1st March 1813: Thomas Shillitoe visits the families of Thomas Brook, James Haigh, William Thorpe & John Ogden

On Monday, the Quaker missionary Thomas Shillitoe continued his visits to the families of the Luddites executed at York in January, accompanied by Joseph Wood:

Second-day, we bent our course to Lockwood, sat with the widow and three children of Thomas Brook, who suffered for rioting. We also had the company of his parents and two brothers: his two brothers were in York castle with him, but were discharged. This proved a heart-rending opportunity to us all: being willing, as I humbly hope I may say we were, to sit where the surviving sufferers sat, we were helped to go down into suffering with them, and thereby became qualified, through the renewal of Divine aid, to administer suitably to the need of those we sat with. Our minds were clothed with feelings of compassion for the widow and the deeply-afflicted parents, accompanied with a hope, the opportunity had made such an impression on the minds of the two young men, that it would become of lasting benefit to them. The sufferer, we were informed, had only been out once with the rioters, at which time he lost his hat, which caused his apprehension. At our parting, they endeavoured to make us sensible that our visit had been like a cordial to their minds, and they expressed the thankfulness which they felt for it. We proceeded to Huddersfield; visited the widow of James Haigh—he suffered for rioting—left no children: we found her under deep affliction. She appeared to have a clear view of our motives for taking the steps which we did, expressing, in strong terms, the gratitude she felt for our visit. Our next visit was to the parents and two sisters of [William Thorpe], who was a single man, and who suffered for the murder of the master-manufacturer: we felt deeply for the afflicted parents. Divine regard was mercifully extended in this opportunity, both to visited and visitors: that a grateful sense thereof may continue in each of our minds, was the secret prayer of my soul. It appeared a time of precious visitation to the sisters of the sufferer. In the afternoon we proceeded to Cow-cliff, to visit the widow and two children of John Ogden, who suffered for rioting. We proposed to meet her at her husband's parents, in order to have their company, and that of two of the sufferer's sisters; but we were given to understand, that the parents spurned at the idea of sitting with us. As it did not appear to me we should be warranted in so easily giving up this prospect, and apprehending I felt that in my own mind that would bear me out, in taking the widow and family with us into their cottage, my companion consenting, we did so, and took our seats amongst them. After sitting awhile together in solemn silence, we had to hand forth both caution and encouragement, especially to the poor young widow, and the sufferer's sisters: it proved to all a melting season. The parents were both confined to the house, in consequence of the melancholy event that had occurred respecting their son, and from their appearance, with that of one of their daughters, they were sinking under the weight of their afflictions. The parents, in a very feeling manner, at our parting, expressed thankfulness for our visit, and, I hope I may say, feelings of gratitude clothed my mind. The wedding of a sister of the sufferer's being kept at the adjoining cottage, apprehending it would be safest for us to make them a visit, we accordingly did so, but the men were all absent: pausing, and feeling something stirring in my mind towards the bride and her female friends, I gave way to it; the labour bestowed soon put aside all their light behaviour, which our presence at first excited; and, at our parting, novel as our visit was to them, it appeared to be kindly received. May glory abound to His praise, who is God over all, blessed for ever, and for evermore.

Where were the West Yorkshire Luddite martyrs buried - and how many were buried at all?

Memorial placards for the 17 executed Luddites, left at the execution site on 19th January 2013 (image copyright Richard Holland)

The subsequent burial of the Luddites executed on 16th January 1813 still remains largely mysterious. The funerals that did take place went unreported in the local press. Sources in the Home Office records refer to only to one burial by name, but other than that do refer to some numbers and locations. The parish records are somewhat better, yielding three burials we know took place for certain.

Among the definites are John Ogden, a 23 year-old cropper from Cowcliffe. He was buried on 18th January 1813, in the Huddersfield St Peter's Parish, with a John Coates officiating. In the margin of his burial record is written "This man was hung as a Luddite, innocent, but knowing his brother was guilty but would not inform".

An extract from the Parish record showing the burials of John Ogden & James Haigh.

Buried the following day in the same parish was the Dalton cropper James Haigh, aged 28. Again, John Coates officiated.

On the 20th, William Hartley, a 41 year-old tailor from Warley was buried in St Mary Parish, Luddenden. Thomas Sutcliffe officiated.

Moving past the parish records, one contemporary letter in the Home Office correspondence confirms another name. In a letter to General Acland, Lieutenant Cooper at Elland confirmed on 24th January that John Hill, a 36 year-old cotton spinner from Greetland, had been buried locally within the past few days. Cooper also confirmed that, in common with the burial of the Luddite Samuel Hartley at Halifax months before, the Methodist preacher refused to read service over the body, and although there was no disturbance arising from this, Cooper intimates there was much unhappiness.

The only other information in the Home Office records is about the number and/or location of bodies at different points. On the 18th January, Lieutenant-Colonel Lang at Huddersfield revealed that 'bodies' had arrived there at 6.30 p.m. on the 17th, only to be taken to Lockwood and Longroyd Bridge. We know that Thomas Brook, a 32 year-old cropper was from Lockwood and John Walker, a 31 year-old cropper, was from Longroyd Bridge.

Major Bruce at Halifax reported on the 18th January that 2 bodies had arrived there that morning and had been held in a warehouse before being taken away by their friends on carts at 11.00 a.m. - one headed to Sowerby, one to Elland. The latter was presumably John Hill, whilst the body headed for Sowerby could have been Joseph Crowther, a 31 year-old cotton spinner of that place.

On the 19th January, Lieutenant Colonel Lang reported that 3 'quiet and orderly' burials had taken place in the Huddersfield area by then.

And that is where my research leads me to at this point.

In a recent article on the Guardian's website, local historian Paul Furness states that only 7 bodies were claimed by friends or relatives, and that the rest were dissected. Whilst Hall & Kipling (1984, p.50) agree that seven bodies were claimed, the latter statement is new information, although it's not clear what the sources are that support it (NB, both these accounts would appear to be wrong - see the foot of this blog post for updated information). There could be some truth in this - in a letter of 16th January, the Huddersfield solicitor John Allison wrote to General Acland that:

"I do not expect that any of the friends of the unfortunate Men (save one or two), can afford to bring the bodies to Hudd and I conceive the Croppers will not subscribe for the purpose for they all here appear ashamed of themselves"

However, despite what Allison stated, we know from the information above that two croppers were buried for definite, with a third alluded to Lang, and that the bodies of two others were taken to Lockwood and Longroyd Bridge upon their arrival in Huddersfield. So it does look like the local Luddites could afford to take care of their dead after all.

Until further information comes to light though, it's not absolutely certain that the following Luddites were buried at all:

John Batley of Thornhill
Thomas Brook of Lockwood
Joseph Crowther of Sowerby
Jonathan Dean of Huddersfield
Joseph Fisher of Briestwhistle
James Hey of Skircoat
Job Hey of Greetland
Nathan Hoyle of Skircoat
John Swallow of Briestwhistle
John Walker of Longroyd Bridge 

NB  - since writing this article, new research has yielded more definite information about what happened to the bodies of those executed. William Knipe's 'Criminal Chronology of York Castle' (1867, pp.153-154) tells us that the bodies of all the Luddites were claimed by family/friends except those of Joseph Crowther and Nathan Hoyle, whose bodies were 'interred in the hoppet at the back of the Castle'.

16th January 1813: The 14 convicted Luddites are executed at York Castle

A contemporary illustration, from York Castle Prison, of an execution at the 'New Drop' after 1802.

On Saturday 16th January 1813, the fourteen Luddites sentenced to death 4 days previously were hanged at York Castle. It had been decided to hang them in two groups of seven: an anecdote has it that the counsel for the prosecution asked Baron Thomson after sentencing if they were to be hung together, and he responded "Well no, sir, I consider they would hang more comfortably on two."

There are two main contemporary accounts of the execution in both the Leeds papers, with the longest being printed in the Leeds Mercury of 23rd January 1813. This is below, with notes added in square brackets.

After sentence of death had been passed upon the persons convicted of making the attack on Mr. Cartwright’s Mill, at Rawfolds, and of the Burglaries, fifteen in number, all of them except John Lumb, who was reprieved, were removed to the condemned-ward, and their behaviour in that place was very suitable to their unhappy situation. They confessed that they had offended against the laws of God and their Country, but on the subject of the offence, for which the sentence of death was passed upon them, they were very reserved; yet all of them except one, tacitly confessed that they were guilty of the crimes which they stood convicted, when they were asked if any of them could say they were not guilty, they all remain silent except James Haigh and Nathan Hoyle, the former of whom said, “I am guilty,” and the latter, “I am innocent;” this was the day before the execution; but Hoyle did not make any declaration to that effect when brought to the platform. Their minds for the most part had attained an extraordinary degree of composure; except the mind of John Ogden—he appeared some time to be much disturbed, but on the question being put to him whether his agitation arose from any discovery that he had to make, and with the weight of which his conscience was oppressed? he answered, no; his agitation arose from the terrors of his situation.

And here it seems proper to observe, that if any of these unfortunate men possessed any secret that it might have been important to the public to know, they suffered it to die with them. Their discoveries were meagre in the extreme. Not one of them impeached any of their accomplices, nor did they state, as might reasonably have been expected, where the depot of arms, in the collection of which some of them had been personally engaged, was to be found. When interrogated on this point, some of them disclaimed all knowledge of the place, and others said, Benjamin Walker, the informer against Mellor, Thorpe, and Smith, could give the best information about the arms, as he had been present at most of the depredations. On the question being put to them whether they knew who was concerned in the robbery of a mill (not Rawfolds) near Cleckheaton; James Hey said, “I and Carter the informer were present at the robbery.” It was observed to James Hey, that it was very extraordinary, that he who had the advantage of a religious education, his Father being of the Methodist Society, should have come to such a disgraceful situation; to which replied, in a manner that shewed that his vices, however flagrant, had not extinguished in his bosom the feelings of filial affection, I hope, said he, “the son’s crimes will never be imputed to his father.” The principal part of these ill-fated men were married and have left families. William Hartley, has left seven children, their mother, happily for herself, died about half a year ago. John Ogden, wife and two children; Nathan Hoyle, wife and seven children; Joseph Crowther, wife pregnant, and four children; John Hill, wife and two children; John Walker, wife and five children; Jonathan Dean, wife and seven children; Thomas Brook, wife and three children; John Swallow, wife and six children; John Batley, wife and one child; John Fisher, wife and three children; Job Hey, wife and seven children; James Hey, wife and two children; James Haigh, wife, but no children. On the morning before the execution, the eldest daughter of Hartley obtain permission to visit a wretched parent, when a scene took place which we will not attempt to describe. The heart-broken father wished to have been spared the anguish of this parting interval, but the importunate intreaties of his child a last prevailed, and they met to take a long farewell, never again to be repeated in this world. What must be the feelings of an affectionate father, (for such in this trying moment he appears to have shewn himself,) when, though standing on the brink of eternity, he declines to see a darling child; how great an aggravation of his punishment must those parting pangs of inflicted, and how loud an admonition does this melancholy incident suggest to the Fathers of families against entering into combinations that may place them in the same inexpressibly afflicted situations. It was Hartley’s particular request that the public should be informed of the number and unprovided situation of his orphan family.

At 11 o'clock on Saturday morning, the Under Sheriff went to demand the bodies of John Ogden, Nathan Hoyle, Joseph Crowther, John Hill, John Walker, Jonathan Dean, and Thomas Brook. They were all engaged in singing a hymn:

Behold the Saviour of Mankind,
Nail’d to the shameful tree;
How vast the love that him inclin’d
To bleed and for me, &c.

Which one of them [John Walker, according to the Leeds Intelligencer] dictated in a firm tone of voice; and in this religious service they continued on their way to the platform, and some time after they had arrived at the fatal spot. They then join the ordinary with great fervency in the prayers appointed to be read on such occasions, and after that gentleman had taken his final leave of them, ejaculations to the throne of mercy rose from every part of the crowded platform.

Joseph Crowther addressing himself to the spectators said, “Farewell Lads;” another whose name we could not collect said, “I am prepared for the Lord,” and John Hill, advancing a step or two on the platform, said, “Friends! all take warning by my fate; for three years I followed the Lord, but about half a year since, I began to fall away; and fell by little and little, and at last I am come to this; persevere in the ways of godliness, and O! take warning by my fate!” The executioner then proceeded to the discharge of his duty, and the falling of the platform soon after, forced an involuntary shriek from the vast concourse of spectators assembled to witness this tremendous sacrifice to the injured laws of the country.

The bodies having remained suspended for the usual time [12.00 p.m.], they were removed, and while the place of execution was yet warm with the blood of the former victims, the remaining seven, namely, John Swallow, John Batley, Joseph Fisher, William Hartley, James Haigh, James Hey, and Job Hey, were led at half-past one o'clock from their cell to the fatal stage, their behaviour, like that of their deceased confederates, was contrite and becoming; James Haigh expressed deep contrition for his offences. John Swallow said he had been led away by wicked and unprincipled men, and hoped his fate would be a warning to all, and teach them to live a life of sobriety and uprightness. They all united in prayer with an earnestness that is seldom witnessed in the services of devotion, except in the immediate prospect of death [the Leeds Intelligencer said they sung the same hymn as those executed earlier]. A few moments closed their mortal existence, and placed at the bar differing from all earthly tribunal's in this infinitely important particular—here, owing to the imperfections of all human institutions, repentance though sincere, cannot procure forgiveness—there, we have the authority of God himself for saying, that the cries of the contrite and broken-hearted shall not be despised. Charity hopeth all things.

The criminal records of Yorkshire do not perhaps afford an instance of so many victims having been offered in one day to the injured laws of the country. The scene was inexpressibly awful, and the large body of soldiers, both horse and foot, who guarded the approach to the castle, and were planted in front of the fatal tree, gave to the scene a peculiar degree of terror, and exhibited the appearance of a military execution. The spectators, particularly in the morning, were unusually numerous, and their behaviour on both occasions, were strictly decorous and unbecoming.

The site of the 'New Drop', where the executions took place (Google Street View)

9th January 1813: The trial of the men accused of attacking Rawfolds Mill

On Saturday 9th January 1813, the day after George Mellor, William Thorpe & Thomas Smith had been executed, the trial commenced of several alleged Luddites who were accused of tumultuously assembling and beginning to demolish Rawfolds Mill on 11th April 1812.

The prisoners on trial were James Haigh (aged 28), Jonathan Dean (28), John Ogden (23), James Brook (26), John Brook (22), Thomas Brook (32), John Walker (31) & John Hirst (22), all of them croppers. They all pleaded Not Guilty. Mellor, Thorpe & Smith were also named in the indictment.

The Jury for this trial was as follows:

Isaac Newton
John Mickelthwaite
Godfrey Park
William Parker
Henry Popplewell
Gervas Seaton
Christopher Smith
Robert Stubbing
Richard Tottie
Thomas Tootal
Richard Waddington
Henry Wilkinson

James Alan Park started the case against the prisoners for the prosecution by eulogising machinery and chiding the prisoners for their lack of patience in understanding that their actions were ‘depriving others of bread’, which was of course the charge the Luddites levelled at the likes of William Cartwright. The alternative viewpoint to that of the State and Capital was never mentioned throughout the whole trial.

Park continued to give an outline of the events of 11th April 1812 from the viewpoint of Cartwright. He then went on to introduce the principal witnesses for the Crown, starting with Joseph Sowden. Sowden had come forward when the evidence led the solicitors John Allison & John Lloyd to the workshop of John Wood, George Mellor’s employer and step-father.

Park said that Sowden contended that on the morning of the 11th April, a man called Joshua Dickinson had come to Wood’s cropping shop and a great deal of conversation ensued, and Dickinson later distributed ammunition. Arrangements were then made for the raid on Rawfolds Mill that took place later that night.

Sowden alleged that at the beginning of the year, he had heard John Walker & Jonathan Dean discuss commencing frame-breaking in the West Riding, along the same lines as the Nottinghamshire Luddites had been doing. Around this time, Sowden said he had been asked by George Mellor and Dean to join them, but said he had refused. Sowden painted a picture of Mellor and William Thorpe being the ringleaders, and commanding musket and pistol companies respectively at the Rawfolds Fight.

Park went on to discuss the prisoners in turn, beginning with James Haigh. He related how, the day after the Rawfolds Fight, Haigh had gone to Richard Tatterson,  a surgeon,  to have the wound in his shoulder treated, and from there went to Penistone Green to his relative, Mary Culpan, accompanied by his master, Joseph Ardron.

Park revealed Sowden had said that Jonathan Dean had been wounded in the hand at Rawfolds, as he was hitting the front door with a hatchet and had been shot at.

Sowden had also said that John Ogden was at the attack at Rawfolds, carrying a sword, which later broke in the scabbard. When the attack failed, he was alleged to have fled via Clifton with a man called Drake and another witness for the Crown, Benjamin Walker.

Another prisoner, James Brook, had talked about what had happened at Rawfolds to his neighbour and the horror of hearing John Booth and Samuel Hartley, the wounded left behind at Rawfolds, screaming from half a mile distant. The woman had gone to the authorities to tell them what Brook had said to her.

John Brook was before the Court because he had admitted to someone in conversation that he was there, and also that he had removed firearms from John Wood’s cropping shop prior to a search taking place.

Thomas Brook was before the Court because he had lost his hat in the mill pond at Rawfolds (where it was found later by a servant of William Cartwright), and on his way home later he had stopped at the house of a man called Samuel Naylor to borrow his hat from his wife. The hat was later returned.

John Walker was before the Court on the evidence of Sowden, whom he tried to recruit into the ranks of the Luddites. At Rawfolds, he was shot at, with the musket ball passing through his hat and not injuring him.

Lastly, Park stated that John Hirst had admitted to being at Rawfolds in a statement, saying that he was threatened to take part after meeting at the Dumb Steeple. He said he had made his way back to Hartshead with William Hall, another witness for the Crown.

Park went on the say that the Court may well hear from character witnesses for the prisoners, but that any tributes as to them being honest, industrious and hard-working did not mean that they had pledged allegiance and submission to lawful authority and government. He also strongly intimated that those providing alibis were liars.

Mr Justice Le Blanc then summed up the case before the Court.

The first witness for the prosecution was William Cartwright himself, who was examined by Mr Topping for the prosecution: he related his preparations for an attack he expected to come at some point and also the events of that night. One of his servants, James Wilkinson, spoke to Court about how the following morning after the attack, he had found a hat in the mill dam.

The next witness was a Luddite-turned-informer, William Hall. Hall was a cropper and worked at John Wood’s cropping shop. Hall related how Joshua Dickinson had brought ammunition and gunpowder to the cropping shop early on 11th April 1812. He also related what happened at the raid and that he had seen James Haigh, Jonathan Dean, John Ogden, James Brook, John Brook, John Walker & John Hirst assembled at the Dumb Steeple beforehand. He did not see Thomas Brook there, nor did he see Hirst at the Mill.

Hall said that when he retreated from the Mill, he went through the beck from the mill-pond, and later met John Hirst at Hightown, before leaving him to head back to Sir George Armytage’s fields.

Hall went on to say, that two weeks later, he had been in John Wood’s cropping shop when Thomas Brook brought in a hat, and asked him to take it back to where it belonged, and that George Mellor would know where it was from. Mellor told him it belonged to a Samuel Naylor, and Hall took it back to him.

The next witness was a cropper, Joseph Drake, who admitted to being at Rawfolds, making his way there with John Walker and Jonathan Dean, but said that he did not take part, gave up his pistol and stayed 60 yards distant throughout the raid. Other than Walker and Dean, Drake identified Thomas Brook, having seen him in Hightown later that night, without a hat and having wet clothes: he said Walker told him he had fallen into the mill-dam. Drake stated that Mellor was with Brook, and they went together to Samuel Naylor’s house, to borrow a hat for Brook.

Drake went on to say that they had also stopped at Clifton, and knocked up a house to provide them with something to eat and drink. Drake also said that he met John Ogden at Hightown after the attack: Ogden had a pistol, and they went together to Cowcliffe where they parted.

The next witness was Benjamin Walker, whose evidence for the Crown had already hung three men. Of the prisoners before him, Walker stated that he had seen James Haigh carrying a maul at the Dumb Steeple; that Jonathan Dean had given him a tot of Rum on the way to Rawfolds from the Dumb Steeple, and he also saw John Walker with a pistol as they were travelling. Walker said that after the attack, he fled the Mill with George Mellor, Joseph Drake, Thomas Brook and a man whom he did not know from Cowcliffe and corroborated Drake’s evidence about stopping at Samuel Naylor’s for a hat for Brook, and also the group stopping for food and drink at Clifton. Later, he had gone to Dean’s house after the attack, to find Dean in bed, with a bleeding hand.

It was now Joseph Sowden’s turn to give evidence. He claimed to have not been involved at Rawfolds, and related what he had seen & heard at John Wood’s cropping shop in the days afterwards, in particular John Walker relating to tale of how a shot from the Mill passed through his hat. Under cross-examination by Mr Hullock for the defence, he claimed to have been too scared to speak out earlier than the 24th October, when he was questioned by Allison and Lloyd under oath.

Mary Brook was called to give evidence that she was the woman at Clifton who had given bread and water to people she claimed to be unable to identify. The Crown contended the people outside her house were Benjamin Walker, George Mellor, Thomas Brook, Joseph Drake and John Ogden on their way home from Rawfolds.

Sarah Naylor was called to give evidence about the same group calling at her home at Hightown to lend a hat for the bare-headed Thomas Brook. She also related that the hat was returned, but could not be specific as to the time. Like Mary Brook, she said she could not identify the men.

Richard Tatterson, a surgeon, was called to give evidence about how he had treated James Haigh’s wound to his shoulder. He stated that the wound did look like it had been caused by a fall onto a stone, contradicting what the Crown had said when they opened the case. Tatterson pointed out Haigh at the Bar when he was asked to identify the man who had called on him.

Joseph Culpan was also called as a witness, to relate how he had sheltered James Haigh when he was brought to his home at Penistone Green by Haigh’s employer, Joseph Ardron. A Constable, Thomas Atkinson related how he had tracked and eventually arrested Haigh at Methley 12 days after the Rawfolds attack.

Fanny Miles, a neighbour of James Brook, gave evidence about his behaviour in the days following Rawfolds: how he had been visited by many croppers and held discussions, of which she had overheard talk of a ‘dismal din’ that could be ‘heard for half a mile’. Under cross-examination, she admitted that her husband had had Brook arrested on a former occasion, and Brook subsequently sued him and won damages for assault and false imprisonment.

The last evidence for the prosecution was the statement given by John Hirst to the magistrate Scott on 2nd November 1812 in which he said he was ordered to go to the Dumb Steeple and intimidated into taking part in the raid at Rawfolds, and subsequently retreated as far as Hartshead with William Hall.

The prisoners were now asked for their defence: James Haigh and Jonathan Dean stated they were Not Guilty, but would leave their defence to their Counsel. John Ogden said he had never been in company with the other men. James Brook said he was not involved. Thomas Brook said he was not at Rawfolds, and John Brook and John Hirst said they were Not Guilty.

Witnesses for the defence now appeared.

Abraham Berry spoke for James Haigh. He started by saying that he been in Haigh’s company after Haigh’s abortive trial at the York Summer Assizes in a public house, when he had been accosted by a man called Hall. At this point, the Judge told him that unless he could identify this man as William Hall, his testimony could not be accepted as evidence. When Hall was brought into the Court with some others, Berry could not identify him.

Thomas Ellis, the Lockwood wool-stapler and correspondent of George Mellor’s (although the latter fact was not mentioned at the trial) who spoke for James Brook. He stated that he had been in Huddersfield on the night of the Rawfolds Fight, and making his way home later, he saw Brook opposite his house at 11.45 p.m. He also paid tribute to Brook’s character. Ellis was cross-examined by the prosecution, as to whether the defence solicitor, Mr Blackburn, had discussed particulars relative to the trial with him. Ellis denied this.

George Armitage, a blacksmith from Lockwood, also spoke for James Brook. He had visited Thomas Ellis on his way home and gone from there to James Brook’s father’s house at 12.05 a.m. on the 13th April and saw him there.

Hannah Tweddle was called to dispute the evidence given by Fanny Miles – she claimed to have overheard Miles saying she was determined that some of the Brooks ‘must be hanged before they left this place’.

John Ellis, a cropper from Lockwood, was called to speak for Thomas Brook. He said that he, Thomas Elam and Jonathan Vickerman worked for Brook and saw him that evening at midnight and earlier. Shortly after midnight, they finished work and Brook paid them their wages. The prosecution spent a lot of time cross-examining Ellis about minute details of the day, and Ellis appeared at time inconsistent.

Richard Lee was called to speak for John Walker. He said that he had been at Walker’s house that evening and stayed overnight, and he was sure Walker was not absent that evening, other than when he left briefly to fetch some coal. Walker’s brother-in-law, Joseph Walker, was also present for some of the time, and he was also called as a witness for Joseph. There appeared to be some differences in the accounts given of that evening by Lee and Joseph Walker.

Hannah Blakey, a coal-dealer, corroborated Richard Lee’s evidence about John Walker buying some coal from her that evening.

Character witnesses were then called for the prisoners.

An apprentice cropper called Mills spoke to the good character of James Haigh, as did Joshua Wood, a cloth manufacturer.

Joseph Brook, a cloth-finisher, spoke in favour of Jonathan Dean, having known him for four years. James Garside, a cropper, had known Brook for up to 7 years, and called him honest and industrious. Joshua Priestly had know Dean for 12 years and described him as peaceable. Joseph Riley, a tailor, had known Dean since he was a child and gave a tribute to his character.

Richard Beaumont, a clothier, spoke for John Ogden having known him for 5 years and worked with him for 2. Another clothier, Abel Armitage, said he had known Ogden for up to 6 years, and described him as steady, and hard-working and had a wife and two children.

William Haigh spoke to the good character of all the Brooks, having known them from their youth, as did James Garside, who had known them up to 8 years. Joshua Wood, a cloth manufacturer, also spoke in favour of Thomas Brook.

William Haigh spoke in favour of John Walker, having known him for years, and found him a laborious, honest man.

Two witnesses called Holdfield and Shipley spoke for John Hirst, both of them having known him for many years.

Sir Simon Le Blanc summed up the case, and paid a highly partial and glowing tribute to William Cartwright. The Jury retired at 6.00 p.m. to consider their verdict. They returned an hour later, finding James Haigh, Jonathan Dean, John Ogden, Thomas Brook and John Walker Guilty, and James Brook, John Brook & John Hirst Not Guilty.

21st October 1812: The cropper, Benjamin Walker, turns informer & implicates Mellor, Thorpe & Smith in the William Horsfall shooting

By the evening of Wednesday 21st October 1812, Benjamin Walker, the cropper who had been arrested 4 days before, had reached his limit and agreed to turn King's Evidence for the State against his former comrades and fellow croppers.

Only 24 hours before, he had proved to be unyielding for the past 3 days: General Acland had reported to General Maitland in a letter of the 20th that Walker had "been examined, but nothing has come out".

Something had made him capitulate. He was being interrogated by the Stockport solicitor, John Lloyd, a loyalist zealot who was renowned for his interrogation techniques and practice of abducting witnesses. In a letter Lloyd wrote to Acland the day before,  he indicated that he had an informer (a 'respectable merchant in Huddersfield') who told him that prior to her son's arrest, Walker's mother had unwittingly approached the informer with concerns that those in custody may impeach those at large. Lloyd had persuaded this merchant to turn informer when he had Walker's mother watched and followed to his home. Lloyd had then acted to apprehend Walker, followed by William Thorpe after 'intimations' from Walker's mother he was also somehow involved. Lloyd then apprehended Walker's mother herself, and subjected her to a rigorous 'examination', but she would not tell him what she had told the informer. Lloyd got the informer to give him an undertaking that he would get Walker's mother to relent, so that he would not have to appear himself to give evidence. Finally, Lloyd then abducted Walker's mother to his home in Stockport "where she will more fully and freely give her Examination".

By the Thursday 22nd October, Walker had placed a mark next to his name (because he was illiterate) at the bottom of a lengthy confession which implicated many of his comrades. Radcliffe, Lloyd & the others intended to use him as King's Evidence, which would save him from the hangman.

The statement began with a description of how Walker became involved in the raid on Rawfolds Mill: hearing about the plan at his workplace in John Wood's cropping shop: Walker said George Mellor had teased him, asking him if he could 'keep a secret', before revealing the plans to attack Rawfolds. A good deal of what we know about the raid comes from this statement. Walker stated that Mellor and William Thorpe were the ringleaders, and company commanders on the night, and also stated that he and others from John Wood's shop felt obliged to be involved because, as well as being their employer, Wood was Mellor's step-father. Walker also implicated others he said were wounded - James Haigh and a man called Jonathan Dean - and also a man called Mark Hill who had been involved in collecting money for those wounded in the raid.

Walker then went on to state his involvement in the assassination of William Horsfall. He alleged that the shooting was solely the idea of Mellor & Thorpe, a plan they presented to him and Thomas Smith only 30 minutes prior to putting it into execution. This is perhaps the weakest past of Walker's whole testimony: all that subsequently followed is supposed to have occurred in only 30 minutes, something which stretches credibility beyond any reasonable point, but which the Crown subsequently based its case on. Walker said he and Smith 'refused for some time' the idea of the execution, hard to believe as they would have needed to have moved fast to make it to Crosland Moor and lie in wait for Horsfall, who would have been well on his way to the Warren House even by then. Walker then said that Mellor provided both he and Smith with pistols and directed them to make their way to the plantation on Crosland Moor and wait for him and Thorpe who would take a different route to arrive there. According to Walker, they did this and waited 10 minutes before the two others arrived, meaning that only 20 minutes had elapsed from Mellor broaching the idea to them reaching this point.When Mellor & Thorpe arrived, they agreed that Walker and Smith would fire only if they missed, and that they should lie in wait 20 yards behind Mellor & Thorpe. Walker then says, rather bizarrely, that they all waited a further 30 minutes before Horsfall arrived, which contradicts his statement earlier that he only knew of the plan to kill Horsfall 30 minutes before it happened.

Walker went on to say that when Horsfall drew level with the plantation, he heard two shots, and assumed both Mellor & Thorpe had fired, although he did not see what happened. In this statement, he is clear that neither he nor Smith fired a shot, something which he said annoyed Mellor as they fled. The four split in Dungeon Wood, with Walker & Smith taking a different route. He and Smith then headed on to a public house at Honley, where they drank and ate.

The following day at John Wood's workshop, Walker said that William Thorpe made he and Smith swear on a Bible to keep the matter secret. The day after that, Walker said Mellor told him to be careful and say nothing, as some people from Dungeon had already been questioned.

Walker was keen to exonerate his master, John Wood, saying that he knew nothing of his step-son's plan.

At the end of the statement, more detail was added: Walker said that after he and Smith had parted with Mellor and Thorpe in Dungeon Wood, they had hidden their loaded pistols in an anthill, but never returned to retrieve them. He also talked about the Russian pistol belonging to George Mellor, and how Thorpe had hurt his cheek running through Dungeon Wood, and Mellor one of his fingers because he had loaded his pistol full of musket balls. He also described the coats Thorpe and Mellor were wearing. All of these details had appeared as questions put to Joseph Mellor's household 10 days before, and appear to corroborate them.

Radcliffe and Lloyd now had what they wanted: an accomplice to corroborate the story that had been concocted. Despite the seemingly insurmountable issues with the timings given by Walker, his confession would prove to be the framework for the Crown's case.

29th September 1812: James Haigh arrested for the second time

Time had run out for James Haigh. After being freed following the abandonment of his prosecution at York Summer Assizes in July, the magistrate Joseph Radcliffe clearly felt there was cause enough to commit him for being involved in the Luddite attack on Rawfolds Mill on 11th April. Over the past few days, spies operating locally had gained information from those either concerned in or close to Luddism which confirmed his involvement at Rawfolds.

Haigh was sent to Wakefield House of Correction (i.e. Workhouse) on Tuesday 29th September 1812, pending his standing trial at a future Assizes.

24th September 1812: Two spies report about Luddite activity in & around Huddersfield

Huddersfield 24th. September 1812.
Copy of paper delivered to Mr. Hirst.

Representation of Thomas Ewart & Robert Lumas.

That they have been lodg’d in one of the Luddites houses five weeks, & are now getting into confidence with some of them, that they are not yet twisted in, but expect to be so in a short time. That previous to this are to be employ’d in procuring arms. That Joshua Hague, John Seiner, Richard Horsfall & a Mr. Sunderland all in Dalton & John Fox Innkeeper on Greetland Moor are the Principal supporters, along with other Six whose names they have not learn’d. That John Fox offer’d them a Barrel of ale to destroy the Machinery at Gatehead Mill, which was given them after the Engagement. James Hague that was wounded at Cartwright’s Mill, the Balls were extracted by Dr. Wright, & he along with several others were sent to the Whitworth Drs. to be eased of their wounds, & are now return’d. The first attempt that it is now to be made is to [divert] of the Soldiers by false Alarms, until they can accomplish the destruction of Bradley Mills, & an old Soldier has Volunteer’d to blow them up with powder. They are only waiting for an opportunity to destroy the owner of the Mills, as also justice Ratcliffe. There have several places where they have a considerable quantity of arms & ammunition, & the Two men I have employ’d are in full expectation of seeing where they are concealed in a short time

The Luddites have met 5 or 6 times within these 14 days at a place about 2 Miles out of the Town [west] of Huddersfield at a place called Dungeon Wood at the foot of Taylor’s hill—a meeting took place on Crossland Moor on Monday last to consult about some of their Society that had been taken up—

These are the principal parts of the information obtain’d at present.

An agent from Glascow came down to Huddersfield about Ten days ago, & put up at the Packhorse. The people at Huddersfield would not receive him as he had not he is proper credentials, he staid ‘till he sent a Glascow for them (their own letters) he is now gone back—

Disturbances to break out at Wakefield very soon—

24th July 1812: The convicted prisoners are sentenced at York Summer Assizes

On Friday 24th July, Judge Bayley sentenced the prisoners convicted at the York Summer Assizes.

Patrick Doring, was found guilty of threatening Mary & Joseph Culpin with death for giving evidence against the Luddite James Haigh. The Leeds Mercury of 1st August 1812 recorded Judge Bayley's verdict:

“You been found guilty, on evidence which satisfies the Jury and the Court, of endeavouring, by threats, to obstruct the regular course of justice; an offence of a very serious nature, and which, in this case, is much increased by the consideration of the aggravated nature of the crime you were endeavouring to screen and protect. The attack on Mr. Cartwright’s mill was of so atrocious and savage a nature, and struck so directly at the root of civil society, that it might have been expected that every man would have been anxious to bring the persons concerned in so daring an outrage to justice; but instead of being disposed to contribute, by the information of which you might be possessed; to this end you did all in your power to prevent those who were disposed to perform their duty, giving their evidence. This attack was of so savage and cowardly a nature, that I should have thought there were few persons in this country of minds of so depraved a character as to be capable of joining a transaction of so dark a complexion. It is evident from your conduct, that you are either in some respects connected with the persons concerned in this transaction, or at least that you are a well wisher to their cause. But it is quite certain that it is a cause which cannot succeed; the persons concerned in it will probably in this world be brought to justice; but there will a time come when this attack, made in the darkness of the night, will be brought to light, and when all those concerned in it will stand unveiled, and when they must answer for their conduct at a tribunal from which nothing can be concealed.”

The prisoner was sentenced to be confined two years in York Castle.

Thomas Wilson was found guilty of rioting in Sheffield on 14th April. The Leeds Mercury of 8th August 1812 carried the Judge's words:

His Lordship, on passing sentence upon the Prisoner, some days after, said, “in addition to the recommendation of the Jury of you to mercy, on account of your general good character, a circumstance has been stated to me, and which, upon enquiry I believe to be correct, but you have, by your industry, been the principal means of maintaining your widowed mother and eight children. This instance of filial piety has made a strong impression upon my mind, and has induced me to go as far as my duty to the public would permit in mitigating your punishment; and I am persuaded that it will form no inconsiderable part of your sufferings, that you have, by your folly, deprived her for so long a period of that support, and I regret to say, that your separation must be continued some time longer. If those who engage in excesses of which you have been convicted, or in other more aggravated species of guilt, would consider the anguish, disgrace and sufferings they occasion to near and dear relations, they would not, I am persuaded, engage in such destructive courses. I trust you will, in your future life, be warned and instructed by the error you have committed, and atone for it by continuing the same course of laudable industry has distinguished your conduct previous to this unguarded moment.” His Lordship then ordered him to be imprisoned three months, and find security for his good conduct for one year.

William Groom, charged with entering a cellar to steal potatoes during the same riot, was sentenced to 12 months in Wakefield House of Correction.

Mary Gibbon & William Rodgers, who had both been found guilty of taking part in the raid on the military depot at Sheffield on 14th April, were respectively sentenced to 1 year and to 6 months imprisonment in York Castle.

Though William Shirtcliffe was also found guilty of rioting at Sheffield, the Mercury does not record his sentence.

Of the two cases of assaulting soldiers that may or may not have been linked with the disturbances, both Ann Gardner & Robert Dick were acquitted

Finally, the Grand Jury had heeded Judge Bayley's comments about James Haigh at the start of the Assizes, when he had warned them that to proceed with the case on the evidence that existed could mean an acquittal and thereby no chance of bringing Haigh before a court again for the same offence. No true Bill (i.e. no indictment) was found against him on this occasion, meaning that he would return to custody to stand trial again at a future Assizes, provided more evidence was found and a proper indictment brought. With the sympathiser and witness intimidator in the shape of Patrick Doring now ensconced in York Castle, the authorities could work on the Culpins and amass other evidence and witnesses to try Haigh again at a future Assizes.

23rd July 1812: The trial of Patrick Doring at York Summer Assizes

The Leeds Mercury of 25th July 1812, carried the details of the trial of Patrick Doring, who was accused of threatening the lives of Mary and Joseph Culpin after they had given evidence against the Luddite James Haigh. Again, William Cartwright gave evidence. It is not clear on what day the trial took place, although it was likely to be before sentencing on 24th July. NB - the article refers to Martha Culpin, rather than her actual name Mary - her relative contacted us to point this error out on a previous occasion.

PATRICK DORING, otherwise BELL,
was charged with endeavouring to prevent Martha Culpin from appearing to give evidence against James Haigh, charged with being concerned on the attack in the attack on Rawfolds Mill, by threatening, that if she appeared against him she would be shot.

Mr. Cartwright proved the riot, and the attack upon his mill on the 11th of April last.

Mr. Allison, attorney at law, Huddersfield, stated, that Martha Culpin had been examined on the charge against James Haigh, before Mr. Radcliffe, at Milnes-Bridge.

Mr. Staveley produced the warrant of the committal of James Haigh to the Castle, on the charge of being concerned in the riot and attack on Mr. Cartwright’s Mill.

Martha Culpin stated, that she lived at Penistone Green; has known the Prisoner two or three years. Witness has heard of the attack on Rawfolds Mill, and has been examined before Mr. Radcliffe, at Milnes Bridge, respecting James Haigh. About sunset of the same day she saw the Prisoner; he came to her house, and said, “Why, you have been at Milnes Bridge; you must know what you have been for; if you go again you will be obliged to go to York to give evidence; and if you do, take notice what I tell you—I know that the bullet is made with which you will be shot.” Prisoner said he had risked his life in telling her this. He further said, if she and her husband would go away, he would find a place where they would be safe. In consequence of what the Prisoner had said to her, she and husband went into Derbyshire, where they remained about a week; on their return home, which was on Tuesday, they received a summons to attend Mr. Radcliffe, at Milnes-Bridge, where they went and were examined. On the evening of their return, the Prisoner came to their house, and said, “What! you have been again, but you will catch it.” Prisoner, on the occasion, told her, that he had come near her house, with an intention of dressing James Haigh’s wound, but there were so many persons about the house that he durst not come in.

Joseph Culpin, the husband of the last Witness, stated, that on the day of their first examination before Mr. Radcliffe, he saw the Prisoner going towards his (the Witness’s) house, but did not see him go in; had no conversation with him. In consequence of some communication from his wife, they went into Derbyshire, where they remained a week; this was in the month of July. After their return, they were examined a second time before Mr. Radcliffe, and entered into a recognizance to appear at the Assizes in York. The Prisoner came to his house the same evening, and said to them, “What! you have been again; but you shall catch it.” Witness told the Prisoner it was no business of his, and desired him to go about his business. Prisoner then went away, swearing at them. Witness said James Haigh was part of a day at his house; he appeared to be unwell, but Witness did not know that he had been wounded.

The Prisoner had no Counsel, nor did he call any Witnesses. He addressed the Jury in his defence; he stated that he had attended Martha Culpin as a Medical Man three weeks, during which time he had furnished her medicines, and made a cure of her; but when he carried in his bill, she had not money to pay it, and gave him only a small part of it. He had several times requested payment of the remainder, but could not obtain it; one time in particular he pressed her closely for the payment, and which she said if he asked her for the money again she would swear his life away. Witness, upon this threat, went to Mr. Allison, attorney at law, Huddersfield, and desired him to write a letter to Culpin to demand payment. Prisoner proceeded to state, that as soon as he had taken this step, they preferred this charge against him, which, he said, was entirely without foundation, as he never had any conversation with on the subject, nor did even so much as know James Haigh; and that he delivered himself up as soon as he knew that a warrant was issued against him. The prisoner concluded his defence by saying, that there was no man or subject more dispose than himself to stand true to his King and Country.

The Witnesses on the part of the Prosecution were examined in support of the Prisoner’s defence. The note was proved to have been delivered to Martha Culpin, and the demand made by Mr. Allison, before the Culpins preferred any charge against the prisoner.

After his Lordship had recapitulated the evidence, the Jury, without retiring, found the prisoner—Guilty.

18th July 1812: The York Summer Assizes commence

Sir John Bayley c.1808

On Saturday 18th July 1812, the Summer Assizes commenced at York before Baron (Sir George) Wood & Sir John Bayley. Bayley was the Judge who presided over the Nottingham Lent Assizes, who was perceived as lenient by many members of the ruling class.

The Grand Jury included Henry Lascelles (as Foreman) and Joseph Radcliffe, amongst others.

A number of cases were connected with the Luddite disturbances:

James Wolstenholme, William Rodger, Mary Gibbons, John Rowans, Thomas Wilson, William Denton, Charles Parker, William Shirtcliffe, and William Groom were charged with rioting in Sheffield on 14th April 1812.

James Haigh, of Dalton, cropper, was charged with being strongly suspected of having been involved in attacking Rawfolds Mill on 11th April 1812.

Betty Wood, of Horbury, charged with riotously assembling, theft and incitement to riot at Horbury on 17th June 1812. Mary Ellis and Marty Wright were also charged with riotous assembly, assault and robbery on the same date.

James Oldroyd, of Dewsbury, clothier, charged with confessing his involvement in the attack on Rawfolds Mill on 11th April 1812.

Robert Grimshaw, labourer, charged with feloniously entering and setting fire to the cotton mill of John and Arthur Armistead, of Clapham on 20th May 1812.

Patrick Doring, aka Patrick Bell, late of Scholes, surgeon, charged with having threatened to shoot Mary & Joseph Culpin for their giving evidence against James Haigh.

There were also 2 cases of stabbing and shooting soldiers - Ann Gardner & Robert Dick respectively - although it is not clear if these were directly related to the disturbances.

In his address to the Grand Jury, Judge Bayley made comments about some of the cases which are worthy of publication:

No. 13, in the calendar, (James Haigh) is the case of a person committed on strong suspicion of being concerned in an attack upon a mill. On this I would remark, that if the evidence amounts only to what may be called a conjecture, or slight presumption, it would be advisable to throw out the bill; but it often happens that more evidence is laid before you than is contained in the depositions handed to me. You will consider the amount of the evidence, and if he be but slight, it would be better to reject the bill, unless you have reason to believe that you have all the evidence before you that can be collected on the case, because if you find the bill, and the party is tried and acquitted upon it, he can never be tried for that offence again, whatever evidence may come out; but if the bill is thrown out, he would be still amenable to the law, if subsequent evidence should render it expedient to apprehend him. I make these observations because it appears, from the depositions, that some persons refused to enter into recognizances to appear and give their evidence. It gives me concern to observe a disposition in any person to obstruct the course of Justice; and the Magistrates would have been justified, and I wish they had so acted, in committing the persons, thus refusing, to prison.

In No. 25, (James Oldroyd,) the evidence will probably mainly rest on the confession of the party, you will, therefore, inquire what corroborating circumstances there may be in the case, and whether the confession rests under the suspicion of being made by the undue influence of promises or threats.

With respect to the disturbances of which we have heard so much in this and the neighbouring counties, I do not observe that there are any cases in the Calendar of persons charged with being concerned in any recent outrage; and I am happy to find that the vigilance exercised by the Magistracy of this county, has already so materially checked and repressed this disposition to outrage, and I trust the exertion of the same vigilance will be effectual in totally suppressing those disorders. I feel, as an individual, no alarm on the subject. The machinations of those deluded and misled persons cannot ultimately succeed; they may produce for a time uneasiness and alarm, but must at length be put down; yet though on the ground of the public safety there is no ground of apprehension, it is highly desirable that the most prompt measures should be adopted to suppress these outrages, as their further continuance must bring down upon the persons concerned in them the most heavy and serious punishments.

If the labouring classes suffer from the high price of provisions, or have any other just ground of complaint, I am sure there will be found, in you and in the country, a disposition to afford them relief and redress. In no country (and I am proud to think I live in such a country) are the comforts of the poor more attended to, or more instant attention paid to their distresses than in this; and I am sure every practicable mode will be resorted to, to diminish the pressure they must feel from the high price of the necessaries of life. Gentleman, if, by submitting to little privations ourselves, we can contribute to this, we shall have the satisfaction of reflecting, that we have done nothing to increase these troubles, nay more, that we have done all in our power to remove them; and if those people should be so unwise and so ungrateful as to persevere in their measures of hostility, we shall have the consolation of having done our duty.

The trials would take place over the next few days.

7th July 1812: Patrick Doring of Scholes arrested for intimidating witnesses

On Tuesday 7th July 1812, Patrick Doring of Scholes, aka Dr. Patrick Bell, was arrested. He was accused of intimidating Mary & Joseph Culpin to not give evidence against James Haigh, who was suspected of being involved in the attack on Rawfolds Mill - he was accused of threatening to shoot them both on the 13th June.

The following day, Doring was committed to York Castle to stand trial at the next Assizes.

16th May 1812: Joseph Radcliffe informs the Home Office about prisoners committed to York Castle

Sir

With the concurrence of My brother magistrates, Messrs G. Armitage & F. Scott, acting in this Neighbourhood, I have the honor to inform you that different prosecutions are to be commenced at York on account of persons committed in various ways as connected with the riots.—The weighty expence of these in addition to the losses already incurred will bear most heavily on individuals. We therefore trust that we shall be excused by His Majesty's Government in making a request at the same may be carried on at the expence of the Public.—

I have committed one Haigh on strong Suspicions of being at the attack at Cartwrights Mill, & one other on Wednesday last, for forcibly obtaining arms in the night time.

Having been foreman of the Grand Jury at Lancaster in the spring, I am summoned to attend as such on the 23d Inst you will therefore I hope excuse my requesting the [illegible] to know if under any Special commission the prisoners at York are to be tried, and when. An early answer will highly oblige

Sir [etc]
Joseph Radcliffe

Milnsbridge house
May 16, 1812

N.B. I was sorry to hear from Ld [Fitzwilliam] on Thursday last, at a Genl Call of Magistrates & Deputy Lieutenants that an act to empower the magistrates to search for arms did not meet the approbation of His Majestys administration.—

On Sunday night last, within half a Mile of this place, an attack of destruction was made on an other description of Machinery.—

30th April 1812: James Haigh is committed to York Castle, charged with attacking Rawfolds Mill

By Thursday 30th April, the Huddersfield magistrate Joseph Radcliffe had had enough of the cropper James Haigh. Radcliffe had examined Haigh several times over the last 6 days. Haigh refused to admit to anything that Radcliffe had put to him - he was adamant that was not a Luddite, had not been at Rawfolds Mill and that he had hurt his shoulder by falling on a stone, and had not been shot.

Radcliffe did not believe him. He had put to Haigh that he tried to go into hiding, and that was why he had fled south. Radcliffe was puzzled by the solidarity that seemed to exist between Haigh's employer, Joseph Ardron, and this lowly cropper. With Major Gordon's assessment of the bullet-hole in Haigh's shirt, he was happy that he had enough evidence to charge Haigh with being concerned in the attack on Rawfolds Mill.

Haigh was taken later that evening to York Castle via Leeds in a coach, escorted all the way by twelve Dragoons.

24th April 1812: James Haigh is brought before the magistrate, Joseph Radcliffe

James Haigh had been apprehended by the Huddersfield Constable Thomas Atkinson that day before at Methley. On Friday 24th April 1812, he stood before the magistrate Joseph Radcliffe and a Major Gordon in Milnsbridge House, Radcliffe's residence.

Atkinson had told Radcliffe the story of the previous day. How he had found out Haigh had been to a Doctor about his arm, and the story the Doctor had told him about the man and how he come by his wounded shoulder - that it was an accident.

Radcliffe told Haigh to remove his shirt, so that he could assess his wound. Haigh was clearly in pain and had had his wound dressed, though it was beginning to look a bit grubby. He noticed that Haigh's shirt was damaged. He ordered a servant to fetch Haigh a fresh shirt and handed the damaged shirt to Gordon, asking him his opinion of it. Gordon said he thought the hole in the front of the shirt was made by a musket ball.

Radcliffe spent some time questioning Haigh. He accused Haigh of being shot at Rawfolds, and being involved with the Luddites. Haigh looked dejected and exhausted, but would not admit to anything Radcliffe put to him, and insisted he had fallen badly on a stone, which was the cause of his wound.

But Radcliffe was convinced he was lying.

23rd April 1812: Constable Thomas Atkinson arrests James Haigh at Methley

On Thursday 23rd April 1812, Thomas Atkinson had been given a warrant for the arrest of a man called James Haigh, a cropper from Dalton, near Huddersfield. It was suspected that Haigh was involved in the affair at Rawfolds a few days ago.

He proceeded to Haigh's home at Dalton. When he knocked at the door, he noticed it was open. He went and called out to see if anyone was home. No-one answered. He tried again, no answer. Atkinson looked around the home - there was no sign of Haigh or his wife, and it looked like the house had been abandoned: it looked like the couple had been brewing beer, but that the demijohns hadn't been looked after after being filled.

Talking to Haigh's neighbours, Atkinson found out he had been seen with Joseph Ardron, his master, and also that he had been unwell and had been to see a Doctor over at Lepton. Proceeding there, he found the Doctor, a Richard Tatterson, he told him he had twice helped an anonymous man from Dalton dress a wound to his shoulder, but he did not know who he was or where he had gone.

Atkinson had information about Ardron, and understood he had family over Penistone way. He decided to ride over on his horse, despite the fair distance.

After talking to Mary and Joseph Culpin, the relations of Joseph Ardron, he now had a lead, and knew the man who had stayed with them was anonymous to them, and clearly had a problem with his shoulder.  He also knew he had gone to Mary Culpin's mother's house at Willey Bridge, and proceeded there. Mrs Ardron soon told him that the man had headed for Wragby the last she knew.

At Wragby, asking around, Atkinson's description of Haigh was soon resonant with someone who told him he the man had gone to Methley.

Later that day, after a long time in the saddle, Atkinson found James Haigh at his sister's house at Methley. He placed him under arrest and made arrangements to get him back to Huddersfield that night, into the custody of Joseph Radcliffe.

15th April 1812: Joseph Ardron brings a wounded man to the Culpins at Penistone Green

Between 12 midnight and 1.00 a.m. on Wednesday 15th April, Joseph Culpin received a knock on the door of his house at Penistone Green. He and his wife Mary had not yet gone to bed and were surprised to receive a visitor at such a late hour. Joseph stood behind the door and asked the person what they wanted? - the reply came "to smoke a pipe with you". Mary realised it was her brother, Joseph Ardron, and urged him to open the door.

Ardron was a master cloth-dresser from Dalton and was not alone. The man with him looked tired and the Culpins could see he was not well and was holding his arm strangely. Ardron asked the couple if he and the stranger could stay until daylight, and that his companion was not very well, having recently hurt himself. Ardron said the man worked for him at his cropping shop.

The Culpins only had one bed in their house, but they could see the stranger was suffering and offered it to him that night. Ardron and the stranger shared the bed that night whilst the kindly Culpins stayed up until morning.

The following morning, after breakfast, Ardron and Joseph Culpin went out and when they returned Ardron took the wounded man to his mother's house at Willey Bridge.

14th April 1812: Richard Tatterson of Lepton is visited again by the anonymous wounded man

On Tuesday 14th April 1812, Richard Tatterson, the surgeon from Lepton near Huddersfield was again visited by the man with the wounded shoulder who had come to him two days before. The man asked him to check the wound and re-dress it, which he did, and the man afterwards left.

12th April 1812: A wounded man visits a Doctor at Lepton, near Huddersfield

Richard Tatterson was doctor who practised surgery at Lepton, four and a half miles from Huddersfield. At 4 p.m. on Sunday 12th April 1812, a stranger called on him for help. The man explained that he had fallen on a rock and damaged his shoulder and wondered if Tatterson could help him, as he needed the wound to be properly dressed.

Tatterson examined him and found that he indeed had a wound at the back of his right shoulder, it was open from the top to the bottom of his arm where it met the shoulder. He could see no debris in it, but estimated that it was 1.5 inches deep and actually wider still. There was extensive bruising. Someone else had tended to it, as some lint was still there at the upper edge of it, and there was some blood, and the man's arm was covered in it.

Tatterson cleaned the wound, and then sewed it shut at both ends and in the middle. Making small talk, the man told him he was from Dalton, to the East of Huddersfield. He dressed the wound and gave the man some salve to treat it should he need to.

The man left without telling him his name.