HC Deb 30 April 1845 vol 79 cc1442-4
Mr. T. Duncombe

said, that he had hoped to have been allowed to pass this Bill that night through another stage. It was his wish to place the working classes in Scotland on precisely the same footing as were those in England and Ireland, by relieving them, as well as their employers, of a system vexatious to the one, and extremely oppressive to the other. But he found that there were very great difficulties in removing altogether the arrestment of wages, and also that the most conflicting opinions prevailed in Scotland itself upon the subject; and as he had seen several parties from Glasgow and other places, he had promised these individuals, after the representations which they made to him, that he would make some modifications in his measure. These gentlemen had promised to forward to him the draft of a Bill which they thought would meet the views of all parties. He had had communication with the Lord Advocate upon the subject, and must say that, considering the opinions entertained upon the matter, the gentlemen alluded to seemed to have taken a fair and liberal view of it, and were prepared to make such concessions as were likely to lead to unanimity. As he understood them, they were prepared to say that the arrestment of wages should never exceed more than one-half, and that the Commissioners should have the power, in reducing that half, to take into consideration the circumstances of a man and his family. He did not know whether this would suit the views of the Lord Advocate or not; but, when the Bill should be sent up to him, he should think it his duty to send it to the learned Lord for his approval. It might appear presumptuous in him thus to interfere in questions relative to the affairs of Scotland. But it must be borne in mind, that this matter had been already in the hands of Scottish Members several times; but as there was always a sort of local influence which interfered with the progress of the Bill, it was on all these occasions abandoned. He knew that great alarm was felt on the part of many in Scotland, that by abolishing the system included in the Bill, they should give encouragement and hold out a premium to the truck system. He had told the deputation from Glasgow that no one could hold that system in greater detestation than himself. Some more stringent clauses should be introduced into the Bill against the truck system in Scotland. The only way in which they could make them more stringent would be, that, after the first penalty, when a man was convicted of being guilty of the offence, no matter what his wealth or station might be, he should be subject to imprisonment for its repetition. Parties in Scotland would have no objection to a clause or clauses of this nature. If such clauses should be introduced they would not come within the scope of his Bill. The best course, therefore, would be to withdraw the Bill, at present, altogether, and begin de novo when the draft of the new Bill should come to his hands. He now asked leave to have the Order discharged for the second reading of the Bill, on the condition of permission being given him, at a future time, to introduce another Bill, when all parties had agreed as to the proper provisions of such Bill.

The Lord Advocate

was understood to say that difficulties existed on this subject which did not at first appear. He did not think it altogether safe to follow out the sweeping course which the Bill proposed. He approved, however, of the course now taken by the hon. Gentleman, and could a measure on which all parties could agree be devised, he was not prepared to say that he would withhold any assistance which it was in his power to give to the hon. Gentleman.

Mr. F. Maule

said, that the hon. Member for Finsbury alluded to the fact that the Bill introduced by him into the House had not prospered in the hands of Scottish Members who had formerly taken it up. The reason of that was simply the many difficulties which lay in the way of such a measure.

Sir J. Graham

observed that the question was one of extreme difficulty. They should take care that they did not abolish the power of arresting wages, unless they took further precautions against the spread of the truck system. He could not, of course, anticipate what measure would be introduced; but he was quite sure the Government would give all the assistance in their power to the promotion of the object the hon. Member had in view.

Mr. Rutherfurd

considered that there ought to be no arrest of wages, except in execution. He coincided in the propriety of preventing the extension of the truck system.

Mr. Duncombe

, in reply, suggested that the Lord Advocate ought to undertake the conduct of such a measure as this.

Bill withdrawn.

House adjourned at six o'clock.