On February 20, 1909, the third General Council Meeting of the Union was held in St. James's Hall, King's Lynn, and by the resolutions that were sent in from the various branches I was satisfied that the men were getting restless and that without great care trouble was facing us in the near future, and that it was imperative that we should be taking some steps to secure some improvement in the working condition of our members. The committee, however, could not see that there was any danger; but I could see it, and I did persuade the Executive to allow me to write to the Farmers' Federation and invite them to meet us and discuss the question of some readjustment in wages. This I did, but it was again refused. On receipt of this refusal the Executive passed a resolution at their meeting held on April 24th that Mr. Nicholls and Mr. Winfrey be requested to take steps to have the agricultural labourers included in any scheme of arbitration that might be formed. They also instructed me to write every branch that when they desired increase in wages they must communicate with me and that I would suggest what action was to be taken, and that I was to advise all members to sign a paper requesting a rise, and that I be instructed to enclose the same and forward it to each employer. Here were more superhuman responsibilities placed on my shoulders, making me absolutely responsible for every trouble that might arise. As I look at these old minutes that were passed, without complaining of the action of the Executive, I sometimes wonder what kind of man the Executive thought I was. They must have thought I was superhuman, which I was not by any means, for I had very serious limitations. Never before had any one man such grave responsibilities put upon him, and I knew it and it worried me beyond degree. But I faced the work with great faith in the eternal resources and trust in Divine help.

I had, however, one great trouble. My dear wife, who had been such a help to me, began to fail in health, both mentally and bodily, and I saw the end was coming. During the summer it was my misfortune to be insulted by a drunken man, a son of a small farmer at Sharrington. I was advertised to address a meeting near the old cross at Sharrington. On my arrival at the place of meeting this man lay on the green drunk. As soon as I commenced to speak he commenced to brawl and shout so that no one could be heard. When I asked him to be quiet he got up and struck me a violent blow in the chest. What else he would have done had he not been stopped I am unable to say. As it was I was laid up for a week and had to go to a doctor. The man was summoned before the Holt Bench and he was fined £1.

The Executive at the meeting held on April 24th decided that the Union should be affiliated with the Trade Union Congress, and that we should pay on the basis of 3,000 members. I was elected delegate to attend the Congress at Ipswich on September 6th, which I did, and had a most cordial reception by the delegates and was especially mentioned in the President's address. I attended the Congress and spoke on the system of tied cottages. Mr. Smillie, on behalf of the miners, moved the following resolution:—

This Congress urges upon the Labour Members in the House of Commons to take up at once the question of the eviction of workmen and their families from their homes during trade disputes and do everything possible to pass into law a measure that would put an end to this cruel method of warfare.

Although this resolution did not quite meet the case of the agricultural labourer, I supported it, as it gave me an opportunity to bring before the public's notice the difficult position the tied cottage system put the agricultural labourers in. I made the following speech:—

The delegates coming from the large centres of industry have no idea of the seriousness of the question from the standpoint of the agricultural labourers. If a town worker is evicted from his house he can soon get another in an adjoining street. That is not the case with the agricultural labourer. If he is evicted from his cottage he cannot get another in the same village nor in any of the five or six villages near him. I hold in my hand a copy of an agreement which an agricultural labourer has to enter into with the landlord on some estates before he takes his cottage. It reads as follows:—

"I, the undersigned, agree to hire the cottage in the Parish of................the property of....................at a rental of................and agree to give the cottage up at a week's notice should the landlord require it for any other workman.

I also agree not to keep any pigs or fowls without first obtaining permission from the landlord or his agent.

I will also act as night-watchman when required, and give any information I may have that will lead to the conviction of anyone seen poaching on the estate.

I also undertake not to harbour any of my family who may misconduct themselves in any way.

I also agree on leaving my cottage to hand over my copper and oven to the landlord or his agent and not to disturb the bricks or to remove these utensils until the landlord or his agent have refused to purchase them.

I will also undertake to live at peace with my neighbours and to lead an honest and respectable life.

I will, before admitting any of my family home, apply to the landlord or his agent for permission, giving particulars on a form provided by the landlord, their names and ages, also if married or single, and how long they want to stay."

That is the kind of agreement agricultural labourers are called upon to sign. It shows the Congress the nature of the difficulties that confront agricultural labourers. You might say the labourers are not intelligent enough to combine: they are intelligent enough if they have the freedom. Only this week, since I have been at this Congress, I have received a telegram from our solicitor who is contesting a case before the Grimston Bench on behalf of the Agricultural Labourers' Union. It relates to a labourer who obtained permission for a holiday. But when he went back to work he was discharged and received a week's notice to leave his cottage. He could not get another, and an ejectment order was applied for. Our solicitor in his telegram says the magistrates would have granted the ejectment order, but he was able to defeat it on technical grounds. This poor man's wife is within a month of her confinement, and, had the ejectment order been granted, his wife and four children would have been thrown on to the road. I ask you to do all you can to bring this matter to an issue and see if a Bill cannot be brought into Parliament giving the agricultural labourer security of tenure. Labourers who live under conditions such as I have described can neither make applications for allotments nor yet serve on local authorities. If they attempted to do such things, they are marked men and are turned out of their cottages at a week's notice. I trust that the cruel eviction business will soon become a thing of the past.

After some further discussion the resolution was carried unanimously, and for the first time the system under which the labourer has to hire his cottage was brought before the public. It has been a hardy annual at the Trade Union Congress ever since.

This exposure caused a tremendous sensation throughout the country. For months I was inundated with letters asking for the names of estates. Others sought for information for the purpose of writing articles in the press. It gave a wonderful impetus to the Union.

During the summer I held a number of Sunday services under the auspices of the Union. After I had addressed one of these meetings a rather exciting incident happened. When attending a meeting in a village in Norfolk a clergyman was at the meeting and expressed a wish to speak privately to me, and we adjourned to a room in the inn. On entering the room he said he had heard that I had been blaspheming the name of Jesus and demanded that I make an apology to him (the clergyman). I told him I had done nothing of the kind, and, so far as apologizing to him, he would be the last man I should apologize to. Whereupon he informed me he was a lightweight champion boxer, and if I did not there would be bloodshed, and he came towards me. I at once pushed him over and left the room and went back to the meeting and reported what had taken place. Needless to say he had very soon to leave for his own safety.

During the autumn it became evident to me that trouble was looming in the near future. Numbers of small disputes took place, which I had to deal with on my own responsibility and which caused a good deal of anxiety.

As we approached the end of the year the branches were asked to send in resolutions for the General Council. Most of them were demanding that the Executive should take up the question of an increase in wages, Saturday half-holiday and a forty-eight hour week. At the December Executive I again warned the Executive that I feared we should soon have to face trouble as I was sure the members would soon press for an increase in consequence of the rise in the cost of living. I urged them to allow me to call them together at any time to discuss the best method of grappling with the situation and to obtain the increase so long delayed.

But they seemed to think I was able to deal with the situation. The General Council of the Union was not held in 1910 until March 19th. It was held in the Central Hall, King's Lynn. The reason for the Council meeting not being held until March was the General Election in January and the County Council Election in March. This Council Meeting was attended by nearly one hundred delegates. The greatest interest was taken in the proceedings. There were many resolutions on the agenda dealing with hours of labour and wages. The resolution dealing with Saturday half-day was warmly debated and a resolution carried that the new Executive be instructed to take steps to secure the Saturday half-day, one journey all the year round and an increase of 1s. per week at once. At the close of the Council a short meeting of the new Executive was held. Mr. George Nicholls presided. I again pointed out to them the seriousness of the situation and told them I was sure there was trouble looming in the near future, and that the labourers, so far as Norfolk was concerned, would insist on an attempt being made for an increase in wage and an improvement in their working conditions. I urged them to give me more help and to allow me to bring them together at any time, even by wire if necessary; but this they refused and held that I was quite able to deal with any dispute that might arise without calling the committee together. The fact was that, while I had an Executive who were able and earnest and anxious to do their best to build up the Union, they were inexperienced so far as Trade Unionism was concerned. They were always anxious to keep working expenses down. At the committee the night before the Council the Treasurer, Mr. Richard Winfrey, wrote complaining about the increased expenditure during the year for organizing work, although we had saved during the year 1909 £503 11s. 8½d. and had only spent £771 9s. 9½d. out of a total income of £1,275 1s. 6d. This expenditure was for lock-out pay, postages and rent of rooms. Salaries paid during the year were for my assistant secretary, Miss Pike, and myself £91; divided as follows: Miss Pike 12s. per week, £31 4s.; myself £1 3s. per week, £59 16s.; my assistant organizer, Mr. Thomas Thacker, £1 5s. per week, £65. Total salaries for the three of us £156. Yet the Treasurer, in his anxiety to save money, thought this was too high an expenditure. Probably as an economist he was right, but no one can say that those who did the work were overpaid. I left the Executive and the General Council on March 19, 1910, with a very heavy heart, for I could see by the temper of the men that they were determined within a very short time to press for an improvement in their conditions of living and in my judgement they were justified. In fact, it was long overdue, for the cost of living was rapidly rising, and I also knew that the farmers, as they had done in the days of the other Union, would fight this honest desire on the part of the labourers to its bitter end. The saddest thing for me was I could not get my Executive to see it and they left me to face it single-handed. But I set to work to prepare for the inevitable whenever it did come. I was determined to put my back against the wall and stand by the men, and at the same time to do all I could, whenever the trouble did arise, to bring the two sides together.

I had not long to wait. On April 5th I received a letter from Mr. Harvey, the secretary of the Trunch Branch, informing me that his members objected to working ten hours a day unless they received a rise of 1s. per week, a not very extravagant demand. I saw at once that the trouble I had for so long tried to impress upon my Executive had arrived, in fact I felt convinced the farmers were anxious to try their strength. On receipt of the letter I at once wrote to the branch secretary, instructing him to call a special meeting of his members for April 11th and at the same time telling him that no action must be taken until I had met them and obtained full particulars and laid them before the Executive, for in spite of what the Executive had done I was determined I would not take on my shoulders the responsibility of a strike without the Executive being called together to decide it and take their share of responsibility. I received no further information during the week, and I expected nothing would take place until I had an opportunity of meeting the men and discussing the matter with them. But to my surprise on Monday April 11th I saw in the Daily Press that the men had struck work. Altogether thirty men were affected. It appears that the farmers had forced a lock-out by refusing to withdraw the notice until the men had time to meet me and discuss the matter with them. I was, however, determined to prevent an open rupture if possible. On Monday April 11th I attended the Erpingham Board of Guardians, of which the Secretary of the Farmers' Federation was deputy clerk. During the day we had an interview, and I promised that if he would prevent the importation of Federation labour I would try and persuade the men to go back to work until representatives of the two organizations could meet and come to some arrangement, he undertaking to persuade the farmers to reinstate all the men without prejudice. This he did. I, with Mr. Robert Green, Mr. W. Codling and Mr. Herbert Day, met the men at Trunch in the evening and thoroughly discussed the cause of the dispute with them. The facts were as follows: In March, as was the custom, the farmers requested the men to work ten hours a day. This the men agreed to on condition that the employers would give them an increase of 1s. per week. This the employers refused to do and gave the men a week's notice to leave unless they worked the ten hours, the men accepting the notice, which expired on April 8th. I advised the men to go back to work until the committee could meet and some arrangement could be made in reference to their hours of labour and conditions of work. This the Knapton men agreed to do, and on Tuesday morning I received a report that the Knapton men had gone back to work on a nine-hour day. I at once wrote to Mr. J. T. Willis the following letter, which will show how anxious I was to avoid a dispute and to meet the farmers, which I regret to say the farmers for years refused to do.

Flitcham,
April 10, 1910.

J. T. Willis, Esq.,
Secretary, Farmers' Federation,
Sheringham.

Dear Sir,

I was pleased to hear from my representative at the Trunch district before leaving home this morning that some kind of a truce had been arranged between the employers and their men, which I think is a credit to both parties concerned; but to avoid any unpleasantness in the future and in order to arrive at a settlement that will be satisfactory to both parties, I beg to suggest to your committee that a committee be formed consisting of an equal number of employers and employed without prejudice to any one, with you and myself in addition, to represent the two organizations and discuss the whole question of hours and wages. I have hurried my committee on, and they will meet on Monday April 18th, probably at Sheringham, when the whole question will be discussed from our point of view. I shall be glad to hear from you before that date in reference to the above suggestion, and hope the truce will be maintained until after that date.

Yours faithfully,
(Signed) George Edwards,

General Secretary,
Agricultural Labourers' and Small Holders' Union.

To this letter I received no reply, but I heard from my representative during the week that the farmers had broken the truce and were again demanding that the men should work a ten-hour day, which they resolutely refused to do. When the men at Trunch met me on Saturday April 16th I found them all out again and very indignant at the treatment they had received from the employers. I soon found that all hope of a settlement was gone. The meeting was largely attended and most enthusiastic. I had never before witnessed such a spirit of determination. I addressed the men in a most hopeful tone, although in the first instance they were a little out of order. A resolution was passed without a dissentient voice urging upon the Executive to support them, and thus the trouble began.

My first effort to effect a settlement by peaceful means had failed. I could plainly see what was in front of me. I knew that the brunt of the battle would fall on me and I should have poured on my head showers of abuse and the grossest misrepresentation. But I knew the men's cause was just and their demands moderate, and I made up my mind I would fight their battle honestly and justly. The Executive met on Monday April 18th and decided to support the men to the utmost.

The struggle commenced in earnest. The men set themselves to it like grim death. The farmers became furious. The Farmers' Federation imported non-unionists into the villages, but no one would lodge them, so the farmers had to make provision for them. These men were not many of them efficient workmen. They received 10s. per week more than the labourers had asked. They also had lodgings free and a cook found to look after them. They were also supplied with plenty of beer. Policemen were sent into the village to keep order, as they said, but there was no need for it. For one thing I had pressed on the men that they must conduct the dispute in a peaceful way and not on any account allow themselves to be provoked into breaking the peace, for if they did I would not lead them. They received many provocations, but with no avail. Many threats were thrown out to them. The women dressed up an effigy and set it up in their garden and made its legs black, and wrote on it "blackleg." This the police ordered them to take down. I came into the village at the time and told the police to mind their own business or I should report them. No more was heard of it. Many attempts were made to evict these men from their houses, but failed. One thing in the men's favour was that Mr. Bircham of Knapton was under notice to leave his farm. It was up for sale. I was on the County Council and a member of the Small Holdings Committee. I advised these men to make an application to the County Council for a small holding, which many of them did for five, ten, and even up to twenty acres, and so great was the demand that, when the farm was put up for sale, the Small Holdings Committee was one of the bidders and bought it. When this became known the farmers became more furious than ever.

I, of course, came in for all the credit for this and they were not far wrong. I look upon this as one of the best pieces of work I have been able to do for my people. So angry did the opponents of the men become that they became threatening in their attitude towards me, so much so that the men would insist on acting as my bodyguard when I went into the district, and it would have been a sorry day for any man who dared to have attempted to molest me. I set myself at once to collect funds to enable me to pay the men that had families more than strike pay, which was 10s. per week. The subscriptions came in fast. Our first collection was at a meeting held on a Sunday at Knapton when over a thousand people were present. The meeting was addressed by myself, Mr. Day, Mr. Robert Green, Mr. Thacker, and in the evening some friends came over from Norwich, amongst them being Mr. W. R. Smith, now the able President of the Union. This was the first time we had met and we soon became fast friends. The result of the day's collection was over £7 10s., and thus a good start was made. The men themselves were in fine form. This meeting did the greatest good in every respect. It awakened a spiritual interest such as there had not been for a very long time. I devoted my time during the week to holding public meetings and making collections for them. I never missed a Saturday night in going over to pay the men. This, however, meant many a long weary night cycle ride and long hours for my poor assistant at home. But the worst had yet to come. The struggle continued all the summer, and I don't think any one man suffered a penny loss. All the applicants for small holdings and several of the men who had been locked out became tenants in October on the very farm on which they had been locked out a few months before. All of them were allowed to keep in their houses, so that we were able to find work elsewhere for those that could not take any land. Thus in this district, although the dispute lasted over six months, we won a notable victory and its effects are felt to-day, for the Trunch Branch is one of our largest branches in the Union, and Mr. Harvey, their first branch secretary, is still their secretary, and is to-day a member of the Norfolk County Council and a Justice of the Peace. In this district we have a fine type of the Norfolk labourers.