§ MR. BRADLAUGHasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the District Factory Inspector for the Burnley district was, on 5th April, aware of breaches of the Truck Act which had taken place at Higher-ford Shed, Barrowford; whether by inquiry, on an inspection on that day, he obtained primâ facie evidence of such breaches; and whether any, and what, steps have been taken to enforce the law for the infringement which has been found by the Inspector to have taken place?
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. MATTHEWS,) Birmingham, E.The facts are as stated. The Inspector ascertained that the employers were deducting one halfpenny per week per loom from the wages of their weavers towards the expense of providing a man to oil the looms. I requested the Inspector to point out to the employers that such a deduction was contrary to the Truck Act, and I am informed that the system complained of has now been abandoned.
§ MR. BRADLAUGHIs not this one of the many cases in which the passing over of offences against an existing Statute tends to bring the law into disrepute, and ought not punishment to be enforced where there has been a distinct breach of the Act?
§ MR. MATTHEWSThe hon. Member knows as well as I do that the Truck Act has been the subject of conflicting decisions in the Courts of Law, and it would appear that upon so me points the law is not thoroughly clear. I think the most desirable course would be, in the first instance, to call the 978 attention of employers to breaches of the law, and if they immediately comply with the representations made it is not necessary to prosecute.
§ MR. BRADLAUGHasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he is aware that breaches of the Truck Act by Mr. Haynes are alleged to be still taking place at Harpenden: whether, so far back as July last, Mr. Gould, the District Inspector of Factories, reported in favour of prosecution in this case, and with whom the responsibility rests of hitherto preventing the enforcement of the law; and whether the Treasury will commence a prosecution, and in the case of reluctant witnesses take the usual steps to enforce the attendance of such persons before the magistrate?
§ MR. MATTHEWSYes, Sir. This matter was brought to my notice in July, 1888. Careful inquiries were then made by the Treasury Solicitor, the result being to show that proceedings would probably not be successful. The matter was again investigated in January of this year, but at that time it was found impossible to procure the necessary evidence. Fresh evidence has now been laid before the Treasury Solicitor, and proceedings will be taken, the usual steps being adopted, if necessary, with respect to reluctant witnesses.