BARRICADES PROJECT

From the 19th to the 31st of October 1831, rioters were largely in control of the City of Bristol, with their activities centred around Queen's Square.

The image depicts the cavalry attempting to restore order in Queen's Square Bristol - eventually successfully on 31 October 1831.

Harriett Arbuthnot (1793-1834) was a diarist and notable political hostess for the Tory party. Marrying Charles Arbuthnot (who was at the heart of British politics as joint Secretary of the Treasury) enabled her to become close friends with Lord Castlereagh and the Duke of Wellington. It is widely agreed that she was the Duke of Wellington’s closest female companion. Building a network with the men that occupied positions in the upper echelons of the Tory party and British politics gave her access to daily workings of parliament and internal dynamics of Westminster. In 1820, Harriett began writing her journal quoting her motivations for doing so: “It has often been a matter of great regret to me that, in all the years that I have been married and from circumstances have been living so much among the leading men of the day, it had never occurred to me to keep a journal. I have constantly heard so many things it would be interesting to remember, the greater part of which, from their succeeding each other so rapidly, I have already forgotten. I have now determined to conquer my natural laziness & make it a rule from this time forth to write down all that occurs to me, or that I hear of in public affairs that is interesting to me. I begin with the reign of George the 4th, the 1st of February 1820.” Her journal has been vital to the historical record of the political decisions and actions following the Napoleonic wars. As so much political action was conducted in undocumented personal meetings, Harriett’s journal gives us access to the thoughts of politicians that without her journal could have never been revealed. During the time of the Bristol Riots, Harriett’s journal indicates her anxiety (one that was shared by many in government) that hundreds were killed as a result of the riots, significantly higher numbers died than official numbers provided by the Bristol authorities. Historians have similarly argued that the numbers were concealed to avoid further public outrage and that many deaths resulting from the fires across the city went undocumented as the bodies were never found. Harriett also documents the Duke of Wellington’s correspondence with the King regarding illegal armed associations across the country. Wellington stated that the illegal armed associations causing riots across the country were bound to eventually collide with the government and challenge them as they had done all over Europe. The king agreed with the Wellington that the associations “could not be tolerated and must be put down” in order to ensure the survivability of the government. Shortly following the king informing Lord Grey of this, the narrative the “The Times” had been pursuing (supporting these armed unions) “changed its tune” as it now claimed these unions could not continue to exist. This incident exhibits the influence and power the political elites held over the media and the narrative it promulgated.

After being elected with a majority in the House of Commons, Charles Grey, the second Lord Grey, introduced a bill for Parliamentary Reform. The Bill went through the required readings in the Commons and was passed to the House of Lords, where it was defeated on 8 October 1831. The result produced rioting in several towns - especially Bristol (see Bristol Riots 1831), but also Nottingham (where the Duke of Newcastle's Nottingham Castle was burned), Derby (where the jail was attacked), and Birmingham (where disturbances necessitated the calling out of the resident Scots Greys cavalry regiment). There were lesser riots in London, Exeter, Yeovil, Leicester, Bath and Worcester. The riots indicate a dramatic level of discontent - so much so, that it has been claimed that it was the closest Britain had yet come to revolution. The riots were mainly targeted to the people and property of those seen as most resistant to the proposals for reform. See Steve Poole, 'Some Examples Should Be Made": Prosecuting Reform Bill Rioters in 1831-32, in M. T. Davis et al (eds.), Political Trials in the Age of Revolutions (London, Palgrave/Macmillan, 2019), pp. 237-261.

For three days at the end of October 1831, the city of Bristol witnessed a series of extensive  riots - as significant as the Gordon riots in 1780  or the Church and King Riots in Birmingham in 1791.  The Bristol riots were closely connected to the tense atmosphere associated with the attempt by the Whigs to introduce a measure of Parliamentary reform. The political atmosphere in Britain was increasingly tense as the topic of reform divided the population and the political elite.  Under the established franchise only 5% of people in England and Wales were able to vote as eligibility depended on the wealth of an individual (owning land worth 40-shillings or more), although in a very few areas (such as Westminster) it was more widely distributed, and in others (such as the ‘rotten boroughs’) more severely curtailed. In Bristol, out of a population of 104,000 men, only 6,000 could vote, rendering the remaining citizens powerless. Moreover, Bristol was controlled by the City Corporation which consisted of a handful of wealthy men who accomplished little, save for the protection of their entrenched interests. With the proposal of The Great Reform Act in 1830, the lower and middle classes began to call for greater political rights creating an increasingly contentious political climate. Thus, when the Recorder of Bristol Sir Charles Wetherell stood up in parliament and declared that the people of Bristol did not desire any parliamentary reform, Bristolians were furious. When Wetherell arrived at Bristol on the 29th of October 1831, they let their feelings be known by chasing Wetherell into the Mansion House followed by the outbreak of a full-scale riot. Wetherell had to escape across the rooftops but the crowd was further angered when the constables arrested some rioters. The confrontation continued for three days as Mansion House and the Bishop’s Palace were attacked, prisoners from Bridewell Gaols were released, and several more locations around the city were set alight. The rioting turned to parties at Queen’s Square where the mob proceeded to get drunk and loot local properties. Despite the Riot Act having been read, the constables, guards and dragoons failed to act due to the lack of definitive orders. On the 31st of October, the Dragoons finally cleared the square after instructions from the mayor. A Special Commission was set for January 1832 which tried many rioters and Mayor Pinney for his negligence (although he was eventually acquitted). Following a petition (receiving 100,000 signatures) seeking mercy for the 31 rioters sentenced to death, only four were hung. The Great Reform Act was finally passed in 1832 followed by the Municipal Corporations Act eliminating rotten boroughs (boroughs with a small electorate making them susceptible to control by a patron giving said patron unrepresentative influence in the House of Commons). Many historians place the Bristol Riots of 1831 as a pivotal event in success of parliamentary reform the following year.

The Bristol Gazette was a newspaper published in Bristol from 1767 until 1872. These extracts from the Bristol Gazette on the 3rd of November 1831 describe the destruction of the New Goal, Bridewell, Bishops Palace, the Mansion House and upwards of 40 houses in Queen Square caused by the fires lit by the rioters. The Gazette explained the build up of anger to and detestation of Sir Charles Wetherell (the Recorder) for his opposition to the reform bill. However, it mentions that most political figures in the city never expected these feelings to be manifested in violence. Sensing this build up of discontent, a number of special constables from different wards volunteered their services and other individuals were hired for the day the Recorder was due to arrive in the city. After Sir Wetherell was attacked with stones during his address, the constables charged into the crowd and apprehended various individuals using “their staves without mercy”. The Gazette contends that had the constables not acted in this manner, no further disturbances would have taken place. The crowd consisting “wholly…of boys and striplings, persons evidently without stated employment” proceeded to retaliate by charging the constables and beating them severely causing them to retreat. Thus, the collapse of resistance encouraged the mob to become more daring, resorting to “extremities”. Despite the reading of the Riot Act, the rioters continued to manifest “undisputed control”. The destruction of the Mansion House forced Sir Wetherell to escape over the roofs of houses. Emboldened by liquor acquired from the wine cellar, the rioters proceeded to sack several other places. The special constables could offer no resistance. The Gazette claims that there was no explanation for the inaction of the soldiers that it saw as leading to the sacking of the city in a “cool and deliberate” manner. By Monday, the military had arrived and cleared the streets; those who did not retreat were immediately pursued and attacked, causing severe injuries. Total damage was estimated by political figures at between £400,000 and £800,000. The authors of the Gazette shared similar sentiments to Harriett Arbuthnot who thought that “a very great number must have lost their lives, of which we can obtain no account”. These extracts from the Bristol Gazette help us understand the extent of the damage, reporting an appalling sight of the city blazing in all directions during the riots. The Gazette also epmphasised the collapse of resistance to the Bristol riot which explains why the gathering of an angry mob became rapidly transformed into one of the most destructive riots in British history.