The Taff Vale Dispute

THE STORY OF THE TAFF VALE RAILWAY STRIKE

NATIONAL UNION OF RAIL, MARITIME AND TRANSPORT WORKERS

Colleagues,

I am delighted to introduce to you this timely pamphlet produced by Geoff Revell on behalf of the RMT. Geoff is a longstanding member of the National Union of Railwaymen and then the Rail Maritime and Transport Union and is well placed to compile this important reminder of the events surrounding the Taff Vale Judgement; a key moment in the history of our union and of the wider labour movement.

Our history is all the more important because present day conditions call for all the strength, solidarity and clear sightedness shown by our fellow trade unionists in the past. Today there is a massive burden of unjust laws against trade unions, supported by a New Labour Government.

Private management, also supported and extended by New Labour, can be every bit as contemptuous of the workforce as they were in the past. Their decisions are often thoughtless, driven by greed and cruel to the workers and the travellers alike. Our forerunners resisted their employers and unjust laws. They fought great trade union battles. Their conclusion was that they needed a political voice to support their struggle. Despite the most modest of beginnings they took the step to organise a voice in Parliament. It is a path we need to start again.

So I hope you enjoy this pamphlet as much as 1 did. Thanks to all those who contribute to make the RMT the fastest growing union today. We have a proud history and we are on the way to an equally proud future.

Bob Crow
General Secretary


Foreword to The Story of the Taff Vale Railway Strike by John Hendy Q.C.

This excellent and carefully researched booklet tells the story of the strike in 1900 on the Taff Vale Railway in South Wales. That strike led to legal action against one of RMT's forerunners, the ASRS. That legal action resulted in a massive award of damages against the union in a judgment which threatened the same for any union organising industrial action. That judgment influenced political agitation which led to the formation of the Labour Party. That political agitation led to the passing of the Trade Disputes Act exactly 100 years ago. That Act, though it did not grant a right to strike, gave unions legal freedom to organise industrial action for three quarters of a century - until the Thatcher governments. That legal freedom allowed workers to exercise a collective power which went some way to counteract the overweening power of the employer at the workplace. That collective power was largely responsible for the increase in the standard of living of working people and the diminution of the inequalities between rich and poor which marked the progress of the twentieth century until the 1980s.

For the last 25 years however, these achievements have been reversed. And the legal restrictions on the right of trade unions and workers to take lawful industrial action leading to loss of the capacity of unions to defend the interests of their members, has been a principal cause of the decline in the quality of life evident to all. The legal restrictions were imposed by the Tories in the 1980s and 90s and have been maintained since by Labour.

The lesson of Geoff RevelPs booklet is that the trade union movement must once again mobilise politically to change the law to (at least) regain the freedoms enjoyed from 1906. That is why we need a new Trade Union Freedom Act 2006 as a step on the way to securing in this country that which has been achieved amongst our European neighbours and which is enshrined in international laws ratified by the UK: the right to strike.

John Hendy QC 1st Feb. 2006

In 1891 a rabid anti-trade unionist by the name of Amman Beasley was appointed as General Manager of the Taff Vale Railway Company. In 1895 the Company Chairman James Inskip retired, his place was taken by another anti-trade unionist, Mr R Vassall, who believed a trade union to be "a very pernicious body as regards railway companies". Vassall and Beasley were contemptuous of the workforce, had no interest in their welfare and flatly refused to meet with their union. These two men were about to create events that would be a milestone in the British labour movements history.

They began their reign at a time when discontent and anger amongst the South Wales railworkers was reaching a critical point. The 1893 and 1898 coal strikes brought suffering to the railway workers as well as the miners, with the suspension of the guaranteed sixty hour week and lay-offs. The statement "the miners dig the coal out, the railway workers move it" was as true then as in more recent times. The Taff Vale railway workers moved a quarter of the eighteen million tons of coal dug out by the South Wales miners , no coal to move meant cuts in earnings and worse. With the Boer war came a huge demand for South Wales coal to fuel the ships carrying war materials to southern Africa. This resulted in the cost of coal soaring, pit profits increased accordingly and miners were able to win pay increases. However the South Wales railway workers lot did not improve one bit and it must have been galling for them. When the mines weren't producing they suffered, yet when coal production was at a record high their low pay and lousy conditions remained the same, while the cost of living increased.

In 1898 James Holmes a passionate socialist and much respected Independent Labour Party (ILP) member was appointed as South Wales and West Organiser for the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants (ASRS). On October 1st 1899 at a mass meeting, workers from the Taff Vale, Rhymney, Barry and Cardiff railways formed a Joint Committee of all grades to fight for restoration of the guaranteed sixty hour week and wage increases. James Holmes secured the support of the ASRS leadership for the Joint Committees existence and aims.

On November 28th Joint Committee member and signalman Moses Jones wrote to the Taff Vale asking them to meet a deputation. The company wrote back on December 9th refusing a meeting. The union itself had written to all four of the companies setting out a list of wage demands , they received acknowledgements of the letter from the Rhymney and Cardiff Railways and no reply at all from the Taff Vale and Barry Railways. The union Executive decided to write to the four companies and offer arbitration, should the companies fail to reply within six days a strike ballot would take place, this time all four companies replied but only with letters of acknowledgement. On January 14th 1900 a mass meeting took place at Park Hall Cardiff with two thousand rail workers in attendance. The ASRS General Secretary Richard Bell travelled from London to address the meeting telling them that if they were to win they must be "men of sound calibre, men with backbone, not jellyfish".

To protect workers against 'breach of contract' it was necessary to hand notices in giving employers fourteen days notice that labour would be withdrawn. As all notices had to be handed in at the same time it was the responsibility of the union Executive to organise and hand in the notices. The meeting decided to inform the companies that if they did not meet their representatives within seven days notices would be handed in. Once again the employers merely gave formal replies. On January 28th Bell was able to report to a cheering mass meeting that "between 91 and 97 per cent" of workers from the four companies had handed in notices to the union. In spite of this huge majority Bell then went on to persuade the meeting to allow him to hold off handing the notice papers to the employers, to give them another seven to ten days grace.

The Rhymney Railway and Barry Railway directors agreed to an immediate meeting with a deputation which took place on February 1st and 2nd. The Cardiff Railway agreed to meet a deputation later in the month. These meetings resulted in offers to increase the pay of signalmen and certain other grades by up to four shillings a week. The Taff Vale General Manager Beasley met a deputation of his employees on February 9th, he made small concessions to the rail workers but the central demands for a two shilling a week increase and an eight hour day were refused.

A mass meeting was called for March 11th to consider the offers and the militant rank and file Joint Committee now had a problem, how to re-capture the mood of the previous meetings in the face of a divisive situation, indeed the Barry Railway workers were already in receipt of their pay increases. A resolution was put to the meeting to reject the offers and for a ballot to take place of the workers from the four companies and, providing that ninety per cent or above voted to take strike action, notices would be handed in.

There is no known record of who put that rather questionable resolution to the meeting, but Richard Bell put his militant hat on and spoke as if the situation the men were now in had nothing to do with him. He claimed to be in "a lighting mood", and they would "have to prove what metal they were made of" were they "going to be fools any longer?" he asked. But the unity of purpose of the previous meetings does not seem to have been there. An amendment was put to accept the companies offers as interim ones, a down payment till victory over the Boers was won. Moses Jones snapped back that they wanted "no milk and water patriotism". The ballot result was announced by Bell on 22nd March, those in favour of striking was between 71 and 81 per cent, below the ninety per cent decided at the March 11th meeting. The newspapers mocked the union and the Executive agreed a resolution which "deprecated the result of the ballot and regarded is as a retrogressive move, reflecting no credit on those affected".

The Joint Committee must have realised that they had passed up the chance to show their strength at the 28th January meeting. They decided they would not make the same mistake again, next time the Committee would run things, they would work with Holmes but keep Bell and the Executive at arms length.

The situation at the Taff Vale Railway Company can be described by the end of March as so; the trade union haters of the Taff Vale Railway gloating about what they no doubt saw as a victory over the workforce, a disgruntled workforce feeling more under the bosses boot than they had ever been, a militant rank and file all grades Joint Committee whose leadership was seething with anger at a wasted opportunity. It was like a tinder box waiting for a spark. That spark turned out to be a signalman from Abercynon named J Ewington.

Signalman J Ewington.

Ewington had worked on the Taff Vale Railway for twenty years, was forty five years old, lived at Abercynon and had ten children all under seventeen. His wife was ill, three other members of the family were caring for her and helping out with the children. Ewington was also a leading member of the local ASRS, a colleague of all grades Joint Committee leader Moses Jones and had won the respect of his fellow workers. At the height of the agitation in February and March 1900 J. Ewington led a delegation to meet with Taff Vale General Manager Beasley. It is not known what took place at that meeting between the passionate trade unionists and the union hating Bcasley. However it is known that on April 28th Ewington was informed by his stationmaster that he was being promoted away from his signal box at Pontycynon, he would work at Treherbert box for an extra 2 shillings a week and he was "obliged" to accept the promotion. Trehcbert box was sixteen miles from his present home, he would have to move house. The company were to later claim it was normal practice to forcibly promote signalmen.

This was one of their many lies. On being told of his move Ewington wrote to his Line Superintendent W. Harland pointing out his distressful domestic situation. He argued that a move of home would curtail help being provided to a very sick wife, cause great expense and make life even more intolerable. Harland replied through Ewingtons stationmaster, he refused his request to remain at Pontycynon stating that "it is not a question of what Ewington wishes, he is required to move to Treherbert and must be removed forthwith".

Poor Ewington then became seriously ill with rheumatic fever and was off sick from May 10th. When he returned to work on 24th July he found that not only had the post at Pontycynon been filled by someone else but so had the one at Treherbert. To fill a job when a man was off sick was unheard of, he requested and got an interview with Line Superintendent Mr W. Harland at his office. After listening to his plea Harland told him that he had brought trouble on himself for "continually causing disturbances amongst his fellow workers" and that he should be ashamed.

The cat was now out of the bag, Ewington wasn't being moved for reasons of a promotion, he was being viciously victimised for being a trade union activist. When in December 1902 the whole incident was examined in detail by Mr Justice Wills in the Kings Bench Division, Beasley and prosecuting counsel managed to stop two witnesses, Messrs Ponsford and Black, from being called to give evidence. They would have apparently been asked under oath to give the real reasons for Ewington being moved. In addition to this the court was told that a letter from W. Harland to Mr Ponsford which would have also shed light on the truth of Ewingtons treatment had been 'lost'. In his summing up Justice Wills made it perfectly clear he believed Ewington to have been victimised.

Having gained nothing from his interview with Harland, Ewington now asked to meet with the Taff Vale Directors and accompanied by two fellow workers he met three of them. Their decision was to offer Ewington the post of sick relief signalman covering seventeen boxes in the Aberdare valley on the same wage. It would have involved walking two or three miles each morning but he would not have to move house. Ewington sought advice from the Joint Committee who advised him to refuse the Directors offer. From their point of view here was a man whom, despite his awful domestic situation, had given time and energy to fight their cause, for this the Taff Vale bosses were attacking him and his family. Ewington had stood by them, now they would stand by him. He accepted the Joint Committee advice, put his refusal of the Directors offer in writing and demanded his old job back at Pontycynon.

The Taff Vale Strike

Since the set back of the Joint Committee in March James Holmes had been busy building a movement for better pay and conditions. On 29"' July at a mass meeting held in Pontypridd a resolution to demand increases in pay for signalmen, brakesmen, shunters and guards was enthusiastically carried. Ewingtons' case was also put to the meeting and a resolution was passed stating that if Ewington was not reinstated in his old job by August 61 ', notices would be handed in. Holmes gave a fiery speech saying that if the men had any grit they would not allow the company to beat them again, "lt was not a matter of intelligence but courage" he said.

The Taff Vale men were now stirred up for a fight but Holmes was concerned that notices would not all be handed in at the same time, lie used the Joint Committee to voice his concerns and even wrote a letter to the South Wales Daily News advising the men not to hand their notices in till August I3th. Hut Holmes attempts to control the situation failed and on August 5th 363 notices-, representing less than a third of the employees were handed in, these would In­due to expire on August 19th. Four hundred more were handed in a week later due to expire on August 26th, so there could be no simultaneous withdrawal ol labour without being in breach of contract. Not only that, the unions rulrs, demanded E.C. approval for the handing in of notices and Bell is reported to have been furious with Holmes.

On August 17th the Cardiff Chamber of Commerce intervened and asked Beasley if he would meet with Holmes and an all grade deputation replied that he would meet any reasonable number of "the company's servants" but would not meet "officially or unofficially any person nol in the company's service". Holmes offered independent arbitration, Beasley refused. Holmes then offered Beasley a delegation representing all the grades without him being present, but his presence was the delegations first demand so Beasley refused to continue.

Richard Bell and the Executive Committee had paid little attention to the South Wales rank and file movement since the March ballot, but on August 17th Bell rushed to Wales. Armed with a letter of support for an interview from the President of the Board of Trade he tried to meet with Ihe Taff Vale Chairman R. Vassall but was rebuffed. Bell returned to London and arranged a special meeting of the union Executive for Sunday August19th. Two delegates from the South Wales all grades Joint C'ommittee were present at what must have been a lively meeting, it went on for six and a half hours. Finally an amended resolution, opposed by Bell, was carried by seven voles lo five, it read as follows:

'The executive have just decided, after hearing the evidence of a deputation from the Taff Vale railwaymen, and seeing the correspondence relating to the dispute, they cannot but conclude:

· That the conduct of the men taking action prior to obtaining theconsent of the Committee was most condemnatory.

· That by the removal of signalman Ewington the management of theCompany have acted arbitrarily and have incited the men to theirpresent act.

· Having regard to both sides of the issue we, as the Administrators of the Society, decide that every effort be made by the General Secretary and others we may appoint to bring the dispute to a speedy termination.

We have after careful consideration hereby decided to support the men financially.'

The Executive had decided that the rules of the ASRS had been broken. But the men had been pushed to this by the bosses so the union would stand by them in every way including financially.

Whilst the Executive in London were still hotly debating their resolution a mass meeting of 1,300 railworkers was taking place at Pontypridd. James Holmes told them that the only arbitration that would now take place would be "the tribunal of rusty rails and rusty wheels". When a resolution was put that the men would stop work as one body at midnight almost every hand went up in support. The meeting had not yet heard of the Executive decision so in fact the mass meetings decision was to strike irrespective of any financial support from the B.C.

At midnight of August 19th 1900, 1,327 workers went out from the employment of the Taff Vale Railway. Of these, 363 had handed proper notices in, 400 had inadequate notices in, and 564 had put no notices in at all. The picketing that took place is said to be the best organised in any railway strike in Britain with no coal trains running on the first day. Seventy per cent of Taff Vale income came from moving coal yet still Beasley refused to meet Bell, who by now wanted a settlement at any price. Beasley didn't meet with Bell because he had already laid plans to import scab labour to break the strike, he was committed to those plans. He wanted to show that the only way to deal with the evilness of trade unions was to go to war on them. If the ASRS organised railworkers wouldn't work for him then he would raise a new workforce, from outside. To further show he meant business he ordered strikers and their families who rented company cottages to vacate them 'forthwith' and the evictions were carried out even though the rents had been paid for that week.

The Scabs

Beasley, seeing the way things were going at the beginning of August had placed adverts in the majority of newspapers offering employment on the Taff Vale Railway. The company had also been persuaded by Beasley to take out membership of the National Free Labour Association (NFLA) based in London. This outfit was reputed to have broken 300 strikes by the use of scab labour. The NFLA leader, William Collison, undertook to "break the back of the strike in forty eight hours" for a fee of £100. The NFLA had been asked to form an army of strike-breakers to deal with a threatened strike on the Great Eastern Railway, however the strike had not taken place so 197 of these men were sent to the Taff Vale. The men recruited by Collison were often unaware of why they were being employed, like the one interviewed for the South Wales Daily News:

'I was in a lodging house in Kings Cross Road. A gentleman walked in at half past nine and said "Do you want to work? I said "Yes. He said "Come and have a quart of beer". I said "That's me." So when I went he said, "Have you got any mates? I said "Any amount" and I fetched fifteen and we had a good soak of beer and plenty of tobacco. We went by the underground to Addison Road and from Addison Road he gave us a ticket and brought us to Bristol. We got into the train again and came to Cardiff. When we got to Cardiff they locked us in on both sides. A young fellow came up and said "Do you know what you are doing?" and gave us a bill. I said "It's a strike!" and then someone shoved him away. The officials asked me to do some labour, and I said "I don't know how to do it."

The strikers were brilliantly organised and readily took on the threat posed by the NFLA. Beasley attempted to sneak the strike-breakers in during the early hours of the morning, but the strikers laid detonators on the rails to warn them of any trains approaching. All the area ASRS branches were mobilised to intercept and return the strike-breakers. Penarth Branch accounts shows the following item of expenditure 'Cab, blackleg to Cardiff; dinners self and clerk; two old drivers to Cardiff and dinners; blackleg and escort to Weston-Super-Marc; Pier tolls and refreshments; refreshments for blackleg gang 17 in number brought from Cardiff to discharge boat.

Merthyr Tydfil branch books tell a similar story with: 'blackleg J. Dawson, Is 6d; capture of two blacklegs at Merthyr station and escorted to headquarters, Cardiff 7s 3d.' Bell himself persuaded a gang of forty men to return to London from Cardiff, they were fed then put on the next available train. There is no record of any man sent back returning again.

There were a hardcore of 847 pickets working day and night, they were paid 6d for a shift of eight hours. They put thick grease on the rails, stormed locomotives, uncoupled the carriages, cut telegraph wires and made their presence heavily felt in the towns. Taff Vale chairman Vassall said later that the pickets were 'pretty well everywhere where you turned a corner'. Some strikers and their families were homeless, 208 of them were being proceeded against legally by Vassall and Beasley for breach of contract, hired scabs were in the towns with police drafted in to protect them, it is therefore hardly surprising that there were acts of intimidation and violence. These acts ranged from verbal assault, rough handling, stone and rotten egg throwing to more serious physical attacks. Holmes himself was injured twice trying to stop violent assaults by pickets. At Cathays yard "the premises were forcibly entered by a body of men, who assaulted the man in charge and damaged the company's property", prompting the company to offer a reward of £100 for the conviction of "the delinquents responsible".

In all the NFLA sent 400 men from all parts of the country to break the strike, of these all but 192 were either persuaded to return or deemed not fit for railway work. Beasley was frustrated and angry and informed the company solicitors that he wanted to seek an injunction to restrain Bell, Holmes and the ASRS from 'watching and besetting' the company premises, the Great Western Railway station at Cardiff and the 'non-strikers' residences. The lawyers view was that Trade Union Acts of 1871 and 1876 ruled out action against a trade union under its registered name. But Beasley would have none of it, he knew of the Lyons vs. Wilkins case decided on in 1898 by Mr Justice Byrne. The judge had ruled that picketing in the form of 'watching and besetting' was illegal and calling someone a 'blackleg' was a form of intimidation not permitted by law. Beasley had obtained a circular put out under Bells name which was worded as follows:

STRIKE ON THE TAFF VALE RAILWAY

Mens Headquarters Cobourn Street Cathays

There has been a strike on the Taff Vale railway since Monday last. The management are using every means to decoy men here who they employ for the purpose of blacklegging the men on strike.

DRIVERS, FIREMEN, GUARDS, BRAKESMEN AND SIGNALMEN ARE ALL OUT.

Are you willing to be known as a BLACKLEG?

If you accept employment on the Taff Vale that is what you will be known by. On arriving at Cardiff, call at the above address where you can get information and assistance.

RICHARD BELL General Secretary.

Beasley handed the circular to the solicitors and instructed them to proceed.

The end of the Strike.

Throughout the eleven days of the strike Richard Bell made strenuous efforts to get a satisfactory settlement for the strikers. His efforts were frustrated by Vassall and Beasley who refused to meet him. Then on August 24th a Mr Hopwood from the Board of Trade arrived in Cardiff to try and broker a settlement. At the same time two letters appeared in 'The Times' newspaper. One was from James Inskip the former Chairman of the Taff Vale Railway heavily criticising the directors for not meeting with Bell and perhaps averting the loss of hundreds of thousands of pounds. The other letter was from Sir W. T. Lewis who was described as one of the most influential industrialists in Cardiff, he wanted a Conciliation Board for the South Wales Railways. With these heavy guns from their own world pointed at them the Taff Vale Directors decided to make concessions. The next day with Hopwood acting as go-between they published terms for a settlement. They agreed the case of Signalman Ewington go before the Board of Trade for arbitration, they undertook to re-employ as many as possible of the strikers immediately, all of them within two months and to guarantee them full pension rights; the claims of the men would be considered in various grade deputations and the legal proceedings taken against those in breach of contract would be abandoned.

On August 27th Hopwood returned to London with the strike still on. The two months difference in re-employing the men was because the company would not get rid of Collisons scabs immediately. The mens Joint Committee would not accept strikers being unemployed for two months while the rest of them worked alongside the hated blacklegs. Informal conversations between the Taff Vale Vice-Chairman Mr Russell Rea, Sir W T Lewis, Richard Bell and James Holmes kept the attempts to settle going. Eventually an agreement was reached acceptable to the men. The company agreed to take back all strikers within one month; to accept the Board of Trades arbitration on Ewington; to guarantee the mens pension rights and stop all legal proceedings against the strikers. A Conciliation Board would be set up for the South Wales railways 'if possible' by 31st October 1900 and the men's claims placed before it. On September 1st 1900 normal services and operations were resumed on the Taff Vale Railway Company, who then proceeded to immediately break all the terms of settlement.

Signalman Ewington got his arbitration from the President of the Board of Trade who found that he had been treated "quite liberally" by the company. When Ewington asked what his position was within the company Harland told him that he had refused the offer made to him before the strike, so that was that. Ewington left the employment of the Taff Vale and became a coal miner.
October 31st came and went with no sign of a Conciliation Board being set up to hear the demands of the men. On November 6th the directors accepted Beasleys advice not to agree a Conciliation Board as it would 'depute the management of the staff to an outside body'.
In February, over four months after the strike, seventy six of the blacklegs imported in by Beasley were still employed by the company. On January 28th Beasley met an all grades deputation of the men and informed them that it was now company policy to retain the services of the imported labour at all costs. The proposed Conciliation Board was not even discussed.

The Taff Vale Judgement.

On exactly the same day the strike ended the company's application for an interim injunction to restrain Bell and Holmes from all forms of picketing except "the communication of information to non-strikers" came before Mr Justice Farwell who granted an injunction stating that Bell had 'put his name to an improper circular', which was 'a distinct threat to imported labour'. On Sept 5 1900 he made a further statement extending the injunction to the union itself and declaring that unions could be sued for damages caused by a strike:

"Has the legislature authorised the creation of numerous bodies of men, capable of owning great wealth and acting by agents, with absolutely no responsibility for the wrongs they may do to other persons by the use of that wealth and the employment of those agents? I do not think so", he said.

Although the strike was over the serious implications of Mr Justice Farwells decision would have to be dealt with. The Executive immediately instructed Bell to write to the TUC pointing out the ramifications for all Trade Unions if the decision were allowed to go unchallenged Within twenty four hours of the judges statement the TUC passed a resolution instructing its Parliamentary Committee to write and warn all unions of the dangers posed by the decisions and to give contributions to finance an appeal.

On November 12th the unions appeal was heard by the Master of The Rolls, Lord Justice Collins and Lord Justice Sterling. To the relief of the entire trade union movement the judges unanimously agreed to uphold the appeal and Mr Justice Farwells decisions were reversed. However, against his own solicitor's advice Beasley decided to appeal to the House of Lords. It took till July 22nd 1901 for the five law lords to reach their decision, they found unanimously in favour of The Taff Vale Railway.

In settlement of the strike agreement had been reached that the company would not pursue the strikers legally, but there was no mention of the legal attack against the union. Bell and the Executive waited for the Taff Vale directors to act and it looked for a time that they had decided not to. However on December 13th 1901 a claim for damages against the ASRS was lodged by the company.

A further complication now arose. ASRS General Secretary Richard Bell and South Wales and the West Country organiser James Holmes disliked each other intensely. Bell was an average speaker whereas Holmes was 'the best orator the ASRS had'. Bell had sought a seat in Parliament on a Liberal ticket, was moderate and 'calculating'. Holmes, a passionate socialist and active member of the Independent Labour Party, 'wore his heart on his sleeve'. They hardly spoke to each other.

Bell held Holmes to be partly to blame for the situation the ASRS found itself in and set about separating Holmes defence from the union and its other officers. Bell contacted officers of Accrington and Liverpool branches and furnished them with a list of activities carried out by Holmes during the dispute which were in violation of the unions rules. These branches dutifully appealed to the Executive that it should refuse to pay for Holmes defence. When the executive turned the appeal down the two branches sought and were granted an injunction against the union to restrain it from spending union funds on the defence of Holmes.

A meeting was called at the Maskells Hotel Cardiff attended by Holmes, local trade union leaders and councillors. The decision was taken to make a national appeal to trade unionists to finance Holmes defence. Two thousand circular letters were sent out raising £436-Os-4d. A second fund-raising committee was later constituted and further appeals took place resulting in a total of £1,172-11 s-6d being raised, enough to cover the defence costs, posting and printing.
The hearing for damages against the union totalling £24,626 took place in the Kings Bench Division of the High Court of Justice, presided over by Mr Justice Wills, it lasted from 3rd to 19th December 1902. Holmes was criticised by the judge in his summing up as guilty of "conduct impossible to excuse". The jury took just ten minutes to find on all counts against the ASRS. Out of court discussions reduced the amount to £23,000 which was paid on 23rd March 1903, however the total cost to the union came to a staggering £42,000. Today that amount of money would be equal to £2,430,000.

The decision of the Lords was applauded by bosses up and down the country. Vassell told a shareholders meeting that year 'the importance of the judgement could not be exagerated'. During a strike it would be possible to carry on with business so long as an alternative suitable workforce could be found who would now be free of 'intimidation' from the unions. If the unions could be held to have acted in an unlawful way they would have to pay losses to the company from their funds. This meant 'their power to promote and engineer strikes' would be crippled. The London newspaper ECHO commented: 'A strike under these conditions becomes nearly impossible and without the right to strike, however cautious it may be in using it, a union is impotent'.

A grateful Taff Vale Railway Company gave Beasley a gratuity of £1000 "In recognition of his services". A year later an 'Employers Testimonial Committee' gave him another £1000, a pair of silver candelabra and a pendant brooch for his wife. In May 1903 the Council of the Railway Companies Association made a contribution of £5,000 to the Taff Vale Railway Company towards their legal costs. According to its chairman the Taff Vale company that year paid its shareholders 'the highest dividend on any railway in the country'. Beasley and Vassal! were both proud of what they had achieved.

News of the Law Lords decision was received with dismay by trade unionists everywhere. It meant that strikes were legal but almost all forms of picketing, necessary to make the strike effective were not. A union could be sued for damages caused by a strike. Some even asserted that the idea of the right to have a trade union was now to be seen as an illusion. The fear felt by the unions can be seen in the fact that, in spite of rises in the cost of living, the number of strikes each year were half that of the years in the preceding decade.

However, the duplicitous Beasley and Vassals' days of being the darlings of the boss class were numbered. They were responsible for bringing about the Taff Vale judgement, but they had no control over reaction to its consequences.

The Phoenix Rises from the Ashes

In those times the majority of working class people voted Liberal. The four ASRS General Secretaries of the nineteenth century were Liberal supporters and this support was not confined just to the ASRS, other unions were the same. Trade union leaders who ran for parliament in constituencies that had a significant union presence sought sponsorship from the divisional organisations of the Liberal Party and were known as 'Lib-Lab' candidates. The parliament of 1892-5 had ten of these 'Lib-Lab' MPs. In those times the majority of working class people voted Liberal. The four ASRS General Secretaries of the nineteenth century were Liberal supporters and this support was not confined just to the ASRS, other unions were the same. Trade union leaders who ran for parliament in constituencies that had a significant union presence sought sponsorship from the divisional organisations of the Liberal Party and were known as 'Lib-Lab' candidates. The parliament of 1892-5 had ten of these 'Lib-Lab' MPs.

At Bradford in 1893 the Independent Labour Party (ILP) was formed, a socialist party that had a policy of total independent Labour representation in parliament and its influence was strong in the ASRS. As early as 1894 the ASRS President urged the AGM at Newport to 'raise one common standard for the cause of labour, alone clear and distinct from either of the two main political parties' and by 1899 ILP policy was firmly endorsed by the ASRS. The socialists influence at the TUCs' annual congress had been growing, they made passionate speeches that carried the day at a time when there was no 'bloc vote'. Indeed, along with successfully excluding the participation of Trade Councils and individual politicians, the TUC introduced bloc voting in 1895 because a show of hands favoured the fiery socialist speakers. Nevertheless ASRS organising secretary and socialist James Holmes successfully moved the resolution at the 1899 TUC held at Plymouth that led five months later to the formation of the Labour Representation Committee.

Whilst the ILP policy was supported by the ASRS majority this was not the position of the other unions. The ASRS virtually sponsored the February 1900 London meeting which decided to form the Labour Representation Committee (LRC). The union had a delegation of four amongst whom was the editor of Railway Review, George Wardle, who seconded the vital resolution in favour of 'a distinct labour group in Parliament who shall have their own Whips and agree on their policy'.

The ASRS, the Gasworkers and Steel Smelters were the first to affiliate to the LRC, but the unions were divided, only a third of all trade unionists were represented at the London meeting. Important organisations like the Textile Workers unions remained aloof and, apart from Lancashire and Cheshire, the Miners Associations were unenthusiastic or outright opposed. The powerful Yorkshire Miners Association position was an indication of the mood. Addressing the miners' membership its annual report stated - ' We should like to ask our members why we should be called upon to join an association having only one object in view, viz. that of providing means for other trades to send representatives to the House of Commons. Why should we be called upon to find money, time or intellect to focus the weaknesses of other trade unionists to do what you are doing yourselves?'

The inaugural meeting itself rejected a proposal to levy the unions a rate of one penny a member because it was held to be 'premature'. When a year later the first annual conference of the LRC took place ILP delegate Philip Snowden spoke of the 'feeling of despondency' at the meeting, that 'it looked as if this new effort was going to share the fate of previous attempts to secure the direct representation of labour.'

The Taff Vale judgement was to shake the trade unions out of their political complacency. Within two weeks of the judgement Ramsay MacDonald, acting on behalf of the LRC, wrote to every trade union stating that 'The recent decision of the House of Lords should convince the unions that a Labour Party in Parliament is an immediate necessity'.

Realising their situation the trade unions now rallied to the LRC. By 1904 Affiliation rose dramatically from 41 unions with an overall membership of 375,931, to 165 with a membership of 969,800. The LRC annual conference in 1903 agreed by a large majority to adopt the same resolution for a levy of one penny per member they had rejected at the inaugural meeting. The same conference went further by agreeing to pay a quarter of the returning officers fees occurred on behalf of approved LRC Parliamentary candidates. In the days when MPs did not receive a salary it was further agreed to pay a wage of £200 per annum.

These decisions meant that the LRC was able to finance more candidates in the coming General Election. The increase in affiliation meant the LRC had a potential three quarters of a million votes behind them and they used that fact to bargain with the Liberals. That bargain was that in a limited number of constituencies a three cornered contest was to be avoided. The January 1906 General Election resulted in a landslide for the Liberals. The LRC fielded fifty candidates with victory for 29 of them, up from two at the previous election.

The new Liberal Government proceeded to draft a bill based on the findings of the 'Royal Commission on Trade Disputes' set up by the previous Government and now just published. The Commission did not have a single trade unionist on it and with just one member favourable to Labour (Sydney Webb) it offered the unions little. However the Governments own supporters rose in significant numbers to say they had made pledges during the election campaign to give wider protection to unions than those contained in the draft bill. Keir Hardie seized the opportunity and produced another bill - The Trade Disputes Bill- which was passed, the government unable to 'resist the numbers pledged to it'. Even some Tories supported the bill and it passed through the Lords with no problems, but not because of any wish on their part for social justice. Much was happening in Britain and Europe with socialists agitating for the end of capitalism, revolution itself was felt to be a possibility. As one Tory said "If they are denied the right to strike then what else may they do to achieve their aims?"

The '1906 Trade Disputes Act' fully legalised peaceful picketing. Workers could not have legal action taken against them for 'breach of contract' if it was done in pursuance of a trade dispute. Trade union funds would now be fully protected. The biggest victory was the clause that exempted trade unions from legal action:

'An action against a trade union whether of workmen or of masters, or against any members or officials thereof on behalf of themselves and all other members of the trade union in respect of any tortious act alleged to have been committed by or on behalf of the trade union , shall not be entertained in any court.'

Trade union solidarity had seen The Taff Vale Judgement was no more.
It is true that the South Wales railworkers did not deliberately set out to make history , nevertheless the importance of the their role cannot be overstated. If the events in South Wales had not happened there would surely not have been a '1906 Trade Disputes Act' as we know it. It is more likely the Conservative Governments 1903 'Royal Commission on Trade Disputes' recommendations would have formed the basis for new laws to harness the unions. The '1906 Trade Disputes Act' greatly strengthened the trade unions, giving them greater confidence to organise and fight.

However, more than that the Taff Vale Judgement created an understanding by trade unionists of the need for their voices to be heard directly in Parliament, with the majority now believing the only way of achieving it was through LRC affiliation. The LRC, with its central policy of independent representation for labour in Parliament, was itself strengthened from this greater understanding by trade unionists. If ILP leader Philip Snowden was correct in his view of the mood at the LRC first annual conference, then for sure the LRC was actually saved by the judgements effect on the unions. That means without the Taff Vale judgement there would have been no Labour Party created. It is surely a disgrace that laws, designed by the Tories to set the trade unions back one hundred years, are now supported by a government in power on the back of the same Labour Party.

The thoughts of Chairman Vassall, General Manager Beasley and the rest of the Taff Vale Railway Company, who had such contempt for those driven to work for them, do not seem to be recorded. They were no doubt angry at the eventual outcome and are long dead, but New Labour anti-trade union laws ensure they won't be turning in their graves.

Geoff Revell

With Acknowledgements and Thanks to.
Philip S.Bagwell.
G. Allcock.
British Library Newspapers.
Peoples History Museum.