An Extraordinary Punishment in Woodbury

A letter that appeared in the Western Times  12 May 1863

‘It is very seldom we hear in these days of a man being confined in the stocks for breaking the Criminal Justice Act – indeed, it is but comparatively few places where stocks are in existence.  Among these exceptions is the quiet village of Woodbury, adjacent to whose parish church the visitor can see erected a fine pair of stocks capable of carrying out the purpose for which they were intended. These instruments, happily, have not been in use within the living memory of ‘the oldest inhabitant’, who with the rest of the village on Friday last, could not but look with astonishment and horror upon the shameful scene which took place in the churchyard during the whole of that day.
It appears that on 15 April 1863 about 11 pm Dr Brent was passing over Woodbury Hill on his way home, and in consequence of the violent conduct of a young member of the canine family his attention was directed to the middle of the road, where he beheld, to his surprise, two stalwart men lying facewards to the ground in a helpless condition.  The worthy doctor, undesirous of letting the men remain in their perilous position during the night, at once proceeded to the Globe Inn and roused up Host Barrett. The police were also duly informed of the circumstance, and the men were soon awakened and requested to make the best of their way homewards. But no! Buckland, the most obstinate of these ‘Garibusters’, resolutely declined to obey any pacific injunctions whatever, and instead of going quietly home, let his tongue go pretty freely, addressing to the officers some scurrilous language which neither of them could under any circumstances tolerate, but especially when what they had done to the men was more an act of kindness than aught else.
Ward, however, was very civil and went quietly home, while his companion, for his insolence, was locked up and the next day brought up before the magistrates at Exmouth and fined £2 or one month’s imprisonment. He paid up and was released. Ward, the quieter of the two, was later summoned and, in his absence, fined 5s with costs or six hours in the stocks.  The fine was not paid. Both men were drainers in the employ of the Rolle Estate, and prior  and prior to the events were at work in the parish.
At 7.15 am Sgt. Pickford and PC Board entered the churchyard and secured their man in the stocks, where he was left in ‘durance vile’ till 1.15 pm.  The male agriculturists were at work, but a concourse of about 300 women had assembled to witness the release of the prisoner who received general sympathy and commiseration, and by one of his relatives was handed, in the presence of the vast, garrulous and unruly congregation, a plate of bread and sausages and a jug of cider, which he disposed of with unusual relish.  Ward was duly liberated and then formally asked for £1. 7s the balance of the £1. 12s incurred in expenses, onsisting mainly of fees to the magistrate’s clerk and the cost of two commitments.  This item was not forthcoming and the prisoner’s refusal was hailed by the crowd with loud expressions of approval. 
The police officers now attempted to apprehend the prisoner and convey him to the lock-up.  Ward refused to move, and being strongly backed up by the women assembled, he became very obstinate. The officers, after arguing with him for some time, procured a board and endeavored to lay the prisoner on it, but in this they were frustrated by the vociferation and fists of the women and lads assembled.  The crowd rejoiced over their victory over the ‘peelers’ and several of the more jubilant and active ran to the pub and fetched several pitchers of beer, which were eagerly and enthusiastically drunk.  Sgt Pickford threatened to fetch a posse of 40 policemen from Exmouth, which quietened the mob for a while.  But when he appeared at the main entrance to the churchyard, not with his reinforcements, but leading a blind horse which was dragging along a broken-down manure cart, intended as the temporary residence of the culprit, the rioting resumed. To the joy of the crowd the cart was too wide for the gate and it had to remain outside.  The sergeant wanted to take down the gateposts, but the churchwardens present refused him and took up defensive positions by the posts.  This state existed for several hours, some people drinking excessively and shouting vehemently.  By 5 pm the officers understood that if they remained the farm labourers, after work, would give them a sound thrashing, they backed off and Ward returned home. He has not been heard of since though it is assumed that he is still in the parish.
The Rev Fulford was determined to punish the parties who, in his absence and that of other leading gentry (including Dr Brent), wantonly desecrated the consecrated ground of the churchyard.  In the course of the disturbance the turf was torn up from the churchyard, and pieces knocked off some of the gravestones.  The churchwardens later asked the magistrates whether the police were justified in putting the prisoner in the churchyard stocks, but they declined to give an opinion!’
There is no picture or description of the stocks surviving. It would be interesting to know where the parish stocks were placed in the churchyard. There is no mention after this event of them being used as a punishment, or for any other reason. Between 1888 and 1893 there were reports of heavy snow every winter, with children being unable to get to school, so perhaps the stocks were chopped up for firewood!