In my continuing perusal by ear of Dickens’s Barnaby Rudge, I was delighted to come across the following passage (Chapter 49, emphasis mine):

The word of command to halt being given, the soldiers formed across the street; the rioters, breathless and exhausted with their late exertions, formed likewise, though in a very irregular and disorderly manner. The commanding officer rode hastily into the open space between the two bodies, accompanied by a magistrate and an officer of the House of Commons, for whose accommodation a couple of troopers had hastily dismounted. The Riot Act was read, but not a man stirred.

The Riot Act! A piece of idiomatic miscellany whose roots I had often wondered about, but which I had never remembered or noted to look up later. Here was what was quite obviously a literal usage! So of course today I did remember to look up the infamous Riot Act, and was very much intrigued.

Here is the text of the Riot Act, created 1714 and enacted 1715 Anno Domini under the authority of King George I. It is a masterpiece of prolixity. To sum up, it is for dealing (as one might reasonably guess) with riots. Provisions are made for the punishment of rioters who destroy houses and other buildings, especially churches, whether of the C of E, the Catholic church, or dissenters (Protestants other than Anglicans), and for the payment of damages to repair said outrages… et cetera et cetera. But the meat of it is right at the beginning. There is a riot; one of the public officials specified by office in the law comes out and reads a short declaration from the Riot Act, namely:

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.

or something to the same effect. People trying to prevent him from reading this statement will be subject to the same dire punishment I shall mention later. At any rate, if the rioters don’t disburse within an hour - if twelve or more men remain, the mob is not considered disbursed - those remaining will be arrested by force and “shall suffer death as in a case of felony without benefit of clergy.”

This intrigues me more than a little. Not only is it, of course, quite a dire threat - no cooling it off in the drunk tank for these rioters (of course, it is worth noting that pinching a pocket handkerchief got you the drop in those days) - but the provision “without benefit of clergy” is fascinating. To the best of my knowledge of the Church of England, last rites are not a part of the necessary framework—nor indeed should I expect them to be necessary for a dissenter to go to heaven. So is this provision merely a streamlining clause, to help the local constabulary out by allowing them to shuffle off groups of rioters en masse as quickly as ropes can be knotted? Or is it a small dig directly at Catholics, for whom the Riot Act apparently includes a direct penalty for their immortal soul? Now I want to read up on the Riot Act and the exact circumstances of its creation…

Oh, and I also want to memorize the statement above (“The Riot Act” as read) for use in appropriate circumstances. Because I am affected and ridiculous.