Riot Act

Last updated
Riot Act [1]
Coat of Arms of Great Britain (1714-1801).svg
Parliament of Great Britain
Long title An Act for Preventing Tumults and Riotous Assemblies, and for the more speedy and effectual Punishing the Rioters
Citation 1 Geo. 1. St. 2. c. 5
Dates
Commencement 1 August 1715
Other legislation
Repealed by Criminal Law Act 1967
Status: Repealed
Text of statute as originally enacted
First page of the Riot Act 1714, first edition (London, 1715), with heading (caption title) "An Act for Preventing Tumults and Riotous Assemblies, and for the more speedy and effectual Punishing the Rioters", one of six copies known; English Short-Title Catalogue (ESTC.BL.uk) no. N53655 P243 (600 dpi) 025%25.jpg
First page of the Riot Act 1714, first edition (London, 1715), with heading (caption title) "An Act for Preventing Tumults and Riotous Assemblies, and for the more speedy and effectual Punishing the Rioters", one of six copies known; English Short-Title Catalogue (ESTC.BL.uk) no. N53655

The Riot Act (1 Geo. 1. St. 2. c. 5), sometimes called the Riot Act 1714 [2] or the Riot Act 1715, [3] was an act of the Parliament of Great Britain which authorised local authorities to declare any group of 12 or more people to be unlawfully assembled and order them to disperse or face punitive action. The act's full title was "An Act for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies, and for the more speedy and effectual punishing the rioters", and it came into force on 1 August 1715. [4] It was repealed in England and Wales by section 10(2) and Part III of Schedule 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967. Acts similar to the Riot Act passed into the laws of British colonies in Australia and North America, some of which remain in force today.

Contents

The phrase "read the riot act" has passed into common usage for a stern reprimand or warning of consequences.

Introduction and purpose

The Riot Act 1714 was introduced during a time of civil disturbance in Great Britain, including the Sacheverell riots of 1710, the Coronation riots of 1714 and the 1715 riots in England. [5] The preamble makes reference to "many rebellious riots and tumults [that] have been [taking place of late] in diverse parts of this kingdom", adding that those involved "presum[e] so to do, for that the punishments provided by the laws now in being are not adequate to such heinous offences". [5]

Main provisions

The full Riot Act 1714. The lower part contains the proclamation that was to be read aloud. The Riot Act text.jpg
The full Riot Act 1714. The lower part contains the proclamation that was to be read aloud.

Proclamation of riotous assembly

The act created a mechanism for certain local officials to make a proclamation ordering the dispersal of any group of twelve or more people who were "unlawfully, riotously, and tumultuously assembled together". If the group failed to disperse within one hour, then anyone remaining gathered was guilty of a felony without benefit of clergy, punishable by death. [5]

The proclamation could be made in an incorporated town or city by the mayor, bailiff or "other head officer", or a justice of the peace. Elsewhere it could be made by a justice of the peace or the sheriff, undersheriff or parish constable. It had to be read out to the gathering concerned and had to follow precise wording detailed in the act; several convictions were overturned because parts of the proclamation had been omitted, in particular "God save the King". [6]

The wording that had to be read out to the assembled gathering was as follows:

Our sovereign lord the King chargeth and commandeth all persons, being assembled, immediately to disperse themselves, and peaceably to depart to their habitations, or to their lawful business, upon the pains contained in the act made in the first year of King George, for preventing tumults and riotous assemblies. God save the King.

In a number of jurisdictions, such as Britain, Canada and New Zealand, wording such as this was enshrined and codified in the law itself. While the expression "reading the Riot Act" is cemented in common idiom with its figurative usage, it originated fairly and squarely in statute itself. In New Zealand's Crimes Act 1961, section 88, repealed since 1987, was specifically given the heading of "Reading the Riot Act". [7]

Consequences of disregarding the proclamation

If a group of people failed to disperse within one hour of the proclamation, the act provided that the authorities could use force to disperse them. Anyone assisting with the dispersal was specifically indemnified against any legal consequences in the event of any of the crowd being injured or killed. [8] [5]

Because of the broad authority that the act granted, it was used both for the maintenance of civil order and for political means. A particularly notorious use of the act was the Peterloo Massacre of 1819 in Manchester. [9]

Other provisions

The act also made it a felony punishable by death without benefit of clergy for "any persons unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled together" to cause (or begin to cause) serious damage to places of religious worship, houses, barns, and stables. [5]

In the event of buildings being damaged in areas that were not incorporated into a town or city, the residents of the hundred were made liable to pay damages to the property owners concerned. Unlike the rest of the act, this required a civil action. In the case of incorporated areas, the action could be brought against two or more named individuals. This provision encouraged residents to attempt to quell riots in order to avoid paying damages. [10]

Prosecutions under the act were restricted to within one year of the event. [5]

Controversies

Impracticality

At times, it was unclear to both rioters and authorities as to whether the reading of the Riot Act had occurred. One example of this is evident in the massacre of St George's Fields of 1768. At the trials following the incident, there was confusion among witnesses as to when the Riot Act had actually been read. [11]

Use of force

In the 1768 massacre of St George's Fields, large numbers of subjects gathered outside King's Bench Prison in Southwark, south London, to protest against the incarceration of John Wilkes. Officials feared that the crowd would forcibly release Wilkes, and troops arrived to guard the prison. After some time, as well as provocation by the rioters, the troops opened fire on the crowd. There were several fatalities, including non-participants of the riot who were struck by stray bullets. [12] Some scholars believe that this massacre set the legal precedent for the justified use of force in future riots. [11]

The provision pertaining to the use of force can be found in section 3 of the Riot Act:

...and that if the persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled, or any of them, shall happen to be killed, maimed or hurt, in the dispersing, seizing or apprehending, or endeavouring to disperse, seize or apprehend them, that then every such justice of the peace, sheriff, under-sheriff, mayor, bailiff, head-officer, high or petty constable, or other peace-officer, and all and singular persons, being aiding and assisting to them, or any of them, shall be free, discharged and indemnified, as well against the King's majesty, his heirs and successors, as against all and every other person or persons so unlawfully, riotously and tumultuously assembled, that shall happen to be so killed, maimed or hurt, as aforesaid.

There was also confusion regarding the use of troops as it pertained to the one-hour mark. Rioters often believed that the military could not use force until one hour had passed since the reading of the proclamation. This is evident in the actions of the rioters at the massacre of St George's Fields, particularly their provocative behaviour towards the soldiers. [13]

Subsequent history of the Riot Act in the UK and colonies

The Riot Act caused confusion during the Gordon Riots of 1780, when the authorities felt uncertain of their power to take action to stop the riots without a reading of the Riot Act. After the riots, Lord Mansfield observed that the Riot Act did not take away the pre-existing power of the authorities to use force to stop a violent riot; it only created the additional offence of failing to disperse after a reading of the Riot Act. [8]

The Riot Act was read prior to the Peterloo Massacre of 1819 and the Cinderloo Uprising of 1821, as well as before the Bristol Riots at Queen's Square in 1831. [14] [15] Both are held to be related to the Unreformed House of Commons, which was righted in the Reform Act 1832.

Lieutenant-Governor Sir Francis Bond Head and his administrators read the act during the Upper Canada Rebellion of 1837. [16] The malcontented Canadians were assuaged by the eventual introduction of responsible government in Canada.

The death penalty created by sections one, four and five of the act was reduced to transportation for life by section one of the Punishment of Offences Act 1837. [17]

The Riot Act eventually drifted into disuse. The last time it was definitely read in England was in Birkenhead, Cheshire, on 3 August 1919, during the second police strike, when large numbers of police officers from Birkenhead, Liverpool and Bootle joined the strike. Troops were called in to deal with the rioting and looting that had begun, and a magistrate read out the Riot Act. None of the rioters subsequently faced the charge of a statutory felony.[ citation needed ] Earlier in the same year, at the battle of George Square on 31 January, in Glasgow, the city's sheriff was in the process of reading the Riot Act to a crowd of 20,000–25,000 when the sheet of paper he was reading from was ripped out of his hands by one of the rioters.

The last time it was read in Scotland was by the deputy town clerk James Gildea in Airdrie in 1971.

The act was repealed on 18 July 1973 for the United Kingdom by the Statute Law (Repeals) Act 1973. [18]

In other countries

The Riot Act passed into the law of those countries that were then colonies of Great Britain, including the North American colonies that would become the United States and Canada. [19] [20]

In many common-law jurisdictions, a lesser disturbance such as an affray or an unruly gathering may be deemed an unlawful assembly by the local authorities and ordered to disperse. Failure to obey such an order would typically be prosecuted as a summary offence.

Australia

Acts similar to the Riot Act have been enacted in some Australian states. For example, in Victoria the Unlawful Assemblies and Processions Act 1958 allowed a magistrate to disperse a crowd with the words (or words to the effect of):

Our sovereign lady the Queen doth strictly charge and command all manner of persons here assembled immediately to disperse themselves and peaceably depart to their own homes. God save the Queen.

Anyone remaining after 15 minutes may be charged and imprisoned for one month (first offence) or three months (repeat offence). The act does not apply to crowds gathered for the purpose of an election.

The same act allows a magistrate to appoint citizens as "special [police] constables" to disperse a crowd and provides indemnity for the hurting or killing of unlawfully assembled people in an attempt to disperse them. [21] The Act was significantly amended in 2007. [21]

Belize

Belize, another former British colony, also still retains the principle of the Riot Act; it was last read on 21 January 2005, during the 2005 Belize unrest. While there is no specific form of words provided for such proclamations, they must be made "in the King's name".

The provisions are formed in sections 231, 246 and 247 of the country's criminal code, providing particularly that:

Any magistrate, or in the absence of any magistrate any commissioned officer in Her Majesty's naval, military or air force service or any police officer above the rank of inspector, in whose view a riot is being committed, or who apprehends that a riot is about to be committed by persons being assembled within his view, may make or cause to be made a proclamation in the Queen's name, in such form as he thinks fit, commanding the rioters or persons so assembled to disperse peaceably.

Any person who does not disperse within one hour of the proclamation being read is liable to receive a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment. [22]

Canada

In Canada, the Riot Act has been incorporated in a modified form into the Criminal Code, a federal statute. Sections 32 and 33 of the Code deal with the power of police officers to suppress riots. [23] [24] The Code defines a riot as an "unlawful assembly" that has "begun to disturb the peace tumultuously". [25] When twelve or more persons are "unlawfully and riotously assembled together", the proclamation can be read by a number of public officials, such as justices of the peace, provincial court judges, mayors, and sheriffs. [26] The proclamation can also be read during prison riots: Quebec and Manitoba have designated senior correctional staff as justices of the peace for the purpose of reading the proclamation, while other provinces will ask a local justice of the peace to travel to the prison to read the proclamation. [27]

The proclamation is worded as follows:

Her Majesty the Queen charges and commands all persons being assembled immediately to disperse and peaceably to depart to their habitations or to their lawful business on the pain of being guilty of an offence for which, on conviction, they may be sentenced to imprisonment for life. God save the Queen. [26]

Unlike the original Riot Act, the Criminal Code requires the assembled people to disperse within thirty minutes. [28] When the proclamation has not been read, the punishment for rioting is up to two years of imprisonment. [29] When the proclamation has been read and then ignored, the penalty increases, up to life imprisonment. [28] The maximum penalty of life imprisonment also applies to someone who wilfully uses force to hinder the reading of the proclamation, or to those fail to disperse and who have reasonable grounds to believe the proclamation would have been made had the official not been hindered by force.

The proclamation was read during the Winnipeg general strike of 1919 [30] and the 1958 riot over racial discrimination against First Nations in Prince Rupert, British Columbia. [31] [32] One recent reading was during Vancouver's Stanley Cup riot in June 2011. [33] Despite the reading of the proclamation, rioters were almost always charged under s 65 due to the difficulty of proving the elements of the offence in s 68. Many rioters also faced charges related to assaulting peace officers, mischief, theft, arson and assault.

Caribbean region

In St Kitts on 29 January 1935 the act was read at Buckley's Estate [34] located on the western outskirts of Basseterre during the "Sugar Workers Rebellion" [35]

In St Vincent on 21 October the act was read in Kingstown during "The Labour Rebellion" [35]

New Zealand

In New Zealand the Riot Act was incorporated into sections 87 and 88 of the Crimes Act 1961. [36] The proclamation is worded as follows:

Her Majesty the Queen commands all of you to disperse immediately and to go quietly to your homes or to your lawful business, upon pain of being charged with an offence punishable by imprisonment for five years. God save the Queen. [37]

The need to read the Riot Act was removed by section three of the Crimes Amendment Act (1987 No 1). [38] [39]

United States

A riot act was passed by the Massachusetts state legislature in 1786 during Shays' Rebellion. [40]

At the federal level, the principle of the Riot Act was incorporated into the first Militia Act (1 Stat. 264) of 2 May 1792. The act's long title was "An act to provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions". Section 3 of the Militia Act gave power to the president to issue a proclamation to "command the insurgents to disperse, and retire peaceably to their respective abodes, within a limited time", and authorized him to use the militia if they failed to do so. Substantively identical language is currently codified in title 10 of the United States Code, Chapter 13, Section 254. [41]

Prohibitions against inciting riots were further codified in United States federal law under 18 U.S. Code § 2101 – Riots, as part of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, passed by the United States Congress. [42] [43]

"Read the Riot Act"

Because the authorities were required to read the proclamation that referred to the Riot Act before they could enforce it, the expression "to read the Riot Act" entered into common language as a phrase meaning "to reprimand severely", with the added sense of a stern warning.[ citation needed ] The phrase remains in common use in the English language. [44]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Assault</span> Physical or verbal attack of another person

An assault is the illegal act of causing physical harm or unwanted physical contact to another person, or, in some legal definitions, the threat or attempt to do so. It is both a crime and a tort and, therefore, may result in criminal prosecution, civil liability, or both. Additionally, assault is a criminal act in which a person intentionally causes fear of physical harm or offensive contact to another person. Assault can be committed with or without a weapon and can range from physical violence to threats of violence. Assault is frequently referred to as an attempt to commit battery, which is the deliberate use of physical force against another person. The deliberate inflicting of fear, apprehension, or terror is another definition of assault that can be found in several legal systems. Depending on the severity of the offense, assault may result in a fine, imprisonment, or even death.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Affray</span> Public fight that disturbs the peace

In many legal jurisdictions related to English common law, affray is a public order offence consisting of the fighting of one or more persons in a public place to the terror of ordinary people. Depending on their actions, and the laws of the prevailing jurisdiction, those engaged in an affray may also render themselves liable to prosecution for assault, unlawful assembly, or riot; if so, it is for one of these offences that they are usually charged.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Riot</span> Violent public disturbance against authority, property or people

A riot or mob violence is a form of civil disorder commonly characterized by a group lashing out in a violent public disturbance against authority, property, or people.

Life imprisonment is any sentence of imprisonment for a crime under which convicted criminals are to remain in prison for the rest of their natural lives. Crimes that warrant life imprisonment are extremely serious and usually violent. Examples of these crimes are murder, torture, terrorism, child abuse resulting in death, rape, espionage, treason, Illegal drug trade, human trafficking, severe fraud and financial crimes, aggravated Property damage, arson, hate crime, kidnapping, burglary, and robbery, piracy, aircraft hijacking, and genocide.

A citizen's arrest is an arrest made by a private citizen – that is, a person who is not acting as a sworn law-enforcement official. In common law jurisdictions, the practice dates back to medieval England and the English common law, in which sheriffs encouraged ordinary citizens to help apprehend law breakers.

Battery is a criminal offense involving unlawful physical contact, distinct from assault, which is the act of creating apprehension of such contact.

Breach of the peace or disturbing the peace, is a legal term used in constitutional law in English-speaking countries and in a public order sense in the several jurisdictions of the United Kingdom. It is a form of disorderly conduct.

Attempted murder is a crime of attempt in various jurisdictions.

Blasphemous libel was originally an offence under the common law of England. Today, it is an offence under the common law of Northern Ireland, but has been abolished in England and Wales, and repealed in Canada and New Zealand. It is a form of criminal libel that consists of the publication of material which exposes the Christian religion to scurrility, vilification, ridicule, and contempt, with material that must have the tendency to shock and outrage the feelings of Christians.

Culpable homicide is a categorisation of certain offences in various jurisdictions within the Commonwealth of Nations which involves the homicide either with or without an intention to kill depending upon how a particular jurisdiction has defined the offence. Unusually for those legal systems which have originated or been influenced during rule by the United Kingdom, the name of the offence associates with Scots law rather than English law.

Unlawful assembly is a legal term to describe a group of people with the mutual intent of deliberate disturbance of the peace. If the group is about to start an act of disturbance, it is termed a rout; if the disturbance is commenced, it is then termed a riot. In England, the offence was abolished in 1986, but it exists in other countries.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Public Order Act 1986</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Public Order Act 1986 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that creates a number of public order offences. They replace similar common law offences and parts of the Public Order Act 1936. It implements recommendations of the Law Commission.

An information is a formal criminal charge which begins a criminal proceeding in the courts. The information is one of the oldest common law pleadings, and is nearly as old as the better-known indictment, with which it has always coexisted.

Wasting police time is listed as a criminal offence in many Commonwealth countries.

Impaired driving is the term used in Canada to describe the criminal offence of operating, having care or the control of a motor vehicle while the person's ability to operate the motor vehicle is impaired by alcohol or a drug. Impaired driving is punishable under multiple offences in the Criminal Code, with greater penalties depending on the harm caused by the impaired driving. It can also result in various types of driver's licence suspensions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal sentencing in Canada</span> Overview of criminal sentencing in Canada

Canadian criminal law is governed by the Criminal Code, which includes the principles and powers in relation to criminal sentencing in Canada.

In Canada, homicide is the act of causing death to another person through any means, directly or indirectly. Homicide can either be culpable or non-culpable, with the former being unlawful under a category of offences defined in the Criminal Code, a statute passed by the Parliament of Canada that applies uniformly across the country. Murder is the most serious category of culpable homicide, the others being manslaughter and infanticide.

Common law offences are crimes under English criminal law, the related criminal law of some Commonwealth countries, and under some U.S. state laws. They are offences under the common law, developed entirely by the law courts, having no specific basis in statute.

<i>An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code</i> Canadian federal law relating to gender identity

An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code is a law passed in 2017 by the Parliament of Canada. It was introduced as Bill C-16 of the first session of the 42nd Parliament. The law adds gender expression and gender identity as protected grounds to the Canadian Human Rights Act, and also to the Criminal Code provisions dealing with hate propaganda, incitement to genocide, and aggravating factors in sentencing.

The Criminal Justice Act 1994 is legislation that covers public order offences in the Republic of Ireland. It is the main legislation on the matter of public order.

References

  1. ↑ This short title was conferred by the Short Titles Act 1896, section 1 and the first schedule.
  2. ↑ Turner, J. W. Cecil (1964) [1962]. Kenny's Outlines of Criminal Law (18th ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p.  lvii.
  3. ↑ St Clair Feilden, H.; Gray Etheridge, W. (1895). A Short Constitutional History of England (3rd ed.). B H Blackwell. Oxford. Simpkin, Marshall, Hamilton, Kent & Co. p.  335.
  4. ↑ Stevenson, John (6 June 2014). Popular Disturbances in England 1700-1832. Routledge. p. 29. ISBN   9781317897149 . Retrieved 30 July 2018.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 "Full text of the Riot Act (c. 1714 - 1715)". www.gutenberg.org. Retrieved 4 September 2022.
  6. ↑ The Legal observer, or, Journal of jurisprudence. Vol. 2. J. Richards. 1831. p. 32. Retrieved 30 December 2009.
  7. ↑ "Crimes Act 1961, Public Act 88". New Zealand Legislation. New Zealand Government. Retrieved 30 July 2018.
  8. 1 2 "LawCite". classic.austlii.edu.au. Retrieved 4 September 2022.
  9. ↑ "Chester Spring Assizes – Trial of Johnston, Drummond and Bagguley, for Sedition and Conspiracy". Chester Courant. 20 April 1819.
  10. ↑ W. Nippel, "Reading the Riot Act: The Discourse of Law-Enforcement in 18th Century England," History and Anthropology 1 (June 1985): 405–406.
  11. 1 2 W. Nippel, "Reading the Riot Act: The Discourse of Law-Enforcement in 18th Century England," History and Anthropology 1 (June 1985): 408.
  12. ↑ W. Nippel, "Reading the Riot Act: The Discourse of Law-Enforcement in 18th Century England," History and Anthropology 1 (June 1985): 407–408.
  13. ↑ W. Nippel, "Reading the Riot Act: The Discourse of Law-Enforcement in 18th Century England," History and Anthropology 1 (June 1985): 407.
  14. ↑ "Awful and Calamitous Riots". The Bristol Gazette. 3 November 1831. Retrieved 30 July 2018– via The National Archives.
  15. ↑ Trinder, Barrie (2000). The Industrial Revolution in Shropshire (Third ed.). Chichester: Phillimore. pp. 232–233. ISBN   9781860771330.
  16. ↑ De Celles, Alfred D.; Wallace, W. Stewart (1920). The Patriotes of '37 : a chronicle of the Lower Canadian rebellion. Chronicles of Canada. Toronto: Glasgow, Brook & Co.
  17. ↑ "The Punishment of Offences Act". The National Archives . Retrieved 16 July 2019.
  18. ↑ section 1(1) and part five of schedule one.
  19. ↑ "Johnston Riot Act". North Carolina History Project. 7 March 2016. Retrieved 4 September 2022.
  20. ↑ Legislative Services Branch (23 June 2022). "Consolidated federal laws of Canada, Criminal Code". laws-lois.justice.gc.ca. Retrieved 4 September 2022.
  21. 1 2 "Unlawful Assemblies and Processions Act 1958" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 December 2008.
  22. ↑ "Belize Criminal Code Chapter 101" (PDF). Belizelaw.org. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 February 2012. Retrieved 24 December 2012.
  23. ↑ Criminal Code , RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 32.
  24. ↑ Criminal Code , RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 33.
  25. ↑ Criminal Code , RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 64.
  26. 1 2 Criminal Code , RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 67.
  27. ↑ "FORUM on Corrections Research". Correctional Service Canada. 11 July 2007.
  28. 1 2 Criminal Code , RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 68.
  29. ↑ Criminal Code , RSC 1985, c. C-45, s. 65(1).
  30. ↑ ""Fighting the good fight: Winnipeg general strike of 1919", Canadian Public Health Association". Archived from the original on 17 July 2019. Retrieved 17 July 2019.
  31. ↑ Robert A. Campbell, "A 'Fantastic Rigmarole': Deregulating Aboriginal Drinking in British Columbia, 1945-62", BC STUDIES, No. 141, Spring 2004, p. 81.
  32. ↑ "Prince Rupert Fire Museum". www.princerupertlibrary.ca.
  33. ↑ "Riots erupt in Vancouver after Canucks loss". CBC News. 16 June 2011.
  34. ↑ "Historic St. Kitts - Buckley's Estate".
  35. 1 2 "Labour Rebellions of the 1930s in the British Caribbean Region Colonies – Socialist History Society" . Retrieved 4 September 2022.
  36. ↑ "Crimes Act 1961". The Knowledge Basket. 1 January 1962. Retrieved 19 January 2013.
  37. ↑ "Section 88 of the Crimes Act 1961". The Knowledge Basket. 1 January 1962. Retrieved 19 January 2013.
  38. ↑ "Crimes Act 1961 No 43, Section 88". Parliamentary Council Office. 1 October 2012. Retrieved 19 January 2013.
  39. ↑ "Crimes Amendment Act (1987 No 1)". The Knowledge Basket. 12 March 1987. Retrieved 19 January 2013.
  40. ↑ Zinn, Howard (2005). A People's History of the United States . New York: HarperCollins. p.  93. ISBN   978-0-06-083865-2. OCLC   61265580.
  41. ↑ "10 USC Chapter 13 – INSURRECTION, Section 254 - Proclamation to Disperse" (PDF). Government Publishing Office. Retrieved 6 March 2019.
  42. ↑ "18 U.S. Code § 2101 - Riots". LII / Legal Information Institute.
  43. ↑ "History of the Federal Judiciary | Federal Judicial Center". www.fjc.gov.
  44. ↑ Quinion, Michael (12 February 2011). "Read the riot act". World Wide Words. Retrieved 30 July 2018.

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.