But to rule out the non-unionist completely from the industry, and to do so by threatening to block the shipping of non-union wool was "going a bit too far''; it was tantamount to taking charge of the shearing sheds; it was tyrannical. So thought many squatters. Looking back to-day on the events of the period, one feels that the A.S.U., intoxicated by its immense success during 1886-9, lost its head and tried to go too fast. It was dealing with the country's chief export industry, with a body of men accustomed to have their own way during many decades, and with a commodity the price of which had declined rapidly during the eighties. Probably no union has ever over-run a big rural industry so quickly before, and another two or three years' quiet work would have yielded far better returns than could be obtained by presenting the blunderbuss in 1890.

If the closed shed' was an obnoxious novelty to many squatters, the idea of a marine officer in the Trades Hall was equally so to the shipowner. The officers of the inter-colonial and coastal boats had formed an association in 1889-an act to which the shipowners took no objection. But when it was learnt that the Melbourne branch had affiliated to the Trades Hall the employers became annoyed, and refused to grant certain concessions asked for unless the affiliation was withdrawn and never again meditated. The owners' objection to affiliation was that if the officers' union was connected with any outside body, it might be entangled in affairs which would relax the discipline on board ship. To the officers and other unionists these objections seemed a cloak to conceal the real motive-i.e., the desire to restrict the freedom of action of the officers' union. This was regarded by the officers as an unjustifiable attack on a trade union principle, and it was the officers who fired the first shot in the strike.

In

Organization Amongst Employers. While trade unionism was presenting fresh principles for acceptance, the employers were not idle. Here, as in other lands, organization had called forth counter-organization. almost every industry the employers formed an association, and these sectional bodies affiliated in an Employers' Union. The Victorian Employers' Union, formed in 1886, soon had 500 firms enrolled, representing 75 different industries. It had an indemnity insurance system for mutually protecting employers against the financial consequences of the action of employees. One of the first acts of this union was to join with the Trades Hall in establishing a conciliation board. The Employers' Union of New South Wales came into existence in 1888, and its object was "to secure to its members all the advantages of unanimity of action now enjoyed by the various trade unions."' The pastoralists had their district associations and a central Pastoralists' Union; the mine- and ship-owners were all organized. These associations were formed to deal with matters of general interest to each industry, but some of them had been called into existence by the need for presenting a united front to labour, and during the critical years their work was largely concerned with labour difficulties. The conciliation schemes already described were accepted by the employers' unions as fully as by the men's, but as the flood of demands—either for more wages or for the admission of some new principle-rose higher during 1890, one can understand why some of the employers' organizations grew stubborn. Take for instance the demands made by the maritime unions of Sydney during 1890. Early in the year the wharf labourers presented a new set of rules, and asked for a conference with the shipowners' union. The new rules contained many highly debateable points, but after months of intermittent

discussion a compromise was reached late in June. No sooner were the wharf labourers dealt with than the seamen submitted new rules and asked for a conference. Several meetings were held, but on one point the companies would not budge, so the seamen decided to hold a ballot to see if members were in favour of a strike on that one issue. On top of this came demands from the officers and engineers for higher pay and reduced hours; then on August 9 the wharf labourers announced that they would not handle non-union wool. If the owners stiffened their backs and determined to fight for freedom from further union control one cannot be surprised.

To the employer, as to the trade unionist, a principle was at stake in all the negotiations which preceded the outbreak of the strike. The trade unionist demanded recognition and the closed shop or shed. The employer demanded freedom of contract." 66 At first vague in meaning, the phrase quickly acquired definition, and was generally translated as follows: The right to employ any man, without asking whether he is a unionist or not; the right to make such terms of contract with him as are mutually agreed upon; the right to dismiss him without giving any reason to an outside body. To the workman such freedom meant the right to join or keep out of a union as he pleased; the right to seek and take any job for which he was fitted, and the right to retain it free from any molestation or intimidation by union members. The phrase was thus a flat contradiction to the men's demand for a closed shop; as the strike developed, men who had accepted the union and employed only unionists took their chance and reverted to freedom of contract. When the strike was over, and the men were defeated, the phrase was translated by some as "No employment for unionists.''

The Strike of 1890. The first stage of the encounter was fought out in Queensland. Here the squatters on the Darling Downs had resolved not to employ any unionists, and the Australian Labour Federation (the Queensland equivalent to a Trades and Labour Council) called upon the waterside workers to refuse to handle any non-union wool. Hence when the bales from the Jondaryan station reached Brisbane for shipment the wharf labourers declined to touch them. This action brought the squatters speedily to terms; an agreement was drafted, the wool loaded, and the A.L.F. paid the shipping company £75 compensation for the delay to the steamer.

This was in May, 1890. Within the next two months shearing would get into full swing in New South Wales. The A.S.U. had been hard at work, and of 2,800 sheds in that colony all but 400 were "shearing union." These 400 were chiefly located in the Hunter River, Liverpool Plains, and New England districts, and would be responsible for 50,000 bales of wool. Most of their owners had made their agreements with individual shearers, when in June Mr. Spence in a speech at Young threw out a broad hint that non-union wool in New South Wales might meet with the same reception as in Queensland. This speech was followed a month later by the issue of a manifesto (July 12), sent from the A.S.U. offices in Creswick (Vic.), and addressed "To all who desire to see the wealth-producer receive his just share of production.'' The document stated that for four years the squatters had been doing their utmost to kill the shearers' union, and that a movement was now beginning for a grand effort to crush out of existence all organization amongst working men, beginning with the A.S.U. An injury to one is an injury to all, and the unionists of Australia were therefore urged to assist by giving such co-operation as circumstances may suggest, and to draw such a cordon of unionism around the Australian

continent as will effectually prevent a bale of wool leaving, unless shorn by union shearers.'' Two days later a circular was sent from Creswick to the pastoralists of the south-eastern states stating that the wharf labourers' and stevedores' unions had resolved not to handle non-union wool, that the seamen would not man vessels carrying such wool, and that the London dockers had been cabled to, asking them to block any non-union wool whicn might slip through the Australian cordon.

All these utterances were intended to frighten into submission the few squatters who still defied the union. Spence and his fellows did not intend or expect a strike; they were confident that the squatters who had accepted the union would persuade the rest to come in. They certainly succeeded in stirring up the pastoralists, for the Pastoralists' Union of New South Wales came to life, and in the non-union districts meetings were held to consider line of action. At one of these meetings, held at Scone, it was resolved to ask that shearing should be allowed to proceed for that year under the agreements, union or non-union, already made with the shearers, provided that the squatters pledged themselves in writing to accept the present A.S.U. agreements next year and for five years thereafter. This offer, repeated in substance by the Pastoralists' Union, was forwarded to Spence, who replied that the proposal could not be entertained. Let the non-union squatters turn their agreements into union agreements for this year; then the whole thing could be discussed before the next shearing-time came along. Here was a deadlock, and as neither side would budge, in spite of one or two conferences, the situation was left to drift till the middle of August. On August 8 the wharf labourers' union, which in June had made a twelve months' agreement with the shipowners, wrote to state that no non-union wool would be handled, and the employers thereupon replied that they had now no alternative but to make their own arrangements for labour, and would do so regardless of whether the labour was union or not. Spence went to Sydney and secured promises of support from the seamen, wharf labourers, cooks and stewards, and the Newcastle miners. A Labour Defence Committee was formed by gathering together representatives of the various unions concerned, and this committee met daily. The situation thus hardened, and both sides grew more determined to stand firm. Still there was no actual outbreak of hostilities; non-union wool arrived in Sydney, but was not put forward for loading, and as the only ships likely to be affected were those which carried wool-i.e., the overseas vessels-there was still a possibility that some compromise might be found.

Then the match was struck by the marine officers, and in a few days the conflagration spread like a bush fire. As explained above, the officers' union was requesting certain concessions of increased pay, and in the course of the discussion the shipowners learnt officially that the officers were affiliated to the Melbourne Trades Hall Council. This information brought forth the demand that the affiliation should be withdrawn, and that in the interests of discipline the officers should renounce any claim to affiliation with any other labour body. On the question of salaries agreement might be reached, but all idea of affiliation must first be renounced. The officers regarded this as an attempt to limit their freedom of corporate action, refused the demand, and on August 16 left their ships in Sydney. The stand taken by the officers was supported by all the maritime unions except the marine engineers, and when a boat manned by makeshift officers tried to sail from Sydney on the 18th the wharf labourers, seamen, cooks, and stewards

all came out. The employers at once advertised for labourers and crew; a scratch team was secured, and, thanks to the action of the engineers, was able to make its way to Newcastle for coal. On its arrival some of the miners at the pit from which the coal was to be supplied, "downed tools." The mine owners regarded this as a breach of the 1888 agreement, and as the miners had intimated their intention of standing by the Sydney strikers the owners closed down the whole of the mines. Thus the trouble spread, and by the beginning of September had affected all the Australian states and involved New Zealand. An Inter-colonial Conference was assembled in Sydney, containing representatives from Melbourne, Adelaide, Brisbane, Broken Hill, and Sydney.

With the strike in full swing, the temper on each side grew harder. A free labour bureau was established in Sydney, and men who took work were promised permanent jobs. The Sydney and Melbourne shipowners met in conference at Albury on August 3, and determined to carry on their business "clear of these tyrannical labour organizations.'' The stevedores posted a notice on the wharves intimating "that for the future all men working for us will be expected to do such work on such terms and arrangements as may be required by us. On September 10 to 13 an inter-colonial conference of employers gathered in Sydney, reaffirmed in the strongest terms the principle of freedom of contract, denied the right of marine officers to affiliate with other bodies, and then, with delightful inconsistency, resolved that it is desirable to encourage employers to join existing employers' unions, and form other unions where necessary for mutual protection and defence; that such unions form federal councils for each colony, and that all such federal councils be affiliated and confederated.''

6

Meanwhile on the labour side a surprising sense of solidarity was manifested, and the Defence Committee had the utmost difficulty in preventing such bodies as the butchers' and gasworkers' unions from coming out. Nearly 30,000 men were on strike in the different colonies, and those who remained at work subscribed liberally to the strike funds. But money was scarce, and by the end of the first week in September it became evident that the men were in danger of being defeated. Volunteers had rallied up, and some trade was going on. The Melbourne Trades Hall Council on September 11 approached Mr. Andrew Lyall, a Melbourne accountant, stating that Melbourne was willing to call the strike "off,' "' to allow unionists and non-unionists to work together, and to submit all the questions at issue to direct negotiations, or, failing a settlement that way, to a board of conciliation appointed by the executives of the employers' and employees' organizations in the two states.

""

Sydney, however, refused to support the Melbourne proposal, for it had already planned a big strategic move. Efforts by the Defence Committee, by the Lord Mayor, and even by the Governor, to secure a conference had all been met by a refusal from the employers, so the Intercolonial Conference decided on the drastic step of calling out the shearers. Spence tried to reduce the decision to a threat; he pointed out that such a call out" would involve a widespread breach of shearing contracts, for which the legal punishment under the Masters and Servants Act would be severe; he saw that many friends of unionism, and many squatters who had accepted the union, would be turned against it by such a breach of faith, and therefore urged the Conference to content itself with a mere threat to call the men out. But the Conference was feeling desperate, and after delaying the

message for ten days the necessary wire was sent to the shearers of New South Wales on September 19; 16,500 men responded to the call, in spite of the breach of contract and the knowledge that they were liable to lose their earnings or be punished in other ways. At once the effect was seen;

66

the employers verbally informed the Mayor of Sydney that they would meet the strike authorities in open conference, provided the shearers were ordered back. The call out" was at once reversed, and the puzzled shearers tried to take up their interrupted task. When that was done, however, the employers declined to meet the strike committee and left the dispute to run its course.

The rest was twilight. The sum of £37,000 had been contributed from various sources to the strike funds, but did not go far. The government was assisting the employers to carry on in spite of the strike, and there was sufficient labour available to enable the transport system to work in some fashion. The presence of the marine engineers on the ships, and the persistence of a spell of fine weather made navigation possible. In face of these facts it was useless to hold out any longer. On October 9 the Intercolonial Conference adjourned sine die, leaving the executive to wind matters up as best it could; this it did by the 13th, and the strike collapsed, so far as Sydney was concerned. In Melbourne the last straw was added when the marine officers announced that they were accepting the shipowners' terms and withdrawing their affiliation with the Trades Hall.

Subsequent Disputes. Organized labour was shaken and battered. As a master stevedore remarked late in 1890, "the strike was a relief to us, because the men up to then did as they liked, and now they do as they are told." Employers on the wharves took men through the free labour bureau only, and in 1891 the Union Steamship Co. of N.Z. announced that until a better understanding was reached no more union seamen would be employed. The 'call out' had sown much bitterness among the squatters, who held an inter-colonial conference in December, 1890; they drew up a standard shearer's agreement, which, whilst retaining the former rates of pay, ignored the eight-hour day and the union. The A.S.U. strove to regain its old position, but the Pastoralists' Union stuck to freedom of contract, and bluntly observed that agreements were useless when made with the authors of the 1890 scrap of paper incident. In Queensland and New South Wales a bitter fight was waged in 1891, with some semblance of civil war in the former state. Eventually the representatives of the Shearers' Union and the Pastoralists' Federal Council met in August, and the squatters' agreement was amended at some points. But at the head of it was to be printed the Council's definition of freedom of contract, and the A.S.U. had to be content to see its members working alongside non-unionists. This agreement brought three years' sullen peace, but in 1894 the fires burst out again in Queensland. The squatters were in control of the government of that sta and used their power with telling effect, even to the enlistment of Gatling guns and nine-pounders. In face of the prevailing depression brooding over the continent, there was no hope of success for the strikers, and the shearers' organizations entered 1895 bruised and almost prostrate.

Broken Hill also had its storms. Compulsory unionism, a 46 hour week, and machinery for conciliation and arbitration had been won by force during 1889-90, and the mine owners naturally sought a chance for a counter-attack. It came in 1892, when some proposals for a radical change in underground conditions of employment called forth another strike. After