Samuel Munday & Son

By John D Ellis

Most of the hundreds of men of Black or Asian origin who have been identified as serving in the Royal Navy or regiments of the British Army during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries leave few footprints for historians to follow other than brief biographical details, physical descriptions and service details. However, sometimes details emerge of their lives after leaving the forces. That such details are more easily identified in contemporary newspapers and gaol records is problematic, suggesting that involvement in criminality was commonplace. It definitely was not. Only a handful of the hundreds of Black and Asian veterans identified have any involvement in crime, and then they were more likely to be the victims of or witnesses to criminal behaviour. However, in the case of Samuel Munday, an Antiguan former sailor, it was his son, Samuel Munday (junior), who became involved in crime. Samuel Munday’s other child, a ‘mixed heritage’ female who had no involvement in crime, cannot be identified of course.

Samuel Munday (Senior)

Samuel Munday was born on Antigua, West Indies c.1757 (his surname was rendered as both Munday and Monday). In 1814 he was admitted as an out-pensioner of Greenwich Hospital claiming to have served in the Royal Navy “…for fifteen years on board different ships…” before being discharged c.1812 (possibly dating his service between 1797-1812, but often former ratings claimed pensions years after their service had ended).^[1]For Samuel Munday (Monday) see The National Archives (TNA) ADM 6/267 and 6/273. ADM 73/41, 73/42, 73/44, 73/45 and 66. His pension amounted to the sum of £4 per annum, which suggests he was unable to provide the evidence needed to support a claim for fifteen years’ service. This equated to less than 3d per day when the daily wage of a labourer was 1s (12d) per day. He had been disabled by a head injury (possibly a wound) whilst serving on HMS Romney. Assigned to blockade the Dutch coast, Romney ran aground in November 1804.

Despite several attempts to re-float the ship it could not be saved and several of the crew died in the incident, with others being injured. Although this was the eventual cause of his disability, it did not prevent him later serving on HMS Rhin. No dates of service were provided for his time on either the Romney or the Rhin.

When Samuel Munday was admitted to Greenwich his records noted that he was resident in London and married to Elizabeth with two dependent children. Samuel Munday had married Elizabeth Binner at St George Hannover Square, Westminster in 1795, with a son Samuel (junior) being born in 1796 and a daughter born in 1807 (unfortunately she has not been identified).^[2]City of Westminster Archives Centre. Transcription © brightsolid online publishing. findmypast.co.uk Samuel Munday was admitted as an in-patient of Greenwich Hospital in March 1815 when it was noted that he was “a Black man”. He died at Greenwich Hospital in April 1831 aged 67 years. ^[3]TNA/RG/4/1674. Kent: Greenwich, Greenwich Hospital (Anglican): Burials. TNA/RG/4/1674. ancestry.co.uk

Samuel Munday (Junior)

Samuel Monday, hereafter Samuel Munday (junior), was born in February 1796 and baptised at St James, Piccadilly, Westminster, July 1796.^[4]Westminster Church of England Parish Registers; City of Westminster Archives Centre. Reference: STG/PR/7/80. England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975. FHL film number: 1850973/1. ancestry.co.uk … Continue reading His first brush with the law was before the Westminster Sessions in January 1814. From the Sussex Advertiser, with minor corrections:

At the late Westminster Sessions, S. Munday, a mulatto lad [indicating that his mother was White], was indicted for stealing a pocket-handkerchief, value 10d. The prisoner, in his defence, said he bought the handkerchief from a Jew in the Park, for 9d. On the Chairman’s asking him if he had any witnesses, a grey-haired black man in sailor’s clothes, came forward, much agitated. He said the prisoner was his only son; he had nearly broken his heart. He had himself served His Majesty 15 years on board of different ships and had been discharged about two years. That during that time he had been steward to different Captains, and his honesty had never been doubted. He had since been in the merchant’s service and had made two voyages to the West Indies. Before his last voyage, he put the prisoner apprentice to an optician, but when he went to sea he left his master. On his return he again put him apprentice to an engraver and gilder. While he, the father, remained at home, he appeared perfectly satisfied, and his master was pleased with him.- The old man was much affected here, and was obliged to stop in his narrative – in continuation he said, he went to sea happy, thinking the prisoner had seen the error, but on his return he found he had left his master, and had gone back to his idle habits. He had engaged to go on another voyage to the West Indies and was in treaty with the Captain to the take the prisoner with him, when he was apprehended. He, the father, has lost his passage, for he would no more think of leaving the prisoner without trying once more to reclaim him. His money was exhausted, and was almost without means of support. He begged of the Court and Jury to have mercy on the prisoner for the sake of an old father, and for God’s sake. If they acquitted him, and he had got him once more into his care, he should never leave him until he took him to the West Indies, where he had some friends, and he would take care that he never should come back in the country. The worthy Chairman summoned up the evidence and the Jury brought in a verdict of – not guilty. The old man fell upon his knees, in the middle of the Court, and prayed for blessings to fall upon the Court and Jury. The prisoner was discharged with suitable admonition.^[5]Sussex Advertiser, 10th January 1814. Also, Cheltenham Chronicle, 27^th January 1814. findmypast.co.uk

The best intentions of Samuel Munday (senior) were overtaken by ill-health and his subsequent admittance to Greenwich Hospital in March 1815. Thereafter, Samuel Munday (junior) returned to his “idle habits” (his father’s description) and keeping bad company. However, this time his father would be unable to speak for him. In May 1815, Samuel Munday (junior) appeared at the Old Bailey charged with feloniously stealing, on 11^th April, 20 yards of gingham, from the dwelling house of George Todd, a linen draper in St Martin’s in the Field, Strand. PC Barrett had observed Munday in the company of four others. He followed them from the area of St Giles’s Church and saw Munday and an individual “a great deal younger than the prisoner,” steal the gingham (the younger individual stealing the gingham and passing it to Munday). PC Barrett arrested Munday with the gingham. Munday spoke in his own defence: “I never until now have been called to answer a dishonest charge.” He was found guilty and sentenced to six months imprisonment and fined 1s ^[6]www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t18150510-44-defend487&div=t18150510-44#highlight He spent his period of incarceration in Newgate Gaol.^[7]Newgate Prison, London: Lists Of Felons (Prisoners) On The Common Side. England & Wales, Crimes, Prisons & Punishment, 1770-1935. PCOM2/189. findmypast.co.uk

Released in October 1815, Samuel Munday (junior) quickly fell in with bad company again, returning to the Old Bailey on the 4^th December 1816, charged with pick-pocketing. The victim was a Reverend Thomas Silver, who was walking with a Mr Andrews in Coventry Street at 5pm, when Samuel and another man picked his pocket. Witnesses said that in addition to Samuel Munday and his accomplice, several perpetrators were involved in the crime, and used a method referred to as “hussling.” Munday’s description was circulated by the police, and he was taken in St. George’s public house seven days later.

Samuel Munday spoke in his own defence:

“I was behind the prosecutor on the 14th of November; I was going to the George public-house, a young man ran past me, and the gentlemen were following him; that is all I know of the matter.”

The ‘Bloody Codes’, a series of repressive responses to crimes against property in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, had resulted in over 200 crimes being punishable by execution (with transportation to Australia as an alternative commencing in 1787). This was the third time that Samuel Munday (junior) had been charged with a crime, and he no longer had his father to speak in his defence. London was being plagued by gangs of street robbers, and Samuel Munday (junior) was portrayed, rightly or wrongly, as being prominent in gang related activities:

The Saint James’s Chronicle identified him as “West of Temple-bar” the leader of one of “three gangs of street robbers parading the streets of London in the daytime…” being personally responsible for “having committed a number of daring robberies in the neighbourhood of Leicester-fields, Sydney’s-alley, &c…”^[8]Saint James’s Chronicle, 23^rd November 1816. findmypast.co.uk  Whilst the Commercial Chronicle (London) described Samuel Munday as “…a tawney, the captain of a gang of street-robbers…robbing people in the most daring manner…”^[9]Commercial Chronicle (London), 30^th November 1816. findmypast.co.uk

Samuel Munday, aged 20 years, was found Guilty and transported for seven years.^[10]www.oldbaileyonline.org/browse.jsp?id=t18161204-74-defend576&div=t18161204-74#highlight His transportation was reported by Bell’s Weekly Messenger: “Samuel Munday, a man of colour, to be transported for 7 years”.^[11]Bell’s Weekly Messenger, 15^th December 1816. findmypast.co.uk He was transported on the Almorah, departing England in April 1817 and landing in New South Wales in August 1817.^[12]convictrecords.com.au A description of Samuel Munday whilst he was on the Almorah noted: Samuel Munday: Ship: Almorah. Tried Middlesex, 4^th December 1816. 7 years. Born London. Servant. 22 years old, (born 1794). 5/9 and ½” tall. Black complexion, black hair and black eyes.^[13]State Records Authority of New South Wales. Australia Convict Ships 1786-1849. Indents 1788-1842 (Nrs 12188). Reel 394.

At some point, whilst a convict under sentence, Samuel Munday left New South Wales and was taken to Van Dieman’s Land (now Tasmania). This was probably because his behaviour necessitated a more severe environment. He was involved in two disciplinary incidents in New South Wales, (receiving 25 lashes for one), before being moved to Tasmania c.1818 where he was employed on public works at Hobart Town.^[14]HO 10/43. Conduct Record CON31/1/2 Page 19; Conduct Record CON35/1/1 Page 376; Other Records CON13/1/1 Page 126. foundersandsurvivors.org

At St David’s Church, Hobart in November 1823, Samuel Munday married Eliza Wynn, a fellow convict.^[15]Tasmania Marriages 1803-1899. Registration Number 661. © Tasmanian Archive & Heritage Office. Elizabeth Winn (sic Wynn), born c.1791-1794, was convicted at Southampton Assizes of assaulting a … Continue reading However, neither a change of marital status or location appears to have improved Samuel Munday’s relationship with authority, and a further ten disciplinary incidents were recorded between 1818 and 1844. The latter year being well after he had served his sentence and is the last known reference to him.^[16]Tasmania Convict Records 1800-1893. Conduct Record CON31/1/2 Page 19; Conduct Record CON35/1/1 Page 376; Other Records CON13/1/1 Page 126. foundersandsurvivors.org