|
[A tribute written by Bessie Dickinson. Bessie Smith was born in 1904 into a weaving family of parents and seven children. It was a socialist household and Bessie used to collect her fathers copy of Justice. Merrie England and Britain for the British were the first books she read. She entered the mill at 12 and worked as a tenter for half a crown a week. From 1922 she was active in the Young Communists League. She married Harold Dickinson (and took his name) in 1926 and they lived in Blackburn. Bessie rapidly became a leading cadre in the district. She stood as a Communist Party candidate in the Blackburn municipal elections in 1928 and 1930. She also wrote for the Party press on the labour movement in Lancashire and, .. she was the author of the pamphlet on Women and More Looms. Like other activists, Bessie and Harold were unemployed for much of the period 1929-32 and took part in many of the mass pickets in the Burnley and Blackburn areas. (see Gender, Class and Party: The Communist Party and the crisis in the cotton Industry . Between the wars Sue Bruley, University of Portsmouth. Published in Womens History Review. Volume 2. Number 1. 1993)]
Jim Rushton was born at Stonefold, Haslingden which is in the vicinity of Rising Bridge. His family had been hill farmers whose common lot seems to have been destined for work in the cotton factories. His mother was a weaver but his maternal grandfather had been a cattle judge. Farming seemed to be second nature to Jim. One old photograph shows him standing proudly besides a cow whose broken leg he had set although he had been told he would never do it''. He had a lasting love of the countryside and when he had time to spare would cycle the country lanes on his old boneshaker. He often had a small hen-pen near his home.
Jim attended the local Wesleyan school until reaching the age of eleven and then entered the factory. Later he married, his wife Mary Elizabeth coming from the same background of farming and weaving. There were eventually four children of the marriage, Mary, Annie, Margaret and Norman.
In the year 1912 the, family left the Rossendale valley to set up house in Barnoldswick, a small town on the Yorkshire border and in the West Riding. It was a town skirted by a softly-wooded countryside, apart from the Weets moors at its upper end. As hamlet it was mentioned in the Doomsday book. The family lived in Gisburn Street, Jim at first working at Kit's factory then at Albert Hartley's and later at Nutters Bankfield shed.
The last decade of the 19th century and the beginnings of the 20th century saw a marked increase in working class politics, the Social Democratic Federation, with its centre in Burnley. Dan Irving, coming from Huddersfield, came to fill the position as fulltime Burnley secretary and became well known in the area. H. M. Hyndman contested the seat many times until it was won by Dan Irving in 1918.
Jim became a member of the branch in those early years whose local headquarters were over a shop in Manchester Road, Barnoldswick and he played a leading part in the town. He was conscripted into the army during the 1914-18 war and was sent for training. That being completed he was offered a job as his officers batman on the grounds That as the father of four children, it would incur less risk for him than if he went to the front lines. Jim refused this offer because, as he said, he did not accept favours and did not relish the idea of waiting on officers". He was later sent to France and whilst there had a narrow escape. He was the middle one of three soldiers, when a volley of German bullets came which killed one outright and severely wounded the other. Jim was the lucky one escaping with the loss of three fingers on his left hand. For this he was given his discharge and a pension of ten shillings a week. These war experiences made a lasting impression on him, and he was always to be found in the fore-front of activity in the cause of peace and included this question in all his propaganda. Because of his disability, Jim
was sent to a Leeds rehabilitation centre to learn the trade of electrician. While he was there, concerts wore occasionally given and the trainees stood up when the National Anthem was played at the end of the performance as was expected of them. Jim remained seated and on occasions was almost mobbed. Here Jim raised his wounded hand saying ''I gave these fingers fighting for King and country and Im not going to stand up as well'', and he never did.
His training finished, Jim immediately became active in the Labour Party. Many May Day marches were organised and Jim with the local Quakers always highlighted the need for peace and the reductions of weapons of war. The local party was then a strong organisation and the centre of political life, contesting elections, having meetings and discussion classes in a friendly and comradely atmosphere. Jim Rushton and Jim Howarth were two of the leading lights at that time and were excellent propagandists.
The Communist Party was formed nationally in 1920 and the local branch for Barnoldswick about 1921. The two Jims and other members of the S.D.F. formed the core of the new local Party, and also remained members of the Labour Party.
Local people soon became aware of the newly formed Party and Jim was often outside the factory gates, and often his mealtime break would be spent talking to the workers or selling literature or distributing leaflets. These early days were hard for the operatives, but in 1912 and during the war, wage increases bad been won and after a three week strike in 1919 the 48 hours working week also came into operation, and wages were not 215 on list, But not for long, events were to show.
Jim explained events and sold the Communist, on every possible occasion. Even on Saturday evenings he would be outside nubs or working men's clubs usually with n team of like-minded people holding forth on the topics of the day or selling literature. Jim always listened to the other fellows point of view and argued his with patient care. Always interested in young people he would encourage them to take part in whatever activity was afoot. This interest remained with him all through his life.
1920
Another organisation Jim helped to form after the war was the ex-serviceman's association which seems to have been sponsored by the government immediately after the war to deal with the mens problems. Jim and the local body met in the Ivory Hall working-mens club, says Jack Pilkington, to discuss how to stop the eviction of one of their members, a tubercular ex-serviceman with wife and three children. So with the local band and union jacks flying there was a march through the town, with slogans on banners calling for ''Land and homes for ex-servicemen ''Better treatment for ex-service-men. The marchers picketed the mans home and the bailiffs did not carry out the eviction. At the time of the march the Labour Party was holding a meeting on Jepp Hill in support of the Hands off Russia campaign. This meeting showed much sympathy with the aims of the demonstration and Jin was allowed to put its ease. Jim Rushton made a modest yet forceful speech which was received with sympathy from the crowd, was reported in the local press. A resolution was passed supporting their efforts. The eviction later was suspended for three months to allow the family to find other accommodation which they did. Unfortunately the owners of the house had great need as well. That was why Jim was always pressing for more house-building as an urgent need especially for ex-servicemen.
Although Jin had retrained as an electrician, he did not immediately follow his new trade. He went back to weaving to be with his elder children who were then entering the mill. In 1922 he was elected to the local Weavers Union committee. During these stormy years quarterly meetings were lively affairs. One resolution from Barnoldswick to the Weavers Amalgamation urged the formation of Shop Committees as passed at the 1925 Trade Union Congress, held in Scarborough. This was not passed. Another resolution raised, ''views with disgust the attacks on working class fighters shown by the arrest by the Government of the twelve communists", in January 1926, and this was passed after a change in some of the wording, the chairman thinking it unwise 'To adopt such a definite and compulsory resolution.
THE 1926 GENERAL STRIKE
May of that year saw the first prosecution in the Craven District under the Emergency Regulations introduced at that period by the anti-working class Tory Government. The Emergency Trades Council (remembers Jack Pilkington, who was himself a participant) issued a duplicated sheet with message, Every man behind the miners; ''Get the buses off the streets Trade unionists, your duty is to boycott all buses. Don't support blacklegs, stand solid behind the miners. These leaflets were distributed and Jim Howarth arrested in Manchester Road whilst giving them out there. This document was calculated to cause mutiny, sedition or disaffection', and Jim was tried on these grounds. He was defended by F. W. Steele a local solicitor. Jim Rushton was called as a chief witness and replied that he was a member of the Communist Party. On being further questioned he stated that the trades council of which he was a member and Jim Howarth a co-opted member were responsible for the distribution of the leaflet, but he would not divulge who was its author or who was responsible for its duplication.
The solicitor defended on the grounds that Jin wasnt listened to very much and therefore had no influence, and secondly the intent was only to prevent people using the buses by peaceful persuasion. After giving certain promises, Jim Howarth was fined �50 or two months imprisonment. The money was raised from donations, the Weavers Union being amongst the first to donate.
COMMUNISTS AND THE LABOUR PARTY
General relationships between these two bodies as stated had always been good but as early as 1924 discord began to show, the result being the banning of the Communists from the Labour Party as a result of that year's conference decisions. Despite this, the local party refused to expel the communists and joint activities on May days, and discussion classes still took place. Much of this united effort was built around the 'Sunday Worker which had a good sale in the town. A number of leading communists were on the local labour party committee, including Jin Howarth and Jim Rushton. This position continued until late 1926 when the right wing in the party, followers of Macdonald, broke away from the main local body, calling themselves the Labour League. This was done with backing of the backing of the Skipton Division of the Labour Party of which Barnoldswick was part. Undaunted, the official party carried on, paying outstanding debts and collecting membership dues, but eventually the divisional office stepped in and formed a new local branch excluding the communists. This happened soon after there had been a unity meeting, held to protest against the imprisonment of communists and South Wales miners and to uphold freedom of speech. A Mr. MacLean of the Burnley S.D.F. and Carradice of the Nelson I.L.P. were amongst the speakers.
After the new party had been formed the disaffiliated party carried on for a while but of course it was now splintered, so a decision was then taken to break up and either join the Labour Party or Communist Party which was done. But it did not prevent the Communist Party and Jim in particular from still maintaining close links with Labour members. One could visit Jims home almost any time and there would be people from the movement exchanging opinions on current questions or on Socialism
EDMONDSONS' STRIKE
As a union committee member Jim [Rushton] became involved in this strike during March 1926. The workers had walked out in a body claiming compensation for ''bad stuff''. Jim had meetings at the factory gates and the workers had decided to stick up for their rights. The union would not give way so the employers locked out the whole town for three weeks.
The union committee issued a statement requesting ''no demonstrations, and disassociating itself from meetings held by the Communist Party, and further that any official of the union taking part in such a meeting or making statements would do so on his own authority. The local press at the time reported that there were 1,000 non-unionists in the town. There was much hardship and Jim was agitating for relief. (The writer could not verify as to whether the locked out were allowed to draw unemployment benefit)
Negotiations between union and employers gave �30 which only amounted to some 15 shillings per weaver. The union secretary remarked that ''he was Glad it was all over, as he did not want the strike in the first place (Craven Herald).
THE WEAVERS' CHARTER
Since 1912, cotton workers had received wage increases of larger or lesser amounts not less than nine tines, the last being in May 1920. In 1919 the workers claimed a reduction in hours also and 300,000 struck, winning a wage increase and a 48 hour working week, (from 55 � ). In 1921, after a strike lasting two weeks from June 3rd against a proposed wage cut, the Minister of Labour stepped in resulting in a 60% wage cut at once and 10% in December, (off list). Although there was a weak union leadership, many within the Amalgamation opposed the agreement and it was a week before the terms could be signed. In 1922, there was a further reduction of 40% and then 10% in April and October. (off list).
This wage settlement was extended to 1924, so then at the November Amalgamation meeting Nelson moved that a wage increase be demanded. This question was deferred, so at a similar meeting in March 1925, Nelson again pressed a resolution on wages. The Wages of our members are below the cost of living, and if the list percentage was increased to 120% that would re-establish the 1914 status.
Counter proposals were then proposed by the Central Committee, namely to demand a minimum wage of ten shillings per loom, payment for
underemployment at the rate of twopence a loom if stopped over two hours, weavers to be relieved of loom-sweeping, oiling and out-carrying and minimum payment to winders, beamers and reelers. This was the list of demands known as the ''Weavers' Charter, accepted with enthusiasm and launched throughout the area. Jim as a Union committee member was naturally involved in this lively campaign. About a half-dozen leaflets were issued by the Unions or Weavers Amalgamation. The Nelson Weaver's POWER LOOM gave a full page to its advertising. Trade union efforts will increase your wage, improve your standards, enlarge your opportunities and limit the power of those who exploit your labour. Unity, the spirit and the will can secure these demands. Everyone knew about the Charter. But
negotiations between Union lenders and employers dragged on and on for two years, and the employers showed no intention of budging. The Nelson delegates raised at the Amalgamation meeting of May and June 1927 the question of a wage increase, As the Charter had got them nowhere. They and Nelsons supporters , pressed for a straight 25% increase without any other entanglements. This was opposed by the Central Committee at the June meeting on the grounds that it was inopportune. ''They had made a regular study of the situation and were in a good position to know the state of trade where looms and factories were stopped for months and years''. They were not going to argue the question from theoretical economics, because when the Committee had to face the employers it was not theoretical economics that would win our case''. Nelson and the militants lost on a show of hands. There the matter rested for the time being with the workers still on semi-starvation wages, on which Jim campaigned in his many meetings.
MONDISM AND JIMS EXPULSION FROM THE UNION
Despite the Anti-Trade Union Act of 1927 imposed by the Tory Government, most of the leaders of the T.U.C. fell for the Soft sell of Mondism which was a continuation of MacDonaldism after the General Strike of 1926, the circumstances of which had shown, as A. J. Cook wrote, that the new men and women are capable in an emergency of providing the means of carrying on the country''. This was something new, and the capitalist class did not like it, neither did most of the trade union leaders at that time. Never Again was to be the watchword of Jimmy Thomas, Walter Citrine, Bevin, Henderson and others, a slogan which was now intertwined with the Mondist Group of employers proposals of let us all be partners in industry; we believe that the common interests are more powerful than the apparently divergent interests". The Mondists were a consortium of over 20 of the most powerful men in industry, including iron and steel, transport, oil, coal, cotton, shipbuilding and chemicals. Between them they held directorships in 189 companies half of whom sit in the chairmans seat, some were presidents or vice-presidents and three were members or chairmen of the Federation of British Industries as well as in the National Confederation. All represented monopoly interests and rationalisation was the keynote, prosperity to be won by all pulling together''. But as events were to show the workers in all industries were the sufferers.
It was at the July Amalgamation in 1928 that a resolution was discussed, tabled by the Nelson union. ''That this General Council meeting condemns the action of the General Council of the Trades Union Congress in entering into industrial peace conversations with the Mond Group of employers, instead of concentrating all their efforts in bringing to bear the whole power of the trade union movement behind sections of British workers who have been attacked. It further instructs the delegates to the T.U.C. to press for a condemnation of
the conversations and a definite instruction for the General Council to abstain from any conversations with the employers or sections of employers. This motion was defeated on a show of hands by the one from Todmorden That this General Council approves the main principles of the Mond-Turner report''.
Jims expulsion from the union was carried out in the earlier months of the year, and the local press in April reported that a ballot of union members in the town was in progress, but the writer could not find the results''. ''It was a substantial vote against expulsion'', recalls Jack Pilkington. Jim in his letter to the press makes his comments, (appendix) and shows the biased way events were conducted.
The year 1929 was another busy year for Jim. The local Communist Party branch started to publish the Barnoldswick Factory Worker, which was a duplicated sheet selling at a halfpenny. Unfortunately there are no known copies. Every Friday evening they [were] all assembled from the hot news. Five hundred copies were printed every week. ''We could have sold more if we had had the time'' said Jack Pilkington.
HUMIDIFICATION
This question had been a vexed one even before the present century and was more prevalent in such areas as Blackburn and South Lancs. It meant that water was sprayed from fine jets into the factory. This enabled short staple or cheaper raw cotton, when manufactured into twist,' and given sizing and ''body to be woven in the loom without as many breakages of the warp threads. Arthur Henderson, the then Labour Home Secretary in 1924, appointed a committee on which sat employers, unions and scientists which after four years reported that there was no evidence that humid sheds (contrary to past contentions) gave rise to more sickness than in non-humid sheds. The total abolition of steaming would add to the difficulties of a portion of the trade by increasing manufacturers costs. A certain amount of humidity is essential in weaving but it should be controlled and there were certain ranges of temperature and humidity which gave [sic] more favourable for the weavers efficiency. These findings were embodied in an Act of 1924; The Cotton Cloth Factories Act, (Hopwood p.92.) Some manufacturers then started to introduce the system in other areas, and the question was asked Why introduce it into areas which have all the time carried on well enough without it? and it was opposed. Normantons factory workers in Nelson walked out several times and involved the union until later the system was stopped. In Barnoldswick Nutter's Bankfield Shed where Jim and Jack Pilkington worked in 1929 the employer tried to introduce the system and Jack Pilkington who was now a union committee man kept turning the humidifiers off when the wet bulb reached a certain point. They had a union meeting in the Palace Theatre but did not get any further with the question because controlled humidification was now an act of parliament. But there was so much opposition to the system and especially where there were militants in the factory, that the system never caught on in the new areas and the employers left it alone, probably having enough on their plate with the struggles developing around the more looms system and other breaches of
agreements.
It was during this year Jim left the cotton factory for good. His war wound entailed certain difficulties when putting cops on, and doing other weaving jobs which in those years were not as mechanised as at the present time. He decided to put to use his training as an electrician and set himself up in a small way as an electrician, operating from his own home, but trade was not too good. However, his older children were now working and he was eager to give more of his time to political activity in the area. This was not easy for
the family to accept but they always remained loyal and he was always appreciative of this. He helped whenever he was needed in the house and if sickness occurred, which is the common lot of most families, he was always to hand. He was at his wife's bedside, often all night during an illness. His youngest daughter, Margaret, was at one time suspected of suffering from tuberculosis (later proved wrong) and every effort was made to get her well. Jim arranged that all the family drank goats milk as he said he was down on the purity of cow's milk, and he was right at that time.
In 1929, Jim went to Germany as a delegate from the Communist Party, and took part in [an] international meeting of cotton workers, which met when workers were facing bitter attacks from Governments and employers on a world scale. No records have come the writers way apart from a letter sent by Jim to her. On his return he was again in the thick of the struggle as events were to show. Jim Garnett, a cotton worker himself from Haslingden, and active with Jim in many of the activities of that time, remembers Jim on March 6th 1929 leading a march to Trafalgar Mill against the more looms system in Burnley. Jim with a big drum, beating out the first morning sounds as an omen of struggles to come. As one of the leaders of the National Unemployed Worker's Movement locally, Jim used to accompany unemployed workers when they were brought before the Court of Referees and was well known for his tenacity in winning their case. No matter who they were he would always do his best.
One such case involved Jack Pilkington himself. His employer at Nutters Bankfield shed was introducing the more looms system of payment but keeping in operation the four looms system because ''he didn't want to sack anyone'' This meant a reduction of wages per loom so there was a shop meeting and Jack led the opposition and the workers supported him. He later had to attend a week's union conference so the employer got busy and persuaded the workers to accept his system as it would mean less unemployment. On his return Jack was sacked because he would not accept the employers terns and so was refused the dole. The union became involved and he attended the Court of Referees accompanied by the secretary. After the second sitting Jack was allowed to sign on, after six weeks without a halfpenny coming into the home remarked Jack. This decision by the Court became a test case and all unions were notified. A year or so later a further test case was given prominence in the Colne Times, August 28th 1930. It seems that a four loom weaver who had worked for the past ten years at the Spring Bank Weaving Company at Kelbrook, near Earby had been asked on the Saturday morning in question to run eight looms on the Monday after the weekend break, the wage to be �2-9s-4d. He agreed but the union advised him not to turn up for work in the Monday and he didn't. As a four loom weaver the mans average wage over the last 35 weeks had been �1-11s-4d. This included holidays and underemployment. His possible average could have been �2 to �2-4s-0d per week. His wage on the eight looms if paid on the Uniform List (then in operation) would have been �3-12s-0d to �3-15s-0d per week, less a few shillings for helper labour under the eight looms system. Local union representatives and employers as well as a member of the Cotton Spinners and Manufacturers attended the Court of Referees. The employers claimed that the work offered the weaver was if anything a little easier, but that if the man had come on the Monday and asked for his four looms instead of the eight he had accepted then he could have had them, but at the lower rate of wages, which would be half the eight-loom rate they had offered, namely �1-4s-8d per week. The union claimed a breach of agreement, because more-loom experiments were confined to the Burnley factories. There was no objection to the more-looms, system so long as the employers paid standard list prices fixed first by the unions. But of course the employers would not agree to that. The Court emphasised its anti-unionism by its ruling that "by accepting work offered a claimant would commit a breach of rules of his union but [that] would not necessarily in itself justify the refusal of such work as
unsuitable''. In the end, the claimant was allowed the privilege of signing on as the work offered was not considered to give the same conditions as previously. This meant that those refusing the employer's terms, and being sacked, could perhaps sign on after a Court of Referees decision whose Umpires were establishment figures, but as Jack said, ''we didnt want dole, we wanted reinstatement on the old terms. Events were to show that breaches of agreements, based on this lack of fight by the unions, extended through the cotton areas.
It was in the year 1929 that the infamous Rigby Swift award was imposed. At the July Amalgamation meeting, delegates had rejected the employers demand for a wage cut of 25% from list prices. They were also given the information by the Amalgamation leaders that if there was a dispute, employers not in the Masters Federation and some others, would operate on the old rates of pay until the matter was settled and would confirm later to whatever rates of pay were decided. This was accepted by the assembled delegates. The partial stoppage of work then started on July 29th until August 17th pending arbitration.
Meanwhile, textile leaders had decided to interview Sir Horace Wilson, Permanent Secretary to the Minister of Labour, and the employers were subsequently drawn into the interview, but they refused to withdraw their wage demand or accept arbitration. Later in the conversations they did offer a more modified wage demand if the operatives would agree. The Spinning and Cardroom workers leaders did, but not the manufacturing side. At the August 17th Amalgamation meeting the information was given that the employers representatives had travelled up to Edinburgh to see the Prime Minister after which they accepted to go to arbitration. The union representatives met the T.U.C. General Council and again re-affirmed their acceptance of that policy.
All was then ready fur arbitration and Mr. Rigby Smith gave a wage cut of about 1/4 pence in the pound. At the union meeting and later Amalgamations, delegates were furious and did not think that a good case on behalf of their members had been put the word weaver had only been mentioned once, and instead of dealing with wages, the whole subject of over-capitalisation and underproduction and things like that had been dealt with Another delegate thought that when he supported arbitration that such would reflect the influence of a Labour Government". James Bell, a leader of the Amalgamation offered the point of view that the history of strikes and lockouts in the industry was far more disastrous than anything that had ever been done to us by arbitration''. He admitted we had not got what we expected as he had been so confident of the case put, and thought our case was so strong that no arbitration court, however constituted, could have given a decision against us. The judge had come with his mind made up. Even Mr. Luke Bates, the Secretary of the Northern Counties Textile Federation at that time, remarked ''It was in the domain of speculation, but he was of the opinion that we should have come out of the dispute better after a more prolonged stoppage. There was a large number of employers in the County in the balance financially, and to that extent we were in a favourable position.
It was then moved by a delegate that this meeting expressed its disappointment with the award and that an immediate application be made for a wage increase of 25% on list. This was opposed by the leadership and so the matter was postponed but at the October Amalgamation meeting it was carried by 112 � 52. A ballot was taken towards the end of the year on this question which showed in round figures 94,000 in favour of ceasing work and 43,000 against. There was some opposition at the method used in taking the ballot. They did not object to the secret ballot and the total number of votes being given for or against (said delegates at a later Amalgamation meeting) but they desired that each district should know its own strength adding That if the C.C. had been in favour of taking action on the wages question there would not have been the present departure from the usual method of taking a ballot''.
''In view of all the circumstances wrote Edwin Hopwood (p. 94) (there were nearly 9,000 blank and spoiled papers and 20,000 papers not returned) it was decided not to proceed with the matter. The Communist Party had been active during this time campaigning against the threatened wage cuts and Jim, as usual, was to the fore. The Nelson Leader of August 16th [1929?] mentioned the distribution of a cotton lockout special which criticised those TUC leaders willing to negotiate understanding that cuts would be involved. The leaders who desire peace in industry will negotiate a cut in the interests of that peace and warned against mediation. ''It would disunite our ranks and would secure in n more civilised way, the bosses' demands". "Yet the Government pleads that it is impotent to interfere.... what MacDonald means is that he is impotent to interfere on the side of the operatives actually the Government
is interfering on the side of the cotton masters. It is not only refusing to keep the factories open by using the Emergency Powers Act but denying employment to hundreds of thousands of us who are on the streets through no fault of our own''. The same sources a week later drew attention to a meeting of members called by the Nelson Weavers Union where the Nelson M.P. Arthur Greenwood spoke in the Palace Cinema. It was a long plea for support for the Labour Government and arbitration. The leaflet claimed Give them a chance, be patient, accept sacrifices, we shall be rewarded later... pie in the sky when you die Mr. Greenwood must have known that arbitration was in the
offing. Such was the working out in practice of Mondism with the further deterioration in the standard of life for the cotton operatives.
THE 1931 LOCKOUT
The ink was hardly dry on the pen after the Rigby Swift agreement when the unions were confronted by the employers for a new basis of payment to weavers engaged on the more looms system in the ten or twelve experimental factories in Burnley. This particular experiment allowed by the Amalgamation started in April for twelve months up to March 1930 on eight looms per weaver, 4% of the looms with wages from about 46/- to 50/- a week and (now less because of the recent wage cut) arising from these experiments the employers proposed their new wages list in October 1930 and it was at a special Weavers Amalgamation meeting in November a resolution was passed that we do not give powers to the Central Committee to negotiate on the proposals as submitted by the employers, which was passed by an overwhelming majority. The leaders had wanted to meet the employers to pursue the matter further. In particular on the fall-back and minimum wage.
It was after this decision at the Amalgamation meeting when the employers issued notices to post in the experimental more looms factories and others where it was intended to run the system on and after January 5th all districts of the Amalgamation were then instructed to withdraw labour where this applied. The union had shop meetings at the factories involved and all had decided to strike on January 5th to which the Burnley employers replied by a lockout one week after. Even on January 2nd there was a last minute attempt to avoid confrontation when there were two meetings of the employers; first with the Northern Counties Textile Trades Federation and then with the Weavers Amalgamation leaders, asking the employers to revert to the four-looms system of working so that it could give a basis for more discussion of the employers' proposals and to seek power from the Amalgamation to do so. The employers did offer delay if the C.C. leaders could meet them Clothed with authority to negotiate terms, but none was given. Therefore in spite of the efforts of the Ministry of Labour there was a County lock-out of the manufacturing side of the industry lasting from January 17th to February 13th. Writing later in his Pamphlet The Weavers Victory Zeph Hutchinson had this to say; The posting of the above notices struck terror into the hearts and
minds of the Central Committee The messages they have conveyed to the members throughout the district associations by way of leaflet and mass meetings were cast aside. Defeatism took complete possession of their mental outlook. They lamentably failed to correctly understand the economic weakness of the employers to enforce and hold a united County lockout; they equally failed to understand the temper and spirit growing with increasing momentum from day to day of the power of resistance of our own people to the entire system itself, regardless of any conditions that may be secured from its operation. The Central Committee quite frankly did not want to face a lockout. They feared it. They began to organise retreat before the lock-out commenced.
For over seven hours at a special Amalgamation meeting on January 15th, the more looms' system was discussed and the debate was fast and often heated. Nelson's resolution That we do not accept the principles of the more looms system was withdrawn for that of a rider from Skipton That the General Council is totally opposed to the more looms' system as proposed by the Cotton Spinners and Manufacturers Association and further expresses its opposition to any system of more looms to a weaver unless such looms be automatic or semi-automatic.
This rider was not put to the vote by the chairman , and only Darwens amendment was therefore voted upon which stated That the Central Committee be empowered to inform the employers that negotiations may take place upon variations in list prices for more looms to a weaver providing that satisfactory minimum wages and fall back wages be assured''. The voting was 100 � 63 in favour.
Many delegates thought that the Burnley strikers were being left high and dry so Bacup moved that the two motions previously submitted be put to a ballot vote of the membership so that they would be clear about what was involved. This was voted upon and accepted and the C.C. agreed to get such a ballot form out.
Two days later, at the monthly Amalgamation meeting, delegates were
informed that ballot papers were already out which read ''You are asked to declare whether you are in favour of empowering the Central Committee to negotiate with the representatives of the employers organisation upon variations in the price lists for more looms to a weaver system which the employers intend to introduce gradually and its extension jointly controlled, providing that satisfactory safeguards, such as fall-back wages and minimum wages can be assured. There were strong protests from some of the delegates but the deed had been done and the ballot forms in the post. Alvery Barker the Secretary of Skipton Weavers' Union and one of the militants who later went on the Rebel Delegation to London had this to say when he spoke to 2,000 Nelson operatives as reported in the Burnley News February 11th (the day after), ''Did we receive the support of the men on the platform at the meeting for the ballot? You should have seen the antics of some of them when
the ballot was suggested and particularly when it was carried. It is the easiest thing to settle a dispute, any fool can give the employers what they like Just a week since today the dispute could easily have been settled if it had not been for the intervention of this publicity which the cotton trade, delegation set in motion. Speaking in Colne and reported in the local press of February 13th he stated that 'before the ballot was sent out it was submitted to the officials of the Ministry of Labour and it has never been denied that it was also submitted to the employers.
When the County lockout was pending the press as usual took a hand, whereby a cablegram was dispatched to James Bell, one of the leaders of the Amalgamation who was then out of the country on a trade mission to the Far-East which stated Lock-out of weavers threatens hold-up of all Lancashire. Do you favour Weavers Amalgamation leaders being given full negotiation powers? Your lead
|
