UNEMPLOYED BILL.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 65, 16 March 1908, Page 5

UNEMPLOYED BILL.

THE MEASURE DEFEATED.

MUCH CROSS VOTING*

LONDON, March 14.

In the House of Commons, Mr. J. HaveMtock Wilson (Labour member for Middlesbrough) moved the second reading of the Unemployed Workmen Bill. Much public interest was displayed. Mr. Wilson, explaining the root principle of the bill, said the problem of the unemployed must be regarded as a national matter.

Mr- Ramsay Mac Donald, in seconding the motion, claimed that the measure was only an extension of the legislation of 1905, which gave unemployed the hope of State employment. It was a mistake tor Liberals to fancy that they heard the rumble of the tumbrel of Socialism. No fateful results would follow this labour demand, and the cost would not exceed that of one Dreadnought annually. Mr. F. Maddison (Radical) moved an amendment affirming that the bill would throw out of work more than it would assist, and would destroy the power of organised labour. He censured the Socialists for telling the people that there was a way by which everybody could get work, by advocating ruinous and disastrous land schemes.

Mr. A. V. Grayson (Socialist member for the Colne Valley Division of Yorkshire) said that if the Government were unable to solve the problem of unemployment, they ought to resign. Money was needed, and it could be obtained by bursting the bags of the wealthy, which were filled with unearned increment.

5 MR. JOHN BURNS , SPEECH. , Mr. John Burns (President of the 3 Local Government Board), in a vigorous i and argumentative speech, repudiated the i charge that nothing had been done for f the poor. The cry was everywhere raised , that the Government was threatening the . monopolies of the rich, and exalting fusj tian and corduroy at the expense of the 1 tall hat and frock coat. No other counj try would have spent so much in the j relief of the poor, nor would the people . have interested themselves so whole- . neartedly t o assist the indigent. Referrt mr; to the failure of the farm colonies, , he stated that Hol'esley Bay involved a E loss of £22,000 a year, and gave some . striking illustrations of the unsatisfactory results of such methods of assisting , the unemployed. Few local authorities f desired the powers the bill conferred, and J he was confident that such legislation would prove a delusion and a snare. THIN END OP THE WEDGE. Mr. Asquith declared that the accept- ; ance of the main principle of the bill would be more prejudicial to the workers than any other class, and would vastly aggiavate unemployment, and ultimately necessitate complete State control of the whole machinery of production. The bill was rejected by 265 to 11G, and the amendment carried by 241 to 95. There was much cross voting. The majority against the bill composed 195 Ministerialists and 70 Unionists. The minority included 41 Labourites, 20 Nationalists, two Unionists, and a number of Radicals. The South Australian Premier (Mr. T. Trice) attended the debate.