156 LOCAL TAXATION 



employe is quite inadequate. The requirements, therefore, set 

 out by your Committee in their last report remain unmet in any 

 way. 



7. In view of the great disparity between the position of farm 

 labourers earning, say, 15s. per week and artisans whose weekly 

 wages would average quite double that sum, your Committee 

 consider there are many important points connected with the 

 industry of agriculture which should be pressed upon the atten- 

 tion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and they strongly advise 

 the appointment of a deputation to urge upon him a more favour- 

 able consideration of the interests of agriculture than the Bill, 

 even with its amendments, now discloses. 



A deputation met Mr. McKinnon Wood (representing the 

 Chancellor of the Exchequer) on 16th November, especially 

 to lay before the Government the matter of the casual labourer. 

 His reply was that the Government had decided to put down 

 amendments which would largely meet the views of the 

 deputation. No such amendments were ever moved. Eventu- 

 ally, the Insurance Commissioners asked representatives of 

 the Chamber to meet them in conference, some six months 

 after the Act had been passed, to discuss the position of the 

 casual labourer, and some of the principal objections were 

 removed by an order of the Commissioners. All the other 

 suggestions made by the Chamber were completely ignored, 

 except the clause (51 in the original Bill) affecting ejectment 

 and distraint, which was amended on more reasonable lines. 

 Mr. Charles Bathurst, who endeavoured on behalf of the 

 Chamber to move amendments to an early clause, with a 

 view to improving the position of the agricultural labourer 

 under the Bill, was promised by Mr. George that he should 

 have an opportunity of discussing that point on the second 

 Schedule of the Bill. This promise of the Chancellor's was 

 only partially redeemed, for the Schedules, like the greater 

 part of the Bill, were closured in Committee, and though some 

 debate was allowed on the report stage, the division was on 

 party lines, the Government Whips were put on as tellers, 

 and Sir Luke White was about the only Member who voted 

 against his party, and with the Opposition. 



So far as agriculture is concerned, the Act, which has 

 much promise of good in it, has been spoilt by the complete 



