The Bloody Assizes

By Sunny Chung*

 

The Beginning of the Atrocities:

The trials of hundreds of defeated rebels followed the Protestant rising led by James, Duke of Monmouth and bastard son of Charles II against the Roman Catholic James II in 1685.  The Bloody Assizes trials occurred at Dorchester, Exeter, Taunton, Wells and other towns of South West England.  The Bloody Assizes mark the beginning of James’ system of measure which characterizes his reign and eventually led to his demise.[1] 

 

After Monmouth was captured and the rebellion quashed at the battle of Sedgemoor, the king was anxious that an example should be made to deter any similar attempts to overthrow his rule.  James II sent a large troop of cavalry under Colonel Percy Kirke, known for their ferocity but ironically called “Kirke’s Lambs,” to “teach the rebels a lesson.”[2]  The moniker originates from the days when Kirke’s regiment was in Tangiers.  The troops under Kirke had the figure of a lamb painted on their banners as a badge of their warfare against the enemies of the Christian faith.[3]  Kirke replaced Feversham in the aftermath of Battle of Sedgemoor, three days after the end of the battle, and put to death at least nine of his prisoners.  He simply entered their names in the parish register as executed for high treason.[4]  But as many as a hundred were suspected to have died at the hands of Kirke and his men.[5]  Kirke fulfilled his principal duty to flush out any rebels by engaging the services of mercenary informers.[6] Kirke was already well-versed in the art of cruelty, as his position in Tangier allowed him to test the boundary of tyranny.  His only fear was the preoccupied English government’s reprimand.  As Lord Macaulay described, Kirke “lived with boundless dissoluteness and procured by extortion the means of indulgence. No goods could be sold till Kirke had had the refusal of them.  No question of right could be decided till Kirke had been bribed.”[7]  It was common for Kirke to “stave all the wine in a vintner’s cellar” or to “[drive] all the Jews from Tangier,” and to “[conquer] the virtue of a beautiful woman by promising to spare the life of one to whom she was strongly attached” only to “[show] her, suspended on the gallows, the lifeless remains of him for whose sake she had sacrificed her honor.”[8] 

 

Interestingly enough, it was not Kirke’s barbarity that the government eventually grew to disapprove; it was his leniency for those delinquents rich enough to satisfy his love for money.[9] On the tenth of August, Kirke was ordered to come to court to give information on the state of the West and was replaced by Colonel Trelawney who continued the atrocities by illegally executing three persons for rebellion.[10]

 

Although James II was fully informed of Kirke’s progress and pronounced himself well satisfied, he still sent Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys to the West Country, to hold special assizes – to round up those Kirke had missed.[11]  The king believed that in order to secure the support of the Pope as well as the bishops and clergy of the Church England, crushing the dissenters was necessary.[12]  By the end of August, the appointment for a Special Commission was decided and Jeffreys was appointed to preside as the lead justice.[13]   Lord Chief Justice Jeffreys was assisted by four other judges: Baron Montagu, Baron Wright, Justice Wythens, Justice Levinz and Sir Henry Pollexfen.[14]    Many of the accused were persuaded to confess, hoping for mercy after a plea of “Guilty.”  Unfortunate were those who stood in the path of Jeffreys because the range of his personality was somewhere between megalomania and insane.

 

The Condemned:

The Assize began at Winchester on 27th August 1685 in the aftermath of Battle of Sedgemoor which ended the Monmouth Rebellion.[15]  This is where Dame Alice Lisle was condemned to death for helping two of the rebels – a harsh and terrible judgment on an old and sympathetic lady.[16]  The jury reluctantly found her guilty with the law conveniently ignoring the distinction between principals and accessories in treason, and she was sentenced to be burned.[17]  The sentence was followed with imploring and intervention of many, including Lord Feversham, Lord St. John, and Lady Abergavenny.[18]  But, despite the fact that Lady Lisle was the widow of Mr. Lisle, one of the judges of Charles the First, and that her son served in the King’s army against Monmouth, her life was not spared by James.[19]  Lady Lisle herself petitioned for a change in the sentence to beheading which was carried out in Winchester market-place on 2 September 1685.[20]

The proceedings in Dorchester began on September 5th in Shire Hall which was aptly draped with scarlet cloth.[21]  Jeffreys made it clear that he was there “to breathe death like a destroying angel and to sanguine his very ermins in blood.”[22] The full horror of the Assize began to be felt as three hundred and twenty prisoners were arraigned, thirty five of whom pleaded “not guilty.”[23]  Of the ones that plead not-guilty, five were acquitted, and thirty were convicted.[24]  Lord Jeffreys implied that confession was the only road to mercy by sending twenty-nine of the convicted to immediate execution.[25]  This had the intended effect – two hundred and eight confessed at once.[26]  According to accounts, anywhere from seventy four to eighty persons were executed.[27] This horrifying spectacle included public hanging, disemboweling and then quartering, after which the heads and quarters were dipped in pitch and salt and sent to villages around to be displayed in public on poles.[28]  Many who were condemned to death had their sentences reduced to transportation – in effect, long years of slavery in the colonies.  Jeffreys kept James informed of the progress all throughout the Assizes starting at Dorchester.[29] In one early correspondence in which Jeffreys accounted minute details, Earl of Sunderland the Secretary of State, assured Jeffreys that the King approved all his proceedings.[30]  

 

One effect of Jeffreys’ bullying and silencing the accused was that the prisoners were processed on a timely basis.  On Saturday, September 5th the Grand Jury was charged and by Monday, the 7th, thirteen of those found guilty were executed.[31]  Among those tried and executed in those two days, Mathew Bragge was an unfortunate lawyer who was in the wrong place at the wrong time.  Jeffreys already had a bias against lawyers and had often boasted that “if any lawyer or parson came under his inspection they should not escape.”[32]  The crime for which Bragge was charged was so benign that no one supposed that he would be convicted.  He had shown Monmouth’s soldiers to the house of a Roman Catholic where they looked for arms.[33]  Monmouth’s soldiers also seized his horse, cane, and gloves for the Duke, forcing Bragge to walk home to Sadborrow.[34]  Although Bragge surrendered himself according to order, Jeffreys showed no mercy and swiftly convicted and executed the lawyer.[35]

 

John Tutchin was indicted under the assumed name of Thomas Pitts, but later brought before Jeffreys under his proper name for having said that Hampshire was up in arms for the Duke of Monmouth.[36]  Tutchin was twenty four years old at the time of the rebellion and was an ardent opponent of James’s introduction of Catholicism.[37] Jeffreys presided over the Court “more as though he were a Romish Inquisitor than a Protestant Judge.”[38] Upon his conviction, Tutchin was sentenced to be whipped through every market town of Devonshire for seven years.[39]  Even the Clerk of Arraigns protested on his behalf, tactfully mentioning to Jeffreys that the sentence meant that Tutchin would receive a whipping about once a fortnight and that he was very young.  Jeffreys responded, “Aye, he is a very young man but an old rogue, and all the interest in England shan’t reverse the sentence I have passed on him.”[40]  Although Tutchin appealed to the King for a “lenient” punishment of being hanged, he instead contracted small pox in prison and escaped both fates by being released a year later.[41]

 

None of those implicated in the rebellion and brought to trial was allowed to defend himself.[42]  Any defense was useless against Lord Jeffreys who delighted in roaring out sentences of torture of death to those brought before him.[43] The crueler Jeffreys turned, the more unfettered, manic elation he displayed in court.  Even an interjection by the mighty Sunderland could not impede the momentum of the executions.  Sunderland had repeatedly spoke on behalf of a youth named William Jenkins, the son of an eminent clergyman who had recently died in Newgate after a long imprisonment; the younger Jenkins was imprisoned for distributing mourning rings that were inscribed, “William Jenkins, murdered in Newgate.”[44]  The young Jenkins was released by Monmouth’s army and subsequently joined them against James.[45] He was executed despite Sunderland’s efforts.[46]

 

Despite Jeffreys’ utmost efforts to terrorize, there were those who would not be spiritually defeated by him.  Among the few, was young Christopher Battiscombe, who managed to drive Jeffreys to “foam at the mouth” by zealously defending his religious and political principles.[47]  To the end, Battiscombe steadfastly held to his convictions and resisted Jeffreys’ offers of his life and refused to betray his neighbors.[48]  The youth met his end with genuine joy as he was being transported to his execution, crying out, “Farewell, temporal inheritance, I am now going to my heavenly eternal one.”[49] 

 

The utter lack of mercy in the Hewling brothers’ execution caused a national grief.  William Hewling was nineteen years old and at a boarding school in Holland when he accepted a lieutenancy with Monmouth.[50]  Benjamin was little older and arrived with artillery from Somerset after the battle was over.[51]  The two attempted to escape by boat, but were driven ashore by a storm.[52] Seeing that any chance of escape was impossible, they surrendered.[53]  They were transported to London before being sent to Dorchester to be sentenced.[54]  Their maternal grandfather, Alderman Watkins Kyffin, a London merchant, unsuccessfully petitioned for their pardon and release with the offer of 3000£ to the London authorities but no amount could have placated Jeffreys’ fury at deals made without his sanction.[55]  When William was sentenced in Dorchester, Jeffreys told him that his grandfather deserved death as much as he did.[56]  The remains of William was not quartered with the rest of the victims; his sister Hannah paid 1000£ to stay the procedure.[57]  There was some hope of Benjamin being pardoned and Jeffreys gave the impression that he would be lenient.[58]  In truth, Jeffreys was strongly petitioned by one of his kin, whom he could not treat like any other interceder.[59]  But James proved to be obdurate and Benjamin could not escape the gallows.[60]

 

No act escaped the critical inspection of Jeffreys whose mind construed an offense in innocent and harmless actions.  There was an alehouse keeper who told the Excise officers that “she would pay no more excise till the Duke of Monmouth was King of England.” For this, she was sentenced to be whipped through all the market towns in Dorsetshire.[61]  A fifteen year-old barber’s boy’s sentence was even more heinous for his only crime was his literacy.  When Monmouth’s proclamation was posted in Weymouth, he was asked to read it by those who could not read. For this crime, he was also ordered to be whipped through all the market towns in Dorsetshire.[62]

 

To add insult to injury, the districts were made to bear the burden of the costs associated with the executions.[63] The mayor of Lyme was ordered to erect gallows, provide halters to hang the prisoners, provide adequate supply of kindling to burn the corpses, a furnace or caldron to boil the heads, tar, spears and poles to affix the heads.[64]  Furthermore, oxen were furnished by the mayor to carry the remains away to their destinations, as well as men to carry out the orders, all under the threat of being executed himself.[65]

 

The judges entered Exeter on Saturday, September 12th, read their commission that day, and opened the Assizes on the following Monday, September 14th.[66]  Twenty six men were charged with high treason; 3 were tried, convicted, and executed. The remaining prisoners plead guilty and were sentenced to death.[67]  Their bodies were quartered and sent for display into towns and villages in Devon.  By now, the executions’ intended effect of instilling fear had gradually waned, and instead there was a growing resentment.  The local magistrates were not only sickened at the sight of slaughter they were hit economically by the Bloody Assizes.[68]  The massacres wiped out a large number of craftsman and skilled laborers and left behind widows and orphans.[69]  New jails had to be built in order to accommodate a growing number of prisoners.[70]  To make matters worse, in the crowded prison cells small pox and typhoid mushroomed and spread to the general population.[71]

 

The judges began their work in Somerset, “the chief seat of the rebellion,”[72] on Friday, September 18 at Taunton, in the Great Hall of Taunton Castle (now the home of the Somerset County Museum).[73]  On the same day, three hundred eighty five prisoners were convicted of high treason.[74]  All but four plead guilty; all four were subsequently convicted and sentenced to death.[75]  On September 19th, one hundred and twenty more prisoners plead guilty to treason charges.[76]  A total of five hundred prisoners convicted on the 18th and 19th were sentenced to death.[77]

 

The judges took only six days to indict the prisoners, arraign them, try the few who appealed to the legal system, record the confessions of the rest, and examine the circumstances which ought, in each case to aggravate or extenuate the punishment.[78]  To spread the terror as widely as possible, the executions were directed to take place in thirty-six towns and villages, one of which was Wrington, the birthplace of Locke.[79]  Two hundred and thirty-five prisoners were hanged, drawn, and quartered.[80]  Evidences of Jeffreys’ atrocities were displayed fastidiously. “At every spot where two roads met, on every market-place, on the green of every large village which had furnished Monmouth with soldiers, ironed corpses clattering in the wind, or heads and quarters stuck on poles, poisoned the air, and made the traveller sick with horror.”[81]

 

During the proceedings, Jeffreys overwhelmed his victims with scornful mockery.[82]  One of them pleaded that he was a good Protestant: “Protestant!” cried Jeffreys, “you mean Presbyterian; I’ll hold you a wager of it.  I can smell a Presbyterian forty miles.”[83]  Someone tried to move his compassion in favor of one of the accused. “My lord, “he said, “this poor creature is on the parish.” “Do not trouble yourselves,” was the only answer given, “I will ease the parish of the burden,” and he ordered the man to be hanged at once.[84] 

 

It was here that innocent Simon Hamlyn was convicted of being involved in the rebellion.  Although Hamlyn was a dissenter, he had nothing to do with the rebellion and ended up becoming another victim of Jeffrey’s thirst for dissenters’ blood.[85]  When the Mayor of Taunton intervened on his behalf, insisting that Hamlyn was innocent, Jeffreys merely sneered at him saying, “You have brought him on: if he be innocent, his blood be upon you.”[86]   

 

Not even children were safe.  Young girls in Taunton, children of eight to ten years old, were convicted of treason that they didn’t even know was a crime.  When Monmouth came through the town, these maids presented a banner and a bible to him.[87] Ms. Blake, one of the schoolmistresses of the young girls in Taunton, who actually made the banners the girls waved to Monmouth died of smallpox while being held in Dorchester jail.[88]  One of the girls, an eight year-old was brought before Jeffreys who proceeded with his usual brutal tirade and sentenced her to prison which caused the child to die of fear a few hours later.[89] 

 

The King had bestowed a thousand convicts on several courtiers and one hundred onto the Queen, with the order that the prisoner should be enslaved for ten years in some West India island.[90]  Jeffreys protested to such disposal because each was worth ten or fifteen pounds a head.[91]  But by now it was clear that transportation was to be the fate of the majority, especially as each man transported would be worth more than £12, a source of considerable profit for the Crown.  The 284 who were transported were treated worse than slaves.  This was because unlike slaves, who had to be bought and paid for, the prisoners cost nothing and were therefore expendable.[92] The final decision was delayed for some time while the judges moved on to Bristol where there were no rebels held for trial.[93]  

 

On September 23, the last day of the Bloody Assizes, they came to Wells.  A makeshift court, shut in by wooden screens, was held in the space under the Market Hall.  In one day’s sitting, five hundred and forty one men were tried and the majority sentenced to death.[94] Charles Speke, a filacer[95] for the western counties, was arrested for high treason in Wells.  His crime was shaking Monmouth’s hands at Ilminster when the Duke passed through the town.[96]  Despite testimony that another Speke had been an active rebel Jeffreys refused to show any leniency and stated that “he shall die for his namesake.”[97]

 

Many, who were not executed, suffered worse at the hands of Jeffreys and his henchmen.  Those condemned to transportation – eight hundred forty-one in all – were sent off for a period of ten years to the West Indies.[98]  The conditions on these ships rivaled those on slave ships between West Africa and the Americas.  One fifth of those shipped were flung to the sharks before the end of the voyage.  They were never allowed to go on deck.  And in the dark, confined space below, the prisoners were cramped and left to wallow in waste and disease.[99]  Others were imprisoned to await further trials. Many did not live long enough, succumbing to Gaol Fever (Typhus) which was rife in the unsanitary conditions common to most English gaols at that time.  Others who had been involved in giving support of almost any kind to the rebellion were heavily fined and had their land or property confiscated.[100] 

 

On September 30th, Jeffreys returned to London where he and his fellow judges were formally thanked by the king and Jeffrey’s promotion to the office of Lord Chancellor was announced in the Gazette.[101] 

 

 

Those Spared:

Kirke imprisoned the young maids of Taunton for showing support for Monmouth and demanded over £1,000 in ransom from their parents.  Even the Queen’s maids of honor extorted large sums of money for the pardon of a number of these country schoolgirls who had been convicted of presenting Monmouth with a royal flag.[102]

 

Roger Hoare, an eminent trader of Bridgewater saved his own life by paying 1000£.  However, he was not told of his pardon until he was marched to the gallows, just so that the maximum amount could be extorted out of him.[103]  Mr. Hampden was initially tried for misdemeanor on the evidence of Lord Howard and ordered to pay a fine of 40,000£.  After Monmouth’s defeat, he was again brought to trial for high treason based on the same act of consulting with Lord Russell and Mr. Sidney, under the pretense that a second witness had been found.[104] It was secretly arranged between Hampden and Jeffreys that if he plead guilty, he would be pardoned upon payment of a large fine.[105]  After eventually paying a 6000£ bribe, Hampden’s attainder was reversed.[106]

 

Jeffreys, motivated by personal reasons, bribed 2 prisoners, Dare and Malacke.  They were to testify against Prideaux, a gentleman of West of England, who was apprehended on the landing of Monmouth for no other reason than that his father had been attorney-general under the Commonwealth and the Protectorate.[107]  Although unable to procure enough information from the two bribed convicts to obtain the whole of Prideaux’s large estates by a conviction, Jeffreys managed to take 15,000£ from Prideaux by the end.  This was the highest price paid for an innocent life during the Bloody Assizes.[108]

 

Often those spared were not necessarily proven innocent, but had in possession a large sum of money that would not be accessible if found guilty.  Grey was a high ranking commander in the rebel army, yet his life was spared.  His wealth was in life estate which meant that “if he died, his lands devolved to the next heir.  If he were pardoned, he would be able to pay a large ransom.”[109]  Grey was forced to pay a bond for more than forty thousand pounds for his release.[110]

 

John Cochrane’s life was similarly spared because only in pardon could the treasury be handsomely paid.  His father paid five thousand pounds for his son’s pardon.[111] 

 

 

The Aftermath:

When the court had finished its sittings, the guideposts of the highways were converted into gibbets, from which blackened corpses swung in chains, and from every church tower in Somersetshire ghastly heads looked down on those who fathered there to worship God.[112]  Batches of rebels were given as presents to courtiers, who sold them for a period of ten years to be worked or flogged to death on West India plantations.[113]  By the end of the circuit, Jeffreys had hanged three hundred and twenty “rebels.”[114]

 

A graphic account of the country-side after Jeffreys had finished his campaign paints the horrors vividly.

Jeffreys made all the West an Aceldama; some places quite depopulated and nothing to be seen in ’em but forsaken walls, unlucky gibbets and ghostly carkases.  The trees were loaden almost as thick with quarters as leaves; the houses and steeples covered as close with heads as at other times with crows or ravens.  Nothing could be liker hell than all those parts; nothing so like the devil as he.  Caldrons hizzing, carkases boyling, pitch and tar sparkling and glowing, blood and limbs boyling and tearing and mangling, and he the great director of all.[115]

 

In the one month that the Bloody Assizes lasted, James II with the aid of Judge Jeffreys irreversibly damaged his credibility as a leader.  Against any notion of fairness, many low-level dissenters were sentenced while the ring-leaders were let go.  Not only was Jeffreys’ barbarity overwhelming, the trials themselves were a farce.  The rebellion and its consequences made a deep and lasting impression on the minds and memories of Westcountry folk, but it was in Somerset that there was the most lasting bitterness.  The king had raised a far larger standing army to be ready to face any similar threat to his position, and this added another factor to the growing antagonism in the country.  Only three years later he was faced with another invasion, this time by William of Orange with a well equipped army. 


Bibliography

 

 

  1. Bent, James. The Bloody Assizes. Edinburgh: E & G Goldsmith, 1890.
  2. Chandler, David G. Sedgemoor, 1685: From Monmouth’s Invasion to the Bloody Assizes. Spellmount, 1995.
  3. Cheyney, Edward P. A Short History of England. Boston: Ginn & Co., 1904.
  4. Cockcroft, James. The Lives of the Chief Justices of England: From the Norman Conquest Till the Death of Lord Tenterden, vol. 3. Long Island, New York: Edward Thompson Co., 1894.
  5. Gardiner, Samuel Rawson. A Student’s History of England, From the Earliest Times to 1885, vol. 2. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1891.
  6. Hildreth, Richard, ed. Atrocious Judges: Lives of Judges Infamous as Tools of Tyrants and Instruments of Oppression. New York: Miller, Orton & Mulligan, 1856.
  7. Howell, T.B. A Complete Collection of State Trials and Proceedings for High Treason and Other Crimes and Misdemeanors, vol. 11. London: Longman, Hurst, Rees Orme, and Brown, 1816.
  8. Humphreys, A.L., ed. Some Sources of History for the Monmouth Rebellion and the Bloody Assizes. Athenaeum Press, 1892.
  9. Larned, J.N. A History of England: for the Use of Schools and Academies. Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1900.
  10. Macaulay, Thomas Babington. The History of England from the Accession of James the Second, vol. 1.  Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1879.
  11. Mackintosh, R.J. The Miscellaneous Works of the Right Honourable Sir James Mackintosh, three vol. in one. Philadelphia: Carey and Hart, 1846.
  12. Montgomery, David Henry. The Leading Facts of English History, revised ed. Boston, MA: Ginn and Company, 1912.
  13. Muddiman, J.G., ed. The Bloody Assizes. Glasgow: William Hodge & Co., 1929.
  14. Parry, Sir Edward, ed. The Bloody Assize. New York: Dodd, Mead and Company, 1929.
  15. Toumlin, Joshua. The History of Taunton, in the County of Somerset. London: John Poole, 1822.
  16. Tutchin, John, ed. The Second and Last Collection of the Dying Speeches, Letters, and Prayers. 1689
  17. Tutchin, John. The Western Martyrology; Or, Bloody Assizes. London: James Blackwood & Co., 1873.
  18. Wilkes, D.E. “A Chronology of the Bloody Assizes” 1991
  19. Williams, Henry Smith, ed. The Historians’ History of the Word, vol. 20. New York: Hooper & Jackson, 1908
  20. Zook, Melinda. “The Bloody Assizes: Whig Martyrdom and Memory after the Glorious Revolution.”27 Albion 373, 1995.
  21. Zook, Melinda. Radical Whig and Conspiratorial Politics in Late Stuart England. Penn State Press, 1999.

 



* J.D. Candidate, University of Georgia School of Law, 2009.

[1] James Mackintosh, The Miscellaneous Works of the Right Honourable Sir James Mackintosh, Three Volumes Complete in One, 276 (1846).

[2] David Henry Montgomery, The Leading Facts of English History 286 (Ginn and Co. 1912) (1887); 1 Thomas Babington Macaulay, The History of England from the Accession of James the Second 575 (1878) (1848).

[3] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 276.

[4] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 276; Macaulay supra note 2, at 577.

[5] Id.

[6] Montgomery, supra note 2, at 286.

[7] Macaulay, supra note 2, at 575.

[8] Id. at 575, 577.

[9] Id. at 577-78.

[10] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 277.

[11] The Bloody Assize 193 (Sir Edward Parry ed., Dodd, Mead and Company 1929) (1929)

[12] Id. at 193.

[13] Id. at 192.

[14] Id.

[15] Macaulay, supra note 2, at 580; D.E. Wilkes, A Chronology of the Bloody Assizes (1991) (on file with GAVEL, University of Georgia Law Library)

[16] Macaulay, supra note 2, at 580-84.

[17] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 278; Macaulay, supra note 2, at 584.

[18] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 278.

[19] Mackintosh, supra note 1 at 278.

[20] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 278; Wilkes, supra note 15, at 1.

[21] Parry, supra note 11, at 237.

[22] Id.

[23] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 279.

[24] Id.

[25] Id.

[26] Id.

[27] Samuel Rawson Gardiner, A Student’s History of England, from the Earliest Times to 1885 637 (Longmans, Green, and Co. 1891) (1891); Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 279; Macaulay, supra note 2, at 585.

[28] Parry, supra note 11, at 243.

[29] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 279.

[30] Id.

[31] Parry, supra note 11, at 238-39; Wilkes, supra note 15, at 1; The Bloody Assizes 29 (J.G. Muddiman ed., William Hodge & Co., Ltd. 1929).

[32] Parry, supra note 11, at 238.

[33] Id.

[34] Id.

[35] Id.

[36] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 280; Parry, supra note 11, at 246.

[37] Parry, supra note 11, at 237.

[38] Id.

[39] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 280.

[40] Parry, supra note 11, at 246-47.

[41] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 280.

[42] Montgomery, supra note 2, at 286.

[43] Parry, supra note 11, at 239.

[44] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 281.

[45] Id.

[46] Id.

[47] Parry, supra note 11, at 241.

[48] Id.

[49] Id.

[50] Id.

[51] Id.

[52] Id.

[53] Joshua Toulmin, The History of Taunton, in the County of Somerset 512 (1822).

[54] Parry, supra note 11, at 242.

[55] Id.

[56] Parry, supra note 11, at 242; Macaulay, supra note 2, at 589.

[57] Parry, supra note 11, at 243.

[58] Macaulay, supra note 2, at 589.

[59] Id.

[60] Id.

[61] Parry, supra note 11, at 245.

[62] Id. at 245-46.

[63] Parry, supra note 11, at 244.

[64] Id.

[65] Id.

[66] Wilkes, supra note 15, at 2; Muddiman, supra note 31, at 31.

[67] Wilkes, supra note 15, at 2.

[68] Parry, supra note 11, at 248-49.

[69] Id. at 249.

[70] Id.

[71] Id.

[72] Macaulay, supra note 2, at 585.

[73] Wilkes, supra note 15, at 2; Muddiman, supra note 31, at 32.

[74] Wilkes, supra note 15, at 2; Muddiman, supra note 31, at 32.

[75] Wilkes, supra note 15, at 2.

[76] Id.

[77] Wilkes, supra note 15, at 2; Muddiman, supra note 31, at 32.

 

[78] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 279.

[79] Id. Locke was a 17th-century English philosopher whose ideas formed the foundation of liberal democracy and greatly influenced both the American and French revolutions.

[80] Macaulay, supra note 2, at 585.

[81] Id.

[82] Gardiner, supra note 27, at 638

[83] Gardiner, supra note 27, at 638; Macaulay, supra note 2, at 586.

[84] Gardiner, supra note 27, at 638; Macaulay, supra note 2, at 586.

[85] Parry, supra note 11, at 251.

[86] Id.

[87] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 283.

[88] Parry, supra note 11, at 254.

[89] Id.

[90] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 281.

[91] Id.

[92] Muddiman, supra note 31, at 25.

[93] Id. at 33.

[94] Wilkes, supra note 15, at 2.

[95] A former officer in the English Court of Common Pleas; -- so called because he filed the writs on which he made out process.

[96] Parry, supra note 11, at 259.

[97] Id.

[98] Macaulay, supra note 2, at 591.

[99] Id. at 591-92.

[100] Id. at 592.

[101] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 281.

[102] Montgomery, supra note 2 at 287.

[103] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 283.

[104] Id.

[105] Id.

[106] Id.

[107] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 283; Parry, supra note 11, at 260.

[108] Mackintosh, supra note 1, at 284; Parry, supra note 11, at 260.

[109] Macaulay, supra note 2, at 600.

[110] Id.

[111] Id.

[112] Montgomery, supra note 2, at 287.

[113] Id.

[114] Macaulay, supra note 2, at 587.

[115] Parry, supra note 11, at 243.