1874
The first Reduction—Co-operative Colliery—The Strike of 1874—The Wheatley Hill Revolt and Evictions—Second Reduction—First Arbitration
We finished 1873 with a demand for an advance and a difference as to the submission for a reference to arbitration. During the interval the trade had declined to such an extent that the employers sent a claim for a reduction, and thus the young Society was beginning to find itself entering its first dark cloud of depression. Up to that moment the booming times arising out of the Franco-Prussian War had been with it, but now the relapse which generally follows a fever in trade had set in, and the demand for coals had fallen off seriously; and whereas a month or two previously they had expected another advance, it was felt by Mr Crawford and his colleagues that it would not be possible to stave off a reduction.
Before coming to the consideration of the first reduction let us, for the sake of chronological order, note one or two matters of some importance. The first of these is the demand for men being trained before being left to themselves in a mine. At the Council meeting held on Saturday, 21st March, the following resolution was carried:—
"We have again to protest against the introduction of strangers into our mines—men to whom mining with all its dangers is thoroughly unknown, whereby the limbs and lives of other men are constantly endangered. We therefore emphatically ask the owners to put such men under the care of some practical miner for a period of not less than six months, who will be responsible for any danger arising from such person's ignorance of mines."
Another point worthy of note was the resolve to join in the movement to form a co-operative mining company. At the Council meeting on 4th April it was resolved:
"That we take £5000 out of the General Fund, and invest it in the Co-operative Mining Co., as we believe productive co-operation to be the only solution to the many difficulties that exist between Capital and Labour."
At the same Council a copy of the owners' request for a reduction was read. It conveyed the decision of their full meeting: "That the state of the Durham Coal Trade imperatively calls for a reduction of twenty per cent. in all colliery wages, both above and below ground, to take effect from the 18th of next month." A meeting was held between the two Associations on the 16th of April, when the employers stated the reasons for their demand. They held "(1) that there was no connection between profit and wages, and the workmen had, therefore, no legitimate right to interfere in such a matter; (2) that trade was vastly more dull, and prices materially less, than was supposed; (3) that in various parts of our own country and also in Germany, reductions had taken place, in the latter 25 per cent., and having to compete in the same markets with firms and districts so brought down, they had no choice but to enforce the reduction."
This was brought before a Council meeting on April 25th, but the delegates refused to discuss it then, and referred the question to a special meeting to be held on the 29th. Steps were taken to prepare for a stop should a reduction take place, and men were arranged to visit various districts. Those going to Ireland and Scotland had £30 each. The owners had in the meantime given notice at certain collieries, and the workmen were told to remain at their own collieries. On the 27th the Executive Committee issued the following circular:—
April 27th, 1874.
Fellow Workmen,—According to arrangement, Messrs Patterson, Wilkinson and Crawford, saw Messrs Burt and Nixon yesterday, and from information received it appears that the 10 per cent., or a reduction from 50 to 40, has to affect all, both above and below ground.
We cannot but call your attention to our present position. The adjoining county, much more compact than ours, and many years older in organisation,—two elements of strength and power,—have just accepted a reduction of wages. Miners, immediately south of us,—West Yorkshire,—have expressed their willingness to accept a reduction of 12½ per cent. on wages all round. This, however, the owners refused to accept. They seek a reduction of 25 per cent., and the matter is, therefore, going to arbitration. With these facts before us, is it possible that we can, at the present time, by any means, which we might adopt, altogether stave off a reduction, more or less, without referring it to arbitration, in some way or other? We will not attempt to point out all the terrible effects which must arise from anything like a general strike. Many of you experimentally know the direful effect and heartrending destitution which has arisen from partial strikes amongst ourselves. Suppose a general stop now ensues, what are the probabilities of success? Can we make our efforts successful? Suppose we should strike against a receding market, and a surplus number of men, and lose, what would be the consequences? These are questions worthy your earnest consideration, because on them depend your weal or woe for years to come.
We have to-day very fully thought over the matter, and considering everything, we think it wise, if not absolutely necessary, to make some advances, with a view to a settlement of this important question. We, therefore, strongly advise that an offer of 10 per cent. reduction be made to the owners; and should they refuse this, let the whole matter go to arbitration. If arbitration be offered and accepted, we would suggest the appointment of two men on both sides, and let these four men find a basis or starting-point for arbitration. Should they fail to agree as to what such basis ought to be, let the matter go to an umpire, appointed by the four arbitrators.
Let no one regard this as in the slightest degree dictatorial. We have too much respect for your collective judgment to attempt anything of the kind. But we think it our duty to point out that, if not careful, we may drift amongst shoals and quicksands, which may endanger the very existence of our Association. And if this should come to pass, we need not name—not our probable, but certain condition, for years to come.
On the 29th of April the special Council was held, which approved of the Committee's circular by offering a reduction of ten per cent. This decision was conveyed by telegram to Mr Bunning, the employers' secretary. No sooner was it known in the county than a general protest was made, not only by the miners, but by the mechanics and enginemen. They objected to being included in the reduction. These bodies held meetings in Durham on the race-course on May 2nd, and passed resolutions not to accept any reduction. The spirit of revolt was rampant in the county amongst the members of the Miners' Association. Meetings to protest against it were held throughout the county. Circulars were sent out by District Councils, in which the Executive Committee was held up to ridicule. To these the agents replied, boldly pointing out the danger of the course which was being adopted and the disaster which would assuredly follow if more moderate action were not taken. Some of the members of the Executive Committee were found amongst the protestors and the loudest in their condemnation of Mr Crawford, who came in for a large share of abuse. It was calculated that at one of those meetings in Houghton there were 10,000 people present. On May 5th the coal owners held a meeting. The resolutions dealt mainly with the action of the enginemen. From these the employers offered to accept five per cent. if acceded promptly, but no man should be allowed to work for less reduction than that offer. During the owners' meeting a telegram was read from Mr Crawford as follows:—
"For reasons previously given both to the Standing Committee and full meeting of owners, we shall begin on Monday to work five days per week or pits be laid idle on Saturday, so far as the working and drawing of coal is concerned."
To that telegram the owners sent the following reply:—
"The Provisional Committee give notice to the Durham Miners' Association that unless the Owners' Association receive before the end of the week a satisfactory assurance that collieries will continue to work the same number of days per fortnight, as heretofore, they will advise the Coal Owners' Association to insist upon the full twenty per cent.—first demanded; such demand only having been withdrawn on the condition that no change whatever was to be made in the usual mode of working."
On the 7th of May a Council meeting was held, when the ten per cent. was under consideration. By a majority of 15 the delegates decided in favour of the ten per cent., 112 voting for it and 97 against. This brought the dispute to an end so far as the wages were concerned.
The strike, if it could be called such, was of the most desultory kind, there being a division as to the acceptance of the ten per cent. reduction. It is generally known as the "Week's Strike"; but even the Executive were in ignorance of the time off, and sent out a slip asking the lodges to tell them "what number of days they were off, when they stopped, and when they resumed work and the reasons why they were off." The returns show that there were none off more than a week. None of them were entitled to strike pay seeing that a colliery had to be off a fortnight before they could claim. The Executive by their Minute of June 5th, 1874, said the strike commenced on May 8th and ended on the 14th.
The strike being settled generally, all the collieries commenced work except Wheatley Hill, Thornley, and Ludworth. These were in a peculiar position. For some time they had been ten-day collieries, and at Wheatley Hill the hours of stonemen, shifters, and wastemen had been six every day. When the strike ended the Executive Committee sent word out to the county that work should be resumed under the same conditions as obtained before the strike. The workmen at the three collieries claimed they should work the ten days. That position the following Minute of the Executive Committee bears out:—
"We have again had the case of Thornley, Ludworth and Wheatley Hill brought before us, and beg to give the following statement: As will be understood by all lodges, before the stop these places were working ten days under protest. After the settlement of the working days matter at our Council, the question arose between the manager and men whether these were ten or eleven day collieries, the men holding to the former, while the manager held to the latter. On Friday, May 15th, Mr Bunning telegraphed, stating that the owners still held these to be eleven-day places. We replied that they had been working ten days under protest, and that in some way or other they ought to recommence on the same conditions."
The three collieries, on the strength of the notice to resume work, corroborated by the above Minute, refused to start except as ten-day collieries. The owners offered arbitration, but conditioned it by asking for the men to work eleven days, and suspended the Joint Committee until the case was settled. The letter from Mr Bunning contained the words: "The action of the Thornley etc. men renders the resumption of the Joint Committee impossible," and asked whether the Executive were supporting them or not. The men were willing to go to arbitration, but asked to be allowed to start at the ten days. The Executive ordered them to work on the employers' terms, summoned a representative from each colliery to the Committee, and sent out large deputations to attend meetings. Still the men stood firm. On Monday, June 1st, the evicting of the men from the houses commenced. A very large contingent of "Candymen" were imported, and a force of seventy or eighty policemen, in charge of Superintendent Scott, to maintain order. There never was an occasion where better humour prevailed throughout and where there was so little need of police. It would afford a break in this dry matter-of-fact history if some of the incidents were related: how a Jew who had come to gather his fortnightly instalments wrung his hands, and, Shylock-like, cried about his "monish"; how some of the women were to carry out in arm-chairs, and one of them stuck hat pins in the Candymen, to the hilarity of all but themselves; how once in a while a "Candyman," sick of the work, broke through the crowd, and ran off, chased by the police and the cheers of the crowd; and how the people dwelt in tents for three weeks, having continuous sunshine by day and jollity by night, making a continual round of "picnicking."
We must, however, leave the pleasurable for the historical. The lodge made an attempt at Council to get strike pay on an appeal against the Committee. The merits of the case were with them, but their case was prejudiced by the temper of the delegate, Mr J. Wood. During the discussion of the question some contention rose as to Wood (who could write shorthand) taking notes. Mr Wilkinson (the treasurer) expressed himself in doubt as to Wood's honesty, and the latter struck at the treasurer on the platform—the consequence being the Council decided against, and the men were left to their own resources.
An attempt was made to settle the strike by the Rev. W. Mayor of Thornley. He called upon some of the leading men, and asked them to meet Mr Cooper, the manager, who with Mr Bunning agreed to allow the pit to resume work on the old conditions with regard to the number of days, and that the dispute should be left to the two Associations. The arrangement was come to on the Monday, and on the Tuesday the horses and ponies were sent down, and about 100 men commenced. It then transpired that Mr Cooper objected to three of the leading men, and the men alleged that there had been some reduction in prices. The result was the stoppage again. The dispute was as to the submission for the arbitration. The difference lay in this: the owners wanted the men to start as an eleven-hour colliery, and then arbitrate. The workmen were willing to start as at ten hours, and arbitrate. In the end that was accepted. The arbitrators decided that the men were right in considering their collieries ten-day collieries and refusing to resume work except as such; but they concluded that the collieries should work eleven days, "although at the same time we strongly censure the conduct of Mr Cooper, the manager, throughout the entire struggle." They further awarded that the whole expense of the arbitration should be borne by the owners, thus proving the men to be right in their contention as to starting.
We now come to the second claim for a reduction in wages. On July 17th Mr Crawford read to the Committee a resolution he had received from the employers making a claim for a reduction:
"That the Durham Coal Miners' Association, through Mr Crawford, be informed that the associated Coal Owners consider that it is necessary to reduce wages substantially and promptly. That the amount of such reduction, as well as the date of the commencement, will be considered by the owners on the 7th day of August next, and that in the meantime the Association will be ready to give their best consideration to anything the representatives of the workmen may desire to lay before it."
To this request the Executive Committee could not accede, and on 7th August the employers sent another claim for a reduction of twenty per cent. They said "that the best policy to pursue in the exigencies of the trade, and to restore the activity of the coal and iron trades, was for the men to submit to a twenty per cent. reduction." In the event of the workmen not agreeing to such a reduction the owners would be prepared to leave the whole case to the arbitration of any gentleman mutually appointed, each party being left free to produce such evidence as they may think fit and satisfactory, arrangement being made for prompt decision, and for securing the operation of the arbitrator's award from the 29th of this month.
Mr Crawford was instructed by the Executive Committee to inform the employers that, while they did not offer any opinion on the reduction, they would call the attention of the owners to the last portion of their resolution, wherein the date of the reduction was fixed, and said:
"In seeking advances we never yet fixed a date, even when coal was going up in an unparalleled manner and certainly very much more rapidly than ever it has come down. Both in March last and now you wish to fix the date in what seems to us rather an arbitrary manner. Had we in seeking advances pursued this course, you would have been more than justified in doing the same thing, but having pursued a course diametrically opposite, we fail to see the grounds of your justification for the course you are at present pursuing."
A Council meeting was held on August 22nd, when the first question discussed was the owners' application for the twenty per cent. reduction. The following resolution was carried:—
(1) We cannot see where in the Cleveland, or the Coasting, or other markets the prices of coal and coke are down sufficiently low to warrant a further reduction of wages. (2) The stacking of coal and coke may be made to have—but ought not to have—any very material effect on the workmen's wages, seeing that, if too much is being produced, we have no objection to be put on short time, or any other fair process whereby a reduction of wages can be averted.
We fail to see why the employers ought to seek arbitration. We are now in the same position which they were in during the last two and a half years. They were at that time so fully certain that trade would not give any further advance that arbitration was pointedly refused. We are now so sure that the present, as compared with past prices of coal and coke, does not warrant any further reduction, that we think arbitration is only an unnecessary waste of time and money, causing no end of annoyance without any good resulting therefrom.
This resolution was sent, accompanied by a demand for fifteen per cent. advance, to the employers, who held a meeting on 28th August, under the presidency of Mr Stobart, for the purpose of considering it and what action they should take. After considerable discussion a resolution was passed to enforce the twenty per cent. reduction and to give the men fourteen days' notice, to expire on the 19th of September, seeing that their claim and arbitration had been refused. The notices were issued in keeping with that resolve, but not to all men alike. The form of notice was as follows:—
On behalf of—— Colliery I do hereby give you notice to determine your existing hiring on the nineteenth day of September eighteen hundred and seventy-four, and that the wages and prices heretofore paid at this colliery will from that date be reduced to the rate of twenty per cent. and that if your service be continued, it must be on these terms.
In these circumstances the Executive Committee issued a circular and called a special Council. The lodges were asked to send their delegates prepared to discuss and decide upon three questions:
"1. Ought bankmen, horsekeepers, furnacemen, etc., to give in their notices?
"2. Ought collieries of men (hewers included) who have not received any notice to give in their notices?
"3. The matter of arbitration."
We will quote a portion or two of the circular. It is very serious and impressive:
"It must be clear to all that we are passing through the most important crisis which has marked the history of the present organisation on the need or otherwise of a further reduction; we here offer no opinion, that being a matter which will take the collective wisdom of the county to determine. We wish, however, to point out what seems to us to be one of two ultimatums to the present unpleasant condition of matters in the county. If a stolid and unreasoning resistance be persevered in, a strike is inevitable. We feel certain that nothing can or will prevent a stop. How long such struggle might continue it is impossible to say. But whether it might be for a longer or a shorter period an immense amount of suffering would be entailed. We want you therefore to very carefully consider the whole matter. View the entire position with an unbiased mind, not from the standpoint of mere abstract justice, but from that of probabilities or even possibilities. We are offered arbitration. If we refuse, the press and public will most assuredly say that our position is untenable. If we persistently refuse to submit the entire matter to arbitration, we must prepare to cope with the following difficulties in conducting a struggle.
"(1) The strongest combination of employers the North of England ever saw.
"(2) Stacks of coal and coke laid up in every direction of the county.
"(3) Coal and coke brought from other districts to supply what we may be short of supplying from our own heaps.
"(4) The press and public opinion would be against us."
The dispute was brought to an amicable settlement by the whole question being referred to open arbitration. By that decision the Association passed out of the era of negotiations into that of arbitration re underground wages. As that was the first step in the path of conciliation it may be useful to give in detail the proceedings. The inquirer after further information may very usefully consult the printed proceedings of the case. There were for arbitrators Mr G. Leeman and Mr D. Dale acting for the owners, and Mr L. Jones and Mr T. Burt for the workmen. The case was conducted by Mr W. Armstrong and Mr L. Wood (now Sir Lindsay Wood) on behalf of the employers. Mr W. Crawford and Mr J. Forman were for the employed. There were with these arbitrators and conductors other gentlemen, whose names we can find no record of either in the press, the owners' books, or in ours.
The first meeting was held on Tuesday, 13th October, in the Queen's Head Hotel (now the Liberal Club), Newcastle. After a long sitting the case was adjourned until the 15th, when Mr Forman on behalf of the workmen, and because there had not been sufficient time to prepare a reply to the employers' case, asked for an adjournment. Mr Crawford said they had "sat twenty-eight consecutive hours, and never moved the whole of the time." It was therefore decided to adjourn until the 16th. During the discussion Mr Crawford made the request that the owners should produce their books in order that both costs of production and the selling prices of coal might be obtained. The fourth day's proceedings was held on the 19th. The arbitrators met on the 26th in London. Failing to agree, they agreed to refer the question to the Right Hon. Russell Gurney, M.P., whom they met on the 30th in the Abbey Hotel, Malvern. On November 3rd he gave his award. Without giving the whole of the award it will be explained by a quotation from a circular sent out by Mr Crawford: "The reduction is as follows:—At present time our advances amount to 43 per cent. over 1871 prices. This by Mr Gurney's award is reduced to 30. That is a reduction of 9 per cent. on the gross wages and will take effect from Monday, November 2nd."
At that time the attention of the county was turned to the sanitary condition of the mining villages. The Committee took a return in which they asked eleven questions:
"What is the size of your best houses? What size are the rooms, and how many to a house? Size of single houses? Is there attached to your houses or on the colliery any private accommodation? Are there any channels or underground sewers to take away the dirty water and other refuse made in the houses? Are the houses damp and incompatible with health, or dry and healthy? Are there many of the members who have houses of their own? What number of double and single houses have you? Have you a good or bad supply of water and whence supplied? What is your school accommodation, national or colliery? Have you a Mechanics' Institute? Is it colliery or private property? Are there any gardens to the houses?"
On Saturday, November 7th, the owners made a claim for a reduction from all the men at bank. This was before the Executive Committee. They by resolution expressed their surprise, and their opinion that they had not been treated fairly, as the employers ought to have dealt with the classes now to be affected in the arbitration just concluded. They considered that "such a mode of procedure cannot but have an injurious effect on that good and desirable understanding which has so long existed between the two Associations." The owners gave the surface men notice to terminate their engagement on 12th December. A special Council meeting was called. The questions to be decided were—first, should the Miners' Committee act for the cokemen, seeing those men were forming an association of their own, and over two-thirds of that class had joined it? Of the other classes three questions were asked: "Ought these men to follow Russell Gurney's award? Ought the reduction to be resisted or ought arbitration to be sought?" The Council decided on Saturday, December 5th, that the Cokemen's Association meet the employers themselves, but "that the members of the Joint Committee should meet them on the banksmen, screeners, labourers, etc." The arrangement come to by the Joint Committee was:
"The banking-out men having been generally classed with the underground men, should in all cases be dealt with strictly according to the terms of Mr Gurney's award, that is, remain 30 per cent. in excess of March 1871 and it was recommended that the case of men earning less than 3s. per diem be left to the consideration of individual owners."
There are two matters not dealt with in the general statement of this year. These are the appointment of Mr Forman as permanent president on 2nd May and the appointment of the first clerk. The first was Mr A. Hall Shotton; but his stay was short, and he was succeeded by Mr W. Golightly, who was in the office for over thirty-one years.