ContentServer 15.Aspx

8/3/2019 ContentServer 15.Aspx

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/contentserver-15aspx 1/18

This article was downloaded by: [ ]On: 21 October 2011, At: 07:25Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Social HistoryPublication details, including instructions for authors and

subscription information:

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rshi20

Street gangs, crime and policing in

Glasgow during the 1930s: The case

of the beehive boysAndrew Davies

a

aUniversity of Liverpool

Available online: 30 May 2008

To cite this article: Andrew Davies (1998): Street gangs, crime and policing in Glasgow during

the 1930s: The case of the beehive boys , Social History, 23:3, 251-267

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071029808568037

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make anyrepresentation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. Theaccuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independentlyverified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions,claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever causedarising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of thismaterial.


http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03071029808568037




Andrew Davies

Street gangs, crim e and policing in

Glasgow during the 1930s: the case of

the Beehive Boys*

During the 1930s, Glasgow acquired a reputation throughout Britain as a hotbed of gangviolence. A succession of lurid press reports filtered through from thelocal to thenational press,

with the cumulative effect of establishing an image of Glasgow as Britain's most violent city.1

This notoriety wassealed by thepublication in October 1935 of thenovel NoMeanCity which

told the story of a Glasgow gang leader and 'razor king '.2As Sean D arner hasshown, No Mean

City, which was explicitly set in the Gorbals district in Glasgow's South Side, made a massive,

immediate and lasting impact, not the least of which was to cement the city's name as abyword

for violence.3In the British press, Glasgow remains one of the cities most readily associated

with gang violence. Features on the city today are frequently prefaced with historical refer-

ences, to No Mean City and to the history of gang fighting in the Gorbals, yet this history hasrarely been broached by historians.4

Indeed, thewider history of theBritish street gang in the twentieth century remains largely

undeveloped. The most sophisticated historical account of the culture of the street gang in

Britain remains Stephen Humphries s Hooligans or Rebels'? (1981). Hum phries used a series of

oral testimonies to construct an account of the street gang 'from within'. In his analysis, gang

membership among young, working-class males is forcefully viewed as a rational response to

* This article is drawn from a project on 'YouthGangs and Urban Violence: Manchester, Salford

and Glasgow, 1860-1939,' funded by the Economic

and Social Research Council as part of a Research

Programme on 'Crime and Social Order', award

no. L210252006. I am extremely grateful to

Stephen Humphries for permission to use extracts

from his interviews with Larry Rankin, and to

Laura Craig Gray, Sean Darner, Sean O'Connell,

Geoff Pearson and the members of research semi-

nars at the Open University and the University of

Glasgow for their constructive criticism. Furtherthanks are due to Sandra Mather, Department of

Geography, University of Liverpool, who kindly

drew the map.1

Sunday D ispatch, 10March 1935; Sunday Mail, 16

Social History Vol. 23 No. 3 October 1998

0307-1022

June 1935; Glasgow Herald, 27 August 1935.2

A. McArthur and H. Kingsley Long, No Mean

City (London, 1935).3

S. Da m e r , Glasgow. Going for a Song (London ,

1990), 5-6.4

'Razor king image lives on', Scotland on Sunday,

26 November 1995. The only academic treatment

of the subject in any depth is to be found in B.

Murray, The Old Firm. Sectarianism, Sport and Society

in Scotland (Edinburgh, 1984). Further accounts are

to be found in J. Patrick (pseud.), A Glasgow Gang

Observed (London, 1973); G. Forbes and P. Meehan,Such Bad Company. The Story of Glasgow Criminality

(Edinburgh, 1982); and. R. G. MacCallum, Tongs ya

Bas(Glasgow, 1994).

© Routledge 1998

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ ] a t 0 7 : 2 5 2 1 O c t o b e r 2 0 1 1



252 Social History VOL. 23 : N O. 3

the 'shared experience of inequality and subordination'.5

Youths in their mid- to late teens

resorted to street gangs in order to find comradeship and ways of passing the time but also in

order to enhance their status, bo th collectively and as individuals, by taking part in confronta-

tions with rival formations. Gang membership provided a sense of belonging, as shared iden-

tities were consolidated in opposition to rival gangs, and a source of power, not least in the

capacity to instil fear through acts of collective violence and intimidation. 6

Humphries posited a very clear causal relationship between material circumstances and

patterns o f offending among the m embers of street gangs. In his view, 'serious' outbreaks of

gang violence (in which weapons were used) tended to be clustered in the poorest working-

class districts.7

Moreover, violence escalated during periods of economic decline, especially

when indigenous street gangs turned against newly arrived immigrant groups.8

Similarly, gang

members were driven to theft by unemployment and'the material deprivation and deep feelings

of personal humiliation and resentment against society that followed from the inability to find

work'.9 Humphries's oral testimonies were gathered from a range of towns and cities across

Britain. However, by narrowing our focus to a single conurbation, and using a fuller range ofsources, it is possible to outline a more complex relationship between unemployment, gang

formation and criminality during the 1930s.

Glasgow suffered heavy unemploym ent d uring the interwar decades. From N ovem ber 1930

to May 1935, the city's unem ployment rate ranged between 25 and 33 per cent.10 However, to

claim that mass unem ployment was the sole cause of gang conflicts in interwar Glasgow w ould

be misleading. The tradition of gang formation in the city stretched back at least to the 1880s,

and gang rivalries appear to have derived a mom entum of their own during the late nineteenth

century, irrespective of short-term economic trends, both in Glasgow and in other British

conurbations.11 Similarly, the scale and intensity of Glasgow's gang conflicts during the 1920sand 1930s cannot be explained solely in terms of downturns in the local economy. Although

Irish immigration had slowed to a trickle, sectarianism persisted alongside territorial rivalries

in the city's working-class districts and found frequent expression in gang violence. Moreover,

we must not overlook the structures of masculine self-esteem through which gang members

derived self-worth from displays of aggression. Street fights were a source of kudos and excite-

ment for many w ith jobs, as well as those with ou t.12

N on e the less, the advent of mass unem ploym ent does appear to have led to tw o significant

new patterns in gang formation. First, as unemployment peaked locally in the early 1930s and

long -term unem ployment posed increasing concern, it became more co mm on for men in theirtwenties and even thirties to remain active members of street gangs, some of which appear to

have provided an important focus for men without work.13

Second, the interwar decades saw

5 S . Hu m p h r i e s , Hooligans or Rebels? An Oral

History of Working-Class Childhood and Youth,

1889-1939 (Oxford, 1981), 175 and A Secret World of

Sex. Forbidden Fruit. The British Experience 1900-1950

(London, 1988), 142.6

Humphries, Hooligans or Rebels?,op.cit., chap. 7.7

ibid., 192-3.8

ibid.,193-6.9

ibid., 186.10

Ministry of Labour, Local Unemployment Index,

47-101 (1930-5).11 O n Glasgow, see Patrick, op. cit., 150-2. For the

Manchester conurbation, see A. Davies, 'Youth

gangs, masculinity and violence in late Victorian

Manchester an d Salford', Journal of Social History,

xxxii, 2 (1998), 349-69.12 O n masculine self-esteem, see J. White, Th e

Worst Street in North London. CampbellBunk, Isling-

ton, between the Wars (London, 1986), 164; Davies,op .

cit. For a recent account of the 'crack' derived from

gang fighting by English football supporters, see B.

Buford, Among the Thugs (London, 1991), 206.13 O n long-term unemployment in Glasgow

among manual workers in their twenties, see C.

Cameron (ed.), Disinherited Youth: A Report on the 18+

Age Group Enquiry preparedfor the Trustees of the Carn-

egie United Kingdom Trust(Edinburgh, 1943), 11-12.




October igg8 Street gangs in 1930s Glasgow 253

a number of the city's street gangs mutate into organized criminal gangs, operating protection

rackets and forming networks of thieves.14

Humphries's claim that unemployment led to an

increase in property crime finds firmer support in a case-study of Glasgow than his assertion

that 'serious' gang violence was rooted in poverty and short-term economic decline.15

One of the best known of Glasgow's criminal gangs, the Beehive Boys from the Gorbals, form

the subject of this article. By focusing upon a single gang it is possible to explore a series of

themes which have hitherto been neglected in historical studies of street gangs in Britain. In

particular, I propose to examine the nature of the Beehive Boys as an organized criminal network,

and to highlight the relationships between gang members, the police and the broader working-

class population. The Beehive Boys enjoyed a formidable collective reputation in Glasgow during

the 1930s, both as street fighters and as thieves. Indeed, they formed an eclectic criminal network

with a record ranging from 'smash and grab' raids to fraud. Some of the gang's central figures

appear to have regarded themselves as criminal specialists, in contrast to rival gang formations

across the city which they viewed disparagingly as being merely concerned with non-instru-

mental violence. Crucially, the police identified the Beehive Boys as the most serious collectivethreat to property in the city, and it is significant that the most concerted police operation against

the gang was primarily focused on cases of theft rather than violence. Relations between gang

members and the police were characterized by a ready resort to violence on both sides, as police

officers and local youths contested ownership of the streets.16

The Beehive Boys sometimes

appeared to be in the vanguard of a broader working-class hostility towards the police, but

relations between gang members and the rest of the Gorbals population were ambiguous to say

the least, and the Beehive Boys appear to have been as much feared as admired by local people.

This article is divided into five sections. The first provides a brief overview of the pattern

of gang formation in Glasgow in the 1920s and 1930s. The nature of the Beehive gang is thenexamined through an outline of its structure and composition. Third, the lifestyles of the

Beehive Boys and the range of their criminal enterprises are explored through the first-hand

testimony of one of the gang's former members. Police attempts to suppress the gang are then

analysed through an account of the trial of ten Beehive Boys in February 1934. Finally, the

gang's continuing involvement in property crime and ongoing conflict with the police will be

examined through a discussion of a series of cases during the mid- to late 1930s.

This profile of the Beehive gang draws upon a diverse set of primary sources. The initial

account of the gang's structure is drawn from the memoirs of Sir Percy Sillitoe, who was

appointed Chief Constable of Glasgow in December 1931 and who devoted considerableresources to a campaign to suppress the city's street gangs.

17Sillitoe's account is examined

alongside portraits of the gang's leading members contained in a file on known 'housebreak-

ers' compiled by the Glasgow police during the mid-i93os.18

Further biographical information

has been gleaned from poor relief case files, and from the register of births, deaths and

marriages for Scotland.19

More detailed accounts of the gang's activities are drawn from

14The Bridgeton Billy Boys were repeatedly

linked to 'protec tion' rackets in Glasgow's East End,

while the Gorbals-based South Side Stickers

boasted a dedicated 'housebreak ing section': WeeklyRecord, 20 December 1930, 7 March 1931.

15City of Glasgow, Reporton theState of Crime

an d thePolice Establishment with Tabulated Returns for

the Yearended 31st December 1932 (Glasgow, 1933), 9.16

For a compara t ive perspect ive , see M.

B r o g d e n , On the Mersey Beat. Policing Liverpool

between the Wars (Oxford, 1991), 104-10.17

P. Sillitoe, Cloak without Dagger (London,1955), 124 -5.

18

Strathclyde Regional Archives, SR22/63/19,'Photograph album of convicts with notes on each,n.d ., c. 1934'.

19 Local poor relief records are held in the

Strathclyde Regional Archives. The register of

births, deaths andmarriages for the Glasgow districtwas consulted in the Strathclyde G enealogy Cen tre.

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ ] a t

0 7 : 2 5 2 1 O c t o b e r 2 0 1 1



254 Social History VOL. 23 :N O.3

contemporary press reports, and from the records of the Sheriffs' Courts of Glasgow and

Kilmarnock.

These contemporary accounts of the gang's varied criminal operations form the core of the

analysis w hich follows. Crucially, however, they are augmented by a series of retrospective testi-

monies which, in contrast to Sillitoe's depiction, provide glimpses of the Beehive gang from

within the Gorbals. Extensive use is made of a set of three interviews with Larry Rankin, aformer Beehive Boy.

20First interviewed byStephen Hum phries during themid-1980s, Ra nk in

not only described the background of the gang's members and the nature of their criminal

activities but also gave a more rounded account of their lifestyles. His testimony is invaluable,

not least since it allows us to contextualize an analysis of the gang's activities. This is in stark

contrast to press reports, which frequently presented very detailed descriptions of specific events

with little or no attempt to place them in context. Additional retrospective accounts of the

Beehive gang have been gleaned from autobiographies and from oral testimonies gathered by

Glasgow journalists during the 1970s. Such testimonies further help to situate an analysis of

gang activity within a broader understanding of working-class life in the Gorbals.

I

Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, Glasgow's working-class districts were partitioned by avast

array of street gangs. Most had a clear territorial basis, reflected in the choice of names such as

the Bridgeton Billy Boys, theCalton Entry and the South Side Stickers. TheBeehive Boys took

their name from a draper's shop situated at the corner of Thistle Street and Cumberland Street

in theGorbals.21 However, Glasgow's gangs were divided between those which were solely terri-

torial and those which combined territorial and sectarian allegiances. The relationship between

neighbourhood and religious tensions in structuring gang conflicts in the city was by no meansclear cut.22 N evertheless, in very broad terms, it appears that conflicts in theEast End of the city

tended to be strongly sectarian in character, while those in the South Side tended to be rooted

more in territorial rivalries.23In part, this seems to reflect the contrasting patterns of ethnic

settlement in theworking-class areas of the city. Bridgeton, in Glasgow's East End, was apredomi-

nantly Protestant district with a history of Protestant Irish settlement and a strong Orange

movement, which brought Ulster rhetoric to the city where it fused with the existing antipathy

fnw;irrU Trisb C^thnlir immicrranK ibrvujn bv nativp Srntq Prnt-^ifanK 24 Qit-nTt-erl aHiarfnt tn ffie

2 0

R a n k i n was f i r s t in terv iewed by S t e p h e nH u m p h r i e s in 1987. V ar ious extracts we re pub l ishe d

in Humphries, Secret World of Sex, op. c i t . A second

i n t e r v i e w by H u m p h r i e s was c o n d u c t e d for the

BBC televis ion ser ies on ' F o r b i d d e n B r i t a i n ' ,

b roadcas t in 1 9 9 4 . The tapes and t r ans c r ip t w ere

depos i t ed in the N a t i o n a l S o u n d A r c h i v e at the

B r i t is h L ib r ar y , v i d e o t a p e n u m b e r s C 5 9 0 / 0 2 /

177-180 . My owni n t e r v i e w w i t h L a r r y R a n k i n on

5 F eb ruary 1996 was less successful due to a d e t e r i o -

r a t ion in his l o n g - t e r m r e ca l l. R a n k i n is a p s e u d o -

n y m .2 1

G. R o b e r t s o n , Gorbals Doctor (London , 1970) ,

135.2 2

See A. Davies , Street Gangs andViolence in Glas-

gow during the ig2os and 1930s (Edinburgh, forth-

c o m i n g ) .2 3

M u r r a y , op . c i t . , 1 5 0 - 1 .2 4

On Protestant Irish settlement in the East End

districts of Bridgeton and the Calton during the

nineteenth century, see G. Walker,' "There's not a

team like the Glasgow Rangers": football and

religious identity in Scotland' in G. Walker and T.

Gallagher (eds), Sermons andBattle H ymns: Protestant

Popular Culture in Modern Scotland (Edinburgh,

1990), 158. On the role of the Orange Order in

Bridgeton, see G. Walker, 'The Orange Order in

Scotland between the wars', International Review of

Social History, xxxvn (1992), especially 187. On the

historical development of anti-Irish Catholic senti-

ment in Glasgow, see T. Gallagher, Glasgow. The

UneasyPeace (Manchester, 1987).





predominantly Catholic district of the Calton, Bridgeton had a history of sectarian tension. The

Bridgeton Billy Boys, a Protestant gang based at Bridgeton Cross and widely recognized as the

most powerful of all the city's gangs during the 1930s, engaged in ongoing feuds with Catholic

street gangs from the surrounding area such as the Calton Entry. Throughout the interwar

decades, gang conflicts in the East End were laced with sectarian hostility.25

By contrast, the Gorbals district to the south of the River Clyde was more cosmopolitan.

Although renowned as an area of heavy Irish Catholic settlement, the Gorbals also housed both

a substantial Protestant population and a sizeable Jewish community during the interwar

decades.26

Religious divisions were certainly a prominent feature of life in the Gorbals, where

gangs of schoolboys issued the traditional sectarian challenge, 'Wha' are yese — Billy or a Dan?'

to Catholic, Protestant and Jewish boys alike.27

None the less, perhaps reflecting the absence

of a strong Orange presence in the district, gangs of youths and older men appear for the most

part to have been more concerned with territorial rivalries, either within the Gorbals or

between the Gorbals and the Calton district on the other side of the Clyde. In stark contrast

to the Bridgeton Billy Boys, the Beehive Boys had both Catholic and Protestant members. The

Gorbals spawned a whole series of territorial gangs during the 1920s and 1930s. Apart from the

Beehive gang, the South Side Stickers, who congregated at the corner of Rose Street and Govan

Street and the Liberty Boys of Hutcheson Square, were the best known.28

II

In his autobiography Cloak without Dagger, published in 1955, Sir Percy Sillitoe outlined the

structure of the Beehive Boys, and described the roles played by the gang's leading members.

Sillitoe told how the core of the gang comprised an 'inner circle' of housebreakers, around

whom moved 'a much larger group of men who could be called upon to take part in fights,

intimidations, and occasionally mob attacks and robberies'.29

The gang possessed a clear hier-

archical structure with a recognized leader, second-in-command and a criminal 'master mind'

among its inner circle. According to Sillitoe, the 'leader of the Beehives', Peter Williamson, was

a dangerous street fighter, skilful at evading arrest, and 'a highly intelligent and fluent speaker

. . . [who] could put up a creditable show' defending himself in court.30

The 'second-in-

command', Harry McMenemy, was so loyal to Williamson that on one occasion he pleaded

guilty to an assault which had been committed by Williamson and a fellow Beehive Boy named

Dan Cronin, serving a nine-month prison sentence on their behalf.31

If Williamson led the Beehives into affrays, the criminal 'master mind' behind the gang was

Herbert Howie. Sillitoe described Howie as:

2 5M u r r a y , op . c i t . , c h a p . 6.

2 6D a m e r , op.c i t . , 95, 125. A S c o t t i sh P r o t e s t a n t

L e a g u e candida te rece ived 2525 votes ( jus t over 25

p e r c e n t of votes cast) in the G o r b a l s w a r d in the

G l a s g o w m u n i c i p a l e l e c ti o n s of 1934. See The Van-

guard, 29 J a n u a r y 1 9 3 6 .2 7

R. Glasser, Growing up in the Gorbals (London ,

1987), 2-3. Billy' stood for Protestant, referring toWilliam III and theBattle of the Boyne, while Dan'

stood for Catholic.2 8

SixGorba l s gangs we re fea t ured in a s u r v e y of

t h e G l a s g o w g a n g s by the Evening Citizen, 4-8

Augus t 1930 . The Citizen desc r i bed the Sout h S i de

St ickers as a ' C a t h o l i c ' g a n g . By cont ra s t , a former

m e m b e r t o l d how the St ickers ' ' soc ia l s ' brought

C a t ho l i c , P ro t e s t an t and Jewi sh you t hs t oge t h e r :

Weekly Record, 21 M a r c h 1 9 3 1 . O n l y two Gorba l s

gangs , the C o b u r g E r i n and theN ab ur n S tree t B i ll y

Boys , appear to have s tyled themselves as overt ly

sectarian formations.2 9

Sil l i toe, op . c i t . , 124.3 0

ibid., 124.31

ibid., 124-5 . For a repor t of this case, see the

Glasgow Herald,24 Augus t 1937.




THE GORBALS, 1930

Meeting places of the three mostprominent Gorbals street gangs

1 Beehive Boys

2 South Side Stickers

3 Liberty Boys

CO

oQ.

o

o

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ ] a t 0 7 : 2 5 2 1 O c t o b e

r 2 0 1 1




The real brains of the outfit . . . who planned and executed numerous clever, ingenious

crimes but seldom took part in the unprofitable raids. He was a skilled burglar, and at one

time Howie and the 'inside circle' of the Beehive Gang teamed up for their robberies with

an English safe breaker, who was associated with them for several months.32

Finally, Sillitoe attested to the fighting prowess of the Beehives by pointing out that one of themob of street fighters around the gang's inner circle was Frank Murphy, who later became

Scottish welterweight boxing champion. Sillitoe claimed that Murphy possessed 'no great

standing' among the Beehives, adding that it required 'more than fists' to become an outstand-

ing fighter among Glasgow's 'gangsters'.33

The Beehive gang was thus portrayed by Sillitoe as representing a formidable threat. The

gang was composed of a core of experienced criminals, who had links with the criminal under-

world in England, and a wider group of street fighters of such force that even a future boxing

champion did not stand out among them. Within Cloak withoutDagger, Sillitoe's account of the

menace posed by the Beehives serves a clear narrative purpose. Faced with adversaries such asthese, Sillitoe's claim that by 1935 he had curbed the activities of the notorious Glasgow gangs

appears to constitute no mean achievement. The extent of Sillitoe's triumph over the gangs

will be questioned below. Nevertheless, his retrospective sketch provides a useful starting point

for any examination of the structure and composition of the Beehive gang.

It is likely that Sillitoe's portrait of the Beehive Boys was drawn from files compiled by the

Glasgow police during the 1930s. Although few operational records from this period appear to

have survived, the file of known housebreakers assembled by the Glasgow police during the

mid-i93os provides a significant insight into the way in which the Beehive Boys were regarded

by the police. The file contains the places and dates of birth of 186 offenders, along with theirphotographs and notes on their physical appearances.

34The file is cross-referenced, with the

known associates of each offender listed. Most of the individuals featured are linked with only

one or two associates, if any. Significantly, the only network identified in the file comprised

nine members of the Beehive gang (including Peter Williamson and Herbert Howie), which

suggests that the Beehives were viewed by the police as the major organized gang of thieves in

Glasgow during the 1930s.35

Four further members of the gang, identified either in Sillitoe's memoirs or in press reports,

were featured in the file without being cross-referenced to Williamson and Howie.36

In total,

therefore, the file contains biographical information concerning thirteen of the Beehive Boys.In 1934, at the height of police concern with the gang, their average age was just under twenty-

four. Peter Williamson was the eldest, at thirty. Eleven of the thirteen were born in Glasgow

and one was born in Coatbridge in Lanarkshire. Only Herbert Howie was born outside the

west of Scotland. He was a native of Belfast. The Beehive Boys bore the marks of street fighters.

Seven of the thirteen had scars on their faces or necks, and one had an eye missing.

Using information derived from poor relief case files, and from the register of births, deaths

and marriages for Scotland, it is possible to fill out this collective profile of the Beehive

3 2 Sill i toe, op . cit., 125 .3 3

ibid., 1 2 5 - 6 .34 Strathclyde Regional Archives, SR 22 /63/1 9.33

ibid., 'housebreakers' 10, 19, 24, 33, 34, 46, 73,

86 and 87 formed a network centred onWilliamson

and Howie.36ibid., 'housebreakers' 4, 40, 48 and 88 were

identified in reports of court cases involving the

Beehive gang reported in the Glasgow Herald, 21

February 1934 and 19April 1934.

D o w n l o a d e d b y [ ] a t 0

7 : 2 5 2 1 O c t o b e r 2 0 1 1



258 Social History VOL. 23 :N O. 3

Boys.37 Most of the gang's leading members were born and brought up in the Gorbals and

lived in the vicinity of Thistle Street during the 1930s, which suggests that the territorial basis

of allegiance to the gang wasfirmly rooted. The central figures in the Beehive Boys, including

Peter W illiamson, Herbe rt Howie and Dan Cronin, were Catholics, but the gang also recruited

Protestant youths from the immediate locality in keeping with traditions of neighbourhood-

based gang formation in the Gorbals. Moreover, Protestant m embers of the gang appear tohavereconciled their loyalty to the Beehive Boys with their active support of the Rangers Football

Club, themost potent symbol ofpopular Protestantism in thecity.38Thegang's mem bers appear

to have been drawn exclusively from working-class families, and to have sought employment

themselves in manual occupations w hich ranged from labourer to stonemason andboilermaker.

However, poor relief case files reveal that some of the Beehive Boys were frequently unem-

ployed during the 1930s. Significantly, marriage and parenthood do not appear to have

prompted thegang's members to renounce their criminal activities. Some of the leading figu res

in the gang, including Peter Williamson, remained active as street fighters and housebreakers

once m arried despite very severe domestic repercussions, evidenced by theclaims for po or reliefmade by their wives who were left responsible for the upkeep of their young children when

the gang's members served periodic terms of imprisonment.39

How far is Sillitoe's portrait of the organization and leadership of the Beehive Boys borne

out in other retrospective testimonies? Larry Rankin, a former Beehive Boyhimself, estimated

that the gang was around forty or fifty strong during the 1930s. In a clear echo of Sillitoe's

account, Rankin also pointed to a smaller clique of more active criminals at the heart of the

gang.40 N evertheless, it is likely that the division between an 'inner circle' and the rest of the

gang was less fixed than Sillitoe's accou nt suggests. At least twenty Beehive Boys were convicted

for property offences at different times during the 1930s. They frequently formed small, ad hocgroups to raid public houses, shops or warehouses, and many of the gang's members appear to

have taken part in these criminal enterprises from time to time, even if some were more accom-

plished thieves than others.41

Other retrospective accounts of life in the Gorbals during the 1930s provide a more rounded

view of the Beehive gang. Ellen McAllister, for example, highlighted theprofile enjoyed by the

girlfriends of the gang's members, known locally as the 'Queen Bees' .42 Unfortunately, press

reports and retrospective testimonies alike shed little light upon the role of the Queen Bees,

although there were sporadic contemporary reports of young women taking an active part in

clashes between rival gangs in both the Gorbals and Glasgow's East End.43 McAllister alsopointed to the existence of gangs ofjun ior Beehive Boys, known as the WeeHive' or 'Young

Beehive', thus providing a glimpse of the mock apprentice system through which local street

gangs were reproduced across generations.44AsJimmy Boyle commented, when describing the

3 7Access to poor rel ief case fi les held in the

St ra t hc l yde R egi ona l Arch i ves w a s g r a n t e d onc o n -

di t i on t ha t t hey woul d not be used to ident i fy indi -

viduals , so the following profile of the gang's

members la rge ly takes the f o r m of a col lec t ivepor-

trait.3 8

For example, Larry Rankin, profiled in section

m.3 9

Th e file held in S t r a t h c l y d e R e g i o n a l

A r c h iv e s , D - H E W 1 8 / 3 / 2 0 , c as e n o . 2 9 0 4 , is espec i -

al ly revealing in the case of W i l l i a m s o n .4 0

N a t io n a l S o u n d A rc h iv e , C 5 9 0 / 0 2 / 1 7 7 - 1 8 0 ,

1 1 .

4 1 F o r ske t ches of t h e gang ' s c r i m i na l en t e rp r i se s ,

see sect ions III-V.

4 2 E. McAllis ter , Shadows on a Gorbals Wall(Glasgow, 1986), 2 8 .

4 3Weekly Record, 27 A p r i l 1 9 2 9 , 1 J u n e 1 9 2 9 .

4 4McAl l i s t e r , op.cit., 2 8 ; Evening Times, 11 A u g u s t

1936.





1950s, gang members provided some of the most powerful role models for boys growing up in

the Gorbals. Many local boys joined junior fighting gangs which styled and named themselves

after established formations such as the Beehives and effectively formed recruiting grounds for

senior street gangs.45

In contrast to Sillitoe's account, these autobiographical fragments suggest

that street gangs were firmly embedded within the fabric of everyday life in the Gorbals.

Larry Rankin also confirmed Peter Williamson's status as the leader of the Beehive Boys.46

Indeed, the figures of Williamson and Dan Cronin loomed large in the folklore surrounding

the Glasgow gangs of the 1930s. As late as the 1970s, when George Forbes and Paddy Meehan

set out to gather stories of the local 'underworld', they quickly encountered tales of Williamson's

exploits. In the 'low-life' drinking establishments trawled by Forbes and Meehan, stories still

circulated of how Williamson settled differences between the Beehives and their rivals by chal-

lenging opposing gang leaders to single combat on Glasgow Green.47

Jimmy Boyle who was

born in the Gorbals in 1944, recalled the immense local reputation of Dan Cronin:

One feature of the Gorbals sub-culture was that the men in the district who were put onpedestals by us, and in many ways idolised, were the likes of Dan Cronin. Although he

was dead by the time I was six years old he remained very much alive locally being almost

a legend in the Gorbals for his fighting abilities.48

Ill

By far the most rounded account of the lifestyles and criminal enterprises of the Beehive Boys

during the 1930s is to be found in the interviews with Larry Rankin conducted by Stephen

Humphries. Crucially, Rankin's retrospective testimony provides the only inside view of thegang during this period. Rankin was not among the thirteen of the gang's members featured

in the police file of known housebreakers compiled during the mid-i93os. N one the less, he

was involved in a wide range of criminal activities. His account can be verified in many of its

significant details by reference to documentary sources, including press reports, court records

and poor relief case files, and appears to be highly authentic.

Larry Rankin was born in Thistle Street in 1912. Both of his parents were Protestants, and

his father w orked as a warehouse packer. Ran kin served an apprenticeship as aboilermaker,but

in common with other members of the Beehive Boys, he was unemployed for much of his

twenties.

49

At the time of his marriage, in June 1936, he was living with his parents in ThistleStreet and wasreceiving seventeen shillings a week inpoor relief.50

Hejoined theBeehive Boys

during his teens, and remained active as a member of the gang once he wasmarried. Much of

his time was spent with other members of the gang, hanging around at the Beehive corner,

talking and larking about, gambling and playing football in the streets. These mundane activi-

ties, typical of the street life of the Gorbals, were enlivened by his participation in periodic

confrontations between the Beehives and rival gangs. His involvement in the Beehive gang's

criminal enterprises funded visits to local dance halls, cinemas, public houses and billiard halls,

4 5

J. B oyl e , A Sense of Freedom (London , 1977) ,especial ly chaps 2 and 4.

4 6I n t e r v i e w by A n d r e w D a v i e s , 5 F e b r u a r y

1996.4 7

F o r b e s andM e e h a n , op . tit., 66—7.

4 8

B o y l e , op . it., 23.4 9

National Sound Archive, C590/02/177-180,

passim.5 0

S t r a th c l y d e R e g i o n a l A r c h iv e s , D - H E W

18/ 3 / 194 , c a se no. 2 9 0 9 7 .




260 Social History VOL. 23 : N O. 3

with occasional bouts of more conspicuous consum ption. Rankin's mem bership of the B eehive

gang appears to have given him a degree of status locally, manifested, he claimed, in a series of

relationships with young women from the Gorbals before he met his wife.51

Larry Ra nk in was involved in a wide range of criminal activities. Along with othe r m embers

of the Beehive gang, he regularly broke into public houses, shops and warehouses, either in the

Gorbals and adjacent South Side districts or else in Glasgow city centre.52

Thefts from publichouses varied in scale, with alcohol and cigarettes being stolen for the gang's own consump-

tion. By contrast, raids upon warehouses and city centre shops were more likely to hinge upon

contacts made by mem bers of the gang w ithin broader criminal networks. Having identified a

market for stolen clo thing and textiles, for example, the B eehive Boys planned raids upon w are-

houses in the South Side of Glasgow.53 Similarly, raids on city centre shops were sometimes

pre-arranged, and R ankin was nicknamed the 'insurance m an' after he played a pivotal role in

staging break-ins w ith a shopkeeper wh o was planning to m ake fraudulent insurance claims.54

The Beehive Boys regularly stole motor cars from Glasgow city centre in order to move

stolen goods, and for use in 'smash and grab' raids which were carried out in Glasgow andoccasionally in other towns nearby. Electrical goods, which could easily be resold, were a

favourite target.55 Ra nk in and his friends were also habitual joy-riders, although they were quite

scrupulous in choosing cars to steal:

we'd pick up a decent car to go around in because we found that we got more respect

that way. If you go abou t with an old car the police was liable to pull you u p, bu t [if] they

seen you with a good car they just nodded their head and helped you on your way. 56

In an era when working-class car ownership was extremely rare, the gang's members derived

enormous kudos from stealing expensive cars for use when they were courting. Rankin andhis wife-to-be toured 'all over the west of Scotland'.57

Rankin claimed that the Beehive Boys enjoyed a better lifestyle than other street gangs in

Glasgow d uring the 1930s. In his account, whereas other gangs were primarily concerne d with

street fighting, the Beehives turned to property crime in an attempt to transcend the poverty

of their material circumstances.58 The Beehive Boys were:

a gang which looked after themselves and they were always in the habit of having more

money than a normal gang, so most of the time they were well dressed, they could go

dancing and different places and they were looked on by the other gangs as being dapper.59

The more active criminals among the Beehive Boys saw themselves as forming an elite among

Glasgow's street gangs and sough t to dem onstrate their status in a culture of conspicuous narcis-

sism.60 This had its price, however, as detectives targeted gang members whose fashionable

clothes stood out in po or districts. Ra nk in described how he was once apprehended in Glasgow

city centre:

5 1H u m p h r i e s , Secret Wor ld of Se x, op. cit., 141,

1 4 4 - 6 , 1 4 8 .5 2

N a t i ona l Sound Arch ive , C 59 0/ 02 / 177 -180 ,19 .5 3

ibid., 7.54ibid., 8.

5 5ibid., 1 5 - 1 6 .

5 6ibid., 8-9.

5 7ibid., 8 .

5 8ibid., 2 2 .

5 9ibid., 24 .

6 0 O n consp i cuous na rc i s s i sm among ' p r o -

fessional ' criminals, s e e D . Ho bb s , ' P rofe s s iona l a n dorgan i zed c r i me i n B ri t a i n ' i n M . M a g u i r e , R .

M o r g a n a n d R . R ei ne r (eds ) , Th e Oxford Handbook

of Criminology (Oxford , 1994) , 44 8- 9 .





I've got on a nice blue suit, collar and tie and as I'm walking along somebody [tapped]

me on the shoulder and it was a detective. . .. He says,'You're coming down to the police

office, you know where it is.' So he takes you down and says, How much money you got

in your pocket?' 'I don't know, maybe two or three pounds.' 'Where did you get the suit

and where did you get the money?'You got your unemployment benefit. 'I saved it up.'

' N o , that won't do .. . we'll have to charge you with having money that you can't give

an account of.'61

On this occasion, he was sentenced to sixty days' imprisonment with hard labour at Glasgow

Sheriff Court. In Rankin's account, such apprehensions formed an occupational hazard.

Larry Rankin also served at least five prison sentences for theft during the 1930s, and it is

clear that he was never far removed from the sanctions of the law at this time.62

However, when

questioned by Stephen Humphries about the impact of imprisonment upon his attitudes and

behaviour, Rankin responded by stating that in the absence of any prospect of legitimate

employment during this period he had no choice other than to return to crime. His parents

were in no position to support him financially, and he was not prepared to eke out an exist-

ence on parish relief.63

By his own account, Rankin was only apprehended for a small propor-

tion of the crimes that he committed, even though he was well known to the police. This

suggests that the police's mastery over the Glasgow gangs was less complete than Sillitoe

suggested. The Second World War changed the course of Larry Rankin's life much more

markedly. He joined the fire service and, once the war was over, he was able to 'go straight',

finding regular employment as a lorry driver.64

IV

During the winter of 1933-4,t n e

Beehive Boys were targeted in the most concerted police

campaign to be launched against any of the Glasgow gangs during the 1930s. The gang was

singled out because of its collective record of property crime as well as gang violence. Between

November 1933 and February 1934, ten of the Beehive Boys were taken into custody follow-

ing a spate of housebreaking and affrays at South Side dance halls. They stood trial together at

Glasgow Sheriff Court, where they faced a total of twenty-seven charges relating to cases of

housebreaking, breach of the peace, assault and assaulting the police, dating back to July 1933.

Peter Williamson and Herbert Howie, the leader and criminal 'brains' of the Beehive gang

respectively, according to Sillitoe, were both among them. The court proceedings, which lasted

four days, were the culmination of a determined effort on the part of the police and the Procu-

rator-Fiscal to break up the Beehive gang. The trial attracted very extensive coverage in the

local press, as Sillitoe no doubt anticipated.65

Nineteen of the twenty-seven charges related to cases of housebreaking. In seven of these

cases, public houses in the South Side of the city were allegedly raided. Many hauls were

6 1N a t i o n a l S o u n d A rc h iv e , C 5 9 0 / 0 2 / 1 7 7 - 1 8 0 ,

3 0 - 3 1 .6 2

For details of s o m e of Rank in ' s conv ic t ions ,se e the Register of the Sheriff C ourt of Ayshire at Kil-

marnock,8 June 1936, Scottish Record Office,SC7/33/14.

6 3National Sound Archive, 0590/02/177-180,

1, 5-6.6 4

S. H u m p h r i e s and P. G o r d o n , Forbidden

Britain: Our Secret Past ( L o n d o n , 1 9 9 4 ) , 23.6 5

A r e c o r d of the t r i a l is h e l d in the S c o t t i s h

R e c o r d O f f i c e , SC36/56/164, Register of the Glasgow

Sheriff Court, 1 3 3 - 5 0 .




262 Social History VOL. 23 :N O. 3

modest, but in their more successful raids the gang could clear a pub's entire stock of whisky

and cigarettes. In September 1933,for example, sixty-four bottles of whisky, twobottles of gin,

930 cigarettes and three pounds tenshillings in money were stolen from a pub in the Gorbals.66

There were fewreferences in the lengthy court proceedings to thefts from shops orwarehouses,

and no mention wasmade of the safe-blower featured in Sillitoe's mem oirs.67

Press reports of courtroom exchanges during the trial provide occasional glimpses of thestrategies deployed by thepolice in their efforts to solve property crimes. Th roughou t the1930s

the Glasgow police maintained a network of paid informers, including bar staff employed in

public houses in the poorer districts of the South Side and the East End, in order to gather

information concerning the planned activities of local street gangs.68 Within the Gorbals, the

Beehive Boys appear to have been targeted , with occasional successes for thepolice.69 Moreover,

it is clear that the police used motor vans in an attempt to monitor the movements of the

Beehive gang within the Gorbals. AsLarry Rankin recalled, officers were quick to interrogate

gang members whose attire or behaviour attracted suspicion. At the trial, an officer told how

William Rae hadbeen stopped and searched by the members of a police motor patrol after hewas spotted carrying awooden box through theGorbals. The box wasfound to contain bottles

of whisky, stolen from a local public house.70 Sillitoe, who strove to ensure that the Glasgow

force made the fullest possible use of motor vehicles, was equally determined to exploit finger-

print techniques and appointed specialist officers upon his arrival in Glasgow. At the trial in

February 1934, fingerprints were successfully used in evidence against three of those charged

with housebreaking.71

The remaining eight charges - of breach of the peace, assault and assaulting the police -

arose out of four incidents which took place in the Gorbals between September andDecember

1933. Detailed accounts of the incidents, usually bypolice officers, were given in court duringthe trial in February 1934, and these were reported in some detail by the local press. It is there-

fore possible to sketch at least inpart theversions of events p resented at the trial. Although we

should question the veracity of the accounts given by police officers, alleged assailants and

victims, it is clear that considerable weight was attached to police testimonies during the trial,

so that their accounts formed 'institutional truths', if not literal ones.

In the first incident, Michael McMenemy, a thirty-four-year-old builders labourer from the

Gorbals, was allegedly assaulted as he passed theBeehive corner.72In court, McM enemy insisted

that he could not identify any of the accused ashaving been among his assailants. Hiswife, Eliz-

abeth McMenemy, one of the few civilian witnesses to testify to an act of violence by one of

the Beehive Boys, identified James C rearie ashaving thrown a bottle which struck herhusband

and ashaving struck him on the mouth w ith a pen-knife. However, despite insistent prompting

by theProcurator-Fiscal, she wasadamant that none of the other prisoners wasamong thecrowd

which gathered at the scene.73 Throughout the 1930s, theGlasgow police consistently bem oaned

the difficulties encountered in attempting to find witnesses who were willing to testify against

6 6S c o t t i s h R e c o r d O f f i c e , S C 3 6 / 6 0 / 1 1 , Indict-

ment against William Shannon et ah, 8 and 19 February

'934, 2.6 7

Sil l i toe , op .c i t . , 1 2 5 .6 8

A. W. C o c k e r i l l , Sir Percy Sillitoe ( L o n d o n ,

1975). 133 -4 , 143.6 9

The Bulletin, 22 F e b r u a r y 1 9 3 4 .

7 0The Bulletin, 2 1 F e b r u a r y 1 9 3 4 .

7 1Scottish Record Office, SC36/60/11, Indict-

ment against William Shannon et al., 8 and ig February

1934,5.72

ibid., 2.7 3

Glasgow Herald, 2 1 F e b r u a r y 1 9 3 4 .





gang members.74

It is clearly possible that both Michael and Elizabeth McMenemy were fearful

of reprisals if they were to give any further evidence against members of the Beehive Boys.

The charges of breach of the peace related to two affrays at Gorbals dance halls in which

knuckledusters and bottles were reportedly used. A police sergeant told how a mob of Beehive

Boys had clashed with the South Side Stickers in the Regent dance hall in November 1933.75

Four of the gang's members were also charged in relation to an affray which took place thefollowing month in the Ancient Order of Hibernians dance hall in Errol Street, three blocks

away from the Beehive corner. Dan Cronin and James Crearie were further charged with assault-

ing two police constables who arrived at the scene. According to police testimony, Cronin struck

one of the constables on the face with a knuckleduster, and then kicked the prostrate officer on

the face, legs and body.76

Just over a week later, Cronin was arrested by two detectives in Cumber-

land Street. According to the police, Cronin head-butted both officers and kicked one of them

'on the private parts' before he was apprehended.77

As Jimmy Boyle pointed out, such fearsome

displays of aggression earned Cronin an almost legendary status in the Gorbals.78

Two of the gang's members pleaded guilty at the opening of the trial on 19 February. EdwardDoran pleaded guilty to two charges of housebreaking, three breaches of the peace, one assault

and assaulting a police officer. Herbert Howie pleaded guilty to two housebreaking charges.

The other eight accused pleaded not guilty, although their denials were severely undermined

by the pleas tendered by Doran and Howie, both of whom admitted their involvement in what

were alleged to have been collective acts of theft and violence. In their courtroom testimonies

police officers sought to depict the 'Beehive gang', both collectively and individually, as a

profound menace to property and public order. Peter Williamson and James Crearie were

singled out as particularly vicious and dangerous criminals. When Williamson challenged the

police testimony, a detective retorted: 'You are the worst character in the gang; in fact, you arethe one sent by the "Beehive Gang" to settle disputes with other gangs.'

79

As the trial progressed, Williamson displayed the courtroom skills which were to earn the

lasting respect of Sillitoe, not only quizzing detectives but even cross-examining civilian

witnesses who described events in which he was not personally implicated.80

Giving evidence

on his own behalf, Williamson portrayed himself as a family man. His courtroom tales ranged

from the moving to the bizarre. He told the court how he did not leave his house on the date

of one of the alleged offences, since 'It was the anniversary of the burial of one of his children,

and he always stayed in that night.' Similarly, he told how on another of the days in question,

he was at his sister's house in the Gorbals:

I always remember this occasion . . . because I had a tame white rabbit in the house, and

the wife was fed up with it. I put the white rabbit under my jacket and took it to my

sister's house to see if she would take it for her little boy, but she did not want it. I let the

rabbit run about the floor and I played a couple of tunes on the piano. When I left my

sister's house it was after four o'clock.81

74See s ec t ion V.

7 5

The Bulletin, 22 February 1934.76Scottish Record Office, SC36/60/11, Indict-

ment against William Shannon et al., $ and 19 February

1934, 3 - 4 .77

ibid., 4; The Bulletin, 22 F ebruary 1934 .

78Boyle, op. cit.,23 .

7 9

Glasgow Herald, 21 F ebruary 1934 .80S c o t ti s h R e c o r d O f f i ce , S C 3 6 / 5 6 / 1 6 4 , Register

of the Glasgow Sheriff Court, 139; Daily Record,21

February 1934.81

Evening Times, 22 February 1934.




264 Social History VOL.23 :N O. 3

Thus Williamson, in accounting for his movements, presented himself as a grieving father,

subservient husband andkindly uncle in aseries of domestic vignettes which provided an ironic

contrast with the efforts by detectives to portray him as a brutal gang leader. In keeping with

their image as 'hard' m en, however, theBeehive Boys displayed a good deal of bravado in court.

Herbert Howie, for exam ple, refused to name his accomplice in a case of attempted house-

breaking to which he had confessed. Repeatedly instructed by the Procurator-Fiscal and theSheriff to name theperson involved, How ie refused, stating: 'I do not think it is a fair question.'

Told that he would be further charged with contempt of court, Howie grinned at the other

prisoners in the dock.82

The Procurator-Fiscal, J. D. Strathern, described the charges as 'a veritable debauchery of

crime' which disgraced Glasgow.83 Strathern stressed that the trail of cases of housebreaking,

especially, was a matter of great anxiety for the police, who viewed the trial as 'one of great

gravity'.84

In addition to Edward Doran and Herbert Howie, who had already pleaded guilty,

the jury found a further six of the accused guilty of an overwhelming majority of the charges

levelled against them.85

Despite his efforts to portray himself as an innoce nt family man, PeterWilliamson was found guilty of three charges of housebreaking and sentenced to twelve

months' imprisonment. Dan Cronin was sentenced to five months' imprisonment with hard

labour for breach of the peace and assaulting the police. The six other members of the gang

who were convicted received prison sentences ranging from two to nine months.86

V

If the trial of the ten Beehive Boys in February 1934 was intended as a warning to Glasgow's

street gangs, themessage appears to have had little effect. Just over aweek later, a confrontationbetween two other gangs in a Gorbals dance hall ended in the murder of thirty-five-year-old

James Dalziel.87A member of a small gang affiliated to the South Side Stickers, Dalziel was

stabbed in the neck by one of the 'Bridgegate Boys', an East End gang which had infiltrated

the dance hall. For Sillitoe, this was disastrous. The extensive press coverage of the sentences

against the Beehive gang was eclipsed by a barrage of sensational 'Glasgow Murder' headlines,

and Sillitoe's frustration washeightened whe n thecase against thefive B ridgegate Boys charged

with murdering Dalziel collapsed in the High Court.88

W hat was the impact of the trial in February 1934 upon theBeehive Boys? Sillitoe hadclearly

sought to break up the gang, and the imprisonment of a number of its leading figures mighthave served to undermine the morale of their associates. However, a study of court cases

reported by the local press between 1934 and 1939 quickly reveals that the trial in February

1934 did not lead to the dissolution of the Beehive Boys either as a network of thieves or as a

fighting gang. Moreover, W illiamson, Howie andCronin were to feature repeatedly in criminal

cases throughout thedecade, even tho ugh they were allsubjected to a string ofprison sentences.

8 2Daily Record, 23 F e b r u a r y 1 9 3 4 .

8 3

Evening Times, 22 February 1934; Daily Record,23 F eb ruary 1 9 3 4 .

8 4Daily Record, 23 F e b r u a r y 1 9 3 4 .

8 5Scottish Record Office, SC36/56/164, Register

of the Glasgow Sheriff Court, 1 4 6 - 7 .

8 6ibid., 1 4 9 - 5 0 .

8 7

Sunday Mail, 4 M a r c h 1 9 3 4 .8 8Glasgow Herald, 28 Ap ril 1934; Silli toe, op. cit. ,

1 2 6 - 7 . Silli toe claimed, falsely, that this incident h a d

occurred in 1924, before he arrived in Glasgow.





A brief examination of cases involving the Beehive Boys during the second half of the decade

clearly demonstrates the limited impact of Sillitoe's campaign to suppress Glasgow's gangs.

The Beehive gang's property crimes continued to follow the pattern established in the early

1930s. Moreover, it is clear that Williamson's schemes sometimes brought handsome rewards.

In August 1935 he was sentenced to thirty days' imprisonment for 'being a known thief and

having in [his] possession thirty-nine pounds without being able to give a satisfactory accountof how it came into his possession'.

89This was equivalent to three months'wages for a manual

worker during the 1930s.90

Larry Rankin likewise maintained his criminal 'career'. In March

1936, accompanied by two other Beehive Boys, he stole a car in Glasgow before driving to

Kilmarnock, where they stole three wireless sets in a 'smash and grab' raid. Neighbouring police

forces were alerted and the car was spotted on the outskirts of Glasgow as they attempted to

return to the Gorbals. Rankin and his accomplices were imprisoned for ten months.91

The Beehive Boys were likewise involved in a prolonged series of gang fights, assaults and

collective confrontations with the police. Larry Rankin was reluctant to describe his involve-

ment in gang fights during his interviews with Stephen Humphries. Rankin stressed that 'theBeehive Boys weren't so much a razor gang', claiming that when they did clash with other

gangs, it was generally because their rivals had 'interfered' with their criminal activities.

However, Rankin did admit that the Beehive Boys fought with clubs, adding, with a hint of

pride, that 'they mostly won all their fights, they were a powerful gang.'92

Press reports point

to a series of affrays involving the Beehive Boys, both within the Gorbals and in Glasgow city

centre.93

Moreover, the involvement of the Beehive Boys in a series of disturbances during the

second half of the decade, when Peter Williamson was imprisoned for long periods, suggests

that their participation in affrays was not contingent upon his leadership.

The leading figures in the Beehive Boys were involved in a series of alleged assaults between

1934 and 1939, and it is easy to understand how the powerful individual reputations of Peter

Williamson and Dan Cronin were cemented both within the Gorbals and across the city as a

whole. In June 1939 Cronin was tried at Glasgow Sheriff Court following an affray in a South

Side dance hall in which a young man was stabbed and lost an eye. The organizer of the dance,

who was cut with a broken bottle during the affray, stated that he was reluctant to give evidence

at the trial because he was fearful of being labelled a 'squealer' in the Gorbals. A police constable

confirmed that it was 'practically impossible' for the police to obtain evidence in such cases.

Cronin, who pleaded self-defence, was sentenced to a year's imprisonment.94

The Beehive Boys were repeatedly involved in 'mob' attacks on the police throughout the

1930s. In December 1934 five of the gang's members were charged following an assault upon a

beat constable in Cumberland Street. The officer, who was allegedly beaten with 'sticks', suffered

8 9S t r at h c ly d e R e g i o n a l A r c h iv e s , D - H E W

18/3 /20 , case no.2904.9 0 T h e ' a ve rage i ndus tr i a l week l y wage ' r e ma i n ed

a t j us t unde r t h ree pou nds t h rou gh out the decade ,

a c c o r d i n g to J. St evenson and C. C o o k , Britain in

the D epression. Society and Politics 1929-39 ( L o n d o n ,

1994),25.91Scottish Record Office, 807 /33 /14 , Register of

the Sheriff Court of Ayrshire at Kilmarnock; Glasgow

Herald, 9 June 1936. Over fifty years later, LarryRankin gave a detailed account of this incident to

Stephen H umph ries: N ational Sound Archive,C590/02/177-180, 15-16.

9 2N a t i o n al S o u n d A r c hi v e, C 5 9 0 / 0 2 / 1 7 7 - 1 8 0 ,

2 3 - 4 . His re t i c ence is u n s u r p r i s i n g as he was b e i n g

i n t e r v i e w e d on camera for a f o r t h c o m i n g BBC

t e levis ion series , w hi ch me an t tha t his i den t i t y

c o u l d not be shie lded by the use of a p s e u d o n y m .9 3Glasgow Herald,25 Augus t 1936;Sunday Mail,

13 February, 25 S e p t e m b e r , 23 O c t o b e r 1938, 21

M a y 1939.9 4

Glasgow Herald, 2 7 , 2 8 , 29 J u n e 1939.




266 Social Histo ry VOL. 23 : N O. 3

head and body injuries and needed seven stitches over his right eye.95

Peter Williamson and

Herb ert Howie were among those charged with the assault. Williamson had only just been

released from prison following the sentence imposed at Glasgow Sheriff Court in February 1934,

and the assault on a beat constable may well have held a symbolic importance for the Beehive

Boys. However, Williamson appeared in court w ith his head heavily bandaged, which suggests

that the police may have extracted their own revenge once he had been taken into custody.96

Collective confrontations between the Beehive gang and police officers frequently followed

police attempts to take gang mem bers into custody. In the early hou rs of a Sunday mo rning in

July 1939, for example, a major disturbance e rupted in the Gorbals as the B eehive Boys and the

South Side Stickers reportedly joined forces to confront police officers who were conveying

two prisoners to the police station. 'Hundreds' of local people gathered at the main street

corners, and police reinforcements were stoned as they arrived in Thistle Street in squad cars

and vans. As the disturbance spread, shop w indow s were smashed and police officers were forced

to stand guard to prevent looting. Robert McArthur, a twenty-year-old unemployed labourer

of Thistle Street, told the Sunday Mail: As soon as the police quelled one disturbance anotherone broke out immediately after.'

97The police drew batons and were clearly determined to

meet force with force, yet their ability to mobilize large num bers and their willingness to contest

control of the streets were matched by local street gangs.

V I

Membership of street gangs offered considerable cultural capital to young men in the Gorbals.

The Beehive Boys cultivated reputations as criminal specialists and 'hard' men , and flaunted their

status and occasional wealth, bo th in their fashionable, expensive clothes and by asserting th eirownership of one of the Gorbals' principal thoroughfares. Their collective involvement in

property crime effectively gave them an economic role during an era of heavy local unem-

ployment. Moreover, while it is too crude to depict unemployment as the 'cause' of gang

conflicts in interwar Glasgow, the decline of heavy industry does appear to have led to an

upsurge in property crime among gang members. As unemployment increasingly undermined

traditional, work-based masculine identities, it became more common for men in their twenties

and thirties to play active roles in street gangs. Gang members articulated a tough version of

masculinity, and displays of bravado, whether on the streets or in the courtrooms, could earn

widespread peer recognition. Mem bership of the Beehive Boys appears to have been fluid, notleast since many of the gang's leading figures were gaoled repeatedly during the 1930s. N on e

the less, Peter Williamson and his associates clearly identified themselves as a gang, and were

widely viewed as such by local people and by the police, as well as by rival formations both

within the Gorbals and beyond.

While the Beehive Boys were the subject of ongoing scrutiny by the Glasgow police, Peter

Williamson, as the gang's recognized leader, was singled out for attention. He was arrested on

at least fifteen occasions betw een 1930 and 1937 and served a string of pr ison sentences. His

active leadership of the B eehive Boys was therefore sporadic. Und er Sillitoe, the Glasgow police

proved to be a more powerful force than any of the street gangs in the city. Th ere w ere no

9 5Sunday Mail, 2 D e c e m b e r 1 9 3 4 .

9 6Glasgow Herald, 4 D e c e m b e r 1 9 34 .

9 7Sunday Mail, 3 0 J u l y 1 9 3 9 .





streets which beat constables or detectives did not dare to enter, and no gang leader was beyond

their reach. Quite the reverse, southern division officers were determined to issue constant

reminders of their power over Williamson and his circle. Policing was pro-active, as illustrated

by the use of informers and by the readiness of police motor patrols to stop and search gang

members. Moreover, although there are no hints in contemporary press reports that police

officers provoked collective confrontations with the Beehive Boys, such tactics were certainlydeployed against sectarian street gangs in Glasgow's East End, whilst in the Gorbals it is clear

that the police were ever ready to meet force with force.98

The Glasgow police faced widespread resistance when making arrests in working-class

districts throughout the 1930s. Disturbances were especially common late on Saturday nights,

when large crowds gathered on the streets as dance halls and public houses closed, and gang

members could effectively offer leadership to large crowds of local people at such moments."

However, attitudes towards the gangs within districts such as the Gorbals were always ambigu-

ous. The Beehive Boys were well integrated within local kinship networks and their concern

with the cachet of Thistle Street had broader resonances within the culture of the neighbour-hood. Yet there were repeated claims during the 1930s that gangs throughout Glasgow's

working-class districts relied upon intimidation to prevent local people testifying against them

in court, and it is likely that the Beehive Boys inspired fear and admiration in equal measure

among the broader population of the Gorbals.

How might we evaluate Sillitoe's self-proclaimed triumph over Glasgow's gangs in the light

of this case-study? The trial in February 1934 and the recurrent prison sentences served by

Williamson and others inevitably disrupted the Beehive Boys' organization and activities.

However, it is important to recognize the limited effectiveness of police strategies. The gang

was not broken up. Moreover, Larry Rankin's testimony suggests that the police only clearedup a relatively small number of the property crimes committed by the gang's members. Equally,

although the police could mobilize superior force against any one of Glasgow's gangs, they were

unable to prevent gang conflicts breaking out, since affrays could occur in various parts of the

city at any one time. The success of police campaigns against the gangs could never be absolute.

Ownership of the streets was too vigorously contested in districts such as the Gorbals, where

traditions of gang formation were deeply rooted. Ultimately, the outbreak of the Second World

War, which saw many members of the city's street gangs enlist in the armed forces, caused more

profound disruption to gang activity in Glasgow than any of the police strategies devised by

Sillitoe.100

University ofLiverpool

9 8S i l l i t o e , op. cit., 131.

9 9See the c a s e r e p o r t e d by the Glasgow Herald,

2 7 A u g u s t 1935.

100 Mu r r a y , op. cit. ,154.


ContentServer 15.Aspx

Documents

Transcript of ContentServer 15.Aspx