§ Order read, for resuming Adjourned Debate on Question [2nd August], "That the Bill be now read a second time."
§ * SIR F. S. POWELLasked, what was the reason for the introduction of this Bill? The first clause seemed to imply that employers had acted with harshness and unfairness in regard to this matter towards their workmen; but, although he represented a mining district, he had never heard any complaint of that kind. At first sight the idea would arise that the Bill was intended to provide a remedy or the unjust action of employers.
§ THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. ASQUITH, Fife, E.)was sorry the hon. Member was not present when he moved the Second Reading, for he then explained he reasons that led to the introduction of the Bill. He was glad to say that no case, so far as he was aware, in England had made the Bill necessary; but there had been cases in Scotland—cases before the Courts—from which it appeared that the employer, not having any power to 1082 dismiss the check weigher without resorting to the Courts and giving legal ground for it, had taken an indirect means by dismissing the whole of the workmen, refusing to re-admit them unless they agreed not to employ the check weigher, and this had been held to be not a violation of the existing Act. It was to provide for such cases of extreme gravity, such as had never been heard of on this side of the border, that the Bill had been introduced.
§ MR. TOMLINSONasked if the right hon. Gentleman intended to omit Clause 2?
§ MR. ASQUITHYes.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Bill read a second time, and committed for To-morrow.