Not You Again Reuben!

Today's subject is Reuben Anderson, a man who is fair to say kept the police constables and J.Ps more than a little busy! 

The age of Reuben differs by a few years here and there when he gives it in court, on censuses and the like. He generally decides on a birth year of 1845, although he may have been a couple of years older. He was the son of George and Emma Anderson of Dean Street (more commonly known as Well End, Great Marlow at the time Reuben was born, not be confused with Well End, near Little Marlow.) Another Reuben Anderson living in Marlow in the early Victorian era was our Reubens uncle, born in Maids Moreton, Bucks. 

Reuben's father spent several spells in prison throughout the boys childhood, usually lasting a month or two, mostly relating to petty thefts and trespass after game. His was not a wealthy family, and George's work principally as a general and agricultural labourer was not necessarily regular. Dean Street was a poor and populous neighbourhood, the haunt of many a poacher. Many lived on the edge of destitution in a way that's much underestimated now. Those that didn't tended to supplement their income in many  ways, not all of them quite legal. 

Starting Young 

Reuben therefore started his somewhat shady career rather young. In 1858 the boy found himself called to the petty sessions, suspected of stealing a quantity of iron from the premises of baker John Millward in West Street. (Formerly Gibbons the tallow chandlers - see the premises here) At this point the petty sessions were held in a small and often raucous room in the Crown at the Market Square. In court, his age was given as 11 but I think he was more likely 13-15 years. Generally speaking if a resident of Dean Street was bought to the sessions room, a crowd of friends and relatives from the area would attend to offer vocal support much to the magistrates annoyance. Perhaps the same thing happened to young Reuben. Regardless, he was found guilty and sentenced to be privately whipped. This was regarded as a lenient punishment compared to time in gaol. Two months before either Reuben or his uncle of the same name had been summoned and fined for stealing underwood at Little Marlow. I suspect it was the elder of the two. 

 Reuben is often recorded as either an agricultural labourer or general labourer, that catch all term for a variety of unskilled and semi skilled work. But the type of crimes he tends to get arrested for, indicates a slightly different story. By far the most common is wilful damage to a tree or stealing underwood. Reuben isn't gathering firewood, he is collecting the type of material he needs for his sideline as a "skewerter". That is he makes wooden skewers that are sold wholesale to butchers, usually in London. It was a very common and perfectly legitimate trade in Marlow, centred around Dean Street. However it was not legal to help yourself to the wood wherever you found it locally, as almost every tree belonged to someone specifically. Some landowners sold the right to collect the skewer materials to an individual, who naturally would be at a serious disadvantage if it all had vanished come harvest time. But skewer makers like Reuben could not afford to lease woodland and it's unlikely that buying the materials from a middle man would be profitable. Snarky comments were often made about how "wealthy" the skewer makers of Marlow were, given that it was pure profit to make goods from materials obtained free and illegally. But the reality was those we have identified as long time workers in the trade were in poor (sometimes shockingly so) houses and never escaped them. It was hardly a road to riches! Reuben is also identified later as a fruiterer - another classic Dean Street occupation. In this case it was the wholesale trade that involved Reuben along with his father - he did not have a shop. This was a seasonal source of employment for him, something to add to his other sources of income. 

Reuben's punishment for the wood rustling and tree damage tended to be a fine. (For example 2d plus costs in 1861 for damaging trees belonging to magistrate Benjamin Atkinson of the Rookery.) If he could not pay, he would be forced to spend time in gaol in lieu. Sometimes the fine was demanded immediately after the case was heard, on other occasions a week or two to gather the required finds was allowed. (Two weeks in the case mentioned above.) In 1862 he was imprisoned for 3 months for stealing the lunch of a farm labourer William Harris who was working in the fields. (His accomplice James Grace recieved 2 months)

A Familiar Defendant 

1863 was an especially busy year for young Reuben. He plead guilty to 3 offences in the same petty session in January. He was at this point described as a youth "well known to police", as was his co accused in two of the offences, James Grace. First up was two charges for stealing swedes and turnips, both offences committed on the same day. The quantity of swedes was large and they were likely intended for selling on as fruiterers had the connections to sell vegetables too. The second offence occured at Blunts Farm. In both cases the young men were bought to the intention of the authorities by an "informer" Thomas Tilbury. When Reuben heard this, he had gone after Thomas and threw stones at him several hitting their mark. Hence the 3rd case for which he was summoned. For each of the first two offences, Reuben was sentenced to 1 months imprisonment with hard labour. The same sentence was awarded to his co accused who had like Reuben plead guilty. For the stone throwing, Reuben was set a high fine of £1 plus costs. As he could not pay, he was taken to prison for an additional 2 months. As he was led away, our miscreant was heard to mutter threats of dire vengeance against the informant. Thankfully for both, nothing cane of these dark mutterings - as far as public records show at least! Come October Reuben was back in front of the magistrates again. This time he was accused of stealing a higher value item, and this along with his string of previous convictions meant Reuben was remanded for trial at the Assizes. The theft involved a large quantity of straw belonging to surgeon William Hickman. This time the sentence was for one years imprisonment. His age at sentencing is given as 18. 

Father George Creates A Scene

A little under a year after his release, Reuben's father was yet again in hot water. The cause this time was a very public act of rebellion. It was November, and he was out of work as many of those with partially seasonal occupations naturally were. He applied to the Relieving Officer Mr Russell for some parish aid. Mr Russell refused to sanction any "outdoor relief" - that is an allowance of bread or money paid to George while he continued to look for work and live in his existing lodgings. Instead he said he would issue an order that George should go to "the House". That is the parish workhouse. George was furious. No one wished to be admitted there, but the parish officers had decided to crack down on the giving of aid that would allow the poor an alternative to the house. It was considered the provision of out relief made things too easy for the poor and prevented the workhouse acting as proper deterrent to the merely idle. It was noted in the newspaper reports of the events that followed that George had a "good" summer income as a fruiterer and skewer maker, the inference being if he had no money now it was because he had not spent it wisely or saved enough. (This was of course usually an attitude espoused by those who had never had to manage on such wages or live in the condition of those that did.) But it's obvious from study of others in the Anderson families position that the debts and rent arrears speedily increased over a winter when little money came in. These then had to paid out of the next summer's income.  

The following evening, George was heard to declare publicly that he would "wreck" the relieving officers home. He took a bludgeon and smashed 15 panes of glass. He made no attempt to disguise himself and was arrested immediately. It may be that Reuben acted heedlessly out of bravado or anger or both. It may also be that his situation was dire and he did what many others in Marlow did and commited a public crime certain that he would be sent to prison and provided for. We have found many examples of people doing just that, often going to confess immediately at the police station. Was prison better than the work house? Unlikely, but it perhaps carried less stigma for men in Georges situation who had often been in prison before. Whatever the motivation, George's attack earned him two months behind bars, with hard labour. It just be said the conditions of providing parish aid were not set by poor Mr Russell and he could have been dismissed if it was considered he was too lenient. 

Happier Events

In 1879 Reuben married Martha Sparkes, daughter of Maria and William, the landlords of at various times the Barge Pole, Black Boy and Fisherman's Retreat inns in St Peter's Street/Church Passage. Martha was just over a decade younger than he. The couple made their home in Oxford Road, and then St Peter's Street. See links below for detailed information about Martha's family. 

It was not exactly the quietest start in life for the couple, as in 1880 Reuben was arrested for his supposed role in the wide scale election riots in Marlow. The case against him was dismissed over uncertainty about his identification although Reuben himself did admit to being present in the area - as an innocent bystander of course. The riot is covered in more detail in a post here

And now at last we have a report of Reuben in which he is the hero. A few months after the riot, he stepped in to rescue a women who was being threatened and harassed by her brother after the siblings had quarreled. It must have been quite the novelty to appear in court as a witness! But old habits die hard and less than two months later Reuben was back at the petty sessions in the role of defendant, along with John Price. The pair had stolen some wood and both recieved hefty fines based on previous convictions for both. 

Throughout the 1880s minor convictions continue to be earned by Reuben. Charges of drunk and disorderly behaviour, being asleep while in charge of a horse and cart, and tresspass in pursuit of game for example. All resulted in fines. 

Reuben died in 1890. He was only in his forties. Poor Martha was of course even younger when she entered her widowhood. She went to live with her brother George at first, then her elderly widowed mother and youngest  brother Thomas in West Street. At this point she took to working as a laundress or washerwoman.* 

*Tragedy struck in 1907 when Martha's brother Thomas went missing and was subsequently found drowned in the Thames. The circumstances were not known. He was working for Lovell's the builder as a labourer  and carter at the time. It was considered by some that he may have been worried about a summons he had recieved for drunk driving a horse and cart presumably because a conviction may have lead to the loss of his job. He had been sleeping rough at times over the few weeks before, although he had returned home by the time he was last seen alive. Verdict: Found Drowned. Age given as 49.  

Written and researched by Kathryn Day. 

Related Posts

Sparkes family of the Barge Pole here

Index of posts about life in Dean Street when Reuben was growing up - here

The skewer trade in Marlow here

Posts linked to crime and disorder in old Marlow - here

To find every mention of an individual or family here use the A-Z Person Index in the top drop down menu. There's more than 4,000 people mentioned there! 

Sources:

Census 1841,1851,1861,1891 - transcript made by Jane Pullinger. 

Sparkes family and 1880 election rioters research by Charlotte. 

 Bucks Chronicle and Bucks Gazette 5 May 1858. From the British Library Archive and accessed via the BNA. 

Bucks Herald 27 March 1858, 25 May 1861, January 24th 1863, 10 December 1881 as above. 

Windsor and Eton Express 24 Jan 1863. As above. 

Buckinghamshire Advertiser and Free Press 24 October 1863,as above

Reading Mercury 3 December 1875, 

Slough, Eton and Windsor Observer, 21 September 1907. Slough Reference Library. 

© MarlowAncestors 

The Resilience Of Jane Moody / Anson

*Please be aware that the contents of this post includes historic information that may be distressing to read related to the Anson, Moody, Bowles, Anderson and Neighbour families.* 

Jane Ann Moody was born to agricultural labourer William and wife Jane of St Peter's Street, Great Marlow in 1856. We have chosen to feature her as she represents a tale of survival. Life for the men and women of the working class Victorian Marlow was often extremely tough and the reality of the existence of those on the lowest income bracket can be shocking to read to modern Marlow residents long separated from this period. We will tell Jane's story honestly but also fairly. She did not conform to the moral standards of the day and as such was always going to be looked down upon by some in authority. We want to flesh out some the official details of her life so her struggles can be put into context. 

By the time she was 15 years old Jane had moved to Dean Street with her parents and siblings, a densely populated working class area of town. It was about this time that the young girl met the teenage William "Billy" Bowles, grandson of the then landlady of the Cherry Tree pub also in Dean Street. He worked as a hawker. William's grandfather  Thomas Bowles had died under tragic circumstances when still young - you can read more about it and the Cherry Tree here. He was therefore from a family that knew hardship. But it was also one that had came back from disaster, thanks to the strength and determination of his grandmother Emma. William and Jane began to court each other openly - their young age and relative lack of supervision was commented on later but they remained together for something like 7 years. Their relationship was by all accounts tempestuous at times, driven by mutual jealousy. They began to fight both verbally and physically. When Jane was 18 she took out a summons on William for assaulting her but the case was settled out of court. 

A Poor Diet Leads To Tragedy

If Jane and William had to deal with gossip about their relationship before, it was going to get a lot harder after 1876 when Jane fell pregnant. At the time of the baby's birth, the couple had not married which was another black mark against them in the eyes of society. This infant would sadly not live beyond a few months. An inquest was held at the Duke Of Cambridge, and the doctor described the child's emaciated condition. But the coroner's jury was quick and specific to state that they cleared Jane of any charge of neglect. She had made a mistake it was said, and had weaned the child when it was just a few days old, feeding the little one on cornflour and sugar paste with milk. Surgeon Shone who completed the post mortem said such a diet was nutritionally insufficient and the child had never thrived and therefore died of natural causes hastened by malnourishment. It should be noted that very early weaning of children was not at all uncommon in this period. Some of the papers made much of the fact that the bereaved mother was called into the court room and given a "severe reprimand" as to regards her future conduct. (Moral that is, not as regards to infant care). But let's also look at what the more sympathetic sources had to say. They stated that Jane was at this point living in lodgings with one of her sisters, and both girls had gone to work all day every day. As an unmarried women Jane could not simply become a stay at home mother and still support her child, nor could she take the baby to work with her. She needed to have the baby fed while she was away, and while the cornflour and sugar mix seems to us a strange feed, it was in fact a standard feeding mixture of the time for babies old enough to be truly weaned. The surgeon stated that the diet should have been primarily milk based and Jane's error was in the thinking the balance should be different. What's more the initial decision to "dry nurse" or wean the child was made because of Jane's poor physical state of health immediately after the birth. 

Two years later, Jane was pregnant again and William Bowles was the acknowledged father of this boy, known as William Moody. He paid a weekly sum for maintenance, as ordered by a court. The couple still did not marry however, which further blackened her reputation.  

Body Found In The River

In 1878, the relationship of Jane and William was going through a particularly difficult time. She had begun to see other men, at least according to rumour, but William declared he still loved her. Sadly, a young woman, Matilda Neighbour*, decided to cause a little trouble, although she may have been motivated to protect William too. In any case she went to the Cherry Tree where William was to be found and told him that Jane was with another man (a relative of hers) and that if he didn't believe her perhaps he should come and see. William left, and his grandmother told Matilda off, asking her not to come to her premises with such gossip. It seems William did see Jane walking with another man, as well as others, and according to some, a fight broke out although who was involved exactly is hard to pick out from confused accounts given later. Jane said William had threatened to kill her, struck her, and dragged her by the hair. John Neighbour, of whom William had been jealous, intervened. She said they had actually agreed to separate a few days before, but William did not want to be replaced as a sweetheart so soon. (Jane denied there was a successor to her affections and said John Neighbour was actually the sweetheart of another.) Ultimately Jane was said to be aggrieved at William acting in an possessive way as she saw it, and told him to go home as she did not want him. These words were alleged to weigh heavily on the young man. A few days later, William was found floating face down in the river near the bottom of St Peter's Street. His lifeless body was retrieved by John Clark Truss of the adjacent Two Brewers pub, where the inquest into his death was also held. Much was naturally made of the events of the days leading up to his death and the reports tend to hold Jane to blame for it, although a verdict of "found drowned" was recorded rather than suicide. One declared that Jane was a young woman of "considerable notoriety" in the neighborhood of Marlow, and that the case shone a dark light into the immoral "going ons" in the Dean Street area. 

But there is another fact the newspapers skip over. Jane was living with her sister in a cottage in Dean Street that had been previously declared as unfit for human habitation. Numerous orders were made to force the owners to clean it up and provide proper sanitation, most of which were ignored. Finally some work (but not all that was required) had been done and Jane had found a home there. Would those who criticized Jane for being always out, have happily stayed in in such a premises? The neighbouring cottage was let to another woman tarred with the same brush as Jane, the "notorious" Eliza Anderson.**

What's That In Your Apron?

By 1881, Jane and her little boy were back living with her parents and numerous younger siblings elsewhere in Dean's Street - sometimes they were also living in Hatches Row, off Dean Street. The next few years were eventful for her. It started with a 10 shilling fine for stealing some rape greens (used like spring greens, a common edible of the past and only recently "rediscovered" here as a gourmet vegetable) growing in a farm field. A number of other woman were caught in the same sweep - this kind of harvest or turnip greens were a common subject of crop rustling as they were easy to gather quickly. The woman had collected them in their aprons and when challenged they claimed to be gathering primroses. This claim unfortunately fell apart when the ladies were ordered to empty their aprons! Some time after this, Jane was also amongst a group of woman caught taking mushrooms from some fields belonging to the Wethered family. In this instance she escaped a fine despite pleading guilty as the Wethereds declined to press the charges further. They had suffered a plague of mushroom thefts and so wanted to make a point without making a particular example of the women. They hoped the summons to court would act as a deterrent for others. 

A little later Jane fell out with a lady, Sarah West*** of Marefield Passage, also located off Dean Street. What the two bickered over the records don't really make clear but Sarah went to court asking that Jane be bound over to keep the peace against her. Sarah said Jane would follow her up the street and swear at her and call her names, to the point Sarah was in fear of her life. However once Jane had spoke in her own defence, the case was dismissed.

 

In 1884 Jane was pregnant with another illegitimate child, young Nellie. It was her fifth child according to statements reported as uttered by Jane during a maintenance order hearing. This does not quite tally with the numbers of her then children given elsewhere. Regardless, she said the current babies father was William Price but she was denied a maintenance order for "lack of corroborating evidence". 

Jane would go on to marry William Anson. He was usually described as a general labourer at this time. 

Happily Ever After?

Jane, her husband, and her two illegitimate children moved eventually to Primrose Lea, another fairly crowded group of houses adjacent to Dean Street (the place name remains but none of the housing). Was this the start of happier times for the troubled woman? Sadly for her children in particular, the answer is no. We have written many posts about the number of drinking establishments to be found in Marlow, and in the Dean Street/Marefield area of Marlow in particular at this time. If you had sorrows to drown, there was plenty of opportunity to do so on your doorstep. Tragically, William appears to have been an alcoholic, or at least a heavy drinker unable to hold his drink. Numerous convictions for drunk and disorderly behaviour and/or using obscene language while under the influence came his way. But William was not a happy drunk winding his way home singing merrily with a few swear words thrown in. In the words of Inspector Pearce of Marlow police, Anson became "nearly mad" when in drink. On one day in 1908 the officers were called because Anson was rolling drunk and carrying an axe. He chopped up every single piece of furniture in the couple's home. (In Church Road. In this period both of what's now part of Trinity Road and Wethered Road were called Church Road but in this case Wethered Road was meant).The next day he was drunk and armed with an axe again, this time he was apparently attempting to chop up some wooden clothes pegs and the washing. Without much success naturally. It's a miracle he didn't loose a limb! He bravely plead not guilty to behaving in a disorderly fashion on this occasion but given the witness and obvious state of his belongings, he was found guilty and fined. This was not his last conviction for something similar. A few weeks later, Jane had finally had enough. She said he had deserted her and so begged for a separation order to be made. This entitled Jane to live apart from him without legal harassment to re join the marital home. She was granted it along with a maintenance order for a weekly sum to be paid by her husband for the care of her youngest daughter Maude. Jane explained that her husband had even before this time frequently stayed away from work. She had found him at the Cherry Tree or slumped drunk on their doorstep on such occasions. He in his defence accused her of being a heavy drinker herself but I have found no convictions for any public misdemeanours on her part of this kind.  At the separation order hearing, a weary policeman stated that really Anson's problems were all alcohol related and if only he could stay sober, he'd get on well. (In 1891 William Anson was described as a labourer at the Gas Works which were off Dean Street very close to the couple's home. He may have still been working there at this point.)

Afterword

Anson did not learn his lesson straight away as at least one more drunkenness related conviction followed in 1909. But let us hope he did so eventually, because as is so often the case, Jane would return to live with her husband. In 1911 both he and the couple's son Charles who lived with them were described as wood cutters. A tragically comic occupation for Anson given his form with an axe. In the 1910s the couple lived in what is now called Wethered Road. This blog deals with the pre First World War period primarily but we must finish by saying that Jane lived to the age of 83, dying in 1939. 

* Matilda Neighbour age 17 was the daughter of Dean Street general dealer William Neighbour and wife Jane a needlewoman. 

** The owner of the two cottages (James Meakes) wrote a defensive letter to the South Bucks Free Press after the Moody/Bowles case. He does not mention the fact his properties were in a poor state or that they had been condemned. Instead he wishes to defend himself from the charge of renting to two girls of poor repute. He says they were not in fact his tenants but their respective fathers were. He said Jane Moody's father had declared he wanted the property for a daughter of his who was soon to get married. Mr Anderson had rented the other because he declared he had a small home and large family so wanted a second cottage to put some of the children in! The landlord added that both girls had now moved out and so "all difficulty in the matter as far as I'm concerned is removed". Except of course terrible living conditions for the next tenant! 

*** Sarah West's son William John Stacey features in a post here

Written and researched by Kathryn Day. 

Other related posts:

All mentions of a person can be found in the A-Z person index in the top drop down menu where you will find more than 4,000 people mentioned. The same menu has options for post listings of  more detailed entries relating to specific individuals and families. 

More beer sellers than bakers : temperance in Marlow here

Crime and disorder in old Marlow -  here and images of the police court at which Jane made her several appearances here

History of the gas works where William Anson worked: here

More on the history of some of the streets/addresses mentioned above can be found here

Every day life in old Great Marlow when Jane lived here here

SOURCES INCLUDE:

Census 1841,1851,1861,1871,1881,1891 - Transcribed from the original microfilm by Jane Pullinger and Charlotte Day

Judicial case notes for Great Marlow Petty Sessions compiled by Jane Pullinger in 1975, and used with thanks. 

Maidenhead Advertiser 5 April 1876, copy from the British Library archive. 

Reading Mercury 1 April 1876

Berkshire Chronicle 28 April 1883

Bucks Herald 8 November 1884.

South Bucks Standard 7 August 1908. 

England and Wales Death Registration Index 1837-2007", database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QVHP-QKBB  Jane A Anson, 1939. 

South Bucks Free Press 23rd August 1878. 

© MarlowAncestors

 

Holy Trinity Church, Great Marlow

  

Holy Trinity in what was then Gun Lane but is now Trinity Road was consecrated by the Lord Bishop of Oxford on 20th August 1852. It had been built because the main parish church was not big enough. It was also the case that, like lots of other churches of the time, All Saints had some of the seating reserved only for certain rich families who had bought themselves seats. Even if they didn't occupy them during a service no other worshipper could sit in them as they were private. Holy Trinity was to be entirely free seated. (Only 32 seats were freely available out of 1200 in All Saints, not including 238 reserved for children attending the National schools.)

The foundation stone of the church was laid in May 1851 by Col. Alexander Higginson, one of the biggest contributors to the funds for building the church. Another prominent donor was Charlotte Cocks of the Glade in Glade Road Marlow (later known as the Cedars) and other members of her family. Many of her family were buried in the church and two of the original plain glass windows were replaced with stained glass ones in memory of members of the Cocks family. More about Charlotte can be read in a post published earlier this year.

The consecration was celebrated by the giving of a joint of meat to 2000 poor people of the parish. Some also recieved bread. 

Other donors also paid for stained glass windows in the church- Messrs Burisons and Grylls were paid to put in 2 lights in stained glass in the West window in 1876 for instance, the rest of the window to be done when funds allowed.

The church had generally a peaceful history but there was one unhappy instance in 1908 when 13 year old Eliza Anderson was prosecuted by the vicar for taking primroses from the churchyard. He admitted he did not see precisely which grave she took them from but was sure he saw her stooping several times to pick something up. As she had primroses gathered in her apron he presumed that is what she had been stooping down for. Picking of these flowers which were growing abundantly in the churchyard was a big problem he insisted. Eliza said she picked up some flowers discarded in a heap rather than living ones. She was found guilty and admonished but not fined. The vicar had given a statement that he wanted to make a public example of Eliza to stop others taking primroses from graves but not punish her any more than that.

Primroses still grow in the churchyard now. What a pity a child's innocent pleasure in them was dealt with by giving her a criminal conviction (which would have compromised her employment chances) rather than a talking to at the time. Perhaps as the vicar admitted that he was not close enough to see which graves Eliza was bending over or exactly what she picked up, more weight should have been given to the girl's denial that she had disturbed any graves. 

Lower congregation numbers meant that the church closed in 1977 but had not been used for regular services for a few years and the building is now in commercial use.

We have photographed most of the (relatively few) remaining gravestones in the churchyard. The majority of these pictures have already been uploaded onto the blog. See under Graves on the menu. For similar content to this post see under Church Related on the menu.

Researched by Charlotte and Kathryn Day.

Sources:

The Church Of The People [journal] 1864.

Mussons and Craven Commercial Directory, 1853. University of Leicester Library.

Reading Mercury 28th August 1852. Copy held at the British Library via BNA. 

South Bucks Standard May 15th 1908. As above.

Bucks Herald 8th May 1920. As above.

©You are welcome to reuse this content for family or local history purposes with credit to this blog and a link here.

Election Rioters 1880 *Updated January 2024*

On 2nd April 1880 the electors of the Borough of Great Marlow went to the polls to elect an MP. When the Liberal candidate was revealed to have lost out to Conservative Owen Williams tempers frayed amidst the deep disappointment of many working class people. Men, women, boys and girls threw stones at William's election base at the Crown and at other town centre properties known to be occupied by his supporters. They then took to using umbrellas, walking sticks and clubs to do damage. As the evening drew on the women and children melted away and Marlow men were joined by those who had come from Bisham, Little Marlow and High Wycombe to protest. Some estimates give the number of rioters then at over 2000, some even 3,000. Violence escalated when ladders that had been left leaning up against the Crown by those putting up new lights were used to break windows and as an attempted battering ram to try to get into the building. (The men using the ladders may have been working on the framework intended to hold illuminations to mark Williams victory.)  Police were outnumbered and summoned soldiers to quell the riot. This they did but not until some £1000 worth of damage had occurred in the town. 

45 people were arrested as a result, of which 42 were charged. Of the 42 most were Marlow men, said to have been at a disadvantage as the local constables knew their faces and names and so could easily find them later if not seized at the time. Wycombe men could flee with less risk of being called to account. I could not find evidence of an outcome for all of those charged, or even all their names, at least not yet. It may be not all charges were pursued.

The following were those I have found charged with being part of the riot, with outcomes to their cases if any are known. I have confined myself to Marlow men. None of the ladies were arrested. To read about an earlier mainly female lead riot in Marlow see this post

Reuben Anderson

Bill against him thrown out by Jury at early stage in legal process. A labourer aged 36 in Oxford Road at time of 1881 census. But he lived St Peter's Street 1880, a few months after the riot, when he intervened to stop a woman neighbour of his being harassed and threatened by a man who had fallen out with her brother. A few weeks later fined for gathering wood that didn't belong to him. He died in 1890. Read a biography of Reuben here

Alfred Edward Allum

Age "25" or "26", court reports differed [probably actually a few years older] labourer when sentenced. 2 months hard labour. Probably aka Brassey - see here

Edward Anson

Aged 18. Sentenced to just one day in prison because of his youth and low involvement in events. Had been recommended for mercy by the jury. 

William Borden or Burden or Barden

Only rioter denied bail. 2 months hard labour.

Henry Bowles

Age 27. Labourer. 2 months hard labour. Grew up Dean Street. Also known as Harry.

John Bowles

2 months hard labour. Age 24, labourer. 

Robert Bowles

Age 22 and a labourer when tried. 2 months hard labour. 1881 census - skewer maker. For more on this trade in Marlow see this post. Son of Robert, a fruiterer, and Eliza. Grew up Hatches Row, Dean Street and still there 1881 census. This row is now demolished. He was an agricultural labourer age 13 on 1871 census. Robert was allegedly one of those who wrested a ladder from workers at the Crown, in order to use ladder to batter their way inside. He struck the man in charge of the ladder - bricklayer John White - causing John to loose vision in his eye for three days. Described by one policeman as "very violent" on the day. 

Joseph Cox

Sentenced to 2 months hard labour. Presumably the 49 year old labourer who appears in Marlow on the 1881 census in South Place although it sounds in some accounts he was younger. Was seen with a bludgeon by one witness. 

Joseph Dormer

Sentenced to 2 months hard labour. Bricklayer's labourer around 40 years old. Lived Marefield at time, later York Road (the same area). Grew up Gun Lane [now Trinity Road] and Dean Street.

Henry East

Six weeks hard labour. Without a stated age impossible to identify in other records.

James East

Six weeks hard labour. Without a stated age impossible to identify for certain in other records.

James Folly / Folley  alias Steptoe

Aged 32/34 and a bricklayer. Seen using a ladder to break windows. 2 months hard labour.

Joseph Hicks

 A tinker who lived Dean Street 1881. In his late 40s, exact age varies on censuses. Fined the year before the riots along with another man for stopping their cart in the road for too long. Case not proceeded with for riot. 

John Langley junior 

Ringleader of the initial protest but tried hard to calm things down when shops started getting damaged. Given 6 weeks hard labour only after jury recommended mercy. Could afford his own representation at the Quarter Sessions. Aged 25. On the 1881 census a salesman, earlier was a fruiterer, a long time Langley association. His conviction caused outrage in some quarters as it was believed he was targeted because of recent active promotion of the Liberal cause in Marlow. His father, also John had campaigned for the Liberal candidate Griffith too. A subscription fund was set up and the money raised was used to present to John a tea and coffee set from an expensive London maker as a token of esteem. The presentation was made at the Verney Arms, Dean Street, long connected with the Langley family. Read more about the pub here. John himself wrote a public letter of complaint against his conviction, after he had completed his sentence. He said he had been denied the opportunity to call witnesses that could have proved his innocence. A full biography of John is available here

Charles Mullett

Labourer aged 41. Lived in Dean Street 1881 census and a "pensioner". Originally from High Wycombe. Bill against him is "ignored" eg not proceeded with. 

William Moody. 

Threw stone at a policeman early on. Sentenced 2 months hard labour. Nearly 40 years old. Lived Oxford Road 1881 and a chair polisher. 

Albert Rockell

Age "18" [actually nearly 22]. Labourer when convicted. 6 weeks jail. (Or 8 weeks according to second source)  He was the son of James, a bargee / labourer and Sarah an embroiderer. Grew up in Gun Place and Gun Lane Marlow. The former no longer exists, the latter is called Trinity Road today. Albert had been fined £1 in 1876 for playing the illegal game of pitch and toss (coin throwing game which involved betting and was very popular with young men) at Bovingdon Green. He was listed as a hawker on the 1881 census when he lived with his older brother George and his family. Two years later was fined 10 shillings for assaulting a William Fletcher.

Henry Rockell

2 months hard labour. There are a couple of different potential Henry Rockells in other records which this one could be. Was said to be very active at Remnantz, throwing stones and attempting to break in, unsuccessfully. 

William Henry Silvey

A 33 year old shoemaker. Had a witness, grocer Joseph Dorsett of Market Square to show he went shopping with his wife [Fanny] early in the evening after leaving the Crown crowd. However witness admitted William's pockets looked bulging and prosecution said yes that was with stones he later returned and threw at the Crown. 6 weeks jail. On 1881 census he and Fanny lived Cambridge Road. Later lived Queen's Road. Later convictions for drunkenness.

James Benjamin Smith

Aged 22. Bricklayers labourer. 6 weeks in jail. Probably of Lane End. Limited evidence of his direct involvement in any serious damage but considered to be just as guilty as those taking a more active part simply by his presence there!

George Sparkes

Jury threw out bill against him. A 28 year old general labourer. Lived Oxford Road 1881 census.

Henry Stone

Six weeks hard labour. 

Thomas Stone

Six weeks hard labour. Was seen to be one of those wielding ladder that broke the Crown windows. 

William Tubb

Fined £5 plus costs by Magistrates for malicious damage, relating to breaking a pane of glass at The Horns, Chapel Street.  (One of 17 broken there that day.)  He went to the pub the following day, denied breaking the glass and asked the landlord John Coleshill not to press charges for the sake of his wife and 5 children. Coleshill's daughter Sarah had said there were about 40 persons in the mob outside their premises but she only recognised Tubb. He did not have to go to Quarter Sessions after evidence behind further charges for riotous assembly was not considered sufficient. Shoemaker aged 33 on 1881 census. Lived Dean Street.   

Cases not proceeded with against Wycombe men Owen and John Watkins, both chairmakers and labourer Charles Mullett also of Wycombe. 

*Additional info by Kathryn -  Riot Act was read by magistrate Somers Cocks at about 9pm, 3 hours after the election result was announced. (Some reports say at 8pm) All the lights had been put out. An 1882 account says that hot water and a hose from the brewery was used to dispell the group. Later accounts list other dispersal tactics, not necessarily mutually exclusive, of which the one that's survived longest in the popular imagination is the idea that guns were loaded with red jam and blanks to make the rioters think they had been both shot and hurt. I have not found a contemporary reference to this yet though! (The same story was related about the commotion after the 1868 election, complete with raspberry jam.)  Contemporary reports say that although a call for help was made for military assistance to the Grenadier Guards at Windsor, some confusion meant it was not actually delivered. Those describing the riot first hand immediately afterwards do not mention any Guards present while the riot was ongoing. The Bucks Herald says a repeat order for military assistance was countermanded as quiet had been restored by about midnight. The Buckinghamshire Advertiser credited the end of the riot to the gathering together of about 60 special constables, under command of a police superintendent from High Wycombe, who formed a barrier across West Street and used their truncheons "freely". (This superintendent thought there was 3,000 men gathered by 7pm!) The following morning 70 police and an untold number of special constables were on duty in Marlow while the operation of bringing the alleged ringleaders to court was ongoing, and that of rounding up other participants. The police were to patrol in groups, according to the order of  the Chief Constable of Bucks. He had arrived on the morning after the riot to assume control of the police force in Marlow temporarily. 

Violence had actually broken out before the voting even began, outside the Crown as Conservative headquarters. Blows were exchanged with liberal supporters but they dispersed before law and order arrived. The Greyhound was regarded as the centre of Liberal supporters before voting day. It hosted a "working man's meeting" the week before, which ended in a vote to support Liberal candidate Mr J Griffiths. Among the other damaged properties were the Prince Of Wales pub, the Three Tuns (every window broken and the bar damaged), the brewery offices, the shops of Charles Miller Foottit (chemist, High Street and Conservative supporter, lamp and flag pole trashed, upper windows broken, lower ones protected by iron shutters) and William Hankin (tobacconist, High Street. Shop totally sacked. Pipes from here were allegedly bring flogged cheaply in the beer houses that evening), the home of Charles Carter (parish surveyor),  the home of George Ward (High Street, all windows and any sashes broken), the home of Dr Shone, and in a minor way, the Railway Hotel (the Marlow Donkey as it's now known. The widowed Mrs Porter in charge had apparently been seen sporting Conservative colours on her carriage the week before). At the home of Robert Hammond Chambers, the avalanche of stones was severe enough to break plate glass windows a quarter inch thick and smash the substantial closed wooden shutters inside them. The stones damaged a wall across the other side of the room. A man was seen to be in the attempt of using a large stone to smash the entrance door but he was knocked down by a constable before he could break in.  Foottit said he'd found a quarter of a hundredweight of large stones on one of the beds in his home. Some paving slabs had been torn up for use too!

Interestingly Superintendent William Sargent of Wycombe said that the defeated Liberal candidate Griffiths had warned him long before the result was known that he suspected the potential for trouble if the Liberals lost. He added that Griffiths had suggested that policeman should be stationed outside the Conservative Wethered's home but he declined to do so in case it "tantalized" the crowd and he was blamed personally for this. Reports that the contents of Bisham's ballot box were going to be seized by a group of "roughs" as they were bought across the bridge to be counted in Marlow were taken more seriously. It was closely guarded. 

Griffith's himself appears to have left in his carriage quite soon after his loss was announced. Some reports say he passed the Crown just as the victor Colonel Williams appeared at an upper window to address the crowd, and that Williams called for three cheers for his opponent, but had trouble being heard. 

Even children (of both sexes) were apparently seen throwing stones at the various windows. The Bucks Herald (very pro conservative) said the first blow was struck by a liberal supporter on a conservative one, who was taken into the Crown with the aid of 4 men fighting their way through. They also claim that there was a cry to torch the Crown. The next day (Saturday)  there were here and there "significant stains of blood" to be seen in the streets. Even then a flare up of violence was feared and 70 police were on duty. Colonel Wethered decided that most of the arms of the Volunteers should be removed from their Armoury which was then at the Crown. He bought them back to his home and placed them under the care of 16 armed men. Two consignments of the Berkshire police were put on guard outside Bisham Abbey and Temple House but they had nothing to do. The biggest interest on Sunday was in viewing the damage, and people are said to have travelled from Wycombe to do just that. Some later reports suggest a guard made up of members of the Volunteers had been kept up outside the brewery for the next week. 

It's interesting that Colonel Williams held an open session at the Crown in the following April to hear complaints from his tenants about their treatment. He said during the election campaign he'd often been told his tenants were against him but he didn't believe it as no one had said so to his face. On reflection he thought "2 or 3" of these complaints justified further investigations and so so the aggrieved could present their case to him at The Crown on the day mentioned. If any did so, I don't know. 

Rioters info researched and written by Charlotte Day. Additional research Kathryn. 

Related Posts:

Marlow people loved a good riot. So far we have posts up on three previous riots, the 1800 Women's Riots here, 1847 Election riot here and the Swing Riots here.

Voters bribery case of Jason Povey here

For other crime related posts look see the list here

To find every mention of an individual here, see the A-Z person index in the top drop down menu. 

©Marlow Ancestors. 

Sources:

Census, my transcription from microfilm. 

Great Marlow Parish Registers, my transcription

Newspapers from the British Library / BNA collaboration: Buckingham Advertiser 3rd July 1880, Bucks Herald 3rd& 10th April, 26th June and 7th August and 30th August 1880, Maidenhead Advertiser 14th April 1880, Reading Mercury 17th April 1880. Buckingham Advertiser and Aylesbury News April 10th 1880. 

Judicial records research of Jane Pullinger.

Padk, Arthur Thomas From Lock to Lock, a playful guide, "Judy Office" 1882. 

Information from Anthony Wethered. 

Bucks Free Press 8th June 1934, High Wycombe library 

Pig's Feet For A Shilling Or A Whipping- Your Choice!

 

UPDATED AND CORRECTED NOVEMBER 2024

Text and research by Charlotte Day, Image by Kathryn Day.

From at least the 1820s until around 1901 the Sawyer family ran a bakery here.

Robert Sawyer came first. By 1833 he had given over the business to his son James (born 1803) and gone to run a pork butcher's shop nearly opposite it. Robert's wife died after getting a piece of food, probably a piece of bread, stuck in her throat (thanks to Stephen Martin for this information).

In the handwritten 1833 parochial assessment notebooks which my family has Jame's premises were described as a house, yard, flour lofts and sheds and had an annual value of £12. Only two doors away was another baker's shop operated by Henry Menday.

In 1851 a Henry Howard received six weeks hard labour for stealing a 2lb loaf from the shop.

After James' death his widow Charlotte took on the helm but she had been behind the counter long before that. In 1879 her scales were found to be slightly deficient during a routine inspection. Nearby baker Owen Wright who had taken over Menday's premises was similarly found wanting*.

As well as bread Charlotte had a line in pig feet, or at least she did in 1859 when an 11 year child James Harris stole one from a dish on her shop counter. The price was a shilling - or for little James, a whipping. The judge in the case decided to be "merciful" and thus ordered that the punishment could be carried out in private rather than in the usual public manner. As well as pig feet Charlotte had a sideline in other groceries and vegetables.

A definitely more merciful sentence was handed down to a "girl" Emma Anderson who stole a 4lb loaf of bread from Charlotte in 1872. She only had to suffer a day in jail.

After Charlotte retired her son James ran the bakery business but she continued to live with him on the premises. You can read more about James (unfortunately it's not a happy read!) and another son Owen in a post here. I will just add here that under the stewardship of James the family suffered a serious fire on the premises when heat from a bread oven caused part of the timber structure of the building to catch fire. James was just a stone's throw from the fire bell which could be rung to summon the Marlow Fire Brigade. Both the fire and water damage to the building were severe with the family losing much of their furniture and it was feared that only demolition of the premises would be an option. That however seems to have been avoided. A few years later James sold his business to baking rival Charles Carter who did not intend to operate from the premises.

The Morgan family owned the actual building of the bakery. It had once belonged to the church.

Charlotte Sawyer, the wife of James Senior was the daughter of Spittal Street grocer Joseph Eagle and Elizabeth his wife. (Read more about them here) Her birth family were worshippers at the Salem Chapel in Quoiting Square now known as Christ Church. There she was baptised at the age of 2 in 1811. She married her husband aged 19. 

* Many thanks to Stephen Martin for providing information and corrections for this post*

For the involvement in political bribery of Charlotte's brother in law Jason Povey see here

James Sawyer Senior's brother ran the Ship Inn in West Street close to the bakery.

Researched and written by Charlotte Day, photo by Kathryn Day. 

* Many thanks to Stephen Martin for providing information and corrections for this post*

To find other West Street content see the "Specific Shops, Streets Etc" option on the menu. For all mentions of any individual on the blog see the Person Index *As of August 2023 over 7,500 Marlow-linked people are mentioned here*

Sources:

*Bucks Herald 27th November 1875. Via the BNA and British Library archives.

Reading Mercury 12th Feb 1859. As above.

Bucks Herald 12th April 1851. As above.

South Bucks Standard 6th August 1897, as above.

Census 1841-1901. Transcribed by Jane Pullinger and Charlotte Day from microfilm. All census information is Crown Copyright.

Salem Chapel baptisms transcribed by me from microfilm #007765132 images supplied by the LDS church, Intellectual Reserve Inc.

1833 parochial assessment. Original handwritten record held by my family and transcribed by me.

Stephen Martin's family history research.

©Marlow Ancestors. You are welcome to use this information for family or local history purposes with credit to this blog.