more than justified the expectations of the most sanguine. If we take
the entire history of trade disputes, it will be found that not one
ever commanded so much public sympathy. We had justice and right on
our sides, and we took the only wise course--viz. to let the public
know it. We deplore strikes as much as anyone can do, but there are
times when they become necessary and such a climax had we arrived at
in April 1879. Numbers of men who were outside our Association then
came forward and joined with us and fought the battle side by side.
There never was a more complete stoppage of work or one which to the
workmen, at least, ended more satisfactorily.
We may fittingly close the year by a reference to the strong tide of
emigration that was running. A miners' conference to consider a scheme
to assist prospective emigrants and draw up a code of rules was called
in Manchester in November. Such a scheme was formulated and the rules
suggested, but nothing ever came of it. In connection with this large
volume of emigration from the mining districts Mr Crawford took a trip
to America in one of the Inman liners, and wrote an account of it in
a pamphlet entitled "In the Steerage." A report was circulated in the
press describing what purported to be the foul condition of the
accommodation provided for the third-class passengers. With a desire
to ascertain the truth or otherwise of these statements Mr Crawford
went to New York in one of the Inman boats, and completely exposed the
untruthfulness of it, and did a great deal towards easing the minds of
many of the miners who were preparing for leaving the country.
1880
Violations of Scale--Restriction of Labour--Working Hours
Arbitration--Deputies' Wage Arbitration--Employers' Liability
By the end of 1879 the consequence of the strike, as seen in
disarranged collective machinery, had been reconstructed. One
beneficial effect of the stoppage was the great number of men who
joined the Union. When the notices terminated there were collieries
where the numbers were few; but these men, as if moved by the instinct
of self-preservation, ceased work, and to a very large extent became
members, remaining until this day. It was the greatest piece of
missionary effort ever seen. Instead of disunion and isolated action
there were manifest loyal adhesion and solidity.
There were sure to be exceptions to this as to all rules, and early in
the year the Federation Board was called upon to meet a class of
trouble which was entirely illegal, and which arises occasionally now.
Without specifying places (but dealing generally) it will suffice to
say that in a few instances notices were given for advances beyond
what the sliding scale gave. The employers requested the Board to meet
them. This they did, and two resolutions, one dealing with the cokemen
and the other with the miners at one colliery, were unanimously
carried. The workmen were told that they had violated the rules of the
Federation Board and sliding scale agreement. They were told (by a
circular sent out by the Federation Board) that they were parties to
the arrangement, and yet had given in their notices for an advance in
direct contravention of its provisions. Having been parties to the
scale they ought not to violate it with impunity. If this individual
or lodge action were allowed it would end in disruption, and therefore
it must be checked. The wisdom of that advice is obvious, and not only
in that day, but for the present time. If agreements are made for men
they should be adhered to. To violate them is lawlessness, which in
the end is hurtful beyond the immediate act. If conditions are forced
upon people it is right to repudiate, but for the last thirty-four
years in this county there has been freedom and equality.
RESTRICTION OF LABOUR
At the Council meeting held on January 17th it was decided that there
should be a restriction, and that no coal hewer should make more than
4s. 5d. or 4s. 2d. per shift, but this was never carried out in any
general manner. On March 13th the Council again dealt with it, and
declared all lodges unfinancial where it was not put in force. In
furtherance of that resolution the Seaham Lodge put a notice on the
pit heap to inform the members "that the restriction had commenced,
and that a list be drawn up stating the number of tubs each man had to
fill in his respective district or flat, no man to make more than the
county average in any one day." To that notice the Owners' Association
took objection. A letter was sent to Mr Crawford asking him whether
the workmen had determined to enforce restriction, and if so, were
they then acting on it. These questions Mr Crawford did not answer,
but brought them before the Committee. As a result a circular was
issued reviewing the whole case. They pointed out that when the
Council carried it very few of the lodges put it in force, and the few
who did soon left off, and that at the Council to enforce it the
voting was 145 for, 126 against. They reminded the majority that
"surely a minority so strong ought to have led to a reconsideration of
a matter not only so vitally important, but which has at all times
been found so very difficult to carry out in practice." Lodges were
sending in resolutions refusing to carry out the Council resolution.
That resolution said those lodges should be expelled. The position
would be that whole collieries of men would be cut off from the
Association because they were determined to abide by the scale
agreement. In view of these facts, they resolved to call a special
Council. They pointed out that one or two lodges had sent in motions
of censure because advice had been given, and they met the censures by
saying:
One or two lodges have sent motions seeking to pass a vote of censure
on us for issuing the last circular. It would seem that these lodges
would like to see us sit and do nothing, even though we were certain
that an impending evil was threatening our very existence. We cannot
regard this as our province. What we did was for the preservation of
the Association. The moment we see that our efforts have not ended
more satisfactorily we have called a special Council meeting to
further consider the matter. Take our advice, and inasmuch as we have
only done our duty, spare your censures. We have quite enough to do
at present without wasting our energies in useless and pernicious
quarrelling amongst ourselves.
The result of the special meeting proved the Committee right. A
tabulated vote was taken--the voting being against restriction 130,
for 117; majority against, 13. Thus ended the only county attempt to
carry out a uniformity in piecework. It ended as all such will end.
Human nature is too strong for such arrangements.
WORKING HOURS ARBITRATION
This case arose out of the hewers' hours at some of the collieries.
Amongst them were Gurney Pit, Leasingthorne, Letch, and Wingate. These
were eleven-hour pits, but during the depression of 1877-79 the
hewers had been induced or coerced to go in at three A.M. instead of
four A.M. The Executive Committee in their negotiations contended that
this was a violation of Mr Meynell's award, and therefore ought not to
exist. On the employers' side it was held that the award named only
dealt with the coal drawing. After attempts to settle it was finally
agreed to refer it to arbitration, with Lord Rowton as umpire. The
arbitrators on the owners' side were Mr R. F. Mathews and Mr W. T.
Hall, and for the workmen Mr L. Jones and Mr W. Crawford. There were
two days' sitting in the Westminster Palace Hotel, London. On the 20th
of August the umpire decided that the hours complained of should
remain as they were.
THE DEPUTIES' ARBITRATION
This question of the deputies being paid a higher wage if they were
not in the Miners' Association came up in a renewed application for
uniformity of wage. This was sent to the owners amongst a number of
other requests. The reply was that they were strongly of the opinion
that the deputies should not be members of the Miners' Association.
The Executive could not accept that reply. They had never asked about
the Associations, but a just wage, and they considered the reply was
an insult. They recommended to their members that it should be sent to
the Federation Board. This was done, and on the 19th of March the
Board offered to submit the matter to arbitration. The offer was
refused by the following resolution:--
MINERS' REQUEST AND REPLY FORWARDED TO MR CRAWFORD
_June 17th, 1880._
_Deputies._--That deputies who are not members of the Deputies'
Association be paid the same wages as those who are.
Considering the position in which the deputies stand to the hewers
and other workmen, any change in the present arrangement is
undesirable.
On the receipt of this the Board notified the county, and resolved to
call a joint meeting of the four Associations. Their advice was that
the whole of the notices be given in, and work to cease until the
claim was conceded or arbitration granted. The meeting was held on
August 26th. Negotiations proceeded, and in November the employers
agreed to accept arbitration. The case was not heard until February
1881. The umpire on that occasion was Mr I. Hinde Palmer, M.P.; the
advocates were Mr L. Wood, Mr W. Armstrong, Mr L. Jones, and Mr W.
Crawford. The hearing lasted two days, and was held in the Westminster
Hotel, London. The umpire decided upon two points:
(1) That it is competent under the sliding scale agreement of October
1879 for the deputies who are members of the Miners' Association to
require that their wages be advanced.
(2) That the advance shall be such a sum as will make the amount of
their wages respectively the same as the wages paid to those deputies
who are not members of the Miners' Association.
THE EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY ACT
It is not intended to review the introduction and passing of Acts of
Parliament, but mention may be made of the Employers' Liability of
1880, not with a view to explain its provisions, but to indicate steps
which were taken towards contraction out of it. In Lancashire
contracting out was made one of the conditions of hiring, and a strike
took place in an attempt to resist it. With us in the north (for the
two counties worked together) the same end was sought, but by
different means. The aim of the employers here was to avoid litigation
if possible, and, with that end in view, would have increased their
contributions to the Permanent Relief Fund. The officials of that fund
were desirous of bringing an arrangement about, believing it would
strengthen their position. There were a few men outside the ranks of
those officials who advised the miners to enter into a contract. At a
meeting of the Permanent Fund Committee it was just on the point of
being carried when a suggestion was made to the effect "that it was
not a matter pertaining to the fund, but belonged to the Workmen's
Associations, and that a joint meeting should be held." Such did take
place, with the result that the proposal was defeated. The leaders of
the Associations were very strong against it. Among the strongest was
Mr Crawford, whose monthly circular for December contained some very
clear and explicit reasons in opposition to the idea. There were
threats from some employers as to smart money and subscriptions to the
Permanent Relief Fund, but still the workmen refused to give way.
1881-82
Deputies' Wage again--Third Sliding Scale--Death of Mr
Macdonald--Change in the Treasurership
In February this question was again in evidence. By reference to the
award as given above it will be seen that the umpire decided clearly
in the workmen's favour, but there arose a complication in the mode of
application adopted by the owners. The mode of calculation was skilful
and peculiar. The dispute arose in 1876 when, as an inducement for the
deputies to form an organisation of their own, they were to be exempt
from the six per cent. reduction; therefore, said the employers, we
will give those deputies who are in the Miners' Union the six per
cent. given in 1876, and then deduct all the reductions since, by this
process bringing them to 4s. 1½d. per day. They seemed to forget
that the deputies' arbitration was for the difference between the
actual wages at that time--the difference being 6d. or 8d. per day.
The anomaly was that two men might be doing the same work with equal
responsibilities (in some cases the lower paid the best workman) and
yet one have a much higher wage than the other.
Mr Bunning (on behalf of the owners) sent a copy of the instructions
to the managers to Mr Crawford, asking him if they met with his
approval. The answer was sharp. Instead of agreeing with them he
considered them a clear violation of Mr Palmer's award. It was not
based upon Shaw Lefevre's award, but upon the existing difference in
the wages. And he informed the owners, that they would demand the
higher wages. The negotiations continued until May, when the umpire by
joint letter was asked to meet Mr L. Wood and Mr Crawford. He informed
them he would write each of them an explanation, and save the journey.
This he did, and said the award was clear and intelligible, and that
he meant those who were in the Miners' Association to be paid the
highest wages. On the strength of that interpretation the owners paid
the wage, with everything kept off since the award.
THIRD SLIDING SCALE
As the two years for which the sliding scale was definitely fixed drew
near completion it was obvious that there was a strong feeling against
it. The circumstances were against it. Introduced at the conclusion of
a very disastrous strike the whole of its operation was in the worst
times--trade bad, wages low. There was no wonder that the men had
little love for it. Recognising the opposition the Committee placed a
motion on the Council programme suggesting that notice be given to
terminate it at the end of the two years. This was adopted, and notice
given at the proper time. In the meantime the miners generally were
turning their attention to the question. A sliding scale conference
was held on April 20th, 1881, in the Midland Hotel, Birmingham. The
conference affirmed "that the principle of sliding scales is an
equitable mode of settling wages questions, if rightly worked out in
detail: That the best mode of taking out the selling price will
generally be to take the price of coal sold, but that no coals should
be taken which were sold on contract; only those sold at the current
market price." In the matter of leaving firms out each district was
left to its own option. It was considered desirous that the
accountants should have more freedom in regard to the matters they
were permitted to divulge. A second conference on the same question
was called for October 19th in Birmingham, with a programme on very
similar lines.
A Council meeting was held, and two delegates selected to represent
Durham. Certain instructions were given them: sliding scales were the
best arrangements for regulating wages; the open markets were
preferable to the existing mode of ascertainment, with others of a
kindred nature. On January 18th the Federation Board had under
discussion a proposal from the employers. It was not accepted, but
they were told the Board was ready to meet them at any time. At a
special Council held on 25th February 1882 the situation was
complicated by the miners deciding to ask for an advance of twenty per
cent. if the owners refused the sliding scale drawn up by the
Federation Board, and that body was instructed to meet the employers.
The meeting took place on March 13th on the two questions, when the
owners gave the Board the following:--
OWNERS' OFFER
_March 13th, 1882._
The Durham Coal Owners' Association is unable to accept either of the
propositions suggested in the Federation Board Minutes of February
25th, that is to say,--
1. The Association cannot regard "the sliding scale drawn up by the
Federation Board as just and equitable," and consequently cannot
adopt it.
2. The Association cannot grant "an immediate advance of 20 per cent.
in the wages of all men and boys," nor admit "that trade warrants
such an application," or any advance at all.
Having regard to the difference of view between the Owners'
Association and the Federation Board, the Association can only
suggest that the question whether wages shall be varied, and if so,
to what extent, and in what direction, shall be left to open
arbitration.
The Miners' Council then decided to take a ballot on the twenty per
cent. If the question were not carried by a two-thirds majority, to
arbitrate on the advance. When this was sent to the owners they
replied that the advance could not be granted, but they were quite
ready to leave it to open arbitration. The Federation Board as a whole
considered itself in an anomalous position if any section were allowed
to act as the miners were doing. If this were allowed to proceed, then
on wage questions there was an end to all usefulness. Either the power
must be taken away altogether, or they must unreservedly trust them.
As the position was, they were in a crippled condition. "This renders
our work on general questions nil, and the Federation instead of being
a tower of strength is a source of weakness, inasmuch as it exposes to
the owners our want of agreement and diversity of thought and action."
They had, therefore, come to the conclusion to take a vote, with the
view to have the matter settled. The response of the county was in
favour of the Board by a large majority. Immediately they decided to
ask for a scale with a minimum wage, and that the variations should be
two and one and a half per cent.
A meeting between the Board and the owners was held on April 17th,
when the workmen asked for an advance of seven and a half per cent. To
this the employers objected, but said they would pay a wage as if the
coals had reached 4s. 8d., which was equal to an advance of three and
three quarters per cent., and would be an advantage of two and a half
per cent., during the continuance of the scale. The Board strongly
urged the acceptance of the offer, which in their opinion was
preferable to arbitration. The workmen accepted their advice, and the
following scale was signed on April 29th:--
THIRD SLIDING SCALE
There shall be made the
following percentage of
additions to, or deductions
from, the standard tonnage
When the Net rates and datal wages,
Average Selling being those prevailing at
Price of Coal November 1879
Reaches But does not reach Additions Deductions
s. d. s. d.
3 10 4 0 None None
4 0 4 2 1¼ "
4 2 4 4 2½ "
4 4 4 6 3¾ "
4 6 4 8 5 "
4 8 4 10 6¼ "
4 10 5 0 7½ "
5 0 5 2 8¾ "
5 2 5 4 10 "
5 4 5 6 11¼ "
5 6 5 8 12½ "
5 8 5 10 13¾ "
5 10 6 0 16¼ "
6 0 6 2 18¾ "
6 2 6 4 20 "
6 4 6 6 21¼ "
6 6 6 8 22½ "
And so on upwards, 1¼ per cent. for each 2d., the 2½ per cent.
variations for the two ranges of 2d. each in price between 5s. 10d.
and 6s. 2d. being limited to those special ranges.
3 8 3 10 -- 1¼
3 6 3 8 -- 2½
And so on downwards.
It had to continue in force until 30th June 1883, to be terminated by
six months' notice given any time after that date.
It will be of interest if we insert the scales proposed by the owners
and Board before the agreement.
OWNERS' SCALE
There shall be made
the following percentage
of additions to, or
deductions from, the standard
When the Net tonnage rates and datal
average Selling wages, being those prevailing
Price of Coal at November 1879
Reaches But does not reach Additions Deductions
s. d. s. d.
4 2 4 4 None None
4 4 4 6 1¼ "
4 6 4 8 2½ "
4 8 4 10 3¾ "
4 10 5 0 5 "
5 0 5 2 6¼ "
5 2 5 4 7½ "
5 4 5 6 8¾ "
5 6 5 8 10 "
5 8 5 10 11¼ "
5 10 6 0 13¾ "
6 0 6 2 16¼ "
6 2 6 4 17½ "
6 4 6 6 18¾ "
6 6 6 8 20 "
And so on upwards, 1¼ per cent. for each 2d., the 2½ per cent.
variations for the two ranges of 2d. each in price between 5s. 10d.
and 6s. 2d. being limited to those special ranges.
4 0 4 2 -- 1¼
3 10 4 0 -- 2½
3 8 3 10 -- 3¾
3 6 3 8 -- 5
And so on downwards.
WORKMEN'S SCALE
There shall be made the
following additions to the
When the Net standard tonnage rates and
Average Selling datal wages, being those at
Price of Coal November 1879
Reaches But does not reach Additions
s. d. s. d. (5s. minimum wage)
4 8 4 10 2½
4 10 5 0 5
5 0 5 2 7½
5 2 5 4 10
5 4 5 6 12½
5 6 5 8 15
5 8 6 0 17½
6 0 6 2 20
6 2 6 4 22½
6 4 6 6 25
6 6 6 8 27½
6 8 6 10 30
6 10 7 0
And so on upwards, 2½ per cent. for every 2d.
It will be obvious that the difference between the two is very wide.
The workmen sought to renew the minimum wage, although but two years
had intervened since the dark experience of 1877-79, and when it was
impossible for the condition to have been forgotten.
DEATH OF MR MACDONALD
On October 31st, 1881, Mr Macdonald, M.P., died at Wellhall, near
Hamilton, Scotland. He was the ablest leader the miners of Scotland
had, and one of the first Labour representatives in the House, being
elected with our good friend Mr Burt in 1874. He was often called the
"Miners' Friend." Although not a Durham man he was so intimately and
closely connected with our early history and progress up to his death
that there would be a great hiatus if no mention were made of him. The
Executive Committee was represented at his funeral, and the first
Council meeting after his death passed a resolution expressing deep
sorrow at his death, and regarding it as an irreparable loss and
national calamity to the mining population of England, Scotland, and
Wales. His self-sacrificing efforts for a number of years on their
behalf cannot be fully known, but his memory will ever be held dear by
a grateful people. A movement was immediately started to commemorate
his work, the result of which was the statue which is in front of the
Hall in Durham. As Mr Crawford said, "It is the last tribute of
respect we can pay to one who through good and evil report kept
steadily in view the one object of his life--viz. to reduce the
misery, and alleviate the sorrows of the mining population, while
following their hazardous occupation."
It will be interesting to place on record an outline of his life. He
was born in the year 1821, and began work at eight years of age. When
he was born the condition of the mining population was dreadful. There
was no law to protect the miner, and there was little regard for
health or life. The hours were fearfully long. Women worked in the
mines under the most debasing conditions. In the midst of this he set
himself the uphill task of self-education--uphill now, but how much
more so then! In early life he left the mines, and became a teacher.
The knowledge he acquired he determined to devote to bettering the
condition of the miners. Between 1850 and 1855 he was assiduous in
procuring amended Miners' Acts, and those of 1855 and 1860 were mainly
due to his efforts. From that time until his death he was earnestly
working in efforts to ameliorate the conditions of the life he knew so
well, and at his death was busily engaged in further amending the
Mines Act. He was a sample of men who have been endowed with splendid
powers, and who might have made a fortune if they had followed
commercial pursuits as eagerly as they followed after reform and
better temporal conditions for others, but who, when there was nothing
to gain, counted it their highest good if they could in any way assist
their class on to a higher platform and into brighter conditions of
life. They chose rather to suffer with the people in their affliction,
and help those who needed it, than to make for themselves monetary
positions. When he died a truly great man left the ranks of reformers,
and to the honour of Englishmen be it said, they honoured him in death
as they appreciated him in life, as witness the splendid statue which
was unveiled on 17th November 1883 by his colleague in Union and
Labour representation in Parliament, Mr T. Burt.