24th October 1816: Informer's report on Nottinghamshire Luddites

24th October 1816

I went to Arnold last Thursday and saw Fell and Joe Gelthorpe and told them what Green had said, that the Arnold Chaps were expected to go to Bulwell and break the wife Frames there—Fell said he thought they could not get as many as would be necessary to do it as many of the Arnold Chaps would not go with Ned White, whom he said would go any time, but he said he would mention it to them—Gelsthorpe said he would go, and Fell said he would—I was there again yesterday morning and Fell and Gelsthorpe said they had mentioned it but could only get six to go, but that they had no Fire Arms and requested to be provided with some and they would go on Sunday night if they could have other assistance.—They said they could get plenty to go and smash every thing in the House of Industry, and that it had been agreed upon to be done, but the time not fixed.—I am to see Fell again on Saturday either at Nottingham at the Kingston's Arms, or at Arnold to know what assistance can be given them and what Arms can be furnished to them.—I was with Badder last Tuesday at the Goat—He said I expected a Job at your Town last night, that all the Frames were broke—that the Basford Chaps had fetched all the Tackle (viz. the Arms) to do it on Monday night and he could not think the reason why it was not done but it must between then and next Sunday night and he desired me to call upon Bradley and enquire.—I saw him again last night and then he told me they were [through] making Rattles at Nottingham and were going to Watch and Ward again but he'd be damned if they must not be shot—I told him that the Arnold Chaps had determined to destroy all the Frames and things in the House of Industry at Bulwell—He said it must be done but there was no such thing as giving them any assistance from Nottingham, on account of the Constables who were watching at nights and they (the Ludds) could not get back in the night undiscovered—We were together at the Unicorn last night till about 11 and then Badder went and I staid till 2 or 3 and 4 or 5 others playing at Whist in the parlour—The Constables came and knocked at the door several times, and asked for the door to be opened and said somebody were playing at Cards there—The Landlord denied it and said he had only his own family there and refused to open the door to any body—We went out at the Back door—Those that I played with were not Ludds—Two of them were Bakers—The Constables said the last time they came stopped an hour I think until we left some of them followed me down the Street but I ran and they did not get to speak to me—We should have stopped longer had not the Constables been so clamorous, and the Landlord began to be uneasy—I have not heard of any attempt to break into Churchill’s Warehouse last week nor of it being intended to be done—I dont know of any thing more intended to be done.—

10th June 1816: Informer's report on Nottinghamshire Luddites

Monday 10th June 1816.—

I was not with those who broke the Frames at Radford yesterday morning & do not know to a certainty who any of them are, but from the conduct and expressions of 3 or 4 men in whose Company I have been to day whose names I do not yet know but whose persons am well acquainted with I have good reason to believe were some of them. It was at the Odd Fellows (formerly the Pelican) Radford, I saw them. A man came in that they call a Constable, and one of these men has been with Badder when I have been with him. He is about 5 [feet] 5 or 6 inches high, franfreckled, longish mouth. A Blue Great Coat with large buttons upon it but no small Coat underneath. He said the man who came in, supposed to be a Constable and who went with the Landlady into a Room privately was come to Pump the Mistress. I told him they were foolish to trust her and he said in reply she was as good a Pump as old Mrs Seymour.—There was another man sat in the House whom he said they set to get his piece off by Candle light on Saturday night till ten o'Clock I think he said, at Wrights, as I understand him before his Frame was broke and I understood him that that man had a Brother whose Frame was saved.—He said they have taken two but we have got good evidence to prove one was in Narrow Marsh and the other at the Odd Fellows at the time the Frames were broke. I could not learn any of their names a man with thick lips he said acted as Waiter on Saturday night and that he supposed saved him from being apprehended. Some of them I understood got into the Water House and had some ale there and dressed in their disguises.—

Some Chaps came from Hucknall to Bulwell last Sunday but one — Three of the named Clarke, two of them brothers and the other their Father – They asked me if I thought all the wide Frames in Bulwell could be broken in one night,—where they were and how many there were – I told them I thought they could all be broke in one night but could not tell exactly where they all stood. They asked to learn where they are and told me that Arnold is quite ready and they were ready at Hucknall and were doing their Exercise every night. I said I would get to know if I could. I expect they will want me to pilot them when they are ready and have fixed to do the Job. I was at Arnold last Thursday and was with Geo. Shaw and Fell. They spoke against doing anything till the Petition had gone to Parliament, and they spoke as if the Petition was of little use but they had better try. I have not seen Badder since I was here last. I learnt that they broke the Frames yesterday morning because they gave abated prices and the woman had so many girls prentice at running.—

13th May 1816: An informer reports a meeting of framework-knitters in Leicester

13th May 1816

I had been at the Prince Blucher ever since before two o'Clock. There was a man from Leicester and another from Derby. I bought of the Leicester man the copy of "Resolutions of Meeting of the Frameworkknitters at Leicester of 15th April last – a man named Smith of Mansfield was first chosen Chairman between 2 and 3. There was a numerous Meeting 100 or more. The Chairman, called Silence and the Derby man stated that they had solicited the Hosiers of Derby and they had agreed to sign a Petition to Government to put a stop to the cut-up work – He said he had been at Leicester and the Employers and the employed there had petitioned, and it was thought it would not avail much unless the Trade at Derby and Nottingham would do the same and that this Meeting was called to get that done. There were 5 men chosen as a Committee to consult what was to be done. They withdrew into another room and were away about an hour, they then returned and stated that 5 or 6 able men should be chosen to go to the Hosiers tomorrow and next day, and solicit them to do as they had done at Leicester & Derby—and if they did not come to, another meeting was to be called to consult how to proceed. It appeared to be the general opinion of the Meeting that the Nottingham Hosiers would not comply, as they had done at Leicester and Derby, and that the Mayor and Magistrates would not allow them to meet publicly. There was a Meeting at Arnold at Jonathan Stirtevants as I was told yesterday by Robert Mitchell, commonly called Scotch Bob; and he said they were nearly fast at Arnold – as many had nothing to do, and those that had work were so badly paid for it they could not live; and that they had tried in vain to get an honest living by labour, and they must now be under the necessity of breaking the laws of their Country – he said they would kill their own meat – some Frames, & Somebodies carcases beside would be broke. Some said at the Meeting to day that if Government did not redress their grievances violent means must be had recourse to – & they pointed out Mansfield and Sutton where most of the obnoxious work was made.—

30th December 1812: Rising number of Luddite incidents in Nottinghamshire

The 2nd January 1812 edition of the Morning Post carried an article dated Wednesday 30th December 1812 which related the increasing number of Luddite incidents that had taken place in Nottinghamshire over the last month:

RIOTS IN NOTTINGHAMSHIRE.

NOTTINGHAM, DEC. 30.—No less than eight violent outrages have been committed at Beeston, New Radford, [Watnall], Arnold, and Mansfield, and in some villages on the south side of the Trent. The objects of these attacks have been the destruction of frames; at each place the outrages have been put into execution by numbers of disguised men, armed with pistols and swords, using personal violence on the individuals of their revenge, threatening their lives if they open their lips; and after placing guards over these unfortunate people, destroyed their frames and then escaped undiscovered.

In the town of Mansfield, poor woman, on denying a frame demanded by this lawless banditti, was stabbed in several places, afterwards knocked down, and left for dead. Several of the depredators, who committed the outrage at [Watnall], have been taken, and committed to the jail in this town. A large meeting of the Magistrates of the county has taken place, and the strongest measures resorted to, to provide against these disorders. The Watch and Ward Bill is to be put into force immediately. The military have been again called on, the same as upon former occasions, to guard over the property of the inhabitants, and every other precaution, as patroles, &c. &c. &c.

20th December 1812: 2 stocking frames broken in Arnold

In the evening of Sunday 20th December 1812, 2 stocking-frames were broken by Luddites in the original site of the Luddite disturbances, Arnold.

28th July 1812: The Home Secretary receives information from a source at Mansfield

Mansfield Nottm. July 28th 1812

My Lord

The enclosed Circular I got possession of last night and have thought proper to transmit to your Lordship — [surmising] that it imply’s more than is expressed — I have likewise this past week got some few papers belonging to the Arnold Committee and could their Secretary (whose name is Emmerson late an Excise Officer) be laid hold of I have no doubt but some informative discussions would be made, as the Luddites were first organized by this Committee — The man who is to suffer at Nottingham tomorrow for Stack Firing has made a full confession and altho there is no doubt but he broke the first Frame in this County yet being a very humble agent in the late disturbances, his confession has not disclosed any fresh circumstances—

I have the Honor to be your Lordship's
very humb Servant

[L.I.] Stevens.

20th January 1812: Luddites play a practical joke in Arnold

On the evening on Monday 20th January, Luddites broke 1 stocking frame in Arnold. They took the remains of the frame away, but the following morning, villagers found parts of the frame left in the village stocks. As well as playing a practical joke, which demonstrated their increasing confidence, the Luddites were mocking the authorities.

6th January 1812: More frames broken at Old Radford & Arnold

Luddites were raging night after night in the new year. On Monday 6th January, 13 frames were destroyed at Old Radford, and five at Arnold.

24th December 1811: One frame broken at Arnold.

On Tuesday, 24th December, one stocking frame was broken at Arnold.

21st December 1811: Stocking frames broken at Arnold

On Saturday 21st December, and the day after the issuing on rewards for information by Nottingham Corporation, 2 stocking frames were broken in Arnold, including what the Nottingham Review called "the finest and completest frame ever built, for the weaving of cotton stockings".

14th December 1811: More frame-breaking in Nottinghamshire

On the evening of Saturday 14th December, and after a comparative lull in activity for several days, Luddites became active in Nottinghamshire again.

3 frames were broken in Nottingham itself: 2 at Beck Barn (now Beck Street), and 1 in the 'field house'. Another 6 frames were broken at Bulwell and 4 at Arnold.

7th December 1811: Frame-breaking in more than one County

The night of Saturday 7th December saw attacks mounted by Luddites in both Nottinghamshire & Derbyshire.

In Nottinghamshire, 6 frames were broken at Bulwell and 4 at Arnold.

In Derbyshire, Luddites were active breaking 10 frames at Pentrich, 3 at Swanwick and 2 at Riddings.

14th November 1811: The funeral of the Luddite John Westley

In the afternoon of Thursday the 14th November, an almost palpable air of tension existed in the village of Arnold. Up to 1000 people had gathered for the funeral of John Westley, the Luddite shot dead in the early hours of the previous Monday morning.

The funeral cortege was preceded by former colleagues of Westley "bearing black wands, decked with knots of crape"¹ and a band played solemn music. The authorities had turned out for the occasion: the High Sheriff, the Under Sheriff and six of the County Magistrates no less. They were joined by Special Constables as well as 30 Mounted Dragoons. At one stage, the Riot Act was read, and the crowd was given an hour to disperse. To make matters worse, the hour elapsed when Westley's body was being lowered into the grave and the crowd was then ordered to disperse immediately by the High Sheriff, Thomas Wright, the same man who had acted as Coroner at the Inquest into Westley's death. Two who refused were taken into custody (but later released) and at this point the tension dissipated and the crowd dispersed quietly.

22nd October 1811: frame-breaking returns to Arnold

All of the publications about Nottinghamshire Luddism agree that after a lull of 6 months, the disturbances recommenced on 'Mischief Night' (4th November) in 1811. However, the Home Office records hold vital evidence that frame-breaking had begun at least a fortnight earlier, and at the same location as in March - the village of Arnold.

A notice that appears to be unconnected with any other document offers 150 Guineas (total) reward for information leading to the conviction of a 'number of persons' who entered the house of a Framework-Knitter, William Marshall, at Red Hill near Arnold at one o'clock in the morning and destroyed five stocking-frames, as well as stealing a large piece of cloth. The owner of the frames appears to be James Pritt & Co, because the notice states the reward will be paid at their warehouse at St. Mary's Church Yard, Nottingham.

This document appears in the Home Office archive at HO 42/117. A J.J & D Pritt had signed a statement in the Nottinghamshire Papers in January 1811 undertaking to not reduce their prices prior to the first appearance of frame-breaking in March.

In addition, a letter from a Thomas Hayne, Lace Manufacturer, to the Home Office on 12th February 1812 states that frame-breaking recommenced 'at the beginning of October 1811, when some more frames were broken at Arnold, at Bulwell, at Basford etc'. The letter can be found at HO 42/131.

15th March 1811: 'Statement of several Hosiers of Nottingham'

The following statement appears to have been issued by the same four hosiers that had earlier in January asked the stockingers not to accept work from hosiers paying low prices. You'll also remember that one of the firms, Brocksopp & Parker, were identified by the owner of their frames, a Mr Bolton, as renting his frames to them, and that the Nottingham Journal reported that his frames had been broken in the initial attack at Arnold on 11th March: the statement has the four firms complaining about the "destruction of our property."

The statement was presumably issued as a broadsheet or public notice, because it doesn't appear in the Nottingham Journal, but it does appear in the appendix of a Parliamentary Select Committee Report issued in May 1812.¹ William Felkin also alludes to some of the negotiations that are implied in the statement in his 1867 book.²

STATEMENT of several Hosiers of Nottingham, to the Framework Knitters of that Town; respecting the reduction of their Wages, &.c. 

IT appears, from the violent proceedings that have taken place within these few days past' in the destruction of our property, that you are led to suppose that we are the cause or the reduction of your Wages.—It is well known to you, that a great number of Hosiers had reduced their workmen, by direct and indirect methods, a long time before we gave notice of our intention of reducing the prices. Some have been making slender Womens Hose, in size, at the price of Maids, and other sizes in the same manner; others have been taking off 5s. and 6s. per dozen for work left out, which, to the workman, was not worth more than 3s. per dozen; others have been making 38 gauge Hose on 40 gauge Frames, and so on downwards till they have actually made Maids Hose on a 30 gauge Frame, at 10d. and 101/4 d. per pair; at the same time asserting their disapprobation of any reduction in the price of workmanship. 

It is a notorious fact, that the workmen of Arnold have been working for a person there considerably under the stated and regular prices, which enabled him to sell his goods, to the Hosiers for less money than we could make them for. 

These things made it absolutely necessary, for the preservation of our trade, that something should be done to counteract this system, which was destroying us. We had the choice of the following methods—either to reduce the full-fashioned work more to a level with the low-priced work, or to make the same work at the same price it was made at by our neighbours, or to let our frames stand still. 

We have given our workmen their choice, and they have taken the full-fashioned work at reduced prices; they acknowledged it was still the best work, and they preferred it. This has been invariably confirmed to us by the numerous workmen we have since conversed with on the subject, but more particularly by your Committee, who we always supposed were properly appointed by yourselves to settle this business. 

When the reduction of the price of full-fashioned work had taken place in January, we were called upon by the Hosiers to sign their advertisement of the 26th of that month, stating their disapprobation of a reduction. We declined, because we there saw the names, of those who had, for a length of time, taken every method in their power to get their work made at less price than their neighbours, by craftily undermining their workmen wherever they could. We were then told by them, that we should have pursued the same system, and then no notice would have been taken of it. Our answer was, "that we despised the system, and never would adopt it;" because, we were certain that, if that system were to be generally adopted, the most dreadful consequences would ensue to the workmen; and those Hosiers who had the hardest hearts and the least conscience, would get their work made at the lowest prices. We therefore determined to make our reduction, accompanied with such restrictions and regulations as we hoped would protect the workmen effectually from any imposition. Had those gentlemen been really anxious to prevent the reduction taking place, which they attributed to us, why did not they come forward and agree to pay the Standard price for standard sizes, and to pay a proper and fair price for the low-priced work? [We had promised to raise our price to the full standard, and return every farthing we had deducted from the work people.] 

This has never been explained, but instead of so doing, they gave notice of their intention to reduce their Wages; thus by their conduct openly contradicting their own assertions in the public papers, (viz.) that they disapproved of the reduction of the price of workmanship. Several reasons might be given for their conduct; but their main object was to oblige us to raise our prices, that they might still continue to possess the advantages they had obtained over us, and be enabled to send their Goods to market on better terms than their neighbours, who were giving standard prices for standard sizes. 

Your Committee afterwards waited upon us, and at their request we signed an Agreement, stating, that we would give the old standard price for full-fashioned work, provided the rest of the trade would agree not to continue the practice of making sham Hose on 30 Gauge Frames, and fine work on super Frames, &c.; nor to make Slender Womens Hose for Maids price; nor to deduct for fashion left out, more than that fashion was really worth. 

Your Committee then expressed themselves perfectly satisfied with us, and went away filled with the most sanguine expectations that those gentlemen who had voluntarily come forward to express their decided disapprobation of the reduction, would have signed that Agreement without hesitation. But after the most urgent solicitation, they found themselves unable to procure even a single Signature to it. 

We have thought proper thus to state to you publicly the motives for the reduction, and the steps taken to prevent it. We do not wish to possess any unfair advantage over our neighbours, in manufacturing our Goods on better terms than they; and on the other hand, we can by no means allow any exclusive advantage to them, of manufacturing their Goods at a lower price, by substituting one size or one gauge for another—as, in so doing, we are not capable of entering the market on equal terms with them. 

Having thus given you a fair statement of Facts, we leave you to determine who are the real cause of the Reduction. 

J. & T. WATSON, NELSONS, & CO.
CHURCHILL & PRICE.
BROCKSOPP & PARKER.
RICHD. SATTERTHWAITE, (for RICHD. EATON.) 

Nottingham, March 15, 1811.

11th March 1811: the first Luddite attack at Arnold, Nottinghamshire

What became the first instance of Luddism in the year 1811 began during the daytime on Monday 11th March. Hundreds of stockingers gathered in the market place in Nottingham, where "angry speeches were made and the crowd was ‘vociferous in condemning their Employers and clamouring for work and a more liberal price' "¹. Thomis continues "constables were called out and a troop of Dragoons paraded until nine o’clock in the evening"². The crowd then dispersed, but continued on to march to Arnold, north of Nottingham. Once there, they set about frame-breaking in earnest:

"between dusk and dawn, no less than sixty stocking frames were broken by the mob, swarming around the town, entering the houses of unpopular stockingers, and breaking the frames of special, hated hosiers. The general populace so far from preventing actually aided and abetted the disturbance, cheering on the frame-breakers and obstructing the authorities. It was necessary to call out the Dragoons the following morning in order to clear the town. The whole neighbourhood had been fired by these riotous outbursts."³ 

The Nottingham Journal of 16th March carried a report about what had taken place:

We are sorry to observe, that a disposition to riot and tumult has manifested itself amongst the most operative manufacturers in this neighbourhood, owing to the present depressed state of trade, which has occasioned an abatement in the workmen’s prices, and reduced them to the greatest distress. A number of individuals from the adjacent villages in this town on Monday last, with a view of representing to their employers the hardships they were subject to, and of intimidating others into a compliance with their demands, by which alone they would be enabled to obtain a subsistence for themselves and families. The assembling of such numbers induced an apprehension on the part of the Mayor and Magistrates, that some violation of the public peace was intended. They, therefore, adopted the most prompt and vigilant measures, by calling out the civil power, and ordering a troop of horse from the barracks, to be in readiness to act in case of necessity. But happily, in the evening, these precautions were rendered useless, by the whole retiring quietly to their homes. 

In the neighbourhood of this place, however, we are concerned to say, that considerable mischief has been done, and the folly of a deluded multitude was, perhaps, never more conspicuous than at Arnold on Monday; when they proceeded with a premeditated determination to destroy some stocking frames employed there, by hosiers of this town, and rented by them of Mr. Bolton, who had retired from business above two years since, & had let his frames on a lease, and engaged to keep them in repair at his own expence; consequently the loss, which we hear will amount to several hundred pounds, will fall entirely upon Mr. Bolton. The avowed motive of these people to commit acts of so flagrant a nature, was to injure the hosiers who rented the frames; but though they were told by the workmen, in whose hands the frames were, that they belonged to Mr. Bolton, whose name were stamped on the front bars, they persisted in their determination, and nearly demolished upwards of fifty frames, intending by so doing, to suspend the manufactory until the frames could be repaired, to the prejudice of the hosiers who had engaged them to rent: whereas the fact is, that it will have quite a contrary effect, and be to their advantage, by enabling them to refrain from manufacturing more goods than are really wanted, until the demand for them shall increase.

The Journal clearly identified that the hosier who had particularly suffered from the attacks - actually the ex-hosier, Bolton, who had previously written to the Journal in January to state that his frames were rented to Brocksopp & Parker, and warned anyone against frame-breaking. The stockingers were clearly not intimidated by this.

The Morning Chronicle of  Friday 15th March 1811, contains more details about the numbers  of people involved (emphasis added):

RIOTOUS EXCESSES AT NOTTINGHAM.—It is with the deepest regret we have to communicate the occurrence of alarming disturbances and outrageous excesses in the neighbourhood of Nottingham. Letters from the place state, that on Tuesday last the workmen, to the number of one thousands, assembled in the market place, and from thence proceeded in a body to Arnold, a distance of about five miles, when their numbers were increased to between two and three thousand. Thus augmented in strength, they shortly evinced a determination to adopt measures of violence, and parties proceeded to enter the houses and destroy frames of several of the manufacturers. The cause assigned for these afflicting outrages was the extreme distress suffered by themselves and families, in consequence of the stoppage of work. With any further particulars we are at present unacquainted, but we have to express our sincere hopes that these mistaken men must have been made sensible that by the destruction of the property of others, they not only could not alleviate their own misery, but that, on the contrary, they must materially increase it.

Direct action in the form of frame-breaking was back.

Earlier echoes of frame-breaking

Frame-breaking was not a new form of direct action undertaken by workers within the frame-knitting industry. Felkin¹ traces the history back to London in 1710, with 100 frames being broken by unemployed journeymen, protesting about the use of a large number of apprentices by a hosier named Nicholson. The tactic was successful, so much so that "none of the rioters were punished, it is said not even apprehended." But widespread rioting over similar practices led to the House of Commons making machine-breaking a capital offence in 1727.

Shortly afterwards, much of the trade moved North to Nottingham: echoing practices of over one hundred years later, speculators had bought up frames, renting them to stockingers and paying them for cheaper products which broke the standards laid down by the London Company of Frame-work Knitters. The Nottingham magistrates refused to recognise the authority of the London Company, and the speculators moved their trade there.

Predictably, the worst capitalist practices led to grievances and further direct action followed. In 1778 & 1779, the stockingers had looked to Parliament and lobbied for the introduction of a Bill to regulate prices and afford them a degree of protection. The Bills failed, in part because of the connivance of some Nottingham hosiers who enlisted the help of MPs for rotten boroughs in Cornwall.

The response from the stockingers in Nottingham and the Midlands was prolonged and violent. Between 10th-19th June 1779, frame-breaking and rioting was widespread, with the houses & mills of offending hosiers being attacked. Randall² describes a diversionary attack being mounted against the factory of one hosier, a Mr Need, whilst another force wrecked his house and broke 50 frames in a workshop he owned in the Nottinghamshire village of Arnold, (a place we’ll return to shortly). The house of another hosier who had given evidence against the Bill before parliament, was burnt down. Felkin³ tells us that this convinced the hosiers to agree to terms: "provided an immediate cessation of violence took place, to remove every oppression from their workmen, and to bring all the manufacturers up to a fair price." 300 frames were broken during the disturbances: "rioting in fact had proved more successful than applications to Parliament"⁴