As an encore to yesterday's return to something approaching a post, I would like to share a little amuse-bouche with you.
In the light of the 'rioting' that has been going on in the UK these past days, you may care to know that there used to be an actual Riot Act in the UK.This from Wiki:
"The Riot Act[1] (1714) (1 Geo.1 St.2 c.5) was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain that authorised local authorities to declare any group of twelve or more people to be unlawfully assembled, and thus have to disperse or face punitive action. The Act, whose long title was "An act for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies, and for the more speedy and effectual punishing the rioters", came into force on 1 August 1715, and remained on the statute books until 1973."
It has since been superceded by the Public Order Act 1986.
In order to have any legal force, a specific form of words had to be read to the assembled masses (or 12) by a magistrate. This took the form of:
"Our Sovereign Lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably depart to depart to their habitations or to their lawful business upon the pains contained in the Act made in the first year of King George the First for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies.
GOD SAVE THE KING"
The said 'pains' were death by hanging and, later, just transportation to Australia.
If the assembly did not disperse within an hour, all hell broke loose. Troops would be called and they could use whatever force they deemed necessary, including 'shoot to kill', to break up the crowd. If an enterprising citizen decided to chip in on the troops' side, he or she was indemnified for any injury or loss of life which be occasioned upon the rioters.
Ah, how times have changed! It's where the English phrase 'to read the Riot Act' comes from.
Now this would be merely a idle curiosity were it not for one fact. The last time the Riot Act was actually read was in 1919; to striking policemen who were insisting that the Government recognise their trade union, the National Union of Police and Prison Officers, along with the usual changes to the Terms and Conditions of Service and better pay. Needless to say, the Government of the day did not capitulate (it read the mood of policemen rather better than the NUPPS) and it is why your average bobby has only a Federation, which is not allowed to ballot members for a strike, rather than a recognised Trade Union.
Does that count as ironic?
