> Hello all. Here is more on the Tolpuddle Martyrs. Thanks Lorraine. > > > The Tolpuddle Martyrs & Queen of England > > In 1837 Victoria became Queen of England at the tender age of 18. She was a > sprightly young girl who enjoyed a giggle with the best of them, in marked > contrast to many of her dour and sober subjects. One of the first crises of > her reign occurred in 1838 when a deputation from the Lower Bockhampton > Women's Institute presented themselves at Windsor. They brought a petition, > signed by almost every woman in Dorset, requesting the sovereign's > permission to change the names of several East Dorset villages from > Tolpiddle, Alfpiddle and Piddletown to the more salubrious Tolpuddle, > Alfpuddle and Puddletown. The Queen was highly amused by this request, and > refused it just to see what they would do next. > > The response was swift and quite startling. The inhabitants of > the West Country have never been noted for their attachment to the Crown, > and the yeomen of Dorset were soon up in arms, while the Parish Councils of > all the affected villages took the decisive step of changing their names > unilaterally. > > The Dorset War raged for over a decade, absorbing the energies > of almost the entire British Army, and only ended when the Army accepted an > invitation to join in the Crimean War. By this time the Queen had been > forced to give in and approve the name changes. One result of this was that > Victoria vowed to become bad-tempered and never play a prank on her subjects > again. > > > > > > England History. The Luddites and the Combination Acts > The Tolpuddle Martyrs, 1834 > Source: from George Loveless, > > Victims of Whiggery; > In 1834, six agricultural labourers in Dorset tried to resist wage-cutting > by forming themselves into a Friendly Society or trade union. They were > arrested, tried and transported for taking an illegal oath under the > preamble to the 1797 Act intended to prevent mutiny in the Royal Navy. They > were not brought back until 1838. George Loveless became a delegate to the > Chartist Convention in 1839. Loveless, one of the labourers wrote this > account of events. > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- > ---- > > > > In the year 1831-32, there was a general movement of the working classes for > an increase of wages, and the labouring men in the parish where I lived > [Tolpuddle] gathered together, and met their employers, to ask them for an > advance of wages, and they came to a mutual agreement, the masters in > Tolpuddle promising to give the men as much for their labour as the other > masters in the district. The whole of the men then went to work, and the > time that was spent in this affair did not exceed two hours. No language of > intimidation or threatening was used on the occasion. Shortly after we > learnt that, in almost every place around us, the masters were giving their > men money, or money's worth to the amount of ten shillings a week - we > expected to be entitled to as much - but no, nine shillings must be our > portion. After some months we were reduced to eight shillings per week. This > caused great dissatisfaction, and all the labouring men in the village, with > the exception of two or three invalids, made application to a neighbouring > magistrate... > > > > I was one nominated to appear, and when there we were told that we must work > for whatever our employers thought fit to give us, as there was no law to > compel masters to give any fixed sum of money to their servants. In vain we > remonstrated that an agreement was made... From this time we were reduced to > seven shillings per week, and shortly after our employers told us they must > lower us to six shillings per week. We consulted together what had better be > done, knowing it was impossible to live honestly on such scantly means. I > had seen at different times accounts of Trade Societies; I mentioned this, > and it was resolved to form a friendly society among the labourers, having > sufficiently learned that it would be vain to seek the redress either of > employers, magistrates or parsons. I inquired of a brother to get > information how to proceed, and shortly after, two delegates from a Trade > Society paid us a visit, formed a Friendly Society among the labourers, and > gave us directions how to proceed. This was about the latter end of October > 1833. On the 9th December 1833, in the evening, Edward Legg [a labourer], > who was witness against us on our trial, came and desired to be admitted > into the Society... > > > > Nothing particular occurred from this time until the 21st of February, 1834, > when placards were posted up at the most conspicuous places, purporting to > be cautions from the magistrates, threatening to punish with seven years' > transportation any man who should join the Union. This was the first time > that I heard of any law being in existence to forbid such societies. I met > with a copy, read it, and put it into my pocket. February the 24th at day > break, I arose to go to my usual labour, and had just left my house, when > Mr. James Brine, constable of the parish, met me and said, "I have a warrant > for you, from the magistrates." > > > > ...Accordingly I and my companions walked in company with the constable to > Dorchester, about seven miles distant, and were taken into the house of a > Mr. Woolaston, magistrate... Legg was called upon to swear to us, and we > were instantly sent to prison... In this situation the chaplain of the > prison paid us a visit, to pour a volley of instruction in our ears, mixed > up, however, in the cup of abuse. After upbraiding us and taunting us with > being discontented and idle, and wishing to ruin our masters, he proceeded > to tell us that we were better off than our masters, and that government had > made use of every possible means for economy and retrenchment to make all > comfortable. He inquired if I could point out anything that might be done to > increase the comfort of the labourer. I told him I thought I could; and bega > n to assure him that our object was not to ruin the master, but that, for a > long time, we had been looking for the head to begin, and relieve the > various members down to the feet; but finding it was of no avail, we were > thinking of making application to our masters, and for them to make > application to their masters, and so up to the head; and as to their being > worse off than ourselves, I could not believe it, while I saw them keep such > a number of horses for no other purpose than to chase the hare and the fox. > And besides I thought gentlemen wearing the clerical livery, like himself, > might do with a little less salary. "Is that how you mean to do it?" said > he. "That is one way I have been thinking of, Sir." - "I hope the Court will > favour you, but I think they will not; for I believe they mean to make an > example of you." And saying this he left us. On the 15th March we were taken > to the County-hall to await our trial... > > > > As to the trial, I need mention but little; the whole proceedings were > characterised by a shameful disregard of justice and decency; the most > unfair means were resorted to in order to frame an indictment against us; > the Grand Jury appeared to rack heaven and earth to get some clue against > us, but in vain; our characters were investigated from our infancy to the > then present moment; our masters were inquired of to know if we were not > idle, or attended public-houses, or some other fault in us; and much as they > were opposed to us, they had common honesty enough to declare that we were > good labouring servants, and that they never heard of any complaint against > us; and when nothing whatever could be raked together, the unjust and cruel > judge, John Williams, ordered us to be tried for mutiny and conspiracy, > under an Act 37 Geo. III, Cap. 123, for the suppression of mutiny amongst > the marines and seamen, several years ago, at the Nore. The greater part of > the evidence against us, on our trial, was put into the mouths of the > witnesses by the judge... > > > > I shall not soon forget his address to the jury in summing up the evidence: > among other things, he told them, that if such Societies were allowed to > exist, it would ruin masters, cause a stagnation in trade, destroy > property, - and if they should not find us guilty, he was certain they would > forfeit the opinion of the Grand Jury. I thought to myself, there is no > danger but we shall be found guilty, as we have a special jury for the > purpose, selected from among those who are most unfriendly towards us - the > Grand Jury, landowners, the Petty Jury, land-renters. Under such a charge, > from such a quarter, self-interest alone would induce them to say, "Guilty." > ... > > > > ...At the time when so much incendiarism was prevailing in so many parts of > the kingdom, a watch was set in our parish for the protection of property in > the night, and I and my brothers, among others were chosen to watch some > property. Will any reasonable man believe, if we had been rioters that we > should have been so chosen.? But the secret is this: I am from principle, a > Dissenter, and by some in Tolpuddle it is considered as the sin of > witchcraft; nay, there is no forgiveness for it in this world nor that which > is to come; the years 1834-35 are not forgotten, and many a curious tale > might be told of men that were persecuted, banished and not allowed to have > employ if they entered the Wesleyan Chapel at Tolpuddle... > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 266.7.4 - Release Date: 18/03/2005 > >