April 2023
Frame breaking before Luddism by Julian Atkinson
ThemainperiodofLudditeactivityintheEastMidlandswasbetween1811and1816. Oneofitsmajor characteristicswasthebreakingofknittingframesbystockingersastheyattemptedtoachievehigher wages,lowerframerent,controloverexcessivenumbersofapprenticesthatloweredthepriceof labourandlegalprotectionoftheirconditionsofemployment.However,frame-breakingasamethodof strugglehadbegunfarearlierthanthisperiod.Thistacticwentbacktoasuccessorofthemediaeval Guildsystem,theFrameworkKnittersCompany.
In1664theFrameworkKnittersCompanyreceivedaCharterfromKingCharlesII.Atthisstagemost frameworkknittingwascarriedoutinLondonwitharelativelysmallamountintheEastMidlands.The Company,aguildthatcombinedtherolesofemployers’organisationandaprototradeunion,wasgiven considerablepowers. (ForadiscussionoftherelationshipbetweenGuildsandearlyunionssee MalcolmChase, Early Trade Unionism: Fraternity, Skill and the Politics of Labour, London2000pp.3-34.) TheChartergavepower“tocertainpersonsinthedaytime,withtheassistanceandin thepresenceofa Constableorotherlawfulofficer,togointoallmannerofplaces,privilegedornotprivileged,where thereshallbeanysuspicionofdeceitfulframesormanufactures;andifuponsearch,theyshallfindany stockingtops,waistcoats,trousers,oranyotherthingwhatsoever,madeandwroughtbythesaidframe orengine,orunartificiallymade,ortobemadeofbadordeceitfulstuff,theymaycausethesametobe cuttopiecesanddefaced,besidesthepowerofimposingfinesandpenalties”(Derby Mercury 11 June 1812).
ThedualnatureoftheCompanyasbothtradeunionandtradeassociationcontainedcontradictions. At atimewhenthetradewasoverwhelminglycarriedoutbyartisansorsmallmastersthestrainswithin theCompanyweremanageable. However,withthegrowthofMasterHosierswhorentedoutframes, providedtheyarnandpaidthestockingersbypiecesproduced,thepantomimehorsethreatenedto comeapart. Theinterestsofthemastersandtheworkershadbecomeverydifferent. Oneofthemost contentiousissueswasthenumberofapprenticesemployed. TheCompanyrulesspecifieda maximum
ofthree.Thislimitedentryintothetradeandhelped keepupthepriceoflabour. MasterHosiers,however, notonlygotcheapworkersinapprenticesbutwerealso paidasigningonfeewhenanewapprenticewas indentured.
Theissueofapprenticeswasagrowingsourceof conflict.TheCompanydemandedafeeof8s.per indenture.In1730acourtrefusedtoupholditsrightto chargeforindenturinganapprentice (RichardGurnham, 200 Years: The Hosiery Unions 1776-1976,1976Leicester p3). Thiswasjustoneofseveralcontraryattemptsto erodeandthentorenewtheauthorityoftheCompany.
In1720manyjourneymenknittersinLondonwereout ofwork. ThebyelawsoftheCompanythatlimitedthe numberofapprenticeswerethrownoutbyaMagistrate inSpitalfields. Inresponsealmost100frameswere broken.MostLondonmastersthenacceptedthe CompanyrulesonapprenticesbutSamuelFellowswith 49apprenticesandCartwrightwhohad23movedtheir framesoutofLondontothemorehosierfriendlyEast Midlands.In1727and1728therewasfloutingofbyelawsintheEastMidlandsandtheCompanyfailedto imposeitswillduetothepressurefromlocal magistrates.
In1730theCompanyattemptedtodisciplineCartwright andFellowsforhavingtoomanyapprenticesandfinedthem£150and£400respectively.Cartwright refusedtopaysotheCompanyBeadlewasinstructedtoenterhispremisesandseizeandsellgoodsand framesinlinewiththeBye-laws.TheNottinghamauthoritiessupportedCartwrightbecause,foramere £5,theycoulduseapprenticeshipsasacheapwayofgettingridoftheirresponsibilityforpauper children,reducingthePoorLawburdenaswellashelpingtheregionaleconomy. InFebruarythecase wenttoaLondonlegalcourtwherethejudgerefusedtoacceptthelegalityofthebye-laws.
In1745,however,theLawLordsacceptedaredraftedsetofbye-lawsfromtheCompany,thusmaking themlegal.Thesebye-lawsincludedthecontroversialClause14whichallowedtheCompanyofficialsto seizedefective(sometimesdescribedasfraudulent)goodsandalsoframes.TheCompanyhadwona significantvictorybutthiswasthelasttimeitwashelpedbythelegalsystem.TheHosiersthen proceededtoerodetheimpactofthejudgement(SheilaAMason The History of the Worshipful Company of Framework Knitters Leicester2000.pp,99-107).
Therewasofficiallysanctioneddestructionofknittingframesasfarbackas1710(MalcolmChase Early Trade Unionism: Fraternity, Skill and the Politics of Labour, London2000reprinted2012p.75). Clause 14,legitimisedbytheLawlords,wasonlyslightlyrevisedfromtheoriginal.“Itshallbelawfulforthe masterandwardens,oranytwoofthemwithtwoormoreassistants,andalsotheirsworndeputies, fourtimesayear,oroftener,inthepresenceofaconstable,toenterintoshops,&.,toview,search,and proveallframe-workknittedgoods,frames,&.,andiffounddefectivetoseizethesame…”(Masonop.cit. p.235). Attimesofstress“assistants”becametomeananygroupofaggrievedframe-workknittersand therequirementtobeaccompaniedbyaconstablewasconvenientlyforgotten.
ThehosierytraderapidlymovedtotheEastMidlandswherethereachoftheCompanywasimpededby localmagistrates.ThelacemakerandhistorianWilliamFelkinpaintsanidyllicpictureofthelifeof stockingersintheC.18:“…everyvillagehaditswake;thelowerorderslivedincomparativeeaseand plenty,havingtherightofcommonforpigandpoultry,andsometimesacow. Thestockingmakers eachhadagarden,abarrelofhome-brewedale,aweekdaysuitofclothesandoneforSundays,and plentyofleisure,seldomworkingmorethanthreedaysaweek. Moreovermusicwasmuchcultivated
bythem”(WilliamFelkin, A History of the Machine-Wrought Hosiery and Lace Manufactures, London 1867p.99). Allweneedisa“beeloudglade”where“peacecomesdroppingslow”tocompletethe pictureofalostparadise. Thecatastrophicdeclineofthestandardoflivingofstockingersafter1810 madeFelkinamistyeyedoptimistabouttheyearsbeforethatcatastrophe.Therealitywasless satisfactory.
TheFrameworkKnitters’CompanyattemptedtocontroltheMidlandstradebutin1753aCommitteeof theHouseofCommonsdecideditsregulationswere“injurious,vexatiousandinjurioustothetrade.” ThiswasavictoryfortheMasters(JandBHammond, The Skilled Labourer 1760-1832, London1919 reprinted1995p.222). Inthemid1750sknittersbegantorealisetheCompanywasnotfullyeffective andtheStocking-makersAssociationforMutualProtectionwassetuptotryandenforcethebye-laws. InthistheyweresupportedbytheCompany. From1771to1778earningsfellfrom9s.to5s.6d.p.w. (Masonop.cit.p.125).
Ameetingoftheframework-knittersofNottinghamandDerbywasheldon12January1761at NewthorpeinNottinghamshiretosendapetitiontotheHosiersofthecountiesofNottingham,Derby andLeicesternotingthat:“…thepriceoflabourisgreatlylower…thanin1740…”. Theyaskthehosiers “tofindwaysandmeanstoenhanceourpriceoflabour…allnecessariesoflife,asfood,raimentandall implementsarebecomingdearer”(Derby Mercury 20February1761).Touseaphrasenowfamiliarto us,therewasa“costoflivingcrisis.”
Thedifficultiesoftheframework-knitterspersistedintothe1770’sandtheymettoconsiderapetition toraisewagestoalleviatetheirdistresssincethepriceoffoodhaddoubled(DM 12July1771). The DerbyHosiersmettoconsiderthepetitionoftheframework-knitters’aboutwages. Theyagreedtostay inlinewithwhatevertheNottinghamandLeicesterhosiersdecided. “Wewouldthinkourselves wantinginduty,werewetoneglectpayingaproperregardtoyourrequest,particularlywhendesired withsuchcivilityandrespect…Itwouldgiveusgreatsatisfactiontocomplywithanyofyourdesires, whichmightbebeneficialtoyou,withoutbeingdetrimentaltothemanufactory.” Thecaveatinthelast clauseindicatedwhatwastofollow:abut,capitalletterBUT“…howjustlyyoucomplainofthe enormouspriceofthenecessitiesoflife,wewishitwasinourpowertomakethemotherways. The chiefdependence,inourbranchofcommerce,isonforeignmarkets,whichcanbesecuredbynoother meansthanproducingourgoodsonterms,lowasothermanufactors;whichthatcannotbedone,the consequencewillbenodemandforgoods,whichmustmakeusunabletokeepyouinemploy”. There wasthenajamtomorrowhintinthattheissuecouldbereconsideredfor“afewarticlesiftherewas buoyantdemand”(DM 2August1771). Thereplymightserveasanexemplarforamodernemployer oreventhepresentGovernment.
ThepoweroftheCompanywaswaning.Thiswasoneofthereasonswhyanearlyunion,theStocking MakersAssociationforMutualProtection,hadbeenformedin1776. Thisbodydecidedtopetition Parliamenttoincreasewages.
TheMasterHosiersweretoopposethepetition. Indeed,severalHosiershadtaken“umbrage”withthe AmicableAssociationofFrameworkKnitterswhenithadaskedforariseinpricesopaidforgoods produced. TheAssociationarguedthattwo-needleworkers(theseproducedtheleastfineknit)could earnatmost8s.6d.p.w.butdeductionsbythehosiersleftjust6s.Pricespaidmustincreasethey argued:“Ifnot,weare(inthatrespect)ofallmenmostmiserable!”(Nottingham Journal 22September 1777).Thedeductionswereforframerent,thecostofneedlesandcandlesand,mostcontentiously,for badworkorlostyarn.TherewereevenallegationsthatafewHosiersweighedouttheyarntobe knitteddamp,weighedthestockingsmadedryanddeductedmoneyfortheapparentloss.
Thestockingers’petitionwaspresentedtoParliamentin1778. Thepetitionswerepresentedto ParliamentbyDanielParkerCoke,Esq.,M.P.forDerby,duringtheSession1777-8,fromtheframe-work knittersofLondon,andofthecountiesofMiddlesex,Surrey,Nottingham,Leicester,Derby, Northampton,andGloucesterstatingthat:“Thepetitionershadservedaregularapprenticeshiptotheir business,butwereunablewiththeirutmostindustrytoobtainbytheirlabourthecommonnecessaries oflife,byreasonoflowwages,framerent,andotherchargesmadeuponthem,incidenttotheworking theirframesandkeepingtheminrepair”andaskingforaBilltosettleandregulatetheirwages.This
petitionwasreferredtoaselectcommitteeoftheHouseofCommons,whichreportedinfavourofaBill tofixtherateofwagesforeachgauge,size,andqualitythenmade,beingbroughtinbutthiswas refuseduponadivision,byfifty-twoagainsttwenty-seven. Theemployersinthesilkbranchofthe tradesoonaftersoughttoreducethepricespaidforworkby25percent,or6d.to10d.apair;andgreat excitementwastheimmediateresult. ThisinducedotherclassesinNottinghamtosubscribeinaidof resistingthisreduction.Mr.Meadows,oneofthemembersforNottinghamshire,introducedanotherBill in1779,havingthesameobjectsasthatofthepreviousyear.ThiswasstrenuouslysupportedbyMr. RobertSmith,(afterwardsLordCarrington),whosaid:"themeasurewasmoistenedandsaturatedby thetearsofthepoordistressedfamiliesofframe-workknitters."LeavewasgiventobringintheBill withonlyonedissentingvoice;itwassointroducedatonce,andreadafirsttime.Thesecondreading wascarriedbytwenty-fouragainsttwenty-three(Felkinp.116).
TheBillwas,however,thrownoutuponthethirdreadingbyamajorityoffifty-seventoeighteen.The Hosiershadpresentedacounterpetitionstatingthatitisimpossibletosettleawagesincreasebecause offoreigncompetitionanddifferentskilllevelsamongsttheworkers(DM 6February1778).
Thestockingers,manyofwhomhadcompletedtheirseven-yearapprenticeshipinNottingham,were thusabletovoteasFreemenofthecity.Thisgavethemconsiderablepoliticalinfluenceinthecity. In October1778AbelSmithwastheircandidateforaParliamentaryelectionwhichhewon.Thevictory waswelcomedbyamarchoftheframe-workknitters.TheBeadleoftheFramework-knittersCompany togetherwithtwoCompanydeputiesledthemarchunderthebanneroftheNottinghamKnitters inscribedwith“Strength,FortitudeandUnitysurmountthegreatestDifficulties”(DM 9October1778).
Therewasafurtherattemptin1779toobtainreliefforthesufferingofthestockingersbya ParliamentaryActtoregulatewagesbutagaintheMasterHosierswereopposed.Tensionsrapidlygrew inNottinghamandalargecrowdintheMarketsquareburntaneffigyrepresentinganopponentofthe KnittersBill(DM 30April1779). TheHosierstoldtheParliamentaryCommitteeconsideringtheBill thatknittersearnedfrom18to20/-forafourdayweek. Theknitterswereparticularlyincensedwhen anapprenticeofMrWilkinsonclaimedtobeabletoearn20/-aweek. Hewassarcasticallytermed“the miraculousboy”.TheHosierSamuelNeed,apartnerofRichardArkwright,playedaleadingrolebefore theCommittee:“...theworkmenwereadequatelypaid;thatsuchweretheadvantagesofmanufacture, thatthemorechildrenaworkmanhad,thebetter washisconditioninlife;andthatreductionof frame-rentwouldproveruinoustothe manufacture,andpreventpersonsowningframes; andthatiftheBillpassedtorestricttheirbusiness, theywouldselltheirframes,andretirefromthe trade….”(GravenorHenson, History of the Framework Knitters,NewtonAbbot1831reprinted 1970pp.395-6). Thissadpictureoftheimpending penuryoftherichestmaninNottinghammayhave wontheday. ItwasalsosuggestedthatNeedhad bribedsomeWestCountryMPstoopposetheBill whichfellonthethirdreading.
NewsoftheParliamentarydefeatcameto Nottinghamonthe10th Junewhenseveraldaysof riotingtookplace:“…allwaspeaceableandquiet tillaboutTeno’Clock,whenaNumberofriotousPersons(chieflyWomenandBoys)formedthemselves together,wentinaBody,andattackedtheHouseofMr.JoynestilleveryPaneofGlassintheFrontwas entirelydemolished.TheythenwenttoMr.James’sinBearward-lane,whereafterdestroyingtheFront WindowsoftheHouse,walkedpeaceablyofftoMr.Need’s,HosierontheLowPavement;herenotonly theWindowswereallbroke,buttheShuttersandFramesalsodidnotescapetheirresistless Impetuosity.…theRioterswerenotcontentwithbreakingtheWindowsofMr.Need’sHousein Nottingham,buttheyalsowentonFridayEveningtohisHouseinArnold,wheretheybrokeallthe Windows,andunroofedsomepartoftheBuilding.TheylikewisebrokeopenhisCoach-house;theBody
oftheCoachbeingatthePainter’s,consequentlyescaped,buttheWheels&c.werecuttopieces,and thrownintotheRiverLeen”(DM 11June1779).MrWilkinsonofWoolpackLane,theemployerofthe “miraculousboy”wasalsotargetedandhishousedestroyedin15minutes(Hensonop.cit.p408).The soldierswerecalledout;theofficershadbeenataballandturnedupinalltheirfinery.Despitethisthe disturbanceswentonfromFridayuntilTuesday,withriotersleadingthetroopsamerrydance.Some 300framesweresmashed. OnTuesdaymorningtheunioncommitteeaddressedamassmeeting,told theknittersthatameetinghadbeenarrangedwiththehosiersofthethreecountiesandtherioting ceased. ThreeoftheunioncommitteewerearrestedincludingWrightwhohadtoldhismembers“that whenlawandjusticeweredenied,thepeoplehadarighttoresorttothelawofnature”.
TheNottinghamhosiersannouncedon17thJunethatthey“wouldremoveEVERYOPPRESSION, providedthecessationofriottookplace”(Hensonop.cit.pp.409-414).Therealitywasdifferentandthe hosiershadformedanorganisationoftheirownand,whenthefermenthadsubsidedstated“thatthey wouldopposeallregulations,whetherbycharterorActsofParliament...”(Felkinop.cit.p117).
TheNottinghamhosiersmettheunioncommitteeforfivehourswithoutagreement. Themeetingwas inconclusivesincetheLeicestershirehosiersrefusedtogiveground. Astrikewasthendeclaredand Hosierswerevisitedandthreatenedthattheirframeswouldbebrokeniftheywererequiredtowork. Themagistratessworein300constablestocombatthisthreatbuttheknitterswenttoArnoldand broke50frames.Thearmyintervenedagainandtheknitters,inordertoeat,returnedtowork(DM 24 June1779,25June1779).
Mephringham(alsoknownasAnthonyMetheringham)whohadledthedestructionofNeed’shouse, waschargedwithacapitaloffence.ThewitnessagainsthimwasabductedandtakentoEssexuntilthe endofthetrial. Bothsidesbegantopullbackandaseriesofchargeswaswithdrawn.Mephringham wasfined6s8dandgiventhreeweeksingaol.Threewerechargedwith“breakingthewindowsofthe cottonmillinHockley,belongingtoMessrsNeed,ArkwrightandStrutt.”Twoofthemwerefoundnot guiltyandonefinedtenshillings.ThetwounionCommitteemembersPilkingtonandWrightwhohad calledtheknittersgeneralmeetingontheForestweresimplydischargedsincenocrimehadbeen committed(DM 23July1779).Tosomeextentthecourtdecisionsindicatethatthehosierswantedto appearplacatorybutitwasnotuntil1787thatalistofpriceswasnegotiatedagreeabletobothsides.
TheframebreakingcarriedoutbytheLudditesin1811-1816hadpastprecedentsandreliedonseveral oldertraditions.MatthewRobertsmadetheusefulpointthatthepastagrarianprotestplayedarole (MatthewRoberts, Rural Luddism and the makeshift economy in the Nottinghamshire framework knitters, SocialHistory,42,3,2017). However,themodelofprotestdefinitelyharkedbacktothe1720breaking offramesinLondon. ThoserootsalsostretchedbacktotheGuildsystemoftheFrameworkKnitters CompanywithitscherishedCharterwhich,significantly,wassoldbytheLudditeshousetohouseasa moneyraiserandalsoformedthebasisofseveralLudditeaddresses(KevinBinfield, Writings of the Luddites,Baltimore,2004pp21-25).
North East History (Vol 53 2022. ISSN 14743248) by Mike Hamlin
WereviewedVolume52inourApril2022Newsletter,andthisnewpublication,publishedatthevery endofthatyear,continuesthehigh-qualityworkwehavecometoexpectfromtheNELabourHistory Society.
AnumberofarticlesinthiseditioncelebratethelifeofNigelTodd,whodiedin2021.Nigelwasalong servingmemberoftheNELHS,aveteranLabourCouncillorinNewcastleuponTyne,awellpublished radicalhistorian,acommittededucationalistwiththeWEAandananti-fascistactivist.Hewasalsothe fatherofSelinaTodd–OxfordProfessorofModernHistoryandauthorofanumberofimportantworks onthesocialhistoryofworking-classwomen,includingthemagnificentbiographyofShelaghDelaney: Tastes of Honey. The Making of Shelagh Delaney and a Cultural Revolution (Vintage2021).
Ofthehalfdozenarticlesincludedherelinkedtotheworkof NigelTodd,oneofthemostrewardingisbyNigelhimself: Black-On-Tyne: The Black Prescence on Tyneside in the 1860’s Thisarticlewasfirstpublishedin1987andreflectsadesireto capturethelivesofpeoplewhoareoften‘hiddenfromhistory’. PromptedbyPeterFryer’s Staying Power: The History of Black People in Britain (London1984)andRonRamdin’s The Making of the Black Working-Class in Britain (London1987)Nigel approachesthisworkbyselectinganumberofthemesand sweepsthemthroughTyneside’savailablehistoricaldatafrom the1860s.
Onetheme ‘Culture’,forexample,discoversthatthefirst AustraliancricketteamtovisitEnglandwasblack.Theycame in1868andoneoftheplacestheyplayedwasNorthShields.A steadystreamofblacksingers,dancersandcomedians performedinTynesidethroughoutthe1860s.TheTyne ConcertHall,wastheusualvenueandinDecember1860,the allblack Female Christi Minstrels performedaprogrammeoflightoperaextracts,pepperedwith contemporarypoliticaljokes-sometimesrelatingtotheexploitsofGeneralGaribaldi-apopularhero onTynesideatthetime.Themulti-talented Cedar Family wereagreathitinMay1862andwere followedbyacompanyofIndianjugglersandacrobatsin1868.Blackpeoplewerealsoactiveinother leisuretradesandoneofNewcastle’sfewrestaurantsatthetime,achop-houseinGreyStreet,was ownedandrunbyablackman.
Anothertheme‘Class’,pointsoutthatanumberofblackseamenfromAfricaandtheWestIndieshad basedthemselvesonTynesidebythemid-centuryandlocalrecordsshowthepartplayedbyblack sailorsinaseamen’sstrikeontheTyneinJune1866.Forseveraldayshundredsofseamenstruckfor higherwagesinportsalongtheTyne,organisingmasspicketsofshipsandopen-airmeetings.
Finally,thetheme‘Race’,showsthatracialprejudicewasofcourse,evidentonTynesideatthistime. TheNewcastleDailyChroniclestatedinJanuary1865that‘Wedeploretheprejudiceagainstcolour, andweareseverelycensorioustowardsthosewhoexhibitit’- butunfortunately,thiseditorialposition didn’tstopthemusingabusivedescriptionsofblackpeopleinanumberoftheirotherreports.
Thearticlecontinuesbydescribingsomeoftheexamplesofworkingclasssolidaritywithablackcause –theabolitionofslaveryintheUnitedStates.Hereworkingclasscommunities,launchedcampaignsto collectmoneyandclothinginsupportofthecampaignandanumberofspeakingtoursbynotedblack AmericanAbolitionistswereorganised.TheroleoftheNewcastleDailyChronicleisagaincoveredin considerabledetail,especiallyinrelationtotheabolitionistcauseandtheAmericanCivilwarmore generally.
Writtenalmostfortyyearsago,thisimportantarticlebyNigelToddreflectssomeoftheculturalshifts inlocallabourhistorythatweretakingplaceatthetime.It’scertainlyworthreadingtodayanditcanbe foundinitsentiretyatwww.newcastle.antiquaries.org.uk–justsearchforNigelToddontheHome page.
Otherarticlesofnote,includeapiecebyDrCathyHunt,wellknowntousatNDLHSasshedelivered twotalksforusjustacoupleofyearsago-oneontheNationalFederationofWomenWorkers1906-21, anditsfounder,MaryMacarthur;theotheronthecampaignagainstsweatedlabourinearly20th centuryBritain.
Here,CathyreturnstotheworkoftheNationalFederationofWomenWorkersandfocussesspecifically ontheNewcastleonTynebranch1912-13,throughastudyofitshand-writtenminutebookrecently donatedtotheTUCLibrary.
BeforetheFirstWorldWartheFederationofWomenWorkerswasessentiallyaunionforthosewomen consideredbythemoreestablishedlabourmovementtobe‘toodifficulttoorganise’.Whetherthey wereropeworkersinDorset,laceworkersinNottingham,schoolcleanersinLondonorchainmakersin theBlackcountry.KathypointsoutthatintheNorthEast,whichwasdominatedbyvarietiesofheavy industry,womenworkersweretobefoundinsmallfactories,workshops,laundriesandshops.Trying torecruitwomenwhentheyworkedtogetherinsuchsmallnumberswasnevereasy.
And,asKathyconcludes,thesignificanceofthisuniqueminutebook: ‘….liesinwhatitsaysaboutthe strugglesfacingwomenworkersintheyearsbeforetheFirstWorldWar.Itshowswhatanuphilltaskit wastoorganiseamongwomenwhowereoverworked,underpaidandvulnerabletoemployer intimidation.Atthesametime,manyofthesewomenwerelearninghowtobeunionmembers’.
Next,JohnGriffithsprovidesafascinatingpieceonLabourpoliticsin1950sNewcastle.Hisaccountof theriseofthenotoriousTDanSmithfromtheearly50sonwardsisabsolutelyriveting.
ExpelledfromtheTrotskyist,RevolutionaryCommunistParty(RCP)inthelate‘40s,hewasfirstelected asaLabourCouncillorin1950.FromhumblebeginningsasmemberfortheLibrariesCommittee,he quicklyprogressedontotheHealthCommitteein‘52withasharedresponsibilityforHousing.This movealsoallowedhimtobecomeamemberoftheJointCommitteeonSlumClearance.Fromherehe graduallybuilthisbaseandreputation,campaigningmainlyonhousingandenvironmentalissues.He becameChairofthelesssignificantCityLabourPartyin‘53butremainedpoliticallyestrangedfromthe moreinfluentialLabourgroupofmunicipalcouncillors.However,fromthispowerbaseSmithbeganto puttogetheragroupof‘energetic’and‘forwardthinking’candidatesandnewcouncillors,somebutnot allwithadistinctlyleftoutlook.
TheCityPartyexecutivebegantocreateworkinggroupson‘everyactivityinthepoliticalspectrum’. Andby1954theCityPartywasconfidentenoughtocensuretherecentlyelectedLabourgroupleader butdidn’tquitemanagetogaincontrol.However,becauseoftheseriouspolicyinputfromthevarious workinggroups,theCityPartywasnowwellplacedtooverseetheconstructionofthemanifestoforthe 1955municipalelections–whichfocusedoverwhelminglyonhousing.TheLabourgroupneededjust oneseattogainoverallcontrolatthistime,buttheyfailedtotakeit!TensionsbetweentheCityParty andthemoretraditionalLabourcouncillorsremainedstrainedbuteventually,Laboursecuredoverall controlofNewcastleCouncilin1958,retainingamajorityuntil1967;theplanningideasfromthe earlierworkinggroupsinevitablybecameoverallcouncilpolicy,withsomeofthemachievingabroader nationalsignificance.
WhatbecameofTDanSmithisanotherstory.Sufficetosay,heresignedasCouncilleaderin1965to takeuparoleofferedtohimbythethenLabourDeputyLeader,GeorgeBrown,asChairoftheNorthern EconomicPlanningCouncil-thislasteduntil1970. Smithwasheavilyinvolvedinalargenumberof redevelopmentventuresbythistime,severalofwhichwerelinkedtothearchitectJohnPoulson.In 1972Poulsonwasdeclaredbankrupt,andthesubsequentexaminationofhisbooksledtocorruption chargesbeingmadeagainstthethenToryHomeSecretary,ReginaldMaudling.Thesechargesforced Maudlingtoresign,andanationalscandalensued.Otheraccusationsofcorruptionbegantobemade,a numberofwhichfocusedondevelopmentsintheNorthEast.Smithwasarrestedin1973onvarious corruptionchargescoveringtheprevioussevenyears.Hepleadedguiltyin1974andwassentencedto sixyearsimprisonment.
ThevalueoftheGriffithsarticleisthatitlooksbeyondtheexploitsofasingleman-TDanSmith,and managestoappreciateandassesstheimpressiverangeofreformingpoliciesgeneratedbyLabourin Newcastleduringthe‘50s.Thesewerebothimportantandinfluentialbuthardlyrevolutionary–asits stillclaimedbysome.GriffithsmaintainsthatSmithbrokedecisivelywithhisMarxistpastinthe‘40s anddevelopedan‘increasingawarenessofthepotentialitiesofscienceandnewtechnologies,andby themid-1950shehadviewsonnationalprosperitynotdissimilartothosethatweretobeadvancedby AnthonyCrossland’. Majoraspectsofthisprogramme–anextendededucationalprovision,social welfareandhousing,aswellasabroadconcernforarts,culture,theenvironmentandinnercity
renewal‘offeredampleopportunitiesforchangeatlocalandregionallevelsandassuchwouldhave appealedtoSmithandmanyofhisNewcastlecolleagues.’
Finally,MattPerry,authorof ‘Red Ellen’ Wilkinson: her Ideas, Movements and World (Manchester University Press. 2014) writesaboutCarolineBird’splay‘RedEllen’whichranfortwoweekatthe NorthernStageinearlyspring2022beforetouringtotheNottinghamPlayhouseinAprilandthe EdinburghLyceuminMay.
Asanhistorianandbiographer,Perrylooksatsomeofthedifferencesinapproachbetweenhiswork andthatofaplaywrightanddramatist.‘Occupyingthesamespaceofpublichistory,theplaywrightand thebiographerexercisetwodifferentandcomplementarycrafts.Witharesponsibilitytotheaudience, theplaywrightmustplotacoherentnarrativearc.Thedramatistisfreeofthehistorian’sconstraints hesitatingbeforeeverylackofevidence.Conversely,wherethebiographercanaskthereadertodecide oroutlineprovisionalalternatives,theplaywrightcannotandultimatelyhastobebraveraboutthe past’.
PerryconcludesthatthoughherplayCarolineBirdbringsEllenWilkinsonsuccessfullytoamuchwider audiencethanhecouldbyusingdramaticlicencetoreordersomeeventsand,tofillgapswhere evidencewasmissing.‘TheplaypersonalizesEllenWilkinsonwithoutdepoliticizingher,engagingin herprivatelifewithoutsacrificingherpublicone.’
PerryalsousesthearticletodevelopsomeaspectsofEllen’slifewhichtheplaydoesn’tfullyaddress. ThisisespeciallytrueofherrelationshipwithOttoKatzandIsabelBrown,andthroughthemher involvementwiththeReliefCommitteefortheVictimsofGermanFascismaswellasothercampaigns orchestratedbytheenigmaticGermanCommunistandCominternpropagandachiefWilliMunzenberg.
Thearticleisrichindetailandfullofintriguing‘whatif..?’politicalpossibilities.ThedefeatinSpainand thesignificanceofthe ‘Hitler/Stalin’pact,werecrucialtohershiftinpoliticalperspectivefroma forthright‘anti-fascismtoColdwaranti-communism,albeitwithaLabouristinflection,with1940as theturningpoint.’PerryprovidesanumberoftantalizingnewpiecestothejigsawthatwasEllen Wilkinson’slifeyetothersremainmissing,includingherMI5filewhichapparentlywasdestroyedin 1946whenshewasMinisterofEducation!
DuetotimeandspaceithasonlybeenpossibletotouchonfourofthearticlesfromthisvolumeofNE LabourHistorybutthequalityremainshighthroughout.Moredetailscanbefoundattheirwebsite: www.nelh.net -itiscertainlyworthspendingtimewithandencouragingly,itreflectswellonthestate ofLabourHistoryscholarshiptakingplaceinBritaintoday.
The Social Democratic Federation in Ilkeston by Phil Henshaw
InspiredbythewritingsofKarlMarx,theSDFwasthefirstsocialistpartyinBritain,foundedin1881 (astheDemocraticFederation)byHenryHyndman,awealthystockbroker.Capitalisingontherevival ofsocialistthought,hisinterpretationofMarxism, England for All,inspiredagenerationofintellectuals andworkerstojointheFederation,whosecausewasprincipallytodestroycapitalism,withits intolerableextremesofwealthandpoverty.
Hyndmanhadareputationasdomineeringanddogmatic,andtheparty,withitsrigiddoctrine,lackeda coherentorcrediblestrategyandneverresolveditscentraldilemma:reformorrevolution.Studies haveshown,however,thatindividualbranchesoftheSDFwereallowedconsiderableautonomyintheir outlookandactivities,perhapsreflectingthetruenatureofafederation.Incontrasttoatop-down centralismwhichcharacterisedlaterexamplesofMarxistparties,theSDFheldwithinitadiversesetof ideasandconvictions,asituationwhich,perhapsinevitably,ledtomultipledisputesoverstrategy.The
firstschismcamein1884,whenthemajorityoftheCouncil,includingWilliamMorrisandEleanor Marx,resignedtoformtheSocialistLeague.
HistoriesoftheSDFhaveconcentratedonitsstrongholdsinLondon,LancashireandYorkshire,whilst theiractivitiesintheMidlands,particularlytheEastMidlands,havebeenlargelyignored.Nottingham wasanSDFstrongholdasearlyas1885,withthreebranchesandJohnBurnsasaParliamentary candidate.BrancheswerelaterformedinIlkeston(1895),Derby(1899)andChesterfield(1904). Ilkestonprovidedfertilegroundforrecruitment,withitslargeconcentrationofminersandhosiery workers.TheSDFpaper Justice,launchedin1884,hadforyearsmonitoredandreportedonstrikesand lockoutsintheIlkestoncollieries,expressingits‘sinceresympathy’inAugust1885withtheminerson strikeforsixweeksagainstareductioninpay.AriothadoccurredinIlkestonthatmonth,inwhich severalrioterswereshotbythemanagerofCossallColliery,andothersarrested. Inresponse, Justice expressedits‘indignationattheconductofthepoliceinmaltreatingworkingmen –whoseservants theyare–intheinterestofthecapitalistclass’(Justice 22/8/1885).
TheDerbyshireMinersAssociationwasactiveinthearea,butmostlocalminerswerenotunionisedat thetime.Intruth,theSDFwasambivalentabouttradeunions,anditsearlymanifestoactivelyhostile, accusingthemofclasscollaborationanddescribingthemasanaristocracyoflabourhappytousethe ‘middle-classcapitalisticHouseofCommons’astheirmouthpiece.TheSDFwerescathingaboutunion leaders’supportfortheLiberalPartyandtheircollaborationasLib-LabmembersofParliament.Trade unionswereseenasadistractionfromthestruggleforsocialism,indeedanobstacletoachievingit.
CentraltothestrategyoftheSDFwas educationoftheworkingclasses,toenable themtounderstandthecurrentpoliticaland economicsituationandpreparethemforthe imminentrevolution.Lecturesandpublic meetingsintheMarketSquareaddressedby travellingspeakerswereheldthroughoutthe 1880’sandearly1890’s,andtheseeffortspaid offwiththeformationinJanuary1895ofa newbranchinIlkeston,thefirstinDerbyshire, started,accordingto Justice, by‘oneortwo earnestsocialists’.Thebranchquicklygrewto 30members‘withamuchlargernumberof possiblerecruitshoveringinthedistance’, Justice noted.‘Ilkestonappearstobean especiallyfavourableplaceforsocialistic propaganda…itisthecentreofSirWalter Foster’s(LiberalMP)Parliamentary constituency.Theoccupationofworkersisprincipallyminingandthepeopleseemtobefairlywell alivetotheirowninterests.SurroundingIlkestonarealargenumberoftownsandvillagesthatoughtto beworkedupandmadealivetothepropaganda’(Justice 25/5/1895).
The’earnestsocialists’whofoundedtheIlkestonbranchwereRichardRiley,achinaandglassdealer, whohadashopat38BathStreetformanyyears,andHarrySilburn,of3BathStreet,abootmaker originallyfromNorthamptonshire.Riley,anadmireroffreethinkerandsecularistGeorgeHolyoake, hadstoodfortheTownCouncilin1887asarepresentativeoftheWorkingMen’sRatepayers Association.SilburnhimselfranfortheCouncilinCentralWardasanSDFcandidatein1896,polling47 votes.Bylate1896,thebranchhadreportedlydoubledinsize,andtheparty’sitinerantspeakers looked forwardtovisitingthetown:‘ThedistinctivefeatureoftheIlkestonbranchisthatthemembers,ofboth sexes,turnupintimetosingoneormoresocialistsongs,andsingthemwell,beforethespeaking commences’.
In1902,thebranchlauncheditsownpaper, The Dawn,withamonthlycirculationof3,000.Itsfirst editionstatedtheobjectsoftheSDFas‘Thesocialisationofessentialmeansandinstrumentsofwealth production,tobecontrolledbyademocraticstateintheinterestsoftheentirecommunity’. Similarities withClauseFouroftheconstitutionoftheLabourParty,adoptedmanyyearslater,areclear. Afew copiesof The Dawn from1902-5survive(inpoorcondition)intheBritishLibrary,buttheissuesraised inthepaperanddebatearoundthemareilluminatingand manystillresoundtoday–theroleofprivatecompaniesin runningpublictransport,speculatorsmakingfortuneson thestockmarketatothers’expense,theshamingof exploitativeemployersandlandlords,andwhichpartybest representedworkingpeople. The Dawn,withits uncompromisingviewsonKingandclergy,themain politicalpartiesandeventradeunionleaders,highlighted thestruggleforindependentlabourrepresentationandthe heartsandmindsoftheworkingclassesofIlkeston.
Itsleaderran:‘This,thefirstissueofourlittlejournal, marksanewdepartureinIlkestonoftheSocialist propaganda.Itisnotallwecouldhavewishedittobe,but withallitsfailingsitrepresentsagreatersacrificeanda largerburdenofLovetothoseresponsibleforitsbirththan manywillreadilybelieve.Itistheoutcomeofasincere convictionthatthemajorityofourfellowcitizensareas anxiousaswearetoseeanimprovementinthecondition ofthetoilingmasses,andneedonlytohaveanintelligent expositionofSocialismlaidbeforethemtoseethetruth, thejustice,thepracticability,andtheinevitabilityofour cause.Wetrust,therefore,thatourlittlepaperwillbethe mediumwherebymanywillbeenabledtolearnsomething oftheprinciplesofSocialismwhocannotbereachedbythe ordinarypropagandamethods’.Producinganddistributing thepaperwasasizeableandexpensiveundertakingfora relativelysmallgroupofactivists,buttheyclearly approachedtheirtaskwithanalmostreligiousfervourand weredeterminedtopersuadethetownsfolkofthetruthof theirarguments.
ItwasatimeofgreatchangeinIlkeston,withtheopeningoftheFreeLibrary,VictoriaPark(thefirst publicparkinthetown),thenewtramnetworkandimprovementsinsanitation. The Dawn commented onallofthesedevelopments,butwithaverydifferentviewpointfromtheestablishedlocalpapers,the Pioneer and Advertiser. InOctober1902,forexample, The Dawn criticisedlocalcouncillorsfor consideringprivatisationofthetrams,RichardRileyclaiming:‘Agreatquestionofprincipleis involved…arewetobemastersofourownstreets,ofourownpublicservices,orarewegoingtohand overourtowntothetendermerciesofmonopoliesanddividendhunters? Itisthechoiceofprivate greedorthecommongood.Eitherthetramserviceisapublicnecessityoritisnot’.
Fromthe1890’s,theSDFbegantoinvolveitselfmuchmoreinmunicipalpolitics,wherepreviouslyit regardedsuchactivityas‘palliatives’whichmadecapitalismmoretolerable.Asthedreamofrevolution faded,localcampaignsandelectioneeringbecamecommonplaceforSDFbranchesastheyrealisedthat socialistscouldcarrythestruggleintotownhalls.InIlkeston,ThomasMayfieldwaselectedforthe SchoolBoardinJune1899with996votes,followedbySamuelBostock’ssuccessfulcandidacyfor boroughauditorin1902,apositiontowhichhewasre-electedannuallyuntilhisdeathin1908.
AttitudestothetradeunionmovementalsoshiftedwithintheSDF,as thenewunionismofthe1890’sledtoexponentialgrowth,andparty activistssuchasWillThorneandTomMannimmersedthemselvesin unionagitation.Theleadershipcontinuedtobesceptical,believing strikeswouldonlyleadto‘pettygains’,butactivistsontheground couldseethebenefitofembracingunionstruggles.FortheSDFin Ilkeston,solidaritywiththeworkerswasessential,reachingahigh pointin1912whenlocalactivistsbecameembroiledinanationally publiciseddrama,dubbed‘TheIlkestonSensation’bythe Ilkeston Pioneer. Bythistime,manySDFmembers,includingthoseatIlkeston, hadjoinedtheBritishSocialistParty,formedatasocialistunity conferencein1911.Heavilyinfluencedbythesyndicalists,theBSPwas formedagainstabackdropofindustrialstrifewhichlasteduntil1914, andoneofthemostbitterstruggleswastheMiners’Strikeof1912. Followingthefailureofnegotiationstoestablishaminimumwagein theminingindustry,thestrikequicklybecameacrimonious,with troopsandpolicedeployedagainststrikingminers.
Writingin The Dawn,IlkestonpublicanJamesMorleyurgedthestrikers toarmthemselvesinordertomeettheforcesofrepressiononequal terms:‘Strikesandlockoutsmaycontinueforyears,andtheworkerpayhis6daweekintohisunion. Whynotsave3dperweekforarevolver?...Ifyourmastersaregettingextrapoliceandsupplyingthem withshootingirons,surelyyouarejustifiedingettingagunyourself?’Soldiersandpolice,hecontinued, ‘hadprovedthemselvestobetheenemyoftheworkers,andwhenthetimecomes,takeSeely’sadvice andshootlow,nottoolowbutlowenough…Ifitwouldtaketoolongtogetashooterbysaving3dper week,askthattheunionsgetthemforyou,itwouldbemoneywellspentIamsure.Orjointhe territorials;hereyouwouldgetgunsandinstruction’(Ilkeston Pioneer 15th March1912).
Amidfearsofrevolution,thearticleledtoaswiftbacklashfromthe establishment-itwasthesubjectofpresscondemnationanda questioninParliament.MorleyandtwootherIlkestonBSP members,ThomasMayfieldandNelsonKing,werequicklyarrested andchargedwithincitementtomurder.Theywereimprisoned,bail refusedandcommittedtotrialatDerbyAssizes.Bythetimethecase washeardinJune,thechargeofincitementtomurderhadbeen dropped,themenexpressedregretfortheiractionsandwere releasedwithfinesof£50each.
AlthoughtheSDFwereideologicallyrigidandself-damagingly sectarian,asevidencedbytheirwithdrawalfromtheLabour RepresentationCommitteein1901,theyhadanimpactonlocal politicsdisproportionatetotheirsize.Thepartyproduceda generationofsocialistintellectualsandmilitantactivists,who championedthecauseoftheworkersandunemployed,andwho shouldbecelebratedaspioneersofBritishsocialism.TheIlkeston branch,viatheirrelentlesspropaganda,publicmeetings,education programmeandinterventionsinlocalpolitics,certainlywon supportamongthetown’sworkers,butdoubtlessalienatedothers withtheiruncompromisingstance.
WomenwerecertainlypresentandactiveintheSDF,locallyandnationally,althoughtheirnumbers madeuponlyafractionofthetotalmembership.Theparty’sofficialpolicyadvocateduniversal suffrage,butinrealityitwasambivalentaboutvotesforwomen,thesuffragettecampaignseenasa distractionfromthestruggleforfulladultsuffrage.Thesuffragetteswereviewedasamiddle-class groupingaimingto‘createanotherprivilegedclassofvoters’(Social Democrat,July1910).
AnexaminationoftheactivistsweknowaboutinIlkestonshowsthat, ratherthanbeingdrawnfromtheranksoftheindustrialworking class,theywereprimarilysmallbusinessmen.RichardRileywasa glassandchinadealer,ThomasMayfieldacycleagent,NelsonKinga tailorandstationer,HarrySilburnabootmakerandJamesMorleya publican,reflectingthemake-upof theSDFnationally.Whilstthey werenotpartofthetown’s workingclasses,theywere certainlynotalienatedfromthem. Theywerelargelyautodidactswho developedakeenawarenessand understandingoftheworldaround them.Theywitnessedthe privationsoflate-Victorianand Edwardianindustrialcapitalism,theprecariousnatureofwaged labourandpitiablehousingconditions,allofwhichwereinevidence inIlkestonatthetimeandbelievedinthecreationofamoreequal andfairersociety.Itiseasywithhindsighttodismissthemasutopian, butweshouldadmiretheircommitmenttoacausetheybelieved wouldchangetheworldforthebetter.
Further reading:
HistoryoftheSocialDemocraticFederation–MartinCrick; The Dawn,Ilkeston’sSocialistNewspaper–PhilipHenshaw;OldIlkestonwebsite–www.oldIlkeston.co.uk
Workers Socialist Federation branches in the Nottingham area, 1916-1920
By Roger TannerWiththeoutbreakofwarin1914EmmelineandChristabelPankhurstagreedtosuspendthe campaigningoftheWSPUandtosupportthewareffort.SylviaPankhurst,acommittedinternational socialist,brokeirrevocablyfromhersisterandmotherand,withtheEastLondonFederationof Suffragettes(ELFS),continuedtocampaignforwomen’ssuffragewithworkingclasswomeninEast Londonwhilealsoopposingthewar.Initiallytheirfocuswasoneasingtheburdensonwomenand theirfamilies;foodshortages,increasingrents,lackofchildcare,lowwages. ByApril1916working peoplebecameincreasinglywar-wearyandnowfacedthethreatofconscription. SupportfortheELFS spread,withbranchesacrossLondonandwidecirculationoftheirnewspaper Women’s Dreadnought. On9th ApriltheELFSleadaprocessionofwomenthesixmilesfromtheEastEndtoTrafalgarSquare, whereSylviaandotherELFSspeakersdemanded‘humansuffrage’(foralladultwomenandmen), repealoftheDefenceoftheRealmAct(DORA)andtheMunitionsAct,anendtoconscriptionandlifting ofthedeportationoftheClydesideshopstewards. The Times reportedcrowdsof20,000.
FollowingthissuccesstheELFS,nowrenamedtheWorkersSuffrageFederation(WSF)tobetterreflect theirdemands,wasreadytotakeitsmessageacrossthecountry,supportedbytherenamed Workers’ Dreadnought (WD).
TheNetherfieldandCarltonBranch
BytheendofApril1916SylviawasonaspeakingtouroftheNorthEastandonherreturnspoketo NetherfieldILPatacrowdedmeetingintheCarltonCo-operativeHall.‘Therewasagoodsaleof ‘Dreadnoughts’andwehavetothankthebranchforacollectionforourbabies’fund.’
On20th MayWDreportedthatthe18yearoldPatriciaLynchhadbeensenttosetupabranchofthe WSFinNetherfieldandCarlton. MissLynchreportedshe‘hasbeeninvitedtoaddressmeetingsof societiestoexplaintheobjectsoftheWSFandthatthelocalbranchesoftheILPandRailwayWomen’s Guilds,theNUR,theSocialistSundaySchools…havegivengreathelp.’
SheheldameetingonTheGreeninCarlton,speakingwithILPmember,Cllr.Kneeshaw,andinthe eveningaddressedameetingintheLabourClubwithsympatheticlocalleadersoftheILP. OnTuesday sheaddressedWomenTradeUnionistsandonWednesdaymembersoftheWomen’sCo-operative GuildandcouldreportthatshewasmakingarrangementstoaddresstheNURandRailwayWomen’s Guild,reflectingtheimportanceoftheNetherfieldSidings. Shealsoreportedthatshespokeonthe MarketPlaceatBulwell,attracting200people.
ThereisnoreportonherspeechesbutthedemandsoftheTrafalgarSquaredemonstrationandthe consistentthemesintheWorkersDreadnoughtwereagainstconscription,againstthewar-time restrictionstopersonalliberties,foruniversaladultsuffrageandagainstfoodshortages.Theeventsin DublinthatEasterwouldhavealsobeenuppermostinPatriciaLynch’smind,asonlyafew weeks beforeshehadbeensenttocompileaneye-witnessreport,publishedasapamphletbyWSF. Sylvia andtheWSFcampaignedagainstBritish‘atrocities’inIreland,forthereleaseofrebelleaders,and publishedthepoliticalstatementsofSinnFein.
ThefocusontheILP,workingclasswomen’sorganisationsandtheNationalUnionofRailwaymen reflectedtheapproachtakeninotherareas. SylviaandtheWSFwerebuildingonthesupportfor suffrageamongworkingclasswomenandtheirorganisationsfromthepre-waryears,onthepolitical divisionsintheILP,dividedoverthewarandopentopoliticaldebate,andthegrowingrankandfile militancywithintheNationalUnionofRailwaymen,especiallyintheDistrictCouncilsandVigilance Committees.TheNURwasalsoonethefewunionswhichacceptedwomen’semploymentonthe railwaysinthewaryears,andrecruitedwomenintotheunion,althoughwiththeunderstandingthat thiswasonlyuntiltheendofthewar.
PatriciaLynchstayedasOrganiserintothesummerof1916. Acommitteewaselectedforthebranch, withMrsJohnstoneassecretary,MrsHough,literaturesecretaryand laterbranchsecretary,Miss Nicholls,treasurer,MrTurneraspresidentandcommitteemembersMrFreeborough,MrsHurst,Mrs Pilkington,MrsWaltonandMrWalton.AlllivedintheCarltonandNetherfieldarea. Thecommittee reflected theuniquefeatureoftheWSFthatchallengedmaledominationinthesocialistmovement withleadershipbeingheldoverwhelminglybywomen. Abranchandsocialmeetingwasheldevery fortnightintheLabourHallinCarltonandacampaignofopen-airmeetingswasarranged. Thebranch waslistedinWD,sometimesastheCarlton,NetherfieldandNottinghambranch,untilJune1917.
Census returns in 1911 and 1921 record James Walton and John Turner, both in their 40s with families, as railway engine drivers. John Freeborough, 60 in 1916, was a clay miner/brick maker. Thomas Nicholls, in his 60’s, worked as a miner at Digby Colliery in Gedling. The female members of the committee are recorded as housewives or home keepers in census returns although during the war years they were likely to be working, possibly on the railway or in munitions. Mrs Hurst’s husband was a framework knitter, both in their 50s. Mrs Hough’s husband was 34 in 1916 and already conscripted.
Thereisnorecordofwhenorwhythebranchfailedin1917. Itcouldhavebeenoverpolitical disagreementsorjustthedifficultyofmaintaininganactivepoliticallifeinaperiodofwar.Patricia LynchwasclearlyveryeffectiveandwhenshemovedontobeorganiserinLeicesterinSeptember 1916shehadagainestablishedaWSFbranchinamatterofweeks. However,duringthefollowingyear anotherbranchofWSFhadbecomeestablishedandactiveintheNottinghamarea.
