No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 December 2008
The effectiveness of the strike weapon in early-nineteenth-century England depended in some measure upon the response of public opinion. Obviously the state of trade and the relative cohesion and determination of masters and men were more significant factors, but the attitude of non-participants could not be discounted. The readiness of civil and military authorities to intervene, the reaction of the general public to requests for contributions to relief funds, the willingness of politicians to contemplate changes in the laws concerning combination: all these were influenced by the state of public opinion. It would be an oversimplification to regard “public opinion” and “newspaper opinion” as synonymous. The platform, the pulpit, the placard and the popular song were other means of public expression, not that they necessarily provided a complete or reliable guide to the public mind. Nevertheless the newspaper, particularly in the nineteenth century, was in an advantageous position to influence the response of the public to current controversies.
page 227 note 1 Courant, 7 March 1829 and 27 November 1830.
page 227 note 2 Ibid., 27 December 1844.
page 228 note 1 Mercury, 4 June 1822.
page 229 note 1 Chronicle, 23 September 1815.
page 229 note 2 Courant, 30 September 1815.
page 229 note 3 Mercury, 19 September 1815.
page 229 note 4 There is a copy in the Central Reference Library, Newcastle.
page 230 note 1 Courant, 14 October 1815.
page 230 note 2 Chronicle, 21 October 1815.
page 230 note 3 Ibid., 28 October.
page 231 note 1 Courant, 28 October 1815.
page 231 note 2 McCord, N., “The Seamen's Strike of 1815 in North-East England”, in: Economic History Review, Second Series, XXI (1968), p. 131.Google Scholar
page 231 note 3 Rowe, D. J., “The Strikes of the Tyneside Keelmen in 1809 and 1819”, in: International Review of Social History, XIII (1968)Google Scholar; McCord, N., “Tyneside Discontents and Peterloo”, in: Northern History, II (1967).Google Scholar
page 231 note 4 Courant, 11 October 1822.
page 232 note 1 Rowe, D. J., “The Decline of the Tyneside Keelmen in the Nineteenth Century”, in: Northern History, IV (1969), p. 113.Google Scholar
page 232 note 2 Chronicle, 26 October 1822.
page 232 note 3 Mercury, 5 November 1822. The “bond” was the yearly agreement setting out the keelmen's conditions of service.
page 232 note 4 Chronicle, 23 November 1822; Courant, 23 November 1822.
page 232 note 5 Courant, 7 December 1822.
page 233 note 1 Mercury, 18 October 1831.
page 233 note 2 Chronicle, 10 March 1832; Courant, 10 March 1832.
page 234 note 1 Courant, 5 May.
page 234 note 2 One wonders what the Mercury would have thought of the Post Office's commemorative stamp, April 1976, which shows Thomas Hepburn alongside the head of the Sovereign.
page 234 note 3 Mercury, 8 May 1832.
page 235 note 1 Chronicle, 12 May 1832.
page 235 note 2 Mercury, 25 September 1832.
page 237 note 1 Ibid., 17 July.
page 237 note 2 Ibid., 29 July 1834.
page 238 note 1 Ibid., 30 April 1844.
page 238 note 2 Ibid., 16 April.
page 239 note 1 Milne, M., The Newspapers of Northumberland and Durham (Newcastle, 1971), ch. 3.Google Scholar
You have
Access