The History of Trade Unionism: (Revised edition, extended to 1920)Webb, Sidney
History
The History of Trade Unionism: (Revised edition, extended to 1920)
Webb, Sidney
Labor unions -- Great Britain -- History
Dorsetshire, as George Loveless tells us, an agreement was made between
the farmers and the men, in the presence of the village parson, that
the wages should be those paid in other districts. This involved a rise
to ten shillings a week. In the following year the farmers repented of
their decision, and successively reduced wages shilling by shilling
until they were paying only seven shillings a week. In this strait
the men made inquiries about “the Trades Union,” and two delegates
from the Grand National visited the village. Upon their information
the Lovelesses established “the Friendly Society of Agricultural
Labourers,” having its “Grand Lodge” at Tolpuddle. For this village
club the elaborate ritual and code of rules of one of the national
orders of the Grand National Consolidated Trades Union were adopted. No
secrecy seems to have been observed, for John Loveless openly ordered
of the village painter a figure of “Death painted six feet high for a
society of his own,”[264] with which to perform the initiation rites.
The farmers took alarm, and induced the local magistrates, on February
21, 1834, to issue placards warning the labourers that any one joining
the Union would be sentenced to seven years’ transportation. This was
no idle threat. Within three days of the publication of the notice the
Lovelesses and four other members were arrested and lodged in gaol.
The trial of these unfortunate labourers was a scandalous perversion
of the law. The Lovelesses and their friends seem to have been
simple-minded Methodists, two of them being itinerant preachers.
No accusation was made, and no evidence preferred against them, of
anything worse than the playing with oaths, which, as we have seen,
formed a part of the initiation ceremony of the Grand National and
other Unions of the time, with evidently no consciousness of their
statutory illegality. Not only were they guiltless of any intimidation
or outrage, but they had not even struck or presented any application
for higher wages. Yet the judge (John Williams), who had only recently
been raised to the bench, charged the grand jury on the case at
portentous length, as if the prisoners had committed murder or treason,
and inflicted on them, after the briefest of trials, the monstrous
sentence of seven years’ transportation.
The action of the Government shows how eagerly the Home Secretary
accepted the blunder of an inexperienced judge as part of his policy of
repression. Lord Melbourne expressed his opinion that “the law has in
this case been most properly applied”;[265] and the sentence, far from
exciting criticism in the Whig Cabinet, was carried out with special
celerity. The case was tried on March 18, 1834; before the 30th the
prisoners were in the hulks; and by the 15th of the next month Lord
Howick was able to say in the House of Commons that their ship had
already sailed for Botany Bay.[266]
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