The Betrayal of Trade Unionism. 



THE LAST PHASES OF THE RECENT STRIKE. 



Now that the strike is finished it is well for us 

 to consider whether its manner of ending was 

 more sane from a trade union point of view 

 than the manner of its beginning. We had 

 hoped to be able to give some views of those hi.t;h in 

 labour authority upon the article we published last 

 month on " Sane Trade Unionism," but we regret to 

 have to state that not one of those to whom we sent 

 the article asking for criticism replied or criticised. We 

 take this as an encouraging sign, since it shows that 

 although they are evidently afraid to condemn those in 

 authority for this insane strike, they could not venture 

 to criticise the methods of sane trade unionism. It is 

 of interest to glance briefly at the various incidents of 

 the conflict between sanit)' and Ben Tillettism in the 

 final phases pf the strike. 



On July 1 2th, when the funds of the National 

 Sailors' and Firemen's Union available for strike pay 

 were e.xhausted, Father Hopkins, as trustee, wrote to 

 the Transport Workers' Federation and informed them 

 that he saw in the manifesto of the emplo)ers of 

 July nth a possible opening to bring the strike to an 

 honourable close. He stated it may involve retreat, 

 but retreat along the lines of unity and solidarity, to 

 prevent a stampede, and a possible disastrous loss of 

 membership to the affiliated unions. To this the 

 Transport Workers' Federation replied that, in their 

 opinion, the men would have nothing to do with such 

 a retreat, and would only accept honourable peace. 

 This was in the nature of a distinct rebuff to those - 

 responsible for sane trade unionism ideas, and would 

 seem to indi<-ate that the Strike Committee was still 

 actuated by a desire to save the agitator rather than 

 the men. On July i8th the conversations between 

 Lord Devonport and Messrs. Gosling and Orbell 

 having failed, everything seemed at a deadlock, and it 

 was determined to bring into play the Labour Party, 

 who had already interested themselves in the Strike 

 Committee. The situation was put telegraphically 

 but clearly before them in the following words : — 



" Cannot Labour Party now perceive only way for 

 orderly retreat out of present London iiii/>asse is for 

 Transport Federation to refer latest phase to affiliated 

 Unions ; Unions as such should then convene private 

 meetings of respective members to explain that 

 re.sumption of work is first step in re-opening negotia- 

 tions with employers re grievances, and to insure 

 reconstitution and reconstruction of Federation. 

 Affiliated Unions could then issue manifestoes simul- 

 taneously advising resumption of work forthwith. 

 Unless something like this is done soon you will 

 experience a Trade Union rout instead of a temporary 

 Federation defeat." 



.■\ny practical result from this was pre\'ented, how- 

 ever, by the extreme elements of the Strike Committee 

 bringing in Mr. Norman Craig, and cndca\-ourinc; to 



divert attention b\- the so-called " negotiatiiiiis '' 

 carried on by that gentleman. Meanwhile Mr. Havelock 

 Wilson had returned to town, and after consultation 

 with the strike leaders and the Strike Committee, he 

 drew up a line of policy which he has publicly described 

 as endeavouring to — 



{a) Get those who were in work throughout the 

 country to dip their hands in their pockets for 

 one shilling a day each for the financial 

 strengthening of the London strikers ; 

 {b) To incjuire of the transport workers in the larger 

 ports of the United Kingdom if, in the event of 

 the employers in the Port of London not being 

 prepared to come to a reasonable settlement, 

 they — the transport workers in other ports — 

 would " down tools " in favour of the London 

 men. 

 This; however, \vas too direct an interference with 

 forces controlled by sane trade unionism — that is to 

 say, the Sailors' and Firemen's Union, and no time 

 was lost in bringing the real facts of the case before 

 Mr. Havelock Wilson. On July 23rd he was informed 

 that on the resumption of work by the men the 

 employers were prepared to meet representatives of 

 the unions to consider grievances, in a just and 

 generous spirit. This he did not know. It is apparent, 

 however, that the Strike Committee, who did know, 

 did not fully inform him of the situation, probable- 

 actuated by the desire to use his great influence in 

 bringing on a national stoppage. Once having been put 

 in possession of the facts, and having had laid before 

 him good reasons for believing that any attempt to 

 engineer a national stoppage in connection with the 

 London strike was doomed to failure, Mr. Wilson did 

 not persevere in his polic)-. Steps were at once taken 

 to place Mr. Havelock Wilson in possession of the facts 

 of the actual situation necessary to protect him from 

 acting upon a false hypothesis. A series of visits and 

 conversations took place embracing everybody con- 

 nected with the cessation or the prolongation of the 

 strike, and while these were not in any sense negotia- 

 tions, they enabled him to preside over the deliberations 

 of the sailors' executive in full possession of all facts. 

 On the 26th the Sailors' l",\ecutive Council met and 

 communicated to the Strike Committee their opinion 

 that the strike should he brought to a speedy termina- 

 tion. On the next day, after it was known that the 

 so-called " negotiations " of Mr. Norman Craig had 

 comi)letely collapsed, it was reported that the Strike 

 Committee had determined to call off the strike, and 

 to issue its own order to the men to resume work on 

 Monday. There was, however, no decision on the 

 part of the Strike Committee to carry out the obviously 

 sane methods referred to above — that is to say. refer 

 the matter to the respective unions to enable them to 

 consult with the men liehind closed doors prior to the 



