§ MR. POWELLsaid, he would beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether it is intended to widen the powers proposed to be given to the Boundary Commissioners by the 31st clause of the Bill for Improving the Representation of the People so as to enable them to report whether any contraction or enlarging of the boundaries of Boroughs constituted by the said Bill is necessary, and to propose such new boundaries, if any, as would effect the object of the Clause as now drawn; and, whether his attention has been directed to the sparsely populated districts proposed to be included in certain Boroughs, for instance, Keighley and Bingley, which have not within each two persons to the acre, whereas the Census of 1861 gives the main density of town populations as nearly six persons per acre?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERThose schedules of the Bill for the Improvement of the Representation of the People, as placed upon the table, are, as I mentioned before, of a strictly temporary 1940 character, that is to say, they are intended to provide for contingencies in themselves most improbable and almost impossible. One would be, for example, if the Boundary Commissioners were not to report before the dissolution of Parliament. Of course, the chances are a hundred to one against such a contingency. The powers of the Boundary Commissioners, according to the clause which I shall put upon the table, are to be of such a character that they may do anything, but one thing—and that is to diminish the existing boundaries of boroughs, because if that were admitted it would involve the principle of disfranchisement. With regard to anything else the Boundary Commissioners would have the power of changing all the divisions of boroughs or altering the boundaries of the new boroughs in the case to which my hon. Friend has just referred. With respect to Keighley and Bingley, I am not acquainted with all the circumstances of the case; but I am confident that the Boundary Commissioners will settle the matter in a very satisfactory manner. I have received a memorial from an hon. Gentleman opposite who represents the West Riding with regard to Keighley, Bingley, and some other places; but I have no doubt that the Boundary Commissioners will consider the circumstances of the different places fully, and will award boundaries such as will meet all the requirements of each case. I hope, therefore, that the House will understand that with the exception of not diminishing the boundaries of boroughs, the powers of the Commissioners will be unrestricted.
§ SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he would beg to ask, whether the answer now given applies to the boundaries of counties as well as boroughs. Is the proposed division of the counties in the schedules also provisional?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERIf the House will permit me, I will reply to the Question of the right hon. Baronet, although I would have preferred to intimate the views of the Government at a later period. It was not intended, when the Bill was first brought forward, to divide the counties in the manner which now appears in the schedules. It was my intention to have laid on the table today the clause which would have defined the powers of the Bounday Commissioners, and also to have offered to the Committee the names of the gentlemen whom we proposed that the House should insert in 1941 the clause as Boundary Commissioners. But it seemed to Her Majesty's Government that such a proceeding would be premature, because we perceive from the Order of Business this evening that the Committee will have to decide upon the Motion of the hon. Member for Wick (Mr. Laing), which takes precedence of the Motion of Her Majesty's Government. Now, if the Motion of the hon. Member for Wick is carried it will be considered by Her Majesty's Government as completely conclusive as to the opinion of the House on the merits of their general scheme. Therefore it would be perfectly unnecessary, if that Motion were carried, to lay on the table the clause defining the powers of the Boundary Commissioners, or to submit the names of the individuals whom we wish to recommend to the confidence of the House. If the Motion of the hon. Member for Wick be carried, we shall have to consider our position generally and as regards the Bill altogether.
§ MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, he would beg to inquire, whether it is intended to appoint any Member of that House as a Commissioner?
§ THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERLord Eversley has accepted the office of President of the Boundary Commission, and will represent the Commission in the other House. I considered with my Colleagues that it was desirable that the Commission should be represented in this House also by at least one Member, so that if the decisions of the Commissioners were controverted in either House of Parliament they would have an opportunity of stating their own views and explaining their conduct and conclusions, instead of trusting to the Government for defending what they had done. Under these circumstances, I applied to a right hon. Member of this House to undertake the duty, which I know he is perfectly competent to fulfil. That right hon. Gentleman is a Member of the party opposite. I will defer giving a definite answer to the Question of my hon. Friend at present, until it be my duty to inform the House of the names of the Commissioners. I will say, however, that I think it desirable that the Commission should be represented in both Houses of Parliament.