User:Harrias/Bristol Bridge riot

Bristol Bridge riot
Bristol Bridge, 2011
Date	September 1793
Location	Bristol Bridge, Bristol 51°27′13″N 2°35′29″W / 51.45361°N 2.59139°W / 51.45361; -2.59139
Casualties
Death(s)	11
Injuries	45

The Bristol Bridge riot took place in September 1793. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Phasellus hendrerit. Pellentesque aliquet nibh nec urna. In nisi neque, aliquet vel, dapibus id, mattis vel, nisi. Sed pretium, ligula sollicitudin laoreet viverra, tortor libero sodales leo, eget blandit nunc tortor eu nibh. Nullam mollis. Ut justo. Suspendisse potenti. Sed egestas, ante et vulputate volutpat, eros pede semper est, vitae luctus metus libero eu augue. Morbi purus libero, faucibus adipiscing, commodo quis, gravida id, est. Sed lectus. Praesent elementum hendrerit tortor. Sed semper lorem at felis.

Vestibulum volutpat, lacus a ultrices sagittis, mi neque euismod dui, eu pulvinar nunc sapien ornare nisl. Phasellus pede arcu, dapibus eu, fermentum et, dapibus sed, urna. Morbi interdum mollis sapien. Sed ac risus. Phasellus lacinia, magna a ullamcorper laoreet, lectus arcu pulvinar risus, vitae facilisis libero dolor a purus. Sed vel lacus. Mauris nibh felis, adipiscing varius, adipiscing in, lacinia vel, tellus. Suspendisse ac urna. Etiam pellentesque mauris ut lectus. Nunc tellus ante, mattis eget, gravida vitae, ultricies ac, leo. Integer leo pede, ornare a, lacinia eu, vulputate vel, nisl. Suspendisse mauris. Fusce accumsan mollis eros. Pellentesque a diam sit amet mi ullamcorper vehicula. Integer adipiscing risus a sem.

In the 18th century, according to the historian Philip D. Jones, Bristol was "the second city of the kingdom",^[1] and was undergoing significant expansion.^[2] As a result, the existing stone bridge over the River Avon was no longer considered fit for purpose.^[1] The bridge had been built in the 13th century, and houses, shops and a chapel had all been built on top of it. During the Elizabethan era (1558–1603), the houses were built taller and grander, while the shops spilled out onto the carriageway.^[3] The bridge was subject to a growing amount of pedestrian, horse, and carriage traffic crossing the bridge to and from the docks,^[1] but was barely wide enough for two carriages to pass each other, while pedestrians were forced to take refuge in shop doorways to avoid injury. Among an array of injuries and deaths, it was reported in 1758 that a woman crossing the bridge was killed instantly when she was impaled by the shaft of a cart.^[4]

During 1758, a citizen's commission had put forward plans for a replacement bridge, funded by a tax on houses and coal duty, with no toll or wharfage duty. Their plans were agreed by an official committee formed by the city's mayor, and Bristol's Members of Parliament were asked to petition Parliament in 1760, albeit with a ten-year toll added to the proposal. After four days, the official committee altered the plans, replacing the coal duty tax, adding wharfage duty and removing the time-limit on the toll. The citizen's committee dissolved itself in protest, and one of its members, Michael Miller, said it "will lay a foundation for a greater flame than ever was at Bristol as in effect it is the most unequal tax that can be thought of".^[5]

Negotiations and arguments over the financing, and even the design of the bridge itself continued for years. Parliamentary approval was granted in May 1760, but construction of the bridge did not start for another five years. Bristol Bridge opened in November 1768, at a cost of £49,000,^[a] with associated tolls and taxes to run for an initial 21 years from construction.^[6]

In 1786, the bridge commissioners applied to renew the act. There was local opposition, partly because the commissioners also wanted to demolish some houses to make way for a new street to approach the bridge. After negotiation, the commissioners scaled back their plans for the new road, and also set up a leasing system, in which the tolls would be leased for a year at a time to the highest bidder. One of the most vocal opponents of the renewal, a local business, David Lewis, became the first lessee.^[7] In 1792, during the auction for the lease, the agent for the commissioners revealed that the bridge debt had been paid off, and that year's auction would be the last: the tolls would not be leased again. The existing lessee, Abraham Hiscoxe, secured the lease again, paying £2,150 for the year.^[b] After the auction, Hiscoxe was told by Bristol's deputy chamberlain that he would "be the last person who will ever take them." He revealed to Hiscoxe that their was a surplus of £3,000 in the accounts for the bridge, enough, he claimed, "to discharge every debt and a surplus to keep the bridge in repair."^[8] Hiscoxe was also told by the clerk of the Bridge Commission, Thomas Symons, that there would not be another auction.^[8]

In September 1793, Symons approached Hiscoxe and asked if he was planning to bid on the tolls again. Hiscoxe, who had told people that the tolls would be ending, worried about the public reaction to the continuation of the tolls, and demurred. Instead, he decided that if he could raise £60 in subscriptions, he would stop charging tolls for the last eight to ten days of his lease. He mentioned this to a few acquaintances, and started collecting money towards it by visiting local houses, and at the toll exchange itself. A rumour spread that if no tolls were collected for nine days, the Bridge Act would lapse; Jones says that it is unclear whether Hiscoxe spread these rumours himself.^[8] Even though he had not yet collected the full amount, Hiscoxe decided to stop charging users of the bridge on the morning of 20 September. He spoke with the Lewis, the original lessee, who owned the gates themselves, and it was agreed that they would be removed that morning. News got out, and the evening of the 19th,^[8] a crowd of around 1,000 people congregated and burned down the gates and the board displaying the toll prices.^[10] Jones suggested that the rioters felt justified in their actions because they thought the bridge commissioners were acting illegally by extending the tolls, quoting the historian E. P. Thompson who observed that a "legitimising notion" was present in most 18th-century riots.^[11]

In response, the bridge commissioners issued a notice saying that the act had not ended, and listed the penalties it featured; including execution for interfering with either the toll gates or board. They also offered 50 guinea reward for anyone who would tell them who had burned the gates and board. Hiscoxe's lease expired on Sunday September 29,^[12] but the commissioners had new gates installed on the Saturday, in preparation for collecting the tolls. Once again, a large crowd assembled and they pulled down and burned the new gates.^[13] Nobody acted to try and prevent the crowd, and Jones says that there was a "carnival atmosphere".^[12] The mayor called on both the police and the Herefordshire Militia; when they arrived, some of the rioters threw oyster shells and stones at them. At around 1:00 am, George Daubeny—one of the city's aldermen, and a bridge commissioner—read the Riot Act to the crowd three times.^[13] When the crowd failed to disperse, the soldiers were ordered to fire warning shots over their heads.^[12] When they fired, they hit and killed one member of the crowd, and injured several others.^[14]