MASTERS AND WORKMEN.—LEAVE. (Hansard, 27 April 1858)

MR. MACKINNON
said, he rose to call the attention of the House to the Report of the Select Committee of 1856, appointed to inquire into the expediency of establishing equitable tribunals for the amicable adjustment of differences between masters and operatives, and to move for leave to bring in a Bill to enable masters and workmen to form Councils of Conciliation and of Arbitration. The subject had been for many years brought before the notice of Parliament, and was one of very considerable importance, because it was the general impression that, if such a measure as he suggested were carried out, one of its effects would be to put an end to the frequent disputes which took place between workmen and their employers, which disputes too often terminated in "strikes.'' These strikes were often of the most lamentable character, and attended with the most disastrous consequences to all involved in them. During the Preston strike, the loss to the operatives was calculated at between £50,000 and £60,000; the loss to the masters was enormous; and the poor tradesmen who supplied the workpeople with necessaries, and who were, of course, entirely innocent of all connection with the strike, were also great sufferers. There was great hope that these calamitous events would be prevented by meetings of delegates from the operatives and the masters, at which the whole of the circumstances on either side might be gone into, and the case settled on principles of justice to both parties. It would, perhaps, be said, that the law did not sanction any system of equitable coun- 1815 cils. He found, however, that in 1824, a Committee of that House, consisting of no fewer than forty-six of its leading Members, agreed that a Bill should be brought in, whereby these councils should become part of the law of the land. He was not, therefore, now asking the House to affirm a new principle. Again, in 1856, a Committee, over which he had the honour to preside, examined a great number of witnesses on this subject, and although the opinions of the masters was equally balanced, the operatives were entirely in favour of the establishment of those Councils of Conciliation and Arbitration. To show the absurdity of the existing law he might refer to the evidence of Mr. Ham-mill, the Worship Street magistrate, who explained the difficulty at present experienced by magistrates in deciding disputes between masters and workmen. In one case, the question which came before him was, whether the work done by a silk weaver was such as it ought to be. How was it possible for the magistrate to decide satisfactorily such a question, which was one rather for persons skilled in weaving than for magistrates? The conclusion which the Committee of 1856 arrived at was, that the attention of the Legislature might with advantage be directed to this subject, and they were of opinion that the formation of Courts of Conciliation in the country, more especially in large commercial, manufacturing, and mining districts, would be beneficial, and would probably lead to the amicable settlement in many cases of disputes between masters and workmen. From all the information which he had been enabled to collect, the operatives were of opinion that the existing law dealt with them in a very unfair spirit, inasmuch as whenever they happened to have a dispute with their masters, the case was submitted to the consideration of a magistrate, whose tendency they alleged was to support the masters against them. The Bill which he proposed to introduce, had for its object, the removal of the inconvenience which resulted from that state of things, and he therefore trusted it would receive the sanction both of the Government and the House. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving for leave to bring in his Bill.

§ MR. INGHAM
seconded the Motion.

§ MR. WALPOLE
said, at this stage of the measure he should not trouble the House with any observations further than to say, that he thought it only reasonable that the hon. Gentleman should have 1816 an opportunity given him of bringing in his Bill. He granted that there were inconsistencies in the existing law relating to masters and workmen, which might be properly and justly considered. In addition to that, the law as it stood, with reference to arbitration, had not operated successfully, and he thought that certain provisions might be adopted to give further facilities for referring disputes to arbitration. He would not venture to express an opinion upon the Bill, until he had seen and examined it; but on the second reading, he should be prepared to state on the part of Her Majesty's Government, whether they thought it desirable that it should pass or not.