RAILWAY SERVANTS (HOURS OF LABOUR) BILL.—(No. 191.) (Hansard, 14 July 1893)

§ LORD PLAYFAIR
said, in explanation of the Amendment made in the other House, that it was in the same spirit, though not perhaps quite so complete as they had proposed. The operation of the Bill when it left their Lordships' House was restricted to those railway servants who were directly or indirectly engaged in the traffic of the lines; but the Commons had inserted an Amendment excluding from its operation only those railway servants who were engaged in clerical work and in the Companies' workshops. As the Commons' Amendments were approved by the Government, he begged to move that they should be agreed to.

LORD BALFOUR
said, it was permissible to the Members of their Lordships' House who had put in the previous Amendment to think that the words now suggested, and agreed upon, he believed, mainly by negotiation, were not so satisfactory; but under the circumstances he did not propose to offer any objection to the Amendment.

§ THE EARL OF WEMYSS
said, he had thought it desirable to ascertain what was the view taken of the matter by the railway authorities, and he had been informed that, although the railway authorities would have preferred the Bill in the form in which it left their Lordships' House, they had no desire that their Lordships should enter into a conflict with the other House upon the subject, and they, therefore, were willing to accept the Commons' Amendments to the Bill. He desired, however, to congratulate their Lordships upon the change in the Bill, because unquestionably as it left the House of Commons it was inserting the thin end of the wedge of the State prescribing the hours of labour for grown men. Their Lordships could not 1559 be too careful in refusing, as far as in them lay, to commit themselves to such a principle as that. A man who, for the sake of advancing himself in life or for the good of his family, desired to work 9 or 10 hours a day, if the law of liberty was to prevail in this laud or wherever public liberty was not abolished, should not be prohibited from so doing. He, therefore, thought they had done good service to the State, and he hoped that whenever a measure came before the House affecting the liberties of grown men their Lordships would put down their foot firmly, as they had done on this occasion.