Police as Ploughmen in Cheshire in 1917

@drmaryfraser
 
Cheshire was traditionally an agricultural area known at the beginning of the twentieth century for its dairy farming: the production of milk, cheese, butter, beef, mutton, and bacon. From a few years before the First World War the population started to increase, shown in the census of 1911. Expansion was mainly in areas adjacent to Manchester & Liverpool to the North of the county where industry developed along with the need for large amounts of suburban housing for the workers. The population of the rural areas remained static at an average of 0.4 persons per acre. The development of industry threatened the dominance of agriculture and saw the original social leaders, mainly landowners, gradually replaced by businessmen and industrialists. The map below shows the main areas of industry in 1901.
During the First World War, after January 1917, British farmers were expected to feed the nation to prevent impending starvation. Ploughing arable land and planting grain and potatoes was urgently needed, as four times more people could be fed by growing crops than by grazing cattle. The national threat of starvation was due to Britain’s 80% reliance on grain from overseas which was being sunk by enemy submarines. Also, the severe and lengthy winter rotted the potato crop in the ground; this removed most of the bread and all potatoes from the diet for several months, felt acutely by the poorer classes, as prices of most food items soared.
The ability to feed the population caused great alarm in Cheshire initially. Cheshire War Agricultural Committee Minutes for January 1917 show a level of panic at being unable to support government plans to increase home-grown food, as much of the agricultural labour had been recruited into the army. Being asked by the Board of Agriculture to identify which land could be ploughed “at once” led committee members to say “it’s pointless identifying which land should be ploughed if we don’t have the manpower to do it.” and “It was worse than useless to break up pasture land while considerable areas of arable land are unable to be properly cultivated for lack of skilled labour.” Also ploughing machinery was broken with few skilled mechanics to repair and maintain it. They appealed to the newly-formed Board of Agriculture for help.
From 23rd February the army provided 250 soldiers to help farmers, this number increased to 347 from 2nd March and 450 from 10th March. But due to the severe, lengthy winter, ploughing could not start until mid-March by which time bread and potato shortages were felt acutely by the population, so that every other avenue to help farmers was also explored. On 3rd March the National Service Director of Agriculture made an urgent appeal for ploughmen, he said there was only 6 weeks left to plant the spring crops. Newly acquired motor tractors fitted with acetylene lamps could plough 24-hours a day in 3 8-hour shifts, 7 days a week. He asked for those who had taken up work in towns to return to the land for 2 months, particularly identifying policemen as likely to have ploughing skills due to their previous employment. The Cheshire Observer said ploughmen were needed “for the immediate national emergency is of the utmost importance.” From 17th March when the weather broke ploughing began, below is a picture of one of the small number of motor tractors loaned to Cheshire by the Board of Agriculture.


On 23rd March Cheshire’s Executive Committee noted that the Chief Constable of Cheshire had agreed to release policemen with ploughing experience. The Chester Chronicle reported that they would be released at once and the Nantwich Guardian said that around 25 constables had been identified and 2 or 3 had already been placed on farms. By the end of March farmers in Cheshire had requested help from 397 skilled men.
Cheshire County was one of the first to agree to the release of their policemen to plough the fields in March and April 1917. Their Chief Constable Major (later Lt. Colonel) Pulteney Malcolm had sufficient standing that he agreed the release before making a formal proposal to the Standing Joint Committee. The success of these policemen is seen in the thanks the Chief Constable received from the Mayor of Chester, published in the local press.
Policemen were also requested to help with the harvest of 1917, but there is no record of whether they were able to be released on this occasion.
Around Britain between 500-600 policemen were released to help to plough and provide assistance to farmers during the spring of 1917. Some were released again for the harvest. However, the help of policemen to prevent the nation from starvation has so far been unrecognised. This project aims to identify the locations and numbers of policemen released for this vital role in the First World War and in doing so shows the social conscience of the police.
Bibliography
Fraser, M. (2019) Policing the Home front: The control of the British population at war. Abingdon: Routledge.
Harris, B.E. (Ed.) (1979) A History of the County of Cheshire. Volume II. The Institute of Historical Research: Oxford University Press.
Lee, M. (1963) Social Leaders and Public Persons: A study of County Government in Cheshire since 1888. Oxford: The Clarendon Press
Sylvester, D. & Nulty, G. (1958) The Historical Atlas of Cheshire. Chester: The Cheshire Community Council
 

@drmaryfraser







Policing sexual morality in British ports in the First World War

@drmaryfraser

The discourse of sexual morality in the First World War created a moral panic, not only in Britain, but across the Dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Newfoundland and India and later also in America. Sexual immorality was seen particularly in the port towns of Liverpool and Swansea. However, the police felt able to contain it to the houses of ill-repute in Liverpool:
"Disreputable Houses. Manchester and Glasgow are neither of them equal in population to this town (Liverpool). In the former there are *** houses of ill-fame, in the latter ***. In Liverpool there are not less than ****. I have already said that the tonnage of this port exceeds that of London. Our docks are at our doors, with 15 miles of quays. There is an average floating population of 20,000 seamen."[1]
As houses of ill-repute had to be registerd with the police, they were regularly inspected and this surveillance created some kind of safeguard to keep immorality within the dock area and segregated from the rest of the population.
Swansea was similar:
"workmen in the docks declared that the Swansea Docks were a hotbed of immorality, and much worse than ever before, and that there were girls to be seen from 13 years of age with drunken sailors day and night on board ships." [2]
The common factor in these well-established British docks was the mobile population of sailors who were said to encourage and maintain immorality in the local population. In Swansea, the local authority asked the Army to control the dock area, so preventing the spread of immorality by attempting to isolate it in the docks.
However, when 40,000 Canadian troops arrived in Folkestone in early 1915, the town was not a well-established port. It was a genteel holiday resort on the south coast, which had been connected to London by train in 1844, when the railway line was built. It was a port for crossings to Boulogne.
Below is a section of the barracks which housed the Canadian troops at Shorncliffe, 2 miles from Folkestone:

The Canadian troops were welcomed into the town, although they outnumbered the local population of just over 33,000 [3]. But as they were known to be well-paid, inevitably crime developed and the Chief Constable alerted the Watch Committee (responsible for appointing police officers) that prostitutes had arrived from London and immorality was developing. The fear that it would spread to the rest of the population of this genteel town was not lost on the police, they feared they had no means to confine it to the dock area. Unlike Liverpool and Swansea, the Canadian troops were based in Folkestone for the duration of the war, returning from leave in France: Folkestone was their home, unlike the floating population of sailors in Liverpool and Swansea.
From February 1916 the British government passed laws under the Defence of the Realm Act (DORA) to try to evict the prostitutes from towns which housed troops. They met with some success initially, as 37 prostitutes and brothel keepers were evicted in February 1916 from Folkestone. However, this did not satisfy the Dominions, who spoke of their outrage at the state of the streets, particularly in London. The Canadian Prime Minister, Robert Borden spoke for them all in April 1917:
"I do not think you will ever get Canada to send men Overseas to any war again unless we are assured that such conditions as have met our soldiers here will not meet them again. ... I think it is a horrible outrage that they should be exposed as they have been," [4]
He and other Dominion leaders were particularly concerned at the spread of venereal disease to the troops, as there was no cure for the disease at this time. They implored Britain to reduce the temptations to their troops. Canada's pleas were endorsed by the Australian Prime Minister who had been receiving letters from parents of their soldiers saying that while they expected their sons might be killed in the war and die as heroes, they were not expecting the disgrace of them arriving home, on demobilisation, with venereal disease.
The following year, in February 1918, the Dominions said they were "profoundly dissatisfied with the inaction of His Majesty's Government" as they could see no change in the situation from the previous year [5]. They wanted all women prostitutes to be interned. However, the Home Secretary, Sir George Cave, said the problem was no longer the spread of disease by prostitutes, 70% of the spread was now caused by the "amateur girls" over whom there was no control.
This is a synopsis of a paper presented at the Social Dynamics in Atlantic Ports XIVth-XXIst Centuries conference in Ostend, Belgium 24th - 26th April 2019 see http://porttowns.port.ac.uk/cfp-social-dynamics-in-atlantic-ports/
References and bibliography
Fraser, M. (2019) Policing the Home Front 1914-1918: The control of the British population at war. London and New York: Routledge Studies in First World War History. Ch 9, Policing sexual morality, pp. 162-191.
[1] The Police Review and Parade Gossip. An address to Police Recruits. 1st October 1915 p. 477
[2] The Police Review and Parade Gossip. Women Police and Patrols: Opposition to patrols at Swansea. 9th July 1915 p. 335
[3] Personal communication from Mark Ballard, Archive Services Officer, Kent History and Library Centre.
[4] TNA HO45/10182 Imperial War Conference: Temptations of Overseas Soldiers in London. 24th April 1917, p. 17.
[5] TNA HO45/10802 307990. War Cabinet 352 and 365. Extracts from the minutes of the War Cabinet meetings, Friday 22nd February and Wednesday 13th March 1918.
@drmaryfraser

Review of Policing the Home Front 1914-1918: the control of the British population at war

@drmaryfraser

The first review is from The Police History Society and is very complimentary. Thank you to the reviewer.


@drmaryfraser

Police history: Policing sexual morality in English Atlantic Ports

@drmaryfraser

Delighted that I've been asked to present a paper "Policing sexual morality in English ports in the First World War" at the Social Dynamics in Atlantic Ports XIVth - XXIst Centuries: VIth international colloquium of the governance of the Atlantic Ports at the Flanders Marine Institute, in Ostend, Belgium 24th - 26th April, 2019. With nearly 50 speakers it looks like an excellent programme and a chance to make new contacts. See porttowns.port.ac.uk/cfp-social-dynamic
For the conference programme see https://www2.uned.es/gobernanza-puertos-atlanticos/indexEn.html#

@drmaryfraser

The police popular journal "The Police Review and Parade Gossip"

@drmaryfraser

Popular journals are a good way to understand their target audience. In the case of The Police Review and Parade Gossip, it helps us to understand the work and lives of the policeman on the beat and his family. It was started in 1893 by the philanthropist and temperance campaigner John Kempster who invested his £500 savings because he saw a need for policemen on the beat to have a voice and to improve their standard of education and training. It became the most widely read weekly police journal during the First World War and was referred to by government for the views of policemen generally. Files in the National Archives at Kew have cuttings taken from the journal pasted in to letters and correspondence between ministers and civil servants about topical police matters.
Widely read and influential journals are important sources for historical research as they have to reflect the views of their readers, or they lose their target audience; they also help to form opinions through the articles they produce - so that they become a reflector and arbiter of opinions. No journal can afford to be out of step with its readers.
Researchers on police history have called the journal's editor enthusiastic and forceful, with the journal being a mouthpiece for the respectable, educated working man who served as a policeman and also had rights as a citizen. It encouraged the moral values of stability, self-improvement, thrift and sobriety and showed the policeman as respectable, self-disciplined and self-taught, which was close to the values the police as an organisation promoted. It also campaigned for better conditions of service for the policeman, such as the successful campaign for the weekly rest day, which became enshrined in legislation in the Police (Weekly Rest Day) Bill of 1910.
Below is the front cover of the journal, from the first publication after the Armistice in November 1918. Sadly it ceased publication in 2011 after over 110 years in print.
Further reading:
Fraser, M. (2019) Policing the Home Front 1914-1018: The control of the British population at war. Abingdon: Routledge, First World War History Series.
Clapson, M. & Emsley, C. (2011) Street, beat and respectability: The culture and self-image of the late Victorian and Edwardian urban policeman. In Williams, C. A. (ed.) Police and Policing in the Twentieth Century. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Chapter 14, pp. 293-317.


@drmaryfraser