“We are driven into a shed, iron-barred from end to end, outside of which a foreman or contractor walks up and down with the air of a dealer in a cattle market, picking and choosing from a crowd of men, who, in their eagerness to obtain employment, trample each other underfoot, and where like beasts they fight for the chances of a day’s work.”[1]
By 1888 only 5% of the labour force were members of trade unions, most of whom were skilled craftsman and workers. The success of the Matchgirls strike in 1888 followed by the achievements of the London gas-workers in 1889 in gaining the eight-hour day provided inspiration for dissatisfied unskilled workers across Britain. These events proved gains could be made from forming unions.
The Great Dock strike of 1889 was a major victory for ‘New Unionism’ demonstrating how unskilled workers might act collectively to improve their working conditions. The success of the Great Dock Strike inspired the formation of many new unions of largely unskilled workers and a dramatic rise in the membership of already-existing unions.[2]
Many traditional opinions were challenged during the Great Dock Strike, but perhaps the most controversial was the position of the police. Documents held at The National Archives suggest that the actions and attitude of the Metropolitan Police had a role to play in the success of the dockers’ strike. The considered approach adopted by the police suggests there was sympathy for the dockers’ cause, which made the path to victory less problematic than it might have been.
During the hot summer of 1889 after a minor dispute, dock workers went on strike at the South-West India Dock on 13thAugust. The chief organiser was Ben Tillett, a labourer who two years earlier had founded the very small Tea Workers and General Labourers Union. This relatively trivial event proved a catalyst for much bigger things to come. Labour activists, SDF (Socialist Democratic Federation) members and “agitators of all work”[3] Tom Mann and John Burns were called in. Secretaries of the Stevedore and Lighterman Unions who were considered the aristocrats of the dockyards also offered assistance. Meetings were held outside East India Dock gates on Monday 19thAugust during which the organisers announced the formation of a Dockers’ Union. The next day the Port of London was closed, and the Great Dockers’ Strike of 1889 had begun.
The principal demand of the dockers was for the ‘dockers’ tanner’ a minimum wage of sixpence an hour, along with eightpence an hour for overtime and the end of contract work arrangements in addition to some other minor reforms. The strike was marked by great processions of the dock workers through the City of London, led by the indomitable John Burns notable for his black beard and white straw hat. John Burns worked with the police and had sensibly organised the processions according to their guidelines.[4]
These processions conducted in an orderly fashion did much to expand support for the dockers. Other workers were attracted to the cause and the numbers striking swelled dramatically. By 21stAugust the strike extended to all the docks. The largely peaceful nature of the strike secured public sympathy and importantly funds were raised to support the striking dock workers and their families. By the end of August however, the situation was dire with many facing starvation. From early September funds were raised from dockers in Australia which kept the strike going and victory seemed possible.
The Lord Mayor of London formed the Mansion House committee with the purpose of reaching an agreement between the dock owners and the strikers. After much disagreement the Committee persuaded the dock employers to meet the majority of the dockers’ demands. After a final demonstration in Hyde Park on 15thSeptember, the strike was over and the dockers returned to work.[5]
Documents held at The National Archives reveal how the actions and attitudes of the police affected the outcome of the strike. Memos, reports and letters between the Home office and the Metropolitan Police reveal much about the way the police dealt with this latest wave of unrest among workers.
In a letter from James Monro, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, to the Home Office it is suggested that picketing “requires the most careful consideration”. In the letter Munro notes that the Dock Companies have taken the position that picketing is illegal and that complying with this way of thinking would require the police to repress it by clearing the streets of all strikers acting as pickets. Whereas the strikers he notes say that:
“picketing per se is not illegal as picketing is not necessarily intimidation”.He goes on to state that “under covers of this contention they have devised a system of picketing which for the purposes of the strikers has certainly been very successful”.[6]
Whilst the letter does appear to seek instruction from the Home Office as to what action to take in the future regarding picketing, in the case of the recent dockers’ strike it is clear what position the police have taken;
“the attitude of the police in dealing with this question has been to accept that picketing of itself is not illegal, but that when it leads to open intimidation, whether by threats or violence, or reasonable apprehension of violence, the police will act in cases which come under their personal notice, or in which complaint is made and substantiated to their satisfaction.”[7]
In other documentation held by The National Archives the police vehemently defend their approach and dismiss accusations of assault by the strikers and criticism about their failure to protect the interests of the dock employers. In another letter from James Monro to the Secretary of State there is a strong rebuttal to a telegram from the General Steam Navigation Company sent to the Home Secretary during the dockers’ strike suggesting that favouritism was being shown to the strikers by authorities. Monro suggests the incident of cruel assault mentioned in the telegram was “of such a trifling nature that the aggrieved man did not think fit to repeat the matter to the police at the time, and now will not prosecute”.[8]
There is clearly an anger at the expectation in some quarters about the role of the police, a role the Commissioner rejects. Ultimately, he refutes the assumption that the police are servants of the upper classes. [9]It is fair to assume Monro’s attitude might reflect the thoughts of his policemen. A police constable earning £1 4s. a week may well feel sympathy for the plight of the dock worker. They saw themselves as members of the working class “under paid and over-worked”.[10]
The police interpretation of picketing enabled the strikers to defy the Dock Directors and ultimately helped them win. However, Monro’s apparent sympathy for the casual dock worker does not detract him from the recognition that further unrest was likely to follow. Casual workers would be at a disadvantage if employers found it cheaper to retain a smaller but regular workforce. After the strike he writes in a report to the Home office about his concern that stricter union control would reduce opportunities for the casual worker at the docks.
“As I said at the beginning of the Dock Strike, Burns does not care in the least for the casual labourers he only wants to use them to enable him to start a system of coercion against the masters by showing both to labourers and masters the power of combined labour. This has been his aim throughout, and herein lies the danger for the coming winter and for the future. This progress in federation of labour is a very large question, but it is a matter of the gravest importance which we shall have to meet at no distant date.”[11]
The Great Dock strike was a key event in the march for progress of the labouring movement. The result was real improvements in conditions for workers and the growth of unions particularly for unskilled workers. The attitude and actions of the police during the strike as demonstrated through the Home Office records was instrumental in realising that change. It is also an example of how traditional opinions regarding the plight of the working classes were changing towards the end of the nineteenth century and the implications this had for law enforcement.
By Deborah Muir. Deborah is an MA Public History student at St Mary’s University, London.
[1]‘Ben Tillet, A Brief History of the Dockers Union Commemorating the Dockers Strike 1889’,Twentieth Century Press (1910).
[2]Francois Bedarida, A Social History of England 1851-1975, Methuen & Co. Ltd. London (1979) P.136.
[3]G.D.H. Cole & Raymond Postgate, The Dock Strike and the Independent Labour Party, Section VII Imperialism and Socialism,The Common People 1746-1946, Methuen & Co. Ltd., London, (1971) P.428.
[4]G.D.H. Cole & Raymond Postgate, The Dock Strike and the Independent Labour Party, Section VII Imperialism and Socialism, The Common People 1746-1946, Methuen & Co. Ltd., London, (1971) P.429.
[5]The Great Dock Strike, 1889. www.ideastore.co.uk/local-history-online-exhbitions-dock-strike
[6]TNA HO 144/227/A50732/81.
[7]Ibid.
[8]Ibid.
[9]Joan Ballhatchet, The Police and the London Dock Strike of 1889, History Workshop Journal, Volume 32, Issue 1, AUTUMN 1991, Pgs 54–68, P. 55.
[10]Ibid.
[11]TNA HO 144/227/A50732/84.
