October 18 this year marks the 200th anniversary of a bizarre series of events at Rye Town Hall which led to the birth of true democracy in England.
Since the 1720’s, Rye had been a “Rotten Borough”- ruled by a powerful oligarchy led by the Lamb family, of Lamb House, who controlled the town, embezzled its finances, unfairly administered justice, and were the sole voices in choosing Members of Parliament.
The townsfolk were unhappy and discontented, and local Whig supporters – led by a John Meryon, after whom Meryon Court is named, began to plot against the Lambs, seeking reform.
In 1825, the retiring mayor, Dr William Phillips Lamb, nominated his brother-in-Law, Revd William Dodson, as mayor-elect, in order to preserve his family’s interests in the town. However, Rev Dodson lived in Lincolnshire and was unlikely to ever visit Rye – in reality, Lamb would remain the de-facto, behind-the-scenes mayor until he was eligible to stand again the following year.
On August 28 1825, the day before the official mayoral elections were to take place, 40 of John Meryon’s supporters gathered at the stump of the old cross in the churchyard, where mayoral elections had traditionally been made until 1606, and unilaterally declared John Meryon “Mayor”.
The following day, when Revd Dodson was due to be officially elected as mayor, John’s party barged into the town hall, interrupting the mayor-making proceedings, and demanding that Meryon be declared mayor instead. Dr Lamb refused – so the Meryon party marched to the opposite end of the council chamber and loudly held their own, rival, “Corporation Proceedings,” appointing their own officers.
The Lambs and Dodson still refused to stand down, so on the night of October 18, 1825, the Meryon party approached the town hall under cover of darkness. John Waters, a Gunsmith, picked the lock on the town hall railings, gaining entry to the Buttermarket, whilst a painter, Charles Laurence, climbed his ladder at the back of the town hall and removed a pane of glass in the attic window, from where he made his way down and unlocked the town hall’s huge oak doors from inside.
Thus the Meryon party gained access to the town hall, declared themselves the rightful mayor and Corporation, and occupied it for six whole weeks, barricading the windows and doors, and even staying there overnight. The genuine mayor and Corporation retreated to the Lamb’s country seat, Mountsfield (in Deadman’s Lane), from where they appealed to the King’s Bench in Westminster to have the usurpers evicted.
During these six weeks, the anti-mayor, John Meryon, and his “Corporation” passed regulations and by-laws, heard court cases and inquests, and generally behaved as though they were the genuine Corporation – with, it seems, the support of the most of the townsfolk.
They also searched all the town hall paperwork, where they discovered an explosive document signed by the Lamb family and their close associates – a pact to keep the office of mayor amongst themselves and to award each other all the valuable contracts and profits of the town – incontrovertible proof that the Lamb family and the Town Corporation of Rye was riddled with corruption.
They made this document public – which led to outrage and uproar amongst the townsfolk; national newspapers took up the story and soon the whole country knew about it. The spirit of the men of Rye invigorated the cause for electoral reform and soon, as contemporary Rye historian, H P Clark, noted: “The foundation of the Rotten Boroughs began to shake and a desire for reforming the boroughmongering system universally prevailed.”
The eventual result – after further setbacks and revolts – was the Great Reform Bill of 1832, which led to the universal democracy which Britain enjoys today.
After six weeks, the King’s Bench ordered the Meryon party to surrender the town hall back to the Dodsons and Lambs – but the damage had been done. Reform was unstoppable, and in the first council elections after the passing of the Great Reform Bill – the first time most of the townsfolk had ever been allowed to vote – the Lamb family, who had ruled Rye for 110 years, were finally voted out of office, and eventually, disgraced and bankrupted, left Rye.
Today Britain is a great democracy, with universal suffrage, the envy of other, less democratic nations – and it all began here, in Rye, two hundred years ago this week.
Image Credits: Kt bruce .
Fascinating story and an example of ‘we wun be druv’ by Sussex people.
The recent retelling of the John Breeds murder trial showed that the Lambs considered themselves to be above the law.
It took 110 years for Rye to get rid of them!
Fabulous research, Paul. Who knew that Rye was the cradle of democracy?!
One can only imagine what it must have been like to live under an archaic system where the majority’s voice counted for absolutely nothing… It would be as if the current Govt., for instance, wielded 100% of the power on a paltry 34% of the popular vote*… I imagine that would cause great disaffection and a sense that a tin-eared democracy served only elites and interest groups…
Thank goodness we’ve come so far, eh, Paul?
*The current Govt, which supports FPTP, was elected on 34% of the popular vote.
Guy – as a Town Crier, I am not allowed to be political. However it is probably worth pointing out that, according to current polling, if we had a Proportional Representation system of voting, Farage would be our next Prime Minister, something which would not necessarily happen under FPTP.
Is a Farage government what you Lib-Dems really want?
I think you know the answer to that, my friend!
But we’d be mistaken to think FPTP is a bar to Farage, it’s now his enabler, Paul… Indeed, he states that FPTP is now his “friend”. Farage championed electoral reform when he thought he needed it, not bcs he’s an instinctive democrat. Which we know he is not. Farage now understands he can win 100% of political power in Britain with a minority of the popular vote under the current system, FPTP. He can be Trump in No.10. So not changing our electoral system doesn’t make unfettered Farage less likely. It makes it much MORE likely. Under a Proportional system, which 60% of Brits support according to a UCL poll, a Reform PM would be restrained by coalition partners, as has happened with far right populists across Europe. So he wouldn’t be able to roll back reproductive rights, trash climate policy, cut services and deport anyone he didn’t like the look of. Starmer and allies want to retain FPTP bcs it serves the party, not bcs it serves us.
So, if you want full fat Farage, stick with FPTP. If you don’t, PR’s your solution. And since Paul’s ‘outed’ me () I will say, yes, the Lib Dems have always backed PR bcs we think your vote should matter. And we’re also confident we have better policies!
It seems that we need a John Meryon today to protect the elector’s rights.
They were hard fought for back in the day, and are now being eroded by the current councillors who, having had the elections cancelled for next year by the then Deputy Prime Minister who resigned in disgrace, want the elections delayed or a further year. I wonder if they really like the taste of power so much.
The current plans for a unitary authority for the whole of Sussex fill me with dread. Eastern Rother gets little enough in the way of public finance at the present time, by being governed by a Mayor in Brighton there would be even less.
The elections must take place in May 2026, the electorate must be allowed their democratic right to decide their future. The likes of John Meryon fought for it.
Fascinating to hear of the John Meryon local uprising, but to describe it as leading to the true birth of democracy in England is entirely incorrect. It certainly did not ‘all begin here in Rye” 200 years ago. Rotten boroughs existed in many other places in England and numerous more significant factors were at play. The Rye incident was a tiny element in an enormously complex web of historical and social change that led to the reform of British parliamentary elections over many decades. Remember that women only got the vote in 1918 (and not fairly until after 1928). I would recommend that anyone interested in learning about the full history and background of the Reform Act of 1832 reads the Wikipedia entry on the subject. The truth is invariably more complex than a sound bite or an attention-grabbing sentence in a local publication.
Before 1919 the male franchise was limited too, due to a property qualification. As a result of the Representation of the People Act 1918 act, the male electorate was extended by 5.2 million to 12.9 million. The female electorate was 8.5 million. Even after that there were odities, such as the University Seats.
Men and Women aged between 18 and 21 did not get the vote until 1970, and the franchise is now being extended to 16 -18 year olds.
All democracies are imperfect and cnstantly changing. In our case we have a government with a stonking majority achieved on only 30 something per cent of the vote. Scope for more reform there I think.
Andrew – very true, the Great Reform Bill was by no means perfect, but it was a huge step towards universal democracy, and enabled all the further reforms which came after it.
Prior to the 1832 Bill, only 17 people in Rye were entitled to vote – and those 17 were personally chosen by the Mayor, who, of course, only selected those who promised to vote Tory.
After the 1832 Bill, nearly 400 Rye residents were entitled to vote, regardless of political persuasion, a huge improvement.