¹ Information on employers' industrial organizations can be found in Richardson, J. H., Industrial Relations in Great Britain (London, 1933)Google Scholar, Smith, R., “A History of the Lancashire Cotton Industry between the Years 1873 and 1896” (Ph.D. thesis Birmingham, 1954)Google Scholar, Turner, H. A., Trade Union Growth, Structure and Policy (London, 1962)Google Scholar, Griffen, A. R. and Griffen, C. P., “The Role of Coal Owners' Associations in the East Midlands in the Nineteenth Century”, in: Renaissance and Modern Studies, XV (1973), pp. 95–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Brown, E. H. Phelps, The Growth of British Industrial Relations (London, 1959)Google Scholar, and Gospel, H. F., “Employers' Organizations; Their Growth and Function in the British System of Industrial Relations in the Period 1918–1939” (Ph.D. thesis, London School of Economics, 1974)Google Scholar, but generally these deal with the post-1880 period. The most recent and useful study is Burgess, K., The Origins of British Industrial Relations (London, 1975).Google Scholar

² Legislative associations have received even less attention than the industrial organizations. Recent research by Alderman, G., The Railway Interest (Leicester, 1973)Google Scholar, has provided useful information on the Railway Association, but other important interest groups such as the National Association of Factory Occupiers, the Mining Association, the National Federation of Associated Employers of Labour and the Association of British Chambers of Commerce have been overlooked.

³ The early history of trade associations is reviewed in Ashton, T. S., The Industrial Revolution, 1760–1830 (Oxford, 1964), pp. 88–91.Google Scholar

⁴ Turner, Trade Union Growth, op. cit., p. 370; Clegg, H. A., Fox, H. and Thompson, A. F., A History of British Trade Unions since 1889, I (Oxford, 1964), p. 22Google Scholar; Dunning, T. J., “Some Account of the London Consolidated Society of Bookbinders”, in: Trades' Societies and Strikes. Report of the Committee on Trades' Societies, appointed by the National Association for the Promotion of Social Science (London, 1860), pp. 94–95.Google Scholar

⁵ Employers' associations were also illegal under the Combination Laws, but there is no evidence of their prosecution. See Chapman, S. J., “An Historical Sketch of Masters' Associations in the Cotton Industry”, in: Transactions of the Manchester Statistical Society, 1901, p. 79.Google Scholar

⁶ Turner, , Trade Union Growth, pp. 371–75.Google Scholar

⁷ Minute Book of the Associated Masters, 8 06 1825, Bradford Combers and Weavers Strike, Deed Box 3, Case 38, No 6, Central Library, Bradford.Google Scholar

⁸ See Smiles, S., Workman's Earnings, Strikes and Savings (London, 1861), p. 137Google Scholar; Organization and Rules of Trade Unions and Other Associations, Royal Commission (hereafter Royal Commission), First Report [Parliamentary Papers, 1867, XXXII, 3873], q. 2582Google Scholar; Masters and Operatives (Equitable Councils of Conciliation), Select Committee [PP, 1856, XIII, 343], q. 1134Google Scholar; Dunning, “The London Consolidated Society of Bookbinders”, loc. cit., p. 100.

⁹ See Lee, W. A., “The History of Organization in the Coal Industry”, in: Historical Review of Coal Mining (London, 1924), pp. 364, 369Google Scholar; Morris, J. H. and Williams, L. J., The South Wales Coal Industry (Cardiff, 1958), pp. 33, 274Google Scholar; Royal Commission. Fifth Report [PP, 1867–1868, XXXIX, 3980–1], qq. 9393, 9825–29.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Reason given by J. Robinson, secretary to the Manchester Engineers' Association, for the difficulties of association among masters. Royal Commission, Tenth Report [PP, 1867–1868, XXXIX, 3980-VI], qq. 19067–69.Google Scholar

¹¹ Th. Hughes, “Account of the Lock-Out of Engineers, & c, in 1851–2”, in: Trades' Societies and Strikes, op. cit., pp. 177–78. For more detailed studies of the lock-out, see Burgess, K., “Trade Union Policy and the 1852 Lock-Out in the British Engineering Industry”, in: International Review of Social History, XVII (1972)Google Scholar; P. J. Murphy, “The Origins of the 1852 Lock-Out in the British Engineering Industry Reconsidered”, ibid., XXIII (1978).

¹² Jefferies, J. B., The Story of the Engineers 1800–1945 (London, 1945), pp. 37, 94.Google Scholar A degree of unity had been achieved in 1871 with the formation of the Iron Trades Employers' Association. Clegg, Fox and Thompson, British Trade Unions, op. cit., p. 12.

¹³ Turner, , Trade Union Growth, pp. 372–73.Google Scholar For further details on the development of cotton employers'p associations in the post-1870 period, see Smith, “The Lancashire Cotton Industry”, op. cit., pp. 262–310.

¹⁴ See The Times, 10 August 1859, p. 12; Smith, , “The Lancashire Cotton Industry”, pp. 294–95.Google Scholar

¹⁵ See Royal Commission, First Report, qq. 340, 2951–60Google Scholar; “National Association of Master Builders”, in: Capital and Labour, 27 02 1878, p. 133.Google Scholar

¹⁶ See Morris and Williams, The South Wales Coal Industry, op. cit., pp. 276–77; Lee, “Organization in the Coal Industry”, loc. cit., pp. 360, 366, 370, 375; Richardson, Industrial Relations, op. cit., pp. 69–70.

¹⁷ Kingsford, P. W., “Labour Relations on the Railways, 1885–1875”, in: The Journal of Transport History, I (1953–1954), p. 76.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Groves, R., Sharpen the Sickle. The History of the Farm Worker's Union (London, 1949), pp. 71–72, 76.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Quoted in Hurst, J. G., Edmund Potter and Dinting Vale (Manchester, 1948), p. 46.Google Scholar

²⁰ Royal Commission, First Report, q. 2634.Google Scholar

²¹ W. Stewart to Earl Fitzwilliam, 4 June 1874, Wentworth Woodhouse Muniments T 29 d, Sheffield City Library.

²² See Royal Commission, Seventh Report [PP, 1867–1868, XXXIX, 3980-III], q. 14436Google Scholar; Tenth Report, qq. 18306–12; Ninth Report [PP, 1867–1868, XXXIX, 3980-V], q. 17247Google Scholar; Hopper, W. R., “An Iron-master's View of Strikes”, in: Fortnightly Review, Old Series, I (1865), p. 743.Google Scholar Evidence, however, indicates that industrialists were not always on the defensive, and in a number of districts they were the first to initiate combinations. For examples of cotton and coal masters' associations which preceded union development, see Howell, G., The Conflicts of Capital and Labour (London, 1878), p. 101Google Scholar; Ludlow, J. M. “Account of the West Yorkshire Coal-Strike and Lock-Out of 1858”, in: Trades' Societies and Strikes, pp. 26–29.Google Scholar

²³ For the Coal Owners' Association, see The South Yorkshire and North Derbyshire Coal Owners' Association, Ltd, Minutes of Meeting, 30 06 1874, p. 7Google Scholar, Wentworth Woodhouse Muniments T 29 d. For the Clyde Shipbuilders' and Engineers' Association, see Royal Commission, Ninth Report, q. 17456.Google Scholar The funds raised by other associations were not as substantial, e.g., the Iron Manufacturers' Association's strike fund was £47,575, while the Midland Association of Flint Glass Manufacturers' was only £100. See Royal Commission, Fifth Report, q. 9400Google Scholar, and Tenth Report, q. 18374.

²⁴ Royal Commission, First Report, q. 3068.Google Scholar For the General Builders' rules, see ibid., q. 3612.

²⁵ Information derived from the rules of the North of England Iron Manufacturers' Association, Royal Commission, Eleventh Report, Vol. I [PP, 1868–1869, XXXI, 4123]Google Scholar, Appendix H. For the Glasgow association, see First Report, q. 3477, and for McDonald's statement, see ibid., q. 3612. McDonald was the secretary to the Glasgow Master Brick-builders' Association.

²⁶ See, e.g., evidence given by Palmer, Charles Mark, secretary to the Shipbuilders' Association, Ninth Report, qq. 17847–48.Google Scholar

²⁷ Fifth Report, q. 9539; Jevons, W. A., “Account of the Weavers' Strike at Padiham in 1859”, in: Trades' Societies and Strikes, p. 433.Google Scholar

²⁸ First Report, q. 2691.

²⁹ Ibid., q. 1858.

³⁰ Ninth Report, qq. 17488–89.

³¹ First Report, q. 2534.

³² Royal Commission, Eighth Report [PP, 1867–1868, XXXIX, 3980-IV], q. 16470.Google Scholar

³³ For unionists' complaints, see Royal Commission, First Report, qq. 1627, 869Google Scholar, and Fourth Report [PP, 1867, XXXII, 3952], q. 7337.Google Scholar For Mault's statement, see Second Report [PP, 1867, XXXII, 3893], q. 4021.Google Scholar Mault conceded that blacklists were opposed to the principle of freedom of labour, but held that this policy was forced upon employers by trade unions. First Report, q. 3147.

³⁴ Eleventh Report, Vol. I, Dissent to Final Report, p. xlix.Google Scholar The Commission's Majority Report had concluded that the employers' organizations were defensive in nature and free of intimidation, see ibid., pp. xvi-xviii.

³⁵ Hopper, “An Iron-master's View of Strikes”, loc. cit., p. 749. Not all members of masters' societies agreed with the policy of lock-outs. Lady C. Schreiber, proprietor of Dowlis Ironworks, argued that lock-outs threatened to destroy the good relations which had been created by the provision of welfare benefits. Schreiber, Lady Charlotte, Extracts from her journal, 1853–1891, ed. by the Earl of Bessborough (London, 1952), pp. 2–13.Google Scholar

³⁶ For the various opinions expressed, see F. Harrison to E. Beesly, 1865, Frederic Harrison Manuscripts, Box 1, Section A, British Library of Political and Economic Science; Ludlow, “Account of the West Yorkshire Coal Strike”, loc. cit., p. 30; “Trade Union Inquiry”, in: Capital and Labour, 30 12 1874, p. 1038.Google Scholar

³⁷ The Times, 8 08 1859, p. 12.Google Scholar

³¹ First Report, q. 2534.

³² Royal Commission, Eighth Report [PP, 1867–1868, XXXIX, 3980–IV], q. 16470.Google Scholar

³³ For unionists' complaints, see Royal Commission, First Report, qq. 1627, 869Google Scholar, and Fourth Report [PP, 1867, XXXII, 3952], q. 7337.Google Scholar For Mault's statement, see Second Report [PP, 1867, XXXII, 3893], q. 4021.Google Scholar Mault conceded that blacklists were opposed to the principle of freedom of labour, but held that this policy was forced upon employers by trade unions. First Report, q. 3147.

³⁴ Eleventh Report, Vol. I, Dissent to Final Report, p. xlix.Google Scholar The Commission's Majority Report had concluded that the employers' organizations were defensive in nature and free of intimidation, see ibid., pp. xvi-xviii.

³⁵ Hopper, “An Iron-master's View of Strikes”, loc. cit., p. 749. Not all members of masters' societies agreed with the policy of lock-outs. Lady C. Schreiber, proprietor of Dowlis Ironworks, argued that lock-outs threatened to destroy the good relations which had been created by the provision of welfare benefits. Lady Charlotte Schreiber, Extracts from her journal, 1853–1891, ed. by the Earl of Bessborough (London, 1952), pp. 2–13.Google Scholar

³⁶ For the various opinions expressed, see F. Harrison to E. Beesly, 1865, Frederic Harrison Manuscripts, Box 1, Section A, British Library of Political and Economic Science; Ludlow, “Account of the West Yorkshire Coal Strike”, loc. cit., p. 30; “Trade Union Inquiry”, in: Capital and Labour, 30 12 1874, p. 1038.Google Scholar

³⁷ The Times, 8 08 1859, p. 12.Google Scholar

³⁸ E.g., the secretary of the Master Builders' Association toured Germany to obtain blackleg labour. “End of the Mason Strike”, in: Capital and Labour, 20 03 1878, p. 178.Google Scholar For information on the Free Labour Representation League, see Alderman, G., “The National Free Labour Association. A Case-Study of Organised Strike-Breaking in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries”, in: International Review of Social History, XXI (1976).Google Scholar

³⁹ General Deputation from the Cotton, Woollen, Worsted, Silk and Linen Trades, 25 February 1854, Home Office Papers 45, Old Series 5209, Public Record Office.

⁴⁰ National Association of Factory Occupiers, Special Report of the Executive Committee, 1855, pp. 4–5.Google Scholar See also Joint Report of Factory Inspectors, 31 10 [PP. 1856, XVIII, 2031].Google Scholar For Dickens's comment, see Hutchins, B. L. and Harrison, A., A History of Factory Legislation (London, 1903), p. 116.Google Scholar

⁴¹ NAFO, Special Report, op. cit., pp. 6, 9; Joint Report of Factory Inspectors, 1 06 1855 [PP, 1854–1855, XV, 1947], p. 49.Google Scholar

⁴² Minutes of the Leeds and District Association of Factory Occupiers, 26 04 1872, pp. 30–31Google Scholar, and 4 March 1873, pp. 44–45, Marshall Manuscripts 200/58, Brotherton Library, University of Leeds.

⁴³ Association of British Chambers of Commerce, London, Records of Annual Meetings, Eighth Annual Meeting, 1868, p. 70.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Ibid., Fifth Annual Meeting, 1865, p. 96, and Ninth Annual Meeting, 1869, p. 96.

⁴⁵ Ibid., Ninth Annual Meeting, p. 96.

⁴⁶ See “Prevention of Strikes”, ibid., Fifth Annual Meeting, pp. 90–93, and “Strikes”, ibid., Sixth Annual Meeting, 1866.

⁴⁷ Lee, , “Organization in the Coal Industry”, p. 375.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ For further details, see Alderman, The Railway Interest, op. cit., pp. 14–27.

⁴⁹ See, e.g. the case prepared by the secretary in 1874 during the Labour Laws Commission. First Report of the Labour Laws Commission on the Working of the Master and Servant Act, 1867, and the Criminal Law Amendment Act 34 and 35 Vict. c. 32 [PP, 1875, XXIV, C. 1094], qq. 737–45.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Alderman, loc. cit.

⁵¹ Minutes of the Leeds and District Association of Factory Occupiers, 24 11 1872, p. 4.Google Scholar

⁵² Ibid., pp. 5–7, 17–19,27.

⁵³ Ibid., p. 32.

⁵⁴ “The National Federation, Statement as to its formation and objects”, in: Capital and Labour, 31 12 1873, pp. 1–2.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Ibid., p. 1.

⁵⁶ Ibid.

⁵⁷ Ibid., p. 2.

⁵⁸ Howell, G., Labour Legislation, Labour Movements and Labour Leaders (London, 1902), p. 318.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ The Times, 16 December 1873. For Levi's opinion, see Levi, L., Work and Pay or Principles of Industrial Economy (London, 1877), p. 69.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ For a summary of contemporary opinions, see “The Federation and its Critics”, in: Capital and Labour, 31 12 1873, p. 5.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Standard, 17 December; Daily Telegraph and Morning Post, 15 December.

⁶² “The National Federation of Employers”, in: Capital and Labour, 14 03 1877, pp. 148–54.Google Scholar

⁶³ The Times, 16 December 1873. For the deputation, see Howell, Labour Legislation, op. cit., p. 324.

⁶⁴ For the employers' representatives, see First Report of the Labour Laws Commission, op. cit.

⁶⁵ Information on the members and witnesses of the Committee was derived from Report from the Select Committee on Employers' Liability for Injuries to their Servants [PP, 1877, X, 285].Google Scholar

⁶⁶ “Employers' Liability Bill”, in: Capital and Labour, 9 06 1880, p. 358.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ “The Late Employers' Federation”, ibid., 28 September 1881, p. 533.

⁶⁸ “The National Federation of Employers”, loc. cit., p. 151.

⁶⁹ “The Late Employers' Federation”, loc. cit.

⁷⁰ Opinions of this nature were expressed in “Master and Workmen”, in: Capital and Labour, 20 05 1874, pp. 266–67.Google Scholar