Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-8bljj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T10:39:56.008Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Board of Trade and Industrial Relations 1896–1914*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Roger Davidson
Roger Davidson
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

From the standpoint of the late Victorian and Edwardian governing classes, the most disturbing feature of the ‘social problem’ was the breakdown of British industrial relations. The long ideological and political truce observed by organized labour more or less since the 18405 had ended. A new and more militant trade unionism had emerged which condemned the consensus policy of the craft unions and challenged both the prerogatives of management and the conventional criteria of wage determination. Not only did it endanger social stability, it was also regarded in government circles as a major obstacle to British economic growth. Industrial unrest would, it was feared, disrupt production, intensify resistance to technical innovation, and weaken Britain's cost competitiveness in world markets. In the establishment press, in the parliamentary reports, and in the political memoirs and diaries of the period, one therefore finds a growing concern to secure industrial peace; a concern reflected in the growth of state intervention in industrial relations.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , September 1978 , pp. 571 - 591
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Duffy, A. E. P., ‘New Unionism in Britain 1889–90: a re-appraisal’, Economic History Review, 2nd ser. XIV (1961–1962), 318Google Scholar; Porter, J. H., ‘Wage bargaining under conciliation agreements 1860–1914’Google Scholar, ibid, xxiii (1970), 471–5.

2 Clegg, H. A., Fox, A. and Thompson, A. F., A history of British trade unions since 1889; I: 1889–1910 (1964), p. 475.Google Scholar

3 See, e.g. Brown, E. H. Phelps, The growth of British industrial relations (1959), chs. iv, VI–VIIGoogle Scholar; Allen, V. L., Trade unions and the government (1960), eh. IIIGoogle Scholar; Charles, R., The development of industrial relations in Britain 1911–39 (1973), pt. 1Google Scholar; Wigham, E., Strikes and the government 1893–1974 (1976). ch. I.Google Scholar

4 Harris, J. F., Unemployment and politics: a study in English social policy, 1886–1914 (1972), p. 351.Google Scholar

5 Emy, H. V., Liberals, radicals and social politics 1892–1914 (1973), p. 270.Google Scholar

6 See, e.g., The Times, 9 12 1897Google Scholar; Liberty Review, VIII (1899), p. 57Google Scholar; ix (1900), pp. 175–6.

7 The Times, 13 09 1897Google Scholar; Liberty Review, VIII (1899), pp. 37, 57, 62Google Scholar; ix (1900), pp. 104, 176.

8 The Times, 16 01 1902Google Scholar; Liberty Review, IX (1900), pp. 206, 242, 260, 289Google Scholar; x (1901), pp. 31, 51, 113; xxii (1907), p. 39.

9 Mantoux, P. and Alfassa, M., La crise du trade-unionisme (Paris, 1903), pp. 278, 316.Google Scholar

10 See, e.g., P.R.O. Home Office papers, H.O. 45/B 10296A/9837, H.0.45/9726/A52571/6; C. Connell & Co. to T. Biggart, secretary of Clyde Shipbuilders' Association, 16 Dec. 1912.

11 Justice, 17 08 1901, 18 June 1910, 10 Sept. 1910, 29 July 1911, 27 April 1912Google Scholar; Clarion, 3 05 1912Google Scholar; Socialist Review, VII (1911), p. 248Google Scholar; New Age, 22 05 1913Google Scholar; Labour Leader, 24 07 1908.Google Scholar

12 Justice, 18 06 1898, 16 Nov. 1907, 21 Oct. 1911, 27 July 1912Google Scholar; Clarion, 5 01 1912Google Scholar; Socialist Review, VIII (1911–1912), pp. 246–7Google Scholar; New Age, 20 11 1913Google Scholar; Labour Leader, 1 09 1900.Google Scholar

13 Justice, 3 09 1898, 19 Sept 1908, 31 Oct. 1908, 24 Sept. 1910, 15 Oct. 1910, 6 May 1911, 14 Oct. 1911Google Scholar; Clarion, 10 07 1914Google Scholar; Socialist Review, VIII (1911–1912), p. IIGoogle Scholar; New Age, 8 01 1914Google Scholar; Labour Leader, 23 10 1908.Google Scholar

14 Justice, 2 05 1903, 17 May 1913Google Scholar; Clarion, 24 05 1912Google Scholar; Labour Leader, 30 10 1897.Google Scholar

15 Roberts, B. C., The T.U.C. 1868–1921 (1958), p. 156Google Scholar; Watney, C. and Little, J. A., Industrial warfare (1912), pp. 235–6.Google Scholar

16 For a survey of the debate, see Hay, J. R., Theorigins of the liberal welfare reforms, 1906–1914 (1975)Google Scholar; Hall, P. et al. , Change, choice, and conflict in social policy (1975), pts. i and II.Google Scholar

17 Hopwood papers, Bingham's Melcombe, Dorset, Smith, Llewellyn to Hopwood, , 27 06 1901.Google Scholar

18 See, e.g., P.R.O. Marine Department papers, M.T. 9/593/M 5554/1898, papers relating to the Merchant Shipping (Undermanning) Bill, 1897; P.R.O., M.T. 9/591/M 3843/1898, memorandum on the supply of seamen, 2 March 1898.

19 Alderman, G., The railway interest (1973), pp. 141, 172.Google Scholar

20 Ibid. p. 164.

21 Hopwood papers, Smith, Llewellyn to Hopwood, , 23 12 1898.Google Scholar

22 Smith, H. Llewellyn, ‘Arbitration and conciliation in labour disputes’, Encyclopaedia Britannica, XXV (1902), p. 554.Google Scholar

23 Hopwood papers, memorandum on railway trade unionism, Smith, Llewellyn, 2 09 1900.Google Scholar

24 Ibid.

25 Hopwood papers, Ritchie, to Hopwood, , 2 09 1900Google Scholar; Hansard (Commons) 4th ser. cxxi, 508–9, 27 04 1903.Google Scholar

26 Third report of proceedings under the Conciliation (Trade Disputes) Act 1896, P.P. 1901 (296) LXXIV, p. 53.Google Scholar

27 Edinburgh Review, CCCXCI (1900), pp. 1, 10.Google Scholar

28 Alderman, G., ‘The railway companies and the growth of trade unionism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries’, Htstorical Journal, XIV (1971), p. 149Google Scholar; Powell, L. H., The Shipping Federation (1950), pp. 18–22.Google Scholar

29 Clegg, , Fox, , and Thompson, , op. cit. pp. 362–3.Google Scholar

30 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1576/L 743/1903, Observations on Mr Shackleton's Bill (Trade Disputes), Schloss, D. F., 6 05 1903, p. 3Google Scholar; Minutes of evidence of royal commission on trade disputes and trade combinations, P.P. 1906 (Cd. 2826) LVI, qq. 157, 570, 625 (G. R. Askwith)Google Scholar. Askwith was the leading industrial negotiator employed by the Board of Trade under the Conciliation Act. His evidence to the royal commission was prepared in collaboration with the labour department: P.R.O. Lab. 2/1576/L 743/1903.

31 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1576/L 743/1903, Schloss, to Fox, Wilson, 11 05 1903Google Scholar; P.P. 1906 (Cd. 2826) LVI, qq. 150, 152, 570, 613.

32 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1481/L 823/1901, Memorandum on the effect of the Taff Vale judgement upon the position of trade unions, Schloss, D. F., 14 08 1901Google Scholar, with marginalia by Wilson Fox and Llewellyn Smith; P.P. 1906 (Cd. 2826) LVI, qq. 141, 161, 164–74, 785.

33 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1576/L 749/1903, Memorandum on trade union liability, Schloss, D. F., 6 05 1903Google Scholar, with additional minutes by Wilson Fox and Llewellyn Smith, 7 May 1903.

34 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1576/L 743/1903, Memorandum on trade unionism and the law, Smith, Llewellyn, 12 06 1903.Google Scholar

35 P.R.O. H.O. 45/10020/A 54828/4, Memoranda on the implications of the Taff Vale decision for trade unionism, Smith, H. Llewellyn and Schloss, D. F., 22 03 1902Google Scholar; Balfour papers, Whittingehame, East Lothian, File 122, Sandars, J. S. to Balfour, G. W., 18 11 1903Google Scholar; Akers–Douglas papers, Kent County Record Office, Maidstone, U 564, File 026, Papers relating to trade disputes and picketing.

36 P.P. 1906 (Cd. 2826) LVI, pp. 1–57; P.P. 1906 (Bill 134) v, p. 457; Askwith, Lord, Industrial problems and disputes (1920), pp. 94–96.Google Scholar

37 Smith, P., Disraelian conservatism and social reform (1967), p. 324.Google Scholar

38 Emy, H. V., ‘The impact of financial policy on English party politics before 1914’, Historical Journal, XV (1972), 112–13.Google Scholar

39 Hopwood papers, Bingham's Melcombe, Dorset, Ritchie, to Boyle, , 23 09 1899.Google Scholar

40 Ibid. Ritchie to Hopwood, 25 May 1902; Alderman, G., The railway interest (1973), ch. x.Google Scholar

41 P.R.O., Railway Department papers, M.T. 6/966/9450/1900.

42 Bryce papers, Bodleian Library, P. 11/J 63, Boyle, to Bryce, , 5 01 1898.Google Scholar

43 P.R.O., M.T. 6/911/8435/1898.

44 See, e.g., P.R.O., M.T. 6/911/1454/1899.

45 Hopwood papers, Ritchie, to Hopwood, , 21 08 1900.Google Scholar

46 Ibid. Ritchie to Boyle, 23 Sept. 1899.

47 Alderman, , op. cit., pp. 180–1Google Scholar; Rempel, R. A., Unionists divided: Arthur Balfour, Joseph Chamberlain and the Unionist free traders (1972), ch. I.Google Scholar

48 Balfour papers, Whittingehame, East Lothian, File 123, SirBrodrick, John to Balfour, G. W., 29 01 1906.Google Scholar

49 Hansard (Commons) 4th ser. cxviii, 1670–71, 5 03 1903.Google Scholar

50 Ibid., cxxi, 575, 27 April 1903.

51 Bristow, E., ‘The Liberty and Property Defence League and individualism’, Historical Journal, XVIII (1975), 785.Google Scholar

52 Alderman, , op. cit. p. 185.Google Scholar

53 Harris, J. F. and Hazlehurst, C., ‘Campbell-Bannerman as prime minister’, History, LV (1970), 370, 377Google Scholar; Matthew, H. C. G., The liberal imperialists (1973), pp. 248–9.Google Scholar

54 Emy, H. V., Liberals, radicals and social politics, 1892–1914 (1973), pp. 171, 240–1.Google Scholar

55 Ibid. p. 183.

56 Matthew, , op. cit. p. 245.Google Scholar

57 Emy, H. V., Liberals, radicals and social politics, 1892–1914, p. 278.Google Scholar

58 Wrigley, C. J., Lloyd George and the Labour Movement (Hassocks, 1976), pp. 47–9.Google Scholar

59 Morgan, K. O., The age of Lloyd George (1971), p. 37.Google Scholar

60 Wrigley, , op. cit. pp. 5, 8, 24.Google Scholar

61 P.R.O. Cabinet papers, cab./37/85/91.

62 The Economist, 7 12 1907, 8 02 1908Google Scholar; Liberty Review XXII (1907), pp. 194–5.Google Scholar

63 Clegg, , Fox, , and Thompson, , op. cit. pp. 425–8Google Scholar; Wrigley, , op. cit. pp. 57–8.Google Scholar

64 James, R. R. (ed.), Winston S. Churchill: his complete Speeches (1974), pp. 1036, 1158.Google Scholar

65 This is most clearly demonstrated in his handling of the cotton-spinning lockout of 1908 and the Scottish coal dispute of 1909; see, Churchill papers, C/11/3; P.R.O. Lab. 2/79/C6581/1909.

66 James, R. R., op. cit. pp. 1030, 1223.Google Scholar

67 Ibid. p. 1030.

68 Stansky, P. (ed.), Churchill; a profile (1973), pp. 177–9Google Scholar; Eade, C. (ed.), Churchill: by his contemporaries (1953), p. 367.Google Scholar

69 P.R.O. Cab. 37/110/62, p. 7.

70 Hennock, E. P., ‘Poverty and social theory in England: The experience of the 1880's’, Social History, I (1976), 86.Google Scholar

71 P.R.O. Cab. 37/107/92, pp. 1–2; Cab. 37/110/62, p. 8.

72 Davidson, R., ‘Llewellyn Smith, the labour department and government growth 1886–1909’Google Scholar, in Sutherland, G. (ed.), Studies in the growth of nineteenth century government (1972), pp. 239–50.Google Scholar

73 See, e.g. Smith, H. Llewellyn, ‘Strikes and lockouts’, in Encyclopaedia Britannica, XXXIII (1902), p. 21Google Scholar; P.R.O. Cab. 37/107/70, Memorandum on the present unrest in the labour world, 25 July 1911, pp. 10–12.

74 See, e.g., P.R.O. Lab. 2/274/;L 1099/1905, Askwith, to Fox, Wilson, 1 11 1905Google Scholar; Lab. 2/100/C 4614/1913, Draft report of court of enquiry into Dublin tramway dispute, 5 Oct. 1913. PP. 4. 6.

75 Hopwood Papers, Memorandum on railway trade unionism, p. 8. Similar considerations motivated Board of Trade intervention in the 1897–8 engineering lockout; P.R.O. Lab. 2/274/L 1131/1897.

76 P.R.O., M.T. 6/978/14307/1900, Hopwood, to Boyle, , 29 11 1900Google Scholar; Labour Leader, 28 09 1906.Google Scholar

77 P.R.O. H.O. 45/10020/A 54828/4, Memoranda on the implications of the Taff Vale decision for trade unionism, 22 March 1902.

78 Bryce papers, P11/J. 63, Boyle, to Bryce, , 5 01 1898.Google Scholar

79 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1576/L 743/1903, Observations on MrBill, Shackleton's (Trade Disputes), 6 05 1903, p. 7.Google Scholar

80 Ibid. Memorandum on Mr Shackleton's Bill, 7 May 1903, pp. 1–2; Memorandum on trade unionism and the law, 12 June 1903, p. 2.

81 Ibid. Memorandum on trade unionism and the law, pp. 5–6; Hopwood papers, Smith, Llewellyn to Hopwood, , 21 02 1904.Google Scholar

82 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1576/L 743/1903, Memorandum on amendment of the law of conspiracy, 6 May 1903, p. 2.

83 Ibid. Memorandum on Mr Shackleton's Bill, 7 May 1903, p. 3.

84 Hopwood papers, Smith, Llewellyn to Hopwood, , 21 02 1904.Google Scholar

85 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1576/L 743/1903, Memorandum on MrBill, Shackleton's, p. 3.Google Scholar

86 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1481/L 823/1901, Burnett, to Smith, Llewellyn, 19 08 1901.Google Scholar

87 Ibid. Memorandum on the effect of the Taff Vale judgement upon the position of trade unions, 14 Aug. 1901, pp. 5–6.

88 Akers–Douglas papers, Kent County Record Office, Maidstone, U 564, file 026, Papers relating to trade disputes and picketing; 0/59/2, Balfour, G. W. to Akers-Douglas, , 25 09 1903.Google Scholar

89 Majority Report, P.P. 1906 (Cd. 2825) LVI, p. 2.Google Scholar

90 Clegg, , Fox, , and Thompson, , op. cit. p. 393.Google Scholar

91 Sutherland, G., ed. op. cit. pp. 240–48.Google Scholar

92 See, e.g. Smith, H. Llewellyn, The books of political economy (1888), p. 168Google Scholar; P.R.O. Lab. 2/102/L 247/1901, Arbitration minutes (Askwith, G. R.), p. 27Google Scholar; Wilson Fox papers, Bwlch, Breconshire, Fox, to Salisbury, , 3 03 1904Google Scholar; Oliphant, J. (ed.), The claims of Labour (Edinburgh, 1886), pp. 16, 28Google Scholar; Schloss, D. F., Methods of industrial remuneration (1898), pp. 289–90.Google Scholar

93 See, e.g., Smith, H. Llewellyn, Economic aspects of state socialism (Oxford, 1887), p. 96Google Scholar; P.R.O. Lab. 2/102/L 247/1901, Arbitration minutes (G. R. Askwith), p. 180; Lab. 2/98/L 1463/1903, Fox, to Bateman, , 6 10 1903Google Scholar; Lab. 2/89/704/1908, Burnett, to Fox, , 7 03 1908.Google Scholar

94 See, e.g., Askwith, Lord, Industrial problems and disputes, pp. 283–7Google Scholar; Schloss, D. F., ‘The dearness of cheap labour’, Fortnightly Review, CCCXIII (1893), 54–63Google Scholar; Minutes of evidence of Royal Commission on agricultural depression, P.P. 1896 (C. 8021) XVII, qq. 61256–57 (Wilson Fox).Google Scholar

95 P.R.O. Lab. 2/1/L 128/1902, Memoranda on a bill to provide for the establishment of wages boards, Burnett, J. and Smith, H. Llewellyn, 13 and 14 02 1902Google Scholar; P.R.O. Lab. 2/29/TB 2677/1914, Memoranda relating to the Labour (Minimum Conditions) Bill.

96 Encyclopaedia Britannica, XXXIII (1902), p. 410Google Scholar; see also P.R.O. Lab. 2/480/1. 555/1900, Papers relating to the effect of strikes and lockouts upon the performance of British exports.

97 For an explicit statement of this view, see P.R.O. Lab. 2/213/L 156/1904, Memorandum on the proposed creation of a separate department and minister of Labour, Smith, Llewellyn, 4 02 1904.Google Scholar

98 Unless otherwise stated, analysis in this section is based upon material contained in Parl. Papers, Reports of proceedings under the Conciliation (Trade Disputes) Act 1896; Reports on strikes and lockouts; Abstracts of labour statistics.

99 See, e.g., P.R.O. Lab. 2/95/L 502/1901, Blashill, to Smith, Llewellyn, 7 05 1901Google Scholar; Lab. 2/76/L 1362/1903, Foster, to Fox, Wilson, 24 11 1903Google Scholar; Lab. 2/102/L 626/1907, Stewart, to Fox, Wilson, 6 07 1907Google Scholar; Lab. 2/74/L 1614/1907, Woodhouse, to Fox, Wilson, 26 11 1907Google Scholar; Lab. 2/98/L 332/1908, Adam, Forbes to Fox, Wilson, 14 06 1908Google Scholar; Lab. 2/141/C 4078/1909, Hudson, to Askwith, , 27 04 1909.Google Scholar

100 Clegg, , Fox, and Thompson, , op. cit. pp. 143–4Google Scholar; Porter, J. H., ‘Industrial conciliation and arbitration, 1860–1914’ (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Leeds, 1968), pp. 18, 246.Google Scholar

101 Civil Service Gazette, 13 07 1907Google Scholar; Bauman, Z., Between class and elite: the evolution of the British Labour movement (1972), pt. 3.Google Scholar

102 Churchill, R., Winston Churchill Vol II, companion volume Part II 1907–11 (1969), pp. 836–8.Google Scholar

103 Askwith, Lord, Industrial problems and disputes (1920), pp. 77, 128.Google Scholar

104 Lab. 2/24/C 7866/1911, Smith, Llewellyn to Buxton, , 9 10 1911.Google Scholar

105 See, e.g., P.R.O. Lab. 2/86/L51/1903; Lab. 2/74/L 1614/1907; Lab. 2/141/0 4078/1909; Lab. 2/89/C 4890/1909; Lab. 2/89/0 3956/1911.

106 See, e.g., P.R.O. Lab. 2/86/L74/1896; Lab. 2/87/L 438/1902; Lab. 2/89/L 1503/1908; Lab. 2/156/1.C. 5276/1912.

107 See, e.g., P.R.O. Lab. 2/86/L 474/1901; Parl. Papers, 1898, LXXII, pp. 7–9, Correspondence respecting proceedings under the Conciliation Act in relation to the dispute in the coal trade of South Wales and Monmouth.

108 P.R.O. Lab. 2/10/L 1061/1902, Bateman, to Hopwood, , 31 10 1902Google Scholar; Lab. 2/102/L 247/1901, Arbitration minutes, p. 27.

109 See especially, P.R.O. Lab. 2/74/L 1614/1907, Arbitration minutes, p. 8; Lab. 2/74/L 930/1900, Arbitration minutes, p. 7; Lab. 2/157/1.C. 4434/1912, Arbitration minutes, p. 63.

110 See, e.g., P.R.O. Lab. 2/141/L 1483/1904, Arbitration minutes, pp. 107–8.

111 Porter, J. H., op. cit. pp. 345, 479Google Scholar; P.R.O. Lab. 2/29/C 794/1911.

112 See, e.g., P.R.O. Lab. 2/88/L 366/1907; Lab. 2/156/1.0. 5276/1912; Lab. 2/130/1.C. 4251/1913.

113 See, e.g., P.R.O. Lab. 2/29/0 7067/1910; Lab. 2/88/L 366/1907; Lab. 2/90/1.C. 490/1914.

114 The following calculations are based on Parl. Papers, Reports of proceedings under the Conciliation (Trade Disputes) Act 1896; P.R.O. Lab. 2, Arbitration minutes, awards, and correspondence; Aldcroft, D. H. and Richardson, H. W., The British economy, 1870–1939 (1969), pp. 24–5Google Scholar; Mitchell, B. R. and Deane, P., Abstract of British historical statistics (1962), pp. 64–5.Google Scholar

115 On this point, see Harris, J. F., op. cit. pp. 371–3.Google Scholar

116 See, e.g., Lab. 2/74/L 930/1900; Lab. 2/102/L 228/1901, Arbitration minutes, p. 180; Lab. 2/97/C 4556/1910.

117 Porter, J. H., op. cit. p. 510Google Scholar; P.R.O. Lab. 2/101/L 1312/1901, Smith, Llewellyn to Fox, Wilson, 3 09 1901.Google Scholar

118 P.R.O. Lab. 2/102/L 228/1901, Drummond, to Smith, Llewellyn, 28 01 1901Google Scholar; Allen, V. L., ‘The origins of industrial conciliation and arbitration’, International Review of Social History, IX (1964), 252–3.Google Scholar

119 See, e.g., P.R.O. Lab. 2/75/L 776/1902; Lab. 2/274/L 1099/1905; Lab. 2/149/C 5881/1910; Lab. 2/116/I.C. 5492/1912; Buxton papers, Hassocks, Sussex, Askwith, to Buxton, , 23 09 1910.Google Scholar

120 Askwith, , op. cit. pp. 109–10, 149, 152.Google Scholar

121 Porter, J. H., ‘Wage bargaining under conciliation agreements, 1860–1914’, Economic History Review, and ser. XXIII (1970), p. 472.Google Scholar

122 See, e.g., the awards in the 1909 Swansea and Scottish coal mines disputes, and the South Wales Sliding Scale Agreement of 1910 – Reports of proceedings under the Conciliation Act, P.P. 1910 (5) XXI, pp. 100, 117Google Scholar; P.P. 1911 (96) xiii, pp. 27–32. For their adverse effects upon wage levels, see Porter, , op. cit. p. 474Google Scholar; Arnot, R. Page, A history of the Scottish miners (1955), p. 111Google Scholar; Edwards, N., History of the South Wales Miners Federation (1938), pp. 29–31.Google Scholar

123 Meacham, S., ‘The sense of an impending clash: English working-class unrest before the first World War’, American Historical Review, LXXVII (1974), 1348.Google Scholar

124 For the economic effects of private arbitration, see Porter, , op. cit. 460–75.Google Scholar

125 Hansard (Commons) 5th ser. XCV, 596, 28 06 1917.Google Scholar

126 See, e.g., Lockwood, D., ‘Arbitration and industrial conflict’, British Journal of Sociology, VI (1955), 335–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hyman, R., ‘Inequality, ideology and industrial relations’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, XII (1974), 171–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

127 Hay, J. R., ‘Government policy towards labour in Britain 1900–14: some further issues’, Scottish Labour History Journal, X (1976), 47.Google Scholar

128 Hay, J. R., ‘Employers and social policy in Britain: the evolution of welfare legislation, 1905–14’, Social History, IV (1977), 435–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar