On my return home I placed my resignation in the hands of the Executive.

They would not accept it at the time, but gave me a month's rest. But at the end of the month I had to give up all hope, and the committee accepted the resignation with deep regret and allowed me to do what organizing I felt able to do. I moved into a private house in Fakenham with my wife's niece, Mrs. Kernick, who on the death of my wife came to live with me and look after me. During the winter I picked up a bit and was able to do some organizing work.

In 1914 I was appointed by the Lord Chancellor a Justice of the Peace for the County of Norfolk.

I also took some meetings for the National Land Campaign Committee, ceasing to receive any salary from the Union at my own request. In August the Great War commenced. I, like most of the Labour leaders, felt it my duty to do what I could to help the nation in the hour of need. I believed then, and I believe still, that Germany was bent on obtaining a world-wide military domination; I felt it my duty to put the Nation's interest before any other consideration. Not that I believed in war, for war to me is a crime of the deepest dye against humanity.

The Burston School Strike is one of the most interesting and peculiar disputes I have taken part in. Here was I compelled to take sides against one of the committee of the County Council of which I was a member during the latter part of 1913 and the beginning of 1914. The Burston School teachers, Mr. and Mrs. Higdon, for some reason had a difference with the Managers, and as I read the particulars I came to the belief that there was some other reason for the Managers' action.

An inquiry that was held on February 23 and 29, 1914, as to the charges that the Chairman of the Managers' brought against the teachers showed that they were of a trifling nature and never ought to have been brought. I also thought, and still think, the decision come to inflicted a punishment upon the teachers far more severe than the case deserved, even if the charges were true, which I did not believe, and to me their dismissal which took place on March 31, 1914, was a clear case of victimization and I felt it my duty to support them. Soon after their dismissal the children all struck and refused to attend the Council School. Summonses were issued against the parents for neglecting to send their children to school. A large meeting was held on the green on the Sunday after the parents were convicted at Diss, which was attended by nearly two thousand people, and a resolution of protest was pa.s.sed requesting that a public inquiry be held. I attended and gave an address. The meeting was conducted on strictly religious lines, and I took for my text "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."

After this meeting and after seeing the devotion of the people to the teachers and having satisfied myself that the teachers and the parents of the children were fighting a just battle, I decided that I would do my best to champion their cause. I will say, as I look back at the fight I have made on their behalf, I am satisfied I never championed a more righteous cause during my long public life. I was sure, however, at the commencement of the struggle that I should have to fight almost single-handed so far as the County Council was concerned, for I had at that time only one Labour colleague on the Council, and that was my esteemed friend Mr. W. B. Taylor.

I should like to say that I never have accused any of my colleagues on the Council or on the Education Committee of being actuated by any spirit of unfairness or with any spirit of political or religious prejudice.

I have always contended that they acted in what, in their judgment, were the best interests of the education of the children; but I have always contended, and do to-day, that they allowed themselves to be bia.s.sed by the political prejudice of one or two of the Managers, and that was what I set myself out to fight. My first effort on the Council was to move that the Education Committee be requested to hold a public inquiry. On this being put to the vote only my colleague and I voted for the motion.

My next effort on the teachers' behalf was to move that the Education Committee be asked to reinstate the teachers for the period of the war, in order that peace and concord might prevail in the village. On this occasion I warned the Council that unless something in the direction of peace was done, the whole great Trade Union movement would take the matter up, and then they would probably have another school built. My warning, however, was unheeded and the resolution was lost. This time I received a little more support, and Mr. W. B. Taylor, Mr. Coe, Mr. Day and Mr. Pollard voted with me. This brought public sympathy to the teachers. Many of the Trade Union leaders took the matter up, a subscription list was opened, hundreds of pounds were subscribed, a new school was built, which is called the Burston Strike School, and it stands there as a monument of what the subscribers believed to be a great fight for religious and political freedom. I have never regretted the part I took in this great fight. I am, however, satisfied that had the County Council taken my advice at the time most of this unpleasantness might have been avoided.

CHAPTER XVI

THE GREAT WAR

On August 4, 1914, the Great War commenced and, as stated, I came to the conclusion, like most of the other Labour leaders, that according to the information I had at my disposal we had no other alternative but to enter the war. I felt that it was a struggle for our very existence; further, that we were fighting to overcome one of the greatest curses to humanity, namely the wicked spirit of militarism. I therefore decided to put what appeared to me at the time the nation's interest before any other consideration. I spoke at a good many recruiting meetings in the early stages of the war. So far did I carry my patriotism that some of my friends began to be rather nervous about me for fear I should carry it too far, but they need not have been, for I never deviated one iota in my views on the Labour questions nor was there any fear that I should ever leave the cause to which I had devoted all my life. I took, however, the view that it would be the poor that would be the first to suffer, should we be defeated or should the enemy succeed in starving us, as the following letter I wrote to the women of the country will testify. It appeared in the _Eastern Daily Press_:--

To the working-women of Norfolk, the wives and mothers and sisters of our brave boys who are now so gallantly fighting for their country in France and Belgium and other parts of the world.

I feel constrained to make an appeal to you in the hour of our national danger to consider seriously the gravity of the situation and what it would mean to this country, especially the working cla.s.ses, should Germany and her confederates win this war.

Everything that is dear in our English life will be destroyed; all our hopes for improvements in our national life will be blighted; the working cla.s.ses will be thrown back into far worse conditions than they were one hundred years ago; all our liberties so hardly won for us by our forefathers will be lost.

I ask you to consider for one moment what has taken place in Belgian and French towns and villages. The homes of the poor have been destroyed by fire and sword. Old men and women have been murdered in cold blood, women and children outraged and killed, mothers separated from their children and wives from their husbands, not knowing whether they are dead or alive. What these poor people have suffered is a small thing in comparison to what would happen to us should our enemies ever reach these sh.o.r.es, and they will unless we are able to defeat and destroy the cruel and barbarous military power of Germany. Do you wish your daughters to be outraged, your children slaughtered? Would you like to see our veterans of industry murdered, our homes burnt and our towns made desolate? No, I know you would not. No women are more devoted to their homes and loving to their children than the women of Norfolk.

The danger, however, is very great and it can only be prevented by everyone doing all that lies in their power to help the nation in the hour of distress. It is for the protection of our own hearths and homes that we are engaged in this terrible war, hence the great call on the manhood of this country. And now the time has arrived when the womanhood of the nation have to be appealed to, and I am making a patriotic appeal to you, the women of my own country, to come forward and help in the present crisis.

In making this appeal to you I am asking you to do a thing which I had hoped you would never have been asked to do again and which, I am thankful to say, the improved conditions of labour have made unnecessary. But the crisis is so great and the danger of losing all that is sacred and good in our national life is so p.r.o.nounced, that I venture to make this appeal to you to offer your services in cultivating the land in order that as much food can be produced at home as possible. There will be a great deal of work to do in the spring, such as hoeing and weeding, getting the land fit for the turnip crops and many light jobs which hitherto have been done by men; and, as there is a great shortage of labour, we will see that fair wages shall be offered to you. One of the first essentials of life is food, and if this cannot be produced, then a great disaster is staring us in the face. To prevent this our womenkind are called to help. I therefore appeal to you in the name of G.o.d, who made you free, and in the interest of your children to help in this hour of need.

Yours faithfully, (_Signed_) GEORGE EDWARDS.

FAKENHAM, _January 3, 1916._

At the pa.s.sing of the Military Service Act and the setting up of Tribunals, I with my old friend George Hewitt was asked by the Union to represent Labour on the Norfolk Appeal Tribunal, which we did. On that Tribunal we watched very closely the interest of the cla.s.s we were sent there to represent. It was, however, a most unpleasant task and one that I would never undertake again, should the occasion arise, which I hope never will. Before leaving this matter and the part I took in the war I would like to say that I am bitterly disappointed at the result of the war, and it has entirely altered my outlook on war and its causes and has confirmed in my mind more than ever the opinion that force is no remedy, and that, unless the nations disarm and men devote their great inventive and scientific powers in the direction of peace, civilized man will soon be utterly destroyed.

At the setting up of the Norfolk War Agricultural Committee Mr. G. E.

Hewitt and myself were elected on it to represent Labour. We were enabled on this committee to do some very useful work. Our business was to insist that the land be properly cultivated, also to force the bringing back of land that had been laid down to gra.s.s to arable cultivation. We had also to look after the service men who were medically unfit for foreign service, and who were transferred to the land, and to insist that the farmers treated them fairly. Another useful opportunity presented itself for me to do some work for the people on the establishment of the Food Control Committee. I was elected a Labour representative on the Walsingham District Committee and was elected chairman, a position I held until the committee finished its work. I think I can claim that, with the a.s.sistance of my colleagues, we did some most useful work and administered the Act fairly between all cla.s.ses. We certainly did prevent a great deal of profiteering and enabled the people to obtain their food on much better terms than they otherwise would have done.

On the pa.s.sing of the War Pension Act and the setting up of War Pension Committees, I was elected on the Norfolk County Committee. I was also elected on the Walsingham War Pension District Committee and was appointed its first chairman, which position I held until I was elected a Member of Parliament, when I resigned in consequence of being unable to attend its meetings. But I look back upon my work on this authority with the greatest satisfaction. It was a humane work and a labour of love. It is the greatest joy of my life to know that I have been able to do something for these poor widows and children who have been deprived of their bread-winners when they most needed them, and further, to know that I have been able to help the poor fellows who have had their health wrecked through serving their country. During my term of office on this committee my house was always open to receive these poor fellows who sought my aid. In fact all cla.s.ses came to me for help and advice.

It became evident early in the spring of 1915 that the agricultural labourers were becoming very unsettled and justly so. The war commenced in August 1914, and with it the cost of living went up by leaps and bounds, but the labourers' wages never rose a penny piece. At last the labourers informed the officials of the Union that if we did not move in the matter they would take the whole question into their own hands. We appealed to the farmers to meet us in conference and discuss the question, but they refused to meet us, and at last we had no other alternative but to issue notices to the farmers for our men to cease work. One Friday in March there were sent from our office 2,000 notices.

The next day, when I was at Norwich attending a County Council meeting, I met Mr. Keith of Egmere, who was a member of the Council, and this question of notices was discussed, and we both expressed regret that it was necessary to take this course. Mr. Keith asked me if anything could be done and said that Mr. H. Overman of Weasenham would like me to meet about five of the largest farmers at the Royal Hotel that day in Norwich. I told him that was impossible as I had no official authority to do such a thing. The President of the Union was not in the city and I could not get into touch with him. I therefore dared not do such a thing on my own authority and, further, I could not think of attending such a conference alone even if I had authority to do so. A few minutes after I met Mr. H. Overman and he suggested that I should meet the farmers unofficially and talk the matter over and see if it would not be possible to do something to get an official conference called during the next week and if possible prevent a strike. This I agreed to do on condition that Mr. Herbert Day, Treasurer of the Union, attended with me, and with the distinct understanding that our meeting should be absolutely informal and there should be nothing said or done that would have the least appearance of being official. This was agreed to, and at 3 p.m. Mr. Day and myself met Mr. H. Overman, Mr. Keith, Mr. Lionel Rodwell, Colonel Groom and Lord Leicester, the Lord Lieutenant of the County. In the first part of the discussion the farmers complained bitterly of the action of the Union in issuing notices. I told them I was not there to discuss the rights or wrongs of the action of the Union in issuing notices, but to see if something could not be done to get the two sides together. But I would say this: the Farmers' Federation was responsible for what had happened, for the Executive of the Union had asked the Federation to meet us over and over again, but they had refused to do so. We had, therefore, no other alternative but to take the course we did, for our men were determined they would have a readjustment of their wages. But if there was anything I could do, even at the eleventh hour, to get the two sides together at a conference I would do it. After this little straight talk the farmers saw the difficult position we were in and expressed the opinion that the att.i.tude taken up by the Federation was wrong. I think I ought to say that none of the farmers present were members of the Federation, but they were the largest farmers in the county and the most influential and were almost able to force the issue. They promised that if the Union's Executive would meet them they would undertake to see that, whatever agreement was arrived at, it was carried out. With this understanding I undertook to use my influence with the Executive to have such a conference held at Fakenham. On my return to Fakenham I informed the General Secretary of what had happened and asked him to get into touch with the President and obtain his views on the matter, which he did, and I think I ought to say that my action was rather severely criticized by some of the Executive.

But the President put his foot down and was determined that such a conference should be held. It was arranged to meet the above-named farmers, with Lord Leicester in the chair, and the following were appointed to meet them at the Crown Hotel on Thursday in that week: The President, Mr. W. R. Smith, the vice-president, Mr. George Edwards, the General Secretary, Mr. R. B. Walker, and Mr. G. E. Hewitt. Mr. Smith put our case in such a reasonable and forceful way that it was unanswerable and put in a claim for a 5s. per week increase, bringing the wages up to 1. On receiving our requests and after some little discussion the farmers retired, and after some few minutes they returned and made us the following offer. They would agree to recommend to the farmers a rise of 3s. per week at once if we would undertake to withdraw our notices. We withdrew and discussed the farmers' offer, and after some few minutes' discussion agreed to accept the offer as a compromise, and undertook on our part to withdraw all our notices. At the same time we informed the farmers that we considered we were justly ent.i.tled to the 5s. per week rise, but for the sake of peace we accepted the compromise.

To-day I rejoice that I was the means of bringing the two sides together and preventing a terrible dispute. It was also opening up a new chapter in the history of the Agricultural Industry, for here was collective bargaining, something that I had been working to obtain for over forty years. Ever since the Federation has met us every year and our readjustments have been made in a most friendly manner, and many differences which would have ended in bitter disputes have been avoided.

I do not think either side would like to go back to the old individualistic system of bargaining. At least I hope not.

For years at our Annual General Council I had moved a resolution requesting the Government to bring the industry under the Trade Boards Act. I had also moved it at several Trades Union Congresses and had attended as a deputation with the Parliamentary Committee of the Trades Union Congress before the then President of the Board of Trade and put our case in favour of it, but with very little success. My friend Mr.

Noel Buxton, who was then member for North Norfolk, had moved a resolution upon it in the House in 1916. The matter had become so pressing that the Government could not resist it any longer, and in the spring of that year Mr. Lloyd George announced in a speech that the Government intended to bring in a Bill to be called the Corn Production Act, which was to set up an Agricultural Wage Board. This Board was to fix wages from time to time that should enable the labourer to keep himself and family in such a state of health as would enable him to be an efficient labourer. It also fixed the minimum wage at 25s. per week.

The Bill was brought in early in the session of 1917, and in it was inserted a clause fixing the minimum wage at 25s. per week. This to us at the time appeared to be a most inadequate figure as the cost of living had increased beyond all bounds, and we decided to use every means within our power to get that figure struck out and 30s. put in its place. We appointed a deputation to lobby the members when the Bill was pa.s.sing through its final stages to induce the members to vote for the 30s. I was one of the deputation and I did my best to persuade those members I got into touch with to vote for the 30s. But the Government had made up its mind to stand by the 25s. Hence on a division the 30s.

was rejected and the Bill became law during the session of 1917. I was elected on the first Central Wage Board. I was one of the Government's nominees. The Board consisted of sixteen representatives of the workers, sixteen employers and seven appointed members who were to take an impartial view and decide the question when the two sides failed to agree on an equality of votes. Eight of the workers and eight of the farmers with the appointed members were appointed by the Government and approved by the Minister of Agriculture, and, as stated above, I was appointed by the Government. On our side were Messrs. W. R. Smith (National Agricultural Labourers' Union), R. B. Walker, G. E. Hewitt, T.

G. Higdon, Robert Green and W. Holmes. For the Workers' Union there were Messrs. G. Dallas and John Beard. There was one woman on the workers'

side. The Government appointed Messrs. George Nicholls, George Edwards, Denton Woodhead, Haman Porter, H. L. Lovell, with Messrs. Gaurd and Richardson from Wales. We had our first meeting in November 1917. Mr. W.

R. Smith was elected leader for our side. Sir Ailwyn Fellowes, now Lord Ailwyn, was appointed chairman, and he soon endeared himself to all sides, proving himself to be a most able and impartial chairman. The first business of the Board was to set up District Wage Committees. We first decided to set up one committee for each county. Then the Board left it for each side to select their own representatives, and for us it was a most difficult task as we had two Unions catering for one industry and there was a great spirit of rivalry existing between them, which created a bitter spirit between the two secretaries. This was greatly to be regretted and caused friction when there ought to have been harmony.

We always, however, showed a united front in the Board Room. Then there was Mr. Denton Woodhead, who represented some independent Friendly Society. It took us some weeks to set up the committees, and we were into the New Year 1918 before the Board could settle down to its real work of dealing with the wages. In the meantime the men were getting very restless, especially in Norfolk, as the cost of living was going up by leaps and bounds, and I could see serious trouble looming in the near future unless the question was tackled at once. I begged of the Board to set the Norfolk Wages Committee up at once and let us get on with our work. This they did, and I was put on the Norfolk Committee, and at our first meeting was elected leader of the workers' side. We had nine on each side, and there were five appointed members. Our side consisted of myself, Messrs. S. Peel, J. Pightling, R. Wagg, Mrs. S. Kemp, Messrs. H.

Harvey, R. Land, W. Skerry and J. Shickle. Mr. Russell Colman was appointed chairman. At our first meeting I moved that the wages should be raised to 30s. per week for a 54 hour week and that the working week end at one o'clock on Sat.u.r.days. This was rejected absolutely by the employers, and they moved an amendment that the wages should remain at 25s. per week and the working hours remain as before. We had a long discussion, and at last the employers' section asked for the question to stand adjourned for a week. We objected, but the appointed members agreed, and the meeting was adjourned until the following Monday week, when we met again and had a long discussion. The appointed members suggested time after time that the two sides should meet and come to some agreement. The employers withdrew their amendment and moved another that the wages be raised to 27s. 6d. per week and that the working hours be 57 hours per week. This we absolutely refused to accept and would not move one inch. The appointed members retired and discussed the matter.

After a time they sent for the leaders of each side and made a suggestion in the form of a compromise. They would be prepared to vote for 30s. for a 55 hours' working week. The farmers refused the offer. I went back to my colleagues, and after some discussion we reluctantly agreed to accept the compromise, and on the appointed members returning to the room they put their suggestion to the vote. The employers voted against; we voted with the appointed members, and it was carried, and the recommendations were sent to the Central Board which met the same week. The Central Wage Board rejected the 55 hours and adopted our first proposition, namely 54 hours as a working week, and that the week's work end on Sat.u.r.day at 1 p.m., or that there be one six and a half-hour day a week, all that was worked over to be paid for as overtime. We also fixed the overtime pay at time and a quarter for six days and time and a half on Sundays. We also raised the pay of the hors.e.m.e.n and stockmen in proportion. The Wage Board issued their notices accordingly, but it was issued in such a way that it was open to a grave misunderstanding and was misunderstood. The men and some of the leaders thought it came into force at once and several disputes occurred. I, however, took an opposite view and contended that it did not come into force for a month. For this view I was severely criticized and was accused of joining hands with the farmers to defraud the men. So much was this statement spread abroad that I felt bound to defend my honour and challenged my accusers to point to one solitary instance in which I had played the men false. It was evident I was right in the view I held, and if my advice had been taken, a good deal of friction would have been avoided and the men would have had their one o'clock several months earlier, for the Board at their next meeting, while confirming the order, postponed the one o'clock on Sat.u.r.days until three months after the war was over. However, the men got their one o'clock on Sat.u.r.days after hostilities ceased, an improvement I had been fighting for for nearly fifty years. I hope the men, now the Wages Boards are abolished, will not barter away an improvement in their working conditions. I also hope the farmers will act in a good spirit and cause no friction by trying to force the men back to old conditions.

CHAPTER XVII

THE LABOUR PARTY

The Union had decided, after taking a ballot of the members according to the Act of 1913, to take political action and to be affiliated to the Labour Party. I at once decided to be loyal to my Union. Early in 1918 I publicly announced that I intended to sever my connection with the Liberal Party and that henceforth my influence should be given to the political Labour Party. I had for some time been getting out of touch with the Liberal Party. In fact, I always was an advanced Radical and had hoped the party would have advanced in political thought. But I had now become convinced that there was no hope that the Liberal Party would ever advance in political thought sufficiently to meet the need of the growing aspirations of the new democracy. I had therefore no alternative but to separate myself from the party I had so long been a.s.sociated with. The wrench, however, was great, for I could not separate myself from old a.s.sociates lightly, especially when it was a party in which I had received my first political education. But it had to come. My political thought had outgrown the old political clothes I had worn so long. Early in the spring of 1922 the Executive of the Union decided that they would place candidates of their own in the field at the General Election whenever it should come. They decided, however, that this should be carried out in the most democratic way. Every branch of the Union was asked to send in nominations. This having been done, the Executive decided that they would send five names out of the nominations received. They also decided that they would put three candidates into the field, as the National Labour Party had promised to give 1,000 towards the election expenses of two candidates that would be run under our auspices. The candidates that went to the ballot were R. B. Walker, George Edwards, George Nicholls, Capt. E. N. Bennett and T. G. Higdon. Those successful were R. B. Walker, George Edwards, and George Nicholls, Mr. Higdon being the next highest. Mr. Walker was selected by the King's Lynn Divisional Labour Party to contest that Division, and I was asked to meet the newly formed South Norfolk Divisional Labour Party with a view to making a statement on the current topics of the day. In my speech I severely criticized the Government's war policy and claimed that the war could have been ended some months before and a great number of precious lives have been spared had they embraced the opportunity that presented itself and entered into negotiations. In fact, I advocated peace by negotiation as I considered the time was come when every effort should be made to stop this horrible slaughter. I declared my adhesion to the Labour Party's policy and stated that on social questions affecting the lives of the people I stood where I did before the war. I retired for a few minutes, and on being called into the room I was informed by the chairman, Mr. E. G.

Gooch, that the delegates had unanimously decided to invite me to become their prospective candidate to contest the Division at the General Election. I thanked them for their kind invitation and accepted it. On the Monday a full report of my speech and my adoption appeared in the press. I was, however, to have showered on my head storms of abuse. The writer of current topics in the _Eastern Daily Press_ was particularly severe, and other writers in the press in their anxiety to discredit me did not hesitate to stoop to misinterpret my words. While I deeply resented the misinterpretation of words and claimed that the services I had rendered to my country during the war were sufficient answer to my critics and that I was anything but disloyal to my country, I also claimed that I had a right to hold my own views on what I thought was the best method of bringing this terrible conflict to an end. My opponents made as much political capital out of it as they could, but I was satisfied that I was right, if not for any other reason, for the sake of humanity. On November 20, 1918, at a special meeting of the South Norfolk Divisional Labour Party I was formally adopted as their candidate, and the following is a press report of my address.

Mr. Edwards, who was loudly cheered, said he asked the electors to keep before their minds not persons but principles. He somewhat regretted that Mr. Soames had withdrawn, because he was certain that however much they might differ, he was a perfect gentleman, and they would have carried through the contest in a way that would have been creditable to them. Whoever might be their opponents, so far as he was concerned, he intended to act in such a way, whatever the result, that he should not have to look back with any regrets to the contest. He would give his opponents credit for being honest in their intentions. If he was reviled he would not revile again, but if character was attacked he would be compelled to defend character and the position he took up. No one regretted more than the Labour Party that the election had been brought upon them. The Government, however, had determined to go to the country, and the Labour Party took up the gauntlet and would fight for the principles they held dear. The Government said they wanted a mandate. What greater mandate could they have than a united people behind them, and they had a united country to back them up in their peace terms. What was wanted was a just and permanent peace, with no vindictiveness, and the Labour Party held the view that there was no safeguard for a permanent peace except on the grounds laid down by President Wilson. The Labour Party was going in for a League of Nations, for such a league laid down on the President's principles would mean a permanent peace, and bring about universal brotherhood. They meant by a League of Nations a league which should consist of all the civilized nations of the world, and that there should be such international dealings with all questions which would prevent war in the future. (Hear, hear.) What he understood when the President talked about a League of Nations and no boycott was that there should be no preferential tariffs, and that all the nations should be dealt with alike. He wished those who talked about boycotting the Germans and taxing their goods out of existence would think for a moment. Germany was too big a nation to be crushed, and the war had taught us German science and inventions were not dead. If it was attempted to crush her she would prepare for another war, and England and other nations would also have to prepare, and the past war would be nothing as compared to another war. They had to consider the best way to meet the difficulties which had to be met in this country, and one of the first things was reconstruction, and how to help the men who had been fighting for us. The Labour Party would not have the same treatment meted out to soldiers as was meted out after previous wars. They stood for the discharged soldier, the wounded and the maimed, and would see that they were kept in a condition worthy of the nation for which they had been fighting. (Hear, hear.) That would be done without the taint of charity or pauperism. (Hear, hear.) So far as he could see, the Government's scheme for discharged soldiers was free insurance, a month's furlough, and thirteen weeks' out of work pay if they could not obtain employment. The Labour Party demanded that they should be returned to civil life and kept out of the State until employment was found for them at Trade Union rate of wages. (Hear, hear.) They stood for the bringing into operation at once of the Home Rule Act, and to see that justice was done to all and injustice to no one. They asked for a living wage for all workers, and their cla.s.s having made the sacrifice they had--and he did not say the other cla.s.ses had not done their bit--was not going back to pre-war conditions.

Touching upon agriculture, Mr. Edwards said the Labour Party were going in for a wage which would enable parents to raise up healthy children. The first function of the party when it came into power was to see that a long neglected cla.s.s was lifted up above the poverty line on which it had for so long existed. Everything had to come from the land, and if the farmer was to pay a living wage agriculture must be so reorganized that he could do so. The first thing was the farmer must have security of tenure; this he had not had, and he had not been encouraged to get the best out of the land. (Hear, hear.) There must be security of tenure for the farmers, and although he was a Free Trader, he should be in favour of the clause of the Corn Production Act being strengthened so that the farmer could pay the wage which might be fixed from time to time. He did not suppose he should live to see it, but he wanted the land nationalized. (Cheers.) He, however, wanted to see the antiquated land laws repealed. Mr. Edwards also touched upon the housing question, and remarked that if Governments could find money for war they could find money for houses. Proper medical attention must be put within the reach of the poorest, and the National Insurance Act must be radically altered, and there should be State paid medical attendants. (Hear, hear.) He also advocated better wages for teachers, who were the greatest moulders of character in the country.

The campaign commenced in all earnestness. Meetings were arranged throughout the const.i.tuency, but at this time no other candidate was in the field. Mr. Soames, the Liberal Member for the old South Norfolk Division, had informed the Liberal Party that he did not intend to seek re-election, and it appeared for some days that I was not going to have an opponent at all. But in due course the two political parties combined to find an opponent in the person of the Hon. W. H. Cozens-Hardy, son of the late Lord Cozens-Hardy, and a most honourable opponent he was. It soon became evident that, while the fight would be fierce, it would be fought on clean and honourable lines. We both decided that we would fight on principles alone, and that we ourselves would not indulge in personalities, nor would we allow any of our supporters to do so. This we both carried out to the very letter. On one occasion we occupied the same pitch. I spoke for ten minutes first and he spoke for the next ten minutes, which was the allotted time of the meeting, it being held at the factory gates at the dinner hour. This spirit was manifest right through the contest. On the nomination day we both met in the Returning Officer's room and had a very friendly chat and arranged if possible to lunch together on the day of the poll at Diss. This arrangement, however, I was unable to carry out, as my motor failed me on my way and made me late. There is one peculiar feature about this contest. My opponent was the eldest son of the man, Mr. Herbert Cozens-Hardy, for whom I had worked so strenuously in 1885 as a Liberal and whom I had helped to win. For doing so I had lost my situation, been turned out of my house and, as stated before, had been compelled to travel twelve miles a day to work as an agricultural labourer.

During the contest I received valuable help from my honorary agent, Mr.

Edwin G. Gooch of Wymondham, a well-known Norfolk journalist and now a Justice of the Peace, a member of the County Council and other public bodies and Hon. Secretary to the South Norfolk Divisional Labour Party, who undertook the agency without promise of any fee or reward. The women in Wymondham and the men rendered magnificent work. All the envelopes were addressed and the addresses folded voluntarily. The local men supplied the platform with speakers. I also had the a.s.sistance amongst other visitors of the Rev. F. Softly from Fakenham and the Rev.

Starling, and amongst my most earnest local workers were Messrs. W. J.

Byles, J. Long, A. H. Cunnell, H. T. Phoenix, A. V. Gooch, George Mayes and E. A. Beck. More than pa.s.sing interest was attached to the support I received from the Earl of Kimberley. During the contest I made my home with Mrs. J. Long at Wymondham, who looked after me with great care. A few days before the election I issued my address as follows:--

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN,

I am invited by the South Norfolk Divisional Labour Party to contest the Division at the coming General Election, and consider it my duty to accept the invitation in the interests of Labour and Progressive Thought.

My full address will shortly be in your hands. Meanwhile may I briefly state my policy?