Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T12:44:38.740Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Parliamentary Reversal of the Osborne Judgement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Michael J. Klarman
Michael J. Klarman
Affiliation:
University of Virginia School of Law
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On 21 December 1909 the house of lords rendered judgement in the Osborne case. The lords' decision, at a minimum, prohibited trade union contributions to the Labour Party, and therefore threatened with destruction the newly-formed party whose income depended almost entirely upon trade union support. The legal basis upon which a majority of the law lords rested their ruling was that trade union political activity was ultra vires – that is, beyond the unions' lawful authority – because not expressly sanctioned by the 1871–6 Trade Union Acts, which the law lords treated as the functional equivalent of a charter for trade unions. An alternative, possibly more convincing, rationale for the judgement, not mentioned by the law lords but relied upon by two of the lord justices in the court of appeal decision in Osborne and paramount in the public debate surrounding the judgement, was that trade union political fund-raising involved compelling individual trade unionists to support financially their political opponents. The Labour Party, quickly recognizing that the Osborne judgement threatened its very existence, launched an intensive lobbying campaign – both in parliament and in the country – to secure a complete legislative reversal of the lords' decision. Yet the Liberal government's posture towards a legal decision from which it stood to derive immediate political gain was unpredictable; by no means was it clear from the outset that the Liberal Party would acquiesce in any measure curtailing the effect of Osborne, much less indulge Labour's demand for complete rescission of the judgement.

Type
Articles
Information
The Historical Journal , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , December 1989 , pp. 893 - 924
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Section 16 of the 1876 Act defined unions as organizations ‘regulating relations between workmen and master, or between workmen and workmen, or between masters and masters, or…imposing restrictive conditions upon the conduct of any trade or business’. By embracing this restrictive definition of union functions, the law lords in Osborne rendered questionable the legality of a wide array of everyday union activities, including contributions to the Trades Union Congress and local trades councils, political lobbying, spending on workers' education, and even the provision of friendly society benefits to members.

2 Osborne v. Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants [1909], 1 Ch. 163, 175 (Cozens-Hardy), 189 (Farwell). Conservative, Liberal and Labour politicians all tended to treat Osborne as predominantly a minority rights issue. See, e.g., The Times, 23 Sep. 1910, p. 8 (Austen Chamberlain); Parl. Deb., XXVI, 932–41 (30 May 1911) (F. E. Smith); ibid. 974 (Clement Edwards), 992 (Barton), 1003 (Crawshay-Williams); Labour Leader, 26 Aug. 1910, p. 541 (Sutton); ibid. 14 Oct. 1910, p. 651 (Clynes).

3 See, e.g., Pelling, H., ‘The politics of the Osborne judgment’, Historical Journal, XXV (1982), 889–909CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Clegg, H. A., Fox, A. & Thompson, A. F., A history of British trade unions since 1889, Vol. 1, 1889–1921 (Oxford, 1964)Google Scholar; Roberts, B. C., The Trades Union Congress, 1868–1921 (London, 1958)Google Scholar.

4 Throughout this article the term ‘complete reversal’ means restoration of union political functions without granting special exemptions to dissentient members. Legalization of the Labour Party pledge – the feature of the trade union political levy most objectionable to two of the law lords in Osborne – is not encompassed by the term ‘complete reversal’. The Labour Party pledge is considered infra pp. 909–10, 913.

5 See, e.g., Report of the 1910 Trades Union Congress (T.U.C. Report), p. 5 (Haslam); The Times, 20 Oct. 1910, p. 7 (Shackleton); Labour Leader, 30 Sept. 1910, p. 616 (leader).

6 See, e.g., Labour Party Conference Report 1910 (L.P.C.R., 1910), p. 103 (Hardie); Typographical Association, Nov. 1910 report, p. 12, University of Warwick, Modern Records Centre (M.R.C.), MSS. 39A/TA/4/1/38 (Roberts); Cotton Factory Times, 14 Oct. 1910, p. 5 (Todmorden Weavers). The Labour Will, M.P. Crooks, for example, confidently warned ‘our chuckling opponents [not to] forget that Taff Vale led to the Trade Disputes Act’. Newcastle Daily Chronicle, 30 11 1908, p. 7Google Scholar.

7 See, e.g., Star, 30 Nov. 1908, p. 1 (leader); Derby Daily Telegraph, 30 Nov. 1908, p. 2 (leader); Morning Leader, 30 Nov. 1908, p. 4 (leader).

8 Observer, 28 Aug. 1910, p. 6 (leader); see also Newcastle Daily Chronicle, 30 Nov. 1908, p. 6 (leader); Liverpool Courier, 30 Nov. 1908, p. 6 (leader); Scotsman, 30 Nov. 1908, p. 6 (leader).

9 See, e.g., Cotton Factory Times, 26 Aug. 1910, p. 1 (leader); Derbyshire Times, 22 Oct. 1910, p. 7 (Hancock); MacDonald, J. Ramsay, ‘The trade union unrest’, English Review, VI (11 1910), 736–7Google Scholar.

10 Gwyn, William B., Democracy and the cost of politics in Britain (London, 1962), p. 203Google Scholar.

11 Compare journal entry, 16 Nov. 1910, Oxford, Nuffield College, Gainford papers (confidential statement to Pease), and Labour Party N.E.C. minutes, 30 Dec. 1909, London, Labour Party headquarters (L.P.H.Q,), with Labour Leader, 11 Nov. 1910, p. 719 (speech to ironfounders).

12 Compare Manchester Guardian, 25 Oct. 1910, p. 14 (Pemberton speech), and Walsh to MacDonald, 3 Nov. 1910, London, Public Record Office (P.R.O.), MacDonald papers, 30/60/1154/232–4, with The Times, 29 Aug. 1910, p. 7 (Mountain Ash speech), and T.U.C. Report 1910, pp. 154–5.

13 Labour Leader, 28 Oct. 1910, p. 686 (Nelson speech).

14 See, e.g., Labour Leader, 2 Dec. 1910, p. 760 (leader); ibid. 9 Dec. 1910, p. 773 (Carr); ibid. 13 Jan. 1911, p. 18 (management committee of the General Federation of Trade Unions); The Times, 25 Nov. 1910, p. 8 (Smillie).

15 Labour Leader, 2 June 1911, p. 344 (leader); see also, e.g., Parl. Deb. XXVI, 945–6, 949 (30 May 1911) (MacDonald), 987 (Wardle), 1011–12 (Brace); The Times, 11 July ign, p. 13 (Snowden).

16 Postman's Gazette, 17 June 1911, p. 342.

17 The joint board was an organization consisting of the executive committees of the Labour Party, The Trades Union Congress, and the General Federation of Trade Unions.

18 Joint board conference on National Insurance and Osborne bills, 20–21 June 1911, M.R.C., Board of Trade Collection (B.O.T. Coll.), General Federation of Trade Unions (G.F.T.U.) documents for 1910–11.

19 British Steel Smelters, Mill, Iron, & Tinplate Workers (Steel Smelters), June 1911 report, p. 307, London, Iron & Steel Trades Confederation.

20 Cotton Factory Times, 17 May 1912, p. 1; see also, e.g., ibid. 2 Aug. 1912, p. 8; The Times, 4 Sept. 1912 (T.U.C. resolution).

21 On those holding out for complete reversal, see, e.g., Labour Leader, 9 Jan. 1913, p. 1 (76 delegates at joint board conference); South Wales Miners' Federation (S.W.M.F.), executive committee (E.C.) meeting, 30 Dec. 1912, University College, Swansea, South Wales Miners' Federation Project (S.W.M.F. Project), S.W.M.F. documents for 1912 (8 out of 17 E.C. members); The Times, 11 Feb. 1913, p. 10 (O'Grady and Appleton). On the majority's decision to accept the government's bill, see infra pp. 919–24.

22 See, e.g., joint board deputation to prime minister, 8 Jan. 1913, Oxford, Bodleian Library, Asquith papers, MSS 89/16–26 (Davis; Roberts); special miners' conference on Trade Union Bill, 2 Jan. 1913, S.W.M.F. Project, Miners' Federation of Great Britain (M.F.G.B.) documents for 1913 (Smillie; Brace; Straker; Harvey).

23 Ironfounders, June 1911 report, p. 190, M.R.C., MSS 41/FSIF/4/4.

24 Ibid.; Part. Deb. XXVI, 951 (30 May 1911).

25 See, e.g., Part. Deb. XVI, 1327 (13 Apr. 1910) (Harvey); ibid. XLI, 3020 (6 Aug. 1912) (Clynes); Labour Leader, 18 Nov. 1910, p. 735 (MacDonald).

26 Parliamentary Papers 1911, v (51), p. 797 (Leech bill).

27 Parl. Deb. XXVI, 1003 (30 May 1911); see also, e.g., ibid. 979 (C. Edwards); Nation, 8 Oct. 1910, pp. 42 (leader), 51–2 (letter from ‘A Radical M.P.’).

28 Buxton cabinet memorandum, 21 Oct. 1910, P.R.O., CAB/37/103/52; journal entry, 13 Oct. 1910, Nuffield College, Gainford papers.

29 Cotton Factory Times, 25 Oct. 1912, pp. I, 7.

30 The Times, 30 Oct. 1912, p. 5; ibid. 1 Nov. 1912, p. 5.

31 Daily Citizen, 1 Nov. 1912, p. 2. McKibbin appears to criticize the party for holding out so long for complete reversal. McKibbin, R., ‘Evolution of a national party: Labour's political organization, 1910–24’ (unpublished D.Phil, dissertation, Oxford University, 1970), p. 54Google Scholar.

32 Hassam, S. E., ‘The parliamentary Labour Party and its relations with the Liberals, 1910–14’ (unpublished M.Litt. dissertation, University of Aberdeen, 1967), p. 320Google Scholar. Apparently, though, the attorney-general had threatened to drop the bill if Labour's amendment passed. See Parl. Deb. XLVII, 1705 (31 Jan. 1913) (Wolmer); Labour Leader, 7 Nov. 1912, p. 721.

33 See, e.g., Parl. Deb. XLI, 3053 (6 Aug. 1912) (Denman); ibid. XLVII, 1733 (31 Jan. 1913) (Walton); Daily News, 7 Oct. 1910, p. 4 (leader).

34 See Petter, M., ‘Liberals and the Labour Party, 1906–1914’ (unpublished D.Phil, dissertation, Oxford University, 1974), p. 214Google Scholar.

35 Most of the leading lawyers in the Liberal Party – including Asquith, Haldane, Walton, and Robson – had opposed unqualified union tort immunity on the ground that unions should be subject to the law just like anyone else. See, e.g., Haldane, R. B., An autobiography (London, 1929), pp. 211–12Google Scholar; Petter, , ‘Liberals’, p. 38Google Scholar.

36 See, e.g., Part. Deb. XXVI, 974 (30 May 1911) (C. Edwards), 992 (Barton), 1003 (Crawshay-Williams); Manchester Guardian, 12 Oct. 1910, p. 6 (leader).

37 Nation, 15 Oct. 1910, p. 113.

38 Osborne, M W. V., My case (London, 1910), pp. 65–6Google Scholar.

39 Bonar Law to Austen Chamberlain, 1 Oct. 1910, London, House of Lords Record Office (H.L.R.O.), Bonar Law papers, 18/8/12.

40 L.P.C.R. 1911, p. 66 (Robinson); Labour Leader, 22 Apr. 1910, p. 248 (leader); Parl. Deb. XXVI, 945–6 (30 May 1911) (MacDonald).

41 Pease cabinet memorandum, 6 Oct. 1910; Haldane cabinet memorandum, 7 Oct. 1910; Samuel cabinet memorandum, 11 Oct. 1910, P.R.O., CAB/37/103/42, 43, 46.

42 Journal entry, 13 Oct. 1910, Nuffield College, Gainford papers.

43 See, e.g., Labour Leader, 22 Apr. 1910, p. 248; Parl. Deb. XXVI, 932 (30 May 1911) (F. E. Smith), 952–3 (Cripps), 966 (Lyttelton), 990 (Jardine).

44 The Times, 20 Nov. 1912, p. 6 (Peto and Jardine); ibid. 27 Nov. 1912 (Wolmer); Parl. Deb. XLVII, 1357 (29 Jan. 1913) (Peto), 1395–6 (Wolmer).

45 See, e.g., Labour Leader, 4 Feb. 1910, p. 70 (Clynes); Parl. Deb. XX, 119 (18 Nov. 1910) (Barnes); joint board conference on Osbome, 10 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., G.F.T.U. documents for 1910–11 (Shackleton).

46 For Liberal dependence on trade unionist votes, see infra pp. 908–9.

47 T.U.C. Report 1910, p. 141.

48 Joint board deputation to prime minister, 11 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., G.F.T.U. documents for 1910–11; ibid. joint board conference on Osborne, 10 Nov. 1910; T.U.C. Report 1910, p. 157.

49 See supra pp. 895–6; The Times, 25 Nov. 1910, p. 8.

50 T.U.C. Report 1910, p. 156.

51 Manchester Guardian, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 6; see also The Times, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 8.

52 Manchester Guardian, 25 Oct. 1910, p. 14 (Pemberton speech).

53 Ibid. 31 Oct. 1910, p. 8.

54 Ibid. 3 Nov. 1910, p. 3 (letter).

55 Cotton Factory Times, 4 Nov. 1910, p. 1.

56 Robinson to MacDonald, 30 Oct. 1910, P.R.O., MacDonald papers, 30/60/1154/189–90.

57 Ibid. /232–4, Walsh to MacDonald, 3 Nov. 1910.

58 Beer, M., A history of British socialism (London, 1 vol. edn, 1940), p. 343Google Scholar.

59 See, e.g., McKibbin, , ‘Evolution’, pp. 181–2Google Scholar; Gregory, R. G., The miners and politics in England and Wales, 1906–1914’ (unpublished D.Phil, dissertation, Oxford University, 1963), p. 602Google Scholar; Purdue, A. W., ‘The Liberal and Labour Parties in north-east politics, 1900–14: the struggle for supremacy’, International Review of Social History, XXVI (1981), 23–4Google Scholar.

60 Gregory, R., The miners and British politics, 1906–1914 (London, 1968), p. 31Google Scholar.

61 See, e.g., M.R.C., MSS 127/AS/OC/3/7/14; ibid. /8/12, 29, 37, 100–1, 118; ibid. /9/passim; ibid. /13/98, 110, 146; Postmen's Federation, E.C. meetings, Apr. 1910 to July 1911, London, Union of Post Office Workers, U.P.W. House; Postman's Gazette, 22 Oct. 1910 and 22 Apr. 1911; Typographical Association, E.C. meeting, 19 Dec. 1908, M.R.C, MSS 39A/TA/1/31 /1; ibid. /2, E.C. meeting, 23 Oct. 1909; ibid. /4/1/39, Apr., May, June, Oct., and Nov. 1910 reports.

62 T.U.C. Report 1910, pp. 146–57.

63 See, e.g., L.P.C.R. 1911, p. 25; joint board deputation to prime minister, 11 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., G.F.T.U. documents for 1910–11 (Shackleton); Christian Commonwealth, 21 Sept. 1910, p. 882 (Snowden); Cotton Factory Times, 23 Sept. 1910, p. 8.

64 See, e.g., Daily News, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 4 (leader); Manchester Guardian, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 6 (leader); Westminster Gazette, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 1 (leader); Standard, 23 Sept. 1910 (Osborne letter).

65 Daily Chronicle, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 4 (leader).

66 Pease cabinet memorandum, 6 Oct. 1910, P.R.O., CAB/37/103/42.

67 Ibid. /45, Robson cabinet memorandum, 10 Oct. 1910.

68 See, e.g., Derbyshire Times, 7 Dec. 1910, p. 5 (Radford in Chesterfield); ibid. 3 Dec. 1910, p. 7 (Court in Northeast Derbyshire); Daily Telegraph, 12 Oct. 1910, p. 9 (Johnson in Walthamstow); ibid. 13 Oct. 1910, p. 8 (Vaughan Williams in South Shields).

69 Labour Leader, 2 June 1911, p. 342; see also ibid. 26 March 1909, p. 196 (Wake); Christian Commonwealth, 20 Apr. 1910, p. 530 (Snowden); miners' special conference on Osborne, 4–5 Aug. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents for 1910 (Barker).

70 Robson cabinet memorandum, 10 Oct. 1910, P.R.O., CAB/37/103/45.

71 Petter, , ‘Liberals’, p. 220Google Scholar .

72 Daily Mews, 7 Oct. 1910, p. 4 (leader).

73 Part. Deb. XVI, 1333 (13 Apr. 1910) (Pringle), 1348 (Sherwell), 1354 (Robson).

74 Labour Leader, 22 Apr. 1910, p. 248 (leader); ibid. 12 Aug. 1910, p. 507 Qowett); Christian Commonwealth, 20 Apr. 1910, p. 530 (Snowden).

75 Daily Express, 14 Apr. 1910, p. 4 (leader).

76 Daily News, 23 Aug. 1910, p. 4 (leader).

77 Journal entry, 6 July 1910, Nuffield College, Gainford papers; see also ibid. 29 July 1910.

78 T.U.C. Report 1910, p. 153.

79 See, e.g., Daily Chronicle, 22 Dec. 1909, p. 4 (leader); Morning Leader, 22 Dec. 1909, p. 4 (leader); The Times, 6 Jan. 1910, p. 10 (Churchill); Liverpool Echo, 5 Jan. 1910 (Vivian letter).

80 See, e.g., Westminster Gazette, 23 Aug. 1910, p. 1 (leader); Daily Chronicle, 15 Sept. 1910, p. 4 (leader); Morning Leader, 24 Aug. 1910, p. 4 (leader); Star, 23 Aug. 1910, p. 2 (leader).

81 L.P.C.R. 1910, pp. 109–10. This concern was shared by others. See, e.g., Railway Clerks' Association, annual conference, 28–29 May 1910, M.R.C., MSS 55/1/CON/3 (Roberts); Railway Review, 7 Oct. 1910, p. 7.

82 M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., G.F.T.U. documents for 1909–10.

83 On Labour's decision to pursue payment of M.P.s, see, e.g., joint board subcommittee meeting, 27 Oct. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., G.F.T.U. documents for 1910–11 (resolution); The Times, 17 Oct. 1910, p. 12 (Labour Party manifesto); T.U.C. Report 1910, p. 128 (resolution). On opposition within Labour to payment of M.P.s, see, e.g., Cotton Factory Times, 4 March 1910, p. 7 (Hardie); Daily Chronicle, 11 Aug. 1910, p. 4 (‘some’ Labour M.P.s). Hardie's reason for opposing payment of M.P.s was identical to that proffered by some Liberals and Conservatives for supporting it. See, e.g., Grigg, John, Lloyd George: the people's champion, 1902–1911 (London, 1978), p. 290Google Scholar (Lloyd George); Morning Post, 9 Sept. 1910 (‘Practical Tory’).

84 See, e.g., Ironfounders, June 1912 report, p. 181, M.R.C., MSS. 41/FSIF/4/4 (Henderson); The Times, 4 Sept. 1912 (Chandler); Shop Assistant, 3 June 1911, p. 362.

85 See, e.g., Railwaymen's Parliamentary Representation Association, annual general meeting, 4 Oct. 1911, M.R.C., MSS 127/AS/6/2/1 (Mayell); Ironfounders, Sept. 1911 report, p. 287, M.R.C., MSS 41/FSIF/4/4; London Society of Compositors, political committee meeting, 20 Sept. 1911, M.R.C., MSS 28/CO/1/4/1/1.

86 Parl. Deb. XXVI, 1019 (30 May 1911); see also Daily Chronicle, 7 Aug. 1912, p. 4 (leader); Labour Leader, 7 Nov. 1912, p. 720 (leader).

87 Daily News, 23 Aug. 1910, p. 4 (leader); see also L.P.C.R. 1911, p. 25.

88 The Times, 23 Aug. 1910, p. 3.

89 Ibid.; Cotton Factory Times, 26 Aug. 1910, p. 7.

90 Spectator, 27 Aug. 1910, p. 299; Cotton Factory Times, 26 Aug. 1910, p. 1 (leader); Daily Telegraph, 23 Aug. 1910, p. 8 (leader); Labour Leader, 26 Aug. 1910, p. 536; Manchester Guardian, 23 Aug. 1910, p. 6 (leader); Nation, 27 Aug. 1910, p. 753; Observer, 28 Aug. 1910, p. 6 (leader).

91 See, e.g., Morning Post, 9 Sept. 1910; Daily Telegraph, 9 Sept. 1910, p. 3; ibid. 15 Sept. 1910, p. 4; Cotton Factory Times, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 1; The Times, 13 Sept. 1910, p. 8; Labour Leader, 23 Sept. 1910, p. 600 (leader).

92 Spectator, 17 Sept. 1910, p. 413.

93 T.U.C. Report 1910, pp. 146–56 (Brace; Harvey; Sexton; Smillie; Stokes; Gribble; Walsh).

94 Daily News, 16 Sept. 1910, p. I (T.U.C. correspondent); see also The Times,16 Sept. 1910, p. 8; Daily Telegraph, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 8; Star, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 2 (leader).

95 Daily News, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 1.

96 The Times, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 8; Daily News, 13 Sept. 1910, p. 4 (leader); Labour Leader, 23 Sept. 1910, p. 600 (leader).

97 Daily Chronicle, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 4 (leader).

98 Daily News, 17 Sept. 1910, p. 1 (T.U.C. correspondent); ibid. 29 Sept. 1910, p. 1 (MacDonald).

99 Daily News, 19 Sep. 1910, p. I (MacDonald).

100 Daily Telegraph, 23 Aug. 1910, p. 8; Daily News, 17 Sept. 1910, p. 1 (T.U.C. correspondent).

101 See, e.g., Labour Leader, 7 Oct. 1910, pp. 635, 636 (Clynes and Duncan at Bradford; Hardi e at Paisley, Aberdeen, and Edinburgh); ibid. 14 Oct. 1910, pp. 654, 655 (MacDonald at Croydon; Clynes at Sunderland and Bradford; Anderson at Acton; Hardie at Catrine); ibid. 28 Oct. 1910, pp. 686, 687 (Shackleton at Nelson; Barnes at Brighouse); ibid. 18 Nov. 1910, p. 735 (Barnes at Cambridge; Hardie at Grimsby; MacDonald at Leicester).

102 See, e.g., Operative Stonemasons, 2 Nov. 1910 report, M.R.C., MSS 78/OS/4/1/98; Cotton Factory Times, 28 Oct. 1910, p. 1 (Heywood trades council); Operative Plasterers, Nov. 1910 report, M.R.C., MSS 126/OP/4/2; Northumberland Miners, E.C. meeting, 28 Oct. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll.

103 See, e.g., L.P.C.R. 1911, p. 10; Ironfounders, Nov. 1910 report, p. 295, M.R.C., MSS 41/FSIF/4/4 (Lawson and Henderson at Middlesbrough branch); ibid. Dec. 1910 report, p. 320 (Henderson at Blackburn branch); Typographical Association, Nov. 1910 report, pp. 9, 11, M.R.C., MSS 39A/TA/4/1/39 (Roberts at Leeds and Derby branches; Parker at Halifax branch).

104 The constitutional question concerned the extent to which the hereditary house of parliament – traditionally dominated by Conservatives – should be empowered to block legislation – invariably proposed by Liberals – that had been passed by the popularly-elected house. For a thorough discussion of the constitutional crisis, see Blewett, N., The peers, the parties and the people: the general elections of 1910 (London, 1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

105 Rowland, P., The last Liberal governments, Vol. I, the promised land, 1905–1910 (London, 1968), P. 305Google Scholar.

106 This Was somewhat ironic, for had the veto conference resulted in the coalition government which Lloyd George sought, the Labour Party would have been, along with the Irish Nationalists, the likely losers. As F. E. Smith explained to Austen Chamberlain, a coalition government could have ‘absolutely refuse[d] reversal of the Osborne judgment, which Asquith standing alone cannot’. Rowland, , Last Liberal governments, I, 315–16Google Scholar (quoting from Smith to Chamberlain, 20 Oct. 1910).

107 Daily News, 3 Nov. 1910, p. 4 (leader); Daily Telegraph, 29 Oct. 1910, p. 8.

108 See, e.g., Daily Telegraph, 8 Oct. 1910, p. 10; ibid. 13 Oct. 1910, p. 8; Daily News, 8 Oct. 1910, p. 1; Manchester Guardian, 12 Oct. 1910, p. 8; Westminster Gazette, 11 Oct. 1910, p. 2 (notes).

109 The Times, 12 Oct. 1910, p. 10.

110 See, e.g., The Times, 21 Oct. 1910, p. 10; Daily Mews, 20 Oct. 1910, p. 7 (Pickersgill letter); Daily Telegraph, 18 Oct. 1910, p. 8; ibid. 21 Oct. 1910, p. 6.

111 See, e.g., Daily Telegraph, 11 Oct. 1910, p. 8; The Times, 17 Oct. 1910, p. 12 (Peters); Manchester Guardian, 11 Oct. 1910, p. 7; Daily News, 15 Oct. 1910, p. 5 (Peters).

112 The Times, 17 Oct. 1910, p. 12. In the event, both by-elections turned out badly for Labour. In the final week of the Walthamstow campaign, Osborne receded in significance as the local socialists' threat to turn out the workingclass vote against Simon proved to lack credibility. Daily Telegraph, 29 Oct. 1910, p. 8; Manchester Guardian, 26 Oct. 1910, p. 7. South Shields became a debacle for the Labour Party when Will Crooks' candidature, considered a certainty by most observers, had to be withdrawn after the local Labour conference convened to sanction it could not produce even a majority endorsement. Daily Telegraph, 18 Oct. 1910, p. 8; ibid. 19 Oct. 1910, p. 9; The Times, 20 Oct. 1910, p. 10.

113 Cox, H., ‘The story of the Osborne case’, Nineteenth Century and After, LXVIII (10 1910), 569Google Scholar .

114 Railway Clerk, 15 Oct. 1910, p. 196.

115 Christian Commonwealth, 12 Oct. 1910, p. 19 (Parker).

116 Daily Chronicle, 23 Sept. 1910, p. 4 (leader); see also Morning Post, 23 Sept. 1910.

117 Petter, , ‘Liberals’, p. 226Google Scholar; Daily News, 17 Sept. 1910, p. 1; Nation, 15 Oct. 1910, p. 113.

118 Pease to Asquith, 29 Sept. (misdated as Oct.) 1910, Nuffield College, Gainford papers, Box 88.

119 Daily Telegraph, 12 Oct. 1910, p. 9; ibid. 15 Oct. 1910, p. 11; The Times, 14 Oct. 1910, p. 8.

120 Petter, , ‘Liberals’, p. 216Google Scholar (reporting Runciman to Trevelyan, 25 Sept. 1910).

121 Ibid. (reporting Asquith to Runciman, 25 Sept. 1910).

122 Nation, 17 Sept. 1910, pp. 875–6 (letter from ‘A Liberal Member of Parliament’); ibid. 8 Oct. 1910, pp. 51–2 (letter from ‘A Radical M.P.’); Daily Mews, 15 Oct. 1910, p. 3 (Radford).

123 Asquith to Pease, 4 Oct. 1910, Nuffield College, Gainford Papers, Box 88.

124 Manchester Guardian, 12 Oct. 1910, p. 6 (leader).

125 See Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants v. Osborne [1910] A.C. 87, 93 (James of Hereford), 111 (Shaw); Manchester Guardian, 30 Sept. 1910, p. 6 (leader). Lord Shaw, for example, declared that the Labour Party pledge was not ‘compatible either with the spirit of our parliamentary constitution or with that independence and freedom which have hitherto been held to lie at the basis, of representative government in the United Kingdom’.

126 Nation, 17 Sept. 1910, pp. 875–6 (‘A Liberal Member of Parliament’); see also, e.g., Manchester Guardian, 28 Sept. 1910 (Barton letter); ibid. 22 Dec. 1909, p. 6 (leader); Star, 16 Sept. 1910, p. 2 (leader).

127 Westminster Gazette, 23 Aug. 1910, p. 1 (leader); see also ibid. 24 Aug. 1910, p. 1 (leader).

128 The Times, 30 Sept. 1910, p. 8.

129 See, e.g., Daily Chronicle, 30 Sept. 1910, p. 4 (leader); ibid. 15 Sept. 1910, p. 4 (leader); ibid. 16 Sept. 1910, p. 4 (leader).

130 Daily News, 30 Sept. 1910, p. 1; ibid. 1 Oct. 1910, p. 1.

131 Manchester Guardian, 30 Sept. 1910, p. 6 (London correspondence); see also Westminster Gazette, 30 Sept. 191 o, p. 1 (leader); Nation, 1 Oct. 1910, p. 1.

132 Asquith to the king, 13 Oct. 1910, Bodleian Library, Asquith papers, MSS 5/242–3; journal entry, 13 Oct. 1910, Nuffield College, Gainford papers.

133 The Times, 15 Oct. 1910, p. 12; Daily News, 15 Oct. 1910, p. 5.

134 Petter, , ‘Liberals’, p. 215Google Scholar (reporting Trevelyan to Runciman, 19 Sept. 1910); Asquith to Pease, 4 Oct. 1910, Nuffield College, Gainford papers.

135 Daily Telegraph, 17 Oct. 1910, p. 8.

136 The Times, 19 Oct. 1910, p. 10.

137 For the remainder of this paragraph, see Klarman, M., ‘Osborne: a judgment gone too far?’, English Historical Review, CIII (1988), 33–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

138 See note I supra.

139 L.P.C.R. 1910, pp. 107–9.

140 See, e.g., miners' special conference on Osborne, 4–5 Aug. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents for 1910 (Greenall; Barker; Walsh; Whitefield); Typographical Association, Aug. 1910 report, p. 3, M.R.C., MSS 39A/TA/4/1/39; London Society of Compositors, political committee meeting, 19 Aug. 1910, M.R.C., MSS 28/CO/1/4/1/1.

141 T.U.C. Report 1910, pp. 128 (Gordon), 141 (Morris), 154 (Gribble); min-rs' special conference on Osborne, 9 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents for 1910 (Wadsworth; Gilmour; Smillie; Roughley); joint board conference on Osborne, 10 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., G.F.T.U. documents for 1910–11 (Smillie; Naylor; Stuart; Twist).

142 Miners' special conference on Osborne, 9 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents for 1910 (Smillie; Roughley; Edwards); T.U.C. Report 1910, p. 153 (Smillie).

143 See, e.g., miners' special conference on Osborne, 4–5 Aug. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents for 1910.

144 See, e.g., MacDonald memorandum on Osborne, H.L.R.O., Lloyd George papers, C/5/11/1A; Parl. Deb. XX, 122 (18 Nov. 1910) (Barnes); Labour Leader, 14 Oct. 1910, p. 654 (MacDonald). The general election of January 1910 had deprived the Liberals of their independent majority in parliament, forcing the government to rely on the support of Labour and the Irish Nationalists.

145 See, e.g., Manchester Guardian, 29 Aug. 1910, p. 6; Labour Leader, 25 Nov. 1910, p. 748 (Keir Hardie); joint board meeting on Osborne, 10 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., G.F.T.U. documents for 1910–11; miners' special conference on Osborne, 9 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents for 1910 (Smillie; Brown); Lancashire & Cheshire Miners' Federation (L.&C.M.F.), programme for conference, 3 Sept. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., L.&C.M.F. documents for 1910.

146 Railway Clerks' Association, annual conference, 20–21 May 1911, M.R.C., MSS 55/1/CON/4 (Chandler); see also Railwaymen's Parliamentary Representation Association, annual general meeting, 8 Oct. 1912, M.R.C., MSS. 127/AS/6/2/1 (Sherwood); Postman's Gazette, 17 June 1911, p. 323.

147 L.P.C.R. 1912, pp. 90–1 (Sheffield trades council and Wigan labour representation committee delegates).

148 Miners' special conference on Trade Union Bill, 2 Jan. 1913, S.W.M.F. Project, M.F.G.B. documents for 1913.

149 See supra pp. 909–10.

150 Spectator, 8 Oct. 1910, p. 548 (MacDonald); Labour Leader, 7 Oct. 1910, p. 632; Postman's Gazette, 8 Oct. 1910, p. 518 (Stuart).

151 Manchester Guardian, 3 Oct. 1910, p. 8 (F. E. Smith); The Times, 10 Oct. 1910, p. 9 (Wortley); Daily Graphic, 1 Oct. 1910, p. 6 (leader).

152 See, e.g., Daily Telegraph, 1 Oct. 1910, p. 13 (Tillett); Manchester Guardian, 1 Oct. 1910, pp. 8 (Wardle), 9 (Hardie); The Times, 1 Oct. 1910, p. 10 (Pease); Postman's Gazette, 14 Jan. 1911, p. 20 (Stuart).

153 L.P.C.R. 1911, pp. 79 (Glasier), 80 (W. Holmes), 81 (Keir Hardie), 83 (engineers' delegate), 84 (Quelch).

154 Nation, 7 Jan. 1911, p. 595; Spectator, 7 Jan. 1911, p. 3; Postman's Gazette, 11 Feb. 1911, p. 70 (Stuart).

155 L.P.C.R. 1911, p. 81.

156 See supra pp. 900–2.

157 Amalgamated Society of Engineers (A.S.E.), Jan. 1910 report, p. 4, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., A.S.E. reports; Part. Deb. XXVI, 933 (30 May 1911) (Smith).

158 Typographical Association, Aug. 1910 report, p. 3, M.R.C., MSS 39A/TA/4/1/39; see also Christian Commonwealth, 8 Jan. 1913, p. 266 (Snowden).

159 The Times, 4 Sept. 1912, p. 6.

160 Miners' special conference on Osborne, 9 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents for 1910.

161 See infra note 187; The Times, 1 Jan. 1910, p. 6 (joint board resolutions); ibid. 3 Jan. 1910, p. 12 (joint board circular).

162 Part. Deb. XIX, 477 (25 Feb. 1910) (Johnson); ibid, XVI, 1361 (13 Apr. 1910) (Shackleton); infra pp. 916–17.

163 Shop Assistant, 6 Aug. 1910, p. 82.

164 Miners' special conference on Osborne, 4–5 Aug. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents for 1910 (Barker).

165 Cotton Factory Times, 9 Sept. 1910, p. 1 (leader); see also ibid. 26 Aug. 1910, p. 1 (leader); The Times, 26 July 1910, p. 9 (annual conference of textile workers).

166 L.P.C.R. 1911, p. 24.

167 Bell, R., Trade unionism (London, 1907), pp. 53–4Google Scholar; Clegg, et al. , History, p. 323Google Scholar; Bailey, C., ‘The development of the tortious liability affecting trade unions in the period up to 1906 (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Cambridge University, 1981), pp. 289–91Google Scholar.

168 See, e.g., Manchester Guardian, 20 Oct. 1910, p. 6 (Shackleton speech); T.U.C. Report 1910, p. 141 (Henderson); Independent Labour Party Conference Report (I.L.P.C.R.) 1910, p. 56 (MacDonald).

169 Labour Party N.E.C. minutes, 15 Feb. 1910, L.P.H.Q. (confidential memorandum); T.U.C. Report 1910, p. 156 (Shackleton); Snowden, P., Autobiography (2 vols., London, 1934), I, 216–17Google Scholar. Conservatives, including the new-style ‘Tory Democrats’ favouring state payment of M.P.s, were almost unanimously opposed to reversal of Osborne. See, e.g., Daily News, 27 Sept. 1910, p. 1 (F. E. Smith); Morning Post, 9 Sept. 1910 (‘Practical Tory’); Standard, 12 Sept. 1910 (leader).

170 Blewett, N., ‘The British general elections of 1910’ (unpublished D.Phil, dissertation, Oxford University, 1967), p. 463Google Scholar.

171 Hassam, , ‘Parliamentary Labour Party’, p. 20Google Scholar; Douglas, R., ‘Labour in decline, 1910–14’, in Brown, K. D., Essays in anti-Labour history (London, 1974), p. 107Google Scholar.

172 Gregory, , ‘Miners’, pp. 54–5, 204, 263–79, 510, 554–6, 574Google Scholar; McKibbin, , ‘Evolution’, pp. 31–2Google Scholar, 61–2; Blewett, , ‘General elections’, p. 503Google Scholar; Petter, , ‘Liberals’, p. 187Google Scholar.

173 Snowden, , Autobiography, I, 217–18Google Scholar.

174 Gregory, , ‘Miners’, pp. 201–6, 302–17, 334–45, 512–14, 557–65Google Scholar; M.F.G.B., annual conference, 6–7 Oct. 1908, S.W.M.F. Project, M.F.G.B. documents for 1908 (Fenwick); Petter, , ‘Liberals’, pp. 285–6Google Scholar; McKibbin, , ‘Evolution’, pp. 181–2Google Scholar.

175 I.L.P.C.R. 1910, pp. 55–60; Hassam, , ‘Parliamentary Labour Party’, pp. 69–76Google Scholar.

176 I.L.P.C.R. 1910, pp. 56 (MacDonald), 58 (Hardie); L.P.C.R. 1911, p. 76 (delegate from Bradford trades council).

177 Hassam, , ‘Parliamentary Labour Party’, pp. 31–2Google Scholar; Marquand, D., Ramsay MacDonald (London, 1977), p. 122Google Scholar; Sandars to Balfour, 10 March 1910, British Library, Balfour papers, Add. MSS 49766/161–73.

178 I.L.P.C.R. 1910, p. 58.

179 Ibid. pp. 52–5, 59 (Hardie), 68–70.

180 T.U.C. Report 1910, p. 141; Roberts, , Trades Union Congress, p. 226Google Scholar.

181 The Times, 15 Apr. 1910, p. 11 (leader).

182 Part. Deb. XVI, 1349 (13 Apr. 1910) (Robson).

183 See, e.g., ibid. 1361 (Shackleton); Labour Party quarterly circular, Apr. 1910, p. I; London Society of Compositors, quarterly delegates meeting, 2 Feb. 1910, M.R.C., MSS 28/CO/1/1/13/1 (resolution).

184 The house of lords and free trade were the principal issues at the general election of January 1910; the law lords' ruling in Osborne was delivered too near the election for Labour to convert it into a major campaign topic. N., Blewett, Peers, p. 317Google Scholar; Petter, ; ‘Liberals’, p. 191Google Scholar; joint board memorandum, undated, L.P.H.Q., JB/08/144. While Osborne was much more widely discussed at the December election, it still could not compete with the lords for primacy on the electoral agenda. Indeed only 6% of Labour candidates in December ranked Osborne as th e election's principal issue. Blewett, , Peers, p. 326Google Scholar.

185 Blewett, , ‘General elections’, p. 417Google Scholar; Gregory, , ‘Miners’, pp. 360–3, 421Google Scholar; Porritt, E., ‘The British Labour Party in 1910’, Political Science Quarterly, XXV (06 1910), 312–13Google Scholar.

186 Gregory, , ‘Miners’, p. 363Google Scholar.

187 Petter, , ‘Liberals’, p. 231Google Scholar.

188 Journal entry, 22 Nov. 1910, Nuffield College, Gainford papers; Asquith to the king, 25 Jan. 1911, Bodleian Library Asquith papers, MSS 6/3; ibid. /8s, 30 Nov. 1911; ibid. /162, 7 Aug. 1912.

189 Churchill, Randolph S., Winston S. Churchill: young statesman, Vol. II, 1901–1911 (London, 1967) (companion volume), p. 1129Google Scholar (reproducing Churchill to Elibank, 14 Oct. 1911).

190 Rowland, P., The last Liberal governments, Vol. II, Unfinished business, 1911–1914 (London, 1971), pp. 12, 25Google Scholar; Churchill, , Winston S. Churchill, II, 358Google Scholar; Petter, , ‘Liberals’, p. 237Google Scholar; Asquith to the king, 25 Jan. 1911, Bodleian Library, Asquith papers, MSS 6/3.

191 Rowland, , Last Liberal governments, II, 26–7Google Scholar.

192 Steel Smelters, June 1911 report, p. 308, Iron & Steel Trades Confederation (Frank Goldstone: ‘The Labour Party in parliament’); ibid. July 1911 report, p. 378 (same).

193 Steel Smelters, July 1911 report, p. 379, Iron & Steel Trades Confederation (Goldstone); London Society of Compositors, annual meeting of political committee, 17 July 1911, M.R.C., MSS 28/CO/1/4/1/1 (Bowerman); see also Scottish Typographical Journal, July 1911, p. 140.

194 Asquith to the king, 30 Nov. 1911, Bodleian Library, Asquith papers, MS S 6/85.

195 Parl. Deb. XXXII, 595 (30 Nov. 1911).

196 Rowland, , Last Liberal governments, II, 144Google Scholar (quoting letter).

197 Ibid. p. 145.

198 Spectator, 10 Aug. 1912, p. 192.

199 Christian Commonwealth, 17 July 1912, p. 678.

200 Pelling, , ‘Polities’, pp. 904–5Google Scholar (quoting from Henderson to MacDonald, 21 Feb. 1913).

201 See supra p. 898.

202 T.U.C. Report 1913, pp. 152–3 (reprinting circular).

203 Miners' special conference on Trade Union Bill, 2 Jan. 1913, S.W.M.F. Project, M.F.G.B. documents for 1913.

204 Gregory, , ‘Miners’, pp. 107, 595Google Scholar.

205 M.F.G.B., annual balance sheets for 1908–13, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents.

206 Miners' special conference on Trade Union Bill, 2 Jan. 1913, S.W.M.F. Project, M.F.G.B. documents for 1913.

207 S.W.M.F., E.C. meetings, 4 and 21 Aug. 1911, S.W.M.F. Project, S.W.M.F. documents for 1911; Gregory, , ‘Miners’, pp. 452–3Google Scholar; Labour Party N.E.C. minutes, 10 Oct. 1912, L.P.H.Q.

208 Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants, 1908 Reports and Proceedings, p. 106, M.R.C., MSS: 27/AS/1/1/38; ibid. E.C. meeting, Sept. 1908.

209 Ibid. /6/2/1, Railwaymen's Parliamentary Representation Association, annual general meeting, 4 Oct. 1911 (Wardle report; balance sheet).

210 Ibid. 8 Oct. 1912 (balance sheet; Wardle). Because of Osborne Holmes had to take holiday time to fight the contest.

211 Bodleian Library, Asquith papers, MSS 89/16–26.

212 McKibbin, , ‘Evolution’, p. 43 (quoting from letter of general secretary of Amalgamated Society of Engineers to Labour Party, 2 Dec. 1913)Google Scholar.

213 This fund was formed for the purpose of granting assistance to patternmakers and other trades, but the executive committee had wide discretion in its use.

214 Patternmakers, 1910 annual report, pp. xxxiii–iv, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll.; ibid. 1912 annual report, p. xxxvii.

215 Ironfounders, 1908 annual report, p. 7, M.R.C., MSS 41/FSIF/4/1; ibid. 1909 annual report, p. 5; ibid. /4, Sept. 1912 report, pp. 267–8.

216 Ibid. /1, 1913 annual report, p. 19.

217 Ibid. /4, Dec. 1912 report, p. 335.

218 Account of Parr v. Lancashire & Cheshire Miners' Federation (28–29 Jan. 1913), S.W.M.F. Project, M.F.G.B. documents for 1913.

219 Ibid., miners' special conference on Trade Union Bill, 2 Jan. 1913.

220 S.W.M.F., E.C. meeting, 18 Nov. 1912, S.W.M.F. Project, S.W.M.F. documents for 1912.

221 Cotton Factory Times, 23 Feb. 1912, p. 7.

222 The Times, 1 Feb. 1913, p. 3 (Alpe v. Friendly Society of Ironfounders).

223 Sexton to Labour Party, 18 Dec. 1912, L.P.H.Q., Aff. 7/156 (Dock Labourers); Labour Party N.E.C. minutes, 10 Oct. 1912, L.P.H.Q. (Bakers).

224 See supra p. 916.

225 Rowland, , Last Liberal governments, II, 55–6, 75–6Google Scholar; Elibank to Lloyd George, 5 Oct. 1911 (enclosing MacDonald to Elibank, 4 Oct. 1911), H.L.R.O., Lloyd George papers, C/6/5/5.

226 This account is based on Petter, , ‘Liberals’, pp. 281–2Google Scholar; Douglas, , ‘Labour’, p. 114Google Scholar.

227 On this point, in addition to Petter and Douglas, see Nation, 6 July 1912, p. 500; Spectator, 6 July 1912, pp. 5–6; Morning Post, 4 July 1912, p. 9.

228 On these by-elections, see Petter, , ‘Liberals’, pp. 244–54Google Scholar; Douglas, , ‘Labour’, p. 121Google Scholar.

229 Nation, 15 Oct. 1910, pp. 113–14.

230 Joint board deputation to prime minister, 8 Jan. 1913, Bodleian Library, Asquith papers, MSS 89/16–26 (Roberts; Asquith).

231 Christian Commonwealth, 5 Oct. 1910, p. 9.

232 See, e.g., Cotton Factory Times, 15 Sept. 1911, p. 1; ibid. 27 Oct. 1911, p. 7; ibid. 12 July 1912, p. 1; Shires, R. V., ‘Labour unrest in England, 1910–1914’, Journal of Economic History, XV (1955), 262–3Google Scholar.

233 Parliamentary Papers 1911, V (364), p. 785 (Banbury bill); ibid. 1912, V (309), pp. 491–7 (Robert Cecil bill); Ironfounders, Dec. 1912 report, p. 336, M.R.C., MS S 41/FSIF/4/4; Cotton Factory Times, 27 Dec. 1912, p. 4 (Gill).

234 See, e.g., L.P.C.R. 1912, p. 88 (resolution); Cotton Factory Times, 13 Oct. 1911, pp. 1 (G.F.T.U. manifesto), 4 (Greenwood article; Yorkshire federated trades council); ibid. 27 Sept. 1912, p. 1 (T.U.C. parliamentary committee); I.L.P.C.R. 1912, p. 98.

235 Ironfounders, June 1912 report, p. 181, M.R.C., MSS 41/FSIF/4/4.

236 T.U.C. Report, 1913, pp. 152–3.

237 Miners' special conference on Trade Union Bill, 2 Jan. 1913, S.W.M.F. Project, M.F.G.B. documents for 1913.

238 Government Workers' Advocate, Oct. 1911, p. 5.

239 Sheffield Daily Telegraph, 4 Sept. 1911, p. 6. Clynes disputed this claim. T.U.C. Report 1911, pp. 170–1.

240 L.P.C.R. 1912, p. 4.

241 Labour Leader, 7 Nov. 1912, p. 720 (leader).

242 M.F.G.B., annual conference, Oct. 1912, S.W.M.F. Project, M.F.G.B. documents for 1912; see also, e.g., Railway Clerks' Association, annual conference, 18–19 May 1912, M.R.C., MSS 55/1/CON/5 (single Osborne resolution included with ‘non-contentious matters’); Cotton Factory Times, 4 Aug. 1911, p. 8 (textile workers' annual conference: Osborne mentioned, but not prominently); Cooperative Employee, Railway Clerk, Ironfounders' monthly reports (Osborne hardly mentioned, if at all, from mid-1911 through 1912).

243 For example, the attention of the South Wales miners' executive committee was diverted from Osborne to the industrial ferment in the South Wales coalfield as early as the Tonypandy riots of November 1910. Throughout the length of the Cambrian Combine dispute in 1911 and the national union's agitation for a miners' minimum wage in early 1912, the South Wales miners relegated political matters to the backburner. See, e.g., miners' special conference on Osborne, 9 Nov. 1910, M.R.C., B.O.T. Coll., M.F.G.B. documents for 1910; S.W.M.F., E.C. meetings, 6 March, 29 March, 20 May, 27 May, 8 June, 12 June, 26 June, 6 July, 9 Aug., 21 Aug. 1911, 9 Feb. 1912, S.W.M.F. Project, S.W.M.F. documents for 1911 and 1912.

244 See, e.g., Labour Leader, 24 Dec. 1909, p. 827 (Rose); ibid. 10 June 1910, p. 361 (Clynes); Cotton Factory Times, 19 Aug. 1910, p. 5 (W. T. Wilson); The Times, 7 Jan. 1909, p. 8 (Abraham).