Both actions were successful. The A.S.R.S. paid out damages amounting to £23,000 and the injunction was granted. The case ultimately reached the House of Lords, and in 1901 the Lords upheld the original decision of the court. The decision descended like a thunderbolt on the whole trade union movement.
The trade unions and the Labour Party, which the Trades Union congress had brought into existence in 1899, vigorously protested against the result as a decision of judges making a practically new law against trade unions and nullifying the settle ment of their status made by the legislature in 1871; and in June 1903 a royal commission was appointed to inquire into the subject of trade disputes and trade combinations.
The majority of the commission reported in Jan. 1906, in favour of an alteration in the law relating to picketing and conspiracy, but against any alteration of the law as laid down in the Taff Vale judgment. Under pressure from the Labour Party, the Government of the day did not accept this conclusion, and a different view was embodied in the Trade Disputes Act passed in the same year. It was enacted with reference to trade union funds that "an action against a trade union, whether of workmen or masters, or against any members or officials thereof on behalf of themselves and all other members of the trade union in respect of any tortious act alleged to have been committed by or on behalf of the trade union, shall not be entertained by any court," although "nothing in this section shall affect the liability of the trustees of a trade union to be sued in the events provided for by the Trades Union Act, 1871, section 9, except in respect of any tortious act committed by or on behalf of the union in con templation or in furtherance of a trade dispute." The Osborne Judgment.—This victory for the trade unions was speedily followed by another attack. The Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants again bore the brunt of the struggle. In 1908 W. V. Osborne, a branch Secretary of the A.S.R.S., sued the society to have it declared that one of its current rules, which provided, amongst other things, for parliamentary representation, and the enforced levy of contributions from him and other mem bers of the society, towards the payment of salaries or mainte nance allowance to members of parliament pledged to observe and fulfil the conditions imposed by the Labour Party, was ultra vires and void. The case was decided in the King's Bench against Osborne, but the judgment was reversed by the court of appeal, whose decision was upheld by the House of Lords on Dec. 2 1 , 1909. This meant that the Labour Party in the House of Com mons would have to find other ways and means than contribu tions from trade unionists.
The labour movement turned its energies to the reversal of the Osborne judgment. The Labour Party abolished the pledge referred to above, and when the payment of members was intro duced—a measure which was largely a direct result of the Osborne judgment—it discontinued the payment of allowances to elected Labour candidates. After the elections of 1910 the Labour Party
demanded legislation, but it was not until 1913 that compromise was reached in the Trade Union Act of that year. This measure permitted political action and enabled unions to carry on any lawful activity which was authorized by its rules. But the law imposed certain restrictions on the political activities of the unions. A trade union which wished to engage in political ac tivities was required to take a ballot of its members and to obtain a majority of those voting in favour of such action. The union, after a successful ballot, had then to draw up political rules, in a form approved by the chief registrar of friendly socie ties. A separate political fund was to be established from which all expenditure on political purposes as defined by the Act was to be met. Lastly, any member of the union who objected to the political levy was, on signing an approved statement, to be exempted from all political contributions without forfeiting his rights as a member of the organisation.
Industrial Unrest.—In the meantime, whilst the mind of the trade union movement was exercised by the Taff Vale and Osborne decisions, there was a growing volume of industrial unrest. Prices had for some time been rising, and real wages were falling. Trade unionism was stronger than ever it had been, but it held back from action in view of the Taff Vale decision. After the passage of the Act of 1906, however, many strikes broke out. There was in 1907 a prolonged dispute on the railways. In 1909 and 1910 there were frequent strikes in the mining areas. The boilermakers and the cotton operatives were involved in disputes. Broadly speaking, these disputes were unsuccessful, and rising prices swal lowed up such wage increases as had been obtained. But through disappointment with the results of parliamentary action, the banner of "direct action" was raised. The propaganda of the Social Democratic Federation and the Independent Labour Party was for the time, at any rate, overwhelmed by the propaganda of Industrial Unionism and Syndicalism, and a little later of Guild Socialism. The trade union, in the eyes of those under the influ ence of the new intellectual ferment, was not merely a means of defence and a method of collective bargaining, it was a weapon with which to destroy capitalism. Militant Industrial Unionism, as preached by the Industrial Workers of the World (q.v.), found few adherents. Syndicalism found no home in Britain except in South Wales. At the same time, it is undoubtedly true that these gospels influenced the outlook of the trade union movement, stimulated the movement towards federation and amalgamation, and prepared the way for the doctrines of Guild Socialism.