The sad story of Fred Demuth – Marx’s son in Hackney

“I can’t help feeling that Freddy has had great injustice all through his life.”  – Eleanor Marx

 

Photo of Frederick Lewis Demuth 1851-1929

Frederick Demuth 1851-1929

Frederick’s Demuth’s story is a convoluted one which is contested by a number of historians – and tainted by hostility or deference to his alleged father. This bias makes it difficult to do justice to Demuth himself. 

People have strong feelings about Karl Marx, so I’ll put my cards on the table from the outset and say that reading his books has helped me to understand the world. I would thoroughly recommend David Harvey’s lectures about Capital which can be viewed on Youtube or downloaded as mp3s. As an individual Karl seems as charming and annoying and brilliant and messed up as the rest of us – if not more so. More on that later.

We have some travelling to do before we reach Hackney, so please bear with me…

Marx – married and on the move

Karl Marx married Jenny von Westphalen in 1843. They had been engaged for seven years and had known each other since childhood. In October 1843 the Marxes moved from Jenny’s family home in Kreuznach (near Frankfurt) to Paris. It was a busy time. Karl wrote for a radical journal, met lifelong comrade Friedrich Engels for the first time and began his expansive study of political economy that would be the basis for Capital. The couple’s first daughter Jenny Caroline was born in 1844 (the convention is to use the second name to avoid confusing the Jennys, as we will see).

The Marx family were kicked out of France in 1845 and headed to Brussels. Jenny Marx’s mother was worried about them and sent her housekeeper Helene ‘Lenchen’ Demuth to help. Lenchen stayed with the Marxes for the rest of their lives.

Jenny Laura Marx was born in Brussels in 1845. The Marx family and Lenchen decamped to London in 1849. The two junior Jennys were followed by Edgar (1847); Henry Edward Guy (1849); Jenny Eveline Frances (1851) and Eleanor (1855). That’s six children born to Jenny senior in 11 years. But that wasn’t quite the end of it…

Helene Demuth gave birth to Frederick Demuth on 23 June 1851 in the Marx home of 28 Dean Street, Soho. She was not apparently in any kind of “respectable” relationship at the time, so young Freddy was fostered out. The Marx children assumed (or rather, were helped to believe) that frequent visitor Engels was responsible. But Helene never spoke about her son’s father.

It is now generally (but not universally) believed that Karl Marx was actually Frederick Demuth’s father. This means Karl was shagging Helene whilst his wife was pregnant with Jenny Eveline. His letters from the time mention that he went into hiding in the British Library for many days when Lenchen’s pregnancy would have been discovered.

Frederick Demuth in Hackney

Freddy Demuth as a dashing Hackney lad

Frustratingly little is known about Frederick Demuth’s life compared to his birth. (If you know more, or where to find out more, please leave a comment!)

Freddy was fostered by a family named Lewis in East London. He trained as a skilled fitter and turner (lathe operator – possibly gun-smithing) and left his foster family and “rough childhood” as early as possible.

Ellen Demuth

In January, February or March 1873 Demuth married the Irish gardener’s daughter Ellen Murphy (b 1854). The couple lived in Hackney in the early 1880s and had a son, Harry (aka Frederick confusingly) in 1882.

The tomes of Marxological correspondence show that Eleanor Marx maintained a friendship with Freddy from at least the 1880s onwards.

When Karl Marx died in 1883, Helene Demuth became Engels’ housekeeper (Jenny Marx senior had died a few years previously). Harry Demuth would later recall his father taking him to visit granny Helene at Engels’ Regents Park Road home.

Eleanor continued her efforts to bridge the gap between Freddy and his presumed father Engels:

“Freddy has behaved admirably in all respects and Engels’ irritation against him is as unfair as it is comprehensible. We should none of us like to meet our pasts, I guess, in flesh and blood.”

Perhaps because of this Freddy was invited to Engels’ 74th birthday party in November  1894. But there was no time to develop things further – Engels died the next year. He left nothing in his will for Freddy, but the “legitimate” Marx children were included and are said to have given him regular support. There are contested suggestions that Engels confessed that Marx was actually Freddy’s father on his deathbed.

One account states that Eleanor Marx introduced Freddy to Clara Zetkin as “my half brother” during the Second International’s Congress of 1896 in London’s Queen’s Hall, Langham Place.

In February 1888 Freddy joined the Kings Cross branch of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers as a skilled fitter. The ASE would shortly become the third largest union in Britain and embark on a lengthy strike for an eight hour day. (Workers’ struggles around the length of the working day was one of the themes Karl Marx tackled in volume 1 of Capital which had been published in English in 1887.)

When Helene “Lenchen” Demuth died of cancer in 1890 she left all her worldly goods – including ninety-five pounds – to Frederick Lewis Demuth of 25 Gransden Avenue, Hackney.

AVlIwKx2TfSMF5mxLb9DGQ

The site of 25 Grandsden Avenue

That side of Gransden Avenue is now a building site, but our comrades at Past Tense have written about the area as part of their essential Hackney Walk:

London Fields east: Mentmore Terrace, Sidworth Street, Lamb lane, Gransden Avenue:

 

Sidworth Street was the site of a V2 bomb during the war and in the 1960s and 1970s industrial unties built.

 

In 2010 one block (13018) was squatted as Urban HapHazard Squat. Some buildings around Sidworth Street and Mentmore Terrace are currently squatted, some with the knowledge/permission of the property owners.

Properties round here bough by local council after WW2 (bomb damage & slum clearance) and in the 1970s. During this time there were several traveller sites on Lamb Lane, Gransden Avenue and  Mentmore Terrace. In the 1980s a site on Gransden Avenue/London Lane was being considered as a permanent local authority traveller site.

Freddy’s son later recalled that they inhabited the first floor of the “ramshackle” house, with the Clayton family on the ground floor. Henry Clayton worked with Freddy at Paterson and Cooper, a firm of electrical engineers and scientific instrument makers based at Telegraph Works, Pownall Road, Haggerston.

The 1891 census has the family of Frederick, Ellen and Frederick jnr still at Gransden Ave. Freddy is listed as engineer and fitter. But by the 1901 census only the father and son remained.

In 1892 Freddy’s wife Ellen had left him to run away with a soldier. She also nicked most of his possessions, as well as £29 belonging to a workers’ benevolent fund that comrade Demuth had been entrusted with. Ouch. Eleanor Marx pulled some strings and bailed him out with the assistance of her siblings.

Freddy posing with Hackney Social Democratic Federation comrades

Harry Demuth told journalist David Heisler about his father’s political activity increasing around this time, including being an avid reader of the socialist newspaper The Clarion and his membership of the Hackney Social Democratic Federation, attending their meetings at the Rendezvous Cafe at 155 Mare Street and the British Oak Tavern on Lea Bridge Road. There is also mention of Freddy being one of the founders of the Clapton Park and District Co-Operative and Industrial Society at 28 Brooksby’s Walk in Homerton. Harry recalls his father studying the works of Marx and Engels and having their pictures on the walls of their family home.

We also know that Freddy was a founder member of the Hackney Labour Party. (When was this? The Labour Party was founded in 1900, but its first showing in Hackney parliamentary and council elections is 1922. Separate Hoxton ran a Labour candidate in the 1919 council elections though).

jvn0tbmtaqr3xdem4cdyg.jpg

54 Reighton Rd

By 1911 Freddy was boarding at the slightly more upmarket 54 Reighton Road in Upper Clapton. `His profession is listed as mechanical engineer – working with fountain pens. He was boarding with the Payne family. Alfred Payne had also been a founder member of Hackney Labour Party and went on to become mayor of Hackney between 1919-20.

Harry lived elsewhere at this point, working as a cab driver before briefly emigrating to Australia.

Freddy (front and centre) convalescing from a period of illness, 1912

In 1914 Freddy started working at the Bryant and May factory in Bow, initially as a fitter and then as a foreman. He’d previously had roles at Gestetner (Lea Valley) and stamp printers De La Rue (Bun Hill Row). In 1924 he retired at the age of 73. He was still a member of the Hackney branch of Amalgamated Engineers Union.

Freddy died of heart failure in Upper Clapton in 1929, outliving all the other Marx children. At that point he shared a house with Ellen “Laura” Payne, the widow of Alfred Payne. Freddy’s son Harry was for some reason named as his nephew in his will – he got the surprisingly large sum of £1971 12s 4d. Rachel Holmes suggests that this inheritance may have been a product of the financial support Freddy had received from the Marx siblings.

Yvonne Kapp has Frederick Demuth’s last address as 13 Stoke Newington Common:

BxBo4vEpRG+lUD8AvueNzg

13 Stoke Newington Common

The hazards of moral judgements and historical perspective

“[Karl] did not love the boy, the scandal would have been too big.” – Louise Kautsky

There are two very polarised perspectives on Frederick Demuth and they are both entirely wrong.

Socialists and Communists generally gloss over Freddy’s existence as an unfortunate event that is either an interesting footnote or something that demonstrates the steps that the workers’ movement had to take to defend itself from attacks in the media.

Generally, if he is ever mentioned at all, Freddy is one weapon in an arsenal of tools used to attack his father. If you listened to conservative commentators you would know that Karl Marx was a terrible person who never worked a day in his life (in fact he was paid as a journalist and author) sponged off factory owner Engels (partly true – although Engels was more than willing to help out his objectively more talented comrade) and more seriously raped his servant. The latter claim is of course impossible to prove or disprove now.

The few accounts we have of life in the Marx family household seem to indicate that there was a great deal of mutual affection between Karl, Jenny senior and Helene. That said, there is clearly a power imbalance between employer and employee which makes it difficult to know how complete consent can be in a sexual relationship which takes place in that context.

We also know from accounts of the Marx household and the wider historical context that finances were tight (and often desperate) – and that “respectable” families did not include children born out of wedlock.

Karl Marx shouldn’t have shagged his housekeeper. But he did. Is this a stain on his character? Yes it is. Does it undermine his ideas? Not really, but it is a black mark for sure.

They think only of two individuals and forget the family. They forget that nearly every dissolution of a marriage is the dissolution of a family and that the children and what belongs to them should not be dependent on arbitrary whims, even from a purely legal point of view.

On a Proposed Divorce Law, 1842

 

The change in a historical epoch can always be determined by the progress of women toward freedom, because in the relation of woman to man, of the weak to the strong, the victory of human nature over brutality is most evident. The degree of emancipation of woman is the natural measure of general emancipation.

The Holy Family, 1844

The nucleus, the first form of [property] lies in the family, where wife and children are slaves of the husband. This latent slavery in the family, though still very crude, is the first property …

The German Ideology, 1846

In the above quotes, Marx recognises the unequal status of women in capitalism and the effect that the dissolution of a family can have on children. He would also have been only too aware of the differences in class between him and his housemaid – and the consequences of their relationship being discovered.

Marx and Engels’ vision for a new world included some laudable words about women and relationships:

It [communist society] will transform the relations between the sexes into a purely private matter which concerns only the persons involved and into which society has no occasion to intervene. It can do this since it does away with private property and educates children on a communal basis, and in this way removes the two bases of traditional marriage, the dependence, rooted in private property, of the woman on the man and of the children on the parents.

Communist Manifesto, 1848

But the world of 1848 (and 1851 when Freddy was born) was even further away from that than we are now. Marx fostered out Freddy because that is what most people in that situation would have done at the time – and because a public scandal about his family would undermine the work he was doing. He behaved in accordance with his class, which meant oppressing his servant even more than usual when the chips were down.

I am not married. I am writing this whilst my daughter does her school homework at the same table. I am able to do this without controversy because of the work done by feminists and the workers’ movement over the last 167 years to loosen the strange-hold of conservative values on the family and child rearing. Marx’s contribution to this process of social change cannot be ignored.

Having said that, parts of the left would still rather cover up a scandal than address the failings of the men it elevates to leadership positions. In 2013 the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party was rocked by accusations that it had covered up allegations of rape and sexual misconduct against one of its leading members. As one of the female victims said at the time: “They are putting the interests of the party above the interests of the women.”

The personal remains political. Which brings us back to Frederick Demuth.

If you subtract the question of his father from the equation, Freddy’s life remains interesting and worth celebrating. He escaped a harsh childhood and a horrendous marriage breakup and still managed to retain his humanity – his capacity to care for others. His years of union work and political activism are the quiet, patient building blocks out of which we will construct a better world.

demuth-freddy

Notes and sources

I first heard about Frederick Demuth during a talk given by Barry Burke and Ken Worpole at Pages Bookshop in 2015. So thanks as ever to them for all the work they did on Hackney’s radical history before I even got started.

I have used the following for this piece:

Eduard Bernstein – What Drove Eleanor Marx to Suicide (1898) – includes a number of letters from Eleanor `Marx to Freddy that demonstrate he was her main confidante towards the end of her life.

Terrell Carver – Marx’sIllegitimate Son’ …or Gresham’s Law in the World of Scholarship – a useful dose of scepticism on the Marx-paternity claim.

Hal Draper – Marx and Engels on Women’s Liberation

Edna Healey – Wives of Fame: Mary Livingstone, Jenny Marx and Emma Darwin (Bloomsbury, 2011)

Rachel Holmes – Eleanor Marx: A Life (Bloomsbury, 2014)

Yvonne Kapp – Eleanor Marx: A Biography (Verso, 2018) – the main source. Appendix 1 especially.

Yvonne Kapp – Writing Eleanor Marx  – includes an account of the Demuth family contacting her after being messed about by a journalist who stole their family photos.

Frances Wheen – Karl Marx (Fourth Estate, 1999)

Two newspaper articles from the David Heisler interviews in the early 1970s:

ABC Madrid – El Hijo Que Carlos Marx Trato De Olividar (“The son that Karl Marx tried to forget”) (1974)

Der Spiegel – Marx: Ungeliebter Sohn (“Marx: Unloved Son” – google translate) (1972)

Do you remember Hackney spycop Tim Spence?

The Undercover Policing Inquiry is continuing to issue cover names of police spies who were engaged in surveillance and infiltration of protest groups.

A further five names were released this week, including HN 88 “Tim Spence”:

Cover name released: “Timothy Spence”. Groups: Stoke Newington and Hackney Defence Campaign, Hackney Campaign Against the Police Bill; 1983 – 1987.

There are several courses of action that will hopefully arise from this, which readers of this blog may be able to help with.

Firstly, if you knew “Tim Spence” or were active in either of the groups mentioned above, please get in touch with the Undercover Research Group. The UCG is run by activists and is completely independent of the Inquiry. Their aim is to create profiles of spycops to enhance activist investigations into this area. They are good people.

Secondly if you have memories, publications or insights into the groups named and the campaigning they did, please get in touch with me and I will add them to this site.

Here’s what we know so far:

Screen Shot 2018-06-28 at 21.22.43

Hackney Campaign Against the Police Bill

The Police Bill was a typically draconian bit of Tory legislation giving the cops more powers to they could better attack people who were the victims of the government’s own policies. Its proposals included:

  • hold people for 96 hours without charge
  • set up random road blocks around an area
  • conduct forcible intimate body searches of detainees
  • use force in taking fingerprints (even of minors)
  • seize confidential information held by doctors, lawyers, journalists

It became the Police Act in 1985, but there was a great deal of resistance to it from 1983 onwards.

The national campaign against the Police Bill was based at 50 Rectory Road, Stoke Newington N16.

Interestingly, the campaign seems to have received funding from Ken Livingstone’s GLC to the tune of £38,000 which lead to questions being asked in parliament.

Some of this money presumably was spent on admin and printing leaflets (some of which can be downloaded as pdfs here).

There was also a conference at Hackney Town Hall in May 1983:

Kill the Police Bill. 1983

Much of the above is based on this blog post by Hackney comrade John Eden, who also mentions the campaign’s own reggae single by Ranking Ann:

 

Screen Shot 2018-06-28 at 21.45.03

Stoke Newington and Hackney Defence Campaign

Some of the comments of the release of the cover name have confused this campaign group with the Hackney Community Defence Association, which was not formed until July 1988, one year after “Tim Spence” stopped being deployed.

However this leaflet and the commentary makes it clear that the Stoke Newington and Hackney Defence Campaign was involved with defending people who had been arrested during protests about the death of Colin Roach by a gunshot in Stoke Newington Police Station in 1983.

Why this is important

These were legitimate protest groups that campaigned to assist victims of police brutality and also against the potential for police powers to be extended via a change in the law.

That the police would insert a spy into these groups is perhaps not surprising given what we now know. But it is (to put it politely) not a great sign for a supposedly healthy democracy.

 

“Breaking Ground” film about London Irish Women’s Centre – now online

London Irish Women’s Centre was at 59 Stoke Newington Church St from the early eighties until 2012.

liwc

I’ve covered this film previously on the blog and very much enjoyed it when it was screened at The Rio.

The film can now be viewed for free online until the end of May: http://www.breakinggroundfilm.com/

There is a trailer here to whet your appetite:

You can also buy a DVD of the film from the link above.

 

Hackney Fascists: “Enoch Powell Is Right” Party – 1981

The National Front and its several disputatious progeny fought a minimal election campaign in the May 1981 County Council and Greater London Council elections […]

A further [NF] splinter group labeling itself “Enoch Powell Is Right” fought the three seats of the Borough of Hackney and also Stepney and Poplar. At least two of these four candidates had fought seats for the NF in the 1977 GLC and 1978 borough elections […]

The four “Enoch Powell Is Right” candidates averaged 2.6% [of the vote].

from: Racial Exclusionism and the City: The Urban Support of the National Front
by Christopher T. Husbands (Routledge, 1983)

You can see from the results below that the Enoch Powell Is Right (EPR) candidates actually stood against the National Front (NF) ones, splitting the fascist vote cleanly in two:

EPR

Robin May went on to form the British National Party with John Tyndal in 1982.

Enoch Powell himself was intimate with Hackney Conservatives in the 1970s.

See also: The National Front’s Hackney HQ

Working Class History Podcast: John Barker on the Stoke Newington 8

1200x630bb

“Working Class History” has existed for a few years as a social media feed highlighting often neglected events from the past to inspire us now.

They’ve just launched a new podcast. The debut episdode covers the Grunwick strike and is a great listen. It was particularly good to hear some critical discussion about the strike is being absorbed into mainstream history whilst being shed of some of its collective radicalism.

The latest edition is the first half of an interview with John Barker on the Angry Brigade/Stoke Newington 8. As usual John is very insightful and I enjoyed hearing him talk about his early life, political development and the sixties/seventies counter culture generally:

You can get more information about the project on its website:

https://workingclasshistory.com/

(The site also has links to their twitter, Facebook and Youtube feeds as well as a Patreon page for financial support)

You can also subscribe to the podcast on Itunes.

Past Tense – London Rebel History Calendar

A highly recommended daily London radical history blog from our comrades at Past Tense: https://pasttenseblog.wordpress.com/category/rebel-history-calendar/

(Also on facebook and twitter.)

Not all Hackney related, obviously, but always an inspiring read.

Recent articles of interest include:

Past Tense are also helping to organise a FREE central London squatting history walk this Thursday (15th of June) which will be well worth a look…

Oh and don’t forget their publications!

Who Killed Aseta Simms? 1972

thumb_IMG_3319_1024

A small (A6ish) pamphlet published by the Black Unity and Freedom Party in 1972. There is an overview of the history of the BUFP by Professor Harry Goulbourne here. Ken Worpole mentions the group having regular street sales in Ridley Road market.

Aseta Simms is one of an inexcusably large number of people to have died in suspicious circumstances in Stoke Newington police station. Mrs Simms’ death was also a front page story in Hackney Gutter Press.

Aseta Simms is often mentioned in lists of deaths in police custody but it’s harder to find the context. The text is reproduced below (with some small corrections for consistency etc) alongside the original pages so you can see the presentation of the original.

PREFACE

Will we ever know? Mrs Simms was certified dead in Stoke Newington Pig sty. It is very strange that of late, people seem to be leaving everywhere else to die and end up on a cold slab in the Pig-Sty. For our part, the answer is very simple. There is a plot to commit Genocide against our people. The pig-police hands are stained with the blood of our people. They are the hatchet men of the racist fascists.

Printed and Published by Black Unity And Freedom Party c/o 31, Belgrade Road, Stoke Newington, ISSUE No.1. London N.16. 1972.

ASETA1

CHAPTER ONE

Her Daughter Speaks

“My mother was picked up outside the gas station (Manor Road), at approximately 11.30pm. She was brought to the local police station (Stoke Newington), and died at approximately, between 12.00pm and 12.30pm [Hackney Gutter press (link above) report this as having happened on 13th May 1971. The later times in this sentence should probably read 12:00am and 12:30am, i.e the early hours of the 14th May – Radical History of Hackney note].

Here the police stated that she was too drunk to find her way home, and she could not tell the police where she lived. But a white girl who live in one of her houses in Brighton Road, Stoke Newington, had a piece of paper on which my mother had written my sister’s name, her telephone number, her addresses etc. The police claimed they did not see this note. WHY NOT?

The girl, Mrs Archer, said she saw my mother fall. WHERE? She also had my mother’s bank book. Where did she get it from?

On the same day, my mother had a rental Tribunal Case with the Archers. The Tribunal gave them a week in which to leave the house.

Mrs Archer said that my mother was drunk. How did she know? Mr. Archer said that my mother and his wife left the house at the same time and went to the Off Licence. He said further that my mother bought a bottle of Whisky and his wife bought a bottle of Guinness. He showed me the bottle of Guinness. But in the afternoon my mother had bought a bottle of whisky. So therefore; she couldn’t have bought a bottle of whisky when Mr Archer said so.

The police said they laid my mother on her tummy, so if she was sick, it would not stifle her. They said they watched her until she died. What did she say before she died? NO ONE KNOWS!

ASETA2

CHAPTER TWO

The coroner’s Hearing St. Pancras

Coroners Chambers

Police Doctor from WOOD GREEN

“I examined the body of this coloured woman, and found that she was a well-nourished woman. There was swelling above the right eye and bruising below. There was deep bruising over her head but no fracture, but the brain was swollen. The heart was not the cause of her death. There was no barbitrates in her organs. There was alcohol in the blood stream. It is arguable that some people might die with this level of alcohol in their blood stream; but we have had people with much higher levels who are still alive today. The bruising was consistent with someone falling about or with someone who had been beaten. There was very little evidence that she had inhaled vomiting, but this was not the cause of her death. I cannot truthfully say what was the cause of her death.”

DOCTOR FOR Police commission

“I received two samples said to be taken from the body of this dead coloured woman: Samples of blood and whisky. The blood samples showed 479ml grammes of alcohol and this concentration may be considered lethal; but there is no firmly established level to equate with death. The level found in the blood samples could only have arisen if a full bottle of whisky was drunk quickly.”

EIder DAUGHTER Says

“I saw my mother last alive at 2.00pm on 13/5/71, it was polling day of the local council elections. She was sober and alright. She had eaten some fish and chips earlier on. About once every other week my mother would buy some drinks. My mother was fine and healthy. I knew my mother died while in police custody. I saw her at St. Leonards hospital after she was dead, and noticed that she had a lot of bruising over and below her right eye, which she did not have before.”

ASETA3

COUSIN Relates

“She came by my place about 1.30pm on the day she died. We then left and went to Archway and then to Tottenham. She ate some fish and chips. She did not drink before she came to my place. But while we were out the day before 12/5/71, she bought a bottle of whisky on the way back to my place at about 5.00pm. We had two drinks each that evening before she left for home, leaving the whisky behind with me. On the day that she died, she took the bottle which was 3/4 full and put it in her bag and left at about 9.00pm to go and look after her children. She had some grown up children and another four aged from 12 years old down-wards. She often came round to my place to leave money for her daughter to pay the mortgage. She had a tribunal case on that day. I have never seen her drunk. When I went to the police station the drinks (whisky) was not there, but I was shown an empty bottle. I cannot say what has happened to the 3/4 bottle of whisky which she left with, for she never drank in the street. It is still a mystery to me where she could have been between the time she left and when I saw her body in the police station. The woman (Mrs. Archer) who lived upstairs had her bank book”

The coroner, Douglas Chambers interrupted quote “We can-not take such evidence.”

ASETA4

CHAPTER THREE

THE BIG COVER-UP!

Mrs B. Archer

“I have lived at 47, Brighton Road, for over a year. Mrs Simms and I never did get on. I have seen Mrs Aseta Simms worst for drink before, but I cannot really say when. When I returned from the tribunal hearing I saw Mrs Simms..”

The coroner interrupted and said “This is the period which the daughter cannot fill in.”

“I saw Mrs Simms fall near the Post Office in Brighton Road, we picked her up and I went into the Off Licence. She did not bang her head or anything. She then got onto the bus stop, she would have got a shilling fare to go home. She was walking unsteadily. I last saw her at about 10.30pm. She didn’t buy anything in the Off Licence; but when she fell, I saw a bottle of whisky fall out. I have never seen her so drunk.

Mrs Archer was taken to and from the coroner’s court in a police car.

STOKE NEWINGTON POLICE

G.196, KING

“I was a passenger in a police car, we were following a bus; as we went over the junction, I saw a coloured woman lying on a forecourt in Manor Road, N16. She was shouting and supporting herself on one arm. I went to pick her up; She became terrible violent, grabbed my belt and began twisting it, after a struggle, we got her into the van. We lifted her into the van and laid her out onto the floor; she was still kicking out. She forced herself onto her bottom. I then held both her wrists and P.C.227, held her ankles. She was still being violent.

At the station, we carried her into the charge room and placed her on the floor. She was not capable of standing; her knees were badly bruised. I didn’t see any bruising over her eyes; come to think of it, I did see bruising over her head. We then put her on the floor in the cell. I couldn’t get through to her. She was left semi-prone, she was calm and snoring quite loudly. While in there the snoring began to diminish, I thought she was asleep.

I went back to arouse her, but I could not. Sergeant Barker and I then tried to give her respiration but failed. An ambulance was then sent for. We did not send for any doctor. She was not lying on anything; just the bare floor.”

ASETA5

G.227.

“I was with officer G.196. She was lying between cars and swearing, she appeared to be drunk even from a distance. She kicked me two or three times. We lifted her into the van and she fought her way back onto her feet. In the charge room I was to accept that she was very violent. Two hours later, I went back to where we had picked her up and found a whisky bottle leaning against a wall with some whisky in it.”

Sergeant G.81.

“I was on patrol duty in another vehicle when I received a radio call for assistance. When I got to the scene, I saw her on the floor of the van with two officers holding her arms and legs. She was very violent. At the station several of us carried her into the station. Inside I tried speaking to her but she didn’t understand. I did see bruises on her head.

I saw her body later in the back of an ambulance, well she was very drunk. I cannot say exactly when the doctor arrived, but about shortly before 11.45pm.”

Sergeant G.78.

“I was on duty earlier on in the evening, I was driving a car in the Stamford Hill area. I received call for help. I went there and saw her being restraint. I didn’t see any injuries. I saw her being carried into the charge room kicking and struggling; she could not stand. She was crawling about on the floor. Mrs Simms, as I now know was incapable of doing anything. I assisted P.C. G.196 to carry her into the charge room. I held her by the left arm, she was struggling. She was breathing normally, I then left. I returned later and saw P.C. G.196 sitting outside-on the stairs with head in hands and he told me that Mrs. Simms had stopped breathing. I immediately commenced respiration until the ambulance came. The police doctor arrived and examined the body.”

WOMAN POLICE H.345. LEMAN STREET

“I got to Stoke Newington police station at 11.45pm, I went into the cell and saw lying face downwards; I was then called away. I was then told that she was dead.”

ASETA6

INSPECTOR

“I was on duty and I saw events as stated and knew. I did not know the deceased. The doctor was sent for at 11.55pm. Doctor arrived same time as the ambulance. It was normal procedure to have drunken people in that manner. Tries were made to get other doctors before but this failed. ”

The CORONER retired with the jury

“She was violent. She died with an amount of alcohol in her blood stream. The Home office says that the coroner has a choice to sit or not to sit with the jury in special circumstances. There are special circumstances in this hearing, therefore under the Home office rules for coroners’ courts, I shall sit with the jury .

How, when, where or why the person or persons should be charged with murder or manslaughter; under the circumstances, there is no such accusation. No question of the verdict to have civil liabilities . A rider could be put in to prevent repetition of this kind of deaths. Some reasonable people would assume that the bottle found, was the same one from which she had consumed whisky until she was found between the cars. She could not be charged because she could not have understood.”

Verdict

“The verdict is death by misadventure, there is no rider.”

CHAPTER THREE

Conclusion

WE DEMAND AN IMMEDIATE PUBLIC ENQUIRY IN TO THE BRUTAL RACIST ACTIVITIES OF THE POLICE AGAINST BLACK PEOPLE.

We know this Black sister Mrs Simms was murdered by the racist police. This much we have no doubt of. In the face of the evidence given at the coroner’s court held on 10/6/71, at St Pancras. The coroner, Douglas Chambers went and sat with the jury; claiming he had power to do so under some unknown Home Office rules. Now ask yourselves, why did he found it necessary to sit with the jury? The smell left from this inquest bears too potent a stench to be tolerate, even by the greatest appeasement inclination.

ASETA7

BLACK PEOPLE IN BRITAIN MUST WRITE TO THEIR LOCAL MPs, DEMANDING AN IMMEDIATE PUBLIC ENQUIRY INTO THE DEATH OF MRS. SIMMS AND INTO THAT OF THE BEHAVIOUR OF CORONER DOUGLAS CHAMBERS DURING THE INQUEST.

This is only the beginning of the campaign. We shall not rest until the pig-police who have murdered our sister, Mrs Simms are weeded out punished. We shall organize, demonstrate and use any means necessary.

IF WE ARE SO FOOLISH TO ALLOW THIS BRUTAL MURDER OF OUR BLACK SISTER TO GO UNPUNISHED: SURELY AS DAY FOLLOWS DAY: WE SHALL BE MURDERED IN OUR BEDS.

UNLIKE THE JEWS IN GERMANY, WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF LYING IDILY BY. WE SHALL RESIST AND COUNTER ATTACK EVERY INCH OF THE WAY TO THE GAS CHAMBERS. [NB: I don’t think this point is well made – there was significant Jewish and other resistance to the Nazis. Also, as a bad as 1970s Hackney was, a comparison to Nazi Germany, gas chambers etc is well over the top – Radical History of Hackney note]

WE HAVE A DUTY TO OUK CHILDREN , OURSELVES, BLACK PEOPLE THE WORLD OVER AND TO HUMANITY TO STRUGGLE CEASELESSLY UNTIL THESE RABID, RACIST POLICE ARE DEALT WITH.

NO RIGHTS – NO OBLIGATIONS.

asetaback

Aseta commemorated on a Hackney Community Defence Association banner, as seen at a meeting about Spycops earlier this year:

HCDA banner at Chats Palace Spycops meeting