§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYasked whether a crane erected from a German design in the shipbuilding yard of Messrs. Vickers, Sons, and Maxim at Barrow-in-Furness recently collapsed; whether the crane now being erected by a German firm for the Thames Ironworks Company in connection with the building of one of the new "Dreadnoughts" is from a similar design; and, if so, whether he will instruct the Admiralty overseers to take steps to protect the safety of British workmen occupied in the vicinity of the crane?
§ Mr. McKENNAWith regard to the first part of the question, I am given to understand that about three years ago a land crane of German design failed when being erected at Barrow. It was afterwards strengthened, and is believed to have worked satisfactorily since, very heavy weights having been hoisted into His Majesty's ship "Vanguard" by this crane. The Admiralty have no further information with regard to the second part of the question. As to the third part, the Admiralty regard the steps necessary for the safety of workmen as matters for which the contractors themselves rather than the Admiralty overseers are primarily responsible; but the latter will, as usual, carry out such duties with regard to precautions for safety of workmen as are assigned to them under the contract. I would remind the hon. Member that the safety of workmen is a matter which is affected by the Factory Acts, the administration of which is in the charge of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that his recent testimonial to the superiority of the German crane is being extensively quoted in all the German trade papers?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, sir, it was not I. I hope the hon. Member will understand it was he who raised this question. So far from my giving a testimonial to the German designing firm, I represented to the hon. Member the undesirability of always bringing up in this House every case in which a contract was given to Germany.
§ Mr. MARKHAMIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that two of these cranes have been working in the Midland Counties without any danger whatever, and 1056 that these German designs are being copied extensively by English manufacturers with great advantage?
§ Mr. McKENNAYes.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYMy question was, whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the recent testimonial he gave on the floor of this House to the effect that the German design was greatly superior to that of British firms is being extensively quoted in the German trade papers?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir; the hon. Member is not justified in saying I gave any testimonial. I stated in this House that the crane was not ordered by the Admiralty, and that the Admiralty knew nothing of the design. The testimonial was given to me by the Thames Ironworks Company, and they gave as their reason for buying it that they preferred the German design. It was not I who raised the question.
§ Mr. NORTON-GRIFFITHSMay I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it would not be possible to specify in the contracts that, in the construction of all British ships, British machinery should be used?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYI am sorry to have to press the right hon. Gentleman. Did not the right hon. Gentleman say in this House he was sorry to have to say that, as in the case of granite, the German design of these cranes was considered" superior to those of British firms?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir, I did not say considered superior by the Admiralty. The Admiralty did not order the crane. The order for the crane was at the sole discretion of the Thames Ironworks Company, and I stated so to this House. There was no mistake upon the subject.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYasked whether the contract entered into by the Thames Ironworks Company with a German firm for the erection of a floating crane, in connection with the building of one of the new "Dreadnoughts," provides for the delivering of the crane complete afloat in the Thames; and what control either the company or the Admiralty has over the character of the labour employed upon its erection?
§ Mr. McKENNAI have nothing to add" to the information on this subject already 1057 given to the hon. Member. There are provisions in the principal contract which secure Admiralty control in matters concerning the observance of secrecy and the payment of fair wages.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYAs the right hon. Gentleman says he has nothing to add to the answer he has already given to me, does he mean the information he gave that before the German workmen go back no material progress will be made with the "Dreadnought,"' or that there will be no Germans at all?
§ Mr. McKENNAI have told the hon. Gentleman that one overseer will be pre-' sent at the erection of the jib. The hon. Gentleman, therefore, is not justified in saying "before the German workmen go back." He should say before one German workman goes back.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYIs the right hon. Gentleman aware his first answer was that before the German workmen had completed the construction of the crane no material progress would have been made with the building of the "Dreadnought"?
§ Mr. McKENNANo, Sir; that answer was in relation to a state of facts which the hon. Gentleman asked me to assume as true. On investigation I found his statement of facts was not true.
§ Mr. BOTTOMLEYWhat was not true?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWAre we to understand that the right hon. Gentleman gives a guarantee that only one German workman will be employed in connection with this crane?
§ Mr. McKENNAIt is not a question of guarantee. I did not guarantee anything. I gave to the House the full information I had received from the contractors. The contractors told me that one German overseer would be employed in the erection of the jib. As a matter of fact, the guarantee I gave to the House is that the Admiralty will take every precaution to ensure secrecy.