Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:07:11.530Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

British Labour's Lobby, 1867–75

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2014

H. W. McCready
H. W. McCready*
Affiliation:
McMaster University
Get access

Extract

The years 1867–75 were ominous ones in the history of British trade unionism; they were also years of some of its greatest successes. The renewal in 1867 of trade union violence and murder by the Saw-Grinders of Sheffield created a widespread demand for suppression or at least investigation of the unions; and in the same year the Court of Queen's Bench in the case of Hornby vs. Close questioned the legality of unions and denied their funds the protection of the law. Legislation of some kind was certain to follow from these events and organized labour was therefore faced with a serious situation. The Conservative Government of the day decided to proceed by way of Royal Commission and it was only after the organization and practices of the unions had been examined exhaustively over a period of almost two years in 1867–9 that the first steps were taken in the direction of new legislation. Even then the Government—the first Gladstone administration had come to power—moved with exasperating slowness and the unions were kept uncertain of their fate until 1871. But the Liberal enactments of that year did not dispose of the problem; only with R. A. Cross's acts of 1875 were British trade unions set upon their modern foundations. Though long delayed, the two instalments of reform, in 1871 and 1875, constituted a complete success for the unionists, the first great legislative victory won by organized labour and a forecast of its power in the twentieth century.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science/Revue canadienne de economiques et science politique , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , May 1956 , pp. 141 - 160
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association 1956

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 On the Royal Commission and its background see my article, “British Labour and the Royal Commission on Trade Unions, 1867–9,” University of Toronto Quarterly, XXIV, no. 4, 06, 1955, 390–409.Google Scholar

2 On the organization and progress of the C.A.T. see MS Minute Book, passim, and also Progress Report to Members of Trades Societies of the United Kingdom, adopted at the meeting of July 17, 1868. Both are in Webb Coll., section B, vol. XVIII, London School of Economics.

3 The bill of 1867 was drafted for the Conference by Chas. Neate, M.P.; that of 1868 by Professor E. S. Beesly and Henry Crompton. See Minute Book, meetings of Feb.–March, 1867; Oct., 1867–March, 1868.

4 Ibid., meetings of March 16 and May 15, 1868.

5 Ibid., meeting of Sept. 11, 1868.

6 See my article, “British Labour and the Royal Commission on Trade Unions,” cited in n. 1.

7 “The Trade Union Bill,” Fortnightly Review, 07, 1869, 33.Google Scholar A copy of the bill is in the Howell Coll., Bishopsgate Institute; the text was published in BeeHive, April 17, 1869, 1e.

8 On the campaign see BeeHive reports, April 24, 5c–d; June 26, 5e–f; and The Times, April 22, 5c; June 24, 12f. See also George Howell to Henry Crompton, May 29, 1869, Howell Papers, Bishopsgate Institute.

9 BeeHive, July 5, 1869, 5e–f and editorial, 4c–d.

10 Ibid., 5e–f; and see his reply to the masters' deputation which waited on him in opposition to Harrison's bill on June 25, 1869, ibid., June 26, 6f. On the Government's attitude see ProfessorBeesly, E. S., letter of 02 5, 1870, in Birmingham Post Google Scholar, reprinted in his Letters to the Working Classes, etc. (London, 1870), 16–17.Google Scholar

11 See speeches made at the Exeter Hall mass meeting on June 23 in support of the bill, in BeeHive, June 26, 1869, 5e–f; and Harrison to Beesly, July 3, 1869, Harrison Papers, 14. (The Harrison Papers are in the keeping of a grandson to whom the author is much indebted.)

12 Hansard, III Series, vol. CXCVII, (June 17–July 15, 1869), cols. 1344–86; H. Crompton to A. J. Mundella, June 7, 1869, Mundella Papers, Sheffield University.

13 Opponents also entered the field: a masters' deputation waited on Bruce (see n. 10); the Birmingham Chamber of Commerce sent up a petition against the bill; two pamphlets were circulated; and the Law Times ran critical articles.

14 Hansard, III series, vol. CXCVII, col. 1346.

15 Ibid., cols. 1379 seq.

16 There are several references to trade union legislation as Class I legislation in the agenda of Cabinet meetings for Jan., 1871; see, e.g., Brit. Mus., Add. MSS, 44639, f. 5.

17 On the 1871 legislation see Howell, G., Handy-Book of the Labour Laws (London, 1876), 129 seq. Google Scholar, and Hedges, R. Y. and Winterbottom, A., Legal History of Trade Unionism (London, 1930), 65 seq., 112 seq.Google Scholar Synopses are in Crompton, A. and Crompton, H. and Harrison, F., Digest and Report of the Trade Union Acts (London, 1871).Google Scholar

18 Cabinet meeting of Jan. 28, 1871, Add. MSS, 44639, f. 6.

19 Harrison, , “The Trade Union Bill,” BeeHive, 07 1, 1871 Google Scholar, 1a–c; Harrison to Brentano, n.d. (in reply to letter of March 2, 1873), Brentano Papers. (The Brentano Papers are in the keeping of Professor Brentano's daughter to whom the author is indebted.)

20 The Home Secretary made this clear to the Trades Union Congress' deputation of March 9–BeeHive, March 11, 1871, 6c.

21 See Henry Crompton, “New Penal Law against Workmen,” ibid., April 29, 1871, 2a–b.

22 T.U.C. debate and resolution reported in BeeHive, March II, 1871, 4d–5a; and see Howell, G., Labour Legislation, Labour Movements and Labour Leaders (London, 1902), 188.Google Scholar

23 Webb, S. and Webb, B., The History of Trade Unionism (London, 1907), 260.Google Scholar

24 See, e.g., BeeHive editorials of Feb. 5, 1871, 8d–9a; March 4, 1871, 9a–b; and T.U.C. debate cited in n. 22.

25 See C.A.T. Minute Book, meeting of Feb. 18, 1871 and BeeHive reports, Feb. 25, 1871, 4a, and March 4, 1871, 2d.

26 See BeeHive, March 11, 1871, 6c; March 18, 1871, 3d–4a, for reports of proceedings.

27 The Lords' amendments repealed an act of 1859 which had legalized picketing and prohibited “persistently following” any person and “watching or besetting” his premises or the approach to them. The act was all the more serious from the unionist point of view because its administration was left to the summary jurisdiction of the unpaid magistrates, often employers of labour themselves. Bruce practically admitted this was a flaw likely to lead to injustice—see his reply to the T.U.C. deputation cited in n. 20. On the Government's attitude see Mundella to R. Leader, April 1, 1871, Mundella Papers.

28 Humphrey, A. W., Life of Robert Applegarth (London, 1918), 169–70Google Scholar, quoting 11th Annual Report of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners.

29 A., and Crompton, H. and Harrison, F., Digest and Report of the Trade Union Acts, 2–3.Google Scholar

30 First appointed in 1869, the Parliamentary Committee had been scorned by the C.A.T. and had proved ineffective.

31 Official reports of T.U.C. proceedings begin with 1873; before that date newspaper reports must be used. The Committee's reports date from 1872 and were usually entitled Reports for the Year. … All are in the Goldsmiths' Library, University of London. The Howell Papers are at Bishopsgate Institute, London.

32 See, e.g., Report for the Year 1873.

33 There is a full record in Howell, Labour Legislation, 193 seq.

34 Report of the Executive Committee to be Presented to the First Annual Meeting of Members, dated Feb. 26, 1874, Howell Coll.

35 See, e.g., the programme of parliamentary action for the session of 1874 appended to the 1873 Report. It was drafted by Henry Crompton—see his letter to Howell, Dec. 28, 1873, Howell Papers, and also Howell, Labour Legislation, 309. A good illustration of the distribution of emphasis is Howell's letter of July 12, 1873, to Gladstone, the Prime Minister, written on behalf of the Parliamentary Committee soliciting the Government's support for the reform of the labour laws. The letter dealt with four topics—the Criminal Law Amendment Act, the Master and Servant Act, the Law of Conspiracy, the nine-hours' bill—and especially with the first. Add. MSS, 44439, ff. 152–8. It is notable that the Home Secretary had doubts about the Criminal Law Amendment Act, at least in the first months of its operation—see Bruce to Gladstone, Nov. 21, 1871, ibid., 44087, f. 34.

36 For provincial protests in 1872–3 see BeeHive, June 28, 7b–c; Aug. 10, 7d; Aug. 17, 12c; Oct. 5, 10d; March 17, 9c–d; May 24, 5c; and leaflet in Howell Coll., calling for a mass meeting at Edinburgh on Aug. 23, entitled Repeal of the Criminal Law Amendment Act: Trades Demonstration.

37 For the Hyde Park demonstration and press reaction see BeeHive, May 24, 2d–3b, and June 7, 9a–10b; London Trades Council, Annual Report, 1872–3, 7–9, Howell Coll.; The Times, June 3, 6e–f, 9b–c, and June 4, 9b–c.

38 On the passing of Hughes's leadership there see Armytage, W. H. G., New Light on Thomas Hughes' Rugby Colony in Tennessee, East Tennessee Historical Society's Publications, no. 21, 1949.Google Scholar

39 Howell, , Labour Legislation, 185–6.Google Scholar

40 E.g., in “Mr. Crompton and the Criminal Law Amendment Act,” Dec. 23, 1874, 1010–12.

41 BeeHive, Jan. 13, 1872, 5b–6c.

42 H. Crompton to Howell, March 8 and 30, 1872, Howell Papers; Howell's MS autobiography, n.p.; Bruce to Gladstone, July 14, 1872, Add. MSS, 44087, f. 54.

43 See Report of the Parliamentary Committee for the Year 1872, 6; Howell to D. Guile, May 8, 1872, Howell Papers; BeeHive, June 21, 1872, 13d.

44 Harcourt, , “The Criminal Law Amendment Act,” BeeHive, 06 28, 1872, 1a–2a.Google Scholar

45 Resolution passed by the Parliamentary Committee at meeting of June 19–20, 1872, ibid., June 21, 1872, 13d.

46 May 31, 1a–b and 2b–c; June 14, 1872, 1a–c.

47 Howell to Guile, May 18, 1872; Howell to Macdonald, May 25, 1872, Howell Papers; Howell, , Labour Legislation, 214.Google Scholar

48 BeeHive, June 14, 1872, 5b; June 28, 1872, 6d.

49 See T.U.C. debate and resolution, ibid., Jan. 25, 1873, 3d.

50 For Brett's charge to the jury see ibid., Dec. 28, 1872, 3d–4a; for comment see Morley, John, “The Five Gas Stokers,” Fortnightly Review, 01, 1873, 138–41Google Scholar; and John Morley to Harrison, Dec. 22, 1872, quoted in Hirst, F. W., Early Life and Letters of John Morley (London, 1927), I, 230.Google Scholar

51 E.g., that at Exeter Hall, Jan. 9, 1873, BeeHive, Jan. 11, 1873, 4a–d; and see ibid., Dec., 1872 to Feb., 1873, passim.

52 For the Committee's Report and T.U.C. proceedings see ibid., Jan. 18, 6–7; Jan. 25, 3.

53 March 24, 9e; April 7, 9e; June 2, 8c; July 7, 14d.

54 Harrison to J. Morley, Friday, n.d., Harrison Papers, VIII. Morley replied (April 6, 1873, ibid., VII): “Delane is a shrewd old worldling, and may well be your warm admirer, as he knows how the wind blows.”

55 April 20, 1873, Harrison Papers, VII.

56 July 6, 1873, Add. MSS, 44087, f. 92.

57 Harrison, , “Mr. Harcourt's Conspiracy Bill,” BeeHive, 07 5, 1873, 3a–b.Google Scholar

58 Harrison, “The Conspiracy Law Amendment Bill,” ibid., Aug. 9, 1873, 1a–b.

59 Ibid.

60 July 6, 1873, Add. MSS, 44087, f. 92.

61 Davis, W. J., The British Trades Union Congress: History and Recollections (London, 1910), chaps. I and II.Google Scholar

62 Oct. 21, 1870, Howell Papers.

63 See BeeHive reports, March 11, 4d–5d; March 18, 3d–4a.

64 Sheffield Telegraph, Jan. 13, 1874, 2b.

65 Report of the Trade Union Congress held at Sheffield, 14.

66 Jan. 13, 1874, 2b. This editorial concluded that unions could no longer be ignored: “upon the manner in which they are conducted depends, in no small measure, the future welfare of England.”

67 See BeeHive articles, e.g. Feb. 25, 1871, 1a–d; July 1, 1871, 1a–c.

68 July 1, 1871, 13b–c. The list of those who voted for the Lords' amendments was headed “Tories and Liberal Capitalists.” The BeeHive of July 15, 4–5, contained a much more thorough analysis of the vote. Henceforth the paper printed division lists for all bills of special interest to the working classes.

69 Ibid., June 21, 1873, 13d.

70 E.g., Parliamentary Committee, Preliminary Notice of the Sheffield Trade Union Congress (London, n.d. [late 1873]), 2 Google Scholar, Goldsmiths' Library.

71 Ibid., 2.

72 Ibid., 4; Test Questions for General Election (London, 1873), Goldsmiths' Library.Google Scholar

73 BeeHive, Sept. 9, 1871, 11c. On the political developments in general, see my article, “The British Election of 1874: Frederic Harrison and the Liberal—Labour Dilemma,” this Journal, XX, no. 2, May, 1954, 166–75.

74 BeeHive, Jan. 13, 1872, 1d–2b.

75 Ibid., Jan. 18, 1873, 6c–7b.

76 Ibid., Aug. 9, 1873, 1b–d; Aug. 16, 1873, 2a–d.

77 Aug. 8, 1873, Add. MSS, 43389, unfoliated.

78 Harrison to J. Morley, Aug. 21, 1873, Harrison Papers, VIII.

79 See my article, “The British Election of 1874,” cited in n. 73.

80 Special Report of the Deputation to the Home Secretary, November 5, 1873 (London, 1873), 8, Goldsmiths' Library.Google Scholar And see Beesly, , “Tories and Workmen,” BeeHive, 02. 28, 1874, 1–2.Google Scholar

81 Feb. 10, 1874, Harrison Papers, IX.

82 Harrison, , “The General Elections,” BeeHive, March 8, 1873, 3a–cGoogle Scholar; Harrison to J. Morley, July 2 and Aug. 21, 1873, Harrison Papers, VIII; H. Crompton, “The Test Question,” BeeHive, Jan. 31, 1874, 3a.

83 Beesly, “Tories and Workmen,” cited in n. 80.

84 See the issues of Feb. 14 and 21, 1874, passim.

85 Ibid., March 7, 1874, 2d.

86 ”Tories and Workmen,” cited in n. 80.

87 Feb. 10, 1874, Howell Papers.

88 BeeHive, March 21, 1874, 1a–b.

89 See Hughes's explanation of his accepting the Royal Commission appointment in “The Royal Commission on the Labour Laws,” BeeHive, March 21, 1874, 1b–c. Disraeli gave assurances similar to the Home Secretary's. For an illustration of the BeeHive's disbelief see, e.g., July 18, 1874, 7b–c.

90 On the boycott see: ibid., March 28, 1874, 3b–c; The Royal Commission on the Labour Laws and the Trade Union Congress Parliamentary Committee—A Statement of the Facts, etc. (London, 1874), Howell Coll.; and Howell's reply to the Secretary of the Commission, F. H. Bacon, who had asked him to give evidence—June 10, 1874, Howell Papers. On Macdonald's resignation, see BeeHive, March 28, 1874, 3b–c. On Hughes, see: Howell to H. Crompton, March 21, 1874; Harrison to Howell, April 26, 1874, Howell Papers.

91 March 28, 1874, ibid.

92 April 25, 1874, Howell Papers. For other results see BeeHive, March 28, 2c–d.

93 Capital and Labour used this fact to prove the absence of labour grievances—March 10, 1875, 35.

94 S. and B. Webb, The History of Trade Unionism, 274–5.

95 See Howell's MS history of the campaign for the reform of labour law, in his Letter Book for 1875.

96 May 9, 1874, Harrison Papers, IX.

97 Report of the Seventh Annual Trade Union Congress (London, 1875), passim; Memorial to Mr. R. A. Cross on the Labour Laws, April 27, 1873, Goldsmiths' Library.

98 Crompton, H., “The Workmen's Victory,” Fortnightly Review, 09, 1875, 399.Google Scholar

99 On the New Alliance, founded 1871, see BeeHive, especially Oct.–Nov., 1871. On the Conservative Working Men's Association, founded 1868, see, e.g., ibid., April 11, 1868, 4c. A BeeHive editorial applauded the Conservative's views, Jan. 4, 1873, 10a–b.

100 See Howell's article, ibid., July 3, 4a–b.

101 Ibid., Aug. 7, 1a–2b.

102 Ibid., July 3, 4a–b.

103 BeeHive, July 10, 1875, 12a. Crompton's views were the same; see his “The Workmen's Victory” (cited in n. 98), 399–406.

104 Aug. 4, 1875, 416–17.

105 Report of the Glasgow Trade Union Congress, October, 1875, passim; H. Crompton to Howell, Aug. 22 and 24, 1875, Howell Papers.

106 Quoted in Fortnightly Review, Sept., 1875, 399.

107 Texts of these acts are in Howell, Handy-Book, chaps, II, v. Synopses and discussion may be found in ibid., chaps. I, IV; Howell, G., The Labour Laws: An Address … January 14, 1876 (London, 1876)Google Scholar; and Crompton, H., Digest of the New Labour Acts (Parliamentary Committee: n.d.).Google Scholar

108 The Labour Laws: An Address, 9. See also the preface to the 1876 edition of his Handy-Book.

109 “The New Labour Laws,” July 5, 1875, 1a–2a.

110 BeeHive report, Oct. 16, 1875, 5a.

111 Howell to Robert Knight, Sept. 29, 1875, printed with the Committee's report to the Glasgow Congress, ibid.

112 Davis, The British Trades Union Congress, 55.

113 See tables in S. and B. Webb, The History of Trade Unionism, Appendix V, 491–5.