Banned

Download Subtitles

Transcript

0:00:02 > 0:00:06One thousand years of history under one roof,

0:00:06 > 0:00:10the National Archives, a treasure house of secrets.

0:00:11 > 0:00:15The records of extraordinary times and people.

0:00:15 > 0:00:20These files are this nation's story, our shared past.

0:00:20 > 0:00:24Documents housed here were highly classified,

0:00:24 > 0:00:28intended for the eyes of only the privileged few,

0:00:28 > 0:00:31protected from your sight for decades.

0:00:31 > 0:00:33But not now.

0:00:39 > 0:00:44I've been granted special access to files once kept hush-hush.

0:00:44 > 0:00:48I'll unearth amazing tales from our hidden history.

0:00:49 > 0:00:52Forget what you've been told,

0:00:52 > 0:00:54these documents tell the truth.

0:01:05 > 0:01:10Coming up in this programme, banned, censored and forbidden.

0:01:10 > 0:01:12How a Beatle's art was condemned as obscene.

0:01:14 > 0:01:18I feel, behind the scenes, somebody's said, "Let's get Lennon."

0:01:20 > 0:01:22Not welcome in Britain.

0:01:22 > 0:01:25The religious leader that the government tried to keep out.

0:01:26 > 0:01:30Do you ever think that you might be quite mad?

0:01:30 > 0:01:32Oh, yes.

0:01:32 > 0:01:36The one man in the world who never believes he's mad is a mad man.

0:01:36 > 0:01:38And town versus country.

0:01:38 > 0:01:43An age-old conflict between concern for animals and local tradition.

0:01:43 > 0:01:46It's this idea that all of these Londoners,

0:01:46 > 0:01:48coming up here, telling us what to do.

0:01:48 > 0:01:51We have been doing this for centuries.

0:01:57 > 0:01:59No! No!

0:01:59 > 0:02:01Come on... Come on...

0:02:01 > 0:02:02Oh, no...!

0:02:02 > 0:02:05We British love our Carry On films...

0:02:05 > 0:02:07You're only after one thing.

0:02:07 > 0:02:09Why? What's the matter with the other one?

0:02:09 > 0:02:12..for their smutty humour.

0:02:12 > 0:02:14But when does rude become crude?

0:02:14 > 0:02:17And when does art cease to be art,

0:02:17 > 0:02:19passing from risque to obscene?

0:02:20 > 0:02:24The state has always imposed censorship,

0:02:24 > 0:02:28and the first conviction for obscenity was in 1727

0:02:28 > 0:02:33against the intriguingly-named publication The Nun In Her Smock.

0:02:33 > 0:02:39Not until 1960 could literary merit be pleaded as a defence,

0:02:39 > 0:02:45tested in the famous prosecution of the novel Lady Chatterley's Lover.

0:02:45 > 0:02:49That trial inaugurated the struggle between the artists

0:02:49 > 0:02:51and the authorities.

0:02:52 > 0:02:5845 years ago, the work of one person of fame and influence

0:02:58 > 0:03:01tested the authorities' tolerance beyond its limit.

0:03:03 > 0:03:07Sexual intercourse began in 1963,

0:03:07 > 0:03:09which was rather late for me.

0:03:09 > 0:03:14Between the end of the Chatterley ban and The Beatles' first LP.

0:03:14 > 0:03:17Philip Larkin's amusing verse precisely dates

0:03:17 > 0:03:19the beginning of the permissive society

0:03:19 > 0:03:23and places the Fab Four at the heart of it.

0:03:25 > 0:03:27And at the heart of The Beatles was John Lennon.

0:03:28 > 0:03:32From mop-top to peace activism,

0:03:32 > 0:03:35he was the band's trendsetter.

0:03:35 > 0:03:36By the turn of the decade,

0:03:36 > 0:03:39he'd gone his own way as a musician

0:03:39 > 0:03:42and broke the boundaries with pen and ink.

0:03:43 > 0:03:48In 1970, an exhibition was staged at the London Arts Gallery

0:03:48 > 0:03:51of certain of his lewd lithographs.

0:03:51 > 0:03:53A complaint was made

0:03:53 > 0:03:56and the Metropolitan Police went to investigate

0:03:56 > 0:04:00under 1839 obscenity legislation.

0:04:00 > 0:04:03In these wonderful documents

0:04:03 > 0:04:09is the testimony of Assistant Detective Inspector Frederick Luff.

0:04:09 > 0:04:13"Should these lithographs be judged works of great artistic merit

0:04:13 > 0:04:15"or not obscene,

0:04:15 > 0:04:19"I feel sure the progressives have no need to endeavour

0:04:19 > 0:04:20"to repeal the obscenity laws,

0:04:20 > 0:04:23"ie, nothing is obscene.

0:04:23 > 0:04:27"Many toilet walls depict works of similar merit.

0:04:27 > 0:04:29"It is perhaps charitable to suggest

0:04:29 > 0:04:32"that they are the work of a sick mind."

0:04:32 > 0:04:34But he is worried about the great influence

0:04:34 > 0:04:37of John Lennon as a Beatle.

0:04:37 > 0:04:41Who made the complaint that caused the police to investigate?

0:04:41 > 0:04:45The archives contain a statement from a Mrs Nanci Creer,

0:04:45 > 0:04:46a justice of the peace,

0:04:46 > 0:04:50who described her horror on visiting the exhibition.

0:04:51 > 0:04:56"When I saw the first picture on the far wall, I was stunned.

0:04:57 > 0:05:00"I couldn't believe what I was looking at.

0:05:00 > 0:05:03"I went on and looked at two or three more.

0:05:03 > 0:05:04"I went to the other wall

0:05:04 > 0:05:08"and, suddenly, I felt I couldn't stay in the gallery any longer.

0:05:08 > 0:05:11"I went over to my husband, who hadn't left the first picture.

0:05:11 > 0:05:14"I took him by the arm and I said, 'I can't stay in here.

0:05:14 > 0:05:16"'I'll go on up the road. You can follow me.'

0:05:16 > 0:05:19"He turned, looked at me and said,

0:05:19 > 0:05:23"'You're red in the face. You're scarlet.'

0:05:23 > 0:05:27"As I spoke to him, I realised that I was red with embarrassment."

0:05:29 > 0:05:34Well, what was the nature of these works of art

0:05:34 > 0:05:36that had provoked such a strong reaction?

0:05:37 > 0:05:41I can see here the pieces on the wall.

0:05:41 > 0:05:43And, yes, yes...

0:05:43 > 0:05:46I'm getting a kind of idea of what kind of...

0:05:46 > 0:05:47Ah, yes, yes...

0:05:47 > 0:05:49HE CHUCKLES

0:05:49 > 0:05:50Oh, John...!

0:05:50 > 0:05:53Yeah, no, they are pretty explicit.

0:05:53 > 0:05:58They really show all the variations of sexual intercourse and erm...

0:05:58 > 0:06:03Oh, yes, a few solo performances by Yoko Ono...

0:06:04 > 0:06:09Well, whatever were the merits of John Lennon as a lithographer,

0:06:09 > 0:06:11he believed that all you need is love.

0:06:11 > 0:06:12Imagine!

0:06:14 > 0:06:19By 1970, Lennon had little left to prove as a musician or a songwriter.

0:06:20 > 0:06:23But to gain acceptance as a graphic artist was much harder.

0:06:25 > 0:06:28What do you regard as the artistic merit of the lithographs

0:06:28 > 0:06:29or so-called lithographs?

0:06:29 > 0:06:32Most of the art establishment thought that Lennon

0:06:32 > 0:06:36was trading on his reputation as a pop star.

0:06:36 > 0:06:40They were denounced as poor drawings.

0:06:40 > 0:06:42And, in actual fact, they're not.

0:06:42 > 0:06:44They're actually, by today's standards,

0:06:44 > 0:06:47actually rather accomplished drawings.

0:06:47 > 0:06:49You can tell he's trying to be amusing

0:06:49 > 0:06:52and that's a difficult skill to master.

0:06:53 > 0:06:56Of course, Lennon wasn't alone in his creative endeavours.

0:06:58 > 0:07:03By this time, he was in love with and heavily influenced by Yoko Ono,

0:07:03 > 0:07:05who was also no stranger to controversy.

0:07:06 > 0:07:08She brought out, she encouraged his art.

0:07:08 > 0:07:11She encouraged him to do it, about having no boundaries.

0:07:11 > 0:07:15But both of them were obsessed by bottoms

0:07:15 > 0:07:19and were obsessed by naked people enjoying them.

0:07:19 > 0:07:22But, don't forget, they'd been to art college. At least, John had.

0:07:22 > 0:07:24If you're at art college, you do life drawings,

0:07:24 > 0:07:28so you're used, from a young age, to drawing the male and female nude.

0:07:29 > 0:07:32Let's turn to the matter of obscenity.

0:07:32 > 0:07:35The policeman, Mr Luff,

0:07:35 > 0:07:37in the documents that I've seen says,

0:07:37 > 0:07:41"Now, if this isn't obscene, nothing is obscene."

0:07:41 > 0:07:44Do you think they're as obscene as you can get?

0:07:45 > 0:07:47No, they're not nearly as obscene

0:07:47 > 0:07:50as things that were produced even before John Lennon

0:07:50 > 0:07:51was producing those drawings.

0:07:51 > 0:07:57They're merely an affectionate repertoire of lovemaking skills.

0:07:58 > 0:08:01Well, that was not the view of the police,

0:08:01 > 0:08:04who raided the exhibition the day after it opened

0:08:04 > 0:08:07and stripped the offending artworks from the walls,

0:08:07 > 0:08:10much to the annoyance of the gallery's owner.

0:08:10 > 0:08:14I'm just amazed and I find it rather humorous.

0:08:15 > 0:08:17It seems to me, if the police wanted to seize anything,

0:08:17 > 0:08:20they'd go down to Soho, seize smut, seize blue movies.

0:08:20 > 0:08:24And it appears they seized the art mainly because John Lennon did it.

0:08:24 > 0:08:28I actually suspect the police, because it happened so quickly

0:08:28 > 0:08:31and they'd got these people making these really silly comments

0:08:31 > 0:08:32that they were disgusted by it,

0:08:32 > 0:08:36I feel, behind the scenes, somebody's said, "Let's get Lennon."

0:08:38 > 0:08:41But if that was the plan, it didn't work.

0:08:41 > 0:08:44The gallery owner was taken to court,

0:08:44 > 0:08:45but the case was thrown out.

0:08:47 > 0:08:51And Lennon's works were later displayed across the world.

0:08:52 > 0:08:53Where does this stand

0:08:53 > 0:08:55in the battle for the permissive society, do you think?

0:08:55 > 0:08:58I think it's incredibly important,

0:08:58 > 0:09:00because the failure of that trial

0:09:00 > 0:09:04really marks the point at which youth culture has won

0:09:04 > 0:09:07and the establishment has lost.

0:09:07 > 0:09:10They tried very hard to victimise

0:09:10 > 0:09:14many of the more important major characters of the '60s...

0:09:14 > 0:09:18Mick Jagger, Keith Richards were others.

0:09:18 > 0:09:20And they failed in all cases.

0:09:22 > 0:09:25The lithographs, condemned as obscene at the time,

0:09:25 > 0:09:30are now worth an estimated £85,000,

0:09:30 > 0:09:34a price perhaps inflated by the state's attempt to ban them in 1970.

0:09:35 > 0:09:38Proving that, while money can't buy you love,

0:09:38 > 0:09:42it can secure you an outline of lovemaking.

0:09:51 > 0:09:54If I say the word Scientology,

0:09:54 > 0:09:56you'll probably think of movie A-listers,

0:09:56 > 0:10:00like Tom Cruise and John Travolta.

0:10:00 > 0:10:03But long before this religious movement became big in Hollywood,

0:10:03 > 0:10:05it was attracting followers in Britain.

0:10:06 > 0:10:09And as secret documents show,

0:10:09 > 0:10:13the religion was causing alarm amongst government ministers.

0:10:15 > 0:10:18Scientology's founder, L Ron Hubbard,

0:10:18 > 0:10:20was a science fiction writer

0:10:20 > 0:10:23with a vision for a new concept of religion.

0:10:23 > 0:10:26What is Scientology, How would you describe it?

0:10:26 > 0:10:28Well, it's very interesting.

0:10:28 > 0:10:31You've just asked a question like,

0:10:31 > 0:10:35what are the contents of the Encyclopaedia Britannica?

0:10:35 > 0:10:37Answer in one word.

0:10:37 > 0:10:41In 1959, he moved its world headquarters to Britain,

0:10:41 > 0:10:44to Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead in Sussex.

0:10:46 > 0:10:49Scientology teaches that we are immortal beings

0:10:49 > 0:10:51trapped on earth in a human body.

0:10:51 > 0:10:53By undergoing a series of classes,

0:10:53 > 0:10:55followers can train their minds,

0:10:55 > 0:10:57free themselves of their human form

0:10:57 > 0:11:00and reclaim their true selves.

0:11:00 > 0:11:04Critics accused Hubbard of running a money-making cult

0:11:04 > 0:11:06of brainwashing and worse...

0:11:07 > 0:11:11Do you ever think that you might be quite mad?

0:11:11 > 0:11:12Oh, yes.

0:11:12 > 0:11:16The one man in the world who never believes he's mad is a mad man.

0:11:18 > 0:11:22Scientology caused worries for MPs and the media,

0:11:22 > 0:11:26but those who attacked it could face libel writs.

0:11:26 > 0:11:29The churches' leaders were willing to fight back.

0:11:31 > 0:11:34So, it's just as well that they didn't see this...

0:11:34 > 0:11:36A secret dossier

0:11:36 > 0:11:40for the Department of Health and Social Security in 1975.

0:11:42 > 0:11:45Well, here we have a report into Scientology.

0:11:45 > 0:11:47"The teachings of Scientology

0:11:47 > 0:11:50"create family discord and break up marriages.

0:11:50 > 0:11:54"In fact, members are ordered to disconnect from their families.

0:11:54 > 0:11:58"A child of six years of age was declared a 'suppressive'

0:11:58 > 0:12:01"because she would not disconnect from her mother."

0:12:03 > 0:12:05The report shows alarm

0:12:05 > 0:12:08about the church's alleged disciplinary actions.

0:12:10 > 0:12:13"A person who is classified by a Scientologist as an 'enemy'

0:12:13 > 0:12:15"is 'fair game'.

0:12:15 > 0:12:18"He may be deprived of his property by any means,

0:12:18 > 0:12:22"be tricked, sued or lied to or be destroyed.

0:12:22 > 0:12:27"The Scientologists in Britain are based in East Grinstead.

0:12:27 > 0:12:30"The conditions under which Scientologists live in East Grinstead

0:12:30 > 0:12:33"are like those in a police state."

0:12:35 > 0:12:38And in 1977, the department remained unimpressed

0:12:38 > 0:12:42by Scientology's claim to be a true religion,

0:12:42 > 0:12:45writing in a letter that Scientology

0:12:45 > 0:12:48was "an organisation that is essentially evil".

0:12:51 > 0:12:53The hostility went beyond words.

0:12:53 > 0:12:58In 1968, the government banned Scientology members

0:12:58 > 0:13:01from entering Britain to train or study.

0:13:02 > 0:13:06Hubbard moved his world headquarters to a fleet of ships,

0:13:06 > 0:13:11although the religion continued to operate in East Grinstead.

0:13:11 > 0:13:15Today, Scientology has increased its number of bases around the country,

0:13:15 > 0:13:18like this one in London.

0:13:18 > 0:13:20So, did the government's action work?

0:13:21 > 0:13:23The travel ban...

0:13:23 > 0:13:26How effective was it against Scientology?

0:13:26 > 0:13:29It didn't really have the effect that they were intending it to have.

0:13:29 > 0:13:34And, in some ways, it might actually have had the opposite effect.

0:13:34 > 0:13:36There was a lot of publicity about the ban.

0:13:36 > 0:13:40People were reading about Scientology in the press and thinking,

0:13:40 > 0:13:43what is this, this new science in mental health?

0:13:43 > 0:13:46It looks as if it's something I might be interested in.

0:13:46 > 0:13:47In some of this,

0:13:47 > 0:13:49the British government seems to be wrestling with the issue,

0:13:49 > 0:13:53is Scientology a cult or a religion?

0:13:53 > 0:13:54What is the difference?

0:13:54 > 0:13:55Some people would say

0:13:55 > 0:13:57the difference between a cult and a religion

0:13:57 > 0:13:59is about a million members.

0:13:59 > 0:14:01It's just a matter of size.

0:14:01 > 0:14:05Other people would say a cult is a religion I don't like.

0:14:05 > 0:14:06Which I think is a great definition.

0:14:06 > 0:14:09Personally, I don't think the word cult is very helpful.

0:14:09 > 0:14:10Even established religions

0:14:10 > 0:14:13have a lot of good and bad within them.

0:14:13 > 0:14:16And I personally know people in the Church of Scientology

0:14:16 > 0:14:19who have thoroughly enjoyed being in it, who've gained a lot from it,

0:14:19 > 0:14:21who may have left it now,

0:14:21 > 0:14:23but who still believe in the principles of it.

0:14:23 > 0:14:28Despite legal challenges, the travel ban remained in place.

0:14:29 > 0:14:31Then, at the end of the 1970s,

0:14:31 > 0:14:33there was a change of government

0:14:33 > 0:14:37and, according to secret papers, a reversal of policy.

0:14:40 > 0:14:44Apparently, as the result of a very personal decision

0:14:44 > 0:14:45by one Margaret Thatcher.

0:14:47 > 0:14:49In manuscripts she writes,

0:14:49 > 0:14:51"We really cannot keep this ban,

0:14:51 > 0:14:53"unless we're ready publically to say why

0:14:53 > 0:14:56"and to support the conclusion with evidence.

0:14:57 > 0:15:02"The question is not whether we approve Scientology or not,

0:15:02 > 0:15:06"but what possible justification is there for this unique ban."

0:15:08 > 0:15:11I suspect that Mrs Thatcher saw this

0:15:11 > 0:15:15as an issue of personal freedom versus state meddling.

0:15:15 > 0:15:19But I'd like to hear the view of ex-civil servant Graham Angel,

0:15:19 > 0:15:22who provided briefings for her and other ministers.

0:15:24 > 0:15:28The fact that the Prime Minister had a clear view,

0:15:28 > 0:15:31was really what determined what happened.

0:15:31 > 0:15:34Why did the Prime Minister have a clear view? Do you know that?

0:15:34 > 0:15:39She had two constituency people

0:15:39 > 0:15:42who were Scientologists.

0:15:42 > 0:15:45And they went to see her and argued that the ban was unfair.

0:15:46 > 0:15:49I think, and you, Michael, will know more about

0:15:49 > 0:15:51Margaret Thatcher's views than me,

0:15:51 > 0:15:56but I think she believed that it wasn't the government's job

0:15:56 > 0:15:59to tell people this is a good religion,

0:15:59 > 0:16:00this is a bad religion

0:16:00 > 0:16:03and this isn't a proper religion.

0:16:03 > 0:16:06Government should mind its own business.

0:16:06 > 0:16:08What did your paper say in the end?

0:16:08 > 0:16:12It came out pretty clearly, in the end.

0:16:12 > 0:16:17But the case for maintaining the ban couldn't be sustained.

0:16:17 > 0:16:20We found that the Department of Health,

0:16:20 > 0:16:22which still wanted to keep the ban in place,

0:16:22 > 0:16:27couldn't find a psychiatrist who would stand up in court

0:16:27 > 0:16:30and give evidence to the effect that

0:16:30 > 0:16:32Scientology damaged people's mental health.

0:16:34 > 0:16:37Which really didn't make much of a case.

0:16:37 > 0:16:39The lifting of the ban,

0:16:39 > 0:16:42you were happy that that was the right decision?

0:16:42 > 0:16:43Yes, I was.

0:16:43 > 0:16:46I could have made a case to go the other way

0:16:46 > 0:16:48but, if it was left to me,

0:16:48 > 0:16:54I think the balance of advantage was in favour of lifting the ban.

0:16:54 > 0:16:56You civil servants are splendid.

0:16:56 > 0:16:59If required, you could have made an argument the other way!

0:16:59 > 0:17:02I gave them both sets of arguments and they had to choose.

0:17:02 > 0:17:05Nobody voted for me!

0:17:06 > 0:17:07Splendid!

0:17:13 > 0:17:15This impressive building,

0:17:15 > 0:17:19the Church of Scientology, in the heart of the City of London,

0:17:19 > 0:17:22proclaims that the travel ban didn't work.

0:17:22 > 0:17:26Indeed, it may simply have attracted more attention, even support,

0:17:26 > 0:17:28for the Scientologists,

0:17:28 > 0:17:30And standing, as it does,

0:17:30 > 0:17:33just a short walk from the iconic St Paul's Cathedral,

0:17:33 > 0:17:37it proclaims, "You've tried to ban us, but you've failed!"

0:17:46 > 0:17:48The running of the bulls.

0:17:48 > 0:17:49Colourful,

0:17:49 > 0:17:51exciting,

0:17:51 > 0:17:52dangerous.

0:17:52 > 0:17:55This could only happen in Spain.

0:17:55 > 0:17:56Couldn't it?

0:17:59 > 0:18:01Actually, no.

0:18:01 > 0:18:04I've found a document that reveals how bullrunning

0:18:04 > 0:18:07wasn't always confined to the streets of Pamplona.

0:18:07 > 0:18:11It also took place in Britain.

0:18:11 > 0:18:14In Lincolnshire, there was a bullrunning festival

0:18:14 > 0:18:16for almost 650 years,

0:18:16 > 0:18:20attracting crowds, who chased the animal through the streets,

0:18:20 > 0:18:24before cornering, killing and butchering it.

0:18:24 > 0:18:27The citizens considered it a fun day out.

0:18:27 > 0:18:30But, by the 19th century, it faced disapproval.

0:18:33 > 0:18:38In 1824, a group of reformers, including William Wilberforce,

0:18:38 > 0:18:42founded the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.

0:18:42 > 0:18:43And in 1837,

0:18:43 > 0:18:47they targeted the practice in Stanford in Lincolnshire

0:18:47 > 0:18:50of running bulls through the streets.

0:18:52 > 0:18:57This beautiful document is a report by the secretary of the society,

0:18:57 > 0:19:00a Mr Thomas, who visited the bull run

0:19:00 > 0:19:02to monitor whether local magistrates

0:19:02 > 0:19:06were enforcing the law against animal baiting.

0:19:07 > 0:19:11He took two constables along with him as back-up, one called Rogerson.

0:19:12 > 0:19:15But, despite having the law on their side,

0:19:15 > 0:19:18it's fair to say that these out-of-towners

0:19:18 > 0:19:20were not made welcome.

0:19:20 > 0:19:23The constables are not very warmly received.

0:19:24 > 0:19:28"Upon entering the building, the greatest disorder prevailed.

0:19:29 > 0:19:33"Shouts of, 'Bull! Bull! Yahoo! Yahoo!' shook the building.

0:19:34 > 0:19:36"Threats of the most disgusting nature

0:19:36 > 0:19:38"were used towards them

0:19:38 > 0:19:41"and language most obscene applied to them.

0:19:41 > 0:19:43"One fellow, with a long, pointed stick,

0:19:43 > 0:19:46"approached Rogerson and told him that,

0:19:46 > 0:19:48"'Death stared him in the face'."

0:19:52 > 0:19:55"The mob consisted of the lowest vagabonds

0:19:55 > 0:19:58"and others apparently more respectable."

0:19:58 > 0:20:02On this occasion, the society was not successful

0:20:02 > 0:20:04in stopping the running of the bulls.

0:20:04 > 0:20:06The secretary, Mr Thomas, says,

0:20:06 > 0:20:10"The triumph of the Bullards here yesterday was very painful to me.

0:20:11 > 0:20:14"Their cruelty to the bull, when he was helpless,

0:20:14 > 0:20:16"was extreme and long-continued."

0:20:16 > 0:20:19The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

0:20:19 > 0:20:22lost that battle in Stanford,

0:20:22 > 0:20:23but won the war.

0:20:24 > 0:20:28Two years later, the last ever bull run took place.

0:20:29 > 0:20:32If you fancy the rough and tumble of the bulls,

0:20:32 > 0:20:35nowadays, there's no point taking a train to Stanford.

0:20:35 > 0:20:36You must take a plane to Spain,

0:20:36 > 0:20:37Ole!

0:20:43 > 0:20:46The case proved that what we now know as

0:20:46 > 0:20:49the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

0:20:49 > 0:20:53was determined to force animal welfare onto the public agenda.

0:20:54 > 0:20:56To discover more about its history,

0:20:56 > 0:20:59I'm off to one of its modern animal sanctuaries

0:20:59 > 0:21:02to meet Professor Hilda Kean.

0:21:03 > 0:21:05Where does the movement get going?

0:21:05 > 0:21:09It gets going, and this is important, in London.

0:21:09 > 0:21:12And it's the new city.

0:21:12 > 0:21:15London is a focus for modernity

0:21:15 > 0:21:18and you've got practices that are seen as a form,

0:21:18 > 0:21:19and described as a form,

0:21:19 > 0:21:21of medieval barbarism.

0:21:22 > 0:21:26Farm animals, particularly on the way to market,

0:21:26 > 0:21:27being beaten

0:21:27 > 0:21:31and, more importantly, people seeing it.

0:21:32 > 0:21:36Many rural people didn't share this new view of the world.

0:21:36 > 0:21:41Country and town were on a collision course.

0:21:41 > 0:21:45It's this idea that, what are these Londoners coming up here,

0:21:45 > 0:21:46telling us what to do?

0:21:46 > 0:21:50So, it seen as somebody else outside the locality

0:21:50 > 0:21:52that is creating laws

0:21:52 > 0:21:56that ban something they've been doing for centuries

0:21:56 > 0:22:00and, supposedly, nobody locally has been complaining about it.

0:22:00 > 0:22:03And, actually, why should London care what happens in Stanford?

0:22:03 > 0:22:06London should care, and did care, what happened in Stanford

0:22:06 > 0:22:12because this epitomised both the unruly nature of some of the...

0:22:12 > 0:22:14what were seen as the lower orders.

0:22:14 > 0:22:18But also, they were concerned about the fact

0:22:18 > 0:22:20that a bull was being treated in this way.

0:22:20 > 0:22:25City dwellers telling country folk to ditch their traditions

0:22:25 > 0:22:28because they consider them unseemly and cruel...

0:22:28 > 0:22:31To some, this might start to sound familiar.

0:22:35 > 0:22:37It's time to talk to some of those

0:22:37 > 0:22:41at the centre of a modern rural controversy.

0:22:43 > 0:22:46Here in the kennels of the Essex Hunt,

0:22:46 > 0:22:49these boards record the seasons of hunting

0:22:49 > 0:22:52going all the way back to 1910-11.

0:22:52 > 0:22:55In that year, they had 118 days of hunting.

0:22:55 > 0:22:58114 foxes were killed.

0:22:59 > 0:23:02A record year seems to be 1912-13.

0:23:02 > 0:23:05118 foxes killed.

0:23:05 > 0:23:09Then again, in 1926-27, just 69.

0:23:10 > 0:23:14Now, if your reaction to all this is to cringe and to feel horror,

0:23:14 > 0:23:18then you may understand the division of opinion

0:23:18 > 0:23:22around the time of the 1837 Stanford bull run,

0:23:22 > 0:23:24because some people felt

0:23:24 > 0:23:28that they're engaged in a natural country activity

0:23:28 > 0:23:33and that they were the innocent victims of metropolitan do-gooders.

0:23:36 > 0:23:40Robert Ogden is the Huntsman of the Essex Hounds.

0:23:40 > 0:23:43For him, fox-hunting is simply a way of life.

0:23:47 > 0:23:50Robert, how many hounds are we walking with today?

0:23:50 > 0:23:51We've got 36 couple here today.

0:23:52 > 0:23:54- 36 couples. 72.- Yeah.

0:23:54 > 0:23:56Yeah, we always count them in couples.

0:23:56 > 0:23:58It's easier when we're out in the hunting field.

0:23:58 > 0:24:02I'm being pushed around quite a lot by the hounds as we're walking.

0:24:02 > 0:24:05Give me some idea of how strong these dogs are.

0:24:05 > 0:24:07Oh, yeah, this dog, for instance,

0:24:07 > 0:24:10Ranger here, he'll weigh up to 70 kilos, he will.

0:24:10 > 0:24:13So, there's some weight to them, behind them.

0:24:13 > 0:24:15And how often do they get to hunt?

0:24:15 > 0:24:20We hunt from September through to November.

0:24:20 > 0:24:22We hunt three mornings a week.

0:24:22 > 0:24:26And then, after November until February, we do two days a week.

0:24:26 > 0:24:28And then, after February, back to three days a week.

0:24:28 > 0:24:30- That's a lot of hunting.- Yeah.

0:24:30 > 0:24:35In 2002, Robert and nearly half a million others

0:24:35 > 0:24:37marched through London.

0:24:37 > 0:24:41They wanted the metropolis to sense rural indignation.

0:24:42 > 0:24:44With echoes of 19th century Stanford,

0:24:44 > 0:24:47the supporters of the Countryside Alliance

0:24:47 > 0:24:51feared laws that trampled on rural customs.

0:24:51 > 0:24:53This time, a ban on hunting with hounds.

0:24:54 > 0:24:59The row over the ban exposed deep cultural differences

0:24:59 > 0:25:01between the shires and urban Britain

0:25:01 > 0:25:05and sparked a debate about what constitutes

0:25:05 > 0:25:07unacceptable behaviour to animals.

0:25:09 > 0:25:13James Barrington, who campaigns on behalf of the Countryside Alliance,

0:25:13 > 0:25:14has a clear view.

0:25:14 > 0:25:18Anything that is gratuitously cruel,

0:25:18 > 0:25:20anything that you can prove to be cruel,

0:25:20 > 0:25:23in other words causing unnecessary suffering to any animal,

0:25:23 > 0:25:25that should be the starting point.

0:25:25 > 0:25:28You're pleased that bullrunning no longer occurs

0:25:28 > 0:25:30as it did in Stanford in 1838?

0:25:30 > 0:25:31Oh, yes, I certainly am.

0:25:31 > 0:25:33I mean, that's clearly a baiting activity,

0:25:33 > 0:25:35and as someone said at the time,

0:25:35 > 0:25:38"Look, hunting with the aim to kill

0:25:38 > 0:25:41"is very different to baiting with the aim to torture."

0:25:41 > 0:25:43And so baiting is not hunting.

0:25:43 > 0:25:45And that is something which I know

0:25:45 > 0:25:47anti-hunt people like to try and confuse,

0:25:47 > 0:25:49but they're two very different activities.

0:25:49 > 0:25:52Do you think there's an argument that,

0:25:52 > 0:25:53if something is so deeply in your culture,

0:25:53 > 0:25:56even if it does involve a cruelty to an animal,

0:25:56 > 0:26:00you can respect it as part of a human or a national culture?

0:26:00 > 0:26:02Well, I think that is an interesting point,

0:26:02 > 0:26:05because there are certain activities, like falconry, in this country

0:26:05 > 0:26:09that has been accepted as a natural part of our culture

0:26:09 > 0:26:12and is protected that way.

0:26:12 > 0:26:16Now, you spend some of your time lobbying politicians

0:26:16 > 0:26:17and officials about laws.

0:26:17 > 0:26:22Do you think we've got laws on animal welfare about right today?

0:26:22 > 0:26:23As far as wild animals are concerned,

0:26:23 > 0:26:25no, I don't think we have the law right.

0:26:25 > 0:26:29I don't think the Hunting Act has done good for any animal at all

0:26:29 > 0:26:32and here we are ten years after that particular law

0:26:32 > 0:26:36and it's still as hot an issue as it ever was.

0:26:39 > 0:26:40Back at the kennels,

0:26:40 > 0:26:42the hounds have been washed

0:26:42 > 0:26:44and are ready for feeding.

0:26:44 > 0:26:47It's a diet well-suited to their hunting instincts...

0:26:47 > 0:26:49Raw meat.

0:26:53 > 0:26:56Can you be sure they all get their fair share?

0:26:57 > 0:27:01I think it's time to leave the pack to its breakfast

0:27:01 > 0:27:03and watch from a safe distance.

0:27:06 > 0:27:11This macabre sight of a few dozen hounds tearing up raw meat

0:27:11 > 0:27:14is quite a culture shock for a townie like me.

0:27:14 > 0:27:18And that's really been at the heart of the issue.

0:27:18 > 0:27:20A clash between people from the cities

0:27:20 > 0:27:24and those who uphold the traditions of the countryside.

0:27:30 > 0:27:32Silence reigns.

0:27:44 > 0:27:45Come on, get over!

0:27:45 > 0:27:50Today, I've seen some really saucy lithographs by John Lennon.

0:27:50 > 0:27:53But the people who tried to ban them might be dismayed

0:27:53 > 0:27:56that today there's a torrent of pornography

0:27:56 > 0:27:58readily available on the internet.

0:27:58 > 0:28:01It's difficult to make bans work,

0:28:01 > 0:28:03as ministers discovered

0:28:03 > 0:28:06when they tried to exclude Scientologists from Britain.

0:28:06 > 0:28:09As for the ban on fox-hunting,

0:28:09 > 0:28:14it's made little visible difference to country culture and tradition.