At this time there was a great deal of unrest among village agricultural workers, who felt they were not paid a living wage. It caused a certain amount of ill feeling between them and their farmer employers. A meeting was arranged for the beginning of April 1872 to be held in Great Chesterford, so that workers could voice their discontent. It was organised by the National Agricultural & Rural Workers Union at the request of some Chesterford .farm labourers.

The following extract is taken from The Chesterford Chronicle, compiled by Mary Symonds, and is the report of the meeting published in the Cambridge Independent Press:-

1872

An account of the meeting held at Great Chesterford which so much infuriated Mr Samuel Jonas Webb, is given below.It was reported sympathetically and at length by the Cambridge Independent Press, which supported the Liberal cause.The Cambridge Chronicle upheld the Tory interest.

The Agricultural Labourers’ Movement in Essex

The present movement has spread from South Cambridgeshire to Essex, the promoters of the former society being invited to visit Chesterford on Thursday evening, which they did, and found the bulk of the labouring population ready to receive them with open arms, indeed the nucleus of a society had previously been formed, upwards of twenty names having been given in as members.

The visit of the leaders of the movement was expected.To demonstrate the hostility of interested parties to the movement, we may mention that our reporter was illegally, and in the most discourteous manner, refused accommodation for his horse and trap at the Crown and Thistle by the landlord, a Mr Jowett, because of the errand on which he came, although he urged on the inhospitable landlord the fact that his presence there did not necessarily imply aquiescence in the movement, as he was there fairly to report whatever took place. It was of no avail, the yard gate was locked, the ostler sent away, and our representative was left to shift as well as he could.We would advise none but friends of the landlord to apply for shelter or accommodation at the hands of this peculiarly exacting gentleman, whom, we understand, imagines he possesses great acumen in the selection of his guests, having been promoted to be an inn-keeper from a far humbler position in society.This was the only spot in Chesterford from whence emanated any difference of opinion as to the righteousness of the proceedings.

It should be borne in mind that Chesterford is one of the places at which no political agitators have been stirring up dissension between the farmers and their labourers – the latter, of their own accord, specially requested the parties to come over and organise a society, and the justice of the present cry for increased wages has been practically admitted by the farmers spontaneously – and not as a regular practice at this time of the year – increasing the wages from 11s. to 12s. per week.Our reporter, when seeking for cases, had some sad stories told him in the street. One poor woman (about forty years of age) stated that she had seven children and her husband now earned 12s. a week. None of her children earned a penny, and she, when she went to work, earned 7d. a day.All the money that her husband earned was taken up for the purchase of bread, and her rent was provided for out of the harvest wages.She admitted that she received a gift of coals from some charity in the winter, which was all they ever had; and that she gleaned about five or six bushels of wheat and barley after harvest.It need hardly be said that the woman’s appearance was gaunt and almost fierce.

By eight o’clock in the evening, Gee and Sargeant took their places in a wagon, placed on the open space in front of the Crown & Thistle, which was quickly surrounded by a large number of persons, chiefly of the agricultural labour class, although on the outskirts of the crowd we noticed some who looked like tradesmen, and, we thought, farmers, but as they did not respond to the subsequent challenges that were thrown out, it is only fair to presume that we were mistaken in our supposition. Shortly after Gee had commenced his harangue the window of the hostel to which reference has already been made was opened, and a female voice interrupyed the speaker two or three times, on the last occasion by calling the speaker “a liar”. Attention was attracted to the window, but the female head had disappeared and kept out of sight and hearing though asked what particular statement she challenged. Some of the publicans and farmers’ friends who were located in front of the “public”, took up cudgels and said that the labourers had quite sufficient wages if they kept away from public houses.This created a diversion and a discussion proceeded for some little time between a miller and harness-maker, in the interest of the farmers, and some labourers and others on the part of the agricultural labourers.At the same time Geeresumed and his auditors were divided. His remarks were of a similar character to those already reported as having been delivered elsewhere.He said that agricultural labourers should take care before they got married that their future wife should understand arithmetic. (A voice in thecrowd said: “She will only want short division!” This interpolation was received with loud cheering). Gee said that was what he meant.It would tax her powers to the utmost to divide the money so as to provide anything more than bread out of the present wages.

The meeting was afterwards addressed by the man Sargeant and at the termination of his simple but earnest speech, which was responded to enthusiastically, Mr Challis said, though he was unaccustomed to speak in the open air, never having done so before, he had been requested to offer a few remarks so as to correct a few misunderstandings which had got afloat.What they contended was that 10s. a week was not enough wages for the labouring men and the farmers knew it was not enough.If they were satisfied that the labourers were receiving sufficient wages, what did they recently give 1s. a week more for?The time had come when the labourer should stand up for his rights as a man.He was a man and not a mere machine. Twenty pence a day was calculated to make men move like a machine, and many of them did so move.But if they got better wages, there was no reason why they should not walk four miles an hour. It would make no practical difference to the farmer whether he paid ten men 14s. a week or fourteen men 10s. a week, and it would make all the difference to the men themselves.There was plenty of work in England for every man, and the surplus men would be helped by the society to move to where there was an abundance of work. There were some of the stalwart men who were listening to him who, if they were put on piece work, would bring home 16s. a week ( several voices: 18s.) , whilst there were others who would not bring home more than 10s.: Well, the latter men did not ought to have more than 10s. but that was no reason why the others should not. If the men earned 14s. they were entitled to it.Should any of their friends be singled out to suffer for taking any action in this matter, let the others rally round them and support them, and this should be done by combining together. He challenged any farmer who might be present to ask any question, but, receiving no answer, was told by some of the crowd that the farmers were afraid to come, but they would hear all about it by next morning.Challis urged them to acquit themselves like men and success would most assuredly be theirs.

The crowd then dragged the speakers in triumph through the village to the White Horse, in the large club-room of which the remainder of the proceedings took place.

John Webb, who stated that he was a single man, said that he lived at Little London, and had to walk two miles to work every morning, and had to start at 5 o’clock in the morning. He was not a horse keeper but an ordinary labourer.He worked till half past eight, when he had half an hour for breakfast; then he worked till one when he had an hour for dinner.He then had to work till six, when he left off, and had to walk two miles home.He had been getting 11s. a week but within the last month had received a rise of 1s. a week. It was not true that the wages were always raised to 12s. at that time of year. They had never been before.

Mr Challis was again the chief spokesman.He expressed an abhorrence of strikes, but said that it was not at all unlikely that the society might some day or other before long, tell the labourers in some down-trodden village to give their masters a fortnight’s notice to suit themselves if they did not give a fair wage. If they did so, they would not begin with little farmers – they would begin with some great farmers.If farmers would not pay more than 10s. a week, let them have the duffers and not good able-bodied men who could do plenty of work. He counselled the men to ask for an increase in wages at once, but at the same time to treat their masters with all proper respect, for whilst they (the labourers) supplied the bone and sinew, the masters provided the capital.Let them treat their masters with respect, not slavishly. They did not call theirs a union, but a society, but they meant union.It was most absurd for men to say that the agricultural labourer was as well off now as ever.A few years ago they could buy pork at 6d. per pound, butter at 1s., cheese at 4d., and bread three loaves for a shilling.Was it not absurd therefore to make such statements as that, with the present high state of provisions?

A very influential branch of South Cambridgeshire Agricultural Society was organised at once, and the proceedings, which had been of the most enthusiastic character throughout, terminated.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The statement made in the columns of The Times of yesterday that the agitation is on the decline in Cambridgeshire, has its refutation in the foregoing report.

(27 April, p.7)

On 11^th May a furious letter was printed by the Cambridge Independent Press from a farmer, Mr Samuel Jonas Webb of Great Chesterford, defending the rates of pay he gave his workers:-

Sir – My attention being drawn to a report in the Cambridge Independent Press of April 27^th under the above heading and professing to give an account of the so-called meeting in this village, I feel bound, for the credit of our men, to deny the statement that“the bulk of the labouring population” were ready to receive the promoters of the society with “open arms” and I would show that Messrs. Challis and Philpott were selfishly interested in attending, the former being a shop-keeper and charging notoriously high rents for cottages and the latter being a publican.The Independent Press speaks of the inhospitality of the landlord of the “Crown & Thistle”, where its representative would have quartered to report the proceedings.At this I am not surprised, Mr Jowett, feeling that his visit was not to inquire honestly into the condition of our labourers but to report (false or otherwise) the statements he might hear! Why did not this reporter act in a manly way and ask farmers the full earnings of the men before attending any “meeting”? He would at least have been met with respect and been prepared to avoid spreading such a false statement as that a family had to live on 10s. a week only.I say no such case existed. Why not publish the name of the man?I say, because he had no faith in the assertion. I have paid for the last five years 11s. a week and 13s. to a shepherd and horsekeepers and raised the wages some time ago to 12s. and 14s. without being asked to do so, and I do not mind this increase, feeling that my labour will cost me less per acre for the next than for the past year, as only such work as must be done will be done, and none made for the sake of employing labour as heretofore.

I would, as a friend, caution our men against the foolish preaching of such “nothing-to-lose” discontents as came to Chesterford or in any way joining their society, for so sure as they do, will they lose the respect and care we now have for them; and the effect would be, that instead of going from man to man in the fields and passing a few kindly words, we would be driven to look on the labourer as we should on too expensive a machine, upkept while in repair and then exchanged for a fresh one, and if I, who have been but nine years a master, regret the possibility of a difference in feeling being brought about, what must one of perhaps thirty or more years standing on the same farm experience, who now looks on the old men, their sons and perhaps grandsons as “part and parcel” of themselves to look to and care for?I revere the pride of man and master in length of service on the same farm.This feeling should also exist with landlord and tenant but an excessive demand, of either rent in the one case, or wages in the other, must hasten the already too fast increasing familiarity with fresh faces; and it would be well for each to bear in mind that an increase of a shilling a week in labour imposes a burden on land equal to half-a-crown per acre. I do not intend paying more than the present wages. A good man can earn plenty of money with any farmer in this or other parishes, and if they join your society, or over-reach for wages, they will both lessen the respect there now is for them and lose the advance that has been made with good feeling. I do not fear our good men damaging their position; it is only the bad ones and discontented lads who would upset the peace of a village.

The glory of these “agitators” (who of course expect to be paid for their work) seems to be in uprooting all good feeling between man and master and in moulding up any existing discontent. On my last pay day, which was since “the meeting”, one of my men, James Unwin, said that unless his boy, Jacob, had more money, he would not come to work next morning. Now, Unwin has always taken his boy’s money, so that I consider he himself demanded (this is what I call it) an advance; consequently it was not made, and the boy found a fresh master, at one penny a day more.Now, this is I consider ingratitude, as neither the man nor his boys ever had to lose an hour from want of work or bad weather, and this is why I publish the earnings of himself and boys for a year.This man is by no means an over-average workman, but my labour book will prove the following statement:-

Payment to man and three boys for a year - £66. 6. 2d.

One boy works on another farm and received £6. 17s. (besides 3d or 4d a week (for looking up eggs)); thus, the man has received in money alone £73. 3s. 2d.One of the boys has been only 8 ½ months with me out of the year, formerly working on another farm.His earnings there to complete the income for the year I have not ascertained. Added to this, I have paid £3. 13s. 0d. for malt, hops and beer in their harvest only; to say nothing of all the beer given in hay and seed time, thrashing and many other jobs, which I should be glad to see discontinued, and all recompense for labour made in money. Each regular man has land on the farm free of charge, and all the horse labour as required (also free) in the proportion to the manure he supplies, either made from the pigs he keeps or collections on the roads. There he can grow sufficient potatoes to last from harvesting one crop to planting another. Gleaning is allowed, not only of wheat, but barley, beans, peas, etc., which is either exchanged with the miller for flour, given to pigs, or sold.I know a case in which, since last harvest, a miller has given nearly £6 for the gleanings of a family, and cases are not uncommon where a good gleaner with children secures enough wheat to keep the family three or four months, but it sometimes happens that the wife cannot thus prove a breadwinner.In this village there is an excellent coal charity in which each cottager of a years’ standing can participate.

In too many cases anything given to labourers that is not made a bargain for, is not considered as a “gift”, but a “right”, which is most discouraging. It is often the custom of men to bargain with their wives for so much weekly to keep the house, and to retain the rest of their money for beer and tobacco and when earning extra by “piece work” to give up only just the weekly wages.This system and the income of lads mainly supports the 11 (and until lately 13) public and beer houses in this agricultural village of 940 inhabitants, in two cases such houses adjoined.What can we expect to see but unthriftiness whilst this shameful temptation remains?

I say, the condition of our labourer is good, with the exception of his cottage, and this fault is not ours but rests with the owner of their homes, who not seldom is a general shop-keeper, getting a high weekly rent for a miserable cottage, with no garden, as well as a large weekly profit from his earnings, which enables him constantly to increase the number of such dwellings. We want good cottages on our farms where we could study the comfort of our men and help them to respect themselves and not for the purpose of having undue influence over their labour, as set forth by owners of cottage property, and unprincipled speakers at “meetings”.Till this boon is granted to employer and employed, higher wages would in few cases benefit a man or his family.Where higher wages are now given than land will afford, the payment of a week’s wages cannot be considered as for a week’s work only, but partly as an overdraw on the year, to be made right in future settlements.

I have pleasure in stating that James Unwin is a steady and respectable labourer, and that his boy has returned to my employment since I began my letter.

I am, Sir, yours truly

SAMUEL JONAS WEBB

Great Chesterford, Essex,May 8^th, 1872

(11 May, p.8 )

1891

LIFE IN OUR VILLAGES

The following short extract is taken from an article in the Daily News under the above heading by a special commissioner writing from Chelmsford.

“Beyond all dispute, the agricultural labourer is abandoning the land he was born on and is making his way into the towns.I have today driven and walked a good many miles through parts of this County of Essex which have from time to time impressed me with a conviction that Hodge must nor merely be going into the towns, but has actually gone.

“Whom have you left then?”“Old people and fools” is the bitter reply.

“You see very few young men about these parts nowadays”, said the landlady of a little inn into which I turned for some bread and cheese today.“It’s only the old folks as be left.As soon as the young ‘uns be able to do for themselves, they be off to better themselves, as they think.They go into the towns and go into the police, or the army, or on the line. A good many go on the line””

(22 August, p.6 – C.I.P.)

1895

AGRICULTURAL LABOUR IN THE EASTERN COUNTIES

In Essex, at Braintree, in the Braintree Union, and Halstead, in the Halstead Union, about five per cent were reported to be in irregular work after hay was stacked, owing to the lack of root crop.Harvest commenced between July 26^th and August 1^st.Several employers have not been able to find harvest work for all their men owing to the light crop.……… At Great Chesterford, in the Saffron Walden Union, 14 or 15 men were in irregular work in July.

(C.I.P., 23 August, p.7)

This picture is of a National Agricultural & Rural Workers Union Token found in the garden of Bourn Cottage, and probably lost at the time of the meeting. Bourn Cottage stands opposite the Crown & Thistle and next to The White Horse. It is made of copper and one side is badly corroded. Around the perimeter of the other side is the name of the Union. In the centre, beneath two clasping hands, and above a ploughshare, are the words Workers of the World Unite.