|
|
|
Tyleri Tales - Straeon
Tyleri |
|
THE
BLAINA RIOTS 1935
by Martyn Thomas
This
essay is reproduced here with the express permission of Martyn Thomas to whom
thanks are due.
Copyright ©Martyn Thomas 1986
No
part of this document may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted in any form, or by any means, electrical or mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the author.
E-mail:
martyn142@yahoo.com
INTRODUCTION
Commenting
on Britain during the 1930s, the prominent unemployed workers’ leader, Wal
Hannington said,
“The
unemployed did not quietly suffer their degradation and poverty. They were
hungry; their wives and children were hungry; they marched on the streets with
mighty protest demonstrations, and savage battles were fought from day to day in
one town after another against the police who were ordered to suppress these
militant activities. If history is to be truly recorded our future historians
must include this feature of the 'Hungry Thirties'.”1
One
of the worst affected areas in the country at that time was the upper Ebbw Fach
or Western valley in South Wales, and there, on 21st March 1935, an
incident occurred which helps to confirm Hannington's description of the period.
Unemployed people in their thousands from the towns of Abertillery, Blaina,
Brynmawr and Nantyglo marched on the local Public Assistance Committee
(PAC) offices at Blaina. They were marching to demonstrate their
opposition to the Committee's operation of the infamous Means Test, but were
prevented from reaching the PAC offices by a cordon of police waiting outside
the ‘Blaina Inn’. The outcome of this confrontation was to become known
throughout the area as the 'Blaina Riots', as police armed with batons fought
with crowds of stone-throwing demonstrators.
This
is the story of that march and the subsequent violence, but hopefully it a more
than that. It is also intended to depict the circumstances, both immediate and
more general, which led to the march. Those readers who just want the bare facts
will find them here. But good history tries to explain events not just to relate
them, so readers will also find out about the social, economic and political
catalysts which triggered the violence leaving hundreds of people injured.
Information
has been obtained from a variety of sources. Although the event is familiar, in
name at least, to people throughout the area, there has been very little written
about it. This is a familiar tale where South Wales working class history is
concerned (How many of us could name the six wives of Henry VIII but would be
unable to name the Abertillery man who gave his life in the great Chartist
uprising of 1839?). Consequently, whilst a number of books have provided some
valuable background information, the majority of the details of the event itself
were obtained through an examination of the newspapers of the day, and through
interviews with the elderly, but at the time of the interviews, still very
enthusiastic veterans of the march. This is an important point: there are some
people who still claim history can be entirely objective. The author isn’t one
of them. This story is told from the perspective of, and with a great deal of
sympathy towards, the marchers, their colleagues and families. No apologies are
offered for this.
So…what
does this story comprise? Chapter One examines the economic and social
conditions which prevailed in South Wales, and in the upper Western valley in
particular, during the 1930s. Special attention is given to the problem of
unemployment, which was almost a defining feature of the period. Chapter Two
continues this theme by looking at the Means Test which was applied to the
unemployed, and the reaction that it provoked.
Chapter
Three looks at the objectives of the march which led to the riot, and the
particular circumstances which brought the march about. An attempt will be made
to identify the main planners and participants involved, and to find out the
sorts of organisations to which they belonged.
The
march itself and the violence which ensued will be the subject of the fourth
chapter. The march's progress and the police attempts to prevent it will be
examined, and the incident itself will be looked at to try and establish the
balance of responsibility for the violence.
The
subsequent trials provide the basis for the final chapter. By evaluating the
detailed evidence given by both prosecution and defence, a clearer picture of
events of 21st March should be obtained. The chapter also provides an
outline of the activities carried out in the towns in support of the defendants,
and tells of the fate of the individuals concerned.
Sincere
thanks for a great deal of information regarding the 'Blaina Riots' are offered
to Herbie Morgan and Clarence Lloyd, two participants of the march. If it is not
too pompous an idea for this story to be dedicated to anyone, then it is very
definitely dedicated to the memory of Herbie Morgan, a man of principle and
compassion, whose friendship and unlimited enthusiasm are sorely missed.
Hopefully Herbie would agree that this story does, in a small way, add to the
record of the 'Hungry Thirties' for which Wal Hannington called.
1.
ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS
The
1920s and 1930s were the classic example of capitalism in crisis. Unemployment
reached colossal levels in the advanced capitalist countries, and whole
industries were laid waste as the peculiar affliction of overproduction left its
scars. After the First World War ended in 1918 it was assumed in Britain that
the recession which followed closely behind was merely the result of a
post-war upset in the economy. Production and trade, which fell during the
1920s, were expected to pick up again as they resumed their normal
peace-time rhythm. After all, was not the outstanding success of the
United States in the ‘Roarin' Twenties' an example which hard work and
technological advance could achieve for Britain? Karl Marx, it was said, had
been proved wrong.
The
crash which began in Wall Street in 1929 soon shattered any illusions which may
have existed about the prospect of a smooth transition to a boom economy. The
slump spread its effects worldwide, and the British economy, which had been
sliding gradually into recession anyway, foundered along with the rest. By
August 1931 unemployment had reached 2.7 million and 20 percent of this jobless
army had been out of work for over six months.1 By 1933 this tragic
figure had risen to very nearly three million which represented a record 23
percent of the insured workforce.2 Nevertheless, Britain was better placed than some in that it still
possessed a vast empire which cushioned the blow for British capital through the
provision of cheap food, cheap raw materials and overseas investment income. In
this way, the excesses shown by the German and Italian ruling classes were
avoided (at the expense, of course, of the indigenous populations of the
colonies). But the period still proved to be a bitter experience for the British
working class, and the brunt of the attack on their living standards was
suffered by the unemployed. In fact, the trade union movement, which had adopted
a defensive stance after the defeat of the 1926 General Strike, was actually
able to raise average real wages for those still in work during this period,
whilst vicious cuts were made in unemployment assistance.
The
effects of the Depression were by no means felt uniformly throughout Britain.
Particularly badly hit were areas of traditional staple industries such as coal,
steel. shipbuilding and textiles. As early as 1927 Neville Chamberlain had
declared that, "The devastation in the coalfields can only be compared with
the war devastation of France".3 By the mid 1930s, the picture
had not improved. When the recovery started in 1934-35 it was slow, uneven and
whole industries were left out completely. So whilst the growth areas of the
South and the Midlands sprang into life, others in the North and Wales appeared
to have died outright.
The
South Wales valleys, based extensively upon coal production, would have well-fitted
Chamberlain's description accurately. The decline had set in very early on as
German war reparations to France, Belgium and Italy under the Treaty of
Versailles, and the French occupation of the Saar Valley coalfields, hit the
demand for British coal exports. Churchill's infamous decision to return to the
Gold Standard in 1925 aggravated an already serious situation, with a greatly
overvalued pound and foreign protectionism further reducing the level of demand
for British coal abroad.
Increased
competition amongst British coal owners led to a spate of mergers, cartels,
price agreements and production quotas in an effort to maintain prices and so
profit margins. These changes, encouraged by both the banks and government,
resulted not so much in a scaling down of production in individual mines, but in
the wholesale closure of entire areas in order that the remaining collieries
could operate profitably. A commission appointed in 1934 to assist these
'Distressed Areas' was both
relatively powerless and came too late. Output in the South Wales coalfield,
which had already fallen from a high of almost 57 million tons in 1913 to 48.1
million in 1929, plunged yet again to 35 million tons by 1935.4 A
major reason for this reduction was the extent of the coalfield's dependence on
exports, which, as has been shown, dropped dramatically. From 36.7 million tons
in 1913, South Wales coal exports fell to just 19.1 million in 1935.5
Of course, such a massive drop in production was accompanied by a comparable
reduction in manpower. 271,161 men had been employed in the coalfield during the
peak year of 1913. By 1935 the number was just 131,697.6 The effect
on the economy of the region can be imagined. It was not only the direct loss in
mining jobs which had to be contended with. The loss in buying power which
accompanied a reduction in the mining wages bill from £65 million in 1920 to £14
million in 19337 meant that a 'downward multiplier' went into
operation and further devastated the coalmining communities, which thus
decimated tended to exist in twilight worlds with obscene levels of
unemployment.
The
Monmouthshire coalfield possessed many of these 'twilight communities' created,
as described, by the drop in coal exports which had plunged to just 2.6 million
tons from Newport by 1936.8 In the Western valley, life revolved
almost solely around coal production. In the Nantyglo and Blaina area there were
seven collieries in existence in the 1930s: Coalbrookvale, Deep Coal Pit, North
Blaina, Beynons, Lower Deep Coal Pit, West Blaina Red Ash, Henwaun and South
Griffin. In Abertillery there were six others: Roseheyworth, Six Bells,
Cwmtillery, Vivian, Gray and Penybont. Apart from these workplaces there was
precious little else. In Nantyglo, for instance, the only other source of
industrial employment in 1937 was a crusher making ballast employing around
twenty men, a clayworks with thirty employees, and a gasworks.
As
with other coal producing areas, the rot set in early. The 1921 lockout which
put 10,000 men on the unemployment register at Abertillery was a major turning
point. Around one third of this number were not re-employed after the lock-out
had ended. In the same year 4,800 men were laid off in the district of Nantyglo
and Blaina. Of course, large numbers of these miners would be taken on for
varying periods throughout the 1920s and 1930s as the collieries reopened with
temporary increases in demand, only to close once again as it dropped away. But
henceforth the area would be plagued by large residual pools of unemployed which
would continue up to and beyond the 1935 incident. So by 1933, at the very
bottom of the Depression, unemployment in Blaina had reached 60 percent and in
Abertillery it measured 85 percent.9 These two areas, which suffered
not only from the fall in demand for export coal, but also from the reduced
output of the nearby Ebbw Vale steelworks, were the only two parts of western Monmouthshire
which had appreciably more unemployment in 1935 than in 1931. In fact
by 1935 Abertillery accounted for around one third of the unemployed coalminers
in the Western Monmouthshire district.10
These
levels of unemployment, together with the accompanying multiplier effect,
produced problems in the condition of both the people who lived in the pit
villages and in the physical structure of the towns themselves. The valley
communities became rundown in appearance and Lieutenant Colonel Sir Wyndham
Portal, who toured the South Wales coalfield at the time, reported that many of
the heads of the valleys villages such as Abertillery and Brynmawr were
“derelict”.11
Philip
Massey, in his 'Portrait Of A Mining Town' of 1937, wrote extensively of the
housing conditions in Blaina and Nantyglo. In describing Nantyglo itself he
reported that,
“Practically
all this property is unfit for human habitation - a good many houses are
back-to-back or without through ventilation, the
sanitary arrangements are of a
primitive type and in some cases shared between houses".
Winchestown (a part of
Nantyglo) consisted of especially aged and deplorable housing, and Cwmcelyn (in
Blaina) possessed a number of houses built circa 1800. Massey went on to
describe conditions which would have seemed more at home in Friedrich Engels'
'The Condition Of The Working Class In England', written 90 years earlier, than
in a report of life in a twentieth century community. He found at least forty
cellar dwellings in the process of his investigation, and houses where “in
many cases the back is against the earth, so that the walls are constantly
damp - the earth sometimes goes up to the full height of the house”. In
many of the houses there was no direct connection with the main sewer, and
drainage was instead allowed to flow untreated into the river Ebbw which
consequently itself resembled an open sewer. Overall, Massey estimated that in
order to relieve overcrowding and provide accommodation which would be needed if
a programme of slum clearance and reconstruction was carried out, around 600
houses would be necessary.
The
combination of a lack of money and the appalling housing conditions described
above was quite obviously not conducive to good health amongst the towns'
inhabitants. In his report Massey stated that whilst the men of the towns
- except those suffering from industrial diseases - looked their
age, the women of the communities generally looked older than they were. The
children of the valley were particularly badly affected by the Depression. The
infant mortality rate doubled from 56.6 per 1000 children under twelve months in
1930 to 118.8 in 1934.12 If they survived the early years of life,
these children had little to look forward to. In 1935, the Monmouthshire County
Health Department reported that 80 percent of Abertillery's schoolchildren were
physically incapacitated to some degree. Only ten percent were in normal health.13
Boots
and shoes were rare, so that children either wore plimsolls to school or stayed
at home in wet weather. Those that did manage to obtain boots had them supplied
by philanthropic daily newspapers, whose names were stamped upon them.
Poor
nutrition was a contributory factor to the general bad health of the period. A
1932 inquiry into nutrition in Monmouthshire described the children of nearby
Rhymney as "small with a tired expression, lacking bright sparkling eyes
and with no tone to the skin".14 A similar report in 1937 at
Blaina Boys' School produced the following results on the standard of nutrition
amongst the schoolchildren.15
|
Standard
|
Great Britain Ave.(%)
|
Blaina
|
Difference
|
|
excellent
|
14.6
|
6.3
|
- 8.3
|
|
normal
|
74.1
|
66.0
|
- 8.1
|
|
slightly
below
|
10.6
|
24.8
|
+ 14.2
|
|
bad
|
0.7
|
2.9
|
+ 1.2
|
As
can be seen, the Blaina schoolchildren fared significantly worse than average.
In view of the fact that average milk consumption was less than one pint per
family per day, and some unemployed families spent only 1½d per meal per day
when the average middle-class family spent 7d,16 the findings were
not surprising. Whilst hunger as such may not have been common, it was avoided
only by the sort of diet which resulted in continuous physical and mental
dissatisfaction and deterioration.
One
can understand the outrage which must have been felt in the communities when the
Reverend Bradshaw of Ebbw Vale declared in the week during which the riot
occurred that there was no poverty in the towns of the heads of the valleys area
(a statement which was unanimously condemned by the Blaina Council of
Evangelical Churches). Poverty there most certainly was, and the major
contributory factor was the infamous Means Test which was applied to the
unemployed and which serves as the focus for the next chapter.
2.
THE MEANS TEST
The
1930s was a period dominated by orthodox economic thinking which ruled out state
intervention to solve, or even diminish, the problem of unemployment. This
philosophy permeated not only Tory
and Liberal thinking, but the Labour Party also. Thus when Philip Snowden was
appointed Chancellor of the Exchequer in the 1924 Labour government, he told
parliament that, "You are never going to settle the unemployment problem.
You are never going to mitigate it to any extent by making work."1
When the party was again returned to office in 1929 the thinking had not changed
significantly, as later events were to prove. Even the split in Labour's ranks,
which led to the formation of the National government in 1931, was
not, contrary to popular belief, caused by an argument over whether to cut
unemployment benefit, but over the size of the reduction needed.
In
the inter-war period, as today, assistance to the jobless was divided into two
separate provinces - contributory and non-contributory benefits.
Those workers who had lost their jobs recently and who had paid insurance
contributions whilst in work received unemployment benefit, much as happens
today. This was to hold true throughout the era. For those who were not covered
by the insurance scheme, or had received their full entitlement to unemployment
insurance benefit over an extended period of unemployment, there was no single
system of providing assistance. Instead, a variety of methods were tried over
the period to help these non-insured workers including 'uncovenanted benefit',
'transitional benefit' and, as a very
last resort, the Poor Law.
During
the first few years of the 1929 Labour government severe economic problems began
to be encountered. The Unemployment Insurance Fund, from which benefit to
insured workers was paid, was intended to be self-supporting through the
contribution system. Because of the level of unemployment prevailing at the
time, however, the fund had fallen deeply into debt. The May Committee, which
had been established to consider the whole area of public expenditure,
recommended in its July 1931 report that swingeing cuts should be made in
unemployment benefit in order to rectify this problem. It was the argument that
this engendered within the Labour government that led to Ramsay MacDonald
leaving to become Prime Minister of the National government, taking many
prominent MPs with him.
One
of the first actions of this new government was to introduce a 10 percent cut in
benefit to insured workers. "Unemployment benefit is not a living
wage," declared MacDonald on 25th August 1931, "It was
never intended to be that."2 This substantial reduction apart,
the system of payment to insured workers was left unaltered.
At
the same time, however,
arrangements were made to allow the Means Test to be introduced in November
1931. The Means Test was to be administered by local Public Assistance
Committees (PACs) which had been established in 1920 to take over many of the
functions of the Poor Law. Under the new regulations, when a person had been in
receipt of statutory unemployment benefit for 26 weeks, it was deemed that their
contributions had been exhausted and they were transferred to non-contributory
‘transitional payments’. The PACs had a great deal of discretion in setting
these rates of payment, although they were not allowed to exceed the levels of
benefit being paid to insured workers. In practice, many PACs set their scales
below those paid under the insurance scheme, in some cases substantially below.
As the name suggests, these means-tested payments were calculated by the
individual PAC by taking into account all income, savings and possessions of the
whole family to which the claimant belonged. The intrusion into the
personal affairs of the unemployed and their families that this entailed led to
a great feeling of bitterness towards the legislation which has never been
forgotten. The Means Test, like the workhouse before it, was destined to leave
an indelible mark on popular culture.
By
1934, however, unemployment was beginning to fall in Britain as a whole, even
though in the Distressed Areas the levels remained high. So aggressive - and
successful - was the National government's attack on the living standards of the
jobless that the Unemployment Insurance Fund was actually beginning to show a
surplus. The pressure for a restoration of the 1931 cuts was thus increased.
Eventually,
after a great deal of activity on the part of the working class, including the
February 1934 Hunger March, it was announced in April 1934 that unemployment
insurance benefit would be restored to its previous level in July of the same
year. This was the date set for the introduction of the new Unemployment Act.
But although the restoration of benefit to insured workers to its pre-1931 level
was a welcome victory for the unemployed activists, the Act also contained a
sting in the tail for those in receipt of means-tested transitional payments.
The Unemployment Act was in three parts, Part I being the unemployment insurance
act proper which dealt with all claimants on contributory benefit. This, of
course, was restored to its 1931 level. Part III of the act set up an
Unemployment Insurance Statutory Commission which was to oversee the operation
of the act and recommend changes on an annual basis. But it was Part II which
created the greatest storm and which led to a massive roar of dissent from the
working class communities.
The
government had been concerned for some time that whilst they had been able to
control the level of expenditure on unemployment insurance benefit because it
was decided nationally, spending on transitional payments was very much in the
laps of the local PACs. Whilst many committees operated the Means Test very
harshly and consequently ran very low budgets, some such as Merthyr Tydfil in
South Wales more or less refused to operate it at all. This did not mean that
the jobless in these areas were not suffering badly, but it did at least mean
that in the case of Merthyr, for instance, 98 percent of claimants were at least
receiving the maximum payment allowed in law.3 In order to gain some
control over the level of this spending the government announced in Part II of
the 1934 Act that the functions of the PACs would be replaced by an Unemployment
Assistance Board. This body would control means-tested benefits nationally and
would thus remove the local discretion which was of such concern. At the same
time, since the UAB was to be an 'independent' body, it undermined the popular
control which had been a feature, to a certain extent, of the PACs.
The
unemployed maintained their pressure on the government right up to and beyond 7th
January 1935, which was the date set for the implementation of Part II. But it
was not until the new UAB rates of benefit were announced in December 1934, four
weeks before the date of implementation, that they were joined in earnest by the
rest of the labour movement. Even then there was still only muted dissent since
the new scales showed cuts in adult rates being seemingly compensated for by
increases in the rates for children. The following table indicates the extent of
the changes:4
|
Reduction per week
|
s
|
d
|
|
Husband
and wife
|
2
|
0
|
|
Single
adult male, living with family
|
7
|
0
|
|
Single
female worker, living with family
|
7
|
0
|
|
Youths,
18-21 years of age
|
6
|
0
|
|
Girls,
18-21 years of age
|
5
|
0
|
|
Boys
16-18 years of age
|
3
|
0
|
|
Girls
16-18 years of age
|
1
|
6
|
| Increase
per week |
s |
d |
| Between
11-14 years of age |
2 |
0 |
| Between
8-11 years of age |
2 |
0 |
|
Between
5-8 years of age |
1 |
6 |
| Under
5 years of age
|
1 |
0 |
Despite the
apparently compensatory nature of the changes, when reports began to filter back
to parliament from the depressed areas of the actual effects of the Act, there
was uproar on even the Tory (or National Tory) benches. Robert Boothby,
Conservative MP for Peterhead called the effects "brutal" and
government supporter Kenneth Lindsay MP of Kilmarnock reported that 80 percent
of his unemployed constituents had had their benefit cut.5 Writing
in the 'South Wales Gazette', the Abertillery MP George Daggar ridiculed the
anomalies which arose. A family of four unemployed sons would lose 34 shillings
per week, he claimed, whilst a family with four children aged between 4-11 years
old would gain 6s 6d per week.6 The loss of income suffered by many
unemployed families forced the older sons and daughters out of the parental
home, as it was their proportion of the family benefit which attracted the
greatest reductions. This did nothing to lessen the feeling of bitterness
towards the National government, which was accused of destroying family life.
But
whilst parliament played its part in drumming up opposition to the Act, it was
rank and file pressure which played by far the most important role in the fight
against the legislation. Suddenly, militant activity which had been undertaken
by sections of the working class throughout the 1920s and 1930s, through hunger
marches, occupations, and so on, underwent a quantum leap upwards to a new level
of participation and directness by working class organisations. The type and
scope of activity undertaken locally in opposition to the Means Test and the UAB,
and the organisations central to the campaign will be examined in Chapter Three,
in an attempt to set the scene for the incident itself.
3.
THE REACTION OF THE UNEMPLOYED
In
South Wales the unemployed were especially vociferous in their condemnation of
the Unemployment Act. Even before the new rates of benefit were announced, 1,000
marchers from all over Monmouthshire had converged on Newport to put their
demands to the County Council. They demanded that all relief scales should be
increased to the minimum paid to those in receipt of unemployment benefit, and
that striking miners should receive the full amount. They also demanded a non-contributory
medical scheme for the unemployed and their families in order to ameliorate the
effects of the appalling conditions in which they were forced to live. Other
marches took place in the Rhondda and in Bridgend with similar demands.
But
it was after the new UAB rates became known that the struggle really developed
its mass character. In January 1935 a rally at Merthyr, which had beforehand
been dismissed by SO Davies MP as “communist activity”, attracted 40,000
people. In Pontypridd a few days later 20,000 people marched in protest, and
other such marches and rallies occurred regularly as the previously contained
anger of the unemployed flooded out onto the streets.
The
official union movement also began to stir. The South Wales Miners' Federation
organised an all-South Wales conference at Cardiff to discuss ways of combating the legislation. It was attended by 1,600 delegates, some of whom called for a
24-hour strike against the Act. The culmination of this activity came on Sunday,
3rd February 1935 when even the liberal 'Manchester Guardian'
reported that at least 300,000 people had been on the streets of South Wales on
marches and rallies.1
The
Labour Party and Trades Union Congress (TUC) had been slow to take up the
government's challenge to the unemployed, and had in some cases actively
discouraged their local organizations from taking part in protests. Who was it
then who was conducting this campaign on behalf of the jobless? It was primarily
the unemployed themselves through their own National Unemployed Workers'
Movement (NUWM). Its roots went back to the 1920-21 period when unemployment had
first begun its upward spiral. The first workers to be thrown out of work were
the militant shop stewards who had proved to be such thorns in the flesh of the
employers during the height of the First World War stewards' movement. Thus very
early on there was a pool of jobless, radical organizers to create a union to
represent the unemployed. This was felt to be necessary because of the low level
of interest shown by the traditional union movement.
At
first the Labour Party and TUC were reasonably sympathetic to the new movement,
but they very soon lost their initial enthusiasm. It was unnecessary, they said,
as the official trade unions already catered for the needs of the unemployed.
Much nearer to the truth, however, would be that they were unhappy with the high
level of Communist Party membership amongst the ranks of the NUWM, and
especially in the leadership. This high level of participation by communists was
quite understandable bearing in mind the fact that the roots of the organization
were amongst the militant shop stewards' movement.
But
the fears of the Labour Party and TUC were unfounded. The NUWM had been
established to act on behalf of the jobless in much the same way as the formal
unions acted on behalf of their members. It had little political ambition as an
organization. As Clarence Lloyd, who was secretary of the Abertillery NUWM
branch and was involved in the Blaina incident, said of the role of the movement
in relation to the unemployed, "It was to take up their cases with the
Assistance Board and represent them in their interests and get the best benefit
they could for them. Politics was left out of it".2
The
NUWM also stated its opposition to violence. They were militant but were not
looking to bring about a revolutionary change in society, they said. The often
very serious clashes which occurred between the NUWM and the police, especially
during 1931-32, were always blamed upon the police by the unemployed
leaders. At the same time, of course, many NUWM members, such as the National
Organizer Wal Hannington, were as communists very much in favour of
revolutionary (though not necessarily violent) change in Britain. But they
insisted that this outlook did not carry over into their work with the NUWM.
Locally
it was very much the case that the NUWM was led by members and supporters of the
Communist Party. Since it was the local Labour Party, through its
representatives on the Public Assistance Committees, who were actually
implementing the Means Test, it would have seemed rather hypocritical of them to
have involved themselves in action to counteract the effects of their own work.
As George Brown, a communist and NUWM local leader in Nantyglo said of the Means
Test, "We couldn't get a Labour controlled PAC to do anything about
it".3 The Labour county council, he claimed, allowed the
Relieving Officer to run things as he liked. Indeed Clarence Lloyd claims that
the local Labour Party was generally antipathetic to the movement. "The
Labour Party at that time used every excuse they could to discredit the work of
the Unemployed Workers' Movement.'' said Lloyd, "Locally it was
chaotic".4
Certainly
in Abertillery the leaders of the movement were almost all either Communist
Party members or supporters, such as Clarence and Harold Lloyd, the brothers of
Cwmtillery, Harold Thomas, who was secretary of the Communist Party in
Abertillery, Jack Jones, Les Boole and Wyndham Edmunds. In Blaina and Nantyglo
too communists were to the fore. Phil Abraham, a communist county councillor,
was secretary of the Nantyglo branch of the NUWM, and along with George Brown
was seen as the local leader. In Blaina William Madden and Frank Landon led the
movement. In all the towns of the Western valley the NUWM was
very strong both in terms of membership
and support amongst the townspeople. The severe poverty which the Means Test
forced upon them was obviously a major reason for its popularity. Abraham
suggested that around 60 percent of the unemployed in Blaina were associated
with the NUWM.5
The
work that Communist Party members did within the Unemployed Workers' Movement
certainly increased the support for the party itself in the locality. As
mentioned earlier, Phil Abraham was elected to the county council in an area
where the party had one of its strongest Welsh branches. The communists had
their local headquarters in an old bus set on stone pillars, and from there
conducted their campaign based around the 1934 Act which earned them a lot of
support. The 'Daily Worker' of 4th February 1935 reported that at a
rally “... in Nantyglo, a village of 7,000 people, 50 new members had been
made for the Party, 50 women recruited for the Working Women's Guild and 60 for
the Communist Social Club".
However,
it would be wrong to suggest that no Labour Party members were involved in the
campaigns undertaken on behalf of the unemployed. Several local members
participated in the NUWM and 'United Front' demonstrations, and incurred the
wrath of the Labour Party National Executive Committee and TUC for their
actions. Ray Gunter, a railway worker from Aberbeeg who later went on to become
an MP and the Minister of Labour in Harold Wilson's 1964 cabinet, was associated
with the United Front at the time, although he subsequently broke ties.
But
the most important local Labour figure willing to risk disciplinary action for
his involvement in the United Front and NUWM was the secretary of Abertillery
Trades and Labour Council, Len Hill. In a letter to the TUC, the Trades Council
criticized the former’s inactivity, suggesting that the only hope the TUC
seemed to offer the unemployed was the future election of a Labour government.
Hill and the other members of the council did not see this as enough. "We
call upon the TUC to get on with the fight and continually demand the entire
repeal of this Act, even to the extent of calling a one-day general strike. In
the meantime our people are suffering hardship. All we wish for is action...
“.6 The reply from the TUC, which preceded a threat of
disaffiliation, was as follows:
“I
have your letter informing me that your Council consider that the actions of the
General Council over the regulations issued by the Unemployment Assistance Board
have been slack and without vigour and that your Council have consequently
allied themselves with the united front. It appears that your Council feels that
the action taken by a few Communists in South Wales is of more importance than
the deputation to the Minister of Labour and the debates in the House of Commons
- a point of view with which I can only express surprise.
I
also note with astonishment that you appear to blame the General Council in some
mysterious way or other because the National Unemployed Workers' Movement took
the local initiative in organizing agitation against the regulations issued by
the Unemployment Assistance Board. It is surely not unreasonable to ask that our
Trades Council themselves should be capable of taking initiative in a local
situation and should not always depend upon instructions from Headquarters...
The
fact that your Council are connected with the united front will be reported to
the appropriate committee of the General Council at their next
meeting".
The
sort of activity which the TUC saw as the "action taken by a few
Communists" included a rally of 30,000 people held at Abertillery Park on 1st
February 1935 in protest at the UAB rates of benefit. The crowd were told by
local MP, George Daggar, to "Take all necessary measures".8
They hardly needed persuading.
On
the same day the National Council of Labour representing the TUC, Labour Party
and Cooperative Society, issued its 'Appeal To Public Conscience', which Wal
Hannington described as "... the most empty and harmless document that had
ever been issued in the working class movement".9 It contained
no calls for action, but in its strongest passage it urged the clergy to focus
public attention on the effects of the UAB rates. The action taken by the
unemployed against the act, which was outlined earlier in the chapter, indicates
that they were not prepared to rely on the church to win the struggle for them.
They
were proved right in their judgement when, on 5th February 1935,
under massive pressure, the government rushed through a Standstill Order. Its
effect was to ensure that claimants would receive either the new UAB rate of
benefit or the previous PAC rate, whichever was the most beneficial. Herbert
Morgan, who took part in the 1934 Hunger March to London and subsequently was
involved in the Blaina incident, claimed that, "The working class forced
the government to introduce the Standstill Order. That was one of the biggest
victories, in my opinion, that the British working class had achieved up to that
time. It was largely the NUWM”.10
Whilst
this victory was seen by the TUC and Labour Party as the end of the campaign
against the Act, the NUWM and United Front were only made more determined than
ever to carry on the struggle to get the Act repealed completely and to obtain
higher levels of benefit for the jobless. In a pamphlet issued in April 1935,
the Communist Party in South Wales gave examples of PAC payments which were made
in Nantyglo after the Standstill Order had been implemented:11
1.
Widowed mother and invalid daughter aged 19. Mother receives pension of 10s. PAC
granted 2s 6d. Total payment 12s 6d.
2.
Man and wife and two children. Father was ill and made application for relief.
The first week he received 7s 6d National Health Insurance and 7s 6d from the
PAC... a total of 15s. The second week he received 15s from the NHI and 7s 6d
from the PAC... a total of 22s 6d.
3.
Man and wife and one child 13 years old. The man was
ill, but for four weeks he received only 24s per week for the whole
family, and was denied the rent allowance, which the County regulations permit.
As
can be seen, the Relieving Officer was in many cases using the NHI benefit
received by some claimants to prevent them obtaining the maximum payment. This
was not obligatory under the regulations. There was also great dissatisfaction
at the refusal of coal and rent allowances to claimants, even though the county
regulations said that workers on ordinary or sick relief could be allowed 50
percent off their rent up to a maximum rental of 10s per week. Another common
complaint was that there was no set time for interviews so that the unemployed
often had to wait all day to see the Relieving Officer, sometimes even then
being refused an interview.
Consequently
the marches and rallies continued all over South Wales. A day-of-action on 24th
February brought more huge demonstrations, including a
particularly large gathering at Port Talbot. On 8th March,
thousands of women marched in
the Rhondda to demand the abolition of the Means Test. In Nantyglo there was
a large rally on 25th February when schoolchildren and shopkeepers
went on strike in support of the unemployed. 5,000 people marched to the PAC
offices and a deputation of four people entered the building. The 'Daily Worker'
of 26th February 1935 reported that, "They presented a
resolution to the officers of the Board demanding a repeal of the Act and
demanding that a new act be placed on
the statute book guaranteeing £1 for each applicant, 10s for the wife, 5s
for each dependent child".
A
few days later the Communist Party
were rewarded for their part in the campaign by having Jack Jones elected to the
Abertillery Urban District Council. He obtained a majority of 144 over the
Labour candidate in a by-election caused, ironically, by the resignation of the
Labour chairman, Tom Mytton, who had been appointed as an officer under the PAC.
The 'Daily Worker' was sure of the reason for Jones' success. "Comrade Jack
Jones has been foremost in the struggles of the unemployed workers in
Abertillery and Monmouthshire for a very long time", it reported on 27th
February 1935.
A
foretaste of things to come occurred on 15th March. A United Front
demonstration marched to the UAB offices at Rutland House, Oak Street,
Abertillery apparently with the intention of occupying the building since they
took with them packs of sandwiches. However, they were met by a unit of police
who came from within the building and dispersed the crowd, though without the
force that was later to be used on a similar group of demonstrators at Blaina.
As we shall see later, twelve of the leaders of this protest were to be charged
with unlawful assembly and breach of the peace.
But
just before this incident, an event occurred which can be seen as the catalyst
in bringing about the ill-fated march to Blaina PAC offices. When Phil
Abraham had been elected to Monmouthshire County Council, it appears that the
ruling Labour group had tried at first to win him over into their ranks.
According to the South Wales District of the Communist Party, when they failed
to do so they tried to undermine his position within his constituency by
allowing the Relieving Officer Mr. Baxter to apply the full effects of the County
Council's 'economy drive' to the unemployed of Blaina and Nantyglo.12
It would appear from descriptions given by his contemporaries that Baxter needed
little urging. On 7th March a deputation of twelve people which
included Phil Abraham went to the Blaina PAC offices to put the following
demands to the Guardians' Committee:13
1.
Total disregard of an applicant's first 7s 6d of NHI, as provided by law.
2.
Payment of rent and coal allowances where applicable.
3.
Maximum scales to be paid, as allowed by
the County regulations.
4.
Civility to be extended to persons attending the Relieving Officer.
5.
Definite hours at which applicants can attend the Relieving Office.
6.
Local Guardians' Committee to meet weekly instead of fortnightly. (This is
necessary because only the Committee can grant the rent allowance and exempt NHI
benefits. With only fortnightly meetings, workers are often robbed therefore of
one week's benefit in two).
7.
Right of representation for all organizations before the Relieving Officer and
the local Guardians' Committee.
The
deputation was refused an interview with the committee, but Abraham, in his role
as County Councillor, demanded to be allowed to present cases of hardship which
were occurring in his ward. Again the Committee refused. An angry Abraham
suggested to the deputation that, "If twelve people won't move them, 12.000
may!"14
Later
that evening the events that had occurred at the committee rooms were reported
to mass meetings in Blaina and Nantyglo. The meetings decided that a protest
march to the offices should be organized for Thursday, 21st March
1935.
4.
THE BLAINA RIOTS
As soon as the
decision had been made to hold the demonstration, a March Committee was formed
to coordinate the preparations. The other local NUWM branches, such as the one
at Abertillery, were circulated and asked to raise support for the demonstration
in their own areas. The newsletters published by the local branches came to be
used to good effect in the run-up to the march, and petitions and leaflets were
prepared to ensure the maximum support in the valley communities. In addition,
less formal means of communication were utilised. Slogans were chalked on walls
and pavements urging participation and relating the latest developments. Of
course, meetings in halls and on the streets were used extensively and generally
attracted capacity audiences.
A
major setback occurred on Sunday, 17th March when Phil Abraham was
visited at his home at around 6.00pm by Sergeant Clark of Nantyglo. Abraham was
told that Inspector Eugene Davies of Blaina wanted to meet with the March
Committee as soon as possible to discuss their plans. At the same time a similar
message was being conveyed to Frank Landon in Blaina. The next day Davies came
to the committee rooms and told those present that the march was not to go
ahead. He demanded that the committee members sign a statement he had written in
his notebook to the effect that they agreed to abide by his order and would call
off the demonstration. They of course refused.
Although
this was a setback to the organizers in that they would now be risking
confrontation with the police should the march go ahead, it did add another
important angle to their campaign. Originally the march had been intended simply
as a protest at the PAC's operation of the Means Test. It now also served as a
demonstration that the working class would not allow the rights of assembly and
free speech to be taken from them without a struggle.
An
intensive campaign was carried out against the ban. Letters were sent to all
Monmouthshire County Councillors, asking them to intervene, and all local
working class organizations were circulated. The march organizers appealed to
George Daggar to try and win the support of the Home Secretary for a delegation
to be allowed to see the Public Assistance Committee. Daggar reported back that
the Home Secretary had, not surprisingly, refused to intervene, claiming that it
was a "County Council matter". Wal Hannington came to Monmouthshire on
18th March, the day after the ban was placed on the demonstration. He
held several meetings in the towns of the Western valley, one of which was held
in the gymnasium at Abertillery Workmen's Institute on 20th March,
the day before the protest.
At
another packed meeting held at Unity Hall in Nantyglo on Tuesday, 19th
March, a deputation was sent to visit the homes of local Labour councillors. A
group of them were brought to the meeting and pledged their support for the call
to allow the marchers to see the PAC. Their subsequent absence on the march did
not go unnoticed by those that took part. On 20th March the
organizers had received a boost when a deputation which had been allowed an
interview with the Abertillery PAC had been granted concessions similar to those
asked of the Blaina committee.
Thus
by the morning of the march, the unemployed had reconciled themselves to
accepting that they would meet with police resistance in their attempt to
present their case to the PAC at Blaina. Once again, however, the police
intervened to turn the situation on its head. The March Committee were meeting
at the Blaina NUWM rooms to finalise details of the protest when they were again
visited at about 11.00am by Inspector Davies. After a discussion, Davies agreed
to a compromise that would allow the march to go ahead. It would be allowed to
proceed to Central Park in Blaina where a delegation of twelve people could be
escorted by the police to the PAC offices. He would not give an assurance,
however, that they would actually be allowed an interview as this was beyond his
power, he said.
It
seemed that the March Committee had scored a victory since a confrontation with
the police now seemed unlikely. But in an extraordinary change of heart,
Inspector Davies together with Superintendent Roynon Baker of Abertillery
returned to Unity Hall at 4.30pm to inform those present that the ban had been
reimposed. At around 4.40pm Abraham was visited at his home by Sergeant Clark,
and Frank Landon's house at Blaina was visited by PC Moore where similar
messages were conveyed to the march leaders. Davies told the startled Committee
members at Unity Hall that the march was being prevented because demonstrators
would be coming to Blaina from Abertillery and Brynmawr. It was suggested to the
inspector that he must have known of this beforehand as it had been announced at
several public meetings, but Davies denied any previous knowledge of these
plans. It was also pointed out that police officers were being drafted in from
all over the county - 200 was a later estimate - and the inspector was asked to
explain the difference between this and the participation of Abertillery and
Brynmawr people in the demonstration. Davies refused to argue the point and
simply reiterated that the march was off. Any trouble which occurred, he warned,
would be the marchers’ responsibility.
It
is difficult to ascertain the true cause of this U-turn on the part of the
police, but local opinion puts much of the blame on the Deputy Chief Constable,
Superintendent Baker. This officer was generally disliked at the time by the
people of the valley and he was often taunted with cries of "Who's afraid
of the big bad wolf?" 1 when he appeared in public.
Irrespective
of police objections, by this time it
would have been impossible to call off the protest. The Abertillery contingent,
as will be shown, were already making their way to Blaina. The meeting at the
Blaina PAC offices was due to take place at 6.00pm. And, as highlighted earlier,
by this time it was felt that the right of free assembly was being challenged.
Consequently there was no possibility of the marchers backing down. The march
was on. However, in an attempt to ensure a peaceful demonstration, a deputation
was sent to the Labour chairman of the Blaina and Nantyglo UDC, Emlyn Silk JP,
to ask him to associate himself with the protest. He refused.
Meanwhile,
in Abertillery thousands of people had gathered at Unity Hall in Queen Street.
The hall, which served as the town’s NUWM headquarters, was owned by a Mr
Simon, a local furniture dealer. From Queen Street the march proceeded to
Trinity Corner on the Foundry Bridge, which was a popular local speaking
platform, and where many more people joined the demonstration. The road to
Blaina took the marchers over the Foundry Bridge and along Gladstone Street.
"There were
thousands of us," said Mrs. Webber of Alma Street, Abertillery,
"Women with their babies in shawls, old men, young men, all sorts. Marching
and singing to the protest meeting in Banner Park, Blaina".2
But
at the top of Gladstone Street the demonstrators came across two lines of police
standing about 30 yards apart and spread the full length of the road. They were
stopped by the first line of police and told that they could not proceed as the
march had been banned. Harold Lloyd and Councillor Jack Jones got into a nearby
garden and addressed the crowd. Jones told the marchers that they were not being
allowed to continue, recalls Herbert Morgan, and advised them to disperse and
"all take a walk to Blaina".3 This they did.
The
crowd broke up into groups of two or three and carried on their way, although
they were prevented from travelling along the main throughway, Roseheyworth
Road. Instead they went along the Old Blaina Road to the west of the valley or
alternatively walked along the mountainside to the east. But as Herbert Morgan
recalls, “I don't
think anyone turned back".4 Most of the marchers got back onto
the main road at the top of Bourneville and continued on their way.
The
Abertillery contingent was thus very large but quite fragmented as it completed
the journey to Blaina. As the first marchers reached the Blaina demonstrators,
who were gathered at the Salem Chapel in the centre of town, the deputation
which had unsuccessfully visited Councillor Silk was just returning. A number of
speakers addressed the ever-growing crowd of protesters, and the necessity of a
peaceful demonstration was stressed.
The
crowd was in good spirits at this point despite the problems which the
Abertillery section had encountered in reaching Blaina. Herbert Morgan remembers
being particularly amused by a question raised by one old man. "He used to
live in Tillery Street. He was a haulier in the pit. He only had one arm. His
name was Denning. It amused me when I heard him say quite loudly, "Where's
the fighting contingent?".5
When
all
the
marchers had assembled outside
the chapel, and all the speeches had been completed, the demonstration formed
itself into an orderly column. 4 -5,000 people set off, chanting slogans and
singing the 'Red Flag' and the ‘Internationale’.
The
Brynmawr and Nantyglo group had set off slightly earlier and thus arrived at the
agreed meeting place first. In fact they did not quite reach the PAC offices
which were opposite the Blaina Inn as they were stopped approximately 50 yards
from that point by a group of policemen. Superintendent Baker, who had taken
control of the situation, informed the leaders that the Abertillery marchers had
been prevented from leaving their town and that they too would be stopped from
advancing any further. Baker also revealed that the Public Assistance Committee
had met secretly the day before. Since the issue was now one of the right of
assembly as much as a desire to confront the PAC, this did not drastically
change the situation. A short discussion followed between the police and the
unemployed leaders which failed to resolve this impasse. The 'South Wales
Gazette' described the moment:
"As
the traffic crawled by the ranks of the demonstrators, the men burst forth into
singing 'The Red Flag'. While the leaders spoke together there were some tense
moments. Women, girls and young children looked on the scene from the
surrounding coaltips. When a child cried it would be hushed by its mother with
the words, "It's alright, your daddy isn't going to be hurt". The red
banners had to be lowered when a horse shied. The horse was quietened and, with
the red banners out of sight, plodded on".6
However,
when Baker ordered the police to draw their batons the demonstrators retreated
along the road for around 70 yards until they reached Bethel Chapel. Obviously
disappointed, the demonstrators stood around for a little while discussing their
next move. But their discussions were cut short by sounds coming from just down
the valley. Although the main body of protesters could not see the Blaina Inn
from their position, a number of people had broken away and were able to see the
cause of the commotion.
The
noise had been created by the arrival of the Blaina and Abertillery marchers.
They had proceeded unhindered until they had reached the junction of Surgery
Road, which was just yards from the PAC offices. The Nantyglo protesters were
only around 150-200 yards away but could not be seen because of a bend in the
road and so they were met only by a double column of police who marched out of
the Blaina Inn. "They weren't in a pub for nothing," said Clarence
Lloyd,7 and indeed most reports agree that the police, who numbered
60-70, had been drinking although they were not drunk. A few words were
exchanged between Inspector Baker, who had returned from meeting with the
Nantyglo protesters, and the Blaina and Abertillery leaders. Baker told them to
turn back and made to address the crowd. He was advised by William Madden that
it would be better if they were told by one of the march leaders, and Baker said
"Look sharp about it then". Madden asked him to not to be in such a
hurry but Baker told him, "We are serious". "And so are we."
Madden replied.8
Precisely what happened next is a story
which varies according to the source. The police would later claim that the
crowd was unruly and had been out of the control of the leaders, who had anyway
refused to turn back. They would claim to have been pelted with stones, which
the protesters had been carrying, and beaten with sticks before they had been
forced to charge upon the demonstration.
The marchers would counter these
accusations by claiming to have been orderly, unarmed and in the course of
discussions with the police when the baton charge was launched. The evidence
given in court by both the police and the unemployed protesters will be examined
in detail in the next chapter. For the marchers, Herbert Morgan and Clarence
Lloyd are in no doubt of what happened, and their story is corroborated by
John Silk and Jack Hughes of Blaina, who as young children witnessed the events
from the mountainside above the road. Morgan, who was standing approximately six
rows behind the leaders, heard the discussions taking place between the police
and the demonstrators, but says these talks were curtailed when a police whistle
blew from amidst the ranks of police. Morgan insists that this must have been a
prearranged signal to attack the crowd, since this is what happened immediately
after it had sounded. There was no reading of the Riot Act, he claims.
For
a few moments the marchers were in total confusion. They had obviously been
expecting to confront the police at some point. Indeed the Abertillery
protesters had already done so. But the violence being used was unexpected. One
of the first casualties of the baton charge was Clarence Lloyd, who was knocked
to the ground and kicked, and subsequently spent a period in Nantyglo Hospital
with concussion. Very quickly the fight was joined by the Nantyglo and Brynmawr
unemployed who rushed past the police lines to assist their fellow protesters.
"The police were like madmen," said Phil Abraham, "Hitting
indiscriminately and using filthy language."9
Many
of the marchers had by now made their way to the nearby tips or into gardens and
rained down stones upon the police. Herbert Morgan remembers climbing into a
garden with Bert Vranch (who later fought in Spain with the International
Brigade) and pelting the police who were chasing the fleeing demonstrators. For
a short while this barrage of stones forced the police to take shelter, but they
soon regained their composure and made a second incursion into the crowd.
This time those that were still able to ran
along the roads and up the mountainside to escape. The fight had lasted for just
a few minutes although it must have seemed much longer for those trapped in the
midst of the violence. As the 'Daily Worker' reported the next day, "Women
and children were injured and many of them were discovered stretched on the
road". The 'South Wales Gazette' of the same day reported that, "So
many people surged into one surgery for attention that the doors were
closed". Estimates put the total number of injured at around 200.
After
the battle the workers were
advised to stay together in large groups to reduce the chance of police
recrimination, and the streets remained crowded with angry men and women.
Photographs released much later by the police in Blaina to the Abraham family
show that the 'leaders' of the march had been identified at previous
demonstrations, and these men were now sought out by the police who had received
reinforcements.
But
the population of Blaina and Nantyglo rallied around to protect these people.
Scouts were posted to forewarn them of any police presence, and doors were left
open to provide instant access to those the police were hunting. As a crowd of
men stood talking on Garn Cross in Nantyglo later in the evening, they were
approached by a group of policemen. Phil Abraham, who was amongst the group,
stood before the men who were now carrying flat irons, bicycle chains and iron
bars, and he warned the police, "If it's a fight you want we are now
armed".10 The police retreated. Abraham had been informed that
his house was surrounded by police and so decided to sleep at a friend's home in
Brynmawr. Harold Lloyd, brother of Clarence, and Harold Thomas, both
of Abertillery, fled to the Black Mountains to avoid arrest. Herbert Morgan and
Bert Vranch, who had spent the evening on the mountainside overlooking Blaina,
made their way cautiously back to Abertillery.
Thus
ended the evening of Thursday, 21st March 1935. It had been a day of
bitter experience for the unemployed people of the Western valley. They had
failed in their attempt to present their argument to the PAC, and many were now nursing the wounds
they had sustained in their attempt to uphold the right of assembly. But the
story had not yet ended. It would not do so until a full nine months later when
the authorities had finally decided that those who participated in the 'Blaina
Riots' had been sufficiently punished for their actions. This remaining period
is the subject of the next chapter.
5.
THE AFTERMATH AND THE TRIAL
Back
row, left to right;
L. Hill, G. Sheargold, G. Reed, H. Thomas, F. Landon, W. Madden.
Middle
row, left to right;
G. Brown, P. Abraham, J. Jones, J. Doyle, H. Lloyd, C. Lloyd.
Front
row, left to right;
B. Jenkins, B. John, G. Penry, G. Luffman, S. Corp.
Not shown - R. Legge
The
next day the newspapers were full of reports of the happenings in Blaina. The
'Daily Worker' carried the story on its front page under the headline
"Welsh Police Charge Workers - Women And Children In Baton
Charge". The paper outlined the events of the previous day and called for
measures to be taken against the police. Their action, it said,
"First
in banning the demo, and secondly for their attitude against the demonstrators
today (Thursday) should arouse the sharpest protest from the organized working
class movement. A thorough investigation should be made into the conduct of the
police and the necessary steps taken to demand their dismissal”.
Not
surprisingly, the riots were the subject of much local interest. The 'South
Wales Gazette' of 22nd March covered the incident extensively. It
carried the headlines "Clashes Between Unemployed And Police - Blaina
Baton Charges - Fainting Women And Injured Men - Stone Throwing By
Demonstrators". Underneath were reports of the ugly scenes at Blaina and
Garn Road. The 'Western Mail' reported the official estimate of police injuries
as 25, three of whom had received hospital treatment. PC Jenkins of Tredegar had
broken ribs. PC Clark of Nantyglo was badly bruised and PC James of Tredegar had
sustained head injuries. Doctors had been rushed into Blaina from throughout the
area to deal with the injured, said the 'Western Mail', and police
reinforcements had been sent for. A bus carrying officers to Blaina from Newport
had been stoned and its windows smashed. No officers had been injured in this
incident, however.
Meanwhile,
the leaders of the demonstration were taking care not to expose themselves to
police recrimination. When some of them were required to sign on at the labour
exchange the next day, they were escorted to and from the offices by large
numbers of unemployed men and women in an effort to prevent the police from
using this opportunity to make arrests or to harass the march leaders.
Clarence
Lloyd, who had stayed overnight at Nantyglo hospital with concussion, discharged
himself on Friday 23rd and went into hiding. He made his way back to
his home at Gwern Berthi Road, Cwmtillery but discovered that the police were
watching the building. Lloyd therefore found his way into a disused house at the
rear of Gwern Berthi Road which had belonged to ‘Docker’ Woodward. There he
stayed for two nights with no one knowing his whereabouts apart from his
parents, with whom he normally lived. Despite questioning by the police, his
father, who was a deacon at Blaenau Gwent Chapel, denied any knowledge of
Clarence's whereabouts, nor of his son Harold's who was hiding in the Black
Mountains. Clarence Lloyd was able to get a message to his brother's wife and
children to assure them that Harold was well.
This
example suggests that Lloyd and the other march organizers had realised
immediately trouble had occurred that the police would not let this incident
pass. This was in spite of the fact that they felt themselves to be as innocent
as anyone else of causing the violence. As Clarence Lloyd says, "If you
have a group of people who are leading people against the government, they
remove them - you were marked".1
This
view, which appears to have been held by the leaders of the time, was soon
proved to have substance. On 22nd March the police announced that
charges would arise from the Blaina incident. It began to become clear that
hiding would provide no long-term solution. Thus, when mass meetings were
organised for the Friday evening, in addition to consideration of the police
action of the previous day, the establishment of a Defence Committee became an
important item on the agenda. These meetings, which naturally attracted capacity
audiences, were held at Abertillery, Blaina and Nantyglo. The police maintained
a high profile at all three meetings, with around 70 in attendance at Unity Hall
in Blaina, and large numbers also present at the other gatherings. People
emerging from the meeting at Abertillery gymnasium were questioned by the police
concerning their intended movements.
Much
like the NUWM which claimed to be non-political, or at least non-party
political, the Defence Committee was very broad-based. Herbert Morgan of
Abertillery, who became treasurer of the Defence Fund, states that the prime
function of the Committee was to raise money In order to meet the legal costs of
the trial which was obviously on the horizon. The bulk of the money was obtained
through door-to-door collections. The Defence Committee headquarters were in an
old shop in Market Street, Abertillery which was owned by United Front supporter
Roy Jones. Jones was also a spiritualist and the premises therefore fulfilled a
somewhat incongruous additional role as a spiritualist hall.
But
the Defence Committee, along with other local organizations, played a part in
raising active as well as financial support for the demonstrators. Public
meetings continued to play a prominent role in the defence campaign, and another
large rally was organized in Nantyglo for Monday 25th March, when
5,000 people turned out to maintain the right to demonstrate. On the same day in
Abertillery a huge crowd marched to the UAB offices in Oak Street for the same
purpose.
The
NUWM played a major role in this campaign, as could be expected. For the next
few months the Nantyglo limb of the movement concentrated almost entirely on
informing readers of the latest developments and calling for support for the
campaign. In its issue of 30th March 1935, 'Unity' carried an article
under the headline "What Really Happened".2 The press,
wireless and parliament were all suggesting that the people of Blaina had
plotted an attack against the police, said 'Unity'. The establishment view was
that the demonstrators had received their just desserts. The Home Secretary had
announced his belief that they had been treated with "firmness and
fairness" by the heavily outnumbered police contingent. The newsletter, by
contrast, insisted that:
1.
The demonstrators did not attack the police at the Blaina Inn.
2.
The demonstrators had been carrying no arms nor stones, and no stones
were available to them at the point where the baton charge occurred (Indeed if the demonstrators had been armed there would have been a
different story to tell).
3.
At no time did the leaders of the march refuse to turn back.
4.
The demonstration was at all times orderly and in full control of the
leadership. No provocation had been offered by the marchers.
5.
The police attack had appeared to have been previously decided upon.
Meanwhile
the campaign seemed to be gaining a great deal of support throughout the area. A
conference held in Newport attracted people from many organizations including
miners' lodges, steelworkers' unions, local Labour Party and Independent Labour
Party branches, NUWM branches and Communist Party locals. The Communist Party,
which was well represented in the ranks of those under threat of prosecution,
called for a political response to the police action at Blaina. They called for
a workers' inquiry into the events of 21st March and dismissed the
Home Secretary's agreement to an inquiry being held subsequent to the
prosecutions as "useless" The South Wales District called for letters
to be sent demanding a workers' inquiry. Besides County Councillor Phil Abraham
and local MP George Daggar, the targets of this demand were to be the Home
Secretary and the Clerk of the County Council's Standing Joint Committee.
Not
all protests were of such a formal nature. The 'Western Mail' of 23rd
March reported that the windows of Alderman Parry's home had been broken. Parry
was the Labour Chairman of the Blaina PAC. The edition also contained a report
of an interview held with members of the PAC which included the following
statement,
"Members
of the Committee agreed that there might be anomalies at Blaina as in other
parts of the country in the administration of relief, and were prepared to
consider the anomalies provided the unemployed notified the officials in
writing. They were not prepared to receive repeated deputations that
disorganized the work of administering relief and were sponsored by a few
communists amongst the unemployed".
The
police were also apparently of the view
that the events at Blaina had been the responsibility of a "few
communists" since, when charges were finally announced on 2nd
April, many of those charged had Communist Party links. The summons to appear
before the magistrates at the Petty Sessional Division of Bedwellty at Blaina on
9th April 1935 was made to 18 men. The charge was that they,
"On
21st day of March 1935, at Blaina in the parish of Aberystruth,
together with divers other persons unknown to the number of 5,000 or more,
unlawfully and riotously did assemble to disturb the public peace and then did
make a great riot, and disturbance to the terror and alarm of His Majesty's
subjects, contrary..." etc. | | | |
Want to help run Abertillery Online?