HC Deb 09 July 1855 vol 139 cc621-4
SIR JOHN PAKINGTON

I wish to put a question to the Home Secretary relative to the riotous proceedings of yesterday, to ask whether it was in consequence of any orders given by him that when the mob were breaking the windows yesterday in Belgrave Square there were no police present—in fact, no person for the protection of the public, and to check the violence of the mob?

SIR GEORGE GREY

I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman should think it necessary to ask me whether, when the mob yesterday were breaking windows in Belgrave Square, Wilton Street, Eaton Square, and in Tottenham Court Road and the Hampstead Road (where much the greater damage was done), it was in consequence of orders from me that the usual protection of the inhabitants was withdrawn. It is scarcely necessary, I should suppose, for me to say I gave no such orders. I may say I had no intimation, nor was it known to the police, or any one connected with the Government, that the mob would by a sudden impulse, or by the sudden guidance of others, rush from Hyde Park to Belgrave Square, where there was no more than the ordinary number of police-constables in a district usually very quiet. The damage was done in a quarter of an hour, before the reserves of police could be brought up to prevent the violence which had then been actually committed. The reserves were, however, brought up in time to check the further progress of that violence.

MR. ADDERLEY

said, he did not think that the answers given by the right hon. Baronet were at all satisfactory. They had now had a third consecutive Sunday riot, and he wished to know in what way they were to protect themselves from a fourth? If he might be allowed to make a short statement—["No, no!"] Surely it was the custom to allow hon. Members to preface their questions with a short statement, and if the House would grant him that indulgence he would promise not to detain them more than two minutes, whilst he narrated what he had himself witnessed. He saw in Grosvenor Place yesterday a parcel of boys, about fifty or sixty in number, walking down the middle of the street breaking windows. They were surrounded by a large number of the lowest rabble, and there were also present a number of respectably dressed persons, who called themselves "spectators," and who certainly might have been better employed than idly looking on. Not a single police officer was present, but the right hon. Baronet was perhaps aware that a large number of the force were in the neighbourhood, at the top of Constitution-hill, and at Hyde Park. In fact, as soon as the disturbance was over the streets were occupied by them in numbers that might have resisted a hostile invasion with great success—and they remained there for the remainder of the evening. What he wished to know was whether the right hon. Baronet would state to the House what were the orders the police had received; and if the right hon. Gentleman was not prepared to give that information, he (Mr. Adderley) would move that the orders be laid on the table of the House. He should also be glad if the right hon. Gentleman would tell them what was the number of persons that had been taken prisoners; and likewise if he would state in what way the public were to protect themselves in future—whether, in short, they were to take measures for their own defence, or whether they might trust to the police for protection.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, the description given by the hon. Gentleman correspondend pretty much with the statement which had been communicated to him both by the Commissioners of police and by other persons; although he thought the hon. Gentleman had rather underrated the number of persons who followed the knot of boys and the other parties engaged in breaking windows. The hon. Gentleman asked whether the police were not in the immediate neighbourhood of Hyde Park, and whether they had not abstained from interfering. Now he was informed that there was a sudden rush from Hyde Park to Belgrave Square, and he was afraid the hon. Gentleman himself had suffered to a considerable extent. The mob was followed by a largo number of persons, who had been attracted by a curiosity which he could not help considering was blameable—and those persons so obstructed the road that the police could not force their way through the crowd to the front in time to prevent the mischief. In addition to sending a body of 400 men from the park after the mob, a message was despatched to the stations south of Belgrave Square, and 100 men, who were ordered to meet the crowd, succeeded in arresting some of the ringleaders. The hon. Gentleman said that there were no police in the streets; but in point of fact the ordinary police officers were on duty. [Mr. ADDERLEY—No, no!] The hon. Gentleman might be better informed; but he (Sir G. Grey) was told that the ordinary police officers were on duty, though, of course, they were quite unable to resist so large a crowd. The mob ran away as soon as the police were seen to arrive, including those boys who had committed the acts of violence in front. He believed that only one of the persons actually charged with throwing stones and breaking windows in that district had been arrested. He was arrested by a gentleman, an acquaintance of his (Sir G. Grey's). If other persons who were looking on while these acts of violence were committed had vigorously exerted themselves, he believed that several others of the offenders might have been taken. The person who had been so arrested had been fined 40s., or one month's imprisonment. In the Tottenham-court Road district, eight persons had been arrested. The same disorderly and riotous proceedings had taken place there by apparently the same class of persons; and the police certainly could not have had any suspicion that such proceedings would have taken place in a district like that, there being no person resident there who could be supposed to be at all obnoxious to the rioters; and the ordinary police on duty there had not the power of putting a stop to the riot. The orders given to the police were to hold in readiness a large reserve, in order that they might be prepared to act wherever there was any disturbance. In some instances, where it had been anticipated, disturbances did not take place; in others they did. But the orders given to the police undoubtedly were to arrest every person guilty of any act of violence or of obstruction of carriages. Of course, without any special instructions, in the event of open acts of violence like those committed on the preceding day, it was the duty of every policeman—and not only of every policeman, but of every subject of Her Majesty—to do all in his power to put a stop to such lawless proceedings.

COLONEL DOUGLAS PENNANT

said, he wished to ask if the right hon. Baronet was aware that a gallant admiral, Sir George Seymour, had attempted to put a stop to the destruction of property in his own neighbourhood, and had been struck down by a stone on the head, and had been severely injured.

SIR GEORGE GREY

said, he had learnt with most sincere regret from a letter which he had received from Admiral Seymour, that a most dastardly attack was made upon him by the populace, when he, with the courage of a British seaman, seized one of the persons who were most active in committing violence against the property of the inhabitants in his own neighbourhood. When the gallant Admiral called upon the spectators to afford him their assistance in arresting the aggressors they, he regretted to say, did not respond to the call. Had they done so—and they were persons having the appearance of gentlemen—the gallant Admiral would not have sustained any injury. With regard to the number of policemen on duty, it was the same as upon ordinary occasions. ["No, no!"] He believed that they were the same in number.

Subject dropped.