Chapter 4

YEARS OF STRUGGLE AND DEPRESSION, 1918-1939

It seems likely that the many years of war had depleted attendance at Council meetings, and the Council made little impact on the local press in 1918.  There were, however, protests regarding the possible use of troops in place of strikers and help for the theatrical workers, who were seeking trade union recognition.  Activity substantially increased during 1919, the year of the ‘labour offensive’, when an urgent demand for labour and rising prices stimulated widespread demands for wage increases.  Nearly 35,000,000 days were lost in industrial disputes in 1919 – strikes on the railways, in many engineering works and amongst the police and, locally, there was considerable dissatisfaction amongst the bakers and the tramway workers.  The Council had a major discussion on trade unionism amongst the police when some views were expressed in dissent.  Fears were emerging in regard to unemployment and a resolution of protest was passed against the use of German prisoners on coastal work to the detriment of local workers, especially at Whitley Bay.  The demand of the miners for nationalisation was supported, as well as a demonstration for land nationalisation. 

No fewer than 60 union branches were affiliated to the Council in 1920, and a more militant policy now began to be adopted on a number of issues.  While, in an earlier meeting the ‘Hands of Russia’ campaign received little support, in September this campaign was getting whole-hearted backing.  A resolution was passed calling for the stoppage of coal supplies to France because of her action against the Soviet Union.  Congratulations were sent to Irish workers on a successful one-day strike in support of those nationalists on hunger strike, in Mountjoy Prison, and called for the withdrawal of the military forces.  At this April meeting, the Council also demanded the immediate release of all Irish political prisoners, and called on the Parliamentary Committee of the TUC to consider direct action on Ireland.  Even the remote gardeners at Balmoral Castle were supported in their demand for a wage increase, and a letter was despatched to the King’s Commissioner. 

The doubts expressed earlier were absent when a deputation of the National Union of Police and Prison Officers was received and supported by the Council.  A deputation of teachers complained of the conditions in schools in Newcastle.  The threat of increasing rents moved the Council to mount a campaign to resist such increases and they also supported the legislation for rent restriction.  Local trades, such as the bakers and the printers, who were seeking increases, were also given the backing of the Council; while, once again, the Council was offering “moral and financial support for the paviours and roadmenders for better terms, whereby they will get a living wage and we call upon the Town Improvement Committee to give full recognition to their demands.”  But the tide had turned; the Board of Trade wholesale price index fell from 307 to 197 between 1920 and 1921. 

Nationally, total trade union membership dropped disastrously, from more than 6,300,000 in 1920 to less than 5,000,000 in 1921; little wonder that Robert Tait, in his report to the Council, in August 1921, wrote of “probably the most critical year of trade unionism”.  However, “in local disputes, the Council had done some very successful deputation work” and could claim “several new affiliations”, including the municipal employees.  The Council continued to provide representation for organised labour on many local advisory committees, including juvenile education and war pensions.  Efforts were made to secure the payment of benefit for the “enforced vacation of sometimes as much as a fortnight” for Race Week, by obtaining a more favourable local ruling from the Ministry of Health. 

This continuing role of representing working-class opinion in local committees and raising what may seem minor issues of general concern is often overlooked in stressing the more ‘exciting’ strike activity which is so frequently headlined in the press.  Once there was acceptance of the need for working-class opinion on various bodies, the trades councils offered a wider basis of representation than any individual society.  The increased efforts to organise working women were reflected in the Council, when two letters considered were related to the wages of cafe waitresses – one from the local branch of the National Federation of Women Workers and the other from the women’s organiser of NAUL – and the Council decided to invite a speaker on the issue. 

Information on subsequent years is seriously reduced, following the exclusion of the local newspaper reporter during a printing dispute in August 1922.  There was probably a temporary decline in the Council vigour for, by the year 1924-25, membership was down to about 3,000, from a mere 11 branches (9 unions).  The upsurge of activity with the threatened miners’ strike in 1925, and the subsequent preparations for the General Strike, brought new life to the Council.  Membership increased sharply to about 10,000 from 60 branches (21 different unions) in 1925-26.

The Trades Council was the focal point for activity during the General Strike.  On May 4, trade unionists assembled in the offices of the National Union of Distributive and Allied Workers (NUDAW), 14 organisations in all, including the Newcastle Trades Council and the Gateshead Labour Party & Trades Council; this established a Joint Strike Committee for the counties of Northumberland and Durham.  Later, on the evening of the 4th, there was a specially summoned meeting of “delegates from every trade union and labour organisation in the City” which met under GH Laraman, president of the Trades Council.  The purpose was “setting up a Council of Action, which would be responsible for the leadership of trade unions of Newcastle, during the crisis ….”  The chairman of the Labour Party was present and is reported as declaring that “the power behind the Government was undoubtedly the Coalowners ….”  This meeting heard a report of an earlier meeting of the Mayor with his chairman and vice-chairman of committees.  The view was expressed that the authorities were looking to disorder as their excuse to attack the movement.  The newly established Workers’ Chronicle wrote:

“This can be best avoided by having a Council of Action responsible for the discipline of the workers ….  Workers are asked to keep cool and take orders from the Council of Action.  Do not believe the lies of the Boss Press but look to your own paper … for the truth ….”

The Trades Council’s president was responsible for issuing the Workers’ Chronicle, which frequently appeared in both a morning and an evening edition.  There was considerable concern to try to provide some news source independent of what was seen as the capitalist press and Churchill’s British Gazette.  The Workers’ Chronicle was duplicated on foolscap paper and appeared as a two-page or four-page issue; two pages when paper was scarce, as in the morning issue of 9 May: “Today’s issue of a single sheet is due to a shortage of paper which has been impossible to procure over the week-end.”  The paper sold at first for ½d and later for 1d.  The first issue declared its purpose:

“... to provide our class with correct news of the great struggle into which we have entered in defence of our wages and hours.  We will also indicate the kind of policy necessary to give a workers’ victory.  Every instruction received from the General Council, in London, will be published instantly in the Workers’ Chronicle.  We shall ... work in conjunction with the Northumberland and Durham Council of Action ….”

The editorial ended with the slogan, “Long live the solidarity of the International Working Class”.  The cartoon of the day declared “Strike now.  Strike for Bread and Victory.”  Cartoons were a regular feature of the paper and the continuing impact of the ‘l WANT YOU’ recruiting poster is apparent, in that at least two of the cartoons are clearly based on this theme. 

The TUC’s paper, the British Worker, was not available in a Newcastle edition until 11 May so this strike bulletin, together with the other local strike bulletins such as The Northern Light, were the only sources of the trade union viewpoint in this dispute. 

The first issue reported two huge meetings on the Windmill Hills, Gateshead, and the restiveness amongst the Post Office workers, anxious to join their colleagues.  The TUC had adopted a policy of calling workers out in a phased manner and amongst the first group were the transport workers and the printers, but it did not include the crucial local trades of engineering and shipbuilding who were called out on the last day of the strike.  The Trades Council issued a Manifesto to Newcastle Workers, published on 5 May:

“The Trades Council appeals to all workers to stand solidly together and maintain the perfect order that exists.  By tonight, we shall have the machine of resistance working with the highest efficiency.  The following departments will be set up today: Publicity, Propaganda, Feeding and Sport.  The Workers’ Chronicle will appear each day.  The workers must obey their unions.  All delegates to the Trades Council must get into immediate touch with the secretary.  BRING YOUR CYCLES ALONG!  STAND FIRM.   WE ARE WINNING. 

George Wood”

The Council’s officers were clearly most actively engaged in forwarding the miners’ struggle which was clearly identified as their own.  The language of the paper was, on occasion, strong.  When it seemed that the railway clerks were hesitating, they were described as “poor, puny, docile creatures” and they were warned “that should capitalism be successful in this struggle with organised labour then they also will ‘bite the dust’.  For God’s sake be men and fight.”  By noon the next day, any fears of wavering had passed; some 400 clerks had signed the strike roll.  A set of “Immediate Tasks for Militants” was outlined:

“Agitate for the setting up of food kitchens under the auspices of local Councils of Action, Trades Council or, where those do not exist, the Miners’ Lodge.  Urge the local Co-ops to give extended credit to the Miners.  Get Workers Defence Corps formed under the auspices of the Trades Council or Council of Action.  Organise sports under Miners’ Lodges – popularise carnivals, demonstrations, marches etc.  Urge fraternisation with the troops by advocating joint sports. 

Keep the miners’ wives fully informed by calling meetings of miners’ wives under Lodge auspices.

Altogether for a Workers’ Victory.”

While the intention was expressed of publishing all instructions from London, this did not happen but the second issue contained an “Official Bulletin” in which the Trades Council’s secretary George Wood reported the progress of strike organisation.  It was explained that “Arrangements have been made for the issue of permits for the transport of food, and such permits are only valid when issued on NUDAW^[1] official paper and signed by S Flynn, Secretary of the Northumberland Council of Action” (in fact, the secretary was Charles Flynn). 

On May 6, Laraman wrote the leading article:

“Stand firm

Comrades and fellow workers, the Prime Minister has called upon the nation to stand steady.  On behalf of the Trades Council, I also ask you to stand steady.  The crisis which has arisen constitutes an attack upon the economic standards of the miners and all workers of this country.  There has never been such a position as this in the whole industrial history of Britain.  Never had there been a greater need for workers to stand solid.  Our sympathy is and will be in favour of the miners.  It is quite obvious to all that should we fail in this great struggle, we in other trades will undoubtedly be defeated.  A United Front will defeat the efforts of the Capitalists and their Government to cut wages again so again I say, be firm and thus secure victory.”

Matt Pringle, the immediate previous president, explained the position of his union, the Bakers:

“… you have been told that the Strikers are out to starve the people, don’t believe it, it is not the case.  The instructions from the Trade Union Congress to the members of the Operative Bakers Union are that: All members must remain at work during the present crisis, and do all in their power to help in the production and distribution of food.  This we are doing, but our wholehearted support goes to those now on strike and those locked out who are bearing the brunt in order to save the economic conditions of the whole working class.  It is not the miners’ fight – it is yours, it is ours, do your bit.  Support the Miners and their Pals.”

As already indicated, the leaders were concerned to try to ensure that the wives understood what was at stake, and Jessie Platt of the National Union of General & Municipal Workers (NUGMW) wrote “A Message to the Women”:

“The great response to the call for Unity is tremendously encouraging, all classes of workers are incensed at the attack made upon their standards of living and have shown their determination in no uncertain voice to resist the vicious tyranny.  I would urge all women to analyse and try to understand the position.  Stand four-square behind their menfolk, remembering that their fight is our fight and that of our children; and if we only have faith to believe in the ultimate triumph of right we cannot fail to win.

All right-thinking people are with us and I especially appeal to all mothers to watch the position of the girls.  Help them to resist the temptation to blackleg on our men.  Remember they too may some clay be the wives of working men, when they can look back with pride upon the splendid courage displayed by their class.  Let the women of Britain, by their sympathy and understanding, encourage their men and provide the inspiration which ensures success.  If we regard the situation calmly and cheerfully, we shall be doing a loyal service to the whole working-class movement, and also contributing towards a peaceful solution.”

Persistent efforts were made to deal with any potential weak points in the united front of the working people and in this the role of the wives was crucial.  But there were also the young and the fact that apprentices were, by indenture, debarred from striking and it was the normal trade union practice to respect this restriction on their power.  Issue No 4 carried a special appeal to the young:

“The young workers are particularly concerned in this strike.  Not only are the bosses making great efforts to keep apprentices roping workers in, to say they may not act as the backbone of the OMS^[2] scabs, but the younger workers must remember that when they are on adult wages, those wages will be determined by the success of the workers’ fight now.

EVERY YOUNG WORKER OUT!

SMASH THE APPRENTICE STRIKE CLAUSE!

UNITY BETWEEN YOUNG AND ADULT WORKERS!”

The following edition contained letters from the Labour Guild of Youth and the Young Communist League, the latter urging that young workers should be represented on Strike Committees.  The Newcastle Council of Action decided to appoint “a special propagandist for the Youth”.

Appeals continued for cyclists and funds but George Wood reported: “the progress of the strike apparatus is splendid … thousands of willing and voluntary workers are giving their whole time to the Council.”  

A food commissariat was formed, composed of Stanley Evans, Coun Jack Mallock, WA Thompson, Mrs Swanton and Mrs Platt; the names of secretaries of food committees in the north, west central, and east of the city were given.  “All Women’s Working Class organisations, the Co-operative Guilds etc were urged to fall into the ranks and send delegates to the headquarters of the food department ....”  The involvement of the co-ops was never completely achieved and there was a continuing chiding in the Workers’ Chronicle because of their reluctant actions. 

A permits committee consisted of four members of the Council of Action, Larkin (NUGMW), Leeroyd (Transport Workers), Ayton (Tramways) and Haig (Unemployed), together with a representative from each of the transport unions.  There were persistent difficulties over the issue of permits and the abuse of those issued for the movement of food.  At one stage, all permits were stopped. 

One issue still disputed is whether or not the local Civil Commissioner, Sir Kingsley Wood, did or did not hold discussions with local strike leaders and agree to a joint control of the movement of goods.  Officially, some discussion is admitted but no agreement of dual control.  But the Workers Chronicle No 3 was specific:

“Yet the fact that these conferences were being held was known to all the leading trade unionists of Newcastle.  They were unofficial; they were initiated by Sir Kingsley Wood; they contained an offer to withdraw OMS and a system of dual control.”  

Even if it cannot now be established to the satisfaction of all what Sir Kingsley Wood offered, the immediate effectiveness of the stoppage of the movement of goods from the port can hardly be disputed.  By the beginning of the second week, there were barricades on the quayside and “in order that we may be thoroughly intimidated, the Warships are lying handy”, and the OMS carried out its activities.  The paper, which by now showed some signs of Communist leadership in its pages, urged mass pickets to stop movement of traffic (see image). 

There was a persistent concern to stop the call to irresponsible actions.  A notice from the Central Strike Committee, setting out the position on picketing, was published in issue No 12:

“Instructions to pickets

Only peaceful picketing is allowed by law, and it is therefore advisable that all pickets should understand that it is within their rights to converse with and advise any person who they feel is engaged in blackleg labour, but if the said person insists then they are quite within the law in calling upon the police for protection.  Therefore, all pickets should understand that when conveyances come along the road, pickets are entitled to advise them and to reason with them but not to intimidate to violence, and to do their best with such advice to get them to cease work and support the cause which the pickets know to be correct.”

Earlier when reporting on the arrest of Will Lawther, the paper wrote:

“Irresponsible hooliganism is now the opportunity for the authorities.  No doubt at all that their agents are already busy.  What is our best weapon?  Window smashing, individual attacks?  Or is it to transform the hundreds of thousands of locked-out and striking Workers in the two counties into the organised and disciplined pickets to carry through the orders of the Central Strike Committee which has stopped ALL PERMITS.  There must be no doubt as to our stand.  SOLIDARITY AND DISCIPLINE WORKING THROUGH MASS PICKETS.  These are the weapons not only to make victory for the Workers certain and with it the defeat of the Capitalist offensive, but also to enforce the RELEASE OF ALL CLASS WAR PRISONERS.”

This policy was generally successful throughout the city, as the subsequent police report showed.  The paper regularly attacked police action against strikers but, considering the vast extent of the strike activity, such incidents were few. 

On May 11, the second line of workers was called out by the TUC; this included the engineers and shipyard workers.  The turn-out of these workers on Tyneside is disputed but the battle was over.  In London, the surrender had taken place but this was not understood locally where the strike bulletins reported a success that was never achieved, eg The Northern Light:

“Special Late News.

General Council Calls Off Strike.

7-hour day maintained.

45s minimum.

Subsidy for three months.

Reinforcements does the trick.”

The truth was very different and the Workers Chronicle on 14 May wrote:

“OUR ANSWER TO THE TRAITORS!

NO SURRENDER!

Never in the history of the working-class struggle – with the exception of the treachery of our leaders in 1914 – has there been such a calculated betrayal of working-class interests as has overtaken us this week.”

The problems of the attempts of railwaymen to return to work, and their return to strike action pending a more [just] settlement, were reported.  The secretary of the Northumberland and Durham Strike Committee issued a statement which still showed that the full facts were not known locally, that nothing had been achieved, but there was a keen awareness of very real difficulties:

“Whilst the General Strike has compelled the Government to grant a subsidy, yet the manner of ending the General Strike resulting in the collapse of the London headquarters, has left us exposed to the most bitter persecution by the local employers; against this we will fight and continue to fight.

Do you do the same?

Whenever you can – keep together; running away will not help anyone.

Keep all local Councils of Action, Trades Councils, Strike Committees etc in being and

Hold together! Chas Flynn”

Unfortunately, we do not know how far the committees held together but the Newcastle Trades Council had responded well to the demands of tile tremendous struggle of 1926 and its paper graphically reflects many of the attitudes and views of that time.

No event could make such demands on a trades council as a general strike so it was not surprising that the immediate years that followed seemed ‘drab’.  The new secretary, J Yarwood, was later to write in his ‘Retrospective and Explanation’ (1932): “After the General Strike the Trades Council was indeed a very limp body … its meetings poorly attended, its business was mere tinkering and its policy on most things generally inconclusive and purposeless.”  This seems much too pessimistic a view: compared with the movement generally, the Council held its own remarkably well, at a time when nationally membership continued to fall.  Membership was over 12,000 in both 1926-7 (64 branches) and 1927-8 (68 branches); and even if meetings were less well-attended, a major reorganisation was undertaken.  There were some new affiliations, and a couple of withdrawals, allegedly because a Communist was elected to the Council.  The Shop Assistants objected to the clause in the Trades Council constitution which stated that the Council “will co-operate with the Labour Party whenever and wherever possible.”  This was adjusted after consultation with the TUC.  A special committee examined the almost critical financial position: an annual income not much over £60 left little for campaigning, and more than a quarter of this was provided by the £16 affiliation fees paid by the General & Municipal Workers Union.

The title of the Council was changed to “Newcastle and District Trades Council”, so dropping “Gateshead”, an irritating factor in relations with the sister trades council, although perhaps a small one compared with more substantial demarcation difficulties.  The unions forming the Council were divided into three groups, each group having an agreed number of members on the Executive Committee of 11 members:

Group 1: Mining, railways and transport (3 EC members)

Group 2: Engineering and heavy industries (3 EC members)

Group 3: Light Industries and general trades (5 EC members)

A fourth Group for Technical, Clerical and Professional Workers was added a few years later.  The president and two vice-presidents were elected at the Annual General Meeting but did not have a vote on the EC.  A membership analysis for 1928-30 was as follows:

Special efforts were made to increase membership in Group 1, by calling a conference, in December 1928; but, although 42 branches were invited, the meeting was a complete failure.  The Council continued to give help to local societies in dispute, which included the shop assistants at the Meadow Dairies and clerks at the Co-op.  They continued their watching brief in regard to City contracts; during 1927-8 the issue was painting the trams. 

A new hope was reflected in the Annual Report of 1928-9, which concluded:

“The year 1928-9 … saw the end of five years dreary Tory rule and the advent of the Second Labour Government, bringing in its train, hope and expectation to millions of humble homes.  For Trade Unionists, the new Government means much.  It means an era of useful social and industrial legislation and, in foreign affairs, Mr Macdonald will pick up the threads … world peace means much to working people ….”

These rising hopes benefited the labour movement and, as noted above, membership of the Trades Council rose to 14,309 in 1929-30 and income exceeded £100 for the first time in many years.  The disappointments of the Macdonald government followed, and membership fell until by 1931-2 it was 12,540:

Group 1                             1,794 members                        6 branches

Group 2                             1,723 members                      14 branches

Group 3                             8,692 members                      41 branches

Group 4                                331 members                        4 branches

William Short, of the Leatherworkers, was financial secretary from 1925 until he became general secretary of the Council in 1932, which office he was to hold until 1948.  During the 1930s, income fluctuated between £100 and £115, except for 1937-8, when it was less than £89, presumably some freak circumstances which existing records cannot explain. 

Membership increased from the low point of 12,338 (62 branches in 30 unions) in 1932-3 to 15,472 (77 branches in 42 unions) in 1936-7, and probably continued to rise but the records are not available.  The annual affiliation fees from the General & Municipal Workers of £16 10s were a very important single contribution to income but the Newcastle Shop Assistants were also significant, usually more than £7 and reaching £12 6s 6d in 1938-9.  The contributions of the engineering trades were usually less than £6 until the affiliation of the draughtsmen.  The Association of Engineering and Shipbuilding Draughtsmen (AESD) affiliated in 1930, and contributed £3 3s in fees in 1938-9, bringing the engineering trade contribution in that year to almost £9.  Another white-collar union, the railway clerks, contributed almost half the funds from that trade in 1928-9 and more than three-quarters in 1939.

Amongst the new affiliations in the 1930s were the Association of Women Clerks and Secretaries, the National Union of Journalists and the National Union of Seamen.  The long-established connection of the port with Scandinavia was reflected in the affiliation of the Norwegian Seamen, during 1933-4; this was greeted as “an event of some importance”.   In August 1936, a football team of trade unionists visited Norway; in a return visit the Norwegians played in Newcastle, in October 1935.

The appendix (separate) provides an analysis of income and membership as related to fees paid; during this period some unions paid a regular sum, which clearly did not reflect their branch membership.

An unfortunate dispute with the Gateshead Labour and Trades Council continued throughout the thirties, which the Gateshead Herald described as the “now well-established ‘demarcation dispute’ that the Newcastle Trades Council keep bringing out of the cupboard every so often ....”  The Tyneside Federation of Trades Councils, joint committees and the TUC were all involved in attempts to resolve this question.  Most of the documentation is now missing but, as late as 1938-9, the Gateshead AEU No 4 branch was affiliated to Newcastle.  This caused much bitterness and little good for the local trade union movement. 

The frightful proportions of unemployment on Tyneside and the rise of fascism were constant topics for the Council throughout the thirties.  The unemployed workers were organised into a special branch in 1930 but their efforts to affiliate to the Council were opposed by the General & Municipal Workers.  The Council was represented at a conference on the industrial future of Tyneside, in November 1929, and it noted the need to keep a careful watch “to check the evils of reckless rationalisation”; and, during the following year, it was engaged in discussions on allotments for the unemployed.  The depression which spread throughout the world, following the Wall Street crash of 1929, moved the Council to comment:

“Our affiliated Unions must bring silent pressure to bear upon an industrial system which has been subject to the most destructive tests in the last ten years.  Already intellectually discredited, the great force of the Unions must bring about its final defeat and clear the way for a system more rational, more humane and better fitted to carry on the economic activities of the nation.”

Three years later, the Council expressed the view “that our economic salvation lies in Socialist reconstruction and the reorganisation of industry as a public service.”

Early in 1933, the Council organised a Conference on the Unemployed and established an Unemployed Workers Association, which was given financial help on many occasions.  Although the Council participated in the Lord Mayor’s Conference for More Work, in October 1934, it was not regarded as of much success.  There was, however, a big increase in membership of the Unemployed Association, and job propects on Tyneside were still very bleak.  The regular feature of reporting on the state of trade which was begun early in the Council’s history was one of the activities praised by Yarwood in his ‘Retrospect’; this was certainly not an encouraging item in these years of closed shipyards and depressed trade.  One leaflet circulated by the Council was entitled, “No pauperisation of the North East”.

As the remarks on the foreign affairs indicated above, international matters were still causing the Council concern.  In its Annual Report of 1933-4 the Council complained that its attempts to organise a campaign against fascism had received little cooperation from the City Labour Party and other bodies.  It noted that, although Fascism may seem small, we “must not be silent”.  “We have recently seen nations enslaved in the meshes of dictatorship, dictatorships which have crushed noble men and women.  We have seen and are hearing today reason, order and decency supplanted by brutality and unjustice.” A speaker was heard on ‘Fascism in Germany’ and some action was taken in support of the League of Nations peace ballot.  Two years later, the Council described “The Spanish Civil War … [as] the most anxious problem for the Labour movement during the past twelve months.”  Tribute was paid “to our Spanish comrades in their great fight against Fascism” and there was “hope for the success of the Government forces.”  A Spanish Medical Aid Committee was established and this became stronger and did “very useful work”.  There was considerable activity in the city in support of the Spanish government, including the repair of vehicles by engineering workers.  Once again the Trades Council had become a focal point for joint trade union activity in the city.

Explanatory Notes

[1] NUDAW = National Union of Distributive and Allied Workers.

[2] OMS = the government-established Organisation for the Maintenance of Supplies.