South Australia - Politics

Adelaide Times

Labo(u)r Party

Organisation of the Working Classes in the Nineteenth Century

(Taken from Geoffrey H. Manning's A Colonial Experience)

Register

Introduction

Australian political history is one of the greatest economic studies of modern times. Far reaching industrial and political reforms have been initiated by the colonial parliaments and some day a genius will arise capable of putting into bold print not only the achievements of men like Parkes, Kingston and Berry, but some of the driving force behind them.

Politics in this land is more of a game than a profession; a deep, human game, wherein the players move more kings, knights and bishops just as freely as they shift the pawns. There is little regret and no remorse about it. Men loom up large for a time and almost swamp the house, until a voice calls 'eliminate' and some other player takes up the running. Few of the big men die in harness and not always is it that death intervenes. You can see them now, whose presence brings up only memories of times that used to be.

For many years, and coupled with no right to vote, many women wanted the opportunity to break up the smug complacency of the men and to let them understand that rule by men only was not such a remarkable success as they, at times, seemed to imagine.

Women had to be bound by the laws in person and pocket and yet had no voice in the choice of the of the laws. Adulterers and drunkards were elected by men, and women in the most helpless manner were obliged to submit to laws made by such characters. Indeed, some men in parliament continue to exploit the public and, so far as the average man or woman are concerned, there is generally little difference in the result which follows the successful efforts of honest, but misguided reformers.1

The people are expected to pay always, and they always do pay, and the pity is that so few of them realise the fact. If more electors would think out for themselves the economic problems of the day, fewer designing and intriguing men would be able to fatten upon the good-natured indifferent public, who are an easy prey for the artful exploiter.2 It is my considered opinion that, as distinct from a legislator, a politician is a mere puppet in the hands of a few self-seeking individuals calling themselves a party, who pull the strings, or an utterly selfish unprincipled hypocrite, whose sentiments of putty can be moulded to fit any occasion, and whose expressed opinions record the slightest change in the barometer of public opinion. The question is - of what is he the product, and how can we get rid of him?

Prior to 1840, most of the men who purchased allotments in villages such as Hindmarsh, Marion and Thebarton were artisans among whom were bricklayers, masons, carpenters, glaziers, shoemakers, tailors, etc., together with a number of labourers. The 'Mother Country' they left was abounding in poverty and want and for those who had been employed low wages, long hours of labour and the tyranny of employers were rampant.

The colony to which they came emerged, primarily, because of a concern by English capitalists to find profitable investments overseas. The fledgling colony has been given the informal paradoxical title of 'paradise of dissent'; but, at the outset, it was much more a paradise for the privileged classes acting for and on behalf of English capitalists, as they set about purchasing large tracts of the best land by means of the iniquitous system of special surveys.

The basis for this scheme was suggested in 1835 by George Fife Angas and it became a launching pad from which he, and his South Australian Company, were to reap infinitesimal rewards. Other colonial gentry such as John Morphett, as agent for The Secondary Towns Association, joined in the legal pillaging and gambled on the supposition that a large town would spring up at the point where the River Murray met Lake Alexandrina; in this venture he failed but was to gain a fortune elsewhere.

The surveyors, who were required to cut up the country, were strong in their criticism, while Captain Charles Sturt styled them as 'the most dreadful things that could be imagined' and in correspondence to Governor Gipps of New South Wales said:

I do not think the system of colonisation has been rightly understood. Certainly here the country has been deliberately and recklessly sacrificed. The Special Surveys have secured all that is valuable in the shape of water to a few individuals and rendered invaluable more than one third of the provincial lands... The idea of chequering... [the country] as it suits the fancy of the applicants is preposterous and the consequences will be severely felt as the population increases.

Land prices, under the guiding policy of Edward Gibbon Wakefield, were fixed at a price sufficient to deny the working class an opportunity of purchase. Thus, the colony's founders hoped that this factor would ensure a plentiful supply of labour and, indeed, of the 4,000 migrants who came out on free passages only fifty had purchased a section of land (usually 80 acres) before the end of 1844 - 'Those who acquired these sections did so not by saving their wages but by setting up as land agents, storekeepers, licensed victuallers and contractors. In the lists of land-buyers only one name was distinguished by the title "labourer".'

Unions and the Origins of Arbitration

In nineteenth century South Australia, the main reforms in working conditions stemmed from the struggles of the working class and the path they took to industrial justice was difficult, and sometimes bitter, due to the use of draconian laws by many employees. Poor wages and harsh working conditions endured by the colonial working class led to the establishment of legal procedures for the settlement of legal disputes in South Australia.

The roots of the call for a system of state interference in the conduct of industrial relations can be gleaned from the attitude of some vested interests - the employers and capitalists - towards the labour force of the colony.

Early in 1837 the colonial gentry prevailed upon Governor Hindmarsh to pass his government's first law directed at oppressing the protest and dissent of labour. The Masters and Servants Act was a harsh law for, if an employer deemed his workers to be in neglect of duty they were liable to six month's imprisonment and the forfeiture of wages. This law was a mirror of the feudal and aristocratic elitism common in Great Britain and offensive to the labouring class in the infant colony. Fortunately, the Act was rejected by the British Government as too repressive but, during its short period of operation, a number of unwarranted punishments were inflicted:

The record of the Resident Magistrates Court cites thirteen successful actions by masters against servants in little more than a year... Workers sentenced to imprisonment for terms of between a fortnight and three weeks and were chained to trees in the parklands...

The fact that such a law existed, and was to return in a modified form in 1841, indicates the foundations of the colony were not always laid in harmony. In this environment the working class organised to defend itself and advance working conditions and wages. The first craft unions were established during the 1840s; in 1870 the first industrial union was formed (railways) and, in 1876, trade unions were given official sanction by the government of James Penn Boucaut.

Boucaut served three times as Premier over the years 1866 to 1878 and his remarks, in a letter to the Secretary of the Moonta Branch of the Miners' Union, allude to the nature of political power in the Colony:

It is not fair to expect the press to help you until you help yourselves. Recollect that the press, like other mercantile institutions, must consider those who principally support it... I have felt the truth of the sneer - 'the working man cares nothing of politics when his belly is full', consequently he is habitually deceived. I was two years a working man at weekly wages and the iron entered too deeply into my soul to be forgotten.

I have never been unjust to capital, but I hate its assumption that capital is Lord over all. Few men have felt so much, as I, the opposition and vile slander of a clique of monopolists, who really govern South Australia and would, if they could, ruin all who stand in their way.

A Masters And Servants Act was still on the statute books in August 1882 when 13 masons' labourers, employed on a daily basis by Messrs Robin and Hack at Port Adelaide, were refused an increase in wages and, accordingly, decided to withdraw their labour by walking off the building site. Their employers took umbrage and sought legal advice and, in due course, charged them under the provisions of the Act with 'unlawfully absenting themselves from their service'.

According to a report of the trial the magistrate reached a strange conclusion when he contended that the alleged offenders were duty bound under the provisions of the Act to give a day's notice before leaving their master's employ. His decision was to fine each man 'two day's and one hour's pay'!

A few days after the Court's decree was made known an irate carpenter, and no doubt a compatriot of the 'criminals', informed the Editor of the Register that, in his opinion:

The first principle of all laws is that they should equally govern those in authority and those subservient to higher power. If they have not this aim they are unjust... It is most desirable in every way that perfect accord and harmony should exist between capital and labour, yet how can this be attained if men are dealt with in such an arbitrary and uncompromising spirit as that displayed by the informants in [this case].

There is no extant record to show whether the conservative government of the day took any notice of the foregoing cry for real justice. Indeed, the aggrieved labourers and the carpenter were, no doubt, in agreement with the words of a local poet who sprang to their defence with a few lines, the underlying philosophy of which is still applicable today:

Enter the Labor Party

It was in the mid-1880s that the working class of South Australia began to emerge as a political force and challenge the capitalist system and its inherent wealth, which the worker saw as a powerful enemy and all but invincible when supported by monopolies. They began to ask questions - Why should a miserable life of incessant toil ensure them nothing but an old age of dependency, whilst it added to the store of the wealthy man? Why should one man rolling in wealth never be obliged to do an hours work, whilst his neighbour had to work all his days for a bare pittance? Were not all men equal?

The answers to these questions were to be sought by the worker through organised trades unions which asserted three great principles - that all men are equal; that all men have a right to an equal share of the external resources of nature; that all men have equal requirements.

Further, there was a firm conviction that all men were equal because all are, alike, born with an equal right to life, and its blessings, and that the capitalist and the worker was each endowed with gifts and possessions, varying indeed in quality and quantity, but similar in origin.

In the early days of the nineteenth century a great awakening took place among the trades unionists of the English-speaking race. The Fabian Society of London did much to stimulate thoughts on national lines among the working class of Great Britain. Its 'tracts', sent to Australia and elsewhere, moved the leaders of labour unions to earnest enquiries respecting the social conditions of the wage-earning class and its outlook.

That awakening and its development were in harmony with industrial progress and its corollary - the aggregation of capital into limited companies, etc., to secure cheaper production by using the most up-to-date machinery and engaging the highest constructive and organising ability the market offered. Organisation produced organisation and Trades and Labour Councils were organised by the trades unionists.

The purpose of the councils was to create a consolidated body of labour unions for the industrial advancement of wage-earners, in general for defence and, if deemed necessary, for offence. Each body affiliated had full control over its own internal affairs, but in all matters which might affect the well-being of other unions, industrially or financially, the union, after an exhaustive discussion and decision, was to bring the question decided upon before the delegates from all the other unions in council assembled, for advice and practical sympathy.

Should the council consider that a just cause for intervention was established, the council's and the union's executive, acting together, would open negotiations and conduct interviews with the employers concerned with a view to avoiding, if possible, sectional difficulties. Friendly relations were thus established between both parties.

In South Australia a mutual understanding existed between the parties, namely, that before any definite action was taken in the form of a strike or lockout of workmen, the matter under dispute should first be discussed with open frankness by the executives of the two bodies, and other such persons as might be deemed essential to a good understanding of the matter brought forward. It was, in fact, a conciliatory board, untrammelled by legal restrictions.

The good understanding thus promoted was of such mutual, friendly character that the president of the Employers' Federation or Council (the late Mr A.L. Harrold) attended, by invitation, a social of the Trades and Labour Council. Such, in 1889, was the spirit of industrial trade unionism in South Australia.

Unfortunately for those good relations, the great maritime strike of 1890 started in Sydney and like a tidal wave it swept over the whole of Australia inundating all local interests and understandings. Each class - employer and employee - was, in loyalty to its own class, drawn into the strife on purely class lines. Thus ended those mutual arrangements between the parties which gave promise for so much good for South Australian industries; for, like all great wars, whether industrial or between nations, the conflict invariably imposes absolutely new conditions upon the combatants. Indeed, the industrial war of 1890 in Australia changed the political outlook of the country.

It led to the trades and labour unions of South Australia becoming political by creating a Labour political party, a new organisation distinct from the Trades and Labour Council, although the two bodies virtually represented the same unions and people, but for different purposes.

During the great maritime strike, the members of labour unions were reminded frequently by their opponents in the struggle that they were free citizens, possessed the ballot, and should therefore use the powers of parliament to redress industrial wrongs. Such sage advice appeared to some of the prominent leaders of the trade union movement to be sound, having in it immense possibilities for labour, if it could be organised politically. But there lay the difficulty at that time because workmen were not trained to act together politically as labour unionists.

With them politics was an individual master. They supported, or otherwise, candidates for parliamentary honours according to their personal opinion of the candidate's views and policy, or for reasons influenced by friendships. To alter that order of thought and action was no light task and some means had to be devised to excite individual interest and, accordingly, the pre-election idea was introduced - what is known now as a 'party plebiscite'.

It was largely by the adoption of that method of candidate selection that the industrial unionist was led into becoming a political unionist. The first attempt to elect direct labour candidates was made in 1891 and proved most successful. Three men were selected to contest three seats in the Legislative Council on a limited franchise; all of them were elected and, accordingly, the Labour Political Party was fully established in South Australia. The other colonies followed with great success.

0 Considered opinions of a newspaper editor and a prominent King's Counsel in the 1890s on 'direct Labor representation in parliament' were indicative of a general aversion within colonial 'aristocracy' towards the fledgling movement:

Labour politics are a maze of vague aspirations pressing forwards to a goal neither seen or apprehended... but tending to substitute hostility and mutual mistrust for the cordial and friendly relationships which are essential to a prosperous state of society.

The lack of union power was demonstrated in 1890 when many of them failed to defend their members' conditions in the face of concerted efforts by employers to erode the strength of the working class. The widespread success of the employers was facilitated by the advent of economic depression and unemployment.

Many politicians, who had a commitment to help improve the lot of the working class, saw the need to use government legislation to check the ruthlessness of employers and thus the divisiveness that their victory over the unions caused in the community.

Charles C. Kingston introduced a private member's Bill into parliament in December 1890 which sought to establish compulsory arbitration procedures by government-appointed officials, thereby encouraging the formation of unions and associations:

The State has ample right to interfere and provide the peacemakers. The right of the state to interfere with a view for the good of the many was admitted now, where one hundred years ago it was denied.

The idea that the State had a responsibility to intervene in the labour market, does not necessarily derive from socialist thought, but, rather, from traditions prevailing in liberal thought, viz., utilitarianism and social liberalism. These liberal approaches to politics had gained popular support in British politics and became influential in Australia during the latter part of the nineteenth century.

For the utilitarian the role of government was to regulate many individual interests that came in to constant conflict in society. The maxim of utilitarianism was 'the greatest happiness for the greatest number' where, basically, happiness was defined as what each individual thought constituted being happy. Certain things were, however, universally recognised as harming 'happiness'; for example, strikes inconvenienced the public. Therefore, argued the utilitarian, the State should intervene in some way to assist adjudication, end disputes and so minimise inconvenience.

On the other hand, social liberals placed less emphasis on individual desires and stressed the common interest of all citizens in striving for harmony in society and conditions conducive to human development. It was assumed by social liberals that no fundamental conflict of interests existed in society and, accordingly, it was the role of democratically elected governments to weld a community where conflict was duly dealt with by the State. It is debatable as to which liberal tradition was dominant, but it is clear that it was due to the influence of both that the concept of arbitration took root in South Australia.

The representatives of the employers, who formed the government in 1890, did not share the political outlook of either creed; they were conservatives who sought, basically, the protection of the power and wealth of employers and pastoralists. It was not until C.C. Kingston became Premier in 1893 that an arbitration Bill was passed through the House of Assembly. However, it was never effective due to a mass of amendments moved in the Legislative Council.

While the working class was weak politically, and certainly the high unemployment caused by the depression of the early 1890s caused considerable industrial weaknesses, the employers opposed arbitration and insisted upon their 'freedom' to use their property (labour was regarded as their property while it was working for them), as they saw fit. However, when the depression ended the workers felt more confident to press their unions to seek improvements in wages and conditions, the employers began to see arbitration as a means of ending strikes and generally frustrating the activities of unions. In many respects these traits, apparent at the birth of arbitration, have remained: in hard economic times the arbitration courts protect labour from the worst abuses of the employers and, conversely, during prosperous time the advance of workers' living standards can be frustrated by the employers' use of arbitration.

A Retrospect - Dreaming Dreams

Some of the men who laid the foundation of the structure dreamed dreams of a social reconstruction on evolutionary lines, following those taught in the science of sociology, which makes clear to the student the growth and development of society in the continuous efforts put forth for the improvement of man's surroundings and struggles to reach his highest ideal of a perfect social life, in association with his conception of an All-wise God - Father of Mankind.

Those dreamers on behalf of the party conceived the idea of men, chosen by their fellow-workmen, as worthy to represent them in parliament, being consecrated to the study of political economy and social science. By so doing it was envisaged that they might be able to instruct those engaged in manual labour, at least in the rudiments of social and industrial laws, as established by time and experience.

It was through such education that they hoped to lay the foundation for an ideal system of industrial and social progress but, unfortunately, the movement was approached by others with a different view who regarded it as a stepladder for personal aggrandisement - a means to gratify personal ambition and secure public distinction. In essence, such persons never perceived the soul of the organisation.

During the early life of the party many regarded it as a divine institution for the uplifting of mankind towards the Christian ideal of brotherhood, and not a few clergymen became co-workers in the social movement, notably the late Rev Hugh Gilmore, who conducted a well-attended class for the study of sociology.

Such persons sought out leaders and it was expected that those chosen to parliament to advance in economic knowledge rapidly. Indeed, from greater knowledge gained they would be able to form sound judgement on industrial matters, especially between employer and employed. The parliamentary library was another great aid to right-thinking and right-action.

But, alas, for the expectation of such men! Their ideal man and social reformer, if elected, soon found himself opposed in numerous ways, openly or secretly, by those whose aim was, principally, self, the gratification of personal vanity or gain. Hence, from the start a discordant note was struck.

The idealism of the party was swamped by frequent efforts after popularity through appeals to personal and class prejudices, instead of appeals to judgement. Privileges for the sitting member, as against those in the workshop, in the plebiscite selection, soon became an accomplished fact, to the detriment of the idea of securing the best, as aimed at in the scheme. Teachers and leaders should be in advance of their pupils and followers, and trusted by them.

But herein lay the stumbling block to genuine progress as a reform party. To speak in accordance with advance knowledge, acquired by study, often led to vague hints of suspicion being cast on the speaker. However, the self-seeker avoided that danger to his popularity by saying only the generally accepted ideas and encouraging class prejudices.

Thus was education retarded and truth prejudiced, to the destruction of the soul of the party - it grew in numbers, but was soulless, and became a mere political machine, operated by men whose primary aim was and is power - not education, and such reforms as depend upon intellectual growth and honesty of purpose, allied to the development of man's genius and industry in production.

The parliamentary Acts, framed in the interest absolutely of the workmen, were the acts of men like Charles C. Kingston and others not connected directly with the Labor Party. Free and compulsory education for public school children came from the Liberals, as did the State Bank and Homestead Blockers Acts. The taxation of land values was law long before the advent of the Labour Political Party, and so were the Factory Acts - indeed, a barren record!

Conclusion

Of course, many of the opinions I have proffered could be countered by others with a political persuasion dissimilar to that implied within my foregoing words. Accordingly, in a sense of fairness, permit me to quote from The Herald, the Labor Party's official organ, of April 1901:

'From its inauguration many misconceptions have existed as to the aims of the Labor movement. Some very well-meaning people have credited the Labor Party with a design to upset the whole structure of society, to grab everything for the worker, and to drive the rest of the community into the sea. No such revolutionary ideas ever had any quarter inside the Labor fold - yet the success of the party has been qualified in consequence of the prevalence of these absurd opinions concerning its aims.

'In the country districts the farmers have had the notion drilled into them by emissaries of the National League and others that the Labor Party exists to take away the farmer's land and to destroy the assets which he has honestly built up in the country. The contrary is the case.

'Believing thoroughly in the non-alienation of Crown lands, and in the land values taxation, the Labor Party has striven to increase the assets of the industrious man and to depreciate the results of sloth and idleness. Furthermore, the parliamentary Labor members have fought strenuously for the assistance of pioneers who are opening up our agricultural industry. None have been more consistent or more decided in their support of the seed wheat fund designed to aid distressed farmers...

'Equally has the Labor Party assisted the pastoral industry by wise and liberal legislation which is already productive of good results. The terms on which pastoral leases were formerly held were of a most discouraging nature, and the Labor Party's advent into parliament saw the amendments of the existing regulations. In this successful effort to advance the interests of the whole community the Labor members were ably and faithfully aided by many of the country Liberals.

'These facts should be sufficient refutation of the groundless but oft-repeated charge that the Labor Party is a selfish organisation which only exists to benefit the town worker. The Labor Party is broad in its views, comprehensive in its policy, lofty in its aims...

'As to the drones of the community, who live on other men's Labor by virtue of privileges wrongly conceded, the Labor Party desires them to quit - but not without fair and just recompense. Furthermore, the Labor Party helped the Kingston Government in the establishment of a State bank, capable of advancing money at low rates to farmers.

'Herein has a substantial benefit been conferred upon the agriculturist. He is now relieved from the necessity of placing himself in the hands of a private mortgagee who squeezes his life blood out drop by drop, and threatens to foreclose upon the unfortunate mortgagor when the latter in any thwarts the interests of the monopolist... Thus in every way, has the Labor Party striven to benefit the primary producer...

'The extent of the Tory party's work, the height of its invention, is to concoct falsehoods concerning the Labor movement... So far as producers are concerned they have specially to thank the Labor Party. The members sent to parliament by that organisation have been largely instrumental in the granting of butter bonuses to establish creameries, have ever supported the extension of the railway system... and have helped to create a local market for local industries by advocating the judicious protection of the latter.

'In their industrial legislation they have been careful to give immunity to those who are unable to bear the financial risks imposed. Their efforts in aid of the town worker have been most strenuous, persistent and unwearied, and finally have met with a measure of success in the enactment of wise and just industrial laws... Their great aim has been and is the enlightenment and advancement of THE PEOPLE.'

General Notes

"Working Men in Parliament" is in the Register,
30 April 1875, page 4f:

The movement has not achieved much progress as yet, but in a redistribution of political power it would become an element of considerable if not dangerous importance.

"A Reminiscence", by D.M. Charleston, is in the Observer,
20 July 1912, page 40a.
"Genesis of the Labour [sic] Party", an interview with Mr D.M. Charleston, is in The Mail,
31 January 1914, page 8e.
"What Might Have Been - A Retrospect", by D.M. Charleston, is in the Register,
22 and 23 December 1919, pages 9e and 7e.
Also see Place Names - Hundred of Charleston.

"As It Was", the reminiscences of James Jones - "The First Labor Candidate", is in the Advertiser,
8 November 1913, page 6f.

Information on The Political Association of Adelaide is in the Register,
5 March 1878, page 4d.

"The Enfranchisement of Labour" is in the Register,
8 July 1878, page 4d.

"The Trades and Labour Council" is in the Register,
30 May 1885, pages 4g-6e.

"Labour Victories and Labour Troubles" is in the Register,
1 September 1890, page 4d.

"A Labour Parliament" is in the Register,
28 April 1891, page 4f, 1 May 1891, page 4f.

"The Labour Movement in SA Politics" is in the Observer,
15 August 1891, page 29d.

"Labor as a Political Organisation" is in the Advertiser,
31 August 1891, page 6b,
Chronicle,
19 September 1891, page 5b.

"Direct Labour Representation" is in the Observer,
20 February 1892, page 34a.

"The Federation of Labour" is in the Register,
2 April 1892, page 4h.

"Stalwarts of '93 - First Labor Members" is in The News,
14 November 1924, page 10b.

"The Political Progress of the Labour Party" is in the Register,
17 February 1893, page 4f,
"The Labour Vote" on
17 April 1893, page 4g,
"The Labour Party and Politics"
on 27 January 1893, page 7f.

An editorial on "direct labor representation in parliament" is in the Advertiser, 1 April 1893, page 4e:

"The Labor Platform" is discussed in the Advertiser,
11 April 1893, page 6g,
Observer,
15 April 1893, page 21d,
29 February 1896, page 24c,
"The Labour Vote" in the Observer,
22 April 1893, page 25b,
"Recent Criticism of the labour Party" in the Register,
29 May 1893, page 3h,
"The Labour Members and the Unemployed" in the Register,
25 August 1893, page 4e.

Biographical details of Gregor McGregor are in the Express,
13 March 1894, page 3c.

"Labour Representation in Parliament" is in the Register,
14 July 1894, page 7a.

"A Probable Split in the United Labour Party" is in the Observer,
18 August 1894, page 15a.

The United Labor Party - The Qualification Question" is in the Advertiser,
7 December 1894, page 6e.

"The Cause of Labor" is in the Weekly Herald,
25 January 1895, page 2b,
"The Labour Party, Its Actions and Policy" in the Observer,
19 January 1895, page 30d,
"Labour and Journalism" on
23 February 1895, page 24c,
"The Labour Party" on
2 March 1895, page 15a,
"The Aims of the Labor Party" in the Express,
26 February 1895, page 3e,
"The Labor Party and Its Progress" in the Weekly Herald,
8 March 1895, page 3d.

"The Labour Paper Trouble" is in the Register,
15, 18, 21 and 22 February 1895, pages 7e, 4h, 4e and 7h,
4 March 1895, page 6h.
"The Labour Newspaper - An Uproarious Meeting" is in the Observer,
23 February 1895, page 31a.

"The Aims of the Labour Party" is in the Register on
26 February 1895, page 6f,
"The Labour Platform" on
25 February 1896, pages 4f-5a,
"What Has Labour Rule Effected" on
7 September 1896, page 3h.

"The Solidarity of Labour" is in the Register,
4 September 1895, page 3h.

"The Law Reform Bill and the Labor Party" is in the Advertiser,
12 December 1895, page 6c.

"The Labour Party and Its Plebiscite" is in the Register,
27 December 1895, page 4f.

"The Labour Platform" is in the Register,
25 February 1896, pages 4f-5a.

"The Register and the Labor Party" is in the Weekly Herald,
29 May 1896, page 4a,
"The Labor Movement" on
27 April 1901, page 6a.

Biographical details of C.P. Brann, President of the United Labour Party, are in the Observer,
3 April 1897, page 16a.

Dissension within the party is discussed in the Observer,
3 June 1897, page 27d,
"The Labour Dispute" on
28 August 1897, page 22a.

A cartoon is in The Critic,
5 October 1901, page 15,
21 December 1904, page 15,
25 October 1905, page 14,
6 December 1905, page 15.

"The Socialists' Defeat" is in the Observer,
26 May 1900, page 24d.
Also see South Australia - Politics - Socialism

The first annual congress of the United Labor Party is reported in the Advertiser,
8 September 1904, page 6h.

"The Advertiser and the Labor Party" is in The Herald,
16 April 1904, page 1,
"The Labor Party and Women" on
1 March 1902, page 6b.

"What Is the Labor Party" is in The Herald,
17 and 24 December 1905, pages 5 and 7,
7 and 21 January 1905, pages 9 and 10,
"Farmers and the Labor Party" on
22 April 1905, page 8b,
"The Labor Party and Closer Settlement" on
20 May 1905, page 7b.

"Unionism and Labour Members Self-Condemned" is in the Register,
17 June 1905, page 9f.

"Liberalism and Labor" is commented upon in the Advertiser,
2 April 1907, page 4c,
"What Is Labor's Objective" in The Herald,
27 April 1907, page 6b.

"The Labour Party and Tyranny" is in the Register,
10 August 1907, page 11h; also see
13 and 16 August 1907, pages 7i and 6g.

An obituary of George H. Buttery is in the Observer,
16 November 1907, page 26b.

A photograph of members of the Parliamentary Labor Party is in the Chronicle,
14 December 1907, page 29.

"No More Alliances - Labour Party's Dictum" is in the Register,
12 and 15 June 1909, pages 11c and 4c.

"Wanted - Explanations" is in the Register, 21 June 1909, page 4b:

Of what use to the cause of the hard-working son of labour is a Labour Party in decided antipathy to his real and practical bread-and-butter issues.

An interview with Thomas Ryan, President of the Trades and Labour Council, is in The Mail,
14 February 1914, page 8e.

"A Possible Breakaway - Labour's Aristocracy" is in the Register,
3 August 1910, page 8d,
Observer,
6 August 1910, page 38d.

Cartoons are in The Critic,
26 July 1911, page 5,
9 August 1911, page 3,
3 and 24 January 1912, pages 3 and 3,
7 and 21 February 1912, pages 3 and 3,
6 August 1913, page 3.

"Labour in Australia" is in the Register,
5 June 1913, page 12d,
"Making Strife for Political Life" on
14 April 1914, page 9c:

Old Labourites had honest men's affection -
To help the "bottom dog" their sole desire;
But these make strife for life a daily question -
So Labour's dragged still deeper in the mire.

"Happy Family' Rent Asunder" is in the Register,
14 February 1917, pages 6a-7a.

Biographical details of F.W. Lundie, president of the party, is in the Register,
14 February 1917, page 6g,
of F.W. Birrell, secretary of the party, in the Regiater,
10 April 1917, page 4g,
Observer,
14 April 1917, page 35d,
of G.E. Yates, secretary, on
18 September 1920, page 28d.

"Labour and Capital" is in the Register,
2 October 1917, page 4c.

"The Labour Party and Political Morality" is in the Register,
15 November 1919, page 8e.

Biographical details of G.E. Yates is in the Register,
16 September 1920, page 9a.

"Labor and Finance" is in the Advertiser,
15 March 1921, page 6c,
"A Policy of Promises" on
24 March 1921, page 6e,
"Labor and the Empire" on
1 April 1921, page 14d:

The advocacy of an Australian Republic is not singular to members of the Labor Party. It was once advocated by that present champion of Liberalism, the Minister for the Navy.

"Labor and Republicanism" is traversed in the Advertiser,
7 April 1921, page 6g,
Also see South Australia - Politics - Republicanism
"Labor and Communism" on
20 September 1921, page 6g.

"Coquetting With Communism" is in the Register,
18 October 1921, page 6d,
"Labour and Migration" on
9 May 1923, page 8e,
"Labour in Office" - Some Recollections" on
3 April 1924, page 9d,
"Labour and Prohibition" on
22 and 29 July 1924, pages 8e and 10f,
15 and 21 August 1924, pages 10g and 10d.

"A Woman's Political Work - Miss Hanretty's Career" is in the Advertiser,
22 July 1924, page 11c.
"Women in the Labour Movement [Miss E.R. Henretty (Hanretty?)]" is in the Register,
24 and 25 July 1928, pages 4d and 12 (photo.).
"Labour Women - First Conference Opened" is in the Observer,
28 July 1928, page 11d.

"Labor and Australian Socialism" is in the Advertiser,
10 September 1924, page 12g.

"Labour and Capital Punishment" is in the Register on
11 August 1924, page 7c,
"The Aims of Labour" on
22 October 1924, page 8c.

"Labour and Bolshevism" is in the Register,
20 March 1925, page 10c,
"Labour and Communism" on
23 June 1925, page 9g,
"ALP Aims on
3 August 1925, page 6c,
"Labour and the Empire" on
4 November 1925, page 10d.

"Labour and the Reds" is in the Register on
11 February 1926, page 8b,
"Labour Legislators' Pledges" on
24 March 1926, page 12d,
"Labour's Domestic Quarrels" on
16 July 1926, page 8e,
"The Labour Record" on
25 February 1927, page 8b.

"Mr Gunn" is in the Register,
22 August 1926, pages 10e-11a.

"Communists and Australian Labour" is in the Advertiser,
2 January 1930, page 14e,
"Labor in South Australia" on
23 November 1931, page 8d.

"Days of Labor Stalwarts", the reminiscences of T.B. Merry, is in The News,
30 July 1931, page 8d.

"South Australian Labor" is in the Advertiser,
19 June 1934, page 8d.

Politics - Choose again