§ MR. STEWART (Greenock)I beg to ask the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction which exists among the trade unionists of Greenock owing to the intervention of the police, in April of last year, when non-union men were imported by the Brewers' Sugar Company, Limited, to take the place of the sugar porters and labourers who were on strike; whether he is aware that on the first day of the dispute labourers were imported from Glasgow, who immediately returned home on the facts being explained to them by the strikers, and that this peaceful persuasion on the part of the strikers formed the subject of complaint, and was brought before the magistrates at a special meeting, which was attended by Mr. Wingate, the secretary of the Brewers' Sugar Company, Limited, and by the chief constable, who suggested that application should be made for additional police protection; whether on the second day of the dispute, on the Glasgow labourers being again imported they were met at the Greenock railway station by the burgh police, who formed a cordon round them and escorted them to the harbour, and remained with them during the discharge of a cargo, preventing the strikers and their secretary from obtaining any access whatever to the imported men, who, under police escort, were also taken back after work to the railway station; whether such intervention by the police constitutes a violation of the Trade Disputes Act; and whether, having regard to the importance of the case and the precedent it creates, he will issue a general circular to the police authorities of Scotland pointing out 1731 that the action of the police in preventing the strikers from having access to blacklegs itself constitutes a provocation to a breach of the peace which it is their duty to maintain.
§ MR. SINCLAIRI received a communication on this subject, and on 31st December, 1907, a letter was addressed from the Scottish Office to the Secretary of the Greenock United Trades Council, stating that the Secretary for Scotland is advised that persons, acting on their own behalf or on behalf of a trade union, or of an employer, who attend any place of business where workmen are, for the purposes of Section 2 of the Trades Disputes Act, are not "loiterers," and that the police are not justified in treating them as such or in interfering with their exercise of the rights and purposes of the statute. The letter went on to say that the Secretary for Scotland is further of opinion, as advised, that the interference of the police on such occasions as those mentioned is only justifiable in circumstances where the police have reasonable grounds for apprehending that the intentions of those persons are not peaceful or are likely to lead to public disorder or breach of the peace. In the absence of any such reasonable grounds for apprehending a disturbance the exercise of those rights of persuasion expressly conferred and sanctioned by statute would certainly be construed as "peaceful." I will consider whether a circular is required. As at present advised, I think the publicity which the matter will receive through my hon. friend's Question may be sufficient.
§ *MR. STEWARTIs there not sufficient material on which to issue a general statement in view of the specific allegation that the police contravened both the letter and the spirit of the Trade Disputes Act which was specially passed to——
§ *MR. SPEAKEROrder, order. That is an argumentative Question.