HO S36B I6W; Ci^lulliCl) DulilHl 111.- ^l^.rv ..) 111.- IJfr.ll 1 '.).'.; 00,' ■)()'. .Ill I THE LIBRARY OF THE NEW YORK STATE SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS AT CORNELL UNIVERSITY Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924002405300 DISTURBED DUBLIN DISTURBED DUBLIN THE STORY OF THE GREAT STRIKE OF 1913-14 WITH A DESCRIPTION OF THE INDUSTRIES OF THE IRISH CAPITAL BY ARNOLD WRIGHT LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON FOURTH AVENUE & 30th STREET, NEW YORK BOMBAY. CALCUTTA, AND MADRAS 1914 All rights rtservei PREFACE The great labour upheaval in Dublin in the latter half of last year was marked by such extraordinary features, and excited so large a share of public attention during the time that the struggle continued, that no apology will probably be deemed to be necessary for the publication of this volume. The author's aim has been to write a succinct and impartial history of the Larkinite movement in Dublin, from the period of its inception in 1908 until the resumption of the normal industrial life of the city early in the present year, in circumstances which marked the ignominious defeat of the attempt to establish a peculiarly pernicious form of Sjmdicalism on Irish soil. During a visit of several weeks' duration paid to Dublin in the Spring, the author had the opportunity of meeting many of those who had taken an active part in the conflict, and their views freely and courteously given were a valuable aid to a comprehension of the true character of the influences , which brought about this memorable episode in Ireland's industrial history. But to a large extent in the accompanying pages Larkinism has been allowed to speak for itself, and it is hoped that the numerous elegant extracts culled from the press organ of the movement, together with the equally illumi- nating quotations from the speeches of Mr. Larkin and his chief lieutenants, will be held to justify the view taken as to the essentially revolutionary and anarchical aims of the Irish Transport Workers' Union. vi PREFACE In order to give completeness to the work and to allow of the labour position in Dublin being viewed in true perspective, the author has prefaced the narrative of the actual occurrences of the strike period with a sketch of the history of Dublin industries and an account of the modern industrial enterprises of the City. Attention has also been given to the slum problem, which it is widely considered was an important factor in assisting the development of the Larkinite movement. Generally speaking, the aim has been to furnish a complete picture of Dublin industrial life, with special reference to the circumstances of the disturbances of last year. The author's special acknowledgments are due to Mr. Terence O'Hanlon, who rendered him much appreciated assistance in collecting and collating the great mass of published matter relating to the strike. A. W. London, September, 1914. CONTENTS CHAPTER I INDUSTRIES OF THE PAST Introductory — ^The Dublin Strike — ^Aspects of Dublin — ^The City as an Industrial Centre — Beginnin p fs nf Ind iiRtria.^ Ti;qlaprl — Restrictions imposed on the Woollen Industry — Rise of the Silk Trade — Swift on the Wretched Condition of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century — ^The Linen Industry established — Disastrous Effect of Introduction of Machinery on Dublin Industries — Pernicious Influence of Labour Organisations on Trade— Characteristics of the Working Population of Dublin 1-14 CHAPTER II INDUSTRIES OF THE PRESENT The Industrial Dublin of To-day — The Brewing Interest — Guinness's Establishment — Distilleries — ^Manufacture of Non- alcoholic Beverages — ^The Poplin Industry — Paterson's Match Factory — Spence's Engineering Works— Shipbuilding Enterprise — Jacob's Biscuit Factory — Shipping Concerns — Bristol and Irish Steam Packet Company — The City of Dublin Steam Packet Company — The London and North Western Railway Company's and other Services — Importance of the Dublin Shipping Trade 15-27 CHAPTER III CONDITIONS OF LIFE AND LABOUR IN DUBLIN Tenement Houses and Social Degradation — Government Housing Inquiry — Depressing Facts — ^Appalling Character of the Housing Problem — Individual Testimony — Overcrowding and Unemployment closely related Factors — Great Pre- dominance of Untrained Labour — Causes of the Phenomenon — ^Labour Responsible in part for the Economic Deteriora- tion of Dublin — Trade Exclusiveness — ^Mr. John Good's Striking Testimony — Low Scale of Wages Current — ^Physical Deterioration reduces the Value of Labour — Good Qualities of the Dublin Slum-Dwellers — ^The Street Gamin a Merry Urchin — ^Wanted : a Training Ship in the Liffey . 28-41 viii CONTENTS CHAPTER IV THE RISE OF LARKINISM Jhc Diihlin Slums a Fertjlfi Ground f nr thp Pro Principles of Revolutionary Industri alism — ^Mr. James Larkm appears on the Scene — His Birtii and Antecedents — Tb£_B elfast and Dublin Strikes in iqo8 — Mr. Larkin's Quarrel with the Dockers' Union — Founding of the Irish Transport Workers' Union — ^Mr. Larldn tried and sen- tenced — ^He is released by Order of Lord Aberdeen before the Expiration of his Sentence — ^Mr. Larkin's Views in regard to his Prosecution — Growth in Power of the Irish Transport Workers' Union — ^Mr. Larkin's Extraordinary Personal Influence — Distincti vely Irish Charact er of the Larkinite Movement '^ ; : ~. '. '. • 42-51 CHAPTER V THE IGNOBLE ART OF INTIMIDATI ON The Irish Worker — Its Iniquitous Character — Patriotism called in Aid of the Industri al Movement — Elegant Extracts- Incitement to Mtirder — ^Malignant Attacks on the Police and on Employers — Defence of thfi Policy of the ^"uh W""'"' — Larkinite Municipal Campaign — Scurrilous Attacks on Political Opponents ...... 52-63 CHAPTER VI A MODEL FACTORY Attack on Jacob's Biscuit Factory — Description of the Establish- ment—Contented Workers — ^The Factory's Roof Garden — Catering for the Workers — ^Arrangements for the Physical Welfare of Employees — ^A Disgraceful Campaign of Calumny 64-68 CHAPTER VII MR. larkin's b&te noire Attacks on Mr. Wm. Martin Murphy — The Dublin United Tram- way Company — ^Mr. Murphy depicted as a Capitalistic Ogre — ^The Real Man — Mr. Murphy's Association with the Irish Exhibition of 1907 — King Edward and Mr. Murphy — Personal Description of Mr. Murphy .... 69-79 CHAPTER VIII • TO HELL WITH CONTRACTS ! ' Repudiation of Agreements a Characteristic Feature of Larkinism — The Settlement of July 1908 — Mr. Larkin's Reasons for repudiating the Agreement — Antagonism between Mr. Larkin and the National Dock Labourers' Union — Conditions CONTENTS ix PAGB of Dublin Dock Labour favourable to Larkinite Propaganda — Labour Unrest in 1911 — -F ormation of DnbUn Em ployers' Federation — Vio lent Attack in the' Jnsh Worker ti-pon Em- ployers — I ' he battlemen t 1 JPly 1 9 1 1 — Lord Aber deen and Mr. Larkin — Conciliation Board Scheme ignored by the Irish Transport Workers' Union , . . . . 80-90 CHAPTER IX SYNDICALISM IN EXCELSIS Railway Strike — ^First Application of the Doctrine of ' Tainted Goods ' — Collapse of the Strike — ' We the People ' of Liberty Hall — ^The National Insurance Act a Larkinite Asset — Mr. Larkin's Personal Qualities — Harassed Employers — Dead Set on Messrs. Jacob — Growing Strength of the Irish Tran s- port Workers' Union ...... gi-ioo CHAPTER X THE GOSPEL OF REPUDIATION Larkinite Attack on the City of Dublin Steam Packet Company — Irish Worker's Views of the Binding Force of Agreements — Mr. Larkin attacks Lord Aberdeen — His so-called Disclosures Denied — Settlements effected with Shipping Companies — Breach of Agreement with the Clyde Shipping Company — Discontent fomented in the Building and Engineering Trades CHAPTER XI METHODS OF THE YAHOO Mr. W. M. Murphy begins to move — Scurrilous Attacks on Mr. Murphy in the Irish Worker — Purge of Larkinites from the Independent Dispatch Department and the Tramway Com- pany's Traffic Staff — The Larkinite Counter Movement — — Messrs. Eason & Son Attacked — ' Tainted Goods ' again — Disorganisatipn of the Shipping Industry — ^Menaces of the Irish Worker — The True Character of Larkinism . 112-121 CHAPTER XII THE STRIKE THAT FAILED The DubUn Season — Horse Show Week selected for a Tramway Strike — ^Mr. Larkin's Miscalculation — Failure of his Coup — Inflammatory Oratory in Beresford Place — ^Arrest of Mr. Larkin and his Four Principal Associates — ^Police Court Proceedings — ^The Prosecution a Mistake — Incendiary Speeches — PoUce charge the Mob — ^A Frankly Anarchical Crusade 122-130 X CONTENTS CHAPTER XIII AN ORGY OF ANARCHY PACE Description of Sackville Street — ^The Larkinites determine to hold a Meeting in the Thoroughfare — Rioting in the Ring- send District — Attack on the Police in Beresford Square — Disturbance near the Abbey Theatre — Savagery of the Mob — Terrible List of Casualties — SackviUe Street on Sunday, August 30 — Melodramatic Appearance of Mr. Larkin on the Balcony of the Imperial Hotel — His Arrest — Outbreak of Rioting — Terrible Baton Charges by the PoUce — ^Attack on the Inchicore Tramways — ^The military called out . 131-143 CHAPTER XIV THE AFTERMATH OF THE RIOTS Sackville Street Riots cause a Sensation in England — Mr. Handel Booth, M.P., intervenes — Censure of the PoUce — ^Trade Union Congress send a Deputation to Dublin — Fierce Rioting at Redmond's Hill — Funeral of a Victim of the Riots of Sunday, August 30 — Collapse of Tenement Houses in Church Street—Calamity used as an Object Lesson by the Labour Representatives — Employers not Responsible for Tenement House Evil 144-152 CHAPTER XV ORGANISED REVOLT AGAINST LARKINISM The Industrial Struggle Widened — Meeting of Members of the Employers' Federation to concert Measures to deal with Larkinism — Further Meeting of Employers — Coal Merchants* Manifesto locking out Members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union — Messrs. Jacob pubUcly announce their Intention to close their Works — Closing of the Tramway Works at Inchicore — Lord Mayor's Unsuccessful Interven- tion — Great Gathering of Dublin Employers — Decision taken not to employ Members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union — Mr. Keir Hardie's Opinion of Mr. Larkin — ^Distorted Views in England as to the Dispute — Daily Mail and Mr. Murphy — Conference between the Employers' Representa- tives and the Labour Delegates at the Shelbourne Hotel — Breakdown of the Conference — Labour Delegates' Views on the Situation — Baseless Allegations of Bad Faith brought against the Employers ...... 153-167 CHAPTER XVI THE CONFLICT PROCEEDS A Fight to a Finish — Release of Mr. Larkin — ^Action of Authori- ties criticised— Unsympathetic Attitude of English Tr^H a Unionists towards Larkinism — Denunciation of Sympathefic 'str ike b y the N aii o u al Uli ion of Railwaymen — Mr. Larkin at Manchester — His ' Divine Mission ' — Renewed Rioting — Result of Official Inquiry into the Conduct of the Police — Police Action Vindicated ..... 168-178 CONTENTS xi CHAPTER XVII THE GOVERNMENT INTERVENES FAas Breakd own of the Sympathetic Strike Movement inEngland^ '" ke'pBR^f'l^aHe (Jnion f)elegates"on the X)tibUn Situation-^ Misrepresentations of the Delegates — English Trade Union- ists vote ^£5000 for Food for the Dublin Strikers — British Employers support their Dublin Confr6res-:;:£Qyeinmeat ^pp^nt=a=CQiamissiQa»-with Sir George Askwith as President, to visit Dubhn — Sir George Askwith' s Reputation as a Conciliator — Violent Speeches by Larkinite Leaders — Increase of Distress in Dublin — First Food Ship for the Strikers arrives in Dublin from England — ^Mr. Larkin publicly repudiates the Binding Character of Agreements 179-189 CHAPTER XVIII THE GOVERNMENT INQUIRY (yublin gentleman lamented to the writer that there was no training ship in the Liffey, of the type of thos^ which are to be found in the Thames and elsewhere, for the benefit of homeless and friendless lads. The suggestion is one which appears to be well deserving of attention. A great Irishman, who is also a famous naval commander, once publicly expressed a preference for ' scally wags ' as material from which to fashion the best type of handy- man. It was a mere piece of rhetorical extravagance, but there is a great truth underlying it. The boy who has been turned loose into'the streets from earliest infancy is quick and resourceful, and courageous to boot. He has probably a precocious knowledge of evil, but his finer qualities are usually intact, to be brought out by sympathetic treatment combined with discipline. The Dublin street boys certainly are of the type who would shape well in a training ship. A wealthy philan- thropist could hardly make better use of his money at the present juncture than in providing the wherewithal to place a hulk in the river for the equipment for life of some of the unfortunate waifs and strays whose forlorn CONDITIONS OF LIFE AND LABOUR 41 appearance excites the pity of every visitor to the Irish capital. When all has been done that can be done to alleviate the social ills of Dublin, there will remain difficulties of a substantial kind to be faced if the area of employment cannot be enlarged. This phase of the subject will have to be touched upon later ; and it is only necessary to say here that the crying need of the city is, not so much more wages as more work. The desideratum can be supplied, but not if capital is harassed and attacked and the foundations of credit are undermined by the propagation of the lawless doctrines of predatory Socialism. CHAPTER IV THE RISE OF LARKINISM The Dublin Slums a Fertile Ground for the Propagation of the Principles of Revolutionary Industrialism — Mr. James Larkin appears on the Scene — ^His Birth and Antecedents — The Belfast and Dublin Strikes in 1908 — ^Mr. Larkin's Quarrel with the Dockers' Union — Founding of the Irish Transport Workers' Union — ^Mr. Larkin tried and sentenced — He is released by Order of Lord Aberdeen before the Expiration of his Sentence — Mr. Larkin's Views in regard to his Prosecution — Growth in Power of the Irish Transport Workers' Union — Mr. Larkin's Extraordinary Personal Influence- Distinctively Irish Character of the LaxMnite Movement. It is a commonplace of sociology that discontent finds its sturdiest growth amongst people living under conditions of moral uncleanness and economic instability. Human nature, being what it is, revolts against the tyranny of circimistances which condemns it to existence in the infernos of our modem civilisation. The feeling may lie dormant for a long time, but it is always there to be called into activity by demagogic influence. Dublin, as will have been gathered from the facts given in the preceding chapters, affords peculiarly fertile ground for the propagation of the principles of revolutionary industrialism. With little to gain and nothing to lose, with stunted understandings wedded to impressionable natures, the tens of thousands of unfortunates who go to make up the bulk of the working population of the Irish capital are easy prey to the glib orator of the street corner who poses in the familiar r61e of the Friend of Humanity. They are caught up readily by his windy THE RISE OF LARKINISM 43 appeals and carried away by his specious arguments, while their fancies are tickled by the examples of capitalist cruelty and greed which are never wanting to paint the moral and adorn his tale. To most of the slum denizens the intrusion into their lives of a labour movement of the more strenuous kind — ^with its marchings and its counter- marchings, its shouting and cheering, and its periodic thrills — ^is a welcome change from the drab monotony of ordinary existence in which the normal excitement is provided by a wedding or a funeral or a drunken brawl on Saturday night. Therefore, when the great wave of industrial unrest swept over Great Britain in the period following the advent of the Liberal Government to power in 1906, it was inevitable that, sooner or later, Dublin should be drawn into the vortex. The people simply needed a leader. The occasion speedily made one of a remarkable kind in the person of Mr. James — or as he prefers to be called — Jim Larkin. Who is Mr. Larkin ? Many people are constrained to ask much in the spirit that prompted the late Lord Coleridge's query about a well-known burlesque actress. With a more genuine desire for information we may repeat the inquiry. Who is he ? and whence does he come ? It is not easy to give an answer off-hand — a full answer, at all events. One of his numerous Trade Unionist critics denies to him the right to call himself an Irishman. He describes him as ' a foreign adventurer from the slum recesses of probably some clog-wearing town,' and he asserts that his English origin id ' unerringly indicated by his frequent misuse of the aspirate.' Mr. Larkin himself has always denied the soft impeachment of a Saxon origin. He claims to be an Irishman bred and born, and there is no sound reason to doubt the accuracy of his statement. That, however, his early life was largely spent out of Ireland is very probable. In one of his public utterances he made reference to a voyage he once made to South America ; and from his 44 DISTURBED DLfBLIN familiarity with shipping it may be assmned that he had a connection of a more or less permanent kind with the shipping industry; for some years, at all events, he was in the employ of a large Liverpool shipping firm. According to a statement made by his comisel in the criminal proceedings against him, to which reference will shortly be made, he held a good position in this under- taking, and severed it in or about 1908 by going out on strike with other employees of the firm, ' thus,' his counsel said, ' making a sacrifice for the opinions he held.' Mr. Larkin, after shaking the dust of the shipowners' office from his feet, became directly connected with the labour movement. He first came into public view in 1907 or thereabouts, when he was acting in the capacity of organiser at Liverpool and Glasgow, and elsewhere, to the National Union of Dock Labourers. Part of his duties appears to have been to keep an eye on the Irish ports in order to extend the ramifications of the union. He does not seem to have been a brilliant success, judged at all events from the standpoint of his colleagues. Mr. James Sexton, who was the general secretary of the Dockers' Union at the time, in a letter dated July 19, 1909, to the Irish Trades Congress, asserted that there was no port he (Mr. Larkin) had been in prior to the previous May, ' which would not bear testimony to his incapacity to conduct matters on a business footing.' Further on in this communication Mr. Sexton complained bitterly of the action of Mr. Larkin and a colleague in calling men out on strike at Newry and Dundalk and every port they could influence, without the slightest consultation with the head quarters in Liverpool, the only place where the money of the union existed to any extent. ' The inference,' he went on, ' is that those who pay the piper have, in fact, no right to call part of the tune, never mind the whole of it ; and that Tom, Dick, or Harry in Ireland may call a strike on his own and ask us to supply the money.' THE RISE OF LARKINISM 45 These bitter comments were passed in connection with the conduct of the strike which devastated Belfast trade in 1908. Engineered by Mr. Larkin and a number of other fighting spirits, the movement ran on for weeks, and did an immense amount of mischief. The affair cost the workers' organisations £8000, of which £5000 came out of the coffers of the Dockers' Union. The disburse- ment of these funds was at first entrusted to the hands of a committee, but, under the masterful influence of Mr. Larkin, all power was speedily vested in himself and those whom he chose to honour with his favour. Money was spent so lavishly that Mr. Sexton crossed to Belfast from Liverpool and took over charge of the organisation. Subsequently Mr. Larkin's conduct was made the subject of complaint at the Dockers' Congress, and he narrowly escaped censure for his flagrant dis- obedience of the orders of the executive. The disfavour of the great, the wise, and the eminent of the dockers' organisation, however, had little effect on him ; we soon hear of him again at variance with the superior power in the union. On this occasion Dublin was the scene of the strife. Largely through Mr. Larkin's instrumentality a strike broke out amongst the shipping and riverside interests in the earlier half of 1908, and continued a violent course until a settlement was finally reached on July 23, in circumstances to be related in a subsequent portion of the narrative. Mr. Larkin played here the same irresponsible, reckless part that had dis- tinguished him in the northern capital. He brought the men out on his own initiative, and it was only through the wise discretion of Mr. Sexton in assenting to terms of peace that the men's cause was saved from disaster. This fresh defiance of authority, as represented by the body which had the power of the purse in Liverpool, brought matters to a crisis. An edict, in the form of a resolution, was issued by the Dockers' Executive impera- tively prohibiting any organiser from entering into any 46 DISTURBED DUBLIN dispute ' which involved, or was likely to involve, the whole of the union funds.' Mr. Larkin snapped his fingers at the committee. He went to Cork, fished in troubled waters there, with the result that the union funds became very decidedly implicated in the dispute that inevitably arose.^ The Dockers' Executive, incensed at the defiance, gave instructions to the secretary to suspend him in the event of further recalcitrance. Mr. Larkin showed the same contempt for this practical ultimatum that he had done for the earlier efforts of the executive to control him. In consequence he was, on December 7, 1908, suspended from office, and further financial support from the imion was withheld from him. A virtual state of war now arose between the Dockers' Union and their masterful servant. When in the early days of 1909 Mr. Sexton went over to Belfast to assume control of the union's affairs, his authority was openly flouted, and a meeting he attempted to hold was broken up by a Larkinite faction who had obtained adnnission to it. After this a sub-committee of the Dockers' Union met and ratified the decree of suspension. The date of that meeting, January 20, 1909, may be said to mark the final severance of Mr. Larkin's connection with the Dockers' Union. Months before this crisis was reached in the affairs of the Dockers' Union, Mr. Larkin had been laying his plans for the establishment of a distinctively Irish organ- isation. It was probably the knowledge of this fact that spurred the executive of that body on to the attempt to bring their irresponsible representative under effective control. They were quite willing, as Mr. Sexton made clear in Belfast at the time of Mr. Larkin's dismissal, that he should form an Irish branch of the organisation ; but they did not see the force of permitting their funds and their machinery to be used to bring into life a body 1 A settlement was reached on December 8, 1908, as the result of a conference between the parties to the dispute. THE RISE OF LARKINISM 47 which would have an independent existence and be directly under the thumb of their whilom servant. They, in fact, regarded his conduct as treacherous ; and it was not long before they gave striking proof of their feeling that the union had been badly treated by instituting criminal proceedings against Mr Larkin for the mis- appropriation of their funds. The trial came on at Dublin in June 1910, and, after an exhaustive investigation, Mr. Larkin was found guilty and sentenced to twelve months ' imprisonment. The presiding judge, Mr. Justice Boyd, in passing sentence said : 'You have been found guilty by the jury on evidence which has been fully considered. I don't mean to pass a heavy sentence, but you forgot your duty to the imion which employed you, and you did acts which you should not have done. I think it was a very serious matter for the poor men, who considered that they joined a society of a recognised high standard both for money and otherwise, to conduct their affairs properly. I think it a very serious matter that you should have misapplied these monies to matters that you were personally con- cerned in rather than in the vmion which employed you.' Subsequently a motion for a new trial was made in the King's Bench on Mr. Larkin's behalf, but the application was refused after a three days' hearing of the arguments against and for the conviction. Mr. Justice Gibson, who pronounced the decision of the Court, emphasised the serious character of the offence which had been proved against Mr. Larkin. ' The charge made by the Crown,' he said, ' was that the defendant fraudulently cheated the dock labourers of their subscriptions. Every penny which was collected from the poor dockers in Cork was trust funds, and it would be a shockingly dishonest thing to collect that money as if it was for the National Union, and then send it on to another body. One circumstance was that no records or books had been kept. The Crown were entitled to say that Larkin was engaged in a criminal 48 DISTURBED DUBLIN fraud. The money had been traced to Larkin's pocket, and it lay upon him to account for it. No doubt a balance sheet had been produced ; but what was it pre- pared from, when there were no books or vouchers ? Was that balance sheet a sham to conceal from these humble men in Cork that their money had been mis- appropriated ? The defendant had not made out a case to show that the conviction ought not to stand.' The legal force of the conviction was thus doubly established ; but there were undoubtedly circumstances in the case which removed it from the ordinary run of frauds perpetrated for sordid ends. Many who are by no means sympathisers with Mr. Larkin or his methods consider that he was the victim of circumstances, some of which reflected little credit upon his discretion or even his scrupulousness, but which did not partake of the character of direct moral culpability. Lord Aber- deen, the Viceroy, apparently was of this view, for, when Mr. Larkin had served a little more than three months of his sentence, he caused him to be released. Mr. Larkin himself has always strenuously protested that he was more sinned against than sinning. The most recent, and perhaps most emphatic, disclaimer of guilty conduct was made on April 21, 1914, at what is popularly known in Dublin as the Pembroke Election Inquiry, when he was called to give evidence as to a compact said to exist between the Nationalists and the Larkinites relative to the support of candidates for election to the district council of Pembroke, an administrative area outside the limits of the city of Dublin. Mr. Larkin was cross- examined by the counsel (Mr. Sergeant McSweeney) who supported the petition, as to whether he had not taken money from ' Sexton's organisation ' and devoted it to his own society. His reply was a forcible denial. ' He had,' he said, ' been found guilty by a jury of employers and sentenced to twelve months' imprisonment, but was released after three months' imprisonment as he was THE RISE OF LARKINISM 49 innocent.' ' I saw no declaration from the Lord Lieu- tenant that you were innocent,' remarked the counsel. ' If the Lord Lieutenant let me out before my time, and I was not innocent, he should be put in gaol himself,' retorted the witness. At another point in the examina- tion Mr. Larkin said : ' I am secretary at the present time of the society in Cork whom I have supposed to have robbed.' However the conviction of Mr. Larkin in 1910 may be viewed from the standpoint of financial purity and legal right, it is undeniable that its ultimate effect was, if anjrthing, to enhance his prestige with the class to whom he looked for support in his new undertaking. The circumstances of his release, the direct intervention of the Viceroy, and the almost deferential way in which his exit from Mount joy Prison was arranged — circum- stances which lost nothing in the telling — conferred upon him the halo of the legal martyr, a character which in Ireland never stands in need of popular sympathy. Stepping quickly into the forum of the street, he drew to his banner all the disaffected elements which were Ijdng in wait in the city for his call. The Irish Transport Workers' Union, from a mere shadowy outline, became before long a closely knit organisation, embracing thousands of workers who had hitherto been either out- side trade-union influences or only intermittently asso- ciated with labour societies. For a time the old trade unions, in whose ranks were the ' aristocrats of labour,' looked askance at this upstart body, with its leader from the outside world. They disliked the propaganda and they distrusted the man ; and, moreover, the heads of the organisations had no desire to share their throne with one so forceful as Mr. Larkin had already proved himself to be. But before very long they found the pressure upon them from Liberty Hall, the headquarters of the Irish Transport Workers' Union, irresistible, and the end of it was that the autocrat of the quays had the 50 DISTURBED DUBLIN Dublin Trade Council in the hollow of his hand. There are many remarkable things about this Dublin labour movement, but none more extraordinary than the complete way in which Mr. Larkin ultimately dominated the older forces of Trade Unionism in the city, several of which, as we have seen, are buUt upon lines of such rigid exclusiveness that no one born out of the purple can enter the charmed circle of workers in a particular trade. From the very outset Mr. Larkin made the Irish character of the union a leading, it may be said, the leading principle of the organisation. He never missed an opportunity of enforcing the view that Ireland must have her own labour movement, free from outside domi- nation, and working on lines marked out only by her own interests. In one of the earliest issues of his paper, the Irish Worker, he wrote : ' Whilst I agree that the formation of the English Labour Party was, and is, the best thing the English workers have ever done, so, too, the formation of an Irish Labour Party would be the best day's work ever attempted by the Irish workers. The world cannot afford to allow the Irish nation to be obliterated. Internationalism means Internationalism and not one Nationalism. We, of the Irish workers, are out to claim the earth for the world's workers, and our portion as Irishmen is Ireland. So hands off, all predatory persons, no matter under what name or disguise. We are determined to weld together the common people of the North, the South, the East, and the West.' The welding together of the common people referred to in the last sentence constitutes another of the charac- teristic aims of the Larkinite movement. This was a distinctly new departure from the sectional lines on which Trade Unionism in the British Isles had hitherto moved. Nowhere outside Dublin probably could a project of the kind have had much chance of success, and, even in the Irish capital, despite the immense THE RISE OF LARKINISM 51 preponderance of unskilled workers, the task was a stupendous one, because of the difficulty of organising great bodies of people of diverse occupations and aspira- tions. Mr. Larkin, however, relied for his cementing material upon the common tie of poverty which bound the bulk of them together in a union of misfortune. His shrewd calculation of what could be accomplished by an appeal to this brotherhood of woe, couched in the appropriate socialistic language, was not belied. The wild talk of capitalistic tjnranny and greed, which was poured out at scores of meetings, had its effect on the listening crowds. They dropped submissively into the ranks of the imion, and, under the apt tuition of their master, became enthusiasts for the cause of social and economic redemption through the agency of the peculiar, but powerful, weapons which in due course were put in their hands. £ 2 CHAPTER V THE IGNOBLE ART OF INTIMIDATION The Irish Worker — Its Iniquitous Character — Patriotism called in Aid of the Industrial Movement — Elegant Extracts — Incite- ment to Murder — ^Malignant Attacks on the Police and on Employers — Defence of the Policy of the Irish Worker — Larkinite Municipal Campaign — Scurrilous Attacks on Political Opponents, Every machine must have its driving force. Mr. Larkin's organisation found the indispensable agency in a Press engine of maUgnant power in the shape of a weekly newspaper called the Irish Worker. \ There was a time in England when, owing to the ferocity of controversial methods, a standing toast at public dinners was 'The Press without its licentiousness.' Even in that none too fastidious day probably this paper would have been voted outrageous. Its earliest issues were an extraordinary farrago of disloyalty, scurrility, and mendacity with an underlying note of intimidation. That some of the matter, containing direct incitements to violence, should have passed without official notice is one of the amazing facts of a remarkable episode in recent history. For saying — not printing — something far less mischievous some years ago in Trafalgar Square, a man was sent to a long term of imprisonment. The issues of this Irish Worker cannot be too carefully studied by any- one who would obtain a true perception of what the Larkinite labour movement is, and by what means it is kept alive. THE IGNOBLE ART OF INTIMIDATION 53 At the outset it served Mr. Larkin's purpose to pose as a patriot of a specially robust brand. He was clever enough to see that no man who did not play to the political gallery had, as he himself would put it in his exuberant moments of oratory, a dog's chance. Hence we find him taking as the motto of his journalistic venture James Fintan Lalor's declaration — ' The principle I state and mean to stand upon is : That the entire ownership of Ireland, moral and material, up to the sun and down to the centre, is vested of right in the people of Ireland.' Hence, also, it is that the earlier issues teemed with emotional appeals to patriotism such as are an important part of the stock-in-trade of the popular orator in Ireland. One characteristic effusion, a poem in the second issue, entitled ' Youth of Ireland,' struck the note which, with an indifferent degree of harmony, was sounded through many subsequent pages of the paper. The opening stanzas were : Youth of Ireland ! Youth of Ireland, On your onward march to-day. For the freedom of your Sireland Homage to the Old Guard pay ; To the men who marched before you Over danger's deadly trail. They who struggled to restore you To the freedom of the Gael. With their father's faith unshaken, Lisp'd beside their mother's knee. Went they forth men to awaken, And their country to set free ; Tho' the hopes their hearts were rearing Led them to the rebel's doom, Tho' the tyrants' bands were bearing Heroes to their living tomb. In the concluding verse is the inevitable appeal to 54 DISTURBED DUBLIN those of the present to be worthy of the memories of the past : Then forget not, youth of Ireland, That you yet may have to do. For the children of your Sireland, As these brave men done for you ; Then like them be brave, be steady. And for Ireland guard the way. And when God's right hand is ready. Be you heroes in the fray. This is harmless enough, and its only significance is that it was part of the propaganda which was avowedly revolutionary in its aims. It was probably thought that a mere dressing up of the social revolution would not suit the Irish workers' palates, and that something more racy of the soil was required to bring them into the fold. However that may be, all the early issues had a vivid patriotic colouring. But the blatant tones of the Nation- alist harmonies were skilfully blended with dashes of the tints more useful for the organiser's purposes. For example, in No. 4 appeared an article of Lalor's in which figured his well-known declaration that on a wider field with stronger positions and greater resources than were afforded by ' the paltry question of Repeal ' ' must we close for our final struggle with England, or sink and surrender.' Accompanying this production was an ex- hortation to the Irish Worker's readers to act up to the principles preached by Lalor. ' Are you common people, you of the working classes, going to turn recreants ? ' asked the editor. ' Are you going to join the Amalga- mated Union of loyal addressers, sycophantic Lord Mayors,^ jelly-fish Councillors (Urban and Rural), scab labour employers like , J. P. ? If so, go home. Take down from your walls of the dwellings you exist in the pictures and photographs and all that recalls the 1 A reference to the King's visit and the attendant functions in ■which the Lord Mayor took part. THE IGNOBLE ART OF INTIMIDATION 55 men, the heroes and mart5n:s, men who despised all tinsel, show, place, or profit, thought only of truth, honesty, and loyalty to the land that bore them.' In another part of the same number Mr. Larkin made it perfectly clear that the political propaganda held a distinctly subordinate place in his crusade. In the course of a virulent attack on a foreman pavior employed by the corporation, who had excited animosity by taking a contract for paving work of a class which had previously been in other hands, he wrote : ' If the granting of Home Rule, and the opening of our own Parliament means that the workers in this country are to be subject to the tyranny of creatures like this fellow , with no chance of redress, better far to exist under a Star Chamber of Charles I, or the despotism of CromweU.' The markedly industrial character of the aims of the organisation was emphasised by numerous contributions describing the worker's hard lot. One of the earliest published articles was a composition in which Mr. Larkin, doubtless from his own experiences, painted a lurid picture of the lot of the stoker. ' Think of him, one of God's creatures, down below, with brains half burned out of him ; with the open furnace before him, the eyes bloodshot with the heat, the light of the flames dancing around him, and a hard case engineer cursing him and shouting to the already half crazy creature — " shake her up." There is a saying " Hell has no terrors for a woman scorned." What terrors, then, has hell for a creature with the breath scorched out of him — the soul burned up within him ? ' Contrasted with some of the men in the stokehold — ' white men,' the writer assures us — are ' magnates in the shipping world — ^men with an income of £5000 a month, moral lepers, men whose very breath breathed death.' These men, the article went on to say, were the class who directed the Shipping Federation. ' A leprous crew,' wrote the editor in a final outburst. ' The earth would be well rid of them ; and they have 56 DISTURBED DUBLIN not a soul to be saved, and they have so managed to control the law that their bodies are to be saved from kicking yet a little while longer.' The menace in these concluding sentences is palpable. In a different category to this scream of hate stands a poem which appeared in another column of the same issue under the title of 'The Winch, or the Dockers' Orchestra.' There is a grim humour in the treatment of the subject, and a swing of the rugged verses which compel attention. Here are some of the stanzas : It's not the pipe of the organ clear The engines play to an engineer ; It's not the carol of song birds gay Her cordage sings at the break of day. When a clipper's course is fairly laid Along the track of the roarin' trade : But just a grunt and a snaky hiss Of steam pipes leaking, an oily kiss; A rusty rattle of iron gear. Or a new hydraulic lifting clear ; A grip, a strain or a patent clinch — And that's the song of the workin' winch. Up with the hardware, down with the bales. Under the gunwhale, over the rails. Tally clerk, tally clerk, where have y' been ? ' Jambing my thumb in the old machine.' Then tie it up with a bit of string. An' lower away like anything. Now, what's the matter down below ? Why are the stevedores trembhng so ? Only the brains of a workin' man Bashed like a blessed old salmon can. Cover his face from the light of day. Send for a stretcher and heave away. Geniality, even of the peculiar type disclosed in these lines, is not often permitted to have rein in the Irish Worker's pages. The commoner form is a brutal direct- THE IGNOBLE ART OF INTIMIDATION 57 ness of statement without any softening feature. Take the fierce denunciation of a ' scab ' (a free labourer) in No. 3 : ' A scab is to his trade what a traitor is to his country. He cares only for himself, but he sees not beyond the extent of the day, and for a monetary and worthless approbation would betray friends, family, and country. In short, he is a traitor on a small scale — ^he just sells his fellow and is himself afterwards sold in his turn by the master, until at last he is despised by both and deserted by all — he is the enemy to himself, to the present age, and to posterity, and deserves to be execrated by all.' Then are given verses, of which the following is a specimen : Who shuns the face of the open day. Who wanders out in the gloomy grey. Who gets his price and sneaks away ? — The Scab. An even more striking example of the Irish Worker's characteristic mood is furnished in an article published in No. 13 (August 19, 1911). The writer, who had been fired with enthusiasm by the vast industrial upheaval that was at that time proceeding in England, wrote in triumphant terms of the helplessness of capital in the face of the emergency. ' The people are starving ; trains are not running ; boats are lying idle ; trams are stopped ; there is talk of a famine. Why don't the capitalists step in and save them ? Why don't they make the ships sail, the trains travel, the mill wheels turn ? Because there is a strike of workers, and capital is helpless while the strike lasts.' Further on in the article the writer seemed to think that capital, after all, might not be as helpless as he had pictured. There were the ' scabs ' — otherwise the free labourers — to be reckoned with. He made it clear what he would do with them. ' They tell us,' he wrote, ' it is necessary to call out the military to protect the lives of a few 58 DISTURBED DUBLIN miserable scabs. They are afraid the scabs would be killed. A scab is a traitor to his class, a deserter who goes over to the enemy in time of war to fight against his own people. When the capitalists go to war it is for the sake of robbery, as instance the case of the Boers. These men had right on their side — they were defending their country from invasion and robbery. England was in the wrong, yet, if a man deserted from the British Army to fight for the Boers and was afterwards captured, he would be shot. When a man deserts from our ranks in time of war (for a strike is war between capital and labour) he, on the same principle, forfeits his life to us. If England is justified in shooting those who desert to the enemy, we also are justified in killing a scab. If it is wrong to take a scab's life, it is right for British soldiers to desert to the enemy in war time. You can't have it both ways.' Mr. Larkin afterwards disclaimed the authorship of the atrocious article, and even personal knowledge of it before it was printed. But the sentiments expressed so completely accord with the general policy of the paper that his repudiation carries little weight. More especially is this so because he permitted the writer of the article to publish an explanation of his original statement, which was to all intents and purposes a repeti- tion of the offence. ' We have never called on any man to shoot another,' he wrote in No. 21 (October 7, 1911). ' If we thought it would be a good thing to shoot scabs, we would not appeal to others to do it for us, we would do it ourselves. But it is unnecessary to shoot a scab in the interest of the working class, neither is it necessary to shoot down the workers for fear some poor soulless scab would get a black eye.' In another part of the article the writer says : ' We will, if necessary, meet violence with violence in self-defence. The working class is in revolt, and you will not ever be able to regain such a grip on their souls and bodies as you formerly held,' Next to the free labourer the police had the chief THE IGNOBLE ART OF INTIMIDATION 59 place in the venomous attentions of the Irish Worker. At an early period the members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union came into violent contact with the representatives of the law, and they bitterly resented the fact. ' What a skulking bully he looks as he lounges against the street corners of our city — how important he seems when the inspector appears in sight ! ' wrote the editor (No. 10, July 29, 1911). ' What a gigantic column of ignorance to be placed over the people of our Metropolis to administer law and order as it is known under the so-called stainless flag of British justice ! We are certainly a tame crowd in this ancient city of Dublin to remain so long under the heel of this most detestable creature. The question is, are we going to put up with it much longer ? Is the murmur recently raised against this savage breed of Cossacks going to develop into a mighty roar ? ' In the next issue of the paper the attack was made more personal. Under the heading ' Bullies Exposed — Behind the Scenes' appeared a letter from a correspondent who did not even adopt a pseudon}^!, bringing charges of a most offensive kind against indi- vidual policemen whose names and official numbers were given. Of one, who was described as ' lady killer ' and ' a bright hght in the Plsonouth Brethren crowd which meet in Merrion Hall,' it was said that readers of the Irish Worker would scarcely beUeve that he ' would stealthily creep into a police cell and wantonly kick an innocent man black and blue.' The editor appends to the precious contribution a note in which he coolly remarked, ' The writer of the above knows more about the private affairs of the police than we do. We are aware that h37mn-singing covers a multitude of sins, but we thought that the last of the Plymouth Brethren had gone to heaven long ago.' Of course, from the point of view of the Irish Worker, the truth of the story was a mere detail. It was sufficient that it administered a series of poisoned pin-pricks. 6o DISTURBED DUBLIN The Dublin police are well able to take care of them- selves, as the Larkinites have had only too painful reason to know on various occasions when they have come into coUision with them. But the same cannot be said of many who were singled out for the invidious attentions of the Irish Worker. Employers, of course, chiefly suffered. They were fair game for attack, and there was an obvious trading on the fact that they could not retaliate without loss of dignity, and possibly also loss of trade, by entering into a pubHc discussion on the details of the working of their business. The charges made were usually anonjonous. In one issue nearly a column of contributions of this character appeared with the significant intimation : ' We do not hold ourselves responsible for all the statements made by correspon- dents.' As one of the letters stated that it would be ' decenter ' for the manager of a certain enterprise to put his hands into the girl employees' pockets and " take out what they were after earning, instead of swindling them in such a bare-faced way,' we can understand the editorial reluctance to vouch for the truth of the horrible examples of capitalistic tyranny that his correspondents laid bare. But what an iniquitous system is this which gives currency to any wild story that the fancy or the malice of an anonymous contributor may concoct ! That the charges made were often without the least foundation is clear from the Irish Worker's own columns. For example, a correspondent brought against a certain laundry a series of accusations of oppressive conduct in dealings with employees. The manager of the concern in this instance took the trouble to show by indubitable evidence that the anon3niious statements were either false or were gross misrepresentations. The editor published the letter with a note in which he said that he was glad to see that things were not so bad as he wis led to believe. Apparently it was thought, even in the Irish Worker's THE IGNOBLE ART OF INTIMIDATION 6i editorial sanctum, that the strong meat supplied required a lot of swallowing. At any rate something like a justi- fication was offered (No. lo, July 29, 191 1) for the matter appearing in the paper. Briefly the apologia was an appeal ad misericordiam. It was urged that the pillory which the paper set up was necessary to bring home the iniquity of the sweating employer. He might be known as ' an exemplary family man, as a weekly com- municant, as a benefactor of the Church, and as a sub- scriber to charity.' But there was another side of the picture. ' This self-same man,' said the writer, ' was often known by his employees as a heartless tyrant and as a sweater.' ' They fear to ask such a man for an extra shilling a week to buy a little more food for a half-starved family. Men are slaving ten and twelve hours per day for a weekly wage of nine, ten, and twelve shillings in this very city. They often enough have a wife and a family, but God alone knows how they exist.' The facts may be, and probably are, as stated, but they are no excuse for the indiscriminate system of slander which the paper encouraged by opening its columns to every discontented member of the community who could put his possibly malicious, and certainly exaggerated, com- plaints into writing. Though conducted with the best intentions, journalism of this type inevitably breeds rottenness. Mr. Larkin has good cause to know this, for by an act of historic justice he is to-day being attacked with the very same weapons that he brought into use in Dublin. If anything, the pupil has advanced beyond his instructor, for the Irish Toiler — the rival and antago- nist organ — is a monument of scurrility and vitupera- tion. Unhappily for Mr. Larkin, he is the victim of the vitriolic stuff, and not the base capitalist. An important plank in the Irish Transport Workers' platform is purity of administration. Dublin, Mr. Larkin asserts, is an Augean stable, and he holds that it is the duty of the worker to cleanse it as a necessary and 62 DISTURBED DUBLIN indispensable preliminary to the enjojonent of a decent life. From what can be gathered from a study of official documents, to say nothing of enlightenment vouchsafed in the intimacy of private conversation, there is ample scope for this crusade. As the question will call for somewhat lengthened notice later, there is no necessity to go into it further here. Suffice it now to draw'attention to the methods by which the Larkinite municipal cam- paign was in the first instance conducted, for they are highly characteristic of the moral intimidation upon which Mr. Larkin built his organisation. In January 1912 seven labour candidates, including Mr. Larkin himself, were put forward for the then existing vacancies in the corporation. In No. 35 of the Irish Worker, issued on January 12, was pubhshed an article recommending the candidates to public notice. One of the most vital and momentous questions for the future of this race and the betterment of their common country, the editor said, was whether they were to have national and civic purity, or ' allow the present corrupt and inefficient creatures to use the administrative bodies of this and other towns for their own base purposes.' The article went on to show how a certain councillor guarded civic property — a sacred trust — by securing the appoint- ment of his daughter, a girl of fourteen, to a position as teacher of typewriting at the Technical Schools at a salary of £40 a year, and by obtaining for her, after she had been less than three months in her office, a rise of salary. Then there was the case of his henchman, ' The notorious hbertine and one of the most foul-mouthed blackguards, whose every word is an oath, whose breath emits blasphemy, and who, if the public knew a tithe of his guilt, could be hounded out of pubhc Ufe — aye, and private life, too. This beast, this stain on the earth's surface, actually appealed to the Dubhn workers to return him on the grounds that, if rejected, they would not get Home Rule for Ireland. The name of THE IGNOBLE ART OF INTIMIDATION 63 would bring the blush of shame to any man's face, never mind an Irishman's face.' There was a good deal more in this strain leading up to detailed descriptions of candidates and of their opponents, chiefly the latter. One of the anti-Larkinite workers was described as a ■ pimp ' and ' Ijdng slave driver — a thing, not a man.' A second as ' a lickspittle, time-server, place-hunter, and official hangman (sheriff) ' ; and a description was given of one who ' had to be carried home dead drunk ' after a certain meeting. The success of five of the labour candidates at the polls did not soften the asperities of controversy. A defeated candidate was consoled with the reflection that he was * flouted by a pack of unhung scoundrels.' The battle, however, was undoubtedly to the strong — ^in votes and language. CHAPTER VI A MODEL FACTORY Attack on Jacob's Biscuit Factory — Description of the Establishment — Contented Workers — ^The Factory's Roof Garden — Catering for the Workers — ^Arrangements for the Physical Welfare of Em- ployees — A Disgraceful Campaign of Calumny. As the Larkinite movement developed, it manifested an unmistakable tendency to syndicalistic methods. The most conspicuous indication of the influence of the subversive principles of the continental labour anarchists was shown in the dead-set made against certain employers whose reputation for dealing fairly with their employees was high. This was in accordance with the theory of Syndicalism that the good employer is the worst enemy of labour, because under him the working classes are apt to be contented and to decline to assist in securing that revolutionary change in economic conditions which, according to the extremists, is imperatively needed in the interests of the masses. Almost the first establishment to be put in the Irish Worker's pillory was Jacob's Biscuit Factory, the history of which has been sketched in an early chapter. The attack on this was conducted with relentless vigour and a malignity which never failed in its purpose to represent the firm in the darkest colours. The partners were held up to obloquy as oppressors and extortioners, who ground the faces of the poor and posed before the public as philanthropists. How false — ^how grotesquely false is the picture I found in the course of a tour I made of the factory during my visit to Dublin ! A MODEL FACTORY 65 As the subject is one of great importance, I cannot do better than set out briefly my impressions. Jacob's Factory is a tall building of several stories rearing its lofty head from a maze of streets in one of the oldest parts of Dublin. From top to basement it is a hive of industry. In its numerous well-ordered depart- ments the various processes incidental to the business are carried on under conditions of scrupulous cleanliness. An appetising odour, diffused from the ovens through which are passing in rapid succession trays of the familiar biscuits, greets you as you enter the factory, and it accompanies you to the last stage as a fragrant reminder of the attractiveness and wholesomeness of an industry which gives steady employment to upwards of three thousand of Dublin's workers of both sexes. It is im- possible not to be impressed with the cheerful atmosphere that ever5rwhere prevails. Not a single sour, discontented face is anywhere to be seen : all are giving their services with that alert activity that is the best testimony to a wiUing disposition. I was particularly struck with the girls who ranged from the quite small damsel of perhaps fourteen summers to the fully-developed woman. A healthier, more attractive body of factory workers I have never seen. In their spotless white overalls, which set off their usually abundant hair — that ' woman's pride ' — they gave, without exception, the pleasantest impression that I had in Ireland. Some of them had really beautiful faces of the true Irish type — ^black hair, grey eyes, and dark regular features deUcately suffused with the glow of a healthy colour. Others there were of a different Celtic stock, whose masses of golden hair were associated with well-posed heads, bright homely faces, and sub- stantial figures. ' And what do you earn a week ? ' asked ray cicerone of one of the girls of the latter class as we passed. She paused at her task of soldering biscuit tins, and, looking up with a bright smile on her charming face, said shyly, ' Sixteen shiUings.' ' And do you like 66 DISTURBED DUBLIN your work ? ' was asked. ' Very much, thank you,' came the answer as she turned to resume her duties. Similar inquiries put to other workers, selected at random as we traversed the various departments, elicited much the same replies. The wages varied, but there was a never-faihng assurance that the labourer was happy in her toil — an assurance which carried conviction as to its sincerity. We chmbed to the top of the building and found silent evidence, more convincing than words, of the thoughtful care of the firm for the well-being of its employees. The whole of the flat roof of the great building had been covered with shingle and converted into a ' lung ' for this great working hive. Here the girls come during the dinner hour, play games, read or otherwise recreate themselves in the spare time left after their midday meal. Perched high above the houses this roof garden has the benefit of all the winds that blow. The girl, if she be of an aesthetic turn of mind, may watch the changing lights on the Wicklow Hills, note the effect of the golden western sunlight on the dancing waters of the harbour, or look into the brooding city and admire the picturesque effect of the numerous church spires and monuments which tower above the sea of bricks and mortar. Probably very few of them do this, but that they make the most joyous use of this playground is evident to those who are in the vicinity during the dinner hour and hear the merry laughter that floats down from the elevation. Immediately below the roof garden is the great dining- hall of the factory — a. fine, well-ventilated and well-lighted chamber with seats and tables placed in serried array from end to end. In this apartment hot dinners are served, consisting of a plate of meat and two vegetables for twopence or threepence, according to the quantity. Other prices are proportionately low. Thus, a cup of tea costs a halfpenny, and a cup of cocoa a farthing. The whole affair is worked by the firm on the principle of A MODEL FACTORY 67 giving the utmost possible for the money without making an actual loss. The value of the convenience to the worker need not be dilated upon. I can well recall here the harrowing stories once told me by the rector of a great slum parish in London of girls from factories who were driven to the streets in the dinner hour, and who, without a decent home to go to, turned into the public house to have a glass of alcohol, which was, as they put it, ' both food and drink.' Messrs. Jacob's critics might do worse than take a turn in some of the factory districts in England and see what is done there in respect of the creature comfort of the workers. If they did so they would, I think, hide their heads for very shame at the treatment they have meted out to this high-minded firm. But the cheap restaurant and playground are only a part of the arrangements for the care of the staff. Not far from the dining-hall is a department exclusively devoted to the physical welfare of employees. In one room a medical man attends each day to give gratuitous advice to all who care to consult him ; and in another room a dentist attends three mornings in the week, and extractions and fillings are done free of charge. In adjoining departments the lady welfare secretary, who is a qualified nurse, with the help of two assistants, looks after the health and well-being of the girls, and they can consult her at any time during working hours. All injuries, no matter how trivial, have to be reported at once, as when immediate treatment is given they rarely become serious. At the time of out visit a lad with a swoUen hand was under treatment. It was a pleasure to witness the deft movements of the nurse as she bathed the injured member and carefully adjusted the bandages afterwards. Again, I could not help drawing a contrast — this time between the youth and the boys I had seen in the streets with wounded or diseased feet and hands bound up with dirty rags which only served to accentuate the terrible neglect which was their lot. What end is served, F 3 68 DISTURBED DUBLIN I may ask, by holding up to ridicule, as the Irish Worker did, these splendidly human and thoroughly practical arrangements of the firm for the well-being of those under them ? Even a high-minded trade union, if it had control, could not do more; I doubt whether it could do as much, as there is an element of human sympathy visible in Jacobs' establishment which is as rare as it is precious. It is difficult to understand the state of mind of the men who circulated these calumnies against Messrs. Jacob. They pose as the special friends and guardians of the workers — the chosen people who have a mission to uplift the fallen and strengthen the weak-hearted. But what would have been the effect of the success of their crusade ? Most certainly to throw out of employment hundreds of men and women who to-day are earning good wages under the happiest conditions ; for, let there be no mis- understanding on the point, a biscuit factory is a good deal of an exotic in Dublin. The local demand for biscuits is necessarily in the main for export purposes, and a con- cern of this character in the Irish capital, as has been pointed out, labours under exceptional difficulties. In the ordinary way, quite apart from the influence of the recent labour troubles, Messrs. Jacobs have been driven by the exigencies of trade to establish a branch of their business near Liverpool, on a site of ten acres acquired there for the purpose. It would not require much to overweigh the balance against the Irish factory to such an extent as to eliminate it altogether from the list of Dublin industries. CHAPTER VII MR. LARKIN'S BiTE NOIRE Attacks on Mr. Wm. Martin Murphy — The Dublin United Tramway Company — Mr. Murphy depicted as a Capitalistic Ogre — The Real Man — Mr. Murphy's Association with the Irish Exhibition of 1907 — King Edward and Mr, Murphy — Personal Description of Mr. Murphy. There was such a plentiful supply of vituperative material in the Irish Worker ofl&ce that, while this campaign of calumny was being actively prosecuted in one direction, equally energetic measures of a similar type were being directed in a totally different quarter. The special target for abuse in this instance was Mr. WilUam Martin Murphy, who had committed the unpardonable crime, in the eyes of the syndicahstic organisation which had come into existence in Dublin, of having shown exceptional capacity as a business man, notably in estabhshing, or directing, commercial concerns, which had obtained the unmistakable hall-mark of success. As Mr.Murphy will figure very prominently in the subsequent portions of the narrative, I shall deal at some little length with his career ; but before I enter into biographical details, I wiU, by way of suitable preface, give a short account of an enterprise with which he has been closely identified from the start, and which illustrates in its successful working the rare commercial aptitude of the man. If a visitor to Dubhn after a lengthy sojourn were asked to name what appeared to him the most brilliant 70 DISTURBED DUBLIN example of Irish enterprise in the city, he would unhesitatingly say the tramways. They are models of efficiency, comfort, and expedition. Nowhere else in the United Kingdom can you find a service which is so thoroughly comprehensive in its routes or so convenient in every respect as a passenger-carrying agency. From the far-flung confines of pleasant Dalkey in one direction, to the rocky slopes of the great Hill of Howth on the other side of Dublin Bay, the cars carry you over what is, all in all, one of the most interesting tramway routes in the world. No important part of the city and its spreading suburbs is left outside the range of the facilities offered by the service. From a point under the shadow of the Nelson Column in SackvUle Street, in the very heart of the city, you can go to most of the outlying districts, while a skilfully devised system of cross routes enables you to get from one area to an adjacent one expeditiously and with a minimum of inconvenience. For some years the company — the Dublin United Tram- ways, to give it its official designation — ^has paid a dividend of 6 per cent, on both its £io preference shares and its ordinary shares, which have stood in the market during the past few years at an average of about 12. Nor has this result been secured at the expense either of the travelling public or the workers. The fares are as low as on almost any tramway service in the United Kingdom. For example, a trip to Dalkey from Sackville Street, a distance of nine miles, costs only livepence, and, if a return ticket is taken, the double journey may be accomplished for eightpence; the fare to Howth from the centre of the city, also nine miles, is the same as to Dalkey, fivepence ; while the journey from Dolphin's Barn to Glasnevin, four and a half miles, costs three- pence; from Donnybrook to Phoenix Park, five miles, fourpence ; and to Rathfarnham, six miles, fourpence. As for the working staff, the scale of remuneration MR. LARKIN'S BETE NOIRE 71 is fully equal to that in force in towns in England of about the same size as Dublin. Further, a good many of the traf&c men are provided by the com- pany with excellent housing accommodation at moderate rentals close to the depots where the day's work begins and ends — no small advantage in view of the scarcity in the city of artisans' dwellings of a suitable character. Such was the enterprise upon which, from a very early period in its existence, the Irish Transport Workers' Union and its press organ concentrated their maleficent activities. The campaign opened in the familiar fashion by a persistent fire of personal abuse in the columns of the Irish Worker, and at the Larkinite meetings. In turn Mr. Murphy was called an ' industrial octopus,' a ' tramway tj^rant,' an ' importer of swell cockney shop- men,' a ' political and social Captain Mick McQuaid,' a ' financial mountebank,' a ' blood-sucking vampire,' a ' pure-souled financial contortionist,' a 'capitalist sweater,' and ' this whited sepulchre.' The last-mentioned choice epithet was applied in reference to Mr. Murphy's owner- ship of a ' rag styled the Independent,' which had drawn the Larkinite fire by a criticism of the morality of some of the sentiments expressed in an article which appeared in the Irish Worker's columns. Not content with the freest use that could be made of prose to defame the object of their attacks, the Larkinite scribes dropped on one occasion into verse. The lines, which were headed ' It's Murphy's,' and were a close parody of a skit which appeared in an American publication entitled ' It's Morgan's,' satirised the wide-reaching character of Mr. Murphy's commercial enterprises. . A wanderer of an inquiring turn of mind is supposed to be making a tour. The reply he invariably gets to a question as to who is the owner of a particular piece of property, or institution, is that at the head of the verses Thus : 72 DISTURBED DUBLIN I entered a tram and rode all day On a regal couch and a right of way Which reached its arms all over the land In a system too large to understand. ' A splendid property this,' I cried ; And a man with a plate on his hat replied, ' It's Murphy's ! ' After various wanderings and obtaining the same reply to his question, the stranger quits the earthly scene : I went to heaven. The Jasper walls Towered high and wide, and the golden halls Shone bright beyond. But a strange new mark Was over the gate, viz. ' Private Park.' ' What, what is the meaning of this ? ' I cried ; And a saint with a livery on replied, ' It's Murphy's ! ' One final scene remained for the investigator. His experience was the same there : I went to the only place left. ' I'U take A chance in the boat on the brimstone lake, Or perhaps I may be allowed to sit On the griddled floor of the bottomless pit.' But the jeering tout with horns on his face Cried, as he forked me out of the place, ' It's Murphy's ! ' This, of course, is mere fooling, but all the same it is not without its importance as a part of the design to represent Mr. Murphy as a capitalistic ogre who battened on the sufferings of the poor and waxed rich on ill-gotten gains. The Larkinite myth was too monstrous to excite in Dublin, where the facts are known, anything but ridicule. But it had its effect later, when the real clash of arms came and Mr. Murphy stepped into the arena to conduct his historic fight with the sinister force which was strangling Dublin industry. Then certain English writers, as we shall have occasion to show, grasped MR. LARKIN'S B£TE NOIRE 73 eagerly at the idea presented to them by the Irish Worker, and pictured Mr. Murphy as a sort of vulgar American boss whose domineering personality gave a fierce bitter- ness to a conflict which, under other direction, would have taken upon itself a less ferocious aspect. The .impression then created has not been entirely obliterated, but how utterly false it is will be apparent from a brief sketch of Mr. Murphy's career. Bom some seventy years since, the son of a Cork contractor, Mr. Murphy commenced his active com- mercial career as far back as 1863, when, owing to the death of his father, he had to take upon his shoulders the full responsibilities of a business house. For some years his interests were chiefly confined to Ireland, where he projected and carried out several railway undertakings as Well as tramways in Dublin, Belfast, and Cork ; but the time came when his far-seeing schemes took him beyond the limits of the sister isle. The possibilities of tramways as profit-earning ventures in the great populous centres of England and Scotland early attracted his attention. He acquired parliamentary power for, and financed and constructed, a tramway line which ran from Vauxhall Station to Norwood. The over- shadowing of private enterprise by the policy of universal municipal tramways within the county of London, adopted by the London County Council, destroyed the value of the line as a nucleus of a larger scheme. It seemed, in fact, in danger of becoming a derelict, owing to the rise of rival means of communication. Mr. Murphy's financial acumen, however, was ultimately justified by the sale of the enterprise to the public authority on terms which were satisfactory. Checked in London, Mr. Murphy turned his attention to other populous centres where the mania for municipal trading had, happily for the ratepayers, as things have proved in most places, not penetrated. Apart from the Dublin enterprise, to which reference has been made, he was 74 DISTURBED DUBLIN responsible for the construction of lines in a good many towns in the United Kingdoni, ranging from Paisley to Ramsgate and Margate, in all of which he still has an important financial interest. From tramway construction to railway building is an easy transition, and Mr. Murphy has made it by associating himself with the work of making a line in West Africa, which will help forward the wonderful development that is proceeding in that part of the Empire. But though Mr. Murphy has established a business connection that is almost world-wide, his closest ties are with Dubhn. Some years ago, when the prospects of the paper did not seem particularly bright, he acquired the Independent and the allied group of journals. Under his skilled direction the enterprise soon entered on smooth waters, and is now the most flourishing Nationalist journalistic venture in Ireland. A great drapery business is another interest of his. Indeed, he has a finger in most Irish financial pies of any promise, and the fact that he is interested in a particular con- cern is accepted in Dublin as an excellent guarantee of its stability, Mr. Murphy is a Nationalist of a type once more common than it is to-day. With O'Connell and Isaac Butt and other men of a bygone generation he sees no incompatibility between a strongly held conviction of Ireland's right to mould her own destinies and a complete loyalty to the King. He is of the great liberator's opinion that ' the golden link of the Crown ' is a valuable and necessary adjunct of a Home Rule system. His views on this subject have made him the object of the virulent criticism of extremists, but he has gone his way with characteristic independence. A striking example of his indifference to the clamour of the section who would make Irish patriotism a mere narrow sectionalism was afforded in the case of the International Irish Exhibition, 1907. When this enterprise was first MR. LARKIN'S B£TE NOIRE 75 mooted there was an outcry from the advanced party against the holding of any exhibition other than a ■ national * one. There seemed a danger of the whole project being ruined by this rather stupid squabble about a name, when Mr. Murphy, whose sanity of vision is one of his chief qualities, stepped into the breach, pulled the affair together by sheer force of personality, and with the aid of a strong committee of citizens of all classes and shades of opinion whom he got around him, turned what had promised to be a dismal failure into a brilliant success. A visit paid to the exhibition by King Edward and Queen Alexandra on July 10, 1907, was in its way a remarkable episode. An early invitation sent to their Majesties to extend their patronage to the exhibition had been declined on the advice of the Castle authorities, who were of the opinion that the time was inopportune for a Royal visit to Ireland. By some means the King got to hear of the disappointment that the refusal of the invitation had caused ; and when, in the summer of 1907, he was visiting Wales he took the matter into his own hands, and, with Queen Alexandra, went across in the Royal yacht to Kingstown with the definite object of inspecting the exhibition. The visit was an immense popular success. It began and ended in a burst of popular enthusiasm. King Edward was anxious to mark his cordial appre- ciation of the public-spirited efforts of the executive of the exhibition by conferring a title upon its chairman. This led to a curious little contretemps which attracted a good deal of comment at the time. Mr. Murphy, before the King's visit, had been publicly accused of being influenced in his work for the exhibition by a desire to secure a title. In reply he had declared that in no circumstances would he accept a title in connection with the exhibition, even if one were offered to him. In order that there might be no misconception on the 76 DISTURBED DUBLIN subject he, some little time before the Royal visit, explained his position to the Lord Lieutenant, and, having done so, thought no more of the matter. Great was his surprise, therefore, when a short time before the King's arrival at the exhibition Mr. Murphy was informed that, at the conclusion of His Majesty's reply to the addresses, it was intended that he should receive from the King the honour of knighthood. Mr. Murphy at once' reminded the of&cial who brought this information that he had already disclaimed any desire for titular distinction, and he requested that the Lord Lieutenant should be at once informed accordingly. It then appeared that Lord Aberdeen had been as much taken by surprise as Mr. Murphy himself. Having been previously in- formed by Mr. Murphy (as already stated) that the offer of a title would not be acceptable. His Excellency had done nothing in the matter ; and it was not until after the arrival of the Royal party at the exhibition (whither His Excellency had proceeded in advance in order to receive their Majesties) that he learned from his private secretary. Lord Herschell, who had followed from Kingstown and who had been informed by one of His Majesty's personal staff as to what was intended, that he (Lord Aberdeen) became aware of it. The pro- ceedings of a State ceremony do not provide much opportunity for conference, but Lord Aberdeen contrived to have a hurried sotto voce conversation with Mr. Murphy, and then ascertained that he was determined to maintain the view he had already expressed. Accordingly, when a few moments later His Majesty called for the sword in order that he might proceed to the next item on the programme, the Lord Lieutenant found it necessary to step forward and perform what must have been the uncongenial duty of stating that this part of the pro- ceedings would have to be omitted. The incident was of course somewhat disconcerting, but His Majesty passed it off with characteristic external composure. MR. LARKIN'S B£TE NOIRE 77 But it may safely be surmised that, when the Royal party had retired. Lord Aberdeen was asked as to how any misunderstanding on the point could have arisen ; and it is certain that His Excellency took care to explain that it had arisen through the lack of timely notice of what was intended. However, feeling that his action might be misconstrued, and perhaps be attributed to a political cause which had in fact been suggested, Mr. Murphy immediately wrote to the Lord Lieutenant setting out his reasons for declining the knighthood. He said that, so far from having any difficulty in accepting an honour on any political grounds, he had, as a Con- stitutional Nationalist, always held the view that the cause of Irish nationality would be greatly advanced by a frank acceptance of the common Crown for both countries — a principle which had been for years agreed to by the representatives of the Irish people. While adding an expression of his personal feeling of respect for the then occupant of the throne, he observed that he would be grateful if His Excellency would explain his position and views to His Majesty, stating that he did not like that the King should leave Ireland thinking that he had left one churlish man behind him. In compliance with this request, on the following day, at the Leopardstown races, the communication was handed to King Edward. His Majesty, as one would expect, was most gracious and highly pleased at Mr. Murphy's declarations. He sent a message through the Lord Lieutenant saying that he quite appreciated the writer's position. That the Royal words were not merely formal was illustrated by the fact that His Majesty intimated that he wished to retain Mr. Murphy's letter. Thus the incident was thoroughly characteristic of both monarch and subject. It is, perhaps, not surprising, in view of what has been stated, that Mr. Murphy enjoys the entire confidence of the citizens of the more substantial class. Uncompromising 78 DISTURBED DUBLIN Unionists and equally determined Nationalists sit under his presidency on public committees in complete haiinony. They know and respect him, and, above all, they have entire confidence in his level-headed judgments of men and affairs. In any other city than Dublin Mr. Murphy would long since have been marked out for the chief magistracy, but the Dublin Corporation is a select body in the sense that it has no use for a man who will not ' toe the line ' politically in all respects. What political narrowness has denied has been compensated for by the bestowal of high positions in commercial life — like the Presidency of the Dubhn Chamber of Commerce and the chairmanship of important committees charged with duties of a temporary character. His leadership of the Dublin employers in the recent industrial crisis was almost a matter of course. He is the type of strong, silent man who inevitably comes to the front on occasions of public emergency of national danger. A first meeting with Mr. Murphy suggests to the visitor the impression he has formed of the typical family solicitor of the old school — ^the man who is the repository of many secrets and who blends the milk of human kindness with an unswerving rectitude of conduct. ' A taU, spare figure, slightly stooped at the shoulders, with a mass of silvery brushed hair framing a benevolent face in which two kindly but piercing grey eyes are deeply set ' is the word-portrait painted of him for an English paper during the recent troubles by ' One who knows him.' It is a faithful presentment of the man. The very last attribute that you would associate with this striking personality is tyranny, and you would be right. Few Dublin employers have a higher reputation for kindliness and perfect consideration for those who are not so well endowed with this world's goods as he is himself. But Mr. Murphy, as is often the case with men of his temperament, will not be bullied. He acts. MR. LARKIN'S B£TE NOIRE 79 moreover, up to the spirit of Polonius's familiar advice to Laertes : Beware Of entrance to a quarrel, but, being in, Bear't that the opposed may beware of thee. Those opposed to him certainly had reason, before he had done with them, to beware of him. But that is another story. CHAPTER VIII • TO HELL WITH CONTRACTS ! ' Repudiation of Agreements a Characteristic Feature of Larkinism — The Settlement of July 1908 — ^Mr.Lar kin's Reasons for repudiating the Agreement — ^Antagonism between Mr. Larkin and the National Dock Labourers' Union — Conditions of Dublin Dock Labour favourable to Larkinite Propaganda — Labour Unrest in 1911 — Formation of Dublin Employers' Federation — ^Violent Attack in the Irish Worker -a-pon Employers — The Settlement of July 191 1 ; — Lord Aberdeen and Mr. Larkin — Conciliation Board Scheme ignored by the Irish Transport Workers' Union, In the foregoing chapters readers have been given a tolerably full impression of the working of the Dubhn labour movement under Mr. Larkin's direction. But what is, perhaps, the most characteristic feature of Larkinism — ^its contempt for agreements — ^remains to be dealt with. ' To hell with contracts ! ' exclaimed the leader of the movement in a burst of oratory during the tour he made in England in the course of the strike. The sentiment expressed with absolute fidelity the spirit of Larkinism. No understanding, however definite may be its terms and however clear its stipulations as to the duration of the contract, is held to be binding a moment longer than it suits the policy and interests of the workers to acquiesce in it. An early example of repudiation is supplied in the case of an agreement made in 1908 relative to the pa5anent of work done at the wharves and in connection with the maltsters. In the early half of that year there ' TO HELL WITH CONTRACTS ! ' 8i was a strike of dock labourers and others of such con- siderable proportions as to seriously hamper the trade of the port. The Government, with a celerity which at the time was somewhat criticised, intervened and, with a view of securing a settlement, recommended a con- ference of the representatives of employers and employed at Dublin Castle. At this gathering Lord MacDonnell, then Under Secretary for Ireland, presided, and there were also in attendance on the official side Sir James Dougherty, Assistant Under Secretary, and Mr. Mitchell, of the Board of Trade. The employers were represented by Mr. Watson, of the City of Dublin Steam Packet Co. ; Mr. Laidlaw, of Messrs. Tedcastle, McCormick & Co. ; and Mr. McCormick and Mr. Hewat, of the Dubhn Coalowners' Association. Representing the men were Alderman Gee, Vice-President of the General Federation of Trade Unions ; Mr. Appleton, Secretary ; and Mr. James Sexton, Secretary of the National Union of Dock Labourers. After an exhaustive discussion of the points at issue, the parties entered into an agreement of a far-reaching kind. The leading principle of the instrument was the establishment of a Conciliation Board for the adjust- ment of all disputes that might arise, excepting those affecting individuals, which were left to be settled by the malcontents and the firms concerned. A somewhat elaborate machinery was devised to give effect to the arrangement. If no agreement was reached in the case of a dispute, the general secretary of the National Union might make further representations on the matter to the firm concerned, who would then consider them. Should no settlement still be possible, the question would be referred to the representative body of employers and employed, who would appoint an umpire. In the event of a difficulty arising about the selection of the umpire, the appointment was to be made by the Board of Trade. Other points were disposed of on lines which seemed to 82 DISTURBED DUBLIN promise more stable conditions for the trade. Subsequently, in accordance with the agreement, a number of questions relative to wages and working conditions were referred for settlement to Sir Andrew Marshall Porter, Bart., late Master of the Rolls, and Mr. P. J. O'Neill, Chairman of the Dublin County Council, who were appointed joint arbitrators. The award, which was made in February 1909, was a most comprehensive one. It set up schedules of wages for various grades of employees, fixed the hours and conditions of work, and generally smoothed the way for the establishment of peaceful relations between masters and men. A final recommendation of the arbitrators was that the ConciUation Board which had been set up for this particular dispute should become a permanent institution. Both the original agreement and the arbitrators' award were received with public approval. Some sanguine souls, indeed, detected in them the beginning of a new era in which the lion would lie down with the lamb and an idyllic calm would ensue. But all had reckoned without their host — the host in this particular instance being Mr. Larkin-. At the time that the agreement was entered into, Mr. Larkin, as will be seen by a reference to an earlier chapter, was the servant — ^the somewhat unwilling and, if his critics are to be believed, none too loyal servant — of the National Union of Dock Labourers. He was a party to it as much as were other officials of the Union, and if they were bound by it, he was. It was certainly understood at the time that the settlement was a settlement, and not merely a docket of pious opinions which were to be followed or not as fancy or expediency dictated. Otherwise it is impossible to understand why all this compUcated process of Conciliation Board and Arbitration Court, with the highest trained official intelli- gence, should have been brought into operation. Mr. Larkin may have disagreed with the arrangement, but, if he did, he did not then, so far as can be discovered from ' TO HELL WITH CONTRACTS ! ' 83 the publications of the day, pubhcly say so, and in any event his individual opinion counted for nothing against the fact that he was the recognised servant of the only organisation that then existed to uphold the interests of the workers. At a later period, when it suited Mr. Larkin's plans to throw overboard the agreement with all that it impHed, he asserted {Irish Worker, July 1911) that the men repudiated the arrangement and declared that ' it was because that agreement, made against their interests, that the men threw over the National Union.' ' There has [sic] been no members of the National Union of Dock Labourers in Dublin, nay in Ireland except Derry, since November, 1908,' he proceeded. ' Publicly and privately that agreement was repudiated. They might as well say that the silent dead in Glasnevin acquiesced in the present government of this country, and their acquiescence binds the living men of this town. No — the living men of this town are going to have their union. They claimed the right to appoint their own chairman and secretaries, just inasmuch as Tedcastle McCormick claimed to appoint Mr. McCormick as chairman to speak on behalf of the shareholders — ^that, and no more and no less.' But even according to this partial view of the position the National Union of Dock Labourers was the representative authority for the workers when the agreement was concluded, and, that being the case, it is difficult to see how the obUgation entered into could be set aside on right grounds. Surely the whole system of collective bargaining breaks down if the principle is admitted that a change made subsequent to an agreement in the representative body, either of workers or employers, vitiates that agreement. No doubt the antagonism between Mr. Larkin and his old employers in the National Union of Dock Labourers had a powerful influence in securing the ultimate nuUifica- tion of the 1908 agreement. He was, as we have seen, strongly at issue with the executive on matters associated with the organising work of the union, and long before 84 DISTURBED DUBLIN the final severance came, at the end of 1908, he was working against their interests. The undermining of their work in connection with the settlement was to such a man an obviously facile means of consolidating the new power which he was striving to estabhsh. It is always easy to upset a compromise : it is doubly so when one of the parties to it is a body of workers whose means of livelihood at the best are inconsiderable. There were, therefore, many only too eager to give ear to the counsels which were lavishly tendered by Mr. Larkin to strike a fresh blow for industrial freedom under a new organisation which took no account of the undertaking ratified on their behalf. By the policy he pursued, Mr. Larkin achieved a double victory. He scored off his old friends of the National Union, and he rallied to his side a sub- stantial proportion of the unskilled labour forces of the Irish capital — a proportion sufficient to give vitality to his own organisation. An additional advantage, and one by which, perhaps, he set most store, was that he had an absolutely clear course for his peculiar propaganda. No longer was it necessary to consult, even nominally, an executive many miles away. He was the only Richmond in the field. Events in Dublin did not take a definitely aggressive shape until the summer of 191 1. By that time Mr. Larkin, having set Belfast and Cork well ablaze with his incendiary activities and incidentally served his term of imprisonment in the circumstances already related, had regularly established his organisation in Dublin and entered upon his campaign against Dublin industries. He found a rich soil for his revolutionary seed in the dock labourers' domain. At the Dublin quays and docks the work of loading and unloading ships is done very much on the lines which were followed at the London docks before the great labour upheaval of 1885, in which Mr. John Burns played an historic part. Men are taken on as the exigencies of the trade demand. ' TO HELL WITH CONTRACTS ! ' 85 and they are paid by stevedores who are responsible to the shipping companies. The work is necessarily fitful, days of strenuous labour being followed by periods of inactivity. Such a system tends to collect a mass of unskilled labour, more or less of the unregenerate type. Idlers, whose only desire is to keep body and soul together and obtain money for an occasional carouse, are glad to be able to put in a day or two at the wharves to secure the few shillings necessary for a precarious existence* Countrjnnen, who have been attracted to the capital by glowing stories of the wages to be earned there, are equally willing to earn pay which for them is exception- ally good. In addition to these there is a large class of workers, men with wives and families, who obtain an uncertain livelihood at the wharves failing more stable emplo3anent. In the mass the dockers are miserably poor. The majority of them, probably, on waking in the morning scarcely know where their next day's dinner is to come from. Preaching the gospel of discontent in such an environ- ment as that described, Mr. Larkin found ready listeners. With his rough eloquence he stirred the duU imaginations of the crowds, which were never wanting at his meetings, to a sense of the degradation of their lot. In one of his speeches about the period of the strike (reported in the Irish Worker, July 22, 1911), he inveighed against the snobbery which kept the workers apart. ' We have men in this country,' he said, ' there are men even in this crowd, who despise the docker — men who don't recognise themselves as of the same blend as the sailors and firemen, who think themselves a little above the ordinary worker, and who sometimes get very less wages and have far worse conditions of work. Snobocracy cannot exist if the working classes are true to themselves. You can't live without them. Who is going to load the ships and railway trains, or what will you put in them if you have not the fellows who work the land ? They 86 DISTURBED DUBLIN cannot be done without, but nobody cares about them, because these men do not consider themselves ; they are apathetic, they are ill-educated, they are unorganised ; they are a prey to every demagogue, whether labour or political ; they are a prey to every sycophantic person in the country.' Having thus castigated the weaknesses of his hearers, the speaker played upon their prejudices by drawing a dark picture of the Dublin slums. ' Those terrible conditions,' he argued, ' were due to low wages.' ' There are,' he went on, ' thousands in the city who do not attend their religious duty because of their bad clothing. The women were in a wretched, ill-clad condition — below the level of humanity ; and little children were brought up in surroundings of sin and misery. I know what slum life is, and I know the cause of emigration, misery and vice, which is the low wages that people are compelled to work for. Our aim is to change those conditions — to improve the lot of the toilers — and I do not know of any organisation in the world that in its time has done so much in the same period to improve the workers' condition as the Irish Transport Union.' In fine, the thing to do to bring about the social millennium was to join the speaker's organisation. If the argument had been carried on throughout on these lines there would be little to object to in the movement ; but, simultaneously with the oratorical campaign, there was set in motion a system of ' peaceful persuasion ' which was probably a good deal more effective for the attainment of the objects in view. A series of disputes with employers was brought about, and when the breach had been made effective, the position was maintained by devices with which the modern history of trade unionism has made us painfully familiar. So prevalent was the intimidation, that in a short time the trade of the port in many directions was at a standstill- The employers who had surrendered a good deal for • TO HELL WITH CONTRACTS ! ' 87 the sake of peace in 1908 were naturally incensed at the turn of events. They held a meeting on June 30, 1911, to consider their position. Many of the leading merchants attended and gave evidence in speech and vote of their appreciation of the seriousness of the situa- tion. They came to the sensible conclusion that the best way to meet combination was by combination. They felt that, while it was easy for the Transport Workers' Union to coerce a single employer or group of employers, it would be difficult for him to browbeat the whole body of manufacturers, merchants, and others who make up the commercial body in Dublin. Before the meeting separated the foundations were laid of a strong organisa- tion which, in an extended form at a later phase in the troubles, grappled successfully with the labour octopus which was squeezing the life-blood out of the city's commerce. As the employers' organisation will figure very prominently in the subsequent pages, a few sentences may profitably be devoted to the subject. In the main the federation followed on the lines of a similar body which, a few years previously, had been set up in Cork to fight Mr. Larkin and which had successfully coped with the difficulties that he raised. A company, called the DubHn Employers' Federation, Limited, was formed and a provisional committee appointed to carry out the objects in view. These objects were stated to be ' to afford mutual protection to and indemnity of all employers and to promote freedom of contract between employers and employees.' A businesslike scheme in every respect, it started on its way with the active good- will and support of the great bulk of the commercial conimunity of Dubhn. At Liberty Hall, Mr. Larkin's headquarters, the significance of the step taken by the employers was not missed. In the Irish Worker of July 29, 1911, under the heading ' Employers' Secret Society Unmasked,' 88 DISTURBED DUBLIN a violent attack was made upon the new organisation. Apparently the writer's point of view was that, while it was legitimate and proper for men to combine, it was rank blasphemy for employers to form an association for mutual protection. In a burst of fury the editor asked : ' Do these creatures (the employers) think that, because they succeeded for a time in Cork to browbeat the workers (assisted by traitors such as Simon Punch and backed by a corrupt Government), they will succeed in Dublin ? May I remind them that Dublin is not Cork ? Within this town are living men who have defeated — aye, and destroyed — a more corrupt organisation (if that were possible) than this suggested Dublin Employers' Federation. But forewarned is fore- armed, and the working class of this great city has too long submitted ' to the tyranny of the sweater and despoiler.' ' Some of these gentlemen,' the writer went on, ' seem to have forgotten that we had a land problem in Ireland, and that a few individuals, who claimed they owned the land, were taught a lesson. In the beginning of that struggle a large number of the dispossessed farmers blamed the tools of the landlords and dealt in a very summary way with them. Later on men arose in the land who made it clear to the minds of the exploited that it were foolish to blame the tools, the emergency men, and the grabber ; the people who were responsible were the alien landlord class, and in a few short years the problem was solved — as regards the tenant farmers. Some of the landlord class tried the self-same tricks that you in Dublin intend playing. Well, some of them found themselves lying behind a ditch suffering from want of breath, and don't forget we are the sons of those men who enjoyed the gaol and trod the scaffold. Do you think we will be less worthy than they who went before ? You will conspire ; your tools will perjure their dirty souls ; you will intimidate, you will starve us into submission ; ' TO HELL WITH CONTRA.CTS ! ' 89 you threaten us and our wives and children with the whip lash of hunger. Eh ! that is your game. Do you think there are no brains, brawn, or muscle left in this land among the working class ? ' Readers wiU do well to take special note of this choice effusion, and especially of the words which I have italicised. Language has lost its sense if there is not here a direct incitement to murder. The landlords who ' found themselves lying behind a ditch suffering from want of breath ' were the assassinated victims of the land war, the men who were shot by ' village ruffians ' from behind hedges as they were returning home. No English reader can miss the meaning of the sentence ; to the Irish reader, especially if he belongs to the class from which the cUentele of the Irish Worker is drawn, it has a terrible significance. Again, it is permissible to express amazement that incendiary matter of this character could be printed in a newspaper without bringing down upon the writer and publisher the stern attentions of the law. Strangely enough, in Mr. Larkin's case, the publication of the denunciation of the employers followed upon an episode which brought him into close personal association with the Viceroy. Alarmed at the turn that the labour troubles was taking, and particularly at the threat of the employers to introduce free labour. Lord Aberdeen had, as many thought at the time, and not a few think stUl, compromised his high position by calling the arch- labour agitator to his presence. He did so with the object of securing an adjustment of the difficulty by bringing representatives of the employers into touch with those who spoke for the employed, and his aims were achieved to the extent that a mutual arrangement was come to at the conference (which was held in Dublin Castle on July 22) by which the employers, represented by Mr. Watson and Mr. McCormick, agreed not to introduce strike breakers, and Mr. Larkin and his fellow delegate Mr. Kelly, according to a memorandum made of go DISTURBED DUBLIN the conference at the time and quoted by Mr. Healy in his speech at Sir George Askwith's inquiry, pledged them- selves to acknowledge the principle of free labour.^ Mr. Larkin had been given his inch— he promptly took his ell. In doing so he probably had complete confidence in the inaction of the Castle, with whose interior he had, only a week previously, made such intimate acquaintance. Whatever may have been the effect of the Viceroy's intervention on Mr. Larkin personally, the Castle confer- ence only resulted in ameliorating the position of affairs temporarily. One of the proposals which emanated from the gathering was that the conciliation board scheme of 1908 should be given vitality by the appointment of representatives of masters and men. The employers promptly sent in the names of two delegates to act for them, but no move was made in the Larkinite camp, and to this day the board is non-existent because the workers' representatives have not been chosen. The truth, of course, is that conciliation is not a desirable object from the syndicalistic standpoint. Exponents of the creed of the type of Mr. Larkin do not want workers to be contented and relations between employers and employed to be harmonious and peaceful. They have, consequently, no use for conciUation boards, and it is sheer futility to press them upon them. One touch- stone, and one only, they apply to the disputes in which they are involved — ^the test of physical endurance. It was not long before even the most enthusiastic of official conciliators came to realise this rather brutal truth. ' Mr. Larkin at a later date strenuously denied that he had assented to the principle of free labour on this occasion ; but the memorandum is on record against his assertion, and, moreover, the recognition by Tiim of the principle is in keeping with his action in the Cork strike of 1908. In regard to this dispute the Rev. Patrick O'Leary, in giving evidence on Mr. Larkin's behalf in the criminal proceedings taken against him in June 1910, said : ' One of the points of the settlement (of December 8, 1908) was that unionists should work with non-unionists, and the men agreed to that on Mr. Larkin's suggestion.' (Report in the Irish Independent, June 18, 1910,) CHAPTER IX SYNDICALISM IN EXCELSIS Railway Strike — ^First Application of the Doctrine of ' Tainted Goods ' — Collapse of the Strike — ' We the People ' of Liberty Hall — ^The National Insurance Act a Larkinite Asset — ^Mr. Larkin's Personal Qualities — ^Harassed Employers — ^Dead Set on Messrs. Jacobs' — Growing Strength of the Irish Transport Workers' Union. The Viceregal Conference at Dublin Castle had such small influence that, before many weeks had elapsed after the settlement of the dispute at the wharves, Dublin was in the throes of another struggle precipitated by the malign activities of the Larkinite organisation. In this case the storm centre was the railways. The men on some of the Irish lines had come out in S5mipathy with their English colleagues in the great strike which occurred in the summer of 1911, but they had gone back again when the settle- ment was reached with the aid of the Government, in circumstances which are still fresh in the public memory. Business was settling back into its old grooves when a fresh source of trouble was created in Dublin by the raising of a novel issue by the Irish Transport Workers' Union. A distinctive feature of the operations of the organisation, as has been seen, was to strike at individual trades. Grievances, which are never difficult to discover, were exploited, and the screw was applied in the belief, not always without justification, that an isolated firm would put up a poor fight against the forces of the Union- One of the industries thus attacked in the summer of 1911 was the timber trade. As events proved, the timber 93 DISTURBED DUBLIN merchants were of tougher fibre than some of the em- ployers with whom Mr. Larkin had had to deal. They declined to be intimidated into surrender, and actually had the audacity to continue their business in the face of the veto of the autocrat of Liberty Hall. Such contumacy could not be passed over lightly, so plans were laid for putting a stop to the work of the various firms by cutting off their communications. Now for the first time was used a weapon in the Larkinite armoury which was sub- sequently to attain historic notoriety. This was the theory of ' tainted goods,' having as its corollary the sym- pathetic strike. Of all the instruments fashioned by sjnidicalistic ingenuity this is perhaps the most monstrous. If carried to its logical conclusion it would mean the complete paralysing of industry, the subjecting of the community to a slow death by the withholding of the necessaries of life. The original dispute might be of the most trumpery description. A squabble over a few pence a day, affecting a score of men, might start roUirig the ball which in its subsequent passage would involve every trade and every interest in which there were organised workers. In the case under notice the trouble grew out of a simple question of wages. When it was found that the timber merchants were able to dispose of their timber in spite of the Union, attempts were made to coerce the railway companies into a refusal to handle their goods. On the 15th September some carts arrived at the Great Southern and Western Railway, Kingsbridge, with loads of timber, accompanied by the Transport Workers' Union picket, who ordered the railway goods porters not to handle the goods. The men submissively obeyed, and the outcome of the episode was a strike which involved many of the working staff on this and other lines. It was impossible, of course, for the directors to surrender on such a point as thatwhich had been raised. Railway Companies, as public carriers, are bound under statute to accept all goods that SYNDICALISM IN EXCELSIS 93 are offered for transport, and. if they had been weak or foolish enough to have fallen in with the insolent demands of the Union, they would have laid themselves open to heavy pains and penalties. The misguided men, however, under the Larkinite domination, persisted in their refusal to work on the only possible conditions that could be offered them, with the result that the strike spread to Cork and other centres, and for some weeks the trade of Dublin and the districts served by the railways, comprising half Ireland, was dislocated. Though the strike had been entered upon without sanction and upon wholly indefencible grounds, the Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants — ^the general union of railway workers — ^took up the quarrel, and the entire headquarters' staff of the organisation was trans- ferred to Dublin, the more effectually to conduct the campaign. When the dispute had been running three weeks the Society realised that its funds were being depleted without any prospect of advantage, and it suddenly shut down supplies. When the inevitable end came, with the uncon- ditional surrender of the victimised strikers, both on the railways and in the timber yards, the Irish Worker soothed their wounded feehngs with a char- acteristic outburst. ' My comrades,' said the Editor (October 7, 191 1), ' this so-called defeat of a section of the workers is to become an historic landmark in the rise of the common people of this country. Mark what I say, from this hour a new factor enters into the problem of the destiny of Ireland. The basic factor, that which has hitherto been ignored, now has asserted itself, felt the power, realised the possibilities. Woe to you Scribes and Pharisees, you have roused into life and action, the greatest power on earth, the God-given power of the common people. No longer in this land of ours (mark you, ours not yours) will a smaU privileged class hood- wink the people. Defeat, you say ? Yes, the defeat of 94 DISTURBED DUBLIN ignorance and darkness. The common people of this country were of the opinion up to and during the fight that there was no cleavage between the people who had and those who had not. Our friends the enemy have dispelled the myth. The v/orking class has felt its own power and realised the forces opposed to them. The next move belongs to the sovereign people, by the Grace of God. Out of our way you clods, you reptiles, you sycophants. We, the people, are awake.' This rhodomontade from ' We, the people ' of Liberty Hall was poor compensation for the loss of wages and position which the railway workers suffered, and it may be doubted whether the most enthusiastic of Larkinites amongst them ate the very unsubstantial mess of pottage offered them with relish. But it was no doubt true, as stated in the article, that the check given to Larkinism was only a temporary one. The penalties which had to be paid for the reverse fell largely upon those who were outside the Transport Workers' Union, and there was a distinct set-off to the effect which these had in the object lesson which had been given of the tremendous power for mischief of the organisation. People of all classes had in fact, by this time, been made to realise that the syndicalistic forces in their midst were a danger to the community, which some day would have to be seriously grappled with if the community itself was not to go under. Fortune smiled upon Mr. Larkin in various ways in these days when he was building up his organisation. The supineness of the Government in dealing with the more violent phases of industrial unrest in England gave strength to his influence over the Dublin populace by propagating the belief in the infallibility of the vox populi and the invincibility of the organised workers. But by far the most helpful of the agencies which he had at his call at this period was the National Insurance Act. This measure, with its scheme of approved societies deahng directly with the insured, was just the instrument SYNDICALISM IN EXCELSIS 95 that he needed to bring into his fold the miscellaneous class of unskilled workers to whom he principally made his appeal. Under astute guidance the men were shep- herded into the Irish Transport Workers' Union for insurance purposes, and once there good care was taken that they should associate themselves with all the objects for which the Union existed. The character of the inducements offered to insured workers to cast their lot in with the Union may be realised from the following notice in the Irish Worker (February 8, 1913) : ' Remember, the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union Approved Society, under the National Insurance rules, requires no medical certificates, except in cases of malingering. AU genuine cases accepted on their merits ; no delay in settling claims. Maternity claims settled in 12 hours after application. Transfer now to the Workers* Insur- ance Society. Branches throughout the country. We paid the first maternity claim in Ireland ; no deductions, no delay ; not a profit-making society, but a genuine Insurance Society. No highly paid oflicials, no titled ladies and gentlemen managing this Society ; working women and working men control and manage this Society in the interests and for the benefit of the working classes.' This notice appears below a suggestive cartoon in which the artist seems to have embodied the cynical amuse- ment of the managers of the Union at the certain results of their very free system of administering benefits. In the picture a groggy knock-kneed individual is shown entering the State Insurance Ofiice, on the door of which is inscribed the injunction ' Cough here, please.' Next he is revealed at the counter, below which are the words : ' Advance three paces, clutch the counter and groan horribly.' In the succeeding stage he is enjoined to ' breathe in short gasps, stagger heavily, and demand a chair (in a trembUng voice).' Afterwards he is told to • explain (in a hollow voice) that you have a wife and nine children (all the latter under six years of age),' also 96 DISTURBED DUBLIN to ' tell any other plausible lies that may occur to you.' The last scene of all — ^the applicant running hotfoot for the ' Harp ' public house — is described by the words : ' When paid, throw away your stick, turn ofE the cough and groan business, and run for it.' Another contributor, a Larkinite Silas Wegg, dropped into verse, and in a parody of the Charge of the Light Brigade described the rush of ' the Sick Hundred,' how ' just like a December gale ' they charged up the stairs of Liberty Hall to make their claims for sick benefit. In the last verse we have an appropriate finale to the episode : Homeward those sick ones went. With money to pay the rent. Which Lloyd George had kindly lent — Happy Sick Hundred ! And tho' they're badly crushed. Into the pub they rushed. Later, with faces flushed, Homeward they went. By adopting the methods so picturesquely set forth in the Irish Worker, the Union drew into its ranks hundreds of the labouring class who would not otherwise, probably, have been brought under the Larkinite sway ; and what was perhaps more important for the objects of the propa- ganda, it fixed them in their allegiance by the strong bonds which the insurance system supplied. It is, perhaps, too much to say that without the invaluable aid of the Insurance system the Union could not have existed, but it is fairly certain that it would not, on its own basis as a trade organisation pure and simple, have been the power it ultimately became. Mr. Larkin's influence also unquestionably owed a good deal to his own personal qualities. Associated with the magnetism by which he hypnotised his associ- ates and moulded them to his wUl, was a real genius for the ruder form of diplomacy which promotes the success of a policy of aggressive industriahsm. His SYNDICALISM IN EXCELSIS 97 cleverness was notably shown in the manner in which he effected a lodgment in the strongholds of the capitalistic enemy. One of his methods was to employ, as missionaries of his peculiar views, men who had been dismissed from a firm's employ usually for good and sufficient reasons. These individuals, being well ac- quainted with the business system of the establishment and also familiar with the personnel of the working staff, were able to assist in the direction of his operations on the most effective lines. These accredited agents, once established in a workshop or factory, had little difficulty in creating unrest. A high-handed foreman, an irritating regulation, or an exercise of stern, if salutary discipline, supplied a fulcrum for the disturbance of the good relations which had previously existed between employer and employed. Under this dual system the spread of discontent assumed proportions which made it easy to push the claims of the Union to be regarded as the special instrument for the emancipation of the Dubhn workers from the thraldom of a desolating and merciless capitalism. Driven almost to distraction by the continued inter- ruptions to their business, caused by the disputes engineered by the agents of the Union, the employers in some cases sought to make terms with the enemy. But this they speedily discovered was the very worst pohcy that they could have pursued. Before they had been whipped with whips ; now they were whipped with scorpions. Agreements verbally entered into were broken almost as soon as they were made. Every man with a grievance — and in every large factory there are many such — ^went with it to Liberty Hall, and peremptory orders were issued from that seat of autocratic authority for the removal of the cause of offence regardless of whether or not there was right on the worker's side. Discipline in such circumstances was impossible to maintain. The control of the employer's business was 98 DISTURBED DUBLIN no longer his. It had passed to an irresponsible tribunal which had no other interest than, to convince the workers that its power was paramount. There were many instances of the tyrannical inter- ference of the Larkinite combination in the working of individual firms in this period which preceded the great strike. Mostly those attacked were small employers who could not defend themselves. They were usually assailed at the very worst moment for their business — at Christmas or some other period of stress and strain, when stoppage might mean ruin for the firm. Mr. Larkin also, however, went for bigger game — ^the great undertakings employing hundreds of workers. Messrs. Jacob's Biscuit Factory, as we have already indicated, was from an early date the special object of the maleficent attentions of Liberty HaU. After a series of attacks had been made upon the firm, an agreement was come to by the terms of which forty-eight hours' notice was to be given in the event of a further dispute. Relieved that the difficulty had been overcome, Messrs. Jacob paid their workers for the day that they were on strike. The amount thus disbursed was considerable, but it was no doubt felt that if goodwill could be purchased by a concession of the kind the outlay was thoroughly justified. But, alas, for the vanity of human expectations. Messrs. Jacob had not counted on the essentially irresponsible character of the force with which they had made their composition. Before a year was out another sudden stoppage of the operations of the factory occurred, owing to labour troubles. The crisis, in this instance, was not caused by the direct action of the Union : it was brought about in a somewhat roundabout way by a carefully manufactured grievance. A man professed that he could not work at a particular machine because the dough was too stiff. The foreman pointed out that the dough was as usual. Still the man persisted that he could not work the machine. Thereupon the foreman SYNDICALISM IN EXCELSIS 99 set another man to do the work, with perfectly satisfactory results. So conspicuous an instance of insubordination could not be passed over and, after the facts had been carefully sifted by a leading member of the firm, the recalcitrant employee was dismissed. His cause was immediately championed by the Union. A day or two subsequent to the man's discharge, when the senior partner was away in Liverpool, the workers at a given signal — ^the blowing of a whistle — ^left their emplo3Tnent. The fact that an agreement, duly ratified by the head of the Union, had been entered into that there was to be no strike without two days' notice weighed as nothing against the inconvenience and loss which it was possible to inflict upon the firm for daring to assert its authority. Messrs. Jacob were naturally annoyed at the repudiation of the bond which the episode carried with it, but, wishing for peace, they took the man back on his making a proper apology for his conduct. Instead of ensuring harmony, the concession was only an incitement to the Larkinites to strengthen their grip on the business. Messrs. Jacob, who are above everything employers who value the human tie, noted with concern the changed attitude of their workers. But at the moment they had not much time for vain regrets. The interference of the Union in the working of their business was having the most serious consequences. Harassed by the agency of the sinister power which had gained ascendency in Dublin, they looked on the future with increasing misgiving. How they, in common with other cruelly oppressed employers, found deliverance from the deso- lating Larkinite tyranny will be told later. Meanwhile it may be convenient here to point out to what a complete extent by this time Mr. Larkin had realised his ideal of a Union which should embrace all sorts and conditions of workers. Welded into one whole were dock labourers, factory workers, tramway men, builders' labourers, shop porters, railway men, H 3 100 DISTURBED DUBLIN domestic servants, and farm labourers. The female element was especially encouraged, and not improbably the dead set made against Messrs. Jacob from the first was due to Mr. Larkin's perception of the pecuUarly good facilities which the working staff of the factory offered for the pushing of his propaganda in a feminine direction. His movement obtained a great stimulus from the exposure of some cases of undoubted hardship amongst the minor trades of the city where employers had overworked and underpaid their workers, and especially their women workers. But these stories of oppression often exaggerated facts almost beyond re- semblance, and they were adorned with an embroidery of scurrility of the most nauseous description. What Mr. Larkin seems to have aimed at was to make himself a sort of benevolent Napoleon who would hold the whole industrial world of Ireland in fee and dole out to his very obedient subjects rewards for their fidelity out of the spoils of the dynasties he had overthrown. It was a brilliant conception, but Mr. Larkin had reckoned without his WelHngton. The Waterloo of his campaign was looming in the distance. CHAPTER X THE GOSPEL OF REPUDIATION Larkinite attack on the City of Dublin Steam Packet Company — Irish Worker's Views of the Binding Force of Agreements — ^Mr. Larkin attacks Lord Aberdeen-^His so-called Disclosures denied — Settlements efiected with Shipping Companies — Breach of Agree- ment with the Clyde Shipping Company — Discontent fomented in the Building and Engineering Trades. Mr. Larkin, while making his forays into the more obscure recesses of Dublin trade, never overlooked the fact that the primary object of his Union was the cham- pioning of the cause of the transport workers, and parti- cularly of the class associated with the shipping industry. His restless energies found ample scope in the ever- present discontent of those who made up the motley community of the quays and the dockside for the pushing of his claims to an industrial dictatorship. In the early months of 1913 friction was generated amongst the employees of the City of Dublin Steam Packet Co. This enterprise presented an especially broad front for labour attack. As the holder of the mail contract it could not, without very serious loss, allow of the interruption of its service of steamers. Furthermore, as the recipient of a Government subsidy, it was liable to political pressure which, as a simple trading concern, it would not have been subject to. When, therefore, trouble arose of the familiar kind, the Larkinite attacks were pushed with a vigour and assurance which gained new strength as the fight proceeded, and it was made clear that powerful 102 DISTURBED DUBLIN outside influences were at work to terminate the strike in the public interest. In this, as in other crises of a similar kind which occurred under the Larkinite dispensation, the strike was called without previous notice or complaint. On the morning of January 30, no doubt by a pre-concerted arrangement, the quay porters at work for the company at North Wall suddenly quitted their employment. Attempts were made to replace them, but, owing to the intimidation that prevailed, it was impossible to procure substitutes. As a consequence the saihng of the company's ships had to be cancelled. The casus belli, it afterwards appeared, was the refusal by the company of a demand made that four foremen in the steamship service should belong to the Union. It was a matter of dispute at the time of the outbreak of the trouble whether the men wished to join or whether they were prevented from doing so ; but, whatever the truth may have been as to that, it was soon made clear that non-union foremen were only used as a stalking horse for the pushing of a claim of a comprehensi'"« kind for increased wages and improved hours of working. It suited Mr. Larkin's purpose to pose at this juncture as an out-and-out advocate of conciliation. Though, as we have already seen, he had never responded to the invitations addressed to him to join in the setting up of the Conciliation Board, proposed under the 1908 agreement and further recommended in 1911, he had now the audacity to complain that the Board had not been constituted and cite the circumstance as a justifica- tion for the strike. His insincerity is attested, not merely by his course of action from the period he first appeared on the scene in Dublin, but by the definite attitude assumed in regard to agreements, both by himself and those closely associated with him. Thus, in the Irish Worker of June 7, 1913, a contribution appeared in a prominent position in which the true Larkinite faith is THE GOSPEL OF REPUDIATION 103 expounded in these words : ' Agreements come to between parties on equal terms should be enforceable, but in the case of agreements between Capital and Labour, there is wanting the fair and square dealing and that free discussion on equal terms that alone makes ordinary contracts legaJly and morally binding. For instance, why should I be bound by an agreement drawn up at a time when I might be in a condition of helplessness that gives to another man the power to rob me of the greater part of my earnings ? I would keep on signing such things as long as they suited me, but I would never admit they should prevent me striking or demanding better conditions when the opportunity offers.' The gospel of repudiation could not be more frankly preached or more lucidly set forth than it is here. In point of fact, as has already been said, if there is one feature more than another which has characterised this Larkinite movement it is defiance of the moral law, to say nothing of the statute law, which gives binding force to contracts in every civilised community. There is no necessity to follow the City of DubHn Steam Packet Company's dispute through its devious course. Enough to say that, after several weeks' turmoil and interruption of trade, a composition was reached which gave the men a good deal of what they claimed. The responsibility of the directors was great, and they doubtless were constrained by reasons which seemed to them "all sufficient to come to terms with their active opponent. But, as in the case of Messrs. Jacob, it was a case of ' Peace, peace, when there is no peace.' The foe had been bought off for the moment, but the spoils of his victory only served to whet his appetite for further conquest. The temper in which Mr. Larkin conducted the struggle to its final stage is aptly illustrated by an incident which attracted great attention at the time, and which cannot be passed over in a history of the strike. 104 DISTURBED DUBLIN When the dispute was in progress, a meeting was held at the Mansion House under the presidency of the Lord Mayor (Mr. Lorcan Sherlock) with the object, if possible, of finding a basis for compromise. The proceedings proved abortive, but they were made notable by a speech by Mr. Larkin, touched with some piquant reminis- cences relative to his intercourse with Lord Aberdeen, the Viceroy. Alluding to his imprisonment for fraud, Mr. Larkin said that, on his conviction, Mr. Samuel McCormick went straight away to the Lord-Lieutenant and told him that he (Mr. Larkin) had been unjustly dealt with.^ Subsequently he was released and given a free pardon. ' The next time he saw the Earl of Aberdeen,' went on Mr. Larkin, ' he said he was glad to see him (Mr. Larkin), and said he regretted his imprisonment. He also said, " Would you mind shaking hands with me ? " He said he had not the slightest objection. Lord Aberdeen said : " Every man in the country is sorry for you, and only for the old duffer of a judge you woul^ have been out three months ago." ' In the columns of The Times was published an authorised communique to the effect that ' when any respectable intelligent man in Dublin publicly declares that he believes that the Lord-Lieutenant uttered the words attributed to him by Mr. Larkin it will be then time enough for his Excellency to deal with the matter.' Mr. Larkin took up the implied challenge embodied in the official statement and filled two long columns of the issue of his paper on April 5, 1913, with details of his intercourse with the exalted authorities at Viceregal Lodge and the Castle. There was an allegation that, in the trouble of 1908, Lord Aberdeen ' importuned ' Mr. Larkin to go to the Castle to have a chat about the strike, and that his Excellency placed a special motor-car at * Mr. McCormick denies that he ever stated either to the Lord- Lieutenant or any other person that Mr. Larkin had been unjustly sentenced. THE GOSPEL OF REPUDIATION 105 his disposal for use in the subsequent negotiations. He also averred that he and several of his colleagues were invited to tea at the Viceregal Lodge, and that at the symposium, over which Lady Aberdeen presided, he, Mr. Larkin, made it a condition of a settlement that all the men who had been arrested in connection with the strike should be released. The sequel as told in Mr. Larkin's own words was this : ' " What do you mean ? " said the last of the Gordons, his Excellency. " I mean this," said Larkin ; " and if this is not granted the dispute continues — that every man who has been arrested or sentenced in connection with this dispute shall be released, and shall be with wife, mother, or family, as the case may be, on Christmas Eve." Will he deny that a certain gentleman, a responsible head of the Government, objected and said that such a request should not be made publicly to his Excellency ? Will his Excellency deny that Mr. Larkin has in his possession, where the Castle minions won't find it until it is necessary to produce same, the paper from Mr. Isaac Mitchell, of the Board of Trade, dated December 1908, written in black lead, " Your request granted ; kindly furnish list of men." Will his Excellency deny that he or his minions have or had in their possession a list of the men's names furnished by James Larkin : of men lying in Mount joy and Kilmainham Gaols, either under remand or sentence, to the number of 53 who were released on December 24, 1908 ? ' In this interrogative form the list of allegations was considerably expanded, and the whole effusion con- cluded with a gross personal attack on Lord and Lady Aberdeen. In the House of Commons Mr. Birrell gave a general denial to the assertions contained in the article. The whole affair afforded a striking commentary on Mr. Larkin's peculiar methods. As he is not bound by contracts, so he is not hampered by the honourable conventions that make social intercourse possible. He was ready to abuse the confidence of the Viceroy at the io6 DISTURBED DUBLIN moment when it appeared that some end could be achieved by doing so. The circumstance that to Lord Aberdeen he owed his release from a long term of imprison- ment seemed almost to add zest to the task of laying bare the intimacies of private life. Mr. Larkin gave special prominence to details which he knew would cause pain, and he dragged in perfectly irrelevant matter with the special object of adding force to his brutal attack on the great functionary who had befriended him. His parade of ingratitude was no doubt a calculated per- formance designed for the benefit of the ignorant crowd who would not fail to see how puny are the Viceroys when faced by his Majesty of the People in the person of Mr. James Larkin. It would be useless to waste words in denunciation of the spirit of moral lawlessness that runs through all this chapter in the history of Larkinism. Mr. Larkin, we may safely assume, thought that the world was going very well at this particular period in his career. He had harassed to a point almost beyond endurance large employers of labour like Messrs. Jacob, he had infused terror into the hearts of the whole of the smaller traders whose businesses were exceptionally dependent upon labour, and he had won in a stand-up fight with one of the greatest of the Irish shipping com- panies. He was, in fact, almost at the pinnacle of his fame as a labour agitator. One notable series of victories, however, remained to be achieved. These were sur- renders wrung from the leading shipping companies who had been drawn into the struggle with the City of Dublin Steam Packet Company. The capitulating firms included the Dublin-Silloth and Isle of Man Co., the British and Irish Steam Packet Co., the Bristol Steam Navigation Co., the Clyde Shipping Co., the Duke Shipping Co., and Messrs. Tedcastle, McCormick & Co. Virtually the whole of the Irish shipping interest had now been brought to book by the Dictator of Liberty Hall. The firms concerned had been driven to the highly distasteful THE GOSPEL OF REPUDIATION 107 course of making a composition with their tormentor by the tremendous force exercised by an economic situation of daily increasing seriousness. They had conceded much as the City of DubUn Steam Packet Co. had done, in the hope rather than the expectation that a more or less permanent peace might be thereby bought. If they had been dealing with an ordinary Trade Union of the EngKsh type they would almost certainly not have been disappointed, for the agreement to which the representatives of the Union — Mr. Larkin and Messrs. John O'Neill and Patrick Nolan — set their hands was a straightforward undertaking carrying with it the apparent assurance of lasting harmony. Its terms are so important for a full understanding of the true spirit of Larkinism that the essential clause may be given here. It runs: ' Any question as to interpretation of this agreement, or any dispute arising between the men and their employers, to be submitted to the latter in writing : no stoppage of work to take place pending negotiations regarding such matters. This agreement to be binding on all concerned, and at least one month's notice to either side to be given of any intention to terminate it — ^the terms of this agree- ment to come into force on Monday, June 2, 1913.' The language of the foregoing is so clear as to preclude any possibility of legitimate misunderstanding. ' Lightning strikes ' were to be things of the past and complaints were to be submitted in writing. There was to be order and reason where hitherto there had been a capricious and arbitrary method of handling disputes. As a paper arrangement the agreement represented a distinct advance on what had previously been obtained from the same source. If it had been given a fair trial it might have inaugurated a new era in the relations of employer and employed in the port. It would assuredly have averted many of the calamities that ultimately fell upon the city. But the syndicahstic theory, already quoted, that an agreement is only binding upon the workmen just as io8 DISTURBED DUBLIN long as it suits them to accept it, had too powerful an influence to permit of anything so just and reasonable as the testing of the machinery provided by the under- standing. Barely was the ink dry upon the document in which the terms of the concordat were embodied than a flagrant breach of the agreement occurred. Some men who were working on a vessel called the Sandow, belonging to the Clyde Shipping Co., without a moment's notice, ceased work. On inquiry by Mr. Young, the manager, it was found that the grievance was that the men were not receiving such large wages as the Company's employees in Belfast. This, it was represented, was the more important matter, as there existed in the northern port a union which was inimical to Mr. Larkin and which he regarded with a mutual feeling of aversion. The excuse put forward for the gross violation of the compact was too flimsy even for Larkinite impudence to uphold, and in the end the men were ordered back to work ; but as a consequence of the dispute the vessel lost a tide, a rather serious matter for the company. The incident just described, which took place in the first week in June 1913, boded ill for the maintenance of the peace of the port, even on the precarious tenure that an agreement, terminable on a single month's notice, supplied. If this easy renunciation of the responsibilities imposed under the contract was possible a few days after the sealing of the bond, what was likely to happen later, when the lapse of time had brought to the front new questions of real importance from the workers' stand- point ? The answer to this was not long in coming, as we shall see in the next chapter. Anticipating a little, we may say that the agreement was treated as if it were no more than waste paper. After the shipowners, it was the turn of the builders to feel the weight of the Larkinite dictatorship. In the middle of June a demand was made from Liberty Hall THE GOSPEL OF REPUDIATION 109 for an increase of wages for the men employed by Messrs. J. & C. McGloughlin & Co., a well-known Dublin firm. All the Dubhn builders and alhed trades belong to a federation, the members of which have a common under- standing as to wages and hours of work. In consonance with this arrangement, Messrs. McGloughlin informed Mr. Larkin that the application would be sent to the federa- tion and duly considered by them. This, however, was a course which did not suit the policy of the Irish Trans- port Workers' Union. Combination, excepting on the men's side, as has been shown in earlier pages, was abhor- rent to the Larkinite mind. The shrewd perception of the agitator doubtless made it clear to him that his system could not long survive if the threatened interests united in defence in a thorough-going way. Therefore, when he received a reply from Messrs. McGloughlin, he offered strong resistance to the proposal that the question should be dealt with by the general body of builders, and he ignored their invitation to a conference to discuss the matter ; later stating that he did not receive their letters, although one had been sent under registered cover. Mr. Larkin, finding his way barred in this manner, now raised an entirely new issue. He accomplished this in characteristic fashion by causing, or^at all events utilising, local friction in the workshops for the attack on the firm of Messrs. J. & C. McGloughlin. A man who was put on to manage a particular machine refused to work on some flimsy pretext. After it had been shown by the substitu- tion of another workman that the machine was in proper order, the offender was dismissed. Thereupon, without notice of any kind, Mr. Larkin withdrew all members of the Irish Transport Union from the firm's establishment. Almost immediately he followed up this action by sending in a demand for a reply to the application of June 18 for increased wages, but was again referred by Messrs. McGloughlin to the agreement which all builders had as to common action. Ultimately the Masters' Association no DISTURBED DUBLIN decided to consult the Trades Council, and to invite them to send delegates to a conference. This course having been adopted, a meeting took place, Messrs. O'Brien and Simmons, Vice-President and Secretary of the Trades Council, and Mr. Larkin appearing to represent the Trades Council. In the discussion Mr. Larkin resolutely declined to allow the Association to treat with the Trades Council on the subject of the increased wages, and he was supported in his view by Mr. Simmons. Mr. O'Brien held the opinion that Messrs. McGloughlin were justified in dealing with the matter through the Employers' Association, and frankly stated that he considered it an advantage to be able to deal with such an association. His views were afterwards reflected in the resolution adopted by the Trades Council on the subject, which was to the following effect : ' That this Council approves of the idea of Collective Bargaining, and we believe that all matters in dispute can be more easily dealt with by such means than by dealing with individuals.' In a letter sent to the Masters' Association embodying this resolution, the Trades Council stated that they thought that Messrs. McGloughlin should re-instate the man victim- ised, and that the question of wages and conditions of work should be settled between the Association and the men's Union. Mr. Larkin, however, persisted in his atti- tude, and the Association reluctantly decided that they would have no alternative but to lock out all their em- ployees until such time as the Trades Council insisted on Collective Bargaining by one of its affihated unions. At the same time the Association were of the opinion that it would only be fair to consult the various trades unions which would be affected before doing so. In the meantime they refused to employ any members of the Irish Transport Union. Ultimately a settlement was arrived at by the man who had been dismissed apologising to Messrs. McGloughUn and agreeing to carry out all their instructions, which apology was accepted and the man THE GOSPEL OF REPUDIATION iii re-instated. The question of wages, it was arranged should be referred to the Association and the Union. Almost simultaneously with this dispute the Larkinite policy produced a stoppage in the engineering trade. The originating cause of the trouble was a strike which had been manipulated at the Savoy Restaurant in Grafton Street. In order to isolate the business, Mr. Larkin issued his edict that no one should work for the company in any shape or form. A firm of carters who transacted the carrying business of the estabUshment saw fit to ignore the order. Not to be beaten in this way, Mr. Larkin put on an additional screw by prohibiting Messrs. Booth, a well-known firm of engineers, from doing work for the carting firm. As Messrs. Booth in their turn declined to be dictated to, the engineers were called out in the trade generally. An appeal was made to the head quarters of the Amalgamated Society of Engineers in London against this monstrous act of tyranny, and a reply came back that the men were not to come out, but were to remain at work as long as their lives were not endangered. This was satisfactory as far as it went, but unfortunately Mr. Larkin was able to cut off the suppUes of the engineering firms by inducing the carters to decline to handle their goods. The stoppage of the trade was thus eventually brought about, ' all because,' as Mr. Healy afterwards whimsically said at the Government Inquiry, ' of this Uttle dispute in a sweet shop in Grafton Street.' What the interruption of business meant may be gauged from the fact that Messrs. Spence & Co., the firm in Cork Street to which we have previously referred, had at the time a contract for £30,000 for Messrs. Guinness & Co. The Puck-Hke activities of Mr. Larkin almost always seemed to be in the direction in which the greatest mis- chief could be worked to the permanent interests of the Dublin trade. CHAPTER XI METHODS OF THE YAHOO Mr. W. M. Murphy begins to move — Scurrilous Attacks on Mr. Murphy in the Irish Worker — ^Purge of Larldnites from the Independent Dispatch Department and the Tramway Company's Traf&c Stafi — The Larkinite Counter-Movement — Messrs. Eason & Son Attacked — ' Tainted Goods ' again — Disorganisation of the Shipping Industry — Menaces of the Irish Worker — ^The True Character of Larkinism. Usually where a tyranny is established it is from within rather than froni without that the force which breaks the chains comes. In the case of the Larkinite domination this was pecuUarly so. Dublin trade was saved from possible extinction and certain permanent injury by one of its citizens, and he a prominent employer. Those who have followed the narrative will not need to be told that the industrial Wellington who was pitted against the Larkinite Napoleon was Mr. William Martin Murphy. I have already told the story of this gentleman's ante- cedents, and I need not repeat the details here. It is sufficient for my immediate purpose to bring him prominently on to the stage at the moment when Messrs. Jacob and the shipping companies were desperately struggling to free themselves from the tentacles of the Liberty Hall octopus, which had them in its vicious grasp. Mr. Murphy, watching this unequal conflict and ruminating on the position, especially as it was revealed in the Irish Worker, came to the conclusion that the time had arrived for him to take a hand in the business. Though so far METHODS OF THE YAHOO 113 no attack had been made on his business concerns, he reaUsed that the day was not distant when he would be called upon to face the Liberty Hall forces. Like a good general, he decided to choose his own time for the fight. For this he was afterwards criticised by labour apologists, but obviously he would have been singularly foohsh if he had waited for the attack to develop in the fashion which had caused ruinous loss to not a few business houses. Mr. Larkin himself, judging from the character of his writings in the Irish Worker, was, in the early half of 1913, spoiling for a fight with Mr. Murphy. Scarcely an issue of the journal came out without the vilest abuse of that gentleman and aU who were connected in any way with his enterprises. An example may be given of Mr. Larkin's infuriate style of conducting controversy. One day during the strike of the City of Dublin Company's employees the Independent published a story, written by a member of its reporting staff, illustrative of the strain that the dispute was putting upon the men who had come out. It was headed ' My Daddy's on Strike,' and related how a forlorn, half-starved boy encountered in the street had replied, in the words forming the title to the contribution, to a question as to why he was begging. There is not the least reason to suppose that the facts were otherwise than as related by the reporter. At all events, Mr. Murphy probably had as little to do with the publica- tion of the story as he had with the issue of a ticket of a particular number to a passenger travelling the same day on the tramway. But the episode was a good enough excuse for the pouring out of two columns of unmitigated Billingsgate upon Mr. Murphy's devoted head. The article (published in the Irish Worker, February 15, 1913) opened with the statement that ' throughout the past week every issue of the Daily Independent and Evening Herald, owned by the most foul and vicious blackguard that ever polluted any country — ^whose career has been 114 DISTURBED DUBLIN one long series of degrading and destroying the characters of men who he was, and is, not fit to be a doormat for — a creature who is living on the sweated victims who are com- pelled to slave for this modern journalistic vampire ' So possessed with rage was the writer that he omitted to finish his sentence. But he made it clear afterwards that it was the story of the starving child that rankled. ' Fancy,' he exlaimed, ' WiUiam Martin Murphy sjonpa- thising with a hungry child, the Ghoul, the creature who swated [sic] and starved a whole country-side during the strike of the railway slaves in Clare, the Ghoul who has sacked hundreds of men for trivial complaints, knowing that such dismissal meant actual starvation for those dismissed men's children. Why, there is not a labourer in the employment of this capitalistic vampire who is not at all times in a state of semi-starvation.' There was much more of this incoherent vilification of Mr. Murphy, accompanied by miscellaneous mud-throwing at those who in the press or on the platform had dared to criticise the Larkinite methods. Mr. Larkin's vitu- perative vocabulary never seemed to exhaust itself, and again and again he returned to the attack on these ' skunk journals,' these ' Murphyite rags.' ' They are,' he said on one occasion, in a very frenzy of hate, ' as rotten as the heart of their owner, and it is as rotten as hell.' Somewhat later he wrote of Mr. Murphy : ' Will this hypocrite never be tarred and feathered ? ' If Mr. Larkin had stopped at mere abuse, Mr. Murphy would probably have left him to void his filth unchecked. No one knew better than he what little effect this moral sewage had if it was left in its obscurity. It was only when the labour dictator gave evidence of his design to follow up his vitriolic attacks by action of the familiar kind that Mr. Murphy came to the conclusion that the hour had arrived for him to move. The particular manoeuvre of the Liberty Hall contingent which had convinced him that a strike was maturing, was the METHODS OF THE YAHOO 115 incorporation in the Union of the boys engaged in the dispatch department of the Independent, and of the youths who were employed in somewhat analogous duties in the branch of the tramway enterprise which has to do with the delivery of parcels. These youngsters are in the humblest ranks of the workers employed in both concerns, but they play a comparatively important part in the organisations to which they belong, since upon their active discharge of their functions depends the success of the whole operations. Realising, from the character of the Larkinite preparations, that the plan of campaign was to cripple his enterprises by calling out these lads at the moment when their services would be most valuable — ^which he calculated, accurately as it proved, would be during Dublin's great social festival — the Horse Show Week — Mr. Murphy boldly took the initiative by summoning a meeting of all the employees in the dispatch department of the Independent. At the gathering, which was held on August 15, Mr. Murphy made a business-like speech, putting before the workmen in plain language the policy that he had decided to pursue. While repudiating any hostility to legitimate trade unionism, he declared that he could not retain in his service any who belonged to Mr. Larkin's organisa- tion, which was an irresponsible wrecking concern with which it was impossible for employers to work. When he had finished he asked pointedly who were prepared to obey his orders and who were anxious to enrol them- selves under Mr. Larkin's banner. A show of hands revealed that the assembly was about equally divided. ' Very well then,' said Mr. Murphy in effect to the Larkinite section, ' you can take a week's wages in lieu of notice. If you mean to go on strike when Mr. Larkin calls you, you are no longer any use to me, and you may go now.' This direct manner of dealing with them took the malcontents somewhat aback, and they pleaded for time to consider their positions. The concession I 2 ii6 DISTURBED DUBLIN was readily granted, but the result was a foregone con- clusion. As soon as the Liberty Hall fraternity discovered what was in the wind, they took good care that the lads should not go back save to announce their adhesion to the Union. It appeared from the sequel that naost of them were so anxious to shake the dust of the Independent office from their feet that they did not wait to take their wages. Mr. Murphy, having effectually laid bare the position at the Independent in the manner described, turned his attention to the tramways. On discovering that Mr. Larkin, preparatory to a strike, was getting the members of the traffic staff (drivers and conductors) by persuasion and intimidation into the Transport Workers' Union, he himself called the men together to ascertain how far he could rely upon them in an emergency. Mr. Murphy found that, though a large number had become connected with Mr. Larkin's organisation, the majority were loyal to the company, and having given notice that any man intimidating others to join the union would be dismissed — a notice which was acted on — he was content to await the development of events. The Larkinite attack was not long delayed. It took the form, in the first instance, of an organised effort to prevent the sale and distribution of the paper. No great difficulty was experienced, with the employment of the intimidatory practices familiar to Liberty Hall, in temporarily interrupting the free circulation of the journal. Newsagents are, from the very nature of their occupation, widely scattered, and the task of ' peace- fully persuading ' them not to display the Independent contents' bills, or to sell the paper over the counter, was one well within the range of the activities of the indefatigable and unscrupulous pickets. But it was not enough to terrorise the smaller fry of shopkeepers into compliance with the Union's edicts. If the end aimed at was to be fully achieved, it was imperative that METHODS OF THE YAHOO 117 the higher game, represented by the great newspaper distributing agency of Messrs. Eason & Son — the W. H Smith & Co. of Ireland — should be reached. Messrs. Eason & Son are one of the firms of which Dublin citizens are justly proud. From small beginnings the business has been built up to a great enterprise with many branches and a clientele which embraces every class of the com- munity. The headquarters' establishment is in Middle Abbey Street, in direct connection with an extensive retail business in Lower Sackville Street, while an important manufacturing enterprise is carried on in large premises in Gloucester Street. But the feature of the firm's operations which is most in evidence to the visitor to Ireland is the railway bookstall trade. At every station of any importance in and near Dublin, Messrs. Eason & Son have a newspaper and bookselling business of the familiar kind, at which travellers can obtain all the leading journals and periodicals of the day. Manifestly no blow struck at the Independent could be effective without the support of this firm. Mr. Larkin, with a ready perception of the fact, at an early period brought his heavy artillery to bear on the house. Mr. Charles Eason, the head of the firm, who had already had a sample of the mischievous power of the Union in a series of attacks made upon him in the Irish Worker, was disposed at first to temporise with the enemy ; but as soon as the true character of the campaign which had been entered upon was revealed, he took the only course which a self-respecting firm could adopt when faced with a dictatorial demand to cease doing business for a customer — ^he resolutely declined to be a participator in the operations against the Independent by excluding their paper from his list. This open defiance of the decrees of Liberty Hall drew down upon the firm the unwelcome attentions of the organisation. Out of the well-stocked armoury at his head quarters for the coercion of the unwilling employer, Mr. Larkin ii8 DISTURBED DUBLIN drew out once more that now familiar weapon — ' tainted goods.' This he applied with a characteristically reck- less disregard of the effect that might be produced in quarters which were quite innocent of offence, even regarded from the peculiar standpoint of Larkinite ethics. His first blow was struck at the shipping industry, in whose afEairs, as we have seen, he had always displayed an unwholesome interest. It was the easiest thing in the world to pick a quarrel in this direction. In the nature of the things hardly a ship came into port without bringing a consignment of papers and periodicals for Messrs. Eason & Son. The crisis was reached on August 23, when the dock labourers, acting under Mr. Larkin's orders, refused to unload the Lady Gwendoline of the British and Irish Steam Packet Company's service because she had on board goods for Messrs. Eason. A more paltry excuse for a strike was never tendered on the Dublin Quay, though interruptions of work on the most trivial grounds have long been experienced there. But even if there had been a justification for the objec- tion of the men to carf y on the task of unloading, they put themselves in the wrong by ignoring the terms of the agreement of June 2, by striking without notice. Mr. Larkin was appealed to to secure the due enforcement of the contract, and after some delay he condescended to issue orders for the resumption of work. Two days later, however, fresh trouble arose when the Silloth Company's steamer Yarrow came into port, and further ■ tainted goods ' offended the susceptible nostrils of the dock labourers. On their flat refusal to handle the cargo the masters called a conference at Messrs. McCormick's, and invited Mr. Larkin to attend. Mr. Larkin put in an appearance at the meeting, and, when the infringement of the agreement was brought to his notice, he gave his personal guarantee that there should be no more trouble, whether there were ' tainted goods ' on board the ships to be unloaded or not. Apparently METHODS OF THE YAHOO 119 he afterwards repented of his adhesion to the bargain, for two days later he intimated to the employers he could not get his men to handle ' tainted goods.' AVhen taxed with bad faith, Mr. Larkin replied: ' When an army rebels, what is a commander to do ? ' He received the answer that might have been expected from a body of hard-headed business men. He was told that the revolt of the men was a mere pretence, that he could bend them to his will if he wished ; but that he did not wish, because it suited his purpose that they should come out in order that he might embarrass Messrs. Eason & Son and hit thirough them at his arch enemy — Mr. Murphy. Apart from the modest satisfaction that comes of speaking one's mind freely, the employers got nothing out of their iaterviews with Mr. Larkin. They were left with the uneasy reflection that they could no longer rely, to the slight extent that they had hitherto done, on the bona fides of the labour leader or upon agreements in which he had the smallest part. This view was borne in upon them the more strongly by the stories they heard from the lips of many of the workers on the quays — ^their old servants — that they were anxious to work on the ships but that they were prevented from doing so by the system of terrorism maintained under Mr. Larkin's direction. It was asserted by the men that they were attacked in the streets, that pickets visited their houses and frightened their wives, and that the malignant influence of Liberty Hall even extended to the schools, where their children were denounced as ' scabs ' and otherwise insulted. While the shipping magnates were facing the extremely unpleasant vista opened up by the violation of the agreement which they had hoped was to inaugurate an era of peace, the fight against the Independent — or, more properly speaking, against Mr. Murphy — was being prosecuted with all the resources that Mr. Larkin could 120 DISTURBED DUBLIN command. His pickets were active, and not a stone was left unturned by him or them to secure adherents to the Union and to intimidate those who dared to continue at work for the enemy in defiance of the orders of Liberty Hall. Meanwhile, the columns of the Irish Worker bore witness to the savagery with which the aims of the organisation were pushed. ' Every dog and devil, thief and saint,' wrote the editor, ' is getting an invitation to come and work for the Dublin Tramway Co. Every man applying is asked : "Do you belong to Larkin's Union? If so, no employment." " Will you ever join Larkin's Union. If so, no emplojmient." Well, Mr. Wm. M. Murphy will know — I hope to his and Alderman Cotton's satisfaction and the shareholders' benefit — who is in Larkin's Union, and who will have to be in it. Every man he is employing is known to us. What say Howard' and Paddy Byrne? What say Scab O'Neill? What say Kenna, Lawlor, &c. ? We have them all on the list. Mr. Wm. Martin Murphy's satellites, Gordon and Tresillian, have discharged some ten men for being in the Union. Right, William the Saint. We have not moved, will not move until we are ready. Woe betide scabs then ! ' The old note of intimidation rings here as blatantly as ever. No man was to dare to act in opposition to the Union. If he did, woe betide him. Larkinism, as we now see it, stands revealed in its true colours. Masquerading as a trade union, it had little in common with the trade organisations of England and Scotland but the name. The sense of responsibility which, with few exceptions, has marked the modern history of those organisations was entirely wanting. The sole guiding principle of Larkinism was the will of the founder, who arrogated to himself despotic powers and exercised them with an absolutism which few monarchs would dare to emulate. Agreements were flagrantly broken. There was a contemptuous disregard, even of the ordinary conventions of industrial warfare, METHODS OF THE YAHOO 121 in the manner in which strikes were called. Employers were struck at indiscriminately, the good with the bad ; and the most vindictive vendetta was carried against one firm which was especially distinguished for its humane and considerate treatment of its employees. The methods of controversy followed were those of the Yahoo. In gutter language of the vilest kind, anyone and everyone who crossed the path of the arch-agitator was traduced and held up to ridicule. The myrmidons of the Union were ubiquitous, carrying on their crusade of intimida- tion with a callousness which is happily rare in the annals of militant industrialism. The propaganda was osten- tatiously revolutionary in its character. Betterment of the workers' conditions was a mere stalking-horse for a far-reaching scheme of Red Republicanism, in which the elimination of the capitalist by a drastic process had a conspicuous place. In fine, the movement had the worst qualities of syndicalism with the added drawback of a personal ascendancy based on the skilful exercise of an elaborate system of moral and physical terrorism. Such being the character of the organisation, it is not remarkable that it aroused in Dublin feelings of the deepest anxiety amongst those who were in any way dependent upon the maintenance of the trade of the city. It was increasingly felt as the weeks went on that, if a check were not given to the sinister power which had established itself in their midst, irremediable injury would be done to many important branches of DubMn's industry. CHAPTER XII THE STRIKE THAT FAILED The Dublin Season — Horse Show Week selected for a Tramway Strike — Mr. Larkin's Miscalculation — ^Failure of his Coup — Inflammatory Oratory in Beresford Place — Arrest of Mr. Larkin and his four Principal Associates — Police Court Proceedings — The Prosecution a Mistake — Incendiary Speeches — ^Police charge the Mob — A Frankly Anarchical Crusade< The Dublin social season is an attenuated version of the London season and a mere shadow of the spacious period of the city's life as a capital a century ago. It is prac- tically confined to a single week at the end of the summer, when the horse show, for which Dublin is famous, draws visitors from every part of the world. But this Horse Show Week is a time of glorious life, when Ireland for the nonce forgets her political troubles and gives way to gaiety and the mild form of dissipation which shows itself in a constant round of dinners, garden parties, and balls. During the period a fructifying stream of money flows through every artery of Dublin's trade. The hotels are crowded to the utmost limit, the car drivers and livery stable keepers are overwhelmed with patronage, the shops are thronged with customers, and all the mem- bers of the humbler fraternity of the streets— the news- vendors, the street hawkers, the luggage porters, and the beggars — are made happy by the liberality of the pleasure- seeking crowd. At no other period in the whole year would disorganisation of the ordinary machinery of life THE STRIKE THAT FAILED 123 produce more widespread inconvenience and loss to the community. With the eye of a tactician who cares nothing for the consequences of his action so long as the end he seeks is achieved, Mr. Larkin selected this supremely important juncture in Dublin's life for the delivery of his coitp. The position, as it existed on the eve of the Horse Show Week, was that he had got into his Union a certain num- ber of the tramway traf&c men in addition to about 120 of the parcel department who had been dismissed when Mr. Murphy made his purge of Larkinites a few weeks earlier. He had a leverage for a strike, and a very power- ful one, or one which would have been powerful if he had had to reckon with ordinary conditions. But, as has been indicated, he was confronted with an exceedingly able antagonist who, all the weeks that the trouble was brewing, had been quietly perfecting his arrangements to meet the crisis whenever it should arrive. Every precaution that could be taken against attack was taken. Extra men were engaged and held in reserve to supply the place of the road repair men who, it was surmised — accurately as it proved— would be drawn out at the first summons from the Larkinite head quarters. The power house, with its delicate and indispensable machinery, was carefully surveyed and arrangements were made for dealing with any emergency that might arise, and stock was generally taken of the resources that were available to supply deficiencies in a time of crisis. Mr. Larkin, like a good many schemers before his time, proved in this business of the tramway strike ' too clever by half,' to use a popular phrase. He conceived the brilliant idea of calling a strike at an hour when the tramways were fully working. The edict was to go forth like a flash of lightning from Liberty Hall, and lo ! and behold, as a testimony to the power of a master mind, the whole tramway 124 DISTURBED DUBLIN system was to be brought to a standstill at the same moment. The course of events on the first day of the strike — August 26 — ^may be briefly related. At a quarter to ten o'clock in the morning, at various points in the city, and notably in the central area, cars were deserted by their drivers and conductors and left derelict. In a few cases passengers were bluntly told that they had better get out as no more cars would be run ; but, generally speaking, no explanation was vouchsafed. The men simply got off the cars and donned the badge of the Irish Transport Union — a red hand — as a sign of their revolt against constituted authority. Posting themselves at convenient vantage points they awaited the develop- ment of the crisis with an assumption of confidence which their nervousness belied. They were not long before they discovered that the Larkinite strike had conspicuously failed. With a celerity which did credit to the perfection of their organisation, the tramway management got into the sheds the derelict cars, and reorganised the service with the aid of the emergency hands drawn from the clerical and executive staff. Within a little over an hour of the calling of the strike the service was in fuU swing again. In view of the fact that about 150 men out of a total of 750 had been enticed from their allegiance, the tramway directors were reasonably proud of the manner in which they had met the crisis. But it was perfectly clear that, though the Larkinites had been badly worsted in the first action, they had not by any means abandoned the fight. Although the day closed without any serious incident, it was obvious that there was an ugly temper abroad which, on small provocation, would manifest itself in disturbance of the peace. Sullen groups at street comers greeted the men on the running cars with execra- tions, and in out-of-the-way portions of the routes open intimidation was practised. The next day brought no real relaxation of the strain. The cars were run with THE STRIKE THAT FAILED 125 fair regularity on almost all the routes, but they had at several points to encounter a hostile mob, who threw stones freely, and in a few cases broke the windows of the cars with their missiles. The defection of a small number of motor men on the Kingsbridge line and a brutal assault committed on an elderly driver were further indications that the Larkinite influence was still active. Mr. Larkin himself had already given impressive proof that he did not accept the defeat of his plans against the tramways as more than a temporary check. In addressing a meeting of strikers, held at the accustomed labour rendezvous in Beresford Place on the night of August 26, he used the most violent language, apparently to cover up the discomfiture of the morning. Declaim- ing against " police brutality,' he urged his supporters to adopt Sir Edward Carson's advice to the men of Ulster. ' If,' he said, ' it is right and legal for the men of Ulster to arm, why should it not be right and legal for the men of Dublin to arm themselves to protect themselves ? You will need it. I don't offer advice which I am not prepared to adopt myself. You know me, and you know when I say a thing I will do it. So arm, and I'll arm. You have to face hired assassins. If Sir Edward Carson is right in telling the men of Ulster to form a Provisional Government in Ulster, I think I must be right, too, in telling you to form a Provisional Government in Dublin. But whether you form a Pro- visional Government or not, you wiU require arms, for Aberdeen has promised Murphy not only the police but the soldiers, and my advice to you is to be round the doors and comers, and whenever one of your men is shot, shoot two of theirs. Now we will hold our next big meeting in O'Connell Street, come what may, and we will show them that we can use the property for which we pay.' At any time a naked incitement to violence of this 126 DISTURBED DUBLIN character would have been reprehensible ; but, uttered as it was at a moment of public turmoil when the passions of the mob were aroused by the necessary measures of the police for the preservation of order, it was peculiarly mischievous and even dangerous. The Government, who had been watching with increasing anxiety the spread of the spirit of lawlessness and were only too well aware how speedily in Ireland the spoken word is followed by action, felt that so daring and outrageous a challenge to their authority could not be allowed to pass unnoticed. Within twenty-four hours of the delivery of the speech, orders were issued for the prosecution of Mr. Larkin and his four principal associates — Messrs. P. T. Daly, Wm. Partridge, Wm. O'Brien, and Thomas Lawlor. The arrests were quietly effected early on the morning of August 28, and later in the day the defendants were brought before Mr. Swifte, poUce court magistrate, to answer the charges. In the course of the proceedings attempts were made to shake the evidence of the police witness who took a note of the incriminating speech, but the substantial accuracy of the transcript was established. Mr. Larkin, who defended himself, at the close of the evidence made an excited speech in which he denounced the Government for taking proceedings against him which it was too cowardly to institute against Sir Edward Carson. ' Is there a law,' he asked, " which says that we must not meet in O'Connell Street, or to say that a peaceful procession cannot be held through it ? ' He went on to observe that anything he said he stood by. He called the soldiers hired assassins, but he did not describe the police in that manner. He told the respect- able people to come to the O'Connell Street meeting with walking sticks. Was there anjrthing unlawful in that ? he asked. The Government might put him in jail, he added, but they could not stop the meeting on Sunday. In the result the defendants were all returned for trial, but were admitted to bail on the understanding that they would THE STRIKE THAT FAILED 127 not attend illegal meetings or make inflammatory speeches in the interval before the final hearing of their case. In the light of after events it may be doubted whether the action of the authorities in arresting the strike leaders at this juncture was a wise one. The language used by Mr. Larkin in the impugned passages of his speech was beyond question outrageous. His general conduct and attitude also showed an intention on his part to defy the law and produce a condition of public anarchy. But it was worse than useless to take pro- ceedings against him if they were not to result in an immediate curtailment of his power of mischief. In point of fact the only effect of the Government's action was to give Mr. Larkin a splendid advertisement, of which he stood at the moment sorely in need, and to rally to his side bodies of workers who in other circumstances might have been at best lukewarm supporters of his extreme propaganda. Cheering crowds bore him and his associates, on their release, in triumph from the Police Court to Liberty Hall, where exultant speeches were made to a dense mass of spectators of the working class who had been attracted by the always compelhng spectacle of victims of Government oppression relating the tale of their afiiictions. A note of defiance ran through all these utterances — a note which gained in shrillness and confidence as the hours sped by and the growing excite- ment evoked by the operations directed from Liberty Hall appeared to give a surer guarantee of adequate popular support for the contemplated flouting of authority involved in the attempt to hold the Sunday meeting within the prohibited limits of Sackville Street or, to give it its popular name, O'Connell Street. The orgy of exultant oratory culminated, on the evening of August 29, in a great demonstration in Beresford Place attended by some 10,000 persons, at which the Government procla- mation prohibiting the gathering, issued a few hours 128 DISTURBED DUBLIN previously, was publicly burned by Mr. Larkin with every manifestation of contempt, to the accompaniment of the frenzied cheers of the crowd which packed the square to the last inch of standing room. The speeches made at this gathering on the night of August 29 were pitched in a specially violent key. There was a reference at the beginning to action on the part of the strikers which, in Kruger's words, would ' stagger humanity.' Mr. Larkin himself adopted a deliberately provocative and inflammatory style. ' I care as much,' he said, alluding to the proclamation, ' for the King as I do for Mr. Swifte the magistrate. People make kings and people can unmake them ; but what has the King of England to do with stopping a meeting in Dublin ? If they like to stop the meeting at the order of Mr. Murphy, Mr. Wm. Murphy will take the responsibility ; and, as I have previously told you, for every man that faUs on our side two will fall on the other. We have a perfect right to meet in O'Connell Street. We are going to meet in O'Connell Street, and if the police or soldiers are going to stop or try to stop us, let them take the responsibility. If they want a revolution, weU then, God be with them.' In another portion of the speech Mr. Larkin advocated a no-rent campaign and got the meeting to recite after him a pledge to this effect : ' I will pay no rent until the tramway men have got the conditions they demand.' A characteristic remark by Mr. Larkin, the significance of which we are told by a reporter was not lost upon his hearers, was : ' A man who would starve while there is food in the shops is an idiot and deserves to die.' The vast audience responded to the mood of the moment. The cheering was fierce in its intensity and excitement was at fever heat. There were some ugly moments when it seemed that the combustible elements lying about amongst the crowd in over-generous profusion would explode with lamentable results. But the Larkinite leaders had the men well under control, and their exer- THE STRIKE THAT FAILED 129 tions, coupled with the tactful action of the police, saved the situation, temporarily at least. It was only when the meeting was over and the crowd was dispersing that any disturbance occurred. Then the long pent-up feelings of the demonstrators found vent in attacks on the police, which were promptly met by a succession of baton charges. Before these charges the rioters fled like chaff before the wind, but some of the less agile of them received blows from the policemen's weapons which sent them home sadder and probably wiser men. Affairs had now reached a stage at which it was evident that trouble of a very serious kind was unavoidable. Authority had been trampled underfoot with a calculated insolence which could not have been disregarded, even if the maintenance of respect for the law had been the only issue to be settled. But it was clear that something a good deal more vital than the vindication of the power of the executive was involved. The movement had assumed the character of a frankly anarchical crusade, in which all the disorderly elements of the population were banded together to establish a local version of the Reign of Terror, through the instrumentality of which the hated power of the capitalists, and particularly of their champion, Mr. Murphy, might be broken. Those who have followed closely the story of the development of Larkinism related in the earlier chapters, will not be greatly surprised at the turn that events took. The violence, both of action and language, which distinguished the policy of Mr. Larkin and his colleagues in these closing days of August, was the natural and almost inevitable outcome of the S37stem which had been deliberately pursued from the first days of the establishment of the Transport Workers' Union. That organisation sprang into power by feeding the passions of the mob with a diet of highly spiced socialism, and it could not have lived if it had not kept up the supply of its peculiar provender by a course of antagonism to constituted authority. The check given to Larkinism 130 DISTURBED DUBLIN by the failure of the tramway strike made the assertion of the ill-omened power of the Union the more necessary. If the wavering forces of the Union were to be held together, it could only be by the boldest assertion of the majesty of mob law with its corollary of the most open defiance that was possible of the edicts of the Government. CHAPTER XIII AN ORGY OF ANARCHY Description of Sackville Street — The Larkinites Determine to Hold a Meeting in the Thoroughfare — Rioting in the Ringsend District — Attack on the Police in Beresford Square — Disturbance near the Abbey Theatre — Savagery of the Mob—Terrible List of Casualties — Sackville Stj-eet on Sunday, August 30 — Melodramatic Appearance of Mr. Larkin on the Balcony of the Imperial Hotel — ^His Arrest — Outbreak of Rioting — ^Terrible Baton Charges by the Police- Attack on the Inchicore Tramways — ^The MiUtary called out, Dublin's citizens are properly proud of their great cen- tral thoroughfare, which is popularly known to strangers as Sackville Street. An unusually broad street with wide pavements, ample roadwas^s, and a convenient open space in the vicinity of the famous Nelson PDlar to afford a centre for tramway traffic, it attracts to it all the varied elements of the life of the city. On week- dajTS it is for the best part of the business hours thronged with people shopping, and when night falls the youth of both sexes takes possession of the pavements, which they convert into a promenade. Sunday is the great day of the week for this parade of Dublin juvenility. The young people, in incredible numbers, then come out to take the air, to see and be seen, and to enjoy the opportunities of unrestrained companionship that the meeting-ground offers. The street is rarely without its crowds ; and all the time, week in, week out, a constant stream of tramways is passing outwards in both directions from the terminus under the shadow of the loftymonument which dominates the position. K 3 132 DISTURBED DUBLIN The selection of this important thoroughfare for a public meeting by the Larkinites could scarcely have had any other object than to foment disorder. They were already in possession of an admirable meetingrplace in Beresford Square — a position at once central and spacious and free from objection on the score of any interruptions to the traffic by the assembled crowds. Here the members of the Union had for a long time previously met periodically to listen to their leaders, and here they might have continued to do so unmolested as long as they preserved the peace. There was involved, therefore, no question of the suppression of free speech, as was after- wards impudently asserted by the Larkinite apologists. All that was at issue was the right to assemble a disorderly crowd in the most frequented thoroughfare of the city, where its mere presence would constitute a source of grave public inconvenience, if not of actual danger. Challenged on such a point, the authorities could only use the full strength of the Government in the assertion of the right of the general body of the citizens to the unrestrained use of the street. They were under no illusions as to the character of the struggle that they had become involved in by the Larkinite action. The ferment visible in all the lower quarters of the city, and more especially those about the quays, told only too plainly the tale of the dangerous temper that was abroad. Under the stimulus of the anxiety caused by the popular symptoms, the Govern- ment caused the police force to be reinforced by con- siderable bodies of the Royal Irish Constabulary, both mounted and foot. These were disposed about the city in such a manner as to allow of the concentration of an overwhelming force on the Sackville Street area at any desired moment. At the same time the military were held in readiness to assist the civil arm in the event of the police finding the task of suppressing disorder too much for it. Saturday, August 29, was a day of great anxiety for AN ORGY OF ANARCHY 133 those charged with the maintenance of order. Isolated acts of violence directed against tramway officials showed that the incitements of the previous night had not fallen on barren soil. In the earlier hours of the day the police found no difficulty in dealing with the situation ; but, with the approach of evening, it speedily became evident that rough work was ahead. The opening scene, in what was to prove a prolonged and sanguinary drama, was enacted in the Ringsend district. In his speech on Friday night Mr. Larkin had referred to a football match which was to be played on Saturday on the Shelboume Ground at Ringsend between two local clubs. ' There are " scabs " in one of the teams, and you will not be there except as pickets,' he said, in language whose menacing character was understood by those who heard him. In obedience to the implied command, a large body of members of the Transport Workers' Union gathered at the time announced for the match near the entrance to the grounds. The Larkinites vigorously hooted the teams as they passed in ; but, apart from this and an occasional scuffle between the pickets and those who entered the enclosure, there was no actual disturbance of the peace. A little later the temper of the demonstrators underwent a change. They gathered in considerable numbers on a bridge in the locality and indicated a clear intention to resort to violence against those who had excited their animosity. The small force of police present attempted to disperse them, but without success. Shortly afterwards, when reinforcements arrived, including a body of mounted officers, the attempt was renewed and the bridge was cleared. Now ensued some lively moments. A flower-pot thrown at the police from an adjacent house was a signal for a regular outbreak of violence. Tramway cars, crowded with passengers, were attacked by a howling mob, who broke the windows afid assaulted the drivers and conductors. One occupant of a car, who had been struck by a stone, jumped off into 134 DISTURBED DUBLIN the roadway and threatened the rioters with a revolver — a course which, in that instance, produced a cessation of hostilities. But soon the fight was raging as fiercely as ever. The police, finding that the crowd was rapidly getting out of hand, drew their batons and charged. They were, however, too few in number to make any great impression on the mob, which had been augmented by new arrivals. At one point there seemed a danger of the rioters getting the upper hand. A ruffian seized an inspector's sword, drew it from its scabbard, and was about to use it upon the police when the weapon was recaptured and the daring individual was arrested for his pains. Scenes of wild disorder followed. The police were savagely attacked and a number of them were injured by the missiles thrown by the crowd. A substantial rein- forcement of police, sent to the scene of the disturbances about six o'clock, had to fight their way through masses of rioters at strategic points ; and when, later, prisoners arrested in the various encounters were sent to the College Street police station, the escort were stoned from the side streets. About an hour later Brunswick Street became the scene of a hot encounter between the police and the rioters, owing to attacks made on the tramway cars. It was only after a series of baton charges that the street was cleared. Nightfall brought an addition to the anxieties of the harassed guardians of order. Excitement increased every moment, and it was manifest that a spirit of lawlessness was abroad which would not be easily quelled. Beres- ford Place now became the centre about which the con- flict raged. Here, about eight o'clock, a crowd gathered in anticipation of a meeting announced for that hour. Liberty Hall, with its doors heavily barricaded and its windows mostly in darkness, presented an ominous appear- ance of calm. About twenty policemen were on duty in the vicinity of the square at the time, and, as the outlook AN ORGY OF ANARCHY 135 was apparently peaceful, the of&cer in charge considered that he might safely dispense with half his force. The detachment thus relieved had not long quitted the square before a fierce attack was made upon the squad left on duty. Stones and bottles were thrown at them, some from the crowd, but the larger number from the windows of the Transport Workers' Union building, which offered a safe vantage-ground for an attack of this kind. The police were ordered into the open by their superior officer, Inspector Campbell, and the word was given to charge the mob. One constable in the mSlee received a bad wound from a stone thrown from the window of Liberty Hall, and a bottle projected from the same quarter, doubt- less intended for a constable, felled a rioter with whom he was engaged in conflict. Inspector Campbell himself was wounded in the face by a bottle and had to go off duty. Repeated charges were necessary before the rioters were dispersed ; and, so desperate was the fighting while it lasted, that the ambulances were kept busy for some time in removing the injured to the hospital. The outbreak in Beresford Square was quickly followed by a still more dangerous disturbance near the Abbey Theatre. A riotous crowd which had assembled here was driven off by police charges, but the mob again collected in more formidable dimensions in Abbey Street. Sir John Ross, the head of the executive, who arrived on the scene at this juncture, impressed with the seriousness of the position, gave orders for the street to be cleared. The police in great force charged down the thoroughfare against the dense mass of rioters. At first the ground was stubbornly contested, viragos from the slum districts actively assisting the men in assaults on the hated repre- sentatives of the law. A number of constables dropped out of the attacking line with nasty wounds inflicted by the flying missiles. Disciplined force, however, eventu- ally carried the day to the extent of dislodging the mob from the position it had taken up. 136 DISTURBED DUBLIN For some time the contest raged in adjacent localities. One particularly violent ebullition occurred as three injured constables, whose wounds had been dressed in hospital, were being escorted by their comrades back to the Store Street station. They were set upon in a most cowardly fashion by a howling mob of both sexes, who assailed them with volleys of stones and broken bottles. A small body of policemen emerged from the Store Street station and attempted to clear the street. Their appear- ance was the signal for a renewal of the attack with in- creased violence. Under the concentrated fire of glass and stone the little band quailed and eventually retired. A shriek of triumph went up from the frenzied mob. Another charge and another repulse, and another wild howl from the rabble. ' So furious was the rain of bottles — broken and whole — and bricks,' says a newspaper representative who was a spectator of the scene, '' that the place seemed more like the haunt of howling demons than a Dublin street within a few hundred yards from the cathedral. The shameful, filthy expressions, shouted at the top of women's voices, formed a very painful feature of the melancholy exhibition.' A baton charge down Talbot Street by Inspector Campbell with twelve or fourteen constables sent the mob down Mabbott Street towards Tyrone Street. ' To the accompaniment of hoarse, ribald execrations and shrieks from the rioters,' says the writer, to whose exceedingly graphic account I am indebted for these details, ' the combined police force charged up towards Tjnrone Street, but had to withdraw owing to the hail of bottles and stones. Each time the police drew back, the howling rabble followed them and made havoc in their ranks with the hail of missiles that poured on them from all directions. The little barefoot urchins — girls and boys — ^more daring than their elders, rushed out every now and then and gathered up fresh stores of " ammunition " for the mob. Darting out into the street, they had little trouble in finding plenty of broken bottles AN ORGY OF ANARCHY 137 and bricks which had been used on the police a moment before. Women, with dishevelled hair and looking like maniacs, were even more persistent than the men and youths in belabouring the police. One of them would rush out of the mob with a shriek and fling a bottle high in the air to drop on the head of a policeman or one of the foolish crowd of onlookers, or to fall with a crash on the street.' So great was the fury and determination of the mob, and so slender, comparatively speaking, were the resources of the police, that it looked at one time as if authority would be deposed. It was only towards mid- night that the situation was got well in hand and that a proportion of tjie exhausted constables could be sent home to secure a much-needed rest. When the tale of casualties came to be made out, it was found that hundreds of people had received injuries. The wounds in some instances were serious ; and one man, named James Nolan, died in the early hours of Sunday morning from the effects of a fractured skull received in the street fighting. A second individual, named Byrne, subsequently succumbed. Eloquent evidence of the fierceness of the fray is supplied by the fact that over thirty constables received injuries which necessitated medical treatment. The circumstance deserves to be borne in mind in view of the allegations afterwards made by the Larkinites as to the inoffensiveness of the crowds with whom the police dealt. No need exists to emphasise the highly dangerous situation which by this time had been developed in Dublin. Lawlessness was everywhere rampant. The mob had tasted blood, and they were ready for a display of violence at the smallest provocation and in any direction that a favourable opportunity might offer. For the moment the police had triumphed, but it had been by so slender a margin of force that the dangerous lesson had been given of the tremendous power of a determined mob operating from several points. Not without many 138 DISTURBED DUBLIN forebodings must the authorities have awaited the events of that fateful Sunday, August 30. The morning broke in summer sunshine. A soft breeze blew down from the Wicklow HUls tempering the heat and dispersing the mists which had gathered about the river. As the day wore on, the streets filled with the usual Sunday crowd of worshippers. They went to their churches and returned from them, possibly not without giving some thought to the tragic posoibilities of the immediate future. About Sackville Street gathered after midday an unusually large crowd of idlers, including a con- siderable contingent of the class from which Mr. Larkin drew his supporters. The police were not at first in great force, but about midday strong detachments appeared on the scene from various directions and pro- ceeded to occupy the principal strategic positions. A fair proportion of them were members of the Royal Irish Constabulary, many of them were probably strangers to Dublin, or at all events not over famiUar with its population. Attracted by the police preparations numerous additional spectators arrived upon the scene. They, for the most part, were influenced by mere curiosity and were certainly not intentionally supporters of the Larkinite propaganda. But their presence of course, to some extent, had the efEect of strengthening Mr. Larkin's arm in his fight against authority. At all events, nothing was better calculated to serve his interests than a great gathering on the very spot where the authorities had prohibited the holding of a meeting. The police were in due course instructed to disperse the crowd, and they did so without serious diificulty. About one o'clock a stir in the vicinity of Beresford Place appeared to suggest that some Larkinite move was under way. Observing the commotion, the police quietly made their preparations in O'Connell Street for dealing with the emergency which seemed to be at hand. Soon several AN ORGY OF ANARCHY 139 hundreds of men wearing the red hand badge gathered in O'Connell Street in the front of the Imperial Hotel. They were in an excited state, and cheered and shouted without any obvious cause other than a desire to make a demonstration. A great crowd, attracted by the noise, gathered in the roadway and about the Corinthian pillars of the post office opposite the Imperial Hotel to find out what the meaning of the ebullition was. They had not long to wait for an explanation, for at about 1.30, almost to a minute, a French casement on the first floor of the Imperial Hotel was thrown open and a man, attired in a tall silk hat and a frock coat, appeared on the balcony and immediately commenced to address the crowd. Momentarily there was silence, as if the people below were puzzled as to the identity of this black-bearded man who was haranguing them. But the tones were too unmistakably those of the arch- agitator to cause long hesitation. A great shout went Tip, ' It's Larkin ! ' ' It's Larkin ! ' accompanied by a hurri- cane of cheering from the ranks of his supporters below. Through the din were heard the words, ' I am here to-day in accordance with my promise to address you in O'Connell Street, and I won't leave until I am arrested.' It was in some respects an ingenious manoeuvre that had thus reached successful consummation. A dramatic — it may even be said a melodramatic — touch never fails to appeal to a popular Irish audience. Probably there was nothing which contributed more to Parnell's hold on the Irish masses, through all the years of his ascendancy, than the air of mystery in which he enveloped himself. When he shaved off his beard, for purely personal reasons which are now understood, his followers saw in it the indication of some plot of superlative cleverness that was forming in that master mind. They came at length to have an almost superstitious belief in his powers and to regard him as quite apart from the ordinary run of 140 DISTURBED DUBLK^ mortals. Mr. Larkin, who is a close student of political history as well as an astute judge of human nature, had doubtless taken due note of Pamell's methods when he entered upon his own campaign to secure the succession to his post of uncrowned king. Therefore, though he knew that the club men and the society people, and even the business men, would smile contemptuously at his theatrical ruse, the people he cared for — ^his followers-^- would discover in it a heaven-sent inspiration and would be bound the closer to him accordingly. However that may have been, even his colossal vanity must have been satisfied with the sensational consequences which followed upon his melodramatic defiance of the law. Immediately the identity of the figure on the balcony had been established. Superintendent Murphy, with about twenty men under his command, rushed into the hotel to secure the person of the labour leader. They arrested him near the room which he had been able to secure by giving a fictitious name and representing himself as an invalid. To the police of&cer he said : ' It's all right : I am satisfied,' and walked quietly by his side downstairs. Meanwhile, an immense crowd had gathered in the street awaiting with eager curiosity the development of events. As far as the Larkinite section of it was concerned, it was an excited mob plainly ready to explode on the smallest provocation. After a period of suspense Mr. Larkin, bareheaded but still wearing his false beard, appeared in the door- way of the hotel surrounded by his captors, whose drawn truncheons suggested ominous contingencies. Almost simultaneously a car drove up containing two foreign admirers of Mr. Larkin who had been conspicuously identified with some of the later phases of his movements. Cheers were called for Mr. Larkin by the couple, and were given with zest. Before they had died away the police had turned round the vehicle, in which the newcomers were, and had given an order to the driver to go into AN ORGY OF ANARCHY 141 an adjoining street. As the man showed some disposition to question the order, the police essayed to force him from his seat. This action was resented by the Larkinites in the crowd, who hooted vigorously. Every moment the excitement increased, and the patter of stones upon the shop-fronts and the breaking of the great plate-glass of one of the windows of a drapery establishment near the Imperial Hotel told only too plainly the story that the forces of disorder were at their old work. The expected crisis had undoubtedly come. How was it to be met otherwise than by the dispersal of the crowd by the usual methods ? Spectators, who from secure vantage points saw the scene, as a whole thought that tact rather than force was the quality needed to deal with the situation. But, unlike the police, they had not been recently in intimate contact with the Dublin mob and tested its true quality. Nor had they the responsibility which belongs to the guardians of the law, who have to decide when the point is reached at which inaction becomes dangerous weakness. The police of&cials in charge at the time deemed that the hostile attitude of the Larkinites betokened a disposition on their part to renew the con- flict which had been commenced with such lamentable consequences overnight. The police by this time had been formed into a long line in Sackville Street, extending from the post office to the O'Connell Monument. With drawn batons they awaited the order to charge. When the word was given the constables fell upon the crowd with an energy which created momentary surprise but which ultimately produced a panic. Individuals fled in all directions in their attempt to escape the blows which were dealt with fierce intensity by the infuriated members of the police force. Innocent sightseers along with rowdy demonstrators shared in the terrible punishment that was meted out by the guardians of the law. A number were knocked down and trampled upon in their vain efforts to escape. Again and again the police charged 142 DISTURBED DUBLIN up and down the street. One section of the flying crowd made off down Princes Street, only to be met here by a body of police who were held in reserve and who, joining in the fray, dealt out blows indiscriminately to the wretched fugitives. The piteous cries of the injured and the shrieks of the frightened women filled the air. ' Terror and panic were let loose,' observes a spectator, 'and a state of frenzy seemed to possess police and people alike.' The scene of the disturbances was strewn like a battlefield with the bodies of injured people, many of them with their faces covered with blood and with their bodies writhing in agony. The whole episode only lasted a few minutes, but, in that brief space of time hundreds were injured, some seriously. Though at heavy cost the clearing of Sackville Street had been effected, the riotous crowd had not been disposed of. The force escorting Mr. Larkin to the College Street police station was repeatedly attacked ; and in the evening, after the labour leader had been removed to the Bride- well, the station itself was assailed by a furious crowd, which was only dispersed after repeated charges had been made by the police who were guarding it. Another serious outbreak occurred outside the Jervis Street hospital during the conveyance into the building of a police sergeant who had been injured in the afternoon's operations. But the worst rioting of the whole day was experienced on the tramway route from Christ Church to Inchicore, where fierce mobs assembled and attacked the cars. The police did their best to afford protection, but they were too few in numbers to cope with the demonstrators, who, gaining confidence as the evening advanced, made desperate efforts to establish a complete mob ascendancy. When at length it became clear that the police could not suppress the rioting, a battalion of the West Kent Regiment was called out from the Richmond Barracks to assist in the restoration of order. The appearance of the military had a salutary AN ORGY OF ANARCHY 143 effect upon the roughs in this particular area. Elsewhere, however, the contest raged almost without intermission for hours, and it was not until the night was far advanced that the last stone was thrown and the last charge made by the police. CHAPTER XIV THE AFTERMATH OF THE RIOTS Sackville Street Riots cause a Sensation in England — ^Mr. Handel Booth, M.P., intervenes — Censure of the Police — ^Trade Union Con- gress send a Deputation to Dublin — Fierce Rioting at Redmond Hill — ^Funeral of a Victim of the Riots of Sunday, August 30 — Collapse of Tenement Houses in Church Street — Calamity used as an Object Lesson by the Labour Representatives — Employers not Responsible for Tenement House Evil, A TREMENDOUS sensation was caused throughout the United Kingdom by the events recorded in the previous chapter. People read into them mostly what they wanted to read — politicians saw in them traces of the double dose of original sin which previously figured so conspicuously in Irish politics ; trade unionists found in them the mark of the capitalist beast who is ever ready to make holocausts of the suffering workers for the advancement of his personal ends ; while a third section, with truer insight, fully realised that what had happened was merely the natural effect of a revolutionary propaganda upon an excitable population poor in pocket and prone to turbulence. Out of the welter of conflict- ing opinion emanated an uneasy impression, commonly entertained, that the police had shown undue violence in the affair of Sunday, in Sackville Street in particular. This view was strengthened by the narratives of several eye-witnesses of the occurrences, the most conspicuous of them being Mr. Handel Booth, the Liberal Member for Pontefract. Mr. Booth is not a particularly discreet THE AFTERMATH OF THE RIOTS 145 person, or one whose opinions carry much weight outside his own political circle. But his assertions made after the rioting that the police acted with unnecessary brutality, even going to the length of kicking men lying on the ground, were not to be lightly set aside. They received, perhaps, the more credence in England because, at the meeting of the Dublin Corporation on September i, a fierce and sustained attack was made on the police. One of the members of the body declared that, while in Sackville Street in Mr. Booth's company, he had seen members of the Royal Irish Constabulary ' wantonly beating not only men but women and children ' ; another member asserted that the police in some instances entered houses and ' smashed every stick of furniture ' ; while a third described how unoffending spectators standing on the pavement were kicked. In spite of a palpable element of exaggeration in these and other narratives which were made public at the time, the cumulative effect of the stories was to produce the conviction that the police had got out of hand on the occasion. What, perhaps, was not so fully understood was the tremendous strain which had been put upon these men by the experiences they had already passed through. Many of them had been on duty continuously for two days, conducting an unequal fight against a vicious rabble, which not only assailed them with the vilest insults, but lost no opportunity of maiming them with the deadly weapons of the slmn. Harassed and fatigued, with minds still fresh with the vivid impressions of the previous night's savage onslaughts of the mob, it is not wonderful that some of them temporarily lost their tempers. Their conduct, of course, was inexcusable if judged by strict principles of duty; but they were, after all, only men, and history abounds with proofs that the disciplined human machine, even at the best, is liable to breakdowns under excessive work or worry, or, as in this case, both combined. 146 DISTURBED DUBLIN Labour found an appropriate conduit for the stream of criticism which it was ready to pour out on the events of Sunday in the Trade Union Congress which, by a coincidence, opened its first session in Manchester on the following morning. Restraint is rarely a feature of the discussions of this body, and the highly flavoured reports of the events in Sackville Street, which had come through from partial sources, served to work the assembly up to a high pitch of excitement and indignation. Heated speeches were made condemning the action of the police and of the executive ; and, after a resolution had been passed demanding an official inquiry, a deputation, consisting of Messrs. W. Brace, M.P., J. Ward, M.P., J. Jones, H. Gosling, J. Hill, and J. A. Seddon, was appointed to proceed to Dublin to assist the local labour forces in their defence of what was regarded as the right of combination and of free speech. Prior to this Mr. Keir Hardie, M.P., had gone to Dublin on his own account, fired with a holy zeal for the same cause. A circumstance which somewhat discounted the effect of the noisy preparations made in labour circles in England for the backing up of Larkinism, was a further outbreak of rioting on Monday night in and about Red- mond's Hill, a thoroughfare which is on the southern side of the city, not a great distance from St. Stephen's Green. The disturbances here were of a deliberate and violent character — an outcome of sheer lawlessness. They began in the now familiar fashion, by an attack on the tramways. A car, which was passing from Terenure to the Nelson Pillar, was furiously stoned about six o'clock by a crowd of about 200 people. Recognising the storm signal the police authorities took measures to cope with the rioters. But though they struggled gallantly by repeated baton charges to clear the streets, they were unable for a long time to make any material headway. The mob was one of the worst with which the authorities THE AFTERMATH OF THE RIOTS 147 had yet had to deal. ' The police,' says the Independent reporter, ' were attacked from all sides. Stones were hurled at them from the side streets, bottles and utensils containing filthy refuse were poured down from the windows, and pickaxes were requisitioned by the mob, who attempted to pull up the tramway setts. In a number of places the paving in the street was uprooted, and the mob, arming themselves with the large stones, retreated down side streets, firing them at the police as they ran. Every second window in the neighbourhood of Bishop Street and Kevin Street seemed to have been broken. Licensed premises were closed at eight o'clock, and the mob extinguished the gas-lamps in the side streets and hurled defiance at authority.' Another writer, the representative of the Irish Times, says : ' The determined spirit shown by some of the rioters was remarkable. At the corner of Strand Street a rough- looking man stood grasping what appeared to be a heavy leather belt with pieces of metal at the end, which he intended to use. Around him was a group of boys whom he exhorted not to run from the police, but to face them when they charged.' It was a perfect saturnalia of violence ; and that the mob were as ready for pillage as they were for attacks on the police was shown by a raid which they made upon the contents of a boot shop whose windows had been broken by the rioters' missiles. Fortunately the police found it possible to nip this phase of the activities of the rabble in the bud. They were, however, unable to prevent the wanton damage done by the would-be marauders to any and every form of property which was open to their vicious attack — damage which gave to the district the appearance of a city which had been subjected to a bombardment. Not until nearly midnight was complete control obtained of the streets. It was afterwards found that in the course of the evening considerably over a hundred people had been treated at the hospitals for injuries 148 DISTURBED DUBLIN received in the conflict. Some pitched battles have not had a larger list of casualties. This affair of Redmond's Hill had a salutary effect in bringing home to the minds of people at a distance the character of the forces with which the Dublin police had to deal. Even the most purblind of partisans could not help seeing that there was inherent in the local situation a danger of the enthronement of anarchy which could not lightly be regarded in any civilised community. The time was clearly one not to weaken the hands of the law but to strengthen them as far as possible. An inquiry, which the Government had promised into the whole question of the conduct of the police during the rioting, also tended to remove the issue to a serener atmosphere. Nevertheless, a strong feeling of resentment against the guardians of law and order burned in the minds of the members of the Trans- port Workers' Union. It was kept alive by the pro- ceedings at the inquest of James Nolan, the victim of the Saturday night's rioting, and by the public funeral which was given his remains on September 3. The evidence tendered at the inquiry was very conflicting ; and the jury in their verdict expressed their inability to decide who struck the fatal blow, but they held that death had been caused by a baton woimd and not by a bottle thrown from the vicinity of Liberty Hall as the police alleged. Their finding, though given at an adjourned sitting after the funeral, had been generally anticipated, and the conferment of the honours of martyrdom upon Nolan by his labour associates was widely regarded as a natural and inevitable outcome of the excited feeling that prevailed at the time. Nothing was wanting to give impressiveness to the final tribute paid to the dead striker. Liberty Hall, with its doors and windows heavUy draped in black, and with a large placard on the front of the building bearing the inscription ' In memory of one murdered brother,' THE AFTERMATH OF THE RIOTS 149 gave the note of sullen grief that was deemed appro- priate to the occasion. Thousands of strikers in motley mourning and wearing, in conspicuous places on their coats, the red hand — the badge of the Union — marched in the procession. A considerable contingent of tramway men on strike and in uniform in the line of the mourners attracted much attention, as did also many individuals whose bandaged heads and generally battered appear- ance marked them out as the wounded soldiers of the campaign. The Lord Mayor attended, thus emphasising the view expressed so strikingly in the corporation as to the conduct of the police ; and the labour leaders, with Mr. Keir Hardie conspicuously in their midst, were also prominent at the head of the cortege. Stewards, with staves tipped with crape, marshalled the mourners and kept order in their ranks. Their duties were not onerous, as it was a silent and depressed crowd that tramped steadily along to the mournful strains of the music supplied by two bands in the procession. Only one incident occurred to break the sombre monotony of this funeral march of the workers. As the procession entered Sackville Street a sudden panic seized the crowd. A restive horse in the background, creating some little stir, gave the impression that the police were breaking up the procession. In anticipation of a baton charge the mourners fled wildly in all directions, leaving the hearse in dreary isolation in the centre of the thoroughfare. When it was discovered that the fear of police aggres- sion was groundless — that in fact there was scarcely a constable visible anywhere — the processionists crept shamefacedly back to their places in the ranks and the march was resmned, not again to be interrupted until the gates of Glasnevin Cemetery were reached. The entire proceedings were brought to a characteristic close by the delivery, outside the cemetery gates, by Mr. Keir Hardie of a highly spiced demagogic oration, in which a rabid denunciation of ' Murphyism ' mingled with an 150 DISTURBED DUBLIN almost hysterical eulogy of the ' martyr ' whose remains had just been laid to rest. A few hours before the funeral an episode occurred in Dublin which added a touch of horror to an already over- charged situation. On Tuesday night, September 2, two tenement houses collapsed in Church Street, causing the immediate death of seven persons and serious injury to a number of others. The catastrophe occurred with such appalling suddenness that escape was a matter of difficulty for anyone in the doomed houses at the time of their fall. Most assuredly, if the accident had taken place a few hours later, when the inmates were asleep, scarcely one of the fifty or sixty people inhabiting the building would have lived to tell the tale. The incident brought into dramatic prominence the conditions under which a large proportion of the inhabitants of Dublin live. Nothing hardly was wanting to complete the dark shadows of the sordid picture which was presented in the accounts of the calamity to a shocked public. Church Street is a typical slum area, the tenement houses which collapsed were characteristic specimens of their class, and the people who inhabited them were drawn for the most part from the submerged strata of the population. As if to heighten the sombre effect, facts were brought out in evidence tending to show that there had been a lament- able slackness on the part of the municipal authorities in dealing with the doomed tenements. Although adjacent houses were demolished a few years previously because of their dangerous character, and the buildings which actually fell had been reported upon as late as the previous July because of defects, they were passed by the sanitary department of the corporation as habitable in August, after an inspection had been made of the altera- tions that had been effected in response to the official demand. Sinister rumours were in circulation at the time as to the reason for the certifying of these death-traps so short a period before their collapse. But though THE AFTERMATH OF THE RIOTS 151 pointed questions were put at the coroner's inquiry on the matters on which the popular voice was making itself heard, nothing was elicited to show that any undue influence had been at work. What the investigation did undoubtedly prove, however, was that the inspection of these tenement houses is more or less perfunctory, and that, while a considerable number of them ought to be swept off the face of the earth as morally and physi- cally dangerous to the community, they have to be tolerated to a certain extent because of the enormous practical difficulties in the way of housing the dispos- sessed inhabitants. Labour advocates were not slow to see in this Church Street calamity a splendid object-lesson of the evils of Dublin capitalism. Miserable wage-slaves are doomed by the greed of soulless employers to inhabit these horrible and dangerous hovels, and their revolt against the conditions in the shape of Larkinism is a natural and inevitable outcome of the system — so ran the argument which was repeated on a hundred platforms and was the theme of countless editorial pronouncements in the British Press at this period. Indeed, it is not too much to say that the episode did more to spread abroad a distorted view of the actual situation than any other event in these anxious weeks. Mr. Larkin's associates did not fail to fan the flames to the best of their abUity. The fact that one of the victims was an employee of Messrs. Jacob was seized upon with avidity to enforce the lesson which they were anxious to inculcate — ^that low wages were the causes of the slums as well as of the discontent which pervaded the working population. It might just as well have happened, of course, that the victim had been an attendant at Liberty Hall or an employee of some of the few firms who were regarded by the Larkinites as ' fair.' But the stick was good enough to use to beat the hated employers with, and with it blows were dealt about with a lusty vigour bom of prejudice 152 DISTURBED DUBLIN and the feeling that the firm especially marked out for attention was getting the better of the Union. It needs, perhaps, hardly to be urged here, after what has been said in an earlier chapter on the slimi question, that the tenement-house evil in Dublin is not to be laid at the doors of the employers. A product of historic and economic causes which go deep into the national life of Ireland, it has, according to the best authorities, been ameliorated by the growth of Dublin industries and not heightened by them as the critics of the employers have represented. Furthermore, it is the opinion of all who have given thought to the Dublin social question that the only certain means by which this tenement- house cancer can be eliminated from the body politic is by the extension of manufacturing and trading enter- prise and the consequent widening of the avenues of employment. CHAPTER XV ORGANISED REVOLT AGAINST LARKINISM The Industrial Struggle Widened — ^Meeting of Members of the Em- ployers' Federation to concert Measures to deal with Larkinism — Further Meeting of Employers — Coal Merchants' Manifesto locking out Members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union — ^Messrs. Jacob publicly announce their Intention to close their Works — Closing of the Tramway Works at Inchicore — Lord Mayor's Unsuccessful Intervention— Great Gathering of Dublin Employers — Decision taken not to employ Members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union — Mr. Keir Hardie's Opinion of Mr. Larkin — Dis- torted Views in England as to the Dispute — Daily Mail and Mr. Murphy — Conference between the Employers' Representatives and the Labour Delegates at the Shelboume Hotel — Breakdown of the Conference — Labour Delegates' Views on the Situation — Baseless Allegations of Bad Faith brought against the Employers. While the stirring events recorded in the two preceding chapters were being enacted, the industrial struggle was proceeding swiftly onwards to an inevitable crisis. As had been widely anticipated, the area of trouble rapidly widened day by day, almost hour by hour, when the issue was really joined. It is the essence of Larkinism, as of the Syndicalism of which it is the child, that there shall be no isolation of a quarrel. ' Those who are not with us are against us ' is the principle which, in the view of the representatives of the new labour, must be carried out to the letter if there is to be success in a conflict. In Dublin, in these memorable days of the late summer period, the doctrine was acted upon to its fullest extent. From Liberty Hall in quick succession were issued edicts which struck heavy blows at one after another of the 154 DISTURBED DUBLIN commercial and industrial activities of the city until it became evident that, by a ruthless process of elimination, there would soon be scarcely an enterprise that was not affected. Inaction or supineness in the face of attack was a policy which past events had discredited. Employers, by the inexorable logic of events, had been driven to the conviction that they would have to make a stand if they did not wish to see their businesses ruined. Like good Irishmen they accepted without flinching the responsibility which they knew to be theirs, and went into tlie fight with a courageous determination not to put down their arms until they had routed the enemy and reasserted their right to manage their own affairs without constant and irritating outside interference. The organised movement of revolt against Larkinism had its inception in a meeting of certain members of the Employers' Federation which was held on August 29. Up to this period the Employers' Federation had lacked the driving force which is indispensable to an organisa- tion charged with the duty of defending industry against aggressive interference . Now it was realised that the time had come when, if ever it was to do so, the Federation must completely justify its existence. The initial gather- ing was quite a small affair, but those who comprised it were all men known and respected in Dublin ; and what, perhaps, was more to the point of the business they had in hand, they were employer? who knew what they wanted and how they intended to get it. In the chair was Mr. Sibthorpe, and the others present were : Messrs. Wallis, Parsons, Kennan, Crowe, Murphy, Martin, Frame, Boydell, and Coghlan (secretary). The meeting came to the sensible conclusion that the first need of the time was a general meeting of the Dublin employers so that concerted action could be taken under the most impressive conditions and with the greatest assurance of unity and continuity of policy. From the general trend of opinion in commercial circles, it was clear to REVOLT AGAINST LARKINISM 155 the minds of those present that such a step as that contemplated would be strongly supported. Before the general meeting was called it was decided to invite the representatives of the leading trades and industrial organisations and of several of the large firms employing labour to consult with the committee of the Federation. At this gathering the employers present made up a very representative body, the names of the new adherents to the movement reflecting in striking fashion the growth of sentiment in favour of uncompromising resistance to Larkinism. There were in attendance on the occasion : Messrs. Sibthorpe (in the chair), Dixon, Gamble, Wallis, Kennan, J. Brown, McCullagh, Frame, Crowe, Booth, Sir William Goulding, Messrs. Murphy, Watkinson, W. Brown, Thompson, Richardson, Boydell. Kellett, John Good, H. McLaughlin, P. J. O'Neill, C. Eason, J. Shackleton, J. Mooney, H. Cooper, G. Jacob, T. Buchanan, W. Dalton, W. Hewat, and Coghlan (secretary). This joint meeting met twice and confirmed the opinion of the council, already referred to, as to the advisability of calling a general meeting of the Dublin employers. Invitations were, therefore, issued to all the leading trade and industrial organisations and the principal firms employing labour to send representatives to a meeting at the Hall, 35 Dawson Street, on September 3. In the meantime the lines which the rejuvenated movement should take were discussed and practically settled. From the outset there was no hesitation about the proper course to be taken to rescue the community from the anarchaicl tyranny from which it was so sorely suffer- ing. It was this consistency of thought, combined with promptitude of action, that ensured the remarkable triumph which was ultimately achieved over the forces of disorder. Before the decisive gathering was held the members 156 DISTURBED DUBLIN of the Coal Merchants' Association gave an indication of the course that would be adopted by issuing, on the even- ing of September 2, a manifesto announcing that they had decided to lock out such of their employees as belonged to the Irish Transport Workers' Union because of the in- tolerable character of the interference of that organisation in the business. It was intimated in this pronounce- ment that the members of the association had no objec- tion to their employees ' being members of any union acting in a lawful and reasonable manner, but that, as the union would not allow their members to deliver coal to certain firms, the merchants were compelled to decline to employ men belonging to the union.' ' The issue,' the manifesto said, ' is simply the right of employers to con- duct their business on ordinary trade lines and to supply their customers.' The union officials had declared that they would not allow deliveries to be made to any persons or firms having a dispute with them — ^in other words, they compelled a boycott. The coal merchants very much regretted any inconvenience that might be caused to the public, but the position created had become so impossible that they had no option but to adopt the course they had decided upon. Practically all the leading coal merchants in Dublin subscribed to the document, whose uncom- promising terms left no doubt as to the determination with which the contest would be conducted. Simultaneously with the publication of the coal mer- chants' manifesto, Messrs. Jacob issued a letter to the Press intimating that they had decided to close down their works owing to the obstacles put in the way of the transaction of their business by the Union. They gave in the communication a recital of th^ events which had led them to adopt this drastic course. So far as they were concerned, they said, there was no objection to their men belonging to any union ; but of late, it having come to their knowledge that undue pressure was being brought to bear upon some of their employees to become members REVOLT AGAINST LARKINISM 157 of the Irish Transport Workers' Union, they prohibited the canvassing for membership within the factory, or the display of any badge while on the premises which indi- cated membership of any special union. This action on the part of the firm, in conjunction with the dismissal of men who refused to handle flour tendered to them under contract by a firm (Messrs. Shackleton of Lucan), led to the strike. But, proceeded Messrs. Jacob, ' what we most desire to bring before the public notice is the very serious question which was emphasised to us yesterday (Septem- ber i), when we tendered to three of the shipping com- panies of Dublin goods for dispatch to England, which in two cases were refused acceptance, and in the other, we understand, have not been forwarded.' ' If this state of affairs is to continue,' they went on, ' it appears to us to be a matter of the utmost importance to all the traders of Dublin, and it seems to threaten the very existence of the shipping business of the port, if goods could only be delivered to firms in the city or country, or transhipped to England at the will of the Irish Transport Workers' Union.' The closing of the tramway works at Inchicore, which had taken place on Monday, September i, at the same time as Messrs. Jacob were coping with the crisis in their factory, added to the general sense of insecurity that prevailed. At this establishment the company carry out the building and repair of their cars and employ there, in normal times, a good many men. When certain members of the staff were called upon to repair some of the cars damaged in the streets they flatly refused to touch the ' tainted goods,' a development of the doctrine as impudent as it was whimsical. They were promptly given their marching orders. Then men in other depart- ments took up their cause, and, as the work could not be carried on with advantage, the directors decided to make a virtue of necessity and send off the whole of the staff. Though the step caused inconvenience, it was to some 158 DISTURBED DUBLIN extent advantageous to the company to temporarily suspend operations in this establishment, the work of which was not essential to the continuous running of the system. A belated attempt was made by the Lord Mayor to avert the rapidly impending calamity of the closing of the port. Invitations were issued by him to both parties to send delegates to a conference at the Mansion House to put into effect the conciliation scheme which, so far, had been left in the proposal stage. It is, perhaps, not surprising in the circumstances of the moment that no response was made from either camp to the suggestion. While the Larkinites had never ceased to pour contempt upon the corporation and to hold its head up to ridicule, the employers, even if they had been disposed to permit interference at this juncture — and they decidedly were not — would not have gone to the Mansion House for the adjustment of their differences. As far as the employers were concerned, the desire at the moment was to come to close grips with the monster which had so long t jnrannised over them and played havoc with their vital interests. Their spirit was impres- sively shown at the great meeting of September 3 in the hall in Dawson Street. The gathering brought together the largest and most representative body of Dublin merchants, manufacturers, and traders ever held in the city. Not an important organisation, and scarcely a leading individual firm was unrepresented. With a keen sense of the value of a strong fighting leader at a time of crisis, the meeting selected Mr. William Martin Murphy to occupy the chair. The choice, unanimously approved at the time, was abundantly vindicated, as the sequel will show, by the firm, consistent line which was given to the policy formulated at the meeting. That policy, as may be surmised from the circumstances which led to the calling of the employers together, was one of unyielding resistance to the Larkinite domination — REVOLT AGAINST LARKINISM 159 a fight to a finish with every legitimate weapon that could be called in aid. The first resolution, which was moved by Mr. H. McLaughlin, seconded by Mr. George Shackle- ton, and supported by Mr. John Sibthorpe, gave the key- note to the proceedings. It was to this effect : ' That this meeting of employers, while asserting its friendly feelings to Trade Unionism, hereby declares that the position created by the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union (a union in name only) is a menace to all trade organisations and has become intolerable.' The next resolution, which was proposed by Mr. George Jacob, seconded by Mr. Orr, and supported by Mr. Eason, gave practical effect to the simple declaration of war which had already been ratified with enthusiasm. It ran as follows : ' That in order to deal effectively with the present situation all employers should bind them- selves to adopt a common line of action by signing the agreement presented herewith : [Agreement.] ' We hereby pledge ourselves in future not to employ any persons who continue to be members of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union, and any person refusing to carry out our lawful and reasonable instructions or the instructions of those placed over them wUl be instantly dismissed, no matter to what union they belong.' Unanimous approval was given to this far-reaching undertaking, and it was decided that the pledge should take effect from September 6, 1913. After the customary complimentary vote to the chairman, the assemblage separated with the consciousness that they had at last taken an effective step to win back the industrial freedom of the city, which had been so gravely imperilled in the previous three years by the Larkinite movement. The glove had indeed been thrown down to the forces of Syndicalism. That it would be picked up was inevitable ; but it was momentarily doubtful whether i6o DISTURBED DUBLIN the strength of the older and staider Trade Unionism of Great Britain would be placed at the disposal of the Larkinites. Though an influential deputation had been sent across the Channel from the Trade Union Congress, there was no special love for Mr. Larkin amongst the leaders of labour in England. Many of them had had only too painful experience of his methods and of his defects of temperament to be ready to rush with enthusiasm to his aid. Even Mr. Keir Hardie, extremist as he is, in one of his first speeches in Dublin,^ felt constrained to mingle with his eulogy of Mr. Larkin some frank comments on his shortcomings. ' They who knew Jim,' he said, ' liked Jim. They didn't like some of his faults, and that was the point he wanted to emphasise. That was not the occasion to think of his faults, but the virtues of the man and what he stood for. They knew the old saying, that " The man who never said a foolish thing never did a wise thing," and that was especially true of a man of Larkin's temperament.' Of course, the trouble with the English Labour leaders, as with other people who had come in contact with Mr. Larkin, was that he had said so many foolish things and done so few wise ones. His policy had ever been one of personal ascend- ancy, and, as Mr, Keir Hardie put it in the speech from which I have already quoted, ' he had trodden heavily on some of their corns.' There was the less reason for the English unions to be in a hurry to assist the Larkinite movement, as it had been built up on rigidly sectional lines. ' Ireland for the Irish ' was the text from which Mr. Larkin and his lieutenants were never tired of preaching ; and there is little question that he gained his first hold on the Dublin working class by his denunciations of the National Dock Labourers' Union as a ' foreign ' organisation which had sold the pass to the enemy in the crisis of * Address to the Irish workers at the Trades Council, reported in the Irish Worker, September 6, 1913, REVOLT AGAINST LARKINISM i6i 1911. Still, the circumstances of the dispute were such that it was a practical certainty from the outset that, whether they liked it or not, the English Trade Unionists would have to take their place ia the breach by the side of Mr. Larkin. Public opinion in England had been very much moved by the exaggerated stories of police brutality sent over by Mr. Handel Booth and other excited partisans. Moreover, an entirely distorted view of the real character of the struggle had got about owing to the curious attitude assumed by the Daily Mail, which, in its news columns, represented the dispute as a sort of duel for personal ascendancy between Mr. Murphy and Mr. Larkin, and which, in the thick of the crisis, published an article solemnly warning the employers of Dublin that their resistance to Trade Unionism was out of date, utterly ignoring the fact that what had precipitated the crisis was not dislike of Trade Unionism but a revolt against S3mdicalism. Some influence, too, had been exercised by a statement made by a special correspondent of the Daily Mail to the effect that Mr. Murphy knew that he ' carried his life in his hands.' ' This cruel and dangerous suggestion,' as Mr. Murphy with just indignation properly stigmatised it at the time, conveyed an absolutely false impression that the popula- tion were fired to the extreme pitch of animosity against that gentleman. Up to this period Mr. Murphy had gone about his business in Dublin without the slightest molesta- tion or insult. His personal character stood too high to have been affected in the least by the ravings of the Larkinite organ, and he was respected, even by many of his Labour opponents, as the resolute man often is. But after the appearance of the invidious statement in the Daily Mail, which organ, it should be stated, circulates largely in Dublin in the form of a special edition, the police insisted on extending protection to Mr. Murphy, an attention which he resented, but could not resist in view of their opinion that there was a i62 DISTURBED DUBLIN real risk of the idea of personal outrage being acted upon. All the circumstances combined to create in England a sympathetic atmosphere for the Larkinites. In ex- clusively working-class circles the feeling in favour of the strikers was particularly strong, and there were calls made for action which it was clear the executives of the different unions would find it difficult if not impossible to resist. At the same time the leaders, who had still a lively recollection of the tremendous strain put upon their funds by the great railway and mining strikes, from which they were only slowly recovering, had no mind to allow their organisations to be bled white for Mr. Larkin's personal advantage. Though profuse in their expressions of S5nnpathy, they were at the outset markedly chary in accepting any financial obligation in connection with the struggle. The employers understood too well the character of the conflict upon which they had entered to be under any misapprehension as to the possibility of terminating it speedily. They realised, however, that they had nothing to lose and everything to gain by accepting a suggestion that was made early in the crisis, that they should meet the delegates of the Trade Union Congress in conference. Reasonableness has usually been a distinguishing feature of British Trade Unionism, and they hoped that if no other end was served they would be able to carry home to the minds of the visitors the impossibility of their working under the conditions imposed upon industry by Larkinism. On the afternoon of Thursday, September 4, Mr. Murphy received a telephonic communication from the Castle that the members of the congress representatives would be willing to confer with the employers. Mr. Murphy was placed in a considerable difficulty, as he had no opportunity of consulting the temporary com- mittee on the advisability of meeting the delegates, and it was requested that the meeting should be arranged REVOLT AGAINST LARKINISM 163 for the following morning. An informal consultation held with several employers showed that the feeling was that it would be unreasonable to refuse, and it was thought the best deputation that could go would be representa- tives of those firms who were at the time engaged in the struggle. In the result a meeting was quickly arranged for Friday, September 5, at the Shelbourne Hotel, Mr. Murphy being accompanied by Messrs. Jacob, McCormick, Barry, McLaughlin, Eason, and Hewat. The conference between the two parties, which lasted seven hours, brought into strong relief the serious character of the difficulties which existed in the way of a settlement, and the delegates separated with very slender hopes of being able to find a way of peace. One of the greatest obstacles — it may be said the main obstacle — ^was the question of guarantees. The congress delegates were neither wUling nor able to undertake any responsibility, and on their part the employers' representatives were not prepared to consider any settlement which did not carry with it, as an essential part, an arrangement for making agreements effective. The question of the authority of the visitors was also a stumbling-block of no inconsiderable kind. They themselves emphatically dis- claimed any desire or intention to take action without the concurrence of the local men, and this attitude, though natural and even inevitable in the circumstances, was considered by the employers to confirm their view of the hopelessness of negotiations, seeing what the Larkinite pretensions were, and how, judging from past experience, any arrangement that they might enter into would be kept. At the seQond sitting on Monday, September 8, the con- ference was enlarged by the inclusion of a representative delegation from the Dublin Trades Council as weU as the following employers — Messrs. O'Reilly, Martin, Dawson, and Wallis ; and very much the same ground was covered as at the previous meeting with equally barren results. i64 DISTURBED DUBLIN The masters resolutely declined to entertain any proposal which would leave them as before at the mercy of the irresponsible autocracy of Liberty Hall, and the Labour delegates could not entertain any .suggestion which, in their view, would give employers the right to dictate to a man as to what union he should belong. When the meeting separated it was with the consciousness, on the employers' side at least, that the prospects of a settlement were hopeless. The light in which the Labour representatives regarded the discussions was indicated in the speeches made at Liberty Hall a few hours after the conclusion of the pro- ceedings by some of their members. For example, Mr. George Burke, of the National Sailors' and Firemen's Union, stated that the meeting ' arrived at no conclusion whatever ' and that ' the fight was to go on.' ' We never receded from one position we took up when we entered the Shelbourne Hotel to-day until we came out of it,' he added. He went on : 'If it should happen in the course of the week that we should have recourse to some other methods in the shape of a settlement or to approach the employers, you will be well advised by us on any matter that may happen in the interim. At the same time, to-morrow morning probably the employers of Dublin, who have already shown a desire to act in unanimity, may lock out their men.' Mr. David Campbell, of the Belfast Trades CouncU, another member of the conference, said that the conference ' broke up not because the Trades Union representatives were not anxious for a settlement, but because the other side were not inclined to concede the demands that they felt justified in making.' ' They would,' he further stated, ' never concede to any employer or combination of em- ployers the right to dictate to the workers what trades union they should or should not join.' He dropped a significant hint that before the week was out the employers would be inclined to listen to their demands, because REVOLT AGAINST LARKINISM 165 within that period they would have able assistance ' from one who is in jail at the present time,' obviously meaning Mr. Larkin. These expressions of opinion were of some importance because of what followed. Nominally the conference had been adjourned until Monday, September 15, but in view of the attitude assumed by the delegates — an attitude reflected in the public speeches just quoted — the Employers' Federation proceeded to perfect an organ- isation for the struggle which they saw was imminent. They again called a meeting of the general body of em- ployers (whether members of the Federation or not) for September 12, in the Ancient Concert Rooms, Great Brunswick Street, and, as on the previous occasion, the gathering was very largely attended by the most influential employers in the city. Under Mr. Murphy's presidency it was decided to appoint an executive committee to act for all these employers during the continuance of the dispute. The meeting immediately selected the gentlemen who had already acted at the con- ference at the Shelbourne Hotel, namely, Messrs. Murphy, Hewat, M'Cormick, John WaUis, R. Dawson, C. Eason, G. Jacob, D. Barry, M. O'Reilly, F. V. Martin, H. McLaughlin, and added the names of Messrs. John Good and W. Spence. The committee had power to add to its number a representative of any important trade, and eventually co-opted Mr. F. Hall, representing the corn trade. A further decision was come to, to take measures to give effect to the decision arrived at at the previous meeting of employers in Dawson Street to employ no man who was a member of the Irish Transport Union. In order to save thecongress delegates a fruitless journey from England, the secretary was instructed to write to the Trades Union delegates and inform them that the employers could not see that any good would be achieved by sending representatives to the adjourned sitting of the conference. i66 DISTURBED DUBLIN The Labour leaders, who before were pluming them- selves on their unyielding attitude and proclaiming with a great flourish of trumpets that ' the fight was to go on,' now made it a subject of strong complaint that the em- ployers had taken them at their word and declined to continue what had become little better than a farce. It was the first time within their knowledge, they said in a joint communication to the Federation, in which ' negotia- tions of such a serious and far-reaching character have been deliberately broken off by one side when there has been a joint agreement between the parties to continue the discussion.' The action of the Federation, the signa tories declared, was ' a serious, wilful, and indefensible breach of a common understanding arrived at after a long and anxious debatfe,' and was the more extraordinary because the lock-out decided upon by the Federation was due, among other things, to their inability to secure the proper and rigid observance of agreements. The committee of employers, through their secretary, replied that the conference was none of their seeking ; that they had entered it as they ' did not wish to appear stiff- necked,' though they had little hope of practical result ; that the meeting of September 8, though adjourned, was not necessarily so concluded with a view of the con- tinuance of the discussion ; and that, if the employers' representatives had met the Labour delegates again on September 15, it would only have been to convey the unanimous decision of the employers of Dublin held on the previous Friday, and so they deemed it more cour- teous to let them know in advance not only the opinions of the employers' executive committee but those of the employers of the city. No question of bad faith, of course, entered into th6 matter. The negotiations, if such they can be called, really broke down at the first meeting. It was then obvious to everyone, the Labour delegates amongst the number, that there was no basis for an understanding, REVOLT AGAINST LAIrKINISM 167 and could be none so long as the Larkinite organisation was an active force and the British trade unions declined either to act independently of it or to guarantee its bona fides. The complaint probably may be regarded as a characteristic specimen of Labour tactics. The delegates were in a difficult position. They knew Mr. Larkin too well to accept any responsibility for him. On the other hand, they could not confess their impotence before the world by admitting that the situation was beyond them. They therefore fastened with avidity upon the refusal of the employers to be parties to the continuance of a pal- pably barren discussion, in order to show to the world what an unreasonable type of men they had to deal with and how eager they themselves were to seek peace and ensue it. It was a performance which, perhaps, served its immediate purpose of diverting attention from the funda- mental points at issue and creating an appropriate atmo- sphere of prejudice in which the delegates could obscure their lack of influence. But it deceived no one on the spot who had watched the development of the dispute and understood the character of the forces which were arrayed against each other in circumstances which differed widely from the conditions which govern an ordinary conflict between Capital and Labour, CHAPTER XVI THE CONFLICT PROCEEDS A Fight to a Finish — Release of Mr. LarMn — ^Action of Authorities criticised — ^Unsympathetic Attitude of English Trade Unionists towards Larkinism — Denunciation of Sympathetic Strike by the Kational Union of Railwaymen — Mr. LarMn at Manchester — His ' Divine Mission ' — Renewed Rioting — Result of Official Inquiry into the Conduct of the PoUce — Police Action vindicated. The issue had now been fully and finally joined. It was to be a fight to a finish, as the Labour leaders declared, with, it may be supposed, considerable misgiving. Events had really been too much for employers and employed alike. The syndicalistic fever was in the city's bones and, until it had been eliminated by drastic measures, there could be no peace. Almost every hour brought its proof of the lengths to which the virus of the new labour creed had been absorbed. One day the London and North Western Company's employees declined to unload a dray of biscuits intended for shipment because they emanated from Messrs. Jacob's factory and were ' tainted goods.' On another occasion the dockers declined, for similar reasons, or lack of reasons, to load up a consignment from Messrs. Dixon's Soap and Candle Works. Then floated in from the country districts stories of the operations of Larkinite emissaries on farms, with the object of dragging yet another interest into the web of discontent that was being woven about the business activities of the Dublin district. Anon came across the Channel an account of how the unfortunate consignment of biscuits had been THE CONFLICT PROCEEDS 169 held up, temporarily as it proved, in Liverpool because the local railwa5mien declined, on Larkinite principles, to handle the objectionable goods. These episodes had a hardening effect on both parties — on the employers be- cause they went to strengthen the opinion, already firmly held, that they had to cope with a far-reaching conspiracy and not an ordinary labour difficulty, and on the workers because they added to the prevalent excitement and helped to stimulate the aggressive instincts of the fighting section embraced in the membership of the Irish Transport Workers' Union. It was at this moment that Mr. Larkin was let loose once more upon the community. He was released on bail on September 12 through the action of the Courts ; but the Government were benevolently concerned in the busi- ness, if they did not actually secure the opening of the prison doors. The freeing of the Labour leader was probably inevitable in the circumstances of the time, and especially of the dependence of Ministers upon the Labour vote in Parliament. Where the authorities blundered was in prosecuting Mr. Larkin when they did and on the charge they did. At that juncture he plainly sought the attentions of the authorities as a means of diverting attention from his failure to bring out the tramway men, and in order to obtain a much-needed advertisement of a kind which is never wanting in effectiveness in Ireland. The time to have moved against the arch-agitator was a good deal earlier, when his paper was publishing the scandalous incitements to outrage which have been cited. These villainous compositions ought never to have been allowed to pass without the attention of the prosecuting authorities. Their appearance in a newspaper reflected a stain on the community which should have been wiped out by the most drastic measures possible. If action had been promptly taken it would not then have been possible, as it was later, to represent the prosecutions as an attack on the principle of Trade Unionism. Even Mr. Keir 170 DISTURBED DUBLIN Hardie would not have had the hardihood to declare that the suppression of the advocacy of murder was an inter- ference with the rights of combination and of legitimate freedom of speech. But the whole conduct of the Govern- ment in dealing with Larkinism was characterised by lamentable weakness and inconsistency. At one moment they were deferentially placing motor cars at the disposal of the Labour leader and listening anxiously and eagerly to the pearls of wisdom that he let fall from his lips, and at the next they were harrying his steps as a criminal and treating him as a most desperate and dangerous character whose presence within prison walls was a matter of State necessity. One attitude was as foolish as the other. It was not at all necessary to flatter Mr. Larkin's colossal vanity either by fawning upon him or by falling upon him. He ought to have been left severely alone if it was deemed inexpedient to bring him to book for the offences to which we have referred. When Mr. Larkin emerged from seclusion he was confronted with the painful necessity that existed of financing the workers in the crisis which had been brought about by his policy. The situation was about as black as it could possibly be. The Transport Workers' Union, which always lived from hand to mouth, had an almost empty exchequer, local sjnnpathisers were few and unable or unwilling to do much and although the English Trade Unions had been profuse in their expres- sions of S3mipathy, they displayed a marked disinclination to convert those warm sentiments into solid cash. On the other hand there was a daily increasing list of members rendered idle by the dispute who would have to be satisfied if the whole movement was not to collapse. Survejdng the position and recalling, doubtless from his experience, how extremely exigent a body of hungry strikers is, it is not surprising that Mr. Larkin thought that it would be altogether more comfortable for himself and more profitable for his cause if he crossed the Channel THE CONFLICT PROCEEDS 171 and sought to raise the sinews of war for the conduct of his campaign. It must have struck the Labour leader as somewhat ill-omened for his enterprise that, almost simultaneously with his landing in England, there was issued from the head quarters of the National Union of Railwaymen a circular signed by its secretary explaining at length the reasons why the English railwaymen could not support the Irish movement by declining to handle ' tainted goods.' The writer, in the course of a well-reasoned argument, pointed out that railway companies are compelled by statute to accept any goods tendered to them, and that a refusal on their part to deal with them would involve the management in serious con- sequences. He showed, moreover, with great cogency that, if the doctriiie of the sympathetic strike were accepted, the railwaymen would be continually involved in labour troubles, owing to the intimate connection that existed between the railways and all classes of industry. Finally, he warned the members of the Union that any departure from the sound principles of Unionism, based on the strict observance of agreements, would inevitably lead to ' anarchy and disruption.' A more reasonable and sensible manifesto had never been issued from a trade union, but it was the very last thing Mr. Larkin wanted. Shrewd judge as he is of human nature, he could not have failed to understand the depressing effect that the pronouncement would have on his dupes in Dublin. To Manchester Mr. Larkin devoted his earliest atten- tion on entering upon his campaign. He probably recalled the old saw which asserts that what Manchester and Lancashire think to-day the rest of England think to-morrow. He may also have been drawn to the place by old associations, for he told his hearers at the open- air demonstration which he addressed in the northern city on September 14, that there was not a roadway between Manchester and London that he had not tramped nor a hedge under which he had not slept as a boy. He 172 DISTURBED DUBLIN had, he proceeded to say, hungered in Manchester, slept in railway trucks there, and also worked on the Manchester quays. Whatever the motives may have been which dictated the selection, Mr. Larkin appears to have enter- tained no doubt as to the sympathy which he would receive there from the working classes. His discourse was in a familiar, full-blooded vein which seemed to convey the implication that the speaker felt that he was amongst close friends. He was out, he said,i to save William Martin Murphy and those associated with him from eternal damnation. ' I care for no man or men,' Mr. Larkin went on. ' I have got a divine mission, I believe, to make men and women discontented. I am out to do it, and no Murphy nor Aberdeen, nor other creatures of that type can stop me carrying on the work I was born for. Some men will say, you should not start to arouse men's minds until they get Home Rule. Home Rule ! You have got it in England, and you are making a damn bad job of it. A question of Home Rule ? No. It is an economic question — a bread-and-butter question. Our whole Trade Union movement is absolutely rotten. If we were the men we think we. are, the employing classes would be wiped out in an hour and we should become the employing class.' Another characteristic outburst was in a passage dealing with the attitude of the Church towards labour questions. ' I knelt down,' he said, " in Sligo Cathedral at the feet of a bishop, when he said " Anti-Christ is come to town : it is Larkin." Thank God, for his soul's sake and my own, before he died he understood the problem better. I do not blame him. Better men than I in Ireland have been cursed. I prefer to go to the seventh pit of Dante than to go to heaven with William Martin Murphy. Hell has no terrors for me. I have lived there. Thirty-six years of hunger and "^ The extracts are from a lively report of the speech in the Manchester Guardian. THE CONFLICT PROCEEDS 173 poverty have been my portion. The mother who bore me had to starve and work, and my father had to fight for a living. I knew what it was to work when I was nine years old. They cannot terrify me with hell. Better to be in hell with Dante and Davitt than to be in heaven with Carson and Murphy, not forgetting our good friend the Earl of Aberdeen.' A significant reference to the Labour delegates' visit to Dublin was contained in the speech. The speaker said that ' when the delegates came over Larkin was in jail ; and one of them told him, in the presence of the Governor of Mount] oy prison, that he had come rather in a judicial capacity, and was not concerned which came out on top : he only wanted to see what the facts were so that he could make his report. If it did not matter to them who came out on top, they were going to sell the pass.' In a final outburst Mr. Larkin said : ' I am out for revolution or anj^hing. What do I care ? They can only kUl me, and there are thousands to come after me.' This Manchester speech, with its blatant egotism and its nauseous mingling of blasphemy and scurrility, did more to open the eyes of people in England to the true inwardness of the Larkinite propaganda than the many articles that were daily appearing in the papers explanatory of the causes of the Dublin industrial up- heaval. It caused, as it was well calculated to do, great offence in leading Trade Union circles, and was even scoffed at by so devoted a champion of Labour as the Daily News and Leader. ' If Mr. Larkin really has a divine mission to improve the lot of the working man by per- suading him to demand a rise of 5s. a week, which he will get for the asking, why does he stick at 5s. ? ' asked the editor sarcastically. ' Why should he not make his mission diviner stUl by raising the demands to los. ? There seems no more practical reason why one demand should be refused than the other.' Mr. Larkin did not remain to face the storm of 174 DISTURBED DUBLIN criticism that this harangue raised in England. On September 15 he was back again in Dublin attempting to grapple with the difficulties which were accuniulating there to an alarming extent. The Builders' Association, after an unsuccessful attempt to induce their labourers to accept the rule that no employee should be a member of the Irish Transport Workers' Union, that day locked out 3000 of their men ; and the Farmers' Association of the county of Dublin, for similar reasons, had the same day dispensed with the services of their labourers, who numbered about 1000. By this time there were, it was estimated, no fewer than 15,000 men idle in and about Dublin owing to the dispute. The fact that the movement in support of Larkinism in Liverpool had extended to the dockers and was threatening to bring about a general strike, added to the uncertainty of the situation. With several of the shipping services sus- pended and others working intermittently, it was every day becoming clearer that complete paralysis of the trade of the port was rapidly impending. As the position of the port became more desperate, a fresh disposition to violence manifested itself in the Dublin streets. Matters came to a head on Sunday, September 21, when the city experienced what was afterwards described by the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the disturbances as ' the most determined and disgraceful riot ' of the whole series. At 5.30 p.m. on that day one of the now famUiar processions was formed up in Beresford Place for a march through the streets. It was composed of several thousand persons, and we have the authority of the official record for the fact that it was led by a ' crowd of roughs, many of whom were under the influence of drink.' Some sixty sergeants and constables, under the orders of Chief Superintendent Dunne, accompanied the procession. Before the demonstrators had gone very far, the more violent of them commenced to stone the tram cars which THE CONFLICT PROCEEDS 175 were passing at the time. A number of the vehicles were seriously damaged, the police being powerless to prevent the mischief. The march continued in dis- orderly fashion until Townsend Street was reached, when an organised attempt was made to overwhelm the small force of police that accompanied the procession. ' Showers of stones and bottles were thrown in many instances from the houses,' observed the Commissioners in their report, ' and a hand-to-hand struggle went on here for twenty minutes between the police and the rioters. Some of the horses belonging to the troopers were knocked down ; the men themselves received severe injuries, and in many instances their lives were only saved by their helmets, which were broken by the stones and missiles. Pieces of concrete, iron nuts, and bricks were freely thrown. Batons were drawn and used at several points in the street, but for some time even this measure had not the effect of dispersing the crowd or restoring order. Some of the constables were knocked down and rendered unconscious, and in one instance a member of the Dublin Metropolitan Police was wounded by a knife.' Altogether thirty-six constables were injured in the riot, or more than half the force engaged. For more than half an hour the street was a veritable pandemonium. Mr. Larkin was in Glasgow continuing his campaign amongst the British Trade Unionists at the time of this outbreak, but that he was present in spirit was shown by a reference in his speech in the Clyde city to ■ the Dublin Cossack — ^that dirty brute in blue clothes whom they paid and kept up,' and who was ' the tool of the oppressing classes.' Quite as significant in its way as this scurrility was a speech made in Beresford Place a few hours after the riot by Mr. James Connolly, one of the Larkinites involved in the conspiracy charge who, after arrest, had distinguished himself by a hunger strike, the upshot of which was that he was released at 176 DISTURBED DUBLIN the end of seven days' incarceration. ' The employers,' remarked this worthy, ' said the men could not be trusted to keep their agreements. If that were so, why ask the men to sign agreements now ? His advice was, if the employers had brought the people to the verge of starva- tion, let the men sign any agreement asked of them, go into work for a week, and then leave off for a fort- night.' This recommendation was in complete harmony with the policy expounded by the Irish Worker in regard to agreements on an earlier occasion, to which reference has been made in a previous chapter. It expressed in fact a common principle of Syndicalism. But it is important as an indication of the spirit prevailing at Liberty Hall at this time. Nothing hardly could have brought into stronger relief the fatuity of the efforts of well-meaning conciliators to build up a peace on the basis of an understanding with the Larkinite leaders. As the rioting of Sunday, September 21, was the last serious disturbance of the peace that occurred during the strike, it may be convenient here to make reference to the official inquiry which, in response to the popular demand, was held into the conduct of the police.^ The Commission, which was composed of Mr. Denis S. Henry and Mr. Samuel Lombard Brown, two well-known Dublin King's Counsel, with Mr. Thomas Patton,B.L., as secretary, sat during the greater part of January at the Four Courts, exhaustively inquiring into the circumstances of the riots. At the eighteen sittings that were held, 281 witnesses were called, no fewer than 202 of them being members either of the Dublin Metropolitan Police or of the Royal Irish Constabulary. The proceedings were at one point enlivened by a series of personal incidents, in which Mr. J. B. Powell, K.C., who represented the police, and Mr. Handel Booth, M.P., were the principal actors. Considerable heat was engendered in the course of one of these altercations by a remark applied by the ' See Appendix for Report. THE CONFLICT PROCEEDS 177 counsel to the legislator. Mr. Handel Booth so keenly resented this treatment that he could not persuade himself to continue at the inquiry, and, as the Commis- sioners say in their report, they ' had not the advantage of hearing his evidence or receiving further assistance from him.' The omission of the testimony probably was not important, as Mr. Booth had shown himself too much of a partisan to be in a position to make any really helpful contribution to the inquiry. The Com- missioners had no difficulty in coming to the conclusion, from the mass of evidence which was placed before them, that the stories of gross brutality on the part of the police, in the case of the rioting of August 31 in O'Connell Street, were either untrue or grossly exaggerated versions of incidents that happened owing to a mis- understanding by the police stationed in Prince's Street as to the object of the rush of a crowd of people who were flying before a charge made by the police in SackvUle Street. To the police, observe the Commissioners in their report, ' this movement very naturally appeared to be a renewed and determined effort by a suddenly and greatly increased crowd to force a passage through Prince's Street, and they dealt with it accordingly.' ' Any unnecessary or excessive force used by the police during the suppression of the riot was due to this misunder- standing,' add the Commissioners. In regard to the general conduct of the police during the disturbances, the Commissioners had no hesitation in finding that they ' discharged their duties throughout this trsHuig period with conspicuous courage and patience.' ' They were exposed,' sajTs the report, ' to great dangers and treated with great brutality, and in many instances we were satisfied that, though suffering from injuries which would have fully justified their absence from duty, they remained at their posts under great difficulties until peace had been restored. The total number of constables injured during these riots exceeded 200. 178 DISTURBED DUBLIN Notwithstanding the extent and violence of the dis- turbances, in no case save one, and then only for the purpose of protecting two tram cars, was the assistance of the military called for. The riots were dealt with and suppressed by the police, and the police alone ; and, had it not been for their zeal and determination, the outbreak of lawlessness which took place in the months of August and September would have assumed more serious proportions, and been attended by far more evil results.' With this final judgment every impartial person who studies the history of these eventful weeks in Dublin must concur. The most casual examination of facts shows that the police were not the brutal ruf&ans, nor were the strikers the innocent lambs, that they were represented to be by the Larkinite apologists. Against isolated cases of excessive zeal on the part of the police may be set a hundred cases in which, under the most intolerable provocation, they acted with remarkable patience and tact. As to the other party, we have only to read the records of the men ^ who were charged with offences arising out of the riots to understand what a desperate criminal band the police had to contend with in these anxious days of August and September. 1 See table in Appendix. CHAPTER XVII THE GOVERNMENT INTERVENES Breakdown of the Sympathetic Strike Movement in England — Report of Trade Union Delegates on the Dublin Situation — Misrepre- sentations of the Delegates — English Trade Unionists vote ;£5ooo for Food for the Dublin Strikers — British Employers support their DubUn Confreres — Government appoint a Commission, with Sir George Askwith as President, to visit Dublin — Sir George Askwith's Reputation as a Conciliator — ^Violent Speeches by Larkinite Leaders — Increase of Distress in DubUn — ^First Food Ship for the Strikers arrives in Dublin from England — ^Mr, Larkin publicly repudiates the Binding Character of Agreements. In the third week of September the Larkinite combina- tion received a heavy blow in the breakdown of the sym- pathetic strike on the English railways. Responding to the Dublin call for aid, men had come out in Liverpool, Manchester, and Birmingham ; but they received no support from their imion, and in the end had to go back after the useless sacrifice of several days' pay. This collapse of the railway movement was conclusive evidence that the Dublin strikers' cause was not to be taken up whole-heartedly by English Trade Unionism. As much might have been anticipated from the very gingerly way in which the congress delegates handled the question of financial aid in their public utterances, and the general attitude of detachment which they assumed, greatly to Mr. Larkin's disgust, as we have seen. But all the same, the stroke was a deadly one, and the Transport Workers' Union visibly reeled under it. There were not wanting at the moment candid friends to emphasise the unpleasant i8o DISTURBED DUBLIN truth that the prop, which alone could have saved the crazy structure of Larkinism, had fallen. ' There is no such practical enthusiasm for the " tainted goods " doc- trine as would justify any hopes for the future in this direction,' wrote the Daily News and Leader, and the journal went on to express a hope that ' it will not be long before the significance of these facts is realised and the example of the English unions taken to heart and followed in Dublin.' Simultaneously with the return of the English railway strikers to duty, the report of the Trade Union delegates to Dublin was made public. It was a long and laboured document drafted, it would seem, on the Talleyrand principle that language is given to conceal thoughts. Much of it was occupied with a self-laudatory account of the brilliant manner in which the delegates had ' vindi- cated the rights of free speech ' by forcing a practically open door at Dublin Castle and holding a meeting in Sackville Street on Sunday, September 14. The refer- ences made to the actual circumstances of the dispute were meagre and unimpressive to a degree quite remark- able, having regard to the fact that the delegates were men of some experience of public life. The Irish Trans- port Workers' Union was blessed because it had ' con- siderably raised the wages of the various sections of industry which it had organised,' and ' brought hope to thousands of the lower paid workers of Ireland.' It was noted that Mr. Larkin had adopted a ' very aggressive policy,' identified with the enforcement of the ' tainted goods ' theory, and that the employers had met this ' with an equally aggressive policy of a sympathetic lock-out.' But the delegates were so blind to the far-reaching issues that were involved that they brought themselves to write that, at the time of their arrival, the dispute had degenerated into a personal quarrel between Mr. Murphy and Mr. Larkin. ' Quarrel ' is an absurd phrase to use in such a connection. Mr. Murphy never quarrelled with Mr. THE GOVERNMENT INTERVENES i8i Larkin, nor was the latter's vilification of him, as appears to be insinuated in a sentence in the report, the result of an attack made on the Labour leader by one of Mr. Murphy's papers. He simply declined to allow himself to be made a sacrifice on the altar of Syndicalism, and took measures accordingly, most of which, no doubt, were extremely distasteful to Mr. Larkin. In that sense he quarrelled with that gentleman ; but then, so al -o did the four hundred or more employers associated with him. The simple fact is that there has rarely been an instance va which a great principle more dominated a movement than this Dublin rising against Larkinism. Mr. Murphy headed it, greatly to his honour, but probably no man ever entered a fight of the kind with less feeling of personal animosity. Misrepresentations of this character may have been necessary in order to cover up the ugly tracks of the monster which had been gnawing at the vitals of Dublin trade until the whole community were stung to revolt. But the same excuse cannot be found for a deliberate untruth contained in a passage of the report dealing with the futile peace efforts. ' From information obtained since the negotiations broke down,' wrote the delegates, ' we are thoroughly convinced that the Dublin Employers' Federation Committee are not prepared to make any kind of agreement with responsible Trade Union representa- tives, and are determined to crush out Trade Unionism in Dublin.' A more monstrous travesty of the facts could scarcely have been penned. So far from there being any desire to crush Trade Unionism in Dublin, all the leading men in the Employers' Federation are warm supporters of it, as they realise that in these days collective bargaining is an advantage to the employers as well as to the employed, and that the best interests of Capital as well as of Labour are involved in the maintenance of a well-balanced system under responsible management. What they undoubtedly did intend to crush if they could i82 DISTURBED DUBLIN was the anarchical system which found its embodiment in the Irish Transport Workers' Union. They had had their fill of Mr. Larkin and were not disposed again to place themselves in a position which would permit him or his Union to tyrannise over them. If the delegates had been perfectly frank they would probably have expressed entire sympathy with the employers now that agreements based on Mr. Larkin's word were an impossibility. The man, whose most conspicuous comment about them when they were doing their best within the restrictions imposed upon them to aid the movement was that they were ' going to sell the pass/ was not one whom they could have honestly recommended the employers to take to their arms. We shall, perhaps, not be far wrong if we assume that the peculiar tone imparted by the delegates to their report was due to the exigencies of the English rather than of the Irish situation. English Trade Unionists were greatly agitated by the lurid reports which had been sent over relative to police ' brutality,' and the spirit of Larkinism, with its defiance of authority, its abuse of capitalists, and its strident assertion of the majesty of labour, had captured many of the younger minds. Generally, there was a strong feeling, confined to no particular class or district, that something ought to be done on behalf of the gallant strugglers for freedom in Dublin. The leaders probably would have gladly evaded the financial action altogether, for they did not love Mr. Larkin and, quite apart from personal reasons, they did not care to deplete the union coffers for a cause which had so little in it to justify expenditure from the English standpoint. But the pressure from. the ranks was too strong to be resisted with safety. The most that the Trade Union executives could do was to see that the assistance should be given in such a form that the control of the administration of the funds was absolutely retained in their hands. Voting in the first instance a lump sum THE GOVERNMENT INTERVENES 183 of £5000, they spent the money on food products with the intention that their disbursements should, in the directest possible way, go towards the relief of the strikers. They were actuated, no doubt, by motives of pure humanity in thus intervening ; but the whole business, there can be little doubt now, was a blunder of a very bad kind. Not only was the support accorded absolutely useless as a solvent of the employers' opposition, but it had a positively mischievous effect by prolonging a hopeless struggle for many weary weeks, dxuring which the degradation of the working classes was accentuated to an appalling extent. Trade Union honour, however, was satisfied by this plimge into the dispute, and for the time being that was all that was considered to matter. On the employers' side the need of outside assistance had also engaged attention. Early in the struggle it was realised that Dublin's industry could not bear upon its shoulders the entire burden of what, even then, was foreseen must be a long and costly business. An appeal to the general body of British industrialists was the natural means by which the Federation could seek to strengthen its position. The fight that the Dublin employers was waging was no ordinary local affair. It was a conflict which touched the very springs of British industry and involved a common responsibility which could not be evaded without serious detriment to the interests of all associated with it. Some members of the employers' committee were dispatched across the Channel as the representatives of the Federation to conduct a mission to the great industrial centres of England and Scotland. They found that the distorted views of the dispute which had been circulated in the English papers had created a certain amount of prejudice. But they were easily able to show how unfairly the employers had been treated, and, when the mists of doubt had been cleared away and the true position brought out in its full signifi- cance, the British confreres of the Dublin employers were i84 DISTURBED DUBLIN not merely willing but eager to help. After an exhaustive tour of the manufacturing districts, the delegates returned to Dublin with such a measure of assistance as to place beyond doubt the financial capacity of the Employers' Federation to conduct the fight to the bitter end, if such it should prove to be. That the dispute was not to have an early termination was only too apparent as the shortening of the days brought with them the chill of autumn as a reminder that a sterner feature must soon be added to the conflict. The idea of a peaceful settlement still had a foremost place in the public mind, or at all events in that section of it which did not fully comprehend the character of the principles involved. The Lord Mayor, with praise- worthy industry, still worked at his project for the setting up of a conciliation board, and he even went so far as to get together a list of Labour men who were to represent the side of the workers. But as these representatives included, necessarily so perhaps from his standpoint, the Larkinite leaders, the employers declined to have any- thing to say to the scheme. They knew the futility of any composition that might be made under such auspices, and they resolutely refused to be diverted from their purpose of winning their freedom by any specious argu- ments as to the advantages of conciliation based on the totally different conditions which prevail across the Channel. Meanwhile, the Government, properly anxious for the termination of a conflict which was having such a serious effect on the peace of Dublin as well as its commercial interests, decided to send over to the city a Commission, with Sir George Askwith as its head, with instructions to inquire into the situation and report upon it with a view to a settlement. Sir George Askwith enjoys a deserved reputation as a mediator in industrial disputes. His qualities are those which make for success in the adjustment of differences. A well-balanced, judicial habit of mind is THE GOVERNMENT INTERVENES 185 associated in him with a marked capacity for that form of diplomatic finesse that tells in such difficult and com- plicated negotiations as those affecting the relations of employers and employed, in which strong passions and prejudices oftentimes constitute the most serious obstacles to peace. At the time of his Dublin appointment he was at the height of a brilliant career. One successful achieve- ment had followed another in his official service, until it seemed that he had but to appear upon a scene of trouble for the mists of difficulty to dissolve, leaving an atmosphere of peace and sweet reasonableness. In the circumstances the decision to dispatch him to Dublin to try his gifts of conciliation on the opposing elements there is easily to be understood. But the public, not less than the Government, had overlooked the peculiar conditions of the dispute there and the limitations they imposed to the exercise of the skill even of the most able exponent of the arts of compromise. Even whUe the echoes of the chorus of congratulations on Sir George Askwith's appointment were reverberating through England, the course of events in Dublin was showing how hopeless his mission was. On the one side were the employers declining with polite emphasis to be led into any discussion in regard to a settlement unless the preliminary conditions offered an absolute guarantee that any agreement arrived at should be respected. A suggestion had been made that the merging of the Irish Transport Workers' Union in the English organisation might meet the difficulty, but there was no evidence that Mr. Larkin would be content to efface himself, and, in any event, the Employers' Federation were not disposed to consider this solution until it had been shown that Mr. Larkin's influence and personality would be entirely eliminated. In the Larkinite camp there was, at the period, a revival of incendiary oratory as if to emphasise on that side the utter impossibility of carrying through any scheme of conciliation. Speaking at a meeting at i86 DISTURBED DUBLIN' Beresford Square on September 25, Mr. James Connolly stated, in reference to a rrnnour that the Shipping Federation were bringing free labourers to Dublin, that ' if they bring that scab ship here, unload and distribute their goods, I know, you know, and God knows that the streets of Dublin will run red with the blood of the working classes.' At the same gathering Mr. Partridge, another prominent Larkinite, said that if the present fight went on they might have to do some things they did not like to do. ' We will,' he added, pointing to Ihe public street lamps, ' put out these gas lamps and leave them out.' A number of fresh attacks on the police, which occurred about the time that these outrageous speeches were made, fmrther indicated the extent to which the spirit of lawlessness permeated the movement. And that the authorities were apprehensive of serious outbreaks, owing to the temper of the strikers, was shown by their action in calling out a detachment of 100 soldiers to provide guards for the tramway depots. This measure was taken primarily because the police were inadequate for the heavy duties imposed upon them, but that a grave feeling of danger prompted the action is self-evident from the great restraint that the authorities had previously shown in resorting to military aid. The presence of a hungry multitude in the city daily becoming hungrier and more desperate was a sufficient source of anxiety to account for much of the official perturbation. Harrowing stories were published in the press of the terrible privations of the poor in the slum districts, but to the sojourner in Dublin there was no need of testimony of this kind to the acuteness of the situation. One could not walk through the streets without being confronted at almost every step with miserable victims of the dispute in the persons of forlorn women and tattered children, whose pinched features, even more eloquently than their fervid pleas for charity, bespoke the fierceness of the crisis which they were passing through Local THE GOVERNMENT INTERVENES 187 funds were opened for the relief of the distress, but the amounts contributed were utterly inadequate to provide for a tithe of the cases of extreme destitution that existed. It was at this juncture that the English Trade Union- ists gave effect to their vote in support of the strikers by sending to Dublin the first of a series of food ships which were afterwards to play a prominent and historic part in the dispute. This method of intervention did not fail to evoke criticism. Comment was excited at the curious spectacle of cargoes of food being forwarded from England to Ireland, and the suggestion was forthcoming that golden sovereigns would have occupied much less bulk and would have purchased probably more in Ireland than they would in England. More cogent was the line taken by another class of critics, who warned the English Trade Unionists that they were entering upon a course which would degrade and pauperise the com- munity and probably be ineffective from their standpoint. One local organ was so struck with the ' strange spectacle ' of this English food ship entering the port that it was reduced to moralising. ' What a sad commentary,' said the writer, ' it aU is upon the conditions that, in these modem days of highly developed industrialism, rule the relations of man with man, that these things should be.' Generally, perhaps, the local feeling may be said to have been one of curiosity as to the effect that the novel procedure of the English Trade Unionists would have on the dispute. Wise or unwise, the English Trade Unionists' action unquestionably had a fine dramatic effect at the moment. There was something inspiring to the mind of the man who took short views in this gallant effort for the ' ReUef of Dubhn,' as it was termed, with due regard to the belligerent atmosphere in which the operations were conducted. The Hare, the vessel which took the cargo of food from Manchester, was, in the eyes of some enthusiasts. i88 DISTURBED DUBLIN likely to go down to history with the Mayflower and other craft which have been associated with struggles for the rights of man. On their part the Trade Union delegates who accompanied the Hare took pains that the episode should lose nothing in spectacular effectiveness in their hands. As the ship came up the river on the afternoon of Saturday, September 27, they stood on the upper deck and acknowledged with effusion the shouts of joy that went up from the serried masses of strikers on the quays. When at length the Hare had been tied up at Sir John Rogerson's Quay, speeches were made appropriate to the occasion. The note sounded in them, it is worthy of mention in view of the subsequent course of events, was one of strong encouragement and even defiance. ' Should this dispute unfortunately be continued,' said Mr. Seddon, ' rest assured that this, the first ship, will not be the last.' ' We recognise, as Trade Unionists and workers, that your fight is our fight, and we are going to stand by you until that fight is won.' Mr. Gosling, who also spoke, was even more emphatic as to the backing that would be given the strikers from the other side. ' I hope you are all going to stick together to the finish,' he said. ' If you stick together we will stick to you.' ' There is plenty more help if you want it,' he added. Whether the delegates intended it or not, the impres- sion conveyed by their speeches was that the EngHsh Trade Unionists had completely and absolutely cast in their lot with the strikers. The immediate effect of their intervention was a stiffening of the attitude of the Larkinites. In his speech at Beresford Place the same evening Mr. Larkin referred triumphantly to the breaking of the ' starvation boom,' and said that he and those associated with him would make the employers ' eat dirt ' before they were done with them. He repeated, almost in the same words, the threat about agreements which had been made by Mr. Connolly a few days previously. ' They would, he was sure,' he said, ' go back to-morrow THE GOVERNMENT INTERVENES 189 for a week, sign the agreements, and then come out again if they were told to do so ; and that was the spirit which should animate them if they were to achieve victory.' He added in conclusion : ' For victory they were heading, for the toiling masses of Ireland were the classes which were most certain to win a triumph, and it was the marvel of most people that the strike had lasted so long ; but, if it were to be prolonged, they could hold out for a year and a day with the support which they could command from all quarters of the world.' With such an utterance as this on record — an unabashed exposition of the doctrine that agreements might be repudiated by the men — the prospect for the success of the then rapidly impending inquiry was remote. Obviously employers were not going to allow themselves to be inveigled into an under- standing based on the word of a man who openly professed principles of this character. CHAPTER XVIII THE GOVERNMENT INQUIRY Commissioners' Lack of Irish Experience a Serious Drawback — Gravity of the Situation on the Commissioners' Arrival in Dublin — Opening of the Inquiry — Mr. Healy represents the Employers — ^His Speech at the Inquiry one of his Happiest Efforts — Points of the Speech — Evidence of Representative Employers — ^Mr, Larkin's Violent Cross-examination of Mr. G. Jacob— Mr. Murphy examined — His Cross-examination by Mr. Larkin — ^Mr. Larkin addresses the Commissioners — Features of the Speech — Labour Delegates' Speeches — ^A Threat and the Employers' Retort — Sir George Askwith announces the Closing of the Case on both sides — ^Mr. Healy protests. Sir George Askwith was not required to deal single- handed with the knotty problem of finding a way out of the industrial tangle in Dublin. Associated with hini in the work of the inquiry were Sir Thomas Ratcliffe Ellis and Mr. Clyne, M.P., the former a well-known and able expert in mining matters, who had come conspicuously to the front in the great labour upheaval of 1911, and the latter a labour representative of the best type. They brought to their work a good store of experience acquired in dealing with labour matters in England, but none of the trio had ever had any previous acquaintance with Irish industrial questions. The drawback was a serious one, as they were unable to appreciate to the full extent necessary the peculiar conditions which had created the dispute and the exceptional difficulties which stood in the way of a settlement. There was, however, no disposition in any quarter in Dublin to criticise the appointments. THE GOVERNMENT INQUIRY 191 Employers welcomed the opportunity that the inquiry appeared to offer of putting themselves right with the public, whose mind had been prejudiced to some extent against them by biassed newspaper reports and flagrant labour misrepresentations; and the strikers and their friends were hopeful that the Commissioners would be able by their influence to force a settlement which would leave them with, at any rate, the nominal fruits of victory. Outside these directly interested quarters, amongst the great mass of Dublin people, there was an earnest desire for the ending of the strike, which was causing such havoc in trade quarters and disturbing the harmony of the city's life in many ways. At the time that the members of the Commission of Inquiry arrived in Dublin, towards the end of September, the situation had reached a point of greatly increased gravity. A rough estimate of the number of workers out of employment, directly or indirectly, through the disputes put the total at over sixteen thousand, and fresh additioiis were constantly being made. On the very day that Sir George Askwith arrived in the city, a number of men employed by the Grand Canal Co. came out because they would not agree to handle ' tainted goods ' which the company as common carriers were compelled to accept. Though a certain amount of trade was being done in the face of great obstacles, and notably by the coal merchants with the use of motor lorries run under poUce escort, the deadlock was practically complete. On Monday, September 29, in the historic precincts of Dublin Castle, the inquiry was opened in circumstances which did not augur very happily for an amicable discus- sion of the points at issue. A considerable part of the proceedings was occupied with a wrangle between Mr. Goshng, who was the spokesman for the Trade Union delegates, and Mr. James Brady (a solicitor), who appeared to represent the United Builders' Labourers and General Workers of Dublin Trade Union, as to whether the latter 192 DISTURBED DUBLIN should have a locus standi ad. the inquiry. There was also shown a sharp cleavage of opinion between the two principal parties to the dispute as to whether the inquiry should be held in public or not. Mr. W. M. Murphy, who with Mr. George Jacob, Mr. W. Hewat, and Mr. Coghlan, represented the employers, urged strongly that the pro- ceedings should be in the full light of day. Mr. Gosling, on the other hand, held that the interests of peace would best be served by private deliberations where the points at issue could be thrashed out with business-like expedition without the aid of lawyers. No decision was given by the Commissioners at the opening sitting upon the point, but*it was clear that the demand for publicity which was made by the employers was one which could not be resisted. They had been made the objects of virulent attack for weeks past, their motives had been impugned and their actions had been misrepresented, and they had been generally held up to public opprobrium as a body of merciless capitalists who were deaf to the dictates of reason and of humanity. Now that the subject was to be investigated before an impartial tribunal, they could not reasonably be denied the right to place their case before the public in circumstances which would allow of a proper judgment being formed upon their policy. When the inquiry was resumed on October i, it was in circumstances which showed that the question of publicity had been decided in favour of the employers' view. For the first time counsel appeared to assist in the deliberations — a token by itself that the investi- gation was to be of a thoroughgoing kind. The employers had to represent them a notable array of forensic talent. The Employers' Federation had retained the services of Mr. T. M. Healy, K.C., M.P., Mr. Hanna, K.C., and Mr. E. A. Collins, while Serjeant Sullivan appeared to look after the interest of the County Dublin employers. Upon Ml". Healy devolved the important duty of presenting the employers' case as a whole. No better choice could THE GOVERNMENT INQUIRY 193 have been made of a spokesman in such an emergency. Mr. Healy has a remarkable grasp of facts and a happy capacity for stating a case with lucidity and force. A gift of pungent humour, which is his in no common degree, adds piquancy to his discourse and ensures for his utter- ances a wider circle of readers than is possessed probably by any Irishman to-day. A large and lucrative practice at both the English and the Irish Bar has not staled the infinite variety of his wit. He enlivens many a dull case by his quaint conceits and whimsical turns of expression, and yet he is no mere chartered jester. Few counsel are more skilful in getting directly to the heart of a subject and laying bare the points which are really essential to a true understanding of the position. Mr. Healy's speech at the Dublin Labour Inquiry will hve amongst his happiest efforts of forensic oratory. It was a clear, convincing statement in which, by the cumu- lative force of facts set out in proper sequence with many flashes of wit and a wealth of apt illustration, he demon- strated that the Larkinite movement was a purely anarchical one, in which the most subversive principles were backed by an insidious system of moral and physical intimidation. In his address, which extended over two days, the eminent counsel touched all the salient points in the history of the movement from its inception in the circumstances narrated to the final cataclysm in which all Dublin trade had been involved. As the ground has already been covered in these pages, it is unnecessary to follow him in detail through his able survey. Some of his leading points, however, must not be missed, as they help very materially to a full appreciation of the extra- ordinary organisation against which the employers were compelled to fight. In his preliminary remarks Mr. Healy made the striking declaration that within the past five years Dublin had been subjected to more strikes than during its entire existence as a capital. He went on to say that 194 DISTURBED DUBLIN probably no more serious condition of affairs had ever affected the city. It had been brought about by action taken in the name of Trade Unionism, which was sufficient ■ to make every honest trade unionist throughout the three kingdoms ashamed of the abuse of the name.' What had gone on was in defiance of every trade union principle. The principle of collective bargaining had been attacked, employers had been called upon to pay dues to this so-called trade union, and, wherever an attempt had been made to bargain with this organisation, the agreements made had been scandalously and shame- lessly broken. Mr. Healy gave the history of the various arrange- ments entered into, accompan37ing his narrative with a lively comment on the subjects with which he was dealing. He caustically criticised the irresponsible manner in which strikes were called. ' Was there,' he asked, ' even the poorest and the humblest organisation of men in England in which the men were not consulted before a strike was declared ? Was it ever done by one man ? It was done in every case in Dublin, but not at all in England. They heard Trade Unionism appealed to. Tra'de Unionism in the mouths of these people was a mockery ; it exists only in name. The men were mere puppets in the hands of three or four of their leaders. Mr. Larkin acts the part of a Napoleon : he orders this or that and the men obey him ; and that was what had brought about the strikes.' Describing the case of the holding up of the British and Irish Company's steamers in defiance of an agreement, Mr. Healy remarked, ' and yet the masters who resent this system are told by the EngUsh Trade Union Congress that they are out to smash Trade Unionism. ' Why,' he added scornfully, ' these haughty masters have worn out their marrow bones in kneeling at the shrine of Larkin.' An allusion to Mr. Larkin's arrest in Horse Show Week drew from the counsel the comment : ' In this great country, whenever any agitator, THE GOVERNMENT INQUIRY 195 labour or political, is in trouble, the Government always comes to his assistance by locking him up.' The scanda- lous character of the Irish Worker was expatiated on in some searching sentences. Mr. Healy selected one passage for special notice. In this a man was described as ' a lodging-house keeper and Jarother-in-law of a beer shark,' and the notice went on to say, ' He is one of the good men and true who sat in the jury box and found Jim Larkin guilty.' ' In the old days,' observed Mr. Healy significantly, ' a person who ventured to publish such a statement would certainly have been closely attended to by the authorities.' Coming to the Independent and tramway disputes, Mr. Healy said that Mr. Larkin, ' like a skilful general, in order to inflame his troops, had for some years been engaged in abusing Mr. Murphy.' Mr. Larkin described Mr. Murphy ' as the greatest ogre, as a monster in human shape, a sweater, and wound up with the state- ment that he would break his heart.' This went on for two years and Mr. Murphy took no notice of it, but when he saw that Mr. Larkin was determined to have a strike on his paper and to disorganise the trams, he thought it time to intervene. Mr. Murphy differed from other employers in one important respect. ' Nearly all the others met Mr. Larkin, dealt with Mr. Larkin and yielded to him. Mr. Murphy never dealt with Mr. Larkin ; he would not meet him. In fact, Larkin knew that Mr. Murphy was of that stamp that he would not see him, and he never even applied to see him. There was one man in the city who would not deal with Larkin and with whom Larkin could not deal.' As to the actual circumstances of the tramway strikes, Mr. Healy pointed out that the majority of the men employed in the service were opposed to a strike when the attempt was made to paralyse the system. ' Would,' he asked, ' any colliery in England — leaving out the question of a sjonpathetic strike — be " struck " when the o 2 196 DISTURBED DUBLIN majority of the men were opposed to a strike ? And if the minority of the men struck, would they have a right, according to the common sense of the country, to describe the majority who remained in as " scabs," to have their houses boycotted, and to be publicly stoned in the streets ? ' Mr. Healy made some striking points about the cruelty of the tramway strike. He showed that if Mr. Larkin's promise to the strikers, that there would be no tramways running on the streets for twelve months, had been carried out, the end sought by the strikers would have been no nearer. ' Some one foolishly said, ' he proceeded, ' that the freedom of the world was not worth a single drop of blood. I do not hold that ; but if you put on one side any gain Mr. Larkin may have won, and on the other the enormous loss he has caused to business and the sufferings he has caused the poor, the benefit that he has done to any man or body of men in the city is but a drop in the ocean to the mischief, misery, tumult, and ruin of which he is the author.' Mr. Larkin professed to have a ' divine mission.' ' If,' remarked Mr. Healy with cutting irony, ' you go into the country for ten miles you will not find a single labouring man in emplojonent. The very harvest is rotting, and farmers are going about with revolvers, and all in the name of the divine mission to create discontent.' The last words, said with inimitable effect, elicited, as the reporters faithfully recorded, ' loud laughter, in which Mr. Larkin joined.' In the final passages of his address Mr. Healy said that the action of the employers was brought about by the attacks made on them. ' They saw no way by which they could have any guarantee that the sympathetic strike which had been put down and crushed in England would be stopped in Ireland.' It was an extremely able and, as the Labour leaders afterwards acknowledged, moderate presentation of the employers' case that Mr. Healy submitted to the Court. THE GOVERNMENT INQUIRY 197 For most purposes it was amply sufficient as a statement of the history of the dispute ; but, in order that no opening should be given for any accusations that the em- ployers were withholding information, several prominent employers were called into the witness box. Mr. David Barry, Secretary and Manager of the British and Irish Steam Packet Co., and Mr. Samuel McCormick, of Ted- castle, McCormick & Co., gave evidence as to the break- ing of the agreements of 1908 and 1911. Mr. Thomas McCormick, also of the firm of Tedcastle, McCormick & Co., and Mr. John Wallis, who represented the Master Carriers' Association, spoke to the irritating interference of Mr. Larkin's union with the coal trade, while Mr. George Jacob and Mr. W. M. Murphy testified to the facts with which they were familiar. Other witnesses called were Mr. Charles Eason, Mr. A. W. Spence, Mr. T. E. Booth, Mr. Matthew McMurtry, the Right Hon. L. A. Waldron (Chairman of the Grand Canal Co.), Mr. P. J. O'NeUl, Mr. Jolly, and Mr. Dixon. Nearly all the witnesses were subjected to rather severe cross-examination by Mr. Larkin. His desire appeared to be to discredit the statements made by attempts to prove inaccuracies in matters of detail. To Mr. Jacob he was deliberately offensive. ' You don't pretend to carry on your business as a philan- thropist ? ' was the first question he addressed to the witness. Mr. Jacob treated the attack with silent contenipt. Afterwards, to smooth over matters, the chairman himself put the question, and then the witness gave the sensible reply : ' You cannot carry on any business at all if you are not to make money. The more successful you make your business, the more you can do for your workers.' A number of questions were put as to wages which Messrs. Jacob paid. To one of these inquiries relative to the carpenters in the firm's employ (a very small body) the witness replied he did not know, whereupon Mr. igS DISTURBED DUBLIN Larkin broke out : ' Don't know what you pay ! Don't care what you pay ! And you are here asking for the protection of this Court ? ' Shortly afterwards there was another outburst. ' This man is ashamed of himself and his position/ shouted the Labour leader. ' The conditions of work at his factory are damnable slavery. I have asked questions and he has refused to answer them. He has refused to say what wages he pays or what overtime he pays. It is these people who are causing all the turmoil.' There was less of this studied offensiveness when Mr. Larkin came to examine Mr. Murphy. The witness stood up to receive the attack : not to be outdone, Mr. Larkin also rose. The two had, as Mr. Murphy stated in his evidence, never met until they were brought together at the inquiry. The circumstance gave an element of piquancy to the encounter. Mr. Larkin's main line of attack appeared to be directed against an assertion Mr. Murphy had made, that until the present episode he had never in all his long experience as an employer had any difficulties with any of his employees. Although the business relations of the witness during the previous thirty-five years were searchingly brought under review, nothing was elicited to discredit the state- ment. Mr. Murphy's cool and collected manner was occasionally disconcerting to the Labour leader. ' You complain bitterly I have been attacking you in the columns of a paper called the Irish Worker ? ' asked Mr. Larkin. ' I did not complain,' replied the witness quietly. ' You stated yesterday that I suggested that you should be murdered ? ' was the next question. ' I • stated that what appeared in the paper was an incite- ment to murder,' answered the witness, and he added with emphasis, ' and so it was.' Later on the question was put : ' Did you ever see any official of the Transport Union intimidating any man, or did you see myself doing it ? ' ' No ; you are generally in a safe place,' THE GOVERNMENT INQUIRY 199 came the reply swiftly. ' Did I ever make a statement that I didn't make good ? ' inquired the cross-examiner. ' You said you would paralyse the trams, and you did not make it good,' responded the witness. There was a good deal more of this cut and thrust, but Mr. Larkin never succeeded in breaking down the imperturbable demeanour of his antagonist. He once, however, severely upset Mr. Healy's equanimity by asking a witness (not Mr. Murphy) whether a particular employers' representative was not a freemason, and whether on that account he did not object to the men going to mass. As ' a strong Catholic ' Mr. Healy stigmatised it as ' an abominable statement.' On the occasion of another interruption by Mr. Healy, Mr. Larkin told him angrily : ' I am not going to submit to you or anybody else bull- dozing me.' ' I am only a wage-slave,' responded the counsel meekly. With this comic relief the proceedings went on to the close of the third day, October 3, by which time the employers had exhausted their evidence and the way was cleared for the Transport Workers' Union to present their case. A surprise awaited the employers, and also, it may be added, the general public who had intelligently followed the proceedings. The natural supposition was that some attempt would be made to meet the very serious allega- tions of broken faith and systematic industrial lawlessness which had been put forward on the employers' behalf. Indeed, Mr. Larkin himself gave support to this view by a statement made in the course of the examination of one of the witnesses, that he intended to call evidence to rebut a particular charge. Instead, however, of taking the expected course, Mr. Larkin confined himself to delivering an address, which not merely was no answer to the case he was called upon to meet, but added fresh fuel to the flames of discord. It was in the main a highly pitched, rhetorical plea of justification based on the social con- ditions prevailing in Dublin for which the employers were 200 DISTURBED DUBLIN held to be responsible. Christ, he added, would not be crucified any longer in Dublin by these men. The majority of employers of the city had no association with Dublin by birth and had no feeling or respect for Dublin or Ireland's development. They came there to grind down the body and soul of poor unfortunate work- men and their wives and children. In some of the factories they saw the poor married men and women not only with their bodies seared but their souls. When they were no longer useful they were flung out on the human scrap-heap. At every corner they would find places of degradation — ^the public-houses — controlled by these men. Driven to the verge of death, so to speak, the workmen made their way to the bastille owned by these men, and they came out with a kind of stimulation. He was out to lift the class he belonged to from social shame in which they existed, and he would do so ; and, what was more, he believed he would also lift those opposed to him. Mr. Murphy had called his union an anarchist union. Would Mr. Murphy define what anarchy was? Anarchy meant the highest form of love. A strain of exaggerated egoism ran through the whole of the speech. In a great many cases, he said at one point, he had come out on top. Why ? Because he had never been faced with men who were able to deal with him, he was never faced with a social conscience such as they had now aroused, and he was never faced with a combine of workmen who were bound to win, come weal or woe. Mr. Murphy had stated that he would drive Larkinism headlong into the sea. A very able theologian of his own Church had also assailed him, and somebody had said that it would require to build a wall round the country so that the thought of modem Europe could not come in. Well, no matter how high the wall was buUt, thought could not be kept out even by the theologians, or the police, or the politicans, corrupt as they were. THE GOVERNMENT INQUIRY 201 Turning from his introspection, Mr. Larkin went on to deal in characteristic way with his chief antagonist. He described Mr. Murphy as ' an able man who was backed up by able men,' but, he said, he used his power relent- lessly. In his present action he was backed by the people who were choking the life of Dublin and who had given him privileges he had no right to possess. Then followed a lengthy reference to the conditions of the tramway employees, which Mr. Larkin represented were infinitely worse than those of their Belfast confreres. He was soon back again on his favourite theme — himself and his ' divine mission.' It was because of his love for the working classes that he was working for them. He had tried to make peace, and he was called Anti-Christ and an Atheist. If he were an Atheist he would not deny it. A Socialist he was, and always claimed to be one. He believed in a co-operative commonwealth, which was a long way ahead in Ireland. In another passage Mr. Larkin alluded again to his services to the cause of social regeneration. He had, he said, closed more public- houses than were ever closed before. He had given the men stimulation, hope, and heart. He had changed jail- birds and wastrels and made men of them. Then, dropping into a vein of menace, he warned employers not to drive the workers too far. The employer might make them recognise their power by starving them out, but they could only compel them to go back for a time. ' By the Creator that made them they would break the bonds, and they would go back to the old position and give back blow for blow, for they would not be beaten though various agencies might be employed against them.' Occasionally, in the course of his harangue, Mr. Larkin condescended to deal with facts. Referring to the 1908 agreement, he denied that he had ever had any act or part in. the final clauses. He came to the Castle on a Saturday and arranged to go back on the following Monday, and when he arrived he was told that he would 202 DISTURBED DUBLIN not be allowed to go in. After that he went down to a public naeeting and said that, as this was a fight against him, he would withdraw. The speaker indignantly denied that he had ever signed an agreement in favour of free labour as this one was. A passing allusion to Mr. Jacob was accompanied by the expression of a hope that that gentleman would not take anjrthing he said in a personal sense. The remark brought into sharp relief that curious kink in Mr. Larkin's understanding which prevents him from appreciating the consequences of his language and of his acts. He had vilified Mr. Jacob in terms of unparalleled scurrility, and had done his best to ruin the operations of his firm, and yet he hoped that Mr. Jacob would not mind it ! Mr. Jacob might well have responded in the language of J. P. Kemble : Perhaps it was right to dissemble your love, But — why did you kick me downstairs ? The speech throughout was characteristic of the man, and not least so in the expression it gave of his colossal vanity. What he really meant by it was well expressed in the concluding sentences : ' I would suggest to the employers,' he said, ' if they want peace, they can have peace ; and if they want war, let it be war.' As far as Mr. Larkin himself was concerned it was plain that nothing would be done which would prevent the conflict from going on. Nor did the subsequent proceedings at the sitting tend to relieve the gloom which was now settling over the inquiry. Mr. J. H. Havelock Wilson, of the Seamen's and Firemen's Union, made a not unconciliatory speech suggesting that, though it would be difiicult to arrange monetary guarantees as the employers suggested, there might be supplied other guarantees, first by the Dublin Trades Council and secondly by the EngUsh trade unions. Mr. Wilson was followed by Mr. Harry Gosling, who scarcely poured oil on troubled THE GOVERNMENT INQUIRY 203 waters by reiterating the libel that there was a deliberate attempt on the part of the Dublin employers to destroy Trade Unionism, by declaring that he did not believe that ' any other weapon but the sympathetic strike would have done the least bit of good ' in the circumstances in which the DubUn workers were placed, and by asserting that the Enghsh trade unions were going to back up the Irish Transport Workers' Union with their funds as long as it was necessary. A still more threatening speech was made by Mr. Robert Williams, general secretary to the National Transport Workers' Association, who intimated that the men of the federation to which he belonged might stop coal from being shipped to Ireland. He described the attitude of the employing classes as ' obsolete if not obsolescent,' and truculently observed that the union for which he spoke could not see the men in Dublin humiliated. Mr. Healy quickly took up the challenge implied in the last utterance. He said that the employers could well stand abuse from Larkin, but they could not in any sense jdeld to threats. Afterwards, in the course of some conversation, Mr. Larkin said that the English, Scotch, and Welsh unions would not help the employers to deport him from Ireland. 'Let them understand, that,' he added significantly. On the other side, Mr. Healy made an emphatic statement that the employers would never consent to the dismissal of the men they had taken into their employment during the dispute where these men were found to be suitable and honest. It was with these uncompromising notes re-echoing in the room that the inquiry was adjourned until the following Monday, October 6. Before the end was reached the President announced that the case on both sides was considered to be closed. Upon this Mr. Healy raised a protest, pointing out that damaging statements had been made against certain employers and that he had had no opportunity of cross-examining in regard to these. No satisfaction was given upon the 204 DISTURBED DUBLIN point at the time, and it was afterwards apparent that none was to be given. The course adopted was distinctly unfair to the employers, who were compelled to submit to attack on matters connected with the conduct of their business without being given the right to demonstrate the absolute falsity of some of the charges. It was especially unjust to a firm like Messrs. Jacob, whose conduct had been maligned to an extraordinary extent and whose representative had been made a special target for abuse in the witness box. CHAPTER XIX FAILURE OF THE INQUIRY Presentation of the Commissioners' Report — Its One-sided Character — Views on the Sympathetic Strike and the Employers' Agreement — Criticism of the Commissioners' View that the latter is ' Contrary to Individual Liberty ' — ^An American Case cited in Disproof of the View — The Report a Dead Letter as soon as issued — Bitter Criticism of Employers by Mr. Geo. Russell — ^Mr. Larkin's English Campaign — ' To Hell with Contracts ' — EngUsh Public Opinion alienated from the Larkinite Cause by his Violent Utterances — Dublin Industrial Peace Committee's Abortive E£Eorts to arrange a Settlement — ^Employers' Formal Reply to the Report of the Commission. If the Dublin industrial inquiry had no other merit, it was expeditious in its procedure — ^too expeditious for perfect fairness, as has already been demonstrated. Apparently the idea of the Government was that the Com- missioners should come, and see, and conquer ; and in ordinary trade disputes there is a good deal to be said for a policy of the kind. By pushing the business rapidly along, differences have no time to develop, personal ambi- tions have no wide scope, and the utmost is made of the latent desire for peace which is never absent in these cases. But the Dublin conflict — to emphasise a point previously demonstrated — was a thing apart in the region of labour disputes. It was not a question so much of hours of work or rates of wages as of a system. If that system could be changed, all well and good ; if it could not, all the arbitrat- ing talent in the empire was useless to find a solution. As we have seen, the attempts that had been made to 2o6 DISTURBED DUBLIN suggest a new arrangement which would effectually depose the order of things which the employers found so intoler- able were outwardly unproductive. To all intents and purposes the sitting of the inquiry on October 4 ended in a deadlock. The only open question was whether the Commissioners, by the exercise of some almost superhuman intelligence, were able to point to a way out of the impasse. The answer was soon forthcoming in the report of the Commissioners, which was read at the opening of the adjourned sitting of the inquiry on October 6. The report is a long document surveying the history of the labour troubles from the period of Mr. Larkin's first appearance on the scene in 1908 until the present day, and concluding with an elaborate series of proposals for the setting up of a Conciliation Court. In the historical summary the Commissioners deal very sketchily with the events which marked the progress of the various disputes. Without possibly intending it, they gloss over the facts which tell against the Larkinite organisation. A con- spicuous example of this partial method is to be found in the paragraph dealing with the failure to establish a Conciliation Board as recommended by the conference of 1911. It will be recalled that it was a strong part of the employers' case that they were prepared to adopt this suggestion, and that the proposal failed to be made effec- tive because the Larkinites sent in no names of representa- tives to accompany the list of delegates which had been promptly supplied on behalf of the employers. The report dismisses the matter in a few sentences, which almost seem to be designed to conceal the neglect of the Labour party. After mentioning the scheme which was put forward by the Viceroy's conference, the Com- missioners say : ' These proposals appear to have received support from certain sections of the employers, and it is stated that the names of the employers' representatives on the board were sent to the Under Secretary. The Conciliation Board was not, in fact, established.' Not FAILURE OF THE INQUIRY 207 content, it would appear, with the suppression of the important circumstance that the Larkinites treated the proposals with contempt, the Commissioners proceed immediately to refer to a suggestion, made nearly two years later in Mr. Larkin's paper, the Irish Worker, in regard to the establishment of a Wages' Board to deal with disputes, as if to give the impression that the opposition to conciliation machinery did not come from his side. More serious even than this unhappy handling of the question of the Conciliation Board is the omission of the report to deal in any shape or form with the malignant system of moral intimidation persistently followed in the columns of the Irish Worker. That system was an essential part of the Larkinite movement, and it should certainly have been treated in any survey of events which emanated from a quasi- judicial authority essayiog to apportion responsibility for the trouble. When the Commissioners approach the question of the sympathetic strike they recover, to some extent at least, their sense of fairness. They point out how the ramifications of this method of industrial warfare involve loss and suffering to large numbers of innocent persons, how the system leads to the breach of agreements solemnly entered into, and how by its action reprisals on one side are met by reprisals on the other " in such rapid succession as to confuse the real issues.' ' No community could exist,' the report affirms with satisfactory emphasis, ' if resort to the sympathetic strike became the general policy of Trade Unionism, as, owing to the interdepend- ence of different branches of industry, disputes affecting even a single individual would spread indefinitely.' The effect of these sensible words is appreciably weakened by the remark that follows, that ' in our experience of the better organised employers and workmen the sym- pathetic strike or the S37mpathetic lock-out is not recognised as a reasonable way of dealing with disputes.' The Commissioners' experience, which, of course, was 2o8 DISTURBED DUBLIN entirely with English labour troubles, had little relevance to the crisis with which they were dealing. If they had studied the pages of the Irish Worker attentively they would have discovered that the Larkinite movement was founded on principles diametrically opposed to those of the great mass of English trade imions. It was hampered by no scruple and bound by no law other than the fiat of its autocratic leader. As late as September 21 previously, as we have seen, Mr. Connolly, Mr. Larkin's lieutenant, was asking the members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union to sign agreements merely afterwards to break them. This was no isolated utterance, but one of a series of declarations showing that the Larkinite code of morality regarded repudiation not as a crime but as a distinct virtue. The incapacity revealed here for realising the true character of the forces that had been called into being in Dubhn, is further strikingly shown in the unsparing condemnation of the document which the employers required their workpeople to sign as a condition of eraplojonent. ' Whatever may have been the intention of the employers,' observe the Commissioners, ' this document imposes upon the signatories conditions which are contrary to individual hberty, and which no workman or body of workmen could reasonably be expected to accept.' ' Contrary to individual liberty ' is a very sweeping phrase to use in this connection. It is difficult to under- stand precisely what Sir George Askwith means by it. Is it his view that an employer must engage an employee without reference to his or her association with a particular organisation, however objectionable that organisation may be to him ? Would it, for example, be ' contrary to individual hberty ' if Mr. Asquith and the members of the Cabinet made it a condition of employment in the case of their domestic servants that they should not belong to the militant Suffragette FAILURE OF THE INQUIRY 209 organisations ? Assuredly they would be well within their rights in enforcing a condition so necessary to the peaceful ordering of their lives, and if that is so, equally are the Dublin employers entitled to say that they will engage no one who belongs to an organisation which has shown itself capable of grievous wrongdoing. The theory of the limitation of the liberty of the employer to enforce conditions upon the men he engages, which underlies Sir George Askwith's report, is one which probably could not be justified by a reference to the statute law of England. Curiously enough, it has been distinctly repudiated in a judgment of the Supreme Court of the United States, which was cited in some arbitra- tion proceedings held at the end of 1913 in the State of Indiana in connection with a tramway strike. In discussing the legal relations of union labour and employers, the PubUc Service Commissioners, who were the arbitration tribunal in this instance, in their report said that, while it was manifestly right of the employees to join a labour union to promote their own interests ' to secure the highest wages, shortest hours, and the best conditions that they can peaceably compel,' it was equally right that the employers should, if they pleased, refuse to employ union labour in the operation of their cars and in the conduct of their business. They relied upon the judg- ment referred to to support their view of the respective rights of employer and employed. This judgment was given in the well-known case of Adair v. United States, which arose in Kentucky, where a State law had been passed making it illegal to dismiss a man because he belonged to a trade union. Adair was fined $50 under the law, and the State Court of Appeal confirmed the conviction. The Supreme Court of the United States declared that no State had power to make such a law and reversed the judgment of the inferior tribunal, holding that it is ' not within the functions of Government, at least in the absence of a contract between parties, to 210 DISTURBED DUBLIN compel any person in the course of his business and against his will to retain the personal services of another.' ' So/ adds the judgment, ' the right of the employee to quit the service of the employer, for whatever reason, is the same as the right of the employer, for whatever reason, to dispense with the services of such employees.' Clearly from this, in " the land of freedom ' at all events, there is considered to be no question of the infringement of individual liberty when a man is refused employment because he belongs to a particular union. If the Larkinite organisation is revolutionary and lawless, as the employers insist and as all the records of the movement go to show. Sir George Askwith's comment is quite beside the point. An exceptionally outrageous method of attack had to be met by an exceptionally direct style of defence. The conditions of the pledge exacted by the employers were not nearly so ' contrary to individual liberty ' as the iniquitous system of moral intimidation and organised ru£&anism that the employers were by their action seeking to break down. Let me make the point clear by a citation from the prolific pages of the Irish Worker. In the issue of the paper following the presentation of the Commissioners' report appeared upwards of a column of notices of free labourers with names, addresses, and other particulars. The most infamous personal attacks were made upon these in- dividuals, whose crime was that they had preferred not to remain idle. Concerning two girls, who are mentioned by name, the writer of the precious effusion says : ' Now I am giving these girls timely warning that if they persist in scabbing it on the men that are locked out it will not be well for them.' What could be more contrary to individual Uberty than this shameful system of intimidation ? Additional proof seems to be furnished in the para- graph in the report following the one commenting on the pledge of the inadequate attention that the Commis- FAILURE OF THE INQUIRY 211 sioners gave to the characteristics of the Larkinite movement. Here we have almost a condonation of the sjmipathetic strike and inferentiaJly of the other features of the Irish Transport Workers' plan of campaign. ' Without attributing undue blame ' to those who considered that the conditions of Dublin necessitated a resort to these tactics, the Commissioners think that ■ the time has now come when a continuance of the same methods will be fraught with disastrous results to all concerned.' In these mild terms the report refers to the prolonged orgy of Syndicalism in which the Larkinites had indulged from 1911 onwards. It is not remarkable that the Larkinites and their sympathisers seized upon this passage in the report and circulated it with embelUsh- ments as a sort of certificate of character to the justice of the movement. Thus the report, in a very real degree, contributed to the unfair impression which afterwards prevailed in England as to the inadequacy of the employers' grounds of objection to the Irish Transport Workers' Union. . The proposals relative to the establishment of a Conciliation Court do not call for lengthened comment. They are very well suited to a state of affairs in which parties are reasonable and there is a wholesome sense of responsibility on the labour side, but they were quite out of place in Dublin, owing to the abnormal methods adopted by the labour leaders and the pernicious principles upon which their organisation is based. The fatal weakness of the scheme is that it makes no adequate provision for guarantees that agreements entered into win be observed. The proposal that complaints as to breaches of understandings shall be referred to the Concihation Comrt, and that in the event of the complaints being substantiated no support whatever shall be given by the respective associations by any affiliated association to the parties responsible for the breach, is almost farcical, having regard to the tenets of the Larkinites 212 DISTURBED DUBLIN and their contempt for any form of moral restraint. Nothing is more certain from Mr. Larkin's antecedents than that, if the scheme had been put into execution, he would have snapped his fingers at those who attempted to restrain him from irregular action under the authority of these clauses. Regarding it as a whole, the report is a rather poor specimen of that type of mental balancing which is common form in the findings of industrial arbitrators. A point conceded here, a dose of censure administered there, a general splitting of the difference in assigning moral responsibility as well as in settling the lines of future action — such are the characteristics which stamp this class of document. In the case of the Dubhn inquiry the Commissioners appear to have thought that if they could make sure of Mr. Larkin they might leave events to take their course. However that may have been, their exercise has a more lop-sided appearance than is customary with the semi- judicial pronouncements of an industrial tribunal. Too little was said in some places and too much in others, and both restraint and excess were at the expense of the employers. It looks now almost as if there had been an idea of forcing a settlement by the weight of public sentiment aroused strongly on the men's side. If a design of the kind was actually con- templated it failed miserably. The public sentiment was not lacking in volume, but it was confronted with the quiet determination of the employers not to be deflected from the course they had marked out for themselves, which falsified all the confident predictions of the so-called conciliators. Although Sir George Askwith, by adjourning the sitting of the Commission, gave the two parties to the dispute several hours in which to consider their attitude in regard to the report, the decision upon it might have been given at once, as far as the employers were concerned. They intimated through Mr. Healy, when the Commission FAILURE OF THE INQUIRY 213 reassembled, that they were deeply disappointed at the method in which the inquiry had been conducted. They had called their witnesses and submitted them to cross- examination, naturally expecting that evidence would be called on the other side. But not only was this not done, but Mr. Larkin was allowed to deliver a speech, making fresh allegations which the employers were given no opportunity of answering. As to the proposals for a Court of Conciliation, it was stated that the employers were much more concerned ' to put an end to present difficulties than to consider problems relating to future unrest.' They felt that the failure of the report to touch upon the question of guarantees for preventing further outbreaks afforded proof that the Court had fou;«d itself unable to devise a remedy for the difficulty which led to the breakdown of the negotiations with the members of the English Trade Union Congress. On the labour side the intimation was given by Mr. Gosling that the report was accepted as a basis of dis- cussion. Manifestly the intention was to make as much as possible of the tactical advantages of an apparent acquiescence in the findings in contrast with the stern, un5delding attitude of the masters. But events soon made it apparent to how limited an extent the Larkinites really agreed with the terms of the report. As soon as the faUure of the Government intervention had become evident, the employers were assailed with bitter criticism from many quarters. In the pages of the Irish Times, Mr. Geo. Russell, a well-known publicist inter- ested in the economic development of Ireland, published, under the familiar initials ' A.E.,' a column of violent abuse of the masters, who he represented had rejected a reasonable offer of peace and fallen back on the ' devilish policy of starvation.' In less hysterical but equally unfair terms the London Times solemnly called the Dublin employers to account for their obduracy, and warned them that, in acting as they were doing, they were 214 DISTURBED DUBLIN playing into the hands of agitators. These censures were taken up by journals in sympathy with the labour move- ment with zest, and for a brief space the Dublin merchant was the best-abused man in the three kingdoms. The scene then suddenly changed. Mr. Larkin, who had gone off to London at an early moment after the conclusion of the inquiry, very considerately put matters right with the public for the employers by making one of those frank speeches of his which tell with convincing force what manner of man he is and what is the true character of the movement which he directs. In addressing a meeting at the Memorial Hall, Farringdon Street, on October lo, he made some strong comments on the action of the Railway Men's Union in condemning the sympathetic strike. Carried away by excitement in referring to the argument that agreements stood in the way of the execu- tion of the policy, he shouted ' To hell with contracts ! ' He could not have given a terser description of his policy than is contained in these four words. The significance of the declaration, following as it did immediately after the breakdown of the Dublin inquiry, was fully grasped by the public. The London correspondent of the Birmingham Post, Mr. Alfred F. Robbins, who is one of the ablest and most experienced judges of the drift of public opinion, in writing of the episode said that if Mr. Larkin had been the accredited agent of the Dublin employers instead of their avowed enemy, he could not have done them better service, as far as London popular opinion was concerned, than by his utterance. ' As long as London only read of Larkin- ism,' Mr. Robbins wrote, ' it was apt to consider it a chimera of the Dublin employers' imagination, but now it has heard the doctrine publicly proclaimed in its midst by its inventor, it knows just how to regard the man and his mission.' The Westminster Gazette, another important authority conspicuously friendly to the labour move- ment, observed that if Mr. Larkin's attitude was that of any considerable body of the organised working classes, FAILURE OF THE INQUIRY 215 ' the position taken up by the Dublin employers would be justified.' Mr. Larkin's indiscretions were not confined to this timely exposition of his policy. In his London speech he was equally candid about his English labour friends, who had done and were doing their best, within the limitations imposed upon them by his recklessness, to keep the Irish Transport Workers' flag flying in Dublin. There was a biting reference to Mr. Snowdon, a working-man repre- sentative, ■ who had never done a day's manual work in his life.' This was a preface to an attack on the Labour party, who, he said, ' could wrap themselves up in cloth to-morrow and they would be just as useful as the mum- mies in the museum.' ' You have only got to look at them, that's enough,' he added. These courtesies, as may be imagined, did not tend to strengthen the feeling of regard entertained for Mr. Larkin in the ranks of the official Labour party in England. Still, his cause was one which appealed too insistently to the workers in Great Britain for support to be ignored or even slighted. In this period arrangements were made by the English labour organisa- tions for financing the strike for ten weeks to the extent of a minimum of £5000 per week, the total amount to be disbursed on food supplies for the families of those who were out of work by the dispute. Meanwhile, an attempt had been made in Dublin by a number of well-meaning persons, banded together as the Dublin Industrial Peace Committee, to arrange a truce with the view of procuring a settlement of the dispute. Under Professor Kettle's presidency a largely attended meeting was held at the Mansion House, and earnest speeches were deHvered in support of resolutions in furtherance of the objects of the meeting. The move- ment at no time had any very great promise of success ; but even if the prospects of arranging an armistice had been brighter than they were, they would have been irremediably injured by the Larkinite declarations. 2i6 DISTURBED DUBLIN These showed beyond all cavil that the movement was what it had always been — a purely anarchical crusade directed against industry. While contracts were con- signed to the nether regions by the Labour leader, all whom it might concern were told by him in unequivocal language that the sympathetic strike was the most effective weapon in the armoury of the organisation and could not be abandoned. ' This is war to the knife — a fight to the death,' Mr. Larkin also assured an English audience. Reluctantly the Dublin peacemakers were driven to the conclusion which the employers had all along held, that there was no sure basis on which to build an edifice of reconciliation. The uncompromising profession of the syndicalistic creed which was heard at the meetings addressed by Mr. Larkin and his leading supporters in the period following the close of the inquiry gave additional point to the employers' formal reply to the Commissioners' report which was issued on October 14. This document, which was drafted after the opinions of the members of the Em- ployers' Executive Committee had been definitely ascer- tained, confirmed the action taken by the committee on the day of the conclusion of the inquiry. It was inti- mated that, in spite of misrepresentations, the employers adhered to the attitude they had defined in their letter to the Trade Union delegates of September 12— that they favoured trade unionism and collective bargaining, and were prepared to negotiate as soon as the workers pro- vided trustworthy machinery and trusty men to end the system of S5mipathetic strikes. The communication went on to say that while they did not wish to appear to dictate as to the internal management of trade unions, in the face of the conclusions come to by the Commission, and in view of the subsequent declarations of Mr. Larkin in regard to contracts, they were compelled again to refuse to recognise the Union until it had been reorganised on proper lines, with new officials who had met the approval FAILURE OF THE INQUIRY 217 of the British Joint Labour Board. Pending the con- clusion of such an arrangement, the Executive Committee decUned to recommend the withdrawal of the undertaking as to non-membership of the Irish Transport Workers' Union which the Commissioners criticised. Finally, in a reference to agreements, the committee declared that the question of guarantees would, apart from any settlement that might be now arrived at, have to be the subject of legislation, ' as it has become of universal importance to the whole trading community.' In the light of this matured view of the Employers' Committee of the report, no further misconception was possible of the attitude of the employers towards Larkin- ism. ' War to the knife — a fight to the death ' — ^if Mr. Larkin chose to put matters that way they were not disposed to contradict him. CHAPTER XX THE CHURCH AND LARKINISM Politics and Religion introduced into the Controversy by the LarMnites — Mr. Larldn's Insolent Attitude towards the Roman CathoUc Authorities — Scheme for Deportation of Children to England — Archbishop Walsh's Denunciation of the Scheme — Organised Resistance to the Deportation — Mr. Larldn's Violent Attack on the Priests — Great Public Protest — Criminal Proceedings instituted against the EngHsh Managers of the Deportation Scheme — ^Further Public Protest — ^Abandonment of Deportation Scheme — ^Arch- bishop Walsh's Efforts to secure a settlement of the Industrial Dispute — Proposed New Conference, Politics and religion are so closely woven into the fabric of Irish social life that they touch every movement with their influence. The Dublin industrial upheaval was no exception to the rule. Though a purely economic issue involving apparently no question of faith or political conviction, it gave rise to furious controversy in both these directions. This, it must be stated at once, was entirely through the action of the Larkinites. The employers, to their infinite credit, from the very first declined to allow either influence to enter into their calculations. Unionist co-operated with Nationalist and Catholic with Protestant in the heartiest fashion. A Nationalist chairman had the unanimous and enthusiastic support of the entire body of members, and sturdy Unionists sat amicably on the executive with thorough- going Nationalists. If it had been left to the employers nothing would have been heard throughout the dispute either of political or religious differences. But they THE CHURCH AND LARKINISM 219 were only one of the parties to the issue, and in this particular matter they were, perhaps, the least important. The Larkinites, at all events, counted most in their capacity for mischief. Not only did they include the elements of the population yrhich are most prone to political and religious excitement, but they were led by chiefs who were given to running amok in a moral sense. Long before the conflict reached an acute stage Mr. Larkin, in his paper, girded at both the politicians and the priests. Of the former he spoke with withering contempt as mere creatures who, in the municipal sphere, made their professions of Home Rule principles a cover for every sort of jobbery and corruption, and who, in the higher domain of Parliament, were invertebrate oppor- tunists reduced to inactivity by £400 a year. That the parliamentary party had studiously avoided mixing themselves up with his ' divine mission ' was a standing cause of offence. Mr. Larkin could tolerate much, but he could not readily sit down under that form of con- temptuous treatment which consists in leaving the subject of it severely alone. The policy of the parHa- mentary representatives was possibly at one point carried to an extreme of reticence. The country looked to them for light and guidance at a difficult juncture, and it looked for the most part in vain. Too much, however, ought not to be made of the reserve shown. If the politicians were indisposed to talk, they had excellent reason for avoiding entrance into a quarrel which was outside their proper sphere of action. The truth is that far more injury was done by intervention than by abstention from interference in this crisis. It is probably not too much to say that if well-meaning people, both in Dublin and at a distance, had kept outside the arena and allowed the combatants to have their trial of strength unmolested, there would not have been a tithe of the suffering and loss inflicted on the community that there was. 220 DISTURBED DUBLIN As for the Church — and here the word is used to indicate the Roman Catholic Church— Mr. Larkin maintained towards it an attitude of insolent dictation and censure amazing to all who knew how much eccle- siastical authority counts for in Ireland. One worthy priest, who had ventured to warn his flock against the dangers of Larkinism, was railed at in the most offensive way; and, not content with the effect of this general vituperation, the Irish Worker, following its usual practice, attempted to assail the private character of the cleric who had thus dared to speak the truth in the pulpit. Even the institutions of the Church were not immune from the vicious attentions of the Union. At one stage in the conflict there was interference with a community of nuns who managed a laundry, and who had got themselves into the black books of the Larkinites by offending against the ' tainted goods ' edict. The Church dignitaries did their best by quiet action to reprobate these manifestations of disloyalty on the part of men who professed to be Catholics. But their influence had little apparent effect in inducing a change of policy at Liberty Hall. A crisis was eventually reached in the relations of the Church to the Larkinite movement over a question which touches Catholicism in one of its tenderest spots — the training of the children of the faithful. Amongst the schemes hatched in the fertile minds of the labour leaders and their British sympathisers to relieve the pressure of the industrial situation, was the transfer of a number of the children of the strikers to England for maintenance there in artisan homes until the trouble had ended. It was a project conceived no doubt to a large extent in a genuine spirit of charity and kindliness, but the practical difficulties in the way of the very considerable deportation that would have been necessary to influence events were enormous, and beyond them lay the invincible repugnance which the Roman Catholic hierarchy everj^where, and in Ireland more particularly. THE CHURCH AND LARKINISM 221 have to the withdrawal of the young from Catholic supervision. The scheme had barely got to work before its futility was demonstrated by a series of events of almost dramatic significance. On October 21 appeared in the Dublin papers a letter from Archbishop Walsh, condemning unsparingly the whole procedure. Assuming that the mothers of the children to be deported were mainly Catholics, his Grace asked, ' Have they abandoned their faith ? Surely not. Well, if they have not they should need no words of mine to remind them of the plain duty of every Catholic mother in such a case.' ' I can only put it to them,' went on his Grace with significant emphasis, ' that they can no longer be held worthy of the name of Catholic mothers if they so far for- get that duty as to send away their children to be cared for in a strange land without security of any kind that those to whom the poor children are to be handed over are Catholics, or, indeed, are persons of any faith at all.' The letter concluded with an appeal to the disputing parties to come together again in order to find some peaceful means of settling the conflict which was having such disastrous effects on the community. At the moment the Archbishop's admonitions on the subject of the children carried a great deal more weight than his peace proposal. Religious feeling caught fire at the suggestion from the highest Catholic quarter in Ireland that the faith of the young was being imperilled by the deportation measures. In vain did Mrs. Montefiore, the English lady who was responsible for the initiation of the scheme, and who was superintending its carrjTing out, explain that the utmost care was taken to see that the children were placed in good hands in England, and that their rehgious instruction would, if possible, be in Roman Catholic hands. People were not at the moment in a frame of mind to listen to representa- tions of this character. Even if the serious ecclesiastical warning had not been given, there was the evidence 222 DISTURBED DUBLIN that the pages of the daily press afforded that the deporta- tion scheme was being conducted on lines which called for strong reprobation. One writer, from his personal experience, described how he had ' met a group of girls, between fourteen and sixteen, walking in a kind of dis- orderly procession.' ' They were,' he said, ' decorated with Larkinite mottoes and were singing some kind of doggerel in praise of this person. But every now and then they gave utterances to most shockingly obscene language about the Catholic priests.' Elsewhere stories were published of coercive measures used to secure recruits for these bands of children. The position appeared in a more sinister light because an offer from Countess Plunkett, a wealthy Dublin lady, to place a large number of children in Irish homes was con- tumeliously rejected by the Larkinites. In view of all the circumstances it is not remarkable that the deportation scheme met with organised resistance from a large body of people who were genuinely and, on the whole, not unnaturally alarmed at this strange new development of Larkinism. On October 22, the day after the appearance of Archbishop's Walsh's letter, arrangements were in progress for the despatch of a contingent of about fifty children to follow in the wake of parties that had already been sent forward on two previous days. The youngsters were being washed, preparatory to the voyage, at the Corporation Baths, under the supervision of Mrs. Montefiore and the other ladies associated with her, when a body of priests appeared on the scene prepared to contest with the strangers for the possession of their charges. Mrs. Montefiore declined to be moved from her purpose by the representations made to her by the clerics, but she could not prevent them from taking out of her custody a considerable number of the children. Undaunted by this rebuff, the intrepid lady sent off the remnant of the band — nineteen in number — ^to Kingstown for embarkation on THE CHURCH AND LARKINISM 223 the outgoing mail steamer. The priests, following in the track of the little voyagers, captured ten of the party before the landing stage was reached, and ultimately induced the remaining nine, after they had gone on board, to come ashore. The ecclesiastical victory stung Mr. Larkin to the quick. The same evening, speaking from his forum at Liberty Hall, he made a bellicose speech assailing the priests in strong terms. He denounced the clergjonen who had been actively concerned in preventing the deportation of Mrs. Montefiore's charges as ' a disgrace to their cloth.' ' Some of the priests,' he said, ' were afraid of these children going to England for a short stay; they were fearful lest their faith would be interfered with ; but the religion which could not stand a fortnight's hoUday in. England had not very much bottom or very much support behind it. Of course he knew that many of these clergy had shares in the Tramway Company, but while soul-destropng agencies were at work in Dublin for many years there was no protest made against them.' ' Those clergj^nen and the employers,' he added in a final outburst, ' had hghted a fire which it would take more than an hour to extinguish.' These insulting words, apphed to a class held in the highest respect by the great mass of the people of DubUn, had the effect of stimulating the opposition to the de- portation scheme to an extraordinary extent. It was no longer a question of priests against Liberty Hall, but of a concerted movement of the whole of the Catholic forces in Dubhn against what they regarded as an in- sidious Sociahst attack on the faith. On Thursday, October 23, as the hour approached for the departure of the cross-Channel steamers, immense crowds gathered about the quays at North Wall with the declared intention of preventing the embarkation of any more children. A large number of priests were conspicuous in the throng and took an active part in directing what was in reality 224 DISTURBED DUBLIN a picketing of ships Cabs which drove up were detained until the excited Catholics had made sure that they con- tained no juveniles of the class marked out for deporta- tion. In one instance a family party, including children, were detained until one of the attendant priests had assured the crowd that they had nothing to do with the Larkinites' scheme, when they were permitted to resume their journey. Eventually, after the last boat had cast off from the wharf and there was no further possibility of deporting children that night, the great crowd, now numbering many thousands, formed in processional order and marched along the quays bareheaded, singing ' Faith of our Fathers,' ' Hail, glorious St. Patrick,' and other sacred melodies. Thus they proceeded until they reached College Green, where a halt was caUed and the assembled multitude were addressed by Father Farrell, of Donnybrook, a priest who had taken a conspicuous part in the evening's operations. ' Remember,' he said, ' that this great demonstration was unorganised and unprepared. It shows the love you have for the Catholic children of this city. It is a magnificent protest against the proselytising of our children in the Socialistic homes of England.' The crowd cheered these sentiments with enthusiasm, and then dispersed to their homes with cries of ' Away with the SociaUsts,' and ' Down with Larkin.' By general consent it was one of the most remarkable and significant uprisings of Catholics that Dublin had witnessed for many a long day. Apart from the weight of the popular protest, a heavy blow had been dealt at the deportation movement by the institution of criminal proceedings, associated with charges of abduction against Mrs. Montefiore and Mrs. Rand, an American lady who had been prominently identified with the scheme for the removal of the children. Nevertheless, the Larkinites declined to abandon their project without a further struggle. On Friday, October 24, an attempt was made under the direction of Mr. THE CHURCH AND LARKINISM 225 Larkin's sister, Miss Delia Larkin, to despatch a party of juveniles to Belfast by rail. They were to have travelled by the six o'clock train in the evening from Amiens Street Station, and their tickets had actually been taken for the journey, when a number of priests, with an escort of youths, appeared upon the scene with the evident determination of preventing the execution of the plan. Miss Larkin stood her ground for a time, but the persistency of the clerics, reinforced by the action of a hostile crowd who blocked the approach to the train, compelled her eventually to retrace her steps to Liberty Hall with her charges. Flushed with their fresh victory over the forces of Larkinism, the priests and the other demonstrators marched down to the quays to picket the evening boats. There was, however, no further attempt made to get the children out of the country. After the departure of the last boat there was a repetition of the demonstration of the previous evening. A huge procession, numbering in its ranks thousands of earnest sons of the Church, marched off towards O'Connell Bridge, singing appropriate hymns. As the processionists passed Liberty Hall a crowd of strikers vigorously hooted the procession and cheered for Larkin. The compliment was returned with interest by the demonstrators, who varied their cheering for the Pope, the Archbishop, and the Priests, with cries of ' Down with Socialism,' ' Larkin must go,' and ' Kidnapper Larkin.' At one point it appeared as if the two opposing crowds would come to blows. But the large force of police present kept the rival forces apart and the evening closed without any untoward incident. This demonstration of Friday, October 23, virtually closed the history of the deportation project. There were echoes of it afterwards in the law courts and in the press, but Dublin was spared any repetition of the humiliating scenes which had marked the development of this the most tactless of all the manoeuvres of Larkinism. 226 DISTURBED DUBLIN If Mr. Larkin is ever given to counting the cost of his blunders, it must be with a very rueful countenance that he reckons up the bill of damages of this particular move. It is certainly not too much to say that, as far as Dublin opinion is concerned, it did more to alienate public sjonpathy from him than any other action of his during the strike. Previously there had been in many quarters merely a colourless prejudice against his Social- istic views, mixed perhaps in many cases with a certain sympathy with his labour ideals. But his open defiance of ecclesiastical authority in a sphere where it is considered to be supreme, his vulgar abuse of the priests, and the association of his project with the propaganda of the extremest section of the English Socialists, shocked and alarmed that large section of the Dublin community which is swayed by Catholic tradition and which puts before everything else the maintenance of the principles underlying it. The Archbishop of Dublin, as has been noted in his letter in regard to the deportation of children, threw out a suggestion for the renewal of the peace negotiations. His Grace had been prompted to undertake this effort as conciliator by a statement made by Mr. GosUng to a press interviewer to the effect that ' if the parties would come together ample guarantees would be forthcoming to ensure the carrying out of agreements.' Recalling the circumstances under which the previous efforts to secure a settlement had failed, and especially the employers' disinclination to accept any arrangement which was not accompanied by a proper system of guarantees. Dr. Walsh asked, ' Why in the face of this explicit statement the parties should not come together.' The Archbishop's proposal was amplified in a further letter, dated October 24, in which the names of Lord MacDonnell and Sir A. H. Porter were mentioned as ' men of rare capacity ' whose services might be utilised in connection with a new conference, Mr. J. A, Seddon, the President of the THE CHURCH AND LARKINISM 227 British Trades Union Congress, who happened to be in Dublin at the time, gave his support to the Archbishop's proposal, stating that the Congress had already ' offered its good offices towards a settlement based upon adequate guarantees, and that no one would be more delighted than himself and his colleagues if his Grace's suggestion should lead to a speedy and happy consummation of this most unhappy dispute.' Subsequently a meeting held at the Mansion House, under the presidency of the Lord Mayor, carried the scheme a stage further by appointing a committee to wait upon the representatives of the workers and the Employers' Federation to secure their assent to a conference. The labour party raised no difficulty to a meeting, but the employers objected to joining in a general conference such as was proposed, though they intimated that they were prepared to meet three of the English Trade Union leaders then on a visit to Dublin (Messrs. Bowerman, M.P., Seddon, and Gosling) to discuss the situation. Before a meeting could be arranged, the three representatives named had returned to England, and it was announced that they would not again visit Dublin until they were advised that their presence was necessary for the direct opening up of negotiations. It was given out at the time that the British Trade Union leaders were endeavouring to induce the Irish Transport Workers' Union representatives to stand aside and allow them to conduct the negotiations, but that Liberty Hall declined to relinquish its prerogatives. Thus, the old difficulty still barred the way even to an approach to a settlement. While the employers never wavered in their determination to have nothing to say to Larkinism, Larkinism was equally emphatic in declining to allow anything to be said without it. So as the days slipped by the prospects of peace became more remote and the gaunt realities of the struggle were more depressingly apparent. a 2 CHAPTER XXI A MARTYR AND HIS FIERY CROSS Waning Influence of LarMnism — ^Trial of Mr, Larkin — ^Attorney- General's Indictment of Movement — The Defence — Sentence — Agitation for Mr. Larkin's Release — Government succumbs to the Clamour — ^Violent Speeches of Mr. Larkin on his Release — CaUing out of the Dock Labourers — ' Fiery Cross ' Crusade checked — ^Mr. Larkin's Intemperate Oratory — ^Mr. Thomas, M.P.'s, Repudiation of LarMnism — Counterblast to the Larkinite Pro- paganda in England. At the period of Archbishop Walsh's well-intentioned effort to bring about peace at the end of October, there were many indications that the long-drawn-out dispute was reaching its inevitable end. The tramways, which had been the cockpit of the struggle, were running smoothly with their full complement of hands, not a few of whom were disillusioned strikers. In other directions industries, though hampered by the difficulty of getting supplies and removing goods, were working with some regularity. The strikers, too, were not responding with the alacrity they once did to the calls from Liberty Hall. What was to have been a great mass demonstration in Phoenix Park on Sunday, October 26, resolved itself into a meeting of quite ordinary proportions, to which the usual Sunday crowd in the Park contributed in large degree. Generally speaking, there was at the time a marked absence of the enthusiasm which a few weeks earlier had been so conspicuous in the ranks of Mr. Larkin's adherents. It seemed almost that, with the damaging failure of the A MARTYR AND HIS FIERY CROSS 229 project for deporting the children, Larkinism had run its course. Unfortunately, it was at this juncture that the law once more stepped in to give the strike the new lease of life it so sadly needed. Probably the placing of Mr. Larkin upon his trial on the charge of using seditious language, on which he had been committed, was inevitable in view of all the circumstances, but the fact remains that the proceedings were the starting-point of a new phase of the strike movement which did not terminate until the lapse of many weeks and after much additional suffer- ing and loss had been inflicted upon the sorely tried community. Mr. Larkin's trial took place on October 27, before Mr. Justice Madden, in circumstances which heightened the effect of the advertisement it gave his cause. A court crowded with spectators, many of whom the reporters recorded ' were clergymen and ladies,' a great array of Counsel, with the Attorney-General leading for the prosecution, and a small army of journalists and press photographers ready to deal with the business as with a new sensation — all these gave eclat to proceedings which were the veriest farce if they were not intended by the Government to run to their logical conclusion. At the outset there was, as is often the case in Ireland, a good deal of trouble in empannelling the jury. One gentleman, a prominent employer, asked to be excused on the ground that he was an interested party, but was told that the prosecution was not for the labour dispute and that he must serve. Afterwards several challenges were made by the prisoner's Counsel (Mr. Hanna, K.C.), and the spectators in the court witnessed the curious ceremony of specially sworn jurors trying the issue whether in- dividuals summoned could act impartially. In two instances the decision was against the gentlemen named serving, and in a third case the jurors disagreed. Even^ tually the full jury was sworn and the trial entered upon. As the facts embodied in the case for the prosecution 230 DISTURBED DUBLIN were identical with those adduced in the evidence given in the police court, it is unnecessary to deal with them here. The only point in the Attorney-General's opening speech which calls for notice is his defence of the prosecu- tion. ' Some well-meaning people,' he said, " thought that Mr. Larkin should not have been prosecuted at all, but that was not his view. He thought that, under the circumstances that would be detailed to the jury in evidence, it was imperative that the law should be vindicated, and that the offences with which the prisoner was charged should be suppressed and punished.' ' There was,' he went on, " nothing at all novel in the situation in which they found themselves at present. Mr. Larkin and his friends were doing nothing but committing the oldest kind of sins in the newest kind of way, and as in the past the firm and courageous and impartial adminis- tration of the law had been found certain to put down matters of the kind with which the prisoner was charged, so in the future it would be found efficacious. If it did not, anarchy must prevail. There would be an end to society — to the bonds of society — and in a short time Mr. Larkin, or somebody in his position, would be at the head of affairs, and that, then, would be followed by a military despotism.' ' Mr. Larkin,' he added, ' was not being prosecuted as a demagogue, but as a wicked and dangerous criminal.' These remarks of the Attorney-General set out with the utmost plainness the view of the authorities who were responsible for the government of Ireland and the peace of Dublin at the time. There could not have been stronger grounds urged for the prosecution, and in the event of a conviction more powerful reasons could not have been adduced for non-interference with the course of justice. Yet, as we shall see, the prisoner was let loose upon society before he had served more than a tithe of his sentence. Mr. Hanna made out as good a defence of Mr. Larkin A MARTYR AND HIS FIERY CROSS 231 as was possible in the circumstances. He scored a point by securing the acquiescence of the judge in his declara- tion in regard to the proclamation of the Sackville Street meeting, that no proclamation of a magistrate could make a legal meeting an illegal meeting. In another part of his speech he drew a skilful parallel between the posi- tion of Mr. John Burns, the hero of the Trafalgar Square episode of 1888 and the then President of the Local Government Board and Privy Councillor, and Mr. Larkin, the leading actor in the O'ConneU Street affair of 1913. As to the suggestion contained in Mr. Larkin's speech relative to looting, Mr. Hanna said that as a matter of fact not one shop had been looted, nor had one piece of coal been stolen in the city. Mr. Hanna either forgot or con- veniently overlooked here the looting of the shops in the Redmond's Hill quarter on the night of September i. The will to give effect to the Liberty Hall injunction of August 28 was certainly not wanting. The judge in his summing-up pointed out that no attempt had been made to dispute the words used in the speech. Any speech used in the furtherance of a strike which was calculated to arouse bad passions or to lead to violence, he laid down, was an offence against the law. What construction, he asked, could reasonably be put on the expression, ' for every one of our men who falls, two must fall on the other side.' Again, was it a mere platitude to say to hungry men, ' There is food in the shops and clothes in the shops and coal on the banks ' ? The sum- ming-up pointed to the inevitabiUty of the conviction. After half an hour's private deliberation, the jury returned a verdict of guilty on the first count of using seditious language, and not guilty on the two other counts of inciting to riot and inciting to steal. Claiming his right to address the court before sentence was passed, Mr. Larkin raised the question of the accuracy of the report of his speech, but was stopped in the middle of his argument by the judge, who told him that he must 232 DISTURBED DUBLIN confine himself in his remarks to the question of the sentence. Thereupon Mr. Larkin said that he was sorry he had not been tried by his peers — the working men. He was not, he added, satisfied with ' a verdict from a packed jury composed of Jews and Gentiles.' In passing a sentence of seven months' imprisonment upon the prisoner, Mr. Justice Madden said that Mr. Larkin, with his knowledge of labour questions, must have known the consequences likely to follow from a speech such as that which formed the subject of the indictment in the midst of a great labour dispute. ' He ought to have known — and I must attribute it to him,' observed the judge, ' that crime and violence would follow, and would result in the sending to gaol of a great many men who followed his advice.' With an imposing escort Mr. Larkin, at the close of the trial, was removed to Mountjoy Gaol to undergo his term of imprisonment, which, as was made clear in the court, was ' simple imprisonment,' carrying with it the privi- leges of a first-class misdemeanant. Thereafter for a brief space he was a martyr languishing in a prison cell, but there were not wanting inconvenient commentators to point out that while he was enjoying all the luxuries which are possible to a first-class misdemeanant — the wearing of his own clothes, the eating of his own meals supplied from outside, and, possibly, even the smoking of his own fragrant cigars — his poor dupes who had followed his advice were undergoing the ordinary hard labour treatment. From the very outset, as has been noted, the prosecution of Mr. Larkin was considered by many people who were utterly opposed to his views to be a mistake. They did not and could not then foresee that the Government, after incurring themselves all the odium of proceedings and giving Mr. Larkin all the advertisement that they carried with them, would weakly stultify themselves in the face of the world by interfering with the execution of the sentence. But great is the power of Demos when expressed through A MARTYR AND HIS FIERY CROSS 233 the ballot boxes. Ministers stood finn while they were being told in peremptory language by their press organs that ' Larkin must be released ' ; they faced steadily the fire of countless resolutions couched in the strongest language from labour organisations ; they regarded un- concernedly a great Albert Hall meeting at which Mr. George Bernard Shaw and other personages of light and leading in the Socialist world hurled their anathemas at them with all the concocted fury of men who see a magnifi- cent opportunity for self-advertisement. But directly the Larkinite influence appeared to their discomfiture, apparent or real, at by-elections, their stoic resolution broke down. The loss of a seat at Reading and a heavy reduction in the Ministerial majority at Linlithgow were arguments which appealed irresistibly in favour of the enlargement of the Dublin labour leader. With one consent the principal Government organs declared that the factor which was working against the Ministerial Party at the by-elections was the continued imprisonment of Mr. Larkin, and that this cause of offence to British labour must be removed. Mr. Lloyd George lent official support to the Press campaign by declaring, in a speech made on November 11, that there were explanations of the electoral rebuffs that had been administered to the Government, ' the most prominent of which is Jim Larkin.' When the Chancellor of the Exchequer made that speech he had only a short time previously left a Cabinet Council, at which, according to rumour, the release of the prisoner of Mountjoy had been decided upon. However that may have been, on November 13, not many hours after this high Ministerial authority had testified to the damag- ing political effect of the agitator's incarceration, Mr. Larkin was free. Some feeble attempts were made by Ministerial apologists, and notably by Mr. Birrell at Bristol on November 13, to show that the interference with the operation of the law was not due to any form of political pressure. But the facts were too patent to be denied, 234 DISTURBED DUBLIN and when a leading London paper {The Standard) de- nounced the step that had been taken as ' a shameless prostitution of the prerogative of mercy,' there was a widespread disposition to endorse the criticism. If Ministers anticipated — and after Lord Aberdeen's experience they probably did not — any gratitude from the object of the Crown's ' clemency ' they were grievously disappointed. The first use made by Mr. Larkin of his release was to deliver in Beresford Place a violent speech denunciatory of the Government. ' The fight,' he said, ' was only starting. The Government made a mistake in sending me to prison, and they have made a greater mistake in letting me out.' ' I am going in a few hours to raise a fiery cross in England, Scotland, and Wales.' Further on in the speech he declared that ' Lord Aberdeen must go.' In sentences full of sound and fury he girded at the employers. He promised them that they were going ' to sup sorrow with a long spoon.' Descending to particulars, he forecasted a general strike ' not only in Dublin but in England, Scotland, and Wales.' Out- Heroding Herod, Mr. Connolly, Mr. Larkin's Heutenant, declared ' that they were now in a state of war, and possessed a power which made government impossible. No vessel would be allowed to leave the port until all their demands were conceded.' These speeches strikingly indicated the spirit in which the ill-advised Ministerial action was received. But even before Mr. Larkin's actual release, a foretaste of the new conditions that would be created by the surrender of the Government had been given to Dublin by an attempt to paralyse the trade of the port. On November 12, at midday, delegates from the Transport Workers' Union visited the quays and called out on strike all the dock labourers to the number of about a thousand. The effect of the action was a complete cessation of work on the quays. Many of the men, probably the majority, left their work reluctantly, but such was the intimidatory A MARTYR AND HIS FIERY CROSS 235 influence exercised from Liberty Hall that none dared openly to resist the orders of the delegates. The step was taken avowedly as a reply to the action of the em- ployers, who a few days previously had imported a number of free labourers, the last detachment of whom had arrived in the river in the steamer Ella the same morning. It is certain, however, that the desire was to create a sensation as an appropriate accompaniment to Mr. Larkin's release, which it was generally understood at that time was impending. A sensation unquestionably was created, whether intended or not. The menace to the trade of the port was too direct for anyone closely interested in com- mercial operations to be otherwise than seriously alarmed. A characteristic Larkinite feature of the struggle was the way in which Liberty Hall had struck at everybody, including even those who had made terms with them. Thus, the City of Dublin Steam Packet Company, which had gone to the extreme length of withholding ' tainted goods ' from delivery to placate the Union, ^ were involved with the rest of the employers in the withdrawal of labour. In this case, as in others, an agreement made was treated as so much waste paper, although it had been ratified with all proper formalities as the outcome of a conference between employers and employed held under the presidency of the Recorder of Dublin. This shameless renunciation of a contract entered into only a short time previously in circumstances which one might suppose would have made the Larkinite executive especially scrupulous about the observance of the conditions set "■ On September 23, 1913, an application was made at the Northern Police Court, Dublin, on behalf of Messrs. S. N. Robinson & Co., for an order for the delivery of 40 bags of molasses which the City of Dublin Steam Packet Co. had brought from Liverpool, and which, it wEis alleged, were withheld from delivery owing to the influence of the Irish Transport Workers' Union. The Magistrate (Mr. Mahony) made an order for the delivery of the goods, or, in the alternative, for the payment of 1% 15s., their value. In a somewhat similar case heard at the same Court about a month later an order was made for the deUvery of the goods. 236 DISTURBED DUBLIN out in the document, convinced many who had hitherto held aloof from the employers' organisation that it was hopeless to seek peace through any arrangement to which the Larkinite executive was a party. Mr. Larkin's fiery cross crusade did not proceed with the lightning rapidity that he and his friends had evidently anticipated. He met with a serious rebuff at the very beginning of his campaign at Liverpool where the local representatives ignored him, and he found himself so isolated that he had to abandon the demonstration that he had intended holding in the city. Proceeding to Manchester, the same studied coldness was shown by the Trade Union leaders, but, with the aid of the extreme socialists, the pseudo-martyr was able to arrange a meeting in the Free Trade Hall, which to some extent was a salve to his wounded vanity. A crowded audience, bubbling over with enthusiasm for ' the cause,' gave him an uproarious welcome. His moving stories df capitalistic tyranny, garnished as they were with lurid descriptions of slum horrors, for which, of course, the employers were held responsible, excited alternate shouts of rage and groans of pity. Under the influence of the hysterical oratory of the hero of the evening, women wept and strong men were compelled to find vent for their feelings in audible curses and execrations. It was a veritable feast of unreason as well as a flow of soul. Even some characteristic Larkinisms were not wanting to give completeness to the demonstration. The phrase ' Damn the Empire ' was sent to keep company with ' To hell with contracts ' and other refined gems of Larkinite oratory of an earlier period. Quite as typical of the man was his repudiation of the statement that he would bring about a general strike. All the Dublin papers had reported his explicit declaration on this point, but this did not deter htm from telling his hearers that those who ■ used the word general strike trippingly on the tongue were a general nuisance.' This and other little A MARTYR AND HIS FIERY CROSS 237 inconsistencies, however, passed unnoticed by the meeting, which, as was said at the time, was ' a cross between a Welsh RevivaUst gathering and a Continental Anarchist Conference.' The demonstrators had, most of them, paid handsomely for admission in the expectation of what in the music halls would be called ' a star turn,' and they were not disappointed in the performer or his performance. Even while the shouts of the Manchester socialists and the tunes of their revolutionary songs were ringing in his ears, Mr. Larkin was conscious that, so far as effective English support in his fight was concerned, the game was up. At this time the British labour leaders had had more than enough of the intrusive Irish agitator, who kept popping up at such inconvenient moments. They resented his abuse and his dictatorial airs, and they feared the effect of his propaganda on the more explosive elements of their own following. Mr. J. H. Thomas, M.P., doubtless voiced the general opinion of the Trade Union leaders when, in addressing a meeting of railwajnnen at Swindon on November 17, in obvious allusion to Mr. Larkin, he enunciated the doctrine that ' no trade union official, no matter how able or influential he may be, ought to have the sole power of teUing men when they shall cease work.' ' Such responsibility,' he declared, ' rested upon the elected representatives of the rank and file, and it was neither honourable nor true on the men's part to stop work at the dictates of Tom, Dick, or Harry.' Still, Mr. Larkin bulked too largely in the popular imagination in England to be safely ignored by the representatives of the EngHsh unions. They summoned him to a meeting of the Parhamentary Committee of the Trade Union Congress in London on November 18, nominally to discuss the question of the ways and means of helping Dublin movement, but in reality to convey to him pretty plainly that there would be no S3anpathetic strike on the English side. After the conference it was publicly intimated that the question of the method to 238 DISTURBED DUBLIN be adopted in dealing with the situation was adjourned to a special meeting to be held on December 9, and that in the meantime the food supplies to Dublin would be continued. A wholesome counterblast to the Larkinite propa- ganda in England was at this juncture given by the holding in London of an influential meeting of the employers of Great Britain to devise measures to resist the encroachments of S5nidicalism. Messrs. H. McLaughlin and John Good attended as a deputation from the Dublin Employers' Federation and put the case for the employers in powerful and convincing speeches. Subsequently a resolution was passed declaring that the Dublin employers were acting in the interests of freedom and pledging the meeting to extend to them material support. Almost simultaneously with the' holding of this gathering, Mr. Murphy contributed to the English Press a letter in which he set himself the difficult task of dispelling the misconception which prevailed in Eng- land as to the character of the Larkinite movement and the attitude assumed by the employers in regard to it. A certain amount of success attended these efforts to keep public opinion right, but now as ever Mr. Larkin constituted the best missioner that the employers could possibly have. He seldom opened his mouth on an EngUsh platform without being guilty of some extrava- gance which went a very long way to justify in the minds of all reasonable men the determination of the Dublin employers to have nothing to say to any arrangement in which he had a part. CHAPTER XXII THE ROUT OF LARKINISM Calm after Storm — ^Employers' Statement of their Position — Archbishop Walsh pleads for a Renewal of the Peace Negotiations — English Trade Union Delegation sent to Dublin to re-open Negotiations with Employers — Acrimonious Larkinite Criticism — Fresh Conference held — Basis of Discussion — Break-up of the Conference on the Question of Re-instatement — British Trade Union Congress holds a. Special Session to consider the DubUn Situation — ^Hostile Reception of Mr. Larkin — Signs of Defeat in DubUn — Re-opening of the Conference — ^Mr. I^arkin's Denuncia- tion of the Peace makers — Final Collapse of the Negotiations for a Settlement — Causes of the Failure — Resumption of Work — ^The Builders' Labourers agree to repudiate Larkinism — End of the Strike — Its Disastrous Consequences to Workers. The month of December opened in Dublin without any indication, even the faintest, that the end of the protracted struggle was near. Mr. Larkin was away in England continuing his " tearing, raging propaganda ' with equal damage to his personal reputation and the cause that he championed. In Dublin itself business at the port was proceeding with some semblance of activity through the agency of free labourers, who, under police protection, were engaged in loading and unloading vessels which were banned by the strikers. At Liberty Hall energies were mainly centred in the drilling, under the general supervision of Captain White, D.S.O., the son of the hero of Ladysmith, of the ragged levies of the Irish Transport Workers' Union, in imitation of the Ulstermen, whose example was deemed to be worthy of adoption by the ' wage slaves ' of Dublin in the prosecution of 240 DISTURBED DUBLIN their war against capital. The general public were deeply interested in the proceedings of the Housing Inquiry, where an attempt was being made to evolve a practical solution of the terrible slum problem and its sequelae of social evils. Peace had disappeared from the thoughts of the citzens with the admitted failure of the Dublin Peace Committee, whose organisation had been broken up a short time previously. Ahead loomed, none too promisingly, the special sitting of the Trade Union Congress at which the vital question of the continued support of Larkinism by the British Trade Unionists was to be settled. Generally, local opinion was settling down to the belief that nothing could prevent the fighting out of the issue until one or both parties had reached the state of exhaustion. At this juncture, when England was ringing with the Larkinite denunciations of the Dublin capitalist, and when even usually fair-minded publicists were showing a dispositibn to accept the grossly distorted view of the struggle which was presented by the Irish labour leader in his wild harangues, the Executive Committee of the Dublin Employers' Federation issued a statement explana- tory of their attitude. It was a temperate and well- reasoned document, showing with convincing force that, whatever might be the result of inquiries then pending, the Dublin employer would not ' be found blameworthy or neglectful of his responsibilities to his City and Country.' Once more, and with added emphasis, the Committee denied that they were out to ' smash trades unionism.' It was absurd, they said, that a large body of employers representing varied interests, who had everything to lose and nothing to gain by a strike, would band themselves together to destroy trades unionism, with which they had always worked in harmony. They maintained, how- ever, that a trade union had its obligations as well as its rights, and that it was no part of its business to • smash ' capital or to make the business of traders THE ROUT OF LARKINISM 241 unworkable. This, they maintained, was the policy that had been adopted by the Irish Transport Workers' Union, and in return, they observed, ' the employers are surely entitled to say that if they are to be smashed, they may lawfully elect to die fighting rather than suffer extinction by being smothered.' An able review of the history of the Irish Transport Workers' Union followed this general statement of the employers' case. Stress was laid upon the malign in- fluence exercised by the Union's organ. The Irish Worker, ' which spared neither man, woman or child in pursuance of the ofl&cial policy which aimed at making Mr. James Larkin Dictator of the City of Dublin.' The charge of sweating brought against Dublin employers, it was asserted, had as little foundation as the statement that out of the whole of the Dublin employers there were only two Roman Catholics. Summarising the policy of tlie Transport Workers' Union, the Committee declared that the organisation sought to establish a universal domination of the community, that, having made agree- ments, the Union declined to be bound by them, that it adopted as a favourite weapon the S5anpathetic ' strike,' whereby no man, woman, or firm, no matter how far re- moved from the original dispute, is safe from being forced into the vortex, that it pursued a villainous campaign of abuse through the medium of The Irish Worker, and that it followed an ' avowed pohcy of destruction without any effort at construction.' Finally, the Committee announced that they were prepared to fight to a finish or to confer with those whom they could trust to see agreements carried out. ' Peace,' observed the Com- mittee, ' suits employers best, war being wasteful. Peace with honour we welcome, but freedom in the management of our business we fight for to the finish, if necessary.' This manifesto, revealing as it did the fixed deter- mination of the employers to adhere to the principle for which they had tenaciously fought from the 242 DISTURBED DUBLIN first — freedom from the thraldom of Larkinism — served to dispel any illusions that might still have lingered as to the possibility of an arrangement which left any door open for the continuance of the despotism against which the employers were fighting. By a cuifious coincidence the statement appeared side by side in the Dublin papers with a letter from Archbishop Walsh pleading for a renewal of the peace negotiations. His Grace based his action on a statement made in a letter written by Mr. W. M. Murphy on November 17, in the course of which that gentleman stated that there were not five per cent, of the men out of emplojonent " who may not return before their places are filled up, without any sacrifice of principle, or without any undertaking except to do the work they are paid for doing.' As was afterwards pointed out, the reference in the letter was to members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union and not to the general body of those out of emplo37ment. But Dr. Walsh, construing the statement in the wider sense, argued ingenuously that the declaration opened the door to the establishment of peace conditions, more especially as Mr. Connolly in a public utterance had affirmed that though he would never consent to abandon the sympathetic strike he would agree " to check its Operation to the extent that the sympathetic strike would not be used recklessly and indiscriminately.' The foundation which Dr. Walsh indicated for a possible accommodation was a very insecure one. Indeed, to those who were more intimately in touch with the realities of the situation than his Grace could possibly be, the basis which he discovered did not exist at all, for while there was no evidence in Mr. Murphy's statement that the employers had receded from their original deter- mination to have nothing to do with the Irish Transport Workers' Union in its existing condition, there was abundant proof in the declaration made by Mr. Connolly that the weapon of the sjonpathetic strike was still a part of the Larkinite policy. Nevertheless, his Gr?ice's THE ROUT OF LARKINISM 243 letter received, as it was bound to do, a respectful hearing, and his suggestion bore the fruit that he desired in a renewed attempt to reach a settlement. The response to the Archbishop's proposal came in the first instance from the Joint Board of Trade Union organisations in England, which, as a preliminary to the special sitting of the Trade Union Congress arranged for December 9 to deal with the Dublin dispute, decided to despatch to DubUn a delegation to initiate a new peace conference. The deputation assigned for the important duty was a strong one, consisting of Messrs. J. A. Spddon, H. Gosling, and C. W. Bowerman, M.P., representing the Trades Union Congress, Mr. Arthur Henderson, M.P., Chairman of the Joint Board, Mr. Tom Fox, Chairman of the Labour Party, and Mr. James O'Grady, M.P., Chair- man of the General Federation of Trades Unions. Mr. Larkin was reported to have been present at the meeting, at which it was decided to send the delegation to Dublin to re-open negotiations with the employers, but the pubUc had not long to wait for evidence that he and his friends were out of harmony with the move.. Speaking in Beresford Place on December 2, Mr. Wm. Partridge, one of Mr. Larkin's principal lieutenants, assured ' those men,' referring to the deputation, that Liberty Hall would show them what a strike that was ' fizzling out ' was like, and he told them that the one thing certain about the position was that ' whenever the strike was settled it would be settled by Jim Larkin and nobody else.' That Mr. Partridge rightly read the mind of his chief was shown in the next issue of the Irish Worker, published on December 6, in which a manifesto appeared from Mr. Larkin warning his supporters against the machinations of the peace-makers. ' Certain well-disposed gentlemen that you and I have a bitter experience of,' he wrote, ' are prepared to settle the present difficulty by hook or crook — ^mostly crook. The lines upon which they are working is to get the blood-suckers to withdraw the ban R 2 244 DISTURBED DUBLIN against our Union ; they will then go their way — the victimisation of men and women they will minimise, the questions of the future ignore. ... Be not con- founded with the tactics of our false friends in the Trade Union movement. They have burnt their boats. . . . The saying " Fools rush in where angels fear to tread " holds good.' Manifestly the view was that the English delegates might amuse themselves with negotiations, but that nothing would come of them until the autocrat of Liberty Hall had deigned to extend to them his gracious approval. A more unpromising beginning for a peace campaign can scarcely be imagined. But no doubt the delegation was despatched with a two-fold purpose. It was to settle the dispute if it could, and if it could not it was to build up a suitable line of retreat along which the English Trade Union forces might retire from the difficult and even impossible position they had rashly taken up in defence of Larkinism. The fact is that the English Trade Unions were tired of paying the piper without having any effective voice in calling the tune. Their position was very clearly defined at the period by Mr. T. Shaw, of the Northern Counties Textile Trades Federation, a leading Lancashire Trade Unionist. ' If the workers of Dublin really wish that Larkin should be the sole determining factor in the matter, and that he should have the power he claims to have,' he wrote in a letter to the Daily Citizen, ' then I am not prepared to pay the price. ... I am not the only one who thinks that with Larkin in supreme control all the money that we can subscribe will be thrown into a bottom- less bog.' In spite of rebuffs and warnings, the deputation devoted themselves whole-heartedly to the task which had been allotted to them. The moment they arrived in Dublin they got into communication with the employers, and a preliminary meeting was held on December 4 at which THE ROUT OF LARKINISM 243 the visitors conferred with Messrs. G. Jacob, C. Eason, and Martin in reference to the conditions which might be defined as the basis of a settlement. On the following day a formal conference was held in Commercial Build- ings, at which the Executive of the Employers' Federa- tion and the Trade Unionist deputation thrashed out the points at issue. Eventually six clauses were agreed upon as a basis for discussion. They were (i) Abandonment of the sjon- pathetic strike and the refusal to handle ' tainted goods,' the employers undertaking to confer with the labour representatives with a view of framing a scheme or schemes for the settlement of future disputes ; (2) Every employer to conduct his business in any way he might consider advantageous, not infringing the individual liberty of the workers ; (3) No strike or lock-out to be entered upon without a month's notice on either side, and no strike to take place without a preliminary ballot of the men and the carrying of the resolution by a majority of the workers affected ; (4) That the representatives of the Joint Labour Board and of the Dublin Trades Union should under- take that their policy and methods should be conducted on proper and recognised trade lines, and that agreements made with the employers should be kept by the unions and their officials ; and, further, that any union or ofl&cial failing to observe these conditions should be repudiated and should receive no assistance, financial or otherwise, from them ; (5) That while employers would not undertake to dismiss men who had been employed during the strike, they would re-employ ' such men as are required as soon as possible,' it being under- stood that owing to the disorganisation of trade many firms would be unable to employ a full staff immediately ; (6) That the agreement should apply to all workers, skilled and unskilled, affected by the dispute in the City and County of Dublin. A certain measure of agreement having thus been 246 DISTURBED DUBLIN reached, it was deemed advisable to broaden the Trade Union representation by calling in eight delegates from the Dublin Trades Council and the Irish Transport Workers' Union. In this enlarged form the conference held a third sitting, commencing on Saturday morning, December 6, and lasting, with an interval on Saturday afternoon, until five o'clock Sunday morning. In spite of the sincere desire manifested on both sides to reach an agreement, the word ' failure ' had finally to be written over the deliberations of the conference. Now, as before, re-instatement was the rock upon which the conference split. The English labour leaders were willing to devise measures for putting an end to the s3Tn- pathetic strike, and to agree to a revision of the method of calling a strike, but they resolutely declined to recede from the demand that the employers should agree to take back all men thrown out of emplo57ment by the dispute. The condition, which was no doubt put forward at the dictation of the Larkinite leaders, was an impossible one from the employers' standpoint. As one of their members explained publicly at the time, the strike had so injured trade in many directions that it would be years probably before employment could be found for the full number of men who were at work before the dispute occurred. Moreover, the Dublin industries were of such a varied character that what might be practicable in one quarter would be absolutely impossible in another. In the circumstances the farthest that employers could be expected to go — the farthest in which they could safely go with any prospect of carrying out their pledges — was to agree to re-instate as many of the displaced workers as they could make provision for. As the members of the deputation were not permitted by Liberty Hall to accept any solution short of the full demand for re- instatement, the negotiations came to an end before the whole of the points at issue had been discussed. British Trade Unionists were at this time chafing THE ROUT OF LARKINISM 247 with daily increasing impatience under the goads of Larkinism. The Irish Trade Labour leader did not even take the trouble to cultivate the friendship of the men whose support was so important to him. His ■ fiery cross ' crusade had become largely a campaign of abuse directed against the English Trade Union leaders. The fact that in most cases they were unable to retaliate, owing to considerations of prudence, added to the irritation that was excited by the attacks. Thus on the eve of the momentous gathering of the Congress, at which the future policy of dealing with the strike was to be settled, the whole atmosphere of English. Trade Unionism was as unfavourable to Larkinism as it could possibly be. The actual proceedings of the gathering bore out to the full the early premonitions of Laikinite defeat. A resolution proposed by the extremists in the body for the further prosecution of the strike by a blockade of Dublin was rejected by 2,280,000 votes to 203,000. Mr. Larkin himself was practically howled down by a thoroughly hostile assembly. In the few peaceful inter- ludes permitted him, he contrived to hurl defiance at the Congress. ' Neither you nor these gentlemen on the platform can settle this Dublin dispute,' he shouted to the chairman. ' I defy you to try it,' he added. Another characteristic outburst was : ' The men of Dublin will never handle " tainted goods " as long as I am an of&cial.' ' The scene was as painful as it was purposeless,' wrote a correspondent of a labour paper. Nor did the Congress confine its manifestations of dislike to vocal demon- strations while Mr. Larkin was speaking. In continuance of a feud which had already been carried a long way by pamphlet and speech, Mr. J. Havelock Wilson fiercely attacked the Irish labour leader for his conduct of the strike, afiirming that the state of affairs in Dublin would not have existed twenty-four hours if Mr. Larkin had shown a little more common sense. Notwithstanding 248 DISTURBED DUBLIN the passing of resolutions pledging the Congress to a continuance of the support of the strike and protesting against the importation of strike breakers, it was only too palpable at the close of the gathering that the final kick had been given to Larkinism by the Congress. Even before the decision of the Congress was reached the unniistakable shadows of defeat began to gather over Liberty Hall. Some days previously the traffic on the Grand Canal had been resumed, and the day after the gathering in London the men of the London and North Western Railway Company returned to work, their action making possible the opening of the port after a closure extending over many weeks. The disposition everj^where was to consider that the trouble was virtually at an end, and probably it would have ended then and there if the Trades Union Congress had not deemed it necessary to again intervene with the object of procuring a formal settlement. They were possibly driven to adopt that course by the exigencies of a situation of a peculiarly perplexing kind, but whether so or not they must have realised that nothing had altered in the circumstances which led to the breakdown of the earlier negotiations. Mr. Larkin resolutely declined to be a party to ' victimisation,' as he whimsically termed the reaping by the strikers of the fruit of the seed that they had sown. On the other side the em- ployers as determinedly declined to entertain any pro- posal which would compel them to really victimise men whom they had taken on to fill the places of the strikers, and which in addition would bind them to impossible conditions. Still, nothing was left undone to give eclat to the conference. An imposing preliminary gathering of British and Irish Trade Union delegates was held to discuss the position and make arrangements for the attendance of delegates. As Mr. Larkin, who had just previously returned from his abortive ' fiery cross ' crusade was one of those present at the gathering, the public THE ROUT OF LARKINISM 249 were led to infer that the ensuing conference was to lack nothing in comprehensiveness and authoritativeness. To this extent the omens were no doubt propitious, but it was not exactly a reassuring circumstance that, in speaking at Beresford Place the same evening, Mr. Larkin utilised the opportunity presented by the re-assembling of the conference to ventilate his extreme views as to the establishment of a ' co-operative commonwealth.' ' The workers,' he said, ' had the divine right and the divine injunction and the moral law on their side. The workers were the producers of wealth and entitled to share it.' . . . ' The working classes did not want capital ; they wanted to control capital.' That, of course, was the crux of the difficulty. While the Larkinite aimed at the ' control of capital ' the employers absolutely declined to submit to such control. When the conference assembled on December 18, it had before it as a basis of discussion a set of conditions drawn up by a sub-committee of the Joint Board of Great Britain and delegates from the local trade societies, and approved at a general meeting of the labour representa- tives held subsequently. The conditions were : (i) That the employers should withdraw " the circulars, posters, and forms of agreement known as " the employers' agree- ment " ; (2) That the unions as a condition of such with- drawal should abstain from any form of sympathetic strike pending the establishment of a Wages Board by March 17, 1914 ; (3) That no member should be refused employment on the grounds of his or her association with the dispute, and that no stranger should be employed until aU the old workers were re-engaged ; and (4) That all cases of old workers not re-employed on February i, 1914, should be considered at a conference to be held on February 15, 1914. Outwardly there was unanimity on the labour side in regard to these proposals, but it was stated with some show of authority by the Labour Press Agency that the terms put forward were not those 250 DISTURBED DUBLIN originally drafted by the Joint Board. ' The original draft,' the communication stated, " was amended materi- ally in order to meet the wishes of Mr. Larkin, who stood out for uncompromising terms but was outvoted, and the published terms represent the utmost concession the other parties interested in the dispute were willing to make to carry Larkin with them.' Mr. Larkin now as ever was thus the stumbling-block to a peaceful adjust- ment of the dispute. On the very day of the sitting of the conference he had forwarded to the Daily Herald, the extreme labour organ, a furious manifesto addressed to ' comrades ' in England, asking for their support of him in the war- fare he was waging against a ' foul and black conspiracy afoot here ' against ' the greater unionism.' After noting the various measures adopted by the British Trade Unionists to bring pressure to bear upon him, he said, ' This treachery must cease.' ' Are,' he asked, ' the rank and file going to allow this betrayal ? Get busy, rebels in branches and lodges, and send us help direct at once. We will not bend. We appeal to aU honest men and women to make public protests at their ofl&cials' treachery. . . . Are you rebels going to allow this dirty business to succeed ? Arouse yourselves.' When the conference actually assembled, it was speedily seen that Mr. Larkin's influence would effectually prevent any concession to the employers' views on the one point — ^that of re-instatement — ^upon which their determination was fixed. The labour leader made an ostentatiously belated appearance upon the scene, and, when he did attend, it was only to demonstrate his intention to enforce his own decided views on the all- important question at issue. Brushing aside Mr. A. Henderson, M.P., who had up to that point acted as the Labour spokesman, he dominated the situation from the standpoint of the workers, emphatically vetoing all suggestions by way of compromise. Nevertheless, THE ROUT OF LARKINISM 251 the attempt to find a via media was persistently made throughout the whole of the day and during a good part of the forenoon of the next day. At length, when the impossibility of reconciling divergent views had been revealed to the satisfaction of the most sanguine of the delegates, the conference broke up. So ended the last of the formal efforts made to terminate by agreement the disastrous conflict which for many weeks had raged in the Irish capital. The employers were roundly abused for their part in this collapse, but from the statements made by labour representatives as to the course of the negotiations, it is perfectly plain that they took up no unyielding attitude. Nothing indicates this better than the fact that they were willing to withdraw the ban on the Irish Transport Workers' Union to clear the way for a settlement. This was a very real concession, and if there had been in the Larkinite camp a genuine desire to make peace, the action taken would have been reciprocated in a more accommodating spirit on the question of re-instatement. But, having made up their minds to insist on full satis- faction for their dupes, Mr. Larkin and his associates were content to see the conference break up rather than give way. If they had been the victors in the dispute, or even if a reasonable prospect of final triumph had existed, their line of action might have been justifiable. Notoriously, however, they had been beaten at every point, and their only hope of retaining some shred of reputation for leadership was by rescuing as much as they could from the wreckage. That they did not do so is in itself a vindication of the attitude of profound distrust which the employers assumed towards them from the outset of the dispute. The breakdown of the Peace Conference was in a very real sense the beginning of the end. Though the Larkinites talked loudly about continuing the struggle, and there were threats in British Trade Union circles 252 DISTURBED DUBLIN of assisting in this fight to a finish, the seeds of decay were too plainly in the movenient to keep it longer alive. With the cessation of the food supplies from England and the signs that were only too apparent to the deluded strikers of the approaching suspension of the exiguous doles of strike pay which they had been in the habit of receiving at Liberty Hall, there was a marked desire shown on the part of the men to return to work. In some instances the strikers sought re-emplojmient in considerable bodies ; in others, the process of voluntary re-instatement was gradual, the workers putting in an appearance by twos and threes, and acting afterwards as recruiting agents for the firm amongst the body of employees still out. In this way the long vacant work- shops were in a comparatively brief period of time running at full pressure. Perhaps the most striking of the episodes which marked the collapse of the strike movement was the return of the Dublin builders' labourers to work, practically en masse, at the beginning of February. The incident is sufiiciently important to deserve special notice. To make the position clear it is necessary to give a short preliminary explanation. For over two years prior to the strike a feud had existed between the Irish Transport Workers' Union and the Builders' Labourers' Union, and the officials of the latter had made repeated requests to the employers not to employ any Larkinites. . The builders at the outset, for various reasons — chiefly that they did not like to bar any union — had declined to make the distinction. But when the crisis occurred in September they, in conformity with the action of other employers, took measures to enforce the signature of the well-known document adopted by the general body of employers. The course was taken by them because they believed that their labourers would be quite ready to sign any agreement which would have the effect of prevent- ing the Larkinites from getting any employment from THE ROUT OF LARKINISM 253 the builders. The Trades Council, however, used its influence on the Larkinite side to such good effect that the men declined to sign, with the result that a complete stoppage was brought about in the building trade. From a period early in December the men had been anxious to resume work, but as they still declined, for reasons best known to themselves, to repudiate the Larkinite organisation nothing came of their overtures. Some weeks later, when the pinch of want had become more acute, their views underwent a change. They then expressed their willingness to enter into an engagement not to allow any of their members to become members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union. On January 31, at the last of two conferences that were held between the Builders' Association and the men's representatives, an tmdertaking was formally ratified as the basis of a settle- ment of the outstanding difficulty. On behalf of the Labourers' Union, Mr. John O'Toole, the President, Mr. Thomas McCullagh, the Secretary, and Messrs. Thomas Hefferman and John Doyle, delegates, undertook that none of the members of the Union would remain or become in the future members of the Irish Transport Workers' Union. They further pledged themselves that their members would not take part in or support any form of sympathetic strike, and would handle all materials no matter how delivered, would carry out all instructions given them in the course of their employment, and would work amicably with other employees, whether they were members of a union or not. Finally, on their part it was agreed that any member of the Union who broke any of the provisions of the undertaking should be instantly dismissed from membership, while the employers on their side undertook to re-employ such of the members of the Union as they might require on the terms in force prior to the previous September 13. At the earliest moment effect was given by the em- ployers to the agreement by admitting to work every 254 DISTURBED DUBLIN member of the Union on the production of his card of membership. Those who were not members of the Labourers' Union were required to sign the original docu- ment issued by the Employer's Executive Committee. It speaks eloquently for the change which had come over the situation in the early days of the new year that many hundreds accepted the condition and subscribed to the much discussed declaration. This surrender to the employers in the building trade may be regarded as the final blow to Larkinism. Before the new year had far advanced there was every promise that the great strike would soon be but an evil memory. The struggle had been a costly one for the employers : for the workers it had been disastrous. ' So far from bringing any benefit to the working men,' said Mr. Murphy, in addressing the shareholders of the Tramway Company at the general meeting early in the year, ' Larkin's cam- paign has brought nothing but untold misery on them and their families. I get letters every day of the most pitiable character from men whom we should readily have em- ployed if they applied in time, but who delayed so long that their places were filled and their names can now only be put on a waiting list.' Other employers have a similar story to tell of the wretched plight to which the unfortu- nate dupes of Liberty Hall have been reduced. For many of the strikers, indeed, it has literally proved "a fight to a finish.' Bankrupt in pocket and broken in spirit, they have been left by the wayside to indulge in bitter musings on the folly of Larkinism. CHAPTER XXIII A STUDY OF LARKINISM Extraordinary Character of the Larkinite Movement — Influences that fed the Agitation — Mr. Larkin's Personality an Important Factor — Mr. Larkin's Views on Irish Industrialism — He favours the Adoption of Guild Principles — Can the Guild System be Adapted to Modem Conditions ? — Failure of the Larkinite Move- ment — Conclusion . The rise and decline of Larkinism in Dublin constitutes one of the most extraordinary chapters in the history of modern industrial conflict. It is a phenomenon which deserves to be studied carefully by every sociologist who wishes to take accurate note of the development of modern democratic thought. The extraordinary personality of the leader of the movement, the amazing audacity of his plans, and the strangely powerful influence he exercised over the working population of Dublin and over many outside that class, all gave to the recent labour struggle in Dublin an interest peculiarly its own. Though outwardly invested with the attributes of an industrial conflict, the movement stands quite outside the ordinary category of labour disturbances. It was in essence a revolutionary rising, one in which the ultimate aims of its promoters involved the destruction of Society quite as much as the betterment of the wage conditions of the workers. Red Republicanism, Anarchism, Syndicalism, and all the extremest forms of modem revolutionary thought found expression in the literature and oratory of the movement. Even anti-clericalism of a kind was 25b DISTURBED DUBLIN not wanting to complete the syllabus of advanced ideas to which the rising gave such blatant expression. And this in Dublin, the centre and citadel of the most disciplined force of Roman Catholicism in Europe, and the home of perhaps the sincerest conservatism — ^using that phrase in its broadest sense — ^in the Empire ! Many strange things have happened by the banks of the Lifiey, but none probably stranger than that open flouting of authority — ecclesiastical quite as much as civil — ^which marked the progress of Larkinism. In the foregoing pages the causes that brought about this remarkable situation have been indicated, but it may be useful in this concluding chapter to gather together the threads of the narrative and attempt to show the picture of Disturbed Dublin as a whole. It is beyond serious cavil that the evil social conditions of Dublin were a cause, possibly the primary cause, of the Larkinite movement obtaining the hold it did. In the depressed and degraded population of the slums Mr. Larkin found a double source of strength. On the one hand it supplied fertile ground for his ' divine mission of discontent ' ; on the other, he was able to draw from it in due abun- dance the requisite tools for the enforcement of his intimidatory decrees. Indirectly also the social factor enormously strengthened his arm by evoking for his propaganda the sympathy of an outside public which otherwise would probably have been little concerned with the dispute. The public conscience, ever sensitive to stories of moral wrongs, was deeply shocked by the accounts, which were forthcoming in abundance from various sources, of the horrors of over-crowded tene- ment houses of Dublin. Burning with zeal for reform, people only too readily accepted the Larkinite theory that the evils were due to the sweating practices of a merciless body of employers who ground the faces of the poor with unexampled callousness. In point of fact, the Dublin employers are neither better nor worse than those in any A STUDY OF LARKINISM 257 other part of the United Kingdom. If there is a difference it is in their favour, for probably as a whole they are a more humane class than their prototypes in more exclusively manufacturing cities than Dublin is. The black sheep — and of course they are not absent from this any more than from any other flock — are of the minor and baser sort who are to be found in every populous area where a large indigent population offers scope for unscrupulous exploitation by the Gadgrinds of industry. Still, the impression having once got abroad that the heel of the oppressor in Dublin was that of the employer, it was difficult to eradicate it, and it was doubtless a most potent force in keeping the movement going long beyond the period when in the ordinary way it would have spent itself. Government mismanagement must also count for a good deal in any estimate of the influences which went to the building up of the edifice of Larkinism. If Mr. Larkin had been treated at first, as he should have been, as a dangerous firebrand whose vicious incitements to outrage and intimidatory practices were a menace to Society, Dublin would probably have been saved the calamity that overtook it. But instead of pursuing this poUcy, which would have been adopted as a matter of course a few years ago, the authorities truckled to the offender. The result was fatal to the cause of peace. From the moment that Mr. Larkin received official notice, he never ceased to pour contempt on authority, and especially on that most exalted form of it which had been most prominently associated with him. The effect of this on an impressionable population was immense. Even Pamell, in his palmiest days, had not been ' agin the Government ' in so piquant and altogether alluring a form. The ill-timed energy afterwards shown in dealing with the labour leader was less mischievous in its effects, locally at all events. It was too familiar a development of Government activity to influence the population to 258 DISTURBED DUBLIN any lasting degree. Not until Ministers again showed weakness by releasing Mr. Larkin unconditionally in abject fear of the further electoral consequences of his incarceration did the Dublin workers really respond again to the spur of events. That melancholy example of political opportunism gave a vigorous fresh stir to the cauldron of strife and led, it can scarcely be doubted, to the protraction of the struggle by several weeks. In examining the causes which have contributed to the rise of Larkinism it is impossible to avoid giving a prominent place to the personality of the founder of the movement. Few agitators, in modem times at least, have obtained such an absolute domination over a population as Mr. Larkin did over the workers of Dublin. Probably there is none who for so long a period has commanded the implicit obedience of large bodies of his fellow men without any other authority than that of a committee of obsequious satellites. Dublin is divided in opinion as to Mr. Larkin's sincerity ; but there are scarcely two voices as to his forceful personality. He has ever proved himself an impossible man to work with. Dictatorial, headstrong, and vain, he goes his own way, absolutely indifferent to anything but the mainten- ance of his personal ascendancy. His extreme recklessness of speech adds a final and fatal touch to his defects. No consideration of prudence ever prevents him from making the most compromising statements. To score a personal point over a rival he will endanger the whole future of the plans of the moment. In order to elicit a passing cheer he will blurt out some remark which will give deadly offence to those with whom it is essential he should be on good terms. If he had some of the statesmanlike restraint of Mr. John Burns and a little of the Northern caution which characterises Mr. Thomas Burt, he might have a successful pubhc career before him. As things are his future seems likely to be the barren and stormy life of an impracticable idealist who is ever seeking the bubble A STUDY OF LARKINISM 259 reputation in the devious byways of industrial strife. His failure in Dublin is so complete, his promises to the workers have been so utterly falsified, and the misery entailed on those who sacrificed their emplojonent in fol- lowing him has been so great, that he can never again hope to secure any very large following in the same field. It is only by seeking fresh fields and pastures new that he can expect to win any measure of success in adventures of the character of those which he conducted in Ireland with such disastrous results to his reputation for leadership. During a visit to Dublin in April 1914 I sought and obtained an opportunity of hearing at first hand from Mr. Larkin the views he held upon the question of industrial regeneration in Ireland. I found him at first unwilling to discuss the question, in view of the fact that Mr. ConnoUy, his chief lieutenant, was bringing out a book on the subject of the strike, but eventually he opened his mind and we had a most interesting talk on the varied phases of the problem. Appropriately enough, the inter- view took place in Croydon Park, the recreation ground belonging to the Irish Transport Workers' Union. At the period of my call Mr. Larkin, with two assistants, was engaged in erecting a platform for a meeting to be held later in the week in the park. Standing in his shirt sleeves with his pipe in his mouth, he was directing with practised skUl the joining of the planks which were the main support of the structure. A tall, loose-limbed man, with a slight stoop in the shoulders, he gave at the moment Uttle impression of the popular idol ; but we had not been speaking long before I discovered that the man was no ordinary type of agitator. His brain was full of ideas, crude and impracticable for the most part, but suggesting originality of thought and a wider outlook than that commonly attributed to him. With the aid of some notes I made of the conversation at the time I may, perhaps, profitably reproduce here the views he expressed, as they throw an interesting 26o DISTURBED DUBLIN light upon the psychology of the man. In reply to a statement of his that his movement was more advanced than most labour agitations, I hazarded the remark that it was on continental lines. He answered that it was and it was not. It was being conducted on the old Guild principle, on lines which were admirably laid down in a series of articles in the New Age, written by Mr. Orage,! which he recommended for my perusal. I told him that as a writer on municipal questions I had studied the history of guilds very closely, and had accumu- lated a mass of material with the intention of some day writing a book on the subject. He seemed interested, and we discussed for some time the peculiar feature of the ancient Guild system. The talk drifted on to the strike. Mr. Larkin said that the Dublin employers were different to their English prototj^pes. They were a merciless lot, and did not give and take as the others did. I suggested that a good deal of the trouble was due to the fact that there was not enough work to go round. He demurred to this. There was, he said, plenty of work for all under a proper system. The mischief was that men now worked 72 to 78 hours a week for a pittance. I asked whether it was not a fact that they were in Dublin badly in need of more industries. He cordially agreed, but said that people were so un- enterprising in Dublin that nothing could be done. More- over, there were other drawbacks. One was the policy of the banks. The Dublin banks were stuffed full of money at the present time, but anyone who wanted capital for their business had to pay 7 or 8 per cent, for the accommodation — an impossible price. Then there was the action of greedy landowners to contend with. He mentioned the case of an owner of some land in that very locality who declined to sell it for the purpose of a » Since published in book form under the title National Guilds : An Inquiry into the Wage Question and the Way Out. London : G. BeU & Sons. A STUDY OF LARKINISM 261 shipyard, though it was admirably adapted for that purpose. Here was a case in which a promising new industry was choked off by the selfishness of an individual. That was t5^ical of Dublin and of Ireland. He then went on to talk of general affairs. The priest and the poli- tician, he stated, were the curses of Ireland. ' Between the Pope and King Billy the people come to the ground.' He spoke in scathing language of the Ancient Order of Hibernians. He called them Catholic Orangemen, and said they were worse than the Protestant Orangemen. The latter, he said, were misguided but sincere, and some- thing might be made of them with proper treatment. The ■ Catholic Orangemen,' on the other hand, were ' unscrupulous ruffians ' — they stuck at nothing. I spoke of the slums. That, he said, was the root fact of the situation. He denounced the corporation. It was honeycombed, he said, with corruption and jobbery. Contractors waxed fat out of ill-gotten gains. He spoke of a case in which a public-house, which might at one time have been bought for £100 or less, was acquired by the corporation for £1000 for a public improvement. The registration laws were next touched upon. The whole system was, he said, rotten. The party in power did what they liked with the registers. Names of known Larkinites were deliberately left out. On the other hand, he knew of a case in which six votes were given for a house and no one at the house knew the voters. I suggested that proceedings should be taken to alter such abuses. He replied that proceedings would cost too much money. It would be a High Court matter and they could not afford the amount that would be required. Though the party in power were supreme, he said, John Redmond dared not hold an open meeting in Dublin. If meetings were held they were ticket meetings. I asked about rural Ireland. He said that there was great unrest ever3rwhere. New ideas were penetrating the brain of the labouring classes. Long ago a priest told 262 DISTURBED DUBLIN him that they would build a high wall around Ireland to keep out the evil influences of the outside world. Where was that wall to-day ? People were thinking for themselves, and they were moving, slowly perhaps, but they were certainly moving, and no one could stop the movement. But they were terribly handicapped by the educational system. The priests controlled the schools and taught people only just what they pleased, with the result that young men were turned out into the world with very inferior equipment as compared with the young men in England and Scotland. He knew of youths of seventeen or eighteen who had been through the Irish schools who could hardly write their own names. Educa- tion should be under popular control. It was useless if it was not. I asked if the Land Purchase Act had not been a great boon. He replied : Certainly not ; quite the reverse. It led to speculation in land. Men sold their rights for large sums as soon as the transaction was carried through. The purchase money was taken out of the country or left lying idle in the banks. The poor labourers got nothing. The half-acre of land he was entitled to was always selected from the worst land, and the measure- ment was made so as to include the public road. No, there was nothing in the new agricultural movement that was beneficial. The Creameries made people lazy and more unenterprising than they were. Why was there such large emigration at the present time if all was well ? The farmer was a poor type of man. He had no ideas beyond his farm. One of his sons became a priest, a second a policeman, and a third a publican. Drink could always be obtained in the country on a Sunday although the public-houses were supposed to be closed. He mentioned a place (I think in Clare) where there were 137 public-houses and only 150 dwelling- houses. Men might be seen lying drunk outside public- houses on Sunday and policemen passing and re-passing. There were seldom any prosecutions for breaches of the A STUDY OF LARKINISM 263 licensing laws. Drink could always be obtained at the police barracks in the canteens, and it was cheap. Mr. Larkin touched on Home Rule. It was the one thing, he said, which would save Ireland. If Ireland had Home Rule the power of the machine politician would be broken. People would discover what were the reahties, and they would not be hoodwinked by the bosses as they were to-day. He spoke of the jerry- mandering of the constituencies in the Home Rule Bill — how rural areas had been tacked on to urban constitu- encies in the obvious hope that the existing domination might be maintained. But, he said, as soon as Home Rule became a certainty the scene would be changed in a way which would be unpleasant for the Redmonites. We parted after some further conversation of a discursive character on subjects of little importance. I give these opinions without, of course, taking any responsibility for the accuracy of the statements made. Mr. Larkin's assertions on several points would, I am sure, not bear close investigation. But the talk has an interest as a reflection of the mind of a man who has filled a large place in the public eye in Ireland in the last few years. As far as this work is concerned, the most important of the declarations made were those relating to the prosecution of the Irish labour movement on Guild lines. The old Guild system was one of the glories of medieval England, in spite of its narrow oligarchical tendencies. It bound men together in bonds of real brotherhood, it strengthened authority and encouraged a spirit of reverence for the unseen, it inculcated principles of true charity and benevolence, and it instilled into the worker that pride in the productions of his labour which is the truest and highest form of industrial efficiency. Whether in our complex modem life, with its immense aggregations of labour in particular industries, its infinite sub-divisions of skilled workers, and its vast and com- plicated processes involving the employment of costly 264 DISTURBED DUBLIN machinery which must be continually replaced to keep a business abreast of its foreign competitors, a reversion to the old system, even to a modified extent, is feasible is extremely doubtful. But if there is a sincere desire on the part of Labour to emulate the spirit of the ancient Guilds, tofgive to their organisations the duties and responsi- bilities as well as the privileges of those bodies, there is no reasonable man who will not wish well to the movement. It is to be feared, however, that those, like Mr. Larkin, who have taken up with the Guild idea as a panacea for modern industrial evils, do not properly appreciate the character of the instrument whose aid they invoke. In the old Guild nothing was more strongly insisted upon than the duty of the worker to do good work. The records of these institutions are full of instances of the infliction of fines upon members for neglect of this cardinal principle. The Guildsmen realised that the success of the particular industry in which they were engaged depended on the zealous maintenance of a high standard in the quality of the workmanship. Quitting this highly speculative field, we are brought face to face once more with the grim realities of a situation like that which exists in Dublin, where a large section of the population are unable to obtain the means of livelihood on a scale of decency and comfort. The Larkinite movement, which was started to change this state of affairs, failed, as it was bound to do, because it attempted the impossible and attempted it in the worst possible way. Wages, it is true, were raised in many directions, but the betterment of the lot of the regular workers in the long run will probably only intensify the struggle in the ranks of the casual labourers, whose precarious conditions of employment are the root diffi- culty of the Dublin social problem. As has been pointed out elsewhere and cannot be too often repeated, the pressing need of Dublin is for more avenues of lucrative employment. Create new industries and enlarge the A STUDY OF LARKINISM 265 operations of those that exist, and the worst phases of Dublin poverty will disappear. In no conceivable cir- cumstances can a violent and unscrupulous attack on capital such as that recently witnessed have any other effect than to make the general lot of the Dublin workers more wretched than it is. The future of Dubhn is one of the most interesting of the political speculations of the time. Whatever may be its lot in the years to come, it is sincerely to be hoped that it may be spared another such experience as the one it went through in the second half of 1913. Not only was trade disturbed to an unprecedented degree and grievous loss inflicted on all sections of the community, but moral evils were caused which it will take years to eradicate. The sole compensation for all this mischief is that people have been aroused to a sense of the social deficiencies of Dublin, and that minds have been set actively at work to find a solution of the housing and other problems inherent in the present conditions of the city's life. If eventually out of the evil of labour strife good should come in the form of a reconstructed Dublin, the memory of Larkinism will be a less painful one ; but nothing that may happen will deprive it of the reputation it has won as being the crudest and cruellest emanation of Labour belligerency that modem history takes count of. APPENDICES I REPORT OF THE GOVERNMENT COURT OF ENQUIRY 1. The Court of Enquiry, whose appointment was announced on September 26, met the representatives of the employers and of the workpeople in the first instance on Monday, September 29, and again on Wednesday, October i, and the three following days. 2. The terms of reference to the Court were : — ' To enquire into the facts and circumstances of the disputes now in progress in DubUn, and to take such steps as may seem desirable with a view to arriving at a settlement.' 3. For the purposes of our enquiry we think it unnecessary to go further back than 1908, in which year the unrest which culminated in the present disputes may be said to have begun. 4. In that year the Docks and Quay workers, the Carters and similar classes of workmen in Dublin were being organised by Mr. Larkin, an official of the National Union of Dock Labourers, whose head quarters are in Liverpool. Difficulties arose between the local branch of this Union and certain ship- owners and other employers, and on July 4 notice was given by the men to their employers that, on and after July 20, no member of that Union would work with any non-unionist. A stoppage of work ensued on the part of certain men, and as a result of negotiations conducted by Lord MacDonnell an agreement was signed by representatives of the employers and by the President and General Secretary of the National 268 APPENDICES Union of Dock Labourers, and by ofi&cials of the General Federation of Trade Unions on behalf of the men. The terms of the agreement included the following : — ' If no settlement be arrived at, the question shall be referred to a Conciliation Board consisting of a representative of the employers, a representative of the employed, and an umpire. The umpire to be agreed upon by the two representatives, or, failing agreement, to be appointed by the Board of Trade.' So far as we have ascertained no effective steps were taken to carry out this part of the agreement. No Conciliation Board was formed. 5. In November of 1908 a strike of Carters occurred, and as a result of the mediation of His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant, assisted by Sir James Dougherty, the Under Secretary, it was agreed that work should be resumed and that the matters in dispute should be referred to arbitration. '■'^'46. The Arbitrators were the Rt. Hon. Sir A. N. Porter, Bart., and Mr. P. J. O'Neill, J.P., who in their award recom- mended : — (i) That both parties should agree that there should be no stoppage of work by either side without a fortnight's notice, save in case of breach of agreement or other misconduct ; and (2) That a permanent Court of Conciliation to deal with disputes should be established. As in the case of the earlier agreement in this year, the proposal to establish a Conciliation Board was not carried out. 7. Subsequent to this date certain differences appear to have arisen between the National Union of Dock Labourers and its Dublin members, acting with Mr. Larkin. These differences resulted in the severance of the Dublin members from the National Union and the formation of a new Union, called the ' Irish Transport and General Workers' Union,' with Mr. Larkin as General Secretary. 8. In 1911 further strikes occurred, and as a result of a conference of employers and employed, held at the invitation of the Viceroy, proposals for the establishment of a Concilia- tion Board were again made. These proposals appear to APPENDICES 269 have received support from certain sections of the employers, and it is stated that the names of the employers' representa- tives on the Board were sent to the Under Secretary. The Conciliation Board was not, in fact, estabUshed. 9. In the same year proposals for the estabhshment of a Board of Conciliation are stated to have been forwarded to the Irish Transport Workers' Union on behalf of certain shipowners, but the matter does not appear to have been proceeded with. 10. In the Irish Worker of April 26, 1913 — a paper edited by Mr. Larkin — an article by Mr. Larkin appeared proposing the establishment of a Wages Board to deal with disputes, and during the present year, and up to a recent date, efforts were made with a similar object by the Chamber of Commerce and by the Lord Mayor of Dublin. 11. Disputes appear to have taken place more or less frequently between 1911 and the present date. 12. Statements have been made to us regarding the conditions of labour in the city. It is alleged by the repre- sentatives of the workpeople that in many cases wages are low and the conditions of employment unsatisfactory. The events that have occurred in the various industries indicate that grievances of considerable importance have existed. 13. One of the methods which has been adopted by the Irish Transport Workers' Union with a view to remedjdng grievances is that known under the name of the ' sympathetic strike.' The sympathetic strike may be described as a refusal on the part of men who may have no complaint against their own conditions of emplojmient to continue work because in the ordinary course of their work they come in contact with goods in some way connected with firms whose employees have been locked out or are on strike. This practice has far-reaching results, as, for example, the refusal of Porters at Kingstown to handle parcels of publica- tions consigned from England to a firm of newsagents in Dublin who had declined the request of the Union that they should refuse to distribute newspapers printed by another firm whose dispatch hands were involved in a dispute. 14. In actual practice the ramifications of this method of industrial warfare have been shown to involve loss and suffering to large numbers of both employers and work- people who not only have no voice in the original dispute 270 APPENDICES but have no means of influencing those concerned in the original cause of difference. Even collective agreements, signed on behalf of employers' and men's organisations, a provision of which was that no stoppage of work should take place without discussion and due notice, were entirely disre- garded under the influence of this ever-widening method of conducting disputes. The distinction between strike and lock-out became obscured ; attacks on one side being met with reprisals on the other side in such rapid succession as completely to confuse the real issues. 15. No community could exist if resort to the ' sym- pathetic ' strike became the general policy of Trade Unionism, as owing to the interdependence of different branches of industry disputes affecting even a single individual would spread indefinitely. If this should be the policy of Trade Unionism it is easy to understand that it does not commend itself to the employers ; but in our experience of the better organised employers and workmen the sympathetic strike or the S5niipathetic lock-out is not a method which is recog- nised as a reasonable way of dealing with disputes. 16. Possibly it was with the hope that it might result in a termination of this method of industrial warfare that a large number of firms in the city agreed to require their workpeople to sign the following notice as a condition of employment : — I Hereby Undertake to carry out all instructions given to me by or on behalf of my employers, and, further, I agree to immediately resign my membership of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union (if a member) ; and I further undertake that I will not join or in any way support this Union. Signed Address Witness Date Whatever may have been the intention of the employers, this document imposes upon the signatories conditions which are contrary to individual liberty, and which no workman or body of workmen could reasonably be expected to accept. APPENDICES 271 We understand that many of the workmen asked to sign this or similar documents were in no way connected with the Transport Workers' Union, and we think it was unfortunate that they should have been brought into the dispute. It will be obvious that the effort to secure signatures to such a docmnent would be likely to create a maximum of ill-feeling. 17. We have given very careful consideration to the contention put forward that the labour conditions obtaining in Dublin required on the part of the workpeople action of the drastic character which seems to have been taken during the past few years, and, without attributing undue blame to those who considered that these conditions necessitated a resort to the methods which they adopted to remedy them, we think that the time has now come when a continuance of the same methods will be fraught with disastrous results to aU concerned. Thousands of workers have now become associated with the Transport Workers' Union, and the workpeople in many of the industries of the city have shown during the past few years a determination to organise them- selves under its officials. If this struggle is not adjusted by consent, rather than by resort to the extremes of force, the industries of Dublin will not, we think, be free from further serious troubles. Even if, after many weeks of suffering and loss of business, the resort to force should seem to be successful and result in a resimiption of work, resentment and bitterness would remain, with a very probable recurrence of the disputes. On the other hand it cannot be expected that employers — many of whom have no grievance whatever with their employees, can continue their business if they are to be subjected, no matter what conciUatory steps they may themselves take to prevent it, to constant interruptions through the effects of the sympathetic and sudden strike. 18. All the great industries of every civiUsed country have long recognised that trade and manufacture can only be conducted by the practical acceptance on the part of both employers and employed of the fact that there is a mutual interest, and that such interest can only be adjusted satis- factorily by friendly discussion. Irish employers and Irish workers will find they can be no exception to this modem development. 19. We think, therefore, that this position should be frankly accepted by both sides, and while we recognise that 272 APPENDICES a unifonn method of settling differences is impracticable, owing to the varying circumstances in different trades, we think that the following methods of settling differences that exist or may arise hereafter might well be accepted as a basis for discussion : — Draft Scheme 1. Conciliation Committees shall be appointed to deal with questions referred to them relating to rates of wages, hours of labour, or conditions of service, other than matters of management or discipline. 2. The grouping of the various industries for the purposes of these Committees to be such as may be agreed upon. 3. The workpeople in the various sections shall elect by ballot from among themselves representatives to hold office as members of the Conciliation Committee. 4. Members of the Conciliation Committees shall hold office for years from the date of their election, and shall be eligible for re-election. 5. The employers' side of each Conciliation Committee shall be composed of employers selected by the employers in the section concerned. 6. Workpeople acting as representatives on the Con- ciUation Committees shall have leave of absence from their work, without prejudice to their employment, on such days, or portions thereof, that they may be required to attend meetings of the Committee. SECRETARIES 7. Each side of each of the Conciliation Committees shall have a Secretary, who may take part in discussions and act as advocate, but shall have no vote unless he is a member of the Committee. 8. The Workpeople's Secretary shall be chosen by a majority of the workpeople's side of the Conciliation Committee, who may select him from any source they please. 9. The Employers' Secretary of each of the Conciliation Committees may be appointed by the employers from any source they please. APPENDICES 273 10. The length and conditions of office of the Secretary shall be determined by the side of the Committee appointing him, subject to the provisions of these Rules. PROCEDURE 11. In the event of a dispute arising affecting one or more employees, it shall be the duty of the workpeople concerned to bring the matter in the first instance before the foreman, or other person under whose immediate supervision they are working. 12. Failing agreement within seven days of the complaint having been made, the workpeople concerned may bring the matter before their representatives on the ConciUation Committee, and such representatives, accompanied, if they desire, by the Secretary of the workpeople's side of the Committee, shall be granted an interview with the management for the discussion of the dispute. 13. If within seven days of the receipt of the deputation an agreement is not arrived at upon the matter in dispute, the Secretary of the workpeople's side of the ConciUation Committee shall give notice to the Employers' Secretary of a request for a meeting of the ConcUiation Committee, and such meeting shall be held on a suitable date within fourteen days of the receipt of the application for the meeting of the Committee. 14. The Conciliation Committee shall meet under the chairmanship of an independent Chairman selected from a panel of chairmen formed by the Board of Trade. If the parties cannot agree upon a Chairman, one shall be appointed by the Board of Trade. 15. The Chairman to preside over the meeting of the Conciliation Committee, and to endeavour to secure an agreement upon the point at issue. Should he fail to secure an agreement he may either (a) at his discretion recommend to the parties such terms of settlement as he thinks fair and reasonable ; 274 APPENDICES or, if the parties previous to or at the meeting request him to do so, and agree to be bound by his decision, (6) give a decision upon the point in dispute. i6. Pending the reference of the matter in dispute to the Conciliation Committee, and pending the Com- mittee's discussion and (if necessary) the Chairman's recommendation or decision, no strike or lock-out shall be entered upon ; such recommendation or decision to be given within days from the first meeting of the Concihation Committee. 17. No assistance, financial or otherwise, to be given by an Association to any of its members or to any aftihated Association entering upon a strike or lock- out in^ breach of the foregoing conditions. 20. For the purposes of the constitution of the Conciha- tion Committees it would appear to be desirable to group the different trades into a number of sections. This would not, of course, prevent a single firm, which did not readily come within a group, having a Concihation Committee, whose operations would be confined to that firm and its employees. In any trade where there is already in existence a method of adjusting differences recognised by employers and workmen, we think it would be undesirable to suggest that such method should be abandoned or interfered with unless the parties mutually consider that the proposals we have made would be an improvement. 21. These proposals, it will be seen, would tend to remove the necessity for the sudden strike and for the sympathetic strike or lock-out, without requiring either side necessarily to abandon their right to adopt either of these expedients if the conciliation machinery failed. 22. We are not in favour of 'compulsory arbitration,' and we do not suggest that the ultimate right to strike or to lock-out should be abandoned. What we do suggest is that, before the method of strike or lock-out is adopted, there should be opportunity for impartial discussion and independent enquiry. 23. We recognise that personal objections to individuals have entered into the disinchnation on the part of some of those interested to negotiate, and difiicult as this subject may be we think it necessary to deal with it. 24. In ordinary business deaUngs as well as in private APPENDICES 275 matters men have the right to decline to associate with people who, for one reason or another, they prefer not to meet ; but in a community such as the City of Dublin, with its interdependent interests, this right is necessarily subject to great Umitation. This matter is, however, one for indi- vidual consideration and determination, and should not, in our opinion, influence any decision to discuss the proposals which we have made. 25. Charges have been made to the effect that agreements have been frequently broken by both sides, and it has been implied that under these circumstances it would be futile to make further agreements. We offer no excuse for, and have no desire to condone, the breach of agreements, and we recognise the strength of this objection. The subject of the fulfilment of agreements formed part of a long and careful enquiry made recently at the request of H.M. Government by the Industrial Council, and the conclusions unanimously formed then are strengthened by what we have learned here, namely : that the dif&culties arising in regard to alleged breaches of agreement can best be dealt with by isolating as far as possible those responsible for the breach. We therefore suggest that it be agreed : — 1. That any complaint as to the breaking of agreements may be referred to the Conciliation Committee for decision as to whether or not there has been a breach. 2. That in the event of the Conciliation Committee failing to agree as to whether or not a breach has been committed the matter shall be decided by the Chair- man of the Committee. 3. That in the event of such complaint being held to be substantiated no support whatever be given by the respective Associations or by any affiliated Association to the parties responsible for the breach. GEORGE ASKWITH, Chairman. THOS. R. RATCLIFFE-ELLIS, J. R. CLYNES. H. J. Wilson, Secretary to the Court. October 5, 1913. t2 276 APPENDICES II EMPLOYERS' REPLY TO SIR GEORGE ASKWITH'S FINDINGS The following is the reply issued by the Employers' Executive Committee to the Government Report printed above. When the Enquiry held by Sir George Askwith, Sir Thomas Ratcliffe-EUis, and J. R. Clynes, Esq., M.P., terminated by the reading of their Report, which has been pubUshed, the Em- ployers' Executive intimated that they would consult the various bodies of employers whom they represented and obtain their views. This has necessarily taken some time, but they are now in a position to present their reply, and in doing so they take the opportunity to acknowledge the personal courtesy extended to them at the Enquiry by the members of the Court, and where they disagree with their finding, they do so, appreciating the efforts made to arrive at some means which would put a stop to wasteful strife. Little advantage will now accrue from dealing at any length with the procedure adopted at the Court of Enquiry, but in the interests of the employers at Dublin they feel bound to express their regret that while they were asked to state their case and prove it by witnesses, who were cross-examined, the representative of the workers, on the other hand, made a loiig series of charges, many of which were obviously untrue, inter- spersed with attacks on Messrs. Jacob and other respected firms in the city, calculated to seriously injure the businesses of these firms, in support of which no evidence whatever was forth- coming nor opportunity for cross-examination afforded. In these circumstances they feel that the Court should have called for the withdrawal of these charges, and, if not with- drawn, to have stated in their findings that they were unsupported by any evidence. The employers are prepared to accept Clauses i to ii of the Report as historically correct, but they think that the Court should have emphasised the fact that the reason the Conciliation Boards were not formed was not the fault of the employers. In 1911 the workers failed even to reply to the communications from Sir J. B. Dougherty (the Under Secretary APPENDICES 277 for Ireland) asking them to nominate representatives for the proposed Board of Conciliation. With regard to Clause 12, the Court said, ' Statements have been made to us regarding the conditions of labour in the city,' but the Executive Committee beg to point out that none of these statements were proved, and it is unfair to conclude under the circumstances that ' the events which have occurred in the various industries indicate that grievances have existed.' In Clauses 13 and 14 the sympathetic strike is defined, and Clause 15 expresses the opinion that ' no conamunity could exist if resort to the sympathetic strike became the general policy of trade unionism.' This and the breaking of agreements are the main causes of the existing trouble. The employers realise that recent acquiescence by other Unions in the methods of the modem sympathetic strike is due to the domination of the legitimate trade unions by the Irish Transport Union. Relieved of this tyrannical control, they are of opinion that the amicable relations heretofore existing would be restored. Regarding the undertaking referred to in Clause 16, the surmise in the first portion of this clause we agree to be correct. It was a drastic action to meet an extreme case. But when the Court goes on to say that ' whatever may have been the intention of the employers, this document imposes upon the signatories conditions which are contrary to individual liberty,' it seems to ignore its opening remarks in Clause 15, ' No community could exist,' etc. It also ignores the fact that for years past the methods of the Irish Transport Union have imposed conditions which ar§ contrary to the individual liberty of both employers a,nd employees. Clause 19, although an admirable summary of points for discussion, with a view to arriving at a permanent basis for settlement of future labour troubles does not, in the opinion of the Committee, owing to its complexity, afford any assistance in the present crisis. The employers, in spite of misrepresentation, maintain the attitude expressed in their letter of September 12, addressed to the Trades Congress Delegates, in the following passage : — ' The employers of Dubhn favour trade unionism and collective bargaining, and are ready, as soon as the workers 278 APPENDICES provide trustworthy machinery and trusty men to end the system of sympathetic strikes, to negotiate with them on lines which will secure legitimate claims of labour.' While it is in no way the province of employers to interfere with the internal management of trade unions, and whilst not desiring to appear to dictate, they, in face of the conclusions come to by the Court regarding sympathetic strikes, broken agreements, and, further, the statements made since in pubhc by the Secretary of the Irish Transport Union, including the declaration in London, ' To hell with contracts,' are compelled again to refuse to recognise this union until : — {a) The union be re-organised on proper Unes ; (6) With new officials who have met with the approval of the British Joint Labour Board. When this has been done the Executive Committee will recommend the employers to withdraw the ban on the Irish Transport Union, and to re-employ their workers as far as vacancies and conditions permit ; but until then they regret that existing circumstances compel them to continue to insist on the undertaking referred to being signed. Apart from any settlement that may be arrived at now, the different stages of the dispute have made it very clear that the difficulty in arriving at any form of guarantees for the keeping of agreements must be the subject of legislation, as it has become of universal importance to the whole trading community. CHARLES M. COGHLAN, Secretary, Employers' Executive Committee. Office : — Commercial Buildings, Dublin, October 14, 1903. Ill DUBLIN DISTURBANCES COMMISSION REPORT Below is given, with a few unimportant excisions, the report of the Commission appointed by the Government to inquire into the rioting in connection with the Dublin strikes and the conduct of the police on the occasion of the various disturbances. APPENDICES 279 To His Excellency the Right Honourable John Campbell, K.T., Lord Lieutenant-General and General Governor of Ireland May it Please Your Excellency. On December 19, 1913, Your Excellency issued your Warrant to us whereby, after reciting that in the months of August and September, 1913, during the existence of trade disputes in Dublin, certain disturbances and riots took place in that City, and that allegations of the use of excessive and unnecessary force had been made against the police engaged in the suppression of these disturbances. Your Excellency authorised and directed us to hold an Inquiry at Dublin on January 5 then next, and following days, ' and to inquire into the origin and circumstances of the said riots and dis- turbances, and into the allegations above mentioned, and to hear and examine all such witnesses as should appear before us with reference to the matters aforesaid, and to Report to Your Excellency thereon.' In obedience to Your Excellency's Warrant we opened the Inquiry in the Four Courts, in the City of Dublin, on Monday, January 5, 1914, at the hour of 11 o'clock. Mr. J. P. Powell, K.C., and the Hon. Cecil Atkinson (instructed by Mr. Gerdd Byrne) appeared on behalf of the police, and Mr. Ignatius Rice, Solicitor to the Corporation of DubUn, appeared on behalf of the Housing Committee of the Corporation, with reference to certain charges made with reference to the conduct of the police on August 31 in certain buildings in the City which are the property of the Corporation. Our Sittings closed on January 28, 1914, having occupied eighteen days, during which 281 witnesses attended^for the purpose of giving evidence. Of these witnesses 202 were members of either the Dublin Metropolitan Police or of the Royal Irish Constabulary, and 79 were civilians.1 '■ Origin of the Disturbances On August 30 and 31, and September i and 21, 1913, fifteen separate and distinct riots took place in the City 28o APPENDICES of Dublin. Of these five occurred on Saturday, August 30 ; seven occurred on Sunday, August 31 ; two occurred on Monday, September i, and one occurred on Sunday, September 21. We shall deal separately with the circumstances of each of these riots, but before doing so it is necessary to report on their origin. The year 1913 was a period of industrial unrest in Dublin. Between the end of January and the middle of August, 1913, no less than thirty strikes took place in the City, many of which were accompanied by actual ■dolence and intimidation, resulting in prosecutions and convictions in some forty-five cases. On several occasions from the month of March, and particularly in the month of August, speeches containing direct incitements to violence were deUvered at meetings of working men, and in many of these speeches, especially those delivered in the month of August, attacks were made upon the police. In the last week of August a strike occurred of a large number of the employees of the Dublin Tramway Company, but as some of the employees of the Company remained in their employment, it was possible, with the assistance of newly engaged hands, to continue a diminished service of the cars. In order to prevent the cars and their drivers and conductors from being attacked in the streets, it was necessary to obtain police protection, and for a considerable time a member or members of the Dublin Metro- pohtan PoUce, or of the Royal Irish Constabulary, accom- panied each of the cars. The protection afforded to the Tramway Company in running their cars notwithstanding the strike created great resentment, not only against the Tramway Company, but against the police, and two of the earlier riots on Saturday, August 30, and several of the riots on Sunday, August 31, had their origin in organised attacks on tram-cars. AU the other riots, with the exception of the riot in Sackville Street on Sunday, August 31, with the origin of which we have dealt separately, had their origin in organised attacks on the police. Although all the riots were directly or indirectly the result of industrial disputes, they were not confined to working men, and in all of them the worst element was supplied by those who seldom or never work, and who may be described as the comer-boys and criminal class in the City. APPENDICES 281 It is a remarkable feature of the disturbances on which it is our duty to report that between 5 p.m. and 8 p.m. on Sunday evening, August 31, serious rioting occurred in six widely separated districts in the City. Riot at Ringsend on Saturday, August 30, 1913 On the afternoon of Saturday, August 30, the first of the riots which we have investigated broke out in the district of Ringsend, near the City. The Power Station of the Dublin Company is situated here, and it was in the neighbourhood of this building that disorder first showed itself. Inspector Bannon of the Dublin Metropolitan Police was in charge, and he was assisted by Inspector Chase, who was accompanied by a number of mounted troopers. During the riot Inspector Chase was struck by a stone, and his horse was knocked down by members of the crowd. The tram-cars were attacked, and when the police sought to protect them, they were received with a volley of stones, bottles, and other missiles, thrown not only from the street, but also from houses. Four members of the force were injured in the course of this riot, which lasted for an hour. The eftoits made by those responsible for the preservation of the peace did not involve the use of any unnecessary violence. Riot in Brunswick Street, Saturday, August 30, 1913 Later in the same afternoon another riot broke out in Great Brunswick Street, within the City. Superintendent Kieman and Inspector Barrett were in charge of the district ; and the immediate cause of the riot was an attack on a van, the property of the Independent Newspapers, which was proceeding from Ringsend towards the City, under the escort of two constables. A crowd of about 250 persons assembled, and blocked the road. The horse was seized, and when the constables forming the escort attempted to protect the driver, they were struck with stones, one of them — Constable O'Callaghan — ^being knocked down, and kicked while on the ground. The men who went to the assistance of these constables 282 APPENDICES were assaulted and struck by stones and bottles, and in the case of some persons who were arrested numbers of stones were found in their pockets. Men and women joined in the attack, and a prisoner, who had been arrested, was rescued. The men in charge of the tram-cars in the street were also assailed. During the con- tinuance of this disturbance the street was a scene of great violence. The conduct of the police who were chiefly engaged was described in these words by a clergyman who was present : ' It is my distinct opinion that the five or six policemen (D.M.P. and R.I.C.) whom I saw subjected to these insults and violent conduct, behaved with singular self-restraint, and in some cases with actual good humour. There was an absence of violence on their part, except in the last instance, when they only employed such force as was necessary to secure and retain their prisoners. Their behaviour was the only redeeming feature of what was for a Dublin citizen a really humiliating and disgusting spectacle.' This statement, which will be found in the evidence of Sir John Ross, was forwarded by the Reverend Gentleman. Riots in Beresford Place, Talbot Street, Marlborough Street, Earl Street, Eden Quay, and Burgh Quay, Saturday, August 30, 1913 On the night of Saturday, August 30, violent rioting took place in the district comprising Beresford Place and the quays adjoining, Marlborough Street, Corporation Street, Talbot Street, and Earl Street. Inspector Campbell, of the Dublin Metropolitan Police, was on duty in Beresford Place, in charge of twenty men from about 7 p.m. They were stationed outside Liberty Hall, the Head Quarters of the Irish Transport Workers' Union, and about 8 p.m. a crowd which had collected, began to booh "and hiss the police, and become violent. The Inspector was struck on the face with a piece of glass, and a large number of his men were also struck. Reinforcements were called for, and Inspector Willoughby, with between twenty and thirty men, shortly afterwards came to the assistance of Inspector Campbell. Before any charge was made on the crowd at least five constables had been injured, and when the crowd was APPENDICES 283 dispersed by the police, they reassembled at different points from time to time. The stone-throwing continued, and charges were made during the night along Eden Quay, across Butt Bridge, on Burgh Quay, and in Beresford Place. During part of the disturbance Superintendent Quinn was in charge of a party of men on Butt Bridge, and a number of his men were injured, at least one having to be removed to hospital. This constable, who was hit with a bottle on the head, was unable to return to duty for three weeks. The riot in this locality went on for a long time, and while it lasted, the throwing of stones and bottles was almost continuous, and many injuries were inflicted. We regret to say that, as far as we can ascertain, two deaths are attributable to injuries received as a result of baton charges which took place. At Eden Quay, a man called James Nolan, of 8, Spring Garden Street, North Strand, sustained a fracture of the skull, which resulted in his death at Jervis Street Hospital on the morning of Sunday, the 31st. The jury at the inquest found that death was caused by fracture of the skull, and compression of the brain. They also found that the injuries were caused by the blow of a baton, but that the evidence was too conflicting to say by whom the blow was administered. It was proved before us that before the baton charge in question took place, the crowd at the spot in question had been very disorderly, stones had been thrown, and it was quite obvious to any peaceable person that a riot was in progress for some time. No evidence was given before us as to the circumstances under which Nolan became a member of the crowd, but it was beyond all doubt a riotous one. On the same night a labourer named John Bjme, residing at 4, Lower Gloucester Place, was treated at Jervis Street Hospital for a wound on his head. He died on September 4, and the jury at the inquest found that John Bjane died from fracture of the skull and haemorrhage. They further found that they had no evidence to show how the deceased received his injuries. No person gave evidence at the Inquest, or before us, as to the circumstances under which John Byrne sustained the injuries which resulted in his death, and the only account available was the statement made by him to his wife, that 284 APPENDICES he had been struck with a baton at Burgh Quay. It was proved before us that a baton charge had taken place at Burgh Quay on Saturday night, and that the crowd against which this charge was directed was very disorderly and violent, and we have little doubt that in the course of this charge Byrne received the injury which led to his death. We are of opinion that in the case of both these crowds their conduct towards the police clearly showed to any peace- able persons the danger that they ran by remaining members of them. Later on on the same night riotous crowds assembled in Marlborough Street, Talbot Street, and Earl Street, and damage was done in many instances to shops and houses. The rioters gathered at the comers of streets, and when charged by the police rushed away, to reassemble later on and again indulge in stone-throwing. In fact during the greater part of the night continuous disturbances existed in this area, and the force engaged were kept busy in dispersing crowds. Unless the officers in charge were prepared to abandon possession of the streets to rioters, they had no alternative but to give the orders to clear the various streets that they did. The Riot in Sackville Street on Sunday, August 31, 1913 The immediate cause of the riot in Sackvile Street on Sunday afternoon, August 31, 1913, was the appearance of James Larkin outside the Imperial Hotel in Sackville Street, for the purpose of addressing a public meeting, which had been proclaimed by the Chief Magistrate of the City of Dublin. Larkin was arrested, and committed for trial on August 28, 1913, and was admitted to bail on the same day. After his admission to bail Larkin publicly expressed his intention of holding a public meeting in Sackville Street on Sunday, August 31. On August 29 a Proclamation, which was exten- sively posted and circulated in the City, was issued by the Chief Magistrate, prohibiting this meeting. On the evening of August 29 Larkin burned a copy of this Proclamation at a meeting in Beresford Place, and again expressed his intention of holding a meeting in Sackville Street on Sunday, August 31. In these circumstances a warrant was issued for the re-arrest of Larkin, and it became necessary for the APPENDICES 285 police authorities to take steps for the purpose of preventing and dispersing the meeting if an attempt were made to hold it in Sackville Street, on the Sunday. The steps taken for this purpose were described to us in detail by Mr. W. V. Harrel, the Assistant Commissioner of the Dublin Metro- poUtan Police, and will be found in his evidence annexed to this Report. The length of Sackville Street is 616 yards, and its width from wall to wall a little over 50 yards ; and it was not known in what part of the street the intended meeting would be held. In these circumstances it became necessary to make such arrangements as would ensure a suf&cient force of police to prevent and disperse the meeting in whatever part of the street the attempt might be made to hold it, and at the same time to prevent any filling up of the street. With this object in view, Mr. Harrel met all the Superintendents at Head Quarters on Saturday, August 30, and directed them to assemble at 11.30 a.m. on the Sunday in Sackville Street a force of police, which in fact consisted of 5 Superintendents, 9 Inspectors, 23 Sergeants, and 274 Constables, of whom 72 were members of the Royal Irish Constabulary ; to instruct their officers and men that while persons were to be allowed to pass freely along the street about their lawful business, no assembly of persons was to be permitted ; that the police were to advise persons to pass along, and not to remain about ; that small parties of police consisting of a sergeant and a few constables were to move along the sections of the street allotted to each superintendent to keep the people moving when necessary ; that no organised bodies of people were to be allowed to enter the street at any point ; and that James Larkin was to be arrested if he appeared. The superintendents to whom these instructions were given are all men of long experience in the force, and they and the other officers of the Dublin MetropoUtan Police who were in command of the various sections of the force in SackviUe Street on Sunday, August 31, had frequent previous experi- ence of dealing with crowds and meetings in that street, and were competent to deal with any emergency which might arise in their immediate neighbourhood. In accordance with these arrangements, which were subsequently communi- cated by Mr. Harrel to Sir John Ross, the Chief Commissioner of the DubUn Metropolitan Police, and approved of by him, the pohce took up their position in and about Sackville Street 286 APPENDICES at 11.30 A.M. on the Sunday. The force was distributed in the following manner : — One division under Chief Superin- tendent Dunne, and consisting of Inspector Bannon, six sergeants and sixty-three constables, was stationed in sections at the south side of O'Connell Bridge, at the Ballast Office and at the Independent Of&ce at the corner of D'Olier Street. Another division under Superintendent Kieman, and con- sisting of two inspectors, five sergeants, and fifty constables, was stationed in three sections on the east side of Sackville Street between Eden Quay and the Pillar. A third division under Superintendent Flynn was stationed at the Bachelor's Walk side of O'Connell Bridge, and a fourth division, under Superintendent Murphy, was posted in sections, one near the corner of Middle Abbey Street, and the other at Prince's Street, near the of&ce of the Freeman's Journal. A fifth division, under Superintendent Gordon, had charge of the west side of Upper Sackville Street, from Henry Street to the Rotunda ; and a sixth division, under Inspector Willoughby, had charge of the east side of Upper Sackville Street, from Earl Street to Great Britain Street. Both Sir John Ross and Mr. Harrel arrived in Sackville Street about 1.30 p.m., when the rioting was almost over. They left the Head Quarters at the Castle a few minutes before, without having received any summons, for the purpose of visiting Sackville Street, and as the disturbance actually broke out while they were on their way, they had no knowledge that an attempt had been made to hold a meeting. Recognising the serious state of affairs in Sackville Street, they took immediate steps to summon a troop of Mounted Police, which had been kept in readiness. Up to 12.30 on the Sunday the state of affairs was normal in Sackville Street ; but from that hour the number of persons in the street increased rapidly until about 1.25 p.m., when there was a considerable though unformed crowd in the street, particularly in the neighbourhood of the General Post Office. About 1.23 P.M. Larkin appeared on the balcony of the Imperial Hotel, and appears to have uttered some words, and to have then retired into the hotel. As soon as he was ob- served by the people in the street, there was a rush by a crowd numbering 300 to 400, and waving hats and sticks, from the neighbourhood of the General Post Of&ce towards the Imperial Hotel. In order to prevent the rush of this crowd on the APPENDICES 287 hotel, Inspector McCaig with a sergeant and ten men, who were stationed on the foot-way some distance to the south of the hotel door, doubled out into the carriage way ; and simul- taneously Sergeant Butler and five men executed a similar movement from the north side of the hotel. These combined movements had the effect of stopping the approaching crowd, who retreated in the direction of the General Post 0£&ce in considerable confusion. This result was produced without the use of batons by the pohce. This crowd reformed in the direction of the General Post Of&ce ; and in the mean- time Inspector McCaig and his party of police had been ordered to enter the Imperial Hotel for the purpose of effecting the arrest of Larkin, leaving Sergeant Butler and his men guarding the door of the hotel. As soon as the police were seen entering the hotel, there was a second rush by the crowd, which had greatly increased in numbers, from the direction of the General Post Office towards the hotel. During this rush sticks were brandished, and a missile was thrown from the crowd, which broke a large plate glass window a few feet from the hotel door. Believing that the object of the crowd was to prevent the arrest of Larkin, the police who were guarding the door of the hotel drew their batons, with the result that the rush was stopped, and the crowd again retreated in the direction of the General Post Of&ce, where they again seem to have reformed. In this instance also no batons were used by the police, and none of them came in contact with the crowd. A few moments later Larkin was removed from the hotel under arrest, and, guarded by an escort, was taken to College Street Police Station. As soon as Larkin appeared in the street under arrest a third rush was made by the crowd from the direction of the General Post Of&ce and Prince's Street, diagonally across the street in the direction of the escort. Fearing that the object of the crowd, who were shouting, brandishing sticks, and throwing stones, was to rescue the prisoner, orders were given by Inspector Barrett and other responsible of&cers to the police to put back and disperse the crowd. In our opinion these orders, and the baton charge by which they were carried out, were justified by the circumstances. The crowd was dispersed by three bodies of police, numbering in all about fifty, who moved out into the street, one from the comer of Lower Abbey Street, another from O'Connell Bridge, and the third from the 288 APPENDICES neighbourhood of the Metropole Hotel. These three bodies of police effectually prevented the crowd from approaching the escort which was guarding Larkin, and turned the crowd back — dispersing them in the direction of the Nelson Pillar and the General Post Office. In the course of the charge by means of which this crowd was dispersed batons were used by many of the police, and a number of civilians were knocked down in the rush back along and across the street, some as the result of blows from batons, and some as the result of collision with and tripping over each other. Owing to the width of Sackville Street, and the fact that the entrances to Middle Abbey Street, Henry Street, and North Earl Street were left open, there was no hemming in of the crowd by the police, and, except for an unfortunate blocking of Prince's Street, there was nothing to prevent the crowd getting away in all directions up the street. Under the police arrangements which we have described, a force of one inspector, two ser- geants, and twenty men had been stationed earlier in the day near the junction of Prince's Street and Sackville Street ; and owing to apprehended attacks upon premises in the occupation of the Independent Newspapers Company, an order had been given to one of the sergeants with nine men to prevent any crowd passing from Sackville Street through Prince's Street. For the purpose of carr3dng out this order, the sergeant and nine men to whom it was given were stationed near the of&ce of the Freeman's Journal, where Prince's Street becomes a very narrow street, at some distance from the junction of Prince's Street with SackviUe Street, and in a position from which it was difficult if not impossible to see the movements of crowds lower down in Sackville Street. During the dispersal in Sackville Street of the crowd which had followed the escort which was guarding Larkin, a large number of persons rushed round the corner of the Metropole Hotel into Prince's Street, cheering and throwing stones at the police in Prince's Street, many of whom were struck. In pursuance of the orders which they had received the sergeant and nine men who were stationed near the office of the Free- man's Journal prevented the crowd from going down Prince's Street, and turned them back towards Sackville Street, using their batons for the purpose. Having regard to the orders which he had received not to aUow any crowd to pass down Prince's Street, the sergeant had no alternative but to turn APPENDICES 289 back the crowd, and he and his men were justified in using all necessary force in doing so ; and having regard to the numbers and violence of the crowd, the use of batons by this smaU body of police was necesseiry. Unfortunately this crowd, as it was being driven back out of Prince's Street, was met by another crowd rushing into Prince's Street and away from the police in Sackville Street, and the two crowds collided, filling up the entrance to Prince's Street, and becoming mixed up with the police who were near the comer of the Metropole Hotel and the police who were putting the first crowd back out of Prince's Street. In the confusion caused by the colUsion of the two crowds, and in the effort by the police to prevent any crowd going down Prince's Street, a large number of people must have received injuries, not only from the pressure and struggle of the crowd, but also from the blows of batons. As frequently happens in incidents of the kind, there seem to have been several peaceable citizens swept into and along by the riotous mob ; and we have no doubt that some of them were injured during the clearing of the street. In one regrettable instance, that of Mr. O'DonneU, a respectable gentleman carrying on business in Lower SackviUe Street received very severe injuries at the hands of the police. There were thirteen poUce injured during the course of this riot (including the sergeant and nine men who were stationed in Prince's Street — all of whom were injured in discharging their duty). In dealing with the conduct of the poUce during this riot it must be borne in mind that the riot was a matter of a few minutes. All the incidents we have described, from the appearance of Larkin on the balcony of the Imperial Hotel until quiet was restored in Prince's Street, took place within three or four minutes. So far as the movements of the police which turned and dispersed the crowd which was rushing in the direction of the escort are concerned, although batons were freely used, there is no evidence of the use of unnecessary or excessive force up to the moment of the collision of the two crowds at the entrance to Prince's Street. In the confusion of this moment there may have been, and we think that in isolated instances there was, the use of force which in fact was unnecessary. This was due to a misunderstanding on the part of the police who were stationed in Prince's Street as to the object of the second crowd which rushed into Prince's 290 APPENDICES Street, and collided with the crowd which was being driven out of ^that street. It was in fact an accidental collision between the crowd which they were driving out of Prince's Street and a crowd which had been driven up and across Sackville Street from the direction of Larkin's escort. To the poUce it very naturally appeared to be a renewed and determined effort by a suddenly and greatly increased crowd to force a passage through Prince's Street, and they dealt with it accordingly. Any unnecessary or excessive force used by the pohce during the suppression of this riot was due to this misunderstanding. As some suggestions have been made that the crowd in Sackville Street was driven into Prince's Street for the purpose of being caught and batoned there, we think it right to say that, in our opinion, there is no foundation for these suggestions. As suggestions were made in cross-examination of the police that some members of the force were seen smoking, and that others of them were under the influence of drink, while on duty in Sackville Street on Sunday, August 31, 1913, we also think it right to say that both these charges were indignantly denied by the pohce, that there is no evidence whatever to support either of them, and that they are without foundation. At the hearing of the evidence in connection with this riot Mr. Handel Booth, M.P., attended, and asked to be heard in reply to the speech of Mr. Powell at the opening of the Inquiry. We expressed our desire that he should, in addition to being heard and giving his evidence, have an opportunity of cross- examining the various witnesses produced with reference to this particular riot. Mr. Handel Booth availed himself of this opportunity, and, amongst others, cross-examined Chief Superintendent Dunne, Superintendent Quinn, Superintendent Murphy, and Superintendent Kiernan, who were in charge of the various parties of police engaged in the dispersal of the crowds in Lower Sackville Street, and Inspector Lalor who was in charge of the two sergeants and twenty pohce who were stationed at or near the junction of Prince's Street and Sack- ville Street on Sunday, August 31. In the course of the re- examination of Inspector Lalor a charge was erroneously made by Mr. Handel Booth against Mr. Powell of suppressing a material portion of a deposition made by Inspector Lalor. This led to an altercation between Mr. Handel Booth and APPENDICES 291 Mr. Powell, in the course of which an offensive expression was addressed by Mr. Powell to Mr. Handel Booth, who thereupon withdrew ; and we regret that we had not the advantage of hearing his evidence or receiving further assistance from him. Riot in Cornmarket, Thomas Stiseet, and adjoining Streets, Sunday, August 31, 1913 This riot commenced about 5 o'clock on Sunday evening, August 31, and continued from time to time up to 10 or II o'clock on Sunday night. It originated in attacks by mobs, numbering from 200 to 400 persons, on the tram cars on the line from College Green to Inchicore, One of these cars proceeding from College Green to Inchicore and guarded by three policemen, was held up near the corner of Corn- market and High Street, about 5 o'clock p.m. by a crowd of 300 or 400 persons coming from Francis Street, and throwing stones and bottles. Two of the policemen who were guarding the tram car and three or four Metropolitan police who were stationed in High Street succeeded in putting back this crowd, notwithstanding a fusilade of stones and bottles, in the coiurse of which every one of the police was struck and cut. In the meantime the windows of the tram car had been smashed by rioters, who had got behind the police, and two of the police who were nearest to the tram car were badly injured, one of them being knocked down with a stave, and the other getting his chin split open with a bottle. Some of the rioters were arrested, and taken with great difficulty to Chancery Lane ; Inspector White, who went in front to keep back the crowd, being struck on the head, and badly cut in Back Lane. On their way back from Chancery Lane to Cornmarket the police were again assailed from the tenement houses in Nicholas Street with stones and bottles thrown from the windows of the houses. A little later in the evening another tram car coming from Inchicore to College Green, and protected by two constables, was attacked and held up by another riotous mob in High Street, throwing stones, bricks, and bottles. The mob numbered about 200, and there were only the two policemen, who were rescued from a position of imminent danger by Father Reilly, who brought them into the Presbs^tery, followed by about fifty of the crowd, who proceeded to smash the windows of the Presbytery, and U 3 292 APPENDICES tried to force the door. They were relieved by a party of six police from Chancery Lane, who managed to disperse the crowd. From about 5.15 p.m. until 7 p.m., owing to the presence of riotous and disorderly crowds, it was necessary to patrol the streets in the neighbourhood with six members of the Royal Irish Constabulary Troop, who were stoned by the crowd in High Street, and pelted with bricks and bottles from the windows of the houses in High Street and Francis Street. Owing to the condition of this district, it became necessary to requisition a party of thirty-five Royal Irish Constabulary from the Dep6t, who arrived about 6.30 P.M. About half of this body were left at Meath Street, and the remainder went on to Cornmarket and Francis Street. In Meath Street the sergeant in charge and eighteen constables were attacked by a mob of about 200 persons, who threw bricks and mineral water bottles, collected for the purpose, at the police. It was necessary to disperse the crowd by means of a baton charge, but none of the police came in contact with the crowd. A similar attack was made in Francis Street on the party of Royal Irish Constabulary who proceeded to Cornmarket by a crowd numbering 600 or 700 persons, stones and bottles being thrown from the houses as well as from the streets. Later in the evening a portion of this last-mentioned party of police were attacked in Pimlico and the neighbouring streets ; and on their way to report themselves at Chancery Lane Barracks about 10.30 P.M., the entire of this party of Royal Irish Constabulary who had come from the Dep6t were fiercely attacked, and stoned by a mob of several hundred rioters in Corrmiarket. A baton charge was ordered by the sergeant in command, but his men do not seem to have come in contact with the crowd. This riot, which lasted for several hours, commenced by attacks on the cars of the Tramway Company, which were followed later in the evening by organised attacks on the poUce in different parts of the district. Eleven policemen were injured — some of them very seriously — ^they behaved with courage and forbearance, and there was no use of ex- cessive or unnecessary force in dealing with the rioters. Except in the case of rioters who were actually arrested, the police do not seem to have come into contact with the crowds. APPENDICES 293 Riot in Aungier Street, Redmond's HitL, Cuffe Street, AND ADJOINING DISTRICT ON SUNDAY, AUGUST 31, 1913 This riot commenced with an attack, a little before 5 p.m., on one of the outgoing cars of the Tramway Company. The attack came from a crowd which had collected opposite the Transport Workers' Union Hall in Aungier Street. Two members of this crowd attacked and struck the motorman with sticks. The motorman was obliged to leave his car and defend himself with his driving handle. In the meantime the crowd, which had increased to 300 persons, smashed the windows of the car. There were no police in the immediate neighbourhood at the moment, but two men of the.'B' Division were quickly on the scene, and one of them (145 B) went to the rescue of the motorman. He was at once knocked down, and brutally assaulted while on the ground, and the motorman in attempting to get back to his car was struck with a bottle on the back of the head, and so severely injured that. he had to be removed to Mercer's Hospital. One of the policemen went for reinforcements, which soon afterwards arrived, and the crowd was dispersed. Constable 145 B was so severely injured that he had to go off duty for three weeks. About the same time an in-coming tram car was held up at the same place by the same crowd, who wrecked the car, knocked the conductor down, and took his leather bag con- taining about £3 in money. The conductor was so badly injured that he had to be taken to hospital, and remained there for ten days. The party of police who were sent as reinforcements to the scene of this riot, consisting of a sergeant and nine men, were received with volleys of stones and bottles from the crowd in Aungier Street. The sergeant ordered his men to draw their batons and clear the street. As soon as the crowd saw the batons drawn they ran up the street and into Great Longford Street, where some of them entered the houses, from which they attacked the police with stones and bottles. An arrest was effected in this street. After taking the prisoner to Chancery Lane this body of police, consisting of ten men, were attacked by four converging crowds, which came out of Longford Street, Whitefriar Place, Aungier Street, and York Street. These crowds. 294 APPENDICES numbering in all over 500 persons, formed near the Church in Whitefriar Street, and again fiercely attacked the police with stones and bottles. The police charged the crowd, and drove them through Bishop Street to Kevin Street. During this charge stones and bottles were freely flung at the police, and a prisoner arrested in Kevin Street was found to have four stones in his pockets. After bringing this prisoner to Kevin Street Barracks, the party of police returned through Lower Kevin Street, and at the crossing of this street and Redmond's Hill and Wexford Street they were again surrounded and attacked by converging crowds, num- bering several hundreds. The sergeant who had been doing duty in this district for twenty-five years then stepped out from his men, and appealed to the crowd not to stone the police. He was received with a volley of stones, and was struck four times. In order to effect their escape the ser- geant and his men then charged the crowd in Cuffe Street, and were followed by the other crowds down that street, from the houses of which the police were stoned, until they reached Stephen's Green, where they got into a motor car and returned to barracks for reinforcements. A further party of fifteen police were sent from College Street to assist in restoring order, and Inspector Chase and six mounted troopers were despatched to Aungier Street. Both these bodies of police were attacked by a crowd of between 200 and 300 rioters outside the Transport Workers' Union Hall I in Aungier Street with stones, bricks, and bottles, and a number of the men and horses were struck. The rioters were dispersed by means of baton charges, and the streets in the district were clear and quiet about 7 o'clock. No unnecessary or excessive force was used by the police in dealing with this dangerous riot, in which three policemen were severely injured, and a large quantity of property was destroyed. Riot at Inchicoee on Sunday, August 31, 1913 Between 5 and 6 o'clock on Sunday evening a crowd of about 150 persons assembled near the Tramway Dep6t at Inchicore, and were hissing and booing at the driver and conductor of one of the cars. One of the ringleaders of the APPENDICES 295 crowd being warned to go away, refused to do so, and called upon the crowd to wreck the car. He was then arrested by Sergeant Kincaid (12 A), who, with two constables, was on duty at the terminus of the tramway. He resisted arrest, but was secured with the assistance of the constables, and was then taken in the direction of the Kilmainham Police Station. At the Emmet Hall, which is between Richmond Barracks and Kilmainham Police Station, and is the meeting place of the Transport Workers' Union, a crowd of 150 persons was collected. As soon as the three police with their prisoner came near the Emmet Hall, a crowd of people came out of the Hall, and, with the people already in the street, came towards and met the police, and demanded the release of the prisoner. The crowd then commenced to throw stones, and bricks, and other missiles. The sergeant ordered his two men to draw their batons, and keeping the prisoner between them, with the sergeant behind them, they tried to get their prisoner past the crowd. The crowd closed in on them ; the prisoner was rescued, and the police got separated. Sergeant Kincaid was surrounded, knocked down, kicked, and left unconscious on the ground. He was brought into a neighbouring house by a woman and her family, and only regained consciousness after two hours. He was one month in hospital, and another month off duty as the result of the injuries he received. One of the two constables (Crowley, R.I.C.) was also surrounded, knocked down twice, and kicked each time while on the ground. He escaped with difficulty into the Richmond Barracks, and was confined to hospital for five days. The other constable (Denis McMahon) was struck with a heavy stone on the head while still holding the prisoner, staggered back, and was knocked down, and kicked by the crowd several times about the head and body. He fought his way back to his comrades, but was again knocked down and kicked by the crowd, and lost his helmet and baton. He escaped with his life into a house, the door of which was open, followed by the crowd, who demanded that he should be put out again. The owner of the house, who was in terror of the mob, let him out by the back door, and he got into another house by the back way. He was severely injured and on the sick list for some days. It is some satisfaction to be able to state that the prisoner was re-arrested nine days afterwards at ClondaUdn. A little later in the evening, about 6.30 p.m., a crowd of 296 APPENDICES about 400 persons collected outside the Emmet Hall for the purpose of hearing an address from one of the windows of the Hall. The speaker told the crowd that the women and children should clear away, and referred to the arrest of the prisoner earlier in the evening, and said, ' The police were sorry for it now.' During the speech two tram cars coming out from the city with broken windows and protected by a sergeant and five constables, reached the outskirts of the crowd. Inspector Wilkinson who, with a party of about ten constables, was already in the immediate neighbourhood of the Emmet Hall, ordered his men to clear the way for the trams. This order provoked the hostility of the crowd, who declined to clear the way. The constables then drew their batons and tried to make a way for the tram cars. Many of the crowd were armed with sticks, and stones were coming freely from all directions, some of them from the windows of the Emmet Hall. In these circumstances, a number of police entered the Emmet Hall and cleared it out, the people who were there rushing out by the back. At the same time a detachment of the West Kent Regiment, who had been sent to the assistance of the police by Mr. Waters (Special Magistrate), arrived on the scene, and escorted the tram cars to the Dep6t, and the police were able to disperse the crowd. This is the only occasion on which the services of the military were requisitioned, and their services were confined to escorting the tram cars from the Emmet Hall to the Tramway Dep6t, so that they did not come into contact with the crowd. There was no use of unnecessary or excessive force by the police in dealing with this riot, during which six policemen were injured — three of them very severely. CORPORATION STREET AND BUILDINGS, SUNDAY, AUGUST 31, 1913 Evidence was also giveii before us relating to riots which were alleged to have taken place in Corporation Street, and in Corporation Buildings, on the night of Saturday, August 30, and the afternoon of Sunday, August 31. Mr. Rice, solicitor to the Corporation of Dublin, appeared on behalf of the Housing Committee of the Corporation, and called evidence APPENDICES 297 for the purpose of establishing that not only was wilful injury inflicted by members of the police on the property of the Corporation and their tenants, but that excessive and unnecessary violence was in some cases used to such tenants. Having carefully considered the evidence given on both sides we came to the conclusion that the damage done on the night of Saturday, involving as it did only the breaking of a few windows, was not of a serious character, and we were not satisfied as to the identity of the constables who were alleged to have been guilty of it. As regards the Sunday, however, we are of opinion that in a number of instances wilful damage was done to the property of the Corporation and their tenants, and we are also of opinion that assaults were committed on some of the occupiers of the buildings for which there was no justification whatever. On this day a number of rioters who fled from the pohce had taken refuge on the balconies of the Corporation Buildings, and they, assisted by many of the occupants, made an attack on a body of police, who proceeded to enter the buildings for the purpose of dispersing the rioters. With this object they ascended to the balconies, and when there entered a large number of dwellings — some thirty — ^forcibly. In many of the dwellings deimage was caused by the force used on entering, but in some cases, after the entry was made and when no rioters were found inside, some constables proceeded to destroy the property of the tenants. Glass was broken, delph, lamps, and pictures. In some instances furniture and other articles were damaged, and, con- sidering the means of the occupants, substantial damage was iirflicted on them. The windows in some houses were also broken. We make every allowance for the excitement under which the constables were labouring owing to the attacks made upon them from the buildings, but in our opinion in the case of eight or ten dwellings wilful damage was done without justification. The rooms in which the principal damage was caused were seen on Tuesday, September 2, by Mr. Ejrre, the City Treasurer, and his evidence fully corroborated the statements of the tenants of the dwellings, and was fully accepted by us, as was the evidence of Miss Harrison, who saw some of the 298 APPENDICES dwellings. We are also satisfied that in some instances assaults were committed without just cause. Gloucester Street, Waterford Street, Gardiner Street, AND Parnell Street, August 31, 1913 About 5 P.M. on Sunday evening, August 31, extensive rioting prevailed in the district around Gardiner Street, and crowds assembled in that street, and at the corners of streets communicating therewith. In the first instance the police came into contact with the rioters at the corner of Gloucester Street, and dispersed them after being met with a fusilade of stones and bricks, in many cases thrown from houses. A number of troopers were engaged in keeping the crowd moving, but their efforts were greatly hampered by the persistent stone throwing that took place from nearly all the houses in the streets through which they passed. In some of the streets, notably Cumberland Street and Waterford Street, numbers of men were stationed on the roofs of houses, and stripped off slates and tiles for the purpose of throwing them into the street at passing constables. In one case in Waterford Street seven men were discovered on the roof of a house. Constable Sutton (125 C) was struck in this street with a tile thrown from a roof, and many other constables sustained injuries of a similar kind. The troopers engaged in patrolling these streets were all hit, some more than once, during the riot, and when arrests had been effected of persons who had been taken on the roofs of houses the escort conveying the prisoners was followed towards the Police Station and freely stoned. A number of these prisoners were afterwards convicted and sentenced. This disturbance was spread over the entire district, and the serious feature of it was the readiness of the occupants of the various tenement houses to shelter escaping rioters, and to join with them in attacking the police from the upper stories of many houses. Some baton charges were made, but as a rule these were useless, as the crowds fled before the police and took refuge in houses which were open to receive them. APPENDICES 299 Riot in Mary Street, Chancery Street, and along the Northern Quays from Chancery Place to Queen Street, on Sunday, August 31, 1913 From about 5 p.m. till 6.30 p.m. the Northern Quays from Chancery Place up to Queen Street, and the streets abutting on these quays, were in a constant state of riot and disorder. Some of the crowds who took part in this disturbance had collected owing to an incident which occurred in Mary Street. A sergeant and two constables of the D Division, on their way from Green Street to Sackville Street between 4 and 5 p.m. came upon a crowd in Mary Street, near the corner of Stafford Street, who were stoning a party of pohce marching towards Sackville Street. They arrested one of the ringleaders who was inciting the mob to attack the police, and took him to the Bridewell behind the Four Courts. While on their way they were followed by the crowd through Mary's Lane, Michan's Lane, and Chancery Street, and were pelted with bricks, bottles, and stones all the way to the Bridewell — some of the crowd venturing into the Bridewell yard. Before they could leave the Bridewell the sergeant and his two men had to obtain reinforcements from Green Street, and having done so they dispersed this crowd in the direction of Inns Quay and the bridge at Chancery Place, where they re-assembled, and again attacked the police with stones and bottles. One of the police was struck with a bottle, and the man who threw it was pursued and arrested. Later on several tram cars were held up at Church Street and Queen Street bridges by crowds who dispersed up side streets when the police came near them, and re-assembled at some other part of the quays. As soon as the trams ceased running the crowd dispersed and quiet was restored. No unnecessary or excessive force was used by the police in dealing with the disturbances in this district, during which twelve of the police were injured. Riot on George's Quay and Moss Street, on Sunday, August 31, 1913 About 8 o'clock on Sunday evening it was reported to the police stationed at the south side of O'Connell Bridge that there was rioting on George's Quay and in Moss Street. 300 APPENDICES Sergeant O'Donnell and a party of ten constables were sent by Chief Superintendent Dunne to try and suppress it. They found on their arrival at George's Quay that a large fire had been lit on the street near the corner of Moss Street. This fire was surrounded by a collection of loose bricks. The crowd near the fire attacked the police with these bricks and with broken sewer pipes, and they were attacked from the houses with bottles and jam-pots. Sergeant O'Donnell ordered his men to draw their batons and disperse the crowd, and they dispersed the crowd as far as the corner of Moss Street, where the police were again attacked from the houses and in the street, and from a boat or boats on the river. As the crowd numbered over four hundred, the sergeant, seeing that the lives of his men were in danger, brought them back to College Street Station, where he reported the matter to the Superintendent, who ordered out Sergeant Hurley and ten picked men as a reinforcement. Sergeant O'Donnell and his men returned to Moss Street by Townsend Street, and Sergeant Hurley and his men went to Moss Street by Burgh Quay and George's Quay. When Sergeant O'Donnell and party of pohce got within twenty yards of Moss Street (at the corner of Townsend Street and Moss Street) they were attacked by a crowd of two hundred rioters on the street, and also with bottles, stones, and bricks from the windows and hall doors of the houses in Moss Street. From No. 8 Moss Street in particular missiles were thrown from the hall door, and from the top storey windows, and three of the police were severely injured, one being struck in the mouth, another on the back of the head with a stone, and another on the side of the head with a brick. As one of the persons assaulting the police from 8 Moss Street was identified, the police effected an entrance into the house and made two arrests. Soon after this the crowd in Moss Street was completely dispersed, and quiet was restored about lo o'clock. In the meantime Sergeant Hurley and his party of con- stables had arrived near and been attacked by a fusilade of bricks from the fire which had been lit on George's Quay. They dispersed this attacking crowd down the quays, but never got in touch with them, being themselves stoned by the crowd they were pursuing, and also from a boat in the river. This riotous crowd seems to have reformed many times, and was not finally dispersed for nearly an hour. APPENDICES 301 The mob with which the pohce had to deal in this district seems to have been characterised by great violence and lawlessness, and seven policemen were injured during the riots in Moss Street and on George's Quay on this evening. There was no unnecessary or excessive force used by the police in dealing with this riot. Riot at Redmond's Hill and Neighbouring Streets on Monday, September i, 1913 This riot was really a continuation of the rioting of the previous evening in the same neighbourhood. Diuring the afternoon of Monday, September i, between the hours of 3 P.M. and 7 P.M. there had been a good deal of desultory stone throwing at the pohce by crowds which gathered at Redmond's Hill, Digges Street, Aungier Street, Cuffe Street, Whitefriar Street, and Peter Street, but the serious rioting did not begin until after dark. From 9 p.m. until nearly midnight Redmond's Hill, Wexford Street, and Camden Street and the neighbouring side streets were a scene of continuous and dangerous rioting. The crowds collected at the corners of the side streets leading off the main thoroughfares, and kept up a continuous fire of missiles at any body of police who were within range. When the police were out of range, the missiles were directed at shop windows, with the result that a very large quantity of glass was broken. As soon as the pohce charged any particular mob, it disappeared up or down one of the side streets, and when the police followed in pursuit they were fusiladed with deadly missiles from the windows and even the roofs of houses. At no time were the police actually in contact with any of the many riotous crowds. For more than two hours during this riot Redmond's Hill, Wexford Street, and Camden Street — ^main thoroughfares of the city — ^were in possession of the mob, and a deliberate, but fortunately unsuccessful, attempt was made to drive the police off the streets. This riot was remarkable not only for the ferocity of the attacks upon the police, but also for the wanton destruction of property and the looting of some shops. There was no use of unnecessary or excessive force by the police in dealing with this riot. 302 APPENDICES Riot in Capel Street and adjoining Streets on Monday, September i, 1913 At 9.30 P.M. on Monday, September i, Inspector Lowry, with a sergeant and ten men, on their way from Henry Place to Mary Street, were attacked in Capel Street by a mob of 200 to 300 persons, throwing stones, bottles, and pieces of iron. Several of the police were struck. The Inspector deemed it necessary to charge, and they were dispersed up Mary Street, an arrest being made in that street. After bringing the prisoner to the Bridewell the same party of police returned to Capel Street, and found that the mob had re-assembled at the corner of Mary Street. Missiles were again thrown by the crowd, and several shop windows were broken in Capel Street. It became necessary to charge the crowd again, and this time they were dispersed down Capel Street, and over Grattan Bridge, and along Ormond Quay. Later on it was reported to Inspector Lowry that four con- stables of the Royal Irish Constabulary were being attacked in Capel Street, and on returning there he and his party found the foiu- constables, who were returning to their lodgings at the Hibernian Hotel in Capel Street, surrounded just opposite the hotel by an angry crowd of from 150 to 200 rioters, who were attacking them with stones and bottles. The conduct of the mob was exceptionally brutal, and the position of the four constables was one of extreme danger. Except for the timely arrival of Inspector Lowry and his men, it is difficult to see how they could have escaped with their lives. The mob who were attacking the four constables were driven by the relieving party up Capel Street as far as Little Britain Street, and were there dispersed about 10 o'clock. This was a fierce riot, during which eighteen of the police were injured, and their lives were constantly in danger. In all the instances during this riot in which the police charged the mob, the charge was absolutely necessary, and no unnecessary or excessive force was used by the police in the suppression of the disturbance. APPENDICES 303 Riot at Townsend Street, Sunday, September 21, 1913 On Sunday, September 21, about 5.50 p.m. a procession, estimated to contain several thousand people, formed in Beresford Place and the neighbourhood, and proceeded to march through the city. Chief Superintendent Dunne, with Superintendent Kiernan and Inspector Bannon, and sixty sergeants and constables, accompanied the procession, which was led by a crowd of roughs, many of whom were under the influence of drink. The Chief Superintendent, who has forty years' experience in the Dublin MetropoUtan Police force, stated that he had never seen such an assemblage of the disorderly class. In the course of their march tram cars were attacked and wrecked, to the number of nine in all, and the members of the crowd behaved in a very disorderly fashion. Stones were thrown at different times during their progress, but it was not until Townsend Street was reached that the riot assumed a really serious aspect. When the procession reached this street an organised attempt was made by its members to overwhehn the force which had accompanied them. Showers of stones and bottles were thrown, in many instances from the houses, and a hand-to-hand struggle went on here for twenty minutes between the police and rioters. Some of the horses belonging to the troopers were knocked down ; the men themselves received severe injuries, and in many instances their lives were only saved by their helmets, which were broken by stones and missiles. Pieces of concrete, iron nuts, and bricks were freely thrown. Batons were drawn and used at several points in the street, but for some time even this measure had not the effect of dispersing the crowd or restoring order. Some of the constables were knocked down and rendered unconscious, and in one instance a member of the Dublin Metropolitan PoUce was wounded by a knife. The total number of constables injured in this riot was thirty- six. The entire length of the street for nearly half an hour was a scene of riot, and the persistent throwing of missiles from houses added greatly to the dangers incurred by ofi&cers and men. This was, in our opinion, the most determined and dis- graceful riot that took place in Dublin dmring the disturbances. 304 APPENDICES and any measures taken by the police for the purpose of suppressing it were amply justified. It was carefully plannedj and in the case of many of the houses missiles had been provided some time before for use against the police. We desire to report, in conclusion, that in our opinion the officers and men of the Dublin MetropoUtan PoHce and the Royal Irish Constabulary, as a whole, discharged their duties throughout this trying period with conspicuous courage and patience. They were exposed to great dangers, and treated with great brutality, and in many instances we were satisfied that, though suffering from injuries which would have fully justified their absence from duty, they remained at their posts under great difficulties until peace had been restored. The total number of constables injured during these riots exceeded 200. Notwithstanding the extent and violence of the disturbances, in no case, save one, and then only for the purpose of protecting two tram cars, was the assistance of the military called for. The riots were dealt with and suppressed by the police, and by the police alone, and had it not been for their zeal and determination, the outburst of lawlessness which took place in the months of August and September would have assumed more serious proportions, and been attended with far more evil results. We have the honour to remain. Your Excellency's obedient servants, Denis S. Henry, S. L. Brown. Thomas Patton, Secretary, gfh February, 1914. APPENDICES 305 IV BROKEN AGREEMENTS The following is the text of the agreement of July 23, 1908, referred to in Chapter VIII. Extract from the 'Board of Trade Labour Gazette,' August igo8 On July 4, 1908, the Dublin Branch of the National Union of Dock Labourers gave notice to their employers that, on and after July 20, no member of that Union would work with any non-union man. The employers replied by issuing notices that any man who objected to work with non-unionists would be discharged, and that no member of the National Union would be employed after July 11. About 100 members of the Union were paid off on July 10, and the remainder were to have ceased work, in accord- ance with the above notice, on the following day. On that day, however, negotiations were entered into between the parties and Lord MacDonnell, Sir James Dougherty (Under Secretary of State for Ireland), and Mr. I. H. Mitchell, of the Board of Trade ; and it was arranged that the notices on both sides should be withdrawn, and the status quo main- tained, pending a further conference to be held on July 18. Accordingly, on the following Monday (July 13), a majority of the members of the Union returned to work ; some diffi- culties arose, however, by which a number of men were unable to resume work, but these were successfully arranged by Sir James Dougherty. The adjourned conference took place as arranged on July 18 ; it was presided over by Lord MacDonneU, at the request of the Board of Trade ; and Sir J. Dougherty and Mr. I. H. Mitchell were again present, in addition to representatives of the parties. An agreement was made at this conference for submission to the parties, and on July 30 the following terms of settlement were finally arrived at : — j 1. Questions affecting individuals only shall be settled by the individual and the firm concerned. 2. The freedom of the employers as to the persons whom they employ is admitted. 3o6 APPENDICES 3. No distinction as to work (including the delivery or reception of cargo) between Union and non-union men to be made either by employers or employed. 4. Questions affecting general conditions of employment, hours, rates of wages, &c., shall in the first place be com- municated in writing by the men directly affected to the firm or firms concerned. If no arrangement is arrived at, the men, through the General Secretary of the National Union of Dock Labourers, may make further representations on the matter to the firm or firms affected, who will then consider them. 5. If no settlement be arrived at, the question shall be referred to a Conciliation Board consisting of a representative of the employers, a representative of the employed, and an umpire. The umpire to be agreed upon by the two representa- tives or, faiUng agreement, to be appointed by the Board of Trade. 6. That no distinguishing badges or buttons be displayed by the men during working hours. 7. All notices and documents, including tariffs issued during this dispute by either side, be withdrawn. Below are given the terms of the agreement of May 26, 1913. (See Chapter X.) [Agreement between the Irish Transport Workers' Union and Shipping Companies.] Memorandum of Agreement re Rates of Wages and Condi- tions of Labour for Quay Labourers (Cross Channel Steamers) at Dublin, between the Representatives of the undersigned Steamship Companies and of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union. Made on the 26th day of May, 1913. Constant Men : — 30S. per Week of 60 Hours. 8d. per Hour overtime. IS. per Hour for Sunday, from midnight Saturday to midnight Sunday. IS. to be paid for Meal Hour if worked. Casual Men : — 5s. per Day from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. Two Meal Hours. ' 3s. gd. Three-quarter Day. 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. One Meal Hour. 2S. 6d. Half Day. 6 a.m. to 12 noon. 2s. 6d. „ „ 2 P.M. to 6 p.m. APPENDICES 307 8d. per Hour from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. Meal Hours, 8 to 9 or g to 10 A.M. T If worked is. „ „ I to 2 or 2 to 3 P.M. J to be paid. IS. per Hour for Sunday, from midnight Saturday to midnight Sunday. Handling Slag or Whiting : — 6d. per Man for lots of from 20 to 50 Tons. IS. „ ,, „ over 50 Tons. Casual Labour to include working in Ship, on Shore, in Shed or Stores. Any question as to the interpretation of this Agreement, or any dispute arising between the men and their employers, to be submitted to the latter in writing. No stoppage of work to take place pending negotiations regarding such matters. This Agreement to be binding on all concerned, and at least One Month's Notice in writing from either side to be given of any intention to terminate it. The terms of this Agreement to come into force on Monday, the 2nd June, 1913. Signed on behalf of the Shipping Companies : — TEDCASTLE, McCORMICK & CO., LTD., Thos. McCoemick, Managing Director. CLYDE SHIPPING CO., LTD., Chas. J. Young, Agent. For BRISTOL STEAM NAVIGATION CO., LTD., A. Gowan. DUKE SHIPPING CO., LTD., Wm. J. Dollar, Managing Director. For BRITISH & IRISH STEAM PACKET CO., LTD., D. Barry, Secretary and Manager. For DUBLIN, SILLOTH, & ISLE OF MAN STEAMERS, NiCHOLL & Feary, Agents. Signed on behalf of the Transport Union : — JAMES LARKIN, Secretary I. T. & G. W. U. JOHN O'NEILL. PATRICK NOLAN. Dublin, 26th May, 1913. 3o8 APPENDICES CARTERS' STRIKE, 1908 Text of Arbitrators' Award We the Right Honorable Sir Andrew Marshall Porter, Baronet, and Patrick John O'Neill, Esquire, J.P., Chairman of the County Council of the County of Dublin, having been requested to act as Arbitrators to decide upon certain matters (hereinafter appearing) which had arisen and were stated to be in difference between the employers and the employed in connection with the trades and businesses of the Carriers and Carters, and also of Maltsters, in the City of Dublin ; and having acceded to said request, and fuUy heard the several persons interested and their witnesses ; do make and pubhsh this as our award and final determination. We award and determine that in respect of the services described in the Schedule hereto there shall be paid the several sums and rates therein mentioned and set out. This applies only to the case of men working ' on their earnings ' as that term is used in the trade. We award no payment in respect of carting the employers' weighing gear. In the case of men paid by weekly or daily wages, with or without extras, we find it impossible to determine any fixed minimum rate of wages. Many different rates and incidents of employment prevail. No master has indicated any desire to alter the practice of his firm, and no employee has expressed dissatisfaction with the system under wldch he has served up to the present, and many of the men examined before us have been in the same service for many years. As regards the hoiurs of working and the question of overtime in the case of men on weekly wages : — Every hovur of work after 6.30 p.m. shall be counted as overtime and paid for at the rate of sixpence by the hour until 11.30, and after 11.30, up to 6.30 a.m. in the next day, at the rate of ninepence per hour. This provision shall apply as well where the employee is detained at railway or steam- boat, without default of his own, as on other business. Sxmday work is to be paid for at ninepence per hour. A Saturday closing of work at three o'clock, while, very APPENDICES 309 desirable in itself, cannot be enforced by a strict rule, for the discharge of vessels (at any rate) must go on on that date as on others. The question of allowing meal hours diuring the day is also one in reference to which, in the case of Carters out with their loads, it would be manifestly un- workable to stop off at a given time. We, however, recom- mend that if and when it can be done, the men should be allowed a short Saturday and a meal hom: ; but for the reasons given this cannot form part of our Award. As regards the claims of the men employed in the business of Maltsters, we cannot see our way to make any recommenda- tion or award interfering with the existing rates of pay, save as follows: — It appears that in certain firms (if not all) it has been the practice to allow what is called a ' back shiUing ' to be retained by the employer until the end of each season and then given to the workman if his conduct has been satis- factory, or retained in whole or part in the contrary event. We cannot approve of this system, which renders it im- possible for the workman to know exactly what he is earning, and which makes him possibly Uable to an equal penalty in respect of trivial and important deviations from duty. We, therefore. Award that in all cases where this practice prevails, the ' back shilling ' shall from and after the close of the present malting season cease and determine, and that in lieu thereof one shilUng per week shall be added to the weekly wages of the workman. In addition to the foregoing matters, there are three others in respect of which we have no authority to do more than to offer a recommendation to both parties : — 1. We think it highly unreasonable that it should be in the power of masters or men to determine a hiring without proper notice. In the case of the Maltsters, particularly, it may be ruinous ; and we recommend that both parties should agree, in writing, not to dismiss a man, or to throw up work, without a fortnight's notice, save in the case of a breach of agreement or other misconduct. 2. We strongly advise both masters and men to agree to the establishment of a permanent Court of Conciliation, for the hearing and determining of all trade disputes which may from time to time arise. The Conciliation Act 310 APPENDICES (59 & 60 Vict. cap. 30) presents every facility for doing this, arid we believe that the benefits to be derived from the adoption of its provisions would be of incalculable advantage to all parties. 3. We have to express our hope and expectation that nothing shall be done which would have the effect of punishing or injuriously affecting any of the men concerned in this arbitration, or their comrades, in relation to the recent strike. A. M. Porter. P. J. O'Neill. SCHEDULE Per load Storing from ship to stores, with help ... 8d. „ „ „ „ without help . . lod. Loading boat and schooner, same rate as storing, Sd. and lod. respectively. Cashel Point, same rat6. Per 100 sacks Carting corn ys. od. „ wheat or flour to first loft . . .8s. 4d. „ „ „ „ „ second loft . . . 12s. 6d. Per I ton 5 cwt. Carting bags of flour or oatmeal within \ first loft zod. present municipal boundary / second loft is. ^d. Per sack Carting barley or oats or malt, first loft . . ^d. „ „ „ „ „ second loft . . id. „ „ „ „ „ third loft . . i^d. „ pucks, per load ..... is. od. Carting empty sacks to or from railway or canal per bundle ...... |rf. Per load Storing grain to Custom House from either side of way lod. Storing grain to Mooney's Mills or North City Mills, same rate lorf. APPENDICES 311 For carting to or from places outside the present city boundary (together with Pembroke and Rathmines) there shall be allowed at the rate of a load and a half per load in lieu of the rate payable within these Umits. Memorandum We the aforesaid Sir Andrew Marshall Porter and Patrick John O'Neill, Esquire, do hereby declare and af&rm, as a Supplement to our said Award, that the said Award does not, and was not meant to interfere in any way with the relations of the Dublin Granaries Co., Ltd., or the Merchants Carting Co., Ltd., with their respective Carters or servants, it having been expressly stated to us, by and on behalf of the carters and servants of the said two Companies, that they had no cause of complaint whatever, and made no complaint against the said two firms or either of them. Furthermore, our said Award did not touch, and was not in any way meant to alter or interfere with the special rates agreed upon between Messrs. William Carter & Son, and their men in respect of the carting of grain between their various premises over short distances. These rates remain unaffected. Dated this 22nd February 1909. A. M. Porter. P. J. O'Neill. In the supplementary Memorandum of February 22, 1909, we stated the reason why the Award was not intended to apply and did not apply to the cases of the Dublin Granaries Company or the Merchants Carting Company. Where there is no complaint there is nothing to arbitrate about. It appears, however, that there was a misimderstanding as to this, and the men's allegation is that they did not mean to exclude the case of these two Companies. On hearing of this, we at once agreed, if both parties desired, to go into the case of the two Companies. Accordingly, on the 6th inst., we fuUy heard both sides with their witnesses ; but it is fair to state that the men intimated clearly that they would prefer a decision that the Award covered their case, as they contended it did. The arrangements of both these Companies with their 312 APPENDICES carters are substantially the same, and differ from those of the other firms which were before us. There is a fixed minimum wage of £x per week to each man, whether his earnings would amount to that sum or not. The men are paid in proportion to the work actually done in the week, on a scale which has been in operation for some years without complaint. Under this system the average weekly payments to the Carters have been, up to the present, twenty-six shilUngs in the one case and twenty-five shillings and sevenpence in the other, during the entire year. These figures have been extracted from the books. Taking the employment as a whole, and, in particular, bearing in mind the definite minimum of £z a week always paid, we think these are good wages for unskilled labour in Dublin, and that to add nearly or quite one-third to them would seriously injure and might destroy much of the trade of the city, the consequences of which would fall most heavily upon the working classes. Therefore, we cannot accede to the requirement of the men to apply the first six items of the Schedule to the Award to these cases in lieu of the existing rates, with which accordingly we do not interfere. But where the men are required to carry sacks up to second or third loft, we think they should be paid at the rate mentioned in the Schedule to the Award in the case of men working for other firms, and for overtime also beyond their present hours of work at the rate of one shiUing per hour. A. M. Porter. P. J. O'Neill. i6th March, 1909, [As the result of an arbitration held in Dublin on April 19, 1913, and presided over by the Recorder of Dublin [the Right Hon. T. L. O'Shaugknessy, K.C.) an agreement was come to between the City of Dublin Steam Packet Co. {represented by Messrs. Richard Jones and Michael Dawson), the National Seamen's and Firemen's Union of Great Britain and Ireland [represented by Mr. George Burke), and the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union [represented by Mr. James Larkin), whereby a strike which had occurred amongst the employees was terminated and a fresh start was made on terms duly set out in the compact. In November following, the agree- ment was flagrantly broken by Mr. Larkin, in circumstances APPENDICES 313 set out on page 235, and the understanding no longer exists. The author regrets that he has been unable to obtain an authenticated copy of the document and consequently it has been impossible to that extent to complete the list of " broken agreements." ] CHARACTER OF RIOTERS The following is a return of prisoners arrested and im- prisoned in connection with the labour disturbances in Dublin between August 19, 1913, and December 20, 1913, together with a list of previous convictions on various charges, most of which were unconnected with labour disturbances : — Total number of prisoners arrested .... 656 Number imprisoned . . . . .416 Number previously convicted 184 Prisoners previously convicted — ^44 per cent, of total number imprisoned. Number of prisoners once previously convicted twice »i fi three » If 4-10 )> »> 11-20 it if 21-30 ft n 31-40 91 It 41-50 n >» 51-60 >» 9t over 60 55 21 19 43 22 17 4 I I I 184 VI THE CONFERENCES The following is the employers' statement relative to the Conference held at the Shelboume Hotel on Saturday, December 6, 1913. The Conference for the settlement of the labour troubles having proved abortive, the Employers' Executive Committee desire to make the following statement in connection with this important matter : — 314 APPENDICES As announced in the Press, the Joint Labour Board deputed the following gentlemen to come to Dubhn and consider the situation : — Mr. A. Henderson, M.P., Chairman of the Joint Board ; Mr. J. A. Seddon, Chairman of the ParUa- mentary Committee of the Trade Union Congress ; Mr. H. Gosling, representative of the Congress ; Mr. C. W. Bower- man, M.P., Secretary of the Parliamentary Committee of the Trade Union Congress ; Mr. Tom Fox, Chairman of the National Executive of the Labour Party ; Mr. J. O'Grady, M.P., Chairman of the General Federation of Trade Unions. At the meeting of the Joint Board delegates and the employers the following agreement was come to : — ' It is agreed that a conference be arranged between employers, Joint Board delegates (six), and representatives of the workmen (eight) engaged in present dispute in Dublin, on Friday, on the following conditions : — ' The Joint Board delegates to meet separately the representatives of men and employers with a view to arriving at an agreed basis for negotiations, this meeting to be held to-morrow (Thursday). ' Faihng an agreement being arrived at that would be acceptable to both parties, the Conference with the workmen, tentatively arranged for Friday, will be postponed.' Dated December 3, 1913. Basis for Discussion Proposals were discussed at length between the Joint Board delegates and the Employers' Committee, and the following clauses were finally agreed to as a basis for discussion at a conference between all parties : — • I. The abandonment of the sympathetic strike and of the refusal to handle " tainted goods," as recently and at present in force in Dublin, the employers under- taking, when the dispute is over, to confer with the reprer sentatives of the workers with a view to forming a scheme or schemes for the prevention and settlement of future disputes. ■ 2. Every employer shall conduct his business in any way he may consider advantageous in all details APPENDICES 315 of management, notTinfringing the individual liberty of the workers, who will obey all lawful orders and work amicably with all other employees. ' 3. No strike of lock-out to be entered upon without a month's notice on either side ; and no strike shall take place without a ballot having first been taken, and the resolution carried by a majority of the workers affected. ' 4. That the representatives of the Joint Labour Board and the representatives of aU the Dubhn Trade Unions undertake on behalf of the unions they represent that their pohcy and methods shall be conducted on proper and recognised trade union lines, and that agree- ments made with employers shall be kept by the unions and their officials. Any union or official faiUng to comply with the foregoing conditions wiU be repudiated by the Joint Labour Board and all other unions, and will receive no assistance, financial or otherwise, from them. '5. As to re-instatements : while the employers will not undertake to dismiss men who have been employed during the strike, they will re-employ such men as are required as soon as possible ; it being understood that owing to the disorganised condition of trade many firms will be unable to employ a full staff immediately. ' 6. This agreement to apply to all workers, skilled and unskilled, affected by the present labour dispute in the City and County of Dublin.' At the Conference between all parties, held at the Shel- boume Hotel on Saturday, December 6, Mr. Arthur Henderson, M.P., presiding, the representatives of the workers proposed that Clauses i and 5 (the re-instatement of the men) should be considered together. The workers produced the following amendment to Clause i : — 'When the present dispute is over the employers undertake to confer with the representatives of the workers with a view to framing a scheme or schemes for the pre- vention or settlement of future disputes. The workers agreeing, under the same conditions, when the present dispute is over, to handle all goods and to refrain from sympathetic strikes until the said scheme or schemes are in force — the scheme or schemes to be established by March 7, 1914, at the latest.' 3i6 APPENDICES But the workers stated that their proposal was conditional on the employers accepting the amended Clause (5), viz. — ' That all men be re-instated.' The employers, therefore, considering this condition, offered to substitute for their Clause 5 the following clause : — ' The employers, while they cannot agree to dismiss men taken on who have been found suitable, will agree that as far as their business permits, they will take on as many of their former employees as they can make room for, and in the operation of their business will make a bona fide effort to find employment for as many as possible, and as soon as they can.' The workers refused to recede from the position they had taken up in requiring complete re-instatement, a condition obviously impossible of acceptance by the employers, and the Conference came to an end. Signed on behalf of the Employers' Executive CommitteCi Charles M. Coghlan, Secretary. Commercial Buildings, Dublin. The following is the employers' statement relative to the Conference held at the Shelbourne Hotel on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, December 18, 19, and 20, 1913 : — ' The Executive Committee of the Dublin employers regret to have to report the failure of the Conference held on Thurs- day, Friday, and Saturday for the purpose of endeavouring to reach a settlement of the industrial crisis which has now lasted four months. Following the break-up of the first Conference on Simday morning, December 7, the employers were again approached by the Joint Labour Board, and the Conference was resumed on Thursday, i8th, Mr. Arthur Henderson, M.P., again presiding. ' At the sitting of the Conference on that morning the following new proposals were handed in on behalf of the workers : — ' That the employers of the City and County of Dublin agree to withdraw the circulars, posters, and forms of agreement (known as the " Employers' Agreement " ) APPENDICES 317 presented to their employees, embodsHlng conditions governing their employment in the several firms as from July 19, 1913. ' That the Unions affected agree as a condition of the withdrawal of such conditions and forms of agreement governing emplo3mient in the finns affected, to abstain from any form of sympathetic strike pending a Board of Wages and Condition of Employment being set up by March 17, 1914. ' And the Conference also agrees that in restoring relations, no member shall be refused employment on the grounds of his or her association with the dispute, and that no stranger shall be employed until all the workers have been re-instated. ' All cases of old workers not re-employed on February i, 1914, shall be considered at a Conference to be held not later than February 15, 1914.' The Employers' Committee pointed out that this was a resumption of the abortive Conference, and should be taken up where that broke off, viz., on the consideration of the re-instatement offer as follows : — ' The employers, while they cannot agree to dismiss men taken on who have been found suitable, will agree that as far as their business permits, they will take on as many of their former employees as they can make room for, and in the operation of their business will make a bona fide effort to find employment for as many as possible, and as soon as they can.' And they now offered to add to this the further condition, that ' No worker shall be refused employment on the ground that he is a member of any particular union.' It was agreed that the clause governing re-instatement was an essential to the settlement of the dispute. Thereupon the representatives of the workers put a series of interrogatories to the Employers' Committee which they were obviously unable to reply to. The first query required ' A statement of the firms who claim that they cannot re-instate the number so affected, and the proportion of 3i8 APPENDICES workers the said firms claim they can immediately make room for if a settlement is arrived at.' Even if this information was obtainable, which it was not, it would be very improper for the Committee to furnish it, in view of the sinister objects for which it was evidently intended. The next query was whether the statement made by Mr. Murphy in the Press on November 15 last, 'That aU but 5 per cent, can return immediately was any idea of the extent to which immediate re-instate- ment can be guaranteed now,' to which it was replied that Mr. Murphy's letter, pubUshed more than a month ago. referred only to those men out of employment whose places were not filled up, and would be no index. The next query was for ' A statement from the Employers' Committee of the percentage of workers who will be re-instated.' The Committee pointed out that they had already replied to this, and further pointed out that it was obvious they could not answer the question, seeing that the dispute had been going on for more than four months, that it affected every trade and every employment in the city ' working under various conditions.' At this stage on Friday evening the Committee adjourned to enable the representatives of the workers to report the position to the representatives of the National and local delegates now in Dubhn. On Saturday morning Mr. Larkin handed in again the workers' terms, identical with those submitted to the Con- ference at its opening on Thursday morning, and submitted it as a final judgment. The Employers' Committee replied that this brought them back to the position in which they stood at the opening, and that as the re-instatement of all workers would involve the victimisation of men employed by them since the dispute began, they could not possibly accede to such a demand. The employers, looking back on the proceedings at the Conference, taken in connection with the manifesto issued by Mr. Larkin the day preceding, commencing with the remarkable APPENDICES 319 phrase, ' Comrades, a foul and black conspiracy is afoot here,' are forced to the conclusion that there was on the part of at least some of the workers' representatives no real intention to seek a settlement. Chakles M. Coghlan, Secretary, Employers' Executive Committee. Commercial Buildings, Dublin, Dectmher 21, 1913. What the Conference discussed On the Conference opening (on December 18), under the presidency of Mr. Arthur Henderson, M.P., the following was put forward by the representatives of the workers as a basis of agreement : — ' The employers of the City and County of Dubhn agree to withdraw the circulars, posters, and forms of agree- ment (known as the " Employers' Agreement " ) presented to their employees, embodying conditions governing their emplojmient in the several firms as from July 19, 1913. ' That the Unions affected agree as a condition of withdrawal of such conditions and forms of agreement governing employment in firms affected to abstain from any form of sympathetic strike pending a Board of Wages and Conditions of Employment being set up by March 17, 1914. ' And the Conference also agree that in restoring relations no member of any trade union shall be refused employment on the grounds of his or her association with the dispute, and that no new employee shall be engaged until all the old workers have been re-instated. ' All cases of workers not re-employed on February i, 1914, shall be considered at a Conference to be held not later than February 15, 1914.' The employers considered the proposals, and replied — ' The employers regret that any misunderstanding should have arisen as to the procedure to be adopted when the Conference re-opened, and are desirous of impressing on the Joint Board and the local representatives that 320 APPENDICES they understood that the Conference was to be continued on the basis previously arrived at. ' The Conference broke up on the subject of re-instate- ment, and, to avoid further delay, the employers are of opinion that an agreement on this clause is essential before discussing any of the other clauses. ' The employers have, therefore, carefully considered the counter proposal as handed in by the President of the Trades Council this morning in conjunction with the amended Clause 5, which they put forward at the last meeting viz. — ' The employers, while they cannot agree to dismiss men taken on who have been found suitable, will agree that as far as their business permits they will take on as many of their former employees as they can make room for, and in the operation of their business will make a bona fide effort to find emplojmient for as many as possible, and as soon as they can. ' The employers would be prepared, with the object of assisting towards a settlement, to add the following to the foregoing clause : — ' No worker shall be refused employment on the ground that he is a member of any particular union. ' Unless some further suggestions for the amendment of this clause are put forward, of which the employers can approve, they regret that they cannot see their way to depart from the decision which they have already come to, and must, therefore, reluctantly request that this clause be agreed to before proceeding further.' After discussion, the following question was raised by the representatives of the workers : — ' Are the workers' representatives to understand that the employers agree to withdraw the circulars, posters, and forms of agreement presented to their employees, embodying conditions governing their employment in the several firms as from July, 1913 ? ' The form of agreement referred to is that marked ' No. i ' in the employers' letter to Mr. Arthur Henderson dated APPENDICES 321 December 6, 1913, and any other documents having similar import. To this the Committee replied : — ' In the event of a settlement, the Committee will advise employers to withdraw any clause in any agree- ment so far as they relate to any ban on any Union.' The workers then put the following proposition : — ' We agree that the clause governing re-instatement is essential to a settlement of the dispute, and with a view to assisting to that end we would be thankful if the employers would clarify their position to the extent that they, the employers, would provide us with a statement of the firms who claim they cannot re-instate, the number of workers so affected, and the proportion of workers the said firms claim that they can immediately make room for if a settlement is arrived at.' The employers replied : — ' The Committee cannot possibly give or get the information asked for. The employers' statement in Clause 5 as amended, " That they will make a bona fide effort to find employment for as many as possible and as soon as they can," very clearly expresses their intentions in this matter. ' It is quite impossible to foresee how soon the dis- organised trade of Dublin can or will resume its normal condition, especially in view of the serious injury caused to many of its industries ; but it is obvious that the longer the dispute continues the greater will be the injury to trade, and the greater the difficulty of finding employment for the workers.' The further query was then submitted : — ' In view of the statement that the employers agree to make a bona fide effort to find employment for as many as possible, and as soon as they can, the workers' repre- sentatives feel that this does not give them sufficient data to go upon, and further wish to inquire if the statement Y 322 APPENDICES of Mr. Murphy in the Press, that " all but 5 per cent, can return immediately," is any index to the extent to which immediate re-instatement can be guaranteed now.' At this stage it was agreed that the Conference should adjourn till ii o'clock on Friday morning, when a reply would be given. On resumption of the Conference on Friday morning the employers replied : — ' On the subject of the numbers for whom employment can be found the Committee, for the reasons already given, cannot give any data of the number that may be re-employed. ' With regard to Mr. Murphy's statement in the Press on November 15 (now more than a month ago), it referred only to those men out of emplojnnent whose places were not filled up, and is not any index " to the extent to which immediate re-instatement can be guaranteed now." ' This reply having been considered by the representatives of the workers, the Conference resumed its joint sitting, and the question being put as to the percentage which could be re-employed, the Committee said — The Committee have very carefully considered the question put forward this morning on behalf of the representatives of the workers, viz. : — ' That the Committee should furnish a statement of the percentages of workers who will be re-instated. ' The Committee replied to this question very clearly and fully yesterday, and they further point out that the present dispute has been going on for more than four months, that it has affected every trade and nearly every employment in the city, working under varying conditions. ' It must be obvious, therefore, that the Committee could not answer the question as to the percentage of men who could be taken back, and they can only repeat their assurance that " the employers will make a bona iide effort to find employment for as many as possible and as soon as they can. ' The Committee trust that the representatives of APPENDICES 323 the workers will accept this assurance on the part of the employers to act fairly towards their former employees.' Mr. Henderson and the other Joint Board delegates made a special appeal to the employers to furnish the data, even approximately, so that they might be enabled to get over the difficulty of the local representatives. The employers having considered the proposal, Mr. Good, on their behalf, again informed the delegates that the Committee coxild not possibly give, or get, the information asked for. The Conference then adjourned to 4 p.m. On resuming, the delegates handed in the annexed state- ment, viz. — ' The workers' representatives having been informed by the employers that they had considered the proposals handed in by the President of the Trades Coimcil, and decided that they, the employers, must request that their Clause 5 be again considered, and agreed upon before proceeding further, ' The workers' representatives, in order to under stand Clause 5, submitted the following question : — ' In view of the statements that the employers agree to make a bona fide effort to find emplojonent for as many as possible and as soon as they can, the workers' representa- tives feel that this does not give sufficient data to go upon, and further wish to inquire if the statement of Mr. Murphy in the Press that all but 5 per cent, can return immediately is an index to the extent to which immediate re-instatement can be guaranteed now. The employers having intimated that they cannot possibly give or get the information asked for, the Joint Board delegates with the consent of the workers' representatives having appealed to the employers for some explanation of their own Clause 5, showing its effect upon the re-instatement of the old workers, and having failed to obtain any further informa- tion or data bearing on the subject — ^the workers' repre- sentatives agree, with the concurrence of the Joint Board delegates, that the Conference should adjourn to enable them to report the position to the National and Local Delegates of the respective Unions now in Dubhn.' 324 APPENDICES The employers agreed to the request for an adjournment till Saturday morning at 10.30 o'clock, and the following was handed Mr. Henderson : — ' With reference to the statement handed in by the Chairman. Mr. Arthur Henderson, M.P., at the adjourn- ment of the meeting this evening, the Employers' Com- mittee think it necessary to point out that the precedence given to the question of re-instatement was concurred in by all parties, as it was on that question the previous Conference had broken off. ' The workers' representatives in requiring a reply as to the number of men that could be re-instated, imposed an impossible condition on this Committee in view of the great number and variety of trades involved in the dispute, and the length of time during which it has con- tinued. ' Even if the statement could be supplied no advantage whatever would accrue, as it would not give employment to one man more than the employers undertake to re-instate under their amended Clause 5. ' With regard to Mr. Murphy's letter to the Press, dated November 15 last, we have already dealt with it in a previous communication.' On the resumption of the Conference on Saturday morning the representatives of the workers presented the following document through Mr. Larkin : — Dublin Disputes ' The employers of the City and County of Dublin agree to withdraw the circulars, posters, and forms of agree- ment (known as the " Employers' Agreement ") presented to their employees, embodying conditions governing their employment in the several firms as from July 19, 1913. ' That the unions affected agree as a condition of withdrawal of such conditions and forms of agreement governing employment in firms affected to abstain from any form of sympathetic strike pending a Board of Wages and Conditions of Employment being set up by March 17, 1914. APPENDICES 325 ' And the Conference also agree that in restoring relations no member of any trade union shall be refused employment on the grounds of his or her association with the dispute, and that no new employee shall be engaged until all the old workers have been re-instated. ' All cases of workers not re-employed on February i, 1914, shall be considered at a Conference to be held not later than February 15, 1914.' The Chairman of the Employers' Executive Committee read the following in reply : — ' The Committee observe that the proposals put forward through Mr. Larkin this morning are the same as those presented on Thursday morning, and bring us back to the position in which we then stood. ' The clauses submitted again to-day by the repre- sentatives of the workers require the full re-instatement by the employers of all the workers. This would involve the victimisation of many who have been employed since the dispute began. The employers cannot agree to dismiss men who have proved suitable, but subject to this condition are willing and anxious to re-employ their old hands as far and as soon as possible. ' The members of the Committee have laboured to try and effect a settlement so much needed and desired, and regret that their labours in conjunction with those of the Joint Board representatives and the Trades Council delegates have not succeeded in arriving at an agreement.' The Conference was then brought to a close. INDEX Abbey Theatre, disturbance near, 135 Abbott, Alderman, on the methods of the old trade combinations in Dublin, 11 Aberdeen, Countess of, and Irish industries, 19 Aberdeen, Earl of, causes Mr. Larkin to be released, 48 ; and the offer of a title to Mr. W. M. Murphy, 76 ; meets Mr. Larkin at a Labour conference, 89 ; attacked by Mr. Larkin, 104, 234 Adair v. United States, important Labour case, 209 Agreement of employers relative to Larkinites, 159 Agreement of May, 1913...107, ri8 Agreements repudiated by Larkinites, 80, 97, 103, 119, 176 Albert Hall, Larkinite demonstra- tion at, 233 Amalgamated Society of Engineers oppose Mr. Larkin, iii Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants support Dublin strikers, 93 Amiens Street Station, clerical demonstration at, 225 Ancient Concert Rooms, meeting of employers at, 165 Ancient Order of Hibernians, Mr. Larkin on the, 261 Anti-clericalism a feature of Larkinism, 255 Appleton, Mr., Secretary of Labour Conference of igo8 ... 81 Apprenticeship system in Dublin, Mr. John Good on the, 35 Archbishop of Dublin condemns deportation of children, 221 ; advocates conciliation, 226, 228 ' Aristocrats of labour ' at first hold aloof from Mr. Larkin's Union, 49 Askwith, Sir George, appointed to conduct inquiry into DubUn strike, 184, 190 Atkinson & Co., 20 Attorney-General, speech of the, at Mr. Larkin's trial, 230 Barry, Mr. D., Secretary of the British and Irish Steam Packet Co., 25 ; gives evidence at the Labour inquiry, 197 Belfast, Unen industry established at, 9 ; shipbuilding industry established at, 12 ; strike at, 45, 84 Beresford Place, 125, 132, 134, 138, 174. 188, 243, 249 Birrell, Mr., denies Mr. Larkin's statements relative to Lord Aberdeen, 105 ; defends Mr. Larkin's release, 233 Bishop Street, rioting in, 147 Board of Green Cloth, a terror to Dublin employers, 10 Booth, Messrs., and Mr< LarMn, III 328 INDEX Booth, Mr. Handel, M.P., and the Dublin riots, 144, 161, 176 Booth, Mr. T. E., gives evidence at Labour inquiry, 197 Bourke, Mr. Geo., on the Labour Conference, 164 Bowerman, Mr., M.P., visits Dublin, 227 Boyd, Mr. Justice, sentences Mr. Larkin for embezzlement, 47 Brace, Mr. W., M.P,, proceeds to Dublin, 146 Brady, Mr. James, appears at Labour inquiry, 191 Brewing industry established in Dublin, 17 British and Irish Steam Packet Co., 24 ; surrender to Mr. Larkin, 106 Bristol Steam Navigation Co., 27 ; surrender to Mr. Larkin, 106 Broken agreements, text of, 305 Brown, Mr. Lombard, assists at police inquiry, 176 Brunswick Street, rioting in, 134 Builders ' Labourers ' Union and Irish Transport Workers' Union, 252 Building trade, stoppage in the, 109, 174 Burns, Mr. John, M.P., Mr. Larkin compared with, 231, 259 Burt, Mr. Thomas, M.P., com- pared with Mr. Larkin, 259 Byrne, a victim of the riots in Dublin, 137 Campbell,' Inspector, attacked, 135 Campbell, Mr. David, on the Shelbourne Hotel conference, 164 Cantrell & Cochrane, 19 Carson, Sir Edward, cited by Mr. Larkin, 125 Caste system in Dublin, 34 Castle, the, conference at, 81, 89 ; Labour Commission meets at, 191 ; Mr. Larkin's visit to, in 1908. . .201 Chart, Mr. G, D. A., on the Dublin labouring class, 38 Christchurch to Inchicore tram- ways attacked, 142 Church and Larkinism, 220 Church Street, collapse of tene- ment houses in, 151 City of Dublin Steam Packet Co., 26, loi ; capitulates to Mr. Larkin, 106 ; is attacked by Mr. Larkin, 235 Clyde Shipping Co.'s ship Sandow delayed by strike, 108 Clyne, Mr., M.P., assists at Labour inquiry, 190 Coal Merchants' Association issue manifesto, 156 Coghlan, Mr. Charles M., Secre- tary of Employers' Federation, 155 ; at Labour inquiry, 192 Collective bargaining, Trades Council declaration in favour of, 110 College Green, protest meeting at, 224 College Street Pohce Station, Mr. Larkin taken to, after arrest, 142 Commission of inquiry into strike meets, 190 ; report of, 205 Conciliation Board proposed, 81 ; failure of Larkinites to appoint delegates to the, 90, 102, ao6 Conferences, 81, 163, 245, 248, 308 Connolly, Mr. James, repudiates agreements, 176, 208 ; makes incendiary speech, 186, 234 Cooke, Mr. John, on the conditions of the Dublin poor, 31 Co-operative Commonwealth, Mr. Larkin advocates the establish- ment of a, 249 Cork, strike at, 46, 84, 90 Cotton industay estabUshed at Dublin, 9 Croydon Park, author's interview with Mr. Larkin at, 259 Daily Heyald, Mr. Larkin's mani- festo in the, 250 INDEX 329 Daily Mail- publishes distorted view of the strike, i6i Daily News and Leader, on Mr. Larkin's Manchester speech, 193 ; on ' tainted goods ' doctrine, 180 Daly, Mr. P. T., prosecuted, 126 ' Damn the Empire,' Mr. Larkin's phrase, 236 Dawson Street Hall, meeting of employers at, 158 Deportation of strikers' childrep, 220, 225 Distilling industry established in Dublin, 18 Dixon, Mr., gives evidence at Labour inquiry, 197 Dixon's soap and candle works, labour trouble at, 168 Dock labourers' strike, 234 Dougherty, Sir James, at a Labour conference, 81 Dublin, aspects of, 3 ; as an industrial centre, 5 ; history of, as a port, 5 ; Huguenot colony established at, 8 ; silk and cotton industries estab- lished at, 9 ; influence of old trade guilds at, 10 ; evil influence of old trade societies at, 10 ; trade combinations destroy the shipbuilding industry at, 12 ; a reign of terror a?t, 13 ; brewing industry established at, 16 ; distilleries, iS ; manufacture of non- alcoholic beverages at, 19 ; poplin manufacture at, 19 ; Paterson's match factory at, 20 ; Spence & Co.'s engineering works, 20 ; Scott & Smellie establish shipbuilding industry at, 21 ; Jacob's biscuit factory at, 22 ; shipping industry at, 23 ; life and labour in, 28 ; tramways, 70 ; conditions of labour at the quays of, 84 ; slums of, described by Mr. Larkin, 86 ; riots in, 133 Dublin and Mersey Line, 27 Dublin Corporation, condemn the action of the police, 145; Mr. Larkin on the, 261 Dublin Industrial Peace Com- mittee formed, 215 ; failure of, 240 Dublin International Exhibition, King Edward visits the, 75 Dublin MetropoUtan Police denounced in the Irish Worker, 59 ; inquiry into conduct of, 176, 278 Dublin, Silloth and Isle of Man Co. surrender to Mr. Larkin, 106 Dublin slum-dweUer, character of the, 38 Dublin street gamin, description of the, 39 Dublin Trades Council, and the dispute in the building trade, no, 252 ; send delegates to the conferences, 163, 246 Dublin United Tramways Co., Ltd., 70 Duke Shipping Co. surrender to Mr. Larkin, 106 Dunne, Inspector, attacked by rioters, 174 Eason & Son, attacked by Mr. Larkin, 117 Eason, Mr. Charles, at employers' meeting, 159 ; gives evidence at Labour inquiry, 197 Egan, Messrs., Secretaries of the British and Irish Steam Packet Co., 26 Ella, the, free labourers arrive in, 235 Ellis, Sir Thomas R., assists at Dublin Labour inquiry, igo Employers' agreement relative to Larkinites adopted, 159 Employers' Executive Committee established, 159 ; send dele- gates to conference, 163 ; reply to Labour criticisms, 166 ; false charge against, 181 ; seek aid of British employers, 183 ; reply to report of Labour Commissioners, 216, 276 ; statement by, 240 V3 330 INDEX Employers' Federation estab- lished in Dublin, 87 ; certain members of meet to organise resistance to Larkinism, 154 ; perfect organisation for a struggle, 165 Employers' meeting in London support the Dublin employers, 237 Engineering trade, 20 ; dispute in the, in ' Eye of Ireland,' Dublin as the, 23 Farmers' Association lock out labourers, 174 Farrell, Father, addresses protest meeting, 224 ' Fiery Cross ' crusade initiated by Mr. Larkin, 234 Food ships sent to DubUn, 187 Fox, Mr. Tom, proceeds to Dublin, 243 Free labourers denounced in the Irish Worker, 210 Free labour, threat to introduce, 89 ; import of, 235 Freemason, Mr. T. M. Healy protests against Mr. Larkin's attack on a, 199 Free Trade Hall, Manchester, Mr. Larkin's meeting at, 236 Gee, Alderman, at a Labour conference, 81 George, Mr. Lloyd, on the political effect of Mx. Larkin's con- viction, 233 Gibson, Mr. Justice, on Mr. Larkin's fraudulent conduct, 47 Glasgow, Mr. Larkin at, 175 Glasnevin Cemetery, Mr. Keir Hardie's speech outside the gates of, 149 Good, Mr. John, on the ap- prenticeship system in Dublin, 35 ; attends London meeting of employers, 238 Gosling, Mr. H., proceeds "to Dublin, 146 ; address of, on the arrival of the first food ship, 188 ,' at Labour inquiry, 192 addresses the Commissioners 202 ; statement of, to inter- viewer, 226 ; a member of a new delegation to Dublin, 243 Government Housing inquiry in Dublin, 29 Government Labour inquiry, pro- ceedings of, 190 ; report of, 267 Grand Canal Co., employees of decline to handle ' tainted goods,' 190 ; employees of resume work, 248 Great Southern and Western Rail- way, strike on the, 92 Guild principles advocated by Mr. Larkin, 260 Guinness's brewery estabUshed, 16 ; description of, 17 ; a con- tract relative to, in Hanna, K.C., Mr., defends Mr. Larkin, 229 Hardie, Mr. J. Keir, M.P., pro- ceeds to Dublin, 146 ; address by, at Nolan's funeraj, 149 ; speech by, on Mr. Larkin, 160 Hare, the, arrives in Dublin with food for strikers, 187 Healy, Mr. T. M., speech of, at Government inquiry, 90, iii 192 Henderson, Mr. Arthur, M.P,, proceeds to Dublin, 243 Henry, Mr. Denis S., assists at police inquiry, 176 Herschell, Lord, and the offer of a title to Mr. Murphy, 76 Hewat, Mr., at a Labour confer- ence 81 ; at Labour inquiry, 129 Hill, Mr. J., proceeds to DubUn, 146 Home Rule, Mr. Larkin on, 55, 172, 263 Horse Show Week, a tramway strike prepared for, 115 ; in- cidents of the strike in, 122 Housing inquiry in Dublin, 29, 240 Huguenot colony established at Dublin, 8 INDEX 331 Imperial Hotel, Mr, Larkin arrested at the, 140 Inchicore tramway works closed, 157 Incitements, 58, 88, 125, 128, 186 Independent, acquired by Mr. W. M. Murphy, 74 ; the subject of Mr, Larkin's attacks, 113, 116 Industrial centre, Dublin as an, 4 Intimidation, an essential part of Larkinism, 51 Ireland, restrictions on the trade of, in Tudor and Stuart times, 6 ; extreme poverty of, in the early part of the eighteenth century, 8 Irish Parliament's action in regard to the woollen and linen in- dustries, 7 Irish railways, strike on the, 91 Irish Times, Mr. George Russell denounces employers in the, 213 Irish Trades Congress, Mr. James Sexton's letter to the, 44 Irish Transport Workers' Union, plans laid by Mr. Larkin for the foundation of the, 46 ; becomes a closely knit organisa- tion, 49 ; conducts a municipal campaign, 62 ; first proclaims the doctrine of ' tainted goods,' 91 ; an organisation embracing all classes of labour, 99 ; and the dispute in the building trade, 109 ; a frankly anarch- ical crusade conducted by, 129 ; lock-out of members of, by the Coal Merchants' Associa- tion, 156 ; employers decline to retain in their service members of the, 159, 166 ; emptiness of the exchequer of the, 170 ; badly affected by the breakdown of the sym- pathetic strike in England, 179 ; proposed merging of, in the English trade union organis- ation, 185 ; Labour Commis- sioners' attitude towards the, 211 ; members of, drilled by Captain White, D.S.O., 239 ; his- tory of, reviewed in employers' manifesto, 241 ; delegates from, attend conference, 246 ; em- ployers willing to withdraw the ban on the, 251 ; Builders' Labourers' Union and the, 252 Irish Worker, the, Mr. Larkin's organ, 50 ; its malignant charac- ter, 51, 58, 88 ; denounces the Dublin police, 59 ; pillories employers, 60 ; justifies its policy, 61 ; scurrilous com- ments of the, 62 ; violently attacks Messrs. Jacob, 64 ; viUfies Mr. W. M. Murphy, 69, ir3 ; on failure of railway strike, 95 ; on National In- surance, 95 ; repudiates agree- ments, 103 ; Mr. Healy on tte, 193 ; denounces free labourers, 210 ; malignant in- fluence of, 241 ' If s Murphy's,' verses satirising Mr. Murphy, 71 Jacob's Biscuit Factory, estab- lishment of, 22 ; description of, 64 ; an object of Larkinite attack, 98, 106 ; an employee at, killed in Church Street, 151 ; decision to close, 156 ; refusal to handle goods from, 168 Jacob, Mr. W. B., founder of Jacob's Biscuit Factory, 22 Jacob, Mr. George, at employers' meeting, 159 ; at Labour inquiry, 192; gives evidence at the Labour inquiry, 197 ; Mr, Larkin's reference to, 202 ; unfair treatment of, by Labour Com- missioners, 204 Jameson family, 18 John's Lane Distillery, 18 Joint Board of Trade Union organisations send delegation to Dublin, 243 332 INDEX Jolly, Mr., gives evidence at Labour inquiry, 197, Jones, Mr. J., proceeds to Dublin, 146 Kettle, Professor, presides at meeting of Dublin Industrial Peace Committee, 215 Kevin Street, rioting in, 147 King Edward visits the Dublin Exhibition, 75 Kingstown and Holyhead steam- ship service, 26 Lady Gwendoline, labourers re- fuse to unload the, i j8 Laidlaw, Mr., at a Labour con- ference, 81 Laird Line steamship service, 27 Lalor, James Fintan, Mr. Larkin adopts as his motto a declara- tion of, 53 Land Purchase Act, effect of, 262 Larkinism, character of, 80, 120, 151, 161, 167, 181, 2X0, 227, 255 Larkin, Miss Delia, escorts strikers' children, 225 Larkin, Mr. James, antecedents of, 43 ; is criticised by Mr. James Sexton, 44 ; foments strikes in Belfast and Dublin in 1908 ... 45 ; proceeds to Cork and engineers a strike there, 46 ; is dismissed from the employ of the Dockers' Union, 46 ; prosecuted for misappropriation of the Union's funds 47 ; conviction and sentence of, 47 ; is released by Lord Aberdeen, 47 ; protests his innocence, 47 ; founds on a solid basis the Irish Transport Workers' Union, 49 ; insists on the Irish character of his organisation, 50 ; directs the Irish Worker, 52 ; poses as a robust patriot, 53 ; denounces the Shipping Federation, 55 ; repudiates the agreement of 1908 ... 80 ; draws a dark picture of the Dublin slums, 86 ; publishes a violent article, 88 ; is summoned to a con- ference by Lord Aberdeen, 89 ; strenuously denies that he agreed to the introduction of free labour, 90 ; proclaims the doctrine of ' tainted goods,' 91 ; finds the National In- surance system a valuable aid to his organisation, 94 ; per- sonal qualities of, 96 ; attacks Jacob's Biscuit Factory, 99 ; a sort of benevolent Napoleon, 100 ; poses as a supporter of conciliation, 102 ; attacks Lord Aberdeen, 104 ; wrings surren- ders from the leading shipping companies, 106 ; causes a stoppage in the building trade, 109 ; foments strikes at the Savoy Restaurant and in the engineering trade, in ; spoiling for a fight with Mr. Murphy, 113 ; opens a campaign against the Independent, 116; attacks Messrs. Eason & Son, 117 ; condones breaches of agree- ment, 119 ; further attacks Mr. Murphy, 120 ; incites to vio- lence, 125 ; prosecuted, 126 ; defies the authorities, 127 ; de- livers an inflammatory speech, 128 ; arrested at the Imperial Hotel in Sackville Street, 140 ; Mr. J. Keir Hardie's opinion of, 160 ; released on bail, 169 ; addresses meeting at Man- chester, 171 ; at Glasgow, 175 ; antagonism of Trades Union delegates to, 182 ; speech on the arrival of the first food ship, 188; Mr. T. M. Healy's criticisms of, 194 ; cross-ex- amines Mr. Jacob, 197 ; cross- examines Mr. Murphy, 198 ; ad- dresses Labour Commissioners, 199; declares 'to heU with contracts,' 214 ; attacks the Labour party, 215 ; attacks INDEX 333 the poUticiaais and the priests, 219, 223 ; deportation of child- ren the cardinal blunder of, 226 ; trial of, 229 ; conviction of, 232 ; release of, 233 ; violently de- nounces the Government, 234 ; ' fiery cross ' crusade of, 235 ; attitude of, towards peace con- ference, 243 ; howled down at the Trade Union Congress, 247 ; advocates establishment of a Co-operative Commonwealth, 249 ; opposed to a peaceful settlement, 250 ; personal qualities of, 258 ; interviewed by the author at Croydon Park, 259 Lawlor, Mr. Thomas, prosecuted, 126 Lecky on English policy in reference to Irish manufac- tures, 7 Leopardstown races. King Ed- ward's visit to, 77 Liberty Hall, head quarters of the Irish Transport Workers' Union, 49, 87, 97, 108, 127, 134, 153, 164, 223, 235, 243, 248, 252 LifEey, Swift, on the, 3 linen industry, proceedings re- lative to the establishment of the, 7 ; established at Belfast, 9 Liverpool, Messrs. Jacob acquire a site near for a biscuit factory, 68 ; labour trouble extends to, 174 ; Mr. Laxkin rebuffed at, 236 London and North Western Rail- way Company's employees decline to handle ' tainted goods,' 186 London and North Western Rail- way Company, steamship ser- vice of, 26 ; employees of, return to work, 248 Lord Mayor (Mr. Lorcan Sherlock) presides at meeting in favour of conciliation, 104 ; condemns the action of the police in the riots, 145 ; summons conference at the Mansion House, 158 ; continues his efforts for peace, 184; presides at peace meeting, 227 Madden, Mr. Justice, presides at Mr. Larkin's trial, 232 Malcolmson, Messrs., of Water- ford, 25 McConnell, Mr., on the evils of the old trade combinations in Dub- lin, II McCormick, Mr. Samuel, at a Labour conference, 81, 89 ; on Mr. Larkin's conviction, 104 ; gives evidence at the Labour inquiry, 197 McCormick's, Messrs., conference at, 118 McGloughlin, J. & C, & Co., and Mr. LarWn, 109 McLaughlin, Mr. H., proposes resolution at employers' meet- ing. 159 ' attends London meeting of employers, 238 McMurtry, Mr. M., gives evidence at Labour inquiry, 197 McSweeney, Mr. Sergeant, cross- examines Mr. Larkin, 48 Manchester, Mr. Larkin at, 171, 236 Mansion House, meeting at, 104; conference summoned at, 158 ; meeting of Dublin Industrial Peace Committee at, 215, 227 Marrowbone Lane Distillery, 18 Mitchell, Mr. Isaac, of the Board of Trade, 81, 103 Monahan, Rev. P. J., on the Dublin tenement houses, 30 Montefiore, Mrs., superintends de- portation of strikers' children, 222 Mountjoy prison, Mr. Larkin incarcerated at, 232 Municipal campaign conducted by the Larkinites, 62 Murphy, Mr. WiUiam Martin, a special target for Larkinite 334 INDEX abuse, 69; lines on, entitled ' It's Murphy's,' 71 ; biographi- cal details concerning, 73 ; a constitutional Nationalist, 74 ; declines a title offered by King Edward, 75 ; occupies high positions in Dublin com- mercial liie, 78 ; decides to move against Mr. Larkin, iii ; requires employees in the In- dependent despatch department and on the Tramway traffic stafi to cease connection with Mr. Larkin's organisation, 116 ; occupies the chair at meeting of employers at Dawson Street Hall, 158 ; Daily Mail's cruel and dangerous ' suggestion ' concerning, 161 ; assists at conference at Shelbourne Hotel, 163 ; references to, in Mr. Larkin's Manchester speech, 172 ; misrepresented in Trade Union delegates' report, 180 ; appears at Labour inquiry, 192 ; Mr. T. M. Healy's ap- preciation of, 195 ; gives evidence at the Labour inquiry, 197 ; cross-examined by Mr. Larkin, 198 ; contributes a letter to the English Press, 238 ; views of, on the evil efiects of the strike, 254 National Insurance utilised to build up Larkinite organisation, 94 National Union of Dock Labour- ers, Mr. Larkin's connection with the, 44, 82, 160 National Union of Railwaymen repudiate doctrine of ' tainted goods,' 171 Nelson Column in Sackville Street, 70, 131, 146 Nolan, James, killed in the Dublin riots, 137 ; funeral of, 149 North Wall and Liverpool, steam- ship service between, 26 North WaU, shipping facilities at, 5 ; quay porters at, strike, 102 ; exciting scenes at, 223 Nuns attacked by the Larkinite organisation, 220 O'BRIEN, Mr. WiUiam (of Dublin), prosecuted, 126 O'ConneU Monimient, 141 O'Connell Street. See Sackville Street O'Connor's ' History of the Irish Catholics,' reference to, 6 O'Grady, Mr. James, M.P., a member of the peace conference, 243 O'Leary, Rev. Patrick, explains the Cork settlement of 1908. .90 O'NeUl, Mr. P. J., arbitrates in a labour dispute, 81 ; gives evi- dence at Labour inquiry, 197 Orage, Mr.,^on the Guild system, 260 O'Toole, Mr. John, ratifies agree- ment with Master Builders' Association, 253 Otway, Mr., reports on the Dublin silk trade, 10 Parnell, Mr. Larkin an imitator of, 139 Partridge, Mr. WiUiam, prose- cuted, 126 ; makes incendiary speech, 186 ; opposes peace delegation, 243 Paterson's Match Factory, 20 Patton, Mr. Thomas, secretary, at police inquiry, 176 Pembroke Election inquiry, Mr. Larkin at the, 48 Phoenix Park, labour demon- stration in, 228 Pim Bros, 20 Police action in the riots con- demned by the DnbUn Corpor- ation, 145 Police, Government inquiry into the conduct of the, 176 Poplin manufacture at Dublin, 19 INDEX 333 Population of Dublin, analysis of the, 29 Porter, Sir Andrew, arbitrates in a Labour dispute, 82 Power's Distillery, 18 Priest and politician, ' the curses of Ireland," 261 Priests oppose deportation of children, 222, 225 Princes Street, rioting in, 142, 177 Rand, Mrs., identified with scheme for deportation of children, 224 Reading and LinUthgow by- elections, influence of, 233 Redmond's Hill, rioting at, 146 Redmond, Mr. John, Mr. Larldn's reference to, 261 Ringsend district, rioting in the, 133 Rioters, character of, 178, 308 Riots in Dublin, 133 ; create a sensation in England, 144 ; last of series of, 174 ; report of Government inquiry into, 278 Robbins, Mr. Alfred F., on Mr. Larkin's indiscretions, 214 Ross, Sir John, and the Dublin riots, 135 Royal Canal, labour system on the, 13 Royal Irish Constabulary drafted to Dublin, 132, 138, 176 Royal Mail Line, steamship ser- vice, 26 Russell, Mr. George, denounces employers in the Irish Times, 213 Sackville Street (also known as O'ConneU Street), reference to, 3 ; Mr. Larkin asserts his right to hold a meeting in, 126 ; riots in, 138 St. Patrick's Cathedral, descrip- tion of, 3 Sandow, strike on the, 108 Saunder's News Letter, on the Dublin poor, 32 Savoy Restaurant, strike at the, in ' Scab,' description of a, 57 Scott and SmeUie establish a shipbuilding industry, 21 Screw Steam Packet Co., 27 Seddon, Mr. J. A., proceeds to Dublin, 146 ; address of, on the arrival of the first food ship, 188 ; supports Dr. Walsh's peace proposals, 226, 243 Sexton, Mr. James, condemns Mr. Larkin, 44 ; attends Labour conference in 1908.. 81 Shackleton, Messrs., of Lucan, 157 Shackleton, Mr. George, at em- ployers' meeting, 159 Shaw, Mr. Bernard, denounces Mr. Larkin's conviction, 233 Shaw, Mr. T., opposes Larkiuism, 244 Shelboume football ground, 133 Shelbourne Hotel, conference at, 163 Sherlock, Mr. Lorcan. See Lord Mayor Shipbuilding in Dublin, 5, 12, 21 Shipping Federation denounced by Mr. Larkin, 55 Shipping industry, DubUn, 23 Sibthorpe, Mr., presides at meet- ings of employers, 154 Silk industry established in Dub- lin, 9 ; evil influence of old trade societies on the, 10 Slums in DubUn, 3, 29 Spence & Co., 20, in Spence, Mr. William, 20 Store Street poUce station, riot near, 137 Strike at Newry and Dundalk, 44 ; at Belfast, 45 ; at Cork, 46, go ; of Dublin dock labourers, 81 ; on the Irish railways, 91 ; of shipping employees, 102 ; on the Sandow, 108 ; in the building trade, 109 ; in the engineering trade, in ; on the tramways, 123 ; at the docks and in county Dublin, 168 ; on the Grand Canal, 191 ; of dock labourers, 234 336 INDEX Swifte, Mr., the Larkinite leaders brought before, 126 Swift's description of the Lifiey, 3 ; ' Short Views of the State of Ireland," 8 Swindon, railway meeting at, 237 SjTnpathetic strike on English railways breaks down, 179 ; views of Labour Commissioners on, 207 ; Mr. Connolly on the, 242 ; attitude of English Labour leaders towards the, 246 Syndicalism has no room for conciliation, go ; is feared in Dublin, 94 ; Larkinism, a child of, 153 ; a common feature of, 176 ' Tainted goods ' doctrine first proclaimed, 91 ; used to attack Messrs. Eason & Son, 119 ; at tramway works, 157; adopted by railway employees, 168 ; repudiated by National Union of Railwaymen, 171 ; Daily News and Leader on, 180 ; employees of Grand Canal Co. decline to handle, 191 ; used to attack a community of nuns, 220 Talbot Street, riot in, 136 Tedcastle, McCormick & Co., 27 ; surrender to Mr. Larkin, 106 Tenement dwellings in Dublin, 29 Tenement houses in Church Street collapse, 151 Terenure to Nelson Pillar, tram- way car attacked, 146 Thames, the, the first steamboat to ply between Dublin and London, 24 Thomas, Mr. J. H., M.P., repudiates sympathetic strike, 237 Thomas Street Distillery, 18 Thwaites, A. & R., & Co., Ltd., 19 Timber trade, dispute in the, 91 Times and Mr. Larkin's attack on Lord Aberdeen, 104 ; atti- tude towards the Dublin employers, 213 ' To hell with contracts,' 80, 214 Townsend Street, riot in, 175 Trade guilds of DubUn, 10 Trade societies of Dublin, evil influence of the, 10 Trade Union Congress, condemn the action of the police in the Dublin riots, 146 ; despatch deputation to DubUn, 146, 160 ; delegates of, [meet employers, 162 ; report of delegates of, 180 ; make grants for Dublin strikers, 182 ; despatch food ships to Dublin, 187 ; special sitting of, arranged to deal with the Dublin strike, 237 ; pro- ceedings at special meeting, 247 ; renew peace efforts, 248 Tramway strike, 123, 195 Tramway works at Inchicore closed, 157 United States, Supreme Court of, on legal relations of labour, 209 Unskilled labour in Dublin, statistics as to, 33 Viceregal Lodge, Mr. Larkin at the, 105 Viceroy. See Earl of Aberdeen. Wages in Dubhn, 36 Waldon, Right Hon, L. A., gives evidence at Labour inquiry, 197 Wallis, Mr. John, gives evidence at the Labour inquiry, 197 Walsh, Archbishop, protests against deportation of children, 226 ; advocates conciliation, 226, 228 Ward, Mr. J., M.P., proceeds to Dublin, 146 Watson, Mr., at a Labour con- ference, 81, 89 INDEX 337 Webb, Mr. J. J., on the woollen and silk industries, g ; on the evil effects of the trade com- binations, 13 Weld, Mr. C. R., 24 West Kent Regiment, men of the, called out to restore order, 142 Westminster Gazette on Mi'. Larldn's indiscretions, 214 Whisky, Irish, 19 White, Captain, diiUs Larkinites, 239 William Fawcett, the, 24 Williams, Mr. Robert, addresses Labour Commissioners, 203 William Ill's ■ declaration in re- gard to the woollen and linen industries, 7 Wilson, Mr. J. Havelock, speech by, at Labour inquiry, 202; attacks Mr. Larkin at the Trade Union Congress, 247 ' Winch,' ' the,' ' or the Dockers' Orchestra,' verses in the Irisk Worker, 56 Woollen industry established in Ireland, 6 Yarrow, labourers unload the, 118 refuse to PRINTED BV SPOTTISWOODE AND CO. LTD., COLCHESTER LONDON AND ETON HD5368.I6W7""'""™"''-"'"'^ "iMmuiii-m'"' '"* '""T »♦ 'he great 3 1924 002 405 300