§ Order for Second Reading read.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. Asquith.)
§ MR. STUART-WORTLEY (Sheffield, Hallam)said, that without desiring to oppose or delay this Bill, he wished to make an observation about it. The Bill made it an offence for any employer to influence by a threat of dismissal a workman in the appointment of a check-weigher. He believed that that was a very necessary and proper thing, but he would draw the attention of the House to the important consequences which would follow from that doctrine. It practically put the threat to dismiss a workman in the same position as an act of intimidation. When it was done with the intention of persuading a person not to do that which he had a legal right to do, it put him to that extent under intimidation. It was obvious that the counterpart of the refusal of employment was the refusal to give services, and it was notorious that in many cases the threat to refuse services was made use of for the purpose of inducing employers not to do that which they had a legal right to do.
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. ASQUITH,) Fife, E.said, the hon. Member was quite within his right in referring to this matter. He thought there was no real difference of opinion on either side of the House as to the expediency of this proposal. Parliament had deliberately enacted that the workmen should have a right to appoint a check-weigher, who should have a right to take observation of the weight of coal brought up, and for that purpose have access to the weighing machine. The Coal Mines Act of 1887 penalised the employer for impeding or interfering with the check-weigher, and this Bill was brought forward to penalise him for an obvious evasion of that Act—that was, that the employer should not have a right to say to the men that he would dismiss them if they continued to employ a particular person as check-weigher. He was certain that the House would agree that that, though not an infraction of the Act of 1887, was an evasion of it. Clearly the intention of Parliament had been that the workman should have the right to select and continue in his employment a check-weigher who possessed their confidence.
§ MR. TOMLINSON (Preston)said, he did not oppose the Bill; but as it had only been delivered to-day, he would suggest that before reading it a second time further opportunity of considering its provisions should be given to persons interested in the subject.
§ It being after Midnight, and Objection being taken to Further Proceeding, the Debate stood adjourned.
§ Debate to be resumed To-morrow.