R v Lovelass

Last updated

R v Lovelass and Others
The Tolpuddle Martyrs museum and cottages - geograph.org.uk - 1004212.jpg
Tolpuddle Martyrs' museum and cottages
CourtDorchester Assizes
Citation(s)(1834) 6 Carrington and Payne 596, 172 ER 1380; R v Loveless and Five Others (1834) 1 Moody and Robinson 349, 174 ER 119
Keywords
Trade unions, friendly societies, oaths, freedom of association, suppression, combination, conspiracy

R v Lovelass and Others (1834) 172 ER 1380 is a formative case in the history of UK labour law. [1] It saw the Tolpuddle Martyrs, farm workers who wished to form a union to prevent wage cuts, convicted and deported to Australia. It triggered protests, which led to the workers' eventual release and return to Britain.

Contents

Facts

In Tolpuddle, a village in Dorset, George Lovelass (also spelled "Loveless" in a different report of the trial, [2] and sometimes "Lovelace") and James Lovelass, James Brine, James Hammett, and John Standfield, had met in Thomas Standfield’s house, and had taken an oath to combine to attempt to raise wages for agricultural workers. They formed the Friendly Society of Agricultural Labourers. A witness, Edward Legg, had also taken the oath which included an undertaking to reveal nothing. Under the Unlawful Oaths Act 1797, passed in response to naval mutinies following the French Revolution, it was illegal to make an oath, and a further offence to not reveal the oath.

Lock (also spelled as Lark in the case report) gave evidence as a witness. Edward Legg as a witness said the following.

I went with the last witness; they told us something about striking, or that they meant to strike, and that we might do the same if we liked. There was nothing said about the time when we should strike. There was something said about our masters having notice of it, but I don't remember anything about it. We kissed a book when we were blinded. When we were on our knees, we repeated something that was said by somebody, but who said it I don't know. I believe it was like the voice of James Lovelass. I think the words which we repeated were something about being plunged into eternity, and about keeping secret what was done by the society. I don't know what book it was that I kissed. When I was unblinded I saw a book on the [598] table that resembled a Testament. They shewed us the picture of death, and one of them said, ‘Remember your end!’

Counsel for the defence argued that the purpose of the 1797 Act was to target mutiny and sedition, to break allegiance to the King. Associations to raise wages should no longer be illegal. The lodges of Freemasons were no different. Therefore, the Tolpuddle labourers had done nothing unlawful.

Judgment

Williams B gave the following directions to the jury, that the 1797 Act was essentially applicable to the labourers attempt to combine.

If you are satisfied that an oath, or obligation tantamount to an oath, was administered to either of the witnesses Legg or Lock by means of the prisoners, you ought to find them guilty. The prisoners are indicted under the stat. 37 Geo. III. c. 123, [lower-alpha 1] the preamble of which refers to seditious and mutinous societies; but I am of opinion that the enacting part of the statute extends to all societies of an illegal nature: and the second section of the stat. 39 Geo. III. c. 79, [lower-alpha 2] enacts that all societies shall be illegal, the members whereof shall, according to the rules thereof, be required to take an oath or engagement not required by law. If you are satisfied from the evidence respecting the blinding, the kneeling, and the other facts proved, that an oath or obligation was imposed on the witnesses, or either of them, you ought to find the prisoners guilty; and if you come to that conclusion, I wish you to state whether you are of opinion that the prisoners were united in a society.

The jury returned a verdict of guilty, that oaths were taken, and further oaths taken not to disclose the oaths. The prisoners were then to be deported to Australia.

Significance

Tolpuddle Martyrs' Rally in 2005 Tolpuddle martyrs day 2005.jpg
Tolpuddle Martyrs' Rally in 2005

The case triggered a swell of protest. 800,000 signatures were collected for the Tolpuddle labourers, soon to be known as the Tolpuddle Martyrs, to be released. Eventually, in 1837, the Home Secretary did release them and returned them to Britain.

A Tolpuddle Martyrs' Festival and Rally is held annually in Tolpuddle, usually in the third week of July, organised by the Trades Union Congress.

See also

Notes

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tolpuddle Martyrs</span> English agricultural labourers convicted for unionising

The Tolpuddle Martyrs were six agricultural labourers from the village of Tolpuddle in Dorset, England, who, in 1834, were convicted of swearing a secret oath as members of the Friendly Society of Agricultural Labourers. They were arrested on charges under an obscure act during a labour dispute over cut wages before being convicted in R v Loveless and Others and sentenced to penal transportation to Australia. They were pardoned in 1836 after mass protests by sympathisers and support from Lord John Russell and returned to England between 1837 and 1839.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Oath</span> Personal affirmation of a statement

Traditionally an oath is either a statement of fact or a promise taken by a sacrality as a sign of verity. A common legal substitute for those who conscientiously object to making sacred oaths is to give an affirmation instead. Nowadays, even when there is no notion of sanctity involved, certain promises said out loud in ceremonial or juridical purpose are referred to as oaths. "To swear" is a verb used to describe the taking of an oath, to making a solemn vow.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Captain Swing</span>

"Captain Swing" was a name that was appended to several threatening letters during the rural Swing Riots of 1830, when labourers rioted over the introduction of new threshing machines and the loss of their livelihoods. The name was made-up and it came to symbolise the anger of the poor labourers in rural England who wanted a return to the pre-machine days when human labour was used.

<i>Commonwealth v. Hunt</i>

Commonwealth v. Hunt, 45 Mass. 111 (1842), was a case in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court on the subject of labor unions. Prior to Hunt the legality of labor combinations in America was uncertain. In March 1842, Chief Justice Lemuel Shaw ruled that labor combinations were legal provided that they were organized for a legal purpose and used legal means to achieve their goals.

William Orr was an Irish revolutionary and member of the United Irishmen who was executed in 1797 in what was widely believed at the time to be "judicial murder" and whose memory led to the rallying cry “Remember Orr” during the 1798 rebellion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Profane Oaths Act 1745</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Profane Oaths Act 1745 was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain passed in 1746, in effect from 1 June 1746, and formally repealed in 1967. It established a system of fines payable for "profane cursing and swearing".

<i>Rookes v Barnard</i>

Rookes v Barnard [1964] UKHL 1 is a UK labour law and English tort law case and the leading case in English law on punitive damages and was a turning point in judicial activism against trade unions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Oskar Gröning</span> Accountant in Auschwitz (1921–2018)

Oskar Gröning was a German SS Unterscharführer who was stationed at the Auschwitz concentration camp. His responsibilities included counting and sorting the money taken from prisoners, and he was in charge of the personal property of arriving prisoners. On a few occasions he witnessed the procedures of mass killing in the camp. After being transferred from Auschwitz to a combat unit in October 1944, Gröning surrendered to the British at the end of the war; his role in the SS was not discovered. He was eventually transferred to the UK as a prisoner of war and worked as a farm labourer.

The Grand National Consolidated Trades Union of 1834 was an early attempt to form a national union confederation in the United Kingdom.

Unlawful Oaths Act is a stock short title used for legislation in the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland relating to unlawful oaths.

The labour movement or labor movement consists of two main wings: the trade union movement or labor union movement on the one hand, and the political labour movement on the other.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Unlawful Societies Act 1799</span> Act passed by the Parliament of Great Britain

The Unlawful Societies Act 1799 was an Act passed by the Parliament of Great Britain in 1799, as part of measures by Pitt the Younger to suppress republican opposition. It is also sometimes referred to as the Corresponding Societies Act.

In politics, a martyr is someone who suffers persecution and/or death for advocating, renouncing, refusing to renounce, and/or refusing to advocate a political belief or cause.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shire Hall, Dorchester</span> County building in Dorchester, Dorset, England

Shire Hall is an 18th-century courthouse in Dorchester, Dorset. The building was the centre of law, order and government, and served as the county hall for Dorset until 1955. It has been Grade I listed since 1950. In 2018, the hall opened as the Shire Hall Historic Courthouse Museum.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Martyrs' Cottages</span>

There are several cottages associated with the Tolpuddle Martyrs. Most are in Tolpuddle in Dorset while one is in Essex.

Hounga v Allen [2014] UKSC 47 is a UK labour law case, concerning the right to equal treatment, wages, and the illegality principle.

George Loveless was a British Methodist preacher and a leader of a group of six agricultural workers who became known as the Tolpuddle Martyrs.

The Tolpuddle Martyrs' Tree is a sycamore tree in the village of Tolpuddle, Dorset. The tree is approximately 336 years old. It has become associated with the birth of the trade unionist movement.

Thomas Standfield was an English agricultural worker, Methodist and trade union organiser.

Eleven articles of impeachment against United States President Andrew Johnson were adopted by the United States House of Representatives on March 2 and 3, 1868 as part of the impeachment of Johnson. An impeachment resolution had previously been adopted by the House on February 24, 1868. Each of the articles were a separate charge which Johnson would be tried for in his subsequent impeachment trial before the United States Senate.

References

  1. McGaughey 2018, pp. 11–13.
  2. R v Loveless and Five Others (1834) 1 Moody and Robinson 349, 174 ER 119

Bibliography