Manawatu Evening Standard THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1926. THE POWER BEHIND THE STRIKERS.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVI, Issue 174, 24 June 1926, Page 6

Manawatu Evening Standard THURSDAY, JUNE 24, 1926. THE POWER BEHIND THE STRIKERS.

It is a grievous thing- to think that, through the intrigues and machinations of an alien Government, which cannot even be regarded as properly representative of the opinions of a formerly friendly nation, the British people are now at a loss of eight millions a day and that loss is more likely to increase than otherwise. By the latest English mail the first papers published after the general strike have come to hand with some interesting information concerning the strike movement, its origin and the people who were responsible for calling out the trade unionists. Discussing the question, “Was the Strike Revolutionary?” one paper points out that “those who were responsible for the general strike are now anxious to make it' appear that it was not a revolutionary movement.” Nor was it, to the extent that some of the leaders, and most of the strikers, were not inspired by revolutionary ideas or motives. Yet, both in intention and method, the general strike was beyond question revolutionary. It was, as was stated by this journal some time back, a deliberate attempt by the Trades Union Congress to coerce the Government to a certain course of action, and to impose the will of the congress upon the Government. It was further a challenge to the' elected and established Government of the country by a body representing one class and one interest only. To grasp the full significance of the general strike movement, it'is only necessary to consider what would have happened had it succeeded. Parliamentary Government and parliamentary institutions would have been practically dethroned. The Trades Union Congress, having proved its power, would have gone on to increase its hold on the machinery of Government, and a form of Soviet Government would have been established in England, with all its accompaniments of tyranny and oppression. It would, in fact, have created a revolution. Some of the trade union leaders may not have realised the tremendous issues their actions raised, but it is difficult to excuse them on that account; for, as sensible men, they -must have seen that the general strike was a deliberate attempt to overthrow the constitutional government of the country. Other of the leaders cannot plead ignorance of tlie revolutionary character of the movement; for, as far back as 1920, when the “Council of

Action.” was constituted, they publicly admitted both, the unconstitutional character of the action that was being taken and and its revolutionary nature. Mr J. Bromley, M.P., for instance, speaking as the mouthpiece of the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen at Sheffield on August 16th, 1920, stated that “he had just come from London, where for peace and war the 15 of them had taken over the Government of the country in this particular issue.” He was referring'to the strike ordered by the Triple Alliance. Mr J. H. Thomas, M.P., of the National Union of Railwaymen, also declared, in moving a resolution at the Labour Conference on August 13th, 1920, approving the “Council of Action” of which he Was a member:—“lf this resolution is to be given effect to it means a challenge to the whole constitution of the country.” . Mr C. T. Cramp, of the same union, speaking at Yarmouth on the 29th August, 1920, said “the Council of Action was unconstitutional and intended to be so.” Mr Frank Hodges, again,. the general secretary of the Miners’ Federation, declared at the Miners’ Federation Conference held in June, 1920: “We are going. to create a first-class economic crisis which will reduce the nation to chaos.”-

REVOLUTIONARY ACTION ENCOURAGED.

On August Bth of last year Mr A. J. Cook, Mr Hodges’ successor as secretary of the Miners’ Federation, advocated a revolt and warned the Prime Minister (Mr Baldwin) that “what they had done the previous week (in holding up the country and its industries) they were prepared to do again.” Mr A. A. Purcell, member of the General Council of the Trades Union Congress, and an honpyary member of the Moscow Soviet, speaking at Coleport on August Bth, 1925, said it was “.the duty of the working class to see that all the forces available were brought together for the purpose of resisting the Crown forces and to promote the interests of the people.” ' Even Mr Ramsay MacDonald cannot be altogether exonerated from the charge of favouring revolutionary action, because, in speaking in the House of Commons on the debate on the coal subsidy on August 6th, 1925, he is reported as saying:—“This extraordinary manifestation of the unity of industrial will was a thing drawn forth by the circumstances of the case, and was justified amply, and should be welcomed unstintedly, because it was a first line, a magnificent, solid, first line of defence that the miners and trade unionists put up.” The hon. gentleman was then referring to the hold-up of the previous week when the railway men and transporters generally joined the miners in going out on strike. In 1920 Mr Frank Hodges and Mr H. Smith were doing the work which was continued by Mr A. J. Cook and Mr H. Smith in 1926, and, as explained by Mr Hodges, that work was “'the ruin of the coal industry, to be followed by the fall of other industries, until Capitalism was brought crashing to the ground.” In April, 1925, Soviet representatives came to London to confer with the general council of the Trades Union Congress for three days on the construction of a united front of revolutionary workers in all countries for the destruction of industry and capitalism. One member of the Inner Cabinet of the Soviet and two members of the Soviet Cabinet formed part of the delegation and, before the conference closed, they announced that the distinction of being made honorary members of the Moscow Soviet had been conferred on Messrs A. A. Purcell, Swayles, Fred Bramley, and G. Hicks. M. Tomsky, the member of the Inner Cabinet of the Soviet referred to, also attended the Trades. Union Congress at Scarborough in September, 1925, “to give the congress the blessing of the Soviet and to encourage British trades unionists in declaring a general strike to clear the way for revolution.” Tomsky’s valuable advice was acknowledged by the presentation to him of a gold watch. After the conference, G. Hicks went to Russia with Tomsky and, speaking at a meeting of Leningrad workers, said: “British workmen will become your colleagues. The political situation of the whole world points to that. We, like you, agree in one aim, ‘Down with the Capitalists,’ and this can only be done through international trades union unity. The British working class has laid the foundation for this.” It may seem unkind to refer to Mr Ramsay MacDonald’s attitude during the war, but his conduct was consistently anti-British, and it should not be forgotten that, in June, 1917, in conjunction with Philip Snowden, Smillie and others, he tried to form a Soviet to supersede the Government. The hon. gentleman appears to have always had a certain amount of sympathy with the Bolsheviks. It was his Government that recognised them as the legal rulers of the unhappy Russians, two millions or more of

whom were ruthlessly slaughtered by them, and it was he again who proposed to lend money to Russia which the Soviet press exultantly stated would be used in propaganda work aaginst Britain.