Subscribe now and receive weekly newsletters with educational materials, new courses, interesting posts, popular books, and much more!
Articles
Glasgow, 1919: “Churchill Rolled the Tanks” – What Really Happened
- By GORDON J. BARCLAY
- | May 20, 2019
- Category: Churchill Between the Wars Truths and Heresies
A striking example of misrepresentation, this photo is widely purported to be a tank and troops in the midst of the George Square strikers. In reality it’s from a year earlier, when the “Julian” tank 113 was part of a Glasgow war bond and war savings certificate drive which raised £14 million for the war effort. The photo was debunked by Russell Leadbetter in The Herald (Glasgow) on 18 January 2018.
“A century ago in ‘the Battle of George Square,’ Winston Churchill ordered 10,000 soldiers, along with tanks, artillery and machine guns, to attack 60,000 striking workers in Glasgow who were marching for a forty-hour work week.”
This tweet is typical of hundreds of social media postings early in 2019, when Scotland marked the centenary of a major riot. Supposedly, Churchill sent tanks to Glasgow, where soldiers caused injuries and even deaths.
Churchill’s “crimes” of 31 January 1919, are the ones most frequently leveled at him in Scotland. Google “George Square” and you will find numerous respectable websites repeating the charges, some including the inaccurately labeled photo above. The problem with all this is that Churchill was not guilty. Nor were any strikers actually injured or killed by troops. 1
George Square is probably the most mythologised confrontation in 20th century Scottish history. The version almost universally accepted, even taught in Scottish schools, was circulated by strike leaders after the riot, and in their subsequent memoirs. Some of them, such as the Labour Party’s Emmanuel Shinwell, became prominent politicians. 2
The myth that “Churchill sent troops” seems first to have appeared in print in 1973, in I’ve Lived Through It All, a memoir by Emmanuel Shinwell. No evidence was provided. In two later memoirs (1981 and 1984) Shinwell switched the blame to David Lloyd George, the prime minister in 1919. Possibly because Lloyd George does not share Churchill’s mythic stature, those versions have not achieved the same traction. 3
The Glasgow Strike
On 27 January 1919, Glasgow engineering workers in Glasgow struck for a reduction in the work week from fifty-seven to forty hours. In the unstable state of postwar Europe, some feared that widespread industrial unrest reflected revolutionary intentions. 4
The atmosphere was tense in Glasgow during the first week of the stoppage. Strike leaders pressured the Lloyd George government to force employers to meet their demands. Their tactics included trying to shut down the city’s power stations and stopping the tramcars. On Wednesday 29 January, strikers met with the Lord Provost at the City Chambers on George Square. He agreed to send a telegram expressing their case to the government in London. A large crowd of strikers accompanied their leaders; an even larger demonstration was expected to hear the response two days later. Fearing violence, Glasgow’s chief legal officer Alistair Mackenzie, the Sheriff of Lanarkshire, asked the government if military aid would be available to him, should riots break out. 5
The Sheriff’s request was reviewed in London on the 30th by the five-person War Cabinet. Churchill, though not a member, was present as Secretary of State for War and Air. Also attending were the Secretary of State for Scotland, Robert Munro, senior civilian and military officials, and other ministers. With Lloyd George away at the Paris Peace Conference, Deputy Prime Minister Andrew Bonar Law was in the chair. Law was MP for the Glasgow constituency containing George Square.
General Sir William Robertson, commanding the army, quickly reminded the War Cabinet that the government had no legal powers to send troops into a British city unless martial law was declared. Only the civil authorities could do that. He added that the army recommended the use Scottish troops, should any military be deployed. 6
Churchill’s Recommendations
Churchill made several contributions to the discussion. The first related to the difficulty of speeding up demobilisation of Glasgow policemen then still in the armed forces. Next, he advised, “we should not exaggerate the seriousness of this disturbance.” After all, the situation “had been brewing for a long time.” Although there might “have to be a conflict in order to clear the air,” the government should have ample provocation before taking strong measures. By going gently at first, they would earn the nation’s support if troops were needed. But the moment for their use had not arrived. Churchill did suggest arresting some of the strike leaders under the 1914 Defence of the Realm Act.
Churchill was against moving against the strike until some glaring excess had been committed. If events crossed the line of a wage dispute—if strikers broke the law—that would be the time to act. Sir Eric Geddes noted that troop movements might be prevented by a railway strike. Churchill replied “that the War Office would take all the necessary steps to meet such eventuality and would consider arrangements for placing troops in the vicinity of Glasgow.”
Shinwell’s 1973 misrepresentation read: “Churchill persuaded the Cabinet that troops, machine guns and tanks should be deployed in the Clydeside area.” 7 He offered no evidence, and his charge is contradicted by War Cabinet minutes. Subsequently, historians repeated variants—for example that “Churchill made a positive proposal [to use troops] which was the one adopted.” 8
Cabinet Decisions
The War Cabinet decided to follow its established policy and not to intervene in the strike. 9 It agreed that troops would be put on standby within the army’s Scottish Command. A subcommittee chaired by the Scottish Secretary and not including Churchill, was to take the lead for the government. A senior Scottish Office official was to be sent to Glasgow to communicate to the Lord Provost and Sheriff that:
…the lighting of the city must be kept up if there is any possibility of doing it; that the military will be in readiness to give their services when requested by the civil authorities; and that firm, but not provocative action should be taken to put down disorder and prevent intimidation.
The “Battle”
Before noon on Friday 31 January a crowd of around 25,000 gathered outside the City Chambers. While their leaders were inside, the police with batons charged part of the crowd and a violent struggle broke out. When the police lost control of the situation, the Sheriff read the Riot Act, which required all those gathered to disperse. Then, as matters worsened, he decided to ask for military assistance. 1<0/a> The violence in the “Battle” was exclusively between rioters and the police, not the army.
By the time the War Cabinet met at 3pm, troops were already on the move from Edinburgh, Stirling and Cromarty. A single battalion of infantry was brought up from Northumberland; six tanks and 100 trucks with drivers were sent north. 11 Scottish Secretary Munro made the most panicky statement: It was “a misnomer to call the situation in Glasgow a strike—it was a Bolshevist rising.” There is no evidence that at was.
Churchill made only a brief contribution, on how quickly DORA authority could be given for arrests. The main talkers were Munro and his chief law officer, the Lord Advocate.12 While Glasgow civic authorities had indeed requested military aid, it was the army itself that would decide what forces were deployed. 13
The first of 10,000 infantry troops began to arrive around 10pm on Friday night. The six tanks arrived the following Monday, but never left the shed in which they were stored. The deployment of so large a force was almost immediately recognised as overreaction. Some have suggested, and it is my own belief, that the army, with no reliable information on which to base its plans, prepared for the worst situation it might face—a re-run of the 1916 Easter Rising in Dublin. 14
The Truth
A dispassionate analysis of available evidence shows that Churchill was one of the least concerned about a “Bolshevist threat” in Glasgow 15. Indeed he expressly asked his colleagues not to exaggerate the problem. Churchill did not “roll the tanks.” Nor did he persuade the Cabinet that troops “should be deployed” or make “a positive proposal’” to send them. Not being a member of the War Cabinet, he played no role in liaison with Glasgow authorities. He merely acceded to the War Cabinet’s decision to make troops available, should the Sheriff need them. The army alone determined what it needed.
The myths of George Square, established during the last century, have completely overwhelmed the actual history. We read now that the army shot, injured or killed people; that tanks entered the Square. Some versions insist that the all the troops were English, fueling nationalist grievances. Others assert that the army came “to crush the strike” (it lasted twelve days after troops arrived). The mythology repeats uncritically on social media, in the press, on TV history programmes, in history books and in school textbooks. The prevalent myth is that “Churchill sent the tanks.” 16 Not guilty!
The Author
Dr. Barclay is former Principal Inspector and Head of Policy at the government heritage agency Historic Scotland.
Endnotes
1 This summary is drawn from the author’s “‘Duties in Aid of the Civil Power’: The Deployment of the Army to Glasgow, 31 January to 17 February 1919,” Journal of Scottish Historical Studies, 2018, 38.2, 261–92. George Square mythology is also covered in the author’s “‘Churchill rolled the tanks into the crowd;’: Mythology and Reality in the Military Deployment to Glasgow in 1919,” Scottish Affairs, 2019, 28.1, p32–62.
2 Cf. Barclay, “‘Churchill Rolled the Tanks.’”
3 Emanuel Shinwell: I’ve Lived Through It All, (London: Gollancz, 1973), 45. Lead with the Left (London: Cassell, 1981), 63. Shinwell Talking: A Conversational Biography to Celebrate His Hundredth Birthday (London: Quiller, 1984), 93-94.
4 Iain McLean 1999 The Legend of Red Clydeside (Edinburgh, John Donald, 1999), 132-38.
5 “Trial transcript from the trial of William McCartney [et al] for the crime of mobbing and rioting at George Square, Glasgow and other locations…at the High Court Edinburgh…7 April 1919.” Evidence of Sheriff A.O.M Mackenzie. National Records of Scotland, JC36/31. Barclay, “‘Duties in Aid of the Civil Power,’” 2019, 268, 277.
6 Minutes, War Cabinet Meeting 522, 30 January 1919, The National Archives, Kew. CAB 23/9/9.
7 Shinwell, I’ve Lived Through It All, 45.
8 Barbara Weinberger, Keeping the Peace? Policing Strikes in Britain 1906–1926 (Oxford: Berg, 1990), 158-62.
9 War Cabinet Minutes, CAB 23/9/9
10 Barclay “‘Duties in Aid of the Civil Power,’” 277–78.
11 Ibid., 278.
12 The National Archives, Kew. CAB 23/9/10 War Cabinet, minutes of meeting 523, 31 January 1919.
13 King’s Regulations for the Army (London: War Office, 1914).
14 Barclay “‘Duties in Aid of the Civil Power,’” 287.
16 Cabinet Secretary Sir Maurice Hankey, 17 January 1919, described Churchill as the “only one who is sane” on the widespread industrial unrest. Quoted in Ian McLean, “Popular protest and Public Order: Red Clydeside, 1915-1919,” in R. Quinault and J. Stevenson, Popular Protest and Public Order: Six Studies in British History, 1790-1920 (London. Allen & Unwin, 1975), 241, n.39.
16 Barclay, “‘Churchill Rolled the Tanks,’” 49.
You state that there were 10,000 troops involved. I believe that there was one battalion from the East Surrey Regiment, is this correct? What other battalions were involved? Were any of them English? Why no mention of the City of Glasgow’s own Regiment, the Highland Light Infantry, being locked in their barracks in the Maryhill area of Glasgow just a couple of miles from George Square? Do your records show that there were machine gun posts in George Square? Why do you make no mention of two of the ringleaders being prosecuted and jailed?
I readily accept that there is a possibility that some of the “facts” from the Scottish side has changed over the years but what proof do you have that convinces me that your version is the truth, the whole truth etc. Thank you for your time.
–
Dr. Barclay responds:
Thank you for your enquiry. The units involved in the deployment to Glasgow were: Gordon, Seaforth and Argyll & Sutherland Highlanders; Royal Scots; King’s Own Scottish Borderers; East Surrey Regiment (based at that time at Bridge of Allan); Durham Light Infantry. And of course men from the Royal Tank Corps, based in Dorset.
Maryhill Barracks was not occupied by the Highland Light Infantry in January/February 1919. There were 37 men of a Garrison Battalion of the HLI in the Barracks being demobilised but the resident unit was the Royal Scots Fusiliers, who had been there since December 1918. The nearest battalion of the HLI was east of Edinburgh in Haddington. The idea that they were ‘locked in’ rather than just not used is also part of the mythology.
I have as yet not found evidence for machine gun posts in George Square: this is commonly stated but as yet there is no actual evidence. I still have a lot of ground to cover, though. As to Shinwell and Gallacher, the article had to fit in a lot about the reality and mythology of the “Battle.” It was not intended to be a full-scale study of the Forty Hours Strike and the prosecution is not disputed history. The article is a summary of two much longer pieces. One sets out the results of the preliminary survey of the evidence for what happened, and the other examines in detail the construction and modern political use of the mythology. Both papers were published in peer-academic journals and are available on my website:
The Evidence
The Mythology
I would be very happy to answer any further queries direct: [email protected]
“even taught in Scottish schools” complete nonsense virtually NO Scottish history is taught in Scottish schools it’s mostly World War and British specific, check the curriculum.
–
Dr. Barclay responds:
While Scottish history was a rarity in my own school education in the 1960s, it has formed a major part of the history curriculum in Scotland since the 1990s. If indeed you “check the curriculum”—the History curriculum section of the Scottish Qualifications Authority website, and look under “National 5″—you’ll see a detailed breakdown of the course. There’s a lot of Scottish history there. The N4 course also has Scottish history.
The National 5 textbook, in use 2013-18 and approved by Scottish Qualifications Authority, from which the curriculum was taught, included at least seven major errors in one paragraph about the George Square “Battle” and also used a photo, supposedly of tanks in Glasgow in 1919, that was actually a fundraising parade a year earlier in January 1918. The text included three key myths: that the government sent the troops; that they were all English; that there were tanks in George Square facing the crowd.
In recent weeks Education Scotland was found to have on its website as a teaching resource a document entitled “The Road to the Scottish Parliament,” which Sir Tom Devine, the historian, described as “arrant propaganda.” Amongst other errors, it contained a version of the “Battle of George Square” almost as mythical as the textbook, blaming Churchill for sending English troops. The document has been removed from the SQA website “for review.”
If you have any further queries please contact me on [email protected]. More information is to be found on my website.
I can attest to the lack of Scottish History taught in schools. I feel you have little experience of the reality of history teaching in Scottish schools: whilst subjects may be covered in the curriculum, there is no obligation on any school to teach the entire curriculum; indeed, there is insufficient time in the school year to do so. Most leave out Scottish history and focus on European history or WW2 as others will attest. I feel your hagiography of Churchill fails accurately to cover the salient facts in this case.
–
Dr. Barclay responds:
Thank you for taking the time to comment. You say my article “fails accurately to cover the salient points in this case” but you do not say how it fails. The article is a summary of two papers in referred academic journals, in which all the evidence is laid out. If you believe there are errors, omissions or problematic interpretations, please let me know.
On “the lack of Scottish History taught in schools,” I showed your comment to someone who teaches history in a Scottish school, and has briefed MSPs at the Scottish Parliament on the teaching of Scottish history. He writes:
The reality is that Scottish school textbooks and government-sponsored educational support material have presented a mythological version of the “Battle of George Square,” and schoolchildren have been taught these myths as fact. You are no doubt aware of articles in the press in late 2020 about the wider problem of “fake history” in Scottish schools. Sir Tom Devine described an educational support document on the Education Scotland website, which incidentally also included the myths of the “Battle,” as “arrant propaganda.”
But as Churchill said: “This truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it, ignorance may deride it, malice may distort it, but there it is.”