What Does Reading the Riot Act Mean

British legislation

United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland legislation

Riot Deed 1714

Parliament of Great U.k.
Long title	An Act for Preventing Tumults and Riotous Assemblies, and for the more speedy and effectual Punishing the Rioters
Citation	1 Geo.ane St.2 c.five
Dates
Commencement	i Baronial 1715
Other legislation
Repealed past	Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1973
Condition: Repealed

Commencement page of the Riot Act 1714, first edition (London, 1715), with heading (explanation title) "An Act for Preventing Tumults and Riotous Assemblies, and for the more speedy and effectual Punishing the Rioters", i of half-dozen copies known; English Short-Title Catalogue (ESTC.BL.uk) no. N53655

The Riot Act 1714 ^[1] (1 Geo.i St.2 c.5) was an deed of the Parliament of Great U.k. which authorised local authorities to declare whatever group of 12 or more than people to be unlawfully assembled and to disperse or face up castigating action. The human activity's long title was "An Act for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies, and for the more than speedy and effectual punishing the rioters", and it came into force on i August 1715.^[2] It was repealed in England and Wales past section 10(2) and Part Iii of Schedule 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967. Acts like to the Riot Act passed into the laws of British colonies in Australia, Canada, and America, some of which remain today.

The phrase "read the riot act" has passed into common usage for a stern reprimand or alarm of consequences.

Introduction and purpose [edit]

The Riot Human activity 1714 was introduced during a time of ceremonious disturbance in Great United kingdom of great britain and northern ireland, such every bit the Sacheverell riots of 1710, the Coronation riots of 1714 and the 1715 riots in England.^{[ citation needed ]} The preamble makes reference to "many rebellious riots and tumults [that] have been [taking place of late] in diverse parts of this kingdom", calculation that those involved "presum[eastward] and so to do, for that the punishments provided by the laws now in existence are not adequate to such heinous offences".^{[ citation needed ]}

Main provisions [edit]

The full Riot Human action 1714. The lower part contains the proclamation that was to be read aloud.

Proclamation of riotous assembly [edit]

The act created a mechanism for certain local officials to make a proclamation ordering the dispersal of any grouping of more than than twelve people who were "unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled together". If the group failed to disperse inside one hour, then anyone remaining gathered was guilty of a felony without benefit of clergy, punishable by death.^{[ citation needed ]}

The announcement could exist fabricated in an incorporated town or metropolis by the mayor, bailiff or "other caput officer", or a justice of the peace. Elsewhere it could be fabricated by a justice of the peace or the sheriff, undersheriff or parish constable. It had to be read out to the gathering concerned, and had to follow precise wording detailed in the deed; several convictions were overturned because parts of the proclamation had been omitted, in item "God salvage the King".^[three]

The diction that had to exist read out to the assembled gathering was as follows:

Our sovereign lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business organisation, upon the pains contained in the act fabricated in the first twelvemonth of King George, for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God save the Male monarch.

In a number of jurisdictions, such every bit U.k., Canada and New Zealand, wording such as this was enshrined and codification in the law itself. While the expression "reading the Anarchism Act" is cemented in common idiom with its figurative usage, it originated fairly and squarely in statute itself. In New Zealand'south Crimes Act 1961, section 88, repealed since 1987, was specifically given the heading of "Reading the Anarchism Act".^[four]

Consequences of disregarding the proclamation [edit]

If a group of people failed to disperse within one hr of the proclamation, the deed provided that the government could use force to disperse them. Anyone assisting with the dispersal was specifically indemnified against whatever legal consequences in the outcome of any of the crowd being injured or killed.^{[ citation needed ]}

Because of the broad potency that the deed granted, it was used both for the maintenance of ceremonious society and for political means. A especially notorious use of the act was the Peterloo Massacre of 1819 in Manchester.^[5]

Other provisions [edit]

The act also made it a felony punishable past death without benefit of clergy for "any persons unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled together" to cause (or begin to cause) serious damage to places of religious worship, houses, barns, and stables.^{[ citation needed ]}

In the event of buildings beingness damaged in areas that were non incorporated into a town or city, the residents of the hundred were made liable to pay damages to the belongings owners concerned. Unlike the remainder of the human action, this required a ceremonious action. In the instance of incorporated areas, the action could exist brought against 2 or more named individuals. This provision encouraged residents to attempt to quell riots in order to avoid paying damages.^[6]

Prosecutions under the act were restricted to inside ane twelvemonth of the event.^{[ citation needed ]}

Controversies [edit]

Impracticality [edit]

At times, it was unclear to both rioters and authorities as to whether the reading of the Anarchism Act had occurred. One example of this is evident in the St. George's Fields Massacre of 1768. At the trials following the incident, there was defoliation amid witnesses as to when the Riot Act had really been read.^[7]

Employ of force [edit]

In the St. George'due south Fields Massacre of 1768, large numbers of subjects gathered outside Rex's Bench Prison to protest confronting the incarceration of John Wilkes. Officials feared that the crowd would forcibly release Wilkes, and troops arrived to baby-sit the prison. Later some time, as well as provocation by the rioters, the troops opened fire on the crowd. There were several fatalities, including non-participants of the anarchism who were struck by stray bullets.^[eight] Some scholars believe that this massacre set the legal precedent for the justified use of strength in time to come riots.^[seven]

The provision pertaining to the use of force can exist found in department 3 of the Riot Act:

...and that if the persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled, or any of them, shall happen to be killed, maimed or hurt, in the dispersing, seizing or apprehending, or endeavouring to disperse, seize or auscultate them, that then every such justice of the peace, sheriff, under-sheriff, mayor, bailiff, head-officer, high or petty lawman, or other peace-officeholder, and all and singular persons, beingness aiding and assisting to them, or whatever of them, shall be free, discharged and indemnified, as well confronting the Rex's majesty, his heirs and successors, as against all and every other person or persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled, that shall happen to be and so killed, maimed or hurt, as aforesaid.

There was as well confusion regarding the apply of troops as it pertained to the 1-60 minutes mark. Rioters often believed that the military could not apply strength until one 60 minutes had passed since the reading of the proclamation. This is evident in the deportment of the rioters at the Massacre of St George's Fields, particularly their provocative behaviour towards the soldiers.^[nine]

Subsequent history of the Riot Act in the UK and colonies [edit]

The Riot Deed caused confusion during the Gordon Riots of 1780, when the authorities felt uncertain of their power to take action to stop the riots without a reading of the Riot Act. After the riots, Lord Mansfield observed that the Riot Act did not take away the pre-existing power of the authorities to use force to stop a violent riot; it simply created the additional offence of declining to disperse later a reading of the Anarchism Act.^{[ citation needed ]}

The Riot Human activity was read prior to the Peterloo Massacre of 1819 and the Cinderloo Uprising of 1821, also as earlier the Bristol Riots at Queen'due south Square in 1831.^{[x] [11]} Both are held to be related to the Unreformed House of Eatables, which was righted in the Reform Act 1832.

Lieutenant-Governor Sir Francis Bond Head and his administrators read the act during the Upper Canada Rebellion of 1837.^[12] The malcontented Canadians were assuaged by the eventual introduction of responsible government in Canada.

The death sentence created past sections one, four and five of the act was reduced to transportation for life past section one of the Punishment of Offences Human activity 1837.^[13]

The Riot Act eventually drifted into decay. The last fourth dimension it was definitely read in England was in Birkenhead, Cheshire, on 3 Baronial 1919, during the second police strike, when large numbers of police officers from Birkenhead, Liverpool and Bootle joined the strike.^[14] Troops were chosen in to deal with the rioting and looting that had begun, and a magistrate read out the Riot Human action. None of the rioters subsequently faced the charge of a statutory felony.^{[ citation needed ]} Earlier in the aforementioned twelvemonth, at the boxing of George Square on 31 January, in Glasgow, the city's sheriff was in the process of reading the Riot Act to a crowd of 20,000–25,000 when the sheet of paper he was reading from was ripped out of his easily past ane of the rioters.

The last time information technology was read in Scotland was by the deputy town clerk James Gildea in Airdrie in 1971^{[ citation needed ]}

The act was repealed on xviii July 1973 for the United Kingdom past the Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1973.^[xv]

The Riot Act in other countries [edit]

The Riot Act passed into the law of those countries that were and so colonies of Great Britain, including the North American colonies that would become the United States and Canada.^{[ citation needed ]}

In many common-law jurisdictions, a lesser disturbance such as an affray or an unruly gathering may be accounted an unlawful assembly by the local authorities, and ordered to disperse. Failure to obey such an guild would typically be prosecuted as a summary offence.

Commonwealth of australia [edit]

Acts like to the Riot Act have been enacted in some Australian states. For case, in Victoria the Unlawful Assemblies and Processions Act 1958 allowed a magistrate to disperse a crowd with the words (or words to the effect of):

Our sovereign lady the Queen doth strictly charge and command all manner of persons here assembled immediately to disperse themselves and peaceably depart to their own homes. God save the Queen.

Anyone remaining after 15 minutes may exist charged and imprisoned for i month (showtime offence) or three months (repeat offence). The deed does not apply to crowds gathered for the purpose of an election.

The same human activity allows a magistrate to appoint citizens every bit "special [law] constables" to disperse a oversupply, and provides indemnity for the hurting or killing of unlawfully assembled people in an try to disperse them.^[16] The Deed was significantly amended in 2007.^[16]

Belize [edit]

Belize, some other former British colony, likewise still retains the principle of the Riot Act; it was concluding read on 21 January 2005, during the 2005 Belize unrest. While at that place is no specific form of words provided for such proclamations, they must be made "in the Queen's name".

The provisions are formed in sections 231, 246 and 247 of the state's criminal lawmaking, providing especially that:

Whatever magistrate, or in the absence of any magistrate any commissioned officer in Her Majesty'southward naval, armed services or air force service or any police officer above the rank of inspector, in whose view a riot is being committed, or who apprehends that a riot is about to exist committed by persons being assembled within his view, may make or crusade to be made a announcement in the Queen's proper name, in such form as he thinks fit, commanding the rioters or persons and then assembled to disperse peaceably.

Any person who does not disperse within 1 hour of the announcement being read is liable to receive a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment.^[17]

Canada [edit]

In Canada, the Riot Act has been incorporated in a modified form into the Criminal Code, a federal statute. Sections 32 and 33 of the Code deal with the power of police officers to suppress riots.^{[xviii] [xix]} The Lawmaking defines a riot every bit an "unlawful assembly" that has "begun to disturb the peace tumultuously".^[xx] When twelve or more than persons are "unlawfully and riotously assembled together", the annunciation tin can be read by a number of public officials, such as justices of the peace, provincial courtroom judges, mayors, and sheriffs.^[21] The proclamation tin also be read during prison riots: Quebec and Manitoba have designated senior correctional staff equally Justices of the Peace for the purpose of reading the announcement, while other provinces will ask a local justice of the peace to travel to the prison house to read the proclamation.^[22]

The proclamation is worded every bit follows:

Her Majesty the Queen charges and commands all persons being assembled immediately to disperse and peaceably to depart to their habitations or to their lawful business on the pain of being guilty of an offence for which, on conviction, they may be sentenced to imprisonment for life. God save the Queen.^[21]

Unlike the original Riot Act, the Criminal Code requires the assembled people to disperse within thirty minutes.^[23] When the declaration has not been read, the penalisation for rioting is up to two years of imprisonment.^[24] When the proclamation has been read and then ignored, the penalty increases, up to life imprisonment.^[23] The maximum penalty of life imprisonment as well applies to someone who wilfully uses force to hinder the reading of the proclamation, or to those fail to disperse and who have reasonable grounds to believe the proclamation would have been made had the official not been hindered by forcefulness.

The announcement was read during the Winnipeg general strike of 1919^[25] and the 1958 riot over racial bigotry against First Nations in Prince Rupert, British Columbia.^{[26] [27]} Ane contempo reading was during Vancouver'southward Stanley Cup riot in June 2011.^[28] Despite the reading of the announcement, rioters were almost always charged under s 65 due to the difficulty of proving the elements of the offence in s 68. Many rioters as well faced charges related to assaulting peace officers, mischief, theft, arson and set on.

New Zealand [edit]

In New Zealand the Riot Human action was incorporated into sections 87 and 88 of the Crimes Human action 1961.^[29] The proclamation is worded as follows:

Her Majesty the Queen commands all of y'all to disperse immediately and to go quietly to your homes or to your lawful business organization, upon pain of beingness charged with an offence punishable by imprisonment for 5 years. God save the Queen.^[30]

The need to read the Riot Act was removed by section 3 of the Crimes Amendment Act (1987 No 1).^{[31] [32]}

United States [edit]

A riot deed was passed past the Massachusetts state legislature in 1786 during Shays' Rebellion.^[33]

At the federal level, the principle of the Riot Act was incorporated into the kickoff Militia Act (one Stat. 264) of 8 May 1792. The act's long title was "An act to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions". Section iii of the Militia Act gave ability to the president to upshot a proclamation to "command the insurgents to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes, within a limited fourth dimension", and authorized him to use the militia if they failed to do then. Substantively identical linguistic communication is currently codified in title 10 of the United States Code, Chapter thirteen, Section 254.^[34]

Prohibitions against inciting riots were further codified in United states federal police force under 18 U.S. Code § 2101 – Riots, every bit part of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, passed by the Usa Congress.^{[35] [36]}

"Read the Anarchism Deed" [edit]

To this twenty-four hours many jurisdictions that have inherited the tradition of English common law and Scots constabulary^{[ which? ]} nonetheless employ statutes that require police force or other executive agents to deliver an oral warning, much like the Riot Act, before an unlawful public assembly may be forcibly dispersed.^{[ citation needed ]}

Because the authorities were required to read the proclamation that referred to the Riot Human activity before they could enforce information technology, the expression "to read the Riot Act" entered into common linguistic communication as a phrase meaning "to reprimand severely", with the added sense of a stern warning.^{[ citation needed ]} The phrase remains in common use in the English language.^[37]

Come across also [edit]

• Black Act
• Anarchism Acts
• Public Lodge Deed 1986
• Criminal Justice and Public Gild Act 1994
• Serious Organised Crime and Law Act 2005

References [edit]

1. ^ This short title was conferred by the Brusque Titles Human activity 1896, section 1 and the first schedule.
2. ^ Stevenson, John (6 June 2014). Popular Disturbances in England 1700-1832. Routledge. p. 29. ISBN9781317897149 . Retrieved 30 July 2018.
3. ^ The Legal observer, or, Periodical of jurisprudence. Vol. 2. J. Richards. 1831. p. 32. Retrieved xxx December 2009.
4. ^ "Crimes Act 1961, Public Act 88". New Zealand Legislation. New Zealand Government. Retrieved xxx July 2018.
5. ^ "Chester Spring Assizes – Trial of Johnston, Drummond and Bagguley, for Sedition and Conspiracy". Chester Courant. 20 April 1819.
6. ^ Westward. Nippel, "Reading the Riot Human activity: The Discourse of Police-Enforcement in 18th Century England," History and Anthropology ane (June 1985): 405–406.
7. ^ ^{a b} Westward. Nippel, "Reading the Riot Act: The Soapbox of Constabulary-Enforcement in 18th Century England," History and Anthropology ane (June 1985): 408.
8. ^ W. Nippel, "Reading the Riot Act: The Discourse of Law-Enforcement in 18th Century England," History and Anthropology i (June 1985): 407–408.
9. ^ W. Nippel, "Reading the Riot Act: The Discourse of Constabulary-Enforcement in 18th Century England," History and Anthropology 1 (June 1985): 407.
10. ^ "Atrocious and Calamitous Riots". The Bristol Gazette. 3 November 1831. Retrieved 30 July 2018 – via The National Archives.
11. ^ Trinder, Barrie (2000). The Industrial Revolution in Shropshire (Third ed.). Chichester: Phillimore. pp. 232–233. ISBN9781860771330.
12. ^ De Celles, Alfred D.; Wallace, W. Stewart (1920). The Patriotes of '37 : a chronicle of the Lower Canadian rebellion. Chronicles of Canada. Toronto: Glasgow, Brook & Co.
13. ^ "The Punishment of Offences Deed". The National Archives . Retrieved 16 July 2019.
14. ^ "The last reading of the Anarchism Human action on mainland UK". Quezi.com. Retrieved 24 December 2012.
15. ^ section 1(1) and office five of schedule one.
16. ^ ^{a b} "Unlawful Assemblies and Processions Human activity 1958" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 December 2008.
17. ^ "Belize Criminal Lawmaking Chapter 101" (PDF). Belizelaw.org. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 February 2012. Retrieved 24 December 2012.
18. ^ Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 32.
19. ^ Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 33.
20. ^ Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-45, due south. 64.
21. ^ ^{a b} Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 67.
22. ^ "FORUM on Corrections Inquiry". Correctional Service Canada. eleven July 2007.
23. ^ ^{a b} Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 68.
24. ^ Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-45, southward. 65(1).
25. ^ "Fighting the skillful fight: Winnipeg general strike of 1919", Canadian Public Health Clan.
26. ^ Robert A. Campbell, "A 'Fantastic Rigmarole': Deregulating Aboriginal Drinking in British Columbia, 1945-62", BC STUDIES, No. 141, Jump 2004, p. 81.
27. ^ "Prince Rupert Fire Museum". www.princerupertlibrary.ca.
28. ^ "Riots erupt in Vancouver after Canucks loss". CBC News. sixteen June 2011.
29. ^ "Crimes Deed 1961". The Noesis Basket. 1 January 1962. Retrieved 19 Jan 2013.
30. ^ "Section 88 of the Crimes Act 1961". The Knowledge Basket. 1 January 1962. Retrieved nineteen January 2013.
31. ^ "Crimes Human activity 1961 No 43, Section 88". Parliamentary Council Role. 1 October 2012. Retrieved 19 January 2013.
32. ^ "Crimes Subpoena Act (1987 No ane)". The Knowledge Basket. 12 March 1987. Retrieved 19 January 2013.
33. ^ Zinn, Howard (2005). A People'southward History of the U.s.a. . New York: HarperCollins. p. 93. ISBN978-0-06-083865-2. OCLC 61265580.
34. ^ "x USC Chapter 13 – Coup, Section 254 - Declaration to Disperse" (PDF). Government Publishing Part. Retrieved half-dozen March 2019.
35. ^ "18 U.Southward. Code § 2101 - Riots". LII / Legal Information Plant.
36. ^ "History of the Federal Judiciary | Federal Judicial Heart". www.fjc.gov.
37. ^ Quinion, Michael (12 February 2011). "Read the riot act". Earth Wide Words . Retrieved 30 July 2018.

External links [edit]

• Full text of the Riot Act (c. 1714 – 1715)
• The Criminal Code of Canada (R.South. 1985, c. C-46) Archived 5 January 2011 at the Wayback Machine
• Review of Michael Barnholden, Reading the Riot Act (2005) past Max Sartin Archived fifteen March 2007 at the Wayback Motorcar
• BBC interview with a historian, featuring the Reading of the Riot Act by Peter Donaldson
• Prototype of the 1714 Riot Act on the Parliamentary website

varnercourst.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riot_Act

Share this post