British Trade Unions, 1707-1918, Part II, Volume 5

1865-1880

W Hamish Fraser

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• Print ISBN: 9781138751316
• eBook ISBN: 9781000419511
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: British History
• Index: History

Drawing from a variety of libraries and archives, this collection brings together material to illustrate the history of the development of trade unionism and industrial relations. It spans the period from the early journeymen's trade societies as they emerged in the 18th-Century through to the end of the First World War. Part II, Volume 5 spans 1865-1880.

To the Trades’ Unionists of the United Kingdom

FELLOW WORKMEN,

 As a Trades’ Unionist, like yourselves, I desire to speak freely and frankly to you on behalf of Manhood Suffrage.

During the last few weeks you have been called upon to witness a General Election. About 1,000,000 of our fellow countrymen have had the “privilege” of recording their votes in the election of the “Law Makers” of Great Britain.

Out of this number only about 100,000, or one-tenth of the whole, belong to the Working Class of our population. Besides which there are about 6,000,000 of the adult males without any vote or direct voice in the great council of the nation.

Yet these “Law Makers” enact laws binding upon us all; they impose taxes we all have to pay; aye, and spend these taxes most improvidently. Yet we have no voice to advise, no power to check, any extravagance in the expenditure, or mismanagement in the government, or injustice in the laws.

The privileged classes in this country tell us that we have “no rights without duties;” this we admit. But they impose duties and withhold the rights : of this we complain. We obey the laws in common, let us have a voice in their enactment. We pay taxes (far greater than the rich in proportion to the means we have, or our property to be protected), yet are denied any voice in the adjustment of our taxation, or in the spending of our revenue.

The consequence is, that our laws are partial ; being made by a class, for a class; and the taxation most oppressive upon those least able to bear it.

As Unionists we have just reason to complain, inasmuch as there are laws not yet repealed which bear heavily upon the workmen. For example, those relating to Masters and Workmen. How often do we find some case which startles us by the manifest cruelty and injustice of the sentence. For if the case had been reversed, the employer defendant instead of the employed, it would have been dismissed. (See evidence before Committee of the House of Commons this Session.)

How often have we found some of our greatest and most combined efforts rendered nugatory by some antique piece of legislation in the shape of an unrepealed Act of Parliament, or by some action taken by the Home Office.

Is it not fresh in your recollection that the government lent soldiers to a private contractor at Chelsea to enable him to resist his workmen’s demand? Have they not done so at Plymouth? Did they not do so at Aldershot? And in how many cases have they given assistance where the men could not bring positive proof, although they have felt morally certain? Scotland Yard provided “pickets” in blue coats for a large number of buildings in London during the Builders’ Strike and Lock-out. Yet we were condemned if we sent a private citizen (without citizen’s rights) simply to inform workmen in the most friendly and civil manner that a trade dispute existed.

Bearing all this in mind, let us now demand our enfranchisement; not as a class, but as subjects in the eye of the law, and as citizens of our common country, which we all love, all support, and all protect. You spend thousands of pounds annually to obtain some trifling advance in wages, and some small reduction in time; and are compelled to fight for its maintainance over and over again, because no voice is heard in Labour’s right in the “Commons,” or people’s House.

Men stand there and vilify our class, our motives, and our actions, because they know we cannot be present to rebut their charges.

Let us once be able to maintain by the force of intellect and truth our rights as workmen, in that house, and depend upon it we shall ripe in the social scale, and show that we can discharge our duties as well as exercise our rights.

But they tell us that we are incapable of self-government, and unfit to be trusted!! This we deny. Our own organizations prove our power of government, our self-restraint, our financial ability and economy, and our law-making capabilities likewise. They show more, they prove that we understand justice, and are earnest in the protection of every member, whether he be assailed by an employer, or by a fellow-workman and brother Unionist. Your combinations are the most perfect in organization and the most powerful in influence of any in the kingdom. Let us use them for our rights as citizens, and you will soon see the rights of labour respected and the workman benefitted thereby.

We seek not to over-balance political power by the substitution of one class influence for another. We seek it for all men without distinction; for, on the principle of Manhood Suffrage, protected by the ballot, class legislation as well as class representation will be no more.

Support, then, The Reform League in your various localities, and our next parliament will merit your gratitude and respect, by passing a Reform Bill at once comprehensive and just to the People.

I am, fellow workmen,

Yours in unity, GEORGE HOWELL,

Secretary of the Reform League,

8 Adelphi Terrace, Strand, W.C.

P.S.—All information concerning rules, addresses, cards of membership, &c., and the formation of Branches in your respective localities, will be supplied by the Sec. as above, to whom subscriptions also may be sent.

MR. POTTER
AND THE
LONDON TRADES’ COUNCIL.

_______________

THE Council held a special meeting on Wednesday, March 29th, at the Bell Inn, Old Bailey, in compliance with a request from the Operative Bricklayers—Mr. Mildred in the chair.

After the minutes had been confirmed, a letter was read, from the Tinplate Workers, stating that they had voted £5 towards paying the expenses of the movement to obtain an alteration in the Masters’ and Workmen’s Act; also, letters from the iron trades now on strike.

The secretary said he had received an important paper from the Operative Bricklayers’ Society; also, a verbal communication from the Amalgamated Engineers, on the conduct of Mr. Potter, in calling trades’ delegate meetings on his own responsibility: He (the secretary), would read the paper on the, subject.

TO THE LONDON TRADES’ COUNCIL.

March 21st, 1865.

Sir and Gentlemen,—An, announcement having appeared in the Beehive newspaper of March 4th and 11th, that a meeting, of trades’ delegates would be held at the Sussex. Hotel, Bouveric-street, Fleet-street, on the 15th inst, to consider the lock-out in the iron trade, &c., and feeling the irresponsible character of ouch meeting, we forward to you the following resolution, viz.:—“That in the opinion of this Executive Council, the conduct of Mr. G. Potter in calling a delegate meeting of the trades, without first consulting the London Trades’ Council, of which he is a member, is deserving of the severest condemnation, and calls upon that council to censure such assumption of undelegated power.” It furthermore adds, that if the Trades’ Council is prepared to allow its functions to be thus set aside with impunity by one of its own non-official members, it no longer deserves our confidence and support.

By order of the Executive Council,

W. CIIASB, Chairman.

E. COULSON, Gen. Sec.

Mr. Howell would inform the council that he attended as special delegate of the Bricklayers’ Society, numbering 4,000 members. He was instructed to, ask the council whether it was intended to allow Mr. Potter, or any other person, to call delegate meetings on questions affecting the interests of trades’ societies? If so, then he considered it time that the council ceased to exist, and handed its functions over, to Mr. Potter to deal with them as he might feel disposed. He thought, when the council was established, that there was a guarantee against speculators interfering with the special character of trades’ delegate meetings, and he would say that many things had been done by the council which secured for the societies the esteem and good-will of the most intelligent persons of the age; and he had hoped to see the same course continued. He would like to hear an expression of opinion on the subject.

Mr. Allan, secretary of the Amalgamated Engineers, said he was deputed by the engineers’ executive council to appear before the meeting to express the indignation of that society at the wanton insult offered by Mr. Potter to the London Trades’ Council. He had been on several councils in his time, but he never heard of one, of the members calling a delegate meeting without consulting the other members of the council, and he thought that any one who would so act was not worthy the respect of those with whom he had been elected to do business. He would like to know from the secretary if he had received any communication from Mr. Potter on the subject.

The secretary said he had hot.

Mr. Allah continued by saying that he had received letters from the men on strike, complaining of a delegate from the Trades’ Council having been in their neighbourhood without calling on them for such information on the subject as would be useful to the traces of London, and prevent false reports being circulated.

Mr. Cope had stated his views on the subject at the delegate meeting, and felt that great mischief would result if Mr. Potter was allowed to continue the irresponsible course he was pursuing.

Mr. Coulson said that the bricklayers’ executive considered that the conduct of Mr. G. Potter, in convening a trades’ delegate meeting on the iron trades’ dispute, without consulting the London Trades’ Council, or without the authority of any trade, was an unwarrantable liberty, and an insult to trade societies, which placed them in a false position; and it had appeared in the Press that the trades of London had specially sent a delegate down into Staffordshire to learn from the lock-outs the particulars of their dispute, which was without any foundation and entirely untrue. Therefore, it was highly esential that Mr. Potter’s position should be clearly laid before the public, and he would move the following resolution:—

That this meeting regrets and condemns the course taken by Mr. G. Potter in calling a meeting of trades’ delegates on the dispute in the iron trades without first consulting the London Trades’ Council, of which he is a member; and consider that meetings so called by any unauthorised person or persons are dangerous, as resolutions may be passed in them pledging societies to principles that would be prejudicial to their influence and material prosperity, and place the trades’ societies in a false position before the public.

This was seconded by Mr. Cope.

Mr. Applegarth, in supporting the resolution, regretted the absence of Mr. Potter, but as he had been informed of the nature of the business of the evening, and having waited till half-past 10 o’clock, it was no fault of the council that he was not present. He willingly accorded to every man the right of convening meetings or taking whatever steps he thought fit to assist the oppressed, so long as he acted in his individual capacity, and did not lead the public to attach more importance to such actions than they really merited. But he altogether deprecated the idea of any irresponsible and unauthorised individual arrogating to himself the right which belonged to a properly authorised and responsible body, such as the London Trades’ Council, and more especially when such had been done by one of its members. One of the evils resulting from such proceeding was evidenced at the dissolution of the London committee appointed to receive subscriptions on behalf of the men resisting the “Discharge-note.” After all legitimate expenses were paid, a gift of £8 in one instance, and £5 in another was awarded for “services rendered” during a few weeks, whilst, in hundreds of instances, far more onerous services have been rendered gratuitously. The committee were awarded 2s. 6d. per night for their services, when frequently we hear of men almost starving in defence of a principle on 2s. 6d. per week. He contended that such proceedings, if not discountenanced and repudiated by the Trades’ Council, were calculated to abuse the public mind still further against our societies, and afford just grounds for those grave accusations so frequently made against their leaders.

The resolution was unanimously carried.

Mr. Danter, President of the Amalgamated Engineers, considered the conduct of Mr. Potter as unworthy of the confidence of any respectable member of society; in fact, it appeared that Mr. Potter had become the aider and abettor of strikes. He thought of nothing else; he followed no other business; strikes were his bread and cheese; in short, ho was a strike-jobber, and he made the Beehive newspaper his instrument for pushing his nose into every unfortunate dispute that sprung up. He (Mr. Danter) did not know the precise position in which the trades’ unions stood with the Beehive, but they should take care that men of Mr. Potter’s stamp should not commit them to any paper that made capital by trading on their misfortunes. He would move the following resolution:—

That the-visit of Mr. George Potter to Staffordshire was undertaken without the knowledge or sanction of the London Trades’ Council; and this meeting is of opinion that the only object ho had in view was to promote the interests of the Beehive newspaper, and deem it our duty to make known the fact, and thus disabuse the minds of the men locked out, and likewise the public generally.

Mr. Applegarth seconded the motion, which was unanimously carried.

Mr. Applegarth proposed, and Mr. Cope seconded,

That this council expresses its surprise that the following resolution, which was unanimously adopted at the delegate meeting convened by the Trades’ Council, March 23rd, should have been left out of the report of said meeting in the Beehive newspaper.

This was also carried unanimously.

The following is the resolution referred to:—

That the London Trades’ Council be appointed a committee to receive subscriptions on behalf of the men engaged in the dispute in the iron trade.

Mr. Phipps, delegate of the North Staffordshire men, attended to give the latest information he had officially received from the executive. The delegates present considered ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Introduction
• George Howell, ‘To the Trades’ Unionists of the United Kingdom’, Operative Bricklayers’ Society’s Trade Circular (1 August 1865)
• Mr. Potter and the London Trades’ Council [1865]
• Trades’ Societies and Lock-Outs. Report of the Conference of Trades’ Delegates of the United Kingdom, Held in the Temperance Hall, Townhead Street, Sheffield, on July 17th, 1866, and Four Following Days (1866)
• ‘The Tailors’ Strike and the System of Picketing’, Operative Bricklayers’ Society Monthly Report (1 September 1867)
• Edward Spencer Beesly, The Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners (1867)
• Report of the Various Proceedings Taken by the London Trades’ Council and the Conference of Amalgamated Trades, in Reference to the Royal Commission on Trades’ Unions, and Other Subjects in Connection Therewith (1867)
• Report of St. Martin’s Hall United Kingdom Trades’ Conference Committee on the Trades’ Union Inquiry Commission till 7th August, 1867 [1867]
• International Working Men’s Association, To the Trades’ Unionists’ of Great Britain and Ireland [1868]
• J. M. Ludlow, ‘Sir W. Erle on Trade Unions’, Operative Bricklayers’ Monthly Report (1 March 1869)
• Trades’ Unions and the Cost of Labour. Speech Delivered by Thomas Brassey, Jun M.P. in the House of Commons 7th July 1869 (1870)
• Robert Jobson, Trades Unions: An Inquiry into Their Rules and Working, Based on the Evidence before the Royal Commission; Showing the Folly of All Attempts to Raise Wages by Violence and Strikes, and the Beauty and Excellence of the Divine Law Governing Workmen and Employers [1870?]
• W. P. Roberts, Trade Union Bill, 1871. A Letter by Mr. W. P. Roberts, (of London and Manchester, Solicitor) to Mr. George Potter, Mr. William Allan, Mr. Alexander M’Donald and Others Interested in Trades’ Societies (1871)
• Report of the Conference of Trades Delegates, Held in the Town Hall, Leeds on December 2nd 1871. Called to Consider the Statement made by Wm. Newmarch, Esq., in His Address to the Social Science Congress Lately Held in Leeds [1872]
• W. H. Wood, The Advantages of Trades Unions [n.d.]
• Proceedings of the Miners’ National Association Conference, Held in Leeds, on 18, 19, 20, 21 and 22 November 1873 [1873]
• The Criminal Law Amendment Act. A Memorial to the Right Honourable Henry Austin Bruce, MP., with an Appendix of Cases under the Criminal Law Amendment Act [1873]
• Henry Crompton, Tracts for Trade Unionists No IV. The National Federation of Associated Employers of Labour. Report upon the Memorial Presented to the Home Secretary by the National Federation of Associated Employers of Labour, December 13th, 1873 [1874]
• Frederick Clifford, The Agricultural Lock-Out of 1874 with Notes upon Farming and Farm-Labour in the Eastern Counties (1875)
• National Association of Miners, Extraordinary Meeting of the Council Held in the Mechanics’ Institution, David St Manchester, 24 February 1875 (1875)
• Glasgow Herald, The Wages Agitation on the Clyde. 25,000 Men to be Locked Out (1877)
• Address from the Executive Council of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers to their Fellow Workmen Throughout the United Kingdom, the British Colonies, and Foreign Countries [1879]
• George Howell, ‘Trade-Unions: Their Nature, Character, and Work’, Fraser’s Magazine (January 1879)
• Explanatory Notes
• Permisssions