1831 Bristol riots
[4] Inhabitants of cities and towns were angry at the failure to pass the bill and there were serious disturbances in London, Derby, Leicester, Yeovil, Sherborne, Exeter, Bath, Worcester and Bristol.
[3] Although he was given a hero's welcome in the city in 1829 for his opposition to Catholic emancipation, he sparked controversy in 1830 for stating in parliament that the people of Bristol opposed reform.
[3][7] The city had, in fact, sent a petition of 17,000 names to support reform and hosted large pro-reform public meetings in the first week of October.
His election, in September, may have been arranged by the other aldermen of the city, who were mainly anti-reform Tories, to curry favour with pro-reform elements and to reduce the likelihood of unrest.
The citizens were angered as they regarded Pinney, who had not publicly supported electoral reform since taking office, as having abandoned the cause to join the Establishment.
On 24 October a riot was narrowly averted when pro-reform citizens protested the arrival of George Henry Law, Bishop of Bath and Wells for the consecration of a new church in Bedminster.
[13] Herapath refused to allow BPU members to be enlisted as special constables and there were few volunteers from the middle class who were traditionally called upon to provide this service.
The government was reluctant to send any, knowing that it would be unpopular with the public, but eventually the Home Secretary William Lamb, 2nd Viscount Melbourne authorised the deployment of a force of 93 soldiers to be only used in the case of an "absolute emergency".
[16] The location of Wetherell's entrance into the city had been changed for security reasons but soon became common knowledge and he was met with a mob upon his arrival on 29 October.
[15] Pinney twice spoke to the crowd to attempt to regain control, but felt he had no option but to read the Riot Act at dusk, by which time many of the special constables had abandoned their posts.
This meant that their leaders were hard to locate at key times, for example on 30 October a force of 57 men from the Dodington yeomanry arrived in the city but were withdrawn by their officer when no magistrate could be found to requisition lodgings.
[16] Herapath spoke to the mob but failed to halt the violence, he later offered to mobilise the BPU members as a peacekeeping force but was refused by Pinney who thought it would reflect badly upon the authorities.
[20] Brereton had never served in a public order role before and behaved indecisively, he consistently overestimated the size of the rioting crowd and underestimated his ability to control it.
[11][20] Brereton may have been affected by the criticism the armed forces received for its actions in Manchester in 1819, in which 18 people were killed when cavalry charged a crowd in the so-called Peterloo Massacre.
Brereton believed an element in the 14th were provoking trouble with the crowd and, assured by the mob that they would disperse if the "Bloody Blues" were sent away, ordered them to withdraw.
[14][17][22] Fires set at the Bishop's Palace, customs house, excise office and at other buildings were reportedly visible from Newport, Wales.
[22] It is known that a number of "fireballs" of flammable tow and pitch were manufactured for use by rioters; though otherwise they were armed only with improvised sticks, railings, and tools looted from blacksmiths.
[11] They responded to a rush of rioters on the southern side of Queen Square with a charge by the 3rd Dragoon Guards that effectively quelled the riot.
[3][16] The posse comitatus had largely restored order across the city by the time General Sir Richard Downes Jackson arrived from London with several hundred soldiers to do so.
[21] The total death toll is unknown but twelve citizens are known to have been killed in clashes with the authorities; many other corpses were recovered later from within burned buildings.
Many in Parliament had no confidence in the local government under Pinney and set up a committee of enquiry to remove the Bristol magistrates from office, opposed by Melbourne, who claimed he lacked jurisdiction.
[14] Reform campaigners, eager to avoid any political connection to the riot, claimed the rioters were all youths, the unemployed and "women of abandoned character" from St Philips and Lawford's Gate areas of the city.
[24] Another common misconception of the time was that troublemakers had come from the Kingswood collieries; though the pit owners stated that their men had largely remained at work throughout the riots.
