Hide Articles List

24 articles on this Page

. CHESHIRE TRADES COUNCILSI…

News
Cite
Share

CHESHIRE TRADES COUNCILS '"P,,A-i? ES 1-.? MAGISTRATE AND VACCINATION. STRONG CRITICISM. A meeting of ic.r delegates of the Federated Trades and Labour councils of Cheshire was held at Chester on Sat,,day, Mr. Jones (Birkenhead) presiding. The following co^nmun cation from the North- wieh and District Trades and Labour Council was read by the hon. secretary (Mr. W. Carr): -"The Council had before it. the reeent case of Mr. Hmg-ham, of Northwich, being refused an ex- emption certificate for vaccination in respect of his child, and seeing that ther* have been others in Chester, Crewe a,d elsewhere, we consider that the attention of the Federal Councils and the afriuated councils should, be called to the same, and to that end I bide to ask if you can communi- cate to the councils this opinion, and ask them to take the matter up, with a view of the case being brought before Uv- Home Office and the Local Government Board and the support of the local AI.P.'s asked to th", same in the House of Com- mons if the opportunity arises." 1. Ashley \North vich) said he was not going to declare that the Northwich Council was consti tuted of aati-vaecuii.ite, but they looked upon the matter as a question of principle and right, so far as the Act of Parliament was concerned. They claimed tuat not only thi", man. but everyone who appeared before the magistrates to ask an exemp- tion for his children, being vaccinated, had a per- fect right to obtain a certificate, according to the Act of Parliament. When Mr. Hingham applied in the first instance there were two medical gentlemen on the Bench, and he (the speaker) pre- sumed they influenced the rest of the Bench, and the order was not granted. Ho applied at the next sessions, with the same result, and one of the told him he would not be con- vinced that lie had a conscientious objectioa. His council considered that this was a scandal and an inj ustice. The magistrates having refused to grant an exemption, <t would be incumbent upon the vaccination, oiffcer to summon the man to shew cause why he would not have his child vaccinated, and they .had called the Local Government Board's attention to this. pointing O"t that it was just possible that the same gentlemen who had refused the exemption order would sit in judgment upon the man when he wis summoned to shew cause why his child had not been vaccinated. It had been stated that Local Government Board would send an inspector down to enquire into the case, and from a. discussion at the Board of Guardians, it seemed that there was an unwritten understanding that :he vaccination officer should be quietly spoken tn. and that they should not ase their inuuence to obtain a conviction. The magistrates sat Oil the Bench to administer the law, and the Northwich Council claimed that they ought to submit to the. conscientious scruples of any individual who presented himself. In the neighbouring petty sessional division of Middle- wich, a week after., when a conscientious objector appeared before the Bench, the Chairman called him an ass, and told him he should hold him rtespousible if there was an outbreak of small-pox in the neighbourhood It was absurd for a man in the position of a magistrate to use language like that. He moved that the matter be brought before the notice of the members of Parliament for Cheshire and the bodies he had named. Mr. Blower (Northwich) seconded, remarking that he thought it was the fault of the Act, which provided that two magistrates must be satisfied that an applicant h-?d a conscientious objection. He thought a member of Parliament should be appealed to to amend the Act. Mr. W. Carr (Chester; considered it a great mis- take that there should be any exemption clause at all, but they knew there was a great deal of difference of oDinior on the question, and it was nof for them to discuss the rights and wrongs of vaccination. They had to discuss the right of the magistrates to refuse an exemption certificate to any person who gavi a proper reason for his appli- cation. The case at Chester Castle was a most glaring one. A man gave a very intelligent ex- planation—whether ha wa? wright or wrong he (the speaker! was not going to sav-of his reason for applying for an exemption certificate, and the magistrates treated, him in a most scandalous way, and i way unbecoming the digni- fied position of a magistrate. The proposition was carried. CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES AND TRADES UNIONISTS. Mr. Ellis (Crewe) proposed that the council issue a circular to the various trades councils in the countv and to the members of co-operative societies, asking the latter to employ trades union- ists, not to deal with any sweating firms, and to declare less dividends, and give all goods to cus- tomers at cost price. Mr. Higgms (Hyaef It you sell goods at cost price, it will do away with dividends altogether. Mr. Ellis: Do away with dividends altogether, and allow our goods, to be so'd at cost price after paying working expenses. The proposition was not seconded. Mr. Hisgins proposed that they issue a circular asking co-operative firms to employ trades union labour, and not to deal with non-society firms. Mr. Ash!ùv seconded. He approved of the sug- gestion that co-operative societies m Cheshire should be called upon to employ none but trades union labour, and that trades uuionists should be called upon o tgive their custom to those societies which did 50. If that were generally done, it would remove the d ,grace from societies that had not only encourage, non-trades union labour, but had r'k r. -:i.re,j sweating. Mr. \Y. Carr said th>? question was a very im- portant. one to trades rjiuor.rst-. He did not think any trade was more affected than that of the tailots. and he instanced a case where a society had encouraged sweating m the making of clothes. Mr. Ashiev submitted that t?e matter was in ¿he i1il' oF tha woi-k'tigmei;. The resolution was cirri- The wai AMALGAMATION WITH LANCASHIRE i I .I- 1\1r. Can' e-??piaine?& result ot a conversation i h& had ?ad with the pecret&ty ot the Lancashire 1 Feder?fed Trades Cc.tM 1, one oi the provisions drawn up beirg tha- m the event of the Mnatga- mation of t two DOh J wou!d be knov,n as Lancashire and Cheshire lacerat_i.on of Trades and Labour Council. All tbe delegates said tbe1.o councils were in I favour of amalgama'-ioa, and was d ided. on the preposition of Mr Jepheoft ;'Crewe»,•seconded by Mr. Samuel Knowfe- <HYDC>, to amalgamate. Mr. Carr was elected the k-p rosentative on the executive.

Advertising

C0XGLET0X MAY FAIR. I

MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE CO.…

£ 8,150 IN A CASH-BOX.I -+-I

FISHING- BOAT DISASTER,I

Advertising

CREAM OF THE MAGAZINES. I

Advertising

DEE FISHERY BOARD. I

[No title]

IFREE VACCINATION.

COUNTY POLICE COURT.

BILE BEANS 'IN CHESTER.

GENERAL BOOTH AT CHESTER.…

Advertising

MORETON OLD HALL -.-

ICANON SCOTT ON EDUCATION.

CHESTERBANKRUPTCY COURT

[No title]

ROYAL VISIT TO WALES.I ♦

LORD DELAMERE'S RIGHTS. A,

[No title]

[No title]