The 1918 Port Petition: Blaming 'Outside Agitators'
In a Ceylon port town in 1918, a crowd attacked 26 liquor shops after a rice price rise. The governor receives a petition signed by 18 merchants. It blames 'outside agitators' for the disorder and asks for compensation for damaged shops; three signatories hold liquor licences. A police report records 43 arrests, 12 convictions, 4 deaths, and notes that the rice price had risen from 8 to 13 cents a measure in six weeks. A labour union leaflet, printed before the riot, calls for a boycott of shops that raised prices and does not mention liquor. The candidate must judge which explanation of the riot is best supported. The question is not who was 'right' but which claim the sources can bear. There are no court transcripts, and the petition is the only merchant voice.
1. Give two reasons the merchants' petition is weak evidence for the claim that outside agitators caused the riot.
Read the worked answer
- Interest: three of the 18 signatories held liquor licences, and the petition asks for compensation for damaged shops. Blaming outsiders directs attention away from local licence-holders and price grievances. 2. Genre and corroboration: a petition is an appeal, not a sworn inquiry; it gives no names, dates or evidence of outsiders. The police report lists arrests and deaths but does not identify outside agitators, and the union leaflet, printed before the riot, calls for a price boycott and does not mention outsiders. The claim is therefore not corroborated by the two sources closest to the event.
2. Using the police report and the leaflet, construct the strongest alternative explanation of the riot.
Read the worked answer
The price rise from 8 to 13 cents a measure in six weeks is a concrete grievance, and the leaflet shows organised anger at shops that raised prices before the riot. The police record of 43 arrests, 12 convictions and 4 deaths shows a serious disturbance, while the attack on 26 liquor shops suggests that liquor licences were a visible target, possibly because shopkeepers were seen as profiting. Judgement: the best-supported explanation is a local economic protest that focused on liquor shops, not a plot by outsiders. This does not prove that every rioter acted for that reason; it is the claim the sources can bear.
3. What source would best test whether the riot was organised, and what would you look for in it?
Read the worked answer
Police arrest registers or magistrate's depositions giving each person's residence and occupation would be best. If most arrested lived locally and were labourers or consumers, the 'outside agitator' claim weakens; if many were strangers with no local ties, it gains some support. I would also look for the printer's record of the leaflet and any list of shops targeted. A single memoir written later would be weaker. The key is an independent, contemporaneous record that can connect individuals to organisation, not just to presence.