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
An even more serious blow was the lock-out of the London building
trades in July 1834. These trades in London had joined the Grand
Consolidated rather than the Builders’ Union; and in the summer of
1834 an act of petty tyranny on the part of a single firm brought
about a general conflict. The workmen employed by Messrs. Cubitt
had resolved not to drink any beer supplied by Combe, Delafield &
Co., in retaliation for the refusal of that firm to employ Trade
Unionists. Messrs. Cubitt thereupon refused to allow any other beer
to be drunk on their premises, and locked out their workmen. The
employers throughout London, angered by the Union’s resistance to
sub-contract and piecework, embraced this opportunity to insist that
all their employees should sign the hated “document.” The heads of the
Government departments in which building operatives were employed
placed themselves in line with private employers by making the same
demands.[275] The struggle dragged on until November 1834, when the
document seems to have been tacitly withdrawn, and the men returned to
work, accepting the employers’ terms on the other points at issue.[276]
We learn from the correspondence of the Stonemasons’ Society that this
defeat--for such it virtually was--completely broke up the organisation
in the London building trade. What was happening to the Builders’ Union
during these months is not clear. The federal organisation apparently
broke up at about this time; and the several trades fell back upon
their local clubs and national societies.
Whilst the London builders were thus engaged, similar struggles were
going on in the other leading industries. At Leeds, for instance, in
May 1834 the masters were again presenting the “document”; and the men,
after much resistance and angry denunciation, were compelled to abandon
the Clothiers’ Union. The Cotton-spinners, whom we left preparing to
carry out Fielden’s idea of a general strike for an eight hours day
with undiminished wages for all cotton operatives, resolved to demand
the reduction of hours from the 1st of March 1834, the day appointed
for the operation of the new Factory Act of 1833 limiting the hours
of children to eight per day. The operatives in many mills sent in
notices, which were simply ignored by the employers. In this they seem
to have estimated the weakness of the men correctly; for the expected
general strike was deferred by a delegate meeting until the 2nd of
June. That date found the men still unprepared for action, and the
strike was further postponed until the 1st of September. After that we
hear no more of it.
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