The 1831 Bristol Riots: A History Told Through Sources
By Lewis Goode, 3rd Year History
Guided by primary sources, as provided by Gale Resources, Lewis considers the Bristol Riots of 1831 in a new light
In October 1831, Bristol was set ablaze by a rebellious mob of protesters in the wake of the Reform Bill being rejected by the House of Lords. The group had gathered to harass the anti-reform judge, Charles Wetherell, who had wrongly declared in parliament that the city was against the Bill. In fact, Bristol’s populace gathered a petition of 17,000 signatures in support of the Reform Bill. Similar protests, known collectively as the Reform Riots of 1831, occurred across the country in other places such as Birmingham, Leicester, and Nottingham.
On 1st November 1831, the riots were suppressed after three days of riots, looting, and arson. Over £60,000 of damage was given in compensation for the destruction of private property, and there were up to 250 casualties. One notable area of destruction was Queen’s Square, a major historical landmark in Bristol even today. Additionally, three major prisons in the city were burned to the ground, with prisoners released in their hundreds. The dramatic events of the riots were widely covered in the newspapers of the time from all over the country. Whilst blame was actively sought by the press, rather than admonishing the rioters, it was Wetherall and the local magistrates who were shamed publicly.
To find out more about the reactions to the Bristol Riots from newspapers, I used the newspaper archives that Gale Primary Sources provide. I could easily search and find articles retaining to this period from newspapers based in London, Bristol, and Manchester, as well as many more. As a result of doing so, I was looking to see where the media placed the blame for the riots and their reactions to the rioting.
In order to do so, I used the ‘advanced search’ function within the British Library Newspapers collection provided by Gale Primary Sources. I looked up ‘Bristol’ and ‘riot*’ (asterisk indicating any other possible word forms stemming from that; ‘riots,’ ‘rioter,’ etc.) and constrained the time frame of the search from between October and December 1831. This would help me look at the immediate aftermath of the events.
I also carried out a separate search with the same terms, but this time, I selected particular newspapers to look at to provide some variation in my source base. I chose some local (Bristol Mercury and Gloucester Journal) and other national papers (John Bull, Bell’s Life in London and Sporting Chronicle, and Sheffield Independent).
When we look at the reactions to the riots, it is surprising that the rioters themselves did not carry the burden of blame all by themselves. While the riots and also the rioters were labelled with terms such as “alarming” (Morning Post), “dreadful” (Derby Mercury), and “lamentable” (Hereford Journal), the authorities (including the Mayor, magistrates and local constabulary), as well as Charles Wetherell himself, carried some of the blame. Unsurprisingly, due to the nature of the riots and the period, there was a lot of rhetoric and tension surrounding the idea of reform and democracy – some even reminiscent of the French Revolution in 1789.
In the Bristol Mercury, the article describes Charles Wetherell as ‘the buffoon of the anti-reform faction… [who] had insulted and vilified the inhabitants of Bristol as men who were careless of their rights.’[1] The article then later states how the decision of Wetherell to visit the city after making these claims’ dared the hostility’ of Bristolians, especially after making the incendiary claims about the city. Indeed, in Bell’s Life in London, the article criticises Wetherell’s reasoning to go ahead with the visit despite being warned of the mob, not as a duty of a man but of the ‘devil.’[2] Wetherell must have known about the growing resentment of the citizens of Bristol as, according to the Bristol Mercury, he had arrived with ‘the old Tory gang of hired bludgeon-men.’[3] He was expecting trouble and intended to fight it off. From these reports, it seems that the arrival of Wetherell into the city lit the touch paper that eventually led to the rioting getting out of hand. His unpopularity was undoubtedly shown.
The authorities were also not free from the burden of blame. Indeed, their mishandling and late decisions led to several enquiries, trials, and court-martial. In order to look at these trials, I changed my search and found plenty of valuable resources that could aid my research into this topic. Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Brereton, who was in charge of the military presence during the riots, was court-martialled in 1832. He was allegedly sympathetic to reform and, as a result, was accused of allowing the riots to occur. During his trial, he was accused of eleven charges, including failing to make ‘any effort to arrest the progress of the fire [in Queen’s Square], or to prevent the plundering and firing of other houses’ in Queen’s Square.[4] He committed suicide before the court-martial could make a final judgement. Mayor Charles Pinney was also tried and acquitted for being ‘criminally negligent’ due to the ‘ludicrous – had it not been lamentable – inefficiency in the measures taken against the rioters.’[5]
While Bristol had faced massive destruction at the hands of the rioters, arsonists and looters, the Press had largely placed the blame at the feet of the decisions of Wetherell and the mishandling of authorities by the Mayor and the local magistrates. As a result, the protest could easily degenerate into a riot and spread across the city. While we have seen a similar placement of blame on the authorities after the Peterloo Massacre in 1817, this was different as it was the inactivity rather than the activity of the authorities and military in dealing with the popular protest. Maybe this was due to the lenience and sympathies of Brereton that prevented this from repeating; however, the events were hardly bloodless.
In June, the Representation of the People Act 1832 was passed. Although it only added about a quarter of a million more people to the national electorate, it was still a step towards greater democracy in Britain. Later in 1835, the Municipal Corporations Act reformed local government and ensured the efficiency and liability of these governments.
All newspapers used here were accessed via Gale Primary Sources.
[1] ‘Late Dreadful Riots at Bristol,’ Bristol Mercury, 8 November 1831, https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/Y3206651325/BNCN?u=webdemo&sid=bookmark-BNCN&xid=31dc6de7
[2] Bells Life in London, 6 November 1831, pg. 2.
[3] ‘Late Dreadful Riots at Bristol,’ Bristol Mercury, 8 November 1831, pg. 2.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/R3211990459/BNCN?u=webdemo&sid=bookmark-BNCN&xid=c683376e
[4] ‘Court-Martial on Lieu.-Col. Brereton.,’ Sheffield Independent, 14 January 1832, pg. 3.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/R3211990459/BNCN?u=webdemo&sid=bookmark-BNCN&xid=c683376e
[5] ‘Opinions of the London Press on the Trial of C. Pinny, ESQ.,’ Bristol Mercury, 10 November 1832, pg.2.
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/Y3206652395/BNCN?u=webdemo&sid=bookmark-BNCN&xid=2782ce7e