THE TABLET,
A Weekly. Newspaper and Review.
DUM VOBIS GRATULAMUR, ANIMOS ETIAM ADDIMUS UT IN INCCEPTIS VESTRIS CONSTANTER MANEVTIS.
From the Brief oj His Holiness Pius IX . to The Taelet, June 4, 1870.
Vol. 89. No. 2974.
L o n d o n , M a y 8, 1897.
Price 5 [Registered at the General Post Office as a Newspaper. Chronicle of the Week ! Page Imperial Parliament : Compensation to Workmen--A Quiet Debate — The Manning of Merchant Ships—Rejection of the Miners’ Eight Hours Bill—Postal Reforms —The Royal Academy Banquet — The Situation in South Africa— President Kruger’s Attitude^— Awful Fire at a Paris Charity Bazaar—The War Experiences of a London Radical—The Progress of the War—The Princess of Wales and the Poor—The Birthday of “ The Daily Mail ’’ .. .. 717 L eaders: The Paris Tragedy.. .. .. 721 The Russo-Austrian Understanding 721 The New Gallery .. .. .. 723 The Bull “ Apostolic® Curse” .. 723 C ON T St. Aldhelm on the Unity of the Page Church .................................... 726 Notes . . . . ~ ... . . 728 Reviews : The Autobiographies of Edward Gibbon .. .. .. .. 729 The Scriptures for Schools .. 730 Scaramelli . .. .. -.731 Among the Untrodden Ways .. 731 Correspondence ; Rome :—(From OurOwnCorre spondent) .. ... «. «. 733 News from Ireland „ _ 735 Letters to the Editor : “ The Church Times ” and Bucer’s Ordinal .. .. .. .. 736 Bishop Ryle and the Priesthood 736 Controversial Methods .. .. 736 “ Non Videbis Annos Petri ” .. 736 ENTS. Letters to the Editor (Con tinued : The Anglican Episcopate and Page , Foreign Immigrant Protestants 736 The Library of St. Edmund House, Cambridge .. . 736 The Church of England and the Eucharist .. .. .. .. 736 “ The Mission of St. Augustine” .. 737 St. Joseph’s Foregn Missionary Society, Mill Hiil, London, N.W. 742 A Nun’s Bequests Validated .. 744 Lord Bute’s Silver Wedding .. 746 Social and Political .. .. 746 SUPPLEMENT. News from the Schools: St. George’s Cathedral Schools .. 740 The Bill for the Relief of Neces sitous School Boards .. . .*750 News from the Schools (Con tinued): The Second Reading of the School Page Boards Bill .. .. .. 751 Ushaw Dinner in London .. 751 News from the Dioceses : Westminster .. .. ... 751 Southwark .. .. .. 752 Clifton .. .. .. .. 752 Liverpool .. .. .. .. 752 Northampton .. .. .. 752 Plymouth .. .. .. .. 752 Salford .. .. .. .. 753 The Mgr. Nugent Jubilee Testi monial .. .. .. .. 753 The Government and the “ Massa Frumentaria ” of Malta .. .. 754 A Scottish National Pilgrimage .. 755 Catholics at Oxford .. .. .. 755 * Reiected MS. cannot be returned unless accompanied with address and postage. CHRONICLE OF THE WEEK. ----------- ♦ ----------- IN the House of Commons on Monday Sir Matthew White workmen. Ridley asked leave to bring in a Bill to amend the law with respect to compensation to be paid to workmen for accidental injuries suffered in the course of their employment. The question has already been before Parliament, and Mr. Asquith introduced a measure in 1893 which was thrown out by the Lords. The object of that measure was to make employers legally responsible for accidents. It would have given workmen the right of action for unlimited compensation, and would so have given rise to constant litigation. The Government wished to avoid giving any encouragement to litigation, and to do so they had taken up a new principle which had resulted in a new departure. They proposed to make the trades responsible for the risks they create by compensating workmen for the accidents that occur on a fixed scale and within fixed limits. The liability thus established would not be more than that already voluntarily incurred by many of the largest firms throughout the country, whilst the elements of uncertainty being reduced to a minimum afforded reason to hope that litigation would be avoided. The remedy required was one that would be simple, immediate, and effective, and the Government had made an honest endeavour to meet those requirements. The Bill accordingly proposed that where a personal injury is inflicted on a workman by accident arising out of his employment, or in course of it, compensation is to be paid by the employer at a fixed rate. In case of death his dependents should receive a sum equal to his wages for the last three years, or ^150, whichever sum was the larger, so long as the total did not exceed ^300. In case of disablement for more than a fortnight, half the man’s wages are to be paid to him, but the weekly payments are not to be more than 1. Any questions connected with the employment of the workman and the amount of compensation are to be settled either by mutual agreement, or by arbitration committees established between masters and men, or failing these, by the County Court Judge or some arbitrator whose costs will be defrayed by the Treasury. So far, Sir Matthew White Ridley thought that his proposals would meet with little dissent. But he felt and acknowledged that he was on more debatable ground when he came to the next point, by which he sought to redeem the pledge given by Ministers on the question of contracting-out. They still adhered to their preference for mutual agreement over law. They had provided, therefore, that if the Registrar of Friendly Societies certified that any scheme of compensation or insurance was, on the whole, not less favourable than the provisions of the Act, the employer might, until the certificate was revoked, contract with any of the workmen that the provisions of the scheme should be substituted for the provisions of the Act. Conscious that his proposals constituted a new departure, the present Home Secretary had determined to proceed cautiously. Mr. Asquith’s Bill included every one engaged in manual labour and working for a master. Sir Matthew White Ridley has determined to limit the application of his Bill to industries of a dangerous character. Thus, whilst it includes railways, factories, mines, quarries, engineering works and buildings, and ships in dock, to which the Factory Acts are applicable, it does not apply to seamen, domestic servants, agricultural labourers, and people engaged in shops. When the Home Secretary had finished his —a quiet explanation his predecessor in office, Mr. debate. Asquith, who had been engaged in taking notes, rose to put the views of the Opposition before the House. Naturally, he could not help looking back with some fondness to his own rejected measure, and so he regretted that the new Bill did not start from the standpoint of prevention rather than from that of compensation. It made no attempt to abolish the fiction of common employment, by which a third person could recover damages to the extent of the injury he was proved to have suffered, whilst the workman, because he was an employé of the responsible person, could claim nothing. Another defect of the Bill was that it applied to cnly certain selected industries, instead of to all. In this way it introduced a new and unjustifiable principle of discrimination by which the legal rights of a workman would be determined not by the circumstarces under which he was injured, but by the particular category of employment to which he belonged. He also objected to the Registrar of Friendly Societies being called upon to sit in judgment on the question of contracting out, and to the smallness of the maximum payment for disablement—jfx a week— which was obviously less than a man would receive under the ordinary law, if successful in an action against his employer. New Series. Vol, LVII., No. 2,283
