PDA

View Full Version : Book and Media Reviews


jmenges
12-01-2007, 11:17 AM
The Origins of the Vigilant State:
The London Metropolitan Police Special Branch
Before the First World War
Bernard Porter
1987/1991 The Boydell Press
272pp illustrated


http://img108.mytextgraphics.com/photolava/2007/12/01/12643726-48oqtngu3.jpg

The late 19th century was a period of upheaval across Europe, with anarchists, nihilists, communists, Fenians, suffragettes and many other disparate groups all turning to direct action and violence in order to force their cause. While England had it’s share of terrorist attacks and attempts( the bombing of the Board of Trade and Old Scotland Yard , and the Walsall and Greenwich Park bomb incidents) they were minor compared to the seemingly rampant violent actions carried out against political and monarchial figures on continental Europe, particularly in Russia. While Europe’s figureheads bled, England was largely viewed as a safe haven for these various European nihilists and anarcho-terrorists who would use the country as a base of their operations and then export their violence to the continent. But the British did have concerns of their own, facing a relatively moderate but none the less real and sensational threat from Irish Fenians. Britain needed a force that could disrupt the activities of the Fenians as well as reassure the rest of Europe that they were keeping a watchful eye on the foreign anarchist elements bent on creating havoc in other countries. This became the job of the Special Branch. How determined and successful this department was is the subject of Bernard Porter’s book The Origins of the Vigilant State.

Porter’s evaluation of the department that started as the Special Irish Branch in 1883, encompassed Sections B, D and C of the C.I.D and went on to evolve into MI5 is that the department in its early years was not entirely successful. The Special Branch’s operations were hampered by many things, much of it beyond their control. Asked to monitor the activities of foreign anarchists for Britain's European allies, they were unable to completely satisfy Europe due to laws affording political refugees special treatment in England, which made it easy for them to immigrate and nearly impossible for the authorities to extradite known political criminals. Other barriers to the total success of the Special Branch were the governments policy of non-cooperation with foreign police agencies, the liberalism of Parliament and press with regards to political immigrants (particularly Russians, who faced exile or death if returned to their home country), a lack of manpower, and the obligatory squabbles with the Home Office over procedure. Porter presents evidence that, in the face of these barriers, it was not uncommon for the Special Branch to use extra-legal and, probably, illegal methods in order to accomplish their goals.

Mr. Porter’s book was hampered as well, but in a way that turned out to be a blessing. There is a dearth of official documentation regarding the Special Branch and so in many places the author is left to speculate on certain areas of SB history and personnel. Thankfully for the reader he mines an, in my opinion, underused resource: the Anarchist press of London. Oftentimes the author concludes that the articles published in the radical press about the activities of the Special Branch most likely get to the truth of the matter, and it is enlightening to read how openly and closely this “secret” department was scrutinized by it’s target opposition. The anarchist press in the Late victorian period, being at once an international voice for the working poor as well as (in the case of Freedom, a long running London anarchist paper) very much a local entity, containing articles of a local concern (including writings on the Whitechapel murders), is an area that needs closer investigation.

Of course, the book centers around men whose names will be familiar to students of the Whitechapel murders and Late Victorian law enforcement. Being peopled by such individuals as Anderson, Monro, MacNaghten and Littlechild, as well as possibly lesser-known, but equally interesting and colorful figures such as Edward Jenkinson, Thomas Beach (aka Henri le Caron) and William Melville, this book reads like a, for lack of a better term, sequel to works focusing on the Whitechapel murders. And, as it is a very enjoyable and informative read (although expensive to purchase new), it should be added to the collection of anyone interested in Rippperology or crime and prevention in the British LVP.



Bernard Porter is an emeritus professor of history at the University of Newcastle, and is currently teaching at Stockholm University.

He is also the author of:
Empire and Superempire: Britain, America and the World (2006)
The Absent-Minded Imperialists: Empire, Society, and Culture in Britain (2004)
The Lion’s Share: A Short History of British Imperialism, 1850-1995 (1996)
Britannia’s Burden: Political Evolution of Modern Britain, 1851-1990 (1994)
Britain, Europe and the World, 1850-1982: Delusions of Grandeur (1983)


JM

How Brown
12-01-2007, 11:42 AM
The previous review is the first in hopefully a series emanating from the Forums reviewers, Kevin Michael and Jon Menges.

I will set up a special thread....Review of The Reviews on this Forum. Please confine your comments to that thread.

Thanks in advance !!

How Brown
03-19-2009, 06:38 AM
Just in case someone wished to give a review of anything Ripper related they've read lately....here you go.

Nemo
03-19-2009, 04:18 PM
Bernard Porter has also written "Plots and Paranoia" - a history of political espionage which I can thoroughly recommend.

I would imagine it covers much the same ground as the book mentioned above though not quite so specific.

Here is a quote...

"That last point was the positive reason for the public's resistance to
"underhand counter-subversive" methods; their continued adhesion to this particular little element of the Victorian liberal ethic. The prejudice against "espionage" in particular was as strong as ever,
and showed no sign of weakening. It appeared everywhere. Harcourt spoke
of it in a lecture he gave to some London policemen in 1881- before the
main Fenian assault - and with some pride. On that occasion he appeared
to believe that the failure to detect a few crimes was a cheap price to
pay for Britain's freedom from "any organised system of espionage". In
1883 the queen's secretary, writing to congratulate the police on the
arrest of a dynamitard, said that he thought it was all the more
splendid in view of their proper distaste for such methods. "I doubt if
Englishmen ever could take up the business as the French do"."


Which I once thought had bearings on some of Anderrson's statements
regarding foreign police methods


And also...


..."That goes some way to explaining the setting up in 1887 of the
first agency calling itself the "Special Branch".
The immediate occasion for it was the resignation of Jenkinson
at the beginning of 1887, when successive Home Secretaries - not just
Harcourt - refused to give him the powers he hankered for. He
apparently left in a huff after destroying all his secret service
records - for what reason we can only guess. The immediate effect of
this was for most of his functions to be taken over by the "Scotland
Yardites", which he would not have liked at all. His role of "Secret
Agent" passed to James Monro, the assistant commissioner in charge of
CID, who was a particular enemy of his. One of the first things Monro
did in his new post was to recall Robert Anderson, whom Jenkinson had
levered out in 1884. Later on Anderson succeeded Monro as head of the
CID, and possibly as "Secret Agent" too. Their main counter-subversive
tool was the new "Special Section" or "Special Branch"...


I think all Ripperologists should have some background knowledge in regard to Irish and English political history of the time. You could do a lot worse than begin with one of Mr Porter's books

How Brown
03-19-2009, 05:21 PM
Thanks a lot,Nemo. The book sounds interesting and you're right...in that all of us should know more about Anglo-Irish history as well as Victorian society...in addition to WM history.

If you want the job of "Forums Book Critic", you're hired !

Pay is terrible....but we're buddies,right?:kiss:

Nemo
03-19-2009, 06:13 PM
I'll take it - If I've got it, I'll review it...

How Brown
03-19-2009, 06:15 PM
Great !! That also goes for magazine articles...if you want the "job",Nemo.

Pay...ahem..is still terrible...and we're still buddies like before.:kiss:

Nemo
03-19-2009, 07:48 PM
I'd be happy to help/add to the site if I can Howard

There are many others more academically qualified than myself for that job - but I would be happy to supply a "layman's" review of anything you deem relevant

My library is not extensive but I buy and read a lot more than most

I'll PM you if you are serious...:thumb:

How Brown
03-19-2009, 08:44 PM
I'd be happy to help/add to the site if I can Howard

You do that every day my friend.

There are many others more academically qualified than myself for that job - but I would be happy to supply a "layman's" review of anything you deem relevant

Yes ! But do they work for free? Our expenditures usually manage to keep Moderator Jon Rees in baked beans for the month and little more..

My library is not extensive but I buy and read a lot more than most

Thats good enough for us,sor...

I'll PM you if you are serious

No need. You is in like Flynn.

Thanks Nemo...:kiss:

Nemo
03-20-2009, 05:41 AM
Nice :thumbsupbud:-

I'll see what I can come up with - thanks Howard :typing: