Some historical and global examples of tax resistance → Wales → Rebecca riots, 1839–44 → John Hugh

The Welshman for published the depositions given on concerning the prisoners captured during the Rebeccaite action at the Pontardulais gate:

Charles Frederick Napier examined: In consequence of information I received, I proceeded, accompanied by Superintendent Peake, two serjeants, and four police constables to Pontardulais. We arrived there a little before . Just before we entered the village I heard a noise as if of a body of men on the other side of the river which separates the two counties. I also heard horns blowing and a great many guns fired off. I also heard a voice like that of a woman call out — “come, come, come,” and a voice like the mewing of cats. Those sounds appeared to me to proceed from the direction of the Red Lion Inn, which is at a short distance from the Pontardulais turnpike gate. Immediately after this I heard a voice call out aloud — “gate,” and in a very short space of time afterwards I heard a noise as if the gate was being destroyed. I then proceeded with my officers and men towards the gate, and on coming in full view of the gate, I observed a number of men mounted on horseback and disguised. Some had white dresses over them; others had bonnets on. Most of them appeared to be dressed like women, with their faces blackened. A portion of the men were dismounted, and in the act of destroying the gate and the toll-house. About three of the number, who appeared to take the lead, were mounted having their horses’ heads facing the gate with their backs towards me. At this time there was a continued firing of guns kept up by the parties assembled. I immediately called to my men to fall in, and proceeded towards the parties who were on horseback, and who appeared to be taking the lead, and called upon them as loud as I possibly could to stop. I used the word “stop” three or four times. Upon coming up to them, one of the mounted men, who was disguised as a woman, turned round and fired a pistol at me. I was close to him at the time. I moved on a few paces and a volley was then fired by the parties assembled in the direction of myself and of my men. I should say the volley was fired at us; this was my impression at the time. I then endeavoured to take the parties — the three mounted in particular — into custody; and myself and the men met with considerable resistance from them and other parties. The three men on horseback rode at us as if they intended to ride us down and get us out of the way. The three prisoners, John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh, were amongst the parties assembled on this occasion and were taken into custody, after very considerable resistance on the part of John Hughes, and David Jones. When taken into custody John Hugh was dressed in what appeared to me to be a gown and a bonnet, having something stuck in it, which then had the appearance of a feather, and his face was blackened. The other two prisoners were dressed in white. I had seen the prisoner, David Jones, with a stout stick in his hands, with which I saw him aim a blow at Lewis Llewelyn Dillwyn, Esq., a magistrate who had accompanied us; but whether the blow took effect or not, I cannot state. After the pistol had been fired at me, and the volley in the direction of myself and my men, I discharged a pistol at, and shot the horse, upon which the man was mounted who had fired his pistol at me; and my men returned the fire of the parties, and a general skirmish then took place, in which a number of shots were fired on both sides, but in a short space of time the rioters dispersed. Three of the horses ridden that night, by some of the parties assembled, were detained, and are now in my custody. After the parties had dispersed, I found that the turnpike gate, with the exception of the posts, had been broken down and destroyed. The gate-house was gutted; the windows, win[dow] frames, and door driven in, and a portion of the wall of the house pulled down. I found the marks of small shot on the sash of one of the windows of the toll-house. I also found on the ground, near the toll-house, amongst the ruins of the gate, two sledge hammers, two crow bars, a pick axe, and a number of sticks, which I directed my men to take possession of.

Cross-examined by John Hughes: To the best of my belief the prisoner, John Hughes, is the person who fired at me. I believe him to be the man who took the most active part from the commencement of the affray, from his dress, and the appearance of his figure altogether. There was but one man completely covered with white that I saw, and that one was the prisoner John Hughes, to the best of my belief. To the best of my belief the prisoner, John Hughes, is one of the three persons who rode at us.

Cross-examined by David Jones: The prisoner, David Jones, had on what appeared to me to be a white smock frock. I did not observe his head-dress. I saw him very violently resisting Mr. Lewis Dillwyn, the magistrate, and the police officers. He was struck several times on the head before he was taken.

Cross-examined by John Hugh; I did not see the prisoner, John Hugh, do any thing.

The examination of William Jenkins, of the parish of Oystermouth, in the county of Glamorgan, taken upon oath , before, us six of her Majesty’s justices of the peace acting in and for the said county, in the presence and hearing of John Hugh, David Jones, and John Hughes, who saith:— On , I accompanied Captain Napier and others of the police force to Pontardulais. We halted within a field of the turnpike gate, and in about a quarter of an hour I heard horns blowing, and trumpets playing and all sorts of noises, and the sound of a great many horses coming over the road. They halted opposite to the Red Lion Inn, where they fired a volley, and then advanced towards the gate. I then heard a noise as if the gate was being broken down, and the sound of fire-arms. We then advanced towards the gate, and when we arrived there the magistrates and Captain Napier called out “Hold, hold,” Some persons in the crowd then called out “Fire away,” when John Hughes, who was on the Swansea side of the turnpike gate, and who was on horseback, fired off a gun towards us, and others of the party then fired a volley. The flashes were in the direction towards us. We were then ordered to fire, and we fired two rounds at them. The prisoners David Jones and John Hugh were apprehended between the turnpike gate and Pontardulais bridge. The prisoner John Hugh was delivered over to me, and he wished me to let him go, stating that we had done plenty to them already.

Cross-examined by the prisoner John Hughes: The prisoner John Hughes fired with a gun. We were in the field where I first heard them coming, about a hundred yards distant from the gate. I never saw him before, to the best of my knowledge, before that night. I saw him shoot towards us. I know it was him, because I never lost sight of him until I left him with Captain Napier. I did not apprehend either of the prisoners. I was on the bridge when the prisoner John Hugh was delivered into my charge. I cannot say who apprehended John Hughes. I cannot say whether there was any other person dressed in white or not. They were dressed in all colours. I cannot say whether he was on horseback or on foot when he fled. He was horseback when he fired. I never lost sight of the prisoner John Hughes, from the time he fired until I left him in the crowd struggling with Captain Napier. In about five minutes afterwards I saw him in custody on the Carmarthenshire side of the bridge. Soon after the prisoner John Hughes fired his gun, his horse sprung round twice or thrice, and the prisoner got off, but whether he was pulled off or not, I cannot state. This was about a yard from the gate, on the Glamorganshire side. He came to the ground on his feet. I did not see the prisoner John Hughes strike Captain Napier at all. I saw them scuffling together. I did not see Captain Napier strike the prisoner John Hughes. I do not know who was next to John Hughes when he came off the horse. It was in the county of Glamorgan that I saw the prisoner and Captain Napier struggling together.

Cross-examined by David Jones: I do not recollect having seen him at all until he was in custody.

Cross-examined by John Hugh; I cannot say that I saw anything in his hand.

The examination of Henry James Peake, of the town of Neath, in the said county, taken on oath, , before us, six of her Majesty’s justices of the peace, acting in and for the said county, in the presence and hearing of John Hugh, David Jones, and John Hughes, who saith:– I am superintendent of police of the Swansea districts, in the said county. On , I accompanied Capt. Napier, the chief constable of the said county, to Pontardulais, in the said county. We arrived in the neighbourhood of Pontardulais . Shortly before we arrived at Pontardulais, I several times heard the sound of fire arms and horns blowing. When we got to the field in the immediate neighbourhood of Pontardulais, we heard shouting and the sound of firearms, which appeared to me to proceed from the direction of Pontardulais inn. Soon after this I heard a noise as if the turnpike-gate was being broken down. Shortly afterwards Captain Napier and the magistrates told me it was time for us to go there, and Capt. Napier gave us orders to keep together, and when within a short distance of the gate, I heard some person call out to them to stop firing, but who it was I don’t know. Immediately upon this three or four of them rode to us, and a volley was discharged. The policemen and myself then fired, and a regular scramble then ensued. I was close by when the prisoner David Jones was taken, and I believe I wounded him on his head on the bridge. On a white dress and two powder flasks, each being about half full of gunpowder, a large flannel sheet, a red handkerchief, and some letters and papers, two sledge hammers, two small hammers, a pickaxe, two crowbars, one gun, a plaid cloak, two canvass sheets, a coat with the sleeves turned inside out, two straw hats, a black hat with a piece of white cloth tied round it, another hat, an old flannel apron, a shirt and some other articles were delivered to me by Thomas Jones and other police officers, who were present at the affray at Pontardulais, the whole of which articles are now in my possession.

Cross-examined by the prisoner John Hughes. One of the policeman also delivered to me written paper, containing five shillings, which I delivered to Captain Napier this morning.

Cross-examined by the prisoner David Jones: I did not see the prisoner David Jones raise a staff to strike Mr. Dillwyn. I did not see a staff in his hand. I did not see him doing anything about the gate.

Cross-examined by the prisoner John Hugh: I did not see the prisoner John Hugh do any thing about the gate. I did not see anything in his hand.

Re-examined: When I first got near to the toll-gate, there were from one hundred to one hundred and fifty persons assembled there, most of whom were on horseback. It was a moonlight night. As we were proceeding on our way to Pontardulais, about two hours before we arrived there, I saw a rocket explode in the air, and heard guns firing and the sound of horns. When we got near to Pontardulais, I saw another rocket explode in the air.

The Cambrian notes that the press had been refused admittance to this examination. It adds these details:

We saw the prisoners previous to their entering the room in which they were examined. The two wounded men, John Hughes and David Jones, appeared to be in good health, although the arm of the former had been severely shattered. The other prisoner, John Hugh, appeared dressed in an old flannel gown, with a kind of straw bonnet on his head, as he was when first apprehended.

On , a number of suspected Rebeccaites were examined at the Swansea Town-Hall. Here are some excerpts from the examination, as reported in the Monmouthshire Merlin:

Mr. William Cox, governor of the House of Correction, at Swansea, sworn: The prisoners John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh, were delivered into my custody on . It is customary to search prisoners when brought into the House of Correction, consequently I searched the prisoners present, commencing with John Hughes, who is wounded in the arm. A quantity of coarse gunpowder fell from his clothes to the ground as I took them off. I gathered it together and produce it now. I then searched his pockets, and found a quantity of silver and other money — ten half crowns, twenty-four shillings, nine sixpences, one penny, four halfpence, and a half sovereign. I also found a piece of paper with something written upon it in Welsh, a piece of an old Welsh hymn-book, twenty-one copper percussion caps, and a little bag. I next searched the man wounded in the head, David Jones, and found a knife in his pocket. I did not search John Hugh, but I believe he had 8d and a knife.

The following is a correct translation of the writing on the paper taken from Hughes:–

Daniel Jones, Brynhir, — Come with your armour (or covering) to Lanbystia, to assist us, on , or else you shall not have another (or further) notice.

Becca.

PC Thomas Jones examined: I live at Ystalyfera, in the parish of Llanguicke. I accompanied Captain Napier and others of the police force of this county, to Pontardulais, on the night of . We arrived at Pontardulais , and proceeded to the turnpike gate. When we arrived there we saw a man on horseback, on the Swansea side of the turnpike gate. There was a great crowd of people upon the other side of the gate, most of whom were on horseback. They were dressed with white sheets over their bodies, their faces were blackened, and upon their heads they had straw hats. In the hats were stuck pieces of fern. I ran on, and took hold of a gun from a man on horseback, but the man escaped. A great many guns were fired before we reached the gate. On I delivered that gun to Sergt. Jenkins. It was then in the same state as when I took it from the man.

Mr. Superintendent Peake produced a quantity of arms, implements, ammunition, female apparel, &c., which were taken at the scene of the outrage. One of the articles produced was a woman’s cap, which was given to him by the prisoner Jones.

PC Peter Wright examined, proved that he was on duty at the Pontardulais gate riot, where he saw the prisoner J. Hugh discharge a gun at the police. He afterwards fell off his horse, and ran away, taking his horse with him. Prisoner threw his gun down, when he came off his horse, and the witness picked it up.

PC William Robertson Williams examined, stated that he was on duty at the riot, where the prisoner David Jones struck him a violent blow on his shoulder. Witness, being injured in the leg, went into the toll house, while the police were dispersing the rioters, and there saw a man with David Jones, the latter flourishing a bar, with which he again struck witness on the shoulder. Witness struck him a blow with his cutlass, on which he dropped the iron bar and ran out and was taken by Sergeant Jones.

PC John Price, examined, stated that in the affray at Pontardulais gate he saw a man on horseback this side of the gate, and a large mob. Witness took John Hugh off a horse in front of the mob, with a while cloak over his body, a white cloth over his hat, and a red handkerchief round his neck — he had a gun in his hand, which he fired at the police — he bad also a tin horn. Witness gave him and Hughes into the custody of Sergt. Jenkins.

William Abraham Lewis, toll collector at Pontardulais, examined: I am a shoemaker, and have been collector at Pontardulais gate for upwards of a twelvemonth. On , I moved my goods out of the house, because people told me Becca was coming there. After I moved my goods I stopped there, and I saw a party of men coming down over the bridge, most of them being on horseback. I instantly hid myself in the fields behind the house. While the crowd was opposite the Inn, I heard some shots fired. In about three quarters of an hour, I went back to the toll house, and found the doors and windows broken, part of the pine end wall demolished, and the gate in pieces — the posts were standing.

Police Sergeant George Jones stated that in the attack upon Pontardulais gate, where the rioters were firing guns and blowing horns, he pursued and captured Jones, while running out of the toll house.

(There is a somewhat more extensive account of this testimony in The Cambrian.)

The four prisoners taken by Mr. Chambers and the military in Carmarthenshire, on , were then placed at the bar. Three of them were mere boys — one apparently only thirteen years of age, and the fourth seemed a young man of the age of five-and-twenty. [The Welshman, in another article, lists them as “William Hugh, a lad of 15 years of age, the son of a very respectable farmer of Talyclew, dressed in woman’s clothes — Thomas Williams, a servant to a farmer at Llangennech — Henry Rogers, a farm servant at Penllwyngwyn, and Lewis Davies, farmer of Scybor Ucha, near Pontardulais.”] The following evidence was produced:–

William Chambers, jun, Esq, examined: I am one of her Majesty’s justices of the peace for the county of Carmarthen. In consequence of information I received, I proceeded on to Pontardulais, accompanied by a party of soldiers under Captain Scott. We set out from Llanelly  — Llanelly is distant from Ponlardulais six or seven miles. On the way, I saw a rocket explode in the air, in a direction between Llanedy and Llanon. On arriving at Gwilly Bridge, which is about half a mile distant from Pontardulais, I heard some horns sounded. There was one particular note which I noticed, which was repeated several times. Immediately after I heard the last note, I heard the report of fire arms in the direction of Pontardulais bridge, upon which I requested Captain Scott to load. I then advanced to Gwilly bridge, and having arrived there, I was in advance of the men, and saw the prisoner Lewis Davies come in from Pontardulais, over the railway, towards the place where I was. I immediately followed and saw him put something which he had in his left hand either under his coat, or into his pocket. I put my hand there, and pulled from under his coat, or out of his pocket, a woman’s cap. He was dressed in his usual clothes. The bottom part of his face appeared to be blackened. I asked him where he had been, and he said, “I’ll be quiet — I’ll come with you.” He was then given in charge to Sergt. Gibb. Up to this time I had heard the discharge of about forty or fifty shots within about seven minutes. I then went with the rest of the soldiers in the direction of the road leading towards the Hendy bridge, imagining that an attack was to be made on the gate. When I arrived at the gate, I heard the galloping of horses, and I immediately concluded that the Dragoons were approaching from Swansea. About the same time I heard persons approaching from Hendy bridge towards Pontardulais, and the prisoner William Hughes was taken shortly afterwards. He was dressed in woman’s clothes, — a straw bonnet on his head, and his face blackened. I went on to Pontardulais, accompanied by Captain Scott and some of his soldiers. Upon arriving at the bridge, the Dragoons galloped on, and I thought were going to charge us, but on perceiving who we were, they desisted. I proceeded to the gate — found the gate destroyed — the internal partitions of the toll house destroyed — and the windows smashed in. I saw three men there in custody. On my way back to Llanelly, the prisoner, William Hughes, told me he had a horn, and he would show me where it was. I went with him to a certain spot, and there found a horn, close to the spot where he was taken.

Sergeant Henry Gibbs, of the 73rd regiment, examined: I was on duty on , between Pontardulais and Llanelly. I was stationed on the railway near the Gwilly bridge. Whilst we were there I heard some men coming along the railway; I stopped them. I see them here now. They are the prisoners, Henry Rogers and Thomas Williams. They were not disguised at all or armed. They seemed to be very much frightened because I brought the bayonet down as if I was going to run it through them, and told them to slop. I told them I would let them go if they would tell me where others were gone to. They said they had nothing to do with the gate, but merely went out to see.

On , a coroner’s inquest was held concerning the death of Sarah Williams, the toll collector at Hendy Turnpike Gate, who had been shot in the course of that gate’s destruction. This inquest rather incredibly would find the death of Williams to have been from an “unknown” cause — thus precluding a homicide investigation. It seems to have been an act of jury nullification meant to shield Rebecca and her followers from the authorities.

Here is how the Monmouthshire Merlin covered the inquest:

Coroner’s Inquest

On the body of Sarah Williams, the toll collector at the Hendy Turnpike Gate.

On , an inquest was held at Pontardulais, before William Bonville, Esq., coroner, on the body of Sarah Williams, aged 75.

The Jury.
Griffith HenryJenkin Henry
Thomas SamuelJohn Bowen
John ThomasJohn Pugh
Walter HopkinsDavid Davies
John Bowen, jun.Samuel Griffith
John ThomasDavid Evans
John JonesRichard Davies
The Evidence.

John Thomas, labourer, sworn: Is a house carpenter, residing near the Hendy gate toll house, in the parish of Llanedy, in the county of Carmarthen. Knew the deceased, Williams, who was the toll-collector at the Hendy gale, and has been so for about a week. On , or early on Sunday morning, I was alarmed by report of five or six guns near the Hendy gate. I was then in bed, and soon after the deceased came to my house, and called me and my family to assist in putting out the fire at the toll-house, which had been set on fire and was then burning; but we did not go, as we were afraid to do so. In about a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes afterwards I heard the report of another gun; and about a minute after deceased came to my house, and my wife went to the door and saw deceased coming towards her. She (the deceased) was crawling along by the wall to support herself until she came to the door, when she cried out, “Dear, dear,” and fell down, and I found she was dead. The deceased has been a toll collector at many gates for years.

Margaret Thomas, wife of the last witness, said that , the deceased came to our house, and asked my husband and me to get up directly, as some one had set the toll house on fire. I went out to the door and told her to carry her things out of her house. She went back to the toll house, and took her furniture out on the road. I asked her several times to come into our house, but she did not come. I heard the report of four or five guns afterwards, and the deceased, in about three-quarters of an hour after I had first spoken to her, came towards my house, at which time I was standing within the door, which was open. The deceased did not speak a word that I heard, and seeing that she was exhausted, I laid hold of her round the waist, and she sank down at my door, on the outside. My husband came out, and we took her into the house, but she did not speak a word. My husband held her, and put her in a silting posture on the floor, and she died in about two minutes. I did not see any blood, except a little on her forehead. I thought at first that she was frightened to death. I did not hear the noise of horses, nor footsteps, nor did I see any persons from the beginning to the end. I did not hear any horns blown, or any shouting. My husband was in the house all the time.

By the jury: I did not think from the blood on the forehead that she had had a blow, and that that had been the cause of her death. I did not think she died from a blow, but by suffocation from loss of breath.

By the Coroner: About I saw the toll house and gate still standing, and in the course of the night I saw the toll house on fire. That was when the deceased called us up to put it out, and in the morning I found the house and and gate both pulled down, there being only the walls standing. The house had a thatched roof, and contained two rooms. The toll board had fallen down some time back, and was then in the house in pieces.

Mr. Benjamin Thomas sworn: I am a surgeon, residing at Llanelly. I have, with Mr. Cooke, inspected and made a post mortem examination of the body of the deceased Sarah Williams, now lying at the Black Horse, Pontardulais. We examined the body externally and internally. On the anterior view of the body, whilst the corpse was lying on its back, from the feet to the breast there did not appear to be any mark of violence. The marks of shots were seen penetrating the nipple of the left breast, one in the arm-pit of the same side, and several shot marks in both arms. On the external end of the left clavicle there were two shot marks, one on the left side of the wind pipe, several on the forehead, and one in the external angle of the right eye. There was blood on the cloths covering the breast, and the marks of blood having escaped from the mouth. In moving the body to a sitting posture, a considerable quantity of fluid blood escaped from the mouth. The back view of the body did not shew any mark of violence. On moving the integuments of the scalp, the shot marks observed on the surface were found in the bony structure of the skull, but not penetrating through it. Upon removing the bone covering the brain, the external covering of the brain, or dura mater, was exposed entire, and appeared slightly vascular, as did also the entire structure of the brain. The lateral ventricles contained no more fluid than is generally found in them. On opening the chest the left lung pressed higher up than is natural, and was darker in colour, and on cutting into it, the substance was found considerably congested, with marks of some shots on the surface, two of which we found in the substance of that lung. In the right lung, there was an adhesion to the side, on nearly the whole of its external surface, with a considerable effusion of dark coloured blood into its substance. In the cavity of the left pleura there were about three pints of blood, a large portion of which was in a coagulated state, and the remainder fluid. The head was natural, and we did not proceed further with our examination, being satisfied as to what was the cause of death, which was the loss of blood and the state of the lungs and pleura arising from the shot found in the substance of the lungs, and which had caused this extravasation of blood.

Mr. John Kirkhouse Cooke, of Llanelly, surgeon, corroborated Mr. B. Thomas’s evidence.

The jury then retired to consider their verdict, and in about a quarter of an hour returned the following:– “That the deceased died from the effusion of blood into the chest, which occasioned suffocation, but from what cause is to this jury unknown.”

Other newspapers went into more detail about Cooke’s [or perhaps Cook’s] testimony, which more than merely corroborating Thomas’s conclusions, backed them up with additional details. Here, for instance, is the Cambrian’s version:

I examined the body of the deceased with the last witness — found no external marks of violence, excepting some gun-shot wounds. The shots were found in the bony structure of the head, and in the breast. The lungs on the left side protruded considerably, and also had the appearance of having a considerable effusion of blood; and, on removing them, we discovered an immense effusion of blood into the cavities of the chest — the greater portion of it in a fluid state, but a considerable quantity was coagulated. It amounted altogether to about three pounds of blood. On tracing the surface of the lungs, on the interior part of it, I discovered distinct patches of effused blood, also opening, which had the appearance of being made by shot, which I traced into the substance of the lungs, and extracted two. They were the ordinary sized shot. This examination was sufficiently satisfactory to shew the cause of death, which would have been produced from the large quantity of blood effused into the chest, and which impeded the motion of the lungs, as well as by the large quantity of blood lost, destroying vitality. There was also a large quantity of blood escaped through the mouth. There was no other cause to attribute this effusion of blood into the cavity of the chest, but by the shots penetrating the lungs and injuring its vessels.

The Welshman reports that on , a policeman insulted a woman in the company of a soldier, the soldier later caught up to the policeman, and “a furious collision took place” between cops and soldiers “for some time — the combatants amounting to 30 or 40 persons.” This gives some clues as to the state of morale among law enforcement, as do these details: “Every evening since the station house has been literally besieged with persons, yelling and hooting the police, and cheering the military… Several persons are in custody for withholding their assistance to the police when called upon ‘in the Queen’s name.’ ”

The examination of the suspected Rebeccaites captured around Pontardulais continued on .

On a hunch, I cross-checked the newspaper account of the list of 12 Magistrates who were conducting this investigation with the earlier newspaper account of the meeting of 23 trustees of the Swansea Turnpike and Wych Tree Bridge Trusts. The names J.H. Vivian, Samuel Davies, T. Edward Thomas, John Grove, J.D. Berrington, and J.D. Llewelyn appear in both lists. So it seems that the magistrates acting as grand juries to investigate the tollgate attacks were largely the same set of people who were profiting from the tollgates. At least half of the people in this grand jury were also trustees of that one trust. No wonder the Rebeccaites didn’t trust the local authorities to rectify things.

Here are some excerpts from the coverage of the examination as given in the Monmouthshire Merlin:

At the Hall was crowded by persons, most of whom had evidently travelled a considerable distance, for the purpose, of being present at the adjourned examination.

The prisoners, John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh having been placed at the bar, were told that they stood charged with having, on , with divers evil-disposed persons, at the parish of Llandilo-Talybont, in this county, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled together, to the disturbance of the public peace; and being then and there assembled, did feloniously and unlawfully begin to demolish and pull down the dwelling-house of one William Lewis, there situate.

The Chairman having cautioned the prisoners, and informed them that anything they said would be taken down in writing, and probably used against them, asked them if they wished make any statements in reply to the charge.

The prisoners severally replied — “I have nothing to say now.”

Mr. Attwood then informed them that there was a second charge against them — namely, a charge against John Hughes of having feloniously, unlawfully, and with malice aforethought committed an assault upon Captain Napier, with intent to kill and murder him [the coverage in The Cambrian makes this more specific: “charging him with having, on the night in question, in the parish of Llandilo-Talybont, a certain pistol loaded with gunpowder and shot, which he held in his right hand at and against one Charles Frederick Napier, feloniously and unlawfully did shoot, with the intention feloniously, willfully, and of malice aforethought, the said Charles Frederick Napier to kill and murder”]; and the prisoners David Jones and John Hugh were charged with aiding and abetting John Hughes.

The prisoners severally said — “I have nothing to say till the trial.”

The prisoners, William Hughes and Lewis Davies, were informed that they stood charged with having unlawfully thrown down a turnpike gate — to which they replied that they had nothing to say.

The Chairman then addressed the prisoners as follows:– “John Hughes, David Jones, John Hugh, William Hughes, and Lewis Davies, I have now to inform you that you are committed for trial at the first Assizes held for this county.”

On the application of Mr. Hugh Williams, William Hughes and Lewis Davies, were admitted to bail.

The grand jury deciding whether to bring an indictment against several Rebeccaites, including those accused in the Pontardulais gate attack and in the attacks on the constables trying to arrest members of the Morgan family, met on to hear the prosecutor’s opening argument. The Cambrian was there:

Special Commission

For the Trial of Parties Charged with Rebeccaism.

 — Mr. Baron Gurney addressed the Grand Jury, and, after making a few preliminary observations, congratulating them on the good attendance of Magistrates, Grand Jurors, &c., said–

We are assembled at this unusual season of the year, under her Majesty’s Commission of Oyer and Terminer, to enquire into the cases of persons charged with felonies and misdemeanours arising out of, or connected with, the disturbances and outrages lately committed in this county, and to deliver the gaol of persons who are detained therein under such charges.

It is but too notorious that, in other parts of South Wales, there have been, for several months past, tumultuary proceedings — large assemblages of persons, generally by night, for the destruction of turnpike gates.

These proceedings did not receive a check at their commencement; and, therefore, they gradually increased, until they attained considerable height.

It might have been expected that the exposition of the law, the salutary cautions, the solemn warnings of the Learned Judge who presided in South Wales, on the Summer Circuit, in the two neighbouring counties of Carmarthen and Pembroke, would have been effectual in bringing the people to a sense of their moral duly, or if that failed, of their personal danger, from a perseverance in these practices; but I lament to say that, instead of decreasing, these offences have increased in number, in extent, and in enormity, and have at length reached the county in which we are assembled.

Excesses of this kind are never committed without some grievance, real or pretended.

The alleged grievance on account of which they commenced, and have been continued, was heavy tolls at turnpike gates.

When turnpikes were first established in England, about a century ago, it is matler of history that a large proportion of the farmers were hostile to them. They, with short sighted policy, preferred bad roads, imperfectly repaired by the parishes, to good roads, which were attended with the exaction of tolls. Wiser councils, however, prevailed, and to those wiser councils we are indebted for those roads, which have been gradually improved, and have at last, in many paris, almost attained perfection.

By the turnpike roads, many districts have been made accessible, which were not so before. They have stamped an increased value on thousands and thousands of acres of valuable land.

But good roads could not be constructed except by means of a large outlay; for that outlay money was necessarily borrowed, for the payment of the principal and interest of which, tolls were necessary, and gates for their collection.

The Principality has, I believe, largely benefitted by this system.

The improvement in the roads has been beneficial to all classes. It has opened important communications for trade, for agriculture, and for pleasure. The facility afforded to travelling has brought into your country, so rich in scenery, numbers of persons who would otherwise never have visited it.

If, in the execution of plans for the improvement of the roads, any error has been committed — if the tolls imposed by the Act of Parliament have been too heavy; or if, where trustees had discretion vested in them, they have erred in the exercise of it, it was equally the duty and the interest of those who felt any burthen which they thought they ought not to bear, peaceably to prefer their applications to the legislature or to the trustees (as the case might be) for relief.

And if they believed that any illegal exaction took place, they had in their own hands a prompt remedy, by application to the magistrates in petty sessions, or, if they preferred it, either by indictment or by action, when a trial would have taken place at the assizes; and I will venture to say, that the appeal for justice, by even the poorest member of the community, would never have been made in vain.

I have always found that the claim of an oppressed man was listened to with favour in a court of justice, and ample redress afforded.

If, therefore, any grievances existed in the shape or oppression or illegal tolls, there was a legal remedy.

If, indeed, there are persons who, after money has been lent for the making the roads, and tolls imposed for repayment, have wished to break faith with the creditors by destroying their security, they must be dishonest characters. Many a widow and many an orphan are dependent on these securities for their subsistence.

Instead of that peaceable application for redress, which I have pointed out, there have been large and tumultuous assemblages of persons, generally in the night, disguised so as to escape identification; armed in a manner to defy resistance, provided with implements for the destruction of gates, and even houses, and have carried their unlawful and wicked purposes into execution by terror and by violence, extending even to an attack upon the lives of peace officers, in the actual execution of their duty.

In a country which is governed by law, such excesses as these must be put down with a strong hand. They are sure, sooner or later, to bring ruin on on those who engage in them.

I am happy to say that the cases which will be brought before you, though heinous in their character, are not numerous.

I learn from the depositions which lie before me, that on , an attack was made upon the turnpike house and gate at Pontardulais, on the road from Swansea to Llanon, by a tumultuous assemblage of persons, amounting, it is believed, to 150, blowing horns, armed and disguised, provided with implements of destruction. The gate was broken down, and the house partly demolished, when the chief constable and other constables, accompanied by a magistrate, arrived.

There can be no doubt that the demolition would have been completed, but for the interruption by the constables.

The constables, it is deposed, called on them to desist — upon this one of the leaders fired a pistol at the chief constable, and was followed by a volley from the rioters.

The fire was returned by the constables, and three persons were apprehended. These three are John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh. Two charges against them are stated in the commitment — the one of beginning to demolish the house, the other of firing at the chief constable and the other constables. It will be your duty to decide on the evidence that will be laid before you whether the guilt imputed be or be not brought home to them, or to either of them.

If the proof be as, were it remain unanswered, would induce you to pronounce a verdict of guilty (if you were the trying jury) in that case you will find a true bill, and doubtless you are well aware that they who concur in the verdict must not consist of a less number than twelve.

To prove the guilt of the persons accused, it is by no means necessary to show that they were the very persons who wielded the pick-axe or the crow bar, or did, with their own hands, any thing in the demolition of the house.

The crime is the crime of the riotous assembly, and all who formed part of that assembly, all who, by their presence, swelled their number and augmented their force, more especially all who by their disguises had prepared to avoid detection, and all who by their arms had prepared to over-power resistance, and resist apprehension — all in short who, by their conduct, shewed that they were concurring and assisting in the execution of their unlawful purpose are in law equally guilty.

You will, therefore, attend to the evidence that will be adduced, and find a true bill or not, according as the evidence fixes or fails to fix guilt upon each of the persons charged.

The same observation applies to the charge of firing loaded arms at the peace officers — it is not necessary to prove that the person charged was the very man that pulled the trigger — all who banded themselves together in such numbers with such weapons — indicative of such a purpose, are equally guilty.

Had any of these shots taken fatal effect, they would have had to answer for the crime of murder — and this consideration should lead rash and unthinking people to some reflection as to the danger they incur by engaging in such enterprizes which may and continually do involve them in more atrocious crimes, and more condign punishments than they had anticipated.

Another case is a charge of assault upon the chief constable, for the purpose of preventing the apprehension, or of rescuing from his lawful custody a member of the family, against whom a warrant on a charge of felony had issued, of maliciously and feloniously cutting and wounding him.

The depositions state that the chief constable, accompanied by others, had apprehended Henry Morgan, on a charge of felony, when the mother, the father, the sister, and the brother, fell upon him with great violence; assaulted him with different weapons — and the mother assaulted him with a weapon which cat his head to the bone.

In his own defence he was compelled to fire a pistol, by which one the family was seriously wounded; for the preservation of his life he was justified in so doing.

You will hear the narrative of each of the officers, and find a true bill or not, according as the evidence proves or fails to prove the participation of these parties in this crime.

As in the other case, it is fit that I should state that, where all the parties are equally engaged, the act of one is the act of all.

The grand jury deciding whether to bring an indictment against several accused Rebeccaites met again on to decide on the cases of John Hughes, John Hugh, and David Jones. The Cambrian was there:

They first considered the charges against John Hughes (who appeared in court with his arm in a sling from injuries suffered during his arrest). Hughes’s lawyer tried to challenge the method by which the jury was composed, without much success.

The prosecutor addressed the jury, saying in part:

He would forbear from making any observations upon the state of the adjoining counties, were it not for the purpose of accounting for their being assembled together on that extraordinary occasion, for the trial of this, and other cases which would come before the Court. The disturbed condition in which many of the counties of South Wales were at the present time, rendered it, in the judgment of those whose duty it was to advise the Crown, imperatively necessary that the resolute and immediate administration of the law should take effect, and justice be promptly administered, in consequence of the great increase in the number and magnitude of offences committed under circumstances of considerable violence.

He went on to describe the Pontardulais Gate attack as follows:

He would relate what took place on , by a mob, consisting from one to two hundred persons, many of whom were on horseback. They appeared to have come from some of the roads leading from the county of Carmarthen over a bridge, known by the name of Pontardulais bridge, which crossed a river, called the Loughor river. At a short distance from the bridge, on the Glamorganshire side of the river, there was a toll-house and gate, and he believed they had existed beyond the memory of most persons acquainted with that part of the country. He would next call the attention of the jury to the general appearance of the mob, and the manner in which they had provided themselves with arms and other implements of destruction. The majority were disguised in some garments resembling female attire, and having their faces blackened. Several of them had arms. Shots were fired, and in some instances it would be proved, that the guns were loaded with shot, one having been taken, and when examined was found to be loaded. What were the contents of the guns which had been discharged could only be proved by the effect taken by them, and it would be stated in evidence, that the marks of shot were visible on different portions of the toll-house, and he was not confident whether such was not the case in some of the neighbouring houses. They advanced towards the bridge, which they crossed, and went to the toll-house and gate. They appeared to have with them implements of a destructive kind, and when it was considered that there were taken possession of, on the following morning, some guns, cliff, pickaxes, sledge-hammers, and some other instruments, the jury could have no doubt what was the object of the party whom he had just described. The work of destruction soon afterwards commenced — all the windows of the toll house were broken, and part of the frame work destroyed, together with the door, and the house entered. The partitions of the room were destroyed, and from one part of the house there were several stones removed, making a breach or aparture in one place, in height about two feet, and eighteen inches in length, and posts which some of the witnesses would tell them were the props of the house. In their work of destruction, it would be found they were interrupted. That would be proved by the witnesses. When examined, it was found that the gate post was cut one-third through with a cross saw, and the jury would learn the slate in which the toll-house and gate had been left, from the evidence of the magistrates, chief-constable, and officers, who went there with the intention of apprehending some of the rioters. It appeared to him to be idle to suggest any doubts as to the general character of the assemblage — that it was riotous, tumultuous, and in every way illegal. When the large weapons made use of were taken into consideration — when the disguised appearance and the violent conduct of the mob were considered — there could not be the least doubt but that it was, in the eye of the Act of Parliament [the law forming the basis for the criminal charge], a riotous and tumultuous assemblage of persons for the disturbance of the public peace. It appeared to him, that was beyond dispute. What had actually been done, would be borne testimony to, by a variety of witnesses, upon whose evidence no doubt could be thrown. There remained for the juey but one additional enquiry, and that was — what participation the prisoner at the bar had in the proceedings. He believed it would be laid down from the Bench, that when any riotous assembly tumultuously met together, every person who, by his presence, contributed to swell their number, which gave them that formidable appearance and character, calculated to inspire terror and alarm, would, in the first instance, be deemed guilty of participation in the riot. It would devolve upon the accused to show that he was present, with an innocent purpose. But the case against the prisoner did not rest upon his mere presence among the mob. When apprehended, it was found that he was armed, disguised by having his face blackened, and under circumstances from which they would draw the conclusion as to the part taken by him in the affair. It appeared that Capt. Napier, accompanied by a superintendent and some policemen, with a few others, to the number of eleven or twelve persons, in consequence of having received information of an intended attack upon the gate, proceeded there from the Glamorganshire side of the Pontardulais bridge, with the view of apprehending some of the parties concerned in the tumult. They were on a spot not a very great distance from the gate, and from where they were enabled to see, hear, and judge of what was going on among the crowd. They would be called before the jury. and would describe the number assembled, the frequency of the gunshots fired by them, the noises they made, and the signals given by means of blue lights. The work of demolition having been manifested by crashing noises, Captain Napier and his party advanced towards them, and desired them to desist. The conduct of the persons assembled he would leave the witnesses to state. Capt. Napier remarked the dress of the prisoner, and when apprehended, recognised him as the person who wore that dress. It was Captain Napier’s object to wound the horses, so as to apprehend the riders. He accordingly fired, and the prisoner descended; the police and the prisoner came into personal conflict, and in the conflict the prisoner was wounded, as the jury would observe, from his arm being in a sling. Upon a shot being fired by one of the mob, an attempt was made to ride down the party headed by Captain Napier. The prisoner’s identity would be distinctly proved. He was recognised by his dress — he was also recognised by his wounds, and was taken to the toll-house. There was also found on his person a quantity of gunpowder, with a shot belt in addition to copper caps, and papers, which were evidently intended for threatening notices, found upon him, and which he would call their attention to. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman then read a Welsh notice, to this effect:— “Come with your armour or covering to     on Wednesday next, to assist me, or you shall have no further notice — (signed.) — Becca.” There were other papers found upon his person, but parts of which were torn, which might render their meaning doubtful, so that he would prefer the jury to read them for themselves. Those notices would prove the prisoner to be closely connected with the operations of the night in question, He (the Attorney-General) did not consider it necessary to name every individual act of the persons present on the occasion, neither had he a desire to raise any legal discussion, but be thought it clear that all the acts of that assembly showed what were the objects for the accomplishment of which they had assembled together.

The Monmouthshire Merlin quotes the note somewhat differently in their coverage:

Daniel Jones, Brynhyr, — Come with your armour (or covering) to Llan Ty Issa, to assist us, on Wednesday night next, or else you shall not have another (or further) notice. — Becca.

The chief constable who led the raid, Charles Frederick Napier, testified first:

On I received information, which induced me to go to the Pontardulais gate. I first went to Penllergare. I was accompanied by Mr. J.D. Llewelyn, and L.Ll. Dillwyn, two county magistrates, Mr. Moggridge, Mr Sergeant Peake, and six police constables. We went across the country, starting from Penllergare, about . During the time of our proceeding, I heard a great noise of horns blowing [“as if for signals,” the Monmouthshire Merlin adds] in different parts of the country, and firing. I heard those noises repeatedly in the course of our proceeding. When arriving at the gate, we halted in the field about 600 yards from the gate. While in the field, I heard first of all great noise of voices, then shots were fired, and I heard a number of horses trampling from the opposite side of the river. I heard the voices on the Carmarthen side. The noise increased considerably, and came from the direction of the Red Lion Inn. I heard a volley fired, and also cheering, in the neighbourhood of the Red Lion Inn. I heard a voice say. “Come, come,” three times. They then proceeded towards the Pontardulais gate. Some of the mob cried out, “Gate, gate.” It was now . When I heard these voices I heard sounds of gate-breaking, and smashing of glass. I then ordered my men to follow me, and proceeded across the lane, and then to the main road. I saw three men mounted, disguised, with their horses facing the toll-house. There were other persons dismounted, and in the act of destroying the gate. There were about 150 [“about 100” says the Merlin] there. One had a white loose dress, with a loose handkerchief, and their faces blackened. The men on horseback appeared to be directing the other parties. I ordered the men to fall in, and advanced towards the party, and cried out “Stop, stop, stop,” as loud as I could. One of the men on horseback appeared to hear, fired at me. I then said, “Mark that man.” I advanced with my pistol, and fired at the horse. The muzzle was close to him. The horses turned, and the party appeared as if they rode over us. The man on the horse I shot fell, by what means I know not. The man that fell I believe to be the same as the man I fired at. I then advanced to him, and we struggled. He was then wounded in the arm, but by whom I know not. There were several others who fired. I did not take that person into custody then, as I was struck with a stick on the back of the bead. The person I was struggling with had a straw hat and a loose white dress, similar to a Druid’s dress [the Merlin says just that “he was disguised, and his face blackened”]. Others were disguised, but not in the same way. Some had their coat sleeves turned. I afterwards saw the same man in the custody of one of the police. To the best of my belief, he was the same man. The mob then retreated over the bridge to the county of Carmarthen. I know the prisoner at the bar to be one of the persons who was taken that night, and, to the best of my belief, who I was scufiling with. There were two other persons taken one had the straw hat, and his coat sleeves turned inside out. They had their faces blackened. The other had a woman’s straw bonnet, with a piece of fern stuck in it, as a feather. After the mob had retreated, I observed what was done to the house. The door was broken in, the window broken, and part of the walls demolished. Part of the sills were remaining. The boards on the floors broken up. About two feet ot the pine end of the toll-house were taken out. That is, a part of the walls of the building. I observed one person, with the but of his gun, drawing up the windows. There were several instruments found on the following day — crowbars, blacksmiths’ sledges, hammers, &c. There is a blacksmith’s shop adjoining the turnpike. It was damaged. I had seen a light when about five miles from Pontartlulais — it was a blue light, thrown up into the air. I observed it twice.

On cross-examination he added that he’d gotten the tip that caused him to go to the Pontardulais gate at . Next to testify was county magistrate John Dillwyn Llewelyn. He told more-or-less the same story, adding the detail “It was a moonlight night.” His brother, and fellow-magistrate, Lewis Ll. Dillwyn, testified next, to much the same effect, though he described “noises, similar to the mewing of cats” coming from the mob. H.J. Peake then briefly gave his similar description and produced some physical evidence:

I produce two flasks of powder given me by Thos. Jones, who also delivered me some papers. On the same morning he delivered me some articles of dress. [Pouch containing shot produced]. They are large shot. (Handed in). I produce a shirt covered with blood delivered me by Sergeant Jenkins. I produce straw hats and one covered with cloth [like a veil]. I produce two sledges, a cliff, some iron bars, a gun, a coat with sleeves turned.

He was followed by police sergeants Jenkins and Jones, and constables Jones, Price, Williams, and Wright. Price claimed he heard a shout of “fight till death” during the melee (the Merlin says that Jones heard this as well, and attributed the shout to “one of the mob,” while the Cambrian was more ambiguous about who did the shouting). Some of the witnesses reported on which of the prisoners they’d tangled with, what damage was done to the toll house, and what evidence they’d found at the scene, but nothing particularly worth repeating here.

George Evans, proprietor of a blacksmith shop near the Pontardulais gate, testified that his shop had been broken into on the night of the attack and identified some of the tools recovered at the gate as having been among the items taken from him.

The papers, &c., found on the prisoner’s person were then put in evidence — one contained 5s. in silver, and was addressed “Mrs. Rebecca,” and contained writing, but in consequence of its being torn it was not very intelligible. There was also a threatening letter saying, “That the worthy mother would call on some one, and visit him for his wicked deeds, and giving him notice to prepare for the day of judgment,[”] and signed “A Hater of Tyranny, and one of Rebecca’s daughters.”

The Monmouthshire Merlin also covered the hearing. It added the detail that “The court was densely crowded in every part.”

The grand jury deciding on the case against several accused Rebeccaites met again on to decide on the cases of John Hughes, John Hugh, and David Jones. The Cambrian was there to report on the proceedings.

The toll collector, William Lewis, and John Morgan, a surveyor, started by testifying about the extent of damage to the Pontardulais toll house. Then:

The papers on which there were writings in the Welsh language, was also put in evidence. A translation had been committed to writing by Mr. Powell, the Court interpreter.

Mr. Wm. Cox, Governor of the Swansea House of Correction, was also examined, and produced a small quantity of powder, some percussion caps, 5s. wrapped in a piece of paper, addressed “Mrs. Becca,” and stating that it was 5s. from Thos. Thomas, of some place, in addition to 5s. given by him before.

This summed up the prosecution’s case. The defense attorney, a Mr. Hill, then offered his rebuttal. Excerpts:

The Attorney General had told them that this was an unusual course of proceeding. He referred to the Special Commission — a similar one he (Mr. Hill) had not heard to have ever taken place in the history of the county of Glamorgan. They also heard it said that the cases were extremely few. Was that any reason for conferring upon the country the unenviable distinction of a Special Commission. He could not devise what cause existed for one, but that did not prove that a cause did not exist. Why was it not sent to a neighbouring county, where there were apparently greater reasons for sending it? For this they had had no explanation. It was no part of the Attorney General’s duty to give the explanation; but if the object was that a great public example should be made in the vindication of the power and majesty of the law, he could say, that the effect produced would not be that which was intended. Be that as it may, he admitted that it was no part of their duty to enquire into it. He thought that all good men, in every district, deprecated the outrages which had been committed; but he did not remember any instance in which the penal law, even when justly incurred, had succeeded in staying disturbances consequent upon notions of the existence of public grievances, whether real or supposed. He did not know whether any grievances existed; but if they did, it was beyond the power of the law to restore tranquillity merely by the infliction of punishment. In making these observations, he did not rest upon his own authority alone, but he spoke the opinion of Edmund Burke, one of the brightest stars of political opinions. In that immortal speech or his, in favour of the consolidation with America — a measure which it would have been good for this country to have adopted, he illustrated his argument by a reference to the Principality [Wales].

He said that in former times, when the grievances of the people used to be answered by the application of force, either of the penal law or military power, crime multiplied to such an extent, that an Englishman passing through Wales could not go five yards from the highway without incurring the risk of being murdered. Special Commissions, with the Attorney and Solicitor General, a number of Queen’s Counsel, and a host of lawyers, were things never suggested by the wisdom of their ancestors, very justly so called. But when just legislative measures were adopted, they were successful beyond even the anticipation of those who, like himself, had almost an unlimited confidence in the power of moral force. So great was the effect produced by such means in the reign of Henry the Eighth, which was not very auspicious for mercy and justice, that it had been likened to the “sudden stilling of the storm.”

Hill went on to criticize the way the prosecutor had made his case, and along the way characterized the guns seized at the bridge and presented as evidence in this way: “He was glad the guns were produced, for he believed that, if the choice were offered him of firing them, or having them fired at him, he would choose the latter alternative, but he might be wrong.” He suggested that, contrary to the testimony the prosecution had offered, perhaps the police had fired unprovoked on the Rebeccaite crowd, and not in response to having been fired upon.

The instances were not new, but were in the memory of all, in which soldiers and police, in similar transactions to the present, both exceeded their duty.

It was no new thing to find that their conduct was not always such as resulted from united bravery with forbearance, and which indeed participated of the sublime, for there was nothing more sublime than the conduct of men armed with great power, with command to exercise it, and yet submitting to insults and injury rather than exercise it towards their erring fellow-creatures. The Learned Counsel then proceeded to make some general remarks upon the conduct of the assembly — they had advertised their projects on the night in question by firing arms, while the police had hid themselves in their retreat, having pistols loaded with balls, while the mob foolishly and innocently fired without any such implements, as if merely to cheer and arouse their comrades, for there was no evidence that they had injured a single individual. There had not a single hair from the heads of either of the police been singed, and yet it would seem, though strange, that it should be represented that ferocity had been exhibited on the part of the mob, and that justice demanded that they should be placed for trial at the bar of their country. What did the evidence prove? Nothing more than that there was an idle firing of guns — not loaded with bullet or ball. Certainly there had been a few shots produced, and the Attorney-General had asked if they were large? What number were they? Why, it was only necessary for them to be looked at to enable any person to see that they were small bird shot — and that they were fired as a mere feu de joie — for to suppose that with those they intended resisting the police, who were armed to the teeth with pistols loaded with balls, in addition to other weapons, would be the height of absurdity. Capt. Napier had said that there were marks of shots on the windows, and near the lamp on the toll-house door, which evidently proved the use of the small shot — to break the glass. He did not, for a moment, mean to contend that they were justified in doing so, but the question was whether they were guilty of the particular act charged in the indictment. The question was not whether they were guilty of some breach of the law, but whether they were so upon that indictment. He was glad that shot had been produced, for it afforded further proof that there existed no intention to injure. For with shot, though the injury done would be less than with balls, yet it would be more general — the chances of inflicting wounds with shot being at least fifty to one. How could the jury suppose that any shots had been fired, while not one had even penetrated the garments of any of the police or magistrates. — On the other hand, if the conduct of that body were glanced at, it would be found that information of the intended attack upon the gate had been given, as early as , and that after a delay, respecting which no explanation had been given, the police had proceeded armed, not with sparrow-shots but with pistols, each carrying balls, each of which would be fatal to man’s life. They were found coming to the field, and though knowing by the blue lights, firing of guns, &c., that a crime was contemplated, instead of making any attempts to prevent the riot, they were found hiding in the field until the gate had been broken. He confessed it was to him a novel part off the duty of the police of this country to watch until mischief had been accomplished before attempting to prevent it. Here the Magistrates and police had an opportunity of preventing a great outrage of the law, but instead of doing so, they had waited to see it committed. Mr. Hill, after making several additional observations upon the conduct of the police, remarked that in conducting the case against the prisoner, the first maxim of law had been overlooked, which was not to punish the guilty, but to protect the innocent. He hoped that he did not exceed his duly expressing a hope that the spirit which seemed to actuate some of the Glamorganshire authorities would not become general throughout the land. He had never before heard of a prosecution for a flight on one side, while the attack was upon the other. It was something new to him to see persons coming to that Court under the auspices of the Attorney and Solicitor General, to vindicate their conduct in shooting at British subjects with pistols loaded with balls. Such proceedings, in his opinion, exceeded those of the French revolution. Instead of appearing as prosecutors and witnesses, the wounded and injured men appeared at the criminal bar. He could give no expression to any feeling but that of astonishment.

He then called eleven character witnesses for John Hughes. The Solicitor-General then gave a rebuttal and the prosecutor summarized his case. The Monmouthshire Merlin goes into a little more detail here, and reveals the prosecution’s idea of the importance of the five shillings wrapped in the note:

There was also another paper found on prisoner, which was important. On it was writing, directed to Mrs. Rebecca, to the effect that 5s had been paid at some time before by a person named Thomas, and that he now paid another 5s, and two half-crowns were found wrapped up in this paper. It will be recollected that on the person of the prisoner, when apprehended, there was a large number of half crowns, besides other monies, and hence it would appear that he had been collecting subscriptions for some purpose.

Then the jury considered the evidence and came back with its verdict:

The jury then retired, and in the course of fifteen or twenty minutes [“about three quarters of an hour” reported the Merlin] re-entered the Court, and returned a verdict of guilty, with a strong recommendation to mercy on account of previous good character. Sentence deferred.

The Court was then immediately adjourned.

True bills have been returned against the Morgan’s family, of Cwmcillan; against David Lewis, for assaulting the Tycoch toll-collector; against Lewis Davies for a misdemeanor, in aiding in breaking the Pontardulais gate. No true bill against the boy, Wm. Hughes, upon the same charge.

Which confuses me, as I thought this was a grand jury designed only to decide whether charges could be brought, but this seems to indicate that at least in the John Hughes case, it was acting as an ordinary criminal jury.

The special commission trying the Rebeccaite cases continued on , starting by considering the cases against David Jones and John Hugh, who were captured during a Rebeccaite attack on a toll booth. They chose to plead guilty, probably as the evidence against them was pretty near identical to what the same jury had been convinced by a couple of days earlier in the trial of John Hughes, who had been captured alongside them.

A report of the pleas and sentencing appears in the Monmouthshire Merlin.

The court sentenced Jones and Hugh to be exiled to a penal colony in Australia for seven years. Hughes, however, got sterner treatment:

He appeared to be one in a station of society far above the rest — one not likely to be misled by others, and upon evidence proved to be a leader, if not the leader of this lawless multitude.

He got 20 years of penal colony exile. The court then moved on to other cases. The charges against David Lewis were dropped. Lewis Davies was charged with destroying a turnpike-gate, and pled guilty, but was not yet sentenced.

Morgan and Esther Morgan pled guilty to assisting in the assault on the man sent to take Henry Morgan prisoner, but the prosecutor, “[c]onsidering their advanced age and other circumstances connected with the case,” declined to pursue the felony charge. Margaret, Rees, and John Morgan also pled guilty, Margaret to the assault itself, and the others similarly with abetting. The prosecutor again declined to pursue the felony charges, “and observed that, having ascertained the circumstances under which this aggravated assault had taken place, he did believe they were under a mistake with respect to the right to resist. Under these circumstances he was not disposed to press for a severe punishment in this case…” Margaret was sentenced to six months in prison, and Rees & John to twelve months each.

The Rebeccaites were “bad cops” that allowed peace-loving, law-abiding, innocent Welsh farmers to play “good cop” and use the implicit threat of Rebecca to get more attention for their grievances. Here is an example (from the Monmouthshire Merlin):

High Rate of Turnpike Tolls at Nash, &c.

To the Editor of the Monmouthshire Merlin

Sir, — I am sorry no abler pens than mine have undertaken to draw the attention of our neighbourhood to the monstrous high rate of tolls, as well as the unequal system of collecting them. For instance, from Nash or Goldcliff we only travel one mile on the turnpike road, and have to pay 9d a horse, while in many districts it is only 3d or 4d, and where, too, materials are much more expensive.

Again, the toll to Caerleon from Newport, I understand, is 17d or 18d for one horse. Surely, the tolls might be arranged so that a person might pay in proportion to the distance he has to travel, for under the present system he might go thirty or fourty miles for the same money he is obliged to pay for one — As we small farmers find great difficulty in scraping our rents together for our landlords, I hope and trust the proper authorities will look after these local burdens, as they were advised to do by Lord Granville Somerset at the last Quarter Sessions, in order to prevent tumults and outrages like those which are disgracing South Wales, for we ar really very desirous that Rebecca and her children should never come among us to create an anti-toll rebellion — we would rather have our grievances redressed after a lawful fashion.

Should you think these few remarks deserve a corner in your intelligent paper, till some abler advocate may come forward you will greatly oblige,

Several Poor Little Farmers.

PS. Would not our monthly agricultural meeting do a good service to us, by taking the matter into consideration, with a view to assist.

Nash,

John Hughs, David Jones, and John Hugh, who were convicted of Rebeccaite activity, published the following confession, which reads to me like the work of a lawyer trying to work a clemency angle:

Confession of the Convicts under the Special Commission.

To the public generally, and to our neighbours in particular:

We, John Hughes, David Jones, and John Hugh, now lying in Cardiff gaol, convicted of an attack on Pontardulais turnpike gate, and the police stationed there to protect it, being now sentenced for transportation, beg earnestly to call on others to take warning by our fate, and to stop in their mad course before they fall into our condemnation.

We are guilty, and doomed to suffer, while hundreds have escaped. Let them and every one take care not to be deluded again to attack public or private property, and resist the power of the law, for it will overtake them with vengeance, and bring them down to destruction.

We are only in prison now, but in a week or two shall be banished as rogues, to be slaves to strangers in a strange land. We must go in the prime of life from our dear homes, to live and labour with the worst of villains, looked upon as thieves.

Friends, neighbours, all — but especially young men — keep from night meetings, fear to do wrong, and dread the terrors of the judge.

Think of what we must, and you may, suffer, before you dare to do as we have done.

If you will be peaceable, and live again like honest men, by the blessing of God you may expect to prosper, and we — poor outcast wretches — may have to thank you for the mercy of the Crown — for on no other terms than your good conduct will any pity be shown to us or others, who may fall into our almost hopeless situation.

Signed,
John Hughes,
David Jones,
The mark ✗ of John Hugh.
Cardiff gaol, .
Witness, John B. Woods, Governor.

On , the turnpike trustees of the Swansea road district held their monthly meeting. This was supposed to be the meeting at which they would hold their annual auction of the rights to collect tolls at the district’s gates. Here are some excerpts from the account of the meeting from the Monmouthshire Merlin:

At the last letting, those tolls produced the sum of £3,325, at which sum, according to Act of Parliament, they must be again put up [at auction]. Several gates and bars had been either removed or abandoned by the trustees, so it was not probable the tolls would produce so great an amount as they did last year.

Mr. [Thomas] Grove said (with respect to the charges on horses drawing coal) the trustees could not charge less than 1½d for one horse drawing coal. — To Mr. Bullen: What do you charge for two horses?

Mr. Bullen: I have not charged more since I was fined [see ♇ ] than 1½d each horse. I used to charge a shilling.

Mr. James thought Mr. Bullen might legally have charged a shilling for two horses drawing coal, as the toll board did not state that the charge for each horse drawing coal was 1½d, but merely that for one horse drawing, &c., the sum of 1½d was payable, and consequently, if more than one horse was attached to a cart of coal, Mr. Bullen might exercise his discretion, and if he thought proper, the full tolls allowed by the Act of Parliament. He thought Mr. Bullen was right.

After further conversation, the tolls were formally put up by auction, but no offers were made, although Messrs. Bullen and Lewis were present.

The late Rebecca outrages having become the subject of conversation, Mr. M. Phillips said: The expenses incident to this insurrection, will be, to those who took part in it, more expensive than the amount of tolls paid in ten years.

The London Times seems to have had a particularly industrious reporter on the case during the Rebecca Riots. I have yet to delve into the Times archives themselves, but occasionally its work was quoted or referred to in other papers. Here is an example, from the Monmouthshire Merlin:

Rebeccaism.

Commission of Enquiry.

(From the Times reporter.)
Carmarthen, .

On my return from the Special Commission at Cardiff I thought it my duty to wait upon the Commissioners appointed by her Majesty to inquire into the grievances complained of in South Wales, who are now prosecuting that inquiry at the town-hall, in this town, for the purpose of ascertaining how far the investigation would be open to the public. I was politely informed by Mr. Frankland Lewis, the chairman, on the part of the Commissioners, that having no desire whatever to make their inquiry a secret one, but rather to court publicity, the Commissioners yet thought they would best arrive at information and at the truth without the presence of reporters for the public press, as in some cases parties would be deterred by the fear of publicity from giving full information, whilst in others persons would be prompted to make inconsiderate statements in the hope and expectation of seeing them in the newspapers. This was, at present, the opinion of the Commissioners.

The Commissioners sit in a large room in the court-house, and, with their secretary, Mr. Gurney, the short-hand writer, and a clerk, there are usually six persons present at the examinations, which the Commissioners informed me they thought was an audience sufficiently formidable to examine the country people before, without further increasing its numbers by the presence of the representatives of the press. The Commissioners also informed me, that the evidence given before them, and their report, will be printed and laid on the table of the House of Commons, only so far condensed as to be reduced to a readable form. I send you this as the result of my interview, and of the present opinion of the Commissioners.

A deputation of farmers, amongst whom were some relatives and friends of the prisoners [John] Hugh and [David] Lewis, tried at the late Cardiff special commission, last night waited upon Mr. Chambers, jun., of Llanelly, and expressed their anxiety for a restoration of tranquillity to the country, and as an earnest of their feeling, offered to be sworn in as special constables to preserve the peace. I understand Mr. Chambers has appointed to be in attendance on at Llanon, for the purpose of swearing in as special constables those who thus tendered their services.

The Government has sent down a gentleman, Col. Hankey, to act as a police magistrate in those districts where there are now no resident magistrates. Colonel Hankey will, accordingly; as soon as possible, be sworn in of the commission of the peace, to act for the three counties of Carmarthen, Pembroke, and Cardigan.

A rumour is current that another special commission, for the trial of the Carmarthenshire prisoners, will be sent down after term into this county. It appears to have arisen from the fact of the county gaol being quite full of Rebecca prisoners, and from one Mr. Maule, the treasury solicitor’s clerks, being in the town arranging the evidence against the prisoners. [The Monmouthshire Merlin also mentioned this rumor, saying that “There are now nearly fifty prisoners in the county gaol, and several others out on bail, awaiting their trials.”]

In many parts of the county the late verdict against the “Rebecca” prisoner [John] Hughes, at Cardiff, has excited intense animosity against the jury who tried him. I have been told that some farmers from the more disturbed districts have affected even to be incredulous that such a verdict was ever returned by a Welsh jury. So far as an opinion can be formed at present, however, the severity of the sentence appears to have had a salutary effect, whilst it has at the same time excited universal commiseration for the culprit.

Two toll-bars were destroyed on , near Cwm Ammon.