A History of the Durham Miner's Association 1870-1904Wilson, John
History
A History of the Durham Miner's Association 1870-1904
Wilson, John
Coal miners -- Labor unions -- Great Britain -- History; Durham Miners' Association -- History
The resolutions come to were--(1) there should be Labour
representatives; (2) there should be _bona fide_ Labour candidates
selected from the workmen, but run in connection with the Liberals;
(3) the candidates should be J. Wilson, W. Crawford, and L. Trotter;
(4) the ways and means should be left in the hands of the Federation
Board, and that the salaries should be £500 per year. On the same day
the Board met, and decided to select the Bishop Auckland, Mid-Durham,
and Houghton-le-Spring divisions--Mr Trotter for Bishop Auckland;
Mid-Durham, W. Crawford; Houghton-le-Spring, J. Wilson. They further
decided to inform the North and South Durham Liberal Associations what
had been done, and asked them if they would co-operate with the
Board.
A meeting between the representatives of the Liberal Associations, the
Federation Board, and the Franchise Association was held in the County
Hotel, Durham, when the following resolutions were agreed to:--
RESOLUTIONS, 1885
That it is highly desirable for all sections of the new electorate to
arrange for the object of securing the return of Liberal Members at
the next election, and that this meeting is prepared to give support
to the persons nominated by the Miners' Federation Board, providing
their candidature is endorsed by the Liberals in each division.
That this meeting requests the constituencies to form Liberal
organisations, and that small committees from the South and North
Durham Liberal Associations, the Federation Board, and the Miners'
Franchise Association be appointed to aid such organisations.
_January 24th, 1885._
So far as the Mid-Durham and the Houghton divisions were concerned,
all went on smoothly. The candidates were accepted with complete
unanimity, but in the Auckland division the feeling in some quarters
was in strong opposition. The Board were asked to withdraw Mr Trotter,
which they refused to do. There were other two gentlemen in
nomination, and he was asked to put himself in competition with them,
and if rejected retire. He refused, and they, the Board, approved of
his refusal, and arranged a meeting of the lodges in the division for
the purpose of explaining the situation. At this point there arose a
complication of a different order. At their meeting on October 22nd,
1885, the Board decided "that each candidate must be responsible for
the returning officer's fees in their respective divisions." Shortly
after this was made known Mr Trotter withdrew, the reason assigned
being the refusal of the Board to pay the returning officer's fees,
although all the candidates were treated alike. As a consequence the
division was vacant, and open to any candidate. This only need be
added, that at the General Election in November Mr Crawford and Mr
Wilson were both returned by great majorities--the latter being
defeated in 1886, but succeeding Mr Crawford in 1890 as the Member for
Mid-Durham.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account