Stotfold
The Swing Riots
The Stotfold Riot by Mr Bert Hyde
Places > Stotfold > Agriculture
The build up to the Riot
As already mentioned the riot at Stotfold took place on 1st and 2nd December 1830. The Times newspaper 6th of the same month said, "It was one of the most desperate riots to have occurred of late" and went on "For some days previous indications of the pending storm were discoverable in the conduct and declarations of the labouring classes. So much so, that one of the farmers caused it to be circulated that if they would continue quiet their demands should be satisfied. But despite this assurance on Wednesday evening 1st December the labourers began to assemble together and many of the more peaceable inhabitants were forcibly dragged from their beds and compelled to join the rabble. They then proceeded to the residences of the more respectable inhabitants demanding an increase of wages etc. They were told that if they had any reasonable complaint to make they should be dealt with at a vestry at 10 o'clock next morning. With this understanding they separated for the night"Thursday
"Long before daylight next morning they collected again and proceeded to every farm-house in the village and compelled every man and boy that was willing to work to join them positively declaring, with the most horrid oaths and imprecations that neither man nor horse should proceed to work that day; which threat they literally carried into effect, for those who notwithstanding this proceeded to plough, etc., were forcibly taken away from their horses and the horses turned adrift, by a detachment sent from the main body for this purpose. So careful were they of keeping the whole of their forces together, that one individual who, despite their order, stole away to workin a neighbouring village, was fetched from thence by a party of 20, who cudgelled him most lustily for disobedience of orders. "
This next paragraph is taken chiefly from the report of the subsequent trial in the Cambridge Chronicle, 11th March 1831. Things remained in this state until about 10 o'clock when the vestry assembled. By that time around 300 men and boys had 'tumultuously' gathered in the churchyard where the vestry meeting was held. (In other words all the labourers of the village were there not just a few young hot heads) .The Times said 100 to 200 .They were armed for the most part with clubs and bludgeons. The principal object of their fury was one Smith the overseer of the parish. The mob shouted "No Smith! Down with Smith!" till some of the farmers promised that the obnoxious officer should be removed from his situation and all the persons renting cottages of less than 5 per year should be struck out of the rates for the parish.(1) The Times said "Wholly exempt from the payment of taxes".(2) It was then proposed by a farmer that "the satisfied" should separate themselves from "the dissatisfied" upon which some few left the ranks when a man named Godfrey went up to the seceders and striking his club violently on the ground swore that they should join the mainbody again which they were obliged to submit to do. They next demanded 2s a day for their labour and one of the farmers asking where the money to pay it was to comefrom one of the crowd, Thomas Cooper, replied that he did not care for that 2s a day they would have! Another then shouted " Damn their eyes! lets begin to pitch into them!" and some of the farmers were struck. Despite this the farmers would not concede 2s a day as a general principle and as nothing short of recognising this principle would satisfy the mob the vestry broke up after much fruitless discussion.
Returning to the Times it goes on, "The infuriated assembly (from 100 to 200in number) then proceeded to acts of violence and went through the village demanding bread from the bakers, beer from the publicans and money from the inhabitants generally and such as had the hardihood to resist their demands had a forcible entrance effected into their houses and were eventually obliged to comply with their demands or suffer their property to be forcibly taken away" .One source said that a rioter named James Sharpe swore to a man named Barker ,he would have " five shillings of his money in blood", In another incident five men broke into the shop of Benjamin Howard on the Green and stole a loaf of bread. The rioters also railed bitterly against both the non-resident Vicar who had recently increased his( small) tithe and Laurence Trustrarn who farmed Tithe Farm in Rook Tree Lane and who was the leasee of the great tithes. The Times goes on " In this state things continued until evening when they went into the field (3) and collected some uncarted straw which they ignited in order toraise an alarm of fire. Being, moreover, somewhat suspicious that some attempt would be made to apprehend them they bound themselves by the most awful declarations that they would suffer death before any of their party should be taken. Late in the evening they separated hinting that if their demands were not granted on Saturday they would on that evening have recourse to further violence"
(1). The point about, " All the persons renting cottages of less than 5 per year should be struck out of the rates for the parish "is a direct quotation from the Cambridge Chronicle. It seems to be correct for exactly the same is said by the Herts Mercury 4th Dec 1830.
(2). The Times' report is confusing here. It says, "Wholly exempt from the payment of taxes", whereas the context in the paper refers only to the paupers being struck out of the rates for the parish. There is a considerable difference between these two things.
(3)."The field" is correct - not a field The riot was before the enclosure of the large common fields of Stotfold in 1851. What is meant is one of the old open strip type fields, probably Wrayficld .
Page last updated: 4th February 2014