Some historical and global examples of tax resistance →
Wales →
Rebecca riots, 1839–44 →
David Davies (a.k.a. Dai’r Cantwr)
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(The French government has recently decided to abandon the hated “écotaxe”… sort of: it has been replaced by a similar tax in a different form.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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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.
