¹ See McKibbin, R., The Evolution of the Labour Party (Oxford, 1974), for an influential interpretation.Google Scholar

² Howell, D., A Lost Left: Three Studies in Socialism and Nationalism (Manchester, 1986), pp. 10–13, 281–285.Google Scholar

³ Geary, D. (ed.), Labour and Socialist Movements in Europe before 1914 (Oxford, 1989), pp. 4–6, 118–131and passim.Google Scholar

⁴ Holford, J., Reshaping Labour: Organisation, Work and Politics (London, 1988)Google Scholar, and Savage, M., The Dynamics of Working-Class Politics (Cambridge, 1987), for two recent accounts.Google Scholar

⁵ Saville, J., “The Ideology of Labourism”, in Benewick, R. et al. (eds), Knowledge and Belief in Politics (London, 1973)Google Scholar, for an influential account of “labourism”, reworked in Schwarz, B. and Durham, M., “‘A Safe and Sane Labourism’: Socialism and the State 1910–24”, in Langan, M. and Schwarz, B. (eds), Crises in the British State 1880–1930 (London, 1985), pp. 126–150.Google Scholar

⁶ Gallacher, W., Revolt on the Clyde (London, 1936)Google Scholar, reprinted in 1978, and Last Memoirs (London, 1966).Google Scholar More recent Marxist accounts include Kendall, W., The Revolutionary Movement in Britain, 1900–1921 (London, 1969)Google Scholar, and Challinor, R., The Origins of British Bolshevism (London, 1977).Google Scholar

⁷ Pelling, H., The Origins of the Labour Party, 1880–1900 (Oxford, 1965), p. 218Google Scholar and passim; McKibbin, R., “Why was There no Marxism in Great Britain?”, English Historical Review, XCIX (1984), pp. 295–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar, for liberal accounts. See Savage, , The Dynamics of Working-Class PoliticsGoogle Scholar, and Smith, J., “Labour Tradition in Glasgow and Liverpool”, History Workshop Journal, 17 (1984), pp. 32–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar, for changing perspective of Marxist scholars.

⁸ Hinton, J., The First Shop Stewards' Movement (London, 1973), pp. 29–41, 115–129, 143–152 and passim.Google Scholar

⁹ McLean, I., The Legend of Red Clydeside (Edinburgh, 1983), pp. 154–173.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Ibid., pp. 81–85 and passim.

¹¹ Reid, A., “Dilution, Trade Unionism and the State”, in Tolliday, S. and Zeitlin, J. (eds), Shop Floor Bargaining and the State (Cambridge, 1985), pp. 46–74Google Scholar, and “Glasgow Socialism”, Social History, XII (1986), pp. 89–97Google Scholar, and Rubin, G., War, Law and Labour (Oxford, 1987).Google Scholar

¹² Reid, , “Dilution, Trade Unionism and the State”, pp. 49–51.Google Scholar

¹³ Ibid., pp. 65–67 and passim.

¹⁴ Ibid., p. 65 for argument that the Government was pro-labour from the start.

¹⁵ Rubin, , War, Law and Labour, pp. 14–19, 140, 204–209Google Scholar; see Melling, J., “The Servile Revisited”, Scottish Labour History Society Journal (1989), for a response to Rubin.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Ministry of Munitions, Clyde Munition Workers. Report of Lord Balfour of Burleigh and Lyden Macassey (1915) Cd. 8136Google Scholar, paragraph 2 [hereafter, “Balfour-Macassey Report”].

¹⁷ Ministry of Munitions [MUN] records, Public Record Office, Clyde Munition Workers. Minutes of Evidence of Official Enquiry, MUN 5 80/340/3, pp. 292, 432–439ff.Google Scholar [hereafter, “Balfour-Macassey Enquiry Minutes”].

¹⁸ Ibid., pp. 427–430, for Duthie of United Machine Workers at the Albion plant.

¹⁹ Ibid., p. 9, William Sharp of the Boilermakers' Society.

²⁰ Ibid., pp. 510–513, for Lawson and Lorimer's comments.

²¹ Melling, J., “‘Non-Commissioned Officers’: British Employers and Their Supervisory Workers, 1880–1920”, Social History, V (1980)Google Scholar; McClelland, K. and Reid, A., “Shipbuilding workers”Google Scholar, in Harrison, R. and Zeitlin, J. (eds), Divisions of Labour.Google Scholar

²² This view can be contrasted with that of Zeitlin, J., “Engineering workers”, in Gospel, H. and Littler, C. (eds), Management Strategies (Heinemann, 1982).Google Scholar

²³ Melling, , “Non-Commissioned Officers”.Google Scholar

²⁴ Party, Labour, Report of the Special Committee appointed to inquire into the […] Deportations of […] Workmen employed in Munitions Factories in the Clyde District (London, 10 1917), p. 12Google Scholar (hereafter, Labour Party Report).

²⁵ Weekes, B., “Primitive Democracy …”, (Warwick, 1980)Google Scholar, manuscript draft for a general discussion on internal democracy in the ASE.

²⁶ Larke, W.J., “Notes on Controlled Establishments”, 25.8.1917, in MUN 5 353/360/4, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

²⁷ Melling, J., Rent Strikes (Edinburgh, 1983)Google Scholar for a discussion of the prosecution of “munitions workers” from both shipyards and engine shops in the rents struggle of 1915.

²⁸ Larke, , “Notes on Controlled Establishments”, MUN 5 353/360/4.Google Scholar

²⁹ Balfour-Macassey Enquiry Minutes, pp. 97–107 and passim.Google Scholar

³⁰ Ibid., pp. 128–132, 139.

³¹ Ibid., pp. 18–24, 41–46, 50, for Elderslie Dock case.

³² Balfour-Macassey Report, p. 4 paragraph 8 for comment on foremen.Google Scholar

³³ Balfour-Macassey Enquiry Minutes, p. 291.Google Scholar

³⁴ The Glasgow Labour paper, Forward, which was to be suppressed in early 1916 for its seditious reporting, praised the local union officials as well as “the rank and file” and the Govan Trades Council (6–11–1915). It revealed that one of the gaoled shipwrights was an active member of the ILP and a Superintendant of the Socialist Sunday School. Such extracts were collected by the Ministry in MUN 5 70/324/18.

³⁵ Lynden Macassey Memorandum, “Munitions of War: Certain causes of Unrest among Munition Workers on Clyde and Tyne-side…”, 18–12–1915, p. 3Google Scholar, in the “Materials supplied to Mr Lloyd George before his visit to the Clyde and Tyne”, MUN 5 73/324/15/2. A manuscript version exists in MUN 5/72/324/15/1; Labour Party Report, p. 13.Google Scholar

³⁶ Kirkwood, D., My Life of Revolt (London, 1935), pp. 96–97, 107–110Google Scholar for Kirkwood's colourful account, including his denunciation of the Act for “branding” Beardmore workers with a capital B.

³⁷ Melling, , Rent Strikes, for details.Google Scholar

³⁸ Hinton, , First Shop Steward's Movement, pp. 149–151Google Scholar for Kirkwood; cf. Kirkwood, , My Life of Revolt, pp. 60–63Google Scholar for his self portrait as a journeyman.

³⁹ Paterson, J., Memorandum on the progress of dilution, 18–12–1915, MUN 5 73/324/15/2, pp. 2–3Google Scholar for discussion of Langs and the view of Rowan Thomson; Weir, W., “Criticism of the methods of Dilution: Notes for Mr. Lloyd George”, 12 1915Google Scholar, MUN 5 73/324/15/4, gives Weir's forceful views on Langs and other matters.

⁴⁰ Paterson Memorandum, pp. 5–8.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Ibid., pp. 9–10 for Paterson and North West Employers' Association; Weir in his “Criticism” at MUN 5 73/324/15/4, pp. 5, 10Google Scholar, suggested that Government consultation with labour was at the root of the unrest and the Munitions Act should be abolished with direct rule of industry by the state.

⁴² Minutes of the proceedings of A.S.E. deputation to the Prime Minister and MrGeorge, Lloyd, 31–12–1915, Mun 5, 70/324/3, pp. 4, 11, and passim.Google Scholar

⁴³ Ibid., pp. 10–13.

⁴⁴ Macassey, L., “Memorandum on the Progress of the [Dilution] Commission”, 5–2–1916, pp. 9–11Google Scholar, MUN 5 73/324/15/6; in his Labour Policy – False and True Thornton Butterworth (1922), pp. 78–80Google Scholar, Macassey argued that the Clyde resistance to dilution was calculated to uphold the production of howitzers and barges. Yards and workshops producing these were brought out by the SLP activists.

⁴⁵ “Minutes of a Conference on Dilution between the Ministry and the A.S.E.”, 24–2–1916, MUN 5 70/324/6, pp. 4–7.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Ibid., p. 10, for Button.

⁴⁷ Gallacher, , Revolt on the Clyde, pp. 106–107Google Scholar; Hinton, , First Shop Steward's Movement, pp. 149–159.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Labour Party Report, p. 12.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Ibid., pp. 12–13. The speaker was a CWC member from the British Diesel plant in Springburn.

⁵⁰ Ibid., p. 16.

⁵¹ Ibid., “Prepare for Action”, The Worker, 8–1–1916. Gallacher opened the first edition with a critical attack on Kirkwood.

⁵² Labour Party Report, Appendix 4, p. 63Google Scholar for Barr and Stroud scheme; Gallacher, , Revolt on the Clyde, pp. 113–121Google Scholar for his acknowledgement of progress on dilution.

⁵³ The scheme was discussed in detail at the February 1916 conference at the Ministry, MUN 5 70/324/6, pp. 21–22Google Scholar; Kirkwoord, , My Life of RevoltGoogle Scholar, for his account of Wheatley's hand in the scheme.

⁵⁴ Labour Party Report, pp. 21–22.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Ibid., Beardmore quoted p. 24.

⁵⁶ Ibid., pp. 33–34, 37–38.

⁵⁷ Ibid., p. 42.

⁵⁸ Reid, , “Dilution, Trade Unionism and the State”, p. 65, 69–70.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Macassey, L., “Dilution of Labour in the Clyde District”Google Scholar, 29–2–1916, MUN 5 73/324/15/9.

⁶⁰ Macassey, L., “Report on the present serious unorganised condition of shipyard labour”, 14–12–1916, p. 12Google Scholar, MUN 5 57/320/36. Once again Macassey stressed his own invaluable contributions to progress.

⁶¹ Macassey, , “Dilution of Labour”Google Scholar, MUN 5 73/324/15/9, gives details of “Schemes accepted and proposed…” as appendices.

⁶² Macassey, , “Report on the condition of shipyard labour”, MUN 5 57/320/36, pp. 11–12.Google Scholar

⁶³ Ibid., pp. 13–14.

⁶⁴ Ibid., p. 9; cf. Reid, , “Dilution, Trade Unionism and the State”Google Scholar, for an emphasis on this factor.

⁶⁵ Macassey, , “Report on the condition of shipyard labour”, p. 16Google Scholar, where he advocates a “clearly defined and forcibly applied Government policy”.

⁶⁶ “Notes for Ministry on introduction of Munitions Amendment Bill to House of Lords”, Mun 5 20/221.1/40, identified the main object of the Bill to “extend and amend the Munitions of War Act without affecting its main principles”. Some changes in the form of the leaving certificate was conceded but Section 7 of the Act was defended as “a very necessary provision”. Most of advice concerned the extension of the Act to the “Construction of merchant ships” where specified as essential war materials.

⁶⁷ “Conference proceedings between the Ministry of Munitions and the Engineering and Shipbuilding Industries”, 13–8–1917, pp. 5–7, 15–21Google Scholar, MUN 5 71/324/30, for certificates and conscription; cf. Reid, , “Dilution, Trade Unionism and the State”, p. 65Google Scholar, for suggestion that the 1916 Amendment Act had “removed all the causes of grievance which Clyde workers and union officials had raised over Section 7 […]”.

⁶⁸ “Conference proceedings”, pp. 27–28Google Scholar, Boilermakers' Society.

⁶⁹ Ibid., pp. 40–43, 47–50. The A.S.E. was again concerned with the recognition of its premier status.

⁷⁰ Balfour-Macassey Enquiry Minutes, p. 558.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Ibid., pp. 510–513 and passim.

⁷² Reid, , “Dilution, Trade Unionism and the State”, pp. 65–70Google Scholar; Rubin, , War, Law and Labour, pp. 204–209Google Scholar for a “corporatist” variation of the argument.

⁷³ Lowe, R., Adjusting to Democracy: The role of the Ministry of Labour in British Politics, 1916–1939 (Oxford, 1986), pp. 14–75Google Scholar and passim provides an excellent counter point to Middlemass, K., Politics in Industrial Society (London, 1979).Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Smith, J., “Labour Tradition in Glasgow and Liverpool”Google Scholar, and her doctoral thesis, “Commonsense Thought and Working Class Consciousness: Some Aspects of the Glasgow and Liverpool Labour Movements in the Early Years of the Twentieth Century” (Edinburgh, 1980), provides a corrective.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Melling, J., “Work, Culture and Politics on Red Clydeside: the ILP during the First World War”, in McKinlay, A. and Morris, R. (eds), The ILP in Scottish Politics (Manchester, 1990).Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Labour Party Archives, [National] Executive Committee Minutes, 14–4–1915 – 24–6–1915, 30–7–1915 – 16–9–1915 [hereafter, EC Mins].

⁷⁷ Ibid., 17–3–1916 – 19–10–1916; also the ILP Council's circular of 18–12–1917 at 8–10–1918.

⁷⁸ Ibid., 19–10–1916–2–11–1916; in spring 1916 the Govan L.R.C, had selected William Sharp as their candidate for a proposed bye-election contest, 29–3–1916 – 19–4–1916, 21–8–1916. The withdrawal of Sharp later in the war suggests that his conversion to Labour was early and of a particular quality, not the result of mature wartime experience. Ibid., 6–1–1916 – 12–1–1916, 7–12–1916 – 18–4–1917; “Munitions of War Amendment Bill: Notes on Clauses”, MUN 5 20/221.1/40, for comments of civil servants Llewellyn Smith, Beveridge, Wolff and Miles on the proposals of Labour.

⁷⁹ Ibid., 9–12–1915; 1–1918, 9–5–1918, 27–8–1918. S.A.C. Minutes of 4–12–1917 at EC Mins, 13–12–1917.

⁸⁰ Ibid., 31–8–1918.

⁸¹ Ibid., 31–7–1918, for discussions at the Policy and Programme Committee of the Party; 29–6–1916, for agreement to affiliate the British Socialist Party to the Labour Party.

⁸² Labour Party Report, pp. 5, 49.Google Scholar

⁸³ McKibbin, , The Evolution of the Labour PartyGoogle Scholar; Hutchison, I.G.C., A Political History of Scotland, 1832–1924 (Edinburgh, 1986), pp. 256–265Google Scholar and passim gives a detailed background; A. McKinlay's essay in McKinlay, and Morris, (eds), The ILP in Scottish PoliticsGoogle Scholar, for an excellent account.

⁸⁴ See note 5 on page 4 for references.

⁸⁵ Hinton, , First Shop Stewards' MovementGoogle Scholar, and Hinton, J. and Hyman, R., Trade Unions and Revolution: the Industrial Politics of the Early British Communist Party (London, 1975).Google Scholar

⁸⁶ McLean, , The Legend of Red Clydeside, pp. 161–183Google Scholar; Reid, , “Dilution, Trade Unionism and the State”, pp. 69–70.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ Muir, J. W., The Worker 1Google Scholar, 8–1–1916, gives the radicals' view.

⁸⁸ “Conference of the engineering and shipbuilding industries”, 13–8–1917, MUN 5 71/324/30, p. 21.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Ibid., p. 47.

⁹⁰ EC Mins, 2–11–1916.