Читать книгу Industrial Democracy - Sidney Webb - Страница 6

But it was not merely the workman's simplicity in matters N of government that hampered the growth of National organisa- tion. The traditional policy of the craftsman of the English town—the restriction of the right to work j^o those who had acquired the " freedom " of the corporation, the determined exclusion of " interlopers," and the craving to keep trade from going out of the town—has left deep roots in English industrial life, alike among the shopkeepers and among th&, workmen. Trade Unionism has had constantly to struggle against this spirit of local monopoly, specially noticeable in the seaport towns.^ , ^—

Down to the middle of the present century the ship- wrights had an independent local club in every port, each of which strove with might and main to exclude from any chance of work in the port all but men who had learnt their trade within its bounds. These monopoly rules caused incessant friction between the men of the several ports. Shipwrights out of work in one town could not perma- nently be kept away from another in which more hands were

1 It is interesting to note that the modern forms of the monopoly spirit are also specially characteristic of the industry of shipbuilding ; see the chapter on " The Right to a Trade."

VOL. I D 2

74 Trade Union Strtuture

wanted. The newcomers, refused admission into the old port society, eventually formed a new local union among them- selves, and naturally tended to ignore the trade regulations maintained by the monopolists. To remedy this disastrous state of things a loose federation was between 1850 and i860 gradually formed among the local societies for the express purpose of discussing, at annual congresses, how to establish more satisfactory relations between the ports. In the records of these congresses we watch, for nearly thirty years, the struf yprle of the monopolist SQekties_against the efforts ot those, SUCli da Glasgew—a«d—Neatsastle^^^ose drcumstanres had rnnvpri-p d them to a belief in compl ete mobility of labor with in a trad e. The open societies at last lost patience with tne conservative spirit of the others, and in 1882 united to form a national amalgamated union, based on the principle of a common purse and complete mobility between port and port. This organisa- tion, the Associated Shipwrights' Society, has, in fifteen years, succeeded in absorbing all but three of the local societies, and now extends to every port in the kingdom. "In thesd times of mammoth firms, with large capital," writes the general secretary, " the days of local societies' utility have gone by, and it is to be hoped the few still remaining outside the consolidated association of their trade will ere long lay aside all local animus and trivial objections, or personal feeling … for the paramount interest of their trade." ^

The history of the Shipwrights' organisation is typical of^-tbat_Q£_other port unions. The <mmerous societies of Sail makers, once ngJUty -mewftpnljat., are now ^. united in a fe deration, within whrV.h complete mobility p revails. The Coopers' societies, which in the port town."? "^ had formerly much in common with the Shipwrights, now, with one excep- tion, admit to membership any duly apprenticed cooper from

1 Twelfth Annual Report of Associated Shipwrights' Society (Newcastle, 1894), p. xi.

 Rules for the Guidance of the Federation of the Sailmakers of Great Britain

and Ireland (Hull, 1890).

The Unit of Government 75

another town. But the main citadels of local monopoly in the Trade Union world have always been the trade clubs of Dublin, Cork, and Limerick. The Dublin Coopers have, even at the present time, a rigidly closed society, which refuses all intercourse with other unions, and maintains, through an ingenious arrangement, a strict monopoly of this important coopering centre;^ and the Cork Stonemasons, who are combjped in an old local club, whilst insisting on working at Fermoy whenever they please, will not, as we learn, suffer any mason, from Fermoy or elsewhere, to obtain employment at Cork.

Even in Ireland, however, the development of Tra de> Unionism is hostile to local monopoly. Any growing in-i dustry is quickly invaded by members "of the great English I societies, who establish their own branches and force thef local clubs to come to terms. One by one old Irish unions] apply to be admitted as branches into the richer and more powerful English societies, and have in consequence to accept the principle of com plete mobility of labor. ^ The famous^

1 The arrangement is as follows : The Dublin Coopers do not prohibit strainers from working in Dublin when more coopers are wanted. On such occasions the secretary writes to coopers' societies in other towns, notably Burton, stating the number of men required. Upon all such outsiders a tax of a shilling a week is levied as " working fee," half of which benefits the DuTlftl society, the other half being accumulated to pay the immigrant's return fare. As soon as work shows signs of approaching slackness, the "foreigner" receives warning that he must instantly depart : it is said that his return ticket is presented to him, with any balance remaining out of his weekly sixpence. As many as 200 " strangers " will in this way sometimes be paid off, and sent away in a single week. By this means the Dublin Coopers (3) secure absolute regularity of employment for their own members, (i) provide the extra labor required in busy times, and (?) maintain their own control over the conditions under which the work is done. The employers appear to be satisfied with the arrangement, which, so far as we have •;en able to ascertain, is the only surviving instance of what was once a common rule of port unions. Thus, the rules of Queenstown Ship- wrights' Society, right down to its absorption in the Associated Shipwrights' Society (in 1894), included a provision that "no strange shipwright" should be allowed to work in the town while a member was idle. And the Liverpool Sailmakers' Society (established 1817) has, among the MS. rules preserved in the old minute-book, one providing that "strangers" with indentures should be allowed to work at " legal sail-rooms," but should members be unable to obtain employment elsewhere, then " the stranger shall be discharged and the member be engaged."

76 Trade Union Structure

"Dublin Regulars," a rigidly monopolist local carpenters' union, claiming descent from the gilds, and always striving to exclude from admission any but the sons of the members,' became, in 1890, at the instance of its younger members, one of the 629 branches of the Amalgamated Society of Car- penters and Joiners, bound to admit to work fellow-members from all parts of the world. A^mong the Irish Shipwrights, too, once the most rigidly monopolist of all, this tendency has progressed with exceptional rapidity. The annual report of the Associated Shipwrights' Society for 1893 records' the absorption irl that year alone of no fewer than six old Irish port unions, each of which had hitherto striven to maintain for its members all the work of its own port. > But although the growth of national organisation has (done much to break down this spirit of local monopoly, we do not wish to imply that it has been completely eradicated. The workman, whether a Trade Unionist or not, still shares with the shopkeeper and the small manu- facturer, the old instinctive objection to work " going out of the town." The proceedings of local authorities often reveal to us the " small master," the retail tradesman, and the local artisan kll insisting that "the ratepayers' money " should be spent so as directly to benefit the local trade. Trade Unionists are not backward in making use of this vulgar error when it suits their purpose, and the " labor members " of town or county councils can seldom refrain, whenever it is proposed "t6 send work into the country," from adopting an argument which they find so convincing to many of their middle-class colleagues.*

' See, for instance, the detailed account of It given in the Report on Tradt Societies and Strikes of the National Association for the Promotion of Social Science (i860), pp. 418–423. -

2 Twelfth Annual Report of the Associated Shipwright^ Society, p. xi. (New- castle, 1894).

' During the first eight years of the London County Council (1889–97) several attempts were made to confine contracts to London firms. It is interesting to note that these all emanated from middle-class members of the Moderate Party, and that they were opposed by John Burns and a large majority of the " Laboi Members " and Progressives, as well as by the more responsible of the " Moderates."

The Unit of Government 'j'j

But if we follow the Labor Member from the council chamber to his Trade Union branch meeting, we shall I'recognise that the grievance felt by his Trade Unionist GQjistituents is not exclusively, or even mainly, based on the " local protectionism " of the shopkeeper and the small manufacturer. What the urban Trade Unionist actually ^ resists is not any loss of work to a particular locality, but the incessant- attempt of contractors to evade the Trade Union regulations, by getting the work done in districts in which the workmen are either not organised at all, or in which they are working at a low Standard Rate. Thus the Friendly Society of Operative Stonemasons incurs consider- able odium because the branches in many large towns insert in their local rules a prohibition of the use of stone imported in a worked state from any outside district. But this general prohibition arises from the fact that the practical alternative to working the stone on the spot is getting it worked in the district in which it is quarried. Now, whatever mechanical or economic advantage may be claimed for the latter practice, it so happens that the quarry districts are those in which the Stonemasons are worst organised. In these districts for the most part, no Standard Rate exists, the hours of labor are long and variable, and competitive piece- work, unregulated by any common agreement, usually prevails. Moreover, any transference of work from the Stonemasons of large cities where jobs dovetail with each other, to the Stonemasons of quarry villages, entirely dependent on the spasmodic orders for worked stone received by the quarry owner, necessarily involves an increase in the number of Stonemasons exposed to irregularity of work, and habitually " on tramp " from county to county.^

 For instance the " Working Rules to be observed by the Master Builders

and Operative Stonemasons of Portsmouth," signed in 1893, by ten master builders and four workmen, on behalf of their respective associations, include the following provision, "That no piecework be allowed and no worked stone to come into the town except square steps, flags, curbs, and landings, and no brick- layers to fix worked stone." The London rules are not so explicit. As fonna.lly agreed to in 1892 by the associations of employers and employed, they provide

78 Trade Union Structure

We may trace a similar feeling in the protests frequently made by the branches of the National Union of Boot and Shoe Operatives, against work being sent into the country villages, or even from a centre in which wages are high, to one working under a lower " statement." That this is not merely a disguised " local protectionism " may be seen from the fact that the Northampton Branch actually resolved in 1888 to strike, not against Northampton employers sending work out of the town, but against a London manufacturer sending his work to Northampton.^ In 1889, the Executive Council of the same union found itself driven to take action against the systematic, attempts of certain employers to evade the wages agreement which they had formally entered into, by sending their work away to have certain processes

that " piecework and subcontracting for labor only shall on no account be resorted to, excepting for granite kerb, York paving and turning." The London Stone- masons, however, claim, as for instance in their complaint in 1894 against the Works Department of the London County Council, that this rule must be interpreted so as to exclude the use in London of stone worked in a quarry district. This claim was successfully resisted by the Tradte Union repre- sentatives who sat on the Works Committee. We subsequently investigated this case ourselves, tracing the stone (a long run of sandstoiie.kerb for park railings) back to Derbyshire, where it was quarried and worked. We found the district totally unorganised, the stonemasons' work being done largely by boy- labor, at competitive piecework, without settled agreement, by non-unionists, working irregular and sometimes excessive hours. It was impossible not to feel that, although the London Stonemasons had expressed their objection in the wrong terms and therefore had failed to obtain redress, they were, according to the " Fair Wages " policy adopted by the County Council and the House of Commons, justified in their complaint. Unfortunately, instead of bringing to the notice of the Committee the actual conditions under which the stone was being worked, they relied on the argument that the London ratepayers' money should be spent on London workmen. This argument, as they afterwards explained to us, had been found the most effective with the shopkeepers and small manufacturers who dominate provincial Town Councils. The Trade Unionist members of the London County Council proved obdurate to this economic heresy.

1 Shoe and Leather Record, 28th July 1888. In the same way a general meeting of the Manchester Stonemasons, in 1862, decided to support a strika against a Manchester employer who, carrying out a contract at Altrincham, eight miles off, had his stone worked at Manchester, instead of at Altrincham, as required by the working rules of the Altrincham branch. In this case, the Manchester Stonemasons struck against work coming to themselves at a higher rate per hour than was demanded by the Altrincham masons. — Stonemason^ fortnightly Return, September 1862.

The Unit of Government 79

done in lower - paid districts. These employers were accordingly informed, not that the work must be kept in the town, but that, wherever it was executed, the "shop statement " which they had signed must be adhered to. It was at the same time expressly intimated that if these employers chose to set up works of their own in a new place, " they will be at perfect liberty to do so," without objection from the union, even if they chose a low-paid district, " provided that they pay the highest rate of wages of the district to which they go." ^

We have quoted the strongest instances of Trade Union objection to " work going out of the town," in order to unravel, from the common stocE" Of ecunuiiTic~prejuaice, the impulse which is distinctive of Trade Unionism itself. It is customary for persons interested in the prosperity of one establishment, one town or one district, to seek to obtain trade for that particular establishment, town or district. Had Trade Unions remained, like the mediaeval craft gilds, organisations of strictly lo.cal membership, they must, almost inevitably, have been marked by a similar local favoritism. But the whole tendency of Trade Union history has beeij towards the solidarity of each trade as a whole. Th^ natural selfishness of the local branches is accordingly always; being combated by the central executives and national' lielegate meetings, in the wider interests of the whole body of the members wherever they may be working. Just in proportion as Trade Unionism is strong and well established we find the old customary favoritism of locality replaced by the impartial enforcement of uniform conditions upoij all districts alike. When, for instance, the Amalgamated Association of Cotton Weavers, in delegate meeting assembled, finally decided to adopt a uniform list of piecework prices, the members then working at Great Harwood found no sympathy for their plea that such a measure would reduce

1 The " National Conference " of the JUnion passed a similar resolution in 1886; Monthly Report of the National Union of Boot and Shoe Operatives. January 1887/and February 1889.

8o Trade Union Structure

their own exceptionally high rates. And although it was foreseen and declared that uniformity would tend to the concentration of the manufacture in the most favorably situated districts, to the consequent loss of the more remote villages, the delegates from these villages almost unanimously supported what was believed to be good for the trade as a whole.^

In another industry, the contrast between the old " local protectionism " and the Trade Unionist view has resulted in an interesting change in electioneering tactics. The London Society of Compositors and the Typographical Association have, for the last ten years, used more electoral pressure with regard to the distribution of local work, than any other Trade Union. So long as parliamentary electors belonged mainly to^ the middle class, a parliamentary candidate was advised by his agent to distribute his large printing orders fairly among all parts of his constituency, and under no circumstances to employ a printer living beyond its boundary. Now the astute agent, eager to conciliate the whole body of organised workmen in the constituency, confines his printing strictly to the best Trade Union establishments, although this usually involves passing over most of the local establishments and sometimes even giving work to firms outside the district. The influence of the Trade Union leaders is used, not to maintain their respective trades in all the places in which they happen to exist, but to strengthen, at the expense of the rest, those establishments, those towns, and even those districts, in which the conditions of work are most advantageous. \ fWe see, therefore, that in spite of the difficulties ^ government, in spite of the strong inherited tradition of |local exclusiveness, and in spite, too, of the natural selfish- ness of each branch in desiring to preserve its own local monopoly, the unit of government in the workmen's organ- isations, in complete contrast to the gilds of the master-

■ 1 Special meeting of General Council of Amalgamated Association of Cotton Weavers, 30th April 1892, attended by one of the authors ; see other instances cited in the chapter on "The Standard Rate."

The Unit of Government 8i

craftsmen, has become th elfi-ade l instead of the Jown.^_ Our description of this irresistiMe tendency to eipan-" sion has already to some extent /r evealed its cause, in the Trade Union desire to secure uniform minimum rnnHj^f f^^-a t hroughout each industiyj In our examination of the Methods and Regulations of Trade Unionism, and in our analysis of their economic working, we shall discover the means by which the wage-earners seek to attain this end, and the reasons which convince them of its importance. In the final part of our work we shall examine how far such an equality is economically possible or (^esirable. For the moment the reader must accept the fact thatfSiis uniformity of minimum is, whether wisely' or not, the most permanent of Trade Union aspirationsJ

Me anwhile it is interestmg to no te that 1 this conceptio n of^the jsolidarity ol each trade as a whol'g \'\ rbpckfrl by raci ^ differe nces^ 1 ne great national unions of Engineers and Carpenters find no difficulty in exte^iding their /)rganisa- tions beyond national boundaries, and 'easily (ppen^KaSches in the United States or the South African Republic, France" or Spain, provided that these branches are composed of British workmen.^ i^Vit it is needless' to say that it has not yet appeared practicable to any British Trade Union even to suggest amalgamation with the Trade Union of any other country^ Differences in legal position, in political status, in industrial methods, and in the economic situation between

1 Where at the present day a widespread English industry is without a pre- ponderating national Trade Union, it is simply a mark of imperfect organisation. Thus the numerous little Trade Unions of Painters, and Chippers and Drillers include only a small proportion of those at work in the trades.

 The Amalgamated Society of Engineers had, in 1896, 82 branches beyond

the United Kingdom, and the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners no fewer than 87. About half of these are in the United States or Canada, and most of the remainder in the Australian Colonies or South Africa. The Engineers had one branch in France, at Croix, and forinerly one in Spain, at Bilbao, where the United Society of Boilermakers also had a branch until 1894. I" the years 1 880–82 the United Society of Boilermakers even had a. branch at Con- stantmople. The only other English Trade Union having branches beyond sea is the Steam-Englne Makers' Society, which has opened lodges at New York, Montreal, and Brisbane.

82 Trade Union Structure

French and English workers—not to mention the barrier of language—easily account for the indisposition on the part of practical British workmen to consider an international amalgamated union. And it is significant that, even within the British Isles, the progress towards national union has been much hampered by differences of racial sentiment and divergent views of social expediency. The English carpenter, plumber, or smith who finds himself working in a Scotch town, is apt to declare the Scotch union in his trade to be little better than a friendly society, and^ to complain that Scotch workmen are too eager for immediate gain and for personal advancement sufficiently to resist such dangerous innovations as competitive piecework, nibbling at the Standard Rate, or habitual overtime. The Scotchman retorts that the English Trade Union is extravagant in its expenditure, especially at the head office in London or Manchester, and unduly restrictive in its Regulations and Methods. In some cases the impulse towards amalgama^ tion has prevailed over this divergence as to what is socially expedient. The United Society of Boilermakers, which extends without a rival from sea .to sea, was able in 1 88^ through the loyalty of the bulk of its Scottish members, to stamp out an attempted secession, aiming at a national society on the banks of the Clyde, which evoked the support of Scottish national feeling, voiced by the Glasgow Trades Council. In other cases Scotch pertinacity has conquered England. The Associated Shipwrights' Society, the rise and national development of which we have already described, sprang out of the Glasgow Shipwrights' Uiiion, which gave to the wider organisation its able and energetic secretary, Mr. Alexander Wilkie. The British Steel Smelters' Associa- tion (established 1886) haT spread from Glasgow over the whole industry in the Northern and Midland districts of England. In both these cases the Scotch, have " stooped to conquer," the Scottish secretary moving to an English town as the centre of membership shifted towards the south. But in other trades the prevailing tendency towards complete

The Unit of Government 83

national amalgamation is still baffled by the sturdy Scotch determination—due partly to differences of administration but mainly to racial sentiment—not to be " governed from | England."^ The powerful English national unions of Car- penters, Handworking Bootmakers, Plumbers, and Bricklayers have either never attempted or have failed to persuade their Scottish fellowrworkmen to give up their separate Scottish societies. The-xival national societies of Tailors are always at war, making periodical excursions across the Border, this establishment of branches in each other's territories giving rise to heated recriminations. In many important trades, such as the Compositors, Stonemasons, and Ironfounders, effective Trade Unionism is as old in Scotland as in England, and the two national societies in each trade, whilst retaining complete Home Rule, have settled down to a fraternal relationship, which amounts to tacit if not formal federation.

Ireland, presents a similar case of racial differences, working in a somewhat different manner. Whereas the English Trade Unions have keenly desired union with Scottish local societies, they have, until lately, manifested a m arked dislike to having anything to do with Ireland.'^ This has been, in some cases at least, the result of experience,

' Analogous tendencies may be traced in the Friendly Society movement, though to a lesser extent. The Scottish lodges of the Manchester Unity of Odd- fellows have their own peculiar rules. The Scottish delegates to the Foresters' High Court at Edinburgh in 1894, were among the most strenuous opponents of the proposal to fix the headquarters (at present moving annually from town to town) in London or Birmingham. And though exclusively Scottish Orders have never yet succeeded in widely establishing themselves, it is not uncommon for Scottish lodges to threaten secession, as when, in 1889, five Scottish lodges of the Bolton Unity of the Ancient Noble Order of Oddfellows endeavoured to start a new "Scottish Unity" (Oddfellows' Magazine, March 1889, p. 70). Such a secession from the Manchester Unity resulted in the "Scottish Order of Odd- fellows" which has, however, under 2000 members. There exist also the "St. Andrew's Order of Ancient Free Gardeners of Scotland," with 6000 members, and a " United Order of Scottish Mechanics," with 4000 members, which refuse to merge themselves in the larger Orders.

2 Scottish branches are declared by Trade Union secretaries to be profitable recruits from a financial point of view, because they are habitually frugal and cautious in dispensing friendly benefits.

84 Trade Union Structure

From 1832 down to 1840, Irish lodges were admitted to the Friendly Society of Operative Stonemasons, on the same footing as English, whilst the Scotch masons had already their independent organisation. The fortnightly reports during these years reveal constant friction between the central executive and the Irish branches, who would not agree among themselves, and who persisted in striking against members from other Irish towns. At the Delegate Meeting in 1839 the Irish branches had to be specially deprived of the right to strike without prior permission, even in those cases in which the rules allowed to English branches the instantaneous cessation of work to resist encroachments on established customs.^ But even with this precaution the drain of the Irish lodges upon the English members became unendurable. At length in 1 840, the general

"secretary was sent on a special- mission of investigation, which revealed every kind of financial irregularity. The Irish lo dges \y ere found to have a n in curable p rgpensjt^o d ispense benefits toall and sund r y irr e spective of th e_nUes,

>aSd^^inyincibIe _objection to Enfrlish methods nf arrnrmf- keeping . The Dublin lodge had to be dissolved as a punisljment for retaining to itself monies remitted by the Central Committee for other Irish lodges. The central executive who, in 1837, had successfully resisted a proposi- tion emanating from a Warwickshire district in favor of Home Rule for Ireland, " as such separation would injure the stability of the society," " now reported in its favor. " We are convinced," says the report, " that a very great amount of money had been sent to Ireland for the reli ef of tra mps, etc … to which they had no legal fight. … However much a separation may be regretted, we feel convinced that until they are thrown more on their own resources, they will not sufficiently estimate the benefits derivable from such an institution to exert themselves on its behalf." * The receipts

1 Rules of the Friendly Society of Operative Stonemasons (edition of 1839).

2 Resolutions of the Delegate Meeting 1837.

S Stonemason^ Fortnightly Return, 2nd January 1840.

The Unit of Government 85

from Ireland for the year had been £i,y : los., whilst the remittances to Ireland had amounted to no less than ;^545. It is not surprising that the society promptly voted the exclusion of all the Irish branches.

In 1850 the Executive Committee of the Provincial Typographical Association were " reluctantly compelled to declare their conviction that no English executive can successfully "manage an Association embracing branches so geographically distant and so materially different in their regulations and their mode of remuneration as those of the sister kingdom." The union thereupon gave up the one Irish branch (Waterford) which had not already insisted on its independence, and refused to entertain any proposals for new ones.^ Other societies which, in more recent years, have had Irish branches appear to have found them equally un- profitable, and a source of constant trouble. The records of the Amalgamated Society of Tailors are full of references to the extravagance and financial mismanagement of its Irish branches. During the year 1892 no less than four of the principal Irish branches of the society were rebuked by the Executive Council upon this account. One of these had sub- sequently to be closed, the Executive stating that its " report is altogether wrong, and does not balande. The contributions! do not average lod. per member, and the rent of the club- room is more than the whole income from the branch. If a . satisfactory explanation is not sent at once the branch must be closed."" Finally, in 1896, the Executive of the Associated

1 Half -Yearly Report »f the Provincial Typographical Association, 31st December 1850.

 Quarterly Report of the Amalgamated Society' of Tailors, April 1892.

Report on the Ennis branch. In this connection the following extract from the proceedings of the High Court of the Ancient Order of Foresters in 1894 will be interesting. The executive had found it necessary to hold a special investiga- tion into the afifairs of the Dublin District ; and they recommended the grant of certain advantages upon condition of reform. This proposal led to a lively debate. "Were they going," said one prominent Forester, "to encourage extravagant, reckless, and fraudulent mismanagement? The report presented to them showed distinctly that there had been extravagant, reckless, and fraudulent mismanagement. … Not less than ;^997 had been voted by previous High Courts towards the relief of Dublin Courts. … The Order's

86 Trade Union Structure

Shipwrights' Society reported that it had been compelled " to close the Dublin branch, notwithstanding that the E. C. had instructed both the general secretary and the Humber Delegate to visit them. We have not been able to receive any correct reports from them for some time, and the only word we could get from them was that there was no work and no money, yet when your representatives visited them the officers were so busy working they had not time to convene a meeting of members. … Your E. C, offered to have all the idle men sent to ports where em- ployment could be found them, but we are informed where this has been done some of these men, notwithstanding all that has been done for them, refused to pay up their arrears, and rather than pay left their employment and went home. … When the branch books were examined it was found they were paying both sick and unemployed benefit to members who were not entitled to it, and, the branch officers were receiving salary for work they failed or refused to do. Seeing the Dublin branch entirely ignored the registered rules, your E. C. had no other option but to close the branch. The different branches must deal with these men should they come to their ports." ^

/So strong, however, is the dominant impulse towards the complete union of a trade from one end of the United Kingdom to the other, that it seems, during the last few years, to be slowly overcoming the reluctance of both English and Irish organisations. From 1889 onward, we find such, great national unions as the Carpenters, Railway Servants, Engineers, Tailors, and Shipwrights freely opening branches in Irish towns and absorbing the surviving trade clubs of

Chief Official Valuer said ' the members have never done their duty.' That officer thereupon interposed with the remark, ' It was believed that in connection with sickness there was a good deal of malingering.' Another prominent Forester said he would attach the (Dublin) Courts to the Glasgow District. … There was only one element of danger, and it was of putting too many Irishmen together."—Foresters' Miscellany (September 1894), p. 180.

1 The Fifty-eighth Quarterly Report, July to September 1896, of the Assod ated Society of Shipwrights, p. 8.

The Unit of Government 87

local artisansjj The Provincial Typographical Association, now become the Typographical Association, has, since 1878, opened sixteen branches in Ireland, and now employs a salaried organiser for that island, whose efforts have brought in many recruits. This tendency has been greatly assisted, especially in the engineering and shipbuilding trades, by -the remarkable industrial development of Belfast. Since i860 a constant stream of skilled artisans from England and Scotland have settled in that town, with the result that it ftow possesses strong branches of all the national unions of both countries. With the shifting of the effective centre of Irish Trade Unionism from Dublin to Belfast has come an almost irresistible tendency to accept an English or Scottish government |Dn the other hand, attempts to unite the separate local societies of Irish towns in national Trade Unions for Ireland have almost invariably failed, the Irish clubs displaying far more willingness to become branches of British unions than to amalgamate among themselvesij

iPast experience of British Trade Unionism seems, there- fore, to point to the whole extent of each trade within the British Isles as forming the proper unit of government for any combination pf the wage-earners >in that trade. Any unit of smaller area produces an organisation of unstable, equilibrium, either tending constantly to expansion, or liable to supersession by the growth of a rival society. But there is a marked contrast between the union of" Scotland with England, and that effected between either of them and Ireland. The English and Scottish Trade Unions federate or combine with each other on equal- termj. - If complete amalgamation is decided on, it is frequently the Scotchman, bringing with him Scotch procedure and Scotch traditions,

' The Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants now (1897) possesses no fewer than 56 Irish branches, the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners 56, the Amalgamated Society of Tailors 35, the Amalgamated Society of Engineers 19, and the Associated Shipwrights' Society 9.

 Almost the only Irish national trade society is the Operative Bakers of

Ireland National Federal Union, formed in November 1889. An Irish Trade Union Congress has been held annually since 1894.

88 Trade Union Structure

who is chosen to reign in England, the centre of government being shifted almost automatically to the main centre of the industry. Union with Ireland invariably means the simple absorption of the Irish branch, and the unconditional accept- ance of the English or Scottish rules and organisation. This is usually brought about by the English or Scottish immi- grants into Ireland, aided by sections of Irish members who desire to escape from the weakness of internal dissensions, and to secure the benefits of efficient administration, with the -support of a comparatively wealthy and powerful organisation^ Passing now from the boundaries of the autonomous state to the relation between central and local authorities within it, we watch the Trade Unionists breaking away from the traditions of British Denipcra^^ In the political expansion of the Anglo-Saxon rac^'tne development- 'ot ' local institutions has at least kept pace with the extension of empire. In the other great organisations of the British working class, which have, equally with Trade Unionism, grown from small local beginnings' to powerful corporations^ of national, or even international extent, the workmen have , successfully maintained the complete independence of eachj local unit. The Co-operative Movement includes within the British Isles a nominal membership as great as that of Trade Unionism, with financial transactions many times larger in amount The 1700 separate Co-operative Societies have united in the colossal business federations of the English and Scottish Wholesale Societies, and in the educational and political federation called the Co-operative Union. But though the Co-operative Movement has gone through many developments since its re-birth in 1844, and has built up a " State within the State, " the great federal bodies ha ve

1 It may not be improper to observe, for English political readers, that the authors are divided in opinion as to the policy of granting Home Rule to Ireland, and are therefore protected against bias in drawing political inferences from Trade Union experience in this respect. If it is thought that the tacts adduced in this chapter tell against Irish self-government, the considerations brought forward in the next chapter may be regarded as making against the policy of complete union with Great Britain,

The Unit of Government 89

temained in all cases nothing but the agents an d servant s of the local societies / And if we turn to a movement still more closely analoggus to Trade Unionism, we may watch in the marvellous expansion of the " Affiliated Orders," among the friendly societies, the growth of a world-wide working^lass organisatibn, based on an almost complete autonomy of the separate " lodges " within each " Order." ^ To the members of an Oddfellows' Court or a Foresters' Lodge any proposal to submit an issue of policy to the federal executive would seem an unheard-of innovation. But it is in their financial system that this insistence on com- plete local autonomy shows itself most decisively. How- ever strongly the qualities of benevolence or charity may prevail among the Foresters or the Oddfellows, it has never occurred to their rich Courts or Lodges to regard their surplus funds as being freely at the disposal of those which were unable to meet their engagements. Each retains and controls its own funds for its own purposes, and its surplus balances are considered as being as much the private property of its own particular members as their individual investments.

To outward seeming the scattered members of a national Trade Union enjoy no less local self-government than those of the Ancient Order of Foresters or the Manchester Unity of Oddfellows. If the reader were to seek out, in som?" tavern of an industrial centre, the local meeting-place of thev Foresters or ,the Carpenters, the Oddfellows or the Boiler- makers, he might easily fail, on a first visit, to detect any important difference between the Trade Union branch and the court or lodge of the friendly society. The Oddfellows^ who use the club-room on a Monday, the Carpenters who meet there on a Tuesday, the Foresters who assemble on a Thursday, and the Stonemasons or Boilermakers who come

- 1 The Co-operative Movement in Great Britain, by Beatrice Potter (Mrs. Sidney Webb).

2 See The Friendly Societies' Movement (London, 1885) and Mutual Thrift (London, 1892), by the Rev. J. Frome Wilkinson, and English Associations oj Working Men, by Dr. J. Baernreither (London, 1892).

90 Trade Union Structure

on successive Fridays, all seem " clubs " managing their own affairs. Every night sees the same interminable proces- sion of men, women, and children bringing the contribution money. When the deliberations begin, they all affect the same traditional mystery about " keeping the do(|)r," and retain the long pause outside before admitting the nervous aspirant for " initiation " ; they all " open the lodge " with the same kind of cautious solemnity, and dignify with strange titles and formal methods of address the officers whom they are perpetually electing and re-electing. But if the visitor listens carefully he will notice, in the Trade Union business, constant references to mysterious outside authorities.' The whole branch may show itself in favor of the grant of benefit to a particular applicant, but the secretary will observe that any such payment would have to come out of his own pocket, as the central executive has intimated that the case is not within its interpretation of the rules. The branch treasurer may announce that the balance in hand has suddenly sunk to a few pounds, as he has been ordered by the central office to remit ;^ioo to a branch at the other end of the kingdom. And when a question arises as to some dispute with an employer, the visitor will be surprised to find that this characteristic Trade Union business is not in the hands of the branch at all, but is being dealt with by another outside authority, the " district," on instruc- tions from the general secretary. ^

y . Trade Unionism has, in fact, been based, from the outset' T jn the principle of the solidarity of the trade . Even the eighteenth-century clubs of handicraftsmen, without nation^ organisation of any kind, habitually contributed their surplus

1 Branch meetings of Trade Unions are private, but it is not impossible for a bona-fide student of Trade Unionism to gain admission as the friend of one of the officials. The authors have attended branch meetings of almost every trade in various industrial centres, and have found their proceedings of great interest, not only as revealing the inner working of Trade Unionism, but also as displaying the marked differences of physique, intellect, and character between the different sections of the wage-earning class, often erroneously regarded as homogeneousl Some of these differences are referred to in the- chapter on " The Assumptions of Trade Unionism."

The Unit of Government 91

balances in support of each other's temporary needs. When the clubs drew together in a national union, it was assumed, as a matter of course, that any cash in pos- session of any branch was available for the needs of any •other branch. Thus we learn from the resolution of th^ Stonemasons' Delegate Meeting of 1833, that the several lodges were expected spontaneously to send their surplus monies to the aid of any district engaged in a strike.^ This archaic trustfulness in the brotherhood of man still contents such a conservative- minded trade as the Coopers, whose " Mutual Association " remains only a loose alliance of local clubs, aiding each other's disputes by voluntary grants." But in the large industries the same spirit soon embodied itself in formal machinery. Among the Stonemasons the primi- tive arrangement was, it is not surprising to learn, in the opinion of the "Grand Central Committee," wholly in- efficient," each district sending only such funds as it chose, and selecting which out of several districts on strike it would support. The next step, which appears in the first manu- script rules (probably of 1834), was to make each branch " immediately contribute a proportionate share " of the cost of maintaining each strike, fixed by the Grand Committee. Finally, in 1837, we have what has become the typical Trade Union arrangement of a fund belonging, not to the branch, but to the society ; available only for the purposes prescribed by the rules, but within those purposes common to the whole organisation.

It is easy to unders:and why the Stonemasons, dispersed over the country in rwlatively small groups, each conscious of its own isolation and weakness in face of the great capitalist contractor, should quickly seize the idea of a common " war-chest." The Carpenters, working under much ,

 Circular of " Grand Central Committee," held in Manchester, 28th

November 1833, preserved in the records of the Friendly Society of Operative Stonemasons.

2 See the various " monthly reports " of the Mutual Association of Coopers. A proposal is under discussion to form a central fund, fed by regular contributions for the aid of any branch un^er attack.

92 Trade Union Structure

the same circumstances, express this feeling in the following terms : " Although oceans may separate us from each other, our interests are identical ; and if we become united under one constitution, governed by one code of rules, having one common fund available wherever it may be required, we thus acquire a power which, if judiciously exercised, will protect our interests more effectually and will confer greater advan- tages than can possibly be derived from any partial union." ^ But we may see the same process of financial centralisation at work in trades densely concentrated in a small area.j The Cotton-spinners of Oldham and the surrounding towns were, down to 1879, organised as a federation of ten financially autonomous societies, each collecting, expending, and investing its own funds. The great trade struggle of 1877–78 revealed the weakness of this form of organisation. To quote the words of an official of the trade,*^ "The result was that when a strike occurred, some of the branches were on the point of bankruptcy, whilst others were in a good position as regards funds for maintaining the struggle. They soon found out their real fighting strength was gauged, not by the worth of their richest branch, but by the poorest. It was another exemplification of the old law of mechanics that the strength of the chain is represented by its weakest link. After the struggle they remedied the defect by enacting that all surplus funds should be deposited in one common account." Since that time each division of the Lancashire Cotton-spinners has adopted the principle of centralised funds]. " We hold," says the General Secretary of the Bolton Spinners, " that where the labour of any number of men is subject to the same fluctuatioiis of trade, when the product of their labour goes into the same market, and when the prices and conditions which regulate their wages are identical, it is imperative upon such men, if they (ivish to protect their

' Preface to the Rules of the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joinen (Manchester, 1891).

' The late John Fielding, secretary of the Bolton Provincial Operative Cotton- spinners' Association, one of the ablest leaders of tho Cotton-spinneis.

The Unit of Government 93

labour, to combine together in one association. It is not sufBcient that they shall join separate district societies which in time may boast of possessing a respectable resei've fund entirely under their own control. We have no hesitation in saying that any such accumulated funds are of little use in promoting their purely trade interests." ^

The paramount ri ecessity of a. central fund, available fol^ the defence of any branch that might be involved in indus- trial war, has becpme so plain to every Trade Unionist that society after society has adopted the principle of a common purser- But a common purse, as one or two striking inttany psj amo ng successf ul friendly societies prove, does not, in itself; nece ssarily, involve the establishp r ^nt "* n d n m inn nt f i ' iilTi i lj <>vpriitivpjyip1HiTi[T all arii^i'^igtr^f ivp pnwpr . Where business, ran "Ge reduced to prec-ise rules, into the carrying out oK which no quest ion of policy enters, and no discretion' is allowed^ experience shows, as we shall presently see, that , local branch administratioiT may be as efficient and econo- ' mical as that of a central authority^ But the expenditures of the Trade Union funds is determined, not exclusively byj the legislation of its members, but largely by the judgment! of its administrators. In all matters of trade protection, whether it be the elaboration of a complicated list of piece- work prices, the promotion of a new factory bill, the nego- tiation of a national agreement with the associated employers,] or the conduct of a strike, it passes the wit, of man to pre- scribe by any written rule the exact method or amount of the expenditure to be incurred. It follows that the larger' and most distinctive part of Trade Union administration,! unlike the award of friendly benefits, cannot be predeter- mined by any law or scale, but must be left to the discretion] of the executive authority. To vest this discretion abso-N lutely and exclusively in the central executive representing the whole body of members is, it is plain, the only way by which those who have contributed the income can retain

1 Annual Refort of the Bolton Provincial Operative Cotton-siinner^ Associa- tion, 1882.

94 Trade Union Struchire

\^ ' any control over its expenditure. But this developmenn

necessarily entails the withdrawal from the branches of alK real autonomy in issues of policy and in the expenditure ofl their part of the common income. iLibllQWSjiecessarilYJromj t he merging of the fa aBch -iiT aQiffi i nfo n fu n d nomgion to the whole society, and froni. the . repl enishn ient of this fund by~levles Upon'^11 thTlmembers alike,4hat__iia.locanBraiich T!afl~sateiy be permitted'to "mvolve the whole organisatioii in wan" n^entraIIsatIonl)f finance implies, in a milita nt ^organi - sation, cg uUdlibation a f adm m istratio n. inose irade Unions which have most completely recognised this fact have proved most efficient, and therefore most stable. Where funds have been centralised, and power nevertheless left, through the inadvertence or lack of skill of the framers of the rules, to

local authorities, the result has ^been weakness, divided

counsels, and financial disaster.

This cardinal principle of democratic finance has been only slowly and imperfectly learnt by Trade Unionists, and a lack of clear insight into the matter still produces calami- tous results in large and powerful organisations. To take, for instance, the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, which was formed for the express "purpose of bringing about a uniform trade policy under the control of a central executive. It was intended to secure this result by providing that strike pay should be awarded only by the central executive, leaving the branches to dispense the other benefits prescribed by the rules. But unfortunately this strike pay amounts only to five shillings a week, it being assumed that the member leaving his work will also be receiving the Out of Work donation of ten shillings a week, awarded by his branch. This con- fusion of Jtrade with friendly benefits has resulted in a serious weakening of the authority of the central executive in matters of trade policy. Whenever the men working in any engineering establishmeint are dissatisfied with any decision of their employer, they can appeal to their own branch, and, on obtaining its permission, may drop their tools, with the certainty that they will receive at the cost of the whole :

The Unit of Government • 95

society the Out of Work benefit of ten shillings a week.* The matter will be reported, in due course, by the district committee to the central executive, even if the branch itself does not trouble to apply for permission to pay the additional five shillings A ' week contingent benefit. But meanwhile, war has been -declared, and has actually begun ; the local employers may have retaliated with a lock-out, the whole district may even have "come out" in support of their fellow-workmen ; and the society may find its prestige and honor involved in maintaining a great industrial conflict without its central executive ever having decided that the* point at issue was one which should be fought at all. This, indeed, is precisely what happened in the most disastrous"^ and discreditable of recent trade disputes, the prolonged strike of the Engineers and Plumbers in the Tyneside ship- building yards in 1892, when thousands of men were idle for over three months, not in order to raise the Standard of Life of themselves or any other section of the workers, but because the local Engineers and Plumbers could not agree as to which of them should fit up two-and-a-half incl/ iron piping. It would be easy for any student of the records of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers to pick out many other cases in which branches have, by paying the Out of Work donation to members refusing work, initiated important trade movements on their own account, without the prior knowledge or consent of the central • executive.

This uiifortunate confusion between Out of Work benefit and strike pay is not the only ambiguity that perplexes the administrators of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers. Although any authorised dispute is supported

• This injurious practice has been greatly strengthened by the fact that the "contingent fund," out of which alone the strike pay could formerly be granted, has often been abolished and subsequently re-established, by votes of the members. -During the periods in which the contingent fund did not exist, the society had no other means of resisting encroachments than the award of Out of Work benefit to members who refused to submit to them. But this left the decision to the branch, though the funds which it dispensed were levied equally on the whole society.

96 Trade Union Structure

from the funds of the society as a whole, it is left to th^ local members through their district committee to begin the quarrel. This would seem to mean complete local autononi}^ and it is cherished as such by the more active branches. But the rule also provides that the resolutions of district committees shall be " subject to the approval " of the central executive, the ultimate veto, though not the direction of the policy, being thus vested in headquarters. The incapacity of the Engineers to make up their minds whether or not they desire local autonomy in trade policy, has more than once placed the society in an invidious and even ludicrous position. Tlius, in the autumn of 1895 the Belfast branches, with the confirmation of the central fexecutive, struck for an advance. The federated employers thereupon locked out, not only all the Belfast engineers, but also those on the Clyde. In the negotiations which ensued the central executive naturally represented the society, and eventually arranged a com- promise, which was approved by the Clyde branches. The Belfast branches, on the other hand, refused to accept the agreement or to consider the strike at an end, and went on issuing full strike pay, from the funds of -the whole society, to all their members. The central executive found itself bitterly reproached by the federated employers for what seemed a breach of faith, and public opinion was scandalised by the lack of loyalty and discipline. Eventually the dead- lock was ended by the central executive taking upon itself peremptorily to order the Belfast members to resume work, without waiting for the resolution of the district committee. Whether the central executive had any right to intervene 'atx all, otherwise than by confirming or disallowing a resolution of the district committee, became a matter of heated con- troversy; and the Delegate Meeting of 1896 not only passed a resolution censuring this action, but also framed a new rule which expressly deprives both the central executive and the district committee of the. power of closing a dispute, by making the consent of a two-thirds majority of the local., members—some or all of whom must be the very persons

The Unit of Government ' 97

concerned—necessary to the closing of a strike.* This fanatical attachment of the Engineers to an extreme local autonomy—their persistent assumption that any one section, however small and unimportant, ought to be allowed to draw on the funds of .the whole society in support of a policy of which the majority of the members may disapprove—has done incalculable harm to the Amalgamated Society of Engineers, It has been jbhe source of a continuous and need- less drain on the society's resources. It has more than once involved thousands of members in a lock-out, when they had no quarrel of their own. It deprives the federated employers of all confidence in those who meet them on the workmen's behalf. And, most important of all, it effectually prevents the society from maintaining any genuine defence of the conditions of its members' employment. National agree- ments such as are concluded by the United Society of Boiler- makers, the Amalgamated Association of Operative Cotton- spinners, and the National Union of Boot and Shoe Operatives, by which a general levelling-up of conditions is secured, must necessarily be out of the power of an organ- isation which cannot give its negotiators the mandate of a common will.

The same conflict between centralisation of finance and the surviving local autonomy of the branches may be traced in the rules of most of the unions in the building trade.' Here the tradition has »been to require the assent of the whole society, or of the central executive as its representa- tive, before any branch may strike, or even negotiate, for an increase of wages or new trade privileges. But it has been no less firmly rooted in the practice of the building trades, for any branch, or even any individual workman, instantly to cease work, without consulting the central executive, whenever an employer makes an encroachment on the existing Working Rules of thjat town. In such cases, by the rules of most of 'the national unions in these trades, strike pay is granted by the branch as a matter of course,

1 Rules of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers (London, 1896), p. 54. VOL. I

98 Trade Union Structure

A branch is accordingly expressly authorised to involve the whole society in war, whenever its own interpretation of existing customs is challenged by an employer, even in the minutest particular. We may easily imagine how greatly international hostilities would be increased,, if the governor of every colony or out-lying dependency were authorised instantly to declare war, in the name and on the resources of the whole empire, whenever, in his own private judg- ment, any infringement of national rights had taken place. And although, in the Trade Unioii instance, each particular branch dispute is usually neither momentous nor prolonged, the result is a captious and spasmodic trade policy, some- times even ridiculous in its inconsistency, which the cefltral executive has no effective power to check. The Friendly Society of Operative Stonemasons and the Operative BrickV layers' Society have, until recent years, specially suffered froc a constant succession of petty quarrels with particular em-| ployers, most of which would have been avoided if the pointi at issue had been made the subject of quiet negotiation by an ofificer acting on behalf of the whole society.^ ThisJias been dimly perceived by the leaders of the building^teades. Among the Bricklayers and Stonemasons, the traditiotiak right of the branch to strike against encroachments, without authorisation from the central executive, has hitherto been too firmly held to be abolished ; but the newer editions of the rules expressly limit this right to certain kin3s" of encroachment, and require the branch to obtain the

• Sometimes the interpretation placed by two branches on the Working Rules of one or both of them may seriously differ. The Kendal branch of the Friendly Society of* Operative Stonemasons had, in 1873, in its Working Rules, a provision requiring employers to provide dinner for men sent to work beyond a certain distance from their homes in the town. A Kendal employer sent members of the Kendal branch to a. place twenty miles away which was within the district of another branch having no such rule. The Kendal masons insisted on their employer complying with the Kendal rules, whereupon he replaced them by men belonging to the local branch, who contended that the Kendal rules did not apply to work done in the J district. This fine point in interpretation led to endless recrimination between the two branches, and much local friction. Finally the issue was referred to a vote of the whole society, which went against the Kendal branch. — Fortnightly Return, October i87,'{.

The Unit of Government 99

authority of the whole society before resisting any other kind pf attack. The Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners has advanced a step further in centralisation of policy. For the last twenty years its rules have expressly forbidden any branch to strike " without first obtaining the sanction of the executive council , . . whether it be for a new privilege or against an encroachment on existing ones." ' It is no mere coincidence that the Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners, though younger than many other societies in the building trades, is now the largest and most wealthy of them all.

The difficulties that beset the Amalgamated Society of Engineers and the Operative Bricklayers' Society have been overcome by the United Society of Boilermakers, a union which has found a way to combine efficient administration of friendly benefits with a strong and uniform trade policy. Here the problem has been solved by an absolute separa- tion, both in name and in application, between the trade and friendly benefits. The "donation benefit" for the support of the unemployed is restricted to "a man thrown out of employment through depression of trade or other causes," testified by • " a note signed by the foreman or by three full members that are working in the shop or yard he has left," and proved to the satisfaction of the officers of the branch. This benefit cannot be given to a man leaving his employment on a dispute of any kind whatsoever. Strike ^ pay is an entirely separate benefit, awarded, even in the case of a single workman, only by the central executive, and payable only upon its express and particular direction.^ It follows that, although the branches administer the friendly benefits, they are not allowed to deal in any way with trade matters. If any dispute arises betweenj an employer and his workmen, or even between him and one of his workmen, the case is at once taken up by the district, delegate, an officer appointed by and acting for the whole

1 Rule 28, sec. lO of edition of 1893, p. 66. ' Rules of the United Society of Boilermahrs (^t^casWs, 1895).

loo Trade Union Structure

society, in constant communication witli the general secretary at headquarters. No workman may drop his tools, or even give notice to his employer, over any question of trade privileges, except with the prior authorisation of the district delegate ; and to make doubly sure that this law shall be implicitly obeyed, not a penny of beneifit may be paid 1^ the branch in any such case, except on the express direction of the central executive.

Nevertheless, the Trade Union branch, even in the most centralised society, continues to fulfil an indispensable function in Trade Union administration, As an association for mutual insurance, for the provision of sick pay, funeral expenses, and superannuation allowance, the Trade Union, like the friendly society, governs its action by definite rules and fixed scales of benefit, which are nowadays settled as an act of legisla- tion by the society as a whole. Even the Out of Work benefit—the " Donation " or " Idle Money," which none but trade societies have found it possible to undertake, is dealt with in the same manner. The printed constitution of the typical modern union prescribes in minute detail what sums are to be paid for sickness or out of work benefit, and attemptis to provide by elaborate rules for ^very possible contingency. The central executive rigidly insists on the^ rules being obeyed to the letter, and it might at first seem as if nothing had been left for the branch to do. This is very far from being the case. To protect the fun^ from imposition, local and even personal knowledge is indispensable. Is a man sick or malingering? Has an unemployed member lost his situation through slackness of his employer's business or slackness of his own energy? These are questions that can best be answered by men who have worked with him in the factory, know the foreman who has dismissed him, and the employer who has refused to take him on, and are acquainted ■with the whole circumstances of his life. Here we find the practical utility whicn has kept the Trade Union branch alive as a vital part of Trade Union organisation

The Unit of Government loi

It serves as a jury for determining, not questions of policy, but issues of fact.^

And if for a moment we leave the question of local self- government, and consider all the functions of the branch, we shall recognise the practical convenience of this institution' even in the most highly centralised society.,__]jLis_ao small! gain in ar-de mocratic organisation ^r} h?^^" incnrfri tVio. regular meetincT tofrpfher rtf tVip p; reat bulk of the membe rs, under conditi ons whic h lead direc Uy to the discussion of th eir comm on need_§ ^ i>lor< xs tEeeducational val ue of the branch meeting its only justification! In every Trade^ U nion, vPhether governed by Ihu Refeieudum or by a Representative Assembly,

' The utility of this jury system, if we may so describe the branch function, may be gathered from the experience of other benefit organisations. It is, to begin with, significant that the great industrial insurance companies and collecting societies, with their millions of working-class customers, and their ubiquitous network of paid officials, but without a jury system, find it financially impossible to undertake to give even sick pay, let alone out of work benefit. The Prudential Assurance Company, the largest and best managed of them all, begaJto'do so,' but had to abandon it because, as the secretary told the Royal Commission on Friendly Societies in 1873, "after five years' experience we found we were unable to cope with the fraud that was practised." Among friendly societies proper, in which sick benefit is the main feature, it is instructive to find that it is among the Poiesters and Oddfellows, where each court or lodge is financially autonomous, that the rate of sickness is lowest. One interesting society, the Rational Sick and Burial Association (established in 1837 by Robert Owen and his ' ' Rational Religionists "), is organised exactly like a national amalgamated Trade Union, with branches administering benefits payable from a common fund. In this society, as we gather, the rate of sickness is slightly greater than in the Affiliated Orders, where each lodge not only decides on whether benefit shall be given, but also has itself to find the money. Finally, when we come to the Hearts of Oak Benefit Society, the largest and most efficient of the centralised friendly societies having no branches at all, and dispensing all benefits from the head office, we find the rate of sickness habitually far in excess of the experience of the Foresters or the Oddfellows, or even of the Rationals, an excess due, according to the repeated declarations of the actuary, to nothing but inadequate provision against fraud and malingering. During the eight years 1884–91, for instance, the "expected sickness," according to the 1866–70 experience of the Manchester U^ity of Oddfellows (all districts), was 1,111,553 weeks; the actual weeks for which benefit was drawn numbered no fewer than 1,452,106, an excess of over 30 per cent (An Enquiry into the Methods, etc, of a Friendly Society, by R. P. Hardy, 1894, p. 36). " Centralised societies," says the Rev. Frome Wilkinson, " will never be able to avoid being imposed upon ; not so, however, a well-regulated branch of an affiliated society with its machinery in good working order" (The Friendly Societies Movement, p. 193). See also " Fifty Years of Friendly Society Progress," by the same author, in the Oddfellowi \fagatine for 1888.

I02 Trade Union Structure

the branch forms an integral part of the legislative machinery If the laws are made by the votes of the members, it is t Ee^ranch meeting which is the deliberative assembly, anH usually also th e polling plac ed When the society enjoys Tally developed representative institutions, the branch becomes

[ at once a natural and convenient electoral division, and supplies, what is so sorely needed in political democracy, a means by which the representative must regularly meet every section of his constituents. In other trades it is common to

' require that nq important alteration of the society's rules shall be put before the Representative Assembly until it has been first discussed, and sometimes voted on, by one or more of the branches. In attending branch meetings we have found most interesting that jiart of the evening which is taken up with the reports made by the branch representatives on the local Trades Council, on a district or joint committee of the trade, or in the Representative Assembly of the society itself It has often occurred to us how much it would enliven and invigorate political democracy if the member of Parliament or the Town Councillor had habitually to report to, and discuss with, every section of his constituents, supporters and opponents alike, all the public business in which they were interested. Quite apart, therefore, from any administrative functions, organisation by branches has manifold uses, even in the most centralised society. But these usps have little connection with the problem of centralisation and local autonomy. In all these respects the branches are not separate units of government, but constitute, iri effect, a single mass meeting of members, geographically sliced up into aggregates of convenient size.

' Thus, in the vexed problem of how to divide ad-

iministration between central and local authorities. Trade Union experience affords no g:uide, either to other volun- tary associations or to political democracy. /The extreme centralisation of finance and policy, which the Trade Union has found to be a condition pf^ efficiency, has been forced

^upon it by the unique character of its functions, i The lavish

The Unit of Government 103

generosity with which the early trade clubs granted their surplus funds right and left to the clubs in other towns that needed assistance, was not simply an outburst of brotherly unselfishness. Each club had a keen appreciation that a reduction of wages in one centre was likely soon to spread to other towns, as a result either of the competition among the employers, or of the migration among the workmen. And when the various local clubs drew together into a national combination and appointed one salaried officer after another, to execute the commands of a central executive, this was not due to any indifference to local self-government or liking for bureaucracy, nor even to any philanthropic impulse to be kind to their weaker brethren, but |to a dim recognition of their own dependence upon securing a trade policy uniform from one end of the kingdom to the other^ This aspiration has crystallised in the minds of all experienced Trade Unionists into a fixed conviction, which has long since spread to the rank and file. It is obvious t hat a uniform policy can only b^ a rrived at and maintained by a central body act ing for the whole trade. A nd thus it comes about that the constant tendency to a centralised and bureaucratic administration is, in the Trade Union world, accepted, and even welcomed, by men who, in all the other organisations to which they belong, are sturdy defenders of local autonomy.^

' This generalisation applies, in its entirety, only to the trade funds and trade policy of the unions. In so far as the friendly society side of Trade Unionism is used only as an adventitious attraction in obtaining members, there is no inherent difficulty in each local branch, in its capacity of " benefit club," fixing its own rates of contribution, retaining its own funds, and administering its own affairs, whilst at the same time forming part, for all trade protection purposes, of a strictly centralised national combination. More usually, however, the friendly society side of Trade Unionism is valued also for the adventitious aid which its accu- mulating funds bring to the war chest. Thus we find that the , national Trade i Unions, with very few exceptions, have now centralised not only their trade but also their friendly society resources, the whole of each member's contribution being paid into a common fund available for all the purposes of the society. The result is, accordingly, to conc entrate still m ore asthority in the hands of the central executive- "" '