§ MR. KEIR HARDIEI beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether he is aware that arrangements have been made for 700 unemployed workmen in Leicester to begin a march to London on Sunday next, to demand work from the Government; and that arrangements are in progress for similar demonstrations from Glasgow, Newcastle, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, and Birmingham; and whether, in view of the hardship which these men and their wives and children are enduring, he will take the Second Reading and the remaining stages of the Unemployed Bill on an early date so as to ensure that the measure shall become law this session.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI have heard of the report to which the hon. Member refers, but I am of opinion that the arrangements of this House in regard to its own business ought not to be modified in one way or the other by any external demonstrations.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIEWill the right hon. Gentleman reply to the last part of my Question—whether he will take the Second Reading and the remaining stages of the Unemployed Bill at an early date, so as to ensure its becoming law this session.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI did not answer the last part of the Question because it seemed inseparably bound up with the first part, and I was unwilling that the House should suppose from my Answer that we ought in the smallest, degree to be influenced by the facts of 775 which the hon. Member has given an indication. But as he now puts a separate Question, I may assure him that I have every desire and expectation of seeing this Bill passed into law this session, and I should regard it as a great misfortune if it were not passed.
§ MR. KEIR HARDIECan the right hon. Gentleman fix a date for the Second Reading? In reference to the right hon. Gentleman's deprecation of these demonstrations, my statement was that it is only force that carries any measure through this House.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI take exactly the opposite view to the hon. Gentleman. It is not force that carries measures through. I hope it is a reasoned, cautious public opinion; and, in my judgment, any such demonstration of force as he describes is inimical to the prospects of the Bill becoming law, and not favourable to them.
§ MR. CROOKS (Woolwich)Will the right hon. Gentleman exclude from his mind the consideration whether there are any demonstrations or not, and, realising the need for this Bill, will he give us a simple Answer to a Question asked in a law-abiding way? There is no more force about this than there was about the Brewers' Bill.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI did not hear of the brewers marching up to London.
§ MR. SHACKLETON (Lancashire, Clitheroe)The brewers' demonstration was behind you.
§ MR. A. J. BALFOURI can assure the hon. Gentleman that it was not I who introduced the subject of these demonstrations, but the hon. Member who put the Question, as he will find if he reads the Question. The hon. Member cannot ask me to say more than that it is my earnest hope and belief that the Bill will become law in the present session.
§ SIR GEORGE BARTLEY (Islington, N.)May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, seeing the grave evils which the introduction of this Bill has already 776 brought about, he will consider the possibility of at once withdrawing it?
§ MR. KEIR HARDIEI will repeat this Question at an early date. Perhaps, as a personal explanation, I may be allowed to say that I am not advocating force. I am only pointing out that these men have grown desperate, and, seeing the indifference with which this measure is treated, have no resource but force.
§ MR. FLAVINCan the right hon. Gentleman see his way to make a recommendation to these unemployed poor people to withdraw their pennies from the bank of the hon. Baronet the Member for North Islington?