Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T09:08:40.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Politics of State Coercion in Inter-War Britain: The Mines Department of the Board of Trade, 1920–19421

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

M. W. Kirby
M. W. Kirby
Affiliation:
University of Stirling
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the more remarkable features of the Second World War was the emergence of a ‘reforming consensus’ within the two major political parties in Britain. As Addison has pointed out ‘a massive new ground emerged in British polities’ and Conservative and Labour leaders alike openly began to espouse the case for ‘“pragmatic reform” in a mixed economy’. By 1945 the emphasis on social equity in ‘the people's war’ and the removal of lingering doubts as to Labour's fitness to govern, had combined with collective memories of the inter-war period, with its mass unemployment and social distress, to produce a new ‘left of centre’ consensus on the issue of postwar reconstruction. This applied not just to the maintenance of full employment and the inauguration of a ‘welfare state’, but also to the reorganization of certain industries. In this latter category by far the most appropriate illustration of the basic measure of agreement between the parties is provided by their approach to the reconstruction of the coalmining industry. As with other industrial sectors the Labour party was irrevocably committed to nationalization as the key element in its reconstruction programme. In this instance there was, of course, a major difference with the Conservatives who wished to retain, as far as possible, the basic principles of private enterprise. But divorced from the rhetoric of laissez-faire capitalism, what did this mean in practical terms? It is worth noting that the successive modifications during the thirties to the statutory cartel system instituted under part I of the Coal Mines Act, 1930, had been made at the instigation of a Conservative-dominated National government and had meant that the freedom of action of the individual colliery undertaking was severely circumscribed by 1939.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , June 1979 , pp. 373 - 396
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1979

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

2 Addison, Paul, The road to 1945. British politics and the Second World War (London, 1975), pp. 13–14Google Scholar.

3 Cited in Redmayne, R. A. S., The British coal-mining industry during the war (Oxford, 1923), p. 2Google Scholar.

4 On the Mining Association political lobby see Wilson, H. J., New deal for coal (London, 1945), note 2, p. 176Google Scholar.

5 Court, W. H. B., Coal (London, 1951), pp. 176, 184Google Scholar.

6 For a fuller discussion of the impact of the war on the mining community see Kirby, The British coalmining industry, pp. 30–2, 36, 63.

7 Armitage, S. M. H., The politics of decontrol: Britain and the United States (London, 1969), p. 114Google Scholar.

8 Arnot, R. Page, The miners: years of struggle, vol. 11 of a history of the Miners' Federation of Great Britain (London, 1953), pp. 184–5Google Scholar.

9 Hartshorn, Vernon, the Welsh miners' leader in Parliamentary debates (house of commons), 5th series, CXIX, c. 2096, 18 08 1919Google Scholar.

10 Mowat, borrowing from Halévy, termed the Sankey episode, ‘The Foiling of Labour’. See Mowat, C. L., Britain between the wars, 1918–1940 (London, 1955), pp. 30–6Google Scholar. Taylor states that the miners were ‘bought off by a Royal Commission’, Taylor, A. J. P., English history, 1914–1945 (Pelican edn of 1970), p. 189Google Scholar. See also Renshaw, Patrick, The General Strike (London, 1975), p. 62Google Scholar, for a similar view.

11 Scheps, Adrian, ‘Trade unions and the government, 1925–7, with special reference to the General Strike’ (University of Oxford D.Phil, thesis, 1972), pp. 29–30Google Scholar; Kirby, The British coalmining industry, pp. 37–8.

12 CAB 24/74, G.T. 6745,4 Feb. 1919. All CAB references are to the Cabinet Papers, Public Record Office.

13 The Duckham scheme proposed a complete amalgamation of all colliery undertakings in each mining district under a district coal board, each board to consist of seven directors, two of whom would be elected by ‘ballot of the workpeople’. See Coal industry commission, Final report, cmd. 210 (1919), pp. 49–62Google Scholar. The Mining Association objected to the joint control proposals of the scheme while the M.F.G.B. refused to co-operate in the formation of ‘capitalist trusts’ which would ‘legitimise district wage rates’.

14 CAB 23/20, 8 (20) appendix 111, 27 Jan. 1920.

15 POWER 26/23, B. T. C. 242, 27 Jan. 192O; POWER 26/23, A. 3370/24. 10 Feb 1920. All POWER references are to the Ministry of Fuel and Power Papers, Public Record Office.

16 See Coal industry commission, Fined reports, cmd. 210 (1919)Google Scholar.

17 CAB 23/20, 10(2), 11 Feb. 1920; Parliamentary Debates (house of commons), 5th series, CXXXI, c. 486, 30 June 1920.

18 LAB 2/681/IR/1825/1828, p. 10 (Public Record Office).

19 Parliamentary Debates (house of commons), 5th series, CXXXI, c. 846, 30 June 1920. The Haldane report is contained in Report of the machinery of government committee of the ministry of reconstruction, cmd. 9230 (1918).

20 Parliamentary Debates (house of commons), 5th series, CXXXII, c. 1793, 29 July 1920.

21 Parliamentary Debates (house of commons), 5th series, CXXXI, c. 583–4, 30 June 1920; CXXXII 1, c. 1691, 29 July 1920.

22 In addition to the Sankey commission and the Haldane committee, the following bodies had proposed either the creation of a ministry or a department of mines: the controller of the department of the ministry of munitions for the development of mineral resources (cmd. 9184, 1918); the mining sub-committee of the coal conservation committee of the ministry of reconstruction (cmd. 9084, 1918); the acquisition and valuation of land committee (cmd. 156, 1919); and the committee on non-ferrous mining (cmd. 652, 1920).

23 Page Arnot, The miners, 11, 337–8.

24 Mowat, Britain between the wars, p. 35.

25 Phillips, G. A., The General Strike (London, 1976), p. 294Google Scholar.

26 See Kirby, The British coalmining industry, chs. 4–6 passim.

27 The Samuel commission, which reported early in 1926, believed that the amalgamation of colliery undertakings was the only long-term solution to the industry's financial difficulties. See Report of the royal commission on the coal industry (1925), 1, cmd. 2600 (1926), pp. 44–62Google Scholar.

28 Tawney, R. H., ‘The abolition of economic controls 1918–21’, Economic History Review, 1st series, XIII (1943), 8Google Scholar; History of the ministry of munitions, VII, part 1, p. 102.

29 See Committee on industry and trade, Factors in industrial and commercial efficiency (1927)Google Scholar, passim; Final report, cmd. 3282 (1929), pp. 175–93.

30 See Meakin, W., The New Industrial Revolution (London, 1928)Google Scholar and ‘The Rhenish Westphalian Coal Syndicate’, Colliery Year Book (1927), p. 627Google Scholar, for contemporary views of German industrial organization at this time. Hannah, Leslie, The rise of the corporate economy (London, 1976), pp. 29–60Google Scholar, provides an excellent examination of the rationalization movement in inter-war Britain insofar as it applied to manufacturing industry.

31 SirMond, Alfred, Industry and politics (London, 1927), pp. 210–22Google Scholar.

32 See Kirby, The British coalmining industry, pp. 12–13.

33 Lane-Fox to Baldwin, 16 Sept. 1925, Baldwin papers, Cambridge University Library, D.3, XVIII, p. 136.

34 The exception to this was Emanuel Shinwell, secretary for mines in MacDonald's first minority Labour government. Although there was no chance of the government legislating successfully for the nationalization of mines, Shinwell, on his own initiative, instructed the mines department to draw up a bill of public ownership, the provisions of which were heavily influenced by the scheme presented by the M.F.G.B. to the Sankey commission in 1919. MacDonald agreed to proposing the bill in 1925. See POWER 22/27, P. 1735/13; Cowling, M., The impact of Labour 1920–1924 (Cambridge, 1971), p. 375Google Scholar.

35 The Samuel commission had envisaged that the initiative for reorganization would come from within the industry itself. If a scheme of amalgamation favoured by a majority of colliery owners in a mining district was being obstructed by a recalcitrant minority, the former, with the aid of permissive legislation, should be able to coerce the minority into joining the scheme. Report of the royal commission, 1 (1926), 61–2Google Scholar.

36 Reports of the departmental committee on co-operative selling in the coal mining industry, cmd. 2770 (1926).

37 Ibid. p. 25.

38 The minority report proclaimed that ‘the system of free and open competition under which the coal trade in this country reached the commanding position which it occupied in the markets of the world before the war is that which is best suited to its development in the future’. Ibid. p. 41. D. H. MacGregor commented appropriately: ‘When a great industry has reached a crisis the history of how it became great is not a reply to the proposals for further organisation in view of changed conditions.’ MacGregor, D. H., ‘Co-operative coal selling’, Economic Journal, XXXVII (1927), 148Google Scholar.

39 CAB 24/184, R.C.C.(26)99, 14 Dec. 1926.

40 CAB 24/184, C.P.10(27), 14 Jan. 1927.

41 In June 1927, Ernest Gowers, the permanent under-secretary for mines, remarked that ‘The attitude of mind shown by the three [colliery owners] who signed the minority report of the Lewis Committee almost makes one despair’. What the industry desperately needed was ‘co-operation in the selling of coal and amalgamations’. Baldwin papers, D.3, XIX, ‘Memorandum by the under secretary for mines on the present position of the coal industry’, pp. 116–20, 17 June 1927.

42 CAB 24/202, C.P.57, 24 Feb. 1929.

43 In order to stimulate the process of amalgamation Cunliffe-Lister also proposed to offer government finance to the industry for technical modernization. The scheme is set out in CAB 24/202, C.P.57, 24 Feb. 1929. For reasons for the failure of voluntary marketing in the industry see Kirby, The British coalmining industry, pp. 116–20.

44 Court, Coal, p. 17.

45 The Coal Mines Act of 1926 had suspended the Seven Hours Act of 1919 for a period of five years. All of the district colliery owners' associations had taken the opportunity to increase working hours in an attempt to reduce costs of production.

46 POWER 16/191, ‘The Coal Mines Bill, 1929’, not dated, c. June 1929, pp. 26–9.

47 CAB 24/204, C.P. 176 (29), 25 June 1929, p. 33.

48 For a full examination see Kirby, The British coalmining industry, ch. VI, passim.

49 The commission was to consist of five members and was charged with the task of furthering the reorganization of the coalmining industry by promoting and assisting the preparation of schemes for ‘the amalgamation of undertakings consisting of or comprising coal mines where such amalgamations appear to be in the national interest’. Coal Mines Act, 1930, section 12. As under the Mining Industry Act of 1926 the judicial confirmation of the Railway and Canal Commission was required before a scheme could be imposed compulsorily. In December 1930 Sir Ernest Gowers, formerly permanent under secretary for mines and subsequently chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue, was appointed chairman.

50 See Kirby, The British coalmining industry, pp. 139–41.

51 Central council: amendment to coal mines schemes: reports of committee, Jan. 1933, Box 46, National Coal Board Central Reference Archives, Denaby.

52 Opposition to the proposed amendment came mainly from exporting districts. Northumberland district colliery owners, for example, pointed out that the export demand was principally for screened coal, the resultant small coal being directed on to the inland market. Thus, an exhausted inland allocation would make it extremely difficult to supply the screened coal required for an increased demand for exports. Report of general meeting of owners in the Northumberland district, 3 Apr. 1933, Ashington Coal Company, NCB/AG, Northumberland County Record Office.

53 CAB 24/247, C.P.6, ‘Coal Mines Act 1930’, 1 Feb. 1934.

54 CAB 24/249, C.P.128, ‘Coal Mines Bill 1934’, 4 May 1934.

55 See Arnot, R. Page, The miners in crisis and war: a history of the M.F.G.B. (from 1930 onwards) (London, 1961), pp. 171–2Google Scholar.

56 Crookshank diary, 1934–8, Bodleian Library, Oxford, MSS Eng. hist., d. 359, 15 Oct. 1935.

57 See Kirby, The British coalmining industry, p. 143.

58 Ibid. pp. 144–5.

59 In 1933 wages in every district averaged only 2d. per shift less than in 1928. Also in 1933, the average pit head price of coal was only 4 per cent lower than in 1930. This can be compared with a 14–3 per cent fall in the Board of Trade wholesale price index over the same period.

60 It is no coincidence that the M.F.G.B. was amongst the most ardent advocates of the cartel system. See for example, M.F.G.B., Memorandum on part I of the Coal Mines Act, 1930: the case for coal trade regulation (02. 1932)Google Scholar; M.F.G.B., Memorandum on part I of the Coal Mines Act, 1930 (03. 1934)Google Scholar.

61 Baldwin papers, D.3, XIX, pp. 99–102, 12 Dec. 1933.

62 See Kirby, The British coalmining industry, p. 156.

63 CAB 24/260, C.P. 44, ‘Coal mines reorganisation commission’, 13 Feb. 1936.

64 The mines department case for compulsory amalgamations is set out in POWER 22/85, ‘The case for fostering amalgamation in the coal industry’, 16 Oct. 1936.

65 The Mining Association claimed that the introduction of the Bill was a breach of faith in the light of the industry's acquiescence to Crookshank's demand for the creation of selling schemes in 1935.

68 See for example, Parliamentary Debates (house of commons), 5th series, CCCXII, c. 451–2, 957–62, 18 May 1936.

67 Crookshank diary, d. 359, 3 Nov. 1936.

68 The Times, 4 Feb. 1938.

69 Ibid. 3 Feb. 1938.

70 Dalton, Hugh, The fateful years: memoirs 1931–1945 (London, 1957), p.388Google Scholar.

71 Court, Coal, pp. 175–6.

72 The committee was composed of leading civil servants and advisers within the ministry of fuel and power and the coal commission.

73 POWER 26/429, A. 5245A, ‘Postwar planning of the coal industry: report of the Gowers committee’, 7 June 1943.

74 Ministry of fuel and power, Coal mining: report of the technical advisory committee, cmd. 6610 (1945)Google Scholar.

75 Ibid. p. 138.

76 The chairman of the committee, Sir Charles Reid, was personally opposed to public ownership, although he subsequently accepted the post of director of production with the National Coal Board after nationalization.

77 Lee, W. A., Thirty years in coal (London, 1954), p. 165Google Scholar.

78 Foot, Robert, A plan for coal (London, 1945), pp. 53–4Google Scholar.

79 Wilson, New deal for coal, p. 194.

80 The Times, 23 Jan. 1945. See also The Economist, 27 06 1945, pp. 103–5Google Scholar.

81 Lee, Thirty years in coal, pp. 202–3.

82 CAB 66/65, W.P.(45)308, ‘The future of British coal mining’, 16 May 1945.

83 Parliamentary Debates (house of commons), 5th series, CCCCXI, c. 87–8, 29 May 1945.

84 The scheme is set out as an annex to CAB 66/65, C.P.458, ‘The future organisation of the coal mining industry’, 1 June 1945.

85 See Harris, Nigel, Competition and the corporate society: British Conservatives, the state and industry, 1945–1964 (London, 1972), pp. 77–80Google Scholar; Haynes, W. W., Nationalisation in practice: the British coal industry (London, 1953), pp. 111–15Google Scholar; Brady, Robert A., Crisis in Britain: plans and achievements of the Labour government (London, 1950), pp. 77–114Google Scholar.

86 Lee, Thirty years in coal, pp. 247–50.