Sheffield Daily Telegraph — Saturday 30 January 1904
Denaby Strike Case
The Action Against the Miners’ Association
Evidence for the Company
Howden’s Interesting Story
In the King’s Bench Division of the High Court of Justice yesterday, before Mr. Justice Lawrence and a special jury, the hearing was again resumed of the action brought by the Denaby and Cadeby Main Collieries (Limited) against the Yorkshire Miners’ Association and Mr. Benjamin Pickard, M.P., and other officials of the Association, to recover £150,000 damages for conspiracy and unlawful combination for inducing workmen not to enter into contracts, and also for inducing them to break their contracts. The Association denied any unlawful act, and said if any were committed the Association was not liable. Mr. George Cragg, Mr. Joseph Smith, and Mr. Enoch Kaye, pleaded that they were the trustees for the Association, and were prepared to submit to any order the Court might make. Mr. Benjamin Pickard, M.P., Mr. John Wadsworth, Mr. William Parrott, Mr. John Firth, and Mr. Fred Hall admitted they were officials of the Association, and denied that any unlawful acts were committed, or that the plaintiffs suffered any damage. Mr. John Nolan and Mr. Henry Humphreys put in no defence.
Mr. Eldon Bankes, K.C., Mr. Montagu Lush, K.C., and Mr. Cantley, M.P., appeared for the plaintiffs; Mr. Rufus Isaacs, K.C., Mr. Pankhurst, K.C., and Mr. Lochins represented the Yorkshire Miners’ Association; and Mr. Atherley-Jones, K.C., M.P., Mr. Samuel Evans, K.C., M.P., and Mr. Compton represented Mr. Benjamin Pickard, M.P., and the other defendants.
Sheffield Solicitor’s Evidence Objected To
Mr. Arthur Neal, a solicitor practising at Sheffield, went into the witness-box. He said he had been employed to prosecute two men—John Nolan and Croft—before the justices, and at the Assizes, upon charges of conspiring to beset. There were separate charges, and separate committals. He produced the record of those convictions.
Mr. Isaacs objected to this evidence, as it was not connected with the defendants.
Mr. Bankes: It was in February.
Mr. Isaacs: I object to that strongly, and I press the objection.—His friend was seeking to prove affairs which took place long after the strike commenced.
His Lordship asked whether the evidence was pressed.
Mr. Bankes said the particulars for conviction were included in the particulars.
His Lordship: Were they convicted in February?
Mr. Isaacs: They were convicted in March for what took place in February. There is a series of objections which I take to that, and I submit that this evidence is not admissible.
His Lordship remarked that he thought the men went in in January.
Mr. Isaacs replied that some did. They went in on January 15. All the evidence was that they went in, and he had gathered from Mr. Chambers that some of the men in, though they had not all gone in, and these men were not convicted until March. They were not trying the question of damage; they were not concerned with that at all.
Mr. Bankes pointed out that the action was for conspiracy, and in order to prove that, they were entitled to prove any overt acts of any of the conspirators; they were relying upon that.
His Lordship (to Mr. Isaacs): I will take the evidence subject to any observations which you may make upon it.
Mr. Bankes said he would put the convictions in.
Mr. Isaacs: My friend says they are in the particulars, but I am told they are not.
Mr. Bankes: I will withdraw that statement.
Mr. Isaacs: Then it came to the same point as his Lordship had previously ruled upon. They were asking the plaintiffs to give them proof of the acts which were relied upon in support of the charge of conspiracy; and he submitted that his learned friend could not go outside of those particulars.
Mr. Bankes remarked that his Lordship might allow them to amend the particulars, as they were not matters in controversy.
His Lordship: I don’t think you had better amend the particulars.
The witness then left the box.
Witnesses From Denaby
John Soar, under-manager at the Denaby pit, was then called. He said he had occupied the position of under-manager for the last 20 years. He remembered that in 1901 an alteration was made in the rules at the Denaby pit. It made no alteration in the terms of the men’s employment. Prior to the rules coming into force the colliery had always insisted on the men having a sufficient supply of timber in the working places. That practice had been followed for the 20 years he had been there. In other collieries it was usual to put the timber there for the men. When the new rules came into operation no complaint was ever made to him by the men. A copy of the new rules was printed and posted up at the colliery inquiry office, and a notice was also put up stating that the men could have a copy of these rules if they applied for them. He was present at the hearing of the County Court cases at Doncaster, the last trial being in February, 1902. Since then they had continued to make the deductions from the bag-dirt money when the men failed to get the bag-dirt down.
Mr. Lockins: Since that trial did some of the men decline to get it down?
Witness: Yes, after that trial they went on a good time without making any complaint.
And then did some of them begin to omit getting it down?—Yes. I asked them to get it down. Several of them promised to get it down, but they did not do so.
Witness proceeded to state that only about six stalls in the Denaby pit made any disturbance at all. In the Denaby pit there were about 85 stalls. They got labourers to do the work, and they deducted from the money due to the stalls the amount paid to the labourers for getting the bag-dirt down. In no case did the money exceed 3d. per ton.
Giving particulars of what happened on 17th July, witness explained that each man who signed on was engaged by him. On that day he was at the colliery at five o’clock in the morning. He remembered the men coming up there. They came in large numbers, the road being full of them.
Mr. Lockins: How were they dressed?
Witness: Some were dressed in their pit clothes; some in other clothes.
In their plain clothes?—Yes.
Is it the invariable practice of the men, when they go down to the pit to work, to take their food and drink with them?—Yes.
Had they that with them?—Some had and some had not.
Witness said he saw Nolan and a man named Barnes, who was known as Birch, going amongst the men. He could not hear what they said. After this he had been away from work for a week. It was the invariable practice that they had to sign on again. The men came to him, and he asked them to sign on. Two or three signed, but the others did not.
They refused?—I asked them to sign, but they said they had a better job on now. (Laughter.) They had got on the right track now, they said. (Laughter.)
Witness said nothing to them. Two men who signed on were Scott and Poynton, and Smeaton, who was a corporal, signed on also. When Poynton signed on he said something to witness.
Mr. Isaacs submitted that that could not be evidence.
Mr. Bankes said that what any man said or did was clearly relevant.
Continuing, witness said he remembered Poynton coming in clothes. He was dressed in his ordinary clothes, and had no food or drink with him. He signed the contract, but he did not go down to work. He had never been down to work since. Witness gave him a copy of the rules with the timbering rule in them, and he took it away with him, and went out into the yard, and never came near the colliery again.
Mr. Bankes: I think we are entitled to ask whether Poynton asked for the rules.
Mr. Isaacs objected.
Witness: I could not say whether he did or not.
When the men returned to the colliery they put their notices into a bucket, and then went to the lamp-house. They gave no reason for not signing on, beyond saying that they had got a better job. Nothing was said about the conditions of employment; no variation was made in the condition of employment. During the next fortnight the men came up for four or five mornings and afternoons pretty strong, and then they dropped off to almost none at all. None of them offered to sign on, and none of them came to him to offer to work. Some came in their working clothes, and some in their plain clothes.
Cross-examined by Mr. Rufus Isaacs: During 1900, 1901, and 1902, there was a good deal of talk about the bag-dirt, and in June, 1902, the matter became acute. Deductions were made for the week ending June 25th, and when payment came to be made on June 28th, deductions were made to the extent of £8 15s. He went down the mine, and went to the stalls where the bag dirt was. The men had no doubt complained that the bag dirt was as hard as rock, but he said that was untrue. He did not know of the deputations, nor of the correspondence that had been going on. He was at the County Court in February, 1902, and heard the proceedings, but he did not hear the company’s solicitor say that he agreed that the bag dirt used to be more tender. The bag dirt might vary in thickness a couple of inches. He did not know that it was in some parts as thick as 30 inches.
With regard to the events of the 17th of July in the ordinary course a man in the company’s employment would present himself in the morning at work, and get his lamp. Then he would go down the pit. There were about 700 men employed at the two collieries, but there were not so many at Denaby as at Cadeby. Some of the men came in their working clothes ready to go down and work. They first went to the lamp room to get their lamps. The lampman would not give them the lamps because they had been away 17 days, and that being so he would not give them their lamps until he had got instructions, or until they had signed a new contract. Somebody had given instructions to that effect. Then they came to see him, and he required all who applied to sign on. He had instructions not to allow them to go and take their lamps till they had signed. He got his instructions from the agent. They were ready to go to work, but they did not sign; and morning and afternoon the same point arose; and the result of their refusing to sign was that they were not allowed to go down and work. After presenting themselves for some days, they began to fall off.
With regard to the notices which the men gave, these were all right, if they had been given right. He would not have put this in a bucket.
You do not suggest that the notice was bad, because it was put in a bucket?—They gave the notices to nobody.
But the bucket was on the premises of the company?—I don’t know who put it there.
His Lordship: Did they bring a bucketful of notices with them? (Laughter.)
Mr. Isaacs: You don’t suggest that?—Oh, no.
Witness said that when the men came into the yard they dropped the notices in the bucket. They had to pass him to get to the lamp-house.
Mr. Arthur Pearley, certificated under-manager of the Cadeby Colliery, said it was his duty to sign on the men at the Cadeby pit. He was there on the 17th of July for that purpose. About midday he saw the notices blowing about the road, and strewn on the floor of the office. He was prepared to engage the men again on their re-signing the book. Some men signed the book. Between the day of the strike and the 17th of July 56 men had signed. He asked the men on the 17th to sign. They said if they did so they had to sign new rules and new contracts, and also that if they started to work again they would have to work 12 months before they came out again. He told them it was a great mistake, and that there was no alteration whatever, and he asked them to come and look at the books, and also the rules to see for themselves if there was any alteration. The bulk of the men went away, but several came in and looked at the book, and some of them signed it. Counsel was proceeding to examine the witness as to the alleged molestation and interference with the men who resumed work, when
Mr. Isaacs took objection to this line of examination, unless it could be proved that the molestation was connected with the influence exercised by the defendants.
Mr. Lush, K.C., said he wished to prove the assaults, and then to connect them with the defendants’ acts.
Witness said he did not see the acts of molestation himself, but he had complaints from the men themselves.
Mr. Danckwerts, K.C., who also appears for certain of the defendants, complained that owing to the dialect of the witness, and the distance which separated him from counsel, he had a difficulty in following the evidence.
His Lordship said he could not help Mr. Danckwerts with the dialect; he understood it himself when he was on the northern circuit; if he were in Wales he should ask for an interpreter.
Cross-examined by Mr. Atherley-Jones, K.C.: Mr. —— He would not allow the men to go down the pit without signing, and he acted on instructions.
Mr. Thomas Chapman, collier at the Cadeby pit, said he was present at the meeting of the Cadeby Committee when the last batch of officers was elected before the strike. David Moon was elected on the committee. He was also present at a meeting on the 15th of July, which was held in a field by the Station Hotel. The meeting was addressed by Walsh and Wadsworth, and a resolution was passed that the men should take a ballot about the 14 days’ notice. Papers were given out, but no check was kept of the number of papers given out to each man.
Witness, proceeding, said the men made remarks on the papers before they put them in the ballot boxes. There was a table there at which Croft was sitting watching the men.
Mr. Isaacs: I object to this suggestion, and innuendo.
His Lordship: It seems to me it cuts both ways.
Witness went to the pit on the morning of Thursday, the 17th. He went with the object of working, and desired to work. He saw a number of men in the road, and amongst them Moon, Collyer, Humphreys, Dickenson, and Hurst. They had a table there.
Mr. Bankes: What took place?
Witness: The committee stood together, and to people who were coming by them, they shouted, “Here, come here and sign this paper—this notice paper.”
Did the men go and get the paper?—Yes.
And was that one of the fourteen days’ notice which have been used?—Yes.
Was anything said about signing on?—They said we must not sign on. We were told not to sign anything.
Were you willing to sign on?—Yes.
And did you sign on?—No; I was afraid to sign on.
Proceeding, witness said he went up to the pit when he had got his notice at the table, and there were a number of men like himself going up. When he got up there was a lot of men coming down the road. They said, “It is no use to go on; go and chuck your notice in and come back.” Witness spoke to Humphreys about it, saying they were sure to get into a bother over the affair. It was no use carrying it on, and they had better be in line with the Union. The Union would see them all right. This was Phil Humphreys he spoke to. Witness did not go to work, although he was willing and anxious to do so. The other men were in their working clothes. Like him, they were willing to return to work.
Cross-examined by Mr. Rufus Isaacs, witness said he saw a number of men who had already been up were coming back. They went up, and took up their notices, throwing them into a bucket.
In a bucket? (Laughter.)—They were thrown anywhere on the floor—anywhere inside the gates.
Richard Smeaton, a corporal at the Denaby pit, was next called. He said his work was to look after the coal going along the pit bottom. He heard of the meeting which took place on Sunday, 29th June, and in consequence he did not go to work. He did not present himself until July 16th.
Why did you not go to work?—Because I heard there had been a meeting and the men were not going to work.
On July 16th he went and signed on. He had heard there had been another meeting, and the men were going to work. He did not go to work that afternoon, but went the next day, and worked for fourteen days.
Why did you stop work then?—I was afraid.
When he had signed on he had received a rule book. He had told the men who he had seen leaning against the Miner’s Arms that they would have to sign on. He also showed them the rule book, but none of them read it. On the next day, on his way to the colliery, he saw the man Vaughan and Secretary Smith. They were giving out papers, on which the men signed their names. Witness took his notice away.
What did you do with it?—I put it in a basket or bucket; I don’t know which.
Did you want to give notice?
Mr. Isaacs: I object to that. What we have to try here are the facts, not the state of this man’s mind.
Continuing, witness said he had drawn strike pay.
Cross-examined by Mr. Isaacs, witness said he had heard the men talking about the bag-dirt question for some considerable time, but it never affected him. He knew the Drift district well.
Is it not a fact that the bag-dirt there has become thicker and harder?
Witness replied that he had heard the men talking about it, and according to what he heard at a meeting he knew they wanted to be paid more for it.
Mr. Isaacs: I won’t ask you what they said—(laughter)—but they were angry.
The Man Who Fought the Union
William Henry Howden, who was the plaintiff in a former action against the union, said he worked for the Denaby Company, but he was not a coal-getter. He heard the bellman come round calling them to the meeting on Sunday, 29th, in a croft. On the Sunday evening he was walking to his work when he was told that it had been passed that the wheels were to stand and nobody was to go to work. He asked whether they were going to have union pay, and they did not know. He said he paid into the union, and was going to abide by the rules, and was going to work. He pointed out that the men’s action was illegal, and contrary to the association’s rules. Among the men he saw was Casey, the treasurer. He went to his work as usual, and worked regularly until he was assaulted, on the night of August 18. A number of men beside himself were working; as near as he could say, the number was 70 or 80 at Cadeby. The men who were out used to meet them in full force in the roadway. There was always a lot of them. The men commenced to line the roadway about August 13. There was a mass meeting, and the men came from the meeting to meet the men coming out of the colliery. They were “booing,” and shouting, and as soon as they got near the crowd there were cries of “Black sheep.” That was between five and six o’clock in the evening, and it became a regular thing.
On the 18th they were there in full force, and the men from the colliery had to walk down between the lines of men on strike. They had sheep’s heads on sticks, and were all “booing.” Witness was struck in the mouth by a man named Tirrell, and knocked to the ground. When he was on the ground there was a little bit of boot going. He had half a pick shaft in his hand, and the crowd stood back a bit when they saw that. Then some of the police came up, and escorted him home. When he was indoors the crowd gathered round the house shouting, “Fetch the —— out, and kill him,” and during the evening they began to smash the windows. He had two teeth loosened, and he was not particularly comfortable, though he got through nicely. (Laughter.) On the 19th of August he got a written notice that the pits were to be closed. Very few men were at work on the last day he was. Things remained on the following days very much as they were on the Monday. In the crowd he saw the biggest part of the committee of the branch. He never saw them trying to stop the booing, but rather to encourage it. The man Tirrell who assaulted him, was summoned for striking the police-sergeant. He ultimately took proceedings as a member of the union to stop the payment of strike pay on the ground that it was illegal under the rules, and on that he succeeded. He was against the strike in the way it was carried out.
Cross-examined by Mr. Rufus Isaacs: He drew 10s. a week of lock-out pay up to the time of instructing the lawyer who took those proceedings. He did not ask for it after then, because it was getting a little warm. (Laughter.)
“You have been living the life of a gentleman?”—I did not think it was wise for me to go back.
“You are getting paid by the company?”—Well, there is somebody finding it. I get it at the solicitors.
“How much a week are you getting?”—Not much. I am just about living from hand to mouth.
“How much are you getting?”—I am getting £4 a week.
“What! £4 that is living from hand to mouth?”—Yes, it is in London. (Laughter.)
Witness, continuing, said he had earned more at the same colliery than what he was now getting. He should like more if he could get it, if counsel could tell him where he should get it. (Laughter.) There was no arrangement as to how long the £4 a week was to go on. He should like it to go on as long as the litigation lasted. (Laughter.) He brought the action relative to the strike pay, but the company found the money. With regard to the assault case, he was not acquainted with Terrell, but when a man struck him on the mouth he thought he would know him again. (Laughter.) He drew the pick shaft out of his pocket after he had been knocked on the ground by Terrell. They had never exchanged words before, and they did not exchange words then. (Laughter.) He was watching somebody else, when Terrell struck him on the mouth. He would not admit the suggestion of counsel that he drew the pick shaft from under his coat because he was annoyed at the booing of the crowd. He never hit Terrell; he only wished he had. (Laughter.)
Mr. H. S. Withy, certificated manager for the Cadeby Colliery, described what he saw on the 17th of July when the men came up to work. The inquiry office floor was strewn with notices of the men, but the men had gone away. On a particular day in August he saw a great crowd of people on the bridge leading to the colliery. They were hooting and shouting at the men who were leaving work.
Mr. C. Bury, certificated manager of the Denaby Colliery, said the new rules provided for an extra supply of timber, but no further burden was put upon the men.
Mr. A. Barnard, agent of the company, said he had looked into the deductions which had been made with regard to the bag dirt in four stalls. The period covered by these deductions reached back to November, 1901.
Cross-examined: The men were paid according to the coal got. The deductions were made for work which the men had not done, but which had been done by the colliery company. From February, 1902, bag dirt had been accumulating, and that having been removed, the company, on June 28th, deducted the cost from the amount of the work done in the stall.
William Perry, a deputy at the Cadeby pit, said that on the morning of June 30th he went to work, and saw some of the men, including Hurst and Dickenson. On his way to work on the 2nd July a lot of men called out “Blackleg,” and “booed” at him. They also followed him along the street. As he was returning he saw a large crowd at the corner of the turnpike road. There were between six and seven hundred people. Several stones were thrown at him, and one hit him on the back of the head. He did not take much notice of that, because it did not hurt him. He was then caught by half a brick. He fell down insensible, and he was picked up and taken to an hotel. When he regained his consciousness he was escorted home. When on his way home the crowd still continued to follow, shouting and “booing” all the way. A large number remained outside the house, and there were cries of “Blow the house up.” He was laid up for several weeks. He was afraid to go to work, and he was also afraid to go out of the house very often. He attended the meeting which was held on Sunday, June 29, at which Croft made a speech, in which he said, “There are some rats in here, and we will send ferrets to get them out.” Witness afterwards went to work at another colliery.
Mr. Isaacs objected to any evidence as to what happened to the witness then.
Cross-examined, witness said he was drawing strike pay up to September. When he was drawing strike pay he could not work for anyone else.
George Rushforth, a road layer, gave evidence that on July 18 the crowd shouted, “Black sheep,” after him.
Arthur Harrison, a corporal employed at the colliery, said he was with Rushforth when two men stopped them on the Sunday night. They said he was to stop the pulley wheels, but witness replied that they would not keep him when he was getting nothing. He was a member of the union, having joined before the strike, but he had never got anything out of it. On one day he met John Nolan, who asked him why he had not been to a meeting. Witness replied that he took no notice of meetings or of him.
Mr. Lush: What did he say?
Witness: He started cursing me, and said he hoped it would keep well for me, and they would let me work.
Continuing, witness said Nolan had told a man named White to pull a piece of muck out, and bury him out of the road. The crowd came round his house at night, and stood at his door.
Cross-examined: There was a good deal of excitement in the place, but it did not hurt him.
The further hearing was adjourned to Monday.