The Luton Trades and Labour Council are sending their President, Mr W. J. Mair, of the Central Ironworkers' Society, as a delegate to the important conference of the Labour Party, which opens at Bristol on Wednesday. He was to give there a vote which, on a card vote, will represent a thousand Luton trades unionists in favour of a resolution declaring opposition to any form of compulsory service for war purposes.
The resolution believed that its incidence would fall unevenly upon the people and called upon the Labour Party in the House of Commons "to resist to the last any and every attempt to fasten upon the nation a system of conscription which, in practice, has been the deadly foe of the organised workers of Europe for generations".
This was the outcome of a meeting of local trade unionists presided over by Mr G. H. Allen in the Winter Assembly Hall last night [Sunday, January 23rd, 1916], but how far it reflects the real views of local trades unionists as a whole may be judged from the fact that on a vote of less than 200 the majority was just one - a card vote showing, after a recount, 92 votes for the resolution and 91 against.
The resolution was proposed by Mr Murray Janes (A.S.E) and seconded by Mr T. H. Knight (Scientific Instrument Makers), and the arguments used in favour were described by Mr W. H. Wharton (A.S.E.) as "splendid for a young men's debating society and , may be, for a mothers' meeting, but childish and puerile at a juncture like the present".
What Mr Janes had said consisted in the main of stock pre-war arguments. He spoke of the freedom of Britishers for generations, and the old story of one volunteer being worth three men, and had suggested there was some ulterior motive behind the Government's measure. Mr Knight had regarded if as attempt by "the other class" to forcibly restrict the worker.
Five speeches were made in support of an amendment requesting the delegate to support the passing into law of the National Service Bill as a necessity for the complete defeat of Prussianism.
Mr W. J. Mabley (Toolmakers) pointed out that if a non-society man went into a trade union shop he was compelled to join. Wasn't the man who was fighting justified in compelling others to assist.
No one could say that the electors of the country were against the Bill, and unless trades unioists supported the Government in bringing the war to a conclusion in our favour they would not get public opinion on their side in fighting for their rights after the war. "If the country is fit to live in, it is fit to fight for," declared Mr Mabley.
Mr J. Mason (United Machinists), who seconded, declared that munition workers were already conscript, and what form of conscription could be worse?
Two of the supports, Mr G. Walker (Scientific Instrument Makers) and Mr W. H. Wharton ( A.S.E.) said they had been life-long opponents of compulsion prior to the war, but the latter thought they ought now to adopt an even more stringent form of compulsion than was suggested.
Mr Parfitt, an old soldier and present volunteer who was not allowed to go and fight, said: "We are at war and some people don't seem to realise it. They sit and argue, but let's get on with it. Let's win the war. You men in munition works are working long hours, ruining your health for the country, and yet you are against a measure that is going to make the men who are doing nothing for the country do something."
[The Luton Reporter: Monday, January 24th, 1916]