Philip and William Philip,— You are now to receive the sentence of the Court for the very serious offence of which you have been found guilty;– of a riot and an assault upon the persons of the bailiffs that came to distrain for rent on the premises of you, William Philip.
A sad thing it is to see an old man like you — a father and his son — brought up together to receive sentence for an offence of this description; an offence not committed in haste or unadvisedly, but an offence committed after mature deliberation, and which you had prepared yourselves for.
You Philip, the father, warned the bailiff the day before, that if he dared to come to execute the process which he told you he was armed with on the part of the landlady of your son’s farm, that this attack would be made upon them.
Instead of bringing up your son in obedience to the law, and to respect the rights of his landlady, you, no doubt, encouraged him in the commission of this offence.
And you, William Phillip, if you have any feelings at all, what must be your feelings at hearing your aged father sentenced to imprisonment for that offence which arose out of your own delay and neglect to pay the just debt due to your landlady, and which claim you attempted to resist by force.
It is a shocking, shocking thing to see father and son in such a disgraceful position — disgraced and degraded in the face of the whole country — and to be still more disgraced by the punishment that you must now undergo.
If people, taking advantage of the disturbed state of the country, forget the duty they owe to the law — to themselves — and to their Maker, they must be taught to remember it by the example of suffering in others — which suffering is the result of disobedience to the laws of their country and to the dictates of honesty and virtue.
You Philip Philip and William Philip availed yourselves of the disturbances in the county — of the heat and excitement which then reigned predominant in men’s minds — men who went prowling about reckless of order and of disgrace, assuming names which have become a bye-word of alarm and violence — and by their means sought to evade the payment of a just debt, but whether just or otherwise the means you adopted were highly discreditable and dangerous, as you had a right to question the legality of the demand in a court of law, but in no other manner.
For this offence, the sentence of the Court upon you Philip Philip (the father) is that you be imprisoned for twelve calendar months and the sentence of the Court upon you William Philip is that you be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for the term of twelve calendar months.
The Pantycerrig Outrage.
David Evans, farmer, and James Evans, labourer, who were found guilty of the assault on the person of the late Mr. Thomas Thomas, of Pantycerrig, were then brought up to receive sentence.
His Lordship addressed them as follows:—
David Evans and James Evans, you are brought before the court to receive sentence for a riot — a riot attended by circumstances of great cruelty to a very old man, who has since that time by some means or other, lost his life.
You behaved with great cruelty to him and to his family, for you went with others armed and disguised, conducting yourselves in such a manner as to cause terror in the minds of the peaceable inhabitants of the old man’s residence.
You dragged that old man from his house in the dead hour of the night, and took him to a distance from his wife and family.
You James Evans personally ill-used him during the progress of this riotous proceeding.
What must have been that poor old man’s state of feelings when be found himself in the hands of such people, in such a place, and at such an hour of the night; and what must have been the feelings of his aged wife when he was dragged from his bed and from his house by an armed and disguised rabble!
I have seldom seen or heard of an instance of greater cruelty — of a more total want of feeling than in this particular case.
The jury who tried your case recommended you to mercy.
I wish I could think that that recommendation rested on satisfactory grounds.
The Learned Judge then commented in strong terms on the conduct of the witnesses for the defence (a brother and sister of the younger prisoner), in deliberately swearing a willful falsehood, and sentenced the prisoners severally to be imprisoned and kept to hard labour for the term of twelve calendar months.
Other sentences included:
David Jones was then arraigned on the charge of attempting to suborn and instigate one Daniel Lloyd to commit perjury, or to withhold his evidence against John Thomas, then under charge for riot and assault.
— The offence was clearly proved against the prisoner, and he was sentenced to Twelve months’ imprisonment.
William Williams, for destroying Pentreback Gate, six calendar months’ imprisonment.
His Lordship intimated that he gave the prisoner this lenient punishment by the recommendation of the Attorney-General.
It tells of “a devastating erosion of taxpayer service,” and a “lack of effective administrative and congressional oversight” combined with “the failure to pass Taxpayer Rights legislation,” that “is reshaping U.S. tax administration in ways that are not positive for future tax compliance or for public trust in the fairness of the tax system,” and furthermore “we need fundamental tax reform, sooner rather than later, so the entire system does not implode.”
In other words: mostly good news this year.
The report is charmingly earnest, and imagines that it is addressing a Congress that has a genuine interest in improving the functioning of the U.S. government and the lives of its subjects, but has somehow lost its way.
As an example of this naïveté, one of the Taxpayer Advocate’s recent success stories, by its standards anyway, was when it convinced the IRS to issue a “Taxpayer Bill of Rights” — one which didn’t actually give taxpayers any rights, but just tried to list the ones it thought taxpayers ought to believe they have.
Since then, the actual experience of taxpayers has declined for just about every item in the Bill.
One thing the new report emphasizes is that the IRS’s inability to do its job is a problem that compounds with time — “the tax system goes into a downward spiral” as the report puts it.
When the agency is late responding to letters, or can’t be reached on the phone (the IRS projects it will answer fewer than half of incoming calls this year, and those only after on-hold waits exceeding half an hour, and even then it will refuse to answer any but the most basic questions), or doesn’t staff its walk-in sites, citizens get frustrated and either don’t bother to pay or file, or they make up their own answers to the questions they have — often incorrect or conveniently taxpayer-favorable ones.
Both scenarios create more work for the IRS and add to their backlog.
Furthermore:
The erosion of taxpayer trust is an even more serious matter than the erosion of taxpayer service, because with the provision of adequate funding, declines in taxpayer service can be reversed.
Not so with declines in trust — once lost, trust takes a very long time to be regained.
For a taxpayer whose trust has been shaken, each IRS failure to meet basic expectations (e.g., answer the phone…) confirms the belief that the IRS is not to be trusted.
From the Cambrian:
About , Mr. Evan Rees, carrier from Shrewsbury to Aberystwith, was proceeding with his waggon laden with timber from Aberystwith to Llanidloes, when upon arriving at Pantmawr turnpike gate, the toll-collector demanded the customary toll; in reply, Mr. Rees offered the half, which was refused by the gate-keeper.
The stubborn Cambrian waggoner then ordered the servant, who accompanied him, to hook the team of steeds to the gate-posts.
The much-frightened toll-collector, sooner than have his gates and posts dragged to pieces, immediately opened the gates for her ladyship Rebecca to go peaceably through.
But the matter did not end here, as, shortly after, Mr. Rees was visited at the Black Horse Inn, in Aberystwith (which said house he is landlord of), by a bailiff, informing him that the magistrates of the hundred of Llanidloes were desirous of having an interview with him on a certain day in the tillage of Llandinam, near Llanidloes.
Mr. Rees being a man of stomach, properly attended upon their worships at the time desired, who after examining into the business, gently informed him that they would deal very leniently this time, but if he made his appearance before them again upon such occasion, that the utmost penalty of the law should be inflicted; at present they would only impose upon him the sum of five pounds and costs, which was immediately paid.
Mr. Rees then bowed and left the court.
There was some Rebeccaite mopping-up to be done at the Spring Assizes in Carmarthenshire, as was reported in the Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser (excerpts):
The following was the address of his lordship to the grand juries:– … I shall not trouble you with any remarks on the general state of the country, as I have no doubt you have heard much on that subject on more than one occasion previously to this.
There is, however, in the calendar, indications of a disturbed state of affairs continuing in this county longer than in the adjoining one.
I hope that by the vigilance of the magistracy the peace of the county will soon be permanently restored.…
The Rebecca Riot.
John Lewis, Isaac Charles, Job Evans, John Harries, David Williams, and David Thomas, for unlawfully assembling at the Union Workhouse, at Carmarthen, on , were first put upon their trial, and a special jury was sworn in.
Mr. John Evans, Q.C., Mr. E.V. Williams, and Mr. Chilton, Q.C., were retained on the part of the prosecution, and Mr. Lloyd Hall for the defence.
Mr. Chilton opened the pleadings and stated, that John Harries, a miller, residing at Talog, in the parish of Abernant, in this county, was charged with being the ringleader in this unlawful assemblage.
That the said John Harries, had refused to pay Water-street gate, in this town, which caused him to be fined, and his goods were distrained upon for the amount, and that the riot took place in consequence of the distress made by the constables.
That the distress caused an ill-will and an angry feeling, and that threats were held out that Water-street gate would be destroyed.
That the defendant John Harris had called upon Capt. Davies, of Green Hall, stating that unless the fine would be returned, they would pay him a visit, and handed him a letter to the same effect, signed by John Harris and Thomas Thomas.
The parish clerk of Abernant was compelled by Harris to make a proclamation on the previous Sunday, demanding the attendance of all the neighbouring farmers at Carmarthen on the following Monday,— farmers to come on horseback, and their children and servants on foot.
His summons was obeyed, and they attended in thousands, carrying with them banners with Welsh inscriptions, and a band of music playing before them.
That after parading the town, they arrived at the Union Workhouse, and demanded admission; the governor refused for some time, but seeing the crowd so great, he admitted them in, and the place was immediately filled, and were it not for the timely arrival of a detachment of the 4th Light Dragoons, the work of destruction which they had commenced would be carried on.
Several of the horses were left in the Workhouse yard, a number of the men were taken at the time, and that some of them were the prisoners at the bar.
Capt. David Davies.– I am a magistrate of this county.
I know defendant Harries — he is a miller, living at Talog mill.
He called on me on and delivered this letter to me.
I read it in his presence.
He said he had another for Mr. Morris for the same purpose, and away he went.
The letter was as follows:– “Talog, .— Sir– As we have been unlegally fined for refusing to pay Water-street gate, no refuse being made, we give you this offer if you are intending to pay the money to-day is the day.
John Harries and Thomas Thomas.”
He said unless paid that day they were coming to demand it on Monday.
I was in the town of Carmarthen on the Monday.
I was with the magistrates in the Guildhall.
I saw a number of persons between twelve and one o’clock coming up towards the Hall from Lammas-street.
There were 350 on horseback, and a couple of thousands on foot.
There was a band of music on foot.
They came up part of the Hall and went up street.
They were a quarter of an hour passing.
The shops were shut.
The crowd did not alarm me.
Those on foot were agricultural boys and girls, farm servants.
I was not at all alarmed.
David Evans, road-surveyor.— On , I was sworn in as a special constable.
I live in this town.
On , I was required to assist the police to levy a distress on goods of Harries, the miller, for refusing to pay tolls at Water-street gate.
I went with other constables and police constables.
The attempt to distrain was resisted, and there was a great riot.
Towards the end of it they said they would pay Water-street gate a visit and take it down, and also pay the workhouse a visit and take it down.
Cross-examined.— I did not see either Isaac Charles, or John Lewis.
I do not believe they were there.
I believe they were not.
James Lewis.– I am the parish clerk of Abernant.
I have been so 14 years.
I attended Divine service there on .
It is the custom after service is over to cry anything that is lost, or give any public notice.
I cried a mare that was lost, on that day.
I was then desired by John Harries to give notice to parishioners to come to Carmarthen next day; whoever stayed at home would do so at their peril.
I did not refuse to cry it, but I told him I had rather not.
He said there was no harm in it.
After I had made the proclamation, I heard Capt. Evans advise the people not to go.
Late in the evening, I heard a conversation between Capt. Evans and John Harries.
Cross-examined.— Isaac Charles and John Lewis were not at my church on that day.
Capt. Lewis Evans was called on.
Thomas Evans, fanner, of Placeparke, and Thomas Davies, of Bwlchnewydd, Newchurch parish, farm servant, confirmed the preceding statements.
John Rae Evans, master of the Carmarthen Workhouse.— On , my attention was attracted to a parcel of people idling and sitting about the hedge outside.
Perhaps 100 of them.
I had heard rumours that people from the country were to come to the workhouse that day.
Most were country; people about an equal number of women and men.
The gates were closed.
I afterwards saw a large body of people coming up.
We are on an elevation, and had a view of them.
Those in front were on foot, those behind on horseback.
There were hundreds on foot.
I saw musical instruments with them.
I did not hear any music.
They knocked and kicked at the door, and demanded admittance.
I was inside and can’t say who demanded admittance.
Mr. Evans of Placeparke begged me to admit him.
He advised me to open the door, otherwise it would be worse for me.
I said if they were respectable men I would admit them, but not such a rabble.
There was a great noise outside, and the knocking continued.
At last I told the porter to open the gate.
I was afraid, they were so numerous.
The mob rushed in.
I retreated to the dining-hall, they followed me.
The hall was full; some jumped on the table, others thumped the table with sticks.
I attempted to reason with them.
They said they wanted all the paupers out.
They said there was no further need of my services, nor the workhouse.
They demanded the keys of the men’s and women’s yard.
I refused to give them up, and they were wrenched out of my hand.
They got into the two yards.
I was requested to go to the workhouse, some of the pauper children were crying.
The mob wanted them to go out, they were frightened, and did not like to go out.
I heard the cry “the soldiers are coming.”
The room was soon emptied then.
One man struck me, it was Job Evans.
It was in the school-room.
I saw John Harries in the front of the house.
I did not see those in front of the house till they had been captured.
The back of the board-room was broken open.
I knew Isaac Charles perfectly well before this.
He came into the hall with the rest.
He jumped about, waved his hand, and was active amongst them.
He had no stick.
They cried “Hurrah!”
[Capt. Evans?]
— I am a magistrate for this county.
I was in Abernant church on .
[?]
I was in the church when it was cried, and I went [out to ask?] the crier what it was about.
He told me.
I [advised them?] not to go.
I addressed them in Welsh.
I [heard that?]
Harris and Thomas had been fined.
I sent for them and advised them to meet me at Cilwen that evening.
They did not come there.
I went out and afterwards met them.
I cannot be positive that Harris came, but Thomas did.
I went by the Plough and Harrow on my way to Carmarthen.
I saw Harris there; It was between 7 and 8. I desired Harris to come to town and get some of the magistrates to come and dissuade the people from coming.
I also dissuaded him and asked him not to come, and use his influence with them.
Harris said that if I spoke to Mr. Webb, a magistrate very much respected in town and country, and prevailed on him to come out, it might have great effect in preventing them from coming.
I met the band before I entered the town, and I told them the people were not coming, so as to persuade them not to come.
They said they were paid for coming and they would come.
I then came on to town.
I went out of town again and met them half a mile from the Plough and Harrow.
There was an immense crowd.
I did not distinguish Harris then.
I endeavoured to dissuade them from coming to town.
Mr. J.Ll.
Davies did so also.
They said that their motive was to go to tell the magistrates their grievances and not to do any harm.
A great many did stop with us, but the great body went on.
We said idle fellows in town would get them into mischief.
James Morse, Stamp Distributor.— On , I overtook a cavalcade of horsemen and footmen moving down King-street.
They came through Guildhall-square, and went towards the workhouse.
The foot had entered the workhouse before I got up.
I had got ahead of the horsemen.
There were from 300 to 500 horsemen, and from 1,500 to 1,800 on foot.
I got into the workhouse between two horsemen.
I saw the master, he appeared frightened.
I spoke to the mob and exhorted them to go home and petition parliament.
My address gave them satisfaction, as I touched upon the Educational bill — being dissenters they listened to me, and gave me three cheers.
I was interrupted by a man upsetting the iron bedsteads.
I spoke to him and he doubled his fists and said “come on.”
He did not strike me.
He desisted from upsetting the beds.
I afterwards gave him into custody.
I do not know his name.
I did not see either Charles or John there.
Eliza Evans— I am the matron of the union workhouse I was at the kitchen door when they came in.
A man said he would injure me if I would not give the key of the pantry.
He said he would kill me.
I refused the keys.
Another man held his fist in my face.
He said I had locked the children in the pantry.
There was a great deal of noise.
The house seemed coming down.
The bed-clothes were thrown out through the windows.
The children were about me crying, and praying the mob not to kill their mistress.
They said they would provide a place for them.
All of a sudden they all disappeared.
I then saw the military.
One board up stairs was forced up; it was sound before.
Daniel Levy, John Pugh, Thomas Hughes and others were examined.
The jury, after retiring for a short time, found the whole of the prisoners guilty, and sentence was deferred.
The Talog Rioters.
John Jones, Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis[,] Jonathan Lewis, David Davies, and David Lewis, were charged with having committed a riot and assault at Tallog, in the parish of Abernant, on .
Mr. Chilton opened the pleadings, and stated that the prisoners were charged with having tumultuously assembled at the village of Tallog, and obstructed the levying of a distress upon the goods of John Harris, for non-payment of tolls at Water-street gate.
That the goods distrained upon were rescued by the prisoners, and the constables assaulted by the mob.
That Jonathan Jones had a hatchet with him, Jonathan Lewis carried a gun, and David Davies was loud in his abuse.
His lordship having summed up the evidence, the jury acquitted the prisoner John Jones, but Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis, Jonathan Lewis, David Davies, and David Lewis, were found guilty, and ordered to be in attendance to receive judgment when called for.
The court then commenced the following case:— Thomas Lewis and Thomas Morgan were then indicted on the charge of having destroyed the turnpike gate and toll-house at Dolauhirion, near the town of Llandovery.
The court adjourned.
There was some Rebeccaite mopping-up to be done at the Spring Assizes in Carmarthenshire, as was reported in the Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser (excerpts):
John Jones, Thomas Hughes, and Benjamin Jones, were then indicted on the charge of having destroyed Pontarllechau gate and toll-house, near Llangadock, on .
His lordship, after the examination of several witnesses, summed up; after which the jury retired to consider their verdict.
In a short time they returned, and delivered a verdict of “Guilty” against the three defendants.
They were ordered to be detained in custody.
The ruling class in Wales seem to have come to the conclusion by that the worst of the Rebecca Riots were behind them and now the mopping up and self-congratulations could begin.
From the Cambrian:
At a Meeting of the Inhabitants of Llanelly and its Neighbourhood, held on , It was unanimously Resolved, To present William Chambers, Esq., Jun., with a Piece of Plate, as a lasting Testimonial, that his intrepid conduct during the whole of the Rebecca Riots, — his often-expressed anxiety, and public offer to use his utmost endeavours and influence in getting redressed the great Toll grievance of the country by every lawful means, — and subsequently his fearless devotion as a Magistrate in assisting to put down a bold but insane attempt to destroy the barriers of Law and Social Order, involving as they do in their consequences, personal security, house and home, life, and the sacredness of private property, — are duly appreciated by his Friends, his Neighbours, and his Townsmen; and it is hoped and expected, that many Country Gentlemen, participating in the like feeling, will honour the Subscription List with their names, and the cause with their support.
Subscriptions Received By
Messrs. Morris and Sons, Bankers, Carmarthen,
〃 Wilkins and Co., 〃 Llanelly,
J.J. Weir, Esq. 〃 Swansea,
John Rowland, Esq. 〃 Neath.
This was also thought worthy of editorial comment in the edition:
It will be seen, on reference to our advertising columns, that the inhabitants of Llanelly and its neighbourhood resolved, at a meeting held in that town on , to present Wm. Chambers, jun., Esq., with a piece of plate, as a testimonial of his “intrepid conduct during the whole of the Rebecca riots,” and “for his fearless devotion as a Magistrate in assisting to put down a bold but insane attempt to destroy the barriers of law and social order.”
We are satisfied, that no gentleman exerted himself more effectively than Mr. Chambers, in the suppression of these unlawful outbreaks, and we, therefore, trust, the testimonial will be such as to prove to the respected gentleman that his conduct is fully appreciated, no only by his neighbours, but by every gentleman participating in the like sentiment.
This was followed, in the issue, by a letter-to-the-editor that pushed the brown-nosing further:
To the Editor of The Cambrian.
Sir, — Observing in your last paper an advertisement, announcing a public meeting of the inhabitants of Llanelly and its neighbourhood, at which it was unanimously resolved to present William Chambers, Esq., jun., of that town, with a piece of plate, in acknowledgment of his gallant and valuable services during the Rebecca riots, I beg to express my cordial concurrence in the sense of them thus evinced, as well as in the mode proposed to signify the public appreciation of them to the above gentleman, and which I think highly creditable to the good feeling and good taste of the people of Llanelly.
I however regret, that the other magistrates of the district were not included in the tribute to be given, as I understand they all (or nearly all) came forward, and acted with zeal and firmness, as far as circumstances required, and in so doing, exposed themselves to inconvenience, and equally to threats of assassination.
This omission is, perhaps, still not too late to be remedied.
The oversight, however, will not prevent my joining in the testimonial to one of their number, and if you, or one of your readers, would do me the favour to inform me to whom I am to forward my subscription (the advertisement, unfortunately, not giving the names of the committee, or of any gentlemen with whom I could communicate), I, as one of the country gentry referred to, should feel much obliged.
[The reference sought by our Correspondent, he will find supplied in our present number.]
I am, sir, your obedient servant, Aequitas. Swansea, .
From the Cambrian:
Rhayader. — Rebecca Again.
Lady Rebecca, and about 200 of her daughters, assembled at Llangereig, when they soon demolished the turnpike gate.
This is one of four payable within a distance of about twelve miles, on the road from Rhayader to Aberystwith.
At two of these gates the traveller pays 8d. for a horse and gig.
All those obnoxious gates have been before taken down by Rebecca, and it is to be hoped the authorities will order two of them to be removed, as two pay gates would be quite enough within twelve miles, particularly when it is considered that the poor farmers maintain the road by rates, without any aid from the tolls.
— Silurian.
“Rebecca” by this time had become a sort of catch-all license for mayhem, so it’s difficult to determine whether the things described below were really the work of bona fide Rebeccaites.
From the Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser:
Incendiarism.
Ten or a dozen stacks have been destroyed by fire, on the farm of Mr. Prime, about seven miles from Leicester.
There is great reason for supposing it to be the work of an incendiary.
— An act of incendiarism has been perpetrated on the property of the Rev. H. Tollemache, at Harrington, Northamptonshire.
A reward of £100 has been offered for the offenders’ apprehension.
— Property to the amount of £250 has been destroyed in the vicinity of Bristol.
— A wheat rick belonging to Mr. Thomas Cave, of Lye court, Hereford, has been willfully destroyed.
— In Essex, on the 29th instant, three fires broke out simultaneously.
— A reverend gentleman, residing about six miles from Hereford, has received a threatening letter, signed, “Rebecca,” communicating the menacing intelligence that nine incendiary fires will take place in his parish and neighbourhood within a month.
Shortly afterwards a fire broke out in the neighbourhood, and much property was destroyed
The Pembrokeshire Spring Assizes started on , and a number of Rebeccaite cases were on the agenda. In
an address to the Grand Jury, “His Lordship” (the judge? the prosecutor?)
explained:
…although there were a great number of cases in the calendar, it was probable
that, with regard to a considerable portion of them, the jury would not be at
all troubled. The offences to which he referred were those arising out of the
late disturbed state of some parts of the county. He was glad to see that,
although there were a great many of that kind, yet there were none of a very
recent date, and he was therefore induced to believe that peace and
tranquillity were again restored.
The calendar for the county contains the names of thirty-nine prisoners,
twenty-three of whom are charged with being concerned in the Rebecca Riots
that took place last Summer in the neighbourhood of Fishguard. These cases
were respited from the late Winter Assize to the present, but it is now
understood that no further proceedings are to be taken in them, and that the
prisoners will, before the close of the sittings, be discharged from their
recognizances.
The calendar for the town [of Haverfordwest] contains the names of two persons
only, who are charged with a riot at the Prendergast Toll-gate, in
. A true bill was to-day found
against them.
The Pembrokeshire Spring Assizes sat on to begin trying some Rebeccaite cases.
Rebecca Trials.
The first case was one arising out of the late Rebecca riots, and excited a good deal of interest in the town [Haverfordwest]; it was that of the Queen against William [sic, actually Joseph] Walters and David Vaughan, for a riot and unlawfully [sic] assembly at Prendergast turnpike-gate, on .
Messrs.
Chilton, Q.C., Evans, Q.C., V. Williams, and Hall, were Counsel for the Crown, and Mr. Nicholl Carne for the defendants.
Mr. Chilton stated the case to the jury, and called the following witnesses for the prosecution:–
John Davies, shoemaker, examined:– I was a constable in .
On I went to the Three Corner Piece, on the Fishguard road.
Saw four or five men standing before the door.
It was then .
There was nothing particular in their appearance.
I went on further, and met from twenty to thirty people.
I said good night to them.
Some of them had sprays of trees about their hats.
I went on, and near Treffgarne bridge I met a third party.
They also had branches of trees about their heads.
When I met the second party, one of them said, I must come to join Becca, or would I join Becca?
I was rather afraid on that occasion.
I then returned, and turned out of the road at Treffgarne bridge, intending to come back by the river because I was afraid.
I cannot say whether the faces of any of them were blackened.
I missed my way in coming back through the fields, and was on that account a little longer before I reached Haverfordwest.
As soon as I got there I went to the Townhall to the Magistrates.
When I was in the fields I heard the report of two guns.
Cross-examined by Mr. Carne:– None of the people I met did anything to frighten me.
I saw no spray in the hats of the first party.
I cannot say how many of the second party had sprays in their hats, nor of the third party either.
Neither of them did or said anything to frighten me.
I saw no offensive weapon in their hands.
George Thomas examined:— I am apprentice to John James, blacksmith, of Tangiers, that is about a mile and a half from this town.
I remember after I had gone to bed on some persons coming to the door.
I got up and saw some persons at the door.
They were on foot, but one was on horseback.
I think there were more than twenty.
One of them spoke to me, and said they wanted to go to the shop.
I did not observe the faces of any of them.
I think the man on horseback had his face blackened.
I said I had not got the key of the shop.
They then rose the door off the hinges, and took a sledge and cliff from the shop, and went away.
I followed them as far as Simon Evans’s house, which is on the road to Crow’s Nest and Haverfordwest.
I then returned home.
Before I reached home I heard a gun go off.
About nine or ten people then passed me.
I saw a small stick in the hand of one of them.
I could not see their faces, as some of them had something white about their heads.
Cross-examined by Mr. Nicholl Carne:– I thought the gun was discharged about Prendergast.
John James, blacksmith, Tangiers, examined:– Is master of last witness.
I was in this town on .
When I got to Simon Evans’s house, I observed some person coming against me.
There might have been one hundred persons there.
About twenty were on horseback.
The horses were first, and the foot people afterwards.
They kept the middle of the road.
I did not see anything on their shoulders, as it was very dark.
They said nothing to me.
I then went back towards Haverfordwest, as far as Captain James’s house, that is about half a mile from this town.
When I got there I heard a gun go off in the direction of Prendergast gate.
Shortly after I heard the sound of persons coming towards me on horseback and foot.
I went into Captain James’s yard, and saw a number of persons going up, away from Haverfordwest.
Some were running, and others walking.
There were a good many persons.
I then went home.
My boy told me something, in consequence of which I went into my shop, and missed a sledge hammer and a cliff.
The articles now produced are the ones I missed.
Examined by Mr. Carne:— I first met the people about a mile from Haverfordwest.
It was .
They were perfectly quiet.
I was not at all frightened.
Re-examined by Mr. Chilton:– It was too dark for me to see whether they were disguised.
Mr. Joseph Potter, jun., examined:— I am the son of Mr. Potter, who was Mayor of this town .
I accompanied my father to Prendergast Gate on the night of the disturbance, I and Williams, the policeman, went on as far as Crow’s Nest.
When there, I heard a body of horse galloping from the Fishguard road.
I returned towards the gate.
The noise then ceased, and we returned to Colby Scott, and saw some men, and heard them talk.
I then retired, and arrived at the gate first, before the men came up.
The first thing I saw was a horse’s head over the gate, near my face.
The man on horseback presented a gun.
He appeared to have some shawl over his head.
He said forward more than once.
I then saw Williams rush at him and seize the gun.
They struggled for some time, during which the horse turned round, and the gun went off.
The man on the horse then galloped away.
I then saw a scuffle a little way up, and found that my brother-in-law, Llewellin, had secured the prisoner, Walters.
While there, I saw the flash of a gun, but heard no report.
All the men appeared to be disguised, with branches in their hats, and had their faces blackened.
The road was quite full of men.
They had sticks in their hands.
They all ran away when the man on horseback got off.
The Prendergast gate was at that time within the borough.
Examined by Mr. Carne:– I saw no more than one horse that night.
The people made no noise — the men were jumping about.
The man at the gate on horseback said “forward” more than once, and said “off, off,” afterwards.
He sloped the gun upwards, towards the sky.
I had never seen the man Llewellin secured before that night.
I did not notice him among the number at the gate.
The men had large crooked sticks in their hands.
Thirty or forty had sticks.
William Williams examined by Mr. Evans:– I am a police constable of this town, and accompanied Mr. Potter to the gate in .
Went up the road, and heard people talking and horses galloping.
We then returned towards the gate.
The noise stopped, on which we went on again.
The noise was again resumed, and followed us towards the gate.
I stood on the right hand side of the gate.
The man on horseback said “forward, forward.”
He had a gun in his hand.
He went up to the gate.
I was then three or four yards from him.
He had a long beard, and something white coming down over his head and shoulders.
I went towards him.
He presented the gun at me.
He then looked round, to see if his men were coming on, when I caught hold of the gun, and struggled with him.
The horse then turned, and the gun went off towards Crow’s Nest.
I got the gun, and the man galloped off.
This is the gun I took [gun produced]; one of the barrels was discharged, the other was capped and cocked.
I afterwards saw Mr. Phillips take off the barrel and remove the charge — it was a leaden ball and powder.
The men had sticks and other things with them.
I afterwards went beyond the gate, and saw a horse there.
He appeared to be hurt in the thigh, and died shortly afterwards.
I produce the ball taken out of the thigh.
That was not the horse the man was on.
Wm. Llewellin examined:— I am a brother-in-law to Mr. Potter, jun. I went up after the Mayor, on , to Prendergast gate.
I saw a man come up to the gate on horseback.
I heard him cry out, “forward, forward.”
There were people on each side of him.
I saw a gun with him, and a gun with another man.
The faces of both men were blackened, and they had branches of trees in their hats.
Most of them were armed with large bludgeons.
The demeanour and appearance of the men were such as to inspire terror in a person of ordinary courage.
I saw a scuffle between Williams and a man on horseback.
I saw Williams secure the gun.
As soon as the man was disarmed he cried “off, off.”
I ran after them, and got close to the prisoner, Walters.
He held a gun in his right hand.
I walked alongside of Walters for 20 or 30 yards, and was then surrounded by persons in disguise.
Wallers either passed the gun to another, or threw it away.
I saw the constable, Adams, and then spoke to Wallers, and asked him what he wanted there.
He said he was not one of the party.
I then asked him what he wanted with a gun.
He denied having had one.
I then seized him, and he then called out for assistance.
I brought him to town.
On going down the hill, I told him that it was of no use I for him to deny the gun, as I had seen it with him.
He said it was not his gun, but had been given him while the mob stopped at Colby Scott.
I took him to the Hall, where he was searched.
Some gunpowder was found near his feet — it was made up in the form of a cartridge, and his face was blackened.
I first saw him on the Colby Scott side.
He was about ten yards from the gate then.
Examined by Mr. Nicholl Carne:— The powder was found on the floor of the Hall.
I met Walters a minute or two after the man on horseback had left; he was looking towards the gate.
John Blethyn, constable, examined:— Went to Prendergast gate on .
Saw the man coming on horseback.
I was leaning against the gate post.
After he had retired I followed.
About 100 yards up I found those sticks.
[Sticks produced.]
Thomas Adams, constable, examined:– I went to the Prendergast gate, and saw the scuffle between Williams and the man who came to the gate.
He was surrounded by a great number of persons.
I saw the prisoner, David Vaughan, about thirty or forty yards above the gate, near Philip White’s house.
James Davies, the constable, was scuffling with Vaughan.
I heard somebody say “Here’s Becca.”
I laid hold of Vaughan, and secured him.
Vaughan had on an old hat with a handkerchief tying it down.
His face was blackened.
Cross-examined by Mr. Carne:– I never saw Vaughan nearer the gate than within thirty or forty yards that night.
He was then scuffling with Davies.
I observed no branches on the heads of the people nor any disguise.
I heard no riot or disturbance.
James Davies, constable, examined:— Was at the Prendergast gate on .
After the man on horseback had rode away, I went towards Colby Scott.
I saw a person attempting to go over a hedge about forty yards up.
It was David Vaughan.
I laid hold of him.
He had on a round jacket and an old hat.
I gave him into the custody of Garrett, the policeman.
I did not see his face.
Thomas Roch Garrett, policeman, examined:– Was at the Prendergast gate on .
Received the prisoner Vaughan into my custody.
I searched him.
I found a burnt cork and some gunpowder on Walters.
I saw Walters drop the powder on the ground.
Vaughan’s face was blackened.
Thomas Nash Phillips, constable, examined by Mr. Hall:— I was at the gate on .
I saw the constable Williams there.
He gave me a gun in the Magistrates room.
I took the barrel off, and found a cartridge.
It was composed of gunpowder and a ball.
I now produce it.
I produce also a percussion cap, which I took off the nipple of the loaded barrel.
Thomas Carter examined:— I was near the Prendergast gate .
I found a blacksmith’s cliff about sixty yards above the gate.
Wm. Morgan deposed to finding a sledge-hammer near the gate, on .
Elisabeth Llewellyn examined:— I live with my mother, at the Corner Piece public-house, which is four miles from here.
On , a number of persons came to the house, some were on horseback and others on foot — perhaps there were 20 there.
I cannot say how much ale they drank.
I am sure I did not receive 20s. for it — the money was given to my mother.
Some of their faces had a chance black spot on them.
I was going to the door with a light, to receive the money, and a gentleman on horseback told me to go back with the candle — he spoke very good English.
Some of the people wore caps and turbans.
Men do not commonly wear turbans in that part of the country.
[The Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser on the other hand renders this testimony as: “I have seen men in this country wear such caps at ten o’clock at night; such things are common in the country… By turbans I mean worsted caps. They are common in that part of the country.”]
Margaret Llewellyn corroborated the evidence of the last witness.
Mr. Nicholl Carne then addressed the Jury for the defendants, in an able speech.
He contended that there was no evidence of a riot, or any disturbance of the public peace, — that it was not shewn that either of the defendants belonged to the party who came up to the gate, — that no breach of the peace was committed by anybody, until Williams, the policeman, jumped at the man on horseback, — that it did not appear what the intentions of the party at all were, — and that it would not, therefore, be right to convict the prisoners on suspicion of being concerned in riot, in the absence of reasonable evidence.
The learned Counsel went through the whole of the evidence adduced for the prosecution, and submitted that it was not sufficient to warrant the Jury in convicting the prisoners.
His Lordship then summed up, and directed the Jury that before they convicted the defendants, they must be satisfied, first, that there was a riot, or unlawful assembly; and, secondly, that the prisoners were present acting therein, or aiding the real actors.
The Jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict against both defendants, of “Guilty of an Unlawful Assembly.”
Sentence deferred till .
…
The Rebecca Rioters.
Mr. Vaughan Williams moved that the recognizances of the prisoners, from No. 2 to No. 27 on the calendar, be discharged.
In these cases the prisoners were held to bail for having been concerned in the riotous proceedings at Fishguard, in , the Crown proceeding no further in them.
The motion was granted.
Reg.
v. Walters and Vaughan.
— These defendants were convicted of being present at an unlawful assembly at the Prendergast gate.
— His Lordship now sentenced them to Twelve months’ imprisonment each.
James Davies was indicted for stealing a sovereign from on Elinor Williams.
It appears that the prosecutrix, who is a small householder, in this county,
had distrained on the prisoner’s goods for arrears of rent due to her; but her
ladyship “Rebecca” interfered, and took the goods all back. The prosecutrix
paid the prisoner the sovereign to prevent a threat being put into execution,
to the effect that “Rebecca” intended burning her property, and for which the
prisoner was now indicted. After the prisoner had taken the sovereign, he
promised the prosecutrix that he would give notice at the church door that she
had paid it.
His lordship very clearly explained the law of robbery by using threats. The
jury found the prisoner “Not guilty.”
Counsel for the prosecution, Messrs. Chilton,
Q.C., and E.V.
Williams, and attorney, Mr. Scandrell, Lampeter; and for the prisoner, Mr.
Hall, and attorney, Mr. B. Evans, Newcastle-Emlyn.
The Borough Calendar contains the names of nine prisoners, seven or eight of whom are charged with offences connected with the late riot at the Workhouse, and other offenced arising out of the recent disturbances.
There are twenty-two names on the County Calendar, the majority of whom are charged with riots, assaults, and depredations connected with Rebeccaism.
True bills against several of these prisoners were found at the last Assizes.
Several respectable farmers and others are implicated in some of the charges; from their station in society, their cases naturally cause considerable excitement and apprehension as to the result of the trials.
In four cases the defendants are Queen’s Bench traversers, having been at the last Assized removed by certiorari.
They are to be tried by Special Juries, and are precisely in the same position as Mr. O’Connell and the other traversers at the late Dublin trials.
The Workhouse Riot
Before a Special Jury. — John Harris, aged 50, miller, David Thomas, 28, farmer, David Williams, 27, weaver, Job Evans, 49, farmer, Isaac Charles, 19, tailor, and John Lewis, 40, fisherman, were charged in a lengthy indictment, containing several counts, with having, on , unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled at the Carmarthen Workhouse to the disturbance of the peace of our sovereign lady the Queen, her Crown and dignity.
There were also counts in this indictment charging several of the defendants with having committed assaults on different parties.
True bills had been found at the last Assizes, and the defendants had then put in pleas of Not Guilty.
Messrs.
Chilton, Q.C., Evans, Q.C., and E.V. Williams, were Counsel for the Crown.
Mr. Lloyd Hall defended the two last-named prisoners.
— The others were undefended by Counsel.
Mr. V. Williams opened the pleadings by stating the nature of the charge.
Mr. Chilton, Q.C., then addressed the jury for the Crown.
He had the honour to appear before them to conduct the prosecution on the part of the Government.
It was an honour which devolved upon him from the accidental circumstance of seniority, and he assured them it was to him an honour attended with no little anxiety.
To himself it gave no little pain, because that, during his long intercourse with the people of this part of the country, he had experienced nothing but kindness and courtesy from persons of all ranks and conditions of life.
For that reason, he repeated, it pained him exceedingly that the duty had been imposed upon him of substantiating charges of disregard of the law against a large body of people whom hitherto it had been his (Mr. C’s) part and boast to point out as being the most peaceable people, the most obedient to the laws, within the realm.
If the gentlemen of the special jury would glance over the calendars of that county during past years, and compare them with those of other counties, they would agree with him that it had been comparatively free from crime.
It also gave him pain to appear before them after so many trials which had been conducted by the Attorney-General, whose temperate conduct, and whose firm and vigorous, yet forgiving spirit he (Mr. C.), with his numerous infirmities, could not expect to emulate; though he hoped that in no portion of his address would he show any disposition to strain the law against the defendants.
His sympathies had always been enlisted in favour of the people.
It would be his duty to call evidence before them, and if, after they had heard and weighed it, they should find anything which would justify them in returning a verdict of acquittal as to all or any of the defendants, no person could feel more rejoiced at that than himself.
He had that moment been informed that only two of the defendants were defended by Counsel, but he (Mr. C.) was confident that would not operate prejudicially to the other prisoners, as they (the jury) would be their Counsel, and his Lordship would be their Counsel, and see that they should not be convicted unless the charges were well substantiated, and that they should be quite as well guarded as Mr. Hall, with all his zeal, would guard the interests of his client.
To gentlemen of their experience it was unnecessary for him to dwell upon the various points of law which would arise; he would leave that to his Lordship.
In some counts the prisoners were charged with a riot — in others with assaults, but all would be guilty of the acts committed by each of them, if it would be satisfactorily proved that they had assembled together for one common purpose.
He would now give them an outline of the case, the details of which will be given in evidence.
He (Mr. C.) charged the defendant John Harris with being a ringleader, or at least a very active promoter of the riot in question.
He was a miller, residing in the parish of Abernant, in that county.
This riot was unquestionably more or less connected with the disturbances which had arisen from the supposition that tolls had been illegally exacted.
It would appear that the defendant Harris had refused to pay tolls at Water-street gate, in that town, and the consequence was that be was fined, and a distress warrant was issued against his goods.
Considerable opposition was made to levying the fine, and a riot ensued, which he would merely refer to, as it was the subject of another prosecution.
In that riot, which occurred on , several of the defendants took part, and threats were then held out by the mob that they would destroy Water-street gate and the Workhouse.
On , Harris called at the house of Capt. Davies, one of the magistrates who had signed the distress warrant, and told him that unless the money which had been paid were returned, he would he visited on .
He also left a letter with Mr Davies, signed by himself, and purporting to have been signed by another party.
Mr. Chilton here read the letter, which was signed, “John Harris,” “Thomas Thomas,” to the effect, that as they had been illegally fined, they give notice that, if the money was to be returned, was the time so to do.
On , as would be proved, the Parish Clerk of Abernant had been compelled to make a kind of proclamation to the parishioners to assemble at Carmarthen on , or if any persons remained away, they would do so at their peril.
A Magistrate happened to be present, and he endeavoured to dissuade the people from listening to the proclamation, and he sent for Harris, and tried to prevent him from carrying his purposes into effect; but it would be shown that Harris continued very active in persuading the people to assemble: the farmers on horses, and their sons and servants on foot; and that they would remain away at their peril.
On , they accordingly assembled at the Plough and Harrow, which was four miles from Carmarthen.
The assembly was a very large one, and they marched through Trevaughan village, and reached the town of Carmarthen , at which time they amounted to some thousands.
They marched into the town, through the Water-street gate, in procession — the footmen being in the van, and the horsemen in the rear, bearing banners with various inscriptions on them.
Having proceeded through several streets, they went towards the workhouse.
He would show the jury that the appearance of the mob was so alarming that nearly all the shops in Carmarthen were closed.
It would also appear that the master of the workhouse had observed about a hundred idle people loitering about the workhouse until the procession arrived, and admission was then demanded in the most intimidating manner.
One individual, who had been at the Plough and Harrow in the morning, seeing the multitude at the door, suggested to the master that, if he did not open the door, he feared bad consequences would ensue.
The master then admitted the mob.
They went into the hall.
Their acts and general conduct while in the workhouse would be described by the different witnesses who would be examined.
Shortly after they had entered, a gentleman, named Morse, took the opportunity of addressing them.
They attended to him and that, happily, afforded time for the arrival of the military — a small body of the Fourth Light Dragoons, who were nearly worn out by fatigue consequent upon their exertion in travelling.
Immediately on the appearance of the military, the mob dispersed.
Many of those actually engaged in the riot made their retreat, leaving their horses in the yard of the workhouse.
That circumstance in the riot he thought was not unimportant, because it afforded a clue to what the ultimate object might be had they not been interrupted.
“Conscience made cowards of all,” for he could not accuse the Welsh of such cowardice had they not been conscious that they were engaged in a bad cause.
However, when the jury would take into consideration the time and circumstance of the assemblage, and the general character of their acts, it would be for them, under the direction of the Learned Judge, to say whether the defendants were legally justified in such a conduct or not.
— The following witnesses were then called and examined:—
Captain David Davies examined by Mr. Evans.
Q.C.:— I am a Magistrate for this county.
Harris, the defendant, called on me on , and delivered me this letter.
[The letter was put in and read — the substance of it is given in the Learned Counsel’s opening address.]
The defendant added that if the money were not paid on , it would be demanded on .
I was in the town on with the other Magistrates.
I saw a crowd of about 350 people on horseback, and others on foot.
They were more than a thousand.
I remained in the Townhall.
They passed the hall.
The shops were closed.
Those on foot were agricultural servants.
I was not alarmed.
David Evans, road-surveyor, examined by Mr. V. Willams: On I was sworn in a special constable.
On I assisted the police to levy a distress on the goods of Harris, the miller.
It was a distress for a fine imposed for non-payment of toll.
Our distraint was resisted by a mob who created a great riot.
The mob then said that they would destroy the Water-street gate, and pay the workhouse a visit, and take it down.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hall:— I do not think Isaac Charles or John Lewis were present at the Talog meeting.
They were not there.
Re-examined by Mr. Chilton:— There were about 500 persons present.
I could
not positively ascertain that those persons were not there.
I cannot mention a
fiftieth part of those who were present.
James Lewis examined by Mr. Chilton, Q.C.:— Is the parish clerk of Abernant.
I attended service on .
It is the custom after service to give public notice of any meeting, or of anything lost.
I cried the loss of a mare on that day.
After that, John Harris, the miller, Talog, desired me to make another proclamation.
It was a notice to the parishioners to come to town next day, and whoever remained home would do so at their peril.
I objected to crying it, but said I preferred having a written notice on the door.
Having made the proclamation I heard Captain Evans advising the people not to go.
That evening I heard a conversation between Harris and Capt. Evans.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hall:— I do not know whether Isaac Charles and John Lewis were present, at the Church, on that occasion.
Capt. Evans, Pantykendy, was called on his subpoena, but was not present.
Thomas Evans, Plasyparke, examined by Mr. Evans Q.C.:— Is a farmer, who lived at Plasyparke.
On , he was in this town.
Knows John Harris, the defendant; saw him that day in Carmarthen.
Harris asked witness, “If he would accompany Becca and her children to town on ?”
Witness said he would not.
Harris said (continued witness), I had better go, or Becca would destroy all I had.
I said I would not go, but send my servant.
He said, that was not Becca’s request — that every farmer must go on horseback, and his sons and servants on foot.
I mentioned to Capt. Evans what had taken place; I also spoke to the Rev. Mr. Evans.
That was on , before I left Carmarthen.
On , I went to the Plough and Harrow, where Harris told me they were to meet; that is a mile and a half from my house.
It was nine in the morning when I went.
There were a number of people there — about fifteen to eighteen hundred might be present.
I saw the defendant Harris there.
I did not stay there five minute, but went on business to Carmarthen.
I crossed the fields for part of my way.
I was in Carmarthen about two hours before the crowd.
I saw the crowd coming down by Darkgate, and passing the Hall.
I heard it talked in the country that it was the intention of the mob to visit the Workhouse.
I went there and saw some people kicking the door.
I did not see any of the people I had seen in the morning there.
I went to the door, and spoke to the Governor.
I thought they were inclined to break the door, and told him he had better open it.
I heard the Parish Clerk making a proclamation on , at Abernant.
I heard Capt. Evans endeavouring to persuade the people not to go to town.
I saw a written notice on the Church-door of Merthyr, which is the adjoining parish.
Cross-examined:— I fell some alarm in consequence of the threats used about the country — the threats that people’s goods, would be burned, &c.
Re-examined:— I felt alarm at the time I spoke to the Governor of the Workhouse.
Thomas Davies, a labourer, living in an adjoining parish to Abernant, proved having given notice in his parish to the people to meet at the Plough and Harrow.
The notice was, that all who had horses were to ride, and others to come on foot.
I also had notice, that all who remained home did so at their peril.
Joshua Hughes gave the order.
John Ray Evans, Master of the Workhouse, examined by Mr. Chilton:— On , my attention was attracted by seeing about a hundred people about the hedge, opposite the Workhouse, idling; the majority were country people.
There was about an equal number of women and men.
About one o’clock I saw a large body of people assembling; those in front were on foot, and others on horses.
There were at all events hundreds on foot.
I saw musical instruments with them.
When they came to the Workhouse, I heard them knock and kick the door, and demand admittance.
Mr. Evans, Plasyparke, requested me to admit them, and afterwards advised me to let them in.
I at first refused, but becoming alarmed, I requested the porter to open the gate.
The mob rushed in; a portion followed me to the dining-hall — the numbers filled the hall.
Many had sticks in their hands, others beat the table, others said they would turn the paupers out — that no workhouse was required, and that my services could be dispensed with.
I had two keys in my hands — those of the men’s wards and women’s wards; these were wrenched from my hand.
The mob wished the children to go out of the school-room — the children cried.
About this time an alarm of the soldiers coming was heard; all the mob disappeared.
A man named Job Evans struck me with a stick when in the room.
I know the defendant defendant John Harris; I saw him afterwards in front of the house.
The lock of the board-room was broken open.
I know Isaac Charles well; he was one of those who came into the hall.
I did not observe a stick in his hand.
Cross-examined:— I begged of them to desist.
The defendant Charles cried out “Hurrah.”
I do not think he was cheering me.
Capt. Evans examined by Mr. Evans:— I live at Pantykendy, and am a County Magistrate.
I was at Abernant Church on .
I heard of the notice given the people.
I endeavoured to dissuade the people from going to town.
I heard that John Harries and Thomas Thomas had been active.
I sent for them to meet me at the Vicar’s house.
They did not then come, but I subsequently met them.
I went by the Plough-and-Harrow on my way to town on .
I saw Harris there.
There were not many people there then, as it was very early.
I requested Harris to come to town to talk to the Magistrates, and endeavoured to get him to dissuade the people.
Harris said, that if I spoke to Mr. Webb, and if he would come out, it might have some effect in dissuading the people.
I afterwards addressed the people, and endeavoured to persuade the Band I met on the road to go back, by telling them the people would not come to town.
The Band said they were paid for their services.
I then went to Carmarthen, and called at Mr. Webb’s — could not see him.
I then returned homewards, and met the crowd, with the Band at their head — endeavoured to persuade them to return.
They said that they only wished to state their grievances.
I said that many idle fellows in town would get them into mischief.
Many remained with me and another Magistrate.
Mr. James Morse examined:— I am a distributor of stamps, residing in this town.
I overtook a large crowd in King-street, on the day in question.
The foot part of the procession had reached the workhouse before I overtook them.
There might have been three to five hundred horses there, and about eighteen hundred people on foot.
I went into the workhouse yard, and met the Master, who appeared to be very much frightened.
I addressed the crowd from one of the windows.
I endeavoured to persuade them to return, and make known their grievances to Parliament.
My address had the desired effect.
Knowing them to be principally Dissenters, I touched on the Education Bill.
They gave me three cheers.
My address was interrupted by a man in the room upsetting the iron bedsteads.
On my requesting him to desist, he put himself in a fighting attitude.
He was subsequently taken into custody.
I do not remember his name.
Mrs. Sarah Evans, matron of the workhouse, examined and said, that one of the mob threatened to kill her, unless she would deliver the keys to him.
Another man held his fist in her face, and said that he wished the children to get out, as she had locked them in the pantry.
Saw beds and bedding thrown out of the windows.
The children were crying, and requested the mob to leave their mistress alone.
The mob said that they would provide for the children.
The noise up stairs was dreadful; and suddenly the mob disappeared.
I then saw the military.
One of the floor boards was forced up.
Cross-examined:— There were provisions in the pantry when the mob asked me for the key.
Mr. Morse recalled:— I recognize none of the defendants as the man who put himself in a fighting attitude towards me.
At this stage of the proceedings, it was discovered that none of the defendants were present near the bar, with the exception of those defended by Counsel, but scattered about the Hall.
They were requested to come forward, and those portions of evidence given in English were interpreted to them from the Judge’s notes.
Mr. Ray Evans recalled:— I saw the defendant, Lewis.
He took an active part in the riot.
Cross-examined by defendant Job Evans:— I am certain that you are the man who struck me; a farmer interfered, or you would have proceeded further.
Defendant made a statement to the effect, that he was not farther than the workhouse yard.
Mrs. Sarah Thomas:— I am schoolmistress of the Workhouse.
I was on the plain in front of the Workhouse when the mob came up on .
I remained but a short time after I heard the noise of the mob, but went into the dining-hall.
A number of the mob came in.
They commenced making a great noise, beating the table, &c. I requested them to be peaceable.
The master, Mr. Evans, then requested me to go to the school-room — that the children were crying.
Two men followed me.
— The witness here corroborated Mrs. Evans’s evidence respecting the conduct of the mob, as it regarded the children.
I asked one of the men if he was the father of children himself, and requested him to have some compassion on the children, He said he was a father — that as he had commenced the work he would finish it, or lose every drop of his blood.
The people suddenly disappeared.
On going to her room, the door of which had been previously locked, she found that it had been burst open.
David Levi, jeweller, proved that, at the time in question, he acted as special constable; and described the appearance of the mob in similar language to the other witnesses.
He added, that he took several persons into custody, and took them before the Magistrates.
He took one person into custody at Capt. Hughes’s request.
I think it was the defendant David Williams. Had some difficulty in taking him, as some persons endeavoured to prevent me.
One man struck Captain Hughes, and I received several blows.
John Pugh examined by Mr. Chilton:— Was Inspector of Police on .
He gave a similar description of the procession to that given by other witnesses.
There were thousands on foot, and he counted 310 horsemen.
By the direction of the Magistrates, I took several persons into custody in the Workhouse yard.
I saw the defendant David Thomas engaged in a conflict, with a bassoon in his hand; he had also a large stone.
When I seized him, we both fell in the scuffle.
[Witness produced a great number of sticks found in the Workhouse after the mob.]
Cross-examined:— I have been employed to watch some gates — the toll-houses of which have been taken down.
I don’t know whether they were destroyed by sticks or not.
Thomas Hughes, a special constable, corroborated the other witnesses in the evidence relating to the conduct of the mob at the Workhouse.
He saw the defendant Thomas striking Capt. Hughes.
Saw the defendant Harris there.
Mr. William Davies Phillips, Clerk to the Board of Guardians, being examined by Mr. V. William, deposed to the riotous character of the assemblage of people.
He repeatedly saw the defendant Harris among the mob.
First saw him near the Lion in Spilman-street.
Saw the mob pass through King-street.
He then came down to Guildhall square, and there saw Harris among the mob on horseback.
He subsequently saw them turn up Red-street towards the Workhouse.
He attempted to enter the Workhouse, but could not go in.
He then gave information to the Mayor.
On returning to the Workhouse he saw several people in custody.
Among them the defendants Harris, Williams, Evans, and Thomas in custody.
The appearance of the mob was calculated to cause alarm.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hall:— Is not particularly aware of any widely spread dissatisfaction respecting the Workhouse.
I do not know that these feelings against the magistrates is general.
I have seen Oddfellows’ processions.
Cross-examined by the defendant Harris:— I believe the defendant’s daughter was on horseback behind him.
By the Court:— She might be three or four and twenty.
Re-examined by Mr. Chilton:— The procession did not resemble an Oddfellow’s.
Capt. William Garnons Hughes described the conduct and appearance of the mob.
I received a blow from a bludgeon.
The appearance of the mob was such as to create alarm in the minds of quiet persons not bred to arms.
Thomas Charles Morris, Esq., examined by Mr. Evans:— I am a banker residing in this town, and Mayor of the town.
Was a magistrate in .
I accompanied the military to the Workhouse.
Several persons were taken into custody.
Taking the state of the country into consideration, I thick the assembly was calculated to cause alarm.
This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Hall then addressed the jury for the defendants Charles and Lewis.
He contended that in one count of the indictment, the defendants were charged with a riot.
He thought his Lordship would tell them that no riot had taken place, and that all the defendants must be acquitted on that count.
The utmost that could be made of it was that of an unlawful assembly.
He appeared only for two of the defendants.
He was happy to hear that the others would find a much better advocate in the Learned Judge who presided.
There was no doubt but that the riot charged in the indictment had some connection with the Agrarian disturbances which had taken place — disturbances alike indefensible in law or reason.
He could attribute them only to the poverty of the country and the general dissatisfaction with the New Poor-law and the conduct of the Magistracy, but Rebeccaism was not the means of procuring a redress of grievances.
He was confident that the gentlemen of the jury as well as the unfortunate persons who had been implicated in the disturbances must have suffered both in pocket and in peace of mind by the late disturbances.
No person could stand up and state that the country laboured under no real grievances, but yet they could not be redressed by such outrageous conduct.
Mr. Hall then proceeded to comment upon those portions of the evidence which apparently bore against his client.
He contended that there was not the least evidence that the defendants Charles and Lewis took part in the illegalities which he acknowledged had been on that day committed.
The evidence of the master of the Workhouse went merely to prove, that, like foolish boys, they entered the Workhouse at the excitement of the moment, for it was not proved that they took any part in the procession.
It was evident that on the day in question there was both a town and country rabble.
If the country mob contemplated committing any depredations, was it to be concluded that the town mob — among whom two defendants were — had the same objects in view.
He concluded by stating, that he confidently expected an acquittal for the defendants Charles and Lewis.
Mr. James Morse gave the defendant Charles a good character.
He is a married man and has several children.
The four other defendants declined saying anything to the jury, but Harries called Captain Evans, Pantykendy, to character.
He said that up to the present time he was a peaceable man.
He thought he was induced to join the assembly in consequence of having been fined by the Magistrates.
Mr. George Goode gave Harries an excellent character.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chilton:— I have since heard that he has been connected with Rebeccaism.
Thomas Evans one of the witnesses for the prosecution gave him a good character.
Mr. W.B. Swan, a Magistrate, and other persons, including several witnesses for the Crown, gave evidence to the same effect.
Other witnesses bore testimony to the characters of the other defendants.
Mr. Chilton waived his privilege as Counsel for the Crown, to reply to Mr. Hall’s address.
The Learned Judge then summed up the evidence.
The first question for the jury to ascertain was, whether any riot had taken place.
To constitute a riot it was not more necessary that all the parties implicated should be proved to act unceasingly in it from first to last than it was to prove that a man acted riotously throughout his life before being considered a rioter.
There might have been no riot, yet it might have been an unlawful assembly.
Looking at the conduct of the parties when the Magistrates were in conversation with them, they could not be called riotous, though the assembly might have been illegal, as they had met for an illegal purpose.
But the conduct of the mob at the Workhouse was certainly riotous, though it had not been so before.
His Lordship then read over all the evidence, commenting upon it and elucidating all legal difficulties involved in any parts, as he proceeded.
The jury retired, and after a short absence returned a verdict of Guilty against all the defendants.
— Sentence deferred.
The Riot at Talog.
The Queen v. Jonathan Jones and Others.
[Special Jury.]
— This also was an issue from the Queen’s Bench.
The defendants, Jonathan Jones, aged 21, Howell Lewis, 21, David Lewis, 25, David Davies, 60, Jonathan Lewis, 21. and John Jones, 24, were charged with having, on , unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled, together with divers other evil-disposed persons, at Talog, in the parish of Abernant, Carmarthenshire, and then and there made a great noise, riot, and disturbance, against the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, her Crown and dignity.
In other counts the defendants were charged with having committed assaults on various persons.
Mr. Chilton, Q.C. (with whom were Messrs.
Evans, Q.C., and E.V. Williams, as Counsel for the Crown), stated the case to the jury, the circumstances of which must be fresh in the recollection of our readers.
The Learned Counsel said that he would merely give the jury an outline of the facts, which, according to his instructions, he was in a condition to prove.
He understood that only one of the prisoners had the advantage of being defended by Counsel.
This riot arose out of a refusal to pay toll on the part of a man named John Harris, who was not included in the present indictment.
He was a miller, residing at Talog, and in consequence of his refusal to pay toll a fine was imposed upon him, and a warrant issued to levy upon his goods, served by the Mayor and a Magistrate of the Borough, and endorsed by a Magistrate of the County, of Carmarthen.
On , a number of special constables, and about 30 pensioners were sent to levy the distress upon Harris’s goods.
As they approached Talog, they observed a crowd of disguised persons running towards the mill.
A horn was blown by one of the rioters, and the number continued increasing.
One man told the constable that if they persisted in going into the mill, they should be killed.
After considerable interruption, they entered the mill, and effected the levy.
On their road home, when about 300 yards from the mill, they were pursued and overtaken by a large crowd, many of of whom were disguised, and variously armed with hatchets, pickaxes, bludgeons, guns, &c. &c., who insisted upon their leaving the goods behind.
The constables were comparatively few and the pensioners rendered little or no assistance.
At last, a responsible person named Thomas, offered to answer for the payment of the fine, if the constables would leave the goods.
To this the latter assented, but they were not then allowed to return to Carmarthen.
One of them was knocked down, his pistol and staff taken from him, and thrown into the river.
Others were greatly abused, as the jury should hear from the various witnesses who would give evidence before them.
The constables were followed until they reached Troesmawr gate, when the warrant was demanded of them.
The mob also compelled the constables to pull down a piece of wall, stating “that they must do Rebecca’s work.”
Various threats were held towards them relating to Water-street gate and to the Workhouse.
Now, it would be shown that Jonathan Jones and all the other defendants had acted in the manner described, but Jones was particularly active.
Howell Lewis wore a kind of mask.
Jonathan Lewis took part in the riot, but he (Mr. C.) did not charge him with acting prominently.
Though David Davies personally committed no act of outrage, yet he encouraged the others to do so.
David Lewis carried a bludgeon, and was the person who knocked down one of the constables.
John Jones had merely a small stick in his hand, but took no active part in the affair.
He merely charged him with being present, countenancing the acts of the rest.
He had merely given the jury a brief outline of the proceedings.
Should they find that the charge was not clearly made out against any or all the defendants, he would rejoice to see them acquitted; but, if otherwise, it was their bounden duty to convict them.
Evidence was then adduced in support of the charge.
The witnesses who were principally the special constables sent to exercise the warrant, deposed to the circumstance of all the prisoners having taken the part stated in the riots, with the exception of John Jones, who on their arrival they found talking to Harris’s daughter by the door of the mill.
He merely had a small slick in his hand, but did not use it.
Mr. Richards then addressed the jury on behalf of Jones, contending that he was only accidentally present, as it was well known that he paid his addresses to Harris’s daughter.
The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to call witnesses to Jones’s character, when the foreman of the special jury interfered, and said that the jury were satisfied and had agreed to acquit Jones.
Witnesses to character were then called on behalf of the other defendants.
The Learned Judge carefully summed up the evidence, when the jury returned a verdict of Guilty, against all the prisoners with the exception of Jones.
Sentence deferred.
Dolauhirion Toll-Gate.
The Queen v. [Thomas] Lewis and [Thomas] Morgan.
— [Special Jury].
— In this case, the prisoners were tried at the late Winter Assizes, on a charge of riot and destruction of the toll-house, but Mr. Justice Cresswell being of opinion that the evidence did not support the indictment, as far as the riotous assemblage was regarded, directed the jury to acquit the prisoners on that charge.
A true bill had been found against them for misdemeanor, and the prisoners put in a plea of “Not Guilty.”
They were now tried before a special jury, on an issue from the Queen’s Bench.
Mr, Chilton, addressing the jury, observed, that the best course next to not committing an offence, was to acknowledge having committed it.
The defendants wished to retract their plea of “Not Guilty,” and consent to a verdict against them; therefore it would be unnecessary for him to call evidence.
His Lordship expressed a doubt as to the propriety of that course, as the pleas had been made at these Assizes.
Evidence was then called, but in consequence of the absence of a witness (who had left pursuant to that understanding), the case was adjourned to the next day.
. — the examination of witnesses in the case of the Queen v. Morgan and Lewis, was proceeded with.
The facts of the case appeared in our paper during the late Winter Assizes — it is therefore unnecessary to repeat them.
The Judge having summed op the evidence, the jury retired, and after an absence of a quarter of an hour, returned a verdict of “Guilty of being present, but no evidence is adduced to prove that they took part in breaking the gate.”
The Judge:— That amounts to a verdict of “Not Guilty.”
The defendants were accordingly acquitted.
The Queen v. Hughes and others.
— (Special Jury.)
— Counsel for the Crown, Messrs.
Chilton, Q.C., Evans, Q.C., and E.V. Williams. For defendants, Messrs.
Nicholl Carne and Lloyd Hall.
Mr. V. Williams opened the pleadings.
This was an issue joined between the Queen and the three defendants, Thomas Hughes, Benjamin Jones, and John Jones.
The defendants had pleaded “Not Guilty.”
Mr. Chiltlon addressed the jury for the Crown, and observed, that the three defendants were indicted under the statute 7 and 8 Geo. 4, c. 30, s. 14, which provided that if any person destroyed a turnpike gate wholly or in part, he should be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour.
The indictment also charged the defendants with a riot, and they were also indicted for an unlawful assembly.
He thought that, after the jury had heard the evidence, the proofs would be so clear, that they could convict the defendants without doubt or hesitation.
The three defendants had been very leniently dealt with, for they might have been indicted for the destruction of the house, which amounted to a felony, but they were merely indicted for a misdemeanour.
The defendant Thomas Hughes was a sawyer; John Jones was a farmer, of some property, and was generally known by the name of Capt. Jones; Benjamin Jones was a farmer’s son.
The toll-house and gate, which were the subjects of the present indictment, were called Pontarlleche gate and house, situated on the road leading from Llangadock to Neath and Swansea.
He would call a person named Griffith Jones, who had been appointed collector at the gate eight years ago, by a person named Anthony, who was entitled to receive the tolls.
He also carried on the business of a smith at a forge about a mile distant, and his wife generally attended to the gate.
After retiring to bed on , the toll-keeper and his wife heard a great and alarming noise, and had no time to dress themselves before the house was entered, and upon getting out, they observed about thirty persons, armed with guns, pickaxes, &c., disguised in various ways.
The mob so conducted themselves as to cause great alarm.
Both he and his wife well knew John Jones, and would swear that they had not the slightest doubt as to his identity.
He was partly disguised, and took a very active part in the riot, They would also, with equal certainty, identify the other defendants, Hughes and Benjamin Jones, who took part in the business.
The case mainly depended upon the evidence of the toll keeper and his wife.
They both, it appeared, went before the magistrates a few days afterwards, to lay an information against a person named James, who was not included in the indictment.
It was his duly to state, that on that occasion the witnesses did not inform against the defendants, for knowing them to be the ringleaders of the Rebeccaites, they were naturally afraid to mention any names; but it would be proved that on the next day they told a person, named Mary Jones, who the parties were.
In a few days afterwards, they communicated the same information to Anthony, the lessee of the tolls.
In addition to this, he (Mr. C.) should lay in evidence before the jury, certain conversations by which John Jones showed that he was a prominent actor in the Rebecca outrages.
He would not detail the conversations, but let the jury hear them from the witnesses, and after hearing what his learned friend had to say in defence, to which he should reply if necessary, he had no doubt the gentlemen of the jury would return such a verdict as would give satisfaction to the country at large.
Griffith Jones was then examined by Mr. Evans, and deposed to his being the toll-keeper of the Pontarlleche-gale, which is on the road from Llangadock to Neath and Swansea.
After having retired to bed on , he heard noises as of iron bars under the door.
The windows were broken.
He got out of bed, and immediately four disguised men came in, and dragged him in his shirt to the other side of the road, He did not know those four men.
On going out, he saw about thirty persons, some of whom were engaged in destroying the gate, and others in destroying the house.
He positively identified Thomas Hughes, who was partly disguised and engaged in sawing the large gate-post.
John Jones was breaking part of the house with a pickaxe.
Had known him for seven years.
The crowd appeared not to have been aware, for a considerable time, that witness was amongst them, as they had, in the first place, taken him to some distance.
He was afterwards taken to an upper floor in the opposite house.
He could distinctly see the people breaking up the gate into pieces, which they threw into the river.
Shortly after this, witness laid all information before the Magistrates against a person named Jones: but did not inform against the three defendants.
In coming out of the Magistrates’ room, he met the defendant Jones, who told witness that he might as well leave the country.
On another occasion, John Jones told witness’s wife that his furniture would not have been broken had not witness threatened to inform against any parties who might break the house.
Witness informed Mr. Anthony, in a few days, who the parties were who had broken the gate.
Cross-examined by Mr Carne:— There were more than a hundred shots fired, He was full half an hour amongst the mob in his shirt.
As they had white shirts about them, he supposed that they did not recognize him.
His wife was likewise turned out of the house in her night-dress.
Witness did tell some persons that he did not recognize any of the rioters, as he was afraid of them.
Heard of some rewards being offered for informations against Rebeccaites, but never heard the amount mentioned.
Never told any one “There is something for swearing now — I must think of my wife and children.”
Never told so to John Evans; for I have not spoken a dozen words to him for years.
Anne Jones, the last witness’s wife, was examined and cross-examined at great length.
Her evidence corroborated that given by Griffith Jones.
J. Anthony, the lessee of the tolls, stated in evidence that, soon after the gate had been destroyed, the collector’s wife informed him of the parties who had been engaged in the riot but, at her request, he did not tell the Magistrates.
He was also afraid.
Mary Jones proved that, on the day following the outrage, the collector’s wife told her the name of the parties.
Mary Anthony proved that John Jones was seen going in the direction of the gate on the night in question, but that road also lead to his residence.
Mr Nicholl Carne then addressed the jury for the defendants.
He contended that the jury could not rely either upon the accuracy or the veracity of the witnesses for the prosecution.
When it frequently happened that gentlemen had held conversations with country people, mistaking one for the other, how could the witnesses identify the parties at the gate, under the various circumstances of confusion, dread, disguise, and anxiety which must have haunted the minds of the witnesses, seeing that their house and furniture were broken — their lives, and that of their child in danger.
He then commented upon the fact of the witnesses not having mentioned the names of defendants before the Magistrates, and the reasons given for not so doing.
He also called the attention of the jury to the rewards offered upon the conviction of any rioters.
Isaac Morris, Elizabeth Jones, and John Jones were called to prove that the toll-collector and his wife, in conversation with them declared that they could not identify one of the rioters.
Benjamin Jones, father of one of the defendants, was examined but proved nothing important.
John Evans was called to contradict statements made by Griffith Jones in cross-examination.
This witness acknowledged being present at two Rebecca meetings.
He went with Mr. Foster, of the Times, to interpret.
—— Matthews, a constable, who had been employed in watching the gate, said, both the collector and his wife told him next day, that they did not know any of the rioters.
Witness had been dismissed after three nights’ watching.
Mr. Chilton replied to the evidence adduced for the defendants.
He defended the witnesses for the prosecution from the imputation of perjury, as insinuated by the Learned Counsel for the defence.
The Learned Judge then summed up the evidence, elucidating the various points of law arising in the case; after which the jury retired, and returned into Court in about ten minutes, with a verdict of Guilty against all.
Sentence deferred.
. — …Six prisoners, charged with riot and burglary, were arraigned, and pleaded Not Guilty.
— This charge arose out of the Rebecca disturbances, but as it was not probable the case would conclude , his Lordship took a nisi prius cause.
The Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser gives an account of the trial of Rebeccaites accused in the Carmarthen workhouse raid, held on at the Carmarthenshire Assizes.
It gives some interesting background on how the demonstration was sparked.
The Rebecca Riot.
John Lewis, Isaac Charles, Job Evans, John Harries, David Williams, and David Thomas, for unlawfully assembling at the Union Workhouse, at Carmarthen, on , were first put upon their trial, and a special jury was sworn in.
Mr. John Evans, Q.C., Mr. E.V. Williams, and Mr. Chilton, Q.C., were retained on the part of the prosecution, and Mr. Lloyd Hall for the defence.
Mr. Chilton opened the pleadings and stated, that John Harries, a miller, residing at Talog, in the parish of Abernant, in this county, was charged with being the ringleader in this unlawful assemblage.
That the said John Harries, had refused to pay Water-street gate, in this town, which caused him to be fined, and his goods were distrained upon for the amount, and that the riot took place in consequence of the distress made by the constables.
That the distress caused an ill-will and an angry feeling, and that threats were held out that Water-street gate would be destroyed.
That the defendant John Harris had called upon Capt. Davies, of Green Hall, stating that unless the fine would be returned, they would pay him a visit, and handed him a letter to the same effect, signed by John Harris and Thomas Thomas.
The parish clerk of Abernant was compelled by Harris to make a proclamation on , demanding the attendance of all the neighbouring farmers at Carmarthen on , — farmers to come on horseback, and their children and servants on foot.
His summons was obeyed, and they attended in thousands, carrying with them banners with Welsh inscriptions, and a band of music playing before them.
That after parading the town, they arrived at the Union Workhouse, and demanded admission; the governor refused for some time, but seeing the crowd so great, he admitted them in, and the place was immediately filled, and were it not for the timely arrival of a detachment of the 4th Light Dragoons, the work of destruction which they had commenced would be carried on.
Several of the horses were left in the Workhouse yard, a number of the men were taken at the time, and that some of them were the prisoners at the bar.
Capt. David Davies.— I am a magistrate of this county.
I know defendant Harries — he is a miller, living at Talog mill.
He called on me on and delivered this letter to me.
I read it in his presence.
He said he had another for Mr. Morris for the same purpose, and away he went.
The letter was as follows:– “Talog, .— Sir— As we have been unlegally fined for refusing to pay Water-street gate, no refuse being made, we give you this offer if you are intending to pay the money to-day is the day.
John Harries and Thomas Thomas.”
He said unless paid they were coming to demand it on .
I was in the town of Carmarthen on .
I was with the magistrates in the Guildhall.
I saw a number of persons coming up towards the Hall from Lammas-street.
There were 350 on horseback, and a couple of thousands on foot.
There was a band of music on foot.
They came up part of the Hall and went up street.
They were a quarter of an hour passing.
The shops were shut.
The crowd did not alarm me.
Those on foot were agricultural boys and girls, farm servants.
I was not at all alarmed.
David Evans, road-surveyor.— On , I was sworn in as a special constable.
I live in this town.
On , I was required to assist the police to levy a distress on goods of Harries, the miller, for refusing to pay tolls at Water-street gate.
I went with other constables and police constables.
The attempt to distrain was resisted, and there was a great riot.
Towards the end of it they said they would pay Water-street gate a visit and take it down, and also pay the workhouse a visit and take it down.
Cross-examined.— I did not see either Isaac Charles, or John Lewis.
I do not believe they were there.
I believe they were not.
James Lewis.— I am the parish clerk of Abernant.
I have been so 14 years.
I attended Divine service there on .
It is the custom after service is over to cry anything that is lost, or give any public notice.
I cried a mare that was lost, on that day.
I was then desired by John Harries to give notice to parishioners to come to Carmarthen ; whoever stayed at home would do so at their peril.
I did not refuse to cry it, but I told him I had rather not.
He said there was no harm in it.
After I had made the proclamation, I heard Capt. Evans advise the people not to go.
Late in the evening, I heard a conversation between Capt. Evans and John Harries.
Cross-examined.— Isaac Charles and John Lewis were not at my church on that day.
Capt. Lewis Evans was called on.
Thomas Evans, fanner, of Placeparke, and Thomas Davies, of Bwlchnewydd, Newchurch parish, farm servant, confirmed the preceding statements.
John Rae Evans, master of the Carmarthen Workhouse.— On the morning of , my attention was attracted to a parcel of people idling and sitting about the hedge outside.
Perhaps 100 of them.
I had heard rumours that people from the country were to come to the workhouse that day.
Most were country people; about an equal number of women and men.
The gates were closed.
I afterwards saw a large body of people coming up.
We are on an elevation, and had a view of them.
Those in front were on foot, those behind on horseback.
There were hundreds on foot.
I saw musical instruments with them.
I did not hear any music.
They knocked and kicked at the door, and demanded admittance.
I was inside and can’t say who demanded admittance.
Mr. Evans of Placeparke begged me to admit him.
He advised me to open the door, otherwise it would be worse for me.
I said if they were respectable men I would admit them, but not such a rabble.
There was a great noise outside, and the knocking continued.
At last I told the porter to open the gate.
I was afraid, they were so numerous.
The mob rushed in.
I retreated to the dining-hall, they followed me.
The hall was full; some jumped on the table, others thumped the table with sticks.
I attempted to reason with them.
They said they wanted all the paupers out.
They said there was no further need of my services, nor the workhouse.
They demanded the keys of the men’s and women’s yard.
I refused to give them up, and they were wrenched out of my hand.
They got into the two yards.
I was requested to go to the workhouse, some of the pauper children were crying.
The mob wanted them to go out, they were frightened, and did not like to go out.
I heard the cry “the soldiers are coming.”
The room was soon emptied then.
One man struck me, it was Job Evans.
It was in the school-room.
I saw John Harries in the front of the house.
I did not see those in front of the house till they had been captured.
The back of the board-room was broken open.
I knew Isaac Charles perfectly well before this.
He came into the hall with the rest.
He jumped about, waved his hand, and was active amongst them.
He had no stick.
They cried “Hurrah!”
[Illegible]— I am a magistrate for this county.
[I was at Abernant?] church on .
I heard a [illegible] the crier what it was about.
He told me.
[illegible] not to go.
I addressed them in Welsh.
I [illegible] and Thomas had been fined.
I sent for them [and advised them to?] meet me at Cilwen that evening.
They did not come there.
I went out and afterwards met them.
I cannot be positive that Harris came, but Thomas did.
I went by the Plough and Harrow on my way to Carmarthen.
I saw Harris there; It was between 7 and 8. I desired Harris to come to town and get some of the magistrates to come and dissuade the people from coming.
I also dissuaded him and asked him not to come, and use his influence with them.
Harris said that if I spoke to Mr. Webb, a magistrate very much respected in town and country, and prevailed on him to come out, it might have great effect in preventing them from coming.
I met the band before I entered the town, and I told them the people were not coming, so as to persuade them not to come.
They said they were paid for coming and they would come.
I then came on to town.
I went out of town again and met them half a mile from the Plough and Harrow.
There was an immense crowd.
I did not distinguish Harris then.
I endeavoured to dissuade them from coming to town.
Mr. J.Ll.
Davies did so also.
They said that their motive was to go to tell the magistrates their grievances and not to do any harm.
A great many did stop with us, but the great body went on.
We said idle fellows in town would get them into mischief.
James Morse, Stamp Distributor.— On , I overtook a cavalcade of horsemen and footmen moving down King-street.
They came through Guildhall-square, and went towards the workhouse.
The foot had entered the workhouse before I got up.
I had got ahead of the horsemen.
There were from 300 to 500 horsemen, and from 1,500 to 1,800 on foot.
I got into the workhouse between two horsemen.
I saw the master, he appeared frightened.
I spoke to the mob and exhorted them to go home and petition parliament.
My address gave them satisfaction, as I touched upon the Educational bill — being dissenters they listened to me, and gave me three cheers.
I was interrupted by a man upsetting the iron bedsteads.
I spoke to him and he doubled his fists and said “come on.”
He did not strike me.
He desisted from upsetting the beds.
I afterwards gave him into custody.
I do not know his name.
I did not see either Charles or John there.
Eliza Evans— I am the matron of the union workhouse[.]
I was at the kitchen door when they came in.
A man said he would injure me if I would not give the key of the pantry.
He said he would kill me.
I refused the keys.
Another man held his fist in my face.
He said I had locked the children in the pantry.
There was a great deal of noise.
The house seemed coming down.
The bed-clothes were thrown out through the windows.
The children were about me crying, and praying the mob not to kill their mistress.
They said they would provide a place for them.
All of a sudden they all disappeared.
I then saw the military.
One board up stairs was forced up; it was sound before.
Daniel Levy, John Pugh, Thomas Hughes and others were examined.
The jury, after retiring for a short time, found the whole of the prisoners guilty, and sentence was deferred.
The Talog Rioters.
John Jones, Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis[,] Jonathan Lewis, David Davies, and David Lewis, were charged with having committed a riot and assault at Tallog, in the parish of Abernant, on .
Mr. Chilton opened the pleadings, and stated that the prisoners were charged with having tumultuously assembled at the village of Tallog, and obstructed the levying of a distress upon the goods of John Harris, for non-payment of toll at Water-street gate.
That the goods distrained upon were rescued by the prisoners, and the constables assaulted by the mob.
That Jonathan Jones had a hatchet with him, Jonathan Lewis carried a gun, and David Davies was loud in his abuse.
His lordship having summed up the evidence, the jury acquitted the prisoner John Jones, but Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis, Jonathan Lewis, David Davies, and David Lewis, were found guilty, and ordered to be in attendance to receive judgment when called for.
The court then commenced the following case:—
Thomas Lewis and Thomas Morgan were then indicted on the charge of having destroyed the turnpike gate and toll-house at Dolauhirion, near the town of Llandovery.
The court adjourned.
.
His lordship entered the court at , and the trial of the previous evening was proceeded with.
After the examination of several witnesses, the jury acquitted the prisoners.
John Jones, Thomas Hughes, and Benjamin Jones, were then indicted on the charge of having destroyed Pontarllechau gate and toll-house, near Llangadock, on .
His lordship, after the examination of several witnesses, summed up; after which the jury retired to consider their verdict.
In a short time they returned, and delivered a verdict of “Guilty” against the three defendants.
They were ordered to be detained in custody.
, the Learned Judge took his seat on the bench at nine o’clock.
The Court, from an early hour, was extremely crowded, in consequence of the trials of several parties upon charges of Rebecca riots and burglary.
Thomas Powell, John James, Evan Davies, David Evans, Thomas Thomas, John Thomas, and John Thomas were placed at the bar, on a charge of having, on [the Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser says ], at the parish of Llanfihangel-ar-arth, burglariously entered the house of one Daniel Harris, and stealing therefrom various sums of money.
In other counts of the indictment, they were charged with assaults on various persons, and in others with having riotously, unlawfully, and tumultuously assembled, and creating a great noise, riot, and disturbance against the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, her Crown, and dignity.
David Thomas was also charged with being an accessory before the fact.
The names of two other persons (not in custody) were also in the calendar.
Messrs.
Chilton, Q.C., Evans, Q.C., and E.V. Williams appeared for the Crown.
Mr. Richards defended the prisoners David Evans, David Thomas, and John Thomas.
The others were undefended by Counsel.
Mr. Chilton, Q.C., addressed the jury on behalf of the Crown.
May it please your Lordship, Gentlemen of the Jury,— The prisoners at the bar are indicted — seven of them as principals, and David Thomas as an accessory before the fact — for one of the most heinous crimes known to the law — the crime of burglary and, gentlemen, before I proceed to state facts, which will be adduced in evidence, I will observe, that I think it highly probable that, from the circumstance of the great publicity which has been given, and is invariably attendant upon offences of this description, and from the circumstance of myself and my Learned Friends appearing to conduct the prosecution on behalf of the Crown, that you are fully aware that this charge is, in some degree, mixed up with the gross outrages which have lately disgraced the country, under the name of Rebeccaism.
Were this an ordinary case of that description, I should, in the performance of my duty, feel it incumbent upon me to caution you against those feelings which it is natural, and in some points of view excusable, that men moving in your stations in life should entertain; for I will not attempt to deny but that there may have been heavy burdens which the agricultural population may have, for a length of time, endured, and which it may be difficult for them to endure longer.
I can make considerable allowances for this kind of feeling, but, gentlemen, in this case it will be my duty to lay before you one of the most melancholy instances of the great evil of listening to that most dangerous — most seductive doctrine, of “doing evil that good might come” — of doing that which in itself is wrong and vicious for the purpose of producing some real or imaginary good.
In ordinary cases, the evils of Rebeccaism may have this extenuation, though it cannot for a moment be considered either a justification or an excuse, that they have violated the law for the purpose of suppressing and extinguishing some real or supposed public grievance; but, gentlemen, so long as human nature is human nature, and so long as the feelings and passions of humanity are what they are, when once the law is set at defiance, there will, as disclosed in a former case, false Rebeccas arise, and take advantage of the prevalence of lawless violence, and pervert those feelings for the accomplishment of private purposes — either to satisfy private malignity and spite, or, what is worse, private cupidity and love of lucre, as I fear has been the case in the charge before us.
Therefore, so far from calling upon you to guard yourselves against feelings in favour of Rebeccaism, I shall call upon you to exercise the greatest care and caution before you convict either of the prisoners at the bar, to see that the charge is fully proved, and clearly brought home to them.
As to the commission of the offence, and its commission under circumstances which certainly admit of no excuse or extenuation there cannot possibly arise the slightest doubt.
Having made those few observations, I shall now give you a brief outline of the proceedings out of which has originated the present charge.
The house which was broken open and entered on , belonged to a very old man of the name of Daniel Harris, who had no more to do with turnpike-gates or turnpike tolls than you, the gentlemen of the jury or myself.
He had to pay them, but with that exception he was in no other way connected with them.
He resided — I say resided, for I must tell you that these outrages and violence were such — I will not tell you that they hastened his death, but, at all events, he is now no more, and I shall be obliged to put his written testimony in evidence against the prisoners.
He resided on a farm called Pantyfen Issa, in the parish of Llanfihangelararth, in this county, and, at the time of the outrage, the old man’s wife, daughter, his son-in-law, a boy, and a servant named Mary Titus, were the only inmates of the house.
It is beyond doubt, that in the dead of night, during the night of , they were aroused from their beds by a disguised mob, armed with fire-arms, reaping-hooks, bludgeons, and other implements, and who commenced violently beating the door, demanding admittance in the most intimidating manner, and by their threats compelled the inmates to open the door.
That they were compelled to open the door by intimidation could not he denied, when, as you shall hear from the witnesses, they were told by the armed mob that they “would not wait long for them.”
Having been admitted, they entered the house to the number of eleven or twelve, and inquired if the old man had received a letter from Rebecca.
I believe his son-in-law answered that he had not, when one of the mob replied that he had received more than one; they then demanded the sum of 20l. for a woman named Gwenllian Lewis.
The old man told them that he had got but a sovereign and a shilling in the house.
They then desired the son-in-law to procure them a candle, and Mary Titus, the servant, having lighted one, ran upstairs and hid under the bed.
She could therefore give them no further account of the transaction.
They searched the house, but could find no more than the 1l. 1s., which they compelled old Harris to deliver up.
One of the mob then drew a ready written stamped promissory note for 20l. from his pocket, and insisted upon the old man signing it for this Gwenllian Lewis; they also insisted upon his son-in-law signing it as a security.
This note they compelled them to sign, armed with guns and pistol.
Having given them the money, the old man told them they had taken all he had got, that he not even a farthing to buy tobacco, upon which the one shilling was returned to him.
You shall hear from the witnesses the enquiries made respecting the time the note became payable, and other details.
I have already told you that the mob were not only armed, but that they were all disguised.
Indeed, they were so much so, that the inmates of the house do not affect to identify any of them.
To prove these facts, I shall call before you James Davies, the son-in-law, and Mary Titus.
I cannot call the wife, in consequence of her infirmities, but of these facts there can be no doubt.
The next question that arises is, how do I affect the prisoners at the bar.
In the first place, it will be my duty to call before you two accomplices.
They will tell you that the prisoner, David Thomas, who is charged with being an accessory before the fact, was the prime mover and instigator of the whole transaction.
The prisoners first assembled at the house of David Thomas, on , having intended making the attack on that night.
But owing to circumstances which will appear by the evidence, they did not make the attack on that night, but met again on at the house of the prisoner, David Thomas.
There they disguised themselves, and went and did that which has been briefly detailed to yon.
The witnesses will describe to you the part taken by each of the prisoners in the affairs of the night, though I will tell you, under the direction of his Lordship, that it is not necessary to prove what each prisoner did for if it will be proved that they went out together with one common purpose, they are all equally guilty.
Now, Gentlemen, his Lordship will tell you, that you cannot with safety rely upon the evidence of an accomplice, unless his evidence be corroborated in some material points by the evidence of untainted witnesses, who have not participated in the crime.
Now. gentlemen, how do I corroborate their testimony?
In the first place, I shall show you the motive which had actuated the prisoner, David Thomas, throughout the whole transaction.
The money was demanded from the old man pretendedly for Gwenllian Lewis.
In fact, you will find that David Thomas had a kind of smattering in law.
On , he entered into an agreement with Gwenllian Lewis, for the purchase of a supposed claim which she had upon Daniel Harris.
He (prisoner) was to give her 13l., free of all expenses, for the amount of her claim, which was considerably more; but he was not to pay the 13l. until he had got the sum claimed from old Harris.
Now I conclude, from the circumstance of no proceedings having been taken , as he did not go to law, that he found the claim was not good; but in the meantime Rebecca had arisen, and he made use of the terrors of Rebeccaism to enforce a claim which he could not do by the law of the land.
The son-in-law will prove that he saw one letter upon the subject in the possession of the old man, Harris.
In addition to that, it will be proved by David Lewis, who will be called, that the prisoner, David Thomas, offered him 1l. if he would go that night to Pantyfen, bringing with him a pistol, a sword, or any other implement.
He made some excuse, and did not go.
I will also state, that another witness was offered 8s. by David Thomas, for going to the same place.
Another witness, John Jones, whose conduct I cannot commend as being entirely free from blame, yet who cannot be considered or treated as an accomplice, actually went to Thomas’s house on , and saw all the prisoners at the bar there.
After they had dressed themselves in disguise, he told them that he had seen a person on the road who would be a likely party to give information to Mr. Price, the Magistrate, if he saw them.
In consequence of that intimation, it was agreed that they should meet and proceed to Pantyfen on .
David Thomas then said — for it was often found that the ringleader shrunk from the danger — “I will not go with you, but shall show myself at Blaenpant, that Morgans might be a witness that I had nothing to do with the matter.”
There are, Gentlemen, many other facts connected with the case, which I have thought it unnecessary to state, but which you shall hear from the witnesses.
You shall also hear a confession which has been made by one of the prisoners, John Thomas, of Blaenrhidian; but that you cannot consider as evidence against any of the other prisoners.
You shall also hear the statement of a witness, to whom David Thomas gave an account of the proceeding.
He told him much of what had taken place, and added, that he thought they had acted too leniently — that he should again go there himself, and compel the old man to pay them 40l. in cash.
He had, ere that, discovered that a promissory note, obtained under such circumstances, could not be worth a penny, and that any idea of enforcing it would be futile.
In point of fact, he did go to Pantyfen, but as that will be the subject of another prosecution, I forbear dwelling upon it.
There is one circumstance connected with the prisoner, David Evans, that he fled the country; vigilant search had been made before he was discovered.
He was, however, subsequently found concealed under a rug.
I do not request you to give that circumstance more than its due weight.
I believe I have given you an outline of the most prominent features of the case.
You will attend and watch the evidence, and see that the charge is clearly brought home before you convict, and I am confident your verdict, whatever it may be will give satisfaction to the country.
James Davies examined by Mr. Evans:— I am the son-in-law of the late Daniel Harris, of Pantyfen.
I lived with him in .
He is since dead.
He died on .
Pantyfen is in the parish of Llanvihangel-ar-arth.
I remember , being the night before the Carmarthen August fair.
I, my wife, and father-in-law slept at Pantyfen on the night in question.
Mary Titus and a boy also slept in the house.
We were disturbed about twelve o’clock that night.
We had retired to bed about nine or ten o’clock.
I, my wife, and the old man slept in the same room.
We were disturbed by strange people beating the doors and calling out.
We were very much alarmed, and I rose and opened the door.
After I opened the door, they said they required money for Gwenllian Lewis.
Before I opened the door, they told me to open it in five minutes, or they would destroy the old man’s property.
It was a fine moonlight night.
On opening the door, I saw a number of people, about ten or twelve, strangely disguised — their faces were painted.
I cannot describe their dresses, as I was too much alarmed.
They told me that they had sent two ’Becca letters to the old man.
Several of them came to the house, there being two of them with guns, one with a pistol, and another with a sword.
They said they wanted money for Gwenllian Lewis.
There was one who had a red coat.
My father-in-law got up, and came to the passage.
He said he had not such a sum of money in the house, for they had then named 20l. as the sum required.
The old man had said he had only 1l. 1s. in the house.
They ordered me to light a candle.
They said, if I would not they would destroy the things.
I called on Mary Titus to light a candle; she did so, and then went up-stairs.
One of the men then pulled out of his pocket a ready-written note for 20l., After reading it, he requested the old man to sign it.
He did so.
They then said that I must sign it.
Those who had guns, &c., stood at this time each side of the door.
My father-in-law said he required two months to pay.
One man said he should have three months to pay.
The old man requested them to write the time he was to pay it.
One of them then wrote something on the back of the note.
Harris asked where he was to pay the money.
One of them said into Morris’s Bank.
Another told him to pay it into Wilkins’s Bank.
The old man had the shilling back, to pay for a quarter of tobacco, after he had paid them the sovereign and the shilling.
The mob remained in the house for about half-an-hour.
Cross-examined by Mr. Richards:– I can write, but that night I only put my mark to the note.
My father-in-law likewise only put his mark.
The undefended prisoners put the witness no question.
John Lloyd Price, Esq., is a Magistrate for the county — took the examination of Daniel Harries, in the presence of the prisoners.
The examination of Daniel Harries was taken in Welsh, and translated into English.
After it was written, it was explained to deceased witness the second time.
He signed it by attaching his mark to it.
By the Court:— The prisoners were taken into custody, and brought before me by warrant, in consequence of information received after the outrage.
Daniel Harries had given witness information of the outrage, and in three or four months time one of the accomplices informed against several of the prisoners whom the police, by the direction of witness, apprehended.
Cross-examined by Mr. Richards:— The party who gave me information, first gave evidence voluntarily, but understanding that he had been tampered with, I sent for him.
I do not remember whether the proclamation offering rewards for the destruction of gates and houses by fire was then published.
I did not offer the informant any money.
Cross-examined by John Thomas:– I never promised to keep the prisoner safe and give him work if he would make the same statement as Evan Davis.
Re-examined by Mr. Chilton, Q.C.:— [Handing a written statement to witness.]
John Thomas made the confession contained in this paper.
I did not offer him a reward, or held out a threat or anything else.
Cross-examined:— Prisoner made the confession before Mr. Prytherch, myself, and the Clerk, Mr. Spurrell.
He made it voluntarily, as he wished to become Queen’s evidence.
Daniel Prytherch, Esq., was called, said he was present when prisoner signed the confession.
No threat or reward was held out to him.
Mr. Richard Spurrel examined:– I am Clerk to the Magistrates.
I took the examination on .
This witness corroborated Mr. Price’s evidence as to the mode adopted in taking the examination.
The examination of Daniel Harris, the deceased, was then put in, but the Court objected to it, as it had not appeared by the evidence that the prisoners were present when it was taken.
Mr. Price was recalled to prove this circumstance.
The examination of the deceased was then put in, and translated to the prisoners.
It was in substance the same as that given by his son-in-law, the first witness called.
The confession of the prisoner, John Thomas, was then put in and read.
The deposition said that he had been induced to go there by the other prisoner, his master — that they went to Penlan, the house of one of the prisoners, and there disguised themselves.
He then named the parties present, and described the weapons carried by each of the prisoners.
Prisoner himself carried a gun, and the others various other arms, such as pistols, hooks, &c. The rest of his evidence corroborated the deposition of the deceased and his son-in-law’s evidence.
Mary Titus, the servant of the deceased Daniel Harris, of Pantyfen, was then examined by Mr. Vaughan Williams.— She corroborated the evidence given in part, but not as to all the facts detailed, as she had retired up stairs as soon as the mob appeared.
Evan Davies, one of the approvers, now gave evidence.
He said that John Thomas, one of the prisoners, came to his house, requested him to go with him to Pantyfen, to get money.
He said there was an agreement between him and Gwenllian Lewis, that he was to raise 40l. — that he was to divide 5l. between the company.
Witness assented.
He went to the prisoner’s (John Thomas’s) house, on .
There were several persons there — David Richards, Llethermelyn, John Thomas, Penlan, David Richards, David Evans, John James, of Groft, David Evans, of Penrhiwfach, John and Thomas Powell, John Thomas of Blanrhidian, and Thomas Thomas, of Cwmygor.
There were more there who were not at the bar.
There was a man named John Jones, a carpenter, there.
We blackened our faces, and disguised ourselves that night.
I can’t say how far the house is from Pantyfen.
It might have been 10 o’clock.
They did not go to deceased’s house that night, for David Thomas said they had better not go, as it was too late, and some person might tell Mr. Price, the magistrate.
They agreed to go on the next night.
David Thomas said, that as he was the most forward about the money, he had better not go, lest they should suspect him, but that he would show himself by going to Blaenpant, to buy a horse, and take Morgan with him as a witness to prove where he was on that night.
On , they again met at the house, and a number of persons, whom witness named [all who were there on the previous night with the exception of John Jones and David Thomas], then went to the house, and having blackened their faces and disguised themselves in various ways, commenced their journey.
Witness was dressed in a gown, and the others in various dresses — John Powell in a red coat.
David Thomas said he was going to Blaenpant.
They then went, all on foot, and when near Glangwilly they met a person with a cart, and also saw some boys in a wood near Glangwilly.
One of the party ran after the boys.
David Evans had something like a bayonet.
David Richards and John Powell carried guns.
I do not know who carried the pistol.
They arrived at Pantyfen, and knocked and kicked at the door, and threatened, if they did not open it, they would do some injury.
A candle having been lighted, several of them went in.
This accomplice’s evidence corroborated the evidence of the residents of Pantyfen in every particular, and was very similar, with the exception of his describing the names of of the various prisoners who took part in the transactions of the night.
Cross-examined:— I did not go for the sake of getting a share of the 5l. I was afraid of David Thomas.
I was examined before the Magistrates on , and in .
I think I told the Magistrates about 5l., but am not quite sure that I did.
[Mr. Richards then put in the witnesses depositions.]
Examination continued:— One of the guns was fired in Pantyfen yard.
He had not drank anything before going, but on returning they drank a little beer at Pencader.
They did no violence to the old man.
David Richards, Llethermelyn, gave the old man the shilling, and the latter thanked him.
He did not appear pleased.
His (witness’s) object in going to Mr. Price was, because he saw that the county was in a bad state — that there would soon be no order or law, and he was constantly troubled by his wife about it.
I know Margaret Richards, Abergwilly.
I never spoke to her about this business.
I remember I am on my oath.
I will swear, and swear an honest oath, that I never told her Mr. Price had offered 50l. for informing.
I know Benjamin Jones — I never spoke to him about this.
Never said to Margaret Richards, if I knew Talog as well as she did I would inform against some one.
I don’t know Thomas Stephen.
I never told him that I had money, and was subpœned to give evidence against the prisoners, but that I had nothing to say against them but what one of the prisoners told me.
[Mr. Richards here put in the depositions relative to a burglary alleged to have been committed by the same prisoners on the 22d, with a view of proving, that, in giving evidence relating to the second transaction, nothing relating to the first was mentioned by witness, but on reading the deposition it did appear that he had mentioned the former.]
This witness’s examination and cross-examination lasted for two hours.
John Jones examined:— I am a carpenter living in Abergwilly.
I know David Thomas, the prisoner.
Saw him on .
He asked me to come with him to Pantyfen.
I did not know where Pantyfen was.
He said he wished to get money from Gwenllian.
I said I did not like to go, but at last promised to go.
We were to meet at David Thomas, of Penlan’s house.
He said he was not going himself.
He went on ], and named the persons who were present.
They were the same as those mentioned by the last witness.
All the prisoners were there besides two not in custody.
Witness described the circumstance of their having blackened their faces and changed their dresses, but thinking it too late they left and agreed to meet the next night.
They did so all with the exception of John Jones, of Caerphilly.
He was not present on the second night.
The evidence relating to the arms and weapons borne by each of the prisoners was precisely the same as, and corroboratory of, the other evidence.
The description given of the conduct of the parties at Pantyfen was also the same as that already given.
Cross-examined by Mr. Richards:— The old man said that he owed nothing to Gwenllian.
I never heard of the proclamation offering a reward before I gave the information.
Never heard of Colonel Trevor’s proclamation.
Never told Mr. Benjamin Jones that Mr. Price, the Magistrate, had offered me 50l. reward for informing.
Re-examined:— Witness had been ill in bed from the time of the occurrence to the present time.
John Jones, Derllwyn, examined:— I remember hearing of people having been at Pantyfen.
I was on that night by a wood near Glangwilly.
There were two other boys with us.
We saw about ten people walking on the road.
This witness’s evidence was deemed immaterial, and he was dismissed.
David Davies examined by Mr. Chilton, said that, on one occasion, the prisoner David Thomas requested him to go with him to Penlan to get 40l. for a woman.
Witness refused to go.
He then wished to borrow two guns, which witness would not give.
On the following day, David Thomas told him they had been at Pantyfen, and had got 1l. 1s., and had given the old man one shilling back — that they had got the note signed.
William Lewis examined, said, that in , the prisoner, David Thomas, requested him to go with him to Pantyfen, to bring a gun, pistol, and sword with him, and that he should have a sovereign.
He also had asked him .
He did not speak about being armed on the second time.
Told him first time he would go.
The second time he requested me to go with him, and I said, no I would not.
Esau Daniel examined:— Remembers previous to August fair that prisoner, David Thomas, requested him to accompany him to Llanfihangel-ar-Arth, and would give him a share of 5l..
John Jones, Caerphilly, said, that at the request of John Thomas he went to the first meeting at his house.
He named all the prisoners as being present, and two others not in custody.
They all disguised themselves but witness.
He said that he would not go with them to Pantyfen, as he had seen David, of Bryn-amlwg, passing through the yard.
David Evans was disguised in a stuff-cloak and bonnet.
They left the house, and postponed going that night, and agreed to meet on the following night.
Witness did not go that night.
He refused to have anything to do with them.
John Guy, of the A division of Metropolitan Police, examined:– Had been a long time in search of David Evans.
Went in to his father’s house.
His sister denied his being in the house.
On searching, he found him concealed.
Edward Edwards, was called to prove his having seen the signature of David Thomas, the prisoner, and Gwenllian Lewis attached to an agreement.
The agreement was read.
It was one entered into between Thomas and the female, by which she agreed to sell the alleged legacy due from Daniel Harris to her for the sum of 13l., and if he could not recover it the agreement was to be void.
John Davies proved that shortly before the outrage, John Thomas told him to go where they had been to before.
Witness understood he referred to their having been at Pantyfen.
Prisoner said that they had dealt too leniently with the old man, and that they were going again, that he would go there himself, and make him pay in money.
He asked witness if he would come?
Witness said no.
He asked if his son should come.
Witness declined acceding to his request.
He then said, “I could procure enough of men, if I could get horses.”
At last witness consented to lend him a saddle.
Mr. Chilton now announced that this was the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Richards then addressed the jury for the three prisoners, David Evans, David Thomas, and Thomas Thomas, and in doing so he wished it to be understood, that he perfectly agreed with the observations made, with becoming solemnity, by the Learned Counsel (Mr. Chilton), who led for the Crown, on the atrocious enormities which had been lately committed in that county; but he contended that neither of the three prisoners represented by him were present at the time alleged.
There could be no doubt but that a great outrage, as detailed in evidence, had been committed by some persons at Pantyfen, on the night in question, and he also agreed with his Learned Friend who represented the Attorney-General, that, on this occasion, the outrage was one of a private nature, under the garb of public utility.
Mr. Richards then commented upon the unreasonableness of the proceeding adopted to get the vote by David Thomas when he might have known that payment could never have been enforced.
The Learned Gentleman then commented upon the whole of the evidence.
He referred to the rewards offered by Government, and attributed perjury to the witnesses for the prosecution.
Having remarked at considerable length upon the evidence given for the prosecution, Mr. Richards proceeded to state that he would call evidence to prove that David Evans was at a distance of miles off on the night in question, having called at the house of a friend at Soar, which is nine miles distant from Pantyfen.
John Thomas, one of the prisoners, addressed the jury, and said that he had been in the same room in gaol as the witness Evan Davies for about an hour — that Davies wished the prisoner to turn Queen’s evidence, and state the same thing as he did, and that he should get a share of the 50l. which Mr. Price had given him — that he had got John Jones and another witness for the prosecution to swear the same things, and that he (prisoner) said he did not like to tell untruth about his neighbours, and that Mr. Price, the magistrate, said he would be quite safe if he would inform; but he would not do so, as he knew he had a soul.
[This is the prisoner who made the statement in confession to the Magistrates].
Evan Evans was then called as a witness to prove an alibi on behalf of David Evans.
He swore that the prisoner called at his house on the night in question, to make arrangements about going to Hereford.
In cross-examination witness said, that he was the prisoner’s uncle, and he fixed the time so exactly, because prisoner called at his house on the night previous to the fair at Carmarthen.
Evan Jones said he called at Evan Evans’s house on the night in question, and saw the prisoner there.
This witness contradicted the last in one very material point.
Enock Jones was called to prove the same thing.
Mary Evans was called for the same purpose.
Margaret Richards, sister of David Richards, one of the parties charged (but not in custody) with being one of the burglars, gave evidence to prove an alibi for Thomas Thomas.
She also proved that Evan Davies, one of the prosecution witnesses, said that he had been offered 50l. for swearing about Pantyfen.
Benjamin Jones was brought on to prove a similar thing.
Mary Richards, the wife of one of the parties charged, but since absconded, came to prove that one of the prosecution witnesses made to her a statement, but which had been contradicted in cross-examination by that witness.
Several witnesses to character having been called, Mr. Chilton was in the act of replying, when the Judge intimated that, as the case had occupied the whole day, and would in all probability occupy some hours longer, the Court had better be adjourned.
Accommodations for the night were then ordered to be provided for the jury, and the Court was adjourned.
. —
the burglary case was proceeded with.
— Several witnesses were called to give the various prisoners good characters.
Mr. Chilton then addressed the jury in reply.
He commenced by vindicating the characters of the witnesses for the prosecutions from the attacks made upon them by Mr. Richards.
He was extremely sorry that in his defence his Learned Friend had found it necessary so indiscriminately to attack all the witnesses, from the Magistrates who performed their arduous duties so fearlessly during the late alarming state of the country, to the policeman who did his duties, and acted under the direction of the Magistrates.
The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to point out the gross contradictions and inconsistencies in the evidence of the witnesses who were called to prove alibis, all of whom, with the exception of Benjamin Jones, were relations either of the prisoners, or of those who, being charged with the burglary, had absconded.
Many of the discourses said to have been made use of about the proclamations, were stated to have taken place even before the rewards had been offered.
Mr. Chilton then dwelt at considerable length upon the evidence of accomplices.
It would be dangerous to convict upon the evidence of an accomplice, unless corroborated in some important points by the evidence of untainted witnesses.
Such, he contended, was the case in this instance.
The Learned Counsel for the defence had contended that it was extremely improbable that David Thomas should have committed himself into the confidence of so many persons as he was represented to have done; but it indisputably appeared that the offence had been committed by some people.
Some persons had committed themselves into the power of so many people.
Then came the questions, Who did so?
Who had a motive for doing so?
He (Mr. Chilton) contended, that a strong motive was proved by the agreement entered into between the prisoner Thomas and Gwenllian Lewis — that the former should pay her 13l. in case he should, by any means, procure a larger sum from Daniel Harries, the deceased.
How could the accomplices have known anything respecting that agreement, had they not been informed about it by the prisoner?
But even setting aside their evidence, the guilt of the two Thomas’s was proved by that of untainted witnesses.
Mr. Chilton went over the whole of the evidence, and concluded a very powerful address by entreating the jury to give the case that weight and consideration which its importance deserved and give the prisoners the benefit of any reasonable doubts.
The Learned Judge then summed up the evidence.
The first question for the jury to consider was, whether an offence of the nature of that described by the witnesses had been committed.
It was his duty to tell them that, if entrance was effected into a house by threat or intimidation, in law, it amounted to burglary, though the door might have been opened not by force, but by its having been opened by the inmates of the house.
However strong the evidence against David Thomas, as an accessory before the fact, might be, yet, if the others were not guilty, he could not be convicted, for he was charged with having abetted and procured them, and not other persons.
His Lordship then directed the jury how to receive the evidence of accomplices.
The law empowered juries to convict upon the evidence of accomplices only, yet it was never safe to convict upon their evidence, unless corroborated in some important points by other evidence given by untainted witnesses.
His Lordship then read over the most important portions of the evidence, and contrasted the various parts corroborative of, or apparently inconsistent with, the rest of the evidence.
The jury then retired, and after about forty minutes absence, returned a verdict of Guilty against all the prisoners.
You may note that this account tends to report the prosecution’s case as fact and often neglects to say what the defense witnesses actually said (summarizing instead, often in an unflattering way).
Maybe they just weren’t very credible, or maybe this is another case of bias in the English-language press in Wales.
One difference is that Evan Davies, one of the accomplices turned informer, made an explicit “Rebecca” connection, saying that during the robbery: “We told the old man that Becca had come there to get the money which he owed Gwenllian Lewis under a will.”
Another is the account of John Jones’s testimony.
In this version, he says that it was David Thomas who came to him to ask him to join the conspiracy.
Also, this version lists the people in attendance at the meeting: “John Jones, (one of the witnesses,) Thomas Thomas, Esau Davies, John Thomas, David Richards, John Powell, John James, David Evans, and John Thomas, Penlan, father of David Thomas, who was also there.”
The description of John Guy’s testimony of how he found David Evans is more detailed: “I then searched the house, and found the prisoner in a loft under some straw, with a rug wrapped around his head, to conceal his face.
There was no bed there.
His clothes were brought from below, by one of his sisters, I think.”
But this account is even more sparing on presenting the case for the defense.
It just gives this one-sentence summary: “Mr. Richards, for the prisoners, whom he defended, addressed the jury; and called witnesses, who gave several of the prisoners good characters.”
James Thomas and Thomas Thomas, were then placed at the bar, and charged with having, on , feloniously aided and abetted one John Jones, (Shoni Scyborfawr,) in discharging a certain loaded fire-arm, called a gun, at one Margaret Thomas, with intent to murder her, or to do her some grievous bodily harm.
[The Cambrian adds: “In other counts of the indictment the intent was varied, and also the individuals shot at.
— This case excited the greatest interest, in consequence of the respectability of the family and connexions of the former prisoner.”]
The prisoners pleaded not guilty.
Mr. Chilton addressed the jury for the prosecution, and stated that the prisoners were charged with shooting at one Margaret Thomas, with another person of the name of John Jones, called Shoni Scyborfawr, who had been convicted of Rebecca riots at the Winter Assizes.
Thomas Thomas was a most respectable man, and he was sorry to see him standing at the bar to answer the change of taking part in these disgraceful outrages.
He begged the jury to dismiss all prejudice from their minds, and give the matter full consideration; and observed that he would bring evidence before them, which would prove the guilt of the prisoners.
The prosecutor was one Evan Thomas, a weaver, at Porthyrhyd, whose house had been frequently attacked by the Rebeccaites.
On , the mob came to the house, and demanded admittance, put the muzzles of their guns through the window, and fired them into the room, at the wife and children; and a shot entered the thigh of one of the children, and it was a mercy the prisoners were not standing at that bar to be tried on the charge of murder.
The son-in-law would prove the identity of Thomas Thomas, as he knew his person and voice well, and heard him giving directions to the mob, saying, “Shoot him, shoot him.”
The women also knew his voice.
A paper of protection to Evan Thomas, written by Mrs. Thomas, wife of Thomas Thomas, the prisoner, was read.
It desired protection to him from the further molestations of ’Becca, as he expressed his contrition for anything he had done against her, and he would give up the office of constable.
[The Cambrian includes this part of the speech, which gives more details about the attack: “Were he calling the attention of the jury to a mere case of the destruction of a turnpike gate, or of a toll-house, he should feel himself called upon to offer some observations upon the awful and important responsibility of the oath which they had taken, and which called upon them to disregard all prejudices — aye, even if they considered that no very great crime was committed by pulling down a turnpike-gate or house, and so get rid of tolls… But, however much opinions might differ respecting gates and tolls, no honest man could, by any possibility, sympathize with such outrages as he should prove were committed on the night in question, under the guise of Rebeccaism.
The prosecutor in this case was a weaver and small farmer, who had also acted for a number of years as constable in the parish of Porthyrhyd, and the only offence with which he was charged was, that he honestly performed his duties as a constable, which rendered him very inimical to those who, calling themselves Rebeccaites, had resolved upon exterminating turnpike-gates.
In consequence of this, his life was in peril; he had received letter after letter containing all kinds of threats.
His house was attacked, night after night, so that it had become impossible for him longer to continue residing in it.
He had therefore left it on , his wife, son-in-law, two daughters and children remaining therein.
On , in the dead of night, after having retired to rest — they were aroused by a mob, in which were a great number of persons dressed after the fashion of Rebecca, armed with guns, pickaxes, bludgeons, and various other implements.
They demanded that Evan Thomas should be given up to them.
His daughter, alarmed as she was, got up, and assured them that Evan Thomas was not in the house.
They replied that they would have him, or destroy all who were in the house.
They then pulled down a temporary shutter — for the window had been destroyed on a previous night — and pointed three guns, which it would again appear were loaded with slugs, with their muzzles towards the half-naked woman.
This was repeated, and he should prove to the jury that some of the guns were loaded with shot; and it was almost a miracle that the prisoners had not to stand at that bar, and answer to a charge of murder — for murder it must unquestionably have been were any lives lost on that occasion.
Slugs were afterwards discovered in the furniture, and a shot had been extracted from the child’s thigh.
… He should tell them one circumstance, which showed that Thomas Thomas took part in the Rebecca disturbances, and had some influence with those people.
Attacks had been made on the house of the prosecutor, Evan Thomas, in , and he went to the residence of Thomas Thomas, with the hope of making a friend of him, and asked him for protection from the depredations of the Rebeccaites.
The prisoner promised to write him a kind of paper or petition, if he called next day.
He did so on a subsequent day, when the prisoner gave him a piece of written paper, and told him if he would get a few of the neighbours to sign it, the Beccas would leave him alone.
The paper was written in prisoner’s presence, by Mrs. Thomas, who undoubtedly, from the style of the writing, &c., was a person of respectable education.
The Learned Counsel then read the document; it was to the following effect:— ‘The undersigned, Evan Thomas, begs to inform those who call themselves Beccaites, that he is heartily sorry if he has done anything to injure any one, and sincerely hopes they will allow his family and self to rest in peace from henceforth.
He sincerely promises never again to act as constable in this or any other parish, as he is told that is one great objection you have to him, but will from hence endeavour to become a comfort to his family, and regain the friendship of the country, which he finds he has entirely lost.’ ”]
After the examination of the witness, his lordship directed the jury to return a verdict of “Not guilty” of that charge.
The Cambrian is almost as vague.
Apparently the prosecution presented one witness — George Thomas — who, in the Cambrian’s words, testified “in nearly the same words as given in the following charge of misdemeanor against the same defendants” but apparently didn’t give enough substantiation to the felony charge.
The judge seems to have ruled that if the defendants had actually had the intent to shoot to kill or wound the unarmed woman trapped like an animal in a cage, they would have probably actually hit the mark, and so the prosecutor was going to have too high a bar to meet.
So the prosecutor went with Plan B: misdemeanour charges.
The same persons were again put on their trial, and charged with having, on , riotously and tumultuously assembled together, at Porthyrhyd, in the parish of Llanddarog, in this county, and then and there made a great noise, riot, and disturbance, and then and there divers of her Majesty’s liege subjects put in bodily fear, against the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, &c.
The prisoners were acquitted.
Here, again, the Cambrian gives more detail, with the testimony for the defense and prosecution.
I am the son-in-law of the prosecutor, Evan Thomas, who was a constable in , and lived at Porthyrhyd, in a cottage adjoining the road.
My wife, self, and child, slept in his house on .
Mary Thomas, Elizabeth Thomas, and Evan Thomas’s wife were in the house.
We had retired about ten o’clock.
Soon after retiring, we heard great noises of blowing of horns, &c. The mob were passing in the direction from Llanddarog to Swansea.
We heard firing.
In a short time after, when they were returning, I also heard firing.
The mob were calling for Evan Thomas.
Witness lighted a candle, when he saw three guns pointed between a board of the window and the wall.
The board was then pulled down, when witness perceived that it was a fine moonlight night.
I saw a large crowd of disguised persons; there were from thirty to fifty people outside.
After my mother-in-law opened the window, she said, “I know you, old fellow.”
They called his wife to come out, and go on her knees before them.
She said she would not, if she were torn to pieces.
Witness then went to the door, and the mob called on him to bring out Evan Thomas, or he should suffer instead of him.
They then commenced shooting at the house.
I saw the defendant, Thomas Thomas, there — I am sure he was there; had known him for two years, and seen him often before.
I went up to the defendant, about ten days before, to ask a favour, on part of my father, about Rebecca.
Defendant said, if he asked the favour for himself he would do it, but that all the country was angry to his father for being a constable.
Cross-examined by Mr. Wilson: Thomas Thomas wore a white gown down to his knees.
He wore a straw hat.
I well knew his voice.
He told them to shoot my wife.
He spoke English.
Witness could not speak English.
He spoke English, and said, “shoot him.”
(Laughter).
This took place on .
I cannot say when I gave the information.
I think it was a week before the Winter Assizes.
I have always been confident that he was there.
I never told Elizabeth Jones that it was impossible to recognize one of the parties, in consequence of the smoke.
I do not remember seeing her, in company with two others, by a school-room, when I told her, “I die if I knew one of them.
I could not, in consequence of the smoke.”
I never told her so.
I know David Jones, Llwynmor.
I might have told him that I knew none of them, as I suspected his servant was there.
I never told Margaret Roberts that the devil would not know them.
I never told David Davies, Pontfaen, on the evening after the disturbance, that “I could not know one of them, as I should answer judgment, because the house was so full of smoke.”
— Witness was cross-examined at considerable length as to his hiving told several people, in conversation with them, that he could not recognize them.
Reference was made to conversations with about a dozen, people.
I told some people, said witness, that I knew them, and to others that I did not, because I was afraid of them, and suspected that either they or their connexions were present.
Mr. Hall cross-examined witness on behalf of James Thomas:– The examination was principally directed to prove that, in conversation, witness had contradicted statements given by him in evidence.
Margaret Thomas, the last witness’s wife, next gave evidence:— She positively identified, first, John Jones, alias Shoni Scyborfawr.
She said to James Thomas, “Ah! old fellow, who gave you permission to come in here?”
He then smiled, and turned round.
I have known him, said witness, from a child; have spoken with him hundreds of times.
Could not identify Thomas Thomas’s person, but was sure of his voice.
He was at a distance, and had a white shirt and a straw hat about him.
Witness said, “If I have done anything wrong, send the law towards me.”
One of the mob said, “The law is is now nearly all in the hands of ’Becca and her daughters.”
Witness was examined at considerable length by Mr. Hall, who put in evidence the witness’s deposition, taken before the committing Magistrates.
Mary Thomas, sister of the last witness, slept in her father’s house on the night it was attacked by the mob.
Heard a person crying out, “Shoot, shoot him.”
I will swear it was Thomas Thomas’s voice.
Cross-examined:— I will swear I slept in my father’s house that night.
I did not sleep with Martha Vaughan on that night.
I had slept with her a week before.
I never told David Rees that I had that night slept with Martha Vaughan.
Elizabeth Thomas, the wife of Evan Thomas, was examined, to prove that the last witness slept in the house on that night.
Evan Thomas (the celebrated Porthyrhyd lion), was next examined:– is 56 years of age.
Has acted 16 or 17 years as a constable.
My house was attacked in .
I met Thos. Thomas and his wife on the road.
I told his wife that I wished to have quiet with the ’Beccas — that they destroyed my things.
Mrs. Thomas said the only objection the country had to witness was, that he was a constable, and she added, that he must give that office up, and they would leave him alone.
She also asked him to come to the house, and she would give him a paper.
He said he could not that day, but if they wished assistance at the hay-harvest, he would give it.
He went there, and worked a day.
In the evening, Thomas Thomas told him that he would give him a paper.
His wife called me in, and commenced writing.
She gave me a paper to protect me from ’Becca.
I have got the paper.
[Witness then produced the written paper, which is given in the Learned Counsel’s opening statement.]
Mr. Wilson now addressed the jury on behalf of the defendant, Mr. Thomas Thomas.
The jury had heard from his Learned Friend, Mr. Chilton, that his client, Mr. Thomas, was a man of respectable station in society, had borne an irreproachable character, and, in addition to being a considerable farmer and freeholder himself, he was the son of as respectable a freeholder as any in the county, and, therefore, the most unlikely to be connected with the outrageous attack which undoubtedly had been committed on the house of the poor man, Evan Thomas on the night in question.
The Learned Counsel read nearly the whole of the evidence, making comments thereon, and contending that the witnesses must either have been mistaken, or grossly perjured, in swearing so positively to the identity of the prisoner.
Mr. Lloyd Hall then addressed the jury for the defendant, James Thomas, contending that the statements and manners of the witnesses for the prosecution were not such as to entitle their evidence to the belief of the jury.
He then proceeded to state that James Thomas was a lime-burner, in the employ of R.M. Philipps, Esq., and that, on the night in question, he was engaged at his work at a distance off at the time of the riot.
Elizabeth Jones, servant to the defendant, Thomas Thomas, was then called.
She remembered the night of the riot at Evan Thomas’s house.
Saw the defendant and his wife shut the bedroom door.
She slept next door to Mr. Thomas.
No person could go out of the house without her knowing it.
He did not go out that night.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chilton:— She generally slept so lightly, that she could hear a cat go out of the room.
There was a seamstress and another person in the room.
By the Court:– got up about the same time the morning before and the morning after the riot.
I got up the previous morning at five, and retired at twelve.
The seamstress was called to prove that she slept with the last witness.
Remembers Mr. and Mrs. Thomas going to bed, about twelve o’clock.
Heard great noise of horns and shooting before Mr. and Mrs. Thomas came into the house — neither did go out afterwards.
Elizabeth Jones, David Jones, Margaret Williams, David Davies, David Jenkins, Esther Jones, Thomas Davies, John Thomas, John John, and others, were called as witnesses, to prove that various statements had been made by George Thomas and other witnesses, contradictory of the evidence given by them in Court, such as saying, “The devil himself could not know the people there, as they were so disguised” — “if I was to answer judgment at this moment, I could not recognize one, as they were so disguised,[”] — and that George Thomas said, “that he was ready to swear, before God and man, that he knew no person.”
John Thomas, father of the prisoner, James Thomas, was called to prove a similar statement.
Remembered he had a job about , which required the repairing of some tools, and that his son brought them to him at such a time, that he must have been engaged in repairing them on the night of the riot.
Mrs. Evans, wife of the Rev. Stephen Evans, Curate of some parish in Carmarthenshire, gave evidence relative to a conversation, during which Evan Thomas declared he did not know any person at the riot.
Several witnesses were then called to sustain the alibi on behalf of James Thomas.
Margaret Vaughan and David Rees swore — the former that Mary Thomas, one of the witnesses for the prosecution, had slept with her on the night of the riot; and the latter, that she informed him that she had slept at the woman Vaughan’s house.
Richard Rees, Esq., County Treasurer, and Eliezer Wiliams, Esq., Surgeon, gave the prisoner Thomas Thomas a good character, but admitted in cross-examination that latterly he had been a reputed Rebeccaite.
Mr. Chilton, Q.C., then replied to the evidence adduced for the defence, in a very able and energetic speech.
His Lordship then summed up the evidence, observing, that with respect to the first question for the consideration of the jury — whether any riot had taken place on the night in question — there could be no kind of doubt.
The next point was, whether the prisoner, or either of them, was present.
His Lordship observed, that there was nothing either in the evidence or manner of the witnesses for the prosecution, to induce an opinion that they had perjured themselves; but if the witnesses for the defence were believed, the jury must come to that conclusion as to some points.
With respect to the evidence of the witness Vaughan, she might have been mistaken as to the night on which Mary Thomas slept with her; but if it was on the night of the riot, the latter must have perjured herself.
His Lordship then pointed out the various points of evidence given in defence, rather corroborative than otherwise, of the prosecution.
His Lordship most carefully recapitulated the whole of the evidence bearing upon the case, and offered some observations relating to alibis.
After his Lordship had concluded the jury retired, and returned in less than ten minutes, with a verdict of Not Guilty for both defendants.
Back to the Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser:
The following prisoners were then placed at the bar to receive the sentence of the court:
John Harries [Harris?], Isaac Charles, Job Evans, John Lewis, David Williams, and David Thomas, convicted of riot at the Carmarthen Workhouse, on , the former of whom was sentenced to 12 calendar months’ hard labour, and the others to eight calendar months’ each.
[The Cambrian adds these remarks from the judge: “The case of the defendant Harris showed, that there were to be found persons somewhat above the lowest grade in the ranks of the Rebeccaites, though he thought that there never had arisen a popular agitation produced by such gross ignorance.
As Harries ought, from his station in society, to have known his duty better than to allow himself to become the ringleader and instigator of this proceeding, some distinction must be made between the punishment awarded him and that awarded the other defendants.”]
Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis, David Lewis, David Davies, and Jonathan Lewis, convicted of a riot at Talog, were sentenced to 8 calendar months’ imprisonment with hard labour.
The Cambrian adds another case here: of Thomas Hughes, John Jones, and Benjamin Jones, “convicted of a riot, and the destruction of Pontileche Gate” The judge said they had been convicted of a misdemeanor but were probably guilty of a felony, but hadn’t been charged with a felony because this would mean trying them before a common jury, which might have led to jury nullification — “It was a shocking thing to think that there were grounds for imagining that there were some persons of a disposition to sympathise with such depredations, even of the stations in society of persons eligible to serve on juries, who were bound by their oaths to support and vindicate the laws of their country,” he said, perhaps reflecting on the case decided that day.
He sentenced them to twelve months of hard labor apiece.
David Thomas, Thomas Powell, John Thomas, John James, Thomas Thomas, John Thomas, Evan Davies, and David Evans, convicted of burglary and robbery at Pantyfen, in the parish of Llanfihangel-ar-arth, were called on, and the first was sentenced to 20 years’ transportation, for being an accessory before the fact, and the instigator to this disgraceful outrage; and all the others were sentenced to 10 years transportation.
His lordship, in addressing the prisoners, observed that they had been found guilty of an offence of the greatest magnitude; that they had taken advantage of the disturbances which unhappily prevailed in this and the adjoining counties, to serve their own private and wicked purposes; but it would be shewn to them that they would not be allowed to trample upon the laws of the country with impunity, and he would send them to a country where they would have no opportunity of committing such a disgraceful & cruel outrage again.
The scene which took place in the court, after the sentences were delivered on the latter prisoners, baffles all description.
[?!]
Quite the lazy reporter.
Here is how the Cambrian described the scene: “Immediately after the last sentence had been pronounced, the scene in Court became most affecting — perhaps awful would be more expressive of the effect produced upon the minds of the spectators.
Nearly all the prisoners — who, though they had before shewn no carelessness or disregard, yet had manifested no great concern at their situation — now burst into fits of inconsolable agony, while in different parts of the Court, women were seen in hysterical fits, and others of both sexes gave vent to their grief in loud cries, and, in some instances, in terrific yells.
The officers had some difficulty in removing the prisoners.
A sentence of such severity was apparently quite unexpected, both by the prisoners and their friends.”
After the prisoners had been removed, his lordship observed that the persons charged with destroying a turnpike gate near Llanddarog [Thomas Davies, Phillip Thomas, and Joseph Clement] would be admitted to bail, until the next assize; and the civil causes not tried or settled out of court, would be left as remanents.
On , a Special Petty Sessions was held at our Townhall, for the purpose of passing the accounts of the Overseers for the various parishes in the Hundred of Swansea, and also for receiving the lists of their successors.
The Magistrates present were T. Edw. Thomas, Thomas Penrice, L. Ll. Dillwyn, Esqrs, and the Rev. Samuel Davies. …
The accounts of the parish of Ilston and another parish could not be passed, in consequence of the non-compliance of the Overseers with an order, that 18l. for defraying the expenses of constables, who were employed to watch the gates during the late Rebecca disturbances, should be contributed by each parish.
The Overseer declared that the parishioners positively refused paying the rate, knowing the purpose for which it would be applied.
Mr. Attwood informed him, that the only course would be to obtain warrants against the parties refusing, or he (the Overseer) would be held personally responsible for the amount.
From the Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser:
On , David Evans, farmer, of Penlan, in the parish of Llanfihangel-Yeroth, was committed by J.L. Davies, Esq., to Carmarthen Gaol, for inciting persons, by threatening letters, &c., to destroy Llanfihangel gate, last summer, and acting as Rebecca on the occasion.
The Carmarthenshire Summer Assizes were sitting on .
The Foreman of the Grand Jury was George Rice Trevor, who was also the local official responsible for the police actions against the Rebecca Rioters, the one who had called in the riot police from London, and the one who had established the rewards to be given to informers.
Now he would be deciding the fate of the accused, I figured.
Such is Due Process.
But a second “petty jury” was called for the Rebeccaite case, so it is unclear to me from the news coverage quite what role the Grand Jury had in it.
In any case, this time around the jury was not stacked well enough to gain a conviction for the government.
I perceive that there is one case, which, by the depositions, seems to have arisen out of the unfortunate occurrences which took place in this county last year, and of which you have heard so much.
The depositions seem to shew that the party charged is guilty of having attempted to demolish a house — an offense, I need not tell you, which is of a most serious nature.
In order to constitute that crime, you must be satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt, that the party charged, not only intended to demolish the house, but that he did, by himself, and by others under his immediate control, or who acted under his instigation and authority, actually commence the work of demolition.
There seems to be no doubt of that, if the facts stated in the depositions are strictly true, for it is positively alleged, that not only did they begin to demolish the house, but that they actually accomplished the demolition.
You are aware that merely breaking the windows of the house will not be sufficient to warrant you in sending the parties charged, to take their trial; it must be strictly proved that a successful or unsuccessful attempt to demolish the house itself did actually occur.
The trial of David Evans for Rebeccaite demolition took place .
Trial of a Rebeccaite
David Evans, aged 48, farmer, was indicted for having, on , riotously, unlawfully, and feloniously demolished, pulled down, and destroyed a certain dwelling-house and toll-gate, situate in the parish of Llanfihangel-ar-Arth, in the county of Carmarthen.
That is within a day or so of the attack on the Carmarthen workhouse, which was possibly the largest-attended and boldest (it took place in broad daylight) of the Rebeccaite attacks, though it was quelled by the military.
I’ve also seen the place called “Llanfihangleararth” and “Llanfihangle-Yeroth.”
At the time (see ♇ 26 June 2014), the attack on the gate and toll-house there was estimated to have been accomplished by seventy people, which makes Evans a pretty unlucky fellow to have been singled out like this (or, perhaps he was deliberately singled out as a ringleader).
Several petty jurors, who did not answer to their names, were fined forty shillings each.
The officer of the court called over nearly two-thirds of the jury-list, and only three jurymen answered.
— His lordship then directed that the list should be gone over again, and that every juror who did not answer should be fined forty shillings; the result was, that a jury was procured in the course of a few minutes.
Mr. Chilton briefly stated the case to the jury, and said, he would call before them David Thomas, who would tell them that, up to , he, and his wife and family, had slept in the toll-house in question, and had collected tolls there — tolls payable at Llanfihangel gate.
; and on — having heard that the gate and toll-house in which he resided was to be destroyed that night, he had caused his furniture to be removed, to prevent their sharing in the common ruin.
This was one of those many cases which it would be almost affectation to suppose the jury had not heard of.
He (Mr. Chilton) would shew them, that on , a very large assemblage of people came to the house and gate at Llanfihangel.
They were variously disguised, having white dresses on, and their Faces blackened.
Many of them wore dresses usually worn by women.
The first attack on the toll-house was made by the prisoner, who had broken one of the windows with a gun he had in his hand, and which gun he at intervals discharged.
The roof of the house was taken off, and the walls battered down.
While the people were destroying the gate and toll-house, the prisoner walked about, giving orders in English — marching up and down, with his face blackened, among the mob, and giving directions.
He (Mr. Chilton) would call three witnesses, who where present on the night in question.
His learned friend (Mr. Hall) would probably tell them that as those persons were accomplices, this evidence, unless strongly supported by that of other persons, ought not to be received — or at most received with great caution; but he (Mr. Chilton) conceived they were were not accomplices in that sense of the word which rendered their testimony suspicious, or unworthy of credit.
One of the witnesses would tell the jury that he was there in his usual dress and took no part in the proceedings that he looked on, but was, of course, totally unable to resist the crowd of persons who were there assembled.
Two others were compelled by the mob to be present.
The jury would hear from various witnesses, that the prisoner had made use of certain expressions subsequent to the commission of the offence with which he stood charged; and they would also hear from a magistrate what the prisoner said at the time he was committed.
He concluded his opening address by explaining why the case had not been brought forward earlier; and assured the jury that he placed the most implicit confidence in their integrity, and felt sure that they would not shrink from discharging their duty faithfully and honestly.
Thomas Jones examined by Mr. Vaughan Williams: I am a farm servant, and remember I had heard that that gate was to be broken on .
In consequence of what I heard I went up to see what I could see of it.
About I reached the gate, and saw a great many people come to the gate .
They were variously dressed — disguised — they were very much like ladies.
Their faces were blackened, and their hats were tied down to resemble bonnets.
I know Daniel Evans the prisoner was one of them.
He was dressed in white, and his face was coloured.
I knew him, because I was near enough to him, and I saw him break the upper window of the toll-house with the point of his gun.
The crowd were all about him at the time.
Prisoner was talking something to them in English, but I did not understand what he said.
After prisoner had said something to them in English they (the crowd) broke the gate and pulled the house down.
While the people were pulling down the toll-house the prisoner did nothing but fire off his gun a few times.
There was a great deal of noise there — noise occasioned by breaking the things, and by the people cheering.
I think there were more than fifty people there disguised.
I was not disguised.
I had known the prisoner before, and was close by him when he broke the window with his gun.
I knew his walk as he walked up and down, when the people were breaking the gate and house.
I also knew his voice.
Cross-examined: It was rather a bright night.
There were a great many there expecting the people to come and break the gate beside myself.
I did not see David Jones of Bon-y-maen there, nor David Evans, of Brydbwll.
My master’s name is John Lloyd.
I was not in his service .
I do not know of any quarrel that ever took place between my master and the prisoner.
I never heard that the prisoner went to prove who had broken the gate at Wernmackwydd.
I never heard that my master was charged with having broken that gate.
I did not see John Jones, of Cross Inn, there that night, although I have heard that he was employed to watch the gate.
David Jones examined by Mr. Chilton: I remember .
Some time after I had gone to bed on some persons came to my house.
The first thing I heard was guns being fired.
The people who came there knocked at the door and window.
I went down stairs.
It was a fine night, and I saw three or four people there by the door, dressed in strange clothes, similar to women’s clothes.
Their faces were coloured.
They asked me in English for pickaxes.
I told them I did not understand what they said.
One of the party then asked me in Welsh.
I saw one gun there, and it was put opposite to me when they asked for the pickaxes.
They told me to dress, and that I should have not much time to dress.
I was very much frightened.
They compelled me to go with them, and I went to Llanfihangel gate with them.
When I reached the gate the first thing was a window broken.
I saw the gate falling down.
I heard a person there talking English, but I did not know who it was.
I saw David Evans, the prisoner there.
I have known him about 15 years.
He was dressed in something similar to a woman’s dress, and his face was discoloured.
He asked me to throw a few sticks on one side.
They were sticks which had been taken off the house.
He had a gun with him.
I knew his voice when he spoke to me.
There were a very great number of men there, and many of them were disguised.
A great many were engaged in pulling down the house.
The prisoner told a few of them to work well.
He fired his gun off occasionally, and others did the same with guns they had.
There was a great noise and disturbance made.
The roof was all pulled down, and the walls were half pulled down — that is, half from the eaves to the foundation.
Cross-examined: My face was not blackened, and I did not halloa with the rest.
I know John Lloyd of Dolmaen.
I am a tenant of his.
I know Evan Rees of Brydbwll.
I know John Oliver, of Bedwhirion.
I do not know that those three persons were charged with having broken Mr. Bowen, of Wernmackwydd’s gate.
I do not know that the prisoner was to be a witness against those persons.
Re-examined: The men asked me for a mattock.
I have since had it explained that a mattock is a pickaxe.
Evan Evans examined by Mr. V. Williams: I remember the night that Llanfihangel gate was broken.
I was going to bed that night, when a person in disguise came to me and told me I was bound to accompany him to Llanfihangel gate.
I said I was tired.
The man said I must go.
My wife begged of me to go for fear I should put her and the children in peril.
I then went with them to the turnpike road, where I saw scores of people.
Some of them had guns, which were fired off, and many of them were disguised.
I went with them to Cross Inn, but before I got there I recognised David Evans, the prisoner, as one of the party.
He was disguised in a white dress, and had his face discoloured.
He had a gun in his hand.
I was talking to him as I knew him very well.
I was his tenant.
My face was disguised.
I said to him — “David, is it you are here?”
He replied — “Do not call any person by his name.”
I then went on to Llanfihangel gate, and saw the prisoner there.
Some days after I saw the prisoner undisguised, and said to him that there was a terrible appearance at the toll-house.
The prisoner said — “Yes, they did their work well.”
Some days after that he gave me a small letter, and asked me to take it to the smith’s shop at Cross Inn Fach.
Cross-examined: I did not see all that took place at Llanfihangel gate.
I saw the upper window broken before the gate was demolished.
I do not know who broke it.
I do not think it was the prisoner, as it was broken by a shorter man than the prisoner.
I cannot say I have heard of any dispute between Mr. John Lloyd and the prisoner.
When I met the men on the road I heard some one call out — “We shall meet ‘Becca at Cross Inn.”
Cross Inn was nearer to Llanfihangel gate than the place where we were.
I recollect asking the prisoner to come with me to a yard by Cross Inn, to see the people they called “Becca” pass.
I went on to Cross Inn, and saw the people pass.
I do not know where the prisoner was then, as I had lost sight of him.
Re-examined: At the time I had this discourse with the prisoner about Cross Inn, he had a white dress on, and his face was darkly coloured.
David Thomas examined: I was toll-collector at Llanfihangel gate, and had slept in the toll-house with my wife and family the night before it was destroyed, and had done so for 24 years.
I was the lessee of the tolls.
I had heard a report that the gate and house were to be pulled down, and therefore removed my furniture on — that is, the morning before the house and gate were pulled down.
By the court: I paid rent to the Carmarthen and Tivy side district road trustees.
John Timothy Hughes examined: I am a superintendent of the rural police.
On , I conveyed the prisoner to gaol.
I did not say to him it would be better for
him to confess anything.
As we were going along he said — “It is hard that I
should be punished for the whole, when I did no more than the others.”
He was speaking of the offence for which he had been committed — about the destruction of Llanfihangel gate.
Cross-examined: I am sure he was not speaking about Rebeccaism generally.
He complained that he was singled out for punishment, when he had done no more at Llanfihangel gate than others.
He said this more than once.
He said nothing of other gates.
I am quite sure his remarks had reference to the Llanfihangel gate and the Gwarol gate.
Henry Edwards examined: I am a policeman, and had a warrant to apprehend the prisoner on .
I searched for him and found him at Llanfihangel, in the house of David Jones, concealed upstairs.
It was about nine in the morning.
He was in bed with his clothes on.
Cross-examined: I heard that morning that he had been at Carmarthen the day previous with Mr. Bowen of Wernmackwydd.
John Lloyd Davies, Esq., examined by Mr. Chilton: I am a magistrate of this county, and took the examinations of the witnesses against the prisoner.
I took down the examination of David Jones.
When he (David Jones) had answered all the questions I put to him, I asked the prisoner if he wished to ask him (David Jones) any questions.
He replied — “I’ve only to say I was there, I did no more than others.”
Cross-examined: I recollect a person came into the room at the time the examination was going on, but as he told me he was not a professional man, I ordered the room to be cleared.
Re-examined: The prisoner can speak English.
He is a farmer.
This concluded the case for the crown.
Mr. Lloyd Hall then addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner, and said that, the prisoner had now to appeal to them whether or no he was to be transported for the term of his natural life — sent as a felon from his native land, or to be, by their verdict, returned to his home and to his family.
That the toll-house of Llanfihangel was destroyed on the night in question was beyond doubt but that the prisoner was a participator in that riotous and disgraceful affair certainly was very far from being established.
The prisoner had from the very commencement repeatedly said he had not touched the house.
The witnesses for the prosecution did not agree in ascribing the act of breaking the window to the prisoner.
One of them, who knew him well, said, it was not the prisoner who broke that window while the other witness, who did not know the prisoner so well, swore positively that the man who broke the windows was also the man who acted as leader of the crowd.
With regard to the conversations which had been given in evidence very little weight could be attached to them as it was apparent that the prisoner only adverted to the affair in terms similar to those which any innocent person might have used.
The whole case depended upon the evidence of the two first witnesses, Thomas Jones and David Jones.
The jury had heard something relative to another case which had taken place on the day previous to the prisoner’s arrest.
They might infer, from what they had heard, that the witnesses were influenced by private feeling in giving their evidence, and in the colouring which they gave to their statements.
The learned gentleman then eulogized the government for having treated the persons charged with Rebeccaism, during the last Winter Assizes, with marked leniency, and regretted that a similar course had not been pursued on this occasion; and this old affair — this old prosecution which had slumbered for twelve months had not been abandoned.
He then analysed the evidence of the witnesses, and told the jury that if they were to convict the prisoner upon such evidence they would be grieved in after years by the reflection that they had upon insufficient evidence been the means of banishing a man who might be entirely innocent, from his country and from his friends.
The learned judge summed up the evidence at great length to the jury, who after retiring for an hour and 40 minutes, returned the following verdict— “Not guilty of demolishing but guilty of being in the company.”
The prisoner was then removed in custody, and was tried upon a second indictment on .
The article proceeds with that trial a bit further on:
David Evans, who was tried on on a similar charge, was charged on a second indictment for destroying a turnpike gate, called Gwarallt, in the parish of Llanllwny, in this county, on the night of , pleaded “Not guilty.”
After hearing the evidence, the jury were locked up, and were discharged; his lordship informed the prisoner that he was liable still to be prosecuted at a future assizes, of which notice would be given him.
A little further on it is explained:
David Evans, who was indicted for a misdemeanor , connected with the destruction of the Gwarallt gate, was this morning discharged, the jury, who had been locked up all night, being unable to agree as to their verdict.
By , we’re well in to the “mopping up” point in the Rebecca Riots.
The crisis has climaxed, some of the Rebeccaites have been convicted and sentenced, and the Rebecca movement has gained some hard-won reforms in the road toll system.
Here’s a brief note from The Cambrian from :
The Rebecca Riots.
From the Bristol Mercury.
A piece of plate purchased by subscription, which it is intended to present to Mr. J.G. Powell, jun., of this city, one of the reporters of London Times, in acknowledgment of his services in exposing and promoting the redress of Welsh grievances during the period of the late Rebecca riots, has just been manufactured by Messrs. Chilcott, of this city.
It consists of a handsome silver vase, weighing upwards of 80 ounces.
On one side is represented a dragon passant, with wings elevated: the badge of Wales, originally adopted by Henry the Seventh, and settled by royal warrant of George the Third.
On the other side is the following inscription:—
To John Gover Powell, one of the faithful and indefatigable reporters of the Times newspaper, of facts connected with the “Rebecca” disturbances in the Principality of Wales, , who, in the discharge of their professional duties, became the patriotic expositors of grievances in which those disturbances originated, this Vase is respectfully presented as a small token of the feelings of grateful Welshmen, and other friends, for an impartial writer, who calmly traced, amidst popular tumult, the existence and source of legitimatised abuses, and, through the powerful medium of our glorious free press, fearlessly disclosed to public view insufferable wrongs, so as to insure from a British legislature the speedy restoration of just rights.
In , Powell had done a couple of months in jail for selling newspapers without tax stamps attached, so he may have had extra reason to be sympathetic with renegade tollgate destroyers.
The last thing that came to my notice from
concerning the Rebecca Riots that was in the English-language press in Wales
was this article concerning a plaque presented to William Chambers, one of the
Welsh magistrates who tried to suppress the Rebaccaite movement:
Testimonial to William Chambers,
Jun.,
Esq.
The subscribers to this testimonial, in order to evince the sense they
entertain of the valuable services rendered by Mr. Chambers during the period
of the Rebecca riots, have lately presented to him a massive and superb Silver
Epergne and Candelabrum, weighing 210 ounces, prepared under the direction and
management of William Webb,
Esq., the Chairman of the
Committee. We subjoin copies of the inscription on the Plate, and of the
correspondence which has taken place on the subject:–
Presented,
By Public Subscription, To
William Chambers, Junior, Esquire,
As a
Testimonial of the admiration inspired by his upright and intrepid conduct
throughout the whole of the Rebecca Riots; during which
fearful crisis he never relaxed, on the one hand, as a friend of the
people, his efforts for the constitutional redress of grievances, nor,
on the other, forgot, as a magistrate, what was due to the
dignity of Justice and the authority of Law, resisting to the last, with
unshrinking firmness, all criminal combinations against
Social Order and Private Property
Carmarthen,
My dear Sir,– I have the honour of being deputed
by the gentlemen who subscribed to the Chambers’ Testimonial, to present to
you an Epergne, as a token of their approbation of the zeal and intrepidity
displayed by you during the tumultuous proceedings which, unhappily, prevailed
in this county in the course of the last year. They fully appreciate your
meritorious exertions, in quelling disturbances, in maintaining the authority
of the law, and in affording protection and security to life and property.
Unawed by threats of personal violence, and the destruction of your property,
you fearlessly performed your public duty; and while you aided in bringing the
misguided violators of the law to punishment, you evinced a readiness to
assist in redressing grievances, thereby affording encouragement to the
peaceable, and inspiring with confidence the wavering and the timid. Although
your efforts to restore tranquility and order were accompanied by personal and
pecuniary sacrifices, yet, you have the consolation of knowing, that they have
been gratefully and universally acknowledged.
I beg to assure you, that it is to me a source of sincere gratification to
have been selected to make this communication to you.
I remain, my dear Sir,
Yours very sincerely
D. Morris.
To Wm. Chambers,
jun.,
Esq., Llanelly House.
Llanelly House, .
My dear Sir,– I beg to acknowledge the receipt
of your letter, accompanying the very handsome testimonial from the gentlemen
who have been pleased to notice my conduct in so flattering a manner. I shall
ever be proud of this mark of approbation, coming from my neighbours and
friends; nor am I the less grateful to those with whom I have not the honour
of so intimate an acquaintance.
This token more than compensates for all the personal inconvenience which I
was put to, and the pecuniary losses which I sustained, from the performance
of what I merely consider my duty; in the first instance, to my adopted
fellow-countrymen, and latterly as a Magistrate, to assist in upholding the
supremacy of the law. With painful feelings I look back to the occurrences of
last year, which have given rise to this kind expression of sentiment towards
me. Although no excuse can properly be advanced for those infractions of law
and order, which almost nightly disgraced this county, one cannot overlook the
circumstance, that no disturbances would have taken place, had no grievances
existed, or had these admitted grievances been remedied as soon as they were
complained of. The people themselves now feel that the cure they attempted was
of too violent a character, and feel, also, that they lost the sympathy and
support of the right thinking, who were disposed to assist them so long as
they employed constitutional means of redressing their grievances, but rightly
opposed them when they violated the law, and sanctioned the connection of real
grievance with personal animosity. God grant we may never live to see such
another year; I think we never shall, as the country has learnt a lesson it
will not easily forget.
Accept my warmest thanks for the great honour you and the other gentlemen
have bestowed upon me; the recollection will ever inspire me with feelings of
gratitude, to devote, whenever deemed worthy of being called upon, my best
exertions for the protection of the rights of the people, never overlooking,
at the same time, my obedience to, and support of, the laws. Permit me to
subscribe myself, with feelings of respect and gratitude, to yourself, and
the gentlemen who have deputed you to write to me,
Yours and theirs, very sincerely,
Wm. Chambers
Jun.
To D. Morris, Esq.,
M.P.,
Carmarthen.
The issue of The Cambrian covered a late Rebeccaite trial.
Excerpts:
Carmarthenshire Lent Assizes.
…His Lordship observed, that after perusing the depositions placed before him, respecting the cases into which it would be their duty to inquire, he thought he might fairly venture to congratulate them on the marked improvement in the state of public feeling, since the duty last devolved upon him of presiding in that Court; for, although many of the charges in the calendar were of a description similar to those which then formed the subject of inquiry, yet it appeared that, for the most part, they were offences committed during that time; and taking the calendar as a whole, he thought there were in it no features to induce him to think that any of the cases indicated the existence of that spirit of insubordination, and the reckless destruction of life and property, which at that time prevailed in the county.
He should have stated that, since his arrival at Carmarthen, he had been informed of a serious depredation upon property, but he would attribute that to a malignant feeling on the part of one or more individuals, than to anything partaking of the character of a general combination.…
Arson.
Benjamin Jones, 28, labourer, Samuel Thomas, 30, farmer, and John Thomas, 28, shoemaker, were arraigned upon an indictment, charging them with having, on , feloniously and maliciously set fire to the dwelling-house of the late Thomas Thomas, of Pantycerrig, in the parish of Llanfihangle-Rhos-y-Corn.
In other counts they were charged with setting fire to a cow-house adjoining the dwelling-house, &c.; in others, with setting fire to the dwelling-house, persons being therein at the time.
This was a Government prosecution.
Mr Chilton, Q.C. Mr. Evans, Q.C., and Mr. V. Williams appeared for the Crown; Mr. Carne, Mr. Hall, and Mr. Richards defended the prisoners separately.
Mr. Chilton addressed the jury on the part of the prosecution.
He observed, that this was a charge arising out of the late Rebecca disturbances.
The prisoners at the bar were indicted for the most serious offence known to the law, with the exception of murder, and one which, even in the present state of the law, rendered them liable to the forfeiture of their lives, provided they were convicted on the last count — charging them with having fired the house, persons being in it at the time.
… The circumstances of the case were these:– On the house of the prosecutor was burnt down, and that it could not be the result of accident was quite evident.
It appeared that the cowhouse formed part of the house, being separated therefrom by a wattled partition.
Over the cowhouse was a loft, on which were two rooms, a bedroom and a dairy, in the former of which a servant named Margaret Bowen, and a little girl of the name of Catherine Jones, slept.
Between the room and the dairy there was an old wattled partition, full of holes, through which any person in the bedroom would be enabled to see any parties in the loft, into which was an entrance from the yard.
When crimes of the atrocious nature of that with which the prisoners were charged had been committed, it was natural and necessary to endeavour to find out the motives which might have induced the commission of the crime.
For this purpose, it would be necessary to state that, on , an attack was made upon Pantcerrig, by a party of Rebeccaites, when on , Mr. Thomas, who was since found dead, and whose death is still a mystery, visited Carmarthen, and gave evidence before the Magistrates against two parties, which resulted in their committal for trial.
It was also proved, that on the return of Mr. Thomas from Carmarthen, a witness named James met one of the prisoners near Brechfa, when he requested the witness to endeavour to meet Thomas, and ask him what had become of the Evanses (the parties committed).
They added that they had blacked themselves, with the intention of intercepting him, but that they arrived too late, he having passed previous to their coming up.
This witness subsequently walked part of the road with Mr. Thomas, and cautioned him with respect to what he had heard and seen.
On the same day the prisoner, Benj. Jones, borrowed a gun from a person named Davies, for the purpose, as he alleged, of killing rabbits, and he promised to return it that evening.
The lender, however, did not receive his gun back for two months — Jones having absconded.
At the time he borrowed it, he was accompanied by his brother, who also had a gun in his possession.
On the arrival home of the old man, Mr. Thomas, at eleven o’clock, he intimated his desire of sleeping out of the house that night, in consequence of information communicated to him.
He accordingly went out, and about twelve o’clock the wife retired to bed, in a room called the parlour; Margaret Bowen, the servant, and the little girl Catherine, having previously retired to the bed in the room adjoining the loft over the cowhouse.
However, Margaret Bowen having gone to bed in a state of great alarm, could not sleep; and in the course of two hours after having retired, she heard a noise at the back of the house, and on raising herself in a sitting posture in bed, she was enabled, through the holes in the partition, distinctly to see Benj. Jones in the next room, having a gun in his hand; she next saw Samuel Thomas, and next John Thomas, the latter of whom also had a gun.
These persons she distinctly saw, and knowing them well before, she was enabled positively to swear to them.
They were but slightly disguised, merely having turned their coats inside out.
She also heard Benjamin Jones, whose voice she was well acquainted with, say “I will do very well with the old devil.”
She saw a fourth party, but could not positively swear to his identity.
She immediately went down stairs, passed through the kitchen, in which a labourer named David Davies slept, and into the room in which her mistress slept.
To her she immediately communicated what she had seen, and that she had recognised some persons, but she did not then name them.
Her mistress requested her to lay in bed with her, but she had hardly remained there ten or fifteen minutes, before they heard the noise of firing, soon after which the smell of smoke was perceived.
On returning to the loft, she found all in flames; she endeavoured to get part of her clothes, and went down stairs.
She afterwards returned, and found the bed encircled by fire, which was fast gaining on the whole roof.
She immediately aroused the little girl, who was fast asleep, and carried her down stairs, without having time to save any of the clothes.
The servants, some of whom slept in the outhouses, were aroused, but the house was completely burnt to the ground.
It appeared that the witnesses had given information to a magistrate at the time, but owing to Benjamin Jones’s absence, it was thought discreet not to agitate the matter as against the Thomases, until Jones, supposed to have been the chief incendiary, had been apprehended.
The various witnesses testified, Margaret Bowen being the clincher, as she was the one who claimed to have seen and recognized the defendants at the scene of the crime.
The defense therefore attacked that witness relentlessly, saying she could not have seen what she claimed to see in a dark barn at night, that she had made inconsistent statements after the event, and that besides the defendants had alibis.
Witnesses then testified to each of these things, and must have been fairly convincing, as:
The jury retired, and after a short absence returned a verdict of “Not Guilty” as regards the three prisoners.
The following day, though, Benjamin Jones was back in the dock, charged with “assaulting Margaret Bowen, the principal witness in the case yesterday, with intent to murder her — to maim or disable — to disfigure — or do grievous bodily harm.”
Bowen took the stand:
…and said, that some time after the attackes on her master’s house, and after she had said that she saw the prisoner, her master was found dead in a brook; this was three days before the last Winter Assizes.
Some days after the body was found, there was a sale at Bergwm.
The body was found near Glynllydan, where prisoner resided.
On the evening of the day of Bergwm sale, she (witness) went out to gather wood.
She observed the prisoner lying on the other side of a hedge.
She asked him what he did there, and he asked her “where old Thomas, of Tynyforth (a farm in the neighbourhood), was?”
She answered, “What do you want with him, do you wish to serve him in the same way as you did my master.”
He said, “Oh, damn you, you old jade, I am not sorry for anything I have done to your old master, unless it is that I did not kill him sooner.”
He then laid hold of her, placed his hand upon her mouth, which prevented her crying out, took a knife from his pocket and drew it several times across her throat, threatening to kill her.
He then struck her on the nose until she fell insensible to the ground.
She soon became better, and returned to the temporary house in the yard.
On going in she found there were several wounds in her neck; immediately communicated with her mistress, who tied up the wounds.
She subsequently became subject to fits.
She went before Mr. Price, the magistrate, in three weeks.
— Witness was searchingly cross-examined by Mr. N. Carne on behalf of the prisoner.
[The jury here examined the witness’s neck, and found in it the mark of three wounds, and one on the chin.]
Will swear I did not make them myself.
Will swear I never told David James that a bramble in the hedge caused the wounds.
Mary Thomas and John Rowlands (a servant at the Thomas home) corroborated Bowen’s testimony.
The defense brought forward witnesses who testified that Bowen had been bribed by Mary Thomas to invent the testimony, and others who testified as to an alibi for Jones.
This time the Crown won its conviction.
“Another bill,” unspecified by the article, “was preferred before the Grand Jury in the course of the day against the prisoner” and he was again found guilty.
“There are other indictments against Benjamin Jones, but having been convicted of the capital charge it is supposed they will not be proceeded with.”
Sentencing was deferred.
The Grand Jury have ignored the bill preferred against John Morgan, John Howells, David Howells, Thomas Thomas, John Jones, Benjamin Jones, and William Hopkin, charged with having set fire to a house in the parish of Llangadoc, on .
It appeared the prisoner, Thomas Thomas, having been first committed upon the charge, on the evidence of untainted witnesses, was subsequently admitted approver against the rest; and though before the Magistrates he gave such evidence as resulted in the committal of the others, yet he turned round before the Grand Jury, and swore he knew nothing about the affair.
— The Grand Jury also ignored the bill preferred against William Hopkin for demolishing Pontlleche turnpike gate, and also a bill against him for having stolen some smith’s tools.
And, from the same paper, an indication that Rebecca was not quite through yet:
Rebecca Again.
A Correspondent writes– “On , or , some outrageous ruffians broke off the staples, and drew off its hinges, a gate which was on a wood near Ynisygerwn, and threw it on the middle of the high road, to the great danger and inconvenience of travellers.
Some of those wanton poachers think it proper to avenge themselves by destroying private property; but I trust that they shall meet that punishment which is their deserts.
By the Rebecca Riots had mostly run their course, but Rebecca was still at least somewhat on the alert.
Here’s a note from the Hereford Journal as found in The Cambrian ():
Rebecca Again.
In carrying out the provisions of the late Act of Parliament relating to the Turnpike Trusts in South Wales some of the gates in the neighbourhood of Brecon have already been removed, the tolls reduced, and the distances between other gates are about being equalised.
Among the latter the turnpike-gate near the ninth milestone on the Merthyr road, is to be removed and a new tollhouse erected this side of the Story’s Arms.
This building was last week in course of erection, and in a few days expected to be finished; but lo! on , upon the workmen going to their work, the new toll house had disappeared, and the men were struck with astonishment at the industry displayed by the parties who had in so short a period levelled their work.
’s Cardiff and Merthyr Gardian adds:
Information of the circumstance was brought to the Magistrates without loss of time, and strong suspicion rests upon parties residing not many miles from the spot.
Police officers have been sent to the locality, where they are ordered to remain until the house is again raised.
In the meantime every exertion is being used to trace out the perpetrators of this rash and foolish act.
A bit of a dull data point in my Rebecca Riots collection, but one that may be
somewhat revealing about who was backing the forces of law and order. From the
Cambrian:
Testimonial
We are exceedingly happy in being enabled to record that the noble Lord
Lieutenant of this County, the Marquess of Bute, in conjunction with other
Magistrates of the Swansea and Llangafelach districts, have evinced their high
approbation of the services rendered by their Clerk, our much respected
townsman Mr. Thomas Attwood, during the exciting and eventful period of the
prevalence of the Rebecca disturbances in this and the adjoining county, by
presenting him with an elegant service of plate, consisting of a coffee-pot,
tea-pot, sugar-basin, and cream-jug. On each article is engraved the following
inscription:—
Presented
by the Lord Lieutenant and other Magistrates of the districts of Swansea and
Llangafelach, Glamorganshire, to their Clerk, Mr. Thomas Attwood, as a
testimony of their approbation of his general conduct and indefatigable
industry, during the Rebecca riots, in .
When I was digging up old articles about the Rebecca Riots at Welsh Newspapers Online, some of what I found comes from after the main period of the Riots ().
Today I’ll share some of what I found from newspapers in .
First, an update on John Jones, from the issue of The Cambrian:
John Jones, who rendered himself so notorious during the Rebecca disturbances, by informing against several respectable parties, who were committed upon his evidence, after which the Attorney-General entered a nolle prosequi, is now in the custody of the police of this town on a charge of felony.
He was taken before the Magistrates, and remanded to a future day.
John Jones, the informer during the period of the Rebecca disturbances, whose apprehension by our police on a charge of stealing a brass pan at Pontardulais, we announced in our paper , was tried at the Carmarthenshire Quarter Sessions, held last week, and acquitted by the jury, the evidence being defective.
Jones admitted his guilt to Sergeant Bennett, of the Swansea police force, who apprehended him on suspicion, having detected him while offering the article for sale to a marine store-dealer in this town.
Through some oversight Mr. Bennett was not subpœned as a witness.
Oops!
The Cambrian of included a lengthy letter from Cantab Cadwallader concerning the need to reeducate the ignorant population of Wales.
In the course of the letter, he quoted from the testimony of Rev. R.B. Jones, vicar of Killymaenllwyd, at a committee of inquiry into the troubles in Wales:
“Are the bastardy clauses very unpopular?”
— “Yes; there was a man taken up at Narberth; he is a parishioner of ours; he has been writing a Rebecca letter; I asked him how he came to write this letter.
‘He thought,’ he said, ‘it would do good; here was a poor woman starving; and here was this Mr. ——, who was very well off, and he ought to give something to this poor girl to help her to nurse the child she had by him.’ ”
Then says Mr. Jones– “This poor man though he was doing God service when he sat down to write this letter.
He was a schoolmaster of a chapel in the neighbourhood.”
The Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian
of gave this news of some of the convicts who were transported for their Rebeccaite activity:
Letters have been received from John Hughes, one of the men who was sentenced to transportation at the Special Commission held at Cardiff in , for the attack on Pontardulais Gate, during the Rebecca Riots.
He and some others sailed in the London convict-ship for his destination in .
Amongst other matters, the writer says— “As God has been so good, sparing my life and continuing my comforts, although I am not deserving of the least of his benefits, yet, in the events of his providence, he has taught me the uncertainty of life, by the death of one of my fellow-sufferers, David Jones, Cliwnwg Fach, Llanelly, who departed this life on the 19th of the said month, in Ober Town.
I think the cause of his death was the wounds he received by the slugs.
Oh! that our feed may be firm on the rock of salvation before we depart out of this transitory world!”
— Hughes is deeply penitent for his criminal conduct.
We understand that it is in contemplation to petition the Queen in favour of him and his companions.
And finally, The Cambrian gave a followup on another Rebeccaite convict in its edition:
Henry Evans, tried in , as one of the Rebecca rioters, was discharged from his incarceration in the county gaol of Carmarthen, on .
When the poor fellow was committed, he could neither read nor write.
Through the exertions of Mr. Westlake, the Governor of the prison, assisted by the Chaplain, the young man repeated, by rote, the third chapter of St. Matthew, on the morning of his discharge.
Too much commendation cannot be awarded to the Governor of the gaol, when we state that he diligently superintends the education of all well-disposed prisoners, allowing, as far as lay in his power, the same advantages to others which he himself possesses.
Today, some more newspaper coverage related to the Rebecca Riots, from papers published in the years after the peak of the Rebeccaite movement.
First, this note from The Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser of , shows that the Rebecca formula of grassroots enforcement still had currency, though in this case it was not applied to tolls:
A Cardigan correspondent informs us that Rebecca[,] mounted on Black Bess, dressed in a dark shirt and with a national scarlet wrapper round her shoulders, visited Mr. Morris, of Daynold, and ordered him to throw out some corn which had been conveyed from the haggard to the barn, by some of a numerous retinue.
The peremptory request was immediately obeyed.
It is to be hoped that such misguided attempts to force corn to market will not be prevalent, otherwise the county will probably be put to great expense in maintaining police or soldiery.
The Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser of carried these two articles:
On , there were a great many of the family of Rebecca assembled in the field of a publican, at Cresswell Quay, and in a few minutes accomplished their design; they first began tearing down the hedge of the publican’s field, and then engaged themselves in tearing down a freeth, which had been made on the previous day.
The motive the publican had in view was to stop a road which passes through his field, and leads to a well that supplies the neighbourhood with water — the road has been open to the public upwards of one hundred years.
So far, the publican has been unsuccessful.
Rebecca at Work again.
On , a large mob assembled in the parish of Monachlogddn, and proceeded to demolish a hedge, the property of Morris Williams, Esq., of Trellefain, and entirely tore it down from one end to the other.
It seems the hedge was a boundary between different estates, and had been presented at the last leet court, and had since been repaired at much expense — which circumstance did not please these midnight marauders.
It is stated that the real original old Rebecca, who was the first cause of so much disturbance in the country, some years since, was present on this occasion; as her ladyship is now well known in this neighbourhood, her career of destruction cannot be of long duration.
The same paper, in its edition, gave another example of common criminals adopting the “Rebecca” appellation:
On , our active police officer while going his rounds, succeeded in capturing one of a notorious gang of thieves, who have for a long time infested this town and neighbourhood, and are known by the appellation of the Rebecca family, although bearing no connection with the Rebeccas of turnpike celebrity…
A more traditional tollgate-destroying Rebecca returned to action the following year, according to the edition of that paper:
On , Castellyrnyngyll gate (about two miles from the Cross-hands, on the Llandilo road), which has been recently erected, and for which tolls were taken on Saturday, was completely razed to the ground by some of “Becca’s” descendants.
It was erected on the site of the old one, which was demolished during the former Rebecca riots.
Having often occasion to drive from this town to Usk, I have much reason to complain of the shameful amount of turnpike tolls, levied in that short distance (only eleven miles).
First, I pay 6d. at the bridge gate, Newport, which is fair and reasonable.
Then at Caerleon (only three miles distant) 8d.!
Then again at Usk, 6d.! makin in all, 1s. 8d.; while on the Pontypool road, for about the same distance, I pay but 10½d., and from Newport to Cardiff (twelve miles), the charge is 1s. 6d.
Comment is needless.
If such a state of things is not remedied, I should not be surprised if Monmouthshire receives a visit from the celebrated Rebecca and her stalwart daughters.
I am, sir, yours, &c. Viator. Newport, .
The Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian of published some Original Letters from Australia, including one from Ishmael Jones with this tidbit: “Shoni ’Scubor Fawr and Dai’r Cantwr are both liberated, and doing well.”
The newspaper explained:
Shoni ’Scubor Fawr (John of the Great Born) and Dai’r Cantwr (David the Singer) were notorious characters in South Wales some years ago.
They were tried in Carmarthen before Mr. Justice Creswell, about , we believe, for “Rebecca” rioting; and the former was sentenced to transportation for life, and the latter for twenty years.
A thorough reformation and uniform good conduct has, probably, led to their conditional liberation.
The Monmouthshire Merlin of showed Rebecca up to her old tricks again, this time in England:
A good deal of excitement has been created within the last two or three days in the upper part of Somerset, by its becoming known that a turnpike gate had been carried off by a number of people in the style which made “Rebecca” so noted in Wales.
It appears that the Black Dog Turnpike Trust, from a failure of tolls, has for some time been in difficulties, and that an application made to the magistrates some months since by the trustees under their act, with the view of compelling the several parishes though which the roads passed, to undertake the repairs, was unsuccessful, in consequence of a sum of about £5,000, with which a former treasurer of the trust had absconded, not having been brought into the accounts.
Since this time the trustees and the parishes have each declined to repair the roads, which between Bath and Frome and Bath and Warminster have consequently become in a very bad state.
The bondholders, however have seized the gates, and are taking the tolls for their own security.
The consequence of high tolls and bad roads has been continued complaints from those who have occasion to travel over the roads, and the grievance appears to be generally felt throughout the district, and has at last resulted in the forcible removal of one of the gates, which has not since been recovered.
On , the toll taker at the Midford gate, which is situated about four miles from Bath, on the Frome road, was awoke by the firing of several guns, which shattered the lamp outside the toll house to pieces, and so alarmed him that he was afraid to go out.
He afterwards discovered that the massive gates across the road had been unhinged and carried away, and although search been made through the neighbourhood since, not the slightest trace of them can be discovered, nor can any one be found at all inclined to divulge the secret, as to the parties by whom the act was committed.
The Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser of reported that Rebecca wasn’t quite finished in Wales, yet, either:
On , “Rebecca,” with nine of her renowned followers, attired in female apparel, wearing bonnets, and having their faces blackened, assembled at Craigyborian, before the residence of a leading resident in the parish of Amroth.
At this time the gentleman in question, with his two sons and the governess, were walking in a road overlooking the plantations, to which spot the Rebeccaites wended their way in procession, and on approaching at once informed the party in question that he was their man for that night, at the same time taking hold of him.
The astonished captive resisted at first strenuously, but Rebecca maintained her powerful grip, and eventually succeeded in tying his hands behind his back, upon which he earnestly expostulated and inquired what mischief he had done.
It was replied that he had violated the Welsh laws by not living with his wife, and had taken unto himself another woman, which was an insufferable offence in the Principality, and the punishment to be inflicted on all such heinous offences was to ride on the “Ceffyl Pren.”
The fair lady in attendance was immediately fastened to a ladder by these executors of “Lynch law,” who then directed their steps towards Colby Lodge, carrying their female freight hoisted like the coffin of Mahomet between Heaven and Earth.
From Colby Lodge they proceeded in like manner to the Burrows, and from there up the new road to Tinker’s Hill, and to Killanow Gate.
By this time a large crowd of persons had congregated, making loud shouts; and when the procession came near the Craigyborian entrance the captive gallant offered £6 for the liberation of himself and his frail partner in durance, which compromise was in a great degree accepted, but ultimately the Rebeccaites thought better of the matter and refused the money as a bribe.
So they went on to Lanteague, and from thence to Tavernspite, where they arrived about , when the gentleman and his beloved were set at liberty, having to walk back a distance of 10 miles to their home.
The gentleman then addressed the crowd, saying he forgave them for what they had done, and should bear no malice in his heart, wishing God’s blessing upon them all, and promising that the fickle fair one should leave his fireside on the following day.
Upon this understanding his hearers gave hearty cheering, and all departed peaceably to their respective homes.
Rebecca tried her hand at economic populism in , according to The Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian of :
Mistress ’Becca, of gate-breaking celebrity, appears still to be in the land of the living, if we may judge from the notices posted up at Builth and Brecon, though her grammar continues defective, and her English is by no means of the highest order.
A copy of the notice was posted up this week, near the Vale of Neath Railway Station, by some Merthyr disciple; and as it attracted some attention on the walls of the terminus, we give it still greater publicity:–
Take Notice
To All Flour dealers, all corn factors and farmers, that shall be Found Concocting together to rise the price of eatables corn, bread, flour, cheese, butter and meat, Any farmer that shall be found out holding back, not bringing is corn to Market shall be dealt with according to my law, as he is shedding the blood of the Innocent, under the disguise of honest men, Let them look to themselves for my eye is upon them and I shall not spare, for my law is severe.
Who does not remember the “Rebecca riots” of Wales, some years ago, when toll-gates were attacked — keepers beat — pikes overturned — and the Queen’s troops called out to aid in the collection of the pence.
Scotland is on the move, and bids fair to rival Wales in its bar-like emeûtes.
We are told that—
A few days since, the toll-gate at Kelso-bridge was forcibly removed, for the fifth time, by a large crowd of people, belonging to the town and immediate neighbourhood, in defiance of a proclamation by the sheriff.
The next day the gates were re-erected, and a party of Dragoons dispersed the crowd, but on their retiring to their quarters the mob re-assembled, and about eleven o’clock, the gates were completely levelled for the sixth times.
Upwards of one hundred special constables were sworn in.
Having been formed into divisions they awaited further orders.
A detachment of the 82nd Regiment, under the command of Major Hale, arrived by train from Edinburgh, for the purpose of enforcing the resolution of the Kelso-bridge trustees in maintaining the pontage.
A meeting of the lieutenancy, justices of the peace, and magistrates was held, attended by the Duke of Buccleugh, lord-lieutenant of the county; the Duke of Ruxburghe; Lord Polworth, &c., &c.
It was resolved to swear in a number of special constables for the protection of the peace, and in the meantime the workmen at the bridge were for the present ordered to desist from the erection of the gates.
Rebecca was again battling the ongoing theft of the commons in .
This comes from the issue of The Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian:
On the town of Rhayader, in Radnorshire, and its neighbourhood were thrown into a state of great excitement, in consequence of a report being circulated that “Rebecca” and her children were once more going to make their appearance and parade the streets of Rhayader, before the shops closed.
Nearly all the townspeople were standing in groups from the close of the evening until , when suddenly the sound of a horn was heard from a distance, and in a few minutes was answered from an opposite quarter.
The boys and girls ran from all directions towards Cwmtoyddwr, and returned with the news that the Rebeccaites were blackening their faces, and would be up immediately to parade the streets, before they went to kill the fish.
At about “Rebecca” made her appearance in Cwmtoyddwyr and from thence proceeded over the bridge to Rhayader, accompanied by about 80 of her “daughters, forming a procession of 4 abreast.”
First went “Rebecca,” carrying a gun supported by two sword-bearers, right and left, with their faces blackened, and their shirts worn over their clothes, after the fashion of smock-frocks, with a handkerchief tied around their heads.
These were followed by five ranks, four abreast, each outside man carrying a cutlass or sword, and the inside men spears and poles.
Then followed 4 men, carrying a carriage similar to a stretcher with a large quantity of straw tied up in bundles.
These were succeeded by a long train, four abreast, carrying guns, spears, pitchforks, and other weapons.
They proceeded to opposite the Lion Hotel, where they fired two guns, and thence marched round the Market-place, where they fired again; thence they proceeded to Cwmtoyddwr-bridge, where they were joined by a reserve of about 40 or more, all with their faces blackened, and in the same kind of dress.
They arrived at the Grove, the first ford and the bedding place of the salmon, the horn blew, and a gun was fired, which was the signal for commencing the attack; but the depredators did not succeed according to their expectations, as only three fish upon the first fell into their hands.
The whole party then proceeded to a second, where the same signal was given — five of them entered the water with their spears and lights, and commenced the same destruction.
There must have been a great slaughter had it not been for the conservator of the river, Samuel Owens, an old salmon fisher on the river Wye for upwards of 40 years.
He, anticipating the visitors, with the assistance of police-superintendent Jones, and his two sons, well disturbed the fords a few minutes before the enemy approached.
Had not that plan been adopted there must have been a great destruction of fish; but we hear that instead of “Rebecca” having [2?]0 salmon from that ford, they killed only six small ones.
During the time they were in the act of killing the fish, Mr. Taloc, steward of Mr. T. Prickard, of Darw, advanced nearer than was considered desirable, and a gun was fired at him; but fortunately only one shot reached him, and entered his elbow.
David Price, a sawyer of the town, who out of curiosity went towards the river, had three spears placed at his breast, and was ordered to retreat.
The marauders then proceeded to different fords on the Wye and Ellan, but did not succeed in killing so many fish as they expected.
The whole number was supposed not to exceed 30. —Hereford Journal.
, The Aberystwith Observer noted that Rebecca was still defending the rights of Welshmen to fish in Welsh rivers:
The verdicts of Welsh juries have long enjoyed an unenviable notoriety.
The decisions of Welsh justices, if we may judge from a recent example, are sometimes equally perplexing.
For some time past a determined opposition to the salmon fishery laws has been offered by a large number of persons in the counties of Brecon and Radnor, who claim the right to catch salmon at any season of the year, and have of late destroyed large quantities of fish in the river Wye and its tributaries.
In order more effectually to carry out their designs, the poachers have formed themselves into a sort of association, under the title of “Rebecca and her Daughters,” a name which first became notorious when, some years ago, a number of men banded themselves under it for the purpose of destroying the turnpike gates and tollhouses in the two counties just mentioned.
For some time past the poachers have been mustering in force on the Upper Wye and the Khon, one of its tributaries, and lighting the stream by means of torches, have speared the salmon in large numbers.
Great exertions have been made by the board of conservators of the Wye fishery district to prevent this wholesale destruction of the fish but the number of watchers and water-bailiffs at their disposal was so small compared with that of the poachers that it was not deemed prudent to attempt to capture the latter, who at length became so daring as to announce their expeditions by the firing of guns.
In , however, the gangs of these marauders had become so formidable that the number of water-bailiffs on the Khon was increased.
At the bailiffs, led by a gentleman of the neighbourhood and his gamekeepers, came upon a gang of about twenty poachers, disguised in various ways, and armed with spears, pikes, bludgeons, and other weapons; some of them carrying Hambeaux of straw with which to light the streams and attract the fish.
For a time the water-bailiffs and their assistants concealed themselves in a wood on the banks of the Khon, but when the poachers had commenced their work of spearing the fish, they made their appearance and followed them into the stream.
At first the poachers fled, but soon rallied, and, forming themselves into line, presented their spears at their pursuers.
Upon being asked what they meant to do, and whether they would deliver up their weapons, they replied, “Fight!”
Upon this the watchers’ closed with them, and a desperate encounter followed, in which a gamekeeper named Lloyd was nearly scalped by a blow from a spear, and several men, both poachers and watchers, were severely injured.
The watchers, however, after a fight which lasted for a quarter of an hour, proved victorious, capturing four men and driving the others off the field.
During the struggle one of the poachers, the son of a large and wealthy farmer, is said to have knocked down the superintendent bailiff, and keeping him on his back, made an attempt to “gouge” him, which was prevented only by the timely assistance of one of the watchers.
On the four men who had been captured — two of whom, it appears, are the sons of one of the wealthiest farmers in the neighbourhood — were brought before the two magistrates at the petty sessions at Penyhont, when the water-bailiffs and the injured gamekeeper Lloyd gave evidence as to the infringement of the law and the fight which followed.
The proof adduced for the prosecution was certainly precise and positive, but the magistrates discharged the prisoners.
We are not aware of the grounds upon which this decision rests; it was certainly contrary to the evidence of the bailiffs, and it would be interesting to know whether the magistrates disbelieved their statements, or had other reasons for the course they took.
Whether or not the accused persons were really guilty of poaching — though, as the Times says, that is too mild a name for such an outrage against both law and nature as killing salmon in December — it is notorious that wholesale and systematic poaching is carried on by the Radnorshire farmers, and it is time that strong measures should be taken to suppress so flagrant a scandal.
No body of men can be allowed to defy the law with impunity, and we are glad to hear that the matter is to be brought under the notice of the Home Office.
—The Pall Mall Gazette.
