Some historical and global examples of tax resistance →
Wales →
Rebecca riots, 1839–44 →
John Jones (informer, a.k.a. Lletty Fulbert)
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(The French government has recently decided to abandon the hated “écotaxe”… sort of: it has been replaced by a similar tax in a different form.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.
The trial of the accused Rebeccaites fingered by the sketchy informant John Jones begins.
From the Cambrian:
In our last publication we announced the destruction of the Rhydypandy and Bolgoed toll-bars, the latter of which had been re-erected but a short time before.
On , information was communicated to the Magistrates, relative to the parties implicated in the destruction of the toll-bars, in consequence of which, they issued warrants for the apprehension of several parties of the highest respectability.
This circumstance created the greatest excitement in this town and neighbourhood — so much so, that many old residents of Swansea have declared that, on no former occasion, have they seen the town in such a state of effervescence.
Early on , Captain Napier, accompanied by Inspector Rees, of the Borough Police force, Sergeant Jenkins and Henry Lewis, of the Rural Police, proceeded to the neighbourhood of Pontardulais, with warrants for the apprehension of Mr. David Jones, son of Mr. Morgan Jones, of Tymawr (formerly of Court-y-Carne), who is a most respectable freeholder, and Mr. Wm. Morgan, farmer, of Bolgoed.
After having brought these two persons to town and placed them in custody at the station-house, the same officers proceeded to execute a warrant, signed by J.D. Llewellyn and T. Edw. Thomas, Esqrs., for the apprehension of Matthew and Henry Morgan, the sons of Mr. Morgan Morgan, a freeholder, residing at Cwmcillau, near Velindre, in the parish of Llangyfeiach.
The former resides on his own farm, which he rents from J.D. Llewelyn, Esq., and the latter, being a single man, in his father’s house.
The officers arrived in the neighbourhood of Cwmcillau about , and apprehended Matthew Morgan at his own house, two or three fields distant from his father’s house.
He was left in the custody of Sergeant Jenkins and Lewis, while Capt. Napier and Mr. Rees proceeded to Cwmcillau farm-house, for the purpose of executing the warrant against Henry Morgan.
The nature of the warrant was fully explained in Welsh, by Mr. Rees, to the family, who positively declined allowing Henry to be taken by the officers.
At last, Capt. Napier and Mr. Rees found it necessary to take him by force, when the whole family assisted in his rescue, and committed a serious assault upon Capt. Napier.
As all particulars relating to the attack are detailed in the evidence given before the Magistrates on , a report of which is subjoined, it is quite unnecessary to enter upon them here, and refer our readers to the evidence adduced.
However, the family succeeded in rescuing the person against whom the warrant had been issued, but not until one of them (John Morgan) had been seriously wounded by a pistol shot, which Capt. Napier was compelled to discharge in self-defence.
With the assistance of Sergeant Jenkins and Policeman Lewis, who had been left with Matthew Morgan, at a distance of three fields from the house, they succeeded in bringing the young man who was wounded, with his brother, to Swansea.
In , three vehicles, with a party of the 73d Regiment, and several policemen, proceeded to Cwmcillau, for the purpose of apprehending the rest of the family, who had joined in the attack on the officers.
They succeeded in apprehending Esther Morgan, the mother, Margaret Morgan, the daughter, and Rees Morgan, one of the sons.
Morgan Morgan was apprehended in town, having come to enquire after his son.
All the family were now in custody, with the exception of Henry Morgan.
Dr. Bird and Mr. Rogers, surgeon, extracted the ball from John Morgan’s body, and have done everything that was necessary for his recovery.
The ball had entered the left side, below the navel, and was extracted from over the third lower rib, but the medical men were of opinion that it had not entered the abdominal cavity.
On , Mr. Griffith Vaughan, formerly a draper in this town, but now landlord of the Red Lion Inn, Pontardulais, and postmaster of that place, and Mr. Daniel Lewis, known as a writer in the Welsh periodicals, under the name of Petris Bach, were taken into custody, on a charge of having been concerned in the destruction of the Bolgoed bar.
During the whole of the town was in the greatest state of excitement, being filled with a number of respectable country people, farmers, and others, whose countenances betrayed the inward anxiety entertained to know the result of these proceedings.
A private meeting of the Magistrates was held during the whole of , in the Petty Sessions-room, in the Townhall.
It was the fullest meeting that had taken place for some time.
The following Magistrates were present:– Sir John Morris, Bart. (in the Chair), John Grove, Esq., Rev. S. Davies, W.I. Jones, Esq., J.D. Llewelyn, Esq., L.W. Dillwyn, Esq., L.Ll.
Dillwyn, Esq., C.H. Smith, Esq., H. Lucas, Esq., J.N. Lucas, Esq., Rev. John Collins, Thomas Penrice, Esq., Robert Lindsay, Esq., T. Edw. Thomas, Esq., J.H. Vivian, Esq., M.P., J.D. Berrington, Esq., and F. Fredericks, Esq. — Several Reporters made an application for admittance, but were told that the meeting was strictly a private one, to which Magistrates and the necessary officers only were to be admitted, but that reporters should be admitted at the proper time.
Soon afterwards, all the prisoners were brought to the Town-hall and were taken to the Magistrates’ room.
The large hall, was immediately filled, in the expectation that the examination would take place there.
In a short time the Rev. S. Davies appeared, and announced that the examination would be a strictly private one, but when the parties were brought up for final hearing, the public would be admitted.
Mr. Powell, the reporter for the Times, who had come that morning from Carmarthen expressly for the purpose of being present, applied for the admission of reporters.
Messrs.
W. Walters, J.G. Jeffreys, and J.R. Tripp, solicitors, who were respectively engaged to defend the prisoners, made a similar application in writing, and in reply, received the following resolution of the Magistrates — “That all meetings, with a view to the investigation of charges relating to the demolition of turnpike gates in this neighbourhood, be strictly private until the parties are brought up for final hearing.”
— From enquiries made, we understand that the information relative to the destruction of the gates was given by a man named John Jones, who has stated that he was present at the destruction of the Rhydypandy gate.
On , this man told Mr. Rees, the Inspector of police, that he knew all the parties concerned in the destruction of the gates, and could give their names and residences.
This induced Mr. Rees to communicate the circumstance to the authorities, who subsequently issued warrants for the apprehension of the parties.
It would be unsafe to offer any opinion as to the correctness of the information until the case is brought forward, but we deem it right to state, that the public place no confidence whatever in his testimony.
His wife declares that he was in bed on the night of the destruction of the Rhydypandy gate, at which it is said that he was present.
She also stated that, ever since a seizure of his effects for debt, his conduct has been such as to lead her to suspect that he is not altogether sane.
It also appears that some of the Welsh have a notion, that if they can erect what they call Ty un nos — that is, if they can build a house on a common in one night unobserved until the following morning — that the house so erected becomes their property.
Jones erected a house of this description on a common, belonging to the Duke of Beaufort, over which Messrs.
Jenkins, of Cenhordy, and Morgan, of Cwmcillau, had a right of pasturage, and which house they demolished.
This, coupled with the fact that the sum of 100l. has been offered for the apprehension of the destroyers of Bolgoed bar, tend to throw considerable suspicion on his evidence; for we understand that he is the informer respecting the destruction of both bars.
Various rumours were afloat on , respecting the conduct of Capt. Napier and the police, towards the Morgan family, for which, as it appeared by uncontradicted evidence on , there were not the slightest grounds.
Had the assault case been publicly investigated on , those injurious reports would not have been circulated.
Rebecca in North Wales
We find that pulling down toll-gates has become the fashion of the day, and that North Wales is imitating the South.
On the turnpike gate of Brynefal, near Tre’ Madoc, was destroyed.
It appears that there were from twenty to thirty of the Rebeccaites, some speaking with the South accent, and others in English.
They told the toll-keeper that, unless he was silent, they would make him so, and tried to effect an entrance into the house, but he had the presence of mind to place four sacks of salt against the door, which prevented their effecting an entrance.
Having pulled off the post, &c., they carried the gate about a mile, and then cut it in pieces, and left the fragments by the river side.
We are given to understand that no clue has been obtained as to the perpetrators.
We trust that the proper authorities will be on the alert.
— Carnarvon Herald.
On , a party of workmen in returning from hay-making in a field above Mount Pleasant, amused themselves in pushing before them one of the party, a mason, named Williams, who covered his face with his apron, at the same time crying out “Becca for ever.”
The Mayor, who was accidentally passing at the time, immediately seized him by the collar, and gave him in custody to two soldiers.
Mr. Morris, joiner, meeting them, told the Mayor that he would answer for Williams’s appearance on .
He was then liberated.
On , he entered into recognizances to appear before the Magistrates on .
The Monmouthshire Merlin rushed to print on with early reports of the Cwmcillau (or “Cwm Cille” in this account) brawl:
On a gentleman whose family are at present stopping in Glamorganshire, conveyed to us the intelligence that serious outrages had been committed by the followers of the Amazonian Great Unknown in the neighbourhood of Swansea; that the police had been violently handled; and that Captain Napier, the chief constable of the county, had been dangerously wounded.
We deemed it well to proceed to Swansea, and on our arrival found the town a scene of great excitement, and on seeking information from sources likely to prove authentic, learned that a conflict had certainly taken place, but fortunately on a small scale; that several Rebeccaites had been captured, and were then prisoners in the town; and that Captain Napier had been injured, after manifesting the humanity and forbearance which become a brave soldier.
It appeared that the anti-toll-gate campaign having widened the circle of operations, and frightened some of the good and peaceable people of Swansea, the active and intelligent head of the constabulary force of the county was vigilantly on the look-out.
On , a considerable force of the gate levellers marched to Bwlgoed toll house, near Pontardulais, about seven miles from Swansea, on the Carmarthen road, forced the keeper out without making his toilet, and placing an implement in his hand, compelled him, under certain threats of death, to aid in the work of demolition, and lest he should take the liberty of tracing any of the Guerrillas home, they locked him in an adjoining stable, where he was shivering, en chemise, “till daylight did appear.”
Disorganization was increasing with impunity, and as toll-gate keepers looked upon each coming night with fear and trembling, as probably the last of their road-side reign, the authorities of Swansea were not wanting in efforts for prevention and detection.
Heretofore the seal of secrecy has been upon the lips of all sympathisers with the Rebeccaites, and none were found to give a trace to the homes of the termagant, or any of her myrmidons.
On , however, according to public report, a person named John Jones, or Lletty Fulbert, not having the love or fear of “Becca” before his eyes, but being moved and instigated by John Barleycorn, or the genius of cwrw dha, met a policeman at a beerhouse, and there showed symptoms that he would a tale unfold of the wicked lady’s visits to the glimpses of the moon.
Inspector William Rees, of Swansea, was duly acquainted with the circumstance, and deemed this a favourable opportunity of obtaining information touching the names and whereabouts of the persons who razed the toll house and bar of Bwlgoed.
Pursuing this intent, Rees had the informer conveyed to a place of safety, where no person was allowed to interfere with his expressed intention of rendering the State some service, and where, the wicked Rebeccaites insinuated, his public spirit was kept effervescent.
Be that as it may, whether such report arose from malevolence or otherwise, we know not.
Inspector Rees applied to the county magistrates, who, having minutely scanned Jones’s story, issued warrants against persons charged with the commission of Rebeccaite outrage at the Bwlgoed gate.
Four warrants were confided to Captain Napier for the apprehension of William Morgan and Henry Morgan, farmers, of the parish of Llandilo, Talybont, and Matthew Morgan and David Jones, of the parish of Llangerelock.
At the gallant chief constable, accompanied by Inspector Rees, and William Jenkins and H. Lewis, policemen, proceeded well armed to execute the warrants.
Matthew Morgan was taken at home, about .
— David Jones was a prisoner soon after, and both were brought to the lock-up house at Swansea.
After the performance of this duty, they again set out to take Wm. Morgan and Henry Morgan.
William was found in a field, captured, and left handcuffed in the custody of Jenkins, the policeman; and the remainder of the party proceeded to Cwm Cille, near Velindra, the house of Morgan Morgan, farmer, in order to take Henry Morgan.
Inspector Rees first entered the house, and told who was outside.
He then sent for Captain Napier, who, on entering, was handed a seat by Esther Morgan, mother of Henry Morgan.
The object of the visit was then told, the warrant produced, and the signatures of the magistrates — Dillwyn Llewellyn and T.E. Thomas, Esquires — were pointed out.
Morgan Morgan, the father, said Henry was lame, and could not come then, but would do so at some more convenient time.
Morgan, the father, said he would lose his life before his son should go out of his house.
On this, Captain Napier ordered Rees to lay hold of Henry Morgan, and a scene of the utmost violence ensued, which will minutely appear in the evidence which we give below.
Old Morgan, his wife, his sons, Rees and John, the latter of whom was shot, and Morgan’s daughter Margaret, fell upon Captain Napier and Inspector Rees like tigers and tiget cats.
An iron bar, a reaping hook, a hatchet, a crutch, a hammer, scalding water, and a saucepan, were actively used against Mr. Napier and the policemen; one would almost suppose that the gallant captain must have a charmed life to survive the affray.
As it was, he escaped with a severe cut on the head, and other injuries; and no doubt he would have fallen a victim in the discharge of his duty, had he not, when the power of enduring forbearance could go no further, and when they had endeavoured to discharge a pistol, which he had, against him, he fired, by which one of his assailants, named John Morgan, was wounded in the abdomen.
Rees was sadly pummelled, and Jenkins, who came to their assistance, rescued both from further violence, by some dexterous passes of his sword against some neighbours of the Morgans, whom the cry of “Lladderch Nwynt,” — kill them!
— had brought to the scene of action.
Henry Morgan and John Morgan, the wounded man, were then brought to Swansea, where the eminent Doctor Bird skilfully extracted the ball from John; and, be it observed, to the credit of Captain Napier, that though covered with blood, and suffering severely, he declined the medical relief of Dr. Bird, until that gentleman had first performed the offices of humanity for John Morgan, and assured him that Morgan’s life was not in danger.
The news of the capture of Rebeccaites, and of the affray — magnified into a pitched battle, with reports of the killed and wounded — spread like wildfire over the town and neighbourhood — the streets became densely crowded — hundreds assembled at the station house, and the most feverish excitement prevailed; but we did not hear of any breach of the peace.
Doctor Bird and Surgeon Rogers paid close attention to the wounded man, and succeeded in extracting the ball, which had entered the abdomen, passed up, struck the edge of the ilium, and glanced up til it lodged backwards between the second and third ribs, the abdomenal cavity not having been entered in any part.
On a detachment of the Seventy-third Regiment, accompanied by several very well armed policemen, marched to the neighbourhood of Pontardulais, for the purpose of apprehending the parties who had offended against the law in the morning, and the Morgan family, and others, were conveyed to prison without resistance.
On two additional prisoners were brought in, and the rush of anxious crowds to catch a glimpse of the new-comers — for whom we heard repeated expressions of sympathy by the people — rendered the streets through which they came almost impassable.
Mr. Griffith Vaughan, a man of some property, and landlord of the Pontardulais Inn, and Mr. David Lewis, of, we believe, the same locality, are the two persons in question.
[Actually Daniel Lewis, I think — ♇]
The current of the population flowed to the Town Hall, where a numerous bench of magistrates, Sir John Morris, chairman, assembled.
The court was filled in every part, immediately after the doors were opened; and several members of the Press — London and provincial — were ready to take the proceedings; but after the lapse of a considerable period, the Rev. Samuel Davies entered the court, and addressed the meeting to the following effect:–
“I suppose you have assembled here for the purpose of hearing the examination of witnesses in the case which now occupies the attention of the magistrates.
I have to inform you it will be a private hearing, and therefore you may all depart; but before the investigation is brought to a close, when the prisoners are brought up for their final hearing, the public will be admitted.”
This announcement was received with marks of disapprobation.
Mr. Powell, of the Times, applied for permission to be present.
The solicitors who had been engaged to defend the prisoners, made a similar application, and in reply received the following:–
Resolved unanimously — That all meetings with a view to the investigation of charges relating to the demolition of turnpike gates in this neighbourhood be strictly private, till the parties are brought up for final hearing.
John Morris, Chairman.
The people dispersed from the hall slowly and complainingly, but the rumours of fresh arrests, and the current of reports prejudicial to the character of Jones, the informer, gave food for gossip and speculation.
It was said that a rev. gentleman met Jones’s wife in Castle-street, when she assured him “That her husband could know nothing of the occurrences at Bwlgoed and Rhyd-y-pandy, having been at home every night for the last two months.
She added that his conduct of late had been very singular, so as to induce her to believe him insane.
About twelve months since his effects were seized by the officers of the law for debt, which circumstance, she added, had a most powerful effect upon his mind.
Some time ago, he build a house upon the mountain, in the neighbourhood of his former residence, in a bleak and barren spot, where it was scarcely possible for a human being to reside, more especially in such a house as he erected.
The country people have a notion that if they can erect a house in one night upon a common, that house becomes their freehold property.
One of those houses Jones attempted to erect for himself, his wife, and five children; but Mr. Morgan, of Cwm Cille, and Mr. Jenkins, of Cynhordy, conceiving their rights to a sheep-walk invaded by this building, took steps for having it demolished.
Jones’s wife fancies that this act of Mr. Morgan’s so irritated her husband’s mind, already weakened by previous misfortune, that it must have caused him to have sought his revenge, by stating that Morgan’s sons were engaged in the destruction of the Bwlgoed bar.
However, this is mere conjecture on her part.
One thing she seems certain of, that her husband has not been from home during any one night for the last two months.”
Consequently, if her statement be true, her husband’s story must be untrue, as we believe he states he was present at the demolition of the Bwlgoed bar, which occurred a considerable distance from his residence, and during the night.
Jones was in town early on , and called at Mr. Davies’ house.
Having sat there a considerable time, he beckoned to Mrs. D., and begged her to as Mr. Davies to lend him five shillings; but Mr. Davies having some knowledge of his character, refused to lend him any money.
This circumstance plainly shows he was considered unworthy of being trusted with five shillings by persons who knew him.
It is well known that the magistrates have offered a reward of one hundred pounds to any one who will give such information as will lead to the conviction of any person engaged in the destruction of Bwlgoed bar and toll house.
The statement of Jones’s wife is given as being much relied upon by the friends of the Morgans, who are very numerous.
A couple of interesting details show up in this version: one, that among the weapons the Morgan family used was a “crutch.”
No crutch is mentioned during the initial presentation of the prosecution’s case against the Morgan family (though some of the other weapons are brought out for display to the Magistrates), and this may perhaps be because it would bolster the idea that Henry Morgan was injured and that the father had offered to bring him to town to face charges once he’d healed up.
Another detail is that neighbors of the Morgans came to their aid and joined in their vigorous defense of their household.
The preliminary hearing in the first big Rebeccaite criminal trial began on .
Here’s how The Cambrian covered it:
The examination of the parties charged with having been concerned in the destruction of the above toll-bars took place at the Town-hall, Swansea, on .
In consequence of an announcement, that the proceedings would commence at , the hall was completely filled long before the Magistrates, who held a private meeting previous to the examination, had taken their seats.
Soon after , Capt. Napier announced to the prisoner’s attornies, reporters, and others who were anxiously waiting in the large hall, that the Bench was ready to proceed with the examination in the small petty sessions room.
An instantaneous rush took place from the hall to that room, so that every avenue was immediately filled.
The Magistrates occupied the whole of the table, and consequently there was not the slightest accommodation either for the attornies engaged or the individuals connected with the press.
Mr. Tripp, after remarking upon the inconvenience of conducting the examination in that confined room, expressed a hope that the Magistrates would consent to adjourn to the large hall.
J.D. Llewelyn, Esq., on behalf of the Magistrates, expressed their willingness to do any thing for the accommodation of the public, but they had come to an unanimous decision of holding the examination in that room, in consequence of the very unseemly manifestations of feeling evinced by the crowd at the last examination, which had a tendency to defeat the ends of justice.
Still, the Magistrates were quite willing to adjourn to the hall (though they were not bound to give publicity to their proceedings) provided no similar demonstrations would recur.
The Magistrates then adjourned to the Hall.
The following gentlemen formed the bench on the occasion:—
Sir John Morris, Bart., in the Chair.
J.D. Berrington, Esq.
J.D. Llewelyn, Esq.
Col. Cameron.
Griffith Llewellyn, Esq.
The Rev. John Collins.
Robert Lindsay, Esq.
The Rev. S. Davies.
J.N. Lucas, Esq.
L.Ll. Dillwyn, Esq.
Henry Lucas, Esq.
Richard Franklyn, Esq.
C.H. Smith, Esq.
John Grove. Esq.
T. Edw. Thomas Esq.
The Rev. W. Hewson, D.D.
Henry Thomas, Esq.
W.I. Jones, Esq.
J.H. Vivian, Esq., M.P.
Mr. Maule, the Government Solicitor, said that he would not trouble the Bench with a statement, but go through a regular examination, and leave the prisoners, by their attornies, exercise their right of cross-examining; but, in addition to the depositions against the defendants, David Jones, Wm. Morgan, Daniel Lewis, and Griffith Vaughan, there was another circumstance which affected one of them — that was Vaughan.
That circumstance had recently come to light, and until it was satisfactorily explained, be would call upon the Magistrates to give it its due weight and effect.
The fact he alluded to was, that a few days ago, a case arrived by steam-packet from Bristol; the agent to the steamer had received it from the railway carriers at Bristol.
It was addressed to Mr. Griffith Vaughan, and after he had been taken into custody, the order for the contents of the case had been countermanded.
That circumstance excited suspicion, and the case was consequently detained and examined, and upon examination it was found to contain fire-arms and ammunition — there were about a dozen guns, some of which were double barrelled, a brace of pistols, and a number of percussion caps. Now, that seemed to him (Mr. Maule) to be rather an alarming fact, and unless it could be explained, it was a fact which must affect the defendant.
He should submit that circumstance, together with the depositions, to the attention of the Magistrates.
Mr. Tripp requested Mr. Maule to state the charge.
Mr. Maule stated, that he charged the defendants under a statute of 7th and 8th Geo. 4th, which was to the effect that, if any person broke down or destroyed any turnpike-gate, bar, chain, or any toll-house, so as to prevent the collection of tolls, and allow passengers to pass without paying, such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanour and punished accordingly.
He charged the four defendants with having been concerned in the destruction of the Bolgoed Gate, on ; and if that charge should be brought home, the statute enacted, that they should be guilty of a misdemeanour.
Mr. Maule then called John Jones.
The Chairman:– Can you speak English?
Witness (in English): “No, Sir” (laughter.)
Mr. Tripp said he understood English well, and it would be a convenience if he gave evidence in English.
The Chairman observed, that a Welshman who spoke English imperfectly always preferred giving evidence in his native tongue.
He (the Chairman) could understand and speak French, still, if in a court of justice, he would insist on his right of giving evidence in English.
Mr. Glasbrook was then sworn interpreter.
John Jones was then examined:– I live in Cwmsciach, in the parish of Llangafelach, in this county.
I am a labourer, and the place where I reside is about two miles distant from Bolgoed gate, which, I believe, is in the parish of Llandilo-talybont, in this county.
I was out on the night of when the gate was destroyed.
I saw the gate destroyed .
The house was pulled down with pickaxes, and the gate cut with saws.
The parties engaged in the destruction of the toll-house and gate were counted previous to leaving, and they amounted to some hundreds.
I know there must be hundreds of men there.
I did not see any women.
I believe there were both old men and young men present.
There was something peculiar in the dress of all.
Some had white shirts on, and others had women’s bed-gowns about them.
They also wore women’s caps on their heads.
Some of them were armed.
I cannot say how many.
There might have been a hundred guns there.
They were principally single-barrel guns, but some of them were double-barrelled.
They had several hand-saws, a cross-saw, and pickaxes.
They cut the toll-bar with cross-swords and hand-saws, and the toll-house they destroyed with pickaxes by undermining it, and taking out the lower stones with pickaxes.
When the toll-house and gate were being destroyed there was a continual firing of guns.
They were occupied for about ten minutes in destroying both the toll-house and the toll-bar.
Some of the parties also had their faces disguised by having some kind of handkerchiefs tied around their heads, and hanging like veils over their faces.
I did not observe that any of them had their faces blackened.
One of the persons rode on a white horse.
The men addressed the person on horseback by the name of “mother.”
I was near enough to the person they call “mam” (mother) to hear them talk lo him.
They were consulting with each other if it was time to go.
That was before the gate and toll-house were demolished.
It was the man on horseback that asked the men if it was time to go.
They replied that they thought it was time for them to go.
The person on horseback had a white shirt put over his clothes.
He had also a cap and bonnet on his head.
He gave them directions, and made a short speech.
That man was the prisoner Daniel Lewis.
I should know him if I saw him.
This is the man (pointing to Daniel Lewis.)
I had known him before that night.
I know him to be a weaver, and that he lives near the Goppa, but I do not know in which house.
The Goppa is near the Pontardulais road.
I had seen him frequently before, but do not know how often.
I had been acquainted with him for three or four years.
I saw more persons whom I knew among the mob.
I saw Mr. Griffith Vaughan, of the Pontardulais Inn.
I see Mr. Vaughan now.
He was among the crowd.
He had a gun in his hand.
I do not know whether it was a double or single-barrelled gun.
He was dressed in some kind of a white shirt, a cap, and a bonnet.
He fired several shots from the gun.
It might be twice or thrice during the time the others were destroying the gate.
I saw nothing in Daniel Lewis’s hand.
I saw others whom I knew besides Lewis and Vaughan.
I saw David Jones, of Dantwyn, present.
His father is a farmer.
Dantwyn is about a mile distant from the Bolgoed bar.
He was also dressed in a while shirt, a cap, and a bonnet, and had a double-barrelled gun.
He fired more than once, but I cannot say how often.
That was during the time the others were engaged in destroying the toll-house and gate.
I also saw John Morgans, of Bolgoed.
I know his name is Morgans.
I know him well.
[Mr. Tripp observed that his name was William.]
— He is a farmer, and lived at Bolgoed.
He was dressed in a similar manner to the others.
He fired a gun three or four times.
There were neither shoutings or noise then.
They were not speaking, only firing.
I became acquainted with David Jones in the last winter, when I met him out sporting.
I have known William Morgans for the last ten years.
I partly know from where the crowd came.
I first met them on the lowest part of Goppa mountain.
This was .
I accompanied them to the gate, but did not speak to one of them.
Their numbers increased as they went on.
They sat down on the mountain, and others came from all parts to join them.
I understood where they were going to.
They said they were going to break the Bolgoed bar.
I had my coat turned inside out.
I also put a handkerchief about my face.
I did it for the purpose of being like the others.
I had been on an errand, and saw two persons who were going there.
I had previously heard that they intended destroying the gate, but I had not heard the night.
They did not remain a minute after they had destroyed the gate.
They went together to the side of the Bolgoed mountain.
They then pulled the bonnets, &c. from their heads and dispersed throughout the neighbourhood.
I then went home.
I do not remember that I saw Lewis after I saw him by the gate.
Cross-examined by Mr. Tripp, who appeared for David Jones and Wm. Morgans, and, in conjunction with Mr. Walters, on behalf of Dl. Lewis:— I was with my father during a part of that day.
I was at home during a very short portion of the day.
I was not at home after seven or eight o’clock in the morning.
I will swear I slept at home on the preceding night.
I then went to Gellywran-issa, where my father resides; I remained there until the evening.
I do not remember the hour I left.
I did not return to my own house when I left Gellywran-issa.
From my father’s house I went on an errand to my brother’s. My brother’s name is Richard Jones, he lives at Llanedi, in Carmarthenshire — that is about four miles distant from my father’s house; it may be five miles distant, or more.
I reached there about dusk.
It may be six, seven, or eight o’clock; I should think it might be about seven o’clock; I do not know when.
I will swear it was not nine or ten o’clock it was not quite dark.
I had left my father’s house between four and five o’clock.
I did not call at any house between my father’s and my brother’s house; I went direct from my father’s to my brother’s house.
I met several persons on the road, but I do not remember who they were.
I did not speak to one.
I do not recollect having met any person whom I knew; I will not swear I did not.
When I arrived at my brother’s, I saw my brother and his wife, his daughter, and the servant — the latter was in the kitchen; the child was with her in the kitchen, and no other person.
My brother was not in in the house when I arrived, but came in there about an hour afterwards, accompanied by his wife.
I remained there until it was dark.
I might have remained in my brother’s house for about three hours.
When in my brother’s house I saw no person but those named.
The Chairman now asked Mr. Tripp, what course he intended pursuing with the defence?
Mr. Tripp, in reply, said, he did not exactly know at that period of the proceedings, but if the Chairman’s object in putting the question was for the purpose of sending all the witnesses who might be called for the defence out of Court, on the part of his clients he was very willing it should be done.
Mr. Maule observed, that it was usual to do so.
The witnesses were then ordered to leave the Court.
The cross-examination was then proceeded with:— The errand, to perform which I left my father’s house, was to consult with him about my going there to mow hay.
I went there on my own account, and not for any one.
I consider that to be an errand.
When I left my brother’s, I went to the Hendy-gate, and thence to Pontardulais, and from thence to the Farmer’s Arms, and was on my way home.
I had heard that the Bolgoed bar was to be destroyed on that night, but I did not know for a certainty.
I saw the two persons, who were going to break the gate, going through the fields before me — I did not speak to them.
I thought they were going to Bolgoed, because one had a white dress on, and the other a bedgown.
When first I saw them, they had those dresses about them.
I did not walk with them, but after them.
I followed them until the wooden bridge, near the factory.
I do not know that I saw them afterwards.
I will swear that I did I not see their faces.
I then went to Goppa Mountain; I saw scores of persons there.
I have disclosed to the Magistrates the names of all the parties whom I knew were present at the destruction of the gate and toll-house.
When I first saw them, they were sitting down — some were standing.
I sat down above them all.
I did not hear them talk, as they were talking in a subdued tone.
I was near enough to hear, if they had spoken aloud.
I remained there for about half an hour.
During that time the numbers increased.
Becca was calling upon them, throughout all the neighbourhood.
When they left the mountain, they amounted to some hundreds; I was then in the midst of them.
I well understood that they were going to destroy Bolgoed.
One rose upon his feet, and said to me, “You know where we are going — it is to break down the Bolgoed-gate.”
It was Becca that said that.
I knew who Becca then was, but not so exact as afterwards.
I suspected it was Daniel Lewis; I knew him by his voice, but at the gate I saw his face.
I had heard all the neighbourhood say that Daniel Lewis was to act Rebecca’s character.
I had not heard that he was generally Rebecca, but that he was to be so on that night.
I heard that a week or a fortnight before, but cannot name any person who said so.
I will positively swear that I heard Daniel Lewis was to be there, on that night, from a great number of persons.
I do not remember one of the persons who told me so.
I turned the sleeves of my coat by the factory, about three quarters of a mile from the Goppa mountain.
I disguised my face when first I saw them; I used my neckcloth for that purpose.
I turned my coat after I saw the two men disguised.
I did so because I had heard they had done so in Carmarthenshire and I went to see them breaking the gates.
I think all those assembled on the mountain were disguised.
I named all I knew to the Magistrates; I cannot say how many I knew, but I knew many of them — perhaps about six, including the four prisoners.
I did not positively recognize one of them on the mountain.
While on the mountain, one of the persons stretched his hand towards me, but I did not know him.
No person spoke to me.
I heard conversations between several of them.
I was within three or four yards of the toll-house when it was demolished.
I was standing near, looking at them.
I have said that they were about ten minutes destroying the gate and toll-house; it might have been fifteen minutes.
I had seen and known David Jones previous to last winter, but not so well as afterwards; I never spoke a word to him in my life; I only know him by sight.
I first knew Morgans when he was in the employment of Mr. Griffiths, of Penrhiew, at Swansea.
I reside in a house in the Sciach valley; it is a poor house.
I cannot name the day or week I heard that a reward was offered for the apprehension of the Rebeccaites — I cannot say how long before last Saturday week; I had heard some days before.
I first mentioned what I have sworn to to-day, to Mr. Rees.
Inspector of Police, last Saturday week.
I had business at Swansea.
I intended buying plates there.
Near Mr. Attwood’s office.
I had heard speaking about the Rebeccaites.
Mr. Tripp:— What did you tell Mr. Rees?
Mr. Maule objected to that question.
It was quite unusual to ask witness what they had told any person with a view of comparing it with his evidence.
The examination was proceeded with after a short discussion.
I did not name to Mr. Rees the parties whom I have mentioned to-day.
Mr. Rees desired me to accompany him to Mr. Attwood’s office.
Mr. Attwood sent for two Magistrates, who arrived there.
I was examined before them, and I believe my examination was taken down in writing.
When speaking to Mr. Rees, I believe not a word was spoken about the reward.
I then knew that a reward was offered.
I think I had asked Rees if I would be free if I informed about others.
Mr. Rees said I would have the reward if I could make out who had broken the gates.
I do not remember all the conversation between me and Mr. Rees, but I think something might have passed about the reward.
I have no doubt of it.
You must have heard if I said that not a word had passed between us.
— [The witness was also cross-examined as to whether any person had influenced him to become informer on this occasion, which he strongly denied, and stated that he gave the information of his own accord, uninfluenced by any one.
— During his examination, the witness said, that if his word was doubted, the Magistrates might sign two warrants, and he would produce two witnesses who would confirm his statements in every particular.]
Mr. Jeffreys, on behalf of Mr. Vaughan, cross-examined the witness:— I have known Mr. Vaughan for some years.
I do not remember that I ever spoke to him.
I believe I was in his shop some years ago.
I think his shop was in a street called High-street.
I have been often in Swansea.
I do not know the names of the streets.
On the night in question I was within two yards of Mr. Vaughan.
I did not exchange a word with any one by the gate — nor on the mountain.
In leaving the gate I spoke to two men after they had taken off the covering from their faces.
It was a dry light night.
I do not remember that it was a moon light night.
It might have been.
I know Mr. William Jones, of Rhyd.
I spoke to him in coming from the lime-pits a few days after the destruction of the gate.
It might have been a week after.
I spoke to him on two occasions, but only once upon that subject.
I will not swear it was not on the next day.
I did not tell him whom I saw, but that I witnessed the destruction of the gate.
I did not say I was close to them, or that I was at a distance from them.
I did not tell him that I knew any of them, We had no conversation as to the parties who were present.
William Jones did not ask me where I met the Rebeccaites, but I said I had seen them breaking the gate.
He said, “where were they?
If I knew where they were, I would go with them.”
I did not say I did not go near them as I was afraid of them, or any thing to that effect.
I did not say I turned off the road as soon as I had a place to turn.
I did not tell him that I could not recognize one of them, nor did I say they had come from Carmarthenshire, as I knew better.
I was brought before the Magistrates about six years ago for cutting birch.
I was compelled to pay a fine on that occasion.
Cross-examined by Mr. Walters, on behalf of Daniel Lewis.
I do not hold any land.
I was working with my father for three or four days in the week I gave the information.
On the previous week I also worked with my father, perhaps during the whole week.
I was working with Mr. Williams, of Penyfidy, on the week before.
I used to mow for my brother, and my brother for me.
I lived for the last six weeks in a barn belonging to Morgan Pugh.
I had left Pwllfa.
I was turned out of that house.
I had not occupied the farm since Michaelmas.
I wished to have a house near the mountain for the purpose of keeping cattle, otherwise I had the offer of many houses.
I wished to live in a house near Rhosfawr, and Mr. Powell told me that he intended making the two houses into one.
I went to bed about .
That was the first time I returned home after leaving on the previous day.
In leaving the gate I met a man on Goppa Mountain.
When I returned to my house I saw no person, as they had all gone to bed.
I did not see Morgan Pugh.
I know Mr. John Williams, of Penyfidy.
I had some conversation with him shortly after the gate was destroyed.
I did not tell him that I was at a distance from the gate.
I named to Mr. Williams, at that time, the persons whom I have named to day.
I did not tell him that I did not know one of them.
In coming to the gate the four defendants turned the covering they had on their faces on one side, and afterwards returned to shoot.
Re-examined by Mr. Maule:– Mr. Williams, of Penyfidy, is a farmer.
I do not remember whether he or myself commenced the conversation.
What I told Williams was in reply to questions put by him.
Mr. Williams did not express his regret that this disturbance had taken place.
Mr. Williams seemed rather to advocate the parties who had broken the gate.
— William Jones is a small farmer and a publican, and is generally called William, of Rhyd.
The information I communicated to him was in answer to questions put by him to me.
He made no observations expressive of regret at what had occurred, but appeared very partial to Rebecca’s doings.
Mr. J. Naish Smart was then called by Mr. Maule.
Mr. Jeffreys stated, that if the witnesses were called to prove the arrival of a case of arms, he would object to his evidence, as Mr. Vaughan denied having anything to do with the arms in question.
It was also irrelevant to the case, for the arrival of arms would be no proof that Mr. Vaughan had destroyed the gate.
Mr. Maule insisted upon the necessity of calling the witness.
It was most important that an explanation should be offered if that were possible, for it appeared in evidence that Mr. Vaughan, and a multitude of others had riotously assembled, armed with guns, and at the very time he was in custody on that charge, a case of guns and pistols arrived by packet and addressed to him and the order for which had been countermanded since he had been taken into custody upon the charge.
He would say that the Magistrates were bound to receive such evidence, though it was not yet complete as the order had not yet been proved; still he maintained, that it was closely connected with the circumstances of the case, inasmuch as it was evident that he collected arms for some purpose, though it might be no proof that he was present at the particular riot in question.
Mr. Tripp observed, that the evidence might effect his clients, and contended that it was no evidence relating to the destruction of the gate.
It was merely of a general character.
Mr. Maule said that it would not be made evidence against the other prisoners, but thought it of importance as far as it regarded Vaughan.
If the evidence would not be taken as it then stood, the only course would be to adjourn the investigation for the purpose of ascertaining the whole of the facts connected with the transaction.
The only evidence he could at present offer was, that the case had been addressed to Mr. Vanghan.
He was aware that it was necessary to prove some connection between Mr. Vaughan and the case, either by means of a written order or otherwise, as a case of arms might have been addressed to Vaughan by him (Mr. Maule) or any other person, though that would not be a very probable circumstance.
After some further discussion, the Magistrates admitted the evidence.
Mr. Smart’s examination was proceeded with.
He deposed to the following effect:– I am the agent for a Steam Packet Company in this town.
On , we received a case addressed to Mr. Griffith Vaughan, of Pontardulais.
It was received from Messrs.
Bland, who were the railway carriers.
It reached this town on the same day as it was put on board.
The witness read the extract from the manifest relating to the case as follows:– “Bland and Co., shippers, one case, Vaughan, near Swansea.”
Then follows amount of freight.
1s. 6d.; charges, 3s. total 4s. 6d..
The Mayor took possession of the case.
On I received a letter.
It was half-past eight o’clock on Sunday evening when I received it.
— [Letter produced].
It arrived by post, and was given me by Mr. Turner, who is also a steam-packet agent.
— [Mr Jeffreys having glanced over the letter, objected to its being admitted in evidence.]
— [The case was then produced].
It was addressed “G. Vaughan, Red Lion Inn, Pontardulais.”
Witness said that the first word after the name appeared Rich.
Upon the receipt of the letter, I wrote to the Clerk of the Magistrates.
Within five minutes afterwards, he came to the house where I board, and returned in company with the Mayor and Capt. Napier.
There were three or four policemen present.
Mr. Rees was one, and there was a Mr. Jones present.
The case was opened in my presence, and contained twelve fowling-pieces, one brace of pistols, a bullet-mould for the pistols, and ten or twelve boxes of percussion caps. There were three or four double-barrelled guns, and the rest were single-barrelled.
The contents after they had been inspected were replaced in the case, which was fastened up.
It is the practice to keep goods in the warehouse until called for.
I do not know in whose writing these letters are.
Some of the policemen took away the case.
Cross examined by Mr. Jeffreys:— The box was opened about [Mr. Jeffreys handed the witness a letter.]
This letter is in my hand-writing. it was written on .
[Mr. Jeffreys wished to put the Magistrates in possession of the letter, to show the course adopted towards Mr. Vaughan.]
I received no communication from Mr. Vaughan direct or indirect.
I received no answer from the letter addressed to Mr. Vanghan.
The letter referred to was to the following effect:–
County of Pembroke Steam Packet Office, Swansea, .
Sir, — A case arrived per County of Pembroke steamer on , addressed to you.
As we have but little room to spare in the warehouse, probably you will call or send for same at the earliest opportunity.
I am, Sir, yours, obediently, John Naish Smart. Mr. G. Vaughan, Pontardulais.
Mr. Tripp asked if there were any additional evidence against Vaughan?
Mr. Maule answered in the negative.
Mr. Jeffreys again begged leave to urge the objection made by him before, against admitting, as evidence, the circumstance of Mr. Vaughan being in possession of arms weeks after the occurrence had taken place upon which the charge was founded.
Mr. Maule:— “Weeks after.”
We must see what time the order was sent.
Mr. Jeffreys said, that be would be able, at a future period, to give a full and satisfactory explanation of circumstances attending the case of arms being addressed to his client.
The above was all the evidence offered on behalf of the crown.
Mr. Tripp, on behalf of David Jones and Morgan, submitted to the Bench, that the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution was not sufficient to warrant a committal.
The evidence given by John Jones fully established that, in point of law, he was an accomplice in the case, having formed a part of the company when they first started from the mountain — having accompanied them to the spot, and remained present during the whole of the time that the gate and toll-house were demolished.
It could, therefore, be safely said, that Jones was an accomplice to an equal degree with any of the other two hundred and fifty, stated to have been present, with the exception of those who were actually engaged in breaking up the gate, and pulling down the house.
It was therefore clear that Jones was an accomplice and it was equally clear that he was also an informer, and, in that character, he hoped to receive the reward offered for the apprehension of the parties.
He (Mr. Tripp) would therefore submit, that the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice would not justify the Bench in committing the parties for trial.
In support of that opinion.
Mr Tripp quoted a case from Carrington and Payne, and opinions given by Baron Alderson and Mr. Justice Bailey.
Mr. Walters urged similar objections, and contended that Jones was an accomplice in whatever aspect the question was viewed.
He had accompanied the party, disguised his face, and turned his coat.
It was evident that he had considered himself as such, for the first question he put to inspector Rees was, — Whether he should be free, if he informed on the others?
Supposing that Jones had been instructed by the Magistrates to disguise himself, and appear among the crowd for the purpose of bringing the offenders to justice, he would appear in quite a different character.
In that case, he would not have been an accomplice; he would have been present from understood pre-arrangement, but in that case there was no such arrangement.
He would not trouble the Bench by quoting any cases, as Mr. Tripp had quoted several high legal authorities, shewing with what caution the evidence of an accomplice should be taken.
The Magistrates ought not to be satisfied with a committal, on a primâ facie case, from the evidence adduced, but they should also be satisfied that the evidence was accredited.
Mr. Jeffreys, on behalf of Mr. Vaughan, contended that no primâ facie case had been made out.
Supposing Jones’s testimony to be creditable, there was no evidence that Vaughan was concerned in the demolition of the gate and house, but merely that he was present, as the witness himself was.
Mr. Maule replied to the observations made by the gentlemen who defended the prisoners.
He agreed with some of the remarks made, but the Magistrates could not assent to all of them, unless they had made up their minds to think that Mr. Smart and Jones were not creditable witnesses.
The gentlemen who defended the prisoners were entirely mistaken in the cases they had quoted.
If, instead of being before the Magistrates for examination, the prisoners were tried at the Assizes, the Judge had no power, in point of law, to reject the evidence of an accomplice, even though uncorroborated; but it was usual, unless circumstantially or directly corroborated, to recommend the jury to acquit the prisoner; yet that was a rule of discretion rather than a rule of law.
The question was, not whether there was sufficient evidence to convict the prisoners, but whether the account given by John Jones was sufficiently satisfactory to warrant the Magistrates to send the prisoners before another tribunal.
With respect to the witness being an accomplice, he (Mr. Maule) would observe, that there might have been accomplices in various degrees.
If that argument were to operate, there were many persons, besides John Jones, whose evidence would be rejected.
He alluded to parties, who might be mere spectators, encouraging others who were intent upon mischief.
Mr. Walters observed, that there was no difference between the case of Daniel Lewis and that of the witness Jones, with respect to the parts taken by them in the riot.
Mr. Maule was of opinion, that there was a material difference between the two cases.
Had Jones ridden on a while horse?
Had he acted the part of Rebecca, which Daniel Lewis seemed to have done to admiration?
Had the mob consulted Jones as to their manner of proceeding?
He had only turned his coat at that moment, but they were better prepared, having white shirts, caps, bonnets, and gowns.
Mr. Maule quoted several authorities, to prove that the evidence of an accomplice was sufficient to commit, and that it would be legal evidence before a jury.
The Magistrates would necessarily adopt one of three courses — either to acquit the prisoners, to commit them, or to adjourn the proceedings.
Mr. Maule proceeded at considerable length, replying to the observations made by Messrs.
Tripp, Walters, and Jeffreys.
Mr. Walters repeated his objections to committing on the evidence of an accomplice.
Col. Cameron read an opinion from a legal authority, to the effect that any person could be convicted on the evidence of an accomplice, provided the jury thought him worthy of belief.
Mr. Tripp observed, that prisoners formerly were convicted on the unsupported evidence of an accomplice, but that old rule was entirely abrogated.
Mr. Jeffreys hoped the Magistrates would entirely exclude from their minds the circumstance of the possession of fire-arms by the defendant Vaughan.
The Magistrates then retired to an adjoining room, and in a short time returned, when the Chairman said that the Magistrates had come to a determination to commit the prisoners.
Messrs.
Walters and Tripp then proposed calling witnesses for the defence, when Mr. Maule objected to hear, in a preliminary investigation before Magistrates, evidence to contradict statements made on behalf of the prosecution.
They could call evidence to prove that the witness was not worthy of credit, but not to contradict circumstances stated by the witness, for if the Magistrates decided upon the credibility of witnesses, they would be assuming the functions both of judge and jury.
After some further observations from Mr. Tripp and Mr. Maule, the following witnesses were called on behalf of the prisoners.
William Jones deposed to the following effect:– I reside at Rhyd.
I remember the time when the Bolgoed bar was broken.
I heard from some sort of a friend of mine that the gate was broken.
It was from John Jones, whom I met on the following day.
I was returning from the lime, and he was coming from Llandilo.
We were on the road between Glamorganshire and Carmarthenshire.
I had a conversation with him about Rebecca.
John Jones said that he had seen Rebecca on the previous night.
He said that she went before him from Pontardulais to Bolgoed.
I asked him if he did not go near them.
He said he was afraid to go near them — that they were walking before him, and he following.
He said that he was looking for a place to turn, and that at last he turned up by the Fountain Inn to the Goppa Mountain.
He said he looked down from the bank, and saw Rebecca on a white horse with a white dress.
I asked.
“Did you know none of them?”
He said.
I did not, and added, [“]I was glad to get out of their way.”
I asked.
“Did you not know one of them?”
He said, “No, not one of them.
I saw them going before me to Pontardulais, and heard them firing from Llandybie.”
— Mr. Jeffreys:– Are you sure that he is the man who was called as a witness to-day?
— Witness:– Good God, yes; do you think I would commit such a blunder as that.
(A laugh.)
Cross-examined by Mr. Maule:– I was returning from lime at the time.
I had not known before that time that the gate was broken down.
I believe I commenced the conversation about Rebecca by asking how it came on about Llandilo?
I was just asking for news.
I had been in Llandilo in .
I was curious to know how matters got on.
I had never heard of the intention of breaking down Bolgoed gate.
Jones might have been lagging behind me on the road for about two miles.
I mentioned this conversation to Mr. Llewellyn, of Cardinen, and to Mr. Williams, Clyn Castle, and another person.
I told Mr. Jeffreys the circumstance on .
Mr. Jeffreys sent for me.
I might have told a dozen more.
I cannot name any of them, but my wife.
I had a boy with me.
He was about eight years old, but did not appear to take notice of any thing.
John Williams, of Penyfidy, examined:— I am a farmer, and reside in the parish of Llangafelach.
I first heard of the destruction of Bolgoed gate from John Jones.
He spoke to me upon the subject .
In the conversation John Jones had with me he told me he had been with them breaking down the gate.
I asked John Jones if he knew one of them, and he said he did not know one living being.
I asked him if there were any gentleman present? and he answered that he could not say.
He did not name any of the four defendants.
Cross-examined:— The conversation took place at different times.
He spoke to me on two successive days.
He told me the same story both days.
I will swear he did not name either of the defendants.
I reside three miles distant from Bolgoed gate.
I will swear I had not heard of the destruction of the gate before he told me.
I mentioned the circumstance to my own family on that day, but not to any one else.
I think I was in Chapel on the Sunday following the destruction of the gale.
I attend Salem Chapel, which is between three and four miles from Bolgoed.
Mr. Tripp stated, that the next witness he intended calling, would prove that, from Jones’s general character, he was not worthy of credit.
Mr. Maule objected to evidence of that description being adduced before Magistrates.
Mr. Tripp replied, and quoted Phillips on Evidence in support of his opinion.
The following witness was then called—
Evan Roberts said:– I live at Llandimor, in the parish of Talybont.
I have known John Jones for the last twelve or fifteen years.
From his general character I would not believe John Jones on his oath.
Rees Morgan, who stated that he lived in Glyn Castle, in Llangafelach, said:— I have known John Jones for twenty-five years, and would not believe him on his oath.
Cross-examined:— I live about three miles from Bolgoed.
I do not remember the day of the month on which I first heard or the gate being broken down, but I was going to meet the boys coming from lime.
I am generally at home at night, and I think I can swear I was at home on the night the gate was destroyed.
I do not know what time of night I went home.
I will swear that I saw no person going to destroy the gate, until it was destroyed.
None of my family were out on the night the gate was destroyed.
John Joce Strick, Esq., examined:— I reside at Clydach.
I have known John Jones for three or four years.
I cannot say whether I would believe him on his oath.
I think that, from so much as I know of him, I would not believe him on his oath but I am not sufficiently acquainted with him to say so positively.
Richard Jones examined:– I reside in the parish of Llandilo, and am a brother to John Jones.
I heard of the day the gates was destroyed.
I do not remember seeing my brother on that day.
I do not think my brother was in my house on that day.
To the best of my recollection the last time previous to the time mentioned I saw my brother was about .
I saw him then on a Sunday.
I did not see him in the week the gate was destroyed.
Cross-examined:– I swear I did not see him — that he was not seen or my family would let me know.
I am a tenant of the Rev. Samuel Davies, to whom I pay ground-rent.
I also pay rent to Charles Vaughan.
I am not aware that he is any relation to Griffith Vaughan.
I am come here at the request of the young men.
I felt for them, as I thought they were not guilty.
They told me to swear nothing but the truth.
I had previously told them that my brother had not been in my house.
— There was nothing elicited in the remaining part of his cross-examination.
Mr. Tripp, on behalf of David Jones, offered to call witnesses of the highest respectability, who would prove that David Jones was at Neath on the night in question.
He knew the Magistrates were not bound to hear such evidence it was entirely at their discretion, but he hoped they would exercise that discretion in a favourable manner.
Mr. Maule stated at considerable length his objections to such evidence, which he had never known to have been received by Magistrates, who were not to decide upon the guilt or innocence of parties, but to send them before another tribunal.
In cases which were summarily disposed of by Magistrates they heard evidence for the prosecution or from the complainants, and also for the defence.
They also decided upon the guilt or innocence of the parties, and passed sentence.
In those instances Magistrates performed the functions of Judge and Jury, but such evidence could not be admitted in a case like that which was to be sent to the Sessions or Assizes.
Mr. Wallers replied, after which the Bench decided that the evidence offered to be adduced by Mr. Tripp could not be received.
The Chairman then slated that the Magistrates had come to the determination of committing the parties for trial at the Quarter Sessions.
Mr. Tripp hoped the Magistrates would allow the prisoners to chose the tribunal before which they should be tried, and that they would commit them for trial at the Assizes, where they should not only be tried before one of the Learned Judges of the land, but where they should have the assistance of able Counsel, who would do justice to their cases.
— The Bench assented to Mr. Tripp’s request.
On the usual question being put, each of the defendants declined making any statements, as they left the matter entirely to their attornies.
They were then committed for trial at the next Assizes; and having entered into recognizances to appear at that time, were liberated.
Swansea, . we attended at the Assize Court, at nine o’clock, in anticipation of an early commencement of the public business, but the magistrates remained in their private room , when it was officially announced to those in the great hall that the court was opened, that is, that the proceedings against the parties charged with the demolition of the Bwlgoed gate, were to take place in a small apartment, inconvenient to the magistrates, and insufficient to accommodate more than about 50 of the anxious public, when closely packed.
The assigned cause for this very unpopular arrangement, against which we heard the good citizens of Swansea and the visitors from distant parts, strongly and loudly declaim in the precincts of the court, where several “rate payers,” in the peace of our sovereign Lady the Queen, were constitutionally holding forth on the liberty of the subject, was, that on the former day of hearing, the feelings of the public in court were so loudly and irrepressibly expressed, that it was resolved to avoid such unseemly interruptions and annoyances this day, and thus give the people a “great moral lesson.”
No sooner, however, were the magistrates assembled, than the overwhelming heat produced by the closely-packed audience in a small apartment, rendered a motion by Mr. Tripp, the solicitor, for an adjournment to the capacious court, favourably entertained, and Colonel Cameron strongly expressing his disapprobation at the very limited accommodation, seconded by other gentlemen in the commission, the Assize Court was resorted to, which in a few minutes presented an exceedingly dense mass; the far greater proportion of which were farmers, and their country’s pride, a “bold peasantry,” here and there relieved by bright-eyed Cambrian mountain maids.
Pontardulais and its neighbourhood poured its almost entire population into Swansea; and as a “great demonstration” was expected to conduct the defendants (some of whom are great favourites in their respective localities) to the court house, a procedure properly prevented by their legal advisers, the streets were thronged from an early hour of .
The report (since authenticated) that on the previous night, Llanon toll house and gate, together with another “trust” in that locality, had been levelled with the dust, gave an additional interest to the proceedings of the day; whilst the presence, to prosecute, of Mr. Maule, of the Treasury, assisted by the able Mr. Haven, of the same Government department, brought to the Court House the most intelligent gentlemen of Swansea and its precincts.
The following magistrates took their seats on the bench… [omitted; the list is the same as above except that it contains “J.N. Miers” instead of J.N. Lucas, “J.W. Dilwyn” in place of L.Ll.
Dillwyn, and adds F.E. Leach, Esq.]
The following defendants were placed at the bar:– Griffith Vaughan, an exceedingly well-looking rustic, Daniel Lewis, an unsophisticated young farmer, charged with being the Rebecca of , and who would certainly look more effeminate than masculine as a petticoated and capped heroine, David Jones, a staid good humoured looking yeoman, and William Morgan, a merry-countenanced blade, who seemed anything but a fellow addicted to deeds of darkness.
All the reputed Rebeccaites were accompanied and cheered to the court by numerous friends, and seemed to think that it would be “all right.”
J. Ralley Tripp, — Jeffreys, and — Walters, Esqs., solicitors, defended the prisoners.
Mr. Maule rose and addressed the Bench to the following effect:– He had the honour to be engaged by the Crown in the conduct of the present proceedings against the persons who stood there charged with having taken part in the breaking down and destruction of a toll gale at Bwlgoed, distant about eight miles from Swansea.
The four persons then at the bar, named David Jones, William Morgan, Daniel Lewis, and Griffith Vaughan, had been liberated on bail, but this morning had surrendered, in order to have the charge against them investigated.
The witness, upon whose testimony proceedings had been taken against the defendants, would be placed in the box and examined before them, that being the most regular course.
The gentlemen who appeared on behalf of the defendants would then have an opportunity afforded them of cross-examining the witness, and of using every other means of defence which 1 the law placed at their disposal.
In addition to the facts which the witness Jones would prove, he (Mr. Maule) would be in a position to prove a circumstance of a peculiar nature affecting defendant Vaughan.
The circumstance he alluded to was of a most extraordinary character, but as it had only transpired within the last day or two, he (Mr. Maule) was not able to enter very fully into the details of the case.
He would, therefore, merely state that a day or two ago a case, containing arms, and addressed to Mr. Griffith Vaughan, Pontardulais, had been found at the warehouse of the Bristol Steam Packet Compaqny.
It would appear in evidence that after the case had arrived in Swansea, a letter, countermanding its delivery, was received at the packet warehouse.
That case was found to contain from ten to twelve guns, ammunition, caps, bullet moulds, &c., and a brace of pistols.
The defendant Vaughan might be in a position to explain satisfactorily the reason for having arms in such quantities directed to him, and he (Mr. Maule) hoped he would do so; but as the case stood, he was bound to ask the magistrates to admit that fact in evidence.
The degree of importance to be attached to it, he, of course, would leave to the Bench.
The prisoners stood charged with having been concerned in a public outrage committed some short time since.
The statute 7 and 8, Geo. Ⅳ., c 30, s 14. enacts— “That if any person shall unlawfully and maliciously throw down, level, or otherwise destroy, in whole, or in part, any turnpike gate, or any wall, chain, rail, post, bar, or other fence, belonging to any turnpike-gate, set up or erected to prevent passengers passing by without paying any toll, directed to be paid by any Act or Acts of Parliament relating thereto, or any house, building, or weighing engine, erected for the better collection, ascertainment, or security, of any such toll, every such offender shall be guilty of a misdemeanour, and being convicted thereof, shall be punished accordingly.”
The several defendants were charged with having been participators in the destruction of a toll gate, called the Bwlgoed, on , and if the charge was substantiated, it would become the duty of magistrates to commit them for trial.
The learned gentleman then called John Jones, the informer, and on his appearance the indignation of the persons in the body of the court could scarcely be repressed by the officers; hisses were first loudly heard, and when calls of “order” and silence were authoritatively called, a slight under current of sibilations was muttered.
Jones was very firm and collected, and gave his evidence without apparent embarrassment.
He was examined by Mr. Maule.
The examination took place in the Welsh language, which was cleverly interpreted by Mr. Glasbrook, a respectable trader of Swansea.
Witness said that he lived at Cwm Skeach, in the parish of Langafelach, in this county: is a labourer, lives about two miles from the Bolgoed gate.
I was out when that gate was destroyed.
It was destroyed on .
I saw the gate destroyed between twelve and one o’clock somewhere.
It was calculated that there were about 250 people there.
I saw no women there.
Every one of them had something remarkable in their dress.
Some had white shirts on, and some had women’s bedgowns on.
They had women’s caps upon their heads.
I observed that some of the men were armed.
Perhaps there were a hundred guns there, some were double-barrelled.
They had pickaxes, handsaws, and cross saws with them.
They destroyed the toll-house by pulling it down with pickaxes.
While this was going on there was firing of guns all the time.
It took them about ten minutes to destroy the toll-house and toll-bar.
Besides the dresses which I have described, some of them had their faces disguised with some sort of handkerchiefs tied round their heads, and hanging over their faces like veils.
I did not observe that any of them had their faces blackened.
They were not all on foot, one was mounted on a white horse.
I heard the people address the man upon the horse.
They called him “mother.”
(Laughter.)
I was so near to them as enabled me to hear them talking.
I heard the people address the man upon the horse saying, “Is it time for us to go?”
I heard that before the house was pulled down.
The man on horseback asked them, “Is it time for us to go?”
An answer was made to that question.
They thought it was time for them to go.
The man on horseback had a white shirt over his clothes, a cap on his head, and a bonnet over the cap.
(A laugh.)
He spoke a few words to the people.
I know who that man was.
It was Daniel Lewis.
I should know him again if I were to see him.
[Witness then stood forward and pointed out the prisoner Daniel Lewis, who smiled derisively at witness.]
I knew him before that night.
He is a weaver, and resides near the Goppa, but I do not know in what house.
I saw Mr. Griffith Vaughan, of the Inn, there.
I mean the Pontardulais Inn.
I see Mr. Vaughan now in the hall.
He was in the middle of the crowd.
He had a gun with him.
He was dressed with some sort of a white shirt over him, and a cap and bonnet.
He fired the gun off two or three times while the people were destroying the toll-house and bar.
I saw David Jones, of Tantwm, there.
I see him here now.
He had a double-barrelled gun in his hand.
I saw John Morgan, of Bolgoed there; I see him here.
He was disguised like the others, and had a gun with him.
There were no shoutings or noises.
They were not speaking; only firing.
I joined them on the lower part of Mynydd-yy-Goppa, by Velin-ucha.
It was I joined them.
People came from all directions.
I learned where they were going to.
They said they were going to break the Bolgoed bar.
I had my coat turned inside out, and a handkerchief about my face.
After they had broken down the bar and the house they did not stop a minute, but every one went away to [t]he side of Bolgoed mountain again.
I went with them.
When they got to the side of the Bolgoed they drew off the things from about their heads, and scores of them went home.
They spread all over the neighbourhood, and dispersed.
I went home.
I do not remember having seen Daniel Lewis after I saw him by the gate.
Cross-examined by Mr. Trapp (who appeared for David Jones and William Morgan, and who throughout distinguished himself by evincing the ability of a lawyer, with the zeal of an advocate.)
I was with my father during ; that is not my home; I was not at home scarcely any time .
I was at home about but not afterwards that day.
I will swear I slept at home .
I reached my brother’s house in the evening.
Perhaps it might have been six, or seven, or eight o’clock.
Perhaps it was seven, I cannot say exactly.
I am prepared to swear it was not so much as nine or ten, it was something in the dusk of the evening.
It was not dark.
I left my father’s house between four and five o’clock.
I did not call at any house between my father’s and my brother’s. I went direct from one house to the other.
I know I did.
I met some people on the road, but I cannot say whom I met.
Do not recollect having met a single person that I know.
I will not swear that I did not meet some person that I knew.
When I arrived at my brother’s house I saw the servant.
I also saw my brother and his wife.
I saw no one else except my brother’s daughter.
I saw the servant in the kitchen doing the work of the house.
Only the child was in the kitchen at the time with the servant.
My brother was not in the house when I first arrived there, but came in about an hour afterwards.
He and his wife came in together.
I remained at my brother’s house till it was night, I remained there in all two or three hours.
I believe I was there three hours.
During the time I was in my brother’s house I saw no other person except my brother, his wife, daughter, and servant.
The witnesses were ordered to leave the court, but to remain within call.
Cross-examination resumed–
I had a message to my brother, when I left my father’s house on the night in question.
It was a message to talk to him about mowing hay.
I left my brother’s house for the purpose of returning home.
I had heard the Bolgoed bar was to be destroyed that night, but I did not know exactly.
I did not know what night it would be destroyed.
I saw the two persons who told me the bar was to be destroyed that night, going before me on a field near the Pontardulais factory — did not speak to them.
Knew they were going to the Bolgoed bar, because one had a white dress, and the other a bedgown on.
I do not know whether I saw them afterwards.
I did not know them, nor see their faces.
I afterwards found scores of people on the Goppa mountain.
I have disclosed to the magistrates the names of all the parties present at the Goppa that night, that I knew.
Stayed there as long as they stayed — perhaps half an hour.
Becca was calling upon them all the while.
There were some hundreds there when we left the mountain.
One rose on his feet and said– “You know where we are going?
We are going to break down the Bolgoed gate.”
Becca said that — Becca was Daniel Lewis.
I saw his face at the gate, and suspected his voice on the mountain — had heard all the country say it was Daniel Lewis to be there that night as Becca.
I disguised my face when I was near to them — when I saw them.
It was after I saw two men I turned my coat sleeves.
I thought I should see the Rebeccaites — it was night, but not very dark.
I knew many of them.
I went with all of them to the gate.
I could not swear to one of them on the mountain.
I was within a few yards from them when they commenced breaking down the toll house.
I stood by looking at them — it was all done in about ten or fifteen minutes.
I live in Cwm Skuach, in some sort of a little, poor house.
I first mentioned this to Mr. Rees, the inspector of police.
I left home last Saturday week, to transact business in Swansea, and I wanted a scythe.
I told Mr. Rees, Becca broke the gates of our country, but did not tell him the names I mentioned here .
Went with him to Mr. Attwood’s office, and two magistrates came there, who examined me.
In speaking to Rees not a word passed about the reward — knew one had been offered.
Believe I asked him if I should be free if I were to inform on others.
He told me I should have it if I could make out who broke the gates.
No doubt something was said about the reward, when talking with Mr. Rees.
Cross-examined by Mr. Jefferys on behalf of Griffith Vaughan–
I have known Mr. Vaughan for some years, but do not remember having ever spoken to him.
On the night in question I was within two yards of Mr. Vaughan.
It was a dry, light night — not moonlight, I think — the stars were shining.
I know Mr. William Jones, of Rhyd, and had a conversation with him after the gate was broken down — did not tell him whom I had seen in the night, but told him I saw the breaking of the Bolgoed gate.
I did not tell him I knew any of the men — he did not ask me.
I did not say I did not go near them, because I was afraid of them.
He said — The devil! if I was to find them, I would go near them.
I was brought before the magistrates for cutting birch about six years ago, and paid a fine.
Cross-examined by Mr. Walters, on behalf of Daniel Lewis–
I was working with my father before I gave this information.
I worked with Mr. Williams, of Penyfiddy, the week before the week I worked with my father.
I was working two days in exchange with my brother — he came with me two days to mow hay, and I went with him two days to mow hay.
I have lived in Morgan Pugh’s barn six weeks.
I went to bed about two at morn after the gate was broken — all were gone to bed.
I did not tell Mr. Williams I was at a distance from the gate at the time it was broken.
Re-examined.
Mr. Williams is the son of Ynisfawr, and is a farmer.
William of Rhyd told me that he was very willing for the gates to be pulled down.
The whole of the evidence was then read over and explained to the witnesses.
The same paper also covered the part of the examination concerning the arms shipment.
It is similar to the coverage in The Cambrian, although much less extensive about the nature of the objections from the defense.
It also reports the testimony about whom the case was addressed to as “G. Vaughan, Rich Lyon, Ponterdulais, near Swansea” while The Cambrian reports it as “G. Vaughan, Red Lion Inn, Pontardulais” but adds “Witness said that the first word after the name appeared Rich.”
That article also covered the examination of the witnesses called by the defense to impeach the credibility of the prosecution’s main witness.
It is more perfunctory in general than the report in The Cambrian.
The way it reported John Joce Strick’s brief testimony was different in a somewhat interesting way:
I reside at Clydach, and have known John Jones for three or four years.
I would not credit his oath after the way in which he has treated me.
The night of this trial (if I have the difficult-to-interpret chronology correct), there were more toll gate attacks.
A later issue of the Monmouthshire Merlin reported:
Swansea, . The Rebeccaites have brought the anti-toll-gate war literally to the gates of this town, and the audacity of the movement has astonished the natives.
Notwithstanding the strong garrison of soldiers, and numerous police force, with us, the midnight levellers , in considerable numbers, destroyed the Ty Coch gate and two other bars, situated about half a mile from the Town Hall.
On going to the scene of Rebecca’s misdeeds , the work of ruin appeared effectively done: the heavy posts were sawed down nearly to the level of the road; bars were wrenched from their hinges, and cast upon a neighbouring lime-kiln, where they were partially burned, and every part of the “trust” evidenced the determined purpose of the malefactors, whose display of wantonness of power has annoyed the authorities exceedingly.
Ty Coch, which is a sort of suburb, is separated from the town of Swansea by the river, which is crossed at the ferry side by a floating bridge.
In the very centre of this village, completely surrounded by habitations, is a toll house, to which two gates are attached, called the Ty Coch gates.
It appears that at nearly , the woman who is the toll-keeper, was alarmed by a noise outside, and immediately afterwards the window of the toll house was broken in; being very much frightened, she remained in bed, but shortly afterwards the door was violently burst open.
She then rushed out of the house, and saw 30 or 40 men in the road, and found that the gates had been broken down.
She screamed out murder! as loud as she could, when a man rushed at her with an iron bar, and struck her a violent blow on the arm, which inflicted a serious wound.
She then succeeded in re-entering the toll-house, and closed the door, which was endeavoured to be forced, and was split in pieces.
She again rushed out and screamed, on which the men all ran away.
It was then found that the posts of the gate had been sawn off, and the gate itself thrown on a lime kiln, where it was burnt.
They not only demolished these two gates, but also a bar about one hundred yards from Ty Coch.
They were not disguised, but dressed in their usual dresses, those of workmen.
No person came to the poor woman’s rescue, although, as before observed, Ty Coch is a populous village, and the noise must have been great.
No one appeared this morning to be cognizant of the outrage, except from seeing the gates down, and it is quite evident that Becca has friends at hand.
Official intelligence has just reached me, that these depredators made an irruption into Llanelly, about , and totally demolished the Furnace Gate, on the road leading from that town to Carmarthen, and burned the toll-house to the ground.
This is a new — a very formidable feature in this servile war.
They also destroyed the Sandy Gate on the road leading to Pembrey, as well as a private gate, the property of a gentleman named Lewis, of Stradey.
The preliminary hearing in the first big Rebeccaite criminal trial had its second day on .
Here’s how The Cambrian covered it:
. —
The Magistrates entered this morning into the case of Matthew Morgan and Henry Morgan, who were charged with having formed a part of the mob who had destroyed, on , the above toll-bar, which was in the parish of Llangafelach.
There was an impression prevalent, that the investigation into the Rebecca riots had closed on , the hall, consequently, was not as full at the commencement of the proceedings as on .
Mr. Maule stated the charge upon which he intended proceeding against the defendants, which was founded upon the same statute as that against the four defendants on .
John Jones was then sworn, and deposed as follows:—
I know Henry and Matthew Morgan, and see them now in Court. Henry Morgan resides with his father, at Cwmcillau-bach, and Matthew Morgan resides at Tymawr.
Tymawr is three or four fields distant from Cwmcillau.
I know the Rhydypandy turnpike-gate, in the parish of Llangyfelach.
I know the night on which the Rhydypandy-gate was broken down — it was on .
I saw both Matthew and Henry Morgan on that night; I saw Henry first; that was at .
I spoke to him.
I asked him if he was going to break the gate — I did not name the gate, it was reported that Rhydypandy-gate was to be broken.
On my asking him the question, he (Henry) replied, that “he was going to do like the rest.”
I had my coat turned on that occasion.
I had turned my coat just before I spoke to him.
Henry was dressed in a bedgown, and he had a kind of cap on his head, and a pickaxe in his hand.
We went together across three or four fields, and arrived on the high road.
I then stood on the road, and Henry went to the house of his brother Matthew.
He came out of the house, in three to five minutes, accompanied by Matthew.
The latter was dressed in a bedgown, he also had a cap on his head, and had a hatchet in his hand.
Henry, Matthew and myself, went down the road, until a place called Tri Onen (Three Ashes), where there are four cross-roads.
We then went together to Coed-caebryn maen; there were a number of people there — perhaps about forty; they were all men, and the greater part dressed either in bedgowns or white shirts.
There was one person there who attracted my attention more than others — they called him “Becca,” and “Mother.”
He was occasionally on foot, but generally on horseback.
When first I saw him he was walking about, whispering to the different men.
He rode a while horse, was dressed in a white shirt, and had something black over his face, and had an old bonnet on his head.
I did not recognise that man, but suspected him.
The greater portion of the people had some instruments in their hands — some had guns, some pickaxes, cross-saws, &c.
They remained at Coed caebryn-maen for about half an hour, and went off in a body towards Rhydypandy-gate.
The man on horse-back went before them and before leaving, he said, “Come, let us go now, it is time.”
He spoke in Welsh and imitated a woman’s voice, as near as he could.
In obedience to Becca’s orders, the party fired about twenty shots on the road, and the numbers increased as they proceeded.
I heard the man calling out on the road, “Lucy,” “Mary,” “Nanny,” and every name.
They arrived at the gate , and then destroyed it.
Becca gave command.
They broke it up with cross and hand-saws.
Four or five shots were fired during the time the gate was being destroyed, which was done in ten minutes or a quarter of an hour.
I saw Matthew and Henry Morgan during that time.
Henry Morgan drew off the board containing the terms of the gate, from the pine-end of the house.
I heard them break it, but was not on the spot.
They then returned in a body to Coed caebryn-maen.
I did not observe the two Morgans, but I believe they all went.
I had also a cap on my head.
Henry Morgan had a red mark on his face.
Cross examined by Mr. Walters:—
I never built a Tynôs on a mountain.
I dug the foundation of a house near Darren-fawr; that was in the last Spring.
I was never in Cwmcillau-house since that time.
I believe Morgan Morgan had a right of common over Darren-fawr, like others.
I asked him leave to build a house, and he said, I had better seek a place on some freeholder’s land.
I believe he said he had no right to give me leave, as he was only a commoner.
Morgan, at last, gave me leave.
Mr. Jenkins, of Cynhordy, afterwards went round the neighbourhood, and asked several persons to go with him to destroy what I had done.
The two defendants went with them.
I never said I would injure the defendants, when I had an opportunity; I never said so either to John Williams, of Penyfidy, or to his wife.
I told Mr. Jenkins, of Cynhordy, and the others, that perhaps they might want a house themselves.
They were about six in all.
I never told them that they would repent of what they had done.
On , I had been working at Gellywran issa; I was labouring on the farm.
I went there about six, and left at nine o’clock.
There is about a mile between Gellywran and my house.
I returned home about .
I went across the fields, beyond Cwmcillau, from Gellywran.
I knew they were going to destroy the gate that night.
I remained near Cwmcillau for a quarter of an hour, when I saw Henry Morgan.
I had walked direct from Gellywran to the place where I met Henry — it is about an hour’s walk.
I believe it was about when I met Henry.
It might have been later than nine when I left Gellywran.
I turned my coat in the field beyond Cwmcillau house; it was in that field I overtook Henry.
It was daybreak when I went home.
There was no person there but my wife and children.
I did not see Morgan Pugh on that night; I might have seen him in the morning of that day.
I do not remember, nor do I deny, telling Morgan Pugh I did not get up that morning, as I was tired, having been mowing hay.
I have frequently spoken to both defendants, after the taking down of my work on the Common.
I had frequently spoken to Matthew, in going and returning from chapel.
The bedgown worn by Henry Morgan was something grey; the police found 12 of them in Matthew’s house; Matthew wore a similar one.
Mr. Walters then called Morgan Pugh, on behalf of the prisoners:—
I am a farmer, residing at Llangyfelach.
John Jones, the last witness, lives in a barn belonging to me.
On , I saw John Jones returning to bed.
When I saw him on , in bed, he asked me what time it was?
He said he had not got out of bed because he was tired, after having been mowing.
I went into the barn, to see if John Jones had gone to mow hay on that morning.
I thought he was engaged to go and mow for Williams of Penyfidy.
Re-examined:—
I was frequently in the habit of turning to the barn, to see if Jones was there.
I would not have gone to the barn had I not seen the door open.
I had not heard that the gate was to be destroyed.
I got up early that morning, to prevent a calf which was weaning going to suck the cow.
I knew that the calf would suck as soon as he could get up.
(Laughter).
I was in good time to prevent him on that morning.
I have a wife and a son.
My son was not out during that night.
Mr. John Williams, of Penyfify, was examined, and stated, that, after the foundation on Darron-fawr had been destroyed, Jones said he would injure Morgan, of Cwmcillau, or his children.
He said he would not care to run the risk of his life by doing so.
Cross-examined:—
John Jones and myself were always friends.
This conversation took place in , in my own house. — The witness went through a very long cross-examination, but nothing material was elicited.
The defendants were then committed for trial at the next Assizes. — The Magistrates accepted bail to the same amount as that on which they had been previously liberated.
Rebecca at Swansea.
Early on morning, it was generally rumoured in this town that the Tycoch gate, on the other side of the Swansea river, had been destroyed at about , having been cut down with saws and other implements, and afterwards burnt on a lime kiln.
The rumour, at first, excited considerable surprise, especially as the circumstances which gave rise to it had occurred so soon after the long investigation before the Magistrates, on , which terminated in the committal of the parties charged; but, on enquiry, what was a mere rumour soon turned out to be a stubborn fact.
In spite of the number of policemen, both rural and borough, at present sojourning in town — in spite of the numbers of military, including companies of the 73d and 75th Regiments, together with between forty and fifty Light Dragoons, the Tycoch gate — half a mile distant from the town of Swansea, was levelled to the ground unobserved, excepting by the toll-receiver who, as will appear from the following examination, recognized one out of the thirty or forty rioters who took part in the demolition of the gate.
On evening, the Mayor, and several persons in authority, went over the river for the purpose of viewing the wreck of the gate, and of obtaining some information relative to the perpetrators of the outrage, one of whom had committed a most cowardly and disgraceful assault upon Margaret Arnold, the toll-receiver.
On , after the conclusion of the investigation relative to the Rhydypandy gate, a collier, named David Lewis, who had been identified by the toll-receiver, as the person who had assaulted her, was brought before the Magistrates, who had adjourned from the Hall to the Petty Sessions-room.
Reporters were admitted from the commencement of the examination, and the public generally shortly afterwards.
Margaret Arnold, having been sworn, stated that she was a singlewoman, and collected tolls at Tycoch gate, in the parish of Llausamlet, about half a mile distant from Swansea.
I lived in the house near the gate.
When in bed about , I was disturbed by a noise outside the house.
Several heavy blows were given the door of the house, and the shutters, the latter of which together with the windows had been smashed.
When I came out of bed and opened the door, a man came from the turnpike towards me.
He had an iron bar in his hand, with which he gave me a severe blow on the arm.
I had held up my arm for the purpose of avoiding receiving the blow on any other part.
The prisoner, David Lewis, is the man who struck me.
He then struck the bar through the door, which I then closed and ran into the house.
He struck at the door repeatedly afterwards until it was broken to pieces.
I again went to the door, and observed the prisoner break down the toll-board which was fastened to the wall.
There were about thirty or more men scattered here and there about the house when I went to the door.
I screamed out “murder” as loud as I could, upon which they all fled in various directions.
They appeared to be working-men, colliers, &c., and were not disguised.
One of the party rode a dark-coloured horse, which appeared to be a cart-horse.
In leaving he rode on before them.
The gate appeared to have been cut down with saws.
It was all right at when I retired to bed.
There was a gate and a bar by the house, one leading to Foxhole and the other to Danygraig.
The gate was placed on the lime-kiln after it had been cut down.
I well knew the prisoner before.
He had passed through the gate on with a cart.
He rose his hand in passing, which intimated that he had no money about him, but would pay again.
I have frequently trusted him before, and he has always paid me.
Mr. Emery, who stated that be was a member of the Royal College of Surgeons, stated that he had examined the complainant’s person, and found a wound about two inches in length, and half an inch deep, on the fore-arm.
It might have been produced by a blunt instrument.
Mr. Melvin, who now came to the room, said he appeared on behalf of the prisoner, and asked permission to cross-examine the first witness.
The Magistrates granted the request, at the same time intimating that it was a mere favour, being quite irregular after her evidence had closed.
In her cross-examination she said:—
It was nearly when she saw the prisoner at the gate.
It was rather dark, but light enough for her to see his features, and recognize him.
She knew him well.
He is rather lame.
Inspector Rees corroborated the witness’s evidence respecting the state of the gate and house.
Mr. Melvin then addressed the Bench, and offered to produce witnesses who could prove that the prisoner was in bed .
The Magistrates declined hearing evidence to prove an alibi, while it was not intended to convict summarily, but send the case before another tribunal.
The prisoner was then committed for trial at the next Assizes, on a charge of felony.
The Magistrates declined accepting bail for the prisoner’s appearance at the Assizes.
He was consequently committed to the House of Correction.
About , the inhabitants of Llanelly were alarmed by the nocturnal depredators who assume the above name; they were numerous on the occasion, and before they left the town they succeeded in destroying the Furnace gate, which is on the road leading from Llanelly to Carmarthen, and burnt the toll-house to the ground.
The Sandy gate, on the mail road leading to Pembrey was also wholly demolished.
We understand that the party broke to pieces a private gate belonging to D. Lewis, Esq., of Stradey.
During the last week nine gates and several toll-houses have been demolished in the neighbourhoods of Llandovery and Lampeter.
It appears that the impunity with which Rebecca and ber Daughters have hitherto carried on their system of destruction against toll gates in Carmarthenshire and the neighboring counties, has emboldened some lawless ruffians to destroy, by night, the property of any person whom they think to be opposed to their destructive proceedings.
On , some mischievous persons cut down and destroyed some scores of young trees growing in the plantation of Mr. Evans, of Tymain, in the parish of Llangeler.
On , Mr. Howel Davies, of Conwil, was alarmed by the reflection of a bright light in his bedroom window.
On looking out he observed a rick of old hay, and two stacks of straw intended for thatch, on fire in his haggard.
An alarm was given, and nearly all the inhabitants hastened to the spot.
As there was a good supply of water near the place, the flames from the hay were soon subdued, but the stacks of straw were entirely consumed.
On , a neat little house, lately built at Cwmdyad, near Conwil, Carmarthenshire, was in a short time completely reduced to ruins, by a set of lawless ruffians, who were disguised as usual.
Several of them were furnished with fire-arms, which they frequently discharged, to the great terror of the neighbourhood, and of those who travelled along the road.
Some persons who had attended the Carmarthen market, and had to go home that way, were detained for some time, until the Rebeccaites had completed their work of destruction, when they disappeared, and no man can give an account whither they went.
It is believed, that what excited Rebecca’s vengeance against this house was, that it was intended to be a gate-house, at which a toll-gate was proposed to be erected, instead of that lately destroyed at Nantyclawdd.
The government of course played its “why didn’t you just address your grievances through proper channels” card (the same one they’re harping on so tediously in the Edward Snowden case today).
But some did try calling their bluff.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin:
On , a written complaint was made to the Magistrates of Swansea, by a great number of persons who obtain a livelihood by hauling coal for supplying the town, charging Mr. Bullen, the farmer of the tolls for the Swansea district with the exaction of illegal tolls.
The magistrates received the complaint with the greatest cordiality and kindness, and were glad to find that they had brought forward their complaint in a peaceable and lawful manner, and assured the complainants that it should have immediate attention.
Mr. Bullen was requested to attend, which he readily did, and Mr. Wm. Walters appeared for the complainants.
The complaint was, that the scale of tolls which Mr. Bullen had rented of the trustees, authorised him to take three half-pence only for every one-horse cart of coal, which sum was also stated on the painted toll-board, as being the charge; notwithstanding that he had for more than a year past exacted a toll of three pence for every horse drawing coal.
Mr. Bullen, on being called upon for his answer to this charge, referred to an Act of Parliament, and contended that the trustees had no power to reduce the toll to three half-pence; that therefore he had a right to demand the utmost toll allowed by the Act, namely three-pence, but admitted that the scale of tolls let to him, and the toll-board only authorised the demand of three half-pence.
The magistrates referred to Act 4 Geo. Ⅳ c. 95, whereby it is directed that any toll-collector, exacting a greater toll than allowed by any order or resolution of the trustees, was liable to a penalty of £5.
They signified their unanimous opinion that he had been guilty of an illegal exaction, and that they were prepared to fine him when the case was ready for adjudication.
The hearing of this case was resumed on and the magistrates unanimously convicted Mr. Bullen in the full penalty of £5.
We hope this decision will give the public confidence in the laws, and induce all persons to bring their grievances before the magistrates, who have thus shown themselves ready to give redress.
Funny how a little direct action can start making the wheels of justice turn, i’n’ it?
Another note in the same issue read:
We are given to understand that Vaughan, landlord of the Pontardulais Inn, to whom the case of arms recently alluded to, was directed, can prove that the guns (fowling pieces) were ordered for sporting by farmers in his neighbourhood, from a commercial traveller who stopped at Pontardulais Inn: in fact, that the farmers and the commercial travellers will be forthcoming in due time.
We hope so, for the credit of that part of the county of Glamorgan.
It appears that the eyes of the magistrates of Carmarthenshire are at length opened to the gross injustice so long practised on the poor farmers, many of whom were obliged to leave their land almost unmanured, in consequence of the excessive toll plunder.
In one district nine gates levelled by “Becca,” are not to be restored.
A note in an issue of the Monmouthshire Merlin datelined reads:
The prominent report in town is, that a proclamation will shortly be issued, offering a reward of £300 for such evidence as will lead to the conviction of any person or persons engaged in the destruction of toll gates in this county, and that 30 warrants are being prepared for the apprehension of persons against whom there is private information of being participators in the toll-gate crusade.
The investigation of charges against persons for breaking down other toll gates and houses in this county, took place at the Assize Court on .
Mr. Maule conducted the prosecution.
The prisoners charged with the destruction of the Belgoed gate were finally examined before the Magistrates at Swansea, on , and committed for trial.
The only witness against them was John Jones, a rioter turned informer; who was declared unworthy of credit by witnesses adduced for the defence; his own brother contradicting part of his evidence.
Among the committed prisoners, is Mr. G. Vaughan, or Pontardulais; to whom a package, containing twelve fowling-pieces, a brace of pistols, bullet-mould, and percussion-caps, had been addressed, but intercepted at Swansea.
A letter, written after Mr. Vaughan’s arrest, countermanding the order for the arms, had also been intercepted.
At a meeting of the Kidwelly Road Trust, on , it was determined to abandon thirteen out of fifteen tolls within the trust.
The correspondent of the Times, continuing his researches into the cause of the Rebecca riots, rather inculpates certain Dissenting ministers—
I was rather surprised to learn during my inquiries, that the text I sent to you some time ago, the 24th chapter of Genesis and 60th verse, on which the Rebeccaites are said to found their proceedings, has frequently been preached from in the Baptist, Independent, and Dissenting chapels, and that the preachers have advised the people to their outrageous proceedings.
The Wesleyan Methodist preachers, on the contrary, have pursued an opposite course, and have urged the people not to break the law.
This sect, however, in Wales, is not by far so numerous as the various sects of Dissenters.
I have been informed that Mr. Chambers, a Magistrate of Llanelly, and a gentleman of considerable influence, sent an address round to all the Dissenting Ministers, in Welsh and in English, urging them to read it to their congregations, and exhort them to refrain from these outrages; but these Dissenting ministers of peace, as I have heard, without an exception, refused to do this, stating as their excuse that they durst not do it.
This fact exhibits in strong colours one of the worst features of a voluntary system of religion.
He has “wormed out what is at the root of the toll-bar grievances”: every fresh inquiry shows the abuses to be worse—
It happens that in this country the genus of pettifogging and jobbing attornies is pretty numerous.
Wales, as everybody conversant with a London attorney’s office, or with the business which passes through a barrister’s or pleader’s chambers, well knows, is notorious for its spirit of litigation; which is, no doubt, chiefly owing to the chevaliers d’industrie who live by the law.
These “gentlemen,” when lawsuits were scarce, often found it a splendid “spec” to get up a new road.
There were travelling-expenses, the “costs” of getting a private act passed through both Houses of Parliament, and the prospect of getting the appointment of “clerk to the trust” in futuro: and accordingly, there are, as I informed you in a former letter, no less than fourteen distinct trusts in this county; and, of course, fourteen “clerks” and fourteen surveyors of the roads, all receiving heavy salaries — in fact, fourteen different managements to be paid out of the tolls.
And now for the way in which this system works.
When a new road is beat up in the way I have described, a few gentry in the neighbourhood subscribe a few hundred pounds; then the private act of Parliament is obtained, including a certain district, and giving power to the trustees to take under their management such roads as exist, and which have been already made by the farmers.
So far all goes on swimmingly.
The new road is begun, and the trustees are short of cash.
Toll-gates are put on these farmers’ roads, where they never before existed; but still money must be borrowed to go on with.
Then comes another little bit of jobbery — the quid pro quo.
The trustees have money to lend, are gentlemen of the neighbourhood — magistrates: who so fitting to lend money to the trusts as these gentlemen?
They accordingly advance money, taking securities called “tallies,” which are, in fact, bonds for securing the repayment to them of their principal out of the tolls, and interest at 5 per cent.
But the new road, often not being much needed, is not a very paying road: there is not much traffic upon it; and it is found, that though the toll-bars on the trust are as numerous as the trustees dare make them, yet the tolls taken will do little more than pay the 5 per cent interest secured by the tallies, and the salaries of the “clerk” and “surveyor”; and then these gentlemen trustees come “down upon” the farmers under the provisions of the General Turnpike Act, and by indictment compel them to repair in many cases their own roads, which they themselves originally made, and also every day extract from them a grievous toll, nominally to repair the roads, in reality to pay 5 per cent to a neighbouring magistrate on an investment of his money.
But this is not all: from being so numerous, these trusts intersect one another perpetually throughout the country; and though all the tolls taken on the roads of one trust may not be by themselves very oppressive, (though quite enough,[)] it continually happens that you cannot go nine or ten miles without crossing two or three separate trusts, each of course demanding separate tolls.
If, on arriving at a turnpike-gate scarcely a mile from one you have paid toll at, you again have toll demanded, and naturally enough ask, “How is this? I paid toll not a mile from here?” you are answered, “Oh, we have nothing to do with that; this is another trust” — “No connexion with the people next door.”
And now comes perhaps the worst feature in the case.
The tolls are farmed, and let out to the highest bidder; and it is quite common for these toll-collectors to charge a higher toll in the country places than they are entitled to.
If the farmers, exasperated at this and at the way in which toll is demanded of them, refuse to pay, or pay and summon the toll-collector before the Magistrate of the district, what is their remedy?
The Magistrate who adjudicates upon the case is also a trustee of the road: but he is more — he is a tally-holder and a cestui que trust; he has merged his fiduciary character, and become bona fide an owner of the road and its tolls; and is in reality adjudicating in his own case, where his own interest is concerned in the charge, and is opposed to that of the farmers.
The result may be easily imagined.
The farmers get no redress; and the “clerk to the trust,” in defending the case, pockets some fees out of the poor oppressed farmers’ pockets.
Is not this monstrous?
It is to be hoped that the Government Commissioner will inquire into this, the very root of the evil; and that the Government will pass a general act to consolidate all these trusts, and thus insure a moderate and uniform rate of toll throughout the county, and at the same time still enable the keeping up good roads by knocking off the salaries of thirteen “clerks” and thirteen “surveyors,” and (if possible) gradually abolishing the tallies and lessening the rate of interest paid.
If this be done, we shall not hear much more of the war against the turnpike-gates.
Mr. Hall, the Magistrate, who was sent down by Government to inquire, began the investigation at Cardigan on .
He has had such of the farmers as wish to say any thing before him separately; thinking that they would make a more full statement of their grievances than if influenced by the presence of their neighbours.
Several of the farmers afterwards repaired to the reporter of the Times, who was at the same inn.
They fully confirmed statements made by that writer.
We select a few points in this more formal evidence.
The payment of toll at a turnpike does not free the vehicle for the rest of the day; it is free to return, but it must pay on repassing another time; and so on, paying every alternate time.
A man who had contracted to carry building-stone from a quarry to a gentleman’s house for 4s. 6d. a day, threw up the contract, because the tolls on the first day came to 5s.
The new Poor-law is unpopular, for many of the usual reasons; but there are two especial reasons in those districts: under the old plan the paupers were employed by the inhabitants, so that rates were not needed or paid; and as the people of each village are almost all related, it causes them shame when any are declared paupers.
An increasing demand on the score of tithes is another grievance.
This curious note comes from the Monmouthshire Merlin, dated :
We have received from our valuable correspondent at Swansea, a capital report of a cricket match which took place on on the Crumlyn Barrows, near that town, between Mr. Starling Benson and Captain Napier, each supported by ten other gentlemen, in which Mr. Benson’s side was successful by a majority of 23.
The game was well contested on both sides.
We have likewise received from him a small publication, which has just made its appearance, entitled “Will you join Rebecca to night?” which is calculated to do much good at the present moment.
We may make some extracts in our next.
This Committee assembled on .…
A discussion then ensued respecting Jones, the informer against the parties committed on a charge of being concerned in the Rebecca riots.
Since the information was given, it appears this individual has been living in the Inspector’s room at the station-house. — Messrs. Glover, Smith, and Walker, objected to keeping him in the station-house to the obstruction of business.
If it were necessary to keep him in custody, either for protection or to ensure his attendance as a witness, they contended that he should be sent to the House of Correction. — Messrs. Benson and R.M. Philipps defended the Magistrates, who had ordered him to be kept in the station-house. — The Mayor thought the gentlemen who had made the complaint only wished to have a hit at the Magistrates.
When I was digging up old articles about the Rebecca Riots at Welsh Newspapers Online, some of what I found comes from after the main period of the Riots ().
Today I’ll share some of what I found from newspapers in .
First, an update on John Jones, from the issue of The Cambrian:
John Jones, who rendered himself so notorious during the Rebecca disturbances, by informing against several respectable parties, who were committed upon his evidence, after which the Attorney-General entered a nolle prosequi, is now in the custody of the police of this town on a charge of felony.
He was taken before the Magistrates, and remanded to a future day.
John Jones, the informer during the period of the Rebecca disturbances, whose apprehension by our police on a charge of stealing a brass pan at Pontardulais, we announced in our paper , was tried at the Carmarthenshire Quarter Sessions, held last week, and acquitted by the jury, the evidence being defective.
Jones admitted his guilt to Sergeant Bennett, of the Swansea police force, who apprehended him on suspicion, having detected him while offering the article for sale to a marine store-dealer in this town.
Through some oversight Mr. Bennett was not subpœned as a witness.
Oops!
The Cambrian of included a lengthy letter from Cantab Cadwallader concerning the need to reeducate the ignorant population of Wales.
In the course of the letter, he quoted from the testimony of Rev. R.B. Jones, vicar of Killymaenllwyd, at a committee of inquiry into the troubles in Wales:
“Are the bastardy clauses very unpopular?”
— “Yes; there was a man taken up at Narberth; he is a parishioner of ours; he has been writing a Rebecca letter; I asked him how he came to write this letter.
‘He thought,’ he said, ‘it would do good; here was a poor woman starving; and here was this Mr. ——, who was very well off, and he ought to give something to this poor girl to help her to nurse the child she had by him.’ ”
Then says Mr. Jones– “This poor man though he was doing God service when he sat down to write this letter.
He was a schoolmaster of a chapel in the neighbourhood.”
The Cardiff and Merthyr Guardian
of gave this news of some of the convicts who were transported for their Rebeccaite activity:
Letters have been received from John Hughes, one of the men who was sentenced to transportation at the Special Commission held at Cardiff in , for the attack on Pontardulais Gate, during the Rebecca Riots.
He and some others sailed in the London convict-ship for his destination in .
Amongst other matters, the writer says— “As God has been so good, sparing my life and continuing my comforts, although I am not deserving of the least of his benefits, yet, in the events of his providence, he has taught me the uncertainty of life, by the death of one of my fellow-sufferers, David Jones, Cliwnwg Fach, Llanelly, who departed this life on the 19th of the said month, in Ober Town.
I think the cause of his death was the wounds he received by the slugs.
Oh! that our feed may be firm on the rock of salvation before we depart out of this transitory world!”
— Hughes is deeply penitent for his criminal conduct.
We understand that it is in contemplation to petition the Queen in favour of him and his companions.
And finally, The Cambrian gave a followup on another Rebeccaite convict in its edition:
Henry Evans, tried in , as one of the Rebecca rioters, was discharged from his incarceration in the county gaol of Carmarthen, on .
When the poor fellow was committed, he could neither read nor write.
Through the exertions of Mr. Westlake, the Governor of the prison, assisted by the Chaplain, the young man repeated, by rote, the third chapter of St. Matthew, on the morning of his discharge.
Too much commendation cannot be awarded to the Governor of the gaol, when we state that he diligently superintends the education of all well-disposed prisoners, allowing, as far as lay in his power, the same advantages to others which he himself possesses.
