Constitution Reform - My Take Pt 4

By Bukka Rennie
October 01, 2003

It was the working-class mass movement which erupted in the late 1930s spearheaded by the Butler Party and Trade Union, superseding thereby the Cipriani-led Trinidad Labour Party (formerly the TWA), that placed the question of home rule squarely on the political agenda.

The people had come to understand from their experiences between the period 1906 to 1936 that they needed two instruments to break the back of the Crown colony system: they needed the political party to wage struggle for more and more reforms that would bring to them greater civil rights as citizens of this country, and they needed trade unions to guarantee their right to collective bargaining and facilitate democratic practices within the production system.

Butler never separated the two lines of struggle and utilised one organisational structure that would function both as party and union according to the specific, required circumstance.

They had learnt from the experience of seeing, since 1925, the parliamentary activity of Cipriani and his cohorts, Teelucksingh and Roodal, assuming a significance that served to relegate the other aspects of the people's efforts to minimal considerations.

The agitation for better conditions of work and the hunger marches to highlight the plight of the poor and the unemployeds would continue throughout the latter years of the decade.

By 1938 the Constitution itself as a social contract that set out the rules and regulations of engagement by all members of society was being seriously questioned. As we said elsewhere it was felt that the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago as a Crown colony was "...geared to boost and shore up the capitalist political power and economy of Great Britain, and therefore if the T&T working-class were to advance politically, the Constitution had to be radically altered or rewritten to guarantee to further facilitate the political development of the people through some exercise of power as a natural prerequisite or stage to eventual home rule..."

On March 23, 1939, a memorandum on Constitution reform was presented by the Workers' United Front Committee to the then Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, Malcolm Macdonald. They demanded that if there is to be "...responsible government, the Governor in framing his measures must give due weight to the wishes of the electorate..."

And, given the wide powers of the Governor, they argued that "...there can be no reasonable objection to a low franchise, preferably one man-one vote as under this plan a larger number are admitted and are able to acquire experience..."

Furthermore, they advanced the view that the "system of nominated members to the Legislative Council is an anachronism galling to educated opinion, and is not calculated to foster that greater confidence in government which is an indispensable factor for common effort for the common good... We are of the opinion that the time has definitely come when all seats to the Legislative Council should be returned by popular vote, de jure, de facto, representatives of the people at large..."

That memorandum was signed by individuals such as Bertie Percival, chairman of the Workers' United Front Committee; Clement Payne, secretary; Alfred Richards, Mayor of Port-of-Spain (1936-1937); Jim Barratt, Negro Welfare Association; Dudley Mahon, Public Works Workers' Trade Union; John Gill, Federated Workers Trade Union; A Atkinson, Amalgamated Wood Workers' Trade Union, and two women, Elma Francois, organising secretary, Negro Welfare, and Adelaide Harrison, financial secretary, Negro Welfare.

After the working-class eruption of 1937, Butler, the leader of the overall nationalist movement, was arrested and jailed for two years. On his release in 1939, it was clear to the colonial authorities that he was undaunted as he began to agitate around the oilfields on the grounds that nothing fundamental had changed since the upheavals.

When two oil wells went up in flames, the British Government, on the brink of World War II, could not risk the oil supply from Trinidad so they blamed Butler and jailed him again, this time for the entire duration of the war, 1939-1945, supposedly because of his "anti-war activities".

On his release in April 1945, the agitation and mobilisation began in all earnesty. Mass public meetings were held all over the south. Mobilisations spread from Cedros to Toco. Butler's post-war platform was built around two issues:

That the time had come when the people must determine their own affairs - the people must have "100 per cent responsible government".

That there had to be a comprehensive nationalist programme, "a oneness of purpose" around which all the political organisations in the country had to unite.

It was also about this time that sugar workers had begun their move to join the Butler movement, thereby cementing a unity of the main races at the roots.

Though released, according to the then Governor because the "...allied armies had crossed the Rhine," Butler was prohibited from the counties of Victoria, St Patrick and Mayaro, the oil areas, which comprised his stronghold of ardent support. Confining Butler to Port-of-Spain only helped to build the relationship between Butler and the likes of Barratt and company of the Workers' United Front Committee.

Of course the supposed United Front Party that was being proposed throughout 1945 by professionals and intellectuals such as David Pitt, Albert Gomes, Kelshall, Patrick Solomon et al did not materialise as envisaged, particularly after Butler and Barratt left for different reasons. Nevertheless, the powerful push upwards from the masses below was definitely too great for the colonial authorities not to further share power: elections were called in 1946 and adult suffrage granted.

It took us 112 years to move from emancipation (1834) to adult suffrage (1946) as compared to the British experience that took them from the Magna Carta declaration of 1215 to full franchise (Equal Franchise Act) in 1928, a period of 713 years.

What does that tell us about the affairs of humanity, then and now? And, indeed, there are interesting parallels in terms of the interlinking of the struggles for democracy within production, on the factory floors, and the struggles for political democracy and political power. In fact together these two struggles have always provided the catalyst to Constitution reform. That is the point.

Pt I | Pt 2 | Pt 4 | Pt 5 | Pt 6