Agrarian Riots

In the 1820s and 1830s, desperate agricultural labourers in England began to revolt. There were a few factors involved in causing this unrest but Land Enclosure is considered to have played a large part.

Agrarian Rioters in 1830

Before Enclosure

Before enclosure, villages used an open field system of farming. Large open fields were divided into strips that would be farmed by its owners. They were often scattered, and there were no fences or hedges to divide them.

There was also an area of common land used for grazing. This was not open to the general public but was land (controlled by the lord of the manor) that people from that village had rights to use. The land would be used to pasture cattle or keep livestock such as geese, and collect turf, firewood, fruit or berries. There would be a communal consensus for when and how the land would be farmed.

After Enclosure

After enclosure, the separate strips were consolidated so that owners had unified pieces of land. These were marked out through fences or hedges with absolute property rights. No communal consensus was needed – owners could do with their land as they wished.

Depiction of how village land looked before and after enclosure
Before and After Enclosure

Enclosure of land was not new, but in the late 18th century it was now being formalised with parliamentary acts. A landowner wanting to enclose land in their parish would obtain a private Act of Parliament. Commissioners would then visit the parish to survey the area and hear claims of other land holders or those with rights to the common. The commissioners would then enclose the open fields, allocating a plot of land that was equal in size to the total strips of land a landowner previously held. The common would also be divided and given to landowners depending on their total landholdings in the parish and access they had to the common.

People who previously had common rights lost the ability to use that land to make ends meet and those who still had some rights, such as tenant farmers, were increasingly asked for rent in cash rather than stock or produce.

How were agricultural labourers affected?

Consolidating the land meant that less workers were needed. It became more common for labourers to be paid by the day or week, or employed for short periods such as harvesting, hedging, ditching and threshing. Farmhands became casual labourers with no guarantee of work, and rates of pay dropped because there were so many available workers. The problem grew worse in 1815 when the Napoleonic Wars ended, and many thousands of soldiers returned to the rural labour market.

A Horse Gin in Use (The Illustrated Exhibitor, 1851)

The introduction of threshing machines aggravated the situation. Farm labourers who had previously been employed to manually thresh grain over the winter months, were replaced by cheaper and more efficient horse-powered machines. Groups of agricultural labourers began to rise up, setting fire to farms and destroying machinery.

If captured, the rioters faced imprisonment, transportation, and even execution, so it was not an act to be taken lightly.

If you have ancestors who were agricultural labourers in the 1820s and 1830s, they may well have been involved in the protests.

Sources:

Norfolk County Council: Enclosure

In Our Time: The Enclosures of the 18th Century

Wheatley Village Archive: Agricultural riots of 1820s and 1830s

 

George in the Gaol

Painting of a Stagecoach Outside 'The George in the Tree'
Stagecoach Outside ‘The George in the Tree’ by Edward Benjamin Herberte

My convict ancestors have been mentioned on this blog a few times, but unfortunately I haven’t really been able to find out much about their lives before they were transported to Australia. Since George WHITE is a fairly common name, the possible matches I find are hard to verify as being ‘my guy’, but I still like to cast my net out every now and then and see if I catch anything new.

It was while doing this that I came across another George WHITE of similar age in the Warwickshire criminal records.  He is not related to me since the record is dated 1837 whereas my George WHITE was transported in 1834, but I was curious to know more.

differentgeorgewhiteNOTrelated
Warwickshire Assizes entry for a George WHITE, 1837

21 year old, George WHITE was trialled for larceny at the Warwickshire ‘County Adjourned Session’ on the 14th March, 1837.  His ‘degree of instruction’ was recorded as N, which he meant he could neither read nor write [more info].  He was found guilty for this ‘mystery theft’ and imprisoned for 6 months.

I consulted the British Newspaper Archives and found a mention in the Leamington Spa Courier, printed 4 days after his conviction:

differentgeorgewhiteNOTrelated2
Leamington Spa Courier, 18 March 1837, p3 – NISI PRIUS COURT

George White, for stealing one leg and one shoulder of mutton, at the George in the Tree, in the parish of Balsall, the property of John Hemmings.  The prisoner had stolen the property out of the prosecutor’s shop, late one night, and when he was pursued he threw it away and escaped. – Six calendar months, house of correction, hard labour.

Leamington Spa Courier, 18 March 1837, p3

georgeinthetreemap
The George-in-the-tree public house marked on map c1890

I managed to find an interesting mention of the George-in-the-Tree pub in the Dictionary of Pub Names:

The pub was once the Royal Oak, with a signboard showing Charles II hiding in the tree. A licensee with little feeling for history is said to have had the head of Charles replaced by that of George III (then the reigning monarch) when the signboard needed repainting.  A different local story is that the pub (and sign) had become the George, but after a gale one night the signboard was found to have disappeared.  Only when a large elm tree across the road shed its leaves later in the year was the board discovered in its branches…

Hopefully this other George White eventually managed to find a better life for himself too.

beefeater-grill-george-in-the-tree-coventry-warwickshire-1
The George in the Tree pub in more recent times

The Incredible Hulk

Success – hulk similar to where George was imprisoned.    (No photographs of the Ganymede appear to exist)

After a bit of a break I ventured onto the Ancestry site and noticed that they had ‘new’ prison hulk registers and letter books. I found that my ol’ pal, George WHITE was held on the Ganymede while awaiting trial and/or transportation to Van Diemen’s Land in 1834.

UK, Prison Hulk Registers and Letter Books, 1802-1849 for Geo White – Ganymede – 1818-1836

The Ganymede was originally the French frigate, Hébé which was captured in 1809.  She was converted to a prison hulk in 1819 and broken up in 1838  (source: Wikipedia) (AND the Index of 19th Century Naval Vessels).  Hulks were not nice places to be and it seems George was ‘lucky’ enough to stay in one for under a year.
The Intolerable Hulks by Charles F. Campbell seems like a good read.

UPDATE:
In response to a couple of comments below (always welcome) about the fate of the prison hulk Ganymede, I feel I should mention the possibility there are OTHER ships/hulks also named the Ganymede.  The ship I refer to was formerly:

The French L’HEBE taken by Capt. SCHOMBERG in LOIRE in the Atlantic on 5 January 1809. Broken up in 1838 (source: Michael Phillips’ Ships of the Old Navy – http://www.ageofnelson.org/MichaelPhillips/info.php?ref=0998)

I have found reference to ANOTHER Ganymede – an iron clipper-barque built in 1868 which was hulked in 1912 (source).  

Although I don’t claim superior naval knowledge, it is more likely that the Ganymede my commenters refer to as being used as a convict vessel in 1839, is a DIFFERENT ship to either of these as ship names were often REUSED.


I feel I should also add here that wikipedia was not my only source. The Index of 19th Century Naval Vessels also contained this information and I have updated my source in the post to include this link.


However, if you feel you have evidence that proves these ships are in fact the same vessel I would be really interested to hear about it.

Using Convict Records to Go Back

efeec-convict
‘Male and Female Convicts’ (via www.naa.gov.au)

The wonderful Tasmanian Archives site has a wealth of records available online – particularly for those researching their convict ancestors.
My ancestor, Elizabeth ALLEN arrived in Van Diemen’s Land (Tasmania) aboard the convict ship, Margaret in 1843.  The details given by her where recorded upon her arrival.
Coming from a large city like Birmingham, with a relatively common name, I had lost hope of finding who Elizabeth ALLEN’s parents were. For some strange reason – perhaps I was having trouble reading the handwriting or deciphering the code used – I didn’t realise how much family information was contained on my ancestor’s arrival record when I first viewed it. After looking again at her arrival record, I could now see that the information I needed was there waiting for me.

Allen, Elizabeth
Height: 5/2 1/4
Age: 20
Calling: [Domestic Servant] & Needlewoman
Where Tried: Warwickshire, Birmingham Boro QS
When Tried: 21 October 1842
Sentence: 10
Native Place: Birmingham
Married or Single: S
Children: [blank]
Religion: CE
Read or Write: R
Relations – Apprenticeship – Where Last Residing: F Isaac at Churchill 2B Josiah & Wm 1S Mary Ann with my father; 9 [months?] on the Town
Ship Character: Fair
Offences: Stg a shawl [from? Gt?] Hampton St; once for same 3 mos
My interpretation:

F = father Isaac at Churchill
2B = 2 brothers Josiah and William
1S = 1 sister Mary Ann

These siblings (or at least Mary Ann) are living with her father in Churchill.
(‘9 months on the town’ seems to indicate that Elizabeth had also been prostituting herself).
Using Family Search, I searched the IGI for the birth of Elizabeth ALLEN around 1822, including her father’s name Isaac.  I found an appropriate entry for 29 Sep 1822 in Harborne, Staffordshire. Harborne was so near to Birmingham that it became a suburb in 1890 (source).

To check this was the right record and accept her mother’s name as Ann, I then searched for her siblings birth entries.  I was able to find Josiah and Mary Ann, also born in Harborne (no record of William as yet).  Ann was recorded as Ann PHILLIPS on Josiah’s record, Anne Philis on Mary Ann’s and simply Ann on Elizabeth’s.

I was also able to find the likely marriage record for Isaac and Ann – 26 Aug 1821, Halesowen, Worcester – Ann was recorded as Ann Phillis GEALEY/GALEY.  So was Phillis another Christian name or a mistranscription of Phillips?

Next Steps:

I Feel the Need… the Need for FOCUS

I’ve been MIA the last few weeks as I travelled back to Australia for my brother’s wedding (which was lovely).
Sadly, my grandmother’s health has deteriorated and she has now moved to Sydney to be closer to my uncle. (Interestingly, she is a direct descendant of the BUCHAN lunatics I’ve been blogging about and is also suffering from senility).

However, this move uncovered many photograph albums that I think even grandma had forgotten existed.  She told me once that she had thrown out all her old photos because she didn’t think anyone was interested (!).  Happily, this has turned out not to be the case and I pored over loads of antique photographs of her life (which until now I had never seen).  More on those when I have access to a scanner…

 

image via doubleday

In other news, I am currently reading a new book entitled, ‘Tasmania’s Convicts’ by Alison Alexander, which I found whilst in Australia.  I am less than halfway through but find it addictive reading and am happy to recommend it to anyone researching convict ancestors in Van Diemen’s Land.  It even mentions my ancestor Elizabeth ALLEN (very briefly) who was transported there in 1843 for stealing a shawl.

My brother has just returned from his honeymoon in Tasmania, where he had spent part of it ‘researching’ at Port Arthur. I hope to receive some information from him in the near future.

My head is swimming with genealogy right now so I’ve decided to focus on my convict ancestors for a while to give me a bit of focus.  No doubt when I get this scanner, I’ll be flitting around again though.