"In the opinion of this Conference, the time has arrived for the RCA to affiliate with the Labour Party."
A.E. Chandler
Sheffield Branch Delegate,
1909 RCA Annual Conference.
The labour movement has much to thank railway workers for and it was the initiative taken by the ASRS at the 1899 TUC that gave birth to the Labour Party. This led to the establishment of the Labour Representation Committee (LRC), the forerunner of the Labour Party, at the Farringdon Memorial Hall, London, on 27th February 1900. Seventy organisations were represented by 129 delegates and during the first year 41 trade unions affiliated to the LRC along with 3 socialist societies and 7 trades councils. A new political era had begun, but it was the repercussions arising from a dispute with the Taff Vale Railway Company that encouraged many more trade unions to affiliate.
In 1900, and without the initial approval of their union (the ASRS), railwaymen employed by the Taff Vale Railway Company came out on strike. The company, in an attempt to keep the service running, brought in outside labour. Although there was some violence on the picket line, the union was never party to it; indeed it had specifically instructed its members that violence must not be used. Picketing was not illegal, but a number of court cases had indicated that there were weaknesses in the law, and the Taff Vale Company not only brought successful prosecutions against individuals, but also against the ASRS, resulting in the union paying £23,000 in damages plus considerable costs. A successful appeal reversed the decision of the court, whereupon the Taff Vale Company appealed to the House of Lords, and won. This decision undid the Acts of 1871 and 1875 and presented employers with the opportunity of weakening or bankrupting any union that took strike action. As industrial action could not be used to oppose the Taff Vale judgement the trade union movement sought to achieve its reverse by political activity and this had far-reaching results.
Trade unionists attempted to get the position clarified in Parliament but a motion proposed by the Liberal, W.C.B. Beaumont, that legislation was necessary to prevent workmen being placed by judge-made law in a position inferior to that intended by Parliament in 1875,1 was lost by 203 votes to 174. The motion was seconded by Richard Bell, now General Secretary of the ASRS, but with the House dominated by Conservatives it had little chance of success. Nevertheless, some, such as Sir Fortescue Flannery and Ernest Flower, a vice-president of the RCA, opposed the Government. Liberal vice-presidents J.H. Yoxall, C.E. Schwann and F.A. Channing also gave their support to the motion. For a period, there was some hope that a future Liberal Government would be willing to make the necessary changes to the law, but this gradually receded and slowly but surely the trade union movement came to the conclusion that separate political representation was essential to defend the interests of working people.
More and more trade unions affiliated to the LRC, and by February 1903 it had 847,315 members. Following intense pressure the Conservative Government set up a Royal Commission to examine the implications of the Taff Vale judgement, but this was overtaken by the 1906 General Election when they were swept from power by the Liberals. The Labour Party achieved a major breakthrough in the election, increasing the number of its MPs from two to twenty-nine. When the Liberal Government placed a Bill before Parliament based on the recommendations of the Royal Commission, this was unacceptable to the labour movement, and even progressive Liberals and Conservatives demanded a complete reversal of the Taff Vale judgement. Eventually, the Government was obliged to introduce a new Bill which protected the funds of a union when in dispute with employers, and which also clarified the legal position of picketing. This passed into law as the Trades Disputes Act (1906).
Stopford-Challener failed to recognise the danger of the Taff Vale judgement and when the House of Lords made its historic decision in favour of the company, he wrote:
"The ASRS are deserving of thanks for having brought this matter to the front... I hold no brief for the House of Lords politically, but I believe they have this time done a service, unwittingly it may be, to the workers and their organisations."2
The General Secretary saw the House of Lords' ruling as one that would deter trade unionists from ignoring the instructions of their EC; politically, he was more in tune with the policy of the Chamber of Commerce and its President Lord Avebury, than with that of the TUC. Stopford-Challener was unconcerned at the long term implications of the Taff Vale dispute and from the RCA's standpoint he considered its members had little to fear from the judgement.
When Stopford-Challener attended the 1903 TUC as a delegate for the first time, one of the main items of debate was a proposal to instruct the Parliamentary Committee to secure the immunity of trade union funds if a union were sued for damages. This, in effect, meant a return to the position that existed prior to the Taff Vale judgement. An amendment was put forward by those who, by now, considered it was unrealistic to expect to return to the previous situation. Stopford-Challener, on behalf of the RCA, supported this argument, as did Richard Bell. It is unlikely that Bell spoke on behalf of many ASRS members when he said that in the case of his own union, the rules had been broken, and if they had been adhered to there would have been no Taff Vale judgement.3 The amendment was overwhelmingly lost and the motion was unanimously accepted.
The RCA repeatedly proclaimed its non-political position. In September 1900, when Joseph Lawrence (a vice-president of the RCA, proprietor of the Railway Herald, and a Conservative and Imperialist) stood for the Cardiff constituency, all the delegates at the Cambridge conference signed a letter sending him best wishes, but dissociating themselves from party politics.4 Lawrence was not elected but he did eventually enter Parliament in 1901, whereupon the General Secretary, in an article for the Railway Herald on 18th May 1901 wrote:
"Nothing is further from our intention than to dabble in politics or party creed, but we must all realise how much our Association owes to the generosity of the Herald proprietors, and we must join in wishing Mr. Lawrence a successful political career."
Sir Fortescue Flannery frequently remarked that the Association was in no sense political.5 Stopford-Challener also was keen to keep party politics out of the RCA and out of the trade union movement. Despite these "non-political" proclamations, the RCA had been political from its birth. What Flannery and Stopford-Challener really meant was that they had no desire to go beyond the existing mainstream of political opinion and were willing to work with both Conservative and Liberal Parties to enact progressive legislation or block Bills6 that were against the interests of the Association. The RCA was firmly within the politics of the status quo!
From its earliest days the RCA took a great interest in the affairs of Parliament as a considerable amount of its time dealt with railway legislation. The railway companies had, of course, recognised this much earlier and had used it to great effect. During 1902 there were 79 MPs who were railway directors and 81 who had a financial interest in railway companies. The lone voice of the railway worker was Richard Bell. In 1902 the EC disregarded Stopford-Challener's support for the Lords' decisions over Taff Vale and his "non-political" pronouncements and recommended that the Association should affiliate to the LRC.
The membership debated the issue hotly in the Railway Herald and just before the annual conference, Stopford-Challener responded to those who had asked for his opinion on the matter. He remained broadly neutral but was convinced that a greater percentage of labour representation was necessary in Parliament to safeguard the workers' interests. He then made it clear that delegates must decide for themselves whether or not it would be in the truest interests of the RCA and its members to identify themselves with the movement at that stage of their existence.7 In the event, fearful that it could split the union, the debate was deferred on the recommendation of the General Secretary and A.G. Walkden.
Political opinion was constantly in the process of change and in the space of a few years John Stopford-Challener moved from his non-political position to give his allegiance to the LRC. At the 1903 Annual Conference it was proposed that it would be in the best interests of the Association to affiliate to the LRC but Alexander Walkden tabled an amendment:
"That, whilst sympathising with the objects of the Labour Representation Committee, in view of the fact that we have at present only a part of the railway clerks in the Kingdom as members of the RCA, we feel that the time is not yet opportune for affiliation with the LRC."8
This was carried by 20 votes to 15 and as a substantive motion, was carried with only 2 against. The intervention of Walkden in the debate was decisive and without question his speech would have influenced many delegates. Walkden had gained considerable respect throughout the union and as the EC had decided not to make a recommendation, his opinion would have carried some weight. The EC's decision to remain neutral was almost certainly to avoid divisions. Some members had joined the ILP, others were sympathetic to the LRC, but many still advocated support for the Liberal Party.
Walkden himself was a Liberal, and in April 1903 had been elected as a Councillor on Carlton UDC. He served on two of its committees until February 1905 when he moved to Peterborough. After the 1903 Annual Conference, Stopford-Challener wrote to J. Ramsay MacDonald, now Secretary of the LRC, explaining why the Association had decided not to affiliate. He did add one positive note. As a delegate to the Doncaster Trades and Labour Council, he had proposed its affiliation to the LRC and this had been agreed. He finished his letter With best wishes for the continued success of the workers' salvation.
9
Stopford-Challener quickly immersed himself in Labour politics and in 1903 had formed a local branch of the LRC in Doncaster, becoming its secretary. During the same year, and with the approval of the EC he contested the North Ward in the Doncaster Municipal elections, the first occasion that a member of the RCA stood in an election on behalf of the LRC. Stopford-Challener campaigned for housing reform, improved sanitation, the "Fair Wage Clause" to be incorporated in all municipal contracts, and for more technical education to be provided in the town. He was not successful, losing by 120 votes to a councillor who had held the ward for some years. He later stood in a by-election for the South Ward and the following year opposed a Liberal former Mayor, when he was again easily defeated. Stopford-Challener was more fortunate in 1904 when he contested a place on the Doncaster Board of Guardians, and topped the poll with 471 votes. In January 1906 he wrote to Ramsay MacDonald and offered to stand in any Parliamentary constituency where he was needed.
As the RCA gained in strength a positive relationship developed with the ASRS. In 1903, Stopford-Challener was invited to its annual conference dinner, and George Wardle, now a Labour MP, became a regular and extremely popular guest at RCA Conferences. TSSA members may not be too pleased to learn that a union which has been justly proud of its highly efficient conference organisation has to thank an ASRS member for a little fraternal advice on how to conduct its affairs. For it was undoubtedly Wardle, in a very friendly article in The Railway Review, who suggested that we should appoint tellers, a standing orders committee, and have a set of standing orders to avoid difficulties that had been experienced at the 1905 Conference.10 His advice was not immediately heeded and it was not until 1908, at the eleventh annual conference, that a Standing Orders Committee (SOC) was introduced. This committee was elected at the start of the conference and one of its noteworthy achievements was that the timetable was strictly adhered to.
At the EC meeting in July 1903, it was reported that there had been a drop in sales of the Railway Herald and it would not be able to continue for much longer unless a substantial increase took place. Weekly circulation was down to 8,000 copies of which only 800-900 were sold within the Association, to approximately 22 per cent of the membership. Sir Joseph Lawrence had occasionally helped to make good the deficiency but he was no longer in a position to do so and a suggestion from one branch that Sir Fortescue Flannery be approached for financial assistance was turned down by the EC. There was considerable apprehension at the imminent loss of the Railway Herald as it provided an invaluable service, but the Association had now matured and was ready to meet the challenge. After a discussion it was proposed by G. Steele,11 supported by William Hill that the Association should establish its own paper.12 This was accepted but everyone realised that it would be impossible to publish weekly, and it was agreed that a monthly journal was the best option.
As there was insufficient capital to launch the new venture, it was decided to set up a Journal Fund and ask members to take out shares to the value of one shilling (5p), although it was always understood that there would be no prospect of any return on their investment. It was originally intended to have a 24 page paper, but this was not financially feasible and publication commenced with 8 pages. At the end of 1903 the Railway Herald printed its last copy and on 1st January 1904, The Railway Clerk was born. The first Editor was William J. West,13 who worked throughout the whole of the Christmas holidays to ensure that the paper came out on time. West had estimated that 3,000 copies would be required for the first edition; in fact over 5,000 were printed. The first copies were sold for one penny each, and during the first year there was a loss of £65. The following year the deficit was £50, but as The Railway Clerk became more popular it was not long before it was paying its way and by 1914 sales had reached 25,000. (Membership at this time was 29,394.)
West's contribution to the RCA only lasted for a short period but it was immense and the Association owes him a great deal. In addition to his duties as Editor of The Railway Clerk he still continued his employment on the railway and his activities soon brought him to the attention of his employers. For many years it was understood by railway employees that they should not participate in public affairs and that they would jeopardise their employment if they dared to take an active part in politics. West joined the railway after he had been elected as a councillor and had always been careful to get approval for time off to carry out his civic duties. In 1904 this was declined and he was expected to be at the beck and call of the company at all hours.14 This failed to prevent his election as the Mayor of Battersea and if his civic duties brought him disfavour, it was nothing compared to his high profile within the union. Indeed, West noticed during an interview with his manager that every issue of The Railway Clerk was on the table, along with copies of his speeches. After the interview West took twelve months leave of absence, and a collection totalling £30 4s 9d (£30.24) was taken for him from amongst the membership. The EC later made it up to £50.
In 1909 the EC decided that in order to protect the interests of the Association from the effect of any legal action taken against the Editor of The Railway Clerk, a publishing company should be established. This was called Grays Inn Press Ltd and it was launched on 7th June 1909 with £100 as its original capital. The company continued until 1978 when a change in the law made it superfluous.
Following the decision of the 1903 Annual Conference not to affiliate to the LRC, a small number of activists began to conduct campaigns in their branches to persuade members that affiliation should be pursued. Early in 1904, the secretaries of the Swansea and Leeds branches wrote to the LRC asking for propaganda, as did Joseph St. Clair Halfpenny on behalf of the union's London Divisional Council. He not only distributed a considerable amount of literature to branches but also offered to organise a meeting. The secretary of the Manchester branch, Richard H. Rowlands,15 hoped that affiliation would force the resignation of Lord Avebury one of the Association's vice-presidents, and also of the President, "a Tory Knight".16 Rowlands was far from confident that the 1904 Conference could be won for affiliation and when delegates came to debate political affiliation, a minority argued for purely trade union representation in Parliament, and opposed socialist politics. Many delegates were concerned at the prospect of Labour extremism which West countered by arguing that as the Fabian Society had only one delegate within the LRC, the ILP 13, and the trade union movement 284, there was nothing to worry about. The EC again adopted a position of neutrality and when the vote was taken it was agreed to affiliate by 32 votes to 8. The conference was in advance of the membership, and after a ballot was held the position was reversed, with those in favour of affiliation numbering 912, and those against 942.
When the result of the ballot was announced at the 1905 Leeds Conference, there was some bitterness expressed, and West was severely criticised by the Leeds delegate W. Herbert Ainsworth17 about an editorial in the February Railway Clerk which, although in favour of the LRC, contended, We should not affiliate at this time as it would be a tax on the funds and it would take too long to make an effective presence in Parliament.
The membership were urged to pursue the same tactics as the NUT and put forward its own candidate. Ainsworth clearly had a point. Whatever the reasons for the editorial, which may have been decided by its Editorial Board, the damage had been done. To make matters worse, the close vote so frightened those opposed to the LRC that the North-West London branch (which was under strong Liberal influence through its EC member William Edgar Williams18 convinced delegates that in any future ballot affiliation could only be achieved if two thirds of the members agreed.
Within the leadership of the RCA, it was not only Stopford-Challener who had turned to the LRC. By the end of 1905 Alexander Walkden, who only a few months earlier had been a Liberal Councillor, convinced the EC that the Association should not endorse the candidature of any members unless they stood independently of either the Conservative or Liberal parties. This was carried by four votes to one. Nevertheless, politics was still a matter of some delicacy and West, the politician par excellence, could not have been pleased when the Executive resolved that The Railway Clerk must not express opinions on either side of party politics.19
The campaign to affiliate to the LRC continued and at the 1906 Bristol Conference the Hereford, Bristol and Manchester branches proposed affiliation. This was carried, but after the Barnsley branch demanded a ballot of the membership, affiliation was again turned down with 2,006 votes in favour and 2,440 against. Nevertheless delegates did want to be represented in Parliament and the 1907 Conference agreed that the EC appoint a member of the House of Commons to act as its parliamentary representative, and that he be paid an honorarium.20 It was to George Wardle that the RCA turned for this service.
As part of the campaign to affiliate to the Labour Party (the LRC had changed its name in 1906) a number of young politically active members, who were just coming to prominence, met to form the RCA Socialist Fellowship. The first attempt was made by William Duggleby, a member of the Hull branch and a former member of the ASRS. During the 1906 Conference, Duggleby sought out those sympathetic to socialism and his close friend Herbert Ainsworth was one of the earliest to assist. They were unable to make any real progress and the next initiative came from the youngest delegate to attend the 1908 Annual Conference in Birmingham. This was George Ridley who represented (Kings) Lynn. Ridley had already made his mark in the RCA and by the time he was 22 years old he was branch vice-chairman, chairman of the Eastern Divisional Council, a member of the EC and the local ILP branch secretary.
It was the young dynamic Ridley who gathered together the small band of socialists first recruited by Duggleby. Numbered among this group were Arthur E. Chandler, Harold Chadwick,21 Thomas Gill (who later became President of the RCA), and S. Blackshaw.22 The first meeting of the RCA Socialist Fellowship took place in George Ridley's hotel bedroom, but these inauspicious surroundings did not dampen their desire to bring the RCA closer to the Labour Party.
The Fellowship blossomed under Ridley's leadership and was developed by many others over the years. It lasted from 1908 to 1914 and was revived in 1919 by J. Mann (Hinckley) at the Nottingham Conference, with Blackshaw acting as its treasurer. It declined during the early 1920s and was re-established at the 1933 Felixstowe Conference. The Socialist Fellowship is the oldest fringe meeting of the Association, embracing all shades of socialist opinion, and many of its supporters did much to radicalise conference in those early years. Some would achieve considerable prominence in the Association, others notoriety. Both William Duggleby and George Ridley gave much to the Association. Duggleby served on the EC from 1906 to 1935, a record that doubtless will not be surpassed, and George Ridley was, without question, one of the most popular and respected of all RCA members. He became one of the earliest Line Secretaries, an Assistant Secretary, Chairman of the Labour Party, Member of Parliament and Editor of the union's monthly journal.
Early in 1906 the head office of the Association was moved from Doncaster to 337, Grays Inn Road, London, but it was not the change of address or politics that attracted the attention of conference delegates that year. John Stopford-Challener died on 12th March 1906. The news that he had committed suicide in the Bois de Boulogne, Paris, had been announced in the national newspapers the following day. Two park keepers who were patrolling the area found his body, a revolver in his hand and a note for his wife, along with £15 in English money and 25s (£1.25) in French currency. He was well dressed, wearing valuable jewellery and intriguingly, for a person who lived in Doncaster, possessed two tickets to Glasgow.23
The General Secretary had been ill for some time and had worked extremely hard during the General Election campaign. Some of his close friends had been aware that he had suffered a loss of memory and this had been followed by a nervous breakdown. To recuperate, he had taken a cruise on the North Sea, but it was not simply overwork that led to his breakdown. After his suicide it was found that he had misappropriated RCA money from various accounts amounting to £380 4s 9d (£380. 24); in due course, £140 was recovered. Mrs. Stopford-Challener, who had travelled from Doncaster on her way to Paris, met the Association's solicitors in London, and in the event, decided not to continue her journey. John Ernest Stopford-Challener was 30 years old when he died, and had seen the Association grow from 527 members to 6,000 since he took over in June 1899. He was buried in Paris.
This was a tragedy, not only for his widow and three young children, but also for the Association. When conference convened there was hardly sufficient money to pay all the expenses, but by the end of the year there had been some improvement, and the funds amounted to £587. All of this may have been avoided if the delegates to the 1905 Conference had taken note of the criticisms made by the Halifax branch which had called for a full audit of the accounts after having earlier in the year expressed its dissatisfaction regarding the rules which regulated receipts and payment of money. The auditors had responded by severely criticising the branch for its lack of confidence in the EC, the General Secretary and themselves, and insisted that not one stone was left unturned to make the Audit complete and satisfactory.
24 The Nottingham branch then had proposed what was, in effect, a vote of confidence in the EC and Officers; this was carried with 50 votes for and 4 against. A motion from Battersea, which called for the Treasurer's post to be separated from that of the General Secretary, was defeated - this was a dreadful mistake which almost certainly led to Stopford-Challener's downfall.
William West, who had decided not to return to the railway, took over as Honorary General Secretary in addition to his duties as Editor of The Railway Clerk and Parliamentary Secretary. Cecil S. Harrison, who had been an apprentice printer prior to joining the railway, helped West to produce The Railway Clerk and assisted him with secretarial duties.
The 1906 Annual Conference must have been a very sombre occasion. Sir Fortescue Flannery, who was no longer in Parliament, had decided to relinquish the Presidency as he believed that the position should be filled by an MP. Alexander Walkden was elected to preside over conference, but it was West who was elected as President whilst still retaining his position as Editor of The Railway Clerk and also that of Parliamentary Secretary. With the wisdom of hindsight a National Treasurer was elected for the first time. This was John Morgan Roberts, a member of the West London branch who had supported the Battersea motion to appoint a Treasurer in 1905. There were seven nominations for the post of General Secretary and the successful candidate was Alexander George Walkden.
A.G. Walkden was born in 1873 and had started work as a clerk on the Great Northern Railway. He joined the RCA in 1897 and was the fifth person to join the Nottingham branch (Frank Parrish having been the fourth). Walkden worked hard to develop both his own and other branches and played a vital role in advancing the Association at a particularly difficult period. At the time of his election as General Secretary he was 33 years old and employed as a Goods Agent on the Great Northern Railway. There is little doubt that he had a promising railway career in front of him and the decision to change direction and become General Secretary of the RCA could not have been an easy one. He was a close friend of the new Treasurer and they spent many hours preparing proposals to develop the Association. During the early years Walkden tended to concentrate on propaganda and recruitment, visiting branches all over the country, while Roberts spent virtually every evening in the office looking after the business affairs of the Association.
In the course of his career Walkden made a remarkable contribution to the Association, to the Labour Party and to the trade union movement. He eventually took over from William West the duties of Parliamentary Secretary and Editor of the Journal, and went on to become a Labour MP, a member (and in 1932-1933 chairman) of the TUC General Council. In 1945 he was created Baron Walkden of Great Bookham and he continued his political work in the House of Lords.
Throughout 1909 all political decisions were clouded by the "Osborne Judgement" with the ASRS once again forced into a further legal quagmire. Walter Victor Osborne was Secretary of the ASRS Walthamstow branch and had taken the union to court on the basis that a trade union had no right to spend money on political activity, including financing the Labour Party. Although a High Court judge had dismissed the case in 1908, Osborne appealed, and both the Appeal Court and later the House of Lords gave judgement in his favour. This decision threatened the very existence of the Labour Party as its revenue was largely derived from the trade union movement.
An indication that problems could possibly be experienced over Labour Representation was seen when the RCA changed its "Objects" in 1905 to include the words, to publish a service newspaper and to secure Parliamentary and Municipal representation
. This had been turned down by the Registrar of Friendly Societies as the new object did not come within the definition of a trade union as defined in Section 16 of the Trade Union (Amendment) Act 1876. The Association referred the matter to the TUC who advised the RCA not to press for this rule to be included in its "Objects".25
When some trade unions were restrained by legal injunctions from contributing to the Labour Party, they and the trade union movement fought hard to get the decision reversed in Parliament. The RCA was implacably opposed to the Osborne judgement which it condemned at the 1910, 1911 and 1912 Conferences. A.G. Walkden led a TUC delegation to the Liberal Prime Minister H.H. Asquith on 15th February 1912 and made a powerful case for the reversal of the Judgement. He reminded Asquith of the considerable unrest that had taken place over the past few years and insisted that if trade unions were not allowed to develop naturally, they would be forced to resort to less peaceful methods of securing industrial reform. Asquith congratulated Walkden on his very moderate and excellent speech26 but he was not moved from his position. Eventually continuous public pressure forced a compromise between the Liberal Party, Labour Party and the trade unions, with the Trade Union Act being introduced in 1913.
In the meantime the EC and the 112 delegates representing 120 branches at the 1909 Annual Conference, were extremely wary of any discussion concerning affiliation to the Labour Party, given the history of previous ballots, the Osborne Judgement and the conservatism of the membership. When the moment came to debate affiliation the President told conference that he had consulted the union's solicitor who considered that it would be illegal to affiliate to the Labour Party.27 Arthur Chandler (Sheffield) was made of sterner stuff. He got to his feet and proposed, That in the opinion of this conference, the time has arrived for the RCA to affiliate to the Labour Party
and that conference should decide its position and Not His Majesty's Judges.
28 This was supported by Mr Wilson of the Glasgow branch who admitted he was not personally in favour of the motion, but was bound by the wishes of his branch. During the debate the EC was criticised for once again adopting a negative position when it was considered it should have given a lead. Stung by the remark, the President said that the EC had no desire to press its views on delegates as there had been many complaints in the past that EC members had dominated conference, but he was prepared and read the following statement:
"In the event of an adverse decision being given by the House of Lords in the case of Osborne v the ASRS, they would approve of the formation of a voluntary society for the purpose of securing representation in the House of Commons, the subscription to such society being optional to members; and in the event of the House of Lords giving a verdict in favour of the Labour Party, the Executive recommend that a ballot be taken."29
Finally, after a lengthy debate the resolution was carried by 44 votes to 32. Those who favoured affiliation were always nervous that a ballot would once again overturn the conference decision, but the odds on this occasion were in their favour. At the previous conference, Richard Rowlands had prepared the way by convincing delegates that the resolution passed in 1905 (that two-thirds of the members must signify their assent to affiliation), be rescinded. Harold Chadwick then proposed that a ballot be taken, and, if a majority of the members who voted were in favour, the executive should arrange for affiliation.30 This was also carried, by 43 votes to 23.
When the result of the ballot was announced it showed that the RCA had achieved a record number of participants, and also of those in favour of affiliation. Of the 8,457 members, 64.2 per cent participated in the ballot. The result declared on 14th October 1909 was:
| Ballot papers received | 5,443 | |
|---|---|---|
| For Affiliation | 4,296 | votes |
| Against | 1,139 | votes |
| Spoilt papers | 8 | votes |
| Majority in favour | 3,157 | votes |
The EC wanted to affiliate as quickly as possible but they were not willing to risk legal proceedings by doing so, and no action had been taken when delegates arrived at Hull for the 1910 Conference. When the moment came to discuss the 1909 Annual Report, Arthur Chandler, already acknowledged as the "stormy petrel" of conference, was furious at the delay. He said that conference knew exactly what it was doing when it agreed to affiliate and it took upon itself the risk and responsibility; those who had voted in favour knew it was illegal, and the EC should have carried out the decision. Chandler was supported in a similar vein by Chadwick who said that the delegates, and the majority of members, had voted for affiliation with their eyes open, and the Executive should have carried out the wish of conference as it was the "Supreme Authority" of the Association.31 The President then announced that the EC had sought legal advice which recommended that under existing conditions affiliation was not advisable. He emphasised that the EC was keen to affiliate, but the 1909 Conference had not given specific instructions as to when this should take place. After a short, sharp debate a "Reference Back"32 of the report was lost on a card vote, with 1,750 votes in favour and 4,525 against - the Executive's view had prevailed.
Conference did, however, agree to inaugurate a Special Parliamentary Fund. This was proposed by Harold Chadwick. An attempt by the Edinburgh delegate to stop the debate by moving "Previous Question" was lost, and the resolution carried by Conference was:
"That a special Parliamentary Fund be inaugurated from which monies shall be taken to provide affiliation fees to the National Labour Party, and for the purposes of putting forward and supporting Parliamentary Candidates who are officials or members of the Railway Clerks' Association. The monies to be raised by voluntary subscriptions of not less than 1/- (5p) per annum, payable (if preferred by the subscriber) in four instalments of threepence (1.25p) each, to be paid during the first month of each quarter ended March 31st, June 30th, September 30th and December 31st. Subscriptions to commence in the quarter ending September 30th next. All expenses incurred in connection with the Parliamentary Fund to be paid out of the monies so raised."33
The Wolverhampton branch then successfully carried a resolution that the RCA should find members to stand for Parliament at the next election and delegates then focused their attention on who should be nominated. A.G. Walkden (now affectionately referred to as "The General") was proposed by Chadwick, and the Sheffield branch proposed the more radical Joseph St. Clair Halfpenny. His name was eventually withdrawn and Arthur Chandler (who was no political friend of Walkden) strongly objected to the suggestion that the General Secretary could successfully combine his duties with those of an MP, as experience had shown that they tended to neglect their union duties.34 Conference rejected this view and Walkden was endorsed as the RCA's first nominee for Parliament.
The EC eventually abandoned its earlier concerns and affiliated to the Labour Party in 1910, on the basis of 9,000 members. This, as Table 2 indicates, was actually against the trend, owing to the concern of the legal implications of the Osborne Judgement. Of the other "black-coated" workers who had already joined, the NUC had 2,350 affiliates and the Postal Telegraph Clerks' Association 10,000.
The path towards affiliation to the Labour Party had taken many twists and turns and it is interesting to note that in 1894, when the first President of the Association and Liberal MP, Batty Langley, was elected to Parliament he had 4,486 votes, defeating the Conservative candidate. Labour came third with 1,249 votes. At a by-election in the same constituency in 1909, it was the Labour candidate who was returned to Parliament, with the Liberal in third place.
Now that affiliation had been achieved, the Association's commitment was total,and at the RCA's Annual Conference in 1912 its guest of honour was none other than the Secretary of the Labour Party, J. Ramsay MacDonald MP who was given a rapturous reception. In political terms the RCA had travelled a long way from its early beginnings in Sheffield and from now on the RCA and its successor, the Transport Salaried Staffs' Association (TSSA), would play an extremely worthy and loyal role in the affairs of the Labour Party.
| Year | No. | Membership |
|---|---|---|
| 1900 | 41 | 353,070 |
| 1901 | 65 | 455,450 |
| 1902 | 127 | 847,315 |
| 1903 | 165 | 956,025 |
| 1904 | 158 | 885,270 |
| 1905 | 176 | 904,496 |
| 1906 | 176 | 975,182 |
| 1907 | 181 | 1,049,673 |
| 1908 | 176 | 1,127,035 |
| 1909 | 172 | 1,450,648 |
| 1910 | 151 | 1,394,402 |
Source: Labour Party Annual Report 1910
The decision to affiliate to the Labour Party was to protect the interests of the union within Parliament and had little to do with socialism, although socialists of various shades had been the most vigorous advocates of affiliation, as indeed they were for railway nationalisation. The majority of members saw nationalisation as a defensive measure against the growth of trusts and combines, providing an efficient railway service and offering greater job security.
The union first supported railway nationalisation at its 1910 Conference when Charles Blanchard,35 along with A.J. Weaver,36 argued that nationalisation would be in the interests of the whole community.37 Members were reluctant to go further than this and when Arthur Chandler proposed That the means of production and distribution of wealth be owned and controlled by the people, and worked in the common interest of all the workers
, it was ruled out of order by the President. He had the backing of the EC and said that the motion had no direct relationship to conference business. When Chandler protested at the ruling it was to no avail, as the President had the overwhelming support of the delegates. A similar motion proposed by Sheffield had been rejected by the President for the same reason in 1909 when he had said, There are many questions upon which we are more likely to be united than this. We must first put our own house in order.
38 Chandler repeatedly tried to get similar motions debated but each year a pretext was found to stifle discussion.
At the 1913 Conference the Sheffield branch found its proposition opposed by Francis Fitzpatrick with an amendment that noticed that certain of its members were anxious to keep the Red Flag flying
and recommended that they flourished the banner elsewhere than over the RCA. Fitzpatrick thought that such subjects should not be discussed at conference and F.C. Watkins39 (a future Labour MP and President of the RCA), although sympathetic, thought it would do more harm than good and successfully moved "Previous Question".
Only a few conference delegates called themselves socialists and amongst the membership as a whole their number was minute. Reporting on the 1913 Conference, the RCA's special correspondent wrote that he was absolutely opposed to The Railway Clerk being used by the Editorial Committee to promulgate Socialism.
40 This ideological battle continued but it was not until 1914, that the political mood changed. At the Edinburgh Conference it was the former Liberal, W.E. Williams, who proposed:
"That as the principal means of production, distribution and exchange, are monopolised and used for private gain, the public ownership and control of the land, mines, railways, and other monopolies is a necessary step towards securing a general advance in real wages and other improved conditions of life."41
This was supported by A. Ernest Townend42 (Manchester), and when delegates voted the resolution received almost unanimous support. It was a policy decision that did not become part of the Labour Party Constitution until 1918!
The RCA attended the Labour Party Conference for the first time in 1911 and its delegates were Alexander Walkden and Samuel Lomax, a committed socialist. Walkden moved the first motion to be submitted by the Association which opposed railway joint working, pooling agreements and amalgamations as being prejudicial to the interests of railway employees. It also rejected any railway Bills that sought powers to enter into any agreements or amalgamations unless satisfactory clauses had been inserted for the protection of staff. The motion also called for the state to have the right to acquire the railway companies at any future date at twenty-five years' purchase of their average net earnings for the three years preceding any joint working, pooling agreement or amalgamation.43
Walkden emphasised in his speech the importance of having a clear policy on nationalisation and said that the Labour Party should be prepared to take action whenever the opportunity arose. He also explained that the companies were, for the first time, discharging their employees as part of their rationalisation programme. The resolution was carried but many others were to follow before the Association's objectives were realised.
[1]. House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates, 14th May 1902 Vol.108 Col.293/294.
[2]. Railway Herald 3rd August 1901.
[3]. TUC Annual Report 1903.
[4]. Railway Herald 29th September 1900.
[5]. Railway Herald 25th May 1901.
[6]. Blocking Bills was a procedural device used to delay private legislation in the House of Commons.
[7]. Railway Herald 25th April 1902.
[8]. Railway Herald 30th May 1903.
[9]. Museum of Labour History Ref: LRC 9/340.
[10]. The Railway Review 2nd June 1905.
[11]. G. Steele (Leicester). EC 1901-1907.
[12]. RCA EC Minutes 3rd July 1903.
[13]. W. J. West JP (Battersea). Joined the RCA and the railway in 1902 after working for an insurance company. At the age of 19 (legally he should have been 21) West was the Personating Agent for John Burns MP. A member of the EC of the Liberal and Radical Association, he was also a member of the Progressive Party, formed by Socialists and "left" Liberals to contest the London CC elections. Active in the Peace Society and a supporter of the Temperance Movement. Between 1900 and 1902 he attended 721 meetings. Acting General Secretary RCA 1906, President 1906-1908 and Parliamentary Secretary 1903-1908. Liberal councillor, Alderman and Mayor of Battersea. He continued to represent the Progressive Party as a trade unionist after he left the RCA and was elected to the London CC. A Liberal Parliamentary candidate 1918, 1919.
[14]. RCA EC Minutes 26th November 1904.
[15]. R. H. Rowlands (Manchester). Started work at age of 10, then employed by L&Y Railway in 1891. Joined RCA 1902. First Chairman Lancashire and Cheshire Divisional Council. EC 1927-1934. Represented RCA at Labour Party and TUC Conferences. Member ILP, Councillor for Kearsley, elected to CC 1937, Alderman 1950. President Manchester and Salford Trades Council 1932-1934.
[16]. Museum of Labour History Ref: LRC 17/398.
[17]. W. H. Ainsworth (Leeds). Developed many branches in North-East England despite management intimidation.
[18]. W. E. Williams (North-West London). Joined RCA 1903. EC 1906-1914. President 1916-1919, National Treasurer 1920-1927. Chairman Enfield Trades Council, Leader Labour Group on Enfield UDC.
[19]. RCA EC Minutes 3rd December 1905.
[20]. The Railway Clerk June 1907.
[21]. Harold Chadwick (Leeds). Joined RCA 1901. Branch Secretary. EC 1919-1935, SOC. Secretary Socialist Fellowship. Member ILP, represented RCA at Labour Party and TUC Conferences. TUC fraternal delegate at Co-operative Party Congress 1924. Elected to Leeds City Council 1920.
[22]. S. Blackshaw (Gloucester). EC 1907-1916.
[23]. The Doncaster Gazette 16th March 1906.
[24]. RCA Annual Conference Minutes 1905.
[25]. TUC Annual Report 1906.
[26]. The Railway Clerk March 1912
[27]. The Railway Clerk June 1909.
[28]. The Railway Clerk June 1909.
[29]. The Railway Clerk June 1909.
[30]. The Railway Clerk June 1909.
[31]. RCA Annual Conference Minutes 1910.
[32]. A "Reference Back" of the Annual Report enables delegates to delete or amend sections.
[33]. RCA Annual Conference Minutes 1910 item 25.
[34]. The Railway Clerk June 1910.
[35]. C. W. Blanchard (Liverpool). Joined RCA 1903. EC 1907-1929. Helped to form Dublin branch.
[36]. A. J. Weaver (Wolverhampton). EC 1907-1916. Prime interest was superannuation but he was too old to reap the benefit of his efforts and suffered hardship when he retired.
[37]. The Railway Clerk June 1910.
[38]. The Railway Clerk June 1909.
[39]. F. C. Watkins (Railway Clearing House). Elected as either branch chairman or secretary from its formation in 1909 to 1923. EC 1923-1933; National Treasurer 1934-1937; President 1937-1943. MP 1929-1931 and 1935-1945.
[40]. The Railway Clerk June 1913.
[41]. RCA Annual Conference 1914 item 24.
[42]. A. E. Townend (Manchester). Started work at age of 12 in cotton mill. EC 1914-1927. RCA National Treasurer 1927-1934. President Socialist Fellowship 1919-1921. President and Secretary Southport Trades Council. Elected to Southport Town Council and in 1955 its first Labour Mayor. MP 1925-1931.
[43]. Labour Party Annual Report 1911.
Transport Salaried Staffs' Association Registered Head Office: Walkden House, 10 Melton Street, London, England
© 1996-2008 TSSA. All rights reserved.