This article discusses the debates which took place on the three local Boards of Guardians in response to claims for poor law relief by destitute miners and their families during the 1926 lockout of miners in the Forest of Dean. The issue of relief became a highly controversial issue during the lockout as more and more families became dependent on relief to survive.
In contrast to some other mining disticts, no strike pay was availble from the Forest of Dean Miners’Assocaition (FDMA) which was the trade union representing the Forest miners. This was because, the FDMA had no funds because of the debt incurred during the 1921 lockout and the drop in membership following the defeat.[1] Consequently, Forest miners had to survive with no funding from their organisation and became dependent on financial support from within their community, the poor law authorities and outside donations.[2]
Feeding the Children
As soon as the Forest miners were locked out of their pits on 1 May, the community set about the task of feeding the families. Some children were sent away to friends and relatives while some miners’ wives and daughters left the Forest to earn money as servants in the big cities. Soup kitchens were organised in every village and there were local distress funds that accepted contributions from those at work. The women in the community were at the forefront and kept busy every day preparing and cooking food.
The Central Relief Committee in Cinderford operated from the town hall. The delegates on the committee were made up of representatives from across the community and liaised closely with representatives of the local religious organisations. Money was collected from the churches and chapels and the wider community and it was agreed to avoid soliciting donations from the shopkeepers who also were under financial stress.[3] The Gloucestershire Federation of Labour Parties also arranged to make collections throughout the county for miners from the Forest Dean and Bristol.[4]
A minimal amount of relief for the destitute in the Forest area was available from the Board of Guardians at Westbury for East Dean and Monmouth for West Dean. In addition, the destitute living in the Ruardean area were required to apply for relief from the Ross Board of Guardians.
Relief money was raised through the rates and the lockout meant that the collecting of rates was hampered by the level of poverty in the community. As a result of a legal ruling made in 1900 called the Merthyr Tydfil Judgment, striking or locked-out miners were not considered by the authorities to be destitute because they were deemed to have refused work. However, their dependents such as wives, children under fourteen and widowed mothers could be helped if they were in severe need. Any money coming into the house from other sources such as an older son or daughter could be deducted from the weekly allowance and relief was denied to those who had savings or property.
Consequently, no relief was available to able-bodied single men unless they were destitute and physically incapable of work in which case, they could only be offered a bed in the workhouse. Single men often lived in lodgings or with family members, and so became dependent on the families with whom they lived, adding an extra burden to those households. The families of miners who owned or were buying their property with a mortgage were also disqualified from relief.
During May, hundreds of families from the Forest applied for relief and some was paid out to wives and children of miners in food vouchers or cash and initially only for two weeks. The Labour members on the Boards were in a minority but did their best to challenge the legality and morality of the decisions made by the majority of the guardians, who were mainly from upper or middle-class backgrounds. Most of these guardians had spent many years sitting on committees and were well-versed in using legalistic arguments and bureaucratic manoeuvres to undermine those Labour members who were less knowledgeable or experienced.
Westbury Union
Most of the thirty-odd members of the Westbury Board were senior members of the establishment and were vehemently opposed to the action of the miners in refusing to accept a reduction in wages and an increase in hours. The chairman was George Rowlinson who was the full time agent for Forest Dean Miners’ Association (FDMA) from 1888 to 1918. Rowlinson was voted out of office in early 1918 over his hostility to the Labour Party, his support for the conscription of miners and his failure to support his members during industrial disputes. As a result, he had afllen out with the new leadership of the FDMA and many in the minging community in genertal. Coinsequently he was sometimes hostile to the miners and sat as an Independent.
Frank Ashmead sat as a Labour member. He was an ex-miner who had worked closely with Rowlinson when he was the agent for the FDMA and, out of loyalty, he often backed Rowlinson up in the meetings. Rowlinson also had the backing of this fellow district councillor Richard Westaway, a grocer from Cinderford.
However, the miners had a strong ally on the Board, Charlie Mason, who did his best to argue in the interests of destitute families and single men. The other Labour members were Tim Brain, Abraham Booth, William Ayland and Harry Morse from Blakeney all of whom usually backed Mason up in his disputes with Rowlinson and other members of the Board.
700 applications
On Friday 7 May, there was a long queue of miners outside the office of the Westbury relieving officer for the Cinderford area who was registering applications for relief. Consequently, by mid-May, the Westbury Board received over 700 applications. On 11 May an emergency meeting of the Westbury Board met to discuss how to deal with the requests for relief.
In response, John Williams who was the new full-time agent for the FDMA organised a demonstration to argue their case for relief. As a result, a large contingent of East Dean miners and their families walked or cycled to Westbury-on-Severn to lobby the Westbury Board meeting. At the beginning of the meeting, the Board agreed that they would receive a deputation to represent the miners and the families when they had finished their discussions.
During the discussion, Rowlinson said it may take a week to deal with all the applications and each case would be considered on its merit. After a long debate, it was agreed that relief could only be offered to women and children. The guardians decided on a weekly allowance of 10s for a miner’s wife, 4s for a first child and 2s 6d for other children up to a limit of 25s. The relief would not be a loan and they would receive the allowance as 25 per cent in cash and 75 per cent in vouchers to be exchanged in local stores. The relief would be granted for only two weeks after which the cases would be reviewed.
Throughout the meeting, there was some tension between Mason and some of the Board members including Rowlinson who appeared to be hostile to the miners. At one point, Mason challenged Rowlinson’s claim that the law said that destitute single miners could not be admitted to the workhouse. There had been disagreements between these two men in the past because Mason sometimes acted as an advocate for the inmates who made complaints about the conditions in the workhouse and the amount and quality of the food.[7]
The attitude of some of the Guardians appeared to be that the money belonged to them as ratepayers and they were donating it to the mining families out of charity. During the discussion, Mason made the point that the miners were part of the community too and paid rates and so were entitled to benefits as of right in time of need. When Daniel Walkley, who ran a transport business in Cinderford, and John Bate, an estate agent from Blaisdon, claimed that their duty was to the ratepayers and that single miners could not be destitute because work was available to them, Mason replied:
Where? … As the youngest member of the board, he understood his duty quite well and was not going to Mr Walkley to learn it. He was representing the public, and a most essential part of the public. The miners were in the public area. He took it that young men also put money into the fund for administering the Poor Law.
Williams and Thomas Etheridge, who worked for the FDMA as its secretary, were then invited into the meeting as representatives of the delegation. They presented a case for relief for all miners, particularly the single men, arguing that it would be humiliating for them to enter the workhouse. He added that another vulnerable group was those paying a mortgage who were in danger of losing their houses. He asked for relief to be paid wholly in cash to prevent exploitation by tradesmen.[2]
When addressing the crowd of miners and their families outside after the meeting, Williams reported that the Board had decided that the cases of able-bodied single men would not be entertained but, if destitute, they could be allowed a bed in the workhouse. He reported the cases of property owners would be considered on merit. Any money received from the MFGB or elsewhere would be deducted from the allowance. As a result, the FDMA decided to avoid giving any funds from the MFGB to those families on poor law relief. The relief would be paid out at Wesley Hall in Cinderford on Saturday mornings. Williams added:
I want to acknowledge we owe the Board of Guardians something for the courtesy they have shown us this morning.[3]
In the evening a large meeting was held at Cinderford Town Hall and chaired by Jim Jones, who started the evening by singing a song. Jones was chairman of the Cinderford branch of the National Union of Railwaymen and was a Labour County Councilor for Cinderford. Williams reported on the events at Westbury in the morning. He added that if many destitute single men could not get any relief, then they should turn up en masse at the workhouse and demand to be admitted. He thought it would be unlikely that the workhouse would have enough beds to deal with a large number of applicants. He reported that the FDMA was going to ask Jones and Charles Luker if they could make a case to the County Council for two meals a day for children rather than one.[4]
Monmouth Union
An emergency meeting of the Monmouth Board was held on Wednesday 12 May. The Board was chaired by Lady Mather-Jackson who confirmed a similar rate to Westbury of a weekly allowance of 10s for a miner’s wife and 3s for a child, but in the form of a loan up to a maximum of 25s per week. Mather-Jackson was the wife of Sir Henry Mather-Jackson, 3rd Baronet, who held extensive business interests in mining and railway infrastructure.
A J Wilkes, the relieving officer for the Monmouth Board, said that he had already dealt with 200 cases at an average cost of one pound per case paid out in vouchers at the above rate. He added that on Tuesday 4 May the applicants came to Yorkley and he told them he could not relieve the able-bodied men. After collecting more food vouchers from Monmouth on Friday he complained that:
When I got home at 5 o’clock I was besieged … On Saturday night I could not do anything with them. The police came down and since then I have been under police protection.[5]
There were about 30 members of the Monmouth Board including nine Labour members who were sympathetic to the miners. The Labour members were Charles Luker (ex-miner), Ellen Hicks, Albert Brooks (miner), Miss Taylor, E Beard, E Pritchard, A Brown, E J Flewelling and H J Smith. E W Neems was among the fifteen members from the Forest of Dean who argued that:
It was not the spirit of the men that made trouble for the relieving officer it was necessity. There are people starving who are too proud to come here. You cannot drive poverty into the ground. If we do something it will prevent a more serious outbreak.
A motion that the 5d a day for the school meal provided by the County Council should be deducted from the 3s allowance per child was defeated. One of the members of the Board who voted for the motion was William Burdess, who was the underground manager at Princess Royal Colliery. Luker moved a motion at the meeting that the government should provide £20,000 to cover the extra costs of providing relief but this proposal was rejected.[6]
Ross Union
On Thursday 6 May, over 100 applicants from Ruardean presented themselves to a meeting of the Ross Board of Guardians seeking relief on account of destitution. Mr Pilkington, the chairman of the Board agreed to allow a deputation of six men to speak to the guardians. The men’s spokesman S Miles, who was a member of the strike committee for the district, appealed to the guardians to grant relief to those in distress from his community. Miles said
For the past twelve months, they had lived a hand to mouth existence as the men had rarely done more than three and a half turns a week.[7]
One of the guardians asked Miles whether the men would be prepared to go back to work. Miles responded:
They would go back tomorrow on the old terms if they were allowed to.[8]
After consideration, the Board decided to make an allowance in vouchers of 10s a week for a wife, 4s for the first child and 2s 6d for each subsequent child. They said arrangements would be made for a deputation from the Board to proceed to Ruardean the next day and to review the expected 160 cases. Miles thanked the Board and said he hoped the miners would have the same consideration from the colliery owners.[9]
Meanwhile, Charles Luker and Jim Jones, who were both Labour members of the County Council Education Committee, were instrumental in persuading the Committee to contribute 5d a child towards financing a daily school dinner for the children of miners.[5] The committee of the Forest of Dean School Managers took on the task of liaising with the headmasters. School Managers Committee member, Jim Jones, said they should endeavour to provide two meals a day. However, George Rowlinson, who was the chairman, said one good meal at midday would suffice.[6] R
Guardians and the Loan
The FDMA strategy was to encourage miners’ families to claim outdoor relief in the hope that in time the shortage of coal would begin to bite and they could win concessions from the government and the colliery owners. The roles of Luker on the Monmouth Board and Mason on the Westbury Board were fundamental to this strategy. However, the FDMA became concerned when they heard that, after two weeks the Guardians on each of the Boards had decided to review how much relief should be provided and how it should be paid out.[10]
On Thursday 20 May, the Ross Board decided to reduce the amount paid to the first child from 4s to 2s 6d a week if the child was of school age and receiving a free meal from the County Education Authority. The guardians decided that the maximum amount of relief per family would be 25s per week.[11]
On Friday 21 May, at a meeting of the Monmouth Board, the guardians heard that on the previous Wednesday, the Board had 783 new applications from miners’ dependents of which 584 were granted relief including 544 women and 1747 children. The miners’ cases were now costing the Board about £750 per week at an average cost of one pound per case and so arrangements were made to apply for an overdraft at the bank.
Edwin Sims, a school teacher and magistrate from Lydney, asked the Monmouth Board to make it clear to those on relief that they were treating the allowances as loans. The relieving officer, A J Wilkes said that after the experience of the 1921 lockout he was concerned they would never recover the loans.[12] Luker added that if the miners went back with a reduction in wages, they would not be able to keep their homes let alone repay loans.
At a meeting of the Westbury Board held Tuesday 25 May, the guardians were informed by the finance committee that they were in danger of running out of money. As a result, the finance committee presented a motion that stated that from now on the grant should be in the form of a loan, paid in vouchers only and reviewed every week. In response, Mason argued that:
He could see no reason why the grant should be in the future in the form of a loan. He thought the subject was carefully considered last week and he did not know what the prospects were of return even if they did grant it on loan. It seemed to him more or less a farce because the people were destitute and knowing the district very well, he could not see what chance of their paying the money back.
Mason argued that East Dean was more disadvantaged than other districts because the house coal pits in East Dean often only worked part-time. However, when it came to a vote Mason only got the backing of the five other Labour members while Rowlinson, Ashmead and the others voted in favour of the loan.
Mason vs Rowlinson
The Westbury Union met again Tuesday 1 June and the guardians were informed that a meeting of the Finance Committee had produced a report which recommended that relief for the first child should be reduced from 4s to 2s 6d. Rowlinson then informed the meeting that a resolution had been passed at the finance committee that from now on the allowances would be awarded fully in the form of vouchers.
Mason argued that the resolution about the vouchers had not been agreed upon at a full meeting of the Board and challenged Rowlinson over the undemocratic way the decision had been made. He then moved a motion that the decision be rescinded. Rowlinson replied that he needed seven days’ notice to accept a motion to rescind a resolution. Mason attempted to respond but was told by Rowlinson that he had spoken more than once and he should “not strain the feelings of the Board”.
After more discussion, Mason moved an amendment that the allowance for the first child remains at 4s. However, the motion was defeated with only the Labour members voting in favour with twenty-two against. At that point, the atmosphere became quite tense when it appeared that Mason accused Rowlinson of lacking courage. Rowlinson replied, “I don’t allow you or anyone to tackle me on my courage”.[13]
Finally, Brain presented a resolution that the families of miners who owned their own houses should also get relief but this was defeated with only eight votes in favour.[14]
First West Dean Deputation
On Wednesday 2 June, Lady Mather-Jackson informed a meeting of the Monmouth Board that for the week ending 29 May, there were 798 cases representing 2521 persons costing £634. She said that a meeting of the Special Relief Committee had received a deputation consisting of four representatives of the miners from West Dean, including William Hoare and Charles Fletcher who requested that:
- Assistance should be given to the man;
- An allowance should be allowed for rent;
- The income to the home, such as from sons and daughters, should not be taken into account;
- A person owning their own house should be relieved less a fair reduction for rent;
- War pensions should not be taken into account;
- Relief should be given to single men (particularly as they often live in lodges with people who are also receiving assistance).[15]
In response, Mather-Jackson quoted the regulations to justify that no relief could be paid to single men, to property owners or to cover rent. Hicks reported cases of men she knew who owned their own houses and were now close to starving. However, Mather-Jackson’s main concern appeared to be that the Russian money was being given to those claiming relief. This was denied by the Labour members who said the FDMA was prioritising donating the money to single men and property owners.
Second West Dean Deputation
On Friday 4 June, for the second time in three days, about ninety people, mainly single miners, walked ten miles from Bream to the Guardian’s offices at Monmouth to put their case for relief. Many of them were weak from a lack of food.
While the people waited outside, the Board considered how to respond. Mather-Jackson argued that the regulations forbade them from giving relief to able-bodied single men. The Labour members challenged the legality of this claim. Brookes pointed out that the Guardians in Bedwellty had given relief to single men and added that:[16]
There is now more destitution. They are being refused anything and they are absolutely starving. The situation is serious.[17]
After a discussion over the legality of the situation, a deputation of four miners was invited to the meeting. William Hoare was their main spokesman and argued the same points as before but added that an extra allowance was needed to cover rent for housing. He asked: “At what point does a man become destitute?” Mather-Jackson said: “It was when he was physically unfit”. Hoare responded: “Physical unfitness and destitution are two distinct things”. He added:
That the married men and single men were receiving nothing and therefore must be destitute and that was why they had come there that morning to either claim relief from outside or admission into the institution which they contended the law entitled them to. [18]
Mather-Jackson said that in some cases the relieving officer could pay rent in kind. However, she repeated her claim that the regulations forbade guardians from relieving single men and only the wives and children of married men. Hoare replied if that was the case how come Gateshead Union were providing relief to single men with the sanction of the Ministry of Health?[19] He added that he knew of cases of families being so far behind with their rent they faced eviction.
Mather-Jackson then claimed that before the lockout a miner with three sons could be earning £10 a week and therefore must have undeclared savings. Charles Fletcher, who was another member of the delegation, responded to Mather-Jackson’s accusation:
The wages of a colliery labourer in the Forest of Dean would not average more than 25s to 27s a week. Five days was the most the colliers work in the Forest. The wages during the past four or five years had been very low and the conditions had also been bad … He could not conceive of £8 or £9 going into any house of any man working in the Forest collieries at this time neither could he conceive, after having done no work for five weeks, they could have any money.
Luker argued that many of the men earned considerably less than the hewers and some of these were single men living in lodgings and or with their parents. They had no savings and could no longer pay their rent, board and lodgings. He argued that the Board should do everything in its power:
according to the law and to the means at their disposal … and deal with the applications sympathetically and justly.
Mather-Jackson responded that unless a man was physically unfit, they could not relieve him. G F Park, a farmer from Monmouth, said that many of the men drawing relief in the Forest of Dean were doing very well and ran flocks of sheep. Brookes ignored that comment and responded that the Board should:
use common sense rather than an official attitude in regard to these men who were genuinely unemployed.
Luker proposed the following motion which was seconded by Miss Taylor and Ellen Hicks:
This Board of Guardians recognising the need for more generous dealing with able bodied men in the case of industrial disputes asks the Minister of Health to confer greater powers on Boards as to enable them to give immediate relief so that needless suffering can be avoided.
Park made some remark about how long they were going to be on strike and Brookes responded: “Mr Park’s suggestion is that they be starved back to work.” When it went to a vote nine members voted for the motion and nine against it with some abstentions but after a long discussion, a second vote produced a majority in favour of the resolution.
The deputation was then asked to return to the Board room and Mather-Jackson informed them that if anyone could obtain a certificate from a doctor confirming they were physically unfit then they could get relief on a day-to-day basis. Mather-Jackson also said the men who had made the journey this morning could be offered a meal of bread and cheese provided they committed they would leave the premises and not return.
After Hoare consulted with men outside, he informed Mather-Jackson that unless they got a more favourable response they intended to stay. He added:
You know as well as we do that the Minister of Health is trying to override the Poor Law and is cutting it down. He is the willing tool of the coal owners trying to starve us into submission. … Therefore, to us there is nothing in that decision requesting the Ministry of Health to allow you. You already have got the power. You are within the law despite the Ministry of Health.
Mather-Jackson said; “We haven’t got the power”. Hoare alleged that in other districts single locked-out miners had been awarded relief:
The Ministry has sanctioned a rate relief at Gateshead equivalent to unemployment pay. In any case, your decision to get a sanction from the Ministry of Health to extend relief does not mean anything to us. We consider that you have the power, and it is for you to decide now. Anyway, that is what I am instructed to inform the Board, that unless you do something for us, to remain here.[20]
Fennel asked if Luker was their representative and asked him to intervene. Hoare was not willing to allow this and replied:
No, he is not the representative of the body of men. He is simply elected to this Board by the ratepayers.
Fletcher said:
He did not know if they could stop the men from coming to Monmouth at some future occasion but they would see what they could do to only send a deputation down. He expected they would be coming there and demanding admittance. The men had five weeks’ practical experience of the conditions They will not go under lightly, and they are prepared to starve on top, and they will gladly let you bury them. They have had enough burying underground.
Hoare added that several men who were here on Wednesday could not make it because they “are too stiff, sore and weak”. Mather-Jackson told Hoare that he should tell the men what the Board had agreed and that they should leave quietly. He responded:
Very well we will give the men your position, and of course, it rests with them. Before we go, even if the men outside decide to leave, I want to register a protest here. We consider that you already have the power to do more than you are doing.
When Hoare reported back to the men one said: “If we have to die, let us die here”. After eating their bread and cheese they walked home. Some of these men had fought in World War One and it is hard to imagine what they thought of their country now and their treatment by these members of their ruling class.
Deductions
On Saturday 5 June a mass meeting was held at Cinderford Town Hall chaired by Jim Jones with the main speakers Purcell and George Lansbury, a member of the ILP and Labour MP for Bow and Bromley. Both men spoke at a similar meeting in Coleford the next day chaired by Arthur Hicks.
At Cinderford, Williams spoke first and was furious because he had found out that relieving officers for the Westbury Board had been incorrectly making deductions from the grants given to those on relief. He cited one case of a married man who had to walk six miles to Cinderford and was only given 2s 6d for his wife, three children and teenager (who was earning 6s a week) on the assumption they were receiving Russian money from the MFGB. He cited another case in which deductions were made leaving a family with more than ten children without any funds for food.
Williams said it appeared that this was being carried out under the instruction of a small committee or by the relieving officer himself without the authority of a full board meeting. In response, Williams suggested they needed to make a protest and go to the relieving officer’s house and ask him directly to justify his actions. In addition, they needed to approach Rowlinson and Westaway and ask for an explanation.[21]
On Tuesday afternoon 8 June a meeting was held at Cinderford Town Hall with Enos Taylor in the chair. Taylor said the main purpose of the meeting was to protest against the decision of the relieving officers to deduct money from the grants for those on relief on the assumption that they had received money from the MFGB donated by the Russian miners.
Williams said he also wanted to protest against the decision to reduce the allowance for the first child and provide relief solely in the form of vouchers. He pointed out that the vouchers were provided only for food and did not cover other necessities like medicines. In addition, he argued that the families of miners who owned their own houses needed help too.
Williams argued that they needed to make a protest or the Guardians could continue to reduce the allowances. He argued that there may have to be an increase in the rates to cover the cost and felt that most people in the community were prepared to make this sacrifice. He praised the actions of the five Labour members on the Westbury Board who had “displayed such courage and remained so loyal to them”. A resolution of protest against the action of the Westbury Board in reducing the allowances was proposed by Joseph Holder and seconded by Jack Harris and passed without dissent.[22]
On Wednesday 8 June, the Westbury Board met again and Rowlinson dominated the meeting using bureaucratic manoeuvres to undermine attempts by the Labour members to challenge his authority. He reported that some traders had complained they had lost custom because most of the people receiving the vouchers were exchanging them at the Co-operative Store. As a result, Mason put forward a motion that 25 per cent of the allowance be in cash to give those receiving relief more choices. However, this motion was disallowed by Rowlinson.
Booth then presented a motion that applicants could receive an extra allowance to cover rent and mortgage interest repayments and families owning their own houses should be eligible for relief. Rowlinson refused to accept the motion arguing it needed to be tabulated in the correct form and given to the clerk to be presented at the next meeting. However, Rowlinson did accept a motion from Miss Lefroy that those caught earning cash from digging small amounts of coal from the outcrop where the coal seam reaches the surface should be denied relief. Mason asked if families needed to make a new application every week. Rowlinson said this was not possible because the Board had already passed a motion to grant relief one week at a time.[23]
Co-operative Society Membership
Most miners living in Cinderford were members of the Cinderford Co-operative Society which was very much part of the labour movement in the Forest. Cinderford Co-operative Society, just like other Co-operative Societies in the Forest of Dean, was run and managed by its members in the interests of its members mainly to provide relatively cheap food. In Cinderford where eighty per cent of the population were miners, the management committee included some who were miners, such as Martin Perkins (President for 37 years, but retired in 1925) and Enos Taylor.[24]
The hostility of some members of the Board towards the miners was highlighted at the next meeting of the Westbury Board on Tuesday 14 June. Rowlinson had discovered that members of the Co-operative Society in Cinderford needed to hold a maximum of three pounds in their account to maintain their membership. If the amount dropped below this then they would lose the benefits of membership. Rowlinson claimed that these people could not be classed as destitute as they had £3 in savings and therefore were not entitled to relief. Mason responded by presenting a motion, seconded by William Ayland, that the Board consider such cases as destitute. However, he was forced to withdraw the resolution on being told by Rowlinson that the Board was legally obliged to strictly follow its rules on savings.[25] Following this one of the Labour members, Harry Morse from Blakeney moved the following resolution which was seconded by Booth and Mason:
We allow a scale up to 12s a week not to be taken into account when granting relief on and after June 15th.
Morse explained that under the existing system, any money coming into the house was deducted from the allowance which had a maximum of 25s. He elaborated that his proposal meant that in a house with four, five or six children then if 12s were going into the house in income from other sources this should now be ignored. Likewise, 9s should be ignored if there are three children and 7s if there is a wife and child.
Mason spoke in favour of the motion adding that it was wrong that war pensions were being deducted from the allowance. However, Mason was told by Rowlinson he could not speak again. When the motion was put to the vote it lost with only the four Labour members present voting in favour.[26]
The atmosphere was more cordial at a meeting of the Ross Board on Thursday 9 June where the guardians decided to apply to the government for a loan and complimented the families in Ruardean on their civil behaviour. However, a motion was passed that in the future relief should only be given as a loan.
However by mid June, some families, in particular those without any savings, were suffering distress. The Reverend Buck from Cinderford Baptist church worked hard to collect donations from the local Baptist chapels and other chapels as far away as London.[1] At the end of June, he reported that his workers had encountered severe deprivation among some families:
One of my workers reported a case where the family had not a crust of bread. Father left home in the morning to find an odd job, and had not had taste of food. The daughter went to work without a meal. There is another family, comprising twelve children, and the cupboard is bare. People are clamouring for bread. There are mothers lacking adequate nourishment and babies being born into the world whose mothers cannot even provide milk for them. [2]
[1] Dean Forest Mercury 11 June 1926.
[2] Gloucester Citizen 28 June 1926.
Westbury Board
By mid-August, there were about 750 women and children receiving relief, in the form of loans, from the Westbury Board of Guardians who claimed that they were running out of money. In response, the Board decided to cut off all relief to miners’ wives and children. This was despite the protest of Charlie Mason who pointed out that as far as he knew Westbury was the only Board in the country to do so. In response, Williams and Mason worked with a group of miners’ wives to organise a protest outside the Westbury workhouse and arranged transport from Cinderford. There was not enough space on the coaches, so about 300 men and 150 women and children walked about eight miles to Westbury and sang songs outside a meeting of the Board. Mason presented a strong case to the Board, but they still refused to give relief.[27]
The organisers then decided that the women should seek admission to the workhouse by obtaining the necessary orders from the relieving officer. Consequently, on Friday 7 August, transport was arranged for 296 women, children and babies to Westbury. Some women brought as many as 6 or 7 children. Williams and Mason were there to help negotiate with Mr and Mrs Striven, the master and matron, who had no choice but to admit them.[28] After receiving tea, bread and margarine some walked back to Cinderford while 270 remained. The accommodation was poor, so most stayed up all night and were accused by the Strivens of “rowdiness, vandalism and threatening behaviour”. However, having made their protest, it was clear the institution could not cope, so they all decided to return to Cinderford the following evening.[29]
The miners’ wives, with the support of Williams and Mason, continued their campaign and organised two marches headed by brass bands, one from Cinderford and the other from Drybrook, which converged at the Co-operative Society’s field in Cinderford. In his speech, Williams argued that the Westbury Board’s decision may be illegal, particularly as it could lead to starvation. Shortly afterwards the Ross and Monmouth Board stopped giving relief to miners’ wives and children and this meant that some Forest mining families were running out of food.[30] This had a significant impact on the decision of some men to return to work.
Main Chatacters
Frank Ashmead (1856-1940) was born in Upton St Leonards, the son of a farmworker who died because of an accident at work at an early age. Frank Ashmead was brought up by his mother and started work as a farm labourer at the age of eleven. He then migrated to the Forest of Dean, first working as a farm labourer, then for the Colliery company and then as a hodder at Crump Meadow. He worked his way up to be a hewer and became an active member of the FDMA. He married Mary Baker in 1878 and went on to have seven children. In 1904 he obtained work in the Cinderford Co-operative Society as a baker’s clerk but continued to be involved with the FDMA as one of its auditors. He was also a member of the Amalgamated Union of Co-operative Employees. He held many public positions including being secretary of the Cinderford Medical Aid Association, Chair of East Dean Parish Council from 1910, a member of East Dean District Council from 1922 and Chair of the housing committee from 1924. He was appointed as a magistrate in 1926. He was a member of the Westbury Board of Guardians during the 1926 lockout.
William Ayland (1854 – 1934) was born in Westbury-on-Severn. He worked as a coal haulier and general labourer and a member of the Worker’s Union. He was a Labour member of the Westbury Urban District Council and a member of the Westbury Board of Guardians for East Dean during the 1926 lockout.
Abraham Booth (1870 – 1938) was born in Yorkshire, the son of a grocer, and started his working life as a labourer in a colliery, after leaving school. He married Alice Holroyd in 1894 and had two children. In 1901, he was working as an insurance agent for a Friendly Society and in 1911 he was living in Littledean. He was a member of East Dean District Council, a committee member of Cinderford Co-operative Society and a member of East Dean Parish Council, being appointed as its clerk in 1928. He was a member of the Westbury Board of Guardians for East Dean during the 1926 lockout.
Timothy James Brain (1886-1974) was born in Ruardean Woodside and started work at the age of 12 on the surface at Slad colliery. He then worked at Foxes Bridge and later at Cannop, where in 1916 he was promoted to the role of deputy. He married Edith Morgan in 1916 and had one son. He was elected as an East Dean District councillor in 1919 and was elected as a County Councillor for Drybrook in 1922, representing the Labour Party. He was a member of the Westbury Board of Guardians for East Dean during the 1926 lockout.
Albert Brookes (1898-1976) was born in Bream, the son of a miner. From July 1917 to February 1919 Brookes served in the Royal Navy in submarines, and on his return gained work at Princess Royal colliery as a hewer. He then joined the Labour Party and became active within the FDMA. In September 1921 he married Dorothy Phipps and went on to have two children. In 1925, he joined the MMM. He was a member of the Monmouth Board of Guardians during the 1926 lockout. He was blacklisted after the lockout and never worked in a pit again, and gained employment as an insurance agent. In 1926 he was elected as a councillor on West Dean District Council.
Thomas Etheridge (1896-1969) was born in Cinderford, the son of a miner. On leaving school, he started to work as an office boy in the FDMA office under George Rowlinson. He continued in a paid role as a clerk and then was appointed to the full-time role of FDMA Financial Secretary in 1920. He married Ethel Holder in 1925.
Charles Fletcher (1892-1929) was born in Stroud. His father died in 1895 and he was brought up in Muller Orphanage in Bristol. As a teenager, he was sent to work on farms in the Forest including Longley and Trow Green where in 1911 he is recorded as living with the Teague family and working as a cowman. He joined the BSP in 1915. During the war, he moved to Chepstow and obtained work in the shipyards and latterly as a self-employed chimney sweep. In the early 1920s, he joined the CPGB and then moved back to the Forest. In 1925, he was elected as Chairman of the Forest of Dean branch of the MMM. In 1926, he left the CPGB and joined the Labour Party. He wrote articles on mining and industrial problems, was popular within the labour movement in the Forest and became a close friend of Williams. He died aged 37 in 1929.
Ellen Hicks (1864-1948) was born in Ross and moved to Bristol. She married Arthur Hicks in Bristol in about 1893. Arthur Hicks was also from Ross but living in lodgings in Bristol and working as a bootmaker. The couple moved to Coleford where Arthur established a boot repairer business. In 1909 they were instrumental in establishing an ILP branch in Coleford. In 1911, Ellen was among some socialist women who organised a branch of the Women’s Labour League in the Forest of Dean. The League had been founded in 1906 to promote the political representation of women in parliament and onto local bodies and was affiliated to the Labour Party. Around this time, she was involved in establishing the Dean Forest Socialist Party which was based in Coleford and whose main activists included William Morris, Tom and Mary Liddington, Arthur and Ellen Hicks and Benjamin Annie and Pope from the ILP. In 1912 Ellen Hicks was elected to the Board of the Monmouth Poor Law Guardians. Dean Forest Socialist Party was affiliated to the British Socialist Party in 1915. Ellen Hicks was appointed as a magistrate in August 1920.
William Hoare (1883-1959) was born in Bream, the son of Thomas Hoare, a stone cutter, and Sarah Pace. They had eight children including William. Sarah Pace had two other children, born in the Monmouth workhouse before marrying Thomas Hoare in 1873. Two of William’s siblings died as children. Thomas Hoare died in 1888. In 1890 Sarah married Joseph James, a hewer and moved to Drybrook. The family went on to have three more children and moved back to Bream.
In 1901 William Hoare, at the age of 17, was living with his family in Bream and working as a hewer. He then moved to work in the South Wales coalfield, and in October 1907, he married Ann Jones from Pontypool. In April 1908, Ann died, possibly in childbirth. Hoare then moved back to live with his mother’s family in Bream and worked as a hewer at Princess Royal colliery. In July 1918, he married Beatrice Morgan and had seven children. At this time, he was working at Norchard colliery but was sacked after a dispute with the management and then gained work at Cannop Colliery. In 1919, he was sponsored by the FDMA to attend a two-year course at the Central Labour College in London.
After the 1921 Lockout, he was unemployed and helped set up the Coleford and West Dean Unemployed Committee with Tom Liddington. He then returned to work at Norchard and/or Princess Royal Collieries and was elected to the FDMA Executive. In 1925, he joined the MMM. After the 1926 lockout, he was blacklisted and then possibly moved to work in the Kent coalfield and then back to Bream to work as a road sweeper.[31]
Charles Luker (1885-1970) was born in Chepstow where his father worked as a fish dealer. By 1901, the family had moved to Whitecroft where his father sold fish from the back of his cart. As a boy, Luker started work as a trammer in the mines and by 1911 he had started working as a hewer at the Crown Colliery. He married Esther Phipps in 1912 and had two children. In 1919, he was elected as Secretary of the FDMA and as an FDMA representative on the Gloucester Employment Committee. The following year, the post of Secretary and Treasurer of the FDMA were combined to form the role of Financial Secretary and Thomas Etheridge took over the role. In 1921, Luker was working as a hewer at Princess Royal Colliery and was elected to the political committee of FDMA Executive, whose job was to liaise with the Labour Party. In October 1922, he was appointed as election agent and secretary of the Forest of Dean Labour Party, which were paid posts and he continued in the roles until the 1950s. In the 1920s, Luker also worked part-time as an insurance agent and became active within local government. In 1922, he was elected to the Board of the Forest of Dean School managers. In March 1922 he was elected as a County Councillor, in which role he continued up to the 1950s. In 1923 he was elected as a West Dean Rural District councillor and by 1926, he was Chairman of West Dean Rural District Council, a role he held up to the 1950s.
Charles Mason (1889-1945) was born in Brierley and started work in the mines soon after leaving school. He married Margaret Daniels in 1909 and had seven children, including the celebrated Forest author Winifred Foley. In 1922 he was appointed as a Guardian at Westbury Workhouse and in 1923 he was elected to East Dean District Council. He was elected to the FDMA Executive Committee in 1919. He was killed in an accident at Cannop colliery in 1945.
Lady Mather-Jackson was married to Sir Henry Mather-Jackson who was chairman of the Alexandra (Newport and South Wales) Docks and Railway, chairman of the Marianao and Havana Railway Co., deputy-chairman Grand Trunk Railway of Canada, of the United Railway of Havana, Cuban Central, and Western Railways of Havana, of John Lancaster’s Steam Coal Co., and of the Powell’s Tillery Colliery Company, and also directors of the Ebbw Yale Steel Iron and Coal Co. and the Rhymney Railway Co. He was an alderman and chairman of the Monmouthshire County Council, chairman of the Monmouthshire Quarter Sessions, Monmouthshire Standing Joint Committee, of the governors of the Monmouth Grammar School, and the Monmouth Agricultural Institute, etc. During World War One he was chairman of the Military Appeal Tribunal. He lived at Llantilio Court, Abergavenny, and 56 Montagu Square, London.
George Rowlinson (1852-1937) was the agent for the FDMA from 1886 to 1918. A detailed biography and an account of his role as the agent for the FDMA can be found in the text and Ian Wright, Coal on One Hand, Men on the Other, The Forest of Dean Miners and the First World War 1910 – 1922 published by Bristol Radical History Group.
[1] Dean Forest Mercury 14 May
[2] Dean Forest Mercury 7 May 1926.
[3] Dean Forest Mercury 14 May 1926.
[4] Dean Forest Mercury 29 May 1926.
[5] Gloucester Citizen 11 May 1926.
[6] Dean Forest Mercury 14 May 1926.
[1] Gloucester Citizen 12 November 1924.
[2] Dean Forest Mercury 14 May 1926 and Gloucester Citizen 19 May 1926.
[3] Dean Forest Mercury 14 May 1926.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Dean Forest Mercury 14 May 1926.
[6] Gloucester Citizen 19 May 1926.
[7] Dean Forest Mercury 14 May 1926.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Gloucestershire Chronicle 21 May 1926
[11] Dean Forest Mercury 28 May 1926.
[12] Dean Forest Mercury 28 May 1926.
[13] Dean Forest Mercury 4 June 1926 and Gloucestershire Chronicle 4 June 1926.
[14] Gloucestershire Chronicle 21 May 1926 and Gloucestershire Chronicle 4 June 1926.
[15] Dean Forest Mercury 4 June 1926.
[16] There was a Socialist majority on the Bedwellty Board with thirty out of the fifty-four guardians as Labour Party members and twenty-four of these were locked-out miners. They received every deputation and often provided a meal for their representatives at the workhouse. While the Board attempted to remain within the law it did not always comply. A Ministry of Health briefing revealed that more than eight hundred ineligible strikers were relieved during a single week of May 1926, while some Relieving Officers circumvented rules applying to strikers by giving extra relief to their mothers. The nearby Crickhowell Union refused to follow the Government’s directions and paid out money to single miners.
[17] Dean Forest Mercury 11 June 1926.
[18] Ibid.
[19] Gateshead was another district where Labour had won a majority on the local Board and was accused by their political opponents of making lenient and allegedly illegal payments to unemployed single miners. Sam Davies, Gateshead Politics between the Wars, North East History, Volume 41, 2010.
[20] Dean Forest Mercury 25 June 1926. Also see Newcastle Evening Chronicle 13 August 1926 which reported on a warning given to Chester-Le-Street (near Durham) Board of Guardians, which was made up of nearly all Labour members, by the Ministry of Health that its “decision to grant relief to unmarried miners might have a serious effect on their future administration”.
[21] Dean Forest Mercury 11 June 1926.
[22] Dean Forest Mercury 11 June 1926. The Labour members were Charlie Mason, Tim Brain, Abraham Booth, William Ayland and Mr Morse from Blakeney.
[23] Dean Forest Mercury 11 June 1926.
[24] An excellent history of the Co-operative Society in the Forest of Dean can be found in Alistair Graham’s book The Forest Pioneers, The Story of the Co-operative Movement in the Forest of Dean published by the Co-operative Society in 2002.
[25] Dean Forest Mercury 18 June 1926.
[26] Dean Forest Mercury 18 June 1926.
[27] Anstis, Blood on Coal, 79 – 80.
[28] Gloucester Citizen 21 August 1926.
[29] Anstis, Blood on Coal, 80.
[30] Ibid, 81.
[31] Thanks to Andrew Davies-Hoare, William Hoare’s grandson, for providing additional information.