Chapter IV - Labour on the Threshold, Part I

CHAPTER IV LABOUR ON THE THRESHOLD, PART 1 A. "NATIONALISATION" " Labour Unrest" provided the material for education toward the idea of "nationalisation." "Nationalisation" was a plank in the Party's platform. The Party had begun to act as an independent political entity. A few observations show how the Party gathered its forces from " rank" at the same time that it gathered forces in certain "files"; for we have seen how it fomented itself in tutorial school and industrial organization, in the hustings, and in the enclaves of theoretical economics. The Fabians used " unrest" to convince "instructed persons" regarding "nation alisation "; thus they invaded the political life of Britain proper. " N ationalisation" had to be discussed by Churchill and Lloyd George, not to speak of Haldane and Chiozza-Money. But apart from the domestic value of the agitation the publicized drive for nationalisation of means of production and of natural resources signalled unanimity to Socialists on the Continent; for such matters were given currency in the Studies and Reports published by the· International Labor Organization. 1 Domestic politics were agitated by questions of foreign policy. At a certain point, facing stalemate on reparations and economic stabilization on the Conti nent, Mr. Baldwin asked for a mandate on "Protection," with timing which \-vas, to say the least, providential. For one thing, the idea of protection was as far" right" as nationalisation or the Capital Levy was "left." It?- this present chapter, we discuss the use of "nationalisation " and of " unrest" ; and in that follow ing, of' continental policy, and of a list of conference failures. In each of these chapters, " Labour on the Threshold," we leave the situation of 14abour in Opposition in 1922 to take a Tory's eye view ot these four kinds of political agitation from 1918 to 1923, 1 Cf. especially the important Series A of Studies and. R,eports of the International Labour Organization. By way of sampling Cf. Nos. ·4, 6, 18, 19, 24, all of which insist on nationalization.

132 Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 133 then we return to a review of co-terminous domestic politics where the root of unrest was pressing against the political fabric of the nation, if not of the world. The aim is to try to see the cause of the Baldwin ~hallenge, C( Protection"; that is, to mark the effect of Fabianism at this point in British political life. The challenge' was thrown down at the moment best calculated to put Labour prematurely into power in England and at the same time to give a desirable direction to the current of continental policy. Labour had, by 1923, a record on "nationalisation" as the answer to C( unrest," and on foreign policy as an appeal to Social ism, which gave the Government pause. Since our purpose is to show the dilemma Fabians created, we run down the gamut of data on each of the above-items from 1920 (even 1918) to 1923. Labour was poised on a fulcrum of power, balancing East and West, in 1922. Historians have asked why Baldwin was not content to leave them in -Opposition, but risked an election as the barometer of their prestige was rising. The writer believes the reason was someth~ng more 'sapient than the mere aim to C( forestall the fore staller," Lloyd George.

When Labour formed a Government in the last days of 1923, it reaped what the Fabians had sowed in 1918. Then, at the war's end, Labour members had withdrawn from the Coalition. In a sense, this action redeemed the _constitutional practice of Opposi tion. A two-party system was preserved at the time when un ilateral C( loyalty "was urged by Lloyd George and the Coalition ists. It was clear in 1918 that Labour meant to undermine the Government and allow none' of the reforms Lloyd George's machine was capable of _producing to materialize until the new order -should transpire under Socialism. "Onyx" wrote in the NS that" one meets men of all parties who feel" that the Coalition is unstable and " impudent"; yet "Onyx" thought the Govern ment should delay the election until the soldiers returned. A "mandate" was being asked for Mr. George, to achieve, the electorate knew not what. Lloyd George had ideas on "recon struction" resembling his land and insurance schemes before the war. Again," Onyx ,,- had talked to " a very experienced observer" who believed the Party was growing: "last week it would have got twenty [seats], this week, thirty, next week, forty, 134 Fabianism 'In the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 the week after that, fifty." 2 (The psychological effect of this dinning was doubtless the reason for its use.) It was averred that disgust and cynicism met the older parties everywhere.

It is certain that in all classes-from the agricultural labourers to the more enlightened sections of the pros perous and professional classes-there is a general trend toward the Labour Party, which has a programme, wants to change England and knows the kind of change it wants. 3 The editors of the NS and Sidney Webb himself, in a letter to the editor/ inveighed against the "Bolshevism" [sic] of the Coalition, calling it a "pledge-bound" party and a "conscript" motley collection backing something which was "not even a policy" but a man who was as "near to a chameleon" as a man could be. Webb stressed the aim of Labour to safeguard parlia mentarianism: Those who were afraid of " bolshevism" would be well advised not to teach the British workman to give up the House of Commons as a hopeless institution removed completely out of their reach. The best antidote-to an outbreak of Work men's-and-Soldiers' -Councils (there were current horror stories coming out of Russia and Germany into N S pages) seemed to the editor to· be an independent Labour Party in Parliament. Com pared with the Coalitionists, Labour had taken "the manlier and franker course" in consulting the electorate because" we hold as indispensable that consciousness of consent 5 which is the basis of British Government" and this, it was promised, would be borne out by the constitutional historian of the future. 6 (It was being 2 Onyx, "Observations," NS, XII (November 23, 1918), 155. The" ex perienced observer" quoted is Webb, as Francis Williams' Fifty Years' March reveals.

S Ibid. 4 This was tantamount to writing oneself a letter, as it were; it is not more unusual than the meeting" Onyx" contrived with the" experienced observer." In 1913, upon acquiring the NS, Webb and Shaw announced that they would be responsible for the greater number of unsigned articles. According to, the letter received from A. Emil Davies, the latter and Cole, among others, were also responsible. Cf. NS, XII (November 23, 1919), 155 f. 5" Consciousness of consent" was one of Webb's semantic devices. 6 Sidney Webb, "Correspondence," NS, XII (November 23, 1918), 155 f.

Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 135 made to seem that the electorate had only the choice between H con stitutional " Socialism and Bolshevism.) Fabians restated the desirability of a two-party system-one of the old parties must disappear. And they used a " red scare" of their own, while proclaiming the constitutionality of Labour's aims and its deference to British traditional feeling. By hurling the epithets " pledge-bound" and " conscript" at their opponents, Fabian Labour publicists aimed to allay readers' fears that Labour was" pledge-bound" to conscript coal mines and other forms of wealth. Fabians in the N S gave every reassurance that its con fiscations should be unbloody and constitutional. Fabians aimed to "change England" constitutionally, using Party Government and the House of Commons. They had to explain to critics of the Labour Party the rule of Labour's con stitution that its members stood" committed." Onyx wrote: ... as. a fact, this terrible "Constitution" [of the Labour Party] merely demands in the vaguest possible language that a member should in a general way act in accordance with the resolutions of the Party Confer ences.

John Burns, who had refused to join the Party, alleged vehe mently that no free man could belong to it. That was a pity, said the NS, since he possessed a "legendary fame." However, no in consistency was noted when Webb averred on the next page: It seems to me that his [Lloyd George's ] Coalition Com pact, now exposed to all, ought to enable us to und.erstand better the reason why the Labour Party Conference re fused to renew the permission [given only for the prose cution of the war] to Labour Party Members of Parlia ment to hold office in a Ministry dominated by persons of quite opposite policies and .opinions than those of Labour Members. 7 Undeniably, Party members were committed to the Party policy. Fabians were trying to make it palatable. "Pledge-bound" was a less desirable epithet than a "vague" directive to follow Party 7 Ibid., p. 155. Since the Osborn Judgment, Labour candidates-did not sign a Party pledge; but discipline held them to the Conference resolutions.

136 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 Conference resolutions. The use of the technique of hurling upon opponents the epithet most truly characteristic of the hurler has been noted before in regard to the ILP although this antedates that instance. Exactly at this juncture, George Barnes was expelled from the Labour Party for remaining in the Cabinet.s If "nationalisation " was an element of the Conference resolu tions, the incidence of strikes served the purposes of a campaign. The election prognosticated for 1919 did not transpire but a series of strikes helped to underscore the domestic project for "re construction" based on retaining such "nationalisation" as had been used during the war, and disregarding the self-sacrificing motivation which patriotism and peril evoked. The Fabians re iterated constantly the alleged promise of ministers to nationalize coal and rails. The Government, so Mr. Churchill declared at Dundee in answer to a question, "had decided on the Nation alisation of the Railways." But, said NS, Churchill had" blurted"

the truth, after Labour had refused to be " bought" by his scheme substituting mere" control" for nationalisation. He said that the word" expropriation" was something the" Right Wing" of the Coalition detested.9 So NS foretold that by January, 1919, Churchill who had given some lip-service to nationalization would be said to have expressed before election, what was only his own opinion. I f Churchill said nationalize, he meant only control and after election he would not even mean that-according to N S. In any case if the "Government offered "control" in place of ." na tionalisation " the argument served the purposes of Party-gather ing, and that was even better suited to its ends than would be the electi,OnLabour prognosticated. Fabians promulgated a doctrine of guilt, of failure and of de8 An experienced Labour leader, G. N. Barnes, continued with Lloyd George to the end and contributed much to the "Labour Chapter" in the League Covenant creating ILO. He went to the Conferences representing Labour but no longer a member of the Labour Party. Lloyd George wrote an intro duction to Barnes' From Workshop to War Cabinet (London: Herbert Jenkins, 1924) in which he quoted the autobiographer as saying: "Labour is as yet the victim of crude phrases and nebulous theories" risking being "overridden and misrepresented by ill-balanced persons from outside its ranks," p. ix.

9 NS, XII (December 7,1918),190.

Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 137 cadence, then offered salvation in "nationalisation." It took effect in many earnest minds. A "young radical," 10 as the NS de scribed Sir Leo Chiozza Money, who had created a noticeable stir by his resignation from the Government and adherence to the Labour Party· policy of the day-abstention from ministerial office-lectured to the Society, "asserting that the war on its industrial side had been won on Fabian principles." 11 Also, convinced by the success of, wartime "nationalisation," Lord Haldane joined the Labour Party. An internationally recognized philosopher, he had been persecuted during the war for his sym pathy with German culture. He had long been associated with Tawney, Laski, Webb and other Fabians in the Workingmen's Education Association,12 an estimable force in politicizing social aims through learning. As to Haldane, he was a trustee in a group formed in 1919 to administer the great endowment for 10 NS, XII (November 23, 1918), 155.

• 11 Annual R,eport of the Work of the Fabian Society, No. 36, adopted May, 1919, p. 10. The assertion continued, emphasizing that reconstruction was proceeding incredibly, but mainly along Fabian-advocated lines, the "chief step" being that women were to sit in Parliament. In three other matters, decisions had been reached and awaited embodiment in legislation: (1) Abolition of the Poor Law wherein the" personal work" of the Webbs had become" collectively" the Society's assisted by many members through the National Committee; (2) the "true radical programme" of 1887 pushed by M. Cunningham, F. Galton, A. E. Davies, was to nationalise the railways; (3.) miners had chosen three Fabians among their representatives-L. Chiozza Money, R. G. Tawney, Sidney Webb. They had convinced the Government that mines should /not be "left to mismanagement and profiteering." This was interpreted to mean" nationalisation" by the reporter.

This Report showed that in furtherance of its work the Society, thanks to Pease, whose wartime replacement of Sanders had now terminated, was well off and able to proceed toward its main objective, the development' of the Party. 12 Such an association could be so powerful only in a country where general education for workingmen ended at adolescence. Supplementary adult educa tion then became a specialization which further stratified society by the neglect of the humanities-except that kind of history which stressed economic de terminism-and by emphasis of economics, politics, and institutional sociology. (How habitual the attendance at WEA classes had become is measurable from a remark of Sidney Webb, in the Root of Labour Unrest, which is discussed elsewhere, where he suggests that to miss such a WEA class might be an inconvenience comparable with disturbing the dinner hour caused by a foreman's peremptory order to "stop tonight "-work overtime.) 138 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 adult education made by Sir Ernest Cassel. The group included Asquith and Balfour, H. A. L. Fisher, Sir Gilbert Murray, Miss Philippa Fawcett and Sidney Webb. 13 Haldane had not far to go when he 'joined the Labour Party because he had approved " nationalisation" during the war; he was following the work man whom he had taught. G. D. H. Cole, supposed to be an ex-Fabian but still working with the NS, and with the Webbs and Henderson, extended the meaning of " nationalisation " to in clude other industries than coal mining. He linked railways with the housing problem and in proposing a Ministry of Transport, declared that nationalized transport was "the Pivot of Recon struction." 14 The writer of « Observations" in the NS in Feb ruary, 1919, remarked upon the rumor that Labour was" angry"

with Lloyd George, but proceeded to show that if by what was quoted as his statement, on the occasion when "fighting for his life," he had given the impression that he stood for nationalization of mines, or. the « whole programme," he really had meant « Nothing-nothing whatever." Thus by these light ironies and a gentle insistence, Fabians drove toward a mode of expropriation seemingly impossible, and refused to let Lloyd. George steal their thunder. They had concluded that only Labour and not the rest of the Government which they had penetrated, stood firm on what ever was intended by the term" nationalisation." The strikes of 1919 brought out some peculiarities ,of Fabian thinking besides the opportunity to make earnest young men and old philosophers feel guilty. "Sardonyx" was found in Feb ruary, 1919, writing as if the current strikes were failures for which he had no regret. But, he added, as if to incite: If Labour knew the ins and outs of the game which it is playing with a sort of heavyweight amateurishness, it would at once engage a first-rate journalist or two at adequate salaries to write manifestos. But Labour is not yet astute enough to do this.15 The self-criticism is like something Sha\v might write, especially 13 Cf. NS, XII (February 15, 1929),411.

1,4 G. D. H. Cole, "The Pivot of Reconstruction," N S, XII (January 25, 1919),345 £. 15 Sardonyx, "Observations," NS, XII (February 8, 1919),395.

Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 139 with the reference to salaries and manifestos; but the import suggests Labour's preference for fluidity. The well-named " Sardonyx," after saying that the Clyde strikers were admitting the ineptitude of their strike, added: H It remains to be seen whether or not [the employer's] estimate of the men as mere sheep following a Bolshevist wether was even passably correct." Whatever this synthesis of opposite attitudes meant, it conveyed an invitation to the dissatisfied workers to let themselves be guided by the Party. That the Fabian purpose was to use, al though not to foment strikes, for the purpose of agitation for nationalization was clear from the long editorial on March 1, 1919, in the NS.16 In view of a threatened strike one month hence, it appealed to· fear. The whole tone of the editorial is an appeal to the electorate to seek the guidance of "Labour." It declared that if to coerce labor, the Government were to use the powers at its command (residual war powers), it would " fire the heather." Thus brandishing a threat, the NS marked out the social segments which Fabians aimed to direct. It declared that should the Government use its war powers . . . the whole Cooperative Movement would be up in arms, the Trade Union l\10vement would be stirred to its depths. Noone can feel sure (we feel reluctantly compelled to say this) what view would be taken by;, soldiers, who are today only citizens in uniform, of their duty in the matter.

Presuming to speak for CWS, TUC, and the soldiers-there was some fear of soldier-and-worker-councils-and capitalizing on the subversion to CommUniS1TI then going forward, the editor defined the proper function of the Statutory Royal Commission as one designed principally to deal with wages and hours, perhaps to survey the cost of expropriation and the" enormous profits of the owners." That was alL The question of "nationalisations " was not a " justiciable" issue. In other words, while seeming to threaten revolt if the alleged promise to nationalize coal was repudiated, and if the Government should use reactionary methods to prevent an ensuing strike, Fabians advised the Commission on how to evade the issue. Reiterating the assumption that the 16 H The Issue of Nationalisation," NS, XII (March 1, 1919),460 f.

140 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 Government had committed itself three months before to the principle of nationalizing the railways, the editorial argued for taking -over the mines. It pointed out the fact that the system had proved profitable in "two widely contrasted social experi menters-Germany and New Zealand "-no mention of Russia. There was no example of a nation as large as Great Britain experimenting with nationalization. When the Coal Commission made its reports, a N S editor 11 wrote that "had Mr. Justice Sankey and his colleagues plumped for nationalisation, scarcely a dog would have barked." Inter preting the "third report" - (the coal commission reported _in three sequential but differing reports), this editor equated the findings to endorsement of "nationalisation," which, he said, was "the only alternative" to waste, maldistribution, and monopoly.

The Commission had "significantly, boggled at-the word 'na tionalisation.'" (There was a little boom in 1919 and the strike, reaction to which was to " fire the heather," was postponed until 1920 when it again collapsed on " Black Friday.") Whether the Sankey Reports endorsed -" nationalisation" was always afterward disputed. The article in the N S was not docu mented with citations from the Reports such as a reliable publication should have been expected to furnish. It prophesied that Lloyd George would rush over from Paris when the strike transpired, to add to his laurels by doing what he had known for long was unavoidable; for it was known he was "not opposed to nationalisation though unable to persuade Lord Curzon and the rest of his odd team that they are living in the year 1919." 18 It is not impossible that the N S was hereby offering a hopeful suggestion to the Prime Minister.

The strange practice of sloganizing an all-embracing idea like nationalization when only the nationalizing of certain industries was meant had its reason in the uses of psychology, never ex plained but quite apparent. Nationalization was not Socialism but an indispensable step toward it. Real Socialism, as professed 17 The use of the expression "unbiased and instructed opinion" is a hint of internal evidence which suggests Sidney Webb was the author. "The Coal Situation," NS, XII (March 22, 1919), 540. 18 Ibid.

Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 141 on the Continent, and by Fabians when at Geneva or reporting through ILO, meant the" transformation" from ownership and control by capitalists to "ownership and control by the com munity, of all the industries and services essential for the satis faction of the people's needs." 1'9 Englishmen could feel fortunate that only a few public services were destined for expropriation, at least for the present. The reiteration of aims of nationalization was a necessary part of the preparation for assuming government. It was known that Labour was rising to power. If it were not to fail in its principal aims, it must command a majority convinced of the desirability of its major objectives, or resigned to their inevitableness. Blatch ford of The Clarion always said that the way to get Socialism was to make Socialists. Indoctrination did not proceed at a rate fast enough to. complete the ideological conversion of the electorate before power was thrust upon the Labour Party as Opposition in in 1922 and as H. M.'s Government in .1923. The Capital Levy and Poor Law Reform were forgotten until the election of 1923 when it had to be admitted they were not part of the current programme.

To ascertain the significance among Continental Socialists of publicizing this Socialist attitude toward "nationalisation" and the uses of " unrest," the reader has but to peruse the Studies and Reports of the International Labour Office, Series A. The tenor of all these Reports (ILO only publishes them without assuming further responsibility), if for samples numbers 3, 4, 6, and 13 are scanned, maintains sympathy toward the Russian revolution and regret for "reaction" in Hungary (reaction against Bela Kun), advocacy of socialization as a necessary step toward Socialism, and the abolition of private ownership of land, means of production, means of distribution, and" natural wealth." (In 19 Also cf. for instance, ILO Reports Serie A, no. 6, Webb's" Report" of October 1920. He stated that "immediately the phenomenon of wages appears, as soon as work in production is exacted for the benefit of a third person, society has a right to intervene." This report of the meeting of the Labour and SocialistInternationalof 1920 is a mild statement. The various reports run the gamut from Largo Caballero's" Manifesto" (No.1), to "The Programme and Organisation of the Christian Trade Unions of Ger many"~the only one against class-war and nationalization (No. 21).

142 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 England, later, banks and banking began to be included). Doubts about the basic principle of contract wages-some Socialists proposed the idea of equality of labor and capital in economic de cisions, while others demanded worker control-and steadfast· adherence to the aim of nationalization of all groups and profes sions, appear over and over again in the Reports of various or ganizations, filed with ILO. Number 3, for example, is " Annual Meeting of the Trade Union Congress 1920"; number 4 is "International Congress of Workers in the Food and Drink Trades"; number 6 is "The Labour and Socialist International of October 1920" (it was written by Webb as " Reporter," and he whose Fabian Basis allowed" tenure" of a "homestead," re buked the Russian peasants for their revolt against Bolshevism) ; and number 13 is H The Miners Strike in Great Britain." Char acteristic tenets of Labor-plus-Socialism are to be found in these Reports, very potently set forth. All Socialists used ILO as an international bulletin board. The meeting and matching, of the Catholic and the Socialist ethic at the ILO level·and the conquest of the agency by Christian principles would make a stirring story. 20 It is a phenomenon which must be noted, although it cannot be developed here. All we need to note here is that Socialists in Britain were not talking to themselves. That socialized industries would provide financial support for a Party in power was not noted.

B. "UNREST" There were other uses of "unrest." Fabians penetrated though they failed to permeate with Socialism a Government-sponsored project created to deal with employment. There met in April, 1919, the Industrial Conference called by 2~ Cf. especially number 21 in Series A, ILO Studies and Reports also The International Labour Organization: The First Decade (London: Allen and Unwin, 1931) p. 359 f, where the permeation and penetration of Catholic principles through to the top level of ILO official philosophy is illus trated, whereas, number 1 in the ILO Series A which documents the capture of the workingmen's movements in Spain by the Communists and bears among others, the signature of Largo Caballero, might instead have set the pattern for the capture of the workers of the world for communism.

Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 143 the Government and addressed by the Prime Minister. 21 (We have seen the part played by Henderson, and the abstention of the Triple Alliance). It set up a Joint Committee of employers and Trade Union representatives which reported in March. This committee called for an Eight Hour Act and a National Minimum Wage; 22 for the recognition of Trade Unions; for it public works and orders "-admittedly, a "drastic .policy" but thought neces sary for times of depression. Besides sick pay, old age pensions, and education, the Report on this Industrial Conference advocated a National Industrial Council of four hundred elected by Trade Unions and by employers' associations and implemented with a Standing Executive Committee. There had been no dissent in 21 A complete account is found in Mrs. Agnes Hamilton's Arthur Hender son~ pp. 210-215. It is highly illustrative of the struggle between the forces gathered in free associations like the Trade Unions, and II the programme."

Mrs. Hamilton shows the elements at work: (1) British Trade itself under control, by means of the overdraft system, of combines and banking trusts; (2) amalgamation of unions which she calls Ii a movement less marked and less lasting"; (3) the potential of industrial pressure for II reconstruction in the economic field"; (4) the shaping up of an idea of some sort of U parlia ment of industry" latent in (a) Henderson's hope and (b) the Webbs'pro jected Constitution embodying II functional representation" together with (c) the movement for Industrial Councils, sponsored by I. H. Whitley; (5) the Government's efforts to forestall U direct action." When nothing was done by the Government to implement their findings, the Conference dissolved in protest in the Fall of 1921. . Although U Whitley Councils" had the backing of at least one Fabian who was also a civil servant,· John Macrae-Gibson, his views were criticized adversely· by W. A. Robson in FN, XXXIII (September 9, 1922) who said the author of The Whitley System in the Civil Service had not allowed his Fabianism U to shine through" the U adulation" of Whitleyism, else his faith had not been so U fervid" and U without misgivings." It is safe to say Fabian ism' rejected the Whitley Council system; although the system involves equality of labor and management at the industry council level-an ideal of social justice based on charity, which does not gainsay the owners' right to make final economic decisions at the plant level.

22 The method had already been exemplified when in October, 1918, the National Liberal Federation, meeting at Manchester, had adopted a· pro gramme full of amendrrients by constituent associations based upon Labour and the New Social Order. These amendmentsinvolvednationalizationU in flat contradiction of the official proposals," the Webbian U breaking up of the Poor Law," and "prevention of unemployment" substituted (by Asquith) for" provision for unemployment." Cf. NS, XII (October 5, 1918),3.

144 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 the Conference until the" Memorandum on the Causes and Reme dies for Labour Unrest" was appended to the Report by two Fabians, Henderson and Cole, " in behalf of the workers' side." 23 As the N S interpreted it, this section called the attention of Lloyd George to the promised "new social order" and restated the Labour Party programme: Nationalisation, Capital Levy, Housing. The Memorandum insisted there was a "breakdown of the existing capitalist system of industrial organisation" and that it required the questioning of the whole basis of industry (not just a few key industries) to discover a better motive than private gain to serve" as the foundation of a democratic system." Thus, the Report was set forth editorially in the N S,2'4 which in this case supplied documentation. The Fabian periodical restated the Labour Party's programme of postwar reconstruction, which it claimed was incorporated into the Report which was to be adopted by the Industrial Conference. The attempt to incorporate the memorandum of Cole and Henderson in the end caused the failure of any accomplishment by the Conference. On the other hand, Cole's " Memorandum on Procedure," which had furnished the agenda for the joint committee, was, according to Mrs.

Hamilton,25 the one effective agency of the Conferen,ce. Only one immediate matter, continuance of the Wages Act (temporary regulation) was all that resulted in the way of Government action. There was 'an agreement upon some few points but it was nulli fied by the fact, kno,vn in advance to the NS reporter, that "neither the official chairman nor the employers could well be expected to agree" upon the " Memorandum on the Causes and Remedies for Labour Unrest." 26 Apparent unanimity on the Report was negated by the impossibility of agreement on the appended document. 23 Hamilton, Ope cit., p~ 213. 2·' NS,XII (March 29, 1919), 565. 25 Hamilton, Henderson, pp. 210 fI. 26 The editor of the NS warned employers in Parliament to take heed to the action of employers in the Conference in adopting a position of unanimity upon the Report. Of course, the Parliament then sitting was the result of the II Coupon" election. But it was misleading to speak of unanimity; the Cole memorandum destroyed it.

When Cole's Self-Government in Industry was reviewed by Pease in FN, XXIX:3 (February, 1918) the latter described Cole's projected system with approval and said Cole's II bad manners" should be "condoned.".

Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 145 It is clear that the Socialists were not bent upon remedying pres ent evils, but upon "transition" in the social order, looking toward a changed England .. They made for the Conference its only effective instrument and then created for it the stumbling block upon which it fell. It is very important to record that Fabians wrecked the first attempt to create the Industry Council system in England. " Labour Unrest" persisted during the boom which started after mid-1919. Profits accumulated but unemployment increased. The coal mines might be struck, but scarcity meant better prices and more profits. The industrial " little Englanders" had no such global interests as the planners of international cooperativism. The forces of "reaction" capitalized on a restricted market and the Socialistic forces capitalized upon the" unrest." By 1920 the causes of unrest changed, especially in the matter of coal. German reparations paid in coal threatened to destroy the British market.

The miners were locked out in February of 1920.27 Men like J. H. Thomas,28 and J. R. Clynes,29 caught, we might say, in the political-action surf created by Fabianism, tell the story of the strikes of 1919-1921 from the viewpoint of the needs of their" men," their followers who relied upon them to get a decent livelihood out of the· industrial scheme which after mid-1919 pro duced high profits, but which early in 1920 was checked by the dilemma of German reparations and lost markets. It will be re called that unionists were advised by Webb to accept "willing" German reparations, and that only Clydesiders of all the Labour Party contingents stood out against any reparations. Thomas, a former railway engineer, had assisted in· the forma tion of the" Triple Alliance," a combination of Railway workers, Transport workers,s° and Miners. He is to be foundthe chairman of a lecture by Bernard Shaw under Fabian auspices in 1918. The "Triple Alliance" had been created in April, 1920, when the 21 Cf. ILO Studies and Reports, Series A, No. 13, where the whole episode is clearly narrated. .

28 J. H. Thomas, My Story (London: Hutchinson and Company, 1937), pp.62-73. 29 J. R. Clynes, Memoirs, Vol. I, 1869-1924 (London: Hutchinson and Company, 1937). 30 NS, XII (March 30, 1918), 628. Thomas of the "roped-in" NUR chairing a lecture by Shaw is a most interesting spectacle.

146 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britian 1919-1931 miners in conference had approached the other unions seeking cooperation and support in a projected strike. There was at the time much public apprehension of the power of such a combina tion but Thomas thought that " so long as that Alliance held the balance \vithout taking advantage .of its strength, the country would· be rid of strikes and lockouts"; and so he agreed to co operate. The miners, led by Frank Hodges, a Fabian associate and Herbert Smith, a spirited but illiterate man, were to test Thomas' delicately kept balance severely. The Government ceased to control coal six months earlier than warranted under the. war time po~ers because the owners wished to negotiate new con tracts. Labour insisted that this had produced a " lockout"; so a general strike was set for Friday, April 15, 1920. At the ultimate point of cOlnpromise after both sides had been heard by the mem bers of Commons, the miners repudiated Frank Hodges, their spokesman, who had offered a point of agreement in his presenta tion of their position. Instead they followed Herbert Smith 31 and refused to settle. The other two unions felt that the miners had rejected a reasonable means of saving their friends (the Rail way men would have had to provide seventy percent of the cost of the strike, according to Clynes). 32 The miners had been diffi cult, too, in the matter of keeping "safety men" in the pits.

Thomas and his NUR accepted agreement. The leftist element called the day "Black Friday" ever. afterward, because the gen:.. eral strike which they had intended to precipitate did notma terialize. Clynes was severely blamed. J. H. Thomas was vilified to his dying day.33 Thomas sued The Communist and won 31 Cf. Sylvester, The Real Lloyd George, p.. 53, in which Mr. Smith's illiteracy is exemplified: "Well it's these 'ere urns ... first the referendum, then the maximum, then the minimum, now the datum, and what I say is 'b'um' !" He showed himself utterly unlearned. regarding art, also, on this occasion. The Fabians who wrote in N S pages about It Chasse aux renardsII and used the term "sans phrase," needed special techniques to handle the shrewd Mr. Smith. 32 Clynes, op. cit., p. 319. 33 Cf. Raymond Lonergan (a pen name used by the editor), U Lonergan's Comment," in Labor, A National Weekly Newspaper (Saturday, January 29, 1949). '" Jimmy' Thomas died last week in poverty and obscurity. In his day he was one of the outstanding leaders of the British Labor movement.

•.• On the occasion of the famous general strike [threatened], following Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 147 £2,000 damages. Funds for the payment came into England by way of Russian gems smuggled in as chocolates.34 The Left never forgave Thomas. 35 Their methods were execrable in 1922, when he represented labor in the Balfour mission to Washington. 36 Their hatred followed him to the end of his life. Fabians whose general line he had followed, albeit on his own judgment, gave Thomas little encouragement. Yet it was he who was to intro duce at the First International Trade Congress in 1921, the resolu tion that to. govern a country and to claim to direct the workers' International are two things different and irrec oncilable; that it is, inadmissible that the chiefs of a government even communist [sic], should be at the same time the chiefs of the workers' Internationa1. 31 Back in July, 1919, the NS had approved" direct action" 38 for the present,· unreformed, day; that is, while the House of Lords remained to check Commons where Fabians intended to express the popular will, so called: 39 but in general, the N S took an official World War I, he 'ran out' on the other unions and the movement collapsed.

. . . He I ran out' on the Labor Party in 1931, and with Ramsay Mac Donald, formed a coalition government... . . Thomas C ran out' once more." The commentator wrote a story of a budget secret revealed, a friend's en riching himself, and Thomas being " kicked out" by Stanley Baldwin. Lon ergan had not read the autobiographies of the leaders, evidently. His story has the slant of the Thomas-hating Left. The paper in which it was printed, Labor, is as of 1950 markedly pro-British-Labour, pro-Fair-Deal, violently anti-Chinese-Nationalist. The organ of the Railway Brotherhoods, it is backed by A. F. of L. It uses toward employers unchristian terms of dis respect. S4. Clynes, Ope cit., p. 321. There was quite a bit of newspaper (and NS) comment at the time about the ethics of using Russian jewelry (imperiil fami,ly jewels) to pay Russian bills. The NS favored using them, of course. 35 Lately, July, 1950, NUR endorsed the Communist inspired Stockholm Petition against the use of the A-bomb. The Left seems to have gained strength since the days when it kept up a nuisance heckling against Thomas.

86 Cf. Thomas, Ope cit., pp. 62-73. 87 ef. ILO Studies and Reports, Series A, No. 18 (Geneva), March, 1921, p.25. 38" Direct Action/' NS, XIII (July, 1909),336 f. 89 It was the contention of Mr. Webb (seconded by Shaw, Laski and usually 148 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 stand against "direct action" and the political strike, unless the Government should rule, in some hypothetical case, against the interests of the entire working class. The Fabian attitude de prived Thomas in 1920 of any real support. The N S in an article of July, 1919, had treated Clynes, who opposed the current plan for a general strike, in the same way. The general strike was not approved Fabianism, but it could be tolerated. It would not be possible in the new order, save as revolt. Even as workn1en failed to realize that the new order meant the nationalization of unions, so did employers, managers and fore men fail to grasp their part in the envisioned order. They saw that Trade Unions with the potential of the general strike and the Labour Party with the potential. to nationalize were only means to an end in the great plan which was Fabianism, which persistently proffered, together with the vision of a new industrial state, Fabian leadership. The Plan was delineated in an address by Sidney Webb." to. a representative private gathering of Employers, Managers, and Foremen in 1919" and was reproduced with bibliography, and with special reference to the earlier pamphlet, The Works Manager Today, by the lecturer. Entitled The Root the NS) that the House of Lords was obsolete. Webb declared it had been a " second Chamber" since 1832. The effect of attempts to revive its claims to be a separate" Estate" in 1910-1911 had" definitely settled that whatever else they may desire, the people of the country will not tolerate the revival of any separate' Estate' of persons or classes who are to be privileged to enforce, against th'e opinion of the majority of the nation, any views of their own order." The italics inserted suggest the counter-charge that Labour was becoming an estate with a proper view and order of its own. That Webb voiced" the people" is open to question but illustrative of Socialist technique.

Webb's standpoint was that a second Chamber must not be a rival to the House of Commons. Review and delay, the only instruments· left to the House of Lords, insured, he said, against unjust treatment of property owners who, not represented in Lords, must" trust" in "the people" with the assurance that any serious innovation shall obtain a considered judgment. Cf. Sidney Webb, The Reform of the House of Lords, Fabian Tract No. 183 (London: Fabian Society, 1917), p. 6. Nevertheless in the N S, XIX (July, 1922), 406 f, Clifford Sharp's "The Proposed Suicide of the House of Lords" counseled leaving well enough alone, since the Lords were showing themselves capable of learning and the contemporary House of Commons was more "reactionary" than the House of Lords.

Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 149 of Labour Unrest, it was published as Fabian Tract No. 196 in November, 1920. (" Black Friday" occurred on April 15, 1920.) There was a pattern in this speech delivered in 1919 and pub lished in November, 1920, which exemplified perfectly the Fabian thesis. If it had been understood, there would have been no reason for surprise when in 1932 the Webbs and Shaw found in Russia the Order of their dreams. The chronological position of this Tract is important. Strikes in 1919 were aimed at getting a share for the workers in the rising profits of industry. Then came a change in 1921, profits·froni coal must come from domestic trade and an economy of scarcity. "Nationalisation" at first seemed . easy to project, by educing argument from the success of its war time exemplification; then as rugged self-interest necessarily in creased in intensity, it gained sharper cogency. "Production for need" took on the meaning of production for global need, and State planning.· The above mentioned speech of Webb straddled two objectives; for therein was a dual plan: Reform to which all could assent, and a ne\v order called industrial democracy to· which all were invited to make the transition, because " it is coming and we· must find a way of introducing it successfully without upsetting the machine."

Studying the speech, one looks in vain for " the root" of unrest. Although occurring in the title, the term is not defined. One might conclude that unrest is the root capable of overturning" the machine," the force which Fabianism intended to direct. Webb flattered the industrial leaders: " The sphere of the brain working professional will be a great one" in this new adaptation of " the old constitutional ideal of democracy," which will be made by "putting ourselves in tune with the universe and pulling with the stream." Unhistorical and romantic, the phrases have a spell binding appeal regardless of the mixed figures. That the work ingman's mind was" inscrutable" and might not even be judged by the programmes to which he gave assent, was an honest state nlent based on the practice of Fabians of capturing conferences, like the two cited above. Webb knew well how assent was elicited for ready-made programmes by the Committee system. Webb ,vas " going to try to describe . . . the ideas which he [the \vork man] is scarcely conscious of himself." The reform platform which he offered. rings in modern ears as something very familiar; 150 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 demand for higher wages indicative not· altogether of rising living costs but of rising profits, never so large in aggregate in the British empire as that day; 40 a six-hour day for all, for " every healthy adult." (Webb quipped that this was" a terrible consum mation ... for certain people. When we hear of it in Russia, we think the end of the world has come.") He explained that" part nership in industry" was asked by workingmen, not profit shar ing. His grey eminence was somewhat unceremonious: " I cannot stop to prove that, but I am expressing the workman's point of view." Proposals for profit sharing stamp" the man who makes them as an ignoramus." Proceeding with the reform programme, Webb answered affirmatively the question put by Fabian Tract No. 170: Profit Sharing: A Fraud and a Failure!, by E. R. Pease: Webb's worker seeks not ownership, save "as a member of the community in a sense which I will afterward explain"; not a sha,re in the profits, for the workman does not think that profits (as distinguished from the wage of management) ought to exist; but " he wants to be admitted on equal terms as a partner in the man agement and direction of the concern. What he objects to is the autocracy, the arbitrary power, to which he is asked to submit."

We have a class giving orders and " another class passing its whole existence in receiving them" ; the workman does not object to the unjust distribution of the world's wealth." at the moment". but the unjust distribution of the world's power. Therefore, Webb argued, "philanthropy," such as welfare, good housing, and the like, was a "manifestation of power" and did not placate the laborer's resentment. Under philanthropy workers were treated like cared-for horses on a " fodder basis." 4:1 There is a thin fissure in logic formed by putting side by. side the philosophy of power and the needed reform in attitude toward -40 It was the time. for employers to consider the propriety of increasing the share of labor in industry's reward; it was the time also. for workingmen to recall that savings on the part of employers now meant a pool of national assets upon which their future employment rested. It was the time for Government to see that savings were not put to uses which would defeat both sides. Webb asked for Socialism. The National Industrial Conference had been defeated by the Socialist" Memorandum."

41 For the expression "fodder basis," Webb credited Ernest Bevin. It appears in the ILO Report, Series A, No.3, as R. Smillie's expression.

Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 151 workingmen. The historian need only record it. " Fodder" philanthropy was rej ected but a hiring room comparable to the directors' Board Roonl, baths and lockers so that a workman left the premises ".fit to enter his wife's parlour" 42 was not" fodder" because it should be based upon" equality." The motivation for profit-sharing and welfare projects is fraud and love of power; for reception rooms and free baths, it is equality. This is Webb's dialectic equation. This was the affirmation of a power-capturing drive. At the same time it forswore " Reform" and adhered to the formula; " only Socialism can bring them together." Contrary to the foundational principle of ILO that labor is not a commodity, Webb described an hypothetical condition and in so doing he made it appear that only under Socialism could the _ill effects of the concept of labor as a commodity be abolished.

Actually he made the contemporary employer a slave-owner and then skipping the stage of desirable human relations between employer and worker, _turned the latter into the owner of a " quantum" offered for sale, saying, ... the employer imagines that he has bought the whole time and energy of the workmen and that his claim upon him can be indefinitely extended beyond normal working hours, the normal pace, or-.the normal intensity of effort. [This is] the view of the slave owner . . . so long as we cling to the capitalistic system ... there must be some . . . mutual engagement in which one party buys and the other sells certain definite, clear-cut services with a precisely fixed quantum. 43 In the mind of the workingman as Webb interpreted it, there was no objection to the high salaries of managers, only to the idea that they belonged to a different class. But he affirmed that the workingmen did object to the existence of the" idle" shareholder, 42 Webb, The Root of Labour Unrest, Fabian Tract No. 196 (London: Fabian Society, 1920), p. 9. Albert Thomas, head of the ILO, had expressed the psychological effects Webb struggled with, in his stated belief that the change in attitude made official in the ILO Charter, that Labour is no longer to be considered a commodity, "achieved a genuine social revolution." Cf.

Monica Curtis -(translator). Albert Thomas: International Social Policy (ILO: Geneva), 1948,·p. 73. 43 Ibid., p. 8.

152 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 royalty owner, It tribute" collecting landlord. How unnecessarily great was the sum a shareholder received in order to induce saving no one could compute, Webb said, but the system should be abolished. It They flatter themselves that they contribute the capital, on which, of course, we are dependent to keep our busi ness going." The value of this observation must be measured while taking cognizance of the fact that Webb was a civil service clerk, a London County Councilman, a. Labour Party executive committeeman, a lecturer at the LS~, the future Lord Passfield, and one who never owned a· business. 44 His theoretic knowledge must necessarily lack the insight which experience provides. The managers were told that the workman whose mind was here portrayed had learned economics while the employing class had despised the economist. The workman intended to alter the present state of things using It as a rule" democracy, but a democracy very different from that understood in America and England as of 1920. No longer "equality of opportunity," it now meant "that no control over others shall be exercised by individuals, but only by the community." (The word com munity " can be nothing but a Webbian euphemism. It means the State. ) As to "democracy," no longer meaning that it shall be open to anyone to become Prime Minister, democracy now meant that the Prime Minister shall execute the will of the people. (This euphemism meant the rule of - the Party.) The workman in Webb's mind did not want an equal chance to become a million aire, but " he wants that which concerns all to be decided by all."

(Some of the current complaints about Cole's ideas concerned the fact that the system he proposed called for everlastingly electing and holding meetings. ) Webb admitted that the application of these principles was difficult, that It our suggestions" were "crude." The It long road" was to be taken gradually but success was inevitable It if we adapt ourselves." . Certain facts challenge Webb's interpretation of the workfng man's mind. It is very noticeable that the workmen who became articulate, many of whom were drawn into the Fabian Society, or 4-4 Cf. Margaret Cole, Sidney and Beatrice Webb, pp. 149 I. Passfield Corners became the domicile of the Webbs after they had advertised for a country place out of earshot of cocks or dogs.

Labour on the Threshold, Part 1 153 into the company of Fabians, demonstrated great pride in the possibility or attainment of Ministerial or Cabinet rank, and boasted with becoming restraint of their association with royalty. One has but to peruse the autobiographies of G. N. Barnes, J. H. Thomas, J. R. Clynes, even David Kirkwood, Ben Tillett, Ben Turner-real workers who came into political power by the Trade Unions way-to see that labor leaders thought of Government as something regal and authority as something divine, bestowed upon designated persons. Even if "divine" and "spiritual" came to have agnostic and monistic connotations as in the· case of Henry Snell, they did not confuse "community" with " State." Also, the only Fabian who could afford ease but who embraced an "austere," that is, a servantless life, was· Charles Trevelyan. Webbs, Coles, Shaws, Lansburys-all lived in circumstances of upper class ease and on royalties, stock, or profits of· industry.

Webb's workingman was a robot made from his own drab con cepts. The new democracy must produce new forms for social institu tions. In the pamphlet discussed above, The Root of Labour Unrest, reference was given to A Constitution for the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain, by Sidney and Beatrice Webb, where the outline sketched for the employers of 1919 was treated in " elaborate" if "tentative" detail. If the employers could not envision Utopia, they must at least have felt that they had seen Chalot.45 The vision was as follows: Individual ownership, gradually giving way to collective ownership, would assume many forms on three levels, State, Local, and, to give a name, " popular," not to say Party. The State was to run the nationalized industries and services, canals, rails and coal.46 The local governments were to run "many other services by which we live," and consumers' cooperatives "which already op~rate far more successfully than any capitalistic enterprise that I ever heard of " would handle the great mass of commodities which we consume. The functionless shareholder and landlord was to be eliminated, but ~ Edward Bellamy's Looking Backward, and his Equality, were already three and four decades old, respectively.

\16 Little is said of banks at this date, and nothing about steel. Cooperatives, as hasbeen seen, were coming in for their .share of overhauling by the Webbs.

154 Fabianism in the Political Life of Britain 1919-1931 . . . we do not get rid of management. And in this con nection the workman is still very much at sea. As I have often tried to explain, even with the most complete de mocracy, and the utmost equality, management, in a sense, autocracy, remains indispensable as ever.41 The foreman could be an autocrat if he represented the com munity; but to give and receive orders under an owner's system was intolerable autocracy and creative of class! The manager was compared to an orchestral conductor whose "beat is law," because "we must have coordination andcontr61." That this picture is superimposed upon the real workman's view is patent in the declaration: H the .workers have only the vaguest idea of what the management or direction of an enterprise really is." Yet, since they were intellectually and morally as competent as ordinary directors of companies, let them, Webb advised, be consulted through their Works Committee and admitted to the Board of Directors.

Enough has been cited to show that Webb's Socialism is dog matic; his political structure vague; his philosophy utilitarian; his psychology unreal; his utterances contradictory. Furthermore, as "an instructed person," the lecturer should have known better than .to say, H Personal autocracy has been banished from the throne, the castle, and the altar," confusing men and offices, or "that men were advancing rapidly in edu cation and commonsense," confusing the acquired and the en dowed. Envisioning the new order, he asked "Where will authority go?" and again with confusion, this time of authority and competence, the former London County Councillor told. the story of the Council's decision to build a bridge and their need to call in an engineer and entrust the work to this expert, leaving themselves with the residual "authority" to choose its color.48 47 Webb f The Root of Labour Unrest, p. 11. Italics inserted.