Chapter XXV, of Cassells Illustrated History of England, Volume 9 page 3

Other proceedings of the trades' unions, which attracted much attention during the present year, were those connected with the strike of the London tailors, and of the engine-drivers on the London and Brighton railway. The former began on the 28th of April, and lasted for several months. In August, ten of the working tailors were indicted at the Central Criminal Court for a misdemeanour in " conspiring together, by unlawful ways, contrivances, and stratagems, to impoverish Henry Poole, George Wolmershausen, and certain other persons, in their trade and business, in restraint of trade, and the freedom of personal action." In the course of the trial, which attracted much interest, the public learnt many facts about the system of "picketing," which is a common device of workmen on strike towards workmen who will not join them. One witness said, " On the 3rd of May, I saw over 200 opposite Mr. Stohwasser's shop in Conduit Street. The general conduct of the persons acting as pickets was the following and hissing workmen who had not struck on leaving their work in the evening. They were called cowards, and by other offensive names. That was the general conduct of the pickets from time to time. The pickets also used to resort to certain public-houses - ten or a dozen - which they called committee rooms. I have seen them meet there early in the morning, and then go on picketing." Another witness, a pensioned sergeant of police, said that he had seen customers go to shops in carriages, and the pickets hang about the carriages until the customers went away. Much evidence was given of a similar character, showing that, although no outrages like the Sheffield outrages were committed, the union had used its forces to prevent obnoxious workmen, by threats, abusive language, and other annoyances, from working at their trade. Mr. Baron Bramwell, who presided at the trial, laid down the law on the matter very clearly. He said that the common law of the land made it a criminal offence for two or more persons to conspire by threats, intimidation, or molestation, to deter or influence another in the employment of his industry, talents, or capital. This maxim of the common law had been specially applied to the case of workmen by a statute of 6 Geo. IV., which enacted that " any person who should, by threats, intimidation, molestation, or any other way, obstruct, force, or endeavour to force, any journeyman to depart from his hiring, or prevent any journeyman from hiring, should be guilty of an offence." On the other hand, an Act of 1859 declared that "no workman, merely by reason of his endeavouring peaceably, and in a reasonable manner, and without threat or intimidation, direct or indirect to persuade others from working or ceasing to work, should be guilty of an offence under the former Act of Parliament." The question, therefore, for the jury was whether the conduct of the defendants came under the first or second of these Acts of Parliament. After some deliberation, the Jury found the leading defendants guilty, but strongly recommended them to mercy, on the ground of the obscurity of the law; and a similar verdict was returned immediately afterwards in a case of some more of the tailors. The Judge, however, did not wish the conviction to be more than a warning, and the defendants were released on entering into their own recognisances to come up for judgment when called upon.

In the case of the engine-drivers' strike, the dispute ended by the directors conceding most of the points in dispute, and the grave public inconvenience which had been feared was happily avoided. Another strike, however, took place in the same month of March, which, though it was not immediately successful, was the beginning of a movement which a few years later had become of national importance. This was a strike of agricultural labourers in Buckinghamshire, rising in revolt against the system which allowed a family to starve on nine shillings a week. It was not, however, till some years later that the agricultural labourers became organised, and succeeded in enforcing their demand.

The proceedings in reference to the Jamaica riots and their suppression, of which we have told the story in a previous chapter, were brought to an issue in this year. We have already given an account of the remarkable charge delivered by the Lord Chief Justice of England in the case of Brigadier-General Nelson and Lieutenant Brand. The bill against those two persons was thrown out by the grand jury; and none of the proceedings taken against any of the other actors in the suppression met with any better success. An attempt was made by the Jamaica Committee (a committee which was formed by those who believed the measures of suppression to have been excessive and illegal, and of which Mr. John Stuart Mill was chairman) to obtain legal redress from ex-Governor Eyre himself. Mr. Eyre was resident near Market Drayton, and was therefore within the jurisdiction of the Shropshire magistrates. They were induced to issue a warrant against him on the charge of being an accessory before the fact to the murder of Mr. George William Gordon; and when Mr. Eyre appeared before them the case of the prosecution was argued with great force by Mr. Fitzjames Stephen, Q.C., afterwards a distinguished member of the Indian Legislative Council. Witnesses were called to prove Mr. Eyre's connection with the case of Gordon, and Mr. Stephen represented the legal aspect of the question in very much the same light as it was afterwards represented by the Lord Chief Justice in his charge. Mr. Eyre was defended by a practised advocate, Mr. Gifford, Q.C., who, in his speech of six hours long, was so deeply moved by the pathos of the situation that he could not refrain from tears. The case ended, as had been expected, in the dismissal of the charge against Mr. Eyre. It may be mentioned that on a subsequent occasion, when a civil action was brought against him for damages, the result was practically the same.

This year was memorable for various distressing accidents, some of them destructive only of property, others grievously destructive of life. Her Majesty's Theatre was burnt down; and not only was the building itself, the scene of so many a famous operatic triumph during seventy-five years, destroyed, but the music library with all its priceless manuscripts of Handel, Rossini, and the rest, was utterly lost. But more lamentable than this was the memorable ice accident in the Regent's Park on the 15th of January. There was a severe frost, and the ice on the Ornamental Water was crowded with skaters. Suddenly it began to part away from the bank, and for a. moment the skaters found themselves supported by a floating sheet of ice. Almost instantly this broke up, and two hundred persons were in the water. It need only be added that, in spite of all the efforts of the by standers and of the Humane Society's men, more than forty persons were drowned. The depth of the water was afterwards reduced in accordance with the recommendation of the coroner's jury. Before the year ended, other accidents as startling, though happily not so widely destructive of life, took place. An explosion of gunpowder at the Faversham Powder Mills, in the month of December, blew eleven men into the air; a still more frightful explosion of nitro-glycerine, at Newcastle, killed five men, and showed that the destructive power of modern chemical invention is liable to nullify all measures of safety that can be taken to counteract it; and a fire that took place in March at Accrington, by which nine children were burnt alive in their schoolroom, added an unprecedented element of horror to the catalogue of accidents.

There was, however, as if to compensate for these darker facts, an unusual amount of gaiety imported into England during the summer months by the arrival of certain distinguished foreign visitors. The Belgian volunteers came over, more than a thousand strong, and were entertained in a very fraternal manner by their English brethren. The Viceroy of Egypt came, and was feted by the richer classes of England with considerable expenditure and effect. But his star paled before the greater glories of a visitor who arrived when he had been a few days in London - no less a person than the Commander of the Faithful himself. England is so much an Asiatic power, and has under her sway so many millions of Mohammedans, that it was excusable for her to make the most of her opportunity of welcoming the Sultan of Turkey, the recognised head of all those who profess the orthodox Mussulman faith. All questions as to the real character of the man and of his government were lost sight of by the general London public in the contemplation of his retinue, his jewels, his swarthy complexion, and the white Arab which he rode. He was bandied about from dinner to opera, from opera to ball; the days were filled with reviews, and processions, and fêtes. The Lord Mayor gave him a ball at the Guildhall; the Secretary for India spent £10,000 out of the revenues of India upon a single evening's entertainment at the India Office. But the noblest and most creditable display attempted in his honour was the naval review at Spit- head. Fifteen iron-clads and sixteen unarmoured ships, with sixteen gunboats, formed a mighty avenue, through which the royal yacht, bearing Her Majesty and the Sultan, the Prince of Wales, and other great personages, passed, amid deafening salutes. Only one thing was wanting to complete the Sultan's full enjoyment of the scene. A strong north-easter was blowing all the time, and, by common consent of the staff of His Majesty, the spectacle of the naval review proved rather impressive than pleasant. The Sultan left England on the 23rd of July, after a visit of twelve days.