Quick viewing(Text Mode)

At a Labour Heritage Committee Meeting in July a Member Asked

At a Labour Heritage Committee Meeting in July a Member Asked

Bulletin Summer 2015

Contents – Alfred Linnell, Labour Two years of protest prime ministers, Labour and the Government of Ireland Act, ‘Rebel occurred on November footprints’ review, Staines NUR, 13th 1887. It was the culmination of Elections in Acton two years of processions and outdoor meetings initiated by the Social Democratic Federation (SDF) in The Brick, Bloody Sunday, and protest against unemployment. It began with meetings in Dod Street, Alfred Linnell Limehouse where there were tussles John Grigg with the police. Jack Williams, the SDF parliamentary candidate in At a Trafalgar Square demonstration in Hampstead, was arrested and 1887 Alfred Linnell died as a result of imprisoned. At once, in defence of injuries received when mounted police free speech, other socialist groups, charged the crowd. A century later in radical working men’s East End clubs, November 1987 a small ceremony took and branches rallied to the place at the TUC headquarters to mark cause. Numerous marches and rallies the centenary of what had become were held in Dod Street and elsewhere. known as ‘Bloody Sunday.’ At the ceremony Labour Heritage presented a William Stead, radical editor of the small slate, later referred to as ‘the Pall Mall Gazette, and Annie Besant, brick’, with the wording ‘Alfred best known for her support of a strike Linnell 1846 – 1887’ which was to be of women at the East End Bryant and displayed at the TUC headquarters. May match factory, formed the Law and Liberty League to provide bail and Alfred Linnell was a poor man who defence services for arrested earned an uncertain living as a ‘Law demonstrators and strikers. The Writer’ - copying legal documents for League challenged abusive police solicitors. When his wife died he left practices, limitations on public his two children in the care of his sister demonstrations and the unlawful and brother-in-law who, as they had exploitation of workers. four children of their own, sent Alfred’s children to the Holborn Union Riot in the West End Workhouse in Mitcham where the oldest child died. A year after the first Dod Street protest, there was trouble in Trafalgar Square when two rival groups held demonstrations at the same time.

1

One group supported tariffs on but other groups such as the SDF and imports, a policy opposed by the mass the Socialist League became involved of the because it and it widened to include protests would increase food prices. There were against unemployment and restrictions scuffles and the police, who were on public meetings in the capital. frequently few in numbers at these demonstrations, appealed to the SDF The military were called in to prevent leaders to take their demonstration columns of marchers converging on elsewhere. They agreed to lead their Trafalgar Square. All the Thames several thousand followers to Hyde bridges were garrisoned, and most of Park. The route took them along Pall the marchers were driven back before Mall past many gentlemen’s West End they could reach the square. But one Clubs. All was orderly until members contingent from North got of the Carlton Club, perhaps influenced there. The police, on foot and on by after lunch brandies, taunted and horses, charged the crowd with batons. jeered at the motley ill-kempt crowd. 75 marchers were injured and 400 Road repairs were going on in Pall arrested. Mall. Some members of the unemployed crowd, provoked by the Death of Linnell Carlton Club gentlemen, hurled cobble stones through the club’s windows, Alfred Linnell was not there that day and a riotous attack spread to other but the following Sunday a clubs and into Piccadilly and St James considerable crowd gathered in the Street, where shop windows were square protesting against the police broken. Some took advantage of the violence of the previous week. Mr disturbance to loot a few shops. The Linnell was walking in next day several leaders of the Northumberland Avenue and went demonstration were arrested and down towards the square to see what charged with seditious conspiracy. At was going on. Once again foot and the subsequent trial the jury mounted police charged the crowd. Mr unexpectedly acquitted them. Linnell was knocked over by a charging horse and his thigh was Alarm now spread through the West shattered. By-standers carried him to End. More riots and revolution were Charing Cross Hospital in the Strand feared. The Government imposed a where he gave his name as ‘Reynolds’, ban on demonstrations in Trafalgar a name by which he was known when Square, and frequent clashes between a boy. unemployed demonstrators and the police occurred. Days passed and an old work companion went to see him. After a Bloody Sunday week the visitor’s son met Linnell’s sister in the street and told her that her The 13th November 1887 brother was in Charing Cross Hospital. demonstration was called by the She rushed there only to be told that no Metropolitan Radical Federation, a one of the name Linnell was in the campaign group attached to the Liberal hospital. She concluded that her Party which supported Irish brother was not hospitalised and said nationalism. The purpose was to so when she met her informant again. protest against the government’s He insisted and said her brother was in suppression of civil rights in Ireland, the Albert Edward Ward. She went

2

there with her young daughter and of which had been overlooked by the found him on Wednesday, November house doctor. Linnell’s character was 30th. He was in pain but the broken blackened when the police produced a thigh had been set and the doctors said witness, who swore that Linnell was so he would be well in a month. drunk the night before the Trafalgar Square events that he was incapable of “Don’t worry,” said his sister, “there’s writing out his account for work done a dear; you will soon be well again.” at a law firm. But a representative from Ada, his niece, promised to come back the firm was called and produced on the Friday. When she got there she Linnell’s neatly written account for the found that blood poisoning had killed night before the fatal Sunday. The her uncle earlier that day. There were police then explained that their horses three deaths in the hospital that Friday. were walked so quietly that it was Two bodies were sent for burial and impossible for anyone to be knocked Linnell’s was sent to the mortuary to over. It was claimed that Linnell just investigate the cause of death. But it fell over somehow and that was the wasn’t Linnell’s body that went to the cause of the injury. Other witnesses mortuary. The hospital muddled the insisted that he was knocked over by a bodies and the mistake was only police horse, and others that the broken discovered when Mrs Hann, taking one bone was caused by a horse stamping last look at her husband, found a on his thigh. stranger – Mr Linnell - in the coffin. The jury, faced with this conflicting The body was returned to the hospital evidence, returned an open verdict and where there were apologies for the the body was handed over to an cruel blunder. undertaker in Lexington Street.

The Inquest The Funeral March

News of Linnell’s death spread. The The Law and Liberty League began hospital’s house doctor, Mr Smith, said arrangements for Mr Linnell’s funeral. at first that no death had occurred William Stead stated that Mr. Linnell arising out of the disturbances in should be buried simply, but with Trafalgar Square, and that there was no every expression of sorrow and bruise whatever on the body of the sympathy for a man who had fallen as deceased. Later at the inquest at St. one of the people, on a field whereon Martin’s Vestry Hall he stated that the cause of the people was the great newspapers had called to ask if anyone issue of the battle. had died on the Sunday who had been injured in Trafalgar Square. He had The first intention was to begin the replied ‘No’, because the death was on funeral march to Bow Cemetery on a Friday and the injuries were received 18th December from the spot in in Northumberland Avenue, not Northumberland Avenue where Mr Trafalgar Square. Other witnesses, Linnell was injured. The police however, were quite clear about the banned such a gathering and, not cause of Linnell’s death. wishing to have another clash with the police, an alternative rout was taken by The coroner adjourned the inquest and the undertakers to where Aldwych ordered a fresh post mortem. A bruise meets the Strand. A large crowd was discovered, that could have been gathered, greatly increased by caused by a horse’s hoof, the existence marchers crossing Waterloo Bridge

3

from south of the river. The Strand was 100,000 people and a mile-and-a-half blocked preventing the passing of long, wended its way along the five normal traffic and there were scuffles mile route to the Bow cemetery in with the police. good order.

At the head of the cortege was the It was getting dark when the cemetery reverend Stewart Headlam, a was reached at half past four. prominent Christian Socialist, followed towards the gates was hampered by a by the hearse drawn by four horses large waiting crowd, and the gloom bearing the black coffin draped with a gathered as a small number of red flag, above which fluttered red, mourners were allowed through the green and yellow flags, emblems of gates to gather around the grave. revolution. Pallbearers included Heavy torrents of rain fell as the William Morris, Annie Besant, Reverend Headlam read the service. William Stead, Mr Cunningham- By then it was pitch dark. The Graham MP and Mr Bowling of the processionists had neglected to bring a Irish National League. Behind the lantern and the necessary light had to hearse were two coaches conveying be supplied by wax matches held Mr. Linnell’s relatives, friends and inside a tall silk hat under an umbrella. other mourners. And then, stretching back along the Strand, were the bands Mr.Tims of the Battersea Liberal and and banners of many thousands of Radical Federation spoke of the marchers from London’s Socialist and scandalous brutality and astounding Radical Clubs. cruelty of the police. William Morris expressed condolences with the The cortege set off at half past two. relatives of Mr Linnell, who he said The crush was terrific and the police, was a man of no particular party who, on endeavouring to restore some kind until a week or so ago, was only of order, were greeted with fierce known to a few. He might have lived hooting. As the procession to have a happy and beautiful life, and approached St. Pauls, the Cathedral’s it was their business to try and make afternoon bells ceased out of respect this earth a very beautiful and happy for the dead, and the bands struck up place for all. They were engaged in a the Death March while marchers and holy war to prevent their rulers making onlookers raised their hats. The this great town of London nothing procession was joined by members of more than a prison. the Hackney Working Men’s Club to which Mr Linnell belonged and the Mr Dowling of the Irish National streets were lined with masses of League and Mr Quelch of the Social spectators. Occupants of passing trams Democratic Federation called upon and omnibuses bared their heads. working people to organise, challenge, and take over the power possessed by At Ludgate Circus a number of clubs the ruling classes. were waiting to join the procession and it was there that a short fracas occurred The graveside ceremony closed with between the police and a portion of the the Death Song composed by William marchers, resulting in several people Morris. It was pitch dark and the rain being knocked about. Apart from descended in a perfect deluge when the another slight skirmish in the Mile End little band of mourners, at half past Road the procession, estimated to be of five, left the cemetery.

4

spot. So Labour Heritage have erected a stone on the path near where Mr Linnell is buried, with an inscription that Alfred Linnell, 1846 - 1887, is buried near this spot. It includes these words from William Morris.

Not one, not one, nor thousands must they slay. But one and all if they would dusk the day

The Labour Heritage brick has been set The funeral was widely reported and into the stone above the inscription. described by some newspapers as one Labour Heritage will be hosting a of the most imposing spectacles ever commemoration of Alfred Linnell, together with the Friends of Tower witnessed in the metropolis. Reports th appeared in newspapers across the Hamlets Cemetary on Saturday 5 country from the Aberdeen Journal to September 3-5 pm at Tower Hamlets the Exeter and Plymouth Gazette. cemetery. (Southern Grove, E3 4PX. There were even accounts in The nearest tube station is Mile End Australian newspapers - the South (District and Central Lines). All Australian Register and the Kerang members and friends are welcome to Times Swan Hill Gazette. attend.

The labour movement had its martyr.

The Brick

So what happened to the brick donated by Labour Heritage in 1987? Instead of being displayed on a wall at the TUC headquarters, it was put in a cupboard, until found when their archives were transferred to London Metropolitan University in the Holloway Road. The curator did some research and returned it to Labour Heritage, and the committee then considered what would be an appropriate location for the brick, in order to honour Alfred Linnell’s memory.

The Bow Cemetery is now called the Tower Hamlets Cemetery Park and the staff are aware of the burial but the grave cannot be found. The exact Photo by David Sankey place where Mr Linnell is buried is recorded, but there is no headstone and other graves have crowded out the

5

Prime Ministers in Labour’s can be made. For the purposes of Pantheon comparison my approach is to divide Archie Potts Labour’s prime ministers into two groups. Labour historian Ben Pimlott once 1. won four general described as ‘top deity’ elections and three. Both in the modern Labour Party’s men served long spells as prime pantheon. (Independent, 16 March minister. 1977) and few people would challenge 2. and this judgement. Becoming prime inherited the premiership and failed to minister of a bankrupt and exhausted retain it in a subsequent general country in 1945 Attlee successfully election. presided over the implementation of 3.Ramsay MacDonald was prime Labour’s radical programme of social minister of two minority Labour and economic reform that ushered in governments after general elections thirty years of full employment within had failed to provide an overall the framework of a and a majority for any single party. large public sector. Attlee also played a leading part in the granting of Harold Wilson and Tony Blair independence to India, Pakistan, Burma and Sri Lanka, and he was Harold Wilson seemed uniquely prominent in the creation of NATO. qualified to tackle Britain’s economic More controversially he authorised the problems when he took office as Prime building of a British atomic bomb. No Minister in 1964. Yet he failed in this other Labour prime minister can match area in spectacular fashion and his these achievements and his reputation reputation never recovered. Inheriting has grown over the years rather than a deficit from the diminished. There is little doubt that previous Conservative government he Attlee is top of the league table of chose not to devalue the pound and Labour prime ministers. But what of instead pursued deflationary policies the other Labour prime for three years before being forced by ministers:where do they fit in? market forces to devalue in 1967. One beneficial result of the need to cut Methodology public expenditure was that Britain was forced to wind up her military There have been six Labour prime commitments in the Far East. Perhaps ministers. In chronological order: Wilson’s main achievement was that Ramsay MacDonald 1924 and 1929- he kept Britain out of the Vietnam 31; Clement Attlee 1945-51; Harold War. He failed however to deal with Wilson 1964-70 and 1974-76; James the rebellious white settler regime in Callaghan 1976-79; Tony Blair 1997- Southern Rhodesia. On the domestic 2007; and Gordon Brown 2007-10. front the Wilson government passed an Drawing up a league table of Labour Equal Pay Act, legislated on racial prime ministers is fraught with discrimination and reformed the laws difficulties; there are problems of on abortion, homosexuality, and selection of sources, the need to censorship. Returning to Downing consider the context in which Street in 1974 Wilson tied up some of individual prime ministers had to the mess left by the Heath operate, and an element of subjectivity Government, skilfully steered the is always present. This said, an attempt country through a referendum on EEC

6

membership, and passed some sex Government, however, was also forced discrimination legislation before hand to borrow from the International over the premiership to James Monetary Fund and cut public Callaghan. expenditure. Labour’s income policy under Tony Blair took held until the winter of 1978 when the power with a huge majority in 1997 Callaghan government tried to extend and he inherited a buoyant economy. wage restraint for a further year. This Blair’s main achievements were to was a serious misjudgement. The result introduce to and was the so-called ‘’ Wales, and pass a Human Rights Act. when the trade unions broke ranks and He also played a major role in securing pressed for wage increases. The a peace settlement in general election held in 1979 brought and brought in a national minimum Mrs Thatcher to power. wage. His most controversial action Gordon Brown took over the was his wholehearted support for the premiership from Tony Blair in 2007. invasion of and dragging the Without doubt his finest hour was his Labour Party behind his war chariot. leading role in helping to resolve the Harold Wilson and Tony Blair are global banking crisis of 2008-9. This similar in that they promised much also showed Brown at his best in an more than they ever delivered and otherwise lacklustre period in office. disappointed many Labour supporters. At the general election of 2010 Labour Harold Wilson, however, faced lost power and was replaced by a difficult economic problems during his Conservative-Liberal Democrat premiership and never lacked critics Coalition still fresh in our memories. inside his own party. Blair, on the Both men would have done better as other hand, enjoyed the -off Prime Ministers if they had come to engendered by a world boom and his office earlier in their careers. decisions were rarely challenged by Callaghan in his autobiography (Time anyone in the Labour Party. Wilson and Chance, 1987), wished he had encountered difficulties never been given the opportunity a few years experienced by Blair and he showed earlier when he had possessed more great skill in holding his party together energy. ‘I ran out of steam’ he through a series of crises that could observed. Gordon Brown always have ripped it apart. maintained that Blair had reneged on a promise made at that famous meeting James Callaghan and Gordon in the Granita Restaurant, to step down Brown after two years in his second term of office and hand over to him. Of course James Callaghan took over from this did not happen and when Brown Harold Wilson in 1976 and faced the did succeed Blair the shine was most problem of rampant stemming definitely off New Labour. from a massive hike in oil prices. Callaghan was experienced in Ramsay MacDonald government and his previous job as an official of a white collar union stood Ramsay MacDonald became Britain’s him in good stead when he sought the first Labour prime minister in January co-operation of the trades unions in the 1924 under unusual circumstances. struggle to curb inflation. The unions The retiring Conservative Prime agreed to wage restraint in the form of Minister, , had called a a social contract. The Labour general election in December 1923 to

7

secure a mandate to impose tariffs in handling of the economic crisis and the order to protect the British economy. harm he did to the labour movement He failed to win an overall majority; MacDonald must be placed at the the Conservatives won 258 seats to bottom of any league of Labour prime Labour’s 191 with the Liberals ministers. returning 158. The Liberal leader, Herbert Asquith was clear what should Conclusion be done. The electorate had rejected protection therefore Labour as the In conclusion then we have Clement largest opposition party should be Attlee at the top and Ramsay invited by the King to form a MacDonald at the bottom of the government and this is what happened. Labour prime minister’s league but MacDonald not only became Prime what about those in between? I think Minister but also served as foreign that Harold Wilson and Tony Blair by secretary. reason of their long periods in office The first Labour government lasted and ability to win general elections nine months. Lacking a majority in the must follow Attlee, with Wilson House of Commons meant that no ranked above Blair. Wilson was prime socialist measures could be attempted. minister during tumultuous times and There were some minor improvements he led a restless Labour Party with in social benefits and a housing act was skill. Blair had a much easier passed that gave subsidies to local premiership with fewer crises to authorities to encourage the building of surmount and a tightly disciplined council houses. The Labour party at his command. James Government achieved more in its Callaghan and Gordon Brown both foreign policy. It recognised the new served three years in 10 Downing Soviet state, eased the reparations Street. For them it was a case of what burden on Weimar Germany and might have been. If they had come to MacDonald became the first Prime the premiership earlier and had a Minister to attend meetings of the longer run in office both would League of Nations. It was not a bad probably have had more substantial record for a Prime Minister at the head records to their credit. I would rate of a . Brown above Callaghan because he The same could not be said of the had a better grasp of economics. second Labour Government. In the Callaghan’s ended in general election held in May 1929 disaster and he handed over a deeply Labour won most seats but again failed divided party to his successor as to win an overall majority. Ramsay Labour leader, . MacDonald formed his second government. Unemployment in Britain The final table is as follows: was already high when Labour took office and it went rocketing up with the 1.Clement Attlee onset of the world slump later in the 2.Harold Wilson year. The Labour Government was 3.Tony Blair overwhelmed by the crisis and 4.Gordon Brown resigned, whereupon MacDonald 5.James Callaghan ditched his Labour colleagues and 6.Ramsay MacDonald. became Prime Minister of a Conservative dominated National Government. Because of his inept

8

Partition Resisted: the British British Labour Party remained resolutely Parliamentary Labour Party opposed to the partition of Ireland although, paradoxically, it had no and the Government of Ireland difficulty in accepting the Anglo-Irish Act 1920 Treaty one year later which in effect Ivan Gibbons underpinned the partition settlement in Ireland initiated by the Government of Before the First World War, the fledgling Ireland Act the previous year. British Labour Party was content to follow the Liberal government’s policy of general Labour’s policy on Ireland overall may support for home rule in Ireland. However, have oscillated frequently after the First as events in Ireland both during and World War but on one aspect of that immediately after the War saw the policy - opposition to the Lloyd George’s political initiative move away from the ’s proposal to moderate demand for Home Rule towards partition Ireland - the party was steadfast; an increasingly militant demand for a at least until the proposal became a reality. completely independent Irish state, the The party’s adamant hostility to the Labour Party was forced to reconsider its proposals contained in the Government of relationship with Irish nationalism. This Ireland Bill served to mask the shifting occurred as the Labour Party was of Labour policy on Ireland becoming a major political and electoral generally. Furthermore, that evolving force in post-war Britain. The political policy was first outlined in the debates on imperative from the Party’s perspective the Bill in the Commons and only was to portray itself as a responsible, afterwards ratified by the party’s official moderate and, above all, patriotic decision-making machinery. In effect, alternative governing party and thus it was therefore, the debate on partition in the fearful of the potential negative impact of House of Commons determined the nature too close an association with extreme Irish of Labour Party policy on Ireland. nationalism. This explains the Party’s often bewildering and erratic changes in In December 1919, the Government of policy on Ireland at various party Ireland Bill, with its proposals for two conferences in 1919 and 1920 ranging Irish parliaments and an all-Ireland federal from support for Home Rule to outright council, was presented to the Commons “self-determination” for a completely and the following February it received its independent Ireland. first reading. There had been no discussion on Ireland at the 1919 Labour Party On one aspect of its Irish policy however Conference and the Party's official the Party was adamant and united – its position remained that it was nominally opposition to the partition of Ireland for full independence and against partition. enshrined in the Government of Ireland When the Bill was formally introduced on Bill of 1920 which established Northern 25 February, Labour gave notice of an Ireland. Curiously, this aspect of Labour’s amendment, which stated that ‘ Irish policy was never discussed in the cannot assent to the second reading of a Party at large at the time the legislation Bill which would divide the Irish nation in was being debated in Parliament. All the a manner repugnant to the great majority running was made by the Parliamentary of the Irish people; which would foster and Labour Party (PLP) in the House of accentuate religious animosities between Commons as the Bill proceeded through sections of the Irish people; and which its various stages. In effect, the PLP’s would lead to no settlement of the Irish outright opposition to the Bill acted as a question. ‘ balm throughout the wider party, binding together the confusing and often Positioned uneasily between a traditional contradictory positions promulgated on the commitment to an increasingly irrelevant long-term constitutional future of Ireland Home Rule proposal and a growing and its relationship with Britain. The clamour for complete Irish self- 9

determination, the PLP announced in maintained that the solution he outlined December 1919 that it would send a was in the best interests of both Ireland parliamentary delegation to Ireland to and Britain. meet Irish political representatives, including Sinn Fein. This was to be a fact- In the same debate, John Allen Parkinson, finding trip to help prepare Labour’s the MP for Wigan, elaborated on why, opposition to the constitutional proposals even though it resolutely opposed in the Government of Ireland Bill, but it partition, the Labour Party’s definition of was also obviously an attempt to deflect ‘self-determination’ did not include accusations of apathy or disinterest in the complete separation. He stated that: Irish issue which were being increasingly heard both on the left of the British Labour The Labour Party is not, and by its Party and in the Irish Labour Party. own nature never can be, a separatist party. It is a federalist party, and far Irish in Britain from wishing to detach the Irish people from the English, it aims at For Labour, J.R. Clynes MP challenged establishing the closest possible the partitionism of the Bill on the second relations between both, and all the reading on 29 March when he argued that workers of the modern capitalised Labour opposed partition because it world.... We think there ought not to enshrined sectarianism and ignored the be two Parliaments imposed upon historic unity of both Ulster as well as that one country.... What we would like to of Ireland as a whole. Ulster’s ability to see would be for the Government to veto any decision of the proposed Council withdraw the Bill for the time being, of Ireland as well as its equal and having withdrawn the Bill, to representation on the Council with the rest consider fully, along with of Ireland, despite the disparity in representatives of the Irish nation, population both helped to ‘concede to a Dominion Home Rule. minority of the country the selection of a form of Government which it denies to a Despite the fact that it inevitably drew majority’, and were good reasons for attention to the party’s inconsistencies on Labour to oppose the bill. In his speech, Ireland, one of the main reasons Labour Clynes outlined Labour’s evolving policy MPs adopted a far more vigorous on Ireland by calling for the maximum of approach on the Government of Ireland self-government compatible with the unity Bill was because they were spurred on by of the Empire and the security of the the prospect of losing support amongst the in war-time. He also Irish in Britain. The essential predicament demanded the maximum devolution of the growing British Labour Party faced on financial and economic responsibility, Ireland was the need to present itself to the adequate safeguards for Ulster and the British electorate as a responsible, establishment of an Irish assembly to moderate and, above all, patriotic decide upon the country’s future government-in waiting while at the same constitutional and financial arrangements. time not alienating the bedrock of Irish Clynes argued that such proposals, which working-class support in Britain it he termed dominion self-government, depended upon in order to continue its would maintain Irish unity, in contrast to electoral advancement. the Government of Ireland Bill which would perpetuate division on religious Jack Jones, MP for West Ham, Silvertown, grounds. Looking to the future, Clynes was even clearer when he stated that predicted that workers in the North of Labour adamantly opposed the partition of Ireland would, in the years immediately Ireland because ‘we object to partition, we ahead, be more concerned with advances object to the setting up of two Parliaments in social and economic conditions rather in Ireland; we claim there should be only than sectarian division. Clynes, himself one.... The Labour party in is born in Lancashire of Irish parents, always opposed to any action which is going to

10

divide the people of one nation into two condition is that the Constitution will hostile factions.’ prevent Ireland from becoming a military or naval menace.... Ireland On the third reading on 11 November must be given full freedom of choice; 1920, MP stated quite that is where their self-determination frankly that: comes in. On the other hand, we recognise that an independent Ireland I do not believe that in their heart of would be a grave menace to this hearts they [the Irish people] really country, and it is self-determination want a republic, they are simply on our part to say that the peace and putting , in my opinion, their safety of this realm shall be maximum demand. The Labour safeguarded. Party does not believe in an Irish Republic. The Labour Party does not wish to see an Irish Republic Adamson argued that it was no good the established. They do not think it Prime Minister talking about self- would be good for the people of this determination in Czechoslovakia if he was country or for Ireland. not prepared to concede the same principle in Ireland. Lloyd George riposted that self- Adamson was merely repeating the determination was only for ‘the debris of strongly held view inside the the Austrian Empire not for the British Parliamentary Labour Party that, despite Empire’, and went on to say that Ireland the Scarborough Conference commitment did not know her own mind and that a to full self-determination, the leadership of Republic would be disastrous for her. the Party preferred for there to remain a Despite Adamson’s criticism of meaningful constitutional link between the government policy, his was a conditional two countries. He asked: interpretation of free and absolute ‘self- determination’ which was clearly at odds what does the Labour Party with the policy of the party as established propose?... we say, first of all the at the Scarborough Conference in the British army of occupation should be summer. The reality of the situation was withdrawn, and the coercive that Labour had few realistic counter- measures being applied to Ireland proposals beyond vague references to repealed... let the army of occupation ‘self-determination’, itself conditional and be withdrawn, and let arrangements implying everything from an independent be made at once for the calling republic, through Dominion Home Rule, together of a Constituent Assembly, to the traditionalist pre-1914 view of what elected on the basis of proportional constituted Home Rule. However, this representation by a free, equal and confusion itself accurately reflected the secret vote... let that Constituent vast range of opinions on Ireland inside Assembly draw up a Constitution for the Labour Party. Only in their opposition Ireland, on the understanding that to partition were all Labour politicians that Constitution shall be accepted (except those in Belfast who had indicated subject to two conditions. their support for partition at the Scarborough conference earlier in the Adamson went on to provide the clearest year) saying the same thing and even then exposition yet of how the Labour the increasing emphasis from 1918 leadership interpreted self-determination onwards on the need to ‘protect and this was to form the basis of the PLP’s minorities’, at least implied that position on Ireland up until the signing of consideration of partition must be one of the Anglo-Irish Treaty a year later. He the ways of achieving this end. Lloyd continued by stating that: George often criticised Labour’s vagueness on ‘self-determination’. What The first is that it affords protection did the party mean by this phrase? to the minority.... The second According to J. R. Clynes, it meant the

11

maximum of national self-government Act would have been a brilliant solution. consistent with the unity of the empire and In 1886, 1893 and 1912-14, Home Rule the safety of the UK. Obviously, the had foundered on the rock of Unionist Government of Ireland Bill with its opposition. Ironically, in 1920 the ‘Fourth reserved powers, both economic and Home Rule Bill’ satisfied Ulster but not political and most of all, its endorsement the extreme nationalists of Sinn Fein, the of partition, did not satisfy those criteria. It new masters in the south. was designed not to concede but to exclude national self-government. From the Conservative point of view, they had realised as early as 1917, that an Irish Government of Ireland Act settlement involving some kind of Home Rule was essential to the war effort in On 11 November 1920, the Bill received order to attract the into the its third reading and on 23 December the war and probably inevitable if the Empire Government of Ireland Act received royal was going to survive after the war. assent. The Act created two Parliaments Equally, it is apparent that Conservative and a Council of Ireland with 20 support for the Ulster Unionist case representatives from each Parliament and a weakened between 1913 and 1918 President of the Council nominated by the undoubtedly because, since 1916, the Lord Lieutenant of Southern Ireland. The Conservatives were the dominant partners Council could only receive or assume in the coalition government and there was further powers with the mutual authority no further need to play the Orange card in of both Parliaments. Partition could be the quest for office. Furthermore, as the terminated, theoretically at least, as soon Irish crisis intensified, it became as Irishmen agreed amongst themselves in increasingly obvious to both parties that wishing to have a single national although their short-term interests might government. It is hard to disagree with coincide, the Conservatives were Fanning’s succinct conclusion that ‘the ultimately concerned about the future Government of Ireland Act was not so welfare of the UK whereas the Ulster much a sincere attempt to settle the Irish Unionists’ overriding concern was question as a sincere attempt to settle the maintaining their own identity in Ireland. Ulster question’. After 1918, therefore, the Tory commitment to the unionists was based Undoubtedly, the passing of the more on ‘a stoical determination to honour Government of Ireland Act enabled Lloyd a debt rather than a burning desire to George to satisfy the Ulster Unionists and reward their Ulster friends’. his Conservative government allies prior to beginning negotiations with a resurgent Labour’s Policy and strident Irish nationalism. The partition solution establishing two Irish The Labour Party, however, did not have Parliaments took Ireland out of the realm any such political debts to pay. There had of British politics allowing Britain to never been a cohesive and logically withdraw from Ireland on her own terms. planned Irish policy in the Labour Party. Sovereignty would be retained by Britain For historical reasons there was a deep and ‘de jure’ but ‘de facto’ the Irish could now genuinely held emotional attachment by govern themselves and no Irishman could nearly all of the Labour Party (except in complain about domination from Belfast) to the moderate home rule Westminster. In theory, all Ireland was policies of the Irish Nationalist Party. The autonomous. It is difficult to imagine Party’s opposition to partition again another option to partition from the British reflected the Irish nationalists keenly felt point of view, if their overriding concern antagonism to any proposal which was to withdraw from Ireland without threatened the territorial integrity of coercing Ulster. If the Irish Nationalist Ireland. Consequently, the partition debate Party, rather than Sinn Fein, had been the during the progress of the Government of dominant political force in the south, the Ireland Bill provided certainty for the

12

Labour Party at a time when its own proposal for partition. Such a strategy policies on Ireland were in a state of flux. served to mask the uncertainty underneath It was experiencing increasing criticism as to what Labour policy on Ireland for merely slavishly following the actually proposed. The Daily Herald was traditional home rule policy of the Irish in no doubt about the validity of Labour’s Nationalist Party when it was obvious that position. In a valedictory editorial as the in nationalist Ireland itself mainstream Government of Ireland Bill became law it political demands had moved well beyond argued: that. The British Labour Party’s cautious constitutionalism and parliamentarianism British Labour has only two alternatives were threatened by demands for direct before it. It can acquiesce in the action and a closer identification with the Government’s methods of shame, or it extra-parliamentary nationalism of Sinn can put an end to them. It has its own Fein. The resultant evolution from ‘Home plan - clear, simple, definite, honourable Rule’ to ‘unqualified self-determination’ and immediate, to withdraw the British and then back to again to a contradictory forces from Ireland and leave to a ‘conditional self-determination’ made it Constituent Assembly of the Irish easy for Lloyd George to undermine people the settlement of their own Labour’s position by constantly probing at destinies. This is the way of peace and the vagueness and vacuity of what the honour. There is no other way. Labour Party's position on Ireland truly meant. Between 1918 and 1921, the Labour Party’s position on Ireland moved The 1921 Parliamentary Report recorded, bewilderingly from home rule to somewhat defensively, that the debate on unqualified self-determination and back to the Bill gave Labour an opportunity to dominion status. However, during the stress its alternative Irish policy and it same period the party’s outright opposition went on to detail how Adamson presented to the Government of Ireland Bill and this when it argued that: partition in 1920 provided certainty in terms of its Irish policy and served to bind The Party had decided that its all sections of the Party, however much speakers should in opposing the Bill, they may have disagreed on other aspects take the following line: That the of its Irish policy. Furthermore, the British Army of Occupation should Parliamentary Labour Party with its be withdrawn, the question of Irish opposition to partition and its set of Government should be relegated to a alternative proposals outlined in the Constituent Assembly, elected on the debates on the Government of Ireland Bill, basis of Proportional Representation, in effect determined Labour’s policy in and that the Constitution drawn up by this period and enabled it more easily to the Constituent Assembly should be accept the constitutional arrangements accepted, provided it afforded which resulted from the Anglo-Irish protection to the minority, and would Treaty the following year. prevent Ireland becoming a military or naval menace to Britain. The Dr Ivan Gibbons is Senior Lecturer in Irish policy adopted by the Party was History at St Mary’s University, shortly afterwards endorsed by the and is author of The British Irish labour Movement and complete Labour Party and the Establishment of the unity of policy between British and Irish Free State 1918-1924 (Palgrave Irish Labour was thereby achieved. Macmillan 2015).

With its overall Irish policy constantly in a state of flux and open to justifiable criticism for its lack of clarity, the Party was on much safer political ground relentlessly and consistently attacking the

13

Labour’s Lost Membership CLP’s membership figure was based Records upon the number of cards paid for. John Grigg The weakness of the system is At a Labour Heritage Committee obvious. Cards could be lost but had meeting in June a member asked to be paid for. I remember when I was where Labour Party membership a ward secretary in Brentford and records were held before 1992. The Isleworth I issued a dozen cards to one answer is they were not held centrally collector who disappeared. A CLP and it is just possible, but unlikely, that might have 500 members, but with some CLPs may have old records. cards being sent to say 10 wards and then sent out to 5 or 6 collectors in The national membership system was each ward, the job of getting back the introduced in 1991, which is why unused cards (and the money!) was an anybody who joined before that date is arduous task. Some CLPs might even recorded as joining on 01/01/91. exaggerate their membership by paying Before 1991 statistics for the number for cards that were not used. of members nationally was based upon The end result, of course, was that the number of membership cards paid membership was exaggerated. for by each CLP. Each year a CLP would order a number of cards. The CLP secretary would then arrange the Book review – Rebel collection of subscriptions and issue of Footprints: a Guide to cards to members. The local system Uncovering London’s Radical varied but one way was to send a History by David Rosenberg, number of cards to each ward Pluto Press, 2015 secretary, who would arrange for Barbara Humphries collectors to call on each member. A record was kept in each collector’s This is a collection of essays written in ‘Collectors Book’. memory of London historian Bill

Fishman, 1921-2014. It covers themes At the end of the year unused cards in London’s radical history from the were returned to Head Office with a 1830s to the 1930s, illustrating a rich payment for the used cards. For tradition of radical political and labour example if the CLP received 1,000 movement history. As well as covering cards at the beginning of the year and aspects of radical politics such as 800 were used, 200 would be returned Chartism, the strikes of the match with a payment for 800. women and dockers, the suffragettes,

and the anti-fascist struggles of the The payment to Head Office was a 1930s, these essays have extensive proportion of the subscription and the biographical interest covering the lives CLP kept the rest. I have a copy of the of, for instance, the Pankhursts, Tom 1938 Constitution and Standing Orders Mann, John Burns and George and the amount required in old money Lansbury. However what makes this by Head Office was 4½d per card. I book particularly interesting is its don’t know what the full subscription setting in the localities of London, was in 1938 but in 1950, when I making the point that the City is a joined, I vaguely remember it being collection of places with their own 6/- (six shillings per annum) Each radical traditions. Each chapter is

14

accompanied by a map and a self across London, thereby obtaining guided tour, so that the reader can use justice for the poor. it to walk around each area, connecting However the West End is not without locations of past struggles such as its radical traditions. Westminster itself Clerkenwell and Cable Street with the was the focus of political protest city as it is . particularly by the suffragettes, Early London radical history is centred fighting for the rights of women to in Clerkenwell. Visitors to Exmouth vote. Also Bloomsbury was home to Market in Clerkenwell walking along radical émigrés such as Karl Marx who Spafield Street might be interested to studied in the British Library Reading know that Spa Fields was where a Room, and his daughter Eleanor, who radical teacher, Thomas Spence lived in Soho for much of her life and organised protest meetings in 1816. played an enormous role in assisting One of his meetings was violently strikers in London, like in Silvertown, disrupted by police and he was accused West Ham. She helped to form the of high treason, a case which finally Bloomsbury Socialist Society in 1888, collapsed. He advocated universal part of the socialist revival in late 19th suffrage, egalitarianism and land century London. nationalisation. The self guided walks last no longer Several of the chapters are located in than an hour. They bring to life, (with the East End, covering the dockers’ some imagination) a radical past which strike in 1889, and lives of the tailors could have been lost with the changes of Spitalfields. One recurrent theme is which have taken place in London over the extent of immigration into London the past centuries. and how its communities, Jewish and Irish for example gave support to radical politics and the labour movement. Battersea in South London attracted a growing Irish population to work in its factories. It produced early trades union leaders such as Tom Mann and Ben Tillett. It was also to see the foundation of the Battersea Labour League with its motto “Not for me, not for you but for us”, and the which was to make an impact on the London County Council, when it was set up in 1889. The legacy of ‘Red Battersea’ continued into the 20th century, providing the most militant supporters of the 1926 General Strike in London, and the Aid for Spain Committee in the 1930s, when Nye Bevan addressed an audience at Battersea Town Hall. , one of the poorest parts of London also receives coverage with the fight of the Poplar councillors led by to equalise rates

15

George Wardle MP speaks to a ought to follow this example as was National Union of Railwaymen done in Australia and even in (NUR) meeting at Staines Germany.

(Middlesex) on Sunday th Many reforms had been affected by the evening, 30 April 1916 representation of labour over the last ten years. They now had political as Staines branch of the NUR held a well as industrial power, but must use meeting at the Co-operative Hall where it wisely. If they did not alter most MP, for Stockport things from which they suffer, the spoke on ‘Trade Unions and the War’. blame would be on their own head. If There was a fair attendance. the War meant a split in the Labour Party they would lose their power in Trades unions had shown they could the House of Commons and the Party hold themselves together even in the would suffer. Everything was in the great crisis of t he War said George melting pot, and everything depended Wardle. Great progress had been made upon them. They must win the War – since 1911. When he first joined the no half measures, because it was the union its membership was between 56- turning point in their lives and the 70,000. Now it was over 300,000. history of the world. It demanded The first big strike in 1911 marked the sacrifices. There had been a lot of talk commencement of their progress for it about equality of sacrifice – all cant brought about the consolidation of five and humbug, because there never could railwaymen’s unions, making one great be such a thing. However, we are union, which had achieved improved getting a good deal closer to it in this working conditions and brought War, than ever before. Men’s hearts employers and men together in a way were opening to each other and he never known before. hoped that after the War there would dawn a new era for the country and if Conciliation Boards were controversial this could be done it was worth making but had smoothed over a great deal of a few sacrifices now. He had had the trouble and had helped the men get privilege of going into the trenches and their grievances redressed. A stronger had seen the men who were making the union had been able to get more done most supreme sacrifice of all. Nothing for the workers in three years than had at home could equal that and the men been done in the previous thirty. were of all classes of society. There was still a lot of ‘tommy rot’ in the He dealt with the benefits unions gave army but a great deal more for their members – a death grant, free comradeship and good feeling between legal defence, an insurance policy, officers and men than before the War. unemployment pay etc. The NUR had The view was growing that the men pioneered provision for orphans by who were fighting would be given paying a widow a weekly sum until the something worth fighting for. A children grew up, keeping them out of French Deputy had told him the an institution – an illustration of how socialists of France had thrown the state should seek a solution to everything into winning the w poverty. The death of the breadwinner War and when it was over, would say was a great cause of poverty. They ‘We have won the War for you and we had spent £200,000 on this work and demand that France will do its duty by laid out £10,000 a year for it. The state every citizen and give them better lives

16

than before’. The working men of great feature but in which co-operation Britain would be able to say the same and help should predominate. To gain if they were wise. that end the workers had to be strong, be of good courage, stand to their guns, If we win the War – and I am confident and keep the unions intact and we will – it would not be because of strengthen them and they could the politicians, but because the command respect because they working men and women of England deserved it. It would be madness to let had spirit enough to do it and whoever loose the floods of anarchy, civil war was failing, they were not. They were and enmity. bearing the burdens of the War – working long hours in making He finally appealed once again, to the munitions without the protection of workers to do their part in defeating their trades union rules which they had the enemy. scrapped in order to win the War and this was the biggest sacrifice they Middlesex County Times, 16th May, could make. Their minds and efforts 1916 were concentrated on winning the War and having done this should demand a fair and reasonable opportunity of Labour Wins Elections in having full advantage of the joys and Acton 1918-1945 pleasures of life. They had a strong Barbara Humphries claim. In 1918 Acton was a new He was a believer in democracy and parliamentary division, having been human nature and if they won the War previously part of Ealing. It was they wanted a new start in which there contested by the Labour Party for the would be no internal war but co- first time. Due to the Representation operation in which the workers would of the People Act of 1918 the be recognised as the foundation of all combined electorates of Ealing and effort. The War would leave a lot of Acton had increased from 25,073 to problems. Either there would be 58,229 (43%). Part of this would have unemployment or hard times or a new been the extension of the electorate, co-operative commonwealth and a new but these divisions also had a growing social structure. population. Labour had introduced political He did not think unemployment would campaigning in a very visible way. be as serious as some supposed for Open air meetings were held on a Belgium and part of France would regular basis and candidates need rebuilding – and goodness knows campaigned on aspects of Labour Party a part of England needed rebuilding policy. Labour’s parliamentary badly (laughter) and there need be no candidate in Acton was ‘Dunsmore – lack of work. the man for Acton and the man for action!’ They had got to set themselves the task Born in Kilmarnock, Lanarkshire, of winning the War because of the Dunsmore had been a councillor for ends they were seeking – to rebuild a the Acton’s South West ward for new England, a new Scotland and still thirteen years. He set up committee more, a new Ireland, in which enmity rooms in Acton High Street and between the classes should not be a appealed to workers for funds. His

17

agent was a Mr Connolly, trades known as ‘Soap-sud island’ was home unionist born in Dublin and convert to a working class community of from Liberalism. Mr Mawby of the laundry workers, and there were large National Union of Railwaymen chaired numbers of railway workers living in the selection meeting. Dunsmore said the town .There were to be dozens of that war was the wrong way to settle new factories in North Acton and the disputes. He called for war widows and Park Royal Estate. The largest and orphans to be properly looked after. He most well known was Napiers on wanted more public works, no Acton Vale. Building aero-engines it hoarding of capital and for government was to employ thousands of workers. controls to continue. He called a So the Labour Party hoped to win the special meeting for women, who had Acton Parliamentary Division. just enfranchised. In his election However many who came into Acton address he said that liberty was not to work did not live in the town , and compatible with the private ownership although there were working class of the means of life. Land and capital communities in south Acton and east must be owned by the people, wealth Acton, parts of the division, were leafy created enjoyed by the people. He suburban streets as they are today. In supported the League of Nations, Gunnersbury homes with all mod cons Home Rule for Ireland, war pensions, were advertised for City workers to more power for local government, buy. A far cry from the overcrowded trades union freedom, building more slums of south Acton. housing, education and equality for The Acton Gazette reported a rally in women. Acton in July 1924, addressed by Public meetings were held on Saturday Marion Phillips, Labour Party evenings at the market place in Acton. Women’s organiser. She said: “Acton This came to be known as Dunsmore’s people though mainly workers had not Corner. Meetings could last for four realised that it was the workers hours or more. Dunsmore also responsibility and duty to be appealed to the voter, represented by workers - how long saying that those timorous people who would they continue to allow their regarded him as a Bolshevik should politics to be a matter of tradition take the trouble to attend his meetings. rather than common sense?” They sent Labour’s capital levy, to eliminate the to Parliament a Tory who could not war debts, would not hit the middle know what working people required.” class, only those with over £1000. However the seat was won by Mary Richardson Conservative candidate Sir Harry Brittan. He complained that his In 1924 however Labour had been meetings had been disrupted by Labour hampered by a split in its own ranks, as supporters singing ‘The Red Flag.’ former candidate, and one-time These were the results. Brittan suffragette, Mary Richardson, stood (Conservative) 11,671; Dunsmore against the official Labour candidate, (Labour ) 4,241 (29,542 electors in Herbert Baldwin. During the course of total). 1924 her supporters were engaged in an increasingly bitter and public row Industrialisation of Acton with other members of Acton Labour Party. She was shouted down at a By the 1920s Acton had become a Party meeting, which broke up amidst growing industrial area. South Acton quarrels and punches. She launched the

18

Acton Democratic Labour Party with class area with trade union support. fifty one members. Mary Richardson Labour attracted thousands at election and her supporters claimed that the meetings. In what was to be a rowdy candidate Herbert Baldwin was election campaign at times, imposed by Labour Party head- Conservative candidate, Captain quarters. He denied this and claimed Longhurst was booed and heckled at a that he had won a majority of the South Acton public meeting. When votes. The election result in October he asked ‘Is this election necessary?’, 1924 showed that she was still he was told ‘yes’ by . ‘The attracting support amongst Labour Labour Party wanted to nationalise the voters, although not enough to ’ he said.‘Why not?’ decisively split the Labour vote. They replied. ‘What have we to lose Labour’s first success in Acton came in from a Labour victory? ’ they asked. 1929 where it won the seat, taking ‘Your freedom!’ he replied. He 41% of the vote. Its vote had more appealed to the electorate to ‘vote for than doubled since 1924, an indication Longhurst and make Sparks fly’. But of how the political landscape was they did not and this was the result - changing. Women over 21 now had the Sparks (Labour) 19,590; Longhurst vote and were the majority of the (Conservative) 12,134; Halpin electorate in the division. Joe Shillaker, (Liberal) 3,172 (44,861 electors). Two a researcher and son of a policeman, streets on a housing estate in North had been selected as parliamentary Acton are named after Joe Sparks candidate. Labour held regular public today. meetings, campaigning against the Conservative’s national record on Acton Council unemployment and their local record on housing. Land had been sold to On Acton Council Labour support was speculative builders who built houses based in the long standing working that workers could not afford. This class community of South Acton. was leading to chronic overcrowding There were four wards which elected in South Acton. Other issues were councillors to the Acton Urban District pensions and school leaving age, and Council – North-West, North-East, unemployment from which, Joe said, South-West and South-East. Labour no worker was safe. A spectacular support was in the South West ward. In pre-election rally was held in the April 1919 Labour fielded 15 Globe Theatre , which attracted over candidates, 12 of whom were 3000 people. An hour before the successful. It won 50% of the council, beginning of the meeting there were a result which was favourable queues to get through the door. compared to the 1918 General Election Confident of the result, Shillaker, was result in Acton, and the best result for introduced as the first Labour MP for Labour on Acton Council in the Acton! He won by 467 votes. interwar years. In these elections less However he lost in 1931 and the seat than one sixth of the electorate voted. was not to be regained until 1945, Labour was the only party to identify when Joe Sparks, a local railwayman, its political colours. The Conservatives was the candidate. The Acton Gazette did not stand openly but supported the believed that the Conservatives could Anti-Waste Party. hold the seat as they had a better By the time Acton had been organisation but Joe Sparks disagreed, incorporated as a municipal borough in saying that Acton was now a working 1921 Labour faced tougher opposition

19

from the Anti-Waste Party and did not Bush or the leafy parts of central do nearly as well as in 1919. The Ealing. Now the Ealing Central and electorate were perhaps fatigued by the Acton constituency, it was won by frequency of elections, which the local for Labour this year by 274 Conservatives condemned as a ‘waste votes. of money’. The Acton Gazette reported Thanks to the Acton Gazette for its that ‘elections are threatened in all coverage of local politics. wards.’ Forty four competed for twenty four council seats, and Labour only retained its councillors in the South West ward. The Anti-Waste Party had become better organised in getting its vote out. It had access to motor cars to get voters to the polls, whilst the Labour Party was dependent on a donkey and a cart. After a council estate was built in East Acton, Labour was able to win a council seat in the North-East ward in 1929 by 277 votes. ‘Acton needs eight and cannot wait’ – this was Acton Labour’s campaign for the council elections in November 1930. It campaigned for more housing for the working class, abolition of slums, direct labour on municipal contracts, and land for homes not factories. However it was only to win three of these council seats and as a result claimed only nine out of twenty three seats on the council. The local Conservatives, now openly contesting the council, claimed that a Labour victory would mean higher rates. Throughout the 1930s Labour gained votes in Acton but these were not transferred into council seats. Part of the problem was the lodgers were not able to vote in council elections. In spite of failing to win the council Acton’s Labour councillors were able to pressurise the Conservative majority Election leaflet November 1923. John into acquiring more land for council Wheatley, Minister for Health in the housing, on Acton Vale for instance. first Labour Government in 1924 was After 1945 Labour was to hold the to bring in more government subsidies Acton constituency until the 1959 for housing. election, (and won again in 1964) and the council until its amalgamation (Hayes Peoples History blog) with Ealing and Southall in 1965. Boundary changes over the years have ourhistory-hayes.blogspot.com led to Acton being part of Shepherds

20

Top View