The delegates coming from the large centres of industry have no idea of the seriousness of the question from the standpoint of the agricultural labourers. If a town worker is evicted from his house he can soon get another in an adjoining street. That is not the case with the agricultural labourer. If he is evicted from his cottage he cannot get another in the same village nor in any of the five or six villages near him. I hold in my hand a copy of an agreement which an agricultural labourer has to enter into with the landlord on some estates before he takes his cottage. It reads as follows:—
"I, the undersigned, agree to hire the cottage in the Parish of................the property of....................at a rental of................and agree to give the cottage up at a week's notice should the landlord require it for any other workman.
I also agree not to keep any pigs or fowls without first obtaining permission from the landlord or his agent.
I will also act as night-watchman when required, and give any information I may have that will lead to the conviction of anyone seen poaching on the estate.
I also undertake not to harbour any of my family who may misconduct themselves in any way.
I also agree on leaving my cottage to hand over my copper and oven to the landlord or his agent and not to disturb the bricks or to remove these utensils until the landlord or his agent have refused to purchase them.
I will also undertake to live at peace with my neighbours and to lead an honest and respectable life.
I will, before admitting any of my family home, apply to the landlord or his agent for permission, giving particulars on a form provided by the landlord, their names and ages, also if married or single, and how long they want to stay."
That is the kind of agreement agricultural labourers are called upon to sign. It shows the Congress the nature of the difficulties that confront agricultural labourers. You might say the labourers are not intelligent enough to combine: they are intelligent enough if they have the freedom. Only this week, since I have been at this Congress, I have received a telegram from our solicitor who is contesting a case before the Grimston Bench on behalf of the Agricultural Labourers' Union. It relates to a labourer who obtained permission for a holiday. But when he went back to work he was discharged and received a week's notice to leave his cottage. He could not get another, and an ejectment order was applied for. Our solicitor in his telegram says the magistrates would have granted the ejectment order, but he was able to defeat it on technical grounds. This poor man's wife is within a month of her confinement, and, had the ejectment order been granted, his wife and four children would have been thrown on to the road. I ask you to do all you can to bring this matter to an issue and see if a Bill cannot be brought into Parliament giving the agricultural labourer security of tenure. Labourers who live under conditions such as I have described can neither make applications for allotments nor yet serve on local authorities. If they attempted to do such things, they are marked men and are turned out of their cottages at a week's notice. I trust that the cruel eviction business will soon become a thing of the past.
"I, the undersigned, agree to hire the cottage in the Parish of................the property of....................at a rental of................and agree to give the cottage up at a week's notice should the landlord require it for any other workman.
I also agree not to keep any pigs or fowls without first obtaining permission from the landlord or his agent.
I will also act as night-watchman when required, and give any information I may have that will lead to the conviction of anyone seen poaching on the estate.
I also undertake not to harbour any of my family who may misconduct themselves in any way.
I also agree on leaving my cottage to hand over my copper and oven to the landlord or his agent and not to disturb the bricks or to remove these utensils until the landlord or his agent have refused to purchase them.
I will also undertake to live at peace with my neighbours and to lead an honest and respectable life.
I will, before admitting any of my family home, apply to the landlord or his agent for permission, giving particulars on a form provided by the landlord, their names and ages, also if married or single, and how long they want to stay."
After some further discussion the resolution was carried unanimously, and for the first time the system under which the labourer has to hire his cottage was brought before the public. It has been a hardy annual at the Trade Union Congress ever since.
This exposure caused a tremendous sensation throughout the country. For months I was inundated with letters asking for the names of estates. Others sought for information for the purpose of writing articles in the press. It gave a wonderful impetus to the Union.
During the summer I held a number of Sunday services under the auspices of the Union. After I had addressed one of these meetings a rather exciting incident happened. When attending a meeting in a village in Norfolk a clergyman was at the meeting and expressed a wish to speak privately to me, and we adjourned to a room in the inn. On entering the room he said he had heard that I had been blaspheming the name of Jesus and demanded that I make an apology to him (the clergyman). I told him I had done nothing of the kind, and, so far as apologizing to him, he would be the last man I should apologize to. Whereupon he informed me he was a lightweight champion boxer, and if I did not there would be bloodshed, and he came towards me. I at once pushed him over and left the room and went back to the meeting and reported what had taken place. Needless to say he had very soon to leave for his own safety.
During the autumn it became evident to me that trouble was looming in the near future. Numbers of small disputes took place, which I had to deal with on my own responsibility and which caused a good deal of anxiety.
As we approached the end of the year the branches were asked to send in resolutions for the General Council. Most of them were demanding that the Executive should take up the question of an increase in wages, Saturday half-holiday and a forty-eight hour week. At the December Executive I again warned the Executive that I feared we should soon have to face trouble as I was sure the members would soon press for an increase in consequence of the rise in the cost of living. I urged them to allow me to call them together at any time to discuss the best method of grappling with the situation and to obtain the increase so long delayed.
But they seemed to think I was able to deal with the situation. The General Council of the Union was not held in 1910 until March 19th. It was held in the Central Hall, King's Lynn. The reason for the Council meeting not being held until March was the General Election in January and the County Council Election in March. This Council Meeting was attended by nearly one hundred delegates. The greatest interest was taken in the proceedings. There were many resolutions on the agenda dealing with hours of labour and wages. The resolution dealing with Saturday half-day was warmly debated and a resolution carried that the new Executive be instructed to take steps to secure the Saturday half-day, one journey all the year round and an increase of 1s. per week at once. At the close of the Council a short meeting of the new Executive was held. Mr. George Nicholls presided. I again pointed out to them the seriousness of the situation and told them I was sure there was trouble looming in the near future, and that the labourers, so far as Norfolk was concerned, would insist on an attempt being made for an increase in wage and an improvement in their working conditions. I urged them to give me more help and to allow me to bring them together at any time, even by wire if necessary; but this they refused and held that I was quite able to deal with any dispute that might arise without calling the committee together. The fact was that, while I had an Executive who were able and earnest and anxious to do their best to build up the Union, they were inexperienced so far as Trade Unionism was concerned. They were always anxious to keep working expenses down. At the committee the night before the Council the Treasurer, Mr. Richard Winfrey, wrote complaining about the increased expenditure during the year for organizing work, although we had saved during the year 1909 £503 11s. 8½d. and had only spent £771 9s. 9½d. out of a total income of £1,275 1s. 6d. This expenditure was for lock-out pay, postages and rent of rooms. Salaries paid during the year were for my assistant secretary, Miss Pike, and myself £91; divided as follows: Miss Pike 12s. per week, £31 4s.; myself £1 3s. per week, £59 16s.; my assistant organizer, Mr. Thomas Thacker, £1 5s. per week, £65. Total salaries for the three of us £156. Yet the Treasurer, in his anxiety to save money, thought this was too high an expenditure. Probably as an economist he was right, but no one can say that those who did the work were overpaid. I left the Executive and the General Council on March 19, 1910, with a very heavy heart, for I could see by the temper of the men that they were determined within a very short time to press for an improvement in their conditions of living and in my judgement they were justified. In fact, it was long overdue, for the cost of living was rapidly rising, and I also knew that the farmers, as they had done in the days of the other Union, would fight this honest desire on the part of the labourers to its bitter end. The saddest thing for me was I could not get my Executive to see it and they left me to face it single-handed. But I set to work to prepare for the inevitable whenever it did come. I was determined to put my back against the wall and stand by the men, and at the same time to do all I could, whenever the trouble did arise, to bring the two sides together.
I had not long to wait. On April 5th I received a letter from Mr. Harvey, the secretary of the Trunch Branch, informing me that his members objected to working ten hours a day unless they received a rise of 1s. per week, a not very extravagant demand. I saw at once that the trouble I had for so long tried to impress upon my Executive had arrived, in fact I felt convinced the farmers were anxious to try their strength. On receipt of the letter I at once wrote to the branch secretary, instructing him to call a special meeting of his members for April 11th and at the same time telling him that no action must be taken until I had met them and obtained full particulars and laid them before the Executive, for in spite of what the Executive had done I was determined I would not take on my shoulders the responsibility of a strike without the Executive being called together to decide it and take their share of responsibility. I received no further information during the week, and I expected nothing would take place until I had an opportunity of meeting the men and discussing the matter with them. But to my surprise on Monday April 11th I saw in the Daily Press that the men had struck work. Altogether thirty men were affected. It appears that the farmers had forced a lock-out by refusing to withdraw the notice until the men had time to meet me and discuss the matter with them. I was, however, determined to prevent an open rupture if possible. On Monday April 11th I attended the Erpingham Board of Guardians, of which the Secretary of the Farmers' Federation was deputy clerk. During the day we had an interview, and I promised that if he would prevent the importation of Federation labour I would try and persuade the men to go back to work until representatives of the two organizations could meet and come to some arrangement, he undertaking to persuade the farmers to reinstate all the men without prejudice. This he did. I, with Mr. Robert Green, Mr. W. Codling and Mr. Herbert Day, met the men at Trunch in the evening and thoroughly discussed the cause of the dispute with them. The facts were as follows: In March, as was the custom, the farmers requested the men to work ten hours a day. This the men agreed to on condition that the employers would give them an increase of 1s. per week. This the employers refused to do and gave the men a week's notice to leave unless they worked the ten hours, the men accepting the notice, which expired on April 8th. I advised the men to go back to work until the committee could meet and some arrangement could be made in reference to their hours of labour and conditions of work. This the Knapton men agreed to do, and on Tuesday morning I received a report that the Knapton men had gone back to work on a nine-hour day. I at once wrote to Mr. J. T. Willis the following letter, which will show how anxious I was to avoid a dispute and to meet the farmers, which I regret to say the farmers for years refused to do.