ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 17

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be blog posts throughout May on this site.

Z is for Zangwill and Zygielbojm

For my final post in this series I struggled to find London radicals whose surnames began with X or Y, but I have found two Zeds – whose roots were much further east than Whitechapel or even Essex.

Israel Zangwill was born in Whitechapel in 1864. His mother was from Poland and his father from Latvia. Szmul Zygielbojm was born in Borowica, Poland in 1895. His life in London lasted just over a year, from late March 1942 until early May 1943, but it was a very dramatic one.

When Zangwill was very young his family moved to Plymouth and Bristol before they

zangwill-articles-110413-1423659292

Israel Zangwill

returned to the East End when Israel was 9 years old. They enrolled him at the Jews’ Free School (JFS) in Bell Lane near Spitalfields market (my grandfather went there too, in the early 1900s). Zangwill stayed for many years because when he finished his schooling he became a teacher at JFS.

During his early years as a teacher the demography of the East End changed rapidly with the arrival of a much bigger influx of Jews fleeing persecution and violent pogroms in Eastern Europe. They also suffered discrimination which restricted their options for work and education. Many came as economic migrants seeking better opportunities, as well as political freedom. Initially they huddled within one square mile around Aldgate and Whitechapel.

An acute and acerbic observer of the new scene, Zangwill wrote about this rapidly changing environment. He resigned his teaching post in 1888 to become a journalist on a recently established journal called Jewish Standard.

220px-Israel_Zangwill_by_Walter_Sickert_Vanity_Fair_25_February_1897He went on to write acclaimed novels and plays, his most famous book being Children of the Ghetto, (1892). His writing, which laid bare poverty, petty and major class distinctions, and both the grim and humorous realities of the struggle for life, earned him a title – the “Jewish Dickens”. Biographers describe him as: “angular, tall, gaunt, and bespectacled” a “witty, powerful… speaker”, who was “eccentric in some respects … giving the appearance of brusqueness, sometimes bordering on rudeness.”

His overt political radicalism was expressed through feminism and pacifism and a complicated engagement with Jewish nationalism. In 1903 he married Edith Ayrton, a feminist writer active in the National Union of Women’s Suffrage Societies, and later the more militant Women’s Social and Political Union (WSPU – Suffragettes). She noted: “… as I am unable to be militant myself, from reasons of health, and as I believe most fully in the necessity for militancy, I was bound to give every penny I can afford to the militant union that is bearing the brunt of the battle… the WSPU.”

One difficulty the WSPU faced was promoting their views across a mainstream media dominated by an anti-suffrage male establishment. Women struggled to intervene on letters pages of influential press outlets, which is partly what prompted the WSPU to establish its own newspaper.

But a left of centre cultural elite among male poets, writers and artists, could get their critical views published. Zangwill was a co-founder in 1907 of the Men’s League for Women’s Suffrage, which wrote letters, campaigned and attended protest rallies. He used his sardonic wit in his campaigning, saying: “A man likes his wife to be just clever enough to appreciate his cleverness, and just stupid enough to admire it.”

He spoke up in defence of militant tactics of civil disobedience but criticised the use of arson, and increasingly, the lack of internal democracy in the movement.

He was committed to absolute equality of the sexes in the fight for a new way of life. He promoted “joint work” among women and men “to foster every noble growth; joint work to make a better world for both.”

His dream of overcoming the world’s imperfections informed his pacifism. He was an outspoken critic of the First World War, and supported the pacifist Union of Democratic Control (UDC), formed in 1914. The UDC which demanded transparency in foreign policies of government. It believed that smaller conflicts between nations only escalated into wider conflicts because of secret military alliances. Transparency would make that less likely to happen.

The UDC was vilified in the right wing press, especially the Daily Express, and some meetings were broken up by soldiers. Zangwill believed that the impulse to war grew from exaggerated nationalism but knew that Germany was not the only culprit. He criticised the peace treaty’s terms at the end of World War1, predicting another more deadly war could follow. He branded the League of Nations, the “League of Damnations”, a body that guaranteed that the injustices of the peace treaty were eternalised.

Zangwill argued that a future war could be prevented by abolishing “frontiers, passports, customs and tariffs”!

During World War one he was especially moved by the symbolic and actual changes GunmakersPlaque-300x225brought about in Old Ford Road Bethnal Green, a road which he lived on earlier in his life. The East London Federation of Suffragettes converted a disused pub there, the Gunmaker’s Arms, opposite a munitions factory, into a mother and baby clinic, free milk depot, and day nursery (later a small school run on Montessori principles). They renamed it the Mother’s Arms.

When Zangwill was opening the Second Women’s Exhibition at Caxton Hall In 1916 (a favoured venue of suffragettes) he declared: “…the hope of the world lies in changing the Gunmaker’s Arms to the Mother’s Arms.”

Zangwill was an early adherent of Zionism, from the standpoint of seeking a solution for Jewish people suffering antisemitism in many lands over many centuries. He was friendly with its founder, Theodore Herzl, and helped him to reach a wider public, but a few years later he broke with Zionism – over insistence on Palestine. Zangwill became part of the Territorialist  movement that sought a Jewish homeland wherever a safe spot on the globe could be found.

While personally close to many ardent Zionists, he criticised the Zionist movement he had formerly supported over its downplaying of potential conflict with the indigenous population and its willingness to become a pawn of colonial powers. Zangwill also had high hopes that what seemed to many an eternal persecution of Jews, could be overcome through progress in diaspora nations.

defaultIn March 1917 he spoke alongside Labour MPs George Lansbury, Josiah Wedgewood and William Anderson, and the left wing libertarian writer, Henry Nevinson, at a rally in London welcoming the February Revolution in Russia that removed the Tsar. Zangwill said: “As a representative of the race which has suffered more than any other from the old Russia, I am very happy on this occasion to add my words of welcome to the new Russia.”

He worked for a world comprised of increasingly cosmopolitan societies, based on equal rights, where nationalism would have diminished influence.  But he worried that: “Nationality, deep as life, but narrow as the grave, is closing in on us” and that “religion was giving way to ‘nationality’ as a permanent placeholder for cohesive shared experiences… leaving no space for … more benign forms of group identity.”

Zangwill’s columbarium in London’s Liberal Jewish cemetery bears an inscription he had prepared for after his death: “A man of letters and a fighter of unpopular causes.”

Z is also for Szmul Zygielbojm, an even more strident critic than Zangwill of all nationalism, not least Zionism. Zygielbojm was a leading member of a working class, Jewish socialist movement, the Bund, that was initiated in a house in Vilna (Vilnius) in 1897, in the same year that Herzl founded political Zionism in a more salubrious location in Basel.

One of 10 children from an impoverished family, Zygielbojm was working as a carton-box maker for pharmaceutical supplies from the age of 10. At 12 he was apprenticed as a glove maker. Largely self-educated, he developed a love for music, art, theatre, literature and poetry, but had few outlets to express this early on.

He joined the Bund as a young adult and rose within both the party and the trade union

Screen Shot 2018-05-10 at 08.14.31

Szmul Zygiebojm

movement. He became Secretary of the Metal Workers Union and an executive member of the Federation of All Trade Unions in Poland to which Jewish and non-Jewish workers’ were affiliated. In 1930s Poland Jews comprised 10% of Poland’s population but 25% of all the country’s trade unionists.

Fast forward to 1939 and the invasion by Nazi armies. Bundists and Polish socialists helped form workers’ battalions in Warsaw to resist the invaders but Warsaw succumbed after three weeks. The occupying Nazi forces set about discriminating  against Jews and physically separating them from non-Jews as a prelude to complete ghettoisation and eventual deportation for annihilation.

After Zygielbojm engaged in an open act of defiance he was “invited” (ordered) to report to Gestapo headquarters “to discuss important matters”. His Bund comrades hid him, then, a few weeks later, organised a daring escape in which he travelled in disguise through Nazi Germany on a false Dutch passport. They entrusted him, though, with a formidable task: to tell the world what was happening to Poland’s Jews and mobilise for their defence and rescue.

Zygielbojm emerged in Belgium at a meeting of the Socialist International. He shocked delegates with an eye-witness report of Nazi atrocities. But when the Nazis occupied Belgium, Zygielbojm fled again, eventually reaching America. He told Jewish and labour movement audiences there about the barbaric Nazi occupation and urged action to rescue the Jews.

In early 1942, the Polish Parliament in Exile invited Zygielbojm to join their National Council in London. So he came here as a political refugee. The one other Jewish delegate to that council, politically dominated by the right but with some more liberal representation, was Schwarzbard, a Zionist with whom Zygielbojm had an antagonistic relationship. Zygielbojm represented the Bund but was, by extension seen as representing Poland’s ghettoised Jews under Nazi occupation.  He maintained a network of clandestine contacts – Jewish and non-Jewish – who relayed detailed information from Poland through underground resistance channels.

In London Zygielbojm lived alone in a bedsit in Paddington. His closest contacts in London were other exiled émigré socialists – Polish, Czech, Austrian, German, Belgian, who met within small circles, with some overlap. Among them was Camille Huysmans, a Belgian who was a key figure for émigré socialists liaising with the Labour Party.

Zygielbojm sent telegrams to diplomats and political leaders, broadcast twice on BBC radio (July and December 1942), addressed public meetings, and bombarded the press with letters and information.

At a packed Labour Party international meeting in Caxton Hall, Westminster in September 1942, on the third anniversary of the start of the war, Zygielbojm was the opening speaker. He revealed gruesome facts about the first use of poison gas as a weapon of mass slaughter. Around 40,000 Jews were exterminated in 7 weeks in Chelmno, northern Poland. He asked the audience to “imagine the people who see their nearest ones being dragged away to their death every day.” Each one, he said “knows that their turn must come. The conscience of every person must be shaken; the serenity of those who ignore the facts must be exploded.” He called on people of all nations to “force the Nazi murderers to stop the systematic massacre of a people.”

Screen Shot 2020-05-31 at 16.50.49

Jan Karski

Three months later, Zygielbojm was visited at his Paddington flat by Jan Karski a remarkable figure in the Polish underground. Karski had smuggled himself into the ghetto to relay messages between underground resisters. In London he handed Zygielbojm a letter from Leon Fajner, a Warsaw Ghetto Bundist, which asked Jewish leaders in the West to go on hunger strike outside British and American Government offices until they obtained guarantees of action to save the Jews. “Let them accept no food or drink, let them die a slow death while the world is looking on… This may shake the conscience of the world.” Zygielbojm knew that Britain’s Jewish leaders would not act on it, but promised Karski that he would do something about this letter.

Two separate events began on 19th April 1943. Nazi tanks and soldiers entered the Warsaw Ghetto intending to destroy it completely and massacre or deport its remaining inhabitants (most had already been deported to death camps). A world away American and British leaders convened the Bermuda Conference where they spent 11 days ruling out taking significant numbers of Jewish refugees. Inside the ghetto, though, Bundists, Communists and Zionists under a joint command, boosted by a small number of weapons received from the Polish resistance outside, fought a courageous three week guerrilla campaign to defend the ghetto. The Nazis paid a high price for their eventual victory over a few hundred fighters aged 13-40 years of age.

On the night of 11th/12th May, 1943, Zygielbojm ingested poison at his Paddington home. He left letters to political leaders and to his Bundist comrades and friends, confirming that his suicide was a premeditated act of political protest:

“My comrades in the Warsaw Ghetto perished with their weapons in their hands in their last heroic battle. It was not my destiny to die as they did, together with them. But I belong to them and in their mass graves. By my death I wish to make the strongest possible protest against the passivity with which the world is looking on and permitting the extermination of the Jewish people … perhaps … I shall help to break down the indifference of those who have the possibility now, at the last moment, to save those  Polish Jews still alive from certain annihilation … I wish that the surviving remnants of the Polish Jews could live to see, with the Polish population, the liberation that it could know in Poland, in a world of freedom and in the justice of socialism.”

He also left a letter for his landlady to apologise for the shock she would experience.

In Warsaw today, where the ghetto once stood, an artistic memorial is etched in glass on a building in “Zygielbojm Square”. Montreal has a Zygielbojm Memorial Park. In Israel, a Tel Aviv street is named after him. Here in London, where his life ended, there was no memorial. But in the run-up to the 50th anniversary of the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, in April 1993, I helped to found a Szmul Zygielbojm Memorial Committee (which included Bundist Holocaust survivors) to campaign for a local memorial.

We sought and received endorsements from writers, historians, rabbis, trade unionists and MPs, and then requested the notoriously right wing council Westminster Council to mount a plaque honour a refugee Polish, Jewish, socialist, anti-fascist resident.

A young council officer responded enthusiastically but met repeated hurdles. It tookIMG_2546 three years to succeed in mounting the plaque. When Zygielbojm committed suicide he believed that all his immediate family had been wiped out. But one son Yossel (Joseph) survived, fought as a Red Army partisan, and settled in California after the war with Adela, also a Polish-Jewish Holocaust survivor.

Sadly, in those three years in which we worked to get a plaque mounted, Yossel died, but Adela and other family members came for the ceremony. They unveiled the plaque together with the Polish ambassador, Ryszard Stemplowski, in front of a crowd of 200 people. The elderly Jan Karski, living in America too, and a close friend of Zygielbojm’s surviving family, sent a moving handwritten message regretting that he was “not strong enough” to travel, but assuring us of his joy that Zygielbojm would be finally honoured here in London.

ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 16

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be blog posts throughout May on this site.

W is for Wesker and for Workers’ Circle

The year 1926 recalls the 9-day General Strike in May that year, in solidarity with miners who rejected employers demands to work longer hours for less pay. But in London, strikes were in the news as early as January that year. Newspaper hoardings advertising the Daily Herald  announced: “Trouser workers strike for a farthing a pair.” The story inside described events at Goodman’s factory in east London where an all-female workforce had walked out, led by a 25-year-old trouser machinist named Sara Wesker.

banner_trousermakers1882Sara Wesker lived with her sister Ann and her invalid mother in the Rothschild Buildings tenements in the Jewish immigrant area between Brick Lane and Commercial Street. After the strike at Goodman’s she organised women and helped to lead important strikes about working conditions and piece-rates at Rego’s factory in 1927, Pollikoff’s in 1929, and Simpson’s factory in Hackney in 1930.

She was described as “a ferocious speaker”, as if “the energy of five men was balled up inside that miniature frame of hers.” Fluent in Yiddish as well as English, she could relate to the older women in the sweatshops as well as younger workers.

In 1929, she helped to found a new union, the relatively short-lived United Clothing Workers’ Union (UCWU), in which there was a significant cross-over of leading members with Communist Party militants. Early on, Sarah was the only female member of UCWU’s Executive Committee. By 1933 she was appointed as the full-time women’s organiser of that union.

The year before that she had been elected to the British Communist Party’s Central Committee – something of an all-boys club previously. She remained active in the trade union movement and Communist Party her whole life, until she died of a stroke in 1971.

The name “Wesker”, though, has been more commonly associated with her nephew Arnold, the9781408156605 playwright, but it is Sara’s personality and beliefs that impose themselves on his most famous play Chicken Soup with Barley, first performed in 1958. which focuses on an impoverished left-wing Jewish family, the Kahn’s, in London East End. Scene 1 opens in 1936 – the day of the Battle of Cable Street.

The play highlights the pressures which result  in the  disintegration of the family relationships and political ideals which once bound them. A matriarch, Sara Kahn, who tries to hold the family together and is steadfast to her beliefs, is an amalgam of Arnold’s mother and his aunt Sara.

The poster promoting Chicken Soup with Barley, when it was revived 50 years later, for a run at the Royal Court Theatre, summed up Sara Kahn and Sarah Wesker. She is defiantly holding a red flag in one hand and a mixing spoon in the other, that she personally wants to klop Oswld Mosley’s head with.

In 1936 her family are worried by fascism but convinced that the forces of progress will win and deliver a better world. By scene 2, in 1946, the Kahn’s are living with the outcome of World War 2 and the devastation that fascism wrought before the Nazis were defeated and Sara is fighting a losing battle against her husband’s indolence. Scene 3 is set in 1956, as Soviet tanks are rolling into Budapest, to repress an uprising against “communist” rulers. One of Sarah Kahn’s grown-up sons visits her and challenges her to open her eyes see what is happening in the name of the the ideals she holds dear.

But she answers back powerfully: “All my life I worked with a party that meant glory, freedom and brotherhood. You want me to give it up now? You want me to move to Hendon and forget who I am? [my emphasis for my favourite line!] If the electrician who comes to mend my fuse blows it instead, so I should stop having electricity? I should cut off my light? Socialism is my light…”

A couple of years before Arnold died I briefly interviewed him by email. I asked him to describe his aunt and the flat where she lived (134 Rothschild Buildings).

le2_116783

Rothschild Buildings

“…a small lounge, a toilet to the left, a door into a bedroom where she and her sister, Ann, slept.  An alcove where her mother slept.  A small kitchen. A warm hissing gas fire in the lounge.  Cosy but very small, small enough for one.  No bathroom. But bookshelves bursting with classics: Jane Austen, the Bronte sisters, Dickens, historical novels, editions of the left Book Club. Photographs in frames of all the beloved nephews and nieces and their even more fussed over offspring!

He described Sarah as “feisty, loyal, affectionate, generous and a a vehement feminist, a dedicated Communist who thought Stalin could do no wrong.”

Sara and her sister Ann never married. In much of their spare time outside of work and political activity they cared for their invalid mother. But in the 1930s Sara had a boyfriend, 10 years younger, from the same block of flats, also a CP member and a trade unionist in the tailoring trade. His name was Mick Mindel. Eventually their relationship floundered. Mick married Sylvia – also a Mindel – a distant relation. But when Mick spoke at Sara Wesker’s funeral, he broke down as he addressed her coffin, and said “I always loved you Sara and always will.”

W is for Worker’s Circle.

Mick was brought up in a socialist household, and though he joined the Communist

732145

Young Bundists in Vilna

Party, his father retained allegiance to the Bund, formed in Vilna in 1897, who were less keen on Lenin, and much preferred the “democratic” part of “Democratic Centralism”. But the regular commitment that Mick and his Vilna-born father, Morris, shared was to a friendly/mutual aid society that his father had helped to found among the East End’s Yiddish-speaking immigrant Jewish workers.

It was called the Arbeter Ring (Workers’ Circle). Many of the early meetings of the Workers’ Circle took place in the Mindels’ flat at 184 Rothschild building. By the 1930s it had nearly 4,000 members in 19 branches (divisions), mostly in London, but also two in Leeds, two in Glasgow as well as divisions in Manchester, Liverpool, and Cardiff.

workerscirclebadgeThe  Circle was especially strong among tailors and cabinet-makers. It played a powerful role in giving East End Jewish workers dignity, strengthening their cultural lives, and broadening their education. It provided practical support when they faced the hardships of unemployment and illness, and helped them to organise against fascist threats.

Synagogue-based friendly societies were common, though these often had some richer benefactors starting them off. The Workers’ Circle was secular and socialist. On principle it would not accept charitable money. Everything they did was built through the collective contributions of their members.

The first attempts to create such an organisation in the East End was in 1903 by a group called the Fraye Arbeter Ring (Free Workers Circle) but they found it hard to sustain. After the attempted revolution in Russia in 1905 more revolutionaries went into exile. Experienced Bundist activists such as Mindel, Weinberg and Birenbaum, and anarchist activists such as Kramer and Kapitanshik arrived here and they aided the process of building a continuously functioning Workers’ Circle.

Its first official meeting took place on 17th July 1909 in the home of Nathan Weiner, an immigrant cabinet maker, on the Shoreditch/Bethnal Green borders. Its members were generally trade unionists. They didn’t replicate what unions did in individual workplaces but joined together in wider initiatives such as assisting workers’ cooperatives and developing cultural and educational projects.

At a basic economic level the Circle provided a kind of pre-welfare state insurance. For a small weekly contribution workers could draw benefits if they were long term unemployed through illness. They received bereavement benefits and burial rights. If they were on strike, the Workers’ Circle often supplemented their strike pay. For members with pressing financial problems there was a no-interest loan club.

In 1913 they opened a voluntary building fund. in 1924 they purchased a large house in

circle_house

Circle House

Alie Street, Aldgate, for £2,000 and converted it into Circle House, a social and cultural centre with a hall, a library, meeting rooms, a café filled with people enjoying food at workers’ prices, lemon tea, chess, draughts, dominoes, conversation and arguing over politics.

The Hall at the back of Circle House hosted lectures and discussions  sometimes with international speakers. A “propaganda committee” organised a series of Friday night lectures in Circle House’s library with speakers such as Sylvia Pankhurst and Fenner Brockway, and also study classes.

On Sunday nights there were classical concerts and Yiddish theatre productions, though younger members expressed a preference for dances. On Thursday nights, two brothers – Alexander and Frank Fine – both of them law graduates, keyneynehora, gave free legal advice to members. A weekly Yiddish supplementary school was set up for members’ children.

In the late 1920s a group of recently arrived young Polish Jews used a room on the top floor to establish the “Progressive Youth Circle”. They invited trade unionists, activists and academics to discuss topics ranging from communism and free love to women’s rights and Zionism. They questioned them closely and then dramatized what they had learned. The result was Proltet, a Yiddish-speaking agitprop theatre group, which played at various venues, raising money for causes locally and also in Poland, Romania and Spain.

Screen Shot 2020-05-29 at 17.34.07

Banner of the Naftali Botwin Company in the Spanish Civil War

There were members of the the Workers’ Circle who fought in the Spanish Civil War. The Circle targeted its Spanish aid  especially at the Botwin Company which mainly comprised Yiddish speaking combatants from Poland. They sent 6,000 cigarettes to them and a two ton lorry.

As a class-conscious organisation the Workers’ Circle were wary of being drawn into the forums of more bourgeois sections of Jewish life but in the crisis years of the mid-1930s they sent two delegates to the World Jewish Congress in Geneva 1936. After their delegates returned they were asked: “What’s the situation like in Switzerland?” One delegate replied: “Terrible – lemon tea is 9d a glass!”

In those years the Workers’ Circle ran an appeal to aid starving Jewish children in Poland and also took responsibility for looking after 19 children who came over from Germany, Austria and Czechoslovakia on the kindertransport.

During the 1940 blitz, Circle House suffered severe bomb damage. After the war, the Circle relocated to Hackney where it stayed until it closed in 1984. It held a farewell dinner for 400 people in February 1985.

The post-war welfare state and the NHS had taken over many of its basic economic functions. Over the decades the original political base – Bundists and Anarchists  – widened to include other socialists, communists and left wing Zionists. The twin births of Israel and the Cold War increased political factionalism within the circle and sapped its earlier tolerant and united spirit.

After its farewell dinner, files were deposited with the local history museum, its Yiddish book collection was donated to specialist libraries and museums, and a Yiddish sign outside the building was tea-leafed by a souvenir hunter. A chapter of secular Jewish working class history closed, in which people used to the full their cultural and political awareness to create meaningful lives in which, despite differences, the values of mutual aid, solidarity and socialism prevailed.

ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 15

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be blog posts throughout May on this site.

V is for Victoria Park

A sign in Victoria Park in East London tells you that this park was created by the generosity of Queen Victoria. A petition among East Londoners had certainly attracted thousands of signatures. But this was a request that she was only too happy to comply with, as one of her advisors, the epidemiologist William Farr, had warned her that the unhealthy, impoverished population of the area were increasingly choosing the West End’s more refined and exclusive green spaces for their recreation. So, at the outset Queen Victoria’s act of “generosity” was actually tainted with social cleansing.

The Crown Estate purchased 218 acres which began to be landscaped using architect Sir James Pennethorne’s drawings from 1842. It is a beautiful park that has served the radical movement well.

It was opened to the public in 1845 in a period when Chartists were agitating to extend democracy. The East London Democratic Association was a particularly active and militant Chartist section. They held outdoor meetings in Bonner’s Field in Bethnal green, part of which was later incorporated into the park. They were probably the first political activists to use it.

Baroness Angela Burdett-Coutts, a major landowner in East London paid for an elaborateVictoria-Park-Speakers-Corner-1024x1311 drinking fountain to be built in the park. The area around it became known as the Victoria Park Forum in the 1870s, an East End rival to Hyde Park’s Speakers Corner, which was established in the same decade.

At the forum, anyone could become a soapbox speaker, but the biggest crowds would flock towards “stars”, such as the atheist-feminist-socialist Annie Besant, the libertarian communist William Morris, the Dublin-born Fabian George Bernard Shaw, or the trade union militant and later syndicalist, Tom Mann. An article in Harper’s magazine in the politically charged year of 1888 listed the different ideologies you could be exposed to at the Forum:

“Malthusianism, atheism, agnosticism, secularism, Calvinism, socialism, anarchism, Salvationism, Darwinism, and even, in exceptional cases, Swedenborgianism and Mormonism.”

The bandstand, a relatively short distance from the fountain, was a venue for agitational meetings organised by political groups, such as as the No Rent Campaign. This campaign  was promoted by Charles Mowbray, an anarchist from the North East who moved to London in his 20s. He lived with his family on Boundary Street on the Bethnal Green/Shoreditch borders, along the northern edge of the notorious Old Nichol slum. Nearly 6,000 people were crammed into barely 650 houses in 20 very narrow streets in the Old Nichol. In a quarter of the houses there the foundations had collapsed and sunk down, so their living rooms seemed more like a cellar.

Mowbray printed leaflets inviting people to a meeting at the bandstand at 3pm

Charles+Mowbray+left+David+Nicol+right

Charles Mowbray

on July 26 1886. The leaflet was headed “MURDER!” It spoke of the “slow murder of the poor… poisoned by thousands in the foul, unhealthy slums from which robber landlords exacted monstrous rents”. It reminded people that they had already “paid in rent the value over and over again of the rotten dens” they lived in. He urged them to join a rent strike: “Pay no rent to land thieves and house farmers, who flourish and grow fat on your misery, starvation and degradation.”

In the second decade of the 20th century, the park was frequently used by the East London Federation of Suffragettes (ELFS). They began a tradition of Women’s May Day marches which took place at the end of May. They marched from East India docks to Crown Gate at Victoria Park and would often hold rallies just inside Crown gate, near the boating lake. At these rallies they sold their newspaper, Woman’s Dreadnought.

On one occasion in June 1913 they got their messages across in a novel way to the crowds who gathered there. Dozens of suffragettes entered the park each holding an umbrella. They hired boats and, when they were safely in the middle of the lake, far from police who often harassed them, they unfurled their umbrellas with suffragette slogans painted on them!

On one of the Women’s May Day marches, Sylvia Pankhurst advanced towards Crown

Junior-Bow-suffragettes-rose-pengelly-victoria-park

Young suffragettes at a gathering in Victoria Park

Gate with a circle of female bodyguards. As they got near the entrance, the police attacked the bodyguards to try to re-arrest Sylvia who had time on a prison sentence still to serve, having been released early following a hunger strike. But their initial attempts to get near her were repulsed as the police discovered that the security circle were all chained to each other. The police sent some of their number off to bring hammers and other tools to smash the chains, in order to get to Sylvia, which they did, but only after a fierce struggle.

In good weather the ELFS also used the park to run training session for a mixed-sex group known as the People’s Army which would protect the suffragettes from police brutality.

A few hundred yards west of the park, closer to Bethnal Green station, was a road called Victoria Park Square which ran between Old Ford Road and the section of Roman Road  then called “Green Street”. In the 1930s the Bethnal Green branch of Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists (BUF) had established a local headquarters in Green Street and held intimidating weekly marches through the area. One of their favourite speaking pitches was in Victoria Park Square, and a group of BUF thugs were guarding the platform from the morning of 4th October 1936 to hold it securely for Oswald Mosley. He had planned to appear consecutively on East End four different platforms in the after his Blackshirts had stormed their way through the East End that afternoon.

Oswald-Mosley-is-saluted-by-members-of-his-British-Union-of-Fascists-before-beginning-the-march-to-Cable-Street

Mosley inspecting his Blackshirts

But on that day Mosley’s 4,000 Balckshirts, and the 7,000 police that were gathered to facilitate him, were repulsed by mass blockades at Gardiner’s Corner, Aldgate and barricades in Cable Street. The BUF’s platform guards in Victoria Park Square were removed by large numbers of anti-fascists who led a hastily organised victory march through the East End after Mosley was sent packing back to the West End.

One of the anti-fascists, Reg Weston, describes it: “Hundreds joined in. Thousands stood on the pavements and in the roads, clapping and cheering as we marched on… We sang the traditional working class marching songs and anthems: the Internationale; the Italian revolutionary Bandiera Rossa…  the Berlin workers’ song Rote Wedding; the Polish Varshavianka, and the old Wobbly song ‘Solidarity Forever’, with the appropriate words: ‘We’ll hang Oswald Mosley on a sour apple tree … when the red revolution comes’.”

Another Cable Street veteran Ubby Cowan enjoyed the irony that anti-fascists had appealed to the Home Secretary through a petition with nearly 100,000 signatures, to stop the fascists marching that day. the Home Secretary refused the appeal and gave the fascists permission to march. But in the end the people stopped the fascists from marching, and then went on a march to celebrate. Cowan commented: “The Home Secretary said there could be a march so we (the anti-fascists) gave him one!”

For me personally Victoria Park will always be associated with the colour, excitement IMG_2856and exuberant atmosphere of the first Rock Against Racism/Anti-Nazi League Carnival on 30 April 1978. I had marched with so many others to be part of an 80,000 strong multicultural crowd that filled one section of the park with people while the performers on stage blasted out positive anti-racist, anti-fascist messagesalongside their powerful riffs.

I want to finish with another post-war moment that involves Oswald Mosley and anti-fascism. In 2010 I was invited to talk to a local history group that met in Notting Hill, West London. They asked me to speak about the build up to a key moment in the history of Mosley’s fascist party. This was not 1936, but 1934, and a 15,000 strong rally at Olympia – geographically much closer to Notting Hill than Cable Street. It was a night when the thuggishness of Mosley’s fascism revealed itself. Some 80 anti-fascists who had heckled “the Leader” at the rally required medical treatment after taking a beating from Mosley’s stewards. One detail I described in my talk was Mosley’s entrance to the hall. Lights were dimmed with a sole spotlight trained on Mosley. He walked slowly towards the platform. between two lines of flag-bearers, emphasising his leg-wound from the First World War,

Among these 25 or so local history enthusiasts there, I was paticularly aware of Leon, an older man at the back, with glasses and white hair, listening intently to every word. In the Q&A after the talk he said: “I want to tell you something about Mosley 15 years after the war, in 1960. Leon explained that he used to live in the East End. One Sunday morning his friends rang him up, urging him to come to meet them at “the park” (Victoria Park) as there was “something we need to do”. He couldn’t get his friends to say more. He went and met them and questioned them closely about what they would be doing. “You’ll see,” they said.

Eventually as they moved more deeply into the park they could see in the distance, an elderly man on a platform speaking to a small assembled crowd. It was Mosley, in his mid-60s, still spouting fascist and antisemitic nonsense. Feeling brave, Leon and his friends rushed the platform. Mosley’s audience scattered for safety. They tipped the platform up and confronted Mosley. But he got away, running for his life. There was no trace at all of that alleged war wound!

ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 14

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be blog posts throughout May on this site.

T is for Tillett and Thorne,

U is for Union of Women Matchmakers

In his book The Anarchists, set in London in 1887, the Scottish-German writer John Henry Mackay described London’s East End as “the hell of poverty” and the “Empire of Hunger”. This district bordered the City of London where enough wealth was made to build an Empire, then more fortunes were amassed from that empire. But they did not trickle down. How was it possible for grinding poverty and immense wealth to rub against each other without eventually sparking rebellion?

But Karl Marx’s comrade and sponsor, Friedrich Engels, thought the prospects of revolt were slim. In early 1888, He wrote to the writer/social commentator Margaret Harkness: “Nowhere else in the civilized world are the people less actively resistant, more passively submitting to their fate than in the East End of London.”

Suddenly, it all kicked off, first in a match factory in Bow, among the most exploited and disadvantaged sections of the labour force: girls and women, many of them also of Irish heritage – a community struggling to be treated as equals.

Their example was taken up by male workers in the Gas Works and Docks. In the struggles of 1888 and ’89, a “New Unionism” was born – one of its early products was the Union of Women Matchmakers established during a successful two-week strike at the Bryant and May factory that employed 1,400 women. After the spark was lit, a key role was then played by two trade union leaders, Will Thorne and Ben Tillett, whose personal experience of workplace exploitation began at the ages of 6 and 7 respectively.

The strike by women at Bryant and May’s  factory was precipitated by the management’s zealous matchwomenmarchingover-reaction after exploitative and unhealthy conditions there had been exposed in a small circulation left-wing newspaper. The author, Annie Besant, struck a nerve because Bryant and May were Quakers who cast themselves as slave abolitionists and enlightened employers. Besant told of long shifts, paltry wages, and petty fines frequently imposed on the flimsiest basis.

Foremen asked the workers to sign notes confirming they were happy their conditions. They met mass refusal. A gaggle of alleged “ringleaders” were sacked. Despite the absence of a union, as word got round the plant, women walked out spontaneously on strike. They picketed to stop any scab labour, held open-air meetings on free speech pitches; marched to parliament, forced the media to notice them, and rallied material and political support for their cause.

Managers threatened to import unemployed girls from Glasgow to replace them, or relocate to Scandinavia. The workers knew this was bluster. They formed a Union of Women Matchmakers and demanded that the sacked “ringleaders” were reinstated; that the whole system of fines was binned; and that management commit to building a separate eating area, as their food was getting contaminated on their long shifts by unhealthy work materials, and women were going down with “phossy jaw”.

They fought – and they won.

The match factory closed in 1979, and its 275 remaining workers made redundant. In 1988 its building started to be converted into a gated community of luxury flats. On the outer wall a plaque celebrates Annie Besant implying that she led the strike. She didn’t. That was led by the workers themselves such as Mary Driscoll, Alice France, Eliza Martin, Kate Slater and Jane Wakeling, who apparently had been involved in earlier unsuccessful strikes.

will_thorne

Will Thorne

Further east from Bow were London’s largest gas works at Beckton. Employees there were unionised by Will Thorne, a worker and agitator in his early 20s who had to overcome a major personal barrier. Neither he nor his wife could sign the marriage register on their wedding, as they were illiterate. He was working a 12-hour day at 6-years-old at a rope-makers in Birmingham. But he had great organisational and oratory skills, honed in open-air speeches for the Social Democratic Federation. He learned to read in his mid-to-late 20s with help from a union colleague, one Eleanor Marx!

At Beckton Gas Works there were two 12-hour shifts generating power round the clock. When management introduced a technological advance, instead of it easing the work burden, workers had to meet new targets and, on a rota basis, they were working occasional 18-hour shifts as well.

While low wages made life hard, Thorne believed that workers’ time was ultimately more valuable to them than money. His union committee him convinced them to fight collectively for an 8-hour day. He welcomed colleagues to a a huge workers’ meeting on 31 March 1889 as “Fellow Wage–Slaves”. Thorne promised them that if they “stand firm and don’t waver, within six months we will claim and win the 8-hour day, a 6-day week and the abolition of the present slave-driving methods in vogue not only at the Beckton Gas Works, but all over the country.”

This unionisation drive came at an apposite moment. The electricity industry was growing and beginning to challenge gas. When Thorne knew they had thousands of workers unionised his committee petitioned their employers saying that they had the strength to go on strike but they would rather negotiate a new deal for workers. Ultimately their employers, fearful of a strike, agreed. Negotiations took several weeks as productivity matters were ironed out. In the resulting deal, two 12 –hour shifts became three 8-hour shifts as more workers were taken on, and shorter hours were gained at no loss of pay.

Despite Thorne’s struggles with literacy, he later became the Labour MP for West Ham and went on to write his autobiography, My Life’s Battles. 

Meanwhile, a former navy junior, then shoemaker, called Ben Tillett,was making a

BenTillett

Ben Tillett

name for himself locally as a trade unionist. In contrast to Thorne, Tillett’s working life began later – at 7-years-old – in a Bristol brickyard. His home life was abysmal. His birth mother died young, replaced with stepmothers who served the demands of Tillett’s alcoholic father, while neglecting or mistreating him. On his third attempt, he successfully ran away from home, joined a travelling circus and learned acrobatics. One of his five sisters tracked him down and took him to stay with relatives where he gained two years’ education before resuming his working life.

While Thorne was organising Gasworkers, Tillett, who had moved to Bethnal Green in east London where one sister lived, was attempting to unionise dockers in a largely casualised working environment, where workers endured the humiliating daily call–on. If they got work that day they were only guaranteed 2-hours. Tillett graphically described the atmosphere in the shed where the call-on happened in a pamphlet – The Dock Labourers Bitter Cry. He kept a diary. His last entry in 1888 read: “Cold worse than ever. Went to chapel. Old year out. Like to live next year a more useful life than last”.

He did. In mid-August 1889, the growing Tea Operatives and General Labourer’s Association made links with the Amalgamated Stevedore’s Union and, in response to a set of disputes that had begun with their employers, announced that the dockers were on strike. Tillett was the key figure among a collective strike leadership. In the first week, 10,000 workers were on strike. That grew massively as other dockers and workers in factories and warehouses, especially in dock related areas came out.

By the beginning of September, the local newspapers described (in disapproving terms) the East End as infected with “strike fever”. Workers across the board “found some grievance real and imaginary” to come out on strike. The dockers listed their demands: the dockers tanner (six old pence) an hour and 8d for overtime; a minimum 4-hour call-on, and the right to organise a union throughout the dock. Organising strike pay for such large numbers was logistically impossible so they distributed meal tickets redeemable at supportive shops and cafes. The Salvation Army supplied thousands of loaves a bread each day and dockers’ wives organised rent-strikes to minimise outgoings.

dockstrike_marchThey held huge marches, and spectacular community parades to Hyde Park, appealing for support form the West End. According to Thorne, Tillett possessed “a spark of genius”, as he organised a picket system of the whole London docks.

Four weeks in, the main dock employers, who had tried to starve the workers back to the docks, offered some enticing deals to small groups of employees, but at this critical moment with the strike becoming shakier,  help suddenlyarrived from far away. Many of the dockers were Irish Catholics (neighbours and families of matchwomen), as were many of the dockers in Australia. On hearing of the strike they collected for their brothers and began cabling over huge amounts of money to keep that strike going.

The employers were forced to negotiate. In negotiations mediated by Cardinal Manning a widely respected churchman, the dockers won their demands. Their union, renamed itself the Dock, Wharf, Riverside and General Labourers’ Union and emerged from the strike with 18,000 paid up members.

besantburrows_matchgirls

Meeting to form a matchwomen’s union

In each of these cases – the matchworkers, the gasworkers, the dockers all created or developed thier unions, but instead of the old “craft unions” of highly skilled  workers, these were general unions, cheap to join, meeting the needs of the unskilled and low-skilled. This was the New Unionism.

Tillett and his close colleague Tom Mann wrote a pamphlet describing this phenomenon. In their new conception the work of trade unions went beyond just sorting out their own workplace “It is the work of the trade unions to stamp out poverty from the land.“ They would “work unceasingly for the emancipation of workers. Our ideal is the Cooperative Commonwealth.”

 

ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 13

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be blog posts throughout May on this site.

S is for Shaw and South Place Ethical Society

“The millionaire class, a small but growing one, into which any of us may be flung tomorrow by the accidents of commerce, is perhaps the most neglected in the community… In the advertisements of the manufactures of the country… everything is produced for the million and nothing for the millionaire…the unfortunate millionaire has the responsibility of prodigious wealth without the possibility of enjoying himself more than an ordinary rich man… can he attend more than one theatre in one evening, or wear more than one suit at a time, or digest more meals than his butler?”

This sardonic contemplation of the wealth gap was published in 1896 in the Contemporary Review. In 1901, the Fabian Society published it as a pamphlet, under the title Socialism for Millionaires

Screen Shot 2020-05-21 at 10.13.34

George Bernard Shaw

Its author, who wrote five failed novels before he became a successful drama critic and an even more successful playwright, was George Bernard Shaw.  Shaw had arrived in London from his Dublin birthplace as a 20 year old in 1876. His mother and two sisters were already here, having left George with his alcoholic father, a struggling corn merchant, a year earlier.

Shaw was 15 when he found his first paid work – as an estate agent‘s clerk – or, as he later described it “sitting in a stuffy little den counting other people’s money”. When he was sitting in more interesting surroundings, in the British Museum’s reading room, writing his novels, he came into contact with Bloomsbury’s left-wing intelligentsia. He then spent much of the 1880s and 1890s writing lectures, pamphlets, and manifestos for several socialist groups and campaigns, especially the Fabian Society. He spoke in grand halls, drawing rooms, street corners, and on demonstration platforms against capitalism, censorship, poverty, vivisection and war. He spoke for a minimum wage, universal healthcare, women’s right to vote, the abolition of hereditary privilege, and for socialism.

In 1895, Frank Harris employed Shaw as a theatre critic on the Fortnightly Review. He described Shaw: “…thin as a rail, with a long, bony, bearded face. His untrimmed beard was reddish, though his hair was fairer… his abrupt movements – as jerky as the ever-changing mind – his perfect unconstraint, his devilish look, all showed a man very conscious of his ability”.

The socialist novelist Edith Nesbitt’s description was less flattering: “very plain like a

55e0ad7982230269499686-922x1024

Edith Nesbitt

long corpse with a dead white face – sandy sleek hair, and a loathsome small straggly beard”. He may have been “a clever writer and speaker” and “fascinating” but she thought he was also, “the grossest flatterer I ever met, is horribly untrustworthy… (and) does not always stick to the truth”.

Shaw’s most famous play, Pygmalion, made typically sharp observations on language and class. He was writing his 61st play when he died in 1950.

His particular talent as a radical writer and commentator was in his use of “one-liners” to puncture the orthodoxies of Victorian and Edwardian times, that saw inequality as natural, thought national conflicts were best settled through war, believed that women could not be equal, that education was a privilege not a right, and that the Church should have a privileged role as arbiter of morality.

On that last aspect Shaw said that “All great truths begin as blasphemies.” On religious faith, specifically, he commented: “I’m an atheist and I thank God for it.” he insisted that, “it is not disbelief that is dangerous for society, it is belief”. If he proselytized for anything, it was vegetarianism: “Animals are my friends,” he said, “and I don’t eat my friends.”

He cut to the chase on social and economic questions: “What is the matter with the poor is Poverty; what is the matter with the rich is Uselessness.” Capitalism, he argued, “has destroyed our belief in any effective power but that of self-interest backed by force.”

He disdained militarism and war, as destructive outgrowths of excessive patriotism, mocking patriotism as “your conviction that this country is superior to all others because you were born in it.”

A very profound comment of Shaw’s, that has stood the test of time, in a period where tens of thousands of refugees drown in the Mediterranean struggling to reach safety in Europe, with little comment, was: “The worst sin toward our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them: that’s the essence of inhumanity.”

Towards the end of his life, Shaw requested that “the form of a cross or any other instrument of torture or symbol of blood sacrifice” should be omitted from all memorials to him.

Screen Shot 2020-05-21 at 10.20.01One place, though where his image lives on and crucifixes are decidedly absent, is in the form of a plaster plaque, made by Lawrence Holofcener, displayed in the treasure trove of freethought materials that is in the Humanist Library, on the first floor at Conway Hall, home of the South Place Ethical Society.

Conway Hall opened in 1929, and to this day runs affordable Sunday evening concerts, and hosts lectures and meetings, many on radical and transgressive themes. Its roots are in a non-conformist, unitarian congregation that rejected the Christian doctrine of “eternal hell”, that began meeting around the time of the French Revolution on the eastern edge of the City of London. In the early 1820s it found new premises in South Place, Finsbury, where it stayed for more than a century.

Gradually it shed more and more aspects of religiosity, giving increasing emphasis to its humanistic spirit. When Moncure Conway, an American unitarian-cum–freethinker, and avid campaigner against slavery, became leader of the congregation, he oversaw its full transition to secularism and ultimately humanism/atheism.

Conway led the South Place Ethical Society for more than 30 years, with a gap of a few years when he returned to America to write a major biography of Tom Paine.

In the foyer of Conway Hall, a display board lists the Ethical Society’s successive leaders. Those preceding Moncure Conway share the appellation “Revd”. Conway had “Dr” instead, as have all those who came after him, symbolising the Society’s decisive move away from any religious trappings.

Screen Shot 2020-05-21 at 10.22.47

Bertrand Russell

As a freethinker, Shaw lectured several times at Conway Hall, which sits in a corner of Red Lion Square near Holborn. Another plaque on display in the library there celebrates the utopian thinker and activist, William Morris, who lived in the square in the late 1850s and had a workshop nearby. At either end of the square’s serene green space, are a statue of Fenner Brockway and a bust of Bertrand Russell, both of them proud atheists and pacifists, a cause on which both shared platforms with Shaw, especially around the time of the First Word War.

They had met earlier. In 1895 the Sheffield Independent reported a bicycle crash involving

Screen Shot 2020-05-21 at 10.23.21

Fenner Brockway

Russell and Shaw when they were cycling to Tintern Abbey with the Fabian, Sidney Webb. Brockway describes being particularly impressed by a Fabian Society lecture he attended where Shaw spoke on “How to achieve the Superman”, presumably one who survives bicycle crashes.

George Bernard Shaw died at the age of 94, Bertrand Russell at 97 and Fenner Brockway at 99. I once asked an adult education class why they thought that atheists lived such long lives, and one student offered: “Because they have nowhere to go?”

ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 12

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be  blog posts throughout May on this site.

P is for Pankhurst, Q is for Quelch, R is for Rocker

How likely is it that the man appointed editor of the leading radical Yiddish newspaper in London’s East End in 1898, read by thousands of Jewish immigrants from the Russian Empire, would have been born a Catholic in Mainz, Germany and raised there in a Catholic orphanage? Well, that’s what happened.

Rudolf Rocker.CP, Fonds Chambelland

Rudolf Rocker

Rudolf Rocker arrived in London as a political exile in 1895. When he left the orphanage he trained as a bookbinder and involved himself in socialist politics, but the elders of the German Social Democratic Party found the ideas of its youth section, Die Jungen, too hot too handle. Several of them were expelled, including Rocker who then shifted from socialism towards anarchism.

As his close comrades were increasingly being arrested for their activism, he went into exile and emerged in Paris, where he shared a flat and bookbinding tools with a fellow worker, a Russian Jew, who later became a famous Yiddish poet and playwright. Shloyme Rappaport, was best known for writing a Yiddish play (later turned into a film) called The Dybbuk (a wandering evil spirit) under the pseudonym Sh. Anski.

It was a foggy day when Rocker reached London. He described seeing, “a world of ghosts” and “a thick clammy yellow mist over everything”. He stayed at first in Soho – the cosmopolitan home of exiled revolutionaries. One of his contacts there, Otto Schreiber, told Rocker that he must see the “real” London. Schreiber showed him areas where Rocker found “an abyss of human suffering… And in these cesspools of poverty, children were born”. One of these was the East End, where overcrowded immigrants eked out a living working long hours in sweatshops and small factories.

MillyWitkop-219x300

Milly Witkop

One sweatshop worker was Milly Witkop, who had arrived aged 17 from Ukraine. Rocker and Witkop fell in love, and they lived together in the East End after a short period in Liverpool. Rocker remained in the East End until 1914 when German males were interned as “enemy aliens” as world war broke out. The authorities didn’t ask him which side he supported. He would have told them neither. He was a pacifist. After internment he was deported, but Rocker, Witkop and their son Firmin, were reunited in Germany after the war. When Hitler came to power in 1933 they moved to America, where they lived in an anarchist commune in upper New York State.

Rocker dedicated himself to the liberation of the sweatshop workers and learned to read, write and speak their language. (Yiddish is written in Hebrew text.) He helped them form unions and played a key role in successful strikes, especially the 1912 Tailor’s strike. Together with Yiddish speaking anarchists – he established the Jubilee Club in 1906, a cooperatively run international Workers Education club, where workers of many origins, socialised, agitated, and benefited from adult education classes based on Francisco Ferrer’s progressive pedagogy.

Rocker’s most crucial and longstanding contribution, though, was through editing the arbayterfrayndArbayter Fraynd (Worker’s Friend) newspaper, which acted as a mirror for the workers who could see the bitterness of their lives, but also their hopes for radical change, reflected in its pages. The paper inspired them to struggle collectively for a better future.

Before the Jubilee Club was established, Rocker frequently lectured on Friday nights in a back room at the Sugar Loaf pub in Hanbury Street, off Brick lane. One Jewish anarchist, Milly Sabel, said Rocker’s lectures “opened up… the vision of a new society – no persecution, no hunger, only warmth and generosity.”

By its nature, the Arbayter Fraynd had a large but niche audience – the Yiddish speaking immigrant workers. From 1892 to 1908, Harry Quelch, living over the river in Bermondsey, but working in Clerkenwell Green, edited a socialist newspaper with more general appeal. This was Justice, the weekly organ of the marxist Social Democratic Federation (SDF).

Born in 1858 in Hungerford, Berkshire, to a blacksmith’s family, Quelch left school at 10 to find work, at first in an upholsterer’s shop and then for a dairyman/cattle dealer. At 14 he moved to London and worked in factories and warehouses, including Peak Frean’s biscuits in Bermondsey. When he subsequently worked as a porter/packer in a warehouse, one of his fellow workers introduced him to the SDF’s politics. In his leisure time he taught himself French and also wrote short stories.

Harry_Quelch

Harry Quelch

Unlike Rocker, Quelch was not a great speaker. His speeches were initially described even by close comrades as “heavy and gloomy and without humour“, but he worked at improving them and he was later seen as one of the SDF’s best speakers. His first article for Justice was called “Labour and Luxury”.

In the 1890s, the designer and furniture making libertarian-socialist, William Morris, put money into establishing a publishing operation for pamphlets and books through the offices of the SDF. He wanted to give the publishing arm a very dynamic and forward looking name so they agreed to call it “Twentieth Century Press”. The vast majority of socialist pamphlets circulating in Britain in the early 1900s were published by the Twentieth Century Press in the same building in Clerkenwell Green, that was later purchased (in 1933) as the Marx Memorial Library and Workers’ School. Quelch was the business manager of the Press. He also temporarily helped a revolutionary, who would become world-famous, with his newspaper publishing.

In the late 1898 the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party (RSDLP) – the Russian revolutionary party – was created under conditions of dictatorship in the country that made it very hard for revolutionaries to operate openly. In order to reach the masses they needed a party newspaper. They made plans to publish Iskra – the Spark. Their plan was to print it clandestinely, and in the middle of the night leave it in bundles at places where workers would pass through. Think of your local free newspaper – in London we have The Metro – and then infuse it with revolutionary content!

But before the first issue could be completed the editorial group were raided, then

Screen Shot 2020-05-19 at 02.10.35

Lenin

imprisoned in Siberia for 18 months. When they were freed the Iskra group went into exile and arranged for copies to be made and smuggled in from abroad to clandestine printers to make many more copies for distribution. Between 1900 to 1902 it was produced in Munich. From late 1903 it was written in Geneva but in that year in between, Lenin edited it at 37a Clerkenwell Green and worked with Harry Quelch to get some copies printed which could be smuggled into Russia. In that way Quelch helped the Russian Revolution!

Another radical in London who played a significant role especially in the first decades of the 20th century through her activism which included publishing was the socialist and suffragette and artist, Sylvia Pankhurst, the middle one of the three Pankhurst sisters and the most consistently left wing.

In an earlier post in this series, Alphabet No. 5, I wrote about the East London Federation of Suffragettes (ELFS). A key role that Sylvia played there was as co-founder and editor of Woman’s Dreadnought, the ELFS own independent weekly newspaper. She wrote features for it, and editorials, but also helped to nurture writers from the predominantly working-class ELFS who had not had the educational opportunities that were available to her. The paper gave education, inspiration and a platform to its readers and writers.

Sylvia_Pankhurst_1909

Sylvia Pankhurst

It was Sylvia Pankhurst’s political influence that later resulted in the name change of the paper to the Workers’ Dreadnought, as the organisation changed its name too, to the Workers Socialist Federation and included men.

The Workers Dreadnought acquired some office space on Fleet Street, and was responsible for hiring one of the first Black journalists on fleet Street, Claude Mackay, a Jamaican revolutionary poet and writer.

Above the Dreadnought’s office there was another room where Sylvia embarked on a simultaneous publishing project assisted by May O’Callaghan, a sub-editor on the Workers Dreadnought and Nellie Rathbone (Cohen), Sylvia Pankhurst’s secretary.

It was in the wake of the Russian Revolution – an event celebrated by workers in many countries and, not surprisingly, strongly denounced and reviled by mainstream bourgeois press in Britain, who were worried that revolution might prove infectious. In the face of incessant propaganda from those sources against the Revolution, Pankhurst established the People’s Russian Information Bureau which aimed at telling the story of the dramatic changes in Russia from a pro-revolution perspective.

Rocker, Quelch and Pankhurst – three writers, editors, publishers –  and activists – whose radical contributions enriched and empowered ordinary people fighting for change in their lives and communities.

ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 11

 

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be a series of blog posts through May on this site.

N is for Naoroji, O is for O’Brien

The role of migrants and people of migrant heritage in London’s radical movements has been huge. Today’s blog focuses on two individuals, both of them migrants, who through their writing, public speaking, networking and activism made a powerful impact.

James “Bronterre” O’Brien grew up in County Longford, Ireland, his birth date recorded variously as 1804 or 1805. He studied at Trinity College in Dublin before moving to London in 1829 as a freethinker and with a plan to become a lawyer.

pmg-standardIn London though, he fell in with radical circles, became a campaigning journalist and then an activist in the Chartist movement. He wrote first for Henry Hetherington’s Poor Man’s Guardian in 1831, becoming its editor the following year. The Poor Man’s Guardian (PMG) was published as a “penny paper” in defiance of Government laws that imposed a stamp duty on the press as part of their war on a cheap radical press. The paper’s motto was Bacon’s 1597 formulation, “Knowledge is Power”, and O’Brien argued through PMG that the government was effectively placing a tax on knowledge.

Early on in his journalistic work he signed his articles with his favourite pseudonym: “Bronterre”, which he later incorporated as a middle name. He studied the writings of French revolutionary writers and was especially attracted to Babeuf’s rebellious egalitarian essays

In 1835, O’Brien wrote this powerful passage:

“The history of mankind shows that from the beginning of the world, the rich of all countries have been in a permanent state of conspiracy to keep down the poor of all countries, and for this plain reason – because the poverty of the poor man is essential to the riches of the rich man. No matter by what means they may disguise their operations, the rich are everlastingly plundering, debasing and brutalising the poor… The desire of one man to live on the fruits of another’s labour is the original sin of the world…It is the parent injustice from which all injustice springs.”

In 1837 he established the National Reformer which castigated the industrial and political system of that time. He claimed that labourers without property, and without the vote, were the producers of all of society’s wealth, but that wealth was appropriated by government, the church, unproductive middlemen, and aristocrats.

He wrote impressive articles for the Northern Star, the main Chartist paper, which bronterre_obriensupported the more militant “Physical Force” wing of Chartism. He collaborated closely with George Harney, in the radical East London Democratic Association, and toured the country in 1839 agitating to win popular support for the People’s Charter. Following the failed armed uprising by Chartists in Newport there was a wave of Chartist arrests. In 1840 O’Brien was imprisoned for 18 months, charged with “seditious libel”, for speeches he made in Lancashire.

Prison gave him time for reflection. He emerged from it just as committed to his class analysis of society that linked agitation for political democracy with the struggle for economic demands by the working class. But his emphasis shifted more towards the “Moral Force” Chartists after his prison stretch, prioritising education as a key means of ensuring political progress. He was nicknamed, “The Chartist Schoolmaster”.

In 1847, he began to publish another newspaper called The Power of the Pence, intended, he said, for those who knew the look of a penny better than a pound!

His health declined seriously in the 1850s. He spent his last years before his death in 1864, bed-ridden, at his home in Hermes Street, a tiny street off Donegal Road in Islington. A plaque to commemorate him was mounted in Donegal Road in 1984 on the outer wall of EGA Secondary School, but during the school’s rebuilding project, that wall disappeared and the plaque was moved to a more obscure position off the road. He is buried in Abney Park cemetery in Hackney.

It was in the mid-1850s that Dadabhai Naoroji, first came to Britain. he moved between Britain and India from that time until 1907, before spending the last 10 years of his life in his homeland.

Dadabhai-Naoroji-3

Dadabhai Naoroji

Naoroji was born into a relatively poor Parsi (Zoroastrean) family in Gujerat’s Navsari district. But through his mother’s efforts (he was just four  when his father died), he got a good education. After studying maths and philosophy he taught philosophy at Elphinstone college in Bombay. He was very committed to women and girls’ education and set up Bombay’s first girls’ school. He also established a newspaper, the Voice of India.

Under British rule Indians became poorer as British colonists became richer. He applied his mathematical training to calculate how much wealth the British rulers extracted from the Indian economy, or rather, from the Indian people. Indian people’s taxes paid the wages and expenses of viceroys and governors and the cost of their lavish accommodation. Raw materials extracted from the low-wage labour of Indians supplied manufacturers in Britain who then sold goods made from them back to Indians at considerable profits. O’Brien’s words about the rich “everlastingly plundering” the poor, “no matter by what means they may disguise their operations”, were laid bare in India’s case by Naoroji’s “Drain Theory”, shared through discussion circles and eventually documented in his book, Poverty and Un-British Rule in India.

He estimated that the wealth drain from India in the years following the Indian Uprising (or “Indian Mutiny”, as it was conveyed to me in history lessons at secondary school) ran at approximately £30 million per year

The discussion circles he helped establish laid the basis for founding the Indian National Congress, which moved gradually from demands for reform of the Raj, to demands for full self-government and independence.

In Britain, he worked at first in a cotton company and then became a professor of Gujerati at University College London. He helped to establish an East India Association to communicate truths about the plunder of ordinary Indians to opinion-formers and the wider public, and to agitate for change.

Moving between both countries he knew his efforts to speak truth to power in India about the need to reform of the Empire were coming to little. Returning to Britain, he sought to join their “club” and try to address them as equals. He stood to be an MP unsuccessfully in Holborn in the mid-1880s, but then successfully in the 1892 election. He won the Finsbury Central seat for the Liberals… by three votes. Not surprisingly his defeated opponent demanded a recount. The recount showed that Britain’s first non-white MP actually had a more comfortable victory – by five votes. He earned the nickname Dadabhai Narrow Majority for his efforts in 1892, but lost to a Conservative at the next election in 1895.

Lord Salisbury described his candidacy at Holborn very dismissively  as an “odd choice in an English election adding:

Screen Shot 2020-05-16 at 12.46.45

Lord Salisbury

“I doubt whether we have yet got to that point of view where a British constituency will take a black man to represent them.”

The press seized upon Salisbury’s statement and piled in with their own racist comments.

The Times published a letter by Sir Lepel Griffin, a former colonial administrator in Punjab, who said that Naoroji was “an alien in race, in custom, in religion, destitute of local sympathy or local knowledge, no more unsuitable representative could be imagined or suggested.” Griffin gratuitously added that he regarded the Parsees as “the Jews of India”. It was not intended as a compliment.

Although Naoroji stood for the Liberals, who defended him strongly from Salisbury’s racism, his close political friendships included several radicals and socialists. In parliament he spoke up for free education, public social housing and Home Rule for Ireland. He supported women’s suffrage demands and campaigned for “justice for India”, saying: “It is futile to tell me that we must wait till all the people are ready… Self-government is the only and chief remedy. In self-government is our hope, strength and greatness.”

Screen Shot 2020-05-16 at 12.52.20

Bhikaji Cama

In the early 1900s he helped to nurture a new younger generation of India radicals and campaigners for independence. He spoke alongside the India revolutionary and feminist, Bhikaji Cama (who worked for a period as Naoroji’s private secretary), the socialist and suffragette Charlotte Despard, and the Marxist Henry Hyndman at the opening ceremony of India House, a hostel for 25 students, founded by Shyamaji Krishnavarma at Cromwell Avenue, Highgate.

From 1905-1907 Naoroji returned to India House several times for discussions there. India House found itself under surveillance from the British State. Valentine Choril, a regular writer for The Times, described it as “the most dangerous organization outside India.”  It was closed down in 1909 after the assassination of Sir William Curzon Wylie, a Lieutenant-Colonel in the British Indian Army who later held several administrative and diplomatic posts, by Madan Lal Dhingra, a regular visitor to India House.

ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 10

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be a series of blog posts through May on this site

M is for Macarthur

“While women are badly paid because of their unorganised condition, they remain unorganised mainly because they are badly paid.”

These are the words of Mary MacArthur, born into a Conservative-voting family in Glasgow in 1880, who spent her tragically shortened life fighting to break this cycle of exploitation and marginalisation.

She became a trade unionist and socialist in 1901, in Ayr, where her family had movedmary-macarthur-speaking when she was young, after attending a meeting that turned her view of life upside down. She moved to London two years later to work for organisations that were recruiting women and arming them with the tools to fight for their rights. Her remarkable talents for empowering women in struggles for their dignity, rights and better conditions were especially evident in Bermondsey during a great wave of militancy that started spontaneously in summer, 1911.

This trajectory would have been hard to predict from her first political forays in her late teens. She was active then in the Tory Party’s Primrose League founded in 1880. The League’s aims were: “… the maintenance of religion, of the estates of the realm, and of the imperial ascendancy of the British Empire.” Their recruitment targets were “respectable” working class men and women in cities.

Mary worked as a bookkeeper in her parent’s business, but had aspirations to be a journalist. Her curiosity took her to a local meeting of shop assistants addressed by trade union and socialist activists. She was very moved by personal accounts of super-exploitation, and saw the determination among those present to fight for change. Just a few months later she was Secretary of the Shop Assistant’s Union in Ayr.

women-trade+union+league-1903In London she worked first as secretary of Women’s Trade Union League (WTUL), and then, in 1906, founded the National Federation of Women Workers (NFWW), who adopted the slogan: “To fight, to struggle, to right the wrong. While the WTUL had campaigned for women to join unions, the NFWW was a union in itself and fought hard to organise especially in mixed workplaces where men were preventing women from joining their union. In1907 she helped establish their own monthly journal – The Woman Worker.

The NFWW saw strikes and militancy as the key to organising women. She rose to national prominence through a 10-week strike she led in 1910  in Cradley The_Woman_Worker-_a_journal,_1907Heath in the Midlands. She battled with employers to win minimum rates for women workers in a set of industries there, especially among chain-makers. Mary used mass meetings and the media very effectively, and attracted substantial donations to support the workers on strike. But here in London it was her activism and leadership in Bermondsey in August 1911 that stood out.

Many women there were employed on starvation wages in the food-processing industries that had grown up close to the docks. She was a member of the Independent Labour Party (ILP) as well as leader of the NFWW. The ILP locally was a growing presence and had rented a large building they later purchased on Fort Road, as a Labour Institute. It was the hub of ILP activity. Within a couple months after opening it became the hub of the Bermondsey Uprising, a set of strikes involving 14,000 women in 21 local factories. It had started spontaneously with a walkout for better conditions at a confectionary factory. The workers marched to other nearby factories and called workers out there too.

PinksJamFactorystrikers

Strikers at Pink’s Jam Factory in Bermondsey, 1911

Mary came down on the second day of the strike and began calling pubic meetings, marches and rallies, organising strike pay at the Labour Institute, and putting out requests for donations of food and material support. Her involvement gave massive confidence to the workers who were determined to stay out until they got a better deal.

Over the next two weeks, the women, with Mary playing a key role as mobiliser and negotiator, won better pay or shorter hours, or both, in 18 of the 21 factories form which women workers had walked out . In three factories where employers were stubbornly refusing workers’ demands the women went back to work worried they may not have a job to return to. Mary was convinced that if they stayed out just a little longer their employers would have made concessions too.

She had an ambivalent relationship with the suffragette movement, demanding universal suffrage as a basis for representation of working class women and men in order that they could play a full part in the political process. She was concerned that the demand for partial suffrage that the middle-class leaders of the Women’s Social and Political Union promoted, would, if achieved, then act to prevent further political advance for the working class, but she was very pleased that leading left wing suffragettes such as Sylvia Pankhurst and Charlotte Despard came to Bermondsey to support the strikers.

Over that two weeks in August 1911, more than 7,000 of the women strikers joined the NFWW. The director of Peak Frean’s Biscuit manufacterers, one of the biggest local employers described the strikes, which were spreading from workplace to workplace, as “a reign of terror”. The local papers were up in arms that bar-maids had come out on strike too. While the women workers themselves no doubt cherished their material gains, for Mary MacArthur the most significant achievement was “a new sense of self-reliance, solidarity and comradeship… making it certain that, whatever the difficulties and dangers of the future, they will never again be without hope.”

macarthur plaque GG

Trade unionists and family members at the plaque unveiling

In that same year of 1911 she got married to another rising socialist figure, William Anderson, who became the Labour MP for Attercliffe in Sheffield in 1914. They had a daughter who was still-born in 1913, but one who was born healthy in 1915 and survived through wartime. Tragically her husband died from the post-war flu epidemic, and Mary herself died two years later from cancer.

Her funeral in Golders Green close to where she lived was attended by confectionary workers from Bermondsey, munitions workers from Edmonton and chain-makers from Cradley Heath, as well as several prominent Labour politicians and union organisers.

On the eve of International Women’s Day in 2017 I was privileged to be present when an English Heritage plaque was unveiled on the house where she and her daughter Anne had lived after her husband’s death.

ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 9

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be a series of blog posts through May on this site.

L is for Lansbury

“All reforms come from those who are ready to break bad laws.”

“If we have to choose between contempt of the poor and contempt of court, it will be

c8_Poplar_to_court

contempt of court.”

“The question is not whether what we are doing is legal or illegal but whether it is right or wrong.”

Labour councillor George Lansbury, made these statements in 1921 when he was leading the Poplar Rates Rebellion in one of the most deprived areas of the country.

Voting reforms in 1918 had added far more working class men and women to the electoral register. Labour swept the vote in several east London boroughs for the first time at the delayed local elections held in 1919.

Their largest majority there was in Poplar, where Labour won 39 out of 42 councillors, though no doubt if Laura Kuenssberg existed then, she’d have called it “a disappointing result”.

Labour in Poplar was represented mostly by ordinary working-class councillors. The council added 4 aldermen to their ranks including George Lansbury’s activist daughter-in-law, Minnie Lansbury, born Minnie Glassman to an immigrant Jewish bootmaker’s   family in Whitechapel. Minnie married Edgar, one of the Lansburys’ 11 children.

George&BessieLansbury

George and Bessie Lansbury

The newly elected council had a mandate to embark on a radical programme to improve the lives of working people locally. They held conferences with trade unionists and public meetings to develop that programme with the local community. When George Lansbury became Poplar’s Mayor in 1919 – at the age of 60 – he refused to adopt the trappings of the office and said: “We are clear class-conscious socialists working together.”

They turned their ambitious programme into reality by employing more council staff, but with shorter hours, and brought in a minimum wage for council employees, with equal pay for equal work by women and men council employees. Some women saw their wages rise by 75%. They attracted London County Council (LCC) funds to boost their slum clearance and council house-building programme, and also provided electrification in many homes for the first time. They provided free milk to expectant and nursing mothers and appointed more health visitors (infant mortality reduced in Poplar by 25% by the mid-1920s). They provided many services free to unemployed people and established labour exchanges. They expanded the library service, planted thousands of trees, and improved recreation facilities, and more.

They set what they believed was a fair rate to fund this programme. But by March 1921 bills were stacking up for Poplar’s contribution to London’s cross-borough services. They owed the LCC £30,000, the Metroploitan Police £25,000, and Water Board £40,000. They should have been charging ratepayers an additional rate known as the “precept” to pass on to these bodies. But when they looked at the precept formula, they saw how much it discriminated against poorer boroughs with larger populations to support and many unemployed. They refused, and by doing so set themselves on a collision course with the LCC and the law.

In court the Council stood its ground. Lansbury’s colleague John Scurr said: “The government is on the horns of a dilemma. If they send us to prison they will not get their money; and if they don’t send us to prison they will bring the law into contempt. Poplar does not care on which horn they choose to impale themselves.”

Minnie Lansbury added: “Poplar will pay its share of London’s rates when Westminster, Kensington, and the City do the same.”

They held protest marches and rallies attended by thousands of local residents. In court

screen-shot-2016-06-26-at-23-53-33

Nellie Cressall

one of their legal representatives was WC Thompson who had been jailed three times in World War 1 as a conscientious objector. Despite their moving speeches, 30 councillors were imprisoned indefinitely – 25 male councillors were sent to Brixton prison, and five female councillors were incarcerated in Holloway, including Minnie Lansbury and heavily pregnant Cllr Nellie Cressall, a laundry worker who with Minnie and the others in Holloway had all been active in the East London Federation of Suffragettes.

Before I reveal what happened next, I will say more about George Lansbury. Born in Suffolk in 1859, his family moved to the East End when he was a child. He revealed his political ambitions when he was young by scribbling his name inside a book at church: “George Lansbury MP”.

At first he joined the Liberal Party and  was the Political Agent for Jane Cobden one of only two women elected to London County Council at its first election in 1889. That was the year though, that Lansbury increasingly worked with socialists and trade unionists around the Great Dock Strike and the 8-hours movement. By 1892 he helped found a local branch of the marxist Social Democratic Federation (SDF), which he called “the cockpit of socialism in East London… we were convinced [that] our mission was to revolutionise the world … Our branch meetings were like revivalist meetings. We opened with a song and closed with one… Every Saturday we ran dances, telling our critics we were going to dance into socialism.”

Describing himself as a “Christian Socialist” he moved from the SDF into the Independent Labour Party (ILP), which defend itself more by “ethical socialism” than Marxism. As an ILP member he won the Bromley and Bow parliamentary seat for Labour in 1910.  constituents were excited that he would take their voice into Westminster but many were dismayed when in 1912 he stood down on a key issue of principle, to fight the election over again, effectively as a referendum on the principle of votes for women.

His suffragette wife Bessie, who shared George’s socialist and internationalist principles told the local press, “Both of us believe, that men and women, united as… comrades can… can save this country from the horrors of destitution, prostitution and misery.” George’s elder brother James warned him though that parliament “is no place for a man of conscience”. The Liberals and Tories united behind one candidate – a Tory. Lansbury lost by a few hundred votes to a Tory named Blair.

5153M4dyRrL._SX327_BO1,204,203,200_It took him 10 years to win the seat back but he used the intervening period to support local campaigns of the exploited and oppressed, and help to found the left wing Daily Herald newspaper, run on a shoestring combined with idealism. He started a 6-months prison sentence in 1913 for expressing strong support on a public platform for the Suffragettes’ campaign of civil disobedience, but was out in a few days having borrowed their tactic of going on hunger strike. When War broke out in 1914, he used the short space before Britain formally joined it to lead a mass anti-war protest in Trafalgar Square, under the auspices of the Herald League. He was a lifelong pacifist.

To return to the Poplar Rates revolt: putting class conscious, campaigning councillors behind bars is a risky business. Lansbury wrote: “We all refused to be bathed and wore our own clothes, not prison uniforms. All of us… refused to do any work… drink the tea or eat the food. In a few days the food was changed… we all went on strike against being locked in our cells all day, and as a result we had them opened after breakfast until after supper… We were entertained after 8 o clock by public meetings and singing outside our windows. My colleagues and I joined in singing and… made speeches from our cell windows.”

They demanded the right to hold Council meetings in prison. The first one was convened on 11 September. From 27 September until they were released in mid-October the five councillors in Holloway were regularly taken out of their cells and bussed to Brixton to join the meetings

From their cells councillors wrote letters to friends, family and Poplar’s school children. One such letter urged them to join a union when they left school and added: “We want you to grow up strong, active, loving men and women. We want you never to be contented while there is one single man or woman starving”.

The Government and LCC thought that sending councillors to prison would deter any other boroughs following this course of action. But Bethnal Green council voted to follow the same course of action as Poplar, and later Stepney did too. With the rebellion spreading the government ordered their release, and a conference was convened that very week on ensuring much greater proportionality in the rates.

Lansbury said: “We leave prison as free men and women, pledged only to attend a conference with all parties concerned in the [rates] dispute”.

Their victory, though, came at a price. Minnie Lansbury became ill in prison. Two

minnie Lansbury on her way to arrest 1921

Minnie (centre), before being taken to prison September 1921

months after her release she was suffering with flu and then pneumonia. She died at the age of 32 on January 1st 1922. Minnie, a teacher, gave up her school work  to be an assistant Secretary to Sylvia Pankhurst in the East London Federation of Suffragettes, and stayed politically close to Sylvia as the ELFS publication Women’s Dreadnought became the more explicitly socialist Workers’ Dreadnought. Minnie and Husband Edgar were also early members of the Communist Party

Thousands took to the streets to pay respects as her coffin was borne on the shoulders of four Poplar councillors, amid a procession led by hundreds of unemployed workers. At Bow Bridge the coffin was transferred to a hearse for a service at Ilford crematorium, where the service concluded with William Morris’s poem, Hear a Word:

Mourn not, therefore, nor lament it,

That the world outlives their life

Voice and vision yet they give us

Making strong our hands for strife.

minnie_clock_restoredHer ashes were later interred in East Ham Jewish Cemetery. Bessie Lansbury died in 1933; Minnie’s husband Edgar in 1935, and  George Lansbury in 1940. On electric House, the council flats erected by Poplar’s Labour Council in the 1920s, that stand opposite Wellington Way, where Edgar and Minnie lived, there is a memorial clock for Minnie.

ALPHABET OF LONDON RADICALS No 8

In honour of the 130th anniversary of London’s first May Day march in 1890, there will be a series of blog posts through May on this site.

I is for Inge; J is for Justice; K is for Kitz

The first demand of the People’s Charter drawn up by the London Working Men’s Association in 1837 was: “A vote for every man 21 years of age, of sound mind, and not undergoing punishment for crime.” The author, William Lovett, acknowledged later that he had strongly considered including women in this demand, but had held back fearing that it would be seen as too radical and outlandish for the times and could put potential supporters off from backing their other just demands.

In 1840 the Chartist John Cleave, a radical printer and publisher based in Clerkenwell, wrote a pamphlet supporting votes for women. He argued: “If a woman is qualified to be a queen over a great nation… [she] ought not to be excluded from her share in the executive and legislative power of the country”. If a woman is punished for breaking laws, he said, “she ought to have a voice in making the laws”. Women, “contribute to the wealth and resources of the kingdom…. They [should] have as much right as a man.”

inge

Susannah Inge

It was this kind of encouragement that brought numbers of women into Chartist activism. Susannah Inge, who grew up in Folkestone the daughter of a plumber and glazier, and had hardly any education (she couldn’t write her name at the age of 16), moved to London and became a prominent Chartist in the early 1840s. She spoke at public meetings in London and around the country, and wrote for the leading Chartist newspaper of the day, the Northern Star, established in Leeds.

Other prominent women Chartists, pilloried as “she-chartists” in The Times, and the target of vicious cartoons in the journals of “polite” society, were Mary Ann Walker and Emma Matilda Miles. All three were leading lights of the City of London Female Charter Association

In July 1842 Inge wrote an “Address to the Women of England”, which described how menFemale-Chartists-800x445 had been aroused by the Chartist movement to their “sense of misery and degradation”, and were emerging from “ignorance “ and “superstition” to demand their political rights. She said it was high time for women to “rouse yourself to a sense of your merits”, and told them that if they assist men “in gaining their rights… yours will be gained also.” In public speeches she urged those women who attended to not “leave such things to your husbands, fathers and brothers”, explaining that women have “a deeper interest… if the country is misgoverned, and bad laws instituted, and good laws perverted, it is on you those laws fall heaviest.”

She was sharp at replying to objectors. When a male audience member at a Chartist meeting said women were not ‘physically intended by nature to take part in politics” She replied that it took little exertion of physical force to vote.

She clashed with the editor of the Northern Star, Feargus O’Connor, who was more northernstar-standardbackward on women’s rights, but clashed too with Mary Ann Walker, where differences seemed to be based more on personal rivalry than political principle. Inge was very much in demand though as a Chartist speaker, especially in the years from 1842-44.

She gave birth to a son in 1847 (out of wedlock it seems) and was still living in Clerkenwell in the 1851 census, working as a furrier finisher. In 1857 she emigrated to New York, to do similar work there in the fur trade. She died in Brooklyn in 1902.

The period of the 1840s were years of great political agitation and upheaval but it was another four decades before a new wave of sustained agitation would return. In the 1880s several explicitly socialist and anarchist organisations emerged in London, and developed their own written propaganda outlets, some more formal, others based more on DIY principles.

JjusticeThe letter “J” is for Justice – with a capital letter, the weekly newspaper of the Social Democratic Federation (SDF), Britain’s first Marxist organisation created by Henry Hyndman. The SDF began to produce its newspaper after it changed its name from the Democratic Federation. One spur to that development was the affiliation of a libertarian socialist group in 1884, the Labour Emancipation League (LEL).

K is for Kitz. A leading figure in the LEL and an active DIY propagandist was Frank Kitz, born into an impoverished family in Kentish Town, as Francis Platt. He later moved to the East End, living in Boundary Street on the northern edge of the Old Nichol, one of London’s most notorious slums.

Kitz rewrote his personal biography, claiming that his father was a German refugee from the revolutions of 1848, although it seems that his biological father was a watchmaker called John Lewis. While Hyndman was a very dogmatic Marxist, Kitz, and several other LEL members were more influenced by anarchism. In Boundary Street Kitz teamed up with the libertarian agitator, Charles Mowbray, who had settled there from the North East of England and established a low-tech print-shop there, run as a collective.

Kitz described their operation. “The furnishing of our printery was a model of economy and simplicity. Our seating Kitz posteraccommodation was made of packing cases. A paving stone was our marking up stone and ink slab combined. Candles stuck in the composing cases was (sic) our lighting installation, and a roller handpress our machinery.”

Kitz and Mowbray and raised money for printing materials through concerts and lotteries. Additional materials, Kitz admitted, “were supplied by involuntary contributions from printing firms where some of our members were employed …  a well known firm of government printers furnished us with some excellent ink, paper and other requisites for printing our revolutionary manifestos and addresses.”

Kitz recalled how the collective “‘sallied out on nocturnal bill-sticking expeditions … despite the destruction by the police of some of our handiwork, we managed to placard the East End with incendiary manifestos.”

Political and personal tensions within the SDF came to a head within a year. Hyndman was accused by other members of abrasiveness, pervasive dishonesty, arrogance, and, as editor of Justice, increasing censorship of views contrary to his own. Some of Justice’s best writers in its early period, including William Morris and Eleanor Marx, splintered off from the SDF to form the Socialist League.

Kitz, who once worked professionally for Morris as a dyer, joined them and produced a leas dogmatic newspaper called Commonweal. A few years later, though, the League itself split along Marxist/anarchist lines. In the early 1890s there was a rapprochement of elements for the Socialist League and the SDF who then contributed articles again to Justice

To return to Susanna Inge’s pre-occupations in the 1840s, though, the SDF as an organisation, and Justice as its organ, were dominated by men, some of whom, such as E. Belfort Bax were especially harsh critics of feminists and other advocates of women’s rights, and had, at best, an ambivalent attitude to women’s equality

Although the SDF programme was formally committed by to “social, political and economic equality of the sexes”, one editorial in Justice  stated plainly: “We do not for a moment admit the absurd theory that women are in every way equal to men… it would surely be a very dangerous principle to set up that social and political equality is to depend on absolute physical and mental equality… equality does not mean that everyone shall do precisely the same thing…. But that each shall do what he or she can best do for the common good”.

montefiore-dora

Dora Montefiore

And yet Justice carried articles by outstanding proponents of these rights such as Annie Besant, Eleanor Marx, and Charlotte Despard, in the 1880s and 1890s, and, especially in the early 1900s, those of Dora Montefiore, who ran a regular page in Justice called “A Woman’s point of view”, later renamed “The Women’s’ Circle”.

Montefiore summed up her perspective there succinctly when she wrote that: “…nothing but a social and economic revolution, in which, women themselves take a conscious and active part, can make for them complete emancipation. For this reason, we militant women strongly protest against the idea that Socialism can be given us by men… It is in working for our own emancipation that we shall gain that inner freedom, that sense of striking off our own chains, that really frees the individual.”

I suspect that Susannah Inge and the early female Chartist pioneers in London would have been inclined to agree with her.