MINES (COAL) REGULATION (re-committed) the Government should put down an House, signified by a direct Resolution Order for the second or third reading on the subject. of a Bill at one of these 2 o'clock Sittings, I will, upon that Order, raise the issue as to whether the great body of the non-official Members of the House are to continue to labour under that practical incapacity, that disqualification which is inflicted on them by the present Standing Orders, Resolutions, and Practice of the House. I wish to (Mr. Secretary Bruce, Mr. Winterbotham.) [Progress 4th July.] COMMITTEE. Bill considered in Committee. (In the Committee.) On the Motion of Mr. BRUCE, the fol lowing new clause was agreed to, and ordered to stand part of the Bill: (Prosecution of offences.) "No offence against this Act shall be prosecuted except by an inspector under this Act, or by the permission of the Secretary of State; and in the event of any contravention or failure to comply with any of the provisions of this Act, or any general or special rules in force thereunder, in respect of which contravention or failure the owner, agent, and manager are each guilty of an offence against this Act, unless he satisfy the court that he had taken all reasonable means for the publication and enforcement of such provisions or rules, the inspector shall not institute proceedings against any owner, agent, or manager who satisfies the inspector that he had taken all reasonable means as aforesaid." MR. BROWN moved, after Clause 5, the insertion of a new clause, providing that no boy under the age of 13 should be employed in any mine to which the Act applied below ground, unless he had obtained a surgical certificate from a person qualified to give such certificates for the purposes of the Factory Acts. He thought labour of this kind was degrading to boys below the age of 12 or 13 years. ask you, Sir, Whether I shall be out of Order, if, at a Morning Sitting, I propose the second reading of a Bill which I may have in charge, in substitution of an Order indicating that the Government intend to take the second or third reading of another Bill first at that Sitting? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Member proposed to move the adjournment of the House to put himself in Order in asking the Question which he has put to me, but he has not moved the adjournment of the House. I am, however, willing to answer the Question which he has put to me. I am bound to tell the hon. Member that the Amendment he has placed on the Paper is one that I cannot submit to this House. When the Orders of the Day are called on, any hon. Member in charge of a Bill which is the subject of the Orders of the Day may make such Motion as he thinks proper with regard to that Bill, and, having made that Motion, no Amendment can be moved, except an Amendment relevant to the subject-matter of the Bill before the House. If an hon. Member thinks proper to move an Amendment relevant to the Bill before the House he will be in Order in doing so. With reference to the conduct of Business in this House, in giving precedence at Morning Sittings to Government Orders of the Day, I have to inform the hon. Member-as I informed him some time ago that the practice is one which has been uniformly followed since the adop-be subjected. tion of Morning Sittings, and that this MR. FOTHERGILL said, it was difpractice cannot be departed from with-ficult to draw a hard-and-fast line as to out the express authority of this House. MR. NEWDEGATE: Am I to understand, Sir, that no change in the present arrangements of the House can be made except by Resolution of the House? MR. SPEAKER: The Business of the House is carried on in accordance with its Practice and Resolutions, and no change can be made in the conduct of its Business without the authority of the Mr. Newdegate MR. FOTHERGILL said, he must enter his indignant protest against the notion that manual labour was degrading to a boy. It was far more degrading to live upon the labour of others. MR. BROWN explained that he had not alluded to manual labour in general, but to a particular kind of labour to which boys of tender age ought not to age; but he thought at 12 years of age, a boy might have laid a good foundation of education without getting into habits which would unfit him from gaining a livelihood by manual labour. He should certainly give his vote against the proposed clause. MR. BRUCE said, the object of the clause was that a surgical certificate should be given in the case of boys under 13 years of age; but it was im- | therefore, required a combination of possible in a clause of the kind to create qualities which it would be difficult to the necessary machinery to give effect to obtain by any examination. He was the proposition of the hon. Member. not wedded to the wording or the maFor that purpose a great many other chinery of the clauses, except as affording clauses would be required to be added a basis on which they might discuss this to the Bill. important question. MR. BRUCE said, he decidedly approved of the clause. Indeed, he hardly knew the reason why it was omitted from the Bill in the first instance. Clause agreed to, and ordered to stand part of the Bill. MR. LIDDELL moved to leave out Clauses 25 and 26, for the purpose of inserting a series of new clauses, providing that, for the granting of certificates of competency under the Act, Boards of Examiners should be constituted in the various districts under the superintendence of the Secretary of State, consisting of nine members, one appointed by the Secretary of State, three to be practical engineers, and three to be mine owners, elected by mine owners of the district, and two working miners, elected by the working miners of the district. The great object of the clause was to provide a proper machinery for the examination of managers of mines. The manager of a mine should be a person of great physical energy and powers of endurance and considerable tact, with a patient and conciliatory manner towards the men. He must also possess great knowledge of the district. His first and essential duty would be to provide for the safety of the pit; but he would have much more than that to do. He would have to make all the bargains with the men and settle the rates of payment to be made for work done. The position, MR. PEASE said, he had supported his hon. Friend the Member for South Northumberland in moving the omission of the 25th clause on a former occasion. The Committee then came to the conclusion that the selection of the Board of Examiners ought not to be wholly left in the hands of the Secretary of State. The great point was to have the Board thoroughly representative in its character. No doubt the owners should be represented; mining engineers should also be on the Board as well as those employed in mines. The difficulty would be to obtain a proper representation of the miners. He proposed to reduce the number of representatives at the Board to seven, of whom one should be named by the Secretary of State, two by owners of mines, two by mining engineers to be named by the local institutes of mining engineers, with two persons employed in any MR. STAVELEY HILL believed, As "For the purpose of granting certificates of competency under this Act Boards of Examiners shall be constituted under the superintendence of a Secretary of State in the various districts to which inspectors shall be appointed, and every such Board of Examiners shall consist of four members, one thereof a person appointed by a Secretary of State, one practical mining engineer, State upon the nomination of the mine owners of and one mine owner, appointed by a Secretary of the district as after mentioned, and one miner of the district appointed by a Secretary of State upon the nomination of the miners of the district | the selection of the examiners, the Seas after mentioned." MR. RODEN said, he could not think that four would be a sufficient number. A great many persons would have to be examined, and therefore it would be necessary to have a reasonably large number of examiners. The hon. Member for South Northumberland's plan, which was approved by the representatives both of the mine owners and the men, was, in his opinion, that which was most worthy of adoption, and he did not think there would be any difficulty whatever in the mode of election. MR. GATHORNE HARDY said, this was one of the most difficult questions involved in the Bill. He could not conceive a Board of Examiners less calculated to do the work well than a Board of nine brought together in the heterogeneous manner which the hon. Gentleman approved, and would suggest that a Board representing masters and men should nominate Examiners for the approval of the Secretary of State. If the whole number was not to be brought together when an examination was to be conducted, the very object of the clause would be defeated, for that object he understood to be that there should be a representation of all the interests concerned-scientific, proprietary, and mining. None of the propositions which he had seen would carry out effectively the object which the Bill had in view. There was no clause providing that the managers of the underground works should have a certificate of competency, and he considered that a great omission. Perhaps it would be as well if the right hon. Gentleman would consider the suggestions which had been thrown out, and prepare a clause embodying them. MR. BRUCE said, he adhered to the opinion which he expressed at an earlier period of the Sitting-namely, that the mining Institutes, which were perfectly independent bodies, should have the nomination of the Boards of Examiners; for if the election was to be made by the miners, the matter would become very complicated, there being then over 350,000 persons who would be entitled to vote. In that case, he certainly thought the machinery of election would be too cumbrous. He thought they might safely leave to the Institute of Mining Engineers-branches of which existed in almost every mining district Mr. Staveley Hill cretary of State, who would have to confirm the selection, being aided by the Inspectors of the district as to local details. He should suggest that the Local Mining Institute should select three persons to conduct the examination. In conclusion, he thought that in compliance with all the Petitions from the miners on the subject, every manager should hold a certificate. MR. HENDERSON said, no difficulty was experienced in the North of England in the election of delegates by masters and men to treat upon trade disputes, and there would be no difficulty in each colliery sending a representative for the election of the examiners. LORD ELCHO said, that he had spoken to persons representing the miners respecting the proposition of the Home Secretary, having reference to the appointment of Boards of Examiners, and they had assured him that there was no objection on the part of miners to that proposition. What they wanted was a perfectly independent body, from which the examiners should be selected, and he had every reason to believe that mining engineers were perfectly independent. MR. HUSSEY VIVIAN said, he could not agree with the suggestion of the Home Secretary, and much preferred that of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. G. Hardy). Neither could he agree with the noble Lord opposite (Lord Elcho) respecting the independence of mining engineers. In his opinion the majority of them were not independent, because they were, in a great measure, dependent on the coal owners by whom they were employed. He did not wish to say anything against mining engineer institutions; but they were composed of any gentlemen who wished to belong to them, and, as a matter of fact, numbers of practical engineers were not members of such associations. In many instances they were nothing more than debating societies, and the members could go away when they thought fit, but mine owners and miners could not. It was the owners and workmen who were really interested in the election of examiners, and, as far as he was concerned, he was not prepared to delegate the duty to other persons. He thought, also, that the nature of the examination should be defined, because otherwise there was MR. WOODS thought the proposal of the Government satisfactory, and preferred that the appointment should be vested in the Government rather than an irresponsible body. He would suggest that the Board might be constituted of one-third owners, one-third engineers, and one-third working miners. great danger that it might be too theo- | certificated managers. Scientific men retical and would not secure practical might be all very well, and they might men who could carry on a mine safely. be very able men; but they certainly did DR. LYON PLAYFAIR said, he was not make good servants. He would, of opinion that the elective principle in however, suggest that the number of the case of a body of examiners was so working miners on each Board should be far of importance that it would tend to three instead of two. preserve the local peculiarities of the several mining districts, and the mining institutes would, he thought, form a very good body for the selection of local examiners. But although it was necessary to preserve local peculiarities, it was not expedient to run too much in the groove of those peculiarities. In the various mining districts into which the country was divided there was the greatest difference in the number of accidents of the same character which occurred in some as compared with others, and it was therefore, he maintained, the duty of the Secretary of State to see that general knowledge was brought to bear on the peculiarities of a particular district, either through the agency of a general examiner representing the public or an Inspector appointed by the Government. He agreed with those who contended that the examinations should be practical in their character; but to exclude from them scientific knowledge would be to ignore the whole progress of science in its application to industry. The lamp of Sir Humphrey Davy was, for instance, the result of pure abstract investigation. MR. ELLIOT thought that many of the proposals which had been suggested would secure a good examination, but signified a preference for that of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford. While not wishing to speak disparagingly of scientific education, he argued in favour of the great advantages of practical knowledge on the daily conduct of mining operations. MR. FOTHERGILL expressed his intention of supporting the proposal of the hon. Member for South Northumberland. He could not for a moment agree with the Home Secretary's proposition. He admitted that it was a most difficult question, and expressed his belief that by far the best method of appointing managers was that which was adopted at present; but, at the same time, as there was to be a change, the working classes would not be satisfied unless they had a strong voice in the election of MR. PEASE expressed his willingness to withdraw his Amendments, and thought his hon. Friend the Member for South Northumberland would see that it was impossible to carry out his Amendment without any machinery. Mining institutes were not merely scientific, but consisted of practical men; and he concurred in the proposition of the Secretary of State, supposing it to be modified in the way suggested by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford. MR. WHALLEY was of opinion that the best way of preventing accidents in mines was to leave the matter as much as possible in the hands of the mine owners, making them responsible. MR. STAVELEY HILL said, he would withdraw the Amendment he had placed on the Paper. MR. LIDDELL said, the practical discussion which had arisen fully justified his having submitted his proposal to the Committee. He was ready either to dividé on his proposition or to withdraw it, according as it might be the pleasure of the House; but if he withdrew it he trusted some provision would be proposed by the Home Secretary based on the suggestion of the right hon. Member for Oxford University. MR. RICHARD did not think the nomination of the Board by an irresponsible body would be satisfactory. But if nomination by institutes were accepted he hoped it would be from the council, not from the individual members of those bodies. However the Board of Examiners might be appointed, there should not be less than three examiners; and a working miner should be a member of the Board, or otherwise the men would not be satisfied. MR. BRUCE also hoped the clauses would be withdrawn. The Secretary of State would be responsible for the working of the Act, and it would be his duty to put the proposal in a workable form before the Report. LORD ELCHO hoped his hon. Friend | measure. Now, he had been assured (Mr. Liddell) would not divide the Com- by those representatives-and he cermittee, but follow the example of his tainly was inclined to place entire conhon. Friend the Member for South fidence in the statement-that any opiDurham and withdraw the clauses. nion they expressed was conditional on the course they sanctioned being adopted by the Government, and that their wish was, as far as possible, to adhere to the proposals of the Government. They also stated that with respect to the supposed arrangement by which one clause was put against another, they only made that mode of arrangement when they conscientiously believed that Government was about to abandon their proposal to lay the burden of proof on the employers. MR. HUSSEY VIVIAN hoped that the right hon. Gentleman in any clause he might frame would have special reference to the concluding portion of the clause proposed by the hon. Member for South Northumberland. It was most desirable that the nature of the examination should be clearly defined. Motion, by leave, withdrawn. Schedules agreed to. Preamble. MR. BRUCE said, he wished to take that opportunity of doing an act of justice to a number of gentlemen who had acted as delegates from colliers in the North during the discussion of the measure. In consequence of representations which had been made to him (Mr. Bruce), he had complained-and felt himself justified in complaining-of the course they had taken in regard to the Bill, considering that from all the districts of the country the colliers had sent up Petitions to that House, and Memorials to his right hon. Friend at the head of the Government, and himself, praying, in the strongest terms, that the Bill in its entirety should pass. He confessed himself deeply disappointed when he found that, with respect to some of the most important clauses of the Bill of which the colliers had expressed their approval, their representatives in London were quoted as opposed to the proposals of the Government, and he drew particular attention to the fact that their consent had been obtained to the insertion of words which, in his opinion, went far to destroy the legislation proposed for the protection of children, and also for the protection of the colliers themselves from accident. He asserted on that occasion that he had been informed that they would withhold their support from the Government with respect to the general rules, on condition that they obtained payment by weight instead of LORD ELCHO said, that the difficulties attending this measure would have been very much greater if an understanding had not been come to, and if they had not acted upon the principle of "give and take." He should be sorry to hear anything from his right hon. Friend discouraging to the system of arbitration, which so many people wished to see established, and he hoped the system would be carried further. With respect to the miners, everyone who had been brought into communication with them would bear testimony to their conciliatory but firm demeanour. MR. HUSSEY VIVIAN said, he wished to know when the right hon. Gentleman proposed to take the Report, as several matters were to be discussed on that stage? MR. BRUCE said, he proposed to take the Report on Tuesday, and, if necessary, the Bill could be re-committed. It would be impossible to put the Amendments on the Paper earlier than Monday night. Preamble agreed to. Bill reported; as amended, to be considered upon Tuesday next, at Two of the clock. METALLIFEROUS MINES REGULATION COMMITTEE. Bill considered in Committee. (In the Committee.) Clauses 1 to 4, inclusive, agreed to. Clause 5 (Employment of male young persons in mines). |