LABOUR IN BRITAIN

Otago Witness, Issue 3783, 14 September 1926, Page 31

LABOUR IN BRITAIN

TRADES UNION CONGRESS. GENERAL STRIKE DEFENDED. LONDON, September 6. In his presidential address to the Trades Union Congress, Mr A. Pugh claimed every justification for the general strike weapon. He said that they need not hesitate to use it again if circumstances warranted such a course. It would be fatal to the future welfare of the country, and destructive of all hopes of peaceful progress, if the great spontaneous demonstration of working-class solidarity in May were regarded as the evil conspiracy of a few agitators. Given the circumstances existing in May, a national stoppage was inevitable. The choice lay between action by a controlled and disciplined body or industrial chaos and disorder; but if the whole of the Labour movement might be required to rally to the defence of any part of trade unionism it was equally a fundamental principle that the interest of the part could never be superior to the interest of the whole movement. ABSENT DELEGATE'S ADDRESS. LONDON, September 6. The Daily Herald learns that the address of M. Tomsky, which would have been delivered at the Congress had he been permitted to land, has reached the country, and will be printed and distributed among the delegates despite its criticism of the General Council, which are understood to be very frank. THE SPAHLINGER TREATMENT. LONDON, September 6. The Congress rejected a resolution that a committee should investigate the Spahlinger treatment. Mr Evans, representing the Journeymen Butchers’ Federation, said that if non-tubercular meat were insisted upon, with fresh air and sunshine, there was no need for such treatment. THE GENERAL STRIKE. LONDON, September 9. An astonishing cablegram from M. Tomsky (chairman of the Soviet Trade Unions) was the first thrill at* the Trades Union Congress, which had a session of unprecedented excitement. The cablegram was written in pidgin English, and opened by sending greetings to the courageous battalion of mine workers, “who continue to defend their standards of living and their past historic gains, despite betrayals by certain leaders during the general strike and capitulating to the mentality of others.” The cablegram added: “The Soviet workers lay the blame of the failure of the British general strike upon the bend-the-knee attitude towards the Government of the trade union leaders, like Mr Thomas, who was the main instigator of the defeat of the strike, which otherwise would have resulted in a glorious victory by which British Labour would have been freed of the present Government of aristocrats. Had the miners been left alone they would long since have smashed the obstinacy of the clique of mine owners. ** M. Tomsky ended with “Long live international working class solidarity, and up with the fight against the capitalist offensive.” Circulating the cablegram the General Council described it as the most regrettable abuse of the ordinary courtesies expected from fraternal delegates, adding that the council had no intention of replying to this ill-instructed, presumptous criticism.

Bitter feeling was aroused in the congress on the subject, and was the chief cause of augry scenes during the discussion of the failure of the general strike. Mr Jack Tanner, of the Engineers’ Union, accused the General Council of selling the unions.

A motion to refer back sections of the report dealing with the general strike was finally rejected by 755,000 votes to 309,800 amid frenzied cheers from the supporters of the council. The dissatisfaction of the extremists, however, was renewed when Mr Robert Smillie moved a motion pledging the support of the Congress to the miners. When Mr J Bromley (secretary of the Locomotive and Firemen’s Society) rose to second the motion pandemonium commenced. Mr M'Girk (vice-chairman of the Miners’ Federation) objected to the choice of Mr Bromley as seconder, as being a deliberate insult on the part of the miners to the General Council.

Mr Pugh (president of the congress) refused the suggestion to appoint another seconder. When Mr Bromley again got on his feet he was greeted with a volley of boos. Mr M'Girk shouting: “You are a lot of cowards and traitors.” Other delegates cried “Judas.”

Mr Bromley’s supporters joined in with cries. “Stand to your guns. Let ’em have it,” Mr Pugh meanwhile beating the ball frantically, or naming obstructive delegates, none of whom took the slightest notice. Finally Mr Pugh adjourned the meeting, which was in the utmost disorder, the council going into another room and leaving the delegates shouting at each other.

An hour later Mr Pugh retook his seat amid ironical laughter. Mr Bromley was allowed to speak, and the resolution was carried.

Colonel House, the famous American statesman, has been expressing his pre-sent-day views on Great Britain in the July number of The World To-day. “To ray mind,” says Colonel House, in reply to a question, “the breaking of the general strike has put England once again right at the top of the list of the nations of the world. It has been just such a splendid demonstration of calm strength and good nature as we who know and love her would have expected, but there are many round the globe who do not love England, and who must be now giving expression of begrudging admiration. One might almost be bold enough to say that in no other country could such things happen. Neither among the excitable Latins, nor in more free-and-easy and therefore lawless West, could 4,000,000 of workers have defied 30 odd millions of non-unionists and have submitted to such a complete and yet bloodless defeat. Communism simply will not grow on this soil. This fact gives hope and confidence to those of us Americans who come of British stock that we, too, if the time ever comes, may so imperturbably sustain the power of the Constitution.”