Its a fairly logical reaction to such treatment of poor people. Possibly they had disputed rights to the land they were living on or were renting and the owner sold as even in Victorian Britain I suspect if they owned the land they would have had some rights but a lot of nasty things happen to poor and even ordinary people when the rich go unrestrained. Far worse even than in parts of Britain and the US today where at least there is some social services and legal rights for people. [Still a lot better than in parts of what used to be called the 3rd world.]
60
@Dorsai
Its a fairly logical reaction to such treatment of poor people. Possibly they had disputed rights to the land they were living on or were renting and the owner sold as even in Victorian Britain I suspect if they owned the land they would have had some rights but a lot of nasty things happen to poor and even ordinary people when the rich go unrestrained. Far worse even than in parts of Britain and the US today where at least there is some social services and legal rights for people. [Still a lot better than in parts of what used to be called the 3rd world.]