CHAPTER XXVIII

THE QUEEN INTERVENES

A Breakdown from Overwork--Health Permanently Impaired--Appointment

of a Royal Commission on the Poor Law--Saving the Unemployed

Bill--Need of Money to Work the Bill--Mrs. Crooks heads the Women's

March to Whitehall--Mr. Balfour's Sympathetic but Unsatisfactory

Reply--Queen Alexandra's Intervention--A Vote of Money in the New

Parliament.

The labour and anxiety, the long arduous days and the sleepless nights

Crooks endured that winter for the unemployed, culminated in a sudden

and serious illness.

The attack was short, but dangerous. His doctor reported that unless a

change took place within a few hours it would be a case for confinement

to bed for at least three months. Fortunately, the welcome change came.

A few days before he took to his bed he got a severe shaking by a fall

while jumping off a 'bus in the Strand. That was not the cause of his

illness, however. The real cause, as his medical man declared, was

nervous breakdown due to overwork. His overwork had all been in the

direction of trying to get work for the unemployed.

He fretted himself into a worse condition during the first few days of

his illness. Every night, instead of sleeping, he was mentally putting

hosts of unemployed men to work.

The sympathy and affection shown during his illness by his neighbours at

Poplar affected him deeply. All day long callers of all sorts and

conditions were making inquiries and leaving messages of good-will.

Labourers, mechanics, widows, children, tradesmen, public men,

officials, Free Church ministers, Anglican clergymen, Roman Catholic

priests, and Sisters of the Poor were among those who came to the door

once the news leaked out that the man from their midst, whom they had so

often delighted to honour, lay sick and in danger. Their sympathy was

intensified by the knowledge that Mrs. Crooks herself had not wholly

recovered from a serious operation that had kept her for weeks in

hospital.

That breakdown shattered him for life. He has never been the same in

health since, and knows he can never be the same again. Sometimes for

weeks together he endures agonising nervous pains, deprived of sleep and

rest, yet all the time steadily refusing to slacken his labours for

those whom he is fond of calling "the people at our end of the town."

As soon as he was able to get out again in the New Year (1905), he took

up the case for the unemployed, if not with all his former zeal,

certainly with all the zeal he could then command.

Towards the end of January he had so far recovered as to be able to

attend the Liverpool Conference of the Labour Representation Committee.

He was then in a position to make public for the first time that the

King's Speech at the opening of Parliament in the following month would

in all likelihood promise an Unemployed Bill. On his motion the

Conference decided:

That the policy of the Labour Party in Parliament relating to

unemployment should be to secure fuller powers for the local

authorities to acquire and use land, to re-organise the local

administrative machinery for dealing with poverty and unemployment,

to bring pressure on the Government to put the recommendations of

the Afforestation Committee into effect, to undertake forthwith,

through the Board of Trade, the reclamation of foreshores, and to

create a Labour Ministry.

His forecast of the King's Speech proved correct. An Unemployed Bill was

promised. It was introduced on April 18th by Mr. Gerald Balfour, who had

succeeded Mr. Long at the Local Government Board. The Bill confirmed Mr.

Long's scheme of Distress Committees in London, and provided for the

formation of similar bodies in provincial towns. It granted the

principle of State aid by permitting the cost of organisation, including

the provision of farm colonies, to be charged to the rates, leaving it

to voluntary subscriptions to provide a fund for paying the men's wages.

That Session was made memorable to Crooks in another sense. A Royal

Commission on the Poor Law was appointed, and although it was little

faith he had in Commissions generally, he believed that, whatever came

of the recommendations of this one, it would help the people of England

to see, while its investigations were going on, something of the cruelty

and folly of a system which had been ruthlessly thrust upon the voteless

labouring people by the middle class individualists who came into power

after the Reform Act of 1832. His fellow Guardian, George Lansbury, was

appointed a member of the Commission--a notable compliment to Poplar,

which for a dozen years had striven to make this soulless system humane

and helpful.

Although the Unemployed Bill passed second reading with a majority of

217, the Session dragged wearily on with little prospect of its getting

through the Committee stage and becoming law. When August dawned and the

House found itself within a week of adjournment, everyone but Crooks

despaired of getting the measure through. The Prime Minister told the

House there was no time for the Bill. Several of Crooks's Labour

colleagues declared the Bill to be too meagre a thing to fight for.

"I admit its faults and shortcomings as readily as anyone," he argued

with his Party; "but it contains the germ of a great principle--State

recognition of the need and State aid in carrying out the organisation."

Almost alone he fought for the Bill in the last days of the Session. He

urged the Government to save the unemployed from foolish and useless

rioting by holding out to them the hope which the passing of the Bill

would convey.

By a dramatic coincidence, on the very afternoon he was thus warning

the Government the police were charging a crowd of desperate unemployed

in Manchester.

"The Prime Minister urges the plea that there is no time," Crooks went

on to tell the House. "What would the business men of this House think,

when they went down to their offices to-morrow, if they were told by the

manager that grouse-shooting would begin on the Twelfth and that

therefore business would have to be suspended? Does the Government

prefer grouse-shooting to finding work for honest men? Was this Bill of

theirs only introduced to kill time--to wait until the birds were big

enough to be shot? I don't want to stop your holidays. Go and kill your

grouse and your partridges. But are you going to put dead birds before

living men?

"There was the day on which the Eton and Harrow match was played. What

will the unemployed say when they hear that the Government could not

find time to discuss this Bill because Ministers wished to see two

schools play cricket? Do you think the working man gets a day off to see

his sons play cricket in the public parks? Unlike many hon. members of

this House, workmen do not live by dividends. They have nothing to sell

but their labour. When out of work a little help often saves them from

ruin and pauperism. They are only asking to be given an opportunity to

fulfil the Divine curse by earning their living in the sweat of their

brow."

His appeal went home. The following day the Government sprang a

surprise on the House. The Bill would be taken that week. It was passed

within a few days. "H. W. M.," in his parliamentary sketch in the _Daily

News_ of August 5th, referring to what he called "the strange story of

the passing of the Unemployed Bill," said:

At the end of last week its chances seemed to have disappeared.

To-day it has passed Committee, and Monday will see it through the

Commons. The Member chiefly responsible for this issue is Mr.

Crooks, who has shown undoubted subtleness as a Parliamentary

tactician.

In his final speech on the Bill, Crooks argued that even the loafer

would become a better man by being given, not the charity that

demoralised, but a day's work for a day's pay. Such a man, by being put

on a farm colony for a few months, would be turned into a good citizen.

He stood for discipline in Labour as the Government stood for discipline

in the Army and Navy. He wanted to preserve the manhood of the nation

rather than to see it degraded, as it was by the present system of

despising an unemployed man. The type of men who hung idle about all our

large towns was the type that filled the workhouses and prisons. Take

them in their early stages of unemployment, put them under proper

discipline on the land, and he was prepared to prophesy they would

become useful citizens. It was a loss to the nation that men and women

should be going about without the common necessaries owing to being out

of work.

So the Bill went through, and people of all classes agree with his old

friend, Mr. A. F. Hills, a large employer, who wrote to him a letter on

the subject, ending with the words: "I believe that generations yet

unborn will in the years to come rise up and call you blessed."

In the opinion of many people well able to gauge the distress and

discontent of the country, the Act came just in time to prevent serious

disorders in the large towns. For the winter that immediately followed

found the unemployed in a worse plight than ever.

Promptly the Distress Committees formed under the Act got to work. The

London Committees found themselves at first stranded for funds. The weak

point in the Act was that which allowed only the expense of organisation

to be made a public charge. The Committees found themselves asking, What

was the use of organising work for the unemployed when there were no

means of paying wages? It looked as though public subscriptions were not

to be forthcoming. Was the Act, so hardly won, to fail on its first

trial?

Again Poplar fought the cause of the poor for the whole country. This

time the workless men's wives took action. The women of Poplar met in

the Town Hall, Mrs. Crooks in the chair, with the object of urging

Parliament to vote money to the Distress Committees set up under the new

Act.

Mrs. Crooks, as reported in the _Times_, said:

They were endeavouring to enlist the help and sympathy of those in

high places to give some little time to the consideration of the

claims of the wives and children of men who were willing to work,

but who were unable to find the wherewithal to feed those near and

dear to them. The Queen had more than once shown her desire to

help. Was it, then, too much to expect that their wealthy sisters

would use their influence with their all-too-powerful husbands to

appeal, with the women of Poplar, to the King and Government to

call Parliament together with a view to passing estimates to enable

work to be undertaken--work that would give them their daily bread?

Theirs was a cry for national defence, and Parliament must see to

it.

The meeting decided to petition the King to instruct the Prime Minister

to call Parliament together. In acknowledging a vote of thanks to his

wife for taking the chair, Crooks said the mothers and sisters had

remained too long indoors, suffering in silence. If the King could see

that meeting it would make him realise what unemployment meant to the

wives and mothers of his industrial army, and he would no doubt do

something to ensure that they should not lack the sustenance needed to

bring up strong daughters and strong sons as faithful and loyal

citizens. They had got the machinery, and they had got certain powers,

but they needed funds. They had got an organisation that could gather up

all the information as to useful work that needed doing--work that would

be profitable and inspiring to the men who did it, instead of being

degrading, like the foolish and useless and expensive task-work which

was all the Poor Law had to offer.

[Illustration: MR. & MRS. WILL CROOKS

_Photo: G. Dendry._]

About a month later took place the memorable women's march to Whitehall.

The day, November 6th, was truly a tragic and historic one in the

social life of London.

Headed by Mrs. Crooks and the then Mayoress of Poplar (Mrs. Dalton),

some six thousand poor women gathered on the Thames Embankment, near

Charing Cross Bridge, and marched to the offices of the Local Government

Board in order to back up their appeal to the Premier to aid their

out-of-work husbands and brothers. The women came not only from Poplar,

where the march had been organised by George Lansbury, but from

Edmonton, Paddington, West Ham, Woolwich, and Southwark. Some carried

infants in arms; others had children dragging at their skirts.

"Work for our men--Bread for our children." So ran the appeal on the

banner that floated above the Southwark contingent, led by Mrs. Herbert

Stead.

The Embankment was deep in mud, and, as the women trudged bravely

through it--those carrying babies unable to save their skirts from

dragging in the road--the scene was one that filled you with an

indignant shame. Even those other women in motors and carriages, who had

driven down to see the sight out of curiosity, sank back into their

cushions aghast, sickened, ashamed at this spectacle of their sisters'

plight.

In Whitehall the processionists told off a dozen of their number to form

the deputation to Mr. Balfour. The women were accompanied into the Local

Government Board offices by Crooks and Lansbury and two or three other

men from the Central Workers' Unemployed Committee.

The object of the visit was explained by Lansbury, and then a working

woman from Poplar read the women's memorial. The memorial spoke of the

misery, degradation, and desperation of the women which had driven them

to determine to bear their lot in silence no longer. They thought that

Parliament should make it impossible for unscrupulous employers to grind

the faces of the poor. The Government had gone to the aid of the

tenantry of Ireland. The plight of the poor in London was worse. If war

were threatened, ways would be found for raising money. The country was

faced with a worse evil than war in the presence of starving citizens.

In the name of their country, their homes, and their children, they

appealed to the Prime Minister not to send them empty away.

Several of the workless men's wives who, it had been arranged, should

speak broke down; so Mrs. Crooks explained they had not come to utter

words only; they had come as Englishwomen, driven to despair, in the

hope that the Premier, as the chief Minister of the King, would no

longer leave them in a worse condition than that of his dogs and horses.

Mr. Balfour was sympathetic, but had nothing to suggest. He saw no hope

of Parliament voting money. The deputation came away sullen and

disappointed. For the time it looked as though the women's march had

been in vain. But, before a week passed, another woman spoke. The need

was met by Queen Alexandra. On November 13th her Majesty issued her

famous appeal:

"I appeal to all charitably disposed people in the Empire, both men and

women, to assist me in alleviating the suffering of the poor starving

unemployed during this winter. For this purpose I head the list with

£2,000."

Before the winter was over the public, in response to this appeal,

subscribed £150,000--a sum that proved sufficient that winter to keep

Distress Committees going in London and elsewhere during the time of

greatest privation.

The needs of the next winter were provided for by the State. The new

Liberal Government had not been in office many months before it voted

£200,000 to the Distress Committees appointed under the Unemployed Act.

Poplar had done its work. The women had marched to victory.

From Workhouse to Westminster: The Life Story of Will Crooks, M.P. · 第 28 / 33 章