Ispeak 19063/8/2023 ![]() If you take up the Report of the Royal Commission on Trade Unions, and turn to the statement accompanying the Minority Report to which Mr. I have looked up the Taff Vale Judgment and I see that Lord Macnaghten said this. I have looked up the OFFICIAL REPORT of that time and I think that one of the reasons why we did not divide was that it was then held by the Liberals of that day-and, so far as I can gather, this consideration affected my noble friend Lord Balfour-that the Taff Vale Judgment, upon which the whole thing turned, would, if it were allowed to remain law, affect the benefit funds of the trade unions, and that the proper course to pursue was to separate the benefit funds from the other funds. That fear was the chief reason why we did not divide. We had a very small number of members, and there was a fear amongst many of them, in which I never participated and in which I do not think my noble friend Lord Balfour participated, that it was a mistake to divide when our numbers We have to remember the situation in which we found ourselves at that time. I divided the Committee on those Amendments, and when the Third Reading came I said that I should divide the House, but the then Leader of my Party, the noble Earl, Lord Balfour, whom I am pleased to see in his place, thought that it would not be advisable to divide. ![]() I moved several Amendments-in fact, on looking back into the history of the dispute, I see that I was charged by a Liberal Member of that day with moving wrecking Amendments, and I do not think that he made an incorrect statement. In that interval the Second Reading was taken, and there was no Division, but several Amendments were moved in Committee and there were several Divisions. I was beaten in January, 1906, and I did not return to the House of Commons until May, 1906. It has been said that when this Act was passed in 1906 the Conservative Opposition in the House of Commons did not oppose it and did not divide on the Third Reading. They were met by the police, who succeeded in breaking them up, but they got at the miners in smaller bodies and the result was that the miners who had resumed work were afraid to continue and again went on strike. Peachey, who was attacked in a subway under the Thames because he had done his duty during the strike in endeavouring to preserve the food supply of his fellow citizens, and only a day or two ago I read in The Times that in Wales certain miners had returned to work and this so angered other miners who were still out that a large body set out to prevent these men going to work. You are all aware of what has taken place during the last three months, during which time the peaceful picketing, which was supposed to be one of the reasons why there was no objection to the Trade Disputes Act being passed, has turned out to be the grossest possible intimidation. My Lords, I do not think it will be necessary for me to say much in defence of this Bill.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply.AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |