The Watnall Riot of 1893

The Watnall Riot - Sept 7th 1893 - Sleepy old Watnall was once the scene of a miners' riot as significant at the time as the infamous "Battle of Orgreave" during the miners' strike of 1984. The big difference was the miners at Orgreave had little intention of causing trouble whereas the miners at Watnall were fully intent and tooled up for it. 

During their trial the rioters were quoted as
threatening to kill the policemen...

The police and the local magistrate, Mr Holden of Nuthall Temple who was trying to read the Riot Act, were subject to a constant volley of stones. The 4,000 miners marched from Bulwell and Hucknall, fought running battles with the small force of police, destroyed several of the pit buildings and set fire to railway trucks. They thought the mine was being worked during a strike but no evidence of this was found.


It made national headlines as the strike against wage cuts and lock-outs reached its crescendo. The Illustrated London News described it as follows...
"DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY IN NOTTINGHAMSHIRE - Our Nottingham correspondent states that a very serious riot occurred yesterday at the New Watnall Pit, belonging to Messrs. Barber, Walker, and Co., and situated between Hucknall and Moorgreen, Nottinghamshire. The disturbances commenced on the previous evening, when a large crowd of miners visited the pit and overpowered the dozen or so of policemen who attempted to arrest their progress. The officers were attacked with sticks and stones, and some of them were injured.
Badly assaulted - One of the men, who had been engaged in attending to the ventilation of the mine, was badly assaulted. Later at night the miners again visited the pit under the cover of darkness, and, creeping under the railway trucks, stoned the police, who however, succeeded in making four arrests. Today the disturbances assumed a more serious phase. A very large body of miners [4000 men was stated at the subsequent trial], armed with thick sticks, pieces of steel, iron bars, and other weapons, proceeded to the colliery. The small body of police on duty were powerless against them, and the colliers set to work to destroy everything within their reach. The telegraph and telephone wires were cut, and the offices, weighing-room, and other buildings, as well as some railway trains, were fired. The weighing-machine was destroyed, and the destruction of property was very great. Several of the police were again assaulted. At length a reinforcement of police arrived on the scene, accompanied by a magistrate Mr. John Holden, of Nuttall Temple who read the Riot Act [while being stoned by the rioters], and, after some time, the officers succeeded in driving back the rioters, seven of whom were arrested.
Police injured - Several of the police, including Superintendent Harrup, were injured. Some of the rioters also received injuries in the charges of the police. Telegraphic messages were despatched to York, Lichfield, and Alfreton for military aid, and later in the day a body of troops arrived in the district. Other pits were visited by the miners who compelled the engineman to leave, and at Wellington Pit, Selston, the workings will be flooded, owing to the cessation of pumping. At the Bulwell Pit considerable damage was done to the offices."


Nottingham's Shire Hall - where the Watnall rioters
were tried and convicted

The Trial
The law acted swiftly on the rioting miners. Their subsequent trial took place at the Shire Hall in Nottingham just 13 days later on Sept 20th 1893. I've found an account of the trial and added it to the notes below (as it takes up 4 columns of tightly-spaced newsprint). It goes into forensic detail about exactly what happened
To summarize, the magistrates treated the events at Watnall as two separate cases. One case was for the "mini riot" on the evening of the 6th September and one for the main and more destructive riot on the 7th September. Charges were for riot and assaulting the police. It was mostly stone throwing and fighting but one officer was thrown through a window and another threatened by the rioters... "That's the sergeant that was here last night, and got some of our men. Let's kill the **** and chuck him down the pit."
Seven men were arrested for the main riot on the 7th September (two of whom were 14 year old boys). The accused and their charges were... 
"Samuel Briddlestone (40) and John Gulley (35) of Hucknall Torkard; John Richards (50), Henry Birchmore (38), Henry Saint (50), Albert Palmer (14), and Charles Robert Eaves (14), of Bulwell, were charged with a felonious riot at Greasley on the 7th September, and setting fire to some building belonging to Thomas Barber and others, a second charge being that of a common riot at the same time and place and assaulting William Frear, police-constable, and Superintendent Harrop."
"Richards and Birchmore were each sent to prison for six months with hard labour Saint, Briddleston, and Gulley were committed for three months with hard labour; and Eaves and Palmer to one month each."
For the mini riot of the evening of the 6th Sept... "Thomas Bailey, 26, William Felse, 22, William Hovell, 26, Levi Finney, 27, all of Hucknall, were charged with committing a riot in the parish of Greasley on the 6th of September, and also with assaulting Police-sergeant Freer and Police-constable Pearson, county constables, whilst in the execution of their duty." The verdict was that "...all four defendants go to Her Majesty's gaol with hard labour for two calendar months".
Bringing history full circle, the last cases to be heard in the Nottingham Shire Hall almost 100 years later and before it became a museum, were offences arising from the 1984 miners' strike.

Scavenging for coal during the 1893 strike
at Clay Cross

Why were the miners not working?
Locked out - In 1893, mine owners tried to offset a downturn in the economy and a reduction in coal prices by forcing miners to take a 25% pay cut. If the miners refused, as most did, the mine owners locked them out of the pits. This "lock out" had dragged on for several months. Three hundred thousand (300,000) miners across Britain’s major coalfields had been locked out for four months. Practically all the men employed in Cheshire, Midlands, Derbyshire, Lancashire, Leicestershire, Nottinghamshire were out. It became known as the Great Lockout of 1893.
Most miners' unions were county-based so it had been difficult for the miners to present a unified front against the proposed pay cuts. This time though they were aided by the recently-formed national miners' union, the Miners’ Federation of Great Britain (MFGB, later the National Union of Mineworkers), led by Ben Pickard the general secretary of the Yorkshire miners.
National unions had been tried before but had always failed either through poor leadership, as with the Chartists of c.1840,  or oppressive actions from the powers that be.

What was the outcome?
The two most serious disturbances, at Watnall and at Featherstone in Yorkshire where two men were shot dead, helped sway public opinion towards the miners' cause. Sympathetic newspapers ran stories about the miners' plight to raise funds and local Co-ops donated food and money. 
Local branches of the miners' union rallied to the cause. The Wollaton branch had already distributed 50 gallons of soup at the time of the Watnall riot and a free tea and concert for the miners' children. 
The dispute dragged on into November when the government intervened, the first time a British government had become involved in an industrial dispute. Talks began between future prime minister Lord Rosebery, the mine owners and the miners' leaders. After several rounds of negotiation the miners agreed to return to work on November 17th with no cut in pay. Pay rates were to be guaranteed until Feb 1894 after which a Conciliation Board would meet consisting of equal numbers of miners and the mine owners, chaired by a government official to discuss future pay rates. 
In July 1894 the mine owners put their case to the Conciliation Board for an immediate 10% reduction in miners’ wages – to which the miners eventually agreed, with proviso that this should be reviewed no later than January 1896. In January 1896 the owners called for a further 10% reduction and the Conciliation Board collapsed.

"Waiting for Coal" - Coal merchants in Kildwick, North Yorkshire 
during the 1893 dispute. They would have a long wait.



------------------ THE END ------------------ 

Sources and Notes

Lisa Fitzgerald supplied the Illustrated London News article and illustration; Nottingham Daily Express.
Healey Hero website "The Great Lockout of 1893"
Socialist Party website has an article about the strike and the trade union activity around it https://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/115093/06-09-2023/the-1893-miners-strike-130-years-on/

1 - The transcript of the subsequent trial - Nottingham Daily Express. Sept 21 1893
There follows, in great detail, an examination of exactly what happened during the Watnall Riot(s) of Sept 1893 and of who the main perpetrators were. There were 2 cases of rioting and assault brought before the Nottingham magistrates after the events at Watnall. Case #1 was the initial "mini riot" on Sept 6th and Case #2 for the larger and more destructive riot on Sept 7th 1893.

THE RIOTING AT WATNALL.

PRISONERS BEFORE THE MAGISTRATES.

The miners who were arrested in connection with the recent disturbances at the New Watnall Colliery were again brought before the magistrates at the Shire Hall, Nottingham, yesterday. It will be remembered that the men were twice remanded, and in anticipation of the case being gone into yesterday a number of colliers were present in court. The magistrates on the Bench were Mr. Thomas Hill, Mr. Albert Heymann, Mr. W. Wright, Mr. George Fellows, and Mr. R. Bagnall-Wild. Mr. E. Williams (of Messrs. Whittingham and Williams) prosecuted on behalf of the police, and the prisoners were defended by Mr. H. B. Clayton.

Case 1 – Rioting of Sept 6th at Watnall

The events of the evening of the 6th inst. were first gone into. Thomas Bailey, 26, William Felse, 22, William Hovell, 26, Levi Finney, 27, all of Hucknall, were charged with committing a riot in the parish of Greasley on the 6th of September, and also with assaulting Police-sergeant Freer and Police-constable Pearson, county constables, whilst in the execution of their duty.

Mr. Williams, in opening the case, said the charges arose out of disturbances which took place at the New Watnall Colliery, belonging to Messrs. Barber, Walker, and Co., on September 6. The charges were of rioting and assaulting the police, Mr. Williams pointed out the law as to rioting, quoting cases to show that to constitute riot the behaviour must be such as to alarm not only foolish persons, but reasonable men and women. He said the bench were aware that an unfortunate dispute was pending between colliery proprietors and coal miners as to wages, and that that dispute had resulted in the cessation of operations in all the collieries in this neighbourhood. With the merits of the dispute he had nothing to do, but to confine himself to the particular cases with which they had to deal. The facts, briefly, were that on the evening in question between five o'clock and nine large crowds of people gathered at the New Watnall Colliery, and were very disorderly. Some of them were armed with sticks and stones, and used threatening language to such extent that the engineman who was in charge of the enginehouse became so alarmed that he had to quit the place. The police appeared, and found that considerable damage had been done by stone throwing. The mob threatened to kill the police and burn the place down, and the excitement grew till the police felt it their duty to charge the crowd. They did this, and the crowd pelted them with stones. The four prisoners were taken into custody. The evidence would show that each of the men took a very active part in the disturbance. He thought he would satisfy the magistrates that the crowd was disorderly, that some of them had sticks, and threw stones at the windows and at the police, and used the sticks to assault the police when the officers charged the mob. If he did satisfy the magistrates of this, he would ask the bench to deal with the prisoners severely. He believed it would be their duty after they had heard the evidence to commit the prisoners to take their trial at the Assizes.

Witnesses were then called. The first was Walter Sisson, of Clay Cross, engine man, employed at the New Watnall Colliery, who said he was on duty at the colliery on the evening of the 6th inst. There were a large number of people there about half-past six. The prisoners were there. Felse and others demanded to have the horses out of the pit. There were no horses at work, and witness told the men that it was not possible to bring the horses up because the engine was not going, and he could not get steam uр. Witness tried to get steam up, and whilst he was doing this the men did considerable damage, breaking into certain premises and smashing several windows. Subsequently the men told witness to leave, and not come again, or it would be worse for him. Witness became afraid, and went away. He met the police on the way in charge of Sergeant Freer, and he returned in their company. The crowd were on the premises, and as soon as the police made their appearance the men rushed at them, and the police had to charge the crowd. Some of the crowd had hedge sticks in their possession. Two men were arrested and taken into the engine house, whereupon the crowd made their way into the house, intending to release them. The police charged them a second time, and secured the two other prisoners. The crowd afterwards dispersed, some of them, saying they would come again the next day. Witness missed some tools from the shop. The windows of the joiner's shop, the black-smith's shop, and the machine house were all damaged. None of the men were employed at the colliery.

In cross-examination by Mr. Clayton, witness said it was dark on the night in question, Witness could identify Felse as being there, but did not see the other three men till they were apprehended. There were hundreds of people in the crowd. Felse had no stick.

Sergeant Freer was then called. He said he was stationed at Eastwood. On the evening of the 6th inst. he was on duty at Watnall. A large number of people gathered there between six hundred and a thousand as nearly as he could estimate. He had gone there in consequence of hearing that there had been a riot. He had thirteen police officers with him. He arrived about half-past eight, and found that great damage had been done. The pit bank was covered by a yelling, shouting, mob. Witness asked the men what they wanted, and they replied with a shower of stones. He endeavoured to speak to them again, when they attacked the police with stones a second time. One of the stones struck witness. He saw Finney strike Police-constable Pearson with a stick. The police then charged the mob, and four of the prisoners - Bailey, Hovell, Finney, and Felse - were apprehended. These men were taking part in the riot, and were among the men who threw the stones. Hovell struck witness with a stick. The mob separated after the first charge, but returned in five minutes, and threatened to burn the place and kill the police if the prisoners were not released. More stones were thrown. Witness apprehended Hovell and Bailey. Both prisoners struck him with sticks. The four prisoners were taking a leading part in the rioting, leading the mob.

By Mr. Clayton: All the prisoners were apprehended in the pit yard. Witness struck Bailey, knocking him down. He did not see Bailey throw stones. He was in the act of charging Bailey when prisoner struck him. He swore prisoner had a stick, though he did not take it from him when he arrested him. When Finney struck Police-constable Pearson, the officer was about to strike Finney with his staff. Pearson knocked Finney to the ground.

By Mr. Williams: The crowd was so disorderly that witness deemed it necessary to charge them.

Police-constable Pearson was the next witness. He deposed that he accompanied Sergeant Freer to the colliery on the evening in question. He heard Frear ask the crowd what they wanted. He heard no reply, but a shower of sticks and stones came down upon them. Witness was struck with a stone on his shoulder. They charged the crowd, and witness saw Hovell strike Freer with a stick. Finney threw a hedgestick at witness, hitting him on the jaw. He heard Felse say: "Let them have it." The four prisoners were in front of the crowd.

Cross-examined by Mr. Clayton: Witness did not see Bailey strike anybody. He saw him knocked down. Sergeant Freer warned the men that he would have to charge them if they continued the disturbance. Witness's jaw was injured at the present time. Some of the men received injuries, Bailey's eye being cut.

Police-constable Holmes deposed that he was on duty at the colliery on the night in question, and corroborated the evidence of the previous witnesses. He added that at one time Bailey had a four-pronged garden fork in his hand. The fork was produced; one of its prongs was went, Bailey was knocked down when he was apprehended, and made no attempt to use the fork. Witness was struck several times. Some of the police officers were very badly hurt.

Police-constable Newstead spoke particularly as to Felse. He said the prisoner had a large, stout hedge-stick (produced) in his possession. He arrested Felse, who was shouting “Come on, lads."

Isaac Chambers, manager at the colliery, said he was at the colliery on the night of the 6th inst. He saw stones thrown and several windows broken. Witness was very much frightened. Witness escaped unhurt, though some of the men in the crowd followed him.

This closed the case for the prosecution.

The Chairman asked Mr. Clayton if he intended to call evidence.

Mr. Clayton said he had not settled this question. He asked the Bench to consider whether they intended to deal with the case that day or to send the men forward for trial. The Magistrates retired for a few minutes, and on returning into court said the magistrates had decided to deal summarily with this case.

Mr Clayton then addressed the magistrates on behalf of the men. He said it was a case in which under the circumstances connected with it he hoped their worships would see fit to deal more leniently than they otherwise might do under ordinary circumstances. Now, according to the evidence and he did not think, after conferring with the defendants, that he should call any witnesses for the defence - there could be no doubt about it that the charge of assaulting the police was made out, if they believed the police, more or less, against these four defendants. There were degrees with regard to the men which he should endeavour to point out later on. He was not there to defend their action for a single moment. It was a serious day's work for these miners in connection with this strike, or lock-out, but he thought their worships would see that up to this 6th of September, and from that day, considering the treatment they had been subjected to on the whole they had behaved exceedingly well; in fact, exceptionally so, and he could not fairly or rightly argue that these men had been incited or encouraged to do what they or somebody did on the 6th of September. He could not say that their leaders - Councillor Bailey or anyone - had incited them to riot; but their whole leaders had advised them to do nothing of the kind. Therefore, it would not be right or fair of him to make any insinuations that they were incited.

Mr. Williams: I have not suggested that they were incited by anyone.

Mr. Clayton, continuing, said so that for what took place on the 6th of September these men must bear the consequences - pay any penalty or undergo any imprisonment which their worships might seem fit to impose upon them. In this case they had before them not men who had been repeatedly convicted before the Bench. He had characters with regard to three out of the four, namely, Finney, Hovell, and Felse, and there was nothing, according to his instructions, whatever known by the police against those three. With regard to Bailey, he had been convicted once, and fined 10s. 6d. for assault, so that their worships had before them men, he might put it, who were not in the habit of assaulting the police, but on the whole hard-working, respectable miners - men who worked for their living, yet who seemed to have lost their heads on this night in question, and who seemed to have gone to this pit because they thought someone was employed working the ponies to or mine, and acting as blacklegs. That led to these going the pit and causing the damage to the windows and the machinery in the place. He felt certain their Worships were not going to visit the whole of the punishment upon these four men, because the police had admitted that not one of these men was seen to throw stones, and the principal part of the damage and injuries sustained by the police seemed to have been done by stone-throwing. That someone threw stones no one had disputed. These men were charged with various assaults, but he hoped their Worships would see that there were degrees in their cases. For instance, with regard to Felse it was not suggested that he assaulted anyone, for all the police said with regard to him was that he made use of some kind of expression - "Let them have it" - and that thereby he caused the crowd to do something to the police.

Mr. Williams: He had a stick.

Mr. Clayton said he didn't use it. With regard to Bailey it was suggested that he struck out freely but didn't strike anyone. With regard to Havell the case was clear, the case against Finney being that he struck Pearson. That officer was undoubtedly struck on the jaw, but none of the officers were seriously injured. What took place after the damage to this property was that Sergeant Frear and 14 or 15 officers charged the crowd without notice. The defendants were undoubtedly amongst the mob, and one of the policemen said they were doing their best to charge the mob. He (Mr. Clayton) ventured to say there was a very great difference between an assault committed under these circumstances, and if the men had actually been the aggressors. He asked their worships to take into consideration seriously that matter. He could not defend the men because when the police rushed amongst them they ought to have run away of course, it was not everyone who could have run away. He asked their worships to bear in mind this fact that since these unfortunate riots at Watnall these colliers had behaved well. There seemed to have been no repetition of these offences, and he did ask for leniency on that account. He also asked the bench to consider the position of these men, the serious privation they, their wives, and families had undergone, and not deal was them as roughs who had been continually brought before their worships. Leniency would have re a far better effect as a deterrent than if they acted with great severity. The magistrates had exercised leniency in other parts, and he asked their worships to exercise that leniency in this case.

A number of letters as to the character of the three defendants named by Mr. Clayton were handed up to the bench, the chairman remarking without reading the letters that they accepted what Mr. Clayton had said.

The Chairman, after consultation with his colleagues, said: The magistrates have decided to make no distinction between the four defendants, and their decision is that all four defendants go to Her Majesty's gaol with hard labour for two calendar months.

 

Case 2 – Rioting on Sept 7th at Watnall

The second case was then proceeded with. Samuel Briddlestone (40) and John Gulley (35) of Hucknall Torkard; John Richards (50), Henry Birchmore (38), Henry Saint (50), Albert Palmer (14), and Charles Robert Eaves (14), of Bulwell, were charged with a felonious riot at Greasley on the 7th September, and setting fire to some buildings belonging to Thomas Barber and others, a second charge being that of a common riot at the same time and place and assaulting William Frear, police-constable, and Superintendent Harrop. Mr. Williams prosecuted, and Mr. H. B. Clayton defended all the prisoners.

Mr. Williams said in this case the prisoners were charged with a felonious riot, and also with a riot in common law, and also with assaulting the police in the execution of their duty. There was one more charge than in the last case, viz., of feloniously setting fire. He regretted to say that in this case the character of the offences charged against these men was far more serious than that in the last case. The crowd which gathered at the colliery was much larger and the resistance was much greater the damage which was done to the buildings and property of the colliery company was very considerable. The offences in this case were committed on Thursday, the 7th September, the day following the last case.

It appeared about seven o'clock in the morning a very large crowd gathered at the pit and they appeared to have been under the impression that some work was going on down below. Mr. Laidley, the manager of the colliery, who was there with a view to bringing about a peaceable condition of things, consented to some of the men going down the pit to see whether any work was going on. That crowd seemed to be satisfied with what they had seen and heard, and then another crowd came about ten o'clock in the morning, numbering somewhere about 4,000, some armed with hedge stakes, some with sticks, and others with stones, and some had hammers as well. It appeared as time went on that this crowd became very disorderly and behaved in a most riotous and disorderly way. They set fire to the building, and got a barrel of tar which was on the pit bank and sent it down to the railway below. This they also fired, and pushed some railway wagons that were on the line on to the fire, and they also threw some on to some timber. So alarming became the situation that the police considered it necessary that they should get a magistrate to read the Riot Act, calling upon the crowd to disperse. Mr. John Holden, one of the county magistrates, attended, and while in considerable danger of being injured by stones, he read the Riot Act. The police charged the crowd, and they were extensively assaulted. In the end seven prisoners were arrested, and taken into custody. He thought there would be abundant evidence to show that each one of these prisoners took a very active part in what was going on. An estimate of the damage had been made, and it was said to be somewhere about £330, including the windows, timber, bricks, and other property of the Company, which was destroyed. He thought their Worships might think there was some distinction between one prisoner and another but having regard to all the circumstances connected with the case, he was afraid that their Worships would feel it almost to be their duty to send these men for trial.

Sergeant Frear stated that he was on duty at the New Watnall Colliery on Thursday, 7th September, about seven in the morning. A crowd of people came to the colliery, numbering about 500. They said they had heard there were some men working. That crowd want away after a deputation had been down the pit. There was one more officer than on the previous day.

About ten o'clock the same morning another crowd came numbering not less than 4,000, some coming from Bulwell and some from Hucknall. All were armed, without exception, the instruments including pick shafts, hedge stakes, and others, with what they could get out of an adjacent wood. They were marching in a body. Witness went to the crowd, and asked them what they wanted, and the other officers went to the engine-house. In reply to witness, the leaders, some of them - none of the defendants spoke – said “We have heard there are men at work and we intend to have them out." They also said there were horses in the pit, and they intended to have them out too. Witness recognised the defendants as being there. Witness also said in a loud voice, standing on a raised platform, that there had been a deputation down the pit that morning, and that one of the deputation had addressed the people telling them he was perfectly satisfied no coal was being got. The reply was “It’s a ***** lie.” Witness asked if they would go to Kimberley to ascertain for themselves of what he said was correct, and if it wasn't he would give them a sovereign. They refused to go. They used threatening language to witness, one saying "That's the sergeant that was here last night, and got some of our men. Let's kill the **** and chuck him down the pit."

After a time they forced their way to the pit bank. Witness had 18 officers there at that time. When they got on to the pit bank, and set fire to the joiners shop, which was partly destroyed by fire, witness went to the engine-house, where his men were. After that the blacksmiths' shop and storehouse took fire. There was a barrel of tar in the pit bank, and this was rolled on to the railway and smashed, the contents running down the pit bank. Shortly after, it was set on fire, by whom he did not know. Witness next saw a heap of timber on the opposite side of the pit bank on the railway set on fire. There were two distinct fires.

While the timber was burning he saw Richards with a number of others take up the brakes of two railway trucks and push them down on to the burning timber. The trucks were destroyed completely, and others beside. About one o'clock Superintendent Harrop came with other police officers. About two o'clock there was a danger of the pit bank getting on fire, and 30 or so trucks which were below. Witness and Harrop and others were endeavouring to remove the trucks when Richards with a number of others came and used very bad language, also saying "This is 25 per cent chaps." Shortly after that the mob started to stone the police, the stones coming in thousands. He recognised all the defendants as being there and throwing stones. Witness was struck very badly on the back of his head. The Riot Act was read by Mr. John Holden. Whilst he was doing that stones were being thrown from all directions. He saw Saint and Birchmore there while the stones were being thrown. Eventually the police charged the mob. It would be about five minutes after the Riot Act had been read. He saw Birchmore strike Superintendent Harrop with a large stick. Each of the defendants was armed with sticks. For some time before any damage was done that morning he tried to persuade the defendants and others to retire. Richards threw a stone which struck Superintendent Harrop at the time that officer was trying to remove a truck from the burning tar.

Cross-examined by Mr. Clayton: Richards was one of the men who were lifting the brake when the mob was trying to lower the trucks. There were, at the least, four or five thousand men, each of whom, without exception, was armed with either sticks or stones. He really meant what he said. At the examination at Bagthorpe he said that all the men present were throwing stones, and he said so now. He saw the two lads throwing stones. Eves was running after the police throwing stones. A great portion of the mob were throwing stones, and the defendants present in Court were among those who were throwing stones. The seven defendants were arrested by the police at different short periods after the Riot Act had been read.

By Mr. Williams: The mob was sufficient to terrify any ordinary person.

Superintendent Harrop, examined by Mr. Williams, said he went to Watnall on the morning of the disturbance. There were about ten other officers present besides himself. A very large crowd was assembled on the pit-bauk and about the colliery. When he arrived there the mob appeared to be destroying property -the workshops and windows - and fires were alight at several places on the pit bank. Three railway wagons, which had been on fire, were nearly burnt out. The crowd generally was armed with sticks and stones. He went to where some other colliery wagons were close to the fire, and said, "Come, lads, it's no use destroying other people's property. Let's move these wagons out of the road." The wagons were on the other side of the colliery, which were danger of being burned. They were near a lighted barrel of tar. Several of the men out of the crowd came to assist to remove the wagons. The prisoner, Richards, had a hammer in his hand, and was very excited. He said he would kill those who helped. "Let the b****** policemen shift them, if they want. They're paid for it.” He and some officers moved one wagon, and they went back to shift the other one, when he was struck on the back of the head with a stone, and he was knocked down. At the same moment he heard Richards who was just behind him, call out "That's 25 per cent. for you, you b******.”

The stone was thrown from behind him, and he could not say who threw it. The stone cut him but the injury was not a serious one. Richards when he afterwards observed him, had a number of stones and "cinders" gathered in the bend of his arm. He saw the prisoner throw stones amongst the other officers, saying "Let's kill the b******* now we've got them." Sticks and stones were coming at the police from all directions then. The crowd was gathering on them, and he ordered the constables to "fall in" on the clover field. The mob followed throwing at them, till they had exhausted all their stones, and just then he saw a contingent of the Hull police - twenty of them - coming up in a break to the assistance of the constables present, and they then returned to the pit bank. The crowd retired from the pit bank as the officers approached, the mob throwing stones as they retired. Captain Holden (a magistrate) and himself went in front of the constables, and he called out to the mob to be still while the Riot Act was read. He called out "Silence" several times. Mr. Holden read the Riot Act, and during that time stones were thrown at them from the direction of the crowd.

After that he told the crowd to be peaceable. The Riot Act had been read, and he told them to go away: but stones continued to be thrown, so he gave the order for the constables to draw their staves and charge the crowd. He went first. The prisoner Birchmore stood before the others, armed with a big stick (produced), which he was waving about. Witness said to him, "For God's sake stop that and go away!" He swung the stick round, aiming a blow at witness's head, and the stick, catching him on the shoulder, broke. Witness then struck Birchmore with his staff, and a constable secured him. Saint was present and had a big stick in his hand. Stones were thrown as the officers charged the mob, but when they got amongst the crowd they retired, and, afterwards re-assembling on the flank of the officers, the constables charged them a second time, when they dispersed. Witness was struck several times by stones and sticks, and many of the constables were also struck. Police-constable Wilson was badly injured, and had been off duty ever since. Sergeant Smith was also badly injured, and Police-constable Martin was also severely stoned and injured.

Cross-examined by Mr. H. B. Clayton: Witness did not see stones thrown by any one of the prisoners except Richards. Sergeant Frear had not fallen in with his detachment on the occasion of the first charge. He could not identify the lad Eves and Palmer as having been present.

Police-constable Martin gave evidence as to being present at New Watnall, seeing the fire, and seeing stones thrown. He was stoned, His helmet was cut through, and he was knocked down and kicked. The mob seized him and threw him through a cottage window near the pit-bank, and threw bricks and stones at him through the window. He identified Eves as one who was present taking part in the disturbance. Eves was smashing the weighing room windows with a stick, along with several other lads. He also saw Brittlestone throwing logs of wood from a new sawn heap on to the fire caused by the tar barrel.

Cross-examined by Mr. H. B. Clayton: He did not see Eves arrested. He saw him breaking windows with a stick, but there were not sufficient officers present then for them to attempt arrest. Witness could not say who put him through the cottage window. He would only like to know.

John Archibald, residing at Eastwood, in the service of Messrs. Barber, Walker, and Co. as engineer, was next called. He was at the New Watnall Colliery in the morning of the 7th before any damage was done. He had since examined the property, and estimated the damage done. The machine-house windows were damaged, the pit-bank machine-house was burned and smashed, and the carpenter's shop and goods shed were destroyed with their contents. The whole amount of damage done on the Thursday would be about £332.

Mr. Williams here intimated to the magistrates that he had called Mr. Archibald at this stage of the proceedings to show what his case was. If their worships were inclined to commit the cases to the Assizes he should shorten the evidence which he had to call considerably. He should of course identify the whole of the prisoners. The Magistrates then retired for a few minutes announcing on their return into court that they had decided to deal with it summarily.

Sergeant James Ire was then called, but before being examined, Mr. Clayton remarked that the prisoners were prepared on his advice to plead guilty on the evidence as it stood. He did not wish to be guilty of a repetition, and would not reiterate anything said in the former case. The men had pleaded guilty, and the evidence of Sergeant Frear certainly to the effect that they took part in the assault on the constables, and the case against two of the defendants was undoubtedly of a more serious nature than in the cases which their worships had previously disposed of. He was sure, however, the magistrates would distinguish between the degree of guilt in the case of the two boys as compared with the other defendants. Mr. Clayton produced letters of character for Eaves and Palmer, including in connection with the last-named a letter from the headmaster of Quarry-road Board School, Bulwell, stating that Palmer left school at the age of 13 about two months ago, and had only reached the second standard although he had attended regularly. He did not consider him mentally responsible. Except stone-throwing there was no evidence against the boys whatever of assaulting the police. He asked on their behalf that their worships would see fit to take a very lenient view of their case. In respect of Saint it was not suggested that he took any part in this matter in the opening stages, and that he was in any way a ringleader.

Mr. Wiliams remarked that Mr. Clayton had pleaded guilty, and he didn't think he had a right to comment upon the absence of evidence against any one of the prisoners. The Chairman agreed, and asked what made these men go all the way from Bulwell to Watnall? Mr. Clayton said they were out of work. With regard to Briddlestone, he had borne a good character, and had never been in trouble before. He did not think that it should be suggested that he was actually a ring-leader in this matter. taking part in these very disgraceful proceedings, however, he must suffer.

Mr. Williams called attention to Mr. Clayton's going against the ruling of the bench.

Mr. Clayton, continuing, said with regard to the other two undoubtedly Richards was more to blame than anyone. Under the whole circumstances, he trusted the Bench would be as lenient as they could.

Mr. Williams said as to Palmer they did not wish to press the case unduly against him. The Chief-Constable was content to take the statement put in by Mr. Clayton.

Mr. Bagnall-Wild: Has the fellow sense enough to know the difference between right and wrong? He must have.

Richards and Birchmore were each sent to prison for six months with hard labour: Saint, Briddleston, and Gulley were committed for three months with hard labour; and Eaves and Palmer to one month each.

 


2 - Letter to the Nottingham Daly Express which shows the generally favourable view of the public to the miners' plight. It also shows the lessons of history, themes familiar from the 1984 miners' strike had been present already almost 100 years before in the 1893 strike...

THE COAL CRISIS.

To the Editor of the "Nottingham Daily Express.

September 19th, 1893.

Sir, Most friends of the miners will rejoice to see the attitude which has now been taken up by the officials of the Notts. Miners' Association on the question whether those men who can shall resume work at the old rate of wages. I venture to wish them complete success in their campaign through the county in support of an affirmative reply to this question. If they succeed in carrying with them an overwhelming majority of the men and I think they will - it is not likely that the Federation Executive Committee will withhold its approval. It seems to me that it is on this point alone that the leaders of the Miners' Federation have made any serious mistake in the course of their great struggle. They would, I think, have been wise if, at the London Conference on August 22, they had decided in favour of allowing work to be resumed wherever possible at the old rates. In submitting this opinion, I do not for one moment wish to hide the fact that the miners leaders are a body of very shrewd and able men, and that it may seem almost an impertinence for an outsider to question the wisdom of their policy. But they do not claim to be infallible, and I am supported in my view by the fact that at least a minority of them, including Mr. Bailey from our own county, and Mr. Cowey from Yorkshire, were even then strongly in favour of partial resumption of work.

I regret to see that some of the Derbyshire men are taking up a position hostile to the Notts. Association on this question. At Mr. Haslam's Alfreton meeting yesterday, the chairman said, "they must allow no sectional fighting." But is it "sectional fighting" in the sense that it will divide the men in their aims! Every pit which starts work at old rates is an argument in favour of other pits doing the same. It is an argument which will appeal strongly both to coalowners and to the public. The owners will not care to stand quietly by, while other doing their trade at high prices. And the public will be strengthened in their support of the miners by the consideration that if some owners can afford to pay the old rate of wage, others can afford to pay it. Therefore, it seems to me that the men who will resume work will be striving to carry out the objects of the Federation much more efficentiv than if, under the circumstances, they remain idle. The phrase. "Sectional fighting" represents a mere superstition. From the men's standpoint there can be no objection to sectional fighting, unless it can be shown that such fighting is likely to damage their cause. It would certainly damage the masters; it could not damage the men. If all the collieries of the country were in the hands of one man, or one company, It might answer his or their purpose for a part of them to be at work while the others were idle.

But they do not all belong to one man, and if Nottinghamshire pits commence work while Derbyshire pita do not, it means that Notts, owners will do their own trade and a good portion of Derbyshire trade as well, and at highly remunerative prices. The effect which this state of things would have on the lock-out generally can be easily imagined.

At the same meeting at Alfreton yesterday Mr. W Whilde, of Swanwick, said he was very sore that the Brierley Hill men were at work. He condemned those men for breaking the rules of the Federation. They had no right to be at work, and they must not be surprised if something occurred that they did not expect. But in any case the Brierley Hill men must not blame the other miners. This looks to me like a direct incitement to violence or intimidation against the Brierley Hill men. I shall be pleased to hear that Mr. Whilde's remarks will bear some other interpretation. If they will not, I can only say that they deserve the strongest condemnation from all who have the miners' cause at heart.

Yours truly, A. X. Ε. September 19th, 1893.




Comments