20th October 1816: The Duke of Rutland updates the Home Secretary about James Towle

By the 20th of October 1816, it had been reported in the press that were James Towle to succeed in his forthcoming appeal that the original indictment against him was incorrectly made, another correctly drafted one would be laid against him.

Extract

Private

Cheveley Park 20th Oct. 1816

My Dear Lord

I felt much indebted to your Lordship, for the Information communicated to me by your letter of the 10th Inst, on the interesting subject of our late correspondence. Your Lordship, with some accustomed ability, and zeal for the public Service, has placed the matter in the best track, & whatever may be the final Result, of the Proceedings which have been adopted, I am confident that the Importance of the subject, will ensure my excuse, in having brought it before you. Mr Pochin has no doubt informed your Lordship of the Interview which he has had with Towle, since he quitted London, and of the manner in which the Culprit received an Intimation, of the Intention to prefer another Indictment against him, in the event that the Validity of the Objection waged against the former one. Notwithstanding the Paroxysm of Passion into which Towle fell, or that on that occasion, Mr Pochin has still hopes that when his disappointment has subsided, & he has again become calm, it may be possible to bring him to the desired point.—

Your Lordship has I understand, been made acquainted with the Establishment of a “Hampden Club” at Leicester, to the Motives, the Objects, and possible results of which, the Magistrates of that place look with considerable apprehension. Such an Institution, will I fear be a rallying point, for the idle and the disaffected, and it would be very satisfactory to know that there is in existence any Act of Parliament by which its formation can be prohibited, and checked in the bud—At this particular Moment such an Establishment must be regarded with more than ordinary Jealousy for your Lordship is, I am confident, aware of the uneasy state of the Country, arising from the universal distress which pervades all classes, and from the stagnation of Employment among the lower orders. The latter Cause has been less active since the commencement of the Harvest, and indeed the accompanying document, which will shew your Lordship the amended Situation of very considerable Manufacturing Town, is satisfactory as far as it goes, but it is feared that the Improvement will be but temporary, and the winter months are expected with Apprehension by many, and with Anxiety by all. The Landed Interest is exerting itself to the utmost in various parts of the Country, for the Support and Employment of the Poor who are out of Work, and it is self Evident, that the Relief which is afforded by Employment, is far preferable to that which is derived from increased Poor Rates. But the depressed state of the Landed Interest must cripple and weaken its efforts, especially while the Poor Laws, which press almost exclusively upon the Land, continue to be a burden of such serious and increasing Magnitude. I have been asked by several Gentlemen, whether the Government have it not in contemplation to adopt some measures for the Relief of the Agriculturalists, but this is a point of so much delicacy, and so crowded with difficulties, that it would ill become one to do more than to mention the Circumstance. On the whole I am strongly induced to hope that those parts of the State Machine, whose action is at present impeded and disordered, will gradually [illegible] their tone but this desirable object may not, & probably will not

[The rest of the letter is missing]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trials of the Two Incendiaries.

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

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

The paper also recorded Sir Vicary Gibbs' sentencing:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Lincolns Inn
28th June 1816

Sir

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

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

I have [etc]

H.Hobhouse

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

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

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

25th June 1816: A Suffolk magistrate forwards a threatening letter to the Home Secretary

My Lord: I beg to hand to your Lordship a paper I received this morning from Mr. Booty Farmer at Worlington in Lackford hundred in the County of Suffolk. The paper was found nailed to his barn on Sunday last. A part of the threshing mill had been destroyed by some person or persons unknown who had set fire to it on Wednesday night in an enclosure belonging to Mr. Booty.

I have [etc]
J Barker

Newmarket
25th June 1816

[To: Lord Sidmouth]

23rd June 1816: Threatening letter sent to a farmer at Worlington, Suffolk

A Caushen for Worlington farmer that youse the threshen Meshien for whe are determined to seet fier to every one that comes to worlington and if the required part are not made away with we will fier the Bilding whare whare it is in

19th June 1816: Threshing Machine set alight at Worlington, Suffolk

In the evening of Wednesday 19th June 1816, a Threshing Machine belonging to a farmer called Mr. Booty was set alight at Worlington, near Mildenhall in Suffolk.

12th June 1816: A Brandon magistrates responds to John Moseley's letter to the press the previous week

TO THE EDITOR OF THE BURY POST.

SIR,

AS the resident Magistrate in Brandon, I feel myself called upon to express my concern, that reports are not only industriously spread, but accredited, to fix the origin and existence of all the riots in this neighbourhood, and even in the more distant parts of Suffolk and the Isle of Ely, upon the inhabitants of this town, because they impute a neglect of duty to the Magistrate residing here.

I believe the Assize Calendars will not shew more crimes to have been committed in the town of Brandon of late, than in any other parishes in the county.—But the strongest refutation of those reports, injurious to the Magistrate and the principal Inhabitants of the parish, is, that although charges are brought generally against the inhabitants of Brandon, for instigating and abetting the pre-existing and subsequent riots, and although I have used every means in my power to investigate and ascertain the truth of the reports, no proof has yet been substantiated before me, or information yet laid, against any individual of this town, which might on conviction of such offender, have led to the suppression of the riots in other places, and the prevention of them in the town of Brandon, by the immediate application and exercise of the Civil Authorities.

I am, Sir, your obedient humble Servant,

J. R. BURCH.

Brandon, June 7th, 1816.

8th June 1816: A Clerk to Norfolk magistrates has concerns that risings are still being planned in East Anglia

My Lord [Suffield]

Mr. Robert Harvey a Farmer & Miller of respectability and considerable property called upon the late this evening to communicate the intelligence which he had been able to collect during the day in Suffolk, considering himself as a marked man if any riot should take place, of which he seems persuaded of the probability. The restlessness is I believe that present confined to the Suffolk side of the Waveney. His Mills are on the river, and it appears to be highly expedient to take measures both the defence of Mr. Harvey's premises and to prevent the mischief from spreading in Norfolk. The same information which I send your Lordship will be communicated early tomorrow morning to Mr. Lee at Dicklebury who is a magistrate for Suffolk and I write my this nights post to Col: Nelthorpe in Norwich to request a detachment of Dragoons if possible to be sent to Harleston as the information which Mr. Harvey has detailed to me more at length than is assembled in a short affidavit which I requested him to write down hastily, bespeaks a degree of regular organization on the border of Suffolk too dangerous to be trifled with. I expect that some of the principal yeoman will arm themselves and be ready to unite if necessary for their mutual Defence, but having no corps means as we shall hardly be able to resist a mob with effect, and therefore I [request] your Lordship to sanction my application for military aid to take such measures for maintaining the peace of the County as your Lordship may think better adapted to the purpose

I have [etc]
John Oldenshaw

Harleston June 8th 1816.—

[affidavit follows]

Norfolk to wit

Robert C Harvey at Aldburgh County Norfolk informs me John Oldenshaw Clerk that he has this day had information from Mr. Gower of Metfield & Mr. Chambers of St James's in Suffolk, that a party of Men about 100 assembled between Nine & Eleven OClk last Thursday [evening] upon a Common call’d Greazy Green—& in their way there did press such poor Men as they met with, telling them if they refused to join them, that their Houses should immediately be destroy’d & that both Mr. Gower & Mr. Chambers had [received] information from those pressed Men, that the Party was headed by two Men arm’d on Horse back & that they met the purpose of fixing upon the Time of Meeting again to destroy the Premises of such People as are obnoxious to them, & that they are determined to destroy the premises of those who do not accompany them, whether Farmers or poor Men, & R. Harvey has had further information, that those Men have sent out Men to different Villages to tempt the Labourers to join them & that Monday evening is the time fix’d for their next Meeting at which it is fear’d they will proceed to carry their threats into execution.—

R. C. Harvey further declares upon his Oath that he believes Mr. Gower & Mr. Chambers to be most respectable Farmers & fully entitled to credit

Robert Harvey

Sworn before me
June 8th 1816
John Oldenshaw—

5th June 1816: A Suffolk magistrates expresses concerns about the legal implications of John Moseley's letter to the press

My Lord;

I call your Lordship’s attention to a letter, I this day see published in the County of Suffolk Bury Newspaper, from Mr Mosely of Tofts in Norfolk, to the Duke of Grafton.

If Mr. Mosely is correct in his assertions as to the people of Brandon remaining quiet & that they dispersed upon the riot act being read, (which if I recollect does not appear by the depositions we had the honor to submit to your Lordship by our clerk Mr Wootton Isaacson), I take the liberty of putting it to your Lordship whether or not Mr. Mosely does not remove the felonious part of the charge against the persons committed to Gaol.

I wish your Lordship to understand I by no means want to lessen your confidence in the depositions you have seen upon this subject, but merely to inform you of every particular relating to it at comes within my knowledge. Had I a Bury newspaper I would have forwarded it to you

I have [etc]

J Barker

Newmarket 5 June 1816

5th June 1816: Lord Suffield sends a report about the disturbed Hundreds of Suffolk to Lord Sidmouth

Gunton June 5
1816

My Lord

I beg now to lay before your Lordship the result of the communications that have been made to me by the Magistrates acting for the several Hundreds within this county. Of Thirty Three Hundreds Twenty Eight have remained in a state of tranquillity.—

Of the remaining Five, the Town of Downham in the Hundred of Clacklose and bordering on Cambridgeshire, has been more seriously disturbed than any other in this County,—I understand that Mr. Dering, one of the Magistrates waited on your Lordship to acquaint you with the disorderly state of that neighbourhood, it is the opinion of Mr. Place one of the Magistrates acting for Downham and its vicinity that the riot was occasioned by the sudden increase of the price of Flour, and the inability of the Farmers to employ the Labourers. On the day the disturbance began the Magistrates had ordered the overseers of all the parishes to attend their Meeting at Downham.—

In the Hundred of South Greenhoe a considerable number of Labourers assembled on the 26th [or] 27th of May at Castleacre & Sporle, to obtain an advance of wages and a reduction in the price of Bread, no violence was offered by them, and conciliatory means being adopted, they dispersed quietly. The causes of dissatisfaction were, the lowness of wages, want of employment, and the high price of Bread—

In the Hundred of Grimshoe, the parish of Feltwell was in a very disorderly state for one day, but nothing very serious occurred—

In Hundred of Mayland, the Labourers of some of the Parishes assembled in bodies and shewed a disposition to be riotous but by the interference of the Revd. Mr. Barker of Caston they dispersed without doing any mischief.

In the Hundred of Happing on the day of a meeting of the Magistrates at the House of Industry, a number of people assembled demanding relief in a very disorderly manner but on the Magistrates remonstrating with them, and threatening to read the Riot Act, after a short time they went peaceably away.

In the Hundred of Shropham Four men were committed to the Castle at Norwich on the 27th of May for breaking a Threshing Machine a rescue was threatened, but was not attempted

I hope your lordship will excuse my troubling you so much at length, but I have had some reason to think that this County has been represented to your Lordship as more generally disturbed that has actually been the case. I am of the opinion that the inability of Farmers to employ their usual number of Labourers has been the chief cause of the late riotous proceedings, and which cause, I regret to say, still exists.—The sudden rise of the price of Wheat added much to the discontent.—

To the vigilance and activity shewn by the Magistrates throughout the County I conceived it to be owing, that the Evil has not been of greater magnitude, and I also feel it incumbent upon me to state that your lot to your Lordship, that much [illegible] is due to the different Corps of Yeomanry Cavalry, for there alacrity in assembling and their excellent conduct when called upon to assist the civil power—

I have [etc]

Suffield

[To] Viscount Sidmouth

&c &c &c

5th June 1816: A Norfolk magistrate writes to the press about his role in suppressing disturbances at Brandon

TO THE EDITOR OF THE BURY POST.

SIR,

Tofts Hall, June 2d, 1816.

AS the conduct of the Magistrates at Brandon has been censured by some of the public Newspapers, you will much oblige me by inserting in your next paper my letter to the Lord Lieutenant of the County of Suffolk; wherein are narrated all the transactions at Brandon, so far as they implicate the conduct of your obedient servant,

J. MOSELEY.

MY LORD DUKE,

Mr. Borton yesterday shewed your Grace’s Letter to me; and, as it refers to the reported conduct of the Magistrates, acting for Brandon, where my assistance, as a Magistrate for the county of Suffolk, is occasionally required; I here state all that was done by me towards suppressing the riot there on Thursday the 16th instant, till five o'clock on the following morning.—On Thursday evening, between 8 and 9 o'clock, a constable of Brandon arrived in a chaise at Tofts, in order to convey Mr. Burch to the former place, to suppress a riot: which the constables were unable to subdue. I accompanied Mr. Burch to Brandon: on our arrival we swore in all the inhabitants, that we could collect, special constables; they (to the amount of about 25) reported themselves quite insufficient to quell the tumult, or to detain any rioter in custody. We went into the mob; read the King’s Proclamation, and explained the penalty; upon which the people dispersed.—At 10 o'clock we sent an express to Thetford for military aid; a Cornet and 11 men arrived about 5 or 6 hours afterwards. The town remained quiet; and between 5 and 6 o'clock of the morning I left it to return home, and to act for my own Hundred of Grimshoe, in which I am the only resident Magistrate; and where various disturbances have prevented my offering any further assistance to Mr. Burch; except by signing a letter, which Mr. Burch wrote on Saturday evening (18th inst.) at Tofts (by desire of the inhabitants of Brandon) to request that Lord Sidmouth would afford immediately a military force to support the Magistrates in Brandon and its vicinity. As the Hundred, which is peculiarly under my direction, is in Norfolk, it is unnecessary to trouble your Grace with the transactions therein; however it may be agreeable to you to learn, that with the assistance of the Yeomanry, tumult is for the present suppressed.

I have the honour to subscribe myself,
Your Grace’s most obedient and very humble servant,
JOHN MOSELEY.

To His Grace the Duke of Grafton, Lord
Lieutenant of the county of Suffolk, &c.

31st May 1816: Sir Henry Bunbury informs the Home Office about Brandon prisoners & suspicions about a Civil Servant

Private

Milden Hall May 31st: 1816

My dear Beckett,

Having qualified myself properly on Wednesday to act as a magistrate, I went with Mr. Barker to Brandon yesterday. We collected all the Evidence which could be obtained on the subject of the Riots in that Town:—and in consequence of what came out we issued warrants against two more men & two women (in addition to the five men committed on Tuesday) and we succeeded in securing one of each viz: Mingay Rampling, & Helen Dyer. The other two (Willm Clark, & Anna Folkes) have fled.—It appears that Peverett, one of those committed on Tuesday, is the most dangerous Character of the Party. He was the Leader and perhaps the mover of the whole business. The day before the first Riot he was seen to have many Bank notes in his hand and was boasting of the money he had at command—next to him we may rank Talbot, Wiggan, Rampling, Spendlove, & Helen Dyer—The fair Sex were very active, and both Helen & Ann Folkes are very good looking young women.—The Townspeople of Brandon have recovered from their Panick, & are now ready enough to give their testimony. We are much obliged to a Gentleman, Mr. [Toomey], who has returned from Benfield to his house at Brandon since the Riots, for his personal Exertions in seizing Peverett himself, in spite of a desperate resistance.—Mr. Barker & I have sent up our Clerk Mr. Wootton Isaacson to lay the Depositions before the Duke of Grafton & with his approbation before Lord Sidmouth. Mr Isaacson and was at Brandon with us, & give you further information.

I am inclined to believe that Spendlove repents hastily of his Share in the Riots, and might would give information of all &c he may know.—And now I must introduce to your notice a fresh Character, named James Smythe:—he is a petty Attorney at Brandon:—Clerk to Justice Burch:—and, as it would seem, leading the Justice by the nose. Mr. Smythe is moreover a little dissenting Preacher. He mixes  constantly with all the poor & profligate Characters of Brandon, and unless He be grievously belied is deeply connected with them. This fellow very imprudently attempted to oppose Mr. Barker's first proceedings on Tuesday, but was very properly put down. There are many grounds for suspicion against this Mr. Smythe; & I wish to have the [track] closely & skilfully followed.—Mr Burch’s misconduct as a magistrate has certainly been flagrant, nor has it been confined to the instance of these Riots.

I have been sitting seven hours again today on minor Justice-business with my two Colleagues—I have been particularly anxious to get insight into the provision made for the Poor round this neighbourhood & the treatment they have experienced. I feel no hesitation in saying that in general the Provision has not been what it ought & might have been;—& in many cases the Poor have been treated with great harshness or great neglect

P.S. Since writing the above the aforementioned William Clark & and Anne Folkes have been brought before me; and I am about to commit them to Bury Gaol.

[illegible] my dear Beckett
Very truly your’s

H.E. Bunbury

30th May 1816: General Byng's latest update on East Anglia

Milden Hall May 30th 1816

My Lord

I have only to add to the report I have the Honor of yesterday addressing to your Lordship that I have since received very favorable accounts, that I have seen and heard in the excursions I have made is equally so—

At Wisbech on Monday the Magistrates apprehended a riot, and I accordingly sent them some Cavalry from Downham—which I shall leave a few days longer, although they are reported to me quite quiet there—at Downham they also remain so, and the Ringleaders have been apprehended, at Peterborough from whence an application for a for assistance was made last Sunday, I have received a letter from Doctor Strong of yesterdays date, who states their alarm has subsided—

On the subject of withdrawing some part of the additional force sent me upon the late Emergency, so much must depend on the general state of the County, and of necessity for them elsewhere, of which your Lordship must be so much better informed than I can pretend to be—that I will not presume to add to the opinion I ventured to submit in my Letter of yesterday—and in the disposal of myself—I wish to leave it entirely to the decision of His Royal Highness the Commander-in-Cheif, and of your Lordship where my services can be most available, in remaining here, by returning to my Head Quarters at Colchester, or repairing to my intended destination at Newcastle upon Tyne, there to assume the command of the Northern District—

Before I close this letter I conceive it my duty to report your Lordship, that I have no doubt will afford you as much satisfaction in learning, as I have in communicating—that wherever the Military have been sent during the late disturbances, not only have the Officers received the greatest attention and Hospitality from the Gentleman of the place, but the Soldiers in their Quarters, have also been kindly and well treated by their Landlords and the Inhabitants—In some instances I had occasion to move the Troops without a regular Route, and not a single difficulty on that account was made in providing Quarters, or in procuring the necessary conveyance for the Baggage—

I have [etc]
John Byng
Major Gen

[To] Rt. Honble
The Secretary of State
Home Department—
London—

29th May 1816: General Byng sends an update about East Anglia to the Home Secretary

Milden Hall. May 29th 1816—

My Lord—

I have the Honor to inform Your Lordship, that it was reported to me from Downham last night, that the Magistrates had, immediately upon the arrival of the Troops I ordered there on the 27th, commenced apprehending the principal persons in the late disturbances there, and that the Military arrived there in time to send in some Cavalry to Wisbech, upon a representation from the Magistrates of their services being required—I expect a report from thence tonight, but too late I am afraid for this Post—

I am just returned from a ride thro several places in Cambridgeshire which were considered as disposed to riot, but every where I have been, I found them perfectly quiet, and at work—the Arrival of the Artillery, which I have placed at Newmarket, will spread some alarm amongst the ill disposed—

It may perhaps be considered too presuming in me in giving any opinion on the amount of Force it may be expedient to retain in these Parts, as your Lordship is probably much better informed of the state of the Country, than I can pretend to be—but at least I should be considered remiss in neglecting to do. I must trust that you will have the goodness to receive what I say on the subject is respectfully submitted to your consideration

As I am aware that the greatest part of the Cavalry placed under my orders are intended for other destinations, as soon as their services in these parts can be dispensed with. I am unwilling to retain them longer than is absolutely necessary—I hear not of any serious disturbance, and I think the measures your Lordship has adopted will be likely to deter any repetition of the outrages which were last week committed, I therefore hope that by the beginning of next week you might begin gradually to withdraw the Force—at the same time I venture to suggest the propriety of keeping at least a Troop of Cavalry and two Companies of Infantry in the Isle of Ely, until the special Commission have closed their proceedings and the sentence of the law (if required) has been carried into effect—I should have recommend also Cavalry to be stationed at Bury, and Norwich, particularly at the former place, as besides a crowded Prison there, and a large Depot of Arms and ammunition, they are well placed to move if wanted towards the places where disturbances have existed—I am perfectly aware that the magistrates in general, will be unwilling, yet a while to part with the Troops which they now have, as they are still naturally under some alarm, which will however I trust by degrees subside, much must depend on the call there is for the troops in other parts—I am fearful the same disposition may be appearing else where, the disturbances have been in general in all parts of this extensive district, that I am afraid it is not alone confined to the Eastern part of the Country—with respect to myself I have not a wish, but to remain here, or go elsewhere, wherever my services can be most usefully employed—it is my intention to go towards Downham in Norfolk tomorrow, and then I shall have completed a tour of the part of the Country, within my power to make during a days excursion

I have [etc]
John Byng
Major General

PS. I must request Your Lordship to excuse the haste in which I write to save the Post, having returned home late—JB

The
Rt. Honble
The Secretary of State
Home Department—

29th May 1816: Letter to the Bury & Norwich Post laments the automation of the Wool-spinning industry in the County

TO THE EDITOR OF THE BURY POST.

Sir,—Through the channel of your useful Paper, I beg leave to make a few observations on the state of the Wool-trade in this County, and to suggest some hints whereby that which is at present nearly lost, may, in the course of a few months be probably recovered. The great disadvantage to the extensive Spinning-trade appears to have arisen from the use of Machinery; to meet this, therefore, I should wish to recommend it to every parish throughout the County to have certain quantity of Wool combed, proportioned to the population of the Parish; that each should supply its own Poor with Spinning, and to pay such wages as will encourage them to keep from the weekly pay-table. Let them not say, “We have no employment;” it is good to keep them employed, and to have their minds as well as their hands occupied. By such measures, and at the same time selling the Yarn made under the price of Machine Yarn, a stop may be put to the use of Machinery; the Trade of the County may return to its own channel; and the Poor be enabled to live by their labour. Embrace, therefore, the present opportunity, or the Trade will be lost past recovery, and thus the landed, as well as every other interest, will be greatly and inevitably injured. I am happy to say, that several Parishes have already adopted the plan now proposed, and that the Poor are well satisfied; and I entertain a hope that it will be immediately attended to in every Parish throughout the County, as I feel no doubt, that at a moderate calculation, it will be the means of employing 1000 combers.

I am, Sir, your obedient Servant.

A Friend to the County of Suffolk.

28th May 1816: General Byng updates the Home Secretary from Mildenhall, Suffolk

Milden Hall May 28th 1816—

My Lord—

I was this morning honored with your Lordships Letter of yesterdays date, I am most happy that I have it in my power to state, that although an alarm still prevails in some places, I have not heard of any fresh disturbance, the ample means placed at my disposal, have enabled me to send Troops wherever they were actually required – and in this neighbourhood I shall tomorrow have some dispersable, to move upon any point wanting their assistant, the movement of these Troops in different directions has circulated a report of a large force being under my orders, which I have taken care should reach the parts most dissatisfied, and as I think my appearance at such places will corroborate, I shall make it my duty to ride over to them all, as I should be very happy if by a little personal exertion, I could prevent the necessity of moving, or the employment of the Troops—

I have been to Brandon this morning, and arrived opportunely at the time some of the principal persons concerned in the late riots there, were apprehended, which the Duke of Grafton yesterday directed to be done, not any attempt was made to rescue them—[tension] seeming to prevail, much more than any inclination to riot—

I am in hope that so large a Force in this District will not much longer be necessary, but on that subject I propose writing more fully to your Lordship by tomorrows Post, after I have received the reports I have directed to be sent to me—but I now beg leave to submit to you, whether it might not be advisable to withdraw the Troops from Downham and Brandon some short distance, to ascertain if they are really inclined to remain quiet—before any of the Force is withdrawn to any distance—and if they do not remain quiet, the terms ceded to them by the Magistrates will be at an end—

I am so well situated at this place for communicating with the Troops which tomorrow will be stationed at Cambridge Newmarket, Bury, Brandon and Downham, and for going over to them, and for the information I get from Sir Henry Bunbury, that I have applied to the Commander-in-Chief for His Royal Highness’s permission to make this place my Headquarters—which I hope will also meet with your Lordships approval—

I have had an application for some assistance at Peterborough, and have ordered there a Troop of the 1st Dragoon Guards which will arrive there on the 30th or 31st—

The troops at Downham are ordered to move to Wisbech upon leaving hearing of any disturbance at that place, I thought it too distant to send any Force to remain there—

I returned so late from Bury yesterday, and as Sir Henry Bunbury was writing to your Lordship, I trust you will not think me remiss that I did not.

I have [etc]
John Byng—
Major General

[To] The
Rt Honble
The Secretary of State
Home Department

28th May 1816: Sir Henry Bunbury informs the Home Office that arrests have been made for the Brandon disturbances

Mildenhall. May 28th 1816

My dear Beckett,

The business of Brandon has been left of late years (from motions of Courting or Convenience) to the direction of Justices living in & near this place. But nearly the whole of the Town stands in the Hundred of Suffolk for which I am about act in conjunction with Mr. Barker of Newmarket & Mr. Eagle of Lakenheath. We had some conversation yesterday at Bury on the question of meaning the proper Authority of the District magistrates over Brandon; and as we found the Duke of Grafton considered it to be desirable & proper, we have determined to waive the point of delicacy towards Mr. Burch & to take cognizance of proceedings in the said Town. Mr. Barker had previously received information of two Fellows who had been the principal Leaders of the Riots;—and after our meeting at Bury, he set off with great alacrity for Brandon. From the intimidation which had prevailed in that place, Mr. Barker found much difficulty in getting Persons to give Evidence; but at length his perseverance & good management were awarded by such swift Depositions as [moved] him to take up in the course of this morning the five Ringleaders of the late Disorders. Three Fellows were I understand the Delegates of the mob, and prominent in the Tumults & [illegible] which took place. They are all sent to Bury Jail; and I conceive it will be very desirable that, if the Evidence is found sufficient for the conviction of these Offenders, your Special Commission should come into Suffolk & afford some salutary Example to this quarter.—Mr. Barker is deserving of very every commendation for the Spirit, Zeal, & Promptitude he has manifested in this Business.—The Capitulation which had been made with the mob at Brandon, & in conformity with which they are now paying but [two shillings sixpence] a Stone for Flour will explain on Saturday, and we shall then see what course the populace will be inclined to take. But I am strongly persuaded that this Arrest of their Ringleaders coupled with the knowledge of what has passed at Littleport, will prevent their [illegible] the Tumults. However, you must [illegible] Troops in this Quarter & in Cambridge for some time:—during that time exertions will probably be made on all sides to alleviate the distresses of the Poor, and to contrive a means of carrying them through till the Harvest.

Ever, very truly yours
H.E. Bunbury