APPENDIX B.

1.--NOTE ON THE CASUALTIES AT PETERLOO.

On few points do the accounts of Peterloo vary more than on the question of the casualties. There is sufficient historical material available to enable us to investigate this matter in detail, but the task would be a gruesome one, and no useful object would be attained if it were accomplished. On the other hand, a few words may serve to show whereabouts the truth lies.

In the _Cambridge Modern History_ (Vol. X., pp. 580, 581) it is stated that "a man was killed and forty were injured." In the _Political History of England_ (1906, Vol. XI., pp. 178, 179) we read that "happily the actual loss of life did not exceed five or six, but a much larger number were more or less wounded." A number of the most important school histories in use at the present time reproduce one or the other of these statements _verbatim_.

If we turn to the contemporary records, they are somewhat conflicting. The hurried estimates given by the local papers immediately after the catastrophe (_e.g._, one newspaper reported twelve killed) had to be corrected later. The most general estimate seems to be "eleven killed and between 500 and 600 wounded." When we come to examine these figures in detail, however, these points emerge: (1) "Killed" is evidently taken to include the cases of those who died after lingering (possibly) for some weeks. (2) The summary includes the casualties due to the firing of the infantry in the neighbourhood of New Cross, some hours after the great event; included in the list, also will be the child (Fildes) knocked from its mother's arms by one of the yeomanry as they were riding to the meeting.

Archibald Prentice, in his _Historical Sketches and Personal Recollections of Manchester_ (p. 167), states that eleven were killed, that 420 were wounded, and that there still remained (according to the Relief Committee's Report) 140 cases to be investigated, making a total of 560.

Mr. John Benjamin Smith (who very likely refreshed his memory by looking up records when writing his Reminiscences) gives the same result. Mr. J.

C. Hobhouse, speaking in the House of Commons, on May 19th, 1821, said that "he held in his hand a list of killed and wounded running to 25-30 sheets, and defied them to disprove it." It is clear, then, that these estimates are quoted from the Committee's Report, and to this it will be well now to turn.

With the kind a.s.sistance of Mr. Swann, of the Reference Library, I have been able to find one (and only one) copy of this Report. It is bound up with a series of papers catalogued as "Lancashire and Yorkshire Tracts,"

at the Manchester Reference Library. (The Reference number is "Lancashire and Yorkshire Tracts; Barlow's Historical Collector. H. 63. 3. No. 3 (15104)"). It is ent.i.tled: "Report of the Metropolitan and Central Committee appointed for the Relief of the Manchester Sufferers, with an Appendix containing the names of the sufferers and the nature and extent of their injuries; also an account of the distribution of funds, and other doc.u.ments. Published by order of the Committee. London, 1820." This Committee seems to have been formed by amalgamating several organisations in the metropolis which sprang into being as a result of public sympathy with the sufferers, and it worked in conjunction with the Manchester and other Lancashire Committees. The subscriptions recorded to date amount to 3,408 1s. 8d. of which 1,206 13s. 8d. had been distributed, 250 having been received from the local Manchester Committees. The amount expended on law charges and expenses of witnesses is given as 1,077 6s. 9d.; advertis.e.m.e.nts and sundries cost 355 13s. 6d.; and this leaves a balance of over 768, which is p.r.o.nounced inadequate to deal with the cases that remain. A fresh appeal is therefore made to the British Public. A Deputation was sent from London to investigate cases, and this Deputation reports, in January, 1820, that out of 420 sufferers visited and relieved 113 are females; that 130 received severe sabre-cuts, 14 of these being females. (To be quite safe, we must admit the possibility that the term "sufferers" may sometimes include members of the families of those killed or injured.) There follow 38 pages filled with the names of those killed and wounded at Peterloo, some 430 in all, with full details of their injuries, and in the case of the former the description is "Killed, _or_, who have subsequently died in consequence of injuries there received," the number of these being given as eleven. Of these eleven: two were "sabred;"

one was "sabred and trampled upon;" one was "sabred and stabbed;" one "sabred and crushed;" two (one of them a woman) "rode over by the cavalry;" one "trampled by the cavalry;" one "inwardly crushed;" and one (a woman) "thrown into a cellar." In the case of two of these the words are added "killed on the spot." The child killed in Cooper Street completes the total.

One of the Relief Committees met at Mr. Prentice's warehouse, and the care with which the various cases were investigated, and successive grants made from the funds of the different Committees, is clearly shown by the details given in the account-book secured by Mr. Guppy in 1919 for the Rylands Library, which is mentioned above.

Perhaps it will never be possible to say exactly how many were left dead on the field. One, at anyrate, who died at once, or very shortly afterwards, was (by a strange irony) a Special Constable, and this is probably the "one man killed" of some of the accounts. It will be remembered that Lieut. Jolliffe reported "two women not likely to recover; one man in a dying state; and two or three reputed dead;" in the letter quoted above, describing his visit to the Infirmary on the Sunday following the event.

Most of the cases investigated by the Committees belonged to the side of the Reformers; but it must not be forgotten that the other side claimed to have serious casualties. Mr. Francis Phillips, _e.g._, enumerates the casualties to the troops, and an estimate of these is given also in the Centenary Volume of the Cheshire Yeomanry; we have already seen above, moreover, that a subscription list was opened for the families of the Special Constables, and that the appeal met with a generous response. It is a curious feature of the case that each side seems to be anxious to make its casualty list as imposing as possible. An interesting summary of the various estimates is given by MacDonnell in his _State Trials_. This summary includes the Official Report from the Infirmary, and the list of casualties to the troops. Without pursuing the matter further, we may say that a careful examination of the somewhat confusing evidence would seem to show that the estimate "eleven killed and between 500 and 600 wounded"

will not prove to be far wrong, provided that (1) we understand "killed"

to include those who died as the result of injuries received on the field; (2) we include in the general total the casualties incurred during the disturbances some hours later in the neighbourhood of New Cross. At least one list, published subsequently, brings the total of killed up to fourteen.

Two points not directly concerned with this discussion are dealt with by the Relief Committee, and are sufficiently interesting to be recorded: (1) The Committee paid out 710 "on account of the Trial at York; the Manchester Committee voting 100 for the same object." (2) The Deputation sent from London to investigate the cases, mentioned in their Report some striking details of the conditions of life amongst the operatives. To quote only two sentences: "in no one instance among the weavers did your Deputation see a morsel of animal food, and they ascertained that in most families where there were children the taste of meat was unknown from one year to another." "Six shillings a week was the average wage of an able-bodied and industrious weaver. Many could not get this."

2.--PRESENCE OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN AT PETERLOO.

It has often been a.s.serted that the peaceful intentions of the crowd at Peterloo are attested by the presence among them of women and young children. As every detail of evidence is of value, I give here a sentence from a letter which I received from Princ.i.p.al Reynolds: "My father was there, in his mother's arms, though only one year old; so my grandmother told me."

3.--SOME GLEANINGS FROM THE Sc.r.a.p-BOOKS.

It was the custom in the early decades of the nineteenth century, when newspapers were dear and newspaper files were not available, as there were no free libraries, to collect newspaper cuttings and ill.u.s.trations, with tracts and "broadsides," election squibs and so forth, in large sc.r.a.p-books. Thus, at the Peel Park Library is preserved the sc.r.a.p-book of Joseph Brotherton (for many years Member for Salford), running to over forty volumes. The Greaves sc.r.a.p-book at the Reference Library contains a valuable collection of this kind. The Owen collection at the same Library fills over eighty volumes. At the Chetham Library may be seen Lord Ellesmere's sc.r.a.p-book and a number of others. From many references to Peterloo in these books we may select the three items which follow: The Greaves collection contains a rare print of Peterloo, somewhat lurid in its detail. Mr. Albert Nicholson has in his possession a highly-coloured copy of this, which he has shown me. No other copies seem to be known.

I have to thank Mr. J. J. Phelps for calling my attention to two papers in a sc.r.a.p-book at the Chetham Library which he conjectures to have been that of Mr. Francis Phillips, the protagonist on behalf of the magistrates, and the author of _An Exposure of the Calumnies, &c._ One of these is the actual subpoena which Mr. Phillips received, summoning him to give evidence in the trial at York: "there to testify the truth on our behalf against Henry Hunt and others for certain misdemeanours whereof they are indicted." (MS. B. 9. 41. 110. p. 43.).

The other paper is of some importance as it fixes the date of the embodiment of the Manchester Yeomanry. In _The Story of Peterloo_ (p. 13) some details are given in support of a conjecture that the corps was formed later than March in 1817. The sc.r.a.p-book just quoted confirms this conjecture, for there appears a printed copy of a letter addressed to the Boroughreeves and Constables of Manchester and Salford, and bearing over a hundred signatures (that of Mr. Phillips coming second), asking that a meeting may be convened with the object of forming such a corps. In response to this appeal the Boroughreeves and Constables summoned a meeting for the purpose, in a letter dated Manchester, June the 16th, 1817. (MS B. 9. 41. 110. p. 22). With this date as a guide, it was easy to find in the advertis.e.m.e.nt columns of _Wheeler's Manchester Chronicle_ for Sat.u.r.day, June the 21st, 1817, a copy of both letters, a list of the signatures, and the announcement that the proposed meeting was actually held on June the 19th, 1817, when it was resolved: "that under the present circ.u.mstances it is expedient to form a body of Yeomanry Cavalry in the Towns and neighbourhood of Manchester and Salford." Details follow as to Government allowances for uniform, etc., and as to the possibility of amalgamating with similar corps in the surrounding towns, should such be formed. Each man was to provide his own horse.

This information has an important bearing on the tragedy of Peterloo, and taken in conjunction with the Resolution of the Magistrates mentioned in _The Story of Peterloo_ (p. 13), leaves no doubt as to what was the nature of the "present circ.u.mstances" that called the corps into being.

4.--EXPLANATION OF THE CONTEMPORARY PLAN AND PICTURE OF PETERLOO.

(_a_) The Contemporary Plan of St. Peter's Field which appears on the following page was published in Farquharson's verbatim Report of the Trial in 1822. As the lettering is small, some explanation is necessary.

The shaded area in the centre represents the open s.p.a.ce on which the tragedy was enacted. To the south of it is clearly seen the "raised ground" mentioned by Stanley, and shown also in his Plan. The windmill which stood near, and gave its name to Windmill Street, had disappeared some years before. The site of it is now occupied by the Central Station Approach.

On the shaded s.p.a.ce are marked: "Hustings;" "Carriage" (_i.e._, Mr. Hunt's carriage, marked also on Stanley's Plan); the double line of "Constables;"

and the "Manchester Yeomanry," drawn up in front of the row of houses in Mount Street, labelled: "Magistrates a.s.sembled here." The Friends' Meeting House is marked "Quaker's Meeting House," and the enclosing wall is stated to measure in height "3 ft. 7 in. on the inside" and "10 ft. 3 in. on the outside." These measurements would be inserted, probably, in connection with the statement that one of the Cavalry jumped his horse over this wall. Apparently a gate and posts cross Mount Street in front of the Meeting House, and lead into "St. Peter's Field," across which two dotted lines indicate the _projected_ line of Peter Street.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Plan of Peterloo. From Farquharson's Report of the Trial, 1822. (See page 88.)

_Photo by R. H. Fletcher._]

The position of the Troops and the line of their approach to the Field are shown as follows: The "31st Infantry" are drawn up in Brazennose Street, the upper end of which is also blocked with a gate and posts; the "88th Infantry" are lined up in d.i.c.kinson Street; in Portland Street are the "Manchester Yeomanry," and their course is shown by a dotted line up Portland Street, along Nicholas Street, down Cooper Street, and then round the corner of Cooper's garden wall (now the site of the north-western corner of the Midland Hotel) into Mount Street; the Plan stating that "The Manchester Yeomanry came this way to the ground;" another troop of the "Manchester Yeomanry" is drawn up in front of St. John's Church, in Byrom Street; facing them, in the same street, are shown the "15th Hussars" in two sections, presumably representing the "two squadrons" mentioned by Lieutenant Jolliffe in his letter; lastly, the "Cheshire Yeomanry" are drawn up in St. John's Street, off Deansgate, and the line of approach of all these mounted troops is shown by a dotted line pa.s.sing along Byrom Street, St. John's Street, southward down Deansgate, then along Fleet Street, up Lower Mosley Street, and along the "raised ground" already mentioned to St. Peter's Field, the inscription on the Plan reading: "The 15th Hussars, one troop of the Manchester and Cheshire Yeomanry came this way to the ground." The artillery are not shewn.

The scale of yards given on the Plan shows that Stanley's estimate of a hundred yards as the distance from Mr. Buxton's house to the Hustings was exactly correct.

(_b_) Wroe's Contemporary Picture of Peterloo, which is shewn on the following page, is perhaps the best of a number of sketches extant. The details are fairly accurate. In the background, on the extreme left, is seen (to quote Bamford) "the corner of a garden wall, round which the Manchester Yeomanry, in blue and white uniform, came trotting, sword in hand, to the front of a row of new houses." The "corner" is on the site of the north-western corner of the Midland Hotel. The "new houses" were on the site of the present Midland Buffet. Mr. Ewart's factory, in the distance, was just off Lower Mosley Street. The row of houses to the right of this, in the background, was on the upper side of Windmill Street. The Hustings are on the site of the south-eastern corner of the Free Trade Hall. Standing on them we may distinguish Mr. Hunt and the Leader of the Manchester Female Reformers. Around them are the Banners of the various contingents; we may even make out the legend "No Corn Laws" on the one in front. The Banner-poles are shaped to resemble caps of Liberty, as shown in another of our ill.u.s.trations. The crowd are occupying the site of the Free Trade Hall, the Theatre Royal, the Y.M.C.A., the Gaiety, and a number of adjoining buildings.

[Ill.u.s.tration: A VIEW OF St PETER'S PLACE

_To face page 90_]

The moment seized by the artist for his picture is that in which the Manchester Yeomanry, many of whom are scattered and entangled among the crowd, have reached the Hustings, while in the distance the Hussars can just be seen lining up in Mount Street and charging to their relief. The crowd, consisting of men, women and children, are seen dispersing in all directions.

The view might be imagined to have been taken from the roof of a building which then occupied the site of the present Albert Hall, in Peter Street.

Other contemporary prints include St. Peter's Church and the Friends'

Meeting House in the picture.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] I met Mr. Buxton on the steps of his house, not at all aware till then that his _residence_ was at or near the place of meeting. I had been directed to his _shop_, considerably beyond the square, to which I was proceeding. I state this to prove that what I afterwards saw was purely accidental, and that I had no previous intention of witnessing in detail the transactions of the day. As I came from the bottom of Alport Street, on the Altrincham side of Manchester, my original directions were indeed to pa.s.s through St. Peter's field as the shortest line, but I had taken a circuitous route to avoid the meeting, which led me to the corner of it near Mr. Buxton's house.

[2] It has been stated, upon evidence which I should be unwilling to discredit, that the body of persons more immediately in contact with the hustings were of Hunt's party. My reasons for believing them at the time to be (as I was told) special constables, were because they resembled them in appearance, were connected in their lines, had their hats on, and staves of office occasionally appeared amongst them. Mr. Hay, in his official letter, says: "A body of special constables took their ground, about two hundred in number, close to the hustings, from whence there was a line of communication to the house where we were." This is precisely my view of the case; doubtless, had the communication been cut, he would have noticed it.

[3] Some, by being better mounted or rather in advance, might have been more moderate in their pace, but generally speaking it was very rapid, and I use the word gallop, as conveying the best idea of their approach.

[4] I am particular in mentioning these minute circ.u.mstances, because in this and some other points in which I could not be mistaken, I have been strongly contradicted.

[5] It has been often asked when and where the cavalry struck the people.

I can only say that from the moment they began to force their way through the crowd towards the hustings swords were up and swords were down, but whether they fell with the sharp or flat side, of course I cannot pretend to give an opinion.

[6] On quitting the ground I for the first time observed that strong bodies of infantry were posted in the streets, on opposite sides of the square; their appearance might probably have increased the alarm and would certainly have impeded the progress of a mob wishing to retreat in either of those directions. When I saw them they were resting on their arms, and I believe they remained stationary, taking no part in the transaction.