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
are still extant, such as those of the Bookbinders, Compositors,
Ironfounders, Cotton-spinners, Steam-engine makers, and Stonemasons,
there are no traces of Chartist resolutions; although denunciations
of the “Notorious New Poor Law oppression” abound in the _Fortnightly
Circular_ of the Stonemasons;[304] whilst the Ironfounders,
Compositors, and Cotton-spinners pass resolutions in favour of Free
Trade. A partial explanation of this reticence on the more exciting
topic of the Charter is doubtless to be found in the frequently adopted
rule excluding politics and religion from Trade Union discussions--a
rule which was, in 1842, protested against by an enthusiastic Chartist
delegate from the Bookbinders at the Manchester Conference.[305] There
must, however, have been something more than mere obedience to the rule
in the unwillingness of the trade societies to be mixed up with the
Chartist agitation. The rule had not prevented the organised trades of
1831-2 from taking a prominent part in the Reform Bill Movement. The
banners of the Edinburgh trade clubs were conspicuous in the public
demonstration on the rejection of the Bill of 1831. When the House
of Lords gave way, the Birmingham Trade Unions themselves organised
a triumphal procession, which was discountenanced by the middle
class.[306] The records of the London Brushmakers show that they
even subscribed from the Union funds to Reform associations. But we
never find the trade societies of 1839-42 contributing to Chartist
funds, or even collecting money for Chartist victims. The cases of
Frost, Williams, and Jones, the Newport rebels of 1839, were least
as deserving of the working-class sympathy as those of the Glasgow
cotton-spinners. But the Trade Unions showed no inclination to
subscribe money or get up petitions in aid of them. “Never,” writes
Fergus O’Connor, in 1846, “was there more criminal apathy than that
manifested by the trades of Great Britain to the sufferings of those
men;” and he adds, “that if one half that was done for the Dorchester
labourers or the Glasgow cotton-spinners had been done for Frost,
Williams, and Jones, they would long since have been restored.”[307]
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