Chapter M: Thompson (7)

Thus ended one of the most memorable strikes in this or any other country, not on account of its length, but the circumstances which were connected with it. The workmen were poor in funds at the start, and the help (although generous from some quarters) was small per individual; the total benefit for the three months did not exceed 25s. each full member. With these poor resources and prospects they entered upon what was felt would be a strike of a very determined kind--this, too, with the minimum amount of friction. The only event of much importance happened at Castle Eden. The disturbance took place on May 7th. It arose in reference to a man named Stogdale, who would not abstain from working during the strike. Four of the workmen at Castle Eden were tried for intimidation. Their names were Michael Forbes, W. R. Robbins, T. Jones, and T. H. Cann. They were tried at the Durham Assizes in July 1892, before Judge Day. They were tried under the Intimidation Act. The judge summed up in a very strong manner against all the men except Robbins, who was discharged, but the other three were sent to prison. The judge said they had been found guilty by the jury of the offence with which they were charged--namely, with the object of preventing a certain person from pursuing his legal occupation "you in a disorderly manner, with other people, followed him along the road." After making a long speech in a similar strain, to show how beneficent the law was in his opinion and what a trio of desperadoes they were, he sentenced Forbes to a month, Jones to six weeks, and Cann, because the judge thought he was the ringleader, to two months.

THE AFTERMATH OF THE STRIKE

If the strike was unique in its endurance and order it was none the less important in its lessons. In it, as in 1879, was seen the result that followed the lack of confidence. A strike is the harvest field of the agitator, who cares not what is destroyed so long as he prospers. What would have been the gain to the individual member and to the Association if the resolve taken in the last few weeks had been taken before the tools were brought to bank? The funds, such as they were, would have been kept intact instead of being wasted. The great loss in individual income would have been avoided; in that respect the savings banks and co-operative societies (which in many cases are the poor man's bank) could have told a tale of hardly saved stores used up which had been kept for a "rainy day" of unavoidable troubles. The unnecessary and destructive friction which is sure to arise in these matters, no matter how peaceably the struggle be conducted, would have been avoided. Two great bodies, such as the two great Associations in Durham, are two great armies, and in the struggle and strivings anger will arise, and regrettable things will be said in the heat of the moment. These have a more far-reaching effect than people are apt to credit.

Then the loss in wages. This was twofold. There was the three months' irredeemable loss and there was the lessening of the reduction. It was admitted on all hands that less than the ten per cent. would have kept the pits working if the Federation Board had been trusted with power to settle, even up to the eve of the strike. In saying this there is no intention of measuring the result of a strike by the money loss or gain. The world would not have been so far as it is in the path of reform and better life if the forlorn hopes of labour had not been fought, but it would be a piece of false logic if we were to infer that strikes should, therefore, be entered upon at all times. And certainly no one who in 1892 was able to appreciate the situation then would say it was one of those necessities of our industrial life. It was far from that; the gain would have been greater by the avoidance of the quarrel. If in writing our history this is emphasised, it is not in the spirit of reflection, but rather that we may learn wisdom; for in these matters it cries aloud in the street, and we can from a remembrance of such events escape the like evils. If this be done, then the strike of that day will be useful in the greatest degree to those of us who are active in this. Using Longfellow's figure, it is part of our dead selves, of which we can make a ladder, by which we can rise to higher things.

Another part of the aftermath was the burden which was thrown upon the funds. This was twofold. There were the men who could not get started, in the first instance, because of the state some of the pits were in; and second, because of the dislocation of trade, which was sure to follow a stoppage of work for three months. Business connections are liable to break, and the difficulty is to heal them again. The consequence was that there were men out of work for a long time after the actual strike was settled, and these were to maintain for a considerable time, many of them so long that they had to be transferred to the Relief Fund. The money paid to them was the outcome of a levy, which pressed heavily on those at work.

Then there was another burden, the result of the strike, but which was not any portion of the obligations of rule, the payment of the back rent of those who were living in rented houses. There was one peculiar and pleasing feature in connection with that strike, as with that of 1879, there was no interference with the men who were living in the colliery houses. There was in one or two places some little talk of a rent obligation from such men, but it came to nothing. Perhaps it was never intended that it should. This much it is our duty to state, to the credit of the employers: the men who were in battle with them were allowed to live in their houses, and were not prevented from gathering coal wherever such was lying about. To the men who were in rented houses the case was vastly different. Every week off work added to their debt, which they were bound to pay when they resumed work. With a spirit of generosity which is not restricted the whole of the members recognised the debt of those men as belonging to the whole county, and resolved to pay a levy for the purpose of paying the back rent. The resolution was carried at the Council meeting on June 18th, 1892:

"That a levy of 3d. per full member and 1½d. per half member
throughout the county be made to help to pay the house rent of the
members living in rented houses."

At the same meeting the present (1906) Relief Fund was formed, to support men who were out of work. The system adopted in paying rent was to cavil the collieries, and pay them as they were drawn, with this provision, that if any colliery were drawn, but had not paid the levy, no rent was allowed until the levy was paid.

THE EIGHT HOURS AGAIN

The only remaining subject in 1892 was the ballot on the legal eight hours. We have noted previously how and when this was first introduced, with some plain advice given by Mr Crawford--advice which has never been shown to be wrong. It was decided at the Council meeting held on August 13th "that the county be balloted for and against the eight hours." On September 21st the Committee took the ballot, and issued a circular setting forth their views on the subject. As we have now (1906) reached a crucial stage in the discussion, it will be useful to place on record what the Committee of that date thought of the question and the difficulties it involved. In their opinion there were two modes of procedure by which the hours of labour might be shortened: legal interference and Trades Union effort. The latter was the one they had adopted, and it had been successful. No man could think they were against short hours; any opportunity to shorten them would be welcomed. They referred the members to the action in 1890: how they had given up a claim for ten per cent. and accepted a shorter day. "We are not now to set up a show of weakness, and sacrifice our manhood and independence, by handing ourselves over to the supervision and control of the House of Commons, which is not acquainted with the peculiarities of our occupation."

If it were the function of the State to fix hours of labour, was it not logically its function to fix the wages of the workman? "It is said that some of the organisations are weak, and therefore the State should protect." The reply was: "Where weak organisations exist low wages are found. It is therefore necessary for the State to fix the amount of wages men should be paid, for men require bread as well as hours." They then turned to the difficulty.

EIGHT HOURS

Those who favour legal eight hours must consider how it would work.
There would be serious alteration needed in our present mode of
working. We must either have two shifts of 8 hours, making 16 hours'
coal drawing and 8 hours' shifts, increasing the hours of hewers by 1
to 1½ hours per diem, and deputies half hour per day. This would
increase the output, and consequently the price of coal, and
necessarily the wages of all men. The other alternative is an 8
hours' shift for all men and boys, which would throw into the labour
market thousands of men. Consequently, competition amongst ourselves
such as we experienced in '76 and '77 would arise, and thus we would
have a repetition of the hardships we underwent in those disastrous
times. Much is made of the hours of boys; these we will shorten at
the earliest opportunity. Under our present system, and taking a
number of years, we work less than we should do under eight hours by
law.

We therefore strongly urge on you to vote to a man against any
Parliament fixing the hours of labour, as in our opinion it would be
injurious to the working classes generally, and to ourselves in
particular. Do not be led away by the idea that the short hours we
have obtained for the hewers will be maintained. The request is eight
hours from bank to bank for all and every man who works down the pit.
To this, it may be said, it is a maximum number of hours, and that,
therefore, some might be allowed to work less. That will depend upon
the arrangement. If the employers get the sanction of the law, and
they require us to work eight hours, we shall be expected to so work.

There is another point which demands consideration. It is a question
of wages. Let us suppose the Act passed, and those who work ten hours
(both below and above ground) were reduced to eight, how much should
the wages be reduced? If we shorten the hours by negotiation, it will
be done gradually, and wages could be arranged.

The result of the ballot was: for parliamentary eight hours, 12,684; against it, 28,217.

1893

The Wages Board--The Miners' Federation

THE WAGES BOARD

During the negotiations for a settlement of the strike in 1892 the employers laid emphasis upon what they designated the Wages Board, but which afterwards was known as the Conciliation Board. Their idea (commendable in every point) was to bring the parties closer together, and avoid the recurrence of the stoppage, which they felt (as all must feel) had been a disaster to the whole of them. The question rested over until the beginning of the year, when the owners made application for a reduction in wages, and at the same time asked that the formation of the Board might be taken into consideration. The meeting took place, and on February 27th the Executive Committee issued a circular, putting the whole position before the members. The miners at the time were in a complicated position, being connected with the Durham Federation, and they had a short time before become members of the Miners' Federation of Great Britain. Under Rule 20 that Federation claimed to have control of the wages disputes in all the districts identified with them. In order that the position may be properly understood we will insert the rule.

20. That whenever any county, federation, or district is attacked on
the wage question, or any action taken by a general conference, all
members connected with the Society shall tender a notice to terminate
their contracts, if approved by a conference called to consider the
advisability of such action being taken.

The application of that rule to Durham, in the situation it was in, would have been to leave the whole matter in the hands of the Miners' Federation, which would have taken full charge of the question, and have told the Durham Association what they must do--whether to accept or reject. The complication arose from the fact that they were members of the home Federation as well, and there would be confusion if two bodies, one in the county and the other at a distance, were to have supervision. It was impossible to go on in that state. One body was on the spot, and knew the whole bearings of the case; the other was at a distance, and therefore bound to be in comparative ignorance of the facts of the situation.

The Executive Committee felt they were compelled to put the position clearly before the Federation Board and the county, and inform them they were members of the Miners' Federation. In addition, they resolved to call a special Council, and place before it the plain issue. "Let us state the position to you," they said. "Prior to our becoming members of the Federation of Great Britain we acted on all general and wage questions with the Durham Federation Board. Our action was a whole one with the cokemen, mechanics, and enginemen, the last strike being the most recent and clearest illustration of that. You will remember with what loyalty the four sections worked together on that occasion."

If they were resolved to remain members of the Miners' Federation, and accept Rule 20, they must prepare for leaving the county Federation. That would result in sectional action in Durham, for the other sections would naturally seek to make the best of themselves they could. It was not reasonable to ask them to wait until the Miners' Federation had decided, as per Rule 20, for Durham to strike, and then ask the cokemen, mechanics, and enginemen to join in it. There was needed some definiteness on the point, and the Council would be asked to decide two questions: First, "Shall it be settled by the Federation of Great Britain?" Second, "Shall it be settled by the Durham Federation Board and the united Committees?" At the Council held on March 6th the decision was in favour of the latter question.

In accordance with that resolution the united Committees met the owners on March 13th, and asked them to reduce their demand for ten per cent. to five, and they (the Committee) would at once accept it. The employers accepted the offer, the following being their resolution:--

The Durham Coal Owners' Wages Committee feels the responsibility of
accepting a less reduction than the 10 per cent. claimed, because
upon an adequate reduction really depends the extent of employment
that can be afforded. Whilst, therefore, the owners' judgment is that
the true interest of both parties lies in at once bringing into
operation a reduction of at least 10 per cent., the owners, desiring
to show a spirit of conciliation, accept the Federation Board's offer
to submit to a reduction of 5 per cent., to come into operation from
the next pay of each colliery; but in doing so the owners feel it
their duty to point out that so small a reduction as 5 per cent.
falls far short of meeting the urgent necessities of the trade, and
can therefore be regarded only as a temporary settlement.

This reduction brought the percentage above the standard down to twenty. But the employers were not satisfied; they pressed upon the Board the formation of a Wages Board. On May 27th Mr Guthrie wrote to Mr Patterson as follows:--

I am directed by the Durham Coal Owners' Association to press
strongly upon you the honourable obligation we come under to the
Bishop of Durham, and to each other, to endeavour to establish a
Wages Board which would secure by conciliation or arbitration the
pacific settlement of all questions outside the jurisdiction of the
Joint Committee. That honourable obligation has been more than once
reaffirmed by your Federation Board, but no steps have been mutually
taken to give effect to it, and my Association feels that such steps
should not be longer delayed, and therefore instructs me to ask your
Board to meet the Owners' Committee in order to advance the matter.

The members of the Federation Board were eager, as individuals, to come to an arrangement, but were not sure how the membership would receive it. It was a new but necessary departure in an industry such as the Durham coal trade, but in order that it might be acceptable they were desirous that some scheme (beyond a mere name) should be outlined at least, and placed before the various sections for consideration. They asked the owners, therefore, for certain information:

"(1) The allocation of the 3s. 10d. basis price of coal under the
following heads:--wages, salaries, material, royalties, and profits.
(2) The proportion of coal required to make a ton of coke in 1893 as
compared with 1877. (3) The cost of producing a ton of coke in 1893
as compared with the same in 1877. (4) A statement setting forth the
various objects to which the 2d. per ton was allocated. (5) A
statement showing the percentage of steam coal, gas coal, household
coal, manufacturing coal, and coal converted into coke. (6) The
average lengths of contracts, with the periods when they are
ordinarily made."

A reply to these questions was received on December 7th. This was in conjunction with an application for an advance made by the Federation Board. They were informed that the Owners' Committee was willing to meet and discuss the question at the same meeting when the proposed Wages Board was considered. In reference to the list of questions the letter contained the following:--

"The meaning of some of your questions does not seem clear, and
generally my Committee failed to understand how they bear on the
expediency or otherwise of forming the proposed Board, or arise prior
to its establishment, but the Committee accepts your suggestion that
a meeting should be held to discuss your communication."

The meeting was held on December 19th. Nothing was done in relation to the Wages Board, but an arrangement was made with respect to the advance. The Owners' Committee were convinced that the tendency of prices was downward. These had been somewhat higher during the strike in the Midlands, but the effect of that was passing away, and they had very grave reasons to doubt whether the first quarter in 1894 would justify the rate of wages then paid. They had given a temporary advance in October for six pays only, and they were prepared to make that permanent, and bring the wages to twenty-five and twenty-two per cent. respectively above basis rates.

DURHAM AND THE MINERS' FEDERATION

In order that we may make the chronology of our history as close and sequential as possible, we will postpone the Wages Board until 1894, and take up a subject which is within the year we are dealing with. In the autumn of 1892 Durham decided to join the Miners' Federation of Great Britain. The membership continued without any difference (except that arising from the eight hours, and the case of the reduction in Durham mentioned above) until the month of July 1893, when a demand was made upon the Miners' Federation for a reduction of twenty-five per cent. In connection therewith a conference was held in Birmingham (the proverbial Hen and Chickens' Conference) to consider the situation. Two delegates were sent from Durham (Mr J. Johnson and Mr J. Wilson). It was found that in some districts organisation was in a very poor condition. The delegates from Durham were sent to move the whole question be referred to arbitration, but when they brought it forward as the best mode of procedure, they were prevented for some time, but finally were permitted, with the result that, by a majority of four to one, they were outvoted. A resolution was carried pledging all the districts within the Federation area to give in notices. If they had suffered reductions within two years, then they had to apply for an advance equal to the amount lost, without regard to the state of trade or any other consideration. The absolute order was to give in notices, the aim being to bring all into the struggle which was impending, and these had to be given within a fortnight. When these proceedings were reported to the county a circular was sent out by the Executive Committee, in which they commented upon the situation, and asked the members what should be done. They said there were two questions for them to decide upon--first, the position in the south; and second, the demand they had to make for fifteen per cent. advance, as per the Birmingham resolution. These could have been sent out in a bald form, but it was their duty to give the county guidance, for if a Committee be appointed for anything at all, it is to watch, warn, and guide the members of the organisation. There could be no doubt but that Durham was in favour of arbitration, for the last vote taken on the instructions to the delegates proved that. This was refused, and instead they were ordered to make a demand for fifteen per cent. advance. The question which they must answer first was: Is trade favourable for such a demand? Unless trade is prosperous now, could they expect to succeed in such a claim? What support could they get? Their own funds were gone entirely. If the Federation strike took place, then there was no source of income anywhere.

There were at that moment 5000 men out of work, some of whom had never started since the late strike. The small support these men had been receiving would be cut off. They would have to commence a strike, not in comparative, but absolute poverty. Where, then, was the hope?

But suppose notice was not given in for an advance, then Durham must give in notice to terminate their engagement when they had no dispute with their employers. If they were asked "what they were striking about" what answer could be given, except the following:--"Nothing whatever in our own county; we have no difference." Further, if the employers were to offer a ten per cent. advance, it could not be taken without the leave of the Federation. Neither could they accept arbitration, for they had been told the No. 20 Rule of the Federation would not admit of it. Therefore they must strike, or be expelled from the Federation. But, said the Committee, "much as we desire national federation, and may regret our expulsion from that body, we cannot urge you to a course that would in our opinion be disastrous."

The questions involved were then placed before a special Council, when it was decided to ask for an advance of fifteen per cent., but that they would not join the Miners' Federation in the strike. The Council likewise resolved to ask the cokemen, mechanics, and enginemen to join them in their demand for the fifteen per cent. If not, then the Miners' Executive should apply themselves. The Federation Board considered the decision of the miners. They regretted the circumstances which had led to the great dilemma in which they were found, but, having a desire to keep the solidity of the Board, they would accede to the request, and meet the owners, but if it were refused, it would be desirable to refer the question to their respective sections for further instructions, and at the same time they would ask the united Committees to accompany the Board. The owners could not accede to the request, and it was necessary that the will of the members should be ascertained by the miners. This was the position: they had been ordered by the Birmingham conference to make a demand for fifteen per cent., and if not conceded, to give in their notices. None of the other sections had received the same orders. The questions were: Should there be a strike to force the demand, or should they work on? But before that stage was reached, it was necessary that they should ascertain whether the ballot should be the whole of the Durham Federation, or simply the miners. The voting was: for the whole Federation Board, 267; for the miners' vote alone to decide, 167. It was then found that the other sections could not join the ballot until they had consulted their members, and the Executive Committee determined to take a ballot of their members alone. The result of the ballot was: for a strike, 20,782; against, 19,704. The rule, therefore, was against a strike. The consequence of that vote was to place Durham in direct conflict with the Miners' Federation. That body had a conference arranged for August 22nd in London. Messrs Johnson and Wilson were sent to it by a nearly unanimous vote. The first business of the conference was to consider the action of Durham, and the following resolution was moved and carried with great unanimity:--

That we, the representatives of this Federation, cannot allow the
Durham delegates to sit in this conference, seeing that this district
through its officials has not carried out the resolution of the
Birmingham conference.

There are two very notable things in the resolution and its setting. Durham was expelled from the Federation, and the officials of that organisation were charged with preventing the carrying out of the Birmingham resolution. The first of these is very clear, for on that point the motion is specific; but it will be seen the second is not correct when we consider the two votes recorded above--the first placing it in the hands of the Federation Board and the second by a ballot being against the strike. This is a history, and not a record of any man's opinion. It is necessary that the state of things that existed should be recorded, not a mere theory as to how things should be. The history would be incomplete if we were not to follow the sequence a little further. No sooner had the expulsion taken place than there was an introduction of speakers from the Miners' Federation, who came with the avowed object of trying to induce the county to continue its membership. The only complete illustration of that circumstance would be for a man to kick another out of his house, and the next minute go himself, or send some of his relations, to ask the man to come in again, doing his best to show that he who was kicked out was the offender, and ought to feel thankful for the usage he had received, and to supplicate to be taken in again. It was a curious mode of procedure, to say the least, and, most surprising of all, they were assisted by some of the people in the county, who did not feel the slightest ignobleness in the treatment they had received by the expulsion.

1894-95

The Conciliation Board--Lord Davey's Arbitration

The formation of a Conciliation Board was again brought forward by a request from Bishop Westcott to the Federation Board asking them to meet him for the purpose of discussing the subject. The Board acceded to his request, but did not appoint a definite deputation except the four secretaries, leaving any others to join them who thought proper. The result of the interview was the calling of the four Committees to discuss the proposal. The decision of the Miners' Council on March 10th was:

That the Committee meet the owners and discuss the advisability of
forming a joint Board for fixing the correct selling price of coal,
and the other sections of the Federation (county) be asked to join
the negotiations and report to the county; that there be a
Conciliation Board formed, to consist of members from the owners on
the one part and members of the Durham Federation Board on the other
part. The said Board shall be formed of equal representatives of the
before-named parties, who shall meet on terms of absolute equality.

This resolution was brought before the Federation Board, when it was found that the other three sections had not been instructed by their members, and it was resolved that the question be deferred until "they had an opportunity of bringing the matter before their Associations, and that the Board recommend the acceptance of the principle for their adoption, and the four secretaries meet and draw up a code of rules for the guidance of the Conciliation Board." A difficulty arose from a resolution passed by the Cokemen's Association.

Dr R. S. Watson had given an award in a cokeman's case shortly before, which in the opinion of the cokemen was not being carried out by the owners, and therefore, while they were in favour of the principle of conciliation, they decided not to take any part in the formation until the owners brought the award into practical operation. The Federation Board regretted the action of the cokemen, as in their opinion "such a Board would be the most effective means of bringing a full recognition of that award. As, however, the other three sections were in favour of proceeding with the formation of the Board, we ask the employers for an early meeting, and we would urge upon the cokemen to reconsider their resolution of March 31st, and give their representatives power to proceed with us in that formation."

The owners were desirous that the Board should join them in meeting the Bishop, but they were informed that a previous understanding had been come to, by which it was arranged that each side should meet him separately, and then the joint meeting should take place. They had carried out their part of the bargain, and were ready to meet jointly as soon as his lordship should ask them, as they were very wishful not to throw any obstacle in the way of the formation of the Board. On July 27th the formalities were settled, and the rules were left to the four secretaries, with instructions to draw up a circular recommending such rules to the members.

PROPOSED CONCILIATION BOARD

Gentlemen,--We hereby desire your attention and consideration to the
rules of the "Proposed Conciliation Board," which you instructed us
to form. We have always told you that, however carefully we might
draft such rules, the acceptance, amendment, or rejection thereof is
with you. We were proud to receive the commission of the duty, and we
place before you the result of our work, and are hopeful that great
benefits will accrue to the trade of the county if these rules are
adopted. We do not claim perfection for them, but we do assert that
they are in advance of any method ever arranged here for the
settlement of disputes.

We will not trouble you by any lengthy statement by way of urging you
to accept the rules, for in our opinion their fitness is clear, but
we will in as brief a manner as possible draw your attention to three
of their leading features or principles. First, the scope of the
operations of the Board; second, its duration; and third, the
machinery by which it arrives at its decisions.

The scope of the Board is set forth under the headings of "Objects."
We do not quote those objects, but ask you to refer to and consider
them carefully. They are clear in their intention and comprehension.
What can be more interesting and important to us than the prevention
of disputes? We speak for you, as well as ourselves, and say we
desire them not, and welcome any mode of settlement which will
minimise friction, and help both employers and employed to avoid any
irritating action, while it does not interfere with the right of and
justice to either party. You will observe that the Board is intended
to be _more than a Wages Board_. It will take into its cognisance and
decision any questions which may arise and for which the Joint
Committee rules do not provide.

You know as well as we do the numerous cases that arise which have no
standing at the Joint Committee, and you will, therefore, easily
recognise the value and importance of any tribunal which will deal
with such matters in a ready and expeditious manner. There is no need
to enumerate those questions. We hope you will not merely glance at
the latter portion of the "Objects," but give it your careful
attention.

The duration is fixed by rule three. The limit is 1895, and,
therefore, if the rules should fail to meet our views, we can
terminate the existence of the Board in less than a year and a half
from now, which is a short time in the history of our industrial
relations. A shorter time than this will not give us the opportunity
of testing the usefulness of the arrangement, neither is it long
enough to allow any serious evil to arise therefrom.

The machinery or mode of operation is contained in rule four and
subsequent rules. If you examine these rules you will see, that while
they provide for the appointment of an umpire (which is necessary),
yet his services are not to be called in until the Board have tried
to settle by negotiation and conciliation. We recommend to your
special notice the main features of this portion of the rules. These
are the provisions for the play of conciliation and mutual
confidence. Anything that will beget a feeling of trust and
mutuality, that will remove the desire to overreach and withhold on
the one hand, and of suspicion and doubt on the other, should be
welcomed and tried, and if possible strengthened.

There were a number of suggested objects and provisions sent in, which were afterwards commented upon by the united Committees. Amongst these was a minimum wage. The Committees, in relation to that question, drew attention to the period between 1877-79, when, in little more than a year and a half, the miners spent £23,000 in the maintenance of men out of work; that, so severe was the pressure, they were compelled to abolish the Relief Fund; that there were collieries where the men asked to be allowed to work at twenty per cent. below the minimum; and that the actual average went down to nearly 6d. per day below the minimum. The second suggestion was "a voice in the selling price of coals." This, the Committees thought, was a very good ideal, but it was yet a great way off. It implied more mutuality than was in existence, and it was a state which must evolve, rather than be fixed arbitrarily. "The voting to be by ballot at the Board meetings." This was thought to be unbusiness-like, as secret voting was a strange thing for a business meeting. Then it was thought by some lodges that the question of sacrificed men, and arranging for all men to be in the Associations, were matters to come within the purview of the Board, but it was found that they were not compatible with its objects. The rules as framed were not perfect, but were far in advance of any to be found in the country. "Many other districts and trades have adopted the principle, but we venture to say that in no instance has a Conciliation Board been formed which, for breadth of scope in its operation and dealing with questions that can arise, is in any way equal to that proposed for this county. We have had the opportunity of studying the rules of all the Boards already formed, we have watched the work of those, and we unhesitatingly declare that in no single instance have such equitable rules been found."

When these views were put before the four sections they were accepted by the other three, but the miners hesitated. The Executive pointed out to them that by a Council resolution the power had been given to the Board to arrange rules and conditions, and therefore theirs was an anomalous position for them to take up by their objection. Under the circumstances they had resolved to call a special Council, in order that the matter might be fully considered. They were confident that if the common good were the aim, and all were imbued by that idea, the Conciliation Board would be formed on the lines suggested by the united Committees. The result of the Council was the acceptance of the proposed constitution, with the alteration of the number of members from fifteen to eighteen on each side, and the owners were informed that the Federation Board was ready to meet and sign the rules. The rules were signed on the 18th of February 1895.

There is no need to insert the rules here, as they can at all times be seen in the office, if any person feels desirous of doing so. The election of the first members took place on the 12th February 1895, the following persons being elected:--

J. Wilson.
J. Johnson.
J. Forman.
W. H. Patterson.
T. H. Cann.
W. Golightly.
S. Galbraith.
W. House.
H. Jemison.

At the first meeting of the Conciliation Board the employers asked for a reduction of wages. Many people thought they were in a hurry. Such a conclusion was hardly justifiable when we remember that they had been pressing for a reduction for some time, and the delay had arisen from the length of time taken in the negotiations to establish the Board.

The employers felt themselves injured by the delay, and therefore took the first opportunity of having their claim put forward and settled. The Federation Board in their circular on the situation acknowledged that, for they said:

We cannot but regret that the first meeting of the Board should have
been convened to consider a reduction of wages, yet we feel confident
that, however distasteful and unpleasant it may be to submit to a
fall in percentage, all who have observed the condition of trade,
taken note of the prices prevailing generally, and the serious
lessening of the number of hands, during the past six months, could
not be otherwise than prepared for a reduction in the rates of wages
which were got when the condition of trade was different and prices
higher.

While the Board were prepared for a demand for a reduction they were not prepared for the amount asked. The demand was for fifteen per cent., which would bring the wages down to a point to which the scale of 1889 would have brought them. The price of coal in 1889 was 4s. 8d., in 1895 it was 5s. 2d. Wages had risen thirty-five per cent., and therefore they had a claim (said the owners) for at least fifteen per cent. The arguments against that claim we need not state in full. The main one was that, taking the whole period since 1889, wages had been between seven and nine per cent. higher than the periodically quoted net selling prices would have given. That argument, as all are aware, was of great weight, and that it influenced the decision, there is not the slightest doubt. The decision of the umpire was a reduction of seven and a half per cent., but it left the wages higher by that amount than the old arrangement would have done. Under it 5s. 2d. per ton would have given a wage ten per cent. above the standard; the award of Lord Davey in May 1895 left it seventeen and a half above the standard.

Although they had been called upon to suffer this reduction so early in the era of conciliation, the Federation Board did not lose faith in it as an advance in wage settlements. They said:

It may not be out of place to allude to a feature or two of the newly
adopted method of dealing with wages regulations as disclosed by
recent applications, and we may modestly, yet rightly, claim for it a
superiority of character and practice over preceding modes. As
already stated, it has by its earliest results confirmed the
conviction previously held, that the standard relation of wages to
prices governing previous methods was not correct, and established
the increased average amount obtained by the negotiations of the past
years.

At the next meeting of the Board the owners made another application for a reduction. When the July meeting took place the claim was brought forward. It was objected to at first, on the grounds that there had not been sufficient time, seeing the three months had not elapsed. The notice was withdrawn and renewed. The reasons assigned were the declension in the markets and the inadequacy of the previous reduction. These reasons were not accepted, and the umpire was again called in. His decision, after two days' hearing, was a reduction of two and a half per cent. In spite of this adverse circumstance the Federation Board were still strong in their belief in the utility of the system. They said:

We are not going to say that its course, so far as it has gone, has
been pleasant, for there have been two reductions, but these do not
shake our confidence in it. It is an unfortunate coincidence, the
initiation of a new system when circumstances are unfavourable and
its changes are downward. The true test of institutions, as of men,
is their action in a variety of conditions. No arrangement can make
trade prosperous. They are dreamers who think so, and are liable to a
rude awakening. Wise men recognise the ever-recurring changes, and
employ the means which are most expeditious, easy, and equitable in
their responses. Friction between employer and employed is a foe to
any trade, uncertainty is a sure and hurtful detriment, hastening and
enlarging the times of adversity. Our opinion is that, if we have not
the best system, we have one which will ward off friction, allay
uncertainty, and induce steadiness in the trade of the county.

That clear and bold statement of their confidence in the Board was not effective in maintaining it, for at the Miners' Council held on November 16th it was resolved to take a ballot to test its continuance. The Federation Board, on being informed of that action, resolved to take it of all the sections. They at the same time advised their members to keep it intact. They did not find fault with the decision to take the ballot. Their advice was therefore not prompted by a spirit of complaint. It was right that these matters should rest on the will of the members. Their duty, however, was to guide the members and advise, even on subjects that were unpalatable. In October they placed before them their views in as clear a manner as possible. Those views they adhered to, and did not swerve from their belief in conciliation as the best system yet tried. It was condemned, because there had been reductions. If advances had come there would have been loud praise. Would wages not have been reduced if the Board had never been formed?

"Without hesitation we tell you that, in our opinion, he is a foolish
or a designing man, or ignorant of commercial relations, who attempts
to teach such a doctrine. We have never told you such an absurdity.
When we asked you in the spring of the year to adopt conciliation we
never dreamt of it as a fixed, immovable machine. To us it was (and
is) a more mutual, closer, and smoother principle than we have ever
had, taking within its comprehension other and important matters
outside wages."

In spite of this pleading on the part of the Federation Board the voting was: for the Conciliation Board, 11,974; against it, 29,000; neutrals, 17,000, as a result of the miners' vote. The whole Federation vote was: for, 14,894; against, 30,587; neutrals, 20,000.

On the strength of that vote notice was given to terminate the Conciliation Board in accordance with rule.

1896

The Conciliation Board--Death of Mr Patterson

The Federation Board were still in hope that the decision to terminate the Conciliation Board might be reconsidered, and they again brought the question before the members. They asked what system was to be substituted for it. They were firm in their belief in conciliation, but, if the members still persisted in abolishing it, what other form was to be adopted?

"The situation in which we as a county find ourselves makes it
imperative that we should address you. We do not refer to our own
organisations, for these are strong, but to our relation with the
employers and the settlement of our transactions with them. How are
these to be managed in the future? Has our attitude to be one of
repulsion or attraction? Have the employers and ourselves to act like
two antagonistic forces, looking with suspicion upon each other, and
ready to take every advantage, as if we were in a continual wrestling
match on the catch-who-can principle, where those who get the hold
win, whether their cause be righteous or not? If the members
persisted in their resolve to have no Conciliation Board, or some
substituted machinery, who would suffer most? If there were two
parties before you of equal strength and similarly conditioned, then
the issue would be uncertain, and the victory would depend upon some
unforeseen circumstances.

Such is not the case with us. Given a solid organisation of labour,
and the same of employers numerically--still the balance of the
chances in a wear-and-tear and struggling policy will he on the side
of the party who is the best ammunitioned and provisioned. In this
case, which in your opinion as the advantage?"

They pointed out that they were mutual sufferers with the members, if there were suffering; that there was not time in the lodge meetings to discuss the utility of such a system; and that as a consequence they, as one of the obligations of their office, were bound to have a fuller knowledge of the subject than the members. It was an unfortunate circumstance that the system had been tried in a receding market, but the proper test was not by one condition of trade. If conciliation were tested by an increasing as well as a falling market it would then be seen how useful it was. Some people seemed to charge the Conciliation Board with being the cause of the depression.

"There cannot be a greater fallacy. The causes of the reductions lie
outside the purview of any system yet arranged, and the control of
them is not within the possibility of an arrangement yet thought of.
But the question that faces us now, and demands an answer from us,
is, would they have come if the Board had never been formed? There
needs no philosophical knowledge to satisfy the mind on that point,
except it be the philosophy of matter-of-fact, everyday life, which
in these matters is not an unsafe test. Let experience guide, and it
will afford a sure refutation of the unfounded idea that it is
possible to fix, firmly and permanently, wages by any scheme within
the knowledge of man."

They were desirous of giving them another chance, as the ballot on the previous occasion was very unsatisfactory, and some of the sections had made a request for such to be done. And they were hopeful that, before the notice of termination ran out, the Conciliation Board would be reaffirmed, as "the hope of all true reformers is centred in the cultivation of amicability and friendly intercourse between employers and employed, with a conciliatory method of settling any difference that may arise, monetary or otherwise, and in the ultimate blending of the two forces--Capital and Labour--for the mutual and equal benefit of all concerned. Consider seriously every step we as an organisation take, and let all we do tend towards the attainment of the much-needed object." The result of the second ballot was against the Board, the numbers being in close similarity to the previous vote--the miners being very largely against, while the other three sections were in favour. We may add here that it terminated on August 4th, and for a short time the county entered the region of uncertainty again, which all must acknowledge is no help to trade or district.

DEATH OF MR PATTERSON

The month of July had been fatal to the organisation, for in it, in 1890, Mr Crawford died, and on July 16th of this year Mr Patterson passed away from the labour to which he gave his youth and manhood. He had filled the position of agent and financial secretary for twenty-five years.

It will not be out of place if we insert a portion of the _Monthly Circular_ for the month in which he died. It contains the sincere estimate of one who knew him intimately, who had the highest respect for him while he lived, and who now has pleasant recollections of his manly and reliable actions. He was no self-seeker or panderer for self-profit; he was the antipodes of that mean and despicable character. You might have difference of opinion with Patterson, but you could at all times depend upon the open honesty of his nature.

MONTHLY CIRCULAR

_July 1896._

My first word must be a note of sorrow. July to us, as regards the
agency, has been a fatal month. In it we lost Crawford, and now
Patterson has joined the great majority. This is the common lot of
all. Happy is the man who leaves this world for the next without
regret, feeling that his life has been of some service to his kind,
and that the people amongst whom he has lived express their
recognition of his worth by their sorrow and appreciation of his
labours. Such was our friend. If we, who stood by his bedside in the
last moments of the final struggle, could have been cognisant of his
thoughts there would have been no regret; for W. H. Patterson was the
enemy of no living man, but the friend of all. We were not so
privileged, but we were so glad to see the large crowd of people who
gathered to pay a tribute to his memory. The gathering was
diversified in its character, spontaneous in its gathering, and truly
sympathetic in its manner and spirit.

But from our regret for his loss let us turn to the influence of his
life. The true test of a man is his work. Our friend stood the test.
The real measure of a man's life is its actions; he was full measure.
He was not showy, but solid, and as such, being dead, yet
speaketh--speaks in no uncertain sounds; let us turn no indifferent
ear. The main work of his life, in conjunction with others, was the
inception, promotion, and solidifying of our organisation. It will
be the most real expression of our sorrow if we do our best to carry
forward that upon which he set his mind, and which he endeavoured on
all occasions to enforce. Would it not be sham sorrow and unreal
regret on the part of a son who on the death of a father ... a father
who by the toil and care of his life had made a position ... if he
were careless of that work, and had regard only to self-indulgence?
Little as we may think of it, there has a fortune come to this
generation and a position been gained for it by the labours of our
friend and others which cannot be estimated in money. We are apt to
test everything by a monetary standard, but in this case the test
fails. Within the life of Mr Patterson there have been effected
changes which he outside the range of wages, but which are none the
less valuable to us. These are only known to those whose working life
commenced anterior to thirty years ago. There are many who have not
the experience, and who cannot, therefore, realise to the full, the
contrast. Lightly as these may be inclined to look upon the changed
conditions, and think because these conditions exist now they have
always existed, there are numbers who know, and who are able to
compare, and rejoice in the change made.

I would not say that all is attributable to the labours of our lost
friend. No man would have protested more strongly against such an
idea than himself; but he did what he could; he never devolved his
share of work upon others.