Even though there is significantly more violence in the ATL than actually happened, it is still probably less - and certainly no worse - than similar events in the US over the same period.

See for example:-
the Homestead Strike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Strike
The Ludlow Massacre : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludlow_Massacre
The Battle of Blair Mountain: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain
Battle of Matewan: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Matewan

Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_worker_deaths_in_United_States_labor_disputes

It is incidents like these (and some from the Anglo-Irish war and the Irish Civil War) that I'm channelling as I write this TL.

Of course it IS going to get worse...
 
I've been struggling with the transition to war in 1914 until a silly mistake I made in the last TL post (I won't say which - Spoilers!) gave me the idea I needed to make progress. So, I've now got a very broad brush timeline into the mid 1920s and hope to make progress rather more quickly now.

Coming up:

  • Transport Strike continues
  • a post on suffrage
  • a tour d'horizon of the situation elsewhere in Europe
  • an unlikely alliance...
 
Blenkinsopp commands Civilian Force
From: The Times 29th January 1913

CIVILIAN FORCE APPOINTS NEW PRESIDENT
REORGANISATION TO MEET THE COMING CHALLENGES​

Following the death of the former President of the Civilian Force, the Grand Council agreed at its meeting on 27th January unanimously to appoint Lord Willoughby de Broke as its new President. At the same time, in recognition of the challenges ahead, the Grand Council agreed to create a new post of Commander of the Force and to appoint to that post Mr Charles Blenkinsopp, late of the 18th Hussars. In due course further appointments will be made to the Force command structure.​
 
Carters Strike 1913
from: The Times, July 2nd 1913

RAILWAY CARTERS' STRIKE IN LONDON.
ONE THOUSAND MEN AFFECTED.


Late last night the difficulties caused by the present strikes on the London docks and elsewhere were compounded by the calling of a strike of railway carters in London, already affecting some 1,000 men. In a grievance of last year, a carman employed at the King's Cross depot of the Great Northern Railway Company refused to perform porter's work. His dismissal led to men employed at Farringdon-street, Poplar, Victoria Docks and Mint-street striking in sympathy with their King's Cross colleagues. Now a similar issue has arisen at Farringdon-street, which has spread in like fashion. The men are members of the Amalgamated Society of Railways Servant, of which a number of Branches have already declared sympathy with the Transport Strike, even though their union is not a part of the Transport Workers Federation.

It appears that workers in other Companies are considering the refusal of traffic diverted from the affected depots. The London and Northwestern Railway Company have declared that they will dismiss any man refusing to work in such circumstances.

 
Last edited:
Unite and Fight leaflet
Pamphlet handed out to members of Railway Unions in London and elsewhere.

UNITE AND FIGHT!
Comrades! These past few years many have fought, and some have given their lives. But too often has the curse of sectional unionism led us only to the acquisition of trifling concessions that have made precious little difference in our lives. Now though we are fast approaching a parting of the ways. While a couple of generations past, action trade by trade, occupation by occupation, each independent of the other, may have been of some service, it is of no use now! Sectional unionism is being set aside.

Even so, there is still much to do. Blacklegs, police and soldiers with all their necessary food, liquor, bedding etc., etc., are still being shipped and conveyed by Union men. It is these Union men, and not the capitalists who beat the other Unionists trying to resist reduction or obtain increases. And yet these same Union men are subscribing to help those other Unionists in their fight. This cannot continue. We must organise by Industry and not by Trade, until we can unify the Industrial Movement into one compact fighting force.

Our French comrades have already learnt this hard lesson. They have eliminated the antagonisms and sectional craft interests, and they have proved by their behaviour that they dare fight and know how to fight. They are, for the most part, anti-patriotic and anti-militarist. They are “non” not “anti” Parliamentarians. They favour resorting, when advisable to the General Strike.

Let us follow in the footsteps of our comrades in France. We cannot stand by and allow our Brothers on the dockside and elsewhere to be beaten into submission by the Police, the army and now by the bully boys of the so-called Civilian Force. That way lies defeat. That way lies starvation.


Comrades! - we must unite, we must fight! And, if the Union leaders will not join us then we must be prepared to do it for ourselves. Support your comrades and strike now!
 
Last edited:
General Election 1913
A Gathering Storm.

Extract from “A gathering storm” by George Dangerfield.
Published New York, 1935
...

The General Election of 1913 took place in a troubled period.

Continued violence in Ulster, mainly on the part of the well armed and increasingly brutal UVF had led the Irish Parliamentary Party to threaten to withdraw support unless action to curb the Unionists was taken. Asquith was also being warned informally that if the army was ordered to take action against the UVF many officers would resign their commissions or face dismissal from the service rather than fire on those they saw as their own people.

At the same time disturbances continued to erupt across the North of England in 1912 and into 1913, leading to hundreds of detentions under the Emergency Powers Act. At first these detainees had been kept in their local area, but after numerous cases of them being broken out, in some cases by dissident units of the Territorial Army, they were moved to a makeshift camp at Frongoch in South Wales. The delicate feelings of Regular Army officers seemed not to apply when dealing with working class Northerners and the death toll continued to rise. That this was being done by a Liberal government, elected in the North on the back of working class votes was creating an increasing unease on the part of Northern Liberal MPs, who threatened their own rebellion unless the violence was not curbed.

Midway through the year 1913, yet another Transport Strike erupted. As in 1911 it spread from London to the other major ports, with much agitation by Syndicalists attempting to stir up a General Strike. Matters were not helped by the intervention of a newly aggressive Civilian Force, under a new President and with a reformed command structure modeled on Carson's UVF.

In the end, faced with waning support from his own party, increased violence in Ireland and the prospects of an Army mutiny, Asquith had no choice but to call yet another general election in September, the third since 1910, probably anticipating that the government would fall and the problem would pass to Bonar Law. The result was surprising, even though it still left the main parties roughly balanced as in 1910. The surprise came in the way the parties fragmented.

Conservative 251
Ind Conservative 1
Labour 69
Liberal 216
Liberal unionist 17
Irish Parliamentary Party 70
Irish Unionist 7
Ulster Socialist 10
All for Ireland 11
Independents 17
Scottish Nationalist 1

The Liberals had lost ground to the Conservatives but had managed to recover some seats previously held by Liberal Unionists. In Ireland the Irish Party had lost seats, but so had the Irish Unionists, where the split in the Orange Orders had led to the creation of a new party, the Ulster Socialists, who were nominally Unionist in sentiment, but strongly aligned with the Irish Trades Unions. Also a surprise was the appearance of the first Scottish Nationalist MP and a gaggle of Independents, largely in the North of England. These had not stood on any common platform, although all were generally to the left. In some respects they had much in common with the Ulster Socialists, in other ways they would have been indistinguishable from Labour. Some had in fact been Labour Party members or Trades Unionists, disgruntled at the failure, as they saw it of the party to stand up for Northern workers, or to oppose the Detention Orders. Some were avowed federalists. Two Welsh Nationalists also came close to being elected, losing to Labour candidates who were themselves sympathetic to the idea of Home Rule All Round.

In the end, although Asquith could probably put together a government around a promise of Home Rule for Ireland, the opportunity first fell to Bonar Law,as the leader of the Party with the largest number of seats. It was a Pyrrhic victory. The largest group he could put together only commanded about 275 seats as opposed to the 336 he needed for a bare majority. Although pressed by the likes of Willoughby de Broke to try nevertheless he reluctantly told the King that he would be unable to form a Government.

The position was not much better for Asquith. Any coalition he put together had to include Labour and he knew they would exert a high price. Just how high he would soon find out.
 
Battle of Tilbury
The Battle of Tilbury

Extract from “A Gathering Storm” by George Dangerfield Published New York, 1935

...

The Asquith 1913 government got off to a bad start. In November, the bad tempered Transport dispute, which had been simmering since July, took a turn for the worse. In August, the dockers had reluctantly returned to work, persuaded yet again by Sir George Askwith, to agree to a commission of investigation into working conditions and pay levels. The Report of that commission, published at the end of October, made some mild criticisms of employment practices and arbitrary decisions favouring non-unionists, but found almost entirely in favour of the Port of London employers in terms of wages. Despite by an agreement to abide by the Commission's findings, this led to an immediate walkout of the men, coupled with calls to rail workers and seamen to join them.

Askwith immediately called both sides together in an attempt to resolve matters. His attempts were thwarted however when on November 3rd, a group of non-unionists was escorted by a token group of four police officers and a party of about 60 men from the Civilian Force attempted to start work at Tilbury. As they approached the dock gates, they were metby a large body of strikers determined to prevent them gaining access. Blows were exchanged between strikers and the Civilian Force escort and this rapidly developed into a full blown brawl in which no quarter was given. The police attempted to intervene and separate the parties but were swept aside as were most of the men attempting to work. Inside less than 30 minutes, dozens lay injured. At one point the strikers appeared to be gaining the upper hand. The Civilian Force men were pressed back against a brick wall around the dock when suddenly the wall gave way and collapsed. Despite more injuries to both sides, the battle continued unabated, with bricks from the wall being hurled by both sides.

The strikers had by now surrounded the men of the Civilian Force and were subjecting them to heavy beatings, when two shots were heard. The two parties separated, each thinking they were under fire from the other. As they fell back one body remained with wounds to head and shoulder, a member of the strikers. On seeing this the men of the Civilian Force took to their heels and, running into the docks, secured themselves inside an empty shed. By then, alerted by the police, a unit of Marines was on the scene and took control, allowing both Civilian Force and strikers to withdraw.

For the first time a civilian had been killed by someone acting for an employer, rather than by an agent of the State seeking to maintain public order. The Transport Workers' Federation immediately called for the person responsible to be arrested and charged with murder. The Chief Constable of Essex, Edward Showers was hauled up to see the Home Secretary with a demand for an explanation of how this situation had come about. His not unreasonable, if testy, rejoinder that previous requests for support had been rejected unless a disturbance was already in progress and that had the Marines not been in the vicinity on route to their ship matters would have been much worse, was not well received. He did not however explain his decision to allow police officers to effectively work alongside a private militia in the maintenance of public order. This was something that would later have serious implications for both Showers and the Home Secretary. The Shipping Federation made no comment. The soi-disant Commandant of the Civilian Force, Charles Blenkinsopp, only issued a brief statement to the effect that 35 members of the Civilian Force had been injured, nine requiring hospital treatment, during a disturbance in Tilbury.

The day following, the House of Commons was in uproar. Labour and Liberal members alike, horrified by the idea of weapons being used on the streets of London by a private militia, demanded that the Home Secretary attend the House with an explanation.
 
One more update to come soon, which will take me into 1914, after which I'll be working on my Change Times TL for a few days.
 
Labour-Liberal Coalition begins
Coalition Government begins.

Extract from "A Gathering Storm", George Dangerfield
Published New York 1935

Bonar Law's decision not to try and form a government meant he had clearly discounted any idea of a Coalition with the Liberals. Only a tiny minority of Asquith's party would have countenanced such a deal anyway. Nor, with even fewer votes than the Conservatives, could the Liberal Party sustain a minority government. The only option, bar a fresh election, was to work with Labour. Even that was not enough to give Asquith a majority, but with continued informal support from the Irish Parliamentary Party there would be a working majority on most issues. It would not be easy though. Labour support was conditional on having Ministerial posts and, while the Irish Parliamentary Party refused any active role in government, they still had legislative demands, most notably the return of the Home Rule Bill, but also as it turned out, measures to curb the UVF.

Negotiations with Labour took over a month, not helped by a split over the wisdom of propping up a Liberal Government. The Party Leader, Ramsay Macdonald, refused in the end to take part and his place as leader was taken by Arthur Henderson. The last sticking point was not however resolved until after the so-called Battle of Tilbury, when McKenna agreed to fall on his sword and free the position of Home Secretary for Labour. It was in reality the only one of the great offices of state available. It was inconceivable that the positions of Chancellor of the Exchequer or Foreign Secretary be given to Labour, nor would the present incumbents have gone quietly. Grey in particular had a great deal of support and his demotion could potentially have led to further resignations, bringing down the fragile coalition before it even got started. Even so there was still unrest in the ranks of the Liberal Party that such a critical post at such a critical time should go to Labour.

Prime Minister H H Asquith
Lord Chancellor Viscount Haldane
Lord President of the Council Lord Tweedmouth
Lord Privy Seal Marquess of Crewe
Chancellor of the Exchequer David Lloyd George
Home Secretary Arthur Henderson (Labour)
Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey, Bt
Secretary of State for the Colonies James Keir Hardy (Labour)
Secretary of State for War John Seely
Secretary of State for India Earl of Crewe
First Lord of the Admiralty Winston S Churchill
Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Charles Hobhouse
President of the Board of Trade J R Clynes (Labour)
Secretary of State for Scotland Thomas McKinnon Wood
Chief Secretary for Ireland Augustine Birrell
President of the Local Government Board Philip Snowden (Labour)
President of the Board of Agriculture Walter Runciman
President of the Board of Education Joseph Pease
Postmaster General Herbert Samuel
First Commissioner of Works George Lansbury (Labour)
Attorney General Sir John Simon

Of the eventual appointments perhaps the most surprising was the appointment of Keir Hardy – surprise that he agreed to serve as much as surprise at the post he was given. It was thought that he would have preferred to be Secretary of State for Scotland, but his known support for Scottish Home Rule made that appointment unacceptable to the Liberals. The real poisoned chalice however was almost certainly the dual appointments of George Lansbury as Home Secretary and J R Clynes at the Board of Trade. To these two would fall the dual problems of policing the industrial unrest and finding a way through it.

It was only after these protracted negotiations that the new Government was able to turn to the question of Ireland or more accurately, how to secure the support of the Irish Parliamentary Party. This proved much more difficult than anyone had anticipated. Labour insisted on being included in any discussions and the negotiations over membership of the group to meet Redmond and others from the IPP were almost as difficult as those on the coalition proper. In the end it was agreed that the negotiating team would comprise Asquith, Viscount Haldane and Birrell for the Conservatives with Henderson and Keir Hardie for Labour.

It was not until November 24th that the first meeting between the two sides took place. In laying out their case Redmond was blunt. The IPP wanted Home Rule for the entire island of Ireland, with full responsibility for all internal affairs to be handed to the new Irish Parliament including
a) a guarantee from the British government to maintain Irish national spending at current levels,​
b) the abolition of the Dublin Castle administration and its replacement by one responsible to the new Parliament,​
c) No change in the number of Irish MPs in the London Parliament and,​
d) Immediate legislation to control the activities of the UVF.​

Asquith's negotiating position was immediately undercut by Keir Hardie, who had his own agenda. He demanded that any Home Rule Bill should include provision for Scotland and perhaps Wales, including proposals to disestablish the Scottish and Irish Churches. He supported the controls on the UVF, but wanted them extended to cover similar bodies on the mainland – in other words the Civilian Force. Unfortunately the negotiating team had not met as a group until an hour before the meeting with Redmond. Haldane had refused to talk to Labour at all, and so, without a common position to present to Redmond in response, the meeting broke up after 45 minutes with no agreement except to meet again in three days.

Asquith's post meeting with Haldane and Birrell was to say the least difficult. In a rare display of anger, he berated both Haldane and Birrell for the loss of face, despite being himself complicit in the failure. Henderson and Keir Hardie on the other hand were well pleased. They had gained much by securing Cabinet posts but had little to lose if the government fell. They recognised that they were in most electoral danger if they were seen to be getting too close to the Liberals.

The Cabinet meeting the next day, 25th November, at which Asquith had hoped to present an agreement was equally difficult. He could not admit the problems were caused caused by his failure to agree a position before hand and instead he tried to suggest a breach of faith by Labour. Keir Hardie had however taken the opportunity of talking to Lloyd George on the disestablishment question in advance, so Labour had the pleasure of seeing their Liberal colleagues dissolve into bickering. In the end it was Henderson and Clynes who, supported by Lloyd George, brought the meeting back to the matter in hand. Finally it was agreed to offer the possibility of Home Rule for Ireland, but for it first to be considered by a Constitutional Convention, which would consider the position of all the Home Nations. This would include representatives from all the major parties. On the question of controlling the UVF and like bodies, no agreement was reached, Asquith being aware of what was happening in the Army but reluctant to raise it in front of Labour for fear of giving them an electoral weapon. His position was not helped by news of another confrontation between strikers and a contingent from the Civilian Force, this time in Hull.

The idea of linking movement on an Irish Parliament with similar changes in Scotland and Wales was not well received by Redmond. He presented it as a breach of faith, arguing that Ireland had waited for centuries, that it had reached the current position by its own endeavours and if Scotland for example wanted Home Rule, they should not do so on the back of Irish efforts. This rather ungracious response was bluntly put down by Keir Hardie. It was this or nothing, since without the Labour party the government would fall and the next time they could be facing Bonar Law, with his public support for Unionism and the UVF. Nor would it go down well in Ireland if a firm offer of Home Rule in principle was known to have been rejected because other parties might get it too. Did Redmond want to hand Ireland over to those who would seize power by force, probably leading to Civil War, a War which the Home Rule side was not guaranteed to win? As for Disestablishment, the Irish had secured that in 1871. Was Ireland now going to stand in the way of the same freedom for others? In the end Redmond gave in and it was agreed to call a Constitutional Convention in February 1914 at which representatives of all the Home Nations would be present, covering the full range of views in each country. In return the IPP would not vote against the Coalition without prior notice and in any case not before the Convention had finished its work.
 
Last edited:
Ouch, that seems to be a bad time for the United Kingdom and the Empire at large.

How are the Dominions and Comonwealth states handeling the troubles in Britain. Either political and economical and how is the situation economical "at home".

Another important question is the millitary spending in the time. Is the RN still the biggest part, or are they taking a step back?

Also how are the other European powers seeing Britain and the Comonwealth at that moment?
 
My guiding principle in writing this is to adhere strictly to the idea that anything that doesn't follow from the POD is more or less unchanged. So far this means that the Asquith Government have more or less continued as OTL, with the sole exception of bringing two regiments back from Gibraltar and Malta. A third, from India is likely. This may have knock on effects, but they haven't shown up yet. My focus will however remain Britain. Anything else will be happening offstage. It is only with the 1913 election that serious deviations from OTL with long term consequences appear.
 
While I can understand that keeping the butterfly net there is important, the thing is, that the leading or one of the leading worldpowers is having trouble in this TL.
So to simply assume that the other powers do not react in any case is Imo out there. The same with the, for me implied at least, same spending a OTL. That is, again Imo, simply not possible with the economic troubles that seem to wreak the UK.

Lets make an example. For me the British troubles will impact the working of Grey, as he has to acknowlage that the British are having trouble. That in turn will likely impact the French. As they can not be totaly sure that Britain is capable of keeping its parts of the deals it made. Here I think of the guarding of the Chanel Coast. Again a consequence of lower RN priority vs. keeping civil unrest in check and the HSF. So they will likely be more cautious in dealing with Germany and Russia.
That again may or may not impact Russia in its stance come Sarajevo. And before that in Persia and the Great Game.
 
The point is that even in OTL, the French and Germans thought Britain was in trouble. Grey went to France to reassure them. Part of the cause of WW1 in OTL was a belief that Britain would stay out.

What I'm doing in the ATL is turning up the heat a bit rather than having any radically different event.

As for the attitudes of other players in general, if a change in behaviour or events can be linked to the POD - fine. If not then my default assumption is no or minimal change. So - nothing in the POD affects WHO the German leaders are (not yet anyway), but it may affect their behaviour - at the appropriate time.
 
While I understand and to a degree agree with your reasoning, I still think that the troubles in Britain would have rather more pronounced results in France, Russia and Germany. (And others too, but that would be too long...)

For examples, France had the Entente Cordeale with Britain. And that secured them the help of the biggest fleet on earth. So they could concentrate more on the army. Here we may see more focus on the navy as the RN may seem less strong in comparison to the HSF.

Russia on the other hand may see the opportunity to gain somewhat in Asia and or Persia that was previously blocked by Brtish influence. Whereas here the British have to concentrate more on the home front. But also they have to include the changed stance of the French in relation to the Germans.

For both they may not egg each other on to commit without the reasurance that the British are going in on their side or are at least leaning towards them.

For Germany it is the same. The British will seem weaker then OTL. But that may not be good, as it could result into more naval spending. But with the OTL focus shift towards the army, which I think will also happen in ATL as the French and Russians were growing in that regard, we also could see devided interests. Also an understanding between Germany and Britain may seem more advantageous for the UK as it would refocus Germany onto France and Russia. So there are many possible ways the political situation may change.

Last but not least the British themself. As I mentioned before, the financial situation of the UK and the RN should have changed regarding OTL. The troubles will most likely have cost money directly and indirectly in the future. So we may not see the massive pre-war upbuild of the RN, as costly as it was. So the HSF may be seen as a more credible threat. At least regarding Dreadnoughts.
 
I'm not really disputing your points but the TL is just going into 1914 after a POD in 1911, with only 1913 being significantly different to OTL. It's too early for major effects elsewhere.
 
While I agree that the major changes are not yet there, the minor things add up. That is more so the point as the political situation in that time was "loaded" so to say.
Because while some alliances may have existed, that was often more one of convinience then real understanding and cooperation. The example again is Britain and Russia. Both brought together by France and the "German menance".

The other important point is that Britain saw themself as the leading worldpower of that time. And that many aggreed with that or at least acknowlaged the importance and power of the Comonwealth and Empire. So troubles that are rather long lasting and economicaly damaging are not a good thing to keep the others away. Esp. as the British foraign policy could be rather snobish before.

And lastly the economic troubles arrising in Britian will most likely change the setup of the RN and Army. That will together with the uncertain internal situation will colour Britians stance in European matters. That again will influence the stance of other nations and their reactions. Esp. the major players in Europe.

To close the debate if you want, this are all things that stemm directly or indirectly from your PoD as I understand it. If you dissagree then I will stopp and let it be. But it would Imo take the same line as "Nazi Germany changes something and no one reacts / drinks lead paint".
 
Of course the minor things add up. But that takes time. The Royal Navy isn't going to disappear because Britain has a couple of years of rioting. Even if Britain stopped all new ships for the RN in 1913 it would still have a huge navy. Despite the loss of production, Britain's economy is still one of the largest in the world in 1913. Add in the Empire and its probably top.

There's only been one year of change in the TL. Be patient!
 
While it is true that the RN would still be the biggest navy around, they would loose some ships not build. Imo likely the QE class as an example. And that could together with the probable less money mean that the HSF is more competitive then OTL and there they had a window of opportunety in Dreadnoughts as well. As said little things from 1911 on pilling up...

That is also compounded by the changed image of Britain in the World. While not hugely demaging, it will leave a impression. And that will most likely change the actions and reactions on the part of other players. That would probably have started somewhat in 1912. And only gotten worse as the troubles draged into 1913 and onwards.

And then you have the restive parts of the Empire, or those that could be restive. eg. the Boers and maybe India will try something. Helped by others that whant to demage Britian more? Maybe or not. But the power plays at that time could be vicous.
 
Top