The Trial of the Tolpuddle Six, by George Loveless

❰

1 2

❱

“We challenge any man, or number of men, to prove that we have acted, or intend to act, different from the above statement.”

The judge asked if I wished it to be read in Court. I answered, “Yes.” It was then mumbled over to a part of the jury, in such an inaudible manner, that although I knew what was there, I could not comprehend it. And here one of the counsel prevented sentence being passed, by declaring that not one charge brought against any of the prisoners at the bar was proved, and that if we were found guilty a great number of persons would be dissatisfied; “and I shall for one,” said he.

Two days after this we were again placed at the bar to receive sentence, when the judge told us that not for anything that we had done, or, as he could prove, we intended to do,* but for an example to others, he considered it his duty to pass the sentence of seven years’ penal transportation across his Majesty’s high seas upon each and every one of us.”*

by George Loveless 1797-1874

From ‘The Victims of Whiggery: A Statement of the Persecutions Experienced by the Dorchester Labourers’ (1837, 1875) by George Loveless (1797-1874), with a Preface by J. Charles Сох. Additional information from ‘The Crisis’ No. 31 Vol. iii (Saturday March 29th, 1834) by Robert Owen (1771-1858) and ‘A Narrative of the Sufferings of J. Loveless, J. Brine, and T. & J. Standfield, Four of the Dorchester Labourers’ (1838).

* The Combinations of Workmen Act 1825 (6 Geo 4 c 129) permitted persons “to meet together for the sole purpose of consulting upon and determining the rate of wages or prices, or the hours of time for which they shall work, and to enter into any agreement, verbal or written, among themselves for the purpose of fixing the rate of wages or prices, or the hours of time, for which they shall work.” The Act did not allow strikes, but then, neither did Loveless’s lodge rules: they required members to complete all work for which they had been paid before handing in their notice.

* The ‘Tolpuddle Martyrs’ were not executed and so therefore not literally martyrs to their cause, but Loveless was justified in speaking in horror of “all the punishments, afflictions, and miseries connected with the present system of Transportation (which is far worse than death).” Protests immediately flooded in. William Cobbett MP and Daniel O’Connell MP presented a petition to the Commons within days of sentence being passed. In 1836, the six men were pardoned, and they returned home to England. Four of them later published autobiographical accounts of their harrowing experiences.

Précis

Loveless’s appeal to the court closed with an invitation to name one law he or his Society had broken. It was a challenge which even the judge admitted he could not meet; nevertheless, all six men were sentenced to be transported to Australia for seven years as an example to others who might think of establishing such a society.

Questions for Critics

1. What is the author aiming to achieve in writing this?

2. Note any words, devices or turns of phrase that strike you. How do they help the author communicate his ideas more effectively?

3. What impression does this passage make on you? How might you put that impression into words?

Based on The English Critic (1939) by NL Clay, drawing on The New Criticism: A Lecture Delivered at Columbia University, March 9, 1910, by J. E. Spingarn, Professor of Comparative Literature in Columbia University, USA.

Précis

Questions for Critics

Tags

Read Next