Walsall Anarchists and West Midlands Police

– a personal experience of using the “Freedom of Information Act” to research anarchist history

                                                                                                    by Christopher Draper

In 1892 four Walsall anarchists were imprisoned for a bomb plot orchestrated by Auguste Coulon, a police agent-provocateur. Although the police and trial judge conspired to conceal Coulon’s role he subsequently boasted of his involvement to reporters. For over a century the Metropolitan Police refused to disclose details of its part in securing conviction until in 2001 there was a breakthrough. Despite claims that all relevant documents had either been lost or destroyed a serving police officer seeking early retirement and academic respectability was granted access to hitherto hidden Special Branch files to complete his PhD: ”Three “Special Account” books, each measuring 160mm by 200mm, and printed into five columns per page. They detail, among other items, what appears to be the cash amounts paid out to individual informants. In all, approximately six thousand individual entries span a total of the twenty four years from 1888 to 1912”.

These files revealed Coulon was paid almost £1,000 by the Metropolitan Police (and incidentally also revealed the previously unsuspected involvement of a second police agent in a separate high-profile “anarchist-terrorist conspiracy). This initiative prompted me to wonder whether the Walsall anarchists’ local police force might similarly be sitting on undisclosed evidence so in September 2017 I made a formal FOI request to West Midlands Police (WMP) for copies of documents relating to this 1892 case. It has taken almost 1½ years for that simple enquiry to be concluded and in the hope that it might amuse, enlighten and encourage fellow researchers I’ve recorded details of my quest.

My initial FOI was emailed to WMP on 4.9.2017. WMP replied on 12.9.2017 suggesting I instead contact their ”Heritage Project” adding, “Can I please ask you to confirm that you are happy for this request to be withdrawn under the FOI Act?”  I responded by refusing to withdraw and insisting on a formal FOI response. The law allows 20 working days for an FOI response so on 7.10.2017 I reminded WMP, ”After 25 working days you are yet to comply. It is regrettable that a Police Authority should demonstrate such little regard for the law…”

I received a substantive response on 9.10.2017 declaring my FOI “Vexatious” which technically means it would take them too much effort and consequently cost more than the nominal £450 the Act allows to supply the information I requested (WMP later suggested my request was also vexatious in the non-technical sense as I was impertinent). “The information that we hold in respect of your request is a very old, large, fragile and very rare document. It is not suitable for scanning and therefore we would have to investigate the provision of specialised services in order to supply an electronic copy to you. This would be costly and burdensome.”

WMP had whetted my appetite – they’d revealed they held a relevant old and rare document. At this point FOI inquirers can either accept the brush-off or if they choose to persevere must request an authority reviews its own FOI decision. On 18.10.2017 I did the latter, pointing out to WMP that historic documents are nowadays digitally photographed in situ with minimal handling or cost. On 13.11.2017 WMP’s internal review conceded, “You suggested that the documents could simply be photographed… this is a sensible suggestion”!  Then WMP went on to explain that as their resulting photographs weren’t clear enough “to be certain that there was not any harmful information in the documents”  it would require further time, effort and cost to satisfactorily censor the information. WMP’s response was peppered throughout with technical references to various clauses and sub clauses of FOI legislation (sections 8/1c, 12, 14, 14/1, 23, 31 etc), not forgetting “Section 38 (health and safety)”! What all this amounted to was as far as WMPI was concerned I was getting nothing.

I read hundreds of pages of FOI legislation and precedents to escalate to the next stage, an appeal to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Of course the ICO comes at it cold so it is up the applicant to gather all relevant communications and present a coherent case to challenge the combined expertise of a public authority – a demanding and time consuming business, but in for a penny…

My 25.11.2017 appeal to ICO rested on two main grounds, firstly it was not credible that WMP did not have expert photographers at hand to efficiently produce excellent copies of the historic document and so it could not fairly cite “vexation” as grounds for withholding information. Secondly I argued that full disclosure was in the Public Interest. Of course I had to play the game of citing specific clauses and precedents and supplying supporting documents. Five months later I received the ICO’s 17.4.2018 Decision Notice, “The Commissioner’s decision is that the request was not vexatious and so section 14(1) was relied on incorrectly. WMP is now required to issue a fresh response to the request… WMP must take these steps within 35 calendar days… failure to comply may be dealt with as a contempt of court”. Now the ball was firmly in WMP’s court, would it hand over the contents of the 1892 document or appeal over the head of ICO to the mysterious “First-tier Tribunal”?

Thirty-four days later (21.05.2018) WMP responded, “We have considered the above judgement and although we do not agree with the conclusions drawn by the Information Commissioner, we have made the decision not to take this case to the Information Tribunal.” WMP explained that its substantive response would be further delayed whilst it applied a “Public Interest Test” on what precisely it would disclose. Unfortunately this further delay is permitted by the FOI Act.

On 16.6.2018 WMP emailed copies of all 57 handwritten pages of the large (300mm X 250mm) bound volume with the title “WALSALL ANARCHIST TRIAL 1892” embossed on the cover, a document containing almost 20,000 words of “evidence”. After ten months this was a huge advance but the contents had been censored by almost 300 redactions so on 25.6.2018 I requested another WMP internal review.

On 20.7.2018 that review conceded much of my case, restored almost 90% of the redactions (posting me paper photocopies) yet maintained that the name of the agent-provocateur should continue to be withheld along with the addresses of those involved in the prosecution. This despite the fact that Coulon’s name had been in the public realm for over a century and one of the redacted addresses, “238 Stafford Street”, the home of Joe Deakin, was marked by a “Walsall Anarchist Blue Plaque” erected in 1989 by the local authority.

On 11.8.2018 I contacted ICO to contest WMP’s reliance on sections 30/2 (informants' names) and 40/2 (witness addresses) in retaining 39 redactions. Five months later, on 17.1.2019 ICO ruled “that WMP was entitled to rely on section 30/2b to withhold information but that section 40/2 was not engaged”. Consequently WMP were directed to disclose all redacted addresses but permitted to withhold any mention of Coulon and they had just 28 calendar days to comply, appeal to the “Tribunal” or risk Contempt of Court. Twenty-five days later I received full disclosure of thirty addresses and I filled in the few redactions of Coulon’s name myself!

I’m sifting through this new evidence and will write more of the Walsall Anarchists in due course but I’m pleased with the FOI outcome. In a future post I’ll reveal the shocking fate of the Special Branch files and the officer who uncovered them and draw lessons on the workings of the FOI Act. In the meantime I’m just about to launch a new FOI seeking information about an intriguing anarchist artefact exhibited in 1889 in the Metropolitan Police’s “Black Museum”…

Is this the Walsall Bomb?

"One aspect of this case that is especially interesting is the State's determination to resist disclosure at every level..."

(Guest blog from Christopher Draper – 1.)

John Quail’s account of “The Walsall Anarchists” in his classic “The Slow Burning Fuse” remains unchallenged after almost forty years but it left some unanswered questions.

1. What became of the physical evidence presented at the 1892 trial?
2. What was the ultimate fate of the imprisoned anarchists after their release?
3. Who exactly was Auguste Coulon, the “Secret Agent” mysteriously absent from the trial proceedings?

 The Evidence

Over the intervening years I’ve researched these questions and turned up some interesting leads that I’ll describe in this and two subsequent posts. Here I’ll deal with that first question and submit this picture of “the bomb” for your consideration. Contemporary press reports make extensive, if somewhat inconsistent, reference to numerous artefacts employed by the Walsall anarchists in their alleged enterprise, including - “a sketch of a bomb with instructions (in French) how to make the bomb”, “wooden pear-shaped patterns”, “plaster core-stocks”, “a quantity of clay mixed with hair, evidently for moulding purposes”, “a coil of miner’s fuse”, “a hollow brass casting”, “a leaden bolt” and a “bomb, a conical iron shell four or five inches long”. I’ll deal with issues of guilt or innocence in the second article, here I simply ask if this is really, as claimed by its inscription, the “Walsall Anarchist Bomb”?

  

                                                         

 Where’s that Bomb?

The leading role of the Metropolitan Police Special Branch in securing the conviction of the Walsall anarchists is well recognised and prompted post-Quail researchers to focus their attention on MPSB archives but as I’ll discuss in my piece on Coulon this yielded vital but limited results. As my parents lived for years in Walsall I was curious whether their local police might have retained some evidence from the case.

Following reorganisation, Walsall is now part of the “West Midlands Police Force” which has a small police museum accommodated in Smethwick Police Station. Aware of my interest in the case a local contact sent me the above illustration which prompted me to wonder if “the bomb” might be gathering dust in the WMP museum. Although the museum was developed and maintained as more of a part-time hobby pursuit by an enthusiastic (and now deceased) copper than as an academic or legal resource nonetheless it comes under the auspices of WMP and therefore is open to Freedom of Information Requests (FOIR). 

                                                           

 The Crucible

Investigating Black Country history I also came across an illustration (above) that was said to be the very crucible that cast the Walsall Bomb. There was no suggestion that it had ever been taken into police custody as it had been effectively and deliberately concealed. Like the police museum, Walsall’s civic museum is moribund but nonetheless the local authority are subject to FOIR, so I sent them an email.

Walsall Museum Service duly confirmed that they do indeed hold this object which is catalogued as, “Height 29.7cm; Diameter 18cm - A casting crucible that was found under the floorboards at a foundry. It is alleged to have been used in casting the bomb casings of the Walsall Anarchists Bomb Plot of 1892.”  I was further informed that the find-site was Algernon Street (now the Crown Wharf Development) which suggests it was concealed beneath the Faraday Works which is ironic as the conspirators initially claimed they were merely contriving “electrical lubricators”.

The recorded dimensions of the crucible are too imprecise to make an informed judgement but they are not out of line with the size of the “bomb” described in court proceedings.

 Un-FOIR Response from WMP

On 4^th September 2017 I submitted the following FOIR to West Midlands Police, “I request copies of all information and artefacts held by WMP relating to what became known as the “1892 Walsall Anarchist Bomb Case”

Initially WMP suggested I cancel my FOIR and instead make informal inquiries of their “Heritage Project”. When I declined to go down that route WMP refused to supply any substantive information, claiming FOI exemption “by virtue of S14(1) (Vexatious Requests)”.

On the 18^th October 2017 I invoked the WMP internal appeals procedure. If they do not come up with the goods within a week I will appeal to the Information Commissioner (IC). Yet even now I haven’t entirely drawn a blank, in the course of exchanging emails WMP disclosed that, “The information that we hold in respect of your request is a very old, large, fragile and very rare document”, and tantalisingly it might well offer unique insight into the case.

The law more or less requires compliance with FOIR unless it would cost authorities more than £450 (18hrs labour) to do so. It seems unlikely that photographing this document and sending me jpegs would prove excessively burdensome and I think they are trying it on and will eventually be overruled by the IC. If they intended to facilitate (as obliged by legislation) rather than frustrate my FOIR it is curious that they also admit, “that we do hold a summary of the document and could supply this electronically” yet steadfastly refuse to do so. I’ll let you know how this pans out and meanwhile I ask comrades not to intervene with WMP until I’ve exhausted the official appeals procedure.

 Where are we Now?

We now know WMP holds substantive previously unexamined archival evidence on the Walsall anarchists. It is likely they also have the, “Walsall Anarchist Bomb” illustrated, although they were careful neither to confirm nor deny this in our email exchanges. Walsall Museum Service retains the “bombers’ crucible” and the exact significance of this object might itself become clearer once I obtain copies of the information detailed in WMP’s “large, fragile and rare document”.

So is this really the bomb? Well I seriously doubt it. As West Midland police officers examined this evidential exhibit over the last century or so they probably congratulated one another on their courage and moral worthiness in capturing fiends that could produce such a devilish device. And conspiratorial fiends they were too but not anarchist fiends for only one viable bomb casing was ever presented in evidence and its makers were identified in a particularly detailed account of the final day of the trial published in the Birmingham Daily Post of Tuesday April 5^th 1892 (incidentally, Frederick Brown was an associate of the Institute of Civil Engineers and Colonel Arthur Ford R.A. Home Office Inspector of Explosives); “From the evidence of Brown and Colonel Ford there was evidence that the iron casting which they had seen, and which had been made by the police from the original patterns of the prisoners would cause such an explosion” (my emphasis)!

So the police themselves almost certainly manufactured, “Walsall Anarchist Bomb – 1892”. What other evidence they manufactured in 1892 might soon be revealed by the Walsall Papers WMP seem so determined to keep secret. I’ll keep you posted.

======================

Previously on this blog:   

Little stories from the Old Bailey: Anarchist on trial 1894 

Trying Again: More Anarchists at the Old Bailey, 1894