Lord Lindley's words could well be repeated from the bench in Shrewsbury later on this year, with just us much validity as they had almost 80 years ago. 1875 ACT After the passing of the Conspiracy and Protec Lion of Property Act in 1875 (see Red Weekly 9 for a discussion of this) the trade union movement generally considered the right to picket to be secure. That Act specifically legalised attending at or near ... a place,, in order to obtain of communicate information. + For the next few years the courts did indeed behave as if picketing was legal. But as soon as the class struggle began to get a little warmer, the courts quickly did an about face. In the crucial case over which Lord Justice Lindley presided, the courts decided that peaceful picketing was both a 'nuisance' under common law, and an offence against the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act. They claimed that picketing was not protected under this Act because, by definition, it went beyond just "communicating information".
PEACEFUL PERSUASION After this ruäng, successful prosecutions of picketers hecame common. In 1901 came a further blow against the trade unions - the historic Taff Vale judgement that trade unions could be sued for their industrial actions, and their tunds seized to pay damages.
In reply the trade unions mounted a major national campaign which led to the passing of the Trades Dispute Act in 1906, after the Liberal's election victory. This not only wiped away the Taff Vale judgement, bur also tried to neutralise the various rulings on picketing by extending the definition of legally protected activities to include "peaceful persuasion' as well as communicating information'.
This remained the law as far a picketing was Red Weekly 17 August 1973 Page 4 concerned until the passing of the Indusinal Re-s lations Actin 1971.
LAW AND THE CLASS STRUGGLE Roberl Carr, the Tory Home Secretary, has said time and again that the existing laws ane adequate to 'deal with picketing - and for once he is teiling the truth, Strict enforcement of the present laws would be enough to smash picketing as it is presentiy understood.
Laws do not exist apart from the class struggle, they are weapons used by the ruling class to influence the class struggle in their own favour. They reflect a certain relationship of forces between the classes, and will be interpreted and enforced in different ways according to changes in the relative strength of the warring classes. The law must be interpreted in order to be applied, and this gives the representatives of the ruling class wide lee way in how they use it in While this completely Jar time.
WORKING CLASS DEFENCE Smell! dents
would be able to claim extra compensation on the grounds that because of his own special situation, his income had not been fully
----- pull-quotes -----
•replaces the Trades Dispute Act, it scems to leave the picketing laws basically unchanged