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
they explained their grievances. All this energy on the part of the
Unions was, as Place observes, in marked contrast with their apathy
the year before. The workmen, though they had done nothing to gain
their freedom of association, were determined to maintain it. Doherty,
the leader of the Lancashire Cotton-spinners, writing to Place in the
heat of the agitation, declared that any attempt at a re-enactment
of the Combination Laws would result in a widespread revolutionary
movement.[190] The net result of the inquiry was, on the whole,
satisfactory. The Select Committee found themselves compelled to hear
a certain number of workmen witnesses, who testified to the good
results of the Act of the previous year. The ship-owners’ Bill was
abandoned, and the House of Commons was recommended to pass a measure
which nominally re-established the general common-law prohibition of
combinations, but specifically excepted from prosecution associations
for the purpose of regulating wages or hours of labour. The master
shipbuilders were furious at this virtual defeat. The handbill is still
extant which they distributed at the doors of the House of Commons
on the day of the second reading of the emasculated Bill.[191] They
declared that its provisions were quite insufficient to save their
industry from destruction. If Trade Unions were to be allowed to exist
at all, they demanded that these bodies should be compelled to render
full accounts of their expenditure to the justices in Quarter Sessions,
and that any diversion of monies raised for friendly society purposes
should be severely punished. They pleaded, moreover, that at any rate
all federal or combined action among trade clubs should be prohibited.
Place and Hume, on the other hand, were afraid, and subsequent events
proved with what good grounds, that the narrow limits of the trade
combinations allowed by the Bill, and still more the vague terms
“molest” and “obstruct,” which it contained, would be used as weapons
against Trade Unionism. The Government, however, held to the draft
of the Committee. The shipbuilders secured nothing. Hume induced
Ministers to give way on some verbal points, and took three divisions
in vain protest against the measure. Place carried on the agitation to
the House of Lords, where Lord Rosslyn extracted the concession of a
right of appeal to Quarter Sessions, which was afterwards to prove of
some practical value.
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