From the cradle to the grave, social welfare in ...

6 downloads 0 Views 2MB Size Report
Common Sergeant of London, Sir John (“Bloody Black Jack”) Sylvester, which induced .... Six Dorchester Labourers in March 1834 for the mere act of administering an oath. ...... with 'baby boom' only 250 secondary schools built by 1950s.
Working class movement UK – 1800-1926 and beyond…

Edited by Hearts and Minds Media 2017

Foreward This is a selection of articles on the Class struggle in the UK to gain democratic rights, working rights, access to healthcare, education, pensions.. Literally every benefit we now have had to be fought for even at great personal cost which is why I presented the Lune St Memorial as a cover picture. This struggle is still continuing today as the fight for a brighter future never ends in this country or globally.

1

A SHORT HISTORY OF THE BRITISH WORKING CLASS MOVEMENT TO THE 1926 GENERAL STRIKE (December 15, 2009 by rtuc)

~by KENNETH KNAPMAN First Printed and Published by the Workers’ Resource Centre (2000) 170, Wandsworth Road, London, SW8 2LA

2

FORWARD Workers’ Resource Centre is very pleased to publish this Short History of the Working Class Movement in Britain up to the 1926 General Strike. Kenneth Knapman wrote the Short History in 1992. While our historicism begins from the present, and the events in history must be seen from the perspective of the need of the working class at this time to end their marginalisation and de-politicisation and to go for socialism in Britain, it is also necessary to analyse what is stopping them from doing so. A history of the working class movement is one resource, which can be utilised from this standpoint, to examine what was the old philosophic conscience in order to settle scores with it. We hope that readers will find in this Short History such a resource. Readers will be able to draw their own conclusions from the historical traditions of the British working class, one of the oldest, most organised and practical. They will be able to appreciate, as Karl Marx discovered, that in the working class, the modem proletariat, the bourgeoisie has above all else produced its own gravedigger. The class struggle between these two major classes is the basis of the motion, change and development in society. However, Marx also analysed that it is this struggle, which will give rise to the working class constituting itself the nation and establishing socialism. To carry forward the historical traditions of the working class in today’s conditions, in our view, means taking up the task of giving that socialism a content, to give a programme and a vision for the line of march of the working class to this new society, to socialism. This is the challenge of the working class today, just as it was the challenge in their conditions of the working class in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Workers’ Resource Centre July 15, 2000

3

INTRODUCTION EVERY SO OFTEN, as History has shown, the Working Class Movement has had to regenerate itself while trying to operate under the Capitalist System. Today renewal has as much bearing as ever. It is essential because of the offensive against the movement in recent history. Overall, with the collapse of Eastern Europe, and the remnants of Socialism there, it is necessary to see that the still young movement, despite setbacks, inevitably renews itself. Like the mythological Phoenix it rises again from its ashes to continue with life afresh. The movement in Britain, affected by the class struggle, has had to move quantitatively and qualitatively making its aims ever higher but has never ultimately resolved the basic class question in Britain in favour of the working class. It is for this reason that zigzags in the movement are bound to happen. What I have tried to show in this outline, is that the movement has had to become ever more political. The integration, of politics with the working class movement both in theory and practice is of prime importance. Ken Knapman, Birmingham 1992 CHAPTER ONE THE TRADE UNIONS (An Early History) FROM THE EARLIEST times workers have formed associations to defend their rights and interests against their employers. As they developed as a CLASS, organised resistance against capitalist exploitation and oppression was essential in order to fight for the unity of the working class and to organise to end the system of exploitation of man by man. Socialism has become the ultimate goal under the Capitalist System.

4

The British Working Class is rightly proud of and loyal to its great traditions of militant organisation, determined and heroic struggle, all of which have characterised its history. In the earliest days, whatever they may have been called, there were nationwide organisations like the Great Society of the Fourteenth Century or local Craft bodies like the Yeomen Gilds. These were in essence the earliest forms of unions. Economic advancement, at first hindered the formation of permanent combinations among the JOURNEYMEN of the middle ages. Certain classes of skilled manual workers, who had no chance of becoming employers, do appear to have succeeded in establishing long lasting combinations. Nevertheless, the Industrial Revolution changed things making wider and more formidable combinations possible. The partly deliberate and partly natural concealment and secrecy of Trade Unionism of the eighteenth century makes it next to impossible to write History. The members of the earliest clubs were the skilled. Unskilled workers, if they had any such societies, have left no traces of them in history. A glimpse of activity in 1718 was where a proclamation against unlawful clubs in Devon and Somerset complains about how great numbers of wool combers and weavers had illegally presumed to use a common seal. The proclamation complains about how they tried to ‘Act as bodies Corporate’ by making and unlawfully conspiring to execute certain by-laws or Orders, whereby they pretended to determine who had the right to the Trade, what and how many Apprentices and Journeymen each should keep at once. When the Masters would not submit they fed them with money till they could again get employment in order to oblige their Masters to employ them for want of other hands. In 1754, 300 Norwich Wool Weavers, desiring to obtain an increase in wages, retreated to a hill three miles away from the town and built huts. They lived there for six weeks supported by contributions from fellow workers.

5

By 1721 the Journeymen of Tailors of London had a powerful and permanent union. When the capitalist builder or contractor began to supersede the master mason, master plasterer etc., this class of small entrepreneurs had again to give place to a hierarchy of hired workers, TRADE UNIONS in the modern sense, began to arise. The TRADE UNION was the successor of the Guild. Both institutions had arisen “under the breaking up of an old system.” From the moment that to establish a given business more capital is required than a Journeyman can easily accumulate within a few years, guildmastership – the mastership of the masterpiece, becomes little more than a name. Labour and skill are like commodities. Skill has a value, but skill only has a value if it is sold, hired out to capital. Here you have the opposition of interests between capital and labour. Labour groups together and organises the TRADE SOCIETY. Industrial society is still divided vertically trade by trade, instead of horizontally between employers and wage earners. It is the horizontal cleavage, which would transform the organisation of petty and narrow-minded craft mentality of the skilled into the modem Trade Union Movement. The pioneers of the Trade Union movement were not the trade clubs of the town Artisans but the extensive combinations of the West of England Woollen workers and Midland framework knitters. THE COMBINATION ACTS

6

An endeavour by the ruling class was made to make even economic resistance impossible. The act against illegal oaths passed in 1797 against the NORE MUTINEERS was used to break up existing Trade Unions; the Combination Acts of 1799 and 1800 outlawed them altogether. They gave the masters unlimited power to reduce wages and make conditions more severe. The sentences passed on the compositors of THE TIMES in 1810 by the Common Sergeant of London, Sir John (“Bloody Black Jack”) Sylvester, which induced reformer Francis Place to devote himself to repeal of the acts. It was the textile industries where the weight of the acts was felt; the trade clubs of the artisans were half tolerated. During the reign of this anti-union reign of terror it gave birth to real trade unionism. Huge strikes or “turnouts” as they were called took place. The Scottish Weavers in 1812; the Lancashire Spinners in 1818; the North East Coast Miners in 1810; Scotland 1818 and South Wales 1816 (including the Ironfounders, they succeeded in defeating a wage reduction). The advance of unity through these bitter years saw the emergence of the first complete national unions. The Calicoprinters, The Friendly Society of Ironfounders, the Papermakers and the Ropemakers were these national unions. Without the struggle there would have been no room for the pushing through of a Bill repealing the Combination Laws.

7

The repeal of the Combination Act seemed to have done nothing but to prove the futility of mere sectional combination (due to the commercial slump of 1825). The emancipated combinations were no more able to resist reductions than the secret ones had been. Working men turned back again from Trade Union action to the larger aims and wider character of the radical and socialist agitations of the time with which from 1829 to 1842, the Trade Union Movement had become inextricably entangled.

Engraving of events at St Peter’s Fields, 1819 The Peterloo Massacre (or Battle of Peterloo) occurred at St Peter’s Field, Manchester, England, on 16 August 1819, when cavalry charged into a crowd of 60,000–80,000 that had gathered to demand the reform of parliamentary representation. In the next period we were to see the development of the Trades-Union, which represented NEW UNIONISM. Trade Union or Trade Club represented old unionism. The ideal at which the Trades Unionists aimed was a complete union of all workers in the country in a single national trades union. CHAPTER TWO THE NEW UNIONISM OF 1829-34

8

Just before this period it is appropriate to say that the Lancashire Spinners struggles of the mid-twenties had a consequent development of organisation. A number of trades agreed to form a General Union of Trades, or philanthropic society that became known as the PHILANTHROPIC HERCULES (presumably intended as a legal cover because of the Combination acts). This was the essence of the idea or one big union. It was in Lancashire that the first outstanding trades union leader appeared, JOHN DOHERTY. He was the moving spirit in a conference of English, Scottish and Irish textile workers held in the Isle of Man in 1829 at which the GRAND GENERAL UNION of the UK was set up. Despite of its name, it appears to have been a union of cotton spinners only. In 1830 Doherty became secretary to the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION for the PROTECTION of LABOUR. This was the first Trades Union or Union of Trades, as distinct from organisations catering for one section of the workers only. 1831 saw the NATIONAL UNION OF THE WORKING CLASSES, (formed by William Lovett to support the REFORM BILL and with others, in London, became the METROPOLITAN TRADES UNION, to which many unions affiliated. In 1833 the OPERATIVE BUILDERS UNION was formed out of a number of craft unions reaching a membership of 40,000 mainly around Manchester and Birmingham. Early in 1834 it merged into the GRAND NATIONAL CONSOLIDATED TRADES UNION. At this time Radical politics were on the agenda and given great attention to by radical newspapers such as “Voice of the People.” They gave attention to the repeal of the union with Ireland and the progress of revolution on the continent. The Owenite newspapers towards the end of 1833 were full of references to the formation of a General Union of the Productive Classes.

9

ROBERT OWEN, the Utopian socialist, gave a speech to the OWEN societies of 6th October in 1833.

Robert Owen “I will now give you, ” he said, “a short outline of the great changes which are in contemplation, and which shall come suddenly upon society like a thief in the night …It is intended that national arrangements shall be formed to include all the working classes in the great organisation, and that each department shall become acquainted with what is going on in other departments; that all individual competition is to cease; that all manufacturers are to be carried on by National Companies … All trades shall first form association of lodges to consist of a convenient number for carrying on the business… all individuals of the specific craft shall become members.” Immediately after this we find in existence the “GRAND CONSOLIDATED TRADES UNION in January 1834. OWEN was its chief recruiter and propagandist. THE TOLPUDDLE MARTYRS

10

Owen’s G.T.C.U. was to come into conflict with the law with the conviction of Six Dorchester Labourers in March 1834 for the mere act of administering an oath. The sentence was seven years transportation. A protest of nation-wide dimensions supported by unions in the north took place over a quarter of a million signatures in a petition were collected for their release and the agitation culminated in London’s first monster working class demonstration, where they marched to Copenhagen Fields near King’s Cross. The building trades struck work to take part. There were no immediate results, but in 1836 the sentences were remitted and the men returned home. The fall of the G.C.T.U. was marked by the London Tailors’ strike. The strike led to a General G.C.T.U. strike involving 20,000. Funds were burdened and a levy on members taken. Other smaller cities shook the credit of the Grand National. The executive attempted in vain to stem the torrent of strikes by publishing a, “Declaration of the views and objects of trades unions” in which they deprecated disputes and advocated what would now be called Co11

operative production by associations of producers. They gave effect to this declaration by refusing to sanction the London shoemakers’ demand for increased wages on the grounds that it was opportune. The decline the union was as rapid as its growth and in August 1834 a delegate conference decided to dissolve the union. CHAPTER THREE THE SOCIALIST MOVEMENT SOCIALISM is a system free from Capitalism, a system run by those that PRODUCE THE WEALTH of society and are not hindered by the multimillionaires and billionaires who have historically exploited the labour of workingmen and women. It is a society free of exploitation of man by man based on, “from each according to his ability to each according to his work”. Socialism is where the factories, mines, workshops and property are in the hands of the majority of the people, where the Working Class controls production and distribution. Socialism is a system where there is no crisis, no unemployment and no inflation. It is where production is geared to the material and cultural needs of the people as a whole and not to the profits of a few. It is a system that cares for the sick and needy and respects old age and also looks after the future of the youth such as with the provision of education to a high standard. Socialism is the aspiration of the workers, who, in their heart of hearts, desire fairness, equality, freedom and democracy. Socialism has been a movement of the people for an ultimate political goal for centuries. It has come up at various times in English History (for instance) before modern times. In every period there have been those that have held radical thinking and have put forward ideas of running society for the whole of the people, for equality amongst men and women and have spoken of the Class Struggle between the Rich and the Poor.

12

There have been movements amongst the Slaves of ancient times led by such people as Spartacus the Gladiator against the Roman slave-owners. In Mediaeval times there were the Levellers and there were many leaders of the Peasant uprisings in Feudal Britain. There have been movements amongst the workers against Capitalism which have put forward demands for change, for political rights, for partial demands like the “People’s Charter” and the Chartist Movement in the last century. Socialists and Trades Unionists have formed Socialist Parties and Socialism has been enshrined as an aim in the constitutions of practically every Trade Union in Britain. Socialism, as a doctrine, has known many forms. Sometimes trends have arisen to oppose its development in the name of socialism. There was even “Feudal Socialism” which developed at a time when Capitalism replaced the Feudal System and there were aristocrats that warned Capitalism of its impending doom by the rising working class. This “Socialism” was a reactionary ideology to try and stop history advancing. There was Bourgeois Conservative Socialism, which told the workers that society should be left to the capitalist masters who would somehow become benefactors. There was Petty Bourgeois Socialism of the middle strata and also Utopian Socialism, that of ROBERT OWEN, FOURIER and SAINT SIMON. The Utopians built model factories to prove to the capitalists that if they gave workers better conditions, education, less hours of working etc. that their productivity was better and so the ideal system should copy such experiments. But capitalism as a whole, terrified of such notions, only too quickly used its power to crush the dreams of the Utopians. As a reminder Robert Owen’s model factory at New Lanark still stands today as a museum.

13

New Lanark Cotton Mills The movement of socialism always advances and it was KARL MARX, the founder of SCIENTIFIC SOCIALISM, who proved the inevitability of the socialist system and that the revolutionary overthrow of Capitalism was the only path.

Karl Marx “The class struggle leads to the Dictatorship of the Proletariat”, says Marx. Thus socialism reached its conclusion in a logical and analytical way, and society could progress because social development is a scientific phenomenon. Marx had laid bare the essence of the contradictions in society and proved that the class struggle was the motive force of history. The strategy and

14

tactics needed to be worked out and so Marx and Engels wrote The Manifesto of the Communist Party. All that was needed was to carry out the programme. The workers did it first of all in the Paris Commune of 1871 and again in 1917 led by Lenin in Russia and in various places since then. Despite Socialism developing to a system in operation as occurred in the Soviet Union for many years, the development of Socialism has gone forward and gone back. We know that the fall of Eastern Europe and Albania as well meant that Socialism, as a system in the world, once again was set back in the 1990’s, but it always inevitably rises again as a more advanced system in future.

Socialism has its origins as an independent movement, separate and from without of the working class movement, just as the Working Class Movement has had its separate development. The workers, in the past, themselves have only really been able to achieve Trade Union consciousness on their own as a class though it tends towards Socialism. The Working Class Movement is like a ship on the sea and Socialism is like the land on the distant horizon. The ship will go in and out and grope in the dark and encounter many obstacles. It will probably eventually reach the land but, with a compass on the ship, it will reach the land more quickly. Working class politics and the Socialist ideology is like the compass in the Working

15

Class Movement headed for Socialism; it is the INTEGRATION OF THE TWO MOVEMENTS. The WORKING CLASS MOVEMENT, (the most important organisation having been the Trade Unions) and the SOCIALIST MOVEMENT, two INDEPENDENT MOVEMENTS being integrated has always been an imperative. It is this integration, which the bourgeoisie has always opposed in order to retard the movement, to slow it down. It is here that we must address ourselves. The capitalists call it “keeping politics out of the unions,” what they mean is keeping out working class politics and keeping in bourgeois politics. CHAPTER FOUR CHARTISM The Chartist political movement (1837-48) was not of a trade union character, even so, trade unionists played an active part in it. The shock troops of Chartism were the textile factory workers and the miners. The former unions favoured by overwhelming majorities the turning of the Lancashire General Strike of 1842 into a political rising for the charter. Chartists played a leading part in the formation of the first national coalfields organisation, the MINERS ASSOCIATION in 1841. But Chartism tackled too late the vital problem of rooting itself firmly in the relatively strong craft unions. The stronghold of Chartism lay in the industrial north but ideological origins were from London. The Artisans and skilled craftsmen in London, led by such people as WILLIAM LOVETT, were the pertinent radicals. They were to set up the LONDON WORKING MEN’S ASSOCIATION in June 1836 as a political and educational body intended to attract the “Intelligent and influential portion of the working classes.” It was radical and Owenite in outlook.

16

In February it drew up a petition to parliament in which were embedded the six demands that afterwards became known as THE PEOPLE’S CHARTER. They were: • EQUAL ELECTORAL DISTRICTS • ABOLITION OF THE PROPERTY QUALIFICATIONS FOR MP’S • UNIVERSAL MANHOOD SUFFRAGE • ANNUAL PARLIAMENTS • VOTE BY BALLOT • THE PAYMENT OF MP’S Frederick Engels declared that the six points were “sufficient to overthrow the whole English constitution, Queen and Lords included.” “Chartism,” he wrote, “is of an essentially social nature, a class-movement. The `six points’, which for the Radical bourgeoisie are the end of the matter… are for the proletariat a mere means to further ends. `Political power our means, social happiness our end’ is now the clearly formulated war-cry of the Chartists.” In the spring of 1838 the six points were drafted into the form of a Parliamentary Bill and it was this draft, which became the actual Charter. The Chartist movement was formally launched at a vast meeting at Newhall Hill, Birmingham, on August 6`” 1838. There were three distinguished groups; the right wing was led by LOVETT and ATTWOOD, the centre by the dynamic figure of FEARGUS O’CONNOR and the left wing by BRONTERRE O’BRIEN in the early stages and later JULIAN HARNEY and ERNEST JONES.

17

FEARGUS O’CONNOR had the support of the great majority of the industrial workers, the miners and the ruined and starving hand workers of the North. He was an Irishman, nephew or one of the leaders of the Rebellion of 1798, nurtured on the Irish revolutionary traditions. He was a one time Irish MP and started the famous paper, important in the movement, THE NORTHERN STAR.

O’Brien, Harney and Jones never had the popularity of O’Connor, but were clearer politically. O’Brien was considerably influenced by the ideas of the Cooperative and Owenite socialism. Harney and Jones were younger men who came into the movement when it was already in decline. They both held views in common with KARL MARX, with whom they were closely associated, when he came to live in England in 1848. During the winter of 1838 collections of petition signatures had begun, the Chartist Convention in February 1839 showed that only 600,000 had been collected. The criticism stimulated activity so that by July 12th it had 1,280,000 signatures. On July 4th, a body of police, specially imported from London, attacked a meeting at the BULL RING Birmingham with exceptional brutality. The workers rallied and drove the police out of the Bull Ring and it was not till some days later that order was restored in the city, and that was after soldiers had been used to assist the police. The outrage spread rapidly over the

18

Birmingham news and there were a number of violent clashes in Glasgow, Newcastle, Sunderland and Lancashire towns. On July 5th Lovett was arrested.

Hansard Records the Birmingham Bull Ring Riots

Battle of the Bull Ring The petition was rejected after being debated in parliament. More arrests followed. There were plans for an insurrection, many details of which have never been available. There was also an insurrectionary committee of five. There was a rising in South Wales where thousands of armed miners, led by JOHN FROST, marched. The miners had been assembled on the night of November 3rd 1839 at Blackwood on the Rhymney. Others from Pontypool and Nantyglo were to meet up with them at Risca, but inexperience of the leaders led this rendezvous to fail. The Chartist force that arrived in Newport numbered some four thousand. They were fired upon by troops concealed in Westgate Hotel. Ten were killed and about fifty were wounded. 19

Soon after all the Chartist leaders were arrested (in all about 490 were arrested) the movement was forced underground. As the leaders came out of gaol a slow revival began. In the revival THE NATIONAL CHARTIST ASSOCIATION was formed in July 1840. The N.C.A. was the first real political party of the working class. It went far in trying to remove one of its main weaknesses – the Trade unions and built Chartist groups within them. The attempt was partially successful. O’Connor was released in August 1841 and preparations were made for a second petition, which took into account poverty. It demanded higher wages, shorter hours and factory legislation. The capitalist crisis had intensified and unemployment had risen and there were consequent wage reductions. 3,315,000 people signed the second petition nevertheless it was rejected by Parliament in May 1842. Strikes broke out all over Lancashire against the wage reductions. In the second week in August the strikers turned a casual strike in Ashtonunder-Lyne into a strike for the Charter. Immediately it spread. Manchester came out, and then it went over into Lancashire, Yorkshire, Cheshire and the

20

Potteries, Warwickshire and into Wales. The Scottish Miners came out. A trade union conference decided by an overwhelming majority: “That it is our solemn and conscientious conviction that all evils that afflict society, and which have prostrated the energies of the great body of the producing classes, arise solely from class legislation; and that the only remedy for the present alarming distress and widespread destitution is the immediate and unmutilated adoption and carrying into law the document known as the People’s Charter.” “That this meeting recommend the people of all trades and callings to forthwith cease work, until the above document becomes the law of the land.” Troops were sent into the strike areas and by September a combination of repression and hunger, with over 1500 arrests saw the strike dwindle and consequently the movement once again. The movement held together until the crisis of 1846 accompanied by the Irish famine brought Chartism into its third period of activity. O’Connor was elected as MP for Nottingham in 1847. With a background still of poverty, misery and starvation and also the attempt of pacification by the passing of the Ten-Hour Act, the movement tended to focus on the unemployed. In Glasgow there were severe bread riots in April 1848 and many people were killed and wounded. The Government made serious military plans. The new tide began to arise, in February 1848, the people of Paris suddenly drove the King of France from his throne, and the people of Paris had proclaimed a Republic. One by one Royalty was under siege throughout Europe. Popular insurrections were taking place. The small kingdoms of Germany the kingdoms and Duchies of Italy, which had began to go up in smoke. The King of Prussia was forced to grant a Constitution. The Emperor of Austria accepted the National Guard forced on him, and Metternich fled to England.

21

In England the Chartists promptly drafted a new petition and an Assembly called to present it, a Constitution of the British Republic was drafted. A mass meeting was to be called for April 10th to present the petition, to meet on Kennington and march to Parliament. The frightened Ruling-Class thought it was to be the day of Revolution. A new petition of 1,975.000 signatures was presented. The Duke of Wellington had packed London with troops and special police.

Kennington Oval Chartist Meeting On May 1st the Chartist-Convention (which became the National Assembly) debated the question of armed insurrection. A National Guard was instituted as a result of a local Lancashire and Yorkshire Conference. 3,000 were reported drilling at Wilsden, under a black flag. There is evidence of other armed Chartist forces at Leicester, Aberdeen and Glasgow. London was to be the centre of the insurrection; they were in touch with Irish revolutionaries. The headquarters were in Orange Street, as it was called then, in Red Lion Square. Numerous bands of armed men were scattered about Bloomsbury, the largest number at seven dials, with pickaxes ready to turn paving stones into barricades

22

. Unfortunately for the Chartists, they could not try their strength because the movement was riddled with spies and provocateurs and the executives were arrested. Afterwards the movement went into decline despite the adoption of a new programme with marked socialist features. The National Charter Association continued until about 1858. ERNEST JONES continued almost alone. The failure of Chartism was partly because of its leadership and tactics, but also because it was new and the working class immature. CHAPTER FIVE THE CO-OPERATIVE MOVEMENT

The earliest Co-operatives were mainly attempts by groups of workers to break the monopoly of the millers and to provide cheap flour for their members. Examples were the Hull Anti-Mill Society of 1795 and the Devenport Union Mill of 1817. Then came Owenite Utopian Socialism and the Co-operatives were hailed as the key to the peaceful supersession of Capitalism. The `new model’ Co-operative was that of the Rochdale “Equitable Pioneers” having founded their Co-operative shop in Toad Lane in 1844. Twenty-eight

23

men started it with twenty eight pounds. They survived by paying a dividend on purchases. The greatest single benefit that the “Co-ops” brought to the workers was pure food. There were `sand in the sugar’ grocers, and other adulterators commonplace then.

In the 1860’s the Co-operative wholesale society came into being to supply goods to the retail societies and in the next decade it began actually to produce goods in its own factories. In 1869 began the regular series of annual Co-operative Congresses, which has continued. From the second congress sprang the Co-operative Central Board, which developed into the Cooperative Union, the co-ordinating body for propaganda and education. The first central board contained Owenite and trade union Junta members. Also there were sympathisers from the middle class who became less needed as time went on. On many occasions the Co-op’s supported the wider working class movement including strike struggles.

24

Eventually people who had become successful traders in commerce got to the top. The belief that the movement would peacefully put an end to the competitive system, while never formally abandoned, became more of a pious dream than a reality. The Co-operative movement took in thousands of workers who learned how to organise and administer large-scale business enterprise at the time. This demonstrated conclusively that the ability to do so is not confined to the Capitalist Class. CHAPTER SIX THE NEW SPIRIT AND NEW MODEL UNIONS After 1848 there was a tendency for the narrow-minded craft mentality to become a trend due to the setbacks of the previous period. The “New Model” Unions, as they became known, however were not Trades Unions but Trade Unions. A national organisation employed in a single craft. They expressed the point of view of the skilled artisans. The result was to go against strikes and rely upon keeping down the supply of labour by restricting apprentices, discouraging overtime and even encouraging emigration. They were exclusive, catered for a labour aristocracy and had little concern for the masses outside their ranks. The first of the New Model Unions was the AMALGAMATED SOCIETY OF ENGINEERS founded in 1851 by merging a number of craft unions. The journeymen Steam Engine and Machine Makers and the Millwrights Friendly Society were the most powerful. The next strongest of the unions at this time were the Iron founders and Stonemasons. The Lancashire Cotton Operatives formed a permanent organisation in 1853 along similar lines. The Amalgamated Society of Carpenters, founded in 1860, became second only to the A.S.E. in numbers and influence. In 1860, these unions formed an unofficial central leadership known as the JUNTA. The JUNTA can be described as a “Cabinet” of the Trade Union

25

Movement. The presence in London of the headquarters of these societies brought their salaried officers into close intimacy with each other. The inner circle consisted of ALLAN and APPLEGARTH of the Engineers and Carpenters, GUILE of the Ironfounders, and COULSON of the Bricklayers. A fifth member, GEORGE ODGER, was of a different kind belonging only to a small union of skilled Bootmakers. But he became important as the secretary of the London Trades Council and an influence in Radical circles. ROBERT APPLEGARTH became a leading member of the FIRST INTERNATIONAL (led by KARL MARX) and its Chairman in 1870. The “New Model” Unions brought more business methods into the working class movement and care for the more tedious details of organisation. They made trade unionism a normal and regular part of working class daily life. The JUNTA interested itself in politics, but not in the same way as the Chartists. They were more interested in exerting pressure on the existing parties. They participated in the Reform agitation of 1866-7. Many Existing sections did not follow the “New Model” especially the miners and textile workers and those in the north They challenged the domination of the Junta and (with the assistance of GEORGE POTTER of the London Working Men’s Association took part in national conferences, which initially were boycotted by the JUNTA until 1872 when they took a hand. Eventually from this The TRADES UNION CONGRESS came about. In the General Election of 1874 Trade Union Leaders came forward as candidates for the first time independently of the Liberal and Tory Parties, though as individuals they were still only Radicals. CHAPTER SEVEN THE INTERNATIONAL

26

The INTERNATIONAL WORKING MEN’S ASSOCIATION, later known as the First International, was founded at an international workers’ meeting in St. Martin’s Hall, London, on September 28th, 1864. Under the leadership of KARL MARX and FREDERICK ENGELS it was for 10 years the directing force of all the advanced sections of the working class throughout Europe.

27

Marx and Engels The movement in England had always been sensitive to events abroad. Going back to the 1840’s the Chartists had taken the initiative in the formation of the body known as the `Fraternal Democrats’, a forerunner of the 1st International, founded in 1846, mainly through the efforts of GEORGE JULIAN HARNEY. The movement in Britain had therefore kept in touch with events abroad, through the great epoch of European Revolutions. The fundamental aim of the International was the union of workingmen of all countries for the emancipation of labour. Its principles went on to declare that, “the subjection of the man of labour to the man of capital lies at the bottom of all servitude, all social misery and all political dependence.” Between 1864 and 1870 branches were established in nearly all European Countries as well as in the United States, the majority of Trade Societies in some European Countries joining in a body. The central administration was entrusted to a General Council of 55 members sitting in London, which was composed of London residents of various nationalities, elected by the branches in the countries to which they belonged. The General Council had, however, no legislative or other control over the branches, and in practice served as little more than a means of communication between them, each country managing its affairs in its own way. The principles and programme of the Association underwent a steady development in the succession of annual international congresses attended by delegates from the various branches. The extent to which English workingmen really participated in its fundamental objects is not clear. In 1870 ODGER was president and APPLEGARTH chairman of the General Council, which included BENJAMIN LUCRAFT, afterwards a member of the London School Board, and other well-known workingmen politicians. But few English Trade Unions (amongst them being the Bootmakers and Curriers) joined in their corporate capacity. When, in October 1866, the

28

General Council invited the London Trades Council to join, or that failing, to give permission for a representative of the INTERNATIONAL to attend its meetings, with a view of promptly reporting all Continental strikes, the council’s minutes show that both requests were refused. The London Trades Council declined indeed to recognise the INTERNATIONAL even as the authorised medium of communication with Trade Societies abroad, and decided to communicate with these directly. APPLEGARTH attended several of the continental congresses as a delegate from England, and elaborately explained the aims and principles of the Association in an interview published in the New York World of May 21st 1870. After the suppression of the PARIS COMMUNE the branches in France were crushed out of existence and the membership in England fell away. The annual Congress held in 1872 at The Hague decided to transfer the General Council to New York and the INTERNATIONAL was unable to play any part in the English Labour movement. The formation between 1858 and 1867 of permanent Trades Councils in the leading industrial centres was an important step in the consolidation of the Trade Union Movement. THE LONDON TRADES COUNCIL The Struggle over Politics. In 1862 the London Trades Council held a great meeting in St. James’s Hall in support of Northern States against Negro slavery. POTTER fought the Bill of GLADSTONE to sell Government Annuities for small amour as an insidious attempt to divert savings workingmen from their Trade Unions and benefit societies into an exchequer controlled by the governing classes. London Trades Council sent an influential deputation to Gladstone to publicly disavow Potter action.

29

Also during 1861-62 HOWELL and ODGER strove in vain to enlist the council in the agitation for a new REFORM BILL, but 1866, under the influence of ODGER and APPLEGARTH, ALLAN and COULSON, the council enthusiastically threw itself into the demonstration in favour of the REFORM BILL. The Liberal Government brought in the Bill. The council took a leading part in the agitation, which resulted in the enfranchisement of the town Artisan. In the same year the Council agreed to co-operate with the INTERNATIONAL in demanding DEMOCRATIC REFORM from all European Governments. CHAPTER EIGHT THE NEW UNIONISM OF 1880-1900 In 1881 FREDERICK ENGELS had publicly pointed out in the Labour Standard, Organ of the London Trades Council; (a series collected in his pamphlet The British Labour Movement) that the waning of Britain’s Industrial Monopoly meant that the unions could not maintain their organised strength. He pointed to the failure of unions, “Unless they really march in the Van of the working class…” This meant breaking the, “Vicious circle out of which there is no issue” (Of movements limited to wages and hours) and that they must cease to be the “Tail of the “Great Liberal Party.” “A Political organisation of the Working Class as a whole,” which would win power for the workers and build a new social order. As for the dominant leaders – the “old gang” as they became to be called, this appeal fell on deaf ears. The men who succeeded the JUNTA offered the movement not leadership but abdication, they dominated the T.U.C. It was the Socialists, both the intellectual leaders outside the unions and the younger Trade Unionists, who became converts, who led the fight against the “old gang” and revolutionised trade unionism. THE LONDON MATCH GIRLS’ STRIKE

30

Match Girls In July 1888, a famous Socialist led strike of the girls at Bryant and May’s match factory took place in the East-End of London, it secured wide publicity. It was the “Light Jostle needed for the entire avalanche to move” (Engels). The Gasworkers followed. Unrest had been growing for some time at Beckton, where the Stokers worked a 12-Hour shift and a 13-Day fortnight. They demanded and 8-Hour shift, a 12-Day fortnight and a shilling shift wages increase. Led by WILL THORNE, a Beckton Stoker, the men vainly sought Liberal aid to have their case raised in Parliament, and then turned to the Socialists. They were advised to organise a union and were given maximum assistance, notably by ELEANOR MARX and AVELING.

31

Eleanor Marx The “Law and Liberty League” of 1887 united Socialist and Radical Working men and Trade Unionists in a broad mass movement. Rapid recruitment to the new Gasworkers’ and General Labourers’ Union enabled the men shortly to hand in strike notices. They were in so strong a position that the Gas companies conceded the whole of their demands, save that the wage granted was 6d instead of 1/-. This led to a spontaneous strike of the men at the South West Indian Dock that within a week became a “General Dockers’ Strike.”

32

London Dock Strike, 1889 A movement that completely paralysed its greatest port electrified the world. Under the leadership of Socialists JOHN BURNS, TOM MANN, and BEN TILLET, with ELEANOR MARX as secretary of the strike-committee – the `starvelings’ had truly arisen from their slumbers. The strike lasted for four weeks sustained by an unprecedented wave of international solidarity. CHAPTER NINE THE WORKERS’ OFFENSIVE (1910-1914) V. 1. LENIN in his article, Lenin on Britain in 1913 is quoted as saying that: “…the masses of the English workers are slowly but surely taking a new pathfrom the defence of the petty privileges of the labour aristocracy to the great heroic struggle of the masses themselves for a new system of society.” Within this period, union membership grew from 2.5 million to 4 million. The initiative of the 1889 NEW UNIONISM was to be carried forward. TOM MANN was the leader that had emerged as the leading exponent of SYNDICALISM, which is organisation by industry, rather than by craft.

Tom Mann

33

In 1910 the several unions of Dockers and other Transport Men formed the “Transport Workers’ Federation”. In June 1911 the Seamen struck work for uniform conditions at all ports and other improvements, The Dockers and Carters in Manchester struck and in July the Port of London was closed down. Winston Churchill, Liberal Government Home Secretary reinforced the London Garrison and threatened to dispatch 25,000 troops to the docks to break the strike by doing the Dockers’ work. Daily demonstrations of the strikers on Tower Hill were of unprecedented size, marches through the city counted up to 10,000 people. Movements took place in other Ports, In Liverpool it almost turned to civil war. A General Transport strike with Dockers, Seamen, Carters, Tramwaymen, Railwaymen, a total of 70,000 being out. The leading figure was Tom Mann. The Police brutally charged a monster demonstration on St. George’s Plateau causing a great outcry. Warships were moored in the Mersey their guns trained on the city. The troops were called out and two workers were shot when a crowd of demonstrators, said to be attempting a rescue of prisoners, were fired on. So alarmed were the authorities that the local territorials, which included many trade unionists and kept their arms at home, were ordered to remove the bolts from their rifles and turn them in at headquarters. In January 1912, after the Glasgow Dockers struck the Dockers were in action again including London where 100,000 came out. The big transport struggles of 1911 inspired the railwaymen and strikes broke out there too. Ultimatums to the railway companies from the railway unions led to threats of bloodshed from the Government of Asquith, Churchill sent troops to Manchester and other places without requistion from the civil authorities.

34

At Llanelly a strike demonstration was fired on and among the numerous casualties two were fatal. 200,000 railwaymen came out and industry was being brought to a standstill. An agreement was forced. In the autumn of 1910 disputes over payment for abnormal places in the pit led to a strike of 10,000 miners employed by the Cambrian Combine in the Rhondda Valleys. The arrogant attitude of the mineowners headed by Lord Rhondda gave rise to deep resentment and there were stormy demonstrations. Metropolitan Police and troops were sent up the valleys and clashed with strikers at Tonypandy. Throughout 1911 strikes took place throughout these parts of the South Wales Coalfield. A delegate conference of the Miners Federation of Great Britain decided to ballot for a national strike to establish the minimum wage, by March 1st the strike was complete and a million Miners ceased work. The first national miners strike proved to be the vastest labour conflict ever known up to that time in this country and the most sensational. The Government intervened, drafted a Minimum Wage Bill and rushed it through into law by the end of March. As a result of the strike, within a year the number of trade unionists in mining had leapt by nearly 160,000 to over 900,000. It was a new era for the workers, the British Working class would no longer be the same they had learned to fight and realised their power. Within the country there was a “General Spirit of Revolt” which spread throughout the country. Of utmost importance and significance at the time was a strike in Ireland, which was to influence important political developments for Irish freedom against British Colonial Rule, particularly the development of the movement, which led to the 1916 “Easter Uprising”. All of this occurred in Dublin and was not to be without effect upon the British Working Class Movement.

35

The Historic year of 1913 witnessed the General Strike in Dublin in August and September. The Irish Transport and General Workers Union was under the revolutionary leadership of JAMES CONNOLLY and JIM LARKIN.

James Connolly

James Larkin

This fierce struggle of 80,000 Dublin Workers aroused an extraordinary response. Solidarity was symbolism in the enthusiastic dispatch through the Co-operative movement of a food ship to Dublin, and in the sympathetic strikes in which some 7,000 British Railwaymen took part. There was a wave of unlimited police terror launched against the Dublin strikers. Two workers were killed, 400 wounded and over 200 were arrested. There was outrage and talk of arming the workers, general strikes and revolutionary action throughout the trade unions. At the TUC in Manchester, Robert Smillie, president of the Miners federation, said: “If revolution is going to be forced upon my people by such action as has been taken in Dublin and elsewhere I say it is our duty, legal or illegal, to train our people to defend themselves …it is the duty of the greater trade union movement, when a question of this gravity arises, to discuss seriously the idea of a strike of all the workers.”

36

Everything pointed to a maturing political and social crisis towards the end of 1914. The number of disputes in 1908 averaged 30 a month. In 1911, 75 a month. The latter half of 1913 and the first half of 1914 the strike total rose to 150 a month. The summer of 1914 was working up towards a revolutionary outburst of gigantic industrial disputes. The miners were preparing new autumn claims. The Transport Workers were organising and Railwaymen and Engineers were preparing. In 1914 an alliance for mutual aid was proposed and agreed between the Miners Federation, the National Union of Railwaymen and the Transport Workers Federation. This was to be called the TRIPLE ALLIANCE.

37

The ruling class were in a deep crisis; the problems in Ireland and the internal situation were grave. The English aristocrats, Tory politicians and army officers were preparing for civil war. Lloyd George said openly that with labour “insurrection” and the Irish crisis coinciding, “the situation will be the gravest with which any government has had to deal for centuries.” They thought that if the war did not materialise quickly it could be forestalled by revolution. The first imperialist world war came, in time to dissipate the internal crisis. CHAPTER TEN THE FIRST IMPERIALIST WORLD WAR YEARS Without the collaboration of the trade union leaders, the working class could not have been tied to the Imperialist War turning workers into cannon fodder for the capitalist class. The union leaders and the labour aristocracy had control of the machinery of organised labour. They abandoned their pre-war pledges to prevent war or to end it by revolutionary means. Only some leaders such as KEIR HARDIE and WILL THORNE condemned the war. The general feature of 1914-18 was the development of shop leadership in place of the disarmed union machine. In engineering the SHOP STEWARDS, already existing as card inspectors and reporters to their union district committees, were transformed into workshop representatives and leaders. Strikes took place during the war against the wishes of the union executives. In 1915 on Clydeside, shop stewards in engineering took action for a pay increase and fifteen establishments were involved, these included large armament firms and overtime was ceased on war contracts. A ballot on March 9th led to shops coming out on strike.

38

The miners of South Wales struck work in July 1915 for a new agreement with wage increases. The Government intervened under the Munitions Act but 200,000 miners struck and in less than one week the Government turned about, over rode the coal owners, and conceded the main points at issue. Out of the Clyde workers struggle emerge the SHOP STEWARDS as the core of an entirely new form of workshop organisation. Out of the strike arose the Clyde WORKERS’ COMMITTEE, pledged to resist the Munitions Act. WORKERS’ COMMITTEES on the Clyde model were established in other centres and in 1916 the NATIONAL SHOP STEWARDS AND WORKERS’ COMMITTEE MOVEMENT was formed. The leaders of the Clyde Workers’ Committee were WILLIAM GALLACHER (chairman and JOHN McLean (a revolutionary and agitator for Bolshevism).

John McClean

39

Willie Gallacher 1917 brought the Russian Revolution, which had huge repercussions. There were almost 2.5 million working days lost as a result of disputes with the shop stewards in the lead. Up to July 1916 over 1,00 workers were convicted under the Munitions Act for strike activities.

The Russian Revolution had the effect of immensely politicising the British Working Class. This was shown at the Leeds Convention in 1917, it met with the aim of setting up Workers’ and Soldiers’ Councils on the model of the Russia Soviets. Of the 1,150 delegates from all section of the movement that attended, the largest single group was 371 from trade unions and Workers’ 40

Committees. Amongst the calls at the convention were appeals for a revolutionary struggle against the war. CHAPTER ELEVEN THE POST WAR CRISIS After the First Imperialist World War a revolutionary crisis was threatening capitalism. After the Russian Revolution, Britain, as well as the whole of Europe was in a mortal crisis. THE 40 HOURS STRIKE (1919) On Clydeside, January – February 1919, a great struggle took place, which was to be known as the 40 hours strike. Men had returned from the armed forces and also saw the return of unemployment on an even larger scale. Engineers, Shipyard and other workers united under the leadership of the Clyde Workers’ Committee. The feeling was that this was no ordinary strike and the authorities feared a rising. The hours of labour before the war had been fifty-four, the Scottish were in favour of a 30 hour week but Emmanuel Shinwell persuaded everyone to go for a 40 hour week. Not everyone agreed that the strike should be in February; John McLean argued that it should be postponed until March when the Miners might also be on strike. In this strike the MASS PICKET became a new phenomena. Everyone went to the factory gate because this is where they got their information then they would march onto the next factory or shipyard until all the industries were shut. On the first Friday of the strike the magistrates were warned to get the trams off the road and they were given a week to do so. Because the trams were still running the following Friday an incident took place where a fight broke out and it turned into a riot. The riot started in George Square and spread down to

41

Glasgow Green. The police made a rush at the crowd in George Square, which never budged; the police were at a loss. The Chief Constable was hit and someone tore the Riot Act out of the Sheriffs hands. GALLACHER, KIRKWOOD and a number of rank and filers were batoned down and arrested. A number of ex-servicemen at Glasgow Green fought with the police, and being very disciplined, forced them to run.

Battle for George Square Eventually Troops were dispatched to the area on the night of the riot. The troops remained in Glasgow for a week. Machine guns were placed on top of the buildings in George Square and a Howitzer in the city chambers. Tanks were placed in the cattle market. WILLIAM GALLACHER wrote later that the preoccupation of the Shop Stewards Movement with industrial organisation alone, and their contempt for Politics, meant that, “We were carrying on a strike when we ought to have been making a revolution.”

42

The national union officials of the unions concerned isolated the strike and also disciplined their local officials. A 47-hour week was agreed between the employers and the trade unions. In the meantime the miners prepared for their struggle, their demand included a 30% increase, a six-hour day and nationalisation of the mines with a measure of workers control of the industry. Since the miners were in consultation with the Triple Alliance, who had also tabled demands, also with coal stocks depleted, the Government could have been faced with a General Strike with revolutionary potential. Lloyd George bluffed; offering a commission on the one hand and threatening armed force suppression of any strike on the other hand. The union leaders recoiled from the threat. There were many working class strikes of Cotton Operatives, Railwaymen and others up to 1920. HANDS OFF RUSSIA!

43

In August 1920 the climax of British intervention in Soviet Russia threatened to become open war in support of the invading Poles. It was seen as an attack on the movement of International Socialism and the trade union movement. A `Hands off Russia’ campaign developed. It was in the spring of 1920 that the Poles, with British and French backing made an unprovoked attack against Russia and unprecedented actions took place. It was the London Dockers who struck the JOLLY GEORGE – one of the many freighters loading munitions for Poland. The Dockers had the support of their union who put a general ban on the loading of munitions for use against Russia. In August, when the threat of open war came, huge demonstrations took place throughout the country.

44

In these days trade union battles had deeper and greater scope. With Councils of Action established and the threat of a General Strike, open war was stopped; the miners played a leading part. NEW ORGANISATION AND A GENERAL STAFF It became clear, in those days, that the millions of workers, like an army, needed better organisation and it needed a General Staff. Issues should not be narrow; victories should not be centred on sectional and isolated actions. Since the formation of the Second International, of which the British Labour Party was a member, the social democratic parties did not oppose the imperialist war. They were not militant parties of the working class dedicated to the revolutionary transforming of society in favour of the working class. The

45

fact was that they were parties that operated within the status quo, adapted for parliamentary elections and parliamentary business. The chartists were the first attempt by the working class to form some sought of political aims and political party limited as it was to its charter and reforms. This was in itself an advance for the working class movement becoming ever more conscious of itself as a class with its own political destiny. The Labour Party came out of this movement and also was another step for the workers, but it soon showed its colours. The 1920’s, though, represented a new period of radicalism. Open class collisions were taking place with revolutionary actions and recently there had been the Russian Revolution. There was a need for a new party, a militant party, also one that was capable of diverting the working class movement as a whole, from the path of narrow trade unionism and converting into an independent political force. The party had to be the General Staff and at the same time a detachment of the class. In August 1920, the British working class with leaders coming from the Socialist Movement, Shop Stewards Movement and Trade Unionists, formed their General Staff, the Communist Party of Great Britain, which was to serve the movement for 30 years or more. Side by side with these developments there took place a series of amalgamations. The grouping of the numerous unions of Dockers and other transport workers in the Transport Workers Federation gave place in 1921 to their fusion into the TRANSPORT and GENERAL WORKERS UNION. It became the largest single union, sharing the field of general labour with the NATIONAL UNION of GENERAL and MUNICIPAL WORKERS. The latter was a descendent of the Gasworkers Union of 1889. Absorbing a number of leading craft unions created the expansion of the AMALGAMATED SOCIETY of ENGINEERS into the AMALGAMATED ENGINEERING UNION in 1920.

46

Unfortunately during the next few years it became clear that the labour chiefs and the labour aristocracy were to disrupt the movement. The Capitalist class were, out of their imperialist profits plundered from the colonies, still in a position to bribe, corrupt and foster the labour aristocracy. This social stratum had been nurtured because it “did all right” out of capitalism, it was “dazzled” by the glitter and that is why it supported the war, because it was imperialist bribed and imperialist corrupted. The labour aristocracy was only too willing to compromise the struggle. With the onset of the 1921 slump, the employers set out to push the burden of the crisis onto the backs of the workers. They set out on an offensive. In the face of it the labour traitors were to hold back the movement through misleadership. The capitalists were first to take on the vanguard of the working class -The Miners. They wanted a return from national to local agreements and also wage-cuts. The Miners Federation invoked the aid of the Triple Alliance unfortunately the leaders were not enthusiastic and they took a colloquial attitude. Strike notices were postponed. Leaders of the Miners’ Union also capitulated and the time of the sell out became known as “Black Friday”. When the Labour Government of Ramsey MacDonald took office in January 1924, a railway strike was in operation over wage cuts. The Locomotive men had rejected wage-cuts under A.S.L.E.F. but the N.U.R. had accepted the cuts on behalf of the drivers. The division brought bitterness. The Labour Government hastened to say in the House of Commons that it had no sympathy for the strike. The government also tried to put pressure on the Dockers in February. An important move was made at this time to try and deal with the situation on behalf of the working class. The veteran TOM MANN led the formation of the NATIONAL MINORITY MOVEMENT in London in August 1924 and became its president.

47

The aims were not against the unions or for disruption of them or to encourage new unions. The object was to unite the workers in the factories by the formation of factory committees and to work for the formation of one union for each industry. Also to strengthen the Trades Councils to be representative of every phase of the working class movement, with its roots firmly embedded in the factories of each locality. It stood for the creation of a real General Council which would have the power to direct, unite and co-ordinate all of the struggles and activities of the trade unions. To make it possible to end the present chaos and go forward in a united attack in order to secure not only the immediate demands, but to win complete workers’ control of industry.

48

The movement first took root in the coalfields (notably South Wales and Fife) and recorded support for the Red International of Labour Unions (founded in Moscow in the summer of 1921. A Miners’ Minority Movement developed during 1923 and A. J. Cook became secretary of the M.F.G.B. upon the enforced resignation of Hodges due to the campaign of the minority movement. The labour Government was defeated and the TUC General Council at Congress was given powers to intervene in disputes in 1924. CHAPTER TWELVE THE 1926 GENERAL STRIKE In 1923-24, the coal industry was heading for disaster. The Prime Minister, Baldwin, demanded wage reductions of all workers to, “Put industry on its feet.” The owners’ demands on the Miners were rejected by the Miners Federation of Great Britain (M.F.G.B) and had the TUC General Council support. A special support committee was set up with assurances from the railway and transport unions.

Miners Federation of Great Britain 49

Detailed preparations were made in the event of a Miners’ lockout. They met on July 30th 1925, the day before the official notices were due to expire. The Government, unprepared for such a development beat a temporary but hasty retreat, this was to become known as Red Friday. A nine-month subsidy was granted. The Government preparations were immediate. Official support was given to the organisation for the maintenance of supplies, a volunteer strike – breaking organisation. Blackleg shock troops were given technical training. Counter preparations were not made on the trade union side. Some key traitors were moved into positions on the General Council of the T.U.C. Attacks on Communists were taken into the unions. Within a fortnight the Government swooped and arrested 12 Communist Party leaders, advocates of preparedness. They were jailed after a big state trial. A Royal Commission report was produced on the coal industry that was vague about state intervention in the coal industry. This was intended to sew confusion and splits, but it was definite that the miners should accept longer hours or lower wages. The M.F.G.B. line, supported heavily by the Communist Party Newspaper, The Daily Worker, was, “Not a Penny off the Pay, Not a Second on the Day.” The T.U.C held a defeatist view not shared by the Miners who stood firm at their delegate conference on April 10th. Also the Minority Movement held a conference of action attended by 883 delegates representing around a million trade unionists, supporting the militant position. The coal owners soon announced their intention to proceed with negotiations at a district level only and demanded sweeping wage reductions. The T.U.C. were forced to harden their attitude in support of the Miners. On April 27th decided to draft plans for action, yet they still were bemused by the Royal Commission report.

50

A General Strike Order was drafted and was endorsed by a conference and unions representing over 3,600,000 members against a handful representing 50,000. It was announced that the trades specified would strike from midnight on Monday May 3rd. The call out was in two grades or lines. The first line was all transport, printing (including newspapers), productive industries (iron and steel, metal and heavy industries) and building (except housing and hospitals). The second line was engineering and shipbuilding. Individual Unions were asked to place their powers into the hands of the General Council after the call out. The maintenance of food and health services was to be undertaken by unions. The General Council thought that it was empowered to settle on behalf of the Miners, the M.F.G.B. protested vehemently against the Industrial committee’s re-opening of negotiations with the Government within a few hours of the strike decision. The General Council basically accepted the Royal Commission’s report. When the Daily Mail Printers struck as a result of anti-union propaganda, Baldwin called it an “overt act of war”. He demanded the unconditional withdrawal of General Strike notices if negotiations were to continue. The T.U.C. was in a war it did not want to be in and feared to win. It feared more the strikers; the working class might win in a revolutionary fashion. The General Strike took place at midnight on Monday May 3rd as decided previously. It happened despite a defeatist leadership. By the end of the first week the General Council’s attention was concentrated not on leading the strike but on negotiations to end it. On Wednesday morning, May 12th, the Council, in a humiliating way, announced their unconditional capitulation. The T.U.C. organ the British Worker suppressed the M.F.G.B. repudiation of the call-off.

51

Immediately the employers hit back determined to reduce wages, impose non-unionism and servile conditions. But the strikers themselves continued. The Nine Days of action made the workers feel its own power. They proved that the men and women were capable in an emergency of providing the means of carrying on the country. It also proved something to the sold out leaders, “Never Again” was to be their slogan. Arthur Henderson was subsequently to call it the “terrible prospect” of a collapse of the present social and political order. The General strike was over by the middle of May, but the Miners remained stubbornly on strike until December, even at the end rejecting surrender, which now involved the loss of the seven-hour day as well as the wage cuts.

Colliers on Strike in 1926 The failure of the General Strike was due to a number of circumstances and important lessons can be drawn from the experience. The Capitalists class led by the Conservative Party was more experienced and organised than the workers and their leaders. They were fully armed and prepared and they struck their blows at the decisive points of the struggle.

52

On the other hand the General Staff of the labour movement, the T.U.C. General Council and its “political committee” the Labour Party were demoralised and corrupt. They were downright traitors to the Working Class. They were Thomas, Henderson, MacDonald and Co. with spineless fellow travellers Purcell, Hicks and others. The Capitalist class knew that the fight had to be fought politically because the strike had enormous political importance and therefore measures of a political character had to be taken. Therefore the authority of the King, House of Commons and the constitution would have to be invoked. There would need to be a state of emergency and troops would have to be used. The General Council of the T.U.C. would not recognise the political realities of the situation and insisted that the General strike be of an economic character. It had no intention of turning the struggle into a political one or raising the question of political power. It therefore doomed the strike to inevitable failure. A General Strike, which is not turned into a Political Struggle, must inevitably fail. The General Council refused to accept International support. It refused to accept financial assistance from the workers of the Soviet Union and other countries. It also meant that the strike was not made an action in the struggle of the workers of all countries. Also, the fact was that the Amsterdam federation of Trade Unions did not aid the General Strike but reduced support to resolutions and platitudes. The social democrats of the Second International and the connivance of the trade unions of Europe and America donated not more than one eighth of the amount the trade unions of the Soviet Union were able to afford. In fact the Amsterdam Unions literally acted as strike-breakers by allowing transport of coal to break the strike. There is no doubt that the weakness of the Communist Party played a role of no little importance. Even though its attitude was correct, its prestige and influence was small.

53

The outcome of the strike showed the unsuitability of the old leaders, the collaborators and compromisers. The necessity was that new, revolutionary leaders should replace them. The task of the Communist Parties was to convert the attacks of the Capitalists into a counter attack of the working class, for the abolition of capitalism. ****** BIBLIOGRAPHY Webb, Sydney and Beatrice, The History Of Trade Unionism. Hutt, Allen. British Trade Unionism (A Short History). Glasgow 1919. (The Story of the 40 hours Strike with an introduction by Harry McShane). The Molendinar Press. Morton, A.L. A Peoples’ History of England. Cole, G.D.H. The British Common People. Lenin, V.I. Lenin on Britain. Marx, Karl and Engels, Frederick. Selected writings and correspondence. Engels, Frederick. The British Labour Movement.

From the cradle to the grave, social welfare in Britain 1890s-1951 Britain at the end of the 19th century; context By 1900 Britain was one of the world’s richest and powerful countries mainly due to the industrial revolution. However most of this wealth was in the hands of the upper class and growing middle class of bankers, merchants and factory owners. Important writers in this period attempted to highlight the inequality, greed, cruelty and mistreatment of the poor which helped to reform areas of health, education, work, housing and paved the way to the working and business class movements for the foundation of the welfare state and the NHS model

54

Charles Dickens is the most famous Victorian novelist. Extraordinarily popular in his day with his characters taking on a life of their own beyond the page; Dickens is still one of the most popular and read authors of the world. His first novel, The Pickwick Papers (1836–37) written when he was twenty-five, was an overnight success, and all his subsequent works sold extremely well. The comedy of his first novel has a satirical edge and this pervades his writing. Dickens worked diligently and prolifically to produce the entertaining writing that the public wanted, but also to offer commentary on social problems and the plight of the poor and oppressed. His most important works include Oliver Twist (1837–39), Nicholas Nickleby (1838–39)A Christmas Carol (1843), Dombey and Son (1846–48), David Copperfield (1849–50), Bleak House (1852–53), Little Dorrit (1855–57), A Tale of Two Cities (1859), and Great Expectations (1860–61).There is a gradual trend in his fiction towards darker themes which mirrors a tendency in much of the writing of the 19th century. William Thackeray was Dickens' great rival in the first half of Queen Victoria's reign. With a similar style but a slightly more detached, acerbic and barbed satirical view of his characters, he also tended to depict a more middle class society than Dickens did. He is best known for his novel Vanity Fair (1848), subtitled A Novel without a Hero, which is an example of a form popular in Victorian literature: a historical novel in which recent history is depicted.

55

The Brontë sisters wrote fiction rather different from that common at the time. Anne, Charlotte and Emily Brontë produced notable works of the period, although these were not immediately appreciated by Victorian critics. Wuthering Heights (1847), Emily's only work, is an example of Gothic Romanticism from a woman's point of view, which examines class, myth, and gender. Jane Eyre (1847), by her sister Charlotte, is another major nineteenth century novel that has gothic themes. Anne's second novel The Tenant of Wildfell Hall (1848), written in realistic rather than romantic style, is mainly considered to be the first sustained feminist novel.[1] Later in this period George Eliot (Mary Ann Evans), published The Mill on the Floss in 1860, and in 1872 her most famous work Middlemarch. Like the Brontës she published under a masculine pseudonym.

56

In the later decades of the Victorian era Thomas Hardy was the most important novelist. His works include Under the Greenwood Tree (1872), Far from the Madding Crowd (1874), The Mayor of Casterbridge (1886), Tess of the d'Urbervilles (1891), and Jude the Obscure (1895). Other significant novelists of this era were Elizabeth Gaskell (1810–1865), Anthony Trollope (1815–1882), George Meredith (1828–1909), and George Gissing (1857–1903).

The role of the government was limited in the 1900s they had to provide control of the workplace, minimum standards of public health, limited education and limited help for the poor who deserved to be helped.

The governments in Britain believed in Laissez faire, (that is leaving things alone and not interfering). Individuals were responsible for their own life. Although the government had passed laws in the before 1900 to control conditions and hours in the mines and public health laws were passed to stop diseases like cholera, many people in government believed poverty was people’s own fault.

Poor Law system •

Poverty led to appalling living conditions. The housing of the poor in 1900 was overcrowded, dirty, damp and disease ridden and their diets were poor. Due to laissez faire ‘help’ was limited.



The poor law system meant people had to proof they were poor before they were allowed into the poorhouse.



Life was made so unattractive that it was less likely to be chosen than the lowest paid job.



If you were fit you would not receive help, only the disabled, widows, deserted wives with children and orphans had the right to help.

57

Why was the system unsuccessful? •

Designed for poverty in the countryside not for an industrial country



Could not deal with massive unemployment in the towns



Hated by the poor, humiliating experience, boring, repetitive and families were separated

Self help

This was the idea that people could get themselves out of poverty if they worked hard. Samuel Smiles published a book in 1859 called self-help; his ideas were very popular in Britain. He warned against government helping people too much as it made them helpless. Smiles argued that the average worker could avoid poverty by working hard and saving some of their wages. Those who did not look after themselves were lazy, unable or unwilling to save or drunks.

What self help was there? •

Friendly societies allowed workers who had a regular income to pay in contributions which meant they could receive benefits when they were sick, had an accident or old age



Savings banks were popular with servants and those who were saving for their children. ‘Penny savings banks’ allowed the very poor to save



Co-operative movements involved communities to get together to provide low cost food and services e.g. grocery store

Criticisms of self-help •

not every one could afford to save e.g. Henry Mayhew in his study of London labour and the London Poor (1861) identified that casual labourers were unable to save



lack of education and poor health also stopped many people improving their lives.

58

Voluntary aid: Charity

Usually the first place people looked for help was from relatives e.g. looking after children, giving food or clothes that their children had grown out of. However if this was not enough, people had to depend on the help of charitable organisations.

Charities provided a range of help •

money



expertise



time

By the 1860s there were so many different groups and insufficient help that they organised themselves to co-ordinate effort. Most of these societies would only help the ‘deserving poor’. Many of these charities still exist today e.g. RSPCA, Dr Barnardo’s, Salvation Army, Quarrier’s.

Why were charities run? •

Mainly run by middle class women and men who feared the poor rising up against the wealthy, charity could stop this



Genuine concern, Christian concern for the poor e.g. William Booth formed the Salvation Army



Opportunity for middle class women to get involved outside the home



Wanted to help the poor lead a ‘better life’



Many believed poverty was caused by the poor themselves, believed in Smile’s ideas, they therefore wanted to educate the poor e.g. Octavia Hill

Importance of charities •

Existence of so many charities was evidence that not everybody could help themselves and escape poverty

59



No means clear that the only cause of poverty was the person who was poor

Changing attitudes to poverty Books like Andrew Mearns, The bitter cry of Outcast London, an enquiry into the Conditions of the Abject poor in 1883, Charles Booth and Seebohm Rowntree’s studies into poverty shocked the wealthy Victorians.

Charles Booth •

Liverpool ship owner who originally believed that if people were poor it was their own fault.



Between 1889 and 1903 he studied the life of the poor in London



His findings ‘Life and Labour of the people in London’ changed his opinion and he concluded that 30% of London’s population was living in poverty



He used scientific methods and put people in classes, he worked out a ‘poverty line’ a level of income required to stay beyond starvation



The scale of poverty he discovered could not be met by charity alone

Seebohm Rowntree Member of the wealthy family Rowntree’s chocolate factory. He decided to conduct his own research in York to compare Booth’s findings. His book Poverty, A study of Town Life found similarities to those of Booth •

Showed poverty was widespread, one third of the population living in towns lived in poverty



Primary poverty was used to describe those whose earnings were low but could survive on this (15%), secondary poverty was used to describe those whose earnings were enough but who spent their money in a wasteful way (18%)



These investigations found poverty was not the persons fault



Many of the elderly, ill and unemployed lived poor lives and workers wages were so low they could not afford the basics.

60

The Boer war

The Boer war broke out in 1899 between British Empire and the Boer Republicans (Dutch settlers) in South Africa. Britain thought the war would be over quickly but Boer troops were well trained and equipped and it dragged on for 3 years. 400,000 British troops were sent eventually to defeat the Boers.

Why did the Boer war highlight poverty? •

Performed badly in war, 3 years to defeat Boers



9 out of 10 recruits were rejected as they were unfit, this would have implications for defending the empire in the future



Implied an unfit workforce as well as an unfit army



1903 the Committee on Physical Deterioration was set up to investigate, in 1904 it reported no long-term physical deterioration of the population, but many made recommendations including medical inspections of children in schools, free school meals and training in mother craft.

Democratic developments

By 1890 the majority of people voting were members of the working class. 6 out of 10 had the vote. This meant the working class could now elect people who wanted to change the way Britain was run.

Trade Unionism Between 1892 and 1900 membership of TU’s had grown from 1.6 million to just over 2 million members. Skilled and semi-skilled workers were now represented and there were strikes and lockouts. This led unions to look to

61

Parliament to protect them from unemployment and employers. It also led to the creation of the Labour party.

Spread of Socialism

Socialists argued that the government should interfere more with the way the country was organised and to help the poor. The growth of the labour party and socialist thinking pressurised the Liberal Party by threatening to take away the support of the working class. Liberals had supported the theories of self-help and laissez faire. However new liberals argued that this was not working and that the state had to take a role in improving standards of living. It was the Liberal Party that would begin to tackle the huge problem of poverty.

62

The Liberal Government, 1906-14

In 1906 the Liberal Party won a huge majority in Parliament. The party was led firstly by Henry Campbell Bannermann, then from 1908 Henry Asquith. The new liberals, Winston Churchill and David Lloyd George were willing to use the power of the state to intervene and end poverty.

The Liberal Reforms: Children

Meals for children, the Education (provision of meals) Act, 1906

Why •

Boer war and poor condition of recruits



Healthy children would become healthy soldiers



The British empire would be stronger

The Act •

Allowed local authorities to provide school meals for poor children



Allowed local authorities to raise a local tax to pay for this



Children from better off families were expected to pay

Problems •

Act was voluntary which meant that many local authorities chose not to provide food



By 1913 over half (England and Wales) had not begun to provide meals



Money was the problem, government provided money in 1914 to meet half the costs

Importance •

Feeding the children rather than their families, challenged idea of selfhelp

63



More children than expected given free school meal as difficult to make parents pay and identify who deserved a free meal

Medical Inspections for Children, 1907

Why •

Need for a healthy Britain



Recommended by board in 1904

The act •

Provided treatment for illnesses and many clinics were introduced into school to provide treatment



Government provided help to pay for these clinics in 1912 as again they were not compulsive for local authorities

Importance •

Another step taken to provide for children



Self-help theory attacked



Step towards greater healthcare for all



However only identified problem did not cure it

The Children’s Charter, 1908

Why •

Creation of Herbert Samuel, Liberal MP brought together previous laws such as Prevention of Cruelty to Children’s Act and produced one law



Stated what the legal rights of children were

64

The Act •

If children were not cared for by their parents, the government should care for them



Children banned form buying cigarettes under age of 16, and not allowed in pubs under 14, forbidden to give alcohol to children under 5 except in illness



Inspections of children’s homes



Fires to be guarded as 1,000 children burnt to death every year



Child criminals to be sent to juvenile courts and borstal system rather than prison



Death sentence abolished for children

Importance •

Protected children from abuse and covered many other aspects of life for children.



Children’s rights regulated by the state, self-help challenged

The Elderly and Old Age Pensions (1908)

Why •

Booth and Rowntree had shown how much poverty was due to old age, they could not afford to save when they were working



Royal Commission on the age poor, 1895 provided evidence to support introduction of pensions



New Zealand and Germany had introduced pensions in 1906



Pressure from Labour Party and TU’s as they supported pensions, Liberals were losing seats by 1908 to the Labour Party in by-elections, therefore they wanted to encourage working class to vote Liberal in the future

The Act •

No contribution necessary, to be paid from taxation and paid through the Post office removing the stigma of the poor law

65



Paid to people over 70



5 shillings at full rate a week for a single person, 10 shillings a week for a married couple



savings had to be used to provide an income, so amount paid varied

Importance •

No contributions necessary, therefore self-help challenged



More people claimed as people not branded poor but instead discreetly collected for post office



Made a real difference although not enough to live on alone, topped up their income

Problems •

Demand higher than expected, cost estimated at £6.5 million, actual cost was £8 million, this meant the government had to find the extra money



Limited to over 70s

Health; Part 1 of the National Insurance Act of 1911

Lloyd George wanted to help those who became poor through ill health and unemployment. Bad health cost many workers their jobs and often their lives.

Why •

The insurance scheme planned allowed employer, employee and state to contribute to a fund of money when the worker was employed



When the worker was ill or unemployed money was paid out for a limited period of time



Insurance meant the cost of reform was not too expensive for the government



Workers contributed for their own care making the scheme ‘respectable’



Workers would hopefully vote for the Liberal Party

66

The Act •

Employers contributed 4d a week if they earned under £160 a year, employers contributed 3d a week, the state contributed 2d a week



It gave workers ‘9d for 3d’



Insured workers were entitled to 10 shillings a week for 13 weeks and 5 shillings for another 13 weeks if ill



Entitled to free medical treatment and 30 shillings maternity benefit for the birth of each child

Problems •

Opposition from friendly societies who ran schemes for workers, TU’s who objected to men contributing to the reform and Private insurance companies e.g. Prudential who were threatened by the scheme



After using 26 week entitlement, ill workers had to rely on poor law medical facilities



Families did not receive benefits if they fell ill only workers



Self employed and unemployed not covered

Importance •

State extended role to help poor, this was a compulsory Act



Many workers were angry that they were forced to contribute as it reduced their pay packet, Liberals did not make the political gains they had hoped for

67

The 1911 National Insurance Act Part II; Unemployment Benefit

The Act •

Employees contributed 2 ½ d per week, employers 2 ½ d per week, the state 1 2/3 d per week



The benefit was 7 shillings a week for up to 15 weeks of unemployment



A weeks benefit was paid, for every 5 weeks contributions made and was administered through the Labour Exchanges

Problems •

No cover for rest of family only worker



Limited cover once entitlement was used up the Poor law had to be used



Applied to limited industries e.g. building, construction, shipbuilding, mechanical engineering etc these workers were normally employed for short periods of time then were unemployed when the work finished



Original scheme, no scheme like this in other countries



Undermined idea of self-help, no distinction between deserving and undeserving poor



Recognised complex problems of unemployment

Employment reforms The government also tried to improve the conditions for workers who were employed regularly.

1908 Mines Act •

Limited time that a miner could work, to 8 hours a day

1909 Trade Boards Act •

Boards were established in ‘sweated trades’ such as tailoring



These trades had long hours and poor pay, minimum wages were negotiated

68

1911 Shops Act •

Limited working hours of shop workers to 60 hours a week



Shops had to close one day a week to give time off

Labour exchange Act, 1908

Short-term unemployment was also a concern. Many workers had employment but only for a short time. Between these times they often had no money to live on as they could not save. These workers were not covered by insurance schemes run by the friendly societies.

The Act •

By 1910 there were 83 labour exchanges



The idea was that unemployed workers could go there to find work, employers would also go to these exchanges to find the workers they required



By 1911 there were 414 exchanges

Problems •

Scheme was voluntary



Employers did not have to tell the exchanges they had vacancies



Workers did not have to register with the exchanges if they were out of work

An answer to poverty? •

Look at each act and then the problems to make an evaluation



Historians disagree,



View 1; liberal reforms were the starting point for reforms in the future, the laid the foundations of the welfare state that was completed under Labour



View 2; limited in their aims e.g. did not tackle the problem of housing or education, widow and orphans not helped. More reform was required.

69

The First World War and inter-war years

What progress was made during the First World War? •

3 out of 9 recruits were fully fit to fight, rationing was set up to ensure everyone got a fair deal



by the end of the war plans were in place to carry out important welfare reforms

Why did Post-War Welfare Plans Fail? •

1918 election produced a joint government between the Liberals and the Conservatives therefore Lloyd George was not free to do what he wanted



Unemployment was high and from the 1920s Britain’s economy had a depression, not enough jobs were created in new industries e.g. cars instead Britain was reliant on old industries such as shipbuilding



Therefore the government decided to keep government spending down and this meant no money for reforms, there were also 5 different governments between 1918 and 1929.



In 1929 after the Wall Street crash in America, there was high unemployment in Britain, which increased the level of poverty.



In 1929 Ramsay MacDonald, Prime Minister, appointed a committee to deal with the crisis. It reported that cuts in spending and wages of civil servants and cuts in unemployment benefit would help. This led to a split in the Labour Party and a National Government was set up. Unemployment benefit was reduced by 10% and the ‘means test’ was used after 26 weeks. The cuts were restored in 1934



The 1934 unemployment Act set up two national boards, one to take care of those who had paid contributions and the other for those who had not.



Government training centres were set up and ‘special areas’ to encourage investment. However these special areas were not attractive to new firms and therefore did not guarantee jobs.

70

What progress had been made by 1939? •

Realisation by government that it was not enough to react to crisis



Renewed growth in charities who worked in partnership with the government



Availability of help was extended e.g. housing and education



Growing awareness of the social neglect and division in British society.

The effects of the Second World War

When war broke out in 1939 it was clear that the war was not going to be short. The war united communities and many people found out about social problems for the first time. This and people’s suffering in the war made people determined to create a better world after the war.

Key figures •

Winston Churchill replaced Neville Chamberlain as Prime Minister. His government included all the main parties- coalition government.



Clement Atlee was deputy Prime Minister



Ernest Bevin was Minister of Labour



Arthur Greenwood, Herbert Morrison and Stafford Cripps were all given key posts. This was a chance for the Labour Party to gain experience.

Evacuation •

‘The bomber would always get through’ this fear led to the organised moving of children to the countryside.



The condition of some of the children was a shock to middle class country dwellers this raised awareness of social problems which many assumed to have disappeared



Different section of society met up and socialised with each other in a way unheard of peacetime

71

The bombing •

Key factories and communication links were bombed by the Germans, as well as big industrial town including Aberdeen, Glasgow, Edinburgh and Dundee



Very often the bombers missed their targets and dropped their bombs before they went home, the bombers destroyed the homes of rich and poor



Again this brought people together who normally had little to do with each other e.g. sheltering in subway stations, this helped raise awareness of the level of poverty

Rationing •

As Britain depended on imports (60%) for food their food supplies dropped



This caused queuing and rising prices, which meant only the rich could pay the high prices, to ensure ‘fair share for all’ the government introduced food rationing in 1940 and clothes rationing in 1941



This helped to establish the idea of universal and equal share of the ‘national cake’ as rich and poor were fighting the war, conscription introduced young men in the armed services and women were conscripted either on the home front or war front.



Government also took more control of the nations health



The Ministry of Food under Lord Woolton, ensured everyone got a fair share of the food, it also aimed to improve the nation’s health in order to improve the ability to fight, calcium, iron, minerals and vitamins were added to certain foods



A series of ‘food fact’ leaflets with nutritional information were produced and cookery demonstrations took place nation-wide



The Ministry of Food was important for promoting the nation’s health and was the first attempt to apply nutritional knowledge.

To what extent did the Second World War cause the Welfare State? •

See notes from effects of WW2

72



Suffering made people determined to create a better society after the war



Shared experiences, evacuation, bombing, rationing led to more awareness of poverty



The government took a greater role in helping people and the public expected them to do more



Pressure to rebuild Britain led to Churchill’s government drawing up plans to tackle the ‘five giants’

The Beveridge Report and the ‘five giants’

What were the five giants •

Beveridge believed Want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness stood in the way of social progress



To fight these giants a proper system of sickness and unemployment benefit was needed, a proper national health service, family allowance and a full employment policy.



His ideas provided the basis for the ‘welfare state’, he believed all the problems would have to be solved to improve the welfare of British citizens

Main points in Beveridge report •

Government minister to be appointed to control all the benefits schemes



National Health Service should be set up



Weekly National Insurance Contributions to be made by people in work and unemployed to have the right to payments for an indefinite period, no means test



Benefits to include Old Age Pensions, maternity grants, pensions for widows and people injured at work, family allowance



The scheme was to be universal, applied to everyone and people were entitled to benefits. It had revolutionary ideas- society should tackle five giants of poverty

73

Coalition government under Churchill •

Labour Party credited for putting Beveridge Report into action but coalition government made a start



1943 ministry to supervise insurance benefits was set up



1945 Family Allowance Act was passed, benefits not as generous as Beveridge had proposed, payments delayed for a year



Ministry of Town and County Planning set up in 1943, new towns were planned, temporary housing built for homeless



White papers published (future action) on the National health service, employment policy and social insurance but nothing radical with the exception of education as concentrating on war

Education reform under coalition government •

Three stages of educational development; Primary, secondary and further to be provided by local authorities



Free education for all, fees abolished for local authority schools although not grammar schools



Leaving age set at 15 from 1945

Criticisms •

Two-tier system crated, grammar school pupils could expect to go to university a secondary modern pupil would do practical subjects and go onto a trade.



Young people from poorer backgrounds were discriminated

Election of 1945 •

People wanted a reward for all their suffering during the war



Policies of two main parties, Conservatives and Labour not very different, but electorate trusted Labour more. They won with 393 seats compared to the Conservative’s 213



People had remembered the promises after WW1 which had not been delivered by the Conservatives or Liberals

74



Labour had consistently supported social reforms whereas the Conservatives had favoured cuts during depression



Churchill not as enthusiastic about Beveridge report, worried about the cost involved



Churchill campaigned on heavy spending for defence rather than domestic spending

Labour government and the welfare state

How did they pay for the reforms? •

By 1948 the Labour government had set up most of the services that made up the welfare state.



Money was raised by nationalising industries e.g. coal, gas, railways, electricity, airways, Bank of England to help control the economy



Rationing continued on food, furl and clothing



Further Loan from America and ‘Marshall Aid’ from America to help fight Communism

Labour reforms

The National Insurance Act, 1946 •

Benefits were set up for unemployment, sickness, maternity and widows



Allowances were paid to parents in charge of children



Retirement pensions were paid



Death grant given to assist with funeral expenses



Rates of benefit; 26 shillings a week basic rate, 42 shillings for a married man, 7s 6d for first child

Industrial Injuries Act, 1946 •

Payments for these temporarily hurt in an accident



Long term payments for anyone permanently unable to work, this group also got a higher rate of benefit than someone out of work

75

National assistance board •

In 1948 a National assistance board was set up to help people not covered by the National Insurance Act



People had to undergo a ‘needs test’ and an interviewing process to assess genuine need



Provided weekly or one-off payments for bedding or clothing

Nationalisation •

Committed to full employment, the Labour government nationalised many key industries (see previous page)



This kept unemployment low (below 3%) but many industries were badly run and cost the government money e.g. coal mining

National Health Service, 1946

Problems Setting up of Health service •

Bevan’s biggest problem was getting the co-operation of the doctors and dentists, they were worried that they would become government workers, the service was therefore delayed for 2 years



Many hospital workers were in favour of the health reforms as the hospitals required modernising, the real opposition came from GPs who felt they would lose the freedom to treat a patient as he wished, they began a fierce campaign



Bevan had to promise new equipment and buildings, he also agreed that doctors could continue to treat private as well as Health Service patients. Also doctors would get a salary and be able to earn money by treating private patients, each hospital had pay beds for people wanting private treatment



This left the GP’s isolated by 1948 Bevan had persuaded a quarter of GPs in England and a third in Scotland and Wales to sign up for the NHS.



The NHS started working in July 1948

76



People now had access to basic health services free of charge

Problems with NHS •

High demand for services, demand outstripped government estimates, cost of prescriptions doubled after July 1948, the same with dentists and opticians



Funding became a real problem, NHS contributions only paid for about 10% of the service costs, the rest was met with taxation



Prescription charges had to be introduced in 1951, Bevan resigned in protest

Housing

How did they cope with the housing shortage? •

Many homes had been destroyed during the war and slum housing still existed



The priority was to house the homeless, ‘pre-fabricated’ or ready made houses continued to be put up, these were supposed to be temporary but many still exist today



Private house building was restricted so building supplies and labour could be used for council housing



The 1946 New Towns Act tried to solve the problem of overcrowding in the cities by planning new communities



The 1947 Housing Town and Country Planning Act gave councils more planning powers and the ability to buy property in areas they wanted to re-develop



1949 Housing Act. Local Authorities were allowed to buy homes for improvement or conversion, grants were available for home improvements

77

Did the government meet the Housing needs? •

Made progress with housing problem but still huge shortages



Demand was so great that quantity rather than quality became the priority



Shortage of building materials led to problems

Education, 1947 Butler Education Act •

Planned expansion in further education, student places increased and grants system was set up to assist children from poorer backgrounds



Leaving age increased to 16



Children’s Act, 1948 meant local authorities had to appoint children’s officers to ensure decent care for children under authority supervision

Summary of welfare reforms: success?

Want successes; •

The National Insurance, Industrial Injuries and National Assistance Acts meant everyone would be given help ‘from the cradle to the grave’

Want problems; •

Needed many people to administer scheme



Not everyone covered by the National Insurance Act, only those with a certain level of contributions, ‘safety net’ did not cover everyone

Disease successes; •

National health Service Act, 1946 gave free medical, dental and eye services to all



Huge improvement for British citizens

Disease problems;

78



Hospitals were old and not suitable for modern health care, financial pressures meant old hospitals were not replaced until 1960s



So many people used service that it became too expensive for the government to fund, charges were introduced in 1951 for prescriptions

Housing successes; •

Building encouraged by keeping down the prices of building goods and labour



New towns planned and home owners encouraged to make improvements by applying for a grant



200,000 houses built between 1948-51 made real progress

Housing problems; •

level of house building does not compare well with 1930s or 50s



many houses built were prefabs-temporary, shortage of materials



still shortages families forced to squat in London, aerodromes had to be used (military housing), not enough housing for ex service people

education successes; •

raised school leaving age to 16, definition of stages of school



school building programmes

education problems; •

limited for a socialist party, few working class children had the chance to go to an academic school, divisional education system



school building programme concentrated on primary schools to cope with ‘baby boom’ only 250 secondary schools built by 1950s

Idleness successes; •

policy of full employment promoted, nationalised industries



Unemployment 2.5% below the target of 3%

Idleness problems; •

British economy and jobs depended heavily on loans from America

79



women were replaced by the men returning from the war, many were happy to go back to being a house wife others found themselves excluded from the jobs they would have liked to continue doing.

Success or failure

Historians disagree View 1; poverty was not abolished but it was reduced, system of universal social insurance provided a welfare state.

View 2; crushed individual responsibility and created dependency on the state, cost was a burden the government miscalculated the cost of the NHS, failed to address housing and education needs fully. Remembering Pre-NHS Britain – Narrative example “Hunger, filth, fear and death”: remembering life before the NHS Harry Leslie Smith, a 91-year-old RAF veteran born into an impoverished mining family, recalls a Britain without a welfare state. By Harry Leslie Smith Over 90 years ago, I was born in Barnsley, Yorkshire, to a working-class family. Poverty was as natural to us as great wealth and power were to the aristocracy of that age. Like his father and grandfather before him, my dad, Albert, eked out a meagre existence as a miner, working hundreds of feet below the surface, smashing the rock face with a pickaxe, searching for coal. Hard work and poor wages didn’t turn my dad into a radical. They did, however, make him an idealist, because he believed that a fair wage, education, trade unions and universal suffrage were the means to a prosperous democracy. He endured brutal working conditions but they never hardened his spirit against his family or his comrades in the pits. Instead, the harsh grind of work made his soul as gentle as a beast of burden that toiled in desolate fields for the profit of others.

80

My mother, Lillian, however, was made of sterner stuff. She understood that brass, not love, made the world go round. So when a midwife with a love of gin and carbolic soap delivered me safely on a cold winter’s night in February 1923 into my mum’s exhausted arms, I was swaddled in her rough-and-ready love, which toughened my skin with a harsh affection. I was the first son but I had two elder sisters who had already skinned their knees and elbows in the mad fight to stay alive in the days before the social safety network. Later on, our family would include two half-brothers, after my mother was compelled to look for a more secure provider than my dad during the Great Depression. By the time I was weaned from my mother’s breast, I had begun to learn the cruel lessons that the world inflicted on its poor. At the age of seven, my eldest sister, Marion, contracted tuberculosis, which was a common and deadly disease for those who lived hand to mouth in early-20th-century Britain. Her illness was directly spawned from our poverty, which forced us to live in a series of fetid slums. Despite being a full-time worker, my dad was always one pay packet away from destitution. Several times, my family did midnight flits and moved from one decrepit single-bedroom tenement to the next. Yet we never seemed to move far from the town’s tip, a giant wasteland stacked with rotting rubbish, which became a playground for preschool children. At the beginning of my life, affordable health care was out of reach for much of the population. A doctor’s visit could cost the equivalent of half a week’s wages, so most people relied on good fortune rather than medical advice to see them safely through an illness. But luck and guile went only so far and many lives were snatched away before they had a chance to start. The wages of the ordinary worker were at a mere subsistence level and therefore medicine or simple rest was out of the question for many people. Unfortunately for my sister, luck was also in short supply in our household. Because my parents could neither afford to see a consultant nor send my sister to a sanatorium, Marion’s TB spread and infected her spine, leaving her an invalid.

81

**** The 1926 General Strike, which began just as my sister started her slow and painful journey from life to death, was about more than wages to my dad and many others. It was called by the TUC in protest against mine owners who were using strong-arm tactics to force their workers to accept longer work hours for less take-home pay. At its start, it involved 1.7 million industrialised workers. In essence, the strike was about the right of all people, regardless of their economic station, to live a dignified and meaningful life. My father joined it with enthusiasm, because he believed that all workers, from tram drivers to those who dug ore, deserved a living wage. But for my father the strike was also about the belief that he might be able to right the wrongs done to him and his family; if only he had more money in his pay packet, he might have been able to afford decent health care for all of us. Unfortunately, the General Strike was crushed by the government, which first bullied TUC members to return to their work stations. Eight months later, it did the same to the miners whose communities had been beggared by being on the pickets for so long. My dad and his workmates had to accept wage cuts. I remember my sister’s pain and anguish during her final weeks of life in October 1926. I’d play beside her in our parlour, which was as squalid as an animal pen, while she lay on a wicker landau, tied down by ropes to prevent her from falling to the ground while unattended. When Marion’s care became too much for my mother to endure, she was sent to our neighbourhood workhouse, which had been imprisoning the indigent since the days of Charles Dickens. The workhouse where Marion died was a large, brick building less than a mile from our living quarters. Since it had been designed as a prison for the poor, it had few windows and had a high wall surrounding it. When my sister left our house and was transported there on a cart pulled by an old horse, my mum

82

and dad told my other sister and me to wave goodbye, because Marion was going to a better place than here. The workhouse was not used only as a prison for those who had been ruined by poverty; it also had a primitive infirmary attached to it, where the poor could receive limited medical attention. Perhaps the only compassion the place allowed my parents was permission to visit their daughter to calm her fears of death. My sister died behind the thick, limestone walls at the age of ten, and perhaps the only compassion the place allowed my parents was permission to visit their daughter to calm her fears of death. As we didn’t have the money to give her a proper burial, Marion was thrown into a communal grave for those too poor to matter. Since then, the pauper’s pit has been replaced by a dual carriageway. **** Some historians have called the decade of my birth “the Roaring Twenties” but for most it was a long death rattle. Wages were low, rents were high and there was little or no job protection as a result of a postwar recession that had gutted Britain’s industrial heartland. When the Great Depression struck Britain in the 1930s, it turned our cities and towns into a charnel house for the working class, because they had no economic reserves left to withstand prolonged joblessness and the ruling class believed that benefits led to fecklessness. Even now, when I look back to those gaslight days of my boyhood and youth, all I can recollect is hunger, filth, fear and death. My mother called those terrible years for our family, our friends and our nation a time when “hard rain ate cold Yorkshire stone for its tea”. I will never forget seeing as a teenager the faces of former soldiers who had been broken physically and mentally during the Great War and were living rough in the back alleys of Bradford. Their faces were haunted not by the

83

brutality of the war but by the savagery of the peace. Nor will I forget as long as I shall live the screams that fell out of dosshouse windows from the dying and mentally ill, who were denied medicine and solace because they didn’t have the money to pay for medical services. Like today, those tragedies were perpetuated by a coalition government preaching that the only cure for our economic troubles was a harsh austerity, which promised to right Britain’s finances through the sacrifice of its lowestpaid workers. When my dad got injured, the dole he received was ten shillings a week. My family, like millions of others, were reduced to beggary. In the 1930s, the government believed that private charities were more suitable for providing alms for those who had been ruined in the Great Depression. Austerity in the 1930s was like a pogrom against Britain’s working class. It blighted so many lives through preventable ailments caused by malnutrition, as well as thwarting ordinary people’s aspirations for a decent life by denying them housing, full- time employment or a proper education. As Britain’s and my family’s economic situation worsened in the 1930s, we upped sticks from Barnsley to Bradford in the hope that my father might find work. But there were too many adults out of work and jobs were scarce, so he never found full-time employment again. We lived in dosshouses. They were cheap, sad places filled with people broken financially and emotionally. Since we had no food, my mum had me indentured to a seedy off-licence located near our rooming house. At the age of seven, I became a barrow boy and delivered bottles of beer to the down-and-outs who populated our neighbourhood. My family were nomads. We flitted from one dosshouse to the next, trying to keep ahead of the rent collector. We moved around the slums of Bradford and when we had outstayed our welcome there, we moved on to Sowerby Bridge, before ending up in Halifax. As I grew up, my schooling suffered; I had to work to keep my sister, my mum and half-brothers fed. At the age of ten, I was helping to deliver coal and by my teens, I started work as a grocer’s assistant. At 17, I had been promoted to store manager. However, at the age of 18,

84

the Second World War intervened in whatever else I had planned for the rest of my life. I volunteered to join the RAF. **** My politics was forged in the slums of Yorkshire but it was in the summer of 1945, at the age of 22, that I finally felt able to exorcise the misery of my early days. In that long ago July, I was a member of the RAF stationed in Hamburg; a city left ruined and derelict by war. I had been a member of the air force since 1941 but my war had been good, because I had walked away from it without needing so much as a plaster for a shaving nick. At its end, my unit had been seconded to be part of the occupational forces charged with rebuilding a German society gutted by Hitler and our bombs. It was in the palm of that ravaged city that I voted in Britain’s first general election since the war began. As I stood to cast my ballot in the heat of that summer, I joked with my mates, smoked Player’s cigarettes and stopped to look out towards a shattered German skyline. I realised then that this election was momentous because it meant that a common person, like me, had a chance of changing his future. So it seemed only natural and right that I voted for a political party that saw health care, housing and education as basic human rights for all of its citizens and not just the well-to-do. When I marked my X on the ballot paper, I voted for all those who had died, like my sister, in the workhouse; for men like my father who had been broken beyond repair by the Great Depression; and for women like my mum who had been tortured by grief over a child lost through unjust poverty. And I voted for myself and my right to a fair and decent life. I voted for Labour and the creation of the welfare state and the NHS, free for all its users. And now, nearly 70 years later, I fear for the future of my grandchildren’s generation, because Britain’s social welfare state is being dismantled brick by brick.

85

**** My life didn’t really begin until the end of the Second World War. I fell in love with Friede, a German woman, whom I married and brought home to Halifax. My wife gave me emotional stability while the welfare state gave me economic stability. When I was demobbed, I didn’t have many prospects, except using my brawn over my brain. I took factory jobs while my wife and I studied at night school. But I am forever grateful for the foundation of the NHS, because it allowed my wife to receive first-rate treatment for the PTSD she acquired by having witnessed both the atrocities of the Nazis and the firebombing of Hamburg, which killed 50,000 people in three nights of intense RAF bombing in 1943. My experiences of growing up in Britain before the NHS, when one’s health was determined by one’s wealth, and after 1948, when free health care was seen as a cornerstone for a healthy economy and democracy, convinced me that it was my duty to share my family experiences at this year’s Labour party conference. I agreed to speak about the NHS because I know there are few people left who can remember that brutal time before the welfare state, when life for many was short and cruel. I felt that I owed it to my sister Marion, whose life was cut short by extreme poverty and poor health care, along with all of those other victims of a society that protected the rich and condemned the poor to miserable lives. In many ways, making that speech freed me from the suffering of my youth. Harry Leslie Smith is the author of a memoir: “Harry’s Last Stand: How the World My Generation Built is Falling Down and What We Can Do to Save it” (Icon Books, £8.99) Harry Leslie Smith is a survivor of the Great Depression, a Second World War RAF veteran and an activist for the poor and for the preservation of social democracy. He has authored numerous books about Britain during the Great Depression, the Second World War, and post-war austerity

86