Skip to content
Early Days in Belfast

by William McMullen

Belfast became the cockpit in the initial phase of the struggle for supremacy in Ireland between the National Union of Dock Labourers and the Irish Transport Workers’ Union, in the early days of January 1909 with towns nearby playing a lesser role. It resolved itself into a dialectical battle, at some distance removed, between Sexton who had come to the city from Liverpool, and Larkin on flying visits from Dublin, in what was to be the closest confrontation to have taken place between them from the time the trouble began, without actually making contact.

Efforts, particularly on the part of the supporters of Larkin, to have the matters in dispute debated from a common platform were rejected by Sexton who, when challenged, stated he refused to bandy words with him “because it was a waste of energy to deal with a man who was not even a good liar. A good liar lied scientifically so that he could not be discovered, but Larkin lied indiscriminately for the sake of lying.  There was not even finality about Larkin’s lies.”  (Belfast Newsletter, January 15, 1909).

Dundalk on the perimeter, without awaiting the outcome of the issue, was in the van with an unequivocal declaration in favour of Larkin, whose spokesman while presiding in Belfast, with a touching faith in the former’s omniscience, naively declared: “He has been deputed to substantiate anything Mr. Larkin might say.”

Newry, having organised late in 1907, went under early the following year in an effort to assist the Belfast coal dockers and carters to repel an attempt to start a Protestant trade union organisation on the Queen’s Quay, and were in consequence unorganised, with no interest in the impending struggle, while Derry, if deciding the issue on traditional lines, should not have done so, elected to remain with the old organisation not so much on the merits of that course as out of regard for the views held by J. McNulty, the Branch Secretary.

The initial advantage in Belfast lay with Larkin who controlled the letting of the local headquarter premises, 11 Victoria Street, at the corner of Waring Street, (known as the Canadian Buildings) and in having the Branch Secretary Councillor Michael McKeown on his side, had possession of the register of members and all other relevant documents, without access to which, those favourably disposed to remain with the NUDL, were at a distinct disadvantage.  Moreover he had all the militant elements on his side, drawn in the main from those employed at the deep-sea docks who had not been participants in the 1907 strike, and although having undergone some idleness through congestion of goods in the dock sheds consequent upon the carters’ strike, had never the less escaped relatively lightly compared to the men employed at the cross-channel portion of the docks who had been deeply involved.

The latter were the imponderables in the situation from the standpoint of the ITWU, Protestants in religion in the main, as well as Orangemen to boot, they were less demonstrative in their loyalties than the deep-sea dockers, most of whom were Catholics in religion, but the former were not without strong convictions and had borne with quiet fortitude, and unflinching courage, the trials of a four months’ strike period.

Now, however, in the far from satisfactory aftermath of that event, they were known to have grave reservations - afterthoughts, in fact - as to the suitability of the tactics employed by Larkin during that time; a not unnatural reaction, following a gallant but unsuccessful struggle.  They were potential adherents to the old union, together with a strong predisposition to things British, and an equally strong aversion to having association with a trade union with headquarters in Dublin.

As was to be expected, the strike of 1907 played a prominent part in the acrimonious controversy which followed, where in some circles a strong reaction had set in consequent upon its unsatisfactory ending.  The cross-channel dockers, who had to seek reinstatement at its close, unaided by trade union representatives felt resentment at its lack of success and the degree of victimisation to which they had been exposed.  They were inclined to vent their wrath on Larkin, a feeling that was played upon and exploited to the full by those who argued that his tactics had been wantonly irresponsible.  In fact, the reaction was such, that the strike weapon as an instrument of working-class advancement had fallen into disfavour to so great an extent, to be regarded as an outmoded method to settle labour/management relations.

Sexton, whose role during the strike had been a conciliatory one, even if suspect at the time as reactionary, could now regard the turn of events as a complete vindication of his policy, as he disclaimed all responsibility for its origin or conduct, the latter of which he characterised as recklessly aggressive and lacking in sane competent leadership.

Larkin on the defensive, and fighting a rearguard action on the issue, was nonetheless undaunted, if not indeed defiant, in claiming with a forthrightness that the merits of the case did not warrant, when considered in relation to the London dock strike of 1889, “that the strike had been referred to all over the Universe as the greatest fight between capital and labour for 40 years;” that if he had not been betrayed by the official leadership, and the men had shown greater resolution, it would have ended in a resounding victory for himself and the men.

Events, however, had not remained static. On January 6, two days after the formation of the ITWU, at a mass meeting sponsored by themselves, the cross-channel dockers protested strongly against the attempt to sever their connection with the NUDL and a resolution was passed “pledging the members to remain loyal to that union.” On the other hand, a further two days later at a similar meeting described as one composed of the dockers of Belfast, a resolution was carried - “with a renewal of confidence in Mr. Larkin, and we one and all join the Irish Transport Workers’ Union, and will have no other union but this one.”

The stage, therefore seemed well set for a head-on clash between the protagonists on each side, with little hope of compromise, on the irreconcilable views that divided them.  The oratorical fireworks that followed the sharp division of opinion in the ranks, recriminatory as they were, were in consequence largely a formality as there were few neutrals to influence, but it was deemed, expedient nevertheless, from the point of view of the old union, that every inch of the ground should be contested, as an earnest of its intentions, if it was to retain any members in Ireland, as the two principal ports in the country outside the North of Ireland, namely Dublin and Cork, had been allowed to go by default and pass under the control of the ITWU without a challenge, so that if Belfast went, the remnants in Ireland, from their standpoint, would not be worth catering for.

Outside of the partisans, there was a minority, small, with only an influence in ratio, who were far-seeing enough to envisage that a split in the ranks of the workers could only have disastrous consequences, to alone benefit the employers, and even although they were faced with a fait accompli in the form of the ITWU, as a breakaway union, they nevertheless wanted to undo the damage and did not hesitate to suggest that the possibility of a reapproachment should be explored before the ranks were irretrievably sundered. That view may have been entirely unrealistic in the circumstances, and therefore foredoomed to failure, but as subsequent events showed, it would have been the more profitable in the short term.

Influenced, without doubt, by the resolution in his favour, Sexton, when launching his first meeting in Belfast, did not take the necessary precaution to ensure an orderly one. It was an egregious blunder on his part, in the then climate of opinion, to hold a meeting in the union premises, in the hall of the Municipal Employees’ Association, while his opponents held the adjoining rooms, as it was to metaphorically walk into the lion’s den. In addition, although it may have been entirely fortuitous and a matter that could not have been foreseen when the meeting was arranged, that it was held on the evening of the day that saw the formal opening of the branch of the ITWU, at which many members were enrolled in an atmosphere of much enthusiasm, an ebullience of spirits, which found an outlet that evening in the unruly scenes which marked the proceedings at the meeting.  In the sequel, the meeting resembled a bear garden, at which the speakers had to face an audience hostile in part but vociferous enough to make it clear from the outset that no quarter was to be shown.

Councillor Alexander Boyd, the official of the Municipal Employees’ Association who presided at the meeting, was a prominent member of the recently formed Independent Orange Order, an intimate friend and close associate of its leader, Lindsay Crawford, and a typical working class product of a movement whose object was to establish a democratic Orange organisation in opposition to the old existing Order dominated by reactionary place hunting politicians and diehard landlords who were still intellectually seated on the banks of the Boyne.

He was a decided asset to Sexton to consolidate his position among the Protestant cross-Channel dockers, when having to make an invidious choice between two leaders, each of whom was Catholic in religion, even if there was objection to him, as an official of another union, meddling in a dockers’ quarrel.

The presence on the platform of Councillor Alexander Boyd had the effect of adding fuel to the fire, as he had been Larkin’s chief lieutenant during the 1907 strike but was now in opposition to him, while his disclosure that it had been many times contemplated during that period to remove Larkin from the leadership of the strike, and that only the necessity to maintain a facade of solidarity restrained them from doing so, created such an uproar to cause the meeting to be abandoned, but not until Sexton had made several ineffectual attempts to address it.

The meeting which was held on Tuesday, January 12, had been convened by Mr. H. Reid of the NUDL, appointed to replace the former Secretary, Councillor Michael McKeown, who had been relieved of his post. The circular issued by him invited all those who desired to remain members of the National Organisation to attend, an injunction that was more honoured in the breach than in the observance, by the followers of Larkin who, if numerically outnumbered at the meeting, were not so vocally, in demanding the issues in dispute to be publicly debated by the rival leaders.

It was reported that two letters were handed up to the Chairman, one purporting to have come from Larkin, but about the existence of which there was some doubt as no contents of the hypothetical letter were revealed.  The other was addressed to Sexton, in the following terms

“Dear Sir, Mr. James Larkin, being unable to reach Belfast in time to meet you tonight, requests you to remain until tomorrow night, when he will be pleased to meet you and discuss the questions in dispute with you.

Yours Truly

Michael McKeown.”


The invitation it can be stated, was ignored, despite vigorous protest, ostensibly for the reason given at the outset of this portion of the narrative, but more likely for the reason that Sexton, with his defective articulation of speech, however Machiavellian in other respects, would have been no match in debate for the over-powering eloquence of Larkin.

The meeting was then passed into the control of the rebels who, paradoxically enough, showed a restraint and a sense of responsibility that would have been more magnanimous had it been exercised earlier.  The chair was occupied by James Flanagan, a Protestant and a sympathiser of Larkin’s - an exception in that respect - who seemed to favour a settlement, within the existing organisation, with the replacement of Sexton by Larkin - and it will not be without interest in a later context to note here that he presided at the meeting on 8th January which opened the ITWU campaign.  It was in some degree ironic that he should ask the meeting to act as gentlemen so that an attempt at reconciliation could be made, while the resolution proposed by John Quinn, an uncompromising backer of Larkin’s went no further than to state there could be no return to the old union until Sexton was removed from the General Secretaryship.  A line that was the more inexplicable in view of the establishment of the ITWU to which the speaker was a staunch adherent.

The modification in tone, as reflected in the more conciliatory demand for the replacement of Sexton (by Larkin, although that was not mentioned) was, however, tactical, with no intention of giving effect to it, to meet temporarily the objection of those who held that an Irish organisation did not contain the industrial potential of one that operated in both countries if help outside the port of Belfast was needed, but whatever the motive for the less belligerent line (which in all probability was inspired) it was not incompatible with the propaganda of Larkin himself, who claimed:

“He was still an official of the NUDL and would remain so until he was dismissed by resolution of the Executive; that his removal from office was the work of Sexton and not the members” strengthened by his challenge to him “to go to Liverpool and resign his position as General Secretary,” affirming if he did so, he would stand against him for the post, and he could guarantee that out of the 20,000 members, Sexton would only get 3,000 votes” (modestly forbearing to state he would get the difference although always fastidiously punctilious in quoting national figures) “that he had never meant to form a new union until forces over which he had no control forced him”, and then almost in the same breath, as if unconscious of the contradiction in terms - “that the new union he had started would not be confined to Ireland, but would spread its operations to England and Scotland.”

It presumably did not escape notice, even if no public comment was made upon it, how it was possible, having started a new organisation that was a break from the old, at the same time to remain an official of the union and be eligible to challenge the holder of the office for the position of General Secretary. (Technically the claim that he was still an official of the NUDL, strange as it may seem, was correct, as he had been suspended from office by Sexton on December 7, 1908 on the authority of the Executive Council of the union, but it was not until January 20, 1909 that he was dismissed).

In the fiery rhetorical exchanges that were taking place, it was possibly asking too much to expect consistent logical reasoning throughout, which in any case had never been a forte of Larkin’s.  The sentiments expressed by him in the above respect were nostalgic, as he was long known to have cherished the ambition that one day he would oust Sexton from the position and become General Secretary of the NUDL.

The last word in that phase of the controversy went to Sexton who, when interviewed by the Press in an ante-room off the hall at the end of the meeting, referred to Larkin’s unsatisfactory conduct in the handling of the union’s affairs in Ireland - acting contemptuously of the directives of the Executive Council of the union in embarking upon strikes in Dublin and Cork without first seeking its approval, as he had also done in the 1907 strike in Belfast, but relating particularly to matters of finance (which he quoted in some detail to show how chaotic they were) despite numerous admonitions to put them on a more satisfactory basis, all of which requests, he asserted, went unheeded as well as unredressed.

With the controversy still at its height in Belfast, the area of the conflict was momentarily shifted to Derry, where as foreshadowed earlier the terrain was favourable to the NUDL. The port had been organised by Larkin during an interlude in the 1907 Belfast strike in the autumn of that year, about the same time as the port of Newry, but unlike the latter they had been spectators rather than participants in the industrial trouble that had at one time or another, as well as for one reason or another, visited every port in the country in which Larkin had operated.

They had none of the sectarian prejudice against the ITWU, peculiar to the Belfast cross-channel dockers. Ideologically, in political outlook and religious belief they had more in common with Dublin than Liverpool, but being mainly engaged in the cross-channel traffic, their economic interests coincided more closely with the Belfast cross-channel dockers with whom they differed in so many other respects, but whom they knew would remain with the parent union. Moreover, they were witnesses of the rancour and strife that divided the dockers of Belfast and threatened their solidarity - a catastrophe which they decided should be avoided in Derry at all costs.

Their isolated geographical position had sheltered them from the wind of change that had blown with gale force against their union, but being out of the direct line of communication between Dublin and Belfast, any influence that Larkin had exercised upon them earlier had receded notwithstanding a visit by him to the city a month previously, and being judiciously fed with propaganda from Liverpool, relating to Larkin’s history on the docks of Liverpool as a non-trade unionist, and other matters, together with the influence of the local Secretary in whose judgement they had full confidence, the cumulative effect was to settle their course of action in the direction indicated.

A meeting which was held in the Orchard Street Hall on Wednesday, January 13, and which was crowded in all parts, was addressed by Sexton and Councillor Alexander Boyd.  It, however, put the seal of endorsement on a decision reached earlier by themselves to remain loyal to the old union, while “condemning the action of the late Organiser, and other branch officials in Belfast, in their attempt to create a division in the ranks of the union by the formation of an opposition union.”

The success of the Derry meeting was hailed as the turn of the tide in favour of the NUDL - a view that was understandable as up to then it had been reeling under the impact of the onslaught launched against it from the commencement of the campaign in the Northern area, but that view was more superficial than real as all along there had been a substantial volume of opinion hostile to any change in union affiliation in Belfast as well as Derry, which but required the opportunity free from intimidation to find its true expression. Confirmation of which was forthcoming the following evening at a meeting of the NUDL, held in the York Street district of Belfast, where the lesson of the previous unhappy experience having been learned, the venue was chosen for an area having certain characteristics less congenial from the standpoint of interruption or intimidation which made opposition more difficult, to be rewarded with an audience orderly in behaviour, receptive in mood, with their emotions completely under control, who voted, without any great show of enthusiasm, unanimously in favour of the status quo.

Almost at the same time as the foregoing events were taking place, a Law Court action was launched by the NUDL for the recovery of the register of members, stationery, badges, etc. and for monies outstanding.

A sum of £247 was stated to be owing to the headquarters of the union, but according to an audited statement submitted to the Court by the former Secretary - Councillor Michael McKeown - there were no funds available locally to meet the claim, there being only £8.0.9d in hand!

Much interest was aroused by the proceedings which were contested with great vigour by the Solicitor acting on behalf of the ITWU, as defendants. The action, it would be almost superfluous to mention, was vital to the interests of both parties.  In the first instance, to remove the disability under which the NUDL were attempting to operate without a record of members, and in the second instance it was no less vital to the interests of the ITWU, to keep them under that restraint as long as possible, in addition to which it was the time of year when a register of members wad indispensable, with membership cards due for renewal.

A technical hitch was responsible for the postponement of the case as there was no evidence when challenged that the proceedings had the approval of the Executive Council of the Liverpool organisation, and they were accordingly adjourned to enable such evidence to be produced.

With the required evidence available at the resumed hearing, a decision favourable to the plaintiffs was a foregone conclusion, as there was no legal or moral reason as to why the application should not be granted, as it was seen to be untenable for the defendants to sustain a claim to property belonging to the union from which they had seceded; besides which, the goods were the property of the union even if they had been paid for, but in the absence of such payment, as was the case, the Magistrate had no option but to decide the case in favour of the plaintiffs.

Much as the recent successes had boosted the morale of the members of the NUDL it would be misleading to infer that the wheel had turned full circle to a restoration of their fortunes to anything like their previous prestige, as there had been little or no diminution in the support accorded to the ITWU, among those who for trade union or other reasons had already pledged their adherence.  How matters might have developed, had they been permitted to evolve as normally as a complex situation would allow, would be to enter the realm of speculation, but it could safely be predicted on the basis of the known facts, without donning the mantle of a prophet, that a division in the ranks on the question of religion was the most probable outcome.

But an altogether new line of development was set in train - in fact from a quarter where least trouble was apprehended - to that presaged in the foregoing paragraph; to wit, that the future pattern of organisation would be determined by the free play of the forces concerned.  Instead of which, by the unexpected action taken by the cross-channel shipowners in setting up a “Free Labour Bureau” through which labour on that section of the docks would be employed, a crisis was precipitated which neither union had anticipated, nor was able to satisfactorily meet on its own and too widely estranged to unite to meet the challenge.  The consequence was, the end of effective trade union organisation in the port for some time to come.

It was but a matter of time until the Head Line Steamship Co. - the largest employers of labour at the deep-sea end of the port, who already had a foretaste of the united union in action when, towards the end of 1907, they were compelled to continue payment of the same daily rate 5/- instead of 3/9 for the shorter winter hours, similar to that paid for the longer summer hours, when faced with the prospect of a concentrated force of ITWU members on its flank, decided to follow the example of the cross-channel employers by the extension of the “Free Labour Bureau” principle to cover their operations - an action which the several Stevedores employing men there also followed.

Ominous signals of distress were at once evident to anyone who could interpret the signs aright, by the hurriedly convened mid-day meetings at the Dock Street corner where the members of the ITWU fore-gathered for employment, addressed by Larkin hastily summoned from Dublin, and Michael McKeown the Secretary, with an urgent appeal for solidarity to defeat the machinations of the employers as well as an outbreak of violence against those who had accepted employment under the new conditions at the Head Line steamers, with the subsequent arrest and imprisonment of many members of the ITWU, of which a strong force of police and detectives being required to maintain order, was not the least overt manifestation.

It was, however, all in vain for the continued division in the ranks had let loose so many without affiliation to either union that a more than adequate supply of labour was available to ensure the success of the experiment undertaken by the employers, so that by mid-February, a short period of five weeks from the opening of the branch of the ITWU, it could be announced by the Press of the city that all resistance was at an end and the members of the ITWU had capitulated - albeit reluctantly - to the point of acceptance of membership in the employers’ “Free Labour Bureau” in order to obtain employment that was denied to them as members of their union.  After which the Branch of the union languished for some time before ceasing to function.

At which stage Sexton could return to Belfast in relative triumph to hold a meeting in the rooms of the Municipal Employers’ Association where he had been previously denied a hearing, with scarcely a dissentient voice raised in opposition during a speech which, while intended to show magnanimity towards those who had championed a lost cause, was nevertheless strong enough in content to cause resentment tot his erstwhile opponents, when he declared - “That the Augean stables had been cleaned as a result of the recent struggle” and “that had the ITWU survived, it would have been an Ishmael in the international trade union movement.”

Not less symptomatic of the change of fortune was the fact that at the commencement of the meeting the docker, James Flanagan, previously referred to as having presided at the inaugural meeting of ITWU, and subsequently at the rebel meeting, showed an impartiality that was to be envied by accepting nomination to preside at the one in question, and came perilously near crossing a trade union Rubicon by a declaration which he described as a ‘Candid Confession’ - “that the recent strike (1907) was a big mistake; that there was a great lack of discipline during it, and “that he believed the last possible remedy was a strike.”

Finally it can be said, its improved position not withstanding, that the NUDL did not find itself under the same compulsion to contest the presence of the “Free Labour Bureau” as did the ITWU, with its more militant reputation. It, therefore, weathered the storm until, with the passage of time, the employers’ organisation, having served its purpose, lapsed into an unregretted oblivion, hastened in part by the removal of the menace to the employers’ interests by the demise of the ITWU by the derision of its more cynical members, who labelled those more compliant with the uncomplimentary epithet of “Beetle-heads”, but accelerated chiefly by its failure to do anything to mitigate the harsh conditions under which dockers at that time operated. At which stage the NUDL was able to resume a more normal role, but still having more than a nominal existence.

It can be added, however, that the flame of revolt that had been sparked by the ITWU in its short existence in the North, while quiescent during the recession, was never quite extinct, awaiting a rebirth in altered circumstances.

It was rekindled into life with the arrival of James Connolly during the summer of 1911, but never again as a completely unified force, as the separation that divided Protestant from Catholic into two warring and distinct unions persisted, and does so even to the present day, and looks likely to continue as long as the division of Ireland lasts.




Previous and Next: James Connolly | James Larkin