IMPERIAL POLITICS.

Otago Witness, Issue 2818, 18 March 1908, Page 31

IMPERIAL POLITICS.

MINERS' EIGHT HOURS BILL. LONDON, March 11. In the House of Commons Mr H. Gladstone (Home Secretary) was asked if he would consent to defer the Miners' Eighttkvurs Bill until another session owing to t-he depression in industries which were Jar-gely dependent on the price of coal. Jar Gladstone replied in the negative. The Metal Exchange of Swansea, representing 326 members in South Wales and Monmouthshire, has unanimously condemned the bill, predicting that it w ; ll seriously diminish the output of coal, and increase the price, and also injure trade. March 13. Mr H. Gladstone, on receiving a deputation representing the Shipping Federation and the railway companies, denied that the Miners' Eight Hours Bill would Cause an increase in the cost of Is 6d or 2s a ton, but admitted that it would curtail the output. The bill will be amended In some points. ASCENDANCY OF MR ASQUITH. LONDON, March ll" The Standard (0.) attributes the Cabinet's definite statement on naval construction to Mr Asquith's growing ascendancy. It also declares that Mr Asquith is trying to induce the Cabinet to break from the Socialists, and that he had deputed Mr F. Maddison (Labour member of Burnley) to move the rejection of Mr J. H. Wilson's (Labour member for Middlesborough) Unemployed Bill, which provides that registered unemployed and their dependants shall be maintained at the public expense. SMALL HOLDINGS IN SCOTLAND. LONDON, March 11. Lord Lorebum moved the second reading of the Government's Scottish Small Holdings Bill. He offered to consider minor amendments not affecting the orofterising of the lowlands. The Duke of Montrose moved a hostile resolution, and the debate was adjourned. March 12. The Duke of Montrose's amendment in favour of the rejection of the Scottish Small Holdings Bill, and substituting a resolution against crofterising the whole of Scotland and the establishment of a land court to deal with those changes that did Hot meet the approval of the agricultural interests affected, was carried by 153 to 63. Lord Lorebum promised that "if the House would go into committee on the Scottish Landholders Bill the Government would meet all amendments in a most conciliatory spirit. Lord Rosebery, who supported the Duke of Montrose, says in a letter to The Times that deeds are more significant than words. He points out that the Government, after considering the House of Lords' objections for Beven months, had returned the bill unaltered, although all Scotch Agricultural authorities upheld the position taken by the House of Lords. THE ARMY ESTIMATES. LONDON, March 12. During the discussion on the Army Estimates Mr H. Fownes Luttrell moved to reduce the regular army personnel of 185,000 men by 10,000, but a motion for the application of the closure was carried by 186 votes to 41, and the Army vote Jfas agreed to. CONTEMPT OF COURT. LONDON, March 11. At the instance of the Nationalists who sympathise with Mr Ginnell, the member lor West Meath, now undergoing imprisonment for contempt of court, the House of Commons, by a majority of 15, adopted a motion that jurisdiction in matters of contempt of court was arbitrary . tad required limiting.. Mt Birrell : (Secretary for Ireland) declared that the law of contempt was an excrescence, and that its amendment was grrgently required. THE EDUCATION BILL. LONDON, March 16. Mr John Redmond, speaking at Manchester and discussing the Education Bill, declared that contracting-out would place Catholic schools in an unfair position Unless the grant was largely increased. THE UNEMPLOYED PROBLEM. LONDON, March 12. Mr J. Ramsay Macdonald, when interviewed, said that Labour was in deadly earnest over the Unemployed Workmen Bill. Their party would not permit it to be shelved, and if it were not passed there would be large demonstrations of protest fill over the country. March 14. In the House of Commons Air Phillip iWhitwell Wilson moved the second reading of the Unemployed Workr-ien's Bill. Much public interest was displayed. Mr Wilson, in explaining the root and principle ot the bill, said the problem of the unemployed must be regarded as a national matter. Mr Ramsay MacDoaaid, who seconded the motion, claimed that the measure .Was only an extension of the legislation Of 1905, which gave the unsmployed the hope of State employment. It was a mistake for the Liberals to fancy that toey heard the ramble and tumbril of SocialKm. No fateful results would follow this

labour demand, and the cost would not exceed that of one Dreadnought annually. Mr F. Madison moved an amendment affirming that the bill would thiow out of work more than it would assist, and that I it would also destroy the powar of organised labour. He censured the Socialists for telling the pwple that th^re was a way by which everybody could get work, and for advocating ruinous and disastrous land schemes. He said that State control of lives must follow the recognition of the right to have work, which was an , interference which no freedom-loving people would tolerate. Mr Grayson said that if the Government was unable 1o solve the unemployed problem it ought to resign The money needed could be obtained by bursting the bags of the wealthy, which were filled with the unearned increment. Mr John Burns, in a vigorous and argumentative speoch, repudiated the charge that nothing had been done for the poor. The cry was everywhere Taised, he said, that the Government was threatening the monopolines of the rich «md exalting fustion and corduroy at the expense of the tall hat and frock coat. No other country would have spent so much for the relief of the poor, nor would tbe people have interested themselves so whole-heartedly in order to assist the indigent. Referring to the failure of the farm colonies, Mr^ Burns stated . that the farm at Hollesley Bay involved a loss of £22,000 a year. The speaker gave striking illustrations of the unsatisfactory results of such methods of assisting the unemployed. Few of the local authorities desired the powers which the bill conferred. He «vas confident that such legislation was a delusion and a snare. Mr Asquith declared that the acceptance of the mam principle of the bilil would be more prejudicial to the workers than to any other class, and that it would vastly aggravate the question of unemployment, I and ultimately necessitate complete State J control of the whole machinery production. The bill was rejected by 265 votes to 116, and the amendment was carried by 241 votes to 95. There was much cross-voting. The majority against the bill composed 195 Ministerialists and 70 Unionists, and the minority included 41 Labourites, 20 Nationalists, two Unionists, and a number of Radicals. The Premier of South Australia (Mr Price) was present during the debate. March 16. The Chronicle rejoices at the rejection of the bill for making unemployment chronic and creating a maximum of disturbance to organised industry and of cost to the State. The Spectator says that it considers that Mr Lloyd-George and Mr Churchill are Protectionists at heart, and that they are anxious to form a new Liberalism on the basis of the nationalisation of the Ta ;1ways and canals, and the development of afforestation in order to encourage home industries and counterbalance the natural fluctuations in the world's trade by means of bounties and other expedients. They are unwilling to adopt Tariff Reform lest they be accused of stealing the Unionist thunder.