A Comprehensive History of Norwich

by A. D. Bayne

J. J. Gurney, Esq., said, “I can assure the commissioners that they have no notion of the sin, guilt, wickedness, and poverty, which our local elections inflict upon this city. I wish to add an expression of my conviction, that if the election of magistrates and other officers was altered, the whole city would be benefitted, and no persons more so than the poor freemen. I was lately informed by a principal manufacturer, who has large dealings with the poor, that it was his firm conviction that one single ward election does more harm than all the preaching in all the churches and all the meeting houses in all the year does good; and I believe it to be true. I would observe that I make no distinction of parties; both, to my knowledge, are equally guilty; and whenever the managers find a purse, they fly to it as an eagle does to a carcase.”

Mr. H. Willett was of opinion that the local elections were an injury to the lower orders, notwithstanding the money they received. There was less work done on account of these elections. Party had a very injurious effect on the trade of the city. He thought Norwich suffered from carrying on trade in a different manner to that pursued in other towns. The trade had not paid in previous years, and capital was not employed because it did not pay. The trade was carried on upon such a system that there was no inducement to employ capital. An open rate of wages would cause capital to be more beneficially employed. A great deal of capital had been lost to the city. At that time there was less capital employed in this city than in any manufacturing town of its size in the kingdom. He thought the city had been brought into this state by a fixed rate of wages, and the trade had been gradually leaving the city for years. The fixed rate operated against the workmen, because it prevented their being employed regularly. In consequence of this small capitals were employed. The men thought they would be injured by a fluctuating scale, but he believed the contrary. While the country generally was never more flourishing, the city was never in a worse state. Manufacturers feared so much annoyance, that they would not risk altering the present system. Many influential men were of his opinion as to the fixed rate of wages, but dared not avow it, lest they should lose their political influence. He dared not adopt the varied rate. He did not choose to subject himself to the consequences. The weavers were the only operatives who had a fixed rate. He believed that a fixed rate was kept up by municipal elections, because the leading men were afraid of losing their influence. Most of the influential men were unconnected with manufactures. He believed politics to be the first consideration with all of them. He believed that the apprehension of violence deterred all the manufacturers from attempting to alter the fixed rate of wages; but wages were reduced, or else the whole trade would have left the city. This caused such a disturbance that he dared not go home. The civil power was not sufficiently strong at the time, and the Dragoons were called out to enable him to go home. His warehouse was attacked, and his windows were broken. The magistrates rendered all the assistance in their power, and measures were adopted to prevent any further injury. His premises were guarded by special constables for two or three weeks.

Mr. Wright, one of the largest manufacturers of the city, said he was attacked in consequence of his reducing wages. Vitriol was thrown on his face, by which he lost the sight of one of his eyes. A majority of the manufacturers considered a reduction of wages to be necessary, but some of them became alarmed and did not acknowledge it. The reduction prevented a further decrease of a declining trade. But for the reduction there would have been a greater decline of the trade. Formerly the trade was very flourishing when there was a fixed rate of wages, but that was when there was a great demand for Norwich crapes, then very much worn for mourning.

Mr. John Francis, a manufacturer, said he did not quite agree with Mr. Willett. He did not think a fixed scale of wages advisable; but they were not in a condition to alter it. He thought the alteration would create more strife between masters and men. He considered a fixed scale to be a disadvantage to the men, but it was not too high. He believed that the local elections prevented capital being employed, and disunited the people. But for these local elections there would have been more trade. Both parties had united in promoting one establishment, but six such mills would not supply all the yarns wanted for Norwich manufactures.

Mr. John Athow regarded the local elections as the cause of the ruin of the city, as far as such ruin had taken place; as ruinous both to property and morals. The mode in which the elections were then conducted had contributed to the poverty and depravity of the city. He believed that the streets were in a more disgraceful state than in any other town, from what he had seen, and from what he had heard from commercial men visiting Norwich.

Mr. R. M. Bacon, then editor of the Norwich Mercury, believed that the prosperity of the city and private intercourse were all poisoned by the party spirit engendered by frequent municipal elections.

Mr. J. W. Robberds, a manufacturer, connected with the corporation from 1807 till 1827, said that during that period he had seen the working of the municipal system, and witnessed the strife of parties. He believed that by the contests in the different wards the character of the whole population of the city had been greatly deteriorated; that a great depravity among the lower classes had been produced; and that the character of the whole corporation had been affected. He knew that individuals had entered the corporation, not from any consideration of public duty, but to serve their own private interests.

The Election of Stormont and Scarlett.

During the inquiry of the commissioners, evidence was taken as to the general election of the previous year.

Thomas Rust stated, “Mr. Grimmer, in order to induce me to vote for Stormont and Scarlett, offered to pay me £50 down, and to procure me £50 of the city money after Christmas. He promised distinctly to procure the city money. I have taken an active part at general elections. I believe there was great bribery at the last election for members of parliament. I do not think there was any bribery previous to the last election. I do not know any instance of it. I saw some bribery at the last general election. I was up two nights working for the party. I never had money offered to me at local elections, but I was offered £100 at the last general election to go out and buy votes. The proposition was made by two leading partizans of Stormont and Scarlett. One of the parties produced a large quantity of promissory notes. I told him that he was playing a dangerous game. The partizan said ‘Can’t I lend money to whom I like?’ I replied, ‘I think not; it depends on the conditions.’ The gentleman who made the proposition said, “This is the way we do business.” The proposers were not members of the corporation. They went away and called again. One of them pulled out a large bag of sovereigns, and said he would not only lend me £100, but give it to me to join the party, and to do what I could in the Northern ward. They declared more than once that they were determined to buy it. They were guardians of the poor. There was no distinction as to the voters to be bought; freemen as well as others.”