§ Mr. BOOTHasked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the dispute between the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway and the farmers in the district of Womersley; whether he is aware that a claim has been made by a farmer in connection with delays at Woodall crossing; whether he has official information showing that the inconvenience caused to users of the public road is due to insufficient signalling arrangements; and whether he can see his way to take any action for the safety and convenience of the public?
§ Mr. TENNANTI have asked the railway company for their observations in 2112 this matter, and I will communicate with my hon. Friend upon receipt of their reply.
§ Mr. HUNTasked whether the net wages of labour have increased or decreased or remained stationary since the 1st December, 1905; and whether, in view of the admitted increase in the cost of living for the working classes during recent years, he has any official estimates showing whether the rates of wages obtained in this month of this year enables the working classes to live in greater comfort than in August, 1905?
§ Mr. TENNANTDuring the six years ending 31st July, 1911, the wages index number rose from 97.1 to 100.3, while the index number showing changes in the prices of food in London rose from 102.8 to 108.1 The unemployment percentage at the end of July, 1905, was 4.7, and is now 2.9.
§ Mr. J. WARDIs it a fact that during the whole of this year the total wealth of the country has accumulated greatly beyond any improvement in the condition of the working classes?
§ Mr. TENNANTI believe that to be accurate, but I would like notice, in order to give accurate figures.
§ Mr. TENNANTI really must leave that to the imagination of the hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. HUNTIs it not a fact that the conditions of the working people have got worse since the Liberal Government came in?
§ Mr. TENNANTIt is obviously the fact that the amount of unemployment has diminished very much.
§ Mr. TENNANTIt is fully covered by my answer.
§ Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYIs it a fact that hon. Gentlemen opposite are anxious to use the military in pending disputes?
§ Mr. SPEAKERThis is not the time for debate.
§ BARON de FORESTasked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been called to the Motion standing in the name of the Member for West Ham North; 2113 and whether he will give the House the opportunity of discussing the same at an early date after the Recess?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGENo, Sir, I am afraid I cannot give any such undertaking.
§ BARON de FORESTIs my right hon. Friend aware that almost all the social legislation to which much of the time of this House is devoted is vitiated and rendered practically futile because the cause to which the Motion refers is not established as it may be established?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEMy hon. Friend raises a very big question that I could not possibly discuss by way of question and answer.
§ Colonel YATEasked for what period Mr. H. Gosling was appointed by the Board of Trade a member of the Port of London Authority; whether, when the time arrives for the consideration of the advisability of re-appointing Mr. Gosling for a further period, the Board of Trade will take into consideration the conduct of Mr. Gosling during the present strike which, in the opinion of many of those concerned, has been prejudicial to the interests of the Port of London, which interests he was appointed to serve?
§ Mr. TENNANTMr. Gosling's present appointment on the Port of London Authority will terminate on 1st April, 1913. It is obvious that I cannot say how the power of the Board of Trade in the matter of appointments will be exercised in two years' time.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEIs any charge made by the Board of Trade against Mr. Gosling in his capacity as member of the Port of London Authority?
§ Mr. TENNANTNo, none.
§ Mr. W. THORNEIs the hon. Gentleman aware of the invaluable services rendered by Mr. Gosling during the last fortnight?
§ Colonel YATEIs this Mr. Gosling the same Mr. Gosling who placarded the walls all over the country at the last election but one with statements that we starved the children of London?
§ Mr. TENNANTI am not at all aware to what the hon. and gallant Gentleman refers. In reply to the hon. Member for South-West Ham I believe that the efforts of Mr. Gosling have been entirely for good.
§ Mr. T. P. O'CONNORMay I ask the Under-Secretary for War whether his Department has considered the recommendations of the Select Committee of 1908, in reference to the employment of the military in civil disturbances, especially the recommendation that more adequate warning should be given to the crowd, before firing takes place.
§ The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Colonel Seely)Yes; as a result of the recommendations of the Select Committee referred to, the King's Regulations respecting the duties of troops in aid of the civil power were amended by an Army Order in 1909 in order to emphasise the duties and responsibilities of the officers commanding under common law. With regard to the latter part of the question, where it is practicable, before the reading of the Proclamation under the Riot Act the attention of the crowd will be drawn by the sounding of a bugle to the fact that the Proclamation is about to be read, and orders have been issued accordingly.
§ Mr. T. P. O'CONNORWas that done in the case of the unfortunate occurrences in Liverpool?
§ Colonel SEELYNo, Sir; the orders in regard to this special warning when the Riot Act is about to be read have only been issued this afternoon. All the authorities were not agreed as to the advisability of adopting this method, but on the balance of opinion it has been decided that it is best, if possible, to sound a bugle in order to call attention to the fact.
§ Mr. MacVEAGHHas the right hon. Gentleman considered whether it would be advisable that the first volley fired should be of blank cartridge in order that those in the neighbourhood should know that firing is about to take place?
§ Colonel SEELYI do not think that that would be a wise policy at all. It might lead to further loss of life. If my hon. Friend will read the reports of what has taken place in past years he will see that upon at least one occasion the firing of a volley was attended by great loss of life when it was believed that it was a blank volley being fired. Any attempt to fire over the heads or at the feet of the crowd or to fire blank cartridge is very liable to defeat its own object, as all inquiries into the matter have shown.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEMay I ask whether any orders were issued to the military in 2115 Liverpool not to give unnecessary cause for disturbance by marching through public meetings as was done yesterday? It might have led to a riot.
§ Colonel SEELYThe reports we have received at the War Office are that the military have shown the greatest forbearance, and I have no doubt that is the case. If there is any specific instance where, in the opinion of the hon. Gentleman, a mistake has been made, that is certainly not due to any desire on the part of the military to exasperate the crowd. So far as my information goes there has been no mistake.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that a justice of the peace of Liverpool has stated in the Press this morning that such was the case yesterday, and that but for the strong attitude of the strike leaders in all probability it would have led to a riot?
§ Mr. HARRY LAWSONIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is stated by correspondents on the spot that the military went near, but they did not interfere?
§ Colonel SEELYThere are two sides to the question, no doubt.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEWill the right hon. Gentleman inquire into the specific charge?
§ Colonel SEELYWe are at this moment inquiring into all that takes place in the disturbed districts.
§ Mr. CHIOZZA MONEYAre any special warnings issued to the officers who undertake this duty?
§ Colonel SEELYYes, every officer is fully acquainted with the King's Regulations, to which I would refer my hon. Friend—especially the paragraphs about No. 960. Every officer is specially warned to read those Regulations.
§ Mr. GOLDMANI beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer a question of which I have given him private notice: Whether the Government are aware that at the Central Station in Manchester that transport yesterday was wholly discontinued; that the food supply of the city and surrounding district is in an alarming condition; that the business of the city is practically at a standstill; that large numbers of persons have been compelled to walk along the lines in order to get from 2116 place to place; and what steps do the Government propose to take in order to terminate this extraordinary state of things?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThe Government are doing all in their power to promote a settlement, and I have nothing to add to what I have already said on the subject.
§ Mr. T. P. O'CONNORHas the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary any information with regard to the state of things in Liverpool to-day?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLIn London the improvement has in most directions been maintained; but I regret to learn that in other directions new demands are being made which are contrary to the agreement of last Friday. Some of the lightermen, I am informed, have come out because they refuse to work under non-union foremen, and the difficulties to which I alluded yesterday, arising from the claims of the dockers at the Victoria and Albert Docks to be engaged outside the dock gates, still continues. This demand is admittedly a contravention of the agreement of last Friday, and if persisted in will be likely to upset the whole settlement. I have reason to hope, however, that the workmen and their leaders will abide by the agreement and withdraw this claim. In Liverpool the comparative quiet of yesterday continued throughout the night. Some tramway men came out yesterday, and there have been attacks on the trams, but not of a serious character. The gravest feature to-day is that the Strike Committee have called on the men employed in the electric power station to come out at 2.0 p.m. to-day. The result of which will be to stop all trams, and cut off the electric light in Liverpool, Bootle, and the large areas round. This is an act which would be most detrimental to public order, and could in no way promote the object of the-strikers. There have been one or two fires on vessels in the docks, but they have been put out before much damage could be done. A cruiser has been sent by the Admiralty to the Mersey for purposes of protection. In Manchester there has been no marked change in the situation. The convoys of food have been kept up in spite of desultory attacks made by hooligans and strikers. In Sheffield convoys of food are also being constantly attacked, chiefly by persons of the hooligan class. At one of the railway stations there was an attack last night on a, signal box by a 2117 mob, which threw stones from a bridge and drove out the signalmen. Assistance to guard the railway has now been given by the military. A battalion of infantry has arrived in the City of Sheffield at the request of the local authorities. The Guards brigade have returned to their regular Station in London.
Mr. POINTERMay I ask in regard to the last statement of the reply of the right hon. Gentleman, whether it is absolutely correct, seeing that the Lord Mayor of Sheffield has stated that the troops coining into the City, or which have already come, are not there by his orders or at his request?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLMy information is that the troops went in response to the request of the local authority.
§ Mr. WILLIAM THORNEIn regard to the part of the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman when he stated that the dockers and the lighter men are making fresh demands, I would like to ask him if he is aware that so far as the stevedores and others are concerned, that the major part of the shipowners and contractors have always taken on the dockers outside the dock gates?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLYes, Sir, it is the Victoria and Albert Docks where the difficulty has arisen.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIECan the Home Secretary say what are the circumstances which justify the sending of troops to Cardiff?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThe local authorities requested; I think it was 500; and they have been sent.
§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEWhy?
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThey have been sent because the local authorities consider it desirable to have them at hand. We are meeting all reasonable requests on behalf of the local authorities. It does not follow that the troops will be used if there is no occasion.
§ Mr. WILLIAM THORNEI desire to put a question to the President of the Board of Trade, of which I have given him private notice. I think, Mr. Speaker, I ought to apologise now to you and to the President of the Board of Trade for not being in my place last night in view 2118 of the fact that you gave me permission to raise the question. The reason I could not be here was in consequence of serious trouble at the docks. My question is whether the President of the Board of Trade is aware that the Strike Committee of the Transport Workers' Federation were apprised on Friday last of a telephone message sent by the general manager of the Port of London Authority to Sir H. Llewellyn Smith, that he would use his good offices to secure that there should be a general reinstatement of the men when they presented themselves for work, and that no procedings would be taken against them for breach of contract; whether he is aware that it was out of respect for that undertaking on the part of the Port Authority, that the Strike Committee declared the strike at an end on Friday last; and whether he is aware that when the men did present themselves for work on the Saturday and Monday following the undertaking was not carried out, and the committee of the Port Authority afterwards made a settlement conditional on a probation of six months being served; and whether he will use his good offices to secure the carrying out of such undertaking in order that the whole of the men may be able to resume work at once?
§ Mr. TENNANTThe facts are substantially as stated in the question, but I would point out to my hon. Friend that the general manager of the Port Authority, when giving the assurance referred to on Friday night, made it perfectly clear that he was unable, without consultation with the Port Authority, to promise more than that he would use his good offices in the matter. That is a pledge that I have every reason to believe was honourably kept. The matter apparently did not come before the Port Authority till Monday morning at a meeting specially summoned for the purpose, so that anything which happened in the interval was before the Port Authority had had an opportunity of considering the question. I understand that the words inserted in the resolution of the Port Authority to which exception is taken are not intended to bear the meaning which has been attached to them in some quarters. There is no qualification for reinstatement, except that the men who broke their contracts shall be of good behaviour for the next six months, that condition being imposed out of regard for their colleagues who refused to break their contracts. There is no intention to victimise or penalise the reinstated men, or 2119 to interfere with their pension rights. While there may be room for differences of opinion as to the wisdom and necessity of the condition, I am certain that my hon. Friend may safely reassure any men who have- not yet resumed work that they need not be under any misapprehension on this score. I am glad to know that the great majority have already gone back to work. I earnestly trust that the general resumption of work in the port may not be impeded by this or any other matter.
§ Mr. WILLIAM THORNEIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Port Authority has already posted up notices to the effect that the men are "reengaged," but not "reinstated," and is he aware—it must be perfectly plain to everybody—that there is a great deal between being "re-engaged" and "reinstated"?
§ Mr. TENNANTI would like my hon. Friend to give me notice of that question.
§ Sir CLEMENT KINLOCH-COOKEI would like to ask the Postmaster-General a question of which I have given private notice. Whether he is aware that, owing to the position in Liverpool and Manchester several business houses in London and elsewhere are being compelled to send their goods by parcels post; whether in the circumstances he will consider the question of a refund being made with regard to the extra expenses incurred.
§ Mr. HERBERT SAMUELI am not prepared to take the course suggested. In the first place, it would be quite impossible to distinguish which parcels are so diverted to the parcels post; and, in the second place, I have no administrative power vested in me which will allow me to do so.
§ Sir C. KINLOCH-COOKEIs it the intention of the Department to make a profit out of the strike?
Mr. POINTERI desire to ask the President of the Board of Trade the following question, of which I have given him private notice: Whether he has yet received any definite information in respect to the alleged cases of trains running past signals standing at danger, and the working of signal-boxes and passenger trains by incompetent men, in the Sheffield district of the Midland Railway system?
§ Mr. TENNANTMy hon. Friend asked me this question yesterday. I put myself 2120 into communication with the railway yesterday, and I was promised an early reply. I have since asked for that reply, and the company say that it is impossible to give me one at this moment, but that they will do so at the earliest possible moment. When I receive it I will communicate with the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. POINTERHas the hon. Gentleman yet received any resolution of protest from the signalmen in Sheffield against the using of incompetent men in the signal-boxes, and pointing out the danger thereof. I understand one has been sent?
§ Mr. TENNANTIt is conceivable that such resolution sent to the Board of Trade may have been sent without my knowledge. I will make inquiry, as I am not aware at present.
§ Mr. T. P. O'CONNORIn view of the great public anxiety, is the Chancellor of the Exchequer in a position yet to make any statement with regard to the negotiations in connection with the railway strike?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEI think it would be rather undesirable to make any statement at the present moment, because negotiations are pending.
§ Mr. T. P. O'CONNORI do not press the right hon. Gentleman.
§ Mr. JOHN WARDI should like to ask the Home Secretary whether he has received any complaint from the citizens of Liverpool as to the action of the police on Sunday last.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLThere may be a great many at the Home Office, but I have not seen any as yet.
§ Mr. WARDThe right hon. Gentleman, I believe, said he had not received any on Monday last. I only asked the question because I received copies from the doctor and several traders in the town of complaints that had been sent on to the Home Office on Monday, and therefore I cannot quite understand why none of them were received.
§ Mr. CHURCHILLI said I have not myself seen them. I will inquire and see it they did arrive. Of course, the matter is one to be dealt with in the first instance by the Liverpool local authorities.