Demonstrations against the Irish Church, 1868--In favour of
Fenians, 1869--Regulations made by Commissioners of Works--Fenian
Demonstration, 1872--A speaker sentenced--Meeting about the Eastern
Question, 1878--Fight--Preaching in the Park--Modern
instances--May-Day and May 6, 1894--Against the House of Lords,
Aug. 26, 1894.
On Sunday, July 19, 1868, there was a demonstration in the Park against
the Irish Church: then there was one in favour of the Fenians in Oct.,
1869. But it is not worth chronicling all the meetings that have taken
place since the time when the Commissioners of Works settled upon the
place of public meetings, and the routine necessary before they were
held.
_Times_, Oct. 15, 1872: “The Commissioners of Works have caused to be
erected in Hyde Park, at exactly 150 yards distance from the so-called
‘Reformers’ Tree,’[52] a granite pedestal and iron standard, surmounted
by a board, to mark the spot where it shall be lawful (and there only)
to hold public meetings, and inscribed with the following announcement:
‘The Notice Board respecting Public Addresses.--No public address may be
delivered except within 40 yards of the notice board on which this rule
is inscribed.’ The rule is to the following effect, and in addition,
posted at all the entrances to the Park: ‘No public address may be
delivered unless a written notice of the intention to deliver the same,
signed with the names and addresses of two householders residing in the
metropolis, be left at the offices of Her Majesty’s Works and Public
Buildings, at least two clear days before: such notice must state the
day and hour of intended delivery. After such notice has been received,
no other notice for the delivery of an address on the same day will be
valid.’”
Because the concession had been made, of course it was forthwith to be
set at nought--by a Fenian Demonstration. The following is the
commencement of an account of the meeting in _The Standard_ of Nov. 4,
1872.
“The late Mr. O’Connell was in the habit of boasting that he could drive
a coach-and-four through an Act of Parliament. The sympathizers with
political discontent, or disturbance rather, in London, transcended the
rhetorical flourish of _the_ agitator, _par excellence_, yesterday. They
had been bragging at Convention for some time past that they would hold
a meeting in Hyde Park, ‘the people’s Park,’ in the teeth of Mr. Ayrton
and the Parks Regulation Bill,[53] and yesterday they carried out their
threat. The day was the day consecrated to God’s worship, but these
disciples of ‘the revolution’ held their demonstration all the same,
evidently acting on the principle of the proverb ‘the better the day,
the better the deed.’ The object of the gathering was to seek for the
amnesty of the political prisoners (by political prisoners being
understood sundry soldiers who had forsworn their allegiance to join a
conspiracy against the Queen’s Government, and the lives of their own
comrades), and various other culprits who, under the pretence of
patriotism, had transgressed the laws that regulate the order of the
community by acts of violence.”
This led to twelve of the speakers being summoned to Marlborough Street
Police Court, and one of them, a man named Bailey, was tried before the
magistrate as a test of the whole, on Nov. 19, and fined 5_l._ or a
month’s imprisonment, but it was agreed that a case should be stated,
and taken to a higher Court, the other summonses being adjourned _sine
die_. The Appeal came on at the Queen’s Bench, on Jan. 23, 1873, before
three judges, who all concurred in affirming the conviction. The
Treasury, to the very great disgust of the Fenian sympathizers,
presented them with a bill of costs for 100_l._, but I do not know
whether it was ever paid.
The effect of licensing public meetings in Hyde Park has been to turn
that place into a bear-garden on most Sundays during fine weather, and
one-sided meetings, more or less orderly, have been held on almost every
subject, social and political. Is there a strike, the strikers must
needs go and bellow their grievances--be they cabmen, laundresses,
bakers, or unemployed. What good they think can accrue from it, they
themselves cannot answer. As to the Trades’ Unions who go there
periodically, I fancy very few would go were it not to show their
regalia, air their banners, and march to the sound of a brass band;
while of late years it has become to very many a Sunday picnic, to
which they and their wives go in brakes. Nay, sometimes they meddle with
things wholly out of their sphere; as, for instance, the demonstration
on the Eastern Question on Feb. 24, 1878, at which the following
handbill was distributed:--
“RUSSIAN MEETING IN HYDE PARK:--Englishmen! A last attempt is to be made
by the baffled agents of Russia, on Sunday, Feb. 24 (to-day), to corrupt
and undermine the patriotism of our countrymen. Do you wish Count
Schouvaloff to telegraph to the Czar that any meeting of Englishmen have
passed resolutions in favour of the policy of the most despotic and
cruel Power in Europe, a Power that deliberately crushes all ‘national
freedom’ with the iron heel of military force, and shuts out British
industry from all her territories? Any resolution passed at their
meeting will be a direct encouragement to Russia. Nothing but a vigorous
and determined policy will prevent war, which the Russian party, if
successful, will inevitably bring about, as they brought about the
Crimean War, in 1853.”
While Mr. Auberon Herbert was speaking, _The Times_ says that “A rush
was made by a number of well-dressed young men on the south-east, at the
same time that a huge column, with banners spread, was advancing from
the north-east. It was easy to see that the ‘specials’ in the ring had
had no military training, for some left the part which needed the most
strength to repel the attack made by the young men. The chairman and the
clergyman disappeared, and the Peace party then stood ready to greet the
on-coming column. Mr. Bradlaugh had a special constable’s staff in his
hand; and, parleying with the head of the column, demanded that their
flags should be put down. Each of the men who had composed the circle
brought out a constable’s staff. The platform was, meanwhile, left in
the possession of one person. The Peace party tore down the Turkish and
Polish banners from the poles, and thereupon the anti-Russian party made
a rush to, and broke up the platform.
“The _mélée_ now became almost general, for all classes of persons had
got mixed up together, and in the struggle of those who wanted to pass
out of harm’s way, an extraordinary scene was presented. There must have
been 60,000 or 70,000 people, but only a very small number was inclined
to take active part in the proceedings. The fight, which was more noisy
than hurtful, did not occupy much time. One or two men climbed small
trees, where they took up the remains of the Turkish flag, and displayed
it upon the leafless branches. It was draped too low, however, and was
seized and lost. One of the events of the day was a regular fight in a
tree, between two well-matched antagonists. The fight was witnessed by
the whole crowd, some of whom took it upon themselves to dislodge the
fellows from the trees, by pelting them with heavy sticks and stones.”
But public meetings were not the only nuisance occasioned by throwing
open the Park. It at once became a place for every shade of religious
and secular doctrine to be preached; and the first notice I can find of
these practices is in a letter in _The Times_ of Nov. 27, 1872.
“The public are not aware of what occurs on Sundays in Hyde Park. Here
is what I have seen.
“A man dressed as a clergyman was standing on a seat near the
Serpentine, and preaching to a few listeners, a very sensible sermon. A
policeman advanced and told him, ‘This is not allowed.’ The preacher at
once discontinued. Scene the second. A considerable crowd near what is
called the Reformers’ Tree: three men, dressed in cassocks and caps,
preaching such terrible blasphemy that I quite shuddered to hear it, our
Saviour’s name and His words being travestied in the most awful and
obscene manner. The policeman there stood outside the crowd, but made no
attempt to interfere.”
Are things better now? Let anyone go and see for himself; or, if that is
inconvenient or impossible, let him read these two recent newspaper
cuttings (_Globe_, April 16, 1894):--
“DISORDERLY SCENE IN HYDE PARK.
“Yesterday afternoon a disorderly scene took place in Hyde Park. Two
persons who were endeavouring to hold a religious meeting near the
Serpentine, were surrounded by a crowd of men and boys, and, owing to
some peculiarity, were frequently interrupted and prevented from
proceeding with the service they were attempting to conduct. Finally,
the opposition became so demonstrative that the two men were compelled
to beat a retreat, a small banner they had with them being torn. Their
hats were knocked off, and they were otherwise subjected to considerable
hustling and ill-usage. Some disorder also occurred at a meeting which
was being held close by. Scenes of this character have recently become
very common in the Park.”
“THE BISHOP OF HYDE PARK.
“At the Marlborough Street Police Court, John Mullane, thirty-seven,
labourer, Circus Street, Marylebone; John Hayes, twenty-three, painter,
John Street, Marylebone; and John Henlay, thirty, labourer, Carlisle
Street, Marylebone; were charged with fighting together in Hyde Park. A
police sergeant said that on Sunday evening, a man named Scully was
addressing a meeting in Hyde Park, close to the Marble Arch. Presently,
the three prisoners began to fight with each other, apparently over some
argument with Scully. To prevent further disturbance, he obtained
assistance, and took the men into custody.
“In defence, Mullane said he was listening to Scully, and noticed that
he had a bottle in his pocket. Scully said it was water, but Hayes smelt
it, and said it was gin. Then Scully knocked him (Hayes) down. He
(Mullane) then struck Scully, when Henlay came up and struck him
(Mullane) and knocked him down. Henlay said that he was standing behind
Scully, when Hayes took the bottle out of his (Scully’s) pocket, struck
Scully, and threw him on the top of him (Henlay). Peter Scully deposed
that he lived in Stanhope Street, Deptford, and got a living by selling
‘good’ books. He had been in the habit of lecturing in Hyde Park, in
favour of religion, for the last twelve years. While he was speaking on
Sunday night, a bottle of water was pulled away from him, his hand was
cut, and his chair was pulled from under him. People called him the
‘Bishop’ of Hyde Park, because he had such large audiences. He saw two
young fellows struck.
“Mr. Newton: ‘You see all these disturbances are caused by your
preaching.’--Scully: ‘I cannot help that.’--Mr. Newton: ‘Yes, you can,
because you need not preach there.’--Scully: ‘Many other persons speak
there as well as myself, and if I should stop speaking there, the other
speakers should do the same.’--Mr. Newton: ‘I think it would be a good
thing if all of them were stopped. If there were no speakers in the
Park, there would be no fights.’--Scully: ‘I should not mind if speaking
in the Park were stopped, for I can always get an audience, and could
address meetings elsewhere.’--Mr. Newton (addressing the defendants)
said, they ‘should not misbehave themselves in the Park,’ and ordered
them to enter into their own recognizances to be of good behaviour in
the future.”--_Daily Graphic_, May 1st, 1894.
Here, also, in the Park, men’s minds are poisoned by the doctrines of
Socialist and Anarchist; but the latter, at present, is somewhat out of
favour with King [Greek: dêmos]--probably on account of the Anarchist
predilection for bombs, against which even his majesty is not proof.
Here is an account from the _Daily Graphic_ of last
“MAY DAY IN HYDE PARK.
“The May Day celebration in London has been marked by one of the most
extraordinary scenes ever witnessed in Hyde Park. The occasion was a
demonstration organized by the Social Democratic Federation to unite
with the demonstrations on the Continent in making the first of May
Labour Day. There was, of course, a procession, which formed up on the
Embankment, and was about as imposing as that which follows a drunken
man to the police-station.
“There was the difference that it had a few waggonettes and
greengrocers’ carts to lengthen it out. Some of the waggonettes and the
greengrocers’ carts were arched in with green branches, and the drivers
wore red caps of the sort usually associated with burlesque. They were
understood to represent ‘caps of liberty.’ A few bakers’ carts displayed
specimens of French loaves and horseshoe rolls. In some of the carts
were children who sang the ‘Marseillaise,’ as the carts trailed through
Piccadilly. Girls of an older growth had donned white dresses trimmed
with a virulent red, and marshalled the younger ones. Mr. Keir Hardie,
with his tweed cap and his pipe, walked through the crowd like one who
expected the homage due to a hero. Mr. William Morris was also there,
but one could not help thinking that he was, and felt, out of place.
There were speeches, of course. These were laudatory, for the most part,
of the workers and the Social Democratic Federation.
“But the Anarchists had, somehow, recovered their spirits, and had
ventured to join in the procession. Agnes Henry, in her inevitable
yellow ulster and cloth shoes, plodded indefatigably on the outskirts of
the crowd. Louise Michel hovered here and there. They had their
flags--red with black fringes--with them. One was an imposing banner on
two poles, with an appeal to put down all government and authority. The
Anarchists took up their position as side shows to the main
demonstration. The crowd had paid no attention to the Social Democrats,
but the Anarchists drew them like a magnet. A man, named Leggatt, a well
known anarchist, declaimed from one platform; a succession of speakers,
including Louise Michel, Mowbray, Dr Macdonald, and others, from
another, which was intended to be more important. Sullivan, of Tower
Hill fame, had a little show of his own. There was an evident desire to
listen to the Anarchists patiently at first. Then the listeners had
their feelings jarred by some outrageous exposition of the doctrine of
explosives. They groaned and hooted. Leggatt, with clumsy retort, said
they should be at a Board School, or playing marbles. So far as he was
concerned, the result was disastrous. There was a spring at him, and he
swayed for a moment on his perch, and then came down full length, while
his platform was soon in little bits. The police, who had been observing
the ugly temper of the crowd, rushed in, just in time to save him from
worse injury. The banner was promptly in ribbons, and its pole was
broken up. On this the people at the other platform discreetly folded
their banner, and took it away.
“They would have done as well to have taken themselves away also. One
man, whose vanity shall not be gratified by having his name mentioned
here, said the police were keeping down the workers. ‘You will never be
free while you have such men as Melville.’[54] He was answered with a
cheer for the police, and, in a second more, was in the hands of the
crowd. There were cries of ‘In the Serp. with him,’ and again
Chief-Inspector Peters and his men had to rush in to save the
demonstrators from the consequences of their own folly. A red tie became
a dangerous article of adornment--there were threats to lynch the
wearers. It was now becoming more and more difficult to keep the crowd
in hand. Big as the A.R. division men are, they could hardly force their
way through the dense masses.
“Never has there been such a scene in the Park. Racing across it came
the hunted Anarchists, surrounded by a yelling, fist-using crowd, with
the police protecting, as well as they could, the objects of the public
wrath. At the Marble Arch, the police formed a _cordon_ across the gates
and closed all passage, and it was then only that the Anarchists,
bleeding and bruised, were able to get into cabs and be driven to
safety.”
Any one would have thought that this lesson would have lasted them some
time, but it was not so. On the first Sunday in the month (6th May) the
annual demonstration in favour of a “Legal Eight Hours Day” took place
in Hyde Park; and, although the Anarchists had nothing whatever to do
with the meeting, yet the irrepressibles were there, and succeeded in
marching to their usual speaking-place near the Reformers’ Tree; but
their reception by the sympathizers with the demonstration was of so
hostile a character, that before the head of the procession arrived,
they were hunted out of the Park, and, but for the protection afforded
by the police, several would have been severely handled.
Perhaps the greatest fiasco of any of these meetings was one held Aug.
26th, 1894, with a view of abolishing the House of Lords. There were
comparatively few people, the procession being made up of banners and
bands.
[Illustration]
[Illustration: decorative bar]