The Sun.
London, England, 1865-05-09 00:00:00

STRIKES AND LOCK-OTJTS.

Lord ST. LEONARDS drew the attention of their
lordships to the recent strikes and lock-outs. He said
the legislature could not wisely interfere in the
question of the regulation of wages. He thought the
proper course would be to endeavour to bring employers
together, and by creating friendly feelings between them
strike at strikes. Having given an outline of the different
strikes from 1850, he said he would lay a report on the
table on this subject. He next adverted to the mode of
proceeding between masters and men which prevailed,
which had the object of leading to an arrangement
of their differences without leading to the mutual
feelings of exasperation that occasionally existed
between the two classes in this country. Those
tribunals (as we understood the noble lord, who
spoke very indistinctly) were called Courts of Concilia-
tion, and had worked efficiently for some years, while
the adoption of a similar institution in this country was
recommended by Lord Brougham and other per-
sons who had paid attention to the subject. The
reason why the attempts made at arbitration in this coun-
try had failed was that the operatives had an objection to
go before magistrates, who in many cases were manufac-
turers, and whose sympathies, it was supposed, would
be adverse to their interests. A bill, having passed
through the House of Commons, was brought before
their lordships, and was referred to a select committee ; but
it did not pass, although it was good. He did not intend
to refer to that bill in its original form, but with certain enact-
ments that would render courts of arbitration more likely
to meet the, views of both classes interested. He
concluded by moving the second reading of the bill.

DISTRICT CHURCH TITHES.
The Duke of MARLBOROUGH said that although this
bill had been read a second time, he merely proposed that
it be referred to a committee, which was accordingly done.
COURTS OF JUSTICE BUILDING BILL.

On the motion of the LOUD CHANCELLOR this bill was read
a third time.

On the motion that the bill should be passed some dis-

cussion arose.

Lord REDESDALE proposed to omit from the clause
empowering the construction of a communication between
the Temple and tho Courts by means of a bridge over or
tunnel under the Strand, the words "a bridge over or."
He did not think that it was desirable to have a bridge
over the Strand.

The- LORD CHANCELLOR contended that it would
be quite possible to construct such a bridge without caus-
ing the slightest obstruction to public traffic.
Lord REDESDALE did not press the amendment.
Lord REDESDALE then moved a clause, enacting that
no portion of the property designated should be taken un-
til a definite plan and estimate had been provided, and had
been sanctioned by Parliament. At present they were
utterly ignorant of the probable cost of the new building.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that if this clause was
carried it would be impossible to proceed with the bill.
Lord CHELMSFORD suggested a verbal alteration in
the amendment, which was accepted by Lord Redesdale,
and the house then divided on the question that the clause
proposed should stand part of the bill—

Contents ....
Non-contents

47

Majority
The clause was therefore added.

-3

The bill, as amended, was then passed.
THE JURIES (IRELAND) BILL.

This bill was withdrawn.
The County Courts Equitable Jurisdiction Bill passed
through committee.

THE IRISH CONSTABULARY.

The Earl of LEITRIM moved for certain returns con-
nected with the Irish constabulary.

The returns wero ordered.

The Land Drainage Supplemental Bill, the Local Go-
vernment Supplemental Bill, and the Local Government
Supplemental (No. 2) Bill, were read a third time and
passed.