THE FREMANTLE
WHARF CRISIS
OF 1919
Table of Contents
PERTH, W.A.
"WESTRALIAN WORKER"
3840 Stirling Street
1920
Vale, Tom Edwards!
O N SUNDAY, MAY 4, 1919, Thomas Charles Edwards, a member of the Fremantle Lumpers Union, received, during a riot on the wharf, at the hands of a policeman, a blow from a baton, the force of which fractured his skull, and ended fatally three days later. He was only 30 years of age, and he left a wife and three little children.
To his memory this brief history of the crisis is dedicated. It has been issued under the direction of the State Executive of the Australian Labor Federation, and the proceeds of its sale are to be devoted to the fund to assist the widow and children of the deceasedthe first man in Western Australia to give his life for his fellow workers, when seeking to preserve industrial freedom, in conflict with the armed forces of the Government of the day.
The Cortege Marshalling.
THE WHARF CRISIS OF 1919.
Table of Contents
T HE industrial records of Australia contain no more pregnant illustration of the power of organised labor than is to be found in the history of the Fremantle Wharf Crisis of 1919. Hitherto, in the long struggle for the proper recognition of the rights of the working classes the force of arms had not been openly employed; but what occurred on that tragic Sunday morning of May 4, and both prior, and subsequent, to that day, has shown to the Governments of this country that even armed force is impotent when employed to protect the privileges of the few against the common interests of the body politic. The victory of the Lumpers Union was complete, although in the achievement thereof one life was sacrificed on the altar of industrial freedom.
GENESIS OF THE TROUBLE.
The genesis of the 1919 crisis is to be found in the wharf trouble of 1917. On August 13, 1918 the Empire was engaged in a life and death struggle, a cargo of flour was to be lifted at Fremantle by the Singapore liner Minderoo and destined for a Dutch settlement. The Fremantle lumpers had been advised that flour so consigned was finding its way into Germany, and refused to load the ship. For this action they were declared disloyalists and pro-Germans, and accused of starving the boys in the trenches. History has disproved the first infamous calumny; the second needed no refutation. Amongst those boys in the trenches whom they were accused of starving were scores of their own comrades, the sons of many lumpers, and husbands and brothers of lumpers wives. Even were that proud fact not sufficient to silence the slanderers of a body of men whose record of patriotic service provides its own imperishable testimony of patriotism, the offer of the President of the Lumpers Union might have been accepted as a complete denial. For on August 24 Mr. William Renton offered, through the Press, on behalf of the lumpers to load any ship, free of all charge or wages, with foodstuffs for the boys in France. His offer was not accepted, and for the purpose of the employers the cry of anti-patriotism was continued.
It would take too long in this brief history, which has to do more particularly with the 1919 crisis, to deal at length with the progress of the 1917 dispute. It is known to the world that the Government of the day, backed by the shipowners, decided upon the enrolment of "blackleg" labor, and with that labor the work of the wharf proceeded. On October 4, 1917, the lumpers presented themselves for work; no work was offering. For some time this state of affairs continued, and even when work was offering the lumpers were studiously overlooked and "blackleg" laborers engaged. Attempts were made to open negotiations with the employers, but the mens leaders were treated with contempt. An application for a conference was refused, and on October 19, in a public statement, Mr. McCallum threw upon the Government and the employers full responsibility for the continuance of an intolerable position. When at long last some recognition was made of the lumpers, who had declared their willingness to work side by side on the wharves with the "blacklegs," they were subjected to many indignities and unfair tactics in the allotment and nature of the work. With marked forbearance and patience the injustices were borne until April of 1919, and then the inevitable conflict came. That it was inevitable is not the claim of the lumpers. It was admitted by the then Premier of the State (Mr. H. P. Colebatch ), in his first interview with the leaders of the men, when he declared that industrial peace was impossible on the wharves whilst two bodies of workers were engaged.
EVENTS OF INTERVENING PERIOD.
Before embarking on a record of the 1919 crisis, it is necessary to recall what was occuring in the intervening period of time between October, 1917, and April, 1919. The "black leg" laborers had been engaged for a specific task. That task completed, the majority were quite willing that the lumpers should return to their rightful calling on the wharves, and therefore did not continue to offer their services. Those who remained, though always in dwindling numbers, were used by the employers in continual acts of provocation against the lumpers. Invariably in industrial disputes a condition precedent to resumption of work is that differences between the parties shall be regarded as finally settled, and that no victimisation shall follow. Without that essential understanding industrial harmony could never exist. But in the period following the wharf trouble of 1917 the powers that be deliberately chose to perpetuate discord. Then, when the inevitable conflict of their own creation came, they sought to saddle the lumpers with the blame. If, not knowing the facts that history has since proved, the public in 1917 was induced to support the Government of the day, it was not so in 1919, as was so dramatically proved. For in 1919 the lumpers were able to substantiate what they had previously asserted regarding the flour destined for Dutch settlements in 1917, and to refer the public to the statement of the British Prime Minister (Mr. Lloyd George ) in the House of Commons, in which that great statesman admitted that flour had found its way into Germany from Dutch sources. In reply to Mr. McPherson, Mr. Lloyd George also admitted that Australian and New Zealand flour had reached Germany during the war.
It has been stated that Mr. Colebatch admitted it was impossible for industrial peace to exist on the wharves whilst two distinct organisations were engagedthe members of one (the minority) under conditions which humiliated the members of the other (the majority). Mr. Colebatch had good reason for that observation. It is explained in the words of the President of the Lumpers Union (Mr. Renton), who, on April 28, inter alia, in a Press interview, said:
