In 1926, ‘Stroud and District’ comprised both an urban-industrial and a rural-agricultural landscape, stretching along and through five valleys and hillsides, with fast flowing streams and picturesque villages; the 1921 census indicated some 66,000 persons. Those streams powered the woollen mills with the renowned Stroud scarlet cloth that provided the redcoats for the British army stretched out on tenterhooks once a common sight.
Coal and steam power came with canals and even though Stroud struggled against the textile industries of the north in the 19th century, there were still many cloth mills in the area in 1926. Other major industries included metal-working and even plastics at the famous Erinoids factory.
Communications for the locality were excellent: the Stroudwater Navigation linked Stroud with the Gloucester and Sharpness Canal and hence the Bristol Channel, there had also been the Thames and Severn Canal that linked Stroud with the Thames at Lechlade – about to be largely abandoned. Railways came early to Stroud: the GWR branch line from Swindon to Cheltenham in 1845. There was also a spur into town off the Stonehouse-Nailsworth Midland Railway line.
So how did the General Strike affect Stroud?
It started at midnight on May 3 (after the government broke after negotiations after unofficial action by printers at the Daily Mail) with the first wave of unions called out: transport, printing, the press, iron, steel, metals, heavy chemicals, electricity, gas, building (excluding hospitals and houses). The country was strangely quiet on May 4: an absence of passenger trains; hardly a bus or a tram; docks like a still life; no national newspapers (a few trades councils produced a strike broadsheet; strike bulletins featured on the BBC every three hours). May 5 and 6 saw an appeal from the government for strike-breaking volunteers, and special constables, together with the Government’s British Gazette and the TUC’s British Worker. Some Councils of Action and Joint Strike Committees were formed. Sir John Simon declared, in the House of Commons, that the General Strike was illegal.
On May 6, the Gloucester newspaper, The Citizen, described ‘Stroud and district’ as ‘one of the biggest industrial areas in the county … already seriously affected by the strike.’ The unemployment figure had rocketed by 500 persons, with short-time working at fifteen major employers because of shortage of fuel.
The Stroud Journal reported on May 7 that ‘With the “cease work” order of the Trades Union Congress coming into operation at midnight on Monday the wheels of industry in our valleys began to slow down. Trains disappeared from our local railway lines, the big daily newspapers failed to appear on our breakfast tables, and within a day or two many of our Stroud Valley industries were compelled to work short time.’ (Unemployment rose from 798 to 2,171 by the end of the strike.)
Trains disappeared from ‘our local railway lines’: just 9 out of 75 GWR staff signed on for work at Stroud on the GWR; none reported for work at picturesque Chalford (where a crucial rail car service operated); some 50% were out on the LMS in the area, with ‘one or two working’ on the branch line to Nailsworth, Woodchester and Dudbridge. ‘Altogether, in our district, we understand that there are over 200 railwaymen who have ceased work,’ reported the Stroud Journal.
The local branch of the NUR reported that 98% of members were out, with telegram instructions from their general secretary: “Position unchanged, no wavering anywhere. Pickets should wear prominent badges. All other members, far as possible, must keep off the streets.” There were no reports of pickets interfering with the attempts made by the G.W.R. stationmaster at Stroud to create a minimal replacement bus service for the rail car between Chalford, Stroud and Stonehouse (there were only three buses available for a scant service).
The Government – unlike the TUC – was well prepared, however. Not just because of the stockpiling of coal during the nine-month subsidy to buttress miners’ wages (“Red Friday”, July 1925) that ran out at the end of April 1926, and not just because of right-wing support offered by groups such as the Organisation for the Maintenance of Supplies, but also because of contingency planning in the event of widespread industrial action that went right back to Lloyd George’s government in 1919.
The General Strike would see England and Wales divided into areas under the aegis of Civil Commissioners, whilst north of the border would be overseen by the Lord Advocate for Scotland. A.R. Williams in ‘The General Strike in Gloucestershire’ (Transactions of the Bristol and Gloucestershire Archaeological Society 1972) commented that the ‘Earl of Stanhope organised efforts in Gloucestershire, Somerset, Dorset, Devonshire and Cornwall, supported by a squad of assistants, coal officer, food officer, four military liaison officers, railway and postal representatives.’
It’s interesting to see how the chain of authority descended down from the Earl of Stanhope to an emergency meeting of the Stroud Urban District Council in the Town Hall in Stroud. The brief was to decide upon the ‘advisability’ of forming a new local committee, in response to the Government’s emergency plans. The chairman was Col. J.R. Morton Ball who declared that the planned and prepared emergency schemes (for example, a circular from November 1925) now needed action.
With the railways paralysed, the transportation of goods – particularly foodstuffs and fuel – occupied minds at this emergency meeting (as reported by the Stroud Journal May 7); the chairman revealed that Mr Hudson was responsible for organising food supplies in their large area (Stroud Urban and Rural Districts, Nailsworth Urban, Wheatenhurst and Dursley rural districts) and he believed that ‘Stroud stood as well as any place in the matter of local supplies, at grocers’ shops in particular’ with ‘a number of big establishments, including the two Co-operative Societies and the Cotswold Stores … Mr. Hudson had formed a traders’ committee to help him on which representatives of these three businesses were represented, together with milk retailers.’
Discussions then turned to coal: the Emergency Officer, Mr. Hayne, based at Gloucester, had reported that not all coal merchants were willing to follow orders ‘limiting … supply to one cwt.’ Shortage encouraged competition rather than cooperation at local authority level too: for Mr. Haynes wanted his committee ‘to prevent the departure of fuel from the district.’ There had been panic buying (‘stocks in the hands of coal merchants were low, probably owing to the big demand made upon them by local residents during the last few weeks’); there was sufficient fuel for the Hospital and the Workhouse but the committee would have to, somehow, ‘discover what coal was required’ and ‘get Mr. Harper to bring more coal into the district if necessary’.
The final – and vexed – matter for the committee’s discussions was the required appeal for volunteers to ‘maintain essential services.’ The discourse about this and the social standing of the participants epitomises the impact of the General Strike upon Stroud and the five valleys. We have already come across the chairman at this meeting: Col. J.R. Morton Ball. The County Chairman for the appeal for volunteers was Col. Ricardo; the vice-chairman was Sir Percival Scrope Marling V.C. (local mill family, educated Harrow and Sandhurst) and he led the discussions after revealing ‘that just before he went to Egypt in January, Col. Ricardo asked for his help in this matter in the event of a strike, and he consented, although somewhat against his will, as he thought a younger man could do it better.’
Mr. Harper was not intimidated by Sir Percival’s imperial aura, however, as revealed in what feels like a somewhat heated exchange of words, as reported in the Stroud Journal May 7.
Mr. Harper wanted to know the definition of ‘volunteer services.’ Sir Percival’s answer was curt and to the point: ‘They will carry on essential services.’ Mr. Harper equally curtly demanded a definition of essential services. Sir Percival’s definition mentioned the transportation of food and fuel etc. Mr. Harper then asked if there had been any instructions received from the Government; the Chairman replied affirmatively and monosyllabically. Mr. Harper’s rejoinder employed a Dickensian trope: ‘This is a lot of humbug to run volunteer services …’
Discussion then politely turned to whether members of the local Trades and Labour Council would volunteer; interestingly (and disingenuously?), Mr. Harper said that was happening. But after the chairman affirmed that ‘maintenance of food, fuel and water and light were essential for the benefit of the community’, Mr. Harper asked the chairman to ‘read from the card’ what the volunteers were to do and after hearing that the volunteers filled in their own card, Mr. Harper sharply said, ‘They won’t volunteer to go down the mines I suppose.’ The chairman’s reply was slightly oracular in that ‘volunteers were wanted solely for handling and transporting the necessary food, fuel, light and power’, but then went on to say ‘or to perform such other duties which might be held by the Civil Commissioners to be essential for the maintenance and well-being of the country.’ Sir Percival cleared the air, perhaps, by declaring, ‘We are recruiting for the well-being of the community and not for the purpose of strike-breaking.’
Mr. Harper stood his ground when the formation of a committee was proposed and seconded; this lone left-wing voice in the wilderness moved that such a decision should be deferred ‘for a fortnight so that they might see how it went … it had all been done behind their backs. The Emergency Order, the appointment of officials etc., had all been done prior to this trouble. The Government had been talking peace and declaring for war at the same time.’
The report in the Stroud Journal finished abruptly: ‘Chairman: Your amendment is a direct negative. The resolution was carried. Mr. Harper voting against it.’
In consequence, over two hundred volunteers were registered within three days: ‘very satisfactory’ said the newspaper, together with its appeal from ‘the authorities’ for the loan of ‘motor cars, lorries and motor cycles.’ By the end of the strike, 362 volunteers came forward, ‘including 29 lorry drivers, 114 motor car drivers, 6 engine drivers, 13 firemen and 10 women helpers. Altogether, 6 lorries, 58 motor cars and 28 motor cycles were placed at the disposal of the local committee, and were made good use of.’
The Stroud Journal made, to say the least, minimal efforts to present both sides of the story during the nine days and beyond: ‘This challenge to constitutional authority, if it is not withdrawn or speedily defeated, means trouble on a scale such as this country has never before experienced’ – the newspaper saw itself and its role, in effect, as a means of defeating the strike – whilst simultaneously boosting circulation and profit. Hence the warm tone of its NOTICE TO “JOURNAL” READERS on May 7: ‘The Stroud Journal will be published as usual each week, with the usual features. As a great demand for the paper is expected, special orders should be sent at once to the Publishing Office, Lansdown, Stroud.’
It wedded itself firmly with the BBC and the Government, too; it reached an ‘arrangement with the local agent for the Stanley Radio Company’, on Tuesday May 4, so that ‘Government reports concerning the strike broadcast by the B.B.C.’ could be publicly posted in Lansdown, Stroud, outside the offices of the newspaper each day. Readers of the newspaper might well forget the possibility of reading The British Worker or of trying to get hold of a copy of the Gloucester Strike Bulletin, or even studying the governmental mouthpiece, The British Gazette, if they did not possess a wireless, when they saw this in the Stroud Journal:
Official Strike News
Broadcast by the Government is being
Posted Outside the “Journal” Office
EACH DAY
The next edition of the newspaper, on the 14th, carried none of the Stroud news from the Gloucester Strike Bulletin Monday May 10: ‘meetings are being held at Stroud. Position satisfactory and orderly’ or Wednesday May 12: ‘The Stroud Council of Action reports the following strike position: N.U.R. and A.S.L.E. & F. Solid as ever. PRINTERS – Solid as ever, position unchanged. R.C.A. Solid as ever, position unchanged. A.E.U. Some out, rest ready to come out on receiving instructions from Head Office. BUILDING TRADES Majority out, rest awaiting instructions. Greeting to all fellow workers who are fighting for justice and humanity. Keep solid and the fight is ours! Council of Action is now functioning, with close co-operation of all Unions and workers concerned and the necessary sub-committees are all in operation.’
Signed
A.H. Williams (Secretary)
K. Underwood (Chairman)
This is tantalising history. It looks as though the Council of Action was formed too late during the nine days to have had any impact and, indeed, leave any records. This is almost reminiscent of EP Thompson and ‘rescuing the poor and anonymous from the enormous condescension of posterity’ … but imagine if the strike had continued. There could have been a very different picture of Stroud during the General Strike, for as Ralph Anstis stated in Blood on Coal: the lack of central direction from the TUC General Council meant that local trade union branches and strike committees took over, some becoming ‘remarkably efficient; they ran sub-committees for food, workers’ defence, intelligence, sports, communications, prisoners aid, mass picketing and others.’ And as the nine days progressed these local strike committees ‘developed into organs of government themselves’ – Ralph Anstis argued that their power grew as the strike progressed, indicated by the growing number of employers who approached the committees ‘for permission to do certain things like moving food and coal. The hitherto cap-in-hand position between employer and employee was reversed.’
But what national strike news would local residents have read about or listened to (or not) between May 7 and the next edition of the Stroud Journal on May 14?
On May 7, the Archbishop of Canterbury announced proposals for a settlement (printed in the British Worker but not in the British Gazette nor broadcast on the BBC); Sir Herbert Samuel (who had headed the earlier Royal Commission about the mines) returned from holiday to approach the TUC General Council with an offer of mediation, emphasising that he was acting unofficially, with no governmental authority; they met, without informing the miners.
On May 8, an armed convoy transported food supplies in London; plans were announced for a Civil Reserve Constabulary (steel helmets and truncheons). The government declared that any member of the armed forces would receive full governmental support for any action they deem necessary to take “in an honest endeavour to aid the Civil Power.”
On May 9, Cardinal Bourne declared the General Strike a sin against God at High Mass; the army placed a cordon around London Docks; TUC leaders informed miners’ leaders of Samuel’s recommendations which included wage cuts; the Miners’ Federation Executive declared wage cuts unacceptable, as they did on the 10th when they met with Samuel and the TUC Negotiating Committee. Many arrests were mentioned on the BBC. The TUC General Council sent out this rallying call to those out on strike: “Stand firm. Be loyal to instructions and trust your leaders.”
The second wave of shipbuilding and engineering workers was called out on the 11th – the Transport and General Workers Union leadership published this message: “Hold fast. We must see the miners through.” Justice Astbury declared the General Strike illegal and that trade union funds could not be legally used for strike pay; the TUC General Council accepted the final draft of the Samuel Memorandum; the MFGB Executive rejected it as it involved wage cuts.
On May 12, the TUC General Council informed the Prime Minister that the General Strike was unconditionally called off. On May 13, came the realisation that the settlement failed to protect the miners; widespread employer victimisation followed as people returned to work; many workers went back on strike: there were more out today than on any previous day.
The Stroud Journal on May 14 had the headline GENERAL STRIKE TERMINATED
‘The General Strike which began at midnight on Monday, May 3rd, ended on Wednesday in an unconditional withdrawal of the strike notices by the General Council of the Trade Union Congress.’ Then came the official communique from Whitehall, then Arthur Cook’s official statement from the miners, followed by Stanley Baldwin’s “A Victory for Common-sense” statement in the House of Commons, then the message from the King “To My People: “Bring into being a lasting Peace”.
The feature concluded with this strapline: The Aftermath – Question of taking back Strikers.
‘His Majesty’s Government have no power to compel employers to take back every man who has been on strike, nor have they entered into any obligation of any kind in this matter.
Some displacements are inevitable in view of the reduction of business consequent upon the strike, as well as any obligations … towards volunteers … Attention is, however, drawn to the hope expressed by the Prime Minister, in his statement to the House of Commons that “we should resume our work in a spirit of co-operation, putting behind us all malice and vindictiveness.”’
With the GWR so important to the locality and with so many local GWR men so solid during the strike, and then staying out after May 12, and with ‘Men Offered Re-instatement but Refuse’, these words were particularly resonant. But the newspaper was, of course, jubilant in tone and content: ‘The news that the T.U.C. had decided to call off the General Strike was … received in Stroud during Wednesday dinner-time with universal feelings of relief. The welcome bulletin was posted outside the “Journal” office a few minutes after the announcement had been made by wireless, and large crowds quickly gathered round the notice board.’
But how did the end of the strike go down on the local railways?
The GWR station master at Stroud acted initially on official orders from Paddington, informing returning employees that he could not, as yet, reinstate them. Similarly, on the LMS, there was no immediate reinstatement. Then, after company telegrams, the GWR station master was officially instructed to reinstate specified, notified, employees. They refused to return, pending Union instructions, and until all of those who had been on strike were reinstated. The local NUR secretary, Mr. Wake, affirmed that all of the Stroud branch were ‘standing solidly together’ and that the Railway workers had met in the Liberal Hall to unanimously pass this resolution: “That this meeting of the members in this district of the R.C.A, the A.S.L. and F., and the N.U.R. hereby pledge our loyalty to each other and to the Joint Executive of the three Unions. Further, we pledge ourselves to stand firm for the re-instatement of every man who came out on strike at the call of the T.U.C.”
The newspaper followed this news with the strapline BACK TO NORMAL NEXT WEEK? and with a statement from an ‘official of the Railway Information Bureau’ who said he hoped for restored railway normality ‘next week.’ But the official offered a new definition of ‘normal’ (not that the Stroud Journal said so): employees would only ‘be taken back where there was work for them. It was explained that with disorganisation of business some big industries could not get going at once, and there would not be the same work for the railways.’
Similarly, some local engineers, who had been called out on the second wave by the TUC on the last day of the strike, and then returned to work later in the day when the strike was terminated, ‘were told that at present they would not be re-instated.’ The Stroud Journal did not mention that this was hardly in the spirit of the King’s Message or the Prime Minister’s speech: “we should resume our work in a spirit of co-operation, putting behind us all malice and vindictiveness.”
Had there been any malice and vindictiveness in the streets of Stroud and beyond during the nine days? There is an absence of evidence on that question – which may, of course, suggest peaceful streets. The Stroud Journal praised local reserve constables who ‘again donned their uniform’ and the large enrolment of ‘efficient and highly satisfactory’ special constables.’ Significantly, the feature finished with the lofty tone of this sentence: ‘We have been fortunate in this locality in that no disturbances have taken place, which speaks well for the hundreds of men who have been unemployed.’ Indeed, the only court cases that I chanced upon in the May 21 edition of the newspaper involved bicycles (one speeding) and the parking of a motor car.
In consequence, it’s easy to imagine that Beatrice Webb’s diary entry for Monday May 3 could also ring true for Stroud’s comfortably-off: ‘The net impression left on my mind is that the General Strike will turn out not to be a revolution of any sort but a batch of compulsory Bank Holidays without any opportunity for recreation and a lot of dreary walking to and fro.’
And then there is the resonant reassurance of the King’s diary: ‘Our old country can be well proud of itself, as during the last nine days there has been a strike in which four million people have been affected, not a shot has been fired and no-one has been killed, it shows what a wonderful people we are.’
But we shouldn’t forget that nationally ‘there were outbreaks of violence. There was, for instance, a major riot at Swindon on Thursday when a crowd of thousands, including women with aprons full of stones, prevented the first trams from returning to the streets’ (Chris Farman The General Strike). Swindon, that key GWR town with a railway factory of well over 10,000 employees, just thirty miles or so up the line from Stroud, was rock-solid in the General Strike and would, no doubt, have exercised its influence along the mute branch line west to Stroud.
Talking of muteness, and the lack of sustained evidence about the General Strike in the Stroud area, we have no figures about how many copies of the British Gazette, or the British Worker were read or shared in Stroud, nor the Communist Party’s Workers’ Bulletin, nor the Gloucester Strike Bulletin. The Stroud Journal, as we have seen, not only carried on with its publication, but also circulated the ‘official’ news from the BBC outside its offices. The wireless had an incalculable but huge influence during the nine days throughout the country: the TUC Intelligence Committee reported that ‘Many districts … have complained of the lack of reliable news and in isolated places the workers must have been without any source of information except the wireless’ and ‘Though the publication of the British Gazette had little influence upon public opinion, the wireless and the newspapers which improved day by day as the Strike proceeded, did exert some influence.’
The publication of the Stroud Journal is an interesting case-study in itself. On Thursday May 4, the Gloucester Strike Bulletin reported: ‘We have just received the news that the Stroud Branch of the Typographical Association have decided by a large majority to cease work.’ Ten days later, the right-wing ramblings found in ‘Jottings by Jonathan’ in the Stroud Journal ran thus: ‘Last week the broad-cast news included the announcement that “The Stroud Journal” would be published as usual. This week the Newspaper Society stated that “The Union members of the “Stroud Journal” have decided to return to work.” But they never ceased work. They were too sensible to follow the false and illegal lead given them in other parts of the country. At Dursley “The Gazette” men were less wise, but the proprietors by dint of hard working and contriving, brought out their paper, and then promptly notified the strikers that if they did not turn up on Monday morning their places would be filled by other men …’
Jonathan didn’t mention the Gloucester Strike Bulletin’s news from Sharpness from Wednesday May 12: ‘Many of the workers in Sharpness district refused to take last Wednesday’s issue of the “Dursley Gazette” and will refuse to buy it again until the whole of the “Gazette” staff is back at work. The members of the “Gazette” staff are on strike and the proprietors of the “Gazette” have declared that these men will be dismissed.’
And so to the aftermath of the General Strike in Stroud. On May 15, the Stroud Branch of the National Union of Textile Workers discussed the matter of support for cases of hardship amongst those who had been on strike, led by the treasurer of the distress committee, Alderman F. Wake, J.P., who ‘explained that there would be cases of hardship, and they were all anxious to relieve such cases as much as possible, as those who were suffering were doing so in the interest of all workers. He recognised that the textile workers had worked a lot of short time, so he left it to them to do the best they could. It was unanimously agreed to support the distress fund and collecting sheets were taken by representatives from every mill.’ (Stroud Journal May 21)
On Wednesday May 12, the Gloucester Strike Bulletin had cheerfully announced that ‘A large Labour Demonstration will be held on Sunday May 16th, leaving Lansdown at 2.30 p.m. proceeding to Frome-hall Park with a band. Speakers: Morgan Jones and Dan Griffiths. A meeting will be held at night in the Cooperative Hall, Cainscross at 7.30 p.m. Speakers: Mr. G. Hall and Dan Griffiths. All supporters of the cause are heartily invited to join the procession.’ When the meeting was held, in the wake of the ending of the strike and with no settlement for the miners, it was, of course, important to raise Labour and trade union spirits and look to the future.
The Stroud Journal on May 21 reported on ‘the May Day celebration held … under the joint auspices of the Stroud Division Labour Party and Trades and Labour Council.’ There was a procession, with a band, ‘red banners flying’, to the meeting ‘attended by several hundreds.’ The prospective Labour candidate, Dan Griffiths, sent this message: “I shall be with you in spirit at your May Celebration. I trust the day is not far distant when the workers all the world over will come into their own.”
The next speaker, Mr. Webb, also spoke with an uplifting tone, ‘pointing out how the older men of the movement had been looking forward to the day when the united workers of the country and the whole world would realise what a mighty power they had in their hands if they desired to use it, and when they would throw down the challenge to those of the employing class who had been crushing the worker under its heel.’
The next speaker, Mr. Hiatt, started by emphasising that the strike had not been a challenge to the constitution; it was an industrial dispute. He went on to say that ‘the dispute had shown the working people of the country their real power, and it had shown how false the conception … that capital was the main spring of industry.’ Trade Unions would continue to progress, he said, and the movement ‘had tasted power, and it needed only men of goodwill, sound judgement, and of understanding’ to use ‘power wisely …Industrially and politically, they were never nearer their goal’, he concluded.
The final speaker was Mr. Morgan Jones, M.P., from a mining constituency. Although he, too, emphasised that the strike had been an industrial dispute not a revolutionary constitutional challenge, he also emphasised that the nine-day working class solidarity just shown was globally and historically unique. He asserted that future progress would rest upon a fusion of the ‘Trade Union movement on the one hand as an industrial weapon, and of the political Labour Party as a political weapon … Now was the time to reflect and reconsider and … he urged that at the next election they would place a cross against the name of his good friend, Dan Griffiths (applause).’
But now to finish our account of the aftermath of the strike, the last words come from Percival S. Marling and Henry Ricardo:
(To the Editor of the “Stroud Journal’)
Sir – Now that the General Strike is, as we hope, happily ended … I should like, as Chairman of the Volunteer Services Committee for Essential Services for Stroud and District, to thank the Stroud Urban District Council for the use of the room at the Town Hall, Stroud, and also to thank all those who have so loyally helped the Recruiting Committee … The total number recruited up to May 11th was 362. I think we who live in the Stroud area have just cause to congratulate ourselves on the excellent behaviour and good temper shown by all sections of the community during the past trying fortnight.
Yours truly,
PERCIVAL S. MARLING
Stanley Park, Stroud,
May 15th, 1926
Shire Hall,
Gloucester,
17th May, 1926
My dear Marling,
Will you kindly convey to the voluntary workers who assisted in the registration and employment of volunteers in your Area the appreciation of the Civil Commissioner of the South Western Division for their loyal assistance in the national crisis, and as Chairman of the Committee for the County of Gloucestershire may I add my own.
The arrangements in the County have worked most admirably, thanks to the prompt and efficient help we have received, while the offers for assistance which went far beyond what it was in the smallest degree possible to make use of, have shown that the spirit of the County was as fine as it always has been.
Yours sincerely,
RICARDO
Chairman