PART TWO 



TIIK rPSTANDIXC, CROP 



THE Revolt of ihe Field as the agricultural labourers' move- 

 ment of 1^72 has been called, was one which sprang from the 

 agricultural labourers' cottage home \vith its empty larder, 

 and from no other source. At its binh it was an economic, 

 not a poltical revolt. It was a cry lor bread, and not for 

 votes. 



"The agricultural labourer of iXj->," wn>|r Mr. ll<rl;'rt 

 Paul, "coals and blink. ts notwithstanding, was wo]-s<- ]od^< d 

 and worse fed than the cattle. . . . 'I he wau s rarin d did not 

 suffice for the di cent maintenance ol IIMIV ihan a single indi\-i- 

 dual. If he had a family he was dept nd'-nt Millar uj.oii aid 

 from outside or at l'-a>t from his o\vn ihildrtn." ' 



Indeed, it mi;/ht be .aid that the hi-ii'iv of the ri^ricnl- 

 tnral lal;ouier from iS-o to JOi-j i^ :i sto;y o| the la n heroii^ 

 edge of life er.dured on ca-h \vagi s n-ing and iallini; In [ween 

 2s. and ^jS. a day. 



It is true that laier on its leaaler. Jo<eph Arch, de-j-ite 

 his own c-arly conx'ir-tions, t-finverted the mo\'einent into 

 a political one ; but there i- no doubt thai at the br^inniiii/ 



1 i 



of the re\'oh Arch him- elf ju'e-enled a cold shoulder both 

 to the professional politician and to the professional trade 

 union organ i -el". Had he li-teiied less to t he blandishments 

 of the politician and more to the advirr of the trade union 

 organise!', he would probably have saved hi- union from 

 the wreckage of later days. 



No trade union organber came out from lh>- towns to 

 agitate amonu-i til'' agricultural labourer- in country plans 

 ' //; t : / .'/- dfni /'/:/.'/-;;'/, l.y II- ih. M I'.ir.l. 



