On this day … 5 June 1872

The Preston Guardian reported turbulent scenes during a lecture in the town promoted by the Preston Republican Club. The club had been formed the previous December as a branch of the London and Birmingham Republican Clubs. Within a month it had inaugurated a lecture series in favour of the abolition of the monarchy, and shortly after published a four-page setting out its case for the reform of the constitution.

One of their first coups was to secure the attendance at one of their events of the political activist and atheist, Charles Bradlaugh, founder of the National Secular Society.

Two lectures in June by Harriet Law, which were to be held in the Theatre Royal, had promised to be โ€˜turbulentโ€™ soon after they were advertised. Opponents plastered posters on the walls of the town denouncing the speaker and accusing the theatre manager, a Mr Duval, of letting his theatre for โ€˜treasonable and revolutionary purposesโ€™.

Harriet Law was a Victorian political activist, Marxist and atheist. Marxโ€™s daughter, Eleanor, was a supporter, โ€˜When the history of the labour movement in England is written, the name of Harriet Law will be entered into the golden book of the proletariat.โ€™

With her presence in the town threatening the prospect of civil unrest, the townโ€™s magistrates met to decide what action to take, but, probably wisely, did not get involved.

The posters urged Conservatives and โ€˜moderate Liberalsโ€™ to boycott the lectures, but many must have attended to judge from the response to the first lecture, given by Mrs Law. Her opponents gathered in the gallery, and … โ€˜Shortly before the lecturer appeared the โ€œgodsโ€ commenced whistling โ€œRule Britannicaโ€, โ€œGod save the Queenโ€ and other loyal airs, with an interlude of shouting โ€ฆโ€™

When Mrs Law appeared on stage, she appealed for calm, and declared that:

โ€˜She was certain that the working men would not oppose her that evening, because she believed that the working classes of this country perfectly understood this one thing โ€“ that the existence of artificial distinctions in society was detrimental to them as constituting the great body of the people. (Applause and disturbance.)

She then launched into an attack on the landed aristocracy, which had โ€˜locked up the land in the hands of a fewโ€™, arguing that:

โ€˜Was it not a fact that they had stolen all they could, and then turned themselves into policemen in order to see that no one took from them that which they had already stolen.โ€™

The solution to releasing that stranglehold was to nationalise land and make it the property of the people. And also to abolish the special position the Anglican Church enjoyed, with its tithes and Easter dues:

โ€˜The great obstacles to the carrying out of these reforms were the aristocracy. The disestablishment of the Church was opposed by the aristocracy, because their relations, their friends, their minions were placed in the best livings the Church could afford.โ€™

The following evening Mrs Law was back at the theatre to deliver her second lecture. The theatre management had clearly taken steps to avoid the โ€˜turbulenceโ€™ that accompanied the previous lecture. The price of tickets had been raised and, more importantly, the gallery was closed.

Mrs Lawโ€™s subject was โ€˜Republicanism versus Monarchyโ€™ and she pointed to the Prince of Wales as example of the defects of a hereditary system. She was clearly dreading the prospect of his succeeding his mother, Queen Victoria, โ€˜Who could point to a single noble deed he had committed, or say that his whole life had not been one of selfish pleasure?โ€™

The Republican Club does not seem to have long survived that early enthusiasm, for by 1880 a correspondent to the Preston Chronicle was already referring to it in the past tense.


Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Law
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Bradlaugh


Discover more from preston history

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a Reply