Worcestershire in the Nineteenth Century / A Complete Digest of Facts Occuring in the County since the Commencement of the year 1800

by T. C. Turberville

1817—At the Lent Assizes, held before Mr. Justice Park and Mr. Justice Burrough, no less than twenty prisoners were sentenced to death, most of them for sheep stealing; but they were all afterwards reprieved.

1818—At the Lent Assizes this year, the trial of Joseph Steers, a respectable tradesman of Worcester, and six others, charged with being concerned in the “freemen’s riots,” and the demolition of the buildings upon Pitchcroft, created the most intense interest, and at one part of the proceedings there was an absolute tumult in court, so great was the crush of people. The history of these riots is as follows: In 1817 the “popular mind” of Worcester was much agitated and incensed by buildings being erected on the corner of Pitchcroft Ham, nearest to the city, and known as Little Pitchcroft. The citizens viewed any encroachment on this lung of the city with commendable jealousy, as it was their principal resort for amusement and promenade; besides which, each freeman had some property in the Ham, having a right of pasturage thereon. A meeting was accordingly called in August, at the Hoppole Inn, to protect the rights of the freemen in this matter. Richard Spooner, Esq., then exceedingly active in all popular movements in Worcester, was called to the chair, and a committee was appointed, who issued notices to the parties who had built upon the Ham to remove their erections before the 29th of September. On the 15th of September, however, the committee met, and agreed that as the removal of the whole buildings would be attended with great loss to a charity which derived considerable revenue from the wharfs, &c., it would be more desirable only to remove those buildings and fences which were most obnoxious. On this decision being made known, the populace determined to take the matter into their own hands; and on the morning of the 29th assembled in large numbers, and commenced the demolition of such of the fences and buildings as were not strong enough to resist their efforts. The mayor came down to the spot and read the Riot Act, but nobody took any heed of his worship, who, with the magistrates, then began to swear in everybody as special constables—the said “specials” standing by and looking on at the demolition, very anxious to keep the peace, but not venturing to interrupt the mob. At last some of the yeomanry assembled, but being pelted with stones, they retreated to the Star and Garter yard, and made no further appearance. The demolition was concluded next morning; everybody saying that it was most disgraceful, but nevertheless glad that it was done. Steers and other persons, who had taken part in the work of destruction, were indicted (under statutes which had recently been passed) for a capital offence; but Mr. Jervis, counsel for the prosecutor, Mr. John Edmunds, declared that that was only done in order to have a foundation to recover the damages he had sustained during the riot. After two witnesses had been examined, Mr. Justice Burrough, who presided, said there was enough evidence to convict the whole prisoners of a capital offence, and advised them to throw themselves on the mercy of the court. This course they adopted; and his lordship then discharged them, on entering into recognizances of £100 each, to keep the peace for twelve months. The greatest possible interest had been made on behalf of these parties; and Lord Deerhurst, whose efforts were supposed to have contributed greatly to the lenity with which they were treated, was almost overwhelmed, on leaving the court, by the tumultuous approbation of the populace. The mob endeavoured to drag Mr. Justice Burrough in triumph through the city, on leaving for Stafford; but his lordship instantly called in the aid of the javelin men, and threatened to commit the foremost of the crowd. To finish the story here; immediately after these assizes, the agitation about the encroachments was recommenced, and Mr. Thomas Carden, one of the six masters, put forth a statement that the four acres in dispute were the gift of Thomas Wylde, Esq., formerly of the Commandry in the city of Worcester, to the Corporation; and the rents and profits of this land had been uniformly applied to the benefit of the Free School, and Trinity Alms Houses. Having in 1796 let out this land in lots, the six masters had been enabled to increase the pay, to twenty-nine old women, from 3s. to 6s. per month, which was a thing much more worth doing than to allow one thousand freemen the pasturage thereon, from Old Midsummer Day to Old Candlemas Day. A common hall was shortly afterwards held, at which the committee appointed for protecting the freemen’s rights made their report. It was read by R. Spooner, Esq., and stated that they had ordered entries to be made on two of the plots in Little Pitchcroft; the result of which had been, that actions had been brought against the enterers, and the venue changed by the plaintiffs to Gloucester. The committee now wanted to know whether the claims of the freemen were to be contested or abandoned, as in the former case it would be necessary that the city generally should enter into a subscription to provide the sinews of war. The report was adopted, and a subscription forthwith commenced. A motion to make terms with the six masters was rejected. Just before the trial came on, however, the matter was settled by arrangement, concessions being made on either side; and buildings cover the greater part of “Little Pitchcroft” to this day.

1819—At the Summer Assizes, John Grindley, of Bromsgrove, was tried on a charge of wilfully murdering Thomas Mannering. They had quarrelled in a public house, gone out into the street to fight, but there made up their differences, and sat upon the public stocks, drinking some beer. While thus occupied, Grindley stabbed Mannering twice so severely that he died next day. He was found guilty of manslaughter, and sentenced to six months’ imprisonment.

1820—At the Lent Assizes, John Burton was convicted of the murder of one Jaunty, in Worcester, on the 30th of July, 1819. Parties who had been employed by the Excise to seize some malt, were met at the back of the Hoppole Inn by a number of persons from the neighbouring public houses, and a general battle commenced; the interest of which at length concentrated itself in a fight between Burton and Jaunty. They had several rounds, and Jaunty at last getting the better of his antagonist, Burton ran off to his house, but presently returned with a pike, and stabbed Jaunty right through the heart and lungs. Burton was, however, reprieved on a point of law. At these assizes, twenty-seven persons were sentenced to death (one a woman, for stealing thirty-nine yards of bombazine from a shop at Stourbridge), but all were reprieved, except one for highway robbery.

1820—March 24—A curious application was made to the Lord Chancellor by the guardians of Sir Roger Gresley, a young man of twenty, and a ward of Chancery, to restrain the Earl and Countess of Coventry, and the Hon. John Coventry, from encouraging a marriage between Sir Roger and Lady Sophia Coventry, daughter of the earl, aged seventeen. There had been negociations for a marriage, rent rolls having been handed to the guardians, &c.; but as no settlement could be made on the bride till Sir Roger was of age, the matter was postponed. The court took it in dudgeon that anything should have been done towards disposing of its ward in matrimony without its license, &c.

1821—February 13—A rule moved for in the Court of King’s Bench on behalf of the magistrates of Worcestershire, to compel the inhabitants of Ombersley to pay £150 into the hands of the clerk of the peace for the repairs of Hawford Bridge. The Ombersley people replied that they were going to repair, and that £50 would be quite sufficient to do all that was needed. The rule was granted, but enlarged to the next term to admit of time for the repairs being effectively carried out by the inhabitants of Ombersley themselves, if they so pleased.

1821—At the Lent Assizes, before Mr. Baron Jarrow, an action was brought by a schoolmaster at Dudley, a little deformed man, named Hilliard, to recover damages from Mr. Badger for knocking his hat off at the theatre, because he would not take it off when the national anthem was being played. Mr. Badger, in the zeal of his loyalty, not only knocked the unfortunate pedagogue’s hat off, but the pedagogue himself off the bench; and Mr. Baron Jarrow, in summing up, intimated that he thought he was rather to be commended than otherwise, and pictured to the jury “the glorious sight of a whole audience in a theatre paying a just tribute of veneration to their sovereign.” The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff: damages, one farthing.

1821—August—At the Midsummer Assizes was tried, Jarratt v. the Mayor and Corporation of Evesham, being an attempt to establish the right of any person who had served a freeman of that borough for an apprenticeship of seven years to be himself admitted a freeman. The Corporation admitted that if the whole service had been within the borough the custom was to admit; but if the master and apprentice had lived elsewhere any period of the time then the right of admission failed. A verdict was entered for the Corporation.

1823—Two men, named Oliver and Skinner, convicted at the Easter City Sessions of a most unprovoked assault on three journeymen carpenters going home one dark night in January, and sentenced—Oliver to six months, and Skinner to nine months’ imprisonment. These two fellows were part of a fraternity calling themselves “lambs,” who used to infest the streets of Worcester at night for the sole purpose of annoying more peaceably disposed persons. At the trial they brought a number of witnesses to prove an alibi, but utterly failed, and disclosed the most unblushing perjury in lieu thereof.

1823—William Taylor, a working stone mason, recovered £120 damages in the Sheriff’s Court, for a fright into which he had been put by Henry Geast Dugdale, Esq., a magistrate of Worcestershire, living at Bordesley Park. He was one of some workmen who were erecting a stone lodge for defendant, who one day, when they had nearly finished, came up and peremptorily ordered them off his premises. He said he had been told by his master not to leave till he had finished the job; but Mr. Dugdale, foaming with rage, presented his gun at him, cocked it, and declared he would shoot Taylor presently, if he were not gone; whereupon he dropped his chisel and mallet in a terror, took to his heels, and had been declining in health ever since—such had been the effect of the alarm upon his nervous system. Mr. Dugdale, in addressing the jury, said “he once took a noble earl by the collar, and forced him off his lands;” and hereupon Lord Plymouth, writing to the Worcester papers, said Mr. Dugdale no doubt meant himself, but that the whole statement was entirely untrue.