250 ENGLISH AGRICULTURAL LABOURER. 



by combination that a living wage could be secured. 



In many country districts unionism had been regarded 

 as some alien antagonistic force which increased the cost of 

 the farm worker's coal, or of his oil, or of his boots. But 

 the war, which dispelled so many illusions, dispelled this 

 one too. Had not farmers, in their very presence, told trib- 

 unals that without Hodge they could not carry on their 

 farms ? There were rumours, too, that District Wages 

 Committees were to be set up to fix a minimum rate 

 of wages, and on these Hodge must get men appointed who 

 could argue with the farmers ; and how could that be done 

 without combination ? 



In the beginning of 1917 the National Agricultural 

 Labourers' Union asked for 303. a week. The 

 Farmers' Federation offered 253. a week and as the 

 employers and men could not come to any agreement an 

 arbitrator was called in, who was Mr. Harry Courthorpe- 

 Munroe. To the astonishment of both employers and men, 

 Mr. Courthorpe-Munroe, on March 12, 1917, made an 

 award of exactly 253. a week. Naturally, this award 

 gave rise to much discontent amongst the Norfolk farm 

 workers. It was considered that the Government's an- 

 nouncement that a minimum wage of 255. would be in- 

 serted in the forthcoming Corn Production Act prejudiced 

 the decision of the arbitrator, especially as 255. was to include 

 all extras. 



The demand for 303. in Norfolk soon became the minimum 

 demand in other counties. In some counties, such as 

 Nottingham, the wages rose to 273., though in other coun- 

 ties, such as Somerset, Suffolk and Worcester they were as 

 low as 22s., and in Bucks even as low as 2is. 



On February 14, 1917, the Trade Union Parliamentary 

 Committee presented themselves before Mr. Prothero, 

 (now Lord Ernie), the President of the Board of Agriculture, 

 to submit to him the resolution passed by the Trade Union 

 Congress held in Birmingham, 1916, which was as follows : 



" That while recognising the land problem cannot be effectively 

 dealt with outside national ownership and control, this Congress 

 is strongly of opinion that any scheme that has for its purpose 



