No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 December 2008
The task of this paper is to examine trade union policy and the 1852 lock-out in the British engineering industry. The focus of attention will be upon the development of worker militancy and how this led to the lock-out. Although a history of the British engineering worker has long been extant, the causes of the 1852 dispute remain controversial. In The Story of the Engineers, J. B. Jefferys emphasizes the opposition of workers to systematic overtime and piece-work. Henry Pelling, in a more recent work, attributes the dispute to the opposition of skilled men to the employment of unskilled labour. I hope this paper throws more light on the origins of the 1852 lock-out.
page 645 note 1 Jefferys, J. B., The Story of the Engineers (1946).Google Scholar
page 645 note 2 Ibid., p. 38.
page 645 note 3 Pelling, Henry, A History of British Trade Unionism (1963), p. 51.Google Scholar
page 645 note 4 The discussion which follows is based on my previous paper, loc. cit.
page 646 note 1 The Operative, 19 April, 1851, No 16, pp. 249–50; Trades' Advocate and Herald of Progress, 27 July, 1850, No 5, p. 40.
page 646 note 2 Offices of the Amalgamated Engineering Union, London: Monthly Reports […] A.S.E., 1851.
page 646 note 3 These had followed the spread of capital-intensive techniques in the engineering industry during the period 1830–h50. Their effect on skilled labour is discussed in my previous paper.
page 646 note 4 The Operative, 4 January, 1851, No 1, pp. 11–12.
page 646 note 5 Leeds Intelligencer, 21 December, 1850, p. 5.
page 647 note 1 See my previous paper, especially Graph B.
page 647 note 2 The Operative, 4 January, 1851, No 1, pp. 11–12.
page 647 note 3 Ibid.
page 647 note 4 See my previous paper.
page 647 note 5 The Operative, 7 June 1851, No 23, p. 360.
page 647 note 6 The Operative, 28 June, 1851, No 26, pp. 409–10.
page 647 note 7 Ibid.
page 647 note 8 Ibid.
page 647 note 9 Ibid., 19 July, 1851, No 29, pp. 21–22
page 648 note 1 Ibid. In the depression year of 1849 the average weekly wages of mechanics in Huddersfield were 23s.6d. See Returns of Wages, 1830–1886 [Parliamentary Papers, 1887, LXXXIX], Pt II, p. 460.
page 648 note 2 The Operative, 2 August, 1851, No 31, p. 37.
page 648 note 3 The Operative, 19 July, 1851, No 29, pp. 21–22.
page 648 note 4 Ibid., 2 August, 1851, No 31, p. 37.
page 648 note 5 Ibid.
page 648 note 6 Ibid., 16 August, 1851, No 33. pp. 52–53.
page 648 note 7 Ibid.
page 648 note 8 Ibid., 20 September, 1851, No 38, p. 93.
page 649 note 1 The Operative, 20 September, 1851, No 38, p. 93.
page 649 note 2 Ibid.
page 649 note 3 Ibid., 18 October, 1851, No 42, p. 125.
page 649 note 4 Hunslet (Holdings) Ltd., Leeds: Kitson locomotive order book.
page 649 note 5 The Operative, 6 September, 1851, No 36, pp. 76–77.
page 649 note 6 The Operative, 6 September, 1851, No 36, pp. 76–77.
page 649 note 7 Ibid.
page 649 note 8 Leeds Intelligencer, 20 September, 1851, p. 8.
page 650 note 1 The Operative, 6 September, 1851, No 36, pp. 76–77.
page 650 note 2 Ibid.
page 650 note 3 Ibid.
page 650 note 4 The Operative, 4 October, 1851, No 40, p. 110.
page 650 note 5 Ibid.
page 650 note 6 Jefferys, op. cit., p. 35.
page 650 note 7 The Times, 19 January, 1852, p. 110.
page 650 note 8 Jefferys, op. cit.
page 650 note 9 See my previous paper.
page 650 note 10 The Operative, 3 May, 1851, No 18, p. 282.
page 650 note 11 Ibid.
page 651 note 1 Ibid.
page 651 note 2 Ibid.
page 651 note 3 Ibid.
page 651 note 4 Masters and Operatives: Report from the Select Committee on Masters and Operatives (Equitable Councils of Conciliation) [Parliamentary Papers, 1856, XIII], p. 77.
page 651 note 5 Jefferys, op. cit., quoted on p. 82.
page 651 note 6 See my previous paper.
page 652 note 1 The Operative, 31 May 1851, No 22, p. 344.
page 652 note 2 The Operative, 17 May, 1851, No 20, p. 316.
page 652 note 3 Ibid., pp. 318–19.
page 653 note 1 Ibid., p. 316.
page 653 note 2 The Operative, 17 May, 1851, No 20, p. 319.
page 653 note 3 The Times, 27 December, 1851, quoted on p. 79.
page 653 note 4 The Operative, 24 May, 1851, No 21, p. 334.
page 653 note 5 The Operative, 24 May, 1851, No 21, p. 334.
page 654 note 1 Ibid.
page 654 note 2 Ibid.
page 654 note 3 The Operative, 27 December, 1851, No 52, pp. 207–9.
page 654 note 4 Hughes, Thomas, Account of the Lock-Out of Engineers, 1851–1852 (1860)Google Scholar, cites minute book of ASE Executive to this effect, dated May 5, 1851, on pp. 8–11. The original is no longer extant.
page 654 note 5 The Times, 29 December, 1851, p. 84, contains a letter from William Newton, a member of the ASE Executive, which confirms this.
page 654 note 6 The Operative, 25 October, 1851, No 43, p. 133.
page 654 note 7 The Operative, 25 October, 1851, No 43, p. 133.
page 655 note 1 Ibid., 29 November, 1851, No 48, pp. 173–75.
page 655 note 2 Brentano, L., “The Growth of a Trades Union”, in North British Review, 10 1870, p. 92.Google Scholar
page 655 note 3 The 1852 lock-out was confined to Lancashire and London, and not all firms there were involved in the dispute, especially in London. It was a minority of large and progressive firms in Lancashire and London which locked out their men. See my previous article.
page 655 note 4 Ibid.
page 656 note 1 Neale, E. Vansittart, May I not do what I will with my own? (1852)Google Scholar, discusses the 1852 lock-out in light of prevailing opinion.
page 656 note 2 6 Geo. IV, c. 129.
page 656 note 3 Fox, Alan, “Managerial Ideology and Labour Relations”, in: British Journal of Industrial Relations, IV (1966).Google Scholar
page 656 note 4 In the event, the ASE did receive considerable support from other trade societies during the 1852 lock-out, but it was not enough.
page 656 note 5 For a wider discussion of these see my “The influence of technological change on the social attitudes and trade union policies of workers in the British engineering industry” (Ph.D. thesis, University of Leeds, 1970), pp. 254–63.Google Scholar
page 656 note 6 This circular is reproduced in The Operative, 27 December, 1851, No 52, pp.
page 656 note 7 The Times, 29 December, 1851, p. 84.[207–9.
page 656 note 8 This is the view of Hughes, op cit., pp. 8–11. The latter reproduces a letter from Henry Whitworth, the Secretary of the Central Association of Employers, which does not contradict it: see the preface, p. iv. This is also the view of Jefferys, op. cit., p. 38.
page 657 note 1 Jefferys, op. cit., p. 37.
page 657 note 2 Ibid., p. 38.
page 657 note 3 Offices of the Amalgamated Engineering Union, London: Monthly Reports […] A.S.E., 01 1852, p. 99.Google Scholar
page 657 note 4 Hughes, op. cit., p. 18.
page 657 note 5 Ibid., p. 19.
page 658 note 1 The Times, 27 December, 1851, p. 79; 17 January, 1852, see the letter from Lord Cranworth.
page 658 note 2 Neale, op. cit., cited on pp. 3–4.
page 658 note 3 See above, pp. 655–56.
page 658 note 4 Hughes, op. cit., p. 24, Appendix I.
page 658 note 5 Ibid.
page 658 note 6 Hughes, op. cit., p. 19.
page 658 note 7 See my previous paper.
page 659 note 1 Smiles, Samuel (ed.), James Nasmyth, Engineer: an Autobiography (1889), p. 299.Google Scholar
page 659 note 2 The Operative, 21 February, 1852, No 60, quoted on p. 274.
page 660 note 1 Ibid., 6 March, 1852, No 62, p. 291.
page 660 note 2 The Times, 10 April, 1852, p. 161.
page 660 note 3 The Times, 29 April, 1852, pp. 164–65.
page 660 note 4 The Operative, 1 May, 1852, No 70, p. 393.
You have
Access