No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
Judging from articles on the subject, American interest in British trade union law has been considerable, but spasmodic. Every important decision or statute affecting the legal status of the British trade unions has been followed by articles on this side of the Atlantic outlining the entire history of the British law of labor combinations and attempting to forecast the outcome of the most recent developments. Between times, the subject has not been discussed and no one has presented the actual results of the heralded developments. The Trade Disputes and Trade Union Act of 1927 is the most recent of these developments noted in this country.
1 17 and 18 Geo. V, ch. 22. For contemporary articles on this act published in American periodicals, see Laski, Harold J., “Mr. Baldwin Attacks the Trade Unions,” 51 New Republic, 63–65 (1927)Google Scholar; Selekman, Ben M., “British Industry and the Trade Unions Bill,” 51 New Republic, 224–227 (1927)Google Scholar; Mason, Alpheus T., “The British Trades Disputes Act of 1927,” 22 American Political Science Review, 143–153 (1928)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Millis, H. A., “British Trade Disputes and Trade Union Acts,” 36 Jour. Polit. Econ., 305–329 (1928)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Whitton, Lt. Col. F. E., “The Trades Union Bill in Great Britain,” 9 Law and Labor, 235–238 (1927)Google Scholar; and “New British Law Affecting Trade Unions,” ibid., 275-277. A more recent article dealing with one phase of the legislation is Macrae-Gibson, J. H., “The British Civil Service and the Trade Union Act of 1927,” 23 American Political Science Review, 922–929 (1929)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
2 The quotations in this paragraph are from the resolutions which were adopted by the National Conference of Trade Union Executives held shortly after the introduction of the bill. For fuller statements of contemporary trade union criticisms of the bill, the following articles and pamphlets, all of which were published in 1927, may be consulted: Labour Opens its Attack; Shattering Exposure of the Government's Sinister Proposals, and Arthur Henderson, Jr., The Government's Attack on Trade Union Law; An Analysis of the Trades Disputes and the Trade Union Bill, both published by the Trade Union Defense Committee; W. A. Robson, The Trade Disputes and Trade Union Bill; Analysis and a Commentary, published by the Fabian Society; Harold J. Laski and Ernest Benn, The Trades Disputes and Trade Union Bill, published by P. S. King; and Ramsay Muir, Trade Unionism and the Trade Union Bill, published by Williams and Norgate. Articles written later presenting the same point of view are Henderson, Arthur Jr., “The Trade Disputes and Trade Union Act, 1927,” 8 Labour Magazine, 157–160 (1929)Google Scholar; Robson, W. A., “The Future of Trade Union Law” 1 Political Quarterly, 86–103 (1930)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Bowen, J. W., “Civil Service Unions in Trade Disputes Bill,” 9 Labour Magazine, 494–495 (1931)Google Scholar. On the other side, favorable to the 1927 law, little has ever been written. SirSimon, John, Three Speeches on the General Strike (London, 1926)Google Scholar, is valuable for the background of the legislation, as is Hewitt, E. P., Trade Unions and the Law; Their History, Present Position, and Suggested Reform (London, Solicitors' Law Stationery Society, 1927)Google Scholar, which was first published as a series of articles in the Solicitors' Law Journal in 1926 and 1927. Ferguson, L. B., The Trades Disputes and Trade Union Act, 1927 (London, 1927)Google Scholar, is a purely legal treatise. Signorel, Jean, “De l'illégalité de la grève générale; Commentaire du Trade Disputes and Trade Unions Act, 1927,” in Bull, de la Soc. de Sci. Écon, et Sociol., Comité des Travaux Hist, et Sci., 1929, 71–124Google Scholar, is an article strongly supporting the legislation.
3 6 Edw. VII., ch. 47.
4 Conway v. Wade [1909], A.C. 506.
5 38 and 39 Vic., ch. 86. In the Trades Disputes and Trade Union Act of 1920, the proviso reserving the right to strike was repealed.
6 National Sailors' and Firemen's Union v. Reed, 1, ch. 536 (1926).
7 The author visited nearly all of the principal industrial centers of England in the summer of 1931 as a member of a group of economists studying European economic conditions. He everywhere interviewed trade union and industrial leaders on the practical operation of the Trade Disputes and Trade Union Act, 1927, and much of the material presented in this article was obtained in this manner.
8 [1910] A.C. 87.
9 2 and 3 Geo. V, ch. 30.
10 This bill and its advancement to second reading is reported in the Parliamentary Debates, Jan. 28, 1931, and the proceedings in committee in the Official Report of Standing Committee C, Feb. 10, 12, 17, and 19, 1931. On the trade union attitude toward the bill and the Liberal amendment thereto, see Report of the Trades Union Congress General Council, 1931, 167-169; a leaflet entitled The Trades Disputes Bill, published jointly by the Labor party and the Trades Union Congress in February, 1931; and Henderson, Arthur Jr., “An Analysis of the Trade Disputes and Trade Union (Amendment) Bill, 1931,” 9 Labour Magazine, 390–392 (1931)Google Scholar.
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.