
A letter to the Oxford and Reading Gazette in December 1837 pointed out that Shillingford Wharf was “free for handling goods, time out of mind; it was part of a road leading to Shillingford Ferry and a large meadow, which road was kept by the parish. Now when Shillingford Bridge was built, about eighty years ago, a new road was made up to the London Road; since which the narrow way, so called, has gradually gone to decay. About twenty years ago that part which the boats had always used, was out of order, and the question arose who should repair it: – the parish were not willing. It was therefore thought of a wharfage upon out-town people only, to keep in repair; and on consulting the magistrates they did not say it was law, but told the party waiting on them, to persuade and bother them to pay it. Upon this a demand was made on a stranger dealing in coals, who, with others, paid.”
The Wharf was subsequently repaired from these funds but then people refused to pay unless the Wharf Keeper could show legal authority to collect the charges, which, of course, he was unable to do.
Things came to a head when the Oxford Journal in March 1839 reported on a case before the Nisi Prius Court of (Alfred) Biesley v (Henry) Webb. “The action was brought for an assault and trespass at Shillingford but was in effect to try the right to the use of the wharf at that place”.
A witness, Joseph Ashby, of Shillingford, “was employed by the parish, first in 1817, to collect tolls at the wharf, and continued to receive it nearly seventeen years and was succeeded by Richard Tripp; the wharf was improved by the money collected by putting camp-sheeting and extending the wharf, and rings and posts were put down to moor the barges to. Some railings were put up within this twelvemonth by the side of the wharf and across the road. When I was a boy the barges were placed by the side of the wharf, and thousands of quarters of corn, and also quantities of coal, landed at this spot. The road where the rails cross is about eight or nine strides wide and the gate about four to five feet wide, and no one can pass along this way without getting the key of the gate. The first collection of tolls was made about twenty-one years ago; previously to that time no toll was paid by anyone”.
The court was then told that on 22nd May, Richard Cherry and William Goodenough working for farmer Henry Webb, began loading corn down into a barge from a cart, passing the sacks over the railings. The plaintiff, Alfred Biesley and his brother, Charles, were there and claimed to have the right to charge tolls. In answer to their demand, Henry Webb, the defendant, said “No; I never did pay anything and never will”. He then told his men to knock the Biesleys off the fence with a sack of corn, but they responded that they would cut it open and spill the corn into the river. Webb then produced a pistol from his pocket and threatened to shoot Alfred Biesley. He took a second pistol out and said, “if this one misses, here is another for ye”.
Another witness called was “Jacob Waite, a labourer, who said his age was 86, and that he had lived at Shillingford all his life; he had been employed as a maltster 50 years; the first stone of the bridge was laid 73 years ago this March; the way in question was the only way then in use to Wallingford; this was kept in good repair by the parish; I have driven waggons hundreds of times along this way; I opened the gate for the first carriage to pass over the bridge; I have loaded and unloaded boats and waggons at this place many a time, but never paid toll, and never heard of any such thing till about 20 years ago; I have put thousands and thousands of quarters of corn into my master’s boats”.
The Learned Judge summed up the case pointing out that it was difficult to apportion blame but that the plaintiff himself was guilty of the assault complained of but established the right of the inhabitants of Shillingford to use the wharf in question, free from tolls. The trial lasted nearly eleven hours.
Despite this, the situation continued, and The Oxford Chronicle reported in April 1839 on another case at Oxford Crown Court of “The Queen on the prosecution of Richard Green against John Gammon for an assault”.
A group of up to 40 people had gathered by the railings that had been placed to stop people accessing the wharf without paying. Four horses had been hitched to the railings and were being urged to pull them down. Richard Green and Richard Horwood were described as ringleaders, but they claimed to be bystanders looking to see what was going on. The defendant, John Gammon, was the village constable from Warborough. He claims to have had his staff of office with him and a number of citizens who “he had called upon to assist him in the Queen’s name”.
Green and Horwood were dragged from the railings, handcuffed together, then escorted to the Six Bells where they were forced to spend the night. They remained handcuffed for 19 hours and their wrists were so sore they were unable to work the next day. Gammon took them to the magistrates but realising how weak his case was, released them without charge.
“The Chairman summed up, remarking in a very clear and distinct manner relating to the duties of constables, and likewise regarding illegal commitments. The Jury retired for half an hour and returned a verdict of Guilty. The Chairman stated that at the last sessions there was a case of assault tried arising out of the Shillingford Wharf business, and he had used a strong expression that in future whoever was found guilty of a similar offence, arising out of the same cause, should receive the extreme punishment of the law. But the present case he thought was totally different of nature. It appeared that the constable was acting under a wrong impression of his duty, and what he did he considered to be an error of his judgement; he hoped the lenient sentence he was about to pass would be sufficient for the ends of justice. He wished to be understood that if these disorders were going to be continued it will be necessary to visit every future case with severe punishment, in order to counteract them. John Gammon was then sentenced to pay a fine of one shilling to the Queen and be discharged.”
Researched by Ray Thackrah – October 2024