A Loyal Englishman?: John Lloyd and Aspects of Oath-taking in 1812

Abstract

The significance of the Luddite disturbances in the northern counties of England in 1812 has engendered considerable debate, yet many aspects remain obscure.¹ Despite E.P. Thompson’s contention that Luddism was a ‘quasi-insurrectionary movement, which continually trembled on the edge of ulterior revolutionary objectives’,² the evidence on oath-taking, secret meetings and civilian arming remains perplexing, one fundamental cause being the reliability of the evidence of spies. In contrast to the scrutiny given to the ideology of the protesters, that of their chief persecutors has largely escaped attention.³ Yet, it may supply a clue to deciphering some of the extant evidence. Ralph Fletcher, a magistrate of Bolton, and John Lloyd, a solicitor and clerk to the magistrates of Stockport, were key figures. Fletcher’s informer, Bent, has been subjected to the scathing criticism of historians, but there has been little scrutiny of the crucial evidence of Thomas Whitehead and Joseph Taylor, employed by Lloyd, on the alleged Luddite oath.⁴ Others supplied evidence, but it was their information which was central to the case presented to the Secret Committees established by the government to inquire into the disturbances.⁵