Mexborough and Swinton Times, December 5, 1902

The Strike at Denaby and Cadeby.

The Question of Evictions.

750 Ejectment Orders to be Asked For.

A Considerate Company.

Possible Evictions Postponed.

Considerable interest was aroused in Denaby and Conisboro’, in the proceedings that were anticipated to take place at the Doncaster West Riding Police Court on Saturday, as it was understood that the Colliery Company would apply for ejectment orders.  It was apparent to the stranger that something unusual was about to take place on Saturday, owing to the fact that, in addition to the company’s solicitor, Mr. W. M. Gichard, there were present: Mr. W. H. Chambers, the managing director of the Colliery Company; Mr. A. H. Barnard, agent for the Colliery Company; and also a number of clerks from the offices.  Representatives of the local lodge committee, Messrs. J. Nolan and Mr. G. H.Hirst, were present, and their return to Denaby was eagerly awaited. To the relief of the miners now out on strike it transpired that in view of the approach of Christmas, the Colliery Company had decided to waive the matter for the present.  By all persons it is sincerely hoped if only for the sake of the women and the little children that the evictions will not eventually take place, but that the efforts which are at present being made in the direction of a reconciliation between Masters and men will end successfully.

The Chairman of the magistrates, Mr. G. B. C. Yarborough, presided, and the other magistrates present were Major Dove, Ald. Chadwick, Mr. J. C. Coulman, and Mr. W. W. Warde-Aldam.

Mr Gichard, solicitor, of Rotherham, appeared for the Colliery Company, and Mr. G. W. Andrews appeared for the men.

Mr Gichard said that he appeared on behalf of the Denaby and Cadeby Collieries Company, and on the list were James Benton, and 749 miners, and the colliery company wished to obtain ejectment orders in consequence of the men occupying houses belonging to them, and having failed to give up their occupancy of their tenancy after legal notice to quit had expired.  For the purposes of that day he understood that Mr. Andrews admitted the service of the summonses without prejudicing his right to raise the point at some future time.

Mr Andrews: The reason I come here is for the purpose of asking that these applications may be deferred, if only for the sake of the women and children of these unfortunate people.

Mr. Gichard hoped Mr. Andrews would allow him to make his statement.

When the company gave the men notice to quit the houses they did not realise that if the orders of the Bench were carried out – orders which, he considered, the Bench were bound to grant on certain facts being proved – that the convictions would take place in Christmas week.  Though the men had been allowed to remain in the houses for 22 weeks, and in the majority of cases received no rent, the company felt that they would not like to take any undue advantage in that week, if the position they would be put in, or to take any vigorous measures which might cause some persons to feel that they had perhaps done something which was regrettable, and for that reason they were content to give a fortnight’s further grace to the persons who were occupying their houses, so that during that period looked upon in this country with great reverence as a period when good will was felt, and very often extended towards men; and there should be not any lack of feeling or consideration to the men to whom already they had shown much consideration; and that there might not be anything on their part which would lead those persons to feel that there had not been sufficient consideration shown towards them.

His application that day as they would be aware, was that the applications could stand over for a fortnight, and he may say, that he wished to correct an impression which had gained ground in the neighbourhood where the persons lived, and which had undoubtedly been spread with an object in view.  The impression was that persons living in the company’s houses could not be turned out, and why that impression had gained ground he could scarcely understand; and why the story was set about one could only form certain reasons.  He desired to state publicly that there was not the slightest foundation for such an opinion, and the sooner the people in those houses understood that they could be turned out, even if there was no other thing than a desire on the company’s part to turn them out and nothing behind that, the better it would be for them.  He further wished to impress upon those who were spreading such stories about, and misleading persons who were living in the houses of the company, that the colliery company intended to proceed, and would proceed with all speed after the Christmas holidays, against those men who prevented men in the neighbourhood from going to work when they desired to.

Mr. Andrews thanked Mr. Gichard on behalf of the men, for the feeling which had induced them to make the application.  Whatever the trade difficulties might be, he felt sure that appeal would be appreciated.  It had been his purpose that day, rather to plead than to oppose the application for ejectments subject to the proper proof of notice, and for the sake of the women and children of the men.  A meeting might take place, he said, between the masters and the men, and he hoped at the conclusion of the 14 days, from then, his friends would have come with a happier tale to tell.

The Chairman: An adjournment for a fortnight, then the notices must be admitted for to-day.

Mr. Andrews: That might preclude me from taking any objection.

The Chairman: Any objections you might raise to-day, you will be at liberty to raise on the day for which the case is adjourned.

Mr. Andrews thanked the Bench.

The Chairman said that, naturally, it had occurred to some members on the Bench that the notices, supposing orders had been made for evictions, would mature at a very inconvenient season, both for the people evicted and also for the police during the week.  It was to be very much hoped, without prejudice either to the employers or the employed that they should not take place that week, and, therefore, the application would be adjourned for a fortnight.

Mr. Gichard, in reference to an application for a judgement summons amounting to £1 3s., against Joa. Roome, collier, of Heath, which amount was an instalment of the £6 and damages, claimed by the Denaby and Cadeby Colliery Co., against the defendant for leaving his employment at the pits without giving 14 days notice, said the amount had been paid.  In another case, that of John Roberts, miner, of Old Whittington, also a former workman of the company, the case was adjourned.  Mr. Gichard stating that the man had made some offer of payment.