31st August 1816: Daniel Harwood & Thomas Thody are executed at Norwich for their parts in the 'Bread or Blood' disturbances

Two accounts of the execution of the 'Bread & Blood' rioters Daniel Harwood & Thomas Thody appear in the local press, both of which are reproduced below. The executions took place on Saturday 31st August 1816,

The Norwich Mercury of 7th September 1816:

On Saturday last were executed at the Castle Hill, Thomas Moy, for sheep stealing, and Thomas Thody, and Daniel Harwood, for rioting at Downham. They were all of them men of honest and reputable connections, and were brought to their untimely end by Sabbath-breaking—by bad company of both sexes—by occasional intoxication, when in their power—and by following a multitude to do evil. As far as their time permitted, they endeavoured to atone for their former neglect of their duty to God, by assiduously employing themselves in devotional exercises, and there is reason to think that, had their lives been spared, they would have been better men, better subjects, and better Christians; but the prevalence and danger of the crimes for which for which their lives were forfeited and the necessity of making severe examples to deter others from similar crimes, rendered all applications in their favour to the higher powers fruitless. Their behaviour since they were left for execution, was meek and contrite; and they passed their weary hours in reading the Scriptures, in fervent prayer, and in attentively listening to the terms of salvation held out by the Saviour to truly penitent sinners. Having taken a last farewell of their relatives and friends, and an affecting leave of their fellow prisoners, and after being indulged in waiting till the last moment, in the forlorn hope of reprieve, they proceeded to the place of execution.—When the prayers appropriated to the solemn occasion were concluded, they submitted, with manly resignation, to the awful preparations for death. Harwood was first fixed to the fatal tree. Thody was the next sufferer, and he suffered indeed, as far as related to mental suffering: he had hitherto conducted himself with patient fortitude, and with a steady step had ascended the scaffold; but, when the rope was placed on his neck, the remembrance of his wife and children, whom he loudly called upon and deplored, overwhelmed his mind, and with agonising screams he would have fallen in a fit, had he not been supported by the exhortations of the Ordinary and of his fellow sufferers, and by the soothing attentions of those around him, he recovered soon from his fainting state, and stood up firmly while the executioner performed his office upon him and Moy, who was the last tied up. The raised part of the platform immediately fell, and they died with some convulsive struggles, in which Moy appeared to be the longest sufferer. No malefactors ever expired with greater sympathy from the immense multitude, which covered the whole surface of the hill joining the place of execution.—Thomas Moy, aged 32, was born at Guestwick in Norfolk, and has left a wife and seven young children. The pressure of the times had involved him in great distress; and he had undertaken to hire a farm of considerable extent at Binham, to which his circumstances were by no means equal. His relations are respectable, and the crime for which he suffered was the only one which brought him under the sentence of the law.—Daniel Harwood, aged 32, was a native of Gooderstone, in Norfolk, unmarried, and pursued an agricultural mode of life, by occasionally working with his waggon and team in jobs for farmers, as is the custom, in that part of the country where he resided, near Downham. This wandering manner of life led him into bad company, and together with a neglect of his religious duties, at length involved him in the riots which brought him to his untimely end.—Thomas Thody, aged 22, was born at St. Neots, in Huntingdonshire, and has resided several years at Necton, in Norfolk, where his father was coachman to the late Mr. Mason. He has left a wife and two small children.

The Norfolk Chronicle of 7th September 1816:

This day se’nnight, Daniel Harwood, and Thomas Thody, for rioting; and Thomas Moy, for sheep stealing, were executed on the Castle Hill, pursuant to their sentence at the last Assizes, amidst an immense concourse of spectators, who expressed their pity for the unfortunate but guilty sufferers.—The execution not taking place till half-past one, gave strength to the prevalent though unfounded rumour that a reprieve had been received for these unhappy men. Harwood and Moy behaved with great firmness; as did Thody until he was placed under the fatal tree. The recollection of his wife and children, and the horror of immediate death, then overcame his fortitude; he was nearly sinking down under an agony of grief and terror, which he expressed by convulsive shrieks, and was obliged for a short time to be supported by several men. By the admonitions, however, of those attended him on the scaffold, and of his two fellow sufferers, he soon recovered and underwent the last painful part of his sentence with manly resolution. During the short period that intervened between their condemnation, and execution, they received every help and consolation that Religion could afford; and they died with penitence, in the faith of their Saviour, and in a firm trust in the mercies of HIM, who is the great foundation of all mercy!—Moy was in his 33d year, he was born at Guestwick in this county, and his relations are respectable, he was (as we have before had occasion to notice) a farmer, occupying nearly a hundred acres of land at Binham; and has left a wife and seven young children.—Thody who has also left a wife and two children, was 22 years old, born at St. Neots, in Huntingdonshire, and has resided several years at Necton, in this county.—Howard, aged 22, was a native of Gooderstone, in this county, and unmarried.—We are authorised to state, in opposition to a report which has been pretty widely circulated, that none of these unfortunate men, had ever made any profession of religion among any body of Christians; but on the contrary, they acknowledge that they lived in an awful neglect of religious duties, and had been sinking in sin, prior to their commission of those crimes, which brought them to their unhappy end

24th August 1816: Joseph Bugg is executed at Ipswich for his part in the 'Bread or Blood' disturbances

The Cambridge Chronicle of 30th August 1816 gave sparse coverage to the execution of Joseph Bugg, who had been found guilty of arson at the previous Suffolk Assizes:

On Saturday last Joseph Bugg was executed at Ipswich, pursuant to his sentence at the last Suffolk assizes, for setting fire to a barn and cart-lodge, in the occupation of Mr. Glanfield, of Martlesham-hall. When exhorted by the chaplain to confess, he replied, he was in liquor, and did not know what he did; but after the Chaplain had left him, he confessed to the gaoler and the persons assisting, (just before he was turned off) that he set fire to a quantity of whins that were near the premises burnt. He was 26 years of age, had served in the Spanish campaign, and was much addicted to liquor.

16th August 1816: The trial of the Feltwell & Downham Market rioters, at Norfolk Assizes

The Norfolk Chronicle of 24th August 1816, carried an extensive report about the trials of those charged with rioting in Feltwell and Downham Market during the 'Bread and Blood' disturbances of the previous May. The trials covered two days, Friday 16th & Saturday 17th August 1816:

TRIALS of the RIOTERS at DOWNHAM and FELTWELL.

Before Lord Justice Lord Chief Justice Gibbs.

Wm. Bell, Amelia Lightharness, and Hannah Jarvis were indicted for having, on the 20th of last May, together with various other persons, riotously into and tumultuously assembled at the parish of Southery, in Norfolk, from whence they proceeded to acts of theft and violence in the town of Downham Market, which were specified by the evidence.

Francis Wiseman stated that she kept a pork and sausage shop in Downham Market; that in the afternoon of the 20th of May, a mob was assembled in the front of her house; that she observed the prisoner, Amelia Lightharness, looking in at the shop window, and that immediately afterwards the same prisoner opened the latch of the door, and brought in several of the mob, telling them, "this was the shop for good pork." The witness further stated, that her shop formed a part of her dwelling-house; that the prisoner Lightharness was the first that entered, and that at her instigation the mob ransacked the shop of the witness, taking away forcibly a quantity of pork sausages. The shop window was broken by the violence of the people.

Maria Palmer, Wm. Buxton, and Zachariah Stebbing severally corroborated the first witness, and the latter proved that all the above named prisoners entered the shop of Mrs. Wiseman, and concurred in the acts of violence there committed.—Bell and Jarvis severally produced evidence of good character. Verdict—all Guilty.

Thomas Thody, Charles Nelson, Daniel Harwood, the same Hannah Jarvis, Elizabeth King, Margaret Jerry, and Elizabeth Watson.

These prisoners were indicted as forming part of the same unlawful riotous assembly at Southery, as before mentioned, and for proceeding to assault Wm. Spinks, at Downham aforesaid, and stealing from his person certain quantity of meal and flour.

Williams Spinks stated that he was apprentice to Mr. Baldwin, a miller, at Downham, and at the time of this riot had the charge of his mill. That on the said 20th of May last, at about two in the afternoon, he saw a large number of persons approach the mill, whilst he was on the road about a furlong off; that upon is coming up to them he they demanded of him the key of the mill, which he delivered to them through the impulse of fear; that the persons so assembled had sticks and cudgels; that upon his delivering them the key the mill, they proceeded to lay violent hands upon the meal, flour, and sacks found therein, some part of which they threw about and destroyed, and other part they carried away with them.

This witness, together with George Gillingham, Susan Stebbing, Pleasance Laws, and Wm. Baldwin, or some of them, identified the persons of all the prisoners, and proved that Charles Nelson was the first to enter the mill. Verdict—All Guilty.

The same Thomas Thody, the same Daniel Harwood, Lucy Rumbelow, the said Amelia Lightharness, Wm. Youngs, Edward Mellon, and William Galley were indicted as parties to the same unlawful and riotous assembly at Southery aforesaid, and having proceeded to Downham, for breaking open the dwelling-house and shop of Samuel Bolton, a butcher there, and stealing therein and carrying away a certain quantity of pork, the property of the said Samuel Bolton, the said Samuel Bolton and another being in the house and being put in fear.

Samuel Bolton stated, that he had on the said 20th of May given to the mob some meat, in the hope of pacifying them; that about five o'clock in the afternoon of the same day, they came in a large body to his house and demanded more, which he said he was unable to give them. Upon this occasion, the prisoners, Thody, Harwood, and a man named Fendyke, who is still at large, appeared to be the ringleaders. Harwood said, if witness did not give them more they would have all there was in the shop.—The shop was shut and witness was standing at the door of his house. To this menace, uttered by Harwood, the witness replied, "he would be damned if they should," and immediately close and bolted the door, and went towards the kitchen, for the purpose of loading two guns, with which he meant to defend his property. Before he had reached his guns, however, the mob forced open the door, and stripped the shop of meat to the value of 5l. or 6l.

These prisoners were all identified as taking an active part on this occasion, by the concurrent testimony of the last-named witness, and Thomas Bolton, Zachariah Stebbing, and Ann Springfield.—Verdict—All Guilty.

The same Thomas Thody, the same Daniel Harwood, Frances Porter, John Bell and John Blogg were indicted as parties to the same unlawful and riotous assembly, and for breaking open the dwelling-house of John Parkinson, in Downham aforesaid, no person being therein, and feloniously stealing and carrying away a quantity of flour, and various articles of wearing apparel, found therein.

Hannah, wife of the said John Parkinson, who is a tailor and baker, and keeps a general shop at Downham, stated, that being terrified at the appearance of the mob, they had, on the said 20th of May last, shut their shop, and retreated to the house of a neighbour. The mob did proceed to Mr. Parkinson’s house and shop, as was expected, and after they were gone away the witness, with her family, returned, upon which they found the house had been broken open, and they missed from the shop hats, waistcoats, shawls, shoes, flour, and other articles.

The evidence of the last witness, corroborated by her daughter Charlotte Parkinson, Richard Gamble, Thomas Mallet Bailey, Wm. Gamble, Charles Smith, and James Weston, was sufficiently clear to establish the charge against all the prisoners except John Bell, who had not been seen in the house, but had been afterwards met with hats under his arm.

The latter prisoner was therefore acquitted, and the others found—all Guilty.

John Sterne was indicted for larceny only, he having on the said 20th of May demanded cheese of Wm. Oakes, at Downham.

Wm. Oakes stated that the prisoner came with a mob and demanded cheese, which he delivered to him through fear, observing at the same time that he himself wanted it as much as they did. Samuel Johnson, the landlord of the Crown Inn, at Downham, stated, that on the same day the prisoner Sterne brought a cheese to his house, and divided it among the mob, who were there assembled. Verdict—Guilty.

The same John Sterne, the said Thomas Thody, and John Pearson were indicted for breaking open the Crown Inn, at Downham, together with other persons, for assaulting the said Samuel Johnson, the landlord, and stealing from his person meat, beer, and other provisions. Mr. Johnson identified the persons of the prisoners Thody and Pearson as having been foremost of the party who first broke in by force, but the prisoner Sterne was not observed by him until he (Sterne) produced a cheese, which was sometime after the forcible entry. Sterne was therefore acquitted upon this indictment. The other prisoners were found both found Guilty.

In addressing the Jury upon the several indictments for riot, the Chief Justice very clearly explained the law to them, that in tumultuous assemblies of this nature, not only the parties which commit any acts of violence are answerable to the law, but likewise all persons who, by joining a mob, give a sanction to their unlawful proceedings, were in the eye of the law equally guilty of any outrage which was committed by any of such mob, with the party by whose hand the fact is actually done. In directing the verdict of the Jury respecting the attack made upon the dwelling-house and shop of Mr. Bolton, his Lordship observed, that if, by any act of the mob, murder had been committed upon the person of Mr. Bolton, or of any of his family, all the persons composing that mob would have been equally guilty; but on the other hand, if Mr. Bolton, in defending his property, had killed any of the persons who made this attack, he would have been justified in doing so. In allusion to the good characters which most prisoners adduced in their own favour, with respect to the honesty and peaceable habits of their former lives, the Judge emphatically observed, that nothing could more clearly shew the necessity of suppressing such disorderly and mischievous proceedings as were subjects of these trials. Persons who had heretofore acted honestly, and had been good members of society, had now, by deluding one another in the vain hope of addressing those grievances which their proceedings only tended to aggravate, evinced their peaceable dispositions by unlawfully assembling to the terror of well disposed persons, and their honesty by forcibly seizing the property of others.

His Lordship further stated, there where facts were so clearly proved as they had been in most of the above cases, the character of the parties ought to have no weight in the verdict of a Jury, although in measuring the punishment of the offenders, their respective characters would not be forgotten. It was in cases of doubt only in which the former characters of prisoners should weigh in the minds of Juries.

John Cracknell, Jeremiah Lawrence, and Thos. Pleasance, were indicted for having, on the 18th of last May, feloniously assaulted Thomas Willett, a shopkeeper, and Feltwell, and having at the same time stolen from his person two Bank notes, of the value of one pound each.—Mr Willett stated, that on the morning of the said 18th of May, he saw a body of people, to the number of from 50 to 100, including boys, collected together in Feltwell; that they stated their intention of proceeding to destroy the Dam, which the witness stated he himself, and, he believed, the whole parish deemed a very desirable measure, as the Dam was considered injurious to the inhabitants. That on the return from the Dam, at about five in the afternoon, they assembled in the front of his house, and on his coming out, he saw the prisoner Cracknell amongst them, who pulled off his hat, and said, "I hope, Sir, you’ll please to give us something." The witness then asked what his neighbour, Mr. Fuller, had given them, and was answered, that he had given twenty shillings. The witness, therefore, gave them a one pound bill; upon which some persons from the back of the mob cried out that they must have two pounds. Mr. Willett then gave another.—In answer to some very pertinent questions from the Chief Justice, Mr. Willett said, he considered the first one pound as an encouragement to the people for their day's work in destroying the Dam; but he admitted that he gave the second through a fear that his windows might be broken if he did not.

John Place stated, that he saw the prisoner Pleasance amongst the mob before Mr. Willett’s house, which he described as a company of people.

John Thorpe saw Cracknell and Pleasance amongst the company of people before Mr. Willett’s house, and saw the notes given by Mr. W. to Cracknell.—On his cross-examination he said, some of the people called at Mr. Willet’s house to know if he thought it right that the Dam should be destroyed; to which Mr. Willett had replied, that "it was a thing that was necessary." That the company of people then said, they should call to be paid for their job on their return.

The Judge then stated to the Jury, that as the counsel for the prosecution did not press this case, they might acquit the prisoners, which was done accordingly.

He then desired that Mr. Willett might not go out of Court, and enquired whether or not the Grand Jury were discharged, and appeared disappointed at being answered in the affirmative.

Upon Mr. Willett being again called before his Lordship, the latter stated, that he should refrain from mentioning names, but there had been few persons in the bar before him, on the several charges for rioting, who had incurred more, in so much blame, as the persons who had been concerned in encouraging the measures of those who had destroyed the Dam at Feltwell. Those were the persons who had given rise to the mischievous consequences that had followed two days after at Downham.

Mr Serjeant Blossett, as the leading Counsel on the part of the Crown, then stated to the Jury, that it was now that he first learned the real complexion of the late disturbances at Feltwell. If such persons as Mr. Willett gave encouragement to the mob, as has been shewn by the evidence, that which followed amongst the lower orders could excite no surprise.—Having convicted the ringleaders at Downham, sufficient had been done to answer the purposes of the prosecution on the part of the Crown, which could only be to shew persons who were disposed to join in such tumultuous proceedings, that those transactions cannot take place with impunity, for that a day of reckoning must come sooner or later.

The SENTENCES.

The Chief Justice now proceeded to pass sentence of transportation for seven years on John Sterne, who had been indicted and convicted of larceny only, in stealing a cheese from Mr. William Oakes, of Downham, the charges against him not having been laid capitally.

This being done, the following prisoners, who had been capitally convicted of rioting, 16 in number, (viz. William Bell, Amelia Lightharness, Hannah Jarvis, Thomas Thody, Charles Nelson, Daniel Harwood, Elizabeth King, Margaret Jerry, Elizabeth Watson, Lucy Rumbelow, William Youngs, Edward Mellon, William Galley, Frances Porter, John Blogg, and John Pearson), were called before his Lordship to shew cause why Sentence of Death should not pass against them to die according to law. The Chief Justice, then, in a very impressive manner, passed that solemn sentence upon them. His Lordship stated, that on account of the good characters which some of them had borne, it would afford him high satisfaction if circumstances should appear to justify him in recommending their cases for a relaxation in the severity of their punishment. Nevertheless, he wished them not to be deluded into any ill founded security. There were amongst them some who had excelled their fellows, and had stood foremost in the execution of their misguided and wicked actions. To these he could hold out no hope. His Lordship concluded by exhorting them all to use well the short time which might remain to them in this world, and to make their peace with Him before whom they must soon appear in the next.

Of the above 16 prisoners who received sentence of death, two only are left for execution, viz. Harwood and Thody. All the others were reprieved.

After the ringleaders had been tried and convicted, the following minor offenders were discharged on giving security for their good behaviour, viz. John Jerry, Harrison Bone, and John Bowers.

9th August 1816: The Judge at Bury Assizes gives death sentences to 'Bread or Blood' arsonists

The Bury St Edmunds Summer Assizes commenced on Friday 9th August 1816, and saw a number of prisoners face trial for offences committed during the previous months in Suffolk.

A number of cases failed, or were postponed, as noted by the Bury & Norwich Post of 14th August 1816:

No true bills were found by the grand jury against Thos. Baker, for setting fire to a barn at Kettlebaston, or Susan Bruty, for setting fire to a building belonging to J. Skelton, of Clare.—The trials of the nine Brandon rioters were traversed to the next Assizes.

However, the main spectacle was reserved for the trials of two arsonists, and the same edition of the paper gave extensive coverage to these:

Trials of the Two Incendiaries.

James Pleasants, a boy of 15 years of age, was indicted for having feloniously set fire to a barn in the parish of Lawhall, in the occupation of Mr. Thomas Bradley, a farmer, by which the same and other buildings were destroyed by fire on the 12th of May last. The only witness in this case, in addition to the prisoner’s confession, was a little girl about 15 years of age, in the service of Mr. Bradley. She stated that during the divine service on the 12th of May, she was left at home with the prisoner and her mistress, who was ill up stairs, her master being on a visit to Mr. Reman, a neighbour adjoining.—The witness had been cleaning knives, and doing dirty work, for which she had occasion to put some water on the fire in a back kitchen, for the purpose of washing her hands: the prisoner was then present by the fire, when he observed to the witness, "why don't you go up stairs and put on your cloathes."—Witness replied it was wet and she should not change her dress that day. She took the water from the fire to the sink in the same apartment, and on turning her back, the prisoner left the kitchen; she did not see that he had any thing in his hand, but soon after he returned, saying, "the barn is on fire." This the witness was soon enabled to perceive from a great quantity of smoke issuing, and immediately after she observed the place all in flames. She instantly ran out and gave the alarm. The boy ran towards the church, thinking his master was there. He, however, accidentally met his master by the way, who by this time saw with great alarm the situation at his premises. There were several good and valuable horses, together with several cows and calves, besides other stock, which were totally consumed. The flames, however, did not reach the dwelling-house, from the timely assistance of the neighbours. When the prisoner was apprehended, he voluntarily confessed that he had conveyed in his glove a coal of fire from the back kitchen to the barn, where he threw it amongst some wheat in the straw. This confession was recorded by the magistrates, who thereupon committed him for trial.—It further appeared, that an anonymous letter containing threats to three persons in the neighbourhood had been previously picked up by the prisoner. That letter said, "the Magistrate was no Justice, and that he should be the first to suffer." But by whom that letter was written had never been discovered.—The prisoner being asked what he had to say in his defence, wept bitterly, and in a low voice which could only be heard by the gaoler, stated that this confession had been extorted from him under a threat from some person, that if he did not confess the crime, or say who did it, he should be scalded to death, and that it was under an impression of fear that he had so confessed. The magistrates being examined whether any such disclosure or threat was made at the time of his commitment, completely negatived that statement.—The prisoner was found guilty, but on account of his youth, recommended by the Jury to mercy. 

Joseph Bugg was capitally convicted of setting fire to a barn and a cart-lodge, in the occupation of Mr Jas. Glanfield, at Martlesham-hall. The prosecutor stated, that he rented the farm and premises under the Rev. Geo. Doughty, of Hoxne. He left his house on the 23d of April, with his wife, on a visit to a neighbour, and returned at 12 o'clock at night, when the premises were all safe. As he had walked from home, and did not expect to return very early, he left directions with the servants not to sit up for him. About an hour after his return, he was awakened out of his sleep by a cry of "fire!" and, looking out of his chamber window, saw the barn on fire. He immediately went down stairs, and saw that the cart-lodge was also on fire, and the roof was just falling in. These outbuildings were distant about 150 yards from his house. The night was calm, and the flame from the buildings, which were considerably apart, arose in an upright direction.—There were 80 coombs of barley in the barn, chiefly in the straw, and most of his farming implements in the cart-lodge, the whole of which were destroyed. Eliz. Hammond, who lived servant at Waldringfield Cliff public-house, was next examined. She stated, that the prisoner was there on the night the fire happened; he came about 6 o'clock in the evening, and drank with several others, all of whom went away before him. He staid until a little time after a quarter past 12, and went away then, upon her refusing to let him have any more beer. She had supplied the prisoner with a half-quartern of rum, 2 pints of old beer, five or six pints of other beer, with a half-quartern of gin in each. On cross examination, she admitted that, altho’ the prisoner had had part of this in the first instance, subsequently they had all drunk together. The next witness was ____ Rouse, who stated that he lived at Martlesham, and have known Bugg ever since he was a boy. On the night of the fire, the prisoner called at his house between twelve and one; his wife, who heard the prisoner call out to know whether he was at home, awoke him. On his getting up, the prisoner asked him if he could lend him a tinder-box and steel, which he at first denied, as he should want it himself in the morning; on a promise, however, that it should be then returned, he gave them to him. When the prisoner had gone three or four yards from the window, he called out to the witness, "don't tell any body!"—Directly upon hearing of the fire, he went and acquainted Mr. Glanfield of this circumstance. Witness’s house is nearly three-quarters of a mile out of the direct path from the Cliff public-house to the prisoner’s. The tinder-box was returned in the morning. He thought the prisoner wanted a tinder-box because there were gipsies in the neighbourhood. A young man, servant to Mr. Cattermole, next deposed, that when in conversation with one John Barber, on a Sunday, upon a stile, near the Lion at Martlesham, the prisoner came up to them; and in talking about work, the prisoner observed, that the farmers in the parish were all damn’d rogues, especially Mr. Glanfield; he would do them a kindness, and he (Mr. Glanfield) should be the first.—Mr. John Cook, a farmer, residing at Bucklesham, about four miles from Martlesham, but occupying a farm in that parish, stated that Bugg had formerly worked with him; that in March last, on being sent to work in the roads, he complained of Mr. James Glanfield, saying, it might bethank him that men were posted about from parish to parish. He thought Mr. G. the worst of them all; and he should not wonder if something were to happen to him before long.—The prisoner, on being called upon for his defence, said, that he drank all the liquor himself.—The learned Judge, in summing up the evidence, remarked, that in the species of crime with which the prisoner stood charged, it was by circumstantial evidence alone, that conviction could be founded; it was not likely that a man having such a diabolical purpose in view, should have any accomplices in the act. His Lordship took great pains to point out the connecting chain of evidence upon which the guilt of the prisoner might reasonably be presumed; and, after some pertinent remarks on the heinousness of the offence, and the necessity of preventing its recurrence, by example, he left the case for the consideration of the Jury. He concluded by noticing, that, as he had hinted before, the evidence was only presumptive, and in such a case, could only be so, the Jury would therefore give the prisoner the benefit of any doubt which really existed in their minds.—It was not, however, the province of a Jury, with the view to exonerate themselves from such a painful duty, to fabricate doubts, but to deliver such a verdict as the evidence of the case, in all its bearings, might lead them to. The Jury returned a verdict—Guilty, but recommended the prisoner to mercy.

The paper also recorded Sir Vicary Gibbs' sentencing:

Sentence passed on Prisoners capitally convicted.—Chief Justice Gibbs, in passing sentence, addressed the prisoner Bugg, expressing his regret at the situation in which this unhappy man was placed, by the heinous offence of which he had been convicted, on such clear evidence as that which had been adduced against him.—The learned Judge said he could not see the slightest hope which the prisoner could entertain of any thing like reprieve or pardon, from the awful severity which the law had denounced against his crime by way of punishment; and, for the sake of example, to deter others from committing the like offences; that sentence, however painful, yet towards a criminal like him, it was his Lordship's duty to pronounce. From the depravity and wickedness which the nature of the crime evinced, it was justly ordained that it should be expiated by the death of the culprit. The pretence of not knowing right from wrong could not avail the prisoner, whose years and experience must have taught him to view the extent of enormity which belonged to the crime of which he was convicted by a Jury. 

His Lordship next addressed James Pleasants, whose youth excited a great degree of compassion in the mind of the Judge, being under the necessity of passing sentence of death upon him for the same offence. His Lordship said, it was astonishing that such a degree of malignity should have entered the heart of a boy at his early age, whose depravity on that account was the more to be lamented. The Jury, on this consideration, and in hopes he might yet live to repent, the more sincerely as he advanced in years, were disposed to rescue him from an ignominious and untimely death, by recommending him to mercy; and although it was the Judge’s duty to pronounce the sentence of the law, corresponding with the magnitude of the offence, his Lordship was in hopes that by conforming to the recommendation of the Jury his life might be spared, in order that he might become a penitent, and at some future period, a useful and industrious member of the community, by seriously reflecting, that death was the least punishment which must await the commission of an heinous offence.

Before he left Suffolk for Norfolk, Gibbs reprieved Plesants, but left Bugg to hang.

6th August 1816: Arson suspected at Little Blakenham, Suffolk

The Bury & Norwich Post of Wednesday 14th August 1816 reported a case of suspected arson at Little Blakenham, Suffolk, which took place on 6th August 1816:

Early yesterday se'nnight, a fire was discovered on the premises lately occupied by Mr. Ward, at Little Blakenham, which consumed a barn and neathouse; and it was with difficulty that the dwelling-house was preserved from the flames. It is supposed to have been caused by some incendiary.

31st July 1816: A pseudonymous writer replies to the Courier about the Ely prisoners affair

The 31st July 1816 edition of the Bury & Norwich Post carried a letter from a pseudonymous writer 'Eliensis' (latin for 'Ely'), which tackled the Courier about their recent editorial about the Ely prisoners. 

TO THE EDITOR OF THE COURIER.

Ely, July 27th, 1816.

SIR,—Being one of the Inhabitants of Ely charged by you with a desire to excite a clamour against Government, I think it necessary to notice some of your observations. 

You deny that the unfortunate men just removed to the Hulks had any expectation held out to them by the Judges that their punishment would be limited to 12 months’ imprisonment.—Now, Sir, I beg to inform you, that a Calendar of the Prisoners, with their respective sentences, was signed by all the Judges, and left at the Gaol; and that it expressly states that they are reprieved for 12 months’ imprisonment:—the words are, "Reprieved, Goal 12 months." This, Sir, you are aware, is an official document for the Gaoler, and is open to the inspection the Public. For further satisfaction, I will refer you to a short statement of some of the proceedings during the Assizes, published here (as it is understood) by the Magistrates themselves; and which also states that these men were reprieved, on condition of being imprisoned 12 months. 

As to publicly having been given to the resolutions, it was done solely with a view to satisfy the lower classes here, and the public, that the suspicions which were entertained of the inhabitants of Ely having been instrumental in obtaining an extension of punishment, were wholly groundless. 

Your statement insinuates that these men have misconducted themselves in prison, and that it was necessary to have them removed; this, Sir, I flatly contradict, and I challenge enquiry into the facts. 

You ask, whether the Bishop has not a Palace at Ely?—Yes, Sir, he has, and he is sometimes a resident here; but without any disrespect to his Lordship, I may venture to state, that the Inhabitants present at the Meeting possess better information as to the temper and disposition of the lower classes that his Lordship. They are in the habits of employing the poor, and mixing with them; they know their sufferings, and they contribute to their necessities. Mr. Page himself employs upwards of 150 labourers daily in agriculture. 

The only Magistrates here (now that the Rev. Mr. Metcalfe has retired) are the Rev. Sir H.B. Dudley, Bart. and the Rev. Mr Jenyns, both of whom being Prebendaries of the Cathedral, are only occasionally resident. 

The proceedings of the Meeting, so far from occasioning any irritation, have had the effect of allaying the ferment which had arisen in the public mind in consequence of this unpleasant business.—The poor are now well satisfied that their neighbours take an interest in their welfare; many of them have waited upon the Inhabitants who attended the Meeting, and have expressed their gratitude with tears in their eyes.—There was no intention on the part of the Meeting to excited a clamour against Government.—His Majesty's Ministers were believed to have acted from the purest motives, and with the best intentions. 

Your observations lead me to conclude that they were advised this quarter—it was so suspected. 

ELIENSIS.

26th July 1816: The London Courier defends the transportation of the Ely prisoners

An editorial in the 26th July 1816 edition of the London Courier attacked the meeting recently held in Ely which expressed disquiet about the transportation of Ely prisoners:

In common with other Newspapers we have inserted some Resolutions, purporting to have been entered into by the Inhabitants of the Town of Ely, assembled at an inn in that city, Mr. JONATHAN PAGE in the Chair. We read those Resolutions with equal astonishment and indignation. As if their object was to raise a clamour against Government rather than to serve the cause of the persons whose case has filled them with such sympathy, Mr. PAGE and his associates do not wait the event of any application either to the Secretary of State or to the Judges, but give instant publicity to their Resolutions. The trials at Ely are fresh in the recollection of all our readers, who must have admired and applauded the manner in which firmness was combined with forbearance, and justice tempered by mercy. Five of the persons convicted were sentenced to be executed, which sentence has been carried into execution. There were nineteen other persons convicted, whose sentences were less severe: of these nine were left in any Ely gaol, and Mr. JONATHAN PAGE'S first resolution declares that these nine had "an expectation regularly notified to them that their punishment would be limited to twelve months’ imprisonment." By whom? By the Judges? Certainly not—for the decision upon the kind of punishment to be inflicted upon them depended solely upon the PRINCE REGENT his Ministers. In addressing all the prisoners, Mr. JUSTICE ABBOTT said "Such of you whose lives may, perhaps, be saved by the Crown, that power alone on earth that can save them, must not expect that you shall be dismissed from your offences without undergoing some severe punishment."—But nothing in the Justice’s speech pointed out the particular mode of punishment which these nine were to undergo. But did Mr. PAGE or the Meeting enquire whether any circumstances had occurred to render it inexpedient to keep these men in Ely Gaol?—Did they enquire into their conduct while in gaol? Did they take the pains to ask whether the Magistrates had recommended their removal? Were they anxious to ascertain whether the Judges themselves had approved of it? Did they inform themselves whether or not these nine could not be kept on board the hulks as separate from the other prisoners, as they would be in Ely gaol? When transportation is thought to be the proper commutation for a sentence of capital punishment, some term of transportation must by law be specified; but, although such specified term be for seven years, whether the whole of that sentence be carried into execution depends upon the pleasure of the Crown. The REGENT'S mercy may be again extended, and all further punishment remitted at the end of one year. This will probably depend in the present case on the conduct of the delinquents themselves. 

Mr. PAGE and his associates begin with telling us, that the Magistrates refused the Shire-hall for their meeting: but they do not tell us the Magistrates’ reasons, or that they thought the purport of the meeting improper and unnecessary. No, no: their object seems to have been to give instant publicity to resolutions which appear to have been entered into without any enquiry or investigation, and which could not tend to produce any other effect than clamour. The country is tranquil, they say. Were Resolutions like these complaining of the severity of Government, likely to preserve it so? They accuse Government too of acting upon a supposition that the neighbourhood was in a disturbed state, of encreasing the measure of severity upon a mere supposition, without taking any pains to ascertain the real situation of the country. Were there no Magistrates on the spot capable of giving as accurate information as Mr. PAGE and his associates? Has the Bishop of ELY no palace at Ely? Do they mean to represent him as so supine and negligent? The fact we believe to be, that his Lordship, the Magistrates, and the Judges, all concurred in the necessity of removing these persons from Ely to the hulks, where, we repeat, it will depend upon themselves whether a year shall be the limit of their punishment, or not.

24th July 1816: Bury Quarter Sessions ends with sentences for machine-breakers and others

The Bury & Norwich Post of 31st July 1816 carried details of the sentences for prisoners tried at the Bury Quarter Sessions for various events that had taken place in east Anglia in previous months:

Bury Quarter Sessions did not terminate till Wednesday afternoon, when the following sentences were passed on the several prisoners, convicted subsequent to our last week's paper being put to the press:— 

Thomas Meers, Geo. Farrant, sen. Stephen Clarke, Mary Jackson, and Richard Rogers, for breaking a threshing machine at Stoke by Clare, the property of Mr. J. Wales, 12 months’ imprisonment each; George Farrant, jun. and W. Jackson, 6 months; George Frost, 3 months; C. Meers, T. Swallow, Wm. Turner, John Deeks, Sarah Jackson, and J. Angel were discharged on their own recognizance. 

Jonas Taylor, Wm. Seeley, and Jeremiah Osborn, for destroying two threshing machines, the property of Mr. Thos. Kemp, 13 months’ imprisonment; and Jas. Seeley, Jas. Howard, and Jas. Burroughs, were acquitted. 

William Edwards, for conspiring with several others with a view of inducing labourers to form themselves into a society for raising their wages, &c. at Wattisham, and elsewhere, 9 months’ imprisonment, and to find sureties for his good behaviour for one year.—No true bills against Wm. Abbott and John Payne, charged with the same offence. 

Robert Leader, Henry Poole, Robt. Durham, John Smith, John Abbott, Wm. Howe, Wm. Halls, for riotously assembling at Rattlesden and breaking a mole plough, the property of Mr. Benjamin Morgan, of Gedding; the said Robt. Leader, (styled commander) two years’ imprisonment in one of his Majesty's gaols, and the other six 12 months each; J. Button, Benj. Buxton, J. Chinnery, T. Durham, B. Steggles, R. Osborn, M. Moore, R. Baxter, Chas. and r. Cobble, Ezekiel Buxton, Mesach Moore, Jas. Southgate, J. Bird, G. King, J. Folkerd, John Steggles, T. Mattock, and J. Clover, 3 months each, or until they find sureties to keep the peace for one year, which they all procured in Court and were discharged; Wm. Richer, W. Nunn, R. Folkerd, and R. Gladwell, pleaded guilty, and were allowed to be at large on their own recognizance; & J. Golding was acquitted.

A week later, the Bury & Norwich Post corrected their coverage of the trial of another incident at Clare with the following information:

In the account of our quarter-sessions last week, we omitted the names of Jacob Halls, Sam. Gridley, Rhinaldo Bareham, and Henry Atherton, convicted of burning a threshing machine at Clare: the former of whom were sentenced to 13 months, and the latter to 9 months' imprisonment.

24th July 1816: Bury & Norwich Post editorial about the recent meeting in Ely

ELY, JULY 22, 1816.

We are much concerned to state, that an occurrence which has recently taken place here has occasioned a very considerable degree of ferment in the public mind in this neighbourhood.—It will be in the recollection of our readers that nine of the rioters who were condemned were considered deserving of the lenity of the Crown, and they were consequently reprieved, and an official notification was made to them that their sentences would be commuted for 12 months’ imprisonment.—They continued in Ely gaol until Thursday last, when, strange to tell, a dispatch arrived from the Secretary of State’s Office announcing their Pardon, upon Condition of being transported for 7 years!!! In the course of the day they were sent off for the Hulks, and in order to prevent any unpleasant consequences, the circumstances attending their removal were with great propriety concealed from the public until the following day.—The wives and families of the unfortunate men, as might be expected, are in a deplorable state of distress, and an universal gloom is spread over the inhabitants of the town.—The rich and poor are equally loud in their murmurings, as these men were deprived of the small consolation of being permitted to take leave of their nearest relatives, who indeed imagined that their place of confinement was only to be changed from Ely gaol to Newgate.

We are well assured that the severe examples recently made have produced the happiest effects. The lower classes seemed to have felt the necessity of them, and to be duly sensible of the lenity shewn to those men whose lives have been spared.—In the town of Littleport, we are told, that a reformation of manners is plainly discernible amongst those who were engaged in the late riots. It is, therefore, a matter of sincere regret, that it should be thought advisable to adopt so impolitic a measure, than which, as it appears to us, nothing could be more calculated to make an indelible impression upon the public mind, fatal to the good order and peaceable government of Ely and its neighbourhood.—The prisoners are principally young men of good character, who, it is supposed, had been induced to join in the late riots from the evil examples which were set them.

A very numerous and respectable meeting of the inhabitants took place on Monday at the Club Inn, (the Magistrates having refused to allow the use of the Shire-hall) when several Resolutions were come to upon the business, for which see advt. next page.

22nd July 1816: Public Meeting in Ely expresses alarm about the fate of transported prisoners

AT a MEETING of the INHABITANTS of the TOWN of ELY, held at the Club Inn, in Ely, on Monday the 22d day of July, 1816, (the Magistrates having refused the use of the Shire-hall upon the occasion)

JONATHAN PAGE, Esq. in the Chair:

The following Resolutions were unanimously entered into:

That this meeting cannot but observe the sincerest emotions of sympathy and regret, that Nine Persons who were capitally convicted at the Special Assizes lately held here, and who were reprieved under an expectation regularly notified to them, that their Punishment would be limited to Twelve Months Imprisonment, have suddenly been removed from Ely, to the Hulks at the Nore, and that the terms of their Reprieve, contrary to general usage, have been extended to Seven Years’ Transportation.

That this Meeting being apprehensive that His Majesty's Government may have been induced to suppose that the disturbed state of this Neighbourhood required such an additional example of Severity to be made, entertain confident hopes, that upon a faithful Representation being made to them of the present tranquil State of the Country, and of the orderly and peaceable demeanour of the lower Classes of Society, the commuted Punishment recommended by the learned Judges may be adhered to.

That a Letter be immediately addressed the Secretary of State for the Home Department, and signed by the Persons present at this Meeting, earnestly imploring his Intercession with the Prince Regent in Behalf of the said Convicts.

That a similar Application be made to the learned Judges who presided at the Assizes, and who have thrown such distinguished lustre upon their characters by their judicious conduct upon that occasion.

That these Resolutions be signed by the Chairman, and advertised in The Times, Courier, Cambridge, and Bury papers.

JONATHAN PAGE.

Resolved,—That the Thanks of this Meeting be given to the Chairman for his conduct in the Chair, and for his constant readiness to support the Privileges, and promote the Interests and Welfare of the Inhabitants of the Town.

17th July 1816: Four jailed for destroying a Threshing Machine at Hockham, Norfolk

At the Norfolk County Session on Wednesday 17th July 1816, 4 prisoners were jailed for destroying a Threshing Machine at Hockham on 19th May.

The Norfolk Chronicle of 20th July 1816 carried a report about the trial:

John Abery, Jas. Bailey, the elder, Peter Palmer, the elder, and Peter Palmer, the younger, were indicted for having, together with other persons to the number of 100, routously and riotously assembled in the parish of Hockham, on the 19th of May last, and then and there destroyed a certain threshing machine, the property of William Burlingham.—The two latter prisoners pleaded guilty. On the part of the prosecution, it appeared, that the prosecutor, Wm. Burlingham, being nearly blind, was rendered unable to work for his livelihood, but having a little money, he had purchased a threshing machine for the price of 76l. which he used to let out to the neighbouring farmers, at a small profit to himself. That in May last, it had been to let out to a Mr. Wells, in the aforesaid parish, and that on the 19th of that month, being on a Sunday morning, the prisoners together with other evil disposed persons had dragged the machine from off Mr. Wells's premises into the high road, where they completely effected its demolition. The prisoners were proved to have taken an active part in the riot. 

Mr. Cooper, for the prisoners, contended that they had not been proved to have committed an unlawful act, and that none of the witnesses had sworn to their dragging the Machine off, the private property of Mr. Wells, but had all found them in the act of destroying it in the public road. It might therefore be presumed that a number of persons passing that way, had found this clumsy machine very much in their way upon the road, and deeming it a nuisance had destroyed it and removed the materials, which the learned Counsel stated they had a legal right to do. An alibi was attempted in favour of the prisoner Bailey, by calling two witnesses who had seen him six yards distant from the spot where the machine was destroyed, but it was not denied that at the time, Bailey was thus far off, the greater part of the mischief had been effected. 

Mr. Alderson, as Counsel for the Prosecution, strongly rebutted the position of law asserted by the Counsel for the Prisoners, the dangerous and fallacious tendency of which was strongly laid down from the Bench in the Chairman's charge to the jury. 

The prisoners were found Guilty; Abery and Bailey, were sentenced each to imprisonment for one year, in Wymondham Bridewell, and find sureties for their good behaviour for two years further; and Peter Palmer the elder, and Peter Palmer, the younger, who had pleaded guilty, were sentenced each, to three months imprisonment in Norwich Castle, and enter into security for their good behaviour, for one year more.

16th July 1816: One rioter imprisoned for Norwich riot in May 1816

On Tuesday 16th July 1816, the Norwich Quarter Sessions commenced & the trials included cases of rioting that took place in the city in May.

The Bury & Norwich Post of 24th July reported the following:

Robert Hatton, the younger, was tried for a misdemeanour, in having, together with other persons unknown, riotously assembled in the Market-place of this city, on the evening of the 17th of May last, and acted in a violent and tumultuous manner. On being called upon for his defence, the prisoner threw himself upon the mercy of the jury, who after a few minutes deliberation, returned a verdict of Guilty, but recommended the prisoner to the mercy of the Court. He was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment in Norwich Bridewell.—No true bill was found against Hardy Sheppard, who had been committed for a similar offence.

Meanwhile, the Norfolk Chronicle of 20th July carried the following report:

Robert Hatton, the younger, was tried for a misdemeanour in having together with other persons unknown routously and riotously assembled in the Market-place of this city, on the evening of the 17th of May last, and for having acted in a violent and tumultuous manner upon that occasion. By the evidence of several very respectable persons, it was proved that the prisoner had on the above occasion, distinguished himself amongst the mob by exciting others to assist him in acts of violence, and particularly by endeavouring to frighten the horses upon which the cavalry were mounted, by means of a fireball, at a time when the cavalry were called out to aid the police in preserving or restoring the public peace. On being called upon for his defence, the prisoner threw himself upon the mercy of the jury, who after a few minutes deliberation returned a verdict of guilty, but recommended the prisoner to the mercy of the court. 

He was sentenced to three months present in Norwich Bridewell.  

No true bill was found against Hardy Sheppard, who had been committed for a similar offence.

1st July 1816: The 9 'bread or blood' rioters are moved from Ely to Newgate prison prior to transportation

On Monday 1st July 1816, the 9 prisoners convicted of various offences and who had been sentenced to transportation  at the Ely Special Commission were escorted from Ely Gaol to the Newgate prison in London.

Their ultimate destination was said at this point to be Botany Bay.

29th June 1816: The executed rioters are buried in Ely

The memorial plaque, on the south wall of the tower of St Mary's Church, Ely, to the five executed Ely and Littleport rioters, executed on 28 June 1816 & buried the following day (Photo: John McCullough, cc license)

In the evening of Saturday 29th June 1816, the five Ely rioters who had been executed the preceding day, were buried in the churchyard of St Mary's Church at Ely. The Bury & Norwich Post of 10th July 1816 carried a brief report of the funeral:

The bodies of the five unhappy sufferers for the late Riots (whose execution was noticed in our last) were committed to the care of the Chief Constable, who, at the express wish of their relations, provided a house to deposit them in, where they were decently and respectfully laid in their coffins, attended by four constables until the funeral took place on Saturday evening, when they were carried to church in the following order:—A company of singers from Littleport walked before, singing the 104th Psalm through the streets to Church: next the Chief Constable and Mr. Barlow, keeper of the prison, with their staves of office, covered with black, and themselves also dressed in black; then followed the corpse of Beamiss, he being the elder; next his relations; the other four were carried two abreast, with their respective relations following each corpse.—From the great concourse of spectators, it was thought necessary to have the attendance of several constables.—The bodies were all deposited in one grave, by the side of each other, in the church yard of Ely St. Mary's, in the most decent and respectful manner.—The reports circulated of disturbances on this occasion, and the further mischief committed in the Isle, are all unfounded.

28th June 1816: General Byng reports his plans for the military in East Anglia

Ely June 28th 1816—

My Lord,

As I did not attend, and as Sir Henry Dudley has fully informed your Lordship of the particulars of the awful ceremony which took place this day, it is unnecessary for me to occupy your time by any further by any further statement of it—It will I am sure be satisfactory to you, that the Military were not present, nor required, those quartered here, were under Arms and at Exercise, near, but out of sight, and the Cavalry was in its march from Littleport, to reoccupy their Quarters here—Those at Newmarket, Brandon, Cambridge, and Downham, were out in marching order on the road, to whom, when the multitude had quietly dispersed, I sent orders to return—

I propose to direct the Troops quartered at Brandon, and Downham to join their squadrons next Tuesday the 2d July at Newmarket and this place, the Two Companies of Infantry also to join their Regiment at Colchester—and would recommend that no further movement should take place before the 6th or 8th when the 13th Dragoons could be moved on to Grantham, Stamford, Huntingdon & Peterborough occupying these Quarters a few days, they could if all remains quiet in this district, move on to their destination in the North of England, and when they move from hence, a Troop of the Royal Dragoons can replace them at Bury and at Ely—

I have taken the liberty to submit this for your Lordships consideration—it is not that I anticipate any fresh disturbances in these parts, but it is evident to me, that much alarm prevails among the gentry, and much dissatisfaction among the poorer class—it is on that account I recommend to gradually withdraw the Troops—and for the same reason, it may perhaps be advisable, I should continue ten days or a fortnight longer to superintend these movements, and observe upon the effect they produce—I am however entirely at your Lordships disposal, you are so much better able to judge where the presence of the Troops, as well as my own, is most requisite, that I must trust to your goodness to pardon, what perhaps may have an appearance of presumption—but which I am far from meaning in communicating my opinion—I have wrote to Sir Willoughby Gordon by this Post respecting these movements—and as I do not see that my stay here is that all requisite, I propose returning to Colchester tomorrow—

I have [etc]
John Byng—
Major General

[To] The
Lord Viscount Sidmouth—
&c &c &c

London—

28th June 1816: The prosecution solicitor, H. R. Evans, writes a report about the Ely executions

Dear Sir

The awful Business is over! The five unhappy wretches behaved with the greatest penitence and submission—acknowledging the Justice of their Sentence, and cautioning their neighbours against the said Effects of Riot under misrule—They have left a paper behind them to that Effect which you shall have a Copy of as soon as I can procure it from Sir H. B. Dudley, to whom it was delivered by the person (a dissenting minister) who drew it up. Sir H. B. Dudley has anticipated my Intentions of writing an account for the Public which he has sent off by this Days post to Lord Sidmouth—

Nothing could exceed the Solemnity, and the silence of the Scene. I was attended by 200 of the Principal Inhabitants on Horseback & by another Hundred on foot. Not a Soldier was present at the Execution or formed any part of the Cavalcade. They had paraded the Town in the morning and then retired from Public View—Genl. Byng was in his plain Cloaths—The Concourse was prodigious—but most orderly—Scarcely a word was heard—we had a Drop made which answered our fullest Expectations, and the unhappy men were launched into Eternity without the horrible pause attending the usual mode of Execution here from a Cart—Every thing that could produce Effect was done. But most of all the Anguish the heart rending cries – the loud mournings and prayers for mercy—and the solemn Appeals of the Prisoners to the populace, contributed to the awful Solemnity of the Scene and which can never be forgotten; while not a murmur was heard against the Justice of the Sentence—The Town is full of Strangers who form themselves into Groupes, and talk over the Business with a Solemnity of Voice and manner, that convinces me that the Impression is indelible – may this necessary but dreadful Act of Justice prove to be a most merciful measure and put a Stop for ever to the Practices that rendered it unavoidable—

The Prisoners had nothing to communicate as to the Authors of the Riot, or the property Stolen, They were too busily employed themselves to know any thing about others—and the Pilfering that took place after the Entering of the houses were committed by women & Children—part of the money taken from Dennis is what he received of Mr. Edwards—Harley said he died the Death he Expected—South confessed, that his Case could not have been pardoned—Crow denied any Intention of murdering Mr. Martin; but he was checked by Dennis who said "yes, yes, he would have been murdered had he been found." meaning by this, that he saw the temper of the mob and which he declared, he Endeavoured to restrain;—and he added that he gave Mr. Martin warning to keep out of the way—Beamiss acknowledged his general Guilt but denied the words imputed to him by Tansley, "make the old fellow lug out." and at the gallows he called out "I forgive Mr. Tansley, tho’ he swore falsely against me." The Drop fell as he was pronouncing these words, Dennis and he were the most awakened, South was the most violent in his Gesticulations. But all were resigned.—

I am &c.
H. R. Evans

Ely. 28 June 1816

28th June 1816: Sir H.B. Dudley sends Lord Sidmouth a report of the Ely executions

Ely College
Friday noon [28th June 1816]

My Lord

The concluding scene has passed, with a [illegible] & impressive solemnity. Many of my brother magistrates, with the principal Inhabitants of the Isle preceded the ceremonial on horseback with white wands; and having a numerous band of Peace Officers Sir John Byng thought with me that it [would] be better that the execution should take place without any appearance of military [among]: but the troops were properly stationed so that immediate access might have been had. The behaviour of the Sufferers has been contrite every one of them acknowledging the Justice of their sentence.—

Your Lordships intention of removing the other convicts from hence has given great satisfaction to the Inhabitants of the City—

The friends of the Sufferers having sent Coffins to the Gaol to remove the bodies for internment with great parade, on Sunday at Littleport, we have thought it our duty to direct the internment to be here in the parish where they died, to prevent the dangerous assembly of the Fen People [that] [would] otherwise take place.

May I request the favor of your Lordship to attend one of your Servants to deliver a small packet to the person to whom it is addressed who will call for it

I have [etc]
Dudley

[To: Lord Sidmouth]

28th June 1816: The 5 Ely rioters are executed in the city

On Friday 28th June 1816, the 5 rioters sentenced to death at the Ely Special Commission were executed in the City. Two East Anglian newspapers subsequently carried contrasting articles about the spectacle, and these can be found below:

From the Bury & Norwich Post (3rd July 1816 edition):

EXECUTION of the FIVE RIOTERS.

J. Dennis, I. Harley, W. Beamiss, T. South, and G. Crow were executed on the New Drop, near Ely, on Friday last, pursuant to their sentences, in the presence of many thousands of spectators.—They had shewn the sincerest penitence and contrition since their condemnation, and met their fate with becoming firmness and resignation. Dennis, who was better educated than the others, was continually exhorting them to fervent prayer.—The following is a copy of an acknowledgement which they made and signed at the gaol on the morning of execution:— 

"We, your poor unfortunate suffering fellow-creatures, beg leave to present the public with this our dying acknowledgement of the justice of that sentence which has condemned us to die, for the violent outrages we have committed; and hope it will be a warning to all who may see or hear of us, to avoid the like courses. 

“We acknowledge and confess our sins in general, and we most sincerely beg of God to pardon our sins, fervently hoping and trusting, that God Almighty will, for the all-atoning merits of the Redeemer, receive our precious and immortal souls in his favour, though we have delayed their interests to this late hour, most earnestly entreating, that the Almighty may grant us all our sufferings in this world, and none in the next. 

“We most sincerely warn you all to avoid those sins which have been the cause of bringing us here. By all means avoid irreligion, and vices of every kind, particularly those of swearing, drunkenness, Sabbath-breaking, and that of a shameful neglect of the means of Grace, the only means (through the merits of Christ) of our souls salvation. 

“We sincerely recommend to you, that you attend the public worship of God, particularly on the Lord's Day; and most sincerely pray, that all our friends and relations will not put off their repentance to a death-bed, lest that God, whom they have neglected to serve whilst in health and strength, should say unto them at length, as he does to every neglecter of salvation to the last, ‘Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hands, and no Man regarded; ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof; I also will laugh at your calamity, and mock when your fear cometh.’ Isaac Harley, Wm. Beamiss, Thos. South, John Dennis, Geo. Crow.” 

At the place of execution, J. Dennis addressed the multitude as follows:— 

"All you who are witness to this my disgraceful end, I exhort you, in the name of God, that God before whom I must shortly appear, to avoid drunkenness, Sabbath-breaking, whoremongery, and bad company; oh! beware of these sins. I pray you also to avoid rioting! and in every respect refrain from breaking the laws of your country!—Remember the words of the Judge, that tried us for the crimes for which we are now going to suffer, who said, ‘The law of the land will always be too strong for its assailants, and those who defy the law, will, in the end, be subdued by the law, and be compelled to submit to its justice or its mercy.’—We stand here a melancholy example of the power and justice of the law. I freely forgive those who gave their evidence against me: and may the God of mercy forgive me, and have mercy upon my soul!" 

Harley and Beamiss also addressed the people to nearly a similar effect.—Harley said he died the death he expected; South confessed that his case could not have been pardoned; Crow denied any intention of murdering Mr. Martin, but was checked by Dennis, who said—"Yes, yes, he would have been murdered had he been found"—meaning by this that he saw the temper of the mob, which he declared he endeavoured to restrain; and he added, that he gave Mr. Martin warning to keep out of the way. Beamiss acknowledged his general guilt; but denied the words imputed to him by Tansley.

From the Cambridge Chronicle (5th July 1816 edition):

EXECUTION OF THE RIOTERS AT ELY. 

At nine o'clock on Friday morning last, the Ordinary (the Rev. Mr. Griffith) performed his last religious offices in the gaol with the prisoners under sentence of death, and about half an hour after the great bell of St. Mary's tolled the signal, when John Dennis, George Crow, William Beamiss the elder, Thomas South the younger, and Isaac Harley, were brought out with white caps on their heads, tied with black ribbands, and ascended a cart with elevated seats on each side, covered with black cloth, to be conveyed to the usual place of execution. Several of the Magistrates attended in person, accompanied by not less than three hundred of the most respectable inhabitants of the isle, on horseback, with white wands. All the peace officers, with additional ones sworn in special on the occasion, headed by Mr. Edwards, and three other chief constables, with their staffs of office covered with black crape, forming a large body, preceded and followed the melancholy procession, which was conducted without the necessity of any military aid. 

The unhappy sufferers demonstrated the most sincere contrition, and signed an acknowledgement of the justice of their sentence, which they gave to the Ordinary before they left the prison, hoping that their fate would prove an example to the country, and deter others from the perpetration of such crimes for which they were about to die, and particularly their confederates, who had so mercifully escaped being made partakers in their sufferings. 

The procession reached the place of execution about eleven o'clock, where a platform was erected, with a drop, which they ascended. The spectacle was awful and impressive on the surrounding multitude. When they reached the platform they knelt down severally, and prayed fervently for a considerable time; the Ordinary then went up to them and assisted them in their last devotions; after this John Dennis addressed the multitude as follows: 

"All you who are witness to this my disgraceful end, I exhort you, in the name of God, that God before whom I must shortly appear, to avoid drunkenness, Sabbath-breaking, whoremongery, and bad company; oh! beware of these sins. I pray you also to avoid rioting! and in every respect refrain from breaking the laws of your country!—Remember the words of the Judge, that tried us for the crimes for which we are now going to suffer, who said, ‘The law of the land will always be too strong for its assailants, and those who defy the law, will, in the end, be subdued by the law, and be compelled to submit to its justice or its mercy.’—We stand here a melancholy example of the power and justice of the law. I freely forgive those who gave their evidence against me: and may the God of mercy forgive me, and have mercy upon my soul!" 

Harley and Beamiss also addressed the people to nearly a similar effect.—Harley said he died the death he expected; South confesses his case could not have been pardoned; Crow denied any intention of murdering Mr. Martin, but was checked by Dennis, who said—"Yes, yes, he would have been murdered had he been found,"—meaning by this that he saw the temper of the mob, which he declared that he endeavoured to restrain; and he added, that he gave Mr. Martin warning to keep out of the way. Beamiss acknowledged his general guilt; but denied the words imputed to him. 

The whole then prayed again for some time, when, on a signal given, the drop fell, and they were launched into eternity almost without a struggle. 

After hanging the usual time, the bodies were put into coffins, given to their respective friends for interment in St. Mary's Church-yard, on Saturday. 

The following is an authentic copy of their voluntary confession:— 

"We, your poor unfortunate suffering fellow creatures, beg leave to present the public with this our last dying acknowledgement of the justice of that sentence which has condemned us to die, for the violent outrages we have committed, and hope it will be a warning to all, who may see, or hear of us, to avoid the like courses. We acknowledge and confess our sins in general, and we most sincerely beg of God to pardon our sins, fervently hoping and trusting, that God Almighty will, for the sake of the all-atoning merits of the Redeemer, receive our precious and immortal souls into his favour, though we have delayed their interests to this late hour; most earnestly entreating, that the Almighty may grant us all our sufferings in this world, and none in the next. We most sincerely warn you all to avoid those sins, which have been the cause of bringing us here. 

“By all means avoid irreligion, and vice of every kind, particularly those of swearing, drunkenness, Sabbath breaking, and that of a shameful neglect of the means of grace, the only means through the merits of Christ, of our souls salvation. We sincerely recommend to you, that you attend the public worship of God, particularly on the Lord's Day; and most sincerely pray that all our friends and relations will not put off their repentance to a death bed, lest that God, whom they have neglected to serve whilst in health and strength, should say unto them at last, as he does to every neglecter of salvation—‘Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hands, and no man regarded; but ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof; I also will laugh at your calamity, and mock when your fear cometh.’ 

The Marks of  

{“JOHN DENNIS,
{W. BEAMIS.
{THOMAS SOUTH. X
{ISAAC HARLEY.” X 

In the presence of BENJ. BARLOW, Gaoler. 

A true copy.
H. B. DUDLEY,
HENRY LAW,
Acting Magistrates for the Isle of Ely.

28th June 1816: The Treasury Solicitor writes to the Home Office about prosecutions for rioting at Brandon

Lincolns Inn
28th June 1816

Sir

In answer to your note of yesterday, transmitting a note from His Grace the Duke of Grafton, in which His Grace requested to be furnish with a List of persons the county of Suffolk, who are to be prosecuted by Government, together with a Specification of their respective crimes; I beg leave to acquaint you that I have not received any Depositions from County, Except with respect to the persons implicated in the Riot at Brandon on the 16th & 17th May, whose names are contained in the inclosed List; and from those Depositions it does not appear, which are the persons implicated remain at large, have been admitted to Bail, or have been committed for Trial.

I beg leave therefore to suggest that if there are any other prisoners whose offences may be presumed by the Magistrates to fall within the description of those, which Lord Sidmouth has directed to be prosecuted at the Expence of Government, it is highly desirable that the Depositions against them should be transmitted to this Office without further delay, for the consideration of the Attorney and Solicitor General.

I have [etc]

H.Hobhouse

[To] J. Beckett Esq
&c. &c. &c.

Offenders charged with Riot at Brandon
16 & 17. May. 1816.

Arnold
Clarke William
Crane
Dyer Helen
Field Robert
Peverett Willm
Rampling Mingay
Spendlove Henry
Talbot Porter
Wigger James
Folkes Ann

27th June 1816: Thomas Gooch MP informs the Home Office of arson at his property

Milford House
nr. Godalming
June 27th 1816.

My Lord.

Understanding that my Brother “MP for Suffolk” has communicated to your Lordship's Office, the unfortunate fire that happened on my premises last Saturday; I think it right to inform you what steps have been taken in the business—In the first place, it is the opinion of all who were present at the fire, that it was done on purpose, L Taunton from Bow Street is of the same opinion—a reward of £500 is offered for the apprehension of the person or persons who committed the act—

a Person is this day committed by Lord Midleton, to jail from on suspicion of setting fire to the Wharf at Godalming last November, which he confessed to have done to a man at Godalming, but which he denied this [morning] before Lord Midleton;—

This same person having asked respecting the fire at my Barn said positively he never heard of it, & afterwards that he believed he had—Taunton who was present strongly suspects him, as he could give no account of himself last Saturday, the day my premises were [burnt]

I should have mentioned to your Lordship, that it is generally supposed, that the cause of the fire, was my having a Thrashing machine, & I have myself in no doubt of it.—If Government should think proper to offer a pardon to any accomplice I think it might have a very good effect, as the reward of £500 might then have more effect weight—

I have [etc]
Thomas Gooch