Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T16:27:51.793Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

VI. The Railway Companies and the Growth of Trade Unionism in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Geoffrey Alderman
Geoffrey Alderman
Affiliation:
University of Reading
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The deep-seated hostility of the railway companies of the United Kingdom to trade unionism in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries is well known to students of labour history. The foundations of that hostility were two-fold. Railway companies objected to the organization of their employees by outside bodies because this was felt to endanger discipline; in consequence, directors saw the growth of collective bargaining procedures as an attempt to divide responsibility for die running of the railways, and hence as a threat to public safety, for which they, the directors, were responsible. Moreover, the large companies had strong paternalist leanings, and provided their men with many of the housing, educational, recreational and medical facilities associated with a welfare state; they expected loyalty in return, and were quick to react when this loyalty was not forthcoming. Though trade unionism on the railways can be traced back at least to 1848, none of the early organizations survived. Collective bargaining, even in its most elementary form, the presentation of petitions by elected representatives of the men, was strongly discouraged.4

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 1971 , pp. 129 - 152
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

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 For detailed studies of labour relations on the railways, written mainly from a trade union standpoint, see Bagwell, P. S., The Railwaymen (London, 1963)Google Scholar; Gupta, P. S., ‘The History of the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, 1871–1913’ (unpublished Oxford University D.Phil, thesis, 1960)Google Scholar, part of which has appeared as an article, entitled ‘Railway Trade Unionism in Great Britain, c. 1880–1900’, Econ.H.R., 2nd ser., XIX (1966), 124–53Google Scholar; Kingsford, P. W., ‘Railway Labour 1830–1870’ (London University Ph.D. thesis, 1951)Google Scholar, and the same author's ‘Labour Relations on the Railways, 1835–1875’, Journal of Transport History, I (1953–1954), 65–81.Google Scholar

I am grateful to the following for permission to consult private papers in their possession: the Beaverbrook Library (Lloyd George and Bonar Law Papers); the University of Birmingham (Austen Chamberlain Papers); Mark Bonham Carter (Asquith MSS); British Railways Board Historical Records Department (British Transport Historical Records). Transcripts of Crown-copyright records in the Public Record Office appear by permission of the Controller of H.M. Stationery Office. I am also indebted to Mark Bonham Carter and the British Railways Board Historical Records Department for permission to quote from copyright material.

2 Government interference with the running of the railways was opposed by the companies for exactly the same reason; see Railway Times, 28 Mar. 1874, p. 341.Google Scholar

3 Kingsford, , Journal of Transport History, I (1953–1954), 78–9.Google Scholar

4 Ibid. pp. 67–9.

5 The one important exception being the definitive work by Clegg, H. A., Fox, A. and Thompson, A. F., A History of British Trade Unions since 1889. Volume I 1889–1910 (Oxford, 1964)Google Scholar, a study which displays a deep awareness of employers’ attitudes.

6 51 and 52 Vict., cap. 25; 57 and 58 Vict., cap. 54.

7 52 and 53 Vict., cap. 57.

8 56 and 57 Vict., cap. 29.

9 63 and 64 Vict., cap. 27.

10 Gordon, W. J., Every-day Life on the Railroad (2nd ed., revised, London, 1898), p. 186Google Scholar: ‘however low may be the wages and long the hours, the work is constant.’

11 B[ritish] Transport] Historical] R[ecords], Minutes of the Railway Companies’ Association, RCA 1/1B no. 857, 6 Mar. 1874; Manchester Sheffield and Lincolnshire Railway, Proceedings of the Board of Directors, MSL 1/13, minute 3613, 6 Feb. 1874.

12 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/1B no. 941, 22 June 1875; though both bills were noticed, neither was discussed. The railway companies did play a part in the campaign against the Employers’ Liability bill of 1880; but though the Amalgamated Society actively supported this measure, the railway companies concentrated all their pressure on the Liberal Government, not the infant trade union.

13 Gupta, , Econ.H.R., p. 129.Google ScholarRailway Review, 25 Jan. 1889, p. 37; 1 Mar. 1889, p. 97.

14 Herapath's Railway and Commercial Journal, 26 Oct. 1889, p. 1176; 17 May 1890, pp. 578–9.Google Scholar

15 B.T.H.R. Great Western Railway Minutes of the Board of Directors, GW 1/39, p. 325, 9 Jan. 1890.

16 B.T.H.R. North Eastern Railway Board Minutes, NER 1/17, min. 9807. In December 1890 the company made some concessions, including a six-day guaranteed week and a 48-hour week for shunters: ibid., mins. 9913 and 9917; Bagwell, , op. cit. p. 136.Google Scholar Clegg, Fox and Thompson, op. cit. pp. 231–2, are probably right in ascribing the relatively rapid growth of collective bargaining on the North Eastern Railway to the prevalence of local industrialists on its board; many of these were skilled and experienced conciliators, and a significant proportion were Quakers. The North Eastern was unique amongst the companies in having a virtual monopoly of traffic within an area of the country already distinguished by the prevalence of trade union activity.

17 Western Mail, 28 July 1890, p. 5; 5 Aug., p. 5; 15 Aug., p. 5. Herapath, 23 Aug. 1890, p. 978. B.T.H.R. Bute Docks Company Minutes, BDC 1/1, pp. 370–2; BDC 1/2, pp. 9–10. Barry Dock and Railway Company Directors Minute Book, BRY 1/4, pp. 32–3, 43, 48–9, 53, 196. Rhymney Railway Board of Directors Minute Book, RHY 1/7, pp. 39–40.

18 Western Mail, 1 Aug. 1890, p. 5.Google Scholar

19 B.T.H.R. RHY 1/7, p. 32, 6 June 1890.

20 Railway Review, 6 Nov. 1891, p. 5.

21 Mavor, J., The Scottish Railway Stride, 1891. A History and Criticism (Edinburgh, 1891), p. 63 et passim.Google Scholar

22 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/2 no. 1907, 24 July 1890. Herapath, 26 July 1890, pp. 839, 850–1.

23 See, for instance, B.T.H.R. MSL 1/27, min. 15659, relating to porters and goods guards. Clegg, Fox and Thompson, , op. cit. p. 237Google Scholar, pay tribute to the effect of the rates legislation of this period without, however, working out its long term effects on the problem of collective bargaining.

24 ‘British Railway Progress, 1850–1912’, The Jubilee of the Railway News (London) [1914], p. 33.Google Scholar The following figures, extracted from The Times, give the average rates of dividend on the ordinary stock of twelve of the largest British railway companies, for the first halves of the respective years. The companies are the Caledonian, Glasgow and South Western, Great Eastern, Great Northern, Great Western, Lancashire and Yorkshire, London and North Western, London and South Western, Midland, North British, North Eastern, and Taff Vale:

25 B.T.H.R. MSL 1/30, min. 17175, 26 Mar. 1897; MSL 1/31, mins. 23 and 24, 27 Aug. 1897. The arbitration, which covered wages and conditions, was made by Lord James of Hereford, the Liberal Unionist Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster in Lord Salisbury's Government.

26 Railway News, 9 Oct. 1897, p. 527. Railway Times, 16 Oct. 1897, pp. 516–7; 30 Oct., p. 580. B.T.H.R. MSL 1/31, min. 24, 27 Aug. 1897: opinion of William Pollitt, general manager of the Great Central Railway. On 2 September 1890 the shipowners had formed a ‘Shipping Federation’ as a ‘fighting machine to counter the strike weapon’; it had a fair amount of success: see Powell, L. H., The Shipping Federation. A History of the First Sixty Years 1890–1950 (London, 1950), pp. 1–8.Google Scholar

27 B.T.H.R. MSL 1/31, mins. 145 and 146, 5 Nov. 1897; Great Northern Railway Minute Book, GN 1/56, p. 325, 5 Nov. 1897.

28 Newcastle Daily Chronicle, 5 Nov. 1897, p. 8.

29 B.T.H.R. Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Minutes of Meetings of Committees, LY 1/354, p. 356, 10 Nov. 1897.

30 Manchester Guardian, 5 Nov. 1897, p. 6; Railway Times, 6 Nov. 1897, p. 620.

31 B.T.H.R. MSL 1/31, min. 168, 19 Nov. 1897; GW 1/43, pp. 466–7, 18 Nov. The companies represented were the London and North Western, Great Northern, Great Western, Midland, Lancashire and Yorkshire, and Great Central.

32 Newcastle Daily Chronicle, 3 Dec. 1897, p. 5. B.T.H.R. MSL 1/31, min. 194, 3 Dec. 1897.

33 Railway Times, 11 Dec. 1897, p. 797. B.T.H.R. MSL 1/31, mins. 194 and 224, 3 and 17 Dec. 1897; London and North Western Railway Minutes of Special Committees, LNW 1/121, min. 658S, 2 Dec.; London and South Western Railway Court of Directors Minute Book, LSW I/I0, min. 847, 9 Dec.; Midland Railway Minutes of the Board of Directors, MID 1/26, min. 6938, 3 Dec.; North British Railway Minute Book, NBR 1/44, p. 426, 16 Dec.

34 Manchester Guardian, 4 Dec. 1897, p. 10Google Scholar; 6 Dec., p. 6. P[ublic] R[ecord] O[ffice], Papers of the Board of Trade Railway Department, MT6/808/13907/1897, file 13764 of 1897.

35 Manchester Guardian, 8 Dec. 1897, p. 9.Google Scholar

36 The first occasion on which it came into use was during the Taff Vale strike in 1900, when the Rhymney and Great Western companies paid the Taff Vale over £1,000 in respect of competitive traffic carried by them during the strike: B.T.H.R. RHY 1/8, p. 316, 4 Oct. 1901.

37 Newcastle Daily Chronicle, 24 Dec. 1897, p. 4.Google Scholar B.T.H.R. LNW 1/36, min. 15522, 17 Dec. 1897.

38 B.T.H.R. LNW 1/36, min. 15576, 21 Jan. 1898; MID 1/26, mins. 6965, 6966a, and 6978. The assistance offered was not specified. The Great Northern of Ireland gave an extra week's wages to all its men who had remained loyal.

39 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/2 no. 2232, 30 June 1898. Croker, E. J. O'B., Retrospective Lessons on Railway Strides (London and Cork, 1898), pp. 78–165.Google Scholar

40 Hence, no doubt, the desire of the companies to obtain compensation also through the law courts, as the Taff Vale succeeded in doing.

41 Croker, , op. cit. p. 166.Google ScholarLudlow, J. M., ‘The Labour Protection Association’, The Economic Review, IX (1899), 244–6.Google Scholar

42 Mantoux, P. and Alfassa, M., La Crise du Trade-Unionisme (Paris, 1903), pp. 213 and 320: statements by a railway director and a general manager.Google Scholar

43 Parl. Papers 1908, XCV (312); 1900, LXXVII (263); 1910, LXXX (277); 1911, LXX (266). The figure for the National Free Labour Association does not include the £105 given by the London and South Western Railway in 1907, increased to £120 in 1908 to 1910, to the Southampton Free Labour Association.

It would be naive to assume that the companies were uniformly truthful in the returns they made. Yet an examination of the entries in the minute books of the major British companies has revealed that in general the returns do give an accurate account of company donations. The only notable exception is the North British Railway. According to the returns, the North British ceased contributing to the National Free Labour Association after 1908; the minute books of that company show that it continued to subscribe £10 10s. yearly to that Association: B.T.H.R. NBR 1/58, p. 374; NBR 1/60, p. 76. The relatively small sums involved in these discrepancies suggest that the reason for them was either to avoid adverse publicity on the question of the principle of such contributions, or simply because of company oversight.

44 Railway News, 8 Jan. 1898, p. 69.Google Scholar

45 Ibid. 30 Apr. 1898, p. 668.

46 Collison, W., The Apostle of Free Labour (London, 1913), pp. 93–5.Google ScholarLudlow, J. M., ‘The National Free Labour Association’, The Economic Review, V (1895), 110–11.Google Scholar

47 Ludlow, , The Economic Review, V (1895), 112–13.Google ScholarSaville, J., ‘Trade Unions and Free Labour. The Background to the Taff Vale Decision’, in Briggs, A. and Saville, J. (ed.), Essays in Labour History (London, 1960), p. 338.Google ScholarFree Labour Gazette, 7 Nov. 1894, pp. 1 and 3.Google Scholar

48 Mantoux, and Alfassa, , op. cit. pp. 185–6, 214, 325–6.Google Scholar The railways were not represented on the Employers’ Parliamentary Council.

49 Saville, , op. cit. p. 337.Google Scholar

50 Collison, , op. cit. p. 141.Google Scholar B.T.H.R. Taff Vale Railway Directors’ Minute Book, TV 1/11, min. 321, 21 Aug. 1900.

51 Railway Times, 1 Sept. 1900, p. 250; 6 Oct., p. 639.Google Scholar

52 But, as shown, the Great Eastern was ready to use Collison's services. In 1907 the Lib-Lab M.P. Clement Edwards accused the London and North Western of having contributed £25 to the Free Labour Association in 1893. This was a charge which Collison and the company's director, Amelius Lockwood, a Conservative M.P., both publicly denied: Part. Deb., 4th ser., CLXXI, 763; CLXXIII, 352.Google ScholarFree Labour Press, 30 Mar. 1907, pp. 5–6.Google Scholar

53 B.T.H.R. NBR 1/64, p. 430, 16 Apr. 1914.

54 Railway Times, 13 Oct. 1900, p. 407.

55 Ibid. 1 Sept. 1900, p. 251. B.T.H.R. Great Central Railway Proceedings of the Board of Directors, GCR 1/3, min. 1501, 7 Sept. 1900.

56 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/2 no. 2251, 22 Feb. 1899; RCA 1/3 nos. 2437, 2446, 2759 and 2778.

57 Saville, , op. cit. p. 339.Google Scholar

58 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/3 nos. 2531 and 2537; RHY 1/8, p. 294, 7 June 1901.

59 ‘British Railway Progress, 1850–1912’, The Jubilee of the Railway News (London) [1914], p. 33.Google Scholar

60 Statist, 13 July 1901, p. 64; 12 Oct. 1901, p. 650. Herapath, 26 Dec. 1902, p. 1186. Railway News, 18 Feb. 1905, pp. 283–7.

61 Railway Times, 17 Mar. 1900, p. 355; 24 Mar., p. 378; 7 Apr., p. 450; 5 May, p. 569. B.T.H.R. GCR 1/3, min. 1310, 9 Mar. 1900.

62 Railway News, 10 Aug. 1901, pp. 246–8. Cleveland-Stevens, E., English Railways Their Development and their Relation to the State (London, 1915), pp. 297–311.Google Scholar

63 Robertson, W. A., Combination Among Railway Companies (London, 1912), p. 23.Google Scholar‘Railway Amalgamations and Agreements’, The Jubilee of the Railway News (London) [1914], p. 42.Google Scholar

64 The Times, 31 July 1907, p. 14; 10 Aug., p. 13; 26 Aug., p. 8.

65 Railway Review, 28 June 1907, p. 2.

66 The best account, in spite of minor inaccuracies, remains that of Halévy, E., The Rule of Democracy 1905–1914. A History of the English People in the Nineteenth Century, VI (1st paperback ed., London, 1961), pp. 108–14.Google Scholar

67 The Times, 17 Oct. 1907, p. 4; 18 Oct., p. 8; 19 Oct., p. 10. Railway News, 12 Oct. 1907, p. 635; 19 Oct., pp. 670–3.

68 Railway News, 19 Oct. 1907, p. 673.Google Scholar

69 Alfassa, M., La Crise Ouvrière Récente des Chemins De Fer Anglais. Une solution nouvelle des conflits (Paris, 1908), pp. 40–1, 48.Google Scholar

70 B.T.H.R. LNW 1/39, min. 21239; LNW 1/40, min. 21452; Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway Proceedings of Directors Board, LY 1/458, pp. 88 and 174. The Times, 30 Oct. 1907, p. 9. Railway Gazette, 1 Nov. 1907, p. 415.

71 Alfassa, , op. cit. p. 6.Google Scholar

72 The Times, 7 Nov. 1907, p. 4.

73 Parl. Papers 1909, LXXVII [Cd. 4534], pp. 17–19.Google Scholar

74 P.R.O., Cabinet Letters, CAB 41/31/35: Campbell-Bannerman to Edward VII, 5 Nov. 1907; and see Webb, S. and Webb, B., The History of Trade Unionism (new impression of 1920 ed., London, 1956), p. 527.Google Scholar

75 Owen, F., Tempestuous Journey, Lloyd George His Life and Times (London, 1954), p. 155Google Scholar: Lloyd George to Campbell-Bannerman, 25 Oct. 1907. B.T.H.R. LY 1/458, pp. 406–9, 5 Nov. 1907.

76 George, W., My Brother and 1 (London, 1958), p. 212Google Scholar: Lloyd George to William George, 21 Oct. 1907. Lord (Sir G. R.) Askwith, , Industrial Problems and Disputes (London, 1920), p. 121.Google Scholar

77 George, W., op. cit. p. 212Google Scholar: Lloyd George to William George, 29 and 31 Oct. 1907. Alfassa, , op. cit. pp. 46–7.Google Scholar

78 George, W., op. cit. p. 212Google Scholar: Lloyd George to William George, 25 Oct. and 1 Nov. 1907. Beaverbrook Library, Lloyd George Papers, B/1/1/6: Maxwell to Lloyd George, 25 Oct. 1907.

79 Maxwell, Sir H., Evening Memories (London, 1932), pp. 105–6.Google Scholar

80 The Times, 24 Oct. 1907, p. 5. Railway News, 26 Oct. 1907, pp. 712–13.

81 On Fay (1856–1953), see Railway Times, 27 July 1912, p. 85, and Dow, G., Great Central, III, ‘Fay Sets the Pace 1900–1922’ (London, 1965), pp. 25–8, 32, 81–4, 296–7, 353–4.Google Scholar Fay, who was Claud Hamilton's junior by more than ten years, had an illegitimate son in 1908, was knighted in 1912, and played an important part in the running of the railways during the First World War.

82 B.T.H.R. GCR 1/6, min. 3887, 8 Nov. 1907; GW 1/48, p. 431, 21 Nov. 1907. George, W., op. cit. p. 212Google Scholar: Lloyd George to William George, 1 and 4 Nov. 1907.

83 Birmingham University Library, Austen Chamberlain Papers, AC8/2/7: A. J. Balfour to Austen Chamberlain, 3 Jan. 1908, passing on information supplied to his brother, Gerald Balfour, by Lord Allerton, Chairman of the Great Northern Railway and a member of the negotiating committee. This is supported by the evidence of Guy Granet, General Manager of the Midland Railway, before the Royal Commission of 1911: Parl. Papers 1912–13, XLV [Cd. 6014], q. 12912; and the extract in the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway minutes, B.T.H.R. LY 1/458, pp. 409–10, 5 Nov. 1907.

81 Bagwell, , op. cit. p. 269.Google ScholarDow, , op. cit. p. 85.Google Scholar For the text of the scheme, see Parl. Papers 1911 XXIX, pt. I [Cd. 5922], 21–4.Google Scholar

85 The Times, 8 Nov. 1907, p. 9.

86 The official view, given only some years after, was that the scheme had emanated from Sir H. L. Smith, Permanent Secretary at the Board of Trade: Askwith, op. cit. p. 122.

87 ‘British Railway Progress, 1850–1912’, Jubilee of the Railway News (London) [1914], p. 33Google Scholar; the percentage of working expenses to gross receipts stood at 62 per cent in 1906, rose to 63 per cent in 1907, and reached 64 per cent in 1908.

88 Railway Gazette, 8 Nov. 1907, p. 439.Google Scholar

89 Railway Gazette, loc. cit. Financial Times, 7 Dec. 1907, p. 3. Daily Chronicle, 9 Dec., p. 6. Financier and Bullionist, 24 Sept. 1910, p. 4. Yorkshire Post, 6 July 1911, p. 6. B.T.H.R. RCA (S) 1/4, Minutes of Conference between the President of the Board of Trade and Members of the Railway Companies’ Association, 19 Dec. 1907, pp. 1–2, 5, 7. P.R.O. MT6/1786/2859/1909, file 15924 of 1907: typescript memo., 21 Dec. 1907. Part. Papers 1911, XXIX, pt. I [Cd. 5927], q. 18215: evidence of Guy Granet.

90 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/4 no. 3243, 3 Dec. 1907. P.R.O. MT6/1786/2859/1909, file 15924 of 1907.

91 The Times, 14 Dec. 1907, p. 15. Railway Gazette, 16 Aug. 1907, p. 145; 20 Dec. 1907, pp. 583 and 597.

92 Dow, , op. cit. p. 116.Google ScholarDaily Telegraph, 30 Nov. 1907, p. 11.Google ScholarDaily Chronicle, 9 Dec. 1907, p. 6; 14 Dec., p. 5. Tribune, 14 Dec. 1907, pp. 6–7.

93 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/4 no. 3251, 17 Dec. 1907.

94 B.T.H.R. RCA (S) 1/4, Minutes of Conference between the President of the Board of Trade and Members of the Railway Companies’ Association, 19 Dec. 1907, p. 5.

95 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/47, meeting of general managers and honorary solicitors of the Railway Companies’ Association, 29 Jan. and 5 Feb. 1908.

96 Produce Markets’ Review, 22 Feb. 1908, p. 151. Builders’ Journal and Architectural Engineer, 26 Feb. 1908, p. 176; 18 Mar., p. 249; 1 Apr., p. 296.

97 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/4 no. 3317, 3 Dec. 1908.

98 Builders’ Journal and Architectural Engineer, 4 Mar. 1908, p. 211. Evening Standard, 3 Jan. 1908, p. 1. A pooling agreement was an agreement between competing companies to divide receipts from competitive traffic on an agreed basis, thus making further and expensive competition unnecessary.

99 P.R.O. MT6/1770/550/1909, file 549 of 1909: typescript memo, by A. R. Thomson headed ‘Railway Agreements’, 18 Dec. 1908, pp. 1 and 10. Manchester Courier, 28 Jan. 1908, pp. 6–7.Google ScholarPall Mall Gazette, 28 Jan. 1908, p. 5.Google Scholar

100 The Times, 3 Mar. 1908, p. 3.

101 Railway News, 8 Aug. 1908, p. 276. The Times, 13 Aug. 1908, p. 10; 15 Aug., p. 4. Parl. Papers 1909, LXXVII [Cd. 4695], pp. 3–4.Google Scholar

102 Daily Express, 15 Sept. 1908, p. 1; 19 Sept., p. 5.

103 Ibid. 21 Sept. 1908, p. 5; 23 Sept., p. 1.

104 Standard, 18 Dec. 1908, p. 2.

105 Daily Express, 22 Sept. 1908, p. 1; and see ibid. 26 Sept., p. 5. The September 1908 articles in the Daily Express were later used as anti-railway propaganda by the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants: Parl. Papers 1911, XXIX, pt. II [Cd. 5927], qq. 16581, 16600, 16612.

106 Daily Express, 25 Sept. 1908, p. 1.

107 Yorkshire Post, 6 June 1908, p. 9. P.R.O. MT6/1799/4635/1909, file 46 of 1909.

108 Bodleian Library, Oxford, Asquith MSS 11, fo. 241: Churchill to Asquith, 26 Dec. 1908.

109 Churchill, R. S., Winston S. Churchill. Volume II, Young Statesman 1901–1914 (London, 1967), pp. 276–8, 281.Google Scholar

110 Bodleian Library, Oxford, Asquith MSS 11, fos. 251–3: Churchill to Asquith, 29 Dec. 1908.

111 P.R.O. MT6/1770/550/1909, file 549 of 1909: minute by Churchill, 26 Dec. 1908.

112 The Times, 4 Mar. 1909, p. 9. Railway Times, 6 Mar. 1909, p. 237.

113 Bodleian Library, Oxford, Asquith MSS 5, fo. 90: Asquith to Edward VII, 10 Mar. 1909.

114 Com.Deb., 5th ser., III, 846–8, 5 Apr. 1909.Google Scholar The minority of III against the bill was composed of eight Unionists, 66 Liberals, six Irish Nationalists, 24 Labour M.P.s, and seven Lib-Labs: House of Commons’ Divisions, 1909, no. 50, 5 Apr.

115 Com.Deb., 5th ser., III, 841, 5 Apr. 1909.Google Scholar

116 Ibid. 996–7, 1014–40, 6 Apr. 1909.

117 Ibid. 1039; IV, 179, 27 Apr. See also P.R.O. MT6/i799/4635/i909, file 2761 of 1909: draft letter, not sent, Churchill to Lord Allerton, the Great Northern Chairman, Apr. 1909.

118 Com.Deb., 5th ser., VI, 711, 14 June 1909.Google Scholar

119 Parl. Papers 1911, XXIX, pt. II [Cd. 5927], q- 18180: evidence of Guy Granet.

120 Railway Times, 20 Oct. 1909, p. 341.Google Scholar

121 Parl. Papers 1912–13, XLV [Cd. 6014], qq. 105, 1175, 1878, 2867–73, 4826. On the working of the Conciliation Scheme, see Bagwell, , op. cit. pp. 275–84.Google Scholar

122 P.R.O. MT6/1931/10397/1910, file 10397 od 1910

123 The Times, 15 Aug. 1911, p. 7.Google ScholarDaily News, 17 Aug. 1911, p. 1.Google Scholar

124 Daily News, 17 Aug. 1911, pp. 1 and 5.Google Scholar

125 The Times, 17 Aug. 1911, pp. 6–7.Google Scholar Bodleian Library, Oxford, Asquith MSS 92, fo. 184: memo, by Buxton, 23 Aug. 1911.

126 Daily News, 18 Aug. 1911, p. 1.Google Scholar

121 Hamilton, M. A., Arthur Henderson (London, 1938), pp. 87–8.Google Scholar

128 Daily News, 19 Aug. 1911, p. 1.Google ScholarMasterman, L., C. F. G. Masterman (London, 1939), p. 204.Google Scholar

129 Daily News, 21 Aug. 1911, p. 1.Google ScholarTaylor, G., The English Railway Strife and its Revolutionary Bearings (Chicago, 1911), p. 15.Google Scholar [The City Club Bulletin, vol. IV, no. 19, 11 Oct. 1911.]Google Scholar

130 In Liverpool, where the trouble began, free labour was non-existent: P.R.O. HO 45/10654/ 212470 (1–140), file la of 1911: Head Constable of Liverpool to Home Office, 7 Aug. 1911. It is noteworthy that Collison, in his autobiography, made no mention of the National Free Labour Association having played a part in the 1911 railway strike: Collison, W., The Apostle of Free Labour (London, 1913), pp. 288–93.Google Scholar

131 Masterman, , op. cit. pp. 205–6, 208.Google Scholar

132 Ibid. p. 207. P.R.O. HO 45/10655/212470 (141–250), file 161 of 1911: memo, by Gibb, 19 Aug. 1911 (typescript copy).

133 Bodleian Library, Oxford, Asquith MSS 92, fo. 186: memo. by Buxton, 23 Aug. 1911. Askwith, , op. cit. p. 165.Google Scholar

134 Railway Gazette, 1 July 1921, p. 24.Google ScholarModern Transport, 28 Aug. 1920, p. 11.Google Scholar When Buxton set up the Industrial Council in October 1911, Claughton was an automatic choice for membership of it: Railway Times, 14 Oct. 1911, p. 367.Google Scholar It is worth noting that by 1911 the North Eastern had been joined by the North Staffordshire and Barry companies in recognizing the Amalgamated Society: Clegg, Fox and Thompson, op. cit. p. 427.

135 Modern Transport, 23 July 1921, p. 9.Google Scholar

136 Railway Review, 8 Sept. 1911, p. 5.Google Scholar Bodleian Library, Oxford, Asquith MSS 92, fo. 187: memo, by Buxton, 23 Aug. 1911.

137 Bodleian Library, Oxford, Asquith MSS 92, fo. 187. Daily News, 21 Aug. 1911, p. 1.Google ScholarMasterman, , op. cit. p. 207.Google Scholar

138 Halévy, , op. cit. p. 460.Google Scholar

139 Pelling, H., A History of British Trade Unionism (Penguin Books ed., Harmondsworth, 1965), p. 137.Google Scholar

140 B.T.H.R RCA 1/48, meeting of chairmen, 8 Sept. 1911, p. 3: speech by Claughton.

141 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/5 no. 3536, p. 4. P.R.O. MT6/2022/8739/1911, file 8739 of 1911. Daily News, 21 Aug. 1911, p. 1.Google ScholarThe Times, 21 Aug. 1911, p. 6.Google Scholar

142 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/48, meeting of chairmen, 8 Sept. 1911, p. 2: speech by Lord Allerton.

143 Ibid. p. 3.

144 The Irish companies were in a perpetually impoverished condition; see Pim, F. W., The Railways and the State (London, 1912), passim.Google Scholar

145 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/48, meeting of chairmen, 8 Sept. 1911, p. 4: speech by Cosmo Bonsor, Chairman of the South Eastern Railway.

146 Ibid. p. 6. Presumably, Claughton voted, but evidently without much sincerity.

147 Ibid.

148 Parl. Papers 1912–13, XLV [CM. 6014], q. 9080: evidence of Herbert Walker, Assistant General Manager of the London and North Western; see also ibid. q. 10448, evidence of W. H. Hyde, general manager of the Great Eastern.

149 Ibid. qq. 9650, 9879.

150 Railway Times, 11 Nov. 1911, pp. 472–3.Google ScholarThe Times, 4 Nov. 1911, p. 8Google Scholar; 6 Nov., p. 9. The amended scheme gave members of each conciliation board the liberty to select a secretary from ‘any source they may think proper’. The unions objected to this form of partial recognition: Parl. Papers 1911, XXIX, pt. I [Cd. 5922], pp. 11, 15–21.Google ScholarThe Times, 24 Oct. 1911, pp. 8 and 15Google Scholar; 26 Oct., p. 6; 30 Oct., p. 8.

151 Com.Deb., 5th ser., XXXI, 1250–5, 1271–2, 1290–2.Google Scholar In evidence to the Royal Commission, Hamilton asserted his view that the meeting of the two sides on 19 August was nothing more than the physical presence of certain individuals in the same room, not to discuss anything, but merely to hear ‘an explanation’: Parl. Papers 1912–13, XLV [Cd. 6014], q. 10356.

152 Com.Deb., 5th ser., XXXI, 1265–6, 1323–7.Google Scholar

153 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/5 no. 3479. Railway Times, 2 Dec. 1911, p. 552.Google Scholar

154 B.T.H.R. RCA 1/5 no. 3482, pp. 7–9; no. 3483; meeting of committee, 8 Dec. 1911; nos. 3484 and 3486. The Times, 9 Dec. 1911, p. 8Google Scholar; 12 Dec., pp. 9–10. Railway Times, 16 Dec. 1911, p. 603.Google ScholarCole, G. D. H. and Arnot, R. P., Trade Unionism on the Railways. Its History and Problems (London, 1917), pp. 23–4, 116–24.Google Scholar

155 2 and 3 Geo. 5, cap. 29. Ireland, where the railway companies had not accepted the settlement of 1911, was excluded from the Act's operation.

156 Railway Times, 10 May 1913, p. 471.Google Scholar

157 Daily Telegraph, 1 Mar. 1913, p. 4.Google ScholarYorkshire Observer, 12 Apr. 1913, p. 10.Google ScholarThe Times, 8 May 1913, p. 17Google Scholar; 21 June, p. 19. Railway Times, 2 Aug. 1913, pp. 112–13.Google Scholar

158 P.R.O. CAB 37/116/51: Cabinet paper by Buxton, ‘Enquiry into Railway Companies of Great Britain’, 23 July 1913.

159 Railway Times, 25 Oct. 1913, pp. 389 and 404.Google Scholar At the outbreak of war in 1914, sittings of the Royal Commission were suspended, and were never resumed.

160 The Times, 11 Nov. 1913, p. 17. Daily News, 13 Nov. 1913, p. 9; 15 Nov., p. 9

161 Railway News, 4 Apr. 1914, p. 732.Google Scholar

162 Morning Post, 2 Oct. 1914, p. 4.Google ScholarRailway Review, 9 Oct. 1914, p. 9.Google Scholar P.R.O. MT6/2323/11230/ 1914, file 11230 of 1914: Granet to Sir H. L. Smith, 2 Oct. 1914.

163 Beaverbrook Library, Bonar Law Papers 24/3/38: memo, by Lord Balcarres for Bonar Law, 15 Nov. 1911.