THE "DAILY NEWS," THE HOUSE OF LORDS, AND THE LAW
LORDS.
[To THE EDITOR OF THE "SPECTATOR,"] SIR,—In many quarters there has been a most dishonest attempt to prejudice the trade-union judgments in reference to political levies by purposely confusing the Law Lords with the political House of Lords, and urging that the legal decisions were the outcome of class bias. On May 26th the Daily News published an article full of such misstatements and altogether misleading. Thinking the inaccuracy had crept in by error, I wrote them the following letter, which was not published:—
[Copy.]
"77 Barrett Road, Walthamstow, "May 31st, 1911.
"To THE EDITOR OF THE 'DAILY NEWS.'
"DEAR SIR,—In your leader of the 26th instant re 'Trade Union Bill' you say that in 1909 came the House of Lords sur- prise, and go on to speak of Lord Halsbury and his colleagues giving a judgment adverse to trade unions. As this is likely to give a false impression, perhaps you would allow me to correct it. The continual turning of the screw within the unions had caused a revolt, and an appeal was made to the law for protection. The judgment that followed was the work of the Appeal Court, and was so well founded that the unions were told by their own legal advisers that a further appeal to the Lords would be useless, and this was the general opinion. To make the Law Lords responsible for a decision of the Lower Courts simply because they did not upset it is most unfair. You also say that there was no substantial hardship whilst the political levies were kept at such a low figure ; this is remarkable coming as it does from the Daily News, who opposed the Education Act of 1902, notwithstanding that the amount of rate going to the Church schools was very low. Per- sonally I have never been able to gauge conscience by a monetary scale.—Yours faithfully, W. V. OSBORNE."
Previous page
