On Wednesday, the House of Commons considered Lord Dudley's amendment
to the Employers' Liability Bill. Mr. Asquith moved to disagree with it as "mischievous in sub- stance and impracticable in form," and criticised severely the proposal to make the Board of Trade decide what was reasonable compensation, and the Treasury decide whether the employers were solvent. Mr. Asquith, to support his contention, quoted Lord Salisbury on betterment : "What could be more monstrous than to introduce the nominee of a Government department to determine a difficult question like this ? It would be sure to give rise to friction and political disagreements." Mr. Chamberlain, who defended the principle of Lord Dudley's amendment, ridiculed the notion that the Bill provides greater securities against acci- dents "You cannot make a workman more careful by putting an extra liability upon the employer. Yet that is what the Bill proposes to do." As an example of the folly of stopping voluntary schemes for insurance, Mr. Chamberlain quoted the testimony of the Secretary of the Shipping Federation. Within the last few weeks over 4700 had been promptly paid in compensation for the loss of life which took place during the recent gale. But in "not one single case could com- pensation have been claimed under the law." Mr. McLaren had some difficulty in explaining how it was that he, the author of the contracting-out amendment in the Commons, could not support Lord Dudley's amendment. It was pro- bably on this account that he filled his speech with the grievances of a London and North-Western employe. On a division, the Government carried their disagreement with the Lords by 62 (213 to 151).
Previous page
