THE SOLDIERS AND THE PEOPLE.
.IT is the fashion to abuse Democracy, but Democracy has done one thing for us,—it has enabled us to put down violence and disorder without causing any outburst of mistaken sympathy for the rioter, A generation ago the soldiers could not have acted as they did at the Featherstone Colliery ten days ago without evoking an explosion of indignation. If in the fifties a company of soldiers had fired during a riot, and had killed five relen and wounded many others, the leaders of the men would on all sides have proclaimed the blood-guiltiness of the authorities, and every Radical would have said and believed that pur Government was as reactionary and more callous than that of Russia. Now, however, it is only Mr. Cunning- hame Graham who can be found to denounce the carrying out of the law, and his voice is so shrill and unreal, and so obviously unrepresentative as regards popular questions, that no one heeds it. It is, indeed, the Radicals nowadays who order the firing and accept the responsibility, and the recognised leaders of the men make no sort of attempt to condemn the soldiers or the Magistrate who ordered them to fire, but, instead, imply that the rioters deserved what they got. Even the Trades-Union Congress, the most extreme gathering of men to be found in the Three Kingdoms, and a body not in the least concerned to support the present Government in whatever it does, or to abstain from doing or saying things which might embarrass the Home Secre- tary, merely passes a resolution of regret at the occurrence and of sympathy with the wives and families of the men who were killed,—a resolution in which every man, woman, and child in England would, of course, have gladly joined. No one can feel anything but the profoundest regret that lives should have been taken in the course of civil strife, or can fail to sympathise with the families of the dead,— especially since it is as likely as not that those killed and injured were not the instigators or chief actors in the riots.
The reason for this change of attitude on the part of the public is, as we have indicated above, not far to seek. Men do not now lose their heads about rioters, because we have established popular government in England, and the people feel that it is their peace which is being broken and their order which is being disturbed, and, further, that it is they themselves, through that highest committee of citizens which we call a Government, who are putting the rioting down. When the mass of the population were unenfranchised, they felt that the Government was not their Government, nor the soldiers their soldiers. They stood completely outside the administrative machine, and could criticise it without any sense of, responsibility. No one could say to them, " Well, if you object to its way of working, why don't you undertake its reform ?" because of the ready answer.: " We have no power to do so ; we are not allowed by the law to take any part in the Govern- ment." Now, however, that the people are beginning to realise that they are the State and the Govern- ment, they begin also to judge fairly the facts of each case, and do not assume, as formerly, that those who riot must have a good excuse, and that those who shoot to stop the riot must be in the wrong. They now ask them- selves,—Had the rioters any business to act as they were acting P And when that is answered in the negative, they go on to consider whether the authorities had any other plan open to them but to order the soldiers to fire. There is nothing really new or strange in the attitude of the Democracy towards disorder. In America mob-violence is always repressed with great sternness. Look at what happened at Chicago the other day. The Anarchists tried to hold a meeting—apparently just such a meeting as those the Socialists hold here every week—but the police for some reason would not allow the gathering, and when the Anarchists insisted, charged them, using their clubs freely. In reserve they had posted two or three Gatling guns, and intended to use them if necessary. But the effect of a machine-gun on a thickly-packed mob is sheer carnage. Yet not a word of protest was uttered in America,—except, of course, among the Anarchists. Public opinion in all classes is for putting an end to rioting, and for supporting the police. A rioter in America, unless he is engaged in lynching, has " no show " at all,—at any rate, when there are police and soldiers in his vicinity. The occasional fierce rioting is due to the extraordinary weakness of the police. In the rural districts there are no police at all, and even in con- siderable cities they are often a very small force. The Swiss Government, again, put down rioting very quickly, for they have no hesitation in acting firmly. In truth, sympathy with rioters is nothing but a tradi- tion from the evil days of arbitrary government. When the citizen is prevented from taking his fair share in the i government of the country, it is no wonder that he is grudging and critical in moments of crisis, and that his impulse is to find out the weak spots. Give him responsibility, however, and you make him look with a very different eye on the stern necessities of government. In writing as we have written, we may have appeared to give the impression that we think little of the bloodshed at Feather- stone. That is, however, anything but our intention. We deplore it as much as any one, and can conceive no more terrible position than that of the Magistrate who had to order a volley to be fired into a dense crowd, or than that of the soldiers who had to obey his orders. Our object is simply to point out the one consoling feature in a pitiable incident. It is in every sense a good sign that the Democracy are not afraid to use force to keep order, more especially because it will tend to prevent bloodshed in the future. If the mob know that they are certain to be fired on when they commit excesses, they are far less likely to give way. to the delirium of rioting. The know- ledge that no grievance, however great, will be held to justify rioting, and that against rioters the magazine-rifles will go off of themselves, cannot but have an excellent effect in preventing such scenes of disorder as those which took place at Featherstone and elsewhere last week.
The account of the Featherstone riot which is given in the Daily News of Thursday last contains some facts of considerable importance. The first thing that is clear, is that it is the height of madness to send soldiers among rioters, unless they are accompanied by a Magistrate. Though legally it is of course not necessary that the Riot Act, i.e., the proclamation prescribed by the Riot Act, should be read before the soldiers can act—if actual rioting and violence is going on, all citizens must do their best to stop the disorder, and the fact that they happen to have arms in their hands and act together, is no bar to their stopping the commission of felony—it is almost im- possible to get an officer to take the responsibility involved in ordering the men to fire. Hence, soldiers should never be sent to a scene of riot unless they have a Magistrate with them. Unfortunately, the company of the Stafford- shire Regiment who were sent to Featherstone, had no Magistrate with them. The result was that they could do nothing to quell the rioting, and only irritated the mob. For several hours they were placed in a position of the utmost danger. In order to be out of the reach of the strikers, the soldiers were withdrawn into the upper floor of one of the buildings connected with the mine. Here they had to undergo a sort of siege. Stones were thrown through the windows in such quantities that the soldiers had to lie down to avoid them ; and preparations were actually made for putting blasting-powder under one of the corners of the building, and so destroying it. At the same time, the sheds were burning in all directions. Yet all this time the soldiers had to remain inactive and watch the spread of the flames. In all probability, if they had been able to act the moment they arrived at the colliery, they would have been able to disperse the mob without firing. Another matter of interest and moment is the way in which the mob took the firing. The first two shots unfortunately did not do any execution. We say unfortunately advisedly, because if they had, more bloodshed would probably have been avoided. As it was, the mob shouted that it was only blank cartridge, and defied the soldiers. That was not true, as very properly the soldiers are not al lowed i to fire blank cartridges on such occasions, but if they fire at all, fire to kill; but the belief on the part of the miners rendered it necessary to fire a volley before the mob dispersed. Even then, there was no running and no panic on the part of the mob. It is, indeed, impossible not to feel proud of the way the miners faced the fire of the magazine-rifles, even after they had seen the terrible effects which it produced. There was no muse qui peat such as almost always follows firing in Ireland, but only a grim giving way to the inevitable which was most impressive. Strangely enough, too, there was no main: o3ity expressed against the soldiers. They " only obeyed their ceders " was, says the Daily News correspondent, the feeling he found among the crowd. It may be, as the leaders of the men declare, that the men who formed the mob were all larrikins ; but if that is so, the recruiting officers ought to be sent in force to the neighbourhood of Pontefract. Larrikins who will face rifle-fire at a hundred yards, and understand what "obeying orders" means, are just the men out of which irresistible soldiers are made.
Previous page
