Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-02-21
BRITISH POLITICS.
EMPLOYERS LIABILITY BILL AS AMEND.
Eo BY THE LORDS.
Action Of the House Thcreon-N Nothing Sur
prising-speeches Of Gladstons, Bal
four, and Chamberlain.

moved the discharge Of the order OF the |
day, which was the consideration or the
amendments that had been made by the
House Of Lords to the employers liability
bill.
Mr.. Gladstone's motion was greeted with
loud cheers by the supporters Of the gov
ernment
Mr. Gladstone said he deeply regretted
to have to make such a motion, and that
the government had been Obliged to make
so many similar motions. since they
showed that there was a lamentable degree
OF divergence between the two branches
OF the legislature. The government, how
ever. must confront the facts before them,
acting In conformity with what they be-
lieved 70 be the best interests OF the peo-
pie and the dignity of the position OF
the House of Commons. Substantially the
difference between the two houses on the
employers liability bill was the ques-
ton OF cutting out the contracting-out pro-
vision OF the act There was good
maxim that half loaf was better than
no bread" II they were dealing with
bill In parts which were completely sepa-
rated, and there was question whether
they could accept a limited bill. offering
whole OF our labors absolutely wrecked,
the position might be different.
But this is not a case Of that descrip-
ton. In our view, the chief amendment
made by the House OF Lords cannot be
considered apart from the general working
Of the whole frame of the BILL
POSITION OF THE WORKING PEOPLE
Mr.. Gladstone added: Using a strong
phrase to make my meaning clear. 1t tends
to poison the working of the bill, and to
seriously compromise the position OF work.
ing people In the face OF their employers.
Therefore, l hope this amendment will be
rejected by decisive majority"
AT this point Mr.. Gladstone was In
terrupted by cheers from tho members
on the government benches.
Continuing, he said: THE workingmen
are directly. almost exclusively. interest
ed in the bill. What are their sentiments
concerning the amendment? The oppo-
sition says that the worklngmen are dl-
vided on the subject.
The existing relations between some
workmen and the trades insurance funds
have been used as an argument to show
that the contractng-out principle should
be allowed to vitiate the whole bill.
These workmen have been told. for in
stance, that the great railway companies
will stop subscribing to the insurance
funds If contracting-out should be pro-
nibited
The government has received assurance
from the official representatives OF every
workingmans organization that they did
not dread such a result. Their doml-
nant fear, rather, was that the bill
would be nulified by allowing contract
mg-Out 10 fail"
Mr.. Gladstone went over the oft-repeat-
ed arguments on the necessity of retain
ing the bill in its integrity, and con-
cluded by asking the House OF Commons
not to waste time on prolonged redebat-
ing OF the subject.
MR.. BALFOUR'S REPLY.
A. j. Balfour, the Conservative leader
In the House. held that the bill contained
many valuable reforms quite independ-
ent of the contracting-out clause. IL
! the government believed in these, why
he asked. did it desire TO throw them
overheard altogether?
! IL the government was going to COM
nit infantlcide with the bill, he did not
mean in any way 70 resist 1t. Cheers
| from the Conservatives) But" he
added. do not let the government go
afterward 10 the country saying: What
! a beautiful bin the opposition destroyed.
DO not let the government praise the
virtues OF its office at the moment Of
cutting its throat"
'Mr. Gladstone has spoken about the
poisonous taint OF the amendment. 1t
is the taint of liberty. If 1t were poison,
| would take the poison freely. The fact
was the government could not think
the bill spoiled, but the Liberal party
Il
House OF Lords more than they wished
| 10 see the position Of the workingmen
aineliorated. That was the choice before
the Liberals. They had chosen. 1t would
rest now not with the House OF Com
mond, but with the country to determine
! (rrolonged cheering anl counter-cheer-
ing) whether on their own ground they
had chosen wisely" (Cheers)
Joseph Chamberlain, the Unlonist
leader, said that IL the House OF Com
mons was decidef not to receive any
amendments at all from the House OF
Lords. there would be Slways an oppor-
tunity for collision, II the government
so desired. The policy OF the government
in the present instance was decidedly
unsound. Mr. Chamberlain declared that
he was perfectly certain that the people
were no. going to rise in wrath against
the upper house because II reserved lib
erty OF action to one per cent. OF the
workingmen.
Mr. Gladstone's motion was adopted by
a vote OF 225 to 6.
no SURPRISES.
The debate developed no surprises nor
disappointments for any except those
who had given undue regard to the
statement in the Daily Chronicle this
morning. If that statement. which ema-
mated from the Radical group OF the Ma
tional Liberal Club. had been verified.
II could safely have been predicted that
the. Cabinet had resolved upon immediate
dissolution Of the House OF Commons. Mr..
Gladstone's known strong constitutional
bias, however. ought 10 have kept him
from the suspicion OF springing upon the
House a motion which implied the right
OF the Commons to ignore the amend
monts OF the House OF Lords.
Mr. Gladstone followed the usual pro-
cedure in simply moving that the bill
be discharged.
Every part OF the House was packed.
and the spaces outside were crowded.
Although experienced members expected
no departure from the regular procedure
OF business. Liberal interest was stimu-
lated by the hope Of an oratorial deliver
ance from Mr.. Gladstone against the
House OF Lords. The effect Of his short
restrained speech. therefore. was rather
chilling.
Mr.. Balfour, on he contrary. livfped
up the House, especially when. In touch
Ing the real core OF the question. he ac-
cused the government Of using this as n
weapon OF attack upon the Peers.
Sir Ellis Ashmead Bartlett asked the
Government whether. in view Of the fact
that the Brazilian insurgents had row
maintained for Eve months successful
blockade OF Rio Tar eiro. and had occu-
pied a large portion Of the brazilian terri
tory. the British government would re-
cognize them as bellgerents.
Mr.. Gladstone replied that there was no
evidence that the insurgents had corsti-
tuted government OF such character
as entitled them TO recognition as beill-
gerents by Great Britain. or that would
justify any other government In giving
them that recognition.
This evening the House rejected scria-
tim majority of the Lords amendments
to the parish councils bill.