This gate was demolished some time since, and subsequently replaced by another; but as Rebecca had given intimation of intention to destroy the second gate, it was considered prudent to have a guard of constables to protect it.
At day-light, on , the constables went home, but scarcely had they left, when the Rebeccaites came and demolished the gate, and were in the act of unroofing the gate house, when the chief constable, who had received information of the outrage, galloped back to the gate, when the Rebeccaites all scampered off.
The policemen, however, identified two of them, named Thomas Morgan and Thomas Lewis, who were subsequently apprehended, and committed to take their trial for the offence.
From the Monmouthshire Merlin (Henry Tobit Evans dates the described attack to ):
Rebecca in Breconshire.
We regret to state that the exemption from the prevailing outrages, hitherto enjoyed by this county, exists no longer, an attack having been made last week upon the Cefn Llandewi gate, upon the road leading from Llandovery to Builth, and situate about a mile and a half from the village of Llangamarch.
Its destruction was effected by a party of men, who fastened the door of the toll-house, and threatened the gate-keeper with destruction if he ventured out.
At a meeting of magistrates held at Brecon on Saturday, it was determined to re-erect the gate, and to send a party of the Brecon borough police to watch it; and accordingly three men went over on Monday, but before they could reach the spot, the Rebeccaites, who, by some means had ascertained that something of the kind would be done, set fire to the house in the absence of the keeper, who of course did not venture to stay on the spot alone after the previous outrage.
A large reward has been offered for the apprehension of the guilty parties, and on Wednesday last a meeting of the magistrates was held at the Shire Hall, Brecon, to take the affair into consideration at which Colonel Wood, M.P. for the county, the Lord Lieutenant, the High Sheriff, the Rev. Lord Hereford, and a large body of influential countrymen attended.
Resolutions were passed expressive of the regret and disappointment produced by such an outrage after the conciliatory measures voluntarily adopted by the turnpike trustees, and of a determination to use all possible means for the discovery of the offenders; they also requested the support and co-operation of all classes in sustaining the laws and suppression of outrages.
The police still remain at Llangamarch, and we understand that a meeting of the inhabitants of that district has been convened for the purpose of recording their abhorrence of such violations of the law. — Silurian.
. — This morning.
Mr. Justice Cresswell took his seat upon the Bench at .
The Dolauhirion Gate.
Thomas Morgan, aged 28, and Thomas Lewis, aged 24, were arraigned on an indictment charging them with having, on , at Dolauhirion toll-gate in the parish of Llandingad, assembled together, with divers other persons unknown, and then and there the dwelling-house of the said toll-gate did unlawfully, feloniously, and with force, begin to demolish, pull down, and destroy.
Both prisoners pleaded “Not Guilty.”
The Attorney-General (with whom were Messrs.
Chilton, Q.C., Evans, Q.C., and E. V. Williams, as in all the cases prosecuted by the Government) stated the charge to the jury.
He would occupy but a very few minutes of their time, in giving an outline of the case before him.
As so many days had been already occupied in disposing of other similar cases, and as the jury residing in the county, must be well acquainted with the disturbances which had sprung up in many parts of South Wales, it would be unnecessary for him, in introducing this case, to make any observations of a general character.
The charge against the prisoners was, that they had, on the night of , or rather early on the following morning, assisted others and were themselves actively employed, in destroying a dwelling-house.
A month previous to the destruction of the house to which he referred, the gate alone was destroyed and the toll house left, and shortly afterwards a new gate was erected, and the toll-collector attended early each morning and collected tolls during the day, but did not sleep during night in the toll-house.
Most probably an attempt would be made to raise an objection on a point of law, that the house was not within the meaning of the Act which had been framed and enacted for the purpose of protecting dwelling-houses in general.
He (the Attorney-General) admitted that though the Act might not apply to every description of building which in conversation might be denominated a house — a pigeon-house for instance would not come within the meaning of the Act — still he contended that, where a house had been occupied as a dwelling-house, and if some days prior to the tumult, the party had been compelled by fear and terror to cease occupying it, that house came under the meaning of the Act providing for the protection of dwelling houses.
He thought it right to call their attention as well of that of his Lordship to that point, as the house had not been described in the indictment as a “dwelling house.”
It appeared that, on the night of , after the toll-keeper had retired, that the mischief which gave rise to these proceedings was accomplished.
The case against the prisoners was, that, on that night, a number of persons riotously assembled together, prostrated the gate, and, thinking that as the former destruction of the gate only had not prevented the collection of tolls, they had thought proper to demolish the toll house too.
A witness named Jones, a superintendent of police, who would give evidence before them, was called to the scene by watchers, who had been placed on the “look out” at the gate, partly to protect the toll-gate, and partly to give the alarm in case of an attack being made.
The witness went as near the place as he could with safety have gone, and on his arrival, he saw a number of persons, amounting to some fifty or more running across a field, at the further end of which a gap had been left in the event of an alarm.
As he approached the toll-house, he saw a man, who afterwards turned out to be the prisoner, Lewis, on the top of the house, engaged in the work of destruction.
He saw the prisoner glide down from the roof into the field, where he was afterwards joined by the prisoner Morgan.
They walked together across the field towards Dolauhirion farm-house.
Suspecting that they were going towards some of the farm-buildings, the officer galloped on the road, and saw both prisoners entering a bin or barn attached to the farm-buildings.
Now, the officer would tell the jury, that he saw one of them when on the house slide down the roof, that, being on horseback, he had ample opportunity to keep his eye upon them until they had entered the house, when he procured assistance and took them into custody.
He immediately recognised them as the two who were at the toll-house, and unless the two men were changed by something wonderful, he would almost say miraculous, their identity was fully made out.
The policeman pointed out to one of the other witnesses, whose evidence the jury should hear, the place where he saw the man glide down, and being then early in the morning, that witness was enabled distinctly to trace their footsteps in the dew from the toll-house to the farm-buildings, where they were apprehended.
On the prisoners’ boxes being searched, a horn was found in that belonging to Lewis, and a pair of wet boots in Morgan’s box.
On being questioned, Lewis said that the horn was used to give notice of the approach of the Rebeccaites.
Those were the circumstances under which the prisoners were brought before them, and which would be more fully detailed in the evidence of the various witnesses.
He (the Attorney-General) had been informed that an alibi would be set up on their behalf.
He would tell the jury that an alibi, if clearly made out, was the best possible evidence; but if otherwise, it was the worst evidence, as no innocent man would support his case by perjury.
He had no doubt that they would deal with the prisoners as the justice of the case required.
The Attorney-General then proceeded to explain to the jury a plan of the relative position of the toll-house, road, farm-building, &c., by which they would perceive that one of the witnesses was in such a position, that he could not have seen the prisoner Morgan on the other side of the toll-house.
Sure enough, there follows here some hair-splitting over whether the toll house was really a “dwelling house” as meant by the charge in the indictment, and whether the case should instead be filed under a different section of the law as a misdemeanor instead of a felony.
The judge overruled this objection.
On with the trial:
Evan Davies examined by Mr. Chilton, Q.C.:– I remember Dolauhirion gate toll-house, which was inhabited by Benjamin Evans previous to the destruction of the gate, for two years.
I was employed as watchman and toll collector for two days previous to the destruction of the house.
There was no furniture in the house.
I was employed to collect by Daniel Richards.
I went to collect tolls in the morning at six o’clock and left at ten in the evening.
I was during night employed to watch the gate.
I was so employed on .
I left the house and gate safe that night.
I watched until and then left.
When I returned , I found that the gate had been broken, and the front side of the roof entirely gone, and the back part partly so.
Cross-examined by Mr. Carne:— To the best of my knowledge all the tiles were off the front part of the house.
A man named Rees came to me on the evening of .
We remained until ten that night, and left together, shutting up the house, leaving no one in it.
We returned that night to Llandovery, and saw George Jones, policeman — I drank beer with him.
It was then about .
When in company with Jones, a person named James Phillips came to us.
Upon being told something by Phillips, Jones ordered his horse, and armed himself.
He had a sword and double-barrelled gun — wished me to go with him.
I objected, but afterwards went.
On going up to the gate, we saw Williams and Thomas there.
George Jones got up to the gate a few yards before me.
When I came up, Jones ordered them to apprehend me as one of the “Beccas.”
He said “William Thomas, apprehend this man.
He is one of the Beccas.”
Jones then went away.
He soon after came up on horseback, whistling.
This was .
The moon had set and it was very dark.
Heard some persons singing in a field at a little distance.
Joseph Williams said “that sounds like the voice of one of the Dolauhirion boys.”
None of us went up to see who it was.
Jones and myself then returned to Llandovery.
It was now .
It was still dark.
Might know a person at four or five or even ten yards.
Jones afterwards went back to the gate.
Re-examined:— I was frequently in the toll-honse when B. Evans dwelt there.
It was a furnished house.
I was in the shade when Jones ordered them to seize me.
George Jones, Superintendent of Police, examined by Mr. Evans, Q.C., said — I remember , when Joseph Williams, William Thomas, and Evan Davies watched the toll-house.
I used to go to the toll-house during the night to see if the watchers were on duty.
On hearing whistling in the field, I drew their attention to it.
Williams said, “I know that is Tom, the servant of Dolauhirion — he is going for the horses.”
I then left, together with Evan Davies, and requested the other two watchers to remain.
I proceeded to retire to bed, after having reached Llandovery, when I heard knocking at the door — found William Thomas there, who said, that there were about one hundred “Rebecca’s” about the gate.
Went to the Three Horse Shoes for the dragoons.
The patrol said, that he could not go without the officer.
I said, “there was no time to consult him, that the gate would be destroyed.”
I then went off.
Thomas told me not to go, or I would be murdered.
The Judge:— That is no evidence.
Examination continued:— When I went to the gate, I saw several persons near the pine-end of the house.
I saw one man on the house, who slided down from the roof.
I tried to take the hedge.
There were about fifty persons who ran across the field.
The man on the house was Thomas Lewis, the prisoner.
I could distinctly see him.
He did not go in the same direction as the crowd, but towards Dolauhirion farm-house.
I galloped on the road to the place where I expected them to come out.
They went into a cow-house or bin.
I called upon them to come out, as I knew them.
I revived no answer.
I heard a noise in the bin, as if undressing themselves.
I went and called up David Evans, their master, who gave me a candle, but could not give me a light.
I then called upon them again; they both answered, and asked what I wanted with them.
They came to the door, the upper part of which was open — they were partially undressed.
I charged them with breaking the gate, and told them, that they must come to Llandovery.
Morgan said, “He would be d–d if he would go, until his master was up.”
In ten minutes, the two watchers, Williams and Thomas, came up.
I had gone to the cottage, to get a light.
I ordered Thomas and Williams to take the prisoners into custody.
They said, they would not, as they were not armed.
I galloped to Llandovery, and returned to Dolauhirion with James Phillips, a constable.
Noticed that Morgan’s boots were wet.
Phillips asked both, why their boots were so wet.
One gave no answer, but the other said, he had been out courting until three o’clock.
On searching their boxes, I found this horn [produced] in Lewis’s box.
I knew it to be his box, as he gave me the key.
Morgan told me the other was his box.
In it I found a pair of wet boots.
Asked Lewis what he did with the horn.
He said, “To call Becca, to see what sort of people they were.”
It was between five and six o’clock when I saw the man on the house top.
I pointed to Phillips the place I saw the prisoner on the roof.
Cross-examined by Mr. Carne:— It was not very dark when I returned to the gate.
It was not cloudy.
It was not too dark to see a person fifteen yards off.
I passed a man who stood on the hedge, near the toll-house.
I distinctly saw and recognised a man on the roof.
I had to pass a corner in going to Dolauhirion.
The corner of the house projects into the farm yard.
The corner of the house partially hides the door from the road view.
I knew neither of these men before — had not, to the best of my knowledge, seen them.
When Thomas refused to take them into custody, he did not say there was no appearance of their being at the gate.
I did not ask William Thomas to swear that it was light enough to recognise a man at 20 yards off.
He never told me.
“I would not take the world for telling a lie for you.”
Never said, “Mind to swear to the voices of the Dolauhirion boys: if you swear to their voices, you shall have a hundred pounds.”
Never said any thing of the kind.
I have seen the proclamation, offering a reward for the conviction of Rebeccaites, but not as soon as it had been published [The proclamation was dated in London on that day.]
Never stood in that dock.
Never was charged with robbing a man in conjunction with Rebecca Lloyd.
Knew a person committed to gaol for that offence.
Re-examined:— I saw the two men enter the bin.
Mr. John Williams, surveyor of the Trust, was called to prove the correctness of the plan, the destruction of the gate. and the damage done to the house.
His description was similar to that given by other witnesses.
James Phillips:— Is a constable.
Remembers the morning the Dolauhirion toll-house was destroyed.
Remembers George Jones calling upon him on .
On arriving at Dolauhirion, saw the two prisoners churning.
Assisted George Jones to take them into custody.
Observed Lewis’s boots, which were quite wet.
The mistress of the house said she could prove they were in bed.
I showed the boots to her, and asked if she thought the wearer of them had been in bed.
She then said she “did not think that boy was afraid of Rebecca.”
Witness also proved the finding of the horn, &c., in prisoners’ boxes, as detailed by the last witness.
He afterwards went to the toll-house, and saw the damage which had been done [which witness described in similar language to the other witnesses], Jones pointed to him the place where he saw the prisoner jump from the roof.
Could distinctly trace in the dew the path of two persons walking from the toll-house to the farm-house.
Knows William Jones, who lives in a cottage opposite the toll-house.
Witness was cross-examined, but nothing important was elicited.
Benjamin Evans called:— Was toll-collector previous to the destruction of the gate.
Heard great noise on the night in question — the noise of tiles falling, and the noise of men running.
Judged they were a great many.
Was not disturbed by the firing of guns or the blowing of horns.
I heard no noises with the exception of the cracking of tiles.
Lives at a considerable distance from the gate.
The Attorney-General stopped the case at the suggestion of the Judge, who then proceeded to charge the jury, and said that, at the commencement of their proceedings, the Counsel for the prisoners rose an objection on the ground that the house did not come under the meaning of the section constituting the offence a felony.
Being of opinion that the evidence did not prove the existence of a “riotous and tumultuous assemblage,” he (the Learned Judge) had to tell them that it would be their duty to return a verdict of “Not Guilty” upon the present indictment.
Verdict accordingly.
There is an indictment for misdemeanour against the prisoners.
So much for that.
Riot, and Assault upon Bailiffs.
Philip Philip, aged 56, farmer, Wm. Philip, aged 23, farmer, and Wm. Harries, blacksmith, were charged with having, on , at Pound farm, in the parish of Llangunnor, riotously and tumultuously assembled, with divers other evil-disposed persons, and did then and there make a great noise, riot, and disturbance, and divers of her Majesty’s liege subjects did put in bodily fear, against the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, her Crown, and dignity.
The elder prisoner had his head bound round with two or three handkerchiefs, as if labouring under indisposition.
The Attorney-General stated the case to the jury.
The case which he had to lay before them was in itself a very simple one.
The prisoners were indicted for convening and taking part in an illegal assembly, and with having assaulted two bailiffs.
The jury would find that this case was an instructive example of the great danger to society of any illegal proceedings making head and taking root in the community.
The conduct of those who, taking the law into their own hands, prostrated gates, destroyed toll-houses, and sought to get rid of what they deemed to be grievances, was highly dangerous to society; but though not disposed to moderate the guilt of those who unlawfully endeavoured to redress grievances, supposed or real, the guilt must be greatly aggravated of those who — and the present case was a specimen of that guilt — taking advantage of the disturbed state of the community to further their own private ends — not even pretendedly for the public good.
They went far beyond the persons who, though they set the first example of violating the law, yet professed to be redressing some grievances, either real or imaginary, of a public nature.
There were many features in the case before them, in common with the Rebecca cases, as far as the violent and illegal means used were regarded; but the Rebecca cases professed to have some pretended public object in view, and, consequently, some degree of public sympathy was expected; but in this case a private right was denied — the right of a landlord to demand the rent due.
They would find that the right of the landlord to recover his rent by legal process bad been denied, and that the prisoners had called together a riotous assembly of persons, who had assumed the name of “Rebecca,” to prevent the bailiffs executing their duty.
Mr. Hall appeared for one of the prisoners only; the other two were undefended by counsel.
He hoped the jury would therefore exercise care that the evidence affecting the undefended prisoners should be well considered, that it may not be supposed that, because without counsel, they are without defence.
Wm. Philip was the occupier of a farm called the Pound, from the landlady, Mrs. Eleanor Evans.
Philip Philip, the prisoner who appeared to labour under indisposition, was a farmer, resident in the neighbourhood as was William Harries.
At Michaelmas, when rent became due, the younger prisoner did not pay it, and Mrs. Evans instructed a bailiff, named Evans — who was assisted by another person, named Lewis — to assist him, to distrain for rent due, amounting to 17l. 10s. On the day previous to the day of the riot with which the prisoners stood charged the bailiff, Evans, probably with a view of getting differences adjusted, met the elder Philip — told him that he had received authority in writing to distrain, and informed him that he would execute the warrant on the next day.
The reply made by the prisoner was, that “the mother and her children” would be there to meet them.
What was meant by these expressions, he presumed, would be well understood by all in Great Britain, especially in that county.
Next day Evans, accompanied by Lewis, proceeded to execute process, and at a short distance from the house they met Philip Philip, the father, with whom Evans had some conversation, during which the latter referred to the conversation which had taken place on the preceding day.
Philip said that the money was ready, but there was some mistake made by Mr. Wilson in an arbitration, with which, Evans said, he had nothing to do.
He then accompanied the bailiffs towards the farm, and upon meeting the young man near the house, addressing the bailiffs, he said in a loud voice, “What the d–l do you come here to ruin me.”
Immediately upon his saying so, a gun was fired, and five or six gun-shots followed it.
— After that demonstration, appeared a number of persons disguised in various ways — some with caps, bonnets, and others with blackened faces, false beards, &c., who came out from some of the farm buildings.
The effect of their appearance was to make Evans and Lewis run away, but they were pursued and brought back.
When taken back there was among them a conspicuous tall man, who he might turn out to be was not then important.
He demanded Evans to give up his distress paper, and when he produced them they were burnt.
The tall man appeared to be directing the whole proceedings.
While the papers were burning, the elder Phillip said that they must have the other paper — meaning the authority to distrain.
As the last scene of that strange conduct in a civilized, especially a Christian country, the tall man sent for a Bible, made Evans swear upon it that he would never again visit the place.
Alarmed for his life, and from the circumstance of guns being pointed towards him, he took the oath, but the place being well-known, he adopted that course which the law pointed out, and the parties were brought there to answer for their very gross violation of the laws of their country.
It would be the duty of the jury, after hearing the evidence, to say whether, as the occupier of the farm, there had been any doubt of the son’s participation in the affair.
They would have to make the same inquiry as it regarded the father — not forgetting the expressions used by him.
The other defendant would be identified by the testimony of one of the witnesses who would be produced before them, and the jury would find him to be the man who had administered that strange oath.
He had to inform them that the charge was not one of felony, but of misdemeanour only.
Though such was the case, he would not wish them to commit upon less proof.
He felt it to be his duty to point out the great mischief resulting from even a beginning to redress any supposed wrongs by riotous mobs.
It struck at the very root of society, and set at defiance that law which was the protection of all — our lives, property, and every thing near and dear to us.
Though careful not to impute to the prisoners this offence upon improper or insufficient evidence, but if satisfied as to their guilt, they must not shrink from discharging that duty which they owed both to society and themselves.
John Evans, the bailiff referred to in the Attorney-General’s address, was then called.
His evidence entirely bore out the statements made, as far as the two Philips were concerned.
He added that, when he and Lewis were in the act of running away, the old man called out to the mob, “Catch them, beat them, fire at them.”
There was a tall man amongst them who took the most conspicuous part in the proceedings.
He was disguised with a false beard, similar to a goat’s beard.
He had for many years known the prisoner Harris.
He could not identify him as the tall man.
He observed a fustian trousers under the cloak worn by him.
He at first insisted upon witness stripping himself, and walking to Carmarthen in a state of nudity, but that was abandoned when the mock oath had been administered.
— This witness underwent a long examination and cross-examination by Mr. Hall, who defended the prisoner Harris, but the whole is contained in the opening address.
John Lewis, the person who assisted the last witness, gave evidence to the same effect.
In running away, he fell, and all the party commenced beating him most violently.
He bled profusely from the head, his garments down to his shoes being covered with blood.
The old man interfered, and cried “don’t beat him — ’tis the other I want you to settle,” or words to that effect.
Had it not been for his interference, witness believed the mob would have killed him.
The witness positively swore to the identity of Harries as being the tall man who took so conspicuous a part among the mob.
Had known him for years, and had an opportunity of recognising him when the mask and false beard accidentally fell off when near the fire — leaving his face quite exposed.
Mr. Hall cross-examined the witnesses at great length, but the latter persisted in his evidence that Harris was the tall man referred to.
Both the other prisoners who defended themselves, also cross-examined witness with considerable tact, though occasionally straying to the dispute between themselves and their landlady, which, in fact, had nothing whatever to do with the charge.
Their examination of witnesses proved that the elder prisoner was not so deaf nor infirm as supposed during the first part of the trial.
Mr. Hall then addressed the jury on behalf of the prisoner Harris.
He commenced by deprecating the outrages which had arisen in South Wales, and which no right-minded person could for a moment sanction.
The only excuse that could be offered for their existence was “gross ignorance” — fancying that physical efforts could redress grievances — a more mistaken notion could not be entertained.
Mr. Hall spoke at great length upon the relative position and duties of landlord and tenant, being of opinion that no relationship, if well conducted, could be more conducive to the well-being of society, and then proceeded to establish an alibi on behalf of the defendant Harris.
A witness named Ress was called to prove that between seven and eight the prisoner called at his house, which was a mile and a half distance from Pound, on the Swansea road.
Other witnesses were called to prove conversations with them at different times, until past nine, being the hour at which, according to the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution, the riot took place.
Some of the witnesses deposed having seen the prisoner on the Carmarthen side of Pound farm, about nine.
The prisoner’s father was called to prove that he never wore trousers, the witness Evans having stated that the tall man in the mob wore a fustian trousers.
Mr. Chilton replied on behalf of the Crown.
He remarked upon the badly-sustained alibi made out on behalf of Harries, Mr. Hall having opened that Harries was too far distant from the scene of disturbance at eight o’clock to be at the riot at half-past eight or nine; whereas, by subsequent evidence, it turned out, even by that of his own witnesses, that he was at the time in the immediate vicinity.
As to the circumstance of all the witnesses undertaking to swear to the time almost within a few minutes, it was quite an absurdity, for no man, if asked a few days subsequently, could call to mind the exact hour at which he held any conversation with another.
He also contended, that the testimony of prisoner’s father did not contradict that given by witnesses for the prosecution, as fustian “leggars” might have been easily mistaken for trousers made out of the same material.
Mr. Chilton then commented on the plea set up by the younger prisoner, Philip — that he took no part in the assembling of the mob, and had no previous knowledge of the riot.
He thought the case clear against the two Phillips, and that the alibi set up for Harries had not been sustained, especially when put in opposition to the witness Lewis’s positive evidence of his identity among the mob.
All sympathy should not be exhibited towards the accused, but some should be displayed towards witnesses who come forward to give evidence against those who set all law at defiance.
The Learned Judge having summed up the evidence, the jury acquitted Harris, and returned a verdict of Guilty against Philip Philip, and Wm. Philip.
Sentence deferred.
From the Cambrian:
. — This morning, the business of the Court commenced at the usual hour.
The Attorney-General begged to enter a nolle prosequi as it regarded the indictment for felony against John Jones [acquitted of having sent a threatening letter], 22, farmer, Thomas Hughes, sawyer, and Benjamin Jones, charged with having committed a riot, and feloniously demolishing the dwelling-house of Griffith Jones, being the Pontarlleche toll-house.
The charge of misdemeanour for destroying the gate, was removed by a writ of certiorari to the Court of Queen’s Bench.
Case of the Late Mr. Thos.
Thomas.
David Evans, aged 20, farmer, and James Evans, 25, labourer, were arraigned upon an indictment charging them, with divers others, unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled at Pantycerrig, in the parish of Llanfihangel Rhosycorn, and with having, during the riot, assaulted one Thomas Thomas, and with force demanded the sum of forty shillings, with intent to steal the same.
Both prisoners, who were defended by Mr. Nicholl Carne, pleaded “Not Guilty.”
Considerable interest was felt as to the result of this trial, from the circumstance of the prosecutor, who was the principal witness, having been found dead under very peculiar circumstances, and that of his premises having been fired soon after the prisoners had been committed.
The Attorney-General said, that the charge against the prisoners was one of misdemeanour — for having committed a riot in going to the house of the prosecutor Mr. Thomas Thomas, who had since lost his life; but he must in justice to the prisoners observe, that having been in custody, that circumstance could not in the remotest degree cast any reflection upon them.
Whatever violence might have been offered Mr. Thomas Thomas (and he did not say such was the case), it could in no way have been done by them.
The names of the prisoners could not be connected with any catastrophe of that kind, for they were in gaol at the time.
It was only to be regretted that the deceased’s evidence could not be obtained excepting from the deposition taken before the Magistrates, and that was evidence in law.
It appeared that a number of persons disguised in the usual characteristics of Rebeccaites, with circumstances of considerable force and violence, demanded a sum of money from the prosecutor, and this proceeding did not appear to have originated for the purpose of removing any public grievance, real or imaginary; but, in which it appeared, that the alarming state of the country had been made subservient to the promotion of a private end, and to the settlement of a mere personal claim between the parties.
A short time previous to , it appeared by the deposition, that Mr. Thomas’s cattle strayed at night into a corn field belonging to one of the prisoners, who had estimated the damage at 10s. Early on the morning of , a number of disguised persons assembled together and surrounded the house of Mr. Thomas, and demanded 5l. as a satisfaction for the damage done to the corn.
Thomas would not allow them to enter his house, neither would he go out to them, but refused to accede to their request.
They then reduced their demand to 50s. and subsequently to 40s. They then dragged Thomas from his own house to the house of the prisoner David Evans, and when Thomas challenged them with having offered to settle the matter for 10s., Evans said, “’Tis now in these people’s hands.”
It was for the jury to judge from that expression, whether the riot did not originate with him.
The deceased then asked permission to remain in Evans’s house, but he was finally taken back to his own house, and allowed nine days to pay the money.
Some time afterwards Thomas was found dead, under circumstances which he thought justly created no suspicion against any one.
As far as he (the Attorney-General) could learn, those who possessed the best means of judging, were of opinion that strange and unaccountable as were many of the appearances, there was no just foundation for believing that he came to his death by violence.
As reports had been circulated, he thought it right publicly to state for the sake of the character of the county, that, as far as his opinion went, there had been no reasonable grounds for supposing that the man was murdered.
To resume his statement, the jury would find, that, at one o’clock, the younger prisoner and the other, who was his servant, were at the prosecutor’s house.
Thomas distinctly swore to the presence of both the defendants, as the jury would find on reading the deposition.
In three or four days afterwards a complaint was made, and a a warrant issued, for the apprehension of the defendants.
On , the officer went to David Evans’s premises, and asked him for James Evans, when the former said that James had left his service in consequence of a quarrel, and that he had not seen him for many days.
The premises were searched, and James Evans was found concealed beneath some straw on a loft.
It would be proved that David Evans, in speaking of the transaction, said that they should not have done what they did, if Thomas Thomas had paid the money, and while before the Magistrates, the prosecutor persisted in saying that the demand was 5l. then 50s.s., and then 40s., when David Evans added that he had offered to take 1l. The jury must observe, that he assented to the truth of all the evidence, with the exception of the reduction to 20s. He had also pointed out the spot where he had offered to accept of 1l. He would now read the deposition.
The Attorney-General then read the deposition, as taken , before Col. Trevor and J. L. Price, Esq., in the presence of the prisoners.
The deceased stated, that on the day in question a number of people came to his house, and demanded satisfaction for the trespass, as described.
Deceased did not go to the door, but his wife went.
They at last reduced their demand to 40s. He was then taken by the collar by one of the disguised party calling himself “Becca,” and was taken to Bergwm.
When there he distinctly recognized James Evans, who behaved worse to him than any of the others.
He also recognized David Evans.
James Evans had with him a short gun, and had his face blackened.
David Evans was but slightly disguised.
The Attorney-General observed, that he could very easily have identified him.
They then took him to the Bergwm field.
They kept him outside the door until some one went in to tell the inmates, lest they should be frightened.
They then took him to the house, when he told David Evans that he had agreed to receive 40s. for the damage when the latter answered, “’Tis in the hands of these people.”
The Attorney-General commented upon this answer, as affording convincing proof that the prisoner acted in concert with the mob.
The deposition further stated, that after coming out of the house, James Evans pushed witness on in a contrary direction to his home, and when alone, told him, “I wish to kill you.”
The party who personated Becca called upon him to bring the witness back.
So that Becca, observed the Attorney-General, appeared to have been actuated by better considerations than the prisoner James Evans.
The deposition concluded by stating that the party allowed deceased nine days to pay the money, and if they would visit him again, they would burn his effects.
— The Attorney-General proceeded:— That was the deposition of Thomas Thomas.
He had gone to his account; but the jury could not, in consequence of that, be satisfied with less proof.
It was not necessary there should exist that certainty which could be produced only by witnessing the scene, but with that degree of reasonable certainty which would satisfy them in any important concerns of life.
He hoped they were now rapidly coming to a close with the cases.
He did not know but that he might be addressing them for the last time.
That, he believed, was the last case in which these parties had taken advantage of the agitated state of the county for the purpose of committing outrages.
The guilt was not inconsiderable of those who took advantage of the turbulent state of the country, arising from real or imaginary grievances, and perverted it to their own selfish purposes, for others had some excuse — excuse he should not have called it — pretense rather, who did those things on the ground of abating a public grievance.
— The object of those prosecutions was not to punish every individual who had been concerned in the disturbances.
Their number was so great that no reasonable man could wish, even were it possible, to punish all.
The extent of the outrages and the number concerned in them forbade that wish, but the grand object was to restore the authority of the law, and regain the confidence of those who relied upon that authority for protection.
He trusted the conduct of those whose duty it was to advise the Crown would not be thrown away in reclaiming the misguided inhabitants of that county.
With those observation he would call the witnesses, and leave the case in their hands, and he had no doubt they would do that justice which the circumstances required.
He (the Attorney-General) might be permitted to add — and he did so with unfeigned sincerity, that he had been in various parts of this country performing his official duties and exercising that profession to which he belonged, but he never, in the course of his experience, addressed any gentlemen who inspired in his mind more confidence, that the duties they discharged were done consistently with a sense of right; and he begged to thank them in the name of the public and of the country, for the attention, impartiality, and justice which marked the course of the proceedings which he had the honour to advocate.
[The following evidence was called for the purpose of introducing the depositions.]
Robert Bray, Superintendent in the A division of the Metropolitan Police, examined by Mr. Chilton, Q.C.: Knew deceased — saw his body the morning it was picked up.
Mr. Spurrel examined:– Am Clerk to the Magistrates.
[Deposition handed to witness].
This is the deposition made by Mr. Thomas Thomas; I saw him sign it — the Magistrates also signed it.
Cross-examined by Mr. N. Carne:— Mr. Thomas Thomas first made his statement in Welsh, and it was translated into English by Mr. Price, the Magistrate.
He translated into English, everything stated by Mr. Thomas.
He was not sworn as an interpreter.
I understand Welsh sufficiently well to understand the evidence given.
Mr. Carne went over the whole of the deposition, criticising upon the various English words, given for Welsh expressions used by the witness.
J. Lloyd Price, Esq., examined:— Am a Magistrate for this county.
Took the deposition of Thomas Thomas.
It was taken in Welsh.
He understood English sufficiently well to correct anything which was written not in consonance with what he had said.
I was at Bergwm, the residence of one of the prisoners.
I do not remember the day, but it was on a Friday previous to the apprehension.
I remember it, because, on the following night, his houses were burnt down.
I was accompanied by a policeman of the A division of the Metropolitan police, and a special constable.
I went with the officers to show them the house, because I could get no assistance in the neighbourhood that I could depend upon.
When I went there, I found David Evans in bed.
When he was asked for James Evans, he said, “He has left me; I would not allow him to go to Brechfa fair, and he got offended — has left me, and I have never seen him since.”
He repeated the statement before I sent out the policeman to search the place.
The officers then went ont, and I saw James Evans brought from a hayloft.
The officers brought him to the house.
I remember that near the close of the examination of Thomas Thomas, when he said that they demanded 40s., David Evans said, “When near the gate, we consented to take 20s.”
Cross-examined by Mr. Carne:– I translated nearly the whole.
There might have been some portions of his statement irrelevant to the business omitted.
Some people state many things which are quite irrelevant.
During the first portion of the examination, I put questions to commence the examination.
I had taken a previous examination for the purpose of issuing a warrant.
I took that down in writing, but after the second examination, made in the presence of the prisoners, was over, I did not think the first examination of any importance, so I put them with other useless papers.
The depositions were then put in evidence, and read by the Officer of the Court.
Thomas Evans examined by Mr. Evans, Q.C.:— Is a mason.
Lives with his father at Ty’nyfordd farm, half-a-mile from Pantycerrig.
Lives a mile from Bergwm — the house of the prisoner, David Evans.
Remembers .
Remembers being disturbed about twelve or one o’clock that morning.
Heard a man crying out “heigh” three times at the window.
Went to the window.
Saw people outside.
There were several people present, but I could see only three.
The first thing I heard was a man calling out, “I give you warning, that you must not go to the farm you have taken, or we will burn your hay and corn, as you see your neighbours’.”
My father had taken a farm in the neighbourhood.
To the best of my judgment, that person was James Evans.
I knew his voice, as I was intimate with him.
We had been in the same singing-school.
After this, I and my father got out of bed, and went out of the house.
We heard several guns fired.
When in a field near Pantycerrig, I saw a number of people.
It was too dark to distinguish their dress; but when the guns were fired, we could perceive something white about them.
They then returned from Pantycerrig.
I met a neighbour in the road, whom the mob had desired to shew them the way to Pantycerrig.
Next morning, I went to Bergwm.
The inmates were not up; but the servant shortly opened the door.
David Evans then came downstairs.
I saw a gun on the table, and said, “Here are one of Becca’s guns, I think.”
D. Evans said, “Yes, it is;” and seemed surprised, and said, “Stop, let me see if there is a load in it,” and blew in it, and said there was a load.
I took the screw, and drew the load — it contained powder only.
I then requested D. Evans to come out, and told him “that his servant had been at our house, warning my father not to take the farm.”
He denied it, and said “No; he has been in the house during the whole night.”
David Evans then told James Evans, who came towards me, and said, “D–n you, tell that of me,” and raising his fist.
David Evans put his hand on his shoulder, and said, “Be quiet, James.”
Witness then went to Pantycerrig.
On next day (Sunday) met James Evans, who said, “Why did you tell Thos. Thomas that I had confessed being at Pantycerrig.”
He said the servant of Pantycerrig told him so, and added, that if he had a chance, he would put witness quiet enough; and added, “Well, if you transport me for seven years, I’ll give you a coating when I come back.”
Cross-examined:— I never had a quarrel with Evans previous to that time.
To the best of my knowledge, the voice I heard was James Evans’s. Got out of bed when first I heard the man calling at the window.
I told Thos. Thomas when I saw him, that James Evans was there.
Robert Bray re-called:— I accompanied Mr. Price, the Magistrate, P. C. Powell, and a special constable, to Bergwm.
I saw David Evans, and went out to the barn to search for James Evans.
I heard noise in the loft above the barn, and got up to the loft, and saw the feet of a man showing from under some straw.
I called to him, and took off the straw.
He was James Evans.
We passed Thomas Thomas’s house, who was standing by the door.
I said, “It was a pity you should have gone to this poor old man.”
He said, we should not have gone, had he paid for the damage done by his cattle on our farm.
Rosser Thomas corroborated this witness’ statement.
Mr. Nicholl Carne then addressed the jury in reply to the evidence in support of the charge, and said he should be enabled to prove an alibi on the clearest evidence — that David and James Evans were both in bed at the time of the outrage.
After the examination of several witnesses, whose evidence appeared to be totally at variance with their former statements on oath, Mr. Carne folded up his brief and sat down.
The Judge:— Mr. Carne, if you say you will not hold a brief in this case any longer, I think you will adopt a discreet and honourable course.
The Attorney-General replied, commenting in very strong terms on conduct of the witnesses for the defence.
Verdict — Guilty.
Sentence deferred.
Rebecca’s Daughters
John Jones, aged 21, stonecutter, William Jones, aged 17, stonecutter, Thomas Jones aged 14, stonecutter, Seth Morgan, aged 21, carpenter, Henry Thomas, aged 21, labourer, and Thomas Harries pleaded Guilty to the charge of having, on , with divers evil disposed persons, unlawfully and maliciously thrown a certain turnpike toll-house, the property of the trustees of the Three Commotts district of roads, situate at Porthyrrhyd.
— Discharged on their own recognizances, to appear when called upon to receive the judgment of the Court, and to keep the peace in the mean time towards all her Majesty’ subjects.
George Daniel pleaded Guilty to the charge of having, on , committed a riot, &c., at Blaennantymabuchaf, in the parish of Llanegwad, in the county of Carmarthen.
— Discharged on his own recognizances, to appear to receive the judgment of the Court when called upon.
John Thomas, smith, pleaded Guilty to the charge of having committed a riot and an assault at Llandilo-Rhynws bridge turnpike gate, on .
— Discharged on his own recognizances, to appear and receive judgment whenever called upon.
Mr. Chilton intimated to the Court, that it was not the intention of her Majesty’s Government, to proceed with the case against Francis M’Keirnin and George Laing, charged with the demolition of a turnpike gate, near Llanelly.
The Counsel for the Crown looked into the depositions, and did not think it a proper case to be proceeded with.
William Davies, farmer, Benjamin Richards, farmer, David Thomas, farmer, William Evans, labourer, and Arthur Arthur, labourer, charged with various Rebecca outrages, were discharged by proclamation.
Thomas Morgan, aged 28, labourer, and Thomas Lewis, aged 24, labourer, pleaded Not Guilty to the charge of having, on , at Dolauhirion toll-gate, in the parish of Llanegwad, in this county, and then and there demolished the said gate.
— This case was not proceeded with; but removed by certiorari into the Court of Queens Bench.
In the course of a few minutes, the prisoners who perceived their companions in tribulation set at liberty, wished to withdraw their plea of Not Guilty, and to plead Guilty, but the Judge told them it was too late.
There was some Rebeccaite mopping-up to be done at the Spring Assizes in Carmarthenshire, as was reported in the Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser (excerpts):
The following was the address of his lordship to the grand juries:– … I shall not trouble you with any remarks on the general state of the country, as I have no doubt you have heard much on that subject on more than one occasion previously to this.
There is, however, in the calendar, indications of a disturbed state of affairs continuing in this county longer than in the adjoining one.
I hope that by the vigilance of the magistracy the peace of the county will soon be permanently restored.…
The Rebecca Riot.
John Lewis, Isaac Charles, Job Evans, John Harries, David Williams, and David Thomas, for unlawfully assembling at the Union Workhouse, at Carmarthen, on , were first put upon their trial, and a special jury was sworn in.
Mr. John Evans, Q.C., Mr. E.V. Williams, and Mr. Chilton, Q.C., were retained on the part of the prosecution, and Mr. Lloyd Hall for the defence.
Mr. Chilton opened the pleadings and stated, that John Harries, a miller, residing at Talog, in the parish of Abernant, in this county, was charged with being the ringleader in this unlawful assemblage.
That the said John Harries, had refused to pay Water-street gate, in this town, which caused him to be fined, and his goods were distrained upon for the amount, and that the riot took place in consequence of the distress made by the constables.
That the distress caused an ill-will and an angry feeling, and that threats were held out that Water-street gate would be destroyed.
That the defendant John Harris had called upon Capt. Davies, of Green Hall, stating that unless the fine would be returned, they would pay him a visit, and handed him a letter to the same effect, signed by John Harris and Thomas Thomas.
The parish clerk of Abernant was compelled by Harris to make a proclamation on the previous Sunday, demanding the attendance of all the neighbouring farmers at Carmarthen on the following Monday,— farmers to come on horseback, and their children and servants on foot.
His summons was obeyed, and they attended in thousands, carrying with them banners with Welsh inscriptions, and a band of music playing before them.
That after parading the town, they arrived at the Union Workhouse, and demanded admission; the governor refused for some time, but seeing the crowd so great, he admitted them in, and the place was immediately filled, and were it not for the timely arrival of a detachment of the 4th Light Dragoons, the work of destruction which they had commenced would be carried on.
Several of the horses were left in the Workhouse yard, a number of the men were taken at the time, and that some of them were the prisoners at the bar.
Capt. David Davies.– I am a magistrate of this county.
I know defendant Harries — he is a miller, living at Talog mill.
He called on me on and delivered this letter to me.
I read it in his presence.
He said he had another for Mr. Morris for the same purpose, and away he went.
The letter was as follows:– “Talog, .— Sir– As we have been unlegally fined for refusing to pay Water-street gate, no refuse being made, we give you this offer if you are intending to pay the money to-day is the day.
John Harries and Thomas Thomas.”
He said unless paid that day they were coming to demand it on Monday.
I was in the town of Carmarthen on the Monday.
I was with the magistrates in the Guildhall.
I saw a number of persons between twelve and one o’clock coming up towards the Hall from Lammas-street.
There were 350 on horseback, and a couple of thousands on foot.
There was a band of music on foot.
They came up part of the Hall and went up street.
They were a quarter of an hour passing.
The shops were shut.
The crowd did not alarm me.
Those on foot were agricultural boys and girls, farm servants.
I was not at all alarmed.
David Evans, road-surveyor.— On , I was sworn in as a special constable.
I live in this town.
On , I was required to assist the police to levy a distress on goods of Harries, the miller, for refusing to pay tolls at Water-street gate.
I went with other constables and police constables.
The attempt to distrain was resisted, and there was a great riot.
Towards the end of it they said they would pay Water-street gate a visit and take it down, and also pay the workhouse a visit and take it down.
Cross-examined.— I did not see either Isaac Charles, or John Lewis.
I do not believe they were there.
I believe they were not.
James Lewis.– I am the parish clerk of Abernant.
I have been so 14 years.
I attended Divine service there on .
It is the custom after service is over to cry anything that is lost, or give any public notice.
I cried a mare that was lost, on that day.
I was then desired by John Harries to give notice to parishioners to come to Carmarthen next day; whoever stayed at home would do so at their peril.
I did not refuse to cry it, but I told him I had rather not.
He said there was no harm in it.
After I had made the proclamation, I heard Capt. Evans advise the people not to go.
Late in the evening, I heard a conversation between Capt. Evans and John Harries.
Cross-examined.— Isaac Charles and John Lewis were not at my church on that day.
Capt. Lewis Evans was called on.
Thomas Evans, fanner, of Placeparke, and Thomas Davies, of Bwlchnewydd, Newchurch parish, farm servant, confirmed the preceding statements.
John Rae Evans, master of the Carmarthen Workhouse.— On , my attention was attracted to a parcel of people idling and sitting about the hedge outside.
Perhaps 100 of them.
I had heard rumours that people from the country were to come to the workhouse that day.
Most were country; people about an equal number of women and men.
The gates were closed.
I afterwards saw a large body of people coming up.
We are on an elevation, and had a view of them.
Those in front were on foot, those behind on horseback.
There were hundreds on foot.
I saw musical instruments with them.
I did not hear any music.
They knocked and kicked at the door, and demanded admittance.
I was inside and can’t say who demanded admittance.
Mr. Evans of Placeparke begged me to admit him.
He advised me to open the door, otherwise it would be worse for me.
I said if they were respectable men I would admit them, but not such a rabble.
There was a great noise outside, and the knocking continued.
At last I told the porter to open the gate.
I was afraid, they were so numerous.
The mob rushed in.
I retreated to the dining-hall, they followed me.
The hall was full; some jumped on the table, others thumped the table with sticks.
I attempted to reason with them.
They said they wanted all the paupers out.
They said there was no further need of my services, nor the workhouse.
They demanded the keys of the men’s and women’s yard.
I refused to give them up, and they were wrenched out of my hand.
They got into the two yards.
I was requested to go to the workhouse, some of the pauper children were crying.
The mob wanted them to go out, they were frightened, and did not like to go out.
I heard the cry “the soldiers are coming.”
The room was soon emptied then.
One man struck me, it was Job Evans.
It was in the school-room.
I saw John Harries in the front of the house.
I did not see those in front of the house till they had been captured.
The back of the board-room was broken open.
I knew Isaac Charles perfectly well before this.
He came into the hall with the rest.
He jumped about, waved his hand, and was active amongst them.
He had no stick.
They cried “Hurrah!”
[Capt. Evans?]
— I am a magistrate for this county.
I was in Abernant church on .
[?]
I was in the church when it was cried, and I went [out to ask?] the crier what it was about.
He told me.
I [advised them?] not to go.
I addressed them in Welsh.
I [heard that?]
Harris and Thomas had been fined.
I sent for them and advised them to meet me at Cilwen that evening.
They did not come there.
I went out and afterwards met them.
I cannot be positive that Harris came, but Thomas did.
I went by the Plough and Harrow on my way to Carmarthen.
I saw Harris there; It was between 7 and 8. I desired Harris to come to town and get some of the magistrates to come and dissuade the people from coming.
I also dissuaded him and asked him not to come, and use his influence with them.
Harris said that if I spoke to Mr. Webb, a magistrate very much respected in town and country, and prevailed on him to come out, it might have great effect in preventing them from coming.
I met the band before I entered the town, and I told them the people were not coming, so as to persuade them not to come.
They said they were paid for coming and they would come.
I then came on to town.
I went out of town again and met them half a mile from the Plough and Harrow.
There was an immense crowd.
I did not distinguish Harris then.
I endeavoured to dissuade them from coming to town.
Mr. J.Ll.
Davies did so also.
They said that their motive was to go to tell the magistrates their grievances and not to do any harm.
A great many did stop with us, but the great body went on.
We said idle fellows in town would get them into mischief.
James Morse, Stamp Distributor.— On , I overtook a cavalcade of horsemen and footmen moving down King-street.
They came through Guildhall-square, and went towards the workhouse.
The foot had entered the workhouse before I got up.
I had got ahead of the horsemen.
There were from 300 to 500 horsemen, and from 1,500 to 1,800 on foot.
I got into the workhouse between two horsemen.
I saw the master, he appeared frightened.
I spoke to the mob and exhorted them to go home and petition parliament.
My address gave them satisfaction, as I touched upon the Educational bill — being dissenters they listened to me, and gave me three cheers.
I was interrupted by a man upsetting the iron bedsteads.
I spoke to him and he doubled his fists and said “come on.”
He did not strike me.
He desisted from upsetting the beds.
I afterwards gave him into custody.
I do not know his name.
I did not see either Charles or John there.
Eliza Evans— I am the matron of the union workhouse I was at the kitchen door when they came in.
A man said he would injure me if I would not give the key of the pantry.
He said he would kill me.
I refused the keys.
Another man held his fist in my face.
He said I had locked the children in the pantry.
There was a great deal of noise.
The house seemed coming down.
The bed-clothes were thrown out through the windows.
The children were about me crying, and praying the mob not to kill their mistress.
They said they would provide a place for them.
All of a sudden they all disappeared.
I then saw the military.
One board up stairs was forced up; it was sound before.
Daniel Levy, John Pugh, Thomas Hughes and others were examined.
The jury, after retiring for a short time, found the whole of the prisoners guilty, and sentence was deferred.
The Talog Rioters.
John Jones, Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis[,] Jonathan Lewis, David Davies, and David Lewis, were charged with having committed a riot and assault at Tallog, in the parish of Abernant, on .
Mr. Chilton opened the pleadings, and stated that the prisoners were charged with having tumultuously assembled at the village of Tallog, and obstructed the levying of a distress upon the goods of John Harris, for non-payment of tolls at Water-street gate.
That the goods distrained upon were rescued by the prisoners, and the constables assaulted by the mob.
That Jonathan Jones had a hatchet with him, Jonathan Lewis carried a gun, and David Davies was loud in his abuse.
His lordship having summed up the evidence, the jury acquitted the prisoner John Jones, but Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis, Jonathan Lewis, David Davies, and David Lewis, were found guilty, and ordered to be in attendance to receive judgment when called for.
The court then commenced the following case:— Thomas Lewis and Thomas Morgan were then indicted on the charge of having destroyed the turnpike gate and toll-house at Dolauhirion, near the town of Llandovery.
The Borough Calendar contains the names of nine prisoners, seven or eight of whom are charged with offences connected with the late riot at the Workhouse, and other offenced arising out of the recent disturbances.
There are twenty-two names on the County Calendar, the majority of whom are charged with riots, assaults, and depredations connected with Rebeccaism.
True bills against several of these prisoners were found at the last Assizes.
Several respectable farmers and others are implicated in some of the charges; from their station in society, their cases naturally cause considerable excitement and apprehension as to the result of the trials.
In four cases the defendants are Queen’s Bench traversers, having been at the last Assized removed by certiorari.
They are to be tried by Special Juries, and are precisely in the same position as Mr. O’Connell and the other traversers at the late Dublin trials.
The Workhouse Riot
Before a Special Jury. — John Harris, aged 50, miller, David Thomas, 28, farmer, David Williams, 27, weaver, Job Evans, 49, farmer, Isaac Charles, 19, tailor, and John Lewis, 40, fisherman, were charged in a lengthy indictment, containing several counts, with having, on , unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled at the Carmarthen Workhouse to the disturbance of the peace of our sovereign lady the Queen, her Crown and dignity.
There were also counts in this indictment charging several of the defendants with having committed assaults on different parties.
True bills had been found at the last Assizes, and the defendants had then put in pleas of Not Guilty.
Messrs.
Chilton, Q.C., Evans, Q.C., and E.V. Williams, were Counsel for the Crown.
Mr. Lloyd Hall defended the two last-named prisoners.
— The others were undefended by Counsel.
Mr. V. Williams opened the pleadings by stating the nature of the charge.
Mr. Chilton, Q.C., then addressed the jury for the Crown.
He had the honour to appear before them to conduct the prosecution on the part of the Government.
It was an honour which devolved upon him from the accidental circumstance of seniority, and he assured them it was to him an honour attended with no little anxiety.
To himself it gave no little pain, because that, during his long intercourse with the people of this part of the country, he had experienced nothing but kindness and courtesy from persons of all ranks and conditions of life.
For that reason, he repeated, it pained him exceedingly that the duty had been imposed upon him of substantiating charges of disregard of the law against a large body of people whom hitherto it had been his (Mr. C’s) part and boast to point out as being the most peaceable people, the most obedient to the laws, within the realm.
If the gentlemen of the special jury would glance over the calendars of that county during past years, and compare them with those of other counties, they would agree with him that it had been comparatively free from crime.
It also gave him pain to appear before them after so many trials which had been conducted by the Attorney-General, whose temperate conduct, and whose firm and vigorous, yet forgiving spirit he (Mr. C.), with his numerous infirmities, could not expect to emulate; though he hoped that in no portion of his address would he show any disposition to strain the law against the defendants.
His sympathies had always been enlisted in favour of the people.
It would be his duty to call evidence before them, and if, after they had heard and weighed it, they should find anything which would justify them in returning a verdict of acquittal as to all or any of the defendants, no person could feel more rejoiced at that than himself.
He had that moment been informed that only two of the defendants were defended by Counsel, but he (Mr. C.) was confident that would not operate prejudicially to the other prisoners, as they (the jury) would be their Counsel, and his Lordship would be their Counsel, and see that they should not be convicted unless the charges were well substantiated, and that they should be quite as well guarded as Mr. Hall, with all his zeal, would guard the interests of his client.
To gentlemen of their experience it was unnecessary for him to dwell upon the various points of law which would arise; he would leave that to his Lordship.
In some counts the prisoners were charged with a riot — in others with assaults, but all would be guilty of the acts committed by each of them, if it would be satisfactorily proved that they had assembled together for one common purpose.
He would now give them an outline of the case, the details of which will be given in evidence.
He (Mr. C.) charged the defendant John Harris with being a ringleader, or at least a very active promoter of the riot in question.
He was a miller, residing in the parish of Abernant, in that county.
This riot was unquestionably more or less connected with the disturbances which had arisen from the supposition that tolls had been illegally exacted.
It would appear that the defendant Harris had refused to pay tolls at Water-street gate, in that town, and the consequence was that be was fined, and a distress warrant was issued against his goods.
Considerable opposition was made to levying the fine, and a riot ensued, which he would merely refer to, as it was the subject of another prosecution.
In that riot, which occurred on , several of the defendants took part, and threats were then held out by the mob that they would destroy Water-street gate and the Workhouse.
On , Harris called at the house of Capt. Davies, one of the magistrates who had signed the distress warrant, and told him that unless the money which had been paid were returned, he would he visited on .
He also left a letter with Mr Davies, signed by himself, and purporting to have been signed by another party.
Mr. Chilton here read the letter, which was signed, “John Harris,” “Thomas Thomas,” to the effect, that as they had been illegally fined, they give notice that, if the money was to be returned, was the time so to do.
On , as would be proved, the Parish Clerk of Abernant had been compelled to make a kind of proclamation to the parishioners to assemble at Carmarthen on , or if any persons remained away, they would do so at their peril.
A Magistrate happened to be present, and he endeavoured to dissuade the people from listening to the proclamation, and he sent for Harris, and tried to prevent him from carrying his purposes into effect; but it would be shown that Harris continued very active in persuading the people to assemble: the farmers on horses, and their sons and servants on foot; and that they would remain away at their peril.
On , they accordingly assembled at the Plough and Harrow, which was four miles from Carmarthen.
The assembly was a very large one, and they marched through Trevaughan village, and reached the town of Carmarthen , at which time they amounted to some thousands.
They marched into the town, through the Water-street gate, in procession — the footmen being in the van, and the horsemen in the rear, bearing banners with various inscriptions on them.
Having proceeded through several streets, they went towards the workhouse.
He would show the jury that the appearance of the mob was so alarming that nearly all the shops in Carmarthen were closed.
It would also appear that the master of the workhouse had observed about a hundred idle people loitering about the workhouse until the procession arrived, and admission was then demanded in the most intimidating manner.
One individual, who had been at the Plough and Harrow in the morning, seeing the multitude at the door, suggested to the master that, if he did not open the door, he feared bad consequences would ensue.
The master then admitted the mob.
They went into the hall.
Their acts and general conduct while in the workhouse would be described by the different witnesses who would be examined.
Shortly after they had entered, a gentleman, named Morse, took the opportunity of addressing them.
They attended to him and that, happily, afforded time for the arrival of the military — a small body of the Fourth Light Dragoons, who were nearly worn out by fatigue consequent upon their exertion in travelling.
Immediately on the appearance of the military, the mob dispersed.
Many of those actually engaged in the riot made their retreat, leaving their horses in the yard of the workhouse.
That circumstance in the riot he thought was not unimportant, because it afforded a clue to what the ultimate object might be had they not been interrupted.
“Conscience made cowards of all,” for he could not accuse the Welsh of such cowardice had they not been conscious that they were engaged in a bad cause.
However, when the jury would take into consideration the time and circumstance of the assemblage, and the general character of their acts, it would be for them, under the direction of the Learned Judge, to say whether the defendants were legally justified in such a conduct or not.
— The following witnesses were then called and examined:—
Captain David Davies examined by Mr. Evans.
Q.C.:— I am a Magistrate for this county.
Harris, the defendant, called on me on , and delivered me this letter.
[The letter was put in and read — the substance of it is given in the Learned Counsel’s opening address.]
The defendant added that if the money were not paid on , it would be demanded on .
I was in the town on with the other Magistrates.
I saw a crowd of about 350 people on horseback, and others on foot.
They were more than a thousand.
I remained in the Townhall.
They passed the hall.
The shops were closed.
Those on foot were agricultural servants.
I was not alarmed.
David Evans, road-surveyor, examined by Mr. V. Willams: On I was sworn in a special constable.
On I assisted the police to levy a distress on the goods of Harris, the miller.
It was a distress for a fine imposed for non-payment of toll.
Our distraint was resisted by a mob who created a great riot.
The mob then said that they would destroy the Water-street gate, and pay the workhouse a visit, and take it down.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hall:— I do not think Isaac Charles or John Lewis were present at the Talog meeting.
They were not there.
Re-examined by Mr. Chilton:— There were about 500 persons present.
I could
not positively ascertain that those persons were not there.
I cannot mention a
fiftieth part of those who were present.
James Lewis examined by Mr. Chilton, Q.C.:— Is the parish clerk of Abernant.
I attended service on .
It is the custom after service to give public notice of any meeting, or of anything lost.
I cried the loss of a mare on that day.
After that, John Harris, the miller, Talog, desired me to make another proclamation.
It was a notice to the parishioners to come to town next day, and whoever remained home would do so at their peril.
I objected to crying it, but said I preferred having a written notice on the door.
Having made the proclamation I heard Captain Evans advising the people not to go.
That evening I heard a conversation between Harris and Capt. Evans.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hall:— I do not know whether Isaac Charles and John Lewis were present, at the Church, on that occasion.
Capt. Evans, Pantykendy, was called on his subpoena, but was not present.
Thomas Evans, Plasyparke, examined by Mr. Evans Q.C.:— Is a farmer, who lived at Plasyparke.
On , he was in this town.
Knows John Harris, the defendant; saw him that day in Carmarthen.
Harris asked witness, “If he would accompany Becca and her children to town on ?”
Witness said he would not.
Harris said (continued witness), I had better go, or Becca would destroy all I had.
I said I would not go, but send my servant.
He said, that was not Becca’s request — that every farmer must go on horseback, and his sons and servants on foot.
I mentioned to Capt. Evans what had taken place; I also spoke to the Rev. Mr. Evans.
That was on , before I left Carmarthen.
On , I went to the Plough and Harrow, where Harris told me they were to meet; that is a mile and a half from my house.
It was nine in the morning when I went.
There were a number of people there — about fifteen to eighteen hundred might be present.
I saw the defendant Harris there.
I did not stay there five minute, but went on business to Carmarthen.
I crossed the fields for part of my way.
I was in Carmarthen about two hours before the crowd.
I saw the crowd coming down by Darkgate, and passing the Hall.
I heard it talked in the country that it was the intention of the mob to visit the Workhouse.
I went there and saw some people kicking the door.
I did not see any of the people I had seen in the morning there.
I went to the door, and spoke to the Governor.
I thought they were inclined to break the door, and told him he had better open it.
I heard the Parish Clerk making a proclamation on , at Abernant.
I heard Capt. Evans endeavouring to persuade the people not to go to town.
I saw a written notice on the Church-door of Merthyr, which is the adjoining parish.
Cross-examined:— I fell some alarm in consequence of the threats used about the country — the threats that people’s goods, would be burned, &c.
Re-examined:— I felt alarm at the time I spoke to the Governor of the Workhouse.
Thomas Davies, a labourer, living in an adjoining parish to Abernant, proved having given notice in his parish to the people to meet at the Plough and Harrow.
The notice was, that all who had horses were to ride, and others to come on foot.
I also had notice, that all who remained home did so at their peril.
Joshua Hughes gave the order.
John Ray Evans, Master of the Workhouse, examined by Mr. Chilton:— On , my attention was attracted by seeing about a hundred people about the hedge, opposite the Workhouse, idling; the majority were country people.
There was about an equal number of women and men.
About one o’clock I saw a large body of people assembling; those in front were on foot, and others on horses.
There were at all events hundreds on foot.
I saw musical instruments with them.
When they came to the Workhouse, I heard them knock and kick the door, and demand admittance.
Mr. Evans, Plasyparke, requested me to admit them, and afterwards advised me to let them in.
I at first refused, but becoming alarmed, I requested the porter to open the gate.
The mob rushed in; a portion followed me to the dining-hall — the numbers filled the hall.
Many had sticks in their hands, others beat the table, others said they would turn the paupers out — that no workhouse was required, and that my services could be dispensed with.
I had two keys in my hands — those of the men’s wards and women’s wards; these were wrenched from my hand.
The mob wished the children to go out of the school-room — the children cried.
About this time an alarm of the soldiers coming was heard; all the mob disappeared.
A man named Job Evans struck me with a stick when in the room.
I know the defendant defendant John Harris; I saw him afterwards in front of the house.
The lock of the board-room was broken open.
I know Isaac Charles well; he was one of those who came into the hall.
I did not observe a stick in his hand.
Cross-examined:— I begged of them to desist.
The defendant Charles cried out “Hurrah.”
I do not think he was cheering me.
Capt. Evans examined by Mr. Evans:— I live at Pantykendy, and am a County Magistrate.
I was at Abernant Church on .
I heard of the notice given the people.
I endeavoured to dissuade the people from going to town.
I heard that John Harries and Thomas Thomas had been active.
I sent for them to meet me at the Vicar’s house.
They did not then come, but I subsequently met them.
I went by the Plough-and-Harrow on my way to town on .
I saw Harris there.
There were not many people there then, as it was very early.
I requested Harris to come to town to talk to the Magistrates, and endeavoured to get him to dissuade the people.
Harris said, that if I spoke to Mr. Webb, and if he would come out, it might have some effect in dissuading the people.
I afterwards addressed the people, and endeavoured to persuade the Band I met on the road to go back, by telling them the people would not come to town.
The Band said they were paid for their services.
I then went to Carmarthen, and called at Mr. Webb’s — could not see him.
I then returned homewards, and met the crowd, with the Band at their head — endeavoured to persuade them to return.
They said that they only wished to state their grievances.
I said that many idle fellows in town would get them into mischief.
Many remained with me and another Magistrate.
Mr. James Morse examined:— I am a distributor of stamps, residing in this town.
I overtook a large crowd in King-street, on the day in question.
The foot part of the procession had reached the workhouse before I overtook them.
There might have been three to five hundred horses there, and about eighteen hundred people on foot.
I went into the workhouse yard, and met the Master, who appeared to be very much frightened.
I addressed the crowd from one of the windows.
I endeavoured to persuade them to return, and make known their grievances to Parliament.
My address had the desired effect.
Knowing them to be principally Dissenters, I touched on the Education Bill.
They gave me three cheers.
My address was interrupted by a man in the room upsetting the iron bedsteads.
On my requesting him to desist, he put himself in a fighting attitude.
He was subsequently taken into custody.
I do not remember his name.
Mrs. Sarah Evans, matron of the workhouse, examined and said, that one of the mob threatened to kill her, unless she would deliver the keys to him.
Another man held his fist in her face, and said that he wished the children to get out, as she had locked them in the pantry.
Saw beds and bedding thrown out of the windows.
The children were crying, and requested the mob to leave their mistress alone.
The mob said that they would provide for the children.
The noise up stairs was dreadful; and suddenly the mob disappeared.
I then saw the military.
One of the floor boards was forced up.
Cross-examined:— There were provisions in the pantry when the mob asked me for the key.
Mr. Morse recalled:— I recognize none of the defendants as the man who put himself in a fighting attitude towards me.
At this stage of the proceedings, it was discovered that none of the defendants were present near the bar, with the exception of those defended by Counsel, but scattered about the Hall.
They were requested to come forward, and those portions of evidence given in English were interpreted to them from the Judge’s notes.
Mr. Ray Evans recalled:— I saw the defendant, Lewis.
He took an active part in the riot.
Cross-examined by defendant Job Evans:— I am certain that you are the man who struck me; a farmer interfered, or you would have proceeded further.
Defendant made a statement to the effect, that he was not farther than the workhouse yard.
Mrs. Sarah Thomas:— I am schoolmistress of the Workhouse.
I was on the plain in front of the Workhouse when the mob came up on .
I remained but a short time after I heard the noise of the mob, but went into the dining-hall.
A number of the mob came in.
They commenced making a great noise, beating the table, &c. I requested them to be peaceable.
The master, Mr. Evans, then requested me to go to the school-room — that the children were crying.
Two men followed me.
— The witness here corroborated Mrs. Evans’s evidence respecting the conduct of the mob, as it regarded the children.
I asked one of the men if he was the father of children himself, and requested him to have some compassion on the children, He said he was a father — that as he had commenced the work he would finish it, or lose every drop of his blood.
The people suddenly disappeared.
On going to her room, the door of which had been previously locked, she found that it had been burst open.
David Levi, jeweller, proved that, at the time in question, he acted as special constable; and described the appearance of the mob in similar language to the other witnesses.
He added, that he took several persons into custody, and took them before the Magistrates.
He took one person into custody at Capt. Hughes’s request.
I think it was the defendant David Williams. Had some difficulty in taking him, as some persons endeavoured to prevent me.
One man struck Captain Hughes, and I received several blows.
John Pugh examined by Mr. Chilton:— Was Inspector of Police on .
He gave a similar description of the procession to that given by other witnesses.
There were thousands on foot, and he counted 310 horsemen.
By the direction of the Magistrates, I took several persons into custody in the Workhouse yard.
I saw the defendant David Thomas engaged in a conflict, with a bassoon in his hand; he had also a large stone.
When I seized him, we both fell in the scuffle.
[Witness produced a great number of sticks found in the Workhouse after the mob.]
Cross-examined:— I have been employed to watch some gates — the toll-houses of which have been taken down.
I don’t know whether they were destroyed by sticks or not.
Thomas Hughes, a special constable, corroborated the other witnesses in the evidence relating to the conduct of the mob at the Workhouse.
He saw the defendant Thomas striking Capt. Hughes.
Saw the defendant Harris there.
Mr. William Davies Phillips, Clerk to the Board of Guardians, being examined by Mr. V. William, deposed to the riotous character of the assemblage of people.
He repeatedly saw the defendant Harris among the mob.
First saw him near the Lion in Spilman-street.
Saw the mob pass through King-street.
He then came down to Guildhall square, and there saw Harris among the mob on horseback.
He subsequently saw them turn up Red-street towards the Workhouse.
He attempted to enter the Workhouse, but could not go in.
He then gave information to the Mayor.
On returning to the Workhouse he saw several people in custody.
Among them the defendants Harris, Williams, Evans, and Thomas in custody.
The appearance of the mob was calculated to cause alarm.
Cross-examined by Mr. Hall:— Is not particularly aware of any widely spread dissatisfaction respecting the Workhouse.
I do not know that these feelings against the magistrates is general.
I have seen Oddfellows’ processions.
Cross-examined by the defendant Harris:— I believe the defendant’s daughter was on horseback behind him.
By the Court:— She might be three or four and twenty.
Re-examined by Mr. Chilton:— The procession did not resemble an Oddfellow’s.
Capt. William Garnons Hughes described the conduct and appearance of the mob.
I received a blow from a bludgeon.
The appearance of the mob was such as to create alarm in the minds of quiet persons not bred to arms.
Thomas Charles Morris, Esq., examined by Mr. Evans:— I am a banker residing in this town, and Mayor of the town.
Was a magistrate in .
I accompanied the military to the Workhouse.
Several persons were taken into custody.
Taking the state of the country into consideration, I thick the assembly was calculated to cause alarm.
This closed the case for the prosecution.
Mr. Hall then addressed the jury for the defendants Charles and Lewis.
He contended that in one count of the indictment, the defendants were charged with a riot.
He thought his Lordship would tell them that no riot had taken place, and that all the defendants must be acquitted on that count.
The utmost that could be made of it was that of an unlawful assembly.
He appeared only for two of the defendants.
He was happy to hear that the others would find a much better advocate in the Learned Judge who presided.
There was no doubt but that the riot charged in the indictment had some connection with the Agrarian disturbances which had taken place — disturbances alike indefensible in law or reason.
He could attribute them only to the poverty of the country and the general dissatisfaction with the New Poor-law and the conduct of the Magistracy, but Rebeccaism was not the means of procuring a redress of grievances.
He was confident that the gentlemen of the jury as well as the unfortunate persons who had been implicated in the disturbances must have suffered both in pocket and in peace of mind by the late disturbances.
No person could stand up and state that the country laboured under no real grievances, but yet they could not be redressed by such outrageous conduct.
Mr. Hall then proceeded to comment upon those portions of the evidence which apparently bore against his client.
He contended that there was not the least evidence that the defendants Charles and Lewis took part in the illegalities which he acknowledged had been on that day committed.
The evidence of the master of the Workhouse went merely to prove, that, like foolish boys, they entered the Workhouse at the excitement of the moment, for it was not proved that they took any part in the procession.
It was evident that on the day in question there was both a town and country rabble.
If the country mob contemplated committing any depredations, was it to be concluded that the town mob — among whom two defendants were — had the same objects in view.
He concluded by stating, that he confidently expected an acquittal for the defendants Charles and Lewis.
Mr. James Morse gave the defendant Charles a good character.
He is a married man and has several children.
The four other defendants declined saying anything to the jury, but Harries called Captain Evans, Pantykendy, to character.
He said that up to the present time he was a peaceable man.
He thought he was induced to join the assembly in consequence of having been fined by the Magistrates.
Mr. George Goode gave Harries an excellent character.
Cross-examined by Mr. Chilton:— I have since heard that he has been connected with Rebeccaism.
Thomas Evans one of the witnesses for the prosecution gave him a good character.
Mr. W.B. Swan, a Magistrate, and other persons, including several witnesses for the Crown, gave evidence to the same effect.
Other witnesses bore testimony to the characters of the other defendants.
Mr. Chilton waived his privilege as Counsel for the Crown, to reply to Mr. Hall’s address.
The Learned Judge then summed up the evidence.
The first question for the jury to ascertain was, whether any riot had taken place.
To constitute a riot it was not more necessary that all the parties implicated should be proved to act unceasingly in it from first to last than it was to prove that a man acted riotously throughout his life before being considered a rioter.
There might have been no riot, yet it might have been an unlawful assembly.
Looking at the conduct of the parties when the Magistrates were in conversation with them, they could not be called riotous, though the assembly might have been illegal, as they had met for an illegal purpose.
But the conduct of the mob at the Workhouse was certainly riotous, though it had not been so before.
His Lordship then read over all the evidence, commenting upon it and elucidating all legal difficulties involved in any parts, as he proceeded.
The jury retired, and after a short absence returned a verdict of Guilty against all the defendants.
— Sentence deferred.
The Riot at Talog.
The Queen v. Jonathan Jones and Others.
[Special Jury.]
— This also was an issue from the Queen’s Bench.
The defendants, Jonathan Jones, aged 21, Howell Lewis, 21, David Lewis, 25, David Davies, 60, Jonathan Lewis, 21. and John Jones, 24, were charged with having, on , unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled, together with divers other evil-disposed persons, at Talog, in the parish of Abernant, Carmarthenshire, and then and there made a great noise, riot, and disturbance, against the peace of our Sovereign Lady the Queen, her Crown and dignity.
In other counts the defendants were charged with having committed assaults on various persons.
Mr. Chilton, Q.C. (with whom were Messrs.
Evans, Q.C., and E.V. Williams, as Counsel for the Crown), stated the case to the jury, the circumstances of which must be fresh in the recollection of our readers.
The Learned Counsel said that he would merely give the jury an outline of the facts, which, according to his instructions, he was in a condition to prove.
He understood that only one of the prisoners had the advantage of being defended by Counsel.
This riot arose out of a refusal to pay toll on the part of a man named John Harris, who was not included in the present indictment.
He was a miller, residing at Talog, and in consequence of his refusal to pay toll a fine was imposed upon him, and a warrant issued to levy upon his goods, served by the Mayor and a Magistrate of the Borough, and endorsed by a Magistrate of the County, of Carmarthen.
On , a number of special constables, and about 30 pensioners were sent to levy the distress upon Harris’s goods.
As they approached Talog, they observed a crowd of disguised persons running towards the mill.
A horn was blown by one of the rioters, and the number continued increasing.
One man told the constable that if they persisted in going into the mill, they should be killed.
After considerable interruption, they entered the mill, and effected the levy.
On their road home, when about 300 yards from the mill, they were pursued and overtaken by a large crowd, many of of whom were disguised, and variously armed with hatchets, pickaxes, bludgeons, guns, &c. &c., who insisted upon their leaving the goods behind.
The constables were comparatively few and the pensioners rendered little or no assistance.
At last, a responsible person named Thomas, offered to answer for the payment of the fine, if the constables would leave the goods.
To this the latter assented, but they were not then allowed to return to Carmarthen.
One of them was knocked down, his pistol and staff taken from him, and thrown into the river.
Others were greatly abused, as the jury should hear from the various witnesses who would give evidence before them.
The constables were followed until they reached Troesmawr gate, when the warrant was demanded of them.
The mob also compelled the constables to pull down a piece of wall, stating “that they must do Rebecca’s work.”
Various threats were held towards them relating to Water-street gate and to the Workhouse.
Now, it would be shown that Jonathan Jones and all the other defendants had acted in the manner described, but Jones was particularly active.
Howell Lewis wore a kind of mask.
Jonathan Lewis took part in the riot, but he (Mr. C.) did not charge him with acting prominently.
Though David Davies personally committed no act of outrage, yet he encouraged the others to do so.
David Lewis carried a bludgeon, and was the person who knocked down one of the constables.
John Jones had merely a small stick in his hand, but took no active part in the affair.
He merely charged him with being present, countenancing the acts of the rest.
He had merely given the jury a brief outline of the proceedings.
Should they find that the charge was not clearly made out against any or all the defendants, he would rejoice to see them acquitted; but, if otherwise, it was their bounden duty to convict them.
Evidence was then adduced in support of the charge.
The witnesses who were principally the special constables sent to exercise the warrant, deposed to the circumstance of all the prisoners having taken the part stated in the riots, with the exception of John Jones, who on their arrival they found talking to Harris’s daughter by the door of the mill.
He merely had a small slick in his hand, but did not use it.
Mr. Richards then addressed the jury on behalf of Jones, contending that he was only accidentally present, as it was well known that he paid his addresses to Harris’s daughter.
The Learned Gentleman then proceeded to call witnesses to Jones’s character, when the foreman of the special jury interfered, and said that the jury were satisfied and had agreed to acquit Jones.
Witnesses to character were then called on behalf of the other defendants.
The Learned Judge carefully summed up the evidence, when the jury returned a verdict of Guilty, against all the prisoners with the exception of Jones.
Sentence deferred.
Dolauhirion Toll-Gate.
The Queen v. [Thomas] Lewis and [Thomas] Morgan.
— [Special Jury].
— In this case, the prisoners were tried at the late Winter Assizes, on a charge of riot and destruction of the toll-house, but Mr. Justice Cresswell being of opinion that the evidence did not support the indictment, as far as the riotous assemblage was regarded, directed the jury to acquit the prisoners on that charge.
A true bill had been found against them for misdemeanor, and the prisoners put in a plea of “Not Guilty.”
They were now tried before a special jury, on an issue from the Queen’s Bench.
Mr, Chilton, addressing the jury, observed, that the best course next to not committing an offence, was to acknowledge having committed it.
The defendants wished to retract their plea of “Not Guilty,” and consent to a verdict against them; therefore it would be unnecessary for him to call evidence.
His Lordship expressed a doubt as to the propriety of that course, as the pleas had been made at these Assizes.
Evidence was then called, but in consequence of the absence of a witness (who had left pursuant to that understanding), the case was adjourned to the next day.
. — the examination of witnesses in the case of the Queen v. Morgan and Lewis, was proceeded with.
The facts of the case appeared in our paper during the late Winter Assizes — it is therefore unnecessary to repeat them.
The Judge having summed op the evidence, the jury retired, and after an absence of a quarter of an hour, returned a verdict of “Guilty of being present, but no evidence is adduced to prove that they took part in breaking the gate.”
The Judge:— That amounts to a verdict of “Not Guilty.”
The defendants were accordingly acquitted.
The Queen v. Hughes and others.
— (Special Jury.)
— Counsel for the Crown, Messrs.
Chilton, Q.C., Evans, Q.C., and E.V. Williams. For defendants, Messrs.
Nicholl Carne and Lloyd Hall.
Mr. V. Williams opened the pleadings.
This was an issue joined between the Queen and the three defendants, Thomas Hughes, Benjamin Jones, and John Jones.
The defendants had pleaded “Not Guilty.”
Mr. Chiltlon addressed the jury for the Crown, and observed, that the three defendants were indicted under the statute 7 and 8 Geo. 4, c. 30, s. 14, which provided that if any person destroyed a turnpike gate wholly or in part, he should be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour.
The indictment also charged the defendants with a riot, and they were also indicted for an unlawful assembly.
He thought that, after the jury had heard the evidence, the proofs would be so clear, that they could convict the defendants without doubt or hesitation.
The three defendants had been very leniently dealt with, for they might have been indicted for the destruction of the house, which amounted to a felony, but they were merely indicted for a misdemeanour.
The defendant Thomas Hughes was a sawyer; John Jones was a farmer, of some property, and was generally known by the name of Capt. Jones; Benjamin Jones was a farmer’s son.
The toll-house and gate, which were the subjects of the present indictment, were called Pontarlleche gate and house, situated on the road leading from Llangadock to Neath and Swansea.
He would call a person named Griffith Jones, who had been appointed collector at the gate eight years ago, by a person named Anthony, who was entitled to receive the tolls.
He also carried on the business of a smith at a forge about a mile distant, and his wife generally attended to the gate.
After retiring to bed on , the toll-keeper and his wife heard a great and alarming noise, and had no time to dress themselves before the house was entered, and upon getting out, they observed about thirty persons, armed with guns, pickaxes, &c., disguised in various ways.
The mob so conducted themselves as to cause great alarm.
Both he and his wife well knew John Jones, and would swear that they had not the slightest doubt as to his identity.
He was partly disguised, and took a very active part in the riot, They would also, with equal certainty, identify the other defendants, Hughes and Benjamin Jones, who took part in the business.
The case mainly depended upon the evidence of the toll keeper and his wife.
They both, it appeared, went before the magistrates a few days afterwards, to lay an information against a person named James, who was not included in the indictment.
It was his duly to state, that on that occasion the witnesses did not inform against the defendants, for knowing them to be the ringleaders of the Rebeccaites, they were naturally afraid to mention any names; but it would be proved that on the next day they told a person, named Mary Jones, who the parties were.
In a few days afterwards, they communicated the same information to Anthony, the lessee of the tolls.
In addition to this, he (Mr. C.) should lay in evidence before the jury, certain conversations by which John Jones showed that he was a prominent actor in the Rebecca outrages.
He would not detail the conversations, but let the jury hear them from the witnesses, and after hearing what his learned friend had to say in defence, to which he should reply if necessary, he had no doubt the gentlemen of the jury would return such a verdict as would give satisfaction to the country at large.
Griffith Jones was then examined by Mr. Evans, and deposed to his being the toll-keeper of the Pontarlleche-gale, which is on the road from Llangadock to Neath and Swansea.
After having retired to bed on , he heard noises as of iron bars under the door.
The windows were broken.
He got out of bed, and immediately four disguised men came in, and dragged him in his shirt to the other side of the road, He did not know those four men.
On going out, he saw about thirty persons, some of whom were engaged in destroying the gate, and others in destroying the house.
He positively identified Thomas Hughes, who was partly disguised and engaged in sawing the large gate-post.
John Jones was breaking part of the house with a pickaxe.
Had known him for seven years.
The crowd appeared not to have been aware, for a considerable time, that witness was amongst them, as they had, in the first place, taken him to some distance.
He was afterwards taken to an upper floor in the opposite house.
He could distinctly see the people breaking up the gate into pieces, which they threw into the river.
Shortly after this, witness laid all information before the Magistrates against a person named Jones: but did not inform against the three defendants.
In coming out of the Magistrates’ room, he met the defendant Jones, who told witness that he might as well leave the country.
On another occasion, John Jones told witness’s wife that his furniture would not have been broken had not witness threatened to inform against any parties who might break the house.
Witness informed Mr. Anthony, in a few days, who the parties were who had broken the gate.
Cross-examined by Mr Carne:— There were more than a hundred shots fired, He was full half an hour amongst the mob in his shirt.
As they had white shirts about them, he supposed that they did not recognize him.
His wife was likewise turned out of the house in her night-dress.
Witness did tell some persons that he did not recognize any of the rioters, as he was afraid of them.
Heard of some rewards being offered for informations against Rebeccaites, but never heard the amount mentioned.
Never told any one “There is something for swearing now — I must think of my wife and children.”
Never told so to John Evans; for I have not spoken a dozen words to him for years.
Anne Jones, the last witness’s wife, was examined and cross-examined at great length.
Her evidence corroborated that given by Griffith Jones.
J. Anthony, the lessee of the tolls, stated in evidence that, soon after the gate had been destroyed, the collector’s wife informed him of the parties who had been engaged in the riot but, at her request, he did not tell the Magistrates.
He was also afraid.
Mary Jones proved that, on the day following the outrage, the collector’s wife told her the name of the parties.
Mary Anthony proved that John Jones was seen going in the direction of the gate on the night in question, but that road also lead to his residence.
Mr Nicholl Carne then addressed the jury for the defendants.
He contended that the jury could not rely either upon the accuracy or the veracity of the witnesses for the prosecution.
When it frequently happened that gentlemen had held conversations with country people, mistaking one for the other, how could the witnesses identify the parties at the gate, under the various circumstances of confusion, dread, disguise, and anxiety which must have haunted the minds of the witnesses, seeing that their house and furniture were broken — their lives, and that of their child in danger.
He then commented upon the fact of the witnesses not having mentioned the names of defendants before the Magistrates, and the reasons given for not so doing.
He also called the attention of the jury to the rewards offered upon the conviction of any rioters.
Isaac Morris, Elizabeth Jones, and John Jones were called to prove that the toll-collector and his wife, in conversation with them declared that they could not identify one of the rioters.
Benjamin Jones, father of one of the defendants, was examined but proved nothing important.
John Evans was called to contradict statements made by Griffith Jones in cross-examination.
This witness acknowledged being present at two Rebecca meetings.
He went with Mr. Foster, of the Times, to interpret.
—— Matthews, a constable, who had been employed in watching the gate, said, both the collector and his wife told him next day, that they did not know any of the rioters.
Witness had been dismissed after three nights’ watching.
Mr. Chilton replied to the evidence adduced for the defendants.
He defended the witnesses for the prosecution from the imputation of perjury, as insinuated by the Learned Counsel for the defence.
The Learned Judge then summed up the evidence, elucidating the various points of law arising in the case; after which the jury retired, and returned into Court in about ten minutes, with a verdict of Guilty against all.
Sentence deferred.
. — …Six prisoners, charged with riot and burglary, were arraigned, and pleaded Not Guilty.
— This charge arose out of the Rebecca disturbances, but as it was not probable the case would conclude , his Lordship took a nisi prius cause.
The Pembrokeshire Herald and General Advertiser gives an account of the trial of Rebeccaites accused in the Carmarthen workhouse raid, held on at the Carmarthenshire Assizes.
It gives some interesting background on how the demonstration was sparked.
The Rebecca Riot.
John Lewis, Isaac Charles, Job Evans, John Harries, David Williams, and David Thomas, for unlawfully assembling at the Union Workhouse, at Carmarthen, on , were first put upon their trial, and a special jury was sworn in.
Mr. John Evans, Q.C., Mr. E.V. Williams, and Mr. Chilton, Q.C., were retained on the part of the prosecution, and Mr. Lloyd Hall for the defence.
Mr. Chilton opened the pleadings and stated, that John Harries, a miller, residing at Talog, in the parish of Abernant, in this county, was charged with being the ringleader in this unlawful assemblage.
That the said John Harries, had refused to pay Water-street gate, in this town, which caused him to be fined, and his goods were distrained upon for the amount, and that the riot took place in consequence of the distress made by the constables.
That the distress caused an ill-will and an angry feeling, and that threats were held out that Water-street gate would be destroyed.
That the defendant John Harris had called upon Capt. Davies, of Green Hall, stating that unless the fine would be returned, they would pay him a visit, and handed him a letter to the same effect, signed by John Harris and Thomas Thomas.
The parish clerk of Abernant was compelled by Harris to make a proclamation on , demanding the attendance of all the neighbouring farmers at Carmarthen on , — farmers to come on horseback, and their children and servants on foot.
His summons was obeyed, and they attended in thousands, carrying with them banners with Welsh inscriptions, and a band of music playing before them.
That after parading the town, they arrived at the Union Workhouse, and demanded admission; the governor refused for some time, but seeing the crowd so great, he admitted them in, and the place was immediately filled, and were it not for the timely arrival of a detachment of the 4th Light Dragoons, the work of destruction which they had commenced would be carried on.
Several of the horses were left in the Workhouse yard, a number of the men were taken at the time, and that some of them were the prisoners at the bar.
Capt. David Davies.— I am a magistrate of this county.
I know defendant Harries — he is a miller, living at Talog mill.
He called on me on and delivered this letter to me.
I read it in his presence.
He said he had another for Mr. Morris for the same purpose, and away he went.
The letter was as follows:– “Talog, .— Sir— As we have been unlegally fined for refusing to pay Water-street gate, no refuse being made, we give you this offer if you are intending to pay the money to-day is the day.
John Harries and Thomas Thomas.”
He said unless paid they were coming to demand it on .
I was in the town of Carmarthen on .
I was with the magistrates in the Guildhall.
I saw a number of persons coming up towards the Hall from Lammas-street.
There were 350 on horseback, and a couple of thousands on foot.
There was a band of music on foot.
They came up part of the Hall and went up street.
They were a quarter of an hour passing.
The shops were shut.
The crowd did not alarm me.
Those on foot were agricultural boys and girls, farm servants.
I was not at all alarmed.
David Evans, road-surveyor.— On , I was sworn in as a special constable.
I live in this town.
On , I was required to assist the police to levy a distress on goods of Harries, the miller, for refusing to pay tolls at Water-street gate.
I went with other constables and police constables.
The attempt to distrain was resisted, and there was a great riot.
Towards the end of it they said they would pay Water-street gate a visit and take it down, and also pay the workhouse a visit and take it down.
Cross-examined.— I did not see either Isaac Charles, or John Lewis.
I do not believe they were there.
I believe they were not.
James Lewis.— I am the parish clerk of Abernant.
I have been so 14 years.
I attended Divine service there on .
It is the custom after service is over to cry anything that is lost, or give any public notice.
I cried a mare that was lost, on that day.
I was then desired by John Harries to give notice to parishioners to come to Carmarthen ; whoever stayed at home would do so at their peril.
I did not refuse to cry it, but I told him I had rather not.
He said there was no harm in it.
After I had made the proclamation, I heard Capt. Evans advise the people not to go.
Late in the evening, I heard a conversation between Capt. Evans and John Harries.
Cross-examined.— Isaac Charles and John Lewis were not at my church on that day.
Capt. Lewis Evans was called on.
Thomas Evans, fanner, of Placeparke, and Thomas Davies, of Bwlchnewydd, Newchurch parish, farm servant, confirmed the preceding statements.
John Rae Evans, master of the Carmarthen Workhouse.— On the morning of , my attention was attracted to a parcel of people idling and sitting about the hedge outside.
Perhaps 100 of them.
I had heard rumours that people from the country were to come to the workhouse that day.
Most were country people; about an equal number of women and men.
The gates were closed.
I afterwards saw a large body of people coming up.
We are on an elevation, and had a view of them.
Those in front were on foot, those behind on horseback.
There were hundreds on foot.
I saw musical instruments with them.
I did not hear any music.
They knocked and kicked at the door, and demanded admittance.
I was inside and can’t say who demanded admittance.
Mr. Evans of Placeparke begged me to admit him.
He advised me to open the door, otherwise it would be worse for me.
I said if they were respectable men I would admit them, but not such a rabble.
There was a great noise outside, and the knocking continued.
At last I told the porter to open the gate.
I was afraid, they were so numerous.
The mob rushed in.
I retreated to the dining-hall, they followed me.
The hall was full; some jumped on the table, others thumped the table with sticks.
I attempted to reason with them.
They said they wanted all the paupers out.
They said there was no further need of my services, nor the workhouse.
They demanded the keys of the men’s and women’s yard.
I refused to give them up, and they were wrenched out of my hand.
They got into the two yards.
I was requested to go to the workhouse, some of the pauper children were crying.
The mob wanted them to go out, they were frightened, and did not like to go out.
I heard the cry “the soldiers are coming.”
The room was soon emptied then.
One man struck me, it was Job Evans.
It was in the school-room.
I saw John Harries in the front of the house.
I did not see those in front of the house till they had been captured.
The back of the board-room was broken open.
I knew Isaac Charles perfectly well before this.
He came into the hall with the rest.
He jumped about, waved his hand, and was active amongst them.
He had no stick.
They cried “Hurrah!”
[Illegible]— I am a magistrate for this county.
[I was at Abernant?] church on .
I heard a [illegible] the crier what it was about.
He told me.
[illegible] not to go.
I addressed them in Welsh.
I [illegible] and Thomas had been fined.
I sent for them [and advised them to?] meet me at Cilwen that evening.
They did not come there.
I went out and afterwards met them.
I cannot be positive that Harris came, but Thomas did.
I went by the Plough and Harrow on my way to Carmarthen.
I saw Harris there; It was between 7 and 8. I desired Harris to come to town and get some of the magistrates to come and dissuade the people from coming.
I also dissuaded him and asked him not to come, and use his influence with them.
Harris said that if I spoke to Mr. Webb, a magistrate very much respected in town and country, and prevailed on him to come out, it might have great effect in preventing them from coming.
I met the band before I entered the town, and I told them the people were not coming, so as to persuade them not to come.
They said they were paid for coming and they would come.
I then came on to town.
I went out of town again and met them half a mile from the Plough and Harrow.
There was an immense crowd.
I did not distinguish Harris then.
I endeavoured to dissuade them from coming to town.
Mr. J.Ll.
Davies did so also.
They said that their motive was to go to tell the magistrates their grievances and not to do any harm.
A great many did stop with us, but the great body went on.
We said idle fellows in town would get them into mischief.
James Morse, Stamp Distributor.— On , I overtook a cavalcade of horsemen and footmen moving down King-street.
They came through Guildhall-square, and went towards the workhouse.
The foot had entered the workhouse before I got up.
I had got ahead of the horsemen.
There were from 300 to 500 horsemen, and from 1,500 to 1,800 on foot.
I got into the workhouse between two horsemen.
I saw the master, he appeared frightened.
I spoke to the mob and exhorted them to go home and petition parliament.
My address gave them satisfaction, as I touched upon the Educational bill — being dissenters they listened to me, and gave me three cheers.
I was interrupted by a man upsetting the iron bedsteads.
I spoke to him and he doubled his fists and said “come on.”
He did not strike me.
He desisted from upsetting the beds.
I afterwards gave him into custody.
I do not know his name.
I did not see either Charles or John there.
Eliza Evans— I am the matron of the union workhouse[.]
I was at the kitchen door when they came in.
A man said he would injure me if I would not give the key of the pantry.
He said he would kill me.
I refused the keys.
Another man held his fist in my face.
He said I had locked the children in the pantry.
There was a great deal of noise.
The house seemed coming down.
The bed-clothes were thrown out through the windows.
The children were about me crying, and praying the mob not to kill their mistress.
They said they would provide a place for them.
All of a sudden they all disappeared.
I then saw the military.
One board up stairs was forced up; it was sound before.
Daniel Levy, John Pugh, Thomas Hughes and others were examined.
The jury, after retiring for a short time, found the whole of the prisoners guilty, and sentence was deferred.
The Talog Rioters.
John Jones, Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis[,] Jonathan Lewis, David Davies, and David Lewis, were charged with having committed a riot and assault at Tallog, in the parish of Abernant, on .
Mr. Chilton opened the pleadings, and stated that the prisoners were charged with having tumultuously assembled at the village of Tallog, and obstructed the levying of a distress upon the goods of John Harris, for non-payment of toll at Water-street gate.
That the goods distrained upon were rescued by the prisoners, and the constables assaulted by the mob.
That Jonathan Jones had a hatchet with him, Jonathan Lewis carried a gun, and David Davies was loud in his abuse.
His lordship having summed up the evidence, the jury acquitted the prisoner John Jones, but Jonathan Jones, Howell Lewis, Jonathan Lewis, David Davies, and David Lewis, were found guilty, and ordered to be in attendance to receive judgment when called for.
The court then commenced the following case:—
Thomas Lewis and Thomas Morgan were then indicted on the charge of having destroyed the turnpike gate and toll-house at Dolauhirion, near the town of Llandovery.
The court adjourned.
.
His lordship entered the court at , and the trial of the previous evening was proceeded with.
After the examination of several witnesses, the jury acquitted the prisoners.
John Jones, Thomas Hughes, and Benjamin Jones, were then indicted on the charge of having destroyed Pontarllechau gate and toll-house, near Llangadock, on .
His lordship, after the examination of several witnesses, summed up; after which the jury retired to consider their verdict.
In a short time they returned, and delivered a verdict of “Guilty” against the three defendants.
They were ordered to be detained in custody.
