to accept the first. No definite agreement was come to, but there was
an understanding that the matter would be allowed to adjust itself
smoothly, which it did, and no disturbance whatever took place in the
absence of an agreement. The united Committees guarded themselves by
drawing up a resolution, in which they interpreted the owners'
resolution to mean that every man would be re-employed as before the
stoppage. At the same time they informed their members that if any
case of refusal took place, then all the other men must refuse to
work.
Thus ended one of the most memorable strikes in this or any other
country, not on account of its length, but the circumstances which
were connected with it. The workmen were poor in funds at the start,
and the help (although generous from some quarters) was small per
individual; the total benefit for the three months did not exceed 25s.
each full member. With these poor resources and prospects they entered
upon what was felt would be a strike of a very determined kind--this,
too, with the minimum amount of friction. The only event of much
importance happened at Castle Eden. The disturbance took place on May
7th. It arose in reference to a man named Stogdale, who would not
abstain from working during the strike. Four of the workmen at Castle
Eden were tried for intimidation. Their names were Michael Forbes, W.
R. Robbins, T. Jones, and T. H. Cann. They were tried at the Durham
Assizes in July 1892, before Judge Day. They were tried under the
Intimidation Act. The judge summed up in a very strong manner against
all the men except Robbins, who was discharged, but the other three
were sent to prison. The judge said they had been found guilty by the
jury of the offence with which they were charged--namely, with the
object of preventing a certain person from pursuing his legal
occupation "you in a disorderly manner, with other people, followed
him along the road." After making a long speech in a similar strain,
to show how beneficent the law was in his opinion and what a trio of
desperadoes they were, he sentenced Forbes to a month, Jones to six
weeks, and Cann, because the judge thought he was the ringleader, to
two months.
THE AFTERMATH OF THE STRIKE
If the strike was unique in its endurance and order it was none the
less important in its lessons. In it, as in 1879, was seen the result
that followed the lack of confidence. A strike is the harvest field of
the agitator, who cares not what is destroyed so long as he prospers.
What would have been the gain to the individual member and to the
Association if the resolve taken in the last few weeks had been taken
before the tools were brought to bank? The funds, such as they were,
would have been kept intact instead of being wasted. The great loss in
individual income would have been avoided; in that respect the savings
banks and co-operative societies (which in many cases are the poor
man's bank) could have told a tale of hardly saved stores used up
which had been kept for a "rainy day" of unavoidable troubles. The
unnecessary and destructive friction which is sure to arise in these
matters, no matter how peaceably the struggle be conducted, would
have been avoided. Two great bodies, such as the two great
Associations in Durham, are two great armies, and in the struggle and
strivings anger will arise, and regrettable things will be said in the
heat of the moment. These have a more far-reaching effect than people
are apt to credit.
Then the loss in wages. This was twofold. There was the three months'
irredeemable loss and there was the lessening of the reduction. It was
admitted on all hands that less than the ten per cent. would have kept
the pits working if the Federation Board had been trusted with power
to settle, even up to the eve of the strike. In saying this there is
no intention of measuring the result of a strike by the money loss or
gain. The world would not have been so far as it is in the path of
reform and better life if the forlorn hopes of labour had not been
fought, but it would be a piece of false logic if we were to infer
that strikes should, therefore, be entered upon at all times. And
certainly no one who in 1892 was able to appreciate the situation then
would say it was one of those necessities of our industrial life. It
was far from that; the gain would have been greater by the avoidance
of the quarrel. If in writing our history this is emphasised, it is
not in the spirit of reflection, but rather that we may learn wisdom;
for in these matters it cries aloud in the street, and we can from a
remembrance of such events escape the like evils. If this be done,
then the strike of that day will be useful in the greatest degree to
those of us who are active in this. Using Longfellow's figure, it is
part of our dead selves, of which we can make a ladder, by which we
can rise to higher things.
Another part of the aftermath was the burden which was thrown upon the
funds. This was twofold. There were the men who could not get
started, in the first instance, because of the state some of the pits
were in; and second, because of the dislocation of trade, which was
sure to follow a stoppage of work for three months. Business
connections are liable to break, and the difficulty is to heal them
again. The consequence was that there were men out of work for a long
time after the actual strike was settled, and these were to maintain
for a considerable time, many of them so long that they had to be
transferred to the Relief Fund. The money paid to them was the outcome
of a levy, which pressed heavily on those at work.
Then there was another burden, the result of the strike, but which was
not any portion of the obligations of rule, the payment of the back
rent of those who were living in rented houses. There was one peculiar
and pleasing feature in connection with that strike, as with that of
1879, there was no interference with the men who were living in the
colliery houses. There was in one or two places some little talk of a
rent obligation from such men, but it came to nothing. Perhaps it was
never intended that it should. This much it is our duty to state, to
the credit of the employers: the men who were in battle with them were
allowed to live in their houses, and were not prevented from gathering
coal wherever such was lying about. To the men who were in rented
houses the case was vastly different. Every week off work added to
their debt, which they were bound to pay when they resumed work. With
a spirit of generosity which is not restricted the whole of the
members recognised the debt of those men as belonging to the whole
county, and resolved to pay a levy for the purpose of paying the back
rent. The resolution was carried at the Council meeting on June 18th,
1892:
"That a levy of 3d. per full member and 1½d. per half member
throughout the county be made to help to pay the house rent of the
members living in rented houses."
At the same meeting the present (1906) Relief Fund was formed, to
support men who were out of work. The system adopted in paying rent
was to cavil the collieries, and pay them as they were drawn, with
this provision, that if any colliery were drawn, but had not paid the
levy, no rent was allowed until the levy was paid.
THE EIGHT HOURS AGAIN
The only remaining subject in 1892 was the ballot on the legal eight
hours. We have noted previously how and when this was first
introduced, with some plain advice given by Mr Crawford--advice which
has never been shown to be wrong. It was decided at the Council
meeting held on August 13th "that the county be balloted for and
against the eight hours." On September 21st the Committee took the
ballot, and issued a circular setting forth their views on the
subject. As we have now (1906) reached a crucial stage in the
discussion, it will be useful to place on record what the Committee of
that date thought of the question and the difficulties it involved. In
their opinion there were two modes of procedure by which the hours of
labour might be shortened: legal interference and Trades Union effort.
The latter was the one they had adopted, and it had been successful.
No man could think they were against short hours; any opportunity to
shorten them would be welcomed. They referred the members to the
action in 1890: how they had given up a claim for ten per cent. and
accepted a shorter day. "We are not now to set up a show of weakness,
and sacrifice our manhood and independence, by handing ourselves over
to the supervision and control of the House of Commons, which is not
acquainted with the peculiarities of our occupation."
If it were the function of the State to fix hours of labour, was it
not logically its function to fix the wages of the workman? "It is
said that some of the organisations are weak, and therefore the State
should protect." The reply was: "Where weak organisations exist low
wages are found. It is therefore necessary for the State to fix the
amount of wages men should be paid, for men require bread as well as
hours." They then turned to the difficulty.
EIGHT HOURS
Those who favour legal eight hours must consider how it would work.
There would be serious alteration needed in our present mode of
working. We must either have two shifts of 8 hours, making 16 hours'
coal drawing and 8 hours' shifts, increasing the hours of hewers by 1
to 1½ hours per diem, and deputies half hour per day. This would
increase the output, and consequently the price of coal, and
necessarily the wages of all men. The other alternative is an 8
hours' shift for all men and boys, which would throw into the labour
market thousands of men. Consequently, competition amongst ourselves
such as we experienced in '76 and '77 would arise, and thus we would
have a repetition of the hardships we underwent in those disastrous
times. Much is made of the hours of boys; these we will shorten at
the earliest opportunity. Under our present system, and taking a
number of years, we work less than we should do under eight hours by
law.
We therefore strongly urge on you to vote to a man against any
Parliament fixing the hours of labour, as in our opinion it would be
injurious to the working classes generally, and to ourselves in
particular. Do not be led away by the idea that the short hours we
have obtained for the hewers will be maintained. The request is eight
hours from bank to bank for all and every man who works down the pit.
To this, it may be said, it is a maximum number of hours, and that,
therefore, some might be allowed to work less. That will depend upon
the arrangement. If the employers get the sanction of the law, and
they require us to work eight hours, we shall be expected to so work.
There is another point which demands consideration. It is a question
of wages. Let us suppose the Act passed, and those who work ten hours
(both below and above ground) were reduced to eight, how much should
the wages be reduced? If we shorten the hours by negotiation, it will
be done gradually, and wages could be arranged.
The result of the ballot was: for parliamentary eight hours, 12,684;
against it, 28,217.
1893
The Wages Board--The Miners' Federation
THE WAGES BOARD
During the negotiations for a settlement of the strike in 1892 the
employers laid emphasis upon what they designated the Wages Board, but
which afterwards was known as the Conciliation Board. Their idea
(commendable in every point) was to bring the parties closer together,
and avoid the recurrence of the stoppage, which they felt (as all must
feel) had been a disaster to the whole of them. The question rested
over until the beginning of the year, when the owners made application
for a reduction in wages, and at the same time asked that the
formation of the Board might be taken into consideration. The meeting
took place, and on February 27th the Executive Committee issued a
circular, putting the whole position before the members. The miners at
the time were in a complicated position, being connected with the
Durham Federation, and they had a short time before become members of
the Miners' Federation of Great Britain. Under Rule 20 that Federation
claimed to have control of the wages disputes in all the districts
identified with them. In order that the position may be properly
understood we will insert the rule.
20. That whenever any county, federation, or district is attacked on
the wage question, or any action taken by a general conference, all
members connected with the Society shall tender a notice to terminate
their contracts, if approved by a conference called to consider the
advisability of such action being taken.
The application of that rule to Durham, in the situation it was in,
would have been to leave the whole matter in the hands of the Miners'
Federation, which would have taken full charge of the question, and
have told the Durham Association what they must do--whether to accept
or reject. The complication arose from the fact that they were members
of the home Federation as well, and there would be confusion if two
bodies, one in the county and the other at a distance, were to have
supervision. It was impossible to go on in that state. One body was on
the spot, and knew the whole bearings of the case; the other was at a
distance, and therefore bound to be in comparative ignorance of the
facts of the situation.
The Executive Committee felt they were compelled to put the position
clearly before the Federation Board and the county, and inform them
they were members of the Miners' Federation. In addition, they
resolved to call a special Council, and place before it the plain
issue. "Let us state the position to you," they said. "Prior to our
becoming members of the Federation of Great Britain we acted on all
general and wage questions with the Durham Federation Board. Our
action was a whole one with the cokemen, mechanics, and enginemen, the
last strike being the most recent and clearest illustration of that.
You will remember with what loyalty the four sections worked together
on that occasion."
If they were resolved to remain members of the Miners' Federation, and
accept Rule 20, they must prepare for leaving the county Federation.
That would result in sectional action in Durham, for the other
sections would naturally seek to make the best of themselves they
could. It was not reasonable to ask them to wait until the Miners'
Federation had decided, as per Rule 20, for Durham to strike, and then
ask the cokemen, mechanics, and enginemen to join in it. There was
needed some definiteness on the point, and the Council would be asked
to decide two questions: First, "Shall it be settled by the Federation
of Great Britain?" Second, "Shall it be settled by the Durham
Federation Board and the united Committees?" At the Council held on
March 6th the decision was in favour of the latter question.
In accordance with that resolution the united Committees met the
owners on March 13th, and asked them to reduce their demand for ten
per cent. to five, and they (the Committee) would at once accept it.
The employers accepted the offer, the following being their
resolution:--
The Durham Coal Owners' Wages Committee feels the responsibility of
accepting a less reduction than the 10 per cent. claimed, because
upon an adequate reduction really depends the extent of employment
that can be afforded. Whilst, therefore, the owners' judgment is that
the true interest of both parties lies in at once bringing into
operation a reduction of at least 10 per cent., the owners, desiring
to show a spirit of conciliation, accept the Federation Board's offer
to submit to a reduction of 5 per cent., to come into operation from
the next pay of each colliery; but in doing so the owners feel it
their duty to point out that so small a reduction as 5 per cent.
falls far short of meeting the urgent necessities of the trade, and
can therefore be regarded only as a temporary settlement.
This reduction brought the percentage above the standard down to
twenty. But the employers were not satisfied; they pressed upon the
Board the formation of a Wages Board. On May 27th Mr Guthrie wrote to
Mr Patterson as follows:--
I am directed by the Durham Coal Owners' Association to press
strongly upon you the honourable obligation we come under to the
Bishop of Durham, and to each other, to endeavour to establish a
Wages Board which would secure by conciliation or arbitration the
pacific settlement of all questions outside the jurisdiction of the
Joint Committee. That honourable obligation has been more than once
reaffirmed by your Federation Board, but no steps have been mutually
taken to give effect to it, and my Association feels that such steps
should not be longer delayed, and therefore instructs me to ask your
Board to meet the Owners' Committee in order to advance the matter.
The members of the Federation Board were eager, as individuals, to
come to an arrangement, but were not sure how the membership would
receive it. It was a new but necessary departure in an industry such
as the Durham coal trade, but in order that it might be acceptable
they were desirous that some scheme (beyond a mere name) should be
outlined at least, and placed before the various sections for
consideration. They asked the owners, therefore, for certain
information:
"(1) The allocation of the 3s. 10d. basis price of coal under the
following heads:--wages, salaries, material, royalties, and profits.
(2) The proportion of coal required to make a ton of coke in 1893 as
compared with 1877. (3) The cost of producing a ton of coke in 1893
as compared with the same in 1877. (4) A statement setting forth the
various objects to which the 2d. per ton was allocated. (5) A
statement showing the percentage of steam coal, gas coal, household
coal, manufacturing coal, and coal converted into coke. (6) The
average lengths of contracts, with the periods when they are
ordinarily made."
A reply to these questions was received on December 7th. This was in
conjunction with an application for an advance made by the Federation
Board. They were informed that the Owners' Committee was willing to
meet and discuss the question at the same meeting when the proposed
Wages Board was considered. In reference to the list of questions the
letter contained the following:--
"The meaning of some of your questions does not seem clear, and
generally my Committee failed to understand how they bear on the
expediency or otherwise of forming the proposed Board, or arise prior
to its establishment, but the Committee accepts your suggestion that
a meeting should be held to discuss your communication."
The meeting was held on December 19th. Nothing was done in relation to
the Wages Board, but an arrangement was made with respect to the
advance. The Owners' Committee were convinced that the tendency of
prices was downward. These had been somewhat higher during the strike
in the Midlands, but the effect of that was passing away, and they had
very grave reasons to doubt whether the first quarter in 1894 would
justify the rate of wages then paid. They had given a temporary
advance in October for six pays only, and they were prepared to make
that permanent, and bring the wages to twenty-five and twenty-two per
cent. respectively above basis rates.
DURHAM AND THE MINERS' FEDERATION
In order that we may make the chronology of our history as close and
sequential as possible, we will postpone the Wages Board until 1894,
and take up a subject which is within the year we are dealing with. In
the autumn of 1892 Durham decided to join the Miners' Federation of
Great Britain. The membership continued without any difference (except
that arising from the eight hours, and the case of the reduction in
Durham mentioned above) until the month of July 1893, when a demand
was made upon the Miners' Federation for a reduction of twenty-five
per cent. In connection therewith a conference was held in Birmingham
(the proverbial Hen and Chickens' Conference) to consider the
situation. Two delegates were sent from Durham (Mr J. Johnson and Mr
J. Wilson). It was found that in some districts organisation was in a
very poor condition. The delegates from Durham were sent to move the
whole question be referred to arbitration, but when they brought it
forward as the best mode of procedure, they were prevented for some
time, but finally were permitted, with the result that, by a majority
of four to one, they were outvoted. A resolution was carried pledging
all the districts within the Federation area to give in notices. If
they had suffered reductions within two years, then they had to apply
for an advance equal to the amount lost, without regard to the state
of trade or any other consideration. The absolute order was to give in
notices, the aim being to bring all into the struggle which was
impending, and these had to be given within a fortnight. When these
proceedings were reported to the county a circular was sent out by the
Executive Committee, in which they commented upon the situation, and
asked the members what should be done. They said there were two
questions for them to decide upon--first, the position in the south;
and second, the demand they had to make for fifteen per cent. advance,
as per the Birmingham resolution. These could have been sent out in a
bald form, but it was their duty to give the county guidance, for if a
Committee be appointed for anything at all, it is to watch, warn, and
guide the members of the organisation. There could be no doubt but
that Durham was in favour of arbitration, for the last vote taken on
the instructions to the delegates proved that. This was refused, and
instead they were ordered to make a demand for fifteen per cent.
advance. The question which they must answer first was: Is trade
favourable for such a demand? Unless trade is prosperous now, could
they expect to succeed in such a claim? What support could they get?
Their own funds were gone entirely. If the Federation strike took
place, then there was no source of income anywhere.
There were at that moment 5000 men out of work, some of whom had never
started since the late strike. The small support these men had been
receiving would be cut off. They would have to commence a strike, not
in comparative, but absolute poverty. Where, then, was the hope?
But suppose notice was not given in for an advance, then Durham must
give in notice to terminate their engagement when they had no dispute
with their employers. If they were asked "what they were striking
about" what answer could be given, except the following:--"Nothing
whatever in our own county; we have no difference." Further, if the
employers were to offer a ten per cent. advance, it could not be taken
without the leave of the Federation. Neither could they accept
arbitration, for they had been told the No. 20 Rule of the Federation
would not admit of it. Therefore they must strike, or be expelled from
the Federation. But, said the Committee, "much as we desire national
federation, and may regret our expulsion from that body, we cannot
urge you to a course that would in our opinion be disastrous."