On This Day: The Broadwater Farm Riots, 6th October 1985

The recent Black Lives Matter campaign could give the impression that institutional racism is a distinctly American problem. Britain has had to deal with its own fair share of problems in this regard however, and like in Ferguson and other American cities, tension between the police and ethnic minorities has occasionally flared into violence. The Broadwater Farm Riots, on the 6th of October 1985, were one such occasion.

Overturned and burnt out cars in Broadwater Farm Estate on the day after the riots/uprising. Taken 7 October 1985 (Source: Jim Moody).

At the beginning of October 1985, tensions between police and the black community in Tottenham, north London, were running high. Longstanding grievances were exacerbated by riots in Brixton the previous week, following the shooting of a black woman, Dorothy Groce, during a police search. At lunchtime on the 5th of October Floyd Jarrett, a young black man who lived about a mile away from the Broadwater Farm estate, was arrested and charged with theft and assault- he was later acquitted of both charges. Later that day, however, the police decided to search the house of Floyd’s mother, Cynthia. During the search, 49-year-old Cynthia Jarrett collapsed and died of a heart attack. Her daughter claimed that Cynthia had been pushed by an officer called DC Randle, and the resulting fall could have contributed to her death. Randle denied it, and no police officer was charged or disciplined for what happened.

The black community in London already believed that the Metropolitan Police was institutionally racist (they were probably right!), and the treatment of Cynthia Jarrett sparked outrage. Bernie Grant, local council leader at the time, condemned the search of Cynthia’s house and called for local police chiefs to resign. A demonstration gathered outside Tottenham police station in the early hours of the next morning, the 6th of October. Violence between police and some members of the local community escalated throughout the day; centring on the Broadwater Farm estate. The rioters built barricades, set fire to cars, and threw bricks, molotov cocktails and other projectiles at police, making effective use of the raised walkways on the estate.

At about 9:30 p.m., the police and fire brigade were called to a fire on the upper level of Tangmere House, a block of flats and shops on the estate. Whilst attending the fire, the officers were attacked by rioters and forced to retreat rapidly. A police officer, Constable Keith Blakelock, tripped and fell in the confusion. He was immediately surrounded by rioters, who beat and repeatedly stabbed him in a vicious attack. PC Bl//akelock became the first police officer to be killed in a riot in Britain since 1919. n

The riot tailed off during the night as it started to rain and news of Blakelock’s death spread. The impacts of the riots, however, would last a lot longer than 24 hours. Determined to find Blakelock’s killers, the Metropolitan Police maintained a heavy presence on the Broadwater estate for several months, arresting and questioning over 300 people, many of whom were denied access to a lawyer. The riots led to changes in the police’s tactics and equipment for dealing with riots, and efforts to reengage with the local community.

Six people were eventually charged with the murder of Keith Blakelock; although the investigation and ensuing court cases were severely hampered by officers who were willing to cut corners and ignore the law. Three children had their cases dismissed after a judge ruled that they had been held and questioned inappropriately. Three adults, Winston Silcott, and Engin Raghip and Mark Braithwaite, were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment despite there being no witnesses and no forensic evidence. All three were cleared by the Court of Appeals in November 1991. In July 2013, a man named Nicholas Jacobs was charged with Blakelock’s murder, but was cleared at trial.

Neither Cynthia Jarrett nor Keith Blakelock have received justice for what happened to them. Although from different ‘sides’ of the conflict, both were victims of an institutionally racist society that was creating tension between those in authority and communities in London and across Britain. We are kidding ourselves if we think these tensions no longer exist, and the Broadwater Farm Riots are a stark reminder of the danger of overlooking such problems.

Don’t forget to check out the location of the Broadwater Farm Riots on the Turbulent London Map!

Sources and Further Reading

BBC News, “What Caused the 1985 Tottenham Broadwater Farm Riot?” Last modified 3rd March 2014, accessed 5th October 2016. Available at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-26362633

Bloom, Clive. Violent London: 2000 Years of Riots, Rebels and Revolts. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010 [2003].

Wikipedia, “Broadwater Farm Riot.” Last modified 26th September 2016, accessed 5th October 2016. Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadwater_Farm_riot

Wikipedia, “Death of Keith Blakelock.” Last modified 4th October 2016, accessed 5th October 2016. Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Keith_Blakelock

On This Day: The London Women Transport Workers Strike, 16th August 1918

AN ENGLISH BUS CONDUCTRESS (Q 61348) A bus No 18 (Willesden Route) conductress selling a ticket to a RFC serviceman. Copyright: © IWM. Original Source: http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205026963

In August 1918, female tram conductors in Willesden started a wildcat strike which quickly spread around the country and to other sectors of public transport. Initially demanding the same war bonus that had been given to men, their demands morphed into equal pay, over 40 years before the Equal Pay Act.

During the First World War, women took over many of the jobs that had previously been done by men. Public transport was one area where female employees became key. By the end of the war, the London General Omnibus Company employed 3500 women, and thousands more were employed by other bus and train operators in London as well as on the Underground. Lots of women joined unions, but the unions were more interested in protecting the long-term job security of men rather than the employment rights of women. The unions wanted to make sure that men could return to their pre-war jobs with the same working conditions when the war finished, so they didn’t want women to get too comfortable. In addition, both unions and management refused to entertain the idea of equal pay, arguing that the work that women did was not worth the same as men’s.

In mid-1918, male workers were given a 5 shilling a week wartime bonus to help cope with the increased cost of living. Women were not given this bonus, and some workers in London were not willing to accept this. On the 16th of August, a meeting of women at Willesden bus garage decided to go on strike the following day, without informing their bosses or unions.

The next morning, they were quickly joined by women at the Hackney, Holloway, Archway and Acton depots and garages, and the strike continued to spread throughout the day. At first the women demanded the same 5 shilling per week bonus as men, but their demands soon escalated to equal pay, and they adopted the slogan ‘Same Work- Same Pay.’

By the 23rd of August, female bus and tram workers around the country had joined the strike, including in Bath, Bristol, Birmingham, Brighton, and Weston-super-mare. Some women working on the London Underground also joined the strike- it mainly affected the Bakerloo Line. It is estimated 18000 out of a total 27000 women working in the public transport industry participated.

The strikers held a series of mass meetings at the Ring, on Blackfriars Road in Southwark. It was a boxing arena that had been destroyed by aerial bombing. Many women brought their children and picnics with them. The strike was settled on the 25th of August after a contentious meeting at the Ring- many women did not want to go back to work. The tube workers didn’t go back to work until the 28th. The women won the 5 shilling bonus, but not equal pay.

The Equal Pay Act was passed in 1970 but even now, almost a hundred years after the women transport workers’ strike, women are not paid the same as men for the same jobs. London’s female public transport workers were some of the first to make a demand that is still yet to be fully realised. Without the aid of the experienced unions, the women were able to win the same bonus as men, if not the same wage. Little is known about how the women organised, which is a shame, although it might make a very nice research project!

Sources and Further Reading

Stuart. “London Buses in Wartime.” Great War London. Last modified 30th December 2014, accessed 15th June 2016. Available at https://greatwarlondon.wordpress.com/2014/12/30/london-buses-at-war-1914-1918/

View from the Mirror. “From Prayer to Palestra: The Ring at Blackfriars.” View from the Mirror: A Cabbie’s London. Last modified 4th February 2013, accessed 20th June 2016. Available at https://blackcablondon.net/2013/02/04/from-prayer-to-palestra-the-ring-at-blackfriars/

Walker, Michael. “London Women Tram Workers – Equal Pay Strike 1918.” Hayes People’s History. Last modified 13th February 2007, accessed 15th June 2016. Available at http://ourhistory-hayes.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/women-tramworkers-equal-pay-strike-1918.html

Weller, Ken. “The London Transport Women Workers Strike 1918.” libcom.org. Last modified 19th December 2012, accessed 15th June 2016. Available at https://libcom.org/history/london-transport-women-workers-strike-1918

Welsh, Dave. “The 90th anniversary of the Equal Pay strike on the London Underground.” Campaign Against Tube Privatisation- History. No date, accessed 15th June 2016. Available at http://www.catp.info/CATP/History.html

On This Day: The Death of Blair Peach, 23rd April 1979

Mark Duggan, Ian Tomlinson, Jean Charles de Menezes; some people have the misfortune of being famous because they were killed by the Metropolitan Police. Blair Peach is perhaps one of the better known names on that list. Peach died from a broken skull on the 23rd of April 1979, after being struck on the head during a demonstration outside Southall Town Hall. The results of the internal investigation into what happened weren’t published until 2010, three decades after Peach’s death.

Clement Blair Peach was born in New Zealand on the 25th of March 1946. He moved to London in 1969 and started working as a teacher at the Phoenix School in Bow, East London. Peach was no stranger to radicalism and protest; he was a member of the Socialist Worker’s Party, as well as the Socialist Teacher’s Association and the East London Teacher’s Association, both within the National Union of Teachers. In 1974 he was acquitted of a charge of threatening behaviour after he challenged a publican who was refusing to serve black customers. He was also involved in campaigns against far-right and neo-Nazi groups; he was well known for leading a successful campaign to close a National Front building in the middle of the Bangladeshi community around Brick Lane.

On St. George’s Day 1979, the National Front held a meeting in Southall Town Hall. The Anti-Nazi League held a counter demonstration outside the Town Hall. Peach was one of 3000 people to attend. The demonstration turned violent; over 150 people were injured (including around 100 police officers), and 345 arrests were made. Peach was struck on the head by a police officer at the junction of Beachcroft Avenue and Orchard Avenue, as he tried to get away from the demonstration. He died from his injuries later that night in Ealing Hospital.

Peach’s death struck a chord amongst the communities he had stood up for, and across the city as a whole. A few days after his death, 10000 people marched past the spot where he was fatally injured. His funeral was delayed by several months, until the 13th of June, but that was also attended by 10000 people. The night before his funeral, 8000 Sikhs went to see his body at the Dominion Theatre in Southall.

The Metropolitan Police commissioned an internal inquiry into what happened, which was led by Commander John Cass. 11 witnesses saw Peach struck by a member of the Special Patrol Group (SPG). The SPG was a centrally-based mobile group of officers focused on combating serious public disorder and crime that local divisions were unable to cope with. It started in 1961, and was replaces in 1987 by the Territorial Support Group, which also has a less-than stellar reputation amongst activists.

The pathologist’s report concluded that Peach was not hit with a standard issue baton, but an unauthorised weapon like a weighted rubber cosh,or a hosepipe filled with lead shot. When Cass’ team investigated the headquarters of the SPG, they found multiple illegal weapons including truncheons, knives, a crowbar, and a whip. 2 SPG officers had altered their appearance by growing or cutting facial hair since the protest, 1 refused to take part in an identity parade, and another was discovered to be a Nazi sympathiser. All of the officers’ uniforms were dry-cleaned before they were presented for examination.

Cass concluded that one of 6 officers had killed Peach, but he couldn’t be sure who exactly, because the officers had colluded to cover up the truth. He recommended that 3 officers be charged with perverting the course of justice, but no action was ever taken. The results of the inquiry were not published, and the coroner at the inquest into Peach’s death refused to allow it to be used as evidence, despite making use of it himself. On the 27th May 1980, the jury returned a verdict of death by misadventure. After decades of campaigning by Peach’s partner Celia Stubbs, the report was finally published in April 2010, although the Director of Public Prosecutions decided there was still not enough evidence to bring charges against anyone.

If I had written this blog post more than 6 years ago, it would look very different. The death of Blair Peach was a public relations nightmare for the Metropolitan Police; a respected and well-liked activist who fought hard for local communities, Peach was a man for whom many people cared about. The Met should have been transparent, finding out what happened and punishing those responsible quickly and openly. Instead, they covered up the cause of Peach’s death for 3 decades, allowing what happened to fester, contributing to a sense of resentment and distrust that continues to this day.

Sources and Further Reading

Casciani, Dominic. “Blair Peach Report: What the Investigation Uncovered.” BBC News. Last modified 17th April 2010, accessed 12th April 2016. Available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8646829.stm

Editorial.”Death of Blair Peach: The Truth at Last.” The Guardian. Last modified 28th April 2010, accessed 12th April 2016. Available at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/apr/28/death-of-blair-peach-editorial

Lewis, Paul. “Blair Peach Killed By Police at 1979 Protest, Met Report Finds.” The Guardian. Last modified 27th April 2010, accessed 12th April 2016. Available at http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/apr/27/blair-peach-killed-police-met-report

Metropolitan Police. “MPS Publication Scheme: Investiagation into the Death of Blair Peach.” No date, accessed 12th April 2016. Available at http://www.met.police.uk/foi/units/blair_peach.htm

Renton, David. “The Killing of Blair Peach.” London Review of Books 36, no. 10 (2014): 23-26. Available at http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n10/david-renton/the-killing-of-blair-peach

Wikipedia. “Death of Blair Peach.” Last modified 28th March 2016, accessed 12th April 2016. Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Blair_Peach

On This Day: The Cato Street Conspiracy, 23rd February 1820

The early nineteenth century was a turbulent time. Economic depression was exacerbated by returning soldiers flooding the job market after the Napoleonic Wars in 1815, and the Industrial Revolution was causing food shortages and new patterns of employment. One radical group was called the Spencean Philanthropists, after the radical speaker Thomas Spence. Led by Arthur Thistlewood, they were a revolutionary group involved in unrest and propaganda, with the ultimate goal of starting a revolution. They wanted to assassinate the cabinet, seize key buildings, overthrow the government and establish a Committee of Public Safety to oversee a radical revolution.

Cato Street Plaque — The plaque in Cato Street commemorating the conspiracy being discovered (Photo: Simon Harriyott).

The death of King George III on the 29^th of January sparked a political revolution. The Spencean Philanthropists planned to take advantage of the confusion, and assassinate the Prime Minister (Lord Liverpool) and all the cabinet ministers when they gathered for a dinner at the home of Lord Harrowby. However, George Edwards, the groups’ second in command, was a police spy, and there was never any risk of the plot succeeding. Thanks to Edwards, the Home Office knew about the entire thing, and the cabinet dinner was a fiction designed to entrap the group.

We will probably never know how many people were involved in the conspiracy—there were a lot of groups sympathetic to the aims of the Spencean Philanthropists—but 13 men were arrested in a dramatic showdown in the groups’ rented headquarters in Cato Street. The rented building was a stable and hayloft, close to Lord Harrowby’s House in Grosvenor Square. On the 23^rd of February Richard Birnie, the Bow Street magistrate, waited in a pub across the road with 12 members of the Bow Street Runners, predecessors of the Metropolitan Police. They were waiting for promised reinforcements from the Coldstream Guards, but at 7:30pm they decided to go in alone.

In the resulting scuffle Arthur Thistlewood killed Richard Smithers, one of the Bow Street Runners, and escaped out a back window with 3 others. They were arrested a few days later. Some of the conspirators gave evidence on the others to avoid conviction, so on the 28^th of April 10 men were sentenced to be hung, drawn, and quartered for high treason. This barbaric punishment was commuted for all 10, but that’s not as good as it sounds—5 men were hung and beheaded, and the other 5 were transported to Australia. Thistlewood and 4 others were executed at the infamous Newgate jail on the 1^st of May 1820.

Edwards did not give evidence during the trial. Police spies were controversial at the time, and Edwards was accused of being an agent provocateur—he had suggested targeting the dinner in the first place, and he had even provided money to help the conspirators buy weapons. Some people questioned whether the group would ever have gone so far if it wasn’t for the spy who was supposed to be trying to stop them.

What would have happened if the Cato Street Conspiracy had succeeded? Whether it would have sparked the uprising Thistlewood hoped for, or merely put new faces in the same old positions of power is impossible to predict. Nevertheless, it was a bold and desperate attempt to cause change, and although I can’t approve of the Spencean Philanthropists’ methods, I can’t help but admire their vision.

Sources and Further Reading

Anon. “Cato Street Conspiracy.” Wikipedia. Last modified 12^th December 2015, accessed 22^nd January 2016. Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Street_Conspiracy

Anon. “The Cato Street Conspiracy.” The National Archives. No date, accessed 22^nd January 2016. Available at http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/blackhistory/rights/cato.htm

Bloy, Marjie. “The Cato Street Conspiracy: 23 February 1820.” The Victorian Web. Last modified 30^th August 2003, accessed 22^nd January 2016. Available at http://www.victorianweb.org/history/riots/cato.html

Marjie, Bloy. “The Cato Street Conspiracy: 23 February 1820.” A Web of English History. Last modified 12^th January 2016, accessed 22^nd January 2016. Available at http://www.historyhome.co.uk/c-eight/distress/cato.htm

Simpkin, John. “Cato Street Conspiracy.” Spartacus Educational. Last modified August 2014, accessed 22^nd January 2016. Available at http://spartacus-educational.com/PRcato.htm

On This Day: The Clerkenwell Outrage, 13th December, 1867

Clerkenwell has been the focus of a large amount of turbulence over its history, even for an area of London. During the Peasant’s Revolt in 1381 the priory of St. John was burnt down because of its wealth and connections with Sir Robert Hales, a hated tax collector. Lenin moved into 37a Clerkenwell Green in 1902, and published 16 issues of Iskra, a pre-Bolskevik newspaper from there. The house is now the Marx Memorial Library. The area has also harboured religious nonconformists, such as the Lollards and early Methodists. Clerkenwell Green, historically an open, grassy area, has played host to many political meetings and demonstrations, some more peaceful than others. But on the 13^th December 1867, Clerkenwell was rocked by an explosion that shocked even this contentious neighbourhood.

Lenin used to live in the building that is now the Marx Memorial Library in Clerkenwell (Source: Steven Collins).

The story begins in America in 1858. A group of Irish expatriates founded a secret society called the Irish Republican Brotherhood, known to most as the Fenians. Their aim was to free Ireland from British rule by any means necessary, including attacks on the British establishment in Ireland, other colonies, and even the mainland itself. By the middle of the 1860s, there were Fenian groups in Soho and Finsbury. By 1867, they were proving quite troublesome to the authorities. After a failed attempt to steal over 10,000 rifles from Chester Castle in February to arm an Irish uprising and the breakout of two prominent Fenians from a prison van in Manchester that resulted in the death of a Police Sergeant in September, tensions were running high.

Richard O’Sullivan-Burke was largely thought to be the man who led the Manchester prison van breakout. He was arrested in London in November along with another man called Joseph Casey. To avoid a repeat of Manchester the men were quickly transferred to the Clerkenwell House of Detention, just to the North of Clerkenwell Road. The prison was formidable, surrounded by a wall 25ft high and over 2ft thick. The men obviously had friends in London—every day cooked food was brought to them by a woman named Anne Justice, and rumours of an escape attempt soon reached the authorities.

Extra guards and uniformed police were posted in and around the prison in response to the warning. Despite this, an attempt was made to break out O’Sullivan-Burke and Casey on the 12^th of December. A man wheeled a large barrel up the prison wall by the exercise yard, and attempted to light a fuse on the barrel twice before he gave up, and wheeled the barrow off. A policeman watched the entire thing, but did not think it suspicious. The next day, another, similar attempt was made. This time, a firework was used as a fuse, and it turned out to be much more reliable. The resulting explosion was heard all over London. It levelled 60ft of the prison wall, and the front of a row of houses across the street in Corporation Row. 12 people were killed, and 120 others were injured.

“Britain’s first terrorist bombing” (Webb, 2012; p53) was an unmitigated disaster. Because of the failed attempt the day before the prisoners were not even in the exercise yard at the time of the explosion. Which was lucky in a way, as the Fenians had used far too much gunpowder (548lbs of it to be exact), and the explosion would have killed anyone in the yard. It sparked hysteria across the capital; it was said that twenty babies were killed in the womb by the blast, and that the explosion was a signal to begin a whole wave of terrorist attacks across the city. There were calls for new laws and emergency powers which would not be unfamiliar to us today. Any sympathy that there had been for the Irish cause amongst Londoners evaporated, and the government set up the first Secret Service Department, with the goal of gathering intelligence and anticipating future Fenian attacks. It was the forerunner of today’s Special branch and MI5. 5 people were charged with murder, including Anne Justice, but a man named Michael Barrett was the only one convicted. He has the dubious distinction of being the last person to ever be publicly executed in Britain.

Sadly, London is no stranger to terrorism. The Clerkenwell Outrage may have been Britain’s first terrorist bombing, but it was not the first terrorist plot, with conspiracies going back as far as the 1605 Gunpowder Plot and beyond. In light of everything that has been going on recently, it can be helpful to remember that this is not the first time London has faced vague and shadowy threats; the city has always continued to survive and thrive.

Sources and Further Reading

German, Lindsey and John Rees. A People’s History of London. London: Verso (2012).

Hunt, Nick. “History and Politics.” Plunging into History. No date, accessed 21^st November 2015. Available at http://www.plungingintohistory.com/ir-area-historyandpolitics

Merat, Aaron. “Clerkenwell’s Hidden Communist History.” Islington Now. Last modified 11^th March 2010, accessed 21^st November 2015. Available at http://islingtonnow.co.uk/2010/03/11/clerkenwells-hidden-communist-history/

Webb, Simon. Dynamite, Treason and Plot: Terrorism in Victorian and Edwardian London. Stroud: The History Press (2012).

White, Jerry. London in the 19^th Century: A Human Awful Wonder of God. London: Vintage (2007).

On This Day: The Hyde Park Railings Affair, 23rd July 1866

The Hyde Park Railings Affair is a little-known protest that took place 149 years ago today in Hyde Park. When the Home Secretary banned a rally organised by the Reform League from taking place in Hyde Park, the League decided to question the legality of the ban by marching to Hyde Park anyway. Demonstrators managed to break into the park, which led to scuffles with police and several days of rioting. The protest questioned the nature and control of public space in London, and contributed to Hyde Park’s radical legacy.

‘Manhood Suffrage Riots in Hyde Park; by artist Nathan Turner (Source: Wikigallery).

The Reform League was an organisation formed in 1865 to campaign for universal manhood suffrage in Britain. They had their origins in the Chartist movement, but they were not as radical. After the failure of the 1866 Reform Bill, controversy over which brought down the government in June, the Reform League decided to step up their campaigning by organising mass meetings. Meetings on the 29^th of June and 2^nd of July in Trafalgar Square were relatively peaceful, but the League’s next meeting was destined to be more controversial.

The Conservative Home Secretary, Spencer Walpole, banned the planned meeting in Hyde Park. Edmond Beales, the president of the Reform League, argued that the Home Secretary had no right to ban the demonstration, as the park either belonged to the people or the monarchy. Spencer Walpole was neither, therefore he had to right to dictate what was allowed to happen in the park. The protest became about more than electoral reform; it was now also about who had the right to use, control, and police public space. The Reform League decided to challenge the legality of the ban by marching to Hyde Park anyway.

On the afternoon of the 23^rd of July, the League and their supporters set out from their headquarters in Adelphi Place towards Hyde Park. When they got to Marble Arch, they found the gates locked and guarded by the police. Edmond Beales requested to be allowed entry, but he was not prepared to start a violent confrontation, so he withdrew when he was refused permission to enter. Beales and the Executive Committee of the Reform League led the march to Trafalgar Square, where they had a peaceful meeting.

Not everyone followed Beales and the Reform League however. A group of protesters stayed behind, and soon discovered that if the railings surrounding Hyde Park were rocked back and forth, they could be pulled from their foundations and toppled over. This happened at several locations around the park, leading to clashes with police as demonstrators poured into Hyde Park. There were injuries on both sides, but no deaths, and 40-70 people were arrested. The Police used Marble Arch as a temporary holding cell.

Rioting continued in the park for several days, which resulted in a lot of damage to the park. The stump of one oak tree which the protesters burnt down became known as the Reformers’ Tree. It became a focus point for radical activity in the park, and is commemorated by a mosaic. In 1872 the right of assembly and free speech was officially recognised in the northeastern corner of Hyde Park by the Royal Parks and Gardens Act. Speaker’s Corner is now a world famous site of public speech and debate.

The memorial to the Reformer’s Tree, near the site where the tree was thought to be located (Source: Duncan Cummings).

The Hyde Park Railings Affair is one of several protests in London that escalated because of government attempts to suppress protest, and Londoner’s determination to assert their rights; Bloody Sunday is another. Access to public space and the right to assembly is something many of us take for granted, but it is not a given. It has been fought for by generations of Londoners, and still needs to be defended.

Sources and Further Reading

Anon., “History and Architecture,” Royal Parks. No date, accessed 28^th September 2014 https://www.royalparks.org.uk/parks/hyde-park/about-hyde-park/history-and-architecture.

Tames, Richard. Political London: A Capital History. London: Historical, 2007.

On this Day: The Nore Mutiny, 12th May 1797

On this day 208 years ago a mutiny started at the Nore anchorage in the Thames estuary that would last for a month and would come to threaten the beating heart of London, they city’s incredibly lucrative trade economy. Great Britain was at war with revolutionary France, which put a huge strain on the nation’s navy, and also meant that the government could not afford to have the navy mutinying. Discontent had been brewing within the navy since the start of 1797; the men were poorly treated, their wages had not changed for over a century, and high rates of inflation were severely eroding their value. As well as this, the French revolution had badly scared Britain’s ruling elites, and they feared a similar uprising here.

A caricature of the mutineers. ‘The delegates in council or beggars on horseback’
by Isaac Cruikshank, published by Samuel William Fores
hand-coloured etching, published 9 June 1797
NPG D15627
© National Portrait Gallery, London

In April the ships at the Spithead anchorage near Portsmouth mutinied, demanding better pay and working conditions. They won their demands, and everyone who took part was pardoned. The seamen at Nore took inspiration from those at Spithead, but their mutiny was not destined to be so successful, for a number of reasons.

The crew of the Sandwich were the first to mutiny, on the evening of the 12^th of May 1797. They were joined by other ships, but some ships left the Nore to avoid taking part in the mutiny. Organisation was difficult amongst the sailors at Nore, as the ships were spread out, and they didn’t belong to a single fleet, as was the case at Spithead. Nevertheless delegates were elected from every ship, and a man named Richard Parker was elected ‘President of the Delegates of the Fleet.’

On the 20^th of May (which also happens to be my birthday!), the mutineers presented a list of 8 demands to Admiral Charles Buckner. The demands started off fairly average, including pardons for the mutineers and increased pay. However the demands soon took on a more radical turn, as the mutineers demanded that the King dissolve Parliament, and immediately make peace with France. This turn outraged the Admiralty, who offered the Nore sailors only the same concessions they had given to the men at Spithead.

The mutineers blockaded the Thames, and tried to prevent any ship from entering or leaving London. Had they been successful for any great length of time, they would have crippled London’s booming economy. They also made plans to sail to France, a plan which alienated many of the sailors, causing more ships to abandon the mutiny. The government and Admiralty didn’t want to make any further concessions, especially as they were wary of the political aims of some of the more radical leaders.

The mutineers were denied food, and eventually so many ships slipped away, despite being fired on by those that remained, that the mutiny collapsed. Richard Parker was swiftly convicted of treason and piracy and hanged from the yardarm of the Sandwich, where the mutiny started. 29 leaders were also hanged, and others were flogged, imprisoned or transported to Australia.

The men at Nore were fighting for better conditions and pay, but their more radical demands meant they the government and Admiralty could not be seen to back down. The mutineers also threatened London’s economy, which the authorities could not allow to stand. The seamen’s status as members of the navy put them in a different position to civilians when it came to their working rights. Members of the armed forces do not have the same rights as the average worker; to this day, they are not allowed to join a union or go on strike. These restrictions make the actions of the sailors at Nore all the more admirable. They faced dire consequences to stand up for themselves, and Richard Parker and many others paid the price when the mutiny collapsed.

Sources and Further Reading

Anon. ‘Research Guide B8: The Spithead and Nore Mutinies,’ National Maritime Museum. Last modified April 2008, accessed 15 April 2015 http://www.rmg.co.uk/researchers/library/research-guides/the-royal-navy/research-guide-b8-the-spithead-and-nore-mutinies-of-1797

Anon. ‘Spithead and Nore Mutinies,’ Wikipedia. Last modified 13 February 2015, accessed 15 April 2015. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spithead_and_Nore_mutinies

Anon. ‘The Naval Mutinies at Spithead and the Nore,’ Socialist Appeal. Last modified 15 January 2008, accessed 15 April 2015. http://www.socialist.net/the-naval-mutinies-at-spithead-and-the-nore.htm

Moore, Richard. ‘Mutiny at the Nore,’ Napoleonic Guide. No date, accessed 15 April 2015. http://www.napoleonguide.com/navy_nore.htm

On this Day: Bloody Sunday, 13th November 1887

There are several events which are remembered with the name ‘Bloody Sunday,’ perhaps most famously Sunday the 30^th of January 1972 when members of the British Army opened fire on protesters in Derry, Ireland, killing 13. London has its own Bloody Sunday however, which took place on Sunday the 13^th of November 1887, in Trafalgar Square. It was the culmination of months of increasing tension between police and Londoners over the right to demonstrate in Trafalgar Square.

Demonstrations by the unemployed had been taking place in the square daily since the summer. Many unemployed men and women also slept in the square, washing in the fountains. Under pressure from the press to deal with a situation seen as embarrassing to the great metropolis, the police started to disperse meetings in the square from the 17^th of October, often resorting to violence. The tension continued, now with frequent clashes between police and protesters, and Irish Home Rulers also began to use the square to protest.

Sir Charles Warren, Commissioner of Police, banned all meetings in Trafalgar Square on the 8^th of November. This challenge to the freedom of speech and the right to protest ouraged radicals across London, and a meeting scheduled for the following Sunday suddenly became much more significant. Called initially to demand the release of the Irish MP William O’Brien from prison, the demonstration was a clear and deliberate defiance of the ban, and the police could not allow it to go ahead without suffering severe humiliation.

Sir Charles Warren was Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police when Bloody Sunday took place.
Sir Charles Warren
by Elliott & Fry
albumen cabinet card, circa 1899
NPG x39345
© National Portrait Gallery, London

On the day of the demonstration, London was turned into “an armed camp” (Bloom, 2010; 223). 1,500 police lined the square up to 4 deep, and there were also mounted police, Life Guards and Grenadier Guards. Hundreds of Special Constables, volunteers who wanted peace maintained in their city, were also present. Marchers approached Trafalgar Square from all directions, but were ambushed by police baton charges about half a mile before they reached their destination.

Some protesters did manage to reach the square, where vicious street fighting continued all day. The day was a resounding victory for the police. Using no weapons but their truncheons, they injured at least 200 demonstrators, and killed 2 or 3. The organisers of the march had called for the demonstrators not to use violence, and injuries on the police side were therefore minimal, although 2 police officers were reportedly stabbed.

The official inquest into the day suggested that the police should order stronger truncheons, because so many had broken; clearly the authorities felt no qualms about the level of force used. For activists, Bloody Sunday would be remembered as one of heavy-handed, violent repression, and those protesters who died became martyrs for the labour movement.

Sources and further reading

Bloom, Clive. Violent London: 2000 Years of Riots, Rebels and Revolts. Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

German, Lindsey and John Rees. A People’s History of London. London: Verso, 2012.

Stedman Jones, Gareth. Outcast London: A Study in the Relationship between Classes in Victorian Society. London: Penguin, 1984.

White, Jerry. London in the 19^th Century. London: Vintage, 2008.

On This Day: The Battle of Cable Street, 4th October 1936

The Battle of Cable Street was a clash between police and protesters who were trying to prevent the British Union of Fascists (BUF) from marching through Stepney, the most concentrated area of Jewish population in the country. The 1930s saw fascism spreading across Europe. Both Germany and Italy were under fascist regimes, and the Spanish civil war was being fought between fascists and republicans. In 1932 the BUF was founded by Sir Oswald Mosley, who hoped to replicate the success of similar organisations across Europe.

A placard from the march on the 80th anniversary of the Battle of Cable Street march in front of the mural which commemorates the Battle (Source: Hannah Awcock)

Over the summer of 1936, tension in the East End increased as marches and meetings were organised in response to the BUF’s anti-Semitic propaganda and frequently violent activities. When the planned march was announced on the 29^th of September it was seen as deliberate provocation. One petition against the march gained 10,000 signatures, but the Home Secretary refused to ban the march on the grounds that to do so would be undemocratic. Whilst there was widespread opposition to the march, opinion on how to respond was divided. Moderates feared the inevitable violence that would result from attempting to stop the BUF, so called for people to just ignore the march. However, it was eventually decided that an attempt would be made to stop the march.

Members of the BUF greet Oswald Mosley with Nazi salutes in 1934.
Oswald Mosley
by Central Press
bromide press print, 9 September 1934
NPG x182408
© National Portrait Gallery, London

It was well known that Mosley planned for the BUF to gather in Royal Mint Street, then split into several columns to march through East London before reassembling for a rally in Bethnal Green. However the specific details of the planned route were not known, so the anti-fascists met at 4 different points, attempting to block all possible routes into the East End. It was the responsibility of the police to clear a route for the BUF to march. Although there were minor scuffles between fascists and anti-fascists, the main clashes were with the 6000 police officers who attempted to clear a route for Mosley and the BUF ‘Blackshirts’. The police made numerous baton charges at Gardiner’s Corner in Aldgate, but the way was blocked by a tram which had been stopped by its anti-fascist driver. The only other alternative this left was Cable Street.

Several barricades had already been built, including one constructed from an overturned lorry. The slogan “No Parasan- They Shall Not Pass,” which came from the Republican forces in the Spanish Civil War, had been painted on banners, barricades and the streets. The police were bombarded with projectiles from upper windows as they repeatedly charged, dismantling barricades and obstacles only to find more behind. As injuries and arrests mounted, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner ordered Mosley to abandon his planned route. Furious and humiliated, the BUF marched through London before quietly dispersing at Embankment. In the East End, celebrations continued long into the night.

To me, the Battle of Cable Street was a vocal expression of communal will, as well as a fierce declaration of ownership over the streets and spaces of the East End. A month after the Battle, the Public Order Act was passed, which controlled public processions and banned political uniforms in public. Under the terms of the act marches in East London were prohibited until the BUF was disbanded in 1940. Although it limited their activities too, the ban was a clear victory for anti-fascist campaigners, as it represented a U-turn of the government’s position of supporting the BUF’s right to march at any cost.

Sources and Further Reading

Jackson, Sarah and Rosemary Taylor. Voices from History: The East London Suffragettes. Stroud: The History Press, 2014.

Rosenburg, David. ‘The Battle of Cable Street- 75 Years on.’ History Workshop Online, January 8, 2011, accessed September 17, 2014 http://www.historyworkshop.org.uk/cable-street75/

The Cable Street Group. Battle of Cable Street 1936. Nottingham: Five Leaves, 2011.