§ LORD GEORGE HAMILTONasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he has instituted any inquiry into the riotous proceedings connected with two loyalist meetings held in Chelsea on the 28th November 1871 and 16th January 1872; and, if so, whether he has any objection to state the result of his investigations; whether the police under their present regulations are not compelled to enter a public meeting in order to suppress an actual breach of the peace; and, if so, whether the promoters of a public meeting are to be 48 considered the necessary authority to summon the police to enter the building in which the meeting is held; whether the police complied with this regulation upon the two above occasions; and, whether the Home Office will, in consequence of the disturbances which have recently taken place, issue stricter regulations for the protection of public meetings?
MR. BRUCESir, in answering the Question of the noble Lord, it perhaps, may be convenient that I should first state the orders of the police as to public meetings. Those orders were issued in 1867 by Sir Richard Mayne, after very long experience, and they instruct the police to prevent obstruction to the thoroughfares, but not to enter or interfere within a building where a public meeting is held, unless called upon to prevent an actual breach of the peace, or to take into custody a person charged with an offence of which the police can take cognizance. I am informed that at the first meeting a great number of persons attended, calculating on its being peaceably and quietly conducted. There was considerable disturbance, but the police did not observe such an actual breach of the peace as would have justified their interference. With respect to the second meeting, I have to say that it was not intended to be an open meeting; but a great number of persons attended and interrupted the meeting, who had obtained forged orders of admittance. In the body of the hall there was great disturbance, and an actual breach of the peace. There was a great pressure at the same time outside on the part of a large mob desiring to force their way into the hall, and probably for that reason, the police did not apprehend those who had committed breaches of the peace. I think what occurred would have justified their interference, and I have expressed that opinion to the police. I have communicated with the Chief Commissioner of Police as to the course to be pursued by the police with respect to these meetings in future, and he is strongly of opinion that the rule laid down by Sir Richard Mayne, with some modification, ought to be observed. But henceforth, in the case of all public meetings, an inspector of police will be present, who will communicate with the force outside, so that if any serious breach of the peace occurs, the force outside will at once be brought within the building.