My late friend and amateur historian Dulcie Hartley published several books during her lifetime, but one book she was very proud of never made it into print. This was her book about James Fletcher, Newcastle’s famous “miners’ advocate” – the only man in the city to be commemorated with a statue. Miner, politician and newspaper proprietor, Fletcher was immensely popular and influential, and Dulcie was fascinated by him. After Dulcie’s death, her daughter Venessa entrusted me with the manuscript, and I have slowly transcribed it.
Member for Newcastle
From the early days of James Fletcher’s involvement with the miners’ union it was evident that he possessed the necessary attributes for a successful political career. His charismatic oratory elevated him among his peers. It was likely that Dr William Brookes, “The Old Man Eloquent” and “The Miner’s Friend,” became an important role model for Fletcher during the late 1850s and early 1860s. Certainly, any tuition from Brookes fell upon fertile ground and during the 1860s, as he matured, Fletcher became a powerful figure.
By 1868 Fletcher was displaying an active interest in state politics. At the forthcoming election A.A.P. Tighe, the sitting member, and Alexander Black were contesting the seat of Northumberland. James Fletcher and William Harris invited Black to make an election speech at Wallsend. Fletcher chaired the meeting and Black, a Free Trader, spoke convincingly, with the result that the miners decided to give him their vote.
Fletcher, speaking at the meeting, stated that Tighe was inadequately representing the miners’ interests and as a result, “had forfeited their confidence”. The fact that the miners were rejecting Tighe (later to become a business associate of James Fletcher) for a Free Trader was unusual as they later became firmly aligned with the Protectionist cause. Nevertheless, the miners’ stand did not affect the result of the election as Tighe was returned as Member for Northumberland.
In an effort to have their industrial problems addressed, district miners had fielded parliamentary candidates over the years, guaranteeing payment by weekly subscriptions. This often resulted in the unfortunate situation whereby the member of parliament found himself without a salary if he displeased the miners. In 1874 the Sydney Labor Council supported Angus Cameron, a carpenter and former trade union official (later to become Fletcher’ s business partner), as a Member of the Legislative Assembly. In 1877 William Turner, a Wallsend journalist employed by The Newcastle Morning Herald and Miners’ Advocate, was selected by the Wallsend Branch of the Reform League as their representative in the Legislative Assembly. Considered to be a working man to represent working men he was guaranteed £300 per annum by the League.
After the introduction of the Vend and Sliding Scale had produced stability in the mining industry, the civic-minded citizens of Wallsend and Plattsburg decided to form a borough council. It seemed inevitable that James Fletcher would become involved in local government, and at the first election of Wallsend Council he polled 227 votes, narrowly being beaten by John Y. Neilson with 239 votes. Alderman Neilson, manager of the Newcastle-Wallsend Coal Company, proposed Fletcher as Mayor at the first council meeting held on 24 April 1874, saying that he was “the right man for the job”. Neilson had known Fletcher “for many years as a man of energy and intelligence” as well as “an enemy and a friend”, but the longer he knew him the more he respected him. He felt sure that whatever Mr Fletcher did would be for the best interests of the whole community. Alderman Harris seconded the proposal.
Fletcher accepted the position, promising that “working for the benefit of the mass”, he would act to the best of his judgment for the benefit of all. It was decided at this meeting to use the masthead design of the Miners Advocate as the seal of the new council. The first aldermen of the Wallsend Municipal Council were: John Y. Neilson, James Fletcher, William Harris, William Laing, Thomas Curry, James Richardson, James Birrell, James B. Hogg and Robert Walker.
Fletcher played an active community role and in October of 1874 he, as Mayor, chaired a meeting of the New South Wales Public School League, a group that aspired to ensure that education was “national, secular, compulsory and free”. Fletcher spoke in favour of forming a branch of the League in Wallsend as he believed that education was the key to the working man improving his position in society.
Wallsend and Plattsburg split
It was the council’s expenditure on street formation and drainage that brought the citizens of Wallsend and Plattsburg into dispute and division. This occurred two years after the formation of the Wallsend Council, when residents of Plattsburg were of the opinion that they had not received their fair share of rate revenue. In 1876 J.Y. Neilson, as the result of an apparent coup d’etat, was elected Mayor of Wallsend Council, ousting James Fletcher. Increasing competitiveness and jealousy had became manifest between the two suburbs, the two mines and supposedly, the two mine managers, with the end result being a complete breakaway by Plattsburg. With the formation of the Municipal Borough of Plattsburg on 27 December 1876, James Birrell was elected the first Mayor and the two councils remained divided until October 1915, when they reunited as Wallsend Council. This division very likely impeded development of the district as population figures for 1877 were scanty, with 2500 at Wallsend 2300 at Plattsburg and 300 at Brookstown.
During the following years Fletcher continued to decline nomination as Member for Northumberland although he retained his interest in local government and served a term as Mayor of Plattsburg in 1877.
In 1875 there was a great deal of agitation in parliament for assisted immigration. This issue was of vital concern to workingmen who believed the scheme would result in a labour glut, with resultant reduction in wages. The Piddington Immigration Scheme was before the Legislative Assembly and Fletcher chaired a meeting of Wallsend residents who were generally opposed to the scheme. Fletcher retained his opposition to assisted immigration throughout his later parliamentary career.
In April 1880 Fletcher once again declined nomination for the seat of Northumberland. However, after receiving a petition bearing 1380 signatures asking him to nominate as a candidate he had a change of heart and by September had entered the hustings with great gusto and was standing as a candidate for the Electorate of Newcastle. He may also have been motivated by the 1880 Electoral Act which redistributed seats and enlarged the Assembly to 141. There were three other candidates standing: Dr. Richard Bowker, a medical practitioner with shipping and property interests; George A. Lloyd, a shipping, coalmine and property owner; and James C. Ellis, a merchant with shipping and coal interests. All were men of wealth and influence. However, James Fletcher topped the poll, drawing 1876 votes with Lloyd his closest rival, receiving 1195. There was a triumphal procession through the streets of Newcastle, when Fletcher’s supporters carried him shoulder-high to a decorated dray. He was appointed Member for Newcastle of the New South Wales Legislative Assembly on 22 November 1880.
James Fletcher was an active member who worked hard for his constituents. In 1882, due to his successful efforts on their behalf, the Permanent Way and Tarpaulin Shed employees of the Great Northern Railway line invited Fletcher to a banquet at Smith’s Adelphi Hotel, West Maitland. Fletcher had helped them obtain an eight hour day and, in gratitude, they presented him with a silver urn and gold trinket. He also received an illuminated address on satin in a gilt frame bearing the text: “Presented to James Fletcher M. L.A. by railway employees in remembrance of his efforts in securing the eight hour system on the Great Northern Line – 1881”.
Eight Hour Day victory
Again, in 1882 Fletcher was honoured with a presentation, this time in recognition of his services in securing the abolition of wharfage dues which had been a contentious issue in Newcastle for many years. He was presented with a cheque for £300 plus a solid silver inscribed coffee service displayed in an oak case. The chairman expressed the wish that the gift would be handed down to each succeeding generation of the Fletcher family. These were the days when members of parliament received no remuneration for their services so it was probably not unusual for them to receive donations from the electors for efforts made on their behalf. However, Fletcher reconsidered the ethics of this conduct, and in February of 1883 he declined, “for a variety of reasons”, to accept a testimonial from the Newcastle Workingmen and urged them to abandon the idea.
In 1884 New South Wales was experiencing a depression. Many working men were unemployed and the government had introduced relief work in an effort to alleviate their distress. Despite the unemployment, the assisted immigration scheme was still receiving some support. Fletcher maintained, in view of the prevailing financial situation, that immigrants should pay their own fare from Great Britain and also “bring some ready cash”. Nevertheless, he had earlier taken a more pragmatic attitude when the Employers’ Liability Bill was being debated. “It is …… right to protect the workingman ….. so long as we do not trespass on the rights of capital,” he said.
In 1885 J.C. Ellis was standing for the seat of Newcastle, as were Fletcher and Lloyd. Ellis, campaigning at a banquet held at the Newcastle Lyceum Hall under the banners “Advance Australia” and “Prosperity to Newcastle”, criticised the local newspaper for not providing adequate coverage of his political campaign. He considered himself disadvantaged as the senior member for Newcastle (Fletcher) was the proprietor of the only newspaper and “could say what he liked in public and have it printed”. Ellis spoke disparagingly of the “Newcastle rag” and called for another paper to be established in opposition, motivated by an article which said he was “a contemptible tool of the Government”.
Perhaps as a result of Ellis’s plea, an additional newspaper, the Newcastle Evening Call was established in Brown Street by John Willis in January, 1886, under the banner of “Faithful and Fair – Fearless and Free”.
Fletcher and Lloyd were both returned as Members for Newcastle with Fletcher gaining the majority of the votes and 300 people joined him in a celebratory banquet at the Victoria Theatre. Fletcher’s old friend Alexander Brown was chairman and he said that there was no man in New South Wales who had done more for the working classes than James Fletcher whose motto all his life had been “ a fair day’s wage for a fair day’s work”. He added that Fletcher had laboured with diligence to establish harmony between capital and labour. G.A. Lloyd spoke of the great progress since the early days in 1869 when he had first been Member for Newcastle.
Comparing the times, he said that shipping had increased from 386,176 tons to 1,066,462 tons and imports from £151,410 to £783,263. Lloyd had seen coal exports increase from 503,866 to 1,550,395 tons and he mentioned that Newcastle was now regarded as the second city of New South Wales. A fellow parliamentarian stated that Fletcher was regarded in the House as a man of weight, sound sense and intelligence and was a popular member. After the banquet many parliamentarians stayed overnight at the Great Northern Hotel as Fletcher had arranged an inspection of the city the following day.
Trouble spots such as the sand drift on Old Lake Road (Darby Street) were inspected, but the main thrust seemed to be centred on the new Hetton Coal Company on Onebygamba (Carrington). James Fletcher had a financial interest in this mine which was managed by his old friend Alexander Mathieson. This pit was considered to have the largest shaft in the world sunk with cylinders through sand, with an outside diameter of 16 ft. 6 inches. It was anticipated that a dock would be required after deepening the basin inside the Dyke. Fletcher advised the inspection party that harbour improvements would be necessary to service the new colliery and government funding would be sought for the harbour works.
Newcastle to Wallsend tramway
In 1885 James Fletcher made representations to the Commissioner for Railways regarding the much sought-after Newcastle to Wallsend tramway. The matter was referred to the Minister for Works so that it could proceed immediately and the tramway was completed in July 1887.
January 1886 saw James Fletcher once again on the campaign trail at the Miners Exchange Hotel, Hamilton. Addressing the electors, he stated that when he entered parliament some people predicted he would never be able to make his own way amongst gentlemen of education and high social standing. He said he was personally satisfied with his performance as he had decided early in his career never to disgrace or be ashamed of the class from which he had sprung. He believed that if he had been ambitious he could have led the parliamentary party. (Certainly many of his contemporaries made this same comment throughout his parliamentary career.) Fletcher said he realised as a young man that while capital was entitled to every kind of fair play, labour, the workingman’s only capital, was entitled to the same.
James Fletcher was returned as Member for Newcastle and accepted the portfolio of Minister for Mines in the new government formed by Sir Patrick Jennings.
During March of 1886 the Fletcher furniture was moved from Styles Grove to Icasia at Old South Head Road, Waverley. With Styles Grove once again on the market, Fletcher was accused of deserting his friends. As well, he was criticised for accepting the ministry. Writing in his defence the journalist from the Wallsend & Plattsburg Sun commented: “We fail to see why Mr. Fletcher cannot continue to be the Miners’ Friend and yet be Minister for Mines. In our opinion he can do more good for the labouring classes as one of the Government than ever he did as one of the 120 members of parliament. It redounds to the credit of Mr. Fletcher in working himself up from a collier to one of the highest and most responsible positions in the land. And if several rich “croakers” about Newcastle who are jealous of Mr Fletcher’s political progress had been colliers they would have remained as such; for they have shown not the slightest ability to come to the front by argument, honest perseverance and force of character like the present Minister for Mines who is undoubtedly the right man in the right place. We are compelled to make these few remarks in justice to Mr Fletcher who has been suddenly and fiercely attacked”. (This comment probably referred to a rival newspaper, the Newcastle Daily News which was published for a few months during 1886.) The article in the Wallsend & Plattsburg Sun continued: “A most unwarrantable liberty has been taken with his name by a journal from which we expect something more elevating. And why has he been attacked? Because he happens to be interested in The Newcastle Morning Herald & Miners Advocate, selected as Minister for Mines and has a few personal and envious enemies.” It must be remembered that this praise and loyalty came not from Fletcher’s paper, but from the Wallsend & Plattsburg Sun which had commenced publication in 1886 at Wallsend. The proprietor was K.T. Pogonoski and the paper continued until 1896.
No doubt Fletcher’s ‘enemies’ were also aware of his business interests in the coalmining industry and whilst his knowledge in this field was invaluable for his portfolio, these connections and the resultant conflict of interests should probably have precluded him from accepting the position. However, it was supposed to be a temporary appointment and he was promised the Ministry for Railways when that office was created.
A Sydney newspaper, discussing Fletcher’s appointment to the Ministry, thought he had earned his promotion by good work in the house. “He is a Scot and a strong and effective speaker and though given somewhat to hard hitting, is perfectly fair to his opponents. His career is strong evidence of the value of democratic government in bringing from the ranks men of force and character. Not many years ago Mr. Fletcher worked with his hands in the district he now represents and by his energy and ability, he has reached one of the highest positions in this State, an attainment no-one begrudges him”.
Politicians’ pay
The Jennings ministry favoured payment of £300 per annum for members of parliament, as well as the introduction of an income tax of 4d. in the £ for salaries over £300 p.a. For many years Fletcher had advocated payment for members so that parliament would not just be the precinct of the wealthy. On 6 October 1887 Fletcher’s motion for Payment of Members Bill was carried by 38 votes to 36, but members of the Legislative Council rejected the Bill. The defeat of the Income Tax Bill raised the ire of many in Newcastle and resulted in a scathing leader in The Newcastle Herald. It was not until 1891 that members received an annual salary of £300.
The condition of the state’s economy had deteriorated and in 1886 unemployment and distress prevailed in the Newcastle district. Fletcher spoke in favour of protection as the salvation of the unemployed and, as Minister for Mines, addressed an immense gathering of unemployed outside the Colonial Secretary’s office. He told the men that they had every right to ask for work and blamed the Parliamentary Opposition and the Upper House for obstructing finance which, had it been available, would have funded public works and so absorbed surplus labour.
During this year Fletcher was approached by a deputation of the unemployed and, as a result, he arranged for 200 men (first preference to married men) to work on relief at 5/- per day at the Sydney National Park. One man asked if there would be adequate shelter at the relief works and Fletcher responded angrily, telling the man that he himself had often lain out in the open air and had humped his swag over the Blue Mountains. He thought it was unreasonable of the unemployed to exhibit a ‘silver spoon’ attitude and thought they should be grateful for whatever was provided to alleviate their distress. He scornfully said ‘If a man wanted to go to Parramatta he would follow a Member of Parliament to solicit a free pass!’
In 1886 a deputation met James Fletcher at the Great Northern Hotel to present their case for the erection of a Trades Hall in Newcastle. The Eight Hour Day Demonstration Committee had earlier approached him in this regard and by November of 1886 the committee had raised £500 towards the project. Parliamentary members Fletcher and Copeland were asked to pursue this matter in the House. The project finally came to fruition in 1895 when the Hunter Street building was officially opened.
James Fletcher, whilst Minister for Mines, had fought the battle for Plattsburg and Wallsend citizens in their efforts to secure land at Speers Point as a Public Reserve. He succeeded, amidst strong opposition, in obtaining a grant to enable the purchase of 20 acres from the Speers Estate. The trustees, a civic-minded group of gentlemen from Wallsend and Plattsburg, decided to name the Reserve Fletcher Park in his honour. However, the Park was officially gazetted Lake Macquarie Park on 25 May 1887, but became known as Speers Point Park.
On 17 December 1886 James Fletcher resigned from his portfolio as Minister for Mines, although he retained his seat as Member for Newcastle. As mentioned, he initially had accepted the portfolio on the understanding that it was only temporary, and that he would later be given Railways or Works. However, it was an unstable political period in New South Wales, and a spate of resignations followed Fletcher’s, with Sir Patrick Jennings resigning in January 1887, as well as George R. Dibbs, the Colonial Secretary. Free Trader Sir Henry Parkes formed a new ministry, pending another election.
Soon after the resignations the Newcastle Herald, over which James Fletcher exercised control, printed a scathing leader opposing Imperial Federation. The posting of an expeditionary force to the Sudan in 1885 had been opposed by many and growing resentment prevailed. The article was strongly nationalistic and supported Colonial Federation with loyalty to Great Britain, but not subservience:
The people of Australia will never consent to be made participators in England’s quarrels where they have no voice in controlling them. History clearly proves that 99 per cent of the battles that England has been engaged in were for the purpose of benefiting her merchants and monied classes. We are too democratic to sympathise …… with the conservative notions of the mother country. We have no class distinctions here – men are judged as a rule by their personal worth. “A strong attempt has been made and encouraged ….. to build up a mushroom aristocracy by conferring titles upon colonists ….. Let us tell the people of Great Britain that we, as residents and natives of Australian soil, are prepared …… to maintain Australia as part and parcel of the British dependencies and to defend our shores, but England has no right to expect our men to fight in other wars as her allies.
Federation debates
Imperial Federation was being seriously considered in 1887 put Fletcher strongly supported the concept of Colonial Federation. The Herald leader continued:
We want no repetition of the scenes of strife and violence that have followed in the wake of the Imperial Union between England and Ireland. We must live here a free and independent people. Many of the individuals holding high positions in the State appear to lose their heads, if not their hearts, immediately they are confronted with Royalty. They become like the moth round the candle directly the finger of Royalty is held out and is eagerly grasped by these sycophants who are prepared to throw themselves prostrate at its feet and sell their country for a small Court favour.
Supporting his vision for a federation of Australian states, separate from the mother country, James Fletcher wrote to Sir Henry Parkes, attempting to dissuade him from Imperial Federation. The following is a transcript of Parkes’ reply:
Chief Secretary, New South Wales, 1.11.1889
My Dear Sir,
I only write today that my proposal has nothing whatever to do with Imperial Federation to which I am my self strongly opposed. I feel I shall be much interested in your letter (only a few words of which I have as yet read); but I could not let you for a moment suppose that I have anything to do with the Imperial fad.
Sincerely, Sgd. Henry Parkes
Such are the vagaries of politics that despite this denial, Parkes was soon committed to Imperial Federation and became known as “The Father of Australian Federation”. This strong thread of nationalism, as espoused by Fletcher and his newspaper, continued throughout the latter years of the nineteenth century, until the perceived panacea of Imperial Federation occurred in 1901, after which the movement atrophied.
James Fletcher was in a poor state of health when the 1887 election campaign commenced, so his friends rallied around and campaigned on his behalf. There was strong competition between Fletcher and wealthy free trader James C. Ellis. Ironically, in February 1887, at the height of the election campaign, Fletcher’s youngest daughter, Isabelle, married James F. Ellis, a son of J.C. Ellis, at Pyrmont, despite parental disapproval. Much was made in the Press of the enmity between Fletcher and Ellis Snr., but it is difficult to judge the veracity of this assertion. Fletcher later expressed public outrage at Ellis for leasing and working the Great Northern Colliery at Teralba during the 1888 strike. However, as they were business associates they probably displayed a degree of public enmity but, due to their relationship, private tolerance. Confirming this theory, in September of 1887 Mrs. James Fletcher Jnr. opened a church bazaar at Burwood accompanied by J.F. Ellis and Mrs. J.C. Ellis Snr.
Parkes and his Free Traders formed a ministry after the election. Fletcher was returned as Member for Newcastle, but with a greatly reduced majority. Ellis polled well enough to join Fletcher as a Member for Newcastle. It was at this time that Fletcher became firmly committed to the Protectionist Party. He had earlier vacillated towards Free Trade, but now spoke strongly in favour of Protection as the remedy for the financial problems of New South Wales. The Protectionist states had healthy financial surpluses, while Free Trade New South Wales was in financial decline.
The depressed economy continued and during 1887 Fletcher, attempting to alleviate the plight of the Newcastle unemployed, asked the Premier, Sir Henry Parkes, to add £1000 to the £1000 given by Newcastle Council for temporary employment for unemployed men in the district. This was rejected by Parkes, but he made an offer that if men were employed at 6/- a day, the government would pay half, and this was accepted.
The residents of Newcastle wanted a museum and in 1887 Fletcher presented a signed petition to the Premier requesting the establishment of a museum in Newcastle as a fitting memorial to celebrate the centenary of the Colony. Parkes spoke favourably of this concept, but advised that the residents would have to provide some financial assistance as well as the government. Eventually a portion of the Technical College was used for a time as a museum and it was a further 100 years down the track – 1988 – that Newcastle was finally able to boast a museum.
In September 1887 while parliament was prorogued, James Fletcher addressed his constituents at Henry Buchanan’s Criterion Hotel on the corner of Hunter and Bolton Streets, Newcastle. He held sway over an audience of 3,000, including a fair proportion of women, which was probably unusual at the time. When in full voice his fluency, personal magnetism and ability to manipulate his audience were invaluable assets. During parliamentary debates, at every opportunity Fletcher made reference to his lowly working-class origins, emphasising his continuing ability to identify with these people. Similarly, whilst addressing the voters during election campaigns he always referred to his early days as a collier to create greater rapport with the workers.
James Fletcher once again became embroiled in litigation. John Haynes, the Member for Mudgee, claimed £5000 damages for indignity suffered during an assault by Fletcher in the House. Haynes, while speaking in the Legislative Assembly on 21 March, 1888, accused the Protection Party of being mainly composed of Roman Catholics. (The previous year Haynes was supposed to have renounced Roman Catholicism.) Protectionist Fletcher objected to this statement but Haynes said the Opposition (Protectionists), when in full regalia, looked like an “Ecumenical Council of green leeks over a wheat field”. (Now this was a provocative statement, especially as James Fletcher, like many of his contemporaries, was a staunch Mason and supported the Primitive Methodist Church. As well, Fletcher was Past Worshipful Master of the Loyal Orange Lodge No. 31.)
Haynes next accused Fletcher and other Opposition members of trying to influence government officials to neglect public works in Newcastle to prejudice the government. Fletcher, unable to contain himself any longer, left the Opposition benches, approached Haynes and seized him by the throat and ear, shaking him like a dog and shouting “You liar, you blackguard! Do you dare say I ever used underhand means with the government officials?’ Eventually Fletcher was dragged away from Haynes by the Sergeant-at-Arms, with the help of several members. Fletcher apologised to the Head of the Chamber, but Slattery, the Chairman, ordered his arrest and removal from the Chamber. Total chaos followed in the House, with the Leader of the Opposition G.R. Dibbs speaking in support of Fletcher, after which the Sergeant at Arms returned Fletcher to the Chamber where he again apologised and it was accepted. During the debacle Fletcher was supposed to have poked his thumb in Haynes’ eye, and the top button was torn from his waistcoat. Fletcher offered £5 compensation, but this did not appease Haynes who instituted court proceedings, suing Fletcher for £5000 damages. The case was thrown out of court as the judge considered the £5 offered by Fletcher sufficient compensation.
Free Trade versus Protectionism
In May of 1888, when James Fletcher once again addressed his constituents at the Criterion Hotel he explained this dispute with Haynes, attempting to restore his credibility. However, his popularity remained undiminished and his old friend Alexander Brown moved a vote of confidence which was seconded by the Mayor of Newcastle.
During 1888 the Leader of the Opposition, G.R. Dibbs, resigned and a new leader was to be appointed by Caucus. James Fletcher was mentioned as a possible candidate and the Wallsend & Plattsburg Sun strongly supported Fletcher as leader of the Protection Party, writing that: “ ….. his big heart and genial temper must endear him to members of his party while he has proved that as a broad-minded and liberal statesman he is second to none in the legislature”. However Fletcher and his colleagues considered George Dibbs a competent leader and in October 1888 Dibbs became Leader of the Protectionist faction in parliament. The Protection Party appealed to the working class, being regarded as more democratic than the Free Traders who now called themselves the Liberal Party. Protection was considered by many to be a panacea for the increasingly gloomy employment prospects and deepening financial depression.
The new year saw James Fletcher once again in Newcastle to address the electors, with his old friend and business associate Alexander Brown now aspiring to stand with Fletcher in the approaching election for the seat of Newcastle. The 1888 strike was still fresh in the minds of the voters and these two men, as mine proprietors, could expect some opposition from coal miners who had suffered severe deprivation during the strike. The Herald newspaper, now no longer under Fletcher’s control, stated: “It is rumoured that Fletcher will meet with a lot of opposition for the City (seat) from Borehole, Wickham and Bullock Island, and Stockton miners, as well as from the Carrington Coal Trimmers. The active part Mr. Fletcher took in the formulation of the General Agreement, coupled with his connection with Ferndale Colliery where one of the main causes of the strike arose, have not tended to increase his popularity with the miners, especially the Borehole men.”
Campaigning for the election was proceeding along party lines, with the Free Traders, now the Liberal Party, seeking to promote pastoral exports and reduce the cost of living. The Protectionists sought to impose tariffs on imported goods to protect and encourage local industries. Fletcher, Alexander Brown and William Grahame, all Protectionists, were running against Free Traders H.J. Brown, J.C. Ellis and C.F. Stokes. There was an irony here as not only was Fletcher associated in business with Ellis, but Stokes was his partner in the Ferndale Colliery.
The newspapers reported great rivalry between Ellis and Fletcher during the campaign which culminated in a pitched battle near the Customs House. Ellis’s supporters had two horse drawn lorries bearing lifeboats to focus on his shipping interests. Hunter Street was crowded with people as the horse-drawn cavalcade of Ellis supporters proceeded westwards and when they attempted to return on the same route and turn right into Watt Street, Fletcher’s supporters converged on the lorries and smashed the boats to pieces.
However, it was an unrealistic expectation on the part of Ellis to anticipate gaining the coalminers’ vote in view of the fact that he had leased the Great Northern Colliery at Teralba during the 1888 strike and worked the mine with scab labour. The Protectionists won the election with Fletcher returned as Member for Newcastle and once again heading the poll. His running mate Alexander Brown also won a seat in the Legislative Assembly to represent Newcastle. Fletcher was given a portfolio, becoming Minister for Public Works under Premier G. R. Dibbs. Dibbs (later Sir George Dibbs) had Newcastle connections as he was at one time in partnership with his brother, trading as J. C. Dibbs & Co., Merchants and Shipowners of Newcastle. J. C. Dibbs was also in partnership with Alexander Brown in the New Lambton Colliery, a mine in which James Fletcher had an interest at one time. G.R. Dibbs enjoyed a lengthy parliamentary career, resigning in 1894 due to financial problems.
The new editor of the Herald, John Norton, wrote of Fletcher’s friendship with Dibbs: “By a good many people he (Fletcher) is regarded as the strongest man in the government from a popular point of view ….. It is much doubted whether Dibbs would ever have become Premier …. had he not had the advice and active support of Hon. James Fletcher”. At the same time Norton accused James Fletcher of “smuggling” his business friend Mr. Laidley (owner of the Cooperative Colliery) into Parliament. (William Laidley had gained a seat in the Legislative Council at the recent election.)
Political instability continued during 1889 with the Protectionists being narrowly beaten in March by the Free Traders under Sir Henry Parkes, so Fletcher’s term as Minister for Works was quite brief. Fortunately for Newcastle, it was during this time that he was able to call tenders for the construction of a new courthouse in Church Street, Newcastle. This structure, designed by Colonial Architect James Barnet, was opened on 29 January 1892.
Newcastle now had three Parliamentary seats. William Grahame, the Protectionist who had campaigned for the Seat of Newcastle with Fletcher and Alexander Brown, resigned during 1889 and James Curley, Secretary of the Hunter River Miners’ Association, successfully contested the seat.
Earlier in the year there had been pressure on James Curley to stand as neither Fletcher nor Alexander Brown were viewed by the miners as suitable parliamentary representatives. The Herald wrote: “If he (Curley) does not stand it will be disappointing to the large section of the miners who are anxious for him to have one of the three seats. In the opinion of the Northumberland miners, so far as labour questions are concerned (they) will be practically unrepresented in the coming Parliament. James Curley pursued an unusual role. He continued as General Secretary of the Miners’ Association for a nominal fee and, although a Labor member, espoused Protectionism in trade matters, but was a Free Trader in the House.
James Fletcher was displeased with Curley’s entrance into the political spectrum and spoke derisively at political rallies of Curley becoming a Free Trader. It seems likely that Curley was trying to pursue an independent line as the miners were dissatisfied with the party system of politics. Curley’s old Borehole mates had backed him as their candidate because “they wanted their bodies protected with a good mining bill” and they could no longer trust mine owners Fletcher or Alexander Brown.
Mining fatalities
During the reading of the Coal Mines Regulation Bill in the Legislative Assembly, the Government Geologist’s report showed that the known reserves of coal in the colony to a depth of 4,000 ft was 78 billion cubic feet. Statistics showed that there were more accidents in NSW coalmines than in those of England. During the previous eleven years there were 2.183 deaths per thousand accidents in England while in New South Wales the figure was 3.310. This reinforced the necessity for improved legislation and the Bill before the House was largely based on recommendations of the 1886 Royal Commission. After many years of agitation by the miners, October of 1890 saw the Eight Hour Day principle inserted in the Coal Mines Regulation Bill and passed by the Legislative Assembly.
Whilst debating the Coal Mines Regulation Bill, James Fletcher said that “mine proprietors should grudge nothing to secure the safety of the men ……” However; speaking as a typical mine proprietor, he complained that “if the provisions (as recommended) for 14 yard pillars were carried out more than half the coal would be left in the mine”. This increase in the size of pillars was a contentious issue and the local Press wrote with cynicism that the mine proprietors “will make a dead set on those provisions which require thicker pillars and narrower bords and in others which increase the expense of working while also reducing the proportion of coal to be taken out”.
Unemployment figures were still rising in New South Wales during 1889 and many of the unemployed had sought seasonal work such as shearing and harvesting in rural areas. When this work cut out the men returned to the cities where they tried to get work on Government Relief.
Dibbs was re-elected leader of the Opposition Protection Party in March of 1890, during the Great Strike. This bitter three month national strike ended in November when miners returned to work. As a result the New South Wales government appointed a Royal Commission to enquire into the best method of preventing strikes. James Fletcher and James Curley MLA served on this commission which found that a motivating cause for many strikes was now the endeavour of unionists to exclude non unionists from employment. In earlier times most strikes had been motivated by efforts to secure higher wages and improved working conditions.
Fletcher was once again on the campaign trail during the latter weeks of 1890, with another election pending. Addressing his constituents at Lambton, somewhat defensively, he asked them never to forget a faithful servant and what was due between man and man. There were some men who could never bear the idea of anyone rising, but it was to the credit of anyone to rise and in this country of democracy they would always be ready to give credit to such men. He would ask them always to give fair play to a man until they found he was unworthy of them and then put him away for a better one.
State Federation was receiving strong support from the Parkes Government but many citizens were advocating Republicanism as an alternative. Thomas Walker, the junior Member for Northumberland, stated that he was in favour of a united Australia modelled on American lines. The Eight Hour Day Committee, when planning their coming banquet, decided to strike out the toast of The Queen and to substitute The Australian Republic.
James Fletcher favoured State Federation. However, in February 1891 he prophesied that “the approaching Federation Conference must end in failure, since Victoria is hungering for the Riverina country as South Australia is for the Barrier (Broken Hill) country, while both are so wedded to (State) Protection that they repudiate the bare idea of the principle of divorce being applicable to them.
Fletcher did not survive to witness the return to power of the Protection Party during the latter months of 1891, with his old friends George Dibbs once again Premier and Colonial Secretary, and Alexander Brown the Colonial Treasurer. It is interesting to speculate on the position Fletcher would have held in this Ministry, had he survived.
Despite all the talk of federation in Fletcher’s time, there were to be many more conventions and conferences held over the next few years until the states were sufficiently in agreement to form the Commonwealth of Australia with NSW Protectionist leader Edmund Barton heading the first Commonwealth Ministry in 1901.
