§ Mr. KEIR HARDIEI desire to make a personal explanation on a point raised in a question by the Noble Lord the Member for South-West Lancashire (Viscount Wolmer). I presume what he refers to is a statement made in a pamphlet written by me, and in which it was said that the Commission on the Railway Dispute would be loaded so as to make sure of its findings being in favour of the men. I gathered from the men that the Government were in favour of recognition, and I assumed from that the appointment of the Commission would follow the usual precedent of appointing men who are known to be of like mind. The party opposite appointed a Commission in 1905 to consider the state of the law as it had been affected by the Taff Vale decision, and in appointing that Commission they appointed Members who were known to be in favour of the policy the Government favoured. [HON. MEMBERS: "NO."] The Government, in appointing a Committee or a Commission, has an opinion of its own, and naturally expects to see its opinion is effected. The point I want to make clear is this: The term "loaded" is apt to be misunderstood as having some sinister meaning. All that was intended to be conveyed by it was what I have stated—that the Government itself being in favour of recognition was appointing Members to the Commission who were known to hold the same opinion. The Report of the Commission shows that that was an erroneous 307 impression, and I therefore take the opportunity afforded by the Noble Lord's question to make this explanation to the House.